What Have We Done for You Lately?

We at the MIC are transportation planners. We lay the groundwork for projects that use federal tax dollars.

Large, public, tax-funded infrastructure requires a huge investment of federal, state and local funds—but then, our region’s mobility, quality of life, economic growth and competitiveness rely on the transportation network. Every household and business depends on safe, multi-modal transportation infrastructure for moving people and goods.

Local input,  coordination, and planning expertise

Our job is to coordinate with all local jurisdictions so the money for this infrastructure is well-spent and reflects local priorities.

We at the MIC are also elected officials. Our Board members represent all local units of government in the Duluth-Superior area—states, counties, cities and townships. Because these neighboring jurisdictions all have responsibilities and make decisions that impact the transportation system, coordination is key to making efficient use of limited financial resources.

And the term “stakeholder” is the real deal for us – figuring out and working with those who have a vested interest in the decisions that get made. Our job is to work with the right people – planners, engineers, local officials – to set joint priorities for funding projects, agree on timelines, and to share information about the projects we’re up to.

Bottom-up planning process

This kind of cooperative process is what Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) like the MIC are designed to do, here and across the country. We facilitate a bottom-up approach to transportation planning, allowing for local input into decisions how federal funds are spent, instead of a top-down approach that would make decisions about local projects and priorities at the federal or state level.

Planning Successes

Most important, this planning process is getting real results in our area. Here are some of our planning successes:

HTAC: a national model

Our Harbor Technical Advisory Committee, or HTAC, is recognized as a national model for doing just that—getting the right people in the room to solve problems. The HTAC is a nationally-recognized, bi-state forum to discuss issues confronting the Ports of Duluth and Superior. The HTAC brings together a broad range of industry, environmental and government stakeholders to provide sound planning and management recommendations and to promote the harbor’s economic and environmental importance to our community.

Erie Pier Management Plan: first of its kind on the Great Lakes

HTAC stakeholders have worked for many years to craft the Erie Pier Management Plan, a blueprint for transitioning the Erie Pier Confined Disposal Facility (CDF) to a first-of-its kind Processing and Reuse Facility (PRF). By creating a cost effective and environmentally sound alternative to current dredge material disposal practices for Great Lakes ports, this innovative Plan will save local taxpayers the millions of dollars it would have cost to develop a new CDF.

Landside Port Access Study: targeted roadway construction

The Landside Port Access Study was used to educate the public and policy makers about the land-based access needs of the Port and laid the foundation for funding a new roadway project (Helberg Drive) to improve access and safety.

Corridor planning: addressing problems before they arise

The MIC’s Corridor Planning initiatives seek to be proactive, by identifying and addressing problems along local roadways before they arise. They balance mobility needs with adjoining land uses and environmental and community interests.

Our North 28th Street Plan identified and made recommendations to alleviate critical transportation issues on North 28th Street, in Superior, in advance of planned road reconstruction. Significant safety concerns needed to be addressed due to several conflicting land uses, including the construction of three new schools, a skate park, a recreational trail, housing units and a newly-developed commercial area.

The Duluth Heights Traffic Circulation Study was undertaken at the request of neighbors and local elected officials to address the issue of residential streets being used as an unwelcome and unintended thoroughfare to a commercial district. Using an extensive public participation process, MIC staff worked closely with residents to document the level of cut-through traffic, and identify options to reduce impacts and improve flow in and around the neighborhood.

This planning process set the groundwork for the City to pursue funding for a new roadway connection (Joshua Avenue) between the Miller Hill commercial district and the east side of Duluth.

Long Range Planning: coordinated goals and strategies

The MIC’s Long Range Planning initiatives provide policy guidance, goals and coordinated strategies for jurisdictions within the greater metropolitan area of Duluth, MN and Superior, WI.

Directions 2035 is our Long Range Transportation Plan, setting forth a vision for the area-wide transportation network for the next 25 years. The LRTP provides a framework for working cooperatively to provide a well-maintained, integrated, accessible and multi-modal transportation system to safely and efficiently move people and freight, within the constraints of funding the region can reasonably expect to receive.

The Duluth Urban Area Growth Impact Study examines how best to accommodate growth in areas outside the urban services boundary while ensuring taxpayer protection from the consequences of inefficient patterns of development. Future land use information from each jurisdiction was used as part of a regional planning process to examine growth impacts and to identify the specific areas best suited for development.

Bike, Pedestrian and Transit Planning: mobility and quality of life

The MIC’s planning initiatives for modes of travel that are not centered on cars and trucks account annually for about 20% of our work program and budget. They are important because they aim to improve access, mobility and quality of life for all people in our area, regardless of age or physical ability, whether they travel by car, bike, bus or on foot.

The MIC’s Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee (BPAC) engages local stakeholders to provide sound planning recommendations and to provide public outreach and education about bike- and pedestrian-related plans and projects.

