Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10E Approval of Process and Timeline for Selecting CR 21 Reconstruction AlternativePRl�� U 7 -4 r- 1NNF,S 4646 Dakota Street SE Prior Lake. MN 55372 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT MEETING DATE: April 4, 2011 AGENDA #: 10E PREPARED BY: Frank Boyles, City Mana PRESENTED BY: Frank Boyles AGENDA ITEM: Consider Approval of a Process and Timeline for Selecting the CR 21 Reconstruction Alternative. DISCUSSION: Introduction The purpose of this agenda item is to receive Council input on a proposed process and timeline to complete the selection of a CR 21 reconstruction alter- native. History This fall, as a result of the completion of the connection of CR 21 to the north to Hwy 169, traffic will begin to increase dramatically on CR 21 through downtown. Increased traffic volume will effectively separate the north and south downtown from one another and render the intersections at Main and CR 21 and TH 13 and CR 21 marginal at best. Recognizing that the timing of the CR 21 im- provement in the Prior Lake downtown is a County decision, the City has been investigating three alternatives: 1) Baseline; 2) Bridge; and 3) Pleasant Avenue realignment. Bolton and Menk has prepared cost estimates for each option and Maxfield has analyzed the options from an economic development perspective. The City Council conducted a work session to officially receive the report and an open house was conducted where more than 100 persons received a presenta- tion of the reports and an opportunity to ask questions. Current Circumstances All of the questions received to date have been forwarded to Maxfield. In addi- tion, Ehlers has been asked to do a long -term tax impact analysis for each op- tion. We expect to have the responses to the questions and the Ehlers analysis back by April 15. Attached for Council information is a proposed process and timeline to complete the rest of the process. Conclusion The City Council should review and discuss the proposed process and timeline and determine if it balances the opportunity for thorough analysis with sufficient public information and input. ISSUES: There are a number of questions about the proposed process the Council may wish to consider. • We are assuming that the remaining information will be available from Eh- lers, Bolton and Menk, and Maxfield by April 15. We believe that this is rea- listic, but if the information is late it could impact the remainder of the project timelines. • At the May 2 City Council meeting the City Council would receive the infor- mation from Ehlers, Maxfield, and Bolton and Menk. This meeting is an op- portunity for the public to re- familiarize themselves live or through replay on PLTV 15. As such, the staff regards it as another public information oppor- tunity. • On May 31 a town hall meeting is scheduled at city hall so the public will again have the opportunity to hear the information and ask questions. • The June 6 Council meeting would have an item which essentially amounts to a go or no go for one of the alternatives. The rationale for the date is to allow us to incorporate costs into the 2012 budget / CIP for preliminary de- sign and environmental assessment process as well as initial land applica- tion. Presumably these funds would have to be drawn from the reserve, tax levy or grant funds. • The process does not incorporate neighborhood meetings. The staff be- lieves that the alternate must be chosen and design plans prepared before we can offer the type of detailed information people would seek in a neigh- borhood format. • Are there other meetings the Council believes should be scheduled or should the proposed meetings be sequenced differently? FINANCIAL There is a fiscal impact associated with each of the road reconstruction alterna- IMPACT: tives and with the decision process discussed herein. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Approve the CR 21 process as proposed. 2. Approve the CR 21 process with amendments. 3. Take no action but provide staff with direction on this topic. RECOMMENDED As determined by the Council. MOTION: County Road 21 Process April 4, 2011 January 18 Release Maxfield Research, Inc. report electronically and in paper. January 18 Open CR 21 Website. January 18 Post February 7 work session and February 17 open house on Website. January 22 Newspaper notification of February 7 City Council work session and February 17 business and resident session. February 7 City Council work session (includes PC, EDA and EDAC). February Send Council questions to Maxfield / Bolton and Menk. February 12 Prior Lake American article, City Column, Newswire on topic of February 17 meeting. February 12 Contract with Ehlers or Springsted for revenue analysis. February 16 CR 21 alternatives overview at noon Chamber meeting. February 17 Business and citizen open house meeting including comment cards. (Notice meeting.) February 18 Send public meeting questions to Maxfield and Bolton and Menk. April 4 City Council approves remainder of process and timeline. April 15 Receive responses from Ehlers, Maxfield and Bolton and Menk. May 2 City Council hears Ehlers, Maxfield and Bolton and Menk information on project; and direct next steps based upon results (Council meeting). May 31 (Tuesday) Town Hall meeting. June 6 City Council decision @ City Council meeting.