3-20-89 agenda~~ ~_.
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. ~$
Agenda, March 20, 1.989
Issue Statement:
Approval of a five-year Construction Program for the Municipal
State Aid (MSA) gas tax system.
Background:
The Municipal Screening Committee requires cities to submit a
five-year MSA Construction Program. The Municipal Screening
Committee is composed of City Engineers throughout the state.
The purpose of the program is to encourage planning for the use
of MSA Funds and to make city councils aware of MSA Funding.
The attached program uses projects included in Richfield's
Capital Improvement Program. Some projects and costs have been
updated. The upcoming Capital Improvement Program process will
include consideration of the projects in this MSA program.
Staff is reviewing the scheduling of these projects in light of
the existing MSA funding formula. This formula discourages large
carry-over balances in each city's construction fund.
Interstate/Lyndale/Nicollet (ILN) and 77th Street improvements
and Penn Avenue/76th Street improvements will take this formula
into consideration. Therefore, acquisition from willing sellers
in the ILN area may occur.
Recommended Motion:
Adopt the attached MSA Resolution approving the five-year MSA
Construction Program for the City of Richfield.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The Municipal Screening Committee requires cities to submit
an MSA Construction Program.
2. The Construction Program accurately represents our best
estimate of anticipated MSA Street Improvement Projects.
3. The proposed MSA contribution is consistent with the
Richfield Capitol Improvement Plan.
Alternative Recommendation:
None.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
The approved resolution and program is due to the District State
Aid Engineer by March 15, 1989.
Respectf ly submitted,
James Prosser
City nager
JDP:eja
~~-i
RESOLUTION N0.
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE FIVE-YEAR MUNICIPAL STATE AID (MSA)
CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM FOR THE CITY OF RICHFIELD
WHEREAS, the Municipal Screening Committee requires each
municipality to submit a council-approved, itemized Five-Year
Construction Program at three year intervals to the Minnesota
Department of Transportation's Office of State Aid; and
WHEREAS, the City Engineer has established a Five-Year
Municipal State Aid Construction Program for the City of
Richfield, encompassing the years 1989 through 1993,
NOW,THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the
City of Richfield, Minnesota as follows:
1. The Council hereby approves the Five-Year Municipal
State Aid Construction Program for the years 1989 through 1993 as
submitted; and
2. The City Engineer is hereby authorized to submit the
completed Program to the District State Aid Engineer.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield,
Minnesota this 13th day of March, 1989
Steven J. Quam, Mayor
ATTEST:
Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk
~~
MUNICIPAL STATE-AID STREET SYSTEM
5-Year Construction Program For Clty of Richfield
(State Aid Expenditures Only)
ttEV L•' NU E
~~~~
Present State Aid Construction Balance ~e[~ttulU~r 1, 1988 ~ ~ 1_ _6R4.3~1 00
:atimatsd Annual Construction Allotment ~ 604,012.X 4 ~ 2,416,048.00
Sscima~ed Total State Aid Allotment for Prot;ra~tming Purposes ;;. ,4;100,379.00
ESTIMATED BXP?.~1DITURES
Year Estimated
of State Aid
::xnendiCUre Tc!~ ini Proje~t~ Oe~scr~ip+tion Expenditure
' On 77j:h : t,,~„a~..~...~ Aoquisition,
From t Y.~Iry P Av____;.:_:,,,. Widen and
1989. ~ To - T~SW +~,~ Channelization ~
00
000
00
Le ng t h.....25lL~.eet._. .
.
„
on Port 1 a_n~
,w
en ,
~
,
_
,,
,-
From 65ttL~reet_,,,,_~
Channel ization
1990 To 67th.Stree_ii„+„~, of traffic ~ 250:p~
Q~
Length 2 00
...~-.Q..~. „i
„
On 66th Street
From t venue
1990 To Oak an Avenue See above S_,~ee, a~„o~ :
Length See above _____
On
Prom
1990 To ~ $
Length
From ~ .~;:; ~,. _~
1991. To $ _
Length
on 77th Street
' From Lvnda e Avenue Construct 4-lane
1991 .
