HomeMy WebLinkAbout10C - County Road 17 / Trunk Highway 13 Corridor Study
MEETING DATE:
AGENDA #:
PREPARED BY:
AGENDA ITEM:
DISCUSSION:
DECEMBER 15, 2008
10C
LARRY POPPLER, ASSISTANT CITY ENGINEER
CONSIDER APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE COUNTY
ROAD 17/ TRUNK HIGHWAY 13 CORRIDOR STUDY AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
Introduction
The purpose of this agenda item is to consider a resolution accepting the County
Road 17 I Trunk Highway 13 Corridor Study and recommendations.
Historv
In the spring of 2007, the Scott County Highway Department began the County
Road 17 I Trunk Highway 13 Corridor Study. The Study covers 18 miles of
CSAH 17 and TH 13 roadway bisecting the county from Highway 101 in
Shakopee to the southern border of Scott County with Rice County. This Study
forms the foundation of future planning and construction within this corridor.
Scott County has followed a lengthy process in creating this document which
included 3 public meetings, a number of meetings with local government, study
management team meetings, and citizen advisory committee meetings. The
study process has taken nearly 18 months.
On February 19, 2008, the City Council held a workshop to discuss the corridor
and Study. At that workshop the County shared some concept drawings of the
corridor through Prior Lake and the annexation area.
Current Circumstances
The Executive Summary of the Corridor Study is included with this report. A copy
of the entire report is available for review at City Hall.
The purpose of the Study is to develop a long-range plan for CSAH 17 and TH
13 and for the local roadway system components that support it.
County highway staff and the consultant, SEH, Inc. are here to provide an
overview of the County Highway 17 I Trunk Highway 13 Corridor Study. The
Study is now complete and the City Council is being requested to adopt the
Study.
Conclusion
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached resolution which
accepts the Study. The Study will be sent on to the County for their adoption.
The improvements contemplated in the Study will be incorporated into the Prior
Lake and County capital improvement programs and development proposals for
completion in the coming years and as traffic conditions and funding allow.
www.cityofpriorlake.com
Phone 952.447.9800 / Fax 952.447.4245
ISSUES:
The majority of CSAH 17 I TH 13 which concerns the City of Prior Lake is located
in the City's annexation area with Spring Lake Township. The Study provides a
useful tool for planning development in the City's annexation area.
Intersection of CR17/TH13/TH282
The intersection of CR 17/TH 13/TH282 is of high importance to the City of Prior
Lake. This intersection is planned for commercial, industrial, and medium density
residential in the City's 2030 Comprehensive Plan. When developed this area
will become a large traffic generator. To accommodate this land use yet allow for
good mobility through the corridor, a "Parclo A" (partial Cloverleaf) grade
separated interchange is the long range vision for this area. A shorter term
concept shows a roundabout in the middle and two fairly closely spaced
intersections on each side corresponding to where the ramp terminal
intersections would be in the parcel. The City Council reviewed this concept at
the workshop in February and supported the plan for this area.
Corridor Access and SUDDortina Roadwav Networks
As a future principle arterial, planning appropriate access locations and
supporting roadways provides the best value to the citizens of Scott County and
Prior Lake. Through the work of this Study, the City and County will be able to
preserve right of way needs for both the county roads and supporting local
roadways. This will eliminate costly future buyout of developed property. As
development occurs in the annexation area, the City will be able to guide the
developers in setting up the supporting roadway network and keeping
development set-back at an appropriate distance from the CSAH 17/TH 13
corridor.
ALTERNATIVES: The alternatives are as follows:
1. Approve a resolution accepting the County Road 17 I Trunk Highway 13
Corridor Study and recommendations.
2. Table the Resolution for a specific reason.
3. Deny the Resolution.
RECOMMENDED Alternative No. 1
MOTION: 7
Reviewe~(J W-
Frank aOYlese -at"
Motion By:
Second By:
WHEREAS, Scott County identified the need for a long range concept plan for the County Road 17 I
Trunk Highway 13 corridor; and
WHEREAS, the Study identifies recommended alternatives for access locations and supporting
roadway locations; and
WHEREAS, the Study identifies recommended short term and long range alternatives for the
intersection of CSAH 17/TH 13/TH 282 ; and
WHEREAS, The recommendations of the Corridor Study have received support as the best plan to
serve the long-term transportation needs.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF PRIOR LAKE
MINNESOTA as follows:
1. The recitals set forth above are incorporated herein.
2. The City Council hereby accepts the Corridor Study as submitted.
PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS 15TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2008.
YES
NO
I HauQen
I Erickson
I Hedberg
I LeMair
I Millar
HauQen
Erickson
Hedberg
LeMair
. Millar
Frank Boyles, City Manager
www.cityofpriorlake.com
Phone 952.447.9800 / Fax 952.447.4245
.
/0C-
I
FINAL ORA... I
Corridor Study
CH 17 from TH 13 to CH 101
TH 13 from TH 19 to TH 282
Scott County, Minnesota
In association with Mn/DOT, the Cities of
Shakopee and Prior Lake, and Townships of
Cedar Lake and Spring Lake
Scott County, MN
SEH No. ASCOTT0602.00
December 8, 2008
Jt..
SEH
Multidisciplined. Single Source.
Trusted solutions for more than 75 years.
