HomeMy WebLinkAbout9A - Commerce Avenue Extension Feasibility Study
MEETING DATE:
AGENDA #:
PREPARED BY:
AGENDA ITEM:
DISCUSSION:
4646 Dakota Street S.E.
Prior Lake, MN 55372-1714
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
JULY 16, 2007
9A
STEVE ALBRECHT, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS
CONSIDER APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE COMMERCE
AVENUE EXTENSION FEASIBILITY STUDY
Introduction
The purpose of this agenda item is for the City Council to review the Commerce
Avenue Extension Feasibility Study and to provide direction to staff on which
alternative to pursue as part of the CR 42 Project.
History
Scott County is currently completing a corridor plan which will be the basis for
future improvements of CR 42 between Greenway Street and Quebec Avenue.
As part of project discussions in 2003 the City and County agreed to look into the
acquisition of five homes along CR 42 between Rutgers Street and Commerce
Avenue. To eliminate driveway accesses which are increasingly becoming
roadway hazards as the traffic on CR 42 increases. The intent of the original
discussion had the following goals:
1) Eliminate direct access onto CR 42
2) Create a backage road or the extension of Commerce Avenue to Rutgers
Street
3) Potentially create re-developable commercial acreage
Based on discussions with the City, the County pursued and acquired all five
parcels.
On February 20, 2007 the City Council authorized WSB & Associates to complete
a feasibility study to evaluate the following issues regarding the extension:
1) Impacts to the existing neighborhood
2) Potential alternatives for extension of Commerce Avenue
3) Alternative costs
4) Potential for redevelopment
On June 4, 2007 the Council received a presentation from WSB & Associates on
the CR 42 Project and the neighborhood meeting held on April 18, 2007.
The CR 42 Project is currently scheduled for construction in 2011 in the City's
Capital Improvement Program and Scott County Transportation Implementation
Plan. Based on the City Council's direction, Scott County will complete the
overall corridor plan and will bring it back to the City Council for approval this
winter.
R:\CouncillAgenda Reports\2007\07 16 07\Commerce agenda. doc .ty f . I k
www.C1opnorae.com
Phone 952.447.9800 / Fax 952.447.4245
e
e
e
..
WSB
Memorandum
701 Xenia Avenue South, Suite 300
Minneapolis, MN 55416
Phone 763-541-4800
Fax 763-541-1700
www.wsbcng.com
&. Associates, Inc.
To:
Steve Albrecht, PE
City Engineer / Public Works Director
City of Prior Lake
Copy: Greg Ilkka - Scott County
Rick Hauser - WSB
Don Sterna - WSB
From:
Tony Winiecki, PE, PTOE
File: 1100-52
Date: July 10,2007
Subject: Commerce Avenue Extension
Draft Study Report
1. INTRODUCTION
Scott County, in partnership with the Cities of Prior Lake and Savage, is developing final
design plans for the upgrade of CSAH 42 to a six-lane facility approximately a hal f mile
west and a halfmile east ofTH 13. One of the hazard elimination goals of the project is
to control access and eliminate direct private access onto CSAH 42. As part of that
project, Scott County is in the process of completing the purchase of five residential
properties along CSAH 42 between Rutgers Street and Commerce Avenue.
The City of Prior Lake authorized WSB to conduct an impact study to determine if a
frontage road extension of Commerce A venue to Rutgers Street is feasible and prudent
use of the five parcels acquired for the CSAH 42 project. The impact study included the
following activities.
· Collect existing data and document existing conditions
· Develop alternative frontage road alignments
· Evaluate alternatives including a do-nothing alternative
· Document impacts and recommend preferred alternative
All figures for the study report are shown in the Appendix. The project location is shown
in Figure 1. The proposed CSAH 42 improvements in the vicinity of the project location
are shown in Figure 2.
C:\Documents and Settings\salbrecbt\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLKI6\Memo - Commerce Ave Draft Study
07l007.doc
2.
DA T A COLLECTION AND EXISTING CONDITIONS
e
Data Collection
The following sources of information were collected and utilized for the study.
· Existing traffic volumes
· As-built roadway plans
· Aerial photography and topographic mapping
· Existing and proposed storm water plans
· City ordinance and setback requirements
· Proposed construction plans for CSAH 42 reconstruction
Existing Conditions
Commerce A venue
Commerce A venue is a two-lane urban frontage road that is 30 feet curb to curb
with 50 feet of right-of-way. Commerce Avenue primarily serves the commercial
and business properties west ofTH 13 and south of CSAH 42. The intersection of
Commerce A venue at CSAH 42 has limited access. There is median along CSAH
42 at the Commerce A venue intersection that does not allow the northbound to
westbound turning movement. However, there is a median break that does allow
the westbound to southbound left turn movement from CSAH 42. Eastbound
right-in and north bound right-out movements are also allowed. The intersection
operated adequately for the existing conditions and traffic volumes. Commerce
A venue on the south end is accessed directly via a right turn lane from
southbound TH 13 and also from the TH 13 at Commerce Avenue signalized
intersection.
e
Rutgers Street
Rutgers Street is a local two-lane urban roadway serving residential properties.
Rutgers Street is 28 feet curb to curb and has 66 feet of right-of-way. The CSAH
42 at Rutgers Street intersection is signalized. The Rutgers Street leg of the
intersection includes only one lane of approach for all traffic movements;
however, right turning vehicles are able to get by a short length of northbound
queued vehicles at the intersection. The intersection operates adequately for the
existing conditions and traffic volumes.
Timothy A venue
Timothy Avenue is a local two-lane urban roadway serving residential properties.
Timothy Avenue was cut off just south of Commerce Avenue several years ago
when vehicles were using Timothy Avenue as a direct cut-through roadway
between CSAH 42 and TH 13. The direct access from Timothy Avenue to TH 13
no longer exists. Timothy Avenue is accessed via Boudin Street to the south or as
a loop road with Natalie Road and Lois Avenue.
e
C:\DoclIments and Settings\salbrecht\Local Settings\Temporary Internet FiIes\OLK I 6\Memo - Commerce Avc Draft Study
07 I 007 .doc
e
CSAH 42
CSAH 42 is a four-lane divided arterial roadway with access control and
signalized intersections at major intersections. Design plans are underway to
upgrade CSAH 42 approximately a half mile west and a half mile east of TH 13 to
a six-lane facility. Roadway construction is currently scheduled for year 20] ].
Access and Frontage Roads
The upgrade of CSAH 42 will further limit access to CSAH 42. The traffic
volumes at the CSAH 42 at TH 13 intersection have increased substantially in
recent years as commercial properties have developed in all four quadrants.
Likewise, continued growth in adjacent communities has led to an increase in
background traffic volumes through this area. In order for the CSAH 42 and TH
13 roadways to operate at intended functional classifications and appropriate
safety controls, access spacing and intersection operational efficiency is
important. Effective frontage roads and local street connections are important
aspects to provide the right balance between access and mobility to each
respective roadway.
e
Commercial Property in Area
All four quadrants of the CSAH 42 at TH ]3 intersection have commercial
development. The northwest, northeast, and southeast all have large retail
development with adjacent or adjoining outlot developments. The southwest
quadrant consists of smaller buildings that include commercial and office
buildings.
Residential Property
The southwest quadrant is unique in that it is locked between the lake and the
CSAH 42 and TH 13 roadways. The residents behind the commercial and office
properties have limited mobility and are subject to access points on CSAH 42 and
TH 13. The residents are concerned about roadway access, traffic routing, and
any additional commercial growth in this area.
e
Minnesota Valley Electric Cooperative Sub-station
The CSAH 42 project will require extensive utility relocations including impacts
to the Minnesota Valley sub-station facility located on the south side of CSAH 42
and east of Commerce Avenue. As part of the CSAH 42 project, a 23 foot high
salt protection wall is planned to protect the sub-station from winter road plowing
and salt spray. If any of the frontage road alternatives are selected, Minnesota
Valley Energy has expressed interest to expand their facility to the vacated
Commerce A venue section near CSAH 42. This additional property would allow
them to reconfigure their power facility and reduce the size of the salt protection
wall. In the event that they can expand their facility, they will be able to upgrade
and reconfigure their power facility thereby reducing the required wall height
from 23 feet down to 15 feet. They would also fully enclose the facility on all
sides to provide a more aesthetically pleasing look.
