4.4. SR 03-15-1999
.
Item # 4 . 4 .
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Mayor and City Council
Scott Harlicker, Planning Assista..~'/
March 15, 1999
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT: Update on Northstar Corridor
Project
At the March 4th meeting of the Northstar Corridor Development Authority,
the Authority approved a report regarding different transportation
alternatives considered and screened during the first phase of the Major
Investment Study (MIS). The Authority also discussed the work schedule for
phase 2 of the MIS and received updates on the Burlington Northern capacity
modeling and legislative activity.
.
The study of alternatives, which is included in your packet, involved
reviewing as many possible alternatives as could be identified. Transit
technologies considered included bus system improvements and seven
different rail systems. The commuter rail, bus and light rail transit were the
three transit technologies to be studied further. Highway improvement
options were also evaluated. Highway options ranged from minor signal and
intersection improvements to the construction of freeways and bypasses.
Highway options recommended for further study included additional
Mississippi River crossings, access management and minor improvements to
Highway 10.
BRW presented their work schedule for completing the MIS and the EIS. The
schedule, which is included in your packet, includes Phase 2 of the MIS,
special projects, which includes station design, ridership projections and
capacity modeling, environmental clearance, and conceptual engineering. The
scheduled complete date for phase 2 of the MIS is December 1999. Most of the
special studies are scheduled to be completed by December 1999.
Environmental clearance is to be completed by December 2000 and
conceptual engineering completed by July 2000.
Burlington Northern capacity modeling is moving forward and it looks like
the State will be providing the necessary funding to leverage future federal
funding.
.
.
.
.
, FEB 23 '99 18:15 It .6122412101
FROH-RICHARDSON,RITCHER &ASSOC.
T-115 P.03/03 F-192
tIAi 0 1 1999
Northstar Conidor Development Authority
Thursday, March 4, 1999
4:30 p.m.
Sherburne County Courthouse
Elk River, MN
~I
1. Minutes of February 4, 1999 Meeting. Approval
2. MIS: Universe of Alternatives. Approval
3. Commuter Rail: Update on Capacity Modeling Information
4.
Executive Committee Report
a. BRW Work Program, Team and Schedule
b. MnJDOT Work Program for St. Cloud
Extension.
c. Contract Amendment #1 to BNSF
Agreement for Capacity Modeling,
Extending the Term to April 30, 1999
d. Request for Membership by Langola Twp*
e. Legislative Update
6. Overview of California Commuter Rail Systems.
Policy Makers and staff
7. Other
a. APTA 1999 Commuter Rail I Rapid Transit
Conference (May 22-27, Toronto)
b. Next Meeting: April 1 , 1999
*Attachad
Enclosed: Revised Northstar Directory
Consider
Executive
Committee
Recommendation
Discussion
Information
~
.
DRAFT
DRAFT
DRAFT
NORTHST AR CORRIDOR DEVELOPMENT AUTHOrITY
Regular Meeting Minutes
February 4. 1999
The Northstar Corridor Development Authority met on February 4, 1999, at 4:30 p.m. at
the Sherburne County Government Center, Elk River, Minnesota.
The following members. alternates and citizens were present:
.
Lynn George, Betsy Wergin, Tim Yantos, Stephanie Eiler, Yvonne Chaillet, Peter
Beberg, Robert Kirclucer, Dave Saunders, Dick Wolsfeld, Mike Christen, Jean Keely,
Vic Ovialt, Glenis Luedke, Paul Goenner, Terry Nagorski, Paul McCarron, Steve
Billings, Jim Dickinson, Duane Grandy, Jerry Leese, Jerry Donlin, Paul Ostrow, Walt
Fehst, Don Jolly, Duane Cekalla, Carl Yilek, John Norgren, Lewis Stark, Arne Engstrom,
Scott Harlicker, Ewald Petersen, Mark Stenglein, Dan Erhart, Mary Richardson, John
Blaha, Gary Erickson, Lynn Caswell, Tom Cruikshank, Ronald Juenemann, Rick Speak,
Jim Barton, Gary Hammer, Tom Gamec, David Loch, Pat Cairns
1. Chairperson Wergin called the meeting to order at 4:30 p.m.
2. A motion was made by Duane Grandy, seconded by Jerry Leese and carried
unanimously to approve the agenda of February 4, 1999, with no additions and
the meeting minutes of January 7, 1999, regular meeting minutes as amended.
3. Ken Stevens reported on the tour of the California Commuter Rail System which
many members visited in January, 1999. There is a policy-maker tour scheduled
for February 18-21, 1999, Los Angeles and San Diego for those members
interested in attending with one-half of the cost to be reimbursed by the Authority
to the governmental authority.
4. Dick Wolsfeld, BRW, Inc. reviewed the key elements of the Phase II Technical
Work Program for completing the Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study and
Environmental Impact Statement for the proposed Commuter Rail Service dated
January 29, 1999.
.
DRAFT
DRAFT
DRAFT
.
NORTHST AR CORRIDOR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Regular Meeting Minutes
February 4, 1999
Page 2
5. Executive Committee Report:
a. A revised 1999 budget was distributed indicating an amount of $5,200,000
(dated February 4,1999).
A motion was made by Paul McCarron, seconded by Pat Cairns and
carried unanimously to approve the recommendation of the Executive
Committee to approve the Revised 1999 NCDA budget in the amount of
$5,200,000.
b.
A motion was made by Gerry Donlin, seconded by Pat Cairns and
carried unanimously to approve the recommendation of the Executive
Committee to authorize the staff to:
.
. Complete negotiations with BR W to perform the scope of
work outlined in Attached B, for an amount not to exceed
$2,755,500, Chair to execute the final negotiated Agreement.
(Contract agreement will go to the Executive Committee for their
recommendation to the full Authority. )
c. A motion was made by Duane Grandy, seconded by John Norgren, and
carried unanimously to approve the recommendation of the Executive
Committee to approve Resolution #99-2 for the Northstar Corridor
Development authority to enter into a contract with the State of
Minnesota, Department of Transportation to make $5,000,000 state and
federal funds available to the NCDA for the purpose of completing the
Major investment Study and undertaking the environmental clearance,
engineering and negotiations with Burlington Northern Sata Fe for
implementation of commuter rail and other transportation improvements
in the Northstar Corridor and authorize the chair or financial manager to
executive requests for reimbursement from the Minnesota Department of
Transportation.Mn/DOT Funding Agreement.
.
.
DRAFT
DRAFT
DRAFT
NORTHST AR CORRIDOR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Regular Meeting Minutes
February 4, 1999
Page 3
d. A motion was made by Paul McCarron, seconded by Jerry Leese and
carried unanimously to request that the Executive Committee prepare an
RFP for Public Information Services (included in the 1999 budget) and
present to the NCDA for consideration.
e. A motion was made by Paul McCarron, seconded by Duane Grandy and
carried unanimously to request that the Executive Committee prepare a list
for consideration by the NCDA of qualified legal professionals with the
appropriate technical expertise needed to assist in the negotiations with
BNSF.
f.
A motion was made by Paul McCarron, seconded by Ewald Peterson and
carried unanimously to approve the Executive Committee
recommendation that the NCDA undertake the environmental work
necessary to ensure a connection between the Northstar Corridor and the
Hiawatha Corridor.
.
g. It was noted that the NCDA received a request for stations in Coon Rapids
and Columbia Heights.
6. Paul McCarron provided a brief legislative update and urged members to continue
meeting and discussing issues with their state representatives.
7. The next meeting ofthe Northstar Corridor Development Authority is scheduled
for Thursday, March 4, 1999, at 4:30 p.m. at the Sherburne County Government
Center.
8. The Chairperson declared the meeting adjourned at 5:55 p.m.
Betsy Wergin Chairperson
Date
.
H:\ADMNDA T A\COMMITTE\CORRIDOR\1 999\\020499.DOC
.
EXHIBIT A
REVISED
WORK PLAN FOR THE
EXTENSION OF THE NORTHST AR CORRIDOR
MAJOR INVESTMENT STUDY
WEST OF ST. CLOUD
.
FEBRUARY 9, 1999
.
II ~~~~~-..
Task 1: Public
Involvement
Task 2: Commuter Rail
Alternative
BRW, Inc.
n25092
Wark Plan
.
The Work Plan that follows is composed of the following tasks in order
to complete an extension study west of downtown St. Cloud. The
Work Plan follows the basic outline of the original scope of work that
was prepared for the Northstar Corridor from downtown Minneapolis
to St. Cloud. However, the Major Investment Study (MIS) does not
need to be extended since the original MIS study does take into account
travel characteristics and needs into Stearns County. The following
areas will be a part of this extension study: Breckenridge switching
yards, Crossroads Shopping Center area, the former BNSF yards/ car
shop in Waite Park and downtown St. Joseph. Estimates of system
usage, costs, and public interest in having stations in these locations
will be gauged consistent with the current study.
1. Public Involvement
2. Commuter Rail Alternative Analysis (which includes stations,
patronage, track engineering, operating and maintenance costs,
capital costs, and BNSF integration)
3. Products /Deliverables
4. Management Plan and Schedule
The public involvement program will follow the program that was seja,
up as part of the Northstar Corridor MIS and Commuter Rail .
Feasibility Study work program. The public involvement process that
is currently being implemented will continue to be used for the
completion of the extension study. The mailings and materials that are
currently being sent out will be expanded to include the extension
study area.
Additionally, a planning forum will be held in the St. Cloud
metropolitan area to discuss potential station locations and a system
operating plan. The planning forum will be used to pose questions to
stakeholders, business people, and politicians on their view of what
type of service is needed in the area west of downtown St. Cloud.
A.
Railroad Coordination
Railroad coordination that is currently being conducted as part of the
Northstar Corridor MIS and Commuter Rail Feasibility Study will be
expanded to include the area west of downtown St. Cloud and to the
area of St. Joseph. The purpose of this task is to ensure that throughout
the course of the extension study a continuing and productive exchange
of information is maintained among the BNSF, the Project Team, and
local government jurisdictions.
.
1
Exhibit A-Revised Work Plan for the Extension pf the
Nortlzstar Corridor MIS west of St. Cloud
.
.
.
Work Plan
Continued
B. Engineering and Capital Costing
This task will follow the same course as is being completed as part of
the Northstar Corridor MIS and Commuter Rail Feasibility Study. The
same assumptions will be used that are being implemented in the MIS.
Many of these assumptions are based on those in the Mn/DOT
Regional Phase 2 Commuter Rail engineering, operations and cost
estimating work.
Dispatch Planning Model (DPM)
The work outlined and being implemented for this task in the
Northstar Corridor MIS and Commuter Rail Feasibility Study will be
used in the extension study. With the assistance of David Mahle and
the work of BNSF Railroad staff the output of the DPM will be used to
analyze the impact of additional trains on service and on the need for
track improvements.
The following tasks will be completed: provide input to BNSF on the
proposed Commuter Rail service, work with the BNSF staff to assure
understanding of the Commuter Rail service plans, review the initial
model outputs from the BNSF DPM, work with BNSF staff to jointly
define track improvements and/ or signal improvements to create
potentially needed capacity in the most cost-effective manner, request
additional model runs as necessary, review and comment on the
implications for track improvements, request additional model runs
with different operational parameters/track plans as necessary, gain
concurrence with BNSF on the Commuter Rail service plan and
required track improvements and/ or signal improvements.
Civil Facilities
The work outlined and being implemented for this task in the
Northstar Corridor MIS and Commuter Rail Feasibility Study will be
used in the extension study. Conceptual engineering will be completed
for the civil facilities that are agreed to as a result of the analysis of the
DPM output.
Cost estimates will be developed with input from the BNSF Railroad
and from cost data developed by the BRW Team on similar projects.
Deliverables will include cost estimating methodology, detailed cost
backup materials, and cost summary tables.
BRW, Inc.
Exhibit A-Revised Work Plan for tlze Extension of the
Northstar Corridor MIS west of St. Cloud
#25092
2
Work Plan
Continued
.
Stations
Preliminary station locations for the Northstar Commuter Rail service
will be identified and input into the rail operations analysis; it is
expected that BNSF will provide input on the station locations.
Conceptual site plans will be prepared for two stations for the
extension study area.
Maintenance and Service Facilities
Define assumptions for maintenance and service facilities. Determine
location and design of end of line layover and light service facilities as
well as considerations for major maintenance of vehicles. Conceptual
site plans will be prepared for one additional end of line facility.
Systems Engineering and Costing
The work outlined and being implemented for this task in the
Northstar Corridor MIS and Commuter Rail Feasibility Study will be
used in the extension study. This will place emphasis on achieving the
best match with the local railroad operating environment, forecast .
demand, and a reasonable assessment of a probable project budget.
Fare Collection
The work outlined and being implemented for this task in the
Northstar Corridor MIS and Commuter Rail Feasibility Study will be
used in the extension study. The fare collection systems evaluated for
the Northstar Corridor will be consistent with the operating concepts
developed for the study.
Signals and Communications
The work outlined and being implemented for this task in the
Northstar Corridor MIS and Commuter Rail Feasibility Study will be
used in the extension study. The railroad signal system is a key
determinant of the operating capacity and potential operating speed of
a railroad.
Specific elements to be determined for the extension study area will
include: signal system layout and configuration; headway, speed and
capacity capability of the existing system; location and configuration of
central control; location and operation of interlockings; and type and
level of communications system in place. .
BRW, Inc.
#25092
3
Exhibit A-Revised Work Plall for the Extension of the
Northstar Corridor MIS west of St. Cloud
.
.
.
Work Plan
Continued
c. Operations Planning and Costing
Develop Preliminary Operating Plans
The work outlined and being implemented for this task in the
Northstar Corridor MIS and Commuter Rail Feasibility Study will be
used in the extension study. As in the initial study this task will be
completed in two phases. In the first phase the operating plan will be
developed to coordinate with the main segments of the corridor at a
conceptual level of detail. In the second phase, a refined operating plan
will be developed after the DPM is run.
Estimate Operating and Maintenance Costs
The annual operations and maintenance (O&M) costs will be estimated
as is being completed in the Northstar Corridor MIS and Commuter
Rail Feasibility Study. The estimation of operating and maintenance
costs for the extension study will only be completed for the Commuter
Rail alternative odor all MIS alternatives with a bus component. The
BRW Team will develop resource build-up cost models consistent with
FT A guidelines for commuter rail and other selected modes.
Bus O&M Cost Model
The bus O&M cost model developed to estimate costs of all bus service
in the study region will be completed as it is being completed in the
Northstar Corridor MIS and Commuter Rail Feasibility Study. The bus
operating and maintenance cost model for the extension study will only
be completed for the Commuter Rail alternative or for all MIS
alternatives with a bus component. Additionally, the bus O&M cost
model will be based on current expenses and operations. The bus
O&M cost model will additionally be used to analyze possible bus
service from Collegeville to the possible commuter rail end of line in St.
Joseph.
Commuter Rail O&M Cost Model
The same methodology being used for this task in the Northstar
Corridor MIS and Commuter Rail Feasibility Study will be used for the
extension study to St. Joseph. The commuter rail model will be
expanded for the study area using local wage rates and fringe benefits,
non-labor unit costs, and assumptions regarding the administration
and operation of the rail system.
BRW, Inc.
Exhibit A-Revised Work Plan for the Extension of the
Northstar Corridor MIS west of St. Cloltd
#25092
4
Work Plan
Continued
.
O&M Cost Estimates
The same methodology being used for this task in the Northstar
Corridor MIS and Commuter Rail Feasibility Study will be used for the
extension study to St. Joseph. With the O&M cost models calibrated in
previous tasks, O&M costs will be estimated in the extension study area
for the Commuter Rail alternative or for all MIS alternatives with a bus
component by inputting the appropriate operating statistics and system
characteristics of the alternatives in the analysis year.
D. Detailed Ridership Forecasting
The same methodology being used for this task in the Northstar
Corridor MIS and Commuter Rail Feasibility Study will be used for the
extension study to St. Joseph. The ridership forecasting model will be
expanded to include the area west of downtown St. Cloud to St. Joseph
or possibly to Collegeville. Thc St. Cloyd A TP'" Planning Orgaftiz8fiCJu'ti
tr;Jv.e] ~emaf,ld mQ<h~1 anJ ulller tlertinent data will b~ 11.3ed to ~QIt1FIQtQ
~ The forecasting process will take into account a full
understanding of the characteristics of existing travel in the corridor.
The same forecast years will be developed and analyzed as is being .
developed in the Northstar Corridor MIS and Commuter Rail
Feasibility Study.
The following work tasks will be completed:
· Modification of the zone system outside of the Twin Cities
metropolitan area to add sufficient detail around proposed
additional stations.
· Reevaluating work trip in new zones based on census journey
to work data as done in the original Northstar commuter rail
work.
· Adding detail to the highway network and transit network
around potential new stations.
· Rerunning models as completed during the original Northstar
commuter rail work.
. Addressing potential rail trips from student population around
new stations without the use of a model but using the
consultant's "best judgment".
· Preparing a summary of results.
.
#25092
5
Exhibit A-Revised Work Plan for the Extension of the
Northstar Corridor MIS west of St. Cloud
BRW, Inc.
.
.
.
Work Plan
Continued
E. Social, Economic, Land Use and Environmental Analysis
Economic and Development Implications
The same methodology and analysis being used for this task in the
Northstar Corridor MIS and Commuter Rail Feasibility Study will be
used for the extension study to St. Joseph of the Commuter Rail
alternative. Many times transportation investments in a corridor which
connect small towns, suburbs, and developing areas with a major city
accomplish more than merely moving people quicker and more
efficiently.
Environmental Screening Analysis
The same methodology and analysis being used for this task in the
Northstar Corridor MIS and Commuter Rail Feasibility Study will be
used for the extension study to St. Joseph. An environmental screening
analysis will be conducted of likely environmental and social effects of
the commuter rail alternative.
The screening analysis will be summarized in a technical memorandum
sufficient to include in a subsequent state or federal environmental
document.
F. Financial Analysis
The same methodology and analysis being used for this task in the
Northstar Corridor MIS and Commuter Rail Feasibility Study will be
used for the extension study to St. Joseph. The capital and operating
costs of the alternatives, as well as the expected revenues produced by
these alternatives will be determined in other elements of the study.
Task 3: Deliverables
The following deliverables will be produced.
.
Commuter Rail Alternative Report, including (Task 2):
- Capital Cost Estimate
- Typical Plan/Profile Drawings and Typical Cross-Sections
- Signal System Assessment
- Operating Plan
- Operating and Maintenance Cost Estimate
- Ridership Forecast Technical Report
- Revised Financial Analysis Technical Memorandum for the
extension study area
BRW, Inc.
Exhibit A-Revised Work Plan for the Extension of the
Northstar Corridor MIS west of St. Cloud
#25092
6
Task 4: Management Plan
and Schedule
BRW,Illc.
#25092
Work Plan
Continued
.
The following is a framework for the Management Plan for the
extension of the Northstar Corridor project west of downtown St.
Cloud to downtown 51. Joseph.
· Coordinate with the NCDA Project Management Team and
appropriate staff on a regular basis to discuss work products
and project schedule.
· Refine the scope of work, if necessary, based on changing
project conditions.
· Give technical direction to and coordinate with the various
disciplines and specialists working on the project.
· Coordinate with the Project Management Team to expand the
public participation program into the extension study area.
.
Assure the project work program is completed on time and
within budget.
.
.
Prepare monthly progress reports.
It is assumed that the extension study from west of downtown St.
Cloud to downtown St. Joseph will be completed in coordination with
the Northstar Corridor MIS and Commuter Rail Feasibility Study.
Where scheduling constraints arise, the extension area analysis may be
completed following the currently defined corridor analysis.
.
7
Exhibit A-Revised Work Plall for the Extension of the
Northstar Corridor MIS west of St. Cloud
.
.
.
.c
c:l.
...
'"
o
....
~
.s
>.
'l:l
::l
~
C
o
'r;;
c
...
-
l(
~
>.
'l:l
::l
~
C
...
oS
'"
...
~
c
-
...
o
'..,
~
::;
...
o
'l:l
'i:
...
o
U
...
.s
'"
.s
...
o
Z
c
~ S
.s s
~<
-
'"
.~
E ~
Q., ::l
~
-
-
c
C ::l
o 0
-6 s
~<
c..
0:;
::l
; ~
::; S
:::
C
::l
.c 0
.~ S
~<
...
::l
::
~ ~
o
...
-
ac~
'5 e
~<
'~
~
~ ~
I"" ::l
..:l:=
C
::l
o
<.i S
.5<
~
~--
~
::l
o
:::
-
...
COlI
'l:l
::l
g:
'l:l
...
'"
o
c:l.
o
...
Q.,
c
.S:
a
'i:
'"
'"
...
Q
.:.:
'"
~
E-<
o
o
ci
o
o
00
888888
~~~~~~
.nr'00a\.n~
-
~
0\
00
~~~~~~
r-N\C\C\C<"'l
~r-r-O\I/')<"'l
-
o
o
ci
N
.n
~
I/')
000
000
cicici
01/')0\
oo~
oONN
~~~
I/') <"'l 00
00 N N
000
000
cicici
ON 00
O-~
~..oN
~~~
I/') --
N I/') N
o
o
ci
o
o
00
000000
000000
cicicicicici
000001/')-
~6~~~1/')
~
C\
00
~~~~~~
N-"""-("')\O
N N - ('f'l
c
..,
E
..,
>
'0
>
..=
,~
:c
:::l
0-
~
<;j
c
..,
E
c
8
';;
~ ~~ tij
:0 g 'E; 'c ~ -g
.~ .~ 8 a .= ~u' '"
u...:: 0: tIluC'3 "Vi
'l:l -g 'l:l .., 'E ~
'@ 0 ~ a 6 g ~
': (3 ,:: :g ~ 8 <(
~ ~ i5 .9 .- UJ c;
~ 0 ~ (::i -e -: 'u
~ ~ 'bi ~ ~ 'G ;
(3~tijoQ2c55J:
0<a:i0ci~u.:
<'1 If: I : :
o
o
ci
o
o
r'
~
N
r-
o
o
ci
<"'l
o
N
~
r-
-
o
o
ci
r-
0\
..,;
~
I/')
I/')
'"
..,
:c
e
..,
,~
Cj
Cl
-.
'"
~
-i5
o
c:
~
<"'l
o
o
g
o
o
-
~
\C
o
o
o
ci
o
o
N
~
r-
-
o
o
ci
o
q
00
~
0\
00
c
co
a:
c
..,
E
..,
bIl
co
C
co
~
o
..t
8
~
N
r-
~
r-
~
r-
0\
0\
J;
~
'"
o
o
ci
N
-
.n
~
I/')
o
o
ci
~
I/')
N
-
~
I/')
<"'l
-
o
o
ci
<"'l
\C
.n
-
~
o
<"'l
-
o
o
ci
r-
oO
<"'l
~
o
<"'l
~
"0
E-<
.
