Hwy 63 - Spring Valley Reconstruction

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin Email this link

View full-sized imageWe are planning to reconstruct portions of Hwy 16/Hwy 63 and make ADA improvements.

Improvements include:

Hwy 16/Hwy 63: Tracy Rd. to Griswold St. (Orange section)

  • Remove the road and replace it with new materials
  • Resolve drainage issues
  • Address safety concerns at several intersections
  • Replace sidewalks and make ADA updates
  • Improve pedestrian connections by constructing new sidewalks in locations where they do not currently exist

Hwy 63/Section Ave: Hwy 16/Hwy 63 intersection to Co. Rd. 12 (Blue section)

  • Pedestrian facility and ADA improvements
  • Sidewalk repairs
  • Improve drainage issues
  • Please note, at this time, this section will not receive changes to the roadway

Hwy 16/63 Residents Opinions

During the July 2023 community survey, we heard concerns about impacts to residents and property owners between Tracy Rd. and Griswold St. We began an effort to directly contact those individuals, inform them and gather their thoughts.

On December 7, 2023, we hosted a meeting for those individuals. You’re invited to review what we learned.

Individuals who missed this opportunity are encouraged to contact Cindy Morgan at Cindy.Morgan@state.mn.us or 507-951-6593.

View full-sized imageWe are planning to reconstruct portions of Hwy 16/Hwy 63 and make ADA improvements.

Improvements include:

Hwy 16/Hwy 63: Tracy Rd. to Griswold St. (Orange section)

  • Remove the road and replace it with new materials
  • Resolve drainage issues
  • Address safety concerns at several intersections
  • Replace sidewalks and make ADA updates
  • Improve pedestrian connections by constructing new sidewalks in locations where they do not currently exist

Hwy 63/Section Ave: Hwy 16/Hwy 63 intersection to Co. Rd. 12 (Blue section)

  • Pedestrian facility and ADA improvements
  • Sidewalk repairs
  • Improve drainage issues
  • Please note, at this time, this section will not receive changes to the roadway

Hwy 16/63 Residents Opinions

During the July 2023 community survey, we heard concerns about impacts to residents and property owners between Tracy Rd. and Griswold St. We began an effort to directly contact those individuals, inform them and gather their thoughts.

On December 7, 2023, we hosted a meeting for those individuals. You’re invited to review what we learned.

Individuals who missed this opportunity are encouraged to contact Cindy Morgan at Cindy.Morgan@state.mn.us or 507-951-6593.
  • Summary: Hwy 16/63 resident opinions, Dec. 2023

    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin Email this link

    During the July 2023 community survey, we heard concern about impacts to residents and property owners between Tracy Rd. and Griswold St. We began an effort to directly contact residents and property owners to inform them and gather their thoughts.

    Two letters were sent to each resident and/or property owner. Information about the project was provided. People were asked to attend a Dec. 7, 2023, meeting. The letter also provided instructions on how to share their input if they were not able to make the meeting. We know that not everyone received the letters or participated. Individuals who missed this opportunity are encouraged to contact Cindy Morgan at Cindy.Morgan@state.mn.us or 507-951-6593.

    During the Dec. 7, meeting we provided a presentation on the proposed improvements, schedule, and design options under consideration. Below is a summary of the feedback we received.

    Design options:

    Residents/property owners were asked to provide feedback on their preferred design and rank the importance of corridor issues. Option D was the most preferred. Option A was the least preferred.

    Most preferred: Option D
    View larger image
    • No parking on either side or the road
    • A wide shoulder for bicyclists on both sides of the road
      • This would also benefit wider vehicles such as agriculture equipment
    • Sidewalks on both sides of the road
    • The narrowing of the road will naturally signal to drivers to slow down
    • This option has minor impacts to property
      • To allow for these roadway features and correct drainage issues, the construction limits (yellow line) would remain close to the right of way (red dashed line) on both sides of the road. This decreases the likelihood that property owners would experience impacts to their property

    2nd preferred: Option C


    View larger image
    • Parking on one side of the road and a wide shoulder for bicyclists on the other
      • This would also benefit wider vehicles such as agriculture equipment
    • Sidewalks on both sides of the road
    • A slightly narrower road would naturally indicate to drivers to slow down
    • This option has some impacts to property
      • To allow for these roadway features and correct drainage issues, the construction limits (yellow line) would extend beyond the right of way (red dashed line) on one side of the road. The construction limits would be closer to the right of way on the other side. This increases the likelihood that property owners would experience impacts to their property, but only on one side of the highway


    3rd preferred: Option B
    View larger image
    • Parking on one side of the road
    • A sidewalk one side and a multi-use trail on the other
    • A slightly narrower road would naturally indicate to drivers to slow down
    • This option has some impacts to property
      • To allow for these roadway features and correct drainage issues, the construction limits (yellow line) would extend beyond the right of way (red dashed line) on one side of the road. The construction limits would be closer to the right of way on the other side. This increases the likelihood that property owners would experience impacts to their property, but only on one side of the highway

    Least preferred: Option A
    View larger image
    • Parking available on both sides of road
    • Sidewalk available on both sides of road
    • Maintains the current width of the road. Number of speeding vehicles would likely not change
    • This option would have significant impacts to property
      • To allow for these roadway features and correct drainage issues, the construction limits (yellow line) would extend beyond the right of way (red dashed line). This increases the likelihood that property owners would experience impacts to their property on both sides of the highway

    Corridor issues:

    Ranked by feedback from most important to least important

    1. Pedestrian/sidewalk improvements
    2. Traffic calming/reducing speeds
    3. Freight/agricultural traffic
    4. On-street parking - one or both sides
    5. Minimize impacts to property and/or vegetation
    6. Bicyclists/bike facilities

    Comments:

    Please note, this is not a full list of all comments received.

