Loading...
5.3. SR 06-13-2005 Item 5.3. 13065 Orono Parkway Elk River, MN 55330 June 3, 2005 The Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Elk River 13065 Orono Parkway Elk River MN 55330 RE: VARIOUS TRANSPORTATION ISSUES Dear Council Members: Part of Monday evening's City Council workshop is dedicated to various transportation issues. This memo will provide a brief background on each of the items. For several of the more complex item, I have attached additional backup material. It will be difficult at Monday evening's meeting to cover all of these topics in detail, but I will be prepared to discuss any of these items that the Council may have questions about or comments. The items I have on my list are as follows: 1. School Street Extension Westerly to Upland Avenue (County Road 44) This was one of the top four transportation priorities that the Planning Commission recommended to the City Council. This may ~e the most long-term of the four issues. The reason is that the westerly extension of School Street to Upland Avenue will require a crossing of the Burlington Northern Railroad tracks. It is unlikely that the City would be allowed another at grade crossing. Also, an at grade crossing would not help traffic flow better in the long run. Therefore, a bridge crossing of the railroad tracks will likely be needed to ultimately construct this corridor. Using an assumed bridge length of 1,200 feet and the MnDOT annual estimated cost of$80 per square foot for bridge structures, together with a roadway typical section similar to School Street east of Proctor Avenue, the bridge component of this connection will likely be in the $5 million range. In addition to the bridge, there will be a need to acquire right of way from the Elk River Concrete property. Staff would recommend to the City Council that to pursue this transportation corridor, staff be directed to work with Elk River Concrete Co. to begin discussions on a viable future route for a roadway through their property that will minimize disruption to their plant operation. We would suggest that this be an ongoing discussion item with no immediate deadlines for accomplishment. To help visualize the alignment of this corridor, attached is an aerial photograph of the area. Phone: 763.635.1000 Fax: 763.635.1090 www.cLelk-river.mn.us Transportation Issues June 3, 2005 Page 2 2. County Road 44 Status There are two possible scenarios for the upgrading of County Road 44 (Upland Avenue/Meadowvale Road) from 1H 10 to CSAH 1. The first scenario would be a negotiated turnback of the roadway from Shhburne County to the City of Elk River with the City taking the lead in reconstructing the entire length of the roadway. The reconstruction would be funded through a negotiated agreement between the County and the City. This would be similar to the turnback agreement that is nearing completion for Cleveland Avenue (County Road 40). Sherburne County has done a fair amount of preliminary work, anticipating the reconstruction of County Road 44. They have identified the need for additional right-~f-way in areas where the roadway curves and/ or where turn lanes and bypass lanes are anticipated at major intersections. Any right-of-way acquisition would be the responsibility of the City. The County's estimated reconstruction cost for County Road 44 prepared over a year ago was $1,600,000, not including right-of-way costs. The second scenario which could be utilized on County Road 44 would be for the County to rebuild the roadway surface in its current alignment and current width. The County would mill up the old surface, add granular base to the subgrade, and reinstall two lifts of blacktop to create a new driving surface. This scenario would not add any turn lanes, would not change the road from its rural nature, and would not add pedestrian facilities. What this scenario would do is provide a new surface for a badly deteriorated roadway. The new surface could easily be expected to last 10-15 years. There would be no City cost participation in this option. The City may not have much, if any, say as to whether this scenario is pursued. The roadway is in the County's jurisdiction and Rhonda Lewis, Sherburne County Engineer, is quite concerned about the current condition of the driving surface. Therefore, it is her intent to recommend to the County Board at the June 8th workshop related to transportation, that this option be pursued in the 2005 County overlay program. I will be tracking this discussion and will be able to update the City Council at your June 13th transportation workshop as to the County Board discussion. Again, an aerial photo of the County Road 44 area has been attached for an easy reminder of the roadway corridor. 3. Elk Hills Drive Extension Easterly to CSAH 13 Due to the numerous issues involved with Elk Hills Drive corridor, attached is a bullet point summary of the existing and proposed information relative to rights-of-way width and street section. Also included in this summary is an estimated ballpark cost for additional right-of-way acquisition and construction cost, together with a number of other issues to consider. The attachment includes a brief outline of a potential schedule that this project could follow. Finally, attached to help with the discussion is an aerial photo of the area. S:\Engineer\2005 cc memos\06 03 05 Transp issues.doc Transportation Issues June 3, 2005 Page 3 4. 