City Council Agenda Packet 01-23-2017 SpecialAGENDA
CITY COUNCIL QUARTERLY WORKSHOP MEETING
MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL
Monday, January 23, 2017 — 4:30 p.m.
Academy Room
AGENDA
1. 4:30 p.m. Discussion on Gillard Avenue Improvements
2. 5:30 p.m. Review of Remaining 2017 Road Reconstruction Projects
Monticello City Council Workshop
2017 Street Improvement Project
City Project 16C003
January 23, 2017
Aqenda
1. Review December 8, 2016 Neighborhood Meeting Comments- see Exhibit A
Based on the comments, the project goals on Gillard Avenue are to address:
• Speeds
• Safety (both vehicle and pedestrian)
• Street Design
2. Gillard Avenue
A. Speed Data — see Exhibit B
• 85th percentile speed = 36 mph. Posted speed limit is 30 mph.
Recommendation: Install dynamic speed signs, continue enforcement
B. Street Design
Recommendation: Widen roadway to 32 -feet wide with curb and gutter
with parking allowed on one side, based on the following factors:
• Curb and gutter provides a barrier to the adjacent properties and pathway
for improved safety
• Provides wider area for turning and driveway access maneuvers
• Accommodates parking on one side of the roadway
• Meets City design standards for residential streets
• Accommodates emergency and maintenance vehicles
Examples- Prairie Road and River Street, west of Chestnut Street
C. Other Considerations:
• On -street parking needs
• Alternate street widths
• Lowering grade at hill to improve sight lines
• Filling in ditches for ease of maintenance
• Replace trail with sidewalk if roadway is widened to 32 -feet
• Driveway turnarounds
• Provide mailboxes on both sides of roadway, subject to Post Office
determination
• Traffic calming
• Roadway striping
• Boulevard trees
• Increase signage
3. CR 39 at Gillard Avenue Recommendations
A. Rural Intersection Conflict Warning System
B. Dynamic Speed Signs
C. CSAH 39 Turn Lane Improvements
• County requires a study to justify need and cost benefit.
• County could budget for 2018 if Board determines it is justified
D. Consider pursuing single lane roundabout that could be expanded to a
dual lane roundabout to address safety and/or speed control
• Traffic volumes alone do not support roundabout justification
4. Overall Project Costs and Assessments
Enclosures
Exhibit A- 12/8/16 Meeting Comment Card Summary
Exhibit B- Gillard Avenue Speed Data
Exhibit C- Project Location Map
Exhibit D- Project Costs/ Summary of Assessment Methods
Exhibit E — Preliminary Assessment Map and Roll
Exhibit E1- Sandberg Road
Exhibit E2 - Hart Boulevard
Exhibit E3- Mississippi Drive
Exhibit E4- Gillard Avenue
Exhibit E5- 95th St, Haug Ave, 90th St
G:\City Council\012317 Workshop\Council Workshop Agenda 012317.doc
December 8, 2016 Neighborhood Meeting
Comment Cards Received
Street
Comments
We live nearest to the cul de sac on 95th. Our biggest concern is the recognition of dangerous
95th St NE
traffic down Gullard that will be diverted past the front of our house where our kids play. This plan
does not eliminate the danger in Sunset Ponds, it spreads the danger out.
Giffort Court
95th to Broadway by overpass
95th Extend would impact home owners back yard space and increase traffic noise. Residents
Gillard Ave
along Gillard have heavy traffic along the drive ways. Speed control on Gillard is my primary
concern. 23 driveways along Gillard.
The volume and speed of traffic on Gillard Ave is completely out of control. The current condition
of this road cannot safely accommodate this level/speed of traffic. Impvements to the road and
solutions to address the speed of traffic are desperately needed. I don't know if extending 95th Ave
Gillard Ave
is the answer, but traffic on Gillard must be addressed. We've lived in Gillard over 15 years and live
in city limits of Monticello and pay taxes associated with living city limits, yet our road has been
maintained like a rural county road.
The city needs to look into a better solution to the needs of the development. Cty 39 and Gillard
Gillard Ave NE
intersection definitely needs work. Also something needs to be done with the speed of traffic on
Gillard- whether it be stop signs or more speed cameras to actually catch. 95th extension seems
like a quick fix for a city f -up on too big of development.
Gillard Ave is in desperate need of reconstruction and improvement. The speed and volume is out
of control. People on average are driving well over 45mph and often semis and large construction
Gillard Ave NE vehicles are speeding. It can take us will over 5 min. to back out of our driveway because of the
increased volume of traffic. People pass on our bikepath. We have replaced our mailbox over 5
times. Please consider impovements to Gillard Ave. It is a safety issue!
The safety issues on Gillard Ave NE need to be dealt with. Regardless of the solution something
Gillard Ave NE needs to be done. We have been patient with the growth, but it is now time to make this road
safe. Speeding, accidents, and unsafe driving have caused quality of life to go way down.
Gillard Ave NE Not in favor of 95th idea. Enforce speed zone Gillard 1)Traffic Lights 2)Maybe some speed bumps
3)Look at possibility of doing route east bound connect otherside of Meadow Oakes.
Mill Run Road Safety issues are a major concern as well as sound. It'll be in my backyard.
