Police Advisory Commission Minutes 09/20/2001I-94 Interregional Corridor (IRC) Study
Policy Advisory Committee (PAC) Meeting
Thursday, September 20, 2001, 6:30 PM
Monticello Community Center
505 Walnut Street
Monticello, MN55362
PAC Attendees:
Name
Joe Bechtold
Sonja Berg
LeRoy Berning
Don Dorf
Rick Holman
Ken Jude
Mayor Wayne Kessler
Mayor Don Kjonaas
Russell Nelson
Ken Scadden
Bruce Thielen
Organization
St. Joseph Township
St. Cloud APO
City of Albertville
Silver Creek Township
Lynden Township
Wright County
City of St. Michael
City of Dayton
Silver Creek Township
Monticello Township
City of Monticello
Others in Attendance:
Name
Terry Humbert
Claudia Dumont
Lynne Bly
Mike Sobolewski
Jack Forslund
Loren Polonsky
John Crawford
Jim Henricksen
Organization
Mn/DOT
Mn/DOT
Mn/DOT
Mn/DOT
URS Corporation
URS Corporation
URS Corporation
URS Corporation
Phone Number
320-363-4483
320-253-5437
763497-3384
763-878-2246
320-558-2980
763-682-7697
973497-2320
763427-3074
763-878-2260
763-295-5269
763-295-5433
Phone Number
320-654-5520
320-654-5134
651-582-1235
651-582-1602
612-373-6512
612-373-6441
612-373-6871
612-373-6413
At approximately 6:30 PM, Terry Humbert of Mn/DOT called the Policy Advisory Committee (PAC)
meeting to order and welcomed those in attendance. After re -introductions, Terry provided an overview
of the I-94 IRC Study process and schedule thus far. He said that over the last six months, the Project
Team has completed numerous analyses related to the transportation and land use of the study area —much
of which is reflected in the I-94 IRC Study Existing Conditions Draft Report distributed to PAC members.
Terry also said that the Project Team has recently completed a travel demand model that projects 2025
transportation and land use conditions based on information primarily provided by Technical Advisory
Committee (TAC) members. Over the next three months, Terry said the Project Team would use the
model to help determine future transportation scenarios —in other words, how to fit a transportation system
in with the traffic and land use that will occur.
Loren Polonsky of URS Corporation discussed some of the public involvement activities that have
occurred during the study thus far.
R:1327071541PUBLIC INVOLVEMENPPAC meetingAPAC Meeting No 2 Minutes 9-20-01.doc
Loren indicated that the TAC was broken down into three subareas —the southern part of the corridor
being in subarea 1, the central portion in subarea 2 and northern sections in subarea 3. Subareas 2 and 3
met jointly to ensure sufficient staff participation from the more rural communities. Loren said that both
TAC groups met four times between April and September to discuss existing and future land use
conditions, existing transportation conditions and information necessary for the travel demand model.
Loren also indicated that the Project Team held three focus groups in May with persons who regularly
drive any part of the I-94 IRC Study area. He said the focus groups were held in the cities of Rogers,
Monticello and St. Cloud with a moderator conducting the workshops. Loren said the Project Team
viewed the events from outside the rooms to ease the potential concerns of focus group participants. He
indicated that the focus group sessions included opinions about safety and speed along I-94; alternatives to
driving in the study area; and future transportation improvements. Loren told PAC members that a
summary of focus group comments was contained in Appendix B of the Existing Conditions Draft Report.
Lynne Bly of Mn/DOT said three focus group workshops were held in June with representatives of area
businesses and commerce discussing such transportation issues as speed, road restrictions, congestion and
access management along I-94, Trunk Highway (TH) 10 and Trunk Highways 101/169. Lynne distributed
a summary of the focus group workshops with PAC members and indicated additional information was
contained in Appendix C of the Existing Conditions Draft Report.
Jack Forslund of URS Corporation discussed some of the traffic and safety data contained in the Existing
Conditions Draft Report. Among the data contained in the report, he indicated that:
• The average speed for the entire corridor is 74 miles per hour (MPH), far surpassing the IRC target of
60 mph.
• In general, current year traffic volumes indicate that the I-94 mainline operates at an acceptable level
of service (LOS);
• Crash rates along several I-94 segments grew at a much higher rate than the increase in traffic volume
during the 1990's.
Jack introduced John Crawford and Jim Henricksen of URS Corporation to review the travel demand
model and results with PAC members. After John provided a general overview of the modeling process,
Jim discussed the specific model used for the I-94 IRC study. Jim said the data used for the models came
from, or was confirmed by the study area agencies and the TAC. He said the model reflects existing
conditions including 2000 Census population; 2000 household data; and 1999 retail and non -retail
employment information. Jim said the model was developed in conjunction with the Metropolitan Council
and the St. Cloud APO to ensure all of the study area would be captured. He also said the travel demand
model includes a roadway network that differentiates between suburban, urban and rural traffic, calculates
roadway speed and road capacity.
Jack indicated, in a memo distributed to PAC members, that the model predicting traffic along the I-94
IRC Study area would increase between 67 percent and 105 percent by 2025. He also said that the speed
along the corridor is projected to drop from 74 mph in 2001 to less than 55 mph in 2025—well under the
60-mph IRC target. Jack suggested the decrease in speed might hamper the movement of persons and
goods traveling along the corridor. Terry also suggested that future daily peak hour traffic may resemble
current weekend traffic that is observed during the warmer months. As a result, Jack said that the next step
is to look at ways to reduce future travel time delays which may include such options as growth policies,
creating new alternate routes or adding lanes to the interstate.
One PAC member asked whether the model accounted for the changing demographics of the area —
specifically the aging population. Terry said the model has no ability to take this factor into account.
R: U2707154PUBLIC INVOLVEMEN71PAC meetingsPAC Meeting No 2 Minutes 9-20-01.doc
Lynne suggested that the citizen focus groups provided a lot of details about the changing demographics of
the area and would take that information into account.
Another PAC member asked if the model reflected projected ridership numbers of Northstar Corridor
passengers. Jim said because the Northstar Commuter Rail project is not completed yet, the model does
not reflect any ridership impact on the corridor. He suggested that ridership on the commuter line would
probably have a negligible impact on the model results.
Another PAC member asked if there would be some consideration given to carpool (High Occupancy
Vehicle) lanes along I-94. Terry said the Project Team hasn't looked at that alternative yet. Claudia
Dumont of Mn/DOT indicated the citizen focus groups supported the idea of transit but indicated the
current service would not serve them well. Jack said focus group members strongly supported the idea of
express lanes —or lanes that carry mostly through -traffic.
Terry said that between now and December, the Project Team would begin to look at ways to address the
area's land use and transportation problems that are projected to exist in the future. He also said the
Project Team will work with both the TAC and PAC to develop alternatives and the criteria used to judge
the alternatives. The Project Team and PAC agreed that findings would be presented at the next meeting
on Thursday, December 13 at 6:30 PM at the Monticello Community Center.
The Policy Advisory Committee meeting concluded at approximately 8:30 PM.
For those PAC members unable to attend the September 20, 2001 meeting, the Project Team mailed out all
materials distributed to attending members.
R:132707154T UBLIC INVOLVEMENTIPAC meetingslPAC Meeting No 2 Minutes 9-20-Ol.doc