Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout[09b] Master Park Plan o 0 ~~ ~ o ~ ~~ ~ M ~~ m ~ ~- ~ '" ~- o ~ ~ } V O N b „„„E N~ 0 O N Pf 10 A h h O Q A O ~ ~ ~( N~ M M N N O p N W r N H H N N p N ~ . w V 1 I N of ~ 0] D O N N L m i ~ t _ . ... _ _ C E it Q '. Q'i N ~ M ' v N 6 ~ I I N i - ~. ~~ Qi aa OIL '. i ~ i N I 8 8 g N p S r G r ~ N N N N ta~ SY -~ ~ ~ N p N p . . V DJ O N C A ~ V Q _ -.. Ni N V C ''^^ G VI , N ~~ Q C ~ m ~ I i W` a I a.~~ '' I ~ I I m ° v V t6 N I`v ~. ~i ~' ~ ~. v m.. ~. i i ~. ~ C~ ~ I ~ ~ T ~I ¢ a U ~ I I 1 i w N ~ R ~ ~ a ~ ~ ~, O I = N ~ ` O Q I ~ p o i I AN ~ i 4 a I N w O I li i ~ ~' ~~. i o O x a 'I c d c d I i I i i o ~`o ', a ~ ~ ~ x w w +h Y~I i R ~, m ~ i m I~ I A ~ '" ~~ e S pp E qp m I m W A J ~ " I L ~ I C S ~ ~ ` W ~ ~ W ' N y l I ~y N ~ ~ I ~ ~ J aJ i r r i ~ a .~ ~ I c ~ I ~ ~ ~ i ~. ~ E ~ ~$ E ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ r m a >> r'n _ ~ _ _ R .a ' a W E `~ g ' e ~ c __ m o ~ ~ o m g i m g m a ~L g 9 a ~° g o ~ o d na ;~ ~ ~ ~~ u 'Z ~ r b U r c e .4 r~ d V f r b K c r a ~ r'~ a Z r ~ '~ c ~ ' ~ ,r I ~ E .. y ~ m (q ~ a o V1 ~ o V1 ~ y o f~ m G~ o fll S 4 io N O a 1A s~ Ir o IA i h O _. a oi- w ~ ~ w ' u~ •w• ~, ~ _ u'~i a C w .- ~ N ~ M ++~~ dt K m H m Rf ® 1` +~ id ~ w {Q y n V t 6 10 h N m ~ 8 in ~ g ~ r [- ~ r r . f- r E 0 w ~, ppq~~ p m _ Y ? ~ o _ x` ~ i '' ' ~ W ~j r~ 'a a o f.. V 0 ~. d i Q1 a J w O N a ~ ~ ~ J ~ F- a ~.r) W ~ c Y ~ a a W ~ ~ ____ . d ''" 1 "' a ~ ~ i rv ~ _ _ °' in D LL 0 N ~ F' V W N '.. I T Y N Q `° c ~ ~' o p +-+ i ra it V I C ~ V V GJ .~, R a~+ ~ N Y Y H r d ._ dp ~v 0 C'1 C .~ N M Y !~ L C y ro ro C C d d ~ ~ o c , a O N N p to p . C ~ A E ~ ! E ! ~ o?~ of p Y Y R ~ R L V CC a d Y C R A ~ C d d O ' ii et v1 ~O i~ ~G Y Y Y F~ ''.,,. F~ ~ N a .~ i d v 0 d N C71 C ~! d N t N Q T N m C OJ O Q c c ~ ~ a a ~ c ~LL o~ ~ 3 m V Y ~ d v ., _o E w ~ O N C ll 3 ` O O C O ~ a a a o • ^ ~~~ Scope of Services and Schedule Scope of Work I•he proposed scope otwork is batted ou our current understanding of this project, site visit, and our discassion with you. Primate- tads include the following: Prujccl ~nanagc-uu~nt and adtninistratiun will include comunmicatiuu with the City Staff and St. Joseph Park Board. lneoicing, progress reports, supplenx•ntxl agrecnx•nts, cost and schedule updates, billing preparation, and olhr:r non-technical work will br part of the project mattageutcnt throughout This project. Tusk 1 -Project Initiation 1.1 -Kick-off Meeting A~lentbers of the Sl~a 1 team will attend a project kick<tir rareting with City Stair and Park Board members. This muting will provide an opportunity for rnu leant, City Staff and Park Board ntembcts to review work plan and schrdak, and discuss project issues and/or concerns and discuss City's process Ibr developing their vision, goals and policies. It will also gi~r ns as undcrstaraliug of all other components of-the plan iu ordr'r to cuordinau• iu<iividual team tasks and deliverabh's. Task I Deliverables • 1'rojr°ct kickr>17 meeting sunnnan• Task 2 - Doto Collection and Analysis 2.1 -Base Mapping SEI I will nu•c•t wish (:itv staff to asscrnblr relevant and a~~ailable clecu onic park and open space data (e.g., GIS shaprfiles, Amo(:~1I) drawings, digital orlhoyuads, clc.). llata will be provided by the (;ity and mac include bosh priutan~ :uul seeondan~ soarers of data. SEF 1 will review Ibis data and drtrruiine if them are any new data rrdaircnt<sris. ~1~e ~~•ill gcncrau• a base neap li ant this data, to br used by the Cite and SEl l for the planning project. Undeveloped pads and Iltlure pads will be delined and indicated ou the Parks Map. 2.2 -Review Background Material Rcvicw and rv~ahtatc available har•kground material and past sutdirs, (provided by the (:ity), relating to the park system. Some of these imiudc: SI. Joseph's ~O(12 Coatprehensive t'lan • U.S. Geological Survey • U.S. Geological SurvrY %.:~-minute yuadrauglc maps ~'~~« . BoilSurtryofStearnsCuuuh~ ',.