Minnesota State Highway Investment Plan: 2014-2033

Asset Management	Traveler Safety	Critical connections	Regional + Community Improvement Priorities	Project Support
Pavement Condition	Traveler Safety	Twin Cities Mobility	Regional + Community Improvement Priorities	Project Support
Bridge Condition		Interregional Corridor Mobility
Roadside Infrastructure Condition		Bicycle Infrastructure
		Accessible Pedestrian Infrastructure

What will the future investment direction look like?

MnDOT has developed three approaches that demonstrate fairly diverse possibilities of how available funding could be divided between the investment categories (download MnSHIP Investment Approaches folio). The intent of showing different investment approaches is to illustrate the range of possibilities, or bookends, for forming the basis of the future investment direction. In the end, it is unlikely that any of the three approaches will be the actual investment direction - rather, it is assumed that feedback will be used to refine existing priorities in favor of elements illustrated in Approach A or C.

 

The three investment approaches illustrated in the MnSHIP Investment Approaches folio are:

• Approach A - Focus on maintaining existing infrastructure (roads, bridges, roadside infrastructure) on the entire system.
• Approach B - The current investment direction illustrates how MnDOT currently invests based on the most recently approved statewide investment direction.
• Approach C - Focus on meeting infrastructure and mobility needs on interstates only, and increasing investment in local priorities and non-motorized transportation options.

 

The Approach Folio has three sets of two-page spreads, which illustrate each approach. The left side of each spread contains highlights of the approach and a hypothetical scenario describing a drive from Winona to Bemidji. On the right, strengths and drawbacks are highlighted, and a table compares this approach to current funding levels and lists major outcomes of the approach.

What are major assumptions when choosing an approach?

It is important to keep in mind the following items when thinking about the trade-offs associated with the three approaches:

• Each approach assumes constant revenue (fiscally constrained);
• Each approach assumes the same system size;
• If you want to spend more money in one category, you must spend less on another; and
• There is no right or wrong answer - each option requires difficult trade-offs across the entire system.

We want your feedback!

Send the MnSHIP project team a comment on the web site. We'd love to hear from you!