Loading...
4.4. SR 06-21-1999 rll ~'\) ( ); ~l}{ Item # 4. 4 . MEMORANDUM River TO: FROM: Mayor and City Council Scott Bar licker, Planning Assistan* June 21, 1999 DATE: SUBJECT: Northstar Corridor Update At the June 3, 1999 meeting of the Northstar Corridor Development Authority the Authority received a legislative update, discussed principles for station area planning, received an update on the Major Investment Study and the EIS process, and the BSNF negotiations. . The state legislature approved 60 million dollars for the Hiawatha Corridor Light Rail project, which will connect with the Northstar Corridor in downtown Minneapolis. The legislature also gave responsibility for commuter rail development and operation to MnDOT. They are to have an outline for the development process completed by January 15, 2000. All commuter rail corridor plans must be consistent with the approved plan. The communities must approve station locations and design. The legislation passed was modeled on the Northstar Corridor so consistency with the MnDOT plan should not be an issue. The Authority reviewed the attached principles for station planning. The principles include service, safety, access, land use, park & ride facilities. These principles will be the basis for more detailed station design guidelines which will be developed and reviewed in the future. The Major Investment Study is moving forward as is the Environmental Impact Statement. The Notice of Intent and the scoping document were approved. Negotiations with Burlington Northern are also proceeding. . 13065 Orono Parkway · P.O. Box 490 · Elk River, MN 55330. TDD & Phone: (612) 441-7420. Fax: (612) 441-7425 JU* m. )~S~ Northstar Corridor Development Authority Thursday, June 3,1999 4:30 p.m. Sherburne County Government Center Elk River, MN Action Requested 1. Minutes of May 6, 1999 Meeting* Approval 2. Executive Committee Report of May 20, 1999 a. Revised 1999 Budget* b. Professional Services Agreement with David Loch* c. Ramsey County Regional Railroad Authority Request for Membership* Approval 3. Legislative Update a. Wrap-up of 1999 Legislative Session b. Report on BNSF Letter of Commitment* Information 4. Station Area Planning: Guiding Principles* Approval 5. MIS a. Phase I Study Report Documents Distribution b. No-Build Alternative* Information c. Transportation System Information Management (TSM) Alternative* 6. EIS a. Final Notice of Intent I Scoping Meeting Dates* Approval b. Final Draft Scoping Booklet* Approval 7. Update on BNSF Negotiations Information 8. Report on APT A Commuter Rail Conference Information 9. July Meeting Date Discussion 10. Other *Attached Agenda Item #2a Northstar Corridor Development Authority DRAFT: May 12, 19. 1999 Revised Budget NOTES Approved Revised 1. Authority Expense $10,000 $10,000 2. General Coordination/Administration $150,000 $100,000 Contracts: . Ken Stevens - $17,500 . RRA - $50,000 3. Insurance $1,200 $1,200 4. Legislative Activities $60,000 $60,000 Contracts: . Capital Partnership - $30,000 . Brimsek - $30,000 5. Community and Public Involvement $250,000 $250,0. . Contract: Shandwick - $200,000 . Misc. Expense - $50,000 6. BNSF Negotiations/Legal Services $200,000 $200,000 Contracts: . RRA - $50,000 . Law firms - $150,000 7. Technical Services, including: $2,755,500 $2,923,000 . EIS/MIS . Engineering Support . Station Planning . Capacity Modeling/BNSF Technical Services Contracts: . BRW - $2,755,500 . Ken Stevens - $52,500 . Mainline Management - $75,000 . David Loch - $30,000 8. Unallocated Reserve $1,773,300 $1,655,800 TOTAL $5,200,000 $5,200,0. . *Wf))RmSi1'A1/f1 (C@!R!RI!J))(Q)!fff Agenda Item #2b MEMORANDUM May 25, 1999 To: Northstar Corridor Development Authority From: Executive Committee Subject: Agreement for Professional Services with David Loch . As the Northstar Corridor moves into the Phase II Work Program, a critical and time-consuming element of the work relates to the development of stations, including station design, station area planning and working with the communities. The Executive Committee recommends that David Loch co-manage the station area work as a member of the Northstar Corridor Development Authority Project Management Team. (Ken Stevens will also serve as co-manager.) Action Requested: That the NCDA approve an agreement with David Loch for the term June 3, 1999 to December 31, 1999 for a contract amount not to exceed $30,000. Work will be based on an hourly rate of $75.00. . Northstar Corridor Development Authority 2100 3rd Avenue, Anoka, Minnesota 55303-2265 (612) 323-5700 Fax: (612) 323-5682 i:fNORTHSiT/41/lil CORRIf/))(j)f!I Agenda Item #2c . MEMORANDUM May 25,1999 To: Northstar Corridor Development Authority From: Executive Committee Subject: Ramsey County Regional Railroad Authority (RCRRA) Request for Membership On April 1, 1999, the NCDA received the letter of March 16,1999 from the Ramsey County Regional Railroad Authority requesting membership in the NCDA. The NCDA referred the letter to legal counsel for review of the request in . light of the by-laws, Joint Powers Agreement and funding mechanisms. Further, the NCDA directed legal counsel to present the analysis to the Executive Committee at its May 20, 1999 meeting. To add RCRRA as a member of the NCDA would require an amendment to the Joint Powers Agreement because Ramsey County is not on the Corridor and was not contemplated originally as an eligible government unit (Article II). An amendment would require the approval of each of the 30 current parties to the Ag reement. Action Reauested: The Executive Committee recommends that the Joint Powers Agreement not be amended at this time and that RCRRA be welcomed to attend NCDA meetings to facilitate the exchange of information and coordination. . Northstar Corridor Development Authority 2100 3'd Avenue, Anoka, Minnesota 55303-2265 (612) 323-5700 Fax: (612) 323-5682 .. .~.... ..lV, ..Jli..L..-::L.:UJ - .., ;,. .'~~ <::: i -- - Ramsey County Regional Railroad Authority 220 Courthouse. St. Paul. Minnesota 55102 651/266-27621 FAX 266-2761 ~ . j;',,:;;' , .... '.' " '. ." I .Yfi":..'i.;:,J,-....: . . . .. :. Tony Benneft, Chair March 16, 1999 Commissioner Betsy Wergin, Chair Northstar Corridor Development Authority Sherburne County Government Center 13880 Highway 10 Elk River, Minnesota 55330 Dear Commissioner Wergin: Ramsey County Regional Railroad Authority adopted a resolution on February 23, 1999, that it would request membership in the Northstar Corridor Development Authority. Our reasons for the request are: . > The Minnesota Department of Transportation Commuter Rail Study has recommended that if commuter rail is built. Phase I of investment should include the connector between the two cities, as well as the corridor to Elk River. and, ,.. We are members of the Red Rock Corridor Joint Powers Board, and believe that it makes sense to coordinate our activities in a regional manner, rather than a segmented approach. Please let me know the steps that Ramsey County will need to take to become a member of the Northstar Corridor Development Authority. Sincarely/ _ / T), .~f . .,/ / 8Y'1" f ...A:/7L-f .;G. f .1 Commissioner Tony Bennett, Chair TB:fjm cc: Ramsey County Commissioners Metropolitan Light RaiJ Transit Joint Powers Board Terry Schutten Kathryn OeSpiegelaere . ""ntcd "D Recycled Plpcr .e~4 *NOR7I7H/Sir/41/f1 CORRID@/fI . Agenda Item #3b MEMORANDUM May 25,1999 To: Northstar Corridor Development Authority From: Executive Committee Subject BNSF Letter of Commitment Included in your packet for the meeting on Thursday, June 3, is a letter from Tim Yantos . to D.J. Mitchell, BNSF, requesting a letter of commitment to the Northstar Corridor. In essence, Mr. Yantos' letter requests an acknowledgement from BNSF that the NCDA expects to commence commuter rail service in the Northstar Corridor in 2003, utilizing the existing BNSF right-of-way, freight tracks, and facilities, subject to an agreement between BNSF and the NCDA. Further, the letter asks that BNSF assist the NCDA in accomplishing its goal of providing convenient, reliable, efficient, and cost-effective commuter rail service by making its resources available as necessary as the project progresses to completion. Also included in your packet is the response by the Chief Operations Officer of BNSF, Matthew Rose. Mr. Rose reiterated BNSF's willingness to work with the NCDA. However, he cautioned that BNSF has concerns regarding the improvements needed to support commuter rail, project cost estimates, and overall public safety. Included in his letter is a list of Commuter Principles to help public agencies understand what BNSF deems important when responding to requests to use its right-of-way for commuter rail service. Action ReQuested: Information only . Northstar Corridor Development Authority 2100 3rd Avenue, Anoka, Minnesota 55303-2265 (612) 323-5700 Fax: (612) 323-5682 . . . ~ ~#-.3. COMMUTER PRINCIPLES BNSF is willing to cooperate on commuter rail studies and provide state and local officials with information. Where commuter service is proposed on a