4.3. SR 06-18-2001MEMORANDUM
Item
/4.3.
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Mayor and City Council
Scott Harlicker, Senior Planne~
June 18, 2001
Northstar Corridor Update
At the NCDA meeting held on June 7th, it was noted that as of June 1't MnDOT has
assumed control of the Northstar Corridor project. The NCDA is still evaluating it's future
role. It was the consensus of the members that they still wanted to provide input on the
project and be informed as to how the project is proceeding and of any changes.
The Authority was informed that the commuter rail project cost estimates have been
increased by 30 million dollars from 230 million to 260 million. This increase is due to a 10
million dollar increase because of federal safety regulations a 20 million dollar increase in
property acquisition costs.
MnDOT is planning on starting construction this summer on the park and ride facility
located at the proposed commuter rail station site.
There will be no meeting in July. The next meeting of the NCDA will be in August.
S:\PLAN NING~SCOTT~NCDA JUNE. DOC
Northstar Corridor Development Authority
Thursday, June 7, 2001
4:30 p.m.
Sherburne County Government Center
Elk River, MN
Action Requested
Minutes of May 3, 2001 Meeting*
Executive Committee Report
a. Report on 2000 Legislative Session
b. Local Share of Capital Costs*
c. Procurement Plan*
Report on Completion of Preliminary Engineering
Survey Findings of Residents Along the Northstar
Commuter Rail Corridor*
Transition Documents: Report on Status of Northstar
Corridor Commuter Rail Project*
Future Role of NCDA
Other
a. Next Meeting Date
Approval
Information
Recommendation to
Counties and County RRA's
Information
Information
Information
Approval
Discussion
* Documentation Attached
Northstar Corridor Development Authority
Regular Meeting Minutes
May 3, 2001
Page 1
DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT
NORTHSTAR CORRIDOR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Regular Meeting Minutes
May 3, 2001
The Northstar Corridor Development Authority met in regular session on May 3, 2001, in the Board Room at the
Sherburne County Government Center, Elk River, Minnesota.
Present were: Betsy Wergin, Tim Yantos, Lynn George, Eugene Young, Jeff Schilling, Tim Houle, Ken
Stevens, Paul Danielson, Elliott Perovich, Mike Schadauer, Jean Keely, Kate Garwood, Kirsti Marohn, Ann-
Therese Schmid, Linda Jungwirth, Vic Oviatt, David Hampton, Luci Botzek, Jim Barton, Scott Harlicker,
Robert Kirchner, Bob Johnson, Patrick Cairns, Woody Bissett, Duane Cekalla, John Ellenbecker, Lewis
Stark, Duane Grandy, David Loch, Jeff Dehler, Mary Richardson, Ewald Petersen, Terry Nagorski, John
Norgren, Gary Hammer, Ken Paulson, Steve Billings, Paul McCarron, Tom Gamec, Paul Ostrow, Renee
Zeleny, Patrick Wussow
1. The meeting was called to order at 4:30 p.m. by Chairperson Betsy Wergin.
New representatives Patrick Wussow, City of Big Lake, and Renee Zeleny, Watab Townhip, were
introduced as new members to the Authority.
o
A motion was made by Patrick Cairns, seconded by Lewis Stark and carried unanimoasly to approve
the agenda of Thursday, May 3, 2001, and the meeting minutes of April 5, 2001, as presented.
Executive Committee Report:
a) Paul McCarron provided an update on the congressional and legislative activities.
o
Jeff Dehler, Anoka County, reviewed the results of a short survey which was conducted by Decision
Resources, Ltd. by telephone of 400 random selected households between April 26 - 28, 2001.
Results of this short survey indicated that the majority (60%) would use the rail line. A larger, more
detailed survey will be conducted in the near future.
Jeff distributed a copy of the Northstar Corridor Commuter Rail News (Spring 2001) to all members
along with a list of Legislators and urged all members and citizens to contact their respective
Legislator now urging their support of the Northstar Corridor rail line.
A demonstration was provided on the updated website (www.NorthstarTrain.org) which now
includes information on station locations, rail schedule and costs, news updates and an opportunity to
register and become involved in the project.
6. Executive Committee Report (Con't):
b)
A motion was made by Ewald Peterson, seconded by Duane Grandy and carried
unanimously to approve the recommendation of the Executive Committee to approve
Resolution #2001-05 authorizing the Chair or Vice-Chair of the Northstar Corridor
Development Authority to execute agreements and other documents necessary to accomplish
Page I
Northstar Corridor Development Authority
Regular Meeting Minutes
May 3, 2001
Page 2
the assignment as of June 1, 2001 to tile Minnesota Department of Transportation of the
NCDA professional services agreements with tile following contractors:
URS/BRW - Preliminary Engineering
URS/BRW - Phase II Technical Services
Himle Homer Incorporated - Public Information
c)
A motion was made by Duane Grandy, seconded by Patrick Cairns and carried unanimously
to approve the recommendation of the Executive Committee to approve Resolution #2001-06
authorizing termination of the Agreement for Coordination of Commuter Rail Activities,
Mn/DOT Agreement # 80272-R, effective 60 days after written notice to Mn/DOT, and
forward a copy of this Resolution to the Director of Mn/DOT Office of Passenger Rail,
Mn/DOT's authorized agent to receive notices under tile Agreement.
d)
A motion was made by John Ellenbecker, seconded by Ewald Peterson and carried
unanimously to approve the recommendation of the Executive Committee to approve
Resolution #2001-07 authorizing the Northstar Corridor Development Authority to enter into
Agreement No. 2 to Grant Agreement No. 78569 with the Minnesota Department of
Transportation and authorize the Chair or Vice-Chair of the Northstar Corridor Development
Authority to finalize negotiations and to execute the aforementioned Amendment.
e)
A motion was made by Paul McCarron, seconded by Lewis Stark and carried unanimously
to approve the recommendation of the Executive Committee to approve the termination of
the below listed contracts as of June 1, 2001, and authorize the Chair or Vice-Chair to sign
the necessary documents:
1)
2)
3)
4)
Ken Stevens Agreement, as amended
Richardson, Richter & Associates Agreement, as amended
David Loch Agreement, as amended
Lindquist & Vennum Agreement, as amended
A motion was made by John Ellenbecker, seconded by Duane Grandy, and carried
unanimously to approve the recommendation of the Executive Committee to approve the
execution of the following new Agreements for professional services and authorize the Chair
and Vice-Chair to sign the necessary documents:
1)
2)
3)
Ken Stevens, in the amount of $40,000 for the term June l, 2001 through
December 31,2001
Richardson, Richter & Associates in the amount of $60,000 for the term
June 1, 2001 through December 31, 2001
David Loch & Associates, in the amount of $20,000 for the term June 1,
2001 through December 31, 2001
g)
A motion was made by Paul McCarron, seconded by Lewis Stark and carried unanimously
to approve a new grant agreement with Mn/DOT to provide funding costs incurred in
operations of the Commuter Rail Corridor Coordinating Committee (CRCCC) and the
Northstar Corridor Development Authority (NCDA) for the period of June 1, 2001 through
December 31,2002, in the amount of $250,000.
