HomeMy WebLinkAbout2B, I-694 TH 51 DiscussionAIQENHILLS
Request for Council Review
Prepared By: Terry Maurer, Public Works Director Worksession Date: January 18 2011
City Engineer
13
I -694 TH 51 Discussion
Discussion Topic:
Discussion of the 14 conditions, Resolution 2010 -0052, placed on the Municipal Consent for this project.
Supporting Documents:
1. Memorandum dated January 28, 2011, from Terry Maurer.
2. Council packet from January 20, 2011, Council meeting.
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
January 18, 2011
Background Discussion
I- 694/TH 51 Discussion
BEN HILLS
MEMORANDUM
Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers
Patrick Klaers, City Administrator
Terry Maurer, Public Works Director /City Engineer
Attached is the I- 694/TH 51 packet information from the January 10, 2011, City Council meeting
to continue the discussion of the 14 conditions, Resolution 2010 -052, placed on the Municipal
Consent for the project. Joe Lux of Ramsey County will be present for issues dealing with the
county road system (Jim Tolaas will be out of town at a conference). Former Mayor Stan
Harpstead, the City appointee to the Appeal Board, will be unavailable for the discussion as he is
out of the country next week.
City Council Meeting
P:\Admin \Council\Agendas Packet Information\2011 1 -18 -11 Worksession\Packet Information\ 1 -18 -11 I -694TH 51 Discussion.doc
i
AITT HILLS
Request for Council Action
Prepared By: Terry Maurer,
Public Works Director /City Engineer
Council Meeting Date:
g
January 10, 2011
Mn/DOT I -694 1 TH 51 Improvement Project Appeal Board Appointee
Budgeted Amount:
N/A
Actual Amount:
Funding Source:
Recommendation:
the formal City Appointee to the Mn/DOT Appeal Board for the I- 694/TH 51
is also requested to give staff any further comments and/or direction
the City's 14 conditions_
The City Council is requested to make
Improvement Project. The City Council
regarding MnIDOT staff's position on
Supporting Documents:
10, 2011, from Terry Maurer, Public Works Director.
2010, from Mark Lindeberg, North Area Engineer.
2010, from Commissioner Thomas Sorel.
1. Memorandum dated January
2. Letter dated November 29,
3. Letter dated December 13,
HILLS
MEMORANDUM
DATE: January 10, 2011
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
Patrick Klaers, City Administrator
FROM: Terry Maurer, Public Works Director City Engineer ippi(
SUBJECT: Mn/DOT I -694 TH 51 Improvement Project Appeal Board
Appointee
Discussion
Page 1 of 2
Background
Mn/DOT is proposing an improvement project for the interchange of I- 694/TH51 in
Arden Hills. In June, 2010, Mn/DOT submitted a Mn/DOT approved layout to the City,
requesting City approval (Municipal Consent) of the layout. On August 9, 2010, the City
Council held the public hearing for this project. On October 25, 2010, the City Council
adopted Resolution 2010 -052 Disapproving the Final Layout of I- 694/TH 51 with
Conditions.
Resolution 2010 -052 was sent to Mn/DOT and on December 13, 2010, the City received
a response. The response in the form of a letter dated December 13, 2010, from Thomas
K. Sorel, Commissioner of Transportation, (copy attached) states that Mn/DOT will be
initiating the Municipal Consent Appeal Process. Mn/DOT has appointed Mr. Greg Ous,
Assistant Division Director for Operations Division, as their member to the three member
panel. The letter asks the City to appoint their member as soon as possible. The City
Council at the December 20 worksession briefly discussed appointing former Mayor
Stan Harpstead. Once the City and Mn/DOT have appointed their members, the third
member is appointed by mutual agreement between the City and Mn/DOT. If no
agreement on the third member can be reached, the Chief Justice of the Minnesota
Supreme Court will appoint the final member.
The City may want a third member of the Appeal Board that is both technically
orientated and familiar with the I -694 corridor. Two names staff would suggest are Mark
Maloney, Public Works Director /City Engineer for Shoreview, or Mark Graham, Public
Services Director /City Engineer for Vadnais Heights.