minimally used line that BNSF is willing to sell, BNSF shall be paid fair market value for the property. Where commuter service is proposed on a line BNSF intends to continue owning, the following principles apply: . Any commuter operation cannot degrade BNSF's freight service, negatively affect BNSF's freight customers or BNSF's ability to provide them with service. . BNSF must be compensated for any and all costs incurred in providing commuter service and make a reasonable return for providing the service. . Capital investments necessary for commuter service are the responsibility of the public. . BNSF will not incur any liability for commuter operations that it would not have but for those operations. These operations are provided by BNSF primarily as a public service; the relatively modest compensation BNSF receives does not begin to justify assuming the significant liability associated with passenger service. . Studies of how commuter service might be provided must take into account not only the current freight traffic levels, but projected freight traffic growth. . Investments made for commuter projects must not result in BNSF incurring a higher tax burden. Property improvements should not become part of our tax base; materials used should be exempt from all sales and use taxes, etc. or BNSF must be made whole for any increased tax burden. BNSF must retain operating control of rail facilities used for commuter service. All dispatching, maintenance and construction must be done under the control of BNSF. Passenger stations, parking lots and other non-rail facilities may be publicly owned and operated. . Studies must reflect BNSF's actual operating conditions and cost structures. For example, construction work estimates must reflect our labor contract costs, schedules cannot assume that we will not operate any freight trains during peak commuter periods, etc. . BNSF will limit commuter operations to the commuter schedules intially agreed upon and for which the capital improvement plan has been designed. Future expansions will have to undergo the same analysis and provide any required capital improvements before schedules can be altered, service added, or stations added. . Improvements must include grade crossing protection and intertrack fencing as required to minimize the risk of accidents, due to both liability and service interruption concerns. 04/28/99 PO Box 961034 Fort Worth TX. 76161-0034 :!600 Lou Menk Drive Fort Worth TX. 76131-2830 817-352-6100 817-352-7430 Fax ~~~ ,1 38 BNSF MATTHEW K. ROSE Smior Via Pmidmr and Chi~fOp"allom Offiar Burlington Northern Santa Fe Corporation . May 12, 1999 Mr. Tim Yantos Project Director NorthStar Conidor Development Authority 2100 Third Avenue Anoka, Minnesota 55303-2265 Dear Mr. Yantos: I am writing to reiterate BNSF's willingness to work with you and your Board as NorthStar commuter rail service plans continue to develop. The enclosed document entitled "Commuter Principles" was recently prepared by BNSF to help public agencies better understand what BNSF deems important as we respond to requests to use our right-of-way for commuter rail servIce. In addition, we will soon complete capacity simulation studies that will identify improvements . needed to support proposed NorthStar commuter service while maintaining freight operations at their current levels of efficiency. I know you and others will be reviewing our results and trying to gain a better understanding of our assumptions. If we can help. we will do so as quickly as possible because the results of the capacity simulation studies and subsequent engineering and design work will lead to a better definition of project costs. With respect to current project cost estimates, we continue to be concerned that capital cost numbers being presented in public forums may be underestimated. I have therefore asked our project team to work with you and your staff to determine how quickly we can deveiop better capital cost estimates. A for anticipated operating costs, we will look to NorthStar to provide indemnification and insurance for the service, to pay our costs to operate the service, to pay its share of maintenance of way costs, and to provide us a reasonable return for our work. Regarding the improvements identified to support commuter rail service, they have been designed to maintain freight service levels, not enhance them. However, we understand you may ask us to consider funding some of the capital improvements related to service start-up. To help you speed this discussion, I have asked my staff to prepare a paper which summarizes how we as a company define benefit when BNSF makes decisions on what track and signal improvements merit investment. With such information in hand, your people and ours should be able to have a more informed discussion on what would drive us to invest with NorthStar in planned capacity expansion projects. . . . . . Mr. Tim Yantes May 12, 1999 Page 2 With respect to public safety, commuter service brings additional trains through communities at the very time when vehicular and pedestrian traffic peaks and people are most impatient to get to their destinations. We are very concerned that intertrack fencing at stations, improved grade crossing active warning devices. and. where appropriate, grade separations or closures be either included in the project or funded concurrently from other sources. Furthermore, we understand your interest in commencing commuter rail service between St. Cloud and Minneapolis by the end of the year 2003. Our engineers believe this is realistic as long as three conditions are met: 1) We have concluded capital and operating agreement negotiations; 2) NonhStar has funding for the project and is able to authorize material procurement by no later than the fall of 2001: and. 3) Additional land required for right-of-way improvements has been acquired. cleared, and any environmental remediation completed by no later than the spring of 2002. Building a commuter rail service can be a difficult process. As we have seen so far in Seattle, however, it can be one where all parties work cooperatively toward addressing the twin objectives of meeting local public transit needs while protecting the interests of our freight customers. Regards, ~J;t,., Matthew K. Rose ~:3h "" '~klM(()/!tlm~mJ}tj ~@/!tl!f!lI!@@!f!I . - -' E~-;;C_iUcc: May 5, 1999 Betsy Wer~ NCDA ow, Shcrilwue c.....my D.J. Mitchell, II BNSF Assistant Vice President Passenger Service 2600 Lou Menk Drive PO Box 961034 Fort Worth, Texas 76161-0034 Gerry DauiA. NCDA Via: awr Cily oC SI.. CIOlId P:wI McCanca Anob Ccuacy Mark Slcagieill Ha....pill Coualy Re giCDal R~I""" AuIhorily Sieve Billillr;s CilyoCFridley Dear Mr. Mitchell: Lewis Swlt Haven T <>wI>SIUp As you are aware, a meeting has been scheduled for May 13,1999, with Congressman Jim Oberstar, representatives from the BNSF, and representatives from the Northstar Corridor. It is our uryderstanding that Congressman Oberstar expects that BNSF will sign a letter of commitment to the Northstar Corridor project at that meeting. In preparation for thiS meeting, we have compiled a list of what we believe to be the key elements of a letter of commitment These elements aTe as follows: . 1. BNSF recognizes the intent of the NCDA to commence commuter rail service in the Northstar COrridor in 2003 and agrees to participate in the process of developing the necessary pUbliC/private working relationship and agreements to achieve that end. 2. BNSF is prepared to allow the commuter rail service to run on its right-of-way. tracks, and facilities, subject to agreement between BNSF and the NCOA as to compensation and the design, construction and funding of capital projects that may be necessary to expand the capacity of BNSPs line. While many details of these agreements remain to be worked out, BNSPs early commitment is significant. 3. BNSF will work with the NCOA to achieve the following four goals for commuter rail service in the Northstar Corridor: a. Service that is convenient, fast, and reliable enough to attract and retain a substantial ridership, including commuters currently using automobiles; b. Service that is efficient and cost-effective in meeting the NCOA's goals; c. Service that continues to accommodate freight service and other existing productive uses of the Northstar Corridor' and d. Service that meets or exceeds all appli~able safety and environmental standards. . Northstar Corridor Developmf!1Il rllltllOriry 2100 3'~ Avenue. Anoka. Minnesoca 55303-2265 (612) 323-5700 Fax: (612) 323-5682 . . . . 