Res 2019-61 Receive Report Call for Hearing ST2020-01RESOLUTION NO. 2019 - 61
A RESOLUTION RECEIVING REPORT AND CALLING FOR HEARING
ON IMPROVEMENT FOR THE 2020 STREET REHABILITATION
PROJECT NO. ST2020-01
WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution 2019-35 of the City Council of the City of Fridley adopted
August 12, 2019, a report has been prepared by the City of Fridley Public Works Department with
reference to the improvements listed in `Exhibit A', attached, and this report was officially received
by the City Council on October 28, 2019, and
WHEREAS, the report provides information regarding whether the proposed project is necessary,
cost-effective, and feasible,
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA:
1. The council will consider the improvement of such street in accordance with the report and
the assessment of abutting property for all or a portion of the cost of the improvement
pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429 at an estimated total cost of the improvement
of $1,985,000.
2. A public hearing shall be held on such proposed improvement on the 25h day of November
2019, in the Council Chambers of the Fridley City Hall at 7:00 p.m. and the clerk shall give
mailed and published notice of such hearing and improvement as required by law.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS
28TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2019.
SCOTT J. LUND - MAYOR
ATTEST:
DANIEL TIENTER — CITY CLERK
CITY OF FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA
PUBLIC 'CORKS DEPARTMENT
ENGINEERING DIVISION
lz Fridley
FEASIBILITY REPORT
FOR
2020 STREET REHABILITATION PROJECT
NO. ST2020-01
October 2019
I hereby certify that this plan, specifications, or report was prepared by me or under my
direct supervision and that I am a duly licensed Professional Engineer with the laws of
the State of Minnesota.
d '.~~" Date: October 28, 2019
Jon 1-ennande , �E.
Regwstration N 17024
1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Description Page No.
INTRODUCTION........................................................................................... 3
STREET RESURFACING PLAN....................................................................... 5
BACKGROUND.............................................................................................................. 6
PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS......................................................................................6
Overview...........................................................................................................7
Pavement Resurfacing..................................................................................................7
Water Main Improvements............................................................................................7
Sanitary Sewer and Storm Sewer Repairs.................................................................. 7
Stormwater Quality Improvements..............................................................................7
ESTIMATEDCOSTS...................................................................................................... 8
FUNDINGSOURCES..................................................................................................... 8
Street Rehabilitation Funding...................................................................................... 8
Sanitary Sewer and Storm Sewer Repairs.................................................................. 9
SUMMARY...................................................................................................................... 9
APPENDICES...............................................................................................................10
FIGURE A PROJECT AREA MAP....................................................................11
FIGURE B OPINION OF PROBABLE COST....................................................12
FIGURE C FUNDING SOURCES.......................................................................14
FIGURE D PROJECT SCHEDULE....................................................................15
FIGURE E LIVING STREET WORKSHEET......................................................16
2
INTRODUCTION
The City of Fridley has an ongoing obligation to maintain its streets in an efficient
manner, to provide a high level of service while maintaining a minimum budget. To
enable the City to identify improvements that will provide for an efficient level of service
and life -cycle cost, staff inspects and rates its pavements on a regular basis. The City
also has developed a pavement improvement plan based on resurfacing pavement and
base treatment with intermittent sealcoating. The goal is to provide maintenance
improvements at scheduled intervals. For example:
Activity
Schedule
Initial Construction
Year 0
Sealcoating
Year 8
Sealcoating
Year 16
Resurfacing
Year 24
Sealcoating
Year 32
Sealcoating
Year 40
Reconstruction
Year 48
This is an ideal and aggressive sequence for street maintenance. Note that the final
reconstruction may be substituted with resurfacing activities if roadway base is in good
condition, with the intent to extend road life for an additional cycle of 24 years.
Due to the variability with budgets, road configurations, traffic patterns, condition of
utilities, source of funds, other projects, etc., the basic schedule above varies and
fluctuates for each roadway segment.
As part of identifying the best candidate for this year's pavement resurfacing project,
City of Fridley Engineering Division staff works with Street Maintenance Division staff to
develop the list of candidate projects. The factors considered are physical
characteristics, budgetary factors, and other considerations are listed to assist in
selection of a best candidate.