.
.
I
FE8 23 '99 18:31 TO-6122412707
FROH-RICHARDSON,RITCHER &ASSOC.
Febtuary 11th. 1999
,
, -
T-776 P.03/03 F-193
v-O.- --..~ 't - .
The Langola. Township Board of Supervisors would like to have a supervisor from our
Township on the Northstar Corridor Development Board.
Our nomination to that seat is Gerald Goebel. Gerald bas served many years as a Town
Board Supcrvi!ot' 4Dd bas been involved in plalming commission meetinas and committees
1oca.l1y in Benton County.
Please welcome him as a representative of our Township w"ith a seat on the Northstar
Corridor Board.
Thank You for your consideration.
Sincerely.
The ola To
Cbairman., Robert Hohmann
/-3~D - 3ef ~ - :2-?~-o
.
.-5
""C
aJ
...c
u
V)
c:
o
',p
l'tJ
+-I
c:
aJ
E
aJ
-
0..
E
.
'-
'-
""C 0
aJU
'-
'- '-
aJ l'tJ
"+- +-I
aJ tn
'-...c
Q.+oJ
'-
>-0
~z
U aJ
O...c
--J+oJ
aJ '-
...c 0
+-I "+-
'-
o
"+-
'-
o
""C
>-
0.0
aJ
+-I
l'tJ
'-
+-I
V)
+-I
c:
aJ
E
+-I
tn
aJ
>
c:
c:
o
.-
+-I
l'tJ
+-I
'-
o
0..
tn
c:
l'tJ
~
;::~mm::~i::::::~:::W:~:~~?i:~~:~~:::::~t.:~;:::~::~:;:~~:r::;:r:;::{:r:t~;?:;~:~:::{~:::::::::::~:::~~~:::::~::;:::::~::~;:~:;::::r.<<:~:::::~~1:.@~:;:::;:::::::~:::i~::::m;::::::::::~~~:::
~ ~ U
..... ..... .....
::: ::: :::
v v v
.....
:::
0 0 0
~ ~ l-
0... 0... 0...
..... ..... ....
::: ::: :::
- -
>- >- >-
~ (';l (';l
~ ~ ~
"'0 "'0 "'0
(';l (';l ~
0 0 0
,.; ~ ~
-
......,.,;........... ::::::::::::::~:;::::::::::::::: ::::::;:::;:::::::::::;~:;;:;:;;:
C/J
-
~
-
-
v
Vl
(';l
..c
0...
.................. ...........,..-..... ;::::;:;::::::::~:::~:;~:;~::::::~: :::::::::::::;:::::::;:::i::~{::::::;~::::~;:::~ ::::;:;::;::::;~::::::~::::::;:::::::~::::::::::::;8:::::::;::~:::;:~::~::
::::::::::m:::::
~~ :.:.:::::::::::::.::::}.::::::~::::::;:
:::::::::;::::::::{:::::::':'::::~::::::::.:.:::~:;::::::::::::
C/J
-
~
-
v
Vl
~
..c
0...
~ ~
..... .....
::: :::
v v
..... ....
::: :::
v
...
""""""""""""""",\%", """'""""",',',',,.,.,.,...........
t::
(';l ~
~ ~
c =
o 0
.....
.....
(';l
.....
~
o
.....
.....
(';l
.....
~
o
"""""""""",.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,,,.,,.,.,.,............ IW'"
v
.....
~
S
....
:::
o
U
:::;:;;:;::;:;:;;;::::;:::;;;;:;:;:::;::;:::;::::;:::::;:::::::::;;;.::
:.,.;...;.;.:...:...:.;.....;.;.....;.:..,....;.;.:.;:;.;.;:::,::;.;:.
,
:.8 ~:
, ~
:~ ~
: &~~
:e:::V
'*
,
(';l
.-
l-<
V
.....
.-
~
U
Vl
t::
1]..8 ~
C/J : 1:: ~
:>' c _.
:> ' ;::... ;:::
V' ",...,
Z:e:::V
,*
I
.;;;;;;::;:;:~:;;;:;::::::::::.:.:
C/J
-
~
I
,
'e",
I...... '"
I...... ~
: ~ ~
,~o
: e::: CJ
:*
.....
:::
v
.....
-
-
V
l-
';:.:-:.Z:;:'-,-
U
2
:- ~
~ v
~U
,...
~ :: ..!:
tor. ~ ~
~ 0 ....
0"" U
iI_m""
N
o
o
N
..-
o
o
N
o
o
o
N
;tm:::::;:;::;;;:::;:;'"
en
en
en
-
::;:::;~:::::::;:;::;::::~:::;:;:;;:~:::;::;::;;;:::i::::n~;:m~::.-::;;?:~::::;::;:::~::?::?:::~:::;:::::::t:::;;:~::;:;;;::;f*:::::::::::::::::::~::
::::w:::::;::::::n:::::::;::::~::::~;::::?:::t:t:~:::w~n~::::;::f~:~:~~:::::::::::::m::~;::;:;:m::::m:{::::m~.:~*t:?:m:
..-
.....
(';l
~
;';':';::':':':':':':':';':':"';';':'.
::;;:;;::;:;;::;::;:::;;:~:::::;:
ex>
en
en
-
:::::::m;:;:::$;::::r~::::::::?;:;;;::;::~.;:?:~;:::::~:~?*::::;:::::::::::;:::~:~:;::::w::?:~?x~::~:?:~:::::::::~:::::@::-*mm:~:::::::::;;:?:::::::~{:::;::::::~1:.:::::::r;;:::::::::;m:::::;::::3.:~
.:::::%$::::::::::;;;:::;;::::::~::::{@w0.:::&;$;::::::::::::~~;::-=::.:::::::;;;#::::::::::::::H:::;:::::;:;;::::::::;::::~:::::::::~::~:::::::~:::?~;~:m$.:r.~:::;~::;::::m-:::::;:
.
.
-
'-0
'-0
CXI
$:
=
.........
U
o
..-j
n
o
3
3
c
...,.
(b
""'l
"'0
C
0-
......
_.
n
~
=
0..
t:'
~
_.
......
:::::::;j:N~::x::: ::~~::::r;:;::.@~:;:::::;:;":;:::::::::~~;:::
aq
(b
=
n
'-<
-
~
......
~
3
(b
=
...,.
Ir ':S!.: C
0..~'"O
......J = 0..
~ V> ~
-......J ...,.
:P5"(b
_ 0
= I'-t)
g-?:
o..aq
(b o'
z =
o e:..
5-~
:::;:::;:::>>'-:::"**":1:;-<<;;$ *~*m::~~::;:;:::;:;:;:::;:;::-..%-::~:~"*:::~:::::::e .:.:~ :::::~~
~ V>
""'l '"0
n ~
o ...,.
""'l ~
""'l _.
_. 0
g. =
""'l
r 'Tl
_.
(b =
...,. ~
...,. =
(b
""'l n
_.
0 ~
I'-t) ......
n "'0
......
0 ~
3 =
3
_.
...,.
3
(b
::l
...,.
-
'-0
'-0
'-0
,,' """:~"""~"""'~:""~~~~"""" ,;\;
_.
...,.
::r
t;j
Z
C/)
'Tl
tv
o
o
o
tv
o
o
-
............1.......
,.,.:.,.,.,.,.~ .~
.......;;, \JwI
aq Z
~ C/)
(b 'Tl
=
..... ""0
(b ""'l
=,(b
t""'tl~
,=
'.....
,_.
,=
'~
''''''l
:'-<
I
........................................'......
........................
.....................................~........
~::::~:::::;:~~::::;:::::~:::&~: :~:~~m~::::::;::.;~<<:::::::::::~::;:;::;:::: .........~
::::::::~:~:::::::
';;:;::::::::~
tv
o
o
t.N
'::<:,:::::::::;:::;:;:::?::;:;'
:::::::~ ,", :............w
tc
Z
C/)
'Tl
'Tl
S'
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""'e.,."""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""'"
>-
ni
(b
=
.....
(b
.....
.....
...,.
'Tl
E=
tv
o
o
tv
'Tl
:::
=
~
=
aq
CJ
""'l
n ~
o ...,.
6l >-
...,. aq
""'l ""'l
C (b
n (b
""",g,;""""",EL~"",,,,,,,,;
= g
...,.
;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;::::;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:::::;:;:;:::;::
""""""""""""""""""""'''~''''''''~'*~
(b
::r
_.
n
......
(b
>-
V>
V>
(b
3
0-
--<
o~
.'4':O"~"""~",*":""",,
(b (b
= =
.....
j(b
V>
...,.
_.
=
'of
." ............... ........
.. ...,...v....._..~........
.;.' ..;.:.;...;...~;,:.;.:.:...:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.;.
;:;:~;:;~:;.-r~~~:;:::::~:;:~;;;:;~::::::::::~;;;;:~;::;:;r
......,..................................~
......................
:::;;;:~:~.....;.;.:.:.;.:.:.:.:.:.:.:...:.:...;.;.:.;.:.:.;.;...;.;.;.:.:.:~
tTl tTl
= =
<: aq
a' s'
= (b
= ~
..... ......
(b =
= aq
...,.
e:..01
~~
~..~
"""""""""""""'0
""'l
...,.
~l~
...0
C
(b
V>
...,.
...,.
o
"'0
-
n ~
~ 2.
e; =
""""""""""'''''''' ""'"~,,,,,,,,,,,,,~@,,J):Q'B"@
=
n
(b
tTl
~
a'
=
3
(b
=
...,.
~
......
C/)
...,.
~
o.
o
=
>-
""'l
(b
~
~I~
~ 0
_. (b
""'l V>
o _.
= aq
= =
..... ~
(b o.
= 0
fJ =
...... >-
n V>
(b r
~ (b
""'l ~
"""~m""'"''''"''''''l''~'''''~''''@x''';:~''~:;''''m'''"",;;
(b aq
(b
=
n
'-<
r
~
=
0..
c::
V>
(b
>-
=
~
--<
V>
_.
V>
~
o
(b
V>
ciQ'
=
::;::;::;:::;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:::::::;:;:;:::;:::::::::;:::;:::;:;:;:;:;:;:::::;:::;:::::::;:;:;:;:;:;:;:::;:;:::;:;:::::::;:;:;:;:::;:;:::;:;:::::;:;:::;:;:;;:~:
tTl
=
aq
_.
=
(b
(b
""'l
S'
qq
-
=
_.
...,.
_.
~
...,.
(b
tTl
.....
.....
C1Q
_.
.....
.....
""""""~,.,""""z.,..........
""'l
_.
=
rJq
o
(b
V>
ciQ'
=
8::
,.,.~,.,.,
(b
:r-
_.
Q...
(b
~
a
n
:::
""'l
(b
=
.....
(b
.....
.....
...,.
::;:::;:;:;:::;:::;:::;:;:::~m::::;;::::~:::'t~::::'::::':;::~;;::;~:;:::;::~~~:r:-;.~;:~:~~ :.:.;.~:.:.:
. .... ........... .
.....-..........,................~.....
............................................................................~
:;:;:;:;:;:::;:;:;:::;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:::;:;:;:;:::::::;:::;:;:;:::::::::;:;:::::::;:::;:::::::::::;:;:::::;:;:;:::;:;:::;:;;::;:;;;;;:;:;:::::{~::~:::::;::
;.:.;.:.:-: :;:;:;:;:;:;:;:~;~:::;:;:::;:~:::::~;;:~:;::~~~ili::::::::~::;::::::~~:;;:;:::;:;::
*"
tTlo
= (b
<: n
...... ......
a V>
= o'
3 =
(b 0
~ =
~
......
>-
'"0
'"0
a
llJ
n
::r
;::;:;:;::~::::::::;:::::::::::;:;:
,
I
...:
;::0'
g~ :
_"1:::,
,- <::> I
V<:l ... ,
~ ~.
~ 0':
,
I
,
I
...:
n;::O: Z
2~:(b
r- <::> I ~
~ .., I <;
r"\i .......,
t: 0': ~
,~
''''''l
, ...,.
V>
I
I
...'
,
nit:
2~1
~ 2:
"""': ......
0; -..'
~ '::i'
I
I
,
::::::::::::::::::::~:::::::::
::;::::::::::::::~::::::::.:
"'0
::r
~
V>
(b
*"
"'0 $: 5"
::r ~.::;.'
~ O~'
(b ""'l O.
_ -0
o ~ =
I'-t) (b0
Z ~I'-t)
o 3 Z
;:+ g 0
::r ...,.;:+
~ C/) 6l""
",a:;;;,'~:;'=~;'e~"'<'s-~=""""'"
?' 0.. ""'l
:=: '-< n
C/) 0
""'l
""'l
s.:
o
""'l
n
""'l
_.
...,.
(b
""'l
_.
~
-
-
o
I'-t)
Z
o
""'l
...,.
::r
V>
...,.
~
""'l
-r
=0
<: f]
(b:::::
v>'-<
""''''0
3 ~
(b(tl
= ~
...,.(b
0..
~~
~llJ
(;~
~"8
""'l
...,.
~
...,.
""""""""""""",,'0.,.,.,.,..........,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.".,.,.,.,...,.".,.".,.,.,.,.".....,...,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.".,.",.,.,......
umu=
-
C/)
;:;:::;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:::;:;:::;:::;:;:;:;:::;:::::;:::;:;:;:::;::::::::::::::~;:::;;:::;:;:;:::;
.:.:.:.:~.:.:.;.:.:.:.:-:~.:.:~.:.:.:.:.:.:~.:~.:.:.:.:.::-
...............~......~.....-.....,.,~...............N..
;:;:~:~:::;::~:;::~:::;:::;:;:m:;
:::::::~~::::~::;::::;;
..-j
tTl
n>-
o I
= tv
..... .......
'"2...r*"
(b (b
(taq
0.. ~.
......
~
...,.
::m::(.;;::r::::;*;:r:~::::~~~:~::::;::w;::;:~:::::;~.w;;~$?*Z:?~:::::~~$':mr.;w.#.::w.$:%::::~:::m.;::::::::::::;::;:;@::w.:;::w....:r::;~;W,'::::::~,{M;x6:;:!:::::::~:::::~:;:::{~:;;:;::
=
:;:::::;:;::::::~:' ^.'~~
:::;:;::~:;:;:;:;:;:;:
.
~
-c
"
""C
-c
o
OQ
-c
OJ
3
OJ
:J
a.
3
"'0
-
(1)
3
(1)
:J
roo+
OJ
roo+
-.
o
:J
Vl
n
::r
(1)
c-
c:::
-
(1)
~
-c
n
o
3
3
c:::
roo+
(1)
-c
:::c
OJ
-.
-
n
o
3
"'0
o
:J
(1)
:J
roo+
o
-+'I
z
o
-c
roo+
::r
t/)
roo+
OJ
-c
n
o
-c
:::!.
c-
o
-c
"T'I
-c
o
3
s:
-.
:J
:J
(1)
OJ
"'0
o
-
-.
t/)
roo+
o
Vl
roo+
.
n
-
o
c:::
c-
.
CONCEPTUAL DEFINITION
OF ALTERNATIVES
for the
Northstar Corridor
Major Investment Study
Prepared For
Northstar Corridor Development Authority
.
Prepared By
BRW, Inc.
700 Third Street South
Minneapolis, MN 55415
.
February 1999
.
This document has been prepared
in cooperation with:
.
Federal Transit Administration
Federal Highway Administration
Metropolitan Council of the Twin Cities
Metro Transit of the Twin Cities
Saint Cloud Area Planning Organization
Saint Cloud Metropolitan Transit Commission
Minnesota Department of Transportation
Anoka County Regional Railroad Authority
Anoka County
Benton County
Hennepin County Regional Railroad Authority
Sherburne County
Sherburne County Regional Railroad Authority
Saint Cloud/Stearns County Regional Railroad Authority
City of Anoka
City of Becker
City of Big Lake
City of Blaine
City of Columbia Heights
City of Coon Rapids
City of Fridley
City of Elk River
City of Ramsey
City of Rice
City of Sauk Rapids
City of St. Cloud
City of Spring Lake Park
Becker Township
Big Lake Township
Clear Lake Township
Haven Township
.
.
Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study
Conceptual Definition of Alternatives
TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE
I. SUMMARY 1-1
II. INTRODUCTION II-I
ill. TRANSIT TECHNOLOGY OPTIONS AND SCREENING ill-I
1. Description of Technologies ill-I
2. Transit Options Analysis ill-6
3. Recommendation of Technologies to Carry Forward ill-13
IV. DEFINITION OF HIGHW A Y OPTIONS
1. Background IV-I
2. Description of Highway Options IV-3
V. DEVELOPMENT OF MULTI-MODAL TRANSPORT A TION
STRATEGIES V-I
. 1. Multi-Modal Transportation Strategies V-I
VI. SCREENING OF MODAL ELEMENTS VI-l
1. Commuter Rail VI-l
2. Intermodal Connections VI-l
3. Definition of Highway Evaluation Measures VI-2
4. Highway Options Analysis VI-3
5. Recommendations for Highway Options VI-14
VII. STRATEGIES TO BE CARRIED FORWARD VII-l
LIST OF FIGURES PAGE
Figure 1-1 Overview of MIS Development and Screening of Alternatives 1-2
Figure 1-2 Northstar Corridor Study Area 1-3
Figure ill-I Candidate Transit Technologies (page 1 of 2) ill-2
Figure ill-2 Candidate Transit Technologies (page 2 of 2) ill-3
Figure IV-I TH 10 Issue Areas IV-2
Figure VI-l Crash Rates Relative to Number of Access Points VI-5
Figure VI-2 Elk River/Big Lake Potential Bypass Alternatives VI-9
Figure VI-3 Becker Potential Bypass Alternatives VI-lO
Figure VI-4 Clear Lake Potential Bypass Alternatives VI-II
.
.
I.
SUMMARY
This report describes the alternatives considered and the evaluation process used to screen them
for the Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study (MIS). This includes descriptions of the
following tasks:
. Definition of the universe of transit technology options
. Preliminary screening of the transit technology options
. Definition of the universe of highway options
. Development of the nine multi-modal transportation strategies
. Initial screening of the modal elements
· Multi-modal transportation strategies to be carried forward into Phase IT of the MIS
.
The transportation solutions and recommendations developed during this first phase of the MIS
process were evaluated using a screening methodology as shown in Figure 1-1. The two steps in
the screening process applied increasingly detailed and more comprehensive measures of
effectiveness to a decreasing number of multi-modal transportation strategies. In Phase IT of the
MIS, which is due to start in early 1999, additional screening will be completed of the multi-modal
transportation strategies carried forward. The initial screening resulted in a refinement of the most
optimal solutions with respect to study area needs and community priorities into multi-modal
transportation investment strategies. The purpose of the evaluation process is to differentiate
among possible solutions rather than to serve as a comprehensive assessment of the impacts
associated with the individual alternative elements and multi-modal strategies.
Four study goals were established based on adopted long range transportation plans, federal major
investment planning criteria, public workshops, and agency coordination. The following goals
were adopted by the Northstar Corridor Development Authority (NCDA).
· Improve mobility and safety within the corridor.
· Minimize adverse environmental impacts and foster environmental effects.
· Encourage transportation-supportive land use development patterns.
· Provide a cost-effective and efficient transportation system.
A universe of transit and roadway options was evaluated as to how well each element met these
goals.
The transportation investment corridor that was identified for consideration by the NCDA is the
70-mile Trunk Highway (TH) 10/47 Corridor from downtown Minneapolis to the St. Cloud area.
The corridor was identified based on the results of a number of long-range transportation plans and
other studies completed by the Twin Cities Metropolitan Council (Metro Council) and the Saint
Cloud Area Planning Organization (APO). The Northstar Corridor study area is shown in Figure
1-2.
.
Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study
Conceptual Definition of Alternatives
February 1999
1-1
t'Il!M'IlI~~tf!lI/'!!I!!1'!1
1tfIl!!II!!I~,~"",,~!II!lIIll!'l!lm'I'!tlm!!IIflI"'~m!ll~I!II!'!!!IlIlI""'1fI " !~
I!
~
in
:):
":i
~
'-rJ)CIl
':'_QJ
~ ~.~
~ ...
.- '+- t':S.
.... 0 C
.
.><
:...,+-
QJO
>elj
Oc
.-
C
QJ
QJ
:...
U
rJ)
~
.-
...
.-
C
C rJ)
- 0 0_
t':S.- CIl ~ ~
-C -; .~ ] -C
o t: elj ._ :... =
Eo~~~cu 'ii
.";: ~ t':S t':S __ CIl,
-S CIlc ~ U o..ct':S ~
~ -:... rJ) u.. "":!
\W .... ;!1
HI
I-
l'iimr,n~lllllf!l!:lI!'I'!~TI';H'~:m!l!mr"
CIl
elj c ~ CIl
C QJ cu
.2 E :) .6i:l
QJ cu cu cu
cu_~~
:... u.I t':S \ W
u_ ~ ~
rJ)t':S.crJ)
- -c ... ...,
t':S 0 t':S _
+=~..c..c
.- .c I- I-
C,+-
- 0
'+- C
0_ 0
... t':S.- CIl
C ... cu
cu -c t':S. - 0"1
EOt:~o
~Eo......
o~~r:~
-~C'"
cu ~ t':S rJ)
> .c :...
CU I-
o
.
I
g: i
;:: ~I
~ C:::j
~ co.
~m
-.
'+- CIl
>- 0 .~
:... elj
t':S elj.,:: 0
C C CIl_
.-.- C 0
E C t':S C
. - CU :"'..c
"ij~l-u
Q:~ ~
~
~1
s
C
o
+=
.-
C
.-
'+-
QJ
o
CIl
QJ
... .-
QJ.- elj
CIl CIl 0
:"'C_
'+- QJ t':S 0
o .~ ~ C
C,+-..c
:) 0 u
~
'+-,+-
o 0 >-CIl
CQJt':Sc
.2 ~ ==.2
.':: QJ ib Q.
~ .2 i: 0
QJ:)
o
.... ~
..:. aJ
~ ~
...
::I <:
ell
. w u:
.*. >-
-c
~
....-
V"J
~
.
-:;9 :1...
....~,,'
.:;
C'CI
.lie:
o
C
c:(
~
~
o
...
c
C
;::
c
C'CI
~
Q.
..:c
c..
