The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About3.C. 1st Avenue/C.R. 101 and Riverfront Corridor ~ CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum CASE NO.: NA TO: Mark McNeill, City Administrator Dan Hughes, Chief of Police Jim Grampre, Building Official FROM: Michael Leek, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Discussion of Planning for First Avenue/CR 101 and Riverfront Corridor WORKSHOP DATE: February 11, 2008 INTRODUCTION: DISCUSSION: County Road Issues: In 2007, Scott County reconstructed a portion of CR 101 from the bridge west to CR 17/Marschall Road. In 2008, the County will reconstruct the bridge. The County's Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) provides for the reconstruction of CR 101 from CR 16 to the river crossing. Currently, the County is developing a corridor study and plan for TH 13/CR 17, which includes CR 101 from CR 17 to the river crossing. The study may well posit this corridor as a future "principal arterial." If that is the case, then surely the County will want the City to help it identify direct accesses to CR 101 that can be closed in order to limit the number of direct accesses to that road, and thus improve the functionality of the road. Land Use Concepts and Principles: The Comprehensive Land Use Update adopted by the City Council in 2003 included a discussion of access and land use principles that could be applied to development that might occur in the corridor in the future. At the time the update was adopted, the general land use concept enunciated by the Council was that of a "mixed use" area, meaning that maximum flexibility would be retained for existing uses and property owners to remain, and for private development or redevelopment to occur. Because it has implications for the manner in which CR 101 might be reconstructed in the future, Council is asked to discuss this concept Specific principles enunciated in the Update included; H:\CC\2008\First Avenue rpt wksp 02112008.doc a) Planning for wider (if possible 10 foot wide) continuous walkways in the corridor; b) Consistent use of trees, light fixtures, banners, benches, and other street furniture in the corridor and the Downtown area; c) Orientations of any new or redeveloped buildings toward CR 101; d) Shared driveways where feasible and parking to the sides and rear of buildings, with parking areas to be screened from CR 101. The attached graphics from that plan illustrate those principles. e) Uniform standards for both public and private signage in the corridor ACTION REQUESTED: Council is asked to discuss these principles and provide consensus on implementation of them in preparation for upcoming discussions with Scott County representatives about the future reconstruction of CR 101 and its role in the overall trans ortation network. R. Michael Leek Community Development Director 2 TRADITIONAL ,ARCHITECTURE W„~~:~ 5CREENING OF PARKIN T, ~ , MAXIMUM 20 FOOT t • BUILDING SETBACK ~ Y, y ~ ~ ~ ~ q ~Yf i ...~y j .4 r e 4 W.« ate., I ,a ~~""`",._..._m~- p • T`'~'LANTER/BENCH _ ' ~•y,.~ . , r F~" . ~ e - OVERSTORY 1~REES tr~ TRADITIONAL LIGHT FIXTURES ^4..:,....:c FIRST AVENUE STREETiCAPING CONCEp'1' wt~tu~nmwuuuuwnunnnuuuuuuuunuuunuuunnuunuunnw,Iowa ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~i: e+~..,,,.,:,,. hX 60' 20' 10' 10' 20' SETBACK SIDE LK SID WALK SETBACK 80' RLGHT-QF-WAY 1" - 20' FIRST AVENUE STREETSCAPING CONCEPT uimnuwauuuiumuuuwmniuwwunuwumumuunumnnYmuimunn D ( ~ SHAKOPEE October 30, 2007 Mitch Rasmussen Scott County Engineer 600 Country Trail East Jordan, MN 55352-9339 RE: C.R. 101 Reconstruction, from Spencer Street and CSAH 17 Dear Mitch: The City of Shakopee is in receipt of your letter dated October 16, 2007 in regard to the above referenced project area. This project will be discussed in 2008 after a new Council is in-place, as this is one of the Council's goals of their 2007 action plan on the City's vision. When this item is scheduled for discussion, the City will ask you or other County representatives to attend so your issues can be addressed. The results of the CSAH 17 corridor study for this project area can be provided to the Council as well. If you have any questions in regard to this letter and its contents, feel free to contact me at (952)233-9361. Sincerely, Bruce Loney, Public Work Director BL/pmp ENGR/2007PROJECT/2007-LETTEAS/RASM[JSSEN-10-30-07 COMMUNITY PRIDE