HomeMy WebLinkAbout2. Joint Meeting with Scott County Board CITY OF SHAKOPEE
Memorandum
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Mark McNeill, City Administrator
SUBJECT: Joint Meeting Discussion Items
DATE: February 12, 2008
Comment:
Introduction -
A joint meeting of the City Council and Scott County Board will be at 6:30pm, Tuesday,
Feb. 12~.
Background
The majority of the joint meeting will be verbal presentations by staffs in hopes of
sparking discussion between the Commissioners and City Council members. T'he issues
are generally grouped as follows:
2.A. Discussion of IS` Ave/ I DI Maintenance, Reconstruction, and Corridor.
We know thaf the patching of the cracks in First Avenue last Fall left the driving service
in alees-than-acceptable condition. The County has indicated that they maybe able to get
money advanced from MNDOT for turnback dollars; so that reconstruction could begin,
.perhaps as early as 2009. However, the City will need to be able to tell the County what
its needs are for the area-things like streetscape improvements, and traffic-related
issues. There will be a discussion of this at the Council Goal Setting session on February
11th, and we will share that will the County. Further discussion is anticipated.
2.B. North-South Connectivity-CR 18, 21, and 83.
County Public Works Director Lezlie Vermillion will make a presentation on scheduled
and proposed changes to these highways. She .will report that the SMSC is very. interested
in seeing County Road 83 upgraded to 4 lanes and reconstructed, and it is willing to make
financial contributions in order to accelerate this. From the City's standpoint, it is not a
high priority for us.
In addition, the construction of the County Road 21 extension is scheduled to begin as
early as 2009. This connection maybe important from a regional transportation
standpoint, but there is some question into how much benefit it will be to Shakopee. The
City's cost participation in this is anticipated to be $1.6 million range.
One unresolved issue is access to County Road 18 from the undeveloped property north
of Home Depot. A "right-in" access has been granted by the County, but Shakopee's
request to have a "right-out" .access has not been granted by the County. Ms. Vermillion
will speak about connections that need to be made between Shakopee and Savage in
order for this area to be fully viable, without a "right-out".
2.C. Minnesota River Crossing Corridor Update.
Within the next. few weeks, MNDOT is expected to announce its preferred location for
the TH41 River Crossing, West of Shakopee. This will be an update on that.
2.D. SMSC Status Update.
County Administrator Unmach is expected to give a very brief update on the County's
recent contacts with the SMSC
2.E. Scott County 2030 Plan Update .
County Community Development Director Michael S.obota will give a very brief update
on the status of Scott County's comprehensive planning efforts.
2. F. Other Issues
Given the fact that there will be only an hour and fifteen minutes to cover the above
issues, with the discussion likely focusing on items A and B above, it is unlikely we will
have time to discuss other issues that were suggested to me for the meeting, including
Councilor Clay's desire to find a way to reconnect O'Dowd and Thole Lakes. If,
however, time permits, this and other issues could be discussed.
-The Council should also be aware that March 11th is a workshop that we have scheduled
to discuss Public Works Issues. Included in that will be an update when County Road 17.
That is currently being reviewed by a consultant and a study group appointed by the
County. The emphasis has been South of 169, but staff has reminded the County and the
consultant of the importance of Marschall Road to all of Shakopee, including that area
North of 169.
For this reason, County Road 17 discussion will be minimal. at the February 12th meeting.
Action Required
If the Council chooses to take action on any City issues from the workshop, it should so
designate.
VV (c,~_~l ~ " 1,~ ~~~~I
Mark McNeill
City Administrator
MM: cn
v ~
- ! x 8
Nnno
. ,
uo4aWaY1
8
£Z
i
tl..
- ~ ~ eIPAI ~1~ ~
i
I. i r .y.l ,
a
~ Q t
wa„ L V ~ 't O Y
~}ly~ JN12~dS
~I
~ ~ L
89
t
~ I~ y13=
I
Z C .y.,
£ ~
_
a .,.,ti.~~ 6L
~ Lg _ _ '
. ~ •ye~eN,as 1
OL
1 Z L '
9L L
l
a .y.l,oua,•aan ~ 8
r ~ j7 I
P
a e,
Z8 ~ ,ap,av4>S
.8cu a6eneS ~ z
'~7 ~
a~{e~ ~
.M.l .y.
•~Rl ,oua ,•Ma~ ~ o o
LZ` ~ o ~.a?'~ „ V ~I
d l 5~
Z~b _ ;
Ztr ~ , _ f
~I~ . .
6L £L
8 ~ y,
'.0 ~ _ ~
q _ aado~eyg
4
y a
NOSE Of/ ~
9 ~ ~ ? £8 L ~ ALL ~ .
~r
' =
69~
xt
o ~ i
.yp~ 69
wa V
r ~
L 0 ~
i
• , • , III
i
9.:,~.-
_ v,-
L;
a: - e",
V
~ ~t.c+- ~`.~-~r. s~°
RJR ~ ~
R
_ ~
_ ~RR _
1.~ ~ ~ TM
~
v
_ -
~ ~ ~ _ ~
w
~ .
r
~
H
. ^t ~,-,z ~ _ _ ~ w,
_ _
~ _ ~
,
r +~t 1 L. ~ , ~
i.~~SA
OF ~ ~
a ~ ~ t r
.
~ ~
a
~ 9~! OP
Q-
~K~. ~ RfVER
~ g . _
~ ~ ~f
g~ ~ ~ 4
_ r _
f
.
w : - . ~ ~ f ~
v?, ~
# _ _ ~
8D"
. _ .
- ^
-
s~.teao
is:: J : e k ~
S
445 OF S~~~m
~ 4
7 ~~a
R~Y£4
CORRIDOR HISTORY
For the past fifty years, TH-13 has functioned as a key link between
Minnesota's system of interstate and primary highways, and the largest
intermodal inland waterway grain facility in the upper Midwest - -the Ports
' of Savage. The ability of TH-13 to remain a viable, efficient conduit for traffic
to the port mandates the immediate initiation of a series of highway
improvements designed to enhance the flow of traffic (both commuter and
' commercial) along the increasingly congested corridor. The State of
Minnesota, in partnership with the Scott County Association for Leadership &
' Efficiency (SCALE) - - an intergovernmental partnership among Scott County
and its cities - - as well as Dakota County and the City of Burnsville, is
working toward improvements to Trunk Highway 13 from the Interstate 35W
corridor to Trunk Highway 169. Doing this will improve access to the river,
rail, and roads.
' The Trunk Highway 13 corridor is a heavily traveled, multimodal
(truck, car, barge, and rail) transportation link that provides sole
' access to the Ports of Savage.
¦ The Ports of Savage are a nationally prominent port for the shipment of
grain and other commodities to the rest of the world.
¦ In 2006, three million tons of material was shipped through the Ports of
Savage - -six percent of all inland grain traffic originating in the United
States.
' Important regional facilities rely on this corridor such as Cargill,
Bunge, Yellow Freight, Kraemer Mining & Materials, Inc., Waste
Management, and commercial asphalt and concrete ready mix plants.
Edition 1 - 01/2008
p~~y ~F 5~~"~{,
R K~
A 4
9 ~4•
q~VE4 "
THE PROBLEM
' Long term viabili of the Ports of Sava e, one of the nations most
tY g
critical intermodal facilities, is threatened by an explosion of suburban
growth that now envelops the complex.
' To access the formerly rural Ports of Savage, trucks traveling from I-35,
TH 169, TH 212, and I-494 all funnel to one road - - TH 13.
' The five miles of TH 13 between 35W and TH I69 currently sustain the
highest percentage of truck traffic of any non freeway or non inter-
' regional corridor in Minnesota.
¦ In 2006, an estimated 128,574 trucks delivered commodities to the
' Ports of Savage, an average of 76 trucks per hour during a typical
season.
t ¦ Current volumes of 52,000 to 61,000 vehicles on this corridor exceed
the capacity of a four-lane divided highway by 180%.
¦ Not surprisingly, two intersections on the TH 13 corridor rank among
the top 50 in the Twin Cities metropolitan area for crashes and three
rank in the top 100. Future growth in the area will almost certainly
degrade safety at these intersections
¦ Trucks "stage" (line up) on TH 13 to access the ports, creating a
hazardous situation.
¦ Safe and efficient navigation through the corridor is critical for the
continued viability of the region's agricultural sector.
' Safe and efficient navigation for commuters through the corridor is
essential.
¦ Increasin 1 v 1 f
g e e s o congestion are compromising freight and
commuter traffic in one of the fastest growing regions of the
metropolitan area.
1
~
r~ a, ~
~ ,x
' 5:~,; .nr R• `r' A. 7r'.~~ t ~ ~ i9+'jn; ~ •sr,,~d{;r+r+;'rJr !'r' - u. ~T.-. t
,`~~q. h ,a ~-r"w P 'd`'. le ~Pr. Y+ r yrr ~i~4 ~ I
w
,
1
!`4• ;f,. ,,~i-' ~ .,t« M e" ""x~r i PI a: S 3s
r~
r 4 :a r~
:
~ ! A nb tae Ik ~ ~..w•E
< ~ ~ r~~,~
, ! , . `i , Y, • :
d ~i ` PAS. •«i ~
_
re ~ ;C. JUo l.et!lt2• -i,,.. r+ ~v fl.~ ri iP ~ R" 4`"~+,
=ate r„~; a' ~ v ~
1 J
.re,,. , J' f r„ r_ ? , ro c ""t`. vro,mar ~ d'~' .«;t, e. !t^~.+~' l .a 'r,• 1
„ ~ P~YINERF~LS, ar ~ ~ '-b , u
~ T P rt
, ~
, .
~ RAEM
, , '%:x I, ri',xx.,,..' 9' a , ,a,;,, r ~k~;.a °`r4
,y~
. _ A.
3r" ~ ~ ~ e- » { ' n i is .pa :"rvi, a tl ,.ya+J' ~ p: "'9, E~ ,
I - x w ~ * ; ~ r Ali r` n .r~,a MINING, ~
,
,
, ~ ~ "
'
t L v , ~ .4' .1 S, . _ 'ii d yri?,~` x a I~
, r ' ' ,t•. . .F .'rte r r es', e. ~''l r 3 ' € , f+'.. tom.
k,~_ a" ~ yrt'a ~ ~ .gyp .r r
-.wt„,r ~.,,r',w,~ ~ •tX 8~ .m r ~@~Fg }GS~ s,.#: •k it ~a+,~j~ ;
, . • r `a . , v~ r r;l~" . 13 „s f~.s, a1 ~'"~5. , a . ~ I'' I
r
_
, a-,e ' ~ _ b
. air J h.`h&"`HE:.3.:es , % 1• l' S d• " $ ,3 ;!n , .u~ •b ~ z~ , 4"• ..T b ~'~•4 t ' ~i~ I
C r ~.,r ~ vR, ' ° w. 1 y~'a-a.- t ~.1, '"_E ¢ v,9~ r~`... i • ' J i't' - a.;
' 2•;x•', '"r' ~ r" ~t ~ , i ,CJ~RGILL G° ~i`~r fii' rr+ 'J, u~
, G , . , ' ' ail ~ k ~ C r ` f i1.
. x '
_ ,
n v„ BUNGjE- l,y+~ r ~ ' 1 +ts` ate,:+. k rP'' a ,r':°~~ ~~°,R .
.
. ~ «
,,..e
~ au try. X~ ~ ~ ,
r.., - ,
, „ , ,
.K
I t ~ - CENEXr. ' `1~
~ r+ t L ~'7"y
r „ ~
3 r j:a ;.r. r,, . :rt t. °.a ?s, r..~.'~iaSS.', `A°r• a. »c, ~i
,J.:., , .,Um r. w~„v:. ~y-, . r6 , ~ y,... "vacsrE , °r,P ~.a k , ~ c. "°a , v ,
. ~ on R ~ . : • ' , t! ,,,e ; . _ , I ~ , sip
~ sR'a11ro ~ ~r s T • ~ ~ nprc ; ~ . ' ~
.
. ; . ' f, - Irv. ~ , . , : . ' -i~l~'~« i~ +?~r
..y,:>r r • i _ ?fi «.y. .+r~° . ~ ~ i a _ = .3. r°.f yy 1"' ~k~
v: ~a~:r .t . e$ir+ a... tee, 'vS v~~ :i1fJ a:, 'IL ~I
ya:~ , :,';..,J Ir,.J. , ,'R?iee,., r~ r .St •I 4}i, .r ~ .:;e _,:lr..r. - - ~a ~ r 1~ _ I, . t-y
! J~+"-~• b, _ J r _ ~ .n: „r~~,ir.l~ f , LCow~''
, R.a . .i u.. :ud. CS «x., fAt I ..K K~, e: r Ir~ ~ je 'I
T, n 1 r.... , •,,.r - -4 A „ e , uti• .,.5 4,", 'I t~' ~V 'SrY
„ . ~ , r a , r re , ,....u p~~\.. Pc.~ ~stc... M.. _ i : wa ,W r ~ ~ ~Pa.w[ nY. I Q IL.. ~ r[
f rr-+'.:' .u • 1a•. i~ n. y ' , t s .t < _ 1 .Re-... ! t :.i 4.,~J 1 PP.',. L Y •dF
v, t r, ~.e ~ ,~pl,.,t- ..t. .p -f'~ e .r.x ':LEIGH
-,Y~.l+;, .g ct' r [r , ~ ...r,. 1 .,t a y; =-•.r '9, ~ A'. Y`rty~~a,+. p5.
pp ,
t- „ .P. ' .,I - f . :-t , ~ ,u v,.. rr* a a ~ .,:a ~ r .w,.. ~#~-a,wr e. .,P"^?. J• r
e.. ~ ~ ...1~ e ~.-a ~ n f • ~ . .,t, , . .m IiP:a i r+t~i94! .~S r r re,¢I~ `Y. i`I I€:, .
. '..4 . ,r = a>; J., r„ i C I s. Y c -:d: nz. r I g ~+,11 ~;Y:r. s'!
r :{r. r ,.,5^, sue'.„ -i4'"# T-...:, , 1..-. ;i a. 5. ':I l:t.,. f
r , .e.•.I ..q J , L. ...b.o '..I .RU .,.~raa F ~,.ri'. ~ a _I r~.
s l+ s
.s * t'§f .z•re r~ t,_ ..---'r-..,,.~.-r^e^., . _ , s: - . ~ .I? ~ I r€:* Y E g a ,ir a 'w .rr I {6 ~;r : <
x
r. r ~ < , . . ,a~ 6r .v t« i i I-{I e.. g,~ra r;..~,~x r'.u~4 ..&..a,- M,., E:..r ~ ,.e , ; e. 'x. • : Y
z . „ ~ ter r~ a.. ~i.. a ,L,., r.:. r FE s..,..r ~ ~ ~ ; ,M -y -s ~ r . vd ~ e;0.'
1,. .U yA, - ,_:6rw ryT~~55cc~LCr'° d"•'.~ C•.+ g- ''x `.Pr7 ,:~Ar. i ,,~T~T3P;w ~ 4 y?'
++.oe...k.aw,~ _ , is
;C.c. . " F , id 9 ..ff ~ r tl ~ !fir,§..r I I e s4.. C~ ,4...ur?_ - , i e it// ,5 tJ •a, w~• A_ YY,,
":t.`SC va.-._,... ,,.cl R'<.~ l ti. •r, • ^..^rv.. & I: ~...,~~i: d 4 I: :.,,.n vEo-.,ry.,:.. # b< /,:El I J~.4.#::`!~ i
t e , , 3 :-a - o. ~ 7. - ti.:.} , r'""~`7 ^x'':` r•.f 1 ~t [uu;C ~qpp "'d
fir, i r' ~.....r .T_ 2", , !J err r p S°.:~ ! I ~ ~k,• S^
v, tr.. s , s t „r ~r r. „ ~M1.*,e~ rir- is rr ;:d ~'"J': 't .~t "9 t Fa ai Ik : ;r ~k
K, , .r .,Ilr ~ 9~ miAl . • , ...a. a..,.:'k' 'ii.. ~ ',k~• ~r 1: + n 1
'e~... w q. p a~ : ~ .cr r,: R,ri rr. ~ ..q A, f ;y i I
' 1 .4 w f a xa o. 1 ^ .,f tc_ fi ,-.ni ra ~'y kp ~rS.u ~Ik" I ~i 5 I
r * ! „ a ~1:''a .aE. f ! I:. P .s'~P' v .I 1i ,?f :...ka'e
, , ~z:~,A4 , Ffi,.,,s~ ~ ~ ~ ~,~~„fir . I .,,,,r ,z. _ t r..,~+~~+ ;i.+ r..`~ ei r~.` I
, r.,'re s tv;.. ;p ^~v,A a e.rn ,r.„~,. rr~t{~.s M``I `I sc t~'. i
„ .:r"".:. r « ''a .J i'_... w .r, t ~ a~. ^r r s,. r ••,,:r rhrrP' ~ C~ l~ S~ -'t +':'~,~5
x) , M s k ,:..+„ta s^~ .e , M ue,y,. a':'r,r, r A ~ ' '*J>f, n~ :.,,r.. , ~t.
