HomeMy WebLinkAbout6.j. Reduction in Hours for Community Development Staff4ROSEMOUNTEXECUTIVE SUMMARY
CITY COUNCIL
City Council Meeting: June 1, 2010
AGENDA ITEM: Reduction in Hours for Community
AGENDA SECTION:
Development Department Staff
Consent
PREPARED BY: Kim Lindquist, Community Development
AGENDA NO.
Director
ATTACHMENTS: MOU
APPROVED BY:
D
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Approve the Memorandum of Understanding
Between the City of Rosemount and AFSCME #3857
Optional Additional Motion: Motion to approve a notice of layoff for in the Community
Development Department with one full week of pay for each full year of employment with
the Cit y but not to exceed six weeks.
ISSUE
With a reduction in overall development in the community there is a workload issue in the Community
Development Department. It has been discussed with the Council to provide an opportunity for
employees in the department to have a reduced hours work week and still provide full insurance benefits
to the employees. A memorandum of understanding has been drafted which reflect that benefit change as
it relates to the union represented in the department. The MOU was written by the City attorney. At
present, there have not been enough people participating in the program to fulfill the hours reduction goal
for the department. Should additional participation not occur by the Council meeting, staff may be
recommending the additional optional action item above.
The attached Memorandum of Understanding (MOLD was approved by the AFSCME union in a recent
vote. Staff is requesting the Council, by motion, approve the same MOU.
RECOMMENDATION
Motion to approve the Memorandum of Understanding between the City of Rosemount and AFSCME
#3857 and take additional action if recommended at the meeting.
ROSEM0UNTEXECUTIVE SUMMARY
CITY COUNCIL
i
City Council Meeting: June 1, 2010
AGENDA -ITEM: Reduction in Hours for Community -
AGENDA SECTION:
Development Department Staff
New Business
PREPARED BY: Kim Lindquist, Community Development
AGENDA NO.
Director
ATTACHMENTS: MOU _7
APPROVED BY:
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Approve the Memorandum of Understanding
Between the City'of Rosemount and AFSCME #3857
AND
Motion to approve a notice of layoff for the least senior Building Inspector in the Community
Development Department with one -full week of pay for each full year of employment with
the City but not to exceed six weeks.
ISSUE
With 'a reduction in overall development in the community there is a workload issue in the Community
Development Department. It has been discussed with the Council to provide an'opportunity for
' employees in the department to have a reduced hours work week and still provide full insurance benefits
to the employees. A memorandum of understanding has been drafted which reflect "that benefit change as
it relates to the union represented in the department.. The MOU was written by the City attorney. At
present, there have not been enough people participating in the program to fulfill the hours reduction goal
for the department. Should additional participation not occur by the Council meeting, staff may be
recommending the additional optional action item above.
The attached Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) was approved by the AFSCME union in a recent
vote. Staff is requesting the Council, by motion, approve the same MOU.
RECOMMENDATION
Motion to approve the Memorandum of Understanding between the City of Rosemount and AFSCME
#3857 and take additional action if recommended at the meeting.
After the noon deadline for participation in the hours reduction program, there were no changes%
to the amount of participation. For that reason, it is recommended that the Council approve the
second motion to approve a layoff notice for the least senior building inspector. Based upon the
AFSCME union contract- "seniority will be the determining criterion for transfers, promotions and
lay offs when the job relevant qualification factors between employees are equal." Due to current
staffing, there are three employees whose primary duties and responsibilities are building
inspection and plan review. With the decrease in workload, the redundancies in the building
inspection positions (building inspectors and building official) allows the City to continue to L
meeting current workload needs with one less person:
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
BETWEEN
THE CITY OF ROSEMOUNT
AND
AMERICAN FEDERATION OF STATE COUNTY
AND MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES, LOCAL NO. 3857
This is an Agreement entered into between American Federation of State County and Municipal
Employees, Local No. 3857 (AFSCME Local 3857) and the City of Rosemount (Employer):
WHEREAS, AFSCME Local 3857 is the certified exclusive representative for the City
employees in the specified bargaining unit; and
WHEREAS, the parties have negotiated and agreed upon the following terms and
condition of employment for the bargaining unit employees:
NOW, THEREFORE, it is mutually understood and agreed to as follows:
1. Employees in the Community Development Department are being offered the
opportunity to reduce their hours per week from 40 hours to 32 -36 hours.
2. Employees who apply for and the City approves for the reduction from 40 hours
to 32 -36 hours per week are also offered the continuation of full health, dental and
life insurance during the time when the reduced hours apply, commencing on
June 7, 2010, and continuing up to but no longer than April 1, 2011, in the
discretion of the City. Sick and vacation leave will be consistent with personnel
policy and AFSCME agreement. This Memorandum of Understanding does not
change the seniority or longevity pay provisions of the Labor Agreement.
3. It is understood and agreed that the City retains the right in its discretion to
approve or disapprove each employee's application for this reduced hours
program, based on the needs of the City.
4. The parties agree that the Memorandum of Understanding does not set a
precedent or establish a practice relevant to any future issues or disputes.
IN WITNESS THEREOF, the parties acknowledge that they have read the foregoing
Agreement and, by signing, hereby affirm that they fully understand and agree to its terms and
application.
CITY OF ROSEMOUNT
Date:
Mayor
Date:
City Administrator
3669270 AIL RS'_ 1 i -10
FLoc 857
Date: ,--
gent
i
Date:
;inignPr i
4ROSEMOUNTEXECUTIVE SUMMARY
CITY COUNCIL
City Council Meeting: June 1, 2010
AGENDA ITEM: Rosemount/Empire /UMORE County
AGENDA SECTION:
Transportation Corridor Study
New Business
PREPARED BY: Andrew J. Brotzler, PE, Director of Pu
Works /City Engineer
AGENDA NO. q, 0 ,
Kim Lindquist, Community Developmenp
Director
ATTACHMENTS: Report; Resolution
APPROVED BY:
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to adopt a resolution accepting the Dakota County
Rosemou nt/Empire/U More Area Transportation System Study.
BACKGROUND:
As part of the preliminary discussions for the future development of the UMore Park property located in
Rosemount and Empire Township, it was determined that the preparation of a corridor study through this
area was warranted. As the area has existed primarily as agricultural in use with no plans for development
until recently, Dakota County's Transportation Plan had limited projections for the future development of
this area. In addition, the one future county road extension identified through the property was in conflict
with the recently created Vermillion Highlands Wildlife Management Area in Empire Township.
Based on the above, Dakota County initiated the preparation of a corridor study to review the future east -
west and north -south corridor needs through the area. The City's financial responsibility of 22.5% of the
study cost is to be paid by the University of Minnesota.
The technical group was comprised of staff from the following agencies and firms:
• Dakota County (Transportation, Planning, Parks)
• City of Rosemount
• Empire Township
• University of Minnesota
• Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
• CH2M Hill (Consultant for study)
The group began meeting in December, 2009 with monthly meetings through the completion of the final
draft in March, 2010. As part of the study process, three public open houses were conducted.
The most significant corridors for the City are the ultimate alignment of County Road 46 (160d' Street) and
a future connection of Biscayne Avenue to County Road 73 (Akron Avenue). With the limited
opportunities to expand TH 3 in the future, a north -south corridor that connects Biscayne Avenue in
Empire Township to County Road 73 (Akron Avenue) in Rosemount has been identified as a potential
1
G:\ENGPROJ\ENG 0138 - MORE DEVELOPMENMMore Corridor Study \060110 CC Wore Corridor Study.doc
reliever for TES 3 in the future.
The corridor study will be used as a guide for the future development of properties within the study area
for the preservation and establishment of transportation corridors. All partners in the corridor study have
been asked to take formal action on the study. To -date the County, Empire Township and the University
of Minnesota have taken formal action.
SUMMARY:
At this time, Staff recommends that Council accept the Dakota County Rosemount /Empire /UMore Area
Transportation System Study.
2
CITY OF ROSEMOUNT
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 2010 —
A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE DAKOTA COUNTY
ROSEMOUNT /EMPIRE /UMORE AREA TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STUDY
WHEREAS, the City of Rosemount has participated closely with Dakota County, Empire
Township, the University of Minnesota and the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources in the
development of the "Rosemount /Empire /UMore Area Transportation System Study "; and
WHEREAS, the purpose of the study is to identify and preserve long -range corridors for east -west
and north -south traffic movement in and around UMore Park and Vermillion Highlands; and
WHEREAS, there is flexibility for specific road alignments in the future, provided the general
corridors are preserved for connections to and continuation of the alignments illustrated in the
"Rosemount /Empire /UMore Area Transportation System Study "; and
WHEREAS, the Dakota County "Rosemount /Empire /UMore Area Transportation System Study"
is an effective tool for long -range transportation planning.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, the City Council of the City of Rosemount accepts
the Dakota County "Rosemount /Empire /UMore Area Transportation System Study" and directs
that the primary plan components and transportation corridors be included in future updates of City
of Rosemount Comprehensive Guide Plan and future updates of the City of Rosemount
Transportation Plan.
Adopted this 1" day of June, 2010.
William H. Droste, Mayor
ATTEST:
Amy Domeier, City Clerk
Prepared by:
ROSEMOUNTIEMPIREMMOREAREA TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STUDY REPORT
Table of Contents
1.0 Introduction ...................................................................................................... ..............................1
1.1 Study Area ................................................................................................ ..............................1
1.2 Study Background ................................................................................... ..............................1
1.2.1 Purpose of Study and Anticipated Study Outcomes ............... ..............................1
1.2.2 Relation to Other Studies & Development Planned within Study Area .............. l
1.2.3 Existing and Forecast Traffic Volumes and
Regional Transportation System Needs ................................... ............................... 2
1.3 Supporting Roadway Network ............................................................ ............................... 3
1.3.1 Roadway Functional Classification Guidelines ....................... ............................... 3
1.3.2 Existing Roadway Network Functional Classification ........... ............................... 4
1.3.3 Recommended General Transportation System
(Not Specific Corridor Alignments ..................................................... ............................... 4
2.0 Study Phases, Schedule, and Stakeholder Involvement ........................... ............................... 5
2.1 Study Phases and Schedule ................................................................... ............................... 5
2.2.1 Project Management Team (PMT) ............................................. ............................... 5
2.2.2 Public Involvement ...................................................................... ............................... 5
3.0 Corridor Option Evaluation Criteria ........................................................... ............................... 5
4.0 Development of Transportation Corridor Options ................................... ............................... 6
4.1 Initial Universe of East -West Corridor Options ................................. ............................... 6
4.2 Initial Universe of North -South Corridor Options ............................ ............................... 7
5.0 Alignment Option Evaluation and Refinement ......................................... ............................... 8
5.1 Step 1: "Fatal Flaw" Alignment Option Evaluation .......................... ............................... 8
5.2 Step 2: Corridor Level Evaluation and Continued Alignment Refinement ................10
5.3 Step 3: System Level Evaluation ........................................................... .............................13
6.0 Final Corridor Alignment Recommendations and Roadway Characteristics ....................13
7.0 Activities to Implement Recommended Alignments ................................ .............................16
7.1 Activities and Timing to Implement Recommendations .................. .............................16
7.2 Right -of -Way Acquisition ..................................................................... .............................16
7.3 Context - Sensitive Solution Considerations ........................................ .............................16
8.0 Other Transportation Considerations ........:................................................. .............................17
8.1 Supporting Local Road System, Intersection Spacing, and
Other Possible Roadway Projects ............................................................... .............................17
8.2 Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities .......................................................... .............................18
8.3 Future Transit Service ............................................................................ .............................18
TABLE OF CONTENTS - PAGE 1 OF 2
ROSEWOUNT /EMPIRE /UMOREAREA TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STUDY REPORT
Tables
Table 1— Spacing Guidelines for Functionally Classified Roads ................... ............................... 3
Table 2 — Recommended Transportation System Summary .......................... ............................... 4
Table 3 — Open House Dates and Key Objectives ............................................ ............................... 5
Table 4 —Evaluation Categories and Criteria ................................................... ............................... 6
Table 5 — Fatal Flaw Analysis — Findings and
Corridors Eliminated from Further Consideration ......................................... ............................... 9
Table 6— Corridor Level Evaluation .................................................................. .............................11
Table 7 -3rd Level Evaluation Results ............................................................... .............................14
Figures
Summary of Recommended Regional Arterial Corridors ............................ ............................... III
<<<Note: Study Figures will be integrated into the report upon report finalization >>>
Figure 1, Study Area Location ............................................................................ ............................... x
Figure 2, Study Area Daily Traffic Volumes .................................................... ............................... x
Figure 3, Functionally Classified Roadway System ........................................ ............................... x
Figure 4, Recommended Transportation System ............................................. ............................... x
Figure5, Study Schedule ..................................................................................... ............................... x
Figure 6, PMT Member Roles and Responsibilities ......................................... ............................... x
Figure 7, Universe of Alternatives, East/ West Corridor Options ................. ............................... x
Figure 8, Universe of Alternatives, North /South Corridor Options ............ ............................... x
Figure 9, East-West Corridor Options Remaining after First Level Evaluation ......................... x
Figure 10, North -South Corridor Options Remaining after First Level Evaluation .................. x
Figure 11, Remaining & Refined Regional, Arterial Corridor Options,
Engineered to Defined Design Criteria ................................................ ............................... x
Figure 12, Known Plant and Animal Resources .............................................. ............................... x
Figure13, Hydric Soils ......................................................................................... ............................... x
Figure 14, East-West Regional Arterial Corridor Options Final Evaluation Results ................. x
Figure 15, North -South Arterial Corridor Options Final Evaluation Results ............................. x
Figure 16, Recommended Regional Transportation System .......................... ............................... x
Figure 17, Representative Cross - sections
Figure 18, Context Sensitive Solutions .............................................................. ............................... x
TABLE OF CONTENTS - PAGE 2 OF 2
Executive Summary
Dakota County, the City of Rosemount, Empire Township, the University of Minnesota, the
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR), and the Minnesota Department of
Transportation (Mn /DOT) have spent several months planning for the future transportation
needs for a study area that includes Wore Park, Vermillion Highlands, and a new regional
park. The end result is a recommended transportation system that will meet the needs of the
travelling public into the future and allow for phased implementation, in response to future
development.
Prior to implementation, this study will serve as a planning tool for communities and
agencies with interests in the area. The recommendations will assist Dakota County, the
City of Rosemount, Empire Township, the University of Minnesota, and the Minnesota
Department of Natural Resources (Mn /DNR) with prioritizing future improvements,
coordinating roadway system needs with development and land use needs, and with right -
of -way preservation.
The recommendations of this study include:
• The regional arterial road network as shown on the Recommended Regional Arterial
Corridors map will serve as a planning tool for this area as it develops. This
recommended system will be used by study partners and surrounding communities
as land use and transportation plans are implemented.
The roadway system recommended in this study will form a "back bone" arterial
network. This network was developed using the best information available for a long-
term corridor planning study. The recommended corridors may be refined in
response to changing circumstances and new information. Any refined corridors
would undergo the same level of evaluation as was completed for the recommended
corridors.
Each of the agencies involved should update comprehensive and /or transportation plans to
properly reflect the study recommendations and subsequent planning activities. This
includes the Concept Plan for UMore Park.
Implementation of the recommended regional arterial corridors in the study area will be
coordinated with development as it occurs. Any activities /changes made within Vermillion
Highlands should also take the recommended regional arterial corridors into account.
