Hwy 52 — Hader to Zumbrota study

Share Hwy 52 — Hader to Zumbrota study on Facebook Share Hwy 52 — Hader to Zumbrota study on Twitter Share Hwy 52 — Hader to Zumbrota study on Linkedin Email Hwy 52 — Hader to Zumbrota study link

Study area map Highway 52 from Hader to ZumbrotaView full-size mapWe are conducting a PEL, or Planning and Environmental Linkages, study of the Hwy 52. The study is examining the corridor between Hader and Zumbrota. The goal is to investigate what Hwy 52 may look like in the future. This includes potential changes and an analysis of the impacts each choice may have.

Specific elements considered include:

  • Safety
  • Manage access
  • Freight movement
  • Agricultural needs
  • Congestion
  • Economic development
  • Community needs

The input will help the project team determine community values. It will also help inform the team as they look into specific changes. This study is being done in partnership with Goodhue County.

Update May 2024

The draft Final Study Report is available for review in the Important Documents section and at the Zumbrota Public Library, Cannon Falls Public Library, and Van Horn Public Library. Provide your feedback on the report using the Study Survey. The survey is open until June 7, 2024.

Study area map Highway 52 from Hader to ZumbrotaView full-size mapWe are conducting a PEL, or Planning and Environmental Linkages, study of the Hwy 52. The study is examining the corridor between Hader and Zumbrota. The goal is to investigate what Hwy 52 may look like in the future. This includes potential changes and an analysis of the impacts each choice may have.

Specific elements considered include:

  • Safety
  • Manage access
  • Freight movement
  • Agricultural needs
  • Congestion
  • Economic development
  • Community needs

The input will help the project team determine community values. It will also help inform the team as they look into specific changes. This study is being done in partnership with Goodhue County.

Update May 2024

The draft Final Study Report is available for review in the Important Documents section and at the Zumbrota Public Library, Cannon Falls Public Library, and Van Horn Public Library. Provide your feedback on the report using the Study Survey. The survey is open until June 7, 2024.

  • Draft Final Study Report

    Share Draft Final Study Report on Facebook Share Draft Final Study Report on Twitter Share Draft Final Study Report on Linkedin Email Draft Final Study Report link

    The draft Final Study Report is now ready for your review. The report and appendices are the results of more than two years of community engagement and technical analysis. Share feedback on the report using the Study Survey. The survey is open until June 7, 2024.

    The draft document is also available at the Zumbrota Public Library, Cannon Falls Public Library, and Van Horn Public Library.

    What’s Next?

    We will include your feedback in the final study document. This will complete this study. Recommended concepts will be carried forward for future study in a NEPA process. The intention is to adopt this PEL or incorporate it by reference into one or more NEPA documents in the next 5 years.

    Thank you for your time and participation in this process.


  • Public meeting: May 1, 2024

    Share Public meeting: May 1, 2024 on Facebook Share Public meeting: May 1, 2024 on Twitter Share Public meeting: May 1, 2024 on Linkedin Email Public meeting: May 1, 2024 link

    The public is invited to attend a public meeting for the Highway 52 Hader to Zumbrota Study. There will be a presentation at 6 p.m. Attendees will learn the results of the analysis, concepts recommended for future study and hear about next steps.

    Date: Wednesday, May 1, 2024

    Time: 5:30-7:30 p.m. *presentation at 6 p.m.*

    Location: Zumbrota VFW, 25 E 1st St., Zumbrota

    People unable to attend the meeting can review the information and submit feedback.

    MnDOT invites and encourages participation by all. If you need an ASL, foreign language interpreter, or other reasonable accommodation, or need documents in an alternative format (such as braille or large print), please email your request to Janet Miller at ADArequest.dot@state.mn.us or call 651-366-4720.

  • May 2024 public meeting materials

    Share May 2024 public meeting materials on Facebook Share May 2024 public meeting materials on Twitter Share May 2024 public meeting materials on Linkedin Email May 2024 public meeting materials link

    Community members shared their experiences on Highway 52 over the past year.\

    The project team has finished analyzing the potential concepts and will share which concepts are recommended for future consideration.

    Share feedback on the recommendations on the Study Recommendations Survey.

    Note: The concepts were called alternatives in previous phases.


    Recommendation

    Carried forward

    No Build:

    The No Build concept represents a maintenance only approach. It is used to evaluate potential improvements that a concept would provide.

    Graphic showing existing access points between Hader and ZumbrotaView full-sized image

    Concept 4:

    • Full access interchange at 165th Ave.
    • Access closures and new frontage roads
    • New frontage road along southbound Hwy 52 with new river bridge
    • 165th Ave. would become Co. Rd. 7 from Hwy 52 north to 400th St. then west to existing Co. Rd. 7
    • Existing Co. Rd. 7 would turn back to township

    Graphic showing full access interchange at 165th Ave., access closures at and near existing Co. Rd. 7, future frontage road along southbound Hwy 52 with a new river bridge. 165th Ave. would become Co. Rd. 7 from Hwy 52 north to 400th St. then west to existing Co. Rd. 7. The existing Co. Rd. 7 would turn back to the township.View full-sized image