. , . P~ . ~ . v s . ,e ar x,, , T•..«:~ r4+«v ; tax ,
t r ,
,
Ty. P YBS.. rev , - ~ 's cz .,a., ;S / ,s..y ti~ r.. .,!-#a~..,: Y,l, ~,Fi. ."+1G. 'i •r, 4
1 Irv.,. , „ t ,-Y:,. , r - x r-.,, ~ r.~'w',,. ~r:r °X ~ ~ r ,,M yw` C4,..
,
_ 4.,. f R.~, a .kr~,~. ~ .s `fv $ s r:. 9 y~ r. s u....ns x. p ~,h .,P, d°f I,F.nr~ I 1 k ~ ,`a
r, ,..-=,..,~.•I. I, _ r•~c -+S ,„s.. Ir v... : ' , .'I' »;r+:rr "a"'C, t, °^z.> ,l'".qo rp.,i; r
_ e r '
,...y a3 i aya'",.x i.n~-, :a d. d£_; 3" k~'a.<<,.~ic pr-:w.e" ,'g-. ~s En r.}c _''~1R .i.A".r:*,,,I +,~9i
s , . , :.r,. .e:. , 4. , e+r. r,n. _a~d 4 ti :e ,a: sli:
« f } v,. . .:{y+ , ~ .i ;r ~r - , --z ~i• ~ e.t ~ ~.E:<:"t. c.. ~k ~ :,'t ^T~. °:9J
,p w ;:.a~ 4.... t. :a:: , ,,l, .'.ty r ~r„ ',~4 Rt.. ,
17. 3'mZ"
t e, s,. Y.,.S~,r~~-•Y„ r JY.. w a~ t' .C d, re ,I~q ~ +.~:dd_,k i G,u~
, ,
,t ~ 8 , ' p'~,~#j , - vt, s. ~ ,'s': a t a ~s. '~;.F.ya.,w 1.-~ g .~-d # r ;p ~s i,,rf.r ~l~`,rt, e° Jr ~ ,1
b ,
, I>. r : ' , , ~ {s, , 3-.. .,,e , . ; • ~f s r ,,:rd ~1 ,s, C l . .:t.t A , rJ `u:,,yM ~~r ,5'w~J 7A.•~~.
v ~ ~ 4 ~ ~ t: z` ~ fF'^ r,f~ I ~ " . t r, ter ~ ~ I ru. {,t•~• rt~k . .d ~vr-.%.,a F~~.
. t ,,rr*.;. ,y^` ; S r. k ~ ^.r R v'~ '<r1 r a , A r.2' ) ' ix3M'` ~St rna`~ r
' w e. , I 6 , ~4 a €'F!,. ~'~..r~ F, s' £ , ~t ~r.. Le~. end ''1s. '~rd 1 l~r.~ '41s~rf .,i~' r~A `iii T.e
' , ~
"t i ~ xfi,P , a
' - `.,,b * ' s F • v ~ ` b~° rs'+ r, ~ . ~ { pa a t.-* n >1 v, . '.r r P'~-^." § r.. : ~9,,,. Yi~v r~ +S irk {'~`:~r
: ,
" ~ k ~r,'°. `r~ s.. ~ . Y« ' ,J. "~,sT C'' d 3'" d 't • Y T' '°c• et of «".i;"..
6 i ~ 'S l ~~.s $TM ,..~ix+*I r<,a k'# ,'X. cy~r ~ ,g~ r``~ ~G. 3 Jr~, vt 1..,, P g,t~ Iti,. ~~'i nl :it~°~g,~ie'~ , t+,'+
'c , ~ v' ~'~F.''n 6 5: ` r ~ ~ F ve , t r 6 . ty .iu t• t 3d''Jr~~,= r14~ ,Jy;a.,
° r
a '>~:.:z ~y :s :v-°~i~ .'~,a i' a~ t~ ~:Ib ~-x''u'; I ~ .'ii: i emu."' rri!I.~It., Id` is~:~tr~u~.lll;t.~~~ J'~~2.
v Jk x I ® , ~ sa,
,
".t~' m•;•:f nay°o*,^ , ~ Via; a ? 2~ ? ,"'I I i I Rr~CP' „n 4"~":~~~Iv~.'~. iit; I
' ~ Port
• ~ ~ , , t. ~.6'` •a ro ;.a '°E^~ I i^ „fit, ybk.~ p.'f`:x.~yr't`t' "pv K lfe+j'r, d,~t•,~••' •y, 1
e ~a' • r.,''~ t : ,,yam,.. ` t , wE yf* xr #'rrF.. r f'7p' tt , 1 ,
sJs oc ` i'. " P s. r ~ , at;` 2 y.r, ' w g, •'t. ,gyp ~ "+e 4vi.', ~ •fi. ` ~ : .r , F F, • ~s S23 ^~i L r:, ";f, il$ s vee,r'" p~ '
• : `i , S .ay~ 'a trr ..x t + •k~~7 cyq< x.'4l'1~ ( aK
w~:
" & ~ S ~ ..4 c.°~t "'e ~,{a -x~3~ .,a ~ r . e ty r S~ r 'P .,#1 ~ "ti Rail Line tYte.r'~y"E[~"Iw vvr t •,tiT~°~~~,A, oI +'1~:•
,,~g~ "r. s ~r~` e`~, v. x 7~ ..:,rct _ i ~#9 ~ ; >,Id ~ . v„ t;rE~ `,g' t^.
r~.'1 , ~ , 5 r+,, .
~ 3 r,~; ~'r ,z~~ ' .t~1.>t~ ~ ' ~ t'' rr rW4.ri Irv "~~n~i`r: f a ~ ~::5~4~,~r~ k
~x a I ,v. ~ ;a.- :a"` kt a "S• r a' y ; ^RrP~' +1m f - P rah ..'Y Y rfE, ,Y, ~a+= r ~i~t'r4
'~~a ~ 5a' „ r:. t J c'4'. iC i i'4 ih ~.'~''s g' }
~ d Ge ~ aP.4 .vQr. i x' ~ r Y. ~ er .~°ai. ~e"r."~ ;"'i~ a s'dpa'~tJ,?.. 1
, n ~ r r ~ South Front ('fie Road (,omnleted1 r ~p,~.~ ~ ~ e>:~~
y,. v w. S' 1 _M e - ,a,.. 7 r . , rY ~ ~'~h 'C ''~k,._ A~.'r Y~ ' ;~R~.~m
v`b°&'' a.7 ~ 1" / ~~ca to a., p ,•q ~.k ^~k_ ~1~5, Jr~rfi)i`.
r ` ' s e ~ c {y r • w r Yr•u Ci?- nirJ<"If.~"'~11 ~j~~~~ rP
~Y ,r err
` 34 .F~e t s a•' „t.: 4;s,< 4 i '.~..e e s , _ ` a ~ ,F '~~~t lZP , , k'.'ii'^ .aA':l„r
~k.. ;tom ~ t a' 1j t::r w=- .ms. , Eby ~
rJ O.. is " '"!!r 'I'S T b;-g..~ 'a e,,.,` rC rr: ~ro~ I I .»,s.. L ~~r;~s~c"1°FI'r~k Ib-i~4*Pr,s sr°J..,:a ~'Yytfl~;._a~~~~"r y`'Y
. _ ~ i w ~ _ g~ ~ ~ ~ .g e e, Quentin Avenue (Com -feted ~,y E., ee; a
,r,•,e^ ~ M r'r= ' ~p ri . a ti.',1 4 r" , F .g,. rr:r 1'.. 1 nn 1 !LL' E r_i.r wS ! .a~?~p:!^ s+~:`
Y W z R r I d'~dtt4 ~ -76 ~'1
„~$p Y n 1 d 1 f ~i 3F `,E_~ y Y rr,,I'i
I ~ ~~c~.% %3,tn .r" , , : s9: ±p~ r t6f a y °F r~~ a;g• .r. .c An Gra ! d 1eR rFF ' i r"7,pi,
,
G,,, ~»~'rt2 pa¢^, ,-~"V`rey ; I: ,'tYrr~t..n ~ _ ~r -;a.. q. ~a~: ~ Ir L'3 ~,dr~ ;a ~~;y~ F ~a ! "u ~4+p:e :Y,..
yam, a, vl ~ ~ ° •,t a r r ; , z' r;, , ~ ~ ~ 7~ep, ra"
r'c r r t
,t,,,' ..rr ~ t' ~ n*ss,r`n`+ev,.,t, w; - ` s,,= - x t~'-~v,,< ~•!1'Ua+itc_ n'a aJ~ ~a'd~~t'
r ,I
~ . - . , ~~r : , ~ F ~~r ,-,ra4~~, ~rr~,A ~ N'. t P , ` . r ~ fir;, ; •,w Dakota Avenue ~jz ~ K s~~ , ~ hr.;G ~.a~,
' _ : ,e, b+,, S $ . ; ~ r v 5~.~ r a i 4..1 s v~ C:~e aY.: AC ~v"a.~$
~ ~ , kr '`1" rv. <; 1 ,ilP~ ~„n .d ar'Sr+ r,.r~+L~ fiti • r ' na'` t €t , a - ~ { Lr. .-alaU ^ ~ ~ x;: v ' ~rYr°rr ~
N-0
.r _ + ~ .
f, $ : ,s • € " A"r~.t ~a ~ - r 3.' ~ 3 f,r ~ r'~~ E.a~r„4.? I . Y• ' ,.,r -sa•-r; °s•
'I r„ ° •."l u~~:S ~ t ,'~t ~ 1 , rx a ~;'y""; ~ ,wE ~ ' ~s ..r,~r:`t: ` r~k.. EA,-
i a r.. Pea, ~ ~ r, r i ~~~~~'r Lbtr~l t w ° ~ g x ; ~ ° ~ '1E g c.•~
.l w , • .r~ i. a ~ r. "•Y..•;. " tP" .r r,. h ;•t r`a A y"4a, ar a V ~m"ti+'.- ChOWen n E~1Rt9?Ey[x. ~rv 1 "J,`."4a... ~Y
..r;x• al ~`t, z.. ~ ..Jra~ C ~~p^~t~`~ r'':," tr -t~,~; w+•,. x'k i tyP. a^t'f~
r1+ ,
z q k . t . , r € '$J r .'r„ J,v, s? ~ t ~•„r„ ~ r ..r,z. t°*'`°'~ . ~ P 9wq.:
L r< Y ~ .„w,: , I ,a.'iN' ~ . f r;i twn,.;. tt`" ;.',4 r~, a..r~ i4. ~i. it Aa. 1 ~,i.` .f ~'•,r•~.`.., ~C~Rg
w'. n.K ~°3 ..,ek,.- r.e ;`4~,''^,~.en'r„ i"': ,'r „!,I s a~`,,, .q FV.~.rar,'S l..::,6 se t r•,~r ,4:L+''••p ~,f ,r~,.. ,~M+...=„fit,..
tr 3 2•.,~,r:q dWi.,.;,~Pl, g. 4~'-,. t. ~m . ,.R~.g.;r 4i r.....r.3. .,r '4 ty.' ..v.. .u, a.: a„ ter:,, r€~~:;.
i .g
,r +..~v, ,..v~ g ~.,,•.,,xr,' Vic.`.+,g~ t =sP Yr Y:..„ ~ ,.:;-no fl:g~t : r' a.''Y "h^;. , ~ iit.,.....,•ar /+';.3!•F !r~ ~re4' y*,..•
' ° " i 'z. s~r, A a ~._.r •.~r. r ,try.., T 1 9~ "3C..g'~7 .`u+r,•,q F~
i ~
ti i 4: 2 pis. « • i . a ad : k oaf: y y . ."'m >t ~tl e"r .r w C, 3 ad La H I 0 'y~ f ~ rd,v~ i. s~.`
' r e, r e , s.,a• >A~, ;b t I . t i' pt h, ,i.. 'r~ a .`~spe+. tr ~ r ~r~1~
, ; ,
v r E ,h$ Nrx~g ~ r~ 'r ~ ~ s..~ zr..; a A ;"C. ` 1a, ~ ir"~~,s3~,~:
, • bc. ,.;,5 r
5~' r.«r a a t, `'w r • ^ ~ rr.,: e" to a s,t, li .r, +;r* ° I ft,;i a >s ..j[';. ~ ~';P~P~w L^ ,1~.; 't.¢ ~ '~~'h~_.
r ,
a,.•~:,:..f r ••5 g~:9 « ;Ak;; s. it , g,.. a°,4 i .r« ti•li ,•r~.,l 1m.,a".,f V.I Pc ~IA, .?te tir ..,®~YxE !9v'.
. a
..r.,: P r, ,,r ~Q x x A,re e.r~• ry,. s`r: fI h r~,~,~ cr l~,~ r~~fi ~4aj~~ Pr`a~~a,r' a`. -
`y 1' `~~n 'Fr• rt! r y~ .L,a:, tia; x :'•r .k r • .t ~:F„ ,
r. rr ki~r".s 1/ e',v r . ~e e r CR5 a$',
„~°k1r r, rr s`s ~r ,'.~aa$, s ~ ~ t,.~t *,'s fi - `r ~ ~ Y P ' n ~ + c
' a rs . k a a' ,.Y` { a>'a : r xi} ,tr•~t. k!+'QJ,~I.t~ `1~~'a".;~':7rl~g~a
a "ewF*°~ r` ~.~e ;t•] „ I.. r a;~_ m _ r i .a Sr,~ I r k;~ m t a:~ rq'Y: C'
,'r - ~ [ r - . • 4 #:•.i`:: €=,°f :.e. j ; d"i A,'.r' rr `~,,p N=:a.. a. a i . I"~~ k r ,t; vt r i Xkrs<"~ 'A r'm "5^ 4 ,i.;Y. ¢ ..i
.r'A+ t'~., cu.ra»rr., ~--+m. A: d st~~~, .ss~,.~ ;Y.F e' t~ r. .A.k ly'~ I°I .~5 ertx ~~r~ a ~st •r• E~yy~~ r.,;~~r`~rti,p
rr. re 's, e.r F , ~ a#. y, ~ ~ ~`a ~:;I ~ ^ y! 'f* a,,r•r:r t , : "a", w t'i M r? r ,_.,1r a 9 - ~a~;~r at~.~'J,F'
, i ..y..
rr.. r e,.,,,r' !a x;,, ra,. „t ~6 ,s,:. ~l. z.f., r._ r; ,«r ,W.. *,j:?. Ak~,r,.{..
f ~
I.. 4J .....ax r " s f . t r •-A.~' ,dr~ ::A,. ; c f : iir~' ~
Ct f a
-r a ~F',,:3 , , . i.. 1,.:, ,e, "e' I ,,..4 - ~,~5 .:k~, c,:n : ,e •i q,:> o-l 7sr~'6 ..,mr,
a :~,k ac ,r,..t, ~ , , .1 w .,.,n,. i1'[~x a .et . f r r _ ,.y.; i9ti..1 `'°pc 'va' w.,r-• r.r r~' .€'~.r
,~~yy , ~ v
J . rat.:. , f. c°. r a • • q . 'SeY 1. .1 :.,n,. ,:.~r;:.v.. r , •,:S,:EIV +r,' ,e: :.....,,:.f~ _.I. S{~Q:.",...,.
d y... f „r 4 yq+tJr PPrx: ~ i - ..+e e<. 1r ,?~".,a.: 4d ii,:n ar. ,f„tilt' as '~.1:lt'~i, fis~llr ~R ? i 3' M !2Y : "r-,~Eri su4. x..:. ~~y
~ :«p ,-t,; ,.e., r r. :.r ~.P ,'r F.o. n,, ..c'+1. , •<r .~(x.. d~ „,~P. F.. d' .A,l •.~.''!,"e1..:v~.~~tr, .»x
~ rvW~ t +.41~ ~Nw. A4vh
J,,.aS~r,:,.,..x~.w.._ ~..:..,.'3".,,g °~;`L~~- ..,f .,.,„.L."'..:,. _l, _„_k~.:.'~?''.c M•'E''uL"mr :ud.. ,r
.,~„..xFt ~
Tru n k H i g hwa y 13 N 0 750 1, 500 3,000 4,500 _ This drawing is neither a legally recorded map nor a survey and is not intended to
,i,q,, be used as one. Thls drawing Is a compilation of records, information, and data
' W ~ G Feet located in various city, county, and state offices, and other sources affecting the
r'~~~~ area shown, and i~io be used for reference purposes only. Pcott County is not
Improvements !1 res>onsible far an inaccuracies herein contained. If discre ancies are found,
S 1 inch equals 1,500 feet please contact the Scott County Surveyors0ifce.
~~~5 5~~~~
Q
~ ~
~ ~av
R~VEi
RECENT LOCAL LAND USE/PLANNING ACCOMPLISHMENTS
The challenge of accommodating steady growth in Scott and Dakota
Counties, without jeopardizing public safety or efficient port operations, has
received considerable attention by state and regional transportation
professionals. No fewer than six studies have been. commissioned and
completed.
¦ Corridor Study by MnDOT, Scott County, Dakota County, Burnsville,
and Savage completed in 2000.
¦ 2000 TH 13 Corridor Stud Re ort and 2000 Land Use and Trans ortation
Y P 1~
Study recommendations are being implemented.
¦ Active collaboration among local governments and private industry to
support TH 13 and the Ports of Savage improvements.
¦ Lynn/Chowen Access Study completed by cities of Burnsville and
Savage.
¦ Hamilton District Study completed by the City of Savage.
¦ County Road 5 Extension Study prepared by City of Burnsville and
Dakota County.
i
I
~ e
~ ~ ~
i ~ II
R 5 Access Study ~ F~ y,
~r
.;.r
.f-
n d,.„,F
~
„y4 F ~ ~ s.~"adf >z
~ ~ ~ '
K
y3 ~ # S'
y
4~
l fT'
! `a
~ ~ ~
~ ti
~ ~ ' ~i a ~ t` ~:~0. 0 fi ~ ~ ~ f~ ~ it
a~ ! w 1
{ > ~ ~
« ~ ~ +~E ~ ray A 'ter} .A ' .~jx ~ Y ~
~ ;~-;.c" z!;;`~y: +w- i - .r f ~ ~;i a r' iIi 31 e f , 91Y..
