Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutEDA Packet 05.17.22If you need accommodations for the EDA meeting please contact Rachel Juba at (651) 762-6304 or rjuba@ci.hugo.mn.us, thank you. Agenda ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (EDA) Tuesday, May 17, 2022 Hugo City Hall 5:30 PM 5:30 pm 1.Call to Order 5:31 pm 2.Roll Call (Arcand, Chrun, Denaway, Gallivan, Klein, Puleo, Roberts, Weidt) 5:32 pm 3.Approval of Minutes EDA Meeting of March 15, 2022 5:35 pm 4.Update on Highway 61 Visioning and Jurisdictional Transfer Study 6:00 pm 5.Update on Downtown Redevelopment 6:15 pm 6. Adjournment Background memo for the EDA Meeting of Tuesday, May 17, 2022 3. Approval of Minutes Staff recommends approval of the minutes from the March 15, 2022 EDA Meeting as presented. 4. Update on Highway 61 Visioning Study In its Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) and budget, Washington County has included a visioning and jurisdictional transfer study to be completed for Highway 61. The City also has funds allocated to the study in its budget. The study will build on the existing layout that was developed with the City, Washington County, and MnDOT for the future expansion of Highway 61. The study will further evaluate the access locations and type of intersection improvements at each location. It will define the right-of-way needs for the future expansion and evaluate the future transit plans for the Rush Line corridor. The study will also analyze the future land uses along Highway 61 and transportation corridors that connect to the highway. Highway 61 is planned to be transferred to Washington County from MnDOT in the future. The study will develop a detailed implementation plan including future improvements, timing, cost, and agency responsibility for the transfer to occur. In March, Washington County put out a Request for Proposal (RFP) to consultants to complete the visioning and transfer study. There were five consulting groups that answered the RFP and three were interviewed. Washington County selected Bolton & Menk as the project consultant. Work will start soon on the study with several public engagement events and stakeholder meetings planned. The study is expected to be finished May 2023. 5. Update on Downtown Redevelopment Staff will update the EDA on downtown redevelopment. If you need accommodations for the EDA meeting please contact Rachel Juba at (651) 762-6304 or rjuba@ci.hugo.mn.us, thank you. MINUTES FOR THE EDA MEETING OF MARCH 15, 2022 Chair Weidt called the meeting to order at 5:30pm. PRESENT: Arcand, Chrun, Gallivan, Klein, Puleo, Roberts, Weidt. ABSENT: Denaway STAFF: Bryan Bear, City Administrator Rachel Juba, Community Development Director Emily Weber, Community Development Assistant APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR THE EDA MEETING OF FEBRUARY 15, 2022 Commissioner Klein made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Roberts, to approve the February 15, 2022 EDA meeting minutes. Ayes: All. Nay: None. Motion carried. UPDATE ON DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT PROJECT Staff provided background on the Downtown Hugo development project. At their September 15, 2020 meeting, Mr. Trooien has been working with the TEP and wetland regulators including the DNR on his application that includes boardwalk piers in wetlands. The application has been approved. Mr. Trooien is requesting an extension to close on the first and second phase development and for the completion date of the project phases. The proposed closing date is September 30, 2022, with an option to extend until January 31, 2023. Mr. Trooien addressed the EDA and stated that they have been working very hard on moving the project along. The project has been a much more lengthy process than it was expected. Denny is simply asking for more time to meet the previous deadlines. President Weidt ask about the marketing of the property. Mr Trooien stated there was a letter of intent with the Muddy Cow a year ago but they had to make changes. Limited marketing thus far due to the hold up with the TEP. Denny stated that the PUD application was submitted in October 2021. The application is now complete. Commissioner Klein stated he doesn’t see a problem with the extension. The EDA agreed. Puleo asked if the wetland impacts have been approved. Staff stated yes. The PUD still needs to be approved at the Planning Commission and City Council. Motion by Klein, seconded by Chrun to approve the requested extension. ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Klein made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Puleo, to adjourn at 5:59pm. Ayes: All. Nay: None. Motion Carried. Respectfully submitted. Emily Weber, Community Development Assistant 3507 High Point Drive North, Bldg. 1 - Suite E130 Oakdale, MN 55128 Ph: 651-704-9970 | Bolton-Menk.com CONTACT: Beth Engum, PE 651-341-0847 Beth.Engum@bolton-menk.com PROPOSAL FOR TRUNK HIGHWAY 61 VISIONING AND JURISDICTIONAL TRANSFER STUDY IN THE CITIES OF HUGO AND FOREST LAKE Washington County | April 4, 2022 3507 High Point Drive North Bldg. 1 - Suite E130 Oakdale, MN 55128 Ph: 651-704-9970 Bolton-Menk.com Bolton & Menk is an equal opportunity employer. April 4, 2022 Emily Jorgensen Senior Planner Washington County Emily.Jorgensen@co.washington.mn.us RE: Proposal for Trunk Highway (TH) 61 Visioning and Jurisdictional Transfer Study in Hugo and Forest Lake Dear Emily: Hugo’s population has nearly tripled in the past two decades, with continued population growth projected well into the future. With recent and upcoming major renovations to recreational facilities, housing developments, schools, and other popular amenities, it’s no wonder the City of Hugo has seen such tremendous growth. With that growth comes increased demand for a modern transportation system that meets the needs of residents and visitors alike. Like you, Bolton & Menk, Inc. is driven to provide transportation facilities that improve safety, increase mobility, and support future land uses of our local communities. We’re excited to help you develop an implementable vision for the future of TH 61. When you partner with Bolton & Menk on this important study, you will benefit from: Community Investment—We understand the issues and will bring the right approach to achieve effective collaboration. Bolton & Menk has produced high-quality results for several projects in Washington County, and our in-house multidisciplinary experts will use that understanding of your processes and preferences to keep the study process running efficiently from day one. We have a credible and collaborative full-service team of transportation planners, engineers, and support staff, including a 25-year Hugo resident, who will work together to customize the best outcome for Washington County, the Cities of Hugo and Forest Lake, and MnDOT. County Roadway Design Experience—Customizing the best experience will only come from a team with Washington County roadway design experience. From our previous work on CSAH 15, CSAH 12, and other regional corridors, we know how future County Highway 61 is to function and interface with the surrounding transportation network. We understand the integral role a county road plays within the greater context of the community through which it passes and how it shapes the way surrounding land is developed and used. That experience means we won’t approach this project as just another corridor study; we will use our deep-rooted county roadway design knowledge and expertise to tailor our approach specifically to the TH 61 corridor. Implementable Results—A study isn’t meant to sit on a shelf; it’s meant to bring a vision to life. Our team redefines how a corridor study is done. We take the extra step to make sure we get the stakeholder buy-in needed for implementable results. From helping clients secure funding pursuits to navigating land use plans and managing overlapping jurisdictions, Bolton & Menk has effectively helped studies transition into modern corridors that promote economic growth, community investment, and safety. In continued service to Washington County, we are excited at the opportunity to complete the TH 61 Visioning and Jurisdictional Transfer Study in the Cities of Hugo and Forest Lake. I will serve as your lead client contact and project manager. Please contact me at 651-341-0847 or Beth.Engum@bolton-menk.com if you have any questions regarding our proposal. Respectfully submitted, Bolton & Menk, Inc. Beth A. Engum, PE Project Manager 3 Section 1 5 Section 2 TABLE OFCONTENTS TABLE OFCONTENTS 01 Executive Summary 01 Approach and Methodology 08 Work Plan and Schedule 09 Key Personnel and Experience 12 Study Area Representation 12 Summary TH 61 Visioning and Jurisdictional Transfer Study | Washington County 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1Executive Summary/Approach and Methodology Taking into consideration the draft goals contained in the RFP and our early coordination with representatives from Washington County, the City of Hugo, and MnDOT, the Bolton & Menk team has developed three primary goals that we believe are