Public Improvement & Transportation Committee

MINUTES PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT/TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE MEETING FEBRUARY 10, 2026 3:30 PM MEMBERS PRESENT: Craig Schafer, James Lozinski, John Alcorn MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Jason Anderson, Director of Public Works/City Engineer; Eric Hanson, Assistant City Engineer; Geoff Stelter, Senior Engineering Specialist; E.J. Moberg, Director of Administrative Services Call to Order Schafer called the meeting to order at 3:28 pm. 1. Approval of Minutes MOTION MADE BY ALCORN to approve the minutes of the January 13, 2026, meeting as presented, SECOND BY LOZINSKI. ALL VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION PASSED 3:0. 2. Project ST-014 (139-122-009/139-124-005): S 4th & Country Club Intersection Reconfiguration and Reconstruction - Review of Proposals The item was presented to the PI/T Committee again on 01/13/2026 to discuss the process for selecting an engineering consultant, and staff would like to send to a couple of firms and requested the PI/T Committee to assist with consultant selection. At the meeting, the Committee recommended that City staff move forward with requesting engineering proposals for design of the project and convene the Proposal Review Committee once all proposals are submitted. Subsequently, proposals were requested from two engineering firms in mid-January with proposals returned by February 5th. Proposals were provided to the Proposal Review Committee, which are the three members of the PI/T Committee and two Public Works staff members (Eric Hanson and Geoff Stelter). The Review Committee was given the two proposals to read and a score sheet to privately rank engineering proposals. SEH previously conducted the Intersection Control Evaluation of the area. Schafer stated SEH hired in the past and when interfacing with MnDOT on other projects. Anderson and Schafer summarized proposals and team members of the consultant firms. Hanson indicated SEH more aggressive in the timeline, which City staff was comfortable with. Proposal fees were revealed. SEH was the low proposal. Engineering fees for design typically range 8% to 15%, depending on the complexity of the project or design, and typically 10-12% range is common, and the fees are typical related to project costs. Also, this is a State Aid project, so we can use State Aid funds to help cover these engineering fees. Hanson indicated with the funding received, there's a little more detailed plan set than we typically put together, and State Aid review and federal review requires that. We are still doing the project memo in-house, which is the federal environmental paperwork. Lozinski inquired if SEH only incurs 1,200 hours if that is what City would be billed. Anderson and Hanson indicated that is what the contract will read. Alcorn inquired what would happen if they go over the hours. Anderson explained hourly, not-to-exceed contracts, and the only way the consultant can get additional funding is by coming back the City explaining, for example, if something unforeseen happened which justifies the additional fees, which does sometimes happen. Schafer commented on discussions with constituents and cost concern, which is still tax dollars, but explained the need to clean up these intersections and this is the best way to bring to fruition. Anderson stated the intent of the project is to use concrete pavement, concrete roundabout, concrete 4th Street to College Drive. Anderson reiterated we have received $824,000 in federal grants which will helps defer some of the costs from our State Aid. Schafer inquired on timeline to go to Council. Alcorn questioned if there was a budget for this project. Anderson said it is a $3.15 million estimate for the project, including engineering and construction costs. Moberg indicated this project is not part of the bonding for this year. PI/T – 02/10/2026 -1- After review and closing discussion on the item, MOTION MADE BY LOZINSKI, SECOND BY ALCORN that the Committee recommend award of the proposal for the above-referenced project to SEH of Mankato, Minnesota, in the not-to-exceed amount of $244,850. ALL VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION PASSED 3:0. 2. Review and Discuss US 59 Truck Bypass Anderson presented the item. This item was brought before the PI/T Committee on 1/13/2026. City staff had been asked to consider requesting a US 59 truck bypass to route heavy truck traffic around Marshall on MN 23 to CR 33. The request began as a discussion between a Planning Commission member and City Engineer over a year ago. After discussion, City staff brought forward the request to the traffic engineer’s office of MnDOT District 8. City posed the question in spring 2025 of whether it was possible to sign a truck bypass and what that process would look like. The response that City staff received indicated that the MnDOT traffic office did not believe that signing a US 59 truck bypass would significantly reduce truck traffic along the corridor. The shortest truck bypass would add 2.1 miles to the journey, as it would route US 59 traffic around Marshall on MN 23 and then back to US 59 on CR 33. Further, MnDOT traffic