HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 06.k
Date: October 15, 2018 Item No.
DAKOTA COUNTY PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL STUDY - RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT
Proposed Action
Staff recommends adoption of the following motion: Move to approve a resolution of support
for Dakota County’s Principal Arterial Study.
Overview
Dakota County, in partnership with Apple Valley, Eagan, Farmington, Inver Grove Heights,
Lakeville, Rosemount, Dakota County townships, Scott County, the Metropolitan Council and
the Minnesota Department of Transportation completed a Principal Arterial Study of selected
County highways. Highways designated as principal arterials are designed to provide mobility
and safe, time-efficient travel over long distances for substantial traffic volumes. Technical
guidance and principal arterial characteristics such as traffic volume, freight, transit and
connectivity were considered in the evaluation. The study evaluated several existing/future
highway corridors (non-freeway) and identified segments that best serve the public now or in the
future with principal arterial classifications. Public meetings, geographically spread throughout
the County, were held to gather public feedback.
The study recommends designating County State Aid Highway (CSAH) 70 (210th/215th Street)
and CSAH 23 (Cedar Avenue- within Lakeville) as principal arterials. Other highways (outside
Lakeville) are also recommended as future principal arterials. Study results provide guidance and
support in managing the corridors and developing strategic, long-term planning and capital
improvement decisions.
Primary Issues to Consider
• Dakota County requests a resolution recognizing the study process, including principal
arterial recommendations. Study results will be incorporated into the Dakota County
Transportation Plan, pending County Board approval. The Metropolitan Council must
approve the County’s request to designate CSAH 23 and CSAH 70 as principal arterials.
Supporting Information
• Dakota County Principal Arterial Study (Final Report dated June 2018)
• Resolution of Support
Financial Impact: $0 Budgeted: Y☐ N☐ Source: N/A
Envision Lakeville Community Values: Diversified Economic Development
Report Completed by: Zach Johnson, City Engineer
CITY OF LAKEVILLE
RESOLUTION NO. 18-
RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT
DAKOTA COUNTY PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL STUDY
WHEREAS, Dakota County, in partnership with Apple Valley, Eagan, Farmington, Inver Grove
Heights, Lakeville, Rosemount, Dakota County townships, Scott County, the Metropolitan
Council and the Minnesota Department of Transportation completed a Principal Arterial Study
of selected County highways; and
WHEREAS, Dakota County asked cities and townships to recognize and support the Principal
Arterial Study process, including principal arterial recommendations; and
WHEREAS, the Principal Arterial Study recommendations provide the framework for a County-
wide transportation system that provides mobility and safe, time-efficient travel over long
distances for substantial traffic volumes, freight and transit opportunities, and regional
connectivity; and
WHEREAS, the Principal Arterial Study provides the County, cities and townships guidance and
support in managing highway corridors and developing strategic, long-term planning and capital
improvement decisions; and
WHEREAS, designated principal arterial highways provide opportunities for potential federal
and state funding.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City of Lakeville supports the Dakota County
Principal Arterial Study (Final Report dated June 2018) and the recommendation to designate
County State Aid Highway 70 (210th/215th Street) from Interstate 35 to County State Aid
Highway 23 (Cedar Avenue), and County State Aid Highway 23 (Cedar Avenue) from County
State Aid Highway 70 (210th/215th Street) to County State Aid Highway 46 (160th Street) as
principal arterials.
ADOPTED by the Lakeville City Council this 15th day of October 2018.
______________________________
Douglas P. Anderson, Mayor
_________________________________
Charlene Friedges, City Clerk
Dakota County
Principal Arterial Study
Final Report
June 2018
Prepared for:
Dakota County
Prepared by:
Bolton & Menk, Inc.
Description
This Final Report provides an
Executive Summary, technical
background information, and
the results of the Study. The
Study focused on planning and
visioning for selected Dakota
County highways, all of which
are not freeways and are not
intended to become freeways
in the future. The main
outcomes are priorities for
near-term designation of
selected segments as new
Principal Arterial (PA)
highways and identification of
other segments as future PA
highways, as guidance for
long-term planning. The Study
also provides guidance for
next steps and serves as a
reference for highway system
project priorities and cost
participation.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Project Managers
Brian Sorenson
Assistant County Engineer
Dakota County
brian.sorenson@co.dakota.mn.us
(952) 891-7122
Scott Peters
Senior Planner
Dakota County
scott.peters@co.dakota.mn.us
(952) 891-7027
Study Management Team
The following local and regional partners participated in periodic Study Management Team (SMT)
meetings as well as a series of four subarea outreach meetings, held from summer 2017 through
spring 2018.
Matt Saam, City of Apple Valley
Russ Matthys, City of Eagan
Katy Gehler, City of Farmington
Scott Thureen, City of Inver Grove Heights
Zach Johnson, City of Lakeville
Brian Erickson, City of Rosemount
Kyle Klatt, City of Rosemount
Terry Holmes, Empire Township
Jim Sipe, Hampton Township
Jeff Reed, Douglas Township
Jane Kansier, Dakota County Townships Collaborative
Angie Stenson, Scott County
Lisa Freese Scott County
Steve Peterson, Metropolitan Council
David Burns, Metropolitan Council
Rachel Wiken, Metropolitan Council
Michael Corbett, MnDOT
Jon Solberg, MnDOT
Consultant Support
Technical support and staffing to complete the study, under contract with Dakota County, Minnesota, was
led by Bolton & Menk, Inc.
Note: This document (PDF file) is set up for 2-sided printing with blank pages inserted where appropriate.
Dakota County
Principal Arterial Study
June 2018 Page i
Final Report
Prepared by Bolton & Menk, Inc.
Contents
Executive Summary
1 Introduction and Need for Study.......................................................................................1
1.1 Dakota County Growth and Principal Arterial Spacing............................................................1
1.2 Study Objectives....................................................................................................................2
2 Study Scope and Process...................................................................................................3
2.1 Principal Arterial Characteristics............................................................................................3
2.1.1 Review of Applicable Guidance – PA Characteristics...............................................................................4
2.1.2 Key PA Characteristics Used for the Study ..............................................................................................4
2.1.3 Additional Characteristics Observed for Dakota County Highways.........................................................4
2.2 Input from Regional and Local Partners.................................................................................6
2.3 Study Segments and Dakota County Subareas.......................................................................7
3 Study Analysis and Results by Subarea .............................................................................7
3.1 North Subarea.......................................................................................................................7
3.1.1 Observations and Input Received............................................................................................................7
3.1.2 Conclusions and Recommendations for the North Subarea....................................................................8
3.2 West Subarea........................................................................................................................8
3.2.1 Observations and Input Received............................................................................................................8
3.2.2 Conclusions and Recommendations for the West Subarea.....................................................................9
3.2.3 West Subarea Functional Class Change Recommendation and Process.................................................9
3.3 East Subarea........................................................................................................................10
3.3.1 Observations and Input Received..........................................................................................................10
3.3.2 Conclusions and Recommendations for the East Subarea....................................................................11
3.4 South Subarea.....................................................................................................................11
3.4.1 Observations and Input Received..........................................................................................................11
3.4.2 Conclusions and Recommendations for the South Subarea..................................................................12
4 Study Conclusions and Next Steps...................................................................................12
4.1 Near-Term PA Segment Designations...................................................................................12
4.2 Management of Future PA Highways; Benefits ....................................................................13
4.2.1 Arterial Access Management, Local Planning, and PA Cost Participation.............................................13
4.2.2 Arterial Access Management in Growing Communities........................................................................14
4.2.3 Study Benefits for Regional and Local Planning.....................................................................................15
4.2.4 Review of Dakota County’s Next Steps..................................................................................................16
FINAL REPORT
Page ii June 2018
Tables (on or following page reference) Page Reference
Table 1 Characteristics to Consider for Future Principal Arterial Designation ...................................5
Table 2 Framework for Analysis of Highway Segments......................................................................6
Table 3 Subarea and Segment Analysis Summary by Principal Arterial Key Characteristics ..............7
Figures (on or following page reference) Page Reference
Figure ES-1 Arterial System & Corridor Volumes.................................................................................ES-2
Figure ES-2 Study Conclusions & Recommendations...........................................................................ES-3
Figure ES-3 Summary of Next Steps.....................................................................................................ES-4
Figure 1 2010-2040 Household Growth...............................................................................................1
Figure 2 Study Corridors and Area Highway System............................................................................2
Figure 3 Arterial System and Corridor Volumes...................................................................................2
Figure 4 Existing Principal Arterials, Study Corridors, and System Spacing.........................................2
Figure 5 Freight Network Overview.....................................................................................................4
Figure 6 Corridor Segments and Subareas...........................................................................................7
Figure 7 Study Conclusions and Recommendations............................................................................7
Figure 8 Summary of Next Steps........................................................................................................13
Figure 9 Current Cost Participation Policy and Local Share...............................................................14
Figure 10 Example of Arterial Access Management Progression.........................................................15
Appendix
A. Highway Segment Data and Detailed Maps (see index on the appendix cover page)
List of Acronyms
AADT Annual Average Daily Traffic
CH County Highway
FHWA Federal Highway Administration
HCM Highway Capacity Manual
MN Minnesota Highway
MnDOT Minnesota Department of Transportation
PA Principal Arterial
SMT Study Management Team
TPP Transportation Policy Plan
US US Highway
VMT Vehicle Miles Traveled
FINAL REPORT
June 2018 Page ES-1
The Study focused on planning for selected
highways, all of which are not freeways and are not
intended to become freeways in the future. The
Study provides priorities and recommendations for
future principal arterial (PA) highways.
