Agenda - Council - 02/23/2010 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

CR (should be CSAH) 116. CSAH 116 is an "A" minor arterial and should be talked about in the fourth paragraph which discusses the minor arterial network. Page 6 -3 — Existing Public Roadway System — 3 ra paragraph: After identifying the minor arterials in the city, the paragraph goes on to explain that the roadway network is characterized as having two through lanes with additional turn lanes at intersections. A number of the roadways listed above have been or are in the process of being expanded to four lanes. The sentence should be modified to indicate that at least some of the roadways are already four -lane divided facilities and that plans in the next five years will address expansion of other roadways to four - lane divided facilities. Page 6 -3 — Existing Public Roadway System — item "3": This bullet says that the intersection of TH 47 and CSAH 116 experiences congestion during the morning peak period of traffic. Afternoon should be added to that sentence. The intersection does experience congestion during the pm peak period as well. Page 6 -7 — Planned Changes to Roadway System — 4 t ` paragraph: Is the corridor study referenced in the plan the TH 10 Interregional Corridor Management Plan? If it is, the study was completed in 2002, not 1988. If the plan mentioned is not the IRC study, text and language should be added about this study. Page 6 -8 — Planned Changes to Roadway System —1" paragraph and bullets: This paragraph is confusing based on the work completed to date between the city, county and Mn/DOT. The 2002 IRC Study identified the need to upgrade US 10/169 to a freeway facility, develop frontage roads, close access, and consider a new river crossing. The TH 10 Access Management Study (February 2007) completed after the IRC study identified potential concepts and connections. The preliminary engineering and environmental study are developing concepts for the improvements identified in the paragraph and subsequent bullets. We are curious as to why a new study being recommended. The only item in the list that has not been initiated or carried further along is the location of a new river crossing. A recommendation to further study the need and/or location for a new river crossing is appropriate, but the other recommendations and list in the paragraph are already underway. Page 6 -8 — Planned Changes to Roadway System — 2 nd paragraph — last two sentences: The studies that are mentioned are the same. Additionally, the acronym used to describe the Minnesota Department of Transportation is incorrect. Please do a search and replace on MnDot with Mn/DOT throughout the document. Page 6 -9 — Figure 6 -2 Planned Transportation System: The figure needs to be careful in depicting the future transportation network. Currently it shows a full interchange at Armstrong Blvd NW and a full interchange for a new river crossing. That is not what has been agreed to and could cause problems with both the county and Mn/DOT. Additionally, a river crossing has not been agreed to by 2030 by the agencies to the south nor by Mn/DOT. It might be more accurate to label some of the improvements as beyond 2030. ■ Page 6 -11— Possible New Mississippi River Bridge: The entire text for this section needs to be rewritten. There are a number of outdated items and errors that have to be addressed before the