Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCCP 09-16-2002 Mayer Dennis Probst CollllcII Members Beverly Aplikowskl David Grant Gregg Larson Leis Rem ~ ~ Arden, Hills City Council 'WORKSESSION 4:45 p.m. Se tember 16, 2002 Agenda (The times may vary depending upon length of discussion.) 124!lW. B1pway". J\nIenBllla, ~ , 55111 651.634~20 1. caUto Order DEPARTMENT 2. COMMUNITY SERVICES A. I.35W BuUd Out Study B. Deslgu Center Final Community Dialogue Preselltation C. TCAAP Master Planning Advisory P:meI D. ,FINANCE -NONE 4:45 STAFF Aaron Parrish 3. OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE A. MFI'F Presentation B. MFI'F Ramsey County Agreement C. 2003 PMP Update D. Karth Lake Update 4, ADMINISTRATION CITY COUNCIL REPOR.TS A. Council Member Grant B. Council Member Larson C" Council Member Aplikowski 1. 2030 Blueprint D. Council Member Rem E.. Mayor ProbSt Thomas Moore Clayton Ziminerman - Chair Joe Lynch Greg Brown Thomas Moore/Greg Brown Joe Lynch ~ . . ~ EN HILLS MEMORANDUM DATE: Agenda Item 2.A September 11, 2002 TO: Mayor and City Council Planning Commission Joe Lynch, City Administrator Aaron Parrish - Community Services Director fi1 FROM: SUBJECT: 1-35W Corridor Coalition Subregional Growth Study.. ENCLOSURES: 1. Subregional Growth Study 2. I-35W/I-694?TH lOITH 36 Transportation Deficiency Study: Phase 1 Overview Over the last two years, the 1-35W Corridor Coalition has been in the process of completing a "Build-out" study for the entire Coalition area (Arden Hills, Blaine, Circle Pines, Mounds View, New Brighton, Roseville, and Shoreview). While the study addresses a number of topical areas, the primary focus is on the interconnection between transportation and land use. In particular, the study provides a comparative analysis of land use into the year 2020 under the following scenanos: · Land use as contemplated in Coalition cities' comprehensive plans. · Land use incorporating smart growth principles. Carol Swenson with the Design Center and Bob Benke with the 1-35W Corridor Coalition will be in attendance to provide a presentation on the study. For reference, I have also attached a copy of the recently completed "I-35W/I-694?TH lO/TH 36 Transportation Deficiency Study: Phase 1." While this document is fairly technical, the Council and Commission may want to review the summary on Page 3 and the conclusions on pages 30 and 31. e Requested Action Provided for informational purposes . e . North Metro I-35W Corridor Coalition Subregional Growth Study 2000 - 2020 In collaboration with Design Center for American Urban Landscape calafSumn College of Architecture and Landscape Architecture University of Minnesota Funded, in part, with grants from the Metropolitan Council Liv- able Community Demonstration Account, the McKnight Foun- dation and Minnesota Department of Transportation Land Use and Transportation Analysis Summary Report Prepared by: Design Center for American Urban Landscape College of Architecture and Landscape Architecture University of Minnesota June 2002 . ~~ @2002DesignCenterforAmericanUrbanLandscape College of Architecture and Landscape Architecture University of Minnesota Design Center Project Team: Carol Swenson.,. Interim Director and Project Manager; Regina Bonsignore; Matthew Finn; Frank. Fitzgerald; Nancy Miller; Wira Noeradi; Gia Pionek; Heather Wainwright; and Jason Zimmerman Project Consultants: Robert Benke, Community Resource Partnerships, Inc.; John Carpenter and Joel Koepp, Excensus, LLC.; Viggen Davidian, Fred Dock and David Kennedy, Meyer, Mohaddes Associates, Inc.; PlanSight, LLC.; Steve Wilson, SRF Consulting Group, Inc.; and Joseph Strauss and Shannon Strauss, Strauss Management Company. . This project was financed in part with a grant from the Metropolitan Council through the Livable Communities Dem- onstration Account of the Metropolitan Livable Communities Fund. Additional funding for this project was provided by the McKnight Foundation and Minnesota Department of Trans- portation. Additional funding for this report and other Design Center publications is made possible through support from the University of Minnesota and grants from the Target Foundation. The University of Minnesota is committed to the policy that all persons shall have equal access to its programs, facili- ties, and employment without regard to race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, age, marital status, disability, public assistance status, veteran status, or sexual orientation. The Geographic Information System (GIS) Maps used in this report are provided to you "as is" and without any warranty as to their performance, merchantability, or fitness for any particular purpose. The Design Center does not represent or warrant that the GIS Maps are error-free, complete, current, or accurate. You are responsible for any consequences resulting from your use of the GIS Maps or your reliance on the GIS Maps. Data for these GIS Maps were provided courtesy of the North Metro 1-35W Corridor Coalition. Sources include: North Metro I-35W Corridor Coalition, City of Arden Hills, City of Blaine, City of Circle Pines, City of Mormds View, City of New Brighton, City of Roseville, City of Shoreview, Anoka Cormty GIS, Ramsey County Surveyor's Office, The Lawrence Group, PJanSight, LLC, Insight Mapping & Demographics, Inc., and the Design Center for American Urban Landscape_ This publication is available in alternative formats upon request. Please contact Design Center for American Urban Landscape, Suite 222, 1313 Fifth Street S.E., Minneapolis, MN 55414-1546, Phone: (612) 627-1850, Fax: (612) 627-4124, Web: http://www.cala. uITUl,edu I dcauII dcaul.html . * The Univer:;ity of Minnesota recommends printing this document on recyded paper containing a minimum 10% post>-(:onsumcr waste. e . . North Metro I-35W Corridor Coalition Subregional Growth Study Land Use and Transportation Analysis Summary Report prepared for The North Metro 1-35W Coalition City of Arden Hills City of Blaine City of Circle Pines City of Mounds View City of New Brighton City of RosevilIe City of Shoreview Anoka County Ramsey County Community Partners prepared by The Design Center for American Urban Landscape College of Architecture and Landscape Architecture University of Minnesota with assistance from Fred Dock Meyer, Mohaddes Associates, Inc. and Steve Wilson SRF Consulting Group, Inc. June 2002 North Metro I-35W Corridor Coalition . Coalition Members: City of Arden Hills City of Blaine City of Circle Pines City of Mounds View City of New Brighton City of Roseville City of Shoreview Ramsey County Community Partners: Metropolitan Council Anoka County Minnegasco Northern States Power Williams Energy Services 2001 - 02 Board of Directors President - Dennis Probst, Mayor of Arden Hills Vice-President - Sandra Martin, Mayor of Shoreview, 2001; Tom Ryan, Mayor of Blaine, 2002 Secretary and Treasurer - Matt Fulton, City Manager, New Brighton Steve Larson, Mayor of New Brighton Joseph Lynch, City Administrator, Arden Hills Roger Fraser, City Manager, Blaine James Keinath, City Administrator, Circle Pines Richard Sonterre, Mayor of Mounds View LeeAnn Osbun, Mayor of Circle Pines, 2001; Keith Perlich, Mayor of Circle Pines, 2002 Neal Beets, City Manager, Roseville Terry Schwerm, City Manager, City of Shoreview John Kysylyczyn, Mayor of Roseville; Dean Maschka, City Council Member, Roseville Kathleen Miller, City Administrator, Mounds View Jan Weissner, Commissioner, Ramsey County Roger Williams, Metropolitan Council Member, Ex-Officio e 2001 - 02 Community Development Directors Committee Chair - Chandra Peterson, City of Circle Pines Bryan Schafer, City of Blaine Jim Ericson, City of Mounds View Kevin Locke, City of New Brighton Tom Simonson, City of Shoreview Jennifer Chaput and Aaron Parrish, City of Arden Hills Dennis Welsch, City of Roseville David Windle, City of Roseville and Jeremy Johnson, City of Blaine; GIS Task Force Chairs Joseph D. Strauss, Vice-President and Administrator, Strauss Management Company Shannon Y. Strauss, Director of Marketing and Communications, Strauss Management Company Robert Benke, Project Manager, Community Resource Parternships, Inc. Strauss Management Company 8525 Edinbrook Crossing, Suite 5 Brooklyn Park, Minnesota 55443 Phone: (763) 493-8450, Fax: (763) 424-1174 The North Metro 1-35W Corridor Coalition wishes to acknowledge the following governments, agencies, and organizations for their financial and in-kind support: The Minnesota State Legislature. The State of Minnesota Department of Trade and Economic Development. The McKnight Foundation. The Metropolitan Council Livable Communities Demonstration Account of the Metropolitan Livable Communities Fund. MetroGIS . Ramsey County . Anoka County. The Design Center for American Urban Landscape, College of Architecture and Landscape Archi- tecture, University of Minnesota. . e Table of Contents e e Executive Summary ................................................................. i Land Use and Transportation Analysis Overview Introduction .............................................................................................. 1 Development of Growth Scenarios and Subarea Transportation Model Assumptions Development of Growth Scenarios ....................................................... 5 Subarea Transportation Model Assumptions .................................... 13 Findings, Conclusion, Next Steps General Observations ............................................................................ 17 Land Use Findings and Next Steps ..................................................... 18 Regional Highway Findings and Next Steps..................................... 20 Arterial Findings and Next Steps .................................................:...... 21 Transit Findings and Next Steps .......................................................... 22 Modeling Next Steps ............................................................................. 23 Moving Forward .................................................................................... 24 . Executive Summary As part of its Subregional Growth Study, the North Metro 1-35W Corridor Coalition analyzed the impacts of land use and develop- ment patterns on the transportation system that serve the subre- gion. The results of the analysis informs development of a set of subregional strategies that address common concerns regarding transportation, housing, and economic development in the corridor. Two subregional growth scenarios were analyzed. One scenario fol- lowed conventional suburban development pattems; the other scenario applied transit-oriented development principles, which emphasizes waIkable, mixed-use centers and multi-modal transportation. In this report, the transit-oriented scenario is referred to as the "Coalition growth scenario." Both scenarios met or exceeded Metropolitan Coun- cil subregional job and household growth projections for 2020 as pub- lished in 2001. . Transportation impacts of the two growth scenarios were analyzed with a subarea transportation model designed to function within the regional transportation model. The subarea model provided the level of detail necessary to make findings relevant to individual com- munities while maintaining integrity at the regional level. For both scenarios, the transportation baseline included assumptions based on current policy documents and roads planned to serve major de- velopment or redevelopment in Arden Hills, Blaine, and Roseville. For the second run of the model, additional roadway network was added to increase connectivity within the Coalition and transit ser- vice was enhanced. Findings of the analysis conclude that both growth scenarios in- crease congestion on the regional highway segments and the minor arterial network within the corridor. This finding is not a surprise. National studies indicate that the Minneapolis-St. Paul region is ex- periencing a higher rate of congestion growth than most other re- gions in the county. It stands to reason that adding new growth in any form would only exacerbate this condition. e The question then becomes, does one growth scenario have ad- vantages over the other? Overall the Coalition growth scenario shows a more efficient pattern of tripmaking. Efficiency is gained by re- ducing the length of trips within the Coalition, increasing the num- ber of walking trips, and increasing the number of transit trips. Mixed-use centers appear to playa significant role in realizing this efficiency because they offer a better jobs Ihousing balance, create more opportunities to walk or bike, and generate densities suffi- cient to warrant high levels of transit service. The reduction in ve- hicle miles traveled and slowed growth rate in trip generation, which are associated with the Coalition growth scenario, implies addi- tional benefits for the environment and quality of life. Conventional Growth Scenario for 2020-71,720 households; 140,970 jobs Coalition Growth Scenario for 2020-88,350 households; 159,150 jobs Based on these and supporting findings, the following summary recommendations were prepared: . promote (re)development of walkable, mixed-use centers within the Coalition . lead a subregional effort to coordinate comprehensive plarming among member cities . work with member cities, Ramsey and Anoka Counties, Mn/DOT and Metropolitan Council to coordinate long-range plarming for mutually supportive land uses and arterial roadway designs and to ensure improvements to regional transportation systems within the Coalition corridor starting with the "triangle" formed by 1-35W, 1-694, and CSAH/TH 10. . . . . . e Land Use and Transportation Analysis Overview e Introduction j)GI\'\It./ M6'1~ t4t~ ~~ .t.lV/el6 ~ c."toIrry . ~V,,~~ m.,~6N The diagram above shows how the various studies that constitute the Subregional Growth Study are interrelated and sequenced. The land use and transportation analysis summarized with this report fits in the lower middle cloud. The North Metro 1-35W Coalition is engaged in a three-year subregional growth study. The study uses a 20-year planning horizon to ask the fol- lowing questions: . How do Coalition communities anticipate growing and changing in the next 20 years? . How can "smart growth" strategies be used to accommodate that growth and achieve the Metropolitan Council's Regional Blueprint 2020 goals? . The first year of the growth-or buildout-study generated three subre- gional scenarios for distributing the same amount of job and household I population growth over the next 20 years. The conceptual scenarios evolved from Coalition input, which was gathered during workshops and from city comprehensive plans and information about existing conditions. One scenario followed conventional suburban growth patterns, the other two scenarios used livable community principles. Analysis of the three scenarios indicated that application of livable community principles allowed the Coa- lition to accommodate expected growth while achieving the following goals of the Metropolitan Council: . increasing density closer to the region's core; . encouraging redevelopment in older suburban areas; . increasing the number of mixed-use areas; . reducing consumption of agricultural land; . improving natural resource systems; and . creating more capacity for growth. 1 Although useful, these findings needed to be supplemented with more detailed land use and transportation analysis before subregional strate- gies could be developed. The second year of the study was structured to fill that need. Land use data were refined, two growth scenarios were detailed to the next level of specificity, and a subarea travel demand model was developed to analyze transportation impacts at the subregional and local scales as well as the regional. This report summarizes the land use and transportation analysis, find- ings, conclusions and recommended next steps. These conclusions and recommendations will be blended with findings from the housing demo- graphics analysis to structure a framework for action, which will bring the subregional growth study to completion. land Use and Transportation Analysis The land use and transportation component of the buildout study was designed to investigate the impacts of different growth scenarios on the transportation system and the subregional relationship between land use and travel patterns. The Coalition study, which focused on public transit and the minor arterial network, was coordinated with a study of regional network impacts, which was funded by the Minnesota Department of Transportation. A subarea travel demand model compared two subregional growth sce- narios for 2020. The subarea model, which runs inside the Twin Cities regional model, contains enhancements which refine the zone structure (84 TAZs were subdivided into 371 subTAZs), improve sensitivity param- eters to better represent activity inside mixed-use centers, and add local roadway network detail. The following indicators were used to assess the impacts of each growth scenario on the transportation system: . trip generation . mode choice (auto, transit, walk) . average trip length . vehicle miles traveled (VMT) There were two runs of the model (see diagram on the opposite page). The first run assumed only those transportation system modifications stated in current policy documents of the Metropolitan Council and the Minnesota Department of Transportation. The second run used a modi- fied Coalition growth scenario (2.5a) and two variations of the transpor- tation system: 2.5b-more roadway network than current policy documents indicate; and 2.Sc-the additional roadway network added for 2.5b plus enhanced transit service. Results from these runs were compared and used to develop recommended next steps. 2 e . . . Land Use and Transportation Analytical Sequence e Baseline assumptions for land use and transportation modeling analyses . Roadways: existing plus policy commitments to 2025 - no added lanes on 35W, include streets to serve new development in (TCAAP) with parkway between CRd I & J, Club West Service Rd to Hwy 65, Twin Lakes Parkway . Transit existing (includes Sector 1 & 2 changes) plus NE Diagonal Transitway plus service assump- tions for extensions/new routes to serve transit-oriented development centers in Scenario 2.5a . Land Use: (re)development assigned to 2020 opportunity areas as Identified by cities; future land use in comprehensive guide plan basis for development type assignment Scenario 1.5 - conventional land use pattern, includes (re)development project knowns Scenario 2.5 - Coalition land use patterns include known (re)development projects . Household & Jobs Projections: net growth will, at a minimum, approximate the average of city compo plan and Met Council projections for 2020 I I Scenario 1.5a (Conventional) Scenario 2.5a (Coalition Preferred) . Unconstrained model run . Unconstrained model run . Roadways: baseline . Roadways: baseline . Transit baseline . Transit: baseline . Land Use: low density, single use dominates . Land Use: compact, mixed-use develop- ment in locations suitable for TODs, more moderate-density housi ng types I I 1st Subarea Model Run Analysis . Compare land use 1.5a and 2.5a . Identify needs for highway and transit . Identify potential land useldevelopment modifications I Preparation for 2nd Subarea Model Run . Code proposed missing connections in existing arterial network and systems needs for highways . Code transit needs (will include route modifications or increased frequency) and additional transit service to accommodate land use modifications for 2.5c . Develop land use modifications for 2.5c I I I Scenario 2.5b Scenario 2.5c (add road network) (add road network and optimize transit) . Constrained model run . Constrained model run . Roadways: as modified . Roadways: as modified . Transit baseline . Transit: as modified . Land Use: revised 2.5a scenario . Land Use: revised 2,5a scenario I I I 2nd Subarea Model Run Analysis . Compare to unconstrained 2.5a run . Identify further opportunities that might be addressed in future runs . 