We have had semis and car/semi parts blow off the interstate into our yards. One person hit will be
a law suit. The interstate and MN State said they took 50% of the sound barrier and trees not to
mention what you took for the bike path. Fix the outlets you have. Ask your police to slow traffic.
Roundabouts, speed bumps have to be cheaper than 1.2 million. A roundabout is cheaper than
Mill Trail 95th. Learn to work with the county instead of spending 1.2 million of city taxes. There are other
outlets, fix them. Stop putting people into Sunset Ponds. Find a place that can handle traffic. You
can't say maybe in the future we will have a sound barrier. Do not promise what you can't give for
sure. They will speed no matter what on Gillard. YOu said Gillard can handle the traffic. Connect cul
de sac to Gullard or overpass from 95th to broadway.
What would the feasability to put a bridge over 94 from the end of 95th to Broadway (the old on
Mill Trail Lane ramp). Extending 95th is not going to make Gillard safer. People are still going to speed down
Gillard if they are going to 39.
The 95th extension is a very bad idea. I can't believe you can't think of a better solution!!! All I can
hear in my backyard is the HIGHWAY!! Instead of a road, put up more trees or a barrier wall!!
There are 2 ways out of that dev. Haug is a crappy road and so no one takes it. Put a cop on Gillard
Mill Trail Lane during peak traffic times until people get the picture that they can't speed! If the city is concerned
with safety then change the speed limit!! It should be 45 a lot sooner. People speed all the time
down 39 all the way to Kwik Trip. Building a tunnel under the highway makes me sense than the
stupid idea of extending 95th.
Don't take down all the trees, it'll be too loud. Unsafe with all the debris from the freeway cars,
Mill Trail Lane tires. Put speed bumps on Gillard. Out of sunset ponds build a bridge over 94 to Broadway, round
about on 39 and Gillard. Reduce on speed on 39.
It appears the city is jumping into the most intrusive option. Why not put stop signs on Gillard?
Mill Trail Lane Have police patrol the area? You will be driving down my property value. Will we be getting a
reduction in property taxes? If this is done the extension will be a raceway, a road with no
driveways! They will be 70 mph!
We don't want a road in our back yards. We can slow traffic on Gillard Ave NE. We must find a
Mill Trail Lane solution that doesn't destroy the neighborhood. Use more stop signs, bridges, and more trees. We
need trees to breathe. Can't breathe concrete.
Safety issues for my grandchildren (all kids) using path. The sound from the freeway was louder
from the last time they took trees (from moving freeway) you will now take more trees? Can't have
River Forest Dr my windows open in spring and fall now. Who's paying for this? How much of my property will you
take? Put in speed bumps. Speeding down 95th! I want to keep my trees. Who will buy my house
now?
95th already runs behind my backyard and we already get traffic that comes down and turns
around in the circle. This has already made it unsafe, especially since there is no walking path. We
have a special needs child and her safety and the other children in the neighborhood is #1- put
pressure on county to fix 39 and fix Gillard and put a roundabout in. My daughter has complex
River Forest Dr needs and our activity includes walking (her in a stroller) or biking with her special bike. We utilize
the walking/biking trail and these changes make the trail less safe. How will you compensate us
when our property values decrease? Why aren't other roads like Haug Ave improved so Sunset
Ponds residents have other options to get to 39? What's to stop people from cutting through from
Broadway to 95th to get to 39 via Gillard, right through my backyard?
Safety concern for highway debris, truck tires, property values will fall. Noise pollution is already
River Forest Drive bad from the removal of trees. Break ins have increased. All ready three exists for Sunset Ponds,
Haug, Gillard. Does not offset or help River Forest Neighborhood.
The 95th addition doesn't solve issue at hand about speeding on Gillard. Drop speed limit on
River Forest Drive Gillard, which would result in higher fines. Add stop sign (3 -way) on Gullard and River Forest. How
will you protect kids at the park? Adding this road will only double the safety issues, not fix it!!
I'm opposed to this addition. There will be no noise barrier by removing all the trees. There is a
really big safety issue with the road being so close to the walking path. There needs to be another
River Forest Drive solution with Gillard Ave. Our property value is going to plummet. The access at Broadway will
bring traffic from Hawks Bar through our neighborhood and more problems with break-ins. By
adding a roundabout at 39 an Gillard that will relieve the potential for deaths and accidents not to
mention it will be cheaper.
I am not opposed to the 95th extension, but not one penny of tax payer money should pay for it.
River Mill Drive This should ocme from the developers agreement from Sunset Ponds or cash the letter of credit
for the development. The other proposed development should be assessed part of the cost. Gillard
should also be improved at cost of Sunset Ponds developer.
For 39 & Gillard: Post a lower speed limit about 4-5 blocks from where it is posted now. Lower
speed to 40 mph where it now says 45. Too many people still going 55 past the 45mph posting.
95th Ave NE For Gillard: Widen road. The grass has been replanted at least 3-4 times.
For 95th: Posted speed of 30mph. Speed monitors installed for 1 year to make sure speed limit is
obeyed.
My concern is with the high traffic volume and speed on Gillard Ave. Before we "fix" Gillard, we
Gillard Ave NE need a plan to move some of the high traffic. I don't know if extending 95th is the answer but
something needs to be done.