To Portland Avenue street with traffic. :~ 1
~pn0,dpa,CJ;
Length 5280 feet char~r~el ization artd ,
t~u~~i E-r
~~~ -y
YSTIMATED E:CPENDITUP.ES
Year Estimated
of State Aid
cx~enditure Teti Project Desk ~p~: Ex~ncliturG
~
From Reconstruct
1992
To asphalt boulevards
Len; th
on numerous ,~ 48,000.00
streets
On
From
1992 To ~,
Length
~'-- 7 7th Sirre~~ Construct 4-lane
From P ortland Avenge street with traffic
1992 To C e,ar Av~~,~, channelization ~ nng
1
nnn
nn
Length 5280 feet and buffer ~
,
_
On 76 th Street
Fron aver Avenue Channelization
1992 To ueen Avenue. of traffic ~ 350
000.00
Length eet ,,, ~
,L
on Reconstruct
From streets as indicated
1993 ro
by existing
~
200,000.00
Length Pavement Management
System
On
From
1993 To
Lend th -
On
From
To ~
Length ~-'
On ,
From
To ~.
Length
~
'~
~
y r-~
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 67
Agenda, March 20, 1989
Issue Statement:
Joint meeting of Richfield City Council and Richfield Ad Hoc
135W/I494 Traffic Committee at 5:30 PM, Monday, March 20, 1989.
The purpose of this meeting is to discuss traffic related items,
primarily I494 frontage road alternatives, of mutual concern to
the City Council and Ad Hoc 135W/I494 Traffic Committee.
Background•
The City Council formed the Richfield Ad Hoc 135W/I494 Traffic
Committee in 1986. Committee membership currently includes three
members from the Planning Commission (Nancy Edwardson, Connie
Murray and Robert Nelson), three members from the Community
Services Advisory Commission (Don Anderson, John Hamilton and Joe
Sausen) and two members from a Light Rail Transit (LRT) Committee
(George Karnas and Vern Luettinger).
The Committee meets on an as-needed basis. Topics considered by
the Committee include, but are not limited to, 135W, I494, Trunk
Highway 77 (Cedar Avenue), Local Transportation Policy Plan and
an 1494 alternate frontage road plan. It is the alternate
frontage road plan which will be the primary topic of discussion
in the joint meeting of the Council and Committee.
The I494 Traffic Corridor Study indicated the frontage roads
along this freeway would be eliminated with expansion of I494.
It further indicated as complimentary arterial roadway system is
needed near I494 to accommodate short and medium range trips.The
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) phase of possible I494
reconstruction is just beginning. Current estimates are that it
will take a minimum of 18 months, but more likely 30 months, for
the EIS to be completed.
To be prepared for the elimination of existing frontage roads,
Richfield began to study alternative frontage road options. On
the basis of comments made at public meetings hosted by the
Committee, information gathered by the Committee members while
attending meetings sponsored by others, information obtained by
City staff while attending related meetings and comments made by
consultants, several options have been considered. These are
summarized on the attachments. At the March 9, 1989, meeting,
the Richfield Ad Hoc I35W/I494 Traffic Committee recommended the
City Council reaffirm the position which favors 77th Street
alternative as the east/west arterial between 135W and TH77.
Recommended Motion:
Ratify or confirm that 77th Street appears to be the most
plausible alternate 1494 frontage road between I35W and TH77.
~~ / /
Basis of Recommendation:
City Council members have inquired about the direction of the
alternate frontage road study and seek additional information on
the various options. The Richfield Ad Hoc I35W/I494 Traffic
Committee members, city staff and traffic study consultant will
be in attendance at this joint meeting to discuss the various
options, issues, benefits and problems of using 77th Street or
76th Street as an east/west arterial between 135W and TH77.
Alternative Recommendations:
1. Do not hold a joint meeting of the City Council and the
Richfield Ad Hoc 135W/I494 Traffic Committee.
2. Schedule a joint meeting of the City Council and Richfield
Ad Hoc 135W/1494 Traffic Committee for another time.
3. Hold the meeting as scheduled but do not ratify any street
as the preferred alternative for a I494 frontage road.
4. Hold the meeting but do not ratify 77th Street as the
preferred alternative. Ratify 76th Street as preferred.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
Council action is requested to approve the five year MSA program.
Part of the program includes land aquisition for the 77th Street
project in the ILN area. A decision regarding the corridor is
required if action on this item is to occur.
ly submitted,
Jam s~ Prosser
Cit anager
JDP/e j a
~ /,~
77TH STREET FRONTAGE ROAD IMPLEMENTATION 10/14/88
I. I-494 CORRIDOR STUDY RECOMMENDATIONS (October 1987)
A. Develop an effective system of support roadways to replace frontage
roads that may be lost to widening of I-494 and to serve short to
medium-length trips that might otherwise use I-494.
