Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-04-10 MINUTESCITY OF COTTAGE GROVE PUBLIC WORKS COMMISSION April 10, 2006 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a meeting of the Public Works Commission of Cottage Grove was duly held at the Cottage Grove Public Works Facility, 8635 West Point Douglas Road South, Cottage Grove, Minnesota on Monday, April 10, 2006 at 7:00 pm. 1. CALL TO ORDER Chair David Anderson called the meeting to order at 7:01 pm. 2. ROLL CALL Ken Boyden, David Anderson, Robert Dornsbach, Roger Finnegan, Gary Kjellberg Absent: Mackenzie Kelly, Mallory Kelly Staff Present: Les Burshten, Public Works Director Harry Taylor, Public Works Supervisor Jennifer Levitt, City Engineer Also Present:Mark Grossklaus, City Council Member William Royce, Prospective Member 3. APPROVE MINUTES Upon a motion by Gary Kjellberg, seconded by Robert Dornsbach, the March 15, 2006 minutes were unanimously approved. 4. ADDITIONAL AGENDA ITEMS None. Public Works Commission April 10 2006 – Page 2 5. NEW BUSINESS A. Technical Review 6.1 Runze Addition Paul Runze, 11931 Lofton Avenue South has applied for a variance to City Code Title 11-15-8C(1), Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area Overlay District Development Standards, to allow an addition to be setback less than the required 100 feet from the bluff line, due to a hardship. Levitt noted at this time staff sees no problem with granting the variance. The structure is almost a quarter mile from the actual river itself. Chair David Anderson inquired what the hardship was. Levitt responded that Planning did not note the hardship. 6.2 Holiday Station, Hadley and Grange – Case CUP06-016 Holiday Companies has applied for a conditional use permit to allow the reconstruction of the convenience store/gas station at 8101 Hadley Avenue. The new facility will include a 3,856 square foot convenience store, including an attached car wash and a gasoline dispensing system that will serve 12 vehicles. Levitt reported that the City is still working with the Department of Transportation on the vacation of the right-of-way. The biggest issue the City is facing is what to do with the 54” storm pipe in that area. Cost estimates for the pipe are upwards of $80,000, which isn’t in our current budget. What we are hoping to do is have the developer pick up some of the costs as part of the developer’s agreement. 6.3 East Ravine Development Standards The City of Cottage Grove has applied for a zoning text amendment to add development standards for properties in the East Ravine. Jennifer stated this issue was not discussed at Tech. Review and added that it was just an informational item to be included in the Planning Commission packet. It should be noted the subject of sidewalks was brought up and 4-foot sidewalks on both sides of the road were discussed. Anderson inquired whether that would increase the storm water runoff. Gary Kjellberg commented that the shoveling of sidewalks should be the responsibility of the homeowner. He suggested an ordinance be in place that would stipulate in what timeframe the shoveling must be completed before the City takes care of the snow removal and charges back the homeowners. Dave Anderson stated the City has enough of a problem enforcing the many ordinances we have right now and there appears to be violations on every block. Public Works Commission April 10, 2006 – Page 3 Ken Boyden suggested that homeowner associations be responsible for snow removal from the sidewalks with costs covered by association fees. He doesn’t believe the Public Works Department owns equipment to plow 4-foot wide sidewalks. Council Member Grossklaus indicated this issue has not been brought to the Council yet. rd B. 103 Street Bridge rd Jennifer Levitt indicated there are distinct differences when looking at 103 Street and thth 95 Street. Any comments or recommendations should be associated with either 95 rd or 103 Street avoiding the combination of issues. rd Burlington Northern’s bridge over 103 street has met its useful life and needs to be replaced with work proposed to take place in 2007. They have indicated if we want a wider bridge, the City must pay the additional costs. If BN contributes $1 million for the project, the City would have to kick in $1 million beyond that to actually construct the wider bridge. If the bridge is left in its current condition, we can meet the absolute minimum State Aid Standards with a 26’ face-of-curb to face-of-curb roadway and keeping the 30 mph curve. Levitt also indicated that she estimates the City will need to acquire a small amount of land on the Bailey side to actually get that 30 mph curve in there. Some people would call the curve in the road “traffic calming”. Levitt stated the second option is to widen the bridge. We would go to our City standard of 32’ face-of-curb to face-of-curb with a 6’ sidewalk that could be implemented. In the City’s Transportation Comprehensive Plan, 103rd Street is identified as a collector. We believe it would be important to maintain a wider street to go with the collector system and this is probably one of our few options providing a pedestrian crossing. In the first option, the City requested to put in a box culvert or some other structure to get pedestrians under bridge which added an astronomical amount of insurance required by Burlington Northern which was not feasible for the City to undertake. With the removal of the “S” curve in Option 2 and having the road and sidewalk adjacent to each other, no additional insurance will be required. The