03-07-2011 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION March 7, 2011 APPROVED 1 CITY OF LINO LAKES 2 MINUTES 3 4 DATE : March 7, 2011 5 TIME STARTED : 5:33 p.m. 6 TIME ENDED : 9:55 p.m. 7 MEMBERS PRESENT : Council Member Gallup, Rafferty, Roeser& 8 Mayor Reinert 9 MEMBERS ABSENT : Council Member O'Donnell 10 11 12 Staff members present: City Administrator Jeff Karlson; Director of Administration Dan 13 Tesch; Director of Public Services Rick DeGardner; Director of Public Safety Kent 14 Strege; Director of Finance Al Rolek; Director of Community Development Michael 15 Grochala; Economic Development Coordinator Mary Alice Divine; City Engineer Jim 16 Studenski; City Planner Jeff Smyser; City Clerk Julie Bartell 17 18 1. CSAH 34 (Birch Street) Corridor Study—Community Development Director 19 Grochala reported that this study has been in progress for the past two years, having 20 originally been identified as a city goal in 2008. Anoka County took the leadership role; 21 the study has been prepared by SRF Consulting Group. He introduced Jack Corkle, 22 Anoka County, and John Hagen and Brian Shorten, SRF Consulting Group. 23 24 Mr. Shorten updated the council on the process used to prepare the study and reviewed 25 the overall recommendations. He noted that it has come forward through a public 26 process during which they found clear concerns about needs for the roadway including 27 high levels of congestion during peak hours, accessibility to the roadway and bike and 28 pedestrian concerns. A transportation advisory group was formed with the goals of 29 improving safety, mobility and design for the corridor. In explaining the elements of the 30 study and recommendations and noting concerns heard about the use of a raised median, 31 Mr. Shorten noted the ability to stay with a two-lane roadway in some areas. The study 32 contains different options but all could be accommodated within the proposed right of 33 way. As the council makes decisions about the corridor, they will have flexibility in the 34 planning that's been done. He noted that the report's executive summary reflects the 35 revisions that have occurred within the report. 36 37 When a council member asked for an explanation of why the recommendation is for some 38 two-lane section and some four-lane, Ms. Corkle explained that the county has looked at 39 the numbers (traffic) very carefully and they feel the two-lane is appropriate in a portion 40 of the corridor but in the more highly accessed area, four-lane is appropriate. The use of 41 some two-lane is a cost saver also. 42 43 When a council member asked why trails are included on both sides of the roadway, Ms. 44 Corkle responded that there is a challenge to get people from both sides of the corridor to 1