City Council Meeting
Metro- inet\ ardenhills \Admin \Council\Agendas Packet Information\2011 \1 -10 -11 Regular\Packet Information \8A 1 -694
Merno.doc
After the three member Appeal Board is established, they have 30 days to hold a hearing.
At the hearing both the City and Mn/DOT will be given an opportunity to present their
case to the Board. After the hearing, the Board has 60 days to make its recommendation
in a written report to the Commissioner and the City.
Finally, since the adoption of Resolution 2010 -052 through late November, staff has been
discussing with Mn/DOT staff the 14 conditions contained in the resolution. Attached is a
letter dated November 29, 2010, from Mark Lindeberg, North Area Engineer, detailing
Mn/DOT's position on each of the 14 conditions. Commissioner Sorel's letter states that
MnJDOT will continue to work with the City to "narrow our differences and, I hope reach
agreement on many issues prior to conclusion of the appeal process." Staff believes that
conditions #1, 5, 8, 12 and 13 are adequately addressed in MnIDOT's November 29
letter. Conditions #2 and 10 staff believes are adequate answers from Mn/DOT but
require a further commitment of funding from the City for the noise wall and/or concrete
sidewalk. Finally, staff does not think conditions #3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 14 are adequately
addressed by Mn/DOT's position.
Council Action Requested
Council is requested to formally name a City appointee to the Appeal Board.
Staff would also request direction regarding the 14 conditions and the staff analysis of
Mn/DOT's responses and/or direction regarding further negotiation with Mn/DOT staff
prior to the appeal process beginning.
City Council Meeting
\\Metro-inet\ardenhills\Admin\Council\Agendas Packet Information\2011 1 -10 -11 Regular\Packet Information\8A 1 -694
Memo.doc
Page 2 of 2
a 04 Es°14 4 Minnesota Department of Trans ortation
ti a p
g Metropolitan District
a
QF TA" 1 500 West County Road 8 -2
Roseville, MN 55113
November 29, 2010
Mayor Stan Harpstead
City of Arden Hills
1245 West Highway 96
Arden Hills, MN 55112
RE: Conditions for Municipal Consent of I-694/TH 51 Layout
Dear Mayor Harpstead:
1 am responding to the city of Arden Hills' letter of October 27, 2010, concerning the Arden Hills
City Council resolution disapproving the final layout for the 1 -694 at TH 51 and TH 10 project that
was submitted by Mn /DOT. In that letter, Arden Hills denied Municipal Consent with 14 conditions.
Mn /DOT intends to continue working with you and Arden Hills city staff to at least narrow our
differences and reach agreement on many issues. In doing so, 1 am going to address the 14
conditions to initiate the negotiation process.
Conditions from Arden Hills:
1 The City requests that the revised traffic data outlined in the MnDOT letter dated September
14, 2010 be added to the approved layout.
Mn /DOT response /statement MnIDOT has added the revised traffic data requested. Mn /DOT
sees this condition as being met.
2 The City requests that MnDO T show the beginning and ending points of the possible noise wall
on the proposed layout. MnDO T has estimated the construction cost at $1,525,000 with MnDOT
funding $1,050,000 and the City funding $475,000. The City requests that MnDOT commit to
paying any construction cost over the estimated $1,525,000. In the event that the construction
cost is less than estimated the City requests that their share be prorated.
Mn /DOT response Mn /DOT has shown the possible noise wall on our final layout. The funding
of the noise wall can be established as a lump sum agreement where the city pays $475,000
towards the design and construction of the noise wall, or Mn /DOT and Arden Hills could agree to
use a "Schedule 1" breakdown of costs for the noise wall. Arden Hills would then be responsible for
An Equal Opportunity Employer
whatever the costs are above and beyond the $3250 per decibel per benefiting resident. This
option has much more uncertainty to the city than does the lump sum option.