road would be closed for three months if Option 2 is selected. With Option 1, you would probably only be looking at a week or so of closure. rd The 103 Street Bridge item has been before the City Council in two different forms, the first being a consent item which was tabled because the Council requested additional information including accident data for the area and some financing options. Financing rd for 103 Street is very difficult due to our State Aid system already expended out into the future quite a ways, so that funding mechanism doesn’t really exist for the City. Public Works Commission April 10, 2006 – Page 4 Included in the commission packet was a memo detailing other federal funding options. One option was the Federal Highway Safety Improvement Program, known as SAFETEA-LU, however, a very small percentage of that federal money is available for projects such as this and is highly competitive. It’s unlikely the City would be able to secure funds through SAFETEA-LU. When the two financing options are taken off the table, the job becomes a potential assessment project.If the project is assessed, how would that work? One option is a possible area-wide assessment, similar to the Jamaica Avenue Roundabouts, where residents and commercial properties in a certain perimeter would be charged. The question then becomes, would you potentially assess those people to the west of the bridge who would have a greater benefit? The other thing that drives Option 2 up a little bit is that no cost has been figured in for land acquisition. The City would have to acquire a small portion of the Mississippi Dunes property to straighten the road, probably less than acre. Land price would need to be negotiated. rd Levitt also noted the 103 Street sewer project was completed last fall where the storm sewer was lowered 4 feet to essentially accommodate this proposed change. Right now there’s a 10’4” clearance and with the new option there would be a 14’6” clearance which would then allow our ladder truck to clear the bridge. (It currently does not). Commission Member Ken Boyden inquired whether Burlington Northern will replace the bridge at its existing height and Levitt responded that they would, and added that the City would still have to spend approximately $80,000 in road improvements to drop the road 4 feet in order to get clearance. Boyden went on to state that with the anticipated increase in traffic and density of St. Paul Park, motorists will likely take the most direct route, which may be longer in miles, but faster in minutes. He noted that people are living in a “dream world” if they feel curvy roads are traffic calming – just look at some of the accidents recorded and cited for the area. Boyden added that the City may be looking at saving money now, however efforts should be concentrated on straightening the roadway and making it wider. He also wondered why a sidewalk is being added. Levitt responded that they wish the option available as the island develops either into a state park, county park or as it becomes residentially developed in 20+ years.Mississippi Dunes Golf Course may not be a golf course forever and may potentially be a residential development. The thought is to address pedestrian traffic needs for the future. Boyden asked whether St. Paul Park or Grey Cloud Township will share in the costs of the construction. Levitt answered that the discussion has not yet taken place. Commission Member Gary Kjellberg stated he concurred with Boyden and supports Option 2. He questioned if the roadway is widened to 34 feet, from what point would it begin and end? Levitt responded that the absolute minimum road improvements needed for transition are estimated at $250,000. It is not planned to reconstruct the rd whole section of 103, but perhaps ¼ mile on each side since it’s just enough to make the transition. Public Works Commission April 10, 2006 – Page 5 Commission Member Robert Dornsbach agreed that a bigger bridge makes more sense, especially with more development down the road, including River’s Edge. Levitt commented that the AUAR done for River’s Edge, Phase One pretty much rdth indicated it didn’t need 103 Street or 95 Street, noting that traffic movement was going north enough toward the freeway and didn’t need the Cottage Grove road network. Kjellberg inquired whether there was any way in Option 2 to straighten the road with minimal expense? Then at a later time, should the demand increase, revisit further road width improvements. Levitt explained that the replacement bridge’s center span will be 85 feet so it doesn’t matter whether we wanted a 28 or 30 foot road, the center span needs to be 85 feet, which would be the span needed in order to meet the touchdowns at the abutments or the piers, so no incremental change would matter. rd It was also noted that it’s believed funds for 103 Street road improvements are in the CIP for 2007 for $3.7 million. Kjellberg asked when construction would begin and it was stated that the railroad wants to start the three-month project in June of 2007 and complete the track transfer on Labor Day weekend. William Royce inquired whether the ladder truck is the only truck unable to drive under the existing bridge. He commented he was on the fire department for 23 years and doesn’t recall a time when the ladder truck needed to access Grey Cloud Island. Burshten responded that is true, however, there are other trucks that are unable to clear the bridge. Council Member Mark Grossklaus also commented that an important point to remember is that the bridge will be