Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2011/12/12 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - City Council - Study Session
AGENDA DECEMBER 12, 2011 6:00 p.m. CLOSED EXECUTIVE SESSION – Westwood Room 1. 6:00 p.m. City Manager Evaluation 7:00 p.m. CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION – Council Chambers Discussion Items 1. 7:00 p.m. Future Study Session Agenda Planning – January 9, 2012 2. 7:05 p.m. Business Terms for Redevelopment Contract with Ellipse II LLC (Bader Development) Related to the e2 Project 3. 7:35 p.m. Highway 7/Wooddale Interchange Traffic and Trail Improvement Options 4. 8:35 p.m. Project Update - Highway 100 Reconstruction Project 5. 9:20 p.m. Communications / Meeting Check-In (Verbal) 9:25 p.m. Adjourn Written Reports 6. Project Update - Hwy 7 / Louisiana Avenue Interchange Project 7. Recreational Fire Permits 8. Community Recreation Facility Task Force 9. Fire Stations Project Update Auxiliary aids for individuals with disabilities are available upon request. To make arrangements, please call the Administration Department at 952/924-2525 (TDD 952/924-2518) at least 96 hours in advance of Meeting Date: December 12, 2011 Agenda Item #: 1 Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance Presentation Other: EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other: Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other: CLOSED EXECUTIVE SESSION TITLE: City Manager Evaluation. RECOMMENDED ACTION: J. Forrest, Consultant, will review the information from the annual performance review for Tom Harmening, City Manager. Council will discuss the information from the evaluation process and set general work direction for 2012. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. BACKGROUND: Consultant J. Forrest will update City Council and the City Manager in a Closed Executive Session of the results of the City Manager’s performance evaluation. This information will be sent to the Council under separate cover. The discussion will proceed as follows: The summary of information from the evaluation will be presented by Mr. Forrest. Council will provide comments or suggestions. City Manager Tom Harmening will join the Council and participate in the conversation, reviewing work from 2011 and setting direction for 2012. Once completed, final documents will be presented for formal approval at the next regular Council meeting. In accordance with Minnesota open meeting law, this meeting will be audio taped. The law states: “All closed meetings, except those as permitted by the attorney-client privilege, must be electronically recorded at the expense of the public body. Unless otherwise provided by law, the recordings must be preserved for at least three years after the date of the meeting.” FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. Attachments: None Prepared by: Ali Fosse, HR Coordinator Approved by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director Meeting Date: December 12, 2011 Agenda Item #: 1 Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance Presentation Other: EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other: Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other: TITLE: Future Study Session Agenda Planning – January 9, 2012. RECOMMENDED ACTION: The City Council and the City Manager to set the agenda for the regularly scheduled Study Session on January 9, 2012. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the Council agree with the agenda as proposed? BACKGROUND: At each study session, approximately five minutes are set aside to discuss the next study session agenda. For this purpose, attached please find the tentative agenda and proposed discussion items for the regularly scheduled Study Session on January 9, 2012. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: None. VISION CONSIDERATION: None. Attachment: Future Study Session Agenda Planning – January 9, 2012 Prepared by: Debbie Fischer, Office Assistant Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 1) Page 2 Subject: Future Study Session Agenda Planning – January 9, 2012 Study Session, December 27, 2011 (Tuesday) - Cancelled Study Session, January 9, 2012 – 6:30 p.m. Tentative Discussion Items 1. Future Study Session Agenda Planning – Administrative Services (5 minutes) 2. CVB Update – Administrative Services (30 minutes) St. Louis Park Convention & Visitors Bureau President, John Basill, will give Council an update on the progress that has been made since establishment of the CVB. 3. Fiber Optic Study – Information Resources (45 minutes) Opportunity to meet with the consultants conducting the fiber optic study as they gather stakeholder data the week of January 9. The consultants are interested to learn Council’s specific interests in the study’s research topics to ensure expectations are met. 4. Oak Hill 2 Proposed Redevelopment Agreement – Community Development (15 minutes) Discussion of proposed business terms for a redevelopment contract with Anderson KM Builders for a 21,000 sq. ft. office/showroom building at 3340 Walker Street. 5. Agenda for Council Workshop – Administrative Services (30 minutes) Discussion regarding the results of the Council survey and a proposed agenda for the City Council workshop scheduled for January 20 – 21. 6. Communications/Meeting Check-In – Administrative Services (5 minutes) Time for communications between staff and Council will be set aside on every study session agenda for the purposes of information sharing. Reports 7. Civil Penalties End of Meeting: 8:40 p.m. Meeting Date: December 12, 2011 Agenda Item #: 2 Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance Presentation Other: EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other: Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other: TITLE: Business Terms for Redevelopment Contract with Ellipse II LLC (Bader Development) Related to the e2 Project. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff would like to discuss and receive feedback from the EDA/City Council on the proposed business terms that would serve as the basis for a Redevelopment Contract with Ellipse II LLC (Bader Development) related to its e2 project. If generally acceptable, staff will request the EDA’s attorney to incorporate these terms into a formal Redevelopment Contract with the Redeveloper. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the EDA/City Council support the business terms proposed for inclusion within a Redevelopment Contract with Bader Development to facilitate the construction of the e2 project? BACKGROUND: Bader Development (“Redeveloper”) is proposing to purchase the property located at 3924 Excelsior Blvd from the EDA, remove the existing contamination and prepare the property for redevelopment. Bader plans to construct an upscale apartment building similar to its Ellipse on Excelsior project next door. The proposed 58-unit (62-bedroom) market rate project would be 100% residential and called e2. The structure would have five stories including a mezzanine and would be less than 60 feet tall. e2 would also include one level of underground structured parking that would be heated and ventilated. The total size of the building including the structured parking would be approximately 90,000 square feet. The underground garage would have 73 stalls. e2 would have 31 surface parking stalls; 9 reserved for visitors and 22 for commercial parking from the Ellipse. Lastly, 3 on-street parking spaces (that could accommodate short-term loading) are planned along Excelsior Blvd as part of the project. In conformance with the City’s Green Building Policy, e2 would feature the following sustainable building elements: 1. Re-use site which utilizes existing infrastructure 2. Clean-up of contaminated site 3. LEED for Homes Mid-rise as the design guideline for possible certification 4. Durable, long lasting construction products and materials 5. Energy Star windows and large windows for day lighting 6. Energy efficient lighting with occupancy sensors, off-hours partial shut down 7. Low-flow faucet and shower head plumbing fixtures 8. Continuous ventilation and fresh air at units 9. Proximity to mass transit, sidewalks, and trails Bader envisions the project commencing next fall and taking a year to construct. Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 2) Page 2 Subject: Business terms for Redevelopment Contract with Ellipse II LLC related to the e2 project Property Value and Taxes The estimated market value of the subject property is less than $900,000 assuming the property is in developable condition. The estimated market value of the property upon redevelopment as proposed would be approximately $6.4 million. Currently, the subject property is tax exempt. e2 would generate over $100,000 annually in property taxes. Developer’s Request for Financial Assistance In reviewing the Redeveloper’s latest project proforma, Ehlers & Associates analyzed the proposed project in comparison with general industry standards for land price, construction costs, lease rates, return on equity/profit, various fees, etc. Overall, Ehlers confirmed Bader’s updated cost and revenue assumptions were reasonable and appropriate. e2 is an expensive project and not financially feasible without assistance. Bader Development is seeking help specifically with the higher cost of site preparation (contamination cleanup) and underground structured parking. Providing assistance makes it possible to maximize the development potential of the site and construct a high quality project consistent with the City’s Design Guidelines. The latest cost estimate to excavate, load, haul, and properly dispose of impacted soil and remediate the subject property in conformance with MPCA standards for a residential development is approximately $1.1 million. Additionally, Bader has requested funding to help offset a portion of the construction cost related to the structured parking which is estimated in excess of $2 million. After extensive analysis by Ehlers, and Staff discussion with Bader, a consensus was reached that $700,000 in pay-as-you-go tax increment assistance and joint pursuit of cleanup grants would provide sufficient assistance to allow the project to move forward. Bader’s request for tax increment financing (TIF) assistance is considered reasonable given the complexity, quality, projected total value, and other economic benefits derived from the proposed redevelopment. An updated TIF cash flow analysis prepared for the proposed project shows that the full $700,000 in tax increment would likely be generated in approximately 20 years. This assumes construction is 100% completed in 2013, fiscal disparities is taken from within the district (as per EDA policy), a 5% EDA administrative fee taken from the TIF generated by the project, and no inflation. The subject site is within the City’s Redevelopment Project Area No. 1. The proposed tax increment would be generated from the former motel parcel which is located in the Ellipse on Excelsior TIF District which encompasses both the Ellipse on Excelsior and e2 projects. The EDA/Council reviewed the preliminary TIF application from Bader Development at the September 26, 2011 study session where the proposed project and assistance amount were discussed and found generally acceptable. Thus staff was directed to work further with the Redeveloper and negotiate business terms that would enable the proposed project to proceed. REDEVELOPMENT CONTRACT: The EDA has been in discussion with Bader Development over the use and redevelopment of 3924 Excelsior Blvd for some time. Those discussions came into focus over the past year. The following are key terms for a proposed redevelopment contract between Bader and the EDA. The EDA agrees to sell the subject property to Redeveloper for $810,000 or $25.63/SF subject to certain conditions. Closing would likely occur late summer or early fall 2012 but not later than December 1, 2012. Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 2) Page 3 Subject: Business terms for Redevelopment Contract with Ellipse II LLC related to the e2 project Redeveloper agrees to obtain all necessary planning approvals from the City. Redeveloper agrees to cleanup/remediate the subject property in conformance with MPCA standards for a residential development. Redeveloper agrees to construct an upscale, five-story, 58-unit (62-bedroom) apartment building on the property. The building would include one level of underground structured parking with 73 stalls. It would also have 31 surface parking stalls; 9 reserved for visitors and 22 for customer parking from the Ellipse project next door. Construction must commence by December 31, 2012 and be completed by March 1, 2014. The project will be constructed in compliance with the City’s Green Building Policy and Redeveloper agrees to use commercially reasonable efforts to obtain “green” certification for the Minimum Improvements. In order to offset a portion of the extraordinary costs related to the contamination cleanup and structured parking the EDA agrees to provide the Redeveloper with $700,000 in pay- as-you-go tax increment assistance from the Ellipse on Excelsior TIF District at a 5.6% rate. If one or more of the Grants for which the EDA has applied on behalf of the Redeveloper are not awarded to the EDA and the parties are unable to identify an alternative source of funds for the Grant-Eligible Costs within 90 days after notification of such non-award, the Redeveloper has the right to terminate the Contract, subject to Redeveloper's obligation to pay Administrative Costs through the date of termination. The parties agree that the financial assistance proved to the Redeveloper is subject to a “Lookback” review upon 93% of the building’s leaseup. The amount by which the IRR exceeds __% (percentage to be further negotiated) is considered Excess Income. If the EDA determines that there is Excess Income, it will apply fifty percent (50%) of that amount toward prepayment of the outstanding principal amount of the TIF Notes. Redeveloper agrees it will execute an Assessment Agreement with the EDA specifying the Assessor's minimum market value for the property and minimum improvements. A more detailed summary list of the specific business terms related to the proposed e2 project with Bader Development is attached for review and discussion. If favorably received, these terms will serve as the basis for a Redevelopment Contract with Ellipse II LLC (Bader Development). It is anticipated that such a contract would be brought to the EDA for formal consideration on January 17th. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Bader Development seeks to purchase the EDA’s property at 3924 Excelsior Blvd for $810,000 and has requested $700,000 in pay-as-you-go tax increment financing to offset the extraordinary costs associated with contamination cleanup and structured parking related to its proposed redevelopment on the site. VISION CONSIDERATION: This project supports the strategic direction of being a connected and engaged community and the focus area of creating community gathering places. Attachment: Business Terms of the Redevelopment Contract with Ellipse II LLC Prepared by: Greg Hunt, Economic Development Coordinator Reviewed by: Kevin Locke, Community Development Director Approved by: Tom Harmening, EDA Executive Director and City Manager Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 2) Page 4 Subject: Business terms for Redevelopment Contract with Ellipse II LLC related to the e2 project DRAFT December 12, 2011 Proposed Business Terms Redevelopment Contract between St. Louis Park EDA & Ellipse II LLC e2 3924 Excelsior Blvd. St. Louis Park, MN Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 2) Page 5 Subject: Business terms for Redevelopment Contract with Ellipse II LLC related to the e2 project Business Terms of Redevelopment Contract Between the City of St. Louis Park, St. Louis Park EDA and Ellipse II LLC The following are proposed Business Terms between the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority (“EDA”) and Ellipse II LLC (“Redeveloper”), which, upon mutual agreement, will be incorporated into a Redevelopment Contract (“Redevelopment Contract”) for the “e2” apartment building to be constructed at the 3924 Excelsior Blvd., St. Louis Park. 1. The EDA owns the Redevelopment Property and will convey title to and possession of the Redevelopment Property to the Redeveloper, subject to the following: (a) On or before Closing, the Redeveloper shall prepare and obtain City approval of a PUD Major Amendment to the Ellipse on Excelsior development (the “PUD Amendment”), a PUD for the Redevelopment Property and a plat of the Redevelopment Property at Redeveloper’s cost and subject to all City ordinances and procedures. (b) The City and EDA will use their best efforts to obtain approval by the City Council before Closing of any amendment to the City zoning ordinance in order to permit construction of the Minimum Improvements on the Redevelopment Property. (c) The purchase price for the Redevelopment Property shall be $810,000. The Purchase Price will be paid at Closing. (d) The EDA's obligation to convey the Redevelopment Property to the Redeveloper is subject to satisfaction of the following terms and conditions: (1) The EDA having approved permanent financing for construction of the Minimum Improvements and the Redeveloper having closed on such permanent financing at or before Closing on transfer of title to the Redevelopment Property to the Redeveloper. (2) The City having approved the Redevelopment Plat, PUD, and PUD Amendment in accordance and the City and Redeveloper having recorded the Redevelopment Plat before Closing. (3) Redeveloper having approved the state of title to the property. (4) The City having approved all necessary zoning variances to the Redevelopment Property. (5) The EDA having approved Construction Plans for the Minimum Improvements. (6) The property shall occur no later than December 1, 2012. 2. The parties acknowledge that MPCA has approved a voluntary response action plan (“VRAP”) providing for remediation of hazardous wastes and contaminants on the Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 2) Page 6 Subject: Business terms for Redevelopment Contract with Ellipse II LLC related to the e2 project Redevelopment Property. Redeveloper shall promptly undertake remediation and any other actions required under the VRAP, subject to the reimbursement as further described in this Agreement. Redeveloper expressly agrees to perform any task or obligation imposed under the VRAP and the Declaration, including any emergency procedures. 3. The Redeveloper acknowledges that the EDA makes no representations or warranties as to the condition of the soils on the Redevelopment Property or the fitness of the Redevelopment Property for construction of the Minimum Improvements or any other purpose for which the Redeveloper may make use of such property, and that the assistance provided to the Redeveloper neither implies any responsibility by the EDA or the City for any contamination of the Redevelopment Property nor imposes any obligation on such parties to participate in any cleanup of the Redevelopment Property. 4. Redeveloper will indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the Authority, the City and their governing body members, officers and employees (the "Indemnified Parties"), from any claims or actions to the extent arising out of any claim related to the presence of hazardous substances on the Remainder Parcel which either (a) arise out of activities of Redeveloper on the Redevelopment Property or (b) arise out of hazardous substances, asbestos, petroleum substances, or pollutants, irritants or contaminants brought onto the Redevelopment Property by Redeveloper. In addition, Redeveloper will release the Indemnified Parties from any and all costs, expenses, losses, liabilities, claims, causes of action, demands, and damages relating to the environmental conditions on the Redevelopment Property as of the Date of Closing, including without limitation any claim the Redeveloper may have to recover from all or any of the Indemnified Parties any costs or expenses incurred by the Redeveloper in performing the remediation of the Redevelopment Property (except those costs or expenses reimbursed through tax increment or grants). 5. To finance a portion of the extraordinary costs of environmental remediation on the Redevelopment Property (the “Grant-Eligible Costs”), the EDA has applied for grants from DEED in the amount of $346,690; from the Met Council in the amount of $275,000; and from Hennepin County in the amount of $200,000 (the “Grants”). (a) If the EDA receives one or more of the Grants, the EDA will pay or reimburse the Redeveloper for Grant-Eligible Costs from and to the extent of the grant proceeds under such Grant or Grants in accordance with the terms of the applicable grant agreement. If Grant-Eligible Costs exceed the amount to be reimbursed under such agreements or this Section, such excess shall be the sole responsibility of the Redeveloper (except to the extent reimbursable under the Note). (b) If one or more of the Grants are not awarded to the EDA and the parties are unable to identify an alternative source of funds for the Grant-Eligible Costs within 90 days after notification of such non-award, the Redeveloper shall have the right to terminate the Contract, subject to Redeveloper's obligation to pay Administrative Costs through the date of termination. (c) The Redeveloper agrees to submit to the EDA written reports so as to allow the EDA to remain in compliance with reporting requirements under state statutes. The EDA will provide information to the Redeveloper regarding the required forms. Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 2) Page 7 Subject: Business terms for Redevelopment Contract with Ellipse II LLC related to the e2 project 6. The EDA has determined that, in order to make development of the Minimum Improvements financially feasible, it is necessary to reimburse Redeveloper for a portion of the cost of the site preparation and structured parking related to the environmental contamination cleanup (the “Public Redevelopment Costs”). The tax increment from the Ellipse on Excelsior Redevelopment TIF District will be payable to Redeveloper in the form of one or more “TIF Notes”, which would be structured on the following basis: Issue total: Up to $700,000 Type: Pay-as-you-go Term: Approximately 20 years Interest Rate: 5.6% Admin Fee: 5% Fiscal Disparities: Paid from within the district Note Provisions: The Contract would provide for one pay-as-you-go TIF Note in the maximum principal amount of $700,000 to reimburse Redeveloper for such eligible costs as: environmental remediation, site preparation, and underground parking related to the Minimum Improvements (the “Public Redevelopment Note”), secured by Available Tax Increment generated by the Minimum Improvements. 7. The EDA will perform a “lookback” calculation on the earliest of (i) the date when 93% of the Apartments are leased; (ii) the date of any Transfer in whole or in part of the Apartments; or (iii) three years after the date of issuance of the Certificate of Completion for the project. The Redeveloper must submit evidence of its actual annualized cumulative internal rate of return (the “IRR”) from the Apartments, calculated as of the applicable Lookback Date, along with the estimated annualized cumulative IRR from the Apartments assuming a sale in the tenth year after the date of issuance of the Certificate of Completion for the Apartments. The amount by which the IRR exceeds a percentage to be further negotiated is considered Excess Income. If the EDA determines that there is Excess Income, it will apply fifty percent (50%) of that amount toward prepayment of the outstanding principal amount of the Notes. 8. Both parties agree that any assistance provided to the Redeveloper under the Contract is not a “business subsidy” under Minnesota Statutes because the assistance is for redevelopment. 9. Redeveloper agrees that it will pay the reasonable costs of consultants and attorneys retained by the EDA in connection with any necessary modification of the TIF Plan for the TIF District, and the negotiation and preparation of the Redevelopment Contract and other incidental agreements and documents, including land conveyance, development and financing assistance. Upon termination of the Contract the Redeveloper remains obligated for costs incurred through the effective date of termination. 10. The Redeveloper must remediate the contaminated soils on the Redevelopment Property in compliance with MPCA requirements. Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 2) Page 8 Subject: Business terms for Redevelopment Contract with Ellipse II LLC related to the e2 project 11. Before commencing such construction, the Redeveloper must submit plans and specifications regarding the Redeveloper Public Improvements for approval by the City. Plans related to the soil remediation however do not require approval by the City. All work on the Redeveloper Public Improvements shall be in accordance with the approved construction plans and shall comply with all City requirements regarding such improvements. The parties agree and understand that the City will accept the Improvements in accordance with City procedures. 12. Redeveloper agrees to undertake the “Minimum Improvements” as shown in the Master Site Plan. In summary, the Redeveloper agrees to mediate the site, construct the Redeveloper Public Improvements, and construct a five story building consisting of approximately 58 market rate apartments, as well as necessary underground and surface parking. 13. If the Redeveloper desires to make any material change in the Construction Plans after their approval by the EDA, the Redeveloper shall submit the proposed change to the EDA for its approval. The term “material” means changes that increase or decrease construction costs by $500,000 or more. 14. Subject to Unavoidable Delays, Redeveloper agrees to commence construction of the Minimum Improvements by December 31, 2012 and substantially complete them by March 1, 2014. 