~ $s ~ Yn ~ m ~ ~F .qtr, S ^.a i w ~ ~ ' ?#`~~4"
.d ~ 3 sin s"',rra"~ , ~ ~ ~~x~^~,'3~.`~'.~" ` ~ s I~ r+~ . # °.g~ I
. ear, +r ~'r,~+. ,~,t ~ 1 t ~ s ~ .
i
~ ' e e.
i ~f't
...rtEtS a.... ' + +
f~
I 7.~ ' 1 ~ \
' ~ - r ar . ~ a r r ~ ~
_ 1 g
a Y ~ ~ d, ~ Y~ ~ k ,
f,'
a`
i ~ f
f ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ , i f ',:3 a ~~a 1 i ~ .r?~ `~r
s ' ,ei r..rj ~ .fit
~ ° ~ ~ r,~e'~`'': Legend
~ w„t t'~~.r.r i r{ Fs ~ i~~ N~.~~t ~ ~ '
~w` ~ , ~ °'3e~ a~~ CR S Interchange.
a ~~,-tom.': ~ ~e~r,~ ~~~~y~ r~fr ~~`~~~~m ,A~
~ * era ~ ~ ~,*i~~c~~~<,; CR 5 Future Extension y
.c'~.z~ .~.y~,- i.
I
i
I
~
x Lynn/Chowen ~ _p ~ , Y
y' ! a ~ 83
z ~ ~
~s~
Access Project ~ ~ ~ M~~ t
~
a I
t ~ y y ~~.yq yge
v ~v. 5
M ~
~ e ~ ~ AMYk" .y,y t.`~# ~ ..a ~,xY A'~!'tle Y2 X" ~iV+µD bTY' ~ N IYIW.'ir?
~ ~ ~ ~
I,
, ~ ?,r"~~ r~ ~ ( ,fib M.d~ ii~2 f~«- - ~ g^ p~ q' ~ ~a~1 ~ t
? - ~
~.r SZ..~ 1 X^` e-^^J:~rt~.:°~~y~+`1r'f~f*'~h ~r`/~~ y~~jity?'~,jpl g~~r}y/tp^ i rG~ ~ i m~ 1~~~~ J~f ` ~
~~5{ j ~ 4`!+i ~ P r .~(-iRr~~tiM^n !E t~"'° ,k Yr ~ ~ G y iY } G '44`X ,k`tR
P
k b. ~ k F f S f
~ r a~ ~e._~~~i ~~~~1~ c < .7~~''~''ti~~ .aka, ,r~~s~.,,y ti' • eas.w .;L3 ~
s {7
T
~ $ $~+s ~ MI6 ~r#• ~wl 1 ' aq^~~ A x ~ kG a ~i. ff ~,,s
"L a r~ ""a I ~ ~ t 3 S ~ ~ ~ ri ra y'` f ~ ~ o.' ~ ~ t
a ~ rr' d a ~ ~
.v~ ~n ~ Mr y~,~t, t~'r~ 9' a ~ ~ ~~~'y ~ i. i,,~°~ ~ 5ry
~ ~ s
d- ~
~ , ~z~ k ~,,.(~y.,x ~~+F 41 ~P" ~ ~ « i~ t, yK~P h{tV ~ a^~:';& ~ x; i
~~`yy.."`a'~ ~ ~ g i~`~ ~ , ; ~t ~`jr . > ~,Y~ ~ ~ _r{~ .`w v u a , ~ ~ ~r i ~ ~ ~ $ , I
I,
i~+§~~~i~j ~ j ~ T j~S~y~ y,p ~ ~ ggp~(~ -~~-x+~ J t~~~
~ L ~ ~/r ~/y¦ /p4 ¦M¦
~~w j`~.~ t ~tate5 0.yyy 'mob T~hy~4_^w6 r `L ~ 2 X74 ~VMV¦ YM
s3sco6r a* x ~
CC~. x ~ x ~ :_a- i
~ t a ~ ~ ~
~ s~s~~ ~ r~ ~ ' e ' i __s ~ . f, Rd~ FreServatl0n I
~s; Y ~~~r I,'~Iµ~"~.~fr-~, a~ r~s,~e r` F §w~ f i ~f ~ ~BuenL~nAvenue
~ 11 ~
- e§` 4e a;: kr a w wj
l~ia'~ fi ~ f`tT'.1~'!" 1 5.:.:. g~.
'v ~
~~g~~~~ ~ ~ Chowen Avenue
11'k~a~ w g,.`i~~~`~ q,,,r's, i1.. ra ~a{$ s. ,r ax
~.z
i
ass of s~y~~
a ~
~ a"
Q
R/~~Q ' ~
1 9
I PROJECT OBJECTIVES
' The result of the studies and planning discussions can be condensed into
four common sense objectives:
¦ Improve intermodal connectivity between river, rail, and road traffic
within the corridor.
¦ Improve the flow of freight traffic through the corridor.
¦ Improve safety for motorists traveling through the corridor.
¦ Improve mobility and relieve congestion along the corridor.
i
t
1
1
I
t
4~~5 dF SyLgGy
4 ~
1.
~ 1r.
a
y 4Oq.
• ~~YE4
FUNDING TO DATE
State and regional funds for corridor studies, preliminary engineering
and design, land, easements and right-of--way acquisition, and road
construction have continued unabated since 1999.
' 1999 - MnDOT and local agencies contributed $125,788 for a corridor study.
2003 -City of Savage, with assistance from the Minnesota Congressional
delegation, received a $933,500 federal appropriation for preliminary
design work on the South Frontage Road from Quentin to Dakota.
2005 -City of Savage, with assistance from the Minnesota Congressional
delegation, received an $855,000 federal appropriation for the South
Frontage Road construction from Quentin to Dakota. MnDOT
¦ contributed $1.3 million in access management funding, cultural
¦ resource staff work and construction inspection. The City of Savage
provided a local match of $950,000.
1 2005 -City of Burnsville funded a $200,000 study for preliminary design and
environmental work on the TH 13/CR 5 interchange in Burnsville. A
Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) was approved by Federal
Highway Administration (FHWA) in 2007.
2005 -City of Burnsville, with assistance from the Minnesota Congressional
delegation, received a $2.4 million in Federal High Priority Project
(HPP) funding for final design, right-of--way acquisition, and
construction of TH 13/CR 5 interchange.
2005 -City of Savage was selected to receive $3.9 million in Surface
' Transportation Program (STP) funding (Metropolitan Council process)
for construction of the realigned Quentin Avenue to Lynn Avenue
intersection, completion of the South Frontage Road connection to the
1 east of Quentin, the North Frontage Road from Quentin to Lynn, and
access closures.
' 2007 -Scott County submitted STP federal funding application for TH 13/TH
101 interchange. Results to be determined.
2007 -City of Burnsville submitted STP federal funding application for TH
13/CSAH 5 interchange. Results to be determined.
4~~ra OF S,q`.gGs
R cn
r
A C
1 9 or
~trv~a • ~
PROGRESS
Thanks to the tremendous su ort of the Minnesota Con ressional
pp g
' delegation, funding for two integral pieces of the puzzle, the South
Frontage Road and Quentin Avenue projects, has been identified
and work is either under way or has been completed.
I
1
i
1
1
1
1
1
4
Y
O C~ li
SOUTH FRONTAGE ROAD ~ ~r
RtyCR • !
Description: Construct south frontage road and upgrade TH 13/Quentin Avenue intersection
Right-of-Way Costs: $ 280,000
i Construction/Other Costs: $4,070,000 i
Total Project Cost: $4,350,000
Project Status to Date: '
' Completed frontage road in 2007.
Funding Status:
' 2003 -City of Savage, with the assistance of the Minnesota Congressional delegation,
received $933,500 federal appropriation for preliminary design work on Frontage Road from
Quentin to Dakota. This includes $150,000 for the study of future phases.
• 2005 -City of Savage received $855,000 appropriation with the assistance of the Minnesota II
Congressional delegation for the construction from Quentin to Dakota. MnDOT contributed
$1.3 million access management dollars, and the City of Savage provided a local match of '
$950,000.
¦ 2006-2007 - MnDOT provided construction inspection and cultural resource staff work. II
Future Actions:
This project provided a continuous frontage road south of TH 13 from Dakota Avenue to Quentin i
' Avenue including reconstruction of a railroad bridge over the new roadway consistent with the
Trunk Highway 13 Corridor Management Plan. It is the first project to be completed along the
corridor.
Re uest: No additional federal dollars are needed.
For more information, contact:
John Powell, City Engineer ~
City of Savage i
6000 McColl Drive
Savage, Minnesota 55378
952-882-2672 I
jpowell~a ci.savage.mn.us
_ ~
as
SOUTH FRONTAGE ROAD , ~ . =n ~ ~
rt~ ~ . ~ ~ ~ - ~
x ~r ~
~ ~4~ ~
. ~ ~ ~ ~
'p'
~ a ~ s ~
u~. rt~ , ~ ~~1
`1' ~s _ ~ 1g ~ " c $ nr ~
3~k x t'
~ ~ li i fi,,. . ~ .
I
i
Q~ys C F sA yc~
r a
QUENTIN AVENUE
~
4rvEP'o- I~
Description: Construction and upgrade of a realigned TH 131Quentin Avenue intersection and
construction of a frontage road to the northeast of the intersection. This project will close four
additional access points onto TH 13, create aright-in/right-out only at Lynn Avenue, create right-
in at Princeton Avenue, and move the signal from Lynn Avenue to Quentin Avenue consistent with
the TH 13 Corridor Management Plan.
Right-of-Way Costs: $ 750,000
Construction Costs: $4,500,000 i
Total Project Cost: $5,250,000
Project Status to Date: i
' Preliminary design is underway.
~ Environmental Assessment Worksheet is 50% complete.
• Right-of-way needs for the frontage road are not yet identified.
j ' 2005 -City of Savage selected to receive $3.9 million in Surface Transportation Program (STP)
appropriation for construction of frontage xoad from Quentin Avenue to Lynn Avenue.
$1,000,000 match to be provided by City, County, or State funding sources. i
Future Actions:
¦ City to complete final construction plan.
City to apply for MnDOT cooperative or access management funds for closing access. ~I
¦ City to acquire right-of-way.
¦ City to let construction project in 2009.
Request: No additional federal dollars are needed it
For more information, contact:
' john Powell, City Engineer it
City of Savage
6000 McColl Drive
' Savage, Minnesota 55378 !I
952-882-8672
ipowell a~ci.savade.mn.us
~ QUENTIN AVENUE ~~a ~ e I,
n~ of
~ - F ~ -
_ _ ,
.-~Y y'.. ~ gab R s ~v~ 1 ~T ~ i"T'S ~ 1" s ~ . + ~ ~ ~ ~ Iii
~+s
~ ~'"'x ~ ~ x~ ~.:'..'~u v~ '-``~y~ I ~1 3 ~ "ma"r 1 ~ '*J` ~i,
+j ~ i $d% `r ~1 +s..r^~ , e-cr m . "w=~?"~. ~e~. t.. ilk..`"
s.
M
pMS ~c~~ I
'wy, e ;r o
t ~~'t. ~ ~ it ~ 1 r'"' t~ `1
x.~i J P t d 97 F F...
k~ ~<m"~ agh" i ~px 1 a~~' ~ a ~~o
~ ~ x 4 < ' x
~ yy^ +~R
*~i ~=rnp~` f p ~ ~#,i"^.~C~y ~ H ~c',~d "S y3 ; ~
~ { ~ ~t ~ " x~.`.~ ~y ~k~~A~ ~ ~~~'S3^'~" 4 'Iwr~rtQ t
L+
I
p~~5 O ~ S~~q~
a ~
t
A ~
4OC
RIYE3
1
' PENDING PRO ECTS
J
' Funding for the following four projects has been applied for
through the High Priority Project (HPP) funds in Federal Highway
Bill Reauthorization. These essential projects will improve the flow
' of traffic on the corridor allowing safe access to the Ports of Savage
for the export of grain and other commodities via the river and rail.
i
I
1
~p~1.~ O R dq~~~^
COUNTY ROAD 5 ~ _
R1YER I,
Description: Construct grade separated interchange at TH 13/CR 5
Right-of-Way Costs: $ 7 million
Construction Costs: 20 million
Total Project Cost: $27 million
Project Status to Date.
¦ 20 - it of B rnsvill funde a 200 000 stud for reliminar desi nand environmental
~ 05 C u e d$
Y ~ Y P Y g
work on the TH 13/CR 5 interchange in Burnsville. i
¦ 2005 -City of Burnsville received $2.4 million appropriation with the assistance of the
Minnesota Congressional delegation in Federal High Priority Project funding for additional ~
design, right-of-way acquisition, and construction of TH 13/CR 5 interchange.
¦ 2007 -Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) approved a Finding of No Significant Impact
FONSI .
( )
~ 2007 - Cit of Burnsville submitted Surface Trans ortation Pro ram STP federal fundin
Y P g ( ) g ~
application for TH 13/CSAH 5 interchange.
¦ This intersection was identified as number 29 in the metro area's top 200 crash list. ~
i
Future Actions: i
¦ City, County, and MnDOT to complete final design.
¦ City, County, and MnDOT to acquire right-of-way.
¦ City, County, and MnDOT to obtain $25 million in federal, state, and local agency funding.
RecFuest: $20 million High Priority Project (HPP) funds in Federal Highway Bill Reauthorization
For more information, contact:
Bud Osmundson, City Engineer
City of Burnsville
100 Civic Center Parkwa II
' Y
Burnsville, Minnesota 55337
952-855-4000
bud.osmundson~ci.burnsville mn.us
=
.t, ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ `
t~ - k`4~t <s r
COUNTY ROAD 5 INTERCHANGE : ~ ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
t.~. _ _ d, .
_ ` ++sakt a ssea«* k~ . ~~"h-`mod
~ D
arc ~ * ~ t ~ ~ ~ 11 s^
° 1 ~ti AA
f~ ~ ~ k.
t
F ~~"t5t' ~ 4
~°~r ~ I
PS A' 3, p~ ~ ~ r
F ~d i F
r r ci
~I
a
w R , Mx A
i
i
II
r _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
,~,~GF $'qL
~ y
q
101 INTERCHANGE ~
91YLA • 4
Description: Construct at grade interchange at TH 13/TH 101
Right-of-Way Costs. $0.00
' Construction Costs: $9 million
Total Project Cost: $9 million
Project Status to Date:
' 2006/2007 -Scott County led preliminary study on intersection alternatives with MnDOT and 'I
the Cities of Shakopee and Savage -preferred alternative selected.
¦ 2007 -Scott County submitted Surface Transportation Program (STP) federal funding
' application to Metropolitan Council for TH 13/TH 101 interchange. ~
¦ This intersection was identified as number 48 in the metro area's top 200 crash list.
¦ Scott County enacted wheelage tax to create funding for local matches on this type of project. j
Future Actions:
MnDOT Count and Cit to com lete desi n I
Y~ y P g
¦ MnDOT, County, and City to acquire right-of-way.
¦ MnDOT, County, and City to obtain $9 million in federal, state, and local funding.
I
Request: $7.2 million High Priority Project (HPP) funds to complete project
For more information, contact:
Lezlie Vermillion, Public Works Director I
Scott County
600 Country Trail East
Jordan, Minnesota 55352
952-496-8346
lermillion a~co.scott.mn.us i
~ ~ _ ~ ~-a
TRUNK HIGHWAY 101 INTERCHANGE i
; ~ ~ r
tt ~
t>,.
I
~ ~ ~ t" r ~ -w~,~ ter- ~l'Y•r.,~ U~s.
3s g~`~K"
~
~ :eta ~ ~r'F~~4~ jl ~ I 'acs ,~.e ~ ~
fit' ~ r i a s t h F I i a ~"'r- ~ ~ z
~ r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ t ~ I"`..~
~r~. ' ~ 'ate.'/ .
dpi ~ if d
~ ~ - 3 ~ r ° ~ - ~~~-`7a~'s~ cam"" ~ ~ 's
s s
~ ~
s
, .
„ xr -
"
I'i
I
4~SCF Sqy
a pM
E ~ a
CHOWEN AVENU ,r
9ti~a ` ° i
I
i ' Description:
~ Complete signalized intersection at Chowen Avenue/Glenhurst Avenue and TH 13 consistent with
' the TH 13 Management Plan. This project includes frontage road construction to provide
continuous alternate for local traffic and port access.
Right-of-Way Costs: $1,500,000
' Construction Costs: $6,300,000
Total Project Cost: $7,800,000
Project Status to Date:
¦ Preliminary design is underway. II
¦ Env>.xonmental assessment is 50% completed.
¦ This intersection was identified as number 92 in the metro area's top 200 crash list.
' F ci n
uture A t o s:
¦ City of Savage to complete preliminary and final design.
¦ City of Savage to identify and acquire right-of-way.
¦ o ain fundin for construction.