~ ~E~ se otx of see wi rs antl uhtedulr _ c • U.S. fish and G1'ildlifc Scr~~icc National 14'cllauds Ltcenrory • Stearns Count~° Comprehensive Plan Update • ~easihilih~ Surdy Ibr Slcanrs Count}' Rails and 'Trails • Maiutcnauce costs and auv other park and wail relau•d iuforntation 2.3 -Evaluation of Existing Conditions Sl?l3 will visit existing park facilities arul photograph and collect infortnalion regarding condilio^ of park facilities such as the condition oicxisting play equipmm~t, sn'uctures, paving malcrials, AllA ace<•ssibility rtr. Ltformatiou will be recorded ott our 1ie1d cvaluatiou li>rm and will he added onto existing Cily inventory. Task 2 Deliverables • Project 13asc Alal> • Mau~i~ - Parks al a glance, which will pnx-ide general infiumaliou about each park including site elentcnts and facilities, (}i'/~ x 11 page MS ~4'ord or lnllesign lorutat.) • Park llata Sheets -Individual park inventory and evaluation, including an aerial of the park silo (H'/ ~ l 1 pages in J4S 14'ord or 1nUe~sign format.) • Background inlimmrtion Poa•crYoint sununar~° to presented at first advisory group nu~eting • Advisory Comrnillce Meeting #1 Task 3 -Visioning, Goals, and Policies 3.1 - Meerine Facilitation SI?I I will tacilitare a series of uurerings ~a~ith the Park Board, City staff, and public or selccled adcisot~ counuiuec to identify issues to develop a broad vision and mission staU•uteut for the park and trails s~~stcm 3.2 -Draft Goals Develop a draft set of goals u> Game the planning process. 3.3 -Open House Presentation Present visioning, goals, and policies dc-vcloped with the Adcisot~~ Cwnminee w the public for li°edback. ',_.,;~:z,,,. • 1'isiun and Mission Statement and Goals and Policies sununarv • Advisory C;ommiUee Meeting #2 • Open l louse #1 ., , S E H cope of services and schedule I page i? Tosk 4 -Park Classification and Level of Service Methodology Using regional and national standards :ntd the Gih's existing classilication system, SEI I will develop standards for each type of park unit and trail, ~inchtding senicc radius, types ol~ lacilitics, and other parantetcrs. task 4 Deliverables Sununat~~ utcmorandum of park classifir atiun aucl leccl o1'sct~~icc staud:u ds Tosk 5 -Plan Recommendations t1"orking with City Staff, Park Board and .~ldvisoty Conmtittee, SEI l w~l] develop recommendations that address the major issues and };pals identified uncicr Tasks 3 and 4. 5.1 -Develop Recommendations SEI I ,vi11 also apply standards deeelopc~d in 4.1 to the existing harks and nails w develop a conceptual "}i~anu•work plan" fbr the park and trail svstetu, including reconunendalions for acquisition and development, redeccloputenl and ntaiutcuance. r~t,. ;.;~;;', ~ i 1'rescnt su~ategies, standards and G"amcwork plan to staff, Park Board and Advisot~t~ Contntiuec for review and refiucnuut. 5.3 Advisory Committee Review Prepare diagrammatic concept plans lirr each of St.,)osrph's eight parks including preliminat}~ opinion of probable costs. • Ylan recommendations sutnnrarv generated by SEI1, Staff, Advisor} Comminee • Park an<i'I'rails Asap that illustrau•s existing wxl proposed modifications, (1 large li>ruutt co}ty mounted on foam core board) Memo which ,+°ill un[linc park improvements, with opinions of probable costs and priorities for the recouuuendalious • Individual Park 1)iagramntatic Concept Plans • Advisot-~ Couuuiftce Meeting#3 SEI1 will produce a draft of park and trail system p1an.'I'his draft will include all previous graphics, anah~sis and technical iu{~rn-tnation, park