C:\Documents and Settings\saIbrecht\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLKI 6\Memo - Commerce Ave Draft Study
071007.doc
Traffic Conditions
Discussion of traffic and traffic operations analysis is provided in greater detail in
the Section 4, Evaluation of Alternatives. Existing traffic volumes can be found
in the Appendix on Figure 3. The traffic signal at CSAH 42 at Rutgers Street
currently provides adequate traffic control and vehicle level of service for all
movements of the intersection.
e
e
e
C:\Documents and Settings\salbrecht\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLKI6\Memo - Commerce Ave Draft Study
071007.doe
e
e
e
3.
DEVELOPMENT OF AL TERNA TIVES
CSAH 42 Improvement Project
Scott County and the City of Prior Lake jointly committed to provide
improvements to access control and frontage roads as part of the CSAH 42
project. Scott County purchased the five properties along CSAH 42 between
Rutgers Street and Commerce Avenue from willing property owners as they
became available in advance of the project. It was understood that the partial or
full taking of additional properties may also be necessary to construct an
appropriate frontage road connection to Rutgers Street. The remaining property
from the frontage road construction would be considered for redevelopment.
Open House
The City of Prior Lake Public Works held an Open House on April 18, 2007 to
present the proposed extension of Commerce Avenue to Rutgers Street. The
project was presented at this first Open House to gather input on the impacts of a
potential frontage road extension. No specific detailed alignments were presented
at that time. This was an informational meeting however concerns regarding the
opening of Timothy A venue were expressed by several residents. Residents who
supported the opening of Timothy also spoke. Questions regarding the County's
plans for the existing five parcels and future redevelopment of the area were also
received. In general the majority of the residents appeared to be opposed to
construction of a frontage road in this location.
Alternatives
Three different frontage road alignments were evaluated to determine the
feasibility of extending Commerce Avenue to Rutgers Street. A do-nothing
alternative was also evaluated to weigh against extending the frontage road.
These alternatives are presented in the Appendix.
Alternative A - do-nothing alternative, no frontage road connection.
Alternative B - northern alignment, impact one additional property.
Alternative C - middle alignment, impacts three additional properties.
Alternative D - southern alignment, impacts four additional properties.
C:\DoclIments and Settings\saIbreeht\LocaI Settings\Temporary Internet Filcs\OLK 16\Memo - Commerce Ave Draft Study
071007 .doc
4.
EV ALUA TION OF AL TERNA TIVES
e
The four alternatives were evaluated to assess the following.
.
Frontage road value to the transportation network.
Traffic operational assessment.
Impacts to the residential neighborhood.
Economic redevelopment.
Potential mitigation/screening between residential and developable property.
Construction cost estimate will be determined for the preferred Commerce
Avenue alternative.
.
.
.
.
.
Figure 4 shows the existing roadway sections for Commerce A venue and Rutgers Street.
Commerce Avenue is a 30 foot wide urban street section with 50 feet of right-of-way and
Rutgers Street is 28 feet with 66 feet of right-of-way. A proposed typical roadway
section was developed similarly and used as a footprint to assess impacts of each
alternative as shown in Figure 5. Figures 6 through 9 show the alignment, profile, and
construction limits of Alternatives A through D. Cross-sections were developed for each
alternative to determine construction limits, but not included in this document. Storm
water ponding necessary from the frontage road would likely be located in the vacated
lot(s) south of Commerce Avenue and west of Timothy Street as shown in the alternative
figures. The anticipated partial and full right-of-way acquisitions for each alternative are
marked on each alternative. Economic redevelopment costs are summarized at the end
this section.
e
Alternative A
Alternative A represents the do-nothing alternative with no extension of Commerce
Avenue to Rutgers. In this alternative, Commerce Avenue will remain open to CSAH 42.
However, with the reconstruction of CSAH 42, a median on CSAH 42 will eliminate the
existing westbound to southbound left turn movement. Access will be limited to a right-
in, right-out movement.
Transportation and Traffic Operations
Although the Commerce Avenue access to CSAH 42 would be limited to right-
in/right-out movements, the intersection is not in a desirable location for those
destined to northbound TH 13. With planned improvements to CSAH 42,
Commerce A venue would be located within the limits of the eastbound CSAH 42
left turn lanes at TH 13. This is not considered to be a desirable location and
weaving vehicles will be problematic. Vehicles destined to northbound TH 13
from Commerce Avenue will have to weave across three lanes of thru traffic to
get to the nearest left turn lane. If this alternative is preferred, this movement
should be restricted or not allowed. Vehicles destined to northbound TH 13 or
westbound CSAH 42 should be required to use the signalized intersection on TH
13 at Commerce A venue. If a right-in only access is provided, it would be similar
to the other quadrants of the CSAH 42 at TH 13 intersection. However, dissimilar
e
C:\Documents and Settings\salbrecht\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Filcs\OLKI 6\1'vlemo - Commerce Ave Draft Study
071007.doc
e
to the other quadrants, there are limited exit locations for the southwest quadrant.
There are a finite number of vehicles using Commerce Avenue. A shift in traffic
route does not appear to impose significant degradation of traffic operations at
any access point or cause undue travel routes.
Impacts to Neighborhood
Alternative A provides the least intrusive impact relative to the adjacent
residential neighborhood versus the frontage road options. In this alternative,
there would be no frontage road traffic impacts. However, the property could be
redeveloped (either short or long term) with access to the site from Rutgers Street
and/or Commerce Avenue. In such case, the new driveways would not be in a
desirable location along Rutgers A venue and/or Commerce Avenue with respect
to its proximity and operations of CSAH 42. Redevelopment of these properties
in this alternative may impact the neighborhood more that the existing conditions
depending on the type of redevelopment and driveway access.
Economic Redevelopment
There are limited land use options for the five acquired parcels in Alternative A in
this alternative. After reconstruction of CSAH 42, the five parcels would yield
approximately 1.6 acres minus any setback requirements and access to the
property.
e
The property could be used as a public-use property for recreation or used as open
space. This option, however, does not recover the dollars spent on acquiring the
property for the CSAH 42 project. Conversely, this option does not require the
expenditure to build the frontage road and potential additional parcels. The
parcels could provide limited redeveloped with access to this property from either
Rutgers Street and/or Commerce A venue. Driveway access and setback
requirements to this site will further limit redevelopment options. This option
would yield driveway access points in an undesirable location relative to CSAH
42.
Long-term planning for the southwest quadrant of CSAH 42/TH 13 should be
considered in the decision of frontage road alternatives and whether the alignment
meets long term plans.
Alternative A Summary
The City of Prior Lake needs to assess the long range planning in this area. The
do-nothing alternative may provide the short-term time to plan for future long-
term redevelopment of the southwest quadrant of CSAH 42 at TH 13.
e
C:\Documents and Settings\saIbrccht\Local Settings\Temporary Internet FiIes\OLK 16\Memo - Commerce Ave Draft Study
071007.doc
Alternative B
e
Alternative B is a northerly frontage road connection primarily in the newly acquired
parcels adjacent to CSAH 42. This alignment would require full property acquisition of
the property nearest the existing Commerce A venue and easement acquisition of the
property nearest Rutgers Street.
Transportation and Traffic Operations
With Alternative B, the existing access to Commerce A venue from CSAH 42
would be eliminated. Anticipated 2007 traffic volumes for the frontage road
extension are in the range of 180 vehicles in the p.m. peak hour and 1600 vehicles
per day as shown in the traffic volume graphic in Figure 3. This volume does not
include any addition traffic related to redevelopment of acquired properties.
