DOCSLIB.ORG

Transportation Advisory Board of the Metropolitan Council of the Twin Cities

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Transportation Advisory Board of the Metropolitan Council of the Twin Cities Transportation Advisory Board of the Metropolitan Council of the Twin Cities . ACTION TRANSMITTAL No. 2013-17 DATE: March 14, 2013 TO: Transportation Advisory Board FROM: Kevin Roggenbuck, TAB Coordinator PREPARED BY: Kevin Roggenbuck, TAB Coordinator (651-602-1728) SUBJECT: Public Comment Report on the 2013-2016 TIP Amendment for the 2015-2016 Regional Solicitation Projects and Railroad-Highway Grade Crossing Safety Improvement Program Projects REQUESTED Staff requests that the TAB accept the public comment report with ACTION: the recommended changes. RECOMMENDED Recommend that the Transportation Advisory Board accept the MOTION: public comment report with changes to the draft amendment to the 2013-2016 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) to add approximately $159 million in federal funding as the 2015-2016 allocations of federal Surface Transportation Program (STP), Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ), Transportation Alternatives (TA), and Railroad-Highway Grade Crossing Safety Improvement Program funding. BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE OF ACTION: At its June 21, 2012, meeting, the TAB approved projects selected from the 2011 Regional Solicitation for four federal funding programs in 2015 and 2016: Surface Transportation Program (STP), Bridge Improvement and Replacement (BIR), Transportation Enhancements (TE), and Congestion Mitigation Air Quality (CMAQ). Typically, the selection of projects would occur in time to add them to the draft Transportation Improvement Program so they could be part of the public involvement process. Because the selection was made after the public hearing process had begun for the draft 2013-2016 TIP, the projects could not be added to the draft TIP and would have to be amended into the approved TIP. The TIP amendment to include the regional solicitation projects also includes projects solicited and recommended for funding by MnDOT in the Railroad Highway Safety Crossing program. These projects were not part of the regional solicitation and were not part of the public involvement process. Also, because of the magnitude of the amendment, an opportunity for public involvement was included in the TIP amendment process, similar to the public involvement opportunity for the draft TIP. Staff developed a TIP amendment schedule with a 21-day public comment period in consultation with the Federal Highway Administration and MnDOT, and the TAB approved the schedule in February, 2013. 390 North Robert St., St. Paul, Minnesota 55101-1805 (651) 602-1000 Fax (651) 602-1739 The attached public comment report documents the outreach efforts to gain public involvement and all the public comments received, and includes staff responses to the public comments. RELATIONSHIP TO REGIONAL POLICY: Typically, the projects selected for funding through the regional solicitation process would be included in the draft Transportation Improvement Program that is adopted by the TAB for public comment and a public hearing. Because the selection of projects in the 2011 regional solicitation was made too late to be part of the draft 2013-2016 TIP and its public involvement process, a similar public involvement process was developed and implemented. STAFF ANALYSIS: Staff has three recommendations that are already reflected in the TIP amendment and more fully described in the public comment report. 1. Revise the description of the rail crossing project in Carver County to correctly locate the project in Dahlgren Township. 2. Revise the amendment to program Hennepin County STP project on CSAH 81 in program year 2017 and Hennepin County STP project CSAH 53 in 2016. 3. Revise the amendment to program $2.4 million of CMAQ funds and the remaining $9.024 million as Advance Construction in program year 2015 and Advance Construction payback of $3.76 million in program year 2016. COMMITTEE COMMENTS AND ACTION: The public comment period began on February 20, 2013 and ran through March 13, 2013; during the time the TAB’s technical committees met and discussed the amendment. The technical committees provided the opportunity for public comment at their meetings, but because the comment period was held during their meetings, this public comment report was not available for their review and recommendation. ROUTING TO ACTION REQUESTED DATE COMPLETED TAC Funding & Programming None Committee Technical Advisory Committee None Transportation Advisory Board Review & Accept Metropolitan Council Information Transportation Committee Metropolitan Council Information Page 2 Transportation Advisory Board of the Metropolitan Council of the Twin Cities TO: Transportation Advisory Board FROM: Kevin Roggenbuck, TAB Transportation Coordinator DATE: March 14, 2103 RE: Public Comment Report on the draft 2013-2016 Transportation Improvement Program amendment to include the projects selected in the 2011 regional solicitation and the recommended Railroad Highway Crossing Safety projects. _____________________________________________________________________________________ The Transportation Advisory Board held a 21-day public comment period on the draft 2013-2016 Transportation Improvement Program amendment to include the 2011 regional solicitation projects selected by the TAB to receive federal funding from the Surface Transportation Program, the Congestion Mitigation Air Quality program , the Transportation Enhancements Program and the Bridge Improvement and Replacement Program. The Metropolitan Council sought public involvement by sending notices directly to project sponsors and other stakeholders, by publishing a notice on the metropolitan Council website