diagratuntatic concepts .The plan will inchtdc the vision statement, goals and policies that were fin'unllaled during the city stxlf and ~~ advisuty conunitlee uteetings. It will inc-]nde di:~tgrantmatic concept plans lia' each of the eight parks. In addition to all precious t<lsks and deliverables, the draft will inchtdc Park <md 1't ails Maintenance Plau and ]ntpletneutatiou flan sections w guidr the Yarks System ~,_ SEH ;. ~ ;. decektpntent during the planning period (Io be deterutined by llu• Cite) which includes opinion of probable costs fin- hark and trail ituproventents anti :~t discussion ti.l -Develop Draft Park and Trail System Plan SF:] 1 will dec~elop a park, trails :utd maintcuaure plan with input form City Stiff and Park Board. "Phis section will be•conu• parr of the. Park aud'1~rail Systcnt Plan. 6.2 -Open House Presentation ~' 5 . • llraft Yarks Systctn Plan in a pdf ibrnuu, along ~s~ith ]0 bound hard copies 'I Present draft plan to public al an "Opcu [louse"; integrate and respond to puhlir conuueuts • Open I louse #`L Tosk 7 - Finoi Park and Trail System Pfan Document 7.I - Finai Park and Trail System Plan Document Luc•grate all Platt docuuents and inleriut reports and graphics into a final Park and "frail System Plan docuuunl. Present Io Park hoard and City Council for final approval. -..~i k~. >~.. Present to Yank Board for recommendation ut Cin' Council. Present to (:itv Council (itr approval. Task 7 Deliverables • Final Yark and 'Trail Svstent Plan. Phis docnutent is a refinement of thr• Ihaft Park and '!'t'ail Svsu•m Ylan • Final documents kill be provided in a pdf fitrmat, along with one original hard atpy~. The (:it}' will nut curies as needed inr distribution • Park Board Mccling #1 • Cite Council Mceling #1 S E H se ope of services and schedule ~ Fa$F 19 ~ oq ~ ~ o O ~' ~ ~ ~~ Ua `~ ~_ s- ~ `- M ~" ~;: ~ s s ~ ~ ~ m e ¢ e ~ ~~ 3 : ~ ' ~ ' ~ " ~ ' ~ _ V ~~pp 5 ~ , ° N ~ ~~ W yy N ~ m p 1 [f m ' f .~ v a N ' M ~ O Q '. l w Ys ~~' ~~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ O ~m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N S Q p8 O p p Q ~ $ ppO N _ ? ! ;. r k ~ K N M y S _ 'i~ F ,. I ~ CD N O N N C ~ 7 ~ i ' ' t H d w S i:~ _ ~ w" ~ ~ ~' A~+ '~ ~ ~ -. ~ . N N ' p Na N W ~ ~ .~ .. g t, ~ ~ O ~ -+ C ~ . v i m N m ~ O Y O ~ N M ^ '~ ? ' i f N O t0 v ~ 5 ? a ' ~ ~ s ,~ O ~ N I N t0 O ' t0 O T i N I ~ Y N 0 ~ ~ ~ I l W V ~ a :x rc i (Q Y I ~ J ,' ~ ` ~ s c c ,~ s ~ I I I = c . ~ i I d a W W } ~ I m J ~ ~ (~ GI ~ o C a K I ~ 4 q ~ GG S I b O U a W J i W 1S W O O $ J ~ r ~ C p o W ~ ~ t~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ F O O d ~ ~ W ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ b b ~ ~ E m n ~ ` ; `~ N f0 h 1%i f f 41 M h w ~ H ~ . ' C i ~ o ~ y c Q GC O W c • _ 4? ' t- 'a ~ i ~ - '' m `c ~ s. ~ Wu r a a ~ '~'`'~ w 1~ z ^` a o ~o N ~ ~ V1 ~' _J W ~ W a ~ 1 _ ~ a "' W ~ O a "1 ~ ~a ~ N O ~ W V ~ ~, o +r t%7 I ~i ~ i Q ~._- ___ _. _ i --- ~ ----- I I c~ 6 1 N I =~ ~, T j a~- '. o ° ~ - a o = 1 H N T .v ' ~ O .a ~ Q cc O a. c J °~ '~ ~ ro ~ E :.. v ~ ~ ~ • C ~ ii C ci j ~ ' V o i D1 ~ ~~ H ~ ~ ~ I ~ ! V af°. v ~ CC ro a`. e~ N ~ M 'd' to i h ~ ~ I YV1 ' ~ ~ N H ~ N ~ H ~ F 1 1 _. _.. _ ~- _ _ _._. _ _ F ! --- ~-- - I ~-+- s a E rn a a is i ~ ~ !! O I i 4i r ~. o ~' ~ ~ c .a { a c -. +_. - --- - c a ._ ~ N •3 ~' ,~ ro E c c ~ °' 'o !~ a --- --~- ~-- - -- ~"~ _ ~ W ~ v1 ~ a ~ ~ ~ m c ti. I ~ s ~ rn '" " o a, ~ ~ - I _ I a ~ ~ V c v p °~ V __. _ - ______ _ c ` Y ~ I I a.. a a lJ ~ ; ~ ' mom ~ 3 a ~ ~ ~ ` I ~ a , c ( ~ 3 e0 R I ~ I ~ L a' a ~ a ~ o v • 1 ~. ~- ~'' ~ ~+ ~ I , a 1 a ~ ~ of ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Y Y ~ G ~ s. ~ ~ V v~ f O ~ R C p a -p f0 ;~ 0 ~ R ~ f ar c ~ ~.