01-14-1997 STUDY SESSION JOINT PC-CSCITY OF RICFIFIELD
Knnnm Commission
AGEWR
JANUARY 14, 1997
7:00 p.m. -- Study Session
JOINT PLANNING COMMISSION /COMMUNITY SERVICES
ITEM #1 Addendum to the Environmental Impact Statement
1 -35W
ITEM #2 76th Street East of 1 -35W Study Update
Auxiliary aids for individuals with disabilities are available upon request. Requests must be made
at least 96 hours in advance to the Administrative Services Director at 861- 9702."
Items: #1 and 2 Agenda Section: New Business
PC Letter: #1 Date: January 14, 1997
GENERAL INFORMATION
Subject: Transportation Issues: Addendum to EIS for I -35W; 76th Street East of 35W
Study Update
Type of Request: Listen to presentation by City staff; offer feedback
References: City Council Study Session Letter No. 0106 -35W regarding EIS Addendum
Draft Q &A Brochure for 76th Street East of I -35W Study
BACKGROUND
I -35W: The Minnesota Department of Transportation is proposing to extend the High
Occupancy Vehicle lane on I -35W from I -494 to 42nd Street in Minneapolis.
Staff from the Engineering Division will go over the proposed improvements
and the addendum to the Environmental Impact Statement.
76th Street: Last summer, the City began a study of 76th Street, east of 35W, to consider
downsizing the road and adding bike /pedestrian facilities. Staff from the
Engineering Division will review the plan that has been developed through the
work of a 76th Street Task Force and with resident input.
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Study Session Letter No. 0106 -35W
Agenda January 6, 1997
Issue Statement:
Consideration of the Addendum to the January 1995 Final Environmental Impact
Statement on 1 -35W to add a third lane for high occupancy vehicles from 1 -494 to 46th
Street in Minneapolis.
Background:
The Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) has proposed to extend the
High Occupancy Vehicle lane on 1 -35W from 1 -494 to 42nd Street in Minneapolis (See
attached map). To do this, the January 1995 Final Environmental Impact Statement
EIS) on 1 -35W must be amended to describe the impacts of this scaled back proposal
that was not included in the original EIS. The project will cost $75 million as compared
to the $1.0 billion estimate for the preferred alternative identified in the previous final
environmental impact statement.
The Council is being asked to revise its comment on the adequacy of the Final EIS as
amended in identifying possible environmental effects of the proposed project. The
reduced scale of the proposal will require much less right of way acquisition in
Richfield and eliminate light rail transit, consistent with major objections raised
by the City in its previous comments dated March 13, 1995.
The details of the plan including details of the mitigation of any impacts will be identified
in the review of layouts immediately following this environmental review process.
A review by City staff indicates the project will:
enhance safety in the 62 Crosstown section by separating traffic on 62 Crosstown
from the traffic on 1 -35W;
keep regional trips on the regional highway network and off of local streets;
require some right of way acquisition;
promote public transit and carpooling; and,
not correct all 1 -35W deficiencies, especially inadequate traffic capacity.
City staff have raised Richfield's concerns about the proposal with MnDOT staff.. Our
concerns include:
acquisition of land needed for storm water ponding;
right of way implications for Richfield;
the retention of eastbound 62 access to Lyndale Avenue;
options for a transit hub in the Crosstown area since the Minnegasco site will not be
acquired for a transit hub;
the need for improvements along 66th Street and Lyndale Avenue in the vicinity of I-
35W;
traffic impacts on local streets in response to the proposed improvement;
the potential for bike /pedestrian trails crossing 1 -35W at the Soo Line, at 66th Street
and at Portland Avenue, and along 1 -35W on surplus land, especially west of
Portland Avenue;
the opportunity to demonstrate the performance of high speed bus service and
carpooling in the 1 -35W corridor. Particularly, consider the possible addition of a
transit station in the vicinity of the 62 Crosstown Commons as an alternative to the
transit hub previously proposed for the Minnegasco site.
noise;
the importance of sensitive design of noise and retaining walls; and,
the potential for redevelopment opportunities.