15. Redeveloper agrees to comply with the City's Green Building policy and will present evidence of such compliance including a detail of the specific energy- efficient/sustainable features or components implemented in the construction of the Minimum Improvements. 16. Promptly after completion of the Minimum Improvements, the EDA Representative will deliver to the Redeveloper a Certificate of Completion. The construction of the Minimum Improvements will be deemed to be substantially complete upon issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the Minimum Improvements, and upon determination by the EDA Representative that all related site improvements on the Redevelopment Property have been substantially completed in accordance with approved Construction Plans, subject to landscaping that cannot be completed until seasonal conditions permit. 17. The Redeveloper understands that the Redevelopment Property currently lies within the City’s Special Service District No. 2 and is subject to existing special service charges levied on all properties in the District. The Redeveloper agrees to continue to pay annual services charges for the Special Service District in an amount equal to what would be the amount payable by the Redevelopment Property if it remained a commercial property. 18. By no later than December 31, 2013, the Redeveloper shall submit to the EDA for review and approval a plan for maintenance and operation of all pedestrian and landscaping improvements located within the Redevelopment Property (the “Maintenance Plan”). 19. If the Redeveloper fails to perform the Maintenance in accordance with the Maintenance Plan, the EDA, at its option and following 30 days written notice to the Redeveloper, may enter the Redevelopment property and perform the Maintenance. The Redeveloper agrees to permit the City to specially assess any costs of the Maintenance proportionately against the Minimum Improvements. Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 2) Page 9 Subject: Business terms for Redevelopment Contract with Ellipse II LLC related to the e2 project 20. Redeveloper shall undertake all work related to the Redeveloper Public Improvements and the Minimum Improvements in compliance with all applicable federal and state laws, including without limitation all applicable state and federal Occupational Safety and Health Act regulations. Any subcontractors retained by Redeveloper shall be subject to the same requirements. 21. Upon execution of the Contract, the Redeveloper and EDA will execute an Assessment Agreement pursuant specifying an assessor's minimum Market Value for the Redevelopment Property and Minimum Improvements constructed thereon. The amount of the minimum market value will be negotiated by the EDA and Redeveloper with input from the City Assessor. Based on current assumptions of the construction timeline, the Assessment Agreement will most likely reflect a minimum market value based on final completion of the Minimum Improvements by January 2, 2014. 22. If Redeveloper requires mortgage financing for the development of the Project, the EDA agrees to subordinate its rights under the Contract to the Holder of any Mortgage securing construction or permanent financing, in accordance with the terms of a mutually-approved subordination agreement. 23. Redeveloper agrees not to transfer the agreement or the redevelopment property (except to an affiliate) prior to receiving a Certificate of Occupancy for the building without the prior written consent of the EDA. 24. Redeveloper agrees that the EDA and the City will not be held liable for any loss or damage to property or any injury to or death of any person occurring at or about or resulting from any defect in the Redevelopment Property or the Minimum Improvements. 25. Redeveloper agrees not to transfer the Redevelopment Contract or the Redevelopment Property (except to an affiliate) prior to receiving a Certificate of Completion without the prior written consent of the EDA, except for construction mortgage financing and/or permanent financing. The EDA's consent shall not be unreasonably withheld, conditioned or delayed. The EDA agrees to provide its consent or refusal to consent to Redeveloper in writing within 10 days after a request for such consent from Redeveloper. 26. The Redeveloper agrees not to discriminate upon the basis of race, color, creed, sex or national origin in the construction and maintenance of the Minimum Improvements and Public Improvements as well as lease, rental, use or occupancy of the Redevelopment Property or any improvements erected thereon. Meeting Date: December 12, 2011 Agenda Item #: 3 Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance Presentation Other: EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other: Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other: TITLE: Highway 7/Wooddale Interchange Traffic and Trail Improvement Options. RECOMMENDED ACTION: No formal action required at this time. This staff report has been prepared to assist with the study session discussion on this topic. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does Council wish to pursue any or all of the recommended treatment strategies? BACKGROUND: History On September 26, 2011, the City Council was provided two reports that provided background information and histories for: 1) The regional trail crossings at Wooddale Avenue and Beltline Boulevard and 2) The design and public process with regards to construction of the Highway 7/Wooddale interchange and bridge. Those reports are attached to this report for further reference and background information. At that time the City Council made it clear it wished to discuss these topic areas at a future study session. Please note that representatives from MnDOT, Three Rivers Park District and SLP PD will be in attendance for this study session discussion. Analysis Safety concerns and operational issues have been expressed with regard to the trail crossings at both Wooddale Avenue and Beltline Blvd, as well as the operation of the newly constructed bridge and interchange area. As stated in previous reports, the extent to which improvements can be constructed at both trail crossings is limited due to pending light rail and station improvements. Because the regional trail is located within the Hennepin County Regional Railroad Authority (HCRRA) right of way and LRT design specifics (including specific rail locations) are unknown, longer term solutions such as separated grade crossings have not been possible. However, the concerns over current safety and the time lag until specific LRT design specifics are known has raised the need to consider further options. Over the past couple of months, staff has reviewed these concerns further with the assistance of a traffic consultant (SRF) and other stakeholders, including Mn/DOT, Three Rivers Park District, and the Public Safety/Police Departments of both the City and Three Rivers Park District. Comments and input received from both motorists and trail users throughout the process have been considered as well. The attached memorandum from SRF dated December 2, 2011 pr ovides an analysis of the crossings and provides a wide variety of treatment strategies for consideration. Different strategy options were compared for effectiveness against specific objectives such as vehicle speed reductions, overall pedestrian and bicycle safety, visibility enhancement, and other considerations. These assessments were all compiled onto a multi-colored matrix developed for both Beltline and Wooddale and utilized as a base-map and tool for extensive interactive Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 3) Page 2 Subject: Highway 7/Wooddale Interchange Traffic and Trail Improvement Options discussion amongst the stakeholders. Although the color coded assessments denoting qualitative effectiveness are essentially subjective in nature, they do pr ovide a good general base for analysis and discussion purposes. The consultant also included observations and suggestions with regards to complaints regarding the bridge and interchange sightlines, both in terms of inter- relation with the trail crossing and by itself. After reviewing and discussing the various strategies with the stakeholders, the following are recommended: WOODDALE AVENUE • Strategy W2: Extension of the center refuge median is recommended to improve trail safety by providing a better refuge area for trail users (approximate cost - $15,000). This option could be performed by a combination of paint and curb extension. • Strategy W3: Restriping Wooddale Avenue to a two-lane roadway with left-turn lanes would help to organize traffic flow as motorists travel through this area. Based on the current ADT and a detailed operations analysis completed for this corridor, restriping the roadway would have minimal impact to roadway capacity operations. This strategy would benefit trail users by reducing their exposure to vehicle traffic by reducing the number of traffic lanes, as well as reducing traffic speeds on Wooddale Avenue. In addition, the re-striping would provide additional space for the creation of a wider center median (approximate cost - $10,000). • Strategy W11: Construction of a trail chicane (sharp bends) to add curvature prior to the crossing would significantly reduce the speed of trail users as they approach Wooddale Avenue. This strategy is suggested as a means of addressing cyclists in particular who do not stop or even slow down for the stop signs. However, there is limited right of way in which to perform this option. R emoving the current trail curvature on the east side and extending the trail to intersect perpendicular to Wooddale Avenue would force users to slow down significantly. The curvature of the trail on the west side could be sharpened as it approaches the crossing to slow users. As trail users approach the roadway, soft or hard landscaping features could be used to guide trail users north on Wooddale Avenue, parallel to the roadway, to the current crossing location. This realignment would provide a safety benefit to trail users by reducing their speed as they approach Wooddale Avenue (SRF Memo - Figure 7). The trail realignment and any associated landscape features would require construction within the HCRRA right of way and would require their permission (approximate cost - $50,000). Strategy W6 could be considered as an additional improvement to the Wooddale Avenue trail crossing to improve safety for pedestrians and bicyclists, if and when the City feels additional improvements might be necessary. • Strategy W6: Due to the tight intersection spacing along Wooddale Avenue and the close proximity to the railroad crossing, the use of dynamic in-pavement lighting (lighting is embedded into the pavement) could provide a safety benefit to trail users by increasing the visibility of the crossing and heightening the driver’s awareness of a pedestrian or bicyclist in the crossing, helping to clarify the right of way at this crosswalk. This device would provide a similar benefit to a rapid flash warning beacon, without the added confusion to motorists approaching the railroad crossing (approximate cost - $20,000). Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 3) Page 3 Subject: Highway 7/Wooddale Interchange Traffic and Trail Improvement Options Finally, Strategy W13 could be considered as an additional measure that would address the bridge and interchange sightline concerns, along with providing a possible added benefit for trail users. • Strategy W13: Currently, the TH 7 ramp intersections with Wooddale Avenue are closely spaced unsignalized intersections with limited sight lines (SRF Memo - Figure 3). The installation of traffic signals at the ramp intersections would improve traffic operations for the adjacent intersections and would benefit trail users by providing additional gaps in Wooddale Avenue vehicle traffic. The approximate cost to install traffic signals (for both ramp intersections) is estimated to be $300,000 - $400,000. The sight lines at the TH 7/Wooddale Avenue interchange ramps are not related to the safety of the trail crossing solely, and Mn/DOT did provide feedback for an improvement option to consider. To improve the limited sight lines at the Wooddale Avenue/TH 7 westbound off-ramp intersection, Mn/DOT has suggested extending the current sidewalk on the east side of the bridge slightly to the west. In addition, the current crosswalk on this approach could be shifted further west. With this modification, the sight lines for this approach would improve. However, the feasibility of this option would need to be evaluated further to determine the cost and design modifications that may be required for the roadway and the bridge itself. A less costly measure for further consideration and review would be to slightly shift the existing curb ramps and crosswalk markings further from the ramps. Although such a shift would be very minimal, improvements to the sightlines would see some improvement. T he cost would depend on the extent of treatment. S hifting the crosswalk a couple of feet would be minimal. H owever, reconstructing the sidewalk and/or curbs would require a more extensive re-evaluation, as those elements may be integral to the bridge itself. BELTLINE BOULEVARD To address safety concerns within the limited constraints of the rail corridor, improvement strategy B4 is recommended for further consideration as follows: • Strategy B4: The current alignment of the Beltline Boulevard trail crossing provides an opportunity for bicyclists to approach the crossing at high rates of speed. The construction of a trail chicane to add curvature as the trail approaches Beltline Boulevard would provide a safety benefit to trail users by reducing the speed of trail users as they approach and cross the roadway (approximate cost - $50,000). A potential approach would be to realign the trail on the west side of Beltline Boulevard to the south and on the east side of Beltline Boulevard to the north (SRF Memo - Figure 8). As trail users approach the roadway, soft or hard landscaping features would be used to guide them. These features would be low-lying to avoid blocking sight lines. This realignment would provide significant safety benefits for trail users. One benefit is a decrease in the speed of trail users approaching Beltline Boulevard. In addition, the alignment of trail users facing motorists as they travel north along Beltline Boulevard towards the crossing would improve the visibility and non- verbal communication between motorists and trail users. The trail realignment and associated landscape features would require construction within the HCRRA right of way and would require their permission. Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 3) Page 4 Subject: Highway 7/Wooddale Interchange Traffic and Trail Improvement Options Summary The consultant’s analysis provides a detailed assessment of the Cedar Lake LRT Regional Trail crossings at Wooddale Avenue and Beltline Boulevard, and also addresses sightline issues associated with the interchange tight diamond configuration. The assessment for the trail crossings was completed by applying criteria that is proven to improve pedestrian and bicycle safety at trail crossing locations to a wide variety of strategies. Based on this evaluation, conversations with stakeholders, and taking into consideration the current roadway design and surrounding environment, the solutions that are considered to provide the greatest benefit and are most applicable at each location are recommended. However, further additional detailed analysis, design, and review would be necessary for each of these recommended strategies prior to implementing. Determining more specific costs and possible funding sources will generally require further evaluation, depending on options chosen. The more minor treatment strategies such as additional extending the existing median may be covered covered through existing operating budgets. However, more advanced treatments such as traffic signals and in-pavement lighting would need investigation of other possible funding sources such as Municipal State Aid, bonding, EDA funds, or possible partnerships with other agency stakeholders, Wooddale Avenue • Extension of a painted center refuge median (approximate cost - $15,000) • Restriping Wooddale Avenue to a two-lane roadway with left-turn lanes (approximate cost - $10,000) • Construction of a trail chicane (approximate cost - $50,000) It should be noted that any or all of the above strategies could be implemented either together or in stages if desired. If additional improvements are felt necessary, the following could also be considered: • Dynamic in-pavement lighting at the crossing (approximate cost - $20,000) • Installation of traffic signals at the TH 7 ramp intersections (approximate cost - $300,000 - $400,000) The consideration of traffic signals would also need to consider future traffic levels, especially with regards to a nearby LRT station. Beltline Boulevard • Construction of a trail chicane (approximate cost - $50,000) FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Determining more specific costs and possible funding sources will require further evaluation, depending on options chosen. The more minor treatment strategies such as an extension of the existing median on Wooddale can likely be covered through existing operating budgets. However, more advanced treatments such as traffic signals and in-pavement lighting would need investigation of other possible funding sources such as Municipal State Aid, bonding, EDA funds, or possible partnerships with other agency stakeholders. Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 3) Page 5 Subject: Highway 7/Wooddale Interchange Traffic and Trail Improvement Options VISION CONSIDERATION: The following Strategic Direction and focus area was identified by Council in 2007: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged community. Focus will be on: • Promoting regional transportation issues Attachments: - Study Session Report: Southwest Regional Trail Crossings: (Beltline and Wooddale): Background and History (September 26, 2011) - Study Session Report: Wooddale Avenue Bridge Design: Background Information (September 26, 2011) - SRF Memorandum: Traffic Engineering Study of Regional Trail Crossings (December 2, 2011) Prepared by: Scott Brink, City Engineer Reviewed by: Michael P. Rardin, Director of Public Works Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Meeting Date: September 26, 2011 Agenda Item #: 9 Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance Presentation Other: EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other: Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other: TITLE: Southwest Regional Trail Crossings (Wooddale and Beltline): Background and History. RECOMMENDED ACTION: None at this time. The purpose of this report is to provide Council with a background and general history of these trail crossings in preparation for a study session discussion later this year. POLICY CONSIDERATION: None at this time. Please let staff know of any questions you may have. BACKGROUND: History Since the Cedar Lake (SW LRT) Trail was constructed by Three Rivers Park District over ten years ago, safety concerns have been expressed at the Wooddale Avenue and Beltline Boulevard street crossings. The City Council has reviewed and discussed the crossings several times over the past five years or so at various study sessions and regular meetings. Dates include June 19, 2006, November 27, 2006, February 26, 2007, March 19, 2007, and September 24, 2007 . A written report was also provided on October 26, 2009. I n addition, the Wooddale Avenue crossing specifically was reviewed extensively from 2007 through 2009 as part of the public process for the Highway 7/Wooddale Ave. Interchange project design. On June 19, 2006, t he City Council reviewed a memo from Mike Rardin (May 26, 2006) and discussed options for the regional trail crossings at Beltline Boulevard and Wooddale Avenue (attached). The memo provided a general background and history of the crossings, including the following recommendations approved by the Council: 1. Remove the white crosswalk pavement markings. 2. Narrow the traffic lanes and add a median (safe haven) with appropriate warning signs and markings. 3. Study the feasibility of converting the trail crossing to a pedestrian crossing. 4. Support the Three Rivers Park District trail/street grade separation project funded for 2010. At the November 27, 2006 Study Session, the City Council reviewed a report from staff and a memo from SRF (attached) that provided relevant background information and possible changes which could be considered for the two crossings. Council discussed possible street crossing options, safety, long term improvements, and provided input to staff. Council also requested further information on the following: Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 3) Subject: Highway 7/Wooddale Interchange Traffic and Trail Improvement Options Page 6 1. Beltline Boulevard • Obtain information regarding the feasibility, cost, and schedule to relocate the existing railroad crossing warning signals associated with a median / refuge installation and widening of the roadway. • Request additional information regarding the Three Rivers Park District trail/street grade separation project funded for 2010. 2. Wooddale Avenue • Obtain information regarding the feasibility, cost, and schedule to relocate the existing railroad crossing warning signals associated with a median / refuge installation and widening of the roadway. • Check into the possibility of prohibiting right turns on red from eastbound Hwy 7 to southbound Wooddale Ave. • Request additional information regarding Park District plans for a trail/street grade separation project. After staff followed through further with Mn/DOT, CP Railroad, and Three Rivers Park District, the following additional information was presented to the City Council on February 26, 2007: 1. Beltline Boulevard • The railroad indicated that the existing railroad crossing warning signals could be relocated in the spring (given adequate notice) at an approximate cost of $100,000 (a detailed estimate was being developed at the time by the railroad). • There was no additional information available regarding the Park District trail/street grade separation project at the time. 2. Wooddale Avenue • It was determined that it w as not necessary to relocate the existing railroad crossing warning signals to install a median / refuge with roadway widening. • A right turn on red prohibition from eastbound Hwy 7 to southbound Wooddale Ave. would require a request by the City. It was not known if Mn/Dot would approve such a request, as Mn/Dot typically does not like these prohibitions as motorists generally do not obey them. • There was no additional information regarding a Park District trail/street grade separation project at the time. The district reiterated its desire to participate in the Hwy 7 / Wooddale interchange project development process so trail crossing needs could be included in that project. A grade-separated crossing was presented as the best permanent solution. At the time, Three Rivers Park District had secured funding to provide for such a crossing at Beltline in 2010. The cost of a separated grade crossing was estimated to be approximately $1.0 -$1.5 M. A more immediate, or “interim” solution proposed the construction of a median with a refuge area. A temporary or “non-raised” median had been installed the previous summer and had received positive feedback. However, an improved and more permanent type of raised median was also discussed. Another interim measure proposed for consideration was a signalized crossing at Beltline. These interim measures were summarized to Council on February 26, 2007 as follows: Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 3) Subject: Highway 7/Wooddale Interchange Traffic and Trail Improvement Options Page 7 Beltline Blvd Available Interim Improvement Options Estimated Cost Earliest Possible Completion Date 1 - Install a pedestrian actuated traffic signal (signal- ized crosswalk) $100,000 Summer 2008 2 - Widen road and install a raised 12’ wide median: - raised median, striping, paving, etc. - RR signal relocation and crossing surface Extension $105,000 $125,000 $230,000 Summer 2007 Summer 2007 3 - Install a 6’ wide raised median: - raised median, striping, paving, etc. $20,000 Spring 2007 Wooddale Ave Available Interim Improvement Options Estimated Cost Earliest Possible Completion Date 1 - Realign the trail and crossing north to the south side of Hwy 7 $45,000 Summer 2007 2 - Install a raised 12’ wide median: - raised median, striping, paving, etc. - RR crossing surface extension $35,000 $25,000 $60,000 Summer 2007 Summer 2007 3 - Install a raised 6’ wide median: - raised median, striping, paving, etc. $20,000 Spring 2007 4 - Install a signed and marked 6’ wide median: (same as Beltline Blvd currently exists) $10,000 Spring 2007 In addition to the various interim improvement options and estimated costs, Council also considered the following funding and policy implications: Beltline Blvd 1. Should staff continue to maintain the Beltline Blvd crossing as it currently exists or would Council like to see one of the three improvements identified above pursued? 2. If an improvement is desired at Beltline Blvd, should that be completed in 2007 at city cost or should outside funds be pursued for a future project? Wooddale Ave 1. Staff is prepared to request Council approval for the installation of a signed and marked 6’ wide median on Wooddale Ave this spring; does Council desire staff to pursue one of the other crossing improvement options at Wooddale Ave? 2. If a crossing improvement other than the one proposed by staff is desired at Wooddale Ave, should that be completed in 2007 at city cost or should outside funds be pursued for a future project? 3. Does Council desire staff to request a right turn on red prohibition for eastbound Hwy 7 traffic at Wooddale Ave? Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 3) Subject: Highway 7/Wooddale Interchange Traffic and Trail Improvement Options Page 8 For Beltline Boulevard, the Council identified option #1, the pedestrian actuated traffic signal, as the preferred option. As a result, staff brought forward a motion to adopt a resolution accepting a project report and establishing and ordering Project No. 2007-2700 for crossing improvements at both Beltline Boulevard and Wooddale Avenue trail crossings at the March 19, 2007 C ity Council meeting. Because changes at Wooddale Avenue were anticipated as a result of the Highway 7/Wooddale interchange project design process, a minor 12 foot wide median installation project was authorized at the Wooddale crossing. At the same time the installation of a traffic signal at Beltline Boulevard specifically was identified for further pursuit. In addition to establishing a project, Council directed staff to pursue options for outside funding. As a result, staff contacted surrounding communities and the Three Rivers Park District to request participation in the cost of these projects, and also applied for funding through a new federal program, the Non-Motorized Transportation Pilot Program. In the mean-time, the median (signs and markings) installed on Beltline Blvd in 2006 h ad received satisfactory comments to date and based on feedback, staff proposed maintaining Beltline Blvd in its current condition while funding for a traffic signal could be pursued. A similar median was installed on Wooddale Ave. in the spring of 2007, funded by the Public Works Operations Budget ($10,000). At the September 24, 2007 Study Session staff provided an update on the traffic signal project. A preliminary plan and cost estimate were completed, bringing the estimated cost of the project to $250,000. S taff also notified Council that the grant application for the Non-Motorized Transportation Pilot Program was not successful. As a result, staff offered the following options for the Beltline Boulevard crossing: 1. Identify and secure a l ocal (City) funding source and proceed with a traffic signal installation in the spring of 2008. The installation would be considered “temporary” until Three Rivers Park District constructed their long term improvement (separated grade crossing). All signal fixtures would be salvageable for use elsewhere when removed (salvage value estimated at $75,000, or less). 2. Discontinue consideration of a temporary signal and defer to the long term permanent improvement being pursued by Three Rivers Park District, scheduled at that time for 2010. In the meantime, minor improvements (temporary bituminous median and striping) could be installed at the Beltline Crossing at a minimal cost (estimated at $10,000, or less), similar to the improvements recently installed at the Wooddale Ave crossing. 3. Leave the crossing as is until a long term permanent improvement being pursued by Three Rivers Park District is completed. The Council directed staff to pursue the raised median curb option (#2 above) and to terminate efforts to install a signal (#1 above). After the September 24, 2007 Study Session, the raised median and lane striping at the Beltline Boulevard crossing were installed. Staff also learned that the Three Rivers Park District project to provide a grade-separated trail crossing had been put on hold, pending final decisions about light rail through St. Louis Park, specifically with regards to the proposed station at Beltline Boulevard. Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 3) Subject: Highway 7/Wooddale Interchange Traffic and Trail Improvement Options Page 9 Wooddale Crossing Layout The current crossing layout at Wooddale Avenue was the result of an extensive public process conducted as part of the Highway 7/Wooddale interchange design. This process also considered future changes to the current railroad track configuration in anticipation of future light rail construction. However, much of the design specifics of light rail are still unknown, which added to the difficulty of finding a more permanent solution for the trail crossing. This was all discussed during the public process which also included representatives of Hennepin County (owners of the railroad right of way), Mn/Dot, Three Rivers Park District (owners of the regional trail), the project consultant (SRF), the Police Department, trail users, adjacent neighborhoods, and others. Throughout the process, it was generally acknowledged that a separated grade crossing (i.e., the trail going over or under Wooddale) was likely the most desirable safe and long term “fix”. However, with the unknown design of the pending LRT, such a project was not immediately possible. In addition, no improvements were allowed within the railroad right of way which extends nearly 100 feet from the existing tracks. This is similar to the constraints faced at Beltline Boulevard where Three Rivers Park District was not able to move forward on their grade separation project. Complicating the design for the Highway 7/Wooddale interchange (including the trail crossing) is that several traffic movements are packed into a very short stretch of roadway. Minimizing right of way takings on the north side of the roadway, combined with the railroad restrictions on the south resulted in a tight diamond configuration, which essentially placed a short bridge, two ramps, two frontage roads, a regional trail crossing, and a railroad crossing all within only 700 feet or less. In addition, much of that available space is taken by railroad right of way where no construction or improvements were allowed. As a result, the frontage road and trail crossing were squeezed much closer to the ramps than preferred. Another option discussed during the course of design was to route the regional trail users down to 36th and cross Wooddale at that location (where there is a traffic signal). However, this was not viewed favorably for several reasons (crossing the tracks twice, eliminating straight through movement for trail users, heavy traffic at 36th, etc.). All that said, there was a general consensus from stakeholders during the process that a marked and legally enforceable crosswalk at the current location (at the revised frontage road location) would be best given the design constraints and limitations imposed at this location. Since the interchange and the trail crossing opened to traffic, staff has reviewed the crossing further with Three Rivers Park District, Mn/Dot, the Police Department, the project’s engineering consultant (SRF), and trail users. Additional signage and pavement markings have been added to increase visibility, and other options (such as revising Wooddale traffic striping) are being reviewed further. A follow-up traffic study will also consider current and projected traffic levels with regards to the light rail station, future rehab work to 36th Street and Wooddale, the possibility of traffic signals at the ramps, and future growth projections in general. How other issues are addressed during LRT design, including resolution of the freight rail issue will also impact not only the trail crossing, but the entire surrounding area. Public Safety staff from both Three Rivers Park District and the City continue to monitor the crossing and observe operations and user compliance (both motorists and trail users). Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 3) Subject: Highway 7/Wooddale Interchange Traffic and Trail Improvement Options Page 10 Three Rivers Park District Three Rivers Park District owns and oversees several miles of trails, including many roadway crossings of varying properties. The Park District has been engaged in a system-wide review of trail crossings throughout the metro region, including types of crossings and a review of overall consistency. The Park District will be hosting a workshop on October 14 which will include representatives of Hennepin County and many of the communities served by the trail system (including St. Louis Park). Further information regarding crossings on a comprehensive and system-wide basis, including comparisons with other communities will be further attained from the workshop. VISION CONSIDERATION: The following Strategic Direction and focus area was identified by Council in 2007: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged community. Focus will be on: Promoting regional transportation issues and related dedicated funding sources affecting St. Louis Park including but not limited to Hwy 100 and SWLRT. Attachments: May 26, 2006 Memorandum November 10, 2006 Memorandum (SRF) Prepared by: Scott Brink, City Engineer Reviewed by: Mike Rardin, Director of Public Works Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 3) Subject: Highway 7/Wooddale Interchange Traffic and Trail Improvement Options Page 11 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Arth CITYOF ST. LOUIS PARK Public Works Department 5005 Minnetonka Boulevard St. Louis Park, MN 55416 (952) 924-2555 Fax: (952) 924-2663 Tom Harmening, City Manager Mike Rardin, Public Works Director May 26,2006 SW Regional Trail-Crossing Improvements (final) W ooddale Ave and Beltline Blvd INTRODUCTION: This memo provides background information and proposed changes to the SW Regional Trail crossings on Wooddale Ave and Beltline Blvd. These changes are being proposed as a result of safety concerns at these two trail crossings. There is a very high volume of both trail users and vehicle traffic at both of these crossings. In addition, there appears to be confusion. with both trail users and vehicle operators over right of way requirements at these crossings. These crossings were installed as part of a multi-year regional trail project by the Three Rivers Park District about 2000. It appears these crossings were installed as a part of the project to provide for convenient midblock trail crossings. It also appears the original intent at these crossings was for trail users to stop and yield to vehicles on the roadway. BACKGROUND: Since the SW Regional Trail was constructed, trail usage along with vehicle traffic at these two crossings has increased to the point where safety of trail users at these crossings is a concern. Late last year additional trail signs and trail pavement markings were installed in an attempt to increase crossing safety by enhancing educational and enforcement efforts -aimed primarily at trail users. It does not appear those efforts have had any significant impact on safety at these two crossings. The main problems appear to be high volumes of trail users and vehicle traffic, wide midbl9ck street crossings, and confusion over right of way. To clarify current state statute and regulations: vehicles are required to stop and yield to pedestrians at crosswalks; trail users are required to stop and yield to vehicles at trail crossings. These crossings were intended to be and are signed as trail crossings, but they also have crosswalk pavement markings which legally establish them as crosswalks. It appears that bicyclists are required to yield to vehicles on the roadway while vehicles on the roadway are required to yield to pedestrians in the crosswalks. This is confusing to trail users and vehicle operators. Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 3) Subject: Highway 7/Wooddale Interchange Traffic and Trail Improvement Options Page 12 EVALUATION: The situation at both crossings appears unacceptable and should be changed. In general, remedies to this would be to eliminate the crossings; relocate them to a safer location; or, revise them to provide for positive stop and right of way controls. Specifically, the following options have been identified for consideration: BEL TLINE BLVD. 1. close the existing crossing for use 2. provide for a grade separated facility (currently funded for 201 0) 3. relocation of the existing crossing: a. north to County Road 25, or b. south to Park Glen Road 4. convert the existing crossing to a trail crossing by removing the crosswalk markings which would then provide vehicles with clear right of way over all trail users 5. convert the existing crossing to a pedestrian crossing which would then provide pedestrians with clear right of way over vehicle traffic a. install a signed and marked crosswalk; or, b. install a pedestrian activated traffic signal WOOD DALE AVE. 1. close the existing crossing for use 2. provide for a grade separated facility (requested but not funded) 3. relocation of the existing crossing: a. north to Hwy 7, or b. south to W36th Street 4. convert the existing crossing to a trail crossing by removing the crosswalk markings which would then provide vehicles with clear right of way over all trail users The city is the legal authority for these street crossings and has the power to decide and act in the manner it deems in the best interests of the public with regard to the situation described and options provided above. In doing so, the City has the discretion to consider such environmental, social, economic and/ or financial impacts it deems warranted under the circumstances. Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 3) Subject: Highway 7/Wooddale Interchange Traffic and Trail Improvement Options Page 13 RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends the immediate actions (in terms of days) described below be taken at the earliest opportunity and the short term (in terms of months) and long term (in terms of years) actions be considered for approval by the City Council. BEL TLINE BLVD. Immediate (days) -convert the ex1st1ng crossing to a trail crossing (as originally intended) which would then provide vehicle traffic with clear right of way over all trail users crossing the street. To do so would entail: 1. removal of the white crosswalk pavement markings 2. replacement of the 18"x 18" trail "stop" signs with 24"x24" stop signs 3. installation of a "Cross Traffic Does Not Stop" plaque (R1-X2) beneath the 24" trail stop sign 4. replacement of the black on white trail educational signs with larger black on white educational signs stating "ALL TRAIL USERS MUST STOP AND YIELD" Short Term (months)-consider: 1. the possibility of improving the street crossing as follows • narrow the traffic lanes to 11 feet wide • installation of a 6 foot wide median through the area with a 14 foot gap at the trail location • installation of a white stop "bar" and a "stop" pavement marking for trail users in the median area • installation of advance "street narrows" warning signs • installation of reflectorized warning posts on the median along with painting the median yellow 2. studying the feasibility of converting the existing crossing to a pedestrian crossing which would then provide pedestrians with clear right of way over vehicle traffic. This could possibly be accomplished with the installation of a signed and marked crosswalk or a pedestrian activated traffic signal. Long Term (years)-support the Three Rivers Park District proposal/project intended to grade separate the Regional Trail from Beltline Blvd. Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 3) Subject: Highway 7/Wooddale Interchange Traffic and Trail Improvement Options Page 14 WOODDALE AVE. Immediate (days) -convert the existing crossing to a trail crossing (as originally intended) which would then provide vehicle traffic with clear right of way over all trail users crossing the street. To do so would entail: 1. removal of the white crosswalk pavement markings 2. replacement of the 18"x 18" trail "stop" signs with 24"x24" stop signs 3. installation of a "Cross Traffic Does Not Stop" plaque (R1-X2) beneath the 24" trail stop sign 4. replacement of the small black on white trail educational signs with larger signs stating "ALL TRAIL USERS MUST STOP AND YIELD" Short Term (months)-close the existing crossing and relocate it north to the signalized pedestrian crossing at Hwy 7 and construct an 8 foot wide bituminous surfaced trail on the east side ofWooddale Ave from Hwy 7 to W36th Street. Long Term (years)-support efforts to develop and fund a project to grade separate the Regional Trail from W ooddale Ave. SUMMARY: Based on the safety concerns at these two trail crossings, staff is proposing the "immediate" actions described above be taken at both crossings at the earliest opportunity. A staff report will be prepared for Council to consider the proposed short and long term actions during June. In addition to the actions proposed above, staff is determining ways to partner with Three Rivers Park District to improve enforcement at these (and all other) trail crossings along with increased educational efforts directed not only at trail users, but also at our city residents. Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 3) Subject: Highway 7/Wooddale Interchange Traffic and Trail Improvement Options Page 15 ~CONSULTING GROUP, INc. Transportation • Civil • Structural • Environmental • Planning • Traffic • Landscape Architecture • Parking • Right of Way MEMORANDUM TO: Scott Brink, PE, City Engineer City of St. Louis Park FROM: Patrick Corkle, PE, PTOE, Senior Associate SRF Consulting Group, Inc. DATE: November 10, 2006 SRF No. 0065791 SUBJECT: SOUTHWEST REGIONAL TRAIL CROSSING ALTERNATIVES- W OODDALE A VENUE AND BEL TLINE BOULEY ARD INTRODUCTION We have completed a study to assess trail crossing alternatives for the Southwest Regional Trail crossings at W oodale A venue and Beltline Boulevard in the City of St. Louis Park. The purpose of this study is to evaluate options to improve the operation and safety for both roadway and trail users at the crossing of W ooddale A venue and Beltline Boulevard. Both crossings experience a high volume of pedestrian/bicycle traffic and moderate vehicular traffic. Previously, there were marked crosswalks for the Southwest Regional Trail as it crossed W oodale A venue and Beltline A venue. With the marked crosswalks, there was confusion with the crosswalk law by motorists and trail users, which requires motorists to stop for pedestrians, not bicyclists, in the crosswalk. Due to the confusion and safety concerns associated with the marked crosswalks, they were recently removed. The e~isting trail stops signs were replaced with larger signs and supplemented with an "All Trail Users Must Stop" sign. This situation requires all trail users to stop for traffic on W ooddale A venue and Beltline Boulevard. Wooddale Avenue and Beltline Boulevard are currently four-lane roadways with a posted speed limit of 30 mph at the trail crossings. Daily vehicular volumes range from 10,000 to 15,000 on both roadways. The combination of high trail use, crossing four lanes of traffic, moderate roadway volumes, an adjacent railroad and a crosswalk law not understood by all users, creates an unsafe condition for all modes of travel. One Carlson Parkway North, Suite 1 50 Minneapolis, Minnesota 5 544 7-4443 Tel: 763-475-0010 • Fax: 763-475-2429 srfconsulting.com An Equal Opportunity Employer Case Plaza, One North Second Street Fargo, North Dakota 581 02-4807 Tel: 701-237-0010 • Fax: 701-237-0017 Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 3) Subject: Highway 7/Wooddale Interchange Traffic and Trail Improvement Options Page 16 Scott Brink, PE, City Engineer. City of St. Louis Park SUMMARY November 10, 2006 Page 2 Crossing options were developed and evaluated at Wooddale A venue and Beltline Boulevard. These alternatives can be summarized into two groups. One group is based on the type of crossing (crosswalk, traffic control devise, installation of medians, relocation or separation of crossing) and the other is based on the type of roadway cross-section (four-lane undivided, four-lane divided and two-lane divided). To organize the crossing options, we listed the following trail-crossing options based on the roadway cross-section. At Beltline Boulevard, all three types of roadway cross-sections could be considered, although only certain crossing options should be used for each cross-section. Four-lane undivided roadway A traffic control device should be used with this roadway cross-section. The device could either be warning flashers, traffic signal or "hawk" pedestrian flasher/signal. The striped crosswalk would be re-installed with these devices (Options 4 and 5). The traffic signal device would require coordination with the railroad. The other option would be to remove the at-grade crossing by relocating it or to provide a grade separation. Re-alignment of the trail would require the crossing of a free-right island at CSAH 25, which is not desirable. The grade separation has received federal funding and should be constructed in 2010. (Options 2 and 3) Four-lane divided roadway A median would be constructed in the roadway at the trail crossing. An important detail would be the width of the median, to provide refuge for trail users (pedestrians, bicyclists and bicyclists with buggies). The crosswalk could be re-installed, since it will significantly reduce the complications of a trail user crossing the roadway if a refuge area is provided. (Options 9 and 10). Two-lane divided roadway A wide median would be constructed in the roadway at the trail crossing. Roadway traffic would not be requested to stop, therefore a crosswalk should not be striped. The shorter crossing distance would make the crossing easier for trail users. The roadway transition from two lanes to one lane south of the CSAH 25 intersection could be difficult. Additionally, a traffic signal at Beltline Boulevard/Park Glen Road may be needed for the cross-street traffic (Options 11 and 12). The other three devices (Options 6, 7 and 8) are vanatlons of re-installing the striped crosswalk without enough enhancements to provide additional safety. Our review of the feasible trail crossing alternatives at Beltline Boulevard is summarized in the following table: Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 3) Subject: Highway 7/Wooddale Interchange Traffic and Trail Improvement Options Page 17 Scott Brink, PE, City Engineer. City of St. Louis Park Table 1 November 10, 2006 Page 3 Summary of Trail Crossing Alternatives-Beltline Boulevard Traffic Flow Safety Construction No. Crossing Option Roadway Trail Roadway Trail Cost 1 No Crosswalk Good Poor Fair Fair to $0 (current condition) Poor 2 Grade-Separated Good Good Good Good $1,000,000 Crossing 3 Relocation of Crossing Good Poor Good to Fair $25,000 Fair 4 Traffic Signal with Fair Fair Fair Good to $100,000 Crosswalk Fair 5 Pedestrian Warning Poor Good to Fair to Fair $50,000 Devices with Crosswalk Fair Poor 6 Striped Crosswalk ------ --------- 7 Speed Advisory with ---------------Crosswalk 8 Relocation of Stop Bars ---------------with Crosswalk 9 Center Median without Good to Poor Fair Fair to $25,000 Refuge (no widening) Fair Poor 10 Center Median with Good Fair to Good to Fair $50,000- Refuge (widen road) Poor Fair $150,000 (1) 11 Center Median with Fair Fair Fair Fair $50,000 Refuge (lose a lane) 12 Center Median with Fair to Fair Fair to Fair $30,000 Bump-outs (lose a lane) Poor Poor Note (1): Cost varies greatly depending on the impacts to the railroad crossing and equipment. At W ooddale A venue, the feasible options are limited. The traffic congestion and traffic signal spacing between 36th Street and TH 7 does not allow for a traffic control device, striped crosswalk, or reduction in the number of lanes (Options 4-8, 11 and 12). Four-lane undivided roadway The only options which would improve the crossing condition are a re-alignment of the trail to the TH 7 or 36th Street traffic signal, or a grade separation. Since re-alignment to 36th Street requires crossing the railroad tracks, TH 7 may be the better choice. In addition, the re-alignment of the trail to TH 7 would occur on city property (Options 2 and 3). Four-lane divided roadway A median would be constructed in the roadway at the trail crossing. An important detail would be the width of the median, to provide a refuge for trail users (pedestrians, bicyclists and bicyclists with buggies). The crosswalk should not be re-installed (Options 9 and 10). Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 3) Subject: Highway 7/Wooddale Interchange Traffic and Trail Improvement Options Page 18 Scott Brink, PE, City Engineer. City of St. Louis Park Two-lane divided roadway November 10, 2006 Page4 This roadway configuration is not feasible at this location. The negative impact on roadway and adjacent intersections operations could be significant. Our review of the feasible trail crossing alternatives at Wooddale Avenue is summarized in the following table: Table 2 Summary of Trail Crossing Alternatives -Wooddale Avenue Traffic Flow Safety Construction No. Crossin~ Option Roadway Trail Roadway Trail Cost 1 No Crosswalk Good Poor Good to Fair to $0 (current condition) Fair Poor 2 Grade-Separated Good Good Good Good $1,000,000 Crossing 3 Relocation of Crossing Good Fair to Poor Good to Good to $40,000 Realignment of Trail Fair Fair 4 Traffic Signal --------------- 5 Pedestrian Warning ---------------Devices with Crosswalk 6 Striped Crosswalk --------- ------ 7 Speed Advisory with ---------------Crosswalk 8 Relocation of Stop Bars --------- ------with Crosswalk 9 Center Median without Good to Poor Fair Fair to $25,000 Refuge (no widening) Fair Poor 10 Center Median with Good Fair to Poor Good to Fair $75,000- Refuge (widen road) Fair $150,000 (l) 11 Center Median with ---------------Refuge (lose a lane) 12 Center Median with ---------------Bump-outs (lose a lane) Note (1): Cost varies greatly depending on the impacts to the railroad crossing and equipment. Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 3) Subject: Highway 7/Wooddale Interchange Traffic and Trail Improvement Options Page 19 Scott Brink, PE, City Engineer. City of St. Louis Park RECOMMENDATIONS November 10,2006 Page 5 We do not recommend re-installing a striped crosswalk without other improvements. An additional treatment is needed to enhance the crossing (median, warning flasher, etc.), or a different strategy is needed altogether (traffic signal, crossing relocation, etc.). Based on our review and analysis of the trail crossing alternatives, we recommend grade- separated crossings at Wooddale Avenue and Beltline Boulevard. As an interim solution, a median with a refuge area (as feasible) should be installed at the Beltline Boulevard and Wooddale Avenue crossings. Within the past few weeks, a temporary six-foot marked median was installed on Beltline Boulevard at the trail crossing. It is our understanding that the feedback has been positive and the temporary measure is operating safely. Therefore, if the temporary median at the Beltline Boulevard crossing continues to receive positive feedback and is observed to be operating safely, a "permanent" raised curb median should be installed and no other devices would be required for the interim condition. Another interim solution for the Beltline Boulevard crossing is a fully-actuated traffic signal (or "Hawk" pedestrian flasher/signal). Another interim solution for the Wooddale A venue crossing is re-alignment of the trail to the TH 7 intersection. Further discussion of each alternative is summarized below: 1. No Crosswalk (Current Condition) The current crossing control requires all trail users yield to the roadway users. The trail users must wait for a gap in traffic to cross. Peak hour roadway traffic will reduce the number of crossing opportunities and increase waiting times. Many studies show that unmarked crossings are safer (particular for roadways with ADT over 10,000, similar to Beltline Boulevard and Wooddale A venue); we attribute this result to pedestrians assuming vehicles will stop for them just because they are in a crosswalk. 2. Grade-Separated Crossing The grade-separated crossing would be the only trail/roadway crossing alternative that would provide a high level of flow and be safe for both drivers and trail users.. An underpass is recommended at these locations to capture the highest number of bicycle and pedestrians to use the trail crossing. Many times overpass crossings are not used by pedestrians/bicyclists due to the stairs/ramps that are required on each side. The main benefit of a grade-separated crossing is the elimination of conflicts between trail and roadway users. This option also eliminates the confusion of the crosswalk law. In addition, a grade-separated crossing provides the highest level of safety where trail users can enjoy the experience of the trail and drivers can use the roadway without impedance from crossing trail users. Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 3) Subject: Highway 7/Wooddale Interchange Traffic and Trail Improvement Options Page 20 Scott Brink, PE , City Engineer. City of St. Louis Park November 10,2006 Page 6 The downside to a grade-separated crossing is its high cost ranging from $800,000 to $1,200,000. For Beltline Boulevard, federal funding has been designated for a grade-separated crossing in the year 2010. Since future funding is identified for a grade-separated crossing at this location, all other options should be considered temporary. Further evaluation of funding alternatives should also be considered to determine whether a joint effort to advance the construction of a grade-separation is possible. Federal funding or other financing mechanisms should be evaluated for a grade- separated crossing at W ooddale A venue. All other options should be consider an interim solution, with the ultimate goal of providing a grade-separation. 3. Relocation of Trail Crossing Under this alternative, trail users would be routed to a safer crossing location than the existing mid-block crossing. To cross Beltline Boulevard, trails users would be directed to the CSAH 25 traffic signal. The additional travel distance would be 1,100 feet. A new trail segment would need to be constructed on the westside of Beltline Boulevard from CSAH 25 to the existing trail. To cross Wooddale Avenue, the trail could be re- aligned to either the TH 7 or 36th Street signalized intersection. The re-alignment would occur on city owned property. At the Beltline Boulevard crossing, many trail users would likely continue to cross at the existing location because of the additional distance. They would also have to cross the free right-tum movement from TH 7. At the W ooddale A venue crossing, the trail re-alignment to the TH 7 intersection would be relatively easy. The cost of providing addition trail is a medium-cost option estimated at $10,000 to $40,000. 4. Traffic Signal with Crosswalk Another option is the installation of a traffic signal. Although many different types of traffic signals could be used, a fully-actuated signal with push buttons for trail use~s and loop detectors for vehicles, at a minimum, should be considered. The device would operate with vehicles seeing a green indication and trail users seeing a steady "don't walk" symbol. The trail user presses the pushbutton to identify the need to service the trail. The signal for the vehicles would change from green to yellow to red, and the trail user would receive a walk indication. The flashing don't walk (we would recommend the use of a pedestrian countdown timers) would follow and then the return to the vehicles receiving a green indication. This operation would be the same as the traffic signal at Northwest Boulevard (CSAH 61) at the Bass Lake Playfields. In addition, the signal would need to be interconnected with the railroad crossing equipment. Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 3) Subject: Highway 7/Wooddale Interchange Traffic and Trail Improvement Options Page 21 Scott Brink, PE, City Engineer. City of St. Louis Park November 10, 2006 Page 7 Alternatively a "Hawk" pedestrian flasher/signal could be installed. The operation of the device is described in the following by the City of Tucson, Arizona. The unit is normally off until activated by a pedestrian. When a pedestrian wishes to cross the street, they press a button and the signal begins with a FLASHING YELLOW indication to warn the approaching drivers, just like a school bus signal. The FLASHING YELLOW is then followed by a SOLID YELLOW indication, advising the drivers to prepare to stop. The signal is then changed to a SOLID RED indication at which time the pedestrian is shown a WALK indication. The beacon signal then converts to an ALTERNATING FLASHING RED, allowing the drivers to proceed when safe, after stopping at the crosswalk. This operation and signal sequence does not follow the current MUTCD (although should be included in the 2008 version), therefore an exemption would be needed. The cost of this device would be around $100,000 per system. Additional investigation should be completed to determine if the "Hawk" system has railroad pre-emption capabilities. We do not want a device stopping vehicles on the railroad tracks when a train is approaching. The installation of a traffic signal would dramatically improve overall safety for a trail user at these crossings by providing a controlled location, that would require all vehicles to stop when a trail user activates the pedestrian push button at the crossing. Comparing the traffic signal to the existing condition, a traffic signal would cause more disruption to the traffic flow and additional delays to motorists by requiring drivers to stop for crossing trail users. A traffic signal requires vehicles to stop, increasing the opportunities for rear-crashes. However, changing the traffic signal indication is more predictable to a motorist than a trail user using a striped crosswalk. Trail users would be more satisfied with this option than no crossing or having to wait for a gap in traffic. A traffic signal at either location would require coordination with the railroad. The traffic and railroad signals would need to be interconnected. Some type of vehicle detection would be required to prevent vehicles from being trapped in the dilemma zone and stopping on the railroad tracks. The detection will require an underground crossing of the railroad tracks. The installation of a new traffic signal on W ooddale A venue between the current signals at 36th Street and TH 7 would create three very close spaced signalized intersections. Based on past studies, congestion and delay on Wooddale Avenue and 36th Street is significant during the peak periods. Current peak hour conditions include heavy queues from TH 7 already extending into the trail crossing area. Based on these factors, we would not recommend the installation of a traffic signal at the W ooddale A venue trail crossing. A traffic signal installed at the Beltline Boulevard crossing should have no impact on adjacent intersections. A traffic signal is a moderate-cost option ranging from $80,000 to $120,000 per system. At this cost, consideration should be given to preserving these funds to construct a grade-separated crossing. This option should not be combined with the center median options (discussed in the following sections). Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 3) Subject: Highway 7/Wooddale Interchange Traffic and Trail Improvement Options Page 22 Scott Brink, PE, City Engineer. City of St. Louis Park 5. Pedestrian Warning Devices with Crosswalk November 10, 2006 Page 8 Traffic control devices such as pedestrian warning flashers and/or in-pavement warning lights could be installed at the trail crossings. If warning flashers are installed, they would be activated by the trail user pushing a button. The lights would immediately start flashing and remain active for a pre-set amount of time. If warning lights are considered, they should not continuously flash. It is recommended that the device be pedestrian-actuated with a push button, instead of being actuated by another type of sensor. Pedestrian-actuated flashing lights would alert drivers when a pedestrian/bicyclist is entering the crossing, since the use of the trail occurs at varying times throughout the day and not all trail users wish to cross at this location. An overhead flashing beacon would be recommended based on the number of lanes and roadway and trail user volumes. The crosswalk striping would also be reinstalled. This option does not control the trail crossing, since roadway users would yield to trail users. Many of these devices were installed five to eight years ago. A cursory review of these systems show a positive response from city staff; however, not as the only solution. Median options maybe a better option, or they could be used in conjunction with warning flashers. Median options allow trail users to cross the roadway in simpler stages (observation of traffic in one direction, shorter crossing distance and more adequate gaps to cross), while not providing a false sense of safety when using a striped crosswalk or significant impact to vehicles. The cost of pedestrian warning devices is estimated at $40,000 to $50,000. 6. Striped Crosswalk A striped crosswalk was originally installed with construction of the trail. Re-installing the crosswalk and advanced warning signs could be an option, but not recommended. The crosswalks were removed because of trail user and vehicle confusion. Pedestrians have a false sense of safety when using a striped crosswalk, as they may assume vehicles will stop for them. The law requires vehicles to stop for pedestrians in the crosswalk. The roadway is four-lanes wide at the crossing. The four-lanes create a "multiple threat" situation. A vehicle in one lane stops for the pedestrian to cross and another vehicle traveling in the same direction (in the other lane) fail to see the pedestrian, or just fail to stop, and strikes the pedestrian The cost of a re-installing the crosswalk and signing is a low-cost option at $2,000. We do not recommend just re-installing the striped crosswalk and warning signs. An additional treatment is needed to enhance the crossing (median, warning flasher, etc.), or a different strategy is needed altogether (traffic signal, crossing relocation, etc.). Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 3) Subject: Highway 7/Wooddale Interchange Traffic and Trail Improvement Options Page 23 Scott Brink, PE, City Engineer. City of St. Louis Park 7. Speed Advisory Warning Sign with Crosswalk November 10, 2006 Page 9 This alternative would install a speed advisory sign to warn drivers of approaching trail. The sign would be located in advance of the trail crossing and could be attached to the pedestrian crossing ahead sign posts, if the crosswalk striping were re-installed. The sign could also be a stand alone sign stating "High Use Trail Ahead" with a supplemental speed plaque "25 mph". The advisory speed would not be enforceable, but would at least warn drivers of the approaching trail. If the crosswalk striping were not re-installed, this option may lead to driver confusion on whether they are required to yield for trail users. Therefore, a striped crosswalk would be installed with this option. Previously, warning signs were installed warning of the trail crossing. Changing the warning sign type would not have a significant improvement on safety, therefore we would not recommend this option by itself. The cost to install a new sign is a low-cost option of $1,000 to 2,000. 8. Relocation of Stop Bars with Crosswalk Since W ooddale A venue and Beltline Boulevard are currently four lanes, there is the potential that motorists in the outside lane do not have sufficient sight distance to see a bicyclist/pedestrian due to a car in the adjacent lane blocking their line of sight. The crosswalk would be re-installed, stop/yield lines would be painted in advance of the crossing (approximate! y 1 00 feet) to open the line of sight for drivers in all lanes of traffic to be able to see the pedestrian/bicyclist entering the crossing. The relocation of the stop bars would improve the sight and stopping distance at the trail crossings at a minimal cost. One challenge with this type of treatment at these locations is the close proximity to the railroad crossings. Drivers would need advance warning ·prior to the railroad crossing to stop prior to the tracks. Other challenges include driver compliance, re-installation of the crosswalk striping, and the driver's ability to view trail users at the crossing. This option is not recommended for these crossings due to the proximity of the railroad tracks and adjacent intersections. However, it could be an option at other crossing locations. The cost to relocate the stop bars is a low-cost option of $1,000 to $2,000. 9. Center Median without Refuge Area A center median without a refuge area includes the construction of a narrow center median (temporary or permanent) in the roadway. The median would be approximately four feet in width and would not be intended for trail user storage. This still creates a situation with drivers and trail users to make decisions at the crossing. Installation of Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 3) Subject: Highway 7/Wooddale Interchange Traffic and Trail Improvement Options Page 24 Scott Brink, PE, City Engineer. City of St. Louis Park November 10, 2006 Page 10 median delineator markers (temporary) would provide minimal safety benefits for pedestrians, due to the lack of a physical barrier (curb) between the pedestrian and moving vehicles. The review of this option does not include a striped crosswalk, although it could be included at Beltline Boulevard but not at the Wooddale A venue crossing. Installing the center median without widening the roadway requires narrowing the roadway travel lanes and likely cause a reduction in vehicle speed. The median would identify the crossing location by providing a raised element in the roadway. If the driving lanes are narrowed, the potential of vehicle/vehicle sideswipe crashes may increase. Consideration should be given to providing a solid white line, instead of broken, between lanes in the area of the median to reduce lane changing maneuvers. Trail users will receive improvements in safety due to the reduction in vehicle speed and identification of the crossing. The trail users still will need to yield to vehicular traffic. The cost of a permanent center median without widening the roadway is a low-cost option ranging from $15,000 to $25,000. 10. Center Median with Refuge (widen roadway) A center median with a large enough area to provide a pedestrian refuge would require widening of the roadway. The widening will require modification of the roadway at the train tracks, which could i,nclude the need to relocate the gate arms. For these reasons, this alternative would also require coordination with the railroad. The review of this option does not include a striped crosswalk, although it could be included. This option provides operational and safety benefits for both roadway and trail users. Roadway users would not need to stop for trail users, the number of lanes would be maintained and lane width could be slightly narrowed. The roadway would probably need to be widened at the railroad crossing. If roadway widening is needed, consideration should be given to upgrading the crossing and median to meet Whistle Quiet Zone requirements. Trail users would see a benefit in operation and safety over the existing condition. A refuge area allows trail users to make the crossing maneuver in a two step process. A trail user only needs to watch for gaps in traffic for one direction and the crossing distance is cut in half. The cost of a permanent center median with widening the roadway is a medium-cost option ranging from $50,000 to $150,000. 11. Center Median with Refuge Area (remove a roadway lane) A center median with a refuge area created by the removal of a roadway lane is feasible for the Beltline Boulevard crossing, but not at W ooddale A venue. W ooddale A venue between TH 7 and 36th Street has capacity and operational issues, so reducing the number of lanes should not be an option. Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 3) Subject: Highway 7/Wooddale Interchange Traffic and Trail Improvement Options Page 25 Scott Brink, PE, City Engineer. City of St. Louis Park November 10, 2006 Page 11 This option should not include a striped crosswalk. The center median with a large enough area to provide a pedestrian refuge would require the removal of a roadway lane in each direction at the crossing to maintain the existing roadway width. The lane removal could be done near the crossing, requiring traffic to merge into one lane or develop a three-lane section between CSAH 25 and 36th Street. The roadway operation and safety would be negatively impacted due to the merging of the through lanes. Although, merging traffic would have minimal impact to adjacent intersections. The exception would be Beltline Boulevard/Park Glen Road intersection, a traffic signal may be needed to allow vehicles onto Beltline Boulevard during peak periods of traffic. On Beltline Boulevard, the roadway could be modified to two-lane section with left-tum lanes between CSAH 25 and 36th Street. The roadway safety and operation of a two- lane section with left-tum lanes at the intersections would be better than merging traffic to a single lane near the crossing. The only difficulty would be the transition south of the TH 7 intersection, currently a lane adds southbound from the eastbound TH 7 free right. Trail users would see a benefit in operation and safety over the existing condition. A refuge area allows trail users to make the crossing maneuver in a two step process. A trail user only need to watch for gaps in one direction and the crossing distance is cut by one-fourth. The number of gaps will be reduced because the roadway traffic is concentrated into one lane. Although, the benefit of the shorter crossing distance and refuge area are more beneficial. The cost of a permanent center median with removing a through lane in each direction is a medium-cost option ranging from $50,000 to $75,000. 12. Center Median with Bump-outs On Beltline Boulevard, the installation of curb extensions or bump-outs could be considered by reducing the number of traffic lanes from four to two at the trail crossing location. This would reduce the distance of the roadway that pedestrians are required to cross. With the reduction of traffic lanes, a center median area could be installed wide enough to provide a pedestrian/bike refuge area. This is not an option at the W ooddale A venue crossing. A striped crosswalk should not be included with this option. This option would increase the visibility for pedestrians waiting to cross. In addition, the pedestrian crossing signs could be placed near the nose of the bump-out to be more visible to motorists on Beltline Boulevard. One disadvantage of curb extensions is the potential for drivers to run into them during darkness or poor weather conditions. If the installation is of a Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 3) Subject: Highway 7/Wooddale Interchange Traffic and Trail Improvement Options Page 26 Scott Brink, PE, City Engineer. City of St. Louis Park November 10, 2006 Page 12 temporary nature (i.e. delineator markers), the buffer provides no physical protection from vehicles. Also, the reduction in the number of lanes would require vehicles to merge prior to the crossing, creating a conflict point and potential for an increase in vehicle crashes. The cost of this improvement is low, ranging from $20,000 to $30,000. H:\ Traffic\5791\Fina/Memo11 0806 slp.doc Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 3) Subject: Highway 7/Wooddale Interchange Traffic and Trail Improvement Options Page 27 Meeting Date: September 26, 2011 Agenda Item #: 10 Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance Presentation Other: EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other: Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other: TITLE: Wooddale Avenue Bridge Design: Background Information. RECOMMENDED ACTION: None at this time - the purpose of this report is to provide Council with background information and the general history of the project in preparation for a study session discussion later this fall. POLICY CONSIDERATION: None at this time. Please let staff know of any questions you may have. BACKGROUND: Design of the Highway 7/Wooddale Interchange began as early as 2005 when an application for federal funding was submitted and concept layouts (including a bridge) were submitted as part of the application. T hese concepts featured alternatives that included roundabouts and various combinations of access ramps and frontage roads combined with a bridge. After funding was attained and a project established, detailed traffic forecasting and a traffic operations analysis was conducted to further refine the concepts. In addition, a public process was conducted to gather further comment and input. Eventually, a tight diamond style interchange was proposed and selected. A significant factor in deciding upon the tight diamond configuration and design was there was limited available property for this project which severely restricted the project limits. These limits included not only the railroad tracks on the south, but also a school/community center, business, and residential properties on the north side where very limited right of way takings were possible. Essentially, a bridge, two frontage roads, two ramps, a trail crossing and railroad tracks were designed for construction within a distance of 700 feet or less. Thus the expression “tight diamond” truly lived up to its label. This was reflected by the very short length of the bridge, the placement of the connecting ramps immediately adjacent to the highway and bridge, and the significant amount of retaining wall work required. In addition to the horizontal constrains of the site, the bridge itself was also constrained vertically. The elevation of the bridge essentially required balance with the existing topography. If the bridge had been placed higher, sightlines and safe visibility would have been compromised (including additional condemnation of property for right of way). Lowering the bridge further would have required additional lowering of Highway 7, which would have resulted in significant drainage issues, extensive additional excavation (including contaminated soils), and extension of the project limits. The alignment of Wooddale Avenue with Highway 7 is also skewed (not at right angles) which contributed to design challenges. As a result, an awareness of sightlines and adequate visibilities was present throughout the design of the bridge. The bridge design (including intersection sight distance requirements) utilized American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) guidelines in accordance with State and Federal requirements. Intersection sight distance requirements are determined by a combination of vehicle speeds, the time (gap) available for Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 3) Subject: Highway 7/Wooddale Interchange Traffic and Trail Improvement Options Page 28 turning movements, roadway grades, and other factors. To simplify further, intersection sight distances are often expressed and illustrated by terminology referred to as clear site triangles. Clear sight triangles were developed from technical calculations by our consultant (SRF) for both left turn and right turn movements at each ramp. These sight triangles were utilized significantly during design. For example, when requests were made during the public process to install barriers or railings on the bridge between the roadway and sidewalk, it was determined they could not be installed for this very reason – sightlines would have been unacceptable. Sight triangle calculations typically assume a specific eye height and horizontal distance of the eye from the edge of the traveled roadway, also referred to as the “decision point”. The length of a vehicle, number of lanes of traffic, and the type of traffic control all play factors in the calculations. The results of the consultant’s calculations can be more easily summarized and illustrated by the attached exhibits showing the intersection sight distances (clear sight triangles) at each of the entering access points to Wooddale. As shown per the exhibits, the vertical curvature of the bridge was also factored into the sight distance design. In the case of a tight diamond, such as the Wooddale bridge where the ramps are immediately adjacent to the bridge, the decision point is usually located between the edge of the bridge (parapet and railing) and the crossing roadway. Because the parapet and top rails must also meet accepted design and safety requirements, it may also mean that vehicles must encroach into crosswalk space