Page 2
Northstar Corridor Development Authority
Regular Meeting Minutes
May 3,200 I
Page 3
o
I0.
11.
12.
Discussion was held regarding the qualifications and experience of the individuals who have been
assigned to the Northstar Corridor project by Mn/DOT. Duane Cekalla requested that Mn/DOT
provide background information including the qualifications and experience of the Mn/DOT
appointed team to the Authority. A request will be sent to Mn/DOT.
Chairperson Betsy Wergin read aloud a letter received from Commissioner of Transportation Elwyn
Tinklenberg requesting that a representative from Mn/DOT be appointed as an ex-officio member to
the Executive Committee and Northstar Board of Directors.
A motion was made by Paul McCarron, seconded by Duane Grandy and carried unanimously to
appoint a Mn/DOT representative to the Northstar Executive Committee and the Board of Directors
as a non-voting ex-officio member.
NCDA members requested that Ann-Therese Schmid and Mike Schadauer express the Authority's
desire and concern to Mn/DOT that communication lines with the Authority and Mn/DOT remain
open and continual and that the Authority has input into decisions made by Mn/DOT.
A motion was made by Steve Billings, seconded by John Norgren and carried unanimously to
approve Resolution #2001-03 as recommended by the Executive Committee that the NCDA
recommends to the Commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Transportation that the design of
commuter rail stations provides for the multi-modal enhancements contemplated in the MIS; and, in
particular, that underpasses at stations allow for use by bicyclers and pedestrians and not be
restricted to commuters.
Steve Billings requested that a copy of Resolution #2001-03 be sent with a cover letter to
Congressman Oberstar.
A motion was made by Paul Ostrow, seconded by John Ellenbecker and carried unanimously that the
NCDA approve for distribution the Preliminary Engineering of the Northstar Commuter Rail Project
and authorize its distribution to the cities for review and comment in accordance with the above
schedule. '
Mike Schadauer, Mn/DOT, reviewed the proposed downtown Minneapolis connection to the
Northstar Corridor from the Hiawatha Rail Line. No action taken.
The Authority reviewed the schedule for completion of the EIS with the Record of Decision due
September, 2001. The Final EIS will:
a)
b)
Document resolution of outstanding issues, including the selection of the Preferred
Alternative, and
Include responses to substantive comments received during circulation of the Draft EIS.
A motion was made by Ewald Peterson, seconded by Patrick Cairns and carried unanimously to
approve Resolution #2001-04 recommending that the Final Environmental Impact Statement (Final
EIS) include commuter rail as the locally preferred alternative, and that the FEIS document the
preferred alternative, the preferred alternative decision-making process, the impacts and proposed
mitigation measures of the preferred alternative and response to comments made on the Draft EIS.
Page 3
Northstar Corridor Development Authority
Regular Meeting Minutes
May 3, 2001
Page 4
13.
Tile next meeting is scheduled for June 7, 2001, at 4:30 p.m. at tile Sherbume County Government
Center.
14. The Authority adjourned by unanimously consensus to adjourn the meeting at 6:20 p.m.
Betsy Wergin Chairperson
Date
\\FS I\SYS I\DEPTXAdministrationk4dmndata\COMMITTE\CORRIDOR~001\Minutes\050301 NCDA draft.doc
Page 4
Agenda Item #2b
MEMORANDUM
Date:
To:
From:
Subject:
June 1, 2001
NCDA
Executive Committee/Capital Budget Committee
Local Contributions to Capital Costs
In August 1999, the NCDA members (Anoka County Regional Railroad Authority,
Hennepin County Regional Railroad Authority, Sherburne County and Benton
County) adopted resolutions committing each entity to a portion of the total local
contribution of 10% of $180,000,000 or $18 million. These actions were taken
prior to the development of the preliminary cost estimates for the Northstar
feasibility study and major investment study. The purpose of these early actions
was to demonstrate to the U.S. Congress and the State of Minnesota that the
NCDA was strongly committed to the Northstar Corridor Commuter Rail Project.
These resolutions are attached.
In October 1999, the NCDA released a preliminary cost estimate as an element
of the Major Investment Study. The total capital cost shown in the October, 1999
estimate was $196,270,000 (1999 Dollars) or $231,000,000 (2004 Dollars). The
inflation rate used was 3.5% per year.
The following chart shows the commitment of each county or county regional
railroad authority.
2001 Project Revenue Options
County/RRA
Benton
Sherburne
% of Population 18M (1999)
8.10%
$1,458,000.00
12.40% 2,232,000.00
HCRRA 14.50% 2,610,000.00
ACRRA 65.00% 11,700,000.00
100.00% $18,000,000.00
Northstar Corridor Develop~nent Authority
2100 3'" Avenue, Anoka, Minnesota 55303-2265 (763) 323-5700 Fax: (763) 323-5682 www. northstartrain.org
Notes:
1. Percentage of contribution was determined by the population of each
County within five miles on either side of the BNSF Railway unless
bounded by the Mississippi River.
As a part of preliminary engineering, the NCDA's technical consultants are
preparing new cost estimates that reflect the additional engineering that has
been performed over the last year.
At a joint meeting on May 17, the Executive Committee/Capital Budget
Committee considered a motion to recommend to the contributing members that
they increase their commitment to cover 10% of the capital cost estimate, not to
exceed $30 million. The motion was progressed to the NCDA without Executive
Committee action.
At the June 7 NCDA meeting, the preliminary engineering cost estimates will be
presented and the NCDA will consider a recommendation to the contributing
members (Anoka, Hennepin Sherburne and Benton Counties) that their
contributions be revised to total 10% of the new capital cost amount.
Action Requested:
Recommendation to Sherburne and Benton Counties and
Anoka and Hennepin County Regional Railroad
Authorities.
Agenda Item #2c
PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING
SP 9901-01
VOLUME III
SYSTEMWIDE COMPONENTS
PROCUREMENT PLAN
Prepared For:
Northstar Corridor Development Authority
Minnesota Department of Transportation
Prepared By:
URS/BRW, Inc.