Executive Summary
The transportation system of Dakota County, Minnesota, is built around a framework of Principal
Arterial (PA) highways, which are well established to the north – for example, the major river crossings
(I-35W, I-35E, I-494, US 52, US 61, MN 77, and MN 55). However, possible gaps in the PA system are
apparent to the south and east. Figure ES-1 illustrates this, showing which highways are existing
principal arterials (red lines) with relative 2015 daily traffic volumes on all highways (line weights).
Designated PA highways include freeways and other highways planned and managed to provide time-
efficient and safe travel over long distances for many motorists. These “backbone” highways emphasize
mobility over access. PA highways help connect the region with the other areas in the state, carry the
major portion of trips to/from activity centers, and serve the majority of through movements.
The Dakota County PA Study focused on
planning for selected highways, all of which
are not freeways and are not intended to
become freeways in the future. The key
outcomes are priorities for near-term
designation of new PA segments and
identification of other segments as
recommended future PA highways.
Need for the Study
Dakota County Growth and Principal Arterial Spacing
Dakota County’s highway system has been established to follow the area’s growth and development,
which continues. US Census data and State Demographer forecasts indicate the County gained 42,648
residents from 2000 to 2010 (a 12 percent increase). The County’s population, at 398,552 persons in
2010, is expected to exceed 500,000 persons by 2035.
Technical guidance for spacing of PA highways encourages a network spaced logically within the region:
2-6 miles apart in developed suburban growth areas
6-12 miles apart in rural areas
With reference to Figure ES-1, Dakota County’s existing system includes no east-west PA highways south
of County Highway (CH) 42, a distance of about 20 miles. Similarly, the gaps between north-south PAs
include 15-20 miles from I-35 to US 52 and about 10 miles from US 52 to MN 316. The PA Study looked
at the importance of selected highways based on their potential to fit applicable guidance; specifically:
County Highway 63 (Argenta Trail)
MN Highway 3
MN Highway 149
County Highway 28 (Yankee Doodle Rd.)
County Highway 23 (Cedar Ave.)
County Highway 70
MN Highway 50
County Highway 86
Intentionally Blank
(This PDF is set up for 2-sided printing with blank pages inserted where appropriate.)
!"b$!"b$
%&f(
%&d(?éA@
)s
?ÕA@
?ÕA@
?§A@
?§A@
?úA@
?±A@
?tA@
!"`$
%&c(
)s
)s
?uA@
?§A@
GyWX
GwWX
GjWX
GhWX
G¹WX
G£WX
GâWX
?cA@
?èA@
G¢WX
?ØA@
?ØA@
)p
%&f(
%&c(
%&d(
!"`$
)p
?éA@
?ØA@?éA@
)p
?ÙA@
G¤WX?±A@
G¥WX
GÌWX
G¼WX
SÎ
GÎWX
G²WX
GgWX
G±WX
GªWX GÑWX
GÑWX
G¸WX
GàWX
G¹WX
?¹A@
SÈ
GÉWX
GÐWX WashingtonRamseyHennepinRamseyScott
Rice
GoodhueRiceWisconsin
UMore Park
Legend !IExisting Arterial Roads
Principal Arterial
Minor Arterial
2015 AADT
< 5000
5000 - 10000
10000 - 20000
20000 - 30000
30000 +
Planned Roads
Planned Roads
0 5MilesSource: Met Council, MnGeo, Dakota County, MnDOT
Study Corridor
Park
UMore Park
##Spacing (Miles)
Principal Arterial Corridor Volumes
Map Document: \\metrosouth1\gis\DACO\T44114295\ESRI\Maps\Overview_Regional\Overview_Volume_85x11P.mxd | Date Saved: 9/19/2017 10:55:42 AM
Figure ES1
Source: MnDOT, Dakota Co, Met. Council
0 5Miles
P r i n c i p a l A r t e r i a l S t u d y
FINAL REPORT
Page ES-2 June 2018
The Study does not complete a formal decision-
making process for designation of new PA highway
segments. But it does identify a few segments
proposed for near-term PA designation (in the
coming months or years).
These corridors, highlighted on Figure ES-1, were identified by Dakota County as the best candidates for
future PA designation. All of them exhibit good north-south or east-west continuity and provide
connections to important destinations. A one-mile segment of CH 28 (Yankee Doodle Road) was also
identified as a possible connection in a future PA system based on its links to CH 63 and MN 149.
Study Objectives
The Study’s primary objectives were to evaluate how the above-noted highways are used and the
features they exhibit compared with PA highway characteristics. Other objectives included documenting
context for the highways and providing guidance to help Dakota County and its partners plan for both
regional and local highway system priorities.
The intent of the study was not to identify corridors that require major infrastructure investment or to
prioritize improvement needs, but to identify corridors that will be required to provide a PA function for
the public either now or in the future. This will allow Dakota County, MnDOT, and the cities to plan for
and manage the corridors and supporting road network over time and make appropriate investment to
support the PA function at the time they are needed.
Importantly, the Study does not complete a formal decision-making process for designation of new PA
highway segments. But it does provide supporting data and guidance on next steps, including
identification of a few segments proposed for near-term PA designation (in the coming months or few
years). The Study may also serve as a reference for future discussions of highway jurisdictional roles—
county vs. state highways.
While setting priorities for highway system
funding was also not a primary objective,
designated PA highways have greater
potential for National Highway System (NHS)
preservation funding and for other federal
and state funding programs.
Study Scope, Process, and Partners
All highways addressed in the Study provide continuity over long distances, serving many trips,
commuters, and population or employment destinations. Initially, dozens of parameters were
considered based on FHWA, MnDOT, Metropolitan Council, and Dakota County guidance. But certain
characteristics were found to be most relevant in building the Study’s technical framework:
Decision characteristics: Does the highway function like a PA? Decision characteristics concern the
suitability of corridors to be future PA highways. The key decision characteristics included system
spacing, traffic volumes, system connectivity, capacity role in system, and role in carrying freight.
Timing characteristics: Is the highway ready to be a PA? Timing characteristics are those affecting
the “readiness” of the corridor and often provide a basis for additional corridor planning. The key
timing characteristics included access spacing, posted speed, high-capacity intersections, transit (in
urban areas), right-of-way, and absence of parking.
`
FINAL REPORT
June 2018 Page ES-3
Dakota County invited and encouraged participation from a full range of relevant partners, specifically:
MnDOT
Metropolitan Council
Dakota County
Scott County
Cities of Apple Valley, Eagan, Farmington, Inver Grove Heights,
Lakeville, and Rosemount
Representatives of the County’s 13 townships and rural centers
(under 5,000 residents each)
Representatives of these agencies participated in periodic Study Management Team (SMT) meetings.
The same agencies, as well as other invited stakeholders, were also involved in a series of four subarea
outreach meetings, which were held from late November 2017 into January 2018.
Study Results and Conclusions/Recommendations
Figure ES-2 presents the PA Study’s overall conclusions and recommendations. The information below
briefly notes how Study conclusions and recommendations were reached, including consideration of
input from outreach meetings. More details are provided in the full Final Report A.
North Subarea – Eagan, Inver Grove Heights, and Rosemount
MN 149, CH 63, CH 28, and MN 3
This is a developed urban part of Dakota County and exhibits some of the highest traffic volumes
observed on PA Study highways. Discussions of this area noted close spacing between MN 149, CH 63
(a planned new connection to I-494), and close spacing for MN 3 to the north and constraints from
development on MN 3 in downtown Rosemount. Considering these and other unique characteristics, a
one-mile segment of CH 28 connecting CH 63 and MN 149 was added to the Study.