Through these processes, the following Transportation System Summary recommendations
should be considered:
ROSEMOUNT /EMPIRENMORE AREA TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STUDY REPORT
MARCH 2010
Recommended Transportation System Summary
Corridor
Existing # of
Regional Lanes
Recommended # of Regional
Lanes
Required # of New
Lanes
East/West Corridors
6- to 8 -Lanes
CSAH 42
4 -lanes
4- to 6 -lanes
0- to 2 -lanes
CSAH 46
2 -lanes
4- to 6 -lanes
2- to 4 -lanes
CSAH 66/200"' St.
2 -lanes
2 -lanes
None
Hwy. 50
2 -lanes
2 -lanes
None
North /South Corridors
4- to 6 -Lanes
Hwy. 3
2 -lanes
2 -lanes
None
Biscayne Ave. & CR
73 /Akron Ave.
N/A (not a regional
road)
2- to 4 -lanes
0- to 2 -lanes
Blaine Ave. & CR
81 /Clayton Ave.
N/A (not a regional
road)
2- lanes, possible 4 -lanes where
needed
0- to 2 -lanes
In future months and years, this study's team should continue to address transportation
network needs for this area; including a local road network, future greenway and
bicycle /pedestrian connections, and transit connections. As a complete transportation
network for this area continues to be developed, the study team will continue to use a
stakeholder based approach to develop a complete transportation system; this includes
working with additional partners as appropriate.
ROSEMOUNT/EMPIRE/UMORE AREA TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STUDY REPORT
MARCH 2010
202
rd St W e
a
loan
CSAH 661200th St. - Provide two
new connections from Hwy. 3 via
190th St. and Biscayne Ave.; and
a re- aligned Vermillion River Trail.
Hwy. 50 - Use
existing road.
has not typically used condemnation).
Blaine & CR 81 /Clayton Ave -
Provide connection from
Blaine Ave. to Clayton Ave.
Study Area
' : c' Townshi
I , Rock Township p
N 0 0.5 1 Miles '" "Study Boundary
Previously Planned County Corridor
Rosemount/UMore /Empire Area -Recommended Regional Corridors Summary of Recommended
,
Transportation System Study Regional Arterial Corridors
71
a
CSAH 46 - Use existing
For north -south and east -west corridors,
alignment expand to
connections to roads outside of the study a
4 to 6- lanes.
area will be determined in later studies.
73
4
osemount
-
Blaine & CR 81 /Clayton Ave -
Use existing alignment between
4
CSAH 42 and CSAH 42.
2 -lanes are planned; 4 -lanes
will be considered based on
52
CSAH 42 -Use existing
future traffic needs.
alignment; consider
expanding to 6 -lanes
More Park
C s
sz
Hwy. 3 - Use
existing road.
175th St. Extension -
Option A
Provide connection
17
from Hwy. 3 to
new Biscayne AveJ
Akron. Ave. alignment.
Vermillion
Highlands
if Biscayne Ave./Akron Ave. -
Build one of two possible connections
Option B
Connect Biscayne to Akron
between CR 81 /Clayton Ave. to
Ave. via a 2- to 4-lane road.
CSAH 71 /91aine Ave.
Option A is the preferred option.
3 Regional
Park Adjacent to Vermillion Highlands, the
Empire Townsl p
location of the corridor will be based
on the location of the powedine that
currently runs between the WMA's
eastern border WMA and private
WMA
property.
1 t W
Option B would occur if MNDNR
62
expands Vermillion Highland boun-
daries by purchasing land from willing
1 t W
owners and receives necessary County
Wastewater
and Township approvals. (Note:
Treatment
Mn/DNR's practice is to acquire land
__.. _.... Fa c..
from willing land owners; the agency
202
rd St W e
a
loan
CSAH 661200th St. - Provide two
new connections from Hwy. 3 via
190th St. and Biscayne Ave.; and
a re- aligned Vermillion River Trail.
Hwy. 50 - Use
existing road.
has not typically used condemnation).
Blaine & CR 81 /Clayton Ave -
Provide connection from
Blaine Ave. to Clayton Ave.
Study Area
' : c' Townshi
I , Rock Township p
N 0 0.5 1 Miles '" "Study Boundary
Previously Planned County Corridor
Rosemount/UMore /Empire Area -Recommended Regional Corridors Summary of Recommended
,
Transportation System Study Regional Arterial Corridors
1.0 Introduction
This report documents the process completed by the Rosemount/Empire /UMore Area
Transportation System Study (the study) Project Management Team (PMT) to plan for the
future transportation needs of the study area, which includes the future UMore Park and
Vermillion Highlands. The end result is a recommended transportation system that will meet
the needs of the travelling public into the future and allow for phased implementation, in
response to future development.
Prior to implementation, this study will serve as a planning tool for communities and
agencies with interests in the area. The recommendations contained in this report will assist
Dakota County, the City of Rosemount, Empire Township, the University of Minnesota, and
the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (Mn /DNR) with prioritizing future
improvements, coordinating roadway system needs with development and land use needs,
and also facilitate right -of -way preservation.
1.1 Study Area
Figure 1 shows the study area and its regional orientation. Located within southern Dakota
County, this area is now on the edge of suburban development of the Twin Cities
Metropolitan Area. Parts of Rosemount and Empire Township are within the study area. The
Metropolitan Council forecasts that the population of these two communities will reach a
combined 45,000 by 2030, up from 16,500 in 2000. Much of this growth will come from the
5,000 -acre UMore Park development, planned to be completed in 25 to30 years.
The growing communities of Farmington, Lakeville, and Apple Valley are north and west of
the study area; the communities of Hastings, Northfield, and Cottage Grove, which have
recently experienced substantial population growth, are located to the south and east. Given
these circumstances and future land use plans at UMore Park, this area is located within an
expanded Twin Cities Metropolitan Area, despite the current predominance of rural
agricultural land uses and undisturbed natural areas.
1.2 Study Background
1.2.1 Purpose of Study and Anticipated Study Outcomes
Prior to starting this study, the PMT developed a Purpose/Need for a Study. In summary,
this document notes that it is timely for the PMT and the general public to:
...develop a plan that addresses transportation issues in this area of Dakota County
in a coordinated and balanced manner with area land use development plans. Such
a plan will allow these agencies to develop a transportation system together over
time that will result in safe and efficient travel in the area as cost - effectively as
possible, while at the same time developing land use plans in the area that will
accomplish the objectives of the City of Rosemount, Empire Township, the University
of Minnesota, the Department of Natural Resources, and Dakota County.
The Purpose /Need for a Study and the Expected Study Outcomes documents, which were
developed by the PMT, are included in Attachment A.
1.2.2 Relation to Other Studies & Development Planned within Study Area
The study area is currently the subject of a great deal of land use and preservation planning.
The intensity of development proposed for this land ranges from large tracts of open spaces
within Vermillion Highlands and Dakota County's Regional Park to relatively dense planned
ROSE MOUNT /EMPIRE /UMORE AREA TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STUDY REPORT
MARCH 2010
urban development within UMore Park and existing and future development in City of
Rosemount and Empire Township. As such, this study was developed with consideration of
the transportation and land use elements of the following documents (listed chronologically):
• Dakota County 2025 Transportation Plan (July 2004)
• Creating Common Ground, A report to the Minnesota Legislature (January 2007)
• Dakota County Parks, Lakes, Trails and Greenways Vision, 2030 (2007)
• Draft Rosemount Transportation Plan (April 2008)
• Draft of Concept Master Plan for Vermillion Highlands (June 2008)
• City of Rosemount Draft 2030 Comprehensive Land Use Plan (August 2008)
• Empire Township 2030 Future Land Use Map and data (March 2009) and Sewer
Staging (June 2008)
• Concept Master Plan for the University of Minnesota's New Sustainable Community at
UMore Park (January 2009)
It is noteworthy that the Dakota County 2025 Transportation Plan (see Figure T -6 Dakota
County Highway Capacity Deficiencies, 2025) currently includes a direct connection
between CR 79 and CSAH 71 via Blaine Avenue. This connection was planned before the
creation of Vermillion Highlands. This study was undertaken in part to re- consider this
alignment as it would bisect the newly created Vermillion Highlands.
1.2.3 Existing and Forecast Traffic Volumes and Regional Transportation System Needs
Figure 2 shows existing and future (year 2025 or 2030, depending on the data sources
noted on the figure) daily traffic volumes for roadways in the study area. Much of the growth
in traffic is anticipated to come from planned development within UMore Park and the City of
Rosemount.
Traffic forecasts show that future demand for north -south roads will be 50,500 vehicles per
day, which will require six- to eight -lanes on regional roads.' An additional four to six north -
south lanes are needed within the study area to meet future traffic demand.2 Currently, this
area includes one regional, north -south roadway — Highway 3 —which has two to three lanes
depending on location. Based on anticipated traffic, an additional four to six north -south
regional highway lanes are needed to meet future demand.
Traffic forecasts show that in the future, east -west roadways will be used by over 100,000
vehicles per day, which would require 12 -14 lanes on regional roadways. The study area
now includes three regional roadways: CSAH 42 (4- lanes), CSAH 46 (2- lanes), and
Highway 50 (2 lanes); for a total of eight existing east -west, regional roadway lanes. An
additional four to six east -west regional highway lanes are needed to meet future demand.
1 The number of lanes needed to accommodate future traffic volumes in both the north -south and east -west directions are
based on the assumption that regional, arterial roadways would accommodate an average of 7,000 -8,000 vehicles per lane per
day. These volumes are consistent with the average, daily capacities for arterials assumed in the UMore Park Development
Study. Design capacities are determined based on the relationship between level of service and average daily traffic volumes.
Assumptions for this analysis include a maximum flow rate of 800 vehicles /hour/lane and LOS D for arterials.
2 A range of the number of north -south and east -west lanes on regional roadways are based on planning level traffic forecasts
(versus design level forecasts). This range allows for flexibility in responding to traffic needs as land use planning for this area
evolves and is implemented.
ROSEMOUNT /EMPIRE /UMORE AREA TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STUDY REPORT 2
MARCH 2010
1.3 Supporting Roadway Network
1.3.1 Roadway Functional Classification Guidelines
Developed areas are best served with a classified system of roads where a small fraction
provides high mobility and the majority of the roads provide access to adjacent land. All
roads can be categorized into one of these categories:
• Principal Arterials — Primarily provide mobility and speed for the long, uninterrupted
distances with controlled access.
• Minor Arterials— Provide a combination of mobility and access with reasonable speed
for some extended distance, with some access control.
• Collectors — Collect traffic from local roads, and providing connection to land with little
or no through movements; usually function at lower speeds and for shorter distances.
• Local Streets — Provide access to land with little or no through movement; includes all
roads not classified as arterials or collectors.
Table 1 provides the Metropolitan Council's roadway spacing guidelines, which aid in the
planning of future transportation systems within developed and developing areas.
TABLE 1
Spacing Guidelines for Functionally Classified Roads
Land Use
Principal Arterials
Minor Arterials
Collectors
Local Streets
Characteristics
Developed Areas
2 to 3 miles
'/4 to 1/2 mile
Ye to Y: mile
As needed to
access land uses
Developing Areas
3 to 6 miles
1 to 2 miles
1/2 to 1 mile
Rural Areas
6 to 12 miles
miles
needed to
f4+ JAs
access land uses
Source: Metropolitan Council, Metropolitan Development Guide, Appendix F and Federal Highway
Administration, Highway Functional Classification
1.3.2 Existing Roadway Network Functional Classification
Figure 3 shows the location, spacing, and functional classification of highways in the study
area. The existing road system, with highways spaced at intervals of one -mile or more,
provides adequate levels of mobility for existing rural land uses and relatively low levels of
commuting. The study area includes three east -west arterials (CSAH 42, CSAH 46, and
Highway 50) and one north -south arterial (Highway 3). The Metropolitan Council's
guidelines for a functionally classified road system indicate that the study area would include
a total of five east -west and four north -south arterials. This means there is currently is a
shortage of roadways to meet future demand in this developing area.
The existing rural system is not robust enough to reasonably serve the trips that would be
generated by the higher density urban development planned in Wore Park, Rosemount,
and Farmington, or other nearby areas. The existing transportation system will need to be
upgraded to accommodate development, population growth, and increased commuting
levels between this area and employment centers within the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area.
ROSEMOUNT /EMPIRE /UMORE AREA TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STUDY REPORT 3
MARCH 2010
The likely consequence of an under built transportation system will be substantial increases
in traffic on the few available roads.
1.3.3 Recommended General Regional Transportation System (Not Specific Corridor
Alignments)
As noted above, a regional road system based on the Metropolitan Council's roadway
spacing guidelines would include:
— East/West Roadways: two principal arterials and three minor arterials
— North /South Roadways: one principal arterial and three minor arterials
Based on these basic traffic capacity needs, the PMT developed a recommended
transportation system — package of corridors (not specific alignments). Figure 4 shows these
corridors and the number of lanes that would meet anticipated future traffic needs. This
recommended system would enhance the arterial network by providing corridors that
connect to the regional network. Table 2 describes what would be included in the regional
transportation system.
TABLE 2
Recommended Trans ortat'on System Summary
Corridor
New Right -of -Way
Existing # of
Recommended
Required # of
Required?
Regional Lanes
# of Regional
New Lanes
Lanes
East/West Corridors
6- to 8 -Lanes
CSAH 42
Possible— Existing CSAH
4 -lanes
4- to 6 -lanes
0- to 2 -lanes
42 includes 150' right -of-
way; more right -of -way
needed if lanes are added
CSAH 46
Yes — Existing CSAH 46
2 -lanes
4- to 6 -lanes
2- to 4 -lanes
includes approx. 66' right -
of -way
CSAH 66/200' St.
Yes — Existing CSAH 66
2 -lanes
2 -lanes
None
includes approx. 66' right -
of -way
Hwy. 50
No— Currently a Mn /DOT
2 -lanes
2 -lanes
None
highway; no jurisdictional
change anticipated
North /South Corridors
4- to 6 -Lanes
Hwy. 3
No— Currently a Mn /DOT
2 -lanes
2 -lanes
None
highway; no jurisdictional
change anticipated
Biscayne & Akron
Yes— Existing CRs include
N/A (not a
2- to 4 -lanes
0- to 2 -lanes
Aves.
66' right -of -way
regional road)
Blaine Ave. and /or CR
Yes— Existing CRs include
N/A (not a
2- lanes,
0- to 2 -lanes
81 /Clayton Ave.
66' right -of -way
regional road)
consider 4-
lanes where
needed
ROSEMOUNT /EMPIRE /UMORE AREA TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STUDY REPORT 4
MARCH 2010
2.0 Study Phases, Schedule, and Stakeholder Involvement
2.1 Study Phases and Schedule
The study began in January 2009 and ended in December 2009; it was divided into phases,
which are shown on the study schedule (Figure 5) along with the timing of decision points,
key meetings, and open houses.
2.2 Study Team and Public Involvement
2.2.1 Project Management Team (PMT)
Figure 6 shows the communities and agencies that served on the PMT and the group's
responsibilities. This group developed the recommended transportation system. Throughout
the course of this study, the full PMT met ten times, as shown on the project schedule.
2.2.2 Public Involvement
Three public open houses were held during which the latest study developments were
shared and input was obtained from the public. All open houses were held during the late
afternoon and early evening at the Rosemount Community Center. Table 3 provides the
dates and key objectives of each open house:
TABLE 3
Open House Dates and Kev Obiectives
Open House Date Key Objectives
1. April 1, 2009 Develop universe of transportation corridor options and identify issues to
assist with developing evaluation criteria
2. June 29, 2009 Review universe of corridor options and evaluation criteria
3. November 12, 2009 Review recommended regional roadway system and identify any
implementation issues
Comments received at open houses and throughout the duration of the study help the PMT
identify community values and goals, develop a range of alternatives, and evaluate
alternatives. Summaries of comments and select representative comments received from
the public are included in Attachment B.