areas to achieve adequate sight triangle visibility. This is not unusual for similar bridges in urban areas. However, when intersections of this nature are constructed with traffic signals, this is less noticeable due to the additional control imposed by the signal. That said, the Wooddale bridge was also designed with the understanding that traffic signals would likely be needed in the future once forecasted volumes are reached. In summary, the bridge was designed properly in accordance with federal and state requirements and guidelines within the limited area available for this project. It also means drivers are expected to encroach into crosswalk areas to better see before safely proceeding. As noted earlier, this topic will be discussed at a study session later this fall and staff will identify options the Council could consider to help remedy sight line concerns at the bridge location. VISION CONSIDERATION: The following Strategic Direction and focus area was identified by Council in 2007: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged community. Focus will be on: • Promoting regional transportation issues and related dedicated funding sources affecting St. Louis Park including but not limited to Hwy 100 and SWLRT. Attachments: Intersection Sight Distance Exhibits Prepared by: Scott Brink, City Engineer Reviewed by: Mike Rardin, Director of Public Works Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 3) Subject: Highway 7/Wooddale Interchange Traffic and Trail Improvement Options Page 29 Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 3) Subject: Highway 7/Wooddale Interchange Traffic and Trail Improvement Options Page 30 Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 3) Subject: Highway 7/Wooddale Interchange Traffic and Trail Improvement Options Page 31 Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 3) Subject: Highway 7/Wooddale Interchange Traffic and Trail Improvement Options Page 32 Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 3) Subject: Highway 7/Wooddale Interchange Traffic and Trail Improvement Options Page 33 Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 3) Subject: Highway 7/Wooddale Interchange Traffic and Trail Improvement Options Page 34 Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 3) Subject: Highway 7/Wooddale Interchange Traffic and Trail Improvement Options Page 35 SRF No. 0117627 DRAFT MEMORANDUM TO: Scott Brink, PE, City Engineer City of St. Louis Park FROM: Craig Vaughn, PE, PTOE, Senior Associate Carla Stueve, PE, PTOE, Associate DATE: December 2, 2011 SUBJECT: TRAFFIC ENGINEERING STUDY OF REGIONAL TRAIL CROSSINGS: WOODDALE AVENUE AND BELTLINE BOULEVARD INTRODUCTION We have completed a com prehensive engineering assessment of two regional trail crossings in the City of St. Louis Park along the Cedar Lake LRT Regional Tr ail: one at Wooddale Avenue, between Trunk Highway (TH) 7 and TH 100; an d two at Beltline Boulevard, south of TH 7 (see Figure 1). The purpose of this study is to evaluate the benefits of potential safety strategies to im prove the operation and safety for both roadway and trail users at these crossings. Based on an evaluation of these strategies, the study includes recommendations for improvements at these crossing locations. Various strategies were eval uated based on the following objectives that are comm only considered in the safety and mobility of non-motorized modes of transportation. x Vehicle speed x Sight distance/visibility for motorists and trail users x Pedestrian and bicycle exposure to vehicle traffic x Overall bicycle/pedestrian safety x Clarification of right-of-way x Ease of implementation x Corridor context x Impacts to adjacent street traffic x Cost to implement Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 3) Subject: Highway 7/Wooddale Interchange Traffic and Trail Improvement Options Page 36 NORTH NorthCrossing Locations0117627December 2011Regional Trail Crossing LocationsFigure 1H:\Projects\7627\TS\Figure\Fig01_Regional Trail Crossing Locations.cdrTraffic Engineering Study of Regional Trail Crossings: Wooddale Avenue and Beltline BoulevardCity of St. Louis ParkStudy Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 3) Subject: Highway 7/Wooddale Interchange Traffic and Trail Improvement OptionsPage 37 Scott Brink December 2, 2011 City of St. Louis Park Page 3 3 EXISTING CONDITIONS Wooddale Avenue Wooddale Avenue is currently a four-lane undivided roadway with a posted speed lim it of 30 mph at the trail crossing. Daily vehicular volumes on Wooddale Avenue are approximately 11,300 vehicles per day. This trail crossing expe riences a high volume of pedestrian/bicycle traffic, with more than 1,000 trail users on an average day. Currently this crossing provides a m arked crosswalk for the Cedar Lake LRT Regional Trail as it crosses W ooddale Avenue at the TH 7 South Frontage Road/W ooddale Avenue intersection. Motorists are required to stop for pedestrians and bicyc lists in the m arked crossing based on State Law. Based on our review ,the following safety issues were iden tified at this crossing and considered in developing the potential improvement strategies. x With the tight spacing and close proximity of the TH 7/Wooddale Avenue interchange to the north and the railro ad crossing to the s outh, there is lim ited visibility and reaction time for trail users and m otorists at this location. The TH 7 Eastbound Off- Ramp is located approximately 150 feet north of the trail crossing and the railroad is located within 100 feet south of the trail crossing (see Figure 2). x Motorists are forced to process and react to a significant amount of infor mation in a short period of tim e considering the number of roadway infor mation signs, closely spaced adjacent roadway access points and the presence of the trail crossing along this section of Wooddale Avenue. x The four-lane roadway configuration crea tes the po tential for multip le-threat collisions. A m ultiple-threat collision is a p edestrian crash type th at occurs wh en pedestrians have to cross more than one lane in each direction. x Motorists and trail users at this crossing are confused as to w ho has the right-of-way, leading to an unsafe situation for trail users. As a separate issue, but relevant to th e overall operations of the corridor, the TH 7/Wooddale Avenue interchange was recently constructed as a tight-diamond interchange. It is cu rrently unsignalized, and has lim ited sight dis tance at the ram p intersections. Drivers exiting TH 7 from the east or west to access Wooddale Avenue have limited sight lines along Wooddale Avenue. The combination of retaining wall and bridge parapet wall obstruct the drivers view to Wooddale Avenue; if the driver is stopped behind the striped crosswalk (see Figure 3). This contributes to the safety issu es as a whole. Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 3) Subject: Highway 7/Wooddale Interchange Traffic and Trail Improvement Options Page 38 NORTH North0117627December 2011Wooddale Avenue Figure 2H:\Projects\7627\TS\Figure\Fig02_Wooddale Avenue.cdrTraffic Engineering Study of Regional Trail Crossings: Wooddale Avenue and Beltline BoulevardCity of St. Louis ParkStudy Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 3) Subject: Highway 7/Wooddale Interchange Traffic and Trail Improvement OptionsPage 39 0117627December 2011TH 7 and Woodale Avenue InterchangeFigure 3H:\Projects\7627\TS\Figure\Fig03_Coddington Photos.cdrTraffic Engineering Study of Regional Trail Crossings: Wooddale Avenue and Beltline BoulevardCity of St. Louis ParkStudy Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 3) Subject: Highway 7/Wooddale Interchange Traffic and Trail Improvement OptionsPage 40 Scott Brink December 2, 2011 City of St. Louis Park Page 6 6 Beltline Boulevard Beltline Boulevard is a four-lane roadway with daily traffic volum es of 14,100. The current posted speed on this section of Beltline Boulevard is 30 mph. This trail crossing experiences a high volume of pedestrian/bicycle traffic, with more than 1,0 00 trail users on an average day. Currently this location is designated as a trail crossing, with no roadway markings. Therefore, trail users on the Cedar Lake LRT Regional Trail are required to stop for traffic on Beltline Boulevard. Based on our review ,the following safety issues were iden tified at this crossing and considered in developing the potential improvement strategies. x The current roadway design provides a narrow center m edian (approximately 4 feet) and four 11-foot driving lanes (see Figure 4). There is limited space within the current roadway design for additional pedestrian safety features. x The four-lane roadway configuration crea tes the po tential for multip le-threat collisions. A m ultiple-threat collision is a p edestrian crash type th at occurs wh en pedestrians have to cross m ore than one lane in each direction. Howe ver, with this being a mid-block trail crossing motorists are not required to stop for trail users in the roadway, rather trail users are required to yield the right-of-way. x The trail crossing is located immediately north (approximately 75 feet) of the railroad crossing. This contributes to the am ount of information the motorist needs to process while traveling along Beltline Boulevard. x Motorists and trail users at this crossing are confused as to w ho has the right-of-way, leading to an unsafe situation for trail users. x Many bicyclists approaching the crossing due to not slow or yield approaching Beltline Boulevard. POTENTIAL SAFETY STRATEGIES AND EVALUTION SUMMARY Several improvement strategies were evaluated for the Cedar Lake LRT Regional Trail as it crosses Wooddale Avenue and Beltline Boulevard. Since these roadways have unique design features, and the trail crossing locations present different challeng es, they were evaluated independently. An evaluation m atrix was dev eloped for each cro ssing in order to cro ss reference and compare how these strategies would affect the crossing. Each strategy was evaluated based on a set of objectives (or safety criteria) and identified as good, fair or poor for how the strategy addressed th e objective. This evaluation is highly subjective and very dependent on the corridor context where the strategy would be implemented. Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 3) Subject: Highway 7/Wooddale Interchange Traffic and Trail Improvement Options Page 41 NORTH North0117627December 2011Beltline Boulevard Figure 4H:\Projects\7627\TS\Figure\Fig04_Beltline Blvd.cdrTraffic Engineering Study of Regional Trail Crossings: Wooddale Avenue and Beltline BoulevardCity of St. Louis ParkStudy Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 3) Subject: Highway 7/Wooddale Interchange Traffic and Trail Improvement OptionsPage 42 Scott Brink December 2, 2011 City of St. Louis Park Page 8 8 Based on this evaluation, the following summ ary is offered to ou tline the strateg ies considered for each corridor, highlight potential safety benefits and issues, and identify which strategies would be most effective at the respective crossing location. Wooddale Avenue Safety Strategies and Evaluation Several improvement strategies were evaluate d for the Cedar Lake LRT Regional Trail at Wooddale Avenue. A total of 15 strategies were considered for this crossing (see Figure 5). A brief definition of each strategy, potential safety benefits or issu es, and context within the Wooddale Avenue corridor is provided below. x Strategy W1: Installation of a speed table or raised crosswalk will reduce vehicle speeds by changing the elevation at the crossing. A speed table will also im prove the visibility of the trail crossing and heighten the driver’s awareness, which will help to clarify the right-of-way. However, due to the close intersection spacing and proximity of the trail crossing to the TH 7/Wooddale Avenue interchange, this strategy is not considered feasible at this location. x Strategy W2: A key elem ent in pedestrian and bicycle safety is reducing their exposure to vehicular traffic. Extension of the center median w ith paint or surmountable curb would decrease the exposure for trail users crossing W ooddale Avenue, provide a better refuge area for trai l users to store, and allow trail users to cross one direction of traffic at a tim e. The area that can be modified in the center of Wooddale Avenue is limited due to the turning radius needed for westbound left turns from the TH 7 South Frontage Road to go south on Wooddale Avenue. Extending the median is considered feasible with detailed design considerations taken into account. x Strategy W3:Restriping Wooddale Avenue to a tw o-lane roadway with left-turn lanes would reduce pedestrian exposure to vehicle traffic by reducing the num ber of traffic lanes crossed by trail users and redu ce traffic speeds on W ooddale Avenue. Based on the most recent ADT of 11,300 vehicles per day (2009 data) and a detailed operations analysis completed for this corr idor, restriping this roadway would have minimal impact to roadway capacity opera tions. Restriping W ooddale Avenue is considered feasible along this corridor and could be i mplemented within the current roadway design. Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 3) Subject: Highway 7/Wooddale Interchange Traffic and Trail Improvement Options Page 43 0117627 December 2011 Planning Matrix for the Wooddale Avenue Trail Crossing Figure 5H:\Projects\7627\TS\Figure\Fig05_Wooddale _Matrix.cdrTraffic Engineering Study of Regional Trail Crossings: Wooddale Avenue and Beltline Boulevard City of St. Louis Park W1 W2 W3 W4 W5 W6 W7 W8 W9 W10 W11 W12 W13 W14 W15 Install a speed table or raised crosswalk Extend center refuge median (surmountable) Restripe Wooddale to 2- lanes with left-turn lanes Tighten radius on Wooddale at the South Frontage Road Install advance crosswalk stop bars Install flashing in- pavement lighting Remove marked crosswalk Provide an automated or button-operated flashing warning beacon Install lighting at the trail crossing Remove vegetation and/or signage to clear sight lines Provide a trail chicane Realign the trail crossing slightly south of current location Signalize ramp intersections Provide a grade-separated crossing Install All-Way Stop Control at TH 7 S. Fr. Rd./Wooddale Ave. Reduction in Vehicle Speed N.A.N.A.N.A.N.A.N.A.N.A.N.A.N.A. Increase Visibility N.A.N.A. Pedestrian Exposure to Vehicle Traffic N.A.N.A.N.A.N.A.N.A.N.A.N.A. Bicycle/ Pedestrian Safety Clarify Right-of-Way N.A.N.A.N.A.N.A.N.A.N.A.N.A.N.A.N.A. Ease of Implementation Corridor Context Impacts to Adjacent Street Traffic N.A.N.A.N.A.N.A.N.A.N.A.N.A.N.A.N.A. Key: Poor Fair Good N.A. Potential Safety Improvement Strategies Cost to Implement Low-Moderate Cost Low-Moderate Cost Low-Moderate Cost Moderate Cost Low Cost Low-Moderate Cost Low Cost Low-Moderate Cost Low-Moderate Cost Low Cost Low-Moderate Cost Low-Moderate Cost Moderate-High Cost High Cost Low Cost Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 3) Subject: Highway 7/Wooddale Interchange Traffic and Trail Improvement Options Page 44 Scott Brink December 2, 2011 City of St. Louis Park Page 10 10 x Strategy W4: Since a common type of pedestrian crash at an intersection involves a pedestrian who is struck by a right-turning vehicle, reducing the curb radius lowers the turning speed of vehicles and im proves the v isibility for motorists and pedestrians/bicyclists. However, due to the current intersection design and storm water catch basin locations, this strategy may be difficult to implement while only providing a marginal benefit to trail users. x Strategy W5: Motorists on multilane roadways that yield/stop close to the crosswalk create a dangerous situ ation for pedestrians an d bicyclists, referred to as multiple- threat collisions. This occurs when a m otor vehicle in one lane stops and provides a visual screen to the m otorist in the adjacent lane; the m otorist in the adjacent lane continues proceeds through and hits th e pedestrian/bicyclist. The installation of advance crosswalk stop bars would clarify right-of-way by directing motorists to stop at the yield line, a distan ce back from the crosswalk, so that p edestrians and bicyclists crossing at this location are visible to motorists in all traffic lanes. With the close proximity to adjacent intersections and th e railroad crossing implementation of this strategy would exacerbate the “closeness” to other areas. x Strategy W6:Installation of in-pavement lighting increases the v isibility of th e crossing and heightens driver’s awareness of a pedestrian o r bicyclist in the crossing, which would help to clarify the right-of-way at this crossing. Due to the tight intersection spacing along Wooddale Avenue and the close proxim ity to the railroad crossing, increasing the visibility of trail users as they are crossing would provide a significant safety benefit at this location. The use of dyna mic in-pavement lighting is considered appropriate based on the current crosswalk designation and adjacent corridor features. x Strategy W7: Research has shown that prov iding a marked crosswalk on multilane roadways, with higher traffic volum es, by itself without other im provements has the potential to increase pedestrian crash rates compared to unmarked crossings. Removal of the marked crossw alk may provide a safety benefit by encouraging pedestrians and bicyclists to be m ore cautious as they enter the unm arked crossing versus the marked crosswalk. In the event the crosswalk is removed, this crossing would remain a legal crosswalk because it is at an intersection. By law all approaches of an intersection with unmarked crosswalks are legal crossings. However, contrary to the potential safety benefits, removal of the crosswalk may also reduce the visibility of the crossing through this area given the other visual competition for the driver’s attention that is occurring here. Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 3) Subject: Highway 7/Wooddale Interchange Traffic and Trail Improvement Options Page 45 Scott Brink December 2, 2011 City of St. Louis Park Page 11 11 x Strategy W8: Installation of a pedestrian-activated sign al such as a HAWK or Rapid Flash LED Beacon. These strategies improve the overall safety for trail users at the crossing by reducing vehicle speeds at the crossing, improving visibility of the crossing with added visual elem ents, reducing the exposure and im proving the safety for trail users by requiring m otorists to stop, and clarifying the right-of-way at the crossing. Following is additional information on these strategies and their potential fit within this corridor: o The HAWK system is a highly effec tive strategy in stopping vehicles and clarifying right-of-way at a crossw alk, providing a safer crossing location. The highly visible system consists of two red signal indications above a yellow signal indication. The signal is dark until activated by a pedestrian or bicyclist. Once activated the signal initiates a flas hing yellow indication to warn approaching motorists, followed by a solid yellow. The yel low indications are followed by a brief solid red, then a wi g-wag flashing red, requiring motorists to stop for pedestrians and bicyclists. Due to the operation and phasing of this system, there is some delay for pedestrians and bicy clists to receive the walk indication. With the high number of bicyclists at this crossing in addition to their approach and crossing speed, they m ay not push the button to activ ate the HAWK signal, and once activated, may not wait unti l the proper red indication. This m ay decrease motorists’ respect for the HAWK system, and may reduce o verall compliance. In addition, the HAWK system would cause more disruption to the traffic flow and add delay to motorists by requiring drivers to stop for crossing trail users, which may also increase the opportunity for rear-crashes. o The actuated rectangular rapid flash LED beacons are m ounted on pedestals on each side of the roadway, and possibly on a m ast arm over the roadway. The high intensity stutter flash yellow beacons have been shown to be high ly effective in improving driver compliance at crosswalk locations. This type of application m ay also be ben eficial for b icyclists, since th e trail user would receive th e “walk” indication/actuation more quickly than with a HAWK beacon, which may improve compliance with the system. Due to the close p roximity of this trail crossing to the railro ad immediately to the south, which has cross bucks with flashi ng lights on each side of the roadway, in addition to overhead flashing lights for the railroad, it was determ ined that additional flashing lights would create confusion with the railroad crossing. Therefore, this strategy would not be a good fit at this trail crossing location. Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 3) Subject: Highway 7/Wooddale Interchange Traffic and Trail Improvement Options Page 46 Scott Brink December 2, 2011 City of St. Louis Park Page 12 12 x Strategy W9: The visibility of pedestrians and bicyclists is based on a num ber of factors, including: screening by physical objects; lack of lighting, and roadway geometry. Providing lighting for trail users a t the trail crossing is an effective safety strategy to increase visibility for vehicles, pedestrians and bicyclists during day and nighttime conditions. x Strategy W10: Crashes between trail users and motorists are more likely at locations with obstructed sight lines. Removing trees, signs, and other roadside elements from the sightline dia gram area is a fairly low-cost s trategy to im prove safety. Eliminating obstacles that are affecting the critical sigh t lines and reviewing signage along this corridor to determ ine which signs m ay be candidates for sign rem oval would reduce the clutter for drivers that may lead to distraction. It is important to note that by improving sight lines, vehicle speeds along W ooddale Avenue may increase. Although there is a significant amount of signing near the TH 7/ Wooddale Avenue interchange, the sight lines at the trail cros sing do not appear to be obstructed by signage or other roadside obstructions. x Strategy W11: Providing a trail chicane to modify the trail alignment by adding curvature prior to the crossing would significan tly reduce the speed of trail users as they approach Wooddale Avenue. This is particularly important for bicyclists due to their longer trips where they beco me focused on their d estination in addition to traveling at higher speeds. Reconstruction of the trail crossing would utilize landscaping to physically slow trail users im mediately prior to the trail crossing. This strategy is considered feasible and highly effective at this location. x Strategy W12:Realignment of the trail crossing to a location slightly south of the current location would allow trail users better use of the center m edian on Wooddale Avenue as a refuge area, and would remove the trail crossing from current intersection conflicts. However, due to the spacing needed to provide the true benef its of a mid- block crossing, and the close proxim ity of the railroad crossing to the south, this strategy is not considered feasible at this location. x Strategy W13: Currently, the TH 7 ram p intersections with Wooddale Avenue are closely spaced with a tight diamond. The intersections have limited sight lines and are unsignalized.The installation of traffic signa ls at the ramp intersections will improve safety for trail users by providing additional crossing gaps. This strategy is also expected to provide th e benefit of im proving traffic operations for the overall Wooddale Avenue corridor. However, the inst allation of traffic signals would require a higher degree of planning, engineering and cost to implement the improvements. Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 3) Subject: Highway 7/Wooddale Interchange Traffic and Trail Improvement Options Page 47 Scott Brink December 2, 2011 City of St. Louis Park Page 13 13 x Strategy W14: Construction of a grade-separated crossing would improve safety by physically separating the trail users from vehicular traffic on W ooddale Avenue. However, this strategy is costly, and requires a high level of planning and engineering. In addition, due to the close proximity to the railroad (future LRT line), this strategy is not considered feasible since it is not supported by the railroad authority. x Strategy W15:The installation of all-w ay stop control is typically applied at an intersection of two roadways with approxim ately equal traffic volumes. Other uses include a temporary solution where a traffic signal will be installed, the need to control vehicle/pedestrian conflicts near high pedestrian generator location s, and locations with limited sight distance. This strategy w ould improve the safety of trail users by requiring vehicles on Wooddale Avenue to stop at the intersection of W ooddale Avenue/TH 7 South Frontage Road. However, due to the p roximity of this crossing to the TH 7/Wooddale Avenue interchange to th e north and the railroad crossing to the south, this strategy is not considered to be a good fit for this crossing location. Beltline Boulevard Safety Strategies and Evaluation As shown in Figure 6, nine im provement strategies were evaluated for the Cedar Lake LRT Regional Trail at Beltline Boulevard to im prove the safety at this crossing. A brief definition of each strategy, potential safety benefits or issues, and context within the Beltline Boulevard corridor is provided below. x Strategy B1: Installation of a speed table or raised crossw alk will reduce vehicle speeds by changing the elevation at the crossing. A speed table will also im prove the visibility of the trail crossing and heighten driver’s awareness, which will help to clarify the right-of-way. However, due to the close intersection spacing and proxim ity of the trail crossing to th e railroad crossing (approximately 75 feet to the south), this strategy is not considered feasible at this location. x Strategy B2: A key element in pedestrian and bicycle safety is redu cing the crossing distance and increasing visibility. Installation of curb extensions or delineators extends the trail crossing into the roadway, which reduces the width of the roadway that trail users need to cross. In addition, this strategy would im prove the ability for motorists and trail users to see each other. With the current roadway d esign on this section of Beltline Boulevard, approxim ate 4-foot center median and four 11-foot lanes, it was determined that there is not sufficient space to implement this strategy. Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 3) Subject: Highway 7/Wooddale Interchange Traffic and Trail Improvement Options Page 48 B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 B6 B7 B8 B9 Install a speed table or raised crosswalk Install delineator or curb extensions Widen center median Provide a trail chicane Install marked crosswalk Install advance crosswalk stop bars Install flashing in- pavement lighting Provide an automated or button-operated flashing warning beacon Provide a grade-separated crossing Reduction in Vehicle Speed N.A.N.A.N.A.N.A.N.A. Increase Visibility N.A. Pedestrian Exposure to Vehicle Traffic N.A.N.A.N.A.N.A. Bicycle/ Pedestrian Safety Clarify Right-of-Way N.A.N.A. Ease of Implementation Corridor Context Impacts to Adjacent Street Traffic N.A.N.A.N.A.N.A. Cost to Implement Low-Moderate Cost Low Cost Moderate-High Cost Low-Moderate Cost Low Cost Low Cost Low-Moderate Cost Low-Moderate Cost High Cost Potential Safety Improvement Strategies Key: Poor Fair Good N.A. 0117627 December 2011 Planning Matrix for the Beltline Boulevard Trail Crossing Figure 6H:\Projects\7627\TS\Figure\Fig06_Beltline _Matrix.cdrTraffic Engineering Study of Regional Trail Crossings: Wooddale Avenue and Beltline Boulevard City of St. Louis Park Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 3) Subject: Highway 7/Wooddale Interchange Traffic and Trail Improvement Options Page 49 Scott Brink December 2, 2011 City of St. Louis Park Page 15 15 x Strategy B3: Currently on Beltline Boulevard there is a raised center median th at was constructed to provide refuge f or trail users. The current m edian width is approximately 4 feet. Widening of the center median would provide a better refuge for trail users crossing at this location, part icularly for bikes with trailers. However, due to the physical constraints of the ro adway width, widening of the m edian would require widening of the roadway which would be difficult to construct at this location. x Strategy B4:Currently the Cedar Lake LRT Regional Trail approaches Beltline Boulevard at a right angle, with the trail continuing straight across the roadway. This allows trail users, and bicyclists in part icular, to approach the crossing at higher speeds. The construction of a trail chicane to modify the alignment of the trail to add curvature as it approaches Beltline Boulevard would significantly reduce the speed of trail users as they cro ss the roadway. Design features could also be incorporated to improve the sight lin es between motorists and trails users to provide an additional safety benefit. This strategy is considered f easible and highly effectiv e at th is location. x Strategy B5:Installation of a marked crosswalk would provide additional visibility of the crossing and could provide clarification on who has the right-of-way at the crossing, since right-of-way is typically confusing at trail crossings. However, research has shown that providin g a marked crosswalk on multilan e roadways, with higher traffic volum es, by itself without other im provements has the potential to increase pedestrian crash rates co mpared to unm arked crossings. T herefore, this strategy should be considered with caution at this mid-block location. x Strategy B6: Beltline Boulevard is a four-lan e roadway, which is particularly dangerous for a cro sswalk or trail crossing. M otorists on multilan e roadways that yield/stop for trail users create a d angerous situation, referred to as multip le-threat collisions. This occurs when a m otor vehicle in one lane stops and provides a visual screen to the motorist in the adjacent lane; the motorist in the adjacent lane con tinues proceeds through and hits the pedestrian/bicyclist. The installation of advance crosswalk stop bars would clarify right-of-way by directin g motorists to stop at th e yield line, a distance back from the crossing, so that pedestrians and bicyclists crossing at this location are vis ible to m otorists in ad jacent lanes. This strategy is only applicable at m arked crosswalk locations. If this strategy is im plemented the trail crossing would need to be modified to provide a marked crosswalk. Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 3) Subject: Highway 7/Wooddale Interchange Traffic and Trail Improvement Options Page 50 Scott Brink December 2, 2011 City of St. Louis Park Page 16 16 x Strategy B7:Installation of in-pavement lighting increases the vis ibility of th e crossing and heightens driver awareness of a pedestrian or bicycl ist in the crossing, which would help to clarify the right-of-way at this crossing. If this strategy is implemented the trail crossing would need to be m odified to provide a m arked crosswalk. x Strategy B8:Install a pedestrian -activated signal such as a HAWK or Rapid Flash LED Beacon . These strategies would improve th e safety for trail users at th e crossing by reducing vehicle speeds, im proving visibility, clarifying the right-of-way and improving the safety of trail users by requiring motorists to stop. As previously indicated, these strategies would require modification of the trail crossing to provide a marked crosswalk (based on MUTCD requirem ents). Discussion of the differences in these systems is provided in the previous section under the W ooddale Avenue improvement strategies (Strategy W8). Due to the close proximity of this trail crossing to the railroad immediately to the south, which has cross bucks with flashing lights on each side of the roadway, in addition to overhead flashing lights for the railroad, it was determined that additional flashing lights would create confusion with the railro ad crossing. Therefore, this strategy would not be a good fit at this trail crossing location. x Strategy B9: Construction of a grade separated crossing would improve safety by physically separating the trail users from vehicular traffic. However, this strategy is costly and requires a high level of planni ng and engineering. In addition, due to the close proximity to the railroad (future LRT line), this strategy is n ot considered feasible since it is not supported by the railroad authority. RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the evaluation of the potential safety benefits and issues associated with each safety strategy evaluated, the following recommendations are provided at each trail cros sing. These recommendations are m ade based on the evaluation presented herein; highlighting the strategies that provide the m ost safety benefits without significant negative im pacts to the surrounding environment, trail user characteristics and/or the roadway design. Please note that additional detailed analysis and review will b e necessary for each of these recommended strategies prior to implementation. Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 3) Subject: Highway 7/Wooddale Interchange Traffic and Trail Improvement Options Page 51 Scott Brink December 2, 2011 City of St. Louis Park Page 17 17 Wooddale Avenue To address the safety co ncerns within the lim ited constraints of this corridor, the following improvement strategies (W2, W3, and W11) are recommended for further consideration: x Strategy W2:Extension of the center refuge median is recommended to improve trail safety by providing a better refuge area for trail users. This strategy could be implemented with paint striping to accom modate necessary turning radius f or westbound left turning vehicles from the TH 7 South Fron tage Road to go south on Wooddale Avenue. x Strategy W3:Restriping Wooddale Avenue to a tw o-lane roadway with left-turn lanes would help to organize traffic flow as motorists travel through this area. Based on the current ADT and a detailed operations analysis com pleted for this corridor, restriping this roadway would have m inimal impact to roadway capacity operations. This strategy would benefit trail users by reducing their exposure to vehicle traffic by reducing the traffic lanes, as well as reducing traffic speeds on Wooddale Avenue. x Strategy W11:Construction of a trail chicane to add curvature prior to the crossing would significantly reduce the speed of trail users as they approach W ooddale Avenue. However, there is limited space to the south of the current trail alignment due to the railroad. Removing the current trail curvature on the east side and extending the trail to intersect perpendicular to Wooddale Avenue would force users to slow down significantly. The curv ature of the trail on the west side would be sharpened as it approaches the crossing to slow users. As trail users approach the roadway, soft or hard landscaping features could be used to guide trail users north on W ooddale Avenue, parallel to the roadway, to the current crossing location. This realignm ent would provide a safety benefit to trail users by reducing their speed as they approach Wooddale Avenue (see Figure 7). Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 3) Subject: Highway 7/Wooddale Interchange Traffic and Trail Improvement Options Page 52 Potential Trail Chicane AlignmentNORTH North0117627December 2011Potential Trail Chicane Alignment - Wooddale Avenue Figure 7H:\Projects\7627\TS\Figure\Fig07_Wooddale Chicane.cdrTraffic Engineering Study of Regional Trail Crossings: Wooddale Avenue and Beltline BoulevardCity of St. Louis ParkStudy Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 3) Subject: Highway 7/Wooddale Interchange Traffic and Trail Improvement OptionsPage 53 Scott Brink December 2, 2011 City of St. Louis Park Page 19 19 Strategies W6 and W13 should be considered as additional improvements adjacent to and at the Wooddale Avenue trail crossing to improve safety for pedestrians and bicyclists at this location, if and when the City feels additional improvements are necessary. x Strategy W6: Due to the tight inte rsection spacing along Wooddale Avenue and the close proximity to the railroad crossing, the use of dynam ic in-pavement lighting would provide a safety benefit to trail users by increasing the visibility of the crossing and heightening the driver’s awareness of a pedestrian or bicyclist in the crossing, helping to clarify the right-of-way at th is crosswalk. This device would provide a similar benefit to the rapid flash warning beacon, without the added confusion to motorists approaching the railroad crossing. x Strategy W13: Currently, the TH 7 ram p intersections with W ooddale Avenue are closely spaced unsignalized intersections with lim ited sight lines. The installation o f traffic signals at the ramp intersections will improve traffic operations for the adjacent intersections and would benefit trail users by providing additional crossing gaps. Although the sight lines at the TH 7/Wooddale Avenue interchange ram ps are not related to the safety of the trail cr ossing, MnDOT did provide feedback for an improvement option to consider. To im prove the limited sight lines at the W ooddale Avenue/TH 7 Westbound Off-Ramp intersection, MnDOT has suggested extending the current sidewalk on the east side of the bridge slightly to the west. In addition, the current crosswalk on this approach would be shifted further west. W ith this modification, the sight lines for this approach would improve. However, the feasibility of this option should be evaluated to determ ine the cost and design modifications that would be associated with it. The typical order of operation at similar intersections is for the vehicle to stop prior to the crosswalk, identify if there are any pe destrians or bicyclists immediately in the crosswalk (or immediately adjacent), proceed forward slowly into the crosswalk un til their sight lines are suf ficient enough to id entify a gap in the traffic stream before making their maneuver to access the adjacent roadway. Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 3) Subject: Highway 7/Wooddale Interchange Traffic and Trail Improvement Options Page 54 Scott Brink December 2, 2011 City of St. Louis Park Page 20 20 Beltline Boulevard To address these safety concerns within the lim ited constraints of this corridor, im provement strategy B4 is recommended for further consideration: x Strategy B4:The current alignment of the Beltline Boulevard trail crossing provides an opportunity for bicyclists to approach the crossing at high rates of speed. The construction of a trail chicane to add curv ature as th e trail app roaches Beltline Boulevard would provide a safety benefit to trail users by reducing the speed of trail users as they approach and cross the roadway. One potential alignment is to realign the trail on the west side of Beltline Boulevard to the south and on the east side of Beltline Boulevard to the north (see Figure 8). As trail users approach the roadway, soft or hard landscaping features would be used to guide them. These features would be low-lying to avoid blocking sight lines. This realignment provides significant safety benefits for trail users. One significant benefit is a decrease in the speed of trail u sers approaching Beltline Boulevard. In addition, the alignment of trail users facing m otorists as they travel north along Beltline Boulevard towards the crossing would im prove the visibility and non-verbal communication between motorists and trail users. CONCLUSIONS The results of this study provide the City of St. Louis Park with a detailed engineering assessment of the Ceda r Lake LRT Regional Tr ail crossings south of TH 7, at Wooddale Avenue and Beltline Boulevard. The assessment was completed by applying criteria that is proven to improve pedestrian and bicycle safety at trail crossing locations to a wide variety of strategies. Based on this evaluation and taking into consideration the current roadway design and the surrounding environm ent, the solutions that are considered to provide the greatest benefit and are most applicable at each location are recommended. Again note that additional detailed analysis and review will be necessary for each of these recommended strategies prior to implementation. Wooddale Avenue - Strategies W2, W3, and W11 x Extension of a painted center refuge median (W2) x Restriping Wooddale Avenue to a two-lane roadway with left-turn lanes (W3) x Construction of a trail chicane (W11) Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 3) Subject: Highway 7/Wooddale Interchange Traffic and Trail Improvement Options Page 55 Scott Brink December 2, 2011 City of St. Louis Park Page 21 21 If and when the City feels additional im provements are necessary at the W ooddale Avenue trail crossing, the following improvements should be considered: x Dynamic in-pavement lighting at the crossing (W6) x Installation of traffic signals at the TH 7 ramp intersections (W13) Beltline Boulevard - Strategy B4 x Construction of a trail chicane (B4) H:\Projects\7627\111202_DRAFT Wooddale-Beltline Trail Xing Memo_Rev1.doc Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 3) Subject: Highway 7/Wooddale Interchange Traffic and Trail Improvement Options Page 56 Potential Trail Chicane AlignmentNORTH North0117627December 2011Potential Trail Chicane Alignment - Beltline BoulevardFigure 8H:\Projects\7627\TS\Figure\Fig08_Beltline Chicane.cdrTraffic Engineering Study of Regional Trail Crossings: Wooddale Avenue and Beltline BoulevardCity of St. Louis ParkStudy Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 3) Subject: Highway 7/Wooddale Interchange Traffic and Trail Improvement OptionsPage 57 Meeting Date: December 12, 2011 Agenda Item #: 4 Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance Presentation Other: EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other: Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other: TITLE: Project Update - Highway 100 Reconstruction Project. RECOMMENDED ACTION: The purpose of this report and study session discussion is to: 1. update Council on recent project activities 2. obtain Council feedback on the geometric layout being proposed by Mn/DOT 3. review and answer questions regarding next steps in moving this project forward POLICY CONSIDERATION: Staff is interested in questions, comments or concerns Council may have regarding: 1. the new layout 2. the noise study or NAC activities 3. next steps or proposed project process 4. further information needed on these or other project activities or issues BACKGROUND: History - At the January 24, 2011 Study Session, City and Mn/DOT staff explained concepts B and C and answered questions regarding the proposed Highway 100 project. Council expressed an interest in concept C (see attachments - Concept C (December 2010) - south and Concept C (December 2010) - north) with a two way frontage road on the east side of Highway 100 south of Minnetonka Boulevard along with retention of the W. 27th Street entrance ramp to southbound Highway 100. In addition, the following issues were identified during the course of the Study Session discussion held on the 24th: • Determine impact on Toledo homes, if any; - i.e., construction limits, noise walls, acquisition. • Work with property owners on preference for noise walls or vegetated berms • Minimize cut through in neighborhoods and congestion on local streets • Keep a direct access to SB Highway 100 from Minnetonka Boulevard (make access as easy as possible) • Take existing n/s bike trail into account; how do we extend north to the North Cedar Lake Regional Trail? • Mitigate congestion on Highway 100 to reduce local traffic • Determine if frontage road traffic will stack up • What are the safety requirements/considerations? • Utica Avenue – what will be done north of Minnetonka Boulevard? (answer - this is up to the city) • How wide are bike lanes/sidewalks on Minnetonka bridge (answer - 10 feet) • Is any part of Webster Park being taken? (answer - no) • Does the bike/ped bridge on W. 26th remain? (answer - yes) Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 4) Page 2 Subject: Project Update - Highway 100 Reconstruction Project At the February 7, 2011 Study Session, staff informed Council that Mn/DOT is proposing to close the W. 27th Street entrance ramp to southbound Highway 100 for concepts B, C, and D. Staff presented City goals and criteria that could be considered in evaluating the Mn/DOT proposed concepts. Council expressed significant concern over the proposed closure of the W. 27th Street entrance ramp and requested staff to evaluate impacts and possible mitigation associated with that closure. Council also expressed a desire to discuss north - south transportation needs in the City and how they may relate to the proposed Highway 100 project. At the March 7th Study Session staff presented impacts (traffic projections or shifts and right of way implications) for the various W. 27th Street entrance ramp options associated with the Highway 100 reconstruction project. Since the ramp changes being considered have the potential to alter area access to and from Highway 100, shift traffic, and possibly necessitate changes to existing streets or construction of new streets in the immediate area, the City Council directed staff to conduct a meeting(s) to obtain area property owner input on the ramp options, traffic impacts, access needs, and possible street changes near the W. 27th Street ramp. At the April 11th Study Session Council was presented a report providing information regarding changes in Mn/DOT’s noisewall installation practice and how that new policy was expected to relate to the Highway 100 project. At the June 27th Study Session staff updated Council on results of the public involvement process and input that had been received regarding the W. 27th Street entrance ramp options under consideration. Council decided that Option D (revision of the W. 27th Street ramp by extending it south to Minnetonka Blvd as a separate southbound ramp merging with Highway 100 exit traffic on the east side of the Holiday Station) was their preferred choice. Council directed staff to convey their ramp preference to area residents and respond to comments, if any. In addition, Council informed staff they desired to solicit residents to sit on Mn/DOT’s proposed Noise Advisory Committee (NAC). Recent Events Area residents were notified of this ramp preference during July and no comments were received. During August staff informed Mn/DOT that Council was interested in Mn/DOT pursuing concept C with enhancements (a two way frontage road on the east side of Highway 100 south of Minnetonka Boulevard and a one way southbound frontage road on the west side of Highway 100 south of Minnetonka Boulevard) and ramp Option D at the W. 27th Street entrance ramp. Based on City recommendations, during September Mn/DOT created a NAC to comply with the “new” federal Noise Analysis process required for this project. NAC goals are to provide two-way communication between the community and the project team, educate residents about the noise evaluation process, review the noise analysis methodology and results, and provide feedback to the City Council as well as communicate project information to neighborhood residents. The NAC is a smaller group of persons representing Mn/DOT and the City. City representatives participating on the NAC are: • Scott Brink, city rep - City Engineer • Meg McMonigal, city rep – Planning / Zoning Supervisor • Sue Sanger, city council rep – Councilmember • Brian Driscoll, resident – Triangle NH Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 4) Page 3 Subject: Project Update - Highway 100 Reconstruction Project • Sally Stewart , resident – Birchwood NH • Nancy Klaber , resident – Birchwood NH • Curt Peterson, resident – Fern Hill NH • Mike Skarp, resident – Fern Hill NH • Gary Reierson, resident – Fern Hill NH • Tina Dehn, resident – Sorenson NH The NAC had its first meeting Thursday evening, October 27th. Several more meetings are contemplated during the noise analysis / evaluation process currently underway. Future NAC meetings tentatively being considered: • The 2nd NAC meeting is tentatively scheduled for mid-January • The 3rd NAC meeting, if needed, is tentatively scheduled for Spring From September through November, Mn/DOT conducted a Value Engineering (VE) Study, a Road Safety Audit (RSA), and performed preliminary traffic modeling and an operational analysis for this project. As a result of City comments and these engineering activities, Mn/DOT has developed a proposed geometric layout for the project (see attachments - Proposed Layout (December 2011) - south and Proposed Layout (December 2011) – north). This new layout incorporates the following changes into concept C: 1. (south layout) - adds an exit ramp from northbound Hwy 100 to Minnetonka Blvd 2. (south layout) - eliminates the northbound connection on the east side of Hwy 100 between Hwy 7 / Hwy 25 and Minnetonka Blvd (no longer needed due to the added exit ramp to Minnetonka Blvd) 3. (south layout) - adds a southbound connection on the west side of Hwy 100 between Minnetonka Blvd and Hwy 7 4. (south layout) - revises the exit and entrance ramps on the west side of Hwy 100 at the Hwy 7 interchange. Based on a preliminary evaluation, the revised ramp intersection on the west side of the bridge may not need to be signalized. 5. (north layout) – retains the W27th Street entrance ramp as it exists except it is relocated north about 200’ (to immediately south of the existing overhead pedestrian bridge) Based on the preliminary traffic modeling and operational analysis performed on this new layout, Mn/DOT has concluded that the proposed layout will operate acceptably. One final note on the proposed layout, the proposed Hwy 100 / Minnetonka Blvd interchange is a tight diamond design which is generally used at locations with limited right of way. As a part of the VE Study, the idea of changing this interchange to a Diverging Diamond Interchange (DDI) was raised by the VE team. The DDI was considered last year in concept D, but due to that overall layout configuration was not pursued further. The tight diamond design is felt to work acceptably and the DDI probably will not be proposed unless definite advantages over the tight diamond design are identified. Hennepin County has previously stated they are not in favor of using a DDI at this location. The final determination on this question should be made in the near future. Summary and Next Steps Initial staff reaction to the new layout is favorable. Even though the changes to concept C alter traffic flows / patterns, the layout appears to meet City goals identified at the beginning of this project process. Staff is planning to review the modeling and operational analysis with Hennepin County over the next several months to verify the layout does meet our project goals as well as discuss the DDI idea at the Hwy 100 / Minnetonka Blvd interchange. Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 4) Page 4 Subject: Project Update - Highway 100 Reconstruction Project Mn/DOT is planning a citywide open house for March to update the general public regarding NAC activities or findings and to present the final proposed draft geometric layout and traffic modeling results associated with that layout. Staff expects Mn/DOT to request municipal consent from the City shortly after the public open house next spring. In summary, staff has identified the following steps in advancing this project: • Conduct noise study and NAC meetings October 2011 - April 2012 • Traffic Modeling / Operational Analysis review December 2011 - February 2012 by City and County • Preliminary Water Resources Design December 2011 - April 2012 • Mn/DOT Staff Approves Geometric Layout February 2012 • Mn/DOT Public Open House March 2012 • Final Geometric Layout approved April 2012 • Municipal Consent Approval Process May - July 2012 • Mn/DOT Develops Construction Plans Summer/Fall 2012 – Sept. 2014 and Specifications • Right of Way Acquisition May 2013 - September 2014 • Mn/DOT Opens Bids and Awards Contract November 2014 • Construction 2015 thru 2017 FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: To be determined. VISION CONSIDERATION: The following Strategic Direction and focus area was identified by Council in 2007: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged community. Focus will be on: • Developing an expanded and organized network of sidewalks and trails. • Promoting regional transportation issues and related dedicated funding sources affecting St. Louis Park including but not limited to Highway 100 and SWLRT. • Evaluating and investigating additional north/south transportation options for the community. Attachments: Concept C (December 2010) - south Concept C (December 2010) - north Proposed Layout (December 2011) - south Proposed Layout (December 2011) - north Prepared by: Michael P. Rardin, Public Works Director Reviewed by: April Crockett, West Area Engineer, Mn/DOT Scott Brink, City Engineer Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 4) Subject: Project Update - Highway 100 Reconstruction Project Page 5 Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 4) Subject: Project Update - Highway 100 Reconstruction Project Page 6 M M M M M M M M M ? M M? ? ? ? M M M M M ? M M M M M M M M M M M M MM M M ? ? ? ? ? M ? ? ? M M M M M M M ? ? ? M M ? ? M M M M ? ? ? M M M M M M M ? M ? M??? ? ? M M M M ? M M M ? ? MM ? M M ? ? ? M M M M M MM M M M M M M ? M M W M M MM M M M M M M M M M M M ? ? ?M M M ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? M M ? ? M M M M M ?? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? M M ? STOCK PILE S 100 SCALE IN FEET 100 SCALE IN FEET DATE ISSUED: PRELIMINARY SUBJECT TO CHANGE WITHOUT NOTICE $$$DATE$$$$ LEGEND 250’ SCALE IN FEET CURB & GUTTER, RAISED ISLAND BRIDGES & RETAINING WALLS PAVED SHOULDER ROADWAY 12-01-2011 PROPOSED ALT. - SOUTH TH100 SP 2734-33 R=245’R=220 ’R=552.965’R=245’R=180’ R=270’ R=220 ’R=2380’R=592.965’R=745’R=552.965’R=5730’1 0 ’ SHLD 10’ SHLD 14’12’12’14’14 ’ RTL14’12’12’ RTL12’ RTL12’14’12’12’14’16’12’14’16’12’16’12’4’ SHLD4’ SHLD4 ’ SHLD14’ 14’ 14’10’ SHLD 22’ 10’ SHLD 16 ’POSSIBLE POND LOCATION POSSIBLE POND LOCATION 1:10 TAPER1:10 TAPER12’ THRU 12’ THRU 12’ THRU 12’ THRU 12’ THRU 12’ THRU 12’ THRU 12’ THRU 12’THRU 12’THRU 12’THRU 12’THRU 12’THRU 12’THRU LUGGAGE WORLD THE OLIVER PRESS DOUGLAS CORP. SERVICE CO AUTOMOBILE PLUMBING MOTZKO TOM REFRIGERATION INC. SOUTH TOWN MN CONCRETE SPECIALITIESAUTO BROKERS INTEGRITY REBERS HOMES WALSER FORD GOODYEAR AARCEE PARTY & TENT RENTAL FAST TRACK AUDIO KING WAREHOUSE McGARVEY COFFEE CITY SCAPEAPTS.NORDIC WARE DATA SOURCE HAGEN YOSEMITE AVE.36TH ST. W.36TH ST. W.35TH ST. W.34TH ST.XENWOOD AVE. S. WEBSTER AVE. S.33RD ST.WEBSTER AVE. S. LA KE ST. ROLL E R G ARDEN C OL ONI AL TE RRACE STORE CONVENIENCE MARATHON LINK BROS. FLORIST MINI MALL GROVES ACADEMY MINNETONKA TERRACE HOLIDAY MINNETONKA BLVD.ST. GEORGES CHURCH AUTOMATIVE DUNRITE SALEM AVE. S. RALIEGH AVE. S. XENWOOD AVE. S.35 1/2 ST.CSAH 25ROADSIDE PARK HISTORIC HENNEPIN COUNTY ST. LOUIS PARK 1:15 TAPER18 ’17’14’1:10 TAPER1:10 TAPER1:5 TAPER14’x355’ LTL14’x205’ LTL14’x355’ LTL12’x280’ LTLINP.BRIDGE 5598 INP.BRIDGE 5308 14 ’ LT L 12’ 1:15 TAPER1:15 TAPER 6’ WALK6’ WALK6’ WALK6’ WALK6’ WALK12 ’ AU X VA R SH LD VA R SHLD12’T H R U12 ’TH R U 12’ T H R U 12 ’THRU 12 ’THRU 12 ’THRU12’ I N P12’ I NP12’ I NP12’ I N P12’ I N P12’ I N PD=2 R=29 1 2.789’ R=410 ’ R =102’16’ 16’14’12’16’ 10’ S HLD 12’16’ 10’ SHLD 12’12’ 16’12’ 12’16’ 10’ SHLD INP 10’10’(CONST. UNDER SP 2706-222)INPLACE DETENTION POND12’THRU 12’THRU 1:15 T APE R CO NSTRUCTED U N D ER SP.2706-222 TH 7 12’16’ 12’AUX TH 7 12’ AUX 12’THRU 12’ THRU 16’14’16’12’16’16’R=285’R=1 9 0 ’R=212’ R=190’ R=1000’ 25 mph 25 mph 12’ AUX 1:50 TAPEREXIT TO W OODDALE / 36TH ST W D=1 R=2849.131’ 12’AUX 14’ 700’ +/- R =150’ 16’ 450’ +/- R=68 0 ’R=390’ 35 mph 40 mph 12’AUX 1:30 TAPER 8’SHLD EXIT N OSE 127 0 ’ to WOOD D A LE 1:30 TAPER 930’ +/- 1060 ’ + /-R=1000’ 1:15 TAPER4’ SH LD 4’ SHLD 12’ 1 2 ’1 2 ’1 4 LTL1 6’1 2’ POSSIBLE POND LOCATION 31ST ST. W.& UNDERGROUND GARAGE BRITTANY APARTMENTS 14’10’SHLD 12’14’12’THRU 12’THRU 12’THRU 12’AUX 10’ WALK15’ 15’ POSSIBLE POND LOCATION TOLEDO AVE. S. INP.BRIDGE 5462 10’SHLD 12’AUX 14’ 14’ R=955 ’R=700 ’1:15 TAPER 1 6 ’ 1 6 ’ 1 6 ’ 12’R=245’R=180’ R=270’ R=220 ’R=680’ D=2 R=29 1 2.789’R=2380’ 60’74’R=592.965’R=745’R=552.965’R=955’R=955’R=2865’R=5730’10 3 5 1040 104 5 1 0 5 0 1055 10601035 1040 1045 1 0 5 0 105510604550553025 2 0795800805 810 815 820 825 830 835 45505560’795800805 810 815 820 825 830 835 R=3700 ’R=342 5 ’10 152025795800805 810 815 820 825 830 835 R=1910’20 24 Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 4) Subject: Project Update - Highway 100 Reconstruction Project Page 7 Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 4) Subject: Project Update - Highway 100 Reconstruction Project Page 8 Meeting Date: December 12, 2011 Agenda Item #: 5 Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance Presentation Other: EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other: Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other: TITLE: Communications/Meeting Check-In (Verbal). RECOMMENDED ACTION: Not Applicable. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Not Applicable. BACKGROUND: At every Study Session, verbal communications will take place between staff and Council for the purpose of information sharing. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not Applicable. VISION CONSIDERATION: Not Applicable. Attachments: None Prepared and Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Meeting Date: December 12, 2011 Agenda Item #: 6 Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance Presentation Other: EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other: Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other: TITLE: Project Update - Hwy 7 / Louisiana Avenue Interchange Project. RECOMMENDED ACTION: The purpose of this report and discussion is to update the Council on recent project development activities and financial activities related to this project – Project No. 2012-0100. POLICY CONSIDERATION: None at this time. Please let staff know of any comments or questions you might have. BACKGROUND: History The City’s Capital Improvement Program (C.I.P.) indentifies the Highway 7/Louisiana Avenue intersection as a priority improvement project. The proposed project, which provides for the construction of a grade-separated interchange at Louisiana Avenue and Highway 7, also includes pedestrian and bicycle friendly improvements along with re-configuration of the frontage roads in order to improve access, safety, and traffic flow for both the Highway 7 corridor and Louisiana Avenue. This proposed improvement is essential in meeting long term transportation and safety needs of both Mn/DOT and the City. At the last Study Session Council was provided a project update, discussed the project, and directed staff to: 1. Request a one year extension to the Federal Funds sunset date of March 31, 2012. 2. Delay right-of-way acquisition until project design is completed – later in 2012. 3. Incorporate public art into the project design as a part of Phase 4 activities with an emphasis on the bridge and associated lighting. 4. Discuss with Mn/DOT the use of their personnel for contract administration duties. Since then work on Phase 4 activities, Final Design and Plan Preparation, has continued as described in the Phase 4 Activities section below. Phase 1 and 2 Activities (complete) Phase 1 and 2 activities, which were completed in the first quarter of 2010, included project scoping and data collection, concept design and alternatives analysis. These activities culminated in the selection of two interchange concepts which were further evaluated as a part of the Phase 3 activities. Phase 3 Activities (complete) Phase 3 activities (Preliminary Design and Environmental Assessment) have now been completed. The Environmental Assessment (EA) was approved by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) during early November. The signed documents are posted on the project website: http://www.sehinc.com/online/stlouispark Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 6) Page 2 Subject: Project Update - Hwy 7 / Louisiana Avenue Interchange Project Phase 4 Activities (underway) Council authorized the City’s consultant, SEH, Inc., to begin Phase 4 activities on April 4, 2011 with an expected cost of approximately $958,600. Phase 4 activities, described as Final Design and Plan Preparation, include detailed engineering work needed to complete plans and specifications to obtain final Mn/DOT project approvals and authorization for bidding. The following is a list of tasks associated with this phase of the project: • Project Management • Public Involvement • Survey Work • Geotechnical Analysis • Drainage Design • Wetland Permitting • Roadway Design • Bridge Design • Construction Staging • Lighting • Public Art • Utility Coordination and Relocations • Right of Way Acquisition • Aesthetic Design and Landscape Architecture Final Design: SEH is continuing work on the 60 percent complete plans milestone. 60 percent plans should be finished by January 2012 and will then be provided to Mn/DOT and the City for review and comments. Construction Staging At the September 26, 2011 City Council Study Session meeting, staff presented and reviewed the construction staging plans with Council. The staging plan includes construction of a by-pass for Highway 7 along with construction of a temporary signal system at Louisiana so that thru-traffic and right turns can be maintained on Hwy 7 and Louisiana Avenue at most all times. Left turns will not be allowed at the intersection which will result in the need for detours for those movements. Based on further design work by SEH, the staging plans have been revised to reflect work needed to correct the poor soil conditions and to allow private utility relocation activities to occur prior to the start of construction (See the revised staging plans, Attachment No. 1). The revised staging plans also includes new schedule dates based on a one year extension to the federal funding sunset date discussed later in this report under Project Schedule. Phase 1 of the staging plans shows that private utility relocation will be given a full year to relocate their facilities. Essentially, the private utilities will have the full 2012 construction season to relocate their facilities, if needed. Relocating the private utilities, to the extent possible, in advance of the interchange construction will reduce/eliminate scheduling conflicts between the private utility companies and the city’s general contractor that often occur during the project construction. This will reduce the risk of construction claims which sometimes result from work delays due to utility relocations. Phase 1 also includes soil correction work needed beneath the exit and entrance ramps on the south side of Highway 7. This work will be the first operation performed by the City’s contractor after the start of construction in 2013. The rest of the phases of the staging plan are essentially the same as present at the September 26th Study Session meeting except for the revised dates. Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 6) Page 3 Subject: Project Update - Hwy 7 / Louisiana Avenue Interchange Project Public Art Artists Andrea Myklebust and Stanton Sears have been selected to incorporate pubic art into the Highway 7/Louisiana Interchange Project. Andrea and Stanton have extensive experience in public art including work on highway transportation projects. They were recently involved in the Mn/DOT I-694/35E Unweave the Weave Project where they incorporated public art into the Edgerton Street Bridge over I-694/35E. Two meetings have been held with staff, the artists, the City’s consultants and two resident representatives. Ideas have been discussed about using cast in place concrete to incorporate art- formwork into the bridge’s concrete barrier/railing, bridge abutments, retaining walls, and the bridge piers and caps. The formwork would create a surface finish based on the artist’s ideas developed from context taken from the neighborhood area and/or other areas within St. Louis Park which residents can identify with. Lighting ideas are also being discussed with regards to lighting effects that would highlight the formwork and other bridge features. Upon further development of the public art components, staff will provide a more detailed update at a future Study Session to obtain Council comments and feedback. Project Schedule Staff discussed the opportunity and process for requesting an extension to the federal funding sunset date at the September 26th Study Session meeting. A one year extension is typically granted to projects making significant progress but needing additional time to complete plans, acquire right-of-way, obtain necessary approvals and prepare for advertising, bidding and awarding the project. Council supported the idea of a one year extension to the federal funding sunset date and directed staff to make a formal request at the appropriate time as recommend by Mn/DOT. Staff has started the process to make a formal request to extent the sunset date. Staff is working with the Mn/DOT Federal Aid Office in preparing the City’s request. Staff will make the request based on the need for additional time for private utility coordination and relocation, right of way acquisition, as well as the complex staging plan which includes time dependent soil correction work and construction of a highway by-pass. New schedules have been developed based on a one year time extension to the federal funding sunset date. Two alternate schedules are shown in Attachments No. 2 and 3. One schedule shows an early start (April 1, 2013 construction start date) which allows for a full construction season in the first year. The second schedule shows a later start date (July 5, 2013 construction start date) which uses the full one year time extension request. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The following summarizes the project development phases and the costs contracted for with SEH, Inc. to date: Phase Contract Amount Cost to Date Status 1 & 2 $306,548.00 $296,420.77 Work Completed 3 $535,000.00 $561,231.81 Work Completed 4 $958,600.00 $468,026.71 49% Complete Total $1,800,148.00 $1,325,679.29 Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 6) Page 4 Subject: Project Update - Hwy 7 / Louisiana Avenue Interchange Project Project Costs As discussed at the September 26, 2011 Study Session meeting, estimated construction costs and other project development costs have increased from the planning estimates determined during Preliminary Design. The costs have increased approximately $3.2 million from the initial Preliminary Design estimate to the current estimate based on advanced design work. Presented below are the current project costs based on advanced design work. Funding sources known at this time are also presented below: Current Estimated Project Costs Construction $18,900,000 Preliminary and Final Design Engineering $ 1,800,000 Construction Engineering (estimated consultant cost) $ 1,800,000 Right of Way $ 2,700,000 Total Costs $25,200,000 Funding Sources Federal (STP) Funds $7,630,000 Mn/DOT Access Management Funds $1,000,000 Mn/DOT Cooperative Agreement Funds $ 594,000 Mn/DOT (Construction Eng’r Value) $1,800,000 City Funds (20% construction grant match – source TBD) $2,398,000 City Funds (Preliminary and Final Design Eng’r – source TBD) $1,800,000 City Funds (Right of Way – source TBD) $2,700,000 Total Committed Funds $17,922,000 Unfunded Amount $7,278,000 Funding Sources and Funding Gap $7,630,000 in federal funds has been secured through the Met Council’s State Transportation Program Urban Grant solicitation. $594,000 has been secured through the Mn/DOT Municipal Agreement Program. Mn/DOT has also committed $1,000,000 in Access Management Funds towards the project. At this time, it appears Mn/DOT is willing to provide contract administration services for this project currently valued at approximately $1,800,000. As a part of the grant agreement, the City is required to pay for Preliminary / Final Design Engineering and Right of Way costs plus $2,398,000 required as a 20% match to the Federal construction grant. The construction grant match costs as well as other construction related costs will only be realized should the project be constructed. Thus minimum City costs are currently estimated to be at least $6,898,000 – should the project be constructed – which leaves the $7,278,000 Unfunded Amount shown above. However, based on past experience and regional project funding trends, the City should probably expect to pay about 50% of the total cost of this project which would be approximately $12,600,000. Assuming the City would need to contribute this amount, that leaves a funding gap of $1,576,000. This is the amount of outside dollars the City realistically needs to fully fund this project. Any outside funds obtained beyond $1,576,000 would reduce the City’s overall financial contribution to the project to less than 50%. Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 6) Page 5 Subject: Project Update - Hwy 7 / Louisiana Avenue Interchange Project Funding Opportunities Current funding for Phases 1 through 4 is coming from HRA levy proceeds which have been designated to pay for infrastructure improvements in redeveloping areas. Funding sources for the City’s costs described above have not yet been determined. The following would be logical sources to be considered: HRA levy proceeds Municipal State Aid Funds (gas tax monies) EDA funds General Obligation Bond Funds At some point in the near future the City Council should discuss its interest and willingness in providing more than $12 million in funding to make this project a reality. Steps have been and will continue to be taken to secure outside funding needed for this project (the $1,576,000 funding gap noted above). The 2011 Legislature approved $10 million of state transportation bond funds in the Local Road Improvement Program (LRIP). These funds are to be used to assist townships, cities and counties in paying the costs of constructing or reconstructing local road projects with statewide or regional significance. Staff intends to apply for this grant in February 2012 at the maximum level of $500,000. VISION CONSIDERATION: The following Strategic Direction and focus area has been identified by Council. St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged community. Focus will be on: Promoting regional transportation issues and related dedicated funding sources affecting St. Louis Park including but not limited to Hwy. 100 and SWLRT. Attachments: Attachment 1 – Staging Plans Attachment 2 – Schedule (early start) Attachment 3 – Schedule (late start) Prepared by: Jim Olson, Engineering Project Manager Reviewed by: Mike Rardin, Public Works Director Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager M M M Church Christian Knollwood Store Station Holiday Group Media Mahoney Printing Presswrite Design By Audio Mfg. Inc. Electric Eclipse Exteriors Northeast Ciprico Fabri-Top Clinics Kass Club Sam’s Gallery Furniture Odds-n-Ends Repair Auto Phoenix Systems Z G M M M M M M M M M M M M M M conc. bit conc bit c onc bit bit bit bit bit bit bit bitbitconcconc M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M MM M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M Church Christian Knollwood Store Station Holiday Group Media Mahoney Printing Presswrite Design By Audio Mfg. Inc. Electric Eclipse Exteriors Northeast Ciprico Fabri-Top Clinics Kass Club Sam’s Gallery Furniture Odds-n-Ends Repair Auto Phoenix Systems Z G M M M M M M M M MM MM M M conc. bit concbitconcbit bit bit bit bit bit bit bit bitbitconcconc M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M Creative Inc. Schussler Church Christian Knollwood Store Station Holiday Group Media Mahoney Printing Presswrite Design By Audio Mfg. Inc. Electric Eclipse Exteriors Northeast Ciprico Fabri-Top Clinics Kass Club Sam’s Gallery Furniture Odds-n-Ends Repair Auto Phoenix Systems Z G M M M M M M M M MM MM M M conc. bit concbit bit bit bit bit bit bit bitbitconcconc M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M Creative Inc. Schussler Church Christian Knollwood Store Station Holiday Group Media Mahoney Printing Presswrite Design By Audio Mfg. Inc. Electric Eclipse Exteriors Northeast Ciprico Fabri-Top Clinics Kass Club Sam’s Gallery Furniture Odds-n-Ends Repair Auto Phoenix Systems Z G M M M M M M M M M M MM M M conc. bit conc bit c onc bit bit bit bit bit bit bit bit bitbitconcconc M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M MM M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M Creative Inc. Schussler Church Christian Knollwood Store Station Holiday Group Media Mahoney Printing Presswrite Design By Audio Mfg. Inc. Electric Eclipse Exteriors Northeast Ciprico Fabri-Top Clinics Kass Club Sam’s Gallery Furniture Odds-n-Ends Repair Auto Phoenix Systems Z G M M M M M M M M M M M M M M conc. bit conc bitconc bit bit bit bit bit bit bit bit bitbitconcconc M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M Church Christian Knollwood Store Station Holiday Group Media Mahoney Printing Presswrite Design By Audio Mfg. Inc. Electric Eclipse Exteriors Northeast Ciprico Fabri-Top Clinics Kass Club Sam’s Gallery Furniture Odds-n-Ends Repair Auto Phoenix Systems Z G M M M M M M M M M M M M M M conc. bit conc bit c onc bit bit bit bit bit bit bit bitbitconcconc M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC NOT BOUND TO 1 MONTH TIME FRAME TH 7 & LOUISIANA AV COMPLETED CONSTRUCTION CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC COMPLETED CONSTRUCTION CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC COMPLETED CONSTRUCTION CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC W 37TH ST WALKER ST LAKE ST TH 7 TH 7 AVELOUI SI ANAWALKER ST W 37TH ST AVELOUI SI ANALAKE ST TH 7 TH 7 WALKER ST W 37TH ST AVELOUI SI ANALAKE ST TH 7 TH 7 WALKER STW 37TH ST AVELOUI SI ANALAKE ST TH 7 TH 7 WALKER ST AVELOUI SI ANALAKE ST TH 7 TH 7 W 37TH ST TEMP BYPASS TEMP BYPASS TEMP BYPASS NE RAMP NW RAMP NE RAMP NW RAMP NE RAMP NW RAMP SW RAMP SE RAMP NW RAMP SW RAMP NE RAMP SE RAMP TEMP SIGNAL11/30/20113:11:40 PMS:\PT\S\Stlou\116227\5-dsgn\51-cadd\staging layout.dgnDefaultcflorAVELOUI SI ANATH 7 W 37TH ST LAKE STWALKER STTH 7 PHASE 1 PHASE 2 PHASE 3 PHASE 4 PHASE 5 PHASE 6 CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC OCT. 2013 - NOV. 2013 JULY 2014 - NOV. 2014 TO ALLOW BEAM SETTING COMPLETE BY NOV. 2013 STAGING CONCEPT TH 7/LOUISIANA AVE INTERCHANGE CONSTRUCTING BYPASS SURCHARGE PRIOR TO MUCK EXCAVATION SUMMER 2012 - AUGUST 2013 SEPTEMBER 2013 NOV. 2013 - MAY 2014 JUNE 2014 CONTRACT (JULY - AUGUST 2013) 1 POST AWARD OF CONSTRUCTION - SURCHARGE SW QUADRANT 1 - MUCK EXCAVATION IN SE QUADRANT 1 - RELOCATE CRITICAL UTILITIES - CONSTRUCT TEMP SIGNAL - CONSTRUCT TEMP BYPASS - SURCHARGE NE QUADRANT BRIDGE - CONSTRUCT NB LOUISIANA AVE UNDER BRIDGE AND NORTH RAMPS - CONSTRUCT TH 7 EMBANKMENT, - MUCK EXCAVATION TH7 AND NE RAMP AND BRIDGE AND NORTH RAMPS - CONTINUE TH 7 EMBANKMENT AND ENDS OF TH 7 - CONSTRUCT 1/2 OF LOUISIANA AVE - CONSTRUCT SW AND SE RAMPS ACCESS TO EAST/FROM WEST) - ACCELERATED PHASE (NO RAMP AND ENDS OF TH 7 - CONSTRUCT 2ND 1/2 OF LOUISIANA AVE City Council Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 6) Subject: Project Update - Hwy 7 / Louisiana Avenue Interchange Project Page 6 DRAFT Highway 7/Louisiana Avenue Interchange Design and Right of Way Schedule - EARLY START Revised December 2011 Printed 11/30/2011 Assumes one year extension for Federal funds to March 31, 2013. Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul FONSI (EA approved) Final Design (April 1 Start) 60% plans Agency Review 60% Plans Final plans Agency Review Final Plans Public Art Process/Aesthetic Design Utility Coordination Remedial Action Plan (RAP) Agency Review of RAP Special Provisions Engineer's estimate State Aid Engineer approval of plans FHWA Authorization Utility relocation certificate Permit applications submitted R/W Acquisition R/W identification Appraisals Offers/Negotiation/Title & Possession Condemnation initiated Right of Way Certificate 1 Private Utility Relocation Advertise for bids Open bids (February 2013) Award contract Begin construction (April 1, 2013) 2012 2013 S:\PT\S\Stlou\116227\2-mgmt\Design Schedule (Early) Revised Dec 2011.xlsx City Council Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 6) Subject: Project Update - Hwy 7 / Louisiana Avenue Interchange Project Page 7 DRAFT Highway 7/Louisiana Avenue Interchange Design and Right of Way Schedule - LATE START Revised December 2011 Printed 11/30/2011 Assumes one year extension for Federal funds to March 31, 2013. Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul FONSI (EA approved) Final Design (April 1 Start) 60% plans Agency Review 60% Plans Final plans Agency Review Final Plans Public Art Process/Aesthetic Design Utility Coordination Remedial Action Plan (RAP) Agency Review of RAP Special Provisions Engineer's estimate State Aid Engineer approval of plans FHWA Authorization Utility relocation certificate Permit applications submitted R/W Acquisition R/W identification Appraisals Offers/Negotiation/Title & Possession Condemnation initiated Right of Way Certificate 1 Private Utility Relocation Advertise for bids Open bids (June 2013) Award contract Begin construction (July 5, 2013) 2012 2013 S:\PT\S\Stlou\116227\2-mgmt\Design Schedule (Late) Revised Dec 2011.xlsx City Council Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 6) Subject: Project Update - Hwy 7 / Louisiana Avenue Interchange Project Page 8 Meeting Date: December 12, 2011 Agenda Item #: 7 Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance Presentation Other: EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other: Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other: TITLE: Recreational Fire Permits. RECOMMENDED ACTION: This staff report is being provided to outline some issues associated with the process the City currently uses for issuing permits for recreational fires and insuring compliance. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council wish to discuss recreational fire permits at a future study session? BACKGROUND: Currently, city ordinance allows for both recreational and non-recreational open burning by permit, which is administered by the Fire Department at no cost to the applicant. Recreational permits are good from the date of issue until December 31st each year. Open burning permits, which are used primarily for prairie restoration, are issued for a one time use. With the advent and popularity over the last decade of portable fire pits and other wood burning appliances, the number of complaints has risen steadily. To combat this increase in complaints, the Fire Department has increased staff time to thoroughly go over the regulations with each and every permit holder. In 2011 so far, the Fire Department issued 693 recreational fire permits. The current approach for issuing licenses annually and the increase in permit requests is beginning to create staffing issues. Below is a chart of permits issued over the last seven years: Year # Permits Issued 2005 270 2006 302 2007 313 2008 470 2009 548 2010 628 2011 693 as of 12/2 Listed below are some examples of concerns and/or complaints on burning we received that in some cases led to fires being extinguished and/or permits being revoked. Burning too close to a structure or property line Burning construction materials, garbage, furniture, brush and leaves Burning tree stump with lighter fluid Oversized fire Fire left unattended In 2011 an unattended, unpermitted recreational fire resulted in a neighbor’s garage catching on fire. Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 7) Page 2 Subject: Recreational Fire Permits The Fire Department believes that the number of complaints could be substantially reduced by requiring site drawings, conducting site inspections to ensure proper setbacks are met, and educating applicants to ensure compliance with State and City fire code regulations. In collecting information from neighboring cities, none charge a fee and, in some cases, permits are not required. We do not have information on quantity of complaints in those cities. PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE RECREATIONAL FIRE PERMIT PROCESS What follows is an outline of possible proposed changes: Change the current recreational fire permit from an annual permit to a permanent permit. Assess a $25.00 permit fee for site inspection and administrative processing, which previously was free. Require property drawing with measurements and an onsite inspection in order to ensure recreational fire locations meet setbacks and are in keeping with the State and City fire code. Provide fire prevention education to permit applicants. Allow for a five day permit issuance turnaround time in order to conduct property inspection and permit processing (previously permit was issued upon receipt of recreational fire application). Continue to enforce violation penalties, i.e.; permit revocation or misdemeanor citation (City of St. Louis Park Ordinance Section 14-80). FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Charge a $25.00 recreational fire permit fee for a permanent recreational fire permit. The fee amount was determined based on the property inspection taking approximately 30 minutes, plus administrative processing and record keeping time. This will reduce future staff time in the issuing of annual permits and reviewing regulations with permit holders. VISION CONSIDERATION: Not Applicable. Attachments: City Code Prepared by: Cary Smith, Assistant Chief/Fire Marshal Reviewed by: Luke Stemmer, Fire Chief Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 7) Page 3 Subject: Recreational Fire Permits City Code Sec. 14-73. Prohibited; exemptions. (a) Except as otherwise provided in this article, burners, open burning and recreational fires shall be prohibited within the city. (b) The following open burning is permitted within the city, subject to the requirements of this section, by permit only: (1) Recreational fires. (2) Non-recreational open burning. Exemption to conduct fires under this section does not excuse a person from the consequences, damages or injuries which may result therefrom nor does it exempt any person from regulations promulgated by the state pollution control agency or any other governmental unit exercising jurisdiction in matters of pollution or fire hazard regulation. (Ord. No. 2180-00, § 1(8-212), 11-6-2000) Sec. 14-74. Recreational fires. Recreational fires shall be conducted in accordance with article 11 of the state uniform fire code, and as specified within the city recreational fire permit application. (Ord. No. 2180-00, § 1(8-212), 11-6-2000) Sec. 14-75. Burning permit required. No person shall start or allow any open burning on any property in the city, including camp fires and recreational fires, without first having obtained an open burning permit. (Ord. No. 2180-00, § 1(8-212), 11-6-2000) Sec. 14-76. Application and fees. Open burning permits shall be obtained by making application on a form issued by the city and by paying the permit fee established from time to time by resolution of the city council. The fire chief shall have the authority to waive the fee required under this section if the fire chief deems issuance of the permit to be in the best interest of the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of the city or to enable the regeneration of vegetation. (Ord. No. 2180-00, § 1(8-212), 11-6-2000) Sec. 14-77. Revocation of open burning permit. The open burning permit is subject to revocation at the discretion of a department of natural resources forest/conservation officer, the city fire chief or the city fire warden. Reasons for revocation include, but are not limited to, a fire hazard existing or developing during the course Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 7) Page 4 Subject: Recreational Fire Permits of the burn, any of the conditions of the permit being violated during the course of the burn, pollution or nuisance conditions developing during the course of the burn, or a fire smoldering with no flame present. (Ord. No. 2180-00, § 1(8-212), 11-6-2000) Sec. 14-78. Burning or air quality alert. No open burning will be permitted when the city or department of natural resources has officially declared a burning ban due to potential hazardous fire conditions or when the state pollution control agency (MPCA) has declared an air quality alert. (Ord. No. 2180-00, § 1(8-212), 11-6-2000) Sec. 14-79. Rules adopted by reference. M.S.A. §§ 88.01--88.22 are adopted by reference and made a part of this article as if fully set forth in this section. (Ord. No. 2180-00, § 1(8-212), 11-6-2000) Sec. 14-80. Penalty for violation of article. Any person violating any provision of this article is guilty of a misdemeanor. (Ord. No. 2180-00, § 1(8-212), 11-6-2000) Meeting Date: December 12, 2011 Agenda Item #: 8 Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance Presentation Other: EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other: Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other: TITLE: Community Recreation Facility Task Force. RECOMMENDED ACTION: This report is being provided for information purposes. Please provide staff with thoughts or comments you might have on the approach for forming the Task Force. POLICY CONSIDERATION: None at this time. Please provide staff with your thoughts or comments on the information provided in this report as staff moves forward on forming the Task Force. BACKGROUND: At the November 28, 2011, Study Session the City Council provided feedback on the tour recently conducted of three community centers and the makeup and formation of a task force to assist the City Council with this issue. At that time the Council asked staff to move forward on soliciting members of the task force. SELECTION OF A TASK FORCE: Based on input from the Council, the task force will include one or two members from the Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission, a member from the Planning Commission, a member from the Community Education Advisory Committee, a member from the Human Rights Commission, a resident representative from each ward, a member from one or two youth associations, a member from the Lenox Advisory Board, a member from the business community and/or CVB, a member from the school district, and a youth member. When soliciting members, it was also recommended by Council that we look for representatives who have a financial background. Although it is not necessary to have a resident representative from each ward, it does give the Council an opportunity to identify people in their ward who would be good task force members. Staff suggests an ideal number of task force members are 13 to 15. Unless there are questions or concerns expressed by the Council, staff will begin to solicit and advertise for task force openings using multiple avenues to get the word out. PROPOSED TASK FORCE MISSION STATEMENT: The mission of the Community Recreation Task Force is to consider community input that was received from previous surveys, gather additional information and input and make recommendations to the City Council regarding the addition of future recreation facilities or programs. As a part of this process, the Task Force will also look at possible partnerships and locations. PROPOSED MEETING PROCESS: The Task Force will meet seven to nine times, typically once a month, although they may need to meet more frequently on some occasions. In addition to Task Force meetings, they will be asked to participate and assist in leading focus groups and public meetings to help further define what the community would like to see in future facilities or programs. Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 8) Page 2 Subject: Community Recreation Facility Task Force COMMUNITY RECREATION PLANNING TIMELINES: Staff suggests the following updated timelines: December 2011 December - Review with new council members to get them up to speed on history and next steps. - Define mission and purpose of Task Force. - Solicit members for a Task Force (13-15 members). January 2012 January - Appoint task force members. - Convene task force. January 23 - Date for Ellen O’Sullivan to speak to Council members and other stakeholders (City and School) regarding trends in Parks and Recreation. February 2012 February 13 - Council check-in regarding trends and upcoming public process. March 2012 Public Process. March - A series of focus groups lead by the task force and staff. - A variety of community members (including members of Lenox, youth associations, city and school commission members, people who gave us their e-mail during the survey) will be invited as well as advertisements on the website, Cable TV, and where appropriate. - Staff to research locations, potential partners and financing options. April 2012 April 9 - Council Study Session to discuss what type of facility (s) could support the programs our community wants and location (s). Hear report from Task Force. Next steps might be to create an RFQ (Request for Qualifications) or a RFP (Request for Proposal) or to ask the Task Force to further study options. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Ellen O’Sullivan will be at the January 23, 2012 Council Study Session to present information on trends in the field of Parks and Recreation. Staff is coordinating with the Minnesota Recreation and Parks Association (MRPA) to have Ellen speak to other professionals in the area on January 24 while she is here, sharing the cost with the MRPA. Council gave direction to staff during the budget session to set aside some money to further study this issue. VISION CONSIDERATION: This topic is directly related to the results of Vision St. Louis Park and one of the adopted Strategic Directions that “St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged community” and the related Focus Area of “Exploring creation of a multi-use civic center, including indoor/winter use”. Attachments: None Prepared by: Cindy Walsh, Director of Parks and Recreation Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Meeting Date: December 12, 2011 Agenda Item #: 9 Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance Presentation Other: EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other: Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other: TITLE: Fire Stations Project Update. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Not applicable. Please let staff know of any questions you might have. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. BACKGROUND: Staff last provided a general update to City Council on September 12, 2011. Significant and visible progress has been made at both fire stations. The project remains on schedule and within budget. The overall project is approximately 65% complete. The overall project is still expected to be substantially complete in May 2012. Construction Progress Update Fire Station No. 1: Structural precast concrete, masonry, and steel were completed at the end of September. The underground stormwater detention system was installed in mid-October, during which time material staging moved into the Wooddale Avenue cul-de-sac due to on-site space constraints. Roofing, mechanical rough-ins, pouring of concrete slab on grade and second floor topping were completed in October through December. Exterior stone and brick installation is complete. Exterior concrete curb, some of the sidewalks, and the first lift of pavement for the driveways were completed in November. Permeable pavers in select parking bays will be installed in the spring. Three service stairways have been installed. The building has temporary enclosures and heat. Window installation is underway. Upcoming work will include installation of overhead doors, main stairway and the interior building finishes, such as drywall, tile, fixtures, etc. Coordination work on the building automation system, lighting controls, paging system, and station alerting system installation is also underway. Additional contaminated soils, which included asbestos containing materials, were encountered on the west side of the site. Eight additional truckloads of material had to be loaded, wrapped and hauled to an approved facility last week. Kraus Anderson estimates the cost will be $15,000, but the cost has not yet been included in the attached budget. Fire Station No. 2: Structural steel erection was completed in early October. Exterior stone and brick installation is complete. The curbs and pavement on the north side of the building are complete and permeable pavers will be installed in the parking lot in the spring. The parking lot removals north of Walgreens occurred in October. Steel studs, roofing, mechanical rough-ins, pouring of slab on grade are also complete. Window installation is nearly complete, and overhead garage doors are being installed. In the interim, the building has temporary enclosures and heat. Interior finishes are well underway. Coordination work on the building automation system, lighting controls, paging system, and station alerting system is also underway. Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 9) Page 2 Subject: Fire Stations Project Update It is expected that by the end of January, the Fire Department will begin operations in the new Station #2 building. Following the move, asbestos and hazardous material removal will begin at the old building in preparation for demolition. In the spring, the south side of the site will be brought up to grade, additional retaining walls will be installed, the remaining parking lot changes will be made on the north side of Walgreens, and final grading and landscaping will occur. Budget A project budget summary is attached for your information. The project is within budget. There has been $64,757 in change orders executed to date. There are pending change orders totaling $154,441 that are under review. If all the current change orders were executed, the contingency budget would still have $359,152 remaining. The City Manager may approve up to $100,000 in change orders administratively. City Council authorized the City Manager to approve up to a total of $200,000 in change orders on September 19, 2011. If the change orders approach $200,000 staff may again request the City Council to give the City Manager authority to administratively approve additional change orders to complete the project. Schedule The overall project is currently on schedule. Construction began May 3, 2011. The project should be complete in May 2012. Attached for your information is a basic construction schedule for both stations with milestone events noted. Communications Staff is still providing construction updates via email and the City website on a monthly basis. The emails are sent to people that attended fire station design meetings, the four neighborhood presidents, the Councilmember for each of the two wards, and various city staff. The City Council will continue to receive quarterly study session written reports and occasional updates through the Manager’s Digest. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: This project is in the City’s adopted Capital Improvement Program (CIP). The project budget for constructing both stations is $15.5 million. The sources of funds include $12.5 million in Build America bonds issued in December 2010. The remaining portion will be paid with approximately $3 million from the Fire portion of the Police and Fire Pension Fund. Staff anticipates the actual project costs will be approximately $15.1 million based on the construction bids received in March and the construction progress to date. Attachments: Budget Summary Construction Schedule Construction Photographs Prepared by: Sean Walther, Senior Planner Reviewed by: Luke Stemmer, Fire Chief Kevin Locke, Community Development Director Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Date: 5/5/2011 Update #:6 Update Date: 12/5/2011 Owner:City of St. Louis Park Project Start: May-11 Project:Fire Stations #1 & #2 Location:St. Louis Park Designer:DLR Group/KKE Description Fire Station #1 Fire Station #2 TOTALS Remarks Project Funds Available $0 $0 $15,516,197 Utility Rebates $0 $0 $0 TBD Interest Earnings $0 Total Available Dollars $0 $0 $15,516,197 Construction Costs Budget Building & Site Construction $0 $0 $10,399,785 Bids including Alt #1 and #2 Project General Conditions $282,992 $224,407 $507,399 Direct Cost Items CM Site Services $0 $0 $502,335 Kraus-Anderson CM Fee $0 $0 $157,500 Kraus-Anderson Construction Contingency $355,000 $223,350 $578,350 5% Contingency Small Utility Relocation/New Service Charges $22,354 $53,499 $75,852 Actual Qwest at #1, Xcel allow at #2 Owner Direct Items $2,670 $23,724 $26,394 Design #1 Helicals, Fiber relocate at FS#2 Interior Signage Allowance $9,000 $7,000 $16,000 Home Demo Contract For Fire Station #1 $38,083 $0 $38,083 Actual Contact including change order Total Construction Budget $12,301,698 Soft Cost Budget A/E Fees $0 $0 $498,750 DLR/KKE A&E Project Reimbursable or Constr. Admin.$0 $0 $24,000 DLR/KKE Overall Project Budget - Post Bid A/E Additional Services $0 $0 $70,676 DLR/KKE/Faithful Gould Civil, Structural, M&E Design Fees $0 $0 incl. FFE Programming $0 $0 $0 Building Permit Fee $54,049 $30,574 $84,622 Actual City Fees/ MPCA/Hennepin County Zoning Application Fee $2,800 $2,800 $5,600 Preliminary Info from City SAC & WAC Costs $0 $0 $0 Per City Information Construction Testing / Special Inspections Testing $34,385 $30,595 $64,980 Braun- Actual Amount Site Survey $14,632 $8,556 $23,188 WSB-Sunde#1/Loucks #2 Initial Park Soil Borings $0 $8,465 $8,465 Braun(by City) Geotechnical Exploration / Soil Borings $0 $0 $13,777 Actual Braun Costs Plan Productions / Distribution - Bidding $7,979 $7,500 $15,479 Actual as of 9/1/11 Total Soft Cost Budget $809,538 Owner Costs Budget $0 Land Acquisition/Utility/Taxes Costs $858,944 $0 $858,944 Per City Information Owner Moving/Relocation Costs $25,000 $25,000 $50,000 Estimated/Mobile Home Costs Public Infrastructure $0 $0 $0 Capitalized Interest on Land $0 $0 $0 Capitalized Interest on Building $0 $0 $0 Loan Expenses or Bonding Costs $1,900 $1,900 $3,800 Per City Info Furniture, Fixtures and Equipment $350,000 $200,000 $550,000 Allowance Technology / Equipment $129,000 $104,000 $233,000 Per Modified City Info Opticom Relocation at FS#2 $0 $8,000 $8,000 Allowance Radio System Equipment $0 $0 $25,000 Allowance Art Requirement $50,000 $0 $50,000 Memorial at #1 Special Consultants $14,200 $8,000 $22,200 SRF / Surveying FS #2 Legal Fees / Bid Notices $7,860 $8,518 $16,378 Per City Info Project Commissioning / Validation $25,000 $15,000 $40,000 Allowance SLP CD Budget Postbid 12-5-11 - Owner-Project Budget Page 1 of 2 Print Date: 12/5/2011 Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 9) Subject: Fire Stations Project Update Page 3 Description Fire Station #1 Fire Station #2 TOTALS Remarks Phase 1 & 2 and Hazmat Environmental Study $0 $0 $45,646 Actual Braun Costs Environmental Monitoring $0 $0 $30,000 Allowance Braun Environmental Abatement Costs/Abatement Testing $63,661 Lindstrom/Braun Geothermal Drilling / Report $11,367 $11,367 $22,734 Actual Braun Costs Storm Water Charges, Requirements $0 $0 $0 City Approval Fees & Park Ded.$0 $0 $0 City Administration Costs $1,283 $0 $1,283 Travel / Site Visits $0 $11 $11 Misc. Owner Expenses $71 $6,500 $6,571 Misc. Owner Expenses - Storage Costs $16,800 $16,800 $33,600 Belt Line Properties Tree Replacement Fund $0 $0 $20,585 FS #1 & FS #2 Platting Costs $3,250 $3,250 $6,500 Builders Risk Insurance $0 $0 $6,615 Actual Quote Total Owner Costs Budget $2,094,527 Total Project Costs $15,205,763 Constr. Cost + Soft Costs + Owner Costs Project Balance Available $310,434 Project Cost Revisions Executed Change Orders to Date $30,134.00 $34,623.00 $64,757.00 Pending Changes Currently Under Review $108,571.00 $45,870.00 $154,441.00 Projected Contingency Remaining $359,152.00 SLP CD Budget Postbid 12-5-11 - Owner-Project Budget Page 2 of 2 Print Date: 12/5/2011 Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 9) Subject: Fire Stations Project Update Page 4 ActIDDescriptionOrigDurEarlyStartEarlyFinishNOV2010DEC2011JAN2012FEB2013MARAPRMAYJUNJULAUGSEPOCTNOVDECJANFEBMARAPRMAYJUNJULAUGSEPOCTNOVDECJANFEBMARConstruction PhaseFire Station #11570House Abatement/House Removal/Electric2522NOV10 24DEC101550Owner Move Out Complete003MAY111580Station Abatement1009MAY11 20MAY111560Disconnect Utilities/Demo of Exisitng Building523MAY11 27MAY111590Excavate/Export Contaminated Soil/Import1024MAY11 06JUN111460Sitework1530MAY11 17JUN111470Footings/Foundations2021JUN11 19JUL111480Structure (LB Masonry/Steel/Precast/Steel Stud)5220JUL11 29SEP111490Brick/Roofing/Windows/Enclosure4522SEP11 14DEC111500Building Rough Ins5023SEP11 01DEC111600Exterior Curb/Gutter Paving2020OCT11 16NOV111510Finishes7518NOV11 01MAR121520System Checkouts/Punchlist1002MAR12 15MAR121530Building Turnover to Owner016MAR121540Owner Move In1516MAR12 05APR121610Spring 2012 Misc. Grading/Landscaping2016APR12 11MAY12Fire Station #23460Site Demo Soil Corrections2002MAY11 27MAY113550Contaminated Soil Export524MAY11 30MAY113560Retaining Wall (Phase I)1026MAY11 08JUN113570Import/Sitework/Utilities1531MAY11 20JUN113470Footings/Foundations2014JUN11 12JUL113480Structure (LB Masonry/Steel/Precast/Steel Stud)4513JUL11 13SEP113490Brick/Roofing/Windows/Enclosure3614SEP11 21NOV113500Building Rough Ins2519SEP11 11OCT113510Finishes6828SEP11 30DEC113590Curb/Gutter/Paving2006OCT11 02NOV113580Walgreens Interface Work (Phase I)1510OCT11 28OCT113520System Checkouts/Punchlist526DEC11 30DEC113530Building Turnover to Owner002JAN123540Owner Move In2002JAN12 27JAN123600Owner Move Out Exisitng Station2030JAN12 24FEB123610Asbestos Abatement1527FEB12 16MAR123620Demo Old Station #21019MAR12 30MAR123630Spring 2012 Sitework2002APR12 27APR123640Landscaping1530APR12 18MAY12House Abatement/House Removal/Electric ServiceOwner Move Out CompleteStation AbatementDisconnect Utilities/Demo of Exisitng BuildingExcavate/Export Contaminated Soil/ImportSiteworkFootings/FoundationsStructure (LB Masonry/Steel/Precast/Steel Stud)Brick/Roofing/Windows/EnclosureBuilding Rough InsExterior Curb/Gutter PavingFinishesSystem Checkouts/PunchlistBuilding Turnover to OwnerOwner Move InSpring 2012 Misc. Grading/LandscapingSite Demo Soil CorrectionsContaminated Soil ExportRetaining Wall (Phase I)Import/Sitework/UtilitiesFootings/FoundationsStructure (LB Masonry/Steel/Precast/Steel Stud)Brick/Roofing/Windows/EnclosureBuilding Rough InsFinishesCurb/Gutter/PavingWalgreens Interface Work (Phase I)System Checkouts/PunchlistBuilding Turnover to OwnerOwner Move InOwner Move Out Exisitng StationAsbestos AbatementDemo Old Station #2Spring 2012 SiteworkLandscapingStart date 22NOV10Finish date 18MAY12Data date 08DEC11Run date 05DEC11Page number 1A© Primavera Systems, Inc.Kraus Anderson Construction CompanySt. Louis Park Fire StationsEarly barProgress barCritical barSummary barStart milestone pointFinish milestone poinStudy Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 9) Subject: Fire Stations Project UpdatePage 5 Fire Station No. 1 – 3750 Wooddale Avenue S. Vapor Mitigation System Installation (September) Underground Stormwater Detention (October) Roofing (October) Aprons, Curbs, Sidewalks, Pavement (November) Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 9) Subject: Fire Stations Project Update Page 6 Most Recent Photos (December) View from Oxford Street Main Lobby (temporary stairway) Training Room/Emergency Operations Center (EOC) Three service stairways installed. (Hose tower stairway and main lobby stairway remain.) Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 9) Subject: Fire Stations Project Update Page 7 Fire Station No. 2 – 2262 Louisiana Avenue S. Most Recent Photos (December) View from Louisiana Avenue looking northwest View from Walgreen’s parking lot looking northeast Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 9) Subject: Fire Stations Project Update Page 8 Most Recent Photos (December) Lobby Dayroom Apparatus Bays (looking west) Apparatus Bays (looking east) Bathroom Tile Locker Room Tile Study Session Meeting of December 12, 2011 (Item No. 9) Subject: Fire Stations Project Update Page 9