The URL can be used to link to this page

5.3. SR 11-16-1998ity of vel' MEMORANDUM ITEM ~5.3. TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Mayor and City Council Scott Harlicker, Planning Assistan~ November 16, 1998 Update on Northstar Corridor Project At the November 5th meeting of the Northstar Corridor Development Authority the main point of discussion were updates on the Major Investment Study, MNDOT's phase 2 commuter rail study and Burlington Northern's capacity study. The Major Investment Study (MIS) is at a mid point in the process. BRW is in conducting a fatal flaw analysis. This analysis involves eliminating various transportation alternatives and improvements. Alternatives eliminated include light rail transit, heavy rail transit, monorail and personal rapid transit. Improvements eliminated include construct bypasses, fully controlled access freeway, construct interchanges at key locations (except at County Road 11 and Highway 10 intersection) and add high occupancy vehicle lanes (except in Anoka/Ramsey area). Additional information on this topic is included in your packet. MNDOT is currently conducting phase 2 of their commuter rail feasibility study which includes the Northstar Corridor from Minneapolis to Elk River along with 6 other corridors in the Twin Cities Metro area. Their draft recommended a tiered implementation of the proposed routes. In the recommendation, Elk River was eliminated from the first tier program. Their cost estimates showed that by eliminating the Elk River station $ 26 million could be saved and the ridership would decrease by only 97 riders. The NCDA disagrees with their analysis and will be contacting MNDOT regarding this study and their ridership estimates. Additional information regarding their findings is included with this packet. It should be noted that MNDOT's study is independent of the North Star Corridor study and was initially to include only the metro area. Elk River is still included as a station in the NCDA study. Burlington Northern has completed the base capacity analysis for the corridor. Now that the base capacity analysis has been completed, the trips generated by the commuter trains can be plugged into the analysis to see how 13065 Orono Parkway · P.O. Box 490 · Elk River, MN 55330 · TDD & Phone: (612) 441-7420 · Fax: (612) 441-7425 Memo to Mayor and City Council/Northstar Corridor November 16, 1998 Page 2 they affect travel times and delays. Should the commuter trains adversely affect Burlington Northern's operations, further analysis can be done to see what improvements are needed to mitigate those impacts. Finally, $6 million in funding has been secured from the federal government. This will provide funding for the Authority into 1999. This is important in that once a project has received initial funding it becomes easier to secure future funding to keep the project moving forward. s:kplanningkscottXncdanov.doc OCT 29 '98 14:49 T0-ANOKA COUNTY FROH-RIOflARDSON, RITOHER &ASSOC. T-267 P. 02/02 F-786 9, 10, Northstar Corridor Development Authority Thursday, November 5, 1998 3:00 p.m. Sherburne County Courthouse Elk River, MN Minutes of the October 1, 1998 Meeting* Update on Federal Funding Commuter Rail Feasibility Study: Preliminary Results of BNSF Capacity Modeling Major Investment Study a} Purpose and Need Analysis* b) Fatal Flmw Analysis Mn/DOT Commuter Rail Study' Governance of Commuter Rail* Re~ort on Public Information Workshops Request for Membership by Wstab Township* 1999 Legislative Activities Other Action Requested Approval Information Discussion Approval Information Discussion Information Approval Discussion Next Meeting: December 10, 1998 Documentation enclosed with the Packet II ...... DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT NORTHSTAR CORRIDOR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Regular Meeting Minutes October 1, 1998 The Northstar Corridor Development Authority met on October 1, 1998, at the Sherbume County Government Center in the City of Elk River, Minnesota. The following members, alternates and citizens were present: Dan Erhart, Paul McCarron, Tim Yantos, Duane Grandy, Al Seppelt, Gary Erickson, Terry Nagorski, Betsy Wergin, Gerry Donlin, Ken Paulson, Jim Dickenson, Donald Jolly, Tim Howe, Steve Billings, Scott Harlicker, Tom Gamec, J. Patrick Cairns, Jerry Leese, Gary Hammer, John Norgren, Dick Wolsfeld, Biz Colbum, Paul Goenner, Sea Walther, Tom Cruikshank, Brian Roper, Mike Christensen, Elliott Perovich, Tom Wenzel, Jean Keeley, Anthony Heppelmann, Mary Richardson, Stephanie Eiler 1. The Chairperson called the meeting to order at 4:40 p.m. A motion was made by Gerry Donlin, seconded by Duane Grandy and carried unanimously to approve the agenda of October 1, 1998, with no additions and the meeting minutes of September 3, 1998, regular meeting minutes as presented. o Elizabeth Colburn, BRW, reviewed the dates scheduled for the Northstar Corridor Commuter Rail Open House meeting scheduled for 6:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. at the following locations: October 20, 1998 October 22, 1998 October 27, 1998 Sherburne County Government Center - Elk River Fridley City Hall - Fridley Whitney Senior Community Center - St. Cloud Discussion was held regarding the setting up of the Northstar Corridor Web Page. The web page address is http://co.sherburne.mn.us/northstar and will contain all public relations materials such as newsletters, project updates, press releases, etc. as well as provide a location to contact an NCDA member via e-mail to obtain answers to questions, concerns, etc. DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT NORTHSTAR CORRIDOR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Regular Meeting Minutes October l, 1998 Page 2 A motion was made by Gerry Donlin, seconded by Steve Bills and carried unanimously to approve the recommendation of the Northstar Executive Committee to approve the Northstar Corridor Extension policy. The Policy provides that the Northstar Corridor Development Authority evaluate the initial terminus and future extensions of the Northstar using the following criteria: o o Estimated Ridership Capital Cost Operating Cost Environmental impact Station Site Availability Station Area Access Economic Development Potential Railway Operating Impact Community and Governmental Support Future Expansion Potential The govermnent unit requesting the extension will be responsible for securing funding. A motion was made by Steve Billings, seconded by John Norgren and carried unanimously to approve the recommendation of the Northstar Executive Committee to approve the contract with Lockridge, Grindal, Nauen & Holstein in the amount of $30,000 for the term of September 17, 1998 to September 30, 1999 for Congressional Lobbying Services (contract on file at Anoka County and Sherbume County) with funds to be taken from the Northstar Corridor budget. A motion was made by Duane Grandy, seconded by J. Patrick Cairns and carried unanimously to approve the recommendatiori of the Northstar Executive Committee to approve the contract with Capital Partnerships in the amount of $30,000 for the term of January 1, 1999 to December 31, 1999 for Congressional Lobbying Services (contract on file at Anoka County and Sherbume County) with funds to be taken from the Northstar Corridor budget. DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT NORTHSTAR CORRIDOR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Regular Meeting Minutes October 1, 1998 Page 3 BRW, Inc. distributed a revised preliminary commuter rail service plan fore review by the Committee. It was consensus of the Committee to present the proposed schedule to present and receive feedback from citizens at the scheduled Open House meetings in October. A motion was made by Gerry Donlin, seconded by J. Patrick Cairns and carried unanimously to approve the recommendation of the Northstar Executive Committee to approve Resolution #98-2 to support grant funding activities that will initiate a public participation process to encourage business involvement, identify opportunities for joint public and private development along the Corridor and build support and enthusiasm for the use of commuter rail. A motion was made by John Norgren, seconded by Jerry Leese and carried unanimously to authorize insurance coverage for the Northstar Corridor Development Authority in the annual premium amount of $1,100.00 (funds to be taken from the Northstar Corridor budget). 10. It was the consensus of the Authority to schedule the next meeting of the Northstar Corridor Development Authority for November 5, 1998 at the Sherburne County Government Center at 3:00 p.m. It should be noted that the December meeting is scheduled for December 10, 1998, at 4:30 p.m. 11. The Committee reviewed a number of potential highway-related improvements along TH10 that were identified in the Major Investment Study (MIS) presented by Anthony Heppelmann, BRW, Inc. 12. A motion was made by Jerry Leese, seconded by Terry Nagorski and carried unanimously to adjourn the meeting at 6:15 p.m. Betsy Wergin, Chairperson Date Northstar Corridor Summary of Open Houses October 20 - 22 - 27, 1998 Date Location Number Number of Comments of Written Attendees Comments October 20 Elk River 80 13 15 people had positive comments for a commuter rail system and four stressed it should come as soon as possible Good timing for commuter rail now Need to consider commuter rail impacts if Elk River is trying to slow area growth Will Met Council require the area to provide "Affordable Housing"? Concerned about impacts to personal home Commuter rail is appropriate as population ages During rush hours, transit is faster, more comfortable and less stressful than driving in an auto (2 people) Expand service schedule (2 people) and include a Sunday/Holiday schedule Experience in Chicago (2 people)confirms that if trains available people will use them Provide adequate parking at stations Commuter rail will be good for the taxi industry Consider energy savings of commuter rail Good presentation October 22 Fridley 40 6 All comments were positive for a commuter rail system Commuter rail would improve economic growth of Bethel Check out station location at Anoka Technical College, will college stay at existing Icoation? Interest in land use compatible with commuter rail stations October 27 St. Cloud 45 12 All comments were positive towards a commuter rail system, (5 people said the sooner the better) Commuter rail is equally important for students and employees Develop week-end schedule to events and entertainment Develop feeder service from station to place of employment Continue to evaluate appropriate time schedule to match commuter work times (2 people) Reasonable ticket prices Extend line to Rice (3 people) Provide week-end schedule for Rice Is there available funding Include snowmobile and ATV parking Develop a bike path along entire route Consider DMU's for future flexibility Consider extensions/connections to Fargo-Moofl~ead, Brainerd, Duluth, Mayo Clinic Consider impacts to commuter airlink Calculate cost savings due to gasoline not used by autos (2 people) Consider bicycle racks (2 people) Total 165 31 Agenda Item 4a DRAFT PURPOSE AND NEED STATEMENT ~r ~e Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study Prepared For Northstar Corridor Development Authority Prepared By: BRW, Inc. 700 Third Street South Minneapolis, MN 55415 October 28, 1998 the two metro area highway and transit networks. During certain periods of the year, there is an increase in the typical use of TH 10 and 1-94 because of heavy recreational traffic generated by tourism destinations in central and northern Minnesota. The Mississippi River is a natural barrier and river crossings are limited in number. Both intra- and interstate rail traffic use the BNSF line, a mainline and the second most heavily used in the entire BNSF system. This facility links the Pacific rim port of Seattle with the Chicago rail hub. Amtrak's "Empire Builder" provides daily intercity passenger rail service on this line between Chicago and Seattle. With the exception of intemity bus service (Greyhound), no other transit opportunities for commuters are provided between the two metro areas. S.3 PROBLEM STATEMENT Over the past several years, the two metro areas and the rural communities along the corridor have experienced economic prosperity and corresponding population growth. As a result, both the amount and the patterns of travel within the Northstar Corridor are rapidly changing, reflecting the growth at both ends and changing land uses in the currently rural center. The rural areas are fast becoming "Bedroom Communities". No longer are the Twin Cities and St. Cloud completely separate regions, but they are increasingly linked by the daily travel of people who live in one area but work in another. The corridor has the highest inter-regional growth rate in Minnesota, supported in part by increasing employment opportunities, rising Twin Cities area housing costs, and larger numbers of two-income families. Transportation-related land use strategies must respond to the challenge posed by the diversity of urban, suburban and rural/exurban community types found within the corridor. Growth in peak period vehicle miles traveled (VMT) over the last decade, particularly in the Twin Cities area, has strained the ability of existing facilities to accommodate the demand. Both metropolitan areas recognize the need to provide efficient transportation facilities to accommodate the expected growth in a sustainable manner, while preserving the mobility which makes such growth possible. However, both metropolitan areas are increasingly constrained in their financial ability to provide new transportation facilities for people and goods. The Minnesota Department of Transportation and the two metropolitan planning organizations (the Metropolitan Council in the Twin Cities and the St. Cloud Area Planning Organization) have consequently focused on preserving and managing existing facilities, with limited added capacity projects. As a result, the roads, bridges and railroads in the Northstar Corridor are all affected by increasing congestion and declining safety. Coordinated transit service between the two metropolitan areas is not available to offer an alternative or relieve pressure on the roadway network. In the northwest segments of Hennepin and Wright Counties, where 1-94 parallels TH 10, 1-94 is at or expected to be at capacity by 2015 and will not be able to relieve congestion on TH 10. Without increasing revenues, it is anticipated that future investments in the principal and arterial highway systems serving the corridor will not be sufficient to adequately support the increased commuting travel demands of forecasted growth in the corridor. Congestion will continue to increase during peak travel times, resulting in longer traffic delays, increased cost to commuters, and greater vehicle emissions. State and regional transportation studies prepared for the southern portions of the corridor have concluded that a strategy to soley build additional highway capacity is not a financially feasible solution to congestion. Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study Section 1 - Summary 10-28-98 S-3 An. effective, long-term, coordinated response to congestion will require a commitment by affected governmental units to implement strategies that provide alternative modes of travel. Such alternative modes as transit, while encouraging behavioral and land use changes can result in fewer vehicle trips and strategies which better utilize the existing capacity of the corridor transportation system. All parties have acknowledged that transportation is fundamental to the long-term viability of the corridor. The Northstar Corridor MIS offers the first coordinated opportunity to systematically identify transportation improvements that address development, congestion, mobility, safety, and environmental issues in a cost-effective manner. S.4 POPULATION AND EMPLOYMENT The need for increased transportation options in the region stems, in part, from population and employment growth along the corridor. Over the past twenty years, the Northstar Corridor has experienced substantial population and employment growth. Between 1980 and 1995 all of the counties in the study area have had significant population growth. From 1990 to 1995 the increase in the counties' population ranged from 2.2 to 4.1 percent. Over the next 25 years, it is projected that the county populations will continue to grow, although at a slower rate than in the past 15 years. Employment in the study area also has continued to rise in this same time period. The two major employment centers in the corridor are St. Cloud and the Twin Cities. Although the Twin Cities is the major employment center for the corridor, according to the Minnesota Department of Economic Security, the greatest percentage of employment growth has occurred in Sherburne and Steams Counties. A commuter survey in 1990 indicates that 40 percent of Elk river residents commute to the Twin Cities. S.5 TRANSPORTATION The major east-west roadways between the Twin Cities and St. Cloud are TH 10 and 1-94.1-94 is used more where Mississippi River bridge crossings are located and where TH 10 becomes more congested in southeastern Sherburne County and southwestern Anoka County. The Twin Cities 1990 Travel Behavior Inventory (TBI) conducted by the Metropolitan Council, shows an increase in commuting from one jurisdiction to another. Between 1970 and 1990, the number of trips that were destined to Minneapolis rose 22 percent, to Saint Paul by 27 percent, and to the remainder of the Twin Cities region by 104 percent. Additionally, the external survey completed as part of the Twin Cities 1990 TBI revealed that the most heavily traveled corridors leaving the metropolitan area were in the northwest portion of the Twin Cities. Of the 328,460 vehicles entering or leaving the Twin Cities every day, there were over 113,000 daily vehicle trips in the northwest area of the metropolitan region. In May of 1982, the Saint Cloud Area Planning Organization and Mn/DOT completed a study entitled, St. Cloud-Twin Cities Passenger Rail Service: A Feasibility Study, as directed by the State legislature. As a result of this study, the number of existing and future vehicle trips between the St. Cloud and Twin Cities metropolitan areas was estimated with the roadways they use identified. Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study Section 1 - Summary 10-28-98 S-4 The results of the study are as follows: · Vehicle trips to St. Cloud from the Twin Cities in 1982 Total of 6,230 with 1,640 using TH 10 and 4,590 using 1-94 · Vehicle trips to St. Cloud from the Twin Cities in 2000 Total of 9,450 with 1,800 using TH 10 and 7,650 using 1-94 · Vehicle trips to the Twin Cities from St. Cloud in 1982 Total of 22,100 with 6,850 using TH 10 and 15,250 using 1-94 · Vehicle trips to the Twin Cities from St. Cloud in 2000 Total of 42,850 with 12,200 using TH 10 and 30,650 using 1-94 Transit service in the study area is provided by several transit operators, including Metro Transit in the Twin Cities. In Anoka County, regular, fixed route service is provided by Metro Transit, North Suburban Lines and Anoka County Transit. The Anoka County Traveler also provides dial-a-ride service, and Columbia Heights has a Shared Ride Program. The St. Cloud MTC provides public transportation services in the cities of St. Cloud, Sauk Rapids and Waite Park. Currently, the MTC's program of services includes fixed-route, Specialized Service, subscription and rideshare services. In the center of the corridor, the RiverRider provides daily bus and volunteer driver transit services in Sherburne and Wright Counties, including limited community- based services. Tri-CAP provides daily bus and volunteer driver transit services in Benton and Stearns Counties, including limited schedules from St. Cloud to Foley and three day a week community bus service in Sauk Centre. S.6 PLANNING CONTEXT Transportation planning for the Northstar Corridor involves two Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPO), four counties, three regional railroad authorities, 14 cities, four townships, two primary transit operators and Mn/DOT. To ensure consistency of plans, transportation plans were reviewed from the counties and cities within the corridor as well as Mn/DOT's Metro Division Transportation System Plan (TSP) and information from Mn/DOT District 3. All of the plans recognize the increase in travel demand, in general, and the limited resources available to address the transportation needs in the region. Managing the roadway system and providing travel choices to develop a multimodal transportation system is a continuing theme in these plans. Relevant goals and objectives relating to public transit and transportation were included in the analysis. The Metropolitan Council's 2020 Regional Transportation Plan takes an intermodal approach to addressing the needs of the region and stresses the importance of, and new direction for, Regional Transit indicating that: · Transit is essential in accommodating future development and growth, developing higher density and revitalizing the core area of the region. · Transit will also play an important role in helping alleviate growing traffic congestion and providing better accessibility to jobs. Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study Section 1 - Summary 10-28-98 S-5 The St. Cloud Area Planning Organization's 2020 Plan recognizes the need to seek the optimum balance of mobility, accessibility and safety. Providing for system efficiency as well as intermodal transportation needs is recognized in the APO's statement of objectives. The 2020 Plan also recommends minimizing adverse community impacts and cost. S.7 PROJECT GOALS The overall goal of the project is: To Meet the Future Transportation Needs of the Northstar Corridor Based on the issues summarized in the Problem Statement and transportation needs in the corridor, the following goals have been established: · Improve mobility and safety within the corridor. · Minimize adverse environmental impacts and foster positive environmental effects. · Encourage transportation-supportive land use development patterns. · Provide a cost-effective and efficient transportation system. The Northstar Corridor MIS will evaluate how well the alternative improvements under consideration for the Corridor assist in achieving the area's goals. Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study Section 1 - Summary 10-28-98 S-6 SECTION 1 - INTRODUCTION The Northstar Corridor Development Authority (NCDA) is evaluating transportation improvements in the 70-mile TH10/47 corridor from downtown Minneapolis to the St. Cloud area. The purpose of the Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study (MIS) is to develop a locally preferred transportation invesstment strategy for the corridor. A major component of the analysis is to determine the feasibility of commuter rail service in the Corridor. The Northstar Corridor study area extends from downtown Minneapolis to the St. Cloud area along TH 10/47, and the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) railroad. The study area is bordered by the Mississippi River on the west and extends approximately 3-5 miles to the east of TH 10/47. The Goal of the Project is: To Meet the Future Transportation Needs of the Northstar Corridor. 1.1 Twin Cities Metropolitan Commuter Rail Study At the request of the State legislature, the Minnesota Department of Transportation 0VInfDOT) initiated a Twin Cities Metropolitan Commuter Rail Study in September to determine if commuter rail can provide a viable transportation option for the 1997 the seven-county metropolitan area. Mn/DOT looked at all existing freight corridors to determine which corridors demonstrated the potential for commuter rail service. The Study is being conducted in two phases. Phase I assessed current freight operations, identified institutional opportunities/barriers and conducted a market analysis to determine the public's likelihood of using such a service. A total of 19 commuter rail corridors emanating from the two downtowns of Minneapolis and St. Paul were identified and evaluated. Evaluation criteria included ridership estimates, conditions of the rail bed, tracks and crossings, effects on land use and the environment, safety issues and the number of rail freight carders in each corridor. Phase I was completed in January 1998 and recommended six corridors for further study. Since the Minnesota legislature added one corridor, a total of seven corridors are being evaluated in Phase II. Phase II will determine economic, financial, social, and environmental effects, infrastructure needs, transportation impacts and a potential operating plan for rail service. The criteria being used in Phase II includes a more detailed study of potential ridership, maintenance and operating costs, cost per passenger mile, environmental impacts, the ability of freight carders to conduct their regular business and the level of capital improvements. Phase II will be completed in January 1999. The corridors that are being evaluated further are: · Route A: Bethel to Minneapolis and St. Paul on a Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) route, 39.4 miles · Route B: Elk River to Minneapolis and St. Paul on a BNSF route, 40.7 miles · Route N: Hastings to St. Paul and Minneapolis on a Canadian Pacific Rail (CPR) route, 29.9 miles · Route S: Forest Lake to St. Paul and Minneapolis on CPR and BNSF routes, 36.3 miles · Route L: Northfield to Minneapolis and St. Paul on CPR and BNSF routes, 58.2 miles · Route H: Norwood -Young America to Minneapolis and St. Paul on the Twin Cities & Western (TC&W) route, 47.9 miles · Route T: A route, common to all corridors, between the downtowns of Minneapolis and St. Paul on BNSF and CPR, 9.9 miles Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study Section 1 - Introduction 10-28-98 1-1 The Route B Corridor identified in the Mn/DOT study, extends from downtown Minneapolis to Elk River. For this Study, it has been extended approximately 30 miles to the St. Cloud area as the 70-mile Northstar Corridor and is the subject of this MIS. 1.2 Twin Cities Commuting Area Transportation System Performance Audit, January 1998 Seven County Metro Area The Twin Cities Commuting Area Transportation System Performance Audit, January 1998, (Performance Audit) assessed the existing and future performance of the Twin Cities regional transportation system based on the expected growth in population and employment. While all areas will experience growth, the greatest growth will be in the suburban and rural counties one of which is Anoka County. These growth trends are in areas that are heavily auto-dependent and will have a major impact on traffic levels and congestion throughout the region, with the greatest impacts in the suburban area outside of the 1-494/I-694 ring. This will place increased demand on those facilities. The analysis shows that while population will increase by 27% by the year 2020, the regional travel demand model estimates a 35% increase in traffic on the metropolitan highway system. This increase comes at a time when, with current funding levels, new highway construction and expansion of existing facilities will be limited. The Performance Audit indicates that a major portion of the TH 10 corridor in Anoka County is congested in 1995 and will be even more congested in 2020. The portion of TH 10 in Ramsey that is not congested in 1995 will be congested in 2020. Other than system management, there are no roadway construction projects scheduled for this corridor within the 2020 horizon. Impact of Commuters from Outside the Region In addition, the Performance Audit assessed the impact of growth in commuter traffic from outside of the seven county region on the metropolitan highway system. In 1990, an estimated 13,500 commuters from outside of the region crossed the metropolitan urban service area (MUSA) line during the peak hour on the metropolitan highway system. Overall, these non- metro work trips used 31% of the peak hour capacity of the highways entering the region in 1990 and are projected to use 63% of the capacity by 2020. In Wright and Sherbume Counties, the number of work trips crossing the MUSA line is projected to increase from 4,820 vehicles per hour (vph) in 1990 to 10,700 vph in Year 2020. Therefore, the non-metro commuters from the northwest were already using 50% of the peak hour capacity in 1990, 61% of the peak hour capacity in 1995 and are projected to use 111% of the peak hour capacity by the year 2020. As a result, commuter traffic in the northwest corridor will experience significant delays, and will be forced to divert to other arterials and local streets. One of the seven recommended strategies to reduce congestion in the Performance Audit is to develop an effective long term strategy for transit in the Twin Cities region: Strategic Investments in Services to Current and Future Nodes Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study Section 1 - Introduction 10-28-98 1-2 Development of dedicated transitways that link major nodes of activity providing a travel time advantage to transit vehicles. The transitways (busways, HOV lanes, LRT commuter rail, etc) should offer exclusive right-of-way for transit vehicles only. They should include a range of technologies from buses to rail services, depending on the characteristics of specific travel corridors. The emphasis of the transitways is to provide transit service with a competitive advantage over the automobile--a strategy that has been effective in many urban corridors throughout the country. Most major metropolitan areas in the country have embarked on the development of some type of dedicated transit facilities. In many cases, several technologies (i.e. buses, light rail and commuter rail) successfully exist within the same region. Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study Section 1 - Introduction 10-28-98 1-3 SECTION 2 - POPULATION, EMPLOYMENT AND LAND USE 2.1 POPULATION Between 1980 and 1995 all of the counties in the study area have had significant growth. The impact of this growth on land use and transportation was previously addressed in te Summary of this document. Sherbume County, for example, grew at an average rate of 3.6 percent per year between 1980 and 1990 and 4.1 percent per year from 1990 to 1995. A 3.5 percent growth rate has a doubling effect over 20 years. Estimated and projected population data for the counties in the study area are presented in Table 2-1. 2.2 EMPLOYMENT Employment in the Northstar Corridor study area has continued to rise in the 1980 to 1995 time period. Table 2-2 shows the estimated and projected employment for the study area. There are two major employment centers in the corridor, the Twin Cities and Saint Cloud. Although the Twin Cities is the major employment center for the corridor and the greatest amount of employment growth has ocurred in Hennepin County, the greatest percentage of employment growth has occurred in Sherbume and Steams Counties. The major transportation corridors in Sherbume County, TH 10 and TH 169, will continue to serve a majority of trips between rural and urban areas. Although future development will increase local employment in the cities between the two major employment centers, the majority of workers are anticipated to continue to commute to the St. Cloud or Twin Cities metropolitan areas. In 1990, the percentage of people residing in Sherbume County but employed outside of it was 68 percent. Given that over 60% of the county's population lives within five miles of a county line, this result is not unexpected. The statewide average for residents of one county who are employed in another is 29 percent. The City of Elk River is located 30 miles northwest of Minneapolis and is approximately at the midpoint of the Northstar Corridor. The city's proximity to employment centers in the Twin Cities metropolitan area and the presence of the TH 101 bridge across the Mississippi River promotes a commuter trend among Elk River residents. A commuter survey in 1990 indicates that 40 percent of Elk River residents commute to the Twin Cities metropolitan area. As noted above, since both the Hennepin and Anoka County lines are within five miles of downtown Elk River, this result is not unexpected. 2.3 LAND USE The study area consists of agricultural, residential, institutional, commercial, industrial and recreational land uses. The Northstar Corridor links two major educational institutions, the University of Minnesota and St. Cloud State University, several smaller colleges, junior colleges, and specialized training institutions such as Dunwoody in Minneapolis, as well as the two major employment centers. The Hennepin County portion of the corridor is an urbanized metropolitan area. Anoka County is a combination of urban, suburban, and rural. The majority of Sherburne County can be characterized as farmland, open land or in a natural state (undeveloped) and in 1996, the County modified its zoning ordinances to preserve the County's rustic environment and to ensure orderly development. St. Cloud is located in Benton, Sherburne and Steams Counties and is an urbanized area. The majority of Benton and Steams Counties is urban and mral. Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study Section 2 - Population, Employment and Land Use 10-28-98 2-1 SECTION 3 - TRANSPORTATION This section presents information on transportation facilities and travel patterns in the Northstar Corridor study area. In addition, this section identifies roads that are at or over capacity, impeding both automobile and transit travel times. It should be noted that the Northstar Corridor study area is located in a constrained corridor limited by the Mississippi River on the west, few river crossing bridges and increased land use development in Anoka and Sherburne Counties. As stated in the Metropolitan Development Guide - Transportation from the Twin Cities Metropolitan Council, "Today, it is possible to access almost any point in the region in less than 60 minutes during the peak hour. In 2020, only 60 to 70 percent of the metropolitan area will be accessible within 60 minutes from any point in the region. This constraint in the movement of people and goods will result in lost economic productivity, higher overall cost of doing business and decreased regional competitiveness in the world economy." Additionally, the Saint Cloud Area Planning Organization has recognized the importance of the TH 10 corridor by referencing the roadway in the 2020 Transportation Plan Update as needing a "study of long-term vision for TH 10, from Benton Drive to south of the Saint Cloud Metropolitan Area .... " 3.1 TRAVEL PATTERNS AND CHARACTERISTICS Travel Patterns The proportion of persons driving alone for all trips in the Twin Cities has increased from 28 percent in 1970 to 49 percent in 1990, and at the same time, the overall percentage of transit use has been decreasing. Twin Cities journey to work data from the 1990 Travel Behavior Inventory (TBI) indicates that for work related trips approximately 80 percent of the commuters drive alone, 14 percent carpool, 5 percent use public transit, and 1 percent use some other means, such as walking and bicycling. The current auto occupancy rate is 1.08 for work related trips. The journey to work data from outside the Twin Cities area is more pronounced for work related trips with 91 percent of the residents in Benton, Sherburne, and Steams Counties driving alone, 5 percent carpooling, and 4 percent using public transit. The Twin Cities 1990 TBI data shows an increase in commuting from one jurisdiction to another. Between the years of 1970 to 1990, the number of trips that were destined to Minneapolis rose 22 percent, to Saint Paul to 27 percent, and to the remainder of the Twin Cities region by 104 percent. Additionally, the external survey completed as part of the Twin Cities 1990 TBI revealed that the most heavily traveled corridors leaving the metropolitan area were in the northwest portion of the Twin Cities. Of the 328,460 vehicles entering or leaving the Twin Cities every day, there were over 113,000 daily vehicle trips in the northwest area of the metropolitan region. Additionally, in May of 1982 the Saint Cloud Area Planning Organization and MnDOT completed a study entitled, St. Cloud-Twin Cities Passenger Rail Service: A Feasibility Study. As a result of this study, the number of existing and future vehicle trips to the St. Cloud and Twin Cities metropolitan areas was calculated with the roadways they use identified. The results of the study are as follows: · Vehicle trips to St. Cloud from the Twin Cities in 1982 Total of 6,230 with 1,640 using TH 10 and 4,590 using 1-94 Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study Section 3 - Transportation 10-28-98 3-1 TABLE 2-1 Estimated and Projected Population Growth 1980 - 2020 Projected Average Annual Growth Rate County Population Population Change of Population 1980- 1990- 1995- 1980- 1990- 1995-2020 1980 1990 1995 1997 2020 1990 1995 2020 1990 1995 Anoka ~ 195,998 243,688 272,636 285,271 353,170 47,690 28,948 80,534 2.2 % 2.3 % 1.1% Benton 2 25,280 30,360 33,362 34,057 46,980 5,080 3,002 13,618 1.8 % 2.2 % 1.4 % Hennepin ~ 941,411 1,032,431 1,063,631 1,075,907 1,225,070 91,020 31,200 161,439 0.9 % 0.6 % 0.6 % Sherburne 2 29,906 41,943 51,328 56,682 91,620 12,037 9,385 40,292 3.6 % 4.1% 2.3 % Stearns 2 108,250 119,240 126,912 130,574 144,050 10,990 7,672 17,138 1.0 % 3.1% 0.5 % Sources: 1. Metropolitan Council Regional growth strategy, February 1997; 2. Minnesota State Demographer, September 1998 TABLE 2-2 Estimated and Projected Employment Growth 1980-2020 Projected Average Annual Growth Rate County Employment Employment Change of Employment 1995 1997 1980- 1990- 1995- 1980- 1990- 1995- 1980 1990 2020 1990 1995 2020 1990 1995 2020 Anoka ~ 63,317 81,132 90,686 165,093 126,670 17,815 9,554 35,984 2.5 % 2.3 % 1.3 % Benton 2 11,211 15,748 18,434 18,451 24,233 2,300 1,680 4,470 3.5 % 3.2 % 1.1% Hennepin ~ 590,288 723,095 774,297 628,325 932,590 132,80 51,202 158,29 2.1% 1.4 % 0.7 % 7 3 Sherburne 2 12,683 21,187 27,427 28,906 42,842 4,790 2,020 8,785 5.3 % 5.3 % 1.8 % Stearns 2 47,794 61,838 70,273 70,093 109,770 19,970 11,200 48,540 2.6 % 2.6 % 1.8 % Sources: 1. Metropolitan Council Regional growth strategy, February 1997; 2. Department of Economic Security · Vehicle trips to St. Cloud from the Twin Cities in 2000 Total of 9,450 with 1,800 using TH 10 and 7,650 using 1-94 · Vehicle trips to the Twin Cities from St. Cloud in 1982 Total of 22,100 with 6,850 using TH 10 and 15,250 using 1-94 · Vehicle trips to the Twin Cities from St. Cloud in 2000 Total of 42,850 with 12,200 using TH 10 and 30,650 using 1-94 There are few options of available roadways that can be used by drivers in the Northstar Corridor. The major east-west roadways between the Twin Cities and Saint Cloud are TH 10 and 1-94. Figure 3-1 shows the estimated travel shed based on minimum travel time that is used by drivers in the Northstar Corridor. In addition to through-travel, TH 10 is used to access 1-94 via Mississippi River bridge crossings where TH 10 becomes more congested in southeastern Sherburne County and southwestern Anoka County. Bridges The Mississippi River, located between TH 10 on the north and 1-94 on the south, limits the free flow of traffic between TH 10 and 1-94. There are very few Mississippi River crossings between these two major east-west roadway facilities, thereby reducing the opportunity for 1-94 to relieve the future congestion predicted for TH 10. In addition, there are limited bridge expansions planned, which facilitate less direct linkages, one of which is the Sauk Rapids Bridge connecting St. Cloud and Sauk Rapids. The Sauk Rapids Bridge is planned to be expanded from a 2-lane to a 4-lane bridge. Other fiver crossings from St. Cloud to Minneapolis connecting 1-94 and TH 10 are TH 23 and l0th Street/Michigan Avenue at St. Cloud, TH 24 at Clear Lake, TH 25 at Big Lake, TH 101 at Elk River, TH 169 at Anoka, and TH 610 and 1-694 in Anoka County. Safety The TH 10/47 corridor from Minneapolis to the St. Cloud area has higher crash rates than the statewide average. With the estimated increase in the use of the roadway by 2020, safety will be a major issue in the TH 10/47 corridor. The corridor was divided into eleven segments, with the three-year crash rates compared to the Mn/DOT statewide average crash rate for the same type of roadway. Table 3.1 shows that the crash rates on the TH 10/47 corridor are higher than the Mn/DOT statewide average for every segment but two. Only the two segments of 4-lane rural expressway on TH 10 from TH 25 (near Becker) to TH 301 (in St. Cloud) are under the Mn/DOT state average. The highest crash rate is the 4-lane urban arterial segment on TH 47 from TH 65 in Minneapolis to 37th Avenue at the Hennepin/Anoka County line, which has a 7.1 average three- year crash rate compared to the statewide crash rate of 4.9. Freight Movement Freight movement in the corridor is by track and rail. As congestion increases along TH 10, the viability of freight movement by truck will be threatened. The Texas Transportation Institute (TI'I) estimates that lost time due to congestion costs individuals and businesses in the Twin Cities over $620 million per year. For businesses, congestion has many costs. Delays in the Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study Section 3 - Transportation 10-28-98 3-2 Travel Shed for TH 10/47 Travel Shed for 1-94 Combined Travel Shed forTH 10/47 & 1-94 N 'Lake Minneapolis October 5,1~)! Figure 3-1 Travel Shed Analysis Minneapolis to St. Cloud Table 3.1 Northstar Corridor Vehicular Crash Rates TH 10 / 47 Segment Total Number Avg. 3 year Statewide Length Segment of Crashes Percent Crash Rate Avg. Crash Route Segment From Segment To Roadway Category (miles) ADTt (1995 - 1997) Fatalz (1995-1997)3 Rate4 TH 65 37th Avenue TH 47 4-Lane Urban Arterial 3.5 13,726 372 0.8% 7.1 4.9 (Minneapolis) (County Line) 37th Avenue TH 10 TH 47 (County Line) (Spring Lk. Park) 4-Lane Urban Expressway 7.0 29,619 503 0.4% 2.2 2.0 TH 10 TH 47 Hanson Blvd. 4-Lane Suburban Freeway 4.3 60,548 342 0.9% 1.2 1.0 (Spring Lk. Park) (Coon Rapids) 4-Lane Suburban Expressway TH 10 Hanson Blvd. 