Roundabout on 39 and intersection of Gillard
m
4-4m
0
Q
N
0)
m
r_
0)
Q
L
U
�+o°000
00
N 0 0 0 0
N O O o 0
O O
O O
In 0 0 0 0
0 0
O O O N
p 0 0 0 0
R N
O N
n 6 6 o 0
O O
cn o 00 0
0 0
O O Vo
01 .--I
y� O O O 1
o o O o
O m
0 o
0 0 0 0
0 0
� lfl V1 N 00
� h
,C Q O o o o
-Cr
6
o0 0
0 0
m m m m 0
o
V1 O N 0
c M
cc re) vovr,:
v
oa)
a ----'--
w
h a o 0 0 0
0 0
m lo lo N In N
o t^D
M V m 00
W m
m N M m
M Ci
0 00 0
0 0
ry N 0 r M
00 00
n W
00 l0
�
ry N N r-1 00
n O
V V a M
M N
N o o
� m
m �
p Ol N
m m
00 00
"1 -- l0 Ot c.)
l0 d'
' 0 0 0
0 0
.y 01 N V 0p
n In o0 orn
I V
v a
u D v
v v
v v v
v
� C
d
c
u m m N m v io
CL
t
w
v
w
a
N ^ ^ W Ln M .4
� N N N N N M
d
a
Cm o 0 0 0
O 'o rn Iq
C 00 n W
C M V V V lfl lD
m m m m m m
v
m — —
CL
CL
x
c4 m U1 In lf1 .D n
C N N N N N N
O
H
O
m m Q m m m
� In In N In Z Z
C
w o £
.`"-i. .tO-� In ti \ \ \ \
10
m N N N N N\
11 0\1
v a v m \
0p \
V\1 n Qtt\l1 Ol H
wN
N d
U1 E
a �
N N
U
o
0 0 0 e 0 0 0 0 0
0 o 0 O 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0
O o O o 0 O o 0 O O o
voi a e m om r✓li � � o ui o
aldweSjo %
��, ir,,,, vi/ /iiia �iiir; •.v � •41 /
m1 .%
0, �
.QW/Aft,71
11'I:`Il�j iBu111±
low
-�71111111f1�
,� 71111 1111�� �
� yrrrrr
��11111111—
NIA
I�) IIII IIID_
II �ii p►p "qM►IZ
14 �r4' I I -
/��� 1M1 -
--
lbi?q,i��n❑
Malifill,
� i
`Idill Ass
j
�-
►'+i ii :
ZIA—
raj% I N
�►�► � I• �� 1fillflj�
i�
:Cllu��
Preliminary Cost and Fundinr Summary
2017 Street Improvement Project
CP 16C003
Street Name
Type of Street Improvement
Pro'ect Cost
Assessments*
Sandberg Road
Reconstruction
$2,422
$92,422
Hart Boulevard (West)
Reconstruction
$119,029
$13,800
Hart Boulevard (West)
Mill & Overlay
$30,088
$0
Hart Boulevard (East)
Mill & Overlay
$71,731
$33,201
Hart Boulevard (East)
Reconstruction
$116,345
$116,345
Hart Boulevard (West) Watermain
n/a
$159,376
$0
Hart Boulevard Trail
n/a
$15,000
$0
Mississippi Drive
Reconstruction
$247,461
$161,000
Gillard Avenue
Reconstruction- 32 ft width
$612,137
$92,000
95th Street
Reconstruction
$162,963
$0
Haug Avenue
Reconstruction
$234,167
$92,610
90th Street
Reconstruction
$127,823
$63,700
Total Project Cost
$1,988,542
$665,078
* Does not include City owned properties
Proposed Assessment Rates/Methods
Property Type
Improved Street
Method of Measurement
Rate
Single Family Residental
Mississippi Drive
per dwelling unit
$4,600
Single Family Residental
Gillard Avenue
per dwelling unit
$4,600
Single Family Residental
Hart Blvd West and East
per dwelling unit
$4,600
Commerical
Sandberg Road
per acre
15%
Commerical
Hart Blvd West
per acre
40%
Commerical
Hart Blvd East mill and overlay
front foot
33%
Commerical
Hart Blvd East reconstruct area
average of property area
and trip generation
City Costs
% Assessed
$0
100%
$105,229
12%
$30,088
0%
$38,530
46%
$0
100%
$159,376
0%
$15,000
0%
$86,461
65%
$520,137
15%
$162,963
0%
$141,557
40%
$64,123
50%
$1,323,464
33%
Notes
Rate is approximately 2.2% increase over 2016 rate
for current single family uses on Hart Blvd
i L 1�!'►hlt . r w r t s 1
EFANDPAGM L-,&,
Sandberg Road
CITY 2017 Street Improvement Project
Montif��Ao City of Monticello, MN
City Project Number: 16CO03
I
`"a G
0
o
i
� v
s N
At ro
a
3
� r n
G
v
CD
v
"tt 7 <
m
! •
1
-� Street Reconstruction
Assessed Parcels
N i
A i 0 200 WSB
Feet
1 inch = 200 feet
00 N a;
O z a N
r (C N O
N N
J_
Q z
(OD n 0
J W W M O q a
Q 0 w r O W N
(�O
n M n V
O
O W
R
EO
W W W Z Z J V1 VI
as
asss»wwensj
Fnw
--
O>
L
.- 00 V: N c0
to
W 7 n N (M
w J M O It
w r <o co v
Z N
tp IO
N m
n M n
m o
O�
z
M M M M M
N u7 to to N
y m ao 00 0o ao
J W U OI Oi Ot O1
Q H Q 0 0 0 0
z N
Z n
W
0 di w 64 fR w
W
M M M
N N N
ao ao eo
T 0I
Ol O
69 V} A
v
m
C
Z LL M N N O O
O IL ^ O O O
z
W M O
N' N
N
� N
T
d
N 00
y
U n M M O1 N
� c
v N 0 R'
C
N
c ¢
O
N
¢
N
Q
a u u u J J J
O
it
w
r
Q
V
O o
O
z Q
W F-
Q
a. `R
>1
0O
o
U
a
O
U)
d
U
(/) z O
y o
0
N N N
O
y V
CN
N N
H�m
z L
a .