The Engineering Division monitors existing pavements through semi-annual
inspections. From this inspection information, the Engineering Division prepares a
Street Resurfacing Plan consistent with the Street Capital Improvement Plan, which
designates candidate street segments for construction, reconstruction, and
rehabilitation. The City of Fridley also performs preventative surface maintenance (e.g.
sealcoating), routine crack sealing and pothole patching maintenance. The amount of
street maintenance on this segment is increasing annually due to the rapid deterioration
of the existing pavements.
9
The Engineering Division has prepared a Street Resurfacing Plan consistent with the
Long -Term Street Maintenance Program, which designates candidate street segments
for construction, reconstruction, and rehabilitation. The Plan identifies the areas within
the city and the anticipated year for maintenance projects. Please refer to the following
map summarizing the Long -Term Street Maintenance Program.
rd
STREET RESURFACING PLAN
irfAley G[5
AIPop €1mty tlit/2019
5
alar City of
`rp d►e� Fridley
Street Resurfacing Plan
2019-2029
11
11 Wuaaa�� �� I i
Resurfacing of Local
Streets to be Determined
Rr 2019 M // 2025
2020 2028
ar w L...........
2021 www 2027
2022 2028
1 1 2023 E= 2029
1 2024
The area is a mix between residential, commercial and higher density residential
property. The neighborhood is generally bordered by 79th Way to the south, East River
Road to the west, Ironton Street to the north and BNSF Railroad to the east.
Street segments selected for rehabilitation include:
Street improvements, including bituminous asphalt overlay and pavement reclamation,
including the street segments as follows:
79TH WAY
from EAST RIVER ROAD to CUL-DE-SAC
ASHTON AVENUE
from 79TH WAY to CUL-DE-SAC
ELY STREET
from 232' WEST OF RUTH STREET to 1,041' EAST
HUGO STREET
from EAST RIVER ROAD to IRONTON STREET
IRONTON STREET
from EAST RIVER ROAD to HUGO STREET
LIBERTY STREET
from 107' WEST OF RUTH ST to 1,135' EAST
LONGFELLOW STREET
from EAST RIVER ROAD SVC RD to CUL-DE-SAC
RUTH STREET
from LIBERTY STREET to RUTH CIRCLE
See Figure A in the Appendix for a map of proposed street construction.
The street segments were built in 1964, 1967, 1968 and 1978. Overlays were
completed on 79th Way in 1978 and Ashton Avenue in 1996. Seal coating was last
completed in 2008. Currently, the streets provide 2 -way traffic with no shoulder striping.
All roads in this area are low volume local streets and current traffic counts are not
available. The record pavement thickness ranges from 2 inches to 6.5 inches. The
underlying aggregate base thickness ranges from 0" to 10" of Class 5. The street widths
range from 26.2 feet on Ely to 41.1 feet on 79th Way.
PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS
Overview
Street rehabilitation is funded through the typical combination of funding sources,
including Minnesota State Aid System (MSAS) funding and special assessments.
Staff held an open house on September 17, 2019 to discuss the proposed street
project. Staff answered questions and received feedback about the design options
presented. Staff is incorporating the comments from the open house into the design.
The length of all segments included in this residential project area is approximately 2.00
miles. The work will include pavement resurfacing, water main replacement, storm
sewer improvements and minor sanitary sewer maintenance.
In August 2019, Resolution No. 2019-35 was adopted by City Council to initiate the
2020 Street Rehabilitation Project No. ST2020-01.
!-1
Pavement Resurfacing
Rehabilitation of the streets will include asphalt reclaiming, asphalt paving, concrete
curb repairs, and miscellaneous utility repairs. Damaged or settled concrete curbs will
be replaced. Staff has conducted a Living Streets evaluation of the project area and will
address the findings as feasible in the design of the project. The worksheet is included
as Figure E of the appendices.
Construction records indicate that some streets were found to have an adequate
combination of aggregate base and asphalt and others found to have insufficient
aggregate base and/or asphalt.
Soils in the area are mixed and generally provide for a stable sub -base. Geotechnical
soil exploration is being performed to verify existing conditions and identify any soil
correction needed.