B. The half diamond interchange at 12th Avenue should be closed and a full
interchange developed at Portland Avenue.
C. The interchange at Nicnllet Avenue should be closed.
D. 77th Street should be developed between TH 77 and I-35W to replace the
frontage roads that will be lost with widening of I-494 and to serve
short to medium-length trips.
E. Cities should work to obtain changes in property access along I-494
frontage roads, consistent with the I-494 plan, as opportunities arise.
F. Mn/DOT staff indicated that Mn/DOT has responsibility for replacement
of the north frontage road.
II. CURRENT SITUATION
A. The City of Richfield has initiated a study of 77th Street (in
February 1988) to determine what improvements are needed to replace
the north I-494 frontage road and accommodate the increased traffic
volumes that will occur with the elimination of the frontage road and
change in freeway access.
B. The City would like to make the 77th Street improvements within the
next two years so that they are in a position to respond to developers
and other property owners proposing development, redevelopment, or
.improvements to property along I-494 and 77th Street.
C. The City has received proposals for some major development on property
adjacent to I-494 which they need to respond to.
D. Meetings (March 17 and April 8, 1988}, between the City of Richfield
.and Mn/DOT staff have yielded no results.
/ ~~
III. CURRENT MN/DOT COST PARTICIPATION POLICIES FOR FRONTAGE ROADS
A. For frontage roads adjacent to the highway:.
1. .State will
2. State will
3. State will
4. State will
5. State will
6. State will
furni sfi
acquire
pay for
pay for
pay for
pay for
right-of-way
access control
100 percent of excavation
100 percent of surfacing
curb and gutter on highway side
portion of drainage
B. For remote frontage roads:
1. City must furnish 'fight-of-way
2. City must acquire access control
3. State will only pay for excavation and surfacing fora 32-foot
street
4. City must pay for curb and gutter
5. State will pay for portion of drainage
IV. CITY OPTIONS
A. City works with Mn/DOT on implementing I-494 Corridor Study
Recommendations
1. Implications:
a. Future access control and right-of-way needs negotiated
during. development approval process
b. Costs for acquisition of right-of-way and access control
significantly reduced
c. Increased public support because residential areas protected
from impacts
B. City drops plans for upgraded 77th Street and approves development
based on current transportation system.
1. Implications
a. New development is approved adjacent to I-494 with access
oriented to frontage roads
b. New development occurs within right-of-way needed for I-494
and I-35W improvements
c. Costs for acquisition of right-of-way and access control
significantly increase far both I-494 and I-35W
d. Significant public opposition to I-494 improvements because
of business impact of replacing frontage road adjacent to
highway and potential increase in traffic on 76th Street and
other local streets
.-~_'
V. CITY'S REQUEST
A. That the frontage road cost participation policies be expanded to
include a new classification; remote replacement frontage road for
urban freeway reconstructlon, and that the state participate in the
cost of remote replacement frontage roads to the same extent they
would if the frontage roads were replaced adjacent to the highway.
6. That the state recognize .the substantial beneflts to the state of
early improvements on 77th .Street and assist the City in
implementation of those improvements.
C. State and city work to meet the environmental requirements;-hopefully,
this can be a EA/FONSL~.
r,
~~i-~
i
O
o t
w
~~
~.
~~
a
~ C
c a-
E
o -3v
c~
a~ o
o~ 0~
_-
:®
18~~{E
6S~ `p~~
ii~tl~~
~€III~•~
O
D
~. ~.
~O
~_
O ~--
v
v
°~
d~
i
1
..
.~ ..~~
t
•
L
• ~
~ s
~ =
i
i
~
~_
~ ~
r
~
~ ~
r
~ =
k ~ ~
~
_ ~ ~ r ~ . ~
~
= ~ r ~ ~ ~
~
~. - = ~ =
~ ~ ~ :
k ~ r
~ ~ ~
! ~
~
~
~ ~ ~
pt
ZW
J
4~
^<~ o~~ o
1
/- So
C
O
Q
O
V
O
~~
^~~
W
t~
O
L
U
~_
4
»~~ Q
Q
O
~c
3
o
'' o
W
G
''
i:~
r
v
Z
D
V
z
4
i
E
i/~/
ti.
~~- ~
March 6, 1989
BRW, Inc.