'TH 169 '4-Lane Rural Expressway 14.5 35,560 634 0.3% 1.1 0.9 (Coon Rapids) (Elk River) 4-Lane Suburban Freeway TH 169 Xenia Street 4-Lane Urban Arterial TH l0 2.3 20,516 109 0.9% 2.1 2.0 (Elk River) (Elk River) 4-Lane Urban/Rural Expressway Xenia Street CR 43 TH 10 (Elk River) (Big Lake) 4-Lane Rural Expressway 7.6 14,549 111 0.9% 0.9 0.8 CR 43 Euclid Avenue 4-Lane Urban Arterial TH l0 1.6 12,608 69 1.4% 3.2 2.3 (Big Lake) (Big Lake) 4-Lane Rural Expressway Euclid Avenue TH 25 TH 10 (Big Lake) (Becker) 4-Lane Rural Expressway 8.6 12,174 I00 0.0% 0.9 0.8 TH 25 CSAH 16 TH 10 (Becket) (N. of Clear Lk.) 4-Lane Rural Expressway 8.7 10,806 73 0.0% 0.7 0.8 CSAH 16 TH 301 TH 10 (N. of Clear Lk.) (St. Cloud) 4-Lane Rural Expressway 5.3 15,901 50 0.0% 0.5 0.8 TH 10 TH 301 TH 23 4-Lane Rural Expressway 2.1 20,932 91 2.2% 1.8 1.2 (St. Cloud) (St. Cloud) 4-Lane Urban Expressway Total 65.6 23,432 2,454 0.6% 1.5 Note: All data is three year average or total. Data begins on January I of first year and ends on December 31 of third year. ~ Average Daily Traffic on Segment (1995-1997). 2 Percentange of Crashes with Fatalities ( 1995-1997). Statewide Averages 1995-1997: Urban 0.3%, Rural 1.5%. 3 Average Crash Rate per Million Vehicle Miles. 4 Average Statewide Crash Rate per Million Vehicle Miles for same Roadway Category (1994-1996). Combined roadway categories weighted by distance. Source: Minnesota Department of Transportation, August 1998 movement of products to customers are very costly. According to TI'I, Federal Express and UPS report that a daily delay of five minutes cumulatively costs their businesses $40 million a year. Trucking: The major source of truck traffic is the movement of agricultural commodities and year-round movement of commodities and manufactured goods by over-the-road trucks. In Sherburne County, another major source of truck traffic is the movement of aggregate materials from area quarries. TH 10 is the east-west route that is heavily used by trucks in Sherburne County in addition to the Mississippi River crossings at TH 24 and TH 25. Railroads: There is an increased demand to transport large volumes of commodities in a timely fashion by rail. Railroads are improving facilities to meet the need to move commodities to national and international shipping points. Changes in'railroad companies have led to railroads becoming more competitive with long-haul trucking operations. Located in the TH 10/47 Corridor, the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) railroad currently carries an average of 50 to 60 trains per day. The primary commodities shipped are agricultural and industrial commodities between Chicago and the west coast, general freight, and coal to the SHERCO Power Plant in Becker. BNSF's current policy is to maintain the same number or fewer rail crossings. In other words, BNSF will not allow the opening of new crossings unless an equal number are closed. Future activities of BNSF include the upgrade of the single track to double track between Clear Lake and Big Lake, although this has not been assigned to a definite program year. In addition, BNSF has indicated that it expects train traffic to increase to up to 80 trains per day, although there is no definite timeline. On-time delivery is critical to BNSF profitability. For instance, BNSF receives incentive pay from time sensitive clients such as UPS and the BNSF/LrPS contract states that there will be no on-line construction from Thanksgiving to Christmas. 3.2 HIGHWAY FACILITIES The corridor has several types of roadways, including freeways, multi-lane rural and suburban highways, two-lane highways, and urban and suburban arterials. TH 10 and 1-94 are the major east-west roadways in the study area. The remaining roadways provide a series of facilities that connect and allow traffic to move efficiently to TH 10 and 1-94. Along the north side of the Mississippi River, TH 10 extends from the Twin Cities area north to St. Cloud and further north and west to business, home, and recreational land uses. Along the south side of the Mississippi River, 1-94 is the major east-west route in and through the Twin Cities traveling north to St. Cloud and the areas north and west into the remainder of Minnesota. The primary north-south roadways in the Northstar Corridor are TH 15, TH 23, TH 24, TH 25, TH 169, TH 101, and TH 47. 3.3 EXISTING AND FUTURE TRAFFIC CONDITIONS Existing traffic conditions in the Northstar Corridor indicate that some roadway segments are currently congested and the balance of them are approaching a congested level-of-service. The level of service analysis for traffic forecasts from Mn/DOT indicates that the Northstar Corridor will be severely congested in Anoka, Sherburne, and Hennepin Counties by the year 2020. Level-of-service (LOS) refers to the degree of congestion on a road or intersection and is based on vehicle operating speed, travel time, traffic interruptions, delays, safety, and driving discomfort. LOS is described by a letter scale from "A" to "F", with "A" representing the best Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study Section 3 - Transportation 10-28-98 3-5 service and "F" representing the worst. Table 3.2 relates LOS to the corresponding traffic operation. Table 3.2 Level-of-Service Description LOS Description Congestion Level A Free traffic flow with low volumes and high speeds. Speeds controlled by driver desires, speed limits, and roadway physical Low conditions. B Stable traffic flow, with operating speeds beginning to be restarted by traffic conditions. Drivers still have reasonable freedom to Low select their speed. C Stable flow, but speeds and maneuverability are more closely controlled by higher volumes. Moderate D Approached unstable flow with tolerable operating speeds maintained, but considerably affected by changes in operating Moderate conditions. E Unstable flow with low speed and momentary stoppages. Severe F Forced flow with low speed. Stop-and-go with stoppages for long periods is possible. Severe Source: Highway Capacity Manual, Transportation Research Board, 1994 Based on recent information prepared by the Minnesota Department of Transportation, Anoka County, and Sherburne County, the Northstar Corridor study area is currently experiencing and is projected to experience severe congestion on a number of roadways. Table 3.3 shows congested roadways in the Year 2020 in Sherburne County, Table 3.4 shows congested roadways in Anoka County in the Year 2015, and Table 3.5 shows congested roadways in Hennepin County in the Year 2015. Many of the congested roadways run parallel to or feed into roadways along the study area corridor. Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study Section 3 - Transportation 10-28-98 3-6 Table 3.3 LOS on Selected Roadways in Sherburne County Route Segment From Segment To 1995 LOS 2020 LOS TH 10 E Jct. TH 25 CSAH 5 D E TH 10 Joplin Street CR 44 D E TH 10 TH 169 E. County Line D E TH 10 CR 44 CSAH 1 D F TH 10 CSAH 1 Jackson Street D F TH 10 Jackson Street Main Street D F TH 10 Main Street TH 169 D F TH 24 W. County Line CSAH 8 D F TH 24 CSAH 8 CR 57 D F TH 24 CR 57 TH 10 C F TH 25 S. County Line CSAH 14 E F TH 25 CSAH 14 TH 10 D F TH 169 S. County Line TH 10 C F TH 169 TH 10 Main Street E F CSAH 5 TH 10 Hiawatha Street C F Source: Sherburne County Transportation Plan, December 1997 Table 3.4 LOS on Selected Roadways in Anoka County Route Segment From Segment To 1992 LOS 2015 LOS TH 47 CSAH 8 TH 10 C D TH 10 TH 65 TH 47 E D TH 10 TH 610 CR 78 D E TH 10 CR 78 TH 242 C E TH 10 TH 47 TH 169 C F TH 10 City of Anoka Ramsey Blvd D F TH 10 Ramsey Blvd Armstrong Blvd C E TH 169 S. County Line TH 10 D F TH 47 TH 10 CR 116 C F Coon Rapids B1 TH 610 CSAH 18 D F TH 65 CSAH 2 CSAH 4 C D TH 65 CSAH 4 1-694 D E TH 65 1-694 CSAH 6 C D TH 65 CSAH 8 TH 10 C E TH 65 TH 10 TH 118 C E Source: Anoka County Transportation Plan, July 1998 Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study Section 3 - Transportation 10-28-98 3-7 Table 3.5 LOS on Selected Roadways in Hennepin County Route Segment From Segment To 1994 LOS 2015 LOS TH 252 1-694/I-94 TH 610 F F 1-94 1-394 1-694 D E 1-694 1-94 Brooklyn Blvd D E 1-694 Brooklyn Blvd TH 169 D F 1-694 TH 169 1-494 D F 1-94 1-494 CSAH 30 D F 1-94 CSAH 30 TH 101 C E TH 169 1-694 CSAH 81 D D TH 169 CSAH 81 CSAH 30 E F TH 169 CSAH 30 N. County Line F F TH 101 1-94 N. County Line F F TH 47 TH 10 1-694 D F TH 47 1-694 TH 65 C C Source: Minnesota Department of Transportation, Transportation System Plan, January 1997 Traffic demand is increasing faster than new highway lane miles can be constructed. This means that a greater traffic burden is placed on all roadways, and that congestion levels will increase. Table 3.6 below shows the number of centerline miles of congestion expected in the Northstar Corridor by the Year 2020. Table 3.6 Northstar Corridor Miles of Congestion by Levels of Congestion County and Scenario Anoka County 1992 Capacity Deficiency 2015 Capacity Deficiency Hennepin County 1994 Capacity Deficiency 2015 Capacity Deficiency Sherburne County 1995 Capacity Deficiency LOSD I LOSE I LOSF I Total 12 I 2 4 18 9] 11 10 30 14 I 3 10 27 2I 14 19 35 9 13 10 29 2020 Capacity Deficiency 6 Source: MnDOT, Anoka County, and Sherburne County Access control along TH 10 varies. Portions of TH 10 are fully grade-separated to freeway standards,; portions are constructed to expressway standards with signalized intersections and turn lanes; and portions function with unsignalized intersections. Traffic control in the urban areas of Minneapolis, Columbia Heights, Fridley, and Coon Rapids is frequent with traffic signals approximately 500 feet apart. Posted speed limits are low in the urban areas and increase to a maximum of 65 miles per hour in the more rural portions of the corridor. As TH 10 travels through the cities of Sherburne County, the speed limit decreases and the major roadways Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study Section 3 - Transportation 10-28-98 3-8 crossing TH 10 are signalized. Figure 3-2 shows the locations of traffic signals along the entire Northstar Corridor. Figure 3-3 details the locations of traffic signals in the urban portions of thecorridor along TH 10 and TH 47. Figure 3-4 shows a speed limit profile and roadway geometry from the intersection of TH 47 and Central Avenue in Minneapolis to the intersection of TH 10 and TH 23 in St. Cloud. Additionally, the corridor is inundated with various curb cuts and access points especially along TH 47 in Minneapolis, Columbia Heights, and Fridley. North of Anoka County, TH 10 becomes more rural but roadway access points continue along the corridor especially in the cities of Sherbume County. 3.4 TRANSIT SERVICE Transit service in the study area is provided by Metro Transit in the seven-county Twin Cities metropolitan area, the Metropolitan Transit Commission in portions of the St. Cloud metro area, and county-based transit systems in Anoka, Sherburne, Benton and Steams Counties. While each area of the corridor has at least limited access to some transit service, no corridor-based operations provide linked, cohesive service in the corridor as a whole. Figure 3-5 shows the service areas of each of the four separate transit providers in the TH 10/47 corridor. Although there is some overlap and coordination in Anoka County, in general these are separately operated systems providing service to a specific area. 3.4.1 Metro Transit Metro Transit is operated by the Metropolitan Council in the Twin Cities seven-county metropolitan area. Metro Transit provides both local and express service in the TH10/47 corridor from downtown Minneapolis to the Northtown Transit Hub and on to the Anoka County Technical College. In addition, Dial-A-Ride, a personalized transit service, is available to the general public within the Metro Transit service area. In downtown Minneapolis, connections can be made to the complete Metro Transit seven-county service area and to future LRT in the Hiawatha Corridor. 3.4.2 Anoka County Transit Service Transit service in Anoka County consists of fixed route transit, demand response service provided by the Anoka County Traveler, and other smaller special-purpose paratransit providers. The fixed route service is focused primarily in the southern part of the County, within the MUSA line and within the Metropolitan Transit Taxing District. Regularly scheduled, fixed route service is provided by Metro Transit, North Suburban Lines, and Anoka County Transit. The routes are generally oriented to downtown Minneapolis, with two express routes to downtown St. Paul. Anoka County Transit operates three local fixed routes that provide hourly timed transfer to Metro Transit routes at the Northtown Transit Hub as well as coordinated transfers to/from Anoka County Traveler dial-a-ride service. North of Main Street, service is limited to dial-a-ride provided by the Anoka County Traveler. Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study Section 3 - Transportation 10-28-98 3-9 St. Sauk Rapids MN 23 7th St. 15th I Haven Township ~"~..... CSAH 6 \) Clear Lake ~'- Township ~'~,'~- TH 25 River ~"N,. TH 24 ~ Existing Traffic Signal Locations ~ Flashing Yellow Shetbarne Ave. Liberty tn. Big Lake CSAH I1 lO Big Lake Eagle Lake Rd. TH 25 TH 169{ Jackson A~. P~ctor Ave. Elk River Mississippi' River Blvd. Thurston TH 47 Anoka TH 242 Coon Rapids See InsertA-1 {-~! .... See Insert3--2 j~ Minneapolis ~NOBYH$~B N A NOTTO SCALE Rev. October 28,1991 TH 10/47 Traffic Signal Locations Minneapolis to St. Cloud Mississippi River A-1 CSAH 3 85th Ave. N.E. 81st Ave. N.E. Osborne Rd. N.E. 73rd Ave. N.E. 69th Ave. N.E. Mississi ' St. N.E. 61st Ave. N.E. 57th Ave. N.E. 1-694 Existing Traffic Signal Locations Mississippi River A-2 1-694 53rd Ave. N.E. 49th Ave. N.E. 44th Ave. N.E. 40th Ave. N.E. 37th Ave. N.E. 32nd Ave. N.E. 27th Ave. N.E. Ave. N.E. 20th Ave. N.E. 17thAve. N.E. 13th Ave. N.E. East Broadway %' ' /Centra~ Ave. N.E. N A NOT TO SCALE October 5, 1998 [~BRW Figure 3-3 TH 10/47 Traffic Signal Locations Minneapolis to St. Cloud 5~ 5~ 4£ (Columbia (Hilltop) {~ridl~y) (Sp~in~ Lak~ (~laine) (Coon ~pid~) (Anoka) (~lk H~ight~) Park) -- 4-Lane Urban/ ]----I 4-Lane Urban/Rural Exp .... y [ (Big Lake) (Becket) (Clear Lake) (St. Cloud) TH 10/47 Speed Limit Profile and Roadway Geometry Minneapolis to St. Cloud %:5~:~.~ Metro Transit ~x,~j'x~..