Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011-07-06 PACKET 04.F.REQUEST OF CITY COUNCIL ACTION COUNCIL AGENDA MEETING ITEM # DATE 7/6/11 PREPARED BY Engineering Jennifer Levitt ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT STAFF AUTHOR COUNCIL ACTION REQUEST Consider approving a Federal Funding Submittal for TE and STP -UG for a Pedestrian Underpass at 70 Street and Hardwood Avenue. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Approve the Federal Funding Submittal for TE and STP -UG for a Pedestrian Underpass at 70 Street and Hardwood Avenue. BUDGET IMPLICATION $ BUDGETED AMOUNT ADVISORY COMMISSION ACTION ❑ PLANNING ❑ PUBLIC SAFETY ❑ PUBLIC WORKS ❑ PARKS AND RECREATION ❑ HUMAN SERVICES /RIGHTS ❑ ECONOMIC DEV. AUTHORITY El SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS DATE ACTUAL AMOUNT FUNDING SOURCE REVIEWED APPROVED DENIED ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ® MEMO /LETTER: Jennifer Levitt, June 30, 2011 ® RESOLUTION: ❑ ORDINANCE: ❑ ENGINEERING RECOMMENDATION: ❑ LEGAL RECOMMENDATION: ® OTHER: Federal TE Fund Application, Federal STP -UG Funding Application (Form 1) COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: ❑ APPROVED ❑ DENIED ❑ OTHER CITY OF COTTAGE GROVE J MINNESOTA To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Ryan Schroeder, City Administrator From: Jennifer Levitt, City Engineer Date: June 30, 2011 Subject: Approve Federal Funding Submittal for TE and STP -UG for a Pedestrian Underpass at 70 Street and Hardwood Avenue BACKGROUND /DISCUSSION: The Metropolitan Council and the Transportation Advisory Board have released the 2011 Solicitation Package for federal funds. The regional solicitation process selects projects or programs to be funded by the Surface Transportation Program (STP), the Congestion Mitigation /Air Quality Improvement Program (CMAQ), the Transportation Enhancements program (TE) as well as the Bridge Improvement or Replacement Program (BIR). Applications may be for construction projects for all programs. Requests for funding require a local match for construction costs. The applications enclosed are for a pedestrian tunnel under 70 Street at Hardwood Avenue. The pedestrian tunnel is consistent with the traffic study that was done jointly with Washington County last year. The application request is for $1,000,000 with the minimum 20% match required. The request is for funding in 2015. The City applied in the last Federal solicitation for this project, but was not selected. The City is eligible to apply in both the Transportation Enhancement and Surface Transportation for Bikeway/Walkway categories. The City may only be awarded funds from one category if selected. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that Council approve the Federal Funding submittal for TE and STP -UG for a Pedestrian Underpass at 70 Street and Hardwood Avenue. Federal Transportation Enhancement Fund Complete and return completed application to Kevin Roggenbuck, I ransportation Office Use Coordinator, Transportation Advisory Board, 390 North Robert St., St. Paul, Only Minnesota 55101. (651) 602 -1728. Form 1 needs to be filled out electronically. Please go to Metropolitan Council's website for instructions. Applications must be received by 5:00 PM at the Metropolitan Council FTP site or postmarked on July 18, 2011. *Be sure to complete and attach the Project Information form. 1. APPLICANT: City of Cottage Grove 2. JURISDUCTIONAL AGENCY (IF DIFFERENT): Washington County 3. MAILING ADDRESS: 8635 West Point Douglas Road CITY: Cottage Grove STATE: MN ZIP CODE: 55016 4. COUNTY: Washington 5. CONTACT PERSON: Jennifer Levitt TITLE: City Engineer PHONE NO. (651)458 -2890 CONTACT E -MAIL ADDRESS: jlevitt @cottage - grove.org 6. PROJECT NAME: 70` Street (CSAH 22) Pedestrian Underpass 7 .BRIEF PROJECT DESCRIPTION for database (Include location, road name, type of improvement, etc... A more complete description must be submitted later in the application): Construction of a pedestrian underpass at CSAH 22 and Hardwood Avenue South in Cottage Grove. This project is in conjunction with improvements that Washington County is proposing at this intersection in 2015. Along with reconstruction of the intersection, which will be completed by Washington County, the City is also proposing to construct the necessary trail system and install LED street lighting to service the pedestrian underpass. The underpass can also be constructed as a stand -alone project, while anticipating future construction of CSAH 22 by Washington County. 8. TE PROJECT CATEGORY — Check only one project grouping in which you wish your project to be considered (see p. 85). ❑ Environmental ® Bicycle /Pedestrian ❑Streetscape ❑ Historic /Archaeological Ill. PROJECT FUNDING 9 Are you applying for funds from another source(s) to implement this project? Yes❑ No® If yes, please identify the source(s): 10. FEDERAL AMOUNT: $1,000,000 13. SOURCE OF MATCH FUNDS:City Capital Improvement Funds 11. MATCH AMOUNT: $200,000 14. MATCH % OF PROJECT TOTAL: 20 12. PROJECT TOTAL: $1,200,000 15. PROGRAM YEAR: ® 2015 ❑ 2016 16. SIGNATURE 17. TITLE: City Engineer _Form 2: PROJECT INFORMATION (To be used to assign State Project Number after project is selected)tPRLvATE I Please fill in the following information as it pertains to your proposed project. Items that do not apply to your project, please label N /A. Do not send this form to the State Aid Office. For project solicitation package only. COUNTY, CITY, OR LEAD AGENCY City of Cottage Grove (City No. 180) FUNCTIONAL CLASS OF ROAD Minor Arterial ROAD SYSTEM_CSAH (TH, CSAH, MSAS, CO. RD., TWP. RD., CITY STREET) NAME OF ROAD 70"' Street (CSAH 22)_(Example; 1st ST., MAIN AVE) ZIP CODE WHERE MAJORITY OF WORK IS BEING PERFORMED 55016 APPROXIMATE BEGIN CONSTRUCTION DATE (MO/YR) 05/2015 APPROXIMATE END CONSTRUCTION DATE (MO /YR) 10 /2015 LOCATION: From: At the intersection of Hardwood Avenue and 70` Street (CSAH 22) To: (DO NOT INCLUDE LEGAL DESCRIPTION) TYPE OF WORK concrete box culvert, grading, agg base, bike path, ped ramps, lighting, storm sewer, signage Examples: GRADE, AGG BASE, BIT BASE, BIT SURF, SIDEWALK, CURB AND GUTTER, STORM SEWER, SIGNALS, LIGHTING, GUARDRAIL,, BIKE PATH, PED RAMPS, BRIDGE, PARK AND RIDE, ETC. BRIDGE/CULVERT PROJECTS OLD BRIDGE /CULVERT NO. N/A NEW BRIDGE /CULVERT NO. N/A STRUCTURE IS OVER (Under) 70 Street (CSAH 22) Proiect Elements and Estimate of Construction Costs Fill out the scoping sheet below or attach the worksheet Appendix U and provide the cost estimate for each element. You may add additional eligible costs (construction costs) that are not accounted for in the blank spaces at the bottom of the table. Applicants may instead use the more exhaustive checklist of the Mn /DOT scoping sheet in lieu of this checklist. The total cost should match the total cost reported for the project. Please use 2011 cost estimates, the TAB may apply an inflation factor to awarded projects. CONSTRUCTION PROJECT ELEMENTS /COST ESTIMATES Check all that appl ITEM COST ® Mobilization (approx. 5% of total cost) $ 52,000 ® Removals (approx. 5% of total cost) $ 56,000 ® Roadway (grading, borrow, etc.) $ 35,000 ® Roadway (aggregates and paving) $ 115,000 ❑ Subgrade Correction (muck) $ ® storm Sewer $ 32,000 ® Ponds $ 75,000 El Items (curb & gutter, sidewalks, median barriers) barriers) $ ❑ Pedestrian Curb Ramps (ADA) $ ® Path/Trail Construction $ 65,000 ® Traffic Control $ 15,000 ❑ Striping $ ❑ Signing $ ❑ Lighting $ ® Turf - Erosion & Landscaping $ 27,400 ❑ Bridge $ ® Retaining Walls $ 350,000 ❑ Noise Wall $ ❑ Traffic Signals $ ❑ Wetland Mitigation $ ❑ Other Natural and Cultural Resource Protection $ ❑ RR Crossing $ ® Public Utility Relocations (Water and San. Sewer) $ 64,500 ® Box Culvert S 253,100 ❑ $ ❑ $ ❑ $ ❑ $ ® Contingencies $ 60,000 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST $1,200,000 Maps and Photos Unless indicated otherwise, all applications must include the following: 1. A map of the project limits. If it is an on -road project, highlight the segment of road on a city or county roadway map. If it is a trail project, highlight the segment of trail to be constructed on a map that includes trails, bikeways or roadways. Applicants may include more than one map if the project impacts both a roadway and trail system. 2. An aerial photograph or photographs that show(s) the location of the project as it is today OR a plan view of the existing roadway or trail. 3. For bicycle and pedestrian projects only: A concept drawing of the proposed improvements that shows any bicycle, pedestrian and transit components upon completion of the project. IV. TRANSPORTATION ENHANCEMENTS PURPOSE Transportation Enhancements (TE) are transportation - related activities designed to strengthen the cultural, aesthetic and environmental aspects of the nation's intennodal transportation system. The TE program provides for the implementation of non - traditional transportation projects. TE Propose and Vision TE funds are directed toward projects that preserve historic, archaeological, scenic and environmental resources related to surface transportation, and to facilitate bicycle and pedestrian use. Parks and open space preserve natural resources and provide a wide variety of recreational opportunities. Trail corridors are intended to provide for recreational travel along linear pathways throughout the metropolitan area. Preservation of historic features and protection of scenic areas permit appreciation of the natural resources that have influenced the region's development. GENERAL INFORMATION AND RESTRICTIONS The Safe Accountable Flexible Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA -LU) was signed into law in August 2005. Under SAFETEA -LU, Transportation Enhancement activities continue to be funded through a 10 percent set -aside from STP funds. All projects must relate to surface transportation. Transportation Enhancement (TE) funds may be used for the activities identified in Qualifying Criterion #1. The region has allocated approximately $120 million in TE funds for projects since the beginning of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) in 1991. SAFEATEA -LU expired on September 30, 2009, but Congress has extended the Act several times through September 30, 2011. A new federal transportation Act is expected to be passed during the summer of 2011, during this regional solicitation. At the start of this regional solicitation in May, 2011, the region does not know what the new Act could mean for Transportation Enhancement project eligibility or funding. Therefore, the region is unable to provide a target amount of TE funds available in the 2011 regional solicitation. When the new Act is passed, the region will move quickly to determine how it impacts project eligibility as defined in this solicitation. The Transportation Advisory Board (TAB) is responsible for the selection of projects that are to be financed in part with TE finds made available to the seven - county region. To implement this responsibility, the TAB has developed policies to define eligibility and prioritize eligible projects. GENERAL POLICIES TE funds are available to all Minnesota state agencies, the Metropolitan Council, other transit providers, Indian tribal governments, the seven counties, all cities and towns within the Twin Cities seven county region, and the ten Regional Park System Implementation agencies. Other local or special governmental agencies and private groups are also eligible, but must have a public agency sponsor. The agency sponsor is the local unit of government of record. The local unit of government is responsible for making arrangements with the project proposer to ensure all project requirements of the local unit of government are met. An Agency Agreement is written between Mn/DOT and the local unit of government. The local unit of government will administer the project using the State Aid for Local Transportation (SALT) Delegated Contract Process (DCP) for federal aid projects. 2. Generally, TE funds are available for the activities listed under #1 of the Qualifying Criteria and incidental activities associated with them if the incidental work does not constitute more than 30% of the project costs. See Qualifying Criterion 41 for a description of what is meant by "incidental activities ". 3. Generally, for projects that involve the construction of facilities, the TAB will provide TE funds for project construction and materials, right of way, and land acquisition. For TE- eligible projects that do not involve construction (e.g., bicycle and pedestrian safety education activities), the TAB will provide TE funds for program implementation and related activities. TAB will not provide TE funds for study completion, preliminary engineering, design, construction engineering, or other similar costs. 4. A TE construction or reconstruction project must be a permanent improvement having independent utility. Temporary construction is defined as work that must be essentially replaced in the immediate future (within five years). Staged construction is considered permanent rather than temporary so long as future stages build on, rather than replace, previous work. All projects must comply with the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Reconstruction of a bikeway /walkway facility is eligible as long as the facility is beyond its useful life. 5. Applicants can request up to a cap of $1,000,000 in TE funds for a specific project. TAB reserves the right to partially fund any project. The local (nonfederal) match in funding for any project must be at Least 20% of the total project cost. 6. Projects will be added to the TIP only as a result of the TAB approval in response to this and subsequent solicitations. 7. Projects listed in the region's draft or adopted TIP are assumed to be fully- funded and to have independent utility from other projects. TAB will not consider projects already listed in the draft or adopted TIP, nor the payback of Advanced Construction funds for those projects, for funding through the solicitation process. Projects submitted that are related to projects listed in the draft or adopted TIP but that have independent utility from those projects are eligible for consideration. 8. The Technical Advisory Committee shall prepare an annual report on the implementation of regionally solicited TE projects for the review and approval of the TAB. This report, the Annual Implementation Report shall include updated program, system and project information. The TAC shall include such findings, recommendations and additional information, as it deems appropriate. 9. TAB will base the fundable amount of a project on the original submittal. The TAB must approve any change in the scope of an approved project. The TE federal fund participation for each project will be updated and reported in the Annual Implementation Report as the federal cost cap. The federal cost cap will be based on an inflation adjustment set by the Transportation Advisory Board upon inclusion in the Transportation Improvement Program. 10. If a project is added to the TIP, the entire project is included even though a portion of that work extends beyond the period for which submittals were requested provided that a significant portion of the work is scheduled for letting within the request period. 11. A TE project will be eliminated from the program if it does not meet its sunset date. The sunset date for projects is March 31 of the year following the original program year established by the TAB. Meeting the sunset date established for a project shall be governed by the TAB adopted Criteria for Meeting Sunset Date requirements, attached as Appendix D. If the Criteria for Meeting Sunset Date requirements (as noted above) for a project have been met, but STP funds are not presently available, that particular project will be placed on a waiting List for funds, listed in order of date of approval, and the sunset date would not apply. If a project has met the sunset date requirements, the project contract should be let as soon as possible since the project will not be included in the next revision of the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) and, therefore, will not be able to access federal funds. 12. TAB will not fund a Transportation Enhancements project for which the pedestrian, bicycle or environmental components and benefits have been claimed in a related STP, CMAQ or BIR project that was funded in a previous solicitation or is selected for the 2009 Solicitation. TRANSPORTATION ENHANCEMENTS PROJECTS — PROJECT DESCRIPTION Please provide the following general information about your proposal. Failure to provide this information will result in the application being disqualified. Describe the opportunity that the proposed project is taking advantage of or the nature of the problem that it aims to address: The 70 Street (CSAH 22) barrier is currently preventing pedestrians and cyclists from accessing local and regional parks, connecting with regional trail networks, and enjoying the commercial and retail area of Cottage Grove. Residents have continually voiced concerns about the inability of pedestrians and cyclists to safely cross 70' Street (CSAH 22). The proposed pedestrian underpass will be the only grade separated crossing along the 70` Street (CSAH 22) corridor as it passes through the City. The roadway has a projected Year 2030 ADT of 20,000 and is also a vital link to the City's East Ravine Development area of mixed use, single family residential, commercial and retail. The proposed project seeks to potentially take advantage of a larger scale project that Washington County is undertaking for 70` Street (CSAH 22) from Goodview Court/Avenue to Hinton Avenue. The City project specifically addresses needed improvements for pedestrians and cyclists at the intersection of 70'' Street (CSAH 22) and Hardwood Avenue. The County has completed a Corridor Analysis and Roadway Improvement Study for 70 Street (CSAH 22). The study documented the current and future traffic operations, investigated roadway safety improvements, identified feasible area improvement measures that could be implemented in the near and long terms, addressed right of way needs, and generated preliminary cost estimates for anticipated improvements for 70 "' Street (CSAH 22) from Goodhue Avenue to CSAH 13. The anticipation is that the City would fiord the installation of the pedestrian underpass for the intersection as part of the County's intersection improvement. To allow for 2015 construction, the project schedule would most likely include working with technical advisory groups beginning in 2012, beginning design on the preferred alternative in 2013 folowed by construction in 2014. The County is anticipating funding the roadway and intersection improvements with Federal Highway Safety Improvement Program and county state aid funding. If the County does not receive Federal Highway Safety Improvement Program funding, the City would move forward with the underppass project separately, while considering the future County project. Because the Comity has completed the conceptual /preliminary design of this segment of 70` Street (CSAH 22), the City can ensure that the installation will mesh with future County roadway improvements. The installation of the underpass is seen as the next step in providing multi -modal safety at the intersection. The City and its residents have seen 70` Street (CSAH 22) as a barrier in the community, as it separates the northern and southern parts of the community. In May of 2008, a near fatal incident occurred at the intersection, bringing into focus for the reisdents that the intersection was extremely hazardous and was in need of a traffic signal. A `grass roots' approach was initiated to advocate for a traffic signal at the intersection. The residents approached both the City and the County with their concerns and were instrumental in getting the traffic signal installed. Provide a description (no more than one page) of the project. The proposed project includes installation of a pedestrian underpass wider 70` Street (CSAH 22) at the intersection of Hardwood Avenue. The hail connection made by the underpass will achieve connectivity to the region and the city's trail network as outlined in the City's Comprehensive Plan. Regionally, the trail will provide connectivity to the City of St. Paul Park, Washington County's Cottage Grove Ravine Park and the County's trail system on CSAH 19 which provides for travel northerly and southerly travel within the County. This is an exciting opportunity to linearly connect two City parks that are separated by 70` Street (CSAH 22). Currently, the area to the southeast of the intersection is Hidden Valley Pond, which is stocked by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MnDNR) as a Fishing in the Neighborhood (FiN) pond. The FiN program promotes urban shorefishing and youth fishing opportunities in the metropolitan area. The pond is a Large attraction for youth and old alike in the community, since it is the most accessible fishing opportunity in the city. The trail connection will allow for safer travel to the fishing opportunity and helps to advance the FiN objectives in our community. The city's master plan is to develop a formal park around the Hidden Valley Pond network that would provide more recreational opportunities than just fishing, biking and walking. The proposed park would include play structures, picnic facilities, a parking lot and wildlife observation opportunities. The northeast quadrant of the intersection consists of a DNR protected wetland, stone pond and Hardwood Park. Facilities at Hardwood Park include a play structure and small gazebo for picnicking. In 2008, the City constructed a trail benched into the side slope of Harwood Avenue to facilitate the installation of a fishing pier. This project proposes to carry the existing 10' bituminous path along Hardwood Avenue, further east closer to the pond and fishing pier, traveling north, where an underpass would be constructed to cross 70" Street (CSAH 22). The trail is then proposed to connect to the existing trail system on the north side of 70 Street (CSAH 22), just south of Hardwood Park. The underpass would successfully and safely link the two City parks and their amenities together to better serve the public into the future. Since this underpass provides the connection to our recreational and natural resources features it provides the perfect opportunity to enhance our interpretive program in this location to engage more in the historical and environmental experience of the user. The proposed underpass would include LED lighting to provide for a safe and comfortable environment of user. The underpass and connecting trails will be designed to State Aid and AASHTO Standards. Construction of the underpass includes the necessary grading above and beyond the roadway of 70" Street (CSAH 22) improvements to allow for the installation of the box culvert, grading, base preparation, bituminous surfacing, concrete box culvert, lighting, and landscaping. Construction of the roadway improvements will begin in 2015. No right -of -way will be required to construct the proposed project, since all landownership in the vicinity of the project is either County or City. TRANSPORTATION ENHANCEMENTS PROJECTS - QUALIFYING CRITERIA The applicant must show that the project meets each of the following ten qualifying criteria to qualify for scoring under the prioritizing criteria. Answer each criterion in a numbered sequence. Failure to respond to any of the qualifying criteria will result in a recommendation to disqualify your project. 1. Qualifying Activities. The applicant must show that the proposed project falls under at least one of the following list of twelve qualifying activities and must state the specific category(ies) the project qualifies under. The list of qualifying TE activities provided in 23 U.S.C. 101(a)(35) of SAFETEA- LU is intended to be exclusive, not illustrative. That is, only those activities listed therein are eligible as TE activities. 1. Provision of facilities for pedestrians and bicycles. 2. Provision of safety and educational activities for pedestrians and bicyclists. 3. Acquisition of scenic easements and scenic or historic sites including historic battlefields. 4. Scenic or historic highway programs (including the provision of tourist and welcome center facilities). 5. Landscaping and other scenic beautification. 6. Historic preservation. 7. Rehabilitation and operation of historic transportation buildings, strictures, or facilities (including historic railroad facilities and canals). 8. Preservation of abandoned railway corridors (including the conversion and use thereof for pedestrian or bicycle trails). 9. Inventory, control and removal of outdoor advertising. 10. Archaeological planning and research. 11. Environmental mitigation to address water pollution due to highway runoff or reduce vehicle - caused wildlife mortality while maintaining habitat connectivity. 12. Establishment of transportation museums. One or more of these activities must constitute at least 70% of the project cost. Unlisted ancillary activities such as paving a parking lot, constructing buildings or providing restrooms must constitute no more than 30% of the total project cost. Applicants whose project is part of a larger transportation project must provide a construction cost summary demonstrating that at least 70% of the project is eligible for Transportation Enhancement funds. Many projects include a number of activities — some which are on this list and others that are not. Only those project activities that are on the list may be counted as TE activities. For example, a rest area might include a historic site purchased and developed as an interpretive site illustrating local history. The historic site purchase and development would qualify as a transportation enhancement activity. Work that is made possible because a project presents an opportunity to improve and enhance the environment and or aesthetics in the vicinity of a project may be eligible for enhancement funding. For example, a construction project may present an opportunity to improve the condition of an adjacent stream bed to improve water quality, construct a vital link for a community bikeway system and develop a landscaped green area to enhance the downtown environment. Activities that are not explicitly on the list may qualify if they are an integral part of a larger qualifying activity. For example, if the rehabilitation of a historic railroad station required the construction of new drainage facilities, the entire project could be considered for TE funding. RESPONSE: Activity 1: Provision of facilities for pedestrians and bicycles. The proposed underpass and connecting trails will serve as functional and recreational routes for pedestrians and bicyclists. Activity 2: Provision for safety and educational activities for pedestrians and bicyclists. The underpass and trail connections will provide a grade- separated crossing of 70` Street (CSAH 22) at the Hardwood Avenue intersection. This will provide a safer route for pedestrians and cyclists. Educational signage will be incorporated into the project to enhance trail users experience and to draw on the history of the area and unique features found in the wetland and adjacent water bodies. Activity 5: Landscaping and other scenic beautification. The design treatment of the underpass headwalls, retaining walls and trail system will seek to enhance the users experience with a coordinated streetscape design that is continuous from the intersection design. Along the short trail segments there are a number of scenic viewpoints to take in the water features that are present. Those existing viewpoints will be improved and bolstered with landscaping. 2. The funded activities must be accessible to the general public or targeted to a broad segment of the general public, and must be ADA compliant. RESPONSE: The proposed improvements will meet all ADA requirements for pedestrians utilizing the facility. The funded activities will be accessable to the general public and is intended for their use. 3. Projects must relate to surface transportation. Project Linkage (from federal guidance) To comply with Federal guidelines for eligibility there are two basic considerations: • Is the proposed action one of the listed activities in the TE definition in SAFETEA -LU? • How does the proposed action relate to surface transportation? The applicant must provide a clear statement describing this linkage. The definition of TE activities includes the phrase, "transportation enhancement activities means, with respect to any project or the area to be served by the project, any of the following activities, if such activity relates to surface transportation:..." The nature of a proposed TE project's relationship to surface transportation should be discussed in the project proposal that you submit. For example, where runoff from an existing highway contaminates an adjacent water resource and a transportation enhancement activity is proposed to mitigate the pollution caused by the run off a clear highway or transportation relationship exists. Another example might involve the acquisition of a scenic easement. The acquisition would be in connection with the preservation of a scenic vista related to travel along a specific route. Where a TE activity is for acquisition for scenic preservation purposes, and proposes to contribute to the visual experience of the traveler, but is a substantial distance away with respect to a highway or transportation project, the TE activity must be determined to make a substantial contribution to the scenic viewshed. Given the nature of the list of eligible activities, it is not necessary that each TE activity be associated with a specific surface transportation project to be eligible for funding. Examples which illustrate this include: the rehabilitation of a historic train structure, the provision of a bike or pedestrian path, or the establishment of a transportation museum. Proximity to a highway or transportation facility alone is not sufficient to establish a relationship to surface transportation. Additional discussion, beyond proximity, is needed in the TE project proposal to establish the relationship to transportation. For example, an historic barn that happened to be adjacent to a particular highway facility would not automatically be considered eligible for TE funds simply because of its location; visibility to the traveler in a way that substantially enhances the traveling experience could qualify. Specific documentation of the enhanced experience is required; conversely, a historic structure, such as the barn in the above example, could not be disqualified from consideration because it was not adjacent to a particular Federal -aid facility, as long as some other relationship to surface transportation could be established. It is not necessary to have a TE activity function as an active transportation facility, either past or current, to qualify as an eligible TE activity. For example, a scenic or historic site may have a relationship to transportation but not function as a transportation facility. Once a relationship to surface transportation is established, TE activities can be implemented in a number of ways. For example, they can be developed as parts of larger joint development projects, or as stand -alone projects. RESPONSE: in The proposed project provides for a grade- separated crossing of 70` Street (CSAH 22), improving safety for both pedestrians and motorized traffic. The roadway is currently four lanes wide (including acceleration and deceleration lanes) with designated left turn lanes at the intersection of Hardwood Avenue. The posted speed limit at this segment of 70 Street (CSAH 22) is 40 mph. The underpass will reduce distractions to the motorizing public at the intersection, thereby increasing safety and efficiency for vehicles as well as benefiting the users of the trail. Construction of the pedestrian underpass will provide the regional connection and access to Metro Transit Bus routes located along 80th Street. The pedestrian underpass will eliminate a barrier to individuals seeking to utilize alternative methods to work and shop in the commercial and retail area to the south. The trail connection also serves to provide for better connectivity to the regional trail system, city facilities, the Washington County public library, County Park and the City of St. Paul Park. 4. The project must be included in, be part of, or address a transportation problem or need identified in one of the following: I) an approved local or county comprehensive plan found to be consistent with Metropolitan Council plans; 2) a locally approved capital improvement program; 3) an officially adopted corridor study (trunk highway studies must be approved by Mn/DOT and Metropolitan Council); or 4) the official plan or program of the applicant agency. It also must not conflict with the goals and policies in these adopted regional plans; the 2030 Transportation Policy Plan (201.0), the 2030 Regional Framework (2004), and the 2030 Regional Parks Policy Plan (2010). The applicant must reference the appropriate comprehensive plan, CIP, approved corridor study document, or other plan or program and provide copies of the applicable pages. RESPONSE: • Washington County's CIP addresses the intersection improvements in 2015, • Washingotn County's Comprehensive Plan identifies issues with the intersection and depicts the county and regional trail system, • Cottage Grove's current CIP addresses proposed improvements at the intersection, • Cottage Grove 2030 Comprehensive Plan outlines the proposed improvements at the 70' Street (CSAH 22) and Hardwood Avenue interesection. • A Corridor Analysis Report was prepared in 2010 for 70"' Street (CSAH 22) from Goodview Avenue to Hinton Avenue. The proposed project is consistent with the recommendations of that study. The proposed project addresses the following goals and policies in the City of Cottage Grove 2030 Comprehensive Plan: POLICY 5.7 The trailway system will be separated from roadways whenever feasible. - This project will provide a grade separation to remove pedestrian traffic from the 70 Street (CSAH 22) and Hardwood Avenue intersection. POLICY 5.10 The trailway system will include a variety of surfaces, slopes, and linear distance that will accommodate the needs of all segments of the general population. The system will be implemented to conform to the Americans with Disabilities Act, except when topography or other environmental constraints prohibit meeting the majority of the standards. - The project will be ADA compliant. The proposed underpass will provide a safer, smoother, less intimadating crossing of a high-speed roadway, which is particularity important for individuals that may require additional crossing time. "A main goal of the trails plan is to link together the major pedestrian generators in the City such as schools, parks, and commercial development. Trail crossing locations along collectors and arterials should be carefully considered to maximize trail user safety." 11 - This project aims to maximize safety for trail users by creating a grade separated crossing of 70 Street (CSAH 22). The proposed trail will provide a connection of the Hardwood Avenue trail, connecting residents north of 70' Street (CSAH 22) with the parks, community facilities and commercial properties along 80` Street. 5. Typically a transportation project involves mitigation, work in addition to immediate construction activities, that is negotiated with permitting agencies and local governments as a condition of obtaining permit approval. Activities that are normally part of the mitigation of a transportation project are not eligible, such as required stormwater mitigation or basic bicycle and pedestrian accommodation on bridges to be constricted or reconstructed. NOT ELIGIBLE — Work that is required as a condition of obtaining a permit or concurrence for a different transportation project is not eligible for enhancement funding. For example, a city may require a highway expansion project to include streetscape enhancements in order to gain municipal consent. In that case, streetscape work performed to satisfy the municipal consent requirement is not eligible for Transportation Enhancement funding. Federal permitting and authorizing agencies may include the U.S. Forest Service, U. S. Corps of Engineers, and others. State permitting agencies may include the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, and the Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office. Regional agencies may include watershed districts and metropolitan planning organizations. Local agencies may include counties and cities. RESPONSE: The 70' Street (CSAH 22) pedestrian underpass is an independent project and is not a required mitigation activity for another transportation project. 6. The applicant must assure it will operate and maintain the property and facility of the project for the useful life of the improvement, and not change the use of any right -of -way acquired without prior approval from the Minnesota Department of Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration. The FHWA requires that states agree to operate and maintain facilities constructed with federal transportation funds for the useful life of the improvement, and not change the use of any right -of- way acquired without prior approval from the FHWA. TAB has determined that this requirement will be applied to the project applicant. FHWA considers most physical constructions and total reconstructions to have a useful design life of 10 years or more, depending on the nature of the project. Bridge constructions and total reconstructions are considered to have useful lives of 50 years. The useful life of the project will be defined in the inter - agency maintenance agreement that must be prepared and signed prior to the project letting. RESPONSE: The underpass will be located within the Washington County, CSAH 22 and Hardwood Avenue rights-of-way. No additional right of way is necessary for this project. The City of Cottage Grove is committed to providing the care and maintenance for the proposed underpass and trail segments and amenities for the project's useful design life. 7. Projects must have an estimated total cost of at least $125,000. There are significant federal project processing requirements that come with federal finds. These requirements translate into expenditures of time and money on the parts of both the agency proposing /developing the project and the state agency administering the federal funds for the project. Project applicants can "bundle" projects together to meet this minimum. (Example: bundled projects could consist of signing and lighting a number of bike trails in several counties.) Communities may want to consider using joint powers agreements for implementing bundled projects. RESPONSE: Cottage Grove is requesting $1,000,000, which is 80% of the total estimated project construction cost of $1,200,000. This amount is above the $125,000 minimum in TE funds provided by the TAB. 8. TAB will not award more than $1,000,000 in TE funds to a specific project. Other federal funds may be combined with TE funds. RESPONSE: The City is requesting $1,000,000, which is not over the maximum in TE funds provided by the TAB. 1% 9. Projects must have an assured local (nonfederal funds) match of at least 20% of the estimated total cost of the proposed project. At the time of application, - the applicant must assure the local match will be available when the project is authorized in the requested program year. If the applicant expects any other agency to provide part of the local match, the applicant must include a letter or resolution from the other agency agreeing to financially participate. TAB will not award additional points for providing a match in excess of 20 %. The local match can be provided in the form of cash up front "hard dollars" or a "soft match ". A "soft match" may include donated labor or constriction materials if adequate documentation of its equivalent dollar value and availability can be provided. Donated labor must have expertise and experience in the type of labor required for the project and valued at rates consistent with rates ordinarily paid for similar work. Some type of time sheet must support donated labor. Donated materials, e.g., railroad ties, asphalt pavement, or wiring necessary to nm a street car, must meet all standards and specifications. Caution in using a "soft match" should be taken to ensure the donated materials or labor during actual construction does not fall below the 20% non - federal match required to be able to receive 100% of the federal finds. Applicants wishing to use a soft match should first contact John Lindemer at Mn/DOT at 651/366 -3764 to determine its value and eligibility. RESPONSE: The City of Cottage Grove is committed to providing at least 20% for the CSAH 22 pedestrian underpass and trail connections. The 20% cost share will be a hard match provided by the City's Capital Improvement funds. 1.0. Proposed designs for bikeways and for combined bike /pedestrian facilities must meet MN /DOT State Aid standards. Exceptions to the State Aid standards may be granted during final design if warranted based on social, economic or environmental alternatives, not through this solicitation process. Failure to meet the standards or justify exemptions will result in the loss of federal funds. RESPONSE: The pedestrian underpass and trail connections will be designed to meet MnDOT State Aid standards, AASHTO guidelines and will be ADA compliant. 11. Projects must be coordinated with all affected communities and other levels and units of government. Coordination is defined as written communication from the applicant to all affected communities informing them of the project. The applicant must provide a copy of the written communication as proof of coordination. RESPONSE: The City of Cottage Grove will make every effort to involve residents, interested businesses, and other affected parties in the planning of the underpass and trail connections through the citizen advisory group, open houses and public meetings. If the County project moves forward, the County would be the lead agency on the project and will establish a technical advisory group and a citizen's advisory group for the project. Washington County has written a letter of support for the project. 