193rd Avenue Extension Easterly to CSAH 13 This also is a complex project with many issues; therefore, a summary sheet has been attached, again providing existing data together with proposed data. The attached sheet also includes approximate ballpark costs for right-of-way acquisition and construction costs, together with an approximate schedule of how this project could be pursued. An aerial photo of the corridor area is also attached. Attached is a copy of the letter sent by Barbara and David Burandt to all Council Members. I have also been contacted by and met with Mr. and Mrs. Hovald who live at 19221 Tyler Street. Both families are concerned about the extension of 193rd Avenue and the effect it will have on their property. It is important to note that no firm alignment has been established at this time. If staff is given direction to proceed on development of this proposed corridor, a significant amount of time will be spent on trying to establish an alignment that minimizes impacts while providing a viable transportation corridor for the long term. The Burandt's letter suggests that 197th Avenue be chosen as an alternative to 193rd Avenue. In fact, ultimately both corridors will be needed to move traffic to and from rn 169. It is not a choice of one over the other but more of a question of when each corridor should be developed. 5. County Road 40 (Cleveland Avenue) Turnback Agreement Status The County has prepared a draft turnback agreement that was discussed at the last joint City/County Transportation Committee mee~ing. Since that meeting, the City Administrator and I have reviewed the draft ~greement, added comments, and returned it to the County Engineer and County Attorney. It is our understanding that the Board discussed it briefly at a regular meeting and moved it to the June 8th transportation workshop for further discussion. It is my intent to be present at the County Board's workshop. Hopefully, this issue will be concluded at that time and the agreement will be ready to move forward to final execution. When this agreement is finally executed by the City and the County, we will be presenting resolutions to the City Council for your consideration relative to initiating land acquisition and final design for the reconstruction of County Road 40 anticipated to begin in 2006. The City Council has previously approved the Right of Way Map prepared by the Sherburne County Surveyor for County Road 40. The County Surveyor has now prepared a Right of Way Plat for County Road 40. It is my understanding that the only difference between a "Map" and a "Plat" is the plat identifies the owner of each parcel. It is also my understanding that approving this plat does not obligate the City to acquire each parcel. Therefore, I would recommend that the City Council approve the Right of Way Plat for County Road 40 and authorize the appropriate City officials to sign it. 6. County Road 33 and 77 Turnback Agreement Attached is a draft turnback agreement for County Road 33 between rn 169 and County Road 77, and County Road 77 from County Road 33 north to 1H 169. These two segments of road will no longer serve a County road purpose, once the realignment of County Road 33 and the lowering and realignment of County Road 77 (proctor S:\Engineer\200S CC memos\06 03 05 Transp issues.doc Transportation Issues June 3, 2005 Page 4 Avenue) is completed in the gravel mining area. This draft turnback agreement indicates that the County will reclaim each of the roads and reconstruct them with 6 inches of aggregate base and 7 ~ inches of bituminou$ surfacing. The paving will be 28 feet wide, which is two 12-foot lanes with 2-foot bitun1inous shoulders. On the outside of that will be a one-foot gravel shoulder. The agreement also states that for the two years after the agreement is signed, Sherburne County will be responsible for maintenance of the roadways. Maintenance of the newly-paved surface will essentially amount to snowplowing. I believe that this is a reasonable approach to dealing with these two segments of roadway. I have discussed this issue with Street Superintendent Phil Hals and he is aware of this issue and is generally in concurrence with it moving forward. I am looking for City Council direction whether or not you concur with this approach. If the Council concurs with this, I will work with the County Engineer to get minor changes made to the draft agreement and present it at a future City Council meeting for final approval and execution. 7. Master Agreement with Sherburne County to Turn Back All County Roads I have had a follow-up meeting with Rhonda Lewis regarding transportation issues. At that meeting we discussed the concept of a master agreement between the City and the County for the turnback of all County roads within the City of Elk River. Rhonda expressed some immediate concern about the turnback of higher volume County roads classified as major collector and minor arterial such as CSAH 12 and 13. Rhonda agreed to have a discussion with Kathy Heaney, County Attorney, relative to the legality of such a master agreement and any liability issues about turning back roadways classified on the higher end of traffic volumes. In addition, Rhonda indicated she would have a similar discussion with Brian Bensen, County Administrator, regarding the County's position in funding such an agreement. Rhonda and I plan to have additional information available to discuss at the next quarterly County/City Transportation meeting. 