Most of the issues have been addressed in the addendum. Any remaining concerns
are described in the attached draft resolution.
The Minnesota Department of Transportation will host an Open House on the
addendum to the Final EIS and the plans for the third lane project on Tuesday, January
14, 1997 from 4 - 8 p.m. at the Richfield Lutheran Church at 60th Street and Nicollet
Avenue in Minneapolis. Richfield residents are encouraged to attend the Open House.
City staff is proposing the following public involvement efforts for this project:
A notice that the City Council will review the project was placed in the December,
1996 issue of Your City Newsletter.
A mailing list of 1,000 owner residents living along 1 -35W from 76th Street to
Portland Avenue will receive an invitation from MnDOT to attend the January 14,
1997 Open House.
The City staff will have a booth at the Open House to explain the City's proposed
position on the 1 -35W improvements including the Richfield Lake area plan.
City staff will give presentations on the proposal to both the Planning Commission
and the Community Services Commission prior to Council action being requested at
the January 27, 1997 Council meeting.
If the project is approved, work south of 66th Street could begin as soon as 1999.
Recommended Motion:
None. For discussion purposes only although the Council will be asked for guidance on
the proposed public involvement process for reviewing the 1 -35W improvement.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. Although the MnDOT proposal doesn't correct all 1 -35W deficiencies, it is generally
consistent with the City's position on 1 -35W:
by keeping regional trips on the regional highway network;
by providing an HOV lane rather than light rail transit; and,
by promoting high speed bus service and carpooling.
2. The proposal can be built under existing budgetary limits.
3. Refinements in the design are possible to lessen negative effects on Richfield.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. Consider several minor refinements to the MnDOT proposal designed to reduce
negative impacts on Richfield. Revisions in the design may improve its acceptability
to the City. The Council will have another opportunity to review and comment on
design issues apart from commenting on the addendum to the Final EIS.
2. Consider the alternative of removing eastbound 62 access to Lyndale Avenue to
save two homes from being acquired for right of way in Richfield.
3. Consider continued support for the City's preferred alternative, the Diamond Lane
Alternative. This may not be appropriate without additional highway funding being
identified.
4. Consider opposing the proposal.
Discussion /Decision Mode:
No decision is needed at this time. A decision will be requested at the January 27,
1997 Council meeting. The Council will also have an opportunity to review the layout
for the proposed project where design issues can be discussed.
Respectfully submitted,
James D. Prosser
City Manager
JDP:TFF
Attachments
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION COMMENTING ON THE ADDENDUM TO THE JANUARY 1995 FINAL
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT FOR AN INTERIM THIRD LANE ON 1 -35W
FROM 1 -494 TO 42ND STREET IN MINNEAPOLIS; MINNESOTA
WHEREAS, an addendum has been issued by the Minnesota Department of
Transportation to the January 1995 Final Environmental Impact Statement for
extending the third lane on 1 -35W from 1 -494 to 42nd Street in Minneapolis, Minnesota;
and
WHEREAS, comments on the addendum to the final environmental impact
statement have been requested by the Minnesota Department of Transportation.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Richfield that:
1. The addendum adequately addresses the environmental impacts of building
the third lane project.
2. The negative impacts of the proposed improvement are less than those
identified for the preferred alternative with the exception of providing adequate capacity
on the regional highway network to protect local streets from being used by regional
trips.
3. The amount of additional right of way needed in Richfield for the project is
greatly reduced from the level identified for the preferred alternative in the January
1995 Final Environmental Impact Statement.
4. The addendum responds to requests from local businesses to retain
eastbound access on Trunk Highway 62 to Lyndale Avenue.
5. The addendum addresses stormwater drainage and treatment issues for
Legion Lake, Richfield Lake and Wood Lake. It also provides the City of Richfield the
opportunity to explore redevelopment possibilities in the area of Richfield Lake.
6. The addendum discusses the need for improvements to local streets where
they intersect with 1 -35W such as Lyndale Avenue and 66th Street.