Because of the neighborhood roadway network, it is anticipated that these traffic
volumes will be primarily related to the commercial properties along Commerce
A venue with very little related to through traffic or future background traffic
growth. It is expected that traffic operations of the CSAH 42 at Rutgers
intersection will continue to operate in the acceptable range. Detailed traffic
operations analysis is further discussed in subsequent sections.
Although this alternative does achieve a frontage road connection and closes the
existing Commerce Avenue access at CSAH 42, the access spacing at Rutgers
Street to CSAH 42 is approximately 100 feet. This is not desirable spacing to
provide storage at the signalized intersection and efficient movement of turning
vehicles between the two intersections. Overall this will have a negative impact
on the operations and safety of the CSAH 42 at Rutgers Street intersection as well
as Commerce A venue. For this reason alone, Alternative B is not recommended.
e
Impacts to Neighborhood
Alternative B provides the least intrusive impact of the frontage road construction
alternatives relative to the adjacent residential neighborhood. Although there is
limited available area to develop the remaining properties, access to
redevelopment sites would be from the frontage road. Similarly, commercial and
businesses along the existing Commerce A venue will utilize the new frontage to
access CSAH 42 at Rutgers Street. Adjacent residential property owners are
likely to hear and see additional traffic along the newly constructed frontage road.
A berm, privacy fence, or landscaping along the south side of the frontage road
between Rutgers Street and Commerce Avenue could be constructed to provide a
buffer between the residents and any development north of the frontage road.
Economic Redevelopment
There are limited land use options for the five acquired parcels in Alternative B.
After reconstruction of CSAH 42 and construction of a frontage road, the five
parcels would yield approximately 1.3 acres minus any setback requirements and
access to the property.
e
C:\Documents and Settings\salbreebt\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK I 6\Memo - Commerce Ave Draft Study
. 071007 .doc
e
Development options would be very limited in this long, narrow property.
A verage depth of the property is less than 100' between right-of-way lines
between CSAH 42 and Commerce Avenue. Driveway access and setback
requirements to this site will further limit development options.
The property could be used as a public-use property for recreation or used as open
space. This option, however, does not recover the dollars spent on acquiring the
property for the CSAH 42 project. If left as a public-use property, it would be
undesirable as it is set between a busy arterial roadway and a frontage road used
primarily by commercial and business property users.
Long-term planning for the southwest quadrant of CSAH 42/TH 13 should be
considered in the decision of the Alternative B alignment in meeting long term
goals. Because of the limitation of redevelopment and access concerns,
Alternative B may not suit long term planning for the area.
Alternative B Summary
Alternative B is not recommended. It will not provide adequate traffic operations
as a frontage road with its proximity to CSAH 42 and the remaining property will
not provide redevelopment opportunities.
Altcrnative C
e Alternative C provides a frontage road that achieves greater intersection separation along
Rutgers Street and developable property between the Commerce A venue frontage road
and CSAH 42 than Alternative B. This alignment would require three additional full
property acquisitions and a fourth potential acquisition as shown in the figure. The
remaining property is approximately 2.3 acres.
Transportation and Traffic Operations
With Alternative C, the existing access to Commerce A venue from CSAH 42
would be eliminated. Anticipated 2007 traffic volumes for the frontage road
extension are in the range of 180 vehicles in the p.m. peak hour and 1600 vehicles
per day. This volume does not include any addition traffic related to
redevelopment of acquired properties. Because of the neighborhood roadway
network, it is anticipated that these traffic volumes will be primarily related to the
commercial properties along Commerce Avenue with very little related to through
traffic or future background traffic growth.
e
It is expected that traffic operations of the CSAH 42 at Rutgers intersection will
continue to operate in the acceptable range. Detailed traffic operations analysis is
further discussed in subsequent sections. This alternative provides approximately
200 feet of usable vehicle storage on Rutgers Street south of the signalized
intersection at CSAH 42. Traffic operations analysis indicates this will be
adequate storage and will not block access into or out of Commerce A venue.
C:\Documents and Settings\saIbrecht\Local Settings\Temporary Internet FiIes\OLK16\Memo - Commerce Ave Draft Study
071007.doc
This option does achieve a frontage road connection and closes the existing
Commerce Avenue access at CSAH 42. Any new development north of the
frontage road would access its property via the frontage road.
e
Impacts to Neighborhood
Alternative C impacts the neighborhood in that it requires 3-4 additional property
acquisitions. Access to redevelopment sites would be from the frontage road.
Similarly, commercial and businesses along the existing Commerce Avenue will
utilize the new frontage to access CSAH 42 at Rutgers Street. Adjacent
residential property owners are likely to hear and see additional traffic along the
newly constructed frontage road. Alternative C will also impact 3-4 houses on the
west side of Rutgers Street immediately south of CSAH 42. A berm, privacy
fence, or landscaping along the south side of the frontage road between Rutgers
Street and Commerce Avenue could be constructed to provide a buffer between
the residents and any development north of the frontage road. Likewise,
mitigation could be provided along the east side of Rutgers Street.
Economic Redevelopment
After reconstruction of CSAH 42 and construction of a frontage road, the
developable property would yield approximately 2.3 acres minus any setback
requirements and access to the property. This would provide parcels for
development consistent with other properties along Commerce Avenue to the
east. Long-term planning for the southwest quadrant of CSAH 42/TH 13 should
be considered in the decision of the Alternative C alignment in meeting long term
goals.
e
Alternative C Summary
Alternative C will achieve objectives of a frontage road. It will provide closure of
the existing Commerce A venue intersection at CSAH 42 and greater access
control on Rutgers Street at both the CSAH 42 intersection and the Commerce
A venue intersection. It provides a more suitable size for redevelopment of
property north of the frontage road similar to other existing commercial and office
properties along Commerce A venue. Again, the City of Prior Lake needs to
assess the long range planning in this area.
Alternative D
Alternative D provides a frontage road that achieves greater intersection separation along
Rutgers Street and developable property between the Commerce Avenue frontage road
and CSAH 42. This alignment would require four additional full property acquisitions
and a fi fth partial of full acquisition as shown in the figure. The remaining property is
approximately 3.0 acres.
Transportation and Traffic Operations
With Alternative D, the existing access to Commerce Avenue from CSAH 42
would be eliminated. Anticipated 2007 traffic volumes for the frontage road
e
C:\Documents and Settings\saIbrecbt\Local Settings\Temporary Internet FiIes\OLK I 6\Memo - Commerce Ave Draft Study
07 I 007 .doc
e
extension are in the range of ] 80 vehicles in the p.m. peak hour and ] 600 vehicles
per day. This volume does not include any addition traffic related to
redevelopment of acquired properties. Because of the neighborhood roadway
network, it is anticipated that these traffic volumes will be primarily related to the
commercial properties along Commerce A venue with very little related to through
traffic or future background traffic growth.
It is expected that traffic operations of the CSAH 42 at Rutgers intersection will
continue to operate in the acceptable range. Detailed traffic operations analysis is
further discussed in subsequent sections. This alternative provides approximately
300 feet of usable vehicle storage on Rutgers Street south of the signalized
intersection at CSAH 42. It also provides for appropriate turn lane tapers on
Rutgers Street south of the signalized intersection. Traffic operations analysis
indicates this will be adequate storage and will not block access into or out of
Commerce Avenue.
This option does achieve a frontage road connection and closes the existing
Commerce A venue access at CSAH 42. Any new development north of the
frontage road would access its property via the frontage road.
e
Impacts to Neighborhood
Alternative D impacts the neighborhood in that it requires 4-5 additional property
acquisitions. Access to redevelopment sites would be from the frontage road.