~c
cil~
'""
r,~,.~ 'i~: i;;~~
c
o
-
c
CI,)
m
...............f"i....
~
J:I
...
CI,)
.c
en
:,g. :
~~ ~
Olt Ol
iiit2 iii
<Xl 1
."
." g
-
~ ~I
..
.. 0::::'
... ad
E
.. m
is
z
.,
~,g.
....,
.....
uc
"J
rDt2
(;;.- ~ i~
r";::e;"'''H'''
;~i
1 :i
!Ut2
!
...--..._......_..........__.__._.._.1
:0:
.
~;~..j''''':';~)
t:
~
rs....~
~....2.
il
~...........................Il....'
A~
~i
Definition of the Universe of Transit Technologies
.
Defining the universe of transit technologies serves as a starting point for the identification of
individual transportation modal elements considered in the MIS. The initial alternative elements
considered included:
. Bus System Improvements - Major bus system improvements include: system expansion,
express bus on high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes, articulated trolley bus, and guided bus.
System expansion includes increased bus route coverage, . expanded service hours, and
improved headways. HOV lanes are roadway lanes constructed for the exclusive use of
vehicles with multiple passengers and buses.
. Rail Transit - The rail transit mode consists of special passenger rail vehicles that operate
along a fixed guideway. Seven different rail transit technologies were considered in the
development of the universe of alternatives. These transit technologies are described below:
Commuter Rail- Commuter rail consists of diesel powered locomotives pulling or
pushing passenger rail cars or electrically powered vehicles operating on a railroad
track. Commuter rail service typically operates during peak commute times over longer
distances between outlying areas and central cities.
Light Rail- Light rail transit (LRT) includes electrically powered vehicles operating .
along rails. Light rail is versatile and can be operated in railroad, highway or street
right-of-way, at-grade or elevated, with the electric power provided to the vehicles via
overhead wires.
Diesel Multiple Unit (DMU) - The DMU technology is similar to light rail and
commuter rail technology except the vehicles are powered by individual diesel engines
in each vehicle.
Heavy Rail - Heavy rail vehicles are electrically powered rail vehicles that typically
operate in trains to accommodate very high volumes of passenger traffic. The vehicles
are electrically powered via a "third rail" embedded in the track.
Monorail - Monorail technology uses a narrow vehicle that usually operates along a
aerial guideway consisting of a narrow beam.
Automated Guideway Transit (AGT) - The AGT technology includes vehicles which
operate under automated control on an exclusive guideway, grade-separated from
vehicular traffic.
Personal Rapid Transit (PRT) - PRT provides private party point-to-point
transportation along a grade separated guideway in an automated mode.
.
Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study
Conceptual Definition of Alternatives
February 1999
1-4
. Preliminary Screening of Transit Technologies
A preliminary screening was completed on the seven transit technologies. The parameters used
placed the transit technologies under the same level of scrutiny so as to have an unbiased
evaluation. Transit technologies were reviewed based on a number of evaluation parameters, these
included:
. Capital cost per mile
· Proven technology with operation in a line-haul mode
· Operating environment (urban, suburban, or activity center)
· Ability to have at-grade station access
. Optimal station spacing distance
· Environmental impacts (emissions, noise, right-of-way, visual)
· Other considerations (ease of implementation, areas where most effective, ridership potential)
Based on the screening analysis, the following transit technologies were drooped from further
study:
. Articulated Trolley Bus
. Guided Bus
. . Heavy Rail Transit
. Monorail
. Personal Rapid Transit
. Automated Guideway Transit
The following transit technologies were recommended to be carried forward into the transportation
strategies for the Phase II MIS:
· Bus
. LRT
· Commuter Rail
Definition of Highway Options
Major roadway improvements included highway and street improvements that have the potential
to increase capacity, improve safety and reduce vehicle conflicts through access improvements.
Typical roadway options included new roadway connections (including new river bridges),
upgrading roadways to complete access control, increasing the number of travel lanes, and access
control measures. Transportation Systems Management (TSM) and Intelligent Transportation
Systems (ITS) improvements were also included.
.
Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study
Conceptual Definition of Alternatives
February 1999
1-5
Development of Multi-Modal Transportation Strategies
.
Based on the definition of the universe of highway options and the preliminary screening of the
transit technologies, nine multi-modal transportation strategies were developed. The multi-modal
transportation strategies were the following:
Multi-
Modal
Strategy
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
No-
Build
*
Transportation
Management
and Bus
Improvements
Feeder
Bus
Improve-
ments
Conceptual Alternatives
Commuter Rail with
Anoka Anoka
Commuter County County
Rail LRT HOV
_ TH 10/47
Major
Upgrade
TH 10/47
Minor
Upgrade
River
Cross-
ings
*
Analysis of Modal Elements
* * *
* *
* * *
* * * *
* * *
* * *
* * * *
.
An analysis was completed of the modal elements that make up the nine multi-modal transportation
strategies. The analysis was completed on the following modes.
. Commuter Rail
. Highway Improvements
. Anoka County LRT and HOV Systems
Commuter Rail
The initial analysis of commuter rail concluded that this modal element should be retained for
further analysis. The primary factors were:
. The positive conclusions about commuter rail service in the Northstar Corridor included in the
Phase I MnDOT Commuter Rail Study completed in January of 1998 and Phase II completed
in January of 1999.
. The results of initial discussions with Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) staff that
commuter rail service and existing and future freight railroad traffic could co-exist.
. The positive results from the commuter rail demonstration conducted in the summer of 1997.
.
Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study
Conceptual Definition of Alternatives
February 1999
1-6
.
Highway Option Evaluation
The highway options were reviewed based on a number of evaluation parameters, these included:
. Safety and mobility benefits
. Environmental impacts
. Cost
· Impacts to surrounding land uses (urban, suburban, and rural land uses)
The parameters used to analyze the highway options placed the options under the same level of
scrutiny so as to have an unbiased evaluation. Based on the screening analysis, the following
highway alternatives were dropped from further study:
. HOV lanes from Minneapolis to Saint Cloud
. TH 10/47 upgrade to freeway
. TH 10 selected city bypasses
The following highway alternatives were recommended to be carried forward into the
transportation strategies for the Phase II MIS study:
.
· Additional Mississippi River crossings
· TH 10 minor upgrades including the following:
Addition of turn lanes
ITS technologies for traffic management
Access consolidation
Frontage road development
Signal improvements and coordination
Construction of interchanges at selected locations
Lane additions at selected locations
The recommendation was made to drop the modal elements of Commuter Rail with Anoka County
LRT and Commuter Rail with Anoka County HOV as discrete options. This was due to a number
of complementary major transit investments that have previously been proposed and/or are
currently being proposed that would be integrated with the proposed Northstar commuter rail
system. 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
· Northeast Corridor busway facility on exclusive right-of-way between downtown Minneapolis
and the Northtown Transit Hub.
It was further recommended that the following transit systems and services be included as potential
. intermodal connections with the Northstar commuter rail system: Hiawatha LRT service, Northeast
Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study
Conceptual Definition of Alternatives
February 1999
1-7
LRT service, Northeast Busway service, 1-94 Express Bus service, and local bus service.
Multi-Modal Transportation Strategies Carried Forward to Phase n MIS
As a result of the initial analysis of modal elements, the following multi-modal transportation
strategies are recommended to be carried forward into the Phase II MIS study.
. Strategy I - No-Build
. Strategy 2 - Transportation Management and Bus Improvements
. Strategy 4 - Commuter Rail and Feeder Bus Improvements
. Strategy 5 - Commuter Rail, Feeder Bus Improvements, and TH 10 Minor Upgrade
. Strategy 6 - Commuter Rail, Feeder Bus Improvements, TH 10 Minor Upgrade, and River
Crossings
Improved sidewalks, pedestrian trails, recreational trails, streetscape improvements, landscaping,
and bicycle facilities were candidate improvements for all of the strategies that were evaluated.
Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study
Conceptual Definition of Alternatives
February 1999
1-8
.
.
.
.
.
.
II. INTRODUCTION
The Northstar Corridor connects the Minneapolis-St. Paul metropolitan area, with a population of
3.2 million, and the St. Cloud metropolitan area, with a population of 100,000. Both areas are
regional centers of commerce, employment, education and health care. The corridor has regional,
statewide and national significance as a primary transportation route for automobile, truck, and rail
travel. TH 10, a principal arterial and part of the National Highway System carries vehicular traffic
along the corridor. In addition, a mainline of the BNSF Railroad carries a variety of commodities
through the corridor. TH 10, in conjunction with Interstate 94 (1-94), is part of the regional
roadway system linking airports and universities located within the two metropolitan areas. The
two roadways provide an inter-regional corridor of major significance witbin the State of
Minnesota. TH lO also provides an essential link between the two metro area highway and transit
networks. The Mississippi River is a natural barrier and river crossings are limited in number. 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.
This report describes the alternatives that were reviewed for the Northstar Corridor. An initial
review of potentially feasible transit technologies and options was conducted to determine
appropriateness for the Corridor and a regional transit system. In addition, various highway options
within the Corridor were reviewed to determine which would best meet corridor transportation
needs. In a future work activity, options will be evaluated based on incremental cost and patronage
changes, then compared to current operations, a baseline set of improvements and potential
environmental impacts.
This report is divided into the analysis of transit options and highway options. It concludes with
the development of multi-modal transportation strategies, which blend highway and transit options.
Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study
Conceptual Definition of Alternatives
February 1999
II-I
.
.
.
III. TRANSIT TECHNOLOGY
SCREENING
OPTIONS
AND
This chapter first describes transit technology options and then assesses their feasibility and
appropriateness for the Northstar Corridor. The overview of technologies includes photographs
and locations where the technology currently operates. The second part of this chapter defines
conceptual transit options for the Corridor based on the recommended technologies. The options
are then qualitatively assessed using criteria such as system characteristics (e.g., vehicle size and
speed), infrastructure requirements and cost. The refined set of options that result from this
preliminary screening are carried forward for further evaluation in the Northstar Corridor Major
Investment Study.
Several technologies were identified for evaluation as potential transit options in the study corridor.
These included bus, bus rapid transit, light rail transit (LRT), heavy rail, commuter rail, monorail,
automated guideway transit (AGT), and personal rapid transit (PRT). Many of these transit
technologies have been extensively evaluated over the 30-year history of transit planning in the
Twin Cities. Each technology is described below and then evaluated according to a set of screening
criteria to determine its appropriateness and/or feasibility as a transit mode in the study corridor.
Figure 111-1 and Figure 111-2 present candidate technologies.
1. DESCRIPTION OF TECHNOLOGIES
Technologies are described focusing on characteristics including alignment, physical environment,
vehicles, and typical operation. Variations of a specific technology which also may represent a
feasible alternative for this study are described.
a. Bus
Buses are rubber-tired vehicles which operate on roadways in mixed traffic or in a special
guideway. Buses represent the most common and most flexible type of transit. Stops are
typically as frequent as every one to two blocks, or every one-eighth mile. Express or limited
service is characterized by fewer stops and higher average speeds.
The majority of buses in operation are diesel powered. However, vehicles powered by
alternative fuels, such as compressed natural gas (CNG) and liquified natural gas (LNG), are
available and have been put into service in some locations. These have proven to be a viable
alternative to diesel operation. Battery-powered buses also have been implemented, primarily
as short-haul, special use vehicles in activity centers because of their short operating range.
Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study
Conceptual Definition of Alternatives
February 1999
III-I
Bus
Articulated Trolley Bus
Vanpool
i::fNOmHSTAR
CORRIDOR
Articulated Bus
Guided Bus
Light Rail Transit (LRT)
.
August 25, 1998
Figure III-I
tt ~~...,_
Candidate Technologies
Heavy Rail
Diesel Multiple Unit (DMU)
Automated Guideway Transit (AGT)
Transit Connections, March 1994
William D. Middleton, Photographer
.
~~t~lIV/OIfmISTAR
CORRJIiXJR
Commuter Rail (Diesel-Powered Locomotive))
Monorail
,.. '"
.~. ij,
;:\ "\
Personal Rapid Transit (PRT)
August 25, 1998
Figure 111-2
~BRW
. "~allO:lltllGMlY'~
Candidate Technologies
Electric Trollev Bus
.
Electric trolley buses are a subtype of a standard bus. This technology was originally
implemented as an alternative to the streetcar. The electric trolley bus should not be confused
with actual or replicas of vintage streetcars, which are commonly referred to as "Trolleys."
Electric trolley buses receive power from an overhead wire. These buses are distinguished
from other buses by electric propulsion only, otherwise they are identical in size to diesel buses
and can operate in the same environments, provided that the overhead power source is
available. Electric trolley buses are appropriate for hilly terrain since they can efficiently
negotiate steep grades, and for very busy routes characterized by short headways. While once
common in many cities, few systems or routes remain (e.g., Seattle, San Francisco, Boston).
b. Bus Rapid Transit
Conventional bus rapid transit comprises buses operating on an exclusive roadway, or busway,
that is access controlled. Busways which provide a very high level of service and allow high
hourly passenger capacities are typically grade separated from cross streets (Ottawa,
Pittsburgh). Low volume busways often are characterized by at-grade intersections with cross
streets (Seattle, University of Minnesota Busway). Stops along the busway are made only at
stations, which are typically spaced every one-half to one mile. Buses may operate non-stop
along the busway or make selected stops based on passenger demand. Buses may also exit the
busway and operate along streets to provide local area circulation and distribution.
Additionally, bus rapid transit vehicles can be used on high-occupancy vehicle facilities.
.
Guided Bus
The guided bus technology is a subtype of bus rapid transit and consists of a specialized fixed
guideway and fleet of vehicles retrofitted with lateral guide wheels. This technology can be
adapted to any bus size and propulsion type. Since the guideway can be more narrow than the
lane width required for manual operation, it can be implemented within rail rights-of-way. The
guideway requires that this technology be grade separated from cross streets.
c. Light Rail Transit (LRT)
Light rail transit is a primarily at-grade rail mode with electrically powered vehicles receiving
current from an overhead wire. LRT operates primarily in an exclusive right-of-way; it can also
operate with other traffic along existing roadways. A light rail alignment may also be grade
separated, either in tunnel or elevated. Station spacing can be as close as one-quarter mile in
activity centers, but typically ranges between one-half to one mile in other areas.
.
Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study
Conceptual Definition of Alternatives
February 1999
III-4
.
Light rail operates as a single vehicle or in trains of up to four cars. The LRT train length is
a function of the minimum length of a city block so that stopped vehicles do not block cross
streets. As compared to buses, light rail can more efficiently transport passengers once demand
reaches a specific threshold. LRT is currently operating in many North American cities
including: Portland, Baltimore, St. Louis, Buffalo, Dallas, San Diego, Los Angeles, and San
Jose.
d. Heavy Rail
Heavy rail is a fully grade separated rail mode with electrically powered vehicles receiving
power in most cases from an electrified third rail. The alignment is required to be in exclusive
right-of-way and may be elevated, in tunnel or at-grade. The alignment can also be
implemented in other rights-of-way such as freeway or railroad. Station spacing can be as close
as one-third mile in activity centers, but typically ranges between one to three miles or more
in other areas. Trains vary in length between two and ten cars. Heavy rail is typically
implemented when very high passenger capacity is required. Cities where heavy rail is
currently operating include: San Francisco, Washington DC, Baltimore, and Atlanta.
e. Commuter Rail
.
Commuter rail is implemented along existing railroad rights-of-way and typically serves longer
distance work trips to central cities from outlying areas. Commuter rail coaches are
comparable in size to those used for long-distance AMTRAK service, and may be single or bi-
level. Trains consist of either unpowered cars propelled by a diesel or electric locomotive, or
individually powered electric or diesel rail cars, respectively referred to as electric multiple
units, EMUs, or diesel multiple units, DMUs. Electrically propelled vehicles may receive
power from overhead wire or a third rail. Typical station spacing ranges between one and five
miles. Trains vary from four to eight cars. Cities where commuter rail is currently operating
include: Dallas, Washington DC, Chicago, Los Angeles, and San Diego.
Diesel Multiple Unit
Diesel Multiple Unit operation is a subtype of commuter rail, consisting of one or two vehicles
semi-permanently coupled. DMU service can operate on existing tracks. DMU service is often
more appropriate for corridors with less freight railroad usage, lower passenger demand or
constrained station sites. Trains are typically one or two cars. There are currently no DMU's
operating in joint use with railroad freight traffic in the United States because of safety
constraints associated with mixing the smaller and lighter weight DMU's with heavy
locomotives. .
f. Monorail
.
Monorail refers to an electrically powered vehicle which operates along a single guideway. The
guideway supports the vehicle and contains the power source. A monorail must be grade
separated from other traffic. The majority of monorail installations have been elevated;
Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study
Conceptual Definition of Alternatives
February 1999
III-5
however, it could operate in tunnel or at-grade within in its own right-of-way. Vehicles consist
of two to three units and provide passenger capacities comparable to a light rail vehicle.
Monorail operates in trains of one to four vehicles, or two to nine units. Station spacing is
comparable to light rail or heavy rail, one-third to one-half mile in activity centers and one-half
to one-mile or more in other areas. Locations where monorail is currently operating include:
Chicago, Detroit, and Disneyworld.
.
g. Automated Guideway Transit (AGT)
Automated guideway transit includes steel-wheel, steel-rail or rubber tired vehicles which
operate under automated control on an exclusive guideway, grade-separated from vehicular
traffic. AGT may utilize conventional, or alternative propulsion types such as magnetic
levitation or linear induction. Other transit technologies such as monorails and PRT may also
be automated, operating without drivers as AGT.
Vehicles typically accommodate fewer passengers than other rail modes. The characteristic
operating standard for this technology is service at very short intervals. This frequent service
mitigates the smaller vehicle size so that AGT hourly passenger capacity can be comparable
to that of light rail or heavy rail. Station spacing is comparable to light or heavy rail, one-
quarter to one-third mile in activity centers and one-half to one-mile or more in other areas.
Trains vary between one and six vehicles. AGT is currently operating in Morgantown, West
Virginia.
h. Personal Rapid Transit
.
Personal Rapid Transit, a technology currently under development, would provide private party
point-to-point transportation along a grade separated guideway in an automated mode with off-
line stations. As with AGT, intervals between vehicles would be very short. However, service
could be operated on demand, with vehicles being summoned to a stop by the passenger. This
technology is envisioned to compete with the automobile by providing a direct, non-stop trip
between origin and destination in private vehicles for up to three passengers. Stops could be
designated at very close intervals since passengers would not be subject to intermediate stops
after boarding. As this technology is still under development, no operating systems in are
place.
2. TRANSIT OPTIONS ANAL YSIS
To determine the most appropriate technologies to study further as part of the definition of study
options,. a set of guidelines was established against which each technology was evaluated. Only
those technologies which meet defined guidelines are considered feasible to carry forward in the
study.
.
Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study
Conceptual Definition of Alternatives
February 1999
III-6
.
.
.
2.1
GillDELlNES
Guidelines were defined to reflect regional transportation needs and likely fiscal constraints.
Guidelines are generally qualitative; related quantitative evaluation criteria will be developed in
a future work activity for further evaluation of chosen technologies. The following guidelines
govern preliminary evaluation of the identified technologies:
· The systems carried forward should be relatively low cost. Comparative data from peer cities
will be utilized.
· The system should be reliable and based on proven technology. The subject technology shall
be considered appropriate based on the number of active operations and corresponding
performance records for maintenance and reliability.
· The system should be adaptable to a variety of operating environments. This relates to the
requirement for grade separation and also indicates the degree of difficulty for a system
extension or connection to another mode.
· Stations should be readily accessible for passengers. This relates to station type, at-grade or
grade separated, and the type of platform, high or low.
· The system should be readily accessible for passengers and allow easy coordination with a
multi-modal transportation network.
· The system should not result in extensive negative environmental impacts.
· The system should be supportive of transit-friendly land use.
Results of the preliminary evaluation of technologies shall be the basis for the definition of
conceptual alternatives.
2.2 EV ALVA TION OF TECHNOLOGIES
The evaluation was conducted by first describing the advantages, disadvantages and considerations
related to each technology, then screening these technologies according to defined guidelines.
Table 111-1 summarizes evaluation results in matrix format.
In general, all technologies except PRT are technically feasible and are in operation. Bus Rapid
Transit, Monorail and AGT have been in operation for several years, but in few locations. Bus
exhibits the lowest cost per mile for implementation since no guideway and only low cost physical
improvements are required. Costs for LRT, Monorail, Bus Rapid Transit and Commuter Rail are
mid-range, while those for Heavy Rail and AGT are very high compared to other rail modes.
Required grade separation is less desirable for the study corridor because of the higher
Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study
Conceptual Definition of Alternatives
February 1999
I1I-7
:a
..
"
"S
"
'"
~
-
"
"
.S
;;
"':".:
= :
-",
'" ..
"""I:
"'-
< "
...:;:
...
'"
""
'll
."
-;
~C.?
"
"
~
]
"
'"
~1
.5i
j
"
"
\,)
.i
!
...
'C
'il
;;;
!!l
'"
"1l
Il
is
..
..
E
i!
"
...
o
....
S
~
o
....
s
::
o
....
s
::
...
~
"
"0
Z
"
:i
~
"
S
's
<e
.!!
~
..
..
...
a
;;
~
c:l
~ ~
>-::;:
" ~
>-Il::
" ~
>-Il::
" ~
>-Il::
~ ~
>-::;:
"
j .~
~]
.. ~
~.2
~ .~
E""
...:
....'"
~E~
z=
{/'}~-s
::=:: ~ .:
~z=
~~-&
::>~:E
..
i.!
~ 0 t)
Z"i!
::;:
'" ,,<
:3Zz
~ I#l
!.~ ~
i ~.~
E.i2 ~
~ a )(
" ~ Ul
~! ~ c
!! '" ~
;]~
.s!O<
o ' .
~
"
>-
~
"
>-
"
>-
..
>-
~
<
"
.5i
;;
Iii
..
."
!!
'i'
.:;;
s
~
s
...
"
c
o
~
o
i
=
e
~
.;
'"
"
I
"
Iii
i
...
:i .~
o c
",z
.~ ~
i .~
:i .'"
o~
'"
~ ~
~ .~
~~
'"
!!
'0
Z
"
~
:>
..
'0
Z
li
.~
~
J!l
!i
.s
;;
;:
..
e
"
i
"
'"
2J
~
Q.
.s
...
Ii:
~
....
~
.;
.. .~ "e
~ "::)
~] ~
i! u ~
~ !]
1~:a
"
:;;
'"
~
"
~
'"
u
~.~ ~
.~ i ~
~ e ~
~ ... ~
~.L
i:l
!l
~
Q
'"
\,)
...
