96-21 CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
DATE: March 4~ 1996
RESOLUTION NO: 96-21
MOTION BY: Mason
SECONDED BY: Dockendorf
A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING CONSTRUCTION OF PROPOSED
NEW TRUNK HIGHWAY 212 AS A TOLL ROAD
WHEREAS, the City of Chanhassen ("City") is a Minnesota municipal corporation which
is responsible for the public health, welfare and safety of its residents; and
WHEREAS, the City is located adjacent to T. H. 212 and its residents depend upon T.H.
212 and T.H. 5 as their principal connections to the Minneapolis-St. Paul area; and
WHEREAS, the City has cooperated with and supported the efforts of the cities and
counties within the T. H. 212 corridor and the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT)
in efforts to obtain construction of New T. H. 212; and
WHEREAS, the centedine for New T. H. 212 was first identified by MnDOT in 1967; and
WHEREAS, the construction limits for New T. H. 212 were reserved on the
comprehensive plans of Eden Prairie, Chanhassen, Chaska and Carver County in 1987; and
WHEREAS, Carver County and the Cities of Eden Prairie, Chanhassen, and Chaska
provided financial and technical assistance to MnDOT to assist in the completion of the
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for New T. H. 212 from 1-494 to Chanhassen; and
WHEREAS, the New T. H. 212 project has been included in numerous MnDOT
construction programs that proposed construction in 1993 and previous years but the project has
never been funded; and
WHEREAS, the 1996-1998 State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) includes a
project that will construct one mile of the 18 mile New T. H. 212 project; and
.
WHEREAS, the State of Minnesota and the federal government have both indicated that
neither is likely in the foreseeable future (i.e., before 2015) to be able and willing to' appropriate
sufficient funds to enable construction of New T. H. 212; and
WHEREAS, it currently seems unlikely that the Minnesota Legislature Or Congress will
appropriate sufficient new highway funding to assure construction of New T. H. 212 prior to 2015;
and
WItEREAS, in recognition of the lack of sufficient future state and federal funding, the
Metropolitan Council's transportation plan for the year 2015 indicates that New T. H. 212 will not
be completed west of Eden Prairie Road (Hennepin County Road No. 4) prior to 2015; and
WHEREAS, there is presently heavy congestion on T. H. 5 and existing T. H. 212 for
substantial periods of each day; and
WHEREAS, traffic on T. H. 5 at Powers Boulevard was 250% greater in 1994 than it was
in 1988; and
WHEREAS, existing T. H. 212 between 1-494 and Chaska is subject to a number of unsafe
conditions which, together with heavy traffic and heavy track traffic, cause this segment of highway
to be among the least safe highways in the State of Minnesota; and
WHEREAS, the City is convinced that New T. H. 212 must be completed from 1-494 to
old T. H. 212 west of Chaska as soon as possible and in any event before 2015; and
WHEREAS, MnDOT has solicited proposals for construction and financing of new
highways as toll roads; and
WHEREAS, the Interwest/DLR Infrastructure Corporation ("Interwest") and 212
Community Highway Association ("Association") have submitted a proposal to MnDOT for
construction of New T. H. 212 as a tollway ("interwest Proposal");
WHEREAS, Interwest and Association have requested that City endorse the Interwest
Proposal as being in the best interests of the City; and
WHEREAS, the Interwest Proposal is the only proposal submitted to MnDOT for
construction of New T.H. 212 as a tollway; and
WHEREAS, it is in the best interests of the City that New T. H. 212 will be constructed
before 2015 if it is not constructed as a toll road.
WHEREAS, the Interwest Proposal contemplates that:
All existing routes (including, but not limited to, existing T. H. 212 and T. H. 5)
will remain open and available for use without charge after construction of New
T. H. 212;
Due to diversion of traffic to New T. H. 212, existing T. H. 212, T. H. 5 and other
alternate routes are likely to be substantially less congested if New T. H. 212 is built
than ifNew T. H. 212 is not built; '
ATTEST:
Don Ashw-orth, Ci~Clerk/Manager Dbnald J.~l, Mayor "~'~ ~
YES NO ABSENT
Chmiel
Berquist
Senn
Dockendorf
Mason
None None