there for 75 years. Commission Chair David Anderson stated that public perception will be “Why don’t you do it right the first time?” Dornsbach agreed that it will save money in the long run to do the project correctly right from the start. Levitt asked what the commission’s opinion is on assessments since funding is a critical element. Do they feel a levy is appropriate or should an area assessment be applied? Dornsbach suggested that the residents in that area be assessed, citing that his neighborhood was assessed for the recent reconstruction project. Boyden agreed, but was unsure whether we have the authority to assess Grey Cloud residents. Levitt responded that we can assess those that are in the Cottage Grove city limits, however, cannot assess those on the outside of that area. rdth Anderson stated that this goes into the scenario of combining of 103 and 95 Streets. th Obviously, if 95 Street is extended, that will become the main artery and the level of rdrd traffic on 103Street will decrease. So is it necessary to improve 103 Street when th the majority of the traffic will be on 95? He noted that the Council indicated a FIRM th decision that 95 Street will not be extended into St. Paul Park, however, noted that for the past 10 years, Planning has discussed this and the track record indicated that th Planning gets their way. He believes they will be extending 95 Street. Public Works Commission April 10, 2006 – Page 6 Levitt stated there are many options because of the developable land that needs to be th serviced by a 95 Street extension. She noted there were three options in the scoping study included in the commission packets. The question is, do you deal with the th bridge? Theoretically, if 95 Street were to be extended and utilize a bridge, perhaps it should be a county road due to it serving as more of a connection between communities as a main arterial roadway. Getting back to the assessment issue, Commission Member Roger Finnegan agreed that the residents in that area be assessed for the work. Boyden suggested that a policy be implemented as to what the assessment parameters should be. Levitt asked whether residents should be charged on a per-homestead basis or should they be charged based on area? For example, if there is a farmer owning 40 acres, does he get charged 40 times greater than a person owning one acre? Finnegan stated he feels residents be charged on a per-homestead basis. th Kjellberg suggested that this project be assessed in the same manner as 65 Street – assess for the amount of acreage, but payment would not be required until the property is sold or developed. Levitt commented that the City would still be fronting the cost of the improvement until development occurs. th 95 Street Levitt indicated a scoping report was included in the packet. It is planned to meet with local area landowners to go over the options since each one of them affects the properties differently. We will need to come to a consensus on which alignment we like nd because there are 5 plus units in Mississippi Dunes 2 Addition that are on hold th because it is unknown how 95 Street will be extended. Boyden commented there seems to be much more verbiage on Option 2 and 3 rather than Option 1. Option 1 appears to be the most logical to him in that it’s a straight line rather than curves. What purpose do the curves serve? Levitt answered that it’s actually to provide a collector network and attempting to gain as much length as possible to reduce our slopes. Coming straight down is going to be a super-section, will cost quite a bit more and will require a lot of fill since the grade change was quite significant to overcome. Levitt also noted that considering this road would primarily be funded by a developer and not the residents of Cottage Grove, the developer would have the bigger “say”. The ultimate question is, should we have a bridge crossing? We’re seeing that even the extension beyond the bluff line is 6 plus years out at the absolute minimum. So the question is, is the bridge 10, 15 or 20 years out? Kjellberg commented he does not see any point in putting a bridge in at this time and that project should be put on the back burner until such time it’s really needed. Concentration should be put on extending the roadway. Boyden agreed that a roadway be built with this in mind, if a bridge is required in the future, the roadway will be able to handle it. Levitt reiterated that she hears the Public Works Commission agreeing that th we know 95 Street has to be extended, but that they suggest waiting until development and traffic warrants are essentially met before a bridge is constructed. Public Works Commission April 10, 2006 - Page 7 She added she believes the City still needs to continue to partner with St. Paul Park in their process and to reserve the opportunity to partner with the County regarding funding. rd Gary Kjellberg stated regarding 103 Street, he goes along with Option 2, a wider bridge and a wider, straightened-out road.He added that measures be taken for th emergency vehicles to clear the bridge. Regarding 95 Street, he supports expanding the roadway as necessary in order to develop the properties, but does not endorse the bridge, however, added that the roadway be built so it could accommodate a bridge in the future and stated more time is needed to come up with funding options. When Rivers Edge is developed we will have a better handle on what needs to exist, and this may open up options for other funding sources. Levitt stated since we haven’t met with the landowners, we