Loading...
6. Reivew Median Cut Proposal for 7811 Great Plains Blvd. 111r CITY OF •■•■•••■•■■••• CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937 1900 Action py City Administrator Endorsed ' MEMORANDUM Moditie,;.�^ TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager Date vul mit; d to Gcrmissioq ' FROM: Gary Warren, City Enginee Dat�hr:itted to Council DATE: March 22 , 1989 ' SUBJ: Review Median Cut Proposal for Klingelhutz Property, 7811 Great Plains Boulevard ' File No. 86-11A Attached is the staff report from the February 27 , 1988 City Council meeting. As you will recall, this item was tabled due to the absence of Councilwoman Dimler at that meeting and tabled again at the March 13 , 1989 meeting due to Mr. Klingelhutz being ill . It is therefore being brought back once again for con- sideration . As noted therein, the safest engineering alternative is to go ahead with the plans as originally designed, i .e. no median cut for the Klingelhutz driveway. If an alternative is desired in ' accordance with Mr. Klingelhutz ' s request, the next best alter- native would be alternative #2 , opening in median. This later option should be conditioned, however, as a "temoprary" median cut conditioned on re-evaluation should land uses intensify on the Klingelhutz property and/or traffic accidents/safety con- siderations warrant a change. ' Attachment 1. Staff report dated February 22 , 1989 . cc : Al Klingelhutz Howard Preston, BRW Gary Ehret, BRW I I 1 I L-:,- r, .. .. A 4 CITYOF _________ 4 \ ' !g". _ ' i 1 : . C '- .- Al SSEf t -,,,- 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 I (612) 937-1900;;<� -_, eAf b.? C y Rd?ste.s!r ., NMORANDUM y l L WA I g i?- TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager �-��� �" - FROM: Gary Warren, City Engineer L ;+ ;�._?__b -- II .�f'd�'.:�.�:tZed b LG.^-Y ..gin DATE: February 22, 1989 . ..� SU-BJ: Review Median Cut Proposal for Klingelhutz Property, ?.o ::-.,5 .___.__ 7811 Great Plains Boulevard File No. 86-11A I At the January 23, 1989 City Council meeting, staff was directed to review the II median proposal for West 78th Street in front of the Klingelhutz property just north of the railroad tracks. The concern was expressed that the construction of the median, to be done once the railroad crossing has been realigned this spring, would prevent southbound traffic from directly entering the Klingelhutz II property. The attached sketch is an excerpt from the construction documents for Phase I of the downtown which was approved by the City Council on May 4, 1987. In basic terns, the original design as shown was established to properly chan- II nelize southbound traffic as it approaches the railroad crossing and to work with the crossing arm barricades. The median cut which is shown allows south- II traffic to access the Klingelhutz property utilizing the public parking area immediately adjacent to the property. As such, it was believed that appropriate access was still maintained to this property consistent with present and future land use needs. The plans were approved accordingly. II In response to the Council's request, BRW has prepared the attached alter- natives. As noted therein the original design concept remains the preferred II alternate. Representatives from BRW and I will be available to elaborate on these alternatives at the Council's discretion at Monday night's meeting. It is our best engineering judgement that the median be constructed as originally planned since it is the safest alternative and provides an adequate level of II access for both current and future needs. Attachments I 1. Construction plan excerpt. 