8. TH 169 Corridor Study As the City Council is aware, MnDOT has agreed to do a corridor study dealing with geometric layouts and environmental documentation for the 1H 169 corridor from Elk River to Princeton. An initial kick-off meeting was held on May 9, 2005. Attached are the minutes from this meeting. MnDOT has budgeted $1.25 million for this study in fiscal year 2006. MnDOT will be working to hire a consultant but will likely not have anyone on board until late summer after the start of the next fiscal year. I will keep the City Council apprised of the progress of this study. 9. Highland Road Corridor There are a couple of different options that could be pursued with the Highland Road corridor. The existing Highland Road right-of-way is 80 feet wide and the current roadway is approximately 40 feet wide. The roadway could either be left as is and a pedestrian facility be constructed in the existing right-of-way, or the other option would be to reconstruct the roadway; probably narrowing it to 32 feet, and creating an urban section with concrete curb and gutter to give the perception to the motoring public that the roadway is narrower, hopefully helping to reduce speeds. At the same time, a S:\Engineer\200S CC memos\06 03 05 Transp issues.doc Transportation Issues June 3, 2005 Page 5 pedestrian facility could be built on either or both sides with the narrowed roadway. The abutting property owners would perceive th~t they are losing less of their front lawns. The issue that would be opened up with a reconstruction project would be whether or not to bring City utilities (sanitary sewer and water) into the area. Watermain is currently looped along the Highland Road corridor, bl}t the abutting properties were not required to connect to it. The watermain was looped by the Elk River Municipal Utilities for continuity of their high pressure systems in the east and west parts of the City. The Highland Road neighborhood is within the Gity's Urban Service Area, but is a relatively large-lot development that has never express~d an overwhelming desire for City utilities. Attached is an aerial photo of the Highland Road corridor. 10. School Street/High School Driveway Signalization This is an issue that has been discussed manx times over the past several years in an attempt to minimize or eliminate exposure of the community service officers and school officials to traffic. The City could install a signalized intersection at the high school parking lot driveway onto School Street. We have explored with MnDOT all other possibilities and the only legal possibility is afull-ftedged operating signal which would obviously be green most times for the School Street leg. The signal would operate off loop detectors and timers. This would allow! a vehicle coming from Lions Park Center or the high school parking lot at off hours to trigger the signal to turn green for that leg, but the signal could also be timed so that at the end of the school day, it would allow a longer green time to empty the parking lot. With a signalized intersection, there would likely not be a need for a community service officer to place themselves in the middle of School Street exposed to vehicle traffic. It is! staff's opinion that this installation could and should be funded at least half by the School District. The City's portion of the cost could be funded with Municipal State Aid dollars, since School Street is an MSA route. The estimated cost of a signal system at this location would be $125,000 to $150,000. 11. Westbound 193rd Avenue at TH 169 I have discussed with Tom Davidson, the MnDOT Traffic Signal Technician who works on the Elk River signals, what it would take to make two through westbound lanes at 193rd Avenue and 1H 169. This would allow!more traffic to get through the intersection in peak times on a green cycle. Mr. Davidson has indicated that the loop detectors in place would be able to handle the changing of the lane configuration in most cases. So, simply the changing the signs on the mast arms and repainting the lanes to indicate the combined through/right-turn movement of ~he most northerly westbound lane would accomplish this. The two negatives that could potentially happen would be right turning traffic from westbound 19yd Avenue to northbound 1H 169 that could make their right turn on a red light may not be able to get to ~he intersection if they are waiting behind a vehicle intending to go straight through the intersection. The loop detector issue could arise if a single car wanting to go straight through 1H 169 westbound is waiting in the most northerly lane, it may not trip the signal and would have to wait for the timer, because the current loop detector may regist~r that car as a right turning vehicle. My suggestion would be that we change the sign$ on the mast arm and the striping on the street and let the intersection operate while observing to see if there are any significant issues with its operation before taking the more expensive step of changing the loop S:\Engineer\2005 CCmemos\06 0305 Transp issues.doc I Transportation Issues Jnne 3, 2005 Page 6 . detectors under the pavement and the wiring within the signal control panel. An aerial photo of the intersection is attached. 