~ ~
] S. 8
e 8 ~
>. ~ .~...
~ ~ ,,~
,H,. i!. ~
9a~9~
I#lg~~~c
8 2 ~ g i1 l'I
1! ~ .~ J : .~
!~~l.~t
~ ~ ~ 2
...
<=
'";;
~
"il
..
~
~s
'!! ~.~ ""
~ '" - '!! .-
.pi-,q
- ~ ~ ! .~
sa ~"r "0 ~
J'3~q
I ~ ~ ~ ~
Ie
.5i
S
~
"
"
\,)
"
>
is
...
"
>
c
...
.3
"
>
\S
...
.3
"
>
';n
c
...
::<
.:l
"
>
~
"
...
"
.5i
;;
"
;;
>
'"
...
'"
...
...
(,l
<
"e
g
"
:;:
::
""
Q
1i
'"
..
..
;;
e
e
a-:
.5i
~
"
"
\,)
1i
'"
...
>
~
..
..
~
i!
:
..,
"
"0
Z
~
S
o
....
:;g
S
o
....
::
s
...
~
S
..,
~
S
o
....
i
:$
e
<e
..
~
~
!l
\,)
;;
'!
c:l
"
_ c
Z c
Z
~~~
~ ~
~~
5~~
< =
" ~
>-Il::
~ ~I~
~ ~
" "
>-...
5i~
~ i;
~~
'" c ~
:32:,5
l'J ~
>-::;:
~~~
~ .~
-ai
.2 c
ll-;
...11
" '
.. l!
e:::;
...:
"0-
~ ~
=j~
I ': .~
e .S! B
;: 'Ol ><
l:q~
!! '" ~
.. " "
p~
.!!o<
o
c
Z
c
Z
"
Z
~
~
~
~
"
Z
~
<
"
.5i
;;
Iii
"
."
!!
'i'
.:;;
"
c
o
s
...
12
S
...
S
on
S
...
...
S
~
e
j
.;
'"
"
.5i
3
'"
;ig
0.'"
"'>
;ig
0.'"
"'>
:ig
~;;
~
.~ .~
i .~
Ul
. Ie
.~ .~
i .~
Ul
~
'0 c;
Z ~
:i;;
~
J!l
!i
.s
]j
"
"
Ii
~
"
'"
c
00
.~
~
~
c
e :5
~ e
i ~ ~
~ ~ ~ .~
5g · <l ~
~.~ffi~
: .., = : =
u
."
C
::>
"
v
c
~ g
8 E
~
.c
.~:S c
g...s -
~ ~ i
.re.U'U
~ E! ~ 9 ~
..
c
'"
...
.~
'"
}~
._ e _
C '['0
~:d
l! ~ =
1'$ 5 ' .~...
:r;i=
i:l
!l
~
Q
'"
\,)
< .r
~B
h~
:S E 'f2
~p
t;~
'\" [g
~
~
Q
'"
\,)
00 :t; ~
8.l! 9
-,;!l.
.s'j~.g
11 !. u ~
'~'5 11 ."
~'6.!!
~ ~ ...
"f ~.~.i
~
.~
Ii"
\,)
-a.
:E
!1
.~ ~
'1:i~
~ ~
1:a
Ie
.5i
1!
..
~
"
8
"
~
is
...
.3
"
>
.~
...
.3
u
~
o
""
.3
:~
o
...
I
:;.
~
~
~ .~
- E
~ 2.
C ~
~ ~
.e. ~
~ ".~
~ ~ ~ ~
] ....;..g %-
.:::...:i......
~ 9 ~ ~
'Qo8 S ~
t g t; ~
1",8':-
~':~~
:.~ ~~
~ ~ 1 ~
.~ ~ ~ i
~'~!i ~
~ ~ [~
:s~~~
~ ~ ~ ~
~.e.,-
8 ~i ~
"'5 l3 ::s 6
.::: .. .., ""
~].~ l
~~~d
.:..;~tW-i~
" " " "
~~~~
"
>
~
o
...
"
.~
~
~
.3
c
.5i
g
'!
'"
.
.
-,;
~
';
...
~
.~
~
.,;,
~
~
"'
II
,.
C
'"
,
...
~
:~
"'"
II
.
.Q
.Jl
II
'"
~
:;,
II
:;,
.
.
.
alignment and station costs and less convenient passenger access to stations. Stop spacing for bus
service is closer than other modes, every one to two blocks or 300 to 500 feet typically. Station
spacing of one-quarter to one-half mile is comparable for Bus Rapid Transit, LRT, DMU and AGT;
station spacing for Commuter Rail, Heavy Rail, and Monorail is typically wider, two to five miles
or more. The primary environmental impact for all technologies requiring grade separation is
visual intrusion; other impacts for all alternatives include traffic, noise and emissions. A more
detailed evaluation of each technology is presented in the following sections.
a. Bus
Diesel Bus
The primary advantages of diesel bus operation are low cost and high flexibility.
· Buses generally operate over existing roadways and therefore do not require a significant
additional investment in infrastructure. Capital costs are primarily limited to vehicles.
· Routes can be flexible. Routing changes can be implemented, for all practical purposes,
immediately.
· Buses can serve a wide range of passenger demand and bus size can be adapted to
passenger loads.
Electric Trolley Bus
Electric trolley buses offer a distinct advantage in acceleration and are efficient for routes
characterized by steep grades and high frequencies. Electric trolley buses are more limited in
their maneuverability than diesel buses. Trolley bus operation is quiet and non-polluting.
However, electrification requires a significant investment and overhead wire at junctions can
be perceived as visually intrusive.
Bus stops are typically low cost and easily accessible since stop spacing is close. Buses along
street and roadways are subject to traffic delays. Trolley bus maneuverability is limited and
immediate route deviations are not possible. Trolley buses find their most appropriate use for
heavily used frequently operating routes characterized by steep grades, not a characteristic of
the Northstar Corridor study area. Diesel emissions create an environmental impact; however,
justification of trolley buses for moderate ridership routes is unlikely. Utilization of
alternative-fuel-powered standard buses poses a more feasible method to mitigate bus pollution
impacts.
Bus transit is ~ecommended for further study.
Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study
Conceptual Definition of Alternatives
February 1999
III-9
b. Bus Rapid Transit
.
Bus Rapid Transit, or Busway, provides the speed and guideway advantages typically attributed
to a rail line with the added advantage of circulation within neighborhoods or other areas. This
technology has been implemented at various levels of exclusive right-of-way in only a few
cities. The right-of-way width required is wider than that for a rail line and may result in
significant impacts unless existing underutilized right-of-way is used.
A busway would require continuous additional right-of-way within or along TH 10/47. This
would be similar to upgrading TH 10/47 with an additional travel lane and grade separated
access points, or converting an existing travel lane. Deteriorating levels of service on TH 10/47
make lane conversion infeasible. Substandard lane widths and right-of-way conditions in the
south end of the corridor make acquiring sufficient right-of-way in the City of Minneapolis not
feasible. A busway could not be implemented in the BNSF railroad tracks because of existing
freight use. Due to theseconditions, the Busway technology is not recommended for further
study.
Whereas Bus Rapid Transit comprises a guideway and standard buses; the Guided Bus
technology also requires specially adapted buses. Guided Bus has the same disadvantages
as a busway, as described above and is not recommended for further study.
c. Light Rail Transit
.
Light rail transit operates in a fixed guideway and requires overhead electrification. The
primary advantage of light rail is its adaptability. Light rail can be adapted to a variety of
operating environments and passenger capacities. Its design can range from a high speed, high
capacity system comparable to heavy rail or other completely grade separated technologies, to
low speed, medium capacity streetcar or shuttle service. Train length is limited by block
lengths. A train typically consists of up to three vehicles, thereby accommodating three times
the number of passengers with one operator.
Light rail can penetrate downtown areas and can be extended at-grade in many corridors. These
extensions can be quite cost-effective, particularly in areas such as central business districts
where grade separation is neither desired nor appropriate. Station spacing can be close enough
to provide convenient walk access. Stations can be simple, sidewalk stops with a shelter.
Light rail at-grade operation can be affected by traffic in areas of shared right-of-way. This can
be mitigated by provision of exclusive right-of-way and traffic control that favors light rail.
Improvements to benefit transit may impact traffic flow and pedestrian movements.
Capital cost per mile for at-grade LRT is within the lower range for rail systems and is
comparable to that for busways or guided bus technology. Light rail is a higher cost alternative
than standard bus service, requiring a more costly investment in tracks, electrification, and
necessary modifications to streets and traffic control. .
Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study
Conceptual Definition of Alternatives
February 1999
III-lO
.
Considering passenger capacity flexibility and cost, this technology should be considered
further as a rail option as part of a regional LRT system in the Twin Cities metropolitan
area. An LRT system is not appropriate for the entire Northstar Corridor, however it could be
appropriate as a complementary part of an overall transportation solution.
d. Heavy Rail
Heavy rail transit also operates in a fixed guideway but requires electrification in the guidewa) ,
thus requiring complete grade separation. Because heavy rail transit can transport high
numbers of passengers per hour at a high average speed, it typically operates in dense urban
areas. Operations can be very reliable because of complete grade separation. The capital cost
per mile for heavy rail construction is usually very high.
Heavy rail routes are inflexible due to their fixed, exclusive and fully grade separated
guideway. Alignment changes can be costly unless implemented in already grade separated
right-of-way. Stations must have high platforms and be grade separated from cross streets and
pedestrian walkways. These requirements lead to high cost stations which must have ramps
or elevators.
.
Considering the issues regarding heavy rail transit operations in the Northstar Corridor and the
typical passenger demand required for a heavy rail route, this technology is not recommended
for the study corridor.
e. Commuter Rail
Commuter rail passenger service is generally defined as passenger train service that operates
on existing freight railroad tracks. Commuter rail service primarily operates during "peak"
travel times, usually the hours of 6:00 AM to 9:00 AM and again from 3:00 PM to 6:00 PM.
Trains run inbound to the city center in the morning and outbound to suburban or rural areas
in the evening. Commuter rail can also accommodate reverse commuters (passengers traveling
to suburban areas for work) and other travel times, such as midday, evening and weekend
hours. Most commuter rail systems are integrated with other transit services, such as bus and
LRT systems, to encourage transfers throughout the region.
Passenger capacity, speed and access to central cities are the primary advantages of commuter
rail. Trains can comfortably accommodate a large number of seated passengers over a long
distance. Service can be implemented at a relatively low cost and within a short timeframe,
depending on required track, signaling, and station.improvements. Commuter rail is often ill-
suited to serve areas where closer station spacing is required. The slower acceleration rate of
commuter rail vehicles as compared to heavy or light rail vehicles is mitigated by wider station
spacing which allows faster travel times. Convenient walk access for passengers is diminished
by wider station spacing, but park and ride lots at stations typically provide good auto access
for a significant percentage of riders.
.
Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study
Conceptual Definition of Alternatives
February 1999
III-II
With the potentially lower cost to implement commuter rail, and the fact that it does penetrate
the northern edge of the downtown area near the Target Center and Warehouse District, and
other activity centers, it is an appropriate option for further study.
.
. Diesel Multiple Unit
A diesel multiple unit (DMU) is a self-propelled passenger rail car operating on standard
railroad tracks. DMU trains are a subtype of commuter rail which is more suitable to lower
passenger demand on lightly-used freight railroad lines. As with standard commuter rail,
DMU service would operate on existing tracks and no electrification would be required.
Service could be implemented within a short time frame.
DMU alignment and operating flexibility would be comparable to that for standard
commuter rail. The vehicles are large and have limited flexibility in turns and therefore do
not fit well within an urban streetscape, particularly in a downtown area. Station spacing
of one mile or more is preferable, since vehicle acceleration is less than that for other rail
modes. Although a single vehicle or linked pair could be operated, these vehicles do not
currently meet Federal Railroad Administration standards for operation mixed with
standard freight trains.
DMU service presents a short-term solution to demonstrated passenger demand in a less
freight rail dominated corridor. DMU service does not appear to be a feasible option
based on current regulations and heavy freight use in this corridor. .
f. Monorail
A monorail system operates along an elevated guideway which is often automated (driverless).
It is typically quiet and can use air space for its right-of-way. Vehicles operating singly or in
trains operate quietly and no overhead wires are required.
---
Monorail technology is not flexible due to its fixed, grade-separated guideway. Station costs
are higher than for at-grade rail and switching with the guidebeam is more complicated than
with conventional rail track. The switch issue has tended to relegate monorail to shuttle or loop
service within an activity center and limited its use for line-haul transit. An elevated monorail
guideway could be extended along roadways or other rights-of-way; but this may be considered
visually intrusive.
Considering technical issues related to switching, the requirement of grade separation and the
resulting high cost, monorail is not recommended for further study.
g. Automated Guideway Transit
Automated guideway transit (AGT) provides a medium capacity, fully automated driverless,
technology that may be more appropriate than heavy rail in some cities (Vancouver, Toronto).
Alternatively, AGT may be used as a special use shuttle in CBD's, airports or amusement parks .
Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study
Conceptual Definition of Alternatives
February 1999
III-I 2
.
.
.
or between activity centers (Chicago, Detroit). Advantages of this technology are related to
very frequent service which can be easily augmented or decreased to meet the demand. The
high service frequency tends to attract greater ridership. Like heavy rail and monorail, this
technology requires a special guideway which cannot be crossed by other vehicles. Crossings
of streets or other rail systems must be grade separated.
Implementation costs for this technology are high because of required grade separation and the
automated control system. Station costs are higher because of grade separation. A significant
expenditure is required for maintenance of control system elements, including the trackway and
the hardware for monitoring and operation. Since AGT must be grade separated, it is a
relatively inflexible option with respect to alignment changes. As with other grade separated
modes, alignment extensions could be costly unless implemented in an already grade separated
right-of-way.
AGT is not recommended for further study.
h. Personal Rapid Transit
Personal Rapid Transit (PRT) is a relatively new public transit mode currently under
development. PRT has not yet been implemented in any location, so costs can as yet only be
estimated. PRT's fully automated operation requires that the alignment and stations be grade
separated. The primary development guideline and selling point for this technology is the
ability to provide direct non-stop transit between an origin and a destination. PRT plans have,
so far, been limited to activity centers rather than an entire region.
Despite the small guideway and vehicle size, a large network of elevated structures would be
required to provide the proposed service. The number of stations, and correspondingly, total
station cost would likely be high. This technology would be better suited to circulation and
distribution within an activity center and could be used as a support network for line haul
transit. PRT in the Northstar Corridor is not recommended for further study.
3. RECOMMENDATION OF TRANSIT TECHNOLOGIES TO CARRY
FORWARD
The following technologies are recommended for further evaluation as alternative options in the
study corridor:
. Bus (standard technology)
. Commuter Rail
· LRT
Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study
Conceptual Definition of Alternatives
February 1999
I1I-13
. IV. DEFINITION OF HIGHWAY OPTIONS
1. BACKGROUND
The highway issues in the TH 10/47 corridor were identified through discussions with the Northstar
Corridor Development Authority, PMT, MnlDOT staff and input from the public. To facilitate
analysis, the corridor was divided into issue areas (Figure IV-I).
The highway issues throughout the TH WITH 47 corridor between St. Cloud and downtown
Minneapolis were summarized as follows:
Transportation Service
. Numerous and closely-spaced access points (intersections, driveways, farm access)
. High speed
. Congestion east of Elk River
. Significant truck traffic
. Proximity to active rail corridor
. Safety at rail crossings
Environmental Impacts
.
. Proximity to river and wetlands
· Inadequate right-of-way to expand the corridor in suburban and urban areas
· Conflict between rural and urban transportation needs and expectations
· Population and development growth spreading to rural areas
The corridor traverses two major metropolitan areas in Minnesota that have experienced significant
growth in the last 20 years. The above issues are a result of this growth that has also spread beyond
the boundaries of the Twin Cities and St. Cloud metropolitan areas.
Trunk Highway 10, south of the City of Anoka to the interchange with TH 47 in Coon Rapids, is
currently a four-lane divided facility with a limited number of options available to improve travel
speeds and congestion. The Anoka County Transportation Plan recommends TH 10 for mid-term
study. The plan further recommends that the remaining highway segments be converted to freeway
standards, with ramp metering to improve access control, and that additional interchanges be
evaluated as the roadway design is refined. The plan states that in order for levels of service along
TH 10 to be at acceptable levels, the roadway could be upgraded to a six-lane divided freeway
within the existing right-of-way. Additionally, the County's transportation plan recommends
transit investments.
.
Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study
Conceptual Definition of Alternatives
February 1999
IV-l
CR .
15th I ve.
?
\~,
~''''
\,
';
('"
>> ."
M'..\~~
lSSlSSlppl \
River '"
TH 242
Coon Rapids
~
?o
.
St. Cloud
7th St. S. .
.
1-694
W'~ Current Issue Areas
Current Rural Areas
~ Existing Traffic Signal L.
.
iktlQR11ISTAR
> CORRIDOR
Minneapolis
Figure IV-l
TH 10 Issue Areas
Minneapolis to St. Cloud
.
.
.
Trunk Highway 47, south of the interchange with TH 10, is currently under study by Anoka and
Hennepin Counties for potential highway jurisdictional revisions. MnDOT and the counties are
analyzing the potential of turning back the jurisdictional responsibility of TH 47 from the State of
Minnesota to Anoka and Hennepin Counties. Trunk Highway 47 is functionally classified as a
minor arterial with multiple access points and traffic signals as the roadway enters the City of
Minneapolis. Additionally, right-of-way availability is limited along the TH 47 corridor without
the needed space to expand the travel lanes. Improvements along TH 47 would primarily be made
in signal coordination, access management, and Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS)
technologies. As planning and engineering studies are completed, additional highway options will
be identified
2. DESCRIPTION OF mGHW A Y OPTIONS
2.1 ADDITION OF RIGHT-OR LEFT-TURN LANES
This option would add turn lanes at select intersections along TH 10 to facilitate mobility of
through-traffic by separating turning traffic from through-traffic. This option would be particularly
useful in Columbia Heights, Fridley, Coon Rapids, Anoka, Ramsey and Elk River, where dense
commercial, industrial and retail developments are located.
2.2 ITS TECHNOLOGIES FOR TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT
This option facilitates traffic management through the effective dissemination of traffic information
to users of the TH 10 corridor. It included implementation of current Intelligent Transportation
System (ITS) technologies for traffic management, such as variable/changeable message signs
(VMS/CMS), highway advisory radio (HAR) signs, electronic bulletin board system and
information kiosks. These tools would be implemented at key corridor locations. Additionally,
because of the relatively low need of ITS technologies on additional right-of-way, its use could be
"
optimized if implemented along fully developed areas of the TH lOITH 47 corridor, including
Minneapolis, Coon Rapids and Fridley.
2.3 ACCESS CONSOLIDATION/FRONTAGE ROAD DEVELOPMENT
This option would require closure of a number of access locations. It also addressed current issues
concerning congestion, safety and close spacing of access points through access
management/frontage road development. Because of considerations for existing development
along the corridor and additional right-of-way required by the development of frontage roads, this
option was limited to developing and rural areas.
2.4 SIGNAL IMPROVEMENT/COORDINATION
This option entailed the addition of traffic signals and improvements of existing ones through
actuation and coordination. New signals at intersections that meet warrants and signal coordination
would ensure that traffic movements are given priority so that mobility is maintained in the TH 10
Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study
Conceptual Definition of Alternatives
February 1999
IV-3
corridor. Like ITS technologies, this option has relatively low if no right-of-way requirements. .
This option has potential for corridor segments in fully developed areas such as Minneapolis.
2.5 ADDITION OF THROUGH-LANES OR HOV LANES
This option assumed construction of one of the following on the TH 10 corridor:
a) An additional through-lane per direction
b) A high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lane in each direction. The lanes would not have a barrier
or buffer separation from existing travel lanes. Restrictions would be in effect during peak
travel periods: 6:00 AM to 9:00 AM in the eastbound direction and 3:00 PM to 6:00 PM in the
westbound direction. At all other times, the lanes would be used for general purposes.
Because of additional right-of-way required by this option, its application is limited to rural and
developing areas.
2.6 CONSTRUCTION OF INTERCHANGES AT KEY LOCATIONS
This option assumed construction of interchanges at the following locations: Michigan A venue
Southeast in St. Cloud; TH 24/CSAH 6 in Clear Lake; CSAH 11 in Becker Township; and TH 25
in Big Lake. (Note: The interchange at Michigan Avenue Southeast in St. Cloud is part of
MnlDOT's District 3 plan.) Again, because of additional right-of-way required by this option, its .
application is limited to rural and developing areas.
2.7 CONSTRUCTION OF BYPASS
This option assumed construction of a highway bypass at the following locations: Elk River, Big
Lake, Becker and Clear Lake. No bypass options were considered for the area south of the City
of Anoka because of existing and dense development in Coon Rapids, Fridley, Columbia Heights
and Minneapolis.
2.8 CONSTRUCTION OF FULLY-CONTROLLED ACCESS FREEWAY
This option assumed construction of TH 10 to a fully access control freeway. This would entail
an interchange at every identified local access location. Under this option, TH WITH 47 in Coon
Rapids, Fridley and Minneapolis would most probably remain as it is today because of right-of-way
limitations.
Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study
Conceptual Definition of Alternatives
February 1999
.
IV-4
.
v. DEVELOPMENT OF MULTI-MODAL
TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIES
The transit options that were defined and preliminarily screened, as well as the previously identified
highway options were used in the development of the multi-modal transportation strategies. A total
of nine strategies were developed by blending the transit and highway options.
1. MULTI-MODAL TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIES
1.1 DEFINITION
No Build, Transportation Management/Bus Improvements, and Build comprised the transit and
highway options that were evaluated in the study corridor. The multi-modal transportation
strategies are defined below. A detailed discussion of each option is also included in this report.
· The No Build option included only those roadway and transit improvements defined in the
appropriate agencies' Long Range Transportation Plans and Transit Development Plans for
which funding has been committed.
.
· Transportation Management options included lower-cost transit operation and infrastructure
modifications that improve service efficiency and effectiveness. They also represent the
baseline to which other options will be compared.
· Build options included various higher-cost bus and rail-based alternatives and new roadway
implementation that may require a significant construction effort and investment in
infrastructure. Based on recommendations from the evaluation of transit technologies, build
options shall include bus, commuter rail and light rail transit.
'"
.
Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study
Conceptual Definition of Alternatives
February 1999
V-I
The multi-modal transportation strategies that were developed for the Northstar Corridor include
the following blend of transit and highway options.