3 . . . Development of Growth Scenarios and Subarea Transportation Model Assumptions . Development of Growth Scenarios The two growth scenarios used in the land use and transportation analy- sis were modifications of concept scenarios generated in the study's first year. Modifications included: incorporating approved and pending devel- opment proposals, and adjusting scenarios to reflect immediate develop- ment trends and pressures. The Coalition requested these modifications to optimize use of findings and conclusions for current public policy and public invesbnent discussions among Coalition cities and local govern- ments and state /regional agency partners. Scenario Characteristics The conventional growth scenario is characterized by single land use development, low densities, and auto-orientation. Site designs have low floor to area ratios and surface parking. Residential subdivisions have simi- lar housing types organized around cul-de-sacs. e The Coalition growth scenario is characterized by walkable, mixed-use centers that cluster development in areas identified as transit corridors or transitways or in areas with potential for higher levels of transit service in the future. Densities in these centers are generally higher in the mixed-use core and lower in the surrounding area where land is oriented to either residential or commercial/ industrial uses. Residential subdivisions have a mix of housing types and densities. MAU. "AnMEHT$ Conventional Suburban Design ..,"'", . "'''''''" c::.'2> ~ The diagram above illustrates differences in de- velopment patterns of the conventional and tra- ditional neighborhood design, The Coalition growth scenario is patterned after traditional neighborhood design. (Graphic by Duany and Plater-Zyberk, 1992) >CHOOL Traditional Neighborhood Design 5 Parcels Likely to Develop or Redevelop by 2020 - 7, 860 Total Acres . Bui/tout by 2005 Builtout by 2010 . Scenario Development Process The process for developing scenarios began with input from individual Coa- lition cities. Cities verified parcels likely to be (re )developed in the next 20 years and indicated the time frame-2000 to 2005, 200S to 2010, and 2010 to 202a-in which (re)development is likely to occur. Cities also updated infor- mation about recent or pending (re)development proposals. Using this infor- mation as a base, the conceptual conventional and transit-oriented develop- ment scenarios developed in the first year of the growth study were refined. (Re)development parcels were coded with a development type compatible with city comprehensive plans and each scenario's respective development principles. The conventional scenario extended suburban patterns and trends into the future. The Coalition growth scenario increased development inten- sity by including more mixed-use centers and mixed-housing subdivisions. Mixed-use centers are critical components of the Coalition growth sce- nario. In these centers, land uses are mixed vertically as well as horizon- tally and walkability is emphasized. By design, they have a high jobs/ housing ratio, excellent accessibility and connectivity, and balance devel- . opment with natural resources restoration and conservation. The higher densities associated with these centers makes them ideal for increased tran- sit service, lifecycle housing, and a diverse business mix. 6 . e e Conceptual Transit-Oriented Development Mixed-use centers in the Coalition growth scenario are based on the concept of transit-ori- ented development, This diagram illustrates Iww such development is organized. (Graphic by Caltharpe, 1993) Mixed-use centers have a generic spatial organization, which places higher density and mixed use at the center, near the primary transit facility. Far- ther out from the center, densities drop and single land uses spread over larger areas. Block sizes are smaller and cul-de-sacs are kept to a minimum. However, this basic organization is used only as a template. Each center must be modified in response to unique environmental conditions, com- munity development needs, and location with respect to transportation/ transit systems. The following steps were taken to develop a Coalition growth scenario more analogous to how centers would look in the future. Step 1. Assess Existing Conditions The term "existing conditions" refers to the prevailing local circum- stances, which range from environmental qualities and constraints to land use precedence. Combined, these conditions are the building blocks for making places with unique identities. They also provide land use iniormation that helps formulate options for natural resources conser- vation, development prospects, and transportation system connections. During this step, a determination is made whether or not there is suffi- cient land available to (re)develop as the core of a mixed-use center. Step 2. Apply Community Comprehensive Plans According to legislative mandate, each metropolitan community pre- pares a comprehensive plan to guide land use, provision of public fa- cilities and services and, in some cases, economic development and natural resources management decision-making. These plans express community values, aspirations for the future of the city and its financial basis, and implementation strategies for achieving these goals. Together, this information iniorms decisions to orient land uses in the transit-sup- portive development to jobs or housing. The Coalition's growth sce- nario includes ten job-oriented centers and nine residential-oriented centers. 7 Step 3. Overlay Regional Transportation Policies . Since these mixed-use centers assume transit accessibility, regionaltran- sit policies and guidelines play an important role in determining den- sity minimums and prospective levels of transit service. These poli- cies, in turn, suggest what type of center is more viable from a regional service delivery perspective. In this scenario, there is one center lo- cated on a prospective transitway, twelve inner suburban transit cen- ters and six outer suburban transit centers. For the purposes of sce- nario development, characteristics of the different policy areas were used to anticipate future transit service available to different centers. A literal overlay of the current transit policy area map would show that few proposed centers lie in policy areas slated for service appropriate to the proposed density. Modifications to the policy document would be necessary to align service delivery with expected development. Examples of Mixed Use Center Types in Coalition Growth Scenario Outer Suburban Transit Service Area Jobs Oriented Housing Oriented Inner Suburban Transit Service Area Jobs Oriented Housing Oriented Transitway Jobs Oriented - 8 . . e . e Reference Tables Used to Calculate Growth Projections * parks based on national standards for parks Growth Projections Both growth scenarios meet or exceed regional growth projections for the subregion. Reference tables were prepared for calculating growth pro- jections for each scenario (see above). Although densities for each devel- opment type remained constant between the two scenarios, there were dif- ferent formulae used for calculating net acreage-the Coalition growth sce- nario set aside more land for civic uses, parks, and open space. Calculating growth projections involved many detailed tasks, which, for purposes of this report, have been summarized into four steps. Step 1. Determine Net Buildable Acres Calculations began with estimating the number of buildable acres that exist in each (re)development area. GIS data bases, developed during the first study year, were the main information source for this calcula- tion. They were used to remove protected wetlands and slopes of 20 percent or more from the gross parcel acreage. Also, recent develop- ment projects on certain soil conditions in Blaine suggest that at least 30 percent of the site becomes open water because fill is needed to cre- ate building pads. In areas where similar soil conditions prevail 30% of the parcel was removed as unbuildable. Finally, 10 percent of all rede- velopment parcels was removed for storm water management pur- poses. 9 Step 2. Create Job and Household Density Tables Creating density tables for calculating growth potential was the sec- ond task. Despite recent local and national research on density require- ments for transit-supportive development, there are no universally- used density tables. Draft tables were prepared using the Metropolitan Council's transit-supportive guidelines. These drafts were checked against conventional transportation forecasting tables, estimated den- sities at existing workplaces, and development proposals with a 20- year buildout period and reviewed by Coalition members. Adjustments were made as seemed appropriate. During the review process it was learned that job densities for re- development sites are uniformly higher than those for greenfield sites due to the higher cost of redevelopment. To account for this important variable, a redevelopment factor was determined and applied to all commercial/ industrial redevelopment parcels. These densities and the redevelopment factor were inserted into a common formula used to calculate future growth for each (re)development area. Step 3. Calculate Job, Household, and Population Yields Use the tables to calculate the growth yields for each growth scenario. Note, not all mixed use centers will have the same job and household yields. The range in yields is created because centers and core areas vary in total acreage, are weighted to either residential or job land uses, and have average densities that vary relative to transit service type. Step 4. Distribute Growth by SubTAZ The final step in this portion of the study was assignment of projected growth to subdivided traffic assignment zones (subTAZs). This was accomplished by looking at each subTAZ individually, estimating what portion of it was in which development type, and projecting the num- ber of jobs, households, and people in the year 2020. (Highlights of both scenarios are shown on the following pages.) Data were then en- tered into the model. Growth Scenario Refinement for Second Model Run There were two runs of the model. The second run adjusted the Coali- tion growth scenario. The adjustment entailed removing the mixed-use center located off County Road I on the northern edge of the Twin Cities Army Ammunitions Plant (TCAAP). The City of Arden Hills recommended removal based on new planning information it had received regarding TCAAP. 10 e . . . Conventional Growth Scenario (I.Sa) Coalition Growth Scenario (2.Sb/c) . Scenario 1.5 - the Conventional Buildout - has a net increase of12,208 in households and 41,305 in jobs over 2000. Roughly 7,900 acres of land is developed or redeveloped, and only 350 acres are designated for mixed-use development. . Scenario 2,5B/C-the Coalition Buildout-has a net increase of27,717 in households and 59,330 in jobs over 2000. Roughly 7,900 acres of land is developed or redeveloped, and over 1,000 acres are in some form of mixed-use development. 11 Coalition Growth Scenario and SubTAZ Structure The T AZ structure of the subregion was subdivided from 84 to 371 to better represent the types of tripmaking associated with transit-oriented develapment. The smaller TAZs allows intrazonal trips to be isolated and analyzed by the model. The subTAZ structure is shown over the Coalition growth scenario. 12 ""'~d m,,~ IlMI.......Sllburban _ OUI<<sw..bon -- ,----',HIgI1.- o IiIi1l Iiouoe_ tlev..opmonlTypo _R8gioMI~Center.50 _SIbregionoII.li>:odUOOC<mlor llIWIRoglonaE..-Center- .~~~Cffitot _T"""Centar_1D _tlol,tlOOthoodComw.7 <>R_SuWvIoion_lBgolrt __~.$mdLol __SUbcIviolcn_Mlloc:lli<luU>g _CDnmerdaI/I_~U... _~t.!i.o.edU.. ,mmWatBr '..- ~-- . . . e Subarea Transportation Model Assumptions . . Three components of the transportation system were analyzed: regional roadway network, minor arterial network in the subregion, and public tran- sit in the subregion, i.e. bus. Mn/DOT had expressed to the Coalition an interest in working coopera- tively on long-range planning for regional facilities in the North I-35W corri- dor. Thus, they were engaged as a study partner. The regional facilities ana- lyzed in this part of the study included 1-694, I-35W, 1B 36, and 1B 10 from 1- 694 to I-35W. The analysis focused on three key issues: 1) freeway capacity and travel demand; 2) operation problems beyond those identified in recent studies; and 3) design and operational options for 1B 10. The minor arterial roadway network is primarily under the jurisdiction of either Anoka County or Ramsey County. The Coalition is concerned about the future of this network because these roads have a multi-function role in each community and directly impact local quality of life and eco- nomic development opportunities. In many cities, development patterns rely heavily on minor arterials to accommodate all types of land uses. Residential neighborhoods depend upon direct access to arterials with higher levels of service, thus relieving local streets of trips headed to destinations outside the neighborhood. In other instances, minor arterials are the" commercial street" for a suburban downtown or neighborhood center. Arterials provide direct access to busi- nesses, accommodate transit riders, and provide, in some cases, on-street parking. This study seeks to provide information about the impacts of municipal land use decisions on minor arterial travel demand, which might then lead to agreements between cities and counties on future development patterns and minor arterial design speed, operational management, and mainte- nance. Transit service is the third area of analytical focus. A primary inquiry of the study is to determine if changes in land use patterns have potential to increase transit use and, thereby, justify investment in additional transit service upgrades for Coalition cities. Currently, much of the Coalition lies within the Met Council Area IV transit service market, which implies that transit delivery focuses on park & ride facilities, circulator services, and some local routes with higher frequency service during peak hours. Transportation Assumptions The first run of the subarea model was designed to compare the conven- tional and Coalition growth scenarios. The transportation system was held constant for both scenarios during the first run. The following assump- tions were made: 13 . Transit Network-Assumes the Regional Transportation Plan: North Star Commuter Rail, Northeast Diagonal, new transit service in the subregion to reflect development areas. . Regional Roadway Network -Assumes the Regional Transportation Plan: On 1-694 will have one additional lane from I-35E to I-35W and no weave at I-35E; I-35E improvements between 1-94 to 1-694; I-35W will have one additional lane from Washington Ave. to TH 36; TH 36 will have an additional lane from I-35W to Stillwater. . County/Local RDadway Network-New roads that have been built, but are not part of the regional model will be added; new internal road- ways will be added to development areas in Blaine and at the TCAAP site. The second run of the subarea model made the following revisions to the above assumptions: . New County/Local Network-changes to the network were developed with input from the study's transportation work group. Among the changes are new bridges over I-35W to improve county /local network connectivity and changes in functional class designations for a few road- way segments. . Transit Network-an additional $7 million in express and local services were added in areas where development intensity increases; new routes were added for improved internal connections and better geographic coverage. 14 . . . . Model Changes to Roadway Network Several modifications were made to the transportation system as coded in the regional model. This map shrrws where changes were made and points out examples of different types of changes. This map is overlaid on natural resources data to indicate how they shape the network, New Network Added . Functional Classification Changed New Bridge Added Network Disconnected e 15 e . . Findings · Conclusions · Next Steps . . . General Observations Overall, the Coalition growth scenario shows a more effi- cient pattern of tripmaking which is evidenced by the de- crease in trips per capita for all trip types. Findings that fur- ther support this conclusion are summarized below. Trip Generation . In the Coalition growth scenario, trips made within the sub- region grow at roughly twice the rate of total trip growth. This finding indicates that mixed-use centers have a posi- tive impact on trip capture and may form the basis for new and enhanced transit service strategies within the Coali- tion. . While the Coalition growth scenario generates more trips because of higher densities, new trip production is occur- ring at a slower overall rate of growth than under the con- ventional scenario. Mode Choice . There is a 23% to 33% increase in transit trips over the conventional scenario in both 2.5b and 2.5c. This increase is likely due to a 10 percent increase in the number of dwelling units within a short walk (1/3 mile) to transit and the enhanced transit service of Coalition Growth Scenario 2.5c. Mixed-use centers contribute to the in- crease in dwelling units near roadway networks. Vehicle Miles Traveled and Average Trip Length . The Coalition growth scenario shows increased use of arte- rials and collectors over the conventional scenario. This in- creased use is consistent with the increase in trips internal to the subregion and with increased connectivity provided by links added to the minor arterial network. . Using standard travel demand calculations, the Coalition growth scenario generates a 25% increase in automobile ownership over the conventional scenario, yet only an 11.5% increase in VMT per capita. The average trip length within the subregion is 3.5 miles, while in/ out average commute length is 11 miles. . It is likely that the reduced rate of growth is attributable to "trip capture" within the subregion. This is accomplished by increasing mixed-use developments, which offer subre- gional residents close proximity to work, shopping, and lei- sure activities. Trip Ends Per Capita by Scenario 10% "" c ti 5% ';;( W E 0% .g OJ 0> -5%. C '" .<: U -10% Intemalto 465,086 661,456 793,952 797,078 Intemal Intemalto 321,003 372,411 411,422 410,503 External External 302,223 437,185 432,433 431,966 lolntemal Total 1,088,312 1,471,052 1,637,807 1,639,547 Subarea Subarea Trips by Mode Apto 844,416 1,120,380 1,192,564 1,190,760 Transit 11,353 19,944 24,532 26,613 Walk 23735 23635 Total 855,769 1,140,324 1,240,831 1,241,008 VMT in Subarea Generated by Subarea Freeways 55.2% 48.7% 51.7% 50.9% Arterials 80.1% 75.8% 77.3% 76.7% Collectors 83.9% 96.2% 93.6% 93.8% Vehicle Trip End Statistics Trip Ends 5,81 6.37 5,73 5.63 PerCaptla "P EndsPel' 1.90 1,81 1.79 1.77 Ca "13 NHBTrip Ef'ldsPer 3.91 4,56 3.94 3,87 C. NHBTrip E""'''''' 6,75 5,84 5.55 5.45 Em 0 ee 17 Socioeconomic Data Population 158.760 180,565 224,180 Households 60,750 71.720 88,350 Employment 92,075 140,970 159.150 Autos 115,470 130,015 162,585 Findings/Conclusions and Next Steps . Summary Findings I Conclusions and Recommended Next Steps were developed for land use strategies, regional high- ways, minor arterials, and transit. They are outlined below. Land Use-Findings/Conclusions 1. According to best estimates from Coalition cities, approxi- mately 7,900 gross acres will be development or redevel- oped by 2020. Of this, 42% will be developed by 2005; another 33% by 2010; and the balance of 25% by 2020. Generally, development will occur first and most rapidly in northern portion of the Coalition (Blaine) and then in the central and southern portions of the subregion. There are pockets of redevelopment occurring in the central and southern portions of the Coalition and this development tend to be more dense and mixed use in nature. Land Use Comparison of Developed 2. Application of livable community principles generates more jobs and dwelling units than conventional development and Redeveloped Areas strategies. Although both development scenarios have more growth than is currently projected by the Met Council, the e Commercial & 1,799 1,348 1.348 Coalition growth scenario has both more jobs and more Industrial dwelling units than the conventional scenario. The conven- Mixed Use 350 1.073 1,032 tional scenario generates a 42% increase in jobs over 2000 Residential 3.591 2,940 2906 and 68% increase in dwelling units over 2000, while the Coalition growth scenario generates a 60% increase in jobs Pari< 92 206 204 and a 73% increase in dwelling units over 2000. The growth Civic 28 272 266 projections for the conventional and Coalition growth sce- narios respectively represent 9% and 11 % of the regional ROW 420 543 539 growth assumed for 2020. The ratio of jobs to housing !e- 698 596 591 mains much the same in both scenarios. Storm Water 3. The additional growth in the Coalition growth scenario is attributable to the increased number of mixed-use centers and more compact residential subdivisions, which have higher job and housing densities. Also, mixed-use devel- opments are frequently sited in redevelopment locations, which increases densities even more because of the finan- cial need to offset the higher cost of redevelopment. 4. In both scenarios development in NE Blaine and on the TCAAP site generates the greatest majority of new hous- ing in the Coalition (68% in the conventional scenario and 73% in the Coalition growth scenario). . 5. The Coalition growth scenario generates an job increase of 60% over 2000, while the conventional scenario adds 18 . . . 42% more jobs over 2000. The increased number of jobs contributes to the reduction in VMT, because residents have more options to work closer to home. 6. The Coalition growth scenario contains 36% more housing units than the conventional scenario, thus increasing the potential for a wider range of housing types and price points. Land Use-Recommended Next Steps 1. The Coalition should encourage cities to include mixed use centers, to identify existing or future locations, and strategies for development / redevelopment. This planning should include consideration of transit service location and levels to optimize transit access and walkability. 2. The Coalition should develop an inventory of existing neighborhood- scale, mixed-use areas that should be "protected" and enhanced be- cause of their inherent land use and transportation benefits. 3. The Coalition should encourage (re)development of mixed use centers by doing the following: a. Research overlay zones and other options to allow for mixed-use centers and a variety of housing options. b. Research and develop model design and land use performance stan- dards for mixed use centers and encourage cities to adopt them. c. Develop educational materials about mixed-use centers and meth- ods for evaluating mixed use proposals for cities to share with deci- sion-makers and staff. d. Develop tools for implementing mixed-use development and encour- age their use by Coalition cities. e. Develop strategies to sustain Coalition growth principles over the length of the development or redevelopment cycle and through dif- ferent municipal political administration. 4. The Coalition should work with Ramsey and Anoka Counties to de- velop joint long-range plan for aligning land use, minor arterial road speed design, access, and site organization. 