E1.0
E1.1
Executive Summary
Study Overview
This study has been performed with Scott County serving as the lead agency in partnership with
MnlDOT, along with the Cities of Shakopee and Prior Lake, and Spring Lake and Cedar Lake
Townships.
The primary purpose of this study was to develop a long-term vision for the CH 17 and TH 13
corridor, and for the local roadway system components that support it. The vision was developed
through a public engagement process that built broad understanding and support of the purpose and
need which resulted in acceptance by the County Board and respective City Councils and Township
Boards.
The corridor is divided into unique study segments based upon geography, roadway operational
issues, land uses, development density, roadway jurisdiction and programmed improvements. The
segments are illustrated in the graphic below.
,----
AI
..
FINAL DRAFT CH 17 /TH 13 Corridor Study
SCOTT0602.00
Page ES-1
CH 17 and TH 13 have different operating characteristics and adjacent land uses through the 18-mile
corridor. Below is a listing of study goals for each segment:
· Segments A & B: Develop a long-term vision for CH 17, TH 13 and supporting roadways.
Define right-of-way needs for preservation and an access management plan to safely provide
local access while maintaining roadway capacity.
· Segment C: Prepare a more detailed preliminary design for CH 17 from CH 42 to St. Francis
A venue that identifies needs, impacts, and costs related to programmed roadway expansion in
2013.
· Segment D: Evaluate safety and congestion issues and explore opportunities for short-term or
long-term improvements at and near the US Hwy. 169 interchange.
· Segments E & F: Review existing and future congestion and safety issues. Identify potential
long-term solutions.
The six segments of the corridor each have different issues that must be resolved on a short, medium.
and long-range basis. First, the north end of the corridor (Segments D, E, and F) is mature but must
adapt itself to accommodate the connection of two Principal Arterial highways with higher traffic
volumes and more intensive perimeter development requiring more complex traffic operations
solutions. The mid-section of the corridor (Segments Band C) is an emerging growth area with
immediate and short-term needs spurred by municipal annexation, utility extensions, and extensive
platted developments. Lastly, the southern piece of the corridor (Segment A) is principally rural but in
the very certain path of growth. As such, it represents an opportunity to plan for a roadway of
Principal Arterial performance and design standards, including the preservation of right-of-way
before significant development pressures mount.
The study identified the type of roadway facility that should be planned for each segment of this
corridor to achieve or maintain its long-range operational, safety and performance goals. The study
also identified the need for additional connecting and supporting roadways that would allow the CH
17 / TH 13 corridor to function at an optimal level while maintaining access to adjacent land uses and
providing alternative routes for local trips.
E1.2 Summary of Study Purpose
Scott County, Minnesota, is expected to absorb a considerable share ofthe projected one million new
residents of the Twin Cities by 2030. Planned and programmed improvements to US 169 and other
regional trunk highways and county highway routes will more efficiently and safely deliver current
and future travelers to their destinations in and through Scott County. The County needs a continuous
north-south Principal Arterial roadway to increase the functionality of these roadways and provide an
appropriately spaced viable alternative to other Principal Arterials in the region. The development of
a north-south Principal Arterial highway will also increase the likelihood of realistic, and therefore
successful, multimodal features, including facilities to serve transit patrons, bicyclists, and
pedestrians.
Scott County and its study partners have identified the need for a corridor vision to upgrade and
combine CH 17, a key local route, with TH 13 to create a new regional highway that will help meet
the travel needs of its growing population and provide a greater balance to local and state roadway
investments.
CH 17 and TH 13 are currently classified as Minor Arterials. However, City, County, State, and
Township officials recognize the significant traffic demand that the corridor will carry and envision
the need to manage and preserve the corridor as they would a Principal Arterial. Development
expected to occur in the Cities of Shakopee and Prior Lake and rural areas beyond, will magnify the
FINAL DRAFT CH 17/ TH 13 Corridor Study
Scott County. MN
SCOTT0602.00
Page ES-2
need to: preserve the CH 17 ffH 13 corridor for roadway expansion; manage local access
opportunities; and develop a supporting roadway network of Arterials and Collectors to collect and
distribute trips to and from roadways functioning as Principal Arterials (like CH 17ffH 13).
E1.3 Summary of Findings
Findings were developed based upon review of Scott County's draft land use plan, transportation plan
and comprehensive plan traffic forecasts. These findings reinforced the importance of the CH 17 / TH
13 corridor through Scott County and confirmed the direction of activities included in this corridor
study.
1. Scott County's planned 2030 growth must be served with adequate transportation facilities that
address issues with travel congestion and safety. The CH 17 and TH 13 Corridor is located within
the path of planned urbanizing growth and will have significant capacity, safety, and mobility
needs by 2030.
2. CH 17 and TH 13 represent a key future north-south travel corridor in a geographically central
location in Scott County. There is no other corridor in the County that provides a similar, largely
direct continuous north-south connection.
3. The proposed reclassification of CH 17 and TH 13 in the Scott County Transportation Plan
Update to a Principal Arterial highway will connect the corridor to other existing and planned
Principal Arterial highways, including US 169, CH 42, CH 78, TH 19 and the future new TH 41
. .
nver crossmg.
4. The CH 17 interchange with US 169 represents a regional highway system need. Long range
planning (2030) for this interchange needs to be conducted concurrently to maintain future
acceptable levels of mobility, performance, and safety.
