Orono_Route_Permit_Application - Docket # W002/TL-11-223

Home Browse Search

4.3 Alternative Routes Considered and Rejected In consultation with surrounding landowners, the City and applicable regulatory agencies, Xcel Energy identified and analyzed four Alternative Routes for the Project, which are identified as "Alternative Route 1", "Alternative Route 2", "Alternative Route 3" and "Alternative Route 4" (collectively, "Alternative Routes") in Appendix G, Figure G-1, and are further described in Appendix G. Table G.1 in Appendix G provides a detailed description of the Alternative Routes, including road and waterbody crossings. In evaluating the Alternative Routes, Xcel Energy focused predominantly on the location of existing transportation corridors, alignment of the existing distribution and transmission lines and land use because they best satisfy the routing criteria. The Alternative Routes follow existing rights-of-way and property lines to the extent feasible. In performing the Alternative Routes analysis, Xcel Energy considered social, environmental, and engineering -related factors, such as location of existing transportation and utility corridors, land use, site conditions, proximity to residential or commercial structures, environmental impacts, effects on trees, proximity to areas of archaeological or historical significance, proximity to wetlands or PWI watercourses, and several engineering design -related factors. Based on this analysis, Xcel Energy concluded that the Alternative Routes were not preferable to the Proposed Route for the reasons summarized below and further described in Appendix G. 4.3.1 Alternative Route 1 Alternative Route 1 and the Proposed Route share the same route for the first 1,701 feet of the Proposed Route. At this point Alternative Route 1 deviates from the Proposed Route on a more westerly course for approximately 550 feet to existing Structure 077 of Line 0831. Alternative Route 1 is not preferable to the Proposed Route because it will not fulfill one main objective of the Project, that being to minimize impacts to residences. As discussed in Section 4.2.2, Xcel Energy is working with the two landowners whose properties are currently crossed by existing Line 0831 to remove the Line 0831 from the properties and move the line north of their respective property lines onto adjacent HFA property. Alternative Route 1 also requires the clearing of some mature trees through the middle of one of the residential lots for right-of-way purposes. 4.3.2 Alternative Route 2 Alternative Route 2 utilizes the portion of the Proposed Route (866 feet) prior to the Proposed Route turning westerly at the BNSF railroad right-of-way. At this point Alternative Route 2 continues north an approximate 326 feet and crosses the BNSF railroad, a Metropolitan Council sewer line, U.S. Highway 12 and an existing Xcel Energy distribution line. Upon exiting U.S. Highway 12 right-of-way, Alternative Route 2 enters the Three Rivers Park District's Baker Park Reserve. From here Alternative Route 2 continues westerly approximately 974 feet across Baker Park Reserve property connecting to existing Xcel Energy 115 kV transmission Line 0831 (see Figure 3). The existing tower (Structure 076) located at this connection point lies within 30 feet of a paved bike path within Baker Park Reserve. Alternative Route 2 was rejected due to the number of transportation crossings (e.g. the BNSF railroad, U.S. Highway 12), the location of an existing Metropolitan Council sewer line located Orono Project June 7, 2011 MPUC Docket No. E002/TL-11-223 16