June 1, 2001
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.1 PROJECT DEFINITION .................................................................................................. 1
1.1.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................... 1
1.1.2 Cost ............................................................................................................................. 2
2.1 PROCUREMENT APPROACH ...................................................................................... 2
2.1.1 Contracting Strategy ................. : ............................................................................... 2
2.1.2 Project Packaging ........................................................... ; .......................................... 2
2.1.3 Procurement Guidelines ............................................................................................ 3
2.1.4 Contracting Methods ................................................................................................. 4
2.1.5 Procurement Alternatives ......................................................................................... 5
3.1 STATE LAW ..................................................................................................................... 7
3.1.1 Mn/DOT Authority ................................................................................................... 7
3.1.2 Contracting Authority ............................................................................................... 7
4.1 EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVES ........................................................................... 9
5.1 RECOMMENDATIONS .................................................................................................. 9
5.1.1
5.1.2
5.1.3
5.1.4
5.1.5
5.1.6
5.1.7
5.1.8
Railroad Track Improvements and Control System .............................................. 9
Multi-Modal Connection ......................................................................................... 10
Rolling Stock ............................................................................................................ 10
Stations and Maintenance Facility ......................................................................... 10
Fare Collection Equipment ..................................................................................... 11
Professional Services ............................................................................................... 11
Operations ................................................................................................................ 11
Maintenance Services .............................................................................................. 11
Northstar Corridor Preliminary Engineering
Volume III - June 1,2001
Procurement Plan
Page i
1.1 PROJECT DEFINITION
The Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT), which is responsible for administering
the program and funds for the Northstar Corridor Rail Project, has experience with procuring the
necessary services and products to implement the Northstar Corridor Rail Project, and has in
place adequate policies, procedures, and approval authority to handle such procurements.
1.1,1 Introduction
The proposed Northstar Corridor commuter rail system includes the fol.10w, ing. major
components:
· Eighty-two miles of commuter rail along the Burlington Northern Santa Fe
Railway (BNSF) corridor between Minneapolis and the St. Cloud area;
· Shared BNSF trackage, track and signal upgrades, and separate commuter tracks;
· Rolling stock - five locomotives, six cab coaches, and twelve trailer coaches;
· Eleven stations with pack-and-rides; and
· A vehicle storage/maintenance facility and end-of-line layover facility.
The Northstar Corridor is a part of the BNSF transcontinental mainline railway. The freight
trackage is Class 4 with primarily continuously welded rail. The majority of the mainline is
equipped with Centralized Traffic Control (CTC) signaling, with Automatic Block Signals in an
intermediate section of the corridor. Commuter rail would share the existing tracks with 35 to 50
freight trains a day. To support passenger rail service, the following track improvements may be
implemented along various sections of the corridor:
· Increasing the number of existing traCks by double- or triple-tracking;
· Increasing track capacity passing through the Northtown Yard;
· Additional crossovers;
· Additional access roads to trackway;
· Sidings at selected locations; and
· Signal system enhancements.
The Northstar Corridor Rail Project will connect to an extended Hiawatha Light Rail Transit
(LRT) line at an intermodal station in downtown Minneapolis. The Northstar Corridor Rail
Project was planned by Mn/DOT in concert with the Northstar Corridor Development Authority
(NCDA). Mn/DOT will also design, build, operate, and maintain the commuter rail line.
Northsta~ Corridor Preliminary Engineering
Volume III- June I, 2001
Procurement Plan
Page 1
Trackway, signals, and train control improvements on BNSF right-of-way will be constructed by
railroad forces, with trackway facilities to be maintained by BNSF, under a contract with
Mn/DOT.
1.1.2 Cost
The estimated capital costs for the 82-mile commuter rail system and for the multi-modal
connection (First Avenue North to Fifth Avenue North) are presented in Northstar Corridor
Preliminary Engineering Volume V. The estimate includes costs for the following:
Trackwork and signal systems;
· Downtown Minneapolis inter-modal station;
· Suburban stations;
· Locomotives and coaches;
· Maintenance and layover facilities;
· Engineering and design;
· Right-of-way acquisition;
· Testing and start-up; and
· Contingencies.
2.1 PROCUREMENT APPROACH
2.1.1 Contracting Strategy
The Northstar Corridor Rail Project contracting strategy accommodates the project schedule,
ensures an integrated system, anticipates the capabilities and limitations of the local contracting
community, and satisfies federal, state, and local codes as well as requirements for
Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) participation. Construction and other procurements
will be packaged imo contracts that satisfy these objectives.
2.1.2 Project Packaging
The Northstar Corridor Rail Project will be implemented according to a number of discrete
"packages." Packages are configured to include project elements that are common to
construction of fixed facilities, furnishing and installation, fabrication and furnishing, or design
and other professional services. These are described in more detail below.
Northstar Corridor Preliminary Engineering
Volume III - June I, 2001
Procurement Plan
Page 2
2.1.2.1 Professional Services
Contracts may be procured for professional services consisting of one or more of the following:
program management, engineering and architectural design, environmental services, financing,
transit operations consulting, real property acquisition, legal services, and risk management and
insurance.
2.1.2.2 Trackwork and Signals
These are demolition and construction elements within the Northstar Corridor that will affect the
operations of the BNSF railroad. They include track and signal improvements, drainage and
utility work, and grade crossings.
2.1.2.3 Stations
Passenger stations for the commuter rail line and the inter-modal station in downtown
Minneapolis will include platforms, passenger amenities, access points, and any necessary
improvements to the adjacent public right-of-way.
2.1.2.4 Maintenance and Layover Facilities
This infrastructure includes a maintenance facility to be built near the Elk River, Minnesota,
station to handle operations, storage, and routine maintenance of the vehicles, and a two-track
storage yard at the end-of-line Rice station for dispatching trains in the morning and for layovers
during off-peak hours.
2.1.2.5 Rolling Stock
New locomotives, cab cars, and trailers will be procured for the system's required train sets.
2.1.2.6 Fare Collection Equipment
The commuter rail line will employ a self-service proof-of-payment system, consisting of ticket
vending machines and validators to be installed at all stations.
2.1.2.7 Multi-Modal Connection
The Northstar Corridor Rail Project also includes the multi-modal connection between the
terminus of the Hiawatha Corridor to the Northstar Corridor. The Hiawatha Light Rail Transit
(LRT) Project will be responsible for final design of the LRT system to Third Avenue in
Minneapolis, Minnesota, while the design for the segment from Third to Fifth Avenues and the
multi-modal station will be included as a part of the Northstar Corridor Rail Project. The
construction of the multi-modal connection from First Avenue to Fifth Avenue will be sponsored
by the Northstar Corridor Rail Project.
2.1.3 Procurement Guidelines
All major procurement transactions will be conducted in accordance with the latest revisions of
the Federal Transit Administration's (FI'A) Circular 4220.1D, Third Party Contracting
Guidelines, the Code of Federal Regulations (49CFR 18), Uniform Administrative Requirements
Northstar Corridor Preliminary Engineer/ng
Volume III - Iune 1,2001
Procurement Plan
Page 3
for Grants and Cooperative Agreements to State and Local Governments, and in a manner that
provides full and open competition between contractors and suppliers.
In general, the Northstar Corridor Rail Project will be covered under the following three contract
categories:
Professional Services;
Construction Services; and
Equipment/Materials.