    Primary Needs Evaluation


    Evaluation Approach

    Evaluation Results

    Evaluation Scoring


    Criteria

    Performance Measure

    No Build: Baseline - maintain existing condition

    Concept 4: Overpass at new CR 7 & Interchange at 165th

    Poor =

    Fair =

    Good =

    Vehicle Safety

    Corridor/ network and intersection crashes

    Expected crashes & Expected Severe Crashes (Crash Modification Factors)

    Poor

    Good

    No anticipated crash reduction

    Anticipated crash reduction of 0 to 50%

    Anticipated crash reduction of greater than 50%

    Vehicle Mobility

    Connectivity - Crossing US 52 on the local road network

    Travel time to cross US 52

    Fair

    Fair

    Travel times vs. No Build:

    Significant increase
    (> 15% increase)

    Travel times vs. No Build: Similar or slight increase (5% reduction to a 15% increase)

    Travel times vs. No Build: Reduced
    (> 5% reduction)

    Gap Acceptance

    Side-street delay for all turning vehicles

    Poor

    Good

    Intersections that have side-street delay that exceeds Level of Service E: 25% or More

    Intersections that have side-street delay that exceeds Level of Service E: Less than 25%

    Intersections that have side-street delay that exceeds Level of Service E: None

    Geometric limitations for slow-moving large vehicles on US 52

    Ability to accommodate slow-moving and large vehicles and divert them to local road/off of US 52 (i.e., agricultural equipment, school buses, and freight/semi-trucks)

    Poor

    Good

    Feasible accommodations provided by concept: None

    Feasible accommodations provided by concept: Some

    Feasible accommodations provided by concept: A majority


    Note: Concept figures are preliminary and subject to change. Concept figures represent one potential option of many that could be implemented in the future. No detailed design or analysis has been completed at this stage.

    Draft concept overlaid onto aerial image showing new frontage road along southbound Hwy 52 from south of Co. Rd. 7 to 165th Ave. Roundabouts on each side of Hwy 52 for new interchange at 165th Ave. View full-sized image

    Concept 5:

    • Full access interchange at Co. Rd. 7

    • Right-in/right-out at 165th Ave.
    • Access closures and new frontage roads

    Graphic showing Full access interchange at Co. Rd. 7, right-in/right-out access at 165th Ave., and access closures between Co. Rd. 7 and 165th Ave. along with future frontage along southbound Hwy 52.View full-sized image

    Primary Needs Evaluation


    Evaluation Approach

    Evaluation Results

    Evaluation Scoring


    Criteria

    Performance Measure

    No Build: Baseline - maintain existing condition

    Concept 5: J-Turns at CR 7 and 165th

    Poor =

    Fair =

    Good =

    Vehicle Safety

    Corridor/ network and intersection crashes

    Expected crashes & Expected Severe Crashes (Crash Modification Factors)

    Poor

    Good

    No anticipated crash reduction

    Anticipated crash reduction of 0 to 50%

    Anticipated crash reduction of greater than 50%

    Vehicle Mobility

    Connectivity - Crossing US 52 on the local road network

    Travel time to cross US 52

    Fair

    Good

    Travel times vs. No Build:

    Significant increase
    (> 15% increase)

    Travel times vs. No Build: Similar or slight increase (5% reduction to a 15% increase)

    Travel times vs. No Build: Reduced
    (> 5% reduction)

    Gap Acceptance

    Side-street delay for all turning vehicles

    Poor

    Good

    Intersections that have side-street delay that exceeds Level of Service E: 25% or More

    Intersections that have side-street delay that exceeds Level of Service E: Less than 25%

    Intersections that have side-street delay that exceeds Level of Service E: None

    Geometric limitations for slow-moving large vehicles on US 52

    Ability to accommodate slow-moving and large vehicles and divert them to local road/off of US 52 (i.e., agricultural equipment, school buses, and freight/semi-trucks)

    Poor

    Good

    Feasible accommodations provided by concept: None

    Feasible accommodations provided by concept: Some

    Feasible accommodations provided by concept: A majority


    Note: Concept figures are preliminary and subject to change. Concept figures represent one potential option of many that could be implemented in the future. No detailed design or analysis has been completed at this stage.

    Draft concept overlaid onto aerial image showing new frontage roads along Hwy 52. Roundabouts on each side of Hwy 52 for new interchange at Co. Rd. 7. Realign and connect Sherwood Trail to southside interchange. View full-sized image

    Concept 7:

    • Full access interchange at 165th Ave.