.
Conceptual Alternatives
Transportation Feeder Commuter Rail with
Multi- Management Bus Anoka Anoka TH 10/47 TH 10/47 River
Modal No- and Bus Improve- Commuter County County Major Minor Cross-
Strategy Build Imorovements ments Rail LRT HOV Upgrade Upgrade ings
1 *
2 *
3 * * *
4 * *
5 * * *
6 * * * *
7 * * *
8 * * *
9 * * * *
The upgrade (major and minor) of general purpose traffic lanes in the corridor on TH 10/47 were
also evaluated as part of the Commuter Rail and Light Rail Transit alternatives. Additionally, new
Mississippi River crossings were evaluated as part of minor upgrades of TH 10/47 and Commuter
Rail, as well as major upgrades to TH 10, Commuter Rail, and LRT. HOV improvements within
Anoka County were included as a candidate alternative and should in effect also serve as the test
for the impact of expanding general purpose traffic lanes.
.
1.2 DESCRIPTION OF CONCEPTUAL ALTERNATIVES
No Build Alternative
The No Build alternative comprised bus system and roadway improvements specified in the
appropriate agency Transit Development Plans and Long Range Transportation Plans for which
funding has been committed. The route and schedule modifications are to be made up to the year
1999. Fixed transit facilities included new and expanded Park-and-Ride lots; service changes for
the period included initiation of additional transit service. Any frequency and service span
improvements within the corridor were part of the No Build option. Infrastructure improvements
included implementation of all roadway construction projects outlined in the county plans. No
improvements to TH 10/47 were assumed in the No Build option.
Transportation ManagementlBus Improvements Alternative
This alternative included infrastructure improvements that would benefit transit operation and
improvements In transit servIce coverage, span, and connectivity; and minor roadway
improvements. The Transportation ManagementlBus Improvement Plan represented the
.
Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study
Conceptual Definition of Alternatives
February 1999
V-2
.
framework to initiate and implement strategies which provide short-term improvement of the
transportation network.
· Transportation Management Strategies. These included measures, policies, and actions to
reduce or better control traffic volumes and vehicle occupancy and consist of:
Alternative Work Schedules
Congestion Pricing
Electronic Bulletin Board System and Information Kiosks
Highway Advisory Radio (HAR) Signs
Incident Management
Ridesharing (carpool/vanpool)
Variable Message Signs
Pedestrian!Bicycle Integration
Parking Management
Signal timings at selected intersection locations
Minor roadway widenings
.
· Service Expansion. New routes would be initiated along the Northstar Corridor. These would
provide links to the major activity centers in the corridor, downtown Minneapolis and the Saint
Cloud area. To improve accessibility and modal integration, bicycle racks would be added
along selected routes. Service span and frequency would be increased on selected routes to
improve access to important activity centers along the route and also improve overall route
attractiveness.
· Queue Bvpass Lanes. These lanes would be implemented to improve transit speeds in
congested locations along the corridor. Potential locations included intersections and
expressway ramps cOlfsistently operating at conditions worse than LOS D during peak periods.
Also, diamond lanes and bus shoulder use would be implemented along selected roadways to
improve transit speeds and overall reliability.
· Ramp Meters. Ramp meters are signals located on expressway ramps to control the timing of
vehicles merging into main lanes. These would be used in conjunction with queue bypass lanes
to provide preferential access to transit and other high occupancy vehicles.
· Park-and-Ride Lots. Existing park-and-ride lots would be expanded in coordination with new
express routes. Additional Park-and-Ride sites will be identified and coordinated with new
express and local service.
Build Alternatives
Feeder Bus Improvements
The Feeder Bus Improvement alternative would be included in all commuter rail options and would
.
Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study
Conceptual Definition of Alternatives
February 1999
V-3
provide access from local and regional land uses to the commuter rail connection. This bus
improvement option would feed the following options with riders: commuter rail, commuter rail .
with Anoka County LRT, and commuter rail with Anoka County HOY.
HOY
The Anoka County HOY alternative assumes construction or implementation of visually or barrier
separated lanes for the exclusive use of transit and other high occupancy vehicles. The Anoka
County HOY alternative is based on and may include operating and infrastructure improvements
designated with the commuter rail alternative.
Light Rail Transit
The light rail transit alternative includes only an operation with commuter rail within Anoka
County. The alignment would be connected with the commuter rail alignment with various
intermodal facilities located along the corridor within Anoka County. The LRT line would be part
of a regional system of LRT facilities within the Twin Cities metropolitan area. The current
alignment of the proposed Northeast LRT line begins in downtown Minneapolis and travels to the
Northtown Station primarily along TH 47.
TH 10/47 Minor Upgrade
Minor upgrades to the corridor roadway were described in Section IV of this report. Minor
upgrades were considered to be addition of right- or left-turn lanes, ITS technologies for traffic .
management, access consolidation, frontage road development, signal improvement/coordination,
and construction of interchanges at key locations.
TH 10/47 Maior Upgrade
Major upgrades to the corridor roadway were described in Section IV of this report. Major
upgrades were considered to be the addition of through lanes, construction of bypasses, and
construction of a fully-controlled access freeway.
The next step in the screening process was to evaluate the modal elements of the transportation
strategies and to recommend those multi-modal transportation strategies that should be carried
forward into Phase II of the MIS.
.
Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study
Conceptual Definition of Alternatives
February 1999
V-4
.
VI. SCREENING OF MODAL ELEMENTS
Modal elements of the nine transportation strategies were evaluated in an initial screening.
Evaluation measures were developed with the intention of identifying operational, environmental
and cost impacts so severe as to preclude the implementation of modal elements and thus deleting
the modal element from further study. The analysis was completed on the following modes.
. Commuter Rail
. Intermodal Connections (Anoka County LRT and HOV Systems)
. Highway Improvements
1. COMMUTER RAIL
The initial analysis of commuter rail concluded that this modal element should be retained for
further analysis. The primary factors were:
.
. The positive conclusions about commuter rail service in the Northstar Corridor included in the
Phase I MnDOT Commuter Rail Study completed in January of 1998. Overall, the MnDOT
study concluded that commuter rail in the Northstar Corridor was feasible. The corridor is
located in both an area of growing population with available land to focus new development
and in mature commercial/retail nodes where existing infrastructure would reinforce
transit/pedestrian oriented development. Additionally, the corridor is located adjacent to
existing high capacity transportation (buses and roadways) that would reinforce the multi-
modal nature of the area.
. The results of initial discussions with Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) staff that
commuter rail service and existing and future freight railroad traffic could co-exist.
. The positive results from the commuter rail demonstration conducted in the summer of 1997.
2. INTERMODAL CONNECTIONS
The primary purpose of the commuter rail service between downtown Minneapolis and the St.
Cloud area is to serve relatively long trips in the Northstar Corridor. For longer trips (such as the
trips being made on the Northstar commuter rail system) 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
. Drop off
. Walk access
. Bike access
. Feeder bus
.
Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study
Conceptual Definition of Alternatives
February 1999
VI-l
A number of complementary major transit investments have previously been proposed and/or are .
currently being proposed that would be integrated with the proposed Northstar commuter rail
service. These transit investments include:
· Hiawatha LRT service between downtown Minneapolis and the Mall of America in
Bloomington
· Northeast Corridor LRT service between downtown Minneapolis and the Northtown Shopping
Center
· Northeast Corridor busway facility on exclusive right-of-way between downtown Minneapolis
and the Northtown Transit Hub
Additionally, existing express and local bus services would be integrated with the proposed
Northstar 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
Due to the intermodal connections of each of the distinct transit systems it is recommended that
the following two modal elements be dropped from the multi-modal transportation strategies as
discrete options.
· Commuter Rail with Anoka County LRT
· Commuter Rail with Anoka County HOV
.
Additionally, it is recommended to include the following transit systems and services as potential
intermodal connections with the Northstar commuter rail:
· Hiawatha LR T service
· Northeast LRT service
· Northeast Busway service
· 1-94 express bus service
· TH 10 Express Bus
· Local bus service
3. DEFINITION OF HIGHWAY EV ALVA TION CRITERIA
The preliminary highway evaluation criteria were intended to identify operational, environmental
and cost impacts so severe as to preclude implementation of a highway option. The preliminary
evaluation focused on the qualitative assessment of each option's mobility benefits, safety benefits,
environmental impacts and cost.
· Mobility benefits pertain to improvements in travel time.
· Safety benefits pertain to crash rate reduction.
.
Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study
Conceptual Definition of Alternatives
February 1999
VI-2
. . Environmental impacts relate to potential impacts on water resources and rare, endangered and
threatened species. TH 10 lies within the Mississippi Wild and Scenic River area. This
presents significant limitations on the types of improvements that can be made to the corridor.
Therefore, this criterion is important in determining an alternative's feasibility. Potential
impacts on historic resources, parklands and community disruption are also considered in this
evaluation.
. Cost pertains to order-of-magnitude construction and right-of-way costs relative to other
alternatives. It is also compared to available financial resources.
The feasibility of each option described in the preceding section were measured by the above
criteria. The analysis is presented as follows.
4. HIGHWAY OPTIONS ANALYSIS
4.1 ADDITION OF RIGHT- OR LEFT- TURN LANES
Safety and Mobility Benefits
.
A significant length of the corridor already has turn lanes. Therefore, the incremental
mobility and safety benefits from this option would not be significant. Although, where
appropriate and where right-of-way exists, this may be an option that could improve safety
at urban and rural at-grade intersections. Additionally, at higher accident location areas
along the corridor, safety benefits would be realized.
Environmental Impacts
As much as possible, the addition of turn lanes at existing access locations was expected
to be constructed in existing right-of-way. A significant length of the TH 10 corridor
already has turn lanes at major access locations. Where turn lanes are warranted and do not
exist, minimal right-of-way acquisition was anticipated. Therefore, at this screening level,
this alternative was not anticipated to have significant impacts to the environment.
Cost
A significant length of the corridor already has turn lanes at major access locations. Where
turn lanes are warranted, construction cost is minimal. (Right-of-way cost was not included
in this analysis.)
.
Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study
Conceptual Definition of Alternatives
February 1999
VI-3
4.2
ITS TECHNOLOGIES FOR TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT
.
Safety and Mobility Benefits
Mobility and safety impacts were expected to be low to moderate depending on the location
of the improvement.
Environmental Impacts
There would be visual impacts associated with this alternative. However, they are
considered minimal.
Cost
The cost of this option was expected to be relatively low (for example, variable message
signs costs about $50,000 each).
4.3 ACCESS CONSOLIDATIONIFRONTAGE ROAD DEVELOPMENT
Safety and Mobility Benefits
Providing access control in some form, whether through grade-separated crossings, frontage .
roads or right-inlright-out entrances and exits, reduces the number of traffic conflicts and,
therefore, reduces crash potential. A number of studies have demonstrated a direct
relationship between the number of full access points and number of crashes, including the
Federal Highway Administration (FHW A) Access Research Report No. FHW A-RD-92-
044. The results of this federal study are presented in Figure VI-I.
Safety and mobility benefits would be most considerable in urban areas along the corridor,
namely in the Cities of Anoka, Ramsey, Elk River, Coon Rapids, Fridley, Columbia
Heights, and Minneapolis. These areas have dense development and closely-spaced access
locations along the TH 10/47 corridor. Access consolidation and frontage roads would
limit areas of potential conflict between turning and through-traffic. Frontage roads would
better serve local traffic that would otherwise use TH 10/47.
In some areas of the corridor, frontage roads already exist. These areas include Becker
(north ofTH 10), Clear Lake (north ofTH 10 and west of Sherburne CSAH 6), and Fridley
(along TH 47).
Environmental Impacts
In Anoka, Ramsey, Elk River, Coon Rapids, Fridley, Columbia Heights, and Minneapolis,
access consolidation and/or the development of frontage roads was most important because .
Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study
Conceptual Definition of Alternatives
February 1999
VI-4
.... 0 CI)
~....."'"
> c
(lJ aJ.-
... > 0
~.- Q..
. - .....
I.l. t'CS CI)
- CI)
. aJaJ
0 Q Ct:u
M Cl)U
0 aJ<
. ....."1-
M t'CSo
c.:::
~
..c aJ
CI).:::;,
a..n ~E
N N U~
0"\ . Z
0"\13
QJ .....0
V"l
- 'a;
.- > e:
~ o e:
Z.-
-~
Q .......... ~e:
N fI'J
... 0'-
C I V"l
..... ~
.- O"\~
0 I ~
Q.. O,.e
0:::00
1'-
fI'J <(I
a..n fI'J Sa;
QJ Ie:
,.. ~ L..L..j
~ . I
o 0
<: Z~
~ 6E
0 'Z 0
~....
. Q "- u.......
.- V"l
,.. QJ ::c .;;
..Q ~..... I
c..~
E ,0 Ql)
0- R
~-S ~
:::::s i ~I
Z I.2 .. 0::"
..
L..L.. V) ..0 a:d
E
QjQj .. m
a..n ..
0
u..... z
.... 0
~z
0
V)
o
.
M
o
.
N
o
.
~
.
VI
a;
..c QJ-e::-=
fI'J ... ~ ,9 ~
~ ,. ~=~
"- \"" .-
u ~~~:2
~
Q
o
.
o
~
m'l
~.......:sl~. .
!t..g:
J~
of development density. It was also in these locales where this option presented the most
difficulty. Right-of-way acquisition would have adverse impacts to businesses through .
reduction of access and visibility. There were also environmental impacts in right-of-way
acquisition; for example, in Elk River, where TH lO's proximity to the Mississippi River
and various wetlands would severely limit the environmental feasibility of a frontage road
system. Therefore, this alternative was considered to have significant environmental
impacts on certain areas of the corridor.
Cost
The capital cost of consolidating access points and/or developing frontage roads along
some portions of the corridor was considered feasible. However, in developed areas such
as Elk River or Minneapolis, development of frontage roads would require extensive right-
of-way or property acquisition that could significantly increase the cost of this alternative.
4.4 SIGNAL IMPROVEMENT/COORDINATION
Safety and Mobility Benefits
This option would provide some improvements on corridor mobility and safety.
Environmental Impacts
On the whole, environmental and community impacts from this option were considered
minimal. Visual impacts associated with this option, particularly on areas that were not
currently signalized, were considered to be insignificant. Air quality impacts from queued
vehicles at intersections were considered to be minor. Vehicle emissions from queued
vehicles were not anticipated to significantly increase.
.
Cost
The cost of this option was moderate. (The most costly element of this alternative was the
signal at about $150,000 each.)
4.5 ADDITION OF THROUGH-LANES OR HOV LANES
Safety and Mobility Benefits
In year 2015, MnlDOT's Transportation System Plan (TSP) projects that the segment of
TH lOin Anoka County will be operating in LOS E after TIP implementation and LOS D
after Plan implementation. Therefore, the mobility and safety benefits of additional
capacity presented by this option are significant.
.
Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study
Conceptual Definition of Alternatives
February 1999
VI-6
.
Environmental Impacts
The qualitative environmental and socioeconomic impacts of this alternative are described
by corridor segment. In urban areas, expansion would have to occur on existing right-of-
way because of physical constraints that include existing and future development, close
proximity to the rivers, wetlands and recreational areas, and the BNSF railroad. However,
in rural areas, much of the roadway is bordered by agricultural land that could be used for
expansion of travel lanes. In summary, depending on the location of the roadway
improvement the environmental and socioeconomic impacts of this option were
significantly adverse but do not necessarily preclude its feasibility.
Cost
Construction cost was estimated at $2 million per lane mile for a new four-lane divided
roadway. Right-of-way costs, depending on the location of the roadway improvement,
would have adverse effects on the feasibility of this alternative. Therefore, depending on
the location, this option may be considered infeasible.
4.6 CONSTRUCTION OF INTERCHANGES AT KEY LOCATIONS
Safety and Mobility Benefits
'.
An interchange is a form of access control. A facility with such access control provides a
higher level of safety and mobility than one without (Figure VI-2).
Environmental Impacts
The construction of an interchange requires a significant amount of right-of-way. In many
of the potential interchange locations identified, significant physical constraints exist such
as wetlands, rivers, railroad and development. Depending on the location of the
interchange, the construction would have have highly adverse impacts on the natural
environment and would disrupt and/or displace businesses and neighborhoods along the
corridor. Therefore, depending on the location, this alternative could have adverse
impacts on the environment.
Cost
Depending on the location of the improvement, the large amount of right-of-way required
by this option entails right-of-way costs that are equally significant. Cost of interchange
construction is estimated at $5 million each including bridge, ramps and roadways.
.
At this screening level, it should be noted that of the potential interchange locations
identified (except in St. Cloud), CSAH 11 in Becker Township has relatively the lowest
right-of-way cost requirements. The area is currently zoned agricultural (no wetlands,
Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study
Conceptual Definition of Alternatives
February 1999
VI-7
lakes, rivers or creeks in the vicinity; no commercial or retail uses to displace). Therefore, .
this potential interchange location is considered feasible.
4.7 CONSTRUCTION OF BYPASS
Alternative bypass alignments are presented in Figure VI-2, Figure VI-3 and Figure VI-4.
Safety and Mobility Benefits
By separating through-traffic from turning traffic, a higher level of mobility is provided
because of fewer interruptions to traffic flow. Increased safety is also achieved because of
a significant decrease in the number of conflicts between turning vehicles and through
vehicles. Therefore, this alternative would provide significant and mobility benefits.
Environmental Impacts
Figure VI-2 through Figure VI-4 present the proposed bypass locations. In general, the
bypass alternative has significant environmental impacts.
. AnokaJRamsey - Dense development in this area precluded consideration of a bypass.
. Elk River - The Elk River bypass would require two Mississippi River crossings and
additional right-of-way in Wright County (Figure VI-2). Existing development, the
Elk River, wetlands and the BNSF railroad preclude the potential for the bypass within
Elk River.
.'
. Big Lake - There were two potential bypass alignments in Big Lake (Figure VI-3).
The northern alignment east of CSAH 5 in Sherburne County would require right-of-
way in an area, as identified by the City, with significant future residential development
potential and wetlands. It would also entail Elk River crossings. These were
significant environmental impacts. The southern alignment does not have significant
impacts on the Elk River, wetlands and future development. It also provided continuity
to the Elk River bypass. Therefore, for the purpose of estimating construction costs,
this alignment is the preferred bypass alignment for the area.
. Becker - Similarly, there were two potential bypass alignments in Becker (Figure VI-
3). The northern alignment would require right-of-way from an existing golf course
and an area, as identified by the City, with future potential for residential development.
It also had significant wetland impacts due to its proximity to the Elk River. The
southern alignment would require right-of-way from existing agricultural land.
Therefore, for the purpose of estimating construction costs, this alignment was the
preferred bypass alignment for the area.
.
Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study
Conceptual Definition of Alternatives
February 1999
VI-8
);;> z
"'z
nO
>>-l
!;;~
iii
"OJ
II :::c
i~
II
l
z
!!
3
cT
..
..
-
~
-
'"
'"
co
~
o
f"'t"
~
=
f"'t"
.... .
~
1-0'
Cdtn
,<1-0'
"e~
~~
c:I) <
>~
1-0'''1
f"'t"'
~ Cd
"1 .....
=aQ
~
f"'t" ~ "Il
.... . l '-.
< ~ ~
~ ~<
c:I) ~ ;;::
.
I ~
L. .;,[ ~
i.'.-: .
l'-.. .'"
"
...
.- .
'f.
I
II
"
II .
\\ .r
II ""';:~{ i"
\\ :... >;;:;~;.0~r
1":3
--r-':""-,
1 '.. .........
. .....
1- -
/
~....
. ..
'. .
FIoNNIml ~ HE
I.
\
. q;
~
"
~>
o "1
f"'t"~
~ ~
aO
;. ~
1-0'
Cd
'<
"e
~
c:I)
c:I)
L
. ~..
", ."" .." '\
'..--- ..... -.
~'
,
I..........
\,
\
''----.
"
',--
-..,.....
I
l-
S
,..
~
~z
(1)2
(')0
i!:'"i
I1ld
iii
'I to
J::tJ
II~
II
2
o
<l
3
rr
..
..
-
;0
-
~
~
00
~
"'
~
=
"'
...,..
~
~
ec
'<
'"0
~
~
~
~
"'
('D
~
=
~
"'
...,..
~
~
ec
('D
n :n
@!
~ ~
.
.
I
\ , "
. - _.-/'
,,'!.
s
~
QII
. " .
.' .'
-.. .
.', : . .. :. ':~:: .'
'.. :
'c";S', ..:.:.:.
. .. ..'
:' :~: :.~:':". :.
"r'" "
,. : .....
. .
'. . .... ..
. .... .
:'....:... :l:;..:
. .:./->>:';":.'.::: . :;'; .' '. ,.
:'. :.:... ~ :.:: >::::,:.' ~./:" :, :,::-,~.:/:
. ..'
. ..
. .
.,' . .
,,' ." .
. .
.. .
~~
-
....
~
t'5 y:>
. "s'" "
...
CR52
. \ -. + ..
...
....
~
......
""." "0 ...... ..
..... . I
,,'; .0'
. ',.. ..
.._. . . -I .. ''t.~' .:....:
.... I ..'-
'.~ .....
.:., ,'I
,
:lj~~
'"!:::;~}~
'.....
.t*-;~~? O~ >
r" ~..," ~
",('D
,~ ~
=
:t.O
~~
~
.'t
::i
,~
.~
': ,,~~
, ,
I
/
~/
~
. .
. "
~
, '"0
~
~
~
i:
~ !
','
-
CaI
~
~
in
m
ec
'<
'"0
~
~
~
14OTl1
tz:y:>
(......
~
I
'" . ~ f",
~~ .
~.
f'.:..
i
,.- .
"
,......01. -
,
)
.' .)
i ....
.~j ~
(~,
II/,;:i,:, ' " '
ft' ,',
'/ .':' . "
j' '. ....
I::,::> ~"
J' ",', "
t .". :.:
>l'
.\ .
.. . '. ..'
I
\ '
.
IU~~
-
~
\
\. "
,
'\ .
f-/ ~
I ~
\ ~
\
,
)
(
) ~
(
0..
/
1,~1RD
~
. "'-'~,
,-
CAH
OR"
CR 11
..
17OT1i
-
11
I~
:a(~
:ti
>z
"'Z
nO
>o-l
!;;a
III
>I~
L:o
li~
I'
II
z
o
<
3
cr
"
..
rc
-
'"
'"
co
~
t""t-
~
=
t""t-
I-'e
~
~
t:C
'<
~
~
~
~
e::(J
t""t-~
~ ~
'-t ~
= '-t
~
t""t-
I-'e
~
~
~
~
~
~
"II
.,q'
~
"
=::
,
....