EYALUATION OF 77TH AND 76TH STREET AS AN EAST/WEST ARTERIAL
77TH STREET ALTERNATIVE
Advantages
0 77th Street can serve a dual function of providing
access to development adjacent to I-494 and as a minor
arterial for short- to medium-length trips.
o The Minnesota Department of Transportation may par-
ticipate in the cost of upgrading 77th Street as
replacement access for the north I-494 frontage road
that may be eliminated with the upgrading of I-494.
The alternative is to replace the frontage road adja-
cent to .the highway which would eliminate many of the
businesses which it would be intended to serve..
77th Street can be designed to protect the residential
areas to the north of 77th Street from the traffic and
noise generated by commercial development south of~77th
Street. The creation of residential loop streets would
prevent commercial traffic from cutting through resi-
dential areas. A landscaped buffer area with noise
wal 1 s can also be created between 77th Street and the
residential area to the north.
o The development of 77th Street as a minor arterial
would result in the reduction of traffic on 76th Street
which runs through a low-density .residential area.
0 77th Street provides the flexibility to allow future
redevelopment north of 77th street while continuing to
protect the remaining residential areas. Initially,
77th Street. can be designed to only serve development
between 77th street and I-494. In the future, if the
city desires, 77th Street could serve commercial
development all the way to 76th Street.
o Because traffic on 76th Street would be reduced, some
of the existing roadway could be used to widen the
boulevards and sidewalks along 76th Street.
.~~~ ~
Disadvantages
o The development of 77th Street as a minor arterial
would require the acquisition of one row of single
family homes north of 77th Street. The acquisition of
this row of single family homes would provide. suf-
ficient right-of-way to provide the residential loop
streets and landscaped buffer with noise walls.
o The development of 77th Street would require the exten-
sion of 77th Street through the .city garage and may
require the relocation of the city garage.
o The development of 77th Street could. make it less con-
venient for activities of Assumption. School anal Church
to take place in Roosevelt Park.
o The intersection of 77th Street with Lyndale Avenue is
a key intersection in the proposed Interstate/Lyndale/
Nicollet redevelopment area due to the proximity with
I494. The development of 77th Street would require
extra special attention to the location and configur-
ation of this intersection.
~ -~ v
76TH STREET ALTERNATIYE
Advantages
0 76th Street is already a four lane street that is con-
tinuous-from TH 77 to the western city limits and would
not have to be upgraded immediately, although it will
have to be upgraded if there is an increase in the den-
sity of development ad~a,cent to I-494.
o The use of 76th Street as the east-west minor arterial
would allow for future commercial development from
I-494 to 76th Street. '
o Does not require extension of 77th Street through City
garage.
Disadvantages
o The use of 76th Street as a minor arterial does not
resolve"the problems on 77th Street. If I-494 is
upgraded and the north I-494 frontage road is elimi-
nated, 77th Street will provide the replacement access
for the development adjacent to I-494. Traffic volumes
on 77th Street will increase and some segments may need
widening. If the frontage road is replaced ad3acent to
I-494, it would eliminate many of the businesses which
it is intended to serve and leave very narrow and unde-
sirable properties for development.
o Traffic volumes on 76th Street are likely to increase
significantly. If I-494 is upgraded as recommended in
the I-494 Corridor Study, which includes the elimina-
tion of the north I-494 frontage road and the elimina-
tion of freeway access at 12th Avenue and Nicollet
Avenue, traffic will increase on 76th Street without
any more development. Improvements will be required to
76th Street to accommodate this increased traffic.
o The Minnesota Department of Transportation is not
likely to participate in the funding of improvements on
76th Street.
0 76th Street cannot be designed to effectively protect
the residential areas along and south of 76th Street
from increases in traffic and noise generated by com-
mercial development adjacent to I-494 and changes in
access to I-494. Traffic to and from development ad~a-
cent to~I-494 would cut through residential areas to
get to and from 76th Street. The only effective way to
prevent cut-through traffic is with loop streets along
3
-ri~'~~
77th Street.. In order to create a landscaped buffer
area along 76th Street it would be necessary to acquire
one row of single family homes on either the north or
south side of 76th Street. It would not be possible to
buffer the residential areas along 76th. Street from
traffic. noise because of the number of intersecting
streets.
o The emphasis on 76th Street as a minor arterial will
create a residential island between the commercial-
development adjacent to I-494 and 76th Street that will
rapidly deteriorate because of negative traffic, noise,
and visual impacts.
o The redevelopment of the West 77th Street strip would
be slower because of poor visibility and access.
4