Please comment on the Transportation Plan if you haven’t already.

Email them your comments, nothing fancy, just tell them what you think about specifics parts, citing the page, or section or map.

Here’s the link to the Transportation Plan

Send your comments to:

I’m attaching the DOT’s Comment on the AUAR which is well worth a look,
DOT Comment here –> Download file

If you can’t comment, just send them a note saying “Please take into account the DOT’s Comments on the AUAR in the County’s Transportation Plan.” Attach and THAT will make a difference, because then they can’t ignore it.

Why is the DOT Comment important? Ask Doug Jones! Regarding costs, an issue Leif Knecht said must be included in the AUAR, and THERE’S NOTHING, the DOT says:

The EAW does not include information on the costs of transportation improvements that are projected to occur as a result of this development, although some analysis was provided with the Traffic Impact Analysis. Accounting for the costs and the funding to service this development, particularly for those elements that are not included in Mn/DOT plans, is an essential need. Cost elements as a result of the new development should include:

CSAH 1 realigned to CR 59/ Baseline Road and the 4-lane section extended for a distance east of Baseline Road to accommodate traffic from the CSAH 1 interchange.

I-35/CSAH 1 interchange, to fully account for ramp/loop construction and bridge, to Mn/DOT standards.
Increasing the capacity of I-35 to a six lane facility.

Changes to CSAH roadways and intersections, including the cost of improving CSAH 46 from a rural 2-lane to an urban 4-lane facility with multiple turn lanes and ramp reconstruction.

The DOT’s bottom line on the AUAR??? It’s insufficient, inadequate, and they put it ever so directly:

In summary, Mn/DOT District 6 and Metro have significant concerns with regard to the lack of detail to justify many of the recommendations from this document. Further study is needed to identify level of service needs and proposed operational improvements with each phase of the development, and design options. Access management principles need to be observed with regard to intersection and signal spacing. Finally, the AUAR does not fully account for the cost of proposed improvements to the system as a result of the planned development and how they are to be funded.

DOT Comment on AUAR, Oct. 24, 2005 (emphasis added)

Read it for yourself: Download file It puts the I-35 development beyond the realm of possibilities! And that’s good news.

Make sure that this important information on DOT planning is incorporated into the Rice County Transportation Plan.

Again, send your comments to:


Leave a Reply