The URL can be used to link to this page

9. Livable Communities Act: Action Plan.1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 CITY OF 9 CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager FROM: Kate Aanenson, AICP, Planning Director DATE: June 20, 1996 SUBJ: Livable Communities Act - Housing Action Plan Please find attached a draft of the city's Housing Action Plan. This is the third component of the city's participation in the Livable Communities Act. The City Council should review and make any recommendations to the plan so that the plan can be forwarded to the Metropolitan Council at the end of the month. CITY OF CHANHASSEN HOUSING ACTION PLAN LIVABLE COMMUNITIES ACT ' Background As part of the city of Chanhassen's agreement to participate in the Livable Communities Act, ' the City must submit to the Metropolitan Council the action plan the city will initiate to meet the established housing goals. In November of 1995 the City Council agreed to participate in the ' Livable Communities Act and in December of 1995 adopted housing goals. Housing Element of the Comprehensive Plan ' In 1991, the Metropolitan Council approved an amendment to the City's Comprehensive Plan. A component of the Comprehensive Plan is the Housing Element. The Goals and Policies that were adopted in 1991 are still relevant to today's housing strategies. ' Goal To provide housing opportunities for all residents, ' consistent with the identified community development goal. ' Policies Existing housing within the city should be ' maintained and improved and revitalization of older developed areas should be encouraged. ' The city of Chanhassen will attempt to provide adequate land for projected housing growth and to provide opportunities for ' persons of a range of incomes. As state and federal funding permits, efforts should be ' made to provide low and moderate housing where needed, to provide balance to the generally higher cost of housing. New construction programs may provide a source of such housing. ' Plans and ordinances for the City of Chanhassen should ensure that adequate amounts of land are designated to ' accommodated projected residential growth. The city should promote the use of state and federal ' programs designed to reduce land costs for developers of low and moderate income housing. The ci ty of Chanhassen will cooperate with other governmental units and public agencies to streamline, simplify and coordinate the reviews required for residential development to ' u ' Housing Action Plan Page 2 ' avoid inflating the cost of housing due to unnecessary delays in the review process. ' Subsidized housing should be given equal site and planning considerations to non - subsidized housing units and should not be ' placed in interior locations or in areas that are not provided with necessary urban services. ' If demand becomes apparent, the city will promote the construction of senior citizen housing in locations convenient to shopping and medical services. ' The development of alternative types of housing such as patio homes, townhouses, and quadplexes should be permitted to ' supplement conventional single- family homes and apartments providing that they are compatible with appropriate land uses practices and are representative of high quality development. ' New residential development should be discouraged from encroaching upon vital natural resources or physical features that ' perform essential protection functions in their natural state. ' Housing developments such as PUD's , cluster development and innovative site plans and building types should be encouraged to help conserve energy and resources used for ' housing. Property and code enforcement policies which encourage maintenance and rehabilitation of both owner occupied and rental housing should be encouraged. ' The city should continue to ensure non - discrimination in sale and rental of housing units. ' Citizen participation in developing plans and implementing housing programs is encouraged in redevelopment, rehabilitation and in planning for future housing. Housing Action Plan Page 3 On December 11, 1995, the City Council adopted the following Housing Goals. Current Trends In 1995, more non - single family residential permits were issued than detached single family permits. Of the residential land area in the MUSA, a large portion is guided for medium or high density development. The city has worked with Carver County to provide a 65 unit Senior Housing project with 39 units in the rental affordable range. The City's HRA has approved the creation of a tax increment district to provide assistance to 35 of 76 single family detached units. Price ranges for 35 units will be from $105,00 to $115,000. Through growth and natural maturation, the city is experiencing housing diversity. Action Plan Proposal The city will continue to uphold the housing goals and policies of the comprehensive plan. In addition, the city will pursue other resources of providing life -cycle and affordable housing. Following is the proposed action plan. Currently, the city is also pursuing a clustering project with Southwest Metro, Eden Prairie and Chaska. This project would be a mixed use development with a transit component (park and ride facility). The city is also working on a 60 acre mixed use project that also has a transit component with commercial, office, institutional with residential integrated into the development. Both projects have a strong mass transit component. City Ordinances The following actions are possible actions the city should undertake to pursue life -cycle affordable housing. • Promote Life cycle compatible with existing housing. • Review city ordinance regulations especially the PUD ordinance and lot size /zero lot and design standard including street widths. • Pursue the upper limits of zoning on new proposals where there is a density range. • Require a percentage of medium and high density to have a number of affordable units. f 7 i 7 r L f City