Laserfiche WebLink
APPENDIX <br />Hoisington Koegler Group Inc. ©© <br />©~ <br />Meeting Date: March 25, 2009, 2:00 - 3:30 p.m., Elk River City Hall <br />Client: City of Elk River, Minnesota <br />Project: Elk River Focused Area Study (FAST) <br />Purpose: MNDOT Review of potential interchange location for FAST Study <br />Present: Craig Robinson, MN/DOT; Bryan Harjes, HKGi; Jeremy Barnhart & Terry Maurer, <br />City of Elk River. <br />The meeting was held to review future interchange locations and gather input from MNDOT <br />representatives on general location, future timeframe and potential funding sources for the future <br />interchange. The meeting opened with an overview of the broader transportation and land use issues <br />surrounding the Elk River FAST. The following are the summary of comments from the meeting. <br />Comments related to the future interchange: <br />• Location of a future interchange should be located 1 mile south from the centerline of the Highway 101 <br />and Highways 10/169 interchange. Additionally, the further north the interchange would like increase <br />the complexity of construction for the 101 and 10/169 interchange. In general, the further the interchange <br />is located from the 101 & 10/169 interchange there is a strong likelihood the project costs would <br />decrease due to less acquisition costs and design complexity. <br />• MNDOT had no preference to an interchange either 1 mile south of Highway 101 and Highways 10/169 <br />interchange or further south near the location identified in the IRC around 165` Avenue. <br />• The city should build a case for a future interchange though: <br />o Further study geometries /environmental review <br />o Acquisition of necessary properties or needed right-of--way <br />o Working toward controlled access points at 171'` and 165` Avenues only, while closing all other <br />access points through the corridor <br />• The cost of an interchange would be split between MNDOT and the city 50%-50%. However, the <br />percentage breakdown for the interchange cost could reach 85% MNDOT and 15% City if the city meets <br />certain performance review checklist items. For example, if the interchange is located on an <br />underperforming Inter Regional Corridor (IRC) there is a 10% cost savings for the City. Also, MNDOT <br />currently has no funding for even the 50% portion of the interchange. <br />• MNDOT provided information on the Greater Minnesota Interchange Solicitation Program which has an <br />allotment of 40 million dollars for infrastructure improvements for out-state Minnesota. However, only <br />10 million is the maximum award for a single project. MNDOT provided the checklist for project <br />submittals with evaluation categories ranging from economic development, safety and congestion relief. <br />The submittal packet has a due date of June 12"', 2009 with a general start time of 2013. <br />Additional comments: <br />• Ametro-district resurfacing project will take place in 2012. This project will include a mill and overlay <br />of Highway 1.0/169 and will also included closure of median crossings except for 171st Avenue and 165`f' <br />Avenue. Right-in and right-out access points would still remain as closure of these access points <br />involves property rights issues. <br />• Near term, MNDOT showed some reluctance for an additional signal at 165' Avenue, however would <br />1,__. A consider a proposal for a signal at 165`x' Avenue that included access closures to enhance safety measures <br />through the corridor. <br />~_.: <br />-~~ <br />~..° <br />1718C. QV2r1U2 Focused Area Srudy <br />