    • Overpass to north of Co. Rd. 7
    • New Co. Rd. 7 from north of 420th St. to Hwy 52
    • New township road from Hwy 52 to Sherwood Trl.
    • Access closures and new frontage roads
    • Existing Co. Rd. 7 turn back to township

    View full-sized image

    Primary Needs Evaluation


    Evaluation Approach

    Evaluation Results

    Evaluation Scoring


    Criteria

    Performance Measure

    No Build: Baseline - maintain existing condition

    Concept 7: Interchange at CR 7

    Poor =

    Fair =

    Good =

    Vehicle Safety

    Corridor/ network and intersection crashes

    Expected crashes & Expected Severe Crashes (Crash Modification Factors)

    Poor

    Good

    No anticipated crash reduction

    Anticipated crash reduction of 0 to 50%

    Anticipated crash reduction of greater than 50%

    Vehicle Mobility

    Connectivity - Crossing US 52 on the local road network

    Travel time to cross US 52

    Fair

    Good

    Travel times vs. No Build:

    Significant increase
    (> 15% increase)

    Travel times vs. No Build: Similar or slight increase (5% reduction to a 15% increase)

    Travel times vs. No Build: Reduced
    (> 5% reduction)

    Gap Acceptance

    Side-street delay for all turning vehicles

    Poor

    Good

    Intersections that have side-street delay that exceeds Level of Service E: 25% or More

    Intersections that have side-street delay that exceeds Level of Service E: Less than 25%

    Intersections that have side-street delay that exceeds Level of Service E: None

    Geometric limitations for slow-moving large vehicles on US 52

    Ability to accommodate slow-moving and large vehicles and divert them to local road/off of US 52 (i.e., agricultural equipment, school buses, and freight/semi-trucks)

    Poor

    Good

    Feasible accommodations provided by concept: None

    Feasible accommodations provided by concept: Some

    Feasible accommodations provided by concept: A majority


    Note: Concept figures are preliminary and subject to change. Concept figures represent one potential option of many that could be implemented in the future. No detailed design or analysis has been completed at this stage.

    Local road:

    Various improvements to area local roads.

    Graphic showing potential local road improvements including frontage roads and new local road connections grouped by potential projects.View full-sized image

    Local Roads Potential Projects

    Project

    Segment/Improvement

    Planning-level cost

    Project Timeline

    A

    Closure of driveways 1 & 2 and associated frontage road

    $1,493,200

    Short-term

    B

    Closure of driveway 3 and associated frontage road

    $455,600

    Short-term

    C

    Closure of driveways 5, 7 & 9, plus associated frontage road lay that exceeds Level of Service E

    $2,410,300

    Short-term

    D

    Closure of driveways 4, 6 & 8, plus associated frontage road feasible accommodations

    $1,301,100

    Short-term

    E

    Closure of driveways 13 & 14, plus associated frontage road

    $781,200

    Short-term

    F

    445th Street (access point 15) closure

    $20,000

    Short-term

    G

    445th Street Overpass (over US 52)

    $14,780,000

    Long-term

    H

    145th Ave Extension (over the North Fork Zumbro River)

    $4,118,000

    Long-term

    I

    440th St Extension (over the North Fork Zumbro River)

    $19,100,600

    Long-term


    Eliminated

    Concept 1:

    • J-turn at Co. Rd. 7
    • J-turn at 165th Ave.

    Graphic showing J-turn at Co. Rd. 7 and J-turn at 165th Ave.View full-sized image

    Primary Needs Evaluation


    Evaluation Approach

    Evaluation Results

    Evaluation Scoring


    Criteria

    Performance Measure

    No Build: Baseline - maintain existing condition

    Concept 1: J-Turns at CR 7 and 165th

    Poor =

    Fair =

    Good =

    Vehicle Safety

    Corridor/ network and intersection crashes

    Expected crashes & Expected Severe Crashes (Crash Modification Factors)

    Poor

    Fair

    No anticipated crash reduction

    Anticipated crash reduction of 0 to 50%

    Anticipated crash reduction of greater than 50%

    Vehicle Mobility

    Connectivity - Crossing US 52 on the local road network

    Travel time to cross US 52

    Fair

    Fair

    Travel times vs. No Build:

    Significant increase
    (> 15% increase)

    Travel times vs. No Build: Similar or slight increase (5% reduction to a 15% increase)

    Travel times vs. No Build: Reduced
    (> 5% reduction)

    Gap Acceptance

    Side-street delay for all turning vehicles

    Poor

    Poor

    Intersections that have side-street delay that exceeds Level of Service E: 25% or More

    Intersections that have side-street delay that exceeds Level of Service E: Less than 25%

    Intersections that have side-street delay that exceeds Level of Service E: None

    Geometric limitations for slow-moving large vehicles on US 52

    Ability to accommodate slow-moving and large vehicles and divert them to local road/off of US 52 (i.e., agricultural equipment, school buses, and freight/semi-trucks)

    Poor

    Fair

    Feasible accommodations provided by concept: None

    Feasible accommodations provided by concept: Some

    Feasible accommodations provided by concept: A majority


    Concept 2:

    • J-turn at 165th Ave.
    • J-turn at Co. Rd. 7
    • 165th Ave. would become Co. Rd. 7 from Hwy 52 north to 400th St. then west to existing Co. Rd. 7
    • Existing Co. Rd. 7 would turn back to township


    Graphic showing J-turn at 165th Ave. and J-turn at Co. Rd. 7. 165th Ave would become Co. Rd. 7 from Hwy 52 north of 400th St. then west to existing Co. Rd. 7. Co. Rd. 7 would turn back to township.View full-sized image