2. BRW memorandum dated February 22, 1989. I cc: Al Klingelhutz Howard Preston, BRW Gary Ehret, BRW I Fred Hoisington, Hoisington Group, Inc. II II --_, - -• (1,-*' ,_f" I'" emaidIZICIZZ=3 . , I , k•-• ,-,o r-- ,l' ....-..• I 4 "-- — ' ,-"1•■ •■••■• ••• ,,, T"'''-' I ......... I:, .. ( -.."-- -1 1 71 '1 " ,,,, i ,- k C,••• I,, . ,r. • .„, ' • • 1 r' . "..) 1.....___,...,„ . . •.• • : ' I I ', '..•'6 -,, ..... , 1(1‘16\ 1 ill . — . xj, , ,..: Ir , ,,,I t..-2 0 - 1-----1 .' 1 •- \ .• - F. .rf VI-+ ,■.) I ‘CP 6 3 '3 , ..; 4 -. „,„,. .. • ...•• • '. „‘-:- -‘• q ___. „.•,,.:-.1. 4,2- 12 ..„,1- ---- t 1 - -,,, ,.. w . LI- -..m...'....-to..,..-A........ 7,- A. *0 CC ‘,X.,'.. ' -:%:R.,7-..-"IL. ' • .p..,$,,,,....„,.. 1.1.r.•,..., .......t....... 4%.:,.e:-._.,....,-,1"...c-1-.„...,,,;It' 7 I , I •- 1-11.0 '.• '-.Z"'!,;,..,,•,..--, e. a 1 • -..—• 0 NJ 0 I- cc.3 .. . . ... I .. 7 , ril '` „._..., . :s.: ,..•••.... . , • . ,..„,.• ,•,.: ,,,... „....„ N 41. • t .de s_., -- . , . ccl z EZ 1 -a•--- <-, -- . ■ ,11..4-k ...0, ' ---;""" '":"1: If I , Q. Z ) 11 0 T,J : — 6 il 5c., 11'r 1 . . \ \ - -V tis 4.,\.\, s?,3,,L, . .-- I r-.•,' r. ;.(s$ 1 7( . t.,,...L..„.0 ..,..,> ; wi- 1-1 --, 111.7 4' I* ',3, 1,7 ..' I ,s,e-, •s - ... .1.....,, ..., • Job) . ‘ I' to, , ... „.. ,e \ e o. • s, 11 I I - L. , i . <\•Is,,,..51 I. , ,j. tz u s lco I.I • - _ z /. ."6 ,'' - - 7 d• : 1'6% / \ 6. e 11,01 ' I i.......„............... 4: / ‘•9., ,, ,. 0- • .. ' 7-"?..... `r ' •' .__,,, -.,,,,-, ...-.."... . ,. .... ' 9-- ' I I I -----•"-----.---- -----— S \ • '- • .7.-W o., : rn CI3 I-0, ••• .,,,--••( • 477....... I 1\1 ,-- ...I. ,Th,;;. -,I C..9 j '"C 011, ‘,..._.-.- .71...- ... . cr■ I.:2 v).4 I .t. ,-'- ,- ______c ,f-N, g ‘. 5'.1 4"''''Il z - z ... ,y- • N''-.1-, ....101.."1.' 512° 7,- v lir-4411116._--- . 3--1001111,tt SW" __-""- . ,,,`" . . .....___-- .,15.. _B -50 a--1--‘ .-' X.i __--,:------_,: , I --- - _ - - - - - 1.-xa " _r_ 1,1„.., ... ....• '.....- CO l.3 ,, . ..0 :','ta s--0 :-=. .z.... 9 I 1 1. 0 S co> 0, ..„ ... *4; 231,s 1 q 0 1 I % = .-•- -- --- --'a- ^;`:- ---S-L,' ,'t7, zi .'. 'u- • -. , 44„..._.._.........., 4, .............„.14,,r-- ' ia .4‘`J oc,7 •-,'- - CUL' • i'.-'''''' • • . ",Z... •C 0 _______--- •-.e. .,. , ,.___4.-.— J• t-1 . I 4' I. :.-- mE. .........-----. NI r•-•-• --.--. -____---..--_____A.• *71! ■to• ,..,.. .......:14,.. /,..-- 1 ,;' -1 i I : .•. ., Ili..' 0•-C3■-• •, . pi I, ,''•C 1- ' I er .-- r ? t; - ,,. . : -I r' - - A 2wu0 u II It ti " ?"•-',.i., : -,_ - _ ,,•T 0 4. I ,-Q. ct• , 7:, ..- ° 7: ._. 0<-3 • ....1 1.1 L________1 -, . „ :,-6, ,, . ...,....„.:.. ti...a, 1 ,, • 1 ....s.,.. ., . r- ,' i i (( It , PLANNING = ' 0.,,,- T"' TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING Z2--I URBAN DESIGN BAN/ INC THRESHER SQUARE 700 THIRD STREET SOUTH MINNEAPOLIS.MINNESOTA 55415 PHONE 612 3700700 FAX 612 370-1378 I February 22, 1989 City of Chanhassen II 690 Coulter Dr Chanhassen, MN ive CITY Of CHANHASSEN Attn: Mr. Gary Warren, PE City Engineer FEB 2 3 7 989 I RE: Median Cut Alternatives Klingelhutz Property EfiGINEER1NG DEPT. (7811 Great Plains Boulevard) I Dear Mr. Warren: The Chanhassen City Council at their January 23, 1989 Council meeting, asked 1 that the proposed roadway