4. BNSF is committed to working on this development process with the NCDA and will make its resources available as necessary throughout the Phase II MIS/EIS process, engineering and design, negotiations of the necessary agreements, start up and operation of commuter rail service in the Northstar Corridor. T.he NCDA very much appreciates your consideration of these important concepts. Please let me know ma-dvance of our meeting if you have any questions or concerns regarding these key elements. I look forward to our meeting next week. Sincerely, I .....: Vf A~ Tim vantol . Project Director --- TY:sc cc: Congressman Jim Oberstar . . . DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT NORTHST AR CORRIDOR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Regular Meetine: Minutes Mav 6.1999 The Northstar Corridor Development Authority met on May 6, 1999, at 4:30 p~m. at the Sherburne County Government Center, Elk River, Minnesota. The following members. alternates and citizens were present: Tim Yantos, David Loch, Mark Stenglein, Stephanie Eiler, Mike Christensen, Ken Stevens, Yvonne Chaillet, Robert Kirchner, Bob Gagne, Dave Mona, Holly Ziemer, Heidi Weaver, Eric Peale, Jean M. Keely, Jeanne Witzeg, Richard Nau, Dick Wolsfeld, Joy Scherber, Francis Loetterle, Jim Barten, Rick Speak, Duane Cekalla, Carl Yilek, Gerald Garbel, Paul Goenner, Paul Ostrow, Duane Grandy, Terry Nagorski, LeRoy Pauley, Gerry W oulin, Kevin Hansen, Marlaine Szurek, Walt F ehst, Patrick Cairns, Dan Erhart, Ken Paulson, Jon Haukaas, Tom Cruikshank, Paul Saunders, Vic Oviatt, Tom Gamec, Jerry Leese, Jim Dickinson, Art Daniel, Betsy Wergin, Mary Richardson, Lynn George,k Gerry Donlin, Jeff Dehler, Paul McCarron, Tim Johnson 1. Chairperson Wergin called the meeting to order at 4:30 p.m. 2. A motion was made by Gerry Donlin, seconded by Mark Stenglein and carried unanimously to approve the agenda of May 6, 1999, as presented and the meeting minutes of April 1, 1999, regular meeting minutes as presented: 3. Executive Committee Report: a. Jeff Dehler, Anoka County Public Relations, reviewed the schedule, proposing firms, selection process, the work program and budget followed by the Executive Committee in making a recommendation to the NCDA of the selected Public Involvement Consultant. Shandwick International team members provided information on their background, qualifications and accomplishments. The proposed project budget was reviewed outlining the tasks to be accomplished. " A motion was made by Mark Stenglein, seconded by David Saunders and carried unanimously to approve the recommendation of Executive Committee to approve and authorize the Chair to execute a contract with . Shandwick International for public involvement and public information services as described in the approved work program with a contract amount not to exceed $200,000, for the term May 10, 1999 to December 31, 2000 (said contract on file in the office of Tim Yantos, Anoka County). b. A motion was made by Jim Dickinson, seconded by Jerry Leese and carried unanimously to approve and authorize the Chair to execute an agreement with MainLine Management, Inc. for an amount not to exceed $75,000 to perform services as described in the approved work program, for a term of May 6, 1999, through December 31, 1999. 4. Mary Richardson reviewed the qualification of firms who responded to the Request for Qualifications (distributed by the Executive Committee) to provide legal services in negotiations with BNSF and in the Environmental Impact Statement process. The Selection Committee recommended that the NCDA hire Byron D. Olsen of Felhaber Larson Fenion & Vogt, David Hirsh of Harkins Conningham, and Robert Kessler to provide legal services to the NCDA. A motion was made by Paul McCarron, seconded by Paul Ostrow and carried unanimously to approve . and authorize the Chair to execute a contract with the recommended attorneys for legal services, as described in the approved work plan, for the term of May 10, 1999 to December 31, 2000, in an amount not to exceed $50,000 per firm, to be paid on an hourly basis, for a total amount of $150,000. 5. Paul McCarron and Mary Richardson provided an update on legislative issues. 6. Tim Yantos and Stephanie Eiler, Anoka County, discussed the initiation of the NCDA Phase II Work Program. No action taken. 7. Ken Stevens reviewed and discussed the Land Use Analysis and Station Area Planning Work Program for April, 1999, through November, 1999. The guiding principles for station area planning including service standards, park and ride facilities, safety, access and land ~se were reviewed. NCDA members were asked to provide input on the principles. Action will be requested at the next meeting. 8. Stephanie Eiler, Anoka County, reviewed the proposed scoping process for the environmental impact statement. No action taken. . . . . 9. Other business: The Technical Advisory Committee will meet at their first meeting scheduled for April 20, 1999, at 3:00 p.m. at the Anoka County Government Center, 7th Floor, Administration Department. 10. The next meeting of the Northstar Corridor Development Authority is scheduled for Thursday, June 3, 1999, at 4:30 p.m. at the Sherburne County Government Center. 11. The Chairperson declared the meeting adjourned at 6:05 p.m. Betsy Wergin Chairperson Date Img\\\FS 1 \SYS\DEPl\COORD\ADMNDA T A \COMMITTE\CORRIDOR\1999\050699 .doc . . . ~..,~ ~~ i::fIlO".,.,..,.. DORRIDDR BRW i.."DA.YS-A"M6QRE'GRWiiCQMPANy MEMORANDUM BRW Thresher Square 700 Third Street South Minneapolis. MN 55415 Phone: (612) 370-0700 Fax: (612) 370-1378 To: NCDA From: BRW, Inc. Date: May 26, 1999 Subject: Northstar Corridor Draft Principles for Station Area Location and Planning PRINCIPLES FOR STATION AREA LOCATION AND PLANNING Approved Goals The following Northstar Corridor Project Goals have been approved by the NCDA: · Improve mobility and safety within the corridor. · Minimize adverse environmental impacts and foster positive environmental effects. · Encourage transportation-supportive land use development patterns · Provide a cost-effective and efficient transportation system Principles Supporting Goals The following principles will be considered when the NCDA evaluates initial station location and will guide the design team as it works with the community to integrate the station into the community: Phase II Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study Draft - Principles for Station Area Location and Planning May 26, 1999 Station area location and planning principles will be the foundation for more detailed Station Design Guidelines. These Design Guidelines will be developed and reviewed separately for . eventual adoption by NCDA and will address: . station platform and canopy . parking lot capacity configurations . security systems such as lighting and surveillance . vehicular and pedestrian access . fare collection . utilities . park and ride requirements . signage . feeder bus relationships . lighting 1. STATION LOCATION A. Service I Stations should be located to maximize efficiency of travel in both directions. Efficient travel in the Northstar Corridor is best served by: . Maintaining a 90-minute maximum travel time between St. Cloud and downtown Minneapolis . Maintaining a minimum station spacing of five miles. . Maintaining a 30-minute frequency of service (headway) during peak periods. . Permitting extensions of the line or system with minimum additional capital cost. . Providing direct connection to other transit services where feasible. . Meeting a reasonable threshold for minimum ridership. . B. Safety The system and station area plans will meet all applicable safety standards and strive to minimize conflicts between all modes of transportation. The system should: . Locate and configure stations such that a commuter train stopped at a station does not block roadway crossings. . Utilize designated railroad crossings for all pedestrian track crossings and access to stations. . Minimize track crossings to access the station platform. . Maximize sight lines of approaching trains for pedestrians and vehicular traffic. . Phase II Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study Draft - Principles for Station Area Location and Planning 2 May 26, 1999 . . . ",- 2. COMMUNITY INTEGRATION A. Access Access to the system is critical to effective and safe system operation. Station configuration and siting should: · Provide access on a public street system that accommodates added traffic demands generated by the facility. · A void travel through residential areas. · Minimize parking conflicts between transit patrons and residents. · Accommodate connections to bus transit routes and light rail services. · Provide direct connections to pedestrian and bicycle systems (both community and regional). · Provide connections to adjacent redevelopment sites and employment centers. · Satisfy all Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements. B. Land Use In order to encourage transportation-supportive land use development patterns, station locations and configurations should: · Be compatible with adjacent land use, zoning and community development plans. · Minimize adverse impacts upon natural and cultural resources. · Minimize adverse impacts of property acquisition. · Maximize the potential for future adjacent economic development and revitalization. · Maximize access to employment, including reverse commuting patterns. C. Park and Ride Facilities All stations except Minneapolis should be located and configured as to: · Provide sufficient free parking for all transit patrons. · Provide parking that is accessible from a public street or road. · Minimize walking distance from parking to station platform. · Provide direct platform adjacency for other transit modes such as feeder buses, auto drop- off/pick-up, bicycles and pedestrians. · Encourage shared parking with adjacent development. Phase II Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study Draft - Principles for Station Area Location and Planning 3 May 26, 1999 ~~51 . 