5. The Coalition should research and develop a set of data standards and report formats for use in comprehensive plans to increase the feasibility of coordinating comprehensive planning with neighboring communities. 6. The Coalition should develop GIS-based methods for recording and tracking development within the corridor. 7. The Coalition should monitor and support supply of transit service to areas that are developed and redeveloped. 19 Regional Highway System-Findings/Conclusions . 1. The study area is a significant contnbutor of traffic on I-35W, with ap- proximately 40% to 60% of the traffic on I-35W generated by the study area. Both growth scenarios generate increased congestion on regional and minor arterial roadway networks. This increase occurs even when a second lane is added to I-35W and internal links are added to the minor arterial network. 2. Daily traffic volumes are expected to increase significantly and approach or exceed 200,000 ADT in places by 2025. Even with an assumption of two additional through lanes in each direction on I-35W, traffic vol- umes are forecast to exceed capacity under the assumed land develop- ment scenario. 3. Capacity deficiencies currently exist along much of the I-35W corridor during a.m. and/ or p.m. peak periods. The deficiencies include lack of capacity for the current demand and excessive weaving movements (interaction between vehicles entering the freeways and those exiting at nearby downstream interchanges). 4. A major system-to-system weaving problem occurs on northbound 1- 35W between the entrance from eastbound 1-694 and exitto westbound 1-694 has a very high weaving volume in a very short area, creating backups into the mainline lanes. . 5. Forecast mainline volumes plus high-volume merges and weaves make the segment of 1-35W north of 1-694 particularly at-risk for operational problems. 6. The TH 10 "Diagonal" supports a critical regional function. 1-35W, 1- 694, and the interchange between those two freeways would not have sufficient capacity to absorb the additional demand caused by regional traffic diverted from a "downgraded" TH 10 "Diagonal". 7. The existing and forecast traffic volumes make the intersection between the TH 10 "Diagonal" and CSAH 96 a good candidate for grade sepa- ration. Such a separation, combined with an interchange between the TH 10 "Diagonal" and the TCAAP site would provide a balance be- tween regional traffic movements and land access. Regional Highway System-Next Steps 1. Integrate with Mn/DOT and update the Transportation System Plan with the following: a.change the policy of the subregion's segment of I-35W from an im- provement corridor to an expansion corridor; b.initiate a scoping study and preliminary engineering for lane addi- . tions to 35W; and c. identify bridge requirements in relation to arterial changes, 20 . . . 2. Work with Mn/DOT to ensure that adequate funding levels are avail- able to make necessary improvements to the regional highway system on 1-35W and other highways. 3. Work with Mn/DOT, Ramsey County and the City of Arden Hills to reach a consensus on improvements to the CSAH 96/TH 10 intersec- tion that will protect the role of the TH 10 "Diagonal" in the regional highway system while accommodating local access needs. This should include detailed traffic simulation including traffic from proposed de- velopment of the TCAAP site. Arterials Network-Findings/Conclusions 1. The Coalition growth pattern of development causes increased trip cap- ture to occur in the Coalition area -a larger proportion of trips remain in the study area as a result of the increased amount of mixed-use de- velopment, the improved jobs/housing balance, and increased densi- ties at the nodes. . Internal to Internal trips grow at roughly twice the rate of total trip growth. . Net in-commute to jobs in the study area remains constant. . Net out-commute grows proportional to total trip growth. 2. The Coalition growth pattern results in a lower rate of increase in VMT since the mixed use areas capture study area trips, which results in more trips being made over a shorter average distance. This slows the rate of VMT production in the study area . Internal to Internal average length is 3.5 miles, while in/ out commute average length is 11 miles 3. The Coalition growth pattern shows a more efficient pattern of trip making with a decrease in trips per capita for all trip types. While trips grow, they grow more slowly per unit of population. 4. In terms of vehicle miles of travel and vehicle hours of travel, the Coa- lition growth pattern shows an increased use of arterial and collector streets from existing conditions. Relative growth in Coalition travel on Coalition arterials and collectors grows at a higher rate of increase than on freeways. This trend is most prevalent in the middle portion of the Coalition area from TH 36 to County Road 10. Lexington and Hamline attract trips under the Coalition growth pattern. 5. Freeways in the Coalition area are still being used for local trips, primarily: . 1-35W south of County Road 10 to County Road C . TH 10 west ofI-35W . 1-694 east of 1-35W . Snelling south of 1-694 21 6. Increased congestion is present on arterial roadways, particularly . east of 1-35W, with the Coalition growth pattern as a result of a lack of parallel arterial capacity, which concentrates trips on the few con- tinuous roadways: . Lexington (north of 1-35W) . Central/TH 65 . Hamline (County Road 96 to 1-694) Arterial Network-Next Steps 1. Establish an Arterials Working Group with the Coalition Cities and Ramsey and Anoka Counties to initiate joint planning for arterial streets. This group would evaluate the feasibility of proposed additions mod- eled in the Buildout Study, would assess topographic constraints and structural issues, and would identify additional North-South arterial capacity opportunities potentially available through lane additions and new alignments (see Modeling Next Steps). 2. Integrate the proposed arterial/ collector additions and changes into each city's and each county's transportation improvement program. 3. Work with Coalition cities and Anoka and Ramsey County represen- tation on the Transportation Advisory Board and Transportation Advi- sory Committee to support funding the projects programmed in Sce- narios 2.5b / c. . 4. Work with Mn/DOT to program overcrossings of 1-35W and 1-694 and to identify funding from state and federal sources for these elements. Transit-Findings/Conclusions 1. The transit mode share in the Coalition area continues to reflect subur- ban pattern of auto dependency prevalent in study area. This tendency appears to be a function of both the model parameters and a transit service pattern that favors the commute to core cities. . Downtown Minneapolis is 50% of overall transit market from study area. . Downtown St. Paul accounts for only 10% of overall transit market from study area. . Trips inside the study area account for about half of the Minneapolis market. . Transit service favors these patterns with express service to Downtown Minneapolis from most portions of the study area. . Differences in market by location in the study area shows that where grid service is present (Roseville), there is a better balance between study area and core city trips. 2. The transit service pattern is not especially sensitive to the growth in captured trips in the Coalition area. The shorter distance captured study . 22 . . . area trips are not competitive for travel time with autos, which results in a relatively static transit mode share for the Coalition growth pat- tern. The travel time issue is compounded by a lack of parking costs in the suburban area. For transit trips to the core city CBDs, parking costs in the CBDs offset the time penalty of riding transit. 3. The general linear nature of the study area is likely to result in a north- south transit market rather than an east-west pattern. Design of new service patterns will need to accommodate this propensity. Frequent point to point service and focused express service (limited stop) may prove most effective in meeting the transit needs of the study area un- der the Coalition growth pattern. 4. Transit ridership gains were strongest for those with one or no autos in the household, and those with good walking access to transit. 5. The mixed use areas, while not materially affecting aggregate transit use in the study area, do have a significant effect on overall mode use by being responsible for an increase in primary walk trips that is equiva- lent to the current transit mode share in the Coalition area. Transit-Next Steps 1. Join with Metro Transit to conduct more detailed analysis of transit service provided to major movements within the study area and test alternative services to cost-effectively improve the transit market share of those trips. 2. Conduct more detailed analysis of transit service provided to major movements into the study area or to non-downtown destinations and test alternative services to cost-effectively improve the transit market share of those trips. 3. As land development occurs in the study area, work with the Metropoli- tan Council and Metro Transit to implement transit service to those areas. 4. Explore the use of D /TED survey findings regarding location of home and work to assist with transit service planning and delivery. Modeling-Next Steps 1. Update the model to address any issues of compatibility with the Met- ropolitan Council and Mn/DOT forecasts. 2. Continue to use the model to iterate through the series of analyses needed by the Arterials Working Group to plan the arterial and collec- tor roadway system. Multiple iterations of the model will be needed to refine the arterial planning. 23 3. Work with Metro Transit and the Metropolitan Council to identify ser- vice planning types of transit enhancements that can be modeled to address the overall transit mode share issue for the Coalition area. En- hanced express service and focuses circulator routes should be included. e 4. Encourage city use of the subarea model by cities for traffic impacts analysis of larger developments and for planning at the district level. Moving Forward The purpose of the land use and transportation analysis was to investi- gate the impacts of conventional and Coalition growth scenarios on trans- portation systems. Comparative analysis ofthe two scenario shows notable transportation efficiencies gained in the Coalition growth scenario. These efficiencies are realized in fewer vehicle miles traveled per capita, increased transit ridership within the subregion, and the appearance of walking trips where none existed before. Mixed-use centers were identified as the pri- mary contributor to these efficiencies. On the basis of these findings, the Design Center for American Urban Landscape proposes the Coalition place a priority on the following Next Steps recommended above. 1. Initiate and support Coalition-wide implementation of mixed-use cen- . ters, i.e. transit-oriented development, as an alternative development form within the subregion. Initial tasks should include: a. prepare a presentation oriented to local city councils and commissions that outlines the Land Use and Transportation Analysis, findings and possible strategies for joint action; b.make a presentation in each city to a joint meeting of the council and appropriate commissions and gather input; and c. prepare and implement a Coalition work plan to align city compre- hensive plans across the subregion. 2. Establish an umbrella land use/transportation working group that would take up two issues initially: a.coordinated, long-range planning to bring land use and minor arte- rial design speeds into alignment (cities and counties would be the primary participants with the Met Council being an active participant); and b.needed improvements to CSAH 96 /TH 10 that will protect the role of the TH 10 "Diagonal" in the regional highway systems while accom- modating local access needs and potential policy revisions in Mn/ DOT's Transportation Systems Plan (Mn/DOT, Met Council, Ramsey County and affected cities would be the primary participants). . 24 e 1-35W/I-694/TH 10/TH 36 Transportation Deficiency Study , ' -"';J.,'i'h Ph I !~MOunds . '. ase ~ " i',,"" '. R ;~ Prepared (or: Mn/DOT and North Metro ,.. ' 1-35W Corridor Coalition . h".< , r ;.: , , Prepared by: , SRF CilnS;ulting Gro P, Inc. July 2002 ' I-36W . 1-35W TH280 INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE OF STUDY . The North Metro 1-35W Corridor Coalition is an organization of seven communities located along Interstate 35W in Ramsey and Anoka Counties. The coalition works to achieve a coordinated approach in addressing regional issues such as housing, economic development and transportation as they affect the communities in its boundaries. The North Metro 1-35W Corridor Coalition is a conducting four concurrent studies to assess the long-range transportation/land use needs of the subregion: 1. Design and Development Guidelines for Livable Suburban Arterials 2. Subregional Growth Study - Land Use and Transportationffransit Component 3. Transportation and Subregional Growth Study Part V: Urban Design 4. Transportation Deficiency Study This rcport presents the results of analysis of the regional highway system deficiencies in the study area. The purpose of this study is to identifY and investigate existing and future deficiencies in the regional highway system in the 1-35W North Corridor. The regional roadway system for the study consists ofI-35W, TH 36, 1-694 and TH 10 (see Figure 1). . . 1-35W/I-694ITH 10ITH 36 Transportation Deficiency Study -1- SRF Consulting Group, Inc. July 2002 ~fr'\4=0 p:p ," . ~, ~_p , "I iJ. ,.( - ,! l:,;~a(\"T'~j,::,_.~..J~ IT.,L.J T' /..@j~\ \~~ r.<~~, / I': ,:j: jC'{i"', 'iTr-,. C-' f;1~b;~~e: . I~ ~~~[p , , ~ =1~~'T' ~?:1q ! ,-?jf d ~ .' 1 i [1:---'J,7( ! dv-' t-"'v i .::J Vr'--'\"F " i--' ;,1'UJJ i ---J\ -4, Baine. I J'~ITr;: r C::'~l~; ~,giton. h r"-' lYJ-' W . r\.: ;:11 h=i+-t If]~ :.1.,-- ;::1..'1= - r, ~' !:,,' "( I S. .!:J1 J i ,: ~ I, ._, ~ I '( '"" ) 1.-:; _' ~ ~..l.J.l "_Jrr-~ I .J.-1L""f ~_, Q ~~i + .1. ~ J25, /~ m~"-~,__ iFli\tJ.. _...... ' ~ f.j.. m 1 I \. "\ ~ =:r:::::: ....-r<Ali I I)" i 1'1 ~@I ' ----( ) ''1-'" r ~\-;- I' 1:'::-',,=---::("..' . ~ I'.. ! i , _,.,.,.,J J~ ~:::~r;r .J~ 11=:= ! , _E' :LJ+l+i~ ~ ". :;: ,I, "-""4.E7' ~Yb i X( 1 \1.11 i-- p-- ! -,,- J ", .,,' '(j 'i> 14,!!' " '. .SlVi.ew.) '::f:--'--~ ~IT L ~f-r- ~~! '~K: p ',"11' ~ ! T '{I I I~t". - la ~ r:r' If) t.1:" /lKf-' r ~;:::'J 9W1 li ~ L I j-'tJ. r -c; "-"lJ l1 "-. '( ,/ ~~ 'rl(;Y111 - -- :::.;r;r:... h::i '\1'-. ) \- I ;:.: .r \ y-'\'") . . _ ~ Ie,.., -T-" '-yI/ -J :J' '-= !.. ITb 1\ ., h~r-. ';::i rL ,-,{ , ?' !' ~-H ." _ ~ f""', '-- U:~ =" 1 rl, 1_ ~(~ ~ C' . , . -, Arden Hills ~ I' _ '~~I ~ l 'r;~'f": ,'I :..c):n.I~h.1 '\11 :.t3 L::~,_ V1l ,15; \.-"T'I l..(:t . JJ11h JI -..-\.l .~, ~" @ ut1ITI It~,\J ,'r- ,'- ! ,:,11- 'I 0 "I. f.l.:u.. ~~~ ~ ""111 / :':!::' 4' ,:x:~ ~ A6.r"~:h)J~elllhSnght<7IT f/" I \ '\':1 Cl u ~_w ( p . // . fT'1-1 " I r -::;> \;; :s ,:=;::::' r _.F '..1:::1' 'l I IL..~I Ii ~ / ..FL' ,..I-.. 7' -~ n ~l /L'.)I .1, ' -;.-. ~ .,........,\\ U i.,J , ........ l M I;]~~ r:I II ~ p..., ,~t.,.!::J ""'I 4~1s:!\ t::.. ~ 1 :::r"'l:~ ' f~ (IJ ,\ .J \. I ',\ ,,'\ or: V<::i.\T ..;... O"^p; ,rrr,~~'1!'":'; !' lJ i'<:,,> ',.-.. -, ,,,=:1 r ( ''m'''''t'~''l~i" !,~ ::It-. ~ _ .~ ,-.r .,. i;;> \ ,.,. ! ~:t lk1lf ;::: .~~ I ell H ~ _ 1 .:;'ll ~ '-- ~ I j ~I 1 -co...J~, '\= ' '\" '1 I ~~ \ ,'i+ .Lit.lh . It-'.c;:,; : ,6.. .. Tf \'''"''. .., I ~ b\ i I.l_ 'J.tE::.. L,,, i lL \.{ I ; II " \ I ,"" ' ~ I (ri-I r;...~~ ifl! y.., TJJ:1, ~ II: ", t \ :,~. r:v. /" 'r..~.,:t I ..,~ " l+"-r I -, 11== ,\, ,; ,cl, ~L i <:-7':-/ f'1 ~y 4lJj!J~t ~... ':..:r-" :2~ '"'..: /, /J. ! '3 b '~" .. " (,.. rei 1777.r. .. '''' . - ,( I !iLl '/ ..:+, j' q,~ ""' --;::1 I y ..1 I ~~! JPI ,WI: P"-"f.~~~ :'I'.ml-~' " "":;"/fi'''T~- 61: ~~::i' r:' ,_ / /' (I(ifLL~~1 nh~.OI"",VIIE:. j #!f[lU I~: .,...j . , ~t: '.1 'll'e . !/ l' ,--, C~mj It- ~ ~~--dr:::' 'I'm ~I J i-Ii " ClIL"1 \.,.\, 1.1 I ~ tijl!T ",' ,I 0" (' ttllll-;:::i ~ ,,-' 1/ [.J1 ",. I""" l-jTrn )rrr,.' --... \in' Q. L !11'if::j , . : i:~~~'e~, }C~, I I Jf. ( . ,..--~. '-yt:; "~,I _. .~ '1- V..Ir I f---\ { 36 i" ,. I IL'H ~)" ~ ~ l::=J I~. r(~ IT c , , . __.I \~: ~~~ f!i1T? ? : :::::::-,..I! 'c.::o11, =. r-,:-:J'::r E,l.; 7 ~.J:. -11 'n'r , r't I t l r+ "il i~ fiTil"i".. .. '.' l!aD ~fi'iL'fi'(''bXi~ 4015 STUDY AREA 1-35W NORTH TRANSPORTATION DEFICIENCY STUDY Figure 1 SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS . . Traffic forecasts were prepared using year 2025 development assumptions from the North Metro 1-35W Coalition. These assumptions are higher than the current forecasts from the Metropolitan Council, and generate 55 percent more trips than currently exist in the study area. . Capacity deficiencies currently exist along much of the 1-35W corridor during a.m. and/or p.m. peak periods. The deficiencies include lack of capacity for the current demand and excessive weaving movements (interaction between vehicles entering the freeways and those exiting at nearby downstream interchanges). · Volume currently exceeds demand on several segments in the study area. By 2025, however, the amount of highway that is congested will increase significantly in both directions on 1-35W. Even with an assumption of two additional through lanes in each direction on 1-35W, traffic volumes are forecast to exceed capacity by 2025. The daily volumes will approach or exceed 200,000 ADT in places by 2025. . A major system-to-system weaving problem occurs on northbound 1-35W between the entrance from eastbound 1-694 and exit to westbound 1-694 has a very high weaving volume in a very short area, causing effects to spread to the mainline lanes. The current weaving among TH 51, 1-694 and TH 10 are expected to be eliminated when 1-694 is reconstructed. e · Forecasted mainline volumes plus high-volume merges and weaves make the segment ofI-35W north ofI-694 particularly at-risk for operational problems. More detailed operations simulation and analysis such should be considered to assist in determining the required geometric improvements in the corridor. . Approximately 55-60 percent of the traffic on 1-35W area between the Lexington Avenue interchange and TH 36 begins and/or ends within the study area. Adding one or two lanes in each direction would not significantly change that proportion. . The existing and forecast traffic volumes make the intersection between the TH 10 "Diagonal" and CSAH 96 a good candidate for grade separation. Such a separation, combined with an interchange between the TH 10 "Diagonal" and the TCAAP site would provide the best balance between regional and local traffic movements. · The TH 10 "Diagonal supports a critical regional function. 1-35W, 1-694, and the interchange between those two freeways would not have sufficient capacity to absorb the additional demand caused by regional traffic diverted from a "downgraded" TH 10 "Diagonal". . 1-35W//-694/TH 10ffH 36 Transportalion Deficiency Study -3- SRF Consul/ing Group, Inc. July 2002 . . . LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS The regional highway system analysis of the I-35W/I-694/TH lO/TH 36 Transportation Deficiency Study uses travel forecasts developed from land use and demographic forecasts for 2025, based on a "Build-Out" development scenario defined by the I-35W North Corridor Coalition in a separate element of the study. The Design Center for the American Urban Landscape (DCAUL), which prepared the growth forecasts, defined three scenarios that explore a range of development and redevelopment options ranging from "conventional suburban" to a more compact development pattern. Table 1 compares the rcgional model's forecast demographics with those used in the travel demand forecasts for this study. The coalition forecasts used in this analysis exceed those estimated by the Metropolitan Council for 2025. Table 1 Summary of Demographic Assumptions 2025 2025 2000 Metro Corridor Growth Existin,,(l) Counci!(l) Coalition(l) 2000-2025(3)(4) Population 166,500 191,500 224,200 35% (15%) Households 64,000 78,000 88,300 38% (22%) Emolovment 97,000 125,500 159,200 64% (29%) Notes: (I) Soun::e: Metropolitan Council regional forecast model (2) Source: Design Center for the American Urban Landscape (DCAUL) Scenario 25B (3) Corridor Coalition Scenario 2.58 compared to existing (4) Percents in parentheses show forecast growth using Metropolitan COWlcil projections. Key differences between the Metro Council and Corridor Coalition 2025 forecasts are the Coalition includes higher assumptions in the Northern Blaine area (additional 5,000 households), Twin Cities Army Ammunition Plant (TCAAP) site in Arden Hills (an additional 2,000 households and 5,000 employment) and "Twin Lakes" area ofRoseville (an additional 7,000 employment). Regional control totals were maintained for population, households and employment by moditying the assumed growth outside of the study area. For example, where the Coalition land use shows 10,300 households more than the Metropolitan Council, the growth of regional T AZs outside of the study area (and excluding downtown Minneapolis and St. Paul) was reduced by a total of 10,300 households on a proportionate basis. 1-35WII-694ITH 10ITH 36 Transportation Deficiency Study -4- SRF Consulting Group, Inc. July 2002 BACKGROUND TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM ASSUMPTIONS e Highway This analysis assumes completion of the 2025 regional highway system as included in the MnDOT Metro Division Transportation System Plan (July 2000) and Metropolitan Council (July 2001) The specific improvements assumed in the study area are: 1. One additional through lane in each direction on: . 