Similarly, commercial and businesses along the existing Commerce Avenue will
utilize the new frontage to access CSAH 42 at Rutgers Street. Adjacent
residential property owners are likely to hear and see additional traffic along the
newly constructed frontage road. Alternative D provides the most redevelopment
acreage and extents furthest south. This will also impact 4-5 houses on the west
side of Rutgers Street immediately south of CSAH 42. A berm, privacy fence, or
landscaping along the south side of the frontage road between Rutgers Street and
Commerce A venue could be constructed to provide a buffer between the residents
and any development north of the frontage road. Likewise, mitigation could be
provided along the east side of Rutgers Street.
Economic Redevelopment
After reconstruction of CSAH 42 and construction of a frontage road, the
developable property would yield approximately 3.0 acres minus any setback
requirements and access to the property. This would provide parcels for
development consistent with other properties along Commerce Avenue to the
east. Long-term planning for the southwest quadrant of CSAH 42/TH 13 should
be considered in the decision of the Alternative D alignment in meeting long term
goals
e
C:\Docllments and Settings\salbrecht\LocaI Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLKI6\Memo - Commerce Ave Draft Study
071007.doc
Alternative D Summary
Alternative D will achieve objectives of a frontage road. It will provide closure of
the existing Commerce Avenue intersection at CSAH 42. Alternative D provides
for the best access control on Rutgers Street ofthe alternatives analyzed at both
the CSAH 42 intersection and the Commerce A venue intersection. It provides the
largest area for redevelopment of property north of the frontage road similar to
other existing commercial and office properties along Commerce A venue. Again,
the City of Prior Lake needs to assess the long range planning in this area.
e
Traffic Operations Analysis
Traffic operations analysis was performed to assess the proposed frontage road
connection and impacts at the signalized intersection at CSAH 42 and Rutgers Street.
Currently the intersection of Commerce A venue at CSAH 42 is a limited access
intersection. The northbound to westbound movement is not allowed. The extension of
Commerce Avenue to Rutgers Avenue will provide full access to CSAH 42 for the
commercial and business properties along Commerce Avenue. Currently, Commerce
A venue is a frontage road providing access to an estimated 60,000 square feet of
commercial and business floor space.
Traffic Counts
Directional traffic counts were collected for the AM and PM peak periods along
Commerce Avenue just south of CSAH 42. Intersection turn movement counts
were also obtained at the CSAH 42 at Rutgers Street intersection to estimate
existing and future intersection operations and vehicle queue lengths.
e
Traffic Forecast
Traffic forecasts were developed for the year 2007 and peak hour turning
movements were estimated for Rutgers Avenue at CSAH 42. The forecast
volumes were estimated using the existing turning movements and the 2005 MSA
Daily Traffic Volumes. The existing traffic using the intersection of Commerce
A venue at CSAH 42 was moved to the intersection of CSAH 42 at Rutgers Street.
Additional traffic was added to the Commerce A venue frontage road since full
access movements are provided at the CSAH 42 at Rutgers Street intersection.
The volume forecasted for the extended segment of Commerce Avenue is
esti mated at 180 vph in the peak hour and 1600 vehicles per day.
Operations
A traffic operations analysis was performed to obtain level of service and queue
val ues for the intersection of CSAH 42 at Rutgers Street. The existing and
forecast traffic volumes were analyzed for the intersection. The delay, LOS, and
95th percentile queue was reported for each approach for the AM and PM peak
hours and shown in Tables 1 and 2. Two lane configurations were analyzed for
the northbound approach of Rutgers Avenue at CSAH 42. Alternative 1 in the
tables is for a single northbound approach lane and Alternative 2 was analyzed for
e
C:\DoclIrnents and Settings\salbrecht\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK16\Memo - Commerce Ave Draft Study
071007.doc
e
two northbound approach lanes. The operations analysis does not include any
new traffic from redevelopment or new development along Commerce A venue.
Table 1. AM Peak Hour Intersection Level of Service Summary
A E . RAt CSAH 42
Commerce venue xtenslon. utaers venue a
Approach Existing Counts Alternative 1 Alternative 2
Single Lane NB Approach NB Left-Thru, Right Lanes
Delay LOS Queue Delay LOS Queue Delay LOS Queue
SecNeh Feet SecNeh Feet SecNeh Feet
Southbound 8 A 21 9 A 22 9 A 22
Westbound 12 B 113 12 B 113 12 B 113
Northbound 8 A 15 9 A 35 9 A 29
Eastbound 14 B 122 14 B 122 14 B 122
Table 2. PM Peak Hour Intersection Level of Service Summary
ERA CSAH 42
e
Commerce Avenue xtension, utaers venue at
Approach Existing Counts Alternative 1 Alternative 2
Single Lane NB Approach NB Left-Thru, Right Lanes
Delay LOS Queue Delay LOS Queue Delay LOS Queue
SecNeh Feet SecNeh Feet SecNeh Feet
Southbound 17 A 117 17 B 117 17 B 117
Westbound 14 A 191 15 B 191 15 B 191
Northbound 12 B 16 13 B 47 13 B 39
Eastbound 14 B 226 15 B 226 15 B 226
Traffic Operations Findings
The operations analysis yields acceptable levels of services for all movements at
the intersection in the AM and PM peak hours for existing and future conditions.
There is negligible difference in the delay or queue with the additional lane of
approach for the northbound traffic. It is noted that these traffic volumes do not
include any new traffic from redevelopment or new development along
Commerce A venue. If similar development to the existing commercial and
business properties along Commerce A venue are constructed north of Commerce
A venue, it is expected that traffic LOS will remain at an acceptable level.
However, the queue lengths are expected to be slightly longer. Frontage Road
Alternatives B would not provide adequate separation to CSAH 42. Alternatives
C and D would provide adequate separation between the two intersections, with
Alternative D providing the best traffic operations between the two intersections.
e
C:\Documents and Settings\saIbrecht\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK I 6\Memo - Commerce Ave Draf1 Study
071007.doc
5.
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
e
It is concluded from the assessment of the four alternatives that the City of Prior Lake
needs to establish the long range plan for the southwest quadrant of CSAH 42 at TH 13
before it can proceed with any ofthe frontage road alternatives. Once that is determined,
the most appropriate use of the five recently acquired properties and other needed
properties can be planned.
Alternative A is not a viable long range alternative. It does not provide desired
access closure of Commerce Avenue at its existing location. If Alternative A is
selected as a long range solution, it would not make use of the property acquired
for the CSAH 42 project. However, it is viable alternative if the City desires to
construct a frontage road but needs to further determine the long range plan for
the southwest quadrant that will provide the most appropriate redevelopment plan
while addressing neighborhood impact concerns.
Alternative B is not recommended based on inadequate traffic operations and use
of property acquisitions.
Alternative C and D and similar and are both considered viable alternatives. The
City of Prior Lake needs to determine its redevelopment strategy for the area.
Alternative D provides the best alternative from a traffic operations perspective
while providing for the largest redevelopment area.
e
The following table shows the economic redevelopment costs for Alternatives A, C, and
D. Initial property acquisition for the five parcels along CSAH 42 was $1.2M. It is
estimated that additional property acquisition will be at $250K per parcel. The City's
share is estimated at 50% based on prior commitments with Scott County. Lot resale is
assumed to be split equally with Scott County.
Land City Frontage Lot Total
Acquisition Share Road Resale City
Cost Cost Cost
Alt. A $1,200,000 $600,000 $0 $0 $600,000
Alt. C $1,950,000 $975,000 $450,000 $350,000 $1,250,000
residential
Alt. C $1,950,000 $975,000 $450,000 $801,500 $1,024,250
commercial
Alt. D $2,325,000 $1,162,500 $450,000 $1,050,000 $1,087,500
commercial
It is noted that the five parcels purchased along CSAH 42 are zoned as residential.
Rezoning of these parcels will require an amendment to the City of Prior Lake
Comprehensive Plan.
e
C:\Docull1ents and Settings\salbrecht\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLKI6\Memo - Commerce Ave Draft Study
07 I 007 .doc
e
Appendix
e
e
C:\Documcnts and Scttings\saIbrccht\LocaI Scttings\Tcmporary Intcrnet Files\OLK 16\Memo - Commcrcc A vc Draft Study
071007.doc
- -J':1 '.
