2022.02.10 Work Session Packet
4141 Douglas Drive North • Crystal, Minnesota 55422-1696
Tel: (763) 531-1000 • Fax: (763) 531-1188 • www.crystalmn.gov
Posted: Feb. 4, 2022
City Council Work Session Agenda
Thursday, Feb. 10, 2022 at 6:30 p.m.
Community Room (Lower Level)
Pursuant to due call and notice given in the manner prescribed by Section 3.01 of the City
Charter, the work session of the Crystal City Council was held on Thursday, Feb. 10, 2022 at
______ p.m. in the Community Room at City Hall, 4141 Douglas Dr. N., Crystal, Minnesota.
I. Attendance
Council members Staff
____ Budziszewski ____ Norris
____ Cummings ____ Therres
____ Kiser ____ Larson
____ LaRoche ____ Peterson
____ Parsons ____ Ray
____ Adams ____ Revering
____ Banks ____ Sutter
____ Serres
II. Agenda
The purpose of the work session is to discuss the following agenda items:
1. Communications update.
2. Review updated Blue Line Extension concept plans and traffic information.
3. Continue discussion of work plan regarding inclusion.
III. Adjournment
The work session adjourned at ______ p.m.
Auxiliary aids are available upon request to individuals with disabilities by calling the city clerk at
(763) 531-1145 at least 96 hours in advance. TTY users may call Minnesota Relay at 711 or 1-800-627-3529.
Memorandum
DATE: January 27, 2022
TO: Mayor and Council
FROM:
Kim Therres, Assistant City Manager
SUBJECT:
Mike Peterson, Communications Coordinator
Communications Presentation
Communications Coordinator Michael Peterson will provide the council with a presentation
addressing the city’s communications activities over the past 12 months and provide a look
ahead to 2022.
The presentation will review the following:
● The city’s general communications operations as outlined in the annual
communications strategy document.
- Includes four core strategies encompassing the city website, social media,
media relations, newsletters, streaming media and more.
● The City of Crystal Brand Identity & Editorial Style Guide.
● Major accomplishments in 2021.
● 2022 community events.
● Media Protocol and Crisis Communications.
___________________________________________________________________________________
FROM: John Sutter, Community Development Director
TO: Anne Norris, City Manager (for February 10 work session)
DATE: February 3, 2022
SUBJECT: Review updated Blue Line Extension concept plans and traffic information
___________________________________________________________________________________
On Feb. 2 staff received new materials which Metro Transit and Hennepin County (“the
project”) will present for an interactive discussion with the City Council at the Feb. 10 work
session. City staff has not had time to go through these new materials in detail and the project
may also provide additional new materials at the work session. Other materials have been
seen by the Council at previous work sessions.
The project clearly wants to reduce the roadway from 6 lanes to 4, with LRT at-grade in the
widened median, and an interchange at Bass Lake Road to bridge Bottineau Blvd traffic over
the intersection. Based on previous work sessions, the City Council is not unified in its opinion
about either the lane reduction or interchange.
The goal of the Feb. 10 work session will be for the project to present their materials in an
informal setting, address Councilmember questions and concerns about the project’s preferred
option, and listen to Councilmember suggestions for alternatives and mitigation.
The following materials are attached:
1. City staff questions from Dec. 15 (black) and project response from Feb. 2 (blue)
2. Traffic Counts and Forecasts (previously provided Dec. 21)
3. Travel time comparison, Hwy 100 - I-94 (previously provided Sep. 23)
4. Travel time comparison, Wilshire - 63rd (previously provided Dec. 21)
5. Traffic level of service comparison, Hwy 100 - I-94 (previously provided Sep. 23)
6. Traffic level of service comparison, 4-6-4 vs interchange at Bass Lake Road
7. 4-6-4 option (previously provided Dec. 21, some images updated)
8. Interchange option (previously provided Dec. 21, some images updated)
9. Right of way comparison (previously Dec. 21)
COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Blue Line Extension
February 2, 2022
Blue Line LRT Extension Project responses to:
Questions/comments from the City of Crystal dated 12/15/2021:
Note:The Blue Line LRT Extension Project responses are bulleted in blue text below each question/comment.
TRAFFIC
1.Looks like 2021 counts are roughly the same as 2015 and lower than 2019.
o Yes, very similar.
