HomeMy WebLinkAbout1995-05-09 CC Packet Special Meeting
.
.
.
SPECIAL MEETING
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
CITY OF STILLWATER
CITY COUNCIL MEETING NO. 95-17
May 9, 1995
AGENDA
7:30 P.M.
City Council Chambers
216 North Fourth Street
Stillwater, Minnesota
1. Joint meeting with City Council of Oak Park Heights to discuss issues related to new
interstate bridge.
2, Other Business
ADJOURNMENT
I,
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
-
,
.
I
!I
I
.
,It
SECTION 2.0
PURPOSE AND NEED
2.1 PROJECT PURPOSE
The Draft EIS provided a substantial amount of information on the purpose of
and need for providing a new river crossing over the St. Croix River, including
the reconstruction of bridge approach roadways, Most of the information
provided in the Draft EIS is still valid today. Some factors have changed slightly,
but are still supportive of the need for the project. This chapter provides a
summary of the history of the project and updated information on the key factors
considered in determining the purpose of and need for the proposed
transportation facility,
The existing lift bridge over the St. Croix River between Stillwater, Minnesota
and Houlton, Wisconsin is part of a trunk highway system connecting the Twin
Cities metropolitan area with west central Wisconsin, The bridge and its
approach highways, TH 36 in Minnesota and STH 64 in Wisconsin, serve long
distance inter-regional trips between the two states, as well as short to medium
distance trips between local communities in both states. Problems with safety
and congestion in the study area have been documented for many years, and
they continue to grow worse as traffic volumes increase, These problems
resulted in the initiation of the study and evaluation process for the area,
described in Sections 2,2 and 2,3. The alternatives studied were required to
meet the following key project objectives:
. Improve the safety and congestion problems in Stillwater and on the
approach highways in Wisconsin and Minnesota,
. Efficiently serve long distance trips between regions, as well as provide
access for short and medium distance trips,
The Draft EIS describes the Build and No Build alternatives that were
considered as options to meet the project objectives, Section 3,0 of this Final
EIS describes the selection process for the Preferred Alternative, which was
based upon conformance to the project objectives and the potential impacts of
each alternative.
2-1
2.2 BACKGROUND
2.2.1 History/Status of the Project
Preliminary planning for an improved St. Croix River crossing at Stillwater-.
Houlton began in the late 1960s, when traffic congestion in the vicinity of the
bridge was already a widely recognized problem. Both Minnesota and
Wisconsin DOTs began studies to identify feasible locations for a new,
upgraded facility. By 1972, Mn/DOT had undertaken considerable study in
preparation for a draft environmental statement, while Wis/DOT had finished a
corridor location study. However, funding was unavailable and the studies were
discontinued. No final documents were published from those studies.
Congestion at the bridge and approach highways continued to increase,
Citizens and elected officials in St. Croix and Washington Counties voiced their
concern to their legislators and respective DOTs, reopening discussions about
area traffic problems. As a result, the current study on the river crossing and
approach corridors was initiated in 1984. Like the earlier studies, the project is a
cooperative effort between Minnesota and Wisconsin, with Mn/DOT assuming
lead agency responsibilities. Additional information on the project process and
status is included in Section 3,1 of this Final EIS.
2.2.2 Role in State and Regional Transportation Systems
The Stillwater-Houlton (TH 36/STH 64) bridge is one of five crossings on the
lower 83.7 kilometer (52-mile) reach of the St. Croix River. The bridge connects
Minnesota TH 36 with STH 64 in Wisconsin. These highways link the study area
with the regional transportation systems in each state (see Figure 2-1). Bridges
located at Osceola, Wisconsin (32.2 kilometers [20 highway miles] to the north)
and 1-94 in Hudson, Wisconsin (11,3 kilometers [7 highway miles] south) are
closest to the TH 36/STH 64 bridge (see Figure 2-1).
TH 36 is a four-lane, east-west state highway between the northern suburbs of
St. Paul and the city of Stillwater. Just south of Stillwater, TH 36 turns north and
merges with TH 95 and becomes a two-lane road, It remains a two-lane road
across the existing TH 36/STH 64 bridge where it connects to STH 64 in
Wisconsin. STH 64 is a two-lane, east-west highway which traverses Wisconsin
from Houlton to Marinette, on the shores of Lake Michigan,
TH 36 is part of the Twin Cities Metropolitan Council's Metropolitan Highway
System. It is classified as a principal arterial, serving medium to long distance
trips at moderate to high speeds. Although it is not an interstate freeway, TH 36/
8TH 64 functions as an interregional and interstate commuter and recreational
route. Commuters on this route travel from west central Wisconsin to the Twin
2-2
~
I
I
~
I
I
t
.
.
I,
-
.
.
.
II
.
.
.
..
61
.
.
.
