Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2D, I-694 TH 51 Interchange Project EN HILLS Request for Council Review 2D Prepared By: Terry Maurer,Public Works Director Work Session Date: March 21,2011 1-694/TH 51 Interchange Project Discussion Topic: Informational only. No action required. Su_pp_orting Documents: 1. Letter from Mayor David Grant addressed to Scott McBride,P.E., dated February 28, 2011. 2. Letter addressed to City Administrator Patrick Klaers from Planning Specialist Joseph Lux dated March 9, 2011 EN HILLS MEMORANDUM DATE: March 21, 2011 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers Patrick Klaers, City Administrator FROM: Terry Maurer, Public Works Director rL SUBJECT: I-694/TH 51 Interchange Project Background On February 9, 2011 State Senator Goodwin and State Representative Knuth held a meeting at the State Office Building in an effort to help resolve the Arden Hills' issues with the planned Mn/DOT I-694/TH 51 Interchange Project. In attendance were representatives of Mn/DOT, Ramsey County, and Arden Hills. Arden Hills attendees were Councilmembers Holden and Holmes, City Administrator Klaers and Public Works Director Maurer. Attached is a follow-up letter from Mn/DOT signed by Scott McBride, Metro District Engineer, addressing the City's 14 conditions. Also attached is a letter from Joe Lux of Ramsey County clarifying three of the conditions addressed in Mn/DOT's letter. Below are Staff's comments on key points contained in Mr. McBride's and Mr. Lux's letters: 1. On Condition #2, Mn/DOT states that the City is no longer pursuing the noise wall so they will remove it from the construction plans. Staff has talked to Mn/DOT and informed them that this is not what was said at the meeting with Senator Goodwin and Representative Knuth. Staff reminded Mn/DOT that we indicated our feeling that the City would forego the noise wall if freeing up approximately $1,000,000 of Mn/DOT funding would help with Mn/DOT funding needed traffic improvements on Lexington Avenue. 2. On Condition #3, regarding using excess material generated on the project for building berms to help with noise mitigation; Mn/DOT gave a more detailed City Council Meeting P:1Admin\Counci1lAgendas&Packet Information12011\3-21-11 Worksession\Packet Informationl3-21-11 I-694memo.doc Paget of 2 explanation at the meeting that the need to build storm water ponds, limited right- of-way, and topography of the excess right-of-way made it impossible to build berms of sufficient length and height to provided any noise mitigation. With this more detailed explanation it was agreed that building of berms was no longer needed. 3. On Condition #5, Mn/DOT basically has given the same answer about potential City costs with their project. Ramsey County's letter clarifies even further potential cost from a County project on Lexington Avenue. It appears that the City costs for both projects will be modest. 4. Condition #6 deals with Mn/DOT committing funds to help Ramsey County with needed improvements on Lexington Avenue due to the interchange project. Staff has had several conversations with Mr. McBride and Jim Tolaas regarding this issue. Mr. McBride has been very clear that Mn/DOT policy prohibits them from committing in writing to having funding available for the County project as the funds come from a competitive program at Mn/DOT. Mr. McBride did tell staff that Mn/DOT would do everything it could to help the County with the Lexington Avenue improvements. Staff asked Mr. McBride to call Jim Tolaas to discuss this and then ask Mr. Tolaas to call the City. Staff did receive a phone call from Mr. Tolaas stating he talked to Mr. McBride and that the County is fully committed to making the necessary improvements to Lexington Ave and they feel Mn/DOT will help with funding. 5. Condition #7 deals with making improvements to the Lexington Avenue Bridge to lengthen the left turn lanes. Mn/DOT has committed to making this change including the adjustments to the signal systems at each end of the bridge and to do the work concurrent with the interchange project and to totally fund it with Trunck Highway dollars. This is an estimated$400,000 project. 6. On Condition #14, dealing with the County Road E Bridge, Mn/DOT states the bridge could be advance constructed and commits to working with the County and City to develop the project. Ramsey County's letter indicates they are working with Mn/DOT on the project, will be applying for STP funding and the application will include the pedestrian facilities the City sought in 2009. Staff believes that Mn/DOT has moved a significant amount from their original response to the City's 14 conditions. In fact, Staff believes this is the best deal we are likely to get with the commitment to making bridge improvements and getting potential assistance with the funding of County improvements on Lexington Avenue. Staff would like direction from the City Council regarding the noise wall and whether or not Mn/DOT's current response is acceptable for granting Municipal Consent. City Council Meeting P:\Admin\CouncillAgendas&Packet Information120 1 113-2 1-1 1 Worksession\Packet Informationl3-21-11 I-694memo.doc Page 2 of 2 � oT - 'yam Minnesota Department of Transportation Metropolitan District of: 1500 West County Road B-2 Roseville, MIV 55113 February 28, 2011 Mayor David Grant City of Arden Hills 1245 West Highway 96 Arden Hills, MN 55112 RE: Conditions for Municipal Consent of 1-6941TH 51 Layout Dear Mayor Grant: On February 9, 2011, MnIDOT staff met with Minnesota State Senator Goodwin, Minnesota State Representative Knuth, Arden Hills Council members Holden and Holmes, Arden Hills city staff, and Ramsey County staff. At this meeting, discussions centered on 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 MnIDOT. In that letter,Arden Hills denied Municipal Consent with 14 conditions. Mn/DOT is resubmitting information pertaining to the negotiation process to try to obtain Municipal Consent on this project. Mn/DOT will continue working with you and Arden Hills city staff to narrow our differences and reach agreement on many, if not all, issues. In doing so, I am optimistic the 14 conditions can be resolved based on our discussions on February 9, 2011. 