HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning & Development Committee 02-28-1996Y
ST. CROIX COUNTY
NOTICE OF JOINT COMMITTEE MEETING
TO: Robert Boche, St. Croix County Board Chairperson
FROM: Tom Dorsey, Chairperson
COMMITTEE TITLE: Planning & Development
DATE OF MEETING: Wednesday, February 28, 1996
TIME: 10:00 a.m.
LOCATION: St. Croix County Highway Department, Hammond, WI
CALL TO ORDER:
ROLL CALL:
ADOPTION OF AGENDA:
UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
NEW BUSINESS:
1. Joint Meeting with the Planning & Development Committee and the Transportation
Committee to Discuss the 35/64 Corridor Design
DATES & AGENDA ITEMS FOR NEXT MEETING
ANNOUNCEMENTS & CORRESPONDENCE
ADJOURNMENT:
(This agenda not necessarily presented in this order)
Submitted by: St. Croix County Planning Department
Date: February 21, 1996 -
cc: County Board Office News Media/Notice Board
County Clerk Committee Members
MINUTRS OF THE ST.CROIX.COUNTY JOINT
TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE & PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
Meeting of March 27, 1996
Call to Order: The meeting was called to order by Co -Chairmen, Sinclear
and Dorsey at 7:10 P.M.
Roll Call: Roll call was taken with Dorsey, Draxler, Luckey, Sinclear,
Grant, King, Menter, and Raymond in attendance with Oemichen arriving at
7:30 P.M. Highway staff members present included Fedderly, and Ramberg.
Planning staff members present included Fodroczi and Denzer. WisDOT
staff present included Marty Beekman and Terry Pederson. Town of St.
Joseph board members present included Lloyd Dahlke, Paul Nasvik, Sue
Scarborough, Bob Marty; and Town Clerk, Camille Grant. Town of Somerset
board members present included George Sinclear, Ed Schachtner, and
Jerry Neumann. Others present included Bob Gilbert, Henry Lentz, and
Bernice Lentz -St. Joseph township residents.
Review 35/64 Planning Access Criteria/Development Controls: Fedderly
gave a background of the last official position of the Transportation
and Planning & Development Committees regarding the corridor and limited
access concept. The alternatives of access, traffic, cost and
recommended alternatives from the standpoint of development, zoning, and
transportation were considered in determining the recommended
alternative. Both Committees wish to take this opportunity to present
this group the preferred alternative and why.
Fodroczi noted the key concerns with the connection between land use and
access as well as traffic circulation as part of the process in choosing
the most beneficial alternative to all.
Beekman reviewed the efforts to protect the corridor and preserve it for
mobility, noting there are two projects involved. One is the Stillwater
Bridge approach (+/- $10 million estimate). The other one is the
easterly project, from the end of the bridge approach project to New
Richmond, which has been delayed until approximately 2004 to 2006 due to
budget restraints ($65 million estimate). Beekman also commended St.
Croix County governments on their efforts regarding the management and
preservation efforts with this corridor.
Pederson gave an overview of where the state is at in the 35/64 plans.
Through maps they discussed the layout of the roadway, proposed
interchanges, overpasses, grade separations, local road alterations, STH
35 rerouting, and the multi -government actions needed for each of the
three alternatives. Concerns being addressed in the alternatives
include safety, traffic congestion, land use, access, cost of
intersections and overheads, emergency vehicle use, and future
developments.
Beekman and Pederson discussed the proposed time -line on local
improvements with each alternative. The time -line of action will be
dependant on many factors but they vary from initially impacted road
construction, to delayed improvements, to maybe_ no improvements
depending on growth.
Beekman noted that the state agrees that not providing at grade
intersections makes sense, as there is no question that it would be a
much safer facility. The consensus of the group is to pursue the
freeway concept.
JOINT TRANSPORTATION/PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES Page 2
March 27, 1996
With the best interest to the general public in mind, each entity voiced
their preferred alternative. All entities supported the 150th Avenue
alternative as the preferred option.
With public information meetings being the next step for the' -project,
the Town of St. Joseph volunteered their facilities. The group
scheduled the public informational meeting at the Town of St. Joseph
town hall on May 7, 1996 at 8:00 P.M. with an alternate date of May 14,
1996.
Ad-iournment: A motion was made by Raymond, seconded by Menter, to
adjourn at 9:00 P.M. Motion carried.
PLANNING & EVELOPM /NTCOMMITTEE
SECRETARY