Sf. Croix Falls
Turtle
Lake
64
65
"-~ Amery
Deer
Park
St. Croix River Crossings Adjacent to the TH36/STH 64 Bridge
TH 36/STH 64 ST. CROIX RIVER CROSSING FINAL EIS
CIGIJR'
2.1
New Richmond
E
Cities metropolitan area to work. Recreational travelers from the Twin Cities use
TH 36/STH 64 to travel to the St. Croix River valley and to west central and
northwest Wisconsin, In addition, TH 36/STH 64 plays a role in the distribution
of commercial goods between the Twin Cities and Stillwater, New Richmond and
points beyond, Mn/DOT classifies TH 36 as part of its Market Arterial System, a
network of high priority truck routes,
TH 95 is a two-lane, north-south highway which generally follows the western
shore of the St. Croix River, connecting the communities along the Minnesota
side of the river, It serves as a commuter road and as a route for shopping and
service-related trips, The highway is also a popular route for sightseers and for
people destined for the state parks along the river, TH 95 is classified as a
Minor Arterial, serving primarily shorter distance travel within a sector of a larger
region.
Wisconsin classifies STH 64 as a Principal Arterial, designated for long trips,
with full or partial control of private access. Within 37 kilometers (23 miles) of
the St. Croix River, STH 64 joins STH 35, STH 65, STH 46 and U,S, 63, which
serve the northwestern Wisconsin lakes area. These connections, along with
the connection to Minnesota TH 36, make STH 64 an important element of a
recreational route from the Twin Cities to Wisconsin. In addition, growing
exurban development in western St. Croix County has increased the usage of
STH 64fTH 36 as a commuter route to jobs in the Twin Cities and the Lower St.
Croix Valley,
The segment of STH 64 from Houlton to New Richmond has been designated as
a multi-lane connector in the Wisconsin Corridors 2020 Plan. Plans are
underway for reconstructing the roadway to a multi-lane facility, as a project
separate from the action proposed for the Stillwater-Houlton bridge and TH 36,
STH 64 is combined with STH 35 for the highway segment from Houlton to
Somerset, Wisconsin. STH 35 is a two-lane, north-south Minor Arterial that
extends from the Illinois-Wisconsin state line to the city of Superior in northern
Wisconsin. STH 35 serves short trips between neighboring communities,
recreational travel, and commuting, Within the study area, STH 35 provides
access to recreational opportunities along the Wisconsin shore of the St. Croix
River, serving as a route from Hudson to Houlton,
2.3 NEED FOR THE PROJECT
The primary transportation problems addressed by the proposed action are
related to the location of the existing TH 36/STH 64 transportation corridor
between Minnesota and Wisconsin and the related safety and congestion
conditions found along that corridor, The problems are not concentrated only at
2-4
.
~
.
~
.
.
.
.
.
..
tI
.
.
.
.
I
.
.
.i
.
I
1-'
~
~
~
~ .
the existing lift bridge over the St. Croix River, or at any other single point.
Multiple problems have been identified in locations which extend from the
Minnesota intersection of TH 36 with Washington and Norell Avenues to the
bridge approach corridor east of the St. Croix River along STH 64 in Wisconsin.
The primary transportation problems in this corridor are summarized as follows,
2.3.1 Deficiencies of the Existing Corridor
The Stillwater-Houlton bridge was built in 1931 to serve primarily local traffic
between Stillwater and small communities in Wisconsin. Over time, the bridge
has become a major recreational route between the two states and an important
commuter route for individuals living in Wisconsin and working in the Twin
Cities. Because of its age and design, the bridge is on the National Register of
Historic Places and is an important element of the downtown Stillwater historic
district. However, its lift design and narrow two-lane roadway are outdated for
the current needs of the transportation corridor.
II
.
'r
..
In addition to the deficiencies of the lift bridge described above, there are
geometric deficiencies along the remainder of the study corridor, Figure 2-2
identifies the key corridor deficiencies related to the proposed project. Key
findings are summarized below.
. Eastbound on TH 36, two lanes of traffic merge with one additional lane of
northbound TH 95 traffic, and then are restricted to one lane heading north to
and across the Stillwater-Houlton bridge. STH 64, which connects to the
bridge in Wisconsin, is also single-lane in each direction,
'.
...
.
I"
II
II
i
.
II
· Restricted geometrics in downtown Stillwater limit traffic flow to one lane in
each direction, limit the effectiveness of signal improvements, and severely
limit the ability of trucks, buses and recreational vehicles to make turns at
intersections. Capacity is further constricted by the existing narrow streets,
the close proximity of buildings to the streets, and very high levels of
pedestrian traffic.
· There are several signalized intersections in Minnesota and numerous
access points along the corridor in both Minnesota and Wisconsin which
reduce the effective traffic capacity of the corridor.
· The steep gradient from the bridge to the unincorporated community of
Houlton, as well as the two-lane highway and sharp curve within Houlton,
reduce the effective traffic capacity of the STH 64 corridor. The existing
9 percent grade exceeds the maximum state design standard of 6 percent. In
addition, the configuration of intersections make attempts to enter or exit
,STH 35/64 during peak traffic periods difficult and dangerous,
2-5
, I
Steep gradientlimils speed 01 east-
bound traffic. Dangerous intersection
increase likelihood of accidents.
-I
STH64 two-lanes through Houlton
limits capacity.
I
I
I
I
I
Narrow streets. limited space
due to river bluffs and residential!
historic commelcial structures
limit possibilities lor alternate
routing through city.
1
.. .
Existing Geometric Deficiencies
TH 36/STH 64 ST. CROIX RIVER CROSSING FINAL EIS
~
I.
I
"
I
I
I
t
J
I
.