Conclusions. Because of close spacing and roles in serving future traffic, the northern-most segments of
MN 149 and MN 3 are not recommended as future PA highways. All other segments in the North
Subarea are recommended as future PA highway routes, but not for near-term designation. CH 63 is
noteworthy in the Study as a special case because it is a planned, partially completed, new corridor with
right-of-way reserved for a future access-managed arterial connecting to I-494.
West Subarea – Apple Valley and Lakeville
CH 23 and CH 70
Like the North, the West Subarea is mostly developed and exhibits some of the highest traffic volumes
observed on PA Study highways. Discussions for this area focused on the current and future roles of CH
23 (north-south) and CH 70 (east-west), including the proposed future eastward extension of CH 70 to
Farmington and to MN 50 and US 61 (see more below in the East Subarea section).
Conclusions. The Study found that CH 23 and CH 70 exhibit regional importance now and in the future;
additionally, these links have available rights-of-way, good access spacing/management, and high
posted speeds. The two segments, which connect to each other and to I-35 on the west, are
recommended for near-term designation as PA highways (Figure ES-2). In the coming months or few
years, Dakota County will work with the two cities, as well as the Metropolitan Council and MnDOT, to
officially determine a functional classification change. The one other segment in the West Subarea
(CH 70 west of I-35) is recommended as a future PA highway route, but not for near-term designation.
Intentionally Blank
Corridor Segments and Subareas
Map Document: \\arcserver1\GIS\DACO\T44114295\ESRI\Maps\Overview_Regional\Overview_SubareaKey_Engagement.mxd | Date Saved: 2/6/2018 12:23:54 PM
Source: MnDOT, Dakota Co, Met. Council
?§A@GÉWX
?tA@
?§A@
GwWX
)s
?ÕA@GÐWX
GàWX
?ÕA@
!"b$
?èA@)p
G±WX
!"`$
%&c(
?éA@
%&d(
%&f(
)s
)p
?±A@
%&d(
%&f(
?ÞA@
?ØA@
)m
?ØA@
?§A@
?¸A@
?ØA@
)m
)s
3A
63*
149
3B
3C
3D
23A
23B
70B
86A 86C
50A
50B/61
70A
70C*
3E
23C
23D*
86B
Eagan
Lakeville
Rosemount
Eureka Twp.
Burnsville
Douglas Twp.
Empire Twp.
Hampton Twp.
Marshan Twp.
Vermillion Twp.
Castle Rock Twp.
Greenvale Twp.
Ravenna Twp.
Inver Grove Heights
AppleValley
Hastings
Farmington
SciotaTwp.
Nininger Twp.
Waterford Twp.
Randolph Twp.
Mendota Heights
South St. Paul
West St. Paul
Miesville
Coates
Northfield
Hampton
Sunfish Lake
Lilydale
Randolph
Vermillion
Mendota
New Trier
0 5Miles
P r i n c i p a l A r t e r i a l S t u d y
Legend
Segment Terminous
Study Corridor
Study Corridor Future Connection
County Boundary
Scott Co. Future PA
Principal Arterial
Minor Arterial
City/Township Boundary
!I
23A Segment Label
* Future Connection
Subareas
East
North
South
West
Figure ES2
FINAL REPORT
Page ES-4 June 2018
East Subarea – Farmington, Hampton, and Rural Townships to East
CH 70 (Future Connection), MN 3, MN 50, and US 61
The East Subarea has important connections to the North and West Subareas via MN 3 and the future
connection to CH 70. Transitional land use is an important characteristic, with both urban and rural
areas observed. As noted for the West Subarea above, the future regional importance of the CH 70 –
CH 50 - MN 50 - US 61 corridor is also a consideration to the east. The Study noted the need to manage
highway access and mobility through the small but growing communities to the east – Hampton, New
Trier, and Miesville.
Conclusions. The East Subarea’s highway segments reflect PA characteristics and all are recommended
as future PA highway routes, but not for near-term designation. As noted for both the West and East
Subareas, the regional importance of this multi-jurisdictional corridor for future mobility, and planning
for future demands, should be considered in future studies.
South Subarea – Southern Lakeville/Farmington and Rural Townships to South
CH 23, MN 3, and CH 86
The South Subarea is rural, but includes future growth areas. With few local traffic generators, the
highways in the South are often used for through trips and provide important connections to jobs and
commerce. The system issues for this subarea include connectivity to the north, to I-35, to Northfield,
and to Rochester via US 52, an existing PA. Discussions of this subarea noted that CH 86 has some
limited rights-of-way and no interchange with I-35. The close spacing of parallel segments of MN 3 and
CH 23 was also noted.
Conclusions. The segments in the South Subarea typically fit the characteristics of PA highways.
However, the spacing is close between the southern-most portions of CH 23 and MN 3, and relative
importance in connecting to Northfield is an issue as noted above. Therefore, MN 3 is recommended as a
future PA segment connecting to Northfield; CH 23 south of CH 86 is not recommended as a future PA.
All other segments of CH 23, MN 3, and CH 86 are recommended as future PA highway routes, but not
for near-term designation based on timing/readiness issues.
Next Steps
The Dakota County PA Study concludes
with the above-noted conclusions and
recommendations, including the
proposed near-term official designation
of CH 70 east of I-35 and CH 23 north of
CH 70 as PA highways (West Subarea).
Figure ES-3 summarizes next steps,
which will include noting
recommendations in the County’s 2040
Transportation Plan. The proposed near-
term designations will be formally addressed in the coming months or years with the Metropolitan
Council and MnDOT. This Study’s results, which include several recommendations to manage all of the
recommended future PA highways, will be updated periodically and reflected in transportation plans.
FIGURE ES-3. SUMMARY OF N EXT STEPS
FINAL REPORT
June 2018 Page 1
The Study focused on planning for selected
highways, all of which are not freeways and are not
intended to become freeways in the future. The
Study provides priorities and recommendations for
future principal arterial (PA) highways.
1 Introduction and Need for Study
The transportation system of Dakota County, Minnesota, is built around a framework of Principal
Arterial (PA) highways, which are well established to the north – for example, the major river crossings
(I-35W, I-35E, I-494, US 52, US 61, MN 77, and MN 55).
However, possible gaps in the PA system are apparent to the
south and east.
Designated PA highways include freeways and other
highways planned and managed to provide time-efficient and
safe travel over long distances for many motorists. These
“backbone” highways emphasize mobility over access, as
illustrated in the chart noting functional classifications.
In the functional classification framework, PA highways:
Connect the region with the other areas in the state or
connect metro centers to regional business
concentrations (Dakota County, 2012; 2030
Transportation Plan).
Carry the major portion of trips entering and leaving an activity center, as well as the majority of
through movements (FHWA, 2013; Functional Class Concepts, Criterial and Procedures).
The Dakota County PA Study addressed the need to establish sustainable and locally supported visions
along corridors which could be candidates for designation as new PA highways. The Study focused on
planning for selected highways, all of which
are not freeways and are not intended to
become freeways in the future. The key
outcomes are priorities for near-term
designation of new PA segments and
identification of other segments as
recommended future PA highways.
1.1 Dakota County Growth and Principal Arterial Spacing
Dakota County’s highway system has been established to follow the area’s growth and development.
Figure 1 illustrates this growth pattern, both historically (since 2010) and forecasted. Not surprisingly,
the County’s greatest levels of growth are seen within the major suburbs, with moderate growth
occurring in townships to the south and east. Forecasts indicate that strong growth will continue, even
without proactive efforts to review the highway network. US Census data and State Demographer
forecasts indicate the County gained 42,648 residents from 2000 to 2010 (a 12 percent increase). The
County’s population, at 398,552 persons in 2010, is expected to exceed 500,000 persons by 2035.