.
.
.
.'i';:'J~' :.'
~~. .,.
''''.<(. '.
.-""' .
1:,
. 00-
." 00
.....
......
'. .
~:~
~~'Jf;~~\;"
g
!lI
..,.......
\.>~~f~4\ ;,
. ...--...,t~.... ....J '.11'
~;'~V!t~}~J}) ~ r;.:<:,:.~
fk~~\i
;f!~it)
:~ .
"II
.,q'
c
..
"
.:...,:
,;,;a:"~f;\,
""':-'" "?~'~:"':'''S.':.i~:':
";Z&Jit: " 2i
>:~.::: ..;.:'
_1118
70TH
.<.\~}:;::~~~~:. ~-
......:,.;.:::.-:..~.'{.;.i.:.:!
. ",...
.;:::l.:..:~1 ':~: ~;.:' '.~' '::
............
...I!'....
::;'"
10::.
CA 151
--
I
~
l;l
lA
...
...
111
anD
jj
~
CRe ~1'W
~S
III
.".t.;.;....t.
..;:~:~}i~\
t'-':-:~
...
:~1~;'
--.
-',
...;'::::!...
..............
'...
-.,'"'-
'-.
00 ',-
.....: ':
~ Cite
!t~~~
-'.
. '.:. . ....' . ~ .
j
. . "-.
"
HUI8
,
,
I
WI.
"
~r-
i
.,.
;;I
'. n
~~(,l:;<<~~.;~." , ;
...... t~ ..'... " . ..J..i.:~, . :0;'
:i:~~EY;'cl~~ :..) .f~;:(~I~<:;\ ..
. ..~I..I....... ~:. ....~ ,0. ...l4=',lJ '~.. . ~ ..... ,
. '\{;~:~~:':~?;-- . .~ .~;'t:',:.~<;.~\~;~.~J:
UIO ~~_ ....~:..-:I;...
~
.,." f.....
""<, .... .<.
'1
.... : ":'.' ..' L
. "'I ......:." . ....... .' . ". :~'.: ~':.;..:~i..:...!
. '.. .~ ,. . ......
.:. .' '. ~ '. ". I: .:~..:'':' ;r":i.'. :'.:. ~
,;.'" " .- ":>:,:':.k,'.L
~~"""'''''''' ,.....
.. .~..\\I ~. ,~., . ~..:'.:-': ',;':::
..r::.....", " :.',.
I _
,
i -
,.,.~ "0
.......fP
~l;~;
.~,..~:r.. L:<;~:::;>
,"!..,
':~~;}f:;3W~J.;~.
sn~
~
i:
~
~
.tc~\;;! "
.' .
'~'~~I~'~:':-
'OITH
i
,,'?~.1~1~.
.... ",;:".
..{~~; :~.~~~..
..'f...-..,~
"...: ~~~~:::.,
/
!J
It
,
,/
"
.,....
Ifn 8
't1lHA;~ i
.,,-
,;-'" ~ J
/~i1
...~..
/'
"-
C'HI;)
nlf:l
~
~w:l
.
i
/
(
'\
i
i
" '\
..
I
I
'.
,.,
I
.
· Clear Lake - The Clear Lake bypass alignment would follow the existing TH 24 and
70th Avenue Southeast alignments to the west of Clear Lake (Figure VI-4). The
environmental and community impacts of this bypass were relatively minor.
. St. Cloud - A 1995 MnDOT District 3 study indicated that a bypass around the eastern
edge of S1. Cloud was not warranted. This study found that only twenty-five percent
ofTH 10 trips would use the bypass. The study recommended that minor geometric
improvements be completed at existing intersections and interchanges as needed
through the year 2015. System management, including TSM and land use management,
was also recommended to maintain the function of TH 10 as a principal arterial.
In summary, with the exception of the Clear Lake bypass, this alternative has
significant environmental impacts that severely detract from its mobility and safety
benefits, rendering it infeasible.
Cost
Table VI-I summarizes the major cost elements of the bypass option by roadway segment.
It should be noted that right-of-way costs were not included in these cost estimates. They
were anticipated to significantly increase construction costs.
.
Table VI-l
Order of Magnitude Bypass Construction Cost (1998 $)
Bypass Segment
Elk River Big Lake Becker Clear Lake
Construction Element
Roadway Length 6.5 miles 6.1 miles 2.0 miles 0.0
Number of River Crossings I 2 0 0 0
Number of Railroad Crossings2 0 1 2 0
Number of Interchanges 4 3 0 1
Construction Element Cost
Roadway3 $13.0 million $12.2 million $4.0 million --
River Crossing4 $19.2 million -- -- --
Railroad CrossingS -- $1.3 million $2.6 million --
Interchange6 $20.0 million $15.0 million $0.0 million $5.0 million
Total Cost (1998 $) $52.2 million $28.5 million $6.6 million $5.0 million
Assumptions:
I Dimension for river crossing bridge is 80 feet wide by 150 feet long.
2 Dimension for railroad crossing bridge is 80 feet wide by 200 feet long.
3 Cost for new four-lane divided roadway is $2.0 million per mile.
4 Cost for river crossing bridge is $80 per square foot.
S Cost for railroad crossing bridge is $80 per square foot.
6 Cost for interchange is $5.0 million each, including bridge. ramps and roadways.
.
Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study
Conceptual Definition of Alternatives
February 1999
VI-12
The annual MnlDOT District 3 right-of-way and construction budget is $50 million. Of .
this $50 million, $8 million is programmed for expansion projects such as bypass and
interchange construction. Currently, the expansion budget has been allocated through 2008.
The costs presented in Table VI-I do not include right-of-way costs. These would
significantly increase the total bypass cost and further exceed the existing Mn/DOT
District 3 expansion budget. Therefore, the bypass alternative is considered infeasible
under this screening criterion.
4.8 CONSTRUCTION OF FULLY-CONTROLLED ACCESS FREEWAY
Safety and Mobility Benefits
Safety and mobility benefits that would result from this alternative are significant based on
the following data:
Facility Type
Daily Capacityl
Urban Expressway
35,000
Statewide Average
Crash Rate2
2.0
Urban Interstate
60,000
0.7
.
2
In vehicles per day. Source: 1990 Twin Cities Metropolitan Area Travel Behaviour Inventory.
In crashes per million vehicle miles. Source: Mn/DOT 1991 - 1993 Accident Analysis.
Environmental Impacts
Like the preceding alternative but to a higher degree, the construction of a full-control
access TH 10 would require significant additional right-of-way, resulting in adverse
environmental impacts and community disruptions. These impacts render this alternative
infeasible.
Cost
Table VI-I included in the discussion of Option 4.7, Construction of Bypass, provides an
estimate of construction for part of the conversion of TH 10 into a full-access control
facility. These costs rendered the bypass alternative infeasible.
Similarly, conversion to a full-access control freeway was rendered infeasible because
of construction and right-of-way costs significantly higher than Mn/DOT District 3's
existing expansion budget. Additionally, current planning principles use a
constrained needs analysis that assume a constant amount of financial resources for
the long-term (20 years). .
Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study
Conceptual Definition of Alternatives
February 1999
VI-13
,
.
5.
RECOMMENDA TIONS FOR mGHW A Y OPTIONS
This section summarizes the results of the highway options preliminary evaluation. Table VI-2 is
a matrix summarizing how each option fared against each criterion. Based on Table VI-2, the
following alternatives were recommended to be carried forward for further evaluation:
1. Addition of Turn Lanes
2. ITS Technologies for Traffic Management
3. Access ConsolidationIFrontage Road Development
4. Signal Improvement/Coordination
5. Addition of Through-Lanes/HOV Lanes
6. CSAH 11 Interchange
In general, the above options fared relatively well in all three screening criteria. Options that were
eliminated from the preliminary evaluation had such significant environmental impacts and high
costs that rendered them infeasible. These options were: construction of an interchange at select
locations (all other locations except CSAH 11 in Becker), construction of bypass and construction
of full-access control freeway.
.
.
Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study
Conceptual Definition of Alternatives
February 1999
VI-14
=
Q
.-
....
=
=
-;
~
~
=
Q
N=
,e.
-0
~~
~ =
:c ~
=..c
E-t.~
==
c...
Q
~
'"
=
e
e
=
C/.)
c
.:2
'Ei
"0
C
ll)
E
E
o
u
ll)
~
ell
C
ll)
E
E
o
U
......
ell
o
U
-;;
c
ll) ......
E ~
c c..
e E
'> -
c
~
] >>eIl
~::~
>>.- ll)
.......Dc
~ 0 ll)
t':l~a::l
tI)
t':l
'C
ll)
'c
u
"0
I-
~
~
I-
.E:
>>
l-
I-
~
U
00
c
...
Vl
.;<
Q)
.s
.~
Vl
~
~
~
.:
~
<:
Q)
c
Q)
.D
.q
:.c
o
E
"0
c
~
>>
~ rIi
~ Q)
Vl c
-E~
::iE
.
.
e
Vl
Q)
C
~
...J
c
I-
::::l
F-<
ll) ...
.~ 0
...... c
E .g
B;a
<~
"E
~
~
I-
.E:
>>
l-
I-
~
U
.
o
u
l:E
~
~
I-
.E:
Vl
Q)
'SO
o
o
c
..c
u
~
~
F-<
-
.
c
Q)
E
Q)
00
~
c
~
~
-0
I-
~
~
I-
.E:
>>
t:
~
U
-0
I-
~
~
I-
.E:
>>
l-
I-
~
U
~
.2
c
~
.2
.: ~
c
c Q)
~ g ui
~.g ]
.~ i; -0
Vl Q) .:
~ c
o ~ -.=_Q)
c <.:_
~ 'c ?-
~.~ ~
Vl Vl >
~~11
ii ~ ~
.D"O~
~:; ~
.- 0 ~
==UQ)
-g E
E ~ ~
11 ~.:
~v!!3
>> E u
~.2~
~ ~ .5
c
~
u
<.:
'c
00
.;;;
Vl
~
-0
c
Q)
I-
~
Vl
tE
Q)
c
Q)
.D
E
:.c
o ui
E ~
"0 ~
c ~
~
>>e
~..=
~ 0
~ >
.
e
.
e
.
.
l:
.9
~
:9
o
Vl
c
o
U
Vl
Vl
Q)
U
u
<:
c
Q)
E
c.
o
u
>
Q)
o
"0
~
o
~
Q)
00
~
c
o
I-
u..
"E
~
~
I-
.E:
>>
l-
I-
~
U
e
.
e
=
.9
-
~
=
;a
I-
o
o
~
Vl
C
Q)
E
Q)
>
~ 0
= I-
.~~
~ -
"E
~
~
I-
.E:
>>
l-
I-
~
u
-0
=
o
o
-
-
:c
<:
~
U
"0
a v
~ 00
I- C
.E:~
~~
I- Q)
~ ...
U .:
Q)
..:0:
~
...J
.~
Q:l
"0
I-
~
~
I-
.E:
>>
t:
~
U
ui
Vl
~
C.
>>
.D
-0
I-
~
~
I-
.E:
>>
l-
I-
'""
u
-0
=
o
o
~~ui~~ ~>> ~>>
.2 Q) tE ~ c -.~_ ~ ib .2 ~ ib
.: E Q) "0 ~ 1'-.: <.!. .~
c5ii'""<.: -'E~ cO~
= .!::..c ~ 02 ~ ~ :; ~..,!.,:;
.g i; .~ ~.~ ~ ib 0 .g ib 0
'c Q) == >>Vl 'C a = 'C a
OIlc.D '"" ~ Shc..... OIlc.....
.;;; 0 0 E - .;;; 0 ~ .;;; 0 ~
U'J -.= E c g ell 0= ~ CI'J -.= ~
~~"00Q) '""~c. '""~c.
-0 .2 ~ .~ a -0 .2 .5 -0.2 E
=Q)~OVl.=Q) Q)
~ .s ~ .~ 'g 5 ~.s] e .s ~
.~ =0 ~ .s c.';;; = = '"" = =
.::; ~. _"'~~O~uiVlOQ)ui
l.;: 0Il..c =.:: g l.;: 00 c tE tE 00 E tE
=Q) .: :2! ._9 -= - =Q).: 5 Q) Q) = = Q)
Q) "0 ~ '"" -C'V 'i:' Q) "0.:: ii ii;a.g =
.D =:> U Q) Q).D = >.D.D = >.B
~g,:i.2 E~ ~g,ii.... ~g,ii....>>_
._ Q) 0 Q) = Q) ._ Q) ::; Q)
==0'iii..c0Q:l==011 :=0"0
.Do 0'" I- ,-".co . ,",,:.c.c ~ :.c
E ui U 5'~ - E Vl Vl ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
"0 ~ 11 00 t1.l :c- "0 ~ ~ "0 "0 ~ ~ "0
= ~ '"" = c '"" ~ = = ~
'"" _Vl'-' <: ~ "' ~ ~ '"" ~ E ~
Q) "O~~ ~~ Q)Q)
~ E ~ ii ~ U ~ E .:: ?: ~ E.:: >>
~.2QfrC.Q)~.2::::lQ)~.2::::lti
'"" 0 E 1""\ E..c '"" 0 g' 'a .:l! >0 Q)I-C' ~
~ >._ ..... ._ - ~ > I- Vl ~. ~.
o
o
.
I
..c
00",
::::l Q)
e ~
~...J
...>
00
.9 ~
... Vl
;a ~
~j
o
o
.
-
'""
Q)
00
=
'""
..c
U
I-
Q)
C
- '"
... =
o 0
c "';::
.9 '""
t) g
::::l...J
~ t)
= Q)
Ou
U~
o
o
o
o
.
.
'"
'"
~
c.
>>
Q:l
...
o
=
.9
t)
::::l
t:
'"
=
o
U
'"
'"
Q)
U
U
<:
..!.
;f
...>>
o ~
= Q)
.9 Q)
t)~
50
~ E
o 0
uu
~ ~ .c
Q:;:;:2l
...I,,::C
I :;: I
. - 0
e
ca
::: E .,
i:l .= ~
'7 ~
~~~
,s . I
-eo
.
.cE,.
co.= ..
:E1S's
. :;: I
. - 0
e
"0
c:
Q)
on
~
or.
,
-
>
.
.
>>
"0
::l
ri5
C ~
Q) .~
s~
'" =
Q) ...
> ~
.5<
1-...
.5;, 0
~ =
~ .g
S .2
~~.
5B~
Vl c. '""
.s 8 2
~8;f
.
.
.
VII.
STRA TEGIES TO BE CARRIED FORWARD
Based on the fatal flaw analysis conducted on the transit technologies and the highway options in
the Northstar Corridor it was recommended that the original nine multi-modal transportation
strategies be reduced to five strategies. These strategies are then recommended to be brought
forward into the Phase IT portion of the Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study. The multi-
modal transportation strategies to be brought forward are as follows.
. Strategy 1 - No-Build
. Strategy 2 - Transportation Management and Bus Improvements
. Strategy 4 - Commuter Rail with Feeder Bus Improvements
· Strategy 5 - Commuter Rail, Feeder Bus Improvements, and TH 10 Minor Upgrade
· Strategy 6 - Commuter Rail, Feeder Bus Improvements, TH 10 Minor Upgrade, and River
Crossings
Improved sidewalks, pedestrian trails, streetscape improvements, landscaping, bicycle lanes,
bicycle trails, and bicycle facilities were candidate improvements for all of the strategies that were
evaluated.
Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study
Conceptual Definition of Alternatives
February 1999
VII-l
.
. Phase II Techni<:al W ork ~rog~am
for Completing the-
Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study
And
Environmental Impact Statement
for the Proposed Commuter Rail Service
..
Prepared for
Northstar Corridor Development Authority
Prepared by
BRW, Inc.
700 Third Street South
Minneapolis, MN 55415
.
February 25, 1999
.
Contents
Paee
Overview. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Assumptions...............:..................................................:....:..... '." .... ~''2
Work Program
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
.
Complete Phase II of NorthstarCorridor MIS..... .,.....:........
Conduct Special Studies................................. ............
Public and Agency Involvement....................................
Environmental Clearance....... ...... ..... ... ...... ... ... ... ...... ...
Conceptual EngineeringIDEIS Support..............................
BNSF Coordination...................................................
Project Management................................................ ....
Cost Estimate...... .......... ..... ...... ...... ... ...... ... ....... ..... ... ... ....... .......
.
3
6
10
11
20
24
25 -
26
Work Program for Northstar Corridor MIS and EIS
For the Proposed Commuter Rail Service
February 25, 1999
.-:'
Contents
.
Overview
In mid-1998 the first phase of the NorthstarCorridor Major Investment Study (MIS) between
Minneapolis and the St. "Cloud area was initiated. This initial phase of the planning projeCt
produced the following three major products.
· The purpose and need for transportation imI'rovements in the corridor.
· An initial screening of the universe of modal alternatives that resulted in three
multiniodal transportation strategies for futher analysis. All of the build str!ltegies
include commuter rail service between Minneapolis and the St. Cloud area. A No-
Build and a Transportation Management strategy will also be further analyzed during
the completion of the MIS.
· A feasibility analysis of commuter rail service in the corridor.
The conclusion of the analysis of commuter rail service is that the service is feasible. The four
major supporting factors are as follows:
· There is a strong indication based on demand capacity modeling conducted by BNSF
that sufficient capacity to accommodate the proposed commuter rail service could be
developed with capacity and operational improvements to accommodate both freight
and commuter rail.
.
· The forecasts of ridership, the capital cost estimate, and the operating and
maintenance cost estimate are very comparable to recently built systems.
· No major negative environmental impacts are expected.
· The recently completed MnDOT Commuter Rail Study concluded that commuter rail
was feasible in the Twin Cities and that the Northstar Corridor was the priority
corridor.
When the MIS was initiated, the plan was to complete the MIS in two phases with the second
starting when funding was available in 1999. Given the conclusions of the first phase of the MIS,
the plan is slightly modified to proceed with the project development process as follows:
· Complete the MIS over the next nine to twelve months with the product being the
definition of the Locally Preferred Transportation Investment Strategy for the
Northstar Corridor.
· Since all build alternatives still under consideration contain the commuter rail mode, :
advance this component with a MIS/NEPA integrated process approach to address
the environmental factors as part of the MIS. This approach is consistent with TEA-
21.
.
This document defines the work tasks to be conducted to complete the MIS and complete
environmental clearance for commuter rail service.
Work Program for Northstar Corridor MIS and EIS
For the Proposed Commuter Rail Service
February 25, 1999
~-
.~ ~
1
Overview
Assumptions
.
The following assumptions are made for the work program and cost estimate.
· The geographic scope of the commuter rail service for the environmental clearance
will be Minneapolis to the St. Cloud -area with service termination either in-eastSt.
Cloud, downtown St. Cloud or Rice.
· The environmental clearance for the extension of the Hiawatha LRT service from
First Avenue No~h to the multi-modal downtown station will be part of the Northstar
. Corridor work program.
· The general approach will be to use a MIS/NEP A integrated process with the
environmental clearance included as part of the MIS for the commuter rail service.
. The level of improvements to be made to the BNSF railroad tracks that would affect
the environmental analysis will be agreed to by BNSF by July 1, 1999.
. The key environmental issue areas are expected to be:
Noise
Traffic at stations
Right-of-way required for stations and the maintenance facility
Land use
Cultural resources
.
. An EIS will be prepared.
. The federal EIS will suffice for any state environmental requirements.
. The level of engineering to be completed will be sufficient to support the
environmental analysis.
. The station planning and design will define the required right-of-way.
. The following special studies will be completed:
Revised ridership forecasts
New Starts criteria
Refined rail operations plan
Refined feeder bus plan
Financial plan
Maintenance facility location
Land use'impacts
Station area planning and design
Project Management Plan
Capacity Model
.
Work Program for Northstar Corridor MIS and EIS
For the Proposed Commuter Rail Service
February 25, 1999
~-
....-~
2
Assumptions
.
Work Program
1.0 Complete Phase II of the Northstar Corridor MIS
The Contractor will perform the services outlined in this task necessary to complete Phase II of
the Northstar Corridor MIS. The effort will consist ofrefining the.transportationstraregresto be
evaluated, defining the evaluation framework, evaluating the alternative strategies, and selecting
the Locally Preferred Transportation Investment Strategy (LPTIS).
1.1 Refine the Transportation Strategies to be Evaluated
1.1.1 No-Build Alternative
The Contractor will refine the fixed facilities and transit improvements included in the
Transportation Improvement Program (TIPs) along the corridor; these projects will be included in
the No-Build Alternative.
1.1.2 Transportation Management
The Contractor will refine the low-cost infrastructure improvements and bus transit
improvements for the corridor. Included will be Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS), Travel
Demand Management, bus oper~tions, and Transportation Systems Management improvements.
The initial work completed during Phase I will be used as the base.
.
1.1.3 Transportation Strategy 1
The Contractor will refine the strategy that includes commuter rail service and feeder bus
improvements.
1.1.4 Transportation Strategy 2
The Contractor will refine the strategy that includes the improvements in Strategy I, plus minor
upgrades to TH 10. The candidate minor improvements include selected interchanges, lane
additions in selected locations, access control, frontage road development, signal
improvements/coordination, etc.
1.1.5 Transportation Strategy 3
The Contractor will refine the strategy that includes the improvements in Strategy 2, plus new
Mississippi River crossing(s).
The results will.be documented in a Technical Memorandum.
.
Work Program for Northstar Corridor MIS and EIS
For the Proposed Commuter Rail Service
February 25, 1999
;~
3
Work Program
1.2
Evaluate the Alternative Transportation Strategies
.
The first step in the pr.ocess will be to-define the evaluation framework which will include the
same four subject areas used in Phase I:
. Mobility benefits
. Safety benefits
· El1vironmental impacts including land use
. Costs
The specific evaluation criteria will be more numerous than those used in Phase I.
The evaluation criteria defined in this task will be applied to the alternative strategies defined in
Task 1.1. A comparable level of analysis that is described in Tasks 2.3, 2.4, and 2.5 for
commuter rail will be completed on the Alternative Transportation Strategies. The results will be
documented in a Technical Memorandum.
1.3 Select the Locally Preferred Transportation Investment Strategy (LPTIS)
Based on the evaluation of the alternative strategies, the NCDA will select a LPTIS. The LPTIS
will be multi-modal and likely include a commuter rail component, a roadway element, and a
comprehensive transportation management program.
- -
1.4
Implementation Program
.