rn
y
p
o
o d
Q
(1
W
w
W
0
N
N
d.
V N
W Q tb
U m
V a
f/i d N
m (U/JZ
H W
y(
o
�. O0)
6° CE
m
'o
IL
¢
a
z
J_
Q z
N
4",
N
W w w W
F- � � � w w¢
O N
EO
W W W Z Z J V1 VI
O O � �
a z z z ~ ~
O>
L
v ¢ ¢ ¢
n, �
Q
C
f6
O
tw
w
z
o
c ¢
O
N
U U
w
z
Q z
a u u u J J J
O
it
W W W pLL F- F w >
O w>
A w w w J J p WU o
a a a
Z
=O
`w w w0 0
z
41_ a
c o. d CL m x
z U
Cj O S
u u
O B E E Y Y U U
N U O
z O O o ON ON O a0 0m
O
N N N N N H N H
Q
U
(/) z O
W a 0 0 0 u1 0 0 0
Q O w O
W U z
L Of P
a z
G
_C w O w
W Z, -
•� O
F w
p
_ a
N N M V N lD n 00
- n o a
N n } >
L H H
a nr
z a
�- N U U
A
f
'exhibit Ez
Hart Boulevard
CITY OF 2017 Street Improvement Project N
monikeflo City of Monticello, MN 0 350
Cit Project Number: 16CO03 Feet WSB
`~ 1 inch = 350 feet
N
N
�
O
q
U g
w r S
N M
LL
O
U N
oz S 8
C
V
�
oz
IL
r
W
O a fiN1 T m "
r 0 h
" NR
�
O
w w
02
0 N
�' dm
N
z
W
m $ m
�Um �U
w in
d
H
Q
W
N
Q N Q N
N
Q
Z0
zry
z�
r'
wzF
N
Q
S S
r
E$I
d ^
rcF
�O
zr
N m
m v
E w
Wy
SS
ww W
m�m
m
a u
_
C O
Q d a
v
u
N
SS
O
Q—
9
NN
C
�
vw
Z
0
W
NN
O LL'
z
° m m
"'a ry
o
O.
Z
Z
CL
-.-
d
N N
S S m
N
E
�
d
E em
io 00
6
N
Q
N
Q
u
ry
U
LUUJ8
"a
i
r
=
-
8
V'N
¢ O
N
zi
w
�9°
=
�jw
O
C8
m
888
��
2 Or0
e
Eg
d
F Q�Q
z K
e «
�a°
Q o N
'vEE
N8
N N
Z
O w
�o'z
z z u r
Joy J0
w
_—ri
O
OC
N
o
wzU
Q
O
y
W
c�3
yOU
EF=
v0':
O
Fi
d
o
E,02t
w'o3
a�i�38
>
O
E-8
G m c
H N
Q O
N .O,N
y.uwi
ary
'o
-
z`w
d o
rc
z
z
j
oa
i
a
o
V1
YO> >a>
- liol
N
Y
Z.
E
`L
�oO°Ivaaa��
a t; t;
OQ
0 0 0 0 J J
ws
o
O
orr
9 J J
¢
a
a o 0 o z z
a a a
�
a
a?
vYi
a a
o
X 3 3
>
=
N
j
O
co
rc
_ z
s
m
w
z
O
no on on
-
a
ro r
= N
W
2
O
CD z
z
O
Y s a u u
z
2-22
O u u
n
E2ioo
n=
yE
z
—rii
n-
Eoo
ow2
O w
�rco
z i
00
C mOi
Nz.U�
zzz F
mmmuu
o
c$r
=a o
yzU
IOU-
E U (9
Z
N$ g ry S" ,'
c �a
�=
N U 'U
z
'
rs'
8
8
v r 3
8
�Q
Q o o
Z'
W a❑
Oda
D o c 0
.. ., ., ., ..
'n m
e
H N OJ
Q O
W r O
M
�. F
n z � I„
_ N
-
F
z
a z
.� ..
lam
cwzw,
E,y
o
z n
Crzw
W
w
o_
o
z
......,
yr On
z
iia~
a ry U Z5,
--
N
N
�
O
q
U g
w r S
N M
LL
O
U N
Ct0
C
V
�
Q
F
IL
r
N
" NR
�' dm
N
z
W
�Um �U
w in
d
H
Q
W
2 V
Q N Q N
N
Q
8
w
Ec°�S
r'
wzF
N
Q
S S
r
E$I
d ^
I z
m
m v
E w
Wy
�0 n •N
W d a
°
ww W
m�m
m
a u
_
C O
Q d a
v
u
N
N
O
O
V1
Y
C
�
vw
Z
C
C
o
O.