The County’s historic and forecasted population growth rate exceeds one percent per year and is also
reflected in increased employment, economic activity, and travel demand. As Dakota County grows, the
Intentionally Blank
?§A@GÉWX
?tA@
?§A@
GwWX
)s
?ÕA@GÐWX
GàWX
?ÕA@
G}WX
!"b$
?èA@)p
G±WX
!"`$
%&c(
?éA@
%&d(
%&f(
)s
)p
?±A@
%&d(
%&f(
?ÞA@
?ØA@
)m
?ØA@
?ØA@
)m
)sAppleValley31.9%
Bur nsville13.6%
Coates6.0%
DouglasTwp.23.5%
Eagan18.8%
EurekaTwp.35.1%
Farmington66.9%
GreenvaleTwp.27.2%
Hampton22.4%HamptonTwp.36.7%
InverGrove Heights46.9%
Lakeville60.5%
Lilydale57.3%
Marshan Twp.29.0%
Mendota66.6%
Mendota Heights9.6%
Miesville15.3%
NewTrier21.9%
NiningerTwp.7.5%
Northfield102.8%
Randolph7.1%
Randolph Twp.13.8%
RavennaTwp.28.2%
Rosemount84.5%
SciotaTwp.35.7%
SouthSt. Paul14.8%SunfishLake14.7%
Vermillion8.9%
VermillionTwp.20.2%
WaterfordTwp.8.8%
West St.Paul18.4%
EmpireTwp.127.2%
CastleRock Twp.3.1%
Hastings34.8%
Legend !I
0 5MilesSource: Met Council, Dakota County
P r i n c i p a l A r t e r i a l S t u d y
!I 2010-2040 Household Growth Figure 1
Household Growth
<500
501 - 1000
1001 - 2500
2501 - 5001
5000+
County Boundary
Study Corridor
xxx%Percent Growth
FINAL REPORT
Page 2 June 2018
highway network should be planned to provide for efficient and safe trips. Figure 2 provides a regional
perspective, showing Dakota County’s position in the region relative to other existing PA highways and
future PA highways identified by Scott County. Figure 2 also emphasizes the study corridors selected for
analysis in the PA Study, based on system spacing and other observations. The eight “study corridor”
highways show are:
County Highway 63 (Argenta Trail)
MN Highway 3
MN Highway 149
County Highway 28 (Yankee Doodle Rd.)
County Highway 23 (Cedar Ave.)
County Highway 70
MN Highway 50 / US 61
County Highway 86
These corridors were identified by Dakota County as the best candidates for possible PA designation
considering travel patterns, the service to destinations provided by each route, and desirable highway
system spacing. Figure 3 illustrates the current travel demand pattern, including existing principal
arterials (red lines) with relative 2015 daily traffic volumes on all highways (line weights).
Technical guidance for spacing of PA highways encourages a network spaced logically within the region:
2-6 miles apart in developed suburban growth areas
6-12 miles apart in rural areas
With reference to Figure 4, Dakota County’s existing system includes no east-west PAs south of County
Highway (CH) 42, a distance of about 20 miles. Similarly, the gaps between north-south PAs include 15-
20 miles from I-35 to US 52 and about 10 miles from US 52 to MN 316. Even in the more rural parts of
the County, these gaps may exceed desirable spacing – especially considering these are future growth
areas.
All of the study corridor highways have roles in providing good north-south or east-west continuity and
provide connections to important destinations. Additionally, the one-mile segment of CH 28 (Yankee
Doodle Road) was also identified as a possible PA connection based on its links to CH 63 and MN 149.
1.2 Study Objectives
The Study’s primary objectives were to evaluate how the above-noted highways are used and the
features they exhibit compared with PA highway characteristics. As described in more detail below, PA
characteristics were identified based on guidance from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA),
Dakota County, and the Metropolitan Council. Other objectives for the Study included documenting
context for the highways and providing guidance to help Dakota County and its partners plan for both
!"b$!"b$
%&f(
%&f(
%&d(?éA@
)s
?ÕA@
?ÕA@
?§A@
?§A@
?úA@
?±A@
?tA@
!"`$
%&c(
)s
)s
?uA@
?§A@
GyWX
GwWX
GjWX
GhWX
G¹WX
G£WX
GâWX
?cA@
?èA@
G¢WX
?ØA@
?ØA@
)p
%&f(
%&c(
%&d(
!"`$
)p
?éA@
?ØA@?éA@
)p
?ÙA@
G¤WX?±A@
G¥WX
GÌWX
G¼WX
SÎ
GÎWX
G²WX
GgWX
G±WX
GªWX GÑWX
GÑWX
G¸WX
GàWX
G¹WX
?¹A@
SÈ
GÉWX
GÐWX
G}WX
2.9
3.8
3.8
3.8
4.6
4.7
5.8
7.4
9.3
9.8
10.8
WEST
ST PAUL
MENDOTA HEIGHTS
SOUTH
ST PAUL
INVER
GR OVE
HEIGHT S
SUNFISH
LAKE
EAGAN
BURNSVILLE
NININGER TWP
HASTINGS
APPLE
VAL LEY
ROSEMOUNT
RAVENNA
TWP
COAT ES
MARSHAN
TWP
EMPIRE TWP
VERMILLION
TWP
LAKEVILLE
FARMIN GTON
DOUGLAS TWPEUREKA TWP
CASTLE
ROCK
TWP
HAMPTON TWP
HAMPTON
GR EENVALE TWP
RANDOLPH TWP
SCIOTA TWPWATERFORD TWP WashingtonRamseyHennepinRamseyScott
Rice
GoodhueRiceWisconsin
Legend !I
Existing Arterial Roads
Principal Arterial
Minor Arterial
2015 AADT
< 5000
5000 - 10000
10000 - 20000
20000 - 30000
30000 +
Planned Roads
Planned Roads
0 5Miles
Source: Met Council, MnGeo, Dakota County, MnDOT
0
2
5
10
15
25
20
Study Corridor
Urbanized Area
Existing Principal Arterials, Study
Corridors, and System Spacing
Figure 4
Source: MnDOT, Dakota Co, Met. Council
0 5Miles
P r i n c i p a l A r t e r i a l S t u d y
0 15 2010 255
Spacing (Miles)
##.#
Intentionally Blank
FINAL REPORT
June 2018 Page 3
The Study does not complete a formal decision-
making process for designation of new PA highway
segments. But it does identify a few segments
proposed for formal review and near-term PA
designation (in the coming months or years).
regional and local highway system priorities. Perhaps most important, completing this Study will help
prevent the consequences of not planning ahead, as listed in the text box.
Of course, growth will continue,
even without proactive planning,
as evident in new development
along the highways addressed in
this Study. But with a coordinated
plan, the highway system is more
likely to be designed to meet
mobility and safety objectives for
Dakota County’s many developing areas.
The intent of the study was not to identify corridors that require major infrastructure investment or to
prioritize improvement needs, but to identify corridors that will be required to provide a PA function for
the public either now or in the future. This will allow Dakota County, MnDOT, and the cities to plan for
and manage the corridors and supporting road network over time and make appropriate investment to
support the PA function at the time they are needed.
Importantly, the Study does not complete a formal decision-making process for designation of new PA
highway segments. But it does provide supporting data and guidance on next steps, including
identification of a few segments proposed for formal review and near-term PA designation (in the
coming months or years). The Study’s full Final Report serves as a reference for discussions of highway
jurisdictional roles—considering local governments, Dakota County, the Minnesota Department of
Transportation (MnDOT), and the Metropolitan Council. In this context, the Study provides information
about the possible regional importance of several highway segments.
While setting priorities for highway system
funding was not a primary study objective,
designated PA highways have greater
potential for National Highway System
(NHS) preservation funding and for other
federal and state funding programs.
Additionally, Study results may provide
guidance for highway system project
priorities and cost participation.
2 Study Scope and Process
2.1 Principal Arterial Characteristics
The Study’s process began by identifying the major Dakota County highways to be evaluated, as noted above.
All of these highways provide continuity over long distances, serving many trips, commuters, and population
or employment destinations. The methodology for the Study then considered dozens of parameters based on
FHWA, MnDOT, Metropolitan Council, and Dakota County guidance.
Possible Consequences of Not Planning Ahead
If more principal arterials are not considered, the County’s highway system might
fail to support future needs. The possible outcomes include:
An incomplete highway network
Increasing traffic on highways not designed for needs
Poor mobility; inefficient transportation system
Likely increase in safety problems
Unclear priorities for highway improvement projects and funding
FINAL REPORT
Page 4 June 2018
2.1.1 Review of Applicable Guidance – PA Characteristics
Table 1 provides a complete list of characteristics to consider when looking at possible PA designations
(non-freeway), based on the cited FHWA, Metropolitan Council, and Dakota County guidance. For each
measure, the corridor and segments generally either meet the characteristic or not. In researching the
guidance, the Study found PA characteristics could be described in two groups:
Decision characteristics are those that most directly affect the suitability of corridors or segments to
be future PA highways. These characteristics help establish if the highway is located well within the
system and serves travelers in a manner consistent with a PA.
