Transportation Advisory Commission Minutes - 04-28-2004I-94/CSAH 18 Interchange
Technical Advisory Committee
Monticello, MN
Wednesday, April 28th, 2004
Meeting Minutes
Meeting Minute Issue Date:
July 8, 2004
ATTENDANEES:
David Graeber
FHWA
Terry Humbert
Mn/DOT Dist.3
Chad Hausmann
Mn/DOT Dist.3
Virgil Hawkins
Wright County
Wayne Fingalson
Rick Wolfsteller
011ie Koropchak
Bret Weiss
Doug Weiszhaar
Brandi Popenhagen
Ross Jentink
Wright County
City of Monticello
City of Monticello
WSB & Associates, Inc.
WSB & Associates, Inc.
WSB & Associates, Inc.
WSB & Associates, Inc.
1. Approve February 25th 2004 Meeting Minutes - The meeting minutes were
approved without correction.
2. Status of FHWA's Position
David explained that the folded diamond interchange configuration currently proposed
provides inadequate signal spacing along CSAH 18 and would eventually break down as
volumes get higher. However, the preliminary analysis titled "Traffic Operations
Analysis of CSAH 18/Interstate 94 Interchange Alternatives" shows that for the design
year, the folded diamond configuration shows adequate Levels of Service (LOS) along
CSAH 18. FHWA will allow the folded diamond interchange configuration as long as
the following is met:
• Adequate LOS is provided on I-94 and CSAH 18 based on the CORSIM analysis that
will be included in the Interchange Access Request.
• An agreement is reached with the railroad to allow an at -grade railroad crossing for a
roadway connection between CSAH 75 and 7th Street. This agreement must be in
writing and sent to FHWA along with the Interchange Access Request.
• There is commitment by the City of Monticello to build an I-94 overpass at Fallon
Avenue. This crossing would draw some of the traffic trying to cross I-94 off of the
interchanges. This must be in a form of a financial plan on how this will be carried
out. The plan must be submitted along with the Interchange Access Request.
Page 1 of 3 C:\windows\TEMP\TAC April 28 2004 Minutes.doc
• Mn/DOT and the Wright County must agree with the traffic analysis carried out by
the City of Monticello's consulting firm.
David also explained that the preliminary analysis demonstrated that the "Slip Ramp
Alternative" operated equally as well as the folded diamond alternative. It was stated that
slip ramps with one-way frontage roads are confusing to motorists. Mn/DOT would
prefer a folded diamond configuration if its operations are adequate.
Having considered the alternatives, the committee recommended that the Folded
Diamond Concept is carried forward through the EA and Interchange Access Request.
However, to show a worse case scenario, the Fallon Avenue Bridge will not be
considered part of the network for CORSIM modeling purposes. This will result in more
traffic on CSAH 18 when determining forecasted volumes than if Fallon Avenue was
included.
3. Interchange Layout
It was explained to the committee that the ramp geometrics had been changed from
previous layouts to reflect the change in scope of the Mn/DOT project. The ramps are
now designed to connect into I-94's existing alignment. Mn/Dot had indicated that future
lane additions on I-94 would occur on the inside median, and therefore, would not affect
ramp geometrics. These changes result in the following:
• The CSAH 18 bridge would be slightly longer since Mn/DOT's earlier proposed
typical section is narrower than what is out there today.
• The EB Entrance Ramp design is slightly shorter than the length necessary to achieve
full acceleration (according to guidelines) between CSAH 18 and the I-94 bridges
over the railroad. This is due to the length provided between CSAH 18 and I-94 and
the uphill grade on the ramp, which would be greater than +2% that is necessary to
meet I-94. This has been expressed to Mn/DOT geometrics. The only way to make
the length any longer is to widen the I-94 bridges to provide room for extra ramp
width.
• The same ramp is joining I-94 on the outside of a curve which is superelevated. The
digital terrain model which was developed from a flight survey shows that I-94 is
only superelevated to around 4%. This rate would not meet 70 mph requirements for
the inplace curve on I-94. Survey will be required to determine exactly what the
superelevation would be. If I-94 is actually superelevated higher than 4%, the grade
on the ramp would only increase causing the desired length of roadway needed for
vehicles accelerating on the ramp to increase.