and through social media. The public outreach efforts are documented in Appendix A. The public comment period began on Wednesday, February 20, 2013 than ended on Wednesday, March 13, 2013. All written comments and a summary of the comments received by telephone by the close of the public comment period are attached as Appendix B. Below is a summary of the three comments received during the public comment period with staff response and recommendations. COMMENTS RECEIVED DURING THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD Multiple emails and telephone messages from residents in and around the city of Plymouth Staff received 35 emails and 17 telephone messages during the public comment period and each had nearly identical comments requesting that I-494 be reconstructed to six lanes between I-394 and I-94. Staff response and recommendation: The roadway improvement projects funded through the Surface Transportation Program in the regional solicitation are limited to “A” Minor Arterials and Non-freeway Principal Arterials. I-494 is an Interstate freeway, part of the National Highway System, and not eligible for funds through the 2011 regional solicitation process. The Minnesota Department of Transportation has jurisdiction over the Interstate system and is responsible for programming improvements to this portion of I-494. Lyndon Robjent, Carver County Engineer Staff received an email on March 6 stating that there is a typo in the description of the RR project on CSAH 41 in Carver Co. The description states that the project is in Randolph Township but it is actually in Dahlgren Township. Staff response and recommendation: This error will be corrected in the amendment before it is sent to the TAB for adoption. 2013-16 public comment responses. page 2 James Grube, Hennepin County Engineer. Staff received an email dated February 14 in response to a request from Kevin Roggenbuck to allow the region to program Hennepin County STP project on CSAH 53 in program year 2017. Mr. Grube replied to program a different STP project on CSAH 81 in 2017. Staff inadvertently listed the CSAH 53 project in 2017. This error was brought to the staff’s attention during the public comment period. Staff response and recommendation: This is a staff error. The TIP amendment will be revised to show the CSAH 81 STP project in program year 2017 and the CSAH 53 STP project in program year 2016 as requested by Mr. Grube. Jonathan Vlaming, Associate Superintendent, Three Rivers Park District. Staff received a letter dated February 21 providing air quality assessment of the Nine Mile Creek TE project, allowing it to be programmed as a CMAQ project in 2016. Mr. Vlaming’s letter also requested that the project be programmed in 2015, if possible. Staff consulted with MnDOT Metro Program Management regarding the availability of CMAQ funds in 2015, and forwarded their generally affirmative response to Mr. Vlaming. Also attached is an email dated March 13 from Mr. Vlaming agreeing to have $2.4 million in CMAQ funds programmed in 2015 with the balance of the total project cost Advance Constructed in 2015 and the remainder of the federal funds listed as Advance Construction payback in 2016. Staff response and recommendation: The TIP amendment should be revised to show the funding for the Nine Mile Creek CMAQ project funded as described in both program years 2015 and 2016. 390 Robert Street No. St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 (651) 602-1728 Fax (651) 602-1739 Appendix A: Notification of the opportunity for public involvement. Announcement sent to project sponsors and other stakeholders. Announcement published on the metropolitan Council’s website. Announcement sent on Twitter. From: Schallberg, Heidi Subject: Public comment period open for Twin Cities draft TIP amendment Date: Thursday, February 21, 2013 5:04:22 PM The Metropolitan Council’s Transportation Advisory Board (TAB) is receiving public comment on the draft amendment to the 2013-2016 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Transportation
    6Transportation Introduction Report Organization The Transportation Plan is organized into the following The purpose of the Transportation Plan is to provide the sections: policy and program guidance needed to make appropriate transportation related decisions when development • Roadway System Plan occurs, when elements of the transportation system need • Transit System Plan to be upgraded or when transportation problems occur. The Transportation Plan demonstrates how the City of • Rail Service Plan Richfield will provide for an integrated transportation • Bicycle and Trail Plan system that will serve the future needs of its residents, businesses and visitors, support the City’s redevelopment • Sidewalk Plan plans and complement the portion of the metropolitan • Aviation Plan transportation system that lies within the City’s boundaries. • Plan Implementation The City of Richfield is responsible for operating and Transportation Vision and Goals maintaining the public roadways within the City Guidance for the development of the Transportation boundaries. Maintaining and improving this multi- Plan is provided by the Metropolitan Council’s 2030 modal transportation system is important to the ongoing Transportation Policy Plan (TPP). The Metropolitan economic health and quality of life of the City, as well as Council’s TPP includes five major themes that address for people to travel easily and safely to work and other regional transportation: destinations, to develop property and to move goods. 1. Land Use and Transportation Investments: Coordinate transportation investments with land Richfield Comprehensive Plan 6-1 Transportation 6 use objectives to encourage development at key To achieve this vision, the City of Richfield established nodes. seven goals and strategies for their implementation.