Index Benchmark Goal Affordability Ownership 37% 60 -69% 50% Rental 44% 35 -37% 35% Life -Cycle Type (not S.F.) 19% 35 -37% 34% 1991 comp plan Owner/Renter Mix 85/15% 67- 75/25 -33% 80/20 Density S.F. Detached 1.5 /acre 1.8 -1.9% 1.8 Multifamily 11 /acre 10 -14 acre 9 -10 Current Trends In 1995, more non - single family residential permits were issued than detached single family permits. Of the residential land area in the MUSA, a large portion is guided for medium or high density development. The city has worked with Carver County to provide a 65 unit Senior Housing project with 39 units in the rental affordable range. The City's HRA has approved the creation of a tax increment district to provide assistance to 35 of 76 single family detached units. Price ranges for 35 units will be from $105,00 to $115,000. Through growth and natural maturation, the city is experiencing housing diversity. Action Plan Proposal The city will continue to uphold the housing goals and policies of the comprehensive plan. In addition, the city will pursue other resources of providing life -cycle and affordable housing. Following is the proposed action plan. Currently, the city is also pursuing a clustering project with Southwest Metro, Eden Prairie and Chaska. This project would be a mixed use development with a transit component (park and ride facility). The city is also working on a 60 acre mixed use project that also has a transit component with commercial, office, institutional with residential integrated into the development. Both projects have a strong mass transit component. City Ordinances The following actions are possible actions the city should undertake to pursue life -cycle affordable housing. • Promote Life cycle compatible with existing housing. • Review city ordinance regulations especially the PUD ordinance and lot size /zero lot and design standard including street widths. • Pursue the upper limits of zoning on new proposals where there is a density range. • Require a percentage of medium and high density to have a number of affordable units. f 7 i 7 r L f Housing Action Plan Page 4 • Provide for mixed use projects with a transit component. I City HRA J The city, through the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, will explore all avenues for financing affordable housing, including tax- exempt and tax - increment financing. Carver County HRA L Development, Affordable Financing, Down Payment Assistance, Home Buyer Education and Foreclosure Prevention The HRA has the experience to develop affordable single family housing and is prepared to offer all cities in Carver County its expertise and assistance. The HRA offers first time home buyer funding through participating lenders in Carver County. The program is funded by mortgage revenue bonds from the HRA's bonding allocation. The HRA offers home buyer education and certification to all Carver County residents. The HRA offers foreclosure prevention counseling and financial assistance to all Carver County residents. Homeowner Rehabilitation The HRA currently administers the following programs in Carver County: MHFA Fix -Up Fund Maximum gross income $41,000, Maximum loan amount $15,000, 15 yr. Term, Interest rate 2 -8 %, Credit and repayment ability analyzed. ' MHFA Accessibility Improvement Loans Maximum income: no limit, Maximum loan amount $25,000, 20 yr. Term, Interest rate 8 %, Accessibility improvements only. ' MHFA Home Energy Loans Maximum income: no limit, Maximum loan amount $5,000, ' 5 yr. Term, Interest rate 8 %, Energy improvements only. MHFA Mobile Home Loans ' Maximum income: no limit, Maximum loan amount $5,000, 5 yr. Term, Interest rate 8 %, Energy improvements only. w Housing Action Plan Page 5 MHFA 3% Revolving Rehabilitation Loans Maximum income: $18,000 adj., Maximum loan amount $10,000, 15 yr. Term, Interest rate 3 %, repayment ability (not credit) analyzed. MHFA Deferred Loans Maximum income: $10,000 adj., Maximum loan amount $10,000, Interest rate 0 %, Deferred 10 year loan. MHFA Deferred Accessibility Loans Maximum income: $18,000 adj., Maximum loan amount $10,000, Interest rate 0 %, Deferred 10 year loan, Accessibility improvements only. Carver County HRA Home Improvement Loans Maximum income: no limit, Maximum loan amount $5,000, Interest rate 3 -9 %, Term to commensurate with repayment ability. RENTAL HOUSING L New Construction The Carver County HRA assisted in the formation of the Carver County Housing Development Corporation, a non - profit entity with the ability to partner with private developers to create affordable housing projects and developments. Anticipated Action: The HRA, in conjunction with the City of Chanhassen, will explore the feasibility and funding opportunities available for housing development upon the city's request. II Tenant Based Subsidy Section 8 Rent Assistance Program Metropolitan Council HRA MHFA Rental Assistance for Family Stabilization (RAFS) Carver County Transitional Housing Carver County HRA Rental Inventory Rental Rehabilitation Grants and Loans C r Housing Action Plan Page 6 ' CDBG ' Carver County is completing Housing Condition Study. The city will pursue using CDBG funds from Hennepin County to make housing rehabilitation loans. The city will pursue CDBG funding for acquisition and related infrastructure for multi- family projects. ' Minnesota Housing Finance Agency The city will pursue programs, including grants, loans and federal tax credits, for housing assistance development and rehabilitation including the following programs: • • • • • • • Minnesota Mortgage Program Homeownership Assistance Fund Purchase Plus Program Partnership for Affordable Housing Entry Cost Homeownership Program (ECHO) Low Income Housing Tax Credit Program New Construction Tax Credit Mortgage/Builders Loans Low and Moderate Income Rental Program Deferred Loan Program Revolving Loan Program Great Minnesota Fix -up Fund Mortgage Revenue Bonds Mortgage Credit Certificates (MCC's) Action Responsibility Review