The manner in which these items are procured can vary according to the category, the estimated
dollar value of the contract, schedule, and unusual circumstances.
2.1.4 Contracting Methods
There are several contracting methods that Mn/DOT may employ to obtain the necessary services
and products for designing, building, and administering the Northstar Corridor Rail Project.
They represent the current industry practices from the perspective of the public agency-owner,
and include contracts resulting from proposals, competitive bids, and sole-sources.
2.1.4.1 Proposals
Competitive proposal procurements are used for negotiated contracts, including professional and
personal services contracts and rail vehicle acquisitions. "Requests for Proposals" (RFPs) are
advertised to maximize competition.
Professional consulting services are obtained through a best value procurement where
negotiations are subject to fair and reasonable compensation and limited only to the most
technically qualified firm.
Highly specialized equipment also may be procured through a process where price is not the only
consideration. This type of procurement may be handled through an RFP process where
technical qualifications are determined by ranking responses against published criteria, along
with cost as another, but not sole, consideration.
2.1.4.2 Bids
A sealed-bid procurement is obtained through an Invitation for Bid (IFil) process. This requires
advertising with complete and explicit contract documentation for the services and materials
desired, such as plans and specifications for furnishing materials and/or construction services.
Contract award is typically made to the lowest responsible bidder.
Where it is not possible to fully detail the scope or quantity of the services or goods to be
obtained, competitive proposals are typically requested, as discussed in Section 2.1.4.1 above.
Northstar Corridor Preliminary Engineering
Volume III - June 1, 2001
Procurement Plan
Page 4
L~UUO
2.1.4.3 Sole-source
Non-competitive procurement contracts may be awarded for goods and services, but only on an
exceptional and fully-documented basis. More specifically, non-competitive procurements are
permitted in the following circumstances:
Only one responsible source and no other supplier or services will satisfy
Mn/DOT's project requirements;
· There is unusual and compelling urgency caused by other than lack of advance
planning;
· There is inadequate competition after solicitation of competitive proposals; and
· A capital maintenance item or compatibility with an existing system investment
can only be obtained directly from the original equipment manufacturer.
2.1.5 Procurement Alternatives
Once the planning is completed for a project, and the general components for its implementation
are defined sufficiently to gain approval from the funding authority(ies) to proceed, then there are
several alternatives for procurement that can be used.
2.1.5.1 Design-Bid-Build
This is the conventional industry practice involving complete control by the public agency-owner
of the steps leading up to the bid award in the procurement process. The public sector is
responsible for the following:
· Planning and preliminary design;
· Environmental clearance;
· Preliminary engineering of infrastructure and performance specifications for
system-wide elements and equipment;
· Final design of infrastructure;
· Right-of-way acquisition; and
· Funding.
The vendors and contractors prepare bids for the various construction packages. The lowest
responsible bidder is selected and a contract is awarded. The vendors and contractors fabricate,
construct, install, and test the system under the observation of the public agency. After system
acceptance, the public sector operates the system.
Northstar Corridor Prelim/nary Engineering
Volume HI - June 1, 2001
Procurement Plan
Page 5
Some of the limitations of this process include the following:
· The vendors and contractors do not have opportunities to offer any ideas they may
have on how to improve the product or process.
· The steps are sequential and, therefore, take a fairly fixed, typical amount of time.
· System integration is the responsibility of the owner.
· Coordination during construction among the independent low bidders can be
difficult. "
· Total costs are not known until all contracts are awarded.
2.1.5.2 Limited Turnkey
This procurement alternative is similar to the conventional industry practice, except that a single
vendor is selected for the systems element. This is different from "sole-source" in that the
contract is awarded pursuant to competitive bids. The contractor, however, assumes total control
and responsibility for vehicles, trackwork, signals and communications, the control facility, and
all other equipment necessary to make the system work. The systems element of a fixed
guideway transit project generally requires the most integration; limited turnkey places that
integration responsibility with a single vendor. The systems element may be procured by using
this alternative with a performance specification.
All environmental clearances, design and construction of the civil infrastructure, and system
operation remain the responsibility of the public agency-owner.
2.1.5.3 Design-Build
This "turnkey" alternative addresses the system integration issue and presents the opportunity for
the vendors and contractors to provide input to the design process. The approach consists of the
following:
A single contractor (design-build team) is selected to implement the project after
Preliminary Engineering, environmental clearance, and a "clean" right-of-way is
available. All coordination and systems integration is the responsibility of the
design-build contractor. Any cost overruns due to design error or
technology/system integration are the design-build contractor's responsibility.
The design-build contractor completes final design consistent with the Preliminary
Engineering definition of the project (typically 30% design level). This provides
the design-build contractor with the opportunity to incorporate innovative ideas in
the final design. Such a process may result in more efficient techniques during
construction, comparable improvements at cost savings, and a fast-tracked
implementation schedule.
Northstar Corridor Preliminary Engineering
Volume IH - June 1, 2001
Procurement Plan
Page 6
· The design-build contractor may operate the transit system for a limited initial
period, with the option, at the choice of the public agency, to extend the contract at
fixed rates with appropriate escalation.
With the design-build alternative, the public agency is still responsible for defining the system
sufficiently for final design, environmental clearance, right-of-way acquisition, funding, and
ultimate operations and maintenance.
3.1 STATE LAW
3.1.1 Mn/DOT Authority
Mn/DOT will be the federal grantee for purposes of the Northstar Corridor Rail Project.
Mn/DOT will comply with federal roles and regulations in its procurements related to the
Northstar Corridor Rail Project and will require its sub-grantees and third party contractors to do
the same.
Under Minnesota Statutes Section 174.82, the Commissioner of Transportation is responsible for
the planning, developing, constructing, operating, and maintaining of commuter rail in the State
of Minnesota. The Commissioner may enter in agreements with any public or private entity,
including a railroad, to carry out this authority.
Mn/DOT also has the legislative authority for the planning, designing, acquisition, construction
and equipping of LRT in the State of Minnesota (Minn. Stat. Section 174.35).
3.1.2 Contracting Authority
Minnesota Statutes Chapter 16C generally governs procurements made by the State of
Minnesota.
All acquisitions made by the State must be made by a best value procurement, except for
building and construction acquisitions, which use a low bid procurement (Minn. Stat. Section
16C.03, sub& 3). The legislature has defined "best value" as a procurement that takes cost into
account, as well as other areas such as environmental considerations, vendor performance, and
quality (Minn. Stat. 16C.02, subd. 4).
Under state statute, contracts entered into by the State cannot exceed five years. However, the
Department of Administration, the state agency charged with oversight of state acquisitions, may
waive the five year limitation on contracts where a five year limitation is impractical or not of
benefit to the citizens of the State of Minnesota. All contracts entered into by the State are also
subject to audit by the State and Legislative Auditors.
