Loading...
12-18-12 CC Old Business Cl�� �� �'' Planning Department 763-593-8095/763-593-8109(fax) .$�.-�s� _���._:;. ._ ����.� ������� . . . . �:�:�� ���������:� �: �: �������:���° Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting Qecember 18, 2012 Agenda Item 5. A. Authorization to Sign Revised Resolution of Support of the Bottineau Transitway Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) Prepared By Joe Hogeboom, City Planner Summary The Hennepin County Regional Railroad Authority (HCRRA) has requested that the City of Golden Valley reconsider its endorsement of the Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) alignment of the Bottineau Transitway. The LPA that is proposed is LRT B-C-D1, starting in Brooklyn Park to the north and ending in downtown Minneapolis to the south. The alignment crosses through Golden Valley along the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railraad Corridor, which is adjacent to Sochacki Park (in Robbinsdale), the Mary Hills Nature Area and Theodore Wirth Regional Park. Endorsement of the LPA would be done by the passage of a Resolution of Support. If the City Council passes this Resolution of Support, the Metropolitan Council would vote to incorporate the LRT B-C-D1 Alignment of the Bottineau Transitway into the 2030 Twin Cities Regional Transportation Policy Plan. Doing so would enable the project to be eligible to receive federal funding for Preliminary Engineering. Preliminary Engineering would involve designing approximately one third of the project. The Metropolitan Council would simultaneously conduct a Final Environmental Impact Statement study which would further analyze impacts ta the natural and built environment. Following the Preliminary Engineering and the Final Environmental Impact Statement, the Metropolitan Council would determine if it would like to proceed with the project. If it choases to proceed, then each community along the Bottineau Transitway, including Golden Valley, would be required ta give "municipal consent" for the project. Municipal consent would require a vote of the City Council. If municipal consent is achieved, the project would become eligible for funding for final design and construction. Attached is a resolution that has been revised to include comments from the December 11, 2012 Council/Manager Meeting. At the request of the City Council, a public forum featuring the Bottineau Transitway was held on November 28, 2012. Attachments • Location Map (1 page) • Overstruck and Underscored Resolution of Support of the Battineau Transitway Locally Preferred Alternative (3 pages) • Resolution of Support of the Bottineau Transitway Locally Preferred Alternative (3 pages) Recommended Action Motion to authorize the Resolution of Support for the Bottineau Transitway Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA), or; Motion to deny the Resolution of Support for the Bottineau Transitway Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA). Bottineau Transitway Locally Preferred Alternative Location Map J` Bottineau Trans r tw�y oc rp� ��...r,... �����_�� �,�� .�..�...,..,»�.,�.....-�-,7 �` Recommended Locally �P°� Prefe�red Alternative g� � 5` ...., � J` ,t� �P , sy ��a , `i ; J� ��. 00 ��� 1 o° 0� � � J6 �6� i aP .�a p� '� �69 b a . .. . . .,F'-'�-' � �'. O� Q` _ y1,� I 0� � �. ..._ . •:� '� ..� , . '.. [ry� . � � .� 'I �� ..�..,ia�,i,�� ��o`'� � Ht y,n oc,rr: �0'� '�.. mr`"����'. � - � ��. �__ � �a �,�� 'a �' � t„�e \`e,�P Q��o� oOoJ�� ���� c��o O J��� y1'�`� �a`r C���y�9 r'��cQ���Q ,�0c .�r°`� � � �o�,`�`yo o `c�'O�'._ � y��c'`' '!� Q Oo ko, o�. Q yti ,�a ,.,,=" � �°�a� y �i9 �+� " � �+ �. � rQ Q C� `�AA�:�.,; �', �j� � ..MO"..� - _ _ -__ . _�__ .. ..._.._ n :�: ti.� Resolution December 18, 2012 Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT OF THE BOTTINEAU TRANSITWAY WHEREAS, the Bottineau Transitway is a proposed project to provide transit service which will satisfy long-term regional mobility and accessibility needs for businesses and the traveling public in the heavily traveled northwest area of the Twin Cities, and; WHEREAS, the Bottineau Transitway is located in Hennepin County, Minnesota, e�ctending approximately 13 miles from downtown Minneapolis to the northwest serving north Minneapolis and the suburbs of Golden Valley, Robbinsdale, Crystal, New Hope, Brooklyn Park, Maple Grove, and Osseo, and; WHEREAS, the