12. Waco Street Waco Street between TH 10 and Mississippi Road has been partially reconstructed with the Western Area Phase 4 Improvements. The southern half of Waco Street leading to Mississippi Road has not been reconstructed. Staff has had preliminary contact from an engineering consultant representing the owners of the Pinewood Golf Course exploring the option of developing the golf course into residential lots. In our discussion with this individual, we indicated that development of Pinewood Golf Course into residential lots would require payment of $1,500 per residential unit for the reconstruction of Waco Street. This is ~imilar to the amount charged to the West Oaks Addition. If there were any development to occur on the east side of Waco Street on the property recently purchased by Sherburne County, a similar requirement to contribute towards the reconstruction of the south half of Waco Street would be raised. Staff believes that reconstruction of this portion of Waco Street should be driven by development in the area. 13. Dodge Avenue . The northern portion of Dodge Avenue between 5th Street on the south and Elk Hills Drive was reconstructed in 1995. The southern portion of the roadway originally built in 1981 has never been reconstructed. For a number of years, staff anticipated a petition coming from the major owner of the properties along the south portion of the road. However, to date no petition has been forthcoming. There are basically two options for the south half of Dodge Avenue. It could either be totally reconstructed similar to the north half which was slightly widened to allow for two lanes southbound, with one of the lanes accommodating left turning vehicles and the other through traffic, and one lane northbound. Or it could be recycled; that is, have the bituminous milled off, additional gravel base added and a new bituminous surface placed. It has been suggested that it simply could be overlaid but this is not a viable option because of the deteriorated condition of the existing bituminous surface. After 24 years of heavy commercial traffic, the amount of cracking and patching in the existing surface would simply reflect through an overlay and the overlaid surface would look similar to the existing surface in a few years. The reconstruction of the south half of Dodge Avenue similar to the northern section would cost approximately $275,000. The recycling of the surface would be approximately half that amount. Both of these would be assessable improvements, however, the City would need to participate approximately half or more of the cost because there is very limited assessable frontage on the west side of the roadway. The condition of Dodge Avenue has deteriorated to the point that if no petition is forthcoming from the abutting property owners, the City Council will be forced to initiate some type of project here in the near future. . S:\Engineer\200S CCmemos\06 03 05 Transp issues.doc Transportation Issues June 3, 2005 Page 7 14. Southbound Jackson Avenue at School Street Attached is an aerial photo of the intersection of J ackson Avenue and School Street. The issue we were asked to look at is what can be done differently with the lane drop for southbound J ackson Avenue just south of School Street. Currently, there are two southbound lanes north of School Street. One is a through/right turn lane and the other is a through/left turn lane. Approximately 300 feet south of School Street these two lanes merge into one. The issue here is often times individuals are in the through/left turn lane anticipating continuing southbound on J ackson Avenue, only to find cars speeding by them on the right side to merge into the single lane ahead of them. As the City Council may remember, staff has indicated that we would like to see Jackson Avenue south of School Street considered for three-lane restriping after it is sealcoated. In fact, the recently approved Jackson Villas, the townhome development on the west side of J ackson Avenue, was required to pay a fee to help facilitate the restriping of J ackson Avenue. It is unlikely that this will happen in 2005 because as the Jackson Villas development begins, there is a significant amount of unsuitable material that will be removed from that site and a similar amount that will be imported to the site. All of this heavy truck movement would destroy a new seal coat and striping configuration. So, it is our opinion that the sealcoating of J ackson Avenue south of School Street will not be recommended until 2006. For that reason, there have been no mailings to the property owners on the east side of J ackson Avenue to solicit input and comments relative to a three-lane striping. However, staff will still accomplish an informational mailing and solicitation of comments before any restriping proposal is brought back to the City Council. With this being said, if Jackson Avenue were restriped to three lanes, the three-lane configuration could be run all the way to School Street and actually a little bit to the north of School Street. This would eliminate the two southbound lanes merging into one south of School Street. This scenario would mean at southbound J ackson Avenue at School Street would be a left turn lane and a through/right-turn lane. To make this change, however, would require some modification to the current traffic signal at this intersection. This may also be the time to add left turn arrows for southbound Jackson and/ or westbound School Street. If the City Council would like staff to pursue this further and potentially anticipate this change in 2006, we would request direction to analyze the turning movements and traffic flow at the intersection of School Street and Jackson Avenue. From that traffic counts, we could bring back a firm recommendation and cost estimate to make the striping changes and modifications to the existing traffic signal, at the same time keeping in mind the input from the residents south of School Street on the east side of Jackson Avenue relative to a three-lane striping configuration which would eliminate on-street parking. 