CL
E
m
io 00
u
2
LUUJ8
"a
i
r
=
N
m
zi
w
�9°
=
p
c°
O
? z u
m
2 Or0
U zO
—V
O
"<w
o�
E ;5
'vEE
v
Z
O w
�o'z
z z u r
Joy J0
c
my
_—ri
O
OC
o
wzU
i xoo$
c�3
yOU
EF=
v0':
O
oo
58888
d
o
;g=
a�i�38
Q O
p52w
G m c
H N
Q O
t° F r
C w a w
wE 0
z
p
--
n —
-
z`w
rc
= w
F r
zp w
i
it
N' r
L
a
z
°
i 0
YO> >a>
c; 6 S
6 mdduui
M N M N M N
Q
rc
Q
rc
w
Ct0
C
W
Nr
�
Q
F
IL
r
N
Z
2 V
90
0
N
�
�
N
Q
8
zi
m�m
m
y
N
O
O
TI T Nam -
A N
4
0 0
0 z
J w w 0 0
0 0- U) `— —
a
U)
W¢
Z °
0
O
z
a
w
r
Ln
++
z
z
w
0
w
>
a
0
L
z
O
z
U-
Q
Ecu
pl
Q
a
e
°
0
d
E_
O
�
N N
K
Q
d
N
Z
N
Q
O
o
w o
W
0
N c
a
X
J o
o
V
CL
<
0w
Z
O
Z
I
d
y
3
o
C o
d o
0
0
�
N
J
w -e
o
dN1 o
Q
Z
0
n
N fl
0
Q
�
cli
Y H
LU
8
0
z
J
Ln
++
70
20w
N
a a
>
'¢
0
L
a
Q
Ecu
pl
Q
a
>
°
0
L
0
O
�
Q-
K
rA
`o
Q
Z
LI)
O
o
N Q
W
o
C U)
w
w Z
a
X
C
c y
m
C y
CL
N
0w
Z
O Q
d
Z
I
d
Cr OV
3
° a
o F-
E P=
C7
0
N a o
} z
U
n
N o
CO 0 w
0
W Q O
0
n
Q 5 -J-I
w p
U
ad
0,—
, ->`
>-L 0 z
a ~ —
cli
Y H
Z
8
0 w
O
z
E Ya w
—=— d
- 0 a
n F
o p
z a�
a N U U
■
�J OSPREY 'CII'-'
OSPREY
CT NE
A
t
rn
Kit
W
Z -
W
Q
W
0]
C7
T NE
rk
Street Reconstruction '
Assessed Parcels
r Township Parcels
prnent
18/2017
F-
0 Z
J co
0 al
~IX M
LL Q
� �I
O F
Z'
J W I
Q Q
� � I
w
Z LL
Z LL
e
� � m
N
N � Q
N
N
Q
N O
C
V �
N,
� O
o
o
0
O
C
�
N'N Z
w
Q
W
H
CA O J
G V,r Q
N
N N NW?
N
0 N
I
a Q
00D
W
LL Z
H
Z'
a 0
Z U
EO~—
In
Q zo
o
J
W U Z
Z H
W Q W
W 2 1-
._ F LL O
m O a
L H >-
�- N U U
106 + A
3
.��.
107
108 -
11;0 w
Cr
111 L v -- ---
I
�U
Street Reconstruction
Assessed Parcels
Township Parcels
95th Street, Haug Avenue, and 90th Street
CITYi�eflo
2017 Street Improvement Project N 0 400
ontCity of Monticello, MN Feet
City Project Number: 16CO03 1 inch = 400 feet WSB
oz
J W.w
p0102
00
o0
M
(010
`�`-
M
- ()
Lu
—
aQ
w
O
C
M
H
O O
z
J
Q
O
O
O
�
O
w W
wof ¢
~
O
N
a
IN
o rn
e
E = u-
y M w
N V
N
M M
o
vi
R
m
x
LL
0
of
V
m
K
LL
N
N'
o
0
O
0
O
N O
N O J
UOw ~
O
O
CV
O
N
L
N
LL
N
U N
I N
0
H
v
m
4)o
Ew uJ
a`
d�a
a`
d -ti
N >
Q
U)
m
w
=
A y
V01 NI
N Ni
O
N O
U �
O
I N O
U
0
OO
E U o
° N
o
°
a
a
LL
�
„a
_ a
I
Q
�,
I
z
N
I
z
J
ai
Q� }
� x�
�
v) wa
O
Q
+� CL
O a
01
cz
4J
Q
w
w
t� z
_ p
Q �
06 O
U) w
w °L
z a
LL
_ F �
o
o
i
I
I F
O
a
a Oa,,
Ca) Z
C-- __- Z
Ln p } z
N 3 U 2
o
� W w Z ' w~
°
m � F z
w p w o
C w 2 __ r_
C-woa,
--
-
o
a N U U 1 1 Z
CITY OF
ntfello
City Council Work Session
Gillard Avenue Neighborhood Meeting
2017 Street Improvements
January 23, 2017
CITY OF
a Monticello
Agenda:
Gillard Avenue Improvements Review— 4:30-5:30pm
o Presentation
o Resident Feedback
o Council Discussion
Remaining Street Improvements — 5:30-6:15pm
o Existing 95th St, Haug Ave, 90th St
o Mississippi Drive
o Hart Boulevard
o Sandberg Road
teW7
ty
�j ►frf�ll
1141
a w/ap
maps
4
►_.all
CITY OF
a Monticello
Gillard Avenue:
• Review December 8, 2016 Neighborhood Meeting
Comments- see Exhibit A
• Based on the comments, the project goals on Gillard
Avenue are to address:
o Speeds
o Safety (both vehicle and pedestrian)
o Street Design
CITY OF
Monticello
Gillard Avenue- Speed Data:
• 85th percentile speed = 36 mph. Posted speed limit is 30 mph.