Cit of Sava e to bt
Y J g
' Request: $6.3 million in High Pxiority Project (HPP) dollars to complete project
For more information contact:
ell Ci En ineer Bud Osmundson Cit En ineer
John Pow ty g y g
Cit of Sava e Cit of Burnsville
Y g Y
6000 McColl Drive 100 Civic Center Parkway
Savage, Minnesota 55378 Burnsville, Minnesota 55337
952-882-2672 952-855-4000
ipowell(a~ci.savage.mn.us bud.osmundso~ci_burnsville_mn.us
CHOWEN AVENUE ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
m
~ ~ c=
~ ,
~ -
~ ~
~ a.. x^e t ~?awa. ~b ssdMi:~x.;p~dk,.SSe~.. N '7~'4~" c
e ~ ° ~ " ,
' P ;;~s ~°sa.*,„~. ~:,~,a t r'_r:.? ~ g ill' ,
1. ~ a r ~ ~ t
I
• ~ K t I
,
~ ~
j
I a
DHKOTA AVENUE ~
~ ~
Descri tion: i
p
Complete signalized intersection at Dakota Avenue/TH 13 consistent with the TH 13
Management Plan. This project includes frontage road construction to provide continuous
alternate for local traffic and ort access.
p
Right-of-Way Costs: $ 500,000
Construction Costs: $5,200,000
Total Project Cost: $5,200,000 '
Project Status to Date:
¦ Preliminary study is underway.
¦ Environmental assessment is 50% completed.
' Future Actions:
¦ Cit of Sava e to com lete relimina and final desi n.
Y g P P rY g
¦ City of Savage to identify and acquire right-of-way.
j , City of Savage to obtain funding for construction.
Request: $5.2 million in High Priority Project (HPP) dollars to complete project
1
~ For more information, contact:
John Powell, City Engineer
I ' City of Savage
6000 McColl Drive
Savage, Minnesota 55378 '
925-882-2672
i owell ci~sav~e.mn.us
i .
.
' DAKOTA AVENUE ~ 1~~~~~ x'`~~,
r ,
w
x
A
-
a ~ z . w ~r,~s.Sa+fi~
~ ~ 4 ,R, a ~ w g~ `R ~ ~
a Z 'd4 ?rr - "
' it F' ~ ~ "t tSA v ~ ~ # } *kT "a` ~ i !'...ce,u~'.` "r . Yu'~I'~
K ~ - 7
+t
r' ~ ~HP6
f ,/a- '~F ~ ad
4'S4'r 1 a. 4s _
_ { II
i
~ ~ t Y. ~ d. s S f ~ 4 ~ i.
~ ~ c
e`
I
~iwik~r
~ e N.
j i`;
rr ~ ~ ~ ,,z,F 3~ ~e a
x
a ~
~ r
4. 4
I~~ ,
'9 1 t q _
~ F ~
~ ~ ~ uwM~ $ ere: ~ ~ ~ s~,~ix.
^~,t
s r"s
„ 5', sr rr , ~ ~ ~ ,
~ ~
r
~ •ai~3,~ x s ~ ~ r~ ~w e ra t, >
~ e'z.. C _ ~ ~i e y ? ~ .fit fi ~ F~~
S'Z"" e ~ ~r i Y ~ ll cc~~''""
~h
~ ,
1 °fi
y
..-c i t rte", ~R`a+~ ':.„r. moo. °Y ~s: 4 ~r ~ ~c.~ ~~~I
~tC~&'Maf~C
~ ,~~r~i~sVrfle C~ar~b~'~`~erce
,a r ~ ,~.u-~ ~ „ ~
.r
I~
~f. ~ ~ s. ' ,~r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r ~ s ~ a
~ .s v
w a-,y ~ fem. ~ ~ 1~~,a
1 ,
,~ee&~~ f ;`~3tr~Ed;~ ~~~sz i& ~ '~'4 '~c~P"Yx i. m3 g `T^
a~
~f
r~ ~ ~ ,
~6 f F
b S£ A y-. k x d z~ S
, - au. ,~,r ~ ~ a : ~
t
~s ? ' ate, ''~.t`~.. t 3^ . r a ~a s ~ ,..,g z~ .
~ s r: ~
a
a r 7 A': ~ ~ ~ h~~~ ~a "tr
{t ~ r i
k I ~ ~ F y
I
~ l
L 4 ~A`'S ~ k'~ irk}, #:s x"°s ~ "7 ,-~,3 ~i ..~.r, , ~.r~,e i . s~.
-sy~ i~~ :.t.
~ _
y~ ~
~ ~ ~'~:.'~q
~ . sue, 1 ~ ~
s
er,
I
~ Technical Memorandum
' TH 169/TH 13
i ,o. , ,e, ~
Stakeholders Worksho
~ :
; Rej~ort
~ " r s.
-
w i
~ g
~ ~
4
` k~ M
Prepared for
fix. ~ t~.
~
Scott County, Minnesota
~ December 2006
~ ~
. w
1
i
1
Prepared by
' ILA
i
I
SCOTT COUNTY TH 169/TH 13 STAKEHOLDERS WORKSHOP REPORT
s~
Scott County TH 169/TH 13
Stakeholders Worksho Re ort
~ p p
Table of Contents
' Pa e
Section 9
Acknowledgements 2
1. Introduction and Purpose of Workshop 3
2. Study Area Background 4
3. Concept Development Workshop -December 6, 2006 8
4. Alternative Concept Development 10
5. Evaluation of Concepts 12
6. Conclusions 21
Figures (attached after report conclusions unless noted)
1. Project Study Area -Shakopee and Savage, MN 3
' 2. Existing and Forecast Traffic Volumes 6
3. Planning Level of Service Estimate for TH 13 ~
Appendices
A PowerPoint Presentations
B MicroStation Drawings of Alternatives
C Parcellnformation
' D Mn/DOT Report Comments
1
' SCOTT COUNTY TH 169ffH 13 STAKEHOLDERS WORKSHOP REPORT
Acknowledgements
j Scott County, along with its consultant CH2M HILL, would like to thank the following
stakeholders for their involvement in the workshop.
Greg Ilkha -Scott County Karen Clysdale - Mn/DOT
Daniel M. Jobe -Scott County Jinn Rosenow - Mn/DOT
Joe Gustafson -Scott County Diane Langenbach - Mn/DOT
Lezlie Vermillion -Scott County Brian Isaacson - Mn/DOT
Troy Beam -Scott County James Aswegan - Mn/DOT
Mitch Rasmusson -Scott County Victoria Nill - Mn/DOT
' Brad Davis -Scott County Wayne Norris - Mn/DOT
Bruce Loney -City of Shakopee Howard Preston - CH2M HILL
Mark McNeill -City of Shakopee Cheng Soong - CH2M HILL
Steve Soltau -Shakopee Crossings LP Will Stein - CH2M HILL
Jeannie Briol -City of Savage Nikki Farrington - CH2M HILL
Bryan Tucker -City of Savage
Barney Stock -City of Savage
John Powell -City of Savage
Contacts Regarding this Plan:
Lezlie Vermillion Nikki Farrington
Scott County Public Works. CH2M HILL
600 Country Trail East 1295 Northland Drive.
Jordan, MN 55352 Mendota Heights, MN 55120
(952)496-8063 (651)365-8536
LVermillionC~3co.scott.mn.us nicole.farringtonQch2m.com
' 2
SCOTT COUNTY TH 169/rH 13 STAKEHOLDERS WORKSHOP REPORT
1, Introduction and Pur ose of Worksho
p p
Scott County has identified the area in the vicinity of State Trunk Highway (TH) 169 and TH
13 in the cities of Shakopee and Savage to be an area in need of improvements for the local
roadway network. Current traffic volumes generated by the Southbridge Crossings
development, located between County Highway (CH)18 and Stagecoach Road (see Figure 1, '
Study Area) added to forecasts of future conditions documented in traffic studies for the
area, identify significant congestion after build-out in the year 2010. These traffic studies
also identified as primary factors contributing to the congestion an underdeveloped system
of local roads and lack of connectivity between the local and regional road system.
The overall objective of the TH 169/TH 13 Stakeholder's workshop was to address these
factors by determining the feasibility of adding local access to/from the regional highway
system within the vicinity of the TH 169/CH 101/TH 13 interchange and improve local
street connections in order to address access and mobility issues. The purpose of the '
workshop was to:
e Coordinate with state and local government stakeholders (Scott County, the Cities of
Shakopee, Savage and Prior Lake, and the Minnesota Department of Transportation
(Mn/DOT)) and obtain their input regarding the relationship between planning for
future development/redevelopment within the study area and necessary roadway
improvements.
'101 ~f fV
~
i ,
{ ,
y` V Southbridge ~ ' < ; .
Crossings ~
,`a--'-_:~,- s ' }[?eveiopment ~ ~y Bark-n Ride Lai ~ ~
fem.. J`~~-:*?~~ 1 urea ~1 ~ S~ ' ~``'`--~:w_:.
P
~J f u~
ti
~l 2'C - - ~ ~ ~ ~ ; azditn~'
~u~ ~ 1~ ~ ~ 13
$ ~
. 1& Eac~e Cr E? .
Bek ~L~ ~N~
CH 1f Dag-Leg
iot:atiat, i
Signalized )ntersectians ~r
_ (34th St 1&
6 1,666 2;666 ~ i /'Y
~oFeet ~ rl
FIGURE 1 .
Study Area '
3
SCOTT COUNTY TH 169/TH 13 STAKEHOLDERS WORKSHOP REPORT
• Explore conceptual design options to provide greater accessibility to the regional
roadway system.
• Discuss current traffic operations and explore opportunities to enhance the
underdeveloped roadway system.
• Obtain and incorporate comments for follow-up actions including documenting the
feasibility of various design concepts and implementation options with emphasis on the
highest priority projects.
• Facilitate discussion and actions for a path forward "organizationally" (beyond the
workshop) by exploring how the workshop results can be carried forth into project
development.
2. Study Area Background
The City of Shakopee is currently considering the Southbridge Crossings development
proposal, with plans for over 400,000 square feet of retail, restaurants, a movie theater and a
transit station. Scott County is also in project development for an extension of CH 21 from
its existing terminus at CH 42 north to TH 169. This alignment is shown >n Figure 1.
Traffic studies conducted for the development have concluded that the amount of traffic
generated by such. a high density development, ranging from 18,000 to 21,500 vehicles per
day, would overwhelm the existing roadway network. This is especially apparent at the
signalized intersections of future CH 21 and CH 18 and the intersection of CH 18 and
Crossings Boulevard (shown in Figure 1). Both intersections would be operating at
congested levels by 2010 and will not have any reserve capacity to accommodate future
growth. The traffic study concluded that expansion of the supporting roadway network
would be necessary in order to accommodate the proposed development. The Stakeholders
Workshop was conducted to develop and evaluate a variety of potential improvement
options.
A transit park-n-ride lot is proposed to be located on the development site in the northeast
quadrant. The lot would be built to provide space for 500 vehicles with the potential to
expand to 1,200 vehicles. The current road network does not provide much benefit to transit
in regards to accessing TH 169 to and from the north. Buses from the park-and-ride lot
currently would have to travel south on Crossings Boulevard to CH 18 and then to CH 21 in
order to access northbound TH 169. In addition to improvement to the roadway network,
opportunities to improve transit operations from the park-n-ride lot were also discussed at
the workshop.
Traffic Volumes and Operations
Counts were conducted on December 12 and 13 on the study area ramps and roadways to
supplement volume data provided by Mn/DOT in order to document current traffic levels.
These volumes are shown in Figure 2.Observations of traffic operations indicates that the
TH 169/CH 101 interchange area currently experiences moderate levels of congestion
during both the AM and PM peak periods.
' 4
SCOTT COUNTY TH 169/TH 13 STAKEHOLDERS WORKSHOP REPORT
The Scott County CH 21/18 Access Study (February 2006) documented the existing and
future traffic operations along CH 21/CH 18 after the build out of the 400,000 square feet of
development planned in the Southbridge Development. The type and intensity of
development is expected to generate approximately 20,000 vehicles per day. It was
assumed based on input from the developer that the directional orientation of the site
generated traffic would be as follows:
• 55% of traffic to/from the north (TH 169/CH 101)
• 20% from the south (CH 21)
• 20% from the east (CH 18)
• 5% from the west (Existing Southbridge development on the west side of CH 18/21)
The full build-out of the proposed development is expected in 2010 creating traffic levels in
that year that exceed the 2020 forecasts in the Scott County Transportation Plan. Analysis
from the Access Study concluded that in the post-development condition, the system would
operate at very congested levels with Level of Service (LOS) F at the key signalized
intersections along the County's system.
A planning level analysis was also completed for TH 13 to estimate the current and future
traffic operations. Based on a current (year 2005) average daily traffic volume of 52,000
vehicles per day in the segment between Vernon Avenue and the TH 13/TH 101
intersection the corridor operates at a LOS F. The results of the planning level analysis are
documented in Figure 3. Applying a 1.0% growth rate to the Scott County Transportation
Plan's 2020 forecast of 59,000 vehicles per day, the year 2030 forecast volumes would be
around 65,000 vehicles per day. The analysis indicated that with this volume of traffic a 6- 1
lane signalized arterial would operate at LOS E or a 4-lane freeway segment would operate
at LOS D. Based on this preliminary planning level assessment, TH 13 would have to be an
8-lane arterial or a 4-lane freeway to meet the county's guidelines of operations at or below
the LOS D/E boundary.
5 ,
SCOTT COUNTY TH 169/TH 13 STAKEHOLDERS WORKSHOP REPORT
r„
~ r~. ~;,^-..A
_ t01~- i4~9 3~1 ~
j~$ 303
~
S~~BCOach t~
~ ~ ~ ~fv1 1 °8t}
Phut 'F~3
AEI P~af 5~ `3 .
-
glad ~ 577
3
_ \f~~~ gyp,
,_.~'f6 1 7~zg~F~i ',m _ ~
Pt
~ i ~~1 ' ~ -
Rt ~c'r~ t
~ . _ ~ ~ ~ ~ ;4~A X63 ? ;t~
~ F„ { - z ~
. ~ 3fh Avenue ~ ~ .
~ .~''AFA 7~~~
LL
~~L A , . Y
T.~ ~ YW. q
1
LEGEND ~14~6~i
~~o I~e~k ~{o€rr R~n~~ Vc~1€ttr~es ~ ~ {2s}
P~ SOFT t`wc+rmse: Fobs C~.v ~otn `H4~3 (~~E]17 1 ~7 $281
C18aar~er' ~2 s~,d t 2G~i~) v - - 337 X987. *1
2i,t? Average Liy ~'~afflc Vc~lurnes
3ormrse; A4r~C1(xT7r~c 44~rrraals2ti~G6 1~
fiignallza+d lrrter5~s
TH and ~ iii ~'~r~eEEnn
~~~~t Af~.~~AftiA~ P~ekHcurTurningYoE~rr~a
~iumae! on CwacernEaee N ~AO~j
FIGURE 2
Existing Traffic Volumes
s
SCOTT COUNTY TH 169/TH 13 STAKEHOLDERS WORKSHOP REPORT
s
N
¦ _
¦ 'V
A
¦
¦ 3
w w r r r r r r rrr. \ \ \ \ , .
(n . ' i i i i i ~ lP1 i i i' ~ ~ f75 ~ ~ f13::::$::j: ~ ?:~}::y: ll.
O • / / / r Orr / \ \ \ \ O::}•}:•:•::'::•':
/ r I/ r I I r \ (jj
r r / / / rrr \ \ \ 4: } J
rrrrrrrrrr.
'rrrrrrr/rrr"" '\\\\\\\4
~i
¦
¦
¦
¦
f~
Q'%4t y ii~ r, ti co
c t0
ro ¦
t a 3
m L y 'm ~
c ro o c O
v a~'i c ~ ~ lQ ~ N O
a~?o~ ~ 'a
o tip > N > 'ts c.
m v ~
vi N a~ c A
u;~~~.N ® t F- ~
2°~o-%a 3 3
O ' i i Or " t/Y~" ~ vx: y V.
o. ~ >
ii ii " ~CS~: W N
~ ¦ c Rf
N~ ~ ~ 3
~ ~ a o a L
o.an x'30 d~ ~ HOC ¦ K
~O ~ OcaO N O.G aN ~ C ¢ ¦ ~ 1
cII Ol ~ W O L ® .L..
C ~J C N N ¦
c c m .N c w > > o ¦ • . iii : ~ ~ N
rn p m N = o rrr . ? \ r: rr: r: r ro C
~cayi m ~ ~c:;Eoo mg ¦ t~ m to m•' ~•d:~: m-~ N
c m ~ rnmd. M,n m O r' O O y c v-
o T mgr ro c ~ ¦ J ~ ..I J ~ Q; ~ ~ ~
I- t p~ N C O .d. U 0 0 13 ~ d
{0
mo J
d N F- ~ N X~ ¢ C t3 ro
roc+~ mw'- ^mom~na~^~ ¦ ~u
¦ ~R
D
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 'r3
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~
~ M T O O) a0 t~ CD ~ ~ M N r C
r T G
awnioA ~lUd) ol}~eal ~(Ilep afieaanb w
FIGURE 3
Planning Level of Service Estimate for TH 13
SCOTT COUNTY TH 169lTH 13 STAKEHOLDERS WORKSHOP REPORT
3. Concept Development Workshop -December 6, 2006
A one-day workshop was conducted on December 6, 2006 with representatives from Scott
County, Mn/DOT, the Cities of Savage and Shakopee, and the Shakopee Crossings Limited
Partnership (LP). A PowerPoint presentation (attached as Appendix A to this report) was
used to guide discussion. The workshop was conducted with the following objectives in
mind:
• Coordinate with local government stakeholders regarding the relationship between
future development along the corridor and the types of highway improvements that
maybe needed to accommodate the level of development.