mutually agreeable to all study partners: »Define a long-term vision for Highway 61 that is innovative, realistic, fundable, and ensures safety, mobility, economic vitality, resiliency, and access for all modes of travel »Secure public and agency support for the corridor vision »Develop a detailed implementation plan outlining future improvements, sequencing and triggers, timing, cost, and agency responsibility We believe there are two main project risks or barriers to achieving the above goals: »Not having the appropriate agency engagement during the study such that buy-in for the vision and plan does not result in buy-in as the vision is incrementally implemented as development occurs »The jurisdictional transfer plan is never fully implemented and the vision never realized due to lack of funding Engaging a consultant team with the leadership and experience to navigate the process will be critical to developing buy-in for and momentum to realize the vision. We propose the following as key components of our approach toward a successful project: »Hosting a goal-setting session at the beginning of the study involving representatives, including elected officials, from Washington County, the City of Hugo, and MnDOT. We suggest inviting one of MnDOT’s assistant commissioners. The purpose of this meeting would be to agree upon study objectives and facilitate commitment to following through on implementation of the vision. »Developing a jurisdictional transfer plan that includes specificity regarding funding needs and timing and creativity in identifying sources. The objective of our proposal is to communicate the Bolton & Menk team’s ability to successfully lead corridor vision studies that develop consent among the public and stakeholder agencies and result in constructed solutions that serve the needs of the community. See our issues map on the following page for more insight into this corridor study. APPROACH AND METHODOLOGY Beth’s approach to project management is organized, proactive, and collaborative. This is how she will effectively lead the visioning study process, resulting in an implementable plan. Schedule Beth likes to check in with the county project manager and other key team leaders regularly to make sure the project is on the right track, not only from a schedule perspective, but also from the standpoint of ensuring the team is strategically working toward the established goals. The schedule will be updated throughout the study and will include separate biweekly check-in calls with both the county project manager and consultant task leaders. During these regular check-ins, we will reflect on previous engagements and look ahead to upcoming meetings and milestones. This will help ensure key deliverables are prepared far enough in advance for discussion and review and timely decisions are made. Project Management Team (PMT) Meetings Bolton & Menk will hold monthly PMT meetings to provide project updates, discuss upcoming milestones/events, and ensure activities align with established project goals and objectives. PMT members are anticipated to include Washington County, City of Hugo, and MnDOT staff. City of Forest Lake staff will join for discussions regarding jurisdictional transfer of the corridor. PMT meetings may occasionally include additional department/functional group representatives from the partner agencies to provide insights on specialty topics. To make efficient use of everyone’s time, it is important that PMT meetings are well planned. Toward this end, the Bolton & Menk team will outline agendas for each PMT meeting at least one week in advance so all partners know what to expect and have adequate time to prepare. Building consensus with the study group will largely happen via PMT meetings, which makes these meetings critically important. We highly recommend these meetings be held in-person whenever possible to develop a true sense of teamwork. We also believe it is essential that each stakeholder agency on the PMT is regularly represented by staff who will be involved in implementing the jurisdictional transfer plan when the time comes. In the case of MnDOT, we recommend there be at least one representative from Metro’s East Area Program Delivery team. PUBLIC AND AGENCY INVOLVEMENT2 At Bolton & Menk, we believe in providing relevant public and agency engagement opportunities that are built around the principles of Systematic Development of Informed Consent (SDIC). PROJECT MANAGEMENT1 Our team will work through a series of investigations and evaluations to fully understand existing conditions, set reasonable goals and objectives, develop and evaluate feasible concepts, provide recommendations, and complete the conceptual design and environmental screening. Our approach includes ongoing discussions with stakeholders, finalizing steps along the way to minimize the potential for surprises. We have outlined the process we feel will effectively provide sustainable recommendations for corridor improvements that are technically feasible, economically viable, environmentally compatible, and publicly acceptable. TH 61 Visioning and Jurisdictional Transfer Study | Washington County 2 Exhibit: Issues MapRice CreekClearwater CreekHard w o od Creek Hardwood CreekHardw ood C r e e k Hardwood CreekHardwood CreekLakeAmeli Egg Lake F i s h L akeRound LakeSunset LakeMann R ice Lake Lake LakeOtter LakeEagleBald Lake Oneka Lake Park Bald Eagle -O t t e r Bald Eagle P a r k Park Oneka Lake Oneka Ridge Golf Course CENTERVILLE WES TON Bruce Ven to Reg iona l T ra i l Central An o k a C o u n t y R e g i o n a l T r a i l Hardwood Creek Regional TrailOneka Elementary Hugo Elementary HUG O WHITE BEAR LAKE FOREST LAKE WASHINGTONRAMSEYANOKA 71 7 161 81 8 8 7 60 14 8 21 140 4A 4 77th St E77th St E Rehbein StRehbein St 20th Ave N20th Ave N73rd St73rd StPeterson TrlPeterson TrlCenter StCenter St M il l RdM il l RdMill RdMill RdBrian DrBrian DrW Cedar StW Cedar St20th Ave S20th Ave S21st Ave21st AveCypress S tCypress S tBirch StBirch St Jonquil LnJonquil LnMead o w view DrMead o w view DrO tter View TrlOtter View TrlFisher StFisher StFenway Ave NFenway Ave NElmcrest Ave NElmcrest Ave N180th St N180th St N Fenway Ave NFenway Ave N165th St N165th St N Eth a n Tr l NEthan Tr l N24th Ave N24th Ave NOtter Lake RdOtter Lake RdOtter Lake RdOtter Lake Rd1 5 9 th St N159th St N Everton Ave NEverton Ave N158th St N158th St N Oneka Pkwy NOneka Pkwy NHer itage Pkw y Her itage Pkw y 24th Ave N24th Ave NRosemary Way Rosemary Way E Cedar StE Cedar St Lacas s e DrLacas s e DrW Bald Eagle BlvdW Bald Eagle BlvdAsh StAsh St Europa Trl NEuropa Trl NElmcrest Ave NElmcrest Ave NEl m c r est Ave NEl m c r est Ave NFio n a A v e N Fio n a A v e NEuropa Ave NEuropa Ave NEverton Ave NEverton Ave NFlay Rd NFlay Rd NTart Lake Rd Tart Lake Rd Ethan Ave NEthan Ave N125th St N125th St N24th Ave S24th Ave SW Bald Eagle BlvdW Bald Eagle BlvdOverl a ke AveOverl a ke AveTaylor AveTaylor Ave Henna Ave NHenna Ave N184th St N184th St N 165th St N165th St N Harrow Ave NHarrow Ave NHenna Ave NHenna Ave N180th St N180th St N 180th St N180th St N Goodview Ave NGoodview Ave N157th St N157th St N 145th Cir N145th Cir NHomestead Ave NHomestead Ave NHilo Ave NHilo Ave N135th St N135th St N 1 3 0 t h St N130th St N 130th St N130th St N 132nd St N132nd St N 125th St N125th St NGoodview Ave NGoodview Ave NUpper Heather Ave NUpper Heather Ave NHenna Ave NHenna Ave NHomestead Ave NHomestead Ave NHi l o Ct NHi l o Ct N Homestead Dr NHomestead Dr NDoral RdDoral Rd Bayhill RdBayhill RdHigh P o in t RdHigh P o in t RdJenni LnJenni LnLa Costa DrLa Costa DrIngersoll Ave NIngersoll Ave N165th St N165th St N Inwood Ave NInwood Ave N147th St N147th St N Irish Ave NIrish Ave NIngersoll Ave NIngersoll Ave N157th St N157th St N 155th St N155th St N Ingersoll Ave NIngersoll Ave NIrish Ave NIrish Ave N1 26th St N1 26th St N132nd St N132nd St N Ironwood Ave NIronwood Ave N Inwood Ave NInwood Ave N137th St N137th St NEgg Lake Rd N Egg Lake Rd N Illies Ave NIllies Ave NFenway Blvd NFenway Blvd N1 4 7 th S t N 1 4 7 th S t N O n e k a Lake B lvd N O n e k a Lake B lvd N 35E 35E 61 61 1200 1200 1850 10100 1950 435 165 215 11453 4600 24003450 18002550 3900 1900 39500 1800 42000 1650 2000 1350 2400 6100 3950 2650 5200 255 2050 3400 4700 16500 540540 42001550 3000 140th St N 140th St N 120th St N120th St N North Star Elementary Hugo Estates Intersection with historical safety (severity) concerns; NB bypass lane was added to alleviate NB rear end crashes, but NB LT movements colliding with SB thru traffic remains an issue For more than two decades Hugo has embraced a vision to create a positive identity and instill a unique sense of place in its downtown area. Resident feedback during the 2040 Comp Plan update indicated development on Highway 61 and in downtown should be maximized to provide commercial and residential opportunities. Realization of this community town-center vision will not be achievable without solutions that attract mixed-use investment and promote a sense of security and walkability along and across Highway 61. 