Date of Sample Direction 10 MPH Pace [mph]
% in Pace Average Speed 85th Percentile
5/24/10 - 5/26/10
SB
23
33
81%
27.9
33
7/11/11 - 7/15/11
SB
25
34
76%
27.7
33
9/14/15 - 9/17/15
SB
25
34
80%
27.87
32
Speed
Sample 5/23/16 - 5/27/16
SB
25
34
76%
28.53
33
9/8/15 - 9/11/15
NB
26
35
77.95%
29.31
34
12/1/16 - 12/6/16
NB
27
36
71.69%
31.19
36
• Recommendation:
o Install dynamic speed signs
o Continue enforcement
-Wright County will monitor area
-Offered to meet residents onsite
YOUR SPEED
SPEED LJMI7
40
0
TY
`a
Monticello
Gillard Avenue
f19
L
0
G
f19
L
0
f
TY
`a
Monticello
Gillard Avenue
v-
i
Pop -
Y
_
.r•Y �Sf . ''� 'ice � r..� I �ql f'._ ��' � A_;,
®fin iy�4`• Ks•'!. � w � - }'.`-{ �.�- � 4 i f� � �r 1 `� - i 7p... Q ��J'.>�,.N ♦ ,
ft
,�� 'Xis, �'{�, �/ G 7{ {.,• T' K f -f _f :. •. �
It
TY
`a
Monticello
Gillard Avenue
i
0
0
l�(
Monticello
Gillard Avenue - Proposed Street
Design and Safety Improvements:
• Recommendation: Widen roadway to 32 -feet wide on east
side with curb and gutter with parking allowed on one
side, based on the following factors:
o Curb and gutter provides a barrier to the adjacent properties and pathway
for improved safety
o Provides wider area for turning and driveway access maneuvers
o Accommodates parking on one side of the roadway
o Meets City design standards for residential streets
o Accommodates emergency and maintenance vehicles
o Examples: Prairie Road and River Street, west of Chestnut Street
Gillard Avenue
il
TY
`a
Monticello
GILLARD AVENUE
PROPOSEDTYPICAL SECTION
h
VARIES VARIES
X32'-33' X 81 X 6' X 8' ) ( 12' l ( 12' X W—W- 1 V-12'
EX. DITCH EX.TKAIL* BLVD PARKING THRU THRU BLVD DITCH
NOTTO SCALE LANE LANE LANE
RW
NOT TO SCALE
SOUTH OF RIVER FOREST DRIVE
- I
7oM,ixeniaAuesourn-suae3oo
nneapo�is,,enMN5542017 Street Improvement Project TY °F
WSB Te! - 3-5411800 � Monticello
Fax:763-541-1700
• Da-janmry 20, 2017 •
TY
`a
Monticello
Prairie Road -Before and After Construction Pictures
f
meow .,-- ,,,
5 �
r
r
Q>
f
meow .,-- ,,,
OF
MonCItTY
icello
Other Considerations:
• On -street parking needs
• Alternate street widths
• Lowering grade at hill to improve sight lines
• Filling in ditches for ease of maintenance
• Replace trail with sidewalk if roadway is widened to 32 -feet
• Driveway turnarounds
• Provide mailboxes on both sides of roadway, subject to Post
Office determination
• Traffic calming
o Roadway striping
o Boulevard trees
o Increase signage
TY
`a
Monticello
Gillard Avenue- Drainage Improvements
Gillard Avenue
TY
`a
Monticello
Gillard Avenue
2017 Street Improvement Protect N
250
MoA'�—ii-4ffo
City of Monticello, MN 0 WJD
AL
City Project Number! 16CD03 -reef JO
1 inch = 250 feel -
Single Family Residential
Assessment = $4,600 per lot
20 lots @ $46,000 = $92,000
Assessments total 15% of project
cost
Township properties not assessed.
Will be notified of Public Hearing.