Timing characteristics are those affecting the ease in which the corridor or corridor segments can be
planned for, and adapted, to serve a PA function over time. These characteristics establish the
“readiness” of the highway and could provide a basis for additional corridor planning.
Both decision and timing characteristics were considered important decision-making factors; however,
some characteristics proved more important to differentiate between highway characteristics than
others. Therefore, Table 1 notes which characteristics are considered “Key Factors” for this Study’s
corridor- and segment-level analyses.
2.1.2 Key PA Characteristics Used for the Study
As noted under “Comments” in Table 1, the Study approach considered applicable guidance and the
reasons why some characteristics were identified as key factors for corridor-level comparisons and why
others were not. For example, some characteristics are based on high-level guidance only or will provide
similar results for all corridors and, therefore, were not key factors for analysis of segments.
As listed in Table 2 below, the Study’s framework for analysis and comparison of highway segments
focused on a selected range of decision and timing characteristics. This focus helped to make the
analysis more clear.
2.1.3 Additional Characteristics Observed for Dakota County Highways
With the guidance in Tables 1 and 2 as a reference, this Study also found that Dakota County highways
sometimes have characteristics or context which suggest additional inputs and details toward findings
and recommendations. For example, these factors were observed:
Land Use and the Presence of Transit – Dakota County has a number of public transit corridors with
regularly scheduled service. The presence of scheduled transit service on was considered as noted in
Tables 1 and 2. However, a lack of scheduled transit service in the rural parts of the County is
expected and is thus not considered a relevant characteristic on rural highway segments.
Freight Connections – While many highways are used by trucks, the Metropolitan Council’s 2017
Regional Truck Highway Corridor Study provided an objective means to check designations for
existing routes. Figure 5 shows that most of study corridors are included as priority truck routes
within the Metropolitan Council’s 3-tier scoring structure.
?§A@GÉWX
?tA@
?§A@
GwWX
)s
?ÕA@GÐWX
GàWX
?ÕA@
G}WX
!"b$
?èA@)p
G±WX
!"`$
%&c(
?éA@
%&d(
%&f(
)s
)p
?±A@
%&d(
%&f(
?ÞA@
?ØA@
)m
?ØA@
?¸A@
?ØA@
)m
)s
Source: Metropolitan Council, Regional Truck H ighway C orridor Study, 2017
The Freight Tier is a weighted score for prioritzing regional truck highw ay cor ridors.
Corridors were evaluated based on truck volume, truck percentage, proximity to
freight clusters, and proximity to regional freight terminals.
Legend
Freight Tier
Tier 1
Tier 2
Tier 3
Principal Arterial
Study Corridor
Study Corridor Fu tu re Connection
County Boundary
0 5Miles
Source: Met Council, Dakota County
Figure 5Principal A r t e r i a l S t u d y
!I
Freight Network Overview
)s
G¸WX
G¤WX
?ÙA@
G¹WX
G¸WX
GaWX
Intentionally Blank
FINAL REPORT
June 2018 Page 5
Table 1. Characteristics to Consider for Future Principal Arterial Designation
PA Characteristic Guidance Affects
Key
Factor?Comments
System Spacing Urban: 2-3 miles, Rural: 6-12 miles Decision ✔An approximate fit to system
spacing guidance is sufficient
Typical Volume ADT, Urban: 15,000 to 100,000+, Rural: 2,500
to 25,000+Decision ✔
System Connections Connects to Interstate freeways, other principal
arterials, selected A-Minor Arterials Decision ✔
The corridor and segment
analyses for this Study note the
combined importance of
volumes and connections
System Capacity
Highest traffic volume corridors, higher existing
volume in comparison to parallel corridors
(within the spacing)
Decision ✔Comparison to volumes of
parallel study corridors
Freight Connections Connect to regional job concentrations and
freight terminals; connects to freight centers Decision ✔
Freight tier assigned in the Met
Council’s Twin Cities Regional
Truck Corridors Study
Access Spacing
Urban: Full access public street intersections at
½ mile or greater; Rural: Full access public
street intersections at 1 mile or greater,
Number of full access public street
intersections per mile
Timing ✔
Access management problems
may reduce feasibility of
corridor as a PA
Intersections Presence of grade-separated or high-capacity
at-grade intersections Timing ✔Considered in context with
volumes and connections
Transit
Preferential treatment for regularly scheduled
transit, or bus lanes/priority (a “transit corridor”)
in urban segments (not applicable for rural
segments)
Timing ✔
Scheduled transit routes imply a
high demand for travel (not
applicable for rural segments)
Right-of-Way 100 to 300 feet of highway right-of-way width
(highway easements are sometimes observed) Timing ✔
Limited right-of-way may reduce
segment feasibility as a PA;
study also considers
setbacks/constraints
Parking None (on-street parking not allowed)Timing ✔Parking is rarely allowed, but is
noteworthy when it is
Operations Speed, Urban: 40-65 mph, Rural: Legal Limit
(State Statute), typically 55 mph Timing ✔Low-speed zones may reduce
segment feasibility as a PA
System Mileage Urban: 4-9% of system; Rural: 2-6% of system
(define “system” as Dakota County’s system)Decision High-level guidance only (not a
corridor-level factor)
City Connections
Connects the adjacent cities along route, serve
major activity centers, connect cities (>25,000
population in rural areas)
Decision Similar for all study corridors
Regional Connections Longest trip demands, serves long trip lengths
(consider length of corridor)Decision Similar for all study corridors
Travel Shed
High proportion of travel on fewest miles
(compares vehicle miles of travel, or VMT, of
corridor to parallel route VMT)
Decision Similar for all study corridors
(use volume comparison)
Community Continuity Provides continuity through cities Decision Similar for all study corridors
Employment
Connections
Serves demand between central business
district and outlying residential areas (i.e.,
connects residential communities to freeways
that then connect into Minneapolis/St. Paul)
Decision
Similar for all study corridors
(connections to other PAs and
major highways are noted)
PA Continuity
Continuous route with no dead ends, connects
to existing or proposed Principal Arterials on
each end (system design factor)
Decision Similar for all study corridors
(system requirement)
Access Control Presence of medians Timing Not a key factor by itself when
comparing corridor segments
Bikes and Pedestrians Presence of adjacent trails or sidewalks, no
bike lanes Timing Not a key factor by itself when
comparing corridor segments
Characteristics based on: FHWA, Highway Functional Classification Concepts, Criteria, and Procedures (2013); Metropolitan Council 2040
Transportation Policy Plan; and Dakota County Access Guidelines
FINAL REPORT
Page 6 June 2018
The Study included periodic meetings with
a management committee and a series of
four subarea outreach meetings.
TABLE 2. FRAMEWORK FOR ANALYSIS OF HIGHWAY SEGMENTS
Highway Right-of-Way and Spatial Constraints – There are several Dakota County highway
segments that do not have public rights-of-way established, but instead are reserved by highway
easements. A highway easement is not a major concern by itself. However, some segments include
combinations of incomplete right-of-way, narrow easements, or constraints from railroads,
numerous nearby buildings/structures and many access points. Combinations of such factors are
known to present capacity and safety challenges, perhaps limiting the readiness of a highway
segment for designation as a PA. Highway segments that offered established rights-of-way and few
spatial constraints were considered stronger from a timing or “readiness” perspective.
Possible New Routings or Connections – Some of the corridors/segments included in the Study (CH
63, CH 70, MN 50, CH 86, and CH 23) include proposed, as-yet incomplete, connections or possible
new connections. Such segments may be less ready for PA designation and might also affect the
readiness of adjacent segments. The Study team also added the one-mile segment of CH 28 (Yankee
Doodle Rd.) as a connector between CH 63 and MN 149. The combined segments form a north-
south corridor with CH 28 as a lateral connection.
2.2 Input from Regional and Local Partners
In completing the Study, Dakota County invited and encouraged participation from a full range of
relevant partners, specifically:
MnDOT
Metropolitan Council
Dakota County
Scott County
Cities of Apple Valley, Eagan, Farmington, Inver Grove Heights,
Lakeville, and Rosemount
Representatives of the County’s 13 townships and rural centers
(under 5,000 residents each)
Representatives of these agencies participated in
periodic Study Management Team (SMT) meetings. The
same agencies, as well as other invited stakeholders,
were also involved in a series of four subarea outreach
meetings, held from late November 2017 into January
2018.
