HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012 [04] Apr 19 April 19, 2012
Page 1 of 3
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the St. Joseph City Council met in regular session on Thursday,
April 19 at 7:OOPM in the St. Joseph City Hall, opening with the pledge of allegiance.
Members Present: Mayor Rick Schultz, Councilors Renee Symanietz, Dale Wick, Steve Frank, Bob Loso
and Finance Director Lori Bartlett.
City Representatives Present: Public Works Director Terry Thene, City Engineer Randy Sabart.
Others Present: Mike Kotila, Scott Mareck, Tom Klein, S Kara Hennes, S Paula Revier, Holden Hartert,
Dylan Braun, Brandon Karnik, Derek Larson, Herman Gangl, Tom Gustafson, and S. T Schiller.
Approve Agenda: Symanietz made a motion to approve the agenda adding public comments and
MSA Mileage Designation. The motion was seconded by Frank and passed unanimously.
Public Comments
Frank stated that it is hard for him to identify what has changed in the Transportation Plan feels that it is
hard to tell what has changed in the Transportation plan and has a lot of questions. It is his
understanding that the Transportation Committee has indicated that there are not many changes, but if
the plan extends to 2025 he is not ready to adopt the plan at this meeting. If there are changes to the
plan, there should be public discussion and public hearings as was completed in 2006. Frank stated that
he feels rushed to adopt the plan and he is not ready to vote to adopt the plan at this meeting.
Municipal State Aid Designation of Streets: City Engineer Randy Sabart presented the Council with the
final map designating the mileage for Minnesota State Aid Funding (MSA). New street designations
include: East Baker to Minnesota Street, Northland Drive to Jasmine Lane and Jasmine Lane to County
Road 2. The only section to be deleted from the existing MSA system is the western portion of Field
Street as illustrated before the completion of the corridor study.
Frank made a motion authorizing the Mayor and Administrator to execute Resolution 2012 -007
Revoking the western portion of Field Street as previously designated and Resolution 2012 -008
Adopting the revised MSA road network. The motion was seconded by Symanietz and passed
unanimously.
Transportation Plan Update: Sabart stated that the in December 2011 the City Council authorized the
updating of the 2006 Transportation Plan. The update includes incorporating the final results of the north
and south corridor studies as well as reviewing road classifications. To facilitate the process, a
transportation committee was established by the City Council, whose task was to review and recommend
an amendment to the transportation plan that is reflective of the network changes and any classification
changes. The Committee was assisted by Scott Mareck, Executive Director of the St. Cloud Area
Planning Organization (APO), Mike Kotila, Sr. Transportation Engineer from SEH and Randy Sabart, City
Engineer.
Sabart turned the floor over to Scott Mareck of the APO to provide a brief synopsis of transportation
planning. Mareck provided the following information:
• Transportation consists of four (4) different types of trips: External to External; External to
Internal; Internal to External; and Internal to Internal.
• Road Classifications include: Principal Arterials (High level of mobility and very limited
access; primarily serves intra -state or interstate trips); Minor Arterials (medium length
trips within a regional urban center; mobility is primary focus limited at grade access);
Collectors (provides mobility and land access); Local Streets (very short trips with a focus
on direct property access.
• Spacing of road classifications is an important part of transportation planning. The
following is a spacing guide: Principal Arterials: 2 — 6 miles; Minor Arterials % to 1 mile;
Collectors % to 1 /2 miles.
Frank questioned how growth impacts the road classification and design. Mareck responded that
functional road classification considers the existing use and future plan. If a given roadway today is
April 19, 2012
Page 2 of 3
designated to be a collector, is not pre- determined that it will always be a collector road. If it is declared
as part of the plan today as future growth - then that is what it will be.
Frank questioned if there is a percent of existing collector roads that become one with greater road
capacity. Mareck confirmed the roads are looked at a case by case basis and the Council will determine
in the Transportation Plan which roads to change depending on land use choices.
Randy Sabart introduced Mike Kotila, Senior Transportation Engineer. Kotila presented a brief overview
of the purpose of a transportation plan, a review of the existing transportation network, a view of the
future transportation network, including traffic forecast and current and future trails. The following is a
summary of the presentation:
• The Plan policy and program guidance needed to make appropriate transportation related
decisions.
• Defines an integrated transportation system to serve existing and future travel needs.
• Provides access management guidance to maintain roadway safety and capacity.
• Defines long term needs for right -of -way preservation.
• Provides design guide to include typical cross - sections for minor arterials, community collectors
and neighborhood collectors.
• Examples of Road classifications within the City
o Principal Arterials —1 -94 and County Road 75
o Minor Arterials — County Road 2 and County Road 133
o Minor Collector — Callaway Street
• The existing transportation network aerial has been updated to reflect current conditions using
current definitions. While the roads are roads are working today, future traffic and development
changes the long term viability. For example, access points on CR 75 could be reduced as
development occurs.