- o = em u ? ~ ~ ~ avi '^ •' ~ ~o . r~ ~ a v ~ ~ o o > v a a N ~ ~ 4 ' C t ~ ~ ~~"~ .._ _._ .___ _ ___ ~ * S' Scope o~~ Seim-ices ~~~id Schedule Scope of Work ~~ SEH "The proposed scope: of work is based on our current understanding of this project., site visit, and our discussion with you. Primary [.asks include the following: Project Management Project management and administration will include communication with the City Staff and St. Joseph Park Board. Invoicing, progress reports, supplemental agreements, cost and schedule updates, billing preparation, and other non-technical work will be part of the project management throughout. this projer..t. Task f -Project Initiation I . I -Kick-oft Meeting Members of the SEI i t.eam will attend a project kick-off meeting with City Staff and Park &aard members. This meeting will proti~de an aplyortnnity for our learn, City Staff and Park Board members to review work plan and schedule, and discuss project issues and/or concerns and discuss C.ity's process for developing their v=ision, goals and policies. It wi]1 also give us an understanding of all other component`s of the plan in order to coordinate individual team tasks and deliverables. Task I peliverabfes • Projert kick-off meeting summary Task 2 -Data Collection and Analysis 2. I -Base Mapping SEH will meet. with City staff to assemble relevant and available elertronic. park and open space data (e.g., G1S shapefiles, AutoCAD drawings, digital ortlioquads, et.c.). Data will be provided by the City and may inc:htde hoth primary and secondary sources of data. SEH will review this data and determine if there are any new data requirements. t4'e will generate a base map from this data, to be used by the City and SEH for the planning project.. Un-developed parks and future parks will be defined and indicated on the Parks Map. 2.2 -Review Background Material Review anal evaluate available background material and past studies, (prav~ided by the City>, relating to the park system. Some of these include: • St. Joseph's 20Q2 C:orttprehensive flan • U.S. Geological Survey • U.S. Geologica) Burney 7.5-minute yttadrarrgle maps • Soil Burney of Steams (;ottuty scope of services and schedule ? F,a~F !6 • U.S. Fish and V1'ildlife Service National ti'etlands lm•entory • Stearns County Co---prehemivc: Plan Update • Feasibility Study for Stearns County Rails and 'Trails ~' Maintenance c<rsts ar~d any other park and trail related information f ! 2.3 -Evaluation of Existing Conditions SEI-i will visit existing park facilities and photograph and collect. information regarding condition of park facilities such as the condition of existing play equip-nc:nt., structures, paving materials, ADA accessibility etc. Infor-nation will be recorded on our field evaluation form and will lie added onto existing City inventory. Task 2 Deliverables I • Project Base Maly • Matrix -Parks at a glance, which will }rrov~ide general information r about each park including site caements and facilities, ($'/~ x l g page MS V1'ord or InDesign format.) i • Park Data Sheets - L~dividual j.~ark inventory and evaluation, ~ including an aerial of t:he park site (S ~~ x 1 ] pages in MS ~4'ord or Inllesign format. j • Background information Powerl'oint summary to presented at frst advisory group meeting • Ad~~isory Committee Meeting #1 ~ Task 3 -Visioning, Goals, and Po-icies i 3. t -Meeting Facilitation SEH will facilitate a series of meetings with the Park Board, City staff; and public or selected advisory corrunittee to identify issues to develop a broad vision and mission statement for the park and trails system 3.2 -Draft Goals Develop a draft set. of goals to frame the planning process. 