1-35E from 1-694 to downtown St. Paul (including 1-694 weave/common area) - one additional lane in each direction . 1-694 from 1-35W to TH 36 (including TH IOITH 51 weave/common area) . TH 36, from 1-35W to 1-35E . 1-35W, from Washington Avenue to TH 36 2. ComplctionofTH 610 fromTH 169 to 1-94 3. Elimination ofTH 280 signals The baseline assumptions include continuation of the existing configuration of TH 10 and Ramsey County CR 10 (old TH lOin Mounds View). e The MnDOT TSP identifies 1-35W from TH 36 to the Anoka-Ramsey County boundary is identified as an improvement corridor for the 2001-2025-time period. This means that improvements short of an additional through lane are anticipated. Options could include auxiliary lanes, interchange modifications, bottleneck removal or other improvements short of an additional through-lane are anticipated. Transit Transit service improvements in the study area and in the region were assumed as part of the 1-35W Coalition Buildout Study Scenario 2.5C up which this analysis is based. Region-level improvements assume completion of three commuter rail corridors, two LR T lines and five busways as defined in the Metropolitan Council's Transportation Policy Plan. The study area is affected by one of the assumed busways - the Northeast Diagonal the is identified to generally follow the CP railroad alignment from White Bear Lake to Minneapolis; this busway would cross the southem portion of the study area generally parallel to County Road C in Roseville. Additional transit services assumed in the corridor include express service from the BlainelHam Lake/Andover area via TH 65 to TH 610/1-35W, express service from the e 1-35W/I-694ITH 10ITH 36 Transportation Deficiency Study -5- SRF Consulting Group, Inc. July 2002 . future 95th Avenue North park-and-ride lot and services within the corridor connecting the Rosedale/Twin Lakes area, TeAAP site and Blaine. Capacity And level Of Service Assumptions Forecast model capacity assumptions were slightly modified to account for operational considerations. The default model assumptions do not distinguish an auxiliary lane from a general traffic lane; however, it is known that auxiliary lanes function differently, and at a lower capacity, than through-lanes. A Level of Service D capacity (beginning of slow- and-go congestion) was used in the model to maintain calibration ofthe model parameters. The assumptions used were as follows: . Inside lane 2300 vehicles per hour . Middle lane 1950 vehicles per hour . Outside lane 1650 vehicles per hour · 1950 vehicles per average freeway lane . Auxiliary lane 1400 vehicles per hour . 1100 vehicles per lane TH 10 diagonal (expressway) . . 1-35W/I-694ITH toITH 36 Transportation Deficiency Study -6- SRF Consulting Group, Inc. July 2002 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED . Three future-year geometric alternatives were considered for the North 1-35W Corridor: 1. Baseline (no additional lanes on 1-35W) 2. One new through-lane in each direction on 1-35W 3. Two new through-lanes in each direction on 1-35W As noted above, all alternatives included additional, planned, capacity on TH 36, 1-694 and 1-35W (south on TH 36). In addition to the basic 1-35W alternatives, sub-alternatives were analyzed for the TH 10 "Diagonal" between 1-694 and 1-35W. The sub-alternatives included: 1. Grade-separating the current at-grade intersection ofTH 10 and CSAH 96 with an interchange between TH 10 and the TCAAP area in the vicinity of Prior Avenue. 2. "Down-grading" the TH 10 "Diagonal" to eliminate or minimize the amount of regional through-traffic on that segment. Figures 2 through 5 show the forecast ADT for the basic 1-35W alternatives. A significant increase in traffic is expected between now and 2025 given the growth in development in the study area plus the additional regional traffic from the TH 10/610 corridor and 1-35W north of the study area. Traffic on 1-35W is expected to increase by approximately 60 percent between 2000 and 2025 under the baseline alternative, or about 1.9 percent per year. e As capacity is increased under the additional-Iane-on-I-35W options, the forecast volumes are expected to increase, as expected. The increase is generally 10,000-to l2,000-vehicles per day for the one-lane addition; this would translate into approximately 1,800 to 2,000 vehicles per hour over six hours in the peak direction and a reflection in pent-up demand that can not be accommodated under existing capacity. The two-lane addition alternative increases demand generally by 6,000 to 8,000 per day. . 1-35W/I-694ITH 10ITH 36 Transportation Deficiency Study -7- SRF Consulting Group, Inc. July 2002 :>-0::Jcc,r \ ,II",..L.i I' ~.~:\(~",-!,,~ ) /"C It: ;iJ':=.IQih I 50,00 ... - ,}; l,l~s!':(I" j'J- ~r-~';t:"" r ~ ". /' d"E1 !"- ,---;:Jf,r ~ -1:5....... Inl I ~ It' 11 g i "\! ,Ci ~,I~" '~h __._ f". '~.J H B~aine _ ~'lr5lr,~,0. Co':.-=: ~~tpnY ~....; ~(Jl f;' .,"i'I:l:fj~ ~'r-- J 'i:tr_ ~ ~'I' 'iA.::::r"" I __~.+wJ ( ~u::L11L +- ,t ,1:--\"+1 r 7 :;y..L'~'f!; -~r~: _ I F=~~,:L ' l'... _"\ IW-~ I ..l -Gj'-i I'{"',j I \ r ~ I!) fB f-' 7 oou :~~: ~J,l r \~~l "rT1' :t:=: Jl- I ~;; .c ;~ ).~;u,~ ""tC'b~ Jf-;: ~i .rl :::) ::-\ -!" ...: I _I 118~ "EJ l,:fl\l ",---,--.1{) (..t' rr t<--"-' ..; A- ~ ~;: I c:;1ll"J ~ Lr !V _ "-' ..-.. ) lc ":-~c..z.~ I.- f.Il/if..'"' 1 I -, '\~'" ~~ ~ 123,000 -, ~ '"Y~ J '--. , =;:2. h ~ ~l} i-l /- ;;J :;~_ - n, fP - ~ \~')' "" V ill ~,_ ~ ' L..l~, ~ ( It 1 Arden HiIIs__ '~:;t~~ ~ ~-, "rI1-1f~.'1,iffirn,-. <fi: 11:"4 L~:-~ 41,500 bfl \l~ \."'i'~:~:\\~ ( ~ ~ TTl ' !'.{Liili. ~ 'f., }"lit 'f~ t ~[', \J'" -' , I _ , "" , , " 104,000 Gl _ li.; ", J to, , ~JJ': !:lJ, F h.. ht .--, -~j I j ,_.f"] -,""/J.. je' .. :11l-1 ,.. ..~Ig on v ~"';"'f(1 'In '? ,V ~ I P _ft1~,' /,;:r ,i,; 11I1 I ~ /,....111,000\.-'\:.- . 3._\~lt ..~ . \"1 1"':;:-' ) ~ -= .Jog,.d , " < ,-, -r - ,~ ;;\ 11,:.J ., """.~,' ,11/ ~., M J.~ .J." 113,00b ~~777'OOO..l \..;J,~. '-T I ,~v:.\ ; ~.~ or VIA'W, q , ~'I;;:;:~ .!T' "1'(' ~1=:m ooq . ?~.'1 "'-\ I ->-) .? " J"\'K"<:1-L.;--::i;.'II' U1 117 ~~9,OO" ,..,1_ \:'>.'"-if ( ': ':V~~~;~l\~~~ ~ _ illtlll =~~.cr~~cyrr~~ ~U4 '" 7) r:- =& '" r+ 1'1"'-::1 ~' ;-;::) ,6; _....1 :',00------1 ........... ' 11 ; l, ,,-. '""" 1 "Il'Jd ,~- I 1", .~~ji'l~l~ ( , ~ ~o J,1!8 lu dill OT;;1~~ ~ Ir.:;;!~; f-'" y~, !~ ~.... I~ \-t:,. -r l' :---;'rf=r .U~ ~ .. dlll///I, 7'", (I t'f i.:::::r:\l. [-l 'j) -;:: 'r!' 'L ~ 1 . 7' J;:ii~ ;-,;,JJ ,It:: i0'/1 I;J ~J1j ,,-,,~-,,-, ,," ....-..-;;'""- ~o--\)\I l~ckJr~r.ttt,1i i~ ,!(m'n- :irh I i!t1,~:o~i '!iiI/'m o~vilre.~)~' /~ J ~..~ r~~+ ,".' J/ Yc.':; l~p /~..'t'~ I1-.J \ . iJ~,+ ',ISJl)1 1 L-h_ 1 ~Jjr i I --' I; I ;Leu' r" 11 -;::CI# 1 . " /.....! III~" ~T' (" H"". ," !~ , _ ,., " .-', ,'--' ,,..; I i II I' \1, l ~ 1I1I r 'I . i. ,/ " ! - -, . " -L, 1llTlILL ;:;811j ! j 1\ i ~ 1.1. L;::: i<',. - //~- !Jir'~- _ . ~, ,.+1~ 4Y'"~' ,\- - \~~1~~,' '-j .'''::-" ~':t;-;-I,.."..:t . . - , m#'" L~6,o ,I~-i~~ i1:r::::J:'or'1.1..J::j "/J!,. ,.J .., :'.b';;~ -- - ;: 37;500 II~l-:.;~~~, ",J.:: ---- Ir;5-~ml? = I - 2000 ADT _\iM_,J"':. 4015 1-35W NORTH TRANSPORTATION DEFICIENCY STUDY Figure 2 '\roo'" "",_J I' 881ooLJER13 ~~h \C(9)1?)"!,\ ) JC ~ J., ,! ~V-:~JT ~~ ~t:~~~ i r~-v1' ~~ ;---;.... ~ T, I. I"-~ ~;1' .....1 J ' ;1. 'r I l!.ci w':x: ~ ;. "I \ ~j I Blame n1~i!%op,q . '-"~ ~~n ~ r"- ')::/ lJ1.it '1); :,:,' ~ 1.1 ;ci.;:rG ~i. I" i \';::'Y"'! I -rw--~, a - c ~ ".',L./., , ...:ifi::J I ~----,",.r'" c. r ,-~; /. ~ C t~ ,1 '!~,-L '-~ "-,,:>_r :,.( J:l H I\..'u '-1--';lL "'" h :.. i ilf-' _ <./1 I ~ 7 '1 {jnJ'-~I-.r\! . \ ~F:="\~IJiW!' !1i~ G1~ \,\"r't.mg ill~,1 ! --D' ~;1rN ~,l:r.~'f-:'1 ( I~ A b:!J LL(. ;~i! i-"~ ...._.~,':'" 'II /..'.ll- L i). ~.~I ~ } 1"c:):=:t~ht,TJ" ."",. ~ t~.f! f0 1\ -=-\ J lJi-..z .1 r 192,~f~- FJ:d'l~ .....:...J! iJ:f (T~'~,,"-,~ ~?VJ: i 1 -" ~l I I i -.::;'" -'='111 '1) ~ -I ~ .J u: ~,'\~ q.' & ~~ ". ", '-,(. '\ 'r _ n 191,000 ';=;~i 'yJ III/Iii _1..' 7' IG ~ ';) [J --::;7 r...l -=- iT = - .~UD~: ~ t' /' ~ !i ' .- H ~ I'- . ) '-.. "- tv/-_ ~~' '--r"""-~ ,(:.:. '1 Arden Hills ~'1l' -. 1::;1) ;^.... ~ " In""", ',' " I \ rD: \..,.'* \ \ /).-- -- , 111f--.1 ;yr' "~cl' ''3 ;._-;;:;; ~55,000 LJj,~,~~"{"i~~\.-' -'~Y{'//, 'T I U.I.-l. .If! I, . "~1 159,000 II!(@ 1- ,'~ 4')- I ' t'" 1.1 Ii')" :rt.. . , "Ii: ~ f-l I I I ~r '( ~ .J l~ /2:::, r$5~:::' e ::mghton (/~ - ,w!r.., \ n ,'7 k~" P, ,I]I- / /A"'"') i I I,L:... 11,::j / 172,000\ ~'1: ::I..'~ ~--m "', \::..j ~'"1' F' [Ij 'h:".J'~....() ,,,.J. . 1.. :'c. YC:- '".,..,.,""'\ _\ 1:- ,-I ti'" p=-.' f-r1 . __. 00 : T:I '~T" w /r ,$:!j:, e.r ~ .' : J ~ 144,0 . 163 000 "~ C -f '-.......V' \..>; r7 '.,\ , :, ,Ie!) liS "" rnl I,ll !1 ttt~ &> ~ "1 ' j ~ . , ..., r ,CC'<'...;-"It:..... I~ Y '--., I ~~ \ 4~1+tm.J.Cll, H ! )::. I'- -"'.' fl. ,6; I- W',ooo\.",;1,., ----; ~ II \ " ~ ~ ~ .,;L 1-,1,(.01 ! ' / "o;.,,;r ~ I~....... ,.l . 1: ~'j! ll)W~ (" r--/fIEa ~ C:) ~j)'L ..L 1t ''', , i I t' + ::.:3.! y.., 0: ;~\II ITT "r ~'!~ I~;' rji' ~~~ ~'::IJ~Jl~~' y ~~ ~, 9~ ~:- . I iLf} ~ t' ;-.. ", " ':t: ". "Ii ='. '7 WlI'I "-"~-"-'h .. """":"/ff".T ~,<( J:: ~"" " ~,?///. ~7,00'1 ~ r,"~ o~vil~J . ;;*"1 L:,' J :J! 7')1 ( .Ll hh' .1' 1 'r"l // ~ "1J..L~r:l ~l " H"" ~- V ' ,,--[" 1U IU /AYl-c>--::.I!i'l , \J iT";1j ~;! ,~ I 11"t':l1, ,J:' ;L:C'IL(~m ';::i, ~ ' .1.. r- 0; J,... ,_,w, Ko'lm rT '7h. jtffjl-- fh. - lil!1p ;4 Zl\ i ~ ::.." -- -tl;::rr:rm. /71=" h ;-;'~' ID, "r+H..., i'" . at.'.j" , \ I 11!!,C _ '--~ , :1,- ,-,+-< .A ~~tj.. ." ta'.,' I 1.4:l - ,"-~~ 1) \ ,;' ,'" ,:;1 I In" i.~.t~ .,.Ill::\' Rf r,Tm ~il),n ',.. I ]:::tr"~r-:: f--')n '__.' , , i r .. I' I IJ. A..I1-'.~ .~ !:::J _.I-~ If[ ;=:::: .. :t:.. ..., ~ ~1ITrh7 , ,.:'. 1 : E-3=1 , ....J,.~.. I I, 'c.'::." .. ' l=i:-- 7 'l.J. I "'" 1:=:::J - 2025ADTEX~nNGCONRGURAnON 1-35W NORTH TRANSPORTATION DEFICIENCY STUDY Figure 3 .....m.....!loll>Wi:. 4015 A' )~_J,~~ 0~;L I' 94, ~O n :H1dt\~fr{ (~~! ) I ( C'1.l:;:J hJ 11 ~~ ;JJ r-.:p.~,_~p~ , S', \ ' ~ ~*'t d. 95~' ql~i:i:J -:'1 ! ,-;::r/f D q1::,k. 'I J "' f 11' .u'AL[~ ! Wj:'r:;~ =!;q1 r--.....I \ I H Blaine - '!l'MP.Qo ~~.:,: , ~ ~~!n"Q~n ~ rn- l1y~r ~1 j OL. Ii:'='~ ) tjaY'1 F' 1 It iX~r! I C~~,.f }:j '- c... llil 1 ......~ l '~I ~ E'r't ,- +1' "r-=~".r-' r ""' f'....i 'I-- ~ ~ U I I I r? }-~ rj}-.3,.~, <._) \ i.L \ _u \ 1'\ 'P1 I I I '- ~8 lif II~ "-i 1 1.000/ ~. _ rj.,""::"\'U Lt'- I ' '::;s-':"!f iJr"'jJi Ilt,~I----: 11-;7 I.!:,--,~:~J~P-\Y~ lJf~~ 'I t-..- -. '! ~ ~ ,,::' Y j "<"'Ji'L1::"-! I-- '-I , 'f' f- L l ~p ~. ,l k~~:'J.->-- ~-' en 1J~! rl~ ;:j II i::"\ j" ~ _]~~ a203,O!E:J hJ::1"9 'n":.. j,,) it' ,--/ <~r-' "7 ::: r /0 ~ h 'i' 1) -! ~ ',~ ,.4<-....' '((?T'! - h-l~ - '\ X) _III !> 203,000 ~ -- '$-r-'\( ~ ~'i =I~~' ';) J :;/ -- !r: ~ ~ ~)..., '--- 1l;D7i ~ ';:) I. '--T"' i ! Arden HiIIS~! _, _ _, v!'ll l}t" itIl~vnl"~n ~ _', i, 1 '1,.0;-'" r...l :,\1 ( /) .' '['j ;,~ ~5000 -~ ":- I') ,Y(,_ hil' H '':<,," ~~ t 174,000 '@ 1. lnF )\-,ll>Trt L\ I b:;lJ '1-";1 b . ht ~ f"111 I !:'::? \-1-'((" .-J A>- I )b'.. '" J e IiJrlg on '/ -,. ~"'Vi \ \'=l-i 7' ,Ic.~' \ .,~ rnP.- ,/f! J IILlfJ"! t jIA187,00if\ ;,=~i::L ~,~ ~ )\'=,=:; ~ Ab!dl.::3' /L.) '" ,. c I.... 4- ~ ""'\ l:'- c:i ~ ~~)~~ ~" J~~n"..t;i~.~ i;r\1l~o' v~,,) cr~ ! -~1~ ~<.:::rr.:f.f I ' ..i.. r', I'u ~157, '\ ~ ~64~ ~ "-f'-.....l:f:J \>::;;J fr '.iQ III ,L,. 1~1 1\(' f+,' ,o-=cr' ~~ - " 1 'i: :::-tIiL... < ' ~ '==";<< J;: 1 i4,oao ~;1' 1 ~ '- ,E ,~-' I- I ' '"--'"Ie ~.. ----j [' ............ ; iL ~ , ~~ ~ =,,1 l ,I ::.Ji/L' 'IiI.,"~. ~...(. r--'1.I,i~:::1 l :i-oi ~}~_-:g- I . C"u;ry I [l.1t),.11-- I' :I~-::= rJ(-<" (If.:J,ill ".)1 ' r ' -- _~ . "_n . v'c' ~ . ~,,~~~r~~!~ ~~",-r::-:~Iio :~.;r~-~ J,J~I' ,; ,Iff "-'-!:!:lPi -IfY ( 14s~00~1. ~)r flrli oJ'lvll /t"F m 1:::.-.-.J ;:tit __,..:j.l~ 1/ ~,.h c:: tt" "c:::: :r: L::J ,j 'rFm: Ide~!1 I, i.-h I i I"-...,i;-' I ;;',.1 ;;~21 r -r=I~ I l/U~I L ~~mn IT,' i c~,. . t:ir]1' II.. '-- IIII fl ;11 h['r" ,7~' ~-'lIi ~1UI\., ;::;:~LL q:; ,~ 'IL9'l11,' 11 0 ..:\-L- -:-"--\" ' ~ .. '1lJ! 1)8,1, ^'""'C;' ! ~ j- "i'~B'O ,1).(. . 36 r;J,l'h, i; -- eCC.. I 'L~ ~...), '1[1 ~I'!! II JI" n. _' U r.=l ..f-~hH c=; J~:::.~," ! " 1,-,' l 'l.Jt.A /.. - l~" T: -'e- c: , c::: OC" ~:::rl ,I __~ ,..q,..;.~ 1. ~~ ~__ [::'~-'" J---'.." ~-- ~~, ".......... ~ 1-'-'1 \J.lI__.... 4015 2025 ADT ADD ONE LANE 1.35W NORTH TRANSPORTATION DEFICIENCY STUDY Figure 4 ~' '0""" ;~Ui "".J..' I' 1000~Q, %~ \~~\n{ \\~) ~\~ ).).i, ~:"l*IIJ;;;;: ~h:6. 5!'\~ I," u:...L::J f( ,'Ce" i ~~~~ I . ,.;:r/l--1 "L T': 1'''''T'':!J:1 95th D,1~q! ~L:h1.[:}C- If{ ~l~r--... \ 18 a.ine ~~Q@, c::':, , nf( r'- i:J.::r'i}JJ D;. 1:':'1" 0". t n~. ~ !(~~(~'! ,,.-, ~,~_}- Cl >-. ,lll r j,11......~h ~. ~;J",J.. ~r! I _...rrc- ""'v. iJ LT+ ~ Y, J ' 't\:: ...J&. 1-1\1.11. r--..... _ni.' ill" U II r 7 +. f~~L i ~\i\ .,..:-~~,,- , . I '[ II. !B t r y5 "---~ r ).J. u-- J"! ' \'P-;..:::.l ~~l.J!11 II~ i:::~_~ '-1}...'t=g-)1l-\~"'" n,--:- i ! _n_ "1. 'H i ~ - ~ (I ,~'E V 1'''-( If! t2J 1-, tl ! 17 " ~,')( ~,II', ~:ljIVi'9W I.. Q Q;l y- ~, ~ I~J!. ''''1' p 11 ~ J -<.. i~1 210~~3 h~ 'n 'n j I u" )(g'. ....I. "", IL~~, ";f~ln ~ I.J V.~ ~ 'oJ ./ L:: C\:xc~:t' L; Tfi?/:P:;,,! .. ""I':r:: - _ ' Iti! "10 - II p 210,000 IT]~' ~,/0i:" ,...) j' -:::" 1~lqF=' 17~ :::J Y "( -r J1 ,1'\ '- t r . ., 'i - .. /> .... "- ~/i:'~',"~ ,t,,, ' ~"r ,~'IJ~#,..J"1 Arden Hills ]fi --, ~. ,~'iI ~ '{I J if" .....'~,Y'l.l..1..Jj""' "'\i:::," , 1'1',..., I \,,_~ . ,rDC \ ....~.;r~;... .... \ .0- I, .fI' ....."'1If1liLf"l. ."1- _--...::.i ;._"..;; ~OOO ,~ ". ,i \ >-L,( ITl i1 1--'1 -~ll..im ~+-.. 185,000 '@ 1o(lffillf)'-j1 ]"H ?-- f 4 ~~J-:r~~ e~ :J'3~ighton /'V'T'( \,..., ,"-- II (t:=~ \1 ~~ lL ~ , ]J J}.I,;:;:(; rilL. :i~lrJ" I 203,~ Ji:"j~::L~ ~ ~ \~) , rL~)'" ,,''''- Ii LU ~"r <iI""' l::'--i -4 '1:"- \ ...i' IW. 1.U..J:l"r' I I,:r. ' , -l ~ ' l:)'3 '-Y'I . tt )'~ 'q 1; J'II -= ,'+ q~,:[lV, ~,H a!~ \~130.JlOO '" ~ ~~I\?OO~ ' , ?~~"\.ror~v_~f-i:J 0:u- , ~..JiY;..~~JP 'I,1t , '! mJ165,O '~~64110C ~r--f'-....r \.>f7 r ~~ ,H ~US ~rt1:1 i ,l U m - ill ~c::a;J, ' ......... ) , ~1""'::5], " f\;""~ ~ 1)'1~0~ ,^ I ~~ { \ : ': tr; W~ ~ v (l;' ~~II ~ -I~ ",/ "" \;~ 'I -1 c > S>J~~ / '. ' :~, "'::-DlI,.L' ! 11llellr l':---"- m- I!IXn.;"0, . L...v ~ ' ,i! ..::::J~$'J."# I' ...+~- 'III -----, I'~ 1/ l-:A;11 I" 1 i i / J ,11 :::::1) J, 'r''-- l ,,_too 7 'y '1111 (1i';>,;'lJ h.... R :.." =!-'<;='h= fj.J '-il . ~',' " "" ,"?,,//r '-"iT r+"'/ ,~';I'Io.T~ -I"~ "'-r II- j P i rJ I /,,~/, " : I (I r/ ..c::p" ,f ~::i ~ , ~ I , ..1 1_ ,:P:/.l.IJ;,' I ~~~Y::li 1</;/// \j ~lJ 'Efi~"-"~L~-~" " ~~ '," ".~.-:" j1"""r--\ ,J:; 'iil.-" rrrn !7')I ( ifililllj~5,o"'l .,~, U!li~' 0 vll.e:"..J /;',<:"f.:llll ~- __I. 'f! " , 1"'_, ,u,,:::.FJ:i "". " f-!- ,=' I '.li ' .. ~ [' C i+ U 11'1- ';::"YF I :t1 ..) " ",; -?n ,iJ- 1 "'-t':J:l ,: ',.., I:~i 01:- (:':i ';=I~ ~ ,.,' VOj ~- '''~<nTn)T Ii', th'!" 1 - IIlI1P /. ~ i ~~- "" L::L'7- lTm _'7- - ,l~ill\u.L :1-'1. 1 ~i \ 1_' 11~~ -::!::L~ \'b;;I,I"-"~ .A , '115,0 Jll7'\ re~, (fJ:= 'TL':j '...In, " n. , , U,c=\ __hJ-{J'~,.J\::.:,:i .i.. " !,. /' .....-:::l i: ,_ F='r 1:1' n:= 1 __ ,r::= .:;;:.'~ ~ r rC,"", / ,. Lf .. ,,- 1m: " ;.11 I '"i l~ !, " rmB IliIIIKIlIIIt_ 4015 2025 ADT ADD TWO LANES 1-35W NORTH TRANSPORTATION DEFICIENCY STUDY Figure 5 . HIGHWAY SYSTEM DEFICIENCIES Three types of deficiencies are included in the analysis: 1. Traffic volumes in excess of capacity 2. Weaving movements in excess of capacity 3. Intersection volumes in excess of capacity Freeway operations analysis was not conducted as part of this study. The identification if congested segments was based on review of volumes and forecast-model-based capacities. The MnDOT/Metropolitan Council regional travel demand model was used to assess the impacts of future land use and transportation configurations. This analysis uses a version of the regional model as modified for the North Metro 1-35W Coalition as part of the Coalition's Buildout Development Study conducted in early 2001 (initial analysis of 1- 35W was conducted by SRF in June 2001 using the regional model). Traffic Volumes in Excess of Capacity . Existing deficiencies in the regional highway system were identified based on review of published loop detector data (October, 2000) and traffic count data collected by SRF in June 2001. Several segments of regional highways in the study area currently experience volume- based congestion. "Unacceptable" is defined as peak-hour volumes excceding 110 percent of the level of service D capacity, or approximately 2200 vehicles per lane per hour depending 011 whether auxiliary lanes are present in the roadway segment. This generally would equate to slow-and-go traffic bordering on stop-and-go traffic (LOS Elf). It should be noted that this type of analysis does not reflect the "bottleneck" effect of congestion where traffic queues propagate upstream from a congested point. Table 2 identifies the location of segments considered to have unacceptable congestion under the various alternatives. Very large volume-to-capacity (VIC) ratios (greater than 1.35) represent a potentially unrealistic condition that may be beyond the capabilities of the regional forecast model to adequately model; these segments could be expected to experience congestion four or more hours per day compared to one or two hours for VIC ratios of approximately 1.0-1.2 VlC. Detailed existing and forecast volume estimates for the alternatives considered are included in the appendix. . 1-35W/I-694ITH 10ITH 36 Transportation Deficiency Study -12- SRF Consulting Group. Inc. July 2002 '" .... = '" ~ '" ....'" .Sl~ ~~ f-<~ "" M " " = "" 0 <;g " - " = " 0 ~'" 'il ,,"" " " '"' = , 0 ~,.Q ",,s '" ... Q 0 "'Z "" " " " u ;g -> - " = S.S ~~ o'iV "".. ~ ~ -'"= "", - "", ~ ll. Q " El'" ~ " ,.Q El ,s .~ l-; " " ~ Z ~ - "" " = " ,.Q ,s " o .5 '" - .~ "'"" " " o ,.Q ..c - ... o Z = o 'l:l '" ~ = o U '" - ,.Q '" ~ '" '" '" '" = ;;;l ..c .... ~ , - '" ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - l"- ~ I "" , I ~I --~ "'0_ ~~'" ~~- - ~ , ~ '" ~ - , - '" ~ , - 00 - - tnOt--NMor..;lOOr--r--OO~""'" l:- I t ,........,....................~-r'1:-N~r"'.! I I - I ......--......------ -----~-~ _~~-___________tn _"~I ~-......OONO~~ONOOONOOOO-~N~ ~ ~Nm~~~~~~~M~--~- -....:i....:i__............_............__ N - , ' -- "'0- "!N -....: - - ~ - "! - 1.0 ("l)OO M-."'-'" ...... "!....... "!......"! .....;......,.....:;_............. Nr-riOO"","t--"::t ......"!-_.~-~ ............ ................... -- "::ttnMr:-tn~tnr-- 00 tnOON~"::t-I.O...... -~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ -----..................-......-................................................ oo"::t-...q O~I.C!t-: N--- '" - - NO\'Ooo .................. ,........, \O.....-l":::t"...... :::.....; ...........:i............ " " " ~ " ,Q - 5 a OJ) " '" ",' "!I -I I 1 I I o _ I oj .,,; 1.'. .,,; ~ 11.'.~1.'. ~ ~""''' I~\~~ ~ I~~ ....z1.'._o ~I"',,~OO '< 1.'. 0;,< I."", -.....~ -";e. U 1-+ l-< 00 p:j d I ~...... B:;:q S'C;:;'~. 0 ]. ~d .~g~~ N ~ I~~~ .o~~~~oo>~~ ""uuo~ w ~"'~H~~u-Hl~u,<zu "...:. "'l:j ""(J "Cl "'l:j N '"C 1-0 0\ .CCI "C 01 > "Cl "0: ~ ~ "'O"l{:lV) .....:l i,~a~~~~$]~~~~I@a~]8ga~~] u,,'~~t~ut~7"'~"~O~~-au.....,,< . =""="""""..,~u<"""u.,,;=""~..,.,,;"~z ~~I~~I~~~~~!~~~~I~~I~s~~~~~ ~""g15~1~~~1~1~515~~5~1 ~8U~UH~U~~~U~~u~u~~uu~~ ....: '" - N - - - - '" - '" - - - . OC'oJ .!:o .0 Q,C'oJ '" e~ Ql-S .~ '5 '" c: 8 LI.. ll:: CI) 7 - ....: o ~ ~ i'i -s ~ ~ ..2 .'" .g s u :> ci' i< .e .8 '-' ~ s..~ ~ g Q"il " ~ '-' 0 ,- " t: " " ~ "''' '8~ "'il . ,. 00 " 0 '""t: 1> ~ e 8 o ~ E;... S:g ~< o~ -- -;... 00-0 ~-o l!~ o -~ ,. 0 ~"" '" ~ 00 0 "'..Q -0 00 " ~ ~.E " '" Q> . , '" ~ , -s '" Ci5 coG "'c: ;c,!)l r;:~ a", "'0 ~,~ ""- ~~ , 0 :::::Q, ~'" LOc: "'~ ..!.f.O . ~~ -N ~~ . . e ~ "= ~ = '" " ..: 0 ..c " ..... = '" " .. >-l ~ , ~ ~ = " = >-l " , 0 - ..c on ..... '" '" 0 " '" ~ 't:l = " 0 ..c ..... !;2.. '" .. ;;. .S; ~ ....- " ~ o " =:<1 ""on "'" ~ "0 0..'" = 5 " 0 " ..c 5 ..... '" .~ of " ~ ::g ~ = = 0 -:S " '" .. 0 ~ .~ ~ ..... '" ~ '= ~ " .~ 0 ~ U ~ ..!l = = 0 - on c;, ..c 0 - "! - "! .. ..c i ..... - - - - '" of t.l ~ t.l .. " ~ ..0 a:i ..... .~ > ~ <!) < <!) '" " ~ ..... = bO " ~ <:: ... oj ~ < 0:; ..0 t.l i:: <:: il ... '" :s <Zl <!) "0 "" 'E ;j 0 '" <!) - \C il '" <.i S t5 , p., ..... " <!) t .... > > "0 ~ < < -g <:: " ..c .. ~ 0 i:: bO oj \C = \C 3! <!) .S 8 - ...., " ...., 'E "" 5 :::: S on IIi IIi "0 '" .. 'C "" <!) oj \C t5 E-< " E-< o:l JJ~ , <Il p., ..... ...., ... :c '" E-< <.i", .!;o ,0 "-'" '" e~ C!l~ "~ 'S '" '" (3 l.L a:: C/) o - :a -S ~ M ..!l ,;!l ,9 E u >: ~ ~' ,- '" g : 0.'- " " " " Q<il " ,. " 0 ,- " ~ " " .... '" " 'B~ "il ,. '" " 0 ,",,'<, ... " o il " " .... M @~ ~:g ~:t. 0,- :::;.... ~"O ~~ 0:: ;;.