~~".
.,','A --':e.
E;
<.Jr
"-
~ CQI'
~ ~~~ i.
< ,
Ci. ;
1/)..... N
-.....
CO ~
C1l C'\J ~
E 23 CJ)
C1l '"" u:
~ ~
....l::
0..'"
E 23
_0
N"O
~ el
::I: 0
<(e-
cnQ
U'
-oC
C1l c::
I/) ~
o 0
0..0
e't3
a..b5
e
e
:>.
"'C
:::::s
Ci5
1::",
0.....
.- 0
en en
1::<1>
.S:ll::
>< I::
W.-
<1>:2;
:::::s -
fii~
>'"
<(~
<1> 0
u-a=
(un..
Eo
g~
<..:I <..:I
e
,,'6p.i!O-6!J\UOId\POJ\i!<;-OOIlO\:~ '''''''O<AII:1 B,.~
iOOl/6/1 :;o",UjJd ..,00
e
e
t
!:!
"-
'0
D
W
;:;
.
Prepared by:
, r \' , II .
1 t.:~~ ::.J' If J~,lll/ ~
~., _ II ~', ~NORTH
,1 ,--.ue,!' ,.-..., }_ .If ~ ~ ' ,
~ A.~\ I
....... ........ ..,.,...............wI~ J 'p'. ,
;-14' ': ,":. ,. I""';': .... :- JiJ. ;=-.- - .;.~ .:~.:. ~
, jr... .r!: I~ ~ i
-, . fl, ,"'" r-' ~
"'- ~...- ,....,. , .
t , Itf I', J .. 't.J'..1) ~~'1' ~
".. ell . . '1 I " .~\ .
i~ r ~.-.~ -fl~ I...~___.","'~"'" nn-' I
-~~" l'K.,f ~~ "
. - -'J e.
-~",ijl ': ~. f.~~
-'~ ,111"1 ., '-~r,., ---r .
. ,~~. ~ · ~~. r
- ~ \l
;r
'Ii '. I .'I' j~
"~Y~llg
~ ....;~~
0'$, ~" 1 ~ "-,'
· 1 ~I' ,
'J' .. t,J ~~~ ~".
~: Ii.
~ S ".
!...!J1,
~~ !~,
.r ~,
t,J ~
II ~l
,. ~I
I .
....
WSB
,_..- -;114;;'.". ~
,~It' <
:~
I" ,.jrt,",~l~,~"'1~,,'
'~;...:.J~~~";
~l:
-
~
Legend
"t..... xx (XX)
+-- xx (XX)
~ xx (XX)
AM (PM) Peak Hour Traffic Volume
Source: 2006 Turning Movement Counts
'Do.
~~
t D
~g
"-
.
~'"
DCO
"'~
Traffic Volumes
Figure 3
Commerce Avenue Extension Study
City of Prior Lake, Minnesota
Prepared by:
..
WSB
-
"I r.-.,,,..i,,,~., )n"
c
"
U
"
'"
~
c
S!
Q
S
a
"
"
"
"
'"
is
~.
R/W
I'
R/W
I'
~
Commerce Avenue
I
50'
I~
"I,
~ ~1
15'
15'
L:::.-
PI
RIW
'I
~
Existing Commerce Avenue
~
Rutgers Street
I
Varies 66' Minimum
I~
,I,
~ ~,..!
. " .' '11
14'
14'
L
Existing Rutgers Street
Commerce Avenue Extension Study
City of Prior Lake, Minnesota
~I
-....:.J
RIW
'I
Existing Typical Sections
Figure 4
c:: L.O
0 (])
.- '--
.... :::l
(.) 0)
e Q) LL
(/)
ns
(.)
:1 .-
~ a.
w
NO: ~
-U
--'--' I--
-=:J
r-;>
a:: '"C
w'-
"-'" Q)
en
a.
0
s...
a..
'"
'-
a:
0
>
--'
OJ
Z
0
"' w i=
N 0 Wa:: 0
4 r-W W
a:: ~r
0 Wr- '" '" Cf)
a::r- 0 0
W U=:J --' a:: ......J
<I1 --' ZO W a: <(
0 0
"- uoO CO CO 0
0 OJ OJ W n::
W a: W e>:
=:J CL ~a:: Vl 4 ~
Z <.O=:J --'
W COU =:J
> Z
4 4 W
a::
B'W 0 ~
U
a:: r- Z
W We>: U W
;> W
;> r-W --' >
0 w r- W
U a:r- <I1 <(
U=:J ~l
ZO w
<I1 0 CO 0
'-'oO
OJ CD a:::
~a: W >..
<.O=:J ~ "U
COU
"' ~ :::s
N 0 ......
0 w en
Vl c:
c:: ca
0 I =:J 0
> 0 ......
--' I w u en 0
CD t Vl u en
a:: c:
I =:J~ Z~ CU
0.,- 0:'" CU
/ W u'" 4'" ...... c:
I f-::J I wi >< c:
'" Uco ",CO
'- I wZ Z", ,<I1 W
a: (/)W Zu Vl :E
I o:U Vl
~I Z> ""CL ~= "" CU
-<l: W_ --' :::s
- / f-W '" "'u U CU
U c:
I Zu "'0 >0 w ..x::
We::: '" --," v; CU ca
o/~ >0 0 "'"
~W -,en W<I1 OJ > --I
W~ '" CL'" <(
Ww )-~ w ~
>~ CL3 r-Z r-
Z c: <l:O >-> > "" CU 0
=:J r---, 0--' 0
0 W o...u w (..) "i::
a:: NO: Ow <I1W c::
0 -U enc: "'0: 0 ~ a...
--'--' "'=:J N=:J 0 CU
0 -=:J Nr- _ r- ""
Z r-;> x ~~X E -
c: 0
r- W'- NL '" E
Vl "-'" >..
x '0 0 ......
W --'W
-W U U
OVl
V1
CLa::
':,:, 00
r-
.Q 0
"Q ~~il 0
e: tiJ V1
(\J
Q.
OJ
C::
u6P"f10-6!J \UOld\pO]\Zr;-OOIIO\:;A :aWOU81.':1 85'A
LOOZ/6/L :P&+Uj..Jd 6JDO
::- _f~;f"! I
- - - v;-_ -~. 1
~- ,~;;~~o= I
I
I
I
L ~ -=---=~i;\!
- -- - ~;11 f'
~=~~~~iv,'fllll:
j:lil ,i/I:! ii, :'
I1I1 ,I! Ii
\IJ,: :,'Ii
1\\1 ,Iii il
)"I 'I)"
~ ~~~> . '\':1; II I~t
'~~~bJIII III
" -: Ii
~ I 'II,
I :)1
, " II j'
I,I.) r ~ !
111
I
~
I Ii
I ill
'I
Ii' i
I II'
c.q:
I
I
I~ -
"\.4,.
. ~~' ...
I I
j J, I
'..1 '
'~I~ t
'\!
I'!
,; I'~;
I I"~", I
: j 7i
!f! !
w I
.;~,
'1.! .