• The future transportation illustration has been updated to reflect the revised network and impact
at full build out of the planning areas identified in the St. Joseph Comprehensive Plan.
• An illustration was presenting identifying the revised network based on the completed corridor
studies.
• Field Street is illustrated based on the approved G2a alternative approved by the City Council
and the final product of the corridor study. The alignment of field street to the east recognizes the
historic properties that should be avoided.
• Neighborhood collections should be planned at 1/4 intervals.
Schultz stated that one of the purposes of the plan is to identify areas of transition using projected growth
as the basis. The goal of the plan should be to phase the transition and prepare for the future avoiding
future neighborhood conflicts. Kotila concurred with Schultz and stated that part of managing the plan is
to develop safe neighborhoods and streets, knowing when to limit access and managing private
driveways. He further stated that this type of planning cannot occur without the necessary tools such as a
transportation plan and this same plans provides for consistency throughout the City.
Wick stated that while he concurs with Kotila, he has concerns how a transition occurs when there is an
existing neighborhood such as that on 4 Avenue SE. The section of 4 between Minnesota Street and
Baker is narrow with homes close to the road and development has converted 4 Ave to a collector.
Kotila concurred that the property referred to is not ideally suited for a collector but functions as such and
has been modeled through the APO as such. Whether or not a road carries a classification does not
necessary correlate to how residents use the roads.
Kotila stated that it is paramount for a city to have a transportation plan that serves as a backbone for the
City. What we find is the minor arterials are carrying future volumes in the 5,000- 10,000 cars per day
range, parallel to streets like 4th. Therefore if College Avenue is designed and serving the higher
demand, traffic overflow would not use community collectors. With regard to design standards, a 36 foot
wide street falls within the parameters for neighborhood and collector streets. While that may seem
narrow they can still accommodate the traffic.
Symanietz questioned if the apartment complex in Graceview Estates was considered in the traffic
modeling. Sabart stated that the transportation network was considered when the plat was developed
April 19, 2012
Page 3 of 3
and one of the delays in the project was resistance on the developer's part to construct Callaway Street.
This is an example of why the backbone of the transportation plan must be in place. Schultz stated that
the Transportation Committee did discuss 4 Avenue and the impacts of traffic. He concurred with Kotila
that a plan needs to be established that manages access and traffic.
Mareck stated that good transportation planning has the governing body considering the community and
transportation system as a whole, establishing a plan efficient and safe system spacing, and good
continuity with an adequate mix of roadways. If you commit as a Community to systematically building
out a system of that nature, you will have a healthy system that doesn't inadvertently impact
neighborhoods.
Frank questioned if changes in transportation over the past 10 years, such as alternative forms of
transportation, impact the transportation planning today. Mareck discussed the other modes of
transportation and impacts in areas. When modeling the information multi model transportation is
included and calculated by regional percentages. Like all calculations they include a margin of error.
With regard to changes in urban planning, there have been significant trends in the past 10 to 15 years.
Kotila stated that the plan before the Council has been updated to include the most recent trail plans as
illustrated in the 2008 Master Park and Trail Plan. In addition, the APO non - motorized trail plan and
Wobegon trails are illustrated.
Sabart and Kotila identified the final remaining steps for amending the Transportation Plan.
• Adoption of Plan
• Incorporate the Transportation Plan into the City's Comprehensive Plan
• Use plan in preparation of the City's Capital Improvement Program (CIP)
• Work with Stearns County, MnDOT & APO to apply for grants and program funding
• Share Plan with Townships. Facilitate periodic joint planning Sessions.
• Review Plan periodically; make adjustments to reflect changes, new issues, policies, etc.
Frank discussed the spacing and accidents that occurred when additional signal lights were added to CR
75 and questioned Kolila how the City proactively addresses these same concerns on the realigned CR 2.
Kotila stated that signals and timing is more difficult on new alignments as driving trends will need to be
monitored. He further stated that signal lights must met federal warrants before they can be installed so
sometimes it becomes a waiting strategy or balance act.
Frank questioned how the Transportation Plan is amended, how often it should be reviewed and the most
efficient manner to work with the stakeholders such as the County, Township or APO. Mareck stated that
the Transportation Plan should be considered a living document that is used when considering
development plans and future expansion areas. The benefit of using the plan is consistency with land
use, goals of the City and a safe and efficient transportation network. Schultz stated that the City has
reviewed the Comprehensive Plan approximately every five years and the Transportation plan is part of
that document.
Wick questioned some discrepancies from the old plan with the number of households per zone. For
example full build out of 218 homes in sections 128 & 88 homes in 130 north & south of County Rd 75.
The question is whether or not these numbers are consistent with the 2035 projections.
Schultz commended the committee for the plan and time spent on reviewing the plan. He recommended
the Councilors review the document; accept any feedback from residents and the Council can consider
adoption at a future meeting.
Adjourn: Loso made a motion to adjourn at 8:15 PM; seconded by Wick and passed unanimously.
udy eyrens
• dmi strator
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK