Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout9A - Traffic Signal - C.R. 21 & Jeffers Pass MEETING DATE: AGENDA #: PREPARED BY: AGENDA ITEM: DISCUSSION: CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT NOVEMBER 6, 2006 9A STEVE ALBRECHT, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS CONSIDER APPROVAL OF A REPORT REGARDING THE PROPOSED COST SHARING FOR COUNTY ROAD 21 AND JEFFERS PASS/COACHMAN LANE TRAFFIC SIGNAL Introduction At the September 18, 2006, City Council meeting, the Council directed staff to meet with the School District to discuss cost sharing for the CR 21 and Jeffers Pass/Coachman Lane traffic signal. Historv. Scott County has proposed construction of a traffic signal at the CR 21 and Jeffers Pass/Coachman Lane intersection in 2007. The County has proposed a cost split of SO/50 with the City of Prior Lake. This is a standard cost split for a city street and county road intersection. As part of the EAW for Jeffers Pond a traffic analysis was completed. This analysis looked at empirical information such as ultimate and peak traffic volumes and turning movements. The analysis indicated that a signal would be required in the future at Fountain Hills Parkway but not at Jeffers Pass under a full development scenario. Based on those findings the developer escrowed $125,000 with the City for future construction of the signal at that location. The County recently completed a detailed analysis of the CR 21 corridor between CR 42 and CR 82. The analysis indicates that there is a site distance issue at Jeffers Pass for cars turning left on to CR 21. The combination of the site distance issue, lack of safe pedestrian crossing and surrounding development patterns have resulted in the recommendation of a traffic signal at this location. Because this intersection serves a school there is limitations on the type of intersection improvements that can be made. Installation of a right-in, right-out or a three-quarters intersection would result in the routing of school and bus traffic south along Jeffers Pass through neighborhood streets not designed to handle this type of traffic. Additionally, pedestrian traffic issues outside of school hours to and from the school park facilities would not be addressed. If the school site were developed as a residential subdivision the above controls would be considered instead of a traffic signal as the pedestrian demand would be reduced and the school traffic eliminated. Based on the above City Staff proposed to the School District a SO/50 split of the City's portion of the proposed signal costs which are estimated to be between $125,000 and $150,000. The City's basis for this cost split was that the school is necessitating the need for the signal. However because the p a~elrprtdrIa1t&.tom Phone 952.447.4230 / Fax 952.447.4245 school only impacts % of the intersection staff felt the City should contribute % for the Coachman Lane segment of the intersection. Current Circumstances On October 10, 2006 City staff met with School District staff to discuss potential cost sharing at the intersection. On October 13, 2006 the School District responded in writing to the City regarding the intersection cost sharing. A copy of the School Districts letter is attached to this report. The School District proposes to pay up to $50,000 over a three year period ($16,667 annually). The District's rationale for the cap at $50,000 is that they only utilize a limited portion of the intersection and costs above the proposed amount should be paid by the development which does utilize Jeffers Pass also. ISSUES: There are several issues related to the project cost sharing: 1) The City staff does not believe the cost-sharing proposal tendered by the School District is fair or equitable. 2) The Developer for the overall project has paid in advance the full future City share for the future Fountain Hills intersection and is not required to contribute to this intersection project. Legally the City has no authority to require further contribution from the Developer. 3) Typically the City requires full payment and does not allow a developer, in this case the School District, to pay over an extended period. FINANCIAL IMPACT: 4) The City has not identified this project in the CIP and the County will only pay for 50% of the estimated intersection cost of $250,000-$300,000. This leaves an estimated $125,000 to $150,000 unfunded. The CIP will need to be modified to fund the balance of the project. The unfunded portion of this project is estimated to be up to $150,000. The School District has indicated in writing that they are willing to contribute up to $50,000 over a three year period to the project. The School District's proposal does not appear to be fair or equitable. The City's portion would need to be funded by the CIP. Because this project is required by new development the Street Over-size Fund should be utilized to fund the project. This fund is appropriated for new development street improvements that benefit the community beyond the immediate development. At this time the fund has been allocated in 2007 for future extensions of Stemmer Ridge Road and Carriage Hills Parkway in the amount of $800,000. Both of these improvements will be development driven. At this time neither of these developments have submitted formal concept plans for development. Staff expects a plan for the Stemmer Ridge Road area this winter. Based on the anticipated timelines for these areas it appears the City could fund the balance of the improvement. This project is necessitated by new development and therefore the project will be funded from the Street Over-size fund. No tax dollars will be used to fund the City's portion of this project. ALTERNATIVES: RECOMMENDED MOTION: 1. Accept the report and direct staff to negotiate a more equitable cost- sharing arrangement with the School District. The Council should provide direction as to acceptable cost-sharing parameters. 2. Accept the report and direct staff to prepare a cost share agreement with the School District with the School Districts contribution set at $50,000 to be paid over a three year period with the City paying up to $133,000 initially with a total City contribution not to exceed $100,000 upon receipt of the School District's final payment. 3. Accept the report and direct staff to prepare a cost share agreement with the School District and City each funding up to $75,000 of the improvement. 4. Table this item to a certain date in the future. In my professional opinion, it is in the best interests of this community that this intersection be signalized. Therefore, staff recommends approval of Alternative #1 or #2. If neither of these options is pursued, I believe that the county funding share could be jeopardized or the project delayed. Reviewed ~~~s, ~~~anager ;-i -- PRIOR LAKE-SAVAGE AREA SCHOOLS _-I Comflllwity (~r Lit;,!o1l!! Lear,,,,r,' October 13, 2006 Steve Albrecht City Engineer/Public Works Director City of Prior Lake 17073 Adelmann Street Prior Lake, MN 55372 Dear Steve: At the October 12th meeting of the Building Committee for the Prior Lake-Savage Area School Board, the committee authorized me to approve $50,000 in payment for our portion of the proposed stoplight at CSAH 21 and Jeffers Pass. The committee further authorized this amount with the understanding that the amount could be paid in 3 equal installments of $16,667 over the course of three years. The committee feels that this amount is justified in terms for our usage of the stoplight for buses, parents, and staff, and that further costs of the stoplight should be directed to the developer. We hope this arrangement is acceptable to the City of Prior Lake, as we know this intersection is clearly a safety concern. Please let me know if this agreement is acceptable and when the spotlight would be installed. c[);: /)J~~ DR. TOM WESTERHAUS Superintendent of Schools TW/mw Cc: Margo Nash, Director of Business Affairs Building Committee Members: Dick Booth, Eric Pratt, Tom Anderson Independent School District 719 P.O. Box 539 Prior Lake, MN 55372 Dr. Thomas We.terhaus Superintendent phone 952.226.0010 fax 952.226.0019 web priorlake-savage.k12.mn.us Prior I.akt, . Suvugt.' . SpdT1~ I.Jlkt, ~Ihwn~hip . CI'd.lI' I...k<<' '1i.)wllI.hip . (,,('(IiI Hiv~'I' "liu\"lll'l.ip . S~lIul CI,t'I,k 'I(Jwu,hil'