• Explore conceptual design options for improving the interchanges, intersections, and
.local roadway connectivity in the area.
• Obtain comments on and document the feasibility of design concepts so that actions for
a path forward can be identified, including a discussion of project priorities and
tradeoffs.
' Input from the Stakeholder Group
As part of the workshop, stakeholders were given the opportunity to discuss planning
activities, trends, and anticipated needs for the future. Summaries of the input received
from local representatives are provided below. Key features of the project area described
below are also shown in Figure 1.
Scott County
Lezlie Vermillion, Scott County Public Works director, provided a short overview of current
county planning and project development. Some of the county's key points included:
• The projected population growth in Scott County results in 'an increase from 120,000
~ residents in 2006 to over 400,000 in 2030 based on build out populations determined
from sewer capacities.
• Scott County's current transportation initiatives include: Right-of-way ordinances, TH
13, a new TH 41 budge and lega..slahve issues.
City of Savage
• The congestion on the TH 13 exit from TH 169 southbound is caused by the priority
given to TH 101 based on the lane drops -the TH 13 ramp drops both lanes by the time
it is merged onto mainline TH 13 giving the continuous lanes to the TH 101 exit. The city
thought this could be changed by revising the pavement markings to better facilitate the
PM peak hour traffic.
• Mn/DOT has placed a traffic signal directly south of the TH 13 intersection at 126th
Street, but the city has planned to move the signal to 128th Street to provide better
spacing to the TH 13 intersection.
• There maybe potential to provide another continuous east-west arterial if the dog-leg of
CH 16 at CH 18 could be removed (shown in the bottom of Figure 1).
' a
SCOTT COUNTY TH 169/TH 13 STAKEHOLDERS WORKSHOP REPORT
• The City is in favor of increased transit opportunities.
• The City representatives did not believe that the City Council would be supportive of
providing more connections for the supporting road network if they went through
existing residential areas.
• The City is working towards completing a frontage road system along TH 13 to
accommodate planned changes in access specified in the TH 13 Corridor Study. This
plan recommended interchanges at the intersections of TH 13 and TH 101 and at TH 13
and CH 5 with traffic signals spaced at 1-mile intervals between the interchanges
through Savage.
City. of Shakopee
• The City of Shakopee has planned for dense urban development at this location since
1981. There has been an effort to limit retail development at other interchanges along TH
169 within the City to maximize the use of this location because it appeared to have
good road system/access/etc.
• The area along Stagecoach Road was annexed from the township and appears to be
prime for redevelopment.
• The Southbridge Crossings site cannot be fully developed without better access -which
would also help the new transit park-and-ride lot planned for the northern half of the
development site (see Figure 1, Study Area).
• The City finds the lack of river crossings anissue -Scott County has only 1 year round
crossing at TH 169 (CH 101 and TH 41 are prone to flooding). The City noted that
Dakota County has eight river crossings.
• The City voiced frustration over the amount of traffic that is "funneled" through the city
(because of the limited capacity of the TH 169 river bridge) and they feel that their
development traffic is not able to get adequate access to the regional road system or
across the river.
• The proposed park-and-ride lot would benefit from direct access from the site to CH
18/21 and TH 169 for Express Buses. (Prior Lake and MVTA buses use TH 169 to get to
the Minneapolis Central Business District). There are no transit advantages along TH 169
(or on the river bridge).
Shakopee Crossings Limited Partnership
• Addition/continuation of Crossings Boulevard should help in local circulation through
the development site.
• 13~ Avenue (into Savage) is an available roadway connecting from the development site
to TH 13.
• Congestion northbound on the TH 169 river bridge backs up into area during the AM
peak hour and TH 13 experiences backups on the SB TH 169 exit ramp during the PM
peak hour.
s '
SCOTT COUNTY TH 169/TH 13 STAKEHOLDERS WORKSHOP REPORT
Mn/DOT
• Mn/DOT acknowledged that there are many needs in the area -but currently there are
limited planned investments.
• A project at TH 169 and I-494 is in the plan, but the year of letting is in question due to
funding. (Unfunded at this time -suggests 2015 timeframe).
• Mn/DOT confirmed that interchanges are planned for TH 13/CH 5 and TH 13/CH 101
-but funding details and schedule are undetermined.
• The new MVST dollars are not likely to add any new projects -might advance project
already in the pipeline, but nothing new (MVST dollar trending downward at this time
due to slowing sales of new vehicles}.
• Lots of possibilities are still available -looking for creative solutions.
• Think of thrifty solutions as opposed to sprawling/costly solutions.
• Consider system access issues -not just developer and local access.
Presentation of Preliminar Conce is and Key Factors
Y p
After a lunch break and bus tour of the study area CH2M HILL presented a number of
preliminary concepts to the stakeholders group. The concepts sketches were used to
compare input received in the morning session to a range of potential solutions. These
concepts are described further in the following section, Alternative Concept Descriptions.
4. Alternative Concept Development
Four alternative concepts were developed to demonstrate the tradeoffs between different
improvements for access to Stagecoach Road. In addition, three concept alternatives were
developed for the TH 13 and CH 101 intersection. A brief discussion of the rationale behind
the improvements involved at each location is provided below.
Concept layouts for each of the following alternatives are located in Appendix B.
Access to Stagecoach Road
Stagecoach Road Concept 1
Provide Access to Stagecoach from the North (Across the River on TH 169). This concept
includes an exit ramp from southbound TH 169 to Stagecoach Road. The ramp is added to
the existing TH 13 exit ramp. The constraint of the existing railroad staging area creates the
need to pull the ramp further to the east of Stagecoach, crossing the railroad, before bringing
the ramp back to the west and connecting to Stagecoach. The return movement, an entrance
ramp from Stagecoach Road to northbound TH 169 is provided by merging the Stagecoach
Road ramp back onto the existing CH 21 entrance ramp.
Stagecoach Road Concept 2
Provide Access to Stagecoach from the East (Savage on CH 101/TH 13). This concept
provides ramps configured in ahalf-diamond to and from the ramps between TH 169 and
10
SCOTT COUNTY TH 169/TH 13 STAKEHOLDERS WORKSHOP REPORT ,
CH 101/TH 13. This would provide access from the east along TH 13 from the City of
Savage.
Stagecoach Road Concept 3
Provide Access to Stagecoach from both the North (Across the River on TH 169) and the
East (Savage on CH 101/TH 13). Concept 3 is a combination of Concepts 1 and 2. This
provides access to Stagecoach from the north via ramps from TH 169 and from the east with
ramps configured in a half diamond.
Sta ecoach Road Conce t 4
9 p
Provide Access to Stagecoach from the North (Across the River on TH 169), the East
(Savage on CH 101/TH 13) and the West (Shakopee on TH 169). This concept provides the
most local access by providing access to the north, east and west. While access to the north
and to the east are similar to Concept 3, the CH 21 and CH 101/TH 169 interchange is
downgraded to a service interchange providing a split diamond between CH 21 and
Stagecoach.
Improvement to TH 13
TH 13 Concept 1
Maintain At-Grade Signalized Intersection and Add Lanes. Preliminary operations
analysis suggested that the segment of TH 13 between Vernon Avenue and the TH 13/CH
101 intersection would have to be an 8-lane facility to accommodate the 2030 forecast
volumes. The current configuration is a 41ane facility. In addition to two additional lanes in
each direction, the current northbound TH 131eft turn onto CH 101 is around 1,300 vehicles
in the AM peak hour requiring a triple left turn lane.
TH 13 Concept 2
Roundabout. Assuming that bypass lanes are used to direct some of the major movements
past the roundabout, adouble-lane roundabout is feasible based on existing traffic volumes.
Bypass lanes would be used for the westbound through traffic and would not require the
traffic to use the roundabout. Bypass lanes are a reasonable option at this intersection since
there is very little pedestrian activity (bypass lanes and the associated higher speeds are not
recommended in areas with a large amount of pedestrian activity). Existing peak-hour
traffic entering the roundabout would be approximately 2900 vph. The high-end capacity
for adouble-lane roundabout is approximately 4000 vph. If traffic entering the roundabout
is projected to exceed 4000 vph and depending on entry flows, Mn/DOT may need to
consider 3-lane entries and determine if a roundabout with this design could be considered
on the trunk highway system.
Another consideration is the high percentage of trucks on TH 13. A multi-lane roundabout
would need to be designed carefully so that large trucks could maneuver through the
roundabout without off-tracking into both lanes. This would reduce the operational
efficiency of the roundabout by restricting continuous use of the two lanes.
SCOTT COUNTY TH 169(TH 13 STAKEHOLDERS WORKSHOP REPORT
TH 13 Concept 3
Partial Interchange. This concept removes the traffic signal and eliminates all of the
mainline crossing conflicts by grade separating eastbound TH 13. In addition, the
- westbound through movement is bypassed to the north of the intersection. Therefore, the
only conflicting movements are the westbound left-turns onto southbound TH 13 and the
northbound TH 131eft turns onto CH 101/TH 1b9.
6. Evaluation of Concepts & Conclusions
The concepts presented to stakeholders are intended to start a dialogue about the future of
this study area. While this report does not make a recommendation about moving forward
with one specific alternative, it is possible to compare the tradeoffs involved with each
alternative. Table 2 provides a qualitative comparison of several key aspects of each
Stagecoach Road concept and Table 3 for TH 13/CH 101 intersection concept. None of the
concepts can be taken and used for project development (transportation or land use)
without further study and a higher level of design. As corridor priorities become more clear,
this comparison of options will help to identify the best solution(s) for improving access,
safety and mobility in the study area.
Traffic Operations
TH 169 Interchange (Stagecoach) Concepts
All four Stagecoach Road concepts would improve future traffic operations of the CH
21/CH 18 and CH 18/Crossings intersections by providing an alternative route to access the
proposed developed. The amount of increased performance is based on the volume of traffic
that can be diverted from CH 21 to Stagecoach. Based on the directional orientation used in
the previous CH 21 Traffic Study, it is expected that up to 55% of the development
generated traffic would be corning from the north and 20% from the east. Therefore, the
concepts that provide the additional access to Stagecoach from the north (Concepts 1, 3 and
4) were considered more beneficial than Concept 2 which provided access only to the east
along TH 13. In addition, Concept 4 would only be feasible if Scott County decides that the
reconstruction of CH 21 would be as an arterial and not as a freeway segment.
There was a considerable amount of discussion during the workshop about traffic
operations in the TH 169 corridor, especially in the AM peak hour, and the consequences of
the additional ramps in Concepts 1, 3 and 4. There is currently congestion on the roadway
during the AM peak hour and there was no consensus as to the cause of the congestion. One
opinion was that the river crossing is a bottleneck and that the funneling of traffic onto the
bridge from TH 13 and from CH 18 creates the backup. Another opinion was that the
closeness of the CH 18 and TH 13 ramps was causing the backup.
During the review process Mn/DOT also expressed concerns about congestion on the
regional road system associated with the proposed Southbridge Crossings development.
Specifically, they mentioned the TH 13 exit ramp and the CH 21 exit ramp from
southbound TH 169 where volumes during the PM peak hour are already approaching
capacity. Scott County agrees that the operations on TH 169 are of concern and need to be
considered before implementation of any of the concepts, an in depth study was beyond
' 12
SCOTT COUNTY TH 169/TH 13 STAKEHOLDERS WORKSHOP REPORT
the scope of an analysis focused on documenting traffic impacts to the signalized
intersections along the County's highway system. Some ideas that came out of the
workshop that should be considered included:
- Adding an auxiliary lane from CH 18121 entrance ramp through the river bridge.
- Evaluating the feasibility of providing transit advantages across the river bridge.
- Reassignment of lanes and giving priority to the TH 13 exit ramp instead of the CH
101 ramp. Currently CH 1011anes are continuous and the TH 13 lanes have to merge
before the TH 13/CH 101 intersection.
i~
i
13
SCOTT COUNTY TH 169ITH 13 STAKEHOLDERS WORKSHOP REPORT
TABLE 2
Evaluation of Stagecoach Road and TH 169/CH 101 Concepts
Existing Concept 1 Concept 2 Concept 3 Concept 4
Traffic Operations As the Southbridge +
Development and Improves operations Improves operations Improves operations Improves operations
other growth in the at CH 21 at CH 21 at CH 21 at CH 21
area continues, intersections by intersections intersections by intersections by
operations on both providing another providing another providing another
the local road local access for the local access for the local access for the
system and the heaviest volumes, heaviest volumes, heaviest volumes,
•freeway system will but may have but may have but may have
degrade. impact on TH 169 impact on TH 169 impact on TH 169
operations operations operations
Local Access No direct access + +
to/from the freeway Provides access to Provides access to Provides access to Provides access to
system from Stagecoach from Stagecoach from Stagecoach from Stagecoach from
Stagecoach Road. the north the east the north and east the north, east, and
west
Transit Operations . Does not provide +
direct access to TH Provides direct Does not provide Provides direct Provides indirect
169 for transit. access through any direct access to access through access through
Stagecoach for TH 169 for transit Stagecoach for Stagecoach and CH
transit to TH 169 transit to TH 169 21 for transit to TH
169
Structural None - - - - - - - -
Requirements Railroad bridge and Reconstruction of Railroad bridge and Railroad bridge and
reconstruction of Stagecoach reconstruction of reconstruction of
Stagecoach overpass Stagecoach Stagecoach and CH
over ass over ass 21 over asses
Potential Right-of- None Potential impact to Potential impact to Potential impact to
Way Superior Supply Co. None Superior Supply Co. Superior Supply Co.
and railroad and railroad and railroad
Safety No safety - - - - - - - -
improvements. Adds one signalized Adds two signalized Adds two signalized Adds four signalized
intersection on intersections on intersections on intersections (2 on
Stagecoach Rd Stagecoach Rd Stagecoach Rd CH 21,2 on
Sta ecoach
Environmental No impacts. + - - -
Overview Minimum Potential impact to Potential impact to Potential impact to
environmental retainage ponds on retainage ponds on retainage ponds on
impacts south side of CH south side of CH south side of CH
101 101 101
Relative Cost Costs to maintain $
(NOTE: Costs do existing Necessary ramps Reconstruction of All four ramps plus Requires
not include right-of- infrastructure only. are long, extra cost Stagecoach railroad bridge and reconstruction of CH
way, major utility for railroad bridge, overpass, may need reconstruction of 21 and Stagecoach
relocation, or reconstruction of some retaining walls Stagecoach overpasses along
railroad agreement Stagecoach to minimize impact overpass. with the new railroad
costs) overpass to south quadrant bridge.
water retainage
KEY
+ Some Improvement
More Improvement
Most Improvement
No Improvement
a~
14
SCOTT COUNTY TH 169/TH 13 STAKEHOLDERS WORKSHOP REPORT
1
TABLE 3
Evaluation of TH 13 Im rovement Conce is
TH 13 Concept 1 TH 13 Concept 2 TH 13 Concept 3
Traffic Operations +
Will improve operations Since traffic movement Provides for better
for the intersection is continuous through a operations by removing
overall, but some roundabout and is not signal control of the
movements may still stopped at signals, through movements.
operate at LOS F intersection capacity
can be improved at
roundabouts
(recognizing that there
is an upper limit to
ca act
Local Access +
Moves signal on TH 13 Moves signal on TH 13 Moves signal on TH 13
further south to 128tH further south to 128tH further south to 128tH
Street but keeps the Street and removes the Street and removes the
partial access at Zinran partial access at Zinran partial access at Zinran
Avenue Avenue. Avenue.
Transit Operations NA NA NA
Structural No new structure No new structure New bridge to provide '
Requirements needed needed overpass of the
eastbound through
traffic
Potential Right-of- None None None
Way
Safety +
At-grade intersection Elimination of the Eliminates most conflict
would have the most turning conflicts points and removes
conflict points improves the safety of signal control along
the intersection mainline.
Environmental No impacts identified No impacts identified No impacts identified
Overview
Relative Cost
(NOTE: Costs do not `i'
include right-of-way, major
utility relocation, or railroad
agreement costs)
KEY
+ Some Improvement
More Improvement
Most Improvement
- No Improvement
15
SCOTT COUNTY TH 169/TH 13 STAKEHOLDERS WORKSHOP REPORT
TH 13 Concepts
TH 13 Concept 1 explored the full built-out of an at-grade intersection at the TH 13/CH 101
1 intersection. The number of approach lanes was determined using a planning level model,
(Synchro), with forecasted 2030 volumes. It was determined that the intersection would
operate at LOS D during the peak hours, but with some approaches operating at LOS F
meaning the intersection has little or no reserve capacity. It would also require significant
widening of fine roadway to an 8-lane arterial that would present major challenges in
addressing lane continuity. Eastbound lane drops would be required since there are no
plans to provide 8-lanes through Savage. There are currently no other 8-lane arterials in the
metro area. Mn/DOT also expressed concern with the triple left-turn lanes from
northbound TH 13 to westbound CH 101.
TH 13 Concept 2 reviewed the potential for a roundabout at the intersection. Since traffic
movement is continuous through a roundabout and is not stopped at signals, intersection
capacity can be improved at roundabouts. At this location, traffic operations would likely
improve with adouble-lane roundabout that incorporates bypass lanes. Roundabouts do
have upper limits in terms of the traffic volumes that can be accommodated. More detailed
traffic modeling is recommended if the roundabout concept is pursued at this location. A
safety consideration on high-speed highways is that a roundabout may not be expected by
some approaching drivers. There are a number of mitigation strategies for this issue
including introducing curves in advance of the roundaboufi to transition drivers to lower
speeds. The report High Speed Approaches at Roundabouts (Ritchie, 2005) has information on
additional strategies that maybe effective at this location.