4. CORSIM Update
WSB & Associates, Inc. (WSB) has submitted the "Base Model" to Mn/DOT for review. It
only models the traffic and in -place facilities on I-94 from CSAH 75 to TH 25. After the Base
model is approved WSB will work on the Build and No -Build models to determine traffic
operations for future traffic volumes.
Page 2 of 3 C:\windows\TEMP\TAC April 28 2004 Minutes.doc
5. Mn/DOT Participation on Interchange Costs
Mn/DOT has provided a memo to Doug Weiszhaar detailing their participation to the
CSAH 18 interchange. The following lists their contributions:
• Mn/DOT will pay for a 100% of the I-94 EB Entrance and WB Exit Ramp per bid
prices.
• Mn/DOT will pay for the right-of-way required to build the two referenced ramps
per land value, but will not participate in relocation costs of the Cement Plant.
• Mn/DOT will pay for the CSAH 18 bridge based on a rural two-lane section and
based on the remaining life left of the existing bridge which would be 36.2%.
• Since Mn/DOT prefers a section under the bridge that does not have side piers,
longer spans and a deeper structure depth results. Therefore, they would
participate in the grading of approaches to the bridge from the point where the
profile matches existing. This would be based on a two-lane collector section and
at the same percentage rate as the existing bridge's remaining life (36.2%).
Terry Humbert expressed that it appears that one or two billboards may require relocating
due to ramp construction. Mn/DOT's experience has been that buying out the billboards
has cost them $250,000 per billboard where relocating them is closer to $15,000.
Mn/DOT may be willing to participate in the costs for relocation rather than buy out.
6. Schedule
The current schedule is that the bid opening for the CSAH 18 interchange would be in
April of 2005. Construction would begin in June 2005. Completion would be in the fall
to early winter of 2005 with some clean-up work in the following spring.
7. Next Meeting(s): A TAC/PAC meeting is scheduled for May 19, 2004 to update
them on the status of I-94 and the CSAH 18 Interchange.
8. Other
• FHWA Oversite of Interchange Project: David Graeber explained to the
committee that the construction of the interchange will require full federal
oversite. This means the right-of-way acquisition, letting, and contract
administration must be conducted per Federal policys. It was indicated that WSB
has provided services for Federal oversite projects.
Page 3 of 3 C:\windows\TEMP\TAC April 28 2004 Minutes.doc
I-94/CSAH 18 Interchange
Policy/Technical Advisory Committee
Monticello, MN
Wednesday, May 19, 2004
Meeting Minutes
Attendance:
Terry Humbert
Mn/DOT Dist. 3
Chad Hausmann
Mn/DOT Dist. 3
Virgil Hawkins
Wright County
Wayne Fingalson
Wright County
Pat Sawatzke
Wright County
Rick Wolfsteller
City of Monticello
Jeff O'Neil
City of Monticello
Brett Weiss
WSB & Associates/Monticello City Engineer
Brandi Popenhagen
WSB & Associates
Shawn Weinard
Monticello Industrial Park
Charlie Pfeffer
Pfeffer Co.
Jeff Streeter
Streeter Co.
Ken Streeter
Streeter Co.
Molly Carson
Ryan Co.
Jared Olson
Ryan Co.
Roger Belsaas
Resident
1. Approve Meeting Minutes — The September 17th 2003 PAC/TAC minutes were approved
without correction.
2. Mn/DOT Project Update
• Status of I-94 Bridge Project — Initially, Mn/DOT's portion of the project was to
reconstruct the I-94 bridges that cross over CSAH 75 and the BNSF railroad. This was
due to their fatigue prone nature of their bridge designs. The reconstruction of these
bridges provided an opportunity for Mn/DOT to also realign this portion of I-94. The
combination of crest vertical curve and a reverse horizontal curve that exist at these
bridges are not ideal. Crash records have shown that accidents occur here during
icy/snowy conditions. However, during the rest of the season, the crash rate is below the
average for this type of facility. Since February of 2004, Mn/DOT has conducted non-
destructive tests on these two bridges. The tests have shown that there are no immediate
structural concerns with the beams, and only redecking these bridges is necessary.
