By Nancy Huddleston, Editor

The Minnesota Department of Transportation’s (MnDOT’s) “take it or leave it” stance regarding proposed improvements to the intersection of Highway 13 and County Road 101 was taken Monday night (Dec. 7) by the Savage City Council.

The 4-1 vote to approve municipal consent for the project came after a four-hour public hearing that included passionate speeches by property owners on either side of the busy interchange about the $15.3 million project, which is slated to start in the spring of 2010.

MnDOT’s “all or nothing” stipulation regarding municipal consent of the project was not communicated by agency representatives at the public hearing. Rather, Savage Public Works Director John Powell made a statement about MnDOT’s position at the end of the formal presentation about the project and before public testimony was taken.

“Based on communication from MnDOT staff on Dec. 3, if municipal consent is disapproved MnDOT will not seek an appeal. The project would end and not move to 2012 or 2013 because the conditions related to the interchange influence area would not change,” Powell said.

In his memo to the City Council, Powell also wrote: “Specifically they will require that Zinran Avenue, Rhode Island Avenue and Louisiana Avenue have the access changes being proposed today as part of any future grade separation project. Another important note regarding consent is that any consent given needs to be without conditions; a conditional approval is not consent.”

Councilman Al McColl cast the lone “no” vote, but before doing so apologized to property owners who’d gathered to ask that local access points at Zinran and Louisiana avenues be retained as conditions of approving municipal consent for the project.

“I think we failed,” he stated. “We got $15 million and if I would have known prior to this evening that we’d have to do this without conditions, I’d have been kicking and screaming. To you folks out there – I apologize. I thought we could get some things tonight. I could go on, but I know my temper … I will not support this.”

After the meeting, McColl said he was out of town on business last week and didn’t get a chance to read Powell’s memo until Monday afternoon. When he did, he was shocked.

“If they’d (MnDOT) explained right away that there would be no way they’d allow right in/right out access than that would have been different,” he said. “But because it was not said, the businesses felt they had a chance and came to the hearing with hope. Now we’ve got a level of distrust.”

McColl said he heard MnDOT representatives use the word “partnership” over and over again during the hearing, but noted “if this is a partnership, we’re off to a rocky start.”

“I thought we could go into the municipal consent hearing and add conditions and we’d be able to make a good run at the two right in/right out accesses that businesses were asking us for. But what I heard at that hearing is it was not an option and that upset me,” he said.

Yes or no

Powell said he chose to communicate MnDOT’s stance on municipal consent at the hearing to make sure the City Council knew the consequences of their actions. He said he posed the direct question about the city’s options to MnDOT the first week of December.

“It was my responsibility to let the council know MnDOT’s stance,” he said, “because without that information they would have been put at a disadvantage.”

Mayor Janet Williams asked the “what if” question several times throughout the year at work sessions and open houses when 13-101 was discussed. Powell said he relayed the question about municipal consent in a general manner at various times, but got more specific last week with MnDOT.

Lynn Clarkowski, MnDOT’s south area manager, said when Powell asked her about municipal consent she cited the department’s stance that it does not accept consent with conditions.

That stance is based on an attorney general’s opinion that MnDOT has used for several years to keep municipal consent issues clear for both the state and other government municipalities, she explained a few days after the public hearing.

“The attorney general has told us that we cannot agree to conditional consent because we cannot commit state funding resources beyond the biennium. Legally, we cannot commit resources that we do not have,” she said.

The money

The $15.3 million project to upgrade the current intersection was scheduled to take place in 2012. But it was moved up to 2010 after MnDOT received a $4.71 million boost in ARRA (American Recovery and Reinvestment Act) funding from one of the federal stimulus programs.

Before that, some $10.6 million had already been set aside: $7.8 million in federal money allocated by the Metropolitan Council’s Transportation Advisory Board (TAB), $2 million from Scott County’s wheelage tax and $750,000 more from MnDOT’s safety capacity funds.

The improvements will allow eastbound and westbound traffic to flow freely through the intersection, with eastbound motorists traveling on a land bridge that will be built above the current intersection and westbound motorists traveling along in the current at-grade lanes. Left-turn movements from northbound TH 13 to westbound CR 101 would be controlled by a signal, as would left-turn movements from westbound to southbound TH 13. 