    Primary Needs Evaluation


    Evaluation Approach

    Evaluation Results

    Evaluation Scoring


    Criteria

    Performance Measure

    No Build: Baseline - maintain existing condition

    Concept 2: High T at CR 7 and 165th

    Poor =

    Fair =

    Good =

    Vehicle Safety

    Corridor/ network and intersection crashes

    Expected crashes & Expected Severe Crashes (Crash Modification Factors)

    Poor

    Fair

    No anticipated crash reduction

    Anticipated crash reduction of 0 to 50%

    Anticipated crash reduction of greater than 50%

    Vehicle Mobility

    Connectivity - Crossing US 52 on the local road network

    Travel time to cross US 52

    Fair

    Poor

    Travel times vs. No Build:

    Significant increase
    (> 15% increase)

    Travel times vs. No Build: Similar or slight increase (5% reduction to a 15% increase)

    Travel times vs. No Build: Reduced
    (> 5% reduction)

    Gap Acceptance

    Side-street delay for all turning vehicles

    Poor

    Poor

    Intersections that have side-street delay that exceeds Level of Service E: 25% or More

    Intersections that have side-street delay that exceeds Level of Service E: Less than 25%

    Intersections that have side-street delay that exceeds Level of Service E: None

    Geometric limitations for slow-moving large vehicles on US 52

    Ability to accommodate slow-moving and large vehicles and divert them to local road/off of US 52 (i.e., agricultural equipment, school buses, and freight/semi-trucks)

    Poor

    Fair

    Feasible accommodations provided by concept: None

    Feasible accommodations provided by concept: Some

    Feasible accommodations provided by concept: A majority


    Concept 3:

    • High-T intersection at Co. Rd. 7
    • High-T intersection at 165th Ave.
    • Access closures and new frontage roads

    Graphic showing High-T intersection at both Co. Rd. 7 and 165th Ave., access closures between Co. Rd. 7 and 165th Ave., and future frontage roads along both sides of Hwy 52.View full-sized image

    Primary Needs Evaluation


    Evaluation Approach

    Evaluation Results

    Evaluation Scoring


    Criteria

    Performance Measure

    No Build: Baseline - maintain existing condition

    Concept 3: Interchange at CR 7

    Poor =

    Fair =

    Good =

    Vehicle Safety

    Corridor/ network and intersection crashes

    Expected crashes & Expected Severe Crashes (Crash Modification Factors)

    Poor

    Fair

    No anticipated crash reduction

    Anticipated crash reduction of 0 to 50%

    Anticipated crash reduction of greater than 50%

    Vehicle Mobility

    Connectivity - Crossing US 52 on the local road network

    Travel time to cross US 52

    Fair

    Fair

    Travel times vs. No Build:

    Significant increase
    (> 15% increase)

    Travel times vs. No Build: Similar or slight increase (5% reduction to a 15% increase)

    Travel times vs. No Build: Reduced
    (> 5% reduction)

    Gap Acceptance

    Side-street delay for all turning vehicles

    Poor

    Good

    Intersections that have side-street delay that exceeds Level of Service E: 25% or More

    Intersections that have side-street delay that exceeds Level of Service E: Less than 25%

    Intersections that have side-street delay that exceeds Level of Service E: None

    Geometric limitations for slow-moving large vehicles on US 52

    Ability to accommodate slow-moving and large vehicles and divert them to local road/off of US 52 (i.e., agricultural equipment, school buses, and freight/semi-trucks)

    Poor

    Good

    Feasible accommodations provided by concept: None

    Feasible accommodations provided by concept: Some

    Feasible accommodations provided by concept: A majority


    Concept 6:

    • Full access interchange to north of existing Co. Rd. 7
    • New Co. Rd. 7 from north of 420th St. to Hwy 52 new full access interchange
    • New township road south of interchange to Sherwood Trl.
    • J-turn at 165th Ave.
    • Access closures and new frontage roads
    • Existing Co. Rd. 7 turn back to township
    Graphic showing full access interchange to the north of Co. Rd. 7, new Co. Rd. 7 from north of 420th St. to Hwy 52. A new township road would connect south of the interchange to Sherwood Trl. A J-turn intersection at 165th Ave. Access closures between existing Co. Rd. 7 and 165th Ave. along with existing Co. Rd. 7 from Hwy 52 to the new Co. Rd. 7 north of 420th St. would turn back to the township.View full-sized image

    Primary Needs Evaluation


    Evaluation Approach

    Evaluation Results

    Evaluation Scoring


    Criteria

    Performance Measure

    No Build: Baseline - maintain existing condition

    Concept 6: High T at CR 7 and 165th

    Poor =

    Fair =

    Good =

    Vehicle Safety

    Corridor/ network and intersection crashes

    Expected crashes & Expected Severe Crashes (Crash Modification Factors)

    Poor

    Fair

    No anticipated crash reduction

    Anticipated crash reduction of 0 to 50%

    Anticipated crash reduction of greater than 50%

    Vehicle Mobility

    Connectivity - Crossing US 52 on the local road network

    Travel time to cross US 52

    Fair

    Fair

    Travel times vs. No Build:

    Significant increase
    (> 15% increase)

    Travel times vs. No Build: Similar or slight increase (5% reduction to a 15% increase)

    Travel times vs. No Build: Reduced
    (> 5% reduction)

