Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout3.a. Appoint Representatives for Cedar Corridor Transportation Infrastructure Improvement GroupAGENDA ITEM: Appoint Representatives Cedar Corridor Transportation Infrastructure Improvement Group (Cedar Group) AGENDA SECTION: NEW BUSINESS PREPARED BY: Jamie Verbrugge, City Administrator AGENDA NO. ATTACHMENTS: Cedar Group 5/11/05 Meeting Handouts APPROVED BY: RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Appoint Representatives to the Cedar roue ACTION: 1 CITY OF ROSEMOUNT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION Special City Council Meeting Date. May 24, 2005 BACKGROUND Mayor Droste attended a May 11 meeting of local officials that has formed to serve in an advisory capacity to the Dakota County Regional Railroad Authority (DCRRA) on matters related to transit and transportation improvements to Trunk Highway 77 /Cedar Avenue. ISSUE The Cedar Corridor Transportation Infrastructure Improvement Group (Cedar Group) will be comprised of members appointed by the cities of Bloomington, Eagan, Apple Valley, Burnsville, Lakeville, Farmington and Rosemount. These are communities that have a direct interest in the Cedar Corridor. Each of the cities are to appoint the Mayor or an elected member of the City Council, a business or community representative, and an alternate who may be an elected or appointed official Additionally, the counties of Hennepin and Dakota, Metropolitan Council, and Minnesota Valley Transit Authority (MVTA) will have membership on the Cedar Group. The Cedar Group intends to conduct quarterly meetings, or more frequently if necessary. Mayor Droste has indicated interest in representing Rosemount. Council should discuss who should represent the City in the elected member category and the alternate category prior to action on this item. Regarding the business or community member, staff is proposing to delay appointment of this position until the regular City Council meeting of June 7. This will give prospective appointees an opportunity to review the Cedar Group obhganons prior to making a commitment of interest to the City Council. SUMMARY The Mayor will provide an overview of the meeting he recently attended and provide more background. Council is requested to appoint a member of the City Council and an alternate to the Cedar Corndor Transportation Infrastructure Improvement Group (Cedar Group) MINUTES Cedar Corridor Transportation Infrastructure Improvement Group Continuing Organization Meeting March 23, 2005 Dakota County Western Service Center 14955 Galaxie Avenue South Apple Valley, Minnesota 55124 Meeting was called to order by Commissioner Branning at 315 PM. Present were Dakota County Commissioners Will Branning, Paul Krause and Tom Egan, Apple Valley Mayor Mary Hamann Roland, Apple Valley City Administrator Tom Lawell, Apple Valley Cedar Corridor businessperson Ken Johnson, Burnsville City Manager Craig Eberling representing Mayor Elizabeth Kautz, Lakeville Councdperson Wendy Wulff, Lakeville City Administrator Steve Mielke, Bloomington Director of Public Works Charles Honshell, Eagan City Administrator Tom Hedges, and Dakota County staff members Greg Konat, Mark Krebsbach and Gene Franchett. Commissioner Branning called the meeting to order, and invited persons present to introduce themselves Commissioner Branning asked if there were any responses to invitations to join the Group extended to Mayor Kevan Soderberg of Farmington and Commissioner Randy Johnson of Hennepin County. Staff responded that there were no responses to date Physical Development Director Greg Konat summarized why the group is being formed, the basic structure being proposed, and that the purpose of the meeting is to continue discussion and resolve membership and related organizational issues Commissioner Branning then led discussion of organizational issues. a Group decision making process Commissioner Branning suggested that for such a group consensus appears to be the most meaningful way to arrive at decisions of the body Other members agreed Consensus will be the mode for decision making b. Election of Chair and Vice Chair. Mayor Mary Hamann Roland nominated Commissioner Branning for Chair There were no other nominations and Commissioner Branning was elected Chair. Item 3 I Commissioner Branning ncmmated Mayor Mary Hamann Roland as Vice Chair There being no other nominations, Mayor Hamann Roland was elected Vice -Chair c Inquiry was made if there should be a Treasurer elected to act on matters dealing with finance Response was that Dakota County Regional Railroad Authority (DCRRA) is presently the lead agency providing staff and coordinating grants