13 TE PROJECTS — PROJECT CATEGORIES AND RANKING Instead of the past practice of having general prioritizing criteria to which all projects must respond, the prioritizing criteria are now split into category and general /integrative criteria, as outlined on the following pages. Projects will be scored through the category and general /integrative criteria as follows: a) Categories. All applications must be submitted in one of four categories: Scenic and Environmental; Bicycle and Pedestrian; Historical and Archaeological or Streetscape /Pedestrian Enhancements. Applicants must submit their project under the proper category as outlined below. If prospective applicants are uncertain which category most appropriately includes their project, they should contact Council staff. The 12 Qualifying Activities (as listed and described in Qualifying Criterion #1 on previous pages) fall under those 3 categories as follows: 1. Scenic and Environmental: ➢ QA #3, Acquisition of scenic easements and scenic or historic sites; ➢ QA 44, Scenic or historic highway programs; ➢ QA 49, Inventory, control and removal of outdoor advertising; and ➢ QA 411, Environmental mitigation to address water pollution due to highway runoff or reduce vehicle- caused wildlife mortality while maintaining habitat connectivity. 2. Bicycle and Pedestrian Connections: ➢ QA #1, Provision of facilities for pedestrians and bicyclists; ➢ QA #2, Provision of safety and educational activities for pedestrians and bicyclists; and ➢ QA #8, Preservation of abandoned railway corridors (including the conversion and use thereof for pedestrian and bicycle trails). 3. Historic and Archaeological: ➢ QA 46, Historic preservation (with relationship to transportation, see Qualifying Criterion #2); ➢ QA #7, Rehabilitation and operation of historic transportation buildings, structures, or facilities (including historic railroad facilities and canals); ➢ QA #10, Archaeological planning and research (with relationship to transportation, see Qualifying Criterion #2); and ➢ QA #12, Establishment of transportation museums. 4. Streetscape /Pedestrian Enhancements: ➢ QA #5, Landscaping and other scenic beautification; ➢ QA #1, Provision of facilities for pedestrians and bicyclists. b) Final Ranking. Projects will be ranked against other applications in their category to develop four ranked lists of TE projects, which will be evaluated all together by a multidisciplinary team of scorers, who will develop a single list of recommended projects. The TAB may or may not choose to fund projects submitted from each category. 14 TE PROJECTS - PRIORITIZING CRITERIA Each qualified project will be scored under five common category criteria within its TE project group: urgency; impact; relationship between TE categories; and relationship to intermodal /multimodal transportation; and implementation of the Development Framework. This will allow projects to be scored under these criteria relatively equally across the different categories while addressing the particular attributes of the project type. An explanation of each of the four common category criteria and reasons for their inclusion follows: 1. Urgencv/Sii4nificance This criterion measures how critical or time- sensitive the problem is that is being addressed by a regionally significant project. Examples might include seizing a timely opportunity to preserve a scarce or endangered resource or addressing a critical need. 1 Impact This criterion quantifies the benefit from the project, without specifically relating it to how the larger public will benefit (that calculation will be made in part 2. of the general /integrative criteria). 3. Relationship between Categories This criterion is being presented under the assumption that the region recognizes that there is a value in having projects that provide more than one of the eligible TE activities. Examples might include the reconstruction of a bicycle /pedestrian trail leading to a historic transportation structure. 4. Relationship to Intermodal/Multimodal Transportation System This criterion measures how the proposed project clearly and credibly relates to the surface transportation system. Surface transportation is defined to include all modes of travel with the exception of aviation and military transportation. Federal TE guidance states that proximity to a transportation facility alone is not sufficient to establish a relationship. 5. Development Framework. This criterion measures how the proposed project relates to the goals for land use development, resource protection and transportation described in the 2030 Regional Development Framework and 2030 Transportation Policy Plan. 6. Maturity of Project Concept This criterion measures the number of steps already taken in project development. These steps are outlined in the checklist in Appendix K. 15 ■ Scenic and Environmental Group (Qualifying Activities 3, 4, 9, 11) I. Urgency /Significance (200 points). Discuss if/how the project proposes or addresses each of the following: • Takes advantage of a time- sensitive opportunity, e.g., a willing landowner, cost savings, affiliation with another project, competing development opportunities. RESPONSE: • Addresses a significant issue /problem /threat/opportunity associated with contaminated land, erosion, water quality, rare or threatened plant or wildlife species, and /or obstructed or impaired scenic views. RESPONSE: 2. Impact (300 points). Discuss how the project addresses the applicable questions below (respond as appropriate to all questions except those specifically targeted at a different qualifying activity): • For Qualifying Activity #3: What is the scenic or historic authenticity and integrity of the property or site, and how will these scenic or historic qualities be preserved or enhanced by the project? RESPONSE: For Qualifying Activity 44: What is the scenic or historic authenticity and integrity of the highway and how will these scenic or historic qualities be preserved or enhanced by the project? RESPONSE: • For Qualifying Activity #9: How many nonconforming, illegal and other off - premise signs are targeted for removal under the proposed project? RESPONSE: For Qualifying Activity #11: If addressing water pollution; what pollutants are in the water, what natural resources do they harm, and how will the proposed project address the source of these pollutants? If the project concerns wildlife mortality and habitat connectivity; how would the project maintain, improve, or restore habitat connectivity, reduce vehicle - caused wildlife mortality, and what kinds of wildlife will benefit? RESPONSE: • For All Applicants: Provides more than a local benefit. Two examples of projects that provide more than a local benefit include mitigation of highway water runoff to a river that runs through several communities, and acquisition of a scenic casement and lookout area along a regional ( "A" Minor or Principal Arterial) highway. RESPONSE: • For All Applicants: Provides an immediate benefit. Projects that are likely to show immediate results will receive more points over those that are part of a longer -term project. RESPONSE: • For All Applicants: Provides benefit to significant numbers of people. Staff will determine this by using the population density within one mile of the project area. Applicants will need to supply a map showing the exact location of the project. In the case of water pollution 16 due to highway runoff, the location would be the impacted area even if the source of the pollution being addressed is not in the impacted area. Relationship between Categories (100 points). Projects will score higher if they provide multiple benefits toward the purpose of the Transportation Enhancements program. Applicants should review the respective category criteria to determine the extent to which the project relates to the other two Transportation Enhancements categories: What is the relationship to the Bicycle and Pedestrian group? For example, how does the scenic /environmental project address bicycle and pedestrian access to the project location? RESPONSE: What is the relationship to the Historic and Archaeological group? For example, how does the scenic /environmental project promote people's understanding of transportation in history or protect archaeological resources? RESPONSE: 4. Relationship to Intermodal /Multimodal Transportation System (100 points). Discuss how the project will function as a component and /or enhancement of the transportation system: • How will the project benefit the experience of users of the transportation system? RESPONSE: • How will the project benefit multiple modes of transportation? RESPONSE: 5. Development Framework (100 points) Is the environmental project integrated with a larger development plan that will benefit from the improve resource? Describe how it is integrated. RESPONSE: 6. Maturity of Project Concept (200 points). Projects selected through this solicitation will be programmed for construction in 2015 or 2016. That is a fairly long time but it takes several years to complete preliminary engineering, environmental studies and acquire right -of -way. The region must manage the federal funds in each year of the TIP. Projects that are not implemented in their original program year are carried over to the next program year, or the funding sunset date. This requires other projects to shift program years to maintain fiscal balance in the TIP and STIR Proposed projects that have already completed some of the work are more likely to be ready for funding authorization in their program year. A schedule is important to know what kind of work might be needed. I,arge projects that need right -of -way require more work than those that do not. Applications involving construction must complete the project implementation schedule found in Appendix K. A detailed schedule of events is expected for all phases of the project. Applications involving non- construction projects must include a detailed discussion of the timeframes involved for initiating and completing each phase of planned activities. Points under this criterion are assigned based on how many steps have been taken toward implementation of the project. These steps reflect a federally funded project development path. TOTAL: 1,000 POINTS 17 ■ Bicycle and Pedestrian Pathway Group (Qualifying Activities 1, 2, and 8) 1. Urgency /Significance (200 points). Discuss how the project proposes or addresses each of the following: Takes advantage of a time- sensitive opportunity, e.g., a willing landowner, cost savings, affiliation with another project, competing development opportunities. RESPONSE: Washington County is proposing to improve the intersection at 70 Street (CSAH 22) and Hardwood Avenue in 2015. It is the City's desire to construct a pedestrian underpass as part of, or in advance of, this intersection improvement. This request takes advantage of a time sensitive opportunity as it relates to the improvements of the intersection. Since construction is proposed for 2015, the opportunity presented with this project is only available within a short window. Based upon that time frame, the city would advance construct the pedestrian underpass and trails involved in this proposed project prior to 2015. if the underpass were not constructed with the intersection improvements proposed by the County, it would be impractical and unfeasibile to construction at a later date. There is no right - of -way necessary to aquire for this project. Addresses a significant opportunity, un -met need or problem as relates to the development of an integrated bicycle or pedestrian transportation network; or providing a safe /enjoyable bicycle or pedestrian route. RESPONSE: A pedestrian underpass is the most cost effective solution to eliminate the at -grade crossing at this location. This intersection presents the most viable location for a pedestrian underpass as the city's trail system funnels to this location. No other crossing along the 70 Street (CSAH 22) corridor was determined to be a reasonable location for a grade separation due to lack of right- of-way available, grade or existing trail network connections. The issue of safety is also a significant factor at this location, as it has been the site of numerous accidents and fatalities. The high speeds, steep grade and multiple turning movements have created a serious problem for motorists and pedestrians. It is a location that pedestrians in the area tend to avoid due to the characteristics of 70 Street (CSAH 22). The underpass will provide a safe means of travel for pedestrians and minimize distractions for motorists at the intersection. The route will also provide a pleasant and enjoyable experience for pedestrians and bicyclists along the trail system as parks, tree groves and water features are present. 2. Impact (300 points). Discuss how the project addresses each element below (respond as appropriate to A. or B., not both): A. Bike /Ped Infrastructure (QA #1, and QA #8): Fills gaps, overcomes barriers, connects system segments and /or otherwise seizes on a significant opportunity in pedestrian/bicycle network. The applicant should provide a map showing the location of the project within the context of an existing and planned bicycle or pedestrian network. If the project is removing a barrier, the applicant should demonstrate the magnitude of the barrier (number of lanes, average daily traffic, posted speed, etc.) and how the proposed project will improve travel across that barrier. RESPONSE: 70 Street (CSAH 22) creates a significant barrier to pedestrians and bicyclists as a four lane undivided road section with a current traffic volume at 6,000 ADT and a posted speed limit of 40 mph. The barrier will only increase with time, and will not improve without a pedestrian underpass. When considering 2030 traffic projections of approximately 20,000 ADT, the problem is greatly compounded. The roadway project to be constricted in 2015 will be 18 designed as a 4 -lane divided highway with Left and right turn lanes at the intersection to meet the traffic projections of 2030. The expanded roadway section will increase the distance that pedestrians must cross. • Project provides a high -demand facility or program. Relative levels of demand will be determined using population density and connections to significant travel attractors. Metropolitan Council staff will determine population density using 2009 residential population within one mile of the project. The applicant should also list below significant destinations that are near the facility or that the facility provides close connections to. Destinations can be recreation areas such as parks, beaches, rivers, lakes, etc; or commercial or mixed -use districts, major employment areas or other major cultural destinations. RESPONSE: By removing the barrier that 70 Street (CSAH 22) presents, residents north of the intersection will be able to travel safely and comfortably to the Washington County library, post office, shopping and restaurant opportunities, city hall, police station, as well as to the City's Hardwood, Hidden Valley, West Draw and Oakwood park facilities. The trails will also provide indirect access through existing trails and sidewalks to additional parks, neighborhoods, schools and commerical centers. Addresses safety concerns. The applicant should describe how the project addresses an identified safety problem. RESPONSE: Crash data at the intersection of 70` Street (CSAH 22) and Hardwood Avenue shows 14 accidents from 2008 to 2010. The accidents occurred with a traffic volume of 6,000 ADT. Safety improvements need to take place at the intersection to support the projected 20,000 ADT. Removing the pedestrian /cyclist and motor vehicle conflicts should aid in reducing future accidents at the intersection. For Applications for Qualifying Activity 48 only: Who owns the railway corridor property and will there be an agreement to ensure the preservation and protection of the corridor? RESPONSE: N/A B. Bike /Ped Programs (QA #2): Significantly improves safety /behavior of bicyclists and pedestrians. RESPONSE: The trail users will have a safer route by utilizing the underpass and removing pedestraans and bicyclists from the intersection will remove a source of distraction for drivers on the roadways. As traffic levels reach the projected 20,000 ADT, the high speed county road will continue to be a growing barrier for pedestrians if the pedestrian underpass is not constructed. The problem will not improve, but become more challenging as the road gets wider and more difficult to cross. Increases market share /use of bicycling and walking. RESPONSE: If the barrier of 70 "h Street (CSAH 22) were eliminated pedestrians would be able to flow freely from park to park, trail to trail, and home to shopping without fear of crossing 70 " Street (CSAH 22). Families would feel safer taking their children to the park, the fishing pond or to get an ice cream cone. Individuals who may need additional time to cross the intersection would not have to fear the wide multi-lane, high - speed, high traffic county road. The ADA accessible crossing will provide increased opportunities for fishing, bird watching or meeting a friend for coffee at local coffee shop. This connection could cause individuals to reconsider Metro Transit, because a challenge that was standing in their way has been removed. The overall level of use would increase on the regional trail system, along with the City's local trails. This underpass now opens new opportunities for the novice bicycler or the family that wants a safe environment to walk or bike with their children. 19 • Fills gaps in existing programs. Describe the target audience in this program and how they would benefit from these activities or programs. RESPONSE: The city has worked diligently over the years to create a complete trail network that allows individuals to seek out recreational opportunities via trail. The city's desire has been to work toward providing accessible trails to featured or key destinations in our community. The proposed project spans a gap in our network. The trail system is highly established in this area, it is just lacking a way to cross the `great divide' presented by 70` Street (CSAH 22). The construction of an underpass would fit into the regional and local plan to improve, encourage and promote alternative modes of transportation. Those individuals that utilize the regional trail system would benefit, along with those that use the local trail network for recreation or a means of transportation. Provides more than a local benefit. An example of such a program is a bicycle /pedestrian safety program conducted in several school districts. RESPONSE: The construction of an underpass would fit into the regional plan to improve, encourage and promote alternative modes of transportation. Those individuals that utilize the regional trail system for transportation would benefit by the safer crossing of 70` Street (CSAH 22). 3. Relationship between Categories (100 points). Projects will score higher if they provide multiple benefits toward the purpose of the Transportation Enhancements program. Applicants should review the respective category criteria to determine the extent to which the project relates to the other two categories: • What is the relationship to the Scenic and Environmental group? For example, how does the bike /ped project provide a natural resource enhancement? RESPONSE: The pedestrian underpass improves accessibility the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Fishing in the Neighborhood (FiN) pond found at the southeastern quadrant of the intersection. The pond has been in the program for a number of years and fish are stocked annually to continue to promote shorefishing and youth fishing opportunities in the metro area. If the underpass is constructed, the MnDNR's FiN programs mission and vision for the area will be furthered as more youth and individuals will have opportunities to enjoy urban fishing because they will be able to safely walk or bike to the pond. The City in conjunction with the Minnaqua Program and Fisheries Division of the MnDNR each year holds a `Take a Kid Fishing' event. The event provides opportunities for youth and adults to fish, or learn to fish. There are stations around the pond that provide opportunities to learn about aquatic plants, invertebrates, environmental concerns and how people can make a difference. The program would be enhanced because more exploration and instruction could take place on the north side of 70" Street (CSAH 22) near the wetland where a more diverse plant and animal population could be viewed. The accessibility to the wetland area would provide a good opportunity to provide for educational signage related to the wetland and the value they provide. Overall the users of the trait will have an enhanced and pleasant experience by utilizing a trail with a pedestrian underpass. By bringing the trail user closer to the ponds and wetlands, the scenic views are increased and made accessible to all to enjoy. • What is the relationship to the Historic and Archaeological group? For example, how does the bike /ped project take advantage of or enhance historic and cultural resources or provide orientation/interpretation to users? RESPONSE: 20 The proposed project will connect many of the County's and City's resources located in the area, such as parks, libraries and community facilities. The project also proposes to educate and stimulate interest in the natural features contained within the Cottage Grove park system through interpretive signage and wayfinding. 4. Relationship to Intermodal /Multimodal Transportation System (100 points). Discuss how the project will function as a component and /or enhancement of the transportation system: How will the bicycle or pedestrian facility benefit the experience of users of the transportation system? RESPONSE: The proposed pedestrian underpass will offer an alternative to the at -grade crossing of 70 Street (CSAH 22), which will improve safety for both pedestrians and motorized traffic. Within the project area, 70` Street (CSAH 22) is a four lane roadway with designated left turn lanes. This high - speed, high volume, multi -lane roadway presents a significant distance for pedestrians to cross. Removing bicyclists and pedestrians from the at -grade roadway intersection eliminates a source of distraction for drivers at an intersection with a significant history of crashes. How will the project benefit multiple modes of transportation? An example of a project that would do this would be a bicycle facility that connects to a transit center or a mixed -use pedestrian- oriented district, or a pedestrian project that is a component of a transit- oriented development. RESPONSE: Metro Transit serves the 80th Street corridor within the City of Cottage Grove. This pedestrian underpass will provide a safe crossing of 70 Street (CSAH 22), allowing residents who live north of 70" Street (CSAH 22) to connect to the available transit facilities on 80th Street by way of the Hardwood Avenue Trail. How does the facility serve trips that could otherwise be made by motor vehicles? RESPONSE: A large commercial /retail area exists approximately 1 mile south of 70` Street (CSAH 22) along 80` Street. An existing trail runs north /south along the boulevard of Hardwood Avenue and connects to this popular shopping area. The pedestrian underpass will eliminate a barrier to individuals seeking to utilize alternative modes of transportation, such as walking or biking, to access the many services, shops and restaurants that Cottage Grove has to offer. The trail connection also provides better connectivity to the regional trail system, city facilities, library, County Parks and the City of St. Paul Park. 5. Development Framework (100 points) • If the project is a trail project, does it help to connect to or complete the Metropolitan Council's Regional Trail network? How so? If the project is on part of the Regional Trail system, it must be identified in a Metropolitan Council - approved master plan. RESPONSE: The Metropolitan Council's Regional Trail network has a proposed trail corridor along 80` Street, which is currently listed as 'Under Acquisition, Development, Planned or Proposed'. This proposed regional trail would be connected to this project by way of the Hardwood Avenue trail. 21 Briefly describe how the project implements the Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan in the 2030 Transportation Policy Plan (2009). RESPONSE: The proposed underpass project implements several strategies listed in the Metropolitan Council's 2030 Transportation Policy Plan: Under Policy 18: Providing Pedestrian and Bicycle Travel Systems: Strategy 18a. Bicycle and Pedestrian Regional Investment Priorities: The Council will prioritize federal funding for bicycle and pedestrian improvements based on their ability to accomplish regional transportation objectives for bicycling or walking in a cost - effective manner and improving access to major destinations. - This project will provide the most cost - effective grade separation of 70" Street (CSAH 22). Incorporating the underpass into the proposed intersection improvements for the 70' Street (CSAII 22) and Hardwood Avenue intersection planned by Washington County will provide the only economical way to grade separate the intersection. At a later date, the underpass would be unfeasible. A pedestrian overpass bridge would be significantly more expensive than taking advantage of this underpass opportunity. Strategy 18b. Connectivity to Transit: Recognizing the importance of walking and bicycling to a multimodal transportation system, the Council will strongly encourage local units of government to develop a safe and attractive pedestrian environment near major transit corridors and stations with linkages for pedestrians and bicyclists from origins and destinations to buses and trains. - This project will provide a safe connection to a significant transit corridor within the City (80 "` Street) by way of the Hardwood Avenue 'frail. Strategy 18c. Local Planning for Bicycling and Walking: The Metropolitan Council encourages local planning for bicycle and pedestrian mobility by requiring that a local bicycle or pedestrian project must be consistent with an adopted plan to be considered eligible for federal transportation funding. - Providing a safe crossing of the high speed, high volume 70 Street (CSAH 22) will encourage residents north of 70' Street (CSAH 22) to consider other modes of transportation such as walking or bicycling to access key destinations within the City, including the Washington County library, post office, shopping and restaurant opportunities, city hall, police station, as well as to the City's Hardwood, Hidden Valley, West Draw and Oakwood park facilities. Additionally, the underpass on the Hardwood Avenue trail will provide a connection to the transit facilities located on 80th Street. Strategy 18e. Multimodal Roadway Design: Local and state agencies will implement a multimodal roadway system and design and planning for principal or minor arterial road construction and reconstruction projects will explicitly consider off -road walkway and both on- and off -road bicycle accommodation with special emphasis placed on travel barrier removal and safety for bicyclists and pedestrians. - This project proposes to remove a major barrier to pedestrians and bicyclists traveling through the City of Cottage Grove. 70 Street (CSAH 22) is a high speed, high volume roadway that presents a physical and psychological barrier to residents wishing to travel north /south within the central area of the City. The residents have expressed alarm about the inability to safely cross the 70 Street (CSAH 22) and Hardwood Avenue intersection. 22 If the barrier were eliminated, pedestrians would be able to travel freely from park to park, trail to trail, and home to shopping without fear of crossing 70 Street (CSAH 22). Individuals who may need additional time to cross the intersection would not have to fear the wide multi -lane, high- speed, high traffic county road with the proposed ADA accessible grade separated crossing of 70"' Street (CSAH 22). The underpass also opens new opportunities for the new bicycler or the family that wants a safe environment to walk or bike with their children to area parks. 6. Maturity of Project Concept (200 points). Projects selected through this solicitation will be programmed for construction in 2015 or 2016. That is a fairly long time but it takes several years to complete preliminary engineering, environmental studies and acquire right -of -way. The region must manage the federal funds in each year of the TIP. Projects that are not implemented in their original program year are carried over to the next program year, or the funding sunset date. This requires other projects to shift program years to maintain fiscal balance in the TIP and STIR Proposed projects that have already completed some of the work are more likely to be ready for funding authorization in their program year. A schedule is important to know what kind of work might be needed. Large projects that need right -of -way require more work than those that do not. Applications involving construction must complete the project implementation schedule found in Appendix K. A detailed schedule of events is expected for all phases of the project. Applications involving non - construction projects must include a detailed discussion of the timeframes involved for initiating and completing each phase of planned activities. Points under this criterion are assigned based on how marry steps have been taken toward implementation of the project. These steps reflect a federally funded project development path. TOTAL: 1,000 POINTS 23 ■ Historic and Archaeological Group (Qualifying Activities 6, 7, 10. and 12) 1. Urgency /Significance (200 points)._Discuss if/how the project proposes or addresses each of the following: • Addresses a significant issue /problem /threat/opportunity associated with the preservation /restoration of an endangered historic or archaeological resource. RESPONSE: • Takes advantage of a time - sensitive opportunity, e.g., a willing landowner, cost savings, affiliation with another project, competing development opportunities. RESPONSE: 2. Impact (300 points). Discuss how the project addresses each applicable element below: • Protects or enhances a site on or eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. RESPONSE: • Provides opportunities for users to experience, appreciate, and understand a unique historic or archaeological resource or site. RESPONSE: • Fits into the community's educational system, e.g., school curriculum, libraries, youth programs, archaeology week, etc. RESPONSE: • Provides more than a local benefit. Examples of projects that provide more than a local benefit include rehabilitation of an historic transportation structure in a busy state or regional park, or a project to establish a transportation museum that will be visited by people from outside the community where it is located. RESPONSE: • Provides benefit to significant numbers of people. Metropolitan Council staff will determine this by using the population and employment density within one mile of the project area. Applicants will need to supply a map showing the exact location of the project. RESPONSE: • Provides an immediate benefit. Projects that show immediate results will receive points over those that are part of a longer -terns project. RESPONSE: • For Applications for Qualifying Activity 410 only: What is the archaeological integrity of the ruins, artifacts, structural remains, etc... showing significant historic or prehistoric human life or activity, and how will they be preserved or protected? RESPONSE: 3. Relationship between Categories (100 points). Projects will score higher if they provide multiple benefits toward the purpose of the Transportation Enhancements program. Applicants should review the respective category criteria to determine the extent to which the project relates to the other two categories: 24 What is the relationship to the Scenic and Environmental group? For example, how does the historic /archaeological project provide a natural resource enhancement? RESPONSE: • What is the relationship to the Bicycle and Pedestrian group? For example, how does the scenic /environmental project address bicycle and pedestrian access to the project location? RESPONSE: 4. Relationship to Intermodal /Multimodal Transportation System (100 points). Discuss how the project will function as a component and /or enhancement of the transportation system: 0 How will the project benefit the experience of users of the transportation system? RESPONSE: How will the project be accessible by multiple modes of transportation? RESPONSE: a How will the project benefit multiple modes of transportation? RESPONSE: In what way is the project /program associated with surface transportation through past, present, or future use as a transportation or transportation - related resource? RESPONSE: How does the project facilitate an understanding of the relationship of an historic or archaeological resource to the role of surface transportation in significant historic and cultural events, movements, and contexts. RESPONSE: 5. Development Framework (100 points) • Does the historic preservation project help to improve the immediate area around the project? Is it integrated within a redevelopment plan? RESPONSE: 6. Maturity of Project Concept (200 points). Projects selected through this solicitation will be programmed for construction in 2015 or 2016. That is a fairly long time but it takes several years to complete preliminary engineering, environmental studies and acquire right -of -way. The region must manage the federal funds in each year of the TIP. Projects that are not implemented in their original program year are carried over to the next program year, or the funding sunset date. This requires other projects to shift program years to maintain fiscal balance in the TIP and STIR Proposed projects that have already completed some of the work are more likely to be ready for funding authorization in their program year. A schedule is important to know what kind of work might be needed. Large projects that need right -of -way require more work than those that do not. Applications involving construction must complete the project implementation schedule found in Appendix K. A detailed schedule of events is expected for all phases of the project. Applications involving non - construction projects must include a detailed discussion of the timeframes involved for initiating and completing each phase of planned activities. Points under this criterion are assigned based on how many steps have been taken toward implementation of the project. These steps reflect a federally funded project development path. 25 TOTAL: 1,000 POINTS ■ Streetseape/Pedestrian Enhancements (Qualifying Activities 1 & 5) 1. Urgency /Significance (200 points). Discuss if /how the project proposes or addresses each of the following: • 'fakes advantage of a time - sensitive opportunity, e.g., a willing landowner, cost savings, affiliation with another project, competing development opportunities. RESPONSE: • Addresses a significant opportunity, un -met need or problem as relates to the development of a pedestrian transportation network or providing a safe and pleasant pedestrian route and supporting transit riders. RESPONSE: 2. Impact (300 points). Discuss how the project addresses each element below. Projects will score higher if it is located on an important transit route and significantly improves the pedestrian environment. Describe the existing conditions for pedestrian safety and circulation along the project segment. RESPONSE: • Describe all functional improvements to pedestrian safety and circulation that will be included as part of this project (such as sidewalks, crosswalks, pedestrian countdown signals, etc.). RESPONSE: • Provides more than a local benefit: What are the number of transit lines and the daily frequency of transit service along the segment of roadway being improved and on any roadways connecting to the segment of roadway being improved? RESPONSE: • Provides benefit to significant numbers of people: Metropolitan Council staff will determine this by using the population and employment density within one mile of the project area. • Is the roadway being improved in a business district? If so, describe the business district (number of businesses, nature of businesses, etc.). RESPONSE: • What pedestrian amenities will be installed with the project (vegetation, benches, wayfrnding, pedestrian -scale lighting, etc.)? RESPONSE: • Describe the design intent for the landscaping improvements being proposed. Provide any visual examples or plans if they are available. RESPONSE: 3. Relationship between Categories (100 points). Projects will score higher if they provide multiple benefits toward the purpose of the Transportation Enhancements program. Applicants 26 should review the respective category criteria to determine the extent to which the project relates to the other two categories: • What is the relationship with the Bicycle/Pedestrian Connections group? Does the project include amenities or facilities for bicycles? Does it facilitate any new connections pedestrian or bicycle connections? RESPONSE: • What is the relationship to the Environmental group? For example, how does the project provide a natural resource enhancement and address environmental mitigation? RESPONSE: What is the relationship to the Historic and Archaeological group? For example, how does the project take advantage of or enhance historic and cultural resources or provide orientation /interpretation to users? RESPONSE: 4. Relationship to Intermodal /Multimodal Transportation System (100 points). Discuss how the project will function as a component and /or enhancement of the transportation system: How will the project benefit multiple modes of transportation? An example of a project that would do this world be a project connecting to a transit center or on an important transit route or a project that is a component of a transit - oriented development. RESPONSE: 5. Development Framework (100 points) a. How does the project improve the accessibility and ease of use of transit? RESPONSE: 6. Maturity of Project Concept (200 points). Projects selected through this solicitation will be programmed for construction in 2015 or 2016. That is a fairly long time but it takes several years to complete preliminary engineering, environmental studies and acquire right -of -way. The region must manage the federal funds in each year of the TIP. Projects that are not implemented in their original program year are carried over to the next program year, or the finding sunset date. This requires other projects to shift program years to maintain fiscal balance in the TIP and STIR Proposed projects that have already completed some of the work are more likely to be ready for funding authorization in their program year. A schedule is important to know what kind of work might be needed. Large projects that need right -of -way require more work than those that do not. Applications involving construction must complete the project implementation schedule found in Appendix K. A detailed schedule of events is expected for all phases of the project. Applications involving non - constriction projects must include a detailed discussion of the timeframes involved for initiating and completing each phase of planned activities. Points under this criterion are assigned based on how many steps have been taken toward implementation of the project. These steps reflect a federally funded project development path. TOTAL: 1,000 POINTS 27 Appendices Appendix A - County Support Letter Appendix B - Figure 1, Location Map Figure 2, Aerial Map Figure 3, Proposed Improvements Appendix C - Washington County CIP (Select Pages) Washington County Comprehensive Plan (Select Pages) Cottage Grove CIP (Select Pages) Cottage Grove Comprehensive Plan (Select Pages) Corridor Analysis Report (Select Pages) Appendix D - Implementation Schedule x( . County Support Letter • June 27. 2011 Jennifer Levitt, P.E. City of Cottage Grove 8635 West Point Douglas Road South Cottage Grove, MN 55016 -3318 Pedestrian Underpass at CSAH 22 and Hardwood Avenue South Dear Ms. Levitt Public Works Department Donald J. Theisen, P.E. Director Wayne H. Sandberg, P.E. Deputy Director /County Engineer Washington County is in full support of the proposed Pedestrian Underpass project located at CSAH 22 and Hardwood Avenue South. The grade separation would provide for a safer crossing of CSAH 22 for pedestrians and cyclists, and would also eliminate potential conflicts with motorized vehicles at the intersection, The County's trail system includes a bituminous pathway along CSAH 22 that connects to other County trails and will connect to future regional trails in the County. Our Comprehensive Plan depicts the need for improvements to CSAH 22 in this location and we currently have those improvements identified in the 5 -year CIP adopted by the County Board. A Corridor Analysis Report was prepared in 2010 that also depicts the grade separated crossing and identifies the underpass as a preferred option at the intersection.. Please contact me if you have any questions or additional comments Sincerely Wayne H. Sandberg, P.E. Deputy Director /County Engineer 11660 Myeron Road: North, Stillwater, Minnesota 55082.9573 Phone! 651-430-4300 • Fax: 651-430-4350 • TTY: 651 - 430 -6246 www.co.washington.mn.us Equal Employment Opportunity / Affirmative Action �4 Figure 1 - Location Map Figure 2 - Aerial Map Figure 3 - Proposed Improvements [K190 w1 PROJECT LOCATION cc wC LOCATION MAP S4 CITY OF COTTAGE GROVE, MN FIGURE: 1 70TH STREET PEDESTRIAN UNDERPASS 48GENZFDOI.DWG DATE: 06 -24 -2011 COMM: 48 GEN Gy of Cottag Grove Minnemia •___' s He COTTAGE GROVE, MINNESOTA FIGURE: 2 70TH STREET PEDESTRIAN UNDERPASS 48GENZFD02 DATE: 6/24/11 Coy of Cotta Grove Minnesota COMM: 48GEN COTTAGE GROVE, MINNESOTA FIGURE: 3 70TH STREET PEDISTRIAN UNDERPASS 48GENZFD03.DWG DATE: 6/24/11 Clly Of Cotta Grove M"'.Wlo COMM: 48GEN Appendix C Washington County CYP (Select Pages) Washington County Comprehensive Plan (Select Pages) Cottage Grove CYP (Select Pages) Cottage Grove Comprehensive Plan (Select Pages) Corridor Analysis Report (Select Pages) Capital Improvement Plan 2411 - 2015 Final December 14, 2010 Project # RB -2564 ProjectName CSAH 22 - US TH 61 to CSAH 19 Mgmt & Safety Location Cottage Grove 22 is an important east -west minor arterial roadway in this portion of the county. Department Capital Projects (R &B) Contact W. Sandberg Type Construction Useful Life 5 +years Category Road & Bridge Priority 2 Somewhat Critical his project proposes to increase the capacity and safety of the roadway by implementing those improvements identified in the 2010 JointCity/County Feasibility Study. 