    [Show full text]
  • The Lyndale Avenue 35W Bridge
    _F- . , -"...j,2t Above: The old and the new. On the Ieft the historic Lyndale crossing of the Minnesota River. The photo vividly illustrates the difference in width of old and new, The Lyndale Avenue While the old had one lane each way, the new, carrying Interstate 35W trafiic, has three lanes each way. Photo: 35W Bridge 1960, Dahota County Tribune. The Lyndale Avenue Bridge was the first direct highway connection from Minneapolis to the southern and western part of the state. Built at the cost of $1,000,000 in L920-21, the bridge received much public support throughout its construction. Mrs. R.H. Benham, whose husband was instrumental in the drive which resulted in highway improvement along the route of the bridge, *u. ihu first person to cross it.44 The bridge crossed the Minnesota River on Lyndale into Burnsville. As the freeway system began to take shape, a new bridge, Interstate 35W, was built in 1957 parallei to the oid bridge. However, the new bridge was not met with the same enthusiasm as the old bridge. Residents and landowners of Burnsville who were assessed, questioaed the benefits the bridge offered them and did not want to pay for it.ab In 1984, the bridge needed widening and repairs which totaled $7.5 million. The work was done-by Lunda Construction of Black River Falls, WI.46 Above: Here the lift section of the old bridge is opened PinPoints during the 1940s. Passing through is one of the many ships built for the U.S. Navy by the Cargill Corporation.
    [Show full text]
  • Politics and Freeways: Building the Twin Cities Interstate System
    Center for Urban and Regional Affairs Cavanaugh Politics and Freeways and Politics Cavanaugh Politics and Freeways: Building the Twin Cities Interstate System by Patricia Cavanaugh Used with permission of Minnesota Historical Society Used with permission of Minnesota Historical Society Horses and wagons, bicycles, automobiles, and Cars in front of the St. Paul Cathedral, Summit streetcars cause traffic congestion at Nicollet and and Dayton, St. Paul Sixth, Minneapolis Center for Urban and Regional Affairs University of Minnesota University of Minnesota 200 Transportation and Safety Building 330 HHH Center 511 Washington Avenue SE 301—19th Avenue S. Minneapolis, MN 55455 Minneapolis, MN 55455 Phone: 612-626-1077 Phone: 612-625-1551 Fax: 612-625-6381 Fax: 612-626-0273 E-mail: [email protected] E-mail: [email protected] Website: www.cts.umn.edu Website: www.cura.umn.edu Used with permission of Henry Benbrooke Hall, Minnesota Historical Society Used with permission of Metropolitan Design Center, © Regents of the University Minnesota Used with permission of Metropolitan Design Center, Used with permission of Norton & Peel, Minnesota Historical Society Ce Interstate-35E construction, St. Paul View of downtown from Interstate 35, Interstate 35W with Minneapolis skyline nter for U for nter Minneapolis in background rban and Regional Affairs Affairs Regional and rban Politics and Freeways: Building the Twin Cities Interstate System Prepared by Patricia Cavanaugh University of Minnesota for Center for Urban and Regional Affairs (CURA) and Center for Transportation
    [Show full text]
  • I-35W Over the Minnesota River Findings of Fact and Conclusion
    FINDINGS OF FACT and CONCLUSIONS I-35W Over the Minnesota River State Project No. 1981-124 Prepared by: Minnesota Department of Transportation April 2018 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 STATEMENT OF ISSUE ..................................................................................................... 1 2.0 ADMINISTRATIVE BACKGROUND ............................................................................... 1 3.0 FINDINGS OF FACT ........................................................................................................... 3 3.1 Project Description ............................................................................................................... 3 3.2 Additional Information Regarding Items Discussed in the EA/EAW Since It Was Published ............................................................................................................................... 