~x~_.~_-~.~. Anoka County Traveler ~ River Rider ~r-rT-r~'~ St. Cloud MTC · .L...I.....I.....I_..I.,.J- ' ,ilI]]I[[[Hll, Tri-CAP N A NOT TO SCALE October 5, 1998 Figure 3-5 Transit Service Minneapolis to St. Cloud 3.4.3 St. Cloud Metropolitan Transit Commission (MTC) Service Area The St. Cloud MTC provides public transportation services in the cities of St. Cloud, Sauk Rapids and Waite Park. Currently, the MTC's program of services includes fixed-route, Specialized Service, subscription and rideshare services. The MTC's regular fixed route system operates on eleven fixed schedules, Monday --Friday 6:00 AM to 9:45 PM and Saturdays from 7:45 AM to 6:45 PM. Five additional routes provide direct service to St. Cloud State University and operate from September through May. The Specialized Service program provides door-to-door service for persons with disabilties and mobility impairments. The Senior Rider and Metro Express are subscription services. The Senior Rider provides persons 60 and over with curbside bus service between home and primary destinations on a limited daytime schedule. The Metro Express provides curbside bus service for employees working in St. Cloud's Industrial Park West. Ride matching services for commuters in the St. Cloud area for carpooling and vanpooling is coordinated by the St. Cloud MTC. 3.4.4 Regional/Rural Transit Service The RiverRider provides daily bus and volunteer driver transit services in Sherburne and Wright Counties, including limited community-based services. Tri-CAP provides daily bus and volunteer driver transit services in Benton and Steams Counties, including limited schedules from St. Cloud to Foley and three day a week community bus service in Sauk Centre. Both transit programs are planning for and experiencing system growth. Over the next few years, Tri-CAP will include increased schedule frequencies in the rural areas of the counties and expanded community-based services. The RiverRider and Tri-CAP transportation programs provide limited service into the St. Cloud metro area. RiverRider provides transportation from the St. Cloud area to persons participating in a sheltered workshop. Tri-CAP provides limited service to Sartell, primarily for elderly living in residential apartment communities and grocery shopping service in the MTC's transit area for elderly citizens residing in apartment complexes. 3.4.5 Park-and-Ride Facilities Park-and-Ride facilities vary along the TH 10/47 Corridor. Several park-and-ride facilities are available to serve commuters in and around the St. Cloud area. There currently exist two formal park-and-ride facilities for commuters in Steams County. One is located at St. Joseph at 1-94 and CSAH 2, the other is located in Albany at 1-94 and CSAH 10. Both lots were created with the cooperation of Mn/DOT. Informal park-and-ride usage is also occurring at the Holiday Station off of 1-94 and CSAH 75 in St. Cloud. Other informal park-and-ride usage also is occurring along the 1-94 corridor at Sauk Centre, Melrose, Freeport, and Avon. Sherburne County has few park-and ride facilities. Sherburne County is currently working with a group, which includes MN/DOT, Steams and Benton Counties, City of St. Cloud and St. Cloud MTC, to create a formal network of park-and-fide facilities in the region, with several located in Sherburne County. The Mn/DOT Traveler Information Center, located on TH 10 two miles south of St. Cloud, a municipal parking lot along TH 10 in the City of Becker, and the Mn/DOT park- and-ride lot along north TH 169 in Elk River currently are being used for park-and-ride activities. Currently, no transit connections are available for these sites, but should be considered for future transit service expansion or restructuring. Continued planning and development of additional Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study Section 3 - Transportation 10-28-98 3-14 formal and informal park-and-fide facilities is occurring jointly between Mn/DOT, St. Cloud MTC, and Counties and Cities along the TH 10 and 1-94 corridors. The St. Cloud MTC has been providing ride-matching services for commmuters since 1991, and has initiated the creation of an informal committee to review and make recommendations for the improvement and expansion of park-and-fide facilities throughout the region. Metro Transit provides Park-and-Ride facilities in the TH 10/47 corridor in Anoka County at TH 10/TH 169, TH 10/Hanson Blvd., and the Northtown Transit Hub. Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study Section 3 - Transportation 10-28-98 3-15 SECTION 4 - PLANNING CONTEXT The two metropolitan planning organizations (MPO) in the Northstar Corridor are the Metropolitan Council in the Twin Cities seven-county metropolitan area and the St. Cloud Area Planning Organization (APO) whose transportation plans have been reviewed and are highlighted in this chapter. To ensure consistency of plans, transportation plans were reviewed from the counties and cities within the corridor as well as Mn/DOT's Metro Division Transportation System Plan (TSP) and information from Mn/DOT District 3. All of the plans recognize the increase in travel demand, in general, and the limited resources available to address the transportation needs in the region. Managing the roadway system and providing travel choices to develop a multimodal transportation system is a continuing theme in these plans. 4.1 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL TRANSPORTATION POLICY PLAN December 1996 Of the sixteen policies described in the Metropolitan Council Transportation Policy Plan, Policy 5 addresses transitways and Strategy 5a addresses transit technologies as follows: Policy 5 - Transitways The Metropolitan Council will promote the implementation of a regional network of dedicated transitways to provide a travel-time advantage for transit vehicles, improve transit service reliability and increase transit accessibility to jobs. Transitways will be a tool to help promote higher density development along these major corridors. Strategy 5a - Transit Technologies: The Council will support incremental implementation of transitways with initial applications focusing on bus technology. This does not preclude other technologies in the future (for example, light rail transit and commuter rail), either as an evolution of an existing transitway or as an entirely new initiative if a technology other than buses proves cost-effective and adequate funding for implementation becomes available. The 2020 Regional Transportation Plan takes an intermodal approach to addressing the needs of the region which includes transit. The Transit System Plan discusses: Importance of Regional Transit Transit is essential in accommodating future development and growth, developing higher density and revitalizing the core area of the region. Transit will also play an important role in helping alleviate growing traffic congestion and providing better accessibility to jobs. New Direction for Regional Transit The new direction for regional transit includes two key objectives: Develop a regional network of dedicated transitways to provide a travel-time advantage for transit vehicles, improve transit service reliability and increase accessibility to jobs via transit; and Match the most appropriate transit services to different transit market areas. Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study Section 4 - Planning Context 10-28-98 4-1 Transitways One of the key objectives of a transitway strategy is to facilitate development of an effective express transit route network connecting transit hubs with major economic activity centers. Dedicated transitways, where transit vehicles would not mix with other vehicular traffic, are essential in order to provide a travel-time advantage over single-occupant vehicle and to improve transit service reliability. A regional transitway network would build upon existing transit advantages and would be coordinated with other transit support facilities, such as park-and-ride lots, transit hubs and transit stations. The Metropolitan Council currently supports three corridors for potential rail transit improvements: · Hiawatha Avenue between downtown Minneapolis, Minneapolis-St. Paul Airport (MSP) and the Mall of America; · The Northeast Corridor* between downtown Minneapolis and the Northtown Transit Hub; and The Riverview Corridor between downtown St. Paul and the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport. (*The Northstar Corridor incorporates the Northeast Corridor as described in the Twin Cities Metropolitan Commuter Rail Study.) 4.2 TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE FOR THE ST. CLOUD METROPOLITAN AREA 1995-2020, ST. CLOUD AREA PLANNING ORGANIZATION The first two goals of the 2020 Plan recognize the need for plans to seek the optimum balance of mobility, accessibility and safety. Providing for system efficiency as well as intermodal transportation needs is recognized in the statement of objectives. The remaining goals are a reminder that plans should minimize adverse community impacts and cost. Goal A: Balance Mobility and Accessibility · Objective 1 Objective 2 · Objective 3 · Objective 4 · Objective 5 Minimize road congestion Balance roadway travel by functional class Minimize indirection Maximize transit availability Maximize bicycle/pedestrian availability Goal B: Maximize Safety Objective 1 Minimize accidents Goal C: Minimize Environmental Degradation · Objective 1 Minimize emission of air pollution · Objective 2 Minimize impacts to environmentally sensitive areas · Objective 3 Minimize noise pollution Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study Section 4 - Planning Context 10-28-98 4-2 Goal D: Minimize Costs · Objective 1 Minimize system improvement costs Goal E: Minimize Negative Social and Economic Impacts · Objective 1 Minimize land consumed · Objective 2 Minimize displacement of residences Objective 3 Minimize displacement of businesses Goal F: Minimize land consumed · Objective 2 Minimize displacement of residences · Objective 3 Minimize displacement of businesses Goal G: Minimize Energy Consumption · Objective 1 Minimize gasoline consumption 4.3 OTHER PLANS The Mn/DOT Metro Division Transportation System Plan (TSP) has identified unmet needs in the TH 10/47 corridor in Hennepin and Anoka Counties. The portion of TH 47 in the corridor is already at congested levels of service and is predicted to become worse by 2015. The portion of TH 10 in the corridor is approaching capacity and is projected to be congested by 2015. Because of lack of resources, no investments are planned for these roadways in the 20-year TSP plan. For TH 47, the TSP recommends a preservation strategy allowing it to remain in its current condition and serve its existing purpose. For TH 10, the TSP recommends a management strategy to optimize safety, operation, and capacity of the existing roadway. City and County Transportation Plans identify TH 10/47 as a principal arterial with the function of mobility. As segments of this transportation corridor become more congested, the cities and counties are identifying their role in maintaining the mobility of the roadway and offering travel choices. The City of Elk River has identified a number of moderate- and high-cost improvements for TH 10 through the City. Mn/DOT District 3 draft traffic projections concur that many segments of TH 10 are approaching congestion and by the Year 2020 will be severely congested, especially in and approaching the City of Elk River. District 3 funding constraints indicate a need to identify alternative travel choices. Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study Section 4 - Planning Context 10-28-98 4-3 SECTION 5 - NEED FOR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS The previous sections summarized the transportation issues in the corridor and described the overall project goals and objectives. This section summarizes the needs to be addressed in the corridor. The purpose of the project is: To meet the future transportation needs of the Northstar Corridor. 5.1 INTRODUCTION The Northstar Corridor connects two major employment, population, and educational centers in the region. Over the past fifteen years, the communities in the Northstar Corridor have experienced substantial population and economic growth. Along with this growth has come limited highway expansion, increased automobile ownership, and more auto trips. Increased congestion and the reduced ability to easily travel to key destinations will be a significant deterrent to the continued growth of the area. While the corridor does have a diversity of development patterns, much of the newer development in portions of the corridor are developing with land use patterns which tend to cater exclusively to automobile travel. To manage the impact on existing and planned transportation facilities, future development must also support increased mobility particularly by transit, walking and bicycling. Transportation access and capacity are vital to a community's economic development. Freedom of movement and flexibility (mobility) in the Northstar Corridor have come at a high price here as elsewhere: growing congestion on the highway system, greater reliance on the single-occupant automobile, and declining use of transit. As a result, the movement of both people and goods is slowed. Congestion contributes to air and noise pollution. Congestion causes delays in the delivery of goods and services affecting the local and regional economy. Roadway expansion also has significant impacts. Environmental impacts significantly affect communities which border the facility, and costs affect city, state and federal transportation funding requirements and opportunities. 