and expenditures For the present there does not appear to be a need for a treasurer position. If in the future there is formation of a joint powers board or some other arrangement for sharing of expenses and benefits, the matter could be addressed at that time. d Member participation in the Group, Technical Advisory Committee, and Ad Hoc Advisory Committees Consensus of the body was that the Group will consist of (1) an elected official, (preferably the Mayor from the each City) from the cities of Bloomington, Eagan, Burnsville, Apple Valley, Rosemount, Farmington, and Lakeville, a commissioner from Hennepin and Dakota Counties, and (2) a business person who has an interest in the corridor from each of the cities Agencies to be invited to participate on the Technical Advisory Committee are the Minnesota Valley Transit Authority, Metro Council, Metro Transit, and MnDOT. Consensus was that each city, county and agency may, if they so choose, appoint both a planner and engineer to the Technical Advisory Committee Cities, Counties and Agencies are requested to submit to the DCRRA the names of persons appointed to the Group and the Technical Advisory Committee by Apnl 15, 2005. Consensus was that the City of Rosemount be invited to be a Group member and fully participate in the Group process e Meetings of the Group The Group will meet quarterly or more often as necessary f Starting time will be 3 30 PM Every effort will be made to finish the meeting by 4 45 PM g. The Technical Advisory Group will meet as often as necessary. State and Federal funding updates Mark Krebsbach reported that the State bonding bill in the House contains the $10 million for Cedar Project The Senate bill sometimes contains $10 million for Cedar and sometimes does not. The joint House /Senate conference committee is still working on agreement to the overall bonding bill. The Governor supports $10 million for the project On the Federal side, $11 6 million spending authority has been requested from Congress Congressman Kline and Senator Coleman have been supportive of the project So far $6 million has been identified in the House Authonzation bill. The Congressman and Senator asked how much Federal funds specifically could we actually spend in the coming fiscal year $3 million was identified. Mark K. distnbuted a Spending Schedule showing the amounts of Federal, State and local funds to be spent in years 2005 to 2008 in accomplishing the $27 2 million Phase 1 Implementation Program Question was asked about additional operating revenues, that MVTA is currently $3 million short in operating revenue Response is that there must first be infrastructure in place first if the new BRT system is to be built The current experience points out the dire need to increase transit operating revenues. Greg Konat informed the Group that legislation to enable the DCRRA to levy and spend funds for bus rapid transit is moving through the Legislature Other business. Ken Johnson asked about the possibility of using HOT (high occupancy toll) lanes in the Cedar Avenue Corridor Some members feel a little uncomfortable with it at this time There are operational /safety concerns, and low cost recovery is a significant factor Consensus is that it is a possibility to be considered as we go through the process Consensus is that meeting agenda action items will be identified in future meeting notices. Next Meeting All future meetings will be held on the second Wednesday of the month Mayor Kautz requested that meetings be held on any Wednesday but the fourth Wednesday of the month due to conflict with MVTA Board meetings The next meeting will be May 11 m 3 30 PM Meeting adjourned at 4.20 PM Respectfully submitted, Gene Franchett MAY 11, 2005 Roles and Responsibilities (Significant changes are underlined or lined -eat) CEDAR CORRIDOR TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENT GROUP Goals of the Cedar Group Mitigate congestion growth. Strengthen transportation foundations for future economic growth. Increase overall mobility, accessibility, and travel reliability. Create compelling transportation alternatives The Cedar Corridor Transportation Infrastructure Improvement Group (Cedar Group) replaces the Cedar Transitway Project Management Committee. 