    Gap Acceptance

    Side-street delay for all turning vehicles

    Poor

    Fair

    Intersections that have side-street delay that exceeds Level of Service E: 25% or More

    Intersections that have side-street delay that exceeds Level of Service E: Less than 25%

    Intersections that have side-street delay that exceeds Level of Service E: None

    Geometric limitations for slow-moving large vehicles on US 52

    Ability to accommodate slow-moving and large vehicles and divert them to local road/off of US 52 (i.e., agricultural equipment, school buses, and freight/semi-trucks)

    Poor

    Good

    Feasible accommodations provided by concept: None

    Feasible accommodations provided by concept: Some

    Feasible accommodations provided by concept: A majority


    Not Recommended

    Note: Not recommended at this time. A review in the future may be warranted.

    Concept 8:

    • J-turn at 165th Ave.
    • Overpass to north of Co. Rd. 7
    • New Co. Rd. 7 from north of 420th St. to Hwy 52
    • New township road from Hwy 52 to Sherwood Trl.
    • Access closures and new frontage roads
    • Existing Co. Rd. 7 turn back to township
    Graphic showing J-Turn at 165th Ave., an underpass to the north of Co. Rd. 7, and a new Co. Rd. 7 from north of 420th St. to Hwy 52. A new township road would connect south of the interchange to Sherwood Trl. Access closures between existing Co. Rd. 7 and 165th Ave. along with existing Co. Rd. 7 from Hwy 52 to the new Co. Rd. 7 north of 420th St. would turnback to the township.View full-sized image

    Primary Needs Evaluation


    Evaluation Approach

    Evaluation Results

    Evaluation Scoring


    Criteria

    Performance Measure

    No Build: Baseline - maintain existing condition

    Concept 8: Overpass at new CR 7 & Interchange at 165th

    Poor =

    Fair =

    Good =

    Vehicle Safety

    Corridor/ network and intersection crashes

    Expected crashes & Expected Severe Crashes (Crash Modification Factors)

    Poor

    Good

    No anticipated crash reduction

    Anticipated crash reduction of 0 to 50%

    Anticipated crash reduction of greater than 50%

    Vehicle Mobility

    Connectivity - Crossing US 52 on the local road network

    Travel time to cross US 52

    Fair

    Good

    Travel times vs. No Build:

    Significant increase
    (> 15% increase)

    Travel times vs. No Build: Similar or slight increase (5% reduction to a 15% increase)

    Travel times vs. No Build: Reduced
    (> 5% reduction)

    Gap Acceptance

    Side-street delay for all turning vehicles

    Poor

    Fair

    Intersections that have side-street delay that exceeds Level of Service E: 25% or More

    Intersections that have side-street delay that exceeds Level of Service E: Less than 25%

    Intersections that have side-street delay that exceeds Level of Service E: None

    Geometric limitations for slow-moving large vehicles on US 52

    Ability to accommodate slow-moving and large vehicles and divert them to local road/off of US 52 (i.e., agricultural equipment, school buses, and freight/semi-trucks)

    Poor

    Fair

    Feasible accommodations provided by concept: None

    Feasible accommodations provided by concept: Some

    Feasible accommodations provided by concept: A majority



    Next steps

    MnDOT will work with agency partners to identify and secure funding for future steps. Once funding is secured, then the additional steps of selecting and refining a design would occur. Construction would be the final step. All this could take an additional 5-7 years after funding is secured.




    Evaluation results

    The team used input from the community and technical knowledge to evaluate each concept. A sample of results are with each Concept above. Additional evaluation criteria and results are in the Concept Analysis memo, starting on page 41, in the Important Documents section.





  • March 2024 Update

    Share March 2024 Update on Facebook Share March 2024 Update on Twitter Share March 2024 Update on Linkedin Email March 2024 Update link

    Concept Analysis Memo

    The Concept* Analysis Memo is now ready for your review. Our team has completed the analysis of the concepts we presented last summer. We looked at how well each concept meets the needs of Hwy 52 users. We compared how well the concepts met the needs identified with the community.

    The memo shares these findings. It also recommends concepts for future study. Provide your feedback on the Concept Analysis Memo using the Concept Analysis Survey.

    These documents are also available at the Zumbrota Public Library, 100 W. Ave., Zumbrota.

    *Note: The concepts were called alternatives in previous phases.

    What’s Next?

    We will include your feedback in the final study document. We will host a public meeting later this spring to present the final results. This will complete this study. Recommended concepts will be carried forward for future study.

    Thank you for your time and participation in this process.

  • Dec. 2023 Update

    Share Dec. 2023 Update on Facebook Share Dec. 2023 Update on Twitter Share Dec. 2023 Update on Linkedin Email Dec. 2023 Update link

    Our team has been analyzing the alternatives presented this summer. We're using input from the community and our technical knowledge to make decisions. You can see the alternatives we're considering in our update from September 7, 2023.

    Alternatives analysis

    First, the eight alternatives were evaluated to assess how well each met the established Primary Needs. A “No-Build” alternative was included to compare how things are now.