147th St. extension completed in 2021 New signal programmed for 2022 Hugo Estates is an identifiable Environmental Justice population Hardwood Creek Tr. corridor is planned to deviate from the RR corridor south of 140th St., using existing facilities on 140th St., Fenway Ave., new alignment south of 130th St., and shoulder along Falcon Ave. (west of the RR corridor) Regional Trail Gap Newly redesigned Lions Park (currently under construction) Intersection reconstruction and signal planned with new North Star Elementary School opening Fall 2022 Consider gateway monumentation/ signage signaling a transition in land use and approach to downtown Legend County Boundary Railroad Trail/Sidewalk Proposed Trail Snowmobile Trail Existing Signal Existing Roundabout School City Hall Existing Regional Trailhead XXXX AADT Water Areas NWI Parks/Golf/Cemetery Agriculture (AG) Low Density (LD) Medium Density Residential (MD) High Density Residential (HD) Mixed Use (MIX) Commercial (COM) Business Park (BP) Industrial (IND) Public/Quasi-Public (PQ) 2040 MUSA Boundary Per City Comp Plan, there are four key areas along the corridor where land use will continue to evolve with development TH 61 Visioning and Jurisdictional Transfer Study | Washington County 33Approach and Methodology Several members of our team, including project manager Beth Engum and task lead Bob Rogers, have completed the advanced SDIC training on how to integrate consent-building methods into engagement activities. We will work openly and honestly with all stakeholders so the study process, recommendations, and implementation plan are viewed as “reasonable” outcomes that are legitimate and technically competent. While it is not realistic to reach consensus with every individual or interest group, our innovative and inclusive engagement approach will develop trust, respect, and consent of even the most cynical stakeholders. As part of the study kickoff, we will work with the project partners to craft a dynamic public involvement plan (PIP) that targets the community and corridor users. The PIP will provide details on the engagement opportunities and strategies planned to encourage public participation through regular communication via electronic means (e.g., online, email, social media) and a variety of virtual and face-to-face meetings. As we implement the plan, we will carry forward project branding to provide continuity and a sense of familiarity to the public. Stakeholder Agency Engagement Buy-in from stakeholder agencies will need to be developed throughout the year over which the study takes place. We intend to embrace these agencies as partners working toward a common goal. Staff from each agency will participate in monthly PMT meetings. Through these meetings, we will build trust as we work through the study tasks. Within the first month of the study, we suggest hosting a goal setting session. The meeting would engage a group broader than the PMT to include representatives from the Washington County Board of Commissioners and Hugo City Council, in addition to MnDOT, county, and city staff. Objectives of the session include: »Facilitate buy-in on elected official and staff levels »Identify and prioritize short- and long-term goals »Discuss what project success looks like »Identify challenges/barriers The session would consist of large- and small-group exercises where attendees can share issues and priorities to be explored during the study. Information obtained during the event would serve as a road map for the study team. Engaging the Community in the Vision Our team is skilled in bringing information to the public in a way that helps them understand how the project will impact them and why their feedback is necessary and valued. We will create a meaningful, innovative, and equitable approach to engagement that will build trust with the community and lead to the successful delivery of projects along Highway 61 that plan for community growth, while improving multimodal safety and operations along the corridor. Our approach to engagement is flexible and will go a long way with the study budget, because we focus on the right tools, the right people, and the right strategies to build project champions throughout the study. We work to maintain these connections so they can be leveraged for further support during future project development activities. The Right Tools, People, and Strategies: Engagement Options Toolbox To successfully address safety and mobility in the Highway 61 study area, while also providing a guide for access management and investment triggers for the corridor, efficiency in understanding the issues and finding recommendations is essential to the study’s success. Therefore, effective engagement is about using proven tools, well-known communication outlets, and tailored strategies to actively engage all stakeholders including those that are commonly underrepresented in public infrastructure projects. Bolton & Menk has worked on numerous transportation corridor studies in the past five years. Through this experience, our team has developed and conducted vastly successful and efficient engagement strategies. Taking a “toolbox” approach, we propose using a combination of robust online engagement, in-person events, and innovative concept tools to illustrate and provide clear explanation for each potential improvement option. Online Interactive Comment Map: For robust online engagement, Bolton & Menk will use INPUTiDTM to collect stakeholder feedback throughout the study process. INPUTiD is our proprietary and highly customizable online comment mapping tool which allows users to provide location-specific comments and respond to comments from others. While the online survey tool is a more traditional way of collecting feedback on conceptual improvements, a preferred corridor concept/vision can be loaded into INPUTiD so participants can toggle through to see and provide feedback on the key features and potential impacts. Check out the example of how we used this interactive mapping tool for Rice Street Visioning in Ramsey County. In-person Events: We also know engagement is most effective if we connect with people where they are. Our outreach plan includes both traditional (open houses) and more innovative in-person events (pop-ups). We propose hosting two traditional open house meetings with the first event occurring after the existing conditions task is wrapping up and corridor needs are being defined. The second open house meeting would occur later in the study once conceptual improvements are developed and options are being screened. Including public stakeholders in both defining the problems and determining solutions will go a long way in building trust and consent. We also propose conducting at least one pop-up event and view Hugo Good Neighbor Days as a great opportunity. As a long-time Hugo resident, Bob knows that this event is widely attended by community members. Another opportunity could be coordinated with the Hugo Business Association at the Kidz n Biz Fest if they again decide to organize this event. While attendees at these community events may or may not live or work along the Highway 61 corridor, you can bet CLICKHERE TH 61 Visioning and Jurisdictional Transfer Study | Washington County 4Approach and Methodology they are stakeholders as they use the highway for their daily commutes, shopping, and recreational activities. Interactive Focus or Small Group Meetings: We feel facilitated and interactive group meetings are essential to engagement in a corridor planning study. The format of these meetings can be flexible to accommodate the target group. For example, a short one-hour virtual meeting can be scheduled with emergency service volunteers or an in-person presentation and focus group meeting can be held with area business owners as part of regularly scheduled Hugo Business Association meetings (held on the second Tuesday of each month). These are examples of those who may need more individualized attention and could benefit from these meetings. Digital and Social Media: Our team will provide content for regular project website updates. Assuming Washington County will host a project website, virtual elements of engagement opportunities including surveys, INPUTiD, technical reports, summaries, and more can be linked to provide additional information and transparency of the study process. We will also provide digital information to key establishments along the corridor like St. John’s Church, Hugo City Hall, and the new North Star Elementary School, which is scheduled to open in fall 2022. We propose requesting these key entities share study materials with their networks and post information in their bulletins/newsletters and on their social media accounts, all directing stakeholders to the project webpage where more study information is available and feedback can be provided. Analog materials like FAQ handouts, corridor issues maps, and surveys can also be provided to community destinations to host at their physical sites. These “meeting in a box” style efforts are low cost and flexible to gather feedback from places where people are comfortable and already gathering. Understanding the