HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-10-07 Item 7C, I-694 EA
~
~HILLS
Request for Council Action
Prepared By:
Dept.:
Council Mtg. Date:
Final Action Needed By:
Kristine ~GLga~~~
Engineering
8/13/07
8/13/07
Agenda Item:
7.C.
Budgeted Amount:
Actual Amount:
Funding Source:
N/A
g450
General Fund
'COuiicHAction Request:
Motion to authorize staff to submit comments on the Interstate 694 Environmental Assessment to Mo/DOr on behalf of the City of Arden Hills.
staff to submit comments on the Interstate 694 Environmental Assessment to MnlDOT on behalf of the City of Arden Hills.
x Memo/Letter:
Resolution No.:
Ordinance No,:
Dated September 6, 2007 from Kristine Giga and Greg Haag
Engineering Recommendation:
Attorney Recommendation:
x Other:
Draft letter to MnlDOT with comments on the 1-694 EA
~
~
EN HILLS
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
September 6, 2007
AGENDA ITEM 7.C.
TO:
Mayor and City Council
Michelle Wolfe, City Administrator
Kristine Giga, Civil Engineer ~jul
Greg Hoag, Public Works Director ~
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Motion to authorize staff to submit commeuts on the Interstate 694
Environmental Assessment to Mn/DOT on behalf of the City of Arden
Hills.
BACKGROUND
The Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnlDOT) is planning the reconstruction of a
portion of Interstate 694 as a six-lane freeway with auxiliary lanes and reconstructing the
interchanges at Interstate 35W, Trunk Highway I O/Snelling Avenue, Victoria Street and Rice
Street. As a part of this process, the preparation of an Environmental Assessment (EA) is
required.
The EA has been completed and has been distributed to all interested parties, including the City
of Arden Hills. The 30-day comment period began on August 13,2007, and ends September 12,
2007.
DISCUSSION
Staff utilized the newly created municipal engineering pool to select a consultant to assist the
City in the review of the EA. Staff asked the three firms in the Traffic and Transportation
Engineering pool to provide quotes for this review. Bolton & Menk, Inc. provided the lowest
quote and was selected to complete this work.
Bolton & Menk, Inc. met with City staff prior to beginning the review of the EA to understand
and learn the concerns that had been heard to date from residents, staff and City Council
\\Metro-inet.us\ardenhills\PR&PW\Enginccring\2007\Council_ Actions\9-10-07Memo _ EA _Review ,doc
l'
9/6/2007
Page 2
members. Upon completion of the review, Bolton & Menk drafted the attached letter with
comments and concerns.
Chris Chromy of Bolton & Menk will be present at the City Council meeting to answer any
questions.
RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION
Motion to authorize staff to submit comments on the Interstate 694 Environmental Assessment to
MnlDOT on behalf of the City of Arden Hills.
September 4, 2007
DRAFT
Mark Lindeberg, Area Engineer
Minnesota Department of Transportation
1500 West County Road B2, MS 050
Roseville, Mn. 55113
Re: City of Arden Hills' comments regarding 1-694: 35E-35W Environmental
Assessment (EA)
Dear Mr. Lindeberg,
Thank you for the opportunity to review the 1-694 Environmental Assessment. The City
of Arden Hills has reviewed this document and would like to enter into record with the
following comments and questions. Arden Hills' statements will categorize into the
following areas: I.) Traffic, 2.) Social, Economic, and Environmental, 3.) Land Use and
Right of Way Impacts, and 4.) Water Resources.
1. Traffic
a. From the freeway CORSIM analysis, the eastbound section 1-694 will still
experience unacceptable LOS F during the PM peak hour under the 2030
Build. As this back-up is projected to impact operations past Lexington
Avenue, it may also cause problems to traffic on Lexington Avenue at the 1-
694 ramps. Is there a way to rectify this by extending the fourth lane merge
point further east, maybe even after the I-35E interchange?
b. With the closing of the Hamline Avenue interchange access west to north and
south to east, traffic will now have to use alternative routes such as Lexington
AvenuelCR F or TH IO/CSAH 96 to access the same areas. How does this
change the service levels at those impacted intersections that are not directly
at the 1-694 system? Specially:
. Lexington Avenue at CR F
. Hamline Avenue at CR F
. TH 10 at CSAH 96
. CSAH 96 at Hamline Avenue
c. Has the Twin Cities Army Ammunition Plant (TCAAP) Redevelopment site
been considered in the traffic analysis. This site will add new trips to the area
and there is also consideration for the need to upgrade TH 10 though the area.
Is this addressed in the forecast modeling?
d. The proposed access changes at TH 10 and CSAH 96 has the potential to
redirect some travel demand. The cumulative effect of this change along with
the change in access at 1-694 and Hamline Avenue should be evaluated.