3.3 -Open House Presentation Present visioning, goals, and policies developed with the Advisory Co-nnrittee to the public. for feedback. Task 3 Deliverables • Vision and Mission Statement and Goals and Policies summary I • Ad~~isory Committee Meeting #2 • Open House #1 +~ i i ..~ ~` ~ ~ scope of Servicc4 acid schedule i , Fe Task 4 -Pork Classification and Level o f Service Methadotogy Using regional and national standards and the City's existing ~ classification system, SEI-I will develop standards for each type of park unit and trail, including sen~ice radius, types of facilities, and other 1 parameters. I Task 4 Deliverables • Summary memorandum of park classification and level of service standards Task S - Ptan Recommendations Working wiilt City Staff, Park Board and Advisory Committ:ee, SEH will develop recommendations that address the major issues and goals identified under Tasks 3 and 4. 1 5. ! -Develop Recommendations SEH will also apply standards developed in 4.1 to the existing parks and trails to develop a conceptual "framework plan° for the park and trail system, including recommendations for acquisition and development., redevelopment. and maintenance. 5.2 -Prepare Diagrammatic Park Concept Plans Present strategies, standards and framework plan t.o staff, Park Board and Ad~~isory Commit.t.ee for review and refinement. 5.3 Advisory Committee Review Prepare diagrammatic concept plans for each of St. Joseph's eight parks including preliwinary opinion of probable costs. Task S Deliverables • Plan recommendations summary generated by SEH, Staff, Advisory Committee • Park and Trails Map that illustrates existing and proposed modifications, (I large format. copy mounted on foam core board) ~ Memo which will outline park improvements, with opinions of probable costs and priorities for the recomrnendalaons • Individual Park Diagrammatic Concept flans • Advisory Committee Meeting #3 Task 6 - Dra ft Park and Troll System Plan SEH will produce a draft of park and trail system plan. This draft. will include all previous graphics, anal}psis and technical information, park diagrammatic concepts .The plan will include the ~~ision statement., goals and policies that were formulated during the city staff and i advisory committee meetings. It will include diagrammatic concept plans for each of the eight parks. In addition to all previous tasks and deliverables, the draft will include Park and Trails Maintenance Plan and hnplententation Plan sections to guide the Parks System ..~ scope of services and scfiedule r pE,g±~- ~ E developrnc:nt during tlrP planning period (to be dcterminc:d by the City) which includc;s opinion of probable costs i~>r park and trail I improvements and a discirssion 6. f _ Develop Draft Park and Trail System Plan SEH will develop a park, trails and maintenance plan with input form City Staff and Park Board. This section will become part of the Park and frail System flan. b.2 -Open House Presentation I Task b Deliverables • Draft Parks System Plan in a pdf format, along with 10 bowed hard ~ copies • Present. draft. plan to lniblic at an "Open House"; integrate and respond to public comments • Open I Iotise #2 Task 7 -Final Park and Trail System Ptan Document 7.1 - Pinal Park and Trai! System Plan Document Integrate all plan documents and interim reports and graphics into a ~ final Park and Trail System Plarz document.. Present t.o Park Board and City Council for final approval. 7.2 -Park Board Review Present. to Park Board for recommendatic» ~ to City Council. 7.3 -City Council Review Present to City Council for approval. Task T Deliverables • Final Park and Trail System Plan. This document is a refinement of { t.Ire Draft Park and Trail System Plan !