3.1.2.1 Proposals
Under Minnesota Statutes, acquisitions for professional services are broken into the following
two procurement thresholds: under $25,000 and $25,000 and above (Minn. Stat. Section 16C.06,
subd. 2). Professional services include services that are intellectual in nature, including, but not
Northstar Corridor Preliminary Engineering
Volume IH - June 1, 2001
Procurement Plan
Page 7
limited to, consultation, analysis, evaluation, prediction, planning, programming, and
recommendation. Professional service contracts generally result in a report or a completion of
specific tasks. (Minn. Stat. Section 16C.08, subd. 1).
Procurements under $25,000 may use an informal solicitation process. The informal solicitation
process has been defined by the Commissioner of Administration as a solicitation of three
informal proposals, with the award going to the best value. If the procurement is under $5,000, a
direct selection of a contractor may occur.
Procurements at $25,000 and above must use a formal solicitation process, inCluding'a sealed
cost proposal. Public notice must be made of the solicitation in the State Register and may be
made in other pertinent periodicals and trade journals. Notice must be given for a minimum of
21 days. Again, the award is based on best value, with the solicitation documents containing the
importance of cost and other factors evaluated. (Minn. Stat. Section 16C.06.)
3.1.2.2 Bids
Under Minnesota Statutes Section 16C.03, subdivision 3, an IFB must be used for building and
construction procurements. When using an IFB, the award must be made to the lowest
responsible and responsive bidder, while also considering conformity with specifications, ability
to deliver, the purpose for which the IFB was intended, the availability and capability of the
vendor, and any other considerations identified in the IFB. Life cycle costing may be used in
determining the lowest bid.
3.1.2.3 Sole-source
The State of Minnesota does have the authority to make sole-source, or "single source,"
selections. A single source selection is defined as an acquisition where, after a search, only one
contractor is determined to be reasonably available (Minn. Stat. Section 16C.02, subd. 18). A
single source selection is only available if there is clearly and legitimately only one source for the
services and the cost has been fairly and reasonably established (Minn. Stat. Section 16C. 10,
subd. 1).
3.1.2.4 Negotiated Procurement
Under Minnesota Statutes Section 174.82, the Commissioner of Transportation is given the
authority to negotiate with railroads in order to facilitate the design, construction, operations, and
maintenance of the commuter rail system. In consideration of the fact that the Northstar Corridor
commuter rail line will operate on existing, privately owned, BNSF right-of-way, it will be
necessary for the Commissioner to negotiate directly with 'the railroad for such services 'as final
design review, construction of infrastructure within the BNSF right-of-way, operations of the
commuter rail service, and some maintenance of the commuter rail system.
Northstar Corridor Preliminary Engineering
Volume III - June 1, 2001
Procurement Plan
Page 8
Lg, L~. U J. ;"
4.1 EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVES
In evaluating the procurement alternatives and contracting strategies for the best ways to
implement the Northstar Corridor Rail Project, several factors need to be considered. Each
factor's influence on the selection process is described as follows:
Control/Accountability - the ability of the owner to control the system
implementation process, and, therefore, be accountable for the success of the
project.
Risk - contractor performance risk is based on the impact on the project by the
nonperformance of the contractor(s) and/or vendor(s). The success of the project
is also based on minimizing the risk inherent in construction integration. Such
risks are largely transferred to the contractor in a design-build procurement.
· Quality - Whatever the procurement process, quality must be written in to require
the contractor to deliver the highest quality system reasonable.
· Schedule - Funding arrangements and total costs for a project are often tied to the
schedule and the ability to deliver the built system in the least amount of time.
Staff Capacity - The procurement type will dictate the staffing requirements for the
contract parties; the less risk and responsibility for delivering the various phases of
a project, the less impact on the public agency staff to administer, perform, and
manage the project.
Legislative/Legal Constraints - Federal regulations and state statutes may limit the
authority of the public agency to pursue certain procurement strategies and comply
with legal regulations.
5.1 RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the consideration of the influencing factors for procurement and the understanding of
Mn/DOT's resources and abilities, the following recommendations are made for the various
elements of the Northstar Corridor Rail Project.
5.1.1 Railroad Track Improvements and Control System
Track improvements within the-railroad corridor will affect BNSF's freight operations, and the
raikoad will perform the construction with its own forces. However, the commuter rail agency-
owner can still maximize control by negotiating and agreeing to the necessary capacity upgrades.
Upon the memorializing of project responsibilities, coordination, and funding arrangements in a
legal master construction agreement between the agency and the raikoad, the completed plans are
turned over to the railroad. BNSF would then accompany the track improvement plans with its
standard specifications for construction and a corresponding signal (control system) modification
package for their own forces or contractor to comply with in performing the work.
Northstar Corridor Preliminary Engineering
Volume III - lune 1, 2001
Procurement Plan
Page 9
This arrangement is a negotiated procurement. While any final design completed on the railroad
infrastructure would be procured under a best value procurement, the construction of the
infrastructure improvements themselves will be performed by the BNSF directly as the current
and ultimate owner of any of the capital improvements made.
BNSF will also procure its own materials for use in the capital improvement construction. Such
procurements must be made in compliance with both state and federal statutes, rules, regulations,
and policies. BNSF's current materials acquisition process is highly competitive and
substantially in compliance with the pertinent state and federal guidelines.
5.1.2 Multi-Modal Connection
Construction of the multi-modal connection between the Hiawatha Corridor and the Northstar
Corridor is to be accomplished through a conventional IFB process. Certain track and systems
elements with long lead times for fabrication and delivery, such as special trackwork and the
additional traction power substation, may be procured through the desigu-build contract currently
underway for the Hiawatha Corridor. Mn/DOT would negotiate through Metro Transit for a
contract amendment to procure the materials only. The construction contractor for the multi-
modal connection would then be responsible for incorporating the installation and testing of
those items furnished by Mn/DOT. If acquisition of certain track and systems elements in not
feasible through the current Hiawatha I JRT Project design-build contractor, it will be the
responsibility of the contractor for the multi-modal connection to provide all materials necessary
to accomplish this portion of the Northstar Corridor Rail Project.
5.1.3 Rolling Stock
Locomotives may be procured once performance specifications are completed by Mn/DOT for
the desired vehicles. The specifications become the contract documents for competitive bidding,
and the contract is negotiated and awarded to the most qualified manufacturer with the lowest
responsible cost proposal for a product(s) that meets all the stipulated performance requirements.
Coaches may be procured in the same manner as locomotives or may be procured though an IFB
once complete specifications are produced by Mn/DOT.
5.1.4 Stations and Maintenance Facility
The stations and the maintenance/layover facility for the Northstar Corridor Rail Project may be
included under one contract package or constructed separately. In either case, it is recommended
that Mn/DOT prepares the final design plans and specifications for both the stations and
maintenance facility, and advertises the work under a conventional IFB process.