Because of funding issues within the district and the lack of need for immediate
corrective measures in this location, Mn/DOT has chosen to only redeck these bridges
and take their reconstruction project off of the bonding list. They estimate at this time
that the redeck would take place in 2006. The project scope changes are expected to be
made official in June of 2004.
• Mn/DOT Participation on Interchange Project — Mn/DOT's cost participation is
defined in the attached memo dated April 21", 2004, to Doug Weiszhaar, WSB &
Associates, Inc., from Terry Humbert Mn/DOT Dist. 3. Terry Humbert explained to the
committee that originally Mn/DOT only agreed to pay for one ramp, and the savings
Mn/DOT would have if CSAH 75 were severed under I-94. Since the reconstruction of I-
94 is no longer a project and severing CSAH 75 is no longer needed, Mn/DOT has added
paying for an additional ramp, 1/4 of each signal at the ramp terminals, 36% of a 2-lane
rural bridge at CSAH 18, and 36% of the approaches to the bridge as a 2-lane rural
roadway since Mn/DOT requires the new CSAH 18 bridge without side piers. Mn/DOT
is agreeing to pay for these items based on bid prices and not estimates. It was asked if
Mn/DOT would pay for any of the ponding necessary for the interchange and 1-94. Terry
Humbert stated that they have not considered this but they are willing to discuss this
matter once they have reviewed the hydraulics for the interchange. A meeting should be
scheduled soon to resolve any ponding issues.
Interchange Geometric Layout
• FHWA Position on CSAH 18 Interchange Configuration — At the last TAC meeting in
April, FHWA announced if the CORSIM modeling/traffic operations analysis for the
folded diamond interchange configuration shows an adequate Level of Service they
would allow the interchange configuration to continue forward.
• Geometrics at CSAH 18 and School Blvd. — After developing 2007 forecasts for this
intersection, WSB has determined that it should be signalized for this project. WSB
needs to redesign the geometrics at this intersection and provide this to the County for
their input.
• Partial Access at CSAH 18 and Southern Frontage Road — Adding another
intersection between School Blvd. and Chelsea Road is acceptable per Wright County
guidelines and FHWA as long as the intersection is not signalized. The need for a signal
in this location would only impede the traffic flow on CSAH 18. Because of this, the
TAC has agreed that this intersection would function well without a signal if it didn't
allow all of the intersection movements specifically left out of the Frontage Road on
CSAH 18. The school access was also changed to remain in its existing location so its
movements do not add to the movements at this intersection. The result is traffic wanting
to head south from any type of development along the Southern Frontage Road would
either have to travel through the Meadow Oaks neighborhood, use Chelsea Road, or do a
U-turn at a full intersection on CSAH 18. Terry Humbert added that if we show a
signalized intersection at this location it would greatly deter the chances of FHWA's
approval for the interchange configuration. The owner of the property adjacent to the
proposed Southern Frontage Road told the committee that the site would not be fit for
commercial development if there is not a full access point or signalized intersection at
CSAH 18 and the proposed Southern Frontage Road.
4. Wright County Update/County Participation on CSAH 18 Upgrades — The County explained
that they have included this project in their five-year plan but have not allocated any dollar
amount to it. They will be holding a County Transportation Committee meeting on June to
discuss their level of participation for this project based on their County participation policy.
WSB will revise the estimates based on County comments and present the project and costs to the
County Transportation Committee in June.
Page 2 of 3
5. Interchange Schedule — WSB stated that the anticipated letting date for the interchange is April
of 2005. Construction is anticipated to begin in June of 2005. It is anticipated that traffic will be
detoured, and CSAH 18 will be closed from Chelsea Road to CSAH 75. The CSAH 18 bridge
will be constructed and open to traffic before winter of 2005. Since this project has a late letting,
there is a concern that bridge contractors may bid high if their construction season is filled and
because of the tight bridge construction deadlines. WSB is looking at how to recoup any
additional costs by allowing later deadlines on the ramps. However, it is anticipated that all of
the work could be completed in one construction season with the exception of some clean-up
work. Ken Streeter explained to the committee that the deadlines for this interchange project has
an affect on development and moving property owners. If deadlines are not met, it trickles down
to developers as well, costing them time and money.
6. Other — None.
7. Next Meeting — The next PAC/TAC meeting is scheduled for June 16t", 2004 to go over the
financial aspects of the interchange project.
Page 3 of 3