Hennepin County Regional Railroad Authority (HCRRA) in partnership with the Metropolitan Council and other project stakeholder.s recently; completed th� Bottineau Tra,nsitway Alternatives Analysis Study that ir� addition to'thE No Build �nd Trans�drtation �ystem Il��nagement (TS�II) alterna�iv�s; recommended four Light Rail Transit (LRT) Alternatives and one Bus Rapid Transit (BRT� Alternative be a�vanced for further study in the fec�eral and st�te enviranmental review processes, and; ' WHEREAS, the Federal Transit Admin�istration (FTA), the Henr��pin County, Regit�nal Railroad Authority (HCRRA) and the Metropolitan C4uncil:iiave initiated both federal and state environmental re�iew for the Bottine�u Trans�finray project, and; WHEREA�; federal funding,will be pursued for th�s project from the FTA, which has consequently been designated as the lead federal agen�y far this project, and; WHEREAS, the Bot#ineau Transitway recently campleted the Scoping Phase of environmental process, and; WHEREAS, through the Scoping process, further study is recommended of the No Build and TSM alternatives along with further study of four LRT alternatives (A-C-D1, A-C- D2, B-C-D1, B-C-D2) in the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (Draft EIS), and; WHEREAS, the Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) will be one of the build alternatives identified and studied in the Draft EIS, and; WHEREAS, the Bottineau Transitway selection process does not replace or override the requirement to fully examine alternatives and determine the adverse impacts that must be avoided or mitigated under the federai and state environmenta! review process, and; WHEREAS, the four LRT alternatives to be studied in the Draft EIS were further considered with respect to defined project goals, objectives and evaluating criteria set forth in the Alternative Analysis study and further refined during the Scoping Phase of the federal and state environmental analyses, and; WHEREAS, the Advise Review Coordinate and Communicate Committee (ARCC), in a technical advisory role to the Policy Advisory Committee (PAC), provided the following input: • Affirm the ARCC's Apri12012 input to the PAC during the scoping decision process advising that study of the BRT alternative should stop, BRT should not be considered for the Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA), and advising the PAC to select LRT as the locally preferred mode for the Bottineau Transifinray. WHEREAS, the Bottineau Transitway PAC took into consideration the technical information on each of the alternatives developed to date, along with the ARCC, Community Advisory Committee (CAC) and public input provided as part of the public hearing and comment process and passed a resolution on May 30,2012; designating the LRT Alternative B-C-D1 as the LPA, and; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Gity of Golden Valley supports further study of the LPA recommendation of the PAC for the Bottineau Transitway projecfi as part of the Preliminary Engineering phase. NOW, THEREFORE,BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this document daes not signify municipal consent on behalf pf the City of Gc�lden Valley:;The City reserves the right �e#��-�Ik���to;approve or deny:municipal cons�nt of the Bottineau Transitway LRT B- C-D1 following the completion of the Draft Enuironmental Impa�t Statement (QEIS� and during the Prelimin�ry Engineerir�� Phase and the Final Envir�nmental lmpact Statement Process. NOW, THEREFORE, BE I7 FURTHER RESC3LVED that;the City of Golden Valley commits to workit�g with the Hennepin County Region�l Railroad Authority and the Metropolitan Council to address the fallowing for the Bpttineau Transitway during ti�e Prelirninary Engineering Phiase: 1. Address long-term construction and maintenance needs at the intersection of Golden Valley Road and the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Railroad Corridor. 2. Further assess more detailed data related to noise, light and vibration along #he corridor. 3. Further assess the need for and location and desiqn of possible naise and retaining walls within the corridor. Consider ways to incorporate natural buffers such as trees and other veqetative cover as well as natural boulder retaining walls. 