1:{IfOIlJJlSTJUI CORRIDOR BRW /II. D4.Y.ES.. MciQRE' GROUP COMPANY MEMORANDUM BRW Thresher Square 700 Third Street South Minneapolis. MN 55415 Phone: (612) 370-0700 Fax: (612) 370-1378 To: NCDA From: BRW, Inc. Date: May 26, 1999 Subject: Northstar Corridor Summary of No-Build Alternative SUMMARY OF NO-BUILD ALTERNATIVE . As part of Phase II of the Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study (MIS) and Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Proposed Commuter Rail Service, a number of transportation alternatives will be evaluated. One such alternative is the refinement of a "No-Build" alternative. This alternative includes fixed facilities and transit improvements included in the Transportation Improvement Programs (TIPs) along the corridor. The No-Build alternative encompasses roadway and bus system improvements specified in the appropriate agency Transportation Improvement Plans and Long Range Transportation Plans for which funding has been committed. Committed or programmed transportation projects and existing transit services/facilities along the TH 10 and 1-94 corridors are identified in the following sections. Existing Services - 1999 Transit Services St. Cloud Metropolitan Area · St. Cloud Metropolitan Transit Commission Fixed Routes - serving Sauk Rapids, St. Cloud, Waite Park and SCSU Specialized Service - ADA paratransit service Senior Rider - service for senior citizens . Metro Express - service for industrial center employees Phase II Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study Draft - No-Build Alternative Summary May 26.1999 - Rideshare Coordination · Tri-Cap - service for senior citizens · RiverRider Heartland Express - special workshop transportation . Sherburne CountvlWright County · RiverRider Heartland Express - general public door-to-door service operating in Sherburne County and communities in Wright County. · Volunteer Transportation (Sherburne County) - service to financially eligible individuals for medical appointments. . Monticello Heartland Express (Wright County) - dial-a-ride service within Monticello city limits. Anoka County . Anoka County Transit Fixed Routes - serving Anoka, Blaine and Coon Rapids; timed transfers with Metro Transit Dial-a-Ride - general public, countywide . Metro Transit - Fixed Routes - local and express routes to downtown Minneapolis . North Suburban Lines - Express service to St. Paul . Metro Mobility - ADA paratransit service in southern Anoka County and metro area . Hennepin County I Metro Area . Metro Transit - Fixed Routes -local and express routes to downtown Minneapolis . Metro Mobility - ADA paratransit service . Maple Grove Transit - Express Routes - to downtown Minneapolis Transit Centers / Transfer Points St. Cloud Metropolitan Area . Operations Center - East St. Cloud . MTC Transit Center - Downtown St. Cloud Anoka County . Anoka - Downtown at 3rd A venue I Main Street . Northtown Transit Hub * Approval for new Columbia Heights transit hub - 41 51 Avenue I Central (TH 65) . Phase II Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study Draft - No-Build Alternative Summary 2 May 26. 1999 . . . Hennepin County / Metro Area . 5th Street Transit Station - 5th Street N / 3rd Avenue N . ih Street Garage - 7th Street N / 1 st A venue N Park-and-Ride Facilities St. Cloud Metropolitan Area · St. Joseph - 1-94 / CSAH 2 · Albany - 1-94 / CSAH 10 . St. Cloud - 1-94 / CSAH 75 Sherburne County · St. Cloud - Mn/DOT Traveler Information Center - TH 10 · Becker - Willow Street! TH 10 · Elk River - Mn/DOT Park-and-Ride north TH 169 Wright County . Monticello - 1-94/ TH 25 · Albertville - 1-94 / CSAH 19 Anoka County . Anoka - TH 10/169 · Anoka - Church Street / Forest A venue · Anoka - 7th A venue / Garfield Street · Coon Rapids - Riverdale Cub Foods - 12800 Round Lake Boulevard · Coon Rapids - TH 10 / Hanson Boulevard · Coon Rapids - Zilla Street / 98th Lane NW · Coon Rapids - Hanson Boulevard / 105th A venue NW · Coon Rapids - Hanson Boulevard at 111 th Avenue NW · Coon Rapids - Hanson Boulevard / N orthdale Boulevard · Coon Rapids - Crooked Lake Boulevard / Coon Rapids Boulevard · Coon Rapids - Foley Park and Ride - Adjacent to TH 610 and Foley Boulevard · Blaine - Northtown Transit Hub · Fridley - 6180 Highway 65 NE · Fridley - Holiday Village Shopping Center - 250 57th Avenue NE * Construction of a new ramp at the Foley Park-and-Ride has begun and is expected to be complete by November 1999 Phase II Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study Draft - No-Build Alternative Summary 3 May 26.1999 Hennepin County / Metro Area . Rodgers - TH 101 /I-94 · Maple Grove - Hemlock / West Eagle Lake Road . Maple Grove - South of Weaver Lake Road / Vinewood . Maple Grove - Bass Lake Road / Fish Lake Road . Maple Grove - Weaver Lake Road / Fish Lake Road . Brooklyn Center - Zane / 69th A venue . Brooklyn Center - Brooklyn Boulevard / 65th Avenue . Brooklyn Park - TH 252 / 73rd Avenue (East of TH 252) . Brooklyn Park - TH 252 / 73rd Avenue (West of TH 252) . Champlin - Hayden Lake Road / West River Road . Champlin - 117th Avenue North / West River Road . Champlin - Dayton / Cartway Road . Champlin - Dayton / French Lake Road Phase II Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study Draft - No-Build Alternative Summary 4 May 26,1999 . . . . . . Committed I Funded Improvements Roadway Improvements - TH 10 Corridor (Rice to Minneapolis) Implementation Facility or Route Project Description Agency Mn/DOT MUN 9 / South Street Install signal and gates at RR crossing at MUN 9 in Rice Mn/DOT / 7th A venue N. @ 1 st Street Railroad crossing signal replacement and interconnection City of St. Cloud N. with traffic signal in St. Cloud MniDOT TH 10 Jet Benton CSAH 33 include left turn-lane at median crossover locations Sherburne County RR Safety improvement at RR crossing at CR 55 in Clear Lake Benton County RR Benton County Phase 1 corridor safety improvements Mn/DOT TWN 065 Install signals and gates at RR crossing at 137th Street in Becker Township Sherburne County CR 65 @ BNSF RR Install railroad crossing signals and gates in Haven Township Sherburne County CSAH 7 Resurface and widen shoulders from TH 10 to CR 65 in Haven Township Mn/DOT TH 10 Install flashing beacon near Jet. CR 73 in Big Lake Mn/DOT TWN 182/200T Install signals and gates at RR crossing in Big lake Township Mn/DOT TH 10 1 Replace bridge over Mississippi River in Elk River Sherburne County RR Signal modernization at CSAH 1, Proctor A venue in Elk River Mn/DOT / TH 10 Traffic signal revision and improvements at Hanson Anoka County Boulevard ramp Anoka County CSAH 78 Reconstruct and widen CSAH 78 (Hanson Blvd.) from Coon Rapids Blvd. to Robinson Drive Mn/DOT Sunfish Lake Rd. @ Install high type surface BNSF - Ramsev Mn/DOT TH 169 Mississippi River to TH 10 in Anoka - Reconstruct, widen, etc. Anoka County CSAH 14 CSAH 9 to TH 10 widening to 6 lanes, adding signals Anoka County CSAH 11 Addition of left turns lanes at Egret intersection Mn/DOT TH47 Northeast ramp terminal at 1-694 ramp widening and signal revision Source: Transportation Plan Update for the St. Cloud Metropolitan Area 1995-2020; Stearns County Transportation Plan; Benton County Highway Department; Sherburne County Capital Improvement Plan (CIP); Anoka County 2015 Transportation Plan; Anoka County Five Year Highway Improvement Plan for 1999-2003; Sherburne County Transportation Plan; Minnesota State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) 1999-2001: Draft State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) 2000-2002; Metropolitan Development Guide. Phase II Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study Draft - No-Build Alternative Summary 5 May 26. 