    • Some expressed that there are no existing bike facilities to connect to on the ends of the corridor. They suggest ensuring those issues are also addressed if bike facilities are installed with this project
    • Bike facilities would not be used on such a busy road
    • Concerns about safety, especially large truck traffic, improper lane use, and winter maintenance
    • Some noted a need for parking for emergency, garbage and delivery vehicles
    • Others noted that parking is not needed and/or is not safe on this highway
    • Request for new/better street lighting
    • Suggestion to add turn lanes
    • Acknowledgement of issues at major intersections and support for a change
  • Summary: Community survey, July 2023

    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin Email this link

    Thank you to everyone who participated in the community survey. The online survey was open from June - August 2023, and over 130 surveys were completed. Project staff also collected feedback from community members at a Wednesdays on Broadway event. Corridor maps and design options were available for review and comment.

    Roadway design

    Participants reviewed four different roadway design options and were asked to rate their satisfaction with each. The options showed different roadway elements (e.g., lane widths, parking and wide vs. narrow shoulders) and pedestrian/bicycle elements (e.g., sidewalks, shared use path, and bikeable shoulders). Option D was the preferred design.

    Option D features included:

    • No parking on either side or the road
    • A wide shoulder for bicyclists on both sides of the road
    • Sidewalks on both sides of the road
    • The narrowing of the road will naturally signal to drivers to slow down
    • This option has minor impacts to property
      • To allow for these roadway features and correct drainage issues, the construction limits (yellow line) would remain close to the right of way (red dashed line) on both sides of the road. This decreases the likelihood that property owners would experience impacts to their property


    View full-sized image

    Survey results and summary of comments

    • Most respondents use the corridor daily for commuting purposes or to visit a local business
    • Comments relating to current and future safety conditions were made throughout the survey
    • 80% of participants agree the sidewalks need to be improved
    • 23% of people feel a bike lane/bikeable shoulder is necessary
    • Parking along Highway 16/63 does not appear to be a priority to the community and could be removed or reduced to one side of the roadway
    • Turn lanes should be considered as traffic is often traveling too fast through the corridor and turning traffic or parked cars create conflict
    • Wider shoulders would also be helpful as farm equipment periodically uses the corridor, but would need to be balanced against impacts on traffic speeds
    • There is a strong consensus that trees and landscaping need to be preserved or replaced with future roadway improvements. Comments noted the existing, mature trees make the roadway beautiful and provide shade and aesthetic benefits.

    Comments on current conditions

    • A majority of participants did not see a need for parking. Limited on-street parking was suggested
    • Existing sidewalks need to be replaced. Closing gaps in the sidewalk system will increase safety
    • Several respondents support bike trails, but feel it would be safer to have a multi-use trail separated from the street
    • Existing trees should be preserved, if possible, or replaced. Impact to property owners should be minimized
    • Controlling traffic speed is a priority due to pedestrians, bicyclists, turning traffic and farm vehicles
    • Children walk along or cross this section of roadway. Current conditions are not safe

    Community priorities

    Community members identifies these as the most important corridor issues:

    1. Pedestrian/sidewalk improvements
    2. Freight/agriculture traffic
    3. Reducing the speed of vehicles

    Community members identified these as the most important design features:

    1. Sidewalk and trails
    2. Wide shoulders
    3. Landscape boulevard, trees and/or green space

    Thank you again to everyone who participated. The project team will take this feedback and use it to help guide the design of the corridor.

    If you missed the deadline and would like to submit a comment, please reach out to Cindy Morgan at Cindy.Morgan@state.mn.us or 507-951-6593.


  • Project goal: Improve sidewalks, drainage

    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin Email this link

    This project will remove the entire road and replace it with new materials. MnDOT will also construct new curbs, gutters, and sidewalks.

    Improving the sidewalks and the drainage of the roadway is also a vital goal of the project.

    Existing roadway

    The image below shows and example cross section of the current roadway. The steep slopes in portions of the corridor create drainage issues. Some pedestrians find them difficult to navigate. Also, the sidewalks are not ADA compliant.

    Flattening the corridor will fix drainage issues. The sidewalks will also become ADA compliant.


    View larger-image

    Design Standards


    The team is designing the road to meet these standards:

    Roadways

    • The slope across the driving lane should not exceed 2.5%.
    • The slope across the parking lane should not exceed 5.0%.

    Sidewalks and crosswalks:

    • The slopes of sidewalks in the direction of travel cannot be more than 5.0%. (0.6 inch of rise for every foot of travel)
    • The slope across a sidewalk cannot be more than 2.0%. (0.24 inch of rise for every foot across)

    Curb ramps:

    • The slope of the curb ramps in the direction of travel cannot be more than 8.3%. (1.0 inch of rise for every foot of travel)
    • The slope across the curb ramp cannot be more than 2.0%. (0.24 inch of rise for every foot across)
    View larger-image

    Construction impact

    Regrading is needed to achieve these goals. If the footprint of the current roadway is kept, the grading will be extensive. It will also have the most impact people's property. If the footprint of the future roadway is reduced, then the grading will be less extensive. There would be less impact to people's property.


Page last updated: 23 Feb 2024, 11:57 AM