2.Need detail tables to go along with updated VISSIM models (4-6-4 vs interchange).
o Provided in an attached document.
3.Need explanation for divergence in BLR vs 63rd segments of Bottineau on count/forecast table.
o 2040 traffic forecasts were developed independently of 2030 forecasts as part of the recent comprehensive
planning process. The regional travel demand model developed by Met Council was used as a base model
from which the County further refined traffic analysis zones (TAZs) to include additional roadway segments
and updated population and employment forecasts. The resulting 2040 traffic forecasts were a direct result
of the roadway system and surrounding land use trips being distributed between origins and destinations.
4.Proposed lane reduction from Wilshire-100 is a different issue than BLR-Wilshire 4-6-4 vs interchange question:
a.Previous county documents show 6 lanes are needed (see attached 2002 guidelines and 2020 map).
o Below is a summary of existing 6-lane County roadways. No additional 6-lane roadways are planned and
some may be reprioritized in the future to accommodate HOV, transit, etc.
b.Some Councilmembers want 6 lanes maintained - don’t take anything away to build LRT.
o The County is preparing a letter summarizing its position on CR 81 related to the BLRT project and
changing County policies related to their recently published Climate Action Plan.
c.Metro Transit and Hennepin County need to make a point-by point case for why it will work.
o The Project is preparing a bulleted point by point summary of how a four lane CR 81 can accommodate
the BLRT along with existing and planned future traffic volume.
d.Interchange may solve overall Bottineau through traffic travel time problem, but city is also concerned about
delays for cross streets and local access across/onto Bottineau at Wilshire, Corvallis and 47th.
o While some cross streets movements will experience increases in delays with the addition of LRT, the
overall increase is anticipated to be minor. By comparing the results of the No-Build and Build scenarios
ATTACHMENT 1
for side street movements at Wilshire, Corvallis, and 47th; most delay increases are shown to be 10
seconds or less.
e.Has the (traffic) world really permanently changed because of work from home, etc? Need to do another full set
of comparable counts in fall 2022 before seeking municipal consent.
o No one knows for sure. There are industry indicators forecasting that peak hour travel will likely never
return to the equivalent post Covid highs (due to full and partial work-from-home and more flexible
work hour arrangements) and that daily traffic numbers may show decreases as well (due to work-from-
home changes).
o The County will continue to conduct traffic counts to aid in planning efforts moving forward.
f.Where else on the county system are there current and projected volumes like this? (Examples.)
o Volumes like those in the vicinity of Bass Lake Road, typically occur near freeways and interstates. Below
are examples from across our system:
§CSAH 81 (Bottineau Blvd) just south of I-94/694 to HWY 169
§CSAH 152 (Brooklyn Blvd) north and south of I-94/694
§CSAH 12 (Noble Pkwy) just north of HWY 610
§CSAH 14 (Zane Ave) just north of HWY 610
§CSAH 61 (Hemlock Ln) north and south of I-94/694
§CSAH 61 (Flying Cloud Dr) south of I-494
§CSAH 10 (Bass Lake Rd) just west of I-494
§CSAH 109 (Weaver Lake Rd) just east of I-94
§CSAH 62 (62nd Street) just west of I-494
§CSAH 34 (Normandale Ave) just south of I-494
§CSAH 17 (France Ave) just north of I-494
§CSAH 32 (Penn Ave) just south of I-494
§CSAH 1 (98th Street) near I-35W
g.Has the county changed how it will design other suburban arterials? (Examples.)
o Yes. In 2021 the County endorsed MNDOT “setting a preliminary goal of a 20% reduction in Vehicle
Miles Traveled (VMT) statewide by 2050”. One way that MnDOT specifically has identified accomplishing
this is by “prioritizing transit and high-occupancy vehicles (HOV) on MnDOT-owned right of way”. The
County is developing similar policies.
4-6-4 OPTION
a.What design speed assumptions are being used?
o The current concept layout was not engineered to a specific design speed however, is more companionable
with the 45 mph posted speed south of the intersection than the higher posted speed to the north.
b.Why aren’t 6 lanes shown through Wilshire, with the transition to 4 lanes between Wilshire and the CP bridge? That
was the condition before the 2015 restriping which extended the 6 lane segment all the way to 47th. The 2015
configuration worked OK from Bass Lake Road through Wilshire; it was the Wilshire-100 segment, still striped for 4
lanes, that didn’t work well. Need to re-do the layout to mimic the 2015 condition and re-run the traffic simulation
based on 6 lanes through the Wilshire intersection.
o The current concept layout was prepared with the additional through lanes for the Bass Lake Road
intersection beginning and ending at Wilshire, as opposed to carrying through the intersection. We will
continue to evaluate design options and refinements if this option moves forward for further study.