The implementation program for the LPTIS will include the following:
. Schedule for implementation for each modal element
· Candidate responsible public age-ncy
· Financial plan will identify the following
Capital cost
Operating and maintenance cost
Candidate funding sources
. Proposed project development process for each modal element
1.5 Prepare MIS Report
A draft Northstar Corridor MIS Report will be produced by the Contractor. After review and
comment by the Project Management Team (PMT) and NCDA, a final report will be prepared.
1.6 Public and Agency Involvement '
The proposed public and agency involvement program to be completed during the completion of
Phase II of the MIS is described in Task 3.0.
.
Work Program for Northstar Corridor MIS and EIS
For the Proposed Commuter Rail Service
February 25, 1999
4
Work Program
.
1. 7 Project Management
The proposed .project management- work- tasks to be completed during the .completion of Phase II
of the MIS is described in Task 7.0.
.
.
Work Program for Northstar Corridor MIS and EIS
For the Proposed Commuter Rail Service
February 25, 1999
5
Wark Program
2.0
Conduct Special Studies
.
2.1 Land Use Impacts
Land use analysis will be conducted at two lt~vels with a description below:
h. ":': ~~;;~""":':~;:~'':;.;,''.:~;.~_. _''::~-:.
· Corridor level- this analysis focuses on the development amounts anc:i"type with and
without the commuter rail service.
· Station level-o this ~nalysis focuses on the expected type and amount of land use that
wouldo be expected to occur within one-half mile of each station with and without the
commuter rail service.
Corridor Level Land Use Analysis. The Twin Cities, the St. Cloud area, and the governmental
units along the corridor have forecasts of population, dwelling units, and employment for the next
20 years. These forecasts have been developed with the assumption of no commuter rail service.
Forecasts of the impact of commuter rail service on corridor level of population, dwelling units,
and employment will be made. These forecasts will be further broken down into station area
development and non-station area development. Forecasts will be prepared for 2020 and a
general description of expected impacts beyond 2020 will be prepared.
Station Level Land Use Analysis. The general approach to forecasting changes in development
amount and type within one-half mile of each station will be a top-down approach to forecast
demand for development and a bottom-up approach to assess the capability of each station to
accommodate the demand. The product will be forecasts of type (residential, office, .
industrialllight manufacturing, and retail/service commercial) and amount by station for the Year
2020. The final forecasts will be input to the station area plans.
Two additional aspects of transit oriented development will be completed:
· Definition of proposed policies and actions which would enhance transit-oriented
development. A dialogue will be established to engage the local neighborhoods, the
responsible local and metropolitan agencies, interest groups, and the general public to
identify appropriate actions and the responsible parties for the implementation of
plans for the integration of commuter facilities and land use development. A
workshop format will be used to initiate dialogue with the communities to refine the
analysis process and identify issues to be addressed in Task 2.1.
· Definition of the specific steps to be taken in each local unit of government to
implement the proposed policies and actions which would assist in the
implementation of the proposed policies and actions.
· The impact of the project on growth management policies of the Twin Cities, St.
Cloud area, and the communities in the corridor will be addressed.
.
Work Program for Northstar Corridor MIS and EIS
For the Proposed Commuter Rail Service
February 25, 1999
'--
... ~
6
\V ork Program
.
2.2
Station Area Planning and Design
For each proposed commuter rail station the following work.will be completed. .
. Station functional requirements - defines.theintermodal transfer requirements;' .
parking needs, and expected ridership.
. Station area plan - a plan for quarter to half mile around each station that addresses
relationships to land use and access.
. Station site plan - plan will include:
Platform and canopy configurations
Auto access and egress
Feeder bus access and egress
Number and layout of parking spaces
Pedestrian circulation
Landscape treatments
Right-of-way requirements
Adjacent land uses
One product will be a technical memorandum on station design guidelines.
.
. Preliminary station architecture -- a program will be defined for each station platforin
and up to three station design concepts will be prepared.
2.3 Refine Rail Operations Plan
The preliminary commuter rail operations plan prepared in the Phase I MIS will be refined. The
peak periods and midday service frequency, travel times and deadhead travel will be defined. A
business plan will be developed for the operation of the commuter rail service including costs,
staff, etc. This will be the basis for the request for proposals (RFP) for the service operator.
2.4 Refine Feeder Bus Plan
The feeder bus plan prepared in the Phase I MIS will be refined in consultation with all involved
transit agencies.
2.5 Refine Ridership Projections
The commuter rail ridership projections prepared in the Phase I MIS will be refined for both
'(')pening day of service and the Year 2020. An adequate level of detail for the travel forecasting
model is essential to differentiate key market areas and patronage potential trade-offs between the
alternatives and the design alternative. Additionally, special event ridership will be assessed.
From a technical perspective, the following detailed modeling issues must be addressed.
.
. Land lIse assumptions for areas within adjacent stations need to reflect community consensus
and realistic market-oriented zoning based on officially adopted long range plans.
. Level of zonal and network detail should accurately represent the different mode of access
options (e.g., walk, bus, park-and-ride, and drop off).
Work Program for Northstar Corridor MIS and EIS
For the Proposed Commuter Rail Service
February 25, 1999
~-
;:,
7
Work Program
· A TSM Alternative must be represented that is politically and financially as a point of .
comparison.
· The Build Alternative represented in the model (commuter rail) should reflect a feeder bus
system that.isfinancially .achievable to secure Ff A approval.
Outputs from the refinement of the ridership projections wiRincludethe foUowing'varieb"les.-
· Daily and peak ridership by direction
· Boardings and alightings a!ld each station
· Individual link volumes
· Station-to-stationvolumes
· A verage speed and trip length comparisons
· Transfer incidence and patterns
· Feeder bus ridership
· Diversion of auto trips to transit
· Auto trip access to stations
· Peak-hour transit trips by mode and line
Additionally, travel model related indices will be prepared for submittal input to the New Starts
Criteria and will include travel time savings, incremental trips, passenger miles, and passenger
hours.
2.6 Financial Plan
The financial plan will define the following:
.
· Revenue stream required for capital costs.
· Revenue stream required for the operating costs.
· Amount of candidate revenue sources including innovative sources, from federal,
state, regional, and local governments.
2.7 Implementation Plan
The implementation plan will identify the implementation method to be used; candidate methods
are:
· Design, bid and build (traditional)
· Design/build
· Design/build/operate/maintain
. The institutional. arrangements will also be defined for design, construction, and operation of the
commuter rail service and feeder bus service. This task will include coordination with Metro
Transit, S1. Cloud MTC, Metropolitan Council and MnlDOT.
.
Work Program for Northstar Corridor MIS and EIS
For the Proposed Commuter Rail Service
February 25, 1999
'--
~.-~
8
Work Program
.
2.8 New Starts Criteria
The FTA required evaluation. for inclusion in the-SectionS309 Report to Congress will be
completed and include:
._~ ',-'- . ',"1'"'.,;"'. :::~_'1~'$,.:_,::"",;::'1:.
· Mobility improvements
· Environmental benefits
· Operating efficiencies
· Cost-effectiveness
. Land use
. Other factors
. Financial plan
This work will be closely coordinated with the PMT, Metropolitan Council. St. Cloud APO and
FT A staff.
2.9 Project Management Plan (PMP)
The PMP will define the following:
.
. Project organization
· Project management and control
. Work tasks
. Communications program
The initial PMP will be continuously updated throughout the project.
2.10 Continue Capacity Modeling
Analysis of freight and passenger rail operations will continue until closure is reached with BNSF
on the required improvements.
.
Work Program for Northstar Corridor MIS and EIS
For the Proposed Commuter Rail Service
February 25, 1999
~-
-.'
9
Work Program
3.0
Public Involvement and Agency Coordination
A comprehensive and proactive public and agency involvement program will be conducted to
support the EIS process, Phase II of the MIS, .and the station area pl.anning process. A public
involvement specialist will be retained by the NCDA; the Contractor will support the program.
..... .~. ~':-':_';,'.:"'-:'-',- '."-'~,-:......' ;'-: :-
The'initial program to be completed will be defined by the PMT; this program will define a
comprehensive approach for community/public involvement and agency coordination. The
program will be continuously monitored to assess results; when required, modifications will be
made. -
3.1 Public Involvement
The Contractor will attend selected events and will provide support in developing presentations
for project and public meetings. Support may include developing presentation materials
including text, graphic displays, boards, etc.
3.2 Agency Coordination
The Contractor will coordinate with agencies involved in or affected by the project as required to
complete the MIS, environmental clearance and FT A New Starts Criteria.
A budget for this task was established without a specific number of products or events defined.
Based on the level of effort required, the budget may need to be revised.
Work Program for Northstar Corridor MIS and EIS
For the Proposed Commuter Rail Service
February 25, 1999
~.
-~...
10
Work Program
.
.
..
.
4.0
Environmental Clearance of the Commuter Rail Component of the Northstar
Corridor
The Contractor will perform the services outlined in this task necessary to assess the
environmental consequences or impacts of the proposed commuter-rail service "between "
Minneapolis and the St. Cloud area and the No-Build Alternative and the extension of the
Hiawatha Corridor LRT service to the Northstar Corridor. This effort will consist of collecting -
essential data, comparing viable alternatives, and documenting environmental impacts and
recommendations. In conducting the environmental review effort, the Contractor will perform a
level of environmental analysis appropriate for this project as outlined in the Ff A requirements
and the following sections.
4.1 Notice of Intent (NOI)
A NOI to prepare an EIS for the commuter rail service in the Northstar Corridor will be prepared,
reviewed with the Federal Transit Administration (FfA) staff, revised as necessary, and
transmitted to Ff A for filing.
4.2 Purpose and Need
.
The Purpose and Need chapter of the DEIS is a critical chapter because it defines the
transportation problem in the corridor and the "need for transportation improvements. The
Northstar Corridor Phase I MIS also defined the purpose and need. This previous statement will
be updated and refined.
4.3 Scoping
The Contractor will prepare a Scoping Information Booklet for distribution prior to and at the
scoping meeting(s). It will summarize background of the project, project purpose and objectives,
scoping and public involvement process, work plan, alternatives to be studied, environmental
subject areas to be addressed, and the project schedule. The Booklet also will identify and define
the base set of project alternatives selected for study and evaluation; this work will incorporate
the work completed in Phase I of the MIS. A copy of the Scoping Information Booklet will be
sent to all agencies and organizations and interested individuals on the mailing list.
The Scoping Information Booklet will also define the alternatives to connect the Hiawatha
Corridor LRT service with the Northstar commuter rail service. The alternatives will be
evaluated and a preferred alternative(s) selected for inclusion in the EIS.
The Contractor will define the scoping meeting dates and will monitor the arrangements for the
four scoping meetings, one in St. Cloud, one in the Twin Cities area, one in the central portion of
the corridor, and one inter-agency coordination meeting. The Contractor will prepare meeting
presentation aids and handouts to facilitate the scoping presentations. A record of issues
discllssed and comments received will be created through preparation of a Scoping Summary
Report. The Scoping Summary Report will describe the meeting preparations, content of the
meetings, attendance, comments, and the decisions of the NCDA and FfA.
.
Work Program for Northstar Corridor MIS and EIS
For the Proposed Commuter Rail Service
February 25, 1999
11
Work Program
4.4 Alternatives Definition
.
The Contractor will summarize all alternatives-considered for the corridor. The No-Build and the
Build Alternative, (commuter rail service) wiII be defined. The Transportation Management
Alternative wiII not be included in the EIS, but wiII be defined-forthe'requiredcompariscrmrinthe
New Starts criteria evaluation.
4.4.1 Alternatives Considered But Rejected
The Contractor wiII describe the screening and evaluation process that eliminated any of the
alternatives from further consideration during Phase I of the MIS and the Scoping process. The
criteria and rationale for eliminating alternatives wiII be provided by the Contractor, including a
matrix of advantages and disadvantages of each alternative. The description of the screening
process wiII define the public and agency participation in defining the alternatives and the local
decison-maker actions that led to the selection of the final definition of alternatives serving as the
focus of the DEIS.
4.4.2 Alternatives Consideredfor Additional Study
The Contractor wiII describe and illustrate elements of the No-Build alternative and the
Commuter Rail alternative, the alternatives carried forward and subject to environmental
evaluation.
No-Build Alternative. According to FfA guidelines, the No-Build alternative consists of the
existing transportation system (transit, roadways and highways) and those committed (funded)
projects identified in the Transportation Improvement Programs for St. Cloud and the Twin
Cities. The committed projects will include the funded highway component.
.
Commuter Rail Alternative. All facilities associated with the construction and operations of the
commuter rail line, including right-of-way, structures, track, stations, park-and-ride lots, storage
and maintenance facilities as well as the respective rail and bus operating plans wiII be elements
of the alternative. The Commuter Rail alternative will also incorporate the elements of the No-
Build alternative and will modify the region's bus network that would eliminate duplicate service
and structure routes and service frequencies to feed commuter rail stations.
4.5 Draft EIS
The impact areas to be assessed in the DEIS are organized as follows:
- 4.5.1.. Social./mpact Assessment
4.5.1.1
Land Use
Land use data for the study area will be collected from counties and cities affected by the
proposed project and verified by field surveys. Appropriate local planning agencies will be
contacted for information on local zoning regulations, area growth trends, proposed new
developments, and future land use plans. Data collected will be sufficient to prepare existing and .
Work Program for Northstar Corridor MIS and EIS
For the Proposed Commuter Rail Service
February 25, 1999
~-
...~~
12
Work Program
.
future land use maps delineating residential, commercial, industrial, public, agricultural, and
undeveloped areas adjacent to the proposed alignments.
4.5.1.2
_ Community Facilities
Through contact with local officials, research of available records,telephonedireewries,>CU1dfield
inventory, the community services and facilities within the project area will be identified. Local
public service organizations will be contacted for information on their operational procedures and
any comments they may have on the proposed alternatives.
4.5.1.3
Social-Economic Impacts
The Contractor will analyze socio-economic impacts associated with the build and no build
project alternatives per the FfA process and requirements. This analysis will evaluate both
positive and negative impacts to the corridor, the community and site specific areas that include
commuter rail station areas, park-and-ride facilities, and areas designated for future joint
development. The Contractor will analyze land use changes, such as, opportunity for
development, and zoning modifications that may result form the configuration or operation of the
alternatives proposed. The socio-economic impacts that may result from such land use changes
will be evaluated and documented. Potential impacts from the standpoint of short-term and
permanent employment created from construction and operation of the proposed facility will be
assessed and quantified.
4.5.1.4
Environmental Justice and Title 6 Compliance
.
Potential impacts on neighborhoods will be identified from the neighborhood profiles developed
in previous subtasks, from U.S. census data, city, county, and from the ongoing public
participation process. Rather than making judgments as to the significance of social impacts, this
analysis will quantify impacts and will identify the types of individual groups most likely to be
affected. Particular attention will be given to the transit-dependent population.
4.5.1.5
Displacements and Relocation
The Contractor will be responsible for preparing a technical memorandum that documents the
right-of-way acquisition associated with the various alternatives being considered for the project.
As part of the referenced technical memorandum, the Contractor will examine the amount and
location of property proposed for acquisition using available aerial photography and through
conducting windshield surveys along the commuter rail line. Additionally, the estimated cost to
acquire the property and relocate impacted residential or business structures will be calculated.
The mitigation section of the technical memorandum will include a summary of the relocation
payments and services as required under the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property
Acquisition Act of 1970, as. amended, and as required by state law.
4.5.1.6
Archaeological and Historic Features
The scope of work for archaeological and historic features is based on the assumption that since
the project will use an operating rail line, and earth disturbing activities will generally be limited
to the location of stations, that the project will generate few new impacts to cultural resources.
.
Work Program for Northstar Corridor MIS and EIS
For the Proposed Commuter Rail Service
February 25, 1999
~......
.;~
13
Work Program
The Phase 1 investigation of archaeological and historic features will entail the following tasks.
.
· Review of existing data to locate National Register listed or eligible. historic-and
archaeological properties within the area of potential effect (APE) and assessment of the
. potential for unknown significant properties within theAPE. TheContractorwill'consnlt
with the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) relative to these preliminary
assessments.
. · If any station areas or auxiliary facility locations show potential for signif!cant impact on
historic or prehistoric archaeological resources, Phase 1 testing {shovel tests) will be
completed to establish evidence for cultural materials and intact soils. Any standing
structures to be impacted by new construction will be assessed for their physical integrity and
age, photo-documented, and submitted to the SHPO for review. If the SHPO requests Phase
2 evaluation of any archaeological or historic resources, a second itemized budget will be -
submitted. Phase 2 evaluations are designed to assess the eligibility of a property for listing
in the National Register of Historic Places. When eligible properties are identified within the
area of potential effect, mitigation strategies will be discussed.
4.5.1.7
Determination of Section 4(f) Involvement
The Contractor will determine whether Section 4(t) properties will be affected by the project.
The work program assumes that no 4(f) properties will be impacted.
4.5.1.8
Visual/Aesthetic Impact Analysis
.
The Contractor will assess the potential visual and aesthetic impacts of propos.ed alternatives.
Impacts will be assessed with reference to facility users and facility observers.
4.5.1.9
Farmlands Impact Analysis
In accordance with the Farmland Protection Policy Act of 1984, coordination with the Soil
Conservation Service (SCS) will be undertaken to determine if farmlands bordering the corridor
are of prime, unique statewide, or local importance. While conducting the field review for this
portion of the data collection process, information will be gathered so that Form AD-l 006 can be
completed. For the purposes of defining the scope of services, it is assumed that no prime, unique
statewide, or local importance farmlands will negatively impacted.
4.5.2 Natural Impacts Assessment
4.5.2.1 Hydrologic and Natural Features
The Contractor will collect data and analyze impacts of the proposed alternatives on aquatic
preserves, floodplains, and f1oodways. Data will be compiled through direct field observations,
coordination with applicable agencies, and field reviews involving those agencies. On-going
agency coordination will ensure the use of current accepted data and provide long-term
agreement on baseline conditions and potential course of action.
.
Work Program for Northstar Corridor MIS and EIS
For the Proposed Commuter Rail Service
February 25. 1999
~.
-,"\.
14
Work Program
.
4.5.2.2
Wetland Impact Analysis
The Contractor-will identify wetlands that are likely to be affected by the project and will analyze
the impacts to those wetlands. Wetland data to be collected will include vegetation types;
observations of fauna inhabiting the area; morphology of each'wetland; an evaluation Qfwetland
function; quality and value; and potential project impacts and mitigation. Wetlands will be
-classified as defined by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. A voidance of these habitats will be
addressed during the study. Coordination with environmental and regulatory agencies will
-continue throughout the project's development to avoid and minimize harm to wetlands. No
-WET2 analysis will be conducted in this phase. The Contractor will develop conceptual
mitigation alternatives, as required, for unavoidable impacts to wetland areas.
4.5.2.3
Biological Assessment
Habitats within the project limits having the potential to harbor threatened or endangered species
will be identified through field observations. Findings will be documented. Plans for
investigating whether threatened or endangered species could be affected will be coordinated with
federal, state and local agencies and organized interest groups.
4.5.3 Physical Impact Assessment
4.5.3.1 Air Quality Analysis
.
The Contractor will collect the data necessary and perform the air quality impact analysis for the
proposed alternatives (i.e., park and ride lots, maintenance yards). The Contractor will collect
and summarize existing ambient air quality and meteorological data for the study area.
Previously developed traffic and air quality studies conducted in the area will also be collected,
reviewed, and examined as to their applicability to this study.
Air Quality levels will be estimated at each air quality analysis site under each of the proposed
alternati ves for the project's first year of operation and its design year. At each of the analysis
sites, maximum one- and eight-hour concentrations will be calculated for the AM and PM peak
periods. Future air quality levels estimated for this build alternative (for each of the two analysis
years) will be compared with National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and predicted
no-build levels to determine the effects of each alternative. Assessments will be made of the
potential air quality impacts associated with proposed park-and-ride facilities using FT A-
approved methodologies.
The Contractor will prepare an assessment of the consistency of each alternative with the
strategies contained in the applicable parts of the areas SIP. This analysis will include a
,discussion of possible traffic control measures and physical improvements that may be necessary
for each alternative to attain air quality standards as specified in the SIP. Potential air pollution
mitigation measures will be evaluated for sites where exceedances are estimated.
.
A mesoscale analysis will be conducted to estimate annual area-wide emissions of CO, NOx, and
NMHC under each of the proposed alternatives for the project's first and design years. These
emissions will be based on area-wide projections of ADT and corresponding vehicular speeds for
each build scenario. The emission burden estimated for each alternative will be compared with
Work Program for Northstar Corridor MIS and EIS
For the Proposed Commuter Rail Service
February 25. 1999
.~.
~-:~
15
Work Program
the no-build and base year results in order to determine the consistency of each alternative with .
the applicable portions of the SIP.
4.5.3.2
NoiselVibration Impact Analysis
The noise and vibration analysis, including train whistle blowing, will indicate the magnitude and
extent to which sensitive receptors in the vicinity of the alignment will experience changes in
noise and vibration levels during the construction and operation of the project. Review maps and
aerial photographs that show land uses within 152.4 m (500 ft.) of the project limits will be used
to identify such sites. Project limits include the alternatives or combinations of alternatives and
other roads and streets with increased traffic fromtraffic diversion. Noise-sensitive-Iand uses In
the study area will be identified by land uses that fall into FHW A categories A to E and FT A
categories I to 3: schools, churches, residences, parks and recreational space, libraries, hospitals,
and rehabilitation centers. Vibration-sensitive structures will include historic structures, hospital
surgical wards, and structures housing sensitive equipment or processes. Existing rail and traffic
data (speeds, volumes, vehicle classification) will be reviewed with respect to noise and vibration
emISSIOns.
4.5.3.3
Contamination Impact Analysis
A Contamination Screening Evaluation Report (CSER) for the selected Commuter Rail alignment
will be prepared by the Contractor in accordance with the procedures outlined in NEP A.
Potential hazardous materials and petroleum contamination sites will be identified based on a
review of public records and field inspections. Sites identified will be ranked in accordance with - .
potential contamination impacts. Recommendations will be developed for further Preliminary
Contamination Assessments (PCA) for any sites ranked as medium or high-risk contamination
sites.
4.5.3.4
Water Quality Impact Analysis
The Contractor will conduct a Water Quality Impact Evaluation (WQIE) for the proposed project.
The objective of the study will be to identify and document water quality issues relating to
compliance with the Clean Water Act, other federal and state regulations.