~ ;g ~ M 0 "'" "0 M " M tEE " " Q;;' , "" - , -s .2 C/) <0(;- 0>" i!;.!l1 ~.g 0", ~Cl ~,~ "'- O>~ ""0 >;:C>. S:'" <0" 7~ ~~ -N ~~ Segments with Excessive Weaving Movements . In addition to volume congestion, a roadway deficiency can be identified where weaving movements are excessive. Traffic conflicts can be created between the traffic entering a freeway and the traffic exiting the freeway at a ramp within close proximity as vehicles "compete" to occupy the same space within the roadway. For the purposes ofthis study, if adjacent entrance and exit ramps are within one mile of each other, and if the sum of the vehicles entering and exiting at those ramps exceeds 2,000 vehicles then the segment between the interchanges is considered to have a weaving problem. Table 3 shows the location of interchanges with problem weaving volumes. Figures 6 though 10 show several of the more prominent weaving areas. Several interchanges currently have weaving volumes sufficiently high to cause problems. The most significant of these is the 1-35WII-694 interchange (Figure 7). The vehicles entering on the loop from eastbound 1-694 and the vehicles exiting to westbound 1-694 must weave in a short auxiliary lane under the 1-694 bridge. Weaving volumes in the p.m. peak hour in the year 2000 was 2,076 vehicles per hour. By 2025 this movement will increase to at least 2,339 vehicles (under the baseline forecast). This geometric deficiency can best be addressed by separating the movements, such as through a directional "flyover ramp from northbound 1-35W to westbound 1-694. A second area of concern is the segment ofI-35W north ofI-694 and (new) TH 10. As the TCAAP site and surrounding areas are developed, additional traffic will use the local interchanges at CSAH 96, County Road H and County Road 1. These increased movements, coupled with the major system interchanges at TH 10, old TH 10 and 1-694 will create a significant number of weaving movements over a potentially high number of lanes. Nearly 50 percent ofthe traffic on this segment ofI-35W currently enters or exits at TH 10; this percentage is expected to increase between now and 2025. In addition, improvements to TH 10 may result from inter-regional corridor studies now under way, thus increasing the potential demand on this segment ofI-35W. The 2025 baseline forecast is that approximately 11,000 vehicles will either enter Of exit this 3.5 mile segment ofI-35W in the a.m. peak hour (excluding 1-694). . A more detailed operations-level analysis (such as CORSIM or VISSIM) is warranted for this segment to mOre fully assess the implications of additional development or highway expansion in this area. . 1-35W/I-694ITH 10ITH 36 Transportation Deficiency Study -15- SRF Consulting Group, Inc. July 2002 . . . Table 3 Existing Weaving Problems(l) Location 1-35W TH to SB to 1-35W SB EB 1-694 Entrance to WB 1-694 Exit Old TH 10 to County Rd.H County Rd 1 to TH 10 NB CSAH 96 to 1-694 1-694 TH 51 toTH 10 Existin High weaving volume, short weaving section (SB and NB, AM and PM 2025 Volume-based capacity deficiency SB-AM High weaving volume, short weavin section -PM High weaving volume, short weaving section (SB-AM and NB-PM High weaving volume, short weavin section -PM High weaving volume, short weaving section (SB-AM and PM, NB-PM Correctable in 1-694 reconstruction 1-35W/I-694/TH 10ITH 36 Transportation Deficiency Study -16- SRF Consulting Group, Inc. July 2002 ~ \~~ ----- ~ l- => z -' ~ I-' IJl I ..~ I-' IJl Exist n9 PM V ci 0:: 9 e: 2450 Ve Ihr :z: 0:: o 2 20 Veh/hr (85' To 1-3;( N.) ~ <( -' IJl ?i ~ FAIRWAYS LA. ~ // 89 @ 17 16 T29N R23W W. CO. RD. B 47. BROADWAY DR. SKILL AN ROSEWOOD LA. N. rmD WEAVING ANALYSIS Weaving Area Between 1-35Wand TH 280 Figure 6 eo.""""cG,o",,lNc 1-35W NORTH TRANSPORTATION DEFICIENCY STUDY 4015 C) u.i c::: Cl ~ c:: => c::: :I: I- 0 ~ . z c:: => ~ 0 a. :;;: 53. SEXTANT AVE. OAKCREST "'Jr:.. u.i ?{ vv. " c::: o c:: a. W. PERIMET . 36 I GLUEK \-, - """\ (J) - \ . ff =5 41, lJ.. GLUEK - - LA. S. ffi SHARONDALEAVE. Cl -' . - I- ~ IJl EL ELDRIDGE AVE. t ill AVE. w W c::: ~ <:( w > 0:: LOR~1\f w,2 MN 0 SKIL SHRYE R RYAN :;;: I-' => IJl . 10th u.i u.i u.i ~ ~ ~ 8th <7. ST. 9th ST. "" u.i "" "" ~ "" 1i5 ;!:: >> it) ;;;: "0 CO "E c ST. ~ "" N. W. '" N 10 W. COUNTY ST. u.i ':;;II; ~ V ~, 694 / PARKSHOR VALENTINE ~ET CIR. CREST ~ -; RO il.! Existing PM Volume: 986 Veh/hr # S- UI ::; cr. ft W. GRAMSIE ~ U> ~ CO. (jj) 'ro u.i ~ 35W cr: w w .~~ ~ ~ ~ T. N, W. w ~ J:: "E "0 ~ ;;;: c '" N Z N. W. ST. .c w E "~ m ~ 0 h ST. N.w. () ST. ~ WEAVING ANALYSIS Weaving Area Between 1-35W and 1.694 -~-- CoNSULTlNC GIlOl.J1',INC;:. 1-35W NORTH TRANSPORTATION DEFICIENCY STUDY 4015 if) I - ....J W :E 'vE:NUs~ (9 ci Z :::; 0:: ....J o 0:: ~ ~ RD. <( u.- ~ CRYSTAL AVE. RD. GLENVIEW AVE. Figure 7 \~ NEW BRIGHTON ~ z . @ @ 14th -1(<: . S'J: :;: z@ !!d <('-\). <l:: .,(-. '60' G i====1 694 & 0:: w m PARKSHORE ~R. 0:: m 10th ~ET CIR. W. COUNTY .:r RD VALENTINE CREST .c u.i.c ~ ~~ U5 ~ CO 3: $ N. W. 'co 11 <'> '0 c: N W. GRAMSIE f:' I,j oS " ~ ~ CRYSTAL ;> 0:: AVE. rt: RD, <D ill ill w ~ 2 ~ w ~ ~ 0 ~ U <7. ST. 9th ST. 8th ,.\. 0;- e rmB WEAVING ANALYSIS Weaving Area Between TH 96 and /.694 1-35W NORTH TRANSPORTATION DEFICIENCY STUDY Figure 8 CONSutTINCGIlOOP,INc. 4015 ~ CJ) i< <( LAMBERT ~ 0 :s z z AVE. 0 0 (,) I- :;; I- u. ~ Z ll) ::i 0 r-. H-2 (,) :;; MOUNDSVIEW f-' Trailer 0 / , CJ) Court W ....I 10 i< w DR. u: g 35W z w >- ....I W ....I ~ ~ w a:: w z <!l u. z 0 u. 0 w (,) ...., b 2025 AM Volume: 248 Veh/hr NEW 2025 AM Volume: 1925 Veh/hr ST. WOOD CT. -m CONliULTlNC G1lOUP, INc. 4015 aving Area AM Volume: 10081 Vehlhr ~ () Cft. >- CI,,? ~8~. 0:: W . '14;>~ c5 :;c c\"IESHIR 5 LA. O' KINGWAY z :;c LA. w BUCKINGHAM g LA. ~ / J DICKENS LA. /k; <!l a:: Trailer V ~ (3 Court a .....\ MUSTANG RD. ~~~."-v:..~.~~- >, 1 & 0; 'iJ 0; ~ J \~ Trailer ~ z BRIGHTON @ WEAVING ANALYSIS Weaving Area Between CR Hand TH 10 1-35W NORTH TRANSPORTATION DEFICIENCY STUDY Figure 9 ~ <l: w (j) -' ~i 0: Ol TH 610 82nd LA. LAPORT DR. 2025 AM vOluJe: 4672 Veh/hr p'v w ~ I-' (f) -' w <l: I EWOOD ~ CIR. I-' (f) z w I 0.. W f- (f) I-' I-' (j) (f) o -' W u:: Z W w 0:: e" 202 GROBERG z o (j) I-' ~ (f) 0 BRONSON ::!i o -' w u:: g' ill -' m DR. OAKWOOD TERRACE: PINEWOOD ~ 35W I-' (f) b z 5 o RD. I-' (f) DR. . ci 0:: ~. ~ DR. DR. ci cr lurn : 45 Veh/hr I-' (f) o~ (f) +"5 >- ::;: roC; 0 <l: <';;-" Z Si! DR. 5 LAMBERT AVE. H-2 10 BELLE LA. I-' (f) w w ~ ~ 0:: ~ 3 o 0 ::;: f- ~ ~ AreaAM olurne: 107 \-1\ ~ ::l I o (f) ~ w ~ ~ . ~\.E o ~a >- WEAVING ANALYSIS Weaving Area Between TH 610 and CR I z o f- u.. ::::; o I-' (f) Trailer Court DR. w ~ STATE DRIVERS EXAM. STATION 35W . 4015 --- Figure 10 1-35W NORTH TRANSPORTATION DEFICIENCY STUDY CoNsu-t.TINCGROllP,JNC'. . . e Intersection Analysis Two signalized intersections were included in this study: CSAH 96 at TH 10 and County Road 10 (formerly TH 10) at County Road H in Mounds View. The County Road H1County Road 10 intersection currently operates at Level of Service C in both peak hours. This can be attributed to the reduction in demand relative to the capacity when new TH 10 opened to traffic. However, traffic demand on County Road H will increase with the development of the TCAAP site. In addition, County Road 10 will experience traffic diversion-rclated growth as traffic volumes increase on TH 10 and 1- 35W. The intersection TH 10 and CSAH 96 currently operates at or beyond capacity in the peak hours, primarily due to the high through-volumes on TH 10 but also as a function of the CASH 96 through- and left-turn movements. Demand at the TH 10/CSAH 96 intersection will exceed capacity prior to the development of the TCAAP site. This congestion will worsen as the TCAAP site develops and as congestion increases on 1- 35W increases. Additional through lanes on TH 10 would not eliminate the congestion. The most reasonable alternative would be to provide a grade-separation between TH 10 and CSAH 96 traffic. Design of this separation would need to be made with consideration for access to the TCAAP site and access spacing on CSAH 96 and TH 10. Such a separation, combined with an interchange between the TH 10 "Diagonal" and the TCAAP site would provide the best balance between regional and local traffic movements. Table 4 Levels of Service at Selected Study Area Intersections Intersection AM Level of PM Level of Service Service Existinl! 2025 Existing 2025 TH 10 at CSAH 96 DIE F E F County Rd. H at County Rd. C D C D 1000ld TH 10 1-35W/I-694/TH 10/TH 36 Transportation Deficiency Study -22- SRF Consulting Group, Inc. July 2002 TRAVEL FLOW (SELECTED LINK) ANALYSIS . The origins and destinations of traffic on I-35W were assessed to better determine the causes for the increases in traffic. Two 'selected link' analyses were prepared to identify where traffic passing a certain point on I-35W was originating from or destined. Figure 11 shows the 2025 Baseline forecast origin/destination pattern for traffic at the south end of the corridor (in the TH 36/I-35W common section). It is estimated that 76 percent of the total demand will be from I-35W, with a significant movement from TH 280 (24 percent). However, 35 percent continues through the corridor on TH 36, not using I-35W. I-35W at the north end of the corridor accounts for 14 percent of the forecasted traffic. An estimated 41 percent of the travel is destined for the study area. Figure 12 shows that 2025 Baseline traffic entering the corridor at the north end is predominately regional, with TH 10 (44 percent) followed by I-35W (36 percent). The remaining 20 percent is from local interchanges (CSAH 23, County Road J and 95th Avenue North). Only 22 percent ofthe traffic at the north end ofthe corridor passes through the I-35W/TH 36 common section, which is approximately the same percentage that uses 1-694 to the east (21 percent). (The large percent of traffic to 1-694 East illustrates the critical regional role served by the TH 10 "Diagonal".) Local interchanges, including the above-mentioned interchanges, account for 59 percent of the originations or destination from the north end of the corridor. . . 1-35W/I-694ITH toITH 36 Transportation Deficiency Study -23- SRF Consulting Group, Inc. July 2002 . . em COIIISULnN'G GROUT, INC- 4015 3/2102 '1".l!.rl?'~"~,( >., Ii, y"v.A 1, { ~ Jj.", '0 ;;-e!~~~ '.",.1 r"~ "-j ',.' ,\ l't~ j p '." ._~T ~~;b\-~ r'" ~ r- I ~~(j)11""i r=i)H~'-- ""j"""""'!f"""""':~""'>~~"~.".&,,",I,';\.,,wntr&"r.'l"~*'" \,."",J"'!'1.'~ . ".T.....'" ~, " ",\, ~;c-- 1~\ t~~.. ut~\ J~_~!,*~!I~b ~~lIJI'j 10.0% V LSi ( 191,000 , !'1"'~ d H'll fC'l !- enlSp r~ r k [1 (, l~.~"~ I f-)~"'\ ~-=Ln:-J/: i' .~ "\ \r' )3. -.:-'{~:::::\'i ~ T:..~.' ,_<S'rl.:(~~~.l....j ~ ~'TTii I 11,?~, ~I~ ! "::'~ 1~J? M~1_."-~~ ~2~%~ '".....)~ ~ ~ I iln":;=, ii : c.:l"" ? -rf-"i];- ,,<~ I '{ , p"lL:"-" I . "w \:zr.=;~L':__- 1,1 J:: :.'---.:" ~y~ 1')1 ~ r -... t;::;l ,~ ,_ j " ! , 1 1.J'1i~ C)~ :"""~t';"1'$rh "";:,: ~ J:~trm?Jr~eVinla-!j /JJ :I~+ ~1~ c_ 1..1 ,- ,.<,..J ,_~n , ", "/ rrr-:;FO...1 H 1! I.l ~ ._ ',~. liiCC"~'" ,-'!I ~ ':T :.Ly.4::: '2l n !, -"-{,il'l' -"-"'1:!:1- 8-- TH,,11Lu, '-r ~"4::;..rt~T1 ". __~--L,-. "ii"':IJ.PJ II 1"1 "jO-iiJ--l' ~ l'il '---~'-- I. .J ~L~J'~i:~~~~_b=;:;:r_J .- .. '~t----" '-'11tl - __ i fH:! L~' t=~~U! I (;\ f 2025 SELECTED LINK ANALYSIS 1-35W & TH10 Common Segment 1-35W NORTH TRANSPORTATION DEFICIENCY STUDY Figure 11 m CONSIiLTING GROUP,IN!;. 2025 SELECTED LlNKANALYSJS J.35W West of TH 280 1-35W NORTH TRANSPORTATION DEFICIENCY STUDY Figure 12 4015 3t2102 . . . . . . LANE-ADD TRAFFIC DIVERSION ANALYSIS I-35W currently has three through lanes in each direction from TH 36 to TH 10, with a fourth lane in the TH 10/I-35W common segment that functions as an extended auxiliary lane. Forecasts and analysis were prepared for two alternatives: a one-lane addition to 1- 35W and a two-lane addition to I-35W. A comparison of the forecasts was made to determine the nature of the additional traffic: was it local origins and destinations or was it regional through-trips? Figure 13 shows the location of two screenlines across the region, stretching to include two logical regional facilities from which regional traffic might be diverted: TH 169 and I-35E. At the north screenline (parallel to County Road I) a total of 11,000 trips were diverted to I-35W with the one-lane addition. Traffic on TH 169, TH 252, TH 10 and 1- 35E (the paralleling principal arterials) account for 27 percent of the traffic diversion. Minor arterials within approximately two miles ofI-35W (Long Lake Road, Silver Lake Road, Lexington Avenue and the planned arterial through the TCAAP site) account for 51 percent of the diversion. (The remaining 21 percent is spread across other roadways, in particular Central Avenue (TH 65). The incremental diversion of traffic from adding a second though-lane in each direction are 20 percent on principal arterials, 33 percent on nearby arterials and 47 percent on other roadways. A southern screenline ( approximately County Road D) shows 43 percent from the above-mentioned principal arterials. Approximately 48 percent of the diversion is from nearby arterials, including 15 percent from TH 51. The incremental change from the second through-lane is 29 percent principal arterial and 35 percent minor arterial. Based on this analysis, it can be concluded that either adding one lane or two lanes to 1- 35W would not serve a primarily regional function. Traffic growth would generally be in the same proportion as the approximately 60 percent of Coalition area traffic on I-35W under the baseline. 1-35Wlf-694ITH 10ITH 36 Transportation Deficiency Study -26- SRF Consulting Group, Inc. July 2002 '!---~~M"'" .ilJ!~<, '-:.\~'~ ,,<>'"'['. ~:-_-..:., "'2 :~.( ::11' ~,: y: Ilk' " !1 IU . /' (" ::'1.';'.:' '- / :.:.1:)111,,-0,' ~" J"~ :,:.~-:";" .1!1,~~:'.,: ':<,,-,i,'0 ...\~~:11 :.~: . < ".' ... .", ,.-..,... ..... c'. 'r:"7--'-'o;~,,"" "". -<.:,JL 1'-..... ". 'h.P";- _",", _, ~jl~<r'.:,.,...;~rS'!' \.." '. . !,j~lJt~.F ,'_, . Y...... ......... ! '<."" '1".0 ". .... ''=- ":~T..'I, '0<';"'" ,,.., , i~;<,i" ..I'... t. ~'V .... ... _ ';--..N ,~:..~~ ~., L",d."o. ," ' . ~"I ..~~, "..,,,__,> ~~''-;~~~'t ......": ~ ...__.I.g~I;;J:..:,; ~". I~,,:;'::; -. .. '?I' .T>::;..' ..~ ". '~' t!,,, aI''!:: . .. f-. c. :. .. ~".; ~~" 'i" . ;!Ii~::;" ...-J-r,'. 1=.' -' I ','-'" .:, ;'.' \~.1 i':U ':.; , .. ';,.)';"_ ;::;l';~~;~r,r:.;'\:-' I.'.... '... ~ ..... ~...., "I\)M'~",::~ ..'~' I:f~~'~'!f~l\:tJ::;;~J H .E::;::C::, .. 7',"1...11.... ,,': r,.--> '-~(> ~ "i;YJ I ~', ~4 ~~ ' · ,:~~ ! " c... 'T,.0pJ I c-:c' -- .'~ . I' ... ;,.. ". 1~ I ;--. ~"","' ~.t;; ...:~JU;I..t. .. '== ~iiti;~, 1 " .. ::~ ;,,: -""- '~---~y. ; '0j'. (.. . .. ~~ ~~;" IS ." -" L :iII5l"" lIo...:. '....... &8 J" .... ... /( " 1 ~ _~..: .~Yii:" I I!P"-~"~'I''''',,~,:, "-...,~~~;. ~'~~",,""\ ~" Ln. :I":---J ''C.,' _.J'" .{:Xi i .. ""~~~"" ~ + L .. J i-L~ ~ v 0 IX' '., . --," ...,p.. '- l,,',. ... ~ . ::.. .... _ (I .. . ".. """" '1 '_'.' .. F: s ~'7'c' ..::;lld':..1 ", ,.-:,,~ .... I,' ..f ..' .... 0", .... " '" r7::;;'. ,'_, ...... 1''','' & ..;;:.:.. I.~"'>.K I,,' .c",: f-- '..~ --.... I.... II ,J... ... :..... ':..."1". . !I:~ c.:::.....:" . ;:::~~ '..,,: .. ..:~ ':t1 I' ~...:;. , ... -~: ,'. ,_' . "....~'i:.~: ....-:-}g8 . r _. ,.....,. ~J.i$e :;;~ -:' :~'I" -'\: ~ . ~,~:-;-; '\1~, .' - """-,: 1_ ::;:'~ri1.~.;~" :1' , h':" --.... '-:', .. ;~ ?"" ~ V' '"r'v .. Ii''' ,,,,,1el',,,,,,,,,.. ~-:;: ;I, I, \:"g. .... 'C:~)'--( I /;r:",t;~;-:?'.:/ '1/'" >' ',~ It :; .' ;;' ,< ::'~'I.:'i '. :. ~'.;:i.~,;.>}. ':..,. /", ' .5 ~._. ,--.t :.~,' '~I:i~~f :''c - · .' ,1 ! ; l~,~, ' r ~:<;~ :~i[I' e~hH;~j~~ ,';: n Ii ' " ~"1l10LP p,J~;--': ,;," \ ~"ilfi' ),:;~,>~ri ~~ !~ ' 1.','''''', .:",.' I'''<:~.'~;'':y'~~<r ''1:::...:..:=':';~''i~t ~ ~ ~ ~ 10. ',r,,;'.,/:.... ....,. .0="" "'~J. ~\ ,...:;'-:-'.<:1- '" [ij E c: 1<: {"T T.:L{I"le~ 1 r ", __'r:l~~ ~cl" ;'~ ,-'J;~ i~ ~i .... . ;,".) "[F'''~ /. ~~.., " .,. c. " . .. , ~ -( L_I ....' ::t., (\') ~ e .~. u.: CI) ~ :3 ~ It) (\') ..!. ....a ~~ o ::l j:: t:i CS >- Q 0 ':( m p u .- u:: w ~ ~ Q 0 i= ~ ;:: o g5 Ci; (L ffi ~ :s: ~ - I- Q I (,) ~ iI: 0 L( Z ~ ~ . TH 10 "DIAGONAL" SENSITIVITY TESTS The segment ofTH 10 between I-35W and 1-694 (TH 10 "Diagonal) is an expressway- type facility with four lanes, limited access and a 60 MPH speed limit. 2025 Forecasts estimate that approximately 28,000 of the 52,000 vehicles per day on the facility will be regional trips that use the entire TH 10 segment. Two sensitivity tests were conducted to determine the effect of reducing the regional significance of the TH 10 Diagonal. The first test assumed that the north-end connection between TH 10 and CR lOin Mounds View was eliminated. As shown in Figure 13, volumes would be reduced from 52,000-55,000 to 38,000 to 42,000 (the approximately current ADT). A second test eliminated the connection between 1-35W and TH 10. This test showed a more substantial reduction in traffic to approximately 33,000 ADT. It is observed that demand on the TH 10 Diagonal consisted of three components (TCAAP/CSAH 96 area traffic, CR 10 traffic and TH 10 through-traffic. As the CR 10 and TH 10 connections were eliminated, an increase occurred in local (TCAAP/CSAH 96 area) traffic. In addition, some of the TH 10 through-traffic diverted to the County Road H interchange, causing congestion at that intersection. . 60000 50000 40000 l- e 30000 <( 20000 10000 o . Figure 14 TH 10 "Diagonal" ADTwith Diversion Options I!il Existing .. Baseline III Disconnect from CR 1 0 -, . Disconnect from 1-35W Near 1.35W Near 1-694 Location 1-35WII-694/TH 10ITH 36 Transportation Deficiency Study -28- SRF Consulting Group, Inc. July 2002 As shown in Figure 14, the regional role of the TH 10 "Diagonal" were to be reduced traffic would be forced to take the less-direct interchange ramps, causing significant operational issues. The TH 10 "Diagonal" serves as an alternative to the I-694/I-35W interchange for south-to-east and west-to-north movements. Those ramps currently have light use, but demand is expected to grow as the area develops and as the TH 10 Diagonal" becomes increasingly congested. The displacement of traffic back to I-35W and 1-694 and the interchange would cause increased traffic on 1-694 and I-35W. 1-694, even with the planned additional lane, will be approaching capacity in the peak hour; the diverted traffic would cause the roadway to reach or exceed capacity. I-35W, as previously discussed, is forecast to exceed capacity even with additional lanes assumed; the diversion would worsen that problem. . A very key impact of reducing the regional role of the TH 10 "Diagonal" would be to cause an above-capacity weaving movement on I-35W between the entering loop from westbound 1-694 and the exiting loop to eastbound 1-694. As previously discussed for northbound I-35W, improvements such as a directional "flyover" would be required to correct this problem. 2,00 LBO 1.60 1.40 1.20 1.00 O.BO 0.60 0.40 0.20 0,00 Figure 15 Peak vIe Ratios with TH 10 "Diagonal" Options EJExisting .TH 10 Diagonal Baseline m Disconnect from CR 10 . Disconnect from 1-35W . 1-694 (TH 10 to 1-694) 1-35W {1-694 to CSAH 1-35W (CSAH 9610 Old 58 1-35W Weave 96) TH 10) Section (lolfrom 1-694) . 1-35WII-694ITH 10ITH 36 T ransportaUon Deficiency Study -29- SRF Consulting Group, Inc. July 2002 . CONCLUSIONS Traffic forecasts were prepared using year 2025 development assumptions from the North Metro I-35W Coalition, resulting in a higher level ofland development and traffic than would be predicted using the Metropolitan Council's growth assumptions. For example, the Coalition estimate for 2025 households in the study area was 88,300 households and 159,200 employment, compared to 78,000 and 125,500, respectively, using Metropolitan Council data. Consequently, the study area is forecast to generate approximately 20 percent more traffic under these assumptions. The scenario generates 55 percent more trips than currently exists in the study area. Two types of capacity deficiencies were identified in the analysis: volume-based capacity deficiencies and weaving (interaction between vehicles entering the freeways and those exiting at nearby downstream interchanges) capacity deficiencies. Capacity deficiencies currently exist along much ofthe I-35W corridor during a.m. and/or p.m. peak periods. . As shown in Table 2 volume currently exceeds demand on several segments in the study area. By 2025, however, the amount of highway that is congested will increase significantly in both directions on I-35W. Even with an assumption of two additional through lanes in each direction on I-35W, traffic volumes are forecast to exceed capacity by 2025. Analysis of traffic diverting to I-35W as a result of the additional capacity indicates that the traffic is from both minor arterials in the study area (e.g. - Lexington Avenue and Long Lake Road) and from other regional facilities such as TH 65 and I-35E. The daily volumes on I-35W will approach or exceed 200,000 ADT in places by 2025. A major system-to-system weaving problem occurs on northbound I-35W between the entrance from eastbound 1-694 and exit to westbound 1-694. The volume of traffic entering I-35W from 1-694 plus the volume exiting I-35W to 1-694 exceeds 2000 vehicles per hour. This high weaving volume results in traffic queues spilling over into the mainline lanes resulting in additional congestion. A second significant existing weaving problem occurs in the TH 51/ I-694/TH 10 interchange area. However, this weaving movement is expected to be eliminated when 1- 694 is reconstructed. The segment ofI-35W north ofI-694 is particularly at-risk for operational problems. High-volume system movements occur at the TH 10 entrances and exits. These movements, in combination with the I-35W mainline movements to subsequent exits, creates a very high-volume weaving area. More detailed operations simulation and analysis such should be considered to assist in determining the required geometric improvements in this portion of the corridor corridor. . 1-35WII-694ITH 10ITH 36 Transportation Deficiency Study -30- SRF Consulting Group, Inc. July 2002 Approximately 55-60 percent of the traffic on I-35W area between the Lexington Avenue interchange and TH 36 begins and/or ends within the study area. Based on analysis of traffic diversions, addition of one or two lanes in each direction ofI-35W would not significantly change that proportion. . Forecast traffic volumes at the TH I O/CSAH 96 intersection will result in a failing level of service. The existing and forecast traffic volumes make the intersection between the TH 10 "Diagonal" and CSAH 96 a good candidate for grade separation. Such a separation, combined with an interchange between the TH 10 "Diagonal" and the TCAAP site would provide the best balance between regional and local traffic movements. The TH 10 "Diagonal" serves as an alternative westbound-to-northbound leg of the 1- 35W/I-694 interchange and supports a critical regional function. The interchange between those two freeways, as well as the freeway segments themselves, would not have sufficient capacity to absorb the additional demand if regional traffic could not use the TH 10 diagonal. . . 