Staff recommends standard local roadway pavement and base rehabilitation consisting
of full depth reclamation and topped with 3"-3.5" of asphalt pavement.
Water Main Improvements
Water main work will include replacing segments of 6" watermain. Staff has identified
portions of Liberty Street and Longfellow Street where watermain needs to be replaced.
Additionally, Ely Street has been included from Ruth Street to Ashton Avenue.
This work will include replacement of the main and services, up to the curb stop. Water
main break history and soils condition are factors that influence which segments of main
are replaced.
Sanitary Sewer Repairs
Sanitary sewer repairs will not be a part of the 2020 project. No defects were identified
with the sanitary sewer system in this project area. Castings on the sanitary sewer
manholes will be either replaced or reset as a part of the paving.
Staff will provide inspection service on resident laterals to identify severe root intrusion
at the main connection. Property owners have been notified and may coordinate with
the Sewer Division to complete a video inspection of the service line. Excavations to
repair and clean service laterals with severe root intrusions are born by the property
owner, per City Code.
Storm Sewer Repairs
Storm sewer repairs will include manhole and inlet adjustments and repairs. Catch
basin structures are generally in good condition, but structures in the project area have
been identified as requiring repair, and this work will be included in the project.
An existing culvert crossing Ironton Street will be reconstructed and possibly re -aligned
as part of this project.
7
Private Utility Work
The project scope has been provided to private utilities to allow them to upgrade their
facilities during the project. At this time, CenterPoint Energy has identified
improvements that they plan to include as part of this project. Other private utilities have
not provided information on their need to upgrade or repair their facilities.
ESTIMATED COSTS
The project cost is estimated to be $1,985,000. These estimates include 5%
contingency and overhead costs relating to technical services, printing, publishing,
permit fees, etc. All costs are preliminary but are expected to stay within the budgeted
amount. Estimated costs of the project can be found on Figure B of the Appendix.
FUNDING SOURCES
Costs for this project will be paid using Minnesota State Aid System funding, utility
enterprise funds, and special assessments. The street rehabilitation work is subject to
special assessment; utility work is not proposed to be subject to special assessment. A
preliminary project budget can be found in Figure C of the Appendix.
Street Rehabilitation Funding
The estimated cost of $1,013,000 for the City's pavement rehabilitation will be funded
using monies from special assessments and the City's Minnesota State Aid System
account. The City will assess adjacent residential properties in accordance with its
major street maintenance policy for local streets. These assessments will provide
approximately $663,000 based on the full project scope and is currently only included
for the proposed reclaim street segments. The following assessments are based on
past history as applied by Council policies for Low Density Residential (single family,
duplex). Using these past methods of calculating assessments, and considering our
preliminary project budget, staff has estimated assessment of approximately $3,000 per
unit for Low Density Residential properties.
The remaining balance of approximately $350,000 for local street resurfacing will be
reimbursed from the City's Minnesota State Aid System account.
Water Main Improvements
The estimated cost of $880,000 for upgrading the water main distribution system will be
funded using monies from the Water Utility Fund. In 2020, $690,000 in funding is
identified with in the CIP as a capital expenditure. The estimated cost of watermain
rehabilitation in this project is higher than available funding, and a portion of that work
will be bid as an alternative and decided upon final budget.
Sanitary Sewer Repairs
The estimated cost of $34,000 for maintaining the sanitary sewer collection system will
be funded using monies from the Sewer Fund. In 2020, $33,000 in funding is identified
with in the CIP as a capital expenditure.
Storm Sewer Repairs
The estimated cost of $58,000 for storm sewer improvements will be funded using
monies from the Storm Water Fund. $10,000 of this cost will go towards the culvert
reconstruction. In 2020, $65,000 in funding is identified with in the CIP as a capital
expenditure.
CONSTRUCTION
Construction sequencing will include consideration of access for all properties. A minor
exception will be immediately after asphalt has been constructed. Which may occur on
weekend or night time hours. Commercial properties typically have multiple access
points so this may not be necessary. On residential street segments the project will be
phased so that access is preserved. Similarly, minor disruptions to utility services may
occur during the project but this will be limited to several hours at most.
In order to provide the best access and eliminate conflicts between contractors the
project to proposed to start in May and conclude in September.
SUMMARY
The work proposed for ST2020-01 Street Rehabilitation project is consistent with the
City of Fridley's Long -Term Street Maintenance Program, 2020-2024 Capital Investment
Program, and can be fully funded by its 2020 Budget. The project is cost effective,
necessary, and feasible from an engineering standpoint as described in this report. The
Engineering Department recommends that the City Council approve this project as
presented.
9
APPENDICES
10
FIGURE A PROJECT AREA MAP
ammmmmmmmmL-,=. I
mmmmmmmmm M.,
WV Q'6- M V IVIG
AGIC92 Uri,
NNNHEENJ . .... . . .... . . . . ............................
2020 Street
LTff f I
I rke, 9 iY r iv., 0
11
Streets to be Resurfaced
CITY OF FRIDLEY - 2020 STREET REHABILITATION PROJECT
ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE OF PROBABLE COST BY UTILITY: PROJECT NO. ST2020-01
DATE: 10/23/19
MnDOT
NO. I DESCRIPTION
UNIT
UNIT COST
EST. QTY
EXTENDED COST
Schedule A - Streets
$
2104.502 Salvage Castin Sewer
EA
$
2021.501
Mobilization
LS
$ 60,000.00
0.5
$
30,000.00
2104.503
Remove Concrete Curb & Gutter
LF
$ 7.00
745
$
5,215.00
2104.503
Sawing Bituminous Pavement Full Depth)
LF
$ 3.00
1,450
$
4,350.00
2104.504
Remove Bituminous Driveway Pavement
SY
$ 7.50
50
$
375.00
2104.504
Remove Bituminous Pavement Full Depth)
SY
$ 11.00
500
$
5,500.00
2104.504
Remove Concrete Driveway Pavement
SY
$ 11.50
100
$
1,150.00
2105.507
Common Excavation P
CY
$ 25.50
3755
$
95,752.50
2105.507
Sub rade Excavation EV
CY
$ 30.00
648
$
19,440.00
2105.507
Select Granular Borrow EV
CY
$ 16.00
432
$
6,912.00
2112.519
Sub rade Preparation P
RDST
$ 415.00
105.5
$
43,782.50
2211.507
Aggregate Base CV Class 5
CY
$ 16.00
216
$
3,456.00
2215.504
Full Depth Reclamation P
SY
$ 2.00
38,561
$
77,122.00
2231.604
4" Bituminous Patch w/ 8" Class 5 Aggregate
SY
$ 40.00
100
$
4,000.00
2331.603
Bituminous Joint Saw & Seal
LF
$ 4.00
8,613
$
34,452.00
2357.506
Bituminous Material for Tack Coat
GAL
$ 3.00
2,320
$
6,960.00
2360.509
Type SP9.5 1.5" Wearing Course SPWEA340C
TN
$ 85.00
3185
$
270,725.00
2360.509
Type SP12.5 2" Non Wearing Course SPNWB330B
TN
$ 70.00
4247
$
297,290.00
2360.604
3" Bituminous Driveway w/ 6" Class 5 Aggregate
SY
$ 30.00
50
$
1,500.00
2521.518
6" Concrete Walk
SF
$ 8.00
24
$
192.00
2531.503
Concrete Curb & Gutter Design B618
LF
$ 20.00
745
$
14,900.00
2531.504
6" Concrete Driveway Pavement
SY
$ 65.00
100
$
6,500.00
2531.603
Concrete Valley Gutter 36" Wide
LF
$ 45.00
60
$
2,700.00
2540.601
Repair/Replace Pet Fence & Irrigation System
LS
$ 3,000.00
1
$
3,000.00
2540.602
Removal, Temporary Installation & Reinstallation of Mailboxes
LS
$ 2,500.00
1
$
2,500.00
2563.601
Traffic Control
LS
$ 15,000.00
0.5
$
7,500.00
2565.602
Rigid PVC Loop Detector 6'X 6'
EA
$ 1,100.00
4
$
4,400.00
2574.507
Common Topsoil Borrow
CY
$ 50.00
220
$
11,000.00
2574.508
Fertilizer (Type 3 350 LB/AC
LB
$ 1.50
144
$
216.00
