The URL can be used to link to this page

11-28-12 CC Special Agenda Packet (entire) AGENDA Special Meeting of the City Council Golden Valley City Hall 7800 Golden Valley Road Council Chamber Wednesday, November 28, 2012 7 pm 1. CALL TO ORDER PAGES A. Roll Call 2. PUBLIC FORUM A. Review Support of the Bottineau Transitway 2-9 3. ADJOURNMENT ,x y. , , , . ,;, ,.,, ";. � Th��cum��ilable a��erna�e>�ormats upon a 72=t�aur requ�st P�e�s�cail � �� . �� S93�{�}(�t`Y 7b��3 39��.t�mak��r��st �t�r��l��f.�l��r�i��ficii�m�� `ma�ar�el�ad� la��ri�t;elec�r�nic, Braille;�udioca`ssette�et�: �. �.4 city of Ol t��° M E IV� C� � �11� [� l� N1 � . �Tt`�. �� Planning Department 763-593-8095/763-593-8109(fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley Special City Council Meeting November 28, 2012 Agenda Item 2. A. Review Support of the Bottineau Transitway 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 Railroad Corridor, which is adjacent to 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. Attached is a resolution that has been revised to include comments from the November 13, 2012 Council/Manager Meeting. Attachments • Location Map (1 page) • Draft Resolution of Support of the Bottineau Transitway, Overstruck and Underscored Version (3 pages) • Draft Resolution of Support of the Bottineau Transitway, Clean Version (3 pages) Recommended Action Take public comment. Bottineau Transitway Locally Preferred Alternative Location Map �` B�eauTransitway �c �� i�`P, .,_,,.,,.,-,,,-,7 �_..�,. ��` Recommended Locally AP° Preferred Alternative �� G ; � J� Jec P � _., ♦h �a �' lrAaF�r,r �t. r„a�e�� OJ �\�0 0��0 � I i � J6 X� � � �P� { ..�J d� p� � . ��9 a � �.��a i , , J e' _ c,Yx „� 1 � �_ . � ' j � i a°� �� P:ee-�lfo;tr �Q� � �. l,ly�nouil+ �� PO � � �a Hura+��:inr oa` v° t�,��; ```,�Q°Q��a� eOoJ�� 9c�,o � `c ero o J6�,�-, �r�� ``�r y,. (��a y�9 P'��c�� ,�0c r°�c .. Q . �1 . �r o� `cNi'� ,..... ..,,,•'�y�rP'l �� 0`'�,\ Q CJ ("��{j M.Q�y v�, Q �! '►�' '' '.-�,","� l�J ��'PT ;� I, ;�� r'� P . o � - � ' ��' �., �J �1� p_.,, � _ _ __ .d! _: DRAFT 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, � �`to the northwest servin extending approximately 13 miles from downtown Minnea�� ,;� g north Minneapolis and the suburbs of Golden Valley, Rc��'�dale, Crystal, New Hope, Brooklyn Park, Maple Grove, and Osseo, and; ��; �� , ��;� � WHEREAS, the Hennepin County Regio � Railroad � � ��rity�(HCRRA) in partnership with the Metropolitan Council an w r project stak�\��'.°°ders recently z��°� completed the Bottineau Transitway Altern ' Analysis Study th addition to the No Build and Transportation System Managem SM) alternatives; re ended four Light Rail Transit (LRT) Alternatives and one Bus R ' Tran ' T)Altern ,be advanced for further study in the federal and, te environm w processes \� �� .� �\�� `\� �` _ WHEREAS, the Federal Trari, � : 'stration , the Hennepin County \� Regional Railroad Authority (HCRRA�� d �� ropolit � � uncil have initiated both federal and state enviro tal revie the � ��` u Tr .� ay�project, and; � � � �,,, �,��, � ,c \��'� ��`��` �.a, � � '�� WHEREAS, � ��al fu �� will be��,�� ,,,_ or t � 'ect from the FTA, which h�s consequently been ' nated e lead �I agency��r this project, and; WH the B '�� ay re� , �� y completed the Scoping Phase of ,,. � environ �� an "`��' � � �V�� , � ,� � �EREAS, thro f he ' g process, further study is recommended of the No Build an alternative ng w rther study of four LRT alternatives (A-C-D1, A-C- D2, B-C-D1,;��;,�,-D2) in the ��ft Envi � ,`� ental Impact Statement (Draft EIS), and; �� \ s ' �� '' WHEREA"�`�� Locall : � ��eferred Alternative LPA will be one of the build alternatives identifie �;,;,d st ,\.