City ordinances Explore all options for a variety of affordable housing opportunities Educate developers and ' residents about life -cycle housing ' Cooperate with other governmental units in providing housing ' opportunities City staff, Planning Commission and City Council City staff, Planning Commission and City Council City staff, Planning Commission, City Council and HRA Southwest Metro, Carver County HRA Funding None CDBG, City HRA, Carver County HRA, Metropolitan Council, MN Housing Finance None Carver County HRA, Metropolitan Council, MN Housing Finance Housing Action Plan Page 7 I Property and code City staff enforcement or maintenance and rehabilitation of housing City HRA, Carver County HRA, CDBG ' Look for opportunities for City staff, Planning City HRA, Carver County ' mixed use developments with Commission and City Council HRA, Metropolitan Council, mass transit component MN Housing Finance VIII. SOCIAL, ECONOMIC, AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS This project has been reviewed for its potential effects and impacts. Information is presented for those concerns which merit individual discussion. If no information is presented, the concerns have been considered relative to the appropriate laws, executive orders, rules and regulations, and no potentially significant permanent adverse impacts were found. A complete list of such laws, executive orders, rules and regulations can be found listed in the Project Manager's handbook under "impacts," by specific subject. Q uestions Degree of impact Issue ... will the project yes I no I ? I Impact description or Access Control change access to properties (close, X See § IX. G. change location, make one-way, etc.)? Air Quality affect air quality? X Bicycles & affect bicycle and/or pedestrian X Pedestrians movement? Construction Impacts cause construction impacts? (erosion, X See § IX. A. noise, air, vibration, etc.? Critical Areas be in the Mississippi River critical X area? Economics affect business activity or have other X economic impacts? Endangered Species affect any endangered species due to X See § IX. B. p roject location and design? Energy Impacts have major energy implications? X Erosion involve major soil disturbance (depth or volume) or have erosion potential X See § IX. C. due to landform, wind patterns or water volume? Excess Material involve disposal of excess materials X See § IX. D. outside planned construction limits? Farmlands require any right of way? X See IX. G. Floodplains cross or lie adjacent to any floodplain X See § IX. E. area? R 44 0 Issue .... will the project De •ee of impact yes I no I ? I Impact description or Groundwater affect groundwater, geology or cause X Geology, Earthborne earthborne vibration? Vibration Handicapped affect sidewalk or curb and gutter X ( design for)? Hazardous Material involve a bridge replacement over X water, former disposal/storage sites, or hazardous materials route? Historical affect any historical, archaeological or X See § IX. F. Archaeological cultural site? Cultural Land Use be inconsistent with local & regional X land use plans? Noise affect noise sensitive receptors? X Parks, Recreation 4(f) use any significant public park, Reconstruction 6(f) recreation or wildlife or waterfowl X ( LAWCON) refuges, or any historical site? Will the project affect any LAWCON land? Right of Way require any right of way? (or X See § IX. G. easements Relocation require any relocations of homes or X businesses? Stream Modification change the course, current or cross X section of any stream? Social affect public safety (i.e. police or fire X p rotection)? affect sensitive groups? (children, X handicapped, minorities, poor, etc. affect accessibility to schools, X churches, recreation facilities, etc.? affect community cohesion? X Controversy is the project controversial or likely to X cause controversy? 7 i uestions De ee of impact Issue ... w1U the project yes no ? I Impact description or Traffic correct capacity deficiencies? Is there X See § IX. H. a detour or major traffic delay? X Transit affect transit routes? X See § IX. I. Vegetation & Wildlife affect vegetation, fish or wildlife? X See § IX. J. Visual Quality affect visual qualities? (view to or from X facili Water Quality affect water quality of lakes, streams, X wetlands, etc.? Wetlands are wetlands present within X See § IX. J. construction limits? will project destroy or improve /create X See § IX. J. wetland habitat? Wild & Scenic Rivers: affect a state or federal wild & scenic Canoe & Boating river, federal candidate wild & scenic X Rivers river or state canoe and boating river? N. IX. WrIGATION OF ADVERSE EMPACTS a C: N E: Construction Related impacts such as dust, erosion, and noise have been considered. No unique concerns have been discovered, and standard noise, dust and erosion control specifications, in addition to local ordinances, will be followed. No detours are necessary during construction. No excess materials disposal or borrow site problems are anticipated. Endangered Species Although the project is within the wintering range of the bald eagle ( as outlined in the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Biologist Service Red Book) the Mn /DOT Wildlife Biologist has determined that the location and design of the project is such that it will have no adverse affect on the species Erosion and Ground Cover This project will result in some potential for erosion since ground cover will be disturbed. Erosion control measures will be undertaken in accordance with Mn /DOT standard specifications 1803.5, 2573 and special provisions. Less than 5 acres will be disturbed. All disturbed areas will be reseeded or sodded. Excess Material The project will not require the disposal of excess material outside of the construction limits. No disposal of excess material will occur in wetlands, floodplains, or other sensitive areas. Floodplains This project lies adjacent to the Minnesota River floodplain. Fill will be