'these improvements include, 4dding improvements to intersection control (roundabouts /traffic signals); additional turn lanes at key intersections; ether improvements to pavement and pedestrian facilities. Justification Phis roadway serves regional traffic with traffic volumes ranging from 6,300 to 9,000 vehicles per day. Traffic is expected to continue to increase- This project )reposes to use 2015 bond funds. In the event a bond is not sold in 2015, this project would be delayed or deferred Expenditures 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total Construction 4,000,000 4,000,000 Right -of -Way 1,000,000 1,000,000 Consultant Services 850,000 850,000 Total 850,000 5 5,850,000 Funding Sources 2011 2012 2013 2014 2 Total Bonds Proceeds 3,000,000 3,000,000 Local Contributions 150,000 1,500,000 1,650,000 State Aid 700,000 500,000 1,200,000 Total 850,000 5,000,000 5 Budget Impact/Other This project is expected to increase operations and maintenance costs due to increased pavement widths and additional intersection infrastructure. This project nrono,es to use 21115 bond funds. In the event a bond is not sold in 2015, this oroiect would be delayed or deferred. Page 112 V • - • 1 l Approved by Board of Commissioners May 26, 2009 Adopted by Board of Commissioners September 7, 2010 Writ Eton Page 14 -20 oti lty Future 2030 Congestion Volume /Capacity Ratio 4 0.85 - 1.00 (Approaching Capacity) 1.01 — (Elver Capacity) I IN W E NMA H Po wxsrc 0 1 2 3 4 5 Miles Prepared By: Washington County GIS Support Unit, IT Department �I III ^ Txcs Data Source: The Lawrence Group - 2007, Washington County IT Met Ca:ncii, MnGOT ) Page 14 -55 -..y rn fi a l y- Pi or ` w � GRANT �a sslT Volume /Capacity Ratio 4 0.85 - 1.00 (Approaching Capacity) 1.01 — (Elver Capacity) I IN W E NMA H Po wxsrc 0 1 2 3 4 5 Miles Prepared By: Washington County GIS Support Unit, IT Department �I III ^ Txcs Data Source: The Lawrence Group - 2007, Washington County IT Met Ca:ncii, MnGOT ) Page 14 -55 -..y rn fi a l Figure 4 -21 12 CAND .>t INS, 4em. C t Aka' P I P Planned Trail ®` System T M°GO H 5 55 ` Abp � � p PR nY i0 WN TcT Existing CgyntyTrail Lw TER _ ss T wusa 0 pi, #:Paanned Couny trail ` Existing Regional Trail f S-f, . Regional Trail E µ INx NEA Existing State Trail I u1y'IN N e p Planned State Trail "i nQ C Trail Search Area State Park aai o �P' Planned Master Plan Boundary p ` ' County Park _.,_ �AkE�Arvo� v Ako.r. T rowrvsR ® P Scientific and Natural Area w e = °° '� ® rG na � Wildlife Management Area A " AI rl Q o MA _ Y 4'' C AFTON j w Project Location% d v s o v p 4 m sr >AU� p , N ` LLE ,rfrb W E t7 � ®` n Its' 0 1 2 3 4 5 Miles ftmw �- V Prepared By Washington County GIs Support Unit, IT Department F al Data Source: Metropolitan Council - 2007, Washington County GIs Support Unit 2W7rv� 10 . Wadtittgton Page 1 4 -73 5cof my Y N T 'N p> t6 C . L 3 C C d'�O 3 G c E E ,V a) O Y Y = Y QJ > gU �� a �� a) omm ��> Q) Vl O Y L C 01 E C VI ' a U 'n Y 01 O .c o - 00(D Yc.c :3 oNO. Y Y C N Q i U O- O E C .- _ C m Q) O m pU Q) Q) a s Q) N O C 3 0 m o c a 3 @ ma c 3 0 0 0 o a o a m 0301° a E Y p L Y '0 m VI m C Y o c m Y O VI Y p1 N N C T �n C O U to M U VI u> m 76 0 m W t O c m L m U m m >: M, a C - 0 - 0 .- 3 0 0 m a o E m 3 m 3 0 m > E Y C p L ,L .3 OL T �- a) O .0 N a) ` C + m L + vmi YO N C O - c a Q) ro c a > u a) -0 a° o o 0 0 ~Qo=.� FT U H�N�o Ho-mpa) FEo Y L p L O U a a) N '0 C O ei 01 Q) to L ri N O U N YO Q) tfI L Y t c Q) p E C 0 H L O. U N 3 N� vvoN– vN ° va q _ - vETa L H N O Y L J U> t E ', y :u J N v N O >> C C O Q) t'' a) a) O T a) m 0 O VI U o O >T m L aQronm aam0la a.p _0 m-o aa)mY IL nm C p m Q W �- m - acy 3c. E "Q� =m W u c Q) m Q) 0 O. O t.. F a '> a;E :V aC u 4Z F s py cex® =u. oc y Ox xO E� m o � m 3 t uz o O-0 c0 to T U a LU u H Q) a C= p, E W O Z5 ui a -- 0 a C-0 aj N 9 - O E -0 0 N Q W 0- N !0 Q) m �p c C E M W • O W s m c i oY o OM N C m >Y L OW7ye a' a. Q) Q) > O ® 0 W I f a m m Q a) Q W W= F O mymo Ln o3Y FFOF+p NI d� r�y wxOZQ E o 3 u r— D u ~ > a) > t m Q) O a O C J F- N ! O Y Qa L a-o E m 6OCa C7 0 0 me > W a' a) m 7 m ' a`ni v o1 m Y m L C c L L.. In tE N C m Y .0 E U ai cmo_ YN -=am v, 3: a QJ Tu m 'O a1 -C di C L En 3 m o 3 Lm m .c m D0 � b L°Lm ' L ma z O m t G. O U C m N N C -C N ~ W 0m n 3 ' co(v ap�u 3 0 a) >. EE m U@ >-O a U m 0� L L y m J C 01 0) J '0 J L H M U a C p J 'o 5 a) a) O p 0 0 O m O U O C. U E a� as Q. 0 a a, U N U) v O a C m Y O 0 N rn U a c m a 0 a c h m a m t� 0 N �I Ni Lf) m U N � C Q1 5 a C Y a h J m LL G 4 3 ro c 3 O M N H N �i 9 N co m m a d E t7 a m a CJ O N J a Q1 U :p 0 a c m h Y a • • • MINN ` • • Washington County Public Works Department CSAH 22 (70th Street) it mal, Goodview Avenue to Hinton Avenue Cottage Grove Washington County, Minnesota SBE No. T -00211 November, 2010 (Z,72 P Stonebrooke :Tarr e€ ca Remso,s St Autirrns" CSAH 22 (70th Street) Roadway Improvement Study Project Description CSAH 22 (70th Street) between Goodview Court /Avenue and Hinton Avenue is a two -lane minor arterial roadway that runs through the northern part of Cottage Grove in Washington County, Minnesota. Topography in this section of the City consists of bluff terrain and steep pitches with roadways that have substandard vertical curves. This section of the County has experienced consistent growth that traditionally has met traffic growth projections. The area has also experienced a history of severe crashes. A recent fatal crash and an "A" type irrIcapacitating injury crash at CSAH X22 and Hardwood; Avenue led to the restriping of the intersection in 2008 and, the installation of a temporary signal system later that year. The area carries safety concern from the surrounding community, however, the corridor overall does not rate any worse by crash safety comparison to similar facilities. Wanting to address the challenging terrain, potential roadway capacity issues and address safety concern has led the Washington County Public Works Department to investigate future area improvements for this corridor. The purpose of this report is to analyze current and future traffic operations, investigate roadway safety improvements, identify feasible area improvement measures now that can be implemented in the near and long terms , address possible Right of Way need and generate preliminary improvement cost estimates. Project limits are 1000' west of Goodview Court /Avenue to approximately 1200' east of Homestead Avenue /Ideal Avenue along CSAH 22. North and south limits depend on practical roadway tie -in points. The project limits and corridor location are detailed on Figure 1. Project study intersections are listed below. Project Studv Intersections 1. CSAH 22 at Goodview Avenue / Goodview Court 2. CSAH 22 at Granada Avenue 3. CSAH 22 at Meadow Grass Avenue 4. CSAH 22 at Hardwood Avenue S. CSAH 22 at Pine Arbor Lane 6. CSAH 22 at Hinton Avenue I Existing Conditions (2010) A site evaluation was undertaken to evaluate the current roadway layout, traffic control, speed limits and other corridor features of CSAH 22 and each of the study intersections. Study intersections are described below. Hinton Avenue north of CSAH 22 is also known as CSAH 13. Hinton and Hardwood Avenues south of CSAH 22 are City of Cottage Grove Municipal State Aid routes Traffic turning movement counts were taken during the AM (7:00 -9:00) and PM (4:00 -6:00) peak hours in January, 2010 for all study intersections. These counts were collected under ideal roadway conditions with no snow or ice build -up on the roadways and seasonal adjustment was factored into count volumes. Traffic turning movement counts were taken periodically within a two -week period. Small discrepancies in count data due to day -to -day traffic variability were accounted for by volume balance calculations. Also, Washington County provided approach traffic counts completed in 2008 and 2009 which also resulted in small traffic volume discrepancies due to collection date differences. This data was again calibrated by volume balance calculations to best represent existing traffic conditions in the study area. An existing layout of the study area with current intersection control, lane layouts and 2010 peak hour traffic counts can be seen in Figures 2.1 -2.7. CSAH 22 is the thru movement and all study intersections have four approaches except at Pine Arbor Lane, which is a T- intersection. CSAH 22 at Hardwood Avenue is a signalized intersection. All other side streets are stop controlled, signed at 30 mph and have one lane of approach for all movements, except at Hinton Avenue. The Hinton Avenue intersection is an all -way stop with varying speed limits. A further description of each intersection is contained below: 1. CSAH 22 at Goodview Court /Goodview Avenue CSAH 22 is posted at 50 mph with a free thru movement and two lanes of approach with a right turn lane in eastbound direction. The westbound direction has one lane of approach and is signed the same. Goodview Court is a cul -de -sac north of CSAH 22 and Goodview Avenue is a dead -end street south of the CSAH 22. 2. CSAH 22 at Granada Avenue CSAH 22 is signed at 50 mph with a free thru movement and one lane of approach and right turn lane in both the eastbound and westbound directions. Granada Avenue leads to neighborhoods north and south of CSAH 22. 3. CSAH 22 at Meadow Grass Avenue CSAH 22 is signed at 50 mph with a free thru movement and one lane of approach and right turn lane in both the eastbound and westbound directions. Meadow Grass Avenue leads to neighborhoods north and south of CSAH 22. 4 . CSAH 22 at Hardwood Avenue CSAH 22 is the mainline with one thru lane, left and right turn lanes in the eastbound direction and a left turn lane and shared thru right lane in the westbound direction. The intersection is controlled, y a traffic signal. Left turn movements from CSAH 22 are protected and both approaches are signed at 50 mph,. Hardwood Avenue is the cross street with one thru lane, left and right turn lanes in the northbound direction and right turn and sbared thrudeft lanes on the southbound approach. Left turn' movements from Hardwood Avenue are permissive and the'lappeoacles are signed at 3Q mph. 2. 1,0' trait on north'side of CSAH 22 and 6' sidewalk on'the, south side of CSAH 22: The in place trail system along the north side of CSAH 22 will be improved by applying new pavement material and a consistent 10' width to meet Washington County standards. A sidewalk along the south side of CSAH 22 will be added to increase pedestrian /bicycle mobility options., 3. 3/4 Access at the intersections of CSAH 22 at Goodview Avenue /Court and CSAH 22 at Granada Avenue: Reducing access at these intersections helps improve safety and ensures consistency with Washington County access spacing guidelines for the corridor. The raised directional medians associated with these 3/4 intersections reduces the amount of traffic turning movements that can come in conflict with each other and thus limits crash opportunities. Reducing conflict areas is especially helpful at intersections with challenging sight lines. Vehicles intending to make left turns out of the side streets will need to utilize available u -turns at adjacent intersections. 4. Right -in /right -out access to remain at Pine Arbor Lane: A right -in /right -out access is specified in the current land use permit for this intersection. Access at this intersection is in accordance with Washington County access spacing guidelines to provide more uniform traffic operation due to potential queuing, sightline issues and proximity with the CSAH 22 at Hinton Avenue intersection. 5. Side street center medians: The direction from Washington County and the City of Cottage Grove is to retain existing side street medians where possible and to maintain current neighborhood access appearance. 6. Vertical roadway profile improved: The vertical profile is proposed to be improved to meet State Aid / AASHTO guidelines for 55 mph design speed. The only exception is at the intersection of CSAH 22 at Hardwood Avenue. This vertical curve is set to meet 50 mph design speed (current posted speed) to minimize a proposed large fill section. Improved grades help with sight distance and ease climbing and descending, however, incorporating these improvements will result in large retaining walls. Without retaining walls, tie -in points from the roadway to the surrounding topography would greatly impact adjacent properties. Creating optimal sight lines that would allow for ease of side - street crossing movements would require additional excavation of the hill between Goodview Avenue and Meadow Grass Avenue. 7. Large retaining walls needed to widen current roadway within existing Right of Way: As mentioned above, the proximity of area residences and large cut and fill areas required to achieve Mn /DOT and AASHTO design standards will require large retaining walls in order to construct the Build layout within existing Right of Way. S. Pedestrian tunnel at Hardwood Avenue: Precious analysis for a grade separated: edestrian crossing' of CSAH 22 at Hardwood Avenue led by the City of Cottage;Grove was prepared h'2009. This design;- undertaken by another consultant, has;been'incoro' ed into the.proposed Build layout in a manner to minimize grading for the crossing and utilize the, pro, posed retaining walls. Information on construction costand ,design assumpti6, associated with this pedestrian tunnel can befound in Appetidix E. Approximate cost for the standalone pedestfiian tunnel is approximately $1.4 miliion(prepaaed by :,others). Inclusion of the pedestrian tunnel in the widening of CSAH 22 would result in subtracting off =the " Bltuminous,Trail" portion of the 2009 cost'estimate resulting in ai redaction of,appr,oxin ately $400,000; 13 injury crashes. Cited roundabout crash severity information did not disseminate between single and multi -lane roundabouts. Table 7 details the average crash and severity rates for various intersection control based on the studies listed above. Likewise, Table 7 also details the existing crash and severity rates for the CSAH 22 study intersections. No crashes were reported at the intersection of CSAH 22 at Pine Arbor Boulevard in the past five years, therefore a crash analysis was not undertaken for the intersection. Table 7: CSAH 22 (70th Street) Intersection Crash Analysis Average Average (MEV) 2008 2008 Intersection Crash Crash Severity Severity 2010 Rate Rate Rate Two -Way Stop Control* 0.3 0.5 - AII -Way Stop Control* 0.6 0.8 Signalized Intersection* 0.7 1.1 Single Lane Roundabouts ** 0.2 0.08 - - - CSAH 22 at Goodview Ave. /Ct. - - 3.41 0.23 0.23 CSAH 22 at Granada Ave. - - 3.47 0.29 0.4 CSAH 22 at Meadow Grass Avenue - - 3.42 0.24 0.35 CSAH 22 at Hardwood Avenue - - 3.54 0.73 CSAH 22 at Hinton Avenue - - 4.84 0.37 0.62 *Crash rates from Mn /DOT Handbook * *Crash rates from FHWA and IIHS As can be seen above, the only intersection that experiences a crash rate and severity rate higher than the norm is the CSAH 22 at Hardwood Avenue intersection. Severe crashes at this intersection occurred prior to the installation of a traffic signal. Intersection crash diagrams can be found in the Appendix. 33 Appendix D Implementation Schedule APPENDIX K Project Implementation Schedule Please check those that apply and fill in anticipated completion dates 1) Project Scope Stake Holders have been identified Meetings or contacts with Stake Holders have occurred 2) Layout or Preliminary Plan ❑Identified Alternates ❑Selected Alternates ❑Layout or Preliminary Plan started ®Layout or Preliminary Plan completed Anticipated date or date of completion: 3) Environmental Documentation ❑EIS ❑F,A MPM Document Status Document not started ❑Document in progress; environmental impacts identified ❑Document submitted to State Aid for review (date submitted: ) ❑Document approved (need copy of signed cover sheet) Anticipated date or date of completion /approval: 4) R/W ®No R/W required ❑R /W required, parcels not identified ❑R /W required, parcels identified ❑R/W has been acquired Anticipated date or date of acquisition 5) Railroad Involvement MNo railroad involvement on project ❑Railroad R/W Agreement required; negotiations not begun ❑Railroad R/W Agreement required; negotiations have begun ❑Railroad R/W Agreement is complete 6) Construction Documents /Plan Construction plans have not been started ❑Construction plans in progress Anticipated date or date of completion: ❑Construction plans completed /approved 7) Letting Anticipated Letting Date: 2015 or earlier Federal STP -UG Funding Annlication (Form 1) INSTRUCTIONS: Complete and return completed application to Kevin Roggenbuck, Transportation Office Use only Coordinator, Transportation Advisory Board, 390 North Robert St., St. Paul, Minnesota 55101. (651) 602 -1728. Form 1 needs to be filled out electronically. Please go to Metropolitan Council's Regional Solicitation website for instructions. Applications must be received by 5:00 PM at the Metropolitan Council FTP site or postmarked on July 18, 2011. *Be sure to complete and attach the Project Information form. I. GENERAL INFORMATION 1. APPLICANT: City of Cottage Grove 2. JURISDICTIONAL AGENCY (IF DIFFERENT): Washington County 3. MAILING ADDRESS: 8635 West Point Douglas Road CITY: Cottage Grove STATE: MN ZIP CODE:55016 4. COUNTY: Washington 5. CONTACT PERSON: Jennifer Levitt TITLE: City Engineer PHONE NO. (651)458 -2890 CONTACT E -MAIL ADDRESS: jlevitt @cottage- grove.org IL PROJECT INFORMATION 6. PROJECT NAME: 70th Street (CSAH 22) Pedestrian Underpass 7. BRIEF PROJECT DESCRIPTION (Include location, road name, type of improvement, etc... ): Construction of a pedestrian underpass at CSAH 22 and Hardwood Avenue South in Cottage Grove. This project is in conjunction with improvements that Washington County is proposing at this intersection in 2015. Along with reconstruction of the intersection, which will be completed by Washington County, the City is also proposing to construct the necessary trail system and install LED street lighting to service the pedestrian underpass. The underpass can also be constructed as a stand -alone project, while anticipating future construction of CSAH 22 by Washington County. 8. STP PROJECT CATEGORY - Check only one project grouping in which you wish your project to be scored. "A" Minor Arterials: ❑Reliever ❑Expander ❑Non -Fwy. Principal Arterial ❑Connector ❑Augmenter ®BikewaylWalkway III. PROJECT FUNDING 9. Are you applying or have you applied for funds from another source(s) to implement this project? Yes ❑ No If yes, please identify the source(s): 10. FEDERAL AMOUNT: $1,000,000 13. MATCH % OF PROJECT TOTAL: 20 11. MATCH AMOUNT: $200,000 14. SOURCE OF MATCH FUNDS: City Capital Improvement Funds 12.* PROJECT TOTAL: $1,200,000 15. REQUESTED PROGRAM YEAR (CIRCLE): ®2015 ❑2016 16. SIGNATURE 17. TITLE: City Engineer *Figure should match the subtotal on the Project Elements and Construction Cost table Form 2: PROJECT INFORMATION (To be used to assign State Project Number after project is selected) {PRIVATE ) Please fill in the following information as it pertains to your proposed project. Items that do not apply to your project, please label N /A. Do not send this form to the State Aid Office. For project solicitation package only. COUNTY, CITY, OR LEAD AGENCY City of Cottage Grove (City No. 180) FUNCTIONAL CLASS OF ROAD Minor Arterial ROAD SYSTEM CSAII (TIE CSAH, MSAS, CO. RD., TWP. RD., CITY STREET) NAME OF ROAD 70` Street (CSAH 22)_(Example; 1st ST., MAIN AVE) ZIP CODE WHERE MAJORITY OF WORK IS BEING PERFORMED 55016 APPROXIMATE BEGIN CONSTRUCTION DATE (MO/YR) 05/2015 APPROXIMATE END CONSTRUCTION DATE (MO /YR) 10 /2015 LOCATION: From: At the intersection of hardwood Avenue and 70 Street (CSAH 22) To: (DO NOT INCLUDE LEGAL DESCRIPTION) TYPE OF WORK concrete box culvert, grading, agg base, bike path, ped ramps, lighting, storm sewer, signage Examples: GRADE, AGG BASE, BIT BASE, BIT SURF, SIDEWALK, CURB AND GUTTER, STORM SEWER, SIGNALS, LIGHTING, GUARDRAIL, BIKE PATH, PED RAMPS, BRIDGE, PARK AND RIDE, ETC. BRIDGE /CULVERT PROJECTS OLD BRIDGE /CULVERT NO. N/A NEW BRIDGE /CULVERT NO. N/A STRUCTURE 1S OVER (Under) 70' Street (CSAH 22) Proiect Elements and Estimate of Construction Costs Pill out the scoping sheet below or attach the worksheet Appendix U and provide the cost estimate for each element. You may add additional eligible costs (construction costs) that are not accounted for in the blank spaces at the bottom of the table. Applicants may instead use the more exhaustive checklist of the WDOT scoping sheet in lieu of this checklist. The total cost should match the total cost reported for the project. Please use 2011 cost estimates, the TAB may apply an inflation factor to awarded projects. CONSTRUCTION PROJECT ELEMENTS /COST ESTIMATES Check all that appl ITEM COST ® Mobilization (approx. 5% of total cost) $ 52,000 ® Removals (approx. 5% of total cost) $ 56,000 ® Roadway (grading, borrow, etc.) $ 35,000 ® Roadway (aggregates and paving) $ 115,000 ❑ Subgrade Correction (muck) $ ® Storm Sewer $ 32,000 ® Ponds $ 75,000 ❑ Concrete Items (curb & gutter, sidewalks, median barriers) $ ❑ Pedestrian Curb Ramps (ADA) $ ® Path /Trail Construction S 65,000 ® Traffic Control $ 15,000 ❑ Striping $ ❑ Signing $ ❑ Lighting $ ® Turf - Erosion & Landscaping $ 27,400 ❑ Bridge $ ® Retaining Walls $ 350,000 ❑ Noise Wall $ ❑ Traffic Signals $ ❑ Wetland Mitigation $ ❑ Other Natural and Cultural Resource Protection $ ❑ RR Crossing $ ® Public Utility Relocations (Water and San. Sewer) $ 64,500 ® Box Culvert $ 253,100 ❑ $ ❑ $ ❑ $ ❑ $ ® Contingencies $ 60,000 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST $1,200,000 Maps and Photos All applications must include the following: 1. A map of the project limits. If it is a road project, highlight the segment of road to be constructed on a city or county roadway map. If it is a trail project, highlight the segment of trail to be constructed on a map that includes trails, bikeways or roadways. Applicants may include more than one map if the project impacts both a roadway and trail system. 2. An aerial photograph or photographs that show(s) the location of the project as it is today OR a plan view of the existing roadway that shows the roadway geometry and any bicycle, pedestrian and transit components. 3. A concept drawing of the proposed improvements that shows the roadway geometry and any bicycle, pedestrian and transit components upon completion of the project. 4. A 2030 Land Use Map(s) for all cities included within the project limits with TAZs identified. These can be obtained from the city's local comprehensive plan. PURPOSE To provide a source of flexible federal funds to states and local governments to build highways, bridges, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities, improve transit systems and construct intermodal projects. The Surface Transportation Program also includes 10 percent setasides for safety construction projects and Transportation Enhancements. GENERAL INFORMATION AND RESTRICTIONS The Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: a Legacy for Users, (SAFETEA- LU) was passed in 2005. The Act provides a record level of federal investment while reaffirming the priorities and funding flexibility established in the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA). Title 1, Federal Aid Highways, addresses highway funding (as opposed to Title III, Federal Transit Act Amendments that focus on transit). Title I includes, among others, the Surface Transportation Program (STP), which provides federal funds on a reimbursable basis. Transit capital projects and travel demand and system management programs and projects are also eligible under this program, however in this solicitation all applications for those types of projects should be submitted using the appropriate CMAQ forms and criteria. Under the federal program, STP funds can be used to accommodate other modes, and transportation planning, research and development are eligible activities. SAFETEA -LU expands and clarifies STP eligibility, such as environmental provisions (natural habitat mitigation, stormwater retrofit, and anti-icing and de- icing), programs to reduce extreme cold starts, modification of sidewalks to meet Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements, infrastructure -based intelligent transportation systems capital improvements, and privately owned intercity bus terminals and facilities. Regional policies, outlined beginning page 8, may limit the use of STP funds more strictly than federal guidelines. The Twin Cities Metropolitan Area is allocated the urban area guaranteed portion of the STP finds described here. The region has programmed more than $638 million in STP Urban Guarantee funds for projects since the ISTEA was passed in December of 1991. SAFEATEA -LU expired on September 30, 2009, but Congress has extended the Act several times through September 30, 2011. A new federal transportation Act is expected to be passed during the summer of 2011, during this regional solicitation. At the start of this regional solicitation in May, 2011, the region does not know what the new Act could mean for STP -UG project eligibility or finding. Therefore, the region is unable to provide a target amount of STP -UG funds available in the 2011 regional solicitation. When the new Act is passed, the region will move quickly to determine how it impacts project eligibility as defined in this solicitation. Applicants need to be aware of the time required to process projects using STP funds through MN/DOT's Office of State Aid for Local Transportation (SALT) process. Please review Appendix C before requesting a program year on the STP application form. Applicants may suggest a program year, but the final decision is up to the Transportation Advisory Board. The TAB intends to accommodate applicants' program year requests to the extent possible, but the decision will depend upon the amount of funds available for programming and the total amount requested. The Transportation Advisory Board is responsible for the selection of projects that are to be financed in part with STP funds made available to the seven - county region. To implement this responsibility, the TAB has developed criteria and a transparent process to define eligibility and prioritize eligible projects. The region solicits for projects in six different STP categories: "A" Minor Arterial Relievers, Expanders, Augmenters and Connectors, Non- Freeway Principal Arterials, and Bikeway /Walkway. Transit Capital Expansion projects also may be funded by TAB through the STP program, but must be submitted under the appropriate CMAQ program criteria. The solicitation package contains separate qualifying and prioritizing criteria for each of these categories. Applicants may not submit the same project in more than one STP category. The TAB has requested that the Technical Advisory Committee develop recommendations for defining project eligibility for STP Urban Guarantee funding and establish a process to prioritize the eligible projects. The overall guidance for this process is provided by the following policies adopted by the TAB. GENERAL POLICIES — FOR ALL STP CATEGORIES L The regional solicitation process is open to all seven metro area counties and all cities and townships within the seven metro area counties, all Minnesota state agencies, the Metropolitan Council, other transit providers, Indian tribal governments, and the ten Regional Park System implementation agencies. Other local nonprofit agencies or parties and special governmental agencies may also apply for funding. Although many organizations may apply for STP funds through the regional solicitation, only certain ones can enter into an Agency Agreement with and set up an account to spend the STP funds to implement the project. The seven metro area counties, cities with population over 5,000 and state agencies can enter into an Agency Agreement directly with MN/DOT. All other applicants must find an eligible public agency sponsor. The public agency sponsor is the local unit of government of record and is responsible for working with the applicant to ensure that all project requirements are met. An Agency Agreement is written between MN /DOT and the Local unit of government of record. The local unit of government will administer the project using the SALT Delegated Contract Process (DCP) for federal aid projects. 2. STP funds are available for roadway construction and reconstruction on new alignments or within existing right -of -way, including associated construction and excavation, or installation of traffic signals, signs, utilities, bikeway or walkway components and public transit components. The cost of constructing a new bridge deck or reconstructing an existing bridge deck is eligible. STP funds cannot be used for studies, preliminary engineering, design, construction engineering, or other similar costs. Noise barriers, drainage projects, fences, landscaping, etc., are not eligible for STP funding unless included as part of a larger project which is otherwise eligible or specifically defined as eligible under an individual funding category. Right -of -way costs is not eligible as a stand -alone proposal but are eligible when included in a proposal to build transit hubs, transit terminals, park- and -ride or pool- and -ride lots, and bicycle and walkway projects. 4. A construction project must be a permanent improvement having independent utility. The term "independent utility" means the project provides benefits described in the application by itself and does not depend on any construction elements of the project being funded from other sources outside the regional solicitation, excluding the required non- federal match. Traffic management projects as part of a construction project are exempt from this policy. Temporary construction is defined as work that must be essentially replaced in the immediate future (within 5 years). Staged construction is considered permanent rather than temporary so long as future stages build on, rather than replace, previous work. 5. Although the TAB may award STP funds to transit expansion and transportation system management capital projects, the TAB does not solicit for those projects within the STP funding program. Those projects should be submitted under the CMAQ criteria in this solicitation package. 6. All projects must comply with the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act at a minimum. Designers of roadway projects should consult the Access Board's Public Rights -of -Way Accessibility guidelines. 7. A roadway improvement project, including staged projects, must be structurally capable of handling all applicable legal load limits; roadway projects must meet statutory load limits. The applicants must design the project to permit operation for all types of vehicles, except multiple trailer types (i.e., a 10 -ton road under all conditions is required). 8. Projects on principal arterials that are of freeway design are not eligible for STP funds. Projects on non - freeway type principal arterials are eligible for funding, including projects that upgrade the facility to freeway design. 9. Projects will be added to the TIP only as a result of the TAB approval. 10. The construction cost of projects listed in the region's draft or adopted TIP is assumed to be fully - funded and to have independent utility from other projects. TAB will not consider projects already listed in the draft or adopted TIP, nor the payback of Advanced Construction funds for those projects, for funding through the solicitation process. Projects submitted that are related to projects listed in the draft or adopted TIP but that have independent utility from those projects are eligible for consideration. 11. In the 2011 regional solicitation, the TAB will not fund more than one project in each of the four "A" Minor Arterial categories that are within 3.5 miles of one another on a highway route as defined in Criterion Al or within 7 miles of one another on a non - freeway principal arterial category route as defined in Criterion Al. 12. The Technical Advisory Committee shall prepare an annual report on the implementation of regionally solicited STP projects for the review and approval of the TAB. This report, the Annual Implementation Report, shall include updated program, system and project information. The TAC shall include such findings, recommendations and additional information, as it deems appropriate. 13. The fundable amount of a project is based on the original submittal. TAB must approve any significant change in the scope of an approved project. 14. The STP federal fund participation for each project will be updated and reported in the Annual Implementation Report on the STP -UG, CMAQ, TEP and BIR programs as the federal cost cap. Projects selected to receive federal funding through this solicitation will be programmed in the regional Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) in years 2015 or 2016. When the selected projects are programmed, the TAB will add a small percentage extra to both the federal award and the non - federal match amount to account for anticipated inflation. The inflated amount in the TIP will not be adjusted further. 15. If a project is added to the STP program, the entire project is included even though a portion of that work may extend beyond the period for which submittals were requested, provided that a significant portion of the work is scheduled for letting within the request period. 16. Projects in the STP element of the TIP are specifically limited to the federal funding caps identified in the Metropolitan Council's Annual Implementation Report on regionally solicited and federally funded transportation improvement projects and programs. The federal funding will be capped as follows: federal fiords shall not exceed 80% of the project costs. The federal amount listed for each project may be used to fund 80% of any identifiable useable element of the project and is the total that shall be authorized as plan specification and estimate approval for all advertisements of the project described. All eligible extra work and supplemental agreements will be federally funded if the total project costs remain under the cost cap. Any proposed change by the local agency to the federal cost cap will have to be presented to SALT and the Transportation Advisory Board. If the project exceeds the federal cost cap, the agency will be responsible to fund all additional work regardless if it is justifiable as an eligible expense. Any federal fund amounts authorized at PS &E approval in years prior to the current year shall be deducted from the amount identified in the annual report at the time of approval. 17. Applicants can request up to a cap of $7,000,000 in STP funds for a specific "A" Minor Arterial Reliever, Expander, Augmenter project and for Non- Freeway Principal Arterial projects. Applicants can request up to a cap of $5,500,000 in STP funds for a specific "A" Minor Arterial Connector project or a Bikeway /Walkway project. Other federal funds may be combined with the requested STP funds, but the source(s) must be identified in the application. The cost of preparing a project for funding authorization can be substantial. For that reason, the minimum federal amount for highway projects is $1,000,000 and $250,000 for bikeway /walkway projects. The applicant must show the requested federal amount, the non - federal match and total project cost on the cover page. 18. A STP project will be eliminated from the program if it does not meet its sunset date. The sunset date for projects is March 31 of the year following the original program year as established by the TAB. Meeting the established sunset date shall be governed by the TAB adopted Criteria for Meeting Sunset Date requirements, attached as Appendix D. If a project has met the Criteria for Meeting Sunset Date requirements but STP funds are not presently available, that particular project will be placed on a waiting list for funds, in order of date of approval. If a project has met the sunset date requirements, the project contract should be let as soon as possible since the project will not be included in the next revision of the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) and, therefore, will not be able to access federal funds. 19. STP projects requiring a grade- separated crossing between an STP project route and principal arterial of freeway design must be limited in STP funds to the federal share of those project costs identified as local (non -MN /DOT) cost responsibility using MN /DOT's Policy/Position Statement 84 -2 and MN/DOT Policy Guidelines 6 -1 and b -I and 6.1. In the case of trunk highway STP projects, the policy guidelines should be read as if the trunk highway STP route is under local jurisdiction. 20. Design for all STP "A" Minor Arterial and Principal Arterial projects must meet the requirements of the Mn /DOT State Aid process. Design exceptions (for all federal projects) and variances to the State Aid standards (for projects using State Aid funds) are reviewed and may be granted during final design, not through this solicitation process. Depending on the project, more stringent standards may apply. 21. Applicants may not submit the same project proposal under more than one STP category. 22. The FHWA requires that states agree to operate and maintain facilities constructed with federal transportation funds for the useful life of the improvement, and not change the use of any right -of- way acquired without prior approval from the FHWA. TAB has determined that this requirement will be applied to the project applicant. FHWA considers most physical constructions and total reconstructions to have a useful design life of 10 years or more, depending on the nature of the project. Bridge constructions and total reconstructions are considered to have useful lives of 50 years. The useful life of the project will be defined in the inter - agency maintenance agreement that must be prepared and signed prior to the project letting. "A" MINOR ARTERIAL - RELIEVER DEFINITION Relievers provide direct relief for traffic on the metropolitan highway system. These roads include the closest routes parallel to the principal arterials within the urban areas. These roadways are proposed to accommodate medium length trips (less than 8 miles) as well as providing relief to congested principal arterials. Improvement focus is on providing additional capacity for through traffic. Reliever projects must fall within one of the following types of projects: transportation system management, complete construction, reconstruction or rehabilitation of a segment of roadway along the entire project length; including transit, bikeway or walkway components in the corridor. "A" Minor Arterial - Reliever PurposeNision The Development Framework envisions a dense pattern of development and redevelopment in the existing urban areas. The "A" minor arterial relievers are located throughout the most built -up portion of the region where existing levels of congestion are the greatest. The "A" minor arterial relievers are intended to provide a travel option for the congested parallel principal arterials. The greater the demand, congestion and level of management on the principal arterial, the greater the need for investments on the reliever route. Those relievers that provide greater people moving capacity and congestion relief are more important to the region. GENERAL INFORMATION AND RESTRICTIONS A construction project must be a permanent improvement between logical termini (roadways of equal or higher functional classification) having independent utility. The term "independent utility" means the project provides benefits to air quality, crash reduction, etc... by itself and does not depend on any construction elements of the project being funded from other sources outside the regional solicitation, excluding the required non - federal match. The project must result in a completed segment which meets current design standards and which has an anticipated service life approximately that of a new facility. The project, including staged projects, must be structurally capable of handling all anticipated legal load limit vehicles. STP funds can be used for transit facilities as part of the overall project, and can be requested within the Reliever application. STP funds can only be used for project implementation or construction costs, such as excavation, construction, materials, and clean-up. They cannot be used for right -of -way acquisition, study completion, engineering, design, or other similar costs. Further, STP funds cannot be used for noise barriers, drainage projects, fences, landscaping, or other similar costs as stand -alone projects. These items are eligible as part of a larger, eligible construction project. The benefits and costs of the project shall be estimated over the same eligible project length. The total project cost is defined as all construction components including components ineligible for federal funds. The total project cost does not include pre - construction costs or right -of -way. Projects selected to receive federal funding through this solicitation will be programmed in the regional Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) in years 2015 or 2016. When the selected projects are programmed, the TAB will increase both the federal amount and the non - federal match amount to account for any anticipated inflation. The inflated amount of federal funding in the TIP will not be adjusted further. "A" MINOR ARTERIAL - RELIEVER - QUALIFYING CRITERIA The applicant must show that the project meets all the following criteria to qualify for priority evaluation. Answer each criterion in a numbered sequence. Failure to respond to any of the qualifying criteria will result in a recommendation to disqualify your project. The project must be consistent with the policies in the Metropolitan Council's officially adopted Metropolitan Development Guide, which includes the Transportation Policy Plan (TPP) (2010) , and the Regional Development Framework (2004). Consistency with the TPP includes its appendix, which contains the regional functional classification criteria. Funding allocation to projects involving interchange construction and reconstruction on the Principal Arterial system (regardless of whether the project is on the Principal Arterial or and intersecting "A" Minor Arterial) are made conditional on the successful completion of the Highway Interchange Requests Procedures described in Appendix E of the Transportation Policy Plan. The applicant must list the documents and corresponding policy numbers or portions of text that help illustrate the project's consistency. RESPONSE: The project must be included in, be part of, or address a transportation problem or need identified in one of the following: 1) an approved local or county comprehensive plan found to be consistent with Metropolitan Council plans; 2) a locally approved capital improvement program; 3) an officially adopted corridor study (hunk highway studies must be approved by Mn/DOT and Metropolitan Council); or 4) the official plan or program of the applicant agency. It also must not conflict with the goals and policies in these adopted regional plans; the 2030 Transportation Policy Plan (2010), the 2030 Regional Framework (2004), and the 2030 Regional Parks Policy Plan (2010). The applicant must reference the appropriate comprehensive plan, CIP, approved corridor study document, or other plan or program and provide copies of the applicable pages. RESPONSE: 3. The proposed project must be identified as on an "A" Minor Arterial Reliever shown on the TAB approved roadway functional classification map adopted by the TAB on or before May 18, 2011 and recorded in the Council's electronic file. The vast majority of the project must be physically located on the "A" Minor Arterial Expander roadway between logical termini. The project may include construction on small portions of non - eligible roads, as long as the construction is essential to the operation of the entire project. Examples include but are not limited to reconstruction of the approaches on intersecting collector roads and construction or reconstruction of on -ramps or off - ramps. The applicant must provide a map or sketch of the project relative to the "A" Minor Arterial Reliever system. RESPONSE: 4. STP funds are available for roadway construction and reconstruction on new alignments or within existing right -of -way, including associated construction or installation of traffic signals, signs, utilities, bikeway or walkway components and public transit components. The cost of constructing a new bridge deck or reconstructing an existing bridge deck is eligible but the remainder of the superstructure and all elements of the substructure are not eligible. The applicant must describe the proposed project and state that the application includes only the eligible components. RESPONSE: 5. Studies, preliminary engineering, design, construction engineering, etc. are not eligible for STP funding and should not be included in the required local match or the total project cost. Right -of- way costs are not eligible for STP funding and should not be included in the required non - federal match or the total project cost. Noise barriers, drainage projects, fences, landscaping, etc., are not eligible for STP finding as stand -alone projects, but are eligible if included as part of a larger, eligible project. The applicant must state that pre - construction work and ROW costs are not part of the total project cost in this application. RESPONSE: 6. An STP construction or reconstruction project must be a permanent improvement. Traffic management projects as part of a construction project are exempt from this policy. Temporary construction is defined as work that must be essentially replaced in the immediate future (within 5 years). Staged construction is considered permanent rather than temporary so long as future stages add to, rather than replace, previous work. The applicant must state that the proposed project is a permanent improvement and does not replace any regionally funded project that was opened to traffic within five years. RESPONSE: 7. Applicants can request up to a cap of $7,000,000 in STP funds for a specific "A" Minor Arterial Reliever project. Other federal funds may be combined with the requested STP funds, but the source(s) must be identified in the application. The cost of preparing a project for funding authorization can be substantial. For that reason, the project's federal cost must exceed $1,000,000. The applicant must show the requested federal amount and total project cost on the cover page. RESPONSE: 8. STP funds awarded in the regional solicitation must be matched with non - federal fiords. The non- federal match for any STP project must be at least 20% of the total cost. The applicant must state that it is responsible for the local (nonfederal) share. If the applicant expects any other agency to provide all or part of the local match, the applicant must include a letter or resolution from the other agency agreeing to participate financially in the project's construction. RESPONSE: 9. The applicant must include a letter from the agency with jurisdiction over the road indicating that it is aware of and understands the project being submitted, and that it commits to operate and maintain the facility for its design life and not change the use of any right -of -way acquired without prior approval from MN /DOT and the Federal Highway Administration, rer yz6320is "A" MINOR ARTERIAL - RELIEVER - PRIORITIZING CRITERIA Applicants must respond to each of the following prioritizing criteria. Label your responses clearly. If a criterion is not applicable to your project, explain why. A Relative importance of the route as an "A" Minor Arterial Reliever. 