12. Update on Highway 101, City ManagerI MEMORANDUM
CITY OF la
111 �8AN8ASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739
' TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Don Ashworth, City Manager
DATE: August 8, 1995
' SUBJ: " Years of Cooperative Work Pays Off for 101 Citizens "; or "Eden
Prairie, Chanhassen, Hennepin/Carver Counties, and MnDOT reach
Pact Re: 101 "; or "101 Citizen Voices Finally Heard"
t
Any one of the above titles would be well deserved. Any one of the titles would
acknowledge that city staff, or the Mayor /Council, or our citizens themselves,
' played some major role in solving a dilemma that has plagued Chanhassen for
years; i.e. the reconstruction of Highway 101. Ironically, none of the above titles
would be correct. "Being in the Right Place at the Right Time Pays Off Again"
' would be a more accurate title.
If none of the titles shown above are correct, then how is it that all of a sudden
' 101 is going to be rebuilt after years of frustrating debate /cooperative meetings /50
studies? The answer appears to be a combination of a number of events. The
following should be seen as building blocks, and in the absence of one of them the
' solution disintegrates:
Commissioner Powers: The state legislature recently gave the State
' Transportation Commissioner the power to change the status of highways
from "temporary" to "permanent." As you will probably recall, MnDOT's
reason for not being able to participate in previous solutions was because of
101's "temporary" status, even though it had been there for 100 years. As a
permanent highway, "turn back" dollars may be available to improve the
' highway before it is turned back; and
Highway 169 River Crossing and Shakopee Bypass Nearing Completion:
' Although verbal agreements had been reached between MnDot and
Hennepin County in regards to Hennepin County's taking over State
Highway 101 north of us and the state building new State Highway 169, the
Mayor and City Council
August 8, 1995
Page 2
final contracts have not been signed. Similarly, the Shakopee bypass is
nearing completion and, similar to the Hennepin County situation, MnDOT
has reached agreement with Scott County regarding Scott County's taking
back existing 169 with the state taking responsibility for the new bypass.
Part of the agreement with Hennepin County would have Hennepin County
responsible for maintaining old 101 throughout Hennepin County, including
the southerly tip at Highway 5 which is technically in Carver County.
Hennepin County appears amenable to amending their agreement with
MnDOT and to enter into a joint powers agreement with Carver County and
Chanhassen so as to have them responsible for reconstructing State
Highway 101 north of Highway 5 to new Crosstown. MnDOT believes a
construction contract could be let as early as 1996; and
Allowable Uses of "Turn Back' Dollars: Previously "turn back funds" could
only be used where a state highway was moved from one place to another.
For example, that was the source of funds which moved State Highway 5
out of the center of Chanhassen to its present location approximately 600-
700 ft. south. The "new rules" allow turn back funds to be used for a
highway turn back without a new replacement highway route being
designated; and
Availability of Turn Back Funds: Monies available in the turn back fund
are at an all time high as it would apply to reimbursing counties for monies
spent on turn back projects completed by a county. A separate pool of
money exists for cities who carry out turn back projects. However, that
fund currently has a deficit balance and due to the current demands and
commitments may not regain a positive position for at least 3 -4 years; and
Federal Soenic Highway Legislation: A portion of the ISTEA legislation
included a provision to designate certain roadways as "scenic roadways." In
doing so, many of the typical federal/state standards regarding horizontal
and vertical alignments, minimum design speeds, widths, etc. could be
relaxed. The Carver County Engineer would be very interested in seeing
this designation given to the lower portion of 101 (south of Lyman
Boulevard). That designation would allow for some vertical/horizontal
changes, rebuilding to a 30 -40 year standard, and rebuilding some of the
curves. However, for the most part, the roadway could maintain its scenic
character. By contrast, the section of 101 from the old railroad trestle to
212 should be rebuilt. Specifically, that section of roadway should be
realigned to the east from its current western curvature and the entire "Y"
should be redesigned to a single cross - section intersection. The relocation
would "take" the existing trailers /cabins, and since this would no longer be a
I Mayor and City Council
August 8, 1995
' Page 3
state highway, the city could develop this as a very attractive entrance into
our community, including parking areas for entrance to the Bluff Creek
' Corridor or to the pathways leading to Hopkins /Chaska.
' As noted above, if one of the above events had not occurred, the Highway 101
dilemma would continue to exist. However, with MnDOT reaching agreement
with both Hennepin and Scott Counties on major pieces of the puzzle, MnDOT
now realizes that it is time to take a look at the final piece of the puzzle —us. By
comparison, we are small potatoes. But without us, the whole plan could fall
apart. [Note: Don't be surprised if the final agreement has extra goodies!]
' Hennepin County appears ready to take over the responsibility for the northern
part of the turn back, i.e. Highway 101 from Crosstown to State Highway 5. Since
it is only the "county pool" that has dollars available for turn backs, it would seem
' logical that Carver County should be the lead agency in reconstructing Highway
101 from Highway 5 to the Minnesota Valley. That section will probably be
phased over several years, but all of the above events appear to have produced a
means by which all of our Highway 101 problems can be solved.
I can honestly state that most of the news brought to this office during this past
' year has not been good. I wouldn't mind having it disappear entirely. Hopefully,
with news such as I received yesterday, we're on a new course of "good news
days." Yesterday was definitely a good news day.
J
J
MEETING CONFIRMATION
August 3, 1995
TO Bob Brown, Metro Division State Aid Engineer
Roger Gustafson, Carver County
Don Ashworth, City of Chanhassen
FROM Mary Alyce Chouinard
State Aid Secretary
582 -1353
DATE August 7, 1995
TIME 1:30 - 2:30 PM
LOCATION Chanhassen City Hall Conference Rm A
690 Coulter Drive 937 -1900 Ext 114
Chanhassen MN 55317
MEETING PURPOSE: Discussion Jurisdictional change TH 101
RECEIVED
�,, 05
uffy OF