Laserfiche WebLink
CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL WORK SESSION <br />APPROVED <br />September 6, 2016 <br />89 2. MnDOT I-35W North Corridor Project - Community Development Director <br />90 Grochala recalled the council's discussion on the I-35W North improvement project. <br />91 The council directed staff to speak with the city attorney about language related to the <br />92 MnPass element. He has invited MnDOT representatives to come and speak about the <br />93 program; he noted the project schedule deadline. A resolution was distributed that was <br />94 developed through discussion with the city attorney. <br />95 Jerome Adams, Project Manager, indicated he is available for questions about the project. <br />96 Council Member Rafferty asked for an explanation of the MnPass program. Mr. Adams <br />97 noted that a MnPass lane is a lane that is free to everyone 20 hours of each work day and <br />98 24 hours per day on the weekend. If a single occupant of a car wants to use that lane <br />99 during those restricted hours it has a cost. There is a tag you can purchase that is always <br />100 on or a tag you can purchase to use with a switch. You will get a monthly statement for <br />101 the use. <br />102 The mayor said that is how it operates today but it could evolve over time. Mr. Adams <br />103 said yes adding operation is regulated by statute. <br />104 The council asked about variable pricing. Mr. Adams explained how the price goes up <br />105 with the volume of cars. There are sensors in the freeway lanes. <br />106 <br />107 The council heard about the proposed project. At its onset, the project did not include <br />108 any portion of roadway within Lino Lakes. The limit of the MnPass lane has never <br />109 included any roadway in Lino Lakes. The project was therefore discussed with the <br />110 impacted cities only. At one point, MnDOT staff determined that a pavement project <br />111 was scheduled for the near future on a portion of roadway into the City. Therefore it was <br />112 efficient to add that project to this larger project and that meant that a noise analysis was <br />113 required. That analysis resulted in MnDOT deciding that the noise wall project in the city <br />114 makes sense. There is a voting process with residents underway. MnDOT will be <br />115 holding two public meetings to provide information. The city council is asked to <br />116 consider municipal consent and the options for the city are passage of a resolution <br />117 approving or disapproving the project or sending a formal waiver of consideration. <br />118 <br />119 Mayor Reinert reviewed the resolution provided by the city attorney. He suggested that <br />12o it protects the city from ever being asked to participate financially in a project. The <br />121 resolution states an opinion but MnDOT will apparently do what they wish; it does say <br />122 there will be no city financial support. <br />123 <br />124 Mark Lindeberg, MnDOT representative, remarked that he reads the resolution to say that <br />125 the project doesn't receive approval. Mayor Reinert said it's just semantics and it <br />126 doesn't say the city doesn't approve the project. However since the deadline for city <br />127 consideration is October 30, the legal minds can discuss any issues. <br />128 <br />129 Mr. Lindeberg explained the process they normally follow when consent isn't granted. <br />130 There is arbitration, discussion and a decision by a three -member board and MnDOT then <br />131 makes a decision on going ahead. MnDOT is not asking for any money. <br />3 <br />