Corridor Segments and Subareas Figure 6
Source: MnDOT, Dakota Co, Met. Council
?§A@GÉWX
?tA@
?§A@
GwWX
)s
?ÕA@GÐWX
GàWX
?ÕA@
G}WX
!"b$
?èA@)p
G±WX
!"`$
%&c(
?éA@
%&d(
%&f(
)s
)p
?±A@
%&d(
%&f(
?ÞA@
?ØA@
)m
?ØA@
?§A@
?¸A@
?ØA@
)m
)s
3A
63*
149A
3B
3C
3D
23A
23B
70B
86A 86C
50A
50B/61
70A
70C*
3E
23C
23D*
86B
28
149B
Eagan
Lakeville
Rosemount
Eureka Twp.
Burnsville
Douglas Twp.
Empire Twp.
Hampton Twp.
Marshan Twp.
Vermillion Twp.
Castle Rock Twp.
Greenvale Twp.
Ravenna Twp.
Inver Grove Heights
AppleValley
Hastings
Farmington
SciotaTwp.
Nininger Twp.
Waterford Twp.
Randolph Twp.
Mendota Heights
South St. Paul
West St. Paul
Miesville
Coates
Northfield
Hampton
Sunfish Lake
Lilydale
Randolph
Vermillion
Mendota
New Trier
0 5Miles
P r i n c i p a l A r t e r i a l S t u d y
Legend
Segment Terminous
Study Corridor
Study Corridor Future Connection
County Boundary
Scott Co. Future PA
Principal Arterial
Minor Arterial
City/Township Boundary
!I
23A Segment Label
* Future Connection
Subareas
East
North
South
West
Setting
1. System
Spacing
3. System
Connections
4. System
Capacity RoleB
5. Freight
Connections 6. Access Spacing 7. Posted Speed 8. Intersections 9. Transit 10. Right-of-Way
11. No Observed
Parking +Posted
3A 23,000 CH 63 (Future)2/5 6/6
3B 31,000 TH 77 4/5 Dtown Rosemount 3/6
63C 41,000
(Planned)E 5/5
(Planned)E 6/6
28C 23,000 (Connector)4/5 5/6
149A 27,000 CH 63 (Future)2/5 5/6
149B 30,000 5/5 5/6
23A 50,000 5/5 6/6
70A 19,000 CH 60 3/5 5/6
70B 20,000 CH 60, CH 50 4/5 5/6
70CD 7,700 4/5 1/6
3C 26,100 CH 31 4/5 5/6
50A 10,200 5/5
naG Hampton 3/5
50B/61 6,400 5/5
naG New Trier, Miesville 3/5
3D 7,300 4/5
naG 4/5
3E 7,460 5/5
naG 4/5
23B 12,000 5/5 naG 3/5
23C 5,400 3/5 naG 3/5
23DD 9,900 3/5 1/5
86A 5,300 4/5 naG 3/5
86B 11,000 4/5 naG Castle Rock 1/5
86C 4,800 5/5 naG 4/5
Qualification Guideline Notes:Remarks:
1. System Spacing: Average spacing from considered segment to nearest existing PA must be... Urban: 2-3 miles. Rural: 6-12 miles. A Representative 2030 forecast volumes are shown for each segment.
2. Typical Volume: Qualifies if existing or future AADT's fall between... Urban: 15,000 to 100,000+, Rural: 2,500 to 25,000+. B If a nearby parallel highway has higher current or projected volumes than the considered segment, the higher-volume link is noted.
3. System Connections: Qualifies if considered segment connects to an existing PA. C The analysis for CH 63 is based on future improvement designs, including a new alignment. Much of the needed
4. System Capacity Role: Qualifies if considered segment has highest volume compared to parallel existing highways within system spacing guidance. right-of-way has been dedicated. CH 28 is analyzed in the study only as a connecting link for CH 63 and MN 149.
5. Freight Connections: Qualifies if segment is assigned a frieght tier by the Metropolitan Council. D Segments 70C and 23D are proposed future connections that require additional studies and right-of-way acquisition.
6. Access Spacing: Number of full/primary public street intersections per mile must be... Urban: 1 per 1/2 mile, Rural: 1 per mile (maximums). E As noted above ("C"), CH 63 is a planned corridor, connecting to I-494. Future freight and transit connections
7. Posted Speed: Qualifies if posted speed limits within the segement are... Urban: 40 - 65 mph, Rural: 55 mph. are expected, with timing in the foreseeable future.
8. Intersections: The segment connects to a grade separated or high-capacity at grade intersection. F As noted above ("D"), Segments 70C and 23D are proposed future connections. Segment 70C is expected to meet
9. Transit: Public transit routes are currently present on the segment. all or most decision characteristics, while Segment 23D is not. Timing for both is contingent on local development.
10. Right-of-Way: Qualifies if existing ROW (or easement) is more than 100 feet wide or if setbacks provide such space (if both, two checks). Constraints noted. G The "Transit" question is considered inappropriate for rural areas (five timing characteristics considered).
11. No Observed Parking+Posted: Qualifies if parking is not observed contextually (typical) or if posted "No Parking" in any portion of the segment (two checks)
June-2018 Table 3
Subarea and Segment Analysis Summary
Principal Arterial Study by Principal Arterial Key Characteristics(Note: This page is formatted for 11 x 17 printing.)
Characteristics based on: FHWA, Highway Functional Classification Concepts, Criteria, and Procedures (2013); Metropolitan Council 2040
Transportation Policy Plan; and Dakota County Access Guidelines
(Future Connection, No)F (Future Connection, Timing Uncertain)F
Subarea
North
West
South
Urban
Urban
Rural
Rural
East
(Future Connection, Yes)F (Future Connection, Timing Uncertain)F
Urban
Segment
Timing Characteristics (Is it ready to be PA?)Decision Characteristics (Should it be a Future PA?)
Decision
Total
Timing
Total
2. Typical Volume
(2030)A
FINAL REPORT
June 2018 Page 7
2.3 Study Segments and Dakota County Subareas
Figure 6 and Table 3 summarize the PA Study’s full analysis, based on the PA decision and timing
characteristics considered for 21 highway segments. The segments are grouped into four subareas
(North, West, East, and South) to provide perspective on land use and travel characteristics. More
details about the data considered for each segment, along with maps focused on features in each
segment, are provided in Appendix A – Highway Segment Data and Detailed Maps.
3 Study Analysis and Results by Subarea
This section provides summaries of the Study’s results by subarea (North, West, East, and South). Each
summary statement highlights the important observations, including input received at referenced
subarea meetings, along with the conclusions and recommendations. Figure 7 provides an overall
introduction and summary to the conclusions and recommendations.
3.1 North Subarea
3.1.1 Observations and Input Received
The North Subarea is a developed urban part of Dakota County and exhibits some of the highest traffic
volumes observed on PA Study highways. The system issues for this subarea focused primarily on roles
of north-south highways, including a future extension and connection on new alignment for CH 63 from
I-494 to MN 55.
The North Subarea Focus Group meeting was held on January 4, 2018. Comments, discussion, and
analysis noted:
Concerns about the characteristics of MN 3 (Study Segment 3A) which is mostly residential and
includes curves which limit sight distance. Segment 3A is also not a designated truck route.
The spacing between Study Segments 63 and 3A is roughly a half mile – too close for spacing
guidance between two PA highways.
Segment 3B, while constrained through Rosemount’s downtown, is an important north-south travel
corridor in central Dakota County, connecting to St. Paul/Minneapolis to the north and to
Farmington and Northfield to the south.
The MN 149 Segment has importance as both a through route and as a route providing service to
major employment and freight businesses (even while lacking designation as a freight corridor by
the Metropolitan Council).
The one-mile segment of CH 28 connecting CH 63 and MN 149 is included as a possible future PA
because of its potential role in a future north-south PA system corridor.
Intentionally Blank
Study Conclusions & Recommendations Figure 7
Source: MnDOT, Dakota Co, Met. Council
?§A@GÉWX
?tA@
?§A@
GwWX
)s
?ÕA@GÐWX
GàWX
?ÕA@
G}WX
!"b$
?èA@)p
G±WX
!"`$
%&c(
?éA@
%&d(
%&f(
)s
)p
?±A@
%&d(
%&f(
?ÞA@
?ØA@
)m
?ØA@
?§A@
?¸A@
?ØA@
)m
)s
?¸A@
GÌWX
3A
63
149B
3B
3C
3D
23A
23B
70B
86A 86C
50A
50B/61
70A
70C*
3E23C
23D*
86B
See Detail
149A
28
Eagan
Lakeville
Rosemount
Eureka Twp.
Burnsville
Douglas Twp.
Empire Twp.
Hampton Twp.