15. Pedestrian Count Down Timers There has been some discussion about installing pedestrian count down timers at the TH 10 intersections with Main Street and J ackson Avenue, anticipating parking on the north side of TH 10 with pedestrians accessing downtown by crossing TH 10. I have recently been informed by the MnDOT District 3 Assistant Transportation Engineer Tom Dumont that the installation of count down timers will not be possible at this time at S:\Engineer\200S CCmemos\06 0305 Transp issues. doc Transportation Issues June 3, 2005 Page 8 these intersections. The reason is that the technology of the count down timers has not progressed to the point that it is adaptable to railroad preemption of the signal system. In other words, as a train passes through, it preempts the signals and changes the cycle to preclude cars from stacking up near a closed railroad crossing. If we had count down timers installed, a pedestrian crossing the highway would expect to have a number of seconds left to continue to complete their crossing, but if a train preempted the signal, the technology has no way at this time to warn the pedestrian. MnDOT's Assistant Traffic Engineer was confident that the manufacturers of the count down timer technology would be addressing this issue sometime in the future. I have asked him to keep me appraised as to when this technology change would become appropriate for installation at these intersections. 16. Other Issues If the City Council has any questions regarding the status of the 2005 Street Reconstruction Project or the King Avenue Parking Lot, I will be able to answer those as well. If there are any other transportation issues you would like me to be prepared to discuss at Monday evening's meeting, please call. Sincerely, r-- rJIII~ T :!;:;t'urer, PE City Engineer S:\Engineer\200s CCmemos\06 03 05 Transp issues.doc School Street Westerly Extension I . County Road 44 Corridor I ELK HILLS DRIVE CORRIDOR (TH 169 TO CSAH 13) I A. EXISTING DATA Elk Hills Addition (Elk Hills Drive) . Existing Right-of-Way · Existing Street 60' 32' wide suburban 2003 Traffic Count Added to MSA System after 2003 counts (likely under 1000 ADl) MSA Designation 1H 169 to CSAH 13 1H 169 IRC Study Predicts highway overpass at 1H 169 and Elk Hills Drive (No highway access) .B. FUTURE DATA Length of Roadway Extension . Elk Hills Addition . Elk Hills Addition to CSAH 13 1800' 1800' (depending on fmal alignment) Right-of-Way Need (Assume 80' wide) . Elk Hills Addition · Elk Hills Addition to CSAH 13 0.85 acres 3.30 acres Property Owners Affected · Elk Hills Addition · Elk Hills Addition to CSAH 13 15 abutting (30-35 lots total) 2or3 Possible Future Road Section · 44 to 52 feet wide; urban design with ctletached sidewalk or trail Estimated Cost of Construction · Right-of-Way $332,000 (Estimated $80,000/ acre for purchase and overhead) . Street Construction $1,440,000 S:\EngineerlmprovProj\2005 Improvement Projects \Elk Hills Drive Corridor\06 03 05 draft outline.doc C. POSSIBLE FUNDING SOURCES . Municipal State Aid Funding (City's annual allotment approximately $700,000) . Federal Funding r.y ery competitive and does I!1ot. cover right-of-way acquisition) . Developers . City . J\ssessment D. OTHER ISSUES . Elk. Hills J\ddition is within Urban Service }\rea but does not have City services. If Elk. Hills Drive is reconstructed, consideration should be given to extending urban services into the Elk. Hills J\ddition and over to CSAH 13. This would likely involve reconstructing all streets within the Elk. Hills J\ddition. . Significant wetlands issue (see aerial photo) as new alignment nears CSAH 13 E. POSSIBLE SCHEDULE Gather more information Hold public informational meeting Determine layout/ alignment/ right-of-way J\pply for Federal funding Hold public hearing/adopt alignment Right-of-way acquisition Design project Construction Project complete Summer 2005 Fall 2005 Winter 2005-2006 December 2005 Spring 2006 Summer 2006 - Fall 2007 Fall 2007 -Spring 2008 Summer 2008 Summer 2009 S:\EngineerImprovProj\200S Improvement Projects\ElkHills Drive Corridor\06 0305 draft outline.doc Page 2 Elk Hills Drive Corridor I 193RD AVENUE CORRIDOR (TH 169 TO <;:SAH 13) A. EXISTING DATA Hillside Estates 1st and 3rd (193rd Avenue) · Existing Right-of-Way · Existing Street 70' 44' wide urban Woods at Hillside 2nd & 3rd (193rd Avenue) · Existing Right-of-Way · Existing Street 84' 44' wide (2-22' lanes w/median) 2003 Traffic Count 9500 Average Daily Traffic (near TH 169) MSA Designation rn 169 to Tyler Street (Tyler Street toCSAH 13 could be added) rn 169 IRC Study Predicts one-half of split diamond interchange at 1H 169 and 193rd Avenue B. FUTUREDATA Length of Roadway Extension · Woods at Hillside 3rd to Tyler Street · Tyler Street to CSAH 13 1500' (depending on final alignment) 1800' (depending on fmal alignment) Right-of-Way Need (Assume 80' wide) · Woods at Hillside 3rd to Tyler Street · Tyler Street to CSAH 13 2.75 acres 3.30 acres Property Owners Affected · Woods at Hillside 3rd to Tyler Street 2 or 3 · Tyler Street to CSAH 13 3 to 5 Possible Future Road Section · 44 to 52 feet wide; urban design with detached sidewalk or trail Estimated Cost of Construction · Right-of-Way $484,000 (Estimated $80,000/ acre for purchase and overhead) · Street Construction $1,485,000 C. POSSIBLE FUNDING SOURCES · Municipal State Aid Funding (City's annual allotment approximately $700,000) · Federal Funding 01ery competitive and does not cover right-of-way acquisition) · Developers · City · J\ssessment D. POSSIBLE SCHEDULE Gather more information Hold public informational meeting