Specific in-place maintenance equipment may be procured with performance specifications under
individual or collective competitive bidding or sole-sourcing. Installation may then be performed
by the supplier or by the general contractor for the maintenance/layover facility.
Northstar Corridor Preliminary Engineering
Volume III - June 1, 2001
Procurement Plan
Page 10
5.1.5 Fare Collection Equipment
Metro Transit is procuring the fare collection equipment for the Hiawatha LRT Project as well as
for a systemwide change-out of the equipment for the bus system. It is anticipated that the needs
for the Northstar Corridor commuter rail Line and the multi-modal connection can be met with a
change order or amendment to that procurement contract through an agreement with Metro
Transit. However, if it is not feasible for the Metro Transit contract to be changed or amended,
the Northstar Corridor Rail Project will provide performance specifications for the required fare
collection system and procure the. equipment.
5.1.6 Professional Services
Professional consulting design and/or construction management services are to be procured
through a Request for Proposals (RFP) process (see Volume IV, Section 9.3.1). The award is
made on a best value selection process, where cost is not the sole consideration for selection.
5.1.7 Operations
Operations of the Northstar Corridor commuter rail system will be performed by BNSF or one of
its contractors. Mn/DOT will negotiate with BNSF for operations services and have a long-term
contract (approximately 20 years) with BNSF for such services.
5.1.8 Maintenance Services
Maintenance services will be broken into two different levels. Light maintenance services,
including running repairs, emergency road repairs, and heavy repairs, will be provided by
Mn/DOT crews or its contractor. If these services are contracted, they will be procured through
an RFP process.
Out-sourced maintenance is more intensive fleet maintenance and will be performed by Mn/DOT
contractors. Such out-sourced maintenance will be procured through an RFP. See Volume IV,
Section 16.4 for more information on maintenance services.
Northstar Corridor Preliminary Engineering
Volume IH - June 1, 2001
Procurement P! an
Page 11
DRAFT 1 (May 30, 2001)
Agenda Item #4
SURVEY FINDINGS OF
RESIDENTS ALONG NORTHSTAR COMMUTER RAIL CORRIDOR
KEY FINDINGS:
Residents in Area Concerned about Transportation Problems
In an open-end question, residents surveyed cited traffic as the third most important issue facing
their area behind education funding and taxes. Perhaps due to the growth in the Northwest
metro area to St. Cloud, 76% said that highway congestion in the area had become worse in the
last five years while only 4% said better. Looking ahead, only 9% felt the current highway and
transit system in the region will be sufficient to support growth over the next ten years.
Solution Requires More than Just Highway Improvements
67% said that both highways and transit will need to be improved over the next ten years and
5% said to focus only on the transit system. Only 17% said that highways, alone, should be the
focus of transportation system improvements.
Strong Local Support for Northstar Commuter Rail
80% said the Northstar Commuter Rail project was a good idea while only 15% said it was a
bad idea. 92% of those surveyed said they had some level of awareness of the Northstar
Commuter Rail project.
Strong Support Among All Political Party Affiliations
Support for the Northstar Commuter Rail service was very strong regardless of a respondent's
political affiliation. 82% of DFL, 72% of Republican and 83% of Independent respondents
thought the Northstar Commuter Rail lines thought it was a "good" or "very good" idea.
Residents Perceive Multiple Uses for Northstar
70% of those surveyed said they were very likely (31%) or somewhat likely (39%) to use the
Northstar Commuter Rail service if it becomes operational. Only 15% said they were not at all
likely to use the service. 23% indicated they might use Northstar to commute to and from work
(which is significantly greater than what is required for project to be successful). 72% said they
might use the rail system to go to the MSP airport; 18% may use it to commute to school or
college; 32% to visits friends or relatives. 66% said their most frequent destination on Northstar
would be Minneapolis, while 11% cited St. Cloud, followed by Fridley (4%), Anoka (4%), Elk
River (3%) and Coon Rapids (2%).
Survey Methodology:
600 randomly selected households within a five-mile radius of the proposed Northstar Commuter Rail
Line were interviewed by telephone between May 18th and 24th, 2001. The survey was conducted by
Decision Resources Ltd. of Minneapolis. The average interview time was nine minutes. The results of
this survey are projectable to the universe of all adult residents living in the designated area within +/-
4.1% in 95 out of 100 cases.
Agenda Item #5
MEMORANDUM
Date: June 1, 2001
To: NCDA
From:
Administrative Team
Subject:
Transition Documents: Status Report on the Northstar Corridor
Commuter Rail Project
As directed in NCDA Resolution #2001-01 (attached), the NCDA staff have
prepared the documents necessary to transfer the Northstar Corridor Commuter
Rail Project to Mn/DOT. At the NCDA meeting on June 7, staff will present to the
Authority the following:
a)
b)
c)
d)
A complete report of the status of all project elements as of the
assignment date of June 1;
An assessment of the risk and liability position of the NCDA;
Program audit prepared by Anoka County Finance Department; and
All legal documents required to assign project contracts.
Action Requested: Information.
Northstar Corridor Development Authority
2100 3'° Avenue, Anoka, Minnesota 55303-2265 (763) 323-5700 Fax: (763) 323-5682 www. northstartrain.org
Northstar Corridor Development Authority
Resolution
2001
WHEREAS, the Northstar Corridor Development Authority (NCDA) is a joint
powers board established in May 1997 and is comprised of 30 local units of
government; and
WHEREAS, the NCDA has worked for nearly four years to analyze
transportation needs and alternative solutions for the Corridor, has completed A Major
Investment Study and has identified commuter rail as the centerpiece of the locally
preferred transportation investment strategy, In accordance with federal requirements;
and
WHEREAS, Congress and the State Legislature have appropriated funding for
the Northstar Corridor for the planning, engineering and implementation of the Northstar
Project; and
WHEREAS, in October 2000, the NCDA and the Minnesota Department of
Transportation (Mn/DOT) entered into an agreement assigning to the NCDA the
responsibility to develop the commuter rail project through construction, in cooperation
with and under the supervision of Mn/DOT; and
WHEREAS, the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) has approved the NCDA's
management of the project through preliminary engineering; and
WHEREAS, the NCDA has completed a DEIS and is midway through the
preliminary engineering process; and
WHEREAS, the NCDA has a decision- making and staff structure in place to
complete this phase of the Northstar Project; and
WHEREAS, the political support and unity of the 30 units of government, acting
in concert with Mn/DOT, is critical for the success of the project, and in particular in
obtaining funding from the State Legislature this session; and
WHEREAS, the Mn/DOT has requested that control and management of the
project, as well as certain of the associated contracts, be assigned to Mn/DOT by
March 26, 2001; and
WHEREAS, the NCDA and Mn/DOT share a common purpose of securing
funding for the Northstar Corridor Rail Project and implementing the project as
professionally and expeditiously as possible.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT:
1. The NCDA will retain decision-making authority, its current management structure, its
legislative and ooagress[on~[ responsibilities, and ali associated contracts until at least
Sune l, 2001.