1 The Cedar Group serves an advisory role. and provides recommendations to the Dakota County Regional Railroad Authority (DCRRA) regarding ovorcight and input te transportation planning and project development processes for the Cedar Avenue BRT Phase 1 Implementation project plan Assist in defining critical transportation issues Assist in identifying alternative roadway and transit strategies Review corndor study products and provide advice recommendations on major study decisions 2 Provide communication between the Cedar Group and businesses, cdhes, counties, and agencies Link the Cedar Group to businesses, residents and governments in the corridor Communicate Cedar Group issues to member's organization Bring organization's comments and concerns to the Cedar Group. Item 4 Actively support Cedar Group positions on transportation priorities and investments in the corridor. The DCRRA shall serve as the lead agency for the Cedar Avenue BRT Phase 1 Implementation Cedar Group Membership Membership in the Cedar Group shall consist of representatives of governments who have a direct interest in the corridor. The Cities of Bloomington, Eagan, Apple Valley, Burnsville, Lakeville, Farmington, and Rosemount may appoint the following members to the Cedar Group Mayor or elected member of the City Council. a A business or community representative An alternate who may be an elected or appointed official The appointment of city representatives shall occur by City Council action to serve at the pleasure of the City Council, or until the member becomes ineligible to serve as an elected official The County of Hennepin may appoint one Commissioner to serve at the pleasure of the County Board or until the member becomes ineligible to serve as an elected official. The member may have an alternate who may be an elected or appointed official. The County of Dakota shall appoint three DCRRA members from districts adjacent to the Cedar Corridor The members shall serve at the pleasure of the DCRRA or until the member becomes ineligible to serve as an elected official Each member may have an alternate who may be an elected or appointed official. The Metropolitan Council may appoint a Council member for each council distnct adiacent to the Cedar Corridor The council members shall serve at the pleasure of the Metropolitan Council Each member may have an alternate The Minnesota Valley Transit Authority (MVTA) may appoint one Board Member The member shall serve at the pleasure of the MVTA Board The member may have an altemate Meetings The Cedar Group shall meet quarterly, or more often if necessary. Decision Making' The Cedar Group shall make decisions on a consensus basis 2 Technical Advisory Committee A Technical Advisory Committee, consisting of planners, engineers or other technical professionals shall be appointed to advise the Cedar Group Roles and Responsibilities Provide regular technical input to the Cedar Comdor Group. Provide guidance on technical decisions within the Corridor Provide two -way communication between the technical activities of the Group and the member's respective govemment or agency Receive and review comments from the Cedar Group. Committee Members" Each participating member may appoint up to two members to the Technical Advisory Committee En addition Metro Transit and the Minnesota Department of Transportation may appoint either a piannor or enginoor or both up to two members to the Technical Advisory Committee Meetings The Technical Advisory Committee shall meet as often as necessary Special Ad Hoc Local Advisory Groups As the work of the Cedar Group progresses, local, detailed transportation issues will be considered, causing the need for local interest representatives to meet as often as necessary to work out local site and development issues Examples are, issues dealing with highway design, signal placement, interface with local roads, etc The special ad hoc advisory group will be formed under the leadership of the Cedar Group member from the city in which the issue site is located. Ad Hoc Committee Members will consist of municipal, business and county persons, and, as appropriate, transportation agency and major destination representatives. Once resolved, the issue resolution will be reported to the full Technical Committee and the Cedar Group, at which time the special ad hoc advisory group shall no longer exist. Special ad hoc Advisory Committees may also be appointed by the Cedar Group to deal with special issues of interest and concem to Cedar Group members 9ia ��4.a.e 44/4 3 $1 MILLION FUNDING PROVISION DAKOTA COUNTY, CEDAR AVENUE PROJECT FFY'03 FEDERAL APPROPRIATIONS 1 The final FY 2003 Transportation Appropriations Act was passed by the House and Senate on February 13, 2003, and signed by the President on February 20, 2003 2. 