DRAfT
e. It would seem probable that the existing westbound Hamline-Snelling 694 exit
ramp volume will be reassigned to the Lexington Avenue exit ramp with the
selected alternative. It would seem worthwhile to review the existing traffic on
the Hamline-Snelling ramp and reassign this volume to Lexington A venue
ramp to test the reasonableness of the 2030 forecast.
f. The 2030 peak hour volumes on the 1-694 Ramps at Lexington Avenue as
shown in Appendix 3, Figure 3 seem to be low compared to some existing
traffic counts. Specifically, year 2003 count at the north intersection shows a
volume of998 vehicles during the AM peak hour. The 2030 traffic projection
shows 1,279 vehicles. This seems abnormally low considering that traffic
using HamJine will now have to use Lexington, and that 27 years will have
passed. Assuming a background traffic growth of 1 % per year, for 998
vehicles in 2003, results in 1,306 vehicles in 2030, higher than the year 2030
projection. If one adds to this the traffic that would have been using HamJine,
and the 2030 traffic project is too low.
g. The 2030 modeling seems to indicate improbable conclusions at the signalized
intersections on the Lexington Ramp locations. In addition to the lower than
expected volumes on the ramps in 2030, the "Build" condition indicates an
improved level of service at the south ramps in the PM compared to the "No
Build" condition. Does the Build scenario result in lowering the ramp
volumes, or does the Build scenario include intersection improvements not
shown on the geometric layout provided in the draft EA?
2. Social. Economic. and Environmental
a. The analysis of social, economic and environmental impacts seems to be
rather minimal across the study location, except for possibly noise.
b. The nighttime decibel levels under Minnesota State Noise Standards are 55
decibels for a residential area, while the Federal level is 70 for residential
areas. Arden Hills has three noise monitoring locations:
. Nl: South ofI-694 between TH 10 and 1-35W
. N2: South ofI-694 between TH 10 and TH 51 (near Bethel College)
. N3: North ofI-694 east ofTH 10
Existing nighttime noise monitoring results indicate 62.0, 60.5 and 70.3 levels
respectively for the three locations. These levels are all higher than the state
level and slightly higher than the Federal level on N3. The 2030 projected
noise levels at the NI and N3 locations are projected to both exceed the state
and federal levels without noise barriers. While noise barriers at these
locations may not meet MnlDOT's cost effectiveness criteria, the City of
Arden Hills would like these to be further considered.
D "''' ~...' ti'1 ~"r'.
l"rt7.f' '/\}. f~
, "liil'\'r\~
3. Land Use and Rililit ofWav
a. How have right of way impacts to private property been identified? Are
impacts proposed to be mitigated, so the uses remain conforming, or will
variances for the potential creation of nonconforrnities be sought? This
comment specifically applies to project impacts to commercial property in the
southwest quadrant of 1-694 and Lexington Avenue.
b. Are secondary impacts proposed that may have the potential to result in the
acquisition of additional right of way to accommodate improvements to
various roadways (e.g. increased traffic on County Road F and/or Lexington
Avenue, resulting in expansion to those facilities outside of the existing right
of way)?
c. The City's Park, Trail and Open Space Plan envisions a future trail crossing of
1-694 at Old Highway NO.1 0 bridge and a future pedestrian overpass of 1-694
located outside of project area to provide continuity to the northeast part of the
City. Would the proposed bridge design accommodate future plans for a trail
along Old Highway No. 10?
d. The City of Arden Hills requests consideration of off-street sidewalk and/or
trail facilities along Harnline Avenue and TH 51 as it crosses 1-694. The City
desires to provide non-motorized connectivity of residential areas, schools,
parks, and civil services.
4. Water Resources
a. Floodplain encroachments that occur in the final design stage need to be
monitored to ensure that they are mitigated according to the City's Flood Plain
ordinance and the Rice Creek Watershed's new Floodplain Alteration rule
(which may require I: I compensatory replacement).
b. There is mention that the Rice Creek Watershed infiltration requirements may
be required, but have not been evaluated. Infiltration will likely be a
requirement of the watershed for this project.
c. Of the 11.67 acres of potential wetland impacts, approximately 4.28 acres
would occur in Arden Hills. If project specific wetland replacement does not
occur, how would the impacts affect the local drainage system?
d. There are several areas shown where the proposed impact limits are outside of
the existing right of way limits. There is no mention if drainage patterns will
be impacted, and if so, how they would be mitigated.
e. If new development is planned adjacent to the highway corridor the City may
want to consider if there is potential for regional ponding to occur.
We thank Mn/DOT for giving the City of Arden Hills an opportunity to comment on such
an important study that will affect many of Minnesota's citizens in the future. We
support this transportation system upgrade that results in livable communities.
DR,AfT
If you have any questions, regarding our comments, please contact me.
Sincerely,
Kristine Giga, PE
Civil Engineer
Greg Hoag
Public Works Director