1-35WII-694ITH 10ITH 36 Transportation Deficiency Study -31 - SRF Consulting Group, Inc. July 2002 . . . APPENDIX 1-35W/I-694ITH 10ITH 36 Transportation Deficiency Study -33- SRF Consulting Group, Inc. July 2002 TABLE A-1 I I I I 1-35W SOUTHBOUND PEAK HOUR VOLUMES /ExistinQ I Hourly Capacity AM Peak PM Peak Throu9h I Auxiliary Total (Maximum @ Hour Hour Peak VIe Lanes Lanes Lanes LOS 0) Volume Volume Ratio North of 95th Avenue Mainline 2 0 2 3900 3379 1194 0.87 95th Ave.,.N_ Exit 0 _____9 -- I _____1llil ---- 292 51 0.22 Mainlin~ 2 0 2 3900 3087 1143 0.79 ---- 95th Ave. N Entrance 0 0 1 725 292 328 0.45 , Mainline 21 0 2 3900 3379 -. 1471 0,87 CSAH 23/Ctv. J Entran~e 0 0 2 2900 572 728 0.25 tylalnline , 2 _0 ~_1 I- 3900 3951 2199 1.01 TH 10 NB -' Exit .. I 0 1 3 5468 218 387 _ML.. ..... Mainline 2 0 2 3900 3733 1812 0.96 TH 10 SB Entrance 1 1 2 3468 3817 1564 1.10 1.---.;;;1;;,' Mainline 3_ 1 4 7376 7550 3376 1.02 Coun Rd. I Exit 0 0 1 675 ,36 169 0,25 >-- on"", Mainline 3 1 4 7376 7514 3207 1.02 Coun Rd. I Entrance 0 0 1 ]25 I . 289 252 0.40 fe. Mainline 3 1 4 7376 7803 3459 1.0"-_ Countv Rd. H Exit 0 0 1 1350 l--- 163 180 0.13 Mainline 3 I' 4 7376 7640 3?7~ 1,04 ~1Y'_Rd. H Entrance 0 0 1 725 216 148 0.30 Mainline 3 1 4 .z:m> , 7856 3427 1.07 Qld TH 10 Exit 0 0 1 1450 1401 936 .~ M.ainline 3 0 ,-,------- .3, 5850 6455 2491 1.10 Old TH 10 EntryJnce 0 0 1 1450 212, 368 0,25 Mainline 3 0 3 5850 6667 2859 1.14 CSAH 96 Exit 0 0 1 1350 .161 132 0.12 Mainline 3 0 3 5850 6506 2727 1.11 CSAH 96 Entrance 0 0 1 725 287 447 0.62 Mainline 3 0 3 5850 6793 3174 1.16 '@J-694 Exit , 0 0 1 1450 981 833 0.68 Mainline 3 - 0 -..-- 3 5850 5812 2341 0,99 , '"I.B 1,694 Entran~e from 0 0 1 1450 312 299 0.22 - Mainline 3 1__.._~ ,- 7376 6124 2640 0,83 ~94. Exit 0 o 1 1450 160 "------ 161 0.11 Mainline 3 0 3 ------- 5850 5964 2479 1.02 EB 1-694 Entrance frpm I 0 0 1 1450 929 837 0.64 '- Mainli~ 3 0 - __3., 5850 6893 3316 1.18.. ,- Countv Rd. E2 Exit .0 0 1 1350 143 194 0.14 Mainli~ 3 0 - ---- 3 5850 6750 3122 1.15 Count\f Rd. E~ Entrance 0 0 1 675 1.97 275 0.41 Mainline 3 0 31--,. 5850 6947 3397 1.19 TH 88 Exit 0 _n 0 1 1450 373 302 0.26 COunhtRd.D Mainline 3 0 3 5850 6574 3095 1.12 -- Exit 0 0 1 1350 297 n, 136 0.22 Mainline 3 0 3 5850 6277 2959 1.07 Countv Rd. D Entrance 0 0 1 675 320 560 0,83 --.-- Mainline. 3 0 31--___ 5850 6597 3519 1.13._ Counht Rd C Exit 0 0 11 1350 61L 422 0.45 Mainline 3 0 3 5850 5985 3097 ..,~ Countv R~, G. ___n_ Entrance 0 0 1 675 235 607 0.90 Mainline 3 - 1 4 7376 6220 3704 0.84 ~€l;yeIand Ave.JEB TH 3 Exit__ - 2 0 2 2900 704 983 0.34 TH 280 From SB 35W Exit 2 0 2 2900 1412 816 0.49 Mainline 2 0 - 2 -------- 3900. 4104 1905 ..,..,1JlL WB TH 36 Entrance from T 1 1 2 2900, 3572 -, 2037 1.23 TH 280 from_WB 35W Exit to 0 0 1 14501 583 328 DAD Mainline 2 1 3 54261 7093 3614 1.31 '-35W/J-694ITH 10ITH 36 Transportat;on Deficiency Study SRF Consulting Group, Inc. March 3D, 2002 . . . . . . TABLE A-2 I II I I I 1-35W NORTHBOUND PEAK HOUR VOLUMES (Existinc ... ---- Hourly Capacity AM Peak PM Peak Through Auxiliary Total (Maximum @ Hour Hour Peak VIe Lanes Lanes Lanes LOBO) Volume Volume Ratio Mainline 7376 2898 7607 1.03 NB TH 280 Entrance from 0 0 2 2900. ,"' 876 2421 0.83 Mainlin~___ 4 1 5 9326 3774 10028 1.08 EB TH 36 ~it 2 1 3" 4350 1625 4173 0.96 _ _ _~ainline 3 0 3 5850 2149 ft855 1.00 WB TH 36/Cleveland . Entrance 1 0 1 1450 717 549 0.49 Mainline 3 1 4 7376 2868 6404 0.87 Countv Rd. C '- Exit 0 1 3 5468 580 -, 361 0,11 Mainline 3 0 3 5850 2286 6043 ),.0..3._,_ ~llrltyFld C Entrance 1 1 1 3488 172 397 0.11 Mainline 3 0 3 5850 2458 6440 1.10 Countv Rd. 0 Exit 0 0 __2 ---- 2900 379 438 0.15 Mainline 3 0 3 5850 2079 6002 1,03 9:C?I:mtv Rd. 0 Entran~ 0 ----.<1 ~...1 -.. 675 171 268 0.40 Mainline 3 0 3 5850 2250 827Q 1,07 TH 88 Entrance 0 0 1 1450 266 315 0.22 Mainline 3 0 3 5650 2516 6585 1.13 Countv Rd. E2 Exit 0 0 1 1350 1~3 237 0.18 Mainline 3 0 3 5850 2333 6348 1.09 Qpuntv Rd. E2 Entrance 0 "0_,,..1. 675 233 222 0.35 M~inline 3 o 3 5850 2586 6570 1.12 EB 1-694 j::xit 0 0 1 1450 269 274 ,llJ.L ~_. Mainline 3 0 3 __"._U 5850 2297 6296 1.08 EB 1.694 Entrance from 0 0 1 1450 5t!1 986 0.68 Mainline 3 1 4 7376 2858 7282 0.99 we 1.694 Exit 0 0 1 1450 613 1088 0.75 Mainline 3 0" 3 5850 2245 6194 1,06 we 1.694 Entrance from 0 0 1 1450 245 389 0.27 ~,,,- Mainline 3 0 " 3____, 5850 2490 6583 1.13 CSAH 96 Exit , -- 0 0 1 1350 361 ,~og . 0.27 ~-'''' Mainline 3 0 3 ,,~850 2129 6281 1.07 CSAH 96 Entrance 0 0 1 725 111 512 0.71 Mainline 3 0 3 5850 2240 6793 1.16 Old TH 10 Exit 0 0 1 1450 354 ,548 0.38 Mainline 3 0 3 5850 1886 6245 1.07 Old TH 10 Entrance 0 0 1 1450 696 1578 1.09 Mainline 3 1 4 -, 7376 2582 7823 1,06 " Countv Rd. H Entrance 0 0 1 725 126 297 0.41 ~Rd.-I- Mainline 3 lL-",4 7376 2708 8120 L1L Exit 0 o 1 1350 186 314 0.23 ico;;;;t;;-Rd.1 Mainline 3 " 1 4 7376 2522 7806 ..1.oQL Entrance 0 0 1 725 131 157 0.22 Mainline 3 1 4 7376 2653 7963 1,OL TH 10 NB Exit 0 0 2 2900 1356 3626 1,25 -, Mainline 3 0 3 5850 1297 4337 0.71__ TH 10 NB Entrance from 0 0 1 1450 179 506 0,35 Mainline 3 0 3 5850 1476 4643 0.83. . Counhl Rd. J Exit 0 0 1 1350 244 518 0.38 Mainline -, 2 0 L 3900 4325 1,1..1_ 1232 CSAH 23 Exit 0 0 2 2900 184 742 0.26 Mainline 2 ,0 2 3900 1048 35831 0.9L -_.~ ,,- 95th Ave. N Exit 0 0 1 1350 58 4271 0.32 Mainline 2 0 2 _.-..~ 3900 990 31581 0,81_ 95th AVe. N Entrance 0 0 1 725 84 '-- 2251 0.31 Mainline 2 0 2 3900 1074 33811 0.87 1-35W/I.694/TH 10/fH 36 Transportation DefICiency Study SRF Consulting Group, Jnc. March 30, 2002 TABLEA-3 r I Ex'...;;\ I ~~~!FREEWAY PEAK HOUR VOLUMES I HOllrly Capacity PM~klk>ur ThrollGh AIIJdllal)' Total {M~~~"D~ @ AM Peak Hour C._ C- Lan" "'Ollllll" _ ~olwne Peak"'ICRatlo 1-694 WESTBOUND Existlnn\ _.._. ! . I r ~-- " Mainline , , , 3900, '''' "" 1.08 Lei<! lanAva. Exlllo , , , "" '" ". ,-" Mainline , , , "'''' '3491 "'" ,." laKIn lenA'/(}. Enl~'Oc,;irom , ~ ,.. ! '" '" '" 0.98 yalnllne , , , "" 3815 '''' 0.711 N T 51lHBmllneAvB. !:>;/t , " , "" '" '" 0.13 - Malnlln , , , '''' " " 'D NBT1i51IHamlln..AvlJ. ntrancetrom , " , 1450 .. '" _..:tm "-"-- ... Malnllna , , ,,,. "" ..." 'D' NBTH10 Eldllo , " .' '''' m 1102 ''''' Malnlln.. , " , 39'" '"'' 3525 ".. NBI-35W '''''" " " , 1450 "" , T Malnllna " , " , 39'" "" 3136 I---~.O.~!_ NB1-35W E]ltrancefrom " , , 1450 '" !O" 0.75 MalnllnlJ .._'- , , , 54t1l!:._ 3769 ,.. "" -~ SBI-35W Exlpo " , , 1450 312- '" "." MslnllnlJ -' " -ll-- 5850 34l:i7,_ "" 0.57 SBI-35W En1mncefmm " , '''' '" '''' 0.68 Malnlinll , , , "" 4438 4758 0.81 C" LakaRd. Exit , , , 13~O . '" '" "2' Malnlloo , , , "" 4259 <<iii 0.76 C" lakaRel. Enlranoofrom " , , '" '" '" "-' Malnlln.. ,. , , , 585Q_ "" "''' 0.j!6 1-694 EA~TBOUND Exlstlry;\ , .... C-. - Malnllna , , , "" 4835 "" 0.79 " LakIlRel. '" -- " , , 1350 .... "" 0.33 Mlllnllr\ll , , , "" 4191 "" 0.72 kaRel. - Enlra""",fi-;;-,;.; , , , '" '" " 1l.S5 Malnllnoa , , , "" ..- ._~ "" 0,16 SBI-35W Exit to , " , '''" "" ,." Mainli"" , , , '"'' '''" "" ,." SBI_35W ~ - " ", , '''" "" '" 0.11 Mainli..... , ,I "'" ''" ''"' '-' mU-?!iW_. Ed to , '- '<:'1-_ , '''" ~61 '" 0.68 Malnllr1.. , , , "'" 3119 "" 0.80 NBI-SSW .. Enlrancafmm , , , 1450 ''" '" 0.19 Main~ne , , , """ ,,,. "" 0.87 SBTH10 Enlrancafmm , , , '''' 1420 2742 0." MalnllnlJ , ___2 I- , "', "". 5698 U, SBTH51 Ex~1o , , , '''0 '" "" 0.98 ~ajnllna , 0 , '''" 4172 "" 1.07 BTHSl Enlran<:etmrn , , , 1450 '" m 0.10 Maln~ne , 0 , """ '''' 3017 1.10 lexl Ion Ave. Ed 0 , , 1350 '" '" 0.53 f.l..In~ne , , , ,." '''' 2508 0.91 C.. ton Ave. En~ne;.. , . ,. , , ,__~5 - '" 11~ 1.10 .. Meln~ne , 0 --'"2 """ "'" 3657 1.05' TH 36 WESTBOUNDIExistinn\ Me!~m_ne , , , ..., -- 3911 2483' 0.13 NBTH51/SnlJtl Ave. "'. 0 , , '''0 " . 0 Mainline , 9t___ , '00" ~758 '"00 0._9~__ HUJ::I51lSnet A~, Enlr3m;e .JJ , , "", "" m 0.15 M..Jn~ne , , "" 3927 "' 0.72 SBTH511Snelll A~. Ex-Itto 0 0 , '''0 " '00 '" 0.14 Melnflne , 0 , ,"'" 3727 "" O. SBTH51/Snelll A EnlrancaJt9!ll , , , '''' '" '" 0.11 M8in~ne , , , "" "'" 2393 0.73 F8IrvlawA~Q. '" 0 , , 1350 '00 '" 0.38 Mein~oe , , .__.-----J. 1--.. '00" .3m "" 0.95 F8IrvlawA~en~m Enlranc:a 0 0 , '" --443 0," MllJn~n& , " , "'" "" "'" 0.72 NBI-35WlCle\lelandAve. "'. 0 ,; , '''' '" 261. 0." Mainline , , , 300" ,,,, '"" 'il:oo 1!~~_~landAve. Entra""" 0 , , '''' '" "' "." - Mainline. , , , ".. ,~, '''' "... SBI-35WlClevelandAva. Exit 10 " 0 .. . ~+--- "'" 1--.., .. " ,... - Melnllne , " "" 3572 2037 0.92 TH 36 ~STBOUND IExlstintl\ . 1-35W Exitfmm , , , "'" 1625 A'" 0." SBCle....."ndAve. ". " , , 1450 " " ',", Mai.~lIne_ , , , ,... 1578 "00 0.75 SB 1-35WlClevaland Ave. EnlranCtlfrom , , , 1450 '"' '" "." M..nllne , 3 , ".. "" 4624 0.85 N8 Clevelafld Ave. Entranca .., " 0 , "". " '" 0." Melnrln!!__ , , 31 "" 1953 ''''' ... F..1rviewAvllnue Exit " , , '''' '" '" 0." "'el1lllnll , " 2i _39ll.Q 1151 4282 1.10 FairvlllwAve. En1Jan<:e ..,.' " " '" '" "" 0.62 SB'iH511Sne1ll Malnllnll , " , ''''' '"'" 4702 1.21 A~, Ei<!tlo 0 " , 1450 1.39 ". 0:'-8 "'"Inllna , . 0 , ''''' '"'' "" '-' ~TH5~[Sne1ll A~ En1rllnce = , " , 1450 ". '" O.l~._ .. "'''I;'lin~ , , , --~ . .. "'" 4741 0.87 NBTH 51/Snelll A~. _Ii'xiIto 0 " , 1450 '" '" 0.23 - Mainline , 0 , 3900 18701 "" _1,15,___ NBTH511SrIIlIII "'VIJ. Enlmno&lrom ~ 0 " , '"00 '" _262, 0,09 , " " . . . J..35W1I-89<1'1TH1DfrH36 TrunsportsllonDBflclencyStudy SRFCcnwl1/ngGrrwp,lnc. Msreh30,2002 . . . TABLEA-4 1 II I 1-35W SOUTHBOUND PEAK HOUR VOLUMES (2025 Baseline) I" ..,. ,. - , . ~ -- -- -~- Ho':irli~' Capacity AM Peak Through Auxiliary Total (Maximu~ @ Hour PM Peak Hour Peak vIe Lanes Lanes Lanes LOS 0 Volume Volume Ratio North of 95th Avenue Mainline 2 . ..,.Q--.... 'OJ 1-' 3900 ._4~1!! -- 2995 1.14 95th AVe. N Exit 0 0 1 1350 634 288 0.47 Mainline ,2_ 0 2 3900 3795 2707 0.97 95th Ave. N E.ntrance 0 0 1 725 432 440 0,61 f-_no..., Mainline 2 0 2 3900 4227 3147 1.08 CSAH 23/Ctv. J Entrance 0 0 2 2900 1016 .__n__~__ 916 0,35 Mainline 2 0 2 3900 5243 4063 1.34 TH 10 NB Exit 0 0 1 _14~0 663 1045 0.72 Mainline 2 0 2 3900 4560 3016 1.17 TH 10 SB Entrance 2 0 2 3900 4556 3166 1.17 Mainline 3 1 4 7376 , ,9116 6166 1.24 Cauntv Rd. I Exit 0 0 1 1350 421 452 0.33 Mainline 3 1 4 7376 6697 5734 1.18 Count" Rd. I Entrance - 0 1 725 392 361 0,54 0 IcOu;;;;;Rd.H M~!~line 3 1 4 7376 9089 6095 1.23,. Exit 0 0 1 1350 1073 421 0,79 Mainline 3 1 4 7376 6016 5674 1.09 Goun"" Rd. H Entrance 0 0 1 725j.. 248 170 0.34 Mainline 3 1 4 7376 6264 5644 1.12 Old TH 10 Exit 0 0 1 1450 1924 1149 1,33 Mainline _.". 3 0 3 5850 6340 4695 1.06 Old TH 10 Entrance 0 0 1 1450 678 762 0,61 Mainline 3 0 3 5850 7218 5457 1.23 CSAH 96 Exit 0 0 1 1350 751 445 0.56 Mainline 3 0 3 5850 6467 5012 1.11 CSAH 96 ~ntrance 0 0 1 .._-". 725 631 968 1,36 ---'.~ Mainline 3 0 3 5850 7298 6000 1.25 WB 1.694 Exit 0 0 1 1450 667 1077 0.74 Mainline 3 0 3 5650 6441 - 4923 1.10 WB 1.694 Entrance from 0 0 1 1450 466 344 0,32 -~-- Mainline 3 1 3 7376 6907 5267 0,94 EB 1-694- Exit 0 -- 0 1 1450 566 902 0,62 Mainline 3 0 3 5850 6319 436S 1.08 EB 1-694- Entrance from -- 1 _1450 1266 963 0.87 0 0 ----- , Mainline .. 3 0 3 5650 7565 5326 ",1.,:lL cauntv Rd. E2- Exit 0 0 1 13.50 697 361 0,52 Mainline .. 3 0 3 5650 6668 496? _.._UL Countu Rd. E2 Entrance 0 0 1 _,6J5 263 281 0.42 Mainline 3 0 3 5650 7171 5246 1.23 TH 88 iExit 0 0 1 ------ 1450 365 386 0,27 I Mainline 3 0 3 5650 6786 4662 1,16 Counh. RcC 0 Exit 0 0 1 1350 394 202, 0.29 ----- Mainline 3 0"._ ~, 5650 6392 4660 1.09 Countv Rd. 0 Entrance 0 0 1 675 607 -- --~ 695 1.03 Mainline 3 0 ~-,~- 5850 6999 5355 1.20 CountVRd C Exit 0 0 1 1350 597 438 0.44 Mainline 3 0 3 5850 6402 4917 1.09 Countv Rd. C Entrance 0 0 1 675 348 901 1.33 Mainline 3 1 M ____ 4 " 7376 6750 5818 0.92 Cleveland Ave.lEB TH Exit 2 0 2 2900 1313 1886 ,-,*- TH 280 FroTfl SB 35W Exit 2 0 2 2900 2101 - 1681 0.72 Mainline 2 0 r---1- }900 3336 2251 0.66 WB TH 36 Entrance from T 3 1 4 4350 4517 .3221 1.04 TH 280 from WB 35W Exit 0 0 1 1450 51.0 377 0.35 Mainline 4 1 5 9326 7343 5095 0.79 1-35W/I-694/TH 10flH 36 Transportation DefICiency Study SRF Consulting Group, Inc. March 30, 2002 TABLE A-5 I I 1-35W NORTHBOUND PEAK HOUR VOLUMES (2025 Baselinel Hourly Capacity AM Peak PM Peak Through Auxiliary Total (Maximum @ Hour Hour Peak VIe Lanes Lanes Lanes LOS Dj Volume Volume Ratio ,,-"-- 1-- -, Mainline 4 1 5 9326 3130 8748 0.94 NB TH 280 Entrance from 0 0 2 2900 1007 2784 0.96 Malnline i 5 1 6 11276 4137 11532 1.02 EB TH 36 --_. Exit 1 2 1 3 4350 1658 4990 1.15 Mainline i 3 0 3 5850 2479 6542 1.12 WB TH 36/Cleveland ,- Entrance 1 0 1 1450 1241 1852 1.28 Mainline ~ 1 4 7376 3720 8394 1.14 Countv Rd. C Exit 0 0 1 1350 1037 1087 0.81 Mainline 3 0 3 5850 2683 7307 1.25 COuntv ~d C Entrance 0 0 ---L r-' __-.JIT5 221 1035 1.53 Mainline 3 0 3 5850 2904 8342 1.43 cou~ Rd. D Exit 0 0 1 1350 531 900 0.67 Mainline 3 0 3 5850 2373 7442 1.27 Coun~ Rd. D Entr.ance 0 0 1 675 197 437 0.65 Mainline 3 0 3 5850 2570 7879 1.35 TH 88 Entranfe 0 0 1 1450 306 609 0.42 - Mainline 3 0 3 5850 2876 8488 1.45 c.aun"" Rd. E2 Exit 0 0 1 1350 315 574 0.43 f\.1~inline 3 0, 3 5850 2561 7914 1.35 Count\f Rd. E2.. Entrance 0 0 ..._L +- 675 268 686 1.02 Mainline 3 0 3 5850 2829 8600 1.47 - _--'-'0 - EB 1-694 Exit 0 0 1 1450 ---" 309 384 0.26 Mainline 3 0 3 5850 2520 8216 1.40 ~:694 Entrance frol}1 0.. 0 1 1450 629 1134 0]8 Mainline 3 1 4 7376 3149 9350 1.27 WB 1-694 Exit 0 0 1 1450 705 1205 0.83 Mainline 3 0 3 5850 24<\1 8145 1.39 i'@.1-6~4 Entrance frC?ffi Q 0 1 1450 997 1712 1.18 , Mainline 3 0 3 5850 3441 9857 1.68 CSAH 96 Exit 0 0 1 1350 630 1090 0.81_ Mainline ~._- 5850 -, 3 0 - -- 3 2811 8767 1.50, CSAH 96 Entrance 0 0 1 725 128 871 1.20 ~, Mainline 3 0 3 5850 293.9, 9638 1.65 Old TH 10 Exit 0 0 1 1450 521 975 0,67 Mainline 3 0 3 5850 2418 866~ 1.48 OldTH 10 Entrance 0 0 1 1450 800 1775 1.~_ Mainlin.e 3 1 -"--- I-m 7376 3218 10438 1.42 ~ounty Rd, H Entrance 0 0 1 725 241 1271 1.75 Mainline 3 1 4 7376 3459 ..JJI09 1.59 Counfu Rd. 1 I;:xit 0 0 .1 1350 256 315 0.23 Mainline 3 1 4 "I- 7376 3203 11394 1.54 ~Q!!D!y_f{d. 1 Entrance. 0 0 1 725 290 1184 1.63 '---- Mainline 3 1 4 7376 , 3493 12578 1.71 ~NB Exit I 0 0 2 2900, 1559 4606 1.59 I-- ' i Mainline 3 0 3 5850 1934 7972 1.36 TH 10 NB Entrance from 0 0 1 1450 369 889 0.61 M,ainline 3 0 3 5850 2303 6861 1.51 County Rd. J Exit 0 0 1 1350 287 758 8~ >-, Mainline 2 0 2 ,. 3900 2016 8103 2.08 CSAH 23 Exit 0 0 2 290.0 .---- 212 1328 0.46 Mainline 2 0 2 3900 - 1804 6775 1.74 95th Ave. N Exit 0 0 I 1 1350 212 491 0.36 Mainline 2 0 2 3900 1592 6~~4 1.61 ~th Ave. N Entrance , 0 0 1 f-- 725 212 496 0.68 Mainline 2 0 2 3900 1804 6780 1.74 1-35WII-694ITH 10ITH 36 Transportation Deficiency Study SRF Consulting Group, Inc. March 30, 2002 . . . . . J!A~LE A-6 'O~.lc I EAST-WEST FREEWAY PEAK HOUR VOLUMES 2025 Baseline Hoo"" Capacity Throullh Auxiliary Total (Mr:~~ @ AMp...kHour PM Pe.kIiour ...... "'- lanes Volum& V:Cl!UIn! PeakVICRalio 1-694 WESTBOUND -- [--. Mainline , 0 , S9S0 5097 6354 '00 La~in ton ExlltO 0 0 - , 1.350 '" "" 0.72 MajnJlne , -6 , 5650 4123 1- "'. 0," !..exin ton Ave. Entrancafrom I 0 , no '" '" '" Mainlim' , I , 4 7.,8 456' 6731 _._--g~ NB TH 511Hanllirle AYe. 0 'T , 1450 '" 385 Main~n , 0 , 5650 4358 6346 ,... NBTH61 -- Entrancaf 0 0 , 450 582_ '''''' 1.01 Maln~ne , 1 , 7376 "" '" ,.. NBTH10 Exttto - , 0 , 2900 '" '''' 0.76 ~5W " Malnijna , 0 , '850 . 41124 "'" 0.96 ~tt.l!J' 0 0 1 ''''' '" 1712 1-'1~- Mainijne , . 1 '850 3(127 38" 0.66 NBI-35W Enlranql:from 0 0 ...}- ''''' 70S1 "'" 0.83 Mainijn" , , "'. 3732 """ 0.69 ~- E)(~to 0 0 1 1450 ,.. '" 0.' MaiOline , 0 , '850 3268 4740 O.M SBl-35W .. Enlr:ancefmm , " 1 1450 '" 1077 0.74 Mainline , , , '850 -4123 5612 0.99 '00 lake Rd. Exit, 0 , 1 ''''' '''' 470 --~ Mainline -, , , , 5850 3911 .. "" 0.91 ~.kIlRd. Entrancafmm 0 , , '" '" 546 0.89 "Mainline , , 3 "'" 4416 '''' 1.02 !-694 EASTBOUND_ -., .-_. Maini"ne I 3 0 , - 5850 5081 4774 0.87 , LakaRlI. Exit 0 .- , 13511 '" - 482 " Mall'lline , - 0 , '850 4632 4312 0.79 , LakaRd. Entranoofrom 0 0 , m .. '" '58 08 Mainline 3 0 3 '580 5219 4567 1;l.8~__ SSI-35W Exitta 0 0 ~1--~- - 1450 1266 '" 0.87 Mairlline 3 0 , 5850 "" 3604 0." _SSJ-35W EntraN:l;llrorn 0 0 , "50 '88 90' 0.62 , Mainline 3 ,---- , 7376 '541 "" 0.62 NBI-3SW Exitto 0 0 , "" "" 11." 0.78 Mainline , 0 , 5850, 3912 3372 0.67 NBI_35W Entrnnoolrom 0 . , "50 "" 384 0.26 MQinllne , 0 , 5650 4221 "58 0.72 ~lH10 Entran~Jrorn 1 1 , WOO 2161 3153 1.09 Mainline 3 1 , 7376 ~3?2 6910 0." sa " Exit to 1 1 , 2900 . '''' 3258 1.12 's:s--Tii51 Mainline , 1 , 7376 '''' 3652 ~?- Entrancefrom 0 0 1--- 1458 '" '" 0.18 Mainline , 0 , 5850 "36 3907 1,02 Lexi Ian Ave. Em 0 0 1 1350 ... 780 ---~ Maillline , 0 , 5850 4971 3127 0.85 Lalli tonA~, 'E-iiiTanoo 0 0 1 '" '" 1321 ,.. I-- Malnlina , 0 , 5850 5SOO ..." 0.85 t-Ttl.36 WESTBOUND Mainline , , , - 7376 850' 4128 '0)6- ~iH51lSnalli Ava. Ex~ro 0 0 t "" '" 43' 0.48 Main!i_nll_ " 0 , - 5850 '491Q 3690 ~~~- ~nH>1ISn8Ui- Ava. Entrancufrorn 0 0 , 1450 ". '" Main~ne , 1 , 7376 5329 -4147 on SBTH51/Sflellin Aw Ex~ro '0 0 , ._--~:~ '" 230 -g~ 88TH 511Sflallinu Ave. Malnnna , 0 , 5017 3917 EntranCGftDrn I 0 0 , 85"" '" 56' 0.22 .--- Mail'lJinll , 1 3 7376 5649 "'" ~::~- ~\yAve. E" 0 0 1 1300 '58, '" f Mail'lFil'l8 , , , '850 ~189 390s 0.89 FairviewAverNe IEntrnnCG 'ii' 0 1 m '" 50' 0.71-_ N'BJ.J5WIClavaland Ave. MllinFina , , 3 7376 "" - "" 0.74 Exitta , 0 1 1450 ." 1159 0.80 ~-' Mainline , 0 , 5850 "" "" ~~~:-- NBC!evalanllAve. Entran~~ 0 , , -1450 n. n Mainli~ 3 -', , 7376 "" ,,,. 0.62 ~\~I'IClavelllndAva. Exit to 0 , -1---1-- 1450 " oa 0.07 Mainline , t 4350 __3517 3222 '.04 TH 36 EASTBOUND - l-35W --Exitlrorn , , 3 -- "" 1658 "'" t.t~- ~!f?lalandAYa. E~t , 0 , "50 H m 0.09 Mainlino . . , 7800 "" "" 0" SBI-35WIClevalarldAvl!. Entfencafrom 0 0 , "" ,,, 1242 0.80 Main[il'le , 0 , 5850 2476 60" -~:~- ~vel~dAva. , "DO 0 0 , -2:900 '00 '" Fai;';'iawAv"nue Mainlino , , , 7378 "" 630S '" "'. 0 0 , ',"0 '" 603 0.45 Mainll,nJI , 0 , 5850 "" 5702 _9,~_ ~~~. E",,",,", , 0 , 675- , ~1 0.92 =~ Main~n8 , 1 -j- 1376 270B .= 0.88 SBTH511SnallinuAve. Ed 10 0 0 1 '''0 '" '" 0_58 Main~nB_ , 0 2 5B50 --2:053 "00 -~4-- ~1lSnel~n -Ava. Enlranc:ofrom_ I 0 0 .. , 1450 317' "" 0.22 N"BTH51fSI)flUing/wa. IExitk. Mainllnll , , , , 7376 2371 "" 0.79 , 0 1 ''''' '" '" ~:&- ~nelli !>'Iainllne , , , '''' ,oa, ,,11. A~, Entfafl~lrom 0 0 , "'" '" '" 0.10 Mainli 3 t , "... 5812i . '-35W!l-6941TH101TH36 Trnnsp()/'falioo Daficiarn;y St!ldy SRF Consultlng Gfoop,lnc. March 30.2002 TABLEA-7 I II I I I 1-35W SOUTHBOUND PEAK HOUR VOLUMES 2025 Add One Lanel Hourly Capacity AM Peak Through Auxiliary Total (Maximum @ Hour PM Peak Hour Peak we Lanes Lanes Lanes LOS D) Volume Volume RatiO. .._ Mainline 3 0 3 5850 .,~ 3377 0.91 95th Ave. N Exit .,... 0 0 1 1350 , 336 312 0.25 Mainli!1~ 3 0 3 5850 4976 3065 0.85 95th Ave. N : Entrance 0 0 1 725 709 470 0.98 Mainllne- - 3 0 3 5850 5685 3535 0.97 CSAH 23/0;;: J i Entrance : 0 0 'n 2 2900 1091 968 0.38 ! Mainline 3 0 3 5850 6776 4503 1.16 TH 10 NB Exit .--. 0 0 1 1450 727 1090 0.75 Mainline n ..3 0 .11 5850 6049 3413 1.03 - ,.- TH 10 SB, n Entrance , 2 __---.0. -- ---~.- 2 3900 4672 3251 1.20 COun~-Rd. ,- Mainline 4 ___..,1 nn 5 9326 10721 6664 1.15 -, Exit 0 0 1 1350 452 471 0.35 Mainline 4 1 5 9326 10269 6193 1.10 Countv Rd. I J~n~rance 0 0 1 725 425 414 0.59 Mainline 4 1 5 9326 10694 6607 1.15 Countv Rd. H Exit 0 0 1 1350 861 408 0.64 Mainline. 4 1 5 9326 9833 6199 1.05 County R9.JL Entrance ,.a 0 1 - _~?:_2L-_ 248 170 0.34 Mainline 4 -.._---- 1" n 5 9326 10081 6369 1.08 Old TH 10 __ExA 0 0 1 1450 1925 1106 1.33 Mainline 4 0 4 7800 8158 5263 1.05 Old TH 10 Entrance 0 0 1 1450 980 893 0.68 _ _ M_ainline 4 0 4 7800 9136 6156 1.17 CSAH 96 I;xit 0 0 1 1350 814 394 0.60 Mainline I 4 0 4 7800 8322 5762 1.07 CSAH 96 Entrance 0 0 1 725 865 941 1.30 Mainline 4 0 4 7800 9187 6703 1.18 we 1-694 Exit 0 0 1 1450 857 1087 0.75 Mainline 4 0 4 7800 8330 5616 1.07 WB 1-694 Entrance from .., 0 0 1 1450 503 344 0,35 Mainline 4 1, ,5 9326 8833 5960 " 0.95 EB 1-694 Exit -, 0 0 1 1450 972 1123 0.77 Mainline 4 0 4 7800 7861 4837 1.01 1"B 1-694. Entrance from Mainline -- a 0 1 1450 1455 963 1,00 ,- 4 0 4 7800 9316 5800 1.19 Cou~Rd. E2 Exit no On ,.. 1 1350 .~ 389 _.Jl~ Mainline 4 0 4 7800 8505 --- ---s:IT1 1.09 eou(jh; Rd. E2 Entrance 0 0 1 675 278 300 -6:44' M~inline 4 0 4 7800 8783 5711 1.13 TH88 Exit 0 0 1 1450 525 415 0.36 CoUn';;Rd. D M.ainline 4 0 4 7800 8258 5296 1.06 Exit _._.~ 0 0 1 1350 498 224 0.37 Mainline . 4 0 4 7800 7760 5072 0.99 Countv Rd. D Entrance 01 0 _.J 675 685 691 1.02 Mainline 41 0 4 -- 7800 8445 5763 1.08 Count RdC Exit or 0 1 1350 757 469 0.56 Mainline 4f 0 4 7800 7688 5294 0.99 Cou~ Rd. C Entr~tnce -61 0 1 675 319 688 1.32 Mainline 5' 1 5 11276 8007 6182 0.71 Cleveland Ave./EB TH 3 Exii" I 0 ,__2 _.2900 1759 2105 0.73 2' ----- - , 1 TH 280 From S6 35W Exit 21 0 2 2900 2654 f ' 1826 0.92 Mainline 41 0 3 7800 3594 -_.~-- 2251 1-.. ,... ,q~~- WB TH 36 Entrance from T 21 1 3 4350 4218 3126 0.97 TH 280 from WBn35W Ex" 01 0 1 1450 476 358 0.33 Mainline 5; 1 6 11276 7336 5019 0.65 '.35W/I-694I7H 1O/fH 36 Transportation Det;ciency Study SRF Consulting Group, Inc. March 30, 2002 . . . . . . TABLE A-8 I II I I__~ L 1-35W NORTHBOUND PEAK HOUR VOLUMES (2025 Add One Lane! .~ I ^ Hourly I Capacity AM Peak PM Peak Through Auxiliary Total (MaXlmU~ @ Hour Hour Peak VIe Lanes t Lanes lanes LOS D Volume Volume Ratio Mainline 41 1 5 9326 3146 9128 0.98 NB TIj 280 . Entrance from O. 0 2' 2900 1007 2784 0.98 Mainline 51 1 6 11276 4153 11912 1,06 EB TH 36 Exit 3' _.---- 1 .. 4 4350 1652 4707 1.08 Mainline ___41 . 01- 4 7800 2501 7205 0.92 ~tt_ 36/Cleveland Entrance 1 01 1 1450 1263 2316 1.60 Mainline 4 11 5 9326 3764 9521 1.02 County Rd. C Exit 0 0 -- 1 1350 1046 991 0.77 Mainline 4 0 4 7800 2718 8530 1.09 Counfv Rd C Entrance 0 0 1 675 223 1177 1.74 Mai[l!ine 4 0 4 7800 2941 9707 1.24 Countv Rd. D - Exit 0 ,.