design for TH 101/Great Plains Boulevard be reviewed relative to access to the Klingelhutz property. We have revisited this issue keeping in mind the current design of West 78th Street, and the proposed design II of Great Plains Boulevard south of the tracks. Figure 2, attached, illustrates the design of these areas. In light of the Council request to review this issue, we have considered four II alternatives which provide varying degrees of access to the Klingelhutz proerty. In the text below, we will recap advantages and disadvantages of each of the alternatives. II ALTERNATIVE 1 (Current Design) Advantages - The design is consistent with the design of the rest of II west 78th Street and Great Plains Boulevard (to TH 5). - The design is the safest possible alternative because left I turns from West 78th Street/Great Plains Boulevard can only be made from a left turn lane. - The Klingelhutz property has direct right in/out access II (which meets the letter of the law) and indirect left turn access via the driveway to the public parking lot adjacent I to Klingelhutz property. - The level of access is consistent with the needs of the II present land use and future zoning. Disadvantages - The Klingelhutz property does not have direct left turn access. (However, left turn access is not a legal require- II ment and it isn' t necessary for the present land use or future zoning. ) AN AFFILIATE OF THE BENNETT RINGROSE.WOLSFELD.JARVIS GARDNER INC GROUP - I DAVID J BENNE TT DONALD W RINGHOSE RICHARD P WOLSFELO- FE TER E JARVIS LAWRENCE J GARDNER THOMAS F CARROLL CRAIG A AMUNDSEN DONALD E HUNT MARK G SWENSON JOHN B McNAMARA RICHARD D PILGRIM DALE N BECKMANN DENNIS J SUTLIFF jEFFREV L BENSON RALPH C BLUM DAVID L GRAHAM MINNEAPOLIS DENVER PHOENIX TUCSON ST. PETERSBURG 1 • Mr. Gary Warren February 22, 1989 Page 2 ALTERNATIVE 2 1 Advantages - Provides complete in and out access at the Klingelhutz driveway. Disadvantages - Safety would be compromised because the design is different 1 from the rest of West 78th Street which could cause driver confusion and violate drivers expectations. Also, the southbound to eastbound left turn from West 78th Street to 1 the driveway would be made from a through lane and this is inherently unsafe compared to the expected accident fre- quency of left turns made from an exclusive left turn lane. 1 - This design could also establish a dangerous precident regarding design modifications. ' ALTERNATIVE 3 Advantages - More closely resembles the design of the rest of West 78th 1 Street than Alternative 2 or 4. - Provides complete in/out access at the Klingelhutz 1 driveway. - Disadvantages Still would result in left turns from a through lane which is more dangerous than left turns from an exclusive left 1 turn lane. - The design is still slightly different than for the rest of 1 • West 78th Street, and has the same disadvantages discussed in Alternative 2 above. ALTERNATIVE 4 1 Advantages - Provides complete in/out access to Klingelhutz driveway. 