J
I
I
I
I
I
I
iW
II
I
· Opportunities for passing along the segment of STH 35/64 in Wisconsin are
limited.
· Restricted geometrics on the existing bridge limit traffic to one lane in each
direction, The bridge has substandard lanes (less than 3,7 meters [12 feet]
wide) and no shoulders. In addition, limited lateral clearance caused by
bridge trusses on both sides of the roadway requires semi-trailer trucks and
other vehicles requiring high clearance to cross the center line of the road to
avoid hitting the bridge structure on the sides, These characteristics further
limit the capacity and travel speeds across the bridge,
· The existing river crossing is a river-level lift bridge which, when in use,
requires average delays of 7 to 9 minutes (see lift schedule in Figure 2-3).
The bridge is located only 128,1 meters (420 feet) from the Main Street
intersection in downtown Stillwater. Thus, space for traffic queuing as well
as for left turns at this intersection are severely restricted, The close
proximity of the bridge to the downtown Stillwater commercial historic district,
which is also at river level, makes the option of elevating a new bridge within
the existing corridor infeasible.
· Geometric and structural evaluations indicate that the Stillwater-Houlton
bridge currently has a sufficiency rating of 46, A rating of less than 50 is
indicative of a bridge with very serious functional and/or structural
deficiencies.
· The Stillwater-Houlton bridge is subject to flooding and potential structural
damage due to its low elevation. Closure due to flooding has happened a
number of times in the past. During April of 1965, for example, the structure
was closed for 16 days, and the deck had to be loaded down with gravel to
help hold it in place as floodwater passed over it. In April of 1969, the bridge
was closed for 12 days,
On a more frequent basis during high water periods, the possibility exists that
ice flows or large floating objects could inflict serious structural damage on
the lift bridge, Twenty-four hour monitoring of the bridge and river conditions
is required during these periods.
· The 0,9 meter (3 foot) wide pedestrian/bicycle provision across the existing
bridge is inadequate for pedestrian/bicycle traffic needs.
The existing corridor deficiencies outlined above, and the practical limitations to
improving on those deficiencies, indicate the need for a new river crossing
corridor, which would by-pass downtown Stillwater.
2-7
-~
--------.---- --.--.-e-
Monday through Friday
Weekends &. Federal
Uolidays
5
Noon
12
11
Noon
12
1
6pm
5
7
5
6am
6pm
7
7
1 12 11
Midnight
1 12 11
Midnight
o Every half-hour from 8:00a.m. to 9:00a.m,
o Every hour-on-the-hour from 9:00a,m. to 8:00p.m.
o Every half hour from 8:00p.m. to Midnight
o And from Midnight to 8:00a.m., with at least two
hour notice
o Every hour-on-the-hour from 8:00a.m. to 11 :OOa.m.
o Every half hour from 11 :OOa.m. to 2:30p.m,
o Then at 2:30p.m., 4:00p.m. and 5:30p.m.
o Every half hour from 6:30p.m. to 10:00p.m.
o And from 10:00p.m. to 8:00a.m., with at least two
hour notice
Current Trial Lift Schedule
TH 36/STH 64 ST. CROIX RIVER CROSSING FINAL E1S
~:i
~
~,
..
,.
J
.
.
....
.
.
.
i
.
2.3.2 Travel Demand and Capacity Deficiencies
The geometric deficiencies described in Section 2.3,1 result in insufficient traffic
capacity within the corridor. This is especially true at the two major geometric
constraints in the corridor: the existing lift bridge and the intersection at Chestnut
and Main Streets. Corridor traffic analysis included comparison of existing peak
directlon traffic volumes to the capacity of the Stillwater-Houlton bridge, During
the winter months, weekday morning and afternoon peak period traffic volumes
are above or within 10 percent of the bridge's current Level of Service D
capacity, Winter weekend mid-day volumes also are near capacity, During the
summer months, traffic volumes are near or exceed the bridge capacity during
the weekday morning and afternoon peak periods, and from about 10 a,m, until
about 8 p,m. on weekends.
Traffic capacity is further reduced by congestion at the intersection of Main and
Chestnut Streets, located approximately 128,1 meters (420 feet) from the lift
bridge. The geometric constraints at this intersection are described in
Section 2,3,1. The congestion at the intersection is compounded in the summer
months, when the bridge must be lifted for river traffic and traffic pressures
increase. The short queuing distance from the bridge to the intersection results
in bridge traffic backing up into the intersection, This combined effect results in
the occurrence of near grid-locked traffic conditions on a regular basis,
The bridge currently carries over 15,000 vehicles on an average summer
weekday and over 17,000 vehicles on an average summer weekend day.
Corridor travelers routinely experience congested, stop-and-go conditions, This
is especially the case in downtown Stillwater, as described above; however, the
congested traffic can back up to the TH 36 commercial strip and along STH 64 in
Wisconsin, The anticipated demand for the corridor in the year 2017 is 41,000
vehicles per average weekday. The anticipated increases in traffic demand,
over twice the current levels, will increase the number of hours that the bridge
operates in a highly congested condition, similar to conditions during summer
holiday weekends, This perennial congestion will ultimately result in the
diversion of trips to other bridge crossings, This will result in increased travel
times and delays for corridor users, as discussed in Section 4,1,3.