The Duluth-Superior Area Bike Map is our most popular product, an award-winning guide to the best on- and off-street bike routes in and through this region.

The Duluth Sidewalk Study provides technical and policy guidance to assist local elected officials in working with neighborhoods during roadway reconstruction projects. The GIS-based interactive map is a powerful tool for decision makers to apply data to the sometimes-contentious discussions about locating sidewalks on local streets.

Safe Routes to School (SRTS) Plans: The MIC was an early proponent of SRTS planning, working closely with many community stakeholders collecting data, conducting field observations and identifying safety issues around schools. The MIC’s recommendations have been incorporated into many funded projects to improve bike and pedestrian access to schools in the cities of Duluth, Superior and Proctor.

Transit Planning: The MIC provides ongoing input and technical assistance on local transit initiatives including planning and securing funding for a future downtown multimodal facility. Results from a recent ridership survey will be utilized by MnDOT to determine the potential for utilizing transit service to mitigate the effects of major construction projects statewide.

This is where you come in

Hopefully this gives you an idea of how we have worked (for nearly forty years!) to ensure that federally-funded infrastructure investments are developed with input from the people who know this area best.  As a local resident, do our planning initiatives reflect your priorities?

Transportation Funding: From Neutral Ground to Battleground

Visible damage to deck of I-35 in Duluth, MN

 

As I discussed in an earlier post, there’s a growing local and national backlog of critical transportation infrastructure projects—with no funding in sight.

Consensus Actually Exists

You might be interested to know that all branches of the federal government, from both sides of the isle, agree that we are not investing properly now for the transportation needs of the future.

To put this in perspective, the U.S. is spending approximately 4 to 5 times less on infrastructure than other countries are, including developing nations like China and India.

Since our interstate highway system was built in the 1960s, government expenditures on infrastructure have fallen to just 2.4 percent of GDP. In contrast Europe invests 5 percent of its GDP on infrastructure and China 9 percent.

Pothole as an example of transportation infrastructure that needs funding to maintainAs a result, the United States Is now ranked twenty-third overall for infrastructure quality, between Spain and Chile.

Political Will Does Not

Not so long ago, spending tax dollars on infrastructure was not nearly so political and divisive as it is today.  Roads, bridges and railways used to be neutral ground on which the parties could come together to support the country’s growth. In 1991, the federal transportation bill (the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act, termed ISTEA for short), passed both branches of Congress by nearly a 5 to 1 margin.

Fast forward twenty years.

I-35 bridge collapse in Minneapolis, MN, Today’s gridlock in Washington has resulted in years of legislative limbo.  Transportation funding has been limping along under a series of short-term extensions and appropriations because Congress can’t agree on what should be included in the new transportation bill—and hasn’t figured out how to pay for them either.

The consequences of this inaction are severe. Crumbling bridges and roadways and increased congestion will not only be expensive problems to solve in the future, but will also have a cost in the increased amount of time we spend on substandard roads.

Our nation’s economic future relies on its ability to deliver goods and services, a task that is increasingly more difficult as our highway system falls into disrepair. Without action, our nation’s economic competitiveness will diminish.

While the urgency of the problem is plain to all – the political will to fix it isn’t there.

It Will Get Personal

And the hard part is, it’s not just our politicians who will need to make some attitude adjustments.  All of us, as users of the transportation network, will need to be willing to make a shift in how we think about paying our way.

Mileage-based fees, not motor fuel taxes, are the fairest way to assess the costs and benefits to the users of the system.  BUT…

Solutions Exist

There are many options, ideas and technologies available to us to pay for the transportation system we need, now and into the future.

But they will take some getting used to.  I’ll talk about them in my next blog post.  Stay tuned.

Pothole photo credit: David Erickson
 
 
I-35 photo credit: Marion Doss
 

My Awesome Walk to Work

Snow-covered section of the Superior Hiking Trail in Duluth MN

My Facebook post today reads: “Another awesome walk to work this morning on the Superior Hiking Trail—despite the snow—or maybe because of it!”

Within seconds a friend (an actual friend, in this case) responded “I did the same. I love Chester Park.”

Another commented “You are the luckiest commuter ever!”

This exchange reminded me of the simple, real-life benefits of one of our favorite concepts here at the MIC: multi-modal transportation networks.

It’s all about options

From a transportation planning perspective, a multi-modal transportation network refers to a balance of  infrastructure that supports multiple modes of travel — a mix of roads, air, marine/port, rail, public transportation, bicycle and pedestrian facilities (including paved and non-paved trails).  This mix is plainly visible on any given day in the Duluth-Superior area.

From a societal and governmental perspective, multi-modal transportation networks have been widely supported because a balanced transportation system encourages economic growth, reduces congestion and environmental impacts, and improves mobility and access to transportation.