5. A key feature of a Principal Arterial highway is a high level of mobility. This mobility can be
achieved, in part, by restricting direct access to/from adjacent parcels in order to provide for
reduced traffic conflicts, in turn providing a higher-speed facility for a larger volume of vehicles.
Traffic forecasts indicate that improvements will be needed prior to 2030 in order to maintain this
level of mobility.
6. The CH 17 segment of the Corridor will experience unacceptable levels of congestion prior to
2030. The needs of this segment must therefore be addressed first.
7. The TH 13 segment of the Corridor is not forecast to be unacceptably congested before 2030,
although intersection safety and operational issues may appear before then. Volumes on this
segment of the Corridor are expected to increase approximately 40 to 50 percent between 2030
and 2050 from which operational and safety issues may develop.
8. Preservation of adequate right-of-way in the corridor for 2030 Principal Arterial highway
capacity improvements is essential to prevent costly buyouts and unnecessary delays in
constructing improvements.
9. Design solutions for 2030 needed improvements will include divided four-lane expressway
alternatives and interconnecting Minor Arterial and Collector roadway improvements.
10. Planned 2030 designs should not preclude 2050 long-range needs (Le., potential freeway design)
in the Corridor.
FINAL DRAFT CH 17/ TH 13 Corridor Study
Scott County, MN
SCOTT0602.00
Page ES-3
-----.----- .- '.-" -..- __00_.._.... - .-- 0- --I:" -.-- 00.-00_0__ - _.._oo_.____u_oo_ ____ ________ . _..__oo__u_.
E1.9 Shakopee Chamber of Commerce
A presentation was made to the Shakopee Chamber of Commerce on April 23, 2008. The presentation
included the purpose and need for the study and shared preliminary findings and concept drawings.
E1.10 Prior Lake City Council
Two presentations were made to the Prior Lake City Council throughout this study's process. The
first presentation was on February 19,2008 informed the Council ofthe study's purpose, community
issues and preliminary findings of fact.
E1.11 Spring Lake Township Board
A joint meeting of Spring Lake and Cedar Lake Township Boards occurred in workshop format on
February 21, 2008. The Boards were informed ofthe study's purpose, community issues and
preliminary fiQdings of fact.
E1.12 Cedar Lake Township Board
A joint meeting of Spring Lake and Cedar Lake Township Boards occurred in workshop format on
February 21,2008. The Boards were informed ofthe study's purpose, community issues and
preliminary findings of fact.
E1.13 Scott County Board of Commissioners
There were three presentations made to the Scott County Board of Commissioners during the course
of this study. The frrst presentation was on February 12, 2008 that informed the Board of the study's
purpose, community issues and preliminary findings of fact.
The second presentation to the Scott County Board of Commissioners occurred on October 21,2008.
The presentation focused on the findings and local agency issues. In addition, updates made to the
2013 project and the 2030 long-term corridor plan were discussed.
E1.14 Open House Meetings
The public was invited to attend three open house meetings throughout the course of the study. The
frrst open house was held on June 26, 2007 to identify existing issues, gather local insights about the
study corridor and discuss possible outcomes. The public was invited to attend the study's second
Open House on April 8, 2008 to view study concepts developed to date. The public was invited to the
third and final Open House on October 28, 2008 to review and respond to the study team's
recommended concept plans.
FINAL DRAFT CH 17/ TH 13 Corridor Study
Scott County, MN
SCOTT0602.00
Page ES-5
E1.15 Website
A study website was established early on in the study process and was updated as new materials were
made available to the public. The web site contains study information, graphics, and meeting
announcements, as well as contact information. httD://WWW.co.scott.mn.us/17Studv
E1.16 Property Owner I Small Group Meetings
A meeting with Betaseed and St. Francis Hospital was held on March 3, 2008 to coordinate the new
east-west road that will replace the function of St. Francis Boulevard. Both parties have been involved
in the planning for this street connection, which is part of Segment C layout planned for construction
in 2013. Input was received from both parties relative to access needs, right of way needs, and
alignment considerations.
Multiple meetings and conversations have occurred with St. Francis Hospital regarding a secondary
access for emergency vehicles to get into the hospital site quickly. This study resulted in allowing a
northbound right turn lane to the emergency room at the hospital.
Residents in the neighborhood east of Sarazin Street, especially those on Mooers Avenue and Mathias
Road, have expressed concern that the proposed Valley View Road connection between CH 17 and
Sarazin Street will alter traffic patterns resulting in increased traffic demands on their streets. In
response to this concern, the City of Shakopee performed a traffic study to estimate the magnitude of
change that should be expected. The previous Valley View alignment study was adopted by the City
before many of the homes in area were built. After traffic study was completed the City invited
neighborhood, Hospital and Betaseed representatives to a joint meeting which was held on July 31,
2008.
Results from this sub-study, which include continued coordination and a one-way westbound
operation treatment on Moores Avenue approaching Sarazin Street, have been incorporated into the
final recommendations and plan.
E1.17 Summary of Traffic Analysis
This study team considered many things that lead to the recommended 2030 concept plan. Traffic
analysis was performed to determine the size of facility needed to serve future demands. Intersection
movements and intersection traffic control alternatives were key considerations to maintain traffic
flow through the forecast horizon. Below is a summary of the traffic analysis work completed.
· A crash analysis was performed using MnlDOT's Crash Mapping Analysis Tool (CMAT).
· Existing AM and PM peak period intersection turning movement counts were collected.