7. The noise analysis indicates the possible need for noise walls on the west
side of 1 -35W in the area of Wood Lake. The City of Richfield is concerned that any
noise walls or retaining walls are sensitively designed to blend into the community.
8. The proposal provides for a transit component with the provision of a high
occupancy vehicle lane.
9. The proposal can further enhance transit in the 1 -35W corridor by promoting a
high speed bus service and by considering adding a bus stop in the area of the 62
Crosstown Commons.
10. The design of freeway crossings need to provide for pedestrians and
bicyclists.
11. The extension of the third lane from 1 -494 will add great urgency to
reconstructing the 1- 494/1 -35W interchange.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 27th day of
January, 1997.
Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor
ATTEST:
Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk
1 35iW H W Y 62 Corn_mons Area
35W
Existing
121
LU E. 60 TH
0
Z
62 62
Proposed
I- 35W/Highway 62 Common Section Improvements
and
High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Lane, 42nd Street to I -494
Is
The I- 35W/Highway 62 common section on the Minneapolis/Richfield border has been a problem section of the freeway system
for years. The common section interchange currently handles 250,000 vehicles a day. The east -west portion handles nearly
160,000 vehicles a day. Some portions of the common section are congested for up to 13 hours per day.
The common section is also a high accident area, with an accident rate up to three times higher than the average of the
metropolitan freeway system. The higher accident rate can be attributed to high traffic volumes and poor geometrics. The poor
geometrics consist of I -35W and Highway 62 sharing lanes in the common section, left -hand exits (SB to EB, and NB to WB),
a left -hand entrance (WB to SB), forced lane changes, weaving sections, curved roadway alignment, and access at Lyndale in
the middle of the common section.
The Metropolitan Council Transit Operations (MCTO), Minnesota Valley Transit Authority (MVTA), Southwest Metro, and
the University of Minnesota operate over 300 buses a day on I -35W and currently carry about 11,000 passengers a day.
Project description
Rebuild the I- 35W/Highway 62 common section to provide safety and operational improvements by:
Separating the two roadways, which:
Provides separate Highway 62 roadway;
Provides better lane continuity;
Eliminates weaving sections.
Replacing the SB 35W to EB 62 left -hand exit with a right -hand exit;
Replacing the NB 35W to WB 62 and NB 121 left -hand exit with a right -hand exit;
Replacing the WB 62 to SB 35W and WB 62 left -hand entrance with a right -hand entrance.
Add a high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lane in each direction in the median of the freeway between I -494 and 46th
All existing access is maintained or improved, except for the following:
66th Street to EB 62 (via NB 35W) is no longer possible; Lyndale to EB 62 is a potential alternate route,
Lyndale Ave. to NB 35W is no longer possible; 66th or 60th to NB 35W are potential alternate routes,
Diamond Lake Road to EB 62 (via SB 35W) is no longer possible; Portland to EB 62 is a potential alternate route,
46th St. to NB 35W; changes from starting an additional lane on NB 35W to a ramp that merges on to NB 35W.
Cost $75,000,000
Right -of- -way
For roadway improvements: 5 single - family homes
For drainage: to be determined
Schedule
Informational meetings to discuss project with public:
Addendum to I -35W EIS to update environmental process:
Project layout submitted to Cities of Minneapolis and Richfield for approval:
Proposed construction staging schedule:
Staee Location
1 I -494 to 66th Street
2 66th St. to Minnehaha Creek
3 Minnehaha Creek to 42nd St.
Project Contact
Adam Josephson, P.E.
Mn/DOT Metro Division
1500 West County Road B -2
Roseville, MN 55113
Phone:582 -1320 FAX #:582 -1308
Start Construction Open to traffic
April 1999 Fall 1999
April 2001 Fall 2003
April 2002 Fall 2003
Spring/Summer 1996
December 1996
December 1996
II /I S,%
I- 35W/Highway 62 Common Section Improvements
and
High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Lane, 42nd Street to I -494
Need
The I- 35W/Highway 62 common section on the Minneapolis/Richfield border has been a problem section of the freeway system
for years. The common section interchange currently handles 250,000 vehicles a day. The east -west portion handles nearly
160,000 vehicles a day. Some portions of the common section are congested for up to 13 hours per day.