2575.505
Seeding
AC
$ 3,500.00
0.5
$
1,750.00
2575.508
Seed 25-151 120 LB/AC
LB
$ 20.00
50
$
1,000.00
2575.508
Hydraulic Soil Stabilizer 2100 LB/AC
LB
$ 2.00
859
$
1,718.00
2582.503
24" Solid Line: Epoxy
LF
$ 11.00
30
$
330.00
2582.503
4" Double Solid Line: Epoxy
LF
$ 0.50
220
$
110.00
2582.503
4" Solid Line: Epoxy
LF
$ 0.50
370
$
185.00
Subtotal: $ 965,983.00
5% Eng/Admin: $ 48,299.15
Schedule A -Streets Total: $ 1,014,282.15
Schedule B - Sanitary Sewer
2021.501 Mobilization
LS
$
60,000.00
0
$
2104.502 Salvage Castin Sewer
EA
$
150.00
34
$
5,100.00
2506.502 Furnish and Install Casting MH
EA
$
850.00
3
$
2,550.00
2506.502 Install Casting Sewer
EA
$
150.00
3
$
450.00
2506.502 Adjust Existing Frame and Ring Casting (Sanitary)
EA
$
700.00
34
$
23,800.00
Subtotal: $ 31,900.00
5% Eng/Admin: $ 1,595.00
Schedule B - Sanitary Sewer Total: $ 33,495.00
12
CITY OF FRIDLEY - 2020 STREET REHABILITATION PROJECT
ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE OF PROBABLE COST BY UTILITY: PROJECT NO. ST2020-01
DATE: 10/23/19
MnDOT
NO. I DESCRIPTION
UNIT
UNIT COST
EST. QTY
EXTENDED COST
Schedule C - Storm Sewer
0.4
$
24,000.00
2101.502
Clearing Tree
2021.501
Mobilization
LS
$ 60,000.00
0.1
$
6,000.00
2104.502
Remove Drainage Structure
EA
$ 1,000.00
0
$
-
2104.502
Salvage Casting Storm
EA
$ 150.00
11
$
1,650.00
2104.503
Sawing Bituminous Pavement Full Depth)
LF
$ 3.00
60
$
180.00
2411.502
Concrete Flume
EA
$ 2,200.00
2
$
4,400.00
2503.503
36" RC Pipe Sewer Design 3006
LF
$ 70.00
60
$
4,200.00
2503.602
Connect to Existing Storm Sewer
EA
$ 1,200.00
0
$
EA
2503.602
Connect into Existing Drainage Structure
EA
$ 1,300.00
0
$
-
2506.502
Furnish and Install Casting CB
EA
$ 850.00
3
$
2,550.00
2506.502
Install Casting Storm
EA
$ 150.00
3
$
450.00
2506.502
Adjust Existing Frame and Ring Casting Storm
EA
$ 700.00
11
$
7,700.00
2506.503
Construct Drainage Structure Design 48-4020
LF
$ 800.00
0
$
-
2506.602
Infiltration Basin Drainage Structure
EA
$ 5,000.00
2
$
10,000.00
2563.601
Traffic Control
LS
$ 15,000.00
0.2
$
3,000.00
2573.502
Storm Drain Inlet Protection
EA
$ 180.00
36
$
6,480.00
SPEC
Stream Restoration
LS
$ 7,500.00
1
$
7,500.00
Subtotal: $ 54,110.00
5% Eng/Admin: $ 2,705.50
Schedule C - Storm Sewer Total: $ 56,815.50
Schedule D - Water
2021.501
Mobilization
LS
$
60,000.00
0.4
$
24,000.00
2101.502
Clearing Tree
EA
$
1,500.00
3
$
4,500.00
2101.507
Grubbing Tree
EA
$
1,000.00
3
$
3,000.00
2104.501
Remove Existing Water Service
LF
$
2.00
3805
$
7,610.00
2104.503
Remove Concrete Curb & Gutter
LF
$
7.00
1,575
$
11,025.00
2104.509
lRemove Curb Stop and Box
EA
$
50.00
89
$
4,450.00
2104.509
Remove Existing Gate Valve
EA
$
100.00
5
$
500.00
2104.509
Remove Existing Hydrant and Gate Valve
EA
$
200.00
16
$
3,200.00
2503.603
F&I 6" Watermain FPVC Pie Burst Installation
LF
$
50.00
3223
$
161,150.00
2504.601
Temporary Water Distribution System