3.0 Corridor Option Evaluation Criteria
Based on input from the PMT and the public during Open House #1, evaluation criteria were
developed to compare transportation corridor options. Table 4 shows these criteria, which
are grouped into three categories; this table also shows which criteria were used during
each of the three levels of evaluation.
ROSEMOUNVEMPIRE /UMORE AREA TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STUDY REPORT 5
MARCH 2010
TABLE 4
Evaluation Categories and Criteria
3 Levels of
Community Planning &
Natural Resources &
Transportation
Evaluation
Identity
Environment
I. Fatal Flaw
Is the alignment consistent with
Does the corridor support
Does the corridor provide
Screening
transportation and land use
opportunities to manage and
direct connections to the
elements of area plans?
expand recreational and
County transportation system?
natural areas?
IL Corridor
Can the corridor be
Does the corridor avoid
Is the alignment consistent with
Screening
implemented along with
severances of recreational and
County design guidelines?
planned development?
natural areas? Private farms?
Does the corridor allow for
Does the corridor avoid right-
Does the corridor provide
future development beyond the
of -way impacts?
access consistent with plans
study area?
and guidelines?
Does the corridor avoid
Does the corridor provide
wetland impacts?
opportunities for cost- effective
implementation (e.g., re-use of
existing right -of -way, roads,
and bridges)?
Does the corridor avoid
Would the corridor divert
impacts to threatened and
regional trips from local roads?
endangered species, and /or
cultural resources?
III. System
Do the County roads provide
Does the County road network
Would the corridor allow for
Screening
adequate access to
provide adequate access to
development of a multi -modal
communities?
recreational and natural areas?
system (integration of roads
with transit, trails, greenways,
and wildlife corridors)?
Does the system
Would the corridor provide
accommodate land use plans,
sufficient spacing and capacity
including aggregate mining
of north /south and east/west
activities?
roads to meet future demand?
Does the system allow for
Would the corridor result in a
development of local road
significant change in travel
network?
time for re- routed alignments?
4.0 Development of Transportation Corridor Options
The initial universe of transportation corridor options was developed based on PMT input
and comments received during the first public open house. The following statement from the
PMT's vision was also used as a starting point: The road network provides connectivity and
functional capacity reflective of the demand for transportation services in both the north -
south and east -west directions.
4.1 Initial Universe of East -West Corridor Options
The universe of east -west corridor options initially developed for this study is shown on
Figure 7 and summarized below.
ROSEMOUNT /EMPIRE /UMORE AREA TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STUDY REPORT
MARCH 2010
CSAH 42 Option
A. CSAH 42— Upgrade CSAH 42 as planned and documented in the County Transportation
Plan and County Plat Map (which reflects the CSAH 42 Final Study and Amendment,
and studies completed by Rosemount).
CSAH 46 Options
B. CSAH 46 —Use existing CSAH 46 alignment
C. CSAH 46, UMore Concept—Realign CSAH 46 based on the alignment shown in the
UMore Park Concept Master Plan
D. CSAH 46 via 170th St.— Realign CSAH 46 onto new alignment and 170th St. through
UMore Park (in- between Hwy. 3 and CR 81 /Clayton Ave.)
170th St. Options
E. 170th St. —Use 170th St. alignment (per public comment), extend 170th St. east of CR
79 /Blaine Ave.
F. 170th St. with Extension to Future County Hwy. and CR 81 /Clayton Ave. — Extend future
east -west County highway (just south of existing 170th St.) to CR 81 /Clayton Ave. (near
Hwy. 52 /CSAH 46 intersection), via 170th St. through UMore
180th St. Option
G. 180th St. Extension to Future County Hwy., through Park, Vermillion Highlands — Extend
future east -west County highway Oust south of 170th St.) to Hwy. 52 via new 180th St.
alignment through County Park and Vermillion Highlands
CR 621190th St. Option
H. 190th St. Extension —Use 190th St. alignment, including new connection between Hwy.
3 and Biscayne Ave.
CSAH 661200th St. Option
I. 200th St.— Extend future east -west County highway (along 190th St. alignment) from
Hwy. 3 to CSAH 66/200th St.; includes a new Vermillion River Bridge
210th St. Option
J. 210th St. —Use 210th St. alignment
Hwy. 50 Option
K. Hwy. 50 -Use Hwy. 50 alignment
4.2 Initial Universe of North -South Corridor Options
The universe of north -south corridor options initially developed for this study is shown on
Figure 8; each option is summarized below.
Hwy. 3 Options
1. Hwy. 3 through Rosemount —Use Hwy. 3 alignment
2. Hwy. 3 to CR 73 /Akron Ave. —Use Hwy. 3 alignment; connect to CR 73 /Akron Ave. at
CSAH 42
ROSEMOUNT /EMPIRE /UMORE AREA TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STUDY REPORT
MARCH 2010
Biscayne Ave. O,vtions
3. Hwy. 3 to Biscayne Ave. —Use Hwy. 3 alignment through Farmington; connect and use
Biscayne Ave. up to CSAH 42
4. Hwy. 3 to Biscayne Ave. to CR 73 /Akron Ave. —Use Hwy. 3 alignment through
Farmington; connect to and use Biscayne Ave. alignment to just north of CSAH 46;
connect to CR 73 /Akron Ave.
5. Biscayne Ave. to CR 73 /Akron Ave. — Extend Biscayne Ave. to Hwy. 50; use Biscayne
Ave. corridor to just south of 170th St.; connect to CR 73 /Akron Ave. via new alignment
CR 73/Akron Ave. Oations
6. West Park/WMA Boundary to CR 73 /Akron. Ave.— Extend CR 73 /Akron Ave. south from
CSAH 42 to Hwy. 50, passing along western border of new County Park and WMA/AMA.
7. Annette Ave. to CR 73 /Akron Ave. — Extend CR 73 /Akron Ave. south from CSAH 42 to
Hwy. 50, passing along Annette Ave. and eastern border of new County Park and
WMA/AMA, and through part of Vermillion Highlands
CR 79 1CSAH 71 181aine Ave. Ovtions
8. CR 79 to CSAH 71 via direct Blaine Ave. Connection — Directly connect CR 79 to CSAH
71 via Blaine Ave. (in County's current 2025 Transportation Plan)
9. CR 79 to CSAH 71 via New Connection —Use existing CR 79 /Blaine Ave. alignment and
Vermillion River crossing; connect to CSAH 71 via new alignment.
CR 81 /Clayton Ave. Oations
10. CR 79 to CSAH 71 via CR 81 /Clayton Ave. (190th St. to 170th SQ --Use existing CR
79 /Blaine Ave. alignment and Vermillion River crossing; connect to CR 81 /Clayton Ave.;
connect to CSAH 71 via new alignment
11. CR 79 to CSAH 71 via CR 81 /Clayton Ave. (210th St. to north of 190th St.)— Connect to
and upgrade CR 81 /Clayton Ave., including possible construction of a new Vermillion
River bridge (public comments at Open House #1 recommended upgrading CR 81)
12. CR 79 to TH 52 /CSAH 46 via CR 81 /Clayton Ave. — Connect to and upgrade CR
81 /Clayton Ave., including possible construction of a new Vermillion River bridge,
terminating at CSAH 46.
5.0 Alignment Option Evaluation and Refinement
The screening process was divided into three levels of evaluation as shown in Table 5. As
part of a "Context Sensitive Solutions" (CSS) process (described more fully in Section 7.3), a
fundamental component of alignment option evaluation was the initial determination of
criteria. These criteria were set prior to the development of options to place priority on the
stated goals and objectives of project team members. The integrity of a CSS process relies
on it being driven by the priorities and objectives of all project participants.
5.1 Step 1: "Fatal Flaw" Alignment Option Evaluation
Table 5 below documents the corridors recommended for elimination from the universe of
options during the first evaluation —the fatal flaw evaluation. Corridors with a "fatal flaw"
were considered to be in direct conflict with key criteria identified by the project team in one
ROSEMOUNT /EMPIREIUMORE AREA TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STUDY REPORT 8
MARCH 2010
of three categories: 1) community planning and identity; 2) natural resources and
environment; or 3) transportation network design and function. Attachment C includes a
complete description of the Fatal Flaw Analysis methodology and a table that documents the
PMT'S discussion during this step — including consideration of opportunities lost by
alignment dismissal, and any potential to use dismissed corridors as local roads.
TABLE 5
Fatal Flaw Analysis—Findings and Corridors Eliminated from Further Consideration
Community Planning &
Natural Resources &
Transportation Network
Identity
Environment
Design & Function
Corridors Recommended
Is the alignment consistent
Does the corridor support
Does the corridor provide
for Elimination from
with transportation and
opportunities to manage
direct connections to the
Universe Options
land use elements of area
and expand recreational
County transportation
plans?
and natural areas?
system?
North /South Corridors
1. Hwy. 3 through
No— Inconsistent with
Rosemount Improvements
Rosemount's Land Use
and Transportation Plans.
3. Hwy. 3 to Biscayne Ave.—
No— Inconsistent with
Inconsistent with
Rosemount's Land Use
and Transportation Plans
7. Annette Ave. to CR
No— Inconsistent with
No— Presents
73 /Akron Ave.
More and Vermillion
management challenges
Highlands Plans.
within Vermillion Highlands.
8. CR 79 to CSAH 71 via
No— Inconsistent with
No— Presents
direct Blaine Ave. connection
More and Vermillion
management challenges
Highlands Plans
within Vermillion Highlands.
Yes — Consistent with
Dakota County 2025
Transportation Plan
12. CR 79 to Hwy. 52 /CSAH
No— Doesn't provide
46 via CR 81 /Clayton Ave.
adequate connection to
County road system.
East/West Corridors
E. 170w St.
No— Doesn't provide
necessary level of
connectivity to County
System.
G. New alignment (extension
No— Inconsistent with
No— Impedes long -term
of 180'h St. alignment)
More and Vermillion
plans for Vermillion
through Park, Vermillion
Highlands Plans.
Highlands expansion to
Highlands
River.
H. 190' St.
No— Corridor is
No— Impedes long -term
inconsistent with County,
plans for Vermillion
More, and Vermillion
Highlands expansion to
Highlands Plans.
River.
ROSEMOUNT /EMPIRE /UMORE AREA TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STUDY REPORT 9
MARCH 2010
TABLE 5
Fatal Flaw Analysis—Findings and Corridors Eliminated from Further Consideration
Community Planning &
Natural Resources &
Transportation Network
Identity
Environment
Design & Function
Corridors Recommended
is the alignment consistent
Does the corridor support
Does the corridor provide
for Elimination from
with transportation and
opportunities to manage
direct connections to the
Universe Options
land use elements of area
and expand recreational
County transportation
plans?
and natural areas?
system?
J. 2100' St.
No— Inconsistent with
No— Doesn't provide
Dakota County Plans.
necessary level of
connectivity to County
System.
The fatal flaw analysis resulted in dismissing five north -south corridors and four east -west
corridors from further consideration (see Figures 9 and 10). Corridors of note that were
eliminated include all north -south and east -west options that bisect Vermillion Highlands in
half. The remaining corridors were carried forward into the next level of evaluation,
discussed below.
5.2 Step 2: Corridor Level Evaluation and Continued Alignment Refinement
For the second, corridor level evaluation, more defined alignments were developed for each
of the remaining corridors. These alignments, shown in Figure 11, were developed for these
corridors using the following design features:
• 60 mile per hour design speed3,
• 1,500 minimum curve radius, and
• 150 foot right -of -way (which would accommodate both 2 -lane and 4 -lane rural
roadways).
These corridors were then evaluated based on the criteria that had been identified for the
second level of evaluation (see Table 3). The results of this evaluation are shown in Table 6.
The PMT opted not to dismiss any corridor options during the second phase of evaluation.
As a result, all corridor options were brought into the system level evaluation, discussed
below.
This evaluation included a high level environmental resource scan that reviewed existing
data related to wetlands and hydric soils; rare plants and animals; and historical and
archaeological features (results shown on Table 6). Initially, this data was used to develop
and then refine corridor alignments. Where reasonable, alignments were shifted to avoid
known occurrences of rare plants and animals (see Figure 12) and to avoid wetlands and
hydric soils (see Figure 13). As mentioned above, this evaluation relied on existing
information. As project development progresses for any recommended corridor, more in-
depth impact reviews — including more detailed review of contaminated properties —will be
completed by responsible communities and agencies.
3 The 60 mph design speed does not infer that the speed limit would be 60 mph; the statutory speed limit on rural roads is 55
mph. Speed studies may be necessary to determine whether the speed limit should be higher, lower, or that there should be no
chanae from the statutory speed limits.
ROSENIOUNT /EMPIRE /UMORE AREA TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STUDY REPORT 10
MARCH 2010
0
s
cn
cn
N
z
O
0
a
4a
2
Z O
oR
W U
a
aa
0
a
4R 3
c
c
E
5 c
3 m
3
9 E 3
E 3 $
t
3 m
E rn e °
3
o a
3 m
o,0
3
7-
o
O
°¢ o
4� O
m¢ o
�'O
m K o
°O
0 o
`
c
a
Z
Z
Y
>
Y�
T
}
In
1
r
l
Z
Z
}
a
s
'3
12
o
3 S 3
S3S3�
a
a
a
g a s
o
oR
o
o"
A
o V
o� �#
E
w
m
n
2U
o
ao
•any uoJXVISL NO PUB "any •auFeasig'£'k*H
•any - 198101LO 33 PUB •any aula1811L HMOI L SO
20
0
s
cn
cn
N
z
O
0
a
4a
2
Z O
oR
W U
0
w
y
�Z
O
Q
N
F
Lu
O
2
K
CL
O
W U
0 �
0
c o
a�6�
E C GCi
N
i i
iir
Tt
Y
`m
.5
�kk
N
N
E �
a
a
�
�
3 x3
cli
ci
o
0
0
�aa
�
4
3
3
788 4
4
Y 4
4
4
4
9
4
a�
e
o
a
$
$
c
zz
m
a
o
d�
m
o
n
<
O
} C
+
a =yg�a
N � C 03
t �a min
R
o
c
c
a
N 3
V
g
W
C
•eC- qq
2
�p �
Oy C
�pp � �
Op �
�pp � �
�yy 0 m
� �
,J
N
99
os
ZOHVSO
96 HVS3
HVSa
BFI
0
w
y
�Z
O
Q
N
F
Lu
O
2
K
CL
O
W U
0 �
5.3 Step 3: System Level Evaluation
This phase of evaluation moved beyond individual corridors and assessed how remaining
options would function as part of a regional transportation system. Referencing back to
Figure 4, the PMT agreed to identify a regional roadway system that would generally provide
roadway capacity in the areas identified during the earlier phases of this study. Table 7 and
Figures 14 and 15 capture the recommendations developed by the PMT over a series of
PMT meetings during the summer and fall of 2009.
6.0 Final Corridor Alignment Recommendations and Roadway
Characteristics
Figure 16 shows the recommended transportation system developed by the PMT. The
recommendations of this study include:
• The regional arterial road network as shown on the Recommended Regional Arterial
Corridors map will serve as a planning tool for this area as it develops. This
recommended system will be used by study partners and surrounding communities
as land use and transportation plans are implemented.
The roadway system recommended in this study will form a "back bone" arterial
network. This network was developed using the best information available for a long-
term corridor planning study. The recommended corridors may be refined in
response to changing circumstances and new information. Any refined corridors
would undergo the same level of evaluation as was completed for the recommended
corridors.