1999 Roadway Improvements - 1-94 Corridor (St. Cloud to Minneapolis) Implementation A enc MnlDOT MnlDOT MnlDOT 1 Wright Count . Facility or Route TH25 1-94 CSAH 75 Project Description Construct 100 and ark & ride lot at 1-94 in Monticello Reconstruct westbound ram at CSAH 75 MnlDOT TH25 High school to 1-94 - extend 4 lanes to 1-94 Construct frontage road from 1-94 to CR106 and control access oints MnlDOT 1 Wright 1-941 CR 18 Count Widening existing structure for pedestrian walkway MnlDOT TH 241 MnlDOT 1-94 MnlDOT 1-94 Mn/DOT 1-941 Weaver Lake Rd MnlDOT 1-941 CR 61 MnlDOT 1-94 1 CR 30 Source: Transportation Plan Update for the St. Cloud Metropolitan Area 1995-2020; Steams County Transportation Plan; Wright County Transportation Plan; Hennepin County Transportation Systems Plan; Hennepin County Capital Improvement Plan; Metropolitan Development Guide; Minnesota State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) 1999-2001; Draft State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) 2000-2002. . . Phase II Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study Draft - No-Build Alternative Summary 6 May 26.1999 . . . SOURCES - NO BUILD AL TERNA TIVE · Transportation Plan Update for the St. Cloud Metropolitan Area 1995-2020 · Anoka County 2015 Transportation Plan · Anoka County Five Year Highway Improvement Plan for 1999-2003 · Sherburne County Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) · Sherburne County Transportation Plan · Minnesota State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) 1999-2001 · Metropolitan Development Guide · Benton County Highway Department · Hennepin County Transportation Systems Plan · Hennepin County Capital Improvement Plan · Stearns County Transportation Plan · Wright County Transportation Plan Phase II Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study Draft - No-Build Alternative Summary 7 May 26,1999 . . . ~~.;;) ~III1I1T11BTAR CORRIDOR BRW ;"~~-MOCiEGROUji~ MEMORANDUM BRW Thresher Square 700 Third Street South Minneapolis. MN 55415 Phone: (612) 370-0700 Fax: (612) 370-1378 To: NCDA From: BRW, Inc. Date: May 26, 1999 Subject: Northstar Corridor Summary of Transportation System Management (TSM) Alternative TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MANAGEMENT (TSM) ALTERNATIVE FOR THE NORTHSTAR CORRIDOR Overview As part of the Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study (MIS) and Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for Proposed Commuter Rail Service, a number of transportation alternatives will be evaluated. Once such alternative is the refinement of transportation managementlbus improvements referred to as the Transportation System Management (TSM) Alternative. The TSM Alternative provides a framework for strategies that provide short-tern improvement of the transportation network and includes infrastructure improvements that would benefit transit operations along with improvements in transit service coverage, span and connectivity; and minor roadway improvements. Based on the initial work in Phase I and recent meetings with representatives from Metro Transit, Anoka County Transit, St. Cloud, MnJDOT District 3 Transit, and the RiverRider Service, a number of strategies have been identified as part of the TSM Alternative. These strategies are outlined on the following page. Phase II Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study Draft - TSM Alternative May 26. 1999 " ) Bus Operations Strategies . Service Enhancements . Express Bus Service, New Routes, Expanded Service Area, Expanded Hours of Service, Upgraded Vehicles . . Infrastructure Improvements , . Shoulder Use by Buses, Park & Ride Lot Enhancements, Traffic Signal Preemption, Transit Centers, Transit Hubs . Park & Ride Lots . New Park & Ride Locations, Enhancements at Existing Park & Ride Lots Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) Strategies . Traveler Information . Highway Advisory Radio, Information via the Internet, Interactive Kiosks, Variable Message Signs, Automated Telephone Information Service . Incident Management . Vehicle Detection, CCTV System, Transportation Operations Center . Transit Management Systems . Advanced Vehicle Location (A VL), Traffic Signal Preemption, Mobile Data Terminals, Real-Time Information to Passengers, Cross-System A VL Information - (Common Communications System) . . Traffic Management . Ramp Meters, Traffic Signal Timing Coordination Travel Demand Management Strategies . Rideshare . Coordination Between St. Cloud & Metro Commuter Services, Corridor Based Van Pools, Enhanced Rideshare Services and Staffing . Other Initiatives . Alternative Work Schedules, Promoting & Marketing Alternative Transportation Services, Encourage Employer Support of TDM . Phase II Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study Draft - TSM Alternative 2 May 26,1999 . . . Pedestrian/BicycIe Strategies · Non-Motorized Links · Pedestrian/Bicycle Integration, Commuter Bike Lanes · Infrastructure Improvements · Bike Lockers at Transit Stations Phase II Northstar Corridor Major Investment Study Draft - TSM Alternative 3 May 26,1999 ~~&L . DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Transit Administration Environmental Impact Statement on the Northstar Corridor project located between Minneapolis and the St. Cloud area, Minnesota AGENCY: Federal Transit Administration (FTA) ACTION: Notice of Intent to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement . SUMMARY: The Federal Transit Administration is issuing this notice to advise interested agencies and the public that a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) is being prepared for transit elements of the Northstar Corridor project located in the Trunk Highway 10/47 (TH 10/47) corridor between Minneapolis and the St. Cloud area, Minnesota. DATES: Interagency and public scoping and information meetings will be held on Thursday, July 29, 1999 from 1:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m., and from 4:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. on July 27, 28 and 29, respectively. Interagency Scoping Meeting: Thursday, July 29, 1999 from 1:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m. Fridley City Hall 6431 University Avenue Northeast Fridley, MN 55432 . Public Scoping Meetings: Tuesday, July 27, 1999 from 4:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. Whitney Senior Community Center 1527 Northway Drive St. Cloud, MN 56303 2 . Wednesday, July 28, 1999, from 4:00 p.m.to 7:00 p.m Sherburne County Courthouse 13880 Highway 10 Elk River, MN 55330 Thursday, July 29, 1999 from 4:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. Fridley City Hall 6431 University Avenue Northeast Fridley, MN 55432 . ADDRESSES: Written comments on the scope of analysis and impacts to be considered should be sent by August 20, 1999 to: Mr. Tim Yantos, Project Director Northstar Corridor Development Authority 2100 Third Avenue Anoka, MN 55303 . . 3 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Joel P. Ettinger Ff A Region 5 200 West Adams Street, Suite 2410 Chicago, IL 60606 Telephone: (312) 353-2789 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Federal Transit Administration (FfA) (the federal lead agency) in cooperation with the Northstar Corridor Development Authority (NCDA), a joint powers board (local lead agency), will prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Northstar Corridor project. . . I. Scoping The Ff A and the NCDA invite interested individuals, organizations and federal, state and local agencies to participate in defining the alternatives to be evaluated in the EIS; in identifying social, economic or environmental impacts to be evaluated; and suggesting alternatives that are less costly or have fewer environmental impacts while achieving similar transportation objectives. An information packet, referred to as the Scoping Booklet, will be circulated to all federal, state or local agencies having jurisdiction in the project, and all interested parties currently on the NCDA mailing list. Others may request this Scoping Booklet by contacting: 4 . Stephanie Eiler Anoka County 1440 Bunker Lake Boulevard Andover, MN 55304 Phone: 612/862-4230 Fax: 612/862-4201 E-Mail: sceiler@pubserv.co.anoka.mn.us Four public scoping meetings will be held in the study area. An interagency scoping meeting will be held on July 29, 1999 from 1:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m. at the Fridley City Hall, and three public scoping meetings will be held on July 27,28 and 29, 1999 from 4:00 to 7:00 p.m. at the Whitney Senior Community Center, the Sherburne County Courthouse and the Fridley City Hall, respectively. People with special needs should call Stephanie Eiler at 612-862- . 4230. The buildings are accessible to people with disabilities. Scoping comments may be made at the Public Scoping Meetings or in writing by August 20, 1999. Comments or questions should be directed to Mr. Tim Yantos at the address provided above. II. Description of the Study Area and Transportation Needs The Northstar Corridor study area can be described as a long, narrow 70- mile transportation corridor that extends from downtown Minneapolis to the St. Cloud area along TH 10/47 and the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) railroad. The study area is bordered by the Mississippi River on the west and . . 