J<
TII
'd
,', ,."', i IIJ j,
~ .2.J .LJ' ....2.-......2...,.J _ ~ ;-- I
'- Ll ~ ~~lJL!:L I ~',
1 ClU, J L~ JLJi=) I~- \
I , :-"',/ -'Iilt L... II I I
~ i I - I
, I I
I . 1.<., I
r~ l~' I I
.. f :
i~= i~~ I!. I
j} f' - 1- :
,-......r,cc.,l f~ 1- I
~.- .----;':. 1-_:
"
I, I, I --'
! I ! I
~~Ij
f~~]
II : J !il
~I
I
<75'
g! I I
~: : I I
I I
, ,
ill
I III
i If
I ,I
ii,
, I
: Iii
I I
I\;
I -
r\ I'
Ii l' i It'
J i )fl
I,
q
r'lii
III i [i
~i I,
~T I
~, I
I I
: Ii
I,
I
I
II I
Iii ;" I
'I I' ,
~ ,:"===='-J \
I
,I' i [
I I I
II I
111,'1" 'I I I J \ [r,
\ lOOk "i \! - - -
. -.-. -. - h 133Hl.S SH3~l.nH-.-.-.-
~\ \: -r r )~! '1 I
'Cr:- J- ,< I I ) I I I
ll, < < /'\) \ I ! 'i 'I' II
\; <1 \ l i -' ,- --[\'
\. r I-I I I \ \ I
\l LJ I L I II I j r I
t.t-'Xy
'I
I::
II'
i:l
I
I I"
\. I i III i Ii r
~ II ' II 'II
'"Igl II gl II
I'oj I oj II
Ilt'i ~i ~i 111'1'
,I i I'll
! ~ I' i II I I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i'
\~-- -"- = --=-===--=-.,;:- -::= - - :: ~-= --=--'-----=
---~
U A\tMH8IH >lNnHl. - -- -'-
~~~~:...~~_~-:.:.....--;;-~-:-_~_ _~~__::::~---c=-" ".-:-.
j~~ -
'1~
I:?)
3,. /-<IJ.~Q '""'~
'f
Ji ~. 1
' /.-
: , //
:~ C il
L, Il I
t?{-~-=--, ~
,.: 'r 1 Jhr
!ii' r
~ f
! I
It !
~::; ~
\. ~
o
f"'-
__L
I' -
I
I
I
I
I
!(;
L _ ---:c- __,
"
---~--:/.-
t/ \ I I)
, I I
~JJJ
: Q
',<
'.
{I'-Il!
t ~
(--:
.- \1 J
l
I
~ 'I'
Ill!
, I'
'rJ[ ,
I_~-......
) >
t: 1(,
**~O\ 1
'~::-_~\ i
,~ (l):......J
>- 1 II
"
~ _~ I 1
\
I
"\ l~>-
],
I
IJ,
n \'
.i\ I
) l
'1 J1,
:ti'(()
[!!
;:, ~
al u:
o
:z
-
<C
Q.)
>
:;:;
n:s
c::
...
Q.)
.:!:::
<C
e
e
: 'I
L,
I
I L
r
\
':J
>-
"'C
::::I
en
C::ns
0_
.- 0
(I) (I)
C::(1)
$c::
>< c::
W'-
(1):2
::::I -
c::~
(1) ns
>---1
<(....
(1) 0
u.;::
Ci;o....
Eo
E-i::'
0._
<..> <..>
e
"Op"90-6YI'-'''kj\PO:JIl'>-OOIIO\:;< :BLlJr:!L-""t'.J 8511
LOOZ/6/i '-P8,'-'I-'d ".00
\~-
"'~---_-=-:=
cJ ~;
e
r~ A\!MH8IH >lNmU-
~ ~:_-~~""~~~~-
r~~ i71~;
N
"
I
<
(j)
U
,
,
,
,
,
,
, "-
: lj
L I'
L-_jJ._~~-
/
l
T"d
, '~I
.1)1
~i
J
I
-
3J~ ']
-"1011
',HnJ
iliiS
l_L_
1- --
/
/
/
I!
II I
I' ~
e ,I
.II
c~
..
W
=>
z
I~
IW
,U
L ffi
o :2'
I ':2
-'01
I u
J /)
'!
i
j'
"- I-I
[ I
I: I '
f 1 r-
1~1_~J r ~~~:, ~
'j -1--- ,
I' : \ , ,,', _ _.
~ -1- I t..;
! (3-nN3^\! AH.LOlNll
0, /
I I.
~ "co ,,<l 0
=~=-'
XX mSOl::J XX ,
! r ~~I
',.....~--f
WI ~i 0
c: -, "
.- /
c: I ,
.- 10,
ctS 1/
El-
m I\..'
Ct:'1
:~ ...-{...'"
U1e.
e,~~
/' ()I~--
?<e:W
--( Mt~1
.,
~,
-',
I,
+' I
L!.,
I
gf
oIl
0') :'-)
M""
I
<.D I
Lt)\
I
II \1
oi
I
i
i
(
1")
I \;
I
\
!
I~
I~
,~-
z
f5 i
~ "
i'
I
\!
e
I
\ ___ :l
- - 133~lS S~381n~
~c~"1 \ ' J_{; 1/ I'll ~,~-/ rr-r r~~l
\ (' I I" Il' I I,' I
i \' ~ f l t 11 r. I I
~ 9:l1' ,,- J, :
i <4~ ! -.~ -
I ~
II
c
01
~
~I I ~U ~I I ~:
I ~I I ~I
"'I "'I
'[
, '
/
/
/
/
,
/ '
/
I
/
,/
,/
/
/
/
/
/
,
I
J. Q. ~ ~6 1]
o
ci ~
~ ~
. .
~. ~
. ~
~ w
~ .:.
~
~~~
.1 II g
1I ""'g
~
60'i.H 13.9 '00 "l;;;(}TU' jd^
\
"
1
, ,
, I
"
. - 12'9v6 13 ~ OO'OO+'H'ldA
?
'n ..
. \1)1'"1'>
011 g
o
~ /
/
/
. 60"l't'j/13
,/
/
/
/
J
,
"
) .
.1
/ ,
,/
. \.:--"
.ao '9<;;6
?~'o<;;+tn'~d~ .
mflillWI~
o
o ~
..; ";
.~ ...
~ .
- ~
:;:: ~
~ -
"
3: >
2L"6f6
06 "6~6
99"C,o 2
fi9"1176
'9 ~ 0 ~ ,,'f.
SL"O€'
'Sa "Sit.
817 "S:>6
'f~ "?;o'6
6:>" H6
'9:'h-6
l!i'Lt>6
-"q"~ t't.
. lei '9176
\"~ 'g;o'G.
lO "9:>6
1 ~ '~:_;
0:> "9,6
\":1 "911'6
9, '9...6
2'; '9:6 In
9~ '1:>6 ....
~q 0 ~ ,.:5
280lS6
~q" ~ ::6
~6 "9<;;6
;a ot,"'t.
900 LS6
~q '~<;:6
IL "tSe.
~~ 0'<;;';;
lL'ZSEi
"60 "Z5"O
9 t 0 ~~;s
bd "~~;o
Scj'9S';-
bO'll-;;
~i" LS6
~.o._"5C;;5
LS "9';6
'"
N
'"
~I
'"
OJ t-
al
Cl.l :3
> Ol
+:: i.L
ctl
c:
'-
Cl.l
~
<(
;::
>.
"C
:::s
-
en
5~
"w ~
C::<I>
.sc
>< c
w.-
<1>:2;
:::Sa>
c:: ..:.::
<I> ..,
>....J
<:(.....
<1>.2
u .....
a;~
Eo
gE
<...> <...>
..,60"10-6.>> \"'OId\PO}\?}ogrj~';;: ,~"..~~';::j ..~;~
\1/1 _ '" "":: - -=- ~ -=-= =
~~~--=-=--=
<.q:
o AVMH81H >lNmU-~-
~
I
II
'"
"
I
<J:
U)
U
..
I: r;1 C'
I: [I l I
\'
l --
, _ . _'.' 0
1
J r
1:
I,
I'
I'
xx 03SOl::l xx
I T --
r
O'l -- '
'e:
e:
co
E
(1)
~
<:'J,
to,
t* L
----
--,
-
tJ)
(1)
L..
c' (.)
'<(
,M
!~
-
LL.
0",
(/)
, 0
-- N
0)
II
"
1>
I ~~Ij
'" c
r-J"~'I'
~(Jr:C 1 ~ '
I ~:i.p~~il: I
If=---=
L _
:;:,
c
:~~;~: (~, cor' C
I
o'l'
"
J
c
C'
(C
r
\
I
i (
pi
00
E
:J
~:g
l2
I~
. 0
U
\.
