CC_Minutes_2017_1204 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday, December 4, 2017 Page 23 way; as well as at the "X" interchange at Highway 96. Even though both inter- changes were dramatically different, Councilmember Etten noted how MnDOT had addressed accommodations for pedestrian traffic. That there aren't more fa- talities considering the current vehicle speed, Councilmember Etten opined was fortunate, but suggested the tremendous benefit that could occur for residents south of that signal and traffic southbound from I-35W. Councilmember Etten opined that further review and changes by MnDOT would serve to dramatically slow traffic at the intersection while providing ancillary benefits as well. If the city halts replacement of this signal by MnDOT, Councilmember McGehee opined that it could be a 7-8 year process before the city was ready to replace the signal or make intersection improvements, while the I-35W project continued to drag on and make other demands on the system. Therefore, Councilmember McGehee questioned if it was worth the cost to replace the signals now while pre- paring additional improvements to slow traffic and make the intersection safer in the future. Discussion ensued as to whether this decision involved a"both/and"or"either/or" proposition at this point; and whether replacing the signal at this time caused an impediment to an improved intersection design in the future and potential impacts to MnDOT partnering with the city on a future project at this same intersection. Councilmembers expressed concern with the need to make this quick decision and how/why additional lead time had not been available for further research by the city before now as well as allowing sufficient time for the PWETC to review it and make a recommendation. Mr. Culver apologized for the compressed time frame for consideration of this project, advising that staff had been surprised when this originally scheduled 2020 project had been accelerated to 2018; clarifying that MnDOT needed to pull the signal replacement from their bid project, and unwillingness or inability to include it as an option in the bid package. Etten moved, McGehee seconded, approval of the removal of the traffic signal re- placement from the MnDOT 2018 I-35W Pavement Management Project as pre- sented. Councilmember Etten agreed with Mr. Culver's interpretation that the best answer may dramatically differ from the current signal amenity. As an immediate solu- tion, Councilmember Etten opined that Ramsey County could change the timing of the signal without any dramatic gains. Councilmember Etten also agreed with Mayor Roe that the city may not be able to depend on Ramsey County or MnDOT for additional funds in the future when the city decides on an option, creating the potential for additional cost for the city without such a guarantee in place. There-