LS
$
60,000.00
1
$
60,000.00
2504.602
Connect to Existing Water Includes Excavation Pit
EA
$
2,500.00
8
$
20,000.00
2504.602
F&I 1" Corporation Stop
EA
$
500.00
89
$
44,500.00
2504.602
F&I Curb Stop and Box
EA
$
500.00
89
$
44,500.00
2504.602
F&I 6" Gate Valve
EA
$
3,000.00
7
$
21,000.00
2504.602
F&I Hydrant w/ 6" GV Assembly
EA
$
7,500.00
16
$
120,000.00
2504.602
Adjust Gate Valve and Box
EA
$
425.00
20
$
8,500.00
2504.603
F&I 1" Water Service TYPE K COPPER
LF
$
35.00
3805
$
133,175.00
2504.603
6" Watermain DIP CL 52
LF
$
50.00
300
$
15,000.00
2504.608
Fittings
LBS
$
10.00
3000
$
30,000.00
2531.503
Concrete Curb & Gutter Design B618
LF
$
20.00
1,575
$
31,500.00
2563.601
Traffic Control
LS
$
15,000.00
0.3
$
4,500.00
2574.507
Common Topsoil Borrow
Cy
$
50.00
220
$
11,000.00
2574.508
Fertilizer (Type 3 350 LB/AC
LB
$
1.50
143
$
214.50
2575.505
Seeding
AC
$
3,500.00
0.5
$
1,750.00
2575.508
Seed 25-151 120 LB/AC
LB
$
20.00
49
$
980.00
2575.508
Hydraulic Soil Stabilizer 2100 LB/AC
LB
$
2.00
858
$
1,716.00
SPEC
IDewatering
LS
$
70,000.00
1
$
70,000.00
Subtotal: $ 837,770.50
5% Eng/Admin: $ 41,888.53
Schedule D -Water Total: $ 879,659.03
Grand Total (A+B+C+D): $ 1,984,251.68
13
Figure C - Funding Sources
ST2020-01 Street Rehabilitation Project
No. Description
1 Special Assessments*
2 Water Fund**
3 Sanitary Sewer Fund
4 Storm Water Fund
5 MSA Funding
Estimated
Amount
$663,000.00
$880,000.00
$34,000.00
$58,000.00
$350,000.00
10/25/2019
AL / NRS
2020 Budgeted
Amount
$580,000.00
$690,000.00
$33,000.00
$65,000.00
$270,000.00
Grand Total $1,985,000.00 $1,638,000.00
Special Assessment Breakdown
Assessments
LDR Single Family 177 x $ 3,000.00 = $531,000.00
Non-LDR Commercial 3300 x $ 40.00 = $132,000.00
LDR Total $663,000.00
Assessment Grand Total $663,000.00
*Note that Special Assessments amounts are a calculated need for Estimated Amount,
based on the project estimate, and the Budgeted Amount is calculated based on the project
scope and property information.
**Note- Includes planned alternative bid items that total an estimated $250,000
14
Figure D — Project Schedule
ST2020-01 Street Rehabilitation Project
The tentative schedule for this project is as follows:
PRELIMINARY ACTIVITIES
Project Open House:
Preliminary Assessment Hearing:
DESIGN AND SUBMITTALS
Agency Submittals Complete:
Design Completed:
LETTING. AWARD. AND CONSTRUCTION
Resolution Advertising for Bids:
First Advertisement for Bids:
Bid Letting:
Contract Award:
Begin Construction (earliest):
Complete Construction (deadline):
FINAL ACTIVITIES
Final Assessment Hearing:
Certified Assessment Roll Complete:
September 17, 2019
November 25, 2019
November 2019
December 2019
December 2019
December 2019
January 2020
January 2020
May 2020
September 2020
October 2020
November 2020
Note: subsequent activities may be influenced by changes in schedule of previous activities.