CITY OF
ivionticeao
Estimated Project Costs and Funding:
Preliminary Cost and Funding Summary
2017 Street Improvement Project
CP 16CO03
Street Name Type of Street Improvement Project Cost Assessments*
Sandberg Road Reconstruction $92,422 $92,422
Hart Boulevard (West) Reconstruction $119,029 $13,800
Hart Boulevard (West) Mill & Overlay $30,088 $0
Hart Boulevard (East) Mill & Overlay $71,731 $33,201
Hart Boulevard (East) Reconstruction $116,345 $104,904
Hart Boulevard (West) Watermain
Hart Boulevard Trail
Mississippi Drive
Gillard Avenue
95th Street
Haug Avenue
90th Street
City Costs
$0
$105,229
$30,088
$38,530
$11,441
% Assessed
100%
12%
0%
46%
90%
n/a
$159,376
$0
$159,376
0%
n/a
$15,000
$0
$15,000
0%
Reconstruction
$247,461
$161,000
$86,461
65%
Reconstruction- 32 ft width
$612,137
$92,000
$520,137
15%
Reconstruction
$162,963
$0
$162,963
0%
Reconstruction
$234,167
$92,610
$141,557
40%
Reconstruction
$127,823
$63,700
$64,123
50%
Total Project Cost
$1,988,542
$665,078
$1,323,464
33%
* Does not include City owned properties
l�(
Monticello
moll
CR 39/Gillard Ave Intersection
• Short Term Solution
o Dynamic Speed Signs- Speed Study conducted in 2015, keep 45mph
o Rural Intersection Conflict Warning System
o Separated EB CR 39 right turn lane at Gillard Ave and WB CR 39
left turn lane at Gillard Ave
• Long Term Solution
o Roundabout at Gillard and CR 39
o Consider pursuing single lane roundabout that could be expanded to
a dual lane roundabout to address safety and/or speed control
• Traffic volumes alone do not support roundabout justification
Monticello
CITY OF
MonticeRo
+. _,i.!
'1 Minor Approach Stop
d � Bar Detection
• a • i 4I,+� Major Approach
Warning Flasher
'�:� ♦ is ♦ " �N , .
AWL Jr
Sign and signal beacon
PVC loops
— F & I conduit
Cabinet, controller and service cabinet
Inplace wood power pole
FIGURE 3: Potential Intersection Conflict Warning System Layout
Major Approach
Warning Flasher
Aw
tfTe
�.
Source of Power �#`
1• Controller Cabinet r ,�
L . r
�f„� �,•t+ ,off
J
~
Minor Approach
Advanced De40
tection '!Ad
.Wag
CITY OF
,Monticello
lC ( C
a
Monticello
0
�1
I
CITY OF
a Monticello
CR 39/Gillard Avenue Estimated Costs:
SHORT TERM IMPROVEMENT
Dynamic Speed Signs
ICWS System
Turn Lane Improvements
LONG TERM IMPROVEMENT
Roundabout
Regional Path Connection
TOTAL
TOTAL
$750,000
$250,000
CITY OF
a Monticello
Schedule:
Neighborhood Meetings:
o Gillard Ave
o Mississippi Drive, Sandberg Road, Hart Blvd
Council Accepts Feasibility Report
Public Hearing
Council Approves Plans/Authorize Ad for Bid
Receive Bids
Award Contract
Begin Construction
Complete Construction
January 23, 2017
week of January 30
February 13, 2017
February 27, 2017
April 2017
May 2017
May/June 2017
June 2017
September 2017
Agenda:
CITY OF
a Monticello
Gillard Avenue Improvements Review— 4:30-5:30pm
o Presentation
o Resident Feedback
o Council Discussion
Remaining Street Improvements — 5:30-6:15pm
o Existing 95th St, Haug Ave, 90th St
O Mississippi Drive
o Hart Boulevard
o Sandberg Road
TY
Monticello
95th Street, Haug Avenue, 90th Street
951h Street, Haug Avenue, and 901h Street
�7 2017 Street Improvement Project N 0 aoo A
Monticello City of Monticello, MN - Feet
_A City Project Number: 160003 A 1 inch -400 feet yySB
Property #112 within City limits assessed
at 100% front foot rate = $156,310
- Consistent with past practice
- Assessment totals 43% of project cost
Sunset Ponds Development Agreement -
Funds received for reconstruction of
adjacent roadways
Township properties not assessed. Will be
notified of Public Hearing.
TY
`a
Monticello
Mississippi Drive
Mississippi Drive
2017 $Ve01 IR+GI9vemBnl PfDJVI:l j
�vlanticell0 City of Mand -11o, MN oWNP
cly Ratut Numftl: 1KMo Peel
Single Family Residential Assessment = $4,600 per lot
35 lots @ $46,000 = $161,000
Assessments total 65% of project cost
zaTY
Monticello
Hart Boulevard West
I
r -
ho>Domormnmmmm.mmA,amm�mmmm�� �p�p
. • Mill & O,erlay
Street Reconstruction
Assessed Parcels
City-O—d Parcels
WSB
Hart Boulevard
11 Street Improvement Project N
MO11�10Ell0 City of Monticello, MN � 350
City
Cit Project Number:160003 -Feet
y I � troch = 350 feel
Bondhus properties assessed based on
current use at single family rate of $4,600
per dwelling.
#9/10 @1 dwelling unit = $4,600
#11@ 2 dwelling units = $9,200
If properties redevelop to more intense
use, additional assessments will apply at
the time of redevelopment
Remaining costs are City funded
TY
Monticello
Hart Boulevard East
Hart Boulevard
2017 Street Improvement Project N
Monticello City of Monticello, MN Feet WSB
City Project Number: 16C003 A i;,,�t,=ssoreet
Mill and Overlav Section
Assessments based on front foot rate for
commercial properties
Hoglund property assessed based on
current use at single family rate of $4,600
per dwelling. If property redevelops to
more intense use, additional assessments
will apply at the time of redevelopment
Reconstruction Section
Assessment method based on front foot
rate for apartments, townhomes,
commercial lots. Assessment total = 90% of
project cost.