5 . extends approximately 3 to 5 miles to the east of TH 10/47. The proposed Corridor would connect to the Hiawatha Light Rail Transit (LRT) in downtown Minneapolis. The Hiawatha LRT line would continue to the Minneapolis/St. Paul Airport and the Mall.of America. The NCDA initiated a Major Investment Study (MIS) in May of 1998, pursuant to federal regulations, and conducted a feasibility study of commuter rail in the Corridor. Phase I of this process focused on identifying the purpose and need for transportation improvements in the Corridor, identifying and screening the alternative transportation solutions, and evaluating the feasibility of commuter rail service in the Corridor. During Phase I of the Study, the issues identified in the Northstar Corridor that relate to transportation include: a lack of coordination between transportation investments and land use development; a high accident rate along the TH 10/47 corridor; decreasing mobility on TH 10/47; a lack of corridor-wide transit service; and the lack of alternative transportation modes. A public involvement program was conducted during Phase I of the project to receive input from the public and stakeholders in the Corridor. Public outreach presentations were given to over 30 community groups. Communications to the public were via a newsletter and a monthly Project Update to the NCDA distribution list of approximately 1000 names/addresses, a Web Site, and a series of three public information open houses. . III. 6 Alternatives Phase I of the MIS process defined and evaluated eight transit technologies for the Northstar Corridor: bus, commuter rail, light rail transit (LRT), diesel multiple unit (DMU), heavy rail, monorail, automated guideway transit (AGT), and personal rapid transit (PRT). Each of these transit technologies was reviewed based on the following evaluation parameters: capital cost, proven technology, operating environment, ability to accommodate at-grade station access, optimal station spacing distance, environmental impacts, and other considerations such as ridership potential and implementation. Based on this transit technology screening analysis, the following transit technologies have been recommended for further analysis: Bus, LRT and Commuter Rail. The scoping process will review the full range of modal technologies considered and the evaluation process followed. . . The alternatives proposed for consideration in the Northstar Corridor DEIS include: 1. No-Build Alternative - No change to transportation services or facilities in the Corridor beyond already committed projects. This includes 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. . . 2. 7 Transportation Systems Management Alternative - Low cost infrastructure and bus transit improvements, Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS), Travel Demand Management, bus operations, and Transportation Systems Management improvements will be included in this alternative. 3. Commuter Rail Alternative - A commuter rail line on the existing BNSF rail line to include 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 will be elements of the alternative. The extension of the Hiawatha Corridor LRT service to the . commuter rail line will be included in this alternative. The Commuter Rail Alternative will also incorporate the elements of the No-Build Alternative and will include feeder bus improvements to provide access from local and regional land uses to the commuter rail connection. IV. Probable Effects/Potential Impacts for Analysis The FT A and the NCDA will evaluate significant environmental, social and economic impacts of the alternatives analyzed in the EIS. Primary environmental issues include: land use, historic and archeological resources, traffic and parking, noise and vibration, neighborhoods and environmental justice, . floodplain encroachment, coordination with ongoing related transportation and " 8 economic development projects, and construction impacts. Other issues the EIS . will address include natural areas, rare and endangered species, air and water quality, groundwater, energy, potentially contaminated sites, displacements and relocations, ecosystems, water resources, hazardous waste, parklands, and energy impacts. The impacts will be evaluated both for the construction period and for the long-term period of operation of each alternative. In addition, cumulative effects of the proposed project and any irreversible or irretrievable commitment of resources will be identified. Measures to avoid or mitigate any significant adverse impacts will be developed. V. Procedures In accordance with the regulations and guidance established by the . Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ), as well as 23 CFR 450 and 23 CFR 771 of the FHW AIFT A planning and environmental regulations and policies, the DEIS will include an evaluation of the social, economic and environmental impact of the alternatives. The EIS will also comply with the requirements of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (CAAA) and with the Executive Order 12898 on Environmental Justice. The EIS will also meet the requirements of the US Environmental Protection Agency's transportation conformity regulations [40 CFR 93 and 23 CFR 450.322(b)(8)]. After its publication, the DEIS will be available for public and agency review and comment. Public hearings will be held on the DEIS. . . 9 The Final Environmental Impact Statement (PElS) will consider the public and agency comments received during the public and agency circulation of the DEIS and the NCDA will select the preferred alternative. Then the NCDA, with FT A as federal lead agency, will continue with the preparation of the PElS. Opportunity for additional public comment will be provided throughout all phases of project development. Issued On: . Joel P. Ettinger, Region 5 Administrator Federal Transit Administration, Chicago, lllinois . . ~ , s ~ n "" a: n cu -0 cu :r '-'" c ~ (t) ~ \.0 \.0 \.0 '-'" c -< )> c CJO C lJl r-+ )> (0) -. ~ ;:)0 ~-' :(' 0 ro III CJ') (t) -0 r-+ (t) 3 0- (t) .... o n r-+ o 0- (t) ...... z o < (t) 3 0- (t) .... o (t) (') (t) 3 0- (t) .... * ~< o~ 0..== roo.. * )> ;::; roVJ -. ;:)~ ~ 0 :::!. U1 < ro Vl * rn ;:) lJl< Ci -' -.-' roO ro;:) ~.3 ;:)ro 00;:) ~ ~ )>:!! ;:);:) ~~ -;:) -<Ci Vl _' U;'~ o ;:) 0 o ro ro rQ. Ci -0 III ro -;-. 3_0 lJl;:) 0- 0 ~ ;:) N * * * lJl ~ -'70 ~ro roCi ~o 3 ,~~ Ci;:) roo.. 3ro 0-0.. ro-n ;, 3' ~ ~ ;:) -'Ci \.0 -' \.O~ \.0 --" 3 -0 ro 3 ro ;:) ~ ~ :::!. o ;:) lJl ~ -. ~ ~ ro ~. ro III . . . . . . . . . . . , , , , , . ;:) a: ~ rn < ~ c ~ :::!. o ;:) o -.. )> ;::; ro -. ;:) ~ ~ <' ro Vl . . . . . . . . . . . . rI- 0.. rn < ~ c ~ :::!. , , I ;:) a-: ~ o -0 ro -. ~ :::!. ;:) 00 -0 ~ ;:) Vl ,-o~ _ro ~-. ~ l. . . . . . . . . 70 ro ~ ;:) ro -0 ~ ;:) Vl . . . . . . . . . . . . . o ;:) o -.. )> ;::; ro -. ;:) ~ ~ <' ro III I I I < ~ 0.. ~ ~ ro -n o -. ro Ci ~ Vl ~. ;:) 00 ~ o 0.. ro rn ;:) < -. o ;:) 3 ro ;:) ~ ~ lJl Ci -. ro ro ;:) ;:) 00 , ~ , vt'~ ~~ , , , - ]6'--< , <~lJl~ ro~~ , 3~ ~-< ~ Vl , CJB' , -.~ 0:.0.. oo~~ ro ~ . --< .g3 3"Q <0 ro < 3ro ro3 ;:)ro r;r;l III rn ;:) < -. o ;:))> 30.. roo.. ;:) -' ~~ ~ -' _0 lJl;:) Ci~ -.- ro ro ;:) ;:) 00 , , , , - o ro < !!.. o -0 3 ro ;:) ~ ~ ;:) 0.. 70 ro ~ ;:) ro 3 ro ;:) ~ o -.. )> ;::; ro -. ;:) ~ ~ :(' ro III . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , , , ;:) a: ~ -n ;:) ~ ;:) Ci ~ )> ;:) ~ -< Vl Vl . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -n ;:) ~ g70 -'ro ~-.. ;3' ;:)ro ~o.. -< III III z o -t ... ::s- ri} ... ~ -t , , O)-n o ~ -. oro -,Ci o~ ~ ~O ~ro ~3 ;:) ~ ~;:) <' 0.. ro 0 Vl ;:) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - . . . . . , , I -0 -. -ro ;:)-.. < ro ro~ Vl ro ~o.. 3 ro~ ;:)~ ~;:) lJllll ~-o ii10 ~ -. ro~ oo~ -< -' o ;:) 70 ro ........ ~ o -t -t -. Q. o -t -Q ::s- ~ rI} rD N ~ ~ ~. o -t . . - . . . . . VJ70 ro ~ -.. o -' ;:) U1ro )>-n _0 ~ -. ro ro -. Ci ;:) ~ ~ III ~.,.-+ < Vl ro 0 Vl ;:) ;:) ro )> ;::; ro -. ;:) ~ ~ <' ro III - =' ~ rD rI} ... 3 rD =' ... rJ) ... C Q. --< rJ) ~ ::r rD Q. C - rD . . . Proposed Environmental Review Schedule (Notice of Intent and Scoping Process) Nortllstar Corridor Work Task Start Date End Date Comments NOTICE OF INTENT Submit Draft of Notice Of May 20, 1999 Intent (NOI) to FT A Submit Revised Draft of May 25, 1999 June 10, 1999 Schedule includes Notice of Intent (electronic review time by FT A version and 4 hard copies) Legal- Washington D.C. Conference Call With FT A June 10, 1999 Comments from FT A Regarding Final Comments Legal on NOI Revise NOI per FTA June 11, 1999 Final Notice must be Comments and Resubmit to submitted to Federal FT A (electronic version) Register by June 15, 1999 Publication ofNOI in June 25, 1999 Federal Register SCOPING PROCESS Submittal of First Draft May 20, 1999 (agenda June 3, 1999 - Discuss Submittal to Project Scoping Booklet item to review PMT comments Management Team for document (Agenda item at review and comments. concept/format/content) meeting) Submittal of Second Draft May 27, 1999 Mailing June 3, 1999 NCDA NCDA to act on Scoping Booklet to NCDA Meeting document in draft stage. Preliminary PMT comments have been incorporated into this draft. Receive all Comments on June 11, 1999 June 10 conference call Draft Scoping Booklet with FT A will include discussion regarding the Scoping Booklet. Revise Scoping June 14, 1999 June 30, 1999 Assumes two week Booklet/Production production schedule MnEQB Monitor June 28, 1999 Publication Distribution of Scoping June 30, 1999 To be received no later Document must be Booklet than July 5, 1999 available a minimum of 15 days prior to the first public meeting Scoping Meetings July 27, 28, 29 Whitney Senior Community Center, Sherburne County and Fridley City Hall (4:00 to 7:00 pm) Interagency Meeting July 29, 1999 Fridley City Hall (1 :00 . to 3:00 pm) Close of Scoping Period August 20, 1999 Scoping Summary Report - August 9, 1999 September 3, 1999 First Draft Review of Summary Report September 6, 1999 September 20, 1999 Distribution of Scoping October, 1999 Summary Report .;.:.:.:..;.:..'