The common section is also a high accident area, with an accident rate up to three times higher than the average of the
metropolitan freeway system The higher accident rate can be attributed to high traffic volumes and poor geometrics. The poor
geometrics consist of I -35W and Highway 62 sharing lanes in the common section, left -hand exits (SB to EB, and NB to WB),
a left -hand entrance (WB to SB), forced lane changes, weaving sections, curved roadway alignment, and access at Lyndale in
the middle of the common section.
The Metropolitan Council Transit Operations (MCTO), Minnesota Valley Transit Authority (MVTA), Southwest Metro, and
the University of Minnesota operate over 300 buses a day on I -35W and currently carry.about 11,000 passengers a day.
Project description
Rebuild the I- 35W/Highway 62 common section to provide safety and operational improvements by:
Separating the two roadways, which:
Provides separate Highway 62 roadway;
Provides better lane continuity;
Elinunates weaving sections.
Replacing the SB 35W to EB 62 left -hand exit with a right -hand exit;
Replacing the NB 35W to WB 62 and NB 121 left -hand exit with a right -hand exit;
Replacing the WB 62 to SB 35W and WB 62 left -hand entrance with a right -hand entrance.
Add a high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lane in each direction in the median of the freeway between I -494 and 46th
All existing access is maintained or improved, except for the following:
66th Street to EB 62 (via NB 35W) is no longer possible; Lyndale to EB 62 is a potential alternate route,
Lyndale Ave. to NB 35W is no longer possible; 66th or 60th to NB 35W are potential alternate routes,
Diamond Lake Road to EB 62 (via SB 35W) is no longer possible; Portland to EB 62 is a potential alternate route,
46th St. to NB 35W; changes from starting an additional lane on NB 35W to a ramp that merges on to NB 35W.
Cost $75,000,000
Right -of -way
For roadway improvements: 5 single - family homes
For drainage: to be determined
Schedule
Informational meetings to discuss project with public:
Addendum to I -35W EIS to update environmental process:
Project layout submitted to Cities of Minneapolis and Richfield for approval:
Proposed construction staging schedule:
Staee Location
1 1 -494 to 66th Street
2 66th St. to Minnehaha Creek
3 Minnehaha Creek to 42nd St.
Project Contact
Adam Josephson, P.E.
Mn/DOT Metro Division
1500 West County Road B -2
Roseville, MN 55113
Phone: 582 -1320 FAX 4:582 -1308
Start Construction Open to traffic
April 1999 Fall 1999
April 2001 Fall 2003
April 2002 Fall 2003
Spring/Summer 1996
December 1996
December 1996
11 /l"
Q & A Brochure for 76th Street East of 1 -35W Study
1. Why does the City want to downsize 76th Street?
Traffic on 76th Street has dropped dramatically ever since the new 77th
Street opened. The traffic on 76th Street is now less than 6,000 vehicles per
day. At this traffic volume a two -lane road has adequate capacity to handle
the traffic. Therefore, the four lanes are excessive for the current and
projected traffic volumes.
Residents living along 76th Street have for many years asked the City to
reduce the amount of traffic and traffic speed on 76th Street. Reducing the
roadway to two lanes will greatly discourage speeding and through traffic
from using 76th Street.
2. Isn't the idea to downsize 76th Street a City staff idea?
Residents living along 76th Street east of 1 -35W have long complained about
too much traffic, trucks and speeding on the street. Most of the complaints
have come from the area west of Nicollet Avenue. Even though traffic on 76th
Street has dropped dramatically with the opening of the new 77th Street,
residents have asked the City to do something to lessen the damaging
effects of 76th Street traffic in their residential area:
3. Are there any other reasons to downsize 76th Street?
Cities, just like businesses, need to continuously reexamine and upgrade
themselves in order to prosper. The City of Richfield must do everything
possible to stay competitive with other Twin Cities communities as an
attractive place to live and do business.