51 million was appropriated in the Transit Capital Investment Grants bus and bus facihties program for the Dakota County Cedar Avenue Project 3. Included m the Conference Agreement was a 0.65 percent across-the-board rescission, resulting in a reduction of the grant amount to $984,000 4. Funds are being provided on an 80/20 Federal/locaI funding match basis. The 20- percent local match for the full grant amount is $246,000 5. Funds can be used for preliminary engineenng, buses, bus mamtenance and admuustrative facilities, transfer facilities, park and ride stations, bus maintenance, passenger shelters and bus stop signs, and other bus related purchases. 6 The funds are available in the year appropnated plus two years. This means the $984,000 grant will no longer be available as of October 1, 2005. GF 4-20-05 P d k oi) 1 :)f /I 001 61# Item 5 GF 4-20.05 10 MILLION FUNDING PROVISION CEDAR AVENUE BUS RAPID TRANSIT (BRT) STATE BOND PROCEEDS FUND APPROPRIATION' 1. All bond proceeds must be spent as authorized by the Minnesota Constitution, article XI, section 5, paragraph (a), to acquire and better pubhc land and buildings and other public improvements of a capital nature, or as authorized by the Mianesota Constitution, article XI, section 5, paragraphs (b) to (l), or article XIV (Public Highway System) 2. Unless otherwise specified, the appropriations in this act are available until the project is completed or abandoned subject to Minnesota Statutes, section. 16A 642 3. A sum of $10,000,000 for the Cedar Avenue Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) is appropriated to the Metropolitan CouncIL 4. Identified purposes for which the funds can be spent are environmental studies, preliminary engineering, bus lane improvements, and transit station construction and improvements for Cedar Avenue bus rapid transit between the Mall of America in Bloomington and the cities of Eagan, Apple Valley, Lakeville 5 The funds cannot be spent for capital improvements within a trunk highway nght- of -way (Note The Cedar Grove transit station recommended in the Cedar BRT Plan locally preferred alternative is at the west end of the Cedar Grove area and is located m part on MnDOT nght -of -way t From BF 3 as posted on April 7, 2005 Item 5a DAKOTA COUNTY REGIONAL RAILROAD AUTHORITY REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION 31 Authorrzation To Execute Cedar Transitway Funding Agreement Amendment With Metropolitan Council And Execute Contract Amendment With U R S Inc. To Conduct Further Analysis Of Cedar Corndor Transit Stations Meeting Date' 4/19/05 Fiscai/FTE Impact Item Type Regular -Action None Division: PHYSICAL DEVELOPMENT Amount included in current budget Department. Administration Budget amendment requested Contact Greg Konat Telephone 952 -891 -7034 FTE included in current complement Prepa -ed by Gene Franchett New FTE(s) requested —N/A Reviewed by N/A WA Other PURPOSE /ACTION REQUESTED To authonze the Physical Development Directorto amend funding agreement with the Metropolitan Council to provide for further analysis of the Cedar Condor transit stations and use. To authorize the Physical Development Director to amend the consultant contract with URS Inc to conduct this analysis SUMMARY Dakota County promotes alternative ways to meet future transportation needs of citizens using a variety of of transportation methods, including busway improvements on the Cedar Avenue Transit/ray On March 23, 2004 the Dakota County Regional Railroad Authority (Authonty) selected as the locally preferred alternative the Cedar Avenue Busway (Resolution No. 04 -14). The Phase I Bus Rapid Transit Implementation program, adapted March 23, 2004 by the Authority for 2005 to 2009, lists new transit stations at Cedar Grove in Eagan, in the vicinity of 180'" Street in Lakeville, and major expansion of park and ride capacity at the Apple Valley Transit Station. In addition, the new transit station wilt be constructed this year at CSAH 31 (Pilot Knob Road) and CSAH 46 (160 Street) 11 is not dear what the park and nde impact of building a new park and ride station Cr significantly expanding an existing station will have on other upstream or downstream transit stations. The proposed work will analyze the probable shifts of nders from one station to another as new stafons are built or expanded The work will help assure that the park and ride Investments selected during phased implementation of the corridor will be most effective in serving users of the system An existing contract with URS Inc. can be amended for the work. URS Inc is very familiar with the system, having recently undertaken the Alternatives Analysis for the transit corridor and would not require a Tr J r d i teaming curve Once a contract Is signed, the work is estimated to take five weeks r 1 The work would include two major work tasks Task 1 Evaluation of park and ride demand under four scenarios: N Existing and Growth to the year 2025 YYY With and without service extension to Lakeville