15
FIGURE E - Living Streets Worksheet
Project Narrative
1) Project Name:
2020 Street Project
2) Roadway Jurisdiction:
City of Fridley
3) Project boundaries
Northern: Ironton Rd
Eastern: Ashton Ave/Liberty St
Southern: 79th Way
Western: East River Road
4) Project Manager:
Nic Schmidt/Jon Lennander
5) Is the project area, or streets it intersects, referenced in any of the following plans:
City's Active Transportation Plan
City's ADA Transition Plan
Safe Routes to School Plan (Hayes, North Park, Stevenson, Fridley Middle)
Roadway Corridor Study (ex: East River Road corridor study, TH 47/65 corridor
study)
Transit Overlay District
Parks Master Plan
Local Water Management Plan
Watershed Management Plans
Emerald Ash Borer Mitigation Plan
6) If so, how does the plan reference Living Street components within the project area
or streets it intersects?
A. The City's Active Transportation Plan lists 79th Way as a street designated for
trails/sidewalk. It does not currently have trails or sidewalk
B. The City's ADA transition plan lists the corners of East River Road and Ironton St NE
as having between 0 and 3 defects and a 1-5 priority rank for improvements
C. The East River Road corridor study identifies Hugo St as a proposed road closure
D. The Local Water Management Plan states the water quality and quality
improvement projects will be constructed during the 2020 road reconstruction
project
E. The Local Water Management Plan states that channel improvements to
Springbrook Creek will be constructed to improve flood resistance of properties
upstream
F. The Springbrook Creek Stormwater Retrofit Analysis identifies 13 potential
raingarden locations and 2 locations for hydrodynamic separators in the project
area
16
G. Ash trees identified in the EAB Mitigation Plan are located in the project area
Existing Conditions
7) Describe existing and projected modal volumes, if available:
Volumes
Existing
Projected (Year)
Average Daily Traffic
Pedestrian Counts
Bicycle Counts
Truck Volumes
Transit Volumes
Speed Conditions
8) Detail crash data, if available, and known conflict locations:
Not known
a. Do crashes tend to be between certain modes?
Not known
b. Are there known conflict points between specific modes?
Not known
9) Who are the users of the project area and through what mode do they travel?
The primary land use within the project area is residential, including some Multi -Family
units on Ironton St and 79th Way. There are also industrial properties along the eastern
side of the project area, including along Ashton Avenue, Ely St, Liberty St, Longfellow St,
all of which are east of Ashton Avenue. There is a singular commercial property located
at the intersection of 79th Way and East River Road and a park property (Ruth Circle
Park). The primary routes of travel are:
• Residents travelling by car to East River Road
• Residents traveling by foot or bike to the park
• Residents travelling by foot or bike to East River Road
• Employees travelling by car to their place of employment
• Truck drivers traveling to industrial properties
• Customers picking up items at Broadway Rental
10) How does the existing area accommodate different modes travelling north -south
and/or east -west?
Pedestrians travel north/south traverse on local roads. The off-road trail along
East River Road transitions to an on road along Cuyana Dr and then back to off
road trail north of the Liberty St intersection
An informal east -west connection exists across the railroad at 79th Way NE
11) Describe any public transit facilities along the project area:
16
There are bus stops at East River Rd and 79th Way; East River Road and Liberty St;
East River Rd and Fairmont St; East River Rd and Hugo St. These are connected to the
side streets via trail along ERR.
12) Describe any significant destinations along the routes or for which the project area
is a connector (schools, parks, libraries, Civic Campus, commercial corridors):
• Ruth Circle Park
• SNC
13)Are there areas of identified speeding or other dangerous driving?
• Resident complaints of speeding along Ashton Avenue adjacent to Ruth Circle
Park
• Parking complaints at intersection of Ironton St and Ashton Ave
14) Describe any barriers to pedestrian/bicyclist movement in the project area:
• BNSF railroad
• Transition between off-road trail and on road bike trail along Cuyana
15) How does the existing area manage stormwater?
No stormwater BMPs exist in the project area. Stormwater is collected via the stormsewer
system and discharged into County Ditch 17 or the East River Road storm sewer system.
16)Are there known water quality or quantity concern in the project area or
downstream of the project area?