The high volume of through traffic on TH 13 and left-turns from northbound TH 13 to
westbound CH 101 cause much of the congestion during the peak hours at the TH 13
intersection. Concept 3 removes the traffic signal and all crossing conflicts with the
eastbound through traffic by providing an overpass and reduces conflicts with westbound
through traffic by providing a bypass. This creates atwo-phase intersection with the left
turns from northbound TH 13 to westbound CH 101 and the westbound TH 13/CH 1011eft
turns to southbound TH 13. Concept 3 does not accommodate U-turn movements at the
intersection.
Each of the concepts shows a traffic signal at the intersection of 128 Street and TH13,
replacing the signal at 126 Street and TH 13 with right-in/right-out movements. This
would have operational benefits regardless of what improvements are pursued at the TH 13
T-intersection.
Mn/DOT suggested full closure of the intersection at Zinran Avenue and CH 101, in
conjunction with any of the three concepts (including the right-in/right-out movements).
~s
SCOTT COUNTY TH 769(fH 13 STAKEHOLDERS WORKSHOP REPORT
Local Access
TH 169 Interchange (Stagecoach) Concepts
All four concepts provide more local access from the freeway system. Concepts 1 and 2
provide for only one direction (from the north across the river bridge in Concept 1 and from
the east to Savage in Concept 2). Both Concepts 3 and 4 provide for multiple directions of
access, Concept 3 from both the north and the east and Concept 4 from north, east and west.
TH 13 Concepts
All three TH 13 intersection concepts assume that the signal at 126 Street would be moved
to 128 Street according to the city's signal spacing plan. When the signal is removed, all
concepts show aright-in/right-out as the future intersection configuration at 126 Street.
Also, TH 13 Concepts 2 and 3 remove the existing partial access to CH 101 from Zinran
Avenue located approximately 2,000 feet west of the TH 13 intersection:
~t
Transit Operations
TH 169 Interchange (Stagecoach) Concepts
Concepts 1 and 3 provide the greatest advantage transit operations opportunities because of
the direct ramp access from Stagecoach Road to the north on TH 169. Concept 4 also
provides access to TH 169, but it is a little more indirect with the buses having to use the
split diamond and accessing the freeway from CH 21. Concept 2 does not provide any
access to the north and would require the current planned transit route of using the
Crossings/CH 18 intersection and the CH 21/18 intersection.
Structural Requirements j
~f
TH 169 Interchange (Stagecoach) Concepts
All four concepts assume a widening of the Stagecoach Road cross-section from the existing
two-lane rural roadway to an urban divided four-lane. This would require reconstruction of
the CH 101/TH 169 overpass for all four concepts. Irt addition, Concepts 1, 3 and 4 which
provide the southbound TH 169 exit ramp to Stagecoach Road would require a new ~
structure over the railroad.
Retaining walls are widely used on all of the concepts to accommodate the tight diamond
configuration of the ramps. This provides the minimum amount of additional right-of-way
and limits impacts to the existing mainline.
TH 13 Concepts
Concepts 1 and 2 are at-grade intersections and do not require any additional structure.
Concept 3 includes a new overpass of the eastbound through lanes. To minimize additional
right-of--way needs retaining wall would likely be needed in order to grade separate the
through lanes.
17
SCOTT COUNTY TH 169(f H 13 STAKEHOLDERS WORKSHOP REPORT
Potential Right-of-Way
TH 169 Interchange (Stagecoach) Concepts
Most of the concepts for adding ramps to/from Stagecoach Road access use existing
Mn/DOT right-of-way. The only exception is the exit ramp from southbound TH 169 to
Stagecoach Road. This ramp may require some right-of-way from the parcel that is in the
middle of the existing system interchange (owned by Superior Supply Company) and. also
some coordination with the Union Pacific Railroad Company. The location and parcel
information for both of these parcels are included in Appendix C.
TH 13 Concepts
All three. TH 13 concepts are within the existing Mn/DOT right-of-way and would not
require acquisition of any additional land.
' Safety
The issue of safety performance as it relates to each concept was considered from a
qualitative as opposed to quantitative perspective - no effort was made to compute the
number of additional crashes or likely change in severity.
TH 169 Interchange (Stagecoach) Concepts
All of the concepts would be adding signalized intersections onto the system. Concept 1
would include one more intersection on Stagecoach Road, Concepts 2 and 3 would add two
' signalized intersections to Stagecoach and Concept 4 would include the two at Stagecoach
and two on CH 21. The addition of signalized intersection would tend to increase the overall
number of crashes in the system. However, all of the new intersections are ramp terminals
which effectively operate at "T" intersection and this should minimize the overall increase.
TH 13 Concepts
Concept 1 would not provide any safety benefit because it continues to have all of the
existing at-grade intersection conflict points. In addition, the lane drops (particularly
eastbound) would create new conflict points that would likely result in some crashes.
Concept 2 would eliminate the crossing and turning conflict points, but would still have a
high volume of traffic interacting withm the roundabout. Concept 3 has only one crossing
conflict point, between the westbound TH 131eft turns onto southbound TH 13 and the
north bound lefts turns from TH 13 to westbound CH 101. This concept removes all crossing
and turning conflicts involving through traffic and substitutes merging and diverging
conflicts with a much lower probability of resulting in a crash.
Concept 3 would likely result in the greatest crash reduction and is considered to be the
safest alternative.
Environmental Overview
TH 169 Interchange (Stagecoach) Concepts
Most of the potential environmental impacts are located within the existing Mn/DOT right-
of-way (except the possible impact to the Superior Supply Company parcel on Concepts 1, 3
18
SCOTT COUNTY TH 169/TH 13 STAKEHOLDERS WORKSHOP REPORT
and 4). The most notable impact will involve encroachment on the existing
retainage/mitigation ponds located to the south of the TH 169 to TH 13 ramps. The small
.pond located just north of the railroad tracks would also be effected by Concepts 1, 3 and 4.
TH 13 Concepts
All three TH 13 concepts are within the existing Mn/DOT right-of-way and would not
require acquisition of any additional land. It appears that the only impacts to the adjacent
property involve the proposed closure of the existing access from Zinran Avenue to CH 101,
approximately 2,000 feet west of the TH 13 intersection.
Cost Estimates
Planning level cost estimates were completed for each TH 169 (Stagecoach Road) and TH 13 ,
intersection concepts for comparison purposes. The estimates were based on a conservative
itemized list of concept features shown in Table 4. These estimates were based on
TABLE 4
TH 169 Interchan a Sta ecoach Road Conce t Unit Costs
Item Unit Cost
Ramps
1,500 ft ramp $800,000
2,000 ft ramp $1.0 million
3,500 ft ramp $1.6 million
Structures ,
Railroad Bridge (150 feet long) $1.0 million
Local Bridge Over Mainline (240 feet long) $3.0 million
Retaining Wall (1,500 feet) $800,000
Local Roadway
Expansion of Stagecoach (3,000 ft) $2.5 million
Reconstruction of Intersection $1.0 to 1.5 million
Urban Multi-Lane Roundabout $1.5 to 2.5 million
Signalized Intersections $250,000
Stagecoach Concept 1 Stagecoach Concept 2
1 1,500 ft ramp $800,000 2 2,000 ft ramp $2.0 million
1 3,500 ft ramp $1.6 million 1 Local Bridge Over Mainline $3.0 million
1 Railroad Bridge $1.0 million 2 Retaining Wall $1.6 million
1 Local Bridge Over Mainline $3.0 million 1 Expansion of Stagecoach $2.5 million
1 Retaining Wal! $800,000 2 Signalized Intersection $500,000
1 Expansion of Stagecoach $2.5 million
1 Signalized Intersection $250,000
TOTAL $10 million TOTAL $9.6 million
19
SCOTT COUNTY TH 169lfH 13 STAKEHOLDERS WORKSHOP REPORT
Stagecoach Concept 3 Stagecoach Concept 4
2 1,500 ft ramp $1.6 million 3 2,000 ft ramp $3.0 million
1 3,500 ft ramp $1.6 million 1 3,500 ft ramp $1.6 million
1 2,000 ft ramp $1.0 million 1 1,500 ft ramp $800,000
1 Railroad Bridge $i.0 million 1 Railroad Bridge $1.0 million
1 Local Bridge Over Mainline $3.0 million 1 Local Bridge Over Mainline $3.0 million
2 Retaining Wall $1.6 million 5 Retaining Wall $4.0 million
1 Expansion of Stagecoach $2.5 million 1 Expansion of Stagecoach $2.5 million
2 Signalized Intersection $500,000 4 Signalized Intersection $1.0 million
TOTAL $12.8 million TOTAL $16.9 million
TH 13 Concept 1 TH 13 Concept 2
1 Intersection $1.5 million 1 Urban Multi-Lane $2.5 million
I Reconstruction Roundabout
TOTAL $1.5 million TOTAL $2.5 million
TH 13 Concept 3
1 Local Bridge $3.0 million
2 1,500 ft Retaining Walls $1.6 million
1 Intersection Reconstruction $1.0 million
TOTAL $5.6 million
20
SCOTT COUNTY TH 169lTH 13 STAKEHOLDERS WORKSHOP REPORT
Conclusions
TH 1691nterchange (Stagecoach) Concepts
All four of the Stagecoach Road access concepts are feasible and could be implemented to
provide some benefit to the local system. However, the addition of traffic generated by the
Southbridge Crossings development has the potential to exceed the capacity of some
elements of the regional road system -especially Highway 169 to the north of the site. The
advantages and disadvantages of each are briefly described below.
Concept 1 -Add Ramps To/From North
• Provides access to Stagecoach Road from the north, the direction most in need of access
based on the developer's traffic generation assumptions
• Has the most advantage for transit to access TH 169 1~
• May require some right-of-way from adjacent parcel
• May have negative impact on TH 169 operations during peak hours
Concept 2 -Add Ramps To/From East
i~
• The lowest cost out of all four concepts
• Only provides additional access to the east
• Does not provide any transit advantage
Concept 3 -Add Ramps To/From North & East
• Provides the most access to the regional system if it is determined that CH 21 is a
freewa eliminatin the feasibili of Conce t 4 b rovidin access to the east and to I~
Y( g tY P ) Yp g
the north ~
Concept 4 -Add Ramps to/From North, East & West
• Provides the most access to the regional system if CH 21 is constructed as an arterial
through the study area by providing access to the east, west and north
• Costs the most out of the four concepts
• Less advantage for transit with access to TH 169 through intersection on CH 21
• Does not provide any safety advantage with the addition of four signalized intersections j
(two on Stagecoach Road and two on CH 21)
TH 13 Concepts
All three of the TH 13 access concepts are feasible. The following are brief summaries of the
advantages and disadvantages of each. ~
Concept 1 - At Grade Improvement
• Lowest cost concept
• Easiest to implement and construct
• Does not provide an adequate amount of reserve capacity for future traffic volumes
• Would not improve safety of the intersection
• Creates adesign/operations challenge associated with the mainline lane drops ,
21
SCOTT COUNTY TH 169/TH 13 STAKEHOLDERS WORKSHOP REPORT
Concept 2 -Roundabout
• Multi-lane roundabouts have not been implemented within the region and therefore has
1 the most risk associated with operations and feasibility
• Would provide improvement in safety by eliminating conflict points, but still would
have interaction between large volumes of traffic
• Forecast volumes indicate that amulti-lane roundabout would have little reserve
capacity
• Large truck volumes create the potential for adverse impacts to operations and capacity
if trucks off-track into both lanes of the roundabout.
Concept 3 -Partial "T" Interchange
• Provides the best traffic operations for both current and forecast traffic conditions
• Improves safety by eliminating all mainline crossing and turning conflict points and
removing through traffic from signal control
• U-turn movements are no longer accommodated.
• Is the most costly of the three alternatives
Follow Up Actions
• Scott County should consider generating a more detailed cost estimate for all concepts
selected for further project development.
• Scott County should consider moving forward with project development of a "Bus
Only" ramp from Stagecoach Road to Highway 169. This could provide advantages for
transit (especially if combined with initiating transit enhancements along Highway 169)
without creating the levels of traffic impacts that resulted in Mn/DOT's concerns about
traffic operations on the regional road system.
• Scott County should consider including a detailed analysis of traffic operations on the
regional road system as part of any future project development in the area.
1
1
I
t
f
22
I
Appendix A
December 6, 2006 Stakeholder's Workshop
PowerPoint Presentation
d o
c L ~ d
° O o ~ ~ ~ O
m ~
E y c v c0 N~ ~ ~Q
Q ~ y ul (Q ~ ~ 'p i
a~i r` o ~ OQ ~o R OO
S N O ~ d c d
m T o 3 m'a y
_ ~ ~ ~ d ~ s c m
a a~i ~ 'a d 3 c d
O ~ N as Q ~
v ~ ~ ~ O ~ _ ~ ~ c ai ~ cv +r
~ .8 E ~ 3 c ~ ~ ~A ~EYr °.5 ~a~
~ ° as z 'y~ > C ~ ~ d o p O o M ~ Ul
0 ~ a = c am o°'c ~ 0 ~N s v x
f+ ~ w ~a d caom~ d...
~3 o c ~ cn
1 O O ~ ~p.e U~ ~ ~ ~ip mpV m o~'00
.E.+ a ~ O O ~ ~ ~ ~a as
~ ® ~ ~ ~ ~
•a y
,~s Q N ~ o
> ~ c c c
4~ N
M ~ ~ ~ ~
r Q ~ ~ ~ ~
~ O O ° a. ~ ~ o ~ c
2~ ~ N c= O d~
L ftf ~ 9 ~ m
r (n O ~ c i ~ ~ ~ w
L a~ 0 0 ~ +r O c
~ O. U v
e
_ ~ ~ a~i ~ 2 = c ca
~ O ~ ~ O O t V~~
V Y ~ Q ~ C ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
vN = ~ ~~~W
~ O = ~ w ~ ~ ~
V) U ~ a~ a~ ~ ~ a~
_ ~ OG ~ OC C~ it. OC
N
~ ~ ® ~ ® ~ ~
v
i
~ ~ ;way r'~,llle i y. 3 ° ea,i
. F~ ~ y ~ ~ ~
~C 01 ! ~ , w+
N ~ Y O m ``'`fxx~~brG~r~~~ t~~~~rt $ tiL9 , W
V = ~ ~i~ y~rp ~ L ~m YAP, ~
~F ~
~`J` V/
,Y 1C ~ M a t0 ~ " A
s. G~ ~ d C i p ~ ~ s
L ~ 'a a' V ~ ~ f tl`~ ~
~ E ~ c c ~,-~r r ~
0 p ~ ~ ~ ra
C1 ~ IL O _ 9+ t
~ A` ~ O ~ L!7 O F yl: ..1-n
O ii ~ W ~ ~ ~ ~~I ~F~_~,.A y~t
~Y ~ 'T ~ ~ k k
-O M/~ A ~ ~ a r b i '~i` ~rc~ 3 ~t~~ '4~r
,C~
O Q~ r LL ~ . 1 i~~ kN~ ti ~
W f
a d s ca o c ~ cu i, F ~ .c{ @~
~ ~ z
o ~
{
R N H a'u. d. ~ i,= coo > ~
r ~
r
N ~ Y ~2
= w.. ~ ~
J
0 ~ i ~
N = i
~ G ~
r
~ v ~ ~ _
o
~ .y v
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~
~ o =
c ~ N °a ~ V
- ~ ~ _ ~ c
~ e O ~ O I Y
1 ~ _ ~ ' ~ y Q' ~ ~
o ~
Q cn c o ~ ca
y - ~
~ _ Z V~ d G t~
~ - I `1 YO oUcn2
~
4. J W
a ~
a
o~
< ~
O Ei~'
yr = I'i
~ ~ ~
_ ~ ; 't
Q N / ,I ~
~e d~ ~j 1 ~ ~a
;
I.Y } J y{y{
T f) fl /
t
v- ~ Q .d.. b ~ ' t)aiEi li~U`'
O ~ r. ~r ° x~ y i~k~ t4a~ ~ z ~ ,
~ r t' ~
L O ~ °r° ~ ~ ___X? ~l._,,.t~ , .