placed on the South side of T.H. 212. The project was discussed with Larry Samstead of the Lower Minnesota River watershed. It was determined that although some of the fill was being placed below the "warning zone" level of 726.5 ft, none of it was below the 723.5 ft. floodway elevation. The watershed district engineer has determined that no mitigation will be necessary. J J r r 9 � n L� F: Historical, Archaeological, Cultural The proposed project is in the process of being reviewed by the SHPO for the possible historical - archaeological sensitivity. It is anticipated at this writing, December 19, 1995, that no historical, archaeological, or cultural sites will be affected; therefore, no mitigation is necessary. G: Right -of -Way The area to be acquired is within "Urbanized Area" on U.S. Census maps and is therefore exempt from Federal Farmland Protection Policy (FPPA). Necessary acquisitions and easements will be handled by Mn /DOT. In order to make the 1996 letting the owner will give Mn /DOT the right to construct before the land transfers are final. Mn/DOT regulations regarding acquisition will be observed: only necessary land will be acquired, and fair market value will be paid for it. It is anticipated that no more than 2132 m (0.53 acres) of permanent right -of -way will be acquired. The Right -of -way acquisition involves one parcel of land, all of which lies to the south of the right -of -way line between STA 4 +933 to STA 5 +530 on T.H. 212. At this time final construction limits have not been set. To ensure that this project goes on ' schedule the property owner is working with Mn /DOT's Right -of -Way section. A permit to construct will be requested for approximately 6456 m spread along the whole length ' of the job (600 in x 10.76 m), the excess will be turned back. Additionally, temporary easements of approximately 3900 m will be needed to relocate the new driveway directly south of T.H. 101 and remove the existing driveway. ' H: Traffic Mn /DOT will require the contractor to minimize the effect of this work on traffic by: staging the construction, using traffic control signs and cones conforming to MMUTCD standards, keeping to an absolute minimum the closing of access points to businesses and to side streets. Through traffic will be maintained during construction. I: Transit The Park- and -Ride Lot within the Tri-Wye will be graded surfaced and striped. This will make the lot more attractive to commuters, and therefore promote transit and ride sharing. 10 I J: Wetlands The construction area is adjacent to three areas of wetland. It is a mix of types 2 and 6. , The area that will be affected, a type 2 wetland area, lies on the south side of T.H. 212 between Bluff Creek Drive and T.H. 101. The type of soil is mostly alluvial (Al), with some marshy (Ma) soils on the eastern end. , A few examples of the type of vegetation found in this basin is: cattails (Typha), Giant Reed Grass (Phragmites Australis), Reed Canary Grass (Phalaris Aurundinacea), and ' Sandbar Willow (Salix Exigua). The primary function of this wetland is as a wild life habitat for deer muskrat and ' waterfowl. The groundwater function of this wetland has not been determined. Approximately 909 m (0.22 acres) of wetland will be impacted by the project. A Corps ' of Engineers Nationwide Permit, and a Wetland Conservation Act Exemption Certificate will be completed and kept on file, no DNR permit is needed. The wetland will be replaced by debiting the METRO Division account of the Mn /DOT Wetland bank. There is no , practical alternative to avoiding this wetland. The only other option would be to do nothing. To reduce the impact to the wetland side slopes of 1:3 will be used. For location of wetland to be taken see the layout in the appendix. I X. PUBLIC AND AGENCY INVOLVEMENT I The public will be informed of this project via news releases which will be sent to the appropriate , media. Signing will also be done prior to the project for public notification. No public hearing or opportunity for public hearing is required. This project is exempt from intergovern mental review in accordance with the Mn /DOT ' Memorandum of Understanding with the Metropolitan Council. Municipal approval will be obtained due to the fact that an access is being changed and right -of -way is being acquired. , The Signal Justification Report (SJR) is expected to be completed by February. A Corps of Engineers Nationwide Permit is anticipated for this project. No Department of Natural Resources I permits are necessary. This project has been approved by the ATP. The layout and project memorandum will be , transmitted to city and Central Office for review and approval. The proposed taking of right -of -way has been discussed with the land owner and the details are ' being worked out. 11 I M. LEVEL OF ACTION ' This project is a Federal Categorical Exclusion (Class II Action Category 23 CFR 771.117 (d) (1). It is also exempt from state environmental review in accordance with MR 4410.4600 subp. 14C. No further environmental documents will be prepared or circulated to the required state agencies ' for review and comment. However, this project does encroach wetlands, and additional right -of- way is required. These matters have been discussed and addressed in the mitigation section. I� d r 12 FINAL REPORT DISTRIBUTION CHECKLIST MN/DOT: Metro Detail Design ... ............................... 2 Construction .................................. Hydraulics .... ............................... 1 Traffic Engineering ............................. 1 State Aid ..... ............................... 1 Preliminary Design Project Manager ................... 1 File......... ............................... 1 C.O. District File ... ............................... * 2 or Public Hearing File ............................. Bridge (if bridge is involved) ....................... Traffic Engineering ............................. 