Marshan Twp.
Vermillion Twp.
Castle Rock Twp.
Greenvale Twp.
Ravenna Twp.
Inver Grove Heights
AppleValley
Hastings
Farmington
SciotaTwp.
Nininger Twp.
Waterford Twp.
Randolph Twp.
Mendota Heights
South St. Paul
West St. Paul
Miesville
Coates
Northfield
Hampton
Sunfish Lake
Lilydale
Randolph
Vermillion
Mendota
New Trier
0 5Miles
P r i n c i p a l A r t e r i a l S t u d y
Near-Term PA Designation
Recommended Future PA
Not Recommended
Future Extension
Scott Co. Future PA
Principal Arterial
Minor Arterial
!ILegend
3A
63
149 B
28
149 A
Detail
)p
?§A@
?tA@
%&f(
?ØA@G}WX
FINAL REPORT
Page 8 June 2018
NORTH SUBAREA CONCLUSIONS: Segment 3A (MN 3
from I-494 to MN 149) is not recommended as a future
PA. Other segments (CH 63, CH 28, MN 149, and MN 3
from MN 149 to CH 42) are recommended as future PA
highways, but not for near-term designation.
3.1.2 Conclusions and Recommendations for the North Subarea
The segments in this subarea fit the characteristics of PA highways. However, the spacing is too close
between future CH 63 and Segment 3A to recommend both as future PA segments. The CH 63 segment
is forecast to serve more traffic, currently
has dedicated right-of-way, and will
provide design characteristics appropriate
for a PA. Therefore, Segment 3A is not
recommended as a future PA; all other
segments in the North Subarea are
recommended as future PA highway
routes, but not for near-term designation.
Segment 3B exhibits the above-noted constraints in Rosemount’s downtown. CH 28 is a possible
connection along a future north-south PA corridor; its role in a future PA system will be confirmed
through future designations.
3.2 West Subarea
3.2.1 Observations and Input Received
Similar to the North, the West Subarea is generally a developed urban part of Dakota County and
exhibits some of the highest traffic volumes observed on PA Study highways. In fact, CH 23 carries more
traffic in the West Subarea than any other segments in the Study. The system issues for the West
include the roles of CH 23 (north-south) and CH 70 (east-west). The mobility roles and connections
provided by these two highways, which intersect in Lakeville’s Airlake Industrial Park area, are important
factors in the overall PA Study because of the regional connections they provide. CH 70 is also planned
to provide a future connection to Farmington, and via CH 74 (Ash Street) to MN 50 and US 61 (see more
below in the East Subarea section).
The West Subarea Focus Group meeting was held on January 8, 2018. Comments, discussion, and
analysis noted:
The meeting included representatives of Dakota County and local governments (Apple Valley and
Lakeville) as well as developers. This led to discussions of land development issues, including the
need to create a suitable system of local roadways along Study segments as development fills in.
Dakota County and the communities closely involved in the West Subarea will need to engage on
supporting studies, including the extension of CH 70 east to Farmington.
The CH 70 - MN 50 - US 61 corridor presents a number of highway jurisdictions and, with completion
of the proposed future connection to Farmington and to US 52, the regional importance of this
corridor should be considered. This corridor includes connections to Lakeville’s Airlake airport and
industrial park, to US 52, US 61, and to Scott County to the west (where Scott County Highway 8 has
also been identified as a future PA).
Similarly, it is noted that CH 23 transitions to the north to MN 77, an existing PA.
FINAL REPORT
June 2018 Page 9
WEST SUBAREA CONCLUSIONS: CH 23 from CH 42 to CH 70
and CH 70 from I-35 to CH 23 are recommended for near-
term PA designation (the only two with this recommendation
in the Study). CH 70 west of I-35 is recommended as a future
PA, but not for near-term designation.
Discussions noted the need for continued studies to address the design of CH 70, including the
extension east to Farmington (joining CH 74 or Ash Street).
CH 31, or Pilot Knob Road, was discussed as a locally important north-south corridor. This roadway
has volumes in some segments that are comparable to parallel volumes on CH 23; however, unlike
CH 23 or MN 3, it does not provide continuity south of Farmington and is not proposed to do so.
3.2.2 Conclusions and Recommendations for the West Subarea
The segments in this subarea fit the characteristics of PA highways. Additionally, CH 23 and CH 70 in the
West Subarea both exhibit reasonable available rights-of-way, good access spacing/management, and
high posted speeds. In fact, Segment 23A is a 4-lane divided roadway for its entirety. The lands
surrounding the two highways are established high-growth areas, with current growth and development
evident as well as major commercial and freight uses (Airlake Industrial Park). Therefore, there is short-
term risk of development patterns that conflict with PA highway characteristics. Considering these
observations, Study objectives, and connectivity to existing PA segments to the north (MN 77 and CH 42)
and west (I-35), Segments 23A and 70B are recommended for near-term PA designation. These are the
only two segments in the PA Study
recommended for near-term
designation. The only other segment in
the West Subarea, Segment 70A west
of I-35 is recommended as a future PA
highway route, but not for near-term
designation.
3.2.3 West Subarea Functional Class Change Recommendation and Process
The process for accomplishing a functional classification change warrants attention for the above-
referenced segments of CH 23 and CH 70 (23A and 70B). As noted, these are the only two links
recommended in the Study for near-term designation as PA highways, and they were identified based
on characteristics that strongly reflect existing and future roles in
the system. These two segments also fit together in a future PA
system because they intersect to complete a new stage for the
overall system. Specifically, PA highways should interconnect; and
this recommendation would add both north-south and east-west
links to the system, connecting at a common point.
While the timeframe to formally complete the recommended
designation of these segments as PA highways is not certain, the
process is laid out by MnDOT and the Metropolitan Council. See
applicable guidance at:
www.dot.state.mn.us/roadway/data/functional_class.html
As noted in the detailed guidance for a functional class change process, MnDOT has the primary
responsibility for developing and updating the statewide highway functional classifications (23 CFR
§470.105). However, the change process will begin by Dakota County completing and submitting a
FINAL REPORT
Page 10 June 2018
EAST SUBAREA CONCLUSIONS: All segments are
recommended as future PA highways, but not for
near-term designation. These include MN 3 from CH
42 south to MN 50, the future connection of CH 70
from CH 23 to MN 3, and MN 50/US 61.
“Functional Classification Change Request” form to the Metropolitan Council. The referenced federal
regulation requires MnDOT’s cooperation with local officials in developing and updating the functional
classification and the Transportation Advisory
Board (TAB) typically reviews change requests.
3.3 East Subarea
3.3.1 Observations and Input Received
The East Subarea has important connections
to the North and West Subareas via MN 3 to
the north and the future connection to CH 70
to the west. Transitional land use is an important characteristic of the area, with both urban and rural
areas observed. Traffic volumes reflect this transition, as they vary widely in segments. The system
issues for the East include the connections to the fully urbanized parts of Dakota County (north and west
as noted above) and the regional connections to communities in bordering counties such as Northfield
(south) and Red Wing (east). As discussed for the West Subarea above, CH 70 is planned along a future
connection linking Farmington to Lakeville and to I-35 more directly than provided by existing CH 50.
Therefore, the regional importance of the CH 70 - CH 50 - MN 50 - US 61 corridor is also a consideration
to the east.
The East Subarea Focus Group meeting was held on November 30, 2017. Comments, discussion, and
analysis noted:
Similar to the discussion noted above for the West Subarea, participants asked about CH 31 (Pilot
Knob Road). While this roadway exhibits some relatively high volumes, it does not provide
continuity south of Farmington and is not proposed to do so.
The need for continued studies involving Lakeville and Farmington, in part to address the proposed
design for the CH 70 extension, connecting to MN 50 in Farmington via CH 74 (Ash Street).
The need to manage highway access and mobility through the small but growing communities to the
east – Hampton, New Trier, and Miesville.
The Focus Group discussed traffic counts and noted the 2030 forecast volumes for MN 50 east of
Hampton (Segment 50B/61) suggested a reduction in travel demand versus counts in 2014 and
2015. MnDOT’s counts are updated every three years and Dakota County typically updates counts
semi-annually; forecasts are now also getting updated. The low growth forecast for MN 50 out to
2030 was partially based on limitations of the regional travel model at the edges of the metro area,
as well as need for updates. For purposes of this study, the 2030 forecast volumes to the east will
suggest a flat forecast as a placeholder rather than a future reduction (Appendix A).