Determine layout/ alignment/ right-of-way J\pply for Federal funding Hold public hearing/adopt alignment Right-of-way acquisition Design project Construction Project complete Summer 2005 Fall 2005 Winter 2005-2006 December 2005 Spring 2006 Summer 2006 - Fall 2007 Fall 2007 -Spring 2008 Summer 2008 Summer 2009 S:\EngineerImprovProj\200S Improvement Projects\193rd Avenue Corridor\06 02 05 draft outline.doc Page 2 JUM a 1 mn5 Barbara and David Burandt 19118 Tyler Street NW Elk River, :MN 55330 May 26, 2005 Stephanie Klinzing Mayor City of Elk River Elk River City Hall 13065 Orono Parkway Elk River,.:MN 55330 Re: Alternatives To The Proposed Extension of 193rd Avenue Dear Iv1ajor Klinzing: The mtention of this letter is to'otfer:s?Inereaso~able. itnd."post'yffective 'alternatives to the' proposed extension of 193m Aventie through>bUr ,'propertY "located on .19118 . Tyler Street NW.' In reviewing the Transportation Plan for the City of Elk River, we see that the plan calls for more east-west corridors in the area we live in to move projected increases in traffic around Highway 169. The area identified for a possible corridor appears to be anywhet;'e between 197th and 193rd Avenue on the east side of Highway 169. Therefore, the plan specifies 193rd Avenue as one OfVariOllS options and not as the only option. There are two .other existing options to move projected increases in traffic around Highway 169. Elk River currently has two corridors that bring traffic from County Road 13 or Tyler Street to Highway 169. They are 197th (off Tyler Street) and Line Avenue, which connects to 5th Street and Dodge Avenue (moving traffic off County Road 13). As an alternative and as a cost effective approach to building a completely new road, we suggest that these two corridors be widened and straightened as a first step to moving more traffic around the east side of Elk River. . 197th Avenue has'the potential to be widened and straightened without the cost of moving 9f replacing se-wer and water lines. This isa,si~r,llficant .C()st~aviIlgfor the cOIll1ll,unity. I 97th. Avenue is also a. connect!on to : a .flIture oy~a~~ onHighway 169,.. so greater traffic capacity here is needed in the .long-term anyway. It seems more reasonable and 'economical to widen an existing road now then to build a totally new road. The City's plan to close Line Avenue where it connects with County Road 13 to redirect traffic south to County Road 12 appears misguided. The commercial businesses on Dodge Avenue will suffer because the plan will cut-off easy access to the businesses from the east. As an alternative, if the connection from Line Avenue, via 5th Street to Dodge Avenue were widened, traffic could flow up to School Street to access that future over-pass of Highway 169. Dodge Avenue should be viewed as a service road that is needed to access commercial and residential areas on the east side of Highway 169 and should also be widened for that purpose. If the City's plan to close Line Avenue is effectuated, it will result in economic hardship for the business community of Elk: River. If the City Council does not consider and pursue other alternatives and continues with plans to extend 193rd Avenue, we offer the following cost effective alternative: We suggest that the road not go directly through our property, but rather follow the property line out to Tyler Street. This is more reasonable and far less expensive alternative for various reasons. First, although our property is zoned residential, it is currently being used for agricultural purposes and qualifies as "green acres". We raise cattle and other animals on our property. Putting the road through our property will greatly reduce our pastureland on which our animals graze and live. Additionally and significantly, the road will take away our. access to the northeast comer of our property where there is a natural water source for our animals. If access to the water source is eliminated, which the road would do, our animals will not be able to get water freely. The second reason the City should build a road along the section line opposed to through our property is to save money for reimbursement of our land and l~gal fees. Since the current City's proposal would take a significant portion of our land and make the land far less valuable for future development purposes, we will demand payment for both the land used for the road and the loss of the land in the NE comer. The fees for the land as well as the legal fees and appraisal fees in conjunction to the taking of the land will be very expensive. This land means the world to us and we are not willing to. let it go at a discount. Therefore, if you decide to pursue the option of developing the road through our property, it will be a far more expensive and litigious alternative than you may have originally calculated. It would be less expensive and involve less legal entanglement to simply build the road on the property line. We would like to invite both you and the City Engineer out to walk: around our land and review maps to have a better understanding of our concerns related to our property. David will be calling you to set up times to do this if you are interested. Also please call us if you have any questions at (763) 441-2537. We would invite city councilmembers and planning commission representatives also for a walk: and a review of maps around our property. Thank you for your time and consideration to these matters. Barbara Burandt cc: ~rry Mauer, City Engineer John Dietz, Ward 1 City Councilmember Jerry Gumphrey, Ward 2 City