SINCE 1857 129 Holmes Street South ° Shakopee, Minnesota • »379-1351 952-233-9300 • rAX 952-233-380] ° www.ci.shakopee.mn.us _ * ~ , m40~® I~ ~ ~ _ SCOTT COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS DIVISION ~ ~ HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT • 600 COUNTRY TRAIL EAST • JORDAN, MN 55352-9339 CO ~ ~ L 952 496-8346 • Fax: (952) 496-8365 • +Nww.co.scott.mn.us ( ) LEZLIE A. VERMILLION PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR MITCHELL 1. RASMUSSEN P.E. COUNTY ENGINEER October 16, 2007 Bruce Loney, P.E. Shakopee City Engineer 500 Gorman Street Shakopee, lvi`N ~~379 Dear Bruce, The County has received several concerns recently regarding the condition of CSAH 101 (First Ave E) in Shakopee between Spencer Street and CSAH 17 (Marschall Rd). County forces recently completed a maintenance patching project on this segment which, while vital to preserving the longevity of the pavement surface, has resulted in an increasingly rough ride for users and a worsened appearance. As you know this segment is not programmed for funding until 2011 due to several unresolved issues. As you are aware, the roadway currently suffers from the following issues, among others: • Poor condition of pavement, surface drainage, storm sewer, and underground City utilities; • Wide roadway without medians is not conducive to pedestrian crossings and encourages higher traffic speeds; - • Lack of left turn lanes causes roadway to sometimes operate as a de-facto 3-lane; • Lack of adequate parallel routes far local traffic; • High density of access points, both public and private, increases conflicts and makes signal justification unlikely within the corridor; • Lack of railroad crossings between Minnesota Street and CSAH 17 forces local trips onto CSAH 17; • Morning demand for the CSAH 101 river crossing causes routine congestion in the westbound right lane; • Narrow right-of--way limits options for expansion or reconfiguration; • Numerous roadway patches for recent watermain connections spurred by redevelopment; • Likelihood of future redevelopment creates unknowns for both future geometric design and aesthetics. At a City Council meeting in late 2005, when the County was addressing the Council regarding the improvements made on First Avenue between CSAH 17 and Veterans Memorial Park, the An Equal Opportunity/Safety Aware Employer Z"p Printed on recycled paper containing 30% post consumer content ~ County offered to work with the City to address this segment of First Avenue and suggested the City and County could undertake a study of the corridor to comprehensively address the numerous issues in this segment. At that time the City was not interested in conducting that type of study. Currently, the City and County are participating in a study of CSAH 17 and CSAH 101 which will look at future lane needs for capacity but will not address development issues, as was the City's direction to the County. The County as the ability to redirect Trunk Highway Turnback Funds currently targeted for a segment of CSAH 101 between CSAH 17 and TH 169 in order to fund the First Ave East segment earlier than 2011. However, without addressing drainage issues, lane configuration, corridor aesthetics, access consolidation, and adjacent land use, the County would only be able to address the surface deterioration. The other issues listed would remain unresolved and certainly more difficult to address once the investment in the resurfacing had been made. Resolution of the remaining issues would then, most likely fall to the City's responsibility and then, to protect the investment made in the reconstructed road surface may not be approved by the County. The condition of the surface meanwhile continues to deteriorate, and we request that the City advise the County of its wishes for this segment of CSAH 101, such that capital funding decisions can be r~iade and improvements scheduled which correspond to the needs of the corridor. Sincerely, Mitchell J. asmussen, P.E. County Engineer ~ ti tt r A l' CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor & City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Bruce Loney, Public Works Director SUBJECT: Review of Draft Scott County 2008-2017 Transportation Improvement Program DATE: November 7, 2007 INTRODUCTION: Attached to this memo is a Draft Scott County 2008-2017 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) for