` .. in the Draft EIS and• \\\ \ �� WHEREAS, the B eau 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, 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 April 2012 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. L�l�IG�i A��im°n} rl� /R��rlir�n��r� AI�rF�hvrn Cr+r��.+ Ce� /RAICC\ ne.+�r,�hTCOrl�r� \�rr}� •� � � rl r��o F�r 4ho ��4h n �r�iJ ��F 4ho R�4+ir�o.��i Tr.+nc�if��i.+�i ,r�-&Sz�f2�GiFF2crrvuc�rvrzr�v-�vurrr2Fi caz�—rrarr.ntivvu� r � f �c� r��ee�ihlo � WHEREAS, the Bottineau Transitway PAC sideration the technical information on each of the alternatives develop ,�s,o ate, a = ith the ARCC, Community Advisory Committee (CAC) and po k. nput provi � part of the public hearing and comment process and passed�� olution on May 3 2; designating the �� LRT Alternative B-C-D1 as the LPA, and; �,;�, � ,,o�� \\� NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ; ESOLVED of Golden V supports further study of the LPA recomm � of the PA e Bottineau Tran itway project as part of the Preliminary Engineer ��:ti�� s,.,,, ,� NOW, THEREFORE BE IT FU ER � LVED ��this document does not ;�� . �� signify municipal con � half of th �_ity of � Valle ,��he City retains the ability � ��o��v � ��. � �,� to approve or deny �,f ipa ,Sent of t u � � � �� 'tway LRT B-C-D1 following the completion of t`��,��-aft Envi ;��°�� ental I� ��Stateme � �DEIS) and during the � �4 Preliminary Engineeri hase. �; � ��,� �� N . ORE;� � � '� � � R� LVED that the City of Golden Valley comm�_�-� � orkin � he �� . �pin Co � �e ional Railroad Authority and the �� y� Metro �n Council to ess � ° ollowing the Bottineau Transifinray during the Prelimin �� ngineering � e: ��F � \ �� 1. Ad \ long-term � � struction and maintenance needs at the intersection of Golde ley Roa d the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Railroad Corridor. �� 2. Further ass � � ° ��=etailed data related to noise, light and vibration along the corridor. ��.�� 3. Further assess�fie need for and location of possible noise and retaining walls within the corridor. 4. Identify and pursue opportunities for a Hennepin County Community Works project��"�^ ^r °r^„^,� +�o n_� .,�;��.�o�+ related to the possible reconstruction of Hennepin Countv State Aid Hiqhwav (CSAH) 66. The proiect could work in coniunction with the proposed Bassett Creek Reaional 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 Parkwav. 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 planninq initiatives at the preferred station location at Golden Vallev Road. 9. Further evaluate parking options and passenger drop-off access at the proposed Golden Valley Road station location. 10.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 maintained in t�aeir current condition to the �� largest extent possible. �� ,�� \�\�\,, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this resolut��pted by the City of Golden m�� .,. Valley be forwarded to HCRRA and the Metropolit �u '� r their consideration. �\��°�\ �� `\��\ .� �� ;�� ; � ��?� �\.. �y� ,; ��° ' �� a °� � � ��\ � � ��\�� .�, �s��\� � ��,. .y �„ � .,: �� \\\\� � �� ,, � �� ,�� .�,.�, � S?4 � .. ��\�� \ ��\"��,..�. �AA�� Q�� , . \�\��' aa` \� �� .��r .�a� �\\ � \. \��y� �" �\ �: * �,. � �� ,a=- ��;� �� DRAFT 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 He�nnepin County, Minnesota, ��'�. extending approximately 13 miles from downtown Minne��to the northwest serving ��.