The total volume of traffic currently carried by the three river crossings in the
study area is approximately 68,000 ADT, This is under the combined capacity of
the bridges, However, future traffic forecasts (Year 2017) indicate that daily
traffic for the three crossings is expected to grow to approximately 141,000
vehicles per day, With these forecast traffic volumes and no increase in river
crossing capacity, all three bridges would operate at or near capacity with
significant delays, Section 4,1,3 provides additional information on this issue,
I
II
2-9
2.3.3 Traffic Problems in Downtown Stillwater
As noted above, traffic congestion in downtown Stillwater is a very serious
problem, Weekday peak hour traffic volumes result in delays in downtown
Stillwater. The problems are particularly noticeable during summer weekends
when traffic volumes are higher and remain high for most of the day, However,
as discussed in Section 2,3.2, this is a year-round, regularly-occurring problem,
not just a seasonal problem.
While the City of Stillwater has implemented numerous traffic and parking
management strategies over the past two to three decades, the City must
operate within severe constraints, Historic structures sit very near the streets.
Street widths vary from 9.2 meters (30 feet) on Nelson Street to 14.0 meters
(46 feet) on Main Street (see Figure 2-4 for street locations). Sidewalks range
from 1.1 meters (3,5 feet) on Nelson Street to approximately 3,1 meters (10 feet)
on Main Street. The high pedestrian traffic volume precludes removal or
narrowing of existing sidewalks. Due in part to the importance of historic
buildings in downtown Stillwater and the commercial area's designation as a
National Historic District, large-scale removal of buildings to widen the road is
not a viable option. The location of Stillwater between the river and the bluffs
limits the ability to effectively manage traffic with one-way pairs or other traffic
circulation strategies.
The popular historic commercial district of downtown Stillwater has
characteristically narrow streets, high pedestrian traffic, and high tourist traffic
volumes, Geometries at downtown intersections are very tight, making it difficult
for trucks, buses and recreation vehicles to make turns safely and without
encroaching on adjacent traffic lanes, Occasionally these large vehicles have
hit historic buildings in downtown Stillwater while trying to maneuver in the
narrow streets. High pedestrian volumes substantially increase the potential for
conflicts at downtown intersections, Most on-street parking has been removed;
however, due to a shortage of off-street parking, megal parking is often a
problem. Travelers caught in traffic use parking lots, alleys, U-turns, and
residential streets to escape queues at the bridge and through downtown,
Because the principal access to the Stillwater-Houlton bridge runs directly
through downtown Stillwater, the City's traffic issues are very closely tied to
existing problems and potential solutions for the highway corridor and the river
crossing,
2.3.4 River Traffic
River traffic has a direct relationship with the highway traffic crossing the existing
Stillwater-Houlton bridge and traveling through downtown Stillwater. Numerous
private boats, as well as commercial excursion boats moored in Stillwater,
2-10
.1,
I
e
I
I
I
1
.
.1
I'
I
-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
\
~s
~ \
;;. ,
~\
~ \
\
\
Legend
\
\
\'
\ I
"
1\
_ Public Parking Lots
Downtown Stillwater Streets and Public Parking
TH 36/STH 64 ST. CROIX RIVER CROSSING FINAL EIS
"
FIGURE
2.4
\...
require opening of .the existing lift bridge as they travel on the river through the
Stillwater area, . According to Mn/DOT data, the annual number of lift openings
grew from 436 in 1977 to 1,628 in 1989 to 2,178 in 1994, with considerable
variation depending on weather. The number of vessels passing under the
bridge increased from 547 to 3,830 to 6,962 during the same periods. This
increasing river traffic has had a significant impact on the frequency and length
of delays vehicular traffic encounters on the Stillwater-Houlton bridge,
particularly during the summer season.
The lift schedules have recently been revised to better balance river and
highway traffic demands. Following a public hearing, the lift bridge schedule
was revised (see Figure 2-3) on a trial basis in June, 1994, to eliminate
additional peak period lifts. In addition, recent installation of a new gear
mechanism has reduced average lift time by about one minute.
Some Stillwater residents and corridor users have said that if the lift bridge
operations were substantially reduced that the traffic problems in Stillwater
would be resolved, However, the discussion in Section 2.3,3 above indicates
that the problems in Stillwater are not due only to the bridge. They are caused
by both the bridge and the roadway geometrics in Stillwater.
2.3.5 Travel Time and Delay
It has been estimated that without a new river crossing, traffic congestion
increases would cause an average delay of as much as 35 minutes per vehicle
on an average weekday by the year 2017. These conditions could also result in
the potential for up to 140,000 additional daily miles of travel from vehicles
diverting to other bridges, Existing conditions would have an impact of from $34
million to $45.5 million per year. This is discussed further in Section 4,1 of this
Final EIS.
In addition, these delays not only affect automobile traffic, but they also increase
the costs of moving goods, significantly impede the ability to provide timely
emergency services, and make it nearly impossible to provide predictable transit
. services.
2.3.6 Safety
The Draft EIS contained accident data from 1980 to 1986. Since the publication
of the Draft EIS, additional traffic and accident data have become available.
Figure 2-5 compares more recent accident rates on the trunk highways in the
study corridor to statewide accident rates. From 1980-86 there were 987 total
accidents, including 10 fatal accidents in which there were eleven fatalities.