Access at Zinran Avenue would change to right-in only and road connections at Rhode Island Avenue and Louisiana Avenue would be closed completely. Currently Zinran has three-quarters access, with right-in and right-out turns from Zinran onto the highway and left turn in access from eastbound CR 101. Rhode Island and Louisiana avenues have right-in/right-out access from TH 13 and those will close completely due to the intersection improvement project.

The traffic signal at 126th Street and TH 13 would remain and provide primary access to the business areas on either side of the intersection.

Clarification

Two days after the meeting during a phone interview, Clarkowski expounded upon a statement from Mayor Williams during the meeting about how the funding for the improvements is tied to the design.

Clarkowski said the 2007 applications for the improvements to 13-101 stipulated the closure of local access roads. Specifically, the $7.8 million appropriated by the TAB stipulated that access at Zinran, Louisiana and 126th Streets be changed. The $2 million in wheelage tax from the county and $780,000 in safety capacity funds follow those similar conditions. All transportation applications are scored and awarded on a competitive basis.

When the city and business owners brought up earlier this year that they needed the signal at 126th Street for local access, MnDOT went back to the TAB to get approval to move the signalized access in the original plans from 128th Street to 126th Street, Clarkowski explained.

But when that was done, another local access trade off was needed. By that time, engineers had identified a longer bridge span was needed to get over artesian conditions at the intersection, so that’s when the closure of Rhode Island Avenue came into play.

“We negotiate all these things during the design phase,” Clarkowski stated. “So by the time the City Council crafts its resolution for municipal consent, it should be clean. This is nothing new and this is the way it’s been for the other municipal consent projects I’ve been involved with.”

All that was news to McColl who said: “If I’d known nine months ago what I know now, I’d have fought it tooth and nail.”

That’s because the way he sees it, “MnDOT’s sole purpose is moving traffic effectively and efficiently. Our job is to look out for local interests, and in this case it is the business people in that area.”

Business owners

By the time public testimony was allowed at the public hearing, the meeting was at the three hour mark. As well, members of the audience were not aware of MnDOT’s take it or leave it stance, so once they heard that, many left.

But Mike Kuelbs stayed. He owns four properties in the Zinran area and has been fighting MnDOT since 1997, when access at County Road 101 was altered. At that time, the fight was about a traffic signal that property owners in the area said they were promised at Zinran and CR 101 when access at Boone Avenue was removed in the early 1990s for off ramps from the Bloomington Ferry Bridge.

MnDOT has long maintained that it has no record of the promise and altered the full turning access at Zinran to three-quarters, but stipulated that if the crash rate increased, the intersection would close.

Since that intersection has withstood the test of time, Kuelbs felt that fighting for the right-out from Zinran made sense.

“Restricting access isn’t going to help anything in that area. There’s got to be a way that this can work,” Kuelbs said. “But to hear it said at 8:50 tonight, ‘oh by the way, municipal consent with condition is out of question’ and to put the hammer down on us? Where’s the spirit of compromise?

“Is it ‘Of people, by people, for people’ or is it ‘to hell with the people?’” he asked, “We’re the people – and we’re writing some pretty big checks (for property taxes.)”

Gary Strom also owns property in the area and said many of the questions he started raising in February are still not answered. He implored City Council members to table their decision.

“My first request is they get the answers before you go forward. Municipal consent can be given in 90 days not 90 minutes. If this council goes forward, I, and almost everyone in room, will be very, very, very disappointed because this hasn’t been looked at like it should.”

Strom also pointed to MnDOT’s own definition of access management, saying it includes words like “meetings the access needs of development.”

“Where is the study of impact on access needs of businesses? This is very, very critical,” Strom said, “This is Savage – this isn’t MnDOT. When MnDOT a takes position – ‘it’s this way or nothing’ – it doesn’t work.”

He also warned City Council members that their action on the 13-101 project will be their legacy and asked if they wanted to be known for shutting down businesses.

Several other property owners brought up examples of similar roads in the metro area where the problems MnDOT explained about keeping the right-out local access points around 13-101 already exist.

One of the most detailed was Dave Leffler who owns Curbside Lawn and Irrigation and seven other properties in the 13-101 area on both sides of the intersection.