100 point' Although all Reliever routes parallel an urban principal arterial, the relative importance of each Reliever is not the same. Some Relievers play a more significant role than others do in providing an alternative route for medium distance trips and reducing demand on congested metro area principal arterials. The following criteria are intended to measure the relative importance of each Reliever route submitted for funding in this solicitation. Definition and characteristics of the Reliever route. 0 -100 points The applicant must respond to all three items below and provide a map to help answer items a) and b). The Reliever `route' is defined as the uninterrupted length of the arterial that parallels a principal arterial. The route may be an existing or planned road on the TAB adopted system. The route may be longer than the proposed project and include more than one street name, but it must be continuous. The endpoints of the route must be a principal or other "A" minor arterial, and the route cannot be more than eight miles in length. Two projects on the same route will not be selected unless they are at least 3.5 miles apart. Points under this criterion are assigned based on the length of the Reliever route, the current and forecasted traffic volume on the Reliever route and the current transit ridership on the Reliever route. a) Provide the length of the Reliever route in miles. RESPONSE: b) Provide the current (2009) and forecasted (2030) average daily traffic volume at two or more locations on the Reliever route. MN /DOT 50- series maps should be used for current counts. Use approved city or county comprehensive plans, Met Council, accepted State Aid traffic factors by county, or a transportation study with documented acceptable forecasting methodology for forecasted volume. RESPONSE: c) Is public transit currently provided on this Reliever route and its corresponding section of Principal Arterial? If yes, the Metropolitan Council will provide the project scorers with current average annual ridership based on the project location map and description. RESPONSE: B Deficiencies and Solutions on Reliever and on Principal Arterial Being Relieved 350 points The regional solicitation process is one means of implementing regional plans. The region's Transportation Policy Plan states that the regional highway and street system will be preserved, managed, improved and expanded to support existing and planned land uses and safety and mobility needs consistent with the Regional Development Framework, the Transportation Policy Plan and approved local and county comprehensive plans. The following criteria reflect these objectives. Crash Reduction. 0 -50 points On the Principal Arterial being relieved: Provide data showing the frequency of traffic crashes expressed as crashes per million vehicle miles on the corresponding section of principal arterial. The principal arterial being relieved should be approximately the same length as the project limits on the reliever. Only one principal arterial may be relieved. The applicant must request from Mn/DOT Metro Traffic Engineering, the crash rate for the principal arterial being relieved. The rate received from Mn/DOT will include mainline crashes only. Crash rates will be based on TIS data for 2007 -2009. RESPONSE: 0 -50 points On the Reliever: Calculate the total number of crashes reduced due to improvements on the `A' Minor Arterial Reliever made by the proposed project. Points will be awarded based on the total three -year number of crashes projected to be reduced by the proposed project. The applicant must base the estimate of crash reduction on the methodology found in Appendix E. The applicant must obtain data on crashes for the existing section scheduled for improvement from Mn/DOT's TIS system, and must use data from 2007 through 2009. RESPONSE: 2. Air Quality. The Transportation Policy Plan strongly supports environmental considerations when making transportation funding decisions. The Council supports funding priorities for transportation projects that ensure prevention of air quality violations through the reduction of mobile source emissions. The applicant must show that the project will reduce emissions and help the region to maintain its attainment of federal carbon monoxide standards. All assumptions and calculations must be clearly documented and explained in order to receive points. The applicant must include domnnentation of how the VMT reduction was determined and specify the speed used for the assumptions. Speed assumptions shall be based on the methodology found in Appendix P. Points under this criterion will be awarded based on the reduction of carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen oxide (NOx), and /or volatile organic compounds (VOC) emissions the proposed project is expected to provide. 0 -100 points The applicant must demonstrate through a quantitative analysis that CO, NOx, and /or VOC emissions (in KILOGRAMS/DAY) will be reduced compared to the no -build alternative. The applicant must estimate CO, NOx, and /or VOC emissions reductions using the MOBILE6 emissions factors and vehicle emissions reduction worksheet in Appendix G. RESPONSE: 3. Congestion Reduction. M Applicants should request crash data from Mn/DOT as early as possible. An agency that wishes to dispute the results of their crash data requests can contact Ryan Coddington at 651- 234 -7841 (or Ryan.Coddington @state.mn.us) to reconcile those differences. 10 0 -75 points On the Principal Arterial being relieved: The applicant needs to show the hours per day the current volume exceeds the design capacity in either direction. The applicant should obtain needed data directly from Mn/DOT or a local data source if available, and provide documentation to illustrate accuracy. To calculate existing conditions, the applicant must obtain or collect the average hourly, directional traffic volumes on a weekday, the current lane configurations, and the current signal timing schemes, if applicable. Design capacity calculations must be based on the definition found in Appendix A. RESPONSE: 0 -75 points On the Reliever: The applicant must show that the proposed project will reduce congestion at the most congested location on the Reliever. The applicant must include the current volume to capacity (v /c) ratios in the AM and PM peak hours and the improvement in the ratios resulting from the project. Projects that have low existing We ratios will receive less credit for the improvement resulting from the project than projects that address a problematic existing We ratio. The applicant must use the methodology, worksheet and look -up tables found in Appendix H. The applicant must conduct a corridor analysis for new alignments, comparing parallel routes that will be affected by the project. RESPONSE: C. Cost Effectiveness. 275 points The Regional Development Framework and Transportation Policy Plan document the need for adequate transportation funding to implement regional transportation plans. The region must allocate transportation funds in such a way that the selected projects provide the most benefit for the amount of fending requested. Cost effectiveness is an essential component of the regional solicitation process. Cost effectiveness calculations must be based on the total cost of the project, not just the portion of the project eligible for federal funding, in order to allow consistent comparisons of all qualifying projects. 1. Crash Reduction. 0 -125 points The applicant must calculate the cost per crash reduced by the proposed project. The applicant must divide the total cost of the project by the answer from the second part of criterion B.1., crash reduction on the Reliever. Points will be awarded based on the relative cost per crash reduced. RESPONSE: 2. Congestion reduction. 0 -75 points The applicant must calculate the cost per increase in hourly person throughput provided by the proposed improvement. The applicant must use the worksheet in Appendix I. Points will be awarded based on the lowest cost per increase in person throughput, but if there is little congestion under existing conditions fewer points will be awarded for increasing person throughput. RESPONSE: 3. Air Quality 0 -75 points The applicant must calculate the cost per kilogram per day that will be reduced by the proposed project compared to the no -build alternative. The applicant must divide the total project cost by the estimated reduction in CO, NOx, and /or VOC emissions per day calculated in question B.2. RESPONSE: D Development Framework Implementation. 425 points The Metropolitan Development Guide is comprised of the 2030 Regional Development Framework and system plans for transportation, including highways, transit and aviation; water resources management; and regional parks and trails. Together, the Development Framework and system plans create a vision for the region and are intended to help ensure the orderly, economical development of the seven - county area. The Framework is organized around four overall goals: • Efficient Growth. Work with local communities to accommodate growth in a flexible, connected and efficient manner. • Multi -modal Transportation. Plan and invest in multi -modal transportation choices, based on full range of costs and benefits, to slow the growth of congestion and serve the region's economic needs. • Housing Choices. Encourage expanded choices in housing locations and types, and improved access to jobs and opportunities • Natural Resource protection. Work with local and regional partners to conserve, protect and enhance the region's natural resources. Under the Metropolitan Land Planning Act, local communities must prepare and submit to the Council local comprehensive plans that are consistent with the Council's regional systems plans. Local communities have submitted plans for 2030 and these have been reviewed by the Council. 1. Development Framework Planning Area Objectives 0 -100 points Strategies for regional development relate directly to growth patterns within the region. The Framework communities are identified according to their regional planning area designation which is based on its geographic location, existing development patterns, forecast growth, planned land uses, and the availability of infrastructure. The project's relationship to Framework and TPP are addressed in the qualifying criteria. The objective of this section is to address the land use and transportation linkages and how the project supports development and the accommodation of growth for the communities affected. What are the 2030 land uses proposed in the community(ies) adopted plan for the project area/corridor affected? Identify the TAZs that lie partially or wholly within the project limits. RESPONSE: 12 How does the project support this 2030 land use plan in the project area? Refer to the land use map and provide the land use categories and their description from the adopted local comprehensive plan.' RESPONSE: How does the project support 2030 forecasts for the project area? [Council staff will evaluate this criterion and will provide the following information to assist in the evaluation of this criterion: TAZ Project Area demographic profile population, household, employment and retail employment. The applicant does not need to provide a response.] 2. Progress Towards Affordable Housing Goals 0 -50 points NOTE: Information and analysis in this section will be provided by Council staff Methodology for Evaluating Progress Made Towards Affordable Housing Goals Up to 50 points can be awarded to a project, based upon a community's or group of communities' progress in addressing their affordable housing goals for 1996 -2010. For communities that participate in the Livable communities Local Housing Incentives Program, data from their 1996 -2010 negotiated housing goals was used to determine the progress they have made toward providing opportunities to address their affordable housing goals. For communities that do not participate in the Local Housing Incentives Program, progress will be measured against what the benchmarks were for their community in the Council's LCA goal setting methodology used in determining goals for 1996 to 2010. Communities negotiated goals for both ownership and rental housing. Analysis consisted of comparing the goal, progress made to date and determining the percentage of the goal achieved for both ownership and rental combined. Example of Analysis: 1 Future Land Use map (planned Land use 2030) and description for example: "low density residential— Mostly single- family homes with some two- family homes and open space within or related to a residential development at a gross density of 2 to 4 units per acre." "residential mixed use — Residential at a gross density of 7 to 30 units per acre, neighborhood commercial uses may be appropriate." "General Commercial —Broad range of businesses, generally highway- oriented, serving other businesses and City residents and requiring buffering from surrounding residential areas." "Agriculture — primarily agricultural purpose, including farming and horticulture, including farmstead or rural residence." [Examples from City of Coon Rapids Comprehensive Plan] 13 Negotiated Goal Progress to Date Overall Progress Made - % Rental Units 900 200 Ownershi Units 200 125 Total Housing Units 1,100 325 30% 1 Future Land Use map (planned Land use 2030) and description for example: "low density residential— Mostly single- family homes with some two- family homes and open space within or related to a residential development at a gross density of 2 to 4 units per acre." "residential mixed use — Residential at a gross density of 7 to 30 units per acre, neighborhood commercial uses may be appropriate." "General Commercial —Broad range of businesses, generally highway- oriented, serving other businesses and City residents and requiring buffering from surrounding residential areas." "Agriculture — primarily agricultural purpose, including farming and horticulture, including farmstead or rural residence." [Examples from City of Coon Rapids Comprehensive Plan] 13 Scoring: Percent of Progress Made: Points Awarded 90 -100% 50 71 -89% 40 51 -70% 30 31 -50% 20 11 -30% 10 1 -10% 5 For projects with 2 or more communities, scores are averaged and then applied to the project. Communities that do not have negotiated goals are given the same average score of the other communities within their group. 1. 2. Land Use and Access Management Planning 0 -75 points The Development Framework includes support for connected land use patterns served by an integrated street network. Access management along highways is a key component of planning for these objectives. In addition, various access management strategies can reduce crashes, improve traffic flow, and add operational capacity for the applicable roadway. Higher scores will be given to projects that are developed using a local access management plan and to projects located in communities that have a regulatory framework established to protect and improve access control in the future. Additional points will be awarded to projects that implement these plans by reducing undesired access points. Reference and describe the local access management plan used to develop the proposed project, and describe the corresponding county or state access management plan which supports the regional road network. Higher scores will be awarded to projects developed with an approach that is consistent with county or state access management plans. RESPONSE: Provide and identify intersection spacing and signal spacing guidelines, and driveway allowance criteria used for the proposed project and the corresponding county or state access management guidelines. RESPONSE: Ilaving the necessary regulatory framework is essential for protecting the efficient functioning of the regional roadway network. Reference (adoption date) and describe the local zoning and subdivision ordinance regulations that are in place to maintain the access plan as adjacent properties are developed and /or redeveloped. Higher scores will be awarded to projects in communities with existing or proposed local support of the access management plan through existing regulations or ordinances. RESPONSE: 4. Corridor Access Management Improvements 0 -75 points 14 Projects that help to implement the access management plan by removing or modifying non- conforming access points will receive points in this criterion. Identify the access locations and access management that currently exists and that will be allowed once the project is completed. Indicate by the following classifications, the existing access locations inconsistent with the proposed access management approach and any access locations that will be modified: a. Private Residential Driveways /Field Entrances RESPONSE: b. Low- VOhlme Private Driveways * (Under 500 trips per day) RESPONSE: C. High - Volume Private Driveways * (Over 500 trips per day) RESPONSE: d. Public Streets RESPONSE: * Private driveways may be commercial, industrial or institutional uses such as school or hospitals. 5. Integration of Modes 0 -125 points The Transportation Policy Plan requires that explicit consideration of all users of the transportation system be considered in the planning and scoping phase of roadway projects. The integration of modes criteria evaluate the value of the proposed project in providing better accommodations for pedestrians, bicyclists, transit and freight vehicles. Such accommodation should be provided within the existing right -of -way and provide the same level of access as motor vehicles unless it is shown to be impractical. In such cases, the project may include facilitation of such travel outside of the roadway right -of -way along a close parallel route. "A" Minor Relievers are located parallel to congested principal arterials in the core, urban reserve and urban staging areas. Many of these roadways are served by transit and accommodate travel to congested activity centers and others provide important medium length routes parallel to freeways that are inaccessible to non - motorized travelers. Pedestrians: Examples of pedestrian improvements include constriction or reconstruction of walkways or multi -use paths, separating pedestrian walkways from vehicle traffic through the installation of a buffer such as a boulevard, and providing pedestrian lighting. Equally important to improving pedestrian movement along the project area is improving the safety and ease of pedestrian crossings of the roadways. Some examples of these kinds of improvements are installation of pedestrian countdown signals with crosswalks, reducing the effective crossing distance by installing curb extensions and pedestrian medians, and reducing the speed of vehicles making turning movements at intersections. Different treatments are appropriate for different types of roadway conditions. Include a map that shows all new or reconstructed walkways or multi -use paths that will be constructed as part of this project as well as all pathways that these walkways will connect to and any potential pedestrian destinations such as schools, residences, transit stops, parks, and businesses within 'Amile of the project area that will be accessible to pedestrians. In the response field, indicate the characteristics of these pedestrian facilities (i.e. multi -use trail, sidewalk, or 15 crosswalk etc.) and whether they are brand new facilities or a replacement of an existing facility.. All pedestrian facilities must be designed to be ADA- compliant at a minimum. RESPONSE: Bicyclists: Examples of bicycle improvements include striping a bike lane or a marked shoulder that is 5 feet wide or greater, installing an off -road pathway where conditions favor one, and intersection treatments designed to reduce motor vehicle and bicycle conflict. Different treatments are appropriate for different types of roadway conditions. Include a map that shows all new or reconstructed bikeways that will be constructed (or striped) with this project, and show how they connect to an existing or planned bikeway network. Also show potential destinations along the roadway segment and within a 1 / mile of the project area that will be accessible with this bikeway network such as schools, parks residences, transit stops, and businesses. In the response field, indicate the characteristics of these bicycle facilities (i.e. bike lane, striped shoulder, cycle track, multi -use trail etc.) and whether they are brand new facilities or a replacement of an existing facility. RESPONSE: Transit: Examples of transit improvements include improving accessibility to transit stops by pedestrians, installing bus stop amenities for passengers, and placing bus stops on the far side of intersections. In some cases, other improvements to the roadway, including curb bump -outs for bus stops or the construction of bus lanes can improve transit service reliability and speed along the roadway. Is there transit service on the roadway? If so, what elements of this project will enhance the mobility of transit vehicles, if any? What elements of this project will improve passenger access to transit stops? RESPONSE: Freight: Freight improvements will be evaluated on the role of the roadway in providing freight mobility. What is the current daily heavy commercial traffic along the project segment? Is the roadway used to access any of the regional intermodal freight terminals in Appendix J and does the road connect any of these terminals to a freeway? RESPONSE: E Maturity of Project Concept. 100 points Projects selected through this solicitation will be programmed for construction in 2015 or 2016. That is a fairly long time but it takes several years to complete preliminary engineering, environmental studies and acquire right -of -way. The region must manage the federal funds in each year of the TIP. Projects that are not implemented in their original program year are carried over to the next program year, or the funding sunset date. This requires other projects to shift program years to maintain fiscal balance in the TIP and STIP. Proposed projects that have already completed some of the work are more likely to be 16 ready for funding authorization in their program year. A schedule is important to know what kind of work might be needed. Large projects that need right -of -way require more work than those that do not. 0 -100 points Applications involving construction must complete the project implementation schedule found in Appendix K. A detailed schedule of events is expected for all phases of the project. Applications involving non - construction projects must include a detailed discussion of the timeframes involved for initiating and completing each phase of planned activities. Points under this criterion are assigned based on how many steps have been taken toward implementation of the project. These steps reflect a federally funded project development path. RESPONSE: Please complete implementation schedule in Appendix K TOTAL: 1,250 POINTS INA "A" MINOR ARTERIAL - EXPANDER DEFINITION: Expanders provide connections between developing areas outside the interstate ring or beltway to each other and to the 1 -494/I -694 freeway ring. These routes are located circumferentially beyond the area reasonably served by the beltway and radially outside the beltway where the distance between principal arterials is large relative to the density of development served. These roadways are proposed to serve medium to long suburb to suburb trips. Expander projects must fall within one of the following types of projects: transportation system management, complete construction, reconstruction or rehabilitation of a segment of roadway along the entire project length, including transit, bikeway or walkway components in the corridor. Projects to increase the capacity of the "A" Minor Expander are eligible. "A" Minor Arterial - Expander Purpose /Vision The 2030 Regional Development Framework anticipates a net population increase of nearly 1,000,000 in the region by 2030. The developing suburbs will be required to absorb a large portion of this growth. Planning for and building adequate infrastructure in anticipation of this growth will be necessary to provide for the mobility needs of new residents. "A" Minor Arterial Expanders are the backbone of all adequate minor arterials in the developing suburbs to supplement the principal arterials that make up the Metropolitan Highway System. GENERAL INFORMATION AND RESTRICTIONS A construction project must be a permanent improvement between logical termini (roadways of equal or higher functional classification) having independent utility. The term "independent utility" means the project provides benefits to air quality, crash reduction, etc... by itself and does not depend on any construction elements of the project being funded from other sources outside the regional solicitation, excluding the required non - federal match. The project must result in a completed segment which meets current design standards and which has an anticipated service life approximately that of a new facility. The project, including staged projects, must be structurally capable of handling all anticipated legal toad limit vehicles. STP funds can be used for transit facilities as part of the overall project, and can be requested within the Expander application. STP funds can only be used for project implementation or construction costs, such as excavation, construction, materials, and clean -up. They cannot be used for right -of -way acquisition, study completion, engineering, design, or other similar costs. Further, STP funds cannot be used for noise barriers, drainage projects, fences, landscaping, or other similar costs as stand -alone projects. These items are eligible as part of a larger, eligible construction project. The benefits and costs of the project shall be estimated over the same eligible project length. The total project cost is defined as all construction components including components ineligible for federal funds. The total project cost does not include pre - construction costs or right -of -way. Projects selected to receive federal funding through this solicitation will be programmed in the regional Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) in years 2015 or 2016. When the selected projects are programmed, the TAB will increase both the federal amount and the non- federal match amount to account for any anticipated inflation. The inflated amount of federal funding in the TIP will not be adjusted further. W "A" MINOR ARTERIAL - EXPANDER - QUALIFYING CRITERIA The applicant must show that the project meets all the following criteria to qualify for priority evaluation. Answer each criterion in a numbered sequence. Failure to respond to any of the qualifying criteria will result in a recommendation to disqualify your project. 1. The project must be consistent with the policies in the Metropolitan Council's officially adopted Metropolitan Development Guide, which includes the Transportation Policy Plan (TPP) (2010) and the Regional Development Framework (2004). Consistency with the TPP includes its appendix, which contains the regional functional classification criteria. Funding allocation to projects involving interchange construction and reconstruction on the Principal Arterial system (regardless of whether the project is on the Principal Arterial or and intersecting "A" Minor Arterial) are made conditional on the successful completion of the Highway Interchange Requests Procedures described in Appendix E of the Transportation Policy Plan. The applicant must list the documents and corresponding policy numbers or portions of text that help illustrate the project's consistency. RESPONSE: The project must be included in, be part of, or address a transportation problem or need identified in one of the following: 1) an approved local or county comprehensive plan found to be consistent with Metropolitan Council plans; 2) a locally approved capital improvement program; 3) an officially adopted corridor study (trunk highway studies must be approved by Mn/DOT and Metropolitan Council); or 4) the official plan or program of the applicant agency. It also must not conflict with the goals and policies in these adopted regional plans; the 2030 Transportation Policy Plan (2010), the 2030 Regional Framework (2004), and the 2030 Regional Parks Policy Plan (2010). The applicant must reference the appropriate comprehensive plan, CIP, approved corridor study document, or other plan or program and provide copies of the applicable pages. RESPONSE: 3. The proposed project must be identified as on an "A" Minor Arterial Expander shown on the TAB approved roadway functional classification map adopted by the TAB on or before May 18, 2011 and recorded in the Council's electronic file. The vast majority of the project must be physically located on the "A" Minor Arterial Expander roadway between logical termini. The project may include construction on small portions of non - eligible roads, as long as the construction is essential to the operation of the entire project. Examples include but are not limited to reconstruction of the approaches on intersecting collector roads and construction or reconstruction of on -ramps or off- ramps. The applicant must provide a map or sketch of the project relative to the "A" Minor Arterial Expander system. RESPONSE: 4. At least seventy -five (75) percent of the length of the proposed "A" Minor Arterial Expander project must be within the 2000 urbanized area defined by the Bureau of the Census or the 2020 Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) as defined in the local comprehensive plan accepted by the Metropolitan Council; or if a route connects two MUSA areas and the Average Daily Traffic (ADT) standards qualify the roadway segment for expansion. In either case, the entire project length would be eligible for federal funding. The applicant must provide a map or sketch of the project relative to the urbanized area. RESPONSE: 19 5. STP funds are available for roadway construction and reconstruction on new alignments or within existing right -of -way, including associated construction or installation of traffic signals, signs, utilities, bikeway or walkway components and public transit components. The cost of constructing a new bridge deck or reconstructing an existing bridge deck is eligible but the remainder of the superstructure and all elements of the substructure are not eligible. The applicant must describe the proposed project and state that the application includes only the eligible components. RESPONSE: 6. Studies, preliminary engineering, design, construction engineering, etc. are not eligible for STP funding and should not be included in the required local match or the total project cost. Right -of- way costs are not eligible for STP funding and should not be included in the required non - federal match or the total project cost. Noise barriers, drainage projects, fences, landscaping, etc., are not eligible for STP funding as stand -alone projects, but are eligible if included as part of a larger, eligible project. The applicant must state that pre - construction work and ROW costs are not part of the total project cost in this application. RESPONSE: An STP construction or reconstruction project must be a permanent improvement. Traffic management projects as part of a construction project are exempt from this policy. Temporary construction is defined as work that must be essentially replaced in the immediate future (within 5 years). Staged construction is considered permanent rather than temporary so long as future stages add to, rather than replace, previous work. The applicant must state that the proposed project is a permanent improvement and does not replace any regionally funded project that was opened to traffic within five years. RESPONSE: 8. Applicants can request up to a cap of $7,000,000 in STP funds for a specific "A" Minor Arterial Expander project. Other federal funds may be combined with the requested STP funds, but the source(s) must be identified in the application. The cost of preparing a project for funding authorization can be substantial. For that reason, the project's federal cost must exceed $1,000,000. The applicant must show the requested federal amount and total project cost on the cover page. RESPONSE: 9. STP funds awarded in the regional solicitation must be matched with non - federal funds. The non- federal match for any STP project must be at least 20% of the total cost. The applicant must state that it is responsible for the local (nonfederal) share. If the applicant expects any other agency to provide all or part of the local match, the applicant must include a letter or resolution from the other agency agreeing to participate financially in the project's construction. RESPONSE: 10. The applicant must include a letter from the agency with jurisdiction over the road indicating that it is aware of and understands the project being submitted, and that it commits to operate and maintain the facility for its design life and not change the use of any right -of -way acquired without prior approval from MN/DOT and the Federal Highway Administration. RESPONSE: 20 "A" MINOR ARTERIAL - EXPANDER - PRIORITIZING CRITERIA Applicants must respond to each of the following prioritizing criteria. Label your responses clearly. If a criterion is not applicable to your project, explain why. A. Relative importance of the route as an "A" Minor Arterial Expander. 100 points Although Expander routes are located in growing suburban communities, the relative importance of each Expander is not the same. Some Expanders play a more significant role than others do in providing roadway capacity in areas where travel demand cannot be met with the existing system of principal arterials and public transit service. Some Expanders are the only minor arterial roadway available to provide medium and long -range trips for many miles. The following criteria are intended to measure the relative importance of each Expander route submitted for funding in this solicitation. Definition and characteristics of the Expander route. 0 -100 points The applicant must respond to the two items below and provide a map to help answer items a) and b). The Expander `route' is defined as the uninterrupted length of the arterial that provides medium to long trips in the expanding urban area. The retire may be an existing or planned road on the TAB adopted system. The route may be longer than the proposed project and include more than one street name, but it must be continuous. The endpoints of the route must be a principal or other minor arterial, or the edge of the 2020 MUSA. Provide a map showing the length of the Expander route and the closest parallel `A' Minor or Principal Arterials on both sides of the Expander. Two projects on the same route will not be selected for funding unless they are at least 3.5 miles apart. Points under this criterion are assigned based on the current and forecasted traffic volume on the Expander route and the current transit ridership on the Expander route. a) Provide the current (2009) and forecasted (2030) average daily traffic volume at two or more locations on the Expander route. MN /DOT 50- series maps should be used for current counts. Use approved city or county comprehensive plans, Met Council, accepted State Aid traffic factors by county, or a transportation study with documented acceptable forecasting methodology for forecasted volume. RESPONSE: b) Is public transit currently provided on this Expander route? If yes, what is the average annual ridership? The applicant does not need to provide this information in its funding application. Data will be provided by the Metropolitan Council staff based on the project location map and description. RESPONSE: B. Deficiencies and Solutions on Expander. 300 points The regional solicitation process is one means of implementing regional plans. The region's Transportation Policy Plan states that the regional highway and street system will be preserved, managed, improved and expanded to support existing and planned land uses and safety and mobility 21 needs consistent with the Regional Development Framework, the Transportation Policy Plan and approved local and county comprehensive plans. The following criteria reflect these objectives. 1. Crash Reduction. 0 -150 points Calculate the total number of crashes reduced due to improvements on the `A' Minor Arterial Expander made by the proposed project. Points will be awarded based on the total three -year number of crashes projected to be reduced by the proposed project. The applicant must base the estimate of crash reduction on the methodology found in Appendix E. The applicant must calculate the frequency using the Mn/DOT TIS system average for calendar years 2007 through 2009.* RESPONSE: 2. Air Quality. 'The Transportation Policy Plan strongly supports environmental considerations when making transportation funding decisions. The Council supports funding priorities for transportation projects that ensure prevention of air quality violations through the reduction of mobile source emissions. The applicant must show that the project will reduce emissions and help the region to maintain its attainment of federal carbon monoxide standards. All assumptions and calculations must be clearly documented and explained in order to receive points. The applicant must include documentation of how the VMT reduction was determined and specify the speed used for the assumptions. Speed assumptions shall be based on the methodology found in Appendix F. Points under this criterion will be awarded based on the reduction of carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen oxides (NOx), and /or volatile organic compounds (VOC) emissions the proposed project is expected to provide. 0 -50 points The applicant must demonstrate through a quantitative analysis that CO, NOx, and /or VOC emissions (in KILOGRAMS /DAY) will be reduced compared to the no -build alternative. The applicant must estimate CO NOx, and /or VOC emissions reductions using the MOBILE6 emissions factors and vehicle emissions reduction worksheet in Appendix G. RESPONSE: 3. Congestion Reduction 0 -100 points The applicant must show that the proposed project will reduce congestion at the most congested location on the Expander. The applicant must include the current volume to capacity (v /c) ratios in the AM and PM peak hours and the improvement in the ratios resulting from the project. Projects that have low existing We ratios will receive less credit for the improvement resulting from the project than projects that address a problematic existing We ratio. The applicant roust use the methodology, worksheet and look-tip tables found in * Applicants should request crash data from Mn/DOT as early as possible. An agency that wishes to dispute the results of their crash data requests can contact Ryan Coddington at 651 -234 -7841 (or Ryan.Coddington cr state.mn.us) to reconcile those differences. 22 Appendix H. The applicant must conduct a corridor analysis for new alignments, comparing parallel routes that will be affected by the project. RESPONSE: C Cost Effectiveness. 275 points The Regional Development Framework and Transportation Policy Plan document the need for adequate transportation funding to implement regional transportation plans. The region must allocate transportation funds in such a way that the selected projects provide the most benefit for the amount of funding requested. Cost effectiveness is an essential component of the regional solicitation process. Cost effectiveness calculations must be based on the total cost of the project, not just the portion of the project eligible for federal funding. Crash Reduction. 0 -125 points The applicant mast calculate the cost per crash reduced on the Expander by the proposed project. The applicant must divide the total cost of the project by the answer from criterion B.I. Points will be awarded based on the relative cost per crash reduced. RESPONSE: Air Quality 0 -75 points The applicant must calculate the cost per kilogram per day that will be reduced by the proposed project compared to the no -build alternative. The applicant must divide the total project cost by the estimated reduction in CO, NOx, and /or VOC emissions per day calculated in question B.2. RESPONSE: 3. Congestion reduction. 0 -75 points The applicant must calculate the cost per increase in hourly person throughput provided by the proposed improvement. The applicant must use the worksheet in Appendix I. Points will be awarded based on the lowest cost per increase in person throughput, but if there is little congestion under existing conditions fewer points will be awarded for increasing person throughput. ]T =yvhl.3M D Development Framework Implementation 425 points The Metropolitan Development Guide is comprised of the 2030 Regional Development Framework and system plans for transportation, including highways, transit and aviation; water resources management; and regional parks and trails. Together, the Development Framework and system plans create a vision for the region and are intended to help ensure the orderly, economical development of the seven - county area. The Framework is organized around four overall goals: • Efficient Growth. Work with local communities to accommodate growth in a flexible, connected and efficient manner. 23 • Multi -modal Transportation. Plan and invest in multi -modal transportation choices, based on full range of costs and benefits, to slow the growth of congestion and serve the region's economic needs. • Mousing Choices. Encourage expanded choices in housing locations and types, and improved access to jobs and opportunities • Natural Resource protection. Work with local and regional partners to conserve, protect and enhance the region's natural resources. Under the Metropolitan Land Planning Act, local communities must prepare and submit to the Council local comprehensive plans that are consistent with the Council's regional systems plans. Local communities have submitted plans for 2030 and these have been reviewed by the Council. 1. Development Framework Planning Area Objectives 0 -100 points Strategies for regional development relate directly to growth patterns within the region. The Framework communities are identified according to their regional planning area designation which is based on its geographic location, existing development patterns, forecast growth, planned land uses, and the availability of infrastructure. The project's relationship to Framework and TPP are addressed in the qualifying criteria. The objective of this section is to address the land use and transportation linkages and how the project supports development and the accommodation of growth for the communities affected. What are the 2030 land uses proposed in the community(ies) adopted plan for the project area/corridor affected? Identify the TAZs that lie partially or wholly within the project limits. RESPONSE: How does the project support this 2030 land use plan in the project area? Refer to the land use map and provide the land use categories and their description from the adopted local comprehensive plan 2 RESPONSE: Ilow does the project support 2030 forecasts for the project area? [Council staff will evaluate this criterion and will provide the following information to assist in the evaluation of this criterion: TAZ Project Area demographic profile population, household, employment and retail employment. The applicant does not need to provide a response.] 2. Progress Towards Affordable Housing Goals 0 -50 points NOTE: Information and analysis in this section will be provided by Council staff 2 Future Land Use map (planned land use 2030) and description for example: "low density residential — Mostly single - family homes with some two- family homes and open space within or related to a residential development at a gross density of 2 to 4 units per acre." "residential mixed use — Residential at a gross density of 7 to 30 units per acre, neighborhood commercial uses may be appropriate." "General Commercial —Broad range of businesses, generally highway- oriented, serving other businesses and City residents and requiring buffering from surrounding residential areas." "Agriculture— primarily agricultural purpose, including farming and horticulture, including farmstead or rural residence." [Examples from City of Coon Rapids Comprehensive Plan] 24 Methodology for Evaluating Progress Made Towards Affordable Housing Goals Up to 50 points can be awarded to a project, based upon a community's or group of communities' progress in addressing their affordable housing goals for 1996 -2010. For communities that participate in the Livable communities Local Housing Incentives Program, data from their 1996 -2010 negotiated housing goals was used to determine the progress they have made toward providing opportunities to address their affordable housing goals. For communities that do not participate in the Local Housing Incentives Program, progress will be measured against what the benchmarks were for their community in the Council's LCA goal setting methodology used in determining goals for 1996 to 2010. Communities negotiated goals for both ownership and rental housing. Analysis consisted of comparing the goal, progress made to date and determining the percentage of the goal achieved for both ownership and rental combined. Example of Analysis: Scoring: Percent of Progress Made: Points Awarded 90 -100% Negotiated Goal Progress to Date Overall Progress Made - % Rental Units 900 200 20 Ownership Units 200 125 5 Total Housing Units 1,100 325 30% Scoring: Percent of Progress Made: Points Awarded 90 -100% 50 71 -89% 40 51 -70% 30 31 -50% 20 11 -30% 10 1 -10% 5 For projects with 2 or more communities, scores are averaged and then applied to the project. Communities that do not have negotiated goals are given the same average score of the other communities within their group. 3. Land Use and Access Management Planning 0 -100 points The Development Framework includes support for connected land use patterns served by an integrated street network. Access management along highways is a key component of planning for these objectives. In addition, various access management strategies can reduce crashes, improve traffic flow, and add operational capacity for the applicable roadway. Higher scores will be given to projects that are developed using a local access management plan and to projects located in communities that have a 25 regulatory framework established to protect and improve access control in the future. Additional points will be awarded to projects that implement these plans by reducing undesired access points. Reference and describe the local access management plan used to develop the proposed project, and describe the corresponding county or state access management plan which supports the regional road network. Higher scores will be awarded to projects developed with an approach that is consistent with county or state access management plans. RESPONSE: Provide and identify intersection spacing and signal spacing guidelines, and driveway allowance criteria used for the proposed project and the corresponding county or state access management guidelines. RESPONSE: Having the necessary regulatory framework is essential for protecting the efficient functioning of the regional roadway network. Reference (adoption date) and describe the local zoning and subdivision ordinance regulations that are in place to maintain the access plan as adjacent properties are developed and /or redeveloped. Higher scores will be awarded to projects in communities with existing or proposed local support of the access management plan through existing regulations or ordinances. RESPONSE: 4. Corridor Access Management Improvements 0 -100 points Projects that help to implement the access management plan by removing or modifying non - conforming access points will receive points in this criterion. Identify the access locations and access management that currently exists and that will be allowed once the project is completed. Indicate by the following classifications, the existing access locations inconsistent with the proposed access management approach and any access locations that will be modified: e. Private Residential Driveways /Field Entrances RESPONSE: f Low- Volume Private Driveways * (Under 500 trips per day) RESPONSE: g. High - Volume Private Driveways * (Over 500 trips per day) RESPONSE: h. Public Streets RESPONSE: * Private driveways may be commercial, industrial or institutional uses such as school or hospitals. 5. Integration of Modes 0 -75 points 26 The Transportation Policy Plan requires that explicit consideration of all users of the transportation system be considered in the planning and scoping phase of roadway projects. The integration of modes criteria evaluate the value of the proposed project in providing better accommodations for pedestrians, bicyclists, transit and freight vehicles. Such accommodation should be provided within the existing right -of,- -way and provide the same level of access as motor vehicles unless it is shown to be impractical. In such cases, the project may include facilitation of such travel outside of the roadway right -of -way along a close parallel route. "A" Minor Expanders are routes that make connections between developing areas outside the interstate ring. These roads may or may not be able to be served by transit but serve rapidly growing areas of the region. Roadway improvements provide an opportunity to improve non - motorized connectivity between these growing areas. Pedestrians: Examples of pedestrian improvements include construction or reconstruction of walkways or multi -use paths, separating pedestrian walkways from vehicle traffic through the installation of a buffer such as a boulevard, and providing pedestrian lighting. Equally important to improving pedestrian movement along the project area is improving the safety and ease of pedestrian crossings of the roadways. Some examples of these kinds of improvements are installation of pedestrian countdown signals with crosswalks, reducing the effective crossing distance by installing curb extensions and pedestrian medians, and reducing the speed of vehicles making turning movements at intersections. Different treatments are appropriate for different types of roadway conditions. Include a map that shows all new or reconstructed walkways or multi -use paths that will be constructed as part of this project as well as all pathways that these walkways will connect to and any potential pedestrian destinations such as schools, residences, transit stops, parks, and businesses within ' /a mile of the project area that will be accessible to pedestrians. In the response field, indicate the characteristics of these pedestrian facilities (i.e. multi -use trail, sidewalk, or crosswalk etc.) and whether they are brand new facilities or a replacement of an existing facility.. All pedestrian facilities must be designed to be ADA- compliant at a minimum. RESPONSE: Bicyclists: Examples of bicycle improvements include striping a bike lane or a marked shoulder that is 5 feet wide or greater, installing an off -road pathway where conditions favor one, and intersection treatments designed to reduce motor vehicle and bicycle conflict. Different treatments are appropriate for different types of roadway conditions. Include a map that shows all new or reconstructed bikeways that will be constructed (or striped) with this project, and show how they connect to an existing or planned bikeway network. Also show potential destinations along the roadway segment and within a '/a mile of the project area that will be accessible with this bikeway network such as schools, parks residences, transit stops, and businesses. In the response field, indicate the characteristics of these bicycle facilities (i.e. bike lane, striped shoulder, cycle track, multi -use trail etc.) and whether they are brand new facilities or a replacement of an existing facility. RESPONSE: Transit: Examples of transit improvements include improving accessibility to transit stops by pedestrians, installing bus stop amenities for passengers, and placing bus stops on the far side of intersections. In some cases, other improvements to the roadway, including curb bump -outs for bus 27 stops or the construction of bus lanes can improve transit service reliability and speed along the roadway. Is there transit service on the roadway? If so, what elements of this project will enhance the mobility of transit vehicles, if any? What elements of this project will improve passenger access to transit stops? RESPONSE: Freight: Freight improvements will be evaluated on the role of the roadway in providing freight mobility. What is the current daily heavy commercial traffic along the project segment? Is the roadway used to access any of the regional intermodal freight terminals in Appendix J and does the road connect any of these terminals to a freeway? E. Maturity of Project Concept. 100 points Projects selected through this solicitation will be programmed for construction in 2015 or 2016. That is a fairly long time but it takes several years to complete preliminary engineering, environmental studies and acquire right -of -way. The region must manage the federal funds in each year of the TIP. Projects that are not implemented in their original program year are carried over to the next program year, or the funding sunset date. This requires other projects to shift program years to maintain fiscal balance in the TIP and STIR Proposed projects that have already completed some of the work are more likely to be ready for funding authorization in their program year. A schedule is important to know what kind of work might be needed. Large projects that need right- of-way require more work than those that do not. 0 -100 points Applications involving construction must complete the project implementation schedule found in Appendix K. A detailed schedule of events is expected for all phases of the project. Applications involving non - construction projects must include a detailed discussion of the timeframes involved for initiating and completing each phase of planned activities. Points under this criterion are assigned based on how many steps have been taken toward implementation of the project. These steps reflect a federally funded project development path. RESPONSE: Please complete the project implementation schedule found in Appendix K TOTAL: 1,200 POINTS 28 "A" MINOR ARTERIAL - CONNECTOR DEFINITION Connectors are roads that provide good, safe, all- season connections among town centers. Connectors also link rural areas to principal arterials and other "A" minor arterials. Because of their location predominantly in rural areas not intended for future urbanization, the improvement focus is on safety and access management instead of capacity improvements. Approximately 300 miles have been identified and are primarily county roads and MN/DOT trunk highways. Connector projects must fall within one of the following types of projects: complete construction, reconstruction or rehabilitation of a segment of roadway along the entire project length. Transit, bikeway or walkway facilities in the corridor may be an integral project component. "A" Minor Arterial - Connectors Purpose /Vision The Regional Development Framework envisions the region supporting a large agricultural area, a diversified rural area and a number of rural centers. The Connectors will provide mobility needs for these sub -areas and connect them to the region's large urban complexes and to the adjacent counties. These roads need to provide safe travel and to be kept in good condition. GENERAL INFORMATION AND RESTRICTIONS A construction project must be a permanent improvement between logical termini (roadways of equal or higher functional classification) having independent utility. The term "independent utility" means the project provides benefits to air quality, crash reduction, etc... by itself and does not depend on any construction elements of the project being funded from other sources outside the regional solicitation, excluding the required non - federal match. The project must result in a completed segment which meets current design standards and which has an anticipated service life approximately that of a new facility. The project, including staged projects, must be structurally capable of handling all anticipated legal load limit vehicles. STP funds can be used for transit facilities as part of the overall project, and can be requested within the Connector application. STP funds can only be used for project implementation or construction costs, such as excavation, construction, materials, and clean-up. They cannot be used for right -of -way acquisition, study completion, engineering, design, or other similar costs. Further, STP funds cannot be used for noise barriers, drainage projects, fences, landscaping, or other similar costs as stand -alone projects. These items are eligible as part of a larger, eligible construction project. The benefits and costs of the project shall be estimated over the same eligible project length. The total project cost is defined as all construction components including components ineligible for federal funds. The total project cost does not include pre - construction costs or right -of -way. Projects selected to receive federal funding through this solicitation will be programmed in the regional Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) in years 2015 or 2016. When the selected projects are programmed, the TAB will increase both the federal amount and the non - federal match amount to account for any anticipated inflation. The inflated amount of federal funding in the TIP will not be adjusted further. 29 "A" MINOR ARTERIAL - CONNECTOR - QUALIFYING CRITERIA The applicant must show that the project meets all the following criteria to qualify for priority evaluation. Answer each criterion in a numbered sequence. Failure to respond to any of the qualifying criteria will result in a recommendation to disqualify your project. The project must be consistent with the policies in the Metropolitan Council's officially adopted Metropolitan Development Guide, which includes the Transportation Policy Plan (TPP) (2010) and the Regional Development Framework (2004). Consistency with the TPP includes its appendix, which contains the regional functional classification criteria. Funding allocation to projects involving interchange construction and reconstruction on the Principal Arterial system (regardless of whether the project is on the Principal Arterial or and intersecting "A" Minor Arterial) are made conditional on the successful completion of the Highway Interchange Requests Procedures described in Appendix E of the Transportation Policy Plan. The applicant must list the documents and corresponding policy numbers or portions of text that help illustrate the project's consistency. RESPONSE: The project must be included in, be part of, or address a transportation problem or need identified in one of the following: 1) an approved local or county comprehensive plan found to be consistent with Metropolitan Council plans; 2) a locally approved capital improvement program; 3) an officially adopted corridor study (trunk highway studies mist be approved by Mn /DOT and Metropolitan Council); or 4) the official plan or program of the applicant agency. It also must not conflict with the goals and policies in these adopted regional plans; the 2030 Transportation Policy Plan (2010), the 2030 Regional Framework (2004), and the 2030 Regional Parks Policy Plan (2010). The applicant must reference the appropriate comprehensive plan, CIP, approved corridor study document, or other plan or program and provide copies of the applicable pages. RESPONSE: 3. The proposed project must be identified as on an "A" Minor Arterial Connector shown on the TAB approved roadway functional classification map adopted by the TAB on or before May 18, 2011 and recorded in the Council's electronic file. The vast majority of the project must be physically located on the "A" Minor Arterial Connector roadway between logical termini. The project may include construction on small portions of non - eligible roads, as long as the construction is essential to the operation of the entire project. Examples include but are not limited to reconstruction of the approaches on intersecting collector roads and construction or reconstruction of on -ramps or off - ramps. The applicant must provide a map or sketch of the project relative to the "A" Minor Arterial Connector system. RESPONSE: 4. STP funds are available for roadway construction and reconstruction on new alignments or within existing right -of -way, including associated construction or installation of traffic signals, signs, utilities, bikeway or walkway components and public transit components. The cost of constructing a new bridge deck or reconstructing an existing bridge deck is eligible but the remainder of the superstructure and all elements of the substructure are not eligible. The applicant must describe the proposed project and state that the application includes only the eligible components. RESPONSE: 30 Projects that add continuous lanes, or through capacity, are not eligible under the "A" Minor Arterial Connector category. RESPONSE: 6. Studies, preliminary engineering, design, construction engineering, etc. are not eligible for STP funding and should not be included in the required local match or the total project cost. Right -of- way costs are not eligible for STP funding and should not be included in the required non - federal match or the total project cost. Noise barriers, drainage projects, fences, landscaping, etc., are no eligible for STP funding as stand -alone projects, but are eligible if included as part of a larger, eligible project. The applicant must state that pre - construction work and ROW costs are not part of the total project cost in this application. RESPONSE: An STP construction or reconstruction project must be a permanent improvement. Traffic management projects as part of a construction project are exempt from this policy. Temporary construction is defined as work that must be essentially replaced in the immediate future (within 5 years). Staged construction is considered permanent rather than temporary so long as future stages add to, rather than replace, previous work. The applicant must state that the proposed project is a permanent improvement and does not replace any regionally funded project that was opened to traffic within five years. RESPONSE: 8. Applicants can request up to a cap of $5,500,000 in STP funds for a specific "A" Minor Arterial Connector project. Other federal funds may be combined with the requested STP funds, but the source(s) must be identified in the application. The cost of preparing a project for funding authorization can be substantial. For that reason, the project's federal cost must exceed $1,000,000. The applicant must show the requested federal amount and total project cost on the cover page. RESPONSE: 9. STP funds awarded in the regional solicitation must be matched with non - federal funds. The non- federal match for any STP project must be at least 20% of the total cost. The applicant must state that it is responsible for the local (nonfederal) share. If the applicant expects any other agency to provide all or part of the local match, the applicant must include a letter or resolution from the other agency agreeing to participate financially in the project's construction. RESPONSE: 10. The applicant must include a letter from the agency with jurisdiction over the road indicating that it is aware of and understands the project being submitted, and that it commits to operate and maintain the facility for its design life and not change the use of any right -of -way acquired without prior approval from MN/DOT and the Federal Highway Administration. RESPONSE: 31 "A" MINOR ARTERIAL - CONNECTOR - PRIORITIZING CRITERIA Applicants must respond to each of the following prioritizing criteria. Label your responses clearly. If a criterion is not applicable to your project, explain why. A. Relative importance of the route as an "A" Minor Arterial Connector. 100 points Although most Connector routes are outside the current and future urban area, the relative importance of each Connector is not the same. Some Connectors play a more significant role than others do in connecting rural growth centers to each other and the metro highway system. Some Connectors are the only minor arterial roadway available to provide medium and long -range trips for many miles. The following criteria are intended to measure the relative importance of each Connector route submitted for funding in this solicitation. 1. Definition and characteristics of the Connector route. 0 -100 points The applicant must respond to the two items below and provide a map to help answer items a) and b). The Connector `route' is defined as the uninterrupted length of the arterial that serves medium and long trips outside the urbanized area. The route may be an existing or planned road on the TAB adopted system. The route may be longer than the proposed project and include more than one street name, but it must be continuous. The endpoints of the route must be a principal or other "A" minor arterial (or other minor arterial if the route extends beyond the 7- county boundary), or the edge of the 2020 MUSA. Provide a map showing the length of the Connector route and the closest parallel `A' Minor or Principal Arterials on both sides of the Connector, if any. Two projects on the same route will not be selected for funding unless they are at least 3.5 miles apart. Points under this criterion are assigned based on the number of years since constricted or reconstructed, and the current and forecasted traffic volume on the Connector route. a) In what year was the section to be improved built or reconstructed last? (the most recent of the two dates should be provided) RESPONSE: b) Provide the current (2009) and forecasted (2030) average daily traffic volume at two or more locations on the Connector route. MN/DOT 50- series maps should be used for current counts. Use approved city or county comprehensive plans, Met Council, accepted State Aid traffic factors by county, or a transportation study with documented acceptable forecasting methodology for forecasted volume. RESPONSE: B. Deficiencies and Solutions on Connector 425 points The regional solicitation process is one means of implementing regional plans. The region's Transportation Policy Plan states that the regional highway and street system will be preserved, managed, improved and expanded to support existing and planned land uses and safety and mobility needs consistent with the Regional Development Framework, the Transportation Policy Plan and approved local and county comprehensive plans. The following criteria reflect these objectives 1. Crash Reduction. 32 0 -150 points Calculate the total number of crashes reduced due to improvements on the `A' Minor Arterial Connector made by the proposed project. Points will be awarded based on the total three -year number of crashes projected to be reduced by the proposed project. The applicant must base the estimate of crash reduction on the methodology found in Appendix E. The applicant must calculate the frequency using the Mn/DOT TIS system average for calendar years 2007 through 2009. RESPONSE: 2. Goods Movement. 0 -100 points Many Connectors were not built to accommodate 10 ton loads. All projects that receive funding must meet this standard. This criterion gives points to those projects with the highest AADT and the greatest ton vehicle miles currently not meeting this standard that will be built to this standard. Provide the length of the project that does not accommodate 10 ton loads and the ton vehicle miles that will be built to this standard. If your agency uses a risk management philosophy for load postings, what is the appropriate load rating by segment according to a falling weight detlectometer or other means? What is the existing weight restriction on this section of the roadway? Use the following formula to calculate ton vehicle miles: (AADT /1000) x project length (centerline mi.) x (10 ton — existing weight limit) RESPONSE: 3. Shoulder Improvements and Non - motorized travel. 0 -175 points (100 points) On rural highways, paved shoulders improve safety for the public. Depending on the width, they can provide a safer passage for pedestrians and bicyclists. This criterion provides points for the projects that today do not have adequate paved shoulders but will add them as part of the proposed project, and acknowledges some credit for providing additional gravel shoulders. The worksheet below must be used to calculate the improvements to be made to shoulders. Worksheet for B.3 A B C D E F Segment Length Existing Width Existing Width Proposed B x (E - D or C) (feet) (unpaved) (paved) Width (paved) + V2 *Proposed Width (unpaved) 1 * Applicants should request crash data from Mn/DOT as early as possible. An agency that wishes to dispute the results of their crash data requests can contact Ryan Coddington at 651- 234 -7841 (or Ryan.Coddington @state.mn.us) to reconcile those differences. 33 2 3 Etc... Sum of column E _ Sum of column F divided by total project cost (for calculation of criterion C.3.) = (75 points) In rural town centers, it is usually appropriate to provide separate facilities for pedestrian and bicycle movement including safe crossings. Examples of pedestrian improvements include construction or reconstruction of walkways or multi -use paths, separating pedestrian walkways from vehicle traffic through the installation of a buffer such as a boulevard, and providing pedestrian lighting. Equally important to improving pedestrian movement along the project area is improving the safety and ease of pedestrian crossings of the roadways. Some examples of these kinds of improvements are installing curb extensions and pedestrian medians to reduce effective crossing distances, installing pedestrian signals and crossings, and reducing the speed of vehicles making turning movements at intersections. Examples of bicycle improvements include striping a bike lane or a marked shoulder that is 5 feet wide or greater, installing an off -road pathway where conditions favor one, and intersection treatments designed to reduce motor vehicle and bicycle conflict. Different treatments are appropriate for different types of roadway conditions. Include a map that shows all new or reconstructed walkways, multi -use paths or bike lanes /striped shoulders that will be constructed as part of this project as well as all pathways that these walkways will connect to and any potential pedestrian destinations such as schools, residences, transit stops, parks, and businesses within 1 /a mile of the project area that will be accessible to pedestrians. Please indicate the characteristics of these facilities in the response field below as well as whether the facilities are brand new or are replacing existing facilities. RESPONSE: C. Cost Effectiveness. 275 points The Regional Development Framework and Transportation Policy Plan document the need for adequate transportation funding to implement regional transportation plans. The region must allocate transportation funds in such a way that the selected projects provide the most benefit for the amount of finding requested. Cost effectiveness is an essential component of the regional solicitation process. Cost effectiveness calculations must be based on the total cost of the project, not just the portion of the project eligible for federal funding. 1. Crash Reduction. 0 -125 points The applicant must calculate the cost per crash reduced on the Connector by the proposed project. The applicant must divide the total cost of the project by the answer from criterion B.I. Points will be awarded based on the relative cost per crash reduced. RESPONSE: 2. Goods Movement 34 0 -75 points This criterion gives points for the improved load carrying capability of the route relative to the total cost of the proposed project. The applicant must divide the ton vehicle miles not accommodating 10 ton loads (answer to criterion 13.3. above) by the total cost of the proposed project. RESPONSE: 3. Shoulder Improvements 0 -75 points This criterion gives points for the improvement to the shoulders relative to the total cost of the proposed project. The answer is produced in the last row of the worksheet used for answering criterion B.3. RESPONSE: D. Development Framework Implementation. 300 points The Metropolitan Development Guide is comprised of the 2030 Regional Development Framework and system plans for transportation, including highways, transit and aviation; water resources management; and regional parks and trails. Together, the Development Framework and system plans create a vision for the region and are intended to help ensure the orderly, economical development of the seven - county area. The Framework is organized around four overall goals: • Efficient Growth. Work with local communities to accommodate growth in a flexible, connected and efficient manner. • Multi -modal Transportation. Plan and invest in multi -modal transportation choices, based on full range of costs and benefits, to slow the growth of congestion and serve the region's economic needs. • Housing Choices. Encourage expanded choices in housing locations and types, and improved access to jobs and opportunities • Natural Resource protection. Work with local and regional partners to conserve, protect and enhance the region's natural resources. Under the Metropolitan Land Planning Act, local communities must prepare and submit to the Council local comprehensive plans that are consistent with the Council's regional systems plans. Local communities have submitted plans for 2030 said these have been reviewed by the Council. 1. Development Framework Planning Area Objectives 0 -100 points Strategies for regional development relate directly to growth patterns within the region. The Framework communities are identified according to their regional planning area designation which is based on its geographic location, existing development patterns, forecast growth, planned land uses, and the availability of infrastructure. The project's relationship to Framework and TPP are addressed in the qualifying criteria The objective of this section is to address the land use and transportation linkages and how the project supports development and the accommodation of growth for the communities affected. What are the 2030 land uses proposed in the community(ies) adopted plan for the project arealcorridor affected? Identify the TAZs that lie partially or wholly within the project limits. 35 RESPONSE: How does the project support this 2030 land use plan in the project area? Refer to the land use map and provide the land use categories and their description from the adopted local comprehensive plan.' RESPONSE: How does the project support 2030 forecasts for the project area? [Council staff will evaluate this criterion and will provide the following information to assist in the evaluation of this criterion: TAZ Project Area demographic profile population, household, employment and retail employment. The applicant does not need to provide a response.] 2. Land Use and Access Management Planning 0 -100 points The Development Framework includes support for connected Land use patterns served by an integrated street network. Access management along highways is a key component of planning for these objectives. In addition, various access management strategies can reduce crashes, improve traffic flow, and add operational capacity for the applicable roadway. Higher scores will be given to projects that are developed using a local access management plan and to projects located in communities that have a regulatory framework established to protect and improve access control in the future. Additional points will be awarded to projects that implement these plans by reducing undesired access points. Reference and describe the local access management plan used to develop the proposed project, and describe the corresponding county or state access management plan which supports the regional road network. Higher scores will be awarded to projects developed with an approach that is consistent with county or state access management plans. RESPONSE: Provide and identify intersection spacing and signal spacing guidelines, and driveway allowance criteria used for the proposed project and the corresponding county or state access management guidelines. RESPONSE: Having the necessary regulatory framework is essential for protecting the efficient functioning of the regional roadway network. Reference (adoption date) and describe the local zoning and subdivision ordinance regulations that are in place to maintain the access plan as adjacent properties are developed and /or redeveloped. Higher scores will be awarded to projects in communities with existing or proposed local support of the access management plan through existing regulations or ordinances. RESPONSE: 3 Future Land Use map (planned land use 2030) and description for example: "low density residential — Mostly single - family homes with some two - family homes and open space within or related to aresidential development at a gross density of 2 to 4 units per acre." "residential mixed use — Residential at a gross density of 7 to 30 units per acre, neighborhood commercial uses may be appropriate." "General Commercial —Broad range of businesses, generally highway - oriented, serving other businesses and City residents and requiring buffering from surrounding residential areas." "Agriculture— primarily agricultural purpose, including farming and horticulture, including farmstead or rural residence." [Examples from City of Coon Rapids Comprehensive Plan] W 3. Corridor Access Management Improvements 0 -100 points Projects that help to implement the access management plan by removing or modifying non - conforming access points will receive points in this criterion. Identify the access locations and access management that currently exists and that will be allowed once the project is completed. Indicate by the following classifications, the existing access locations inconsistent with the proposed access management approach and any access locations that will be modified: Private Residential Driveways/Field Entrances RESPONSE: j. Low - Volume Private Driveways * (Under 500 trips per day) RESPONSE: k. High- Volume Private Driveways * (Over 500 trips per day) RESPONSE: Public Streets RESPONSE: * Private driveways may be commercial, industrial or institutional uses such as school or hospitals. E. Maturity of Project Concept. 