- 0 1 1350 54g " 919 0.68 Mainline 4 0 4 7800 2399 8788 1.13 QQlJr1!y_Rd D Entrance 0 0 1 675 197 512 0.71;_ Mainl!ne 4 0 4 7800 2596 9300 1.19 TH88 Entrance 0 0 1 1450 30~, 698 0.48 Mainline .4 0 4 7800 "....- 2902 9998 1.28 Countv Rd. ,E2 Exit 0 0 1 1350 304 498 0.37 Mainline 4 0 4 7800 2598 9500 ,_1,~L QQJm~^Rd. E2 _ F;ntrance 0 0 1 675 268 660 0,98 MfJinline 4 0 4 7800 2868 10160 1.30 EB 1-694 Exit 0 0 1 1450 30_9 463 0.32 I Mainline 4 0 4 7800 2557 9697 1.24 EB 1.694 Entrance trom 0 0 1 1450 649 1134 O,,!L \Nil 1.694 Mainline 4 1 ~ 9326 3206 10831 1.16 Exit 0 0 1 1450 705 1205 0.83 Mainline 4 -, 0 4 7800 2501 9626 1.23 WB 1,694 Entrance from 0 0 1 1450 1028 1752 1.21 Mainline 4 0 4 _. 7800 3529 11378.., 1.46 ~H96 Exit 0 0 1 1350 6351 1248 0,92 - Mainline 4 0 4 7800 2894 ,. 10130 1.30 CSAH 96 Entrance 0 0 1 725 .. 128 971 1.34 Mainline 4 0 4 7800, 3022 11101 1.42.._ Old TH 10 Exit 0 0 1 1450 533 995 2,~ Mainline 4 0 4 7800 2489 10106 .UL Old TH 10 Entrance 0 0 1 1450 800 1815 1.25 Mainline 4 1 5 9326 3289 11921 1.28 County Rd. H Entrance 0 0 1 725 238 1334 1.84 Mainline 4 1 5 9,326 3527 13255 l,4L ~.Rd.1 Exit 0 0 - 1 1350 256 381 0.28 Mainline 4 1 5 9326 3271 12874 1.38 Countv Rd. I Entrance 0 0 1 725 282 949 .,1M...... Mainline 4 1 5 9326 3553 13~23 1.48 TH 10 NB Exit O' 0 2 2900 1559 4843 1.67 ~NB Mainline 4 ~ 4 7800 19i14 8980 1.15 Entrance from 0 1 1450 381 954 0,66 M~inlin8 4 .. 0 7800 2375 9934 1.27' foc-- 4 ~County Rd. J Exit 0 0 1 1350 293 1048 ,Jl2L I Mainline 3 0 3' 5850 2082 8886 1.52 CSAH 23 Exit 0 0 2 2900 212 1111 0.38 Mainline 3 0 3 - 5850 1870 7775 1,33 95th Ave. N Exit 0 0 1 1350 212 '-491 0.36 e.-- ,. Mail)line 3 0 3 5850 1658 7284 1.25_~ ~!h Ave. N Entrance 0 0 1 725 I 212 260 0,3..L Mainline 3 0 3 5850 1870 7544 1.29 1-35WI1-694fTH 1O/TH 36 Transportation Deficiency Study SRF Consulting Group, Inc. March 30, 2002 TABLEAw9 I --" EAST ~WEST FREEWAY PEAK HOUR Y.Qh~~J?:~~!!.!!l!_~e Lan . I ThtoUllh AUlClliary Total HoUrty Capacity (~:@ AM Peak Hour PMPollkH""lr -- I Lanes Lan.. !.,ann V....ume Volume PukV/CRatlo 1:6~ WE~TBOUND " MainliM 3 0 3 5650 5110 "" -~.~ LeKin IonA~e. Exttto 0 0 , 1350 '" '38 0.71 Maiflline 3 0 3 5850 4149 """ ,99 LeKi "'" ,. Entrance m 0 0 , m 437 1032 1.42 Ma~ 3 , , 7416 "8 68" 092 NB TH 51/Hamlirie"ve. EXi,'-' 0 , "50 2101 , 25' 0_18 Mainline 3 0 3 "" 4316 65" 1_1_~_ ~-- _Entranceli"om 0 0 , ''''' 582 "" 1.01 Mainlin , , 7418 '658 "'" '.08 NBTH10 Exit!" 2 0 2 2900 899 2099 0,'" Malrllina 3 0 , 38" - "" '''0 1.(12 NBI-35W Exilic- 0 0 , ''''' 1028 ,,,, ~-~ Mainline 3 0 1 "50 3031 4197 0.72 NBI-35W Entmncefrnm 0 0 , '''0 '" 1205 0.83 Main~ne .. 3 1 3 7418 3736- "50 0.73 SB l-3~iW -- Exit to 0' 0 , '''0 503 '" 0.35 MainlinE! 3 0 3 5850 "'" "" (/.86 SBI-35W Enlrancefrom Maln-I;~ -- 0 0 1 "" 857 1(/81 0.75 3 0 3 5850 "'" 6145 1.05 loo lakE! Rd. "'. 0 0 1 13" 206 '" 0.31 Mainlin& 3 0 3 5850 38" , 5722 0.08 l lakE! Rd. Entnlncefrom 0 ---------{ , '25 '" '" 0.89 Mainline '3 - 3 5850 4~3 "" '.09 -. ~1:~9.4ND . ~La-k&Rd.---- Mainline 3 0 3 5850 5121 "" (/.88 Exi' 0 0 , 13" 511 '" 0.38 Mainline 3 0 3 - 5850 4610 ..." 0.79 ~kaF!c1. Erdmnceli"om 0 0 , m '" ,- 2l,Ili. 0.39 M inline 3 0 3 S8S0 ",. "29 0," SBI-35W Exill... 0 0 , W" 1455 963 1.00 , '--'-'- Mainline " 0 2 5850 3430 .- 3766 0.64 SB1-35W -Entianceli"om 0 0 , '''0 '" 1123 0.77 Mainline 3 .'._- , . 3 7418 4411 "" 0.66 NBI-3SW Em.. 0 0 , '''' '" 1134 0.78 Mainline 3 0 2 5S5O 3762 3755 .. ~:- NBi:3sw Enlrancefrom 0 0 1 "50 309 '" Malniine 3 0 2 5850 4071 4218 0" SBTH10 Entmnoofnlm' , , 2 2900 2029 3153 1.09 Mainlin8 3 1 .. 3 7418 "00 1311 0,09 S 57 Exit to .. , 1 2, ~OO 731 32 , M3in~ne 3 1 2 7418 "" 4113 0.72 SBTH51 Entrnncem.m 0 0 1 '''0 157 232 0.16 MainlinE! , 0 2 "50 ,= '''' 0." LexInOlilr\Ave.. E,' 0 0 1 1350 '" "3 0.72 .. Main~nll , 0 2 "" '''' 3532 0,18 L~ng\CIQ_A~ll. 8"m~ I 0 0 1 675 829 1321 1.96 Main~ne , 0 2 5850 '350 4853 0.9'2'" I ---- :rH 36 WESTBOUND .... M3inline , 1 , 1418 -- 5-357 4214 0.12 NBTH -imsnfiiii A~e_ "'.~ 0 0 , '''0 '35 '" 0.... I Mainline .. 0 , "" 4119 "" 0.81 NBTH511Sneilln A~e. l;I:IlraQcefrom 0 1 "50 ,.. '" ~,3!:!_ " Mainline , , 3 14181 5143 ..., 0.69 SBTH511Sneiun AVE!. Ex~to .. 0 0 , 14501 280 2" 0.19 8BTH51ISneiiirNiAve. Malniine , 0 2 "" "" 4121 '-'3 EnWncefrom 0 0 2 20"' '" '" 0.2(/ Malniirlll 3 , 3 7418 ""'0 --" '70' 0.13 FaifViIlWA~e. "" 0 0 1 1350 '529 50' 0.... Mainline , 0 2 5850 4911 4112 0." F"i.w,wA~enU'e !:;[IirIJ~C11 - 0 0 'i '" 2" ,or 0.74 Mainline 3 , 3 1418 5162 '600 0.10 NB 1-35W!Clev&land A~e. Exit\<.> 0 0 , "50 1008 1451 1.00 NBCiUV~ian,iA~e. MaW](\<! 3 0 2 -5850 4156 3152 0.11 Entrance 0 0 1 1450 f-- --~ " 0.09 =c ., EXi'-to Malnilne , 1 3 -7418 =, 0." S8 r-35WlCle~eiand Ave.. 0 0 , 1 1450 " 08 0.01 MainHne 2 1 , 4350 4218 --~ 0.97 TH 36 EASTBOUND 1-35W Exilfmm 3 1 , "50 1652 4707 1.08 SB Cieveiand Ave. I;)dl 0 0 , "50 " 13' 0.09 ~lcl...~elandAve. Mainline . , 0 3 7800 1578 '572 0.59 EnlranC&fi"om 0 0 , "50 1219 1411 " Mainlinll ;n_ng 3 5850 2797 "" 1.02 NB Cl8veland A~8 Entllln .... -.2 - 20"' 2t~ 20. 0.01 Mai~ilne 3 , , 1418 ~- 6192 0.83 Fli!!rv.iewA~8nue E:~ji- 0 0 , 1350 232 50' 0.45 Mainline ., 3 0 2 5850 I 266' "" O'"~.___ F .rviewA~e. ErdD!~___ 1 0 , --675 365 ---623 0.92 Main/In 3 , 3 1418 3030 6212 0." SBTH51/Sneliin A~. E.illn .,. 0 0 , "50 -~ 870 0.58 Maln.line , 0 2 5850 5396 0.92 ~;!1!~Q.!lJJingA~e. EntranCe'fi"om 0 0 1 "50 317 30' 0.22 Mainline 3 1 3 7418 '500 5701 0.17 NBTH511Sne~i A~9. Elilto 0 0 , "50 '" '" 0.28 Mai"ilne 3 0 2 5850 2115 "" 0.90 NB TH 51lSne~i A'/8: Entnmc&from 0 0 , 2050 '" '" 0.30 . 3 1 3 1418 2327 61171 , . . . 1-35WII.s94l7J-/101TH36 r18nspO/flllionDelidllncyStudy SRFConwllingGrrJJJp,lnc. Man;h30,2002 . . . TABLEA-10 I II nuL ,. L ~W SOUTHBOUND PEAK HOUR VOLUMES '2025 Add Two Lanes\ Hourly Capacity AM Peak Through Auxiliary Total (Maxlmum@ Hour PM Peak Hour Peak Vie Lanes lanes lanes LOS D) Volume Volume ,... Ratio Mainline 4 0 4 7800 5674 3407 ., 0.73 95th Ave. N Exit 0 0 1 135O 336 303 0.25 Mainline 4 0 4 7800 5336 3104 0.68 95th Aile. N Entrance 0 -- 0 1 725 924 S11 1.27 Mainline 4 0 4 7800 6262 3615 0'" 0.80 C$AH 231Clv. J Entrance 0 0 2 2900 1437 1032 O,5O Mainline 4 0 .. 4 7800 7699 4647 0,99 TH 10 NB Exit 0 0 1 -- 1450 885 1127 ~,?L Ma!I1!~ne 4 0 4 78<l0 6814 3520 0.87 ~tl ~O S8 Entrance 2 0 2 3900_ 4903 3264 1.26 I-c-". Mainline 4 1 5 9326 11717 6804 1.26 '" County Rd. I J~xjt 0 0 1 1350 i 456 463 0,34 Mainline 5 1 6 11276 J,. 11261 6341 1.00 Countv Rd. I Entral'!c~e 0 0 1 725 557 457 0.77 Mainline 5 1 6 11276 11818 6798 1.05 Cauntv Rd. H' Exit 0 . 0 1 1350 919 ~.!!5 0.68 Mainline 5 1 6 11276 10899 6413 0.97 CounN Rd. H Entrance 0 0 1 725 248 170 0.34 Mainline 5 1 ,'. 6 11276 11147 6~~ 0.99 Old TH 10 Exit 0 0 " .. . , 1450 1767 1070 .. 1.22 Mai!,!line 5 0 , 5 9750 938<l 5513 -...-- 0.96 OldTH 10 Entrance 0 .0 , 1 '45O 1407 ..~69 0.97 Mainline 5 0 5 , 9750 10787 6482 1.11 ~~f::I96 Exit -- 0 0 1 ". 1350 1148 417 0,85 Mainline 5 0 5 9750 9639 6065 ,,_0""'- CSAH 96 Entran~ .0. 0 1 725 945 1030 1.42_ . Mainline 5 0 5 9750 10584 7095 1.09 WBI-694 Exit 0 0 , 145O 1057 1163 0.8<l Mainline 5 0 , 5 975O 9527 5932 0.98 ~94 E.r::atrance from 0 0 1 1450 540 344 0.37 Mainline 5 1 6 11276 10067 6276 0.89 EBI-694 Exit 0 0 1 1450 1076 1231 O.~? I Mainline 5 0 5 975O 8991 5045 0.92 EBI-694 Entrance from 0 0 1 1450 1372 963 0.95 Mainline 5 0 5 975O 10363 6008 1.06 Gountv Rd. E2 Exit 0 0 1 1350 - ---762 407 0.55 Mai.nline 5 5 9750 9601 5601 0.98 - 0 -, Countv Rd. E2 _.~ntrance 0 0 , 675 295 295 0.44 Iniaa" Mainline 5 0 ~. ~ 9750 9896 5896 1.01 Ex' 0 0 1 1450 747 394 .. 0.52 Mainline 5 0 5 9750 9149 5502 , _.Q:~ Goun Rd. 0 Exit 0 0 1 1350 480 226 .o.._~~ Mainline 5 0 5 9750 8669 5276 0.89 ~tyRd.D I;ntrance 0 0 ,..,' --"- 675 636 709 1.05 Mainline 5 0 5 -- 9750 9305 5985 0.95 Countv Rd G Exit 0 0 1 1.350 642 493 0.62 i Entrance Mainline _..- 5 0 5 9750 6453 5492 . . 0.87 Countv Rd. C 0 0 , 675 351 883 1.31 Mainline 5 1 6 11275 8814 6375 _O~ Cleveland Ave.lEB TH 36 Exit 2 0 2 2900 1969 2166 -~~ TH 280 From SB 35W Exit 2 0 2 2900 2864 1854 g.~ ! Mainline 3 0 3 5850 3981 2355 ,~ WB TH 36 Entrance from T_ 2 , 3 4350 __ 4077 3018 q,~- TH 280 from WB 35W Exit 0 0 , 145O ~~._- 359 0.41 Mainline 4 1 5 9326 7464 5014 0.80 J-35W/I-694ffH 101TH 36 Transportation Deficiency Study SRF Consulting Group, Inc. March 30, 2002 TABLE A-11 I i 1-35W NORTHBOUND PEAK HOUR VOLUMES I --- NBTH 280 EB TH 36 Entrance from Exit WB TH 36/Cleveland - Entrance Exit County Rd. C Countv Rd C County Rd. D S::9~~tyJ:~(~t. D TH88 County Rd. E2 cou~ Rd. E2 EB 1-694 EB 1.694 WB 1.694 Iwe 1:694 CSAH 96 CSAH 96 OldTH 10 Old TH 10 County Rd, H County Rd. I Countv~Rd. r TH 10 NB THiONB Couniv RcfJ CSAH 23 _~5tl!_A~e,J~ 95th Ave. N Entrance _ Exit. Entrance Entrance Exit Entrance Exit Entrance from E;~it Entrance from Exit Erl~~npe Exit Entrance Entrance Exit Entrance Exit Entrance from Exit Exit iExit I _ _ f~ntrance I J-35W/I.694/fH 101TH 36 Transportation Deficiency Study I I 2025 Add Two Lanesl Hourly Capacity (Maximum @ LOS D) 9326 2900 11276 4350 9750 1450 11276 1350 ,_~.7.~.. 675 9750 1350 9750 675 9750 1450 ,_9150 1350 9750 675 9750 1450 9750 1450 ,..11276 1450 9750 1450 9750 1350 9750 725 9750 1450 9750 1450 11276 __ 725 11276 1350 11276 725 11276 2900 9750 __ 115L 9750 ___, .13QQ_, 7800 2900 7800 ,1350._ 7800 725 7800 Through Auxiliary lanes lanes 4 1 o 0 5 1 2 1 5 0 1 0 5 1 o 0 5 0 o 0 Mainline _ __ _ 5 0 o 0 5 0 o 0 5 0 _0 0 5 0 o 0 5 0 o __ 0 5 0 o 0 5 0 o 0 5 1 o 0 5 0 o 0 5 0 o 0 5 0 o 0 5 0 o 0 5 0 o 0 5 1 o 0 5 1 o 0 5,__ 1 o 0 5 1 o 0..._ 5, ,. _--..Jl__ ,0 0 Mainline ['---'5' _ 0 .0 -- ,'--------0-- f--- 4 0 o 0 4 0 ,..__0 0 4 0 o 0 4 0 -,-- Mainline Mainline Mainline Mainline - Mainline Mainline Mainline !v1~inline Mainline ~ainline Mainline Mainline I Mainline Mainline Mainline Mainline Mainline MainU.ne Mainline Mainline Mainline Mainline Mainlin.e Mainline i Mainline Mainline Total Lanes 5 2 6 3 5 1 6 1 6 1 5 1 5 1 5 1 6 1 5 1 5 1 5 1 6 1 5 1 6, 1 5 1 5 1 5 1 5 1 6 1 6 1 6 2 __,6_ 1 L 1 4 2 4 1 4 1 4 . AM Peak PM Peak Hour Hour Peak VIe Volume Volume _~~?_ 3178 9378 1.01 1007 2814 0,97 4185 12192 1.08 1649 4517 ~ 2536 7675 0.79 ...1n.9 2753 1.90 3815 10428 ,...Jl&2.__ 1055 890 0.78 2760 9538 0.98 226 134.L, f--.1.99_ 2986 10880 1.12 532 1036 0.77 2~.. 9844 1.01 197 58!__~Q,8L.. 2651 10431 I 1.07 306 803 0.55 2957 11234 1.15 3.07 550 0.41 2650 10684 1,10 268 686 1.02 2918 11370 1.17 309 484 0.33 2609 . -i0866" 1:12" 667 1254 0.86 3276 12140 1.08 705 __1272.,,_ __ O,!l.L 2571 10868 1.11 1048 1969 1.36 3619 12837 1.32 ,648 1335 0,99 2971 11p_02 !.1~8 128 1020 1.41 3099 12522 1.28 545 1143 0.79 2554 11379 1.17 800 I 1815 1.25 3354 13194 l,j7 235 1284 1.77 3589 14478 1.28 259 i 479 0.35 3330 i 13999 1.24 276 749 1.03 3606 14748 1,31 1559 5021 1.73 2047 9727 1.00 __4QL_ _~.. __11.64.... 2448 10660 1.09 294 _ 16QL.L-.1.1,1__ -"2-1-s:;r---- 9159 i 1.17 212 1215 0,42 1942 7944 1.02 I, 212. ,_..4~L_Jl,3.g_ 1730 7453 0.96 212 259 0.36 1942 7712 0.99 . . SRF Consulting Group, Inc, March 30. 2002 . TABLE A-12 2025 Add on~i.ane') --. ~ST-WEST FREEWAY PEAK HQUR VOLUMES I Hourly Capacity Throllflll AtIll:llJery Total llMulmum@ AMP..kHour PMPeakHoor L~. LoM' ..... _.L~~ Volume Volume Pltak YIC Rallo I ~~__WESTBOUND .. - I ~Ave. Mainline , " 3 5650 5110 6363 1.09 Exilto " " , "50 -952- '" 0.71 Mairll'"'o , " 3 --5850 56 56" -~ Lallin IonAve,_ .. ",,,,~ from " " , ". '" '''''' U M8~line , , 7418 4520 , 0.92 NBTH51 amUnafJ.ve.J:.W!J. Exit " " , '''' ,," '" 11.16 Majnlile 3 " 3 5650 _. 4310 6627 " lilUH51 En1T8[1C8from " " -. , "50 '" , 1.111 MlIinline , 0 3 5650 4892 I .", 1.36 ~.. Exilto .. , 0 , '"00 '" --~-T955 0.67 M~ai!'llhe , 0 3 5050 - 3954 8136 ---ffi- NBI-35W Exllto 0 D.. , ,,,. "" 1969 N8!:i!';W Malnlirla 3 0 , "50 ,... , 4167 jl,Z1__ El'ltranClilfrom 0 0 , 1450 705 "n 0.66 ~ Mainlirla , , ~- 1'U8 3'" 5439 0.73.__ Exilto 0 0 , "50 540 '" 0.31 Mainline , 0 3 "50 3071 r 5095 0.81 S!U-35W _Enp"ancefrom 0 - 0 , 1450 1051 1163 O.BO'~ Mainline__ 3 0 3 "50 4128 I "" 1.07 ''" lake Rd. Exit .. 0 0 1 "50 '" "" -~-#- Mainline 3 0 ,- '500 3922 5650 1.0l Co lake Rd. -Sitiancefrom 0 0 , ". '" ... 0.69 f---. Malnllne'- 3 0 3 5050 '''' 056' 1.13 ~STBOUND .. -- --...- Mainline , 0 3 5050 '''6 99 Q"~I- f1IDl\,!lkeRd. EllIt 0 0 , '350 '" - "" 0.38 Mainline 3 0 5050 _4555 4837 0.19 L Lake Rd. Enlrancafrom 0 0 , no '" , -~~~ ~~W Mainline 3 - 0 3 56'" 4811 ''''' 0.54 ,,,.. 0 0 , '''' 1312 '"" 0.95 Mainline 3 0 , 5050 '''' "" 0.67 SBI-35W Enlrancafrom 0 0 , '''0 1016 1231 0.85 Ml!inJine 3 , , 741j. 4575 5176 0.10 ~.5W Exit to 0 .. 0 , '''' 887 "54 0.8S- Mainline , 0 , 5850 "'" 39" 0.61 NBI--35W EnlrancofrorTt 0 0 , '''' '00 '" 0.33 Mainline , 0 , 56'" 4217 "" 0.75 SBTH10 Enlrancefrom .. -'1 , , 2So'JQ_ "" "50 1..0!il__ ~1'- MalnliM , .1_ , 7418 8123 ..!;i59 1.02 Ellitto " , , 0 '" "50 " Mainline , , , 1416 5392 ''''' 0.13 SBTH51 Enlrllncefrom 0 0 -, , "50 '" "" 0.16 Mainline , 0 , "" 5512 "50 0.95 ,." A~ IExit I 0 0 , "50 on '" 0.12 , IMalnUne 3 0 - 1-- ; 5050 4595 3127 0.79 ~LMIonAV8- Entranca .0, 0 67' .'" 1321 .., Majnine 3 0 , _;;65.0 54'24 "" O,~_ TH36 WESTBO~ND -, ..-- I-- Mall)lIn,!l , , 7418 5319 '''' o,n ~_nem A;;'o. Exitl" " 0 , - 1450 633 '" 0." Mainijntl , 0 , 5850 '50' 3973 0.60 NBTH511Snem .Ave. .. Enlraneefrom " " , 1450 '" 58' 0.39 ~1isneu;naAvo. Moinlir'Je , , :f" 7418 5109 . 4535 0.69 Exalo " " , 145Q, 2<5 '" !tl!---- Mainline , 0 , 5850 "" 4323 0.83 SBTH51/Snellin A~. J;:ntraneefrom " 0 , '900 '" 574 020 MlIinline , , 3 74J8 ''''' 4891 .~~ FairviewAvll. - Exit " " , "'0 523 '" 0," Mainline , 0 , 58'" "95 ""' 0.82 fairviewAvenlte Entrance " 0 , '" '" '" --~~ Mainllr\e , , 3 ":7418 503. 4118 ~{CleYe";ndAve. Exi.!to 0 0 , 1450 1021 1734 W Mainline , " , 50'" 4015 "'" -~-:H- N-B Clevetand Ave. Enlronca 0 0 , 1450 '" n ~aevalondAV8. Mainline , , --3 I 7418 "" 3116 0.56 Exit to 0 0 , "50 " 98 -~ Meinline , 1 .. 3 ,,'" 4077 J018 0.54 'Tii36EASTBOUND ~~, Exit from --.- , , , "50 164' 4517' ,... ~C~velaridAve. Exit .. 0 0 , '''0 I " '" ~:~,- MaJnline , 0 , 7800 1578 "" SBI-35WtClllV@lar.dAve. ntrancafrom 0 , . 1-450 , '''' 1465 1.01 NBCI;V~land Avtl. Mainlin , . , 2920 50'" 1.00 Enlranee , 0 0 , 2900__ 10ii 09 0.07 ~nline 3 , , 7418 3020 0,"' 0.82 FairvitlwAven,ua Exit 0 , 1350 232 '" O. f3iNieW'Ave. Maininll , 0 5850 2788 5450 0.93 Entran<:tI , 0 , '" 385 '" 0.95 !vIain,ne , , - , 7416 3153 - 6095 0.82 ~$~lIin--Ave Exitlo 0 0 , 1450 90S ---804 0.61 = MlIinline , 0 , 5050 ",,, 5291 0.90 SBTH51/Sil6lliml"V&. Enlrancelrom " , 0 , 1450 317 'DO 0.22 Mainline , , 3 7418 2564 ~5596 0.75 .!':llU!iar,:;neii- Ave. Exit 10 " " , 1450 385 '" ~~~~- MlIinline , 0 , 50" "'" 5119 NBTH51ISntl~jr!QA.ve, Entrance from " 0 , I -2900 '" '.' 977 0.30 Main!" , , 1418 "" 0 . . f-35WIl-6!UlJJ-flOlTH36 7rensporliltion DeflCien<:y Sludy SRF Consulllng Groop, me MlJrm30,2002 . . . ~ EN HILLS MEMORANDUM DATE: AgendaItem 2.B September 11, 2002 TO: Mayor and City Council Joe Lynch, City Administrator Aaron Parrish - Community Services Director ;rI FROM: SUBJECT: Design Center Final Community Dialogne Presentation Overview The Design Center will provide a presentation to the City Council regarding the TCAAP Community Dialogues held over the summer. It is anticipated that a final report will be provided at the meeting. Requested Action Provided for infonnational purposes . e e ~ EN HILLS MEMORANDUM DATE: Agenda Item 2. C September 11, 2002 TO: Mayor and City Council Joe Lynch, City Administrator Aaron Parrish - Cornmunity Services Director !If FROM: SUBJECT: TCAAP Master Planning Advisory Panel ENCLOSURES: 1. Advisory Panel Diagram 2. Sample Letter Soliciting Advisory Panel Representatives Overview At the August 12, 2002 meeting of the City Council, the Council retained Dahlgren Shardlow and Uban (DSU) to facilitate the master planning process for TCAAP. In conjunction with that approval, the Council authorized staff and DSU to begin the process of establishing an Advisory Panel that would provide recommendations to the Council in conjunction with the planning effort. Attached is a diagram outlining the current composition of the Advisory Panel. The Council will note the addition of the Minnesota Amateur Sports Commission to the Panel. Given the interest they have indicated in TCAAP to date, staff thought it would be appropriate that they be included. Staff has, or is in the process of doing the following to solicit interest in the Community Representative appointments to the panel: · A notice will appear in the next Arden Hills Notes requesting applications. The application deadline will be October 1 '" 2002. This will enable the Council to have interviews during the second week of October. · A press release has been sent to the Bulletin and Focus. · A notice and application has been placed on our website. · A notice and application will be mailed to Arden Hills residents that provided their name and address at any of the Community Dialogue meetings. . . . . Memo to Mayor and Council Page 2 September 11, 2002 John Shardlow, DSU, has also prepared a letter that would be distributed to the "agency representatives." This letter is attached for your review. It is anticipated that the letters would be signed by the Mayor and City Council prior to distribution. As the letter indicates, it is anticipated that the Council will appoint the entire Advisory Panel at their October 28, 2002 meeting. John will be available at the Work Session to answer any questions that you might have. Requested Action Provided for informational purposes , . 0 0 0 0 . c: . 0 . 0 ., "- ... 0 .- II) . 0 Q, 0 E . 0 0 (J - 0 0 (l) c: (\1 ll.. t' ~ m c - 0 00 0 . - - 0 , c en c c .- " > q: " :I D. tIl - c: D. .- c: 0 c: . (\1 - 0 ll.. .... (l) ... II) 0 ~ 0 . ll.. 0 0 q: t3 0 I . I- a 0 . . . Key Individual Stakeholder Organization RE: Nomination for Membership on the TCCAP Reuse Master Plan Advisory Panel Dear Key Individual: Since the US Army announced its intention to declare the Twin Cities Army Ammunition Property as excess federal property in 1994, the City of Arden Hills has been preparing for the reuse ofthat vitally important area. It now appears that a portion of that land may be transferred to the city within the next 18 months. In preparation for that transfer, the City has been engaged in a dual-tracked process. The first track involves working with the designated developer on the transfer of ownership from the federal government to the City of Arden Hills. The second track involves working with a team of consultants to prepare a master plan to guide the development of this land. On Monday August 12,2002, the City Council approved a scope of services for the master planning services of a team of consultants led by DSU, Inc. To ensure very strong and timely communication and the participation of numerous key stakeholder groups throughout the planning process, the Arden Hills City Council intends to appoint the TCAAP Reuse Master Plan Advisory Panel. This group will serve as the primary working group during the course of this research, planning and design process. All information, work products, findings and recommendations developed by the consultant team will be presented to the Advisory Panel for its review and comment. All of the information provided by the Advisory Panel, including comments, suggestions and concerns, will be assembled and delivered to the Mayor and City Council prior to their review and consideration of the work completed, in each of the five phases ofthe process. The individual members of the Advisory Panel will also serve as liaisons to the group or agency that they represent. The consultant team will provide members with assistance, as needed, in order to bring accurate and timely information back to their respective groups. It is not expected that the Advisory Panel will act as a group to vote on specific recommendations, nor is it intended that this group will usurp the established roles and responsibilities of any of Arden Hills established boards and commissions. Neither will participation on this Advisory Panel in any way affect the established role or authority of any agency, or its established procedures in any permitting or approval process. Rather, the group is being assembled to ensure an open and inclusive process, strong communication, and to facilitate the free and timely exchange of information. Frankly, it is also being formed to avoid the spread of misinformation that often occurs when so many individuals and organizations are involved in a project. It is also critically important that everyone understand that the City of Arden Hills is fully committed to following the framework established by the Vento Reuse Plan that was developed in 1995-97 and subsequently reflected in the Arden Hills Comprehensive Plan that was adopted in 1998. Both of these building blocks are general depictions of the . . . future land uses on this property. This planning process will bring demographic and market research, ecological assessment, land suitability analysis (including contamination and cleanup information), engineering, land planning and urban design expertise and community aspirations together to create a far more detailed rnaster plan for this area. It will also involve the preparation of detailed policies, ordinances and agreements to ensure the successful implementation of this future vision. The purpose of this letter is two-fold. First, we want to notify you about the status of our planning process. Second, we want to invite you to nominate an official representative of your agency or group to serve as a member of the TCAAP Reuse Master Plan Advisory Panel. Weare seeking positive forward thinking people who understand and accept the role and responsibilities