the City to review and comment on before consideration by the County Board. BACKGROUND: Scott County Highway Department prepares a TIP every yeax similar to the City's Capital Improvement Program. Earlier in the process, Scott County asked for Community requests for consideration into the 2008-2017 Draft. Attached to the Draft 2008-2017 TIP is a list of Community requests and County response to those requests. The purpose of this item is to review the County's Draft 2008-2017 TIP and provide comments to the County, Attached to this memo is a draft letter ~~~ith responses to the county on the various projects in the City of Shakopee. Staff will review the Draft 2008-2017 TIP with Council and County staff will be available to answer questions. Council can provide staff comments which can be incorporated in the letter to the county engineer which will be sent to the County Board prior to the County Board's consideration of adopting the 2008-2018 TIP. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Review the Draft 2008-2017 Scott County TIP and provide comments for staff to submit to the County. S ~ C e. (J/' \ , S t 2. Table for additional information. RECOMMENDATION; The Council should provide comments as to the schedule of improvements for C.R. 101, CSAH 21, CSAH 17 in the City of Shakopee. These comments need to be submitted by November 16, 2007, prior to the County Board's consideration of adoption of the 2008- 2017 TIP. ACTION REQUESTED: Approve a motion to send comments on the Draft 2008-2017 Scott County Transportation Improvement Program to the County Board. ruce Lone}~;'P.E. Public `~Jorks Director BL/pmp ENGR/2007PROJECT5/20907COUNCII,/SCOTT-COUNTY-2008TIP November 14, 2007 Mitch Rasmussen Scott County Highway Department 600 Country Trail East Jordan, MN 55352 RE: Review of Draft Scott County 2008-2017 Transportation Improvement Program Dear Mr. Rasmussen: This letter in response to your letter dated October 16, 2007 and in regard to the City of Shakopee's comments and recommendations on Scott County Highway Department's 2008-2017 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). Staff has reviewed the draft County TIP with City Council and has the following comments for you to consider: 2008 C.R. 101, from Lewis Street Bridge to CSAH 17 • Attached is a letter dated October 16, 2007 from the County requesting the City to advise the County of its wishes for this segment. Issues needing direction would depend on the City's future vision for this area. Reconstruction of this segment is currently shown in 2013, but could be moved up if the City provides direction to the County. The City Council has in its vision goals to review and discuss this area and provide the county input in early 2008. The City Council also is requesting a County maintenance plan for C.R. 101 until it is reconstructed. These comments are for this project shown in the year 2013 as well. C.R. 101 Bridge Replacement and Overlay to West of CSAH 83 • A detour will be necessary for bridge construction and City streets may be needed for the detour. The City may request County's funds to repair or restore the City of Shakopee pavements utilized in the detour, if necessary. CSAH 21-CSAH 16 to CSAH 18 • County is receiving federal dollars for this project, including funds for a new park and ride facility. Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community has recently purchased land south of CSAH 16 that could affect project timing. Although shown in 2008, the actual construction start is more than likely in 2009. • County is showing more Federal/State/Local funds than actual project costs. City of Shakopee cost share is not shown by County. Previous estimates have been approximately $750,000.00 and the city would request that the county use Federal Funds to lower the city's share of this roadway. 2009 C.R. 101 Mill and Overlay from West of CSAH 83 to West of 70th Street • This project should match into the City's overlay on Valley Park Drive done in 2007. 2010 CSAH 21 from CSAH 16 to CSAH 42 • Completes the CSAH 21 roadway from T.H. 169 to Y-35. City`s share of project is not shown. Previous estimates of City's share could be $750,000.00. The county may receive Federal Funds to construct this road and the city requests that the Federal Funds be used to lower the city's share proportionately. 