4. Identify and pursue opportunities for a Hennepin County Cammunity Works project related to the possible reconstruction of Hennepin County State Aid Highway (CSAH) 66. The project could work in conjunction with the proposed Bassett Creek Regional Trail, which is identified to be partially located within the CSAH 66 corridor. 5. Identify potential improvements to the intersection of CSAH 66 and Theodore Wirth Parkway. 6. Further assess the negative impacts to properties along the corridor and look for ways for the County and the Metropolitan Council to address those impacts. 7. Pursue funding opportunities for improvements to homes adjacent to the corridor for the purpose of mitigating negative impacts. 8. Identify future planning initiatives and community outreach initiatives in a#-�t�e Golden �l'��Ne�ea�. 9. Further evaluate parking options and passenger drop-off access at the proposed Golden Valley Road station location. 10.Seek wavs to ensure that traffic impacts to Golden Valley Road are minimal. 11.Identif�projections for ridership, based both on commuter traffic and foot traffic, at both potential Golden Valley station locations. 12.Work collaboratively with #he Minneapolis Park Board to ensure that the negative impacts to Theodore Wirth Regional Park, and surrounding parklands, are minimal and that natural areas are maintained in their current condition to the largest extent possible. BE IT FURTHER RESO�VED that this resolution adopted by the City of Golden Valley be forwarded to HCRRA and the Metropolitan Gouncil for their consideration. . Shepard M. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: Susan M. Virnig, Ciiy Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was seconded by Member and upon a vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted a�ainst the same: whereu�on said resolution was decl�red duly passed and' adopfied, signed by the Mayar and his sig.r��ture attested by the City'Clerk. . Resolution 12-103 December 18, 2012 Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT OF THE BOTTINEAU TRANSITWAY WHEREAS, the Bottineau Transitway is a proposed project to provide transit service which will satisfy long-term regional mobility and accessibility needs for businesses and the traveling public in the heavily traveled northwest area of the Twin Cities, and; WHEREAS, the Bottineau Transitway is located in Hennepin County, Minnesota, extending approximately 13 miles from downtown Minneapolis to the northwest serving north Minneapolis and the suburbs of Golden Valley, Robbinsdale, Crystal, New Hope, Brooklyn Park, Maple Grove, and Osseo, and; WHEREAS, the Hennepin County Regional Railroad Authority (HCRRA) in partnership with the Metropolitan Council and other project stakeholders recently complet�d tt�e Bottineau Transitway Alternatives Analysis Study that in addition to the No Build and Tran�portation 5ystem Management (TSM) alternatives; recommended four Light Rail Transit (LRT) Alternatives and one Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Alternative be ad�anced for further study in fihe federal and state environmental review processes, and; WHEREAS, the Fed�ral Transit Administration (FTA), the H�n�epin County Regio�al Railroad Autharity (HCRRA) and the Metropolitan Cauncil have initiated both federal and state �nvironrnental review for the Bottineau Transifiuvay project, and;, WHEREaS, federal funding will be pursued for this project from the FTA, which has consequently been design�ted as the lead federal agency for t�is project, and; ' WHEREAS, the Bottineau Transitway recently campleted the Scoping Phase of environmental process, and; WHEREAS, through the Scoping process, further study is recommended of the No Build and TSM alternatives along with further study of four LRT alternatives (A-C-D1, A-C- D2, B-C-D1, B-C-D2) in the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (Draft EIS), and; WHEREAS, the Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) will be one of the build alternatives identified and studied in the Draft EIS, and; WHEREAS, the Bottineau Transitway selection process does not replace or override the requirement to fully examine alternatives and determine the adverse impacts that must be avoided or mitigated under the federal and state environmental review process, and; WHEREAS, the four LRT alternatives to be studied in the Draft EIS were further considered with respect to defined project goals, abjectives and evaluating criteria set