6 3.3 Findings Regarding Criteria for Determining the Potential for Significant Environmental Effects .................................................................................................................................. 15 4.0 CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................................................. 38 APPENDICES APPENDIX A – Public Involvement: EA/EAW Comment Period APPENDIX B – EA/EAW Comments and Responses APPENDIX C – Figures APPENDIX D – Recent Project Correspondence APPENDIX E – Traffic Noise Analysis – Public Involvement, Solicitation Forms APPENDIX F – List of Commitments I-35W Over
    [Show full text]
  • City of Bloomington, Minnesota COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
    City of Bloomington, Minnesota COMPREHENSIVE PLAN This Plan includes all amendments through March 24, 2004 Bloomington’s City Council adopted and placed the Comprehensive Plan 2000 into effect on April 16, 2001 through Resolution 2001-30. The Metropolitan Council adopted its review record of the plan on April 11, 2001 (Item #2000-568). Comprehensive plans are frequently updated and revised. The City maintains a current version of the Comprehensive Plan on its web site, www.ci.bloomington.mn.us. A hard copy of the current version can be obtained at: Planning and Economic Development Division Bloomington Civic Plaza 1800 W. Old Shakopee Road Bloomington MN 55431-3027 Phone: 952-563-8920 City Council Planning City of (April 2001) Commission Bloomington Mayor (June 2000) City Manager Mark Bernhardson Gene Winstead Chair Councilmembers Dave Abrams Community Development Director Larry Lee Dave Abrams Commissioners Mike Fossum Cheryl Lewis Planning Manager Heather Harden Lee Olander Clark Arneson Alisa R. Ornat Bob Johnson Senior Planner Steve Peterson Steve Elkins Bob Hawbaker Vern Wilcox Jim Knutson Planners Jan Schneider Galen Doyle Bob Sharlin Londell Pease Glen Markegard, AICP* Rebecca Schindler Julie Roepke, Assistant Support Staff Cyndi Osberg Andy Hase Graphic Design Jan Norbeck * Project Coordinator i CITY OF BLOOMINGTON, MINNESOTA ii COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Table of Contents Page Section 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Section 2 LAND USE ELEMENT 2.1 2.1 Summary 2.1 2.2 Land Use Inventory 2.3 2.3 Influencing Factors 2.8 2.4 Future Land Use 2.13 2.5 Goals,
    [Show full text]
  • Final Ordinance Amending and Reorganizing Chapters 1,5,8,10,14
    ORDINANCE NO. 2013- AN ORDINANCE AMENDING AND REORGANIZING CHAPTERS 1, 5, 8, 10, 14, AND 21 OF THE CITY CODE PERTAINING TO THE CITY’S TRAFFIC CODE, VEHICLE REGULATIONS, AND PARKING REGULATIONS. The City Council of the City of Bloomington, Minnesota ordains: Section 1. That Chapter 1 of the City Code is hereby amended by deleting those words that are contained in brackets [ ] and adding those words that are underlined, to read as follows: *** CHAPTER 1 INTERPRETATION AND ENFORCEMENT OF THE CITY CODE *** ARTICLE II. CIVIL HEARING PROCESS *** SEC. 1.11. CITY CODE PROVISIONS THAT ARE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFENSES. A violation of the following provisions of the City Code shall be an administrative offense that may be subject to the administrative mediation and hearing process of this Article. *** (4) Chapter 8, Article III, Vehicle Regulations, Division A. Storage of Abandoned, Junk, and Inoperable[tive] Vehicles as Public Nuisances; (5) Chapter 8, Article [III]IV, Parking, Division A., Parking on Private Property; *** Section 2. That Chapter 5 of the City Code is hereby amended by deleting those words that are contained in brackets [ ] and adding those words that are underlined, to read as follows: *** CHAPTER 5 PUBLIC FACILITIES AND PROPERTY *** ARTICLE III. PARKS AND PLAYGROUNDS *** SEC. 5.21. REGULATIONS. The following regulations shall apply to all City parks: *** (2) Parking - (A) No person shall park any motor vehicle in any place in public parks between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and one hour before sunrise. During the hours when parking is permitted, said vehicles must be parked only in designated parking areas.