Please be aware that the installation of approximately 2000 feet of the 3000 foot noise wall will
impact existing trees in the area. Some of these trees are mature Oak trees and other areas are
very dense clusters of trees. So, the impacts will be very large.
3 The City requests that MnDOT commit that fill generated on the project will first stay on the
project and be used for sound mitigation berming in all areas where noise walls are not proposed.
Additional fill material, if it exists, should be used for berming along both sides of I -694 west of the
project limits.
Mn /DOT response Mn /DOT has investigated potential berming areas on the project. In looking
at berming areas, it is necessary to look at areas that would allow berming within the existing R/W.
The only area where berming can be constructed within the existing R/VV is on the south side of 1-
694 west of old TH 10. Mn /DOT is able to berm in this location while avoiding the area needed for
ponding. The berm will be constructed meeting Mn /DOT design standards for clear zone setbacks,
drainage requirements and wetland impacts. There will be impacts to mature trees with this
berming. Mn /DOT will identify these impacts and requests that these impacts be discussed and
agreed to by Arden Hills.
4 The City requests that MnDOT prove that the traffic modeling for the I- 694/TH 51 improvement
considered the entire region and the effect the proposed grade separated intersection of TH 10 /CR
96 with the loss of some movements will have on the entire transportation system. Furthermore,
the City wants MnDOT modeling to document that the proposed improvement veil cause no harm
and actually provide benefit to the county and local road system beyond Hamline Avenue, County
Road F, Lexington Avenue, County Road E and Lexington Bridge over 1-694.
Mn /DOT response Mn /DOT can confirm that the traffic modeling for this project has considered
the entire region and the effect the proposed grade separated intersection of TH 10 /CR 96 has on
it. In addition, Mn /DOT will prepare an exhibit showing the 2010 traffic counts for the local roadway
system for both the no build and the build condition. This exhibit will show the local traffic
conditions resulting from both projects.
6 The City requests that MnDO T commit that there are no city costs associated with the
proposed improvements necessary on interstate, county or local system (including changes that
might be required on County Roads E, F, Hamline Avenue, Lexington Avenue or the junctions
An Equal Opportunity Employer
between) to construct the 1- 694/TH 51 interchange shown on the proposed layout with the
exception of noise walls.
Mn /DOT response Based on the Mn /DOT construction project, the costs that will be associated
to Arden Hills will be due to requests made by the city. The city, in addition to the noise wall costs,
will be responsible for paying for the cost of construction of the 6' concrete sidewalk from Floral
Drive to County Road F. The signal that is being constructed at Hamline Avenue and County Road
F will have county cost participation. Mn /DOT is unable to state what the Ramsey County cost
participation is. There may be city participation in the signal. Also, Ramsey County will be looking
at future roadway improvement projects in the area. The county cost participation policy will be
implemented on these projects. Ramsey County should be consulted on their cost participation
policy.
6 The City requests that MnDOT work with Ramsey County staff to identify necessary
improvements to the Lexington Avenue /County Road F intersection, assist in estimating the costs
of such improvements and encumber funding from the Cooperative Agreement funds or other
appropriate fund source in a year agreed to by the County in consultation with the cities of Arden
Hills and Shoreview.
Mn1DOT response Mn /DOT has already met with Ramsey County to discuss this area and the
possible improvements. It has been agreed upon that Mn /DOT will continue to work with Ramsey
County in assessing possible improvements. Mn /DOT will work with the county in the submittal of
a Cooperative Agreement project. The Cooperative Agreement process is a very timely process
that allocates money within the same year as the application. If successful, this may allow for a
project to be completed shortly after the completion of the I- 694/TH 51 project.
The City requests that MnDOT agree to work with Ramsey County to identify any potential
changes that could be made to the Lexington Avenue Bridge and adjoining intersections that would
improve their operation and make such improvements prior to the completion of the 1 -694
interchange.
Mn /DOT response Mn /DOT has already discussed this issue with Ramsey County. Mn /DOT
has continued to provide data to Ramsey County as they look at the possible improvements for the
area. This would be a county lead project with Mn /DOT providing assistance in any way possible.