With and without Cedar Grove Station With and without major expansion of Apple Valley Station With and without the CSAH 31 /CSAH 46 transit station Task 2 Analysis of relative effectiveness of Phase I Improvements Update 2003 cost estimates to anticipated year-of- expenditure In conjunction with the results of Task 1, evaluate near term park and ride demand and the most effective means of increasing park and ride supply. Evaluate benefits and costs of alternative Phase I improvements Meet with Dakota County, MVTA, Metro Council and Metro Transit staff to review alternative actions Develop recommended action plan EXPLANAT1ON OF FISCALIFTE IMPACT The estimated pnce for the work is $25,000. Sufficient funds remain from the initial Metropolitan Council grant of $400,000 to cover the $25,000 pnce 4113/2005 434 PM Page1 ttlfinal beard'gi419 -05 no 2 doe Agenda Page M Item 6 05-11 Authorization To Proceed With Dakota County Transit System Plan Phase II Motion Comm Egan Second' Comm. Branning WHEREAS, the Dakota County 2026 Transportation Plan was adopted by the Dakota County Board of Commissioners on July 13, 2004; and WHEREAS, the Dakota County2025 Transportation Plan identifies a specific strategy to develop a County Transit System Plan, and WHEREAS, the Dakota County Board of Commissioners Identified the development of a County Transit System Plan as one of its top 40 Enrtiatives for 2004; and WHEREAS, professional planning services were required to develop the County Transit Plan, and WHEREAS, on July 27, 2004 (Resolubon No. 04-17) the Dakota County Regional Railroad Authority authonzed the Regional Railroad Authodty Chair to execute a contract with SRF Consulting Group, Inc for professional planning services for the Dakota County Transit System Plan in an amount not to exceed $50,000; and WHEREAS, the executed contract with SRF Consulting Group, Inc. identified a work plan separated into two study phases to provide the County with a mid -print to evaluate findings; and WHEREAS, staff has determined that SRF Consulting Group, Inc services are necessary to complete the Dakota County Transit System Plan Phase Il as Identified in the existing executed contract NOW, THEREFORE, BE tr RESOLVED, That the Dakota County Regional Railroad Authority hereby authorizes Dakota County staff to provide a notice to proceed to SRF Consulting Group, Inc for professional planning services for the Dakota County Transit System Plan Phase 11 as identified in the executed contract With SRF Consulting Group, Inc. ayes 7 nays none 05-12 Adjoumment Motion Comm Turner Second Canon Schouweiler BE IT RESOLVED, That the Dakota County Regional Railroad Authority hereby adjourns to Tuesday, Apnl 19, 2005. ayes 7 nays none The Dakota County Regional Railroad Authority was adjourned at 12 00 p.m. Dakota County Raganaf Radioed thos 2 Joseph A Hams Secretary/Treasurer March 15, 1005 003 suVnoa t NET ANNUAL 0 &M COST 13 uo0o59 1 $_i 1000 S 2,400,000 610,000 S 3.010.000 OOO'OLL`E 1 1000'0Lt f s I f 1 s 1 000'0EO't S CAPITAL COST S 5,791,000 3.178,000 546,000 3,583,0001 000 27,180,000 1 000'09t't. 1 1 518 000 7,920,000 2,080.000 15,680,000 000 s 000'869'9 0001MD'Z S 11,50 1 46,929,000 1$ 4,560,000 5 13,749,000 L000 S 000 S Station-to-Station Service and On -Line Stations (5 to 10 years) Constmct stabon-stops at 140tH Street and 147th Street Construct Palomino access improvements and, contingent on demand, increase P &R capacity z Palomino Establish all-d��a' station-to-station BRT smote and add feeder seMC° to station stops Develop an coline station at the Apple Valley Transit Center Establish express service to downtown St Paul onginatng at Palomino Phase 2 Tots agent an timing of MUSA One expansion and land development In Lakeville d BRT and express service south to CSAH 70 ll Op PAR station at CSAH 70 op intermediate statian stops consistent with county roadway and community developmen Phase 3 Total' and and Improve BR f Service and Facilities (Long Tenn) 1 avel times and schedule nllablllty 11 warranted running transriway between TH 13 arid Palomino 7 Road station stop :ed bus access to/from TH 77 at Cedar Grove Phase 4 Total] I I I 1 I I I PROJECT TOTAL, ALL PHASES tRange1s $113,800,000 to $119,000,000 The higher amount is shown b Canhnue to use shoulders for buses on TH 77 c Improve shoulders of CSAH 23 through Apple Valley to all d Develop Cedar Grove transit station and reorient existing I e Proceed with Cedar Grove Station and Access preliminary Contingent on addition of Lakeville to Metropolitan Transit S t transit station and extend express bus service to the vein! a n L V a w N, x IL Imo d s 0 e a u n C. tai UJ ce LL 0 F W W O CO W _cc U m m Q U