7.4. SR 08-19-2002 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

The design options included in Minnesota Department of Transportation's Highway 10 and Highway 169 Interregional Corridor Studies are devastating to Elk River as it exists today. -The options will result in two freeways traversing the city at its core. Many businesses along ooth freeways will be severely and negatively effected. The city's downtown area (currently under consideration for a major revitablization project) will be drastically changed by the study's proposal to raise Highway 10 to an elevation of 20 feet higher than it currently sits. The projected average daily traffic counts in the studies certainly dictate the need for im- provement of both highways through Elk River to more efficiently move traffic through the city in the future. However, the narrow scope of the studies prevented them from considering alternatives (including new routes) to divert future traffic away from Highway 10 and Highway 169 as they pass through Elk River. The assumption in the studies was that these two highways would need to provide for all projected increases in traffic for, at least, the next 25 years. All conclusions and design options in the studies were based on that assumption. The City of Elk River is opposed to the assumption used by MnDot as a basis for the studies. The city does not feel that it is reasonable for the two existing corridors to be expected to carry all future projected traffic as identified in the studies. The city requests MnDot to undertake another study with a broader scope that would include alternatives to Highway 10 and 169 for future projected traffic through the City of Elk River. Although the conclusions of this broader study would come after the research is completed, the city would like to offer several options for MnDot's consideration. _ First, is the option of a new state highway route as an alternative to future projected traffic on .lighway 169. The current study of the Mississippi bridge between Dayton and Ramsey is gener- ating some interest in providing a major north route at the intersection of the river crossing and Highway 10 in Ramsey. This north route is seen as extremely important to the river crossing because without it all bridge traffic would have no alternative than to exit on Highway 10. Con- gestion at the intersection is a definate possibility with traffic backing up on the bridge route and also on Highway 10. The City of Dayton is very concerned about this scenario. If a new major north highway is constructed, it is reasonable to consider this as an alternative to Highway 169. One scenario would be to initiate the new highway at the intersection with Highway 10 and the bridge crossing in Ramsey and end it at the intersection of Highway 169 and Sherburne County Rd. 9 between Zimmerman and Princeton (which is currently being constructed as an interchange). Secondly, is the option of alternatives to future projected traffic on Highway 10. There is no need to consider a new route as an alternative to Highway 10 since there already exists a com- pletely satisfactory alternative - that being I94. Instead of encouraging the use of Highway 10 as a primary route to all points west of Elk River, MnDot needs to look at ways to encourage the use of I94 as the primary route to all points west of Elk River. The proposed improvements to Highway 10 included in the study will certainly encourage the use of the highway for more and more trav- elers to and from points west of Elk River, including St. Cloud and the recreational area beyond. _The study's projected future traffic numbers then become a self-fulfilling prophesy - if you build, · they will Come. If no improvement to Highway 10, as it passes through Elk River, were to occur, traffic would certainly seek other routes as opposed to putting up with the bottlenecked situation through Elk River. The alternative many travelers (including commuters living west of Elk River and vacationers) would seek would be I94, which is actually the proper route for their travel in the