"
\
\.
'-
\
\'2
c
:;: ,
.~ I
WI
:0,
3!_ _
~r
I
I
\f~ J
,-
w
>
~
z.
0::;
-WI
t-" !
'-' I
-;: l
I l
1
1r,
\1,
\
/~
i
I
r
\,
i 1
:---1
It,
\
I
V
'-. .......~
I
I
[ 1
"'
"'
'"
0'
"'I
"'I
I ~,Ll ~lllil1~LI~_
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
1
o
'ci ~
.! i
o
ci:~
~:~
::.;j .
~:~
2L "6iG
05 "GiG
99'Ot>6 2
89 'J t76
"9 ~ . ~ ':0
St'tt76
~q .~':b
H"!:it76
'l ~ '~"o
OC;' HE,
1~ '.?'5
l.S'Lt>6
,,'9., I
[6 "St7Ei
De'S,.'5
1.J '9t:>6
90 '~:r'c
t L '9~6
H' . to,'!:.
~ L '';;t:>5
9:1 .t,"o ::;
l7L'vt:>6
~~.~ ':0
8L' ~t>6
~~.~ ':6
96 'St>6
1.;g',:;.o5
l6 "S,O
s~ '?,:e.
61. . 8 ~6
~~ .~~:~
60 "8,6
?g. ~ ':6
S8.976
?~. ~!:o
57 'OS6
: ?~. o,'b
90 ''<:S6
?~ .~s~c
9S"t>S6
?~. .1;':6 c
ZL'ISE. ~
mllf~T ~
~9:~t>?
8'3'1>1>6,13
. ~
~ ~
._'~ g;
.~ 0;
'7:'1 ~.
:: ,,~.
I' ~ ri';;'~~~~-
I ' 'f!
r
I q;~ J
:i'~~f-"~
i: i'
: , I
" I I
~ / )~
i- ! II
(0 tJ /:
((.
~
o
I~
Il
"I J
\- \.---1 .t; \ ! ~ Ii
,~. - - -133tJ1S StJ381ntJ -"-~..'..::
, \ 0 I I I
'~-i-io
I, 0 r
':, r I
, I
\
I>~ '9t76 13
OO'OO-;-L l :)dA
%:ne. 13
OO'SZ-+S'l :ldrl.'
\i1 ~
.~ ~ >
II g
'x 0
" '"
"
;
';
~'~;t>t76' n;
, I
'I' .
, '
1
I
I
1
,I
,I
,I
,\
I
\
. bo 'SL~{~ :Jdrl.:
u Q)
Cll ~
::J
> OJ
:;::; i.i:
C'll
c
....
Cll
:::
<(
e
e
>-
"'C
=:J
U5
g n>
~Ui (5
c:U)
Q)Q)
_ c:
>< c:
w--
Q)::2!;
~~
Q)n>
>....J
<C.....
Q) 0
u--=:
;Ua..
Eo
!3~
uu
e
u6p'r;o-OH\UO'<J\POJ\l!;'OO,'/O\:~ ;awoU8~~ 8<;.\1
'OO~/O!/l :P"j.UjJa 8,00
e
e
e
l~i bLJ ~I_l ~! J ~l I ~I
~ ~~--~~--- :
,~~~VM~~~ '""",C~ ~ . .;= cJ ~;
11'
II:
II
I:
T:----- -S:--=
r~-I~,
~'r
l.
I.J
t ~ -
N
'<t
I
<
(f)
U
L )
--l
..
\,
\\1
,
I
. .'
=,
.5,
~l
=,
~I
.J
g,
u,
.(-~
II
\~
"...0(;00
-~/
I:
r
xx 03S0lCl XX
,~ T
t t).::f
Q)
0::
c,
'~::t:
-
(/)
Q)
l-
t,)
<
o
M
-
/'
----
--1
(II "-
1-
<
~
I
.-1
IJ
",'J>
E
::l
~1, \~_
~ : 1~
z '0
~ 18
W I I
~ ~
I
~
[,II
I
II
"
'i \1 \,~r
-'~!1 ~ \_ o.
~ .. ~)
7--'---133tJ1S stJ381ntJ -.-.------'___
'.-' 'J I ! I I
'\r.-. ; I [I" ) 1 \.
:< .I' ,)1 l
...... "
~ !:XlI'
I ..~ 1
_ S I,
[.
<;9'2:>6
,
1
1
1
I
I
I
1
I
1
'I
1
1
,
,
','
"
,
"
.!.S't7:>6,13
0,
ci ~ u1 U
~- ~ ~ ~ ::
~,rr> "11 0
~ Lti .11.,,: ~
(/), ...... ~,
~
~ >
2,' Be .13 00 'SO-"lI ~d^
\
"
I
I
1
/
\
\
I
1
\
\
\
\
I
\
'\
I
I
'('
/
\ ,
\
\
/
. O~ .i\lo~}.....-.....
"/' .
\
\
~ :;:; \
" .g
o
. ~
~ ~O'~2+21 .ld^
o 0 ,
o 0
:~ ~
:;: .:;
~. -
~
:~ >
.V
o
'I
~ ' 00'''+01 ,'^
lllTf ~lTir I
2 t . 6~E.
06 'o~5
a
99'0;>6 '"
19 '\1>6
9 \ '~~.5
S:"r,6
SO'SI>6
:U-'Sv'o
OS'9!>.';
B:>'D5
J. l . ~ \>.0
LS'L:>6
6'J'!I>.c
16'9:>6
6'3 '0:,.6
60 '976
eZ'9,6
"2.t:'St>O
63 'S'6
11'<;::>6
ell'SPi, u1
9g '\1,6
f.:J"S'.6
zr'r,.;
0:1 '".c
91;',,5
C~'Ho
tlc"fI/S
ce. "I: ~.5
t>.L "S70
0; "1:\16
<;;e.{76
9 t .~?f,
S9.875
~ z . ~ 11.0
1 ~. ~!16
S... 'r,_:::
<;~. 276
O_''''t.
St: "c,5
0.:. .'l>.t. ;:
96 "9~6
:;::1
,"'
Cl
C1l
>
+::
ca
t:
...
C1l
:!:::
<t:
(J)
~
::J
0)
u::
>-
"'C
~
U5
25m
~u; (5
c: U>
QJ QJ
__ c:
>< c:
W.-
QJ~
~ ~~
QJ m
>-1
<(.....
~.g
..... a..
Eo
~L~
uu
,,6p'60.tJl~ I"O!dIPO)IZ'O.OCI/OI:;J
tOOc/6/i
''',",OI.>8L'-' B~.~
'P"n"IJd 9''''0
Current Circumstances
WSB & Associates has completed the Feasibility Study and City staff has
reviewed potential options with County staff for inclusion in the report. It should
be noted that the residents who own properties in the Commerce, Timothy and
Rutgers area and are potentially impacted by this project are very eager to get a
direction from the City Council. The unknown potential of the extension puts
these property owners in an difficult position and staff believes it is responsible to
provide answers and resolution to their questions in an expedited manner.
Four potential alternatives were examined in the study. Those alternatives are
identified as:
A) "Do Nothing" or no frontage road connection
B) Northern frontage road alignment
C) Middle frontage road alignment
D) Southern frontage road alignment
The attached maps illustrate each alternative. For each of the evaluated
alternatives staff reviewed the following criteria:
. Frontage road value to the transportation network, traffic operations and
functionality
. Impacts to the existing neighborhood, potential for mitigation of
neighborhood impacts
. Redevelopment potential
. Cost
ISSUES:
Alternative A - "Do Nothing"
Under this option Commerce would remain as is. The only roadway changes
would be the widening of CR 42 and the elimination of the left turn in to
Commerce from westbound CR 42.