2011 C.R. 69 - T.H. 169 to North of Railroad Brides Overlay C.R. 69 -North of Railroad Bridge to Fuller Street Reconstruction • Project funding dependent on State Turnback funds. The City of Shakopee requests that rehabilitation and repainting of the RR bridges over CR 69 be included in this turnback project. The City Council also is requesting a County maintenance plan for C.R. 69 until it is reconstructed. 2012 CSAH 15 - T.H.169 to 6th Avenue Mill and Overlay • This project is to preserve pavement life. The City of Shakopee supports this project. 2013 C.R. 101-Spencer Street to CSAH 17 Reconstruction • Roads may need to be widened depending on CSAH 17 corridor study and may need to be reconstructed. City and Shakopee Public Utilities staffs are planning to replace utility lines in this corridor. See 2008, Paragraph #1 for County's request and. City of Shakopee's response. The City Council would request a maintenance plan for C.R. 101 until the road is reconstructed. CSAH 17 from St. Francis Avenue to CSAH 42 • The cost of project is approximately $12,000,000 per mile. City's share is not shown but could be substantial. Widening of roadway and providing turn lanes for safety is definitely needed for this corridor. A CSAH 17 corridor study is underway and should be done in 2008. The City of Shakopee would request a cost share breakdown and would encourage the County to obtain additional funding from Federal, State and Regional sources. 2014 CSAH.IS - TH 169 to 17`h Avenue • Reconstruction of CR 15 does not show the city's share in the project. 2015 CSAH 16 -From CSAH 1 S to CR 69 • This roadway is through the proposed Bluffs at Marystown and may be built sooner than shown. The. County is not showing any County funding for this project. Cost of the project will be more than $750,000.00 as this is a mile long segment of new construction. Beyond 2017 CSAH 16 from Dean Lake Trail to Future CSAH 21 • This project did not make the County's TIP; however, the County will monitor the traffic capacity as this area develops. Another comment from our Community Development Director is for the County to provide the County's policy on participation of enhancements on County projects. ~ i ~ Y This concludes the City of Shakopee's list of comments for the Draft County TIP in the year 2008-2017. Please review this list and if you have any questions in regard to these suggestions, please feel free to contact me at (952)233-9361. Sincerely, Bruce Loney, Public Work irector BUpmp ENGR/2007PROJECTS/2007LETTERS//RASMCTSSEN i 'II U \ ~ W N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ v a m 3 ~ I III ~ 0 d ~ C~ I i bO? I ~ nn SQ2[=I'ItlHOS21tlW ~ ~ p a ~1 _ lt, ~ ~ ~ o Q ~ ~ 4 - ~J ~ p SI.S.L(1WMV GO a / Cjejp~ -i,- 5 ~pRSCFIALL RUN ~ - 6 /V~~ \ 1~~ 4S~.LS JV3?IWfIHN ~ ~ ~I i, 4 a NIO-MflIA~.LStl3 ~ O q ? w 1 ST S' p o ~ 00 S1S ]IilIIV2td_'¢ ~ p I ~ NAUMKEAC' ° ~ ~ O ~ S~,LS 9R71`d8?d d~ ~ ~ r ~ y tigTS ° ~p ~ ~ X~ P o 6.< S.LS~ xtl0 I. I~~.1 ~ TN ptuu~n,ti Q Qoo~ ~ o D w a d a~ t T~ D ~J- p\lA\R1FS o 0 3 O- ~i - ~ O ICOTASTS ~ w d ~kd~~''~~~~ o~ ~W DA V I~~' a Lea. ¢-LL~h.~ u o~ij ~7 u ~ 0 ? L S.LS V.LOS3NNIW ~ _~1 D ~ s d s vLOSaxo Iw t=r~rr~~~ ~~'k'' ~3 4 T 1.I ~ ~9 I r 1NN ~ 0 I'r M ue~ a ? ? _~~J-~ ~ a o ~ o ~ ~ ~ 4~LY_~YJ~ p q I INNtiSOTAsT- a ~ s ss caxxvw ~ a? m O ? °a ~ O d ~ p 9p I - 0 ~~I~~,KE I.ST N a o ~ ~ D lP ..I~"E-'I-'r''JI? .1' J a ¢ ~ I, _--,i htAR r ~ 0 6 0 ¢ S LS Nrow ~ w ~ p 4 I O i ~ Wad f va 6 ~ ~ ~ ? > ~ d W ~ O 4 C1 MgIN STN a ~ N o d ~ ~ 6 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~,~,.F...,,~ ° ~ o oILLMOR~ SD° ~ ~ ° dam' ~ ~ ~ p ? I _ 9~ ° ~ ~ SPLNCERq? S o ~p ° D ~ c° p ? a o ~ ~ ~ pO ? I, i } I, .s 9 ~ a a ° ~ ~ _ ~ ~ o I y 1 ~ ~ ° ~o W ~1 ~ ERVILLE~To ¢ pa WJ-~ S.LS SIM3'I !r C+` r o ~ `O ~ Q ' ~ v~ ° ° a `gyg ~W'lOH l7 p ° C~ ? I o ~ ~ p 3 0 GW ~ Q 7 Uo LLL ~ a o og ~e~,~itiL~,s Sn~'~ 3 i O a ° Qp I 4T ~`~TS a ~ o dd ~ l PT7LLE ~ O 3~ ? 3 QO CJ d 4 Q ~ ~ ~ 1t',~l,~Jr~ ~ ~w ~ C7 1JCJD Q p~ ° 17,1 ~A~IWOOD STS `cr ~ 4 I s is d Oq9 ~ ~ I I~ S~pTT ST. 09 G] ¢ ~a O i a o~ o pL~a Q ~ O n Q° o C!j~ LJO.~-C gTN 3i ° a N~ 0 6 ~ SCI ~ ? Q.. ~ °p a d I I N~ p ~ o tsob ~y Q ~¢Q ~AR STS op ° n~~ S].S~.IVMWfIHS [-.a v,~ ~ ~~~j ~ ? ~ 47 Qj ~ C:O n ~ ~ Ci o p po ? ~ j S.LS~3~N9Id '~Q ~ o d O ? c~ D D 31 ~ a ~ 3 O Q ~ ~ ~ I o ~ ~PIERSE~ST S o ° 0 ~ d Q S.LS AV'IJ ~~~~y ? ~ o~~~ ~ S 3--"~AY STS oo s atI s~Iavw Ls~-`~ls-aa S~alvw LS o d~ ' 1 ' ~I V N ST 1 ° I AY Ua~ cti CL SS o A C _ ~ ~ I I