    Primary Needs


    • Vehicle Safety: We're asking if the option makes driving safer.
    • Vehicle Mobility: We're also checking if it helps vehicles move better on and crossing Hwy 52, especially large agricultural and freight vehicles

    We then assessed how well each alternative met the established Secondary Needs.

    Secondary Needs

    • Pavement Condition: We're looking at if the option makes the road better.
    • Systemic Safety Risk Locations: We're checking if it makes the road safer by reducing danger spots.
    • Bridge and Culvert Conditions: We're looking at whether it helps bridges and culverts.
    • Walkability and Bikeability: We're looking at whether it makes it easier for people to walk or bike across Hwy 52.

    We also thought about whether the alternative:

    • meets access management guidance,
    • fits with local and state plans, programs, and projects,
    • how much it costs to build,
    • how it affects people during construction, and
    • if it helps reduce problems like flooding.

    We're still finalizing the evaluation analysis, and some options might not carry forward. Based on initial findings, here are the alternatives we're considering carrying forward and not carrying forward:

    Alternatives to carry forward

    • Alternative 4: Interchange at 165th Avenue
    • Alternative 5: Interchange at County Road 7
    • Alternative 7: Overpass at new County Road 7 and interchange at 165th Avenue

    Alternatives to not carry forward

    • Alternative 1: J-turns at County Road 7 and 165th Avenue
    • Alternative 2: Right-in right-out at County Road 7 and J-turn at 165th Avenue
    • Alternative 3: High-T intersections at County Road 7 and 165th Avenue
    • Alternative 6: Interchange at new County Road 7 and J-turn at 165th Avenue
    • Alternative 8: Overpass at new County Road 7 and J-turn at 165th Avenue

    What’s next?

    We're still analyzing alternatives and plan to present our findings to the community in Spring 2024. Keep an eye out for more info in early 2024.

    This study is different from previous area projects that ended with construction. Our study purpose, a Planning and Environmental Linkages (PEL) study, is to help transportation decision-making by incorporating environmental and community values early in project development. The study will finish with alternatives to carry forward for future study.

  • Design alternative survey and feedback summary

    Share Design alternative survey and feedback summary on Facebook Share Design alternative survey and feedback summary on Twitter Share Design alternative survey and feedback summary on Linkedin Email Design alternative survey and feedback summary link

    During the summer of 2023 MnDOT collected input from the public on eight proposed design alternatives.

    Feedback was gathered through two pop-up events, a public meeting, and online engagement.

    • 95+ in-person event attendees
    • 1,400+ website visits
    • 542 social media interactions
    • 70 surveys submitted

    Key findings

    People rated how well each alternative meets their needs. The average rating for each alternative with a description of each is shown below.

    • Alternative 5 received the highest rating at both the public meeting and the online survey
      1. Users preferred this alternative due to it improving safety and providing a full-access interchange at County Road 7
      2. There were concerns about the lack of access for locals and farmers
    • Alternative 3 was the second highest-rated design on the online survey
      1. Users who rated it highly liked the High-T design, safety improvements, and frontage road
      2. Users had concerns about this design being expensive, not providing enough access, and not meeting agricultural needs
    • Alternative 4 was the third highest-rated design on the online survey
      1. Users were concerned about the lack of access, high cost, safety, and not meeting agricultural needs
      2. Some thought it improves safety and maintains access, and liked the full-access option
    • The top two priorities identified by the public were safety, and access for locals and farmers.


    View full-sized image


    Alternatives descriptions

    Alternative 1

    J-turn at Co. Rd. 7 and J-turn at 165th Ave.

    View full-sized imageAlternative 2

    J-turn at 165th Ave. and J-turn at Co. Rd. 7. 165th Ave would become Co. Rd. 7 from Hwy 52 north of 400th St. then west to existing Co. Rd. 7. Co. Rd. 7 would turn back to township.


    View full-sized image

    Alternative 3

    High-T intersection at both Co. Rd. 7 and 165th Ave., access closures between Co. Rd. 7 and 165th Ave., and future frontage roads along both sides of Hwy 52.


    View full-sized image

    Alternative 4

    Full access interchange at 165th Ave., access closures at and near existing Co. Rd. 7, future frontage road along southbound Hwy 52 with a new river bridge. 165th Ave. would become Co. Rd. 7 from Hwy 52 north to 400th St. then west to existing Co. Rd. 7. The existing Co. Rd. 7 would turn back to the township.


    View full-sized image

    Alternative 5


    Full access interchange at Co. Rd. 7, right-in/right-out access at 165th Ave., and access closures between Co. Rd. 7 and 165th Ave. along with future frontage along southbound Hwy 52.


    View full-sized image

    Alternative 6


    Full access interchange to the north of Co. Rd. 7, new Co. Rd. 7 from north of 420th St. to Hwy 52. A new township road would connect south of the interchange to Sherwood Trl. A J-turn intersection at 165th Ave. Access closures between existing Co. Rd. 7 and 165th Ave. along with existing Co. Rd. 7 from Hwy 52 to the new Co. Rd. 7 north of 420th St. would turn back to the township.