~ Final documents will be provided in a pdf format, along with one original hard copy. The City will run copies as needed for distribution • Park Board Meeting #1 • City Couucil Meeting #I /EL E J ~ scope cif services and sctreduie ~ F ~,~_ I° 5EH A O U U a 0 r• O ~' 3 v~' 0 U d °~' H b ~~ oU~~ ~' c2 U Y a~ o~ x~ ~o ^' 3 ~U+ ,~ F. ~ ~U o ~ U ~ ~ 00 ~ U U o ~~ N~-r U r ~_ 0 ~U ~~ °~~ o° ¢~ ~W 9a F=' °o U a H a~~ ~'~/ O ^~ 1 h~ ~ ~ A ~' Z ~ ~ ~ a ~ W ~ '~lj ~zo ~ ~ w 0 FNS N 0 .~ ~ 0 000000 0 0 U,~ o°oo°o°o0 0 o a O U COI 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O ~ U •~H OQ1~oNO~~ O ~t •~ Q N U ~ d~ ~, a o ~ ~ o°oo°oo°o o ° `" aH ~~ 000000 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ° '~ ~" ~ rO.+ O O ~ ~ tt 0~0~ 0~1 O N O -0., ~ C% 6~~4 6R 69 69 69 6N4 b4 69 U CCS .~ a Q .o ~~ ~~~' ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O dj ^~ O ~ O O O _O O O O O_ ~ a r0, V ~ O ~ ~ rt' 0~0~ ~ O N ~• o ~ a ~ s~~r~~bss~s ~ ~ ~~ c ~ ~ o U "c3 •--i N ~. U ~ CAO C%~ ~ vii '~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~n o0 • ^'~ ° 3 0 °; o ~ U ~ it ~ U [-~ ~ ~ a~ ~ ~ ~ U ~ ~ '~ ~ ~ N ~. ~s-,M o`. z ~ a~ p bn p~r'"~U.~°o Wa A.' ~ ~v~zt~.. ~~ ~ O ~ ~~~~~~~ W~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ daaa.~ ~~ A~ a N~°, aQO~a~~aa act H ~7H <<PB ~~ Statewide Transportation Plan Update Steven Voss District 3 Planning Director St Cloud Area Planning Organs: Polley Board Me Apr1124, Tonight's Discussion ~(P8 ^ Plan Update • Why update • Policy framework • Schedule and approach ^ Key trends • Socio-economic • Inflation • Performance trends ^ Investment Direction ~~i~F Plan Update Why update the Plan? o State statute -requires update every 6 years o Federal requirements -content, process to maintain federal funding eligibility ^ Required coordination with MPO plans, updated every 4-5 years o New issues & opportunities ^ Experience with performance-based planning ^ Stakeholder issues, system "gaps" ^ Revenue 8 cost trends ^ Critical importance of system preservation ~Ep Plan Update Approach ~(P8 o Update 2003 Policy Plan ^ 10 Key Policy/Issue Areas ^ Address all modes ^ Build on modal, safety, operations plans o Update District Highway Investment Plans a Update Greater MN Transit Plan o Coordinate with MPO Plans Policy Framework ~~P State Plan Steering Committee Schedule ~~° r. System Preservatlon March 28 z. Safety April 23 s. Operations & Security June 25 e. Gbbal Connections April 23 s. StatewideConnecuons April 23 s. MetroMobility- • Trrti Cuies Marrh 6 , June 25 ware • Greater MN May ~ ~. Conmuniry Accessibility May 28 a. Energy & Ernironment March 26 e. IrnestmentManagementPrinciples June 25 ro. Partnerships & Stakelwlder IrnoNement June 25 2 ~~~ Policy Development Approach v Content ^ Review old objectives, strategies, measures ^ Review recent trends, issues ^ Update stretegies, measures, indicators D Drafting Process ^ Technical Work Groups ^ External consultations ^ District Planners ^ Steering Committee o Review ^ Stakeholder ^ General Public Schedule & Approach ~(PP o Stay flexible to accommodate emerging directions o Phase 1: Develop General Direction/Opdons (Mar, 2007-Jul, 2008) ^ Mar-Apr, 07: Initial Statewide Outreach -identify issues ^ Jan-May, 08: Review key issues, policy options ^ Incorporating HF 2600 funding and Legislative direction • Tier 1 and 2 Bridge Program-by draft funding program for public review • Other Mandates Interchanges, Trareil Advamages, D7 project o Incorporating Legislative Auditor's findings, recommenda8ons ^ Jun-Jul, O8: Public Outreach with ATPs and Stakeholders o This is what we know: trends, financial outlook with new funding, legislatlve direction ^ Policy Directions/Options under consideration Schedule & Approach ~(P a Phase 2: Refine Policy Direction, Draft Plan (Jul-Nov, 2008) ^ Review public input ^ Decide policy direction to be included in draft plan ^ Complete funding plan for HF 2800 Mandates ^ Districts draft proposed Highway Investment Plans -Sep OB o Needs FY 0&18, 19.28 ~ Fiscelty Constrained Plan-proposed • STIP 0&12 (completed July t including new funding for 200812010) • HIP 1318 (including new bridge plan) • LR Plan 1 &28 ^ Other Modal Investment Plans drafted -will vary by mode o Needs c Fiscally Constrained Plan ^ Steering Committee - Sep/Oct 08 c Review PH Drag -Key Policy Framework ~ Review Summaryof District Pierre 3 ~~~ Schedule 8~ Approach o Phase 3: Develop/Finalize State Plan (Nov, 2008-Mar, 2009) ^ Nov, 08: Draft Statewide Plan ^ Dec-Feb. 09: o Public Outreach ^ Formal Public Hearings ^ Mar, 09: Review comments, revisions, recommend Final Draft Plan to Commissioner ~~P~ ~ Key Trends Population Forecast ~~P~ ..s n,oaa ~o,aoo~ Population growth forecast ~ t% by Region: 2005.2030 oa,aoo e% Economic Regions 2005 5.2 million i'-'~ MeboPlee 2030 6.3 million NoM Cem~ ofeooo ~ "°""~°" ssu ' ,wee '~ ceneel.swneeel ~• o,an • ro,e•w.a Popetlbn mvr xmsaow M4 • P•rw„t A MMngoY1 pepu4lbn 9,oN11, Iq•ooWOln Ryon 4 1 in 5 Minnesotan's will be 65+ by 2030 Minnesota's Popwtlon by Ap.: 800 2005 and 2030 300 goo 500 300 200 too 0 Orog tOro1B 20ro29 30 fo 3B 60rod8 50ro6g 80ro8B ]Bro70 80~ Age Cah«I Source: U.3. Census Bureau, Popuhtlm Dirlaion. Inkiin Slate Popula5on PmpcS«n, 2005. <<D Ir-, _ --- ~.1 200.5 6t~maled Populaaon .wvo. ~ : 85 Ysa aF Ape«OkNr 3~ 8 Rural counties have higher percentages of seniors, but not ~ necessarily the highest senior populations. 2005 Pap 65 or al0rr e x • y • is.aro ~ t ~ ,w.rca a ~ 2006 Parent 66 or oW« (~ ex- a ! ~~ix tsx Ia%-M 1E~a~a~a~nw~. 2030 Foreented Polwlatbn 85 Years o/ Ape a Older ~~~~, ey 2030, the percentage of seniors will be dramaOcaly higher in rural Minnesota. m66 Pa065«ow .. However, the highest growth in number of seMOr residents wlii be ~ ~, in metropolitan areas. • ~.ooo ®, .o« ~ • 2060 Prr«nl e5 « 0k« nN. ~,ax -2tx ~M%-mx ~ _afM-u% -m%-b% * 1K' neaao 5 Employment Growth ~~~ ~~ Ylneewo4l EmpbYmenl GnrNA by Rpbn 2000•tW6 i t I 100i i 20001006 ~~~ , , 6% i 1161M ~~ 70.000 __._- 10% Eeonank Re0lons I -, MehopNa 3,900 Nam canes 07l 151,900 L~ umu,.. 2004107/ U% I weer ~ c.M.~smN..e 370,000 Salon Jolla L..: ,.. sew wwwON.mwa 0,000 • Empbyment bcneu IOOO~a)06 ~E~ pxapereceMMMlnm•oWl EmpbymentOrowlN In neabn ^'tO"°e ~~Pg 7992.20051ncrea..inMnual VM T Growth ~~~ Vehicle Milee Traveletl (VMT) 11'.. ReOianal di0 oea in VMT ~ ~ grawtll felbw fob, popula0on e e 8 houeeholtl M inueaeea VMT growth 37% 1992-2005 - ', ' Sower growth 20062006 • ~, . s~ . rr<x r~ ~,<- o,e. ~~ ~~ ~ w*- ~.~;"~. B/~~ Motor Gasoline Price Trend ~` US MDlOr Geadhla Prka 8 MInlMeoli Uaegs nro ro MI 50 ~ b~ g ~ ~_ OO F TO 10 0 f Year e>t Caitr fY.50 200 ~MN MNOIGa Ueap -~-~- ~ US newl Oee Rb Per GeOOn lew emuel mnns 51 - 5 SI.50 100 5 50.50 $0.00 agf,&~ ~~ ~ & ww ¢. bi~ $$$~~~$~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ , ~ ,~ ~~ ~ gg .Pi .~ gg .B gg R~ gg .B ~.~ n VMT Trends by Region ~(P8 MnaJ Wt GmWa Tnrd6:lWf •3006 Ina.aaaml6nwasa I.w vv ~3s --- __ _- _~ ___. __. ~rnnwse ~awwr - _. -- __ __ _. _._ _. _-_--, ronnc.wi -- ~ wa ~ lase zow zm6 W~ Traffic is Growing ~(Pp Minnesota Vehicle Miles TraveNd (VMT) '~ Trend and Projections 100 W ~VMr aG -za yaa. nose, venawn ~1o raa~ aeanm,nw vena~n. TG - - € ~ a ~ ~ 40 ____. _._. __... ____ ___ _. _.. p ._ --, _- 10 0 e~ ~ hero e~ °~+~ o°o °°ry~~~°°~ti° ti ~Ebti°~n° ti°~~" ti°tipti°~ti~eti~ ti ti ,w: iannaeme 0enmm«adimmw~+0~~Twwaw Year System Performance Trends o Infrastructure Preservation ^ Bridges: Meeting Targets, but system aging ^ Pavements: Not meetlng targets ^ Other Infrastructure: Need to acknowledge o Safety ^ Fatality rate declining o Metro Congestion • Increasing but