    [Show full text]
  • Zone Profiles
    8 Zone Profiles RETHINKING I-94 Rethinking I-94 Zone Profiles December 2017 This page is intentionally left blank CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 1 Zone Demographics ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 1 Surveys ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 1 I-94 SURVEY RESULTS ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 3 About the Respondents ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 3 How Respondents Use I-94 ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 4 How Respondents Get Information ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 5 How Respondents Participate in the I-94 Project ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 6 ZONE 1 ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������
    [Show full text]
  • LYNDALE AVENUE SAFETY STUDY Investigating Street Safety Along a County Highway Corridor in Minneapolis
    LYNDALE AVENUE SAFETY STUDY Investigating Street Safety along a County Highway Corridor in Minneapolis Cody Flannery, Chris Hong, Ian Jacobson, Clare Riley, and Arianna Reid Public Affairs 5290 Neighborhood Revitalization: Theories and Strategies Shannon Smith Jones and William Delaney Fall 2020 In partnership with: our Resilient Communities Project streets MPLS 1 CONTENTS 1. EXISTING CONDITIONS: DEMOGRAPHICS....................................... page 4 2. EXISTING CONDITIONS: CRASH DATA............................................ page 11 3. EXISTING CONDITIONS: HEALTH DATA........................................... page 17 4. POLICY REVIEW....................................... page 23 5. CASE STUDY............................................. page 28 6. PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT............................ page 33 7. RECOMMENDATIONS............................. page 41 X. APPENDIX................................................ page 46 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY EXISTING CONDITIONS ANALYSIS COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT SUMMARY The team’s data collection and analysis consisted of The team used an online survey to determine users’ various aspects of the existing conditions of the Lyndale attitudes and perceptions of safety. The survey ran from Ave South corridor. With the purpose of creating context November 1st to 26th, 2020. for the project, a demographic analysis was performed on • 617 survey respondents the area within a 15-minute walk from each intersection of • 339 respondents left open-ended comments the corridor. This data revealed inequities in the area and • 70% of respondents live in the zip codes encompassing identified the most vulnerable populations to changes. Lyndale Avenue South In order to successfully plan changes to the corridor, we KEY FINDINGS assessed the community’s health. To ensure the health • The population living in the 15-minute walkshed of the impacts of the residents on Lyndale are positive, we corridor is more white, higher wage earners, more measured the community’s socioeconomic status, existing likely to be college educated, and largely renters.
    [Show full text]
  • Stevens S Quare-Lori a Commun ·Ty Ng Heights
    ~lPCR lQSQ Stevens S quare-Lori A Commun ·ty ng Heights . 1 Defined A CONSORTIUM EducationCommunit Con sort1um~ROJECT for Urb OF .· Augsburg Coll """" aoJ College; Miooea ao Affa.i,s; Maoal:ge; College of St . Uai,e,sity o~1J'.";'i~~:::~~~~1~~'.g~:i~':,.~,~=•~1':;,1,;~,Mi::::,~~';i~~t";:~:,,Y"''e,sity;M Highe, ooeapolis1 comm, ni~,ly y and Coosorti,m neighbo(ho~~nesota· !;•Um,e,sity Extensi~nnn;sota of ty, Mmoeapolis (Center for represent a1 1ves.· erv1ce) ·, -· CURA RESOURCE COLLECTION Center for Urban and Regional Affairs University of Minnesota 330 Humphrey Center -------------------- Stevens Square-Loring Heights A Community Defined by Liddy J. Howard Research Assistant, Stevens Square Community Organization May 1997 This report [NPCR 1058] is also available at the following internet address: http:llfreenet.msp.11111.uslorglnpcr -- May, 1997 Neighborhood Planning for Community Revitalization (NPCR) supported the work of the author of this report but has not reviewed it for publication. The content is solely the responsibility of the author and is not necessarily endorsed by NPCR. NPCR is cbotdinated'bythe:.eenter:fo.rlJrban and Regional Affairs at the ' ·. ,,, , . ·, . t. '-;~- ,">'t., •. 1:"t'' : '• ,,,. .,,. .... _.- ·-.• University of Minnesota and is funded in part by an Urban Community 1 • . - . ' ' •' '· ' Service Program grant administered by the U.S. Department of Education. NPCR 330 HH Center 301 19th A venue South Minneapolis, MN 55455 phone: 612/625-1020 e-mail: nelso [email protected]. umn.edu Table of Contents INTRODUCTION
    [Show full text]