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. WDOT response/statement—Completed and attached. Mn/DOT has added the revised traffic data requested to layout 2A dated November 2010, based on Mn/DOT forecasted volumes. 2— The City requests that MnDOT show the beginning and ending points of the possible noise wall on the proposed layout. MnDOT 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. An Equal Opportunity Employer Mayor David Grant February 28, 2011 Page Two Mn/DOT response - Mn/DOT has shown the possible noise wall on our final layout. The funding of the noise wall(if requested by the city), would have been established as a lump sure agreement where the city pays $475,000 towards the design and construction of the noise wall. Based on discussions at our meeting, MnIDOT understands that this noise wall is not being pursued by Arden Hills, so Mn/DOT will remove the noise wall from our construction plans. 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 1-694 west of the project limits. MnIDOT response—MnIDOT 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 RNV. The only area where berming could be constructed within the existing RIW is on the south side of I- 694 west of old TH 10. MnIDOT would be able to berm in this location while avoiding the area needed for ponding. The berm would be constructed to meet MnIDOT design standards for clear zone setbacks, drainage requirements and wetland impacts. There would be impacts to mature trees with this berming. This berming would NOT provide any noise reduction benefit. Arden Hills stated concern about the lack of noise reduction by the berm and the potential loss of trees,therefore, WIDOT will remove this request from consideration. 4— The City requests that MnDOT prove that the traffic modeling for the 1-6941TH 51 improvement considered the entire region and the effect the proposed grade separated intersection of TH 101CR 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 will 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. An Equal Opportunity Employer Mayor David Grant February 28, 2011 Page Three WIDOT response— Mn/DOT can confirm that the traffic forecasting and modeling for this project has considered the entire region along with the effect the Ramsey County proposed grade separated intersection of TH 10ICR 96 has on it. Mn/DOT is providing the projected traffic volumes for the local roadway system, based on these impacts. 5— The City requests that MnDOT 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 between) to construct the 1-6941TH 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 attributed to Arden Hills will be due to requests made by the city. The city will be responsible for paying for the cost of construction of the 6' concrete sidewalk from Floral Drive to County Road F including ADA requirements at the intersection. The proposed signal at Hamline Avenue and County Road F will be constructed as a part of a separate project, and will have County cost participation. MnIDOT is not in a position to dictate Ramsey County cost participation policy. There may be city participation in the signal based on county policy. Mn/DOT can commit that Arden Hills cost participation is limited to costs associated directly to requests made by the city. Ramsey County will need to be consulted regarding their cost participation policy for signal costs and any future projects the county may have. 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_ An Equal Opportunity Employer n - - �•� Mayor David Grant February 28, 2011 Page Four MnIDOT response— MnIDOT has already met with Ramsey County to discuss this area and the possible improvements. It has been agreed that MnIDOT will continue to work with Ramsey County, with input from Arden Hills and Shoreview, 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 concurrently or shortly after the completion of the I-694fTH 51 project. MnIDOT has committed to finding funding for the MnIDOT share of improvements to the Lexington Avenue area that are eligible- 7-- 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. MnIDOT response—MnIDOT commits to making changes to the Lexington Ave bridge deck to allow for side by side left turn lanes from Lexington Ave to 1-694 as a separate project from the I- 694 bridge replacement project. This work will be completed concurrently with the 1-694 bridge replacement project and will use Trunk Highway dollars for the improvements. Project development has already been initiated. 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%Id TH 10 as it passes under 1-694_ MnIDOT response —Completed _In the development of the layout, MnIDOT worked with the Minnesota State Aid Design Standards to design the necessary space for a trail crossing under the 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 I-694 identified in #8 above. An Equal Opportunity Employer Mayor David Grant February 28, 2011 Page Five MnIDOT response—This request is outside the limits of this project. The development of a TH 10 non-motorized/pedestrian bridge crossing is a project that should be funded through the regional solicitation process for Transportation Enhancement dollars. 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 andlor planned sidewalk Mn/DOT response—Completed - MnIDOT is showing the 6'wide concrete sidewalk along Hamline Avenue from Floral Drive to County Road F, including ADA requirements for pedestrian crossings. 