“MnDOT throws out mobility verses access and I get that,” he said. “But us -- as the city of Savage, taxpayers and politicians -- should not be fine with that. We want our businesses to survive and do well.

“This is not a bypass, so if the city is going to kill off the area, how are you going to replenish it?” he continued, “How are you going to get new roads?”

The city commissioned a study of the local roads and it concluded if MnDOT’s plan is put into action “acceptable traffic operations and delays are expected utilizing the current lane layouts and traffic controls.” And, the study laid out 14 points in a “proposed recommendations/mitigation plan,” such as adjusting the signal timing at 126th Street, reconstructing intersections and putting in additional signage to get motorists into the businesses.

Rob Hazelton of Rob’s Auto did not speak at the public hearing because he felt his fellow business owners did a good job asking questions and making points.

But after the decision was made, he tied his “The last business in Savage, please turn out the lights” sign between two trees at the exit driveway of city hall to voice his displeasure.

He maintains that the loss of businesses due to the 13-101 project, coupled with the loss of property tax revenue will make it hard for the city to pay for necessary improvements in the business area around the 13-101 intersection.

“Is this really good for Savage?” he asked. “There’s going to be a huge tax increase if these businesses fail and property taxes aren’t coming in,” he said, “And I’m telling everyone that the other taxpayers in Savage are going to have to pick up that difference and help pay for road improvements down here to support the intersection improvements.”

Local roads?

At the meeting, several council members asked if a plan to improve the Dakota Avenue intersection and add a signal could be moved up in light of this project.

Powell agreed the 13-101 project highlights the need to make improvements at Dakota Avenue a priority and his staff will need to get a jump start on planning those and for interim improvements before the signal is installed.

“How soon can we do something at Dakota?” asked Councilwoman Christine Kelly, “If we don’t do something down there immediately, we’re dead in the water. How quickly can we do a study? Is there any kind of timeframe we can look at?”

Powell said that could be done “as soon as we get direction on this project” saying the city does need to look at lengthening the lanes on Dakota and maybe installing a temporary traffic signal.

Councilman Gene Abbott asked why the speed limit in the area couldn’t be set at 45 mph, which he maintained, might allow for the local access points to be incorporated into the design.

Clarkowski said MnDOT determines the speed limit after the project is built with speed studies and if it is set to low, that creates an enforcement issue.

Councilwoman Jane Victorey said she was still concerned about the weave that motorists traveling northbound on TH 13 who want to go north on Highway 169 will have to make. She also asked about how many cars use the ramp from 13 to 169 and if there are plans to widen it with this project.

MnDOT representatives said the ramp is designed for 2,000 cars, but during peak demand, there are 2,500 cars trying to use it.

Plans to widen the ramp to two lanes are not in the 13-101 project because of the problems at highways 494/169, Clarkowski said. Putting more cars on the ramp will get them onto the Bloomington Ferry Bridge faster, but motorists will encounter more delays on the bridge and further up the highway through Bloomington and Eden Prairie.

But there is good news for commuters coming off the bridge into Savage within the 13-101 project plans. The off-ramps from the bridge (southbound 169), which are currently one lane, will be made into two lanes and the ramp from CR 101/CR 18 that is now two lanes will be adjusted to one lane. That change, explained Project Manager Michael Beer, will address the demand on those ramps during the evening rush hour.

Before the vote was taken, Mayor Williams said she has listened to concerns and looked at all the options.

“In my heart of hearts, I know safety has to be first,” she said, “I believe that your businesses are destinations. I believe that people will continue to get there and my response has been pooh-poohed. … We have a wonderful business community down there and it will be better in the long run.”

What’s next?

The next step in the process is to continue to have open houses, according to MnDOT’s tentative schedule.

Environmental studies are under way and a request for letters of interest from contractors for the project was posted in October.

Requests for Qualifications are due in by Dec. 18 to MnDOT and an approved short list of possible contractors is expected to be released in mid-January.

Requests for Proposals (RFPs) are due between late January and early March and MnDOT expects to announce bid results by late March. Construction is expected to start in May and finish by the end of 2010.

 

Nancy Huddleston can be reached at editor@savagepacer.com.

 

Online

For previous stories on this project input 13-101 into the search tool option to find all the stories.