Agenda - Council - 11/13/2007 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

significant amount. of discussion relative to the impact to the business owners adjacent to the project. Minutes from this meeting are attached. On October 31,.2007, the Anoka County Highway Department and City Staff met and they handed us the attached letter requesting approval of the CSAH 57 (Sunfish Lake Boulevard) Reconstruction project. In this letter, Anoka County describes two options: approve the design as proposed or take over the entire roadway from Trunk Highway 10 and CSAH 5 (~2.5 miles). Observations: The purpose of this case is to provide Staff with direction on how to respond to the letter received from Anoka County. We have received additional information from the County relating to the concerns that have been addressed by the business owners along the corridor. This information will be provided as part of the case and presented at the work session prior to the City Council meeting. As mentioned earlier, the concerns that were expressed by the business owners primarily focused on the median at two locations (1VIcKinley and in front of Sunfish Express). While passing out the notices for the meeting tonight, Staff encountered a number of business owners adjacent to McKinley Street and found that they were in general support of the project with the McKinley Street access remaining open. The businesses within the Sunfish commons area. have indicated a desire to have a median opening for the Sunfish Commons/Sunfish Express. area. Their primary concern has been the expectation for economic impact to their. businesses. Anoka County's primary concern is the liability that would be created after the construction if they do not comply with their access spacing guidelines. These -two issues cannot be addressed together. This case will attempt to identify 3 options that are available to the City Council this evening and provide the advantages and disadvantages from Staff's perspective for each. Option 1: Approve the plan as proposed {pYOVide municipal consent) Advantages: • Provides the safer design by eliminating NB - WB and EB - NB turning movements • Requires a safer U-turn movement at signalized intersection under. protected LT • Utilizes Federal grant $247,000 for rail crossing upgrade ~ Utilizes MnDOT money $175,000 for signal upgrade • Upgrades the intersection and improves traffic flow and safety in 2008 • Complies with the above mentioned agreements • Complies with quiet zone standards Disadvantages: • Eliminates NB-WB and EB-NB turning movements • Potential adverse impact to business owners during construction -254-