Minutes - Council - 11/12/2002 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

consist of, and how the increase in traffic would affect the intersection of Riverdale Drive and Garnet Street. The Planning Commission tabled the item on-September 5, 2002, and directed staff engage the services of a consulting firm to conduct a traffic generation analysis for the proposed development, discuss with the developer the cost of upgrading the existing signals on U.S. Highway gl0 and how the cost is to be distributed, and provide clarification on how the existing berm will be maintained. The Planning Commission met on October 10, 2002, and continued to review the proposed Rivenwick 3rd Addition development. There was no citizen input during the continuation of the public hearing. Staff engaged the services of SRF to complete a traffic generation analysis for the proposed development. The traffic generation analysis concluded that all key intersections, with the exception of Sunfish Lake Boulevard and Highway gl0, will operate at acceptable levels of service with full buildout of the proposed development. The intersection of Sunfish Lake Boulevard and Highway #10 is scheduled to be improved with dual southbound left mm lanes and separate left mm, through and fight mm lanes on the northbound leg. The poor level of service at this intersection is due to the general increase in traffic on Highway gl0 and not solely based on the proposed townhouse development. MnDOT has stated that the intersection of U.S. Highway #10 and Ramsey Blvd. must be upgraded to facilitate this development. Staff engaged the services of SRF to'provide a cost estimate to upgrade U.S. Highway #10. It should be noted that MnDOT is proposing to upgrade the intersection of U.S. Highway gl0 and Ramsey Boulevard in the year 2004, and the estimated cost to the City at that time will be $5,000. If the developer chooses to move forward with the connection of Riverdale Drive to U.S. Highway gl0 prior to 2004, MnDOT has stated that the signal poles placed at the intersection of U.S. Highway #10 and Ramsey Boulevard will need to be permanent type and must be placed at the location that complies with the ultimate design when the intersection signal rebuild project goes through. The cost to install permanent signals prior to the 2004 upgrade will be approximately $150,000 - $200,000. MnDOT submitted a letter dated September 16, 2002, that states there should be at least a 500 foot separation between U.S. Highway #10 and where another intersection can occur (i.e. the entrance to Anoka County Park and the continuation of the frontage road to the west). In order for the developer to comply with this requirement, the developer will need to purchase additional land from Anoka County (south of the proposed Riverdale Drive alignment). This presents a problem as Anoka County owns the land through a life estate contract. Anoka County has contacted the landowner and has been unsuccessful in obtaining permission to construct a road through a portion of the property at this time. Anoka County is looking into their legal options as they agree with the City of Ramsey that Riverdale Drive should go through the future parkland to continue to serve as a frontage road. The legal matters may take awhile to resolve and, therefore, an interim option Staff discussed with the Planning Commission is to plat the portion of Riverdale Drive that runs from Lot 1, Block 2 to U.S. Highway #10 as an outlot for purposes of preliminary plat approval. The developer would then only final plat Lots' 8, 9, and 10, of Block 2 at this time. This would allow the developer the ability to construct three, 8-unit structures (24 units) and construct Riverdale Drive from Garnet Street to where 138th Avenue intersects Riverdale Drive. The Planning Commission recommended that the City Council approve the preliminary plat contingent upon compliance with City Staff review letter dated September 27, 2002, revised November 8, 2002, and further subject to modifying the proposed plat to include Outlot A as proposed by Staff, and the Developer receiving a rezoning of that portion of the subject property City Council/November 12, 2002 Page 12 of 22