The unshaded rows in Table 7 describe the recommended number of lanes and the
recommended functional classification system for each alignment. The combination of
corridors composing the recommended regional road system for the study area is not
consistent with spacing guidelines, but represents a compromise that provides:
• Reasonable spacing and connectivity,
• Consistency with and support for local plans, and
• Minimum impact to area resources.
When Dakota County constructs or re- constructs any of the regional roadways
recommended in this study, it is anticipated that the County would use either two -lane or
four -lane cross - sections, as shown in Figure 17, based on an assessment of the forecast
volume of traffic in each of the corridors. Details, such as whether or not four -lane cross -
sections will be divided will be determined during subsequent phases of project
development. This study assumed a 150 foot right -of -way to initially assess corridor impacts;
this width would accommodate both 2 -lane and 4 -lane rural roadways.
ROSE MOUNT /EMPIRE /UMORE AREA TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STUDY REPORT 13
MARCH 2010
7
f
L
t
n
z
2
Y
Q1
Y
Y
D
Y
i
f
L
Dg
LU
nz
rI
F� V
°d
0
0
00
Z
N
o
o
0
0
a�i v
E
ov
X
a
E
a)
o
Z
th
O
V
o
v
>+ Q
N
y
w
c
2 0
a)
Z
Z
Z
ca
o
cn
c
0
o
Q
Q m
0
D) o
Q
L
V
C
C
f0�
G
ca 0)
CL
U
C f6
4)
Q
Q 7
L
E
N
t
cc
C C
A
N C
0
C
ca 0 0
N c 3 ca
vca=
c
U
M N
Q
Q
= N O y
�
Q
Q
N
C
cn dI�
Z
Z
U N
Z
Z
Q)
y
—
L
cu t w
cn
in co
$
rn
en cc
U
O
C
ca O O
C L
Co 7
•p
p co
Z C
�
v��....
o
N m
N
L
rn
fh
>'
w
C
'
3
c 3
cca
cn
>
_
—
� N
h
L
tO
N . C
= C _
'
d
C
O
M((� C
O
C O
'D C C
cN a
Q '>p
O
a
O
U_� E
O O
cs
U
EO
=
ca
v)Y
r C L
r a)
c cx
L O
n C
o
�
>
c o
0 0 °
o
cca c,°,
aa)i U°
L
.O
c m
o
ui
0 CL G Co
o c L
C>
a
H
y
M
U)
c
co 0
Q- 0
CL
Q m
O o
">'' O
c"
O
a)
w
c
Eo
C
C
g m
.0 C 3 Q
N E
c
2 c
3-0 >'
cc ca
o
c
v
c
E
is _
t= n
a�L�
a) L C
q
d (6
U
a5
>
C
C U C
I— n
0 ,�, (
s
¢
m m
E
� y
N,o
0-0
o c 3
M
p aX)
� c
3
c
a? �
v 3
�?
= —° c F0
c
M o
a m
m
CL m
rn
aci
o 'D
n
cn
w
v
c
a) 3 t cca
d
cN
c
1>
C
c >,
3:
i
0
a)
®
° m
m
.
o a
o
N
L
C L
!aA
)
rO
cd
Q
y
eCL) —
c
N
C O
O
C
N
to
t
G
O a) '
N
•v p
(D
a
O
() a)
O
cn
O
P
to ca
O
O
11
a�)
cz
Q
0
0
n
O f°
y
o a c
�N °
CA
-2 a) 0
) a)m
w p °-
a) >
¢
Oo
t
0) a)
rn
C
O
Y U
C C U
E H
•E H 03
E
O
.E C
C
C O)
E to >_
-
0 O N
O
w E
�0
°-
c -�
�
C
U3�
w��
w
=cm
n
I
N Q
Z
o
o
Q
m
>
U c
000
_
N
st
to
co
Q
01)
m
01)
U
C"
W
0
to
=
O
C
O
C
O
a
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
p
o
n
O
Q
O
n
O
a
O
n
O
a
0
a
0
Q
0
n
O
a
O
n
O
CL
O
r� 0
U
o
c
cOn
H
J
a G
a
c
£ IMH
•and OUXe3sl8
and auieI8 /LL
HVS3 /6L 21D
F- LL
Z a
Z
7
f
L
t
n
z
2
Y
Q1
Y
Y
D
Y
i
f
L
Dg
LU
nz
rI
0
w
N
0
a
a
z
9
w
X
0=
o�z
rn
C
o
r �
C
O
E
CIO
Cl)
Q
ov
o
0
a_
C
E
m
a)
c
0)
rn
w
cc
c
v
V
U
U
V
y
L
O
C
Cwl
o
D
Z
0
o
Q
V
cc
c
c
C
a
C)
c
aa)
a
Q
E
U
O
L
N
O
cu
N
N
C N
°
C
C
f6
U
f6
C N
D
n
¢
(Q
L
C6
L
C
U C
U
N N
C C
Z
U
U
pl
C
cc m
C
0
'C
(D C a)
+�
to �'
N
N
�.
O
a
C C
cc .M) m
p p
C
cC
C
co
a) to
N
CV
N
ld
L
a) CV
C
a cu cNi
(6 C
L
L
Co (C
N
O
C1
CV n =
CO
.O
•3
C7 QI
°
d'
>.
=
>.
=
>+ m i-.
N
0
U a
m
o
O N
CM
p �
� w
f
°c
m3 mL o°
°
E E
E N
n
n
N E C 3
O
C
C un,
N
N
U
U
N
C
'�
CU6
a) �
C
C
� O
C
C
N �C'D
L •R = N
�
Q
a)
E
O -a
c
O
O
C C
O N U) O
CL
E
N N
p
c
a>
a>
o U tm c
td M
N
N
N
rn
>
0�
O
O
p
C �O N
C
N
a
CV
C
°
U
o
L
05 8i 3
t
as
v��'
-a ca c
>.
-0
a) is
.0
�
cu rn c ca y
U
Y
ccv ccu
c
m o
0
0
—
N 0 a>i
°c
m
-a E a�
p
w n
C
c
Q
c
p
_E
a� N v—
•E
Nn 0
C d
C
N
CO N
O
E
E
N >. L C EFE
(D
a E
ca
Um
A
30
T
30
0 cu
o
cu
E oU
c
N >+
ca o
10 :s
v N
0 0
N
0
0
a>
O— CD
C
2 rn
• Q
c O
-a
'a
U
p
L CD
c
�►
C
--T C a
= (B 0
Q
Ca
— Uj
U -a
C (D
C N
< U =
w U a
X Mn
c 0
G.
Q C.
(n cm
U
N a) Q
CO CL
p C
p C
O- C O m
N=aU
a)
O
E
N
z
U a>
•°
�
c c
�f—C6
n
�fCd
n
dw
N o °
N
U
i
U °a
O
~
a) �
C
N
X
n• O
O
N �C
O N
N �C
R
O _y
a) Q m N
c
to
N - r-
d
U a>
N c E
a)
N
� (—
a) d
4? a
-
N t0 a) C �+
O a)
E
O
N O
�
N >. E -
v
c
«t O
c n
C 0)
C
N
Q2 c 2
c
E E
�c
Ic
avi
m �a
�
°
c at'i C:)
t13 M N
x
W
cca
W W
W
W
ai c¢ > at'i of
U Q
o
U
o
c�
O
- Q
U
>
0 c
�
Q
m
r
U
CV
U
D
LL
a'2
m
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
E
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
W 0
i a
N
�
ZVHVS3
1S
viOLL 19 9b HVS3
99 Hvso
09 *"H
a
.�.
(D
¢
F- LL
Z 0'
w
0
w
N
0
a
a
z
9
w
X
0=
o�z
7.OActivities to Implement Recommended Alignments
7.1 Activities and Timing to Implement Recommendations
Future roadway construction will be coordinated with development. When traffic levels or
development in an area warrant, consideration will be given to construction of new roads or
upgrading existing regional roads. The schedule for implementing study recommendations
varies by area.
Shortly after completion of this study, local communities, University of MN, and Mn /DNR will
formally adopt or recognize the recommendations through their governing bodies (e.g., a
resolution). Within the next few years, communities will update their comprehensive land use
and /or transportation plans to reflect study recommendations.
In the longer term, construction of regional roads will occur as land uses change (e.g.,
More Park) and development is approved by local governments. More Park plans
currently show the northern part of the parcel developing first. Total build -out is expected in
30 years, however, as with any development, this too will be subject to market forces.
This network was developed using the best information available for a long -term corridor
planning study. This included current environmental resource information, engineering
considerations, and land use management plans. The recommended corridors may be
refined in response to changing circumstances and new information. Any refined corridors
would undergo the same level of evaluation as was completed for the recommended
corridors.
Implementation of specific corridors is all subject to phasing, in response to development.
For example, northern portions of the north -south alignments for Biscayne Avenue /Akron
Avenue and Blaine Avenue may be initially built to accommodate More Park, as it
develops. However, the southern portions of these corridors may not get built until much
later, in response to future development.
7.2 Right -of -Way Acquisition
The acquisition of right -of -way for transportation facilities requires significant financial
resources and is a time consuming process. Jurisdictions responsible for road development
(state, county, city, etc.) will use available right -of -way preservation tools. For Dakota
County, this includes requiring plat dedication for highway corridors to preserve the right -of-
way required to implement any of the recommended alignments. In areas that do not
develop, a condemnation process would be used to acquire additional right -of -way.
7.3 Context - Sensitive Solution Considerations
Development evaluation criteria and processes, as well as potential transportation corridor
options was structured according to the principles of a Context Sensitive Solutions (CSS)
process. Given the unique setting for this project — including the unique More Park
development and Vermillion Highlands —the CSS approach is valuable because decision -
making is focused on project context and stakeholder -based criteria. Through this process,
the PMT accomplished transportation objectives while developing a project that reflects
community values. A four -step approach to CSS was implemented, as follows:
1. Community Inventory and Values;
2. Goals and Criteria;
ROSEMOUNT /Ev1PIRE /UMORE AREA TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STUDY REPORT 16
MARCH 2010
3. Alternatives Development and Evaluation; and
4. Implementation Planning and Roles.
CSS is a process that will continue to take place through all upcoming stages related to
implementing the recommended transportation system. Given the early nature of this study,
CSS was applied to identifying project context and issues important to stakeholders.
However, the PMT did broadly contemplate geographic areas within the study area which
should be given a higher level of CSS consideration moving forward into next steps. These
areas are shown on Figure 18.
8.0 Other Transportation Considerations
8.1 Supporting local Road System, Intersection Spacing, and Other Possible
Roadway Projects
The regional roadway network recommended for this study area will be used by the County,
local communities, and the University of Minnesota to plan a supporting local road system to
complement the transportation network and serve any future land development. Specifically,
the Metropolitan Council's roadway spacing guidelines shown in Table 1 will be used to aid
in the planning of the local road network in developing areas, including UMore Park.
Intersection spacing is directly tied to the implementation of a supporting road network,
discussed above. As such, this topic will be considered in tandem with planning of a
supporting, local road network. Dakota County access spacing guidelines will be adhered to
in any future access planning.
In addition to any future access spacing planning, previous recommendations for the CSAH
42 corridor will be implemented as planned (see the CH 42 Final Study planned access
management and Attachment A: Updated Recommended Roadway Improvements Segment
15: TH 3 to TH 52, 2007). The PMT recognizes that there is potential for some
recommended corridors to impact the need for intersection improvements identified in the
CH 42 Study. For example, the Biscayne Ave. /Akron Ave. north -south alignment may result
in a diversion of traffic from Highway 3 that could reduce traffic levels at the intersection of
Highway 3 and CSAH 42 to the point that a previously recommended interchange may not
be necessary. Any impact this study's recommendations would have on plans for other
corridors in or near the study area would need to be studied in detail. Dakota County will
work with local communities and Mn /DOT to assess all future capacity issues, necessary
improvements, and the interrelatedness of future transportation improvements.
During this study, the need to plan for future crossings of Highway 52 were discussed,
including the possibility of grade separating crossings at 170th Street and CSAH 66/200tn
While these intersections are outside of this study area and therefore were not considered in
detail, it should be noted that Mn /DOT, Dakota County, and local communities may consider
grade separations at these locations in the future.
8.2 Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities
Dakota County has plans to implement a north -south and an east -west regional greenway
corridor within the study area. The currently planned greenway corridors are shown on
Figure 18. These greenway alignments are concepts; the actual location of these greenways
will be the result of further planning actions by Dakota County, the City of Rosemount,
Empire Township, the University of Minnesota, and Mn /DNR. Specifically, the preferred trail
ROSEMOUNTiEMPIR&UMORE AREA TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STUDY REPORT 17
MARCH 2010
alignment for crossing the Vermillion River will be mutually evaluated by appropriate
agencies and determined as part of the 2010 master planning process. At any points where
greenways will intersect an existing or planned County highway, a grade- separated highway
crossing will be considered for trail users. Specific details regarding funding will be
addressed during future inter - agency coordination.
8.3 Future Transit Service
The study area currently includes primarily rural and open space land uses and is not
served by transit. However, plans for UMore Park and surrounding communities will likely
increase the intensity of land uses in coming decades. The UMore Park Concept Master
Plan shows that light rail, commuter bus, and internal bus service may some day service the
development. Additionally, the Robert Street Corridor Transit Feasibility Study's Long Term
Corridor Vision shows a "potential transitway" extending down Highway 3 (to just south of
CSAH 42) and providing transit access into UMore Park. None of the above mentioned
transit concepts have been planned or funded. However, Dakota County will continue to
coordinate with the University of Minnesota, the Metropolitan Council, and local communities
regarding any future transit concepts that would service the study area.
Dakota County's Transit Plan (Review Copy, December 2007) has identified specific transit
needs for service beyond anything that is included in regional or county plans. Within the
study area, the County's Transit Plan has identified needs on CSAH 42, CSAH 46, Highway
3, and Highway 50. As noted in the Transit Plan, implementation of these improvements is
considered very long range. Moving forward with any County Highway improvements the
Plan does recommend that, "All County arterial highways should provide appropriate level of
infrastructure for transit service including adequate widths, shoulders, pullouts, and trails"
(Dakota County Transit Plan, December 2007, Chapter Sever: Page 4 of 7).
ROSE MOUNT /EMPIRE /UMORE AREA TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STUDY REPORT 18
MARCH 2010
Apple
Valley
Lakeville
F r
w
oa
Study Area
Eureka
Twp.
QState Highway
O
County State Aid Highway (CSAH)
OCounty
Road
Eagan
Inver
StIN
rl Park
OF
Ware park Rosemount
a
Empire
Two
IOth t W
t
ti
%iom
nds ft
Cottage
Grove
Nininger
1101,
=.!L.�
St E ° = w
19 83. U.
52
Ono, It r
8
0 1.25 2.5 5 Miles N
Rosemount /UMore/Empire Area Figure 1
Transportation System Study StudyArea Location
00
D000
0
0
Z
10,900
26,000
29.100
590
1,000
13,600
o
oa
f
Z's
14.200 UMore Park
Regional Park
Wastewater
Treatment
Fac, I WMA
5,900
{7;' NO.- t al,
Vermillion Highlands
°o¢
wZ
°oQ
mZ
z`
Legend
Future CSAH 42 Access 1,234 Existing Daily Traffic Volumes Ill I F
(MD ftdy Boundary
nOT 2007 Volume Maps)
314 Access F7 State Highway N
1,234 Forecasted Daily Traffic Volumes 9 Y
+ Interchange (North of 46 - Rosemount 2030 Iran Plan
Traffic Signal South of 46- Dakota Co 2025 Tran Plan) O County State Aid Highway(CSAH) 0 1,5003,000 6,000 Feet
1,234 Forecasted Daily Traffic Volumes
Q Unsignalized (UMORE Park Development Study) O County Road
Rosemount /Empire/UMore Area Figure 2 08-2"
Transportation System Study Study Area Daily Traffic Volumes
� o
�Si
Rov-�nship.