5.2 MAJOR NEEDS IN THE NORTHSTAR CORRIDOR The need for transportation facilities and services in the Northstar Corridor can be summarized as follows: NEED: The Imbalance Between Travel Demand and Travel Supply Even with full system management, the Minnesota Department of Transportation projects peak period congestion on TH !0 from Elk River to the east, and capacity deficiencies on highways and bridges throughout the corridor by the Year 2020. Congestion will continue to increase during peak travel times resulting in longer traffic delays, increased cost to commuters and greater vehicle emissions. With no other major east-west roadway available to serve Benton, Sherburne and Anoka Counties, increased traffic, automobile and freight movements are significantly affected. It is anticipated that programmed future investments on the principal and arterial highway systems serving the corridor will not be sufficient to adequately support the increasing Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study Section 5 - Need for Transportation Improvements 10-28-98 5-1 commuting travel demands of forecasted growth in the corridor. State and regional transportation studies prepared for portions of the corridor have documented that a strategy to simply build additional highway capacity is not a financially feasible solution to congestion. NEED: The Lack of Multimodal Transportation Choices .An effective, long-term, coordinated response to congestion will require a commitment by affected governmental units to implement strategies that provide alternative modes of travel such as bus, commuter rail, LRT, etc., while encouraging behavioral and land use changes which will result in fewer vehicle trips, and strategies which better utilize the existing capacity of the corridor transportation system. NEED: The Lack of Coordination Between Transportation Investments and Land Use Development At present there is no system in place to address corridor-wide changing land use and transportation conditions. The two ends of the corridor have separate transportation planning and land use planning jurisdictions, while the center of the corridor is part of neither. But the rural center is growing and changing as development and settlement pattems spread from both ends. There is a lack of transportation related land use strategies to address the challenge posed by the diversity of urban, suburban and rural/exurban community types found within the corridor. Land use development patterns do not provide for more compact development needed to support transit services and encourage the use of other modes of travel to the single-occupant vehicle. NEED: High Accident Rate Along the TH 10/47 Corridor Accident rates in the majority of the corridor are currently higher than the Mn/DOT statewide average for the same type of roadway. Current safety concerns can be expected to worsen without action to address redevelopment, roadway/railroad grade crossings, the high percentage of truck traffic, and access management for TH 10/47. NEED: Increase Mobility on TH 10/47 TH 10 is a Principal Arterial. The purpose of a Principal Arterial is to provide a high level of mobility. Many segments of TH 10 have frequently-spaced signalized intersections and access driveways. This situation conflicts with the mobility function of a Principal Arterial. NEED: The Lack of a Corridor-Wide Transit Services Currently there is not any corridor-wide transit service between the Twin Cities and St. Cloud metropolitan areas. This limits options for travel in general in the corridor, and limits options to reduce vehicular travel on TH 10 during congested periods. It also limits options for travel to major destinations including the downtowns, universities, MSP airport and the Mall of America, areas which could effectively be served by high-quality transit. Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study Section 5 - Need for Transportation Improvements 10-28-98 5-2 NEED: The Lack of Non-Motorized Facilities There is lack of alternative facilities such as recreational trails for non-motorized travel. Safe, convenient linkages to multimodal transportation centers for pedestrian and bicycle travel encourage alternative travel choices. Land use patterns conducive to non-motorized travel may also help to reduce pressure on roadway facilities, contributing to increased mobility with improved environmental and health benefits. 5.3 GOALS Based on the above definition of transportation needs in the corridor, the following goals have been established: · Improve mobility and safety within the corridor. · Minimize adverse environmental impacts and foster positive environmental effects. · Encourage transportation-supportive land use development patterns. · Provide a cost-effective and efficient transportation system. Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study Section 5 - Need for Transportation Improvements 10-28-98 5-3 MIS · Pur__po.s! And. Nc · Defimtlon ol~ A! ~ed ~ernativei ~~ORTHST~ ~ORR~DOR ~ ~Fatal III!1 C~mmut~ Flaw An~ IIiill lysis MIS r Rail F~eas~b~l~ty Work Scope and Bhdget Comm tment ~111111 to Enter ~uter Rail Iii October. 1998 COMPLEXITY OF PLANNING PROCESS Federally mandated planning process requires that Major Investment Study (MIS) be completed to develop a locally preferred alternative. A broad range of alternatives must be considered. The MIS plannning'process typically takes 24 months. Commuter Rail has been identified by Mn/DOT as a viable alternative for the Northstar Corridor. An evaluation of the feasibility of Commuter Rail can be completed in 6 months. NCDA desires to proceed as quickly'as possible if Commuter Rail is feasible. Planning process to accomplish this is to break out the Commuter Rail alternative from the MIS process and proceed with the EIS/PE for just the Commuter Rail. The MIS will be completed in a timely manner to define the complementary appropriate modal elements for the Northstar Corridor. NOTE: FTA APPROVAL IS REQUIRED FOR THIS PROCESS FRAMEWORK FOR DEVELOPMENT OF NORTHSTAR CORRIDOR MIS MULTI-MODAL ALTERNATIVES 1. Roadway Improvements 2. Fixed Guideway Improvements 3. Transportation Management 4. Bus Improvements Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study Multimodal Transportation Investment Alternatives MODAL ELEMENT Transportation Feeder J J J Management/ Bus J CommuterJ Commuter Rail Commuter Rail TH 10 TH 10 River Stratecjy No-Build Bus Improvements j lmprovementsJ Rail J with Anoka CountyLRT with Anoka County HOV Maior Upgrade Minor Upgrade Crossings 4 7 Alternatives Dropped During Fatal Flaw Analysis Transit Technologies -- Articulated Trolley Bus -- Guided Bus -- Heavy Rail Transit -- Monorail -- Personal Rapid Transit (PRT) -- High Speed Rail (HSR) -- Automated Guideway Transit (AGT) Modal Elements -- High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) -- St. Cloud to Minneapolis 7/28/98 Screening Process Screen 2: IH 10 Roadway Improvements Universe of Alternatives · Add Right or Left Turn Lane · ITS Technologies for Traffic Management · Access Consolidation/Frontage Road Development · Signal Improvements/Signal Coordination · Add Thru Lanes or HOV Lanes · Construct Interchanges at Key Locations · Construct Bypass · Fully Controlled Access Freeway I Evaluation C'riteria · Mobility Benefits · Safety Benefits · Cost · Environmental Impacts Improvem. ents Applicable - Add Right or Left Turn Lane - ITS Technologies for Traffic Mangement - Access Consolidation/Frontage Road Development - Signal Improvements/Signal Coordination - Add Tl'u< Lanes or HOV Lanes - Construct Interchanges at CSAH 11 I NCDA '10/'1/98 I Improvements NOT Applicable - Construct Interchange at Big Lake - Construct Bypass - Fully Controlled Access Freeway Table 1 Toolbox of Potential Improvements to Address Issues on TH 10 Potential Improvements Mobility Safety Benefits Cost Environmental Impact Benefits 1. Add Right or Left Turn Lanes Low Low Low Low 2. ITS Technologies for Traffic Management 3. Access Consolidation/Frontage Road Development 4. Signal Improvements/Signal Coordination 5. Add Thru Lanes or HOV Lanes 6. Construct Interchanges at Key Locations 7. Construct Bypass 8. Fully Controlled Access Freeway High Hi[~h High Hi[~h NORTHSTAR CORRIDOR MIS September 23, 1998 NORTHSTAR CORRIDOR MAJOR INVESTMENT STUDY ORDER OF MAGNITUDE BYPASS COST Current Issue Area Parameter Elk River Bill Lake Becker Clear Lake Type of Improvement Bypass Bypass Bypass Interchange Approximate Roadway Length 6.5 miles 6.1 miles 2 miles 0 Roadway Cost (1) $ 13,000,000.00 $ 12,200,000.00 $ 4,000,000.00 0 Number of River Crossings {2) 2 0 0 0 River Crossing Cost (3) $ 19,200,000.00 0 0 0 Number of Railroad Crossings (4) 0 I 2 0 Railroad Crossing Cost (5) 0 $ 1,280,000.00 $ 2,560,000.00 0 Number of Interchanges 4 3 0 1 Interchange Cost (6) $ 20,000,000.00 $ 15,000,000.00 0 $ 5,000,000.00 Total Cost $ 52,200,000.00 $ 28,480,000.00 $ 6,560,000.00 $ 5,000,000.00 Note 1: (1) Assumed cost for new 4-lane divided roadway is $2 million per mile. (2) Assumed dimension for river crossing bridge is 80 feet wide by 1500 feet long. (3) Assumed cost for river crossing bridge is $80 per square foot. (4) Assumed dimension for railroad crossing bridge is 80 feet wide by 200 feet long. (5) Assumed cost for railroad crossing bridge is $80 per square foot. (6) Assumed cost for interchange is $5 million per intemhange (includes bridge, ramps, and roadways). Note 2: A bypass around the eastern edge of St. Cloud was found not to be warranted in a 1995 MnDOT District 3 study. Only 25 percent of the trips on TH 10 were found to be through trips that would use a bypass. The conclusion from the MnDOT study was that minor geometric improvements should be completed at existing intersections and interchanges as needed through the Year 2015. Additionally, system management was recommended in order to maintain the function of TH 10 as a principal arterial. This included transportation system management and land use management. Note 3: The yearly MnDOT District 3 Right-of-Way and Construction budget is $50 million. Of that $50 million, $8 million per year is for expansion projects such as bypass and interchange construction. Currently, the expansion budget has been allocated until the Year 2008. Source: BRW, Inc. 10/1/98 Table 2 Screening of Potential Improvements by Current Issue Area (NCDA decision 10/1/98) Potential Improvements Anoka/ Elk Big CSAH Becker TH 25 Clear St. Rice Ramsey River Lake 11 Issue Issue Lake Cloud Issue Issue Issue Issue Issue Area Area Issue Issue Area Area Area Area Area Area Area 1. Add Right or Left Turn Lanes 2. ITS Technologies for Traffic Management 3. Access Consolidation/Frontage Rd. Development 4. Signal Improvements/Signal Coordination 5. Add Thru Lanes orHOVLanes Drop Drop Drop Drop Drop Drop Drop Drop 6. Construct Interchanges at Key Locations Drop Drop Drop Drop Drop Drop Drop Drop 7. Construct Bypass Drop Drop Drop Drop Drop Drop Drop Drop Drop 8. Fully Controlled Access Freeway Drop Drop Drop Drop Drop Drop Drop Drop Drop Drop - Eliminate from further consideration TH 10 Minor Improvements include items 1 through 4 TH 10 Moderate Improvements include items 5 and 6 TH 10 Major Improvements include items 7 and 8 NORTHSTAR CORRIDOR MIS October 30, 1998 Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study Multimodal Transportation Investment Alternatives MODAL ELEMENT Transportation Feeder TH 10 River Management/ Bus Commuter Commuter Rail Commuter Rail TH 10 Strategy No-Build Bus Improvements Improvements Rail with Anoka Count~ LRT with Anoka Count),HOV Major Up~lrade (a/ Minor Up~lrade (a) Cross ngs ~ Ir 9 ~ -- ~ (a) TH 10 Minor Upgrade includes access control, selected widenings, and ITS technologies. Alternatives Dropped During Fatal Flaw Analysis Transit Technologies -- Articulated Trolley Bus -- Guided Bus -- Heavy Rail Transit -- Monorail -- Personal Rapid Transit (PRT) -- High Speed Rail (HSR) -- Automated Guideway Transit (AGT) Modal Elements -- High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) -- St. Cloud to Minneapolis -- TH 10 Upgrade to Freeway 9/3/98 Screen rig Process COlmlOOZ :a County LRT or Busway Proposed Alternatives · Commuter Rail with Anoka County LRT · Commuter Rail with Anoka County Busway I Si'milar Proposed a..d Existing lra.nsit Services · Hiawatha LRT - Downtown Minneapolis to Mall of America · 1-94 Express Bus Service - Between Minneapolis and St. Paul downtowns · Local Bus Service - Between downtown Minneapolis and U of M I Applicabili~_ to COrridor Evaluation · Length of Trip · Duplication of Service · Type of Service · Intermodal Connection A~oda'l E'leme..ts NOT APplicable to Commuter Rail Alternative - Anoka County LRT -Anoka County Busway Comple'me. tary lra. nsit Systems and Services as Intermodal Connections - Hiawatha LRT Service - Northeast Corridor LRT service - Northeast Corridor Busway service - Local Bus service · COMMUTER RAIL with ANOKA COUNTY LRT and BUSWAY The primary purpose of the Commuter Rail service between downtown Minneapolis and the St. Cloud area is to serve relatively long trips in the corridor. For longer trips it is common to have to transfer from one travel mode to access the Commuter Rail service. Typical examples of services available today would be: · Park-and-Ride · Passenger Drop-Off · Walk Access · Bicycle Access · Feeder Bus A number of complementary major transit investments have previously been proposed and/or are currently being proposed that should be integrated with this proposed Commuter Rail service. These transit investments include: Hiawatha LRT service between downtown Minneapolis and the Mall of America Northeast Corridor LRT service between downtown Minneapolis and the Northtown Shopping Center (see attachment dated May, 1991) Northeast Corridor busway facility on exclusive right-of-way between downtown Minneapolis and Northtown Transit Hub (see attachment dated November, 1995) Existing express and local bus services should be integrated with the proposed Commuter Rail service. Selected services include: 1-94 Express Bus service between downtown Minneapolis and downtown St. Paul Local bus service between downtown Minneapolis and the University of Minnesota The recommendation is made to drop the following two modal elements in the Universe of Alternatives as discrete options: Commuter Rail with Anoka County LRT Commuter Rail with Anoka County Busway RECOMMENDATION The recommended action is made to include the following transit systems and services as potential intermodal connections with the Commuter Rail: Hiawatha LRT Service Northeast Corridor LRT service Northeast Corridor Busway service 1-94 Express Bus service Local Bus service ~ommuter Rail