INTERCHANGE OPTION
a.What design speed assumptions are being used?
o The current concept layout was not engineered to a specific design speed, however is more companionable
with the 45 mph posted speed south of the intersection than the higher posted speed to the north.
b.Still very concerned about short distance from southbound ramp merge and Wilshire intersection, and the lack of a
merge lane. This will look, feel and operate like a freeway interchange - would any highway department design an
interchange with no merge lane? What about weaving from the ramp to the left turn bay at Wilshire? Has this
configuration been recently designed/built anywhere? (Examples.)
o The overall design is truly a concept layout and this area (and others) require more detailed design attention
to progress toward an engineered layout.
c.ROW taking is more negatively impactful for interchange option than for 4-6-4:
§Crystal already has a shortage of living wage jobs compared to other cities.
§5500 Lakeland (Crystal Business Commons) is one of the few places where living wage jobs can be found in
Crystal.
§Taking would eliminate not only parking but also vehicular access and circulation to northwesterly half of
building front.
§Even if not a total taking, the partial taking will make this building functionally obsolete.
§Need to explore shifting the Wilshire-BLR segment west to minimize impacts on east side.
o We will continue to evaluate design options and refinements if this option moves forward for further study.
d.Benefit to the city would be no ownership & maintenance responsibility for a ped bridge - we presume Metro
Transit would own & maintain the trail from the park & ride to the Crystal Lake Regional Trail on the east side of
Bottineau, including plowing.
o It is likely that Metro Transit would maintain the portion of the trail within the station/platform area.
e.What is the anticipated span length of the bridges?
o The main span (directly over Bass Lake Road) is the longest. We have not designed that span but using
engineering judgement came up with a working length of around 150’ to develop the renderings. This span
length would be refined through the design process.
f.Under-bridge areas - examples look nice but don’t fit this context:
§There’s no river or other natural amenity directly adjacent.
§There are no complimentary uses adjacent or nearby.
§Duplicates existing 12 acre Becker Park.
§Who would own and maintain these amenities? City struggles to maintain what we already have.
o The area under the CR 81 bridges would be County right-of-way. The potential treatment and programming
of that space is yet to be determined. The prepared renderings represented one possible vision of how that
space could be designed using similar recent projects completed by MnDOT (Hastings, Winona) as
inspiration.
CR 81 Traffic Volumes Annual average daily traffic (AADT) is the estimated average daily traffic volume experienced in both directions of a roadway segment considering the seasonal variation in traffic in a one‐year period. Segment 2005 AADT1(vehicles/day) 2015 AADT2(vehicles/day) 2019 AADT3 (vehicles/day) 2021 AADT4 (vehicles/day) 2030 Forecast5(vehicles/day) 2040 Forecast6 (vehicles/day) A CR 81, 63rd Ave to Bass Lake Rd 23,900 26,500 28,500 26,500 35,000 34,000 B CR 81, Bass Lake Rd to Wilshire Blvd 23,900 27,000 31,000 26,700 36,000 32,000 C CR 81, Wilshire Blvd to Corvallis Ave 28,100D CR 81, Corvallis Ave to 47th Ave 29,900E CR 81, 47th Ave to TH 100 ramps 28,500 32,500 38,000 33,10039,000 1. Existing volumes during the design phase for the CR 81reconstruction.2.Volumes after the CR 81 reconstruction but before therestriping to 6 lanes between 47th Ave and Wilshire Blvd.3.Volumes after the CR 81 restriping to 6 lanes between 47th Aveand Wilshire Blvd.4.Volumes collected in October 2021.5.Forecasts used in the design phase for the CR 81reconstruction.6.Forecasts in the current Hennepin County Transportation Plan.ATTACHMENT 2