0 ~ -
~ r N V F firr: ! , ~ ~~1
~ ~
W N c~ 1F T Il~`~~ t.ti- i
N 3 v e II ` ~I ~3.,.. ~ ~ ,
t+ r V o ~ )~/^I ~ ~
~
~1VA tV c ~ v 'e ~sl ~ ~ ~J
Q K p i G~ a
0 N W v ~ , : 'W-'o
a ~ =N
® ao
'`,,,~.y~ ~ ~ ~ ~ sue' ~ ~F
' ~ °j ° a by ~\~.y ~ ~p...
i ~1L^~+ ~
}~~t e rr ~ ~ ~ r ti u~ at--- ~ O ~ ~ ~ N
,f / m ~ 'a ~ v
j' %r\~1 i
ja! c-; m- ,I 8` , •-yAO i~ ~ i,. O ~
!q 0 t
I'i z ~a ~ p ~
i h j ~ R ''S %I'€
~ s r . ~r
",~s~:-=-~ ~
- =-~T~._.._ _ 0 =
t'-
3 3 w ~ m
~ ~ G a ~ ^ i ~'y d
_ ~
O
l ~ .C ~ ~S ""'Q d O C
O E C ~ to N~~ ~ O
r' ~ Q~ Q_ ~ ~ ~ ~ .~.r V y.~ C d V
O
~ ~
j q_ Y O i ~~'S Q E'a
) aooL
N ~
to ~ t ~
_ as ~ ~ ca +r V
~ ~ O ~ ~v~ r ~ _ ~
~ yC== y~~ _ ~ ~S ~ O
_ Q ~ N 0 3 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ A
~ Q~~ ~ ~3~ c~C > N ai ~
V o_oo =NO ~ o>,r
~ N ~ ~ ~
•i~+ Rey dN ~ ~ O
~L~' oho ~ o.-r• ~
~o~ ~p cco~~ ~ ~ c
N m~ O E C ~ p ~
Q Y ~ V cC ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ t N ~ ~ •F+
V ~ ~
y ~ L O N W V= ~
~ •y O ~ ;
~ v1 ~ ~ N
tts cC ~ as . ~ G1 ~
•~:=t Caws h 3~ ~ d
i i i 3 i ~ C~ V •
r~ vOi
~ ~
•4+ M Q ~ x
~ _ ~ N d
~ _ ~
~ v •C C• O
i 0
J ~
C L v O Q
a
/ oo Q ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ N
.V O Q ~ Q = C c_OU OC C'3
W
1 ^
0 L
N ~ _
1 ~ ¢ w •N ~ ~
~ aJ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ O Q
o ~
~ o d~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ Q = Q =
C ¢ ~ 0 ~ V ~
V .a+ C ~ O C ~
~ = O N
L' •lC •V N N N
C 2 ~ W C
tl) ~ ~ U ~ N ~ sU C
V V
Q G1 ~ O ca
'O ~ i to ~ N d C ~ ~ _
~ 3 ~ ~v w~ U ~ c o ~p m
1 ~ •~m~a~i~y~coi y~ ~~~c,JO~~
y O o
Q ~ ~ ~ . V ~ Vf i G. ~ t+ C ~ J U G1 ~ ~ ~ i
~V~ ~ii~o~~~~ c'Q ~ 2 QJOC ~ W
m ~[=•Saooca°c~ ~c W
1
1.
I ,
~r5 4 i , 411
~ ` ,~@ ~I~'f' e- '
''~i ~ l~7 1~ ~°rx
# ~ ~ ~ FW
~i q i7 1- ti ~ ~ _ - „
~ ~ _ w
ti v
w j., fit. ~ ' + - -
~ U .~I.
~ ~ a` ~
' _
i
N € ~
~ x'f'c ~
,i: ~ - ~ ~ r
x ~
i i ~
~
~ ~
i ;t ~
€
II~I~ ~«IIII~ „
.a~
o
W P 50 5
~ f
a i
L ¢~~Ex (b 3
~~ikyu 'O ~ rc
5 6 gs
M _ _ ~ ~ ~~i r
r ~ ~
fie§ a ,T~°ae~ , ~ ~ .y^ `Q`
a§=2 3$ ~FZ~3~ ~ ~ w ~ ~ i~ f
peg x ~ ~ s ~ tCS p O
a8 2`4 f
o a a
~ R R 8 $ S ° 8 ~ S R E ~ W O
A+ ._..._....0_........~_C__-.....-_........._ w.. O ~ J
W C ~
ji Q~ ~
O O N ~ LzaQq C ~ ~ ~ G_~ _
Q W N At.O V fA °N~~." R dd O \Y
` _ _ ~ _
~170.N G1 t Cy~O C~NOiy N LO~ ly~~ U
y ^ ~yHGRf~ M> cd~~a OCyytlf O O r r ~
Y li c d a~ p p o ar- ~ y .a ~
E Gu1M NO aL`Od N ~-M c C
MONO= LInlO md.pNt Ri>S ~ O
C)>>.N..H I-cD'aB~Ucov> mOdHWa N
' 0 ~ ~
m
v
D
N = ~
~ ~ ~
~ ~ C~ C ~
~ O G ~ Q.
~ ~ N ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ V
~ ~
M ~ N ~ ~ p O
V ~ v ~ ~ ~ ~ V
C ~ N p `n V i 0
O ~ = O = ~ ~
ctt .
O
v c c = O
C1 is c~ ~ ~
Nl y~ .Y_ cCf ~ ,u,,. (3 L Q~
~ ~ z ~ ~ s o N
a~ a z • ~
Z a
+I~
~ ~ m ~ ~
a~ ~i ~j,
¢j
W
° ~ a ~I. M.
. ~
c
V t ~ ~ i ~ ( N
~ ~ V ~ ~ d d
~ ~ : ~ V y-'
O C ~ ( ~ ~ C .y
' N .F. r ` i X
~ ~ ~ i~ ~ i
~ E ~ ~ ~ ~y I ~ d
a ~
~ L ~ a~ t IL ~
~ y ~ ~
m w ~ c a ~ d ,o ~ E
~ a~i N E o m y c
o s a
~ ~ U~~ ~ ~ j ~ ~ a
W e • • ~ ~ • •
® ~ ~ ~ J
N
1 U
~ ~ C O f/1 i
C C O U 'p r O
O U E m ~ O~ N N U N
N~ O ~ fd ~ C V
~ N y N N N (Lf > Q
~ Q' N ~ l~ ~ p Q L
tN/1 ~ ~ ~ O O ~ ~ U i
N N N N ~
~i Q.~ N ~ Q-~p N U.V .p
Q~ O E~y~ ~Q~Jna`.~
L
V ~
' = d ~
> ~
~ ~ ~
_ n.._
~ ~ > ~
~ a ~ ~ ~ ~
" t/1 ~ c
> a~ 3 ~
W R ~ 'rn E ~
^ N 3 O
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O
V
W ~ ~ U U
1 ~ ,j~ O O Q i ~ .RS cd j
' V O ~ C C
~ 3c=aa~i~oo~oo~
~ d~ ~H~Uin~aoC
~c~.Q o®oo~~®
_ r- ,
~ ~ B
1 _ ~
~y r;~ ~ „ ~ `w`' ~ yam,
v r
x'11 " i'" ~ ~ i ~ J°, ~ ~'~n 1~ ~ - - ~ ~ ' ;j •
~ t
\ r D, ' r ~ 1
\ \ {f
ti
f: ~ \ ~
~ ; ~ s ! .emu I i(H ~i ' ~ ;bra ' ~ r
~ iu, i ii r i iii `7
~ .
a
i ~
F ~ a ~ ~ j~" b r
~ rp ~ ~
~
/ jr
w/ 1
~~k~
- 1 ~ ~ ~ iI
~.u~ ~ f~ ~ ~
_ ,
y
~
. a ~ ~ ~ ~ r r
f
r, m
..a .
r': ° ~ I4 1. _
j
~d i~ `k ~'~'ti~3
~ _
~ ~S
169 . , 4~_ ~
,w~~ ~
y~LL,
r
y4 4 f`kY 1* Y
~~LL
x a , _ Av
13th enu ~'o..
: a eF>
.
i
4
rF ~ ~I
-"'I.A ~
~
`1 ~ i ply / d .J~ t ~ } i I
~ ~ ~ ~r _ 9 4 111- I J 11 ~ 1 t~ a ~~j 4 ca ^ti
. .1 ~ 1 ~ .kffi~~. Ir' 4F i! i~1 ~ R;..,f ~ I
ry ~ -9 11 hn, 1
~ 1111 V
r Ax °'ll '1,,'M1 °i ~ ~ ff ~ ~ ' u"«~ '
fJ~/ 1 119 ~4fk~~ ~ \-'iY `n I r P~h 4f~ _ ~
ca mow.. ~Y ~ ~ ~ ~ 'F ?fit -~I~ H i
n
n 4 ? ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .x _ \ ~ ~ i ~lx~ ill ~ qr ~ ~ I - F ~ ~
~ i- it '
~ ~ h~ ~ ~ _ '7 . .tip ~ -,w, ,
' Legend ~ - d Stagecoach Road
MainlinelRamps Bridge °°RetainingWall <3 Number of Lanes sca~,~
'moo ~ gc~essrrpomlheNath
~h ~ - ~ Local Sireet Existing Removal
i i
f , :r
r '"i'
~ °r ' $~le ~ _ 11
_
~~1~~ "i 1)'ri~i '.,1 ~r.
~ ~ ~w
~ ~
_ _ ~ r~ >,.L. Y a,,~.
3 ? i ~
. M <.N~,.
~ ~ .t 'ilp~ n ';td i 1 ~ -
.r
` ~ '1 _ ~ r
~ ~ z~
~ ;
~ r:~ ,a
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - ~I
~l
a~ , ,11„
e. .
a.n. ~~11 ~i 6
< ^ . c~ ~ ~ °v. „ate- ~
r ~ ~ _
7 ~ # ~ ~y ~ -
1
V;
f~""--
_ _
_ . _ v.Y .w.,~ ~
~ _
169 ~
_
~ -
~ ~ - m.
_ 13th Avenue ~ ~
n
°
7 ,.r~ r ~ ~ Y
<
?u ~ " ~ ~`t
~ _ ~ -
"a: _1 -'1 4µr- °1 -...i _.~~~1 ; . 1 _ \~1 ~ - _ ~ I - --~:aM~
° , ~ ~ _I1~ ~i r's~ y ~rw~~~1~ ~ 'll. - ,a j~~~ ~ ~~1~ 1 } ins; ~ ~ t _ - V - ~
1 ` ~ ` 1 ! q«° 7J1 i,7 1' ill ~ l~ -0 _ ~ I l a. w a ~
1 V
an "'h '^,1 "9 i i ~ ~ h°', ' ~ r fit ~ _ ~ 1 - ( ~ 'iJ
ti 11 ~ I ' ir1 .~'1' ,'.1 'n
~'1 d~ X1,.5 m.. ~ - 5. ~ ..y i A ; ,
.
,l ° I I I~ ^1 '.1 '°1 1 '1~~ ~ ~ i i,€~ y t 1 '4t i
~ ~ . v \
°M° $ u ~ 4i ' d~.s~~.`'~ ~ 2 : _J.Nn l1^i. ~ , ql ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1~~ « t
'"'1 _ -
h
~ _
_ - - -
i ,'ti q. a v ~ , fit, a M
' Legend ~ ~ Stagecoach Road
scn~: '"`500' Concept 2
~ MainlinelRamps Bridge Retaining Wall <3 Number of Lanes ~oo~ ~ t,~srromma F~
~ ~ Local Street Existing Removal
f
. . _ ~ ~ , rti~ ~ ~
~~I"s1 ' ' 7 n ~ ~ \ 1 ~
777 ..i Z .;Rt 5 f r J_ I; ~ ,'n...
~1~`v ~I I "~`~.y~ i it Iii ~ ~ I if
7 f ]
~ ~ ~ ~i ~ ~ y t
~ ~ ~ ~
~ _ _ _ i ! 1 ~ ~ ! ~A;~ , ~
' ~ ~ ,~,d iii ° I 'I ~ i~~
~ c>xr~r, , ~ '!.w„g;., ~-4 ~ ,~~~~~~~R`.,. t ~ s r6 i ~ I ~illi~1~ ~ ,
r1
S
' e~. \r
1 r ~ J /
3`, r. ~ ~x~ ti ~ ~ f fly ~~'~l i
y ~k.~yFti. ~ .qty i r~~~~~~1~~~::
~ v.y
j .
K..-~ ~
[ - _
~
~
~ ~ x
L
~ i -
.4 a
/ ~ 1 - - ~ 3
6~.~~
- y
f~µ..+-+. 4 ~ if.
r
~~~e~ .n I`
f ~
169 - ~ ~ n
w~
r,
F. --_.__W__ ~ 13th Avenue
r: +e i ~ . 9 ~
i
- P s
_ -
~ R ~ i e
m,
- _
_ ~ ~ i I ~ ~a
~s i
r
9 ~ ~ ~ Ili ~l,l al t~~p ~ ~ I 1 ti ~
qr ..gBLgr 1 ~ / 1 ~ \ ~ c A
n
i ~ r1 A ,rl "7 'g1 x~i s,f ~ ice ! 'I„ ~ `in ~l l i*J
y
' f'.
i~
a ,
4 ~ "1111' ~ >.~.q ~~.n ,QY, - ~ ~ * ~~a,~ ,~~r"`,-.
1'I , ,
1 ~ \
--1 y
' ~i ~ \ I
r ` v
' ~ ~ , h ~ y" ~ r'~ r ~ it
r ,
. ~ C0.' 3 ~
11 it i. I^:~
1'
r i 1
'~r,
~~,r H. „ V`~ _ rl:~ 1 III i'.~ ~ r ~
~ in ni~ ~ s - ,
~ .~q,
Stagecoach Rcad
_,.~T.
Legend t°=moo Concept 3
~ MainlinelRamps Bridge ~-Retaining Wall ~3 Number of Lanes scn~e® ~ gccessrmmlhaNathandEast
~ ~--°_.~r Local Street ~ F~cisting Removal
_ _
I
1
_ _
1~ 1~ ,y , k`" ~ ~ ,
'h r rrad~ t ~ ~ 1 r ,
r ~ 1 r.
~ ~ ~ V Fn) I ~..c. t
k i, ( ~~!i~ ~ ~
~'i ~ ~ ~ 'alt lt~n t :i~ I i', t
~ M b". ~ \ IVY ~ I ,V t ig `7 ~ ~
ti 1~ l
t ~
"`tit ~ ' ~
,,1~;,,~, ct
. ~ ,
s ~
- - i ~ ~ ,
~
4 ~ ~ r1.
~ c ' s't . A~ ~ ~ry,.,~
_ .a<e "'y~ ill i,i~ll~l~~l~; s~~ b
N ~:k, ~y t,
~ ~ ~.3;~~~ ~ ~:+y a
i ~ ~ ._1 '1~~. ~ At 714..5 ~ F • i
'
~
µ
_.'t .5 ~ E.
- ~
~ 'r ~ g,
z
r~~
~
n
.F _
4.
169 ~ ,p r
~ ,
_
,.-=r^ s
~ ,
' s 13th Avenue _
, ~
~
t ! is
~ ~1 ,r ~ i, J
I r ~ ~ t
~ ~ i
r' t.: ~ ~ .y _ ° . 111111 Ir+'d -
. .mss ~'~.v - ~ ~ ; s ~ ~ r,, r mil ~x ~ ~ u ~
`111 ~ a. ~ ~ ~ 'E ~ ~ ~ ~ . f
,t
1'19 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
X119. . ~ ~ N ~ . ~ ~i ;R"~ ~*'"-o
f , I I I'q '^T °-7 ""t `7 ~A'c~frrt
~ a 'n1 t~°ri ~ _ t .V-. ~u "r ri i,
,
"
l r. ~ .
m
5'Llm ~ - ~ 'f.~r t ; - 1 \ ~ .i1~N] 11] 9 7~''~ 3 _ - ~ ~ F6` t~ ~ `
' w Legend 1 d Stagecoach Road
MainlinelRam s Bride ~ Retainin Wall y3 Number of Lanes scw.e, ~ Concept 4
P 9 g Accsssfrom the Nafh, Eest, and
A Local Street Existing Removal wa61
'
. e , ~
a
' v. `mil Northbound TH 79 ,
.'mod. `'t ~ ~ ' ~3 ~ ~ US 1&91TH 13 '
~ ` r ~ LaneASSlgnments
t ~ r. - i ~ 1 , , ~ ~ - ~<4 ; fie`''
i
Y
k
r
-'k ~ ~ F } ~ Q7Cr. ~ C' ~a Is "a
, _ L f • ~ 7> tIINE59U
e I ~ 'tC •r,
"'i, 3'f5~.,.~o~ ~ ~I ~ ~ ~C' 4;i a ~ ~ ~ i a Vti ~9~ v' - ,t~ C
! a ~ ~ ^ol ~ , ~ ~ ~ ~ - `v Q ~ i tip N ~ .t97yy9V
~ is/.7~ r. ~ ~ 1s I ~ r ~ C a°
S 11 N - ~ ~ 1' I I yf , 1~~Q/" - ~!R ' ? '.S.
' q. 1 ~ y ' e. i - - ~ A' ~ ~ Ik' A ~eF J e~~'.i; n(j~ ~ a
L ~ ~ v
_ _ _ / 1 (I t ~~~h~ ~ I"~ e ~.F; ~ R~ ~l a 5'~rYT ~
_ I....Ff--"'~i
i 1 YT1 , Y , ~ M ~ L ~ ~ w,e t r
h:- k ti . ~
_ ~ I v, ' i~ ~ yr i
- - - ' _ r ~^,T t R y
~y
rt . 12
6th Street ~ Yom.'
' ~ ~ 126th Street ~ ~ M
_ - , ~ t,
1.
_ , r ,
~ k
`~a 1.. ~ ~ s ~ aj1~r.cnn. ~ .ray,
T 1P ~ RL '~r 1' t. ! 7
t
" ~T~y,~ ~ lkl~ r~, 4 i .ate ~ y
w~
ryr ,r ~ ,fir ~ - ,
.t.