· A Synchro/SimTraffic software micro-simulation traffic model was developed to evaluate traffic
operations within the corridor.
· Average daily traffic (ADT) forecasts for the CH 17fTH 13 corridor study were prepared based
on the Twin Cities regional demand model (TCRM).
· Roadway network link forecasts from the model were converted into AM and PM peak hour
turning movement forecasts for the purpose of operational analysis.
· The analysis for the build condition identified significant need for capacity improvements along
the corridor.
E1.2 Summary of Concept Development
This corridor study identified 2030 traffic demands and defined the future roadway section needed to
serve those demands. Concept design solutions for 2030 needed improvements generally include:
FINAL DRAFT CH 17/ TH 13 Corridor Study
Scott County, MN
SCOTT0602.00
Page ES-6
· A divided four-lane expressway with parallel and interconnecting Minor Arterial and Collector
roadway improvements.
· Design speed of this corridor is 60 mph and has been achieved for the entire corridor for both
horizontal and vertical design speed.
· The desirable right-of-way envelope to be preserved for the corridor is 200 feet for the long-term
plan. Right of way needs for the 2013 project may be adapted on a site specific basis to suit
existing adjacent land uses when possible.
· The 2030 corridor concept plan has ten-foot wide trails shown on both sides of CH 17 as well as
along TH 13 through the entire corridor.
· Twelve-foot wide right-side roadway shoulders will serve as future bus shoulder lanes.
· Three concepts were developed for the intersection of CH 42 and CH 17. The concepts include a
signalized intersection, a multi-lane roundabout, and a grade separated intersection.
· A preliminary drainage analysis has been completed for the 2030 concept plan. Locations for
potential stormwater treatment ponds, infiltration ditches, and drainage directional flow arrows
are detailed on the 2030 design concept.
· A supporting roadway network concept plan has been developed in conjunction with the access
management measures.
Below is a listing of the primary concepts that were developed through this study process. These
figures can be found in the full report version of the Corridor Study Report or on Scott County's
website.
· Figures 8A - 8P display the 2030 vision plan for the corridor.
· Figures lOA - lOD display the supporting roadway network concept plan.
· Figure 13 displays the 2013 Preliminary Design Layout for Segment C.
· Figure 14 displays the roundabout alternative at the CH l7/CH 42 intersection
· Figure 15 displays the grade-separated alternative at the CH 17 fCH 42 intersection
E2.0 Recommendations and Implementation Planning
The CH 17 f TH 13 Study Management Team (SMT) recommends that the findings of this corridor
study be approved by each agency having adjacent land use authority and/or roadway jurisdiction.
Approval by each agency may be subject to conditions that are independently prescribed as recorded
in the respective council/board resolutions.
E2.1
E2.1.1
Corridor-wide Recommendations
Adopt the CH 17 I TH 13 Corridor Study
· The Scott County Board, City of Shakopee and Prior Lake Councils, Cedar Lake and Spring Lake
Township Boards, and MnlDOT should approve the TH 13 I CH 17 Corridor Study as the Vision
for the corridor to be used as a decision making guide as future infrastructure improvements are
considered and as local development requests are received, including the preservation of right-of-
way for the future roadways and access management measures to preserve safety and corridor
performance.
FINAL DRAFT CH 17 I TH 13 Corridor Study
Scott County, MN
SCOTT0602.00
Page ES-7
· Scott County and the Cities of Shakopee and Prior Lake should incorporate the findings of this
study into the next update of the Transportation Plan component of their respective
Comprehensive Plans.
· The Cities of Shakopee and Prior Lake, Scott County, and Cedar Lake and Spring Lake
Townships should maintain and/or adopt policies or ordinances that assist with the
implementation and goals of this plan.
· Each agency should identify projects and prioritize their implementation based upon available
project financing.
· Each agency should take advantage of opportunities along the corridor as they arise to implement
recommendations and findings of this study.
· Scott County and Mn/DOT should seek functional reclassification of CH 17 and TH 13 from their
present category (A Minor Arterial- Connector) to the A Minor Arterial- Expander category as
a fIrst step towards ultimate reclassification as a Principal Arterial.
· MnlDOT and Scott County should continue planning for jurisdictional transfers of segments of
TH 13 and/or CH 17.
· Scott County, the Cities of Shakopee and Prior Lake and Cedar Lake and Spring Lake Townships
should use the concept long-term plans and supporting roadway network as a guide to assess the
compatibility of new development proposals within the corridor.
E2.1.2 Corridor Preservation
· Cedar Lake and Spring Lake Townships will continue planning roadway networks
complimentary to the concept roadway network defined in this study ofTH 13 / CH 17.
· Scott County, the Cities of Shakopee and Prior Lake and Cedar Lake and Spring Lake Townships
will continue to advance opportunities to preserve right of way for supporting and connecting
roadway network improvements to allow CH 17 / TH 13 to function as a future Principal Arterial.
Corridors need to be identified and preserved to serve this function.
· Scott County should consider early acquisition of selected properties on an opportunity basis
prior to environmental study for the 2013 project, as specified in the Safe, Accountable, Flexible,
Efficient Transportation Equity Act (SAl'bTJ::,;A-LU).
· Preservation of adequate right-of-way should be supported by each affected agency in the study
area along TH 13 and CH 17 and its existing and future supporting roadway network. Advance
planning for these improvements is essential to prevent costly buyouts and potential unnecessary
delays in constructing improvements.