improvements in some corridors due to major expansion, low cost Investments o Interregional Corridors ^ Meeting speed targets on most corridors except metro radials o Community Improvements: increasing demand ^ Interchanges ^ 2-4 lane expansion ^ Freight accommodation ~cP~ ~ 7 January Outlook; System Preservation ~~©, Preliminary Annual Investment Requirements a Planning Period 2012.18 201&28 Paeemerd 400-450 000-850 Bridge 120 - 135 100 - 205 BridOe-Major Riser Cnusings 112 52 Other InhasiNClwe 35 - 55 45 - 75 (sigre, signals, drainage, etc) Total 5007-752 $807.082 Projected Annual State Road Constriction FuM $835 - 700 $715 -825 lAIM1on; Y ofCoaarruedon S1 Increased Construction Costs =~aP ~ ~._... s~ R ~,~~d investment Direction 8 TRANSPORTATION FUNDING SOURCES STATEFEDERAL :. ,.rte. n. ,,,, .,r.w ....~-.. rwr wr-q w. .w....` ny..r .,y..r ..... ~. ++::..~. .,.~i..r """ +...,.... .. ~.. a......, '.. .+,w..,.. ~ .r.w nw ar w.,,. Highway Funding Trends ~~P a 1990-2000- High growth in revenues 0 2000-2007- Low growth in revenues o Outlook 2008-2028: ^ Flat to low growth in revenues ^ MVST dedication to transportation -helps backfill ^ HF 2800 -bonding, limited undirected funding, Legislative Audit (e.g., "preservation first") ^ Future Federal funding -uncertain ^ Short Term -economy challenged 9 Legislative Audit: ~(Ps Investment Management o Weaknesses to be addressed ^ Spending not aligned with "preservation first" ^ Process ^ Improve pmect scoping and cost estlmating ^ Spending not aligned with "preservation firsC ^ Committing to more projects than can be realisticalty delivered o Recommendations ^ Ensure that projects slated for the trunk highway construction program (1) align with the department's priorities and (2) ran realistically be delivered within project funding ^ Adopt financial management policies on use of debt financing HF 2800 Investment Principles ;(Da o Honor current investment priorities: Preservation is Mn/DOT's top priority; followed by low cost safety and low cost mobility improvements (OLA); o Comply with draft MnIDOT financial policies (OLA); o Accelerated projects must have a completed scoping document and scoping level cost estimate (OLA); o Mn/DOT will meet the commitments in the existing STIP; o Bridge bonds will be primarily used for bridge structures and limited approaches. Possible State Plan Direction ~,(PF o Given Situation ^ Socio-Economic Trends ^ System Cortdkion ^ Revenue 8 Cost Outlook ^ Legislative Audit Findings • HF 2800 Funding and Mandate o Preliminary Conclusion ^ We can da much, but riot everything ^ Need to set priorkies for available funding ^ Provide guidance for consistent approach to District Irnestment Plans 10 i Possible Statewide Plan ~D~ Principles ~4,a.~P o Focus on multi-modal investments that preserve the existing system, improve safety, and optimize use of existing system capacity. o Stretch available resources to maximize, accelerate, and distribute benefits to people and freight throughout state and metro area. Possible State Plan Investment A" ~ Priorities f ~~8 a Infrastructure preservation (bridges, pavement, other assets) o Efficient, effective operations (snow/ice, signal retiming) o Low-cost, system-wide safety improvements o Low-cost, system-wide rapacity optimization for safety and mobility o Selective capacity expansions for all modes where strategic and low-cost alternatives are not available o Partnership investments to support local community development (interchanges, 2.4 lane expansions, etc.) o Fiscally-constrained plan that is balanced ^ Mix of strategies ^ Emphasis on preservation and low-cost safely/moblllly ~cP For additional information, contact Steven Voss Mn/DOT District 3 (218) 828-5779 steve.voss@dot.state.mn.us 11