1 (signals, lighting, signing, speed zones, pavement markings, work zone traffic control) EXTERNAL: Federal Highway Administration ..................... Corps of Engineers .............................. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service ....................... Minn. Dept. of Natural Resources .................... Minn. Polution Control Agency ...................... Minn. Dept of Agriculture ......................... Metropolitain Council ............................ Regional Development Commision .................... Carver County .. ............................... 1 City of Chanhassen .............................. 1 * Distributed By the Project Development Section, Central Office - others by Metro Division Pre- Design 13 Ll 1 r APPENDIX J J T.H. 212 TYPICAL SECTION LEA a." abc LS - u T.H. 212 PROPOSEO TYPICAL SECTION W /TURN LANES SKDR 36c �lTl2 16 SKM"n TRAFFIC DATA USTH 212 a 448A 873P c<- 5A aP USTH 212 a 189A 563P 34A 13P b 586A 268P b 808A 875P 326, 452A 418P 5 26p MN rH 101 DESIGN SPEED = 100 km /h PROJECT FUNDING SCREEN S ate Project 1: 1013 -63 Contract 1: Let Date: MAY -24 -1996 DPsc: AT TH 101 - SIGNAL & CHANNELIZATION Mkor Dist: METRO Hwy: 212 Work Type: SPOT IMPROVEMENT P se: FINAL DESIGN Program: SC Status: ACTIVE Total Estimated Cost: 405,000.00 Construction Cost only: 375,000.00 F'i AID Fed Fund Federal Date Estimated Amt/ Let Amount/ Cde Code Cde Refrnc Project Numbr MMYY Encumbered Amt Post Award Chgs 4 678219 315 E &C 0596 30,000.00 0.00 SAFETY -SC 0.00 0.00 04 678219 315 NH 012 - 2(068) 0596 300,000.00 0.00 SAFETY -SC 0.00 0.00 678219 315 SM 678219 0596 75,000.00 0.00 SAFETY -SC 0.00 0.00 PF --- ---------- --------------------------------------------------------------- ss ENTER to continue or ESCAPE(PA1) to return to menu ......................... ............................... Mn /DOT ARTEMIS ... ATE 10 -31 -95 METRO DIVISION PAGE Ile ACTIVITY REPORT BY HIGHWAY AND PROJECT NUMBER SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSYSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSJSi 233 SP: 1 -56 HWY: 212 COUNTY ,S SSSSSSSSSi7SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSYSSSSSSYSSSSSSSSS�YSYSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS�SSSSSSSSSJSS: CARVER L STATUS C : , ACTIVE C C ORG.LET DATE 2 -26 -93 CUR,LET-DATE 1 -26-9e ROGRAM: SC WORK_TYPE: SPOT IMPROVEMENT PROJ.MGR: ELLIS,G.C. /MURPHY,D. ORG.COST S 150,000 CUR S 450,00( I: 1.00 KM. ESCRIPTION o 1.61 BEG. RF. PNT.: 148 FROM-E.OF WALNUT AVE. THRU +00.107 CO.RD,17 END RF. PNT. 149 +00 PARCEL= 1 RELOCATION: CONTINUE:LEFT .TURN:LANE 0 R/W COST $ 75,000 UNDING DESIGNATORS: SF, UTE: CHARGE IDENTIFIER: F1 -53457 PRELIM DES BY DATE OF COST EST..CHANGE UNIT OF ERICKSON /GREEN - -RES ENG R.HOPPENRATH - -RW BY CITY MEASUREMENT .. P14SSACTVTY CODE CODE DESCRIPTION DUR. X REM. COMP DUR. CAN DO -EARLY EARLY MUST DO LATE LATE i ACTUAL 'ACTUAL — FINISH — START FINISH I FLOAT START COf1PLETE 040 DS091 070 P10051 DESIGN SURVEYS PROJECT MEMORANDUM 30 90 100 0 100 0 - - - - -- 10— 1 -94 — - - - -- - - - - -- — - - - -- 0 -- - - - - -- 10— 1 -94 140 GL051 FINAL GEOMETRIC LAYOUT 60 100 0.:,, ^:`' 4- 12 -95, 5 -27 -94 0 4 - 1?-95 180 SR131 SOILS SURVEY & LETTER 60 100 0 7 -22 -94 0 0 5 -27-94 181 SR291 SOILS REVIEW & APPROVAL 30. 100,, '' 0 8 -10 -94 0 T - 27 -94 7 -22 -94 8 -10 -94 200 CP071 PREL CONST PLN /CONST LIM 60 .100 0 =2 - 95 0 2 — 95 210 TM431 TITLE OPINIONS 60. 100. 0 5— 1 -95 0 220 R41031 R/W PACKAGE 120 75-+•,. 30 11— 1 -95 11 -30 -95 12— 2 -94 12 -31 -94 —334 5— —95 230 DP431 R/W PREACQUISITION 240 75 `t<60 12— 1 -95 1 -29 -96 1— 1 -95 3— 1 -95 —334 240 RA451 R/W ACQUISITION 270 0 270;••. 1 -30 -96 10 -25 -96 3— 2 -95 11 -26 -95 —334 XXCITY TO PURCHASE ABANDONED RR RW, MNDOT GET PERMIT TO'CONST.X)( 249 HDO22 FINAL HYDRAULICS DESIGN 90 100 0 •. 5— 1-95 0 5— —95 250 RP071 ROAD PLANS 90 100 0 3— 3 -95 0 3 — -95 290 AG531 AGREEMENTS — MUNICIPAL 45 100 0 4 - 30 - 95 4 - 30 - 95 300 PS331 P S & E 60 0 60 11 1 - 95 12 - 30 - 95 10 - 28 - 95 12 - 26 - 95 _4 3 A11551 LETTING 1 0 1 12 -25 -96 12 -25 -96 1 -26 -96 1 -26 -96 —334 ' SSSSSVSSSSSSSSSVSSSSSVSSSSSSSYSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS '34 SP: 10 -63 HW 212 COUNTY; CARVER ;,Sas�S STAT ACTIVE 2 -28 -96 SSVSSVSSSSVSSSVSSYSSSSYSSSYYSSSSSSYSSVSSSYSSSVSYVSSVVSSSSSSVSYSSSS c � c 6 c � ORG [. .LET 6 DATE C CUR.LET DATE 5 -24 -96 OGRAM: SC WORK TYPE; SPOT IMPROVEMENT PROJ.MGR; ERICKSON,R. /GREEN,E. ORG.COST $ 375,000 CUR.COST $ 375,000 0.00 KM.: SCRIPTION : 0.00 BEG. RF. PNT.' 151 +00.541 END RF, PNT.: PARCEL; 1 RELOCATION; AT TH 101 — SIGNAL & CHANNELIZATION , 0 R /1.1 COST $ 10,000 NDING DESIGNATORS: TE: CHARGE NH,SM, IDENTIFIER: F2 53796 - -FINAL DESIGN DATE OF COST EST, CHANGE: •UNIT OF BY SANDSTROM /CLARKOWSKI MEASUREMENT METRIC PMSSACTVTY REM. CAN DO EARLY EARLY MUST DO LATE LATE ACTUAL ACTUAL CODE CODE DESCRIPTION ----- - - - - -- DUR. - - -- COMP DUR. - - -- - - -- START FINISH ' START FINISH FLOAT START COMPLETE 040 DS091 DESIGN SU VEYS 30 •0 30 1— 1 -95 11 -30 -95 — 1 -25 -96 2 -23 -96 - - - -- - - - -- 85 -- - - - - -- 070 M0051 140 GLO51 PROJECT M MORANDUM FINAL GEO ETRIC LAYOUT 30 100 50 151— 100 0 1 -95 11 -15 -95 -95 12 -11 -95 12 -25 -95 40 5-15 -95 165 SJ111 SIGNAL JUSTIFICATION RPT 30 0 30 7 -19 11- 1 -95 11 -30 -95 1 -25 -96 2 -23 -96 0 3 -15 -95 85 7 -19 -95 180 SR131 SOILS SURVEY & LETTER 30 0 30 11— 1 -95 11 -30 -95 11— 1 -95 11 -30 -95 0 200 CP071 PREL CONST PLN /CONST LIM 60 410 =i' 60 1.1— 1 -95 12 -30 =95 3 — -95 •_4 -29 -95 —245 210 TM431 TITLE OPINIONS 30 0 30 11— 1 -95 11 -30 =95 3 -31 -95 4 -29 -95 —215 220 RI-1031 R /t•! PACKAGE 30 0 30 12 -31 -95 1 -29 -96 4 -30 -95 5 -29 -95 —245 230 DP431 R/W PREACQUISITION 120 0 120 1 -30 -96 5 -28 -96 5 -30 -95 9 -26 -95 —245 240 RA451 R/W ACQUISITION 180 0 180 5 -29 -96 11 -24 -96 9-•27 -95 3 -24 -96 —245 249 HD022 FINAL HYDRAULICS DESIGN 30 0 30 11— 1 -95 11 -30 -95 1 -25 -96 2 -23 -96 85 250 RP071 ROAD PLANS- 30 0 40xwe 30 12 -26 -95 *1-24 -96 -� 55 _1 Lazard Elimination Safety Benefit -Cost Calculation Fiscal Year XXXX 1 Control Section (C.S.) T.H. /Roadway 212 1 Location East and West Jct. TH101 Reference Poinds (R.P.) 1 State,County,City or Township Eden Prairie 1 A. Proposed Work New Signal and Channelization 1 B. Project Cost $425,000 C. Traffic Growth Factor ' 1.34 ' D. Capital Recovery I. Percent Interest ...6%... 