2.400
6,400
2,400
5.�
9.000
_ ___
.00
°o¢
wZ
°oQ
mZ
z`
Legend
Future CSAH 42 Access 1,234 Existing Daily Traffic Volumes Ill I F
(MD ftdy Boundary
nOT 2007 Volume Maps)
314 Access F7 State Highway N
1,234 Forecasted Daily Traffic Volumes 9 Y
+ Interchange (North of 46 - Rosemount 2030 Iran Plan
Traffic Signal South of 46- Dakota Co 2025 Tran Plan) O County State Aid Highway(CSAH) 0 1,5003,000 6,000 Feet
1,234 Forecasted Daily Traffic Volumes
Q Unsignalized (UMORE Park Development Study) O County Road
Rosemount /Empire/UMore Area Figure 2 08-2"
Transportation System Study Study Area Daily Traffic Volumes
War* Park
.................... am Ott
Ift*W t; -------------------------
14
..................... Vermillion Highlands
............. "Now
........... ...................................
AMA!
VMA
Je
Zma st W
L
......... ...........
.............................
Ir
L""d
Fob" CS 42 MCI"
Ca"c'm M SUN Ww" N
UWWN " � $ 0 Ck.VWCAWNVft
ftft%"
WWO*AW (CW) A 0 1,5W 3,OOD %ODD Fog
.... 00"MON" 'NW 1
11
Rosemount/UMore/Empire Area Figure 3
Transportation System Study Functionally Classified
08/09/2009 Roadway System
FIL-2
62
Future traffic volumes indicate that the study area will = existing regional road and # of lanes
need 6 -8 north -south lanes and 12 to 14 east -west
lanes to ope,*ate at an acceptable level (LOS D /E). �' = potential future regional road and # of lanes
This graphic shows the system that has been Note: Lines representing lanes do not
recommended to achieve lane these capacity goals.
infer any particular alignment.
Rosemount/UMore/Empire Area Figure 4
Transportation System Study Recommended Transportation System
10/30/2009
Study Area
Boundary
'
J.s
}
WIL
210th St W 210th St E
hStW
��
itarm
tots City• -.
62
Future traffic volumes indicate that the study area will = existing regional road and # of lanes
need 6 -8 north -south lanes and 12 to 14 east -west
lanes to ope,*ate at an acceptable level (LOS D /E). �' = potential future regional road and # of lanes
This graphic shows the system that has been Note: Lines representing lanes do not
recommended to achieve lane these capacity goals.
infer any particular alignment.
Rosemount/UMore/Empire Area Figure 4
Transportation System Study Recommended Transportation System
10/30/2009
2
a
a�
z
L y
�w
LL v)
a�
Q� b
G1 N
O H
O
H
- Act as liaison between PMT and elected /appointed
officials and the public
- Provide input for these key tasks:
1. Identify of opportunities & constraints
2. Develop evaluation criteria and transportation
system alternatives
3. Identify preferred transportation system
4. Implement decisions into Comprehensive /Master
Plans
5. Preserve right -of -way for future transportation
system (as applicable)
-Dakota County (Project Lead)
•Rosemount
-Empire Township
•Wore Park/U of MN
-Minnesota DNR
Rosemount/LTMore/Empire Area
Transportation System Study
08/09
/2009
- Review and comment on the
- Engage in exchange of information
with the PMT
- Facilitate development and
evaluation of alternatives
- ComDlete final reoort
Figure 6
Project Management Team (PMT)
Member Roles & Responsibilities
Rosemount /UMore /Empire Area Figure 7
Transportzi don system study Universe of Alternatives
10'0$'2009 East/West Corridor Options
Rosemoun /UMore /Empire Area Figure 8
Transportairion System Study Universe of Alternatives
10'05'2009 North /South Corridor Options
Rosemoun /UMore /Empire Area
Transporta Ilion System Study
10/05/2009
Figure 9
East -West Corridor Options Remaining
after First Level (Fatal Flaw) Evaluation
N 0 1,5'0 3,000 6,000 Feet Numbered transportation corridors represent
State Highway north /south options: lettered corridors represent
C
east west options.
OCounty State Aid Highway (CSAH)
Exhibit 11
Rosemount/ .Nore /Empire Area O County Road Remaining & Refined Regional,
Transportat m System Study Arterial Corridor Options Engineered
11/05/2009 to Defined Design Criteria
N 0 1,51 J 3,000 6,000 Feet Rare Plant or Animal Species General Locations Regionally Significant Ecological Areas
Sites State -wide Biodiversity Significance Ecological Score
Moderate
= High Figure 12
Rosemounit /UMorejmpire Area
Transport ation System Study = outstanding Known Plant and
12/09/2009 Animal Resources
Resources (DNR), and were current
^"t as of June 12, 2009. These data are
6.�`
6
+- ,
1ti
>
i K11-
..
g.
� .
.d; r.
«. jai.,. .YS
K 50
yyOption
"°°
Copyright 2009 State of Minnesota,'
`
[
Department of Natural Resources
Data included here
;
Ys
were provided
by the Division of Ecological Resources,
Minnesota Department of Natural
— Option 11
N 0 1,51 J 3,000 6,000 Feet Rare Plant or Animal Species General Locations Regionally Significant Ecological Areas
Sites State -wide Biodiversity Significance Ecological Score
Moderate
= High Figure 12
Rosemounit /UMorejmpire Area
Transport ation System Study = outstanding Known Plant and
12/09/2009 Animal Resources
Resources (DNR), and were current
^"t as of June 12, 2009. These data are
:1
not based on an exhaustive inventory s
o-
>
i K11-
y 1 of the state. The lack of data for any
' *p
geographic area shall not be construed to
mean that no significant features are present
k
� .
.d; r.
«. jai.,. .YS
K 50
yyOption
N 0 1,51 J 3,000 6,000 Feet Rare Plant or Animal Species General Locations Regionally Significant Ecological Areas
Sites State -wide Biodiversity Significance Ecological Score
Moderate
= High Figure 12
Rosemounit /UMorejmpire Area
Transport ation System Study = outstanding Known Plant and
12/09/2009 Animal Resources
N 0 1,5 0 3,000 6,000 Feet M Hydric Soils
AI
Rosemou it /UMore /Empire Area Figure 13
Transpor .ation System Study Hydric Soils
12/09/2009
N 0 1,500 3,000 6,000 Feet
A l� Figure 14
East -West Regional
Rosemount /UMore /Empire Area Arterial Corridor Options
Transporta pion System Study Final Evaluation Results
10/30/2009
N 0 1,500 3,000 6,000 Feet
A Figure 15
Rosemount /UMore /Empire Area North -South Regional
Transport; tion System Study Arterial Corridor Options
10/07/2009 Final Evaluation Results
For north -south and east -west corridors,
connections to roads outside of the study
area will be determined in later studies.
3
9
175th St
Zi
, on 5
`
+'� O ,,
ptioon I'
r
F{
f 5f
County
Park
h „� � lk 52
_.
d
4 xk,.
eat Option 11A is the preferred option.+
�
` Adjacent to Vermillion Highlands,?
4: the location of the corridor will be
t based on the location of the powerline °
`ti fafi that currently runs between the WMA s ;� t
eastern border WMA and private property.
Ek
Option 116 would occur if Mn /DNR 62-
expands Vermillion Highland
1W boun
'= daries by purchasing land from willing
owners and receives necessary County w�
N-m- and Township approvals. (Note:
Mn /DNR's practice is to acquire land �' t
°r from willing land owners; the agency ° option
has not typically used condemnation).
P ion jQ
Mf" lit
tit
Re( -)mmended, Regional Arterial Corridors N o 1,500 3,000 6,000 Feet
A �i ICI
Pla fined Dakota County Highways
Rosemou lit /UMore /Empire Area Figure 16
Transpor Lation System Study Recommended Regional
12/10/2009 Arterial Corridors
Divided Urban 4 -Lane Cross - Section
Sidewalk/ Shoulder Through Through Median Through Through Shoulder Sidewalk/
Trail Lane Lane Lane Lane Trail
150 ft
Right -of -Way
Rural 2 -Lane Cross- Section
Shoulder Through Through Shoulder
Lane Lane
150 ft
Right -of -Way
Alternative Concept Design Criteria
- Assumed a 60 mph design speed
• 1,500 feet minimum curve radius
(Source: Mn /DOT Road Design Manual — minimum for 60 mph is 1,349 feet with full superelevation)
• 150 -foot Right -of -Way to accommodate a divided 4 -lane roadway
(Source: Dakota County Contiguous Plat Ordinance)
Rosemount/More/Empire Area
Transportation System Study
08/09/2009
Figure 17
Representative 2 -lane and 4 -lane
Cross - Sections
a �
n% - _O
O N
O O N
N C Y
ro m d= Z N
o'�U`m�inE
N a > N `
N C O 7'N N N
d o ai > E E
LT U 3¢ ca 2
[40
N O N coo N
-
c m m >
Y> C O a ro
cErmN'E3�
:yroa ro0LE
N as F 1 O
N C, O ro 0.2 - U
V U N U N
-off N ° 2 c
Z5 0
cx
O a) O :�
N
010
tl1 �
v 01
= o
Q
� 9
c
N d
a A
s$v
m c
m o d
c wo
m ow
o
w 3 c
a a
v
(a
rn�
d
0
0
0
W
a d
'y
C') N o
k0
?� i
0
a
o `
U
m
O
c
ED
0
K
a
m
E
E
E
v
i
J b
� y
J N
L C
3�
3
x
O
0
D
0
v
a
0
c
0
U
3
C7
a
d
a
ro o
m 3
O C N
O
-
!
E
a aN ro o N
o
F
_ O L.
- E
' D
m =_ ro ~
oo0aroma
o
N
� ttl O N O
m_Eo� 3
'C 3 Q N o
E_QCY � T
L ro ro N C
rf
Q N N 0
� O
U
I t�
O ro O
o O O
-O U
,a
O
d
0
0
0
W
a d
'y
C') N o
k0
?� i
0
a
o `
U
m
O
c
ED
0
K
a
m
E
E
E
v
i
J b
� y
J N
L C
3�
3
x
O
0
D
0
v
a
0
c
0
U
3
C7
a
d
a
�ro
N Y L O O
- C
a > E E
O O O
O w > ro
m =_ ro ~
?i O_ U >
.--
C ro (D ro
�� N N L C
N
� ttl O N O
rf
ro E O O ro
O L E N S ro
o O O
-O U
g
• ri
d
0
0
0
W
a d
'y
C') N o
k0
?� i
0
a
o `
U
m
O
c
ED
0
K
a
m
E
E
E
v
i
J b
� y
J N
L C
3�
3
x
O
0
D
0
v
a
0
c
0
U
3
C7
a
d
a
2oOmount / Emnire / llmore 9
EIUFIIHII I [In aVS11HM XUC
7�
th
Prepai-ed by:
ROSEMOUNT /EMPIRE /UMOREAREA TRANSPORTATIONS YSTEM STUDY REPORT
Table of Contents
1.0 Introduction ...................................................................................................... ..............................1
1.1 Study Area ................................................................................................ ..............................1
1.2 Study Background ................................................................................... ..............................1
1.2.1 Purpose of Study and Anticipated Study Outcomes ............... ..............................1
1.2.2 Relation to Other Studies & Development Planned within Study Area ..............1
1.2.3 Existing and Forecast Traffic Volumes and
Regional Transportation System Needs ................................... ............................... 2
1.3 Supporting Roadway Network ............................................................ ............................... 3
1.3.1 Roadway Functional Classification Guidelines ....................... ............................... 3
1.3.2 Existing Roadway Network Functional Classification ............ ..............................4
1.3.3 Recommended General Transportation System
(Not Specific Corridor Alignments ..................................................... ............................... 4
2.0 Study Phases, Schedule, and Stakeholder Involvement ........................... ............................... 5
2.1 Study Phases and Schedule ................................................................... ............................... 5
2.2.1 Project Management Team (PMT) ............................................. ............................... 5
2.2.2 Public Involvement ...................................................................... ............................... 5
3.0 Corridor Option Evaluation Criteria ........................................................... ............................... 5
4.0 Development of Transportation Corridor Options ................................... ............................... 6
4.1 Initial Universe of East -West Corridor Options ................................. ............................... 6
4.2 Initial Universe of North -South Corridor Options ............................ ............................... 7
5.0 Alignment Option Evaluation and Refinement ......................................... ............................... 8
5.1 Step 1: "Fatal Flaw' Alignment Option Evaluation .......................... ............................... 8
5.2 Step 2: Corridor Level Evaluation and Continued Alignment Refinement ................10
5.3 Step 3: System Level Evaluation ........................................................... .............................13
6.0 Final Corridor Alignment Recommendations and Roadway Characteristics ....................13
7.0 Activities to Implement Recommended Alignments ................................ .............................16
7.1 Activities and Timing to Implement Recommendations .................. .............................16
7.2 Right -of -Way Acquisition ..................................................................... .............................16
7.3 Context - Sensitive Solution Considerations ........................................ .............................16
8.0 Other Transportation Considerations .......................................................... .............................17
8.1 Supporting Local Road System, Intersection Spacing, and
Other Possible Roadway Projects ............................................................... .............................17
8.2 Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities .......................................................... .............................18
8.3 Future Transit Service ............................................................................ .............................18
TABLE OF CONTENTS - PAGE 1 OF 2
ROSEMOUNTIEMPIRENMOREAREA TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STUDY REPORT
Tables
Table 1— Spacing Guidelines for Functionally Classified Roads ................... ............................... 3
Table 2 — Recommended Transportation System Summary .......................... ............................... 4
Table 3 —Open House Dates and Key Objectives ............................................ ............................... 5
Table 4 —Evaluation Categories and Criteria ................................................... ............................... 6
Table 5 — Fatal Flaw Analysis — Findings and
Corridors Eliminated from Further Consideration ......................................... ............................... 9
Table 6— Corridor Level Evaluation .................................................................. .............................11
Table 7 -3rd Level Evaluation Results ............................................................... .............................14
Figures
Summary of Recommended Regional Arterial Corridors ............................ ............................... III
<<<Note: Study Figures urill be integrated into the report upon report finalization >>>
Figure 1, Study Area Location ............................................................................ ............................... x
Figure 2, Study Area Daily Traffic Volumes .................................................... ............................... x
Figure 3, Functionally Classified Roadway System ........................................ ............................... x
Figure 4, Recommended Transportation System ............................................. ............................... x
Figure5, Study Schedule ..................................................................................... ............................... x
Figure 6, PMT Member Roles and Responsibilities ......................................... ............................... x
Figure 7, Universe of Alternatives, East/ West Corridor Options ................. ............................... x
Figure 8, Universe of Alternatives, North /South Corridor Options ............ ............................... x
Figure 9, East -West Corridor Options Remaining after First Level Evaluation ......................... x
Figure 10, North -South Corridor Options Remaining after First Level Evaluation .................. x
Figure 11, Remaining & Refined Regional, Arterial Corridor Options,
Engineered to Defined Design Criteria ................................................ ............................... x
Figure 12, Known Plant and Animal Resources .............................................. ............................... x
Figure13, Hydric Soils ......................................................................................... ............................... x
Figure 14, East -West Regional Arterial Corridor Options Final Evaluation Results ................. x
Figure 15, North -South Arterial Corridor Options Final Evaluation Results ............................. x
Figure 16, Recommended Regional Transportation System .......................... ............................... x
Figure 17, Representative Cross - sections
Figure 18, Context Sensitive Solutions .............................................................. ............................... x
TABLE OF CONTENTS - PAGE 2 OF 2
Executive Summary
Dakota County, the City of Rosemount, Empire Township, the University of Minnesota, the
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR), and the Minnesota Department of
Transportation (Mn /DOT) have spent several months planning for the future transportation
needs for a study area that includes UMore Park, Vermillion Highlands, and a new regional
park. The end result is a recommended transportation system that will meet the needs of the
travelling public into the future and allow for phased implementation, in response to future
development.
