General – Page 8

Three Ways to Have Your Say

Posted on Jan 6, 2012Dec 20, 2017 by Rondi Watson

As the MPO for Duluth-Superior metro area, it’s our role to work with local jurisdictions to identify, plan for and program how federal transportation funds get used in the region.

Since transportation projects can be big, expensive, and time-sensitive (i.e. they need to be coordinated with adjacent infrastructure projects), they need to be planned for in advance – we’re already working to line up funding for construction projects that won’t begin until four years from now.

We are part of a process that is now underway to divvy up about $40 million in federal highway transportation funds for projects throughout the Arrowhead and Northeast Minnesota for 2016.

$40 Million Might Seem Like a Lot, But…

A mile of roadway can cost almost a million bucks to repair. Now consider that the Duluth-Superior area alone has more than 350 miles of roads eligible for federal funds and, well, you get the picture. There are a lot more maintenance and construction needs than money to go around.

So, not every project can receive federal funding. That’s where the MIC’s prioritization process comes in.

Every year, jurisdictions in the Duluth metro tell us which projects they’d like to use federal funds for and we work with our Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) and Policy Board to decide which ones are the most important for meeting the current and future needs of our transportation system.

We Want to Hear from You

Road projects are a public good paid for with taxpayer money, and therefore the local citizens have a right to weigh in on such decisions, along with planners, engineers and elected officials.

This year, the following transportation projects will be prioritized for our area. All of them are intended to use your gas tax dollars to improve the region’s transportation system.

Do you have any opinions about which are more important to our area? How would you rank these proposed projects if only 2 or 3 could be chosen?

Joshua Ave Construction – City of Duluth
Stebner Rd Reconstruction – City of Hermantown
Arlington Rd Resurfacing – St. Louis County
Trunk Highway 23 Rehabilitation & Replacement of Kingsbury Creek Bridge – MnDOT
US Highway 53 Resurfacing– MnDOT

Talk to Us – Online, In Person or by Phone

1) Make a comment, below, or

2) Stop by and visit our informational display on

Wednesday, January 11 from 11:30 a.m. to 1:30 p.m. on the Skywalk level of the Holiday Center in downtown Duluth, or

3) Call me with questions or comments–Robert Herling at (218) 529-7573.

Although it’s only January 2012, NOW is the time to give us your input on these proposed projects before funding decisions are made for 2016. You have three ways to let us know.

Transportation Funding: From Neutral Ground to Battleground

Posted on Dec 16, 2011Dec 20, 2017 by Ron Chicka, AICP

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.

As 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.

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

Posted on Nov 16, 2011Dec 20, 2017 by Rondi Watson

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

Posted on Oct 28, 2011Dec 20, 2017 by Rondi Watson

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.

The 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

Posted on Sep 23, 2011Dec 20, 2017 by Ron Chicka, AICP

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?