City of Oak Creek

Common Council Report

Meeting Date:  May 1, 2007

Item No.:  18

Recommendation:  That the Council adopt Resolution No. 10762-050107 endorsing Elm Road Interchange On Alignment 02 (Exhibit F) as the preferred design alternative.

Background Staff has been working with the Wisconsin Department of Transportation to review possible alignments for the relocated 27th Street interchange with Interstate 94.  The interchange is being relocated to the north, in the vicinity of Elm Road in order to minimize the impact upon the environmental corridor adjacent to the Root River.

Cost:

The cost of the interchange itself, and the connection west to STH 241 (27th Street) will be the responsibility of State, since it is replacing an existing interchange.  However the cost of the connector street east to 13th Street (should the City choose to construct it) would be a local cost.  The costs associated with an “off-Elm” alignment would be greater, given the need to acquire additional right of way.

Alignment:

The alternate alignments can generally be categorized in two groups; those aligning with Elm Road and those diverting south of Elm Road.  The “off-alignment” alternatives (Exhibits A-C) would all place the connector road with the interchange south of the existing Elm Road.  While this would eliminate the absolute need to acquire the existing residences on Elm Road, it would add significant cost, given the additional right of way needed.  It would also present less development potential for the abutting properties, since much of the adjoining property would be owned by Milwaukee County as part of the Root River environmental corridor.  These alternatives also would greatly restrict the ability of the Elm Road connector to service lands to the east of 13th Street, since it would terminate at the facilities of PPG.

Staff has met with local management from PPG to discuss the alternative alignments.  PPG has acquired several properties in the vicinity of their facility.  They have no plans to develop the properties at this time.  They were mainly acquired as a buffer to their facility.  They did not rule out the possibility of development in conjunction with the new interchange, but reiterated that it would need to be development that is compatible with their facility.  And even then, they would propose to maintain some type of buffer.  Those discussions also identified the potential to extend Elm Road east to Howell Avenue at some point in the future.  PPG reiterated their desire not to develop immediately adjacent to the facility, but also left the door open for a roadway at the north edge of their facilities.

One positive aspect of the “off-alignment” alternatives is that it would require less right of way on the west side of the interstate, which would preserve more land for development in the 27th Street corridor.

The “on-alignment” alternatives (Exhibits C-F) use (to varying degrees) the existing right of way for Elm Road.  The use of the existing right of way would likely be less costly, but would also impact the greatest number of residents.  However, any of these alternatives would likely present opportunities for the existing property owners to market their properties for development that would be compatible with the future interchange and connector street.

There have been two (2) neighborhood meetings with nearby property owners on these alignments with the most recent meeting being held on Tuesday, April 24, 2007.  At that meeting residents expressed concerns with having a connector to S. 13^th Street running in front of their properties.  Primarily they were concerned with the loss of property due to right-of-way acquisition, the ability to sell their homes with a 4-lane road in front of it, and the amount of traffic it would generate. 

Staff had recommended that the Plan Commission adopt the On Alignment 01 (Exhibit E) as the preferred design alternative.  After hearing the concerns of the neighbors about this alternative the Plan Commission ultimately decided to recommend that the Common Council endorse On Alignment 02 (Exhibit F).  The property owners in the area also stated that this was the least objectionable layout.

The City is not obligated to construct the connector from the interchange to 13th Street.  But it is important that consideration be given to the alignment in order that the State can proceed towards the upcoming public information meetings with a preferred concept from the City.

Fiscal Impact:  The endorsement of a preferred alignment will have a negligible fiscal impact.

Prepared by: Doug Seymour, AICP Director of Community Development

Respectfully submitted, Patrick DeGrave City Administrator

Fiscal Review by:

Beverly A. Buretta, CMC

City Clerk