2-12
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
,
-
15
en
w
..J
:!E
~ 10
()
:r:
w
>
z
o
~
..J
:!E
0:::
W
0...
en
.-
Z 5
w
o
()
()
<(
o
-=
.-:
~
-.:
-
-
-
-
-
-
~
. .12.4 ___.__ ..
TH36 (TH5 -TH95)
STH64(River-STH35)
TH36 (TH95 - River)
STH64 (STH35 - 15th Street)
Mlnnesola rales: Stalewlde based on average of 1993-1991 slale wide rales, Study Area based on average of 1993-91 dala.
W.isc:?,nsl~. rales: stalewlda based on average of 1990-89 slale wide rales, study Area based on average of 1990-88 data.
-
---
..
. Statewide
el Study Area
Study Area and Statewide Accident Rates
TH 36/STH 64 ST. CROIX RIVER CROSSING FINAL E1S
From 1987 to 1990 there were 704 total accidents with seven fatal accidents in
which there were 13 fatalities. Accident rates are approaching double those
experienced on comparable roadways in both Minnesota and Wisconsin. The
overall accident rate has remained high and the number of fatalities has
increased over the last four years.
On summer weekends, traffic backups occur which extend several miles from the
river. This situation severely hampers emergency vehicle access to accident
sites, and to Lakeview Memorial Hospital in Stillwater. In addition,
pedestrian/vehicle conflicts exist at numerous points along Main and Chestnut
streets in downtown Stillwater. This increases the potential for accidents,
including pedestrian accidents.
Half of the pedestrian accidents in the City of Stillwater occur in the downtown
area, according to a report by the Minnesota Department of Public Safety in the
early 1980's. City and state recommendations for improving pedestrian safety
have not resulted in significant improvements. For example, the phasing of the
traffic signal at Main and Chestnut to protect pedestrians from left-turning traffic
resulted in a major backup of westbound traffic, Traffic frequently backs up
through the Nelson StreeUMain Street intersection, forcing pedestrians to walk
between vehicles. These situations increase the possibility of pedestrian
accidents.
2.3.7 Economic Vitality
Strong transportation infrastructure is an important element of economic viability,
The TH 36/STH 64 corridor is important in the economic vitality of the Stillwater-
Oak Park Heights-Bayport area as well as western Wisconsin areas. Access to
the Stillwater area is vital to its continued economic vitality for several reasons,
Both local and out-of-state tourists and consumers are attracted to this area
because of its historic character, its water resources, its specialty retail shops,
and its close proximity to the Twin Cities metropolitan area. The success of
commercial and industrial enterprises in this area is also dependent upon having
efficient transportation access to deliver people and products.
All three bridges in the study area provide important river crossings for the
movement of goods between the two states and to the local communities on both
sides of the St. Croix River. The Stillwater-Houlton bridge is an especially
important point of access from Minnesota to some of the prime recreational
areas in Wisconsin. In addition, a number of west central Wisconsin cities have
indicated that their opportunities for commercial and industrial growth would be
improved if access to the Twin Cities via STH 64/ TH 36 were improved.
2-14
......,
~.
~.
e
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
tt
I
I
I
I I
I I
I
I
~
II I
I.
iii
It
I
I
I
I
I
I
it
I
I
I
I
I
I
W-
I
2.3~8 Growth and Development
Population growth in the Wisconsin counties of St. Croix and Polk has been
fairly rapid over the past two decades, Rapid growth, particularly in St. Croix
County, is expected to continue over the next two decades (see Figure 2-6). A
large share of people living in these two Wisconsin counties work in the Twin
Cities. Census data indicates that the. number of St. Croix County residents
living in the Stillwater-Houlton bridge travelshed and commuting daily to the
Twin Cities almost doubled in the period from 1980 to 1990. This data also
indicates that not only are there more people living in St. Croix County, but a
higher percentage of those residents are commuting. Based on past commuter
trends, the three river crossings in the study area are expected to be the primary
routes for west central Wisconsin residents commuting to work, This increased
population growth will place increasing pressures on the limited capacities of the
existing bridges.
2.3.9 Conformance with Regional Transportation Plans
Regional planning for the study area is currently provided by two agencies. The
Metropolitan Council (Council) is the regional planning agency for the Twin
Cities metropolitan area, which includes Stillwater. The West Central Wisconsin
Regional Planning Commission (WCWRPC) is responsible for regional planning
for the Wisconsin areas. In the Council's 1989 Major River Crossings Study
Report, the new river crossing at Stillwater-Houlton was ranked third in regional
priority for replacement. The first- and second-ranked bridges (the Bloomington
Ferry and Anoka bridges) are already under construction, making the Stillwater
bridge the next priority replacement project for the metro region. WCWRPC has
similarly endorsed replacement of the bridge in its transportation and economic
plans.
Wis/DOTs Corridors 2020 Plan, the state highway plan extending into the 21 st
century, has studied the regional transportation and has recommended
upgrading STH 64 to a multi-lane connector from Houlton to New Richmond,
including a new multi-lane bridge across the St. Croix River. In addition,
Wis/DOT Translinks 21, Wisconsin's 21 st century transportation plan, which
includes multi- and cross-modalism, economic, land use and environmental
factors, incorporates the principles of the federal Intermodal Surface
Transportation Efficiency Act of 1992 (ISTEA) into long-range transportation
planning for Wisconsin. Translinks 21, which includes strategies for land use
planning in conjunction with transportation projects, reconfirms the need for the
highway system described in Corridors 2020. Similarly, the proposed St. Croix
2-15
.