root cause of issues in the study area will allow the project team to provide recommendations to improve the corridor. This study requires a broad look at data to inform a holistic approach to community benefit and improvement. This will be incorporated in the development of all project alternatives and coordinated with the applicable county, city, and regional departments and agencies. A high-level summary includes: »Workforce and job opportunities on, along, or impacted by Highway 61 »Opportunities for improvements that support healthy alternatives to access and cross Highway 61, including bicycle facilities »Current development and redevelopment opportunities along the corridor »Areas on the corridor with higher crash rates »Coordination with regards to proposed METRO Purple Line BRT study »Corridor demographic information »StreetLight InSight to identify corridor users and travel patterns, travel time, and speed A study of current and future issues will be completed using a variety of data sources. We will assemble study information that provides a solid corridor understanding to help identify any new community priorities and be incorporated throughout the project area as concepts are developed. As part of this effort, we will reference the multiple planning documents that impact the project area to understand expectations of regional growth and transit plans. Demographics and Land Use Analysis of demographic data is important to determining how the area is transitioning and the types of land uses and demands the corridor may need to serve in the future. We are intimately familiar with data sources and environmental justice tools that not only guide decision making but inform a comprehensive public and agency engagement plan. Our team frequently works in this arena, using our agency reach and financial resources to prop up and learn from groups and individuals that best speak to needs and existing barriers surrounding equity in transportation. We don’t just gather this data to document it; we know how to transform it into a framework tool. Demographics and land use are vitally important for informing conversations about the community’s priorities for existing and future infrastructure. In the Arboretum Area Transportation Plan for Carver County, our team graphically represented this data to shape conclusions on how demographics and land use have been and will continue to influence transportation choices in the area. Check it out. Knowing that changing demographics are already driving these conversations, we will use data sources to, where necessary, update or build upon existing understandings. For example, existing understandings related to access and mobility include: »Employees with limited transportation options seek good paying jobs at businesses located in various locations in the county and region »Older adults are living in our communities in greater number »People with disabilities are moving to communities throughout the county, requiring additional transportation resources to meet their needs »Population growth in the region means there are more people to move within the county and throughout the metropolitan area »Residents are using modes other than a private automobile to get to their destinations Roadway Function We will look at big picture elements related to corridor context within the regional transportation system. Land use (existing and future), route function (locally and within the regional system), and access conditions all play a major role in determining what improvements can and should be made. Highway 61 is an A-minor expander up to CSAH 4 where it transitions to an A-minor collector. This study will assess the roadway to first ensure it is CORRIDOR INVENTORY, CONTEXT, AND COMMUNITY PRIORITIES 3 CLICKHERE TH 61 Visioning and Jurisdictional Transfer Study | Washington County 5Approach and Methodology properly classified and then document the criteria to be met for a proper jurisdictional transfer. Parks, Open Space, and Trails The City of Hugo adopted a trail and sidewalk plan with the last update in 2010. Since then significant investments have been made to provide local connections along and adjacent to the project area to link to the Hardwood Creek Regional Trail, a Tier 2 Regional Bicycle Transportation Network (RBTN) alignment and central feature of the local system through the city. It is also the main conduit linking the local trail system with the larger regional park, Glacial Hills Regional Trail corridor, and trail systems in Washington, Ramsey, Anoka, and Chisago Counties. Highway 61 is a major barrier for pedestrians and bicyclists. We will review the existing and planned trail and sidewalk facilities and connections to guide concept development criteria that prioritizes east-west “low stress” connections across Highway 61. Transit The transit system through the study area will likely expand over the next 20 years to meet the demands from the City of Hugo and surrounding growing communities. We will review city and county comprehensive plans, which currently designate the study area as sufficiently served by dial-a-ride (Transit Link) services with low-density. This challenges any current or near-term idea for fixed routes. The study area is also outside the current Metro Mobility service area. We will lead focused outreach to transit providers to discuss the expected evolution along the corridor and the effect the Purple Line BRT Project may have following implementation and on long-term desires for a connector bus service with additional feeder bus routes between White Bear Lake and Forest Lake. Conversations need to consider any impacts from recent opposition of the proposed route from White Bear Lake. Environmental and Cultural Constraints The information received from the agencies will be incorporated into an environmental screening supplemented with research conducted by our team. This screening will be performed to identify sensitive areas by considering all NEPA social, economic, and environmental categories. This corridor study does not include completing an environmental document; however, the study will be completed so findings can be incorporated into future NEPA documents. Key criteria that will feed into the concept development process will come from the multimodal analysis completed in this task. Data Collection and Corridor Use This task begins with collecting data related to existing issues, trends, and usage based on the different modes of travel and crash history. Our team will gather turning movement count data at key intersections along the corridor that will form the backbone of the traffic analysis. Care will be taken to develop a data collection plan to secure data during “normal” periods. The team will work with project partners to adjust as needed based on external factors. We will also gather historical crash data from MnCMAT. We plan on using StreetLight InSight to understand corridor use at a higher level. The tool will allow our team to ask and answer the following questions, which will be important to understanding what the vision of the corridor could and should be: »Who is using TH 61? Based on trip lengths and OD patterns »How are people using TH 61 and how would that change with changes in access? Based on OD patterns »How do TH 61 and I-35E/I-35 work together as a system? Based on OD patterns, speeds, and usage of both roadways during different periods of the day and year on average »How reliable is travel on TH 61? Based on speed data »How are pedestrians and bicyclists using TH 61 and is there latent demand? Based on trip lengths and usage data from StreetLight/Strava/collected intersection count data Check out the example from the Rice Street Visioning Study. Safety Analysis Our approach to analyzing crash data is GIS based, which allows us to run analysis across the entire network of intersections efficiently and display helpful visualizations. Our analysis will include five years of crash data, within which we will identify crash trends and problem locations where mitigation measures should be analyzed to influence the overall corridor vision. Mapped data will allow our team to create compelling visuals both for project partner and public stakeholder consumption. Multimodal Analysis Preparing a vision for a corridor such as this will require a comprehensive multimodal view from an analysis perspective. Vehicle traffic will be analyzed through use of Synchro/SimTraffic based on the collected data and forecast volume information in peak periods. Analysis will be completed for existing, 2030, and 2040 periods which will allow us to better define timing of improvements and more specifically understand lane geometry needs for potential roundabout treatments. Measures of effectiveness will include delay, queuing, level of service, and corridor/segment travel times. Pedestrian and bicycle demand data will factor into the analysis both through Synchro/SimTraffic as well as in understanding TRANSPORTATION MODE DATA COLLECTION4 CLICKHERE CLICKHERE TH 61 Visioning and Jurisdictional Transfer Study | Washington County 6Approach and