Prior to implementation, this study will serve as a planning tool for communities and
agencies with interests in the area. The recommendations will assist Dakota County, the
City of Rosemount, Empire Township, the University of Minnesota, and the Minnesota
Department of Natural Resources (Mn /DNR) with prioritizing future improvements,
coordinating roadway system needs with development and land use needs, and with right -
of -way preservation.
The recommendations of this study include:
• The regional arterial road network as shown on the Recommended Regional Arterial
Corridors map will serve as a planning tool for this area as it develops. This
recommended system will be used by study partners and surrounding communities
as land use and transportation plans are implemented.
The roadway system recommended in this study will form a "back bone" arterial
network. This network was developed using the best information available for a long-
term corridor planning study. The recommended corridors may be refined in
response to changing circumstances and new information. Any refined corridors
would undergo the same level of evaluation as was completed for the recommended
corridors.
Each of the agencies involved should update comprehensive and /or transportation plans to
properly reflect the study recommendations and subsequent planning activities. This
includes the Concept Plan for UMore Park.
Implementation of the recommended regional arterial corridors in the study area will be
coordinated with development as it occurs. Any activities /changes made within Vermillion
Highlands should also take the recommended regional arterial corridors into account.
Through these processes, the following Transportation System Summary recommendations
should be considered:
ROSEMOUNT/EMPIRE/UMORE AREA TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STUDY REPORT
MARCH 2010
Recommended Transportation System Summary
Corridor
Existing # of
Regional Lanes
Recommended # of Regional
Lanes
Required # of New
Lanes
Eastlwest Corridors
6- to 8 -Lanes
CSAH 42
4 -lanes
4- to 6 -lanes
0- to 2 -lanes
CSAH 46
2 -lanes
4- to 6 -lanes
2- to 4 -lanes
CSAH 66/200"' St.
2 -lanes
2 -lanes
None
Hwy. 50
2 -lanes
2 -lanes
None
North /South Corridors
4- to 6 -Lanes
Hwy. 3
2 -lanes
2 -lanes
None
Biscayne Ave. & CR
73 /Akron Ave.
N/A (not a regional
road)
2- to 4 -lanes
0- to 2 -lanes
Blaine Ave. & CR
81 /Clayton Ave.
N/A (not a regional
road)
2- lanes, possible 4 -lanes where
needed
0- to 2 -lanes
In future months and years, this study's team should continue to address transportation
network needs for this area; including a local road network, future greenway and
bicycle /pedestrian connections, and transit connections. As a complete transportation
network for this area continues to be developed, the study team will continue to use a
stakeholder based approach to develop a complete transportation system; this includes
working with additional partners as appropriate.
ROSEMOUNVEMPIRENMORE AREA TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STUDY REPORT
MARCH 2010
">
71
a
CSAH 46 - Use existing
For north -south and east -west corridors,
al ignment; expand to
connections to roads outside of the study
4• to 6•lanes.
�Or_
area will be determined in later studies.
4
Rosemount
--
Blaine & CR 81 /Clayton Ave - '
42
Use existing alignment between
CSAH 42 and CSAH 42.
2 -lanes are planned; 4 -lanes
will be considered based on §y
CSAH 42 - Use existing
future traffic needs.
alignment; consider
expanding to 6 -lanes
More Park C s
sz
4
Hwy. 3 - Use
existing road.
175th St. Extension -
Option A
Provide connection
from Hwy. 3 to W
7 Sf
new Biscayne Ave./
Akron. Ave. alignment.
Vermillion
Highlands
aBiscayne Ave./Akron Ave. -
Build one of two possible connections
Connect Biscayne to Akron
between CR 81 /Clayton Ave. to option B
Ave. via a 2- to 4-lane road.
CSAH 71 /Blaine Ave.
M
Option A is the preferred option.
3 Regional
Park Adjacent to Vermillion Highlands, the
Empire Townsl p
location of the corridor will be based
on the location of the powerline that
currently runs between the WMA's
eastern border WMA and private
property.
WMA
190th St W
Option B would occur if Mn /DNR 62
expands Vermillion Highland boun-
daries by purchasing land from willing
t W
owners and receives necessary County
Wastewater
and Township approvals. (Note:
Treatment
Mn /DNR's practice is to acquire land
> Fac.
from willing land owners; the agency
1
has not typically used condemnation).
R"
Sf
« 6
202
r St w e <�
79
E
E
o t W Q CSAH 661200th St. - Provide two
c a new connections from Hwy. 3 via
190th St. and Biscayne Ave.; and
A
a re- aligned Vermillion River Trail.
7 h
Blaine & CR 81 /Clayton Ave -
e _.
Provide connection from Study Area
Blaine Ave. to Clayton Ave.
f Hwy. 50 -Use
"
3 ' existing road.
Farmington
r -
Rock Township t Township
N o 0.5 1 Miles A 11. Boundary
Previously Planned County Corridor
Rosemount/tlMore/EmpireArea - Recommended, Regional Corridors Summary of Recommended
Transportation System Study Regional Arterial Corridors
1.0 Introduction
This report documents the process completed by the Rosemount/Empire /UMore Area
Transportation System Study (the study) Project Management Team (PMT) to plan for the
future transportation needs of the study area, which includes the future UMore Park and
Vermillion Highlands. The end result is a recommended transportation system that will meet
the needs of the travelling public into the future and allow for phased implementation, in
response to future development.
Prior to implementation, this study will serve as a planning tool for communities and
agencies with interests in the area. The recommendations contained in this report will assist
Dakota County, the City of Rosemount, Empire Township, the University of Minnesota, and
the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (Mn /DNR) with prioritizing future
improvements, coordinating roadway system needs with development and land use needs,
and also facilitate right -of -way preservation.
1.1 Study Area
Figure 1 shows the study area and its regional orientation. Located within southern Dakota
County, this area is now on the edge of suburban development of the Twin Cities
Metropolitan Area. Parts of Rosemount and Empire Township are within the study area. The
Metropolitan Council forecasts that the population of these two communities will reach a
combined 45,000 by 2030, up from 16,500 in 2000. Much of this growth will come from the
5,000 -acre UMore Park development, planned to be completed in 25 to30 years.
The growing communities of Farmington, Lakeville, and Apple Valley are north and west of
the study area; the communities of Hastings, Northfield, and Cottage Grove, which have
recently experienced substantial population growth, are located to the south and east. Given
these circumstances and future land use plans at UMore Park, this area is located within an
expanded Twin Cities Metropolitan Area, despite the current predominance of rural
agricultural land uses and undisturbed natural areas.
1.2 Study Background
1.2.1 Purpose of Study and Anticipated Study Outcomes
Prior to starting this study, the PMT developed a Purpose /Need for a Study. In summary,
this document notes that it is timely for the PMT and the general public to:
...develop a plan that addresses transportation issues in this area of Dakota County
in a coordinated and balanced manner with area land use development plans. Such
a plan will allow these agencies to develop a transportation system together over
time that will result in safe and efficient travel in the area as cost - effectively as
possible, while at the same time developing land use plans in the area that will
accomplish the objectives of the City of Rosemount, Empire Township, the University
of Minnesota, the Department of Natural Resources, and Dakota County.
The Purpose /Need for a Study and the Expected Study Outcomes documents, which were
developed by the PMT, are included in Attachment A.
1.2.2 Relation to Other Studies & Development Planned within Study Area
The study area is currently the subject of a great deal of land use and preservation planning.
The intensity of development proposed for this land ranges from large tracts of open spaces
within Vermillion Highlands and Dakota County's Regional Park to relatively dense planned
ROSE MOUNT /EMPIRE /UMORE AREA TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STUDY REPORT
MARCH 2010
urban development within UMore Park and existing and future development in City of
Rosemount and Empire Township. As such, this study was developed with consideration of
the transportation and land use elements of the following documents (listed chronologically):
• Dakota County 2025 Transportation Plan (July 2004)
• Creating Common Ground, A report to the Minnesota Legislature (January 2007)
• Dakota County Parks, Lakes, Trails and Greenways Vision, 2030 (2007)
• Draft Rosemount Transportation Plan (April 2008)
• Draft of Concept Master Plan for Vermillion Highlands (June 2008)
• City of Rosemount Draft 2030 Comprehensive Land Use Plan (August 2008)
• Empire Township 2030 Future Land Use Map and data (March 2009) and Sewer
Staging (June 2008)
• Concept Master Plan for the University of Minnesota's New Sustainable Community at
Wore Park (January 2009)
It is noteworthy that the Dakota County 2025 Transportation Plan (see Figure T -6 Dakota
County Highway Capacity Deficiencies, 2025) currently includes a direct connection
between CR 79 and CSAH 71 via Blaine Avenue. This connection was planned before the
creation of Vermillion Highlands. This study was undertaken in part to re- consider this
alignment as it would bisect the newly created Vermillion Highlands.
1.2.3 Existing and Forecast Traffic Volumes and Regional Transportation System Needs
Figure 2 shows existing and future (year 2025 or 2030, depending on the data sources
noted on the figure) daily traffic volumes for roadways in the study area. Much of the growth
in traffic is anticipated to come from planned development within Wore Park and the City of
Rosemount.
Traffic forecasts show that future demand for north -south roads will be 50,500 vehicles per
day, which will require six- to eight -lanes on regional roads.' An additional four to six north -
south lanes are needed within the study area to meet future traffic demand.2 Currently, this
area includes one regional, north -south roadway — Highway 3 —which has two to three lanes
depending on location. Based on anticipated traffic, an additional four to six north -south
regional highway lanes are needed to meet future demand.
Traffic forecasts show that in the future, east -west roadways will be used by over 100,000
vehicles per day, which would require 12 -14 lanes on regional roadways. The study area
now includes three regional roadways: CSAH 42 (4- lanes), CSAH 46 (2- lanes), and
Highway 50 (2 lanes); for a total of eight existing east -west, regional roadway lanes. An
additional four to six east -west regional highway lanes are needed to meet future demand.
1 The number of lanes needed to accommodate future traffic volumes in both the north -south and east -west directions are
based on the assumption that regional, arterial roadways would accommodate an average of 7,000 -8,000 vehicles per lane per
day. These volumes are consistent with the average, daily capacities for arterials assumed in the Wore Park Development
Study. Design capacities are determined based on the relationship between level of service and average daily traffic volumes.
Assumptions for this analysis include a maximum flow rate of 800 vehicles /hour /lane and LOS D for arterials.
2 A range of the number of north -south and east -west lanes on regional roadways are based on planning level traffic forecasts
(versus design level forecasts). This range allows for flexibility in responding to traffic needs as land use planning for this area
evolves and is implemented.
ROSEMOUNT /EMPIRE /UMORE AREA TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STUDY REPORT 2
MARCH 2010
1.3 Supporting Roadway Network
1.3.1 Roadway Functional Classification Guidelines
Developed areas are best served with a classified system of roads where a small fraction
provides high mobility and the majority of the roads provide access to adjacent land. All
roads can be categorized into one of these categories:
• Principal Arterials — Primarily provide mobility and speed for the long, uninterrupted
distances with controlled access.
• Minor Arterials— Provide a combination of mobility and access with reasonable speed
for some extended distance, with some access control.
• Collectors — Collect traffic from local roads, and providing connection to land with little
or no through movements; usually function at lower speeds and for shorter distances.
• Local Streets — Provide access to land with little or no through movement; includes all
roads not classified as arterials or collectors.
Table 1 provides the Metropolitan Council's roadway spacing guidelines, which aid in the
planning of future transportation systems within developed and developing areas.
TABLE 1
Spacing Guidelines for Functionally Classified Roads
Land Use
Principal Arterials
Minor Arterials
Collectors
Local Streets
Characteristics
Developed Areas
2 to 3 miles
'/ to'/ mile
%to' /z mile
As needed to
Developing Areas
3 to 6 miles
1 to 2 miles
'/2 to 1 mile
access land uses
Rural Areas
6 to 12 miles
4+ miles
As needed to
access land uses
Source: Metropolitan Council, Metropolitan Development Guide, Appendix F and Federal Highway
Administration, Highway Functional Classification
1.3.2 Existing Roadway Network Functional Classification
Figure 3 shows the location, spacing, and functional classification of highways in the study
area. The existing road system, with highways spaced at intervals of one -mile or more,
provides adequate levels of mobility for existing rural land uses and relatively low levels of
commuting. The study area includes three east -west arterials (CSAH 42, CSAH 46, and
Highway 50) and one north -south arterial (Highway 3). The Metropolitan Council's
guidelines for a functionally classified road system indicate that the study area would include
a total of five east -west and four north -south arterials. This means there is currently is a
shortage of roadways to meet future demand in this developing area.
The existing rural system is not robust enough to reasonably serve the trips that would be
generated by the higher density urban development planned in Wore Park, Rosemount,
and Farmington, or other nearby areas. The existing transportation system will need to be
upgraded to accommodate development, population growth, and increased commuting
levels between this area and employment centers within the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area.
ROSEMOUNT /EMPI REM MORE AREA TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STUDY REPORT 3
MARCH 2010
The likely consequence of an under built transportation system will be substantial increases
in traffic on the few available roads.
1.3.3 Recommended General Regional Transportation System (Not Specific Corridor
Alignments)
As noted above, a regional road system based on the Metropolitan Council's roadway
spacing guidelines would include:
– East/West Roadways: two principal arterials and three minor arterials
– North /South Roadways: one principal arterial and three minor arterials
Based on these basic traffic capacity needs, the PMT developed a recommended
transportation system — package of corridors (not specific alignments). Figure 4 shows these
corridors and the number of lanes that would meet anticipated future traffic needs. This
recommended system would enhance the arterial network by providing corridors that
connect to the regional network. Table 2 describes what would be included in the regional
transportation system.
TABLE 2
Recommended Transport ion System Summary
Corridor
New Right -of -Way
Existing # of
Recommended
Required # of
Required?
Regional Lanes
# of Regional
New Lanes
Lanes
East/West Corridors
6- to 8 -Lanes
CSAH 42
Possible— Existing CSAH
4 -lanes
4- to 6 -lanes
0- to 2 -lanes
42 includes 150' right -of-
way; more right -of -way
needed if lanes are added
CSAH 46
Yes — Existing CSAH 46
2 -lanes
4- to 6 -lanes
2- to 4 -lanes
includes approx. 66' right -
of -way
CSAH 66/200th St.
Yes — Existing CSAH 66
2 -lanes
2 -lanes
None
includes approx. 66' right -
of -way
Hwy. 50
No— Currently a Mn /DOT
2 -lanes
2 -lanes
None
highway; no jurisdictional
change anticipated
North /South Corridors
4- to 6 -Lanes
Hwy. 3
No— Currently a Mn /DOT
2 -lanes
2 -lanes
None
highway; no jurisdictional
change anticipated
Biscayne & Akron
Yes— Existing CRs include
N/A (not a
2- to 4 -lanes
0- to 2 -lanes
Aves.
66' right -of -way
regional road)
Blaine Ave. and /or CR
Yes— Existing CRs include
N/A (not a
2- lanes,
0- to 2 -lanes
81 /Clayton Ave.