90,000
80,000
70,000
z
o
i= 60,000
::s
::::>
a.. 50,000
o
a..
40,000
30,000
. ........p............. .-..............-....... ....-..-.... .-................. ........................-...................-......
st. Croix County
/
/
/
--.----------.--.-. ---..-. /...........
20,000
1950
/
/
/
/
/
/
//
.
/
/'
/
/
//
//
... .. e-:'p, P......P .......... P
.---- .----
.._---------.--poik County
---
.----
-~..~
-'
---
---
--1--1-.--+-t-!--1---t----+----j---t- I -+---
1960
1970
1980 1990
YEAR
Historic and Forec~opulation
TH 36/STH 64 ST. CROIX RIV91NG FINAL f/S
2000 2010
2020
I,
.
"
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
County Development ManaQement Plan assumes that a new bridge will be built.
The studies and recommendations summarized above are consistent with
Minnesota and Wisconsin DOT studies that indicate the need for bridge and
corridor improvements in the Stillwaterrrown of St. Joseph area,
The Stillwater-Houlton bridge replacement project is also included in the 1995-
1997 Minnesota and Wisconsin State Transportation Improvement Programs
(STIP), and in the Twin Cities Transportation Improvement Program (TIP), all of
which conform to ISTEA requirements, Inclusion in these programs requires that
the project be part of a cooperative planning process and be consistent with
regional land use and transportation plans,
No LRT or HOV options were studied for the project corridor, since Metropolitan
Council regional transit plans in place at the time of project planning did not
identify regional LRT or HOV connections extending to the TH 36/STH 64
corridor, The current (1992) Transit Facilities Plan for the Twin Cities
Metropolitan area also does not identify any LRT or HOV connections to the
project area,
.
....
'.
I
I
'II
2-17
I II'
.
.
I-
CITY OF STILLWATER
W ASIDNGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 95-39
A Resolution reiterating the City of Stillwater's position on a new bridge across the St.
Croix River and Trunk Highway 36 improvements.
Whereas, the City of Stillwater supports a new bridge across the St. Croix River for reasons
outlined in Resolution No. 92-49.
Whereas, Stillwater City Council supports the Southern Bridge Corridor and improvements to
the Highway 36 Corridor.
Whereas, the Stillwater Heritage Preservation Commission and the Stillwater City Council
support the preservation of the Historic Lift Bridge as an important asset to the historic, cultural
and visual integrity of Downtown Stillwater and the St. Croix Riverway.
Whereas, the National Park Service has a responsibility to preserve our nation's historical and
cultural resources within a designated Wild and Scenic Riverway System.
Now, therefore, be it resolved by the City Council of the City of Stillwater, Minnesota, that
Resolution No. 92-49 identifies and supports the City's position on a new bridge across the St.
Croix River and Trunk Highway 36 Improvements.
Adopted by the Stillwater City Council on February 7, 1995.
ATTEST:
ftJmL) ~
CITY CLERK
.
.
.
CITY OF STILLWATER
WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 92-49
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF STILLWATER DESCRIBING
THE IMPACT OF TRUNK HIGHWAY 36 TRAFFIC ON THE CITY OF STILLWATER AND
STATING ITS POSITION ON A NEW BRIDGE ACROSS THE ST. CROIX RIVER
AND TRUNK HIGHWAY 36 IMPROVEMENTS.
WHEREAS, the Minnesota Department of Transportation is responsible to plan for
and make improvements to the State Highway System to provide for existing and
projected highway traffic; and
WHEREAS, both the Minnesota Department of Transportation and the Wisconsin
Department of Transportation based on existing traffic conditions and
projected future travel demand identified the Highway 36 Interstate Bridge as
a critical problem and constraint to movement in the region; and
WHEREAS, two-thirds of the traffic on Highway 36 that goes through Downtown
Stillwater over the existing lift bridge does not have a downtown destination;
~d
WHEREAS, over the past thirty years, Stillwater's population has grown by
sixty five percent while traffic through Downtown Stillwater on Trunk Highway
36 has increased by two hundred and fifty percent; and
WHEREAS, Trunk Highway 36 and the Interstate Bridge is undersized, hazardous,
dangerous, congested and economically detrimental to the City of Stillwater
for the following reasons:
1. The existing sixty year old, two lane, lift bridge and approach
roadway does not provide sufficient capacity to accommodate current
traffic; and
2. The roadway is narrow, intersections congested and hazardous, while
pedestrian movements conflict with car and truck traffic; and
3. Most recently a car/truck accident on Highway 36 claimed four lives
and the intersection of Main Street, Highway 36, and Chestnut Street
is identified, based on accidents, as the most hazardous intersection
in the St. Croix Valley; and
4. Severe congestion is experienced five to six hours per day in
Downtown Stillwater and along Highway 36 at Frontage Road
intersections; and
5. Local residents and visitors to Stillwater avoid the downtown because
of traffic conditions negatively impacting local business; and
6. Because of congestion and traffic delays, highway traffic is being
diverted to neighborhood City streets causing hazardous conditions
around elementary schools and in residential areas.