The NCDA hereby renews its request ~at Mn/DOT transfer [o the NCDA the State and
federal funds appropriated for the Northstar Corridor for work on the project.
The NCDA directs its staff to prepare the necessary transition documents including: a)
a complete report of the status of all elements of the project as of the
assignment date of June 1; b) an assessment of the risk and liability position of
the NCDA; c) completfon of a program audit; and, d) all legal documents required
to assign project contracts. The NCDA directs staff to work with Mn/DOT to
ensure an orderly transition and report at the February 15 Executive Committee
meeting and the March I NODA meeting.
As of the June 7, 2001 meeting of the NCDA, the Board will commence operation as a
commuter rail corridor coordinating committee ("CRCCC") as set forth in Minn.
Stat. § 174.86. subd. 5. The NCDA respectfully requests Mn/DOT to prepare
description of the roles and responsibilities of the NCDA acting as a CROCC.
The NODA further directs staff to evaluate whether the new role of the NCDA
requires an amendment to its Joint Powers Agreement and to' report back to the
February 15 Executive Committee meeting and the March 1 NCDA meeting.
This change in project management is subject to the approval of the FTA and will be
submitted as part of the changes required in on-going approval process of the
Project Management Plan.
8et~y WeJ~ir~, Chalrp~r'so-n z¢
Dated: ~'_-..~._/_-7.. ~,,"Z:)/"
Certification
I hereby certify that the above resolution is a true copy of the Resolution duly passed,
adopted, and approved by the Northstar Corridor Development Authority on February 1,
2001.
~//
Northstar Corridor Development Authority
Preliminary
Financial Program Audit
June 7, 2001
Prepared by Anoka County Finance Dept.
Draft
COUNTY OF ANOKA
FINANCE AND CENTRAL SERVICES DIVISION
GOVERNMENT CENTER · 2100 3RD AVENUE · ANOKA, MN 55303-2265
(763) 323-5300 · Fax (763) 422-7505
E-mail: finance @ co. anoka.mn, us
· Accounting · Word Processing - Safety
· Budgeting · Property Management · Construction Management
· Treasury · Purchasing · Debt Management
· Payroll · Risk Management · Financial Management
June 7,2001
TO:
FROM:
RE:
Tim Yantos, Project Director
Northstar Corridor Development Authority
Cevin Petersen, Director
Accounting and Budget
Interim Financial Report
We have prepared at your request the accompanying financial report of the Northstar
Corridor Development Authority (NCDA) as of May 31, 2001. This is an interim financial
report.
The NCDA report was prepared by Anoka County's Finance & Central Services
Division. The responsibility for both the accuracy of the presented data and the
completeness and fairness of the presentation, rests with the county. We believe the
data is presented in a manner designed to fairly set forth the financial position and
results of the operations of the NCDA.
We have prepared this report in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting
Principles.
The report presents the unaudited financial position of the NCDA as of May 31, 2001,
and the results of its operations and activities through that date.
CP/pa
AEach.
Affirmative Action / Equal Opportunity Employer
Northstar Corridor Development Authority
MN DOT Grant Funds
1998 1999 2000
Revenues
Intergovemmental
55100 Federal Revenue - Misc. $ 39,500.54 $ 967,361.65 $ 2,741,481.57
Revenue Accrual 37,283.69 712,642.72 545,911.63
Prior Year Reversal (37,283.69) (712,642.72)
2001'
$ 818,122.89
715,275.06
1545,911.63)
Total
$ 4,566,466.65
2,011,113.10
(1,295,838.04)
Total Revenue 76,784.23 1,642,720.68 2,574,760.48 987,486.32 5,281,74t .71
Expenditures
Departmental
61102 Printing 180.90 607.50 788.40
61476 Other Travel Expense 10,801.48 - 10,801.48
61549 Misc. Program Expense 944.18 1,747.59 - 2,691.77
61558 Advertising 2,236.34 124.00 2,360.34
Operating
62365 Insurance 6,328.00 3,548.00 9,876.00
Contracts and Fees
63010 Professional Services 1,633,387.96 2,533,167.54
63977 Misc. Administrative Expense 76,784.23 8,207.64 19,862.03
Total Expenditures 76,784.23 1,642,720.68 2,574,750.48
Revenues Less Expenditures $ $ $
983,050.53 5,149,606.03
763.79 105,617.69
987,486.32 5,281,741.71
$ $
* As of May 31, 2001; additional expenditures are still outstanding for the months of April and May 2001.
MN DOT Reimbursements Outstanding:
March 01 $ 381,240.97
April 01 334,034.09
$ 715,275.06
Total MN DOT Grant Funding:
$ 350,000.00
5,000,000.00
1,800,000.00
$ 7,150,000.00
MN DOT Grant Funds Remaining:
Total Grant Funding
Reimbursements:
Through May 31, 2001
Outstanding
Grant Funds Remaining
$ 7,150,000.00
4,566,466.65
715,275.06
$ 1,868,258.29
JUN. 7. 200] 3:49PM REP 0BERSTAR
~,30~ R~Y~URN HOUSE 0¢¢1CE BUI~ING
WA~Ht~GTgN, ~C ZOO1
(2OQ) 22~211
FAX: (202)
~N~NG OEMO~AT;
COMM~EE ON
AND IN~AS~UC~RE
June 6, 2001
Dear Northstar Corridor Development Authority friends:
NO. 3753
P. 2
BRAINERD Cll'Y HALL
g0q L*,UnEL
31~ LAKE
C-,~g~M, ~N 55718
~1 ~EDERAL ~UILDIN~
DULUTh, MN
i21B] 727-7474
130~ ORONO
E~ Rm~, MN 55330
5~81 BT. CRO~X TR~
The 90-plus miles from Anoka COunty to St. Cloud cover the 3a fastest pOpulation growth center
in the United States. This growth presents an enormous trangportation el~allenge to the people and their
cities throughout the corridor as well as to the entire State of Minnesota. The Northstar Corridor Project
was born as a creative, visionary response to the transportation challenges posed by this ¢xtraordinary
growth.
It has been a pleasure for me to work with the talented men and women of the NCDA, since
inceptio~ in 1997, toward the realization of thc dream of this exceptional transportation irdtiative. Your
dedication, your hard work, and your success in earryi~lg this project forward have been exemplary. I
have great admiration for thi~ organization of 30 governmental units which has proven its ability tO apply
sound judgment, collaborative decision-making, and inclusive action to tho complexity of issues affecting
each of the governmental units throughout the Northstar Corridor. NCDA is recognized throughout the
country as a model organization capable of high quality work.