Methodology what types of treatments should be considered to cross the highway and what those treatments would mean for non-motorized delay and level of service. Both current and future transit use will be considered in close coordination with Metropolitan Council, Ramsey County, and other Purple Line staff. Transit needs along the route, as well as station location, will be factored into both the analysis, as necessary, as well as the corridor vision concepts. Traffic Forecasting To best meet corridor needs into the future, we will estimate long-term travel demand in the study area via a review of current planning documents and utilization of the Washington County and Metropolitan Council travel demand models. Previous growth estimates show that traffic volumes along the corridor are generally expected to grow by 5,000 to 10,000 vehicles per day (over 10,000 vehicles per day in the core of Hugo) over the next 20 years, however we will work with our project partners to ensure planning assumptions best reflect up-to-date development expectations. Forecasting will provide future volumes for both 2030 and 2040. Results of the forecasting analysis will be filtered through a sensitivity check to add a layer of robustness to the analysis and forecasting process. The intent of the sensitivity analysis is to consider the impact of different scenarios (increased teleworking, CAV, modal shifts, etc.) on the forecasting and what that could mean to corridor demands. Ultimately the goal of this visioning process will be to understand future potentials and construct a vision that can accommodate the possibilities. This could result in a phased approach which could be influenced through a sensitivity process. Such an approach would take additional time and effort but may yield valuable information given current uncertainties and therefore should be considered prior to finalizing the scope of this section. GOAL DRIVEN—Safety and operational analysis completed with this study will be compared to performance goals derived with project partners through the process. These will help frame the expected result of the vision for intersections and corridor segments alike. Access Blueprint Given the future land use anticipated along this corridor, coming to consensus on access spacing as well as defining primary versus secondary access points is a critical piece of a visioning study. A blueprint map depicting these elements will be created by our team through conversations with project partners considering the various relevant guidelines. As development or changes to the intersecting roadways occur, this plan can serve as the basis for decision making to guide those developments in a way that is compatible with the long-term corridor vision. Our approach to concept scoping is to first define the issues and goals of the vision prior to putting ideas on paper. With Tasks 2, 3, and 4 setting the groundwork for these elements, the overall approach to generating and vetting concepts and developing recommendations is described below. Corridor Concepting When setting a corridor vision, both intersection treatments and segment typical sections in between intersections are key elements to discuss and evaluate during the visioning process. We generally consider this a three-step process:1. Determine typical section alternatives – How many travel lanes are required, how are non-motorized uses accommodated, how do segment needs fit within or impact existing right-of-way, etc.?2. Determine intersection alternatives – Based on the analysis completed in Task 4, what intersection locations require upgraded treatments in terms of traffic control type and lane geometry to best suit the current and future needs of the corridor?3. Create corridor concepts – Combine both segment and intersection elements into various corridor concepts depicting how individual elements can work together to meet corridor goals Define Typical Section Alternatives: Our team will use BeyondTypicals, an interactive typical section tool to develop cross section views along the corridor. These sections can easily be constructed on the fly in a matter of minutes during design workshops and are at a quality level that is easily understood by the public. Check out the video we made for the TH 61 corridor. These typical sections will allow the project team to quickly move from the brainstorming phase to public engagement to get meaningful input on ideas before full corridor concepts are prepared. Define Intersection Alternatives: Based on existing and future operational and safety issues at study intersections, our team will develop a set of potential intersection treatments to analyze. Representative treatment images or drawings will be used to the extent possible to depict the general nature of the intersection design. This process should and will focus on the big picture with respect to various treatments and access management strategies versus getting into detailed intersection geometrics. CORRIDOR MANAGEMENT CONCEPTS, FEASIBILITY REVIEW, AND RECOMMENDATIONS5 CLICKHERE CLICKHERE CLICKHERE TH 61 Visioning and Jurisdictional Transfer Study | Washington County 7Approach and Methodology Create Corridor Concepts: With both vetted typical section and intersection alternatives in hand, we will create overall corridor concepts to depict the general intent of improvements. This will facilitate stakeholder and public understanding of where different design features start/stop, what intersection control needs are, and how access is intended to be managed. These conceptual visualizations may range from high-level sketch planning to more detailed CAD concept drawings depending on the level of detail necessary to convey the ideas. Concept work will consider right-of-way impacts at a high level, so stakeholders understand general impacts. Additionally, general space for water quality and drainage features will be noted as appropriate to plan for the full footprint of needs ultimately required. Evaluate Alternatives We will complete an evaluation of the alternatives against the performance goals developed for the corridor. This may occur at the corridor level, intersection level, or segment level depending on the variety of feasible alternatives. This analysis paired with results from environmental screening and the public engagement will serve as a basis for discussion with project partners and ultimately allow the process to develop recommendations for the corridor vision. We will develop a fiscally responsible implementation plan that prioritizes short-, mid-, and long-term transportation improvement recommendations. Our team understands the need to divide the project into manageable, right-sized segments and components that have independent utility. The plan will document the needs, triggers, timing, responsible agency, and potential funding sources for each project. We are familiar with state and federal funding requirements and will develop the vision with competitive application requirements in mind. Ideally, the independent projects will achieve multiple purposes being eligible for a variety of funding sources. Development and approval of the implementation plan is not just another study task; it is a vital part to live on past agency adoption of the vision. Maintaining and building upon study momentum is best achieved by developing visually clear messaging that aligns with multiple agendas of legislative representatives and further results in widespread support of the vision's purpose at the local, state, and federal levels. This widespread support will be fostered throughout the study process through a sense of partnership and commitment of a shared goal. Trunk Highway 41 is a State Highway that also serves as main street for Historic Downtown Chaska. Our team developed a vision that preserved mobility of the trunk highway system while also creating a vision of a downtown environment which will support vast economic opportunity. Since city, county, and state adoption of the vision, many parallel commercial, housing, and institutional redevelopment efforts have been planned and are making progress in Downtown Chaska, vastly achieving the goal of the Highway 41 project being the catalyst for downtown redevelopment. Construction will begin in spring 2023 and be completed in fall 2024. One of the most vital pieces of project success was the implementation plan which led to securing of over $10.7 million in completive funds from five different programs to complete the funding gap in less than two years of study approval. Check out our legislative graphic from the Ramsey Gateway US Highway 10/169 project. The final corridor study report is the culmination of the technical analysis, community engagement, corridor vision recommendations, and action items. A few months into the project, we will draft an outline for the PMT to weigh-in on. As we near completion of the 12-month study, we will prepare a complete draft of the study report for each of the stakeholder agencies to review and comment on. While this will be a technical report, we will summarize the complete study in an easy to understand, image-rich