and Anoka County 'LRT and/or HOV ~ce SaukRapids St. Cloud Mississippi River MN 23 Haven Township CSAH 6 Clear Lake Township 25 Becker Big Lake TH 25 US Elk Rive£ TH 47 Anoka TH 242 ~oon Rapid~ Mississippi TH 610 River TH 10 I--694 Commuter Rail LRT/HOV Line N NOT TO SCALE Minneapolis Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study Multimodal Transportation Investment Alternatives MODAL ELEMENT Transportation Feeder I I ManagemenV Bus I C°mmuterl TH 10 River Strategy No-Build Bus Improvements ImprovementsI Rail I Minor Upgrade (a) Crossings (a) TH 10 Minor Upgrade includes access control, selected widenings, and ITS technologies. Alternatives Dropped During Fatal Flaw Analysis Transit Technologies -- Articulated Trolley Bus -- Guided Bus -- Heavy Rail Transit -- Monorail -- Personal Rapid Transit (PRT) -- High Speed Rail (HSR) -- Automated Guideway Transit (AGT) Modal Elements -- High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) -- St. Cloud to Minneapolis -- TH 10 Upgrade to Freeway -- TH 10 Selected Bypasses -- Commuter Rail with Anoka County LRT -- Commuter Rail with Anoka County HOV I O/27/98 DRAFT IMPLEMENTATION/BUSINESS PLAN TWIN CITIES METROPOLITAN COMMUTER RAIL STUDY STEERING AND ADVISORY COMMITTEES Working Paper of September 30, 1998 INTRODUCTORY SUMMARY This paper brings together the detailed Phase II capital cost estimates, ridership projections, operating/maintenance expenses, legal research and financial analysis for a comprehensive approach to implementing commuter rail service in the Twin Cities region. The development of a business plan to finance the implementation strate~' will be the principal conclusion of the Phase II work undertaken during 1998. The second phase of this study has examined six radial routes, along with a route connecting the central business districts of Minneapolis and Saint Paul. Reference to the project maps, with lines designated by alphabet letter and community destination, will be helpful throughout; they are included as an appendix to this paper. The discussion is presented in five sections: 1. Operating Expenses and Operating Revenues; 2. Capital Costs for Phase II Routes; 3. Initial Implementation Programs; 4. Financing Structures and Funding Sources; 5. Subsequent Development Stages. The initial discussion is based upon an analysis of the full system as studied in this phase: Line Line Line Line Line Line Line A to Bethel; B to Elk River; H to Norwood/Young America; L to Northfield; N to Hastings; S to Forest Lake; T between downtown Minneapolis and do~vntown Saint Paul. DRAFT IMPLEMENTATION/BUSINESS PLAN Working Paper of September 30, 1998 -- Page 2 The initial discussion analyzes this system as a whole. Throughout this paper, however, the downtown connector, Route T, will- not be treated on a stand-alone basis. Instead, all of its capital costs, passenger projections, and operating expenses are factored into the radial routes being analyzed for implementation. This is because all of the Phase II work has been predicated on through-routing of commuter service from each of ihe line end points to the first downtown station and on to the second central business district. After examining the full route structure as a single large-scale project, each of the route evaluations is summarized in matrix form and in accordance with criteria developed earlier. It is possible to consider an initial implementation program of routes that rank highly and work well together, or that consists of routes that initially may not be built to their ultimate destinations in the first project stage due to ridership and investment considerations. The all-route, full-length system would require an initial capital outlay of $1.121 billion, expressed in today's 1998 dollars. This study has established the year 2003 as the peak construction period. Capital dollars are therefore most appropriately expressed on an inflated basis for the year 2003; the $1.121 billion of 1998 becomes $1.364 billion five years later. In this paper, only the first displays of capital costs show 1998 dollars, as a point of reference for readers today. All subsequent dollar amounts are displayed in 2003 values for capital construction, and in 2005 values for operations and maintenance, the first full year of service. The order of magnitude to construct the entire system at one time is substantial, at nearly $1.4 billion. Therefore, this paper will recommend a "First Tier" program of approximately half that size, consisting of Routes B, L and N, together with T and some modifications, totaling $ 655 million in 2003 dollars. This would require approximately $ 74 million of combined annual capital and operatingfimding, as morefidly set out in Sections 3 and 4 of this paper. Once a First Tier program has been constructed and in fidl revenue service for three years, the routes and segments not yet built should be re-examined. Based on specific criteria for the new additions, together with operating results available from the First Tier, that examination should consist o fan evaluation process to determine which of the unbuilt sections would be best suited for staging at what points in time. This Implementation/Business Plan Paper focuses on the First Tier development recommendation, to begin full operation by January, 2005. DRAFT IMPLEMENTATION/BUSINESS PLAN Working Paper of September 30, 1998 -- Page 3 SECTION 1. OPERATING EXPENSES AND OPERATING REVENUES Expenses for Operations and Maintenance The following table summarizes the projected annual expenses for operation and maintenance of each of the Phase II routes for the year 2005, as the first full year of commuter service. Each route assumes service along its full length, and through routing of trains from the first to the second of the Minneapolis and Saint Paul central business districts. The through routing treatment also requires that the operation and maintenance expenses for the line connecting the two downtowns, Route T, be subsumed in the costs of the other six radial routes. This convention is also follo~ved in subsequent sections. Year 2005 Operations in 2005 Dollars: Route A to Bethel $ 6.5 Million Route B to Elk River $ 8.5 Million Route H to Norwood/Young America $ 8.2 Million Route L to Northfield $14.6 Million RouteN to Hastings $ 4.7 Million Route S to Forest Lake $ 5.9 Million Total Full Six-Route System $ 48.4 Mitlion Note: These figUres are based on a projected unit cost of $ 70.17 per train mile of operation in year 2005, based on the study survey of start-up operations. Fare Revenues The following table presents the projected daily revenues for each of the radial routes for the year 2005, derived from study ridership forecasts and fare structures, again subsuming figures attributable to Route T connecting the Minneapolis and Saint Paul central business districts. DRAFT IMPLEMENTATION/BUSINESS PLAN Working Paper of September 30, 1998 -- Page 4 Year 2005 Daily Fare Revenues in 2005 Dollars: Route A to Bethel $ 6,118 Route B to Elk River $ 8,896 Route H to Norwood/Young America $ 6,443 Route L to Northfield $10,725 Route N to Hastings $ 5,120 Route S to Forest Lake $ 5,921 Total Full All-Route System $ 43,223 These daily figures are converted to annual fare collections based on the industry convention of 250 riding days yearly, assuming weekday only commuter service. Year 2005 Annual Fare Revenues in 2005 Dollars: Route A to Bethel $ 1.5 Million Route B to Elk River $ 2.2 Million Route H to Norwood/Young America $ 1.6 Million Route L to Northfield $ 2.7 Million Route N to Hastings $ 1.3 Million Route S to Forest Lake $ 1.5 Million Total Full All-Route System $10.8 Million Recovery Ratio The relationship of revenues generated by passenger fares to annual operating and maintenance expenses is .known as the farebox recovery ratio. For the relatively newer and smaller commuter rail systems in the United States, comparable recovery ratios range between approximately 10% and 40%, leaving between 60% and 90% of annual operating expenses to be covered by oth&r sources of public funding. DRAFT IMPLEMENTATION/BUSINESS PLAN Working Paper of September 30, 1998 -- Page 5 The full all-route Phase II commuter rail system would generate a 22. 3 °/.o recovery ratio, based upon the stu'cly operating expense calculations and fare collection projections. Full All-Route System Fare Recovery Ratio for Year 2005: Farebox Revenues Operating Expenses Recovery Ratio Other Funding $ 10.8 Million $ 48.4 Million 22.3 % 77.7 % ($ 37.6 Million) Note: Some additional operating revenues should be anticipated to come from ancillary sources, primarily from advertising on cars and in stations. Assuming this income at 5% of fare collections would raise the total operating recovery ratio by about 1%. However, advertising income will be dependent upon policies set by the governing agency as well as the marketplace. Policies and practices vary considerably among existing rail operations. Note: Operating and maintenance expenditures are recurring annual amounts. TheY are expected to rise by the regional rate of inflation for the life of the rail service. Tbev are further anticipated to reflect certain efficiencies from start-up conditions, resulting in savings which would partially offset inflationary effects in the early years of operation. Other recent commuter rail starts have experienced such cost reductions, generally within the first four years of service. SECTION 2. CAPITAL COSTS FOR PHASE II ROUTES Capital investment for constructing and equipping a commuter rail system is incurred on a one-time basis. The projected peak year of construction for the Twin Cities commuter facilities will be 2003. Once the capital costs are established for that year, they are fixed for the useful life of the project. The base costs for the full six-route system studied in Phase II, combining costs of materials and labor and reflecting best practices and industry standards nationally, as developed and detailed in the Capital Program Report, constitute the starting point for this section. _- DRAFT IMPLEMENTATION/BUSINESS PLAN Working Paper of September 30, 1998 -- Page 6 The base capital costs for the full system are adjusted below to take account of distribution of the amounts attributable to Route T, connecting the two downtowns, and amounts attributable to common elements, among the six radial routes. Escalation for inflation follows. The result of these steps at the outset of this section is an accounting for all system costs in year 2003 dollars to serve as the basis for the balance of this Implementation/Business Plan Paper. Base Costs in 1998 Dollars: Route A to Bethel Route B to Elk River Route H to Norwood/Young America Route L to Northfield Route N to Hastings Route S to Forest Lake $ 163 Million $ 144 Million $ 183 Million $ 252 Million $ 114 Million $ 134 Million Total Six Routes $ 990 Million (Exclusive of Route T and Common Elements) Distribution of Route T Costs in 1998 Dollars: ($ 43 Million Factored into Radial Routes Proportionate to Base Costs) Route Addition A to Bethel B to Elk River H to Norwood/Young America L to Northfield N to Hastings S to Forest Lake $ 7 Million (16%) $ 6 Million (15%) $ 8 Million (18%) $11 Million (25%) $ 5 Million (12%) $ 6 Million (14%) Total Six Routes (Exclusive of Common Elements) $ 43 Million (100%) Total 170 Million 150 Million i 91 Million 263 Million 119 Million 140 Million $ 1.033 Billion DRAFT IMPLEMENTATION/BUSINESS PLAN Working Paper of September 30, 1998 -- Page 7 Distribution of Common Elements in i998 Dollars: ($88 Million Factored into Radial Routes Proportionate to Base Costs) Route Addition Total A to Bethel $ 14 Million (16%) $ 184 Million B to Elk River $ 13 Million (15%) $ 163 Million H to Norwood/Young America $ 16 Million (18%) $ 207 Million L to Northfield $ 22 Million (25%) $ 285 Million N to Hastings $ 11 Million (12%) $ 130 Million S to Forest Lake $ 12 Million (14%) $ 152 Million Total Six Routes (Inclusive of All Capital Costs) $ 88 Million (100%) $1.121 Billion Note: Common Elements are those capital items not specific to any single route, and therefore not otherwise included in Base Costs, but providing system-wide capital assets. They are comprised of: Two Downtown Stations totaling $ 34 Million; Maintenance Facilities totaling $26 Million; Control Facilities totaling $ 3 Million; and Spare Rolling Stock totaling $ 25 Million. Total Capital Costs in 2003 Dollars: Route A to Bethel Route B to Elk River Route H to Norwood/Young America Route L to Northfield Route N to Hastings Route S to Forest Lake Total Full System $ 224 Million $ 198 Million $ 252 Million $ 347 Million $ 158 Million $ 185 Million $ 1.364 Billion The table on the following page summarizes the all-inclusive capital costs for the full system in 2003 dollars, and relates them to route mileage and ridership for~_ asts. Commuter Route Capital Costs ($2003) CostO Route Miles ($ Million) Bethel (A) 29.5 $224 ' Elk River (B) 30.8 $198 Norwood/ Young America (I t) 38.0 $252 Northfield (L) 48.3 $347 itastings (lq) 18.4 $158 l:orest Lake (S) 24.8 $185 Minneapolis - St. Paul (T) 10.4 * Total/Average 200.2 $1,364 lnchlsive of common elements Included in radial routes Cost/Mile 2005 ($ Million) Riders Cost/Rider ($ Thousand) 2020 Riders Cost/Rider ($ Thousand) $7.6 2,300 $97.4 2,800 $80.0 $6.4 3,400 $58.2 4,300 $46.0 $6.6 2,900 $86.9 3,400 $74. i $7.2 4,700 $73.8 5,800 $59.8 $8.6 2,300 $68.7 2,900 $54.5 $7.5 2,700 $68.5 3,300 $56.1 $6.8 18,300 Draft Implementation/Business Plan Working Paper of 9/30/98 -- Page 8 22,500 $74.5 $60.6 DRAFT IMPLEMENTATION/BUSINESS PLAN Working Paper of September 30, 1998 -- Page 9 The preceding table provides an overview of the basic cost and ridership numbers for each of the Phase II routes. It also provides input for the evaluation matrix in the next section of this paper, and the information for formulation of a staged implementation program. Criteria for inclusion in a first phase of development include a variety of cost-related indices, including total Capital investment and passenger projections, cost per passenger mile, benefit-cost measures, federal cost-effectiveness guidelines, coincidence with development patterns and plans, regional service