From my personal perspective, though, a multi-modal transportation network means that I have options. It was just too nice of a morning to get in my car and drive (the very walkable distance of) two and a half miles.

Trails as commuter pathways

One big advantage of living in Duluth, Minnesota, is the proximity of urban areas to green spaces. A multi-modal system, in this city, means that I can walk out my back door onto the Superior Hiking Trail, which in turn intersects with our urban streets infrastructure across Skyline Parkway (as scenic a walk as you could ask for), down through a couple of local neighborhoods and to our downtown office.

And a community-wide vision is emerging for Duluth to become the premier trail city in North America. Developing an inter-connected trails system will provide not just outstanding recreational opportunities but compelling transportation options as well.

Quality of life improvement

Bottom line, I don’t have to get in my car and drive every time I need to go somewhere. I’m able to travel on foot (or by bike or by bus), and I consider that a big quality of life enhancement.

How about you?

Do you have an awesome walk to work of your own?  Would you like to be able to walk or bike more often in your daily life?  Does it make sense to continue to fund multi-modal transportation networks? (More on that topic to follow…)

Getting Everyone on Board: Coordinating Transit for Human Services

An updated transit plan for the Arrowhead Region has just been released for public review.  It’s a plan that’s aimed to coordinate resources and cover more ground with less.

Woman with walker being assisted by the driver of a lift-assisted bus in Duluth, MNThe 2011 Local Human Service Transit Coordination Plan for the Arrowhead Region outlines broad strategies as well as specific project ideas to help the transportation-challenged – elderly, disabled, and low-income – get to medical appointments, services and jobs.

The strategies and project ideas identified in the plan will be used to set priorities and support competitive bidding for certain Federal Transit Administration (FTA) funds that are dedicated to assisting these groups.

Leveraging shared transportation resources

The Arrowhead Region comprises seven large, mostly rural counties – 10,635 square miles!  Providing transportation services throughout this enormous area is a daunting prospect.  And a few economic trends are making this challenge evermore daunting:

1)  A large percentage of the region’s population is entering old age (and reduced income)

2)  The per/mile cost of service (particularly due to fuel prices) has been increasing at a significant rate while

3)  Federal and state transit assistance is facing significant cuts.

And that’s where the value of this transit plan comes in –  to leverage existing resources (vehicles, drivers, etc.), to provide services more efficiently throughout the region with those limited resources.

Regional coordination is the essence of this plan

Many of the strategies identified in the coordinated transit plan call for projects that create more resource-sharing opportunities, or create “one-stop-shop” call centers that can assist with organizing and lining up ride opportunities.

Perhaps the most important project idea in the plan, however, is to convene a regional coordination body, bringing together the region’s service providers every year to continue to find ways to work together to overcome challenges. And that’s a big move forward!

Draft plan is open for comment

Can you think of another way to take on the daunting challenge to get everybody on board?

This plan is open for public comment until 11/10/11.  For those of you interested, the plan can be reviewed on ARDC’s Regional Planning website.

Photo credit: Arrowhead Transit

Kicking the Can Down the Road

Can of Worms Intersection in Duluth,MN

Are you hearing (or perhaps voicing) complaints about delays on area roadways, road construction or the high price of gas?

Statements like “with the price of gas so high they should lower the gas tax”?

Of course, throw in the usual “all the roads in this area are in terrible shape.”

It seems that we, the traveling public, want to have it all: safe bridges, smooth roads, no construction delays—all at less cost.

A “Can of Worms” – Indeed!

The problem is, it takes time to reconstruct and maintain our infrastructure and it costs a lot of money to do so.

And the backlog of needed projects is growing.

Right here in Duluth, where the I-35 reconstruction project will cost a total of $81 million over two-plus years, the “can of worms” interchange, which contains 31 individual bridges, will also need repair and restoration to the tune of an estimated $250 million.  This will become a critical infrastructure need within the next 10 to 20 years–with no funding source yet identified.

Do (Lots) More with (Lots) Less

Today we are asking our road authorities (at the city, county and state) to do more with significantly fewer resources.

You may have heard by now of a recent survey by the Rockefeller Foundation, which found that two-thirds of the American public felt that a greater investment is needed in transportation infrastructure. Fully 80 percent of those surveyed agreed that spending on highways and bridges would produce jobs and economic growth, yet only 38 percent thought that federal spending should be increased and only 27 percent said that federal gas taxes should be raised to support this spending.

What the survey tells me is that we, as transportation planners and policy makers, have done a horrible job of helping the public understand transportation needs, transportation funding, and the consequences of failing to invest in transportation infrastructure.

Investing in transportation infrastructure supports multiple societal purposes besides our personal mobility, including American economic competitiveness, public health, environmental sustainability and energy independence.

If not addressed, many types of costs will be pushed out into the future.

What will our future generations say about this practice?  How happy would we have been if previous generations had done this to us?