Potential construction would occur some time after completion of the 1 -694 bridge replacement
project.
An Equal Opportunity Employer
8 The City requests that MnDOT change the layout as necessary to provide the required spacing
and appropriate (barrier) separation for a 10 foot wide bituminous trail on the west side of old
Snelling Avenue/old TH 10 as it passes under 1 -694.
Mn /DOT response -In the development of the layout, Mn /DOT work with the Minnesota Rules to
design the appropriate trail crossing under a bridge.
9 The City requests that MnDOT construct a non- motorized /pedestrian bridge across TH 10 to
connect North Snelling Avenue to the trail connection under 1 -694 identified in #8 above.
Mn /DOT response The development of a TH 10 non motorized /pedestrian bridge crossing is a
project that should be developed using the Federal STP process. This project would compete with
other projects in the region with the best projects being selected for funding. Building connecting
facilities to the project would benefit the City by enhancing the proposed pedestrian bridge project
submittal.
10 The City requests that MnDOT show on the approved layout a 6 foot wide concrete sidewalk
on the west side of Hamline Avenue from Floral Drive to County Road F and on the south side of
County Road F towards Lexington Avenue to the existing and /or planned sidewalk
Mn /DOT response Mn /DOT is showing the 6' wide concrete sidewalk along Hamline Avenue
from Floral Drive to County Road F. Mn /DOT is willing to construct any additional sidewalks that
the City requests, but Arden Hills is responsible for the costs of the sidewalks, and Arden Hills will
need to provide the required RIW.
11 The City requests that MnDOT include as part of the proposed bridge structure crossing 1 -694
a non motorized /pedestrian facility that will provide for movements from the west side of Hamline
Avenue to the west side of TH 51.
Mn /DOT response First, the bridges that are being constructed will be able to be widened in the
future to accommodate a trail. The development of an 1 -694 non motorized /pedestrian bridge
crossing is a project that should be developed using the Federal STP process. This project would
compete with other projects in the region with the best projects being selected for funding. Part of
the project development should include working with the 1 -694 pedestrian crossing committee that
will be formed to analyze pedestrian crossings of 1 -694 from 1 -35W to 1 -35E. The committee may
include representatives from Arden Hills, Shoreview, Ramsey County, Mn /DOT, FHWA and the
Met Council, but not limited to this group.
An Equal Opportunity Employer
rte
Est
12 The City requests MnDOT clearly state that the existing area on TH 5lavailable for non
motorized/pedestrian movements will not be lessened in the future with the proposed
improvements.
Mn /DOT response The existing bridge structures have less width for non-motorized/pedestrian
movements than the proposed bridge structures.
13 The City requests that MnDO T commit to including the design standards laid out in the
Architectural and Aesthetic Design Guidelines for the 1 -694 Corridor from the Mississippi River
Crossing in Fridley to the 1 -694 Interchange in Oakdale, July 2002.
Mn /DOT response Mn /DOT commits to using the Architectural and Aesthetic Design Guidelines
for the 1 -694 Corridor from the Mississippi River Crossing in Fridley to the 1 -694 Interchange in
Oakdale, July 2002. This document has been given to the bridge design consultants and is being
used by the Mn /DOT bridge design unit in the development of the bridges for the project.
14 The City requests that MnDO T affirm the intentions for 2015 reconstruction of County Road E
bridge over TH 51 and consider the possibility of moving this construction up in time to match the
balance of the regional construction (for bid economies of scale and logistics). The City may be
able to advance the funds necessary for this construction given a firm repayment in 2015.
Mn /DOT response Mn /DOT will continue the development of the CR E bridge project in
partnership with the County and City. The current Mn /DOT scoping document has been shared
with Arden Hills and Ramsey County. This proposed project could move up if a funding source can
be found.
Mn /DOT appreciates Arden Hills' continued involvement with this project. Please let me know if
you have any questions. 1 am available at 651 -234 -7722.