officials were concerned that creating a bypass route could create some confusion with the traveling public as MN 23 carries quite a bit of through truck traffic, and also additional signage at the signalized intersection of MN 23/US 59 isn’t desirable. In their view, the signage may cause more disruption and confusion and the benefit just isn’t there due to the route being so much longer and less direct and intuitive. The purpose of discussing this item is to assist in determining the level of interest in this topic amongst City Council members. City staff believes we may have discussed this topic at a past PI/T Committee meeting, but we are not finding record of the discussion in our minutes to verify this. While City staff is sympathetic to the idea that there is too much truck traffic through downtown Marshall, we do understand the response from the MnDOT traffic engineers and their belief that the signing of a truck bypass will likely be ineffective at best, and may cause driver confusion at worst. This item was presented to the PI/T Committee on 01/13/2026, and the Committee recommended no action through the MnDOT regarding this item and table the item. PI/T Committee did suggest a conversation with MnDOT regarding possibility of signing 25 mph speed limit through downtown and perhaps some signage to encourage the through truck traffic to use the “inside” lanes. City staff did follow-up with this request and received a response from the MnDOT District 8 Traffic Engineer. The traffic office believes that 30 mph is the right speed through Marshall. During busy times of day with a lot of parking, traffic, right turning traffic, and pedestrian activity, operating speeds in the right lanes are closer to 25 mph. Conversely, during off-peak times, operating speeds in the left lanes are likely closer to 35 mph. Overall, 30 mph is a reasonable balance across conditions. Regarding truck lane use signage, the traffic office does not support this for a trunk highway because the MUTCD (federal highway signage guidance) does not have a standard sign for this use. Even if a sign did exist, it would be difficult to justify its use based on impractical enforcement, legitimate need for a truck to use the right lanes, and competing demands for attention in a downtown setting (other signs, signals, vehicles, pedestrians, people exiting parked vehicles, etc). Schafer gave a history and background of this issue and the reasoning for bringing this discussion back to the PI/T Committee. Schafer had received many concerns about the truck traffic through the downtown and understood there are situations where if should be safer and when questioned and didn't have a good answer regarding reroute or truck route. There was concern of signage that was impossible to enforce and don’t want our officers running traffic and unable to enforce a 25 mph zone. Anderson held discussions with MnDOT as noted. As a committee, we've done due diligence, brought those concerns forward, and we have decent and understandable answers now. A hard bypass is expensive and infeasible. The other side of it is concerns about the loss of downtown traffic for the businesses. Schafer wanted the discussion in a public forum and actually have the discussion to be journaled in the minutes. Lozinski commented on obvious bypass would be routing US 59 traffic along MN 23 to CR 8 in Green Valley. Anderson had discussed this in the past with Aaron VanMoer, Lyon County Highway Engineer, and he was uncomfortable with allowing that on his County highway because Green Valley and the residents up there would have concerns with Marshall pushing our traffic through there. That was the route Anderson originally started with and the State was also uncomfortable with that particular route as well. The State also thought this would cause confusion with 23 being a significant kind of interregional highway and adding signs along there and what quantity. Anderson also offered that the intersection of TH 59 and CR 33 is not ideal for another 400 trucks. MOTION MADE BY ALCORN that Committee recommends no further action through MnDOT regarding this item, SECOND BY LOZINSKI. ALL VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION PASSED 3:0. Other Business PI/T – 02/10/2026 -2- Lozinski initiated a discussion on City use of the Lyon County fuel tank usage. The city now pays $0.15/gallon over and above the County’s cost to purchase fuel. Lozinski inquired on timing of getting a City-owned system and would it be cost-effective. Significant discussion was held on the cost and feasibility of creating a City-owned and operated fueling site. The Airport and Street Department already operate some tanks to better manage operations. Moberg gave historical City usage by department. Lozinski commented on negotiating with local gas stations as an additional option that could be continually evaluated and considered. This was a discussion item only. No voting occurred on this item. Adjourn Being no further business, MOTION MADE BY LOZINSKI to adjourn the meeting, SECOND BY ALCORN. ALL VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION PASSED 3:0. Meeting adjourned at 4:14 pm. Respectfully submitted, Lona Rae Konold, Administrative Assistant PI/T – 02/10/2026 -3-