County Engineer Says Rural Roads Can’t Support Heavy Truck Traffic
Monday, April 02, 2007 at 11:35 am
- 2 Comments
And counties don’t have the money to fix them
At a Growth & Justice seminar in North Mankato Saturday morning, Nicollet County Engineer Mike Wagner said that the alternative fuel boom in southern Minnesota creates a new set of transportation problems. Specifically, county and township roads aren’t built to handle the heavy truck traffic going to and from ethanol and biodiesel plants.
This is not a problem with most state highways, he said, because they are built to four-season, 10-ton capacity standards. But most rural roads are not.
“One 18-wheeler creates the wear and tear of 6,000 cars on a road,” he said.
Nicollet County has been trying to repair a highway between St. Peter and the city of Nicollet. Because of the inflated price of petroleum, the cost has doubled from $4 million a few years ago to $8 million today. Yet the county receives just $1.6 million per year from the state for its roads. The rest must come from local property taxes.
The funding formula for state, county and local roads is very complicated, added state Rep. Terry Morrow, DFL-St. Peter. There’s really only one person in the state House who fully understands its complexity, he said, and that’s Rep. Bernie Lieder, DFL-Crookston. “When he retires, we’re going to be in trouble,” Morrow said. Lieder has served in the Legislature since 1984.
Wagner’s message was that the state needs to pick up more of the costs of county and local roads if it wants to continue to see economic development in greater Minnesota.
2 Comments
Comment posted April 2, 2007 @ 2:06 pm
Would HR 1300 (PROGRESS Act) fund rural roads ? Just another example of Bush’s failure to develop a true Comprehensive Energy Plan.
Every politician talks of the need for energy independence, but so far there is nothing that totally looks at all the consequences. Gutknecht, and now Kline, tout the 10/10 plan which would have put mandates requiring ethanol production, but Congress now HR 1300 (Program for Real Energy Security or PROGRESS) with 104 cosponsors including Ellison, McCollum, Oberstar and Walz. Whether there are adequate monies is unknown, but there is a provision to evaluate rail use and improving the existing public transportation systems. You may want to ask your Congressman if any of the $200,000,000 for fiscal year 2008 outlined in section 5311 of legislation could be used for rural roads.
Comment posted April 2, 2007 @ 9:06 am
Would HR 1300 (PROGRESS Act) fund rural roads ? Just another example of Bush’s failure to develop a true Comprehensive Energy Plan.
Every politician talks of the need for energy independence, but so far there is nothing that totally looks at all the consequences. Gutknecht, and now Kline, tout the 10/10 plan which would have put mandates requiring ethanol production, but Congress now HR 1300 (Program for Real Energy Security or PROGRESS) with 104 cosponsors including Ellison, McCollum, Oberstar and Walz. Whether there are adequate monies is unknown, but there is a provision to evaluate rail use and improving the existing public transportation systems. You may want to ask your Congressman if any of the $200,000,000 for fiscal year 2008 outlined in section 5311 of legislation could be used for rural roads.
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