Sincerely,
ark J. Linde erg
North Area Engineer
Minnesota Department of Transportation
An Equal Opportunity Employer
cc: Thomas O'Keefe
Wayne Norris
Patrick Klaers
Terry Maurer
Jim Tolaas
An Equal Opportunity Employer
4NNES0.. Minnesota Department of Transportation
Transportation Building
395 John Ireland Boulevard
oFT 0, 4 Saint Paul, Minnesota 55155 -1899
December 13, 2010
Mayor Stan Harpstead
City of Arden Hills
1245 West Highway 96
Arden Hills, MN 55112
RE: Municipal Consent for Interstate 694 at TH 10 Snelling Ave
Dear Mayor Harpstead:
1 am responding to the city of Arden Hills' letter of October 27, 2010, concerning the Arden Hills
City Council resolution disapproving the final layout for the 1 -694 at TH 51 and TH 10 project that
was submitted by Mn /DOT to the city for municipal consent under Minnesota Statutes, sections
161.162 161.165. Mn /DOT appreciates Arden Hills' participation in the proposed 1-694 bridge
replacement project. Arden Hills has cooperated with and assisted Mn /DOT in the development of
the geometric layout. The city's contribution has improved the project to its current design.
The proposed 1 -694 at TH 51 and TH 10 project is critical to future mobility in one of the state's
busiest interstate corridors. The project will eliminate one of the region's most notorious traffic
bottlenecks; improve traffic flow and safety; eliminate mainline weaving movements and provide
system continuity on 1 -694, TH 51 and TH 10. This project will reconstruct nine bridges on 1-694
from west of Victoria Street to west of CSAH 76 in Arden Hills.
Given the importance of the 1 -694 project to the region and the state, Mn /DOT will pursue actions
necessary to keep the project on schedule for beginning construction in 2011. With this letter,
Mn /DOT initiates the municipal consent appeal process as outlined in state law, by submitting to
the city Mn /DOT's appointee, Mr. Greg Ous, Assistant Division Director for Operations Division, to
the three member municipal consent appeal board. Please identify your appointee so the appeal
process can move forward as quickly as possible. Consistent with Minnesota Statutes, section
161.164, we intend to focus the appeal process on the city's specific requests for modifications to
the project's final layout.
The law provides that the third member of the Appeal Board will be selected by mutual agreement
between the city and Mn/DOT. If we cannot agree, Mn/DOT will ask the Chief Justice of the
Minnesota Supreme Court to appoint the third member. The law requires that the Chief Justice
An Equal Opportunity Employer
appoint the third member within 14 days of that request. Once the Appeal Board is established,
Mn/DOT will refer the final layout to the Board. The Board must hold a hearing within 30 days after
referral of the final layout. The law provides that the city and Mn/DOT may each present its case to
the Board. The Board must make its recommendation in a written report to the Commissioner and
to the city within 60 days of the hearing.
In initiating the appeal process, 1 want to stress to the city and the region that 1 believe our common
interests and goals for the 1 -694 corridor are greater than our differences_ 1 am hopeful that, with
mutual cooperation, resolution of all issues wilt be achieved quickly.
As with any municipality raising concerns relevant to municipal consent, Mn /DOT will continue to
work with Arden Hills to narrow our differences and, 1 hope, reach agreement on many issues prior
to conclusion of the appeal process. 1 am encouraged by progress already made by our_ respective
staffs to better define, scope and address many of the city's requested layout modifications.
Mn/DOT stands ready to continue these discussions.
Mn /DOT appreciates Arden Hills' continued involvement with this project. If you have any project
specific questions, please continue to work with Mark Lindeberg, the project manager or Wayne
Norris, the North Area Manager. Please let me know how 1 can assist you at any point in this
process.
Sincerely,
Thomas K. Sorel
Commissioner
Minnesota Department of Transportation
cc: Khani Sahebjam
Scott McBride
Betsy Parker
Sue Mulvihill
Greg Ous
Tom O'Keefe
Wayne Norris
Mark Lindeberg
Steve Ryan
An Equal Opportunity Employer
w:.