66' right -of -way
regional road)
consider 4-
lanes where
needed
ROSEMOUNVEMPIRE /UMORE AREA TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STUDY REPORT 4
MARCH 2010
2.0 Study Phases, Schedule, and Stakeholder Involvement
2.1 Study Phases and Schedule
The study began in January 2009 and ended in December 2009; it was divided into phases,
which are shown on the study schedule (Figure 5) along with the timing of decision points,
key meetings, and open houses.
2.2 Study Team and Public Involvement
2.2.1 Project Management Team (PMT)
Figure 6 shows the communities and agencies that served on the PMT and the group's
responsibilities. This group developed the recommended transportation system. Throughout
the course of this study, the full PMT met ten times, as shown on the project schedule.
2.2.2 Public Involvement
Three public open houses were held during which the latest study developments were
shared and input was obtained from the public. All open houses were held during the late
afternoon and early evening at the Rosemount Community Center. Table 3 provides the
dates and key objectives of each open house:
TABLE 3
Open House Dates and Kev Obiectives
Open House Date Key Objectives
1. April 1, 2009 Develop universe of transportation corridor options and identify issues to
assist with developing evaluation criteria
2. June 29, 2009 Review universe of corridor options and evaluation criteria
3. November 12, 2009 Review recommended regional roadway system and identify any
implementation issues
Comments received at open houses and throughout the duration of the study help the PMT
identify community values and goals, develop a range of alternatives, and evaluate
alternatives. Summaries of comments and select representative comments received from
the public are included in Attachment B.
3.0 Corridor Option Evaluation Criteria
Based on input from the PMT and the public during Open House #1, evaluation criteria were
developed to compare transportation corridor options. Table 4 shows these criteria, which
are grouped into three categories; this table also shows which criteria were used during
each of the three levels of evaluation.
ROSEMOUNT /EMPIRE /UMORE AREA TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STUDY REPORT 5
MARCH 2010
TABLE 4
Evaluation Categories and Criteria
3 Levels of
Community Planning &
Natural Resources &
Transportation
Evaluation
Identity
Environment
I. Fatal Flaw
Is the alignment consistent with
Does the corridor support
Does the corridor provide
Screening
transportation and land use
opportunities to manage and
direct connections to the
elements of area plans?
expand recreational and
County transportation system?
natural areas?
II. Corridor
Can the corridor be
Does the corridor avoid
Is the alignment consistent with
Screening
implemented along with
severances of recreational and
County design guidelines?
planned development?
natural areas? Private farms?
Does the corridor allow for
Does the corridor avoid right-
Does the corridor provide
future development beyond the
of -way impacts?
access consistent with plans
study area?
and guidelines?
Does the corridor avoid
Does the corridor provide
wetland impacts?
opportunities for cost- effective
implementation (e.g., re -use of
existing right -of -way, roads,
and bridges)?
Does the corridor avoid
Would the corridor divert
impacts to threatened and
regional trips from local roads?
endangered species, and /or
cultural resources?
III. System
Do the County roads provide
Does the County road network
Would the corridor allow for
Screening
adequate access to
provide adequate access to
development of a multi -modal
communities?
recreational and natural areas?
system (integration of roads
with transit, trails, greenways,
and wildlife corridors)?
Does the system
Would the corridor provide
accommodate land use plans,
sufficient spacing and capacity
including aggregate mining
of north /south and east/west
activities?
roads to meet future demand?
Does the system allow for
Would the corridor result in a
development of local road
significant change in travel
network?
time for re- routed alignments?
4.0 Development of Transportation Corridor Options
The initial universe of transportation corridor options was developed based on PMT input
and comments received during the first public open house. The following statement from the
PMT's vision was also used as a starting point: The road network provides connectivity and
functional capacity reflective of the demand for transportation services in both the north -
south and east -west directions.
4.1 Initial Universe of East -West Corridor Options
The universe of east -west corridor options initially developed for this study is shown on
Figure 7 and summarized below.
ROSEMOUNT /EMPIRE/UMORE AREA TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STUDY REPORT 6
MARCH 2010
CSAH 42 Option
A. CSAH 42— Upgrade CSAH 42 as planned and documented in the County Transportation
Plan and County Plat Map (which reflects the CSAH 42 Final Study and Amendment,
and studies completed by Rosemount).
CSAH 46 Options
B. CSAH 46 —Use existing CSAH 46 alignment
C. CSAH 46, UMore Concept—Realign CSAH 46 based on the alignment shown in the
UMore Park Concept Master Plan
D. CSAH 46 via 170th St.— Realign CSAH 46 onto new alignment and 170th St. through
UMore Park (in- between Hwy. 3 and CR 81 /Clayton Ave.)
170th St. Options
E. 170th St. —Use 170th St. alignment (per public comment), extend 170th St. east of CR
79 /Blaine Ave.
F. 170th St. with Extension to Future County Hwy. and CR 81 /Clayton Ave. — Extend future
east -west County highway Oust south of existing 170th St.) to CR 81 /Clayton Ave. (near
Hwy. 52 /CSAH 46 intersection), via 170th St. through UMore
180th St. Option
G. 180th St. Extension to Future County Hwy., through Park, Vermillion Highlands— Extend
future east -west County highway Oust south of 170th St.) to Hwy. 52 via new 180th St.
alignment through County Park and Vermillion Highlands
CR 621190th St. Option
H. 190th St. Extension —Use 190th St. alignment, including new connection between Hwy.
3 and Biscayne Ave.
CSAH 661200th St. Option
I. 200th St.— Extend future east -west County highway (along 190th St. alignment) from
Hwy. 3 to CSAH 66/200th St.; includes a new Vermillion River Bridge
210th St. Option
J. 210th St. —Use 210th St. alignment
Hwy. 50 Option
K. Hwy. 50 —Use Hwy. 50 alignment
4.2 Initial Universe of North -South Corridor Options
The universe of north -south corridor options initially developed for this study is shown on
Figure 8; each option is summarized below.
Hwy. 3 Options
1. Hwy. 3 through Rosemount —Use Hwy. 3 alignment
2. Hwy. 3 to CR 73 /Akron Ave. —Use Hwy. 3 alignment; connect to CR 73 /Akron Ave. at
CSAH 42
ROSEMOUNT /EMPIRE /UMORE AREA TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STUDY REPORT 7
MARCH 2010
Biscayne Ave. Options
3. Hwy. 3 to Biscayne Ave. —Use Hwy. 3 alignment through Farmington; connect and use
Biscayne Ave. up to CSAH 42
4. Hwy. 3 to Biscayne Ave. to CR 73 /Akron Ave. —Use Hwy. 3 alignment through
Farmington; connect to and use Biscayne Ave. alignment to just north of CSAH 46;
connect to CR 73 /Akron Ave.
5. Biscayne Ave. to CR 73 /Akron Ave.— Extend Biscayne Ave. to Hwy. 50; use Biscayne
Ave. corridor to just south of 170th St.; connect to CR 73 /Akron Ave. via new alignment
CR 73 /Akron Ave. Options
6. West Park/WMA Boundary to CR 73 /Akron. Ave. — Extend CR 73 /Akron Ave. south from
CSAH 42 to Hwy. 50, passing along western border of new County Park and WMA/AMA.
7. Annette Ave. to CR 73 /Akron Ave.— Extend CR 73 /Akron Ave. south from CSAH 42 to
Hwy. 50, passing along Annette Ave. and eastern border of new County Park and
WMA/AMA, and through part of Vermillion Highlands
CR 79 1CSAH 71 /Blaine Ave. Options
8. CR 79 to CSAH 71 via direct Blaine Ave. Connection — Directly connect CR 79 to CSAH
71 via Blaine Ave. (in County's current 2025 Transportation Plan)
9. CR 79 to CSAH 71 via New Connection —Use existing CR 79 /Blaine Ave. alignment and
Vermillion River crossing; connect to CSAH 71 via new alignment.
CR 81 /Clayton Ave. Options
10. CR 79 to CSAH 71 via CR 81 /Clayton Ave. (190th St. to 170th St. -Use existing CR
79 /Blaine Ave. alignment and Vermillion River crossing; connect to CR 81 /Clayton Ave.;
connect to CSAH 71 via new alignment
11. CR 79 to CSAH 71 via CR 81 /Clayton Ave. (210th St. to north of 190th St.}— Connect to
and upgrade CR 81 /Clayton Ave., including possible construction of a new Vermillion
River bridge (public comments at Open House #1 recommended upgrading CR 81)
12. CR 79 to TH 52 /CSAH 46 via CR 81 /Clayton Ave.— Connect to and upgrade CR
81 /Clayton Ave., including possible construction of a new Vermillion River bridge,
terminating at CSAH 46.
5.0 Alignment Option Evaluation and Refinement
The screening process was divided into three levels of evaluation as shown in Table 5. As
part of a "Context Sensitive Solutions" (CSS) process (described more fully in Section 7.3), a
fundamental component of alignment option evaluation was the initial determination of
criteria. These criteria were set prior to the development of options to place priority on the
stated goals and objectives of project team members. The integrity of a CSS process relies
on it being driven by the priorities and objectives of all project participants.
5.1 Step 1: "Fatal Flaw" Alignment Option Evaluation
Table 5 below documents the corridors recommended for elimination from the universe of
options during the first evaluation —the fatal flaw evaluation. Corridors with a "fatal flaw"
were considered to be in direct conflict with key criteria identified by the project team in one
ROSEMOUNT /EMPIRE /UMORE AREA TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STUDY REPORT 8
MARCH 2010
of three categories: 1) community planning and identity; 2) natural resources and
environment; or 3) transportation network design and function. Attachment C includes a
complete description of the Fatal Flaw Analysis methodology and a table that documents the
PMT's discussion during this step — including consideration of opportunities lost by
alignment dismissal, and any potential to use dismissed corridors as local roads.
TABLE 5
Fatal Flaw Analysis—Findings and Corridors Eliminated from Further Consideration
Community Planning &
Natural Resources &
Transportation Network
Identity
Environment
Design & Function
Corridors Recommended
is the alignment consistent
Does the corridor support
Does the corridor provide
for Elimination from
with transportation and
opportunities to manage
direct connections to the
Universe Options
land use elements of area
and expand recreational
County transportation
plans7
and natural areas?
system?
North /South Corridors
1. Hwy. 3 through
No— Inconsistent with
Rosemount Improvements
Rosemount's Land Use
and Transportation Plans.
3. Hwy. 3 to Biscayne Ave.—
No— Inconsistent with
Inconsistent with
Rosemount's Land Use
and Transportation Plans
7. Annette Ave. to CR
No— Inconsistent with
No— Presents
73 /Akron Ave.
Wore and Vermillion
management challenges
Highlands Plans.
within Vermillion Highlands.
8. CR 79 to CSAH 71 via
No— Inconsistent with
No— Presents
direct Blaine Ave. connection
Wore and Vermillion
management challenges
Highlands Plans
within Vermillion Highlands.
Yes — Consistent with
Dakota County 2025
Transportation Plan
12. CR 79 to Hwy. 52/CSAH
No— Doesn't provide
46 via CR 81 /Clayton Ave.
adequate connection to
County road system.
East/West Corridors
E. 170' St.
No— Doesn't provide
necessary level of
connectivity to County
System.
G. New alignment (extension
No— Inconsistent with
No— Impedes long -term
of 180th St. alignment)
Wore and Vermillion
plans for Vermillion
through Park, Vermillion
Highlands Plans.
Highlands expansion to
Highlands
River.
H. 190"' St.
No— Corridor is
No— Impedes long -term
inconsistent with County,
plans for Vermillion
Wore, and Vermillion
Highlands expansion to
Highlands Plans.
River.
ROSEMOUNT /EMPIRE /UMORE AREA TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STUDY REPORT 9
MARCH 2010
TABLE 5
Fatal Flaw Analysis—Findings and Corridors Eliminated from Further Consideration
Community Planning &
Natural Resources &
Transportation Network
Identity
Environment
Design & Function
Corridors Recommended is the alignment consistent
Does the corridor support
Does the corridor provide
for Elimination from with transportation and
opportunities to manage
direct connections to the
Universe Options land use elements of area
and expand recreational
County transportation
plans?
and natural areas?
system?
J. 210t' St. No— Inconsistent with
No— Doesn't provide
Dakota County Plans.
necessary level of
connectivity to County
System.
The fatal flaw analysis resulted in dismissing five north -south corridors and four east -west
corridors from further consideration (see Figures 9 and 10). Corridors of note that were
eliminated include all north -south and east -west options that bisect Vermillion Highlands in
half. The remaining corridors were carried forward into the next level of evaluation,
discussed below.
5.2 Step 2: Corridor Level Evaluation and Continued Alignment Refinement
For the second, corridor level evaluation, more defined alignments were developed for each
of the remaining corridors. These alignments, shown in Figure 11, were developed for these
corridors using the following design features:
• 60 mile per hour design speed3,
• 1,500 minimum curve radius, and
• 150 foot right -of -way (which would accommodate both 2 -lane and 4 -lane rural
roadways).
These corridors were then evaluated based on the criteria that had been identified for the
second level of evaluation (see Table 3). The results of this evaluation are shown in Table 6.
The PMT opted not to dismiss any corridor options during the second phase of evaluation.
As a result, all corridor options were brought into the system level evaluation, discussed
below.
This evaluation included a high level environmental resource scan that reviewed existing
data related to wetlands and hydric soils; rare plants and animals; and historical and
archaeological features (results shown on Table 6). Initially, this data was used to develop
and then refine corridor alignments. Where reasonable, alignments were shifted to avoid
known occurrences of rare plants and animals (see Figure 12) and to avoid wetlands and
hydric soils (see Figure 13). As mentioned above, this evaluation relied on existing
information. As project development progresses for any recommended corridor, more in-
depth impact reviews — including more detailed review of contaminated properties —will be
completed by responsible communities and agencies.
3 The 60 mph design speed does not infer that the speed limit would be 60 mph; the statutory speed limit on rural roads is 55
mph. Speed studies may be necessary to determine whether the speed limit should be higher, lower, or that there should be no
chance from the statutory screed limits.
ROSEMOUNT /EMPIRE /UMORE AREA TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STUDY REPORT 10
MARCH 2010
}
N
O
a
a
W�
C
a
0 R
N K
ire
a m
ovtS 3°�E`
E
0
0
0
c,
r
N
ae$
fO aQ
'ii'
`o
e'�
o`
E
o
$` O
Z5
o o
E c o $
c o $
n m
= o
Eg
f
c
c g'
c
w m
N
c¢
g' m
�i
a
m
a
a°
a
i a°
IN
aC�
�
.
Z
2
pp
2
y
yO
l
Ci
S c
r
r
>•
a
m
A
21 �k
d v
�
O
' °
sae
A
�R
�m c4
a 3
8
c w
;aeF�
�
xN
off
a^ xr
cl o!
��
o�
O
's
cl
2}�
m
E
E
E
m
cli
`
i}
o
m
U
U
a
� o E
a
E
g
S¢ awe
SU a4a
S 1:
gr� m
Sae
O ro
g� ad
g m
v
x O
PINZ
o
eny ua „al£L a� aue `any awCe�sig E GnH
any �uy(ejOjle a3 Pie any -IBIS LL HM16L 83
}
N
O
a
a
W�
C
a
0 R
N K
ire
0
N
N
z
a
a¢
K
H
0-
a
0
� o
o
o
-, .
a
E Z
8
c
c
c
E 3
cc
E 3
E3
c
o �c0
8 E 3
o
E3
c 3
¢
c 3
E 3
c
�9�oc��a�c¢
°'
°' c
E0ia¢
c c
}}1 N N
0 •C "' O � d
.� _ �
� w w �
N
�
� _� w
� ,� m
� .y�
$ m w
w
$
B � _yy
- -
z
$ X
U N `O E
i Im ml R
iI d
Nw
21�
ym
II
i�
N�
i I
I
i II
3 "
y �'
m
w
m
m
j
z
:2
z
z
z
z
z
C C =
L^ c 4
�O�
a
t
3
ic
a'G`
tea"
0
0
0
n.
m
A
'1 � •H �
3
3
3 �
m'
O � 4
SCi c� �`•
� a
'� a
n.