· Agencies should continue efforts to preserve right-of way by applying existing ordinances and
utilizing planning tools to achieve consistent setback goals parallel to CH 17 and TH 13. Current
setback ordinances vary between agencies. Applying public value credits, requesting dedication
of roadway right of way, trail easements, and drainage easements for pond location right of way
through platting are possible considerations.
· Scott County, MnlDOT, the Cities of Shakopee and Prior Lake, and the Townships of Cedar Lake
and Spring Lake should continue to pursue right of way preservation initiatives in the corridor.
Methods that should be considered and utilized as applvpriate include:
Voluntary early acquisitions
FINAL DRAFT CH 17 / TH 13 Corridor Study
Scott County, MN
SCOTT0602.00
Page ES-8
Purchase of development rights
Purchase options
E2.2
E2.2.1
Official map
Letters of agreement with developers
Right of ftrst refusal
Donations of property
Contributions, exchanges of property
Access management
Use of local government land use tools
Segment Recommendations
Segment A
· Cedar Lake Township and Spring Lake Township are engaged in a roadway system planning
study complementary the supporting roadway network planning performed as part of this
Corridor Study for CH 17 and TH 13. They should build upon ideas developed as part of this
study.
· The County should work with MnJDOT, using programs such as the Cooperative Agreement
program, to aid in implementing access management along TH 13
· MnJDOT will continue to monitor the performance and safety of TR 13. At the time when
performance and/or safety problems occur, MnJDOT will work towards implementation of
appropriate corrective actions consistent with the Vision for the corridor as outlined in this study.
· MnJDOT and Scott County should coordinate with Rice County, in support of a roadway
extension southerly from the TH 13 and TH 19 intersection as is shown in Rice County's
Transportation Plan
E2.2.2 Segment B
· Scott County, Spring Lake Township, and the City of Prior Lake should continue to manage
access to the undeveloped areas adjacent to the TH 282/fH 13/CH 17 intersection preserving
opportunities for short term and long-term access.
· Scott County, MnJDOT, Spring Lake Township and the City of Prior Lake should continue to
plan land use and transportation improvements that are complimentary to one another. This
planning study identified a concept plan for access and local street connectivity that focused
access to the southwest and northeast quadrants of the TH 282/fH 13/CR 17 intersection while
preserving the northwest and southeast quadrants for future interchange ramps. This concept plan,
or one of similar effectiveness, should be acknowledged in future planning efforts in the area.
· Scott County, MnJDOT, Spring Lake Township and the City of Prior Lake should plan to
implement recommendations made by the Metropolitan Council's recently completed a transit
study which identifted a need to plan for a future transit station and 200 parking stall park and
ride facility near the TH 282 / TH 13/ CH 17 intersection.
· The City of Prior Lake, through their land use authority, should remove private access from CH
17 when the opportunities arise.
FINAL DRAFT CH 17 I TH 13 Corridor Study
Scott County, MN
SCOTT0602.00
Page ES-9
· Scott County will continue to monitor the performance and safety of CH 17. At the time when
performance andlor safety problems occur, the County will work towards implementation of
appropriate corrective actions consistent with the Vision for the corridor as outlined in this study.
E2.2.3 Segment C
· Scott County and the City of Shakopee should approve the Segment C Preliminary Design Layout
acknowledging that further refinement will occur as the final design proceeds.
· Scott County and City of Shakopee should advance opportunities for right of way acquisition for
the 2013 project (Segment C).
· Scott County should consider soliciting federal funding opportunities for Segment C (2009
Federal solicitation)
· Scott County should proceed with the appropriate environmental review path for Segment C,
preliminarily identified as an Environmental Assessment (EA).
· Scott County should conduct appropriate traffic studies of the CH 17 intersections with CH 42,
CH 78, and Valley View Road to determine the appropriate full access intersection control
(traffic signal versus roundabout).
· Scott County and the City of Shakopee should continue coordination with Betaseed, St. Francis
Hospital and the Mooers A venue residential neighborhood east of the hospital to develop a
concept for the new east-west roadway that is shown in the 2013 project.
· Scott County and the City of Shakopee should continue to work with St. Francis Hospital to
consider emergency vehicle ingress and egress to the hospital campus.
· Transit planning should continue as opportunities are explored for right of way acquisition for a
park and ride facility on the west side of CH 17 north of the t'~ vposed Valley View Road.
· The City of Shakopee should continue to develop alternative routes of access to neighborhoods
that are currently served by a single point of access or those that may be affected by access
management or safety improvement measures recommended as part of the long-term vision for
the CH 17 corridor. Potential alternative routes of access are identified in the supporting roadway
concept plan developed as a part of this study.
· The City of Shakopee should continue planning for supporting roadways in the Segment C area to
provide alternative access routes to neighborhoods consistent with the Vision for the corridor as
outlined in this study. Scott County and the City of Shakopee should determine the preferred CH
42 at CH 17 intersection build alternative for 2013, while preserving the right-of-way for the
future grade separated alternative.
· The City of Shakopee, through their land use authority, should remove private access from CH 17
when the opportunities arise.
E2.2.4 Segment D
· The CH 17 interchange with US 169 represents a regional highway system need. Long range
planning (2030) for this interchange needs to be conducted concurrently to maintain future
acceptable levels of mobility, performance, and safety consistent with the operation goals of a
Principal Arterial.