• Springbrook Creek is listed as vulnerable for chloride impairment
• Springbrook Creek is listed as impaired for aquatic life (approved TMDL; Coon
Creek Watershed District WRAPS)
• Springbrook Creek is listed as impaired for aquatic recreation (approved TMDL;
Upper Mississippi River Bacteria TMDL)
17) Describe the existing landscaping:
• The City has 136 street trees in the project area; There are 22 ash trees in the
project area- 8 trees are slated for removal; the remainder are to be treated.
• The City has minimal landscaping at Ruth Circle Park
18) Mark any Living Streets components exist in the project and on streets that it
intersects?
X Trails, sidewalks, and on -street, striped bike lanes
Median islands
Accessible pedestrian signals
Curb extensions/bump outs
Narrower travel lanes/road diets
Speed limits and other traffic calming improvements
Safe crossing facilities, including pavement markings
Safe and effective lighting
17
X Diverse tree plantings
Stormwater management
Pollinator-friendly/water efficient landscaping
Bike racks
Benches
Water fountains
Waste receptacles
Public art
Other components as determined based on latest and best "Living Streets"
standards
19)Are there any areas that are "under -lit"?
• Ruth Circle Park
20) Describe any other user needs/challenges along the project corridor that you have
observed or been informed of:
• Interest in a connection to the back of SNC at Ashton and Ironton, but would
involve a railroad crossing and therefore is not being pursued
Proposed Conditions:
1) What public engagement has been done or is planned related to Living Streets
components?
• A letter was sent to residents and an open house was held
2) What additional bike/pedestrian connections does the proposed facility
accommodate?
• No additional connections are to be evaluated
3) How does the proposed facility accommodate different modes north -south and/or
east -west?
• No additional connections are to be evaluated
4) How does the proposed facility assist different modes in reaching significant
destinations?
• Traffic calming on Ashton Ave will be considered during the design phase to
assist with travel to Ruth Circle Park
5) How do the proposed conditions align with any applicable long-term plans?
• The project is not evaluating sidewalks on 79th Way; the Active Transportation
Plan shows a sidewalk on 79th Way with a bridge connection over the railroad. In
the absence of the railroad connection, the sidewalk on 79th Way is not merited
• ADA?
18
• East River Road and Hugo St were identified as a road access closure within the
East River Road Corridor Study since alternative access is provided on Ironton St.
This road closure is not being considered at this time.
• Culvert improvements consistent with the Local Water Plan are being considered
as part of this project
• Stormwater improvements, including a raingarden at the intersection of Ashton
Ave and Ironton Ave and hydrodynamic separators and/or SAFL baffles, are being
considered as part of this project
6) How do the proposed conditions address any areas of identified speeding or
dangerous driving?
• Bump outs are other traffic calming devices will be evaluated on Ashton Avenue
during design
7) Does the project propose any tree removal? How does proposed landscaping
enhance the urban forest or promote pollinator habitat/water-efficient
landscaping?
• The project will coordinate with the forestry division on the removal and
replacement of the 8 ash trees
• A rain garden incorporating pollinator habitat will be evaluated at the
intersection of Ashton and Ironton during design
8) Does the proposed project improve any identified water quality or quantity
concerns within or downstream of the project area?
• A rain garden incorporating pollinator habitat will be evaluated at the
intersection of Ashton and Ironton during design
• Hydrodynamic Separators/SAFL Baffle identified in the sub -watershed assessment
will be considered during this project
• Neighbors will be contacted regarding raingardens as part of this project
9) Does the proposed project remediate any design challenges that prevent
pedestrian/bicyclist movement?
• Not applicable
10) Provide an alternative cross section that was considered, list trade-offs associated
with alternative cross-section:
• Not applicable
11) If Living Streets components are not included, mark and explain which exception
under the Living Streets policy is the motivation to not include the components:
The project involves a transportation system on which certain modes and users are
prohibited either by law or significant safety reasons.
The street jurisdiction (Anoka County of the State of Minnesota for non -city streets)
refuses suggested plans.
19
X The cost of accommodation is excessively disproportionate to the need or probable
use.
The corridor has severe topographic, environmental, historic or natural resource
constraints.
X There is a well-documented absence of current and future need.
Other exceptions are allowed when recommended by the Public Works, Building &
Community Standards, Parks and Recreation, and Police and Fire departments, and
approved by the City Council.
20