forth in the Alternative Analysis study and further refined during the Scoping Phase of the federal and state environmental analyses, and; Resolution 12-103 - Continued December 18, 2012 WHEREAS, the Advise Review Coordinate and Communicate Committee (ARCC), in a technical advisory role to the Palicy Advisory Committee (PAC), provided the following inpufi • Affirm the ARCC's April 2012 input to the PAC during the scoping decisian process advising that study of the BRT alternative should stop, BRT should nat be considered for the Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA), and advising the PAC to select LRT as the locally preferred mode for the Bottineau Transitway. WHEREAS, the Bottineau Transitway PAC took into consideration the technical information on each of the alternatives developed to date, along with the ARCC, Community Advisory Committee (CAC) and public input provided as part of the public hearing and comment process and passed a resolution on May 30,2012; designating the LRT Alternative B-C-D1 as the LPA, and; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Golden Valley supports further study c�f the LPA r�commendation of the PAC for the Bc�t�ineau Transitway project as part of the Preliminary;�ngin���rii�g phase. ` NOW, THER.,EFORE, BE IT FURTHER FtESf3LVED that this document do�s not signify'municipal consent on behalf of the City of GQlden Valley: The City reserves the right to approve or deny municipal cons+�nt of the Bottineau Transitw�y LRT B-C-D1 following the completion of the Draft E"!nvironmental Impact Statement (DEIS) and during the Preliminary Engineering Phase and the Final Environmental Impact Statement Process. NfJW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLWED that'the City of Golden Valley comrnits to working with the Hennepin County Regional Railroad Authority and the Metr4politan C�uncil to address the following for the Bottineau Transitway during the Preliminary Engineering Phase: 1. Address long-term construction and maintenance needs at the intersection of Golden Valley Road and the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Railroad Corridor. 2. Further assess more detailed data related to noise, light and vibration along the corridor. 3. Further assess the need for and location and design of possible noise and retaining walls within the corridor. Consider ways to incorporate natural buffers such as trees and other vegetative cover as well as natural boulder retaining walls. 4. Identify and pursue opportunities for a Hennepin County Community Works project related to the possible reconstruction of Hennepin County State Aid Highway (CSAH) 66. The project could work in conjunction with the proposed Bassett Creek Regional Trail, which is identified to be partially located within the CSAH 66 corridor. 5. Identify potential improvements to the intersection of CSAH 66 and Theodore Wirth Parkway. Resolution 12-103 - Continued December 18, 2012 6. Further assess the negative impacts to properties along the corridor and took for ways for the County and the Metropolitan Council to address those impacts. 7. Pursue funding opportunities for improvements to homes adjacent to the corridor for the purpose of mitigating negative impacts. 8. Identify future planning initiatives and community outreach initiatives in Golden. 9, Further evaluate parking options and passenger drop-off access at the proposed Golden Valley Road station location. 10.Seek ways to ensure that traffic impacts to Golden Valley Road are minimal. 11.Identify projections for ridership, based both on commuter traffic and foot traffic, at both potential Golden Valley station locations. 12.Work collaboratively with the Minneapolis Park Board to ensure that the negative impacts to Theodore Wirth Regional Park, and surrounding parklands, are-minimal and that natural areas are;ma�ntained in their current condition to the Iarg�st e�ent possible. ' BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this resof�ation adopted by the City of Golden Valley be forwardecl to HCRRA and:the Metrapolitan Council fa�',their consideratiQn.:. :,r � � ����epard�llll. Harris, Mayor � � ATTEST: Susan M. Virnig, City Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was seconded by Member and upon a vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted, signed by the Mayor and his signature attested by the City Clerk.