FINAL DRAFT CH 17 /TH 13 Corridor Study
Scott County, MN
SCOTT0602.00
Page ES-10
· Scott County, Mn/DOT and the City of Shakopee should develop safety and capacity
improvement projects at and near the US 169 interchange.
· The City if Shakopee and Scott County should further evaluate capacity and safety improvements
for Vierling Drive in the vicinity of CH 17.
E2.2.S Segment E
· The City of Shakopee and Scott County should further evaluate and develop concept plans to
determine feasibility and impacts of a five lane section on CH 17 from Vierling Drive to CH 101.
· The City of Shakopee and Scott County should continue to monitor the CH 17 railroad crossing
and work with the railroad to minimize traffic delays especially during peak traffic periods.
E2.2.S Segment F
· Scott County and the City of Shakopee should develop preliminary and final design plans to
reconstruct CH 10 1 from Spencer Street to CH 17 for construction in 2010 with the intention of
acquiring no additional permanent right-of-way.
· Scott County and the City of Shakopee should take advantage of future opportunttIes to
implement access management techniques to preserve the long-term safety and capacity of CH
101.
E2.3 Continued Agency Coordination
· The study partners should meet periodically subsequent to the completion of this study to ensure
that development and project implementations are consistent with the long term vision for the
corridor and to determine if adjustments are needed.
· Mn/DOT and the County should continue to work with the Cities, Townships and Metropolitan
Council to establish the future functional classification of the corridor as a Principal Arterial.
· Mn/DOT and Scott County should continue to work together to determine the long-term
jurisdictional designation for the corridor (i.e. jurisdictional trade of TH 13 and CH 17). Mn/DOT
should determine if future TH 13 designation of the current CH 17 segment aligns with their
system planning.
· The Cities of Shakopee and Prior Lake and Scott County should work with Mn/DOT to satisfy
the requirements of Minnesota Statue 505.03 Subd. 2. Under this Statute all Cities, Towns, and
Counties are required to provide Mn/DOT (Commissioner of Transportation) with a copy of all
preliminary plats adjacent to all State Highways, regardless of the need for access, before official
action is taken by the local agency. Mn/DOT has applied this language to include all
developmental actions (Change of Use, Variances, etc.) as a way of notifying Mn/DOT of all
potential access locations and potential impacts to the roadway. This request is not stated in any
legal statute but is supported by the Statute above and by Minnesota Rules 8810.5200, which
requires a review, through the permit process, and approval of the access by Mn/DOT.
· The Cities, County, and Townships should work with MnlDOT to provide a contiguous local
transportation system with logical street extensions and properly spaced full movement
intersections as development occurs.
· Scott County, Shakopee and Prior Lake should continue coordination with the Mdewakanton
Sioux Community as undeveloped land areas within the corridor are acquired by the Sioux
Community.
FINAL DRAFT CH 17 I TH 13 Corridor Study
Scott County, MN
SCOTT0602.00
Page ES-11
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
LEGEND
,
~~'
l
,..,
N
N
o
V
PROPOSED ROADWAY
PROPOSED 10' BIT. TRAIL
CONCRETE MEDIANS. CURBS
PROPOSED PAVED SHOULDER
GRASS MEDIANS
FUTURE ROADWAY/CONNECTION
~~g~9S~gR~lg~)OF WAY
EXISTING RIGHT OF WAY
PROPOSED PONDING SITE
POTENTIAL STORMWATER
TREATMENT - POND
POTENTIAL STORMWATER
TREATMENT - INFILTRATION
OITCH
DRAINAGE DIRECTIONAL FLOW
zoo 0
I .
- Ido
ai""""".''''W~''~'-
o
200
.
i
feet
11111111
--
CD
o
o
N
"-
,..,
~
..
PRPFILE ..
0;
am
81
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
LEGEND
:::Ii
...
o
'll
N
o
~
PROPOSED ROADWAY
PROPOSED 10' BIT. TRAIL
CONCRETE MEDIANS. CURBS
PROPOSED PAVED SHOULDER
GRASS MEDIANS
FUTURE ROADWAY/CONNECTION
PROP9SED RIGHT OF WAY
(200 CORRIDOR)
EXISTING RIGHT OF WAY
PROPOSED PONDING SITE
POTENTIAL STORMWATER
TREATMENT - POND
POTENTIAL STORMWATER
TREATMENT - INFILTRATION
DITCH
DRAINAGE DIRECTIONAL FLO.
_oU!...Il...tJlI..Ji.'tdim.
o
11111111
-
~
CD
o
o
N
....
....
~
~
~o 0 200
I . .
8aale !do
l..
o
OJ:
o
\
I ";NB TH 13 ;/CH 17
I I (
I I I I I I I I I I I I
_~o~__________~------------~-----------~------------~-__________~------------~-----------~------------~-----______~------------~-----------~------------~---~o~
I I I I I I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I I I I
-~gQQ---------~------------~-----------~------------~-----------~------------~-----------~------------~-----------~------------~-----------~------------~---~g~
I j I I I I I I I j I I
I I I I I I r. LANGFORD AVE I I I I I I
~ I I I I I "L I I I I I I
_~8Q____~~~~~~;____________~-----------~------------~-----8-----~------------~-----------~------------~-----______~------------~-----------~------------~---~8Q
I I I I 0::: I I I I I I I I
I I I;; ~ I ~.. I ~ I I I I I I I
81 I I":; I .11 I ii I I I I j I I I
I ,~=I · ... . I
- ~6Q - ~ - _.1_ - - - -0- - - - - - - - ~i- - - ~ - - - - ~'::..- - - ~ - - - -.t _.i - - - - - ~ - - -~ - - - ~~- - _...i... ~J'--EX..~ - - - - - - - - - - ~ - - - - - - - - - - - -f' - - - - - - - - - - - ~ - - - - - - - - - - - -f - - - - - - - - - - - ~ - - - - - - - - - - - -~ - ~ - ~6Q.