~ ~ ~ ti~1 ~ ~
-
_ , ~ ~ 1' 128th Street . _
- , . ~ ~ _ ~t
I
P , ~ • ~ ~ ~ _ .~r
~IIIIESOIA f ~ h
~ u
P~' ~ ! ! ~ '1 "
r;r
^ i
Legend TH 13 Concept 1
Mainline/Ramps Bridge Retaining Wall =3 Number of Lanes scue:
~ Local Street ~_LL---= Existing Removal Add Lana Capacity
i
~ r ~ ~I ~ . . 4 h. ~ }Say; /";y,
,x,, M ~ a # Y _ 'J.
t' ~J ~ ~ (S Y..~
t
'S
,y t
a
> , t
a, ~ ~ ..r~~<se ,;y
I
• '
• r ;
I ~ ~
• 9
r 'i ~ Y
..i ~
r~
v - ~
' f 3Y t . II ~ ( 4\jS~A ~.9 1 ~ r~~Y~ - ~ ~ ~ , l ~ ~ ( I ` Y~~. ,J)
r ~ C
III
^M s~ r
J H'/
~ y,~ ~ f g
~ "~-'b ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~I ~ pi 4~ ~ ~ _ ~ ~ 1i-Y i ~ 3 (9 A 1' I f ~ ~ t '~k. Q) ~q' . T'k"
~ ~ ~ I h } i . !i My ~ `-v / ~ Q ~ Y 14f N 1 ~,99n7
'a °.f d 7 ~ y ~ ` 7 ~ ~ _ 1 r ~1 J .k' ~ I t 1, ~+~i ~ _ (Q i?I^Yy,:i~ , 3 ,
~~PI .yr I .W - ~bs,~ I ~ ~ Ian 7 Y'e.. ~~/1' C f h 3
_ ~
Ii 1 ~'.c~' ~ ~ S ~ ~ , s ~ p9lsebtlf;, ~ r j ~s{^ ~ _ _ ~ t ~Af ~ Y ! FY qp_~
_ - ,fir r- t,.~ ~,;J. t 7? . 1 ,t,. - ~ ~j T - ~ '
"Y`
Iwr ,^~~~tti - a 'a~ 1
~ 'z f
_a ,~~.I~ ~ 1 , r*iaa~ c~ ~
y
~ , rI
r ~ ~ 126th Street ° 126th Street ~ ~ p _ tom-
,,y V
_ ` d
`S , a
r +~ry,'. i ~ - ~ K. ~ ~ ~
~ f ~ ~ f~
x
w .
~ ter" "^yl ,jam- ~ „ r. _ j ' ~ - _ . ~ I
, 1 ~ 128th Street ~ ~ ? -
y
Mfr 1 f,^i p ti~ ~ ~ ~ ` ~M v~i` '
,
d
w
n y 4 - ~ '
r
i
p. ~ r V 9
_ya1 rA
!i .
r
i
. ~ ,
d TH 13 Concept 2
`Legend r=soo~
^
Mainline/Ram s Bride Retainin I Wall <3 Number of Lanes scaF: ~
9
P 9 i
Roundebau
~ ~ I tr t Existin Removal
Loca S es
9
r r
{ s '
" ~ ' 4~ ,
6 . ~ ~ I y .A r~} ,y ~ A „ F
~ S
. n.
e
i
d
d, i t , rN` • ^aW
~ r,~~ ~ ~ '•e~t .
' ~ ~ ~ f~ P
>'y!*~~> > ~ ~ :r r
_ ~ ~
. ~ ~ - .7 i ~ ~ ~ t
~r..1 ~ . ` .
1 v ~ .1~ li
_f Imo. (.~f 1 .'l~' ~1 ~ N1'.. ~`Z.yp..~ <,2 ry,. _
~ V m i, i `x' r
' a~v~.vy~. ~I. II~~` ~ ~ C ~ yf' ~ ~ r~ r - ~l yb~ ~ ~ ~d: r~r„. „..,1..
+o so v m a ~ "t ~ 7, ' ~ rJV ~ ~ ~ ®...~.n,'yi ' V rat i:ro ~ ~ I f' ~ ~ ~
y ~ I ~ C
i . ~ • ~ ~ c'o~ ~ ~ ' s` ti ; 11 y .,,y. _ ti la * y/Prr ~ ~ .y `1 ~ 1.
7 ~ "y 6/ / ~ ~ ti r. ~ ~ . I I'~ ~i' n es~ ~1Y~a i ~ S~ r
~ t s~ ~ - ' ~ ~ .l a ~ ~ ~t 1 ,K- ~ nN ~ rV
_ j_ Imo, - .,u.
i ~ / ~ ~ ~
d . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r 3.1 11 +ry L -
_ _ _ ~ ~ ~ I ~ .L ~ °L~ y , 1 y _ r i
r , ~ j I 126th Sheet -
r, ~ • 126th Street ~ _
_ - - , J~' ~ 1 , ~ r~, _ - ~ :Y - tee' ~
~ N • ~ Y M Yly a ~ .ray _
- a k-~, 1 -
~6 y: A~ 1 ~ r . r 7 ~n
S ~ +s.
c 1t ~ 9 ,o,' ~
Y i ~ ~ l _A I , ~ '
~ • . ~ ~~t r ~ t _ _ w~,, x
ia.+ y II 1~~~~,a f'i ~ 7r ~~r
, , t ~ 128th Street v ~ - e
~ 5 ~ ~ # Nx.
1 ~ p f~ ~7t r" . s
~n F t7N1[SOtI i ~ ~ „ r1 ~
'r i ,
•n ~ J TH 13 Concept 3
' Legend
scar:: x`500
Mainline/Ramps Bridge ° Retaining Wall <3 Number trf Lanes ~ parcel ~ntercha~pe
C' • Local Street F~cisting Removal
1
Scott county Property caret rage 1 of 1
Scott County Property Card
~
Owner Information ~ I ~ . ` ~ .
Owner: SUPERIOR SUPPLY COMPANY ~ ~ ~ ~
Address: -
City/State/Zip: MPLS , MN 55440 ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~
~ ~
Parcel Address ! ,f
a'
' Address: 1109 STAGECOACH RD ~ i _ _
City/State/Zip: SHAKOPEE MN 55379 , s t ~ ,
Property Information it s ~'''^~-.ti,~~`'---.~„y,,,
Parcel ID 271100010 f - ti 4 F 1,
Number: -
- - t ~ ~ '
ti
Deeded Acres: 21.7
GIS Acres: 21.7 \ y
Plat; PLAT-27110 SUPERIOR SUPPLY 1ST ADDN ~
Lot: 1 _ _
Block: 1 _ ~
SUPERIOR SUPPLY 1ST ADDN Lot-001 Block- _ ~
001 21.70 AC LYING SE OF LINE COM PT ON
Le al W LINE 67.46' S OF W COR, NE TO PT ON N ; _ ~ 0 572 Feet
g LINE 92.43' E OF W COR& THERE ~
' Description: TERMINATING & LYING NWOF LINE COM _ .,e,.~... ~
203.04' NW OF E COR, 5W 488.68' TO 5 ,
j.....
LINE &THERETERMINATING (HWY). t
# ~
t3uitding Characteristics This drawing is neither a legally recorded map nor a survey and is not intende
Model Type: IND/WRHSE to be used as one. This drawing is a compi{ation of records, information, any
data located in various city, county, and state offices, and other sources
Year Built: 1986 affecting the area shown. Scott County is not responsible for and inaccuracie
' Architectarat herein contained. If discrepancies are found, please contact The Scott Counb
Styfe• N/A Surveyors Office.
Foundation Size 37625
{Sq Ft): ,
' Garage Size (Sq 0
Ft);
Bedrooms: 0
' Bathrooms: 0
Complex Y
Property:
Tax Information
' Taxing Dis#rict Code: 2204 Taxing District: SHAKOPEE CITY
Township/City Cade: 27 Township/City: 27
School District Code: 720
Net Taxes: $ 0 Special Assessments: $ 0
' Net 'Taxes plus Specia! Assessments: $ 0 Outstanding Special Assessments: $ 0 '
First Hatf Payment: $ 0 Second Half Payment: $ 0
Homestead Status: N Homestead Classification: PREP INDUSTRIAL
' Exempt Status: Green Acres:
Ag Preserve:
Property 1/aiese
Land: $ 458100 Building: $ 1032500
Green Acres: $ 0 Total: $ 1490600
' Sate Reformation
Sale Date: N/A Sale Price: N/A
' http://gis.co.scott.mn.us/website/common/asp/printParcelSummaly.asp?thePin=271100010 1/312007
Scott t;ounty rroperty c:arct rage 1 of 1
t Scott County Property Card
Owner in#ormation
Owner: UNION PACIFIC RR COMPANY
' Address: 1400 DOUGLAS, STOP 1640
City/State/Zip: OMAHA , NE 68179
Parcel Address
Address:
City/State/Zip: ~~a
_ .fir ~
Property Information
' Parce{ ID Number: 270005000
Deeded Acres: 0
GIS Acres: 56.44
' Plat: ~ ~ f
Lot: F3
Block:
' RAILROAD PROPERTY CITY OF~~" -
Legal Description: SHAKOPEE T1
~ .
F2~~
Building Characteristics
' Model Type: ~ T2~~ r ~ ~ _ "~~A . ~
Year Built:
Architectural Style: ~
Foundation Size (Sq
' Ft)' This dravaing is neither a legally recorded map nor a survey and is not intendF
Garage Size (Sq Ft): to be used as one. This drawing is a compilation of records, information, anc
BedrOOmS' data located in various city, county, and state offices, and other sources
affecting the area shown. Scott County is not responsible for and inaccuracie
' Bathrooms: herein contained. if discrepanries are found, please contact he.5..cott_Counh
Complex Property- surveyors ofrice.
Tax Information
Taxing District Code: 2201 Taxing District: SHAKOPEE CITY
Township/City Code: 27 TownshipJCity; 27
' School District Code: 191
Net Taxes; $ 0 Special Assessments: $ 0
Net Taxes plus Special Assessments; $ 0 Outstanding Special Assessments: $ 0
' First Hatf Payment: $ 0 Second Half Payment: $ 0
Homestead Status: N Homestead Classification; RAILROAD
Exempt Status: Green Acres:
' Ag Preserve:
Property Value
Land: $ 419700 Building: $ 0
' Green Acres: $ 0 Total: $ 419700
Sale zn#ormation
' Sale Date: N/A Sale Price: N/A
httpa/gis.co.scott.mn.us/website/common/asp/pzintParcelSummary.asp?thePin=270005000 1/312Q07
' Appendix D
MnIDOT Report Comments
' ~~~NN~or9yo Minnesota Department of i'ransportation
Metropor~tan D~str~ct
~~yr pF TRpayaO Waters Edge
' 1500 West County Road B-2
Roseville MN 55113-3174
' April 19, 2007
Lezlie V ernullion
Scott County
600 Country Trail East
Jordan, Minnesota 55352
SUBJECT: TH 169/TH 13 Stakeholder Workshop Report
Technical Memorandum
' Prepared for Scott County by CH2MHILL
December 2006
Dear Ms. Vermillion:
Thank you for the opportunity to attend and participate in the December 6, 2006 Design Concept
Workshop and the follow-up meeting on January 10, 2007. We routed the report to the Mn/DOT
workshop attendees and received the following comments.
The study includes on a new 400,000 square foot development and park-and-ride site that would exceed
2020 traffic volumes in 2010; we would like to review the methodology, applied growth factor and
.assumptions that went into the forecasts.
As the following comments indicate, improving capacity in this interchange and river bridge area is
complex. MnIDOT would like to continue working with Scott County and local communities to seek out
a long term solution to the complex and growing area. A shorter term improvement to pursue is transit
' advantages to cater to and attract more transit users. Mn/DOT supports further analysis of bus shoulders
on TH 169 in the vicinity of the Minnesota River Bridge. We also would like to explore further the
possibility of bus-only ramp access onto TH 169 access ramps. The concepts contained within the report
' depict only mixed-use ramps that add transit into already congested ramps.
TH 169/CR 101/CR 21/CR 18
While in attendance at the workshop, we heard the frustration over Mn/DOT's hesitation to encourage
development in the vicinity of TH 169 without further study and improvements. We would like to give
you some information that might explain some of the constraining elements of traffic flow on North
Bound TH 169, on and around the Minnesota River Bridge.
The right lane capacity of a standard 41ane freeway such as this one is 1900 vehicles per hour.
' Northbound TH 169 in the AM peak, the entering traffic from CR 18 is 1435 vehicles and an additional
329 vehicles at CR 101 leaving only 140 vehicles per hour for the remaining right lane mainline capacity.
The added third lane at TH 13, again with a capacity of 1900 vehicles per hour, currently has AM peak
hour volume of 1880 vehicles thereby using the majority of the available capacity of the added lane.
Ms. Vermillion
April 19, 2007
Page 2 of 3
Expanded service from CR 18 and CR 101 coupled with area growth will only produce more congestion
' for progressively longer periods of time. Further study to evaluate the growth and development of the
entire area to accompany this Southbridge Development Study would give a more complete picture of
traffic operations.
However, modeling for the planned TH 169/I-494 system interchange project shows that after
construction, congestion in the corridor improves. Currently TH 169 mainline in the vicinity of the
Minnesota River Bridge, operates at a LOS C/D in the peak hours and should improve to a LOS B/C with
today's traffic volumes.
Specific comments on the study are as follows:
' • Evaluation of Concepts, Table 2 - add a column to reflect a base condition (existing) to compare
to each of the alternates. This table should also break Traffic Operations to Local and Regional
Operations. This will better define what conditions will improve due to each of the concepts.
' • Evaluation of Concepts, Table 2, Concepts 3 & 4 -the phrase "but may be impacts to TH 169
operations" should be discussed further. Mn/DOT needs a better understanding of how TH 169
is affected as well.
• Modifications to southbound TH 169 exit ramp to Stagecoach Road -there is a concern with
capacity at the southbound TH 169 exit ramp to eastbound TH 13, the single lane ramp is at
capacity currently and will increase by approximately 550 cars with the Southbridge
' Development (PM Peak). Having a single lane off ramp from southbound TH 169 would be
problematic. This likely will cause backups onto the TH 169 mainline. To remedy this problem,
the bridge over CR 101 would likely need to be widened to accommodate 2 lanes.
Accommodation of a 21ane off ramp from TH 169 would require widening of TH 169 prior to the
off ramp and potentially to or across the Minnesota River Bridge.
• Modifications to northbound TH 169 entrance ramp from Stagecoach Road -the existing
' entrance ramp to northbound TH 169 in the AM peak hour is already at a high volume, adding
another lane and access point to the ramp will only further saturate the ramp causing more delay.
Bus-only ramps should be studied first.
• Modifications to eastbound TH 13 from Stagecoach Road -possible operational issues with close
spacing of consecutive eastbound entrance ramps unless improvements to the TH 13/CR 101
intersection and access control at Zinran Avenue.
• Interchange modification at CR 18 and TH 169/TH 13 ramps -modifying the interchange could
' be considered due to low volumes on free-movement loops and ramps. These modifications in
conjunction with the modifications to the TH 13/CR 101 intersection and access control at Zinran
Avenue would provide more benefit.
' • Adding an auxiliary lane from CR 18/CR 21 -our assumption was that this concept intended to
extend the existing auxiliary lane south to CR 18/CR 21. The westbound CR 101 to northbound
TH 169 ramp has an AM peak hour volume of 1880 vehicles and should have its only lane, not a
' merge condition.
TH 13
' • Relocating the signal at 126' and TH 13 to 128`t' and TH 13 has potential traffic operation
benefits and should be pursued regardless of improvements to the T-intersection of TH 13.
• As each of the options is certainly viable and could be pursued if funding were available, further
' refinement of cost estimates should be completed.
Ms. Vermillion
April 19, 2007 -
Page 3 of 3
• Concept 1 (larger signalized intersection) we concur with the summary but reiterate a reluctance
to have a triple left from northbound TH 13 to westbound CR 101.
• Concept 2 -
o Comment on page 11-change the last sentence in TH 13 Concept 2 paragraph to, "If
traffic entering the roundabout is projected to exceed 4000 vph and depending on entry
flows, Mn/DOT may need to consider 3-lane entries and determine if a roundabout with
this design could be considered on the trunk highway system.
o Comment on page 14 in Table 3 - TH 13 Concept 2 deserves a higher ranking under
' Traffic Operations. A well designed roundabout would be expected to work better than a
signal as it would not be allowed to be there with any of the approaches with a LOS F.
Thus it deserves a higher rating than TH 13 Concept 1.
o Comment on page 15 in second paragraph -remove last sentence "There are no other
' multi-lane roundabouts on truck highways now or planned in the near future." There are
a few locations in the Metro area where multi-lane roundabouts are being designed for
Mn/DOT roads - TH 61 and Jamaica interchange ramp terminals, TH 169 and Valley
' View Road interchange ramp terminals, TH 610 and Zachary Lane, etc.
o Comment on page 15 in second paragraph -the text about approach speeds is worth
mentioning, but the curvilinear approach is not necessarily the best way to slow traffic
down as it approaches the roundabout. Please review the report High Speed Approaches
at Roundabouts for alternative methods of controlling approach speeds to roundabouts in
higher speed locations.
• Concept 3 - Mn/DOT supports pursuing a possible design of this type of interchange; a better
understanding of the costs involved would be very beneficial. There are several applications in
the Twin Cities that would benefit from such a design (even just east of this location through
Savage on TH 13).
• TH 13 /TH 101 merge and weave area requires additional analysis before a recommendation can
be given. The right in/right out access at Zinran Avenue in any geometric reconfiguration should
' be closed.
Thank you again for this opportunity to participate in the workshop and to review the study report. If you
have any questions regarding this review please feel free to contact us to discuss.
' Sincerely,
' Victoria Nill
Mn/DOT South Metro Area Engineer
Carver and Western Scott Counties
Cc: William Stein, CH2MHILL
' Howard Preston, CH2MHTLL
Lynn Clarkowski, Mn/DOT South Area Manager
Ken Johnson, Mn/DOT South Area Engineer