1
WHEREAS, clogged downtown streets result in stalled cars, wasted energy
consumption, excessive noi~e and air pollution; ~nd
WHEREAS, the construction of a new river crossing will improve the river
pollution problem by catching and filtering road runoff from TH36 corridor
before entering the St. Croix River.
WHEREAS, traffic in the Highway 36 travel corridor is projected to more than
double in the next twenty years from 12,500 to 28,200 ADTS on the existing
bridge and from 14,000 to 35,350 ADT on Main Street; and
WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Council, the regional planning agency, has
recognized the need for a new bridge in their Transportation Policy Plan,
Major River Crossing Study, 1989, which rates the Highway 36 Stillwater Bridge
third highest out of the twenty worst bridges needing repair or reconstruction
in the metropolitan area (Blooming Ferry #1 rated bridge and Anoka-Champlin #2
rated bridge are funded and under construction); and
WHEREAS, planning for a new Highway 36 Bridge has been studied by MnDOr for
over twenty years, since the early 70's with public awareness of the general
bridge location and community support for the project; and
WHEREAS, the City of Stillwater's Comprehensive Plan and Specific Stillwater
Downtown Plan, consistent with the Metropolitan Council's Regional Development
and Investment Framework identifies the need for a new bridge across the St.
Croix River in a southern corridor location; and
WHEREAS, the Minnesota Historical Society nominated the Downtown Stillwater
commercial Historic District to the National Register of Historic Places on
November 21, 1991; and
WHEREAS, the Downtown Stillwater Commercial Historic District is threatened by
the no-build option under criteria of effect for evaluation published in the
Federal Register (September 2, 1986, 36, CRF, Part 800). The adverse impact is
noise, air pollution, congestion and the increasingly high volumes of traffic
through Downtown; and
WHEREAS, according to Dr. Norene Roberts, author of Historic Reconstruction of
the Riverfront: Stillwater, Minnesota and Intensive National Re9ister Survey
of Downtown Stillwater, Minnesota, 1989, stated in the recommendations lithe
most pressing problem and largest threat to the historic buildings in Downtown
Stillwater is the constant and steady through traffic on South Mainll. A
majority of the buildings along Main Street in the Historic Commercial
District were built during the 1860's, 1870's and 1880's. The large
semi-tractor-trailers rumbling through the downtown area are a danger to the
older stone an9 brick buildings over one hundred years old, some of which are
leaning against adjacent buildings; and
WHEREAS, over the years the City of Stillwater has worked with MnDOr to
increase through highway traffic to the detriment of the City of Stillwater
and Downtown business by:
2
.
.
.1
.
.
.
1. Removing over fifty prime Main Street parking spaces between Olive
Street and Myrtle Street and.Chestnut Street from Union Alley to the
bridge to accommodate more cars and truck turning; and
2. Prohibiting left turns to accommodate pass through traffic making it
more difficult to get around downtown.
WHEREAS, the City of Stillwater and MnDOT has studied in detail other
Transportation System Management (TSM) options, including one-way streets,
widening of Main Street and construction of new north-south roadways along the
river and concluded that the options area not practical because street widths
are narrow, (thirty to sixty feet, including sidewalks). Existing historic
buildings are located at front property lines and would require demolition for
widenings and the existing limited street system can not easily accommodate a
one-way street without major demolition and reconstruction; and
WHEREAS, MnDOT has studied the need for, and alternative locations for, a new
river bridge for the past five years with more than adequate opportunities for
1 oca 1 government, resource agencies, commun ity groups and res ident
participation and input into the study process; and
WHEREAS, MnDOT has conducted a detailed Environmental Impact Study of Bridge
Corridor Locations and concluded that the new south corridor "provided the
best balance of safe, efficient transportation and both positive and negative
social, economic and environmental impacts. "; and
WHEREAS, the central bridge corridor location in Downtown Stillwater would
degrade the natural and historic character and economic vitality of Downtown
Stillwater the birthplace of Minnesota; and
WHEREAS, a central corridor bridge would demolish the existing lift bridge, a
nationally recognized resource on the National Register of Historic Places,
and an asset to the historic, cultural and visual integrity of Downtown
Stillwater; and
WHEREAS, the central corridor bridge would have an adverse effect under
criteria of effect for evaluation published in the Federal Register (September
2, 1986, 36, FR, Part 800). A new bridge introduces a visual, audible or
atmospheric elements that are out of character with the historic integrity of
Downtown Stillwater and alters its setting; and
WHEREAS, a central bridge location would destroy the visual quality of the
river and Wisconsin bluffline, as viewed from the Downtown, result in high
noise levels generated by 32,000 ADT, concentrate air pollution and degrade
one mile of City river open space and park lands; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Stillwater has held several public
hearings on the need for a new bridge and locations of a new bridge; and
WHEREAS, the vast majority of local business owners, property owners,
community groups, Chamber of Commerce, Downtown Association and residents
support the need for a new river bridge in the south corridor; and
3
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Stillwater
that based on the forgoing preponderance of information; facts, finding.s and
recommendations that:
1. The Commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Transportation and
other Wisconsin and Federal decision makers should finally decide
that a new south corridor bridge is necessary to address regional as
well as local traffic needs; and
2. That the Environmental Impact Statement preparation process was
complete and provided more than adequate opportunity for public and
City participation; and
3. That the City of Stillwater has participated in the review of studies
and plans for Trunk Highway 36 corridor improvements and will
continue to work with MnDOT, Washington County and Oak Park Heights
in the final bridge and Highway 36 roadway and interchange design and
development process; and
4. That the City of Stillwater officially recommends approval of the
plans for a new southern corridor Interstate Bridge and
reconstruction of Highway 36 from County Road 5 to Highway 95.