~ . L ~~ I j _ ..1 - - . I I I m I '
1qI I I -- I I I I .130 'T' l
~ _ ~4Q. -;'-7- _~_ _~.:,~-::~_ _ -C _-_ =~_ : _ _ ~_ _ _ -8 _ ~ _ _ _ _ _ ~ _ _ _ ,..-..,..,. _ _ _ _ ~ _ _ _ _ ~ _11~~~: -.: -~-- - ~ 1 ~-=--_--=- ~ - - - - t - - - - - - - - - ~'~J'_v,: - - - - - - - - - - t- --- - ~=----.;l....T~~ _..-~ -- - ~4Q.
0. I I I; ~ I ~.:O?":.c. I ; I ---..1._ I _ _~ I
~! I ~l!1 !5 I I 1 I 1 .1 ~ 1 1
J _~2Q._~-------~~~~------:~--~----- :J____~----~-:-----~-----------~----!-------~-----------~------------~---------~~J;.~----------~---------1~~~~----------~---~2Q.
i : n: : : : : : ~ r. ~ : t
~ I I I 1 1 liT .P T I I
~ _~OQ_ ________~------------~-----------~------------~-------____~------------~-----------~------------~-----------~------------~-----------~------------~---~OQ.
~ I I I 1 1 I 1 I 1 j 1 1
:s I I I 1 1 I 1 1 1 I 1 1
t.> I I I 1 1 1 j 1 1 1 1 1
~ _~8Q.__________~------------~-----------~------------~-__________~---_--------~-----------~------------~-----______~------------~-----------~------------~---~8Q.
o
~ I I 1 I 1 I I I 1 1 I 1
__ 1 1 1 I I I 1 I j 1 I 1
~ 1 1 1 I I I 1 I I 1 j I
~ _~IQ__________~--_---------~-----------~------------~-__________~------------~-----------~------------~-----______~------------~-----------~------------~---~IQ.
'"
~ ! j'. ~~ dOli ;.'~.' , ~~ :.-!.' :.'!.' ~~ " ~~ ~~ ~! ;.'~ ~ ~5 5~ ;.";.' ;..~1I. ~ ~: ~~ ~~ 5~ ~ ~~ ;..~.. ~! ~5 , ~~ ~! ::5 ~~ , ~~ :."!.' ~~ ~5 ~ ~~ ..~! ~i~ ..~~ ~ ~: ~!i ..~~ ~~ ~ ~s ~! ~!i ~.~~.' ~ ~R ~~ ~! ~6 , U
~ . ~ _ ~ . _ _ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ _ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ q ~ ~ ~ ij . ~ ~ - ~ ~ ~ . ~ 8. - ~ ~ . ~ ~ ~ ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ -,
~ _ ~6Q _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _~ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ~_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _~ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ~_ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _~ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . -III- ..,J~ ...J.m ~ r- ...I.M -'-
~ m u __ _ m _ _ _ L _ m m _ j _ m _ _ _ __ __ j m m m ml_ m m __ __ L m __ __ & a= ~ )~ T~O~~O~~TYH MN,7 1~'J ~~'i:'ls~OtOA~I~~tNEN~O~~J6~
IM'._ ....... Jf
...,
CD
tiO..
8J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.,
LEGEND
::E
...
,.,
'i!
,.,
o
:;
~~
PROPOSED ROADWAY .ul-""i.IIl.I&Il.L.lI~'~~~JI~lli.o
PROPOSED 10' BIT. TRAIL
CONCRETE MEDIANS. CURBS ~
PROPOSED PAVED SHOULDER
GRASS MEDIANS .1.....1
___ FUTURE ROADWAY/CONNECTION
~~gb9S~gR~lg~IOF WAY ~
EXISTING RIGHT OF WAY
1[' 0 . '"
,fi/l1
'liP' '0'
'~;.
PROPOSED PONDING SITE
POTENTIAL STORMWATER
TREATWENT - POND
POTENTIAL STORWWATER
TREATWENT - INFILTRATION
DITCH
DRAINAGE DIRECTIONAL FLOW
200
I
ooaIe Ilio
200
.
f
1'eet
CD
o
o
'"
....