Functionalitv
The access of Commerce Avenue to CR 42 would be limited to right-in/right-out
movements as the County will be closing the median and the current left-in
movement as part of the project. Vehicles wishing to exit onto 42 from
Commerce Avenue and travel north on TH 13 will need to cross three lanes of
traffic in a short distance making that movement difficult.
The current Commerce Avenue connection has very limited use based on traffic
counts and therefore this option would very minimally impact existing traffic
patterns. Unless redevelopment in the area occurs future traffic patterns are also
minimally impacted.
Neiahborhood Imoacts
This is the least intrusive alternative to the neighborhood as it does not require
additional right-of-way or property acquisition.
R:\CouncillAgenda Reports\2007\07 16 07\Commerce agenda,doc
Redevelopment Potential
After widening CR 42 the remaining parcel is not wide enough for commercial
development. Additionally the County has indicated they would most likely
remove the houses and not resell the property for residential use.
Cost
The City's potential cost share for the original acquisition of the five parcels could
be as much as $600,000 which is 50% of the total acquisition cost. Most likely
the City would reimburse the County through the project Cooperative Agreement.
As part of that agreement the title of the properties would be clarified as the City
would own 50% of the acquired land.
Alternative B - Northern Frontage Road
Under this option Commerce Avenue is extended to Rutgers Street along the
southerly lot lines of the lots acquired along CR 42 by the County. Construction
of the roadway will require acquisition of a parcel along Timothy for roadway and
stormwater facility construction. The existing Commerce Avenue access at CR
42 would be closed.
Functionalitv
This alternative addresses issues related to the right-in/out in Alternative A and
creates better access to Commerce Avenue and the existing commercial
properties. However, the short stacking distance available to this alternative on
Rutgers Street does not make it desirable. This option could have a negative
impact on safety and operation of Rutgers Street and CR 42 due to the lack of
vehicle stacking storage.
Neiahborhood Impacts
This option does require the acquisition of one parcel. It does result in placement
of a new roadway adjacent to three existing lots. It also results in additional
headlight impacts to existing houses from commercial traffic.
Privacy fences or landscaping could be used to buffer some of these impacts.
Redevelopment Potential
The remaining lot area is not wide enough to redevelop into either commercial or
residential lots.
Cost
The City's potential cost share for the original acquisition of the five parcels and
the frontage road construction is estimated to be $1,300,000.
Alternative C - Middle Frontage Road
This option would extend Commerce Avenue to Rutgers Street as with Alternative
B above except that the alignment is moved further south so that a 2.3 acre
parcel would remain which would have commercial redevelopment potential. This
alternative provides adequate vehicle stacking to ensure proper function of the
CR 42 and Rutgers Street intersection.
R:\CouncillAgenda Reports\2007\07 16 07\Commerce agenda,doc
Functionalitv
This alternative addresses the concerns noted in alternatives A and B.
Neiahborhood Imoacts
This option requires the acquisition of three additional properties along with
easements from two other properties. Owners of two of the three properties
identified for acquisition have expressed an interest in selling to the County or
City. The new frontage road and potential commercial redevelopment would
impact the neighborhood as traffic volumes would increase. Additional headlight
impacts would also affect neighboring residents.
Privacy fences or landscaping could be used to buffer some of these impacts.
Redeve/ooment Potential
This option would provide a 2.5 acre lot on CR 42 that could be redeveloped as a
strip commercial property similar to that further east along Commerce or as office
condos. This property is currently zoned Single Family Residential and is guided
as low density residential in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan. Redevelopment as
commercial property would require a Comprehensive Plan Amendment.
The property could also be redeveloped as residential property with up to five
single family lots backing up to CR 42. This option would eliminate some of the
commercial impacts to the neighborhood area.
Cost
The City's potential cost share for the original acquisition of the five parcels,
frontage road construction and crediting the potential redevelopment as
commercial property is estimated to be $1,025,000. No estimate of potential tax
generation has been included in this study.
Alternative D - Southern Frontage Road
This option would extend Commerce Avenue to Rutgers Street as with Alternative
C above except that the alignment is moved further south so that a 3.0 acre
parcel would remain which would have commercial redevelopment potential.
This option provides even greater vehicle stacking than Alternative C.
Functionalitv
This alternative addresses the concerns noted in alternatives A and B.
Neiahborhood Imoacts
This option requires the acquisition of four additional properties along with part of
a fifth. Two of the four properties identified for acquisition have expressed an
interest in selling to the County. The new frontage road and potential commercial
redevelopment would impact the neighborhood as traffic volumes would increase.
Additional headlight impacts would also affect neighboring residents.
Privacy fences or landscaping could be used to buffer some of these impacts.
Redevelooment Potential
This option would provide a three-acre lot on CR 42 that could be redeveloped as
R:\CouncillAgenda Reports\2007\07 16 07\Commerce agenda,doc
a strip commercial property similar to that further east along Commerce, office
condos or as a professional building. This property is currently zoned Single
Family Residential and is guided as low density residential in the 2030
Comprehensive Plan. Redevelopment as commercial property would require a
Comprehensive Plan Amendment.
Cost
The City's potential cost share for the original acquisition of the five parcels,
frontage road construction and crediting the potential redevelopment as
commercial property is estimated to be $1,087,000. No estimate of potential tax
generation has been included in this study.
Recommendation
The City has not budgeted any additional funding for this project. The funding for
alternative A is available in the current CIP. Unless additional funding is
identified, Alternative A is the only viable option for the City at this time. Staff
does not believe Alternative B should be considered as it creates negative
impacts on the roadway system. Should the Council wish to pursue Alternatives
C or D, a minimum of $750,000 needs to be identified in the CIP. This funding
would be required for the advance acquisition of parcels.
FINANCIAL
IMPACT:
Alternative A is currently programmed in the City's CIP for this project. This
alternative preserves the land and allows the City time to determine long-range
redevelopment plans for the larger area while addressing the immediate
neighborhood concerns.
Pursuit of other alternatives will require additional funding. Based on the current
CIP the City's State Aid account will have no additional funding available. The
use of the Street Oversize fund for either of the redevelopment options will be
very limited.
Because this improvement is not scheduled until 2011 the Council could elect to
set aside funding over the next three years as part of the operating budget and
work with the County to pursue those options. The City Council should also
consider that there are several unfunded roadway projects that may warrant more
serious consideration. These include CR 21 from Wagon Bridge to TH 13 and
the Main Avenue, TH 13 / CR 44 Intersection and the TH 13/150th Street
intersection currently being studied.
ALTERNATIVES: The alternatives are as follows:
1. Adopt a resolution directing staff to pursue alternative A.
2. Provide staff with direction regarding the pursuit of alternatives C or D.
3. Deny this item for a specific reason and provide Staff with direction.
4. Table this item until some date in the future.
RECOMMENDED Alternative 1
MOTION:
4646 Dakota Street S.E.
Prior Lake, MN 55372-1714
RESOLUTION 07 -xx
A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE COMMERCE AVENUE FEASIBLlTY STUDY
Motion By:
Second By:
WHEREAS, The CR 42 Improvements between Greenway Avenue and Quebec Avenue are needed
to address safety and capacity issues resulting from growth; and
WHEREAS, Prior to proceeding with the final corridor design it is necessary that the City compete a
frontage road study between Rutgers Street and Commerce Avenue; and
WHEREAS, The City has completed a feasibility study and evaluated alternatives for the extension
of Commerce Avenue; and
WHEREAS, The City believes that the no-build alternative "A" provides the best long flexibility for
the City regarding potential redevelopment and addresses the neighborhoods concerns
at this time.
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. City Staff is directed to notify the County of the City Councils decision.
PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS 16TH DAY OF JULY 2007.
Hauaen Hauaen
Erickson Erickson
Hedberg Hedbera
LeMair LeMair
Millar Millar
YES
NO
Frank Boyles, City Manager
R:\Council\Agenda Reports\2007\07 16 07\Commerce resolution.doc
www.cityofpriorlake.com
Phone 952.447.9800 / Fax 952.447.4245