Adopted by the Stillwater City Council on March 17, 1992.
j/~
""
Attest: ./it,~b ;L~~
'A t1 ng City Clerk
4
.
.
.
Special Meeting
STILLWATER CITY COUNCIL
MINUTES
May 9, 1995
7:30 p.m.
The Meeting was convened jointly by Mayor Kimble and Mayor O'Neal.
Present: Stillwater City Councilmembers Bea1ka, Cummings, Thole, Zoller and Mayor
Kimble
Oak Park Heights City Councilmembers Kern, Robert, Schaaf, Swenson and
Mayor O'Neal
Absent: None
Also Present: Stillwater City Coordinator Kriesel
Stillwater City Attorney Magnuson
Stillwater Community Development Director Russell
Stillwater City Clerk Weldon
Oak Park Heights City Administrator Robertson
Press: Julie Kink, The Courier
Mike Marsnik, Stillwater Gazette
Others: Richard Kilty
1. Joint meeting with City Council of Oak Park Heights to discuss issues related to new
interstate bridge.
Council met with the Oak Park Heights City Council to discuss each City's views on the
interstate bridge. The two Councils agreed to another joint meeting on May 30 at 7:00
p.m.
2. Other Business.
No other business was discussed.
ADJOURNMENT
Motion by Councilmember Thole, seconded by Councilmember Zoller to adjourn the meeting at
9:40 p.m. All in favor.
~~
ATIEST:~ I ,)Jk.,...
CITY CLERK
~
r illwater
~ ~
TH:-;-;RTHPLACE OF MINNESOTA i)
August 17, 1995
Mr. Mark Benson
Minnesota Department of Transportation
Metropolitan Division, Waters Edge Building
1500 West County Road B2
Roseville, MN 55113
RE: Resolution for Layout Approval
Dear Mr. Benson:
Enclosed for your records is a certified copy of Resolution 95-161 approving Layout No.2,
S,P. 8214-92 and S.P. 8217-10 (35=45) from Washington/Norell to the St. Croix River and
Wisconsin.
Sincerely,
fY(etL ~
Modi Weldon
City Clerk
CITY HAll: 216 NORTH FOURTH STillWATER, MINNESOTA 55082 PHONE: 612-439-6121
1
\
RESOL UTI ON 95-161
FOR LAYOUT APPROVAL
At a meeting of the City Council of the City of Stillwater, held on the 18th day of July,
1995, the following Resolution was offered by Councilmember Thole, seconded by
Councilmember Bealka to wit:
WHEREAS the Commissioner of the Department of Transportation has prepared a
layout for the improvement of a part of Trunk Highway Number 45 renumbered as Trunk
Highway No. 36 within the corporate limits of the City of Stillwater, from the junction of
Washington Avenue to the S1. Croix River; and seeks the approval thereof, and
WHEREAS said layouts are on file in the Office of the Department of Transportation,
Saint Paul, Minnesota, being marked, labeled, and identified as Layout No.2, S.P. 8214-92 and
S.P. 8217-10 (36=45) from Washington/Norell to the S1. Croix River and Wisconsin.
NOW, THEN, BE IT RESOL YED that said layouts for the improvement of said Trunk
Highway with the corporate limits be and hereby are approved.
Upon the call of the roll the following Council Members voted in favor of the Resolution~
Bealka, Cummings, Thole, Zoller.
The following Council members voted against its ado tion: (none) whereupon the
presiding officer declared the Resolution adopted.
Dated: July 18, 1995.
f)JMf., 11~~
. ~ City Clerk
Attest
STATE OF MINNESOTA ) SSe
COUNTY OF W ASmNGTON )
)
CITY OF: STILL WATER )
I do hereby certify that at said meeting (of which due and legal notice was given) of the
City Council of Stillwater, Minnesota, on the 18th day of July 1995, at which a majority of the
members of said Council were present, the foregoing resolution was adopted. Given under my
hand and seal this 18th day of July, 1995.
oor~{l~
City Clerk
"
r illwater
"~ ----~
T H ~I R T H P LAC e 0 F M INN e SOT A i)
CERTIFICA nON
State of Minnesota )
County of Washington )
City of Stillwater )
I, Modi Weldon, City Clerk of the City of Stillwater, Minnesota, do hereby
certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 95-161, is a true and correct copy of a Resolution
adopted by the Stillwater City Council on July 18, 1995.
~ L{t..1~d.-
Modi Wi Idon, CIty Clerk
~
SEAL
CITY HALL: 216 NORTH FOURTH STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 55082 PHONE: 612-439-6121