,.,
~
L-
a
~
o
17
-+:NB
I I I I I I I I I I I I
_~O~----------~------------~-----------~------------~-__________~------------~-----------~------------~-----______~------------~-----------~------------~---~O~
I I j I I I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I I I I
I I I I I I <t.BELMONiI'AVE I I I I C160THSTI
_~OOO. _________~------------~-----------~------------~------_____~------------~-------..---~------------~---------__~------------~-----------~------~-----~---~O~
I I I I I I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I I I I
_ .9IlQ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ~ _ _ _ ~=H_l~ _ _ _ _ _ ~ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _~_ _ ~ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ~ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ~ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ~ _ ~ _ _ _ _ _ _ _I. _ i ~ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _! _ ~ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ~ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - - ~ - - - - - - - -t - - ~ - - - - - - - _1.1~...~lV.9.~ - - - .9IlQ
j I ~~ I S I ;; I Iii I t~ I "'E'" IT _11.<..... I I ~ I I
I I:!l! I !'Ii I a I ~ . .1... ~ . I oJ1Io -o.,n 11lI' Of D. .AVEIEIIT I I I I
I ii I H. I . I ....oq. V.c. ~'" I ~ ' - - -- - - - ... J... I I ~
_ .96Q _ ~o- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ...~tI1 _ _.I _ _ _ _ -..ioi- _ rl _ _ _ _ _ _ _...""'~.,}, _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ~ _ _ Ir _ ~ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _..,1 _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I _-- __ -:. -: :_ _ _ _..,1 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ \ I _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - ..,1 - - _ _ _ _ - - - - - :.. ~ ~ --- -=- -= ~ ---- '- - - :;::- - - - -:. - - -:-...4. = ~ - .96Q
IOG.DG' 'I.a. ~ - ---+ - -\..ri. CII 11 PltClFILE IRADI -G.3U "-1
, I j ...-.-.. I I - I I ~ 11lI' Of Fill...... _ACE I I j 8ll I
,I I ~ I I ........1 , I I I ~ I l!i I
c I I I I I - - - 'c..' ~ 8~ I 1.~~OO~'v.t. I ] I 'I r ]
.g _ .94Q _ :=-._ _ _ _ _~ I~____ _ _ -"88"' _ ~ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ____ ~ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ~ _ _ ~ - ! - - - - - - - ~.~;.~ - - - - - - - j! - ~ - - - - - - - - - - - ~ - - - - - - - - - - i - ~ - - - - - - - - - - - ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ - - - - - - - -.... - - ~ - - - - - - - - - ,i- - ~ - - - .94Q
Q. ~'o .. HI ~, .. s:
0. . I h I HO.OO' V.C. I I fi ~ I I I I I I I
cJ IF. I I I I. I;s: I I I I I I I
~: r. H~ I I I; I ~ J;l I I I I I I I
2 _.92Q_:_________~--------~--~-----------~------------~-__________~------------~-----------~------------~-----______~------------~-----------~------------~---.92Q
:: It I I I I I I I I I I I
-Iii I I I j ] I I I I I I I
-8. I I I I I I I I I I I I
~ _.90Q__________~------------~-----------~------------~-__________~------------~-----------~------------~-----______~------------~-----------~------------~---.90Q
~ I I I I I I I I I I I t
l; I I ] j I I I I I ] ] I
tJ I ] I I I I I I j I I I
~ _~IlQ._________~------------~-----------~------------~-__________~------------~-----------~------------~-----______~------------~-----------~------------~---~IlQ
~ I I I I j I I I I I I I
6 I I I ] I I I I 1 I I I
~ I I I I I j I I I I I I
~ _~IQ__________~------------~-----------~------------~-__________~------------~-----------~------------~-----______~------------~-----------~------------~---~IQ
,/
i : : ~~ ~~ ~i ~ ;~ ~; ~; ~~ ~ :: ~~ ;~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~~ :; ~i ~ ~i i~ ~i :; ~ ~: ;i ~~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~~ ii ~i ~ ;i ~~ ~~ ~: ~ ~i ~; ~i ~; ~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~i ~; ~i ;~ ~ ~~ ;i ~~ ;~ ~ ~
~ _ ~6Q, _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _~ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ ~_ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ __"~ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ~~_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _~ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - -- ...I.co .,.I..., ..o..c, ~ f:+'-n~ dn!i
~ ___ n __ ___ _ ___ j ___ ___ _ ___ j ___ ___ _ _ ___ L ___ __ ___ __ _l_ ___ _ ___ ___ j ___ ___ _ _ _ _ ~ a.:;: a !'S::ott T ~~ 3CO~~TYI:t17 1~'J j.,<i:~lS~O~AZ~~~<tNEN~O~_i'Jb~
.IA~ ."._ ,..,.1
><
CD
'Wl.
8K
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
o
700
1,400
2,800
Feet
TH 13 I CH 17 Corridor Study
Access Management Plan
Supporting Roadway Network Concept
, :. , 1
~-~
_ :ex, -='--'=
--~
-. ~'
November 20
~
SEH
~
y
TH 13 I CH 17
2030 Concept Plan
_ Supporting Roadways
FIGURE 1
Map Document (P:\PT\S\Scott\o60200IGIS\supportingroadways3mxd)
11/1212008-12:55:49 PM
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I I Miles ~
0 0.125 0.25 0.5
I
TH 282 Grade Separation Sub Area
CSAH 17 / TH 13 Corridor
Scott County, Minnesota
Legend
.. Community Retail Shopping
Planned Industrial
it.. C. ~
SEH ,Scott
Urban Low Density
Urban Medium Density
FIGURE 11
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I I Miles
0 0.125 0.25 0.5
I
TH 282 Interim Sub Area
CSAH 17 I TH 13 Corridor
Scott County, Minnesota
Legend
.. Community Retail Shopping
.. Planned Industrial
Urban Low Density
. Urban Medium Density
_ """""te
_ Shoulde,
.. Grass Median
Pe~nt
"Tl"BiI
& !S~U ~
FIGURE 12
'e