2. Project Service Life (n) ...10...... 3. Capital Recovery Factor "" .1359 1 E Anticipated Accident Reduction 1. Property Damage (PDI ............ 48% 2. Personal Injury [PI) ...........45% 1 3. Fatal (F) ..... NA% k,..0 •:;.: .r.. . :. >•::::;,w:i':2- q'.;`..'>i;i;' y .... _.,..: <.:....:>.:...:... ; r... : ::... : >n.:. ».,>,. ,...n.�s'7>A» >. + .. >. - MG'• � ,<..`/..`Y.`:y:,. v::Y.•..::.v:: nv::: N: :v::::::: . 4. iY w.N- �.4v<.< 4WD:. �>!: niisY�: tw< n..: wyv::»: isii v., �. v.. Y. {- K: {Y.•Y.S /JY.r� /..:�v`.Y: . .AJ.\"- >:C:iNriB >�. ., �....p.,f.H , :i C wn/ ":... : ,....:. nF.,n::..... ..w:K<n.!W.M:; :w• »�' � . ..{ ., .....:::.. :.:. -. :. :. v. v: ♦. :: .: y.S` 4•:i'M + '�"Y J ' cw �'�)_,p 'f v'w vJa.vi . „ ": �. /�/. Qt�l}�• >: j�S :..' » ?: »Y..�+ >,>. :.. \. Cyv....':i.4i> 4:2�i j2: FI.:. �.i.. �.. >..M.Y�{�. i.,. X.7.St ::y:' 'O.� `^.t !�^t�. �i4T•:{L w.. c. c. ......... <.::: is > :..:.: ..............:..<.;. <:::. J. :.N. -: >S�n�m: ?.<y.x. Wce�xo: -.,< w °;C'4•:c>' >:v > r e qrf: y : >C. r.;.:. :.i;,.•:yo.;.�.: ��, �...;;...:. . % %i.. ; Mi } M ..;;.a...x y .» ...>xd.:>G`'��»» v M'/. � >Y�+fn 'CCC•OIOY> .vMVd^/.. y. .M.!.: •:. Y/L �i ��: '•Y,4: .i. T %�.v. 4 JMw':� Y � ..a:•i✓ '�'�: :` ♦ y >'` •'ZO'::.�•:i:4C:>l�'Y^.i >'�i�'� MK'v i�'� �� {l. � •::�. �Yik..l.. xxazwN:>».•>.. ysR!•: x• 4raw,:, rr.::.::...!: 5"•; S.'.hE�. »b.<3»::::.>..'v�:a:`2. ,..A<'at:.a?Z «" Type 1992 1993 1994 Total Acc. Type Total Acc. + Years = Avg. Acc. ' PD 5 7 8 20 PD 20 3.0 6.67 Pl 3 2 3 8 P/ 8 3.0 2.67 ,� W �3v$ ":� :. u< �. 9: y:.%? o:::.;; F::::::;>: :': ^i::i:i:.:::.v:::a:<. % t?::,:::':, � ;:.,'w.,:•:(:.:::iy: >::;::i »;; o , ci >:> Type Avg Acc CostM t Total($) Annual Cost (B x D,) $57757.50 PD P/ 6.67 2.67 2,000 26,500 1. 13340 2. 70755 1 J Annual Benefit= F 500,000 3. 1 Cx[(E,xH,) + (E + (E,xH,)J 1.34x[(.45x70755) + (.48x 13340) + (Ox0 /j = $51,245.55 Total :: >: ><::::<:; %:;:; "'':` "`'':::::'" "` % >' <.:: >: K SeneWcost / l = 0.89 1 _ • J Accident Rare 1.6 - Severity Rate 3.1 t Recommended Accident Costs PD = $ 2,000, PI = $ 26,500, F = $ 500,000 (As approved by FHWAI 1 Comments: 47% Total reduction expected. See irarric urowtn actor's Gnart Attacnec See FHWA recommended Service Life Criteria Attached Mn/D0T See Capital Recovery Factor's Chart Attached Traffic Engineering "'" See Formulas Attached December 28, 1993 �i rr �r r rr rr r rr r• r r it r r r r r r ACCIDENT SUMMARY W E FOR H.E.S. SUBMITTAL ' C.S. DATE r � 1l / gs T.H. ILI _'L TYPE & TIME OF SUMMARY . LOCATION: ltJ jrf T lDI GENERAL FROM I/I ? _ TO 1 2 1 1 112V_ R.P. SAFETY IMPROVEMENT CODE DESCRIP11ON NEWS/ -NHS 'f' 41ANI11ELI�Af /D/� X -ST ML X -ST ML t i 2 9 � � 5 I � 7 8 0 �6fiEDUCTION � _., PED 1 OTHER TOTAL EXPECTED 0. EXHIBIT D FATAL A PERSONAL a INJURY PI TOTAL I F + PI TOTAL I PROPERTY I TOTAL ALL wine ADT 19 19 19 AVG. /, 7So AVG. A.R. AVG. S.R. �•l 7n -- qs7 F /PI 713 gs7p -h7. e/4 �- �{ 87• —S17 0/5 NSS F /PI -g7. -h7. I�155 —S17 —Sl7 NSS -`IS% 437, 331 .% PD q �2QlA 4 , Z [o k Il�o �� 870 �� /i - 6170 .-58 to NS$ '6 -'3$7. REDUCTION 0 o COMMENTS: F e +7 +e ACCIDENT REDUCTION 7 -3� PI/ O I O "'� f. '" -I. x• --• �•�� EXPECTED F +PI �1� ab FEDERAL 51 N APPLICATION INSTRUCTIONS: Complete and return to Emnil =rant. Transporation Coordinator Transportation Advisory Board, Mears Park Centre, 230 E. Fitih Street. St. Paul, Minnesota 55101, pcstmarked no later than Aoril 1. 1994 (6 12) 291 -6347 1. GENERAL INFORMATION 1. APPLICANT: Minnesota Department of Transportation 4 2. JURISDICTIONAL AGENCY (IF DIFFERENT): State of Minnesota 3. MAILING ADDRESS: 1500 West County Road B 2 CITY: Roseville I STATE: MN ZIP CODE: 55113 4. COUNTY: Ramsey 5. CONTACT PERSON: Evan Green I TITLE: Project Manager PHONE: (612) 582 -1305 II. PROJECT INFORMATION 6. PROJECT NAME: T.H. 212 improvements 7 7. PROJECT DESCRIPTION (For example please provide Route, Termini, Length, Additional Through Lane Capacity) I TH 212 at Jct TH 101 and 169 at the Shakopee Wye, Carver County: 0 miles. Channelize and signalize the west junction of TH 101 and TH 212: and grade, pave, and stripe the park- and -ride lot at the Shakopee Wye. I, 8. PROJECT CBJECTIVE: To el iminate vehicle conflicts, increase of iciency and safety, promote mass transit 9. PROJECT CATEGORY - Checx me prciecrgruuPinq you wish yvurpraje t tcHoa bcor :n. SURFACE TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM (STP) Connector 'A' Minor Arteria!s ❑ Construction Reliever Augmentor ❑ Transportation System Management ❑ Transportation System Management ❑ Transportation Demand Management ❑Transportation Demand Management ❑ Construction ❑ Construction Expander ❑ Transportation System Management El Transit []Transportation Demand Management ® Principal Arterial ❑ Construction ❑ Bikeway ❑ Walkway ❑ Non - Standard Bikeway/Walkway Ill. PROJECT FUNDING 10. S 256,000.00 t 1. LOCAL S 64,000.00 12.707AL S 320.000.00 13. LOC 20 % I _ 14. LOCAL SC'J;C= ' 16. 7i7L= DAIS 'Wed 30 Mar , __ 1 40TE: Proposals must specifically and directly address each criterion to qualify and receive points. Pages in each proposal should be numbered with this page as number 1. Qualifying Criteria S.P. 1013 -63: T.H. 212 ' at T.H. 169 & 101 Principal Arterial 1. The proposed project is consistent with policies 1, 2. 11, 12, 13, 14. 