Councilmember Larry Farber, Ward 3 City Councilmember Paul Motin, Ward 4 City Councilmember Ho\vard Ropp, Chair, PlannLqg Commission Jennifer Lammers, Esq., Chestnut and Cambronne tJ~~ David Burandt Map -Output Page 2 of 4 C21$IM~ ~;t /13d~ .... http://www.sherburne.Inn.promap.comlservletlcom. esri. esrimap .Esrimap?ServiceName=... OS/26/2005 COUNTY HIGHWAY 33 BETWEEN CH 77 AND US HWY 169 AND COUNTY HIGHWAY 77 NORTH OF CH 33 TURNBACK AND RECONSTRUCTION AGREEMENT BETWEEN SHERBURNE COUNTY AND THE CITY OF ELK RIVER WHEREAS, County Highway 33 between CH 77 and US HWY 169 and County Highway 77 north of CH 33, located in the City of Elk river is presently under the jurisdiction of Sherburne County as a County road; and WHEREAS, These segments of CH 33 and CH 77 has been determined to serve a local function only as a local road; and WHEREAS, revocation of "County Road" status may be accomplished by resolution of the Sherburne County Board of Commissioners pursuant to Minnesota Statute 163.11 Subd. 5b; and WHEREAS, it appears to the City Council of the City of Elk River that these segments of County Highways 33/77 hereinafter described under turnback from Sherburne County should be a Municipal State Aid Street under the provisions of Minnesota Law; and WHEREAS, the legally described limits of County Highways 33 and 77 are as follows; DESCRIPTION OF COUNTY HIGHWAYS 33 AND 77 TO BE TURNED BACK TO THE CITY OF ELK RIVER That part of Sherburne County Highways 33 and 77 described as follows: Beginning at the intersection of the centerline of U.S. Highway No. 169 with the centerline of Sherburne County Highway No. 77 being located on the North line of the Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 15, Township 33, Range 26, Sherburne County, Minnesota; thence west along said centerline of Sherburne County Highway No. 77 to the northwest comer of said Section 15; thence south along the west line of said Section 15 to the southwest comer thereof; thence east along the South line of said Section 15, being the centerline of said Sherburne County Highway No. 33, to the intersection with the Westerly right of way line of said U.S. Highway No. 169 and there terminating. NOW, THEREFORE SHERBURNE COUNTY AND THE CITY OF ELK RIVER agree to the following: 1. County shall reclaim and overlay these segments with the equivalent of 6" of Class 5 aggregate base, 3.5" non-wearing course bituminous and 4" wearing course bituminous. Paving two 14' lanes with l' of gravel on each side. 2. City shall have the right to review and approve ~he fmal design of these segments. City and County Engineers shall meet in good faith to resolve any issues that may arise in the design of these segments of County Highways 33/77. A.@ 3. 'd~~' ~ vt~?~~~~~ County sha maintain thes~;~ of C1~Ii~3/77 for two years under lvlinnesota Statute 163.11 Subd. 5b. Each Party shall be liable for its own acts and the acts of its representatives to the extent provided by law and hereby agrees to indemnify, hold harmless, and defend each other, its officers, employees and volunteers against any and all liability, loss, costs, damages, expenses, claims or actions, including attorney's fees which the other, its officers, employees and volunteers may hereinafter sustain, incur or be required to pay, arising out of or by reason of any act or omission of the Party, its agents, servants, employees or volunteers, in the execution, performance, or failure to adequately perform its obligation pursuant to this Agreement. City of Elk River Sherburne County Mayor Board Chairman City Administrator County Administrator H:\Cities\Elk River\33&77 Draft Agreement.doc Trunk Highway 169 Study Kickoff Meeting Minutes State Project 7106-73 May 9th, 200519:00 am Sherburne County Government Center, Elk River, MN PRESENT: Craig Robinson, MnDOT Jim Hallgren, MnDOT Timothy Bray, MnDOT Terry Maurer, Elk River Herb Murphy, Zimmerman Scott Young, Zimmerman John Dotseth, Zimmerman Randy Piasecki, Zimmerman Bob Gerold, Princeton Jesse Hall, Baldwin TWP. Jesse Hall, Baldwin TWP. Don Sherper, Livonia TWP. Lila Spencer, Livonia TWP. Rhonda Lewis, Sherburne County Nancy Riddle, Sherburne County Jon Sevald, Sherburne County Dick Corbin, Sherburne County Richard Larson, Mille Lacs County INFORMATION ITEMS: The meeting started by Craig Robinson introducing himself as the District 3 Project Development Engineer and the person who is overall in charge of this Engineering study. Craig also introduced Timothy Bray as the MnDOT Project Manager for this Study. He explained that Tim would be the primary point of contact for questions regarding this project. It was explained that MnDOT has already begun the process to select a private engineering consultant to help with the actual analysis and documentation of the proposed alternatives. The process of selecting the consultant is expected to be completed by late summer of 2005. Once the consultant is selected the whole study process is expected to last between 2-3 years depending on the level of required environmental documentation. Funding for the preparation of the environmental documentation has been secured. There is no funding identified for construction of any portion of this project in the MnDOT's 10 year plan with the exception of the CSAH 4 interchange in Zimmerman. The objective is to complete the documentation phase of this project in order that it can be moved directly into the final design phase and actual construction if the funding becomes available. The proposed project scope was discussed and a summery map was handed out. The limits