.�o
A
-cf
Z V N
"O a
s �� ygU o
S
$ A. $
4
y a� J C •� a$i
t
C
F E W F m
C G C
g
y 3 y a
X
¢
E
m �°
E
E
E 2E
E 3E
E 2E
4 �C
r
o
Fr
U
'o
Am
v
m m
c
rn
^
C
a
Q
a
Q
Q
� S2
U
m
m
V
U
E
6¢ E
U
V N
_
`d 79
€
€
ZYHvso
96 HVS3
99
HVS3
OS
�^^H
0
N
N
z
a
a¢
K
H
0-
a
0
� o
o
5.3 Step 3: System Level Evaluation
This phase of evaluation moved beyond individual corridors and assessed how remaining
options would function as part of a regional transportation system. Referencing back to
Figure 4, the PMT agreed to identify a regional roadway system that would generally provide
roadway capacity in the areas identified during the earlier phases of this study. Table 7 and
Figures 14 and 15 capture the recommendations developed by the PMT over a series of
PMT meetings during the summer and fall of 2009.
6.0 Final Corridor Alignment Recommendations and Roadway
Characteristics
Figure 16 shows the recommended transportation system developed by the PMT. The
recommendations of this study include:
• The regional arterial road network as shown on the Recommended Regional Arterial
Corridors map will serve as a planning tool for this area as it develops. This
recommended system will be used by study partners and surrounding communities
as land use and transportation plans are implemented.
The roadway system recommended in this study will form a "back bone" arterial
network. This network was developed using the best information available for a long-
term corridor planning study. The recommended corridors may be refined in
response to changing circumstances and new information. Any refined corridors
would undergo the same level of evaluation as was completed for the recommended
corridors.
The unshaded rows in Table 7 describe the recommended number of lanes and the
recommended functional classification system for each alignment. The combination of
corridors composing the recommended regional road system for the study area is not
consistent with spacing guidelines, but represents a compromise that provides:
• Reasonable spacing and connectivity,
• Consistency with and support for local plans, and
• Minimum impact to area resources.
When Dakota County constructs or re- constructs any of the regional roadways
recommended in this study, it is anticipated that the County would use either two -lane or
four -lane cross - sections, as shown in Figure 17, based on an assessment of the forecast
volume of traffic in each of the corridors. Details, such as whether or not four -lane cross -
sections will be divided will be determined during subsequent phases of project
development. This study assumed a 150 foot right -of -way to initially assess corridor impacts;
this width would accommodate both 2 -lane and 4 -lane rural roadways.
ROSEMOUNT /EMPIRE /UMORE AREA TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STUDY REPORT 13
MARCH 2010
O
W
N
0
R
to
w
O
z°
5 o
C
C�
&§
Q
°d
o
o
°o
Z
rn
c
o
n
C
c
ia
O
o
0
v
E
a�
ov
a
o°'
E
�,
cm
o
Y
o
vs
o
c
2
3
Z
z
Z
v
V
Q
N
CU
O N
(a
�C
.o
Q
Q m
m
O
O N a
Q
a
a
G cu 0)
a
= N
g o
E
U
N
O
_
c6
U C
iii CD
O N c
a
.O
O
v
U
MI O L
Q
¢
= N O N
Q
a
Z
N a)
C
N o
Z
Z
U) a) a> �
Z
= c
rn�C o
U N
o rn
Cb
cu m
n
c�
� �
o
L
cvoo,
c
m
Z
O =
Z
y r 3
N con
m
M
N
N
L
C
O
=
c 3
ca
n.
Im
a
=
cD E
Ci O
M O
N
N
N
N
N>
O
V
A �_
N C
C
a
N
o 'OV
U
N d
ca
Uaa)
cu o
=
E 0
CnY
= x 3
c
o o
x �U
O
_
°.a
��
n� CD
o
ca (n
a)
E
_ m
$
> o
O z .c ca
o Q
o
con
o
E a
c
o
� C '3 2
p O
G C
�'
w
i0 o
=
O N
(=C 2 E
N
_
a ,�
CC
O
c
U
E
N
� -J
t Q cu
CD
= m
L =
O U
C co
+�
N
o a
O
- C
3~
0 ,�
Q
C..E
�
N-0
C 0
°a
ate..
m
aO x
�p CD
a:-.�
2 c
3
m
c
o m
a
a
3
c=a aai
��•
rno
cF-
M = 0
E a N
U
a
N
5 ti
O c
�
?' .�
_— v
O
.0
N
m
O
a >o
00
C N
a
N = c4
m
.�.
Z� �.
..�0_. co
a
N
c
N
= N
N
N N
Q C
N
O
CD
=
.
a C
N
Q
• O
0
L)
5
U,*.)
N
cp
12
N
�i '
•.��„
c
N
C
C
O L
co
a
p
N = . _
.0
�
U)
_ _
o
.O>
O a N
aQo
- =
N
=
E
O
°
o
_
0
ac
N
0 0
o
p
a
O
N
N
o
o
cm
cz
O N
O
N p
O
V
6 0
U
o
c
_=
w
c
E =
N i
y c
cu
c
E ca '>
LL
«'
m
U
m
N ()
o
Q
Y
E
=6
.I= N
Q- N C U
E n2
I
O
�'c
C �
O
U
U 3-0
W Of c
W
Q
p
W 2
W O
ED
N Q
U
Z
m
N
m
m
m
QO
mO
Q
m
O
to
C
LL
0)
C
O
c
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
O
N
ID
=
0
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
r o
W U
N
2
fi XMH
any OUP :)Slq
•any OU1e1811L
HVS316L 213
�
z
z°
O
W
N
0
R
to
w
O
z°
5 o
C
C�
&§
D
H
N
z
0
U)
9
Of
V
06
rn
CY)
o
0
v,
c
o
m
(O
N
C)
lb ci C
C
N
O
C l)
-
o
0
CL
m
E
C
a)
cm
cm
0
L
C
cc
c
y
a)a
O
a)
o
Z
c
a
Q
a
Q
O
0
•°
is
_°'
°c
C
e
m`
a`
E
T
U
N
O
f4
C
N
O
m
C a)
C6
O'
C6
a
t6
_O
.x0..
U
U
C
C U
N to
C C
Z
C
C
o
C C
C
C
O O
<6
Z
Op
4 4)Ca
�N
04
N
f6
L
7
O O
O 04
O
C C N
LL- -p W)
co
�, Q =
co ca
3
3
�'' _N rn
E
O
�_�
LT c
_
mUil
a)
o
UQch
o
2 �L co ai
°>
a) a)
aEi
5
aci aci c
c
L E
E
.
a O
— =
0
C
C -
m
N
U
p
N tM N L
C
Q C
cu cu
OE
4
C -Np
O
O
O(D fn o—
_C
a
E
N
32
°
o
Z a) U
N
y
Etc
c°�
rn
c
°N
cm
c�
°°
'
'
°oa°i�3
,
�a
c
c Co
�?
c CD
camE
c
vim) �
mo
0
0
ca a)
m0E>
o
c
m
C
E
a)
E
= a
.O
.:
•O
O .�
N>
c N d
U)
N C
i
a)
T E
a)
>, E
E _U
N T t c `.�
In
N
CC U
E
ca
N ►'
t6 a
O
N O
a= O C`6
t�
E °
S C
N
fm
a)
p
a)
p
N a) •—
c �
O
_
o
C
o
-t
o
N
c
C
min
a c
C N
= cv
Q
to
�— N
U o
C6 -0
c a)
'0
c N
U d Q U 2
cm a) Q
y
x
c.2
n
0
Q Q
N �-0
U
rn
N Q-
co t
O C
m
O C
m
2 CN C N cn
>a U
a)
a)
E
N
c
n�
C
EO O
O
C j C
N
0° ?�
( 6
N i
' D N m M
O
m°
o
, E
a? i°—
�a
a3a
mto aa))70
=
a)
c
U
>' Eo
`)
�_
�_
n 2 o
-„ E
°o
coca
N o
.=c-
o
m m
U
o
�a
? CD CD
�anOf CV
x°
w
ccv E
wow
w�
-
Lu
vOi > a°i
�UQ W w
U
>
—
v c
o
Q
m
U
U
0
w
w
o
O
c
c
c
c
c
c
e
cm
m
o
o
O
o
O
°
o
0
E
w
0
O
0
0
O
O
o
0
w 0
N
ZtiH11S�
'IS tPOLL 196 HVS3
99 HVS3
09 -XMH
.
a _
a
a
f-
z or
w
D
H
N
z
0
U)
9
Of
TOActivities to Implement Recommended Alignments
7.1 Activities and Timing to Implement Recommendations
Future roadway construction will be coordinated with development. When traffic levels or
development in an area warrant, consideration will be given to construction of new roads or
upgrading existing regional roads. The schedule for implementing study recommendations
varies by area.
Shortly after completion of this study, local communities, University of MN, and Mn /DNR will
formally adopt or recognize the recommendations through their governing bodies (e.g., a
resolution). Within the next few years, communities will update their comprehensive land use
and /or transportation plans to reflect study recommendations.
In the longer term, construction of regional roads will occur as land uses change (e.g.,
More Park) and development is approved by local governments. More Park plans
currently show the northern part of the parcel developing first. Total build -out is expected in
30 years, however, as with any development, this too will be subject to market forces.
This network was developed using the best information available for a long -term corridor
planning study. This included current environmental resource information, engineering
considerations, and land use management plans. The recommended corridors may be
refined in response to changing circumstances and new information. Any refined corridors
would undergo the same level of evaluation as was completed for the recommended
corridors.
Implementation of specific corridors is all subject to phasing, in response to development.
For example, northern portions of the north -south alignments for Biscayne Avenue /Akron
Avenue and Blaine Avenue may be initially built to accommodate More Park, as it
develops. However, the southern portions of these corridors may not get built until much
later, in response to future development.
7.2 Right -of -Way Acquisition
The acquisition of right -of -way for transportation facilities requires significant financial
resources and is a time consuming process. Jurisdictions responsible for road development
(state, county, city, etc.) will use available right -of -way preservation tools. For Dakota
County, this includes requiring plat dedication for highway corridors to preserve the right -of-
way required to implement any of the recommended alignments. In areas that do not
develop, a condemnation process would be used to acquire additional right -of -way.
7.3 Context - Sensitive Solution Considerations
Development evaluation criteria and processes, as well as potential transportation corridor
options was structured according to the principles of a Context Sensitive Solutions (CSS)
process. Given the unique setting for this project — including the unique More Park
development and Vermillion Highlands —the CSS approach is valuable because decision -
making is focused on project context and stakeholder -based criteria. Through this process,
the PMT accomplished transportation objectives while developing a project that reflects
community values. A four -step approach to CSS was implemented, as follows:
Community Inventory and Values;
2. Goals and Criteria;
ROSEMOUNT /EMPIRE /UMORE AREA TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STUDY REPORT 16
MARCH 2010
3. Alternatives Development and Evaluation; and
4. Implementation Planning and Roles.
CSS is a process that will continue to take place through all upcoming stages related to
implementing the recommended transportation system. Given the early nature of this study,
CSS was applied to identifying project context and issues important to stakeholders.
However, the PMT did broadly contemplate geographic areas within the study area which
should be given a higher level of CSS consideration moving forward into next steps. These
areas are shown on Figure 18.
8.0 Other Transportation Considerations
8.1 Supporting Local Road System, Intersection Spacing, and Other Possible
Roadway Projects
The regional roadway network recommended for this study area will be used by the County,
local communities, and the University of Minnesota to plan a supporting local road system to
complement the transportation network and sere any future land development. Specifically,
the Metropolitan Council's roadway spacing guidelines shown in Table 1 will be used to aid
in the planning of the local road network in developing areas, including UMore Park.
Intersection spacing is directly tied to the implementation of a supporting road network,
discussed above. As such, this topic will be considered in tandem with planning of a
supporting, local road network. Dakota County access spacing guidelines will be adhered to
in any future access planning.
In addition to any future access spacing planning, previous recommendations for the CSAH
42 corridor will be implemented as planned (see the CH 42 Final Study planned access
management and Attachment A: Updated Recommended Roadway Improvements Segment
15: TH 3 to TH 52, 2007). The PMT recognizes that there is potential for some
recommended corridors to impact the need for intersection improvements identified in the
CH 42 Study. For example, the Biscayne Ave. /Akron Ave. north -south alignment may result
in a diversion of traffic from Highway 3 that could reduce traffic levels at the intersection of
Highway 3 and CSAH 42 to the point that a previously recommended interchange may not
be necessary. Any impact this study's recommendations would have on plans for other
corridors in or near the study area would need to be studied in detail. Dakota County will
work with local communities and Mn /DOT to assess all future capacity issues, necessary
improvements, and the interrelatedness of future transportation improvements.
During this study, the need to plan for future crossings of Highway 52 were discussed,
including the possibility of grade separating crossings at 170tt' Street and CSAH 66/200tn
While these intersections are outside of this study area and therefore were not considered in
detail, it should be noted that Mn /DOT, Dakota County, and local communities may consider
grade separations at these locations in the future.
8.2 Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities
Dakota County has plans to implement a north -south and an east -west regional greenway
corridor within the study area. The currently planned greenway corridors are shown on
Figure 18. These greenway alignments are concepts; the actual location of these greenways
will be the result of further planning actions by Dakota County, the City of Rosemount,
Empire Township, the University of Minnesota, and Mn /DNR. Specifically, the preferred trail
ROSEMOUNT /EMPIRE /UMORE AREA TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STUDY REPORT 17
MARCH 2010
alignment for crossing the Vermillion River will be mutually evaluated by appropriate
agencies and determined as part of the 2010 master planning process. At any points where
greenways will intersect an existing or planned County highway, a grade- separated highway
crossing will be considered for trail users. Specific details regarding funding will be
addressed during future inter - agency coordination.
8.3 Future Transit Service
The study area currently includes primarily rural and open space land uses and is not
served by transit. However, plans for UMore Park and surrounding communities will likely
increase the intensity of land uses in coming decades. The UMore Park Concept Master
Plan shows that light rail, commuter bus, and internal bus service may some day service the
development. Additionally, the Robert Street Corridor Transit Feasibility Study's Long Term
Corridor Vision shows a "potential transitway" extending down Highway 3 (to just south of
CSAH 42) and providing transit access into UMore Park. None of the above mentioned
transit concepts have been planned or funded. However, Dakota County will continue to
coordinate with the University of Minnesota, the Metropolitan Council, and local communities
regarding any future transit concepts that would service the study area.
Dakota County's Transit Plan (Review Copy, December 2007) has identified specific transit
needs for service beyond anything that is included in regional or county plans. Within the
study area, the County's Transit Plan has identified needs on CSAH 42, CSAH 46, Highway
3, and Highway 50. As noted in the Transit Plan, implementation of these improvements is
considered very long range. Moving forward with any County Highway improvements the
Plan does recommend that, "All County arterial highways should provide appropriate level of
infrastructure for transit service including adequate widths, shoulders, pullouts, and trails"
(Dakota County Transit Plan, December 2007, Chapter Sever: Page 4 of 7).
ROSEMOUNT /EMPIRE/UMORE AREA TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STUDY REPORT g
MARCH 2010