....;.::....:...:./...::;..: :::::::;::::::/::::.:::;::.:/::::::,~:~::::: : .......i.............................~m~~~..~~pitlg.BooJdet June 1999 TRACkiNG TRANSpORTATioN ISSUES iN TilE NORTllsTAR CORRidoR The Northstar Corridor study area ('an be d"scrib(~d as a long, narrow 7()-mil(~ transportatjon.eorridor Ihal (~xlends from downtown Minneapolis to Ihe Sl. Cloud area alon/.drrtl,\~ Highway ('I'll) 10/47 and the Burlingt~nNorthern Santa F,~(BNSF) railroad. The~tlJ(lyarea is bordered hy the Mississippi'm~~~r o,n tlwwest and extends approximat~:ly3Jo'5iT1iJi;s 10 the east of '1'1 l1ON7) Tht~IH'QPosed corridor would conn,~d to the plarih~d Hiawatha Light Hail Ansit (I,HT)C()HiddK:..lfa lll.ult.'I-lllodal Wion in downli,wn Mi~neapolil.;. The Twin Cities metrdpi,JHanaJ'ca has a population of approxim~tt~IJ2;* milliim and the Sl. Cloud melropolitanhf~~hasa population of 100,000. Both areas~\e ....... ... regional c,~nh~rs of commerce, emplo)irry?rit; education and health care, The area between Sl. Cloud and Minneapolis is the fastest growing region in the State of Minnesota, and the third fastest in the nation. The Corridor has regional, statewide, and national significance as a primary transportation route for automo- bile, truek, and rail travel. The Nortbstar Corridor Development Authority (NCDA), the project sponsor, wants to plan now for the transportation needs of the future. Tracking the population - By 2020: InCTea~t'. . '1'111' St. Cloull an'a will add appmximatdy .J,<),()()() 1'1'01'1.', a ,t.')'X, incr..a~e, . Slwrhurrw County i~ I~XIIt't'tml to have a 72% ilwrt'a~t', Ilw City of Bt'ckc~r a '~()2'Y., ina..a~.. and th.. City of Elk Hiver a 232 % i IItTt'a~e. Tracking the Employment Issues · Th.. Iwo major employment centers in the eorridor ;In~ Ihe Twin Citie~ and St. Cloud. Although tlw Twin Citil~~ is tlw major employment eenter for tile eorridor, ae"oreling to till' Minne~ola Department of Eeonomie Sec,urity, the greale~t percent- age of employment growth ha~ oeeurred in Sherhurne and Stearns Countil'~' . ., ~.. A eommuler ~urVt'y taken in 1990 indieat- eel that 'J.O% of Elk Hiver re~ielents eom- .....................}....... mute to tIle Twin Citil~s ."itittiariking the Transportation Issues: :: : '~'''.: A.k.9..f!.r......,h~...BP.9kl.~.r~ Designed to help guide the fi I" '" orma scopmg process a1/(1 meetings required under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), this booklet out- lines the Northstar Corridor project, its purpose and schedule and describes the alternatives to be evaluated in the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). A list of "scoping" meetings i,~ located on the back of this booklet. Look for the ways that YOU CAlVo BE INVOLVED in the Public Involvement section. . San Diego Coaster Commuter Hail COMMUTER RAil FEASibiliTY STudy During Phase I of the project, a feasibility study found that commuter rail is a viable transportation option in the Northstar Corridor. The service eoneept IIsed to evaluate ridership, capital eosts, operating expenses and mainte- nance assumed nine round trips per day, Monday through Friday, using existing BNSF traeks. The C()mmuh~r Hail Technieal Feasibility Heport il1lli- cates that over 7,000 trips per day would be made, with annual ridership expcded to be approximately 2.1 million riders by the year 2005 and 2.4 million riders by 2020. The NCDA colH:hulcd that commuter rail service is tcdmieally feasible in the Northstar Corridor. . BACkGROUNd I I;'i., , . The Northstar Corridor Development Authority (NCDA) initiated a Major Invcstllwnt Stlllly in May of 1998, pursuant to fedcral regulations, and conducted a feasibility study of commuter rail in the Corridor. Phase I of this process focused on identifying the pur- pose and need for transportation illlllrovclllcnts in the corridor, identifying and screening alternative trans- portation solutions, and evaluating the feasibility of commuter rail service in the Corridor. During Phase I of the study, the issucs identified in the Northstar Corridor indude: a lack of coordination between transportation investments alullalUlusc devel- opment; decreasing mobility on THIO/47; a lack of eor- ridor-wide transit service; and the lack of alternative transportation modes. Phase lof the MIS proccss delined and evaluated eight transit technologies for the Northstar Corridor: bus, commuter rail, light rail transit (LIfT), diesel multi- ple unit (~MU), heavy rail, monorail, automated gui(k.... way transit (AG1), and personal rapid transit (pH1). Each of these tran 't t.} I . . o. . 81 ec 1110 ogles was reViewed hased on the followlllg evaluatio . . I '"'h' ..... " n parallletl~rs: capita eost, proven ee nology, opera tin"" I . . o. " cnVlrOnn1l'nt, a lIhty to aecolllmo- - date at-grade station aeeess, optimal station spacing (lis- tance, envi~onlllental impaets, and other cllnsidcrations such as ridership potential allll implementation. Based on this transit teehnology screening al)alysis, the following transit tedlIlologies have been recommended for further analysis: Bus, Commuter Rail and connection to LHT. The smping proeess will review the full range of modal tech- nologies considered and the evaluation process followed. During Phase I of the project, the NCDA received input from the pulllie ami stakeholders in the corridor. Meetings to review, cumment and approve technical analysis indud- cd: monthly NCDA meetings, monthly Executive Committee meetings, twice lIlonthly Projeet Management Team meet- ings,an interaetive station area planning wurkshup for plan- ners/engineers from cach of the participating municipali- ties and agencies, and public outreaeh presentations to over 30 community groups. Cummunications to the pulllie were via a newsletter and a monthly Project Updilte to the NCDA distribution list of approximately 1000 names/addresses, a Web Site and a serics of three pu'hlic information open houses. Comments received to date generally are in support of the project with a sense of urgency for implementation. . , .. I :( No~ Corridor''''''] ........~~~~.~~~~~~~..~~~.~~1.:.M:embers: Counties: Anoka . . Benton..m................... Sherburne . . . . . . . .................... Re3.i.~naI..R8iliqad Authorities: Anoka...GQu.nJYj""'" ; . Hennepin County:~ .............?~.~~?..~.~.~.~Sou nty . St. CIOU.... d/Ste~'r~'~:,.countT",.:."""''''' ........................... ..../''''''., Cities: .............Aiiok~i.'...........................,....................i Becker ! Big qke ! ..........~~;~~jLake ...............", m.............. Co~umbia Heights . Cbon Rapids Fridley Elk River ~inneapo~is" .............~amsey i ~ice i . '. $aukRapi~sm... ..m:.........................L..........\ i..........................! . . ' ..:; ~.'.BENTON ; S~. Cloud ~ '.aw :- ......................Spring Lake,Park , '.Townslllps:...........;........'.................;....... ........ ,Becker 'j Bjg.:~ake..........................i ( Clea~ Lake' [...........1..............:,.::,.............1............. Haven;...'::':-;--.... :............L.............. .........1...............; ~. Langola .~ ..'m W ab ,.......i.. L....,..> ................ : at.............: .'" : L...........: . r ~.t._ Transit AgenCy: , l' .........:....,................................!;......................'.............L..........f.....! St. Cloud ~etropolitan Tra~sitCommiss~.?.~......, , , ... . N(jjl\"C~ofiii~ating Agencie~;""..,.},.......^....r.........._..,.................r.............. Minnesota D~partment of Transportation . : . . ..............Metropolitan.t:ouncil..of..t,he.Twin..Cilies..................!. .......L..................l...............J . Metro Transit.of the Twi? Cities I St. Cloud Are4 Planning Organizatio? . .................................... ......j . . . . . . . . . . . . : ...................................., . . . : : : ,..................................'" : . . ,. ~ ') '1 1---] ............................~........ 1--1 t....................................... The Northstar Corridor Development Authority (NCDA) is a Joint Powers Board, established in the spring of 1997. Its sole pur- pose is to systematically address the transportation needs of the Northstar Corridor. The NCDA is comprised of 30 units of government along the corridor and represents the counties, regional railroad authorities, cities, towns, and transit agencies, along the corridor, as outlined in the adjoining figure. The NCDA is served by an Executive Committee, consisting of five members of the NCDA, and a Project Management Team, consisting of the top administra- tors of the counties and railroad authori- ties in the Corridor, as well as repre- sentatives from Mn/DOT, the Metropolitan Council, the St. Cloud Area Planning Organization, and Metro Transit agen- CIes. ....... ~ , ." ,...........,.......... .......