don’t know where they are at or what they are proposing, however, currently we have a lot of flexibility in that road extension without having to commit to a $2.5 million dollar bridge right now. Dornsbach agreed that it’s too early to make that decision, however, the option will be open if need be further down the road. RD MOTION#1–103STREETBRIDGEPROPOSAL MOTIONMADEBYKENBOYDEN,SECONDEDBYROBERTDORNSBACH,TO PROCEEDWITH“OPTION2”,A32’FACE-OF-CURBTOFACE-OF-CURBROAD WIDTH,LOWERINGTHEROADWAYUNDERTHEBRIDGE4FEETTO ACCOMMODATEEMERGENCYVEHICLESANDSTRAIGHTENINGTHEEXISTING ROADWAY.FUNDINGFORTHEPROJECTSHALLBEOBTAINEDBYASSESSING THESURROUNDINGPROPERTYOWNERS.MOTIONWASUNANIMOUSLY CARRIED. TH MOTION #2 – 95 STREET EXTENSION MOTIONMADEBYGARYKJELLBERG,SECONDEDBYKENBOYDEN,TOEXTEND TH 95STREETTOTHEBLUFFANDFURTHERUPONDEVELOPMENTOF PROPERTIESANDBECONSTRUCTEDINAMANNERTOACCOMMODATEA BRIDGEATAFUTUREDATE.MOTIONWASUNANIMOUSLYCARRIED. C. Hinton Avenue Speed Study Les Burshten stated it was recommended to complete another speed study for Hinton thth Avenue between 70 and 80 Streets. Speed on that roadway has been an ongoing issue for some time. The State completed their speed study for the area which is currently 30 mph and came up with a recommendation to increase the speed to 40 mph. A number of years ago the City considered extending the sidewalk on the east side of thth. Hinton Avenue from 76Street up to 70 Cost at that time was about $86,000. Engineering is recommending extending that portion of sidewalk if the speed limit is increased. It is believed the sidewalk cost would be approximately $134,000 at today’s prices. Public Works Commission April 10, 2006 – Page 8 Burshten also indicated that old lane markings are starting to show through the sealcoat on Hinton. Engineering recommended the markings be removed with a sandblast process. Anderson inquired whether the sandblasting would require the road to be closed for a period of time, to which Burshten responded that the procedure would not necessitate a road closure. Kjellberg asked since the sidewalks are not included in the budget, and if the Council approves the speed limit increase, how long would it take for the City to obtain funds for the sidewalks? Since the funds aren’t available now, is there any way the speed increase can be put on hold until there is money is in the budget for the sidewalk improvements? Levitt stated the Council would review the budget to determine if there are items that can be cut or postponed. She noted there is a bituminous trail on both sides of Hinton all the way to the border. The only section missing is the one that is referenced in this memo – there is already a continuity issue existing in the pedestrian travel way. Additionally, some homes on Hinton are on lower elevations so there will be a retaining wall cost as well. Kjellberg added he’s also concerned that if the speed limit is over 30 mph, drivers will exceed that limit and also cautioned about Crestview Elementary’s close proximity. At this point Levitt added that with the trail extension, we have some potential landscaping issues. Even if the Council were to approve and authorize the speed increase, the City would be fortunate to have the work started by fall. Theoretically, we wouldn’t have a completed trail system until 2007. Boyden inquired which issue was generated first – the speed limit or the trails? He agrees with Gary that if the streets are going to be done, they should be done in conjunction with the sidewalk construction The higher speed limit isn’t solving any problems other than to satisfy some people who don’t like to drive 30 mph. David Anderson questioned whether any kind of study has been done regarding students using a pathway? He added sometimes decisions are based on assumptions and theories. Jennifer commented that when she’s been driving through the area at the time school lets out, she sees quite a few kids using the pathway. When the pathway ends, they continue walking along the unpaved route. Kjellberg suggested that perhaps the Police Department can be asked to look at the area over a period of time to see how many pedestrians are using the trail. The Public Works Commission’s comments will be made known to the Council. 6. OLD BUSINESS None. Public Works Commission April 10, 2006 – Page 9 7. PUBLIC WORKS UPDATE Street sweeping started today and it’s going very well. Hydrant flushing will start on Wednesday, April 12 th Arbor Day will take place April 29 at Oakwood Park May 6th is Spring Clean Up and Household Hazardous Waste Day at Public Works. Hours are from 7:00 AM to 4:30 PM. 8. EAST RAVINE UPDATE No report this month. 9. CITY COUNCIL UPDATE Agenda of March 15th was included in the packet. 10. ENGINEER’S REPORT Jennifer Levitt reported a number of bid awards: nd Pinecliff 2 Addition was authorized for construction 2006A Street and Pavement Project was awarded Ravine Parkway work should be starting the first part of May 11. COMMISSION COMMENTS AND REQUESTS Gary Kjellberg commented he has heard news reports of beetles infesting ash trees. It was noted an ash boar disease is anticipated. More information will be available at the next meeting. David Anderson had a question about potholes. He noted one in the southbound turn exit into McDonalds by the cemetery. Another pothole is located as vehicles enter th northbound Highway 61 from westbound 80 Street. 12. ADJOURNMENT Motion to adjourn was made by Robert Dornsbach, seconded by Ken Boyden. Motion was unanimously carried. Meeting adjourned at 8:19 p.m. Respectfully submitted, íÜÉËÔÚÔÜêÉÎËÛÄ