2011_0808_packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Attachment F 1 T4 Mr. Jacobson provided his perspective on projected traffic increases in the area reviewed l 7'5 statistics on daily average traffic in 1999 and 2009 data, and future driving habits, and opined 1 7'6 that those habits would change and be duly reflected. Mr. Jacobson noted the grade changes between Merrill Street and Fernwood Street on County Road C-2 and suggested additional 1 7'8 review of safety issues based on that grade if and when County Road C-2 was put through. 1 7'9 At the request of Mayor Roe, City Engineer Bloom responded to questions of the public related 180 to traffic analysis of the additional projected 110 daily trips and their conservative nature based 181 on current observations and modeling for future patterns; rationale for the assumptions used in 182 the traffic study; current and projected service levels at the five (5) intersections in the area; and 18'3 review of the larger picture beyond the neighborhood in determining the acceptable service 1&4 levels during peak traffic periods. Related to construction traffic, Ms. Bloom noted that the 185 Majority of that traffic would be using County Road C-2; and that additional parking prohibitions 186 could be addressed for construction workers,, seeking to keep them off public streets and internal 18 7' to the site as much as possible; with staff and the developer working together and incorporating 188 neighborhood comments and concerns into those discussions and negotiations as applicable. 189 Ms. Newcome 190 Ms. Newcome reiterated her allegations that the traffic study and its assumptions were flawed; 191 and asked for additional information on that analysis. 192 City Engineer Bloom expressed her confidence in the traffic study and its assumptions; and 19'3 offered to follow-up with Ms. Newcome outside the meeting. Ms. Bloom noted that the study 194 being requested by Josephine Road residents of pending and/or future development impacts was 195 completely different and had not been done to-date; but that traffic studies were based on 196 specific developments as they came forward. Ms. Bloom advised that the Pulte development and 19 7' traffic projections for an additional 268 daily trips did not indicate any degradation of service 198 levels at the five intersections nor did it create any additional safety issues; therefore, no 199 mitigation was proposed based on those results, or any additional traffic control issues 20o recommended. 201 At the request of Councilmember Punt, Ms. Bloom clarified the map referenced on Page I I of 202 the Traffic Study and location of the current cul-de-sac bulb and pending revisions to address 20'3 drainage following further plan refinement and staff review. 2G4 At the request of Councilmember Willmus, Ms. Bloom addressed past discussions on retaining 205 the right-of-way, based on the reality of documents already referenced by members of the public, 206 and a 1988 motion to vacate the County Road C cul-d-sac right-of-way that failed on a 3/2 vote. 20 7, Further discussion among Councilmembers and Ms. Bloom included County Road C-2 being a 208 State Aid road and comparison of this segmented road with other State Aid roads; examples by 209 Ms. Bloom of 1/2 mile segments for the Ramsey County system; and review of comprehensive 210 transportation plans for residential and connector streets for functionality. 211 Ms. Bloom advised that,, from an engineering perspective, connecting County Road C-2 through 212 would benefit the overall transportation system; however, without additional study of additional 213 signals from Lincoln to Victoria and impacts for those intersections and other safety concerns, 214 the actual ramifications remained unknown. 215 Johnson moved, McGehee seconded, approval of the PRELIMINARY PLAT of the 216 property located at the northwest corner of Lexington Avenue and County Road C-2, Page 5 of 7