executive summary to be posted on the study website and used with elected officials, non-technical stakeholders, and the public. The summary documentation will highlight the study process including methodologies, findings, recommendations, and implementation plan. Following SDIC principles, we want viewers to decide that the study and the process followed resulted in “reasonable” outcomes that are legitimate and technically competent. We propose to organize the summary report into a story map format that guides the reader through the various study phases. Check out the story map Bolton & Menk prepared for Carver County as a summary of the TH 5 Arboretum Area Vision study. JURISDICTIONAL TRANSFER PLAN6 FINAL REPORT AND PROJECT CLOSEOUT7 10101010 1010 1010 1010 1010 1010 1010 10101010 MISSISSI PPI RI VE R 10101010 90% Ramsey GatewayUS Highway 10/169 Project Highway 10 is a critical multimodal transportation link between Minneapolis/St. Paul and Fargo US Highway 10/169 Importance »A principal arterial carrying up to 55,000 vehicles per day (2,800 heavy commercial vehicles) »Significant commuter and freight corridor between Minneapolis – St Paul, northwestern Minnesota, and into North Dakota »Busiest rail line in MN with 57-81 freight trains and 14 commuter trains per day »Connection to northern Minnesota lakes and outdoor tourism industry Project Schedule 2021 2022 2023 Preliminary Design Final Design Right of Way (ROW) Acquisitions 2020J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D 2024J F M A M J J A S O N D Ramsey Gateway Project Construction Environmental Documentation Total InvestmentSecured!$138M 10%20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% (Inflated to 2025 dollars) Corridor Refinements BNSF RAILWAY RIVERDALE DR RAM SEY B LVD SUNF I SH LA K E B LVD 169 100% Funding Sources: Anoka County, City of Ramsey, MnDOT CHIP, INFRA, State General Obligation Bonds, State Bond Funds, State Rail Funds, 2020 and 2021 Bond Funds, Metropolitan Council Regional Solicitation, MN Highway Freight Program, Coronavirus Relief/Response Funds For More Information! Scan the QR code, to the left, with your smartphone camera to visit the Ramsey Gateway project website! AnokaCountyRamseyGateway.com This project will provide grade separations of US Highway 10/169 and the BNSF Railway to address major crash and congestion issues that are greatly impacting the movement of goods and people between the Minneapolis/Saint Paul metro area and greater northern Minnesota.Project benefits include: Highway 10 Rum River Bridge Replacement and Intersection Improvements Project dot.state.mn.us/metro/projects/hwy10-anoka/ Highway 10/169 Improvement Project AnokaHwy10.com Project Need »207 crashes between 2015-2019, 3 fatal crashes in the last 10 years »Crash rate 2x the state average »Traffic backups approaching 1 mile by 2025 and almost 4 miles in 2045 »Fully funded Anoka and Elk River 2023/24 projects will result in Ramsey having the only two remaining at-grade traffic signals on the US Highway 10/169 freeway system from Minneapolis/St Paul to Elk River. Reliable movement of regional railroad and highway freight and commuter traffic Efficiently serves 2045 traffic projections (75,000 vehicles per day) Over 94% DelayReduction SignificantCrashReduction City of Anoka Highway 10/169 construction projects significantly underway in early 2022 Highway 10/169 Improvement Project Construction Rum River Bridge Replacement Construction City of Anoka Construction Projects See project website links in top right corner CLICKHERE CLICKHERE CLICKHERE CLICKHERE TH 61 Visioning and Jurisdictional Transfer Study | Washington County WORK PLAN AND SCHEDULE Angie Bersaw will serve as the quality manager responsible for effectively developing and executing our quality management plan (QMP). The QMP will be geared to produce deliverables in a well-defined and systematic fashion, meeting the highest level of quality expected by Washington County. While the quality manager is responsible for overall quality management, discipline and task leaders are responsible for specific deliverables falling within their area of expertise. These task leads are identified in the key deliverables table below. The QMP will describe the roles each member of the team plays when applying the requirements, guidelines, and responsibilities for developing and implementing quality control and quality assurance associated with the preparation of the deliverables. Task/Subtask Lead Key Deliverables 1.0 Project Management Beth 1.1 Schedule Beth Schedule 1.2 PMT Meetings Beth Agendas, Minutes, Handouts 1.3 Monthly Progress Reports and Invoices Beth Invoices, Progress Reports 2.0 Public and Agency Involvement Bob 2.1 Project Goals and Objectives Bob Memo 2.1a Elected Officials Goal-Setting Session additional value-added task Beth/Bob Presentation, Layouts 2.2 Public Involvement Plan (PIP)Bob PIP 2.3 Public Outreach Meetings Hugo Good Neighbor Days Pop-Up—Saturday, June 11, 2022 Business and Property Owner Meetings—July/August 2022 Public Open Houses—August 2022, February 2023 Bob Invitations, Sign-In Sheets, Presentation Slides/Boards, Handouts, Event and Comment Summaries 2.3a Study Website additional value-added task Bob Website URL, Content 3.0 Corridor Inventory, Context, and Community Priorities Ashley 3.1 Corridor Context Corrin Online Story Map, Interactive Dashboards, Geodatabase Files and Maps Used for Analysis 3.2 Land Uses, Key Resources, and Planning Issues Ashley 3.3 Population, Employment, and Land Use Density Data Ashley 4.0 Transportation Mode Data Collection Ross 4.1 Traffic Infrastructure and Operations/Safety (Existing and Future)Kevin Memo 4.2 Pedestrian, Bicycle, and Transit Needs Ashley Memo 4.3 Roadway Design Guidance and Potential Issues Chris Memo/Access Blueprint 4.4 Future Corridor Performance Goals Ross Memo 4.5 Data Collection Kelsey Turning Movement Counts/StreetLight Data 4.6 Crash Data and Safety Kelsey Memo 4.7 Other Data and Reporting of Travel Patterns, Traffic Operations, and Other Modes Kevin Memo 5.0 Corridor Management Concepts, Feasibility Review, and Recommendations Ross 5.1 Brainstorm Corridor Options Chris Layouts, Typical Sections 5.2 Screen Options Chris Screening Criteria Matrix 5.3 Identify and Recommend High-Priority Projects/Corridor Management Concepts and Actions Ross 6.0 Jurisdictional Transfer Plan Ashley 6.1 Jurisdictional Transfer Plan Ashley Implementation Plan (Table) 7.0 Final Report and Project Closeout Bob 7.1 Final Study Report Outline Bob Outline 7.2 Final Study Report Bob Online Story Map, Executive Summary Document 7.3 Study Closeout Beth 8Work Plan and Schedule We have developed the TH 61 Corridor Study schedule detailing the anticipated work tasks and completion dates. This schedule is based on our review of the project background and scope of work included in the RFP and our experience on other similar projects. This schedule has been structured to meet the tentative project schedule identified in the RFP. Upon selection, Bolton & Menk will work with county staff to prepare a critical path method schedule that details study milestones and linked tasks and deliverables. TH 61 Visioning and Jurisdictional Transfer Study | Washington County Bolton & Menk has assembled a highly motivated and experienced group of planning and engineering professionals for this study. Our team values and understands the importance of ultimately achieving a vision that can be supported by stakeholders and efficiently implemented. Our team’s project manager, Beth Engum, will apply her proven leadership and stakeholder engagement skills, founded on the principles of Systematic Development of Informed Consent (SDIC), to navigate the county and stakeholders through a process that will result in a context sensitive, sustainable solution. We are also proposing Beth as the project manager for the Washington County 28/95 project. She has the required availability, will dedicate the time necessary to meet your expectations on the projects, and will be 100% available throughout the duration of both. KEY PERSONNEL AND EXPERIENCE Beth Engum, PE Project Manager Eric Johnson, PE Principal-in-Charge Angie Bersaw, AICP Quality Manager Public and Agency Involvement Corridor Inventory, Context, and Community Priorities Transportation Mode Data Collection Corridor Management Concepts, Feasibility Review, and Recommendations Jurisdictional Transfer Plan Final Report and Project Closeout Bob Rogers, AICP Task Lead Ashley Hudson, AICP Task Lead Ross Tillman, PE Task Lead Ross Tillman, PE Task Lead Ashley Hudson, AICP Task Lead Bob Rogers, AICP Task Lead Corrin Bemis Corridor Context Chris Braband, PE Concepts and Graphics Kelsey Retherford, PE Data Collection and Operations/Safety Analysis Kevin Mackey, PE, PTOE Traffic Forecasting 9 Work Plan and Schedule/Key Personnel and Experience 2022 2023 Task Task May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May ESTABLISH the VisionProject Management PMT Meetings • Study Goals and Objectives Elected Officials Goal Setting Session Stakeholder Engagement Open House Meetings Pop-up and/or Focus