100 points Projects selected through this solicitation will be programmed for construction in 2015 or 2016. That is a fairly long time but it takes several years to complete preliminary engineering, environmental studies and acquire right -of -way. The region must manage the federal funds in each year of the TIP. Projects that are not implemented in their original program year are carried over to the next program year, or the funding sunset date. This requires other projects to shift program years to maintain fiscal balance in the TIP and STIP. Proposed projects that have already completed some of the work are more likely to be ready for funding authorization in their program year. A schedule is important to know what kind of work might be needed. Large projects that need right -of -way require more work than those that do not. 0 -100 points Applications involving construction must complete the project implementation schedule found in Appendix K. A detailed schedule of events is expected for all phases of the project. Applications involving non - construction projects must include a detailed discussion of the timeframes involved for initiating and completing each phase of planned activities. Points under this criterion are assigned based on how many steps have been taken toward implementation of the project. These steps reflect a federally funded project development path. RESPONSE: See schedule in Appendix K TOTAL: 1,200 POINTS 37 "A" MINOR ARTERIAL - AUGMENTER DEFINITION Augmenters are roads that substitute for principal arterials within the I -494/I -694 ring. The principal arterial network in this area is mature; however, it is not sufficient in all cases relative to the density of development that the network serves. In these situations, key minor arterials serve many long trips. The Augmenter system is mature also and most arterials lack available right -of -way for additional capacity improvements. Although the Transportation Policy Plan states that the improvement focus is on providing additional capacity, the cost of acquiring right -of -way and building additional capacity in the urban area is prohibitive. In this solicitation, the improvement will also focus on the condition of the roadway and the need for reconstruction, operating efficiency and multimodal opportunities on the Augmenter. Augmenter projects must fall within one of the following types of projects: transportation system management, complete construction, reconstruction or rehabilitation of a segment of roadway along the entire project length; including transit, bikeway or walkway components in the corridor. "A" Minor Arterial - Augmenter Purpose /Vision The Regional Development Framework envisions a dense, mixed -use development pattern in the existing urban area. The Augmenters are located within the I -494/1 -694 ring, which is virtually fully developed today but will experience significant redevelopment over the coming 25 years. The principal arterial network in this area is not sufficient to meet the mobility needs of this area. Augmenters provide an alternative for through traffic throughout this area. GENERAL INFORMATION AND RESTRICTIONS A construction project must be a permanent improvement between logical termini (roadways of equal or higher functional classification) having independent utility. The term "independent utility" means the project provides benefits to air quality, crash reduction, etc... by itself and does not depend on any construction elements of the project being funded from other sources outside the regional solicitation, excluding the required non - federal match. The project must result in a completed segment which meets current design standards and which has an anticipated service life approximately that of a new facility. The project, including staged projects, must be structurally capable of handling all anticipated legal load limit vehicles. STP funds can be used for transit facilities as part of the overall project, and can be requested within the Augmenter application. STP funds can only be used for project implementation or construction costs, such as excavation, construction, materials, and clean -up. They cannot be used for right -of -way acquisition, study completion, engineering, design, or other similar costs. Further, STP funds cannot be used for noise barriers, drainage projects, fences, landscaping, or other similar costs as stand -alone projects. These items are eligible as part of a larger, eligible construction project. The benefits and costs of the project shall be estimated over the same eligible project length. The total project cost is defined as all construction components including components ineligible for federal funds. The total project cost does not include pre - construction costs or right -of-way. Projects selected to receive federal funding through this solicitation will be programmed in the regional Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) in years 2015 or 2016. When the selected projects are programmed, the TAB will increase both the federal amount and the non - federal match amount to 38 account for any anticipated inflation. The inflated amount of federal funding in the TIP will not be adjusted further. 39 "A" MINOR ARTERIAL - AUGMENTER - QUALIFYING CRITERIA The applicant must show that the project meets all the following criteria to qualify for priority evaluation. Answer each criterion in a numbered sequence. Failure to respond to any of the qualifying criteria will result in a recommendation to disqualify your prgject. The project must be consistent with the policies in the Metropolitan Council's officially adopted Metropolitan Development Guide, which includes the Transportation Policy Plan (TPP) (2010) and the Regional Development Framework (2004). Consistency with the TPP includes its appendix, which contains the regional functional classification criteria. Funding allocation to projects involving interchange construction and reconstruction on the Principal Arterial system (regardless of whether the project is on the Principal Arterial or and intersecting "A" Minor Arterial) are made conditional on the successful completion of the Highway Interchange Requests Procedures described in Appendix E of the Transportation Policy Plan. The applicant must list the documents and corresponding policy numbers or portions of text that help illustrate the project's consistency. RESPONSE: The project must be included in, be part of, or address a transportation problem or need identified in one of the following: 1) an approved local or county comprehensive plan found to be consistent with Metropolitan Council plans; 2) a locally approved capital improvement program; 3) an officially adopted corridor study (trunk highway studies must be approved by Mn/DOT and Metropolitan Council); or 4) the official plan or program of the applicant agency. It also must not conflict with the goals and policies in these adopted regional plans; the 2030 Transportation Policy Plan (2010), the 2030 Regional Framework (2004), and the 2030 Regional Parks Policy Plan (2010). The applicant must reference the appropriate comprehensive plan, CIP, approved corridor study document, or other plan or program and provide copies of the applicable pages. RESPONSE: 3. The proposed project must be identified as on an "A" Minor Arterial Augmenter shown on the TAB approved roadway functional classification map adopted by the TAB on or before May 18, 2011 and recorded in the Council's electronic file. The vast majority of the project must be physically located on the "A" Minor Arterial Augmenter roadway between logical termini. The project may include construction on small portions of non - eligible roads, as long as the construction is essential to the operation of the entire project. Examples include but are not limited to reconstruction of the approaches on intersecting collector roads and construction or reconstruction of on -ramps or off - ramps. The applicant must provide a map or sketch of the project relative to the "A" Minor Arterial Augmenter system. RESPONSE: 4. STP funds are available for roadway construction and reconstruction on new alignments or within existing right -of -way, including associated construction or installation of traffic signals, signs, utilities, bikeway or walkway components and public transit components. The cost of constructing a new bridge deck or reconstructing an existing bridge deck is eligible but the remainder of the superstructure and all elements of the substructure are not eligible. The applicant must describe the proposed project and state that the application includes only the eligible components. RESPONSE: 40 5. Studies, preliminary engineering, design, construction engineering, etc. are not eligible for STP funding and should not be included in the required local match or the total project cost. Right -of- way costs are not eligible for STP finding and should not be included in the required non - federal match or the total project cost. Noise barriers, drainage projects, fences, landscaping, etc., are not eligible for STP funding as stand -alone projects, but are eligible if included as part of a larger, eligible project. The applicant must state that pre - construction work and ROW costs are not part of the total project cost in this application. RESPONSE: 6. An STP construction or reconstruction project must be a permanent improvement. Traffic management projects as part of a construction project are exempt from this policy. Temporary construction is defined as work that must be essentially replaced in the immediate future (within 5 years). Staged construction is considered permanent rather than temporary so long as future stages add to, rather than replace, previous work. The applicant must state that the proposed project is a permanent improvement and does not replace any regionally funded project that was opened to traffic within five years. RESPONSE: 7. Applicants can request up to a cap of $7,000,000 in STP funds for a specific "A" Minor Arterial Augmenter project. Other federal fiords may be combined with the requested STP funds, but the source(s) must be identified in the application. The cost of preparing a project for funding authorization can be substantial. For that reason, the project's federal cost must exceed $1,000,000. The applicant must show the requested federal amount and total project cost on the cover page. RESPONSE: 8. STP funds awarded in the regional solicitation must be matched with non- federal funds. The non- federal match for any STP project must be at least 20% of the total cost. The applicant must state that it is responsible for the local (nonfederal) share. If the applicant expects any other agency to provide all or part of the local match, the applicant must include a letter or resolution from the other agency agreeing to participate financially in the project's construction. RESPONSE: 9. The applicant must include a letter from the agency with jurisdiction over the road indicating that it is aware of and understands the project being submitted, and that it commits to operate and maintain the facility for its design life and not change the use of any right -of -way acquired without prior approval from MN/DOT and the Federal Highway Administration. RESPONSE: 41 "A" MINOR ARTERIAL - AUGMENTER - PRIORITIZING CRITERIA Applicants must respond to each of the following prioritizing criteria. Label your responses clearly. If a criterion is not applicable to your project, explain why. A. Relative importance of the route as an "A" Minor Arterial Augmenter. 10 tidings Although all Augmenter routes are within the I -494/I -694 beltway except one, the relative importance of each Augmenter is not the same. Some Augmenters play a more significant role than others in providing an alternative route for medium and long distance trips and reducing demand on metro area freeways. The following criteria are intended to measure the relative importance of each Augmenter route submitted for funding in this solicitation. Definition and characteristics of the Augmenter route. 0 -100 points The applicant must respond to all three items below and provide a map to help answer items a) and b). The Augmenter `route' is defined as the uninterrupted length of the arterial that serves medium and long trips within the I- 494/694 ring. The route may be an existing or planned road on the TAB adopted system. The route may be longer than the proposed project and include more than one street name, but it must be continuous. The endpoints of the route must be a principal or other "A" minor arterial. Provide a map showing the length of the Augmenter route and the closest parallel `A' Minor or Principal Arterials on both sides of the Augmenter. Two projects on the same route will not be selected for funding unless they are at least 3.5 miles apart. Points under this criterion are assigned based on the current and forecasted traffic volume on the Augmenter route, the current transit ridership on the Augmenter route, and the years since last major reconstruction of the applicable section of the Augmenter. More than one project may receive the maximum points. a) Provide the current (2009) and forecasted (2030) average daily traffic volume at two or more locations on the Augmenter route. MN /DOT 50- series maps should be used for current counts. Use approved city or county comprehensive plans, Met Council, accepted State Aid traffic factors by county, or a transportation study with documented acceptable forecasting methodology for forecasted volume. RESPONSE: b) Is public transit currently provided on this Augmenter route? If yes, what is the average annual ridership? The applicant does not need to provide this information in its funding application. Data will be provided by the Metropolitan Council staff based on the project location map and description. RESPONSE: d Solutions on Augmenter 440 pain The regional solicitation process is one means of implementing regional plans. The region's Transportation Policy Plan states that the regional highway and street system will be preserved, managed, improved and expanded to support existing and planned land uses and safety and mobility 42 needs consistent with the Regional Development Framework, the Transportation Policy Plan and approved local and county comprehensive plans. The following criteria reflect these objectives. 1. Roadway Condition and Age 0-240 points What is the age and condition of the section of the Augmenter that is to be reconstructed? a. In what year was the section of roadway to be improved built or reconstructed last? RESPONSE: b. Provide the year each of the following to be improved was built or reconstructed last? Sidewalks/Multi -use paths: Lighting: Surface water drainage: Signal Systems: Pavement: c. What is the pavement management system (PMS) condition rating for this section of roadway? RESPONSE: d. Is the entire section 10 -ton rated? Mow much is not? Will the newly- constructed roadway be reconstructed to be 10 -ton rated? RESPONSE: 2. Crash Reduction. 0 -80 points Calculate the total number of crashes reduced due to improvements on the `A' Minor Arterial Augmenter made by the proposed project. Points will be awarded based on the total three -year number of crashes projected to be reduced by the proposed project. The applicant must base the estimate of crash reduction on the methodology found in Appendix E. The applicant must calculate the frequency using the Mn/DOT TIS system average for calendar years 2007 through 2009. RESPONSE: 3. Air Quality. The Transportation Policy Plan strongly supports environmental considerations when making transportation funding decisions. The Council supports funding priorities for transportation projects that ensure prevention of air quality violations through the reduction of mobile source emissions. * Applicants should request crash data from Mn/DOT as early as possible. An agency that wishes to dispute the results of their crash data requests can contact Ryan Coddington at 651- 234 -7841 (or Ryan.Coddington@state.mn.us) to reconcile those differences. 43 The applicant must show that the project will reduce emissions and help the region to maintain its attainment of federal carbon monoxide standards. All assumptions and calculations must be clearly documented and explained in order to receive points. The applicant must include documentation of how the VMT reduction was determined and specify the speed used for the assumptions. Speed assumptions shall be based on the methodology found in Appendix F. Points under this criterion will be awarded based on the reduction of carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen oxides (NOx), and /or volatile organic compounds (VOC) emissions the proposed project is expected to provide. 0 -60 points The applicant must demonstrate through a quantitative analysis that CO, NOx, and /or VOC emissions (in KILOGRAMS /DAY) will be reduced compared to the no -build alternative. The applicant must estimate CO, NOx, and /or VOC emissions reductions using the MOBILE5b emissions factors and vehicle emissions reduction worksheet in Appendix G. RESPONSE: 4. Congestion Reduction. 0 -60 points The applicant must show that the proposed project will reduce congestion at the most congested location on the Augmenter. The applicant must include the current volume to capacity (v /c) ratios in the AM and PM peak hours and the improvement in the ratios resulting from the project. Projects that have low existing We ratios will receive less credit for the improvement resulting from the project than projects that address a problematic existing We ratio. The applicant must use the methodology, worksheet and look -up tables found in Appendix H. The applicant must conduct a corridor analysis for new alignments, comparing parallel routes that will be affected by the project. If no change to We is being proposed or a 4 -3 lane conversion is being proposed, the applicant should describe activities that will improve traffic flow and show that the project will not result in congested conditions. RESPONSE: The Regional Development Framework and Transportation Policy Plan document the need for adequate transportation funding to implement regional transportation plans. The region must allocate transportation funds in such a way that the selected projects provide the most benefit for the amount of funding requested. Cost effectiveness is an essential component of the regional solicitation process. Cost effectiveness calculations must be based on the total cost of the project, not just the portion of the project eligible for federal funding. Crash Reduction. 0 -60 points The applicant must calculate the cost per crash reduced on the Augmenter by the proposed project. The applicant must divide the total cost of the project by the answer from criterion 8.2. Points will be awarded based on the relative cost per crash reduced. RESPONSE: 2. Air Quality 44 0-60 points The applicant must calculate the cost per kilogram per day that will be reduced by the proposed project compared to the no -build alternative. The applicant must divide the total project cost by the estimated reduction in CO, NOx, and /or VOC emissions per day calculated in question B.3. RESPONSE: Congestion reduction. 0 -60 points 'the applicant must calculate the cost per increase in hourly person throughput provided by the proposed improvement. The applicant must use the worksheet in Appendix 1. Points will be awarded based on the lowest cost per increase in person throughput, but if there is little congestion under existing conditions fewer points will be awarded for increasing person throughput. RESPONSE: D Development Framework Implementation 380 points The Metropolitan Development Guide is comprised of the 2030 Regional Development Framework and system plans for transportation, including highways, transit and aviation; water resources management; and regional parks and trails. Together, the Development Framework and system plans create a vision for the region and are intended to help ensure the orderly, economical development of the seven - county area. The Framework is organized around four overall goals: • Efficient Growth. Work with local communities to accommodate growth in a flexible, connected and efficient manner. • Multi -modal Transportation. Plan and invest in multi -modal transportation choices, based on full range of costs and benefits, to slow the growth of congestion and serve the region's economic needs. • Housing Choices. Encourage expanded choices in housing locations and types, and improved access to jobs and opportunities • Natural Resource protection. Work with local and regional partners to conserve, protect and enhance the region's natural resources. Under the Metropolitan Land Planning Act, local communities must prepare and submit to the Council local comprehensive plans that are consistent with the Council's regional systems plans. Local communities have submitted plans for 2030 and these have been reviewed by the Council. 1. Development Framework Planning Area Objectives 0 -100 points Strategies for regional development relate directly to growth patterns within the region. The Framework communities are identified according to their regional planning area designation which is based on its geographic location, existing development patterns, forecast growth, planned land uses, and the availability of infrastructure. The project's relationship to Framework and TPP are addressed in the qualifying criteria. The objective of this section is to address the land use and transportation linkages and how the project supports development and the accommodation of growth for the communities affected. 45 What are the 2030 land uses proposed in the community(ies) adopted plan for the project area/corridor affected? Identify the TAZs that lie partially or wholly within the project limits. RESPONSE: How does the project support this 2030 land use plan in the project area? Refer to the land use map and provide the land use categories and their description from the adopted local comprehensive plan.' RESPONSE: Ilow does the project support 2030 forecasts for the project area? [Council staff will evaluate this criterion and will provide the following information to assist in the evaluation of this criterion: TAZ Project Area demographic profile population, household, employment and retail employment. The applicant does not need to provide a response.] 2. Progress Towards Affordable Housing Goals 0 -50 points NOTE. Information and analysis in this section will be provided by Council staff Methodology for Evaluating Progress Made Towards Affordable Housing Goals: Up to 50 points can be awarded to a project, based upon a community's or group of communities' progress in addressing their affordable housing goals for 1996 -2010. For communities that participate in the Livable communities Local Housing Incentives Program, data from their 1996 -2010 negotiated housing goals was used to determine the progress they have made toward providing opportunities to address their affordable housing goals. Eor communities that do not participate in the Local Housing Incentives Program, progress will be measured against what the benchmarks were for their community in the Council's LCA goal setting methodology used in determining goals for 1996 to 2010. Communities negotiated goals for both ownership and rental housing. Analysis consisted of comparing the goal, progress made to date and determining the percentage of the goal achieved for both ownership and rental combined. 4 Future Land Use map (planned land use 2030) and description for example: "low density residential — Mostly single - family homes with some two- family homes and open space within or related to a residential development at a gross density of 2 to 4 units per acre." "residential mixed use — Residential at a gross density of 7 to 30 units per acre, neighborhood commercial uses may be appropriate." "General Commercial —Broad range of businesses, generally highway - oriented, serving other businesses and City residents and requiring buffering from surrounding residential areas." "Agriculture — primarily agricultural purpose, including farming and horticulture, including farmstead or rural residence." [Examples from City of Coon Rapids Comprehensive Plan] 46 Example of Analysis: Scoring: Percent of Progress Made: Points Awarded 90 -100% Negotiated Goal Progress to Date Overall Progress Made - % Rental Units 900 200 20 Ownershi Units 200 125 5 Total Housing Units 1 1,100 325 30% Scoring: Percent of Progress Made: Points Awarded 90 -100% 50 71 -89% 40 51 -70% 30 31 -50% 20 11 -30% 10 1 -10% 5 For projects with 2 or more communities, scores are averaged and then applied to the project. Communities that do not have negotiated goals are given the same average score of the other communities within their group. 3. Land Use and Access Management Planning The Development Framework includes support for connected land use patterns served by an integrated street network. Access management along highways is a key component of planning for these objectives. In addition, various access management strategies can reduce crashes, improve traffic flow, and add operational capacity for the applicable roadway. Higher scores will be given to projects that are developed using a local access management plan and to projects located in communities that have a regulatory framework established to protect and improve access control in the future. Additional points will be awarded to projects that implement these plans by reducing undesired access points. 0 -50 points Reference and describe the local access management plan used to develop the proposed project, and describe the corresponding county or state access management plan which supports the regional road network. Higher scores will be awarded to projects developed with an approach that is consistent with county or state access management plans. RESPONSE: Provide and identify intersection spacing and signal spacing guidelines, and driveway allowance criteria used for the proposed project and the corresponding county or state access management guidelines. RESPONSE: Having the necessary regulatory framework is essential for protecting the efficient functioning of the regional roadway network. Reference (adoption date) and describe the local zoning and subdivision ordinance regulations that are in place to maintain the access plan as adjacent properties are developed and /or redeveloped. Higher scores will be awarded to projects in communities with existing or proposed local support of the access management plan through existing regulations or ordinances. RESPONSE: 47 4. Corridor Access Management Improvements 0 -50 points Projects that help to implement the access management plan by removing or modifying non- conforming access points will receive points in this criterion. Identify the access locations and access management that currently exists and that will be allowed once the project is completed. Indicate by the following classifications, the existing access locations inconsistent with the proposed access management approach and any access locations that will be modified: e. Private Residential Driveways RESPONSE: f Low - Volume Private Driveways * (Under 500 trips per day) RESPONSE: g. High - Volume Private Driveways * (Over 500 trips per day) RESPONSE: h. Public Streets RESPONSE: Private driveways may be commercial, industrial or institutional user such as school or hospitals. 5. Integration of Modes 0 -130 points The Transportation Policy Plan requires that explicit consideration of all users of the transportation system be considered in the planning and seeping phase of roadway projects. The integration of modes criteria evaluate the value of the proposed project in providing better accommodations for pedestrians, bicyclists, transit and freight vehicles. Such accommodation should be provided within the existing right -of -way and provide the same level of access as motor vehicles unless it is shown to be impractical. In such cases, the project may include facilitation of such travel outside of the roadway right -of -way along a close parallel route. "A" Minor Augmenters provide important regional connectivity within the more densely developed area inside of the interstate ring. Most Augmenters carry significant transit traffic and are located in more densely populated areas that are the most conducive in the region to travel by modes other than automobiles. In addition to providing through capacity for motor vehicles, they carry significant amounts of transit, bicycle, and pedestrian traffic. Pedestrians: Examples of pedestrian improvements include construction or reconstruction of walkways or multi -use paths, separating pedestrian walkways from vehicle traffic through the installation of a buffer such as a boulevard, and providing pedestrian lighting. Equally important to improving pedestrian movement along the project area is improving the safety and ease of pedestrian crossings of the roadways. Some examples of these kinds of improvements are installation of pedestrian countdown signals with crosswalks, reducing the effective crossing distance by installing curb extensions and pedestrian medians, and reducing the speed of vehicles making turning movements at intersections. Different treatments are appropriate for different types of roadway conditions. Include a map that shows all new or reconstructed walkways or multi -use paths that will be constructed as part of this project as well as all pathways that these walkways will connect to and any potential pedestrian destinations such as schools, residences, transit stops, parks, and businesses within '/4 mile of the project area that will be accessible to pedestrians. In the response 48 field, indicate the characteristics of these pedestrian facilities (i.e. multi -use trail, sidewalk, or crosswalk etc.) and whether they are brand new facilities or a replacement of an existing facility.. All pedestrian facilities must be designed to be ADA- compliant at a minimum. RESPONSE: Bicyclists: Examples of bicycle improvements include striping a bike lane or a marked shoulder that is 5 feet wide or greater, installing an off -road pathway where conditions favor one, and intersection treatments designed to reduce motor vehicle and bicycle conflict. Different treatments are appropriate for different types of roadway conditions. Include a map that shows all new or reconstructed bikeways that will be constructed (or striped) with this project, and show how they connect to an existing or planned bikeway network. Also show potential destinations along the roadway segment and within a 'A mite of the project area that will be accessible with this bikeway network such as schools, parks residences, transit stops, and businesses. In the response field, indicate the characteristics of these bicycle facilities (i.e. bike lane, striped shoulder, cycle track, multi -use trail etc.) and whether they are brand new facilities or a replacement of an existing facility. RESPONSE: Transit: Examples of transit improvements include improving accessibility to transit stops by pedestrians, installing bus stop amenities for passengers, and placing bus stops on the far side of intersections. In some cases, other improvements to the roadway, including curb bump -outs for bus stops or the construction of bus lanes can improve transit service reliability and speed along the roadway. Is there transit service on the roadway? If so, what elements of this project will enhance the mobility of transit vehicles, if any? What elements of this project will improve passenger access to transit stops? RESPONSE: Freight: Freight improvements will be evaluated on the role of the roadway in providing freight mobility. What is the current daily heavy commercial traffic along the project segment? Is the roadway used to access any of the regional intermodal freight terminals in Appendix J and does the road connect any of these terminals to a freeway? RESPONSE: E Maturity of Proiect Concept. 100 points Projects selected through this solicitation will be programmed for construction in 2015 or 2016. That is a fairly long time but it takes several years to complete preliminary engineering, environmental studies and acquire right -of -way. The region must manage the federal funds in each year of the TIP. Projects that are not implemented in their original program year are carried over to the next program year, or the funding sunset date. This requires other projects to shift program years to maintain fiscal balance in the TIP and STIR Proposed projects that have already completed some of the work are more likely to be 49 ready for funding authorization in their program year. A schedule is important to know what kind of work might be needed. Large projects that need right -of -way require more work than those that do not. 0-100 points Applications involving construction must complete the project implementation schedule found in Appendix K. A detailed schedule of events is expected for all phases of the project. Applications involving non- construction projects must include a detailed discussion of the timeframes involved for initiating and completing each phase of planned activities. Points under this criterion are assigned based on how many steps have been taken toward implementation of the project. These steps reflect a federally funded project development path. RESPONSE: Please complete the project implementation schedule found in Appendix K TOTAL: 1,200 POINTS 50 NON - FREEWAY PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL DEFINITION Principal Arterials are high - speed, high - capacity highways, including freeways and expressways that make up the Metropolitan Highway System. About 660 miles in total length, these routes carry the longest trips in the region and provide the highest speeds available during peak traffic periods. They connect the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) with urban areas and major cities in Minnesota and other states. Within the MUSA, they interconnect the metropolitan centers, regional business concentrations, important transportation terminals, and large institutional facilities. Within the regional solicitation process, only principal arterials of non - freeway design are eligible for funding. Principal Arterial projects must fall within one of the following types of projects: transportation system management, complete construction, reconstruction or rehabilitation of a segment of principal arterial along the entire project length, interchange construction, or conversion to a freeway design; and may include transit, bikeway or walkway components in the corridor. Principal Arterial (Non- Freeway Design) Purpose /Vision The Regional Development Framework anticipates a metropolitan area with over 3,600,000 people and 2,120,000 jobs by 2030. The dominant form of transportation to jobs, schools and personal business is the automobile. The principal arterial highways carry the longest trips in the region and provide the highest speeds available. GENERAL INFORMATION AND RESTRICTIONS A construction project must be a permanent improvement between logical termini (roadways of equal or higher functional classification) having independent utility. The term "independent utility" means the project provides benefits to air quality, crash reduction, etc... by itself and does not depend on any construction elements of the project being funded from other sources outside the regional solicitation, excluding the required non - federal match. The project must result in a completed segment which meets current design standards and which has an anticipated service life approximately that of a new facility. The project, including staged projects, must be structurally capable of handling all anticipated legal load limit vehicles. STP funds can be used for transit facilities as part of the overall project, and can be requested within the Non- Freeway Principal Arterial application. STP funds can only be used for project implementation or construction costs, such as excavation, construction, materials, and clean -up. They cannot be used for right -of -way acquisition, study completion, engineering, design, or other similar costs. Further, STP fiords cannot be used for noise barriers, drainage projects, fences, landscaping, or other similar costs as stand -alone projects. These items are eligible as part of a larger, eligible construction project. The benefits and costs of the project shall be estimated over the same eligible project length. The total project cost is defined as all construction components including components ineligible for federal funds. The total project cost does not include pre - construction costs or right -of -way. Projects selected to receive federal funding through this solicitation will be programmed in the regional Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) in years 2015 or 2016. When the selected projects are programmed, the TAB will increase both the federal amount and the non- federal match amount to account for any anticipated inflation. The inflated amount of federal funding in the TIP will not be adjusted further. 51 NON - FREEWAY PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL - QUALIFYING CRITERIA The applicant must show that the project meets all the following criteria to qualify for priority evaluation. Answer each criterion in a numbered sequence. Failure to respond to any of the qualifying criteria will result in a recommendation to disqualify your project. 1. The project must be consistent with the policies in the Metropolitan Council's officially adopted Metropolitan Development Guide, which includes the Transportation Policy Plan (TPP) (2010) and the Regional Development Framework (2004). Consistency with the TPP includes its appendix, which contains the regional functional classification criteria. Funding allocation to projects involving interchange construction and reconstruction on the Principal Arterial system (regardless of whether the project is on the Principal Arterial or and intersecting "A" Minor Arterial) are made conditional on the successful completion of the Highway hnterchange Requests Procedures described in Appendix E of the Transportation Policy Plan. The applicant must list the documents and corresponding policy numbers or portions of text that help illustrate the project's consistency. RESPONSE: The project must be included in, be part of, or address a transportation problem or need identified in one of the following: 1) an approved local or county comprehensive plan found to be consistent with Metropolitan Council plans; 2) a locally approved capital improvement program; 3) an officially adopted corridor study (trunk highway studies must be approved by Mn/DOT and Metropolitan Council); or 4) the official plan or program of the applicant agency. It also must not conflict with the goals and policies in these adopted regional plans; the 2030 Transportation Policy Plan (2010), the 2030 Regional Framework (2004), and the 2030 Regional Parks Policy Plan (2010). The applicant must reference the appropriate comprehensive plan, CIP, approved corridor study document, or other plan or program and provide copies of the applicable pages. RESPONSE: 3. The proposed project must be identified as on a Non - Freeway Principal Arterial shown on the TAB approved roadway functional classification map adopted by the TAB on or before May 18, 2011 and recorded in the Council's electronic file. The vast majority of the project must be physically located on the Non - Freeway Principal Arterial roadway between logical termini. The project may include construction on small portions of non - eligible roads, as long as the construction is essential to the operation of the entire project. Examples include but are not limited to reconstruction of the approaches on intersecting collector roads and construction or reconstruction of on -ramps or off - ramps. The applicant must provide a map or sketch of the project relative to the Non - Freeway Principal Arterial system. RESPONSE: 4. STP funds are available for roadway construction and reconstruction on new alignments or within existing right -of -way, including associated construction or installation of traffic signals, signs, utilities, bikeway or walkway components and public transit components. The cost of constructing a new bridge deck or reconstructing an existing bridge deck is eligible but the remainder of the superstructure and all elements of the substructure are not eligible. The applicant must describe the proposed project and state that the application includes only the eligible components. RESPONSE: 52 Studies, preliminary engineering, design, construction engineering, etc. are not eligible for STP funding and should not be included in the required local match or the total project cost. Right -of- way costs are not eligible for STP funding and should not be included in the required non - federal match or the total project cost. Noise barriers, drainage projects, fences, landscaping, etc., are not eligible for STP funding as stand -alone projects, but are eligible if included as part of a larger, eligible project. The applicant must state that pre - construction work and ROW costs are not part of the total project cost in this application. RESPONSE: 6. An STP construction or reconstruction project must be a permanent improvement. Traffic management projects as part of a construction project are exempt from this policy. Temporary construction is defined as work that must be essentially replaced in the immediate future (within 5 years). Staged construction is considered permanent rather than temporary so long as future stages add to, rather than replace, previous work. The applicant must state that the proposed project is a permanent improvement and does not replace any regionally funded project that was opened to traffic within five years. RESPONSE: Applicants can request up to a cap of $7,000,000 in STP funds for a specific Non - Freeway Principal Arterial project. Other federal funds may be combined with the requested STP funds, but the source(s) must be identified in the application. The cost of preparing a project for funding authorization can be substantial. For that reason, the project's federal cost must exceed $1,000,000. The applicant must show the requested federal amount and total project cost on the cover page. RESPONSE: 8. STP funds awarded in the regional solicitation must be matched with non - federal finds. The non- federal match for any STP project must be at least 20% of the total cost. The applicant must state that it is responsible for the local (nonfederal) share. If the applicant expects any other agency to provide all or part of the local match, the applicant must include a letter or resolution from the other agency agreeing to participate financially in the project's construction. RESPONSE: 9. The applicant must include a letter from the agency with jurisdiction over the road indicating that it is aware of and understands the project being submitted, and that it commits to operate and maintain the facility for its design life and not change the use of any right -of -way acquired without prior approval from MN/DOT and the Federal Highway Administration. RESPONSE: 53 NON - FREEWAY PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL - PRIORITIZING CRITERIA Applicants must respond to each of the following prioritizing criteria. Label your responses clearly. If a criterion is not applicable to your project, explain why. A. Relative importance of the route as a Principal Arterial. 100 points Principal arterials are the most heavily traveled roads in the region, carrying 53% of the total vehicle miles of travel. Non - freeway Principal Arterial generally do not carry as much traffic as controlled - access freeways, but are important to mobility within the metro area and connect the Twin Cities to other parts of Minnesota and Wisconsin. Non- freeway Principal Arterials are located in the urban core, the developed and developing suburbs and in rural areas. Although all non - freeway Principal Arterials are part of the metropolitan highway system, the relative importance of each is not the same. Some non - freeway Principal Arterials play a more significant role than others in providing roadway capacity for autos, trucks and transit buses. In some cases, it is the only arterial roadway available to provide medium and long -range tips for many miles. The following criteria are intended to measure the relative importance of each Principal Arterial route submitted for funding in this solicitation. Definition and characteristics of the Principal Arterial route. 