Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10. Metropolitan Council 2030 Transportation Policy Planr r CITY OF ROSEMOUNT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: October 19, 2004 AGENDA ITEM: Metropolitan Council 2030 Transportation AGENDA SECTION: Policy Plan Legislative/ Intergovernmental PREPARED BY: Kim Lindquist, Community Development AGENDA NO: Director Andrew J. Brotzler, P.E., City Engineer I ATTACHMENTS: Draft comment letter to Metropolitan Council APPROVED BY: RECOMMENDED ACTION: MOTION TO AUTHORIZE SUBMITTAL OF LETTER TO METROPOLITAN COUNCIL ACTION; BACKGROUND: The Metropolitan Council is preparing a 2030 Transportation Policy Plan for the metro area that addresses funding and programming of projects for existing and proposed transportation systems. The recommendations of the plan impact the City of Rosemount related to the regional transportation systems within and adjacent to the City. Based on Staff's review of the plan, the attached draft comment letter has been prepared for Council consideration to submit to the Metropolitan Council. The Public Comment period for this process ends October 22, 2004. SUMMARY: Staff recommends that the City Council authorize the submittal of the attached comment letter to the Metropolitan Council. CITY OF ROSEMOUNT October 19, 2004 Mr. Peter Bell, Chair Metropolitan Council 230 East Fifth Street St. Paul, MN 55101 Re: Proposed 2030 Transportation Policy Plan (TPP) Dear Chairman Bell: CITY HALL 2875 - 145th Street West Rosemount, MN 55068 -4997 Phone: 651.423 -4411 Hearing Impaired: 651- 423 -6219 Fax: 651-423-5203 On behalf of the City of Rosemount and City Council, I would like to thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the Metropolitan Council's proposed 2030 Transportation Policy Plan (TPP). The Rosemount City Council reviewed the proposed TPP on October 19, 2004. As you are aware, the City of Rosemount is a rapidly developing community within Dakota County that is supported by Trunk Highway 52, Trunk Highway 3 and County State Aid Highway (CSAH) 42. With the development that is occurring in the City of Rosemount and neighboring communities within Dakota County, there is an increasing need for new transportation funding sources to maintain and expand these corridors as well as local supporting roadway systems. To this extent, the City of Rosemount would offer the following comments: 1. CSAH 42 is designated as aprincipal arterial roadway that connects eastern Dakota County to Scott County and traverses through the central area of the City of Rosemount. As a principal arterial roadway, development adjacent to and along CSAH 42 is subject to additional restrictions to meet access spacing criteria for a principal arterial. These restrictions require the construction of an extensive local roadway system to support the principal arterial classification. With CSAH 42 being under the jurisdiction of Dakota County rather than MnDOT, funding options for the construction of a local supporting roadway system are more limited. The City of Rosemount would request that the TPP work to address funding issues relating to non -MnDOT principal arterials and the need to construct an adequate local support system to maintain CSAH 42 as a principal arterial. 2. The City of Rosemount would request that increased funding be identified for TH 3, an A -minor arterial to accommodate the continually increasing traffic volumes on TH 3 through the City of Rosemount and to address existing and future safety issues. The TPP acknowledges that investments must be made in areas where growth is projected to occur. Rosemount, Farmington and other southeastern communities are designated for steady growth in the Framework. Currently TH 3 is designated as a Preservation Corridor which is not acceptable. The need for increased funding for TH 3 to accommodate existing and future traffic volumes is supported by Mn/DOT's TH 3 Access Management Study. 3. With regard to Strategy 11e: Utilize Transportation corridor studies or sub -area studies, the City of Rosemount has concerns with the proposed remedy to project scope increase above 20% of the adopted plan. Specifically, projects included in this plan, while regionally important are of significant importance to local communities. The development of these projects and project scope creep is generally beyond the control of the local agency. The expectation that local funding will be required to offset a project scope increase to keep the project in the initial program year is not acceptable. A less obtrusive and more efficient process to respond to project scope increase should be developed to ensure the timely completion of important programmed projects. 4. From a policy standpoint the TPP document seems to oversimplify the complex issue of transportation and transit funding. While the Plan tries to address differing funding scenarios, the unconstrained projections still only consider improvements to the existing system and do not recognize expansion of the system is needed. The discussion of funding also appears to underestimate the financial resources needed at the local level for cost sharing on regional projects and also underestimates the valuable local streets that function as relievers during periods of congestion. For the most part these local systems are paid by the City or as development occurs and not through State or Federal funds. The TPP does not address recent activities at the State level which seem to be moving in the direction to curtail obtaining financial exactions as part of the development process. If successful, this will further reduce the funding options open to locals, and thus further hamper the safe and efficient operation of a regional transportation system. 5. The City is concerned about the implementation of Policy 12, Strategy 12C and 12D because it does not provide any mechanism to deal with special situations which may require changes to funding priorities. Specifically, the TPP does not describe how the region would respond to the influx of new federal funds which traditionally become available for emerging issues and urgent problems. We recommend that the policy plan recognize that certain extenuating circumstances may occur, such as projects of regional significance or safety concerns, which may prompt funding of projects out of order from the plan priorities. In conclusion, the City believes the Plan attempts to address the primary issues facing the maintenance and expansion of the regional transportation system to a greater extent than in previous plans. However, the increased growth experienced by the region is vastly outpacing the funding for new infrastructure and transit needs. The Plan needs to recognize this deficit and hopefully its position will serve as a catalyst for future discussions and policy changes. Sincerely, William H. Droste Mayor K