Group Meetings ACHIEVE the VisionCorridor Inventory, Context, and Community Priorities Transportation Mode Data Collection • Existing and Future No Build Operations/Safety Assessment • Ped/Bike and Transit Needs • Roadway Design Guidance and Issues Identification • Future Corridor Performance Goals IMPLEMENT the VisionCorridor Management Concepts, Feasibility Review, and Recommendations • Brainstorm, Develop, and Screen Corridor Options • Identify/Recommend/Prioritize Projects/Corridor Management Concepts and Actions Jurisdictional Transfer Plan Draft/Final Report and Project Closeout Notice to Proceed TH 61 Visioning and Jurisdictional Transfer Study | Washington County 1010Key Personnel and Experience Beth Engum, PE • Project Manager Beth will set the direction, develop a creative approach, and lead consensus-building efforts to ensure the study is successfully completed. She will actively manage the scope, schedule, budget, and risks. Beth has more than 22 years of experience as a civil engineer and project manager specializing in infrastructure design with an emphasis on implementable transportation solutions for public agencies. Her project experience spans planning, final design, and construction phases and includes arterial roadway reconstruction, freeway interchanges, roundabouts, trail design, neighborhood street reconstructions, and drainage and stormwater management. Beth is skilled at leading public and stakeholder engagement for complex, multiagency projects through public open houses and one-on-one meetings with property/business owners and special interest groups. Having worked for DOTs, counties, and cities, Beth has a unique understanding of public agencies, their needs, and how best to serve them. BETH'S PROJECT EXPERIENCE: Highway 47 Pre-Design Study (MnDOT Metro District), City of Saint Francis (while at another firm)—A tragic traffic accident involving middle school pedestrians expedited this community-focused study through the heart of an established commercial business district. Beth was the project manager to evaluate a 1.5-mile segment of TH 47 through the City of Saint Francis to identify concepts to improve pedestrian and bicycle safety and mobility and reduce vehicle speeds throughout the mixed-use corridor. A wide-variety of potential improvements were identified focusing on creative use of expansive right-of-way, narrowing travel lanes and adding curb and gutter, lighting, landscaping, access spacing, intersection types, school circulation, pedestrian/bicyclist crossing locations and treatment, and context-sensitive solutions to preserve the character and encourage growth in the downtown business district. The scope included project management, stakeholder and public involvement, traffic analysis, and concept design. Beth was intimately involved in the extensive stakeholder and public involvement comprised of public open houses, social media, press releases, pop-up events, and engagement with local staff; elected officials at the city, county, and school board levels; area businesses and landowners; and schools, including teachers and students. CONTACT: Melissa Barnes, PE—MnDOT Metro North Area Manager • 1500 County Road B2 W, Roseville, MN 55113 • melissa.barnes@state.mn.us • 612-499-8729 • Original Completion Date: March 2020 • Final Completion Date: March 2020 Southwest Arterial Study (Washington County), City of Cottage Grove and Grey Cloud Island Township (while at another firm)—In response to significant current and anticipated commercial, industrial, and residential development in Southwest Washington County, the county revisited a previous effort to identify a route for an east-west arterial roadway between TH 61 and the Mississippi River. Beth was the deputy project manager and public engagement lead for the study to determine the route to serve the area's growing transportation needs and reduce truck traffic/ relieve congestion on parts of the existing network. The scope included development and screening of several alternative alignments, public and agency involvement, as well as railroad coordination, data collection, traffic analysis, environmental documentation, and development of an implementation and funding plan. Beth led the preparation for public and agency engagement events, including the elected officials goal setting session, two in-person public open houses with content and opportunities for feedback also available online, and business/landowner meetings. CONTACT: Kevin Peterson, PE—Project Manager • 11660 Myeron Road N, Stillwater, MN 55082 • kevin.peterson@co.washington.mn.us • 651-430-4330 • Original Completion Date: Summer 2020 • Final Completion Date: Fall 2020 Eric Johnson, PE • Principal-in-Charge Eric will regularly meet with Beth to discuss progress, schedule, and budget to ensure proactive management of the contract. A transportation engineer since 1999, Eric manages projects for numerous city, county, and state clients. He turns ideas and problems into a vision all stakeholders can support. He has developed a solid understanding of funding opportunities and provides support internally and externally to make projects happen. Eric enjoys developing innovative solutions that can be funded and built. ERIC'S PROJECT EXPERIENCE: Arboretum Area Transportation Plan, Carver County—Eric completed this complex study looking at the arterial system in the eastern part of the county. This study engaged three communities (Chaska, Chanhassen, and Victoria), the University of Minnesota, MnDOT, and Carver County to develop a $200+ million vision that will be implemented over the next 20 years. This vision includes a partial displaced left intersection at TH 5 and TH 41, which may be the first one built in Minnesota. Eric helped the team secure the first $10 million in regional solicitation funding in the last cycle, moving the top priority idea from the study to a funded project in 2025. CSAH 12 (Stillwater Road/75th Street), Washington County—The initial study phase developed a corridor vision supported by Washington County, Mahtomedi ISD #832, and the Cities of Grant, Mahtomedi, and Willernie. As project manager, Eric led a team to facilitate a process that helped the agencies find a unified vision and corresponding implementation plan that transformed downtown. TH 41 and CSAH 61 Downtown Improvements, City of Chaska, Carver County, and MnDOT—Eric served as project manager, and represented MnDOT and Carver County on this controversial study/preliminary design effort that evaluated alternatives for Highway 41 through downtown Chaska and both corridors through Chaska, Chanhassen, and Carver. After much hard work and compromise, we have a $70+ million vision. The first segment was constructed last year, completed by our team. The next project is nearly funded, which is the $28 million downtown Chaska segment. Angie Bersaw, AICP • Quality Manager Angie will ensure study deliverables are high quality and conform with county and project partner requirements. Angie leads Bolton & Menk’s transportation planning practice. She has led more than 70 transportation and environmental projects in the last two decades including more than 30 corridor studies, 30 transportation plans, TH 61 Visioning and Jurisdictional Transfer Study | Washington County 11 5 small area plans, and multiple environmental processes and documentation. Angie also designs and leads public involvement processes for complex, multijurisdictional planning studies. She is formally trained in the SDIC and excels at finding solutions that can be supported by a diverse group of stakeholders. ANGIE'S PROJECT EXPERIENCE: Arboretum Area Transportation Plan, Carver County—Angie served as the deputy project manager leading project stakeholders in understanding the purpose and need of the project, identifying the problems, goals, and range of solutions as well as why the recommended vision was proposed. TH 41 and CSAH 61 Downtown Improvements, City of Chaska, Carver County, and MnDOT—Angie led the corridor study phase of this controversial study/preliminary design effort. She led all planning elements (existing conditions, purpose and need framework, goals and objectives, alternatives evaluation, and study report) and public involvement. This required two years of collaboration, finding flexibility among state and local partners/ stakeholders, and building trust through the process to find common goals and compromise. Bob Rogers, AICP • LEAD: Public and Agency Involvement; Final Report and Project Closeout Bob, a long-time Hugo resident, will develop a robust and focused public and agency engagement plan. He will also prepare the final report and executive summary. Bob is a senior planner who began his career in 1995. He is experienced in transportation, land use, and environmental planning, including a strong portfolio of complex transportation projects and deep history leading the completion of alternatives development/evaluation for state and federal level environmental review and documentation. Over the course of Bob’s career, he has served as project manager and/or task leader for more than 50 projects involving