My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
03 - Industrial Park Expansion
Laserfiche
>
Economic Development (Permanent)
>
EDC Agenda Packets
>
2008
>
07-15-2008 EDC Meeting
>
03 - Industrial Park Expansion
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/28/2016 2:30:50 PM
Creation date
7/28/2016 2:30:50 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
5
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Many of these changes and cuts will be difficult for our customers to understand (road users, elected officials, corridor <br /> groups, etc). Below are bullet points that explain why it was necessary for the district to refocus its future project efforts. <br /> • Previous administrations encouraged districts to plan ahead and ensure projects <br /> be ready so that when the legislature and congress provided additional revenues, <br /> we would be ready to make major highway improvements. <br /> • Many of us thought that as elected officials saw the"need"for highway <br /> improvements for safety and mobility, that they would certainly act and provide <br /> additional funding. <br /> • District 3 identified our highest priority safety and mobility expansion corridors, and <br /> began project development through the environmental process to ensure they <br /> would be ready for construction within two years of provided funding. <br /> • District 3 fulfilled its responsibilities by getting projects positioned for any increased <br /> funding. <br /> • The district has approximately$700 million expansion projects through, or almost through, <br /> the environmental process. <br /> • The district has a total of$2 billion expansion project needs. <br /> • The State Legislature/Governor did not provide a long-term funding bill for 20 years. The recently passed <br /> transportation bill could not make up for 20 years of neglect. Only about half of the funding in the new state <br /> transportation bill goes towards state highways and bridges, the other half goes to counties, cities, and transit. <br /> o The funding going to state highways and bridges is for"preservation"and even that does not satisfy <br /> the preservation needs across the state. Other than the$100 million earmark for District 7 to expand <br /> Hwy 601n southern Minnesota,there are no funds for expansion projects. <br /> • Federal funding of SAFETEA-LU(six-year federal transportation bill)will expire at the end of 2009. <br /> The Federal Highway Trust Fund is in serious trouble. Current indications are that we should not expect <br /> any future funding increases. <br /> • There is no new state or federal funding forecasted for future expansion projects other that what our current <br /> revenue allows($10 million per year).At this funding level,we have 70 years worth of expansion projects <br /> through or almost through our environmental process. <br /> Please contact Jim Povich, district program delivery engineer, at 320/223-6525 with any questions. <br /> Mn/DOT District 3-June 18, 2008 3 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.