Eliminating two traffic lanes on 76th Street will create surplus space that can
be beautified and enhanced with a bicycle path, lighting and landscaping.
This 76th Street enhancement program along with other City initiatives, such
as the Richfield Rediscovered Program, will help to increase the
attractiveness and value of residential neighborhoods along 76th Street and
the City, as a whole. The Minneapolis Star Tribune recently reported that real
estate brokers estimate that in newer suburbs homes appreciate in value by 5
to 10% if they are located on or near a bike trail more than other housing.
The City's newly updated Comprehensive Plan envisions a network of bicycle
paths connecting residential neighborhoods to major activity centers and
parks. One recommended route for a bike path is the 2.5 mile 76th Street
corridor which would provide a convenient crossing of 1 -35W and a link to the
proposed regional bikeway along the Soo Line tracks as well as to the
2
The City's newly updated Comprehensive Plan envisions a network of bicycle
paths connecting residential neighborhoods to major activity centers and
parks. One recommended route for a bike path is the 2.5 mile 76th Street
corridor which would provide a convenient crossing of 1 -35W and a link to the
proposed regional bikeway along the Soo Line tracks as well as to the
Lyndale Avenue business district, the Mall of America, and Washington,
Roosevelt and Lincoln Fields Parks.
4. Is there a problem with the existing 76th Street?
The existing 76th Street is in reasonably good condition and, except for minor
repairs, would not absolutely require reconstruction. However, now that the
new 77th Street is built, reduced traffic on 76th Street requires only two traffic
lanes. The other two lanes are no longer needed to carry traffic and could
accommodate some other beneficial facilities.
The intent of the proposed enhancement program is not so much to fix a
problem as to take advantage of an opportunity. Reducing traffic impacts and
providing amenities and beautification in the 76th Street corridor will help to
improve the appearance of the City and may help in encouraging more
people to stay and /or reinvest in Richfield.
5. What would happen if the City does nothing on 76th Street?
The street would remain as is with the possible conversion of the outside
lanes to on- street parking -- the two center lanes would continue to carry
traffic. At some future time when the road would need to be reconstructed, it
would be rebuilt as a two -lane road because forecasted traffic will not justify
building four lanes.
6. What type of improvements are being proposed for 76th Street?
The recommended plan for 76th Street east of 1 -35W appears as a drawing in
this brochure. The plan was unanimously endorsed by the 76th Street Task
Force and includes the following features and enhancements;
Two lanes of traffic in the center of the right of way
On- street parking in parking bays along the north side of the roadway
A ten -foot wide combined bicyclist/ pedestrian path along he south side of the
roadway'
A pedestrian walkway along the north side of the roadway
landscaped boulevard with street trees along the South side of the roadway
between the street and the bicycle path
3
Landscaped islands with street trees at the corners of the blocks along the
north side of the roadway
Ornamental street lights designed to provide increased neighborhood security
The recommended plan, which was designed with efficiency and practicality
in mind, will utilize much of the existing pavement for the traffic lanes and
parking bays and will require relatively little additional maintenance. The
estimated project cost is $2.2 million to convert the entire 2.5 miles of 76th
Street east of 1 -35W.
The proposed improvements will also help in traffic calming and in improving
the safety and comfort for pedestrians and bicyclists. The narrower roadway,
especially at the intersections, will help to slow down traffic and will make it
easier for pedestrians and bicyclists to cross the street. The additional
bikeway /walkway on the south side of the street will keep most bicyclists off
the street and will provide an additional walkway for pedestrians.
7. Would the money be better spent on other projects?
The City has many programs for funding and implementing various projects
throughout the City. The Municipal State Aid Street funding proposed to
finance the 76th Street improvements could certainly be utilized for other
street reconstruction projects. However, the changing requirements and the
corresponding need to downsize 76th Street presents a unique opportunity
for enhancing the roadway while, at the same time, improving the image and
appearance of the adjoining residential neighborhoods. The 76th Street
improvement project represents a worthwhile investment for the long -term
health and benefit of the Richfield community.
