HomeMy WebLinkAbout13.B.1. Cost Participation of Scott Co. Transportation Study for TH 169, TH 13 and CSAH 18/21 System Analysis
/3.(6./.
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
Memorandum
TO: Mayor & City Council
Mark McNeill, City Administrator
FROM: Bruce Loney, Public Works Director
SUBJECT: Approve Funding for Cost Participation of Scott County
Transportation Study for T.H. 169, T.H. 13 and CSAH 18/21
System Analysis Study
DATE: July 15,2008
INTRODUCTION:
This memorandum is to request Council approval to participate in a traffic study by Scott County
and their consultant for the area of T.H. 169, T.H. 13 and County Highway 18/21. This study
area does include potential accesses from County State Aid Highway 18/21 to Hansen A venue in
the East Shakopee Crossings commercial district.
BACKGROUND:
At the July 1, 2008 Council meeting workshop, staff did update the Council on the County Road
21 design and design issues to date. One of those issues is the access to Hansen A venue and the
Shakopee Crossings commercial district. Staff did place with the Council memo a work scope
proposal from CH2M Hill, a Scott County consultant, selected to do a study of three concepts for
better access to the areas east of C.R. 21 for the City of Shakopee and the City of Savage.
Attached to this memo is an e-mail from Leslie Vermillion, Scott County Public Works Director,
in regard to the traffic study proposed and the recommendation that the City and County split the
cost 50/50 for this study. Also attached is the study proposal, which lists the various work scope
tasks and also lays out the cost and preliminary schedule. The cost of the study is estimated at
$44,340.00 of which Shakopee's share is $22,170.00. The study is to be completed within three
months from the notice to proceed.
The rationale for a 50/50 cost split, from the County's perspective, is that the study being
proposed was requested by the City in order to determine if better access can be provided to this
area and what those improvements would be. The funding for this study per Gregg V oxland,
Finance Director, could come from the Community Development's budget which has sufficient
funds to pay for a study.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Approve a motion to authorize funding up to $22,170.00 out of the Community
Development budget for the Scott County T.H. 169, T.H. 13 and County Highway 18/21
System Analysis Study.
2. Approve a motion to fund the Scott County T.H. 169, T.H. 13 and County Highway
18/21 System Analysis Study at a different funding amount.
3. Do not approve a motion approving funding for the Scott County T.H. 169, T.H. 13 and
County Highway 18/21 System Analysis Study.
4. Table for additional information.
RECOMMENDATION:
In order to move forward with a determination for better access for the Shakopee Crossings
commercial district, east of C.R. 21, a study needs to be done to determine what improvements
needs to be done for a better access. Staff would then recommend Alternative No.1, with a
motion to approve the funding out of the Community Development budget to fund a traffic study
as proposed by Scott County.
ACTION REOUESTED:
Approve a motion to authorize funding up to $22,170.00 out of the Community Development
budget for the Scott County T.H. 169, T.H. 13 and County Highway 18/21 System Analysis
Study.
~~
Bruce Loney, . .
Public Works irector
BUpmp
ENGR/2008-PROJECTS/2008-COUNCILITRANS-FUNDING-STUDY
Bruce Loney
From: Vermillion, Lezlie [LVermillion@co.scott.mn,us]
Sent: Tuesday, July 01,20081:40 PM
To: Lynn Clarkowski; Bruce Loney; jpowell@cLsavage.mn.us; jodLruehle@tinklenberggroup,com
Cc: Freese, Lisa; Rasmussen, Mitch; Jenson, Craig; Gustafson, Joseph;
Nicole.Farrington@CH2M.com; howard.preston@ch2m.com; Unmacht, David; Michael Leek;
bstock@cLsavage.mn.us; Mark McNeill
Subject: FW: Study Scope
Attachments: ScottCol ntercAreaConcptDevScope06 2008.doc
Bruce, John, Jodi and Lynn,
Attached is the revised scope of services trying to include all of the comments we received.
The first meeting is clearly a brainstorming meeting to discuss the three alternatives to be evaluated and come to
agreement on those. It will clearly include an invite to geometric staff and all others who are appropriate to
attend that meeting.
We have added additional tube counts (up to 20) and extended the modeling limits to include what was
requested. We are not going to re-run the regional model. That is an issue well beyond the scope ofthis study
and we never intended to go there. The change in land use from the recent sales of land along CSAH 21 south
of this study area will not significantly change the regional model. If the demand was to come to Scott County
it will continue to be allocated over the system. The Southbridge area will include using land use as guided and
modeled in the earlier work.
We have changed the modeling to include corsim for ramp and weave movements and synchro for at grade
intersections such as CSAH 21 and CSAH 18. Those details can be discussed at the first PMT.
At this point I see no reason to include an implementation plan as part of the consultant's work, but a item at
one of the final meetings to be discussed by all agencies. We were very successful in moving ahead two of the
three previous recommendations.
I think this addressed most of the major concerns. Please review and get back to me with your comments. We
would like to begin moving this study forward. I am proposing at this point that the County and City of
Shakopee share in the cost 50-50. We are looking for Mn/DOT to provide some of the modeling they
committed to and Savage to provide their comprehensive plan work.
Bruce let me know if you need anything else for this evenings workshop.
Sincerely,
Lezlie A. Vermillion
Scott County Public Works Director
952-496-8062
1
Scott County - TH 169, TH 13 and CH 18/21 System Analysis
STUDY AREA
The Study Area includes_TH 169 from the Canterbury Road interchange to Old Shakopee
Road interchange including the TH 169 interchanges with CSAH 18/21 and TH 101/13. The
Study Area also includes the TH 101/TH 13 intersection and CSAH 18/21 intersections with
Crossings Boulevard and Preserve Trail.