1Travel Time ComparisonPeak Hour No‐Build Build Overall ChangeAM 4 min 53 sec 4 min 48 sec‐5 secPM4 min 55 sec 5 min 28 sec+33 secNorthboundPeak Hour No‐Build Build % ChangeAM5 min 23 sec 5 min 21 sec‐2 secPM5 min 42 sec 5 min 17 sec‐25 secSouthboundCR 81 Corridor –TH 100 Interchange to I‐94 Interchange (approx. 3 miles)ATTACHMENT 3"Build" is with interchange at Bass Lake Road
1Travel Time ComparisonPeak Hour4-6-4 Grade-Separated DifferenceAM2 min 36 sec 2 min 5 sec-31 secPM2 min 50 sec 2 min 18 sec-32 secNorthboundPeak Hour4-6-4 Grade-Separated DifferenceAM2 min 46 sec 1 min 59 sec-47 secPM2 min 32 sec 1 min 54 sec-38 secSouthboundCR 81 Corridor – Wilshire Boulevard to 63rdAvenue N (approx. 1.4 miles)ATTACHMENT 4
ATTACHMENT 5
CR 81 ‐ CrystalBass Lake RoadBuild ConditionsLeft58.3E35 150 325 135Left0.7 A 0 30 100 136Through49.9 D 5 100 425 252Through0.1 A 0 30 100 313Right9.6 A 0 50 450 204Through42.6 D 55 290 325 368Left57.5E55 195 250 90Right34.7 C 55 290 325 98Through46.0 D 55 195 400 279Left62.1E90 445 1150 233Right5.3 A 55 195 275 98Right9.0 A 90 450 300 14Left88.4F75 295 400 232 29.1 C‐‐‐1162Through28.9 C 55 340 1300 696Through40.2 D 60 295 350 387Right1.5 A 0 10 275 15Right2.2 A 0 115 350 205Left71.0E20 100 475 62Left1.3 A 0 55 100 89Through33.4 C 105 435 5700 1341Through0.2 A 0 55 100 510Right7.5 A 20 370 350 231Left57.7E25 210 350 62Right6.8 A 10 185 525 23214.4 B‐‐‐1485Left78.9E120 450 325 390Left0.5 A 0 40 100 397Through53.6 D 20 270 425 400Through0.1 A 0 40 100 528Right9.1 A 0 50 450 195Through60.3E130 480 325 529Left92.1F135 590 250 110Right53.3 D 130 480 325 163Through80.8F135 590 400 411Left62.6E165 690 1150 378Right14.5 B 135 590 275 163Right14.6 B 165 695 300 56Left70.6E80480 400 38831.9 C‐‐‐2051Through38.3 D 235 1155 1300 1702Through43.9 D 155 645 350 803Right9.8 A 0 30 275 57Right4.5 A 0 105 350 195Left61.8E30 120 475 124Left0.8 A 0 70 100 110Through38.2 D 50 245 5700 570Through0.1 A 0 70 100 798Right12.6 B 15 210 350 181Left86.3F70 320 525 122Right7.5 A 45 295 350 18021.8 C‐‐‐2208AM PEAK HOURPM PEAK HOURIntersection47.8 D‐‐‐ CSAH 81 NB Ramps &Bass Lake Rd (West Intersection)Intersection Movement4‐6‐4 ConceptIntersection Average Queue (ft)Maximum Queue (ft)Storage Length (ft)Denotes a left‐ or right‐turn movement where maximum queue exceeds the storage length. Denotes a through movement where maximum queue blocks adjacent turn lanes.4701Intersection CSAH 81 &Bass Lake Rd CSAH 81 NB Ramps &Bass Lake Rd (East Intersection)EastboundWestboundNorthboundSouthboundEastboundNorthboundIntersectionWestboundSouthboundModeled Volume (vph)MovementGrade‐Separated ConceptAverage Delay (sec/veh)LOSAverage Queue (ft)Maximum Queue (ft)Storage Length (ft)Modeled Volume (vph)Average Delay (sec/veh)LOSDirectionEastboundWestboundEastboundIntersection3648‐‐‐D36.4DirectionGrade‐Separated ConceptAverage Queue (ft)Maximum Queue (ft)Storage Length (ft)Modeled Volume (vph)Average Delay (sec/veh)LOSStorage Length (ft)Modeled Volume (vph) CSAH 81 &Bass Lake RdWestbound CSAH 81 NB Ramps &Bass Lake Rd (East Intersection) CSAH 81 NB Ramps &Bass Lake Rd (West Intersection)NorthboundEastboundWestboundSouthboundIntersectionEastboundIntersectionMovementDenotes a left‐ or right‐turn movement where maximum queue exceeds the storage length.Denotes a through movement where maximum queue blocks adjacent turn lanes.Intersection Direction MovementIntersection DirectionSouthboundNorthboundWestbound4‐6‐4 ConceptAverage Delay (sec/veh)LOSAverage Queue (ft)Maximum Queue (ft)ATTACHMENT 6
Pedestrian Bridge
Park and Ride
Design Features:
z Expands County Road 81
between Crystal Airport Road