4.5.3.5
Energy Impact Analysis
The Contractor will analyze the energy implications of the alternatives considered. Baseline
condition energy consumption conditions will be evaluated with reference to existing sources of
electric and petroleum power in the study area. Current fuel consumption by transit mode will be
calculated using operating data. Automobile energy consumption will be estimated using data on
automobile vehicle miles traveled. '
4.5.3.6
Traffic Impact Assessment
The traffic analysis at the commuter rail stations will include an analysis of the street network in
the immediate vicinity of the proposed stations. The following analysis will be performed:
· The trip generation for each station will be determined based on the park-and-ride capacity,
estimation of transit trips, and the type and intensity of adjacent land uses. The trip
generation will be estimated for both no-build and build conditions.
.
Work Program for Northstar Corridor MIS and EIS
For the Proposed Commuter Rail Service
February 25, 1999
~-
-'
16
Work Program
.
· Based on the transit planning model and the analysis of transit ridership, the trip distribution
for the individuals will be determined. Future land use changes in the station area resulting
from the station area planning program will be considered.
· Based on the trip generation and trip distribution', the trips for each station including those for
the adjoining development will be assigned to the roadway network on a daily and peak hour
.basis.' - ,~.' .--
· For each station area, significant traffic impacts will be identified and possible mitigation
measures will be suggested.
The Contractor will also perform an initial review of proposed commuter rail/roadway grade
crossings. The following analyses will be performed: -
· Survey of existing or as-built conditions of roadways involving at grade crossings.
· Review grade crossing and identify candidate safety and operational upgrade with respect to
traffic control and safety (e.g., signing, striping, traffic control devices, warning devices,
etc.).
4.5.4 Construction Impact Analysis
.
Short-term, construction impacts to be evaluated will include traffic and circulation disruption,
business and economic disruption, neighborhood disruption, construction equipment noise and
ground-born vibration, dust dispersal, erosion and sedimentation, utility relocations and
disruptions, and public health ~nd safety factors. Likely construction methods will be described.
Measures to mitigate potentially significant adverse impacts will be formulated and described in
the OEIS.
4.5.5 Environmental Impact Mitigation Measures
As the OEIS process identifies potentially adverse environmental impacts, they will be addressed
for mitigation. Mitigation measures may be considered for noise and vibration control, business
and household relocations, restrictions to ground level circulation, visual impacts, wetlands,
floodplains, cultural resources, hazardous materials, disposition, etc.
4.5.6 Prepare Preliminary DEIS
The Contractor will document the results of the data collection effort and the environmental
analysis performed. The Contractor will prepare a Oraft Environmental Impact Statement as
described in NEPA and FTA rules and procedures. The Contractor will then prepare a Notice of
Availability and distribute the DEIS.
4.5.7 FTA Approval and Distribution of DEIS
The Contractor will transmit the preliminary DEIS to FTA for review and comment. All
comments will be responded to and the document will be revised until FT A signs the OEIS.
.
Work Program for Northstar Corridor MIS and EIS
For the Proposed Commuter Rail Service
February 25, 1999
~-
;~
17
Work Program
4.6
Conduct DEIS Public Hearing(s)
.
The Contractor will assist the PMT in making arrangements to hold-up to three public hearings on
the DEIS. Activities will include:
_,_....,.~.._,,- h::"':'.- -~._ .-.
. Secure meeting locations
. Prepare the hearing advertisement
. Prepare handout materials
. Assist in making presentations
· Prepare transcripts
· Record all comments received
4.7 FEIS Preparation
The FEIS will incorporate comments received on the DEIS and specifically identify methods to
be used for mitigating impacts. The FEIS will be consistent with the environmental requirements
of the Ff A and the NEP A. The subtasks for the FEIS include:
· Provide an environmental analysis for the LPTIS consistent with U.S. Department of
Transportation (DOT), FfA, Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ), NEPA, and other
applicable federal, Minnesota statutes, regulations and guidelines.
. Respond to public and review agency comments received on the DEIS.
.
. Resolve remaining DEIS issues necessary to complete selection of a final rail alignment and
station and maintenance facility location. This will likely include additional environmental
analysis of selected subject areas.
. Identify measures to mitigate potential adverse impacts, noting where authority and
responsibility for carrying out these measures reside. The report will discuss monitoring
requirements mandated by federal, state, and local jurisdictions to ensure that the measures
are enforced. Memoranda of Agreement will be developed between the parties responsible
for implementing and monitoring the measures. The mitigation measures will be
incorporated into the FEIS.
. Identify the environmental permits that will be required prior to construction of the system.
The permits will be identified by name of agency, permitting application requirements, and
schedule for obtaining the permits. A Permit Coordination Package will be prepared to share
with involved regulatory and permit review agencies. This package will provide information
on the project sufficient to assist the regulatory agencies in defining potential permitting
problems and in recommending to the PMT ways in which the project could be made more
acceptable from a permitting perspective. The package also will contain proposed mitigation
measures.
.
Work Program for Northstar Corridor MIS and EIS
For the Proposed Commuter Rail Service
February 25. 1999
IL-.~
18
\V ork Program
'.
· Prepare a FEIS document. It is assumed that a Section 106 Determination of Effect and
Memorandum of Agreement and/or a Section 4(t) statement will not be required. The FEIS
document will be prepared and processed in accordance with FT A and NEP A guidelines.
Draft FEIS chapters will be prepared, incorporating the LPTIS preliminary design results,
environmental impacts and mitigation, and responses to comments received'onthe DEIS.
"'The FEIS will be reviewed, approved, and signed by FT A.
4.8 Record of Decision (ROD)
A Netice of Availability of the FEIS for public review. will be prepared and submitted to the PMT
for publication in local newspapers. The EP A will place the notice in the Federal Register, and
the FEIS will be distributed by the Contractor to agencies that have previously commented on the
DEIS, and to those that request a copy of the FEIS.
Support will be provided to the PMT, as necessary, to obtain the ROD.
.
.
Work Program for Northstar Corridor MIS and EIS
For the Proposed Commuter Rail Service
February 25, 1999
19
Work Program
5.0 Conceptual Engineering/DEIS Support
.!
The DEIS engineering support wiII.define the physical and operational aspects of -the project
sufficiently to allow the project to be subjected to the environmental assessment of Task 4.0.
5.1.. Data Collection/Base Map
The Contractor will complete the collection of technical information about pertinent existing or
programmed conditions within the corridor - conditions which may Influence theDEIS, the-
physical planning, and the conceptual engineering work. Among the features of potential interest
are utility lines and structures including railroad facilities, streets and drainage facilities, building
and bridge structures, retaining walls, traffic flows and related data and property ownership.
Scaled but uncontrolled aerial digital orthophotography will be used by the Contractor as the
basis for plotting various data necessary for both engineering and environmental analysis, design
studies, and the development of the conceptual design plans. Aerial digital photography will be
prepared for the following uses:
· Rail Alignment Plan and Profile Drawings
· Station Areas and Storage YardlMaintenance Facility/Central Control
The Contractor will develop a CADD data base compatible for use on aerial photography.
5.2
Preliminary Geotechnicallnvestigations
.
The Contractor will obtain and review published information contained in the US Department of
Agriculture Soils Surveys, available historical soil borings, Quadrangle Maps and aerial
photographs; and perform a site inspection to review existing geotechnical conditions along the
corridor. Information obtained from the Contractor's data review and site inspection will be
documented in a written report.
5.3 Coordinate Track Engineering With BNSF
BNSF will be responsible for preparation of the conceptual engineering of the required track
improvements and any required right-of-way. The Contractor will coordinate with BNSF.
5.4 Conceptual Engineering For Each Station Site Plan
Station site plans will be developed under Task 2.1 Station Area Planning and Design.
Conceptual engineering will be completed on the following plan elements:
· Park-ride facility
· Feeder bus access, layout, and egress
· Auto access and egress
· Pedestrian and bicycle access and egress
.
Work Program for Northstar Corridor MIS and EIS
For the Proposed Commuter Rail Service
February 25, 1999
,.
-'
20
Work Program
.
The conceptual engineering will include:
· Analysis of potential private aHd public utilities. Preliminary designs te rectify any major
conflicts between the commuter rail facilities and the. affected utilities will be completed.
This analysis will include preliminary drainage analysis and design: The design wilhize'"aii"d
locate any required detention and/or retention facilities for storm water.
· Preliminary grading plan tn order to determine right-of-way
· - General assessment of any unusual soil conditions
· Property acquis~tion Tequirements
There products will be combined with the outputs from Task 2.1 and submitted to each
governmental agency with review and/or approval responsibilities.
5.5 Other Infrastructure Revisions
The Contractor will develop conceptual designs of revisions to various existing infrastructure
features which are required or desired to permit or facilitate commuter rail construction and
operation. Beyond resolving conflicts with various utility lines and structures (addressed in Task
5.4), there will be need to make adjustments to other existing infrastructure features to permit the
commuter rail facilities to occupy space and exist permanently. Under this task, major changes to
streets, highways, bridges, sidewalks, traffic control devices and the like will be identified and
conceptually defined.
.
5.6
Conceptual Systems Engineering
As the first step in the process, the Contractor will develop a set of functional design and
operating criteria for the system components of the commuter rail system. The systemwide
components include commuter rail vehicles, signaling systems, communications systems, central
control, and the fare collection system. The criteria will establish the physical limitation of the
components, such as dynamic envelope and minimum curve radius for the vehicles, and the
general performance expectations. The analysis will be based on the generalized requirements
from applicable existing commuter rail systems.
The Contractor will then prepare a conceptual outline specification for each of the following
system-wide components:
· Vehicles
· Fare collection
The Contractor will prepare a conceptual outline specification in coordination with BNSF for
each of the following system-wide components:
· Central control
· Signal system
· Communication system
· Security
.
A key element of this task will be the relationship to BNSF signal and control system.
Work Program for Northstar Corridor MIS and EIS
For the Proposed Commuter Rail Service
February 25, 1999
~.
~7l
21
Work Program
5.7
Conceptual Design of the Vehicle Storage and Maintenance Facility
.
Based on the maintenance and transportation requirements of the -system,- the, Contractor will
develop a survey of facilities and usages at other commuter rail properties from existing
information. This comparison will be used to define'the-desiredrequirements-forthefacility.-
Based on this analysis, the Contractor will define the functional requirements for the facility and
determine the approximate size and footprint ofthe facility. These may include:
· Daily service and inspection of vehicles
· Mid-day and nighttime storage of vehicles
· Scheduled maintenance and minor repair
· Major overhaul and repair of vehicle components
· Storage of spare parts
· Fare revenue collection center
· System security center
· Administrative office space
The spatial requirements and organizational logic will be established for the facility.
The Contractor will also determine functions and facility requirements for a system control
center. The Contractor will assess what related communications linkages must be provided.
Based on this analyses, the central control facility's specific functions, capacity and conceptual
layout will be defined. -
.
5.8 Determine Location of Yard and Maintenance Facility
Candidate locations for the facility include:
· At the end of the line
· At the former BNSF yards in St. Cloud (which may be near the end of the line)
· At a point approximately in the middle of the corridor that would provide the yard and
maintenance facility at a point to service a stage one system that does not go to St. Cloud. No
decision on staging has been made; the overriding preference of the NCDA is service from
St. Cloud to Minneapolis from the start
. Other sites
These alternative sites will be evaluated; the candidate criteria include:
· Availability of land to accommodate the conceptual design developed in Task 5.7
· Cost of land
· Compatibility with surrounding land uses
. Impact on train operations
. Number of "dead-head" miles
. Auto access to the site
Based on the evaluation, the NCDA will select a preferred site and a first alternative site.
.
Work Program for Northstar Corridor MIS and EIS
For the Proposed Commuter Rail Service
February 25, 1999
~-
~-:-,
22
Work Program
.
5.9
Capital Cost Estimate
The Contractor will develop preliminary estimates of-capital cost. A capital cost -methodology
will be adapted for the Project. The cost estimate will be based on discrete contract units, with
descriptions of what each includes and the interface conditions. The capital cost-estimate "Will .-.
serve as input to the Financial Plan task. By the end of this phase, a new zero-based capital cost
estimate will be provided to serve as a pre-preliminary engineering baseline and as final input to
the-financial plan.-
.
.
Work Program for Northstar Corridor MIS and EIS
For the Proposed Commuter Rail Service
February 25. 1999
~.
.~~
23
Wark Program
6.0 BNSF COORDINA nON
Outside legal counsel and/or a-special railroadnegotiator-will be retained to negotiate a letter of
commitment between BNSF and NCDA. The Contractor will provide technical support in the
negotiation of the letter of commitment between'the BNSF and NCDAthat wiUbe'negotiated and
agreed to during this phase of work. A partial list of subjects to be addressed include:
. A vailability of track use
. Track improvements required
. System improvements required
. Responsibility for improvements
. Financial plan
. Time schedule
The Contractor will coordinate with BNSF in the continuing development of the commuter rail
alternatives.
Work Program for Northstar Corridor MIS and EIS
For the Proposed Commuter Rail Service
February 25. 1999
~-
.:\
24
Work Program
.
.
/.
.
7.0
PROJECT MANAGEMENT
7.1 Overall Project Management
The following tasks will be completed:
· Prepare a work breakdown structure (WBS).for the tasks to be completed
.- Prepare and maintain a proje€t ma~ter schedule-
· Develop, maintain, and monitor project costs
· Prepare project progress reports
· Establish and implement a document and drawing control system
· Develop and implement a project staffing plan
· Execute and administer subcontracts
· Establish and implement a cost accounting system geared to the WBS
.
· Provide required administrative support services
· Establish and implement a quality control and assurance plan
7.2 Meetings
· Attendance at NCDA, PMT, and Executive Committee meetings
7.3 On-going Support
· Provide on-going miscellaneous support services as requested by the chair of the PMT.
.
Work Program for Northstar Corridor MIS and EIS
For the Proposed Commuter Rail Service
February 25, 1999
~-
".'
25
Work Program
Cost Estimate
Outlined below are the estimated costs to complete the previously defined work program.
Work Task Cost Estimate ($)
1.0 Phase II of Northstar Corridor MIS "0_'
- 1.1 Refine Transportation Strategies 80,000
- 1.2 Evaluation Framework 10,000
- 1.3 Alternative Strate2:Y Evaluation 140,000
- 1.4 Select LPnS 50,000
- 1.5 Financial Plan 25,000
- 1.6 Implementation Program 25,000
- 1.7 MIS ReDort 10,000
- 1.8 Public and Agency Involvement 10,000
- 1.9 Proiect Management 10,000
Subtotal for Work Task 1.0 360.000
2.0 Conduct Soecial Studies
- 2.1 Land Use Impacts 100,000
- 2.2 Station Area Planning 450,000
- 2.3 Rail Operations Plan 20,000
- 2.4 Feeder Bus Plan 20,000
- 2.5 Ridershio Proiections 40,000
- 2.6 Financial Plan - 40,000
- 2.7 Implementation Plan 20,000
- 2.8 New Starts Criteria 40,000
- 2.9 Proiect Management Plan 10,000
- 2.10 Caoacitv Model 50,000
Subtotalfor Work Task 2.0 790 000
3.0 Public and Aeencv Involvement 0999-2000) 60.000
4.0 Environmental Clearance
- 4.1 Notice of Intent 5,000
- 4.2 Purpose and Need 2,000
- 4.3 Scoping 50,000
- 4.4 Alternatives Definition 30,000
- 4.5 Draft EIS
- 4.5.1 Social 100,000
- 4.5.2 Natural 40,000
- 4.5.3 Physical 120,000
- 4.5.4 Construction 25.000
- 4.5.5 Mitigation 20,000
- 4.5.6 Prepare Preliminary DEIS Document 80,000
- 4.5.7 FT A Aooroval/Revisions and Distribution of Document 15,000
- 4.6 DEIS Public Hearings 50,000
- 4.7 FEIS Preparation 125,000
- 4.8 Record of Decision 15,000
Subtotalfor Work Task 4.0 677,000
Work Program for Northstar Corridor MIS and EIS
For the Proposed Commuter Rail Service
February 25, 1999
~.
:,
26
Work Program
e
e
/e
.
Work Task Cost Estimate7$)
5.0 ConceDtual Eneineerine SUDDort
- 5.1 Data CollectionlBase Maps - 25,000
- .... 5.2 Preliminary Geotechnical Investigations 20,000
- 5.3 Coordinate Track Engineering with BNSF 1 (y.'000
- 5.4 Conceotual Ene:ineering for Station Site Plans 50,000
- 5.5 Other Infrastructure Revisions and Utilities 78.000
- 5.6 Svstems Ene:ineering 50,000
- 5.7 Maintenance Facility Layout Design 75,000
- 5.8 Maintenance Facilitv Location 25,000
- 5.9 Capital Cost Estimate 35,000
Subtotal for Work Task 5.0 368 000
6.0 BNSF Coordination SUDDort (1999-2000) 50.000
7.0 Proiect Mana!!ement and NCDA, PMT and Exec. Comm. Meetines 200000
Sub- Total $2,505,000
Contim!encv (10%) $250,500
TOTAL $2,755,500
.
.
Work Program for Northstar Corridor MIS and EIS
For the Proposed Commuter Rail Service
February 25, 1999
~-
~~..
27
Wark Program
.
'"
'"'
.;::
....
'"
rJl
'a
~
. ....
'"
"S
E
E
0
U
'0
'"
'"
0
"'"
0
....
~
'"
.s
....
~
rJl
~
'0
'"
'"
rJl
....
::8
....
0
'0
.;::
....
0
u
....
.s
'"
.s
....
0
z
-5
eo
~
'"
"5.
E
0
u
....
~
'"
:;
'0
'"
..c:
'"'
rJl
...
. ....
'"
E-< '"
... :g
-<
~ ..
....
0 ~
I ..... -
'" II
" <'R~ -
c:l ;$- -
, ::J:~ f-
I 0'
,; !
0
Z
'" - f-
0 , II
-
:,:::,:,:: I f-
15. ;X:":
" ~I J
'"
....:: )l f-
el ,".w.
= @1
00<: 111
~ :~@ I f-
... :>~~:'::
:; .:::*~ t&
..., ;Wj ,m
f- f-
;:::; " :1 ~~~
"
=
..., )"]: '..%: ::~~::
f- :,:;l::,l: f- f-
... :- '~~'W t
'"
;:;
l::- f- f-
'': ~~;::::: I I il
0.. :&
00<: f-
~ r~ I 8:"';-0
,:::::::: II
m::::
'" ~m;:
~ " f-
~ 'm I' il
.'::::
"- c_ ,
f- ~..., i-"
I -
'1% I ;l::;:
C .::::X: 1i 'ox
'" ~>>~:: J
...,
f- -f- I J - -
'"
"
c:l
f- -f- 1
,; ~:
0 ,;::.
Z 11
f- - Hi
0 I
-t ~f
I-: :::;::~:" I :1
~ ,::.~:::::
'" ~]K 1
f- ~Ilfu f- 11 ~
'" el .N
'" = ::::":~: :.."r
;:: 00<: <~;:;"<~: "
f- - :~:,:
... :::::::.- ;l:l:l::::: I I
~ :'~:'::.:: II I
f-;; I[ ':::::::" I '*
:: .
.:;
I-- ~ "
::;::::;;::
... m~:::.- .
" %;:~::
;:; W#
~ ~ :::;". I
0.. b{
00<:
'- ,.... - -f- ....... ..".",
'"
v i:iJ
~ 0
v :ri
C/O i c ~
- OJ
~ ~ v ~
I c <5 o. ~ ,- o. ~ .E
o. ~
v c co v o. r/: <:
.~ ~ v c > ~ ~ :E
0 c c
co g ~ g ~ - - 2
~ c: c " ~ ~ 'C
'" C c '" o. g ~ 2
~ a u " '" c g: ;:; ~ "
"" " ,:: ~ " " c: c I~ c o. '" '"
~ '" c ~ c GJ co "
~ I " o. c C c: c .~ " .~ " ~ c ~ .~
" .. C >. ~ 6: c "'. ;: c ] 00<: ::: OJ " " "
c: Ie u ~ R " f c: 5 " c co " <( J "" " 3 " ,2 ~
~ c I~ '" c ~ U " ~ 00<: ~ .~ S "
't! c '" " ;; c: " " ] Z " >- " 0 <( G: u C; 8 l{j
c c '" " - > ;;: " OJ)
" ':JI, U 0 (j " " -'" 0 u G: :r.
0 '" '" <( ,g " " " c ~ ;: ~ 6: c- z .g C/O <5 - - C/O :e "
z c ;;: E '" .~ " co c: " c i:iJ > " ~ "
" c ~ co - " co 2 ~ " ~ > ] ~ t !t '" c- o C 0 "
"0 f'= " " c '" " <( ~ ~ i2 ~ >, E '" lI.. 0 c If u ;:;
-l " " :J .5 " " o. i:iJ <3 u " - 0
N " C U '" C " " " ~ Yi '" Q " " '" </l ~ co - (j 'S " 'E! u
c " u I~ ~ = co C c c c ! " e. '" :: '" elg ~ E i:iJ i:iJ co ~ '" c ~ ~ '"
" ~ ~ - '5. "-
~ '- '" " :0 'C c ''':: .., C '" en c 8 '" " u "
~ " " > 0:; ~ " j " " " ~ 9 :g .; c " '" 0 0:; 0 0 c c U '" .~
~ .c '" UJ '" c- c- o '" '" '" u: z 6: " Z o...r.,r.; <: i 6: 13 GJ u 6: '" (j a 6: 0 ~ :3 ~ 0 z ::
'" c- : : : : : : u : : : : : : : : : ... '" : : : : : c 0 : : : : : : : : : : o:l ...
f- : n C". ~. 'C : - n C". " ~. r- oc '" : : - co " '" " ~ ~ " 'C r- oc : n C". .., ~. " oc '" : :
"C '\ " C", " ~ r-
'" ~ - - - - - - N "j ci ci ,,; ". ". oi oi oi ci ... " .,,: .,,: .,,: .,,: .,,: 'i:i ~ .~ ';; .,,: .,,: .,,: or, vi ~: vi ~, vi vi ~, vi vi .., r--
" ~ .;:: ~ -;;; "" -t ~ ~ ~ "" "" "" ~ ~ "" "" ~ ~ ~ .:< "" "" "" "" "" 1! ~ "" "" -'" ~ ~ ~ "" "" "" ~ "" ~ ~ ~ ~
0 ~ en c- '" '"
~ ~ ?: ~ ?: ~ ~ ?: " ~ " ~ r:-:: ~ " ~ ~ " '" ?: " r:-:: ~ ?: ?: ?: " "
f- f- f- f- '" f- f- f- : : : : : f- f- f- f-
'"
'"
'"
~.
-<'>
--
u
.5
:i
~
'"