WORK SCOPE
Task 1. Data Gathering
1.1 Obtain current AM, PM peak hour and daily traffic volumes on TH 169, TH
13, CH 18/21, interchange ramps, Crossings Boulevard and Stagecoach Trail.
1.2 Based on the availability of current traffic count information, collect new
volume information as necessary (assume up to twenty tube count locations).
1.3 Obtain forecasts of future AM, PM and daily traffic volumes on the roadways
in the vicinity of the interchange area. Project level forecasts for background
traffic will be determined based on a review of volumes from both the
County's 2030 Model and the Met Council's Regional Travel Model, with
minor adjustments as necessary to account for specific development in the
immediate Interchange Area. AM and PM peak hour forecasts associated
with the Southbridge Crossings Development Area will be based on volumes
generated in previous studies and then modified if necessary to account for
any planned revisions to the land use.
1.4 Identify a preliminary set of goals and objectives associated with enhancing
local access to the regional highway system and to generate three initial
concept alternatives (hand drawn on aerial photo base). The original
Interchange Workshop documents will be used as a reference for generating
the preliminary goals and objectives and the initial concept alternatives.
1.5 Participate in a kick-off/brainstorming Project Management Team (PMT)
meeting. Provide Project Manager with assistance relative to preparing the
agenda, exhibits/handout material and a meeting summary. The expected
Agenda includes:
. Introductions/Opening Remarks
. Review of Background Material
. Review & Discuss Preliminary Goals and Objectives
. Identify Performance Measures
. Review & Discuss Initial Concept Alternatives
. Brainstorm refinements of Concept Alternatives (includes
participation of MnDOT geometric staff)
. Confirm Three Concept Alternatives for Sketch Layout Development
. Review Planned Work Tasks
7/10/2008 1
Task 2. Preliminary Sketch Layout Development & Technical Analysis
2.1 Prepare preliminary sketch layouts for the three selected Concept
Alternatives - the sketch layouts will be prepared on an aerial photo base and
will document the following features:
. Horizontal Alignment
. Basic Number of Lanes
. Intersection/ Access Locations
. Estimated R/W Limits
2.2 Conduct a traffic operations analysis of the three concept alternatives. The
analysis will use the CORSIM software package following procedures
documented in MnDOT's Advanced CORSIM Manual, to evaluate the effects
of existing and future traffic volume characteristics and the proposed design
features on mainline and ramp operations. SYNCHRO will be used to
evaluate the traffic operations at at-grade intersections.
2.3 Conduct a traffic safety overview of the three concept alternatives. The
overview will identify existing crash characteristics at key locations along the
system of roadways in the study area using available crash data and statistics
and will provide a qualitative overview of the potential safety issues
associated with each of the concepts, including safety issues of any possible
design exceptions, based on research results in published literature including
MnDOT's Safety Fundamentals Handbook.
2.4 Meet with project manager to prepare for upcoming PMT meeting.
2.5 Participate in an interim PMT meeting. Provide Project Manager with
assistance relative to preparing the agenda, exhibits/handout material and a
meeting summary. The expected Agenda includes:
. Introductions/ Opening Remarks
. Review & Discuss Preliminary Sketch Layouts for the Three Concept
Alternatives
. Review & Discuss Results of Traffic Operations and Safety Analyses
. Review Planned Work Tasks
Task 3. Final Sketch Layouts and Project Report
3.1 Based on comments received from study partners, revise the preliminary
sketch layouts as necessary and produce the final sketch layouts.
3.2 Prepare an initial draft Project Report documenting goals, objectives,
performance measures, development of concept alternatives, preparation of
the sketch layouts, results of the operational and safety analyses and concept
level construction cost estimates.
3.3 Submit the initial draft Project Report to Project Manager for review, then
distribute to all study partners for review and comments. Revise the initial
7/10/2008 2
draft Report as necessary based on comments received and produce a final
draft Report.
3.4 Participate in the final PMT meeting. Provide Project Manager with
assistance relative to preparing the agenda, exhibits/handout material and a
meeting summary. The expected Agenda includes:
. Introductions/Opening Remarks
. Review & Discuss Final Sketch Layouts for the Three Concept
Alternatives
. Review & Discuss Draft Project Report
. Future Considerations/Follow Up
3.5 Prepare the final project Report based on comments from the PMT.
3.6 Participate/ attend three additional meetings, as requested by Project
Manager.
Task 4. Pr~ectManagement
4.1 Prepare monthly progress reports and invoices.
Oeliverables
Meeting Agendas, Meeting Exhibits/Handout Materials, Current & Forecast AM and PM
Peak Hour Traffic Volumes, CORSIM & SYNCHRO Analyses, Preliminary and Final Sketch
Layouts (3 Concepts), Draft & Final Project Report, Progress Reports
7/10/2008 3
BUDGET ESTIMATE
Employee Classification
Task PM Proj. Engr. Staff Engr. Admin. Asst. Total
1. 8 16 0 4 28
2. 24 74 64 4 156
3. 24 32 32 6 94
4. 4 8 0 12 24
Hours 60 130 96 26 302
Hourly Rate $205 $125 $100 $65
Labor Subtotal $12,300 $16,250 $9,600 $1,690 $39,840
Expenses Traffic Counts $ 4,500
Mileage $ 110
Total Est. Cost $44,340
SCHEDULE
The project schedule will be three months from the notice to proceed.
Meeting/Deliverables Schedule
PMT Kickoff/Brainstorming Session Week 2
Interim PMT Meeting Week 6
Final PMT Meeting Week 10
Final Report Distributed Week 12
7/10/2008 4