    View full-sized image

    Alternative 7


    Full access interchange at 165th Ave., an underpass to the north of Co. Rd. 7, and a new Co. Rd. 7 from north of 420th St. to Hwy 52. A new township road would connect south of the interchange to Sherwood Trl. Access closures between existing Co. Rd. 7 and 165th Ave. along with existing Co. Rd. 7 from Hwy 52 to the new Co. Rd. 7 north of 420th St. would turn back to the township.


    View full-sized image

    Alternative 8


    J-Turn at 165th Ave., an underpass to the north of Co. Rd. 7, and a new Co. Rd. 7 from north of 420th St. to Hwy 52. A new township road would connect south of the interchange to Sherwood Trl. Access closures between existing Co. Rd. 7 and 165th Ave. along with existing Co. Rd. 7 from Hwy 52 to the new Co. Rd. 7 north of 420th St. would turnback to the township.



  • The Purpose and Need document is available for review and comment.

    Share The Purpose and Need document is available for review and comment. on Facebook Share The Purpose and Need document is available for review and comment. on Twitter Share The Purpose and Need document is available for review and comment. on Linkedin Email The Purpose and Need document is available for review and comment. link

    The Purpose and Need document establishes the transportation purpose and need for Hwy 52 between Hader and Zumbrota by evaluating existing and future conditions along Hwy 52 and identifying needs and potential transportation improvements that future projects may include. No funding for future projects is included in the study.

    Developing a purpose and need statement is part of the Planning and Environmental Linkages (PEL) study process. After reviewing the Purpose and Need document please provide your feedback using the comment form.

    These documents are also available at the Zumbrota Public Library, 100 W. Ave., Zumbrota.

    Your continued interest in this effort is important. Thank you.


  • June 2023 public meeting materials

    Share June 2023 public meeting materials on Facebook Share June 2023 public meeting materials on Twitter Share June 2023 public meeting materials on Linkedin Email June 2023 public meeting materials link

    The following is the information presented at the June 21, 2023 public meeting at the Zumbrota VFW.

    About the study

    The Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) and Goodhue County are conducting a Planning and Environmental Linkages (PEL) study. The study will examine the Highway 52 corridor between Hader and Zumbrota.

    The PEL study will help us understand how proposed transportation improvements might benefit or impact the environment, communities, and economy.

    The proposed improvements aim to:

    • Improve safety
    • Manage access
    • Improve freight movement
    • Address agricultural transportation needs
    • Manage congestion into the future
    • Encourage economic development

    This information collected as part of this study will be used to:

    • Identify short and long-term needs for all travelers
    • Evaluate current and future environmental conditions
    • Develop criteria and evaluate alternatives
    • Create an implementation plan including future projects, risks, and next steps


    Project area map from Hader to Zumbrota


    Note: The access points closed by the adjacent Highway 52 project will remain closed.

    Timeline

    The study began in March 2022 and will continue into 2023.

    Funding

    No funding has been identified for any proposed improvements.

    Existing Conditions

    Traffic and Access

    • The highway is managing the traffic volume well. The levels of delay or congestion are typical.
    • 75% of vehicles on this section of Hwy 52 are passing through.
    • Freight trucks make up 8-12.5% (2,700) daily trips.
    • Several access points will be closed with the Hwy 52 Southbound Reconstruction Project.

    Land Use

    • Zumbrota anticipates new commercial, residential, and industrial developments.
    • For new developments to the west, Hwy 52 will be a barrier into central Zumbrota.

    Infrastructure Condition

    • There are no concerns over the condition of existing bridges.
    • Pavement in fair to good condition.

    Safety

    • Most of the project area has safety issues.
    • 225 crashes in the past five years.
    • 85% are run off the road or right angle crashes.
    • The rate and severity of these crashes are significant compared to similar locations.
    • Conditions are unsuitable for walking and bicycling.

    Environment

    • Zumbro River – floodplain is close to and crosses Hwy 52.
    • Endangered species – there may be three endangered species in the area – the northern long-eared bat, Minnesota dwarf trout lily, and monarch butterfly.
    • Pollution – Feedlots, storage tanks, and hazardous waste sites are nearby.

    What we’ve heard so far

    Community members shared their experiences on Hwy 52 from Hader to Zumbrota through township board meetings, the Goodhue County Fair, a public meeting, and online engagement.

    Improve safety

    • Better and safer crossings on the highway
    • Acceleration/deceleration lanes to enter and exit the highway

    Manage access and congestion

    • Interest in adding a frontage road as access points are closed
    • Understanding that Hwy 52 will “grow up” over time

    Agricultural needs

    • Hwy 52 is important, but it is a divider. There are limited solutions for those who have to work on/around it
    • Want to prioritize farmers and the feeling of “country” amidst growth

    Vision for the future

    • Grade-separated highway
    • Continued growth in the Cannon Falls to Zumbrota area
    • Better access across Hwy 52 and on/off Hwy 52 for farmers

    Access treatments

    Access management is:

    • Planning and control of the location, spacing, design, and operation of driveways, median openings, and street connections to a roadway.
    • Designates where and how vehicles access and exit a roadway.
    • Helps protect public investment in roadways by:
      • Preserving mobility
      • Reducing delay
      • Minimizing crashes
      • Reducing conflict points

    Below are examples of the access treatments MnDOT uses throughout the state.


