Agenda - Council - 01/08/2019 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Councilmember Riley stated that he would be resistant to adding lights and would want to hear more about that in the future. Councilmember Musgrove referenced Alpine and the RCUT intersection, stating that it does not appear to do anything for the south side of Highway 10. She stated that Jarvis Street has more connections and may be a better fit. Ms. Bersaw stated that there are additional plans for the future that are a part of the study, noting that Elk River may have a future connection to Jarvis. Councilmember Shryock stated that there has not been a lot of interaction with Elk River through the Highway 10 Coalition. She asked if there have been conversations with Elk River as part of the study. She stated that in the past the City has tried to work with Elk River. She noted that the other partners to the east have been very willing to work with the City as partners on the Highway 10 Coalition. Ms. Bersaw stated that an Elk River staff member is part of the technical advisory committee. She noted that she and City Engineer Westby also met with Elk River staff to have continued discussions. She stated that this is split between two different MnDOT Districts, MnDOT Metro and MnDOT District 3. Councilmember Shryock stated that she wants to ensure that the City continues the mission that have been expressed through the Coalition. Ms. Bersaw continued with the east end universe of concepts noting that the ultimate goal would be signal removal at Sunfish and Ramsey Boulevards. She reviewed some of the concepts that have been dismissed and conflicting goals. Councilmember Riley asked if the decision to not do traditional grade separations at both Sunfish and Ramsey Boulevards is driven by funding. Ms. Bersaw confirmed there would be a higher cost to have traditional grade separations at both intersections. She noted that there is also a smaller footprint at Sunfish and a traditional grade separation would have an impact on more businesses in that location. She was also unsure if MnDOT would approve traditional grade separations for both intersections because of required spacing. Ms. Bersaw continued with railroad underpass options noting that it would be ideal to have grade separations at both Sunfish and Ramsey, but noted that there would be a distinction between an underpass and overpass for the railroad crossings. She explained that in order to construct an underpass, a shoofly, which is a temporary rail, would need to be constructed and removed. She explained that for Sunfish Lake, a rail crossing shoofly would impact and require the acquisition of four properties and would also impact power lines and therefore they would not like to continue to review an underpass for that crossing. She stated that the option of an underpass is a possibility for the Ramsey rail crossing and they would like to continue to review that option. She summarized the list of concepts that they would like to carry forward in the study for both City Council / December 11, 2018 Page 14 of 18