and Wilshire Boulevard, keeping
six lanes of traffic (three in each
direction) for that section, just
over half a mile
z Light rail is at-grade in the center
of the roadway
z Park and ride access via Lakeland
Avenue North from the Wilshire
Boulevard intersection
z Station platform is in the middle
of a six-lane road with additional
turning lanes at the intersection
z The pedestrian bridge provides
a crossing over County Road 81
and a grade-separated access to
the south end of the station to
the platform from the park and
ride and trails
Aerial View of Station Area Looking North
Note: This image represents a planning concept based on
cursory engineering work. If this concept advances, significant
additional design would be required.DRAFT: CONCEPT IN DEVELOPMENT
METRO BLUE LINE EXTENSION
BASS LAKE ROAD: 4-6-4 OPTION
ATTACHMENT 7
Aerial View of Station Area Looking East Ground View of Station Area- Pedestrian Crossing
DRAFT: CONCEPT IN DEVELOPMENT
DRAFT: CONCEPT IN
DEVELOPMENT
Note: This image represents a planning
concept based on cursory engineering
work. If this concept advances, significant
additional design would be required.
Note: This image represents a planning
concept based on cursory engineering
work. If this concept advances, significant
additional design would be required.
METRO BLUE LINE EXTENSION
BASS LAKE ROAD: 4-6-4 OPTION STATION AREA VIEWS
At-grade
Pedestrian
Crossing
with Trail
Connections
Park and Ride
Design Features:
z County Road 81 two lanes in each
direction on a grade-separated
overpass at Bass Lake Road with ramps
for access from Bass Lake Road
z The intersection maintains full access
for Bass Lake Road
z Light rail is at-grade centered between
overpass bridges
z Park and ride access via Lakeland
Avenue North from the Wilshire
Boulevard intersection
z Station platform is at-grade framed by
adjacent interchange bridges
z The south at-grade crossing provides
grade-separation from County Road
81 and provides access to trails on
either side of County Road 81 and to
the park and ride
Aerial View of Station Area Looking North
DRAFT: CONCEPT IN DEVELOPMENT
Note: This image represents a planning concept
based on cursory engineering work. If this concept
advances, significant additional design would be
required.
METRO BLUE LINE EXTENSION
BASS LAKE ROAD: INTERCHANGE OPTION
ATTACHMENT 8
Ground View of Station Area Looking SouthGround View of Station Area Looking EastGround View of Station Area Looking East from Park and RideDRAFT: CONCEPT IN DEVELOPMENTNote: This image represents a planning concept based on cursory engineering work. If this concept advances, significant additional design would be required.DRAFT: CONCEPT IN DEVELOPMENTNote: This image represents a planning concept based on cursory engineering work. If this concept advances, significant additional design would be required.DRAFT: CONCEPT IN DEVELOPMENTNote: This image represents a planning concept based on cursory engineering work. If this concept advances, significant additional design would be required.METRO BLUE LINE EXTENSIONBASS LAKE ROAD: INTERCHANGE OPTION STATION AREA VIEWS
Ground area view at the north end of the
station looking southwest at night
Ground view of the entrance at the south end of the
station looking east from the Park and Ride at night
DRAFT: CONCEPT IN DEVELOPMENT
DRAFT: CONCEPT IN
DEVELOPMENT
Note: This image represents a planning
concept based on cursory engineering
work. If this concept advances, significant
additional design would be required.
Note: This image represents a planning
concept based on cursory engineering
work. If this concept advances, significant
additional design would be required.
METRO BLUE LINE EXTENSION
BASS LAKE ROAD: INTERCHANGE OPTION
STATION AREA LIGHTING STUDY
Interchange Option
4-6-4 Option
Right of Way ATTACHMENT 9