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 necessary RNV. 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—Mn/DOT has taken a proactive approach in trying to address the pedestrian issue in this area. The design, as it exists today, does not preclude any pedestrian options through the area for recreational use. The users there today will still have the ability to maneuver through the area in the future. Northbound TH 51 will have a 10' shoulder on the outside, and southbound Harnline Avenue will have 24' of pavement width. As previously stated in a letter to Mayor Harpstead, dated August 5, 2010, and in Mn/DOT'S presentation to the Arden Hills City Council meeting on August 9, 2010, crossing 1-694 on the HamlinelTH 51 bridges does present situations that are not safe for pedestrians. These situations require pedestrians to cross high volume traffic headed into two separate entrance loops or crossing a high speed connection from EB 1-694 to SB TH 51. These conditions create situations An Equal Opportunity Employer • 4 Mayor David Grant February 28, 2011 Page Six that are not only unfamiliar to the pedestrian community, but put the pedestrians in situations of conflict with high volume, high speed freeway traffic. In addition to these concerns, a pedestrian trail that follows TH 51 would require either crossing a RR track at grade, which the RR would not be in favor of, or crossing under the RR track which would require the reconstruction of the RR bridge in order to accommodate the addition of a trail under it. Based on the discussion at the February 9, 2011 meeting, our understanding is that this pedestrian connection is no longer being requested by Arden Hills due to the safety concerns for the pedestrians. 12 — The City requests MnDOT clearly state that the existing area on TH 51 available for non- motorized/pedestrien movements will not be lessened in the future with the proposed improvements. MnIDOT response—The proposed new bridge structures will have greater width for non- motorized/pedestrian movements than the existing bridge structures. 13 — The City requests that MnDOT 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. MnIDOT response—Completed - Mn/DOT is 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 MnIDOT bridge design unit in the development of the bridges for the project. 14 — The City requests that MnDOT 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 necessa for this construction given a firm repayment in 2015. An Equal Opportunity Employer 0 On Q Mayor David Grant February 28, 2011 Page Seven 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. If you have any questions, please contact Mark Lindeberg, Project Manager, at 651-234-7722. Please let me know if you have any questions that I can be of assistance on. Sincerely, Scott McBride, P.E. Minnesota Department of Transportation Metropolitan District Engineer cc: Senator Goodwin Representative Knuth Patrick Klaers—Arden Hills Terry Maurer—Arden Hills Jim Tolaas—Ramsey County Joe Lux—Ramsey County Thomas O'Keefe—Metro District Wayne Norris--Metro District Mark Undeberg—Metro District An Equal Opportunity Employer .......... .. Department of Public Works James E.Tolaas,P.E.,Director and County Engineer 1425 Paul Kirkwold Drive Arden Hills,MN 55112-3933•(651)266-7100•Fax(651)266-7110 NW E-mail: Public.Works@co.ramsey.mn.us March 9, 2011 Patrick Klaers City Administrator City of Arden Hills 1245 W. Highway 96 Arden Hills, MN 55112 IVINIDOT 1-6941TH 'i01TH 51 PROJECT Dear Mr. Klaers: We received a copy of MN/DOT Metro District Engineer Scott McBride's February 2e letter to Mayor Grant and wanted to clarify some of points: 5-MNIDOT's response to the City mentions that under Avenu the te and County Road Fthat wohere ould be may be costs associated with the traffic signal at Hamine would be that of passed on to the City. Under County polkapproximately , the imcost iy$5 000-Other than the EVPtcomponents, Vehicle Preemption (EVP) components at pp all costs of this signal would be borne by MNIDOT and the County_ Lexingteen 1-694 and The improvements necessary to accommodate traffic be subject o the County'n Avenue, sVcost participation approximately 600 feet north of County Road F wouldd be ' policy, but because all roads are under owhether Federal fst to the city lunds minima be l Percentages of City funding would vary somewhat depending on Transportation {STP)funds or State funds are received for secured for this project_ If Federal Surface this project, they would reduce any City participation. ether on 6-As stated in Mr. McBride' letter, Ramsey Couand efMic efficient operation of Lexington OT have been working tAvenue, from options to fund the improvements necessary to ensure re confident that we can find a fair way to fund this project. I-694 to north of County Road F and we aas decided the Cunty will seek 14-Ramsey County met recently with MN/DOT and it w ion of the Cou tyaRoad E interchange bridge outer STP funds in the Bridge category for the reconstruct y the City in the 2009 Snelling Avenue. The proposal will inrcnlud�ements and shoulde pedestrian er ss We wile soughtbbe con ac#ing the City STP solicitation, as well as turn lane i p staff shortly to discuss this funding proposal. If we are not successful in obtaining STP funding for the project, it could still be built with bridge bonds in the planned time frame. e an e-mail at Jose h.lux co.ramse .mn.us if you have Please give me a call at 651-266-7114 or send m questions or comments. Sincerely, � bse h lux p Planning Specialist C: Terry Maurer,Arden Hills Public Works Director Wayne Norris, MN/DOT North Area Manager Mark t-indeberg, MN/DOT North Area Engineer