~ rr~' . ,....[.... o .8t Steps The first step in the EIS process is called "scoping". The Scoping Process is a major part of the environmental and com- munity impact assessment. It is required by law in the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) so that the public and the appropriate governmental agencies are involved early in the process. The Northstar Corridor project will comply with all federal and state regulations regarding the evaluation of the alternatives to provide needed transportation services within the corridor. At the scoping meetings, the Northstar Corridor Project Team will explain the EIS process, describe the alternatives being considered, the benefits and impacts being evaluated during the EIS, present the pub- lic involvement program and ask for ideas ed comments from the audience. The environmental analysis will be developed to give an understanding of what is being pro- posed, how much it will cost, what benefits will be gained and what impacts can be expected. The audience is welcome to address any aspect of the proposed project, including the alternatives to be studied (Bee next page). At the end of the Scoping Process, a Scoping Summary Report will be prepared documenting comments received through- out the Scoping Process. The report will describe the meeting preparations, content of the meetings, attendance, the decisions of the NCDA and Federal Transit Administration (ITA) and the refined scope of the project. e o How to comment during Scoping: Verbal comments can be made at the Scoping Meetings-a court reporter will be documenting the meetings. Written com- ments can be sent to the NCDA by mail, fax or e-mail. See page 7 for addresses and phone/fax numbers. Comments are due by August 20, 1999. Mis! R Northstar Commuter Rail Hiawatha Light Rail Transit TilE ENViRONMENTAL IMpACT . The alternatives currently under consideration in the EIS include the No-Build Alternative, the Transportation Systems Management (TSM) Alternative, and the Commuter Rail Alternative. The No-Build Alternative is used as a baseline for comparison of environmental impacts, while the TSM Alternative is included for comparison of the cost effectiveness of the Build Alternatives. These conceptual alternatives were developed and select- ed during Phase I of the MIS study and will be advanced for consideration in the EIS. US 169 · No-Build Alternative The No-Build Alternative includes the current and planned roadway and transit projects that are com- mitted and funded. The current transportation and transit facilities and services, with minimal modifications or expansions, form the base- line for this alternative. . · Transportation SJ8fems Management (TSM) Low capital cost infrastructure and bus transit improvements for the Northstar Corridor include Mall of America . N .t. I I J II Hiawatha Line (proposed LRT Alignment) Potential Station Locations IIIIIII Northstar Commuter Rail s Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) tech- niques, Travel Demand Management (TDM), bus operations, and other system improve- ments. · Commuter Rail Alternative This alternative provides passenger rail service on the existing BNSF rail line. It includes all facilities associated with the construction and operations of a commuter rail line, including right-of-way, structures, tracks, stations; park- and-ride lots, storage and maintenance facili- ties. Both rail and bus operating plans will be developed for this alternative. The Commuter Rail Alternative will also incorporate the ele- ments of the No-Build and TSM Alternatives, and will include feeder bus improvements to provide access from local and regional land uses to the commuter rail connection. The con- nection of the Hiawatha Corridor LRT service to the commuter rail line will be included in this alternative. Twelve potential station locations were identi- fied during Phase I of the MIS Study. These locations, listed below, were used for preliminary technical analysis, including ridership forecast- ing and capacity modeling. · Rice · Downtown St Cloud · East St Cloud · Clear Lake · Becker · Big Lake · Elk River · Ramsey/ Anoka · Coon Rapids · Fridley · Northeast Minneapolis · Downtown Minneapolis Specific station locations will be identified during a collaborative effort with neighborhood residents and businesses, elected officials, com- munity staff, interest groups and the general public. The station area planning discussions will identify actions necessary to link commuter rail to current and future land uses. e . The EIS for the Northstar Corridor project is a deraUy mandated requirement of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), and is being under- taken by the Federal Transit Administration (ITA). The EIS phase of the transportation planning process allows for careful consideration of the design, costs, and benefits of the transportation alternatives, while also addressing potential traffic and transportation management, social, economic and environmental impacts that may result. Conceptual engineering sup- port will define the physical and operational aspects of the project sufficiently to complete the environ- mental review, and will include station site plans, sys- tems design, and the vehicle storage and maintenance facility. The analysis in the EIS will: · Refine tile proposed transportation improvements. · Assess social, economic, and environmental impacts, such as land acquisitions and displacements; parklands, visual and aesthetic conditions, historic and archeologi- cal resources, safety and security, station area planning and development opportunities, noise and vibration. · Analyze transportation system impacts, SUell as effects on roadway operations, bus system operations and facH. . ities, parking demands, railroad operations, at-grade crossings, and pedestrian and bicycle access. . Prepare capital cost estimates, including engineering, design, rigllt-oE-wayacquisition, environmental mitiga- tion, and the purchase of the commuter rail vehicles. · Estimate and analyze operating and maintenance costs, ridership demand and revenues. During the development of the Draft EIS, the NCDA Project Team will continue to work closely with the representatives of the communities potentially affected by the Northstar Corridor project. The Technical Advisory Committee and Project Management Team will review and comment on all aspects of the environmental and technical analysis. Station area planning workshops will be held with affected communities to develop station sites and sup- porting land uses. Communications with the public will continue through the web site, the newsletter, the Project Update, and public outreach. ~.,........ ~..... ,~":"':' .. NOTicE of INTENT SCOpiNG PERiod (Public Meetings and Written Comments) JUNE 1999 SUMMER 1999 . ~ Workshops e ~ DRAfT EIS PREpARATioN DRAfT EIS DiSTRibUTEd SUMMER 1999 - SUMMER 2000 SUMMER 2000 . Public Meetings '.eb . PUBLIC INV .TIle NCDA encourages you to keep commenting, . ring suggestions, asking .questions and expressing your concerns during "scoping" and throughout the EIS process. We want to make sure that the develop- ment of our transportation system. is done in an open, collaborative and comprehensive proeess. Ways to get involved: . Visit our website at http://co.sherbume.mn.us! northstar · Call: 612/323-5700 · Fax: 612/323-5682 · Join us at neighborhood workshops and public meetings · Invite an NCDA representative to give a presenta- tion to your group, organization or business . Add your name to the mailing list by calling or writing us at: NCDA 7th Floor Administration Office 2100 3rrl Arenue Anoka, MN 55303-2265 ~ Scoping Comment period close8 on August y 1999. -:...-...-......-.;.:".... - eubliclNVol VEMENT ~....... ....... ....... ..:...... ".' . .....,.... DRAfT EIS REViEW ANd COMMENT FiNAL EIS (I',,"lic Mel'ling') SUMMER 2000 ~.,..,."..,.. . '. ..... ".'~"" .. RECORd of DEcisioN SUMMER/ FAil 2000 WiNTER 2000 t. Newsletter . . )LVEMENT Public Outreach ~ " TUESdAY, July 27, 1999 4 - 7 pM Public MEETiNG WkiTNEY SENioR COMMUNiTY CENTER U27 NORTkwAY DRivE ST. Cloud . 1;:{"."/O'fJ' ;Br ."'JJIS;':i i ' '.~fJ~&1;R'la' " . ~. ~: :. ,," ,.; ,. ;. ~. ~.:: ".:. .': ,":' . ". ". '.' .~ .. '," .' .' CO.B.-R.....rjD. '0'.' ,: ~ .:. ~: :~i.f..:i ::W:P ~ .: t ::: ~ { ;.- :' .' { .::- /" ".::" :~.. ,::" ; ~. ~: :i: ~. t. ':;, Nortlutar Corridor Development Authority 2100 :~rd AVI~nlw Anllka, Minnesola 55303-2265 WEdNESdAY, July 28, 1999 4 - 7pM Public MEETiNG SkERbuRNE COUNTY COURTkouSE 1"80 HiGkwAY 10 Elk RiVER 1'/111/11': (612) :~2:~-5700 fil!c (612) :12:~-S6H2 Web J>.1gl!: hllp:/ /(~o.slll!rhllrrw.llln.llS./norlhslar TkuRSd4Y, July 29, 1999 1 - ., pM INTERAGENCY MEETiNG FRidlEY CiTY HAU 64}1 UNivERSiTY AVENUE FRidlEY 4 - 7 pM Public MEETiNG BUI.K HATE U.S. I'OSTAI;E PAID I'EH~IIT NO.847 ~1I'IX, MN