of this important group and have the time and interest to attend approximately seven meetings over the course of the next 18 months. Weare also establishing our project mailing list and would appreciate receiving from you the names and addresses (email preferred) of the individuals you would like to receive all project mailings and information. The City Council would like to act on the appointment of the Advisory Panel at its October 28, 2002 meeting. Please submit the name of your nominee, along with contact information, no later than October 18, 2002 to: John Shardlow, President Dahlgren Shardlow and Uban 300 First Avenue North, Suite 210 Minneapolis, MN 55401 (612) 312-2131 ishardlow(aldsuplan.com Thank you in advance for your willingness to participate in this exciting project. We need your help to prepare and realize a plan for the Reuse of the TCAAP that is equal to its potential. Sincerely, The City of Arden Hills Dennis Probst Mayor of Arden Hills Beverly Aplikowski Council Member David Grant Council Member Gregg Larson Council Member Lois Rem Council Member Joe Lynch City Administrator , . . . . ~ ~HILLS MEMORANDUM DATE: Agenda Item 3.B September 12, 2002 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Joe Lynch, City Administrator SUBJECT: Joint Maintenance Facility ENCLOSURE: Phase I Public Works Facility Agreement for Services Backl!round The City Council previously authorized staffto enter into an agreement with Ramsey County and ToItz, King, Duvall & Anderson (TKDA) to provide architectural services to review the space needs analysis previously performed by the same company in 1998 for Ramsey County and the City on the joint maintenance facility. The space needs analysis produced a document which indicated the City would need approximately 22,000 square feet of heated space for office, equipment and vehicle storage maintenance area, as well as approximately 2,000 of cold storage for supplies and related equipment. The report also outlined the potential costs based on the preliminary needs analysis to the City of Arden Hills in the amount of $1.9 million for heated and unheated space and an operating maintenance cost on an annual basis of approximately $123,000. The Maintenance Facility Task Force formed by asking some members of the Operations & Maintenance Committee to meet with other interested parties, to review the information provided by Ramsey County and TKDA and to make recommendations to the City Council on the space needs analysis and the capital and operating costs. That information will be presented to the City Council at your Worksession September 16, 2002, by the Chair of that task force, Clayton Zimmerman. At that the time of this writing, staff is not aware of the recommendations being made by the Maintenance Facility Task Force on space needs, capital costs, and operating and maintenance costs, Staff met with Jolli Mangini and Bruce Thompson of Ramsey County Property Management to discuss the agreement for Phase I services which would include schematics, site plan, fifty percent construction drawings. As well, staff also discussed with Ramsey County staff their understanding of the property owner relationship between Ramsey County and the City of Arden Hills. At that meeting, staff indicated that there were some concerns regarding the language of the agreement. Ramsey County agreed to take a look at changes in that agreement. It was also agreed that the capital cost was based on the space needs analysis and the City could, if they desired, change the amount of space they would require. The payment for Phase I services would also be changed to reflect the change in the percentage of space relative to the total amount. As previously indicated, Ramsey County Board of Commissioners was in favor of a . . . 2 September 12, 2002 Joint Maintenance Facility prepaid capital lease and that the City of Arden Hills would retain a permanent property easement for that amount of space for the City of Arden Hills Operations & Maintenance Department. Ramsey County staff also indicated that they would not be opposed to a rental situation but that would not be a likely favorable position taken by the Ramsey County Board of Commissioners. Ramsey County staff also talked about a time schedule for Phase I services and indicated a prelirninary schedule for demolition and construction as follows: . September 15-20, 2002 Meeting between Ramsey County, City of Arden Hills, and other Ramsey County staff involved in the evaluation of RFP for Phase I services to a short list architectural servIces. September 23-27, 2002 Invite short listed architectural services in for a formal interview and presentation to the selection committee. . October 1, 2002 Presentation to the Ramsey County Board for consideration for decision in selection of a final architectural firm to provide Phase I services. . January 2003 Begin demolition of existing buildings. . Late summer to early fall 2003 Begin construction of the public works facility. . December 2004/January 2005 Occupancy of new public works facility. Space Needs I have asked the O&M Director to review the proposed space and recommend those areas that can be eliminated or reduced because of duplication, lack of need or ability to provide space in another fashion. Tom Moore and Jim Perron have drafted a preliminary change program to the original space needs document from TKDA. At this time, they believe that we could eliminate 2,923 square feet broken down as follows: Park & Recreation Director Office S ace SecretarylReceptionist Office Space Restroom (can be provided by the restroom ortion for City staff) Trailer Space (reduce one 20 foot stall and one 12 foot stall) Toro Mower Space eliminate storage need for two units) Wood Shop Area Hazardous Waste Storage Area 3 September 12, 2002 Joint Maintenance Facility . Paint Stora e Area Machine Re air Machine Storage Tool Stora e Area Copy Room Public Works Foreman Office Parks Foreman Office Administration Total: 100 120 120 400 200 80 80 100 2,668 ".'.'.'''ltall m!;l"".ll Men's Locker Room Women's Locker Room Small Engine Room Total: 30 25 200 255 . This would result in a 13% reduction in heated building space. At $6.19 a square foot for operations and maintenance costs this could save the City approximately $18,000 a year. Financial Consideration The Phase I agreement (Enclosed A with staff comments) calls for the City of Arden Hills to pay based upon the percentage of our needs to the total amount of space. Based upon the TKDA preliminary space needs study, the percentage is 11.35. I have enclosed a memorandum from Ramsey County indicating the range of costs for Phase I services to the City of Arden Hills based upon the contractor/design team selected. Funding for this would come from Fund 408, the Municipal Land and Buildings Fund. By committing to Phase I, we also commit to a process to obtain design services through the Special Use Permit process. Part of what we would be paying for would be time allocated by the contractor/design team to accomplish that task. Phase I services include schematic design, design development and fifty percent construction drawings for civil and landscape. The Ramsey County Board will be taking this issue up on October 1, 2002, for final selection and decision to move forward with Phase I services. They have indicated to us that if we decide not to proceed, they will go ahead without the City. . . 4 September 12, 2002 Joint Maintenance Facility Adolfson & Pelerson Construction/Collaborative $730,389 $637,931 70,515 21,943 730,389 Desi n Grou IRNL Desi n Knutson Construction ServicesiKodet Architectural $798,745 697 ,634 77,114 23,997 798,745 Grou Kraus-Anderson Construction $318,930 278,557 30,791 9,582 318,930 Co an IOertel Arcbitects McGou hi Architectural Alliance $776,000 677,768 74,918 23,314 776,000 M.A. Mortenson Company/BWBR Architects, $880,400 768,953 84,997 26,450 880,400 Inc. us Northwest, L.L.C. $580,000 506,580 55,995 17,425 580,000 PCL Construction Services, $548,550 479,111 52,959 16,480 548,550 IncJSetter Leacb & Lindstrom R anl1v!iIIer Dunwiddie $652,500 569,902 62,995 19,603 652,500 . Witcher Construction $450,707 393,653 43,513 13,541 450,707 CompanylBKV Group . At the end of Phase I, the City of Arden Hills will need to make a decision about a Special Use Permit, as well as commit to Phase II services. Phase II services would complete the construction drawings and prepare plans and specifications to go out for bid for construction. Our assumption at this point would be that the City will be asked to pay based on upon the same percentage as Phase I services. At this time, Ramsey County has not indicated a cost range estimate for those services. The capital cost currently indicated are $1.9 million. This is based upon a preliminary space needs study performed by TKDA. The preliminary plan for financing could be as follows: Water Fund. ..... ...... ...... .... ...... ......... ..... .... .............. .... ............ ..... ...... ........ ...$600,000 Sewer Fund .......... ............. .... ......... ...... ............ ... ............ ...... .... ....... .............600,000 Storm Water Fund........ ..... .......................... ..... ... ....... ...... ,................... ....... ..600,000 Municipal Lands & Buildings Fund (3 year total 02, 03, 04) ......................600,000 Sale of Existing City Property (current public works site) ..........................600,000 Total: $3.000.000 This will allow for some change in the cost estimates and adjust for inflation to the year 2004. The operational costs of $122,000 could be trimmed by reducing the amount of heated space. With the reduction of 2,923 square feet, this would reduce our operating costs by $18,000. The total cost would then be $104,710. These costs would be split between streets, parks 5 September 12, 2002 Joint Maintenance Facility . rnaintenance, sewer, water, storm sewer, and City building budgets based on the prorated share of space. Considerations Staff would like to point out some items for the Council to consider in their discussions. A. At this point in time we have conflicting opinions about whether Ramsey County has to go through our Special Use Permit and abide by our zoning regulations. Legal opinion from the City Attorney indicates that if they chose not to abide by our zoning regulations, for public purposes of which a Maintenance Facility may qualify, the Council needs to decide how aggressive you want to be in the Special Use Permit process with regards to design standards, material selections, and building location and orientation. B. Because this is being proposed as a partnership, Council should be aware that any conditions or stringent expectations might add costs to the project, we would be asked to pay our prorated share of those costs. C. The plans that will be brought forward do not indicate any public access through Ramsey County Public Works Facility and/or the Minnesota Army National Guard property . immediately to the north. Due to the configuration of the piece of property and its relationship to the remaining portion of TCAAP that will be licensed to the Minnesota Army National Guard this could become an isolated area. It would becorne its own separate portion of TCAAP and one that is not in alignment with the original plan for the designation of the Civic Center Zoning. In addition, it would be isolated from a traffic flow standpoint, particularly if there were semaphore at the intersection of Highway 96 and Snelling Avenue North. D. The proposed relationship between Ramsey County and the partners is not one of legal ownership of either the building asset or the land. Ramsey County has indicated to us that there would be a perpetual easement and we would have access and use of the facility as long as we desired. E. In terms of value of the asset, it would be difficult to determine if the City is in compliance with GAS B 34 in protecting and managing its assets if we do not have an ownership right in the facility. F. If at any time the City wanted to dissolve the relationship with Ramsey County we would be in a difficult situation given the fact that Ramsey County would not have a great need for space and probably would not pay market value for the space. At the same time, we would not be able to market the property for anything other than its intended maintenance use. . . . . 6 September 12, 2002 Joint Maintenance Facility Recommendations Staff will be available to answer questions you may have on this subject. The immediate decision the Council will need to make is a determination of whether or not to reduce the overall space needs either based on the Maintenance Facility Task Force recommendation or on the staff recommendation or both. This will have a direct impact on the cost for Phase I services and on the capital cost if we enter into Phase II construction services with Ramsey County. It will also have an impact on the operations and maintenance costs based on the reduction in the amount of heated space. The other immediate decision for the City Council is whether or not to enter into an agreement for Phase I services with Ramsey County based upon the new space needs identified and at the prorated share of space. Draft agreement with Public Works Partners Version 8.23.02 AGREEMENT This agreement made this day of , 2002, by and between Ramsey County, a political subdivision of the State of Minnesota (COUNTY) and the City of Ardcn Hills, a Minnesota municipal corporation and political subdivision ofthe State of Minnesota (CITY). WITNESETH: WHEREAS, the County and the City have determined that it is in the best interest of their respective constituencies to consider the construction, ownership, and maintenance of a Public Works Facility in the City of Arden Hills, Minnesota (the "PROJECT"); and WHEREAS, this agreement obligates the City and the County through Phase I of the PROJECT; and WHEREAS, the County owns certain land in thc City which is legally described as: The south 1425 feet of the east 1572.47 feet of the southwest quarter of Section 15, Township 30 North, Range 23 West, Ramsey County, Minnesota. EXCEPT the north 810 feet of the east 626 feet thereof. Subject to County State Aid Highway 96, Containing 39.80 Acres. Containing 35.00 Acres excluding County State Aid Highway 96 Right of Way. Source: 10/22/99 Ramsey County Surveyor's Office NOW, THEREFORE, on the basis ofthe premises and the mutual covenants and agreements hereinafter set forth, it is agreed as follows: Article I Purpose 1.0 I This agreement has been executed for the purpose of jointly addressing the obligations of the County and the City in invcstigating the feasibility of joint construction, ownership, and maintenance of the Project. Article II Term 2.01 The term ofthis Agreemcnt shall commence on ,2002, notwithstanding the dates ofthe signatures of the parties, and shall continue in full force until the completion of Phase I of the Project. (6)" . . . . Article III Design 3.01 Conceptual Design The parties have agreed to the gencral conceptual design of the Project. Such design has been prepared by Tolz, King, Duvall, Anderson, and Associates (TKDA) under separate professional service agreements with the County and the City. Expenses incurred by both entities to date shall be the responsibility of each entity. The County shall accept responsibility, and pay for, a preliminary Master Plan of the site prepared by TKDA. Any expenses incurred prior to the date of this agreement shall be borne by the entity incurring them without any cost sharing or contributions from the other. 3.02 Phase I Services. ;JJ- ~ B. ~ C!--~f'~ Iv> IS~C, \,-J r ? 1'ht5 - _? D. 3.02.01 Phase I Services shall include: I. Phase One (A&B) Services Phase I services will include, but are not limited to: A. Conduct programming services to validate the 2002 Ramsey County Public Works Updated Space Needs Study (Appendix AI) for Ramsey County and its partners. Provide complete architectural and engineering services (schematic design, design development, and preparation of construction documents) for the Army National Guard facility, in accordance with the following requirements: Conduct conceptual design work sessions with the Project Review Team and complete schematic design, and design devclopment documents, which clearly illustrates the scope of this project in function, size, and materials. Assist and participate with the County/Partners in acquiring a Special Use Permit from the City of Arden Hills for the facility. The proposer should determine the amount of time and the resources necessary to obtain the Special Use Permit from Arden Hills, and consider this in their fee proposal. E. Prepare statements of estimatcd construction costs and a projected construction schedule to be submitted to the Project Review Team. The amount of design work and the level of drawings provided should be of sufficient content to achieve a Special Use Permit from thc City of Arden Hills. This level is anticipated to be schematic design, dcsign development, and pmiial construction drawings (50'Vo) for landscape and civil specialties. -? F. PartIcIpate with County/Partners representatives in project presentations to the County Board of Commissioners and other public groups interested in the development of the Public Work Facility Project at the direction of the Project Rcview Team. It is anticipated the Contractor/Design Team, including County representatives, will be required to participate in 5 -7 presentations of this nature. IAA f!; G. Prepare a site design, building plans, material selections, building elevations, -<(' . . mechanical and electrical system designs, furniture, fixtures, and equipment ~rt~~~ designs, and voice and data designs that meet the County's needs and comply with all applicable building codes and requirements. H. Assist the County/Patners in complying with Xcel Energy "Energy Assets Program". I. Develop Sustainable Architecture guidelines and specifications for the project that incorporate construction material re-use/recycling, and environmentally friendly building materials/construction methods. Submit a report at the end of Phase I describing the guidelines established for the project and highlighting the innovations and anticipated successes in meeting the Sustainable Architecture goals. J, Provide services to plan, select, and bid furniture, fixtures, and equipment, including telephone systems, building signage, and data, for all areas of the facility. K. Assist the County/Partners and participate in the Inclusiveness in Contracting Program ("lICP") in order to incrcase the participation of small, women- owned, and minority-owned businesses in the County's purchasing activities. L. Submit a written maximum not-to-exceed cost for Phase II project construction (culmination of Phase I), M. Coordinate soils testing, special inspections, and other testing/inspections as necessary for the project. 3.02.02 3.02.03 \ ~ P 3.02.04 ~~~ ~- ~J{~ \J)~'\1 oP~W ~ ~ 3.02.05 . The contract between the County and the Consultant shall provide for participation, input, review, and discussion with the City to assure that the plans and specifications meet the needs of the City. . The City will have a reasonable amount of time to review, consider and approve, the plans and specifications during each of two phases: schematic design, design development, and end of Phase 1. The City may elect not to proceed with the Project after its review of plans and specifications at each phase, in its absolute and sole discretion. The City will pay to the Connty their share of the Consultant fees upon contract execution by the County. The pro rata share oftl1e City's portion of the fees will be paid bascd upon 23,889 square feet of space. The City's share of costs is based upon the percentage of proposed bnilding (hcated and cold storage) occnpancy as determined by TKDA in the Ramsey County Public Works Updated Space Nceds Study, dated June 2002. At each phase ofthe Project, the plans, specifications and other documents shall be prepared as to provide information to the parties about the relative costs of each party's share ofthe proposed construction. . e . . Article IV Space Determination 4.01 At the culmination of Phase I, the Consultant shall review the documents and present to the parties its determination of the pcrcentage of space attributable to each party's part of the Project. 4.02 No change orders may bc approved by the County, which affects the City's space without the prior written approval by tl1e City. If any change order increases the total cost ofthe project, the City must first consent, in writing, to such change or it will not be responsible for a pro rata share of the increased cost. Article V Phase II 5.01 In the event the City elects to participate in Phase II, the City and the County will negotiate a Memorandum of Understanding outlining the costs, rights, and responsibilities of each party in thc ownership and operation ofthe Project. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, The parties to this agreement have hereunto set their hands on the dates written below: COUNTY OF RAMSEY CITY OF ARDEN HILLS Chairman Ramsey County Board of Commissioners Mayor City of Arden Hills HP Laser Jet 3200 (Ii]@ I ~ CITY OF ARDEN HILLS 651 634 5137 SEp.27.2002 2:35PM i n v e n t Fax Call Report Job Date Time Type Identification Duration Pages Result 107 9/27/2002 2:24:24PM Send 9.7634219511 1: 50 3 OK 108 9/27/2002 2:26:20PM Send 9.6516286833 130 3 OK 109 9/27/2002 2:27:55PM Send 9.7637060891 1: 03 3 OK 110 9/27/2002 2:29:04PM Send 9.6516333846 1: 37 3 OK 111 9/27/2002 2:30:47PM Send 9,6512282191 1:36 3 OK 112 9/27/2002 2: 32: 28PM Send 9.6512279371 0:58 3 OK 113 9/27/2002 2:33:31PM Send 9.6514821262 1: 32 3 OK .