of this project are expected to be from roughly the junction of US Hwy 10 in Elk River, to State Hwy 95 North of Princeton. Although the official traffic forecast has not been completed, it is expected that the section of TH 169 between Elk River and Zimmerman will be 6-lane divided Freeway with a local interchanges at major roadway crossings. From Zimmerman North it is expected to be a 4-lane divided freeway or expressway with a combination of both local interchanges and at-grade intersections. Each of the counties, cities and townships were asked to appoint 1-2 representatives for a project advisory committee that will meet roughly once a month or as needed. Although not absolutely necessary it was requested that appointees to this committee be the engineering representative for each of the roadway authorities. Please forward the names and contact information of these people to Timothy Bray at your earliest convenience. An invitation to the first meeting will be sent as soon as all the names have been compiled. These meetings are anticipated to start in mid to late June of 2005 and continue thru the end of the project study. They may continue beyond that as needed including the final design and construction phases of this project. The location and possible rotation of these meetings can be discussed at the first get-together. DISCUSSION: There were few questions and little discussion at the end of the presentation. ACTION: The meeting adjourned at 9:50 NEXT MEETING: TSD Highland Road Corridor I TH 169/193rd Avenue Intersection I Southbound Jackson Avenue at School Street I ~ J:J:2 Rhonda F. Lewis, P.E. 425 Jackson Avenue Elk River, MN 55330 (763) 241-7030. 800-594-5208 Sherburne County PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT June 10, 2005 City of Elk River Attn: Terry Maurer 13065 Orono Parkway Elk River, MN 55330 Dear Mr. Maurer: The County Road 40 turn-back was discussed at the County Board workshop on Wednesday, June 8, 2005. As you are aware, the County has received approval for Federal Funding of $719,104, for the road at a rural status. We had also applied for, but unfortunately did not receive, additional funding to be able to change the status of the road from rural to an urban design. The County Board agreed that in order to be consistent with previous turn-backs that we have dealt with, Sherburne County offers to the City of Elk River a total amount of $1,000,000 to build the proposed rural section (as originally planned for with the application for the Federal Funding), plus two years of maintenance for the County 40 turn-back. If acceptable, a formal agreement will need to be passed by the County Board. If you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to call me at (763)241-7030. Sincerely, honda F. Lewis, P.E. County Engineer JUN) a 200s Cc: Brian Bensen, Administrator RFL/pd It ~ ~ $3 " Sherburne County ADMINISTRATOR BRIAN BENSEN June 13, 2005 13880 Highway 10 Elk River, MN 55330-4601 (763) 24.1"2701D1-800-433-5229 webs1te: www.:Co.sherburne.mnus emall: admin@cO.sherburne.rim.us TO: Pat Klaers, Administrator . City of Elk River . .'. .. . ",.. " ::yM:~:~:i~:;:~ County Board members After our phone conversation today, and your subsequent message, I want to supply you with the attached policywhich the County Board will consider tomorrow. lunderstand YOUWO~"ld, like, to uPdate,' y'our co, un,cilat"ton,iglit's"m,eet~g. 'Thi,S".POliCYiS nO,',tnew. " "',',',. Rather It spells out the. policy the Board and County Engmeer have followed mpast turn, / backs. . , As you are aware, the COunty needs to continue to be consistent in how turn hack agreements are structuredwithour.citiesan,d townships. Thope that this written policy will. make .it easier to anticipate County Board decisions. 'Your other question was regarding County Road 44. Lanticipate the County Board will authorize tomorrow that the County Engineer advertise for bids to reclaim and overlay .CountyRoads 44, 77 (north of 33}, & 33 (from 77 to Hwy169)., Th~ Board, based on th~ County Engineer's recommendations, is .concerned that these ro,ads need to be taken care of this year to maintain safe travel. Tam sure the City Council shares. in these concerns. The County and City have had preliminary discussions on turn backs on all three of these roads. We would like to.continue discussions to turn backthese portions of 77 and 33. In the longer term, we understand that the city may want to discuss reconstruction and turn back ofCoR~ 44." . i\dding these reclaim and overlay projects this year will be quite costly, but the Board feels these roads need the attention now. An Affirmative ActioniEqual Opportunity Employer SHERBURNE COUNTY ROAD TURNBACK POLICY The County of Sherburne shall build the road to the County's design based upon the following: · ADTs; · Soils (determination of the need for a seven ton versus a nine ton road); and, · Functional classification of the road under the Sherburne County Highway Plan. If the proposed road project can be fully paid for from sources other than the county revenues, then the County Board reserves the right to deviate from this policy. In the alternative, the County may elect to pay to the City or the Township, with the latter's agreement, the sum equivalent to the Sherburne County Engineer's adopted cost estimate for building the road and the City or Township agree to build the road. The County shall, as required by statute, maintain the road for the statutorily required period. Adopted this day of ,20 Felix Schmiesing, Board Chair Brian Bensen, Administrator Date Date