preliminary design, environmental documentation, and land use planning. Having worked on projects through all stages of development, Bob understands the critical nature of open and collaborative decision making. He works closely with local, state, and federal agencies and community stakeholders to develop multimodal transportation solutions in a variety of built and natural environments. Bob has also been actively involved with state and federal transportation policy and funding through grant writing services. BOB'S PROJECT EXPERIENCE: Highway 36 Corridor Study and Access Management Plan, MnDOT Metro and Washington County—This study focused on developing a corridor plan for TH 36 between I-694 and TH 120. The study involved a multijurisdictional study team with federal, state, county, and city representatives. Bob served as the lead transportation planner responsible for assessment of existing conditions, development of the study goals and purpose and need statement, alternatives evaluation/screening, and public engagement. The TH 36 corridor study resulted in recommendations and conceptual designs for grade separated interchanges at CSAH 35 (Hadley Avenue), along with a Gateway Trail underpass, and at TH 120 (Century Avenue). Highway 12 (Willmar) Corridor Vision Plan, MnDOT District 7—This study identified a long-range corridor vision with conceptual improvements needed to support Willmar's land use plans for new development as well as redevelopment through the community. Bob served as the project manager and led all public/agency engagement efforts. Ross Tillman, PE • LEAD: Transportation Mode Data Collection; Corridor Management Concepts, Feasibility Review, and Recommendations Ross will lead all traffic performance data collection and modeling efforts. He will also identify corridor management concepts and design elements for priority projects. Ross is a principal transportation engineer with Bolton & Menk who began his career in 2010 and has since gained experience across an array of transportation engineering disciplines. While his expertise is rooted in traffic engineering, Ross’s progressive project experience includes planning, preliminary and final design, corridor studies, traffic analyses, intersection control evaluations, project funding, and traffic signal coordination and timing. He understands that effective communication with all stakeholders is imperative to a successful project and enjoys interacting with members of the public to discuss transportation issues. ROSS'S PROJECT EXPERIENCE: Arboretum Area Transportation Plan, Carver County—This subarea study focused on identifying a vision for Highway 5 and the surrounding county highways in the Cities of Chaska, Chanhassen, and Victoria. Ross was responsible for traffic modeling and concept design for 12 miles of corridors, including expansion, signalizing intersections, adding roundabouts, 2- to 3-lane conversions, and building alternative intersections. The complex project included numerous subareas on various timelines for technical development based on a tiered public engagement approach. Given the large study area, many data sources were required to complete the analysis and generate recommendations. This included origin-destination data from StreetLight to understand travel patterns and how improvements to the network could reroute traffic as well as visitor/ticketing data from the Minnesota Landscape Arboretum to understand how their operation impacts the adjacent roadways. Typical data sources such as traffic volumes and crash data were also collected. CSAH 12 (Stillwater Road/75th Street), Washington County—Ross led a corridor study to determine the CSAH 12 corridor vision through the Cities of Mahtomedi, Willernie, and Grant. The project culminated with a locally accepted vision. He also led the final design delivery for Phase I improvements identified in the study. Ashley Hudson, AICP • LEAD: Corridor Inventory, Context, and Community Priorities; Jurisdictional Transfer Plan Ashley will establish the corridor background and outline a process to change the corridor’s jurisdiction. Since beginning her career in 2011, Ashley has developed a range of skills as a transportation planner. She fills multiple roles on an Key Personnel and Experience TH 61 Visioning and Jurisdictional Transfer Study | Washington County 12Key Personnel and Experience/Study Area Representation/Summary assortment of projects, including corridor studies and designs, regional system planning, and multiuse trail studies. She uses her creativity by guiding the creation of visual-heavy materials to communicate project needs, processes, anticipated impacts and benefits, recommendations, and implementation plans clearly and effectively to stakeholders and the public. As the leader of Bolton & Menk's transportation project funding team, she is very engaged with how projects are funded within an agency’s planning and budget and a wide array of competitive sources. Ashley has followed funding for many years as a member of the Minnesota Transportation Alliance, and she currently serves on the legislative committee to help develop and promote the legislative agenda of the organization, including passage of specific bills. With this experience and knowledge, she has excellent capabilities in aligning projects with funding sources, developing comprehensive implementation and funding plans, and grant writing and research. Under Ashley’s leadership, Bolton & Menk has helped clients secure $252 million in the last ten years, leveraging $583 million in total project costs. ASHLEY'S PROJECT EXPERIENCE: Highway 10 Ramsey Gateway, Anoka County—The Highway 10 Ramsey Gateway project team continued to develop their locally supported vision with preliminary and final design of two grade-separated interchanges. Ashley led the public engagement efforts and several funding pursuits, managed the funding plan, and contributed to fulfilling the requirements of an EA re-evaluation. She helped secure more than $60 million in competitive funds and gained public support to provide new interchanges, grade separation of the BNSF Railway, and construct new local frontage road connections. TH 41 and CSAH 61 Downtown Improvements, City of Chaska, Carver County, and MnDOT—Ashley developed and led a strategic funding plan that successfully secured $10.7 million in competitive funds for a $28 million project. The secured funding package will construct the City of Chaska’s vision to revitalize its historic downtown as the hub of community destinations and gathering places, while maintaining the functionality of the CSAH 61 and TH 41 corridor, including the TH 41 regional Minnesota River crossing. Bolton & Menk has a trusted relationship with Washington County and communities within the county. We believe our local knowledge will benefit the project team and bring community perspectives to the table. Ryan Goodman, principal engineer in our Oakdale office, serves as city engineer for Forest Lake, although no one on our TH 61 Visioning Study team provides services to the City of Forest Lake. This project is being led by our transportation group, which has internal separation from the staff that regularly serves the communities within Washington County. In our proposal we hope to have demonstrated a thorough understanding of the project objectives and our approach to collectively creating a road map for the corridor characterized by a shared, implementable vision. We understand the corridor can be a barrier in the community or a catalyst for achieving the mutual goals of the county and city. STUDY AREA REPRESENTATION SUMMARY WHY IS BOLTON & MENK THE BEST TEAM FOR THE PROJECT? There are three primary reasons you should choose Bolton & Menk for this project: We understand the role of county roads within the regional transportation system Our local experts know how to effectively engage your stakeholders We create implementable, achievable visions our clients can use County Road Experience Our team is led by a project manager who is intimately familiar with the role a county road plays within the greater transportation system, both how it is defined by the community through which it passes and how it shapes the way the surrounding land is developed and utilized. Public Engagement Expertise The TH 61 Visioning Study represents an investment in the community. As demonstrated by our team make-up and public involvement approach, our team brings hometown credibility and a collaborative spirit to engaging the PMT and public and developing consensus toward a realistic vision that will benefit the area for decades to come. Vision Implementation A vision that lives only on paper represents unrealized goals and a waste of resources. Our multidisciplinary team brings recent local experience developing the only kind of vision that is important: an implementable one. As set forth in our work plan, we will lead Washington County, the City of Hugo, and MnDOT through the process to develop a vision that is achievable in the time frame identified, having acknowledged and set a path through the challenges and constraints. 1 2 3