TY
Monticello �
Sandberg Road
Sandberg Road
2017 Street Improvement Project N .
Monticello City of Monticello, MNW"�Q D
Cily Project Number: 16CO03 0 ZOFeet
+inch=zoo reel �
Assessment method based on area rate or
front foot of each property with direct and
indirect access to Sandberg Road
Assessment total =100% of project cost.
lC ( CITY
a
Monticeo
Estimated Project Costs and Funding:
Preliminary Cost and Funding Summary
2017 Street Improvement Project
CP 16C003
Street Name
Type of Street Improvement
Project Cost
Assessments*
City Costs
% Assessed
Sandberg Road
Reconstruction
$92,422
$92,422
$0
100%
Hart Boulevard (West)
Reconstruction
$119,029
$13,800
$105,229
12%
Hart Boulevard (West)
Mill & Overlay
$30,088
$0
$30,088
0%
Hart Boulevard (East)
Mill & Overlay
$71,731
$33,201
$38,530
46%
Hart Boulevard (East)
Reconstruction
$116,345
$104,904
$11,441
90%
Hart Boulevard (West) Watermain
n/a
$159,376
$0
$159,376
0%
Hart Boulevard Trail
n/a
$15,000
$0
$15,000
0%
Mississippi Drive
Reconstruction
$247,461
$161,000
$86,461
65%
Gillard Avenue
Reconstruction- 32 ft width
$612,137
$92,000
$520,137
15%
95th Street
Reconstruction
$162,963
$0
$162,963
0%
Haug Avenue
Reconstruction
$234,167
$92,610
$141,557
40%
90th Street
Reconstruction
$127,823
$63,700
$64,123
50%
Total Project Cost
$1,988,542
$665,078
$1,323,464
33%
* Does not include City owned properties
CITY OF
a Monticello
City Financing:
• Street Improvement Bonds
• Possible County participation for CR 39 at Gillard
Avenue improvements - 2018
• Special Assessments
Traffic
Vo-umes
TY
`a
Monticello
Legend
XX Existing AM Peak Volumes _ -
pocj Edsting PM Peak Volumes
XXX Existing AUT ,
XXX Edsting ADT with 95th Sbreet Extension
[XXX] Projected ADT without 95th street Extension T pl -
-AXK" Projected ACTT with 95th Street Ertenslon
ti _ $250 ADT ry� Fs
44
71
ADT J i>sr 'Y n� ` .ff ; ` r -
113 r �. x "J •„'
fl.FJ`
•7 +�. f
ILL.
b` �I•rr•�'�r
/v� r
do
imp
• ♦ 1���=��✓ � •.r - .1 • i �•��.� Tyr �,
k , ksis 3510 r w
F 0 " or ° " 350 ADT
AOT] �, ,1 �_ I 4 4�+�I+ r1 -4-'th Street Wt:
lup1l4w.y .(ai• tro-� 4
O_Ate
F F �
v
� o goo f+ uoo f+
CITY OF
a Monticello
AL
Traffic Analysis:
0 Existing (YR 2016) ADT on Gillard Avenue: 1,620 to 1,850 vehicles per day.
Historic counts conducted in 2001: 1050 to 1200 vehicles per day on Gillard
Avenue.
85% to 90% of the traffic entering or exiting CR 39 at Gillard Avenue has an
origin or destination in the City of Monticello (i.e. left turning from Gillard
Avenue to CR 39 or right turn from CR 39 to Gillard Avenue).
• Traffic on Gillard Avenue is not using River Forest Drive as a cut -through
avoiding the CR 39 intersection.
Currently there is not a significant traffic generation impacting Gillard
Avenue from the area west on 95th Street or Haug Avenue.
It is not likely that future long term development east of Haug Avenue will
utilize the 95th Street extension when traveling to and from Monticello. CR
39 will be likely be primary route.
CITY OF
a Monticello
Traffic Analysis
Year 2001 Traffic On Gillard Ave: 1,050 to 1,200 ADT
Year 2016 Traffic on Gillard Ave: 1,620 to 1,850 ADT
With the 95th Street Extension:
Opening Day:
• Gillard Avenue: 750 to 1,000 ADT
• 95th Street: 1000 ADT
Future Full Build of the Area:
• Gillard Avenue: 900 to 1,100 ADT
• 95th Street: 1,500 ADT
Without the 95th Street Extension:
0 Gillard Avenue: 2,500 to 2,750 ADT (with future build out of area)
CITY OF
JIL Monticello
Traffic Analysis (cont.):
• Typical local City Street 1,200 ADT or less with a capacity of up to
5,000 ADT.
• Existing 1,850 on Gillard is approaching a critical level. With
rehabilitation, critical level could be improved to 2,000 to 2,500 ADT.
o Pavement replacement included in 2017 Street Improvement
project
• Comparable City Streets:
o Broadway east of CR 18/39 = 2,050 vpd
o Fenning Avenue south of School Blvd =1,800 vpd
o Fallon Avenue south of Chelsea Rd =1,750 vpd
o Cedar Street north of 7th Ave =1,450 vpd
o Innsbrook Drive south of Chelsea Rd =1,850 vpd (estimate)
o Prairie Road = 1,500 vpd (estimate)
v
no
I
i