8. Are two lanes of traffic enough particularly at busy intersections?
An analysis by City consultants indicates that a third lane may be needed at
Lyndale Avenue. The third lane would serve as a right turn lane for
eastbound traffic wanting to turn south onto Lyndale Avenue. Coming from
the east the third lane would serve as a left turn lane for people wanting to go
southbound on Lyndale Avenue.
All other intersections will operate at an acceptable level of service even if
traffic volumes doubled from current levels.
9. How will this study address many residents' concerns for on- street
parking?
The final study goals call for some on- street parking, especially in those
areas where limited on- street parking exists. The recommended alternative
4
includes some on- street parking in parking bays along the north side of the
roadway for the full length of the 76th Street corridor.
10. Will buses and trucks be allowed on 76th Street?
Seventy -sixth Street will serve as a residential collector street and thus will
carry truck and bus traffic. However, due to the proposal to reduce the width
of 76th Street and the availability of a wider 77th Street, it is expected that far
fewer trucks will utilize 76th Street in the future. The option to move bus traffic
from 76th Street to 77th Street will need to be evaluated further, since this
would present a benefit -- reduced noise and vibrations along 76th street, as
well as a drawback -- less direct access from the residential neighborhoods to
the bus stops on 77th Street. However, school buses will continue to use
76th Street as they have done in the past.
11. How will access to private properties be impacted?
Access to private properties and the garages along 76th Street will remain
virtually unchanged. Every property owner will be able to have the access
that exists now. The only difference will be that, due to the bicycle path and
the landscaped boulevard along the south side of the roadway, the driveways
for the properties on the south side will be approximately 11' longer than they
are now.
12. Won't 76th Street east of 1 -35W be needed when 1 -494 is rebuilt?
Seventy- seventh Street will be able to carry the through traffic during
reconstruction of 1 -494. The 77th Street/76th Street pair of roadways is able
to carry only a limited amount of through traffic, because there is only one
bridge crossing at 1 -35W. Also, Mn /DOT will not close all the traffic lanes at
once on 1 -494 during construction. Usually, traffic is reduced by one or two
lanes at a time during reconstruction so that freeway traffic is not forced to
use local streets.
13. Must 76th Street be downsized immediately?
Construction of the improvements does not have to begin in 1997. However,
since the City is preparing plans to redevelop the Lyndale Avenue area of
76th Street, it is important to have a concept plan for downsizing 76th Street
so that the redevelopment of the Lyndale Avenue Gateway commercial area
is consistent with the recommendations for the 76th Street corridor east of I-
35W.
14. How will the recommended improvements be implemented?
5
The 76th Street Task Force considered many options for staging the
improvements including partial construction of the improvements,
construction of the improvements on one side of the roadway only, and
construction in segments. The recommendation is to construct the
improvements in segments starting with the highest traffic volume sections
first. Thus, the plan is to begin the construction of the improvements at the
westerly end of the corridor, at the junction of 76th Street with 77th Street,
and to continue east. A more detailed staging plan and time frame would be
prepared at the time the project is authorized.
15. How would the improvements be financed?
The street work would be funded using the City's Municipal State Aid Street
funds (state gas tax revenue.) The 76th Street Task Force chose not to place
overhead utility lines underground. However, if the City Council chose to do
so, this extra work would have to be financed using a different source of local
funds.
16. Won't my taxes increase if 76th Street adds a bikeway and
landscaping?
Most improvements the City makes require some additional maintenance
costs. However, by making physical improvements to the community, the City
may become an increasingly desirable place to live and do business. Such
investments may expand the City's overall property valuation, thus spreading
the tax burden over an increased tax base.
17. Will I be assessed for any improvements?
No special assessments are planned for financing the 76th Street Downsizing
Project.
