HomeMy WebLinkAbout15.B.5. Comments on Metropolitan Council Draft 2030 Transportation Policy Plan
/s; f3 I~
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
Memorandum
TO: Mayor and City Council
Mark McNeill, City Administrator
FROM: R. Michael Leek, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Comments on Metropolitan Council Draft 2030 Transportation
Policy Plan (TPP)
MEETING DATE: October 19,2004
CASELOG NO.: NA
INTRODUCTION:
On August 25, 2004 the Metropolitan Council issued the TPP for public review and
comment. The comment period ends on October 22, 2004. Because transportation is such
an important issue for a growing community like Shakopee, staff believes it is important for
the City to go on record regarding the TPP.
Staffhas prepared draft comments for the Council's consideration, and these comments are
attached.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Offer and pass a motion authorizing the appropriate city officials to submit comments
on the 2030 Transportation Policy Plan as presented.
2. Offer and pass a motion authorizing the appropriate city officials to submit comments
on the 2030 Transportation Policy Plan with additions or revisions.
3. Do not approve making comment on the 2030 Transportation Policy Plan for the
public review record.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends Alternatives No.1 or 2.
ACTION REQUESTED:
Offer and pass a motion authorizing the appropriate city officials to submit comments on
the 2030 Transportation Policy Plan as presented. ~&~~
R..Michael Leek
Community Development Director
1 TPPComment.doc
October 20, 2004
Peter Bell, Chairman
Metropolitan Council
Re: Metropolitan Council's Draft "2030 Transportation Policy Plan" (TPP)
Dear Mr. Bell:
We want to thank the Metropolitan Council (the Council) for its work in preparing, and
for the opportunity to comment on the TPP. The City of Shakopee applauds the efforts of
the Council to identify the investments needed to preserve, manage, and grow the
Region's transportation and transit infrastructure. As you know, the provision of
adequate transportation infrastructure and alternatives is a key issue facing high growth
areas like Scott County and the City of Shakopee. We look forward to working with the
Council in the future on the important issues addressed in the TPP.
Following are the City of Shako pee's specific comments on the draft TPP:
. The City of Shakopee is a Developing Community, and agrees with the TPP
when it states at page 3 that TPP and infrastructure investments will be needed
to ensure adequate services, including transportation and transit, to. serve
residents of the Region and the City of Shako pee.
. "Strategy 3a: Highway System Investments" places the expansion of the
transportation system as a third priority behind preservation and management
of existing facilities. Preservation and management appear to be different
sides of the same coin, and it is clear that they are very important. However,
placing expansion as a third priority will likely not be sufficient to provide
adequate services to meet the needs of the projected population growth for this
Region and places like. Scott County and the City of Shakopee.
. "Strategy 5d: Pedestrian- and Transit-Oriented Communities/"Policy 6:
Increasing Transit Service Attractiveness:"
The City of Shako pee is strongly supportive of the development of transit- and
pedestrian-oriented communities. This support is strongly evidenced by the
City's operation of a variety of transit services (dial-a-ride, circulator, and
express shuttle), its policies that require sidewalk and trail development and
connections in new developments, and its recent hosting ofa Walkable
Communities workshop. The City of Shakopee is, however, concerned about
I
the future financial ability to not only install the required pedestrian and
transit infrastructure, but also maintain such infrastructure over the long haul.
. "Strategy lOa: Transportation Management Organization/Association
Partnerships:" Shakopee has the highest concentration of employment in
Scott County, and is home today to about 10,000 jobs or more. The City is
interested in learning more about TMOs, and how they can be used to address
peak traffic congestion issues
. Figure 4-2: 2030 Transitway Corridors: Given the amount of growth
expected to be accommodated in Scott County, and the growing significance
of STH 169 as a transportation corridor, it is concerning that no transitways on
dedicated ROW are contemplated by 2030. The opportunities to establish
such a transitway should be taken earlier to avoid the high costs of retrofitting
the corridor in the distant future.
. The City of Shakopee agrees with the operating and park and ride priority
placed on the Hwy. 169 corridor. Since it is at the northernmost point in the
169 travel shed in Scott County, the location of useful park and ride facilities
in the community is of keen interest to the City, and real potential benefit to
all of Scott County.
. The City encourages the Metropolitan Council to aggressively pursue
legislative options for the funding that the TPP posits will be necessary for
transportation and transit.
Thank you again for your consideration of the City of Shako pee's comments on the TPP.
Sincerely,
John Schmitt, Mayor
Joseph Helkamp, Councilor
Terry Joos, Councilor
Matthew Lehman, Councilor
Steven Menden, Councilor
2