0 -100 points The applicant must respond to the two items below and provide a map to help answer items a) and b). The Principal Arterial `route' is defined as the uninterrupted length of the arterial that provides medium to long trips in the seven - county metropolitan area. The route may be an existing or planned road on the TAB adopted system. The route may be longer than the proposed project and include freeway sections, but it must be continuous and include only the portion of the roadway designated as a Principal Arterial and be of a non- freeway design. The endpoints of the route must be a principal or other minor arterial, or the boundary of the seven - county region. Two submittals on the same route must be at least 7 miles apart. Provide a map showing the length of the Principal Arterial route and the closest parallel `A' Minor or Principal Arterials on both sides of the Principal Arterial. Points under this criterion are assigned based on the current and forecasted traffic volume on the Principal Arterial route and the current transit ridership on the Principal Arterial route. a) Provide the current (2009) and forecasted (2030) average daily traffic volume at two or more locations on the Principal Arterial route. MN /DOT 50- series maps should be used for current counts. Use approved city or county comprehensive plans, Met Council, accepted State Aid traffic factors by county, or a transportation study with documented acceptable forecasting methodology for forecasted volume. RESPONSE: b) Is public transit currently provided on this Principal Arterial route? If yes, what is the average annual ridership? The applicant does not need to provide this information in its funding application. Data will be provided by the Metropolitan Council staff based on the project location map and description. RESPONSE: 54 B Deficiencies and Solutions on Principal Arterial. 275 points The regional solicitation process is one means of implementing regional plans. The region's Transportation Policy Plan states that the regional highway and street system will be preserved, managed, improved and expanded to support existing and planned land uses and safety and mobility needs consistent with the Regional Development Framework, the Transportation Policy Plan and approved local and county comprehensive plans. The following criteria reflect these objectives. Crash Reduction. 0 -150 points Calculate the total number of crashes reduced due to improvements on the Principal Arterial made by the proposed project. Points will be awarded based on the total three -year number of crashes projected to be reduced by the proposed project. The applicant must base the estimate of crash reduction on the methodology found in Appendix E. The applicant must calculate the frequency using the Mn /DOT TIS system average for calendar years 2007 through 2009. RESPONSE: 2. Air Quality. The Transportation Policy Plan strongly supports environmental considerations when making transportation funding decisions. The Council supports funding priorities for transportation projects that ensure prevention of air quality violations through the reduction of mobile source emissions. The applicant must show that the project will reduce emissions and help the region to maintain its attainment of federal carbon monoxide standards. All assumptions and calculations must be clearly documented and explained in order to receive points. The applicant must include documentation of how the VMT reduction was determined and specify the speed used for the assumptions. Speed assumptions shall be based on the methodology found in Appendix F. Points under this criterion will be awarded based on the reduction of carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen oxides (NOx), and /or volatile organic compounds (VOC) emissions the proposed project is expected to provide and if the project is near an air quality monitoring site. 0 -50 points The applicant must demonstrate through a quantitative analysis that CO, NOx, and /or VOC emissions (in KILOGRAMS /DAY) will be reduced compared to the no -build alternative. The applicant must estimate CO, NOx, and /or VOC emissions reductions using the MOBILE6 emissions factors and vehicle emissions reduction worksheet in Appendix G. RESPONSE: 3. Congestion Reduction. 0 -75 points The applicant must show that the proposed project will reduce congestion at the most congested location on the Principal Arterial. The applicant must include the current volume to capacity (v /c) ratios in the AM and PM peak hours and the improvement in the ratios * Applicants should request crash data from Mn /DOT as early as possible. An agency that wishes to dispute the results of their crash data requests can contact Ryan Coddington at 651 -234 -7841 (or Ryan.Coddington@statemn.us) to reconcile those differences. 55 resulting from the project. Projects that have low existing We ratios will receive less credit for the improvement resulting from the project than projects that address a problematic existing v/c ratio. The applicant must use the methodology, worksheet and look -up tables found in Appendix H. The applicant must conduct a corridor analysis for new alignments, comparing parallel routes that will be affected by the project. RESPONSE: C Cost Effectiveness. 300 points The Regional Development Framework and Transportation Policy Plan document the need for adequate transportation funding to implement regional transportation plans. The region must allocate transportation funds in such a way that the selected projects provide the most benefit for the amount of funding requested. Cost effectiveness is an essential component of the regional solicitation process. Cost effectiveness calculations must be based on the total cost of the project, not just the portion of the project eligible for federal funding. Crash Reduction. 0 -125 points The applicant must calculate the cost per crash reduced by the proposed project. The applicant must divide the total cost of the project by the answer from criterion B.1. Points will be awarded based on the relative cost per crash reduced. RESPONSE: 2, Air Quality 0 -75 points The applicant must calculate the cost per kilogram per day that will be reduced by the proposed project compared to the no -build alternative. The applicant must divide the total project cost by the estimated reduction in CO, NOx, and /or VOC emissions per day calculated in question B.2. RESPONSE: Congestion reduction. 0 -100 points The applicant must calculate the cost per increase in hourly person throughput provided by the proposed improvement. The applicant must use the worksheet in Appendix 1. Points will be awarded based on the lowest cost per increase in person throughput, but if there is little congestion under existing conditions fewer points will be awarded for increasing person throughput. RESPONSE: D Development Framework Implementation. 425 points The Metropolitan Development Guide is comprised of the 2030 Regional Development Framework and system plans for transportation, including highways, transit and aviation; water resources management; and regional parks and trails. Together, the Development Framework and system plans create a vision for the region and are intended to help ensure the orderly, economical development of the seven - county area. The Framework is organized around four overall goals: 56 • Efficient Growth. Work with local communities to accommodate growth in a flexible, connected and efficient manner. • Multi -modal Transportation. Plan and invest in multi -modal transportation choices, based on full range of costs and benefits, to slow the growth of congestion and serve the region's economic needs. • Housing Choices. Encourage expanded choices in housing locations and types, and improved access to jobs and opportunities • Natural Resource protection. Work with local and regional partners to conserve, protect and enhance the region's natural resources. Under the Metropolitan Land Planning Act, local communities must prepare and submit to the Council local comprehensive plans that are consistent with the Council's regional systems plans. Local communities have submitted plans for 2030 and these have been reviewed by the Council. 1. Development Framework Planning Area Objectives 0 -100 points Strategies for regional development relate directly to growth patterns within the region. The Framework communities are identified according to their regional planning area designation which is based on its geographic location, existing development patterns, forecast growth, planned land uses, and the availability of infrastructure. The project's relationship to Framework and TPP are addressed in the qualifying criteria. The objective of this section is to address the land use and transportation linkages and how the project supports development and the accommodation of growth for the communities affected. What are the 2030 land uses proposed in the community(ies) adopted plan for the project area/corridor affected? Identify the TAZs that lie partially or wholly within the project limits. RESPONSE: How does the project support this 2030 land use plan in the project area? Refer to the land use map and provide the land use categories and their description from the adopted local comprehensive plan.' RESPONSE: How does the project support 2030 forecasts for the project area? [Council staff will evaluate this criterion and will provide the following information to assist in the evaluation of this criterion: TAZ Project Area demographic profile population, household, employment and retail employment. The applicant does not need to provide a response.] 2. Progress Towards Affordable Housing Goals 0 -50 points 5 Future Land Use map (planned land use 2030) and description for example: "low density residential — Mostly single - family homes with some two - family homes and open space within or related to a residential development at a gross density of 2 to 4 units per acre." "residential mixed use— Residential at a gross density of 7 to 30 units per acre, neighborhood commercial uses may be appropriate." "General Commercial —Broad range of businesses, generally highway - oriented, serving other businesses and City residents and requiring buffering from surrounding residential areas." "Agriculture— primarily agricultural purpose, including farming and horticulture, including farmstead or rural residence." [Examples from City of Coon Rapids Comprehensive Plan] 57 NOTE: Information and analysis in this section will be provided by Council staff Methodology for Evaluating Progress Made Towards Affordable Housing Goals Up to 50 points can be awarded to a project, based upon a community's or group of communities' progress in addressing their affordable housing goals for 1996 -2010. For communities that participate in the Livable communities Local Housing Incentives Program, data from their 1996 -2010 negotiated housing goals was used to determine the progress they have made toward providing opportunities to address their affordable housing goals. For communities that do not participate in the Local Housing Incentives Program, progress will be measured against what the benchmarks were for their community in the Council's LCA goal setting methodology used in determining goals for 1996 to 2010. Communities negotiated goals for both ownership and rental housing. Analysis consisted of comparing the goal, progress made to date and determining the percentage of the goal achieved for both ownership and rental combined. Example of Analysis: Scoring: Percent of Progress Made 90 -1.00% 71 -89% 51 -70% 31 -50% 11 -30% 1 -10% Points Awarded: 50 40 30 20 10 5 For projects with 2 or more communities, scores are averaged and then applied to the project. Communities that do not have negotiated goals are given the same average score of the other communities within their group. 3. Land Use and Access Management Planning 0 -100 points The Development Framework includes support for connected land use patterns served by an integrated street network. Access management along highways is a key component of planning for these objectives. In addition, various access management strategies can reduce crashes, improve traffic flow, and add operational capacity for the applicable roadway. Higher scores will be given to projects that are 58 Negotiated Goal Progress to Date Overall Progress Made - % Rental Units 900 200 Ownership Units 200 125 Total Housing Units 1,100 325 30% Scoring: Percent of Progress Made 90 -1.00% 71 -89% 51 -70% 31 -50% 11 -30% 1 -10% Points Awarded: 50 40 30 20 10 5 For projects with 2 or more communities, scores are averaged and then applied to the project. Communities that do not have negotiated goals are given the same average score of the other communities within their group. 3. Land Use and Access Management Planning 0 -100 points The Development Framework includes support for connected land use patterns served by an integrated street network. Access management along highways is a key component of planning for these objectives. In addition, various access management strategies can reduce crashes, improve traffic flow, and add operational capacity for the applicable roadway. Higher scores will be given to projects that are 58 developed using a local access management plan and to projects located in communities that have a regulatory framework established to protect and improve access control in the future. Additional points will be awarded to projects that implement these plans by reducing undesired access points. Reference and describe the local access management plan used to develop the proposed project, and describe the corresponding county or state access management plan which supports the regional road network. Higher scores will be awarded to projects developed with an approach that is consistent with county or state access management plans. RESPONSE Provide and identify intersection spacing and signal spacing guidelines, and driveway allowance criteria used for the proposed project and the corresponding county or state access management guidelines. RESPONSE: Having the necessary regulatory framework is essential for protecting the efficient functioning of the regional roadway network. Reference (adoption date) and describe the local zoning and subdivision ordinance regulations that are in place to maintain the access plan as adjacent properties are developed and /or redeveloped. Higher scores will be awarded to projects in communities with existing or proposed local support of the access management plan through existing regulations or ordinances. RESPONSE: 4. Corridor Access Management Improvements 0 -100 points Projects that help to implement the access management plan by removing or modifying non - conforming access points will receive points in this criterion. Identify the access locations and access management that currently exists and that will be allowed once the project is completed. Indicate by the following classifications, the existing access locations inconsistent with the proposed access management approach and any access locations that will be modified: i. Private Residential Driveways /Field Entrances RESPONSE: j. Low - Volume Private Driveways * (Under 500 trips per day) RESPONSE: k. High - Volume Private Driveways * (Over 500 trips per day) RESPONSE: 1. Public Streets RESPONSE: * Private driveways may be commercial, industrial or institutional uses such as school or hospitals. 5. Integration of Modes 0 -75 points The Transportation Policy Plan requires that explicit consideration of all users of the transportation system be considered in the planning and seeping phase of roadway projects. The 59 integration of modes criteria evaluate the value of the proposed project in providing better accommodations for pedestrians, bicyclists, transit and freight vehicles. Such accommodation should be provided within the existing right -of -way and provide the same level of access as motor vehicles unless it is shown to be impractical. In such cases, the project may include facilitation of such travel outside of the roadway right-of-way along a close parallel route. Principal Arterials are the highest capacity highways that make up the metropolitan highway system and carry single occupant vehicles, freight vehicles, and express buses. With some exceptions, non - motorized travel is not well - suited to travel alongside non - freeway principal arterials but without careful planning and development, this roadway type can be a barrier to such travel because it has high speeds, and provides few and difficult crossing opportunities. Pedestrians: Examples of pedestrian improvements include construction or reconstruction of walkways or multi -use paths, separating pedestrian walkways from vehicle traffic through the installation of a buffer such as a boulevard, and providing pedestrian lighting. Equally important to improving pedestrian movement along the project area is improving the safety and ease of pedestrian crossings of the roadways. Some examples of these kinds of improvements are installation of pedestrian countdown signals with crosswalks, reducing the effective crossing distance by installing curb extensions and pedestrian medians, and reducing the speed of vehicles making turning movements at intersections. Different treatments are appropriate for different types of roadway conditions. Include a map that shows all new or reconstructed walkways or multi -use paths that will be constructed as part of this project as well as all pathways that these walkways will connect to and any potential pedestrian destinations such as schools, residences, transit stops, parks, and businesses within i / 4 mile of the project area that will be accessible to pedestrians. In the response field, indicate the characteristics of these pedestrian facilities (i.e. multi-use trail, sidewalk, or crosswalk etc.) and whether they are brand new facilities or a replacement of an existing facility.. All pedestrian facilities must be designed to be ADA- compliant at a minimum. RESPONSE: Bicyclists: Examples of bicycle improvements include striping a bike lane or a marked shoulder that is 5 feet wide or greater, installing an off -road pathway where conditions favor one, and intersection treatments designed to reduce motor vehicle and bicycle conflict. Different treatments are appropriate for different types of roadway conditions. Include a map that shows all new or reconstructed bikeways that will be constructed (or striped) with this project, and show how they connect to an existing or planned bikeway network. Also show potential destinations along the roadway segment and within a 1 /4 mile of the project area that will be accessible with this bikeway network such as schools, parks residences, transit stops, and businesses. In the response field, indicate the characteristics of these bicycle facilities (i.e. bike lane, striped shoulder, cycle track, multi -use trail etc.) and whether they are brand new facilities or a replacement of an existing facility.. RESPONSE: Transit: Examples of transit improvements include improving accessibility to transit stops by pedestrians, installing bus stop amenities for passengers, and placing bus stops on the far side of intersections. In some cases, other improvements to the roadway, including curb bump -outs for bus stops or the construction of bus lanes can improve transit service reliability and speed along the roadway. 60 Is there transit service on the roadway? If so, what elements of this project will enhance the mobility of transit vehicles, if any? What elements of this project will improve passenger access to transit stops? RESPONSE: Freight: Freight improvements will be evaluated on the role of the roadway in providing freight mobility. What is the current daily heavy commercial traffic along the project segment? Is the roadway used to access any of the regional intermodal freight terminals in Appendix J and does the road connect any of these terminals to a freeway? RESPONSE: F Maturity of Proeect Concept. 100 points Projects selected through this solicitation will be programmed for construction in 2015 or 2016. That is a fairly long time but it takes several years to complete preliminary engineering, environmental studies and acquire right -of -way. The region must manage the federal funds in each year of the TIP. Projects that are not implemented in their original program year are carried over to the next program year, or the funding sunset date. This requires other projects to shift program years to maintain fiscal balance in the TIP and STIR Proposed projects that have already completed some of the work are more likely to be ready for funding authorization in their program year. A schedule is important to know what kind of work might be needed. Large projects that need right -of -way require more work than those that do not. 0 -100 points Applications involving construction must complete the project implementation schedule found in Appendix K. A detailed schedule of events is expected for all phases of the project. Applications involving non - construction projects must include a detailed discussion of the timeframes involved for initiating and completing each phase of planned activities. Points under this criterion are assigned based on how many steps have been taken toward implementation of the project. These steps reflect a federally funded project development path. RESPONSE: Please complete the project implementation schedule found in Appendix K TOTAL: 1,200 POINTS 61 BIKEWAYS and WALKWAYS DEFINITION Bikeway /walkway projects must meet one or both of the following definitions to qualify for further evaluation: A BICYCLE TRANSPORTATION FACILITY DESIGNED PURSUANT TO AN OVERALL PLAN FOR THE TRANSPORTATION USE OF BICYCLES, OR OTHER VEHICLES PROPELLED BY HUMAN POWER. Specifically, a "bicycle transportation facility" means new or improved lanes, bike paths, marked bike routes or shoulders for use by bicyclists serving major traffic generators. STP funds may be used for traffic control devices, shelters, and parking facilities for bicycles when integrated with a major bicycle facility. Improvements in safety, speed and attractiveness must receive high priority in the design of bicycle facilities to enable bicycling to compete as an alternative mode of transportation. A PEDESTRIAN TRANSPORTATION FACILITY DESIGNED PURSUANT TO AN OVERALL PLAN AND DESIGNATED FOR THE USE OF PEDESTRIANS. Pedestrian transportation facilities are defined as new or improved paths, skyways, traffic control devices, shelters and other capital improvements designed to accommodate pedestrian needs. Bicycle /Pedestrian Facilities Purpose /Vision The region's transportation plan recognizes travel on foot and by bicycle as important elements of transportation. These modes are critical to transit friendly land uses that are denser and mixed in their development patterns. The pedestrian and bicyclist both support and are supported by this development pattern. Facilities provided through this process will support the region's bicycle and pedestrian systems by filling gaps and overcoming barriers, thereby providing additional access and mobility to the region's residents and a cost - effective alternative to driving on congested roadways. GENERAL INFORMATION AND RESTRICTIONS Bicycle or walkway projects which fail to meet the definition of a "major bicycle transportation facility" or "pedestrian transportation facility" should consider other forms of funding. One possible source is the Transportation Enhancement Program (TE), found elsewhere in this document. Bicycle and pedestrian facilities are eligible under the TE program and the criteria are less restrictive. A construction project must be a permanent improvement having independent utility. The term "independent utility" means the project provides benefits described in the application by itself and does not depend on any construction elements of the project being funded from other sources outside the regional solicitation, excluding the required non - federal match. The applicant must attach a map, with scale and north arrow, highlighting the proposed project and all existing and planned bikeways or walkways clearly marked and labeled as to construction type (separate bike /walk path, bike /walk lanes /paved shoulders or signed bike /walk routes). The applicant shall also provide maps showing how the proposed project is connected to or a part of the existing and /or planned system of bicycle /pedestrian facilities, typical cross - sections of the facility for each segment where the design changes, and cross section continuity where the project connects to the existing system. Proposed designs for projects must meet the requirements of the Mn /DOT State Aid process. Design exceptions (for all federal projects) and variances to the State Aid standards (for projects using State Aid funds) are reviewed and may be granted during final design, not through this solicitation process. Depending on the project, more stringent standards may apply. Proposed designs for bikeways should take consideration of MN /DOT Bicycle Transportation Planning and Design Guidelines in the Bikeway Facility Design Manual. Projects selected to receive federal funding through this solicitation will be programmed in the regional Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) in years 2015 or 2016. When the selected projects are 62 programmed, the TAB will increase both the federal amount and the non - federal match amount to account for any anticipated inflation. The inflated amount of federal funding in the TIP will not be adjusted further. BIKEWAYS and WALKWAYS - QUALIFYING CRITERIA The applicant must show that the project meets all the following criteria to qualify for priority evaluation._ Answer each criterion in a numbered sequence. Failure to respond to any of the qualifying criteria will result in a recommendation to disqualify your project. 1. The applicant must demonstrate that the bikeway or walkway project is consistent with adopted regional plans; namely, the Metropolitan Council's Development Guide, including the Transportation Policy Plan and the Regional Development Framework. The applicant must identify how the project is consistent with the adopted plans, and cite which specific plans, policies, and /or sections of teal' are applicable, and on which pages they can be found. RESPONSE: The proposed underpass project implements several strategies listed in the Metropolitan Council's 2030 Transportation Policy Plan: Under Policy 18: Providing Pedestrian and Bicycle Travel Systems: Strategy 18a. Bicycle and Pedestrian Regional Investment Priorities: The Council will prioritize federal funding for bicycle and pedestrian improvements based on their ability to accomplish regional transportation objectives for bicycling or walking in a cost- effective manner and improving access to major destinations. - This project will provide the most cost - effective grade separation of 70 '' Street (CSAII 22). Incorporating the underpass into the proposed intersection improvements for the 70` Street (CSAH 22) and Hardwood Avenue intersection planned by Washington County will provide the only economical way to grade separate the intersection. At a later date, the underpass would be unfeasible. A pedestrian overpass bridge would be significantly more expensive than taking advantage of this underpass opportunity. Strategy 18b. Connectivity to Transit: Recognizing the importance of walking and bicycling to a multimodal transportation system, the Council will strongly encourage local units of government to develop a safe and attractive pedestrian environment near major transit corridors and stations with linkages for pedestrians and bicyclists from origins and destinations to buses and trains. - This project will provide a safe connection to a significant transit corridor within the City (80"' Street) by way of the Hardwood Avenue Trail. Strategy 18c. Local Planning for Bicycling and Walking: The Metropolitan Council encourages local planning for bicycle and pedestrian mobility by requiring that a local bicycle or pedestrian project must be consistent with an adopted plan to be considered eligible for federal transportation funding. - Providing a safe crossing of the high speed, high volume 70" Street (CSAH 22) will encourage residents north of 70 Street (CSAH 22) to consider other modes of transportation such as walking or bicycling to access key destinations within the City, including the Washington County library, post office, shopping and restaurant opportunities, city hall, police station, as well as to the City's Hardwood, Hidden Valley, West Draw and Oakwood park facilities. Additionally, the underpass on the Hardwood Avenue trail will provide a connection to the transit facilities located on 80th Street. 63 Strategy Ige. Multimodal Roadway Design: Local and state agencies wilt implement a multimodal roadway system and design and planning for principal or minor arterial road construction and reconstruction projects will explicitly consider off -road walkway and both on- and off -road bicycle accommodation with special emphasis placed on travel barrier removal and safety for bicyclists and pedestrians. - This project proposes to remove a major barrier to pedestrians and bicyclists traveling through the City of Cottage Grove. 70` Street (CSAH 22) is a high speed, high volume roadway that presents a physical and psychological barrier to residents wishing to travel north/south within the central area of the City. The residents have expressed alarm about the inability to safely cross the 70` Sheet (CSAH 22) and Hardwood Avenue intersection. If the barrier were eliminated, pedestrians would be able to travel freely from park to park, trail to trail, and home to shopping without fear of crossing 70` Street (CSAH 22). Individuals who may need additional time to cross the intersection would not have to fear the wide multi -lane, high - speed, high traffic county road with the proposed ADA accessible grade separated crossing of 70" Street (CSAH 22). The underpass also opens new opportunities for the new bicycler or the family that wants a safe environment to walk or bike with their children to area parks. The project must be included in, be part of, or address a transportation problem or need identified in one of the following: 1) an approved local or county comprehensive plan found to be consistent with Metropolitan Council plans; 2) a locally approved capital improvement program; 3) an officially adopted corridor study (trunk highway studies must be approved by Mn/DOT and Metropolitan Council); or 4) the official plan or program of the applicant agency. It also must not conflict with the goals and policies in these adopted regional plans; the 2030 Transportation Policy Plan (2010), the 2030 Regional Framework (2004), and the 2030 Regional Parks Policy Plan (2010). The applicant must reference the appropriate comprehensive plan, CIP, approved corridor study document, or other plan or program and provide copies of the applicable pages. RESPONSE: • Washington County's CIP addresses the intersection improvements in 2015, • Washingow County's Comprehensive Plan identifies issues with the intersection and depicts the county and regional trail system, • Cottage Grove's current CIP addresses proposed improvements at the intersection, • Cottage Grove 2030 Comprehensive Plan outlines the proposed improvements at the 70 Street (CSAH 22) and Hardwood Avenue interesection. • A Corridor Analysis Report was prepared in 2010 for 70`" Street (CSAH 22) from Goodview Avenue to Hinton Avenue. The proposed project is consistent with the recommendations of that study. The proposed project addresses the following goals and policies in the City of Cottage Grove 2030 Comprehensive Plan: POLICY 5.7 The trailway system will be separated from roadways whenever feasible. - This project will provide a grade separation to remove pedestrian traffic from the 70` Street (CSAH 22) and Hardwood Avenue intersection. POLICY 5.10 The trailway system will include a variety of surfaces, slopes, and linear distance that will accommodate the needs of all segments of the general population. The system will be implemented to conform to the Americans with Disabilities Act, except when topography or other environmental constraints prohibit meeting the majority of the standards. 64 - The project will be ADA compliant. The proposed underpass will provide a safer, smoother, less intimadating crossing of a high -speed roadway, which is particularily important for individuals that may require additional crossing time. "A main goal of the trails plan is to link together the major pedestrian generators in the City such as schools, parks, and commercial development. Trail crossing locations along collectors and arterials should be carefully considered to maximize trail user safety." - This project aims to maximize safety for trail users by creating a grade separated crossing of 70 Street (CSAH 22). The proposed trail will provide a connection of the Hardwood Avenue trail, connecting residents north of 70 °i Street (CSAH 22) with the parks, community facilities and commercial properties along 80` Street. 3. A project must be a permanent improvement having independent utility. The term "independent utility" means the project provides benefits described in the application by itself and does not depend on any construction elements of the project being funded from other sources outside the regional solicitation, excluding the required non - federal match. The applicant must state that the proposed construction project is a permanent improvement. RESPONSE: While the construction of the pedestrian underpass considers future Washington County improvements to CSAI122, the project is a permanent improvement having independent utility. The project can be constructed independent of, or in conjunction with, the future County improvements. A corridor study was prepared for this segment of CSAH 22 that depicted an underpass at this location. In working with the County, the City has determined the best location and design features for the underpass. The City does recognize the importance of underpass installation prior to the roadway construction occurring. The underpass could be constricted as an early phase of the roadway project, or could be constructed as a stand -alone project years ahead of roadway construction. The City will continue to coordinate with Washington County related to the timing of the improvements. 4. STP funds for bikeways and walkways are intended for facilities that provide an alternative mode of travel for purposeful trips, such as commuting or shopping. The applicant must demonstrate that the proposed facility serves a significant transportation purpose rather than only a recreational purpose. RESPONSE: A large commercial /retail area exists approximately 1 mile south of 70 Street (CSAH 22) along 80"' Street. An existing trail runs north/south along the boulevard of Hardwood Avenue and connects to this popular shopping area. The pedestrian underpass will eliminate a barrier to individuals seeking to utilize alternative modes of transportation, such as walking or biking, to access the many services, shops and restaurants that Cottage Grove has to offer. The trail connection also provides better connectivity to the regional trail system, city facilities, library, County Parks and the City of St. Paul Park. If the barrier of 70 ° i Street (CSAH 22) were eliminated pedestrians would be able to flow freely from park to park, trail to trail, and home to shopping without fear of crossing 70 Street (CSAH 22). Families would feel safer taking their children to the park, the fishing pond or to get an ice cream cone. Individuals who may need additional time to cross the intersection would not have to fear the wide multi -lane, high- speed, high traffic county road. The ADA accessible crossing will provide increased opportunities for fishing, bird watching or meeting a friend for coffee at local coffee shop. This connection could cause individuals to reconsider 65 Metro Transit, because a challenge that was standing in their way has been removed. The overall level of use would increase on the regional trail system, along with the City's local trails. This underpass now opens new opportunities for the novice bicycler or the family that wants a safe environment to walk or bike with their children. 5. If the project provides a grade separated crossing over a significant barrier such as a railroad or trunk highway, the applicant must demonstrate that the project is designed to prevent, discourage or minimize at -grade crossings. The applicant must further demonstrate that the project is designed to prohibit crossing for a reasonable distance in each direction from the crossing so as to maximize the usefulness of the grade separation. RESPONSE: A pedestrian underpass is the most cost effective solution to eliminate the at- grade crossing at this location. This intersection presents the most viable location for a pedestrian underpass as the city's trail system funnels to this location. No other crossing along the 70 Street (CSAH 22) corridor was determined to be a reasonable location for a grade separation due to lack of right -of -way available, grade or existing trail network connections. The 70" Street (CSAH 22) barrier is currently preventing pedestrians and cyclists from accessing local and regional parks, connecting with regional trail networks, and enjoying the commercial and retail area of Cottage Grove. Residents have continually voiced concerns about the inability of pedestrians and cyclists to safely cross 70' Street (CSAH 22). The proposed pedestrian underpass will be the only grade separated crossing along the 70" Street (CSAH 22) corridor as it passes through the City. The roadway has a projected Year 2030 ADT of 20,000 and is also a vital link to the City's East Ravine Development area of mixed use, single family residential, commercial and retail. 6. TAB will not provide fiords for normal sidewalk construction or reconstruction adjacent to functionally classified local or collector streets. RESPONSE: 70"' Street (CSAH 22) is a Minor Arterial roadway in this location. Projected traffic volumes are estimated at 20,000 vehicles per day at this intersection. The underpass will provide a safe connection for a trail network that is comprised of local, county and regional trails. STP funds for bikeway and walkway facilities can only be used for the implementation costs of the construction project, including construction, right of way acquisition, materials, and clean-up. STP funds cannot be used for study completion, engineering, design, or other similar costs and should not be included in the total project cost or non - federal match. Further, STP funds cannot be used for noise barriers, drainage projects, fences, landscaping, or other similar costs as stand -alone projects, but are eligible if included as part of a larger otherwise eligible project. RESPONSE: Cottage Grove is requesting $1,000,000, which is 80% of the total estimated project construction cost of $1,200,000. The City of Cottage Grove is committed to providing at least 20% for the 70 Street (CSAH 22) pedestrian underpass and trail connections. The 20% cost share will be a hard match provided by the City's Capital Improvement funds. The requested funding is only for eligible, construction related items. The City is committed to funding the engineering, design, and other similar costs. 8. The applicant must demonstrate that the facility will be available to and serve the general public. Skyways that connect two private buildings are not eligible. A skyway must connect to a public building and be open to the public during the same hours as the system of skyways to which the proposed project is linked. Bikeways must also be accessible and available to the general public. RESPONSE: The proposed improvements will meet all ADA requirements for pedestrians utilizing the facility. The funded activities will be accessable to the general public and is intended for their use. 9. The applicant must include a letter from the agency with jurisdiction over the final project indicating that it is aware of the project and agrees to operate and maintain the project for its useful 66 life. The applicant must assure that it will not change the use of any right -of -way acquired without prior approval from the Minnesota Department of Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration. RESPONSE: A letter of support from Washington County is included in the appendix. The underpass will be located within the Washington County (CSAH 22) right of way and the City (Hardwood Avenue) right of way. No additional right of way is necessary for this project. The right of way is currently being used for roadway, pathway and sidewalk purposes. No changes to this use are planned. 10. Applicants can request up to a cap of $5,500,000 in STP funds for a specific Bikeway /Walkway project. Other federal funds may be combined with the requested STP funds, but the source(s) must be identified in the application. The cost of preparing a project for funding authorization can be substantial. Por that reason, the project's federal cost must exceed $250,000. The applicant must show the requested federal amount and total project cost on the cover page. One unit of government, such as a county, could "package" more than one small project to meet the minimum level. A project may include separate but related elements and support facilities that are not at the same location. RESPONSE: Cottage Grove is requesting $1,000,000, which exceeds the minimum amount of $250,000. 11. STP funds awarded in the regional solicitation must be matched with non-federal funds. The non- federal match for any STP project must be at least 20% of the total cost. The applicant must state that it is responsible for the local (nonfederal) share. If the applicant expects any other agency to provide all or part of the local match, the applicant must include a letter or resolution from the other agency agreeing to participate financially in the project's construction. RESPONSE: Cottage Grove is requesting $1,000,000, which is 80% of the total estimated project construction cost of $1,200,000. The City of Cottage Grove is committed to providing at least 20% for the 70` Street (CSAH 22) pedestrian underpass and trail connections. The 20% cost share will be a hard match provided by the City's Capital Improvement funds. The requested funding is only for eligible, construction related items. The City is committed to funding the engineering, design, and other similar costs. 67 BIKEWAYS and WALKWAYS - PRIORITIZING CRITERIA Applicants must respond to each of the following prioritizing criteria. Label your responses clearly. If a criterion is not applicable to your project, explain why. A. Points crossed and how well the project improves network connecti given the importance of the separate segments to be connected. The applicant should address either criteria A -I or A -2, whichever best describes the project being proposed. If the project includes both spot facilities to overcome barriers and system segments, complete both A -1 and A -2, and the average score will be used to award up to 200 points. A -1. Spot Facilities to Remove Barriers. 