17, and 18 of the Metropolitan Council's officially adopted Nletropolitan Development Guide, which includes the Transportation Policy Plan. These policies, in some detail, are the following: ' Policy #1 requires that a facility "...will be designed and constructed to support the region's Acconomic vitality and quality of life and provide for safe, efficient movement of people and goods through strong, effective, highway and transit components." T.H. 21 . currently a rw•o -lane undivided hip way, will be channelized and signalized at the intersection of T,H. 101, in order to provide safer and more efficient movement of people and goods in personal and commercial vehicles. The current T.H. 212 corridor is listed in ' the Guide as one of the highly congested corridors in 1992 -1993. Policy #2 requires that "...transit and ridesharing in the region must be streng hened to be more competitive with single- occupant automobiles." This project will grade and surface the park -and ride lot at the Shakopee Wye. This improvement, coordinated with the recent expansion of bus service by Southwest Metro Transit Company, will make the lot more attractive to. and more likely to be used by, commuters: therefore, transit ridership is confidently expected to increase. Policy '11 requires that ",Metropolitan highway system investments shall ensure ' preservation of existing facilities.... and, where appropriate, help correct environmental problems." These improvements to T.H. 212, T.H. 101. and the park- and -ride lot will be built totally on the current right -of -way, and alignment of the existing roadways. The improvements to the roads will help ensure saver traffic flow by reducing accidents. Policy #12 renuirezthat "the metronclitan highwa system and its supporting road ' system are built and designed to adequately serve traffic demand to the extent possible, to provide for the safety of users and to minimize negative impacts on the environment." The improvements to T.H. 212 Mill better serve existing and future traffic demand by increasing capacity and safety. The minimization of environmental impacts will be ' ensured by the procedures embodied in the project memorandum to be written for this project. Policy 7#13 requires that "Local comprehensive plans are required to be consistent with ' the Transportation Development Guide." The local plans were developed with the assumption that the new T.H. 212 corridor would be completed by this time. Funding delays, etc., have pushed completion dates of T.H. 212 to a point that officials of local communities are becoming worried that the local street system will reach capacity before the new T.H. 212 can relieve it. This situation is creating a need for projects (not previously planned) on the local system. These improvements are part of one of those ' projects. Policy 7#14 requires a project to answer the need for "...integrated planning for land use... "; "...to maximize the energy efficiency of the transportation system, and to avoid further degradation of air qualir:." The improvements to T.H. 212 will help maintain ade.quate Eiohwav access_ to the metro center from the southwestern metro area and ' points beyond. The improved design of the hrg„w•ay at the intersection of T.H. 101 will. again. reduce accidents. Policy x`17 requires a project. as part of the regional transportation system. to "...provide and promote the effective mowtment of goods to. from. and within the region and state...." T.H. 212 is still a major ;ink between the farmland in the southwestern part of Minnesota. is the only practical link between the Twin Cities and the communities of ' Glencoe. Olivia. and Granite Falls. and will he for some years to come. Prioritizing Criteria S.P. 1013 -63: T.H. 212 at T.H. 169 & 101 Principal Arterial Number of People Served ' 1. & 2. 3. Existing T.H. 212 is a bus route and has been for several years. Existing transit ridership is about 860 persons per day, half of that in each peak hour. The relevant ADT's and their growth rates in this project area are: ' Location the improvement of the park- ana -nde lot, the addition of express bus service 88 ADT % incr 7 92 ADT c7c incr 2010 est 5. The relevant 1992 HCADT's are: TH 212 -169 east of the Wye 21500 6.9 90 TH 101 N of TH 212 1 23000 21.7 28000 ' TH 212 at TH 101 11900 18.6 14000 97.8 27700 TH 169 south of the Wye 21000 14.3 24000 - 5.0 22800 ' = =mean growth == overall 13.3 38.2 annual 3.2 :::::<:: >: ;:: ;:::: 1.8 ' 3. Existing T.H. 212 is a bus route and has been for several years. Existing transit ridership is about 860 persons per day, half of that in each peak hour. 4. Mn/DOT has worked. and will continue to work, closely with the Southwest Metro Transit staff. Southwest Metro forecasts that between 1994 and 1998, after the improvement of the park- ana -nde lot, the addition of express bus service between Shakopee and Minneapolis, and the addition of all -day circulation service between Shakopee and Eden Prairie, ridership will grow at a rate of at least 41% 1 a year (likely doubling between 1996 and 1998). 5. The relevant 1992 HCADT's are: 2010 TH 212 at TH 101, west of the Wye 90 TH 101 N of TH 212 2700 TH 169 -212 east of the Wye ' 2650 TH 169 south of the Wye B. Problems of Principal Arterial and Solutions Achieved 1. The section of T.H. 212 near the intersection of T.H. 101 was a graded gravel road in 1924, was paved as 9 -7 -9 concrete in 1928, was overlaid and given ;ravel shoulders in 1966. It was widened and resurfaced, with bituminous shoulders, in 1981. At the T intersection there are: a westbound right turn lane and a through lane, an eastbound through -left lane and a bypass lane, and one southbound lane. ' The combination of restricted geometrics. hich speed. inadequate sight distance. and hish traffic volumes causes congestion and raises the probability of accidents. particularly rear -end and Irft -turn accidents. A traffic signal is warranted. The STP App., SP 2762 -11, PA I C. accident rate of this intersection from Jan. 1 1991 through Dec. 31, 1993 is 2.1: the severity rate is 3.4. ' 2. On the segment of T.H. 212 in Chaska, the average number of hours in a day that traffic volumes presently exceed design capacity in either direction isirrelevant; MnDOTs concern is not capacity but safety. ' 3. Improved ability of the principal arterial to provide an average operating speed of ' at least 40 mph during peak traffic periods is also not relevant: the addition of a traffic signal at the intersection of T.H. 101 will introduce delay to the mainline traffic and will cause lower overall operating speeds; this is the tradeoff for ' increased safety. 