3.3.2 Conclusions and Recommendations for the East Subarea
The segments in this subarea fit the characteristics of PA highways and all are recommended as future
PA highway routes, but not for near-term designation. The segments include MN 3 from CH 42 south to
MN 50, the future connection of CH 70 from CH 23 to MN 3, and MN 50/US 61 extending east to the
FINAL REPORT
June 2018 Page 11
SOUTH SUBAREA CONCLUSIONS: CH 23 from CH 86
to MN 19 in Northfield is not recommended as a
future PA route. All other segments (CH 23 north of
CH 86, MN 3, and CH 86) are recommended as future
PA highways, but not for near-term designation.
county line. As noted for both the West and East Subareas, the regional importance of this multi-
jurisdictional corridor should be considered in future studies.
3.4 South Subarea
3.4.1 Observations and Input Received
The South Subarea is rural, but includes
future growth areas. With limited local
traffic generators, the highways in the South
are often used for through trips and provide
important connections to jobs and
commerce. The system issues for this
subarea include connectivity to the West
and East Subareas (noted above), to I-35, to
existing PA segments in Northfield, and to Rochester via US 52, an existing PA.
The South Subarea Focus Group meeting was held on December 13, 2017. Comments, discussion, and
analysis noted:
The southern-most segments of CH 23 (Segments 23C and 23D) are spaced closely with the parallel
segment of MN 3, Segment 3E (the highways are 3 miles apart or less). This compares to guidance
for rural-area spacing of 6-12 miles.
The Metropolitan Council includes MN 3 within its freight tiers, including Segment 3E (see Figure 5,
above). The parallel Segments 23C and 23D are not identified as designated truck routes.
Participants discussed observations of lower forecast volumes on the above-noted segments of
CH 23 vs. the parallel segment of MN 3 and also noted:
o MN 3 currently serves as the more direct and primary north-south route through Northfield.
o There are potential challenges with the future connection proposed for CH 23 into
Northfield (Study Segment 23D). Land uses in the area proposed for the future connection
include a solar farm and land owners may not be supportive.
CH 86 is a locally important east-west corridor, connecting to US 52 to the east and to Scott County
destinations and I-35 to the west (it is noted as a future Scott County PA). However, CH 86 has right-
of-way constraints in Castle Rock and lacks a direct connection to I-35. An interchange with I-35 has
been proposed for the CH 86 overpass location; but this is a long-term concept and no serious
studies have been undertaken.
3.4.2 Conclusions and Recommendations for the South Subarea
The segments in this subarea typically fit the characteristics of PA highways. However, the spacing is
close between the southern-most portions of CH 23 and MN 3, and relative importance in connecting to
Northfield is an issue as noted above. The MN 3 corridor provides a more direct alignment using all
existing roadway and will carry greater forecast volumes. Given the comparisons noted, and the
FINAL REPORT
Page 12 June 2018
are recommended as future PA highway routes, but not for near-term designation.
4 Study Conclusions and Next Steps
This Study concludes with the above-noted subarea recommendations, including the proposed near-
term official designation of CH 70 east of I-35 and CH 23 north of CH 70 as PA highways (West Subarea).
Figure 8 summarizes next steps, which will include noting recommendations in the County’s 2040
Transportation Plan. Other elements of future highway system management are outlined below.
4.1 Near-Term PA Segment Designations
The proposed near-term
designations will be formally
addressed in the coming months
or years with the Metropolitan
Council and MnDOT. This Study’s
results will also be updated over
roughly the next 10-12 years and
will be reflected in transportation
plans and through proactive
management of the County’s
system.
As detailed in Section 3.2.3 above,
two segments of CH 23 and CH 70
(23A and 70B) are recommended
in the Study for near-term
designation as PA highways. Applicable guidance for changes to functional class is available at this
MnDOT web page: www.dot.state.mn.us/roadway/data/functional_class.html
Actions to resolve the proposed new designations will include Dakota County completing and submitting
a “Functional Classification Change Request” form to the Metropolitan Council and review by the
Transportation Advisory Board (TAB). See Section 3.2.3 for more information.
4.2 Management of Future PA Highways; Benefits
Most of the highway segments evaluated in this Study have characteristics suggesting potential to
become PA highways in the future. However, timing characteristics are often not strong enough to
justify near-term designations. For example, in the North Subarea, there are complexities with multiple
routes and the need to complete design and construction of CH 63. Other planning to add future
connections (for example, the CH 70 extension) and to address constrained rights-of-way will be needed
to address the readiness and sequence for additional designations. See Appendix A for more details on
such planning needs, by segment.
4.2.1 Arterial Access Management, Local Planning, and PA Cost Participation
As growth and development occurs along the corridors, cities and townships can be proactive to:
FIGURE 8. SUMMARY OF NEXT STEPS
FINAL REPORT
June 2018 Page 13
Cooperative planning and design for existing and
future PA highways should follow access-spacing
guidance and consider parallel local roadways to
support the arterial.
Reflect highway system plans in local plans
Support and facilitate access management and right-of-way goals for future PA highways
Attention to access management is important to provide safe and efficient arterials and develop well-
planned roadways and communities, regardless of cost participation policies. But additionally, Dakota
County’s cost participation policy for cities with 5,000 persons or more is based on access spacing goals
and PA designation. As illustrated in Figure 9, the County’s current policy limits local cost participation to
25 percent when an arterial is managed to limit full access to ½-mile spacing or if the arterial is a
designated PA highway. As this study concluded, Dakota County was considering possible revisions to
this policy (as part of the 2040
Transportation Plan) which could
further reduce a city’s cost
participation if the arterial is a
currently designated PA highway or
a future PA based on this Study.
In townships and cities with less
than 5,000 in population, funding
for Dakota County and Trunk
Highway projects is provided
primarily through federal, state,
and county sources.
4.2.2 Arterial Access Management in Growing Communities
Figure 10 provides four general illustrations of how growth may occur in relation to access management
measures on a multi-lane arterial. In Dakota County growth areas, roadway design and access
management on future PA highways should consider the potential to maintain ½-mile full-access spacing
to provide safety and mobility benefits as
well as conformance with County guidance.
Cooperative planning among local
jurisdictions, Dakota County, and MnDOT is
the recommended best practice. As shown,
development-driven adjustments to access
on existing and future PA highways should be
planned based on the ½-mile full-access spacing guidance. Additionally, parallel local roadways designed
to support the arterial should be considered as part of the planning process (Figure 10, illustration no.
4).
FIGURE 9. CURRENT COST PARTICIPATION POLICY AND LOCAL SHARE
FINAL REPORT
Page 14 June 2018
4.2.3 Study Benefits for Regional and Local Planning
This Study provides a long-range perspective for Dakota County’s arterial highway system, with two
segments on CH 23 and CH 70 proposed for near-term designation as PA highways (Section 3.2.3).
Because of this, the benefits of the Study are to:
FIGURE 10. EXAMPLE OF ARTERIAL ACCESS MANAGEMENT PROGRESSION
FINAL REPORT
June 2018 Page 15
Clarify Dakota County’s perspectives on which arterial highways have importance both regionally
and locally.
Inform regional transportation planning intent, as Dakota County’s conclusions can be reflected in
the Metropolitan Council’s Transportation Policy Plan (TPP) and in long-range MnDOT plans.
Provide information about each of the arterials addressed herein as background for future highway
corridor and design studies.
As noted in Section 1, the Study does not complete a formal decision-making process for designation of
new PA highway segments. Nor does the Study set priorities for highway system funding. However, it
does provide supporting data and guidance for the next formal steps (selected PA designations); and it
may serve as guidance for highway system project priorities and cost participation.
4.2.4 Review of Dakota County’s Next Steps
With reference to the details above (including Section 3.2.3), Dakota County’s next steps include:
Complete and submit a “Functional Classification Change Request” form and supporting information
to the Metropolitan Council, requesting portions of CH 23 and CH 70 (segments 23A and 70B) be
classified as PA highways.
Working with local officials (including the Cities of Apple Valley and Lakeville), support the Met
Council and MnDOT functional classification change review and determination process.
Include the results of this Study in its 2040 Transportation Plan.
Communicate with stakeholders about the benefits of corridor management on the future PA
highways, including potential for reduced shares of local government cost participation for highway
improvement projects.
Use this Study to guide additional planning actions and priorities. For example:
o Provide continued leadership, technical assistance, guidance, and input to corridor planning for
future PA highways and to address other Dakota County highway system issues (refer to the
analysis by segment in Table 3 and Appendix A).
o Encourage cities and townships to plan for future PA highways, including planning for access
management and right-of-way goals in constrained areas.