18. Who will maintain the proposed improvements?
The proposed improvements along 76th Street would be maintained in the
same way as along any other street in the City. The City will be responsible
for plowing and maintaining the street, the sidewalk on the north side and the
bicycle /pedestrian path on the south side, for pruning the boulevard trees,
and for maintaining the ornamental street lights. The residents along the
street will be expected to mow the boulevard lawns and to water the lawns
and the street trees.
19. What destinations are available for a bicyclist using 76th Street?
l:.1
Bicyclists would be able to travel to Roosevelt and Washington Parks, Lincoln
Fields Park, the Lyndale Avenue commercial area and several churches
located on 76th Street.
In the future the 76th Street trail would connect to the Soo Line Bicycle and
Pedestrian Trail allowing people to bike or walk to Richfield High School, the
HUB Shopping Center and the Minneapolis Parkway System. Also, 76th
Street will connect to the Mall of America via bikeways planned for 12th
Avenue and 79th Street in Bloomington.
20. Will the improvements increase crime in the area?
The proposed improvements are being designed with safety in mind. Views
would not be obstructed nor secluded areas created for anyone to hide in.
The additional street lighting should help greatly to improve the appearance
and safety of the roadway, the sidewalk, and the bicycle /pedestrian path.
21.What will happen to property values in the area?
Any improvement, which creates a positive image for an area, may help to
increase the desirability of that area and, correspondingly, increase property
values. It is more desirable for any city as well as property owners to have
property values rise rather than to have them decline. The intent of the City of
Richfield is to continue improving the City's environment in order to maintain
and improve property values for its citizens and to provide a setting which is
enjoyable and beneficial for the community. _
22. Will my opinion count, or has the City already made up its mind?
No final decision has been made to date regarding the implementation of the
76th Street Downsizing Project. The study conducted by the 76th Street Task
Force and City staff, at the request of the City Council, represents a
framework plan for guiding future improvements in the 7th Street corridor. A
final report of the Task Force will be submitted to the City Council after the
Tuesday, February 18, 1997 Open House from 3 :00 P.M. to 8:00 P.M. at
Assumption Church's St. Joseph's Hall, 305 East 77th Street in Richfield.
The Open House is an excellent -opportunity for a one -on -one dialogue with
76th Street Task Force members, City staff and the consultant. Your ideas
and comments will be forwarded to the City Council for their review prior to
acting on the study's final report.
7
About a month following the Open House, the City Council will receive the
final report and then decide to accept, modify or reject the Task Force's
recommendations to downsize 76th Street east of I -35W. If the Council
agrees with the study's recommendations, it can, at a later date, authorize
work to begin to design and construct improvements to 76th Street including
when the work should start.
Recommended Concept Alternative
Combination of Options C3, D', & E2)
Existing Pavement for Centered Roadway /Separate Maw Blkeway on South Side
Landscaped Boulevard on South Sida / Parking Bays with Landscaped Islands North
October 23, 1996
76th Street Corridor Study
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
5 10 Feet
11111111111
Rn I E¢
Y I,.
D" Callo"A
LandocapIna
r .. fix.
i ' _ p.3''
a"`; -•
dry' 'C e ' .''
yy
wwwri .. •i wrawwwwwwl.... s,iwtawiwrii* 'swoon
i________________..- _-___________._--.-._--__-.._-__-- _- .__.-- _- __.- ..--- _.- ____.1----------------------------- .
iiwwi jV' owww'o wwaA -- j wwriw iin -
tb ri.: 71,
Existing
Plan of Typical Block
Frbf/nn I
omm
nwwww
Proposed
Plan of Typical Block
Recommended Concept Alternative
Combination of Options C3, D', & E2)
Existing Pavement for Centered Roadway /Separate New Bikeway on South Side
Landscaped Boulevard on South Side / Parking Bays with Landscaped Islands on North Side
October 23, 1996
SIT:-- -_ —_—
wwwwr
76th Street Corridor Study
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
S 0 50 Feet n
IIIIIIIIIII ^
I