balance and ease of operational implementation. Together, these indicators furnish a useful comparative approach among the routes on both technical an policy grounds. However, the capital cost per mile on its own does not provide a useful relative measure for route evaluation. It is independent of ridership and does not vary significantly among routes. It is included in the table because it is helpful in demonstrating that costs fall within anticipated levels. At $ 6.4 to $ 8.6 million per mile for constructing and equipping each of the six radial routes, including common system elements and the 10 miles of the Route T downtown connector, capital investments are within the range expected for commuter rail start-ups in the United States. And these costs are well below even simple urban transit light rail ($20 to $40 million per mile) and heavy rail ($50 to $100 million or more per mile) systems. Costs per passenger mile, factoring in projected ridership, constitute a more meaningful comparative tool. SECTION 3. INITIAL IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAMS Development all of the fidl Phase !I routes would require a near-term expenditure of nearly $1.4 billion covering capital components alone. Such a substantial front-end investment for a start-up system in a region without any recent commuter or urban rail transit experience requires examination to determine whether some of the capital costs can be reduced or deferred, and whether implementation of the system can be phased to better fit regional patterns and resources. Can any of the routes themselves he shortened initially? Can a rational staging plan call for less than all routes to be developed as a first stage? In the process, can overall capital and operating requirements be reduced substantially? Three approaches to capital cost savings are presented in this section, followed by a recommended plan. : DRAFT IMPLEMENTATION/BUSINESS PLAN Working Paper of September 30, 1998 -- Page 10 Capital Cost Savings: Truncation of Routes Examination of each of the six radial routes for productivity of capital dollars shows that, on three of them, the outermost segment of rail is expensive in relation tb riders on that link, while overall route performance is much stronger. In these instances, truncation could shorten the'routes and reduce the capital requirements, for purposes of initial program development. They are shown in the table below (all-inclusive costs in 2003 dollars): Route/Destination Capital Savings Ridership Decrease Revised Cost A to Bethel (full length) B to Ramsey (without Elk River) H to Chaska (without Cologne, Young America) L to Lakeville (without Northfield) N to Hastings (full length) S to Forest Lake (full length) Total Truncated All-Route System .................... $ 224 Million $ 26 Million 97 Riders $172 Million $ 77 Million 99 Riders $175 Million $ 82 Million 64 Riders $ 265 Million ................... $158 Million ................... $185 Million $ 185 Million 260 Riders $1.179 Billion Removal of a relatively unproductive outermost segment has considerable cost effectiveness. This is because shortening a line eliminates major expenditures for constructing substantial trackage and related systems for many miles (42 miles combined here), as well as the more modest station site expenses. This truncation of three of the six radial routes would save 14 % of capital costs, but decrease ridership by only one-tenth of that, or 1.4 %, over the full length route system. There would also be an impact on operations, reducing annual expenses by 18.6 % (to $ 39.4 Million) and fare revenues by only 1.4 % (to $10.6 Million). Truncation would generate a farebox recovery ratio of 26. 9 %, an increase frorn the fidl system ratio of 22.3%. DRAFT IMPLEMENTATION/BUSINESS PLAN Working Paper of September 30, 1998 -- Page 11 Capital Cost Savings: Station Deferrals It would also be possible to realize additional savings in the capital program, although on much more modest levels, by deferring from initial implementation construction of relatively unproductive stations on several lines. ~ these cases, feW'passenger losses are likely, as most riders would probably shift to the nearest available station. The stations that could be considered for deferral, with impacts on users and costs (2003 dollars) are: Andover on Route A -- $ 3.3 Million savings for 100 riders diverted to Cedar or McKay Lake; Chanhassen on Route H -- $ 5.0 Million savings for 80 riders to Chaska or Eden Prarie; Little Canada (35E) on Route S -- $ 4.1 Million savings for 60 riders diverted to White Bear Lake or Little Canada (694) This total of $12.4 million represents less than 1% of the system capital costs. For the two downtown stations, at $17 million each, it may be possible, as final design and implementation plans proceed, to either scale them back or to share some of those station expenditures as part of a joint development program. That would be highly dependent upon Minneapolis and Saint Paul real estate markets at the time. It may also be possible to reduce expenditures at outlying stations, or to look to local communities to provide these facilities, as practiced by some commuter rail start-ups in North America. These station cost savings or sharing possibilities are not certain enough to reduce the capital cost base: of financial analyses at this time. Capital Cost Savings: Staging of Routes In order to create an initial implementation program markedly lower in overall cost than the fidl system of $1.364 billion, or the truncated system of $1.179 billion, the routes would have to be grouped into discrete development stages. Multi-line start-up systems often take this approach. Relevant technical factors derived from capital and operating cost estimates, ridership forecasts and revenue projections are presented in the Evaluation Matrix on the following page. Policy and practical considerations are also relevant to staging, including regional service balance and railroad implementation arrangements. : DRAFT IMPLEMENTATION/BUSINESS PLAN Working Paper of September 30, 1998 -- Page 13 First Tier Recommendation A possible "First Tier" commuter rail program could comprise three of the six radiat routes and the downtown connector. Conventional industry measures, comparative technical factors and regional service considerations taken together support a First Tier composed of Routes B and L (truncated) and N (together with T). Such a grouping appears to rank better in deliverability and performance for the first stage than the other three routes. Routes A, H and S, along with the outermost segments of Routes B and L, would be candidates for a subsequent expansion study once the First Tier is constructed and operated for a reasonable period of time. Proposed First Tier System Capital Costs in 2003 Dollars: Route B to Ramsey (23 Miles) -- $195 Million; Route L to Lakeville (31 Miles) -- $ 282 Million; Route N to Hastings (18 Miles) -- $178 Million. Route T downtown Minneapolis to downtown Saint Paul (10 Miles) -- Costs in Above Truncated Routes (82 Miles) -- $ 655 Million. Note: These figures include base costs for each route, plus prorated amounts for Route T capital facilities and common system elements, adjusted to account for three radial routes. Deferral of the outermost segments of Routes B and L is again extremely cost effective. Truncation of those two routes produces savings of l 4 % in capital requirements over their fidl length inclusion in the proposed First Tier. Yet, truncation results in only a minimal decrease in ridership Of abottt 1.5%. Comparison with the full all-route system provides an overall perspectivefor thiv staging approach. This initial implementation program would be about half the size of the :oral. This proposed First Tier would entail capita[ expenditures equaling 48 % of the full system development; reducing the initial program by $ 709 million. But it would carry 56 % of the passengers forecast for the full Phase II route system, and provide a basis for expansion. Impacts on operations would also improve the revenue-expense relationship. The resulting farebox recovery ratio would be 27.8 %for the proposed First Tier (compared to 22.3 % for the fidl six-route system). TWIN CITIES METROPOLIT '1 COMMUTER RAIL STUDY PRELIMINARY PHASE II RudTE EVALUATION MATRIX ROUTE A B H L N S T CHARACTERISTICS: Bethel/ Elk River/ Young America/ Northfield/ Hastings/ Forest Lake/ Minneapofis/ Anoka County Anoka County Carver County Rice County Dakota County Wash. County St. Paul · Owners/ TC&W, CP, BNSF, CP, BNSF, Operators BNSF BNSF BNSF CP, BNSF CP CP BNSF, CP · Length 28.8 miles 30.1 miles 38.0 miles 48.3 miles 18.4 miles 24.8 miles 10.4 miles · Travel Time 54 minutes 50 minutes 62 minutes 75 minutes 29 minutes 44 minutes 24 minutes · Number of Stations 7 7 9 9 3 7 4 EVALUATION CRITERIA: Operational. Issues · Number of Road Crossings 33 25 49 61 27 37 3 · Freigh[ Utilization Significant Significant Low Low Moderate Moderate Significant Capacity Constraints Northtown Yard Northtown Yard None None None None Numerous Perceived Benefits · Ridership (2005) 2,300 daily 3,400 daily 2,900 daily 4,700 daily 2,300 daily 2,700 daily (Included in · Passenger-Miles 38,100 daily 54,300 daily 34,600 daily 84,900 daily 29,300 daily 34,400 daily other Routes) · Station-Area Land Use Potential Moderate Significant Significant Significant Moderate Significant Significant Impacts and Costs · Environmental On-Going Hazardous (Included in Impacts Minimal Minimal Remediation River Crossing Wetlands Materials other Routes) · Capital Cost (2003) $224 million $198 million $252 million $347 million $158 million $185 million · Annual O&M Cost $6.5 million $8.5 million $8.2 million $14.6 million $4.7 million $5.9 million Comparative Data 1. Benefit/Cost Ratio 0.14 0.26 0.16 0.22 0.16 0.13 (Included in 2. Net Present Value ($192 million) ($153 million) ($214 million) ($267 million) ($133 million) ($173 million) other Routes) 3 Nel Present Value/ Dollar Invested ( 1. t 8) ( 1,06) ( 1.17) ( 1.06) ( 1.16) ( 1. t8) "Average Rank I - 3 4.7 1.3 4.0 3.3 2.7 5.0 4. Cost-Ellectiveness Index $15.30 $9.09 $12.78 $10.44 $10.44 $10.59 Average Rank 1 - 4 5.0 1.2 4.3 3.3 2.5 4.8 5. Cost/Passenger- Mile $1.15 $0.92 $1.53 $1.01 $1.07 $1.12 · October 14, 1998 Draft #3-10/29/98 Commuter Rail Planning and Project Development Process i~ A Collaborative Institutional Approach !~ Northstar Corridor Model SYSTEM PLANNING --easibility Study/ Environmental Assessment Major Investment Study (MIS) BNSF Negotiations 1998-1999 PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING Design Refinement Complete NEPA Documentation BNSF Negotiations 1999-2000 Lead Agency: NCDA Lead Agencies: Supporting Agencies: Mn/DOT, Metropolitan Council, Metro Transit, St. Cloud APO and MTC, BNSF NCDA~BNSF~Mn/DOT Supporting Agencies: Mn/DOT, Metropolitan Council, Metro Transit, St. Cloud APO and MTC FINAL DESIGN Construction Plans, Specifications, Estimates Right of Way Acquisition FFGA Negotiations BNSF Negotiations 2000-2001 lNG GRANT Lead Agencies: NCDA~BNSF~Mn/DOT Supporting Agencies: Metropolitan Council, Metro Transit, St. Cloud MTC and APO CONSTRUCTION Construction management Vehicle procurement Start-up 2001-2002 Lead Agencies: NCDA~MnlDOT~ BNSF~Operating Agency Supporting Agencies: Metropolitan Council and Metro Transit, St. Cloud MTC and APO OPERATIONS Management of Service Contract Marketing Maintenance Security Funding/Liability Transit Connections 20O3 Lead Agencies: Commuter Rail Operating Agency~BNSF Supporting Agencies: Metropolitan Council and Metro Transit, St. Cloud MTC, NCDA October 7, 1998 Mary Richardson Richardson, Richter & Associates Inc. 413 Wacouta Street 200 Gilbert Building St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 Dear Ms. Richardson: At the Watab Township Board meeting on Tuesday, October 6, 1998, the Township Board voted to become a participant in the Northstar Corridor Authority. The Watab Township Board formally requests to be a member of the Northstar Corridor Authority. Your attention to our request is appreciated. Sincerely, Steve Peka Watab Township Board Northstar Corridor Summary of Open Houses October 20 - 22 - 27, 1998 Date Location Number Number of Comments of Written Attendees Comments October 20 Elk River 80 13 15 people had positive comments for a commuter rail system and four stressed it should come as soon as possible Good timing for commuter rail now Need to consider commuter rail impacts if Elk River is trying to slow area growth Will Met Council require the area to provide "Affordable Housing"? Concerned about impacts to personal home Commuter rail is appropriate as population ages During rush hours, transit is faster, more comfortable and less stressful than driving in an auto (2 people) Expand service schedule (2 people) and include a Sunday/Holiday schedule Experience in Chicago (2 people)confirms that if trains available people will use them Provide adequate parking at stations Commuter rail will be good for the taxi industry Consider energy savings of commuter rail Good presentation October 22 Fridley 40 6 All comments were positive for a commuter rail system Commuter rail would improve economic growth of Bethel Check out station location at Anoka Technical College, will college stay at existing lcoation? Interest in land use compatible with commuter rail stations October 27 St. Cloud 45 12 All comments were positive towards a commuter rail system, (5 people said the sooner the better) Commuter rail is equally important for students and employees Develop week-end schedule to events and entertainment Develop feeder service from station to place of employment Continue to evaluate appropriate time schedule to match commuter work times (2 people) Reasonable ticket prices Extend line to Rice (3 people) Provide week-end schedule for Rice Is there available funding Include snowmobile and ATV parking Develop a bike path along entire route Consider DMU's for future flexibility Consider extensions/connections to Fargo-Moorhead, Brainerd, Duluth, Mayo Clinic Consider impacts to commuter airlink Calculate cost savings due to gasoline not used by autos (2 people) Consider bicycle racks (2 people) Total 165 31