1 - Provides opportunity for left turns from West 78th Street to be made from an exclusive left turn lane. 1 - Would provide a design that is similar to the proposed sec- tion of Great Plains Boulevard south of TH 5. Disadvantages - Still not entirely consistent with the design of the rest 1 of West 78th Street. - Because of heavy left turns northbound to westbound into 1 the Chanhassen Dinner Theater, southbound left turners could be struck in the southbound through lane. r f e • Mr. Gary Warren February 22, 1989 Page 3 Analysis of the alternatives and the advantages and disadvantages asso- ciated with each indicates that the current plan (Alternative #1) is the preferred alternative. This design is the safest of all the alternatives because left turns from West 78th Street can only be made from an exclusive left turn lane. In addition, the design is consistent with the design of the rest of the roadway and will not result in any violations of driver' s expectations. None of the other alternatives would be as safe because the design features are not consistent with the rest of West 78th Street and because some or all of the left turns from West 78th Street would have to be made from a through lane. , It should also be noted that the access to the Klingelhutz property, direct right in/out at the driveway and indirect full access via the adjacent City parking lot driveway, meets the letter of the law regarding access to one direction of a roadway and should more than adequately serve both the existing and planned use of the site. We hope that this has provided the additional information you need to address the concerns of the City Council . If we can be of further assistance, please let me know. Sincerely, BRW, INC. ' Howard Preston, PE Project Manager HP/sk ' Attachment File 7-8807 I 1 11 --- ii= dm .. mod I= EN 1.1 I= N. I= ... .. 11. IN. IN. r III ium L I/ T.H.101 REALIGNMENT I\ t \\ \ "—� " \ ‘.. \`"\ I i ili PRELIMINARY LAYOUT \, t W \ tA •T.H.5 at Great Plains \ ` \ \ \ �, 1 l Boulevard \ \ _ 111:11' FIGURE 2 \ \ \=, r ..... I J3'ciry 24, 1989 l I �F `\ fJ \\ \ N i\ t 59' Ice' X00' NOR TI{ \ \ \� l� -- I 1 I 1+� o rn \ \ 5o r--- I 1 �a I my C 1 1 \� \ g-51-., m \ C I r- ON D \ 't� �' I I -- I Y ON Tff; v ` j___.' —� I \--ii:t • — ) - 1•NN''''`L,,,M- -------.. i , „ . • p. I fl —1 J.-.I GREAT PLAINS BLVt '�\ I I ;; f' < may�' i --. — 2 o. 1 ....-- 2, ' 41/ ...-,:.;•._-,_,.' i I -r'.`.i_ — �- Tom. __ __ " .='!yam �. •,AO'•T.4''''''—.4^ .---r �'Jl.wu.. )•,, ,, � 7 •j. ' 1 - —.—.•�` • (//l 1a_ — r _� . 1111111� , WCw ei.+1{ !. _ y'/.irl.0 • ..'i' — ~7i �. / / 8/ y :1—J n a IF ,A 4{ p `�.jTr--- �--� �\\\ % 5ifl .6 c i/ \ , ‘, 1 4 k J ; o \. . \ ' \� \� ; \N\ N \\\ / I\ 11 \ 1 1 k 01 101. �\ \ m/ \ "\ \\•• \\ 1 '�� LEGEND : '�� 1 I -'6. �` \ \� ,\• I � PAVEMENT O 1 1 I � �rG ` \ \\\ ;. \ F CONSTRUCTION F I } `\ BITUMINOUS W 4o �� SMOULDER �� 1 �f II ° 4} • �\` \ � RAISED 1 $, •\ MEDIAN ` .. a-f: I \ % n • \ i. \\*- C------). ' .1 \i j, `. PUBLIC LOT I . . NN \\ ■_I' fir, ,;: _ -.;• =`' DRIVEWAY I • • \\ \ ICO RETE / PLANTED MEDIAN 0 1 _ --"'"" r ALTERNATE +1 I CURRENT DESIGN FEBRUARY, 1989 i 1 I I . . , . \ \\■,... �.tiYfy'.: � PUBLIC LOT li \ \\ ,-.-:., .... . \A\ \ ".:.. 'I''' q''''.1'.C-B''.. —--------- \ :; s.: DRIVEWAY I s\, CO RETE / PLANTED MEDIAN \-- 1 1 _---- —011111.1111111111111111 . . ALTERNATE +2 IOPENING IN MEDIAN FEBRUARY, 1989 I I I I • i I I • I I i \\\a.. ' ■ 1 L : : I PUBLIC LOT ,. .,<,....,1 Ar "r , „:.,11,,.ip-A1:41 ,_ _ `':.`°'' DRIVEWAY \'''%\‘' ss\ I i r. ,..---- C• CRETE / PLANTED MEDIAN 1 Y' - fa .. V\—\-- -- I ALTERNATE #3 I PAINTED MEDIAN FEBRUARY, 1989 I I I i _. . . -; ' . I 1 - I \ ti, 1 `\ PUBLIC LOT � I I \\\ ::,: I ` _- -_-. \ I . . DRIVEWAY %(..-.,. 1 • I1- CONCRETE / PLANTED MEDIAN I ,-------- \ , _______--r.---A---. IALTERNATE #4 PAINTED TWO-WAY LEFT TURN LANE IFEBRUARY, 1989 I I I