CCP 03-20-2006 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

schedule is very optimistic. We recommend that this project be advanced to the 2008-2014 timeframe. We believe that every effort should be made by MnlDOT to finish this project by 2010 using a portion of the new Federal transportation funds that will be coming to the State. Our reasons for making this recommendation include the following: . Every other project in the draft TSP represents the improvement of an existing roadway. People have access to those roadways 24/7. TH 610 is the last segment of new roadway to be added to the freeway system. Without it, traffic that could and should be on TH 610 is forced onto our other arterials and local streets. Completing TH 610 would substantially address performance and mobility targets contained in Policy 5 & Policy 6. It is time to finish what has been started and complete the system. . . The economic vitality of our area has been gathering momentum but is being constrained by the absence of the last segment of TH 610. Growth, while desired, will increase the congestion, economic and safety problems we experience every day. We are in the fastest growing corridor in the State. Our businesses report difficulty in recruiting workers due to traffic issues. Their costs of doing business and moving their products to market are being increased, affecting their competitiveness. . Completion of TH 610 at an early date will provide alternative routes for travelers that will be impacted when 1-94 & 1-494 are expanded on the northwest corner of the Metro freeway ring. Providing a high speed bypass route for through traffic, both people and goods, will have a positive impact on our economy as well as reduce driver frustration and safety problems. . 1-35W North We note that the draft TSP identifies l-35W north of TH 36 as in need of expansion to meet current and future traffic demands. We note also that the draft TSP does not include l-35W north expansion at any time in the 2008-2030 program. We recommend that the draft TSP be revised to advance the expansion so that it follows closely on the completion of the 1-694 expansion east of 1-35W. Our reasons are as follows: . Congestion problems on 1-35W spill over onto 1-694 due to design and capacity faults. It is highly likely that this impact will continue after 1-694 is rebuilt, thus reducing the return on that investment as well as causing credibility problems with the people using the new road. At a minimum, we need to see a specific analysis of the interaction of 1-35W & 1-694 if 1-35W is not improved until after 2030. . The segment of 1-35W north of 1-694 is a critical segment. It includes the joint segment of two I nter Regional Corridors, TH 10 & 1-35W, as they join the high priority metro freeway ring. Failure to address the congestion and . 2