4. The reduction in total accidents per year due to improvements made by this , project. The measure of cost - effectiveness for the improvements on the roadway segment ' is the expected annual reduction in accidents per cost in hundreds of thousands of dollars. It is defined and calculated as follows for the total project cost: REDUCTION IN ACCIDEN'T'S = (A - A ) ! ( TOTS / S100000) ' _ ( 15 acts - 8 aces) / ( S320000. / S100000 ) = 2.18 accidents per hundred thousand dollars total cost It is defined and calculated as follows for the STP funds portion: REDUCTION IN ACCIDENTS = (A - A A ) / ( TOTS / S100000) ' _ ( 15 aces - 8 acts ) I ( S256000 I $100000 ) = 2.73 accidents. per hundred thousand dollars total cost A = Average number of rearend, left -turn. and right -angle accidents (deemed signal- correctible) per year, based on accidcnt data from the last available three years A = Expected average number of rearend. left -turn, and right -angle accidents (deemed signal - correctible) per year after project is completed, based on computational methods explained below TOTS is as above. Data on accidents for the vdsting section scheduled for improvement are from ' from MnDOrs TIS system. Existing traffic volumes have been used for the before and after analysis. The figures for average overall reduction in signal- correctible accidents, the reduction caused by channelization and signal installation, are taken from a MnDOT study of accident reduction factors, updated 22 April 1993. Access to Rezional Centers The redesign of the intersection of T.H. 212 at T.H. 101 and, possibly minor revision of , the Shakopee Wye interchange. will make it easier for passenger vehicles and buses to get from Shakopee and Chaska up to Eden Prairie and 'Minneapolis ' STP App., SP 2762 -11. P.5 The repaving of the park- and -ride lot in the Wye and the possible modification of ' entrance and erit will make the lot more artractive to commuters and will also pro%ide better bus access off and onto T.H. 212. These two enhancements will attract commuters from both Chaska and Shakopee to a site which can become a major transit hub according to the criteria set out by the RTB. The hub can provide service to most t facilities of metropolitan scale. The RTB is also developing a reverse commute service from the inner city of Minneapolis. This service, currently with 500 -500 passenger trips per month, brings transit dependent inner -city people to jobs in the S. service area. I D. Air quality is not expected to increase as a result of this project. ' E. Integration of Modes This project addresses all modes and attempts to integrate them. The Shakopee- Chaska Transit Hub, in which MN, has been providing, and will be improving, the right of way and the park- and -ride facility, is located adjacent to the east point of the Wye within the interchange. Our design already provides direct access to the highway from the facility. The park- and -ride facil%ty will in future provide more parking, spaces for park- and -ride activities as well as for car pooling. Improvement of the park- and -ride facility, redesign of the T.H. 212 - -T.H. 101 intersection, and possible slight redesign of the Wye interchange will significantly improve the ingress and egress of the buses at the hub, as well as provide for improved flow of pasacn cr car and co ..,.erc:al ch ;c:e .raffic. The transit hub will provide service to all the major southern metropolitan facilities. Because of the suburban and semirural environment, it is not anticipated that the pedestrian mode will be significant. It is not expected that pedestrians will conflict with vehicular traffic for many years. F. Maturity of project concept /coordination ' The T.H. 212 corridor has been studied for many years. The improvement of the Wye area has strong support of the communities of Shakopee and Chaska. ' The Project Memorandum is being written, the Signal Justification Report is in progress. The plans for the channelization and signalization of the T.H. 212 - -T.H. 101 intersection and the Wye interchange project should be ready for a 1996 letting. There are no relocations required for the construction of any part of this project, and no land parcels need to be purchased. There has no stated opposition to the project. No letters of support were solicited: however. such information can easily be pro%ided upon request. STP App., SP 2762 -11. P.6 September 5, 1995 MOREHOUSE REALTY 4410 Highway 25 , Watertown, Minnesota 55388 612- 446 -1991 ' This is in reference to the proposed signalization of the intersection of Highway # 101 and 4212 near Shakopee. As you are aware from our on -site meeting, the present owners are agreeable to the ' accommodation of the MnDot's plan for this program and will give optimum cooperation to the Department. However, as you know, the property is for sale and therefore, I am writing to request expediting this matter as rapidly as possible. t If I can be of service in this regard, please advise. Sincerely, Bob Morehouse, ' Agent for the Sellers I 1 Mr. John E. Hippchen Area Right -Of -Way Manager 1500 West County Road, B 2 ' Roseville, MN. 55113 Dear Mr. Hippchen: This is in reference to the proposed signalization of the intersection of Highway # 101 and 4212 near Shakopee. As you are aware from our on -site meeting, the present owners are agreeable to the ' accommodation of the MnDot's plan for this program and will give optimum cooperation to the Department. However, as you know, the property is for sale and therefore, I am writing to request expediting this matter as rapidly as possible. t If I can be of service in this regard, please advise. Sincerely, Bob Morehouse, ' Agent for the Sellers I