�`�� north Minneapolis and the suburbs of Golden Valley, R ��dale, Crystal, New Hope, �� y Brooklyn Park, Maple Grove, and Osseo, and; ,��\ � ��: ��:: �.,�� ,,� WHEREAS, the Hennepin County Regio � ailroad ��rity (HCRRA) in partnership with the Metropolitan Council an �r project stak �: ers recently completed the Bottineau Transitway Altern Analysis Study th addition to the No Build and Transportation System Managem SM) alternatives; re ended four Light Rail Transit (LRT) Alternatives and one Bus R ran ' RT)Altern be advanced for further study in the federal and �� e environm� ' ' � w processes, ��,; ��. ��s\ , WHEREAS, the Federal Tra; ,� �"'� 'stration� �� , the Hennepin County � Regional Railroad Authority (HCRRA�`� d� � �; � ropolit � �� uncil have initiated both federal and state enviro tal review;;,�the �u Tra' ay project, and; , _ WHEREAS, � � �al fu F will be ` �� or t� ��_ 'ect from the FTA, which has ��" � consequently been � ' nated e lead = 1 agency ' r this project, and; � WH - the B ' ay re ";tly completed the Scoping Phase of environ an , , �� \ ��. �EREAS, thro � he ' g process, further study is recommended of the No Build an alternative ' ng w rther study of four LRT alternatives (A-C-D1, A-G D2, B-C-D1, � -D2) in the t Envi ental Impact Statement (Draft EIS), and; WHEREA Locall peferred Alternative (LPA) will be one of the build alternatives identifie d st in the Draft EIS, and; '�� WHEREAS, the B eau 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, 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 April 2012 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, with the ARCC, Community Advisory Committee (CAC) and public inpu , ��ded as part of the public hearing and comment process and passed a resoluti ay 30,2012; designating the LRT Alternative B-C-D1 as the LPA, and; �� NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLV �� ; the City o � � en Valley supports further study of the LPA recommendation , \�'° AC for the Botti Transitway project as part of the Preliminary Engineering phas�°� � � � � a ��. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT URTHER R �� at this docu�� does not i� ��\��. signify municipal consent on beh City of Ga��' alley. The City retains the ability to approve or deny municipal cons ottinea�� sitway LRT B-C-D1 following the completion of the Draft Environm al State DEIS) and during the �o� ��, Preliminary Engineermg Phase. � �� '� �v�� . ��`��::�� NOW, THE �� \ `\ �' E, �T FURT �� ' L �� at the City of Golden Valley commits to working�� the He� in Cou` gional R '� ad Authority and the � �� Metropolitan Council��,° dress � followin �r the Bottineau Transitway during the � Preliminary i eering� ��;�,�� \�;,°�� .�� dress rm �� ruction� �� ai�`itenance needs at the intersection of � ,x �. .� � olden Valle ad a'; e Burling ° n Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Railroad rridor. � '#� 2. � �� r assess m �� detail �� ta related to noise, tight and vibration along the cor 3. Furthe ess the � d for and location of possible noise and retaining walls within th idor. 4. Identify an portunities for a Hennepin County Community Works project relate e 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 at the preferred station location at Golden Valley Road. 9. Further evaluate parking options and passenger drop-off access at the proposed Golden Valley Road station location. 10.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 maintained in their current condition to the largest extent possible. �� ,� BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this resolutiona �ed by the City of Golden Valley be forwarded to HCRRA and the Metropolitan ��:��I for their consideration. �z'��\y`��\�\ � �� \ �� ; ��\� �`�'��'`- � � c . �� \\ � �\\ �`��\. � �� \:� ��". �� ,� �* h �`�� \ « � �� . �� \�. \�� \. � '�\�\�\�� \ c�1 �., \ �R �< � �\��\�\ � �� - �\��\�, �� _ �� \� \�� \�v�"`\`�� "e�o�:*; � ,\ \ ��\,. � �. �� \e \��\��\��\��\ \ ��\��\�\�� \ �. ��. \\�\�� • �`" � \r \\. ,�` \�... �, � �, � �� i � �� :, � ��, :��= ��\\ �:� ` � ..