    Potential access treatment graphic showing: Do Nothing which is lowest cost and no safety improvement; J-turn which is medium cost, maintains access, and improves safety; Right-in right-out which is low cost, reduces access and improves safety; three-quarter access which is low cost, reduces access and improves safety; High T intersection which is medium-high cost, reduces access and improves safety; and full access interchange which is high cost, maintains access and improves safety


    Alternative 1

    Alternative 1 includes a J-turn at County Road 7 as the primary intersection with a J-turn at 165th Avenue as the secondary intersection.


    Alternative 1 map



    Alternative 2

    Alternative 2 includes a J-turn at 165th Avenue as the primary intersection with a J-turn at existing County Road 7 as the secondary intersection. Under this alternative 165th Avenue would become County Road 7 from Hwy 52 north to 400th Street then west to existing County Road 7. The existing County Road 7 would turnback to the township.


    Alternative 3

    Alternative 3 includes a High T intersections at both County Road 7 and 165th Avenue as the primary intersections with access closures between County Road 7 and 165th Avenue along with future frontage roads along both sides of Hwy 52.


    Alternative 3 mapView full-sized image

    Alternative 4

    Alternative 4 includes a full access interchange at 165th Avenue as the primary intersection with access closures at and near existing County Road 7 along with future frontage road along southbound Hwy 52 with a new river bridge. Under this alternative 165th Avenue would become County Road 7 from Hwy 52 north to 400th Street then west to existing County Road 7. The existing County Road 7 would turnback to the township.


    Alternative 5

    Alternative 5 includes a full access interchange at County Road 7 as the primary intersection with right-in/right-out access at 165th Avenue and access closures between County Road 7 and 165th Avenue along with future frontage along southbound Hwy 52.


    Alternative 6

    Alternative 6 includes a full access interchange to the north of County Road 7 as the primary intersection along with a new County Road 7 from north of 420th Street to Hwy 52. A new township road would connect south of the interchange to Sherwood Trail. A J-turn intersection at 165th Avenue as the secondary intersection. Access closures between existing County Road 7 and 165th Avenue along with existing County Road 7 from Hwy 52 to the new County Road 7 north of 420th Street would turnback to the township.



    Alternative 7

    Alternative 7 includes a full access interchange at 165th Avenue as the primary intersection. An underpass to the north of County Road 7 as the secondary intersection along with a new County Road 7 from north of 420th Street to Hwy 52. A new township road would connect south of the interchange to Sherwood Trail. Access closures between existing County Road 7 and 165th Avenue along with existing County Road 7 from Hwy 52 to the new County Road 7 north of 420th Street would turnback to the township.


    Alternative 8


    Alternative 8 includes a J-Turn at 165th Avenue as the primary intersection. An underpass to the north of County Road 7 as the secondary intersection along with a new County Road 7 from north of 420th Street to Hwy 52. A new township road would connect south of the interchange to Sherwood Trail. Access closures between existing County Road 7 and 165th Avenue along with existing County Road 7 from Hwy 52 to the new County Road 7 north of 420th Street would turnback to the township.


    No Build “Do Nothing” Alternative


    This is the access after completion of the current construction process. The alternatives can be evaluated against this no-build alternative.



    Local Road Alternative

    The Local Roads Alternative shows roads turning back to the township along with additional township roads near Sherwood Trail and 440th Street. These are only some of the options that could be incorporated with the No Build or Alternatives 1-8.

    Map showing local road alternatives including potential to extend County 50 to 8 and turn back existing County 50 to township; township road connects from 440th Street to Sherwood Trail and from 135th Avenue to 440th StreetView full-sized image

  • Public meeting: June 21, 2023

    Share Public meeting: June 21, 2023 on Facebook Share Public meeting: June 21, 2023 on Twitter Share Public meeting: June 21, 2023 on Linkedin Email Public meeting: June 21, 2023 link

    Thank you to everyone who attended the public meeting on Wednesday, June 21. Attendees reviewed alternative designs created by the project team and provide input on how the alternatives meet their needs.

    People unable to attend the meeting were provided the opportunity to review the information on-line and provided their feedback through the on-line survey.


    Public meeting:

    Date: Wednesday, June 21, 2023

    Time: 5-7 p.m.

    Location: Zumbrota VFW, 25 E 1st St., Zumbrota

    Over the past year, community members shared their experiences on Hwy 52 from Hader to Zumbrota. The project team has created seven design alternatives based on what we heard. People attending the meeting can provide input on how these alternatives meet their needs.

    The top four priorities that people felt were important to the future of Hwy 52 were:

    • Improving safety

    • Managing access and congestion

    • Addressing agricultural needs

    • Creating a vision for the future

    The input will help the project team further pinpoint community needs and develop specific changes to Hwy 52.

    People unable to attend the meeting will be able to review the information and provide comments through an on-line survey.

  • Spring 2023 Study Update

    Share Spring 2023 Study Update on Facebook Share Spring 2023 Study Update on Twitter Share Spring 2023 Study Update on Linkedin Email Spring 2023 Study Update link


Page last updated: 20 May 2024, 08:09 AM