0 -250 points The applicant must provide the following information describing the barrier to be overcome and the bike /pedestrian facility to be used for this purpose. are a. Magnitude of barrier, i.e., width, elevation differences; if barrier is a roadway: number of lanes, average daily traffic, posted speed, etc. RESPONSE: 70 " Street (CSAH 22) creates a significant barrier to pedestrians and bicyclists as a four lane undivided road section with a current traffic volume at 6,000 ADT and a posted speed limit of 40 mph. The barrier will only increase with time, and will not improve without a grade separated crossing. When considering 2030 traffic projections of approximately 20,000 ADT, the problem is greatly compounded. The roadway project proposed to be constructed in 2015 will be designed as a 4 -lane divided highway with left and right turn lanes at the intersection to meet the traffic projections of 2030. The expanded roadway section will increase the distance that pedestrians must cross. b. Ease of closing or overcoming the barrier using the proposed project relative to the next easiest alternative remaining after construction of the proposed project, expressed in distance and elevation changes. RESPONSE: A pedestrian underpass is the most cost effective solution to eliminate the at -grade crossing at this location. This intersection presents the most viable location for a pedestrian underpass as the city's trail system funnels to this location. No other crossing along the 70 " Street (CSAH 22) corridor was determined to be a reasonable location for a grade separation due to lack of right -of -way available, grade or existing trail network connections. it the barrier is that will be Added points are assigned I A -1 System Segments. 0 -250 points The applicant must demonstrate how the project contributes to the continuous and connected implementation of a significant clement(s) of the system plan(s): a. Identify the number, location and length of segments and routes of existing and planned bicycle /walkway facilities that will connect to the proposed project. RESPONSE: N/A b. Maximum grade and length thereof for bicycles /pedestrians. RESPONSE: N/A c. Number of stops per mile for bicycles /pedestrians. RESPONSE: N/A B. Potential Use. 250 points 0 -250 points Metropolitan Council staff will provide the data for items a., b. and c. for each proposed project, however, applicants must provide a location map and a detailed scaled map showing the project limits and length. Traffic analysis zones that encompass or abut the proposed project will be valued at 100 %. Traffic analysis zones within one mile of the project will be valued at 50 %. The applicant must answer item d. below. a. 2010 population density of traffic analysis zones within one mile of the proposed project. b. 2000 employment (or the most recent available) density of traffic analysis zones within one mile of the proposed project. c. 2009 college /university enrollment of traffic analysis zones within one mile of the proposed project. d. Describe how the proposed bikeway /walkway project will provide more direct connections between trip origins and destinations. Project will be scored based on this response and on an analysis of network connectivity improvements. RESPONSE: The proposed project includes installation of a pedestrian underpass tinder 70 ' Street (CSAH 22) at the intersection of Hardwood Avenue. The trail connection made by the underpass will achieve connectivity to the region and the city's trail network as outlined in the City's Comprehensive Plan. Regionally, the trail will provide connectivity to the City of St. Paul Park, Washington County's Cottage Grove Ravine Park and the County's trail system on CSAH 19 which provides for travel northerly and southerly travel within the County. By removing the barrier that 70 Street (CSAH 22) presents, residents north of the intersection will be able to travel safely and comfortably to the Washington County library, post office, shopping and restaurant opportunities, city hall, police station, as well as to the City's Hardwood, Hidden Valley, West Draw and Oakwood park facilities. The trails will also provide indirect access through existing trails and sidewalks to additional parks, neighborhoods, schools and commerical centers. .• A large commercial /retail area exists approximately I mile south of 70` Street (CSAH 22) along 80" Street. An existing trail runs north/south along the boulevard of Hardwood Avenue and connects to this popular shopping area. The pedestrian underpass will eliminate a barrier to individuals seeking to utilize alternative modes of transportation, such as walking or biking, to access the many services, shops and restaurants that Cottage Grove has to offer. The Metropolitan Council's Regional Trail network has a proposed trail corridor along 80` Street, which is currently listed as 'Under Acquisition, Development, Planned or Proposed'. This proposed regional trail would be connected to this project by way of the Hardwood Avenue trail. C. Cost Effectiveness. 200 points Metropolitan Council staff' will perform all calculations in item D using Metropolitan Council forecasts and the location map and a detailed scaled map of the project showing limits and length provided in criterion B. Traffic analysis zones that encompass or abut the proposed project will be valued at 100 %. Traffic analysis zones within one mile of the project will be valued at 50 %. Cost effectiveness calculations must be based on the total cost of the project, not just the portion of the project eligible for federal funding. D -1. 0 -50 points Total cost of the project (federal and match) divided by the total population (2010) within traffic analysis zones within one mile of the project limits. D -2. 0 -50 points Total cost of the project (federal and match) divided by the total future population (2030) within traffic analysis zones within one mile of the project limits. D -3. 0 -50 points Total cost of the project (federal and match) divided by the total employment (2000 or most recent available) within traffic analysis zones within one mile of the project limits. D -4. 0 -50 points Total cost of the project (federal and match) divided by the total future employment (2030) within traffic analysis zones within one mile of the project limits. D. Safetv /Security. 100 points 0-100 points Points will be given based on how well the project addresses safety issues and aims to eliminate existing or potential safety hazards. Discuss any safety- related issues that will be addressed by the project. Include any available project site- related safety data, e.g., crash data, number of conflict points to be eliminated by the project by type of conflict (bicyclist/pedestrian, bicyclist /vehicle, pedestrian/vehicle), reduction or elimination of steep grades, provision of signage, etc. The applicant shall provide an evaluation of security needs for the project location and how the project will provide security measures consistent with those needs. NO RESPONSE: 70` Street (CSAH 22) creates a significant barrier to pedestrians and bicyclists as a four lane undivided road section with a current traffic volume at 6,000 ADT and a posted speed limit of 40 mph. The barrier will only increase with time, and will not improve without a pedestrian underpass. When considering 2030 traffic projections of approximately 20,000 ADT, the problem is greatly compounded. The roadway project to be constructed in 2015 will be designed as a 4 -lane divided highway with left and right turn lanes at the intersection to meet the traffic projections of 2030. The expanded roadway section will increase the distance that pedestrians must cross. Crash data at the intersection of 70'" Street (CSAH 22) and Hardwood Avenue shows 14 accidents from 2008 to 2010. The accidents occurred with a traffic volume of 6,000 ADT. Safety improvements need to take place at the intersection to support the projected 20,000 ADT. Removing the pedestrian /cyclist and motor vehicle conflicts should aid in reducing future accidents at the intersection. In May of 2008, a near fatal incident occurred at the intersection, bringing into focus for the reisdents that the intersection was extremely hazardous and was in need of a traffic signal. A `grass roots' approach was initiated to advocate for a traffic signal at the intersection. The residents approached both the City and the County with their concerns and were instrumental in getting the traffic signal installed. The underpass will reduce distractions to the motorizing public at the intersection, thereby increasing safety and efficiency for vehicles as well as benefiting the users of the trail. The pedestrian underpass and trail connections will be designed to meet MnDOT State Aid standards, AASHTO guidelines and will be ADA compliant. The proposed underpass would include LED lighting to provide for a safe and comfortable environment of user. E. Development Framework Implementation 200 Points The Metropolitan Development Guide is comprised of the 2030 Regional Development Framework and system plans for transportation, including highways, transit and aviation; water resources management; and regional parks and trails. Together, the Development Framework and system plans create a vision for the region and are intended to help ensure the orderly, economical development of the seven - county area. The Framework is organized around four overall goals: • Efficient Growth. Work with local communities to accommodate growth in a flexible, connected and efficient manner. • Multi -modal Transportation. Plan and invest in multi -modal transportation choices, based on f dl range of costs and benefits, to slow the growth of congestion and serve the region's economic needs. • Housing Choices. Encourage expanded choices in housing locations and types, and improved access to jobs and opportunities 71 Natural Resource protection. Work with local and regional partners to conserve, protect and enhance the region's natural resources. Under the Metropolitan Land Planning Act, local communities must prepare and submit to the Council local comprehensive plans that are consistent with the Council's regional systems plans. Local communities have submitted plans for 2030 and these have been reviewed by the Council. 1. Development Framework Planning Area Objectives 0 -100 points Strategies for regional development relate directly to growth patterns within the region. The Framework communities are identified according to their regional planning area designation which is based on its geographic location, existing development patterns, forecast growth, planned land uses, and the availability of infrastructure. The project's relationship to Framework and TPP are addressed in the qualifying criteria. The objective of this section is to address the land use and transportation linkages and how the project supports development and the accommodation of growth for the communities affected. What are the 2030 land uses proposed in the community(ies) adopted plan for the project area/corridor affected? Identify the TAZs that lie partially or wholly within the project limits. RESPONSE: The trail alignment abuts 3 land uses including: Medium Density Residential, Low Density Residential, and Parks/Private Open Space (See 2030 Land Use Map). The project is located within TAZ numbers 1085 and 1086. How does the project support this 2030 land use plan in the project area? Refer to the land use map and provide the land use categories and their description from the adopted local comprehensive plan .6 RESPONSE: Regionally, the underpass will provide connectivity to the City of St. Paul Park, Washington County's Cottage Grove Ravine Park and the County's trail system on CSAH 19 which provides for travel northerly and southerly travel within the County. The Metropolitan Council's Regional Trail network has a proposed trail corridor along 80' Street, which is currently listed as 'Under Acquisition, Development, Planned or Proposed'. This proposed regional trail would be connected to this project by way of the Hardwood Avenue trail. Pedestrians and bicyclists will also be provided with an alternative means of accessing thee Washington County library, post office, shopping and restaurant opportunities, city hall, police station, as well as to the City's Hardwood, Hidden Valley, West Draw and Oakwood park facilities. The trails will also provide indirect access through 6 Future Land Use map (planned land use 2030) and description for example: "low density residential — Mostly single - family homes with some two - family homes and open space within or related to a residential development at a gross density of 2 to 4 units per acre." "residential mixed use — Residential at a gross density of 7 to 30 units per acre, neighborhood commercial uses may be appropriate." "General Commercial—Broad range of businesses, generally highway- oriented, serving other businesses and City residents and requiring buffering from surrounding residential areas." "Agriculture— primarily agricultural purpose, including farming and horticulture, including farmstead or rural residence." [Examples from City of Coon Rapids Comprehensive Plan] 72 existing trails and sidewalks to additional parks, neighborhoods, schools and commerical centers. A large commercial /retail area exists approximately I mile south of 70` Street (CSAH 22) along 80` Street. An existing trail runs north /south along the boulevard of Hardwood Avenue and connects to this popular shopping area. The pedestrian underpass will provide opportunity for individuals seeking to utilize alternative modes of transportation, such as walking or biking, to access the many services, shops and restaurants that Cottage Grove has to offer. How does the project support 2030 forecasts for the project area? [Council staff will evaluate this criterion and will provide the following information to assist in the evaluation of this criterion: TAZ Project Area demographic profile population, household, employment and retail employment. The applicant does not need to provide a response.] 2. Progress Towards Affordable Housing Goals 0 -50 points NOTE: Information and analysis in this section will be provided by Council staff Methodology for Evaluating Progress Made Towards Affordable Housing Goals Up to 50 points can be awarded to a project, based upon a community's or group of communities' progress in addressing their affordable housing goals for 1996 -2010. For communities that participate in the Livable communities Local Housing Incentives Program, data from their 1996 -2010 negotiated housing goals was used to determine the progress they have made toward providing opportunities to address their affordable housing goals. For communities that do not participate in the Local Housing Incentives Program, progress will be measured against what the benchmarks were for their community in the Council's LCA goal setting methodology used in determining goals for 1996 to 2010. Communities negotiated goals for both ownership and rental housing. Analysis consisted of comparing the goal, progress made to date and determining the percentage of the goal achieved for both ownership and rental combined. Example of Analysis: Scoring: Percent of Progress Made 90 -100% 71 -89% 51 -70% 31 -50% Points Awarded: 50 40 30 20 73 Negotiated Goal Progress to Date Overall Progress Made - % Rental Units 1 900 200 Ownership Units 1 200 125 Total Housing Units 1 1,100 325 30% Scoring: Percent of Progress Made 90 -100% 71 -89% 51 -70% 31 -50% Points Awarded: 50 40 30 20 73 11 -30% 10 1 -10% 5 For projects with 2 or more communities, scores are averaged and then applied to the project. Communities that do not have negotiated goals are given the same average score of the other communities within their group. Integration of Modes 0 -50 points The project proposal will receive a higher score under this criterion if it improves bicycle or pedestrian access to transit routes. Provide a map that shows all transit stops, stations and park & ride lots that will be reachable by the facility. RESPONSE: The Metropolitan Council's Regional Trail network has a proposed trail corridor along 8e Street, which is currently listed as 'Under Acquisition, Development, Planned or Proposed'. This proposed regional trail would be connected to this project by way of the Hardwood Avenue trail. Connection to this trail system then leads to access to the transit station located along 80 Street. Pages from the City's Comprehensive plan related to transit, along with a transit system map, are included in the appendix. F. Maturitv of Project Concept. 200 points Projects selected through this solicitation will be programmed for construction in 2015 or 2016. That is a fairly long time but it takes several years to complete preliminary engineering, environmental studies and acquire right -of -way. The region must manage the federal funds in each year of the TIP. Projects that are not implemented in their original program year are carried over to the next program year, or the funding sunset date. This requires other projects to shift program years to maintain fiscal balance in the TIP and STIP. Proposed projects that have already completed some of the work are more likely to be ready for funding authorization in their program year. A schedule is important to know what kind of work might be needed. Large projects that need right -of -way require more work than those that do not. 0 -200 points Applications involving construction must complete the project implementation schedule found in Appendix K. A detailed schedule of events is expected for all phases of the project. Applications involving non - construction projects must include a detailed discussion of the timeframes involved for initiating and completing each phase of planned activities. Points under this criterion are assigned based on how many steps have been taken toward implementation of the project. These steps reflect a federally funded project development path. TOTAL: 1,200 POINTS 74 Appendices Appendix A - County Support Letter Appendix B - Figure 1, Location Map Figure 2, Aerial Map Figure 3, Proposed Improvements 2030 Future Land Use Map Traffic Analysis Zones Map Traffic Analysis Zones Table Land Use Designations Appendix C - Washington County CIP (Select Pages) Washington County Comprehensive Plan (Select Pages) Cottage Grove CIP (Select Pages) Cottage Grove Comprehensive Plan (Select Pages) Corridor Analysis Report (Select Pages) Appendix D - Transit Portion of Cottage Grove Comp Plan (2 pages) Project Area Transit Map Appendix E - Implementation Schedule Appendix A • June 27, 2011 Jennifer Levitt, P.E. City of Cottage Grove 8635 West Point Douglas Road South Cottage Grove, MN 55016 -3318 Pedestrian Underpass at CSAH 22 and Hardwood Avenue South Dear Ms. Levitt: Public Works Department Donald J. Theisen, P.E. Director Wayne N. Sandberg, P.E, . Deputy Director /County Engineer 22 that connects to other Our Comprehensive Plan depicts the need for improvements to CSAH 22 in this location and we currently have those improvements identified in the 5 -year CIP adopted by the County Board. A Corridor Analysis Report was prepared in 2010 that also depicts the grade separated crossing and identifies the underpass as a preferred option at the intersection: Please contact me if you have any questions` or additional comments, Sincerely, Wayne H Sandberg, P.E. Deputy Director /County Engineer 11660 Myeron Road North, Stillwater, Minnesota 55082 -9573` Phone: 651-430-4300 • Fax`651 430 -4350 • TTY; 651 -430 -6246 www.co.washington.mn,us Equal Employment Opportunity / Affirmative Action Appendix B Figure 1, Location Map Figure 2, Aerial Map Figure 3, Proposed Improvements 2030 Future Land Use Map Traffic Analysis Zones Map Traffic Analysis Zones Table Land Use Designations WASHINGTON COUNTY PROJECT LOCATION Co G LOCATION MAP V, CITY OF COTTAGE GROVE, MN FIGURE: 1 70TH STREET PEDESTRIAN UNDERPASS 48GENZFDOI.DWG DATE: 06 -24 -2011 COMM: 48GEN cw of Cottag Grove M""n la • 9 COTTAGE GROVE, MINNESOTA FIGURE: 2 70TH STREET PEDESTRIAN UNDERPASS 48GENZFD02 DATE: 6/24/11 Gy of Coina Grove M' ... W. COMM: 48GEN COTTAGE GROVE, MINNESOTA FIGURE: 3 70TH STREET PEDISTRIAN UNDERPASS 48GENZFD03.DWG DATE: 6/24/11 cfw of Con Grove Minne�ia COMM: 48GEN a +� Pew O N J Q J w O C'4 N 0 O cn W TO p W Cc , ,E � a L 9 t 0 9 M c U g 4 N 3 LL w O N C Q N 4 2 cz O U O G O tll O U N 'a i v O U W O G m O v Z M (O O a i y � 4 Q C I N �+ a oo m m ni a�m a s :n ro of of ` m, ( W I. ». of m q £ N,I p E W M Ri m m m S ' m1 y n N m N M N O O 3 I o ml m o v m o � o O m o N o b n m N <olo m N o o Q N (O h V1 M N OJ V O O N m N h p C�l M h, O (9 O OI q o it zE b £ w I I 1 o li I O £ ( fi r 2 ( i v'. Mi 1 1 Ej O O O�� N N M O O m n n m m 01 O�O p V N bI 'O o^a m m m m m ro m m m m m m m�m m m m m l m:m m�m m m Q : A U C M V N CN V c N m o o n m N o m' NONOO�OOONNO00'. o m m o m m m o - j m o N.N m m N m: 5 j,C =ONN. � W > > > > > > > > > > > > > >i > > >> > W W >. > >M> > 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O. 0 O j o o o 0 0 0 m. w C 0 O O O O w K t% 0 K K K (D O O) K m O O m to K w O (4 K . K O O O K K l O: 0, O O O O $ � w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w wlw w w l p O o O O 1 O O O O 0 0 0 a O O o O O;O O' C9 O Q ¢ t ¢ ¢ ¢ Q ¢ KKKK��KKK�KKK�;� Q Q Q ! Q ¢ 6 ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ 0 0 0 0 0 O. 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 O. O O O: 0 0 0 Os O 3 0 v O U W O G m O v Z M (O O a i y � 4 Q C I O 0) r N �� V MI J L 6 0 a ru N G IA > d 4 Y - 0 L C: c3000 a v2: .�, o ' V) N' N m m a) to c C v OM O _C E - rn m> a)° Yc m�aW¢o,o 'N 03E m E o c a L m' m a) m - m c c -._ > _ f6 m U a 'O V c c c c v cc, m O4 U..Q. a s m c 0 w m O m °En. 7 TY E L o 0�v�v0' ao. v L a) '6 Vt to O Qv0)m -vmm m > L a) U m�om cm QucO O D Q O O Qva'2a)UOmLO�NV o v u)ro 0) a o0 WN , z O� z a mEQ' - `� C) - 0 3 �cY0U0a) . oE LU Q0) O C a1 a) I- 0 J G 0 C a '� V 0. 1 d O Q Q 0 0 G 0. m N U N- O v m .. C a a. m. Z a.C m a) c N �- a m N w N o c'3 C - : p m O- > Y _O G a) a1 _ m o m O m m C L D m E Z v) U m c m v- E E m c= E o o O m O c y m O Q N° m 0 3 c o c a) _= a 3 U w .0 . U E Y Z 'in m L E E X o m c L u < c � � � 2 m 44)) � o' o+'L° c O a c i �U70�Em a� a Ymaamv0U - 0 0 E 0 a E m c a c E m Y m c a� 0 m N :3 0 0 N � � C O T= V Y U om m i O 0�v a ) 0 a E Y m o w v 0�0 Y Q O O o m m Q a L o) a) C Y m m L m U a c Y o C � U aN 0 0 v +� N ~ ao m o � c a) f - O N a) Z W Y p m = d a 3 � o ° O m > o m Y o.a� L O c> 0 a�a� a) > VI ,T, L E o v 0) c m > aa)M O L L 0 L > (Y/1 a) N O Cl -OU w o)c C w E E O c E 0- m v 3 ° E = C) r T a) 3 0 E� N N N Q � ai L F Q C » U Z U) Y w O C ( N 16 0 ` E 71 C) 0 m L m o_ c O Q .O_ m' �W =a)DN a 0 3 9 c C' wa C c m 3 u vi c c v o m E ac E x E au oa)o a > � � U U U O U L Q O O U C � W a) m U Ola g .0 Y_ v � m V] 'L a) Y Q c O) U' w T - O O ✓ O "u u c m c mI< Y > U a .O O E E c� CL v L > m m c a C o L v 0 U 3 00 N t O Y _ _I�C o � v ttu N w X O O m m ) > -EY O N i j a c J Appendix C Capital Improvement Plan 2011 - 2015 Final December 14, 2010 Project# RB -2564 Project Name CSAH 22 - US TH 61 to CSAH 19 Mgmt & Safety Location Cottage Grove an important east -west minor arterial roadway in this portion of the county. Department Capital Projects (I2 &B) Contact W. Sandberg Type Construction Useful Life 54 years Category Road &Bridge Priority 2 Somewhat Critical This project proposes to increase the capacity and safety of the roadway by implementing those improvements identified in the 2010 Joint City /County Feasibility Study. These improvements include: Adding improvements to intersection control (roundabouts/traffic signals); Additional turn lanes at key intersections; Other improvements to navement and nedestrian facilities. serves regional traffic with traffic volumes ranging from 6,300 to 9,000 vehicles per day. 7tattic is expected to continue to increase. 7 his '.e 2015 bond funds. In the event a bond is not sold in 2015, this project world be delayed or deferred. Expenditures 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total Construction 4,000,000 4,000,000 Right -of -Way 1,000,000 1,000,000 Consultant Services 850,000 850,000 Total 850,000 5 5,850,000 Funding Sources 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total Bonds Proceeds 3,000,000 3,000,000 Local Contributions 150,000 1,500,000 1,650,000 State Aid 700,000 500,000 1,200,000 Total 850,000 5 5,850,000 This project is expected to increase operations and maintenance costs due to increased pavement widths and additional intersection infrastructure. 'this project nrnnna.. u, nse 2015 bond fiends in the event a bond is not sold in 2015_ this Droiect would be delayed or deferred. Page 112 1 1 • • - m y FM Approved by Board of Commissioners May 26, 2009 Adopted by Board of Commissioners September 7, 2010 XWshin on Paget 4 -20 e 4 -17 (, Future 2030 Congestion Volume/Capacity Ratio ( / 0.85 - 1.00 (Approaching Capacity) I.ol Over Capacity) — 1 IN wt C 4TiGE L ' "E nENMPN K� «o wN$Hn 0 1 2 3 4 5 Miles Prepared ey. Washing ±on County G IS Support UNI, IT Departnet s o. Data Source: The Lawrence Group -2007, Washington County IT Met Council, MnDOT N38� gtoi1 Page 14-55 _ fits' Cl L � Q U !n ? NI [� U L Q- E 0 CD y' N tz p 0 v a c O y fi Q Q N y' r E. Planned Trail System 'Fixisting County Trail *Planned County Trail .,,-ACxisting Regional Trail . Planned Regional Trail Existing State Trail a Planned State Trail Trail Search Area -.�:. State Park Planned Master Plan Boundary County Park Scientific and Natural Area Wildlife Management Area N ' 77-- D' ° 'G, , Gx , W E `.. s Iri�YiY+SGE ES OUD . S . D ,?J •� IIGFAF O � P 0 1 2 3 4 5 Miles ro Prepared BY Washington County GIS Support Unit, IT Department Data Source: Me"poitan Council- 2007, Washington County GIS Support Unit 2007 x xcs Wa.Shing" Page 14 -73 h auxr y Q C a no i, no a E D 8 It m PV t0 SM > 691 Afton d r Y L'J Si tWATEA gW NSxIP WD B s< ne. III P 'A WAGE" AGE Owl I kxeK� 1 T11 1. LEE L p, - s.- --- m..•, -- * -1I 8 u s �svglxE x s... 2 GBA11IE _ n w N ' 77-- D' ° 'G, , Gx , W E `.. s Iri�YiY+SGE ES OUD . S . D ,?J •� IIGFAF O � P 0 1 2 3 4 5 Miles ro Prepared BY Washington County GIS Support Unit, IT Department Data Source: Me"poitan Council- 2007, Washington County GIS Support Unit 2007 x xcs Wa.Shing" Page 14 -73 h auxr y Q C a no i, no a m Afton 'Itegro alzeaily p, Afton 8 u s w .egiorzal rail A 1 e O o N ' 77-- D' ° 'G, , Gx , W E `.. s Iri�YiY+SGE ES OUD . S . D ,?J •� IIGFAF O � P 0 1 2 3 4 5 Miles ro Prepared BY Washington County GIS Support Unit, IT Department Data Source: Me"poitan Council- 2007, Washington County GIS Support Unit 2007 x xcs Wa.Shing" Page 14 -73 h auxr y Q C a no i, no E> 'a y L O L M c > -0 a) C C O' O� .N G a) �i a) O E N D.'O M � a: C c' s m . 'mcEo� E O y T Y U m N o3:w �a,Zc b 6 yc° ; 0�'^m r0� IIyua La) y�o as mm i- L E O B �O a a) a) p ,E O 'O 0 w y G= 6 G R C 0 N E C X c'- O O N O C C _p X u° N Vi y w 0 ,6 p y 0.m o m o _° 0. _ LO 0 E G v u u v 3= v 3 u y � c w 3 a? c m o Evcro ° 'o 0) q) CDC a� oom a E u 0 m G N G T O 3 L W C 0 V W V u n U> .O ._ c..v N T'— ._ a) �, E as L r0 00 3 T L '^ c v T a) m w w- 5 c) 0.- �o - 'p >� 3�'� °r 0) o� � 3 u ya 3 0 � � E E c,o - o. m .(° L a L a) a) - 0 L O. 01 C> L y U V O O ro ,.+ G N C O. N L d V '.Cu -�' ~ N@ E O ~ Vi U-0 L 0 C L I Y ._ 01 t0 G -C O U P h � E o L O i F 0 E Q .O - X T y N .O a) E L C V l M C y L O .O y L V G •� L 9 i ' L O. E L y.: N Z to U a) "C C LO N y N G E G O t� 0, :u Q 10 :Ot N >-' s= Y U 00 ut } N N y 'i u @ m 0 } O. N U a) 0 E C 'm } N_ T a) = N U U E T a) O 0 — J a) aJ . J C a) C - — L J U> E — J f6 a) . J Q ate.+ O CL w O >> C C 0 0 '� a) a) m 0 >, a) m O p y V1 V 0 12 T m v a °OE'' ac�oom a0m0a aoov as m° ammm v c Q) } p Q 0 E: O > a) L f6 h • a) Q) ra W l� a) N E @ av 3 aE ¢Q� =w o� @ T N 6 L U C a) M N O a O a' W W h. F- h h C" L C O L'. N. w t6 L a) C C i E N C m w. T .a 0 0) 0 ,4; =< C) Z E N E 3 N L N V O w T U Y 0 Z 2 O w S] E p L V p .G O L C[ it O N U c ) 0 0 -_ - 'a m £ o a m r m u �C)Z a c 3 s a) 3 �a 0 u n U o _ w c .V L Y a) u 00 zQ0 • Eo a m s w C: o E 0 ;° y y � N p C L i� h C h J C a w N N U Q.O c� 0� � E� O vi < ZZw0 (° � - m m'. �t � a w U 3a 0 C : Q) M Mcc E Q 30 �� 3-�yo L Y L Y O o`DJpa CC N 2 p N m 7 0 ( L. '�- T E N fu N N 'O a.+ ?_ y E O L 61 3 L Ip C C O Q) p U �W N O w u w aj f0 (C6 t d f0 C Q O 61 a' (Y m h z O .O h a) O UL a) G CT O. a) M03> w�?UO cflom �3.. 00 rn0) mvacio y m o m '.N a h W w S a.' w N ui w 6 N '- C N w 0)) a ° E } a p z Q a h }° E E > m } o } m° m y o 3 u a) U C v c p U N h U.- E u 3' _U a _U v 0 a c yi Q1 aiv J Oa`))vC h Z �hwYO _I C O) p�oo W 00. J p� J OO�mE 0o L aoEm ¢Da 0 72 a a._ a_0 L(a 00¢_w 0 0C > J CL v u o. N o a C ro L H L O N i m a a N ! I tw'.�w��.vfsl arv6wrvww v^- � - 7 7 7 , 777— 9 c b 1 3nvo+�aroe S _( u L m L �1 U m Q C N 4 O D c m W N N N v Ot F N LO v U m �4 c v Q O a c m m a 0 N m 3 �V v O1 Si N U ro c v a O a c m m e Washington County Public Works Department CSAH 22 (70th Street) from Goodview Avenue to Hinton Avenue Cottage Grove Washington County, Minnesota SBE No. T -00211 November, 2010 (Up Stonebrooke Enid ry er nil ;2 w srt Sou`,"" CSAH 22 (70th Street) Roadway Improvement Study Project Description CSAH 22 (70th Street) between Goodview Court /Avenue and Hinton Avenue is a two -lane minor arterial roadway that runs through the northern part of Cottage Grove in Washington County, Minnesota. Topography in this section of the City consists of bluff terrain and steep pitches with roadways that have substandard vertical curves. This section of the County has experienced consistent growth that traditionally has met traffic growth projections. The area has also experienced a history of severe crashes. recent fatal crash antl, ar} "A" type inda,rfaaitating injury crash at CSAH 22 and, Hardwood', Avenue led to the res €riping of the intersection ih 2008 and the installation of a temporary signal system' later. that year. The area carries safety concern from the surrounding community, however, the corridor overall does not rate any worse by crash safety comparison to similar facilities. Wanting to address the challenging terrain, potential roadway capacity issues and address safety concern has led the Washington County Public Works Department to investigate future area improvements for this corridor. The purpose of this report is to analyze current and future traffic operations, investigate roadway safety improvements, identify feasible area improvement measures now that can be implemented in the near and long terms, address possible Right of Way need and generate preliminary improvement cost estimates. Project limits are 1000' west of Goodview Court /Avenue to approximately 1200' east of Homestead Avenue /Ideal Avenue along CSAH 22. North and south limits depend on practical roadway tie -in points. The project limits and corridor location are detailed on Figure 1. Project study intersections are listed below. Project Study Intersections 1. CSAH 22 at Goodview Avenue / Goodview Court 2. CSAH 22 at Granada Avenue 3. CSAH 22 at Meadow Grass Avenue 4. CSAH 22 at Hardwood Avenue 5. CSAH 22 at Pine Arbor Lane 6. CSAH 22 at Hinton Avenue _,, E i Rosernwnt T Nlnin erTWP y q 2 4 x'Yat s z . Cates � lEmp're7w P -� Vermillion TwP` _j � �. .r-. -i 0 f �, } 4 LEGEN© STtIpY 3NTERSECfPdN SFUbV AREA a c 0 n LOCATION MAP RGOAE Stoneb ke o o QD CSAH 22 (70th ST) CORRIDOR ANALYSIS S 'l lrn�'�ra+ t : sGt� di' tz Sn 7iev < „= WASHINGTON COUNTY �. COTTAGE GROVE, MINNESOTA Existing Conditions (2010) A site evaluation was undertaken to evaluate the current roadway layout, traffic control, speed limits and other corridor features of CSAH 22 and each of the study intersections. Study intersections are described below. Hinton Avenue north of CSAH 22 is also known as CSAH 13. Hinton and Hardwood Avenues south of CSAH 22 are City of Cottage Grove Municipal State Aid routes. Traffic turning movement counts were taken during the AM (7:00 -9:00) and PM (4:00 -6:00) peak hours in January, 2010 for all study intersections. These counts were collected under ideal roadway conditions with no snow or ice build -up on the roadways and seasonal adjustment was factored into count volumes. Traffic turning movement counts were taken periodically within a two -week period. Small discrepancies in count data due to day -to -day traffic variability were accounted for by volume balance calculations. Also, Washington County provided approach traffic counts completed in 2008 and 2009 which also resulted in small traffic volume discrepancies due to collection date differences. This data was again calibrated by volume balance calculations to best represent existing traffic conditions in the study area. An existing layout of the study area with current intersection control, lane layouts and 2010 peak hour traffic counts can be seen in Figures 2.1 -2.7. CSAH 22 is the thru movement and all study intersections have four approaches except at Pine Arbor Lane, which is a T- intersection. CSAH 22 at Hardwood Avenue is a signalized intersection. All other side streets are stop controlled, signed at 30 mph and have one lane of approach for all movements, except at Hinton Avenue. The Hinton Avenue intersection is an all -way stop with varying speed limits. A further description of each intersection is contained below: 1. CSAH 22 at Goodview Court /Goodview Avenue CSAH 22 is posted at 50 mph with a free thru movement and two lanes of approach with a right turn lane in eastbound direction. The westbound direction has one lane of approach and is signed the same. Goodview Court is a cul -de -sac north of CSAH 22 and Goodview Avenue is a dead -end street south of the CSAH 22. 2. CSAH 22 at Granada Avenue CSAH 22 is signed at 50 mph with a free thru movement and one lane of approach and right turn lane in both the eastbound and westbound directions. Granada Avenue leads to neighborhoods north and south of CSAH 22. 3. CSAH 22 at Meadow Grass Avenue CSAH 22 is signed at 50 mph with a free thru movement and one lane of approach and right turn lane in both the eastbound and westbound directions. Meadow Grass Avenue leads to neighborhoods north and south of CSAH 22. 4 . CSAH 22 at Hardwood Avenue Ium lane and by a a at so approaches are signed at 30 mph. 2.10' trail on north side d`f CSAH 22 and 6' sideviiaT,k tin tFie sp #h silt O CSAH 22 The to place trail' system along #he`north side of CSAH 22 will lie In 6y applying new pavement niateria`I and a consistent 10' width to meet Washington County standards: A sidewalk along the south side of CSAH 22 will tieadded fo increase p ,destr�#A[cycle mobilityoptions 3. 3/4 Access at the intersections of CSAH 22 at Goodview Avenue /Court and CSAH 22 at Granada Avenue: Reducing access at these intersections helps improve safety and ensures consistency with Washington County access spacing guidelines for the corridor. The raised directional medians associated with these 3/4 intersections reduces the amount of traffic turning movements that can come in conflict with each other and thus limits crash opportunities. Reducing conflict areas is especially helpful at intersections with challenging sight lines. Vehicles intending to make left turns out of the side streets will need to utilize available u -turns at adjacent intersections. 4. Right -in /right -out access to remain at Pine Arbor Lane: A right -in /right -out access is specified in the current land use permit for this intersection. Access at this intersection is in accordance with Washington County access spacing guidelines to provide more uniform traffic operation due to potential queuing, sightline issues and proximity with the CSAH 22 at Hinton Avenue intersection. 5. Side street center medians: The direction from Washington County and the City of Cottage Grove is to retain existing side street medians where possible and to maintain current neighborhood access appearance. 6. Vertical roadway profile improved: The vertical profile is proposed to be improved to meet State Aid / AASHTO guidelines for 55 mph design speed. The only exception is at the intersection of CSAH 22 at Hardwood Avenue. This vertical curve is set to meet 50 mph design speed (current posted speed) to minimize a proposed large fill section. Improved grades help with sight distance and ease climbing and descending, however, incorporating these improvements will result in large retaining walls. Without retaining walls, tie -in points from the roadway to the surrounding topography would greatly impact adjacent properties. Creating optimal sight lines that would allow for ease of side- street crossing movements would require additional excavation of the hill between Goodview Avenue and Meadow Grass Avenue. 7. Large retaining walls needed to widen current roadway within existing Right of Way: As mentioned above, the proximity of area residences and large cut and fill areas required to achieve Mn /DOT and AASHTO design standards will require large retaining walls in order to construct the Build layout within existing Right of Way. B. pedestrian tun* At Hardwood Avenue: Previous analysis for a grade separated pedestrian crossing cf CSAH 22 at Hardwood Avenue led by the City of Cottage Grove was prepared in 2009. This design; undertaken by another consultant, has been incorporated intothe proposed Build layo(it in'a, tnannei-;to mini tiize gratling for the crossing and utilize the proposed retaining walls Info'r'mation on construction, cost a,nd design assumptions associated with Phis pedestrian tunnel can be found!;in Appendix E Approximate cost for the standalone pedestrian tunnel, is approximately $1.4 million (prepared by others). I of the pedestrian tunnel in the widening of CSAH 22 Would result in subtracting off, =the "Bituminous Tr ill! portion of the 2009 cost estimafe: resulting iri a: reduction, of approximately $4Q�;000; 13 injury crashes. Cited roundabout crash severity information did not disseminate between single and multi -lane roundabouts. Table 7 details the average crash and severity rates for various intersection control based on the studies listed above. Likewise, Table 7 also details the existing crash and severity rates for the CSAH 22 study intersections. No crashes were reported at the intersection of CSAH 22 at Pine Arbor Boulevard in the past five years, therefore a crash analysis was not undertaken for the intersection. Table 7: CSAH 22 (70th Street) Intersection Crash Analysis Average 2008 2008 Average (MEV) Intersection Crash Crash Severity Severity 2010 Rate Rate Rate Two -Way Stop Control* 0.3 0.5 - All -Way Stop Control* 0.6 0.8 - Signalized Intersection* 0.7 1.1 - Single Lane Roundabouts ** 0.2 0.08 - - - CSAH 22 at Goodview Ave. /Ct. - - 3.41 0.23 0.23 CSAH 22 at Granada Ave. - 3.47 0.29 0.4 CSAH 22 at Meadow Grass Avenue - 3.42 0.24 0.35 CSAH 22 at Hardwood Avenue - 3.54 0.73 CSAH 22 at Hinton Avenue 4.84 0.37 0.62 *Crash rates from Mn /DOT Handbook * *Crash rates from FHWA and IIHS As can be seen above, the only intersection that experiences a crash rate and severity rate higher than the norm is the CSAH 22 at Hardwood Avenue intersection. Severe crashes at this intersection occurred prior to the installation of a traffic signal. Intersection crash diagrams can be found in the Appendix. 33 • • • i pages) Project Area Transit Map L c m a) V L a) G m E 0 Z .o L � 0 > Y O .2 Q � U N U O T > y 0 = OD O NU O m y O O u to L C D C7 0 a) o) a) a) o c u c U n F u L = w W m > > Y O ` O O'n c a Q a c o Y E c am�n 0 •- G Oo.'Eo N E o L > � E O y a v o t > � _ o o Y V) ". Z V a) L' E E 00 L 0 Q L N E V N O O lLZ C u L T O a) a E o m m a 0 m 3 t o m c .V L (6 N C m� C"0M v) Y = O O N a C N E m � u c o O'0 m V c c) L c 0 c U m Qa 0 V a) c O OQ -O y _ Y m U') o E 0 m v Y � a 0 c OE N �- C of E o � a) 0 O p ? U,<U uU7 c � o m E N > E O E L o E U E C O � '^ c E; E a) 0:6 U .N L 0 O O -0 Q O L 0 ° U !^ u V T a C �d � v v � � y J.! m _ L O N Y O Q ti = m L ° L O U U N C o�_ a) a Z m L v a) > N . m 0;0 m� Q o 0 a u m 0 @ L O Y 0 � O� rm+ V o m a °-" 0 c CJ Q a C L >> O U 0)sm o)oo2 O C = C U V) 0 C y m O a) 7 t y O L 'X O Ot m U >' d V W-0y QC-0 3 E > L ° Y L L y ai 0 Q) C V 3 U > VI L L > , a) � m30 Y to V C 0 c m m I o o m y 1 m Y V 00E mov mEE > c 0 ` 6 = >LL ° N 0 0, U T 0 � 3 m o c m 3 a) c L t O v o O t t d m 0 U y a) t m o X ' Z M U._ O W 'E G - O L N m " a _ p a) C C V m -6 Y c o -C m o o" E 0 y A Y 0 N O C O �.00 L T_ T V 0 X b E < Q L Q V ° 3 n a L T O a) a E o m m a 0 m 3 t o m c .V L (6 N C m� C"0M v) Y = O O N a C N E m � u c o O'0 m V c c) L c 0 c U m Qa 0 V a) c O OQ -O y _ Y m U') o E 0 m v Y � a 0 c OE N �- C of E o � a) 0 O p ? U,<U uU7 c � o m E N > E O E L o E U E C O � '^ c E; E a) 0:6 U .N L 0 O O -0 Q O L 0 ° U !^ u V T a C �d � v v � � y J.! m _ L O N Y O Q ti = m L ° L O U U N C =3 G a) a 3 U_ "a to >_ c 0 ='��_� m T�(nC N LI a Q �( L 0 0 F~�-i 0 L a) O O L O T N f ° c °_ y V L a) U d 'v= N ,dj m m m v o> G L - Q d N'V m a m T'Cti+ N a) s- _ -6 a) 0) N O m L O ' -0 m N m C� m y O my ;° 0 w C V E - y V ,- L O H E L = �c a a ma (n L O'E c m d m a) y -p U C M U a) m '0 T to F C ' M m W y Y (A Q Q) m d o m N- '0 a>Ew do al O L to w o Y N C 0 m a) C oV Z N N m i E =_ymm �.00 L T_ T V - N O f0 m o 0 v N a = m V O ammUa -E0 X a E m o wUOmQ°0. 0 ro 0 C 17 F i a H N Z 2 F 0 0 N 0 c� w U O U l� a (u r o— E o— L.. `f0 N w Q 6 a - o E — m � a, 3 L °' o c o- -'-. CL OW 0 3 = o Q C — L a 3 uoU m m O U N o E o? m co a uu o E i w ° o m E o. n. N m C o N C U .— N « Y U ro O m m m C C M m � !� m— G m 7 m m o U c 0 O t 'a c v m'o com c O N N m c ) C C C o - o m o O � N O 6 V 3 � c '. irk L 3�3 m m � L 0 � X 1'V .gym 0 N i A tv O 0 c I 2m x u 5 R: y fG � i No"h S v. M Ee C � t l� a (u r o— E o— L.. `f0 N w Q 6 a - o E — m � a, 3 L °' o c o- -'-. CL OW 0 3 = o Q C — L a 3 uoU m m O U N o E o? m co a uu o E i w ° o m E o. n. N m C o N C U .— N « Y U ro O m m m C C M m � !� m— G m 7 m m o U c 0 O t 'a c v m'o com c O N N m c ) C C C o - o m o O � N O 6 V 3 � c '. irk L 3�3 m m � L 0 � X 1'V .gym 0 N i A tv O 0 c I 2m ►� 1 c+ 10th pve O aAV q; 0 a cu 0 c m ho �a s� c uOlUfH 8 a S O G � i I- c a Lm Q L- L V � N ®� i w L � W (� M r M Ujoou1j SISSIPPI RIVER Appendix E Implementation Schedule APPENDIX K Project Implementation Schedule Please check those that apply and fill in anticipated completion dates 1) Project Scope Stake Holders have been identified Meetings or contacts with Stake Holders have occurred 2) Layout or Preliminary Plan QIdentified Alternates OSelected Alternates ❑Layout or Preliminary Plan started ®Layout or Preliminary Plan completed Anticipated date or date of completion: 3) Environmental Documentation ❑EIS DLA JKPM Document Status MDocument not started ❑Document in progress; environmental impacts identified ❑Document submitted to State Aid for review (date submitted: ) QDocument approved (need copy of signed cover sheet) Anticipated date or date of completion/approval: 4) R/W ZNo R/W required QR/W required, parcels not identified ❑R/W required, parcels identified ❑R/W has been acquired Anticipated date or date of acquisition 5) Railroad Involvement ZNo railroad involvement on project ❑Railroad R/W Agreement required; negotiations not begun ❑Railroad R/W Agreement required; negotiations have begun ❑Railroad R/W Agreement is complete 6) Construction Documents/Plan NConstruction plans have not been started ❑Construction plans in progress Anticipated date or date of completion: ❑Construction plans completed /approved 7) Letting Anticipated Letting Date: 2015 or earlier