I have seen sensible NCDA policy makers look at all transportation options, select an integrated
transportatJ01t solution with commuter rail as its centerpiece, and then move carefully and swiftly
forward with planning, engineering, and environmental work. NCDA took thc courageous first step as
the only local ~nding partner with tho fexteral government to commit capital funds to this worthy project.
Your work has paid off, four out of five residents in the Corridor now support the idea of commuter rail.
This is a testament both to your willingness to listen to your constituency and your ability to
communicate the benefits of commuter rail to the public.
Congratulations on your success in completing Preliminary Engineering and the Final
Environmental Impact Statement. As the Minnesota Department of Transportation moves on to the next
ph~e of project development, your cominuing cooperation, support, and advocacy will be essential to thc
succes~ of the final design, eons'truetion, and operations, as well ms in overcoming the significant hurdles
of obtaining funding at tho state and federal levels. I am confident you will meet these challenges with
the same passion that you have exhibited thus far.
Congratulations, and thank you for your visionary leadership in bringing commuter rail in the
Northstar Coaidor eloper to reality.
With all best wishes.
JLOlfm
Northstar Corridor Development Authority
A
Report on the Status of the Northstar
Corridor Commuter Rail Project
June 7, 2001
~,,.aft Status Report on the Northstar Commuter Rail Project. June 7. 2001
TABLE OF
CONTENTS
I. Introduction
II.
Federal Transit Administration (FTA)
A. Introduction
B. Request to Enter into Preliminary Engineering
C. Results
III.
Major Investment Study
A. Introduction
B. Purpose and Need
C. Goals and Objectives
D. Alternatives
E. Evaluation Criteria
F. Evaluation
G. Results
IV.
Environmental Impact Statement
Do
Introduction
Environmental Impact Statement (ELS) Scoping
Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS)
and Supplemental Environmental Documentation
Final ElS and Next Steps
VI.
VII.
Station Area Planning
A. Introduction
B. Interactive Workshop on Land Use
and Station Area Planning
C. Station Area Planning Activities
Advanced Corridor Plan
A. Introduction
B. NCDA Resolution Approving the Advanced Corridor Plan
C. Comments from Cities and Townships
D. Resolutions from Cities with Stations
E. Responses to City Resolutions from the NCDA and the
Commissioner of Transportation
F. Review of the Advanced Corridor Plan by the
Saint Cloud APO and the Metropolitan Council
G. Continued Development
Preliminary Engineering
A. Introduction
B. Track and Signal Improvements
2
2
4
4
5
5
5
6
6
7
7
9
10
10
'10
11
13
13
13
13
16
16
18
18
18
19
19
2O
21
21
21
1~. ~rthstar Corridor Development Authority
Draft Status Report on the Northstar Commuter Rail Project. June 7, 2001
BNSF Preliminary Engineering Agreement
Preliminary Engineering on Stations, Maintenance
Facility, Communication and Control Center,
Layover Facility and Related Trade Work
22
23
BNSF
A.
B.
C.
Do
Negotiations
Commuter Rail Demonstration Projects
Preliminary BNSF Negotiations
Identification of Necessary Capacity Improvements
for Northstar Commuter Rail
BNSF Construction and Operating Agreements
29
29
29
3O
35
IX.
Public
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
Information and Involvement Activities 40
Introduction 40
Federal Requirements 41
Procurement of Services 41
Results: Strategic Plan for Public Information and Involvement 41
Results: Public Information Tools 42
Results: Public Involvement Tools 45
Results: Public Involvement Regarding the Development
of the Environmental Impact Statement 52
Results: Public Involvement Regarding the Development
of the Advance Corridor Plan 54
Funding 55
Background 55
Results 55
Xl.
Additional Activities
A. Multi-modal Connection
B. Multi-modal Facility Development
C. Multi-modal Facility Description and Location
D. Commuter Bus Service Demonstration Project
56
56
57
58
58
Appendices
Appendix A - Introduction
Mn/DOT Correspondence and NCDA Resolutions Relating to the Transition
Appendix B - MIS
NCDA Resolution 1999-06
Appendix C - ElS
NCDA Resolution 2000-04
Northstar Corridor Development Authority
,~aft Status Report on the Northstar Commuter Rail Project. June 7, 2001
Appendix D - Station Area Planning
D,1 Guiding Principles for Station Area Location
D.2 Handbook
Appendix E - Advanced Corridor Plan
E. 1 City Resolutions Approving the Advanced Corridor Plan
E.2 NCDA and Mn/DOT Responses
E.3 Saint Cloud APO and the Metropolitan Council Responses
E.4 Presentation on the Advanced Corridor Plan
Appendix F - PE Engineering
F.1 NCDA Resolution 2001-03
Appendix G- BNSF Negotiations
G. 1 BNSF Letter
G.2 Capacity Improvement Documents
Appendix H - Public Information and Involvement
H.1
H.2
H.3
H.4
H.5
H.6
H.7
Strategic Plan for Public Information and Involvement
Sample NCDA Project Update
Sample NCDA Newsletter
Sample NCDA Corridor Wide Mailing
Sample Fact Card and Fact Sheet
List of Presentations
Sample NCDA PowerPoint Presentation
Appendix I - Funding
I. 1 County Resolutions
~,_rthstar Corridor Development Authority
, ~-~-raft Status Report on the Northstar Commuter Rail Project. June 7, 2001
INTRODUCTION
Introduction
At its meeting on February 1, 2001, the Northstar Corridor
Development Authority CNCDA") adopted Resolution 2001-01
transferring to the Minnesota Department of Transportation
CMn/DOT") the responsibility for the development of the Northstar
Corridor Commuter Rail Project. This resolution was adopted in
response to direction from Mn/DOT, set forth in a letter dated
January 5, 2001.
The purpose of this document is to provide a detailed report on the
status of all elements of the project, as of the date of assignment to
Mn/DOT. As set forth in the resolution, the NCDA contemplated
that the transition would be complete as of June 1, 2001. In order
to accomplish a smooth and orderly transition to Mn/DOT, the
NCDA adopted a phased approach. On April 5, 2001, the NCDA
adopted Resolution 2001-2 assigning all contracts and
management responsibilities relating to the Burlington Northern
Santa Fe Railway Company CBNSF") negotiations to be effective
immediately. The second phase of the transition was approved by
the NCDA on May 3, 2001, as set forth in Resolution 2001-05,
assigning contracts relating to preliminary engineering and other
technical services, as well as public information services, effective
June 1, 2001. In addition, the NCDA terminated its contracts for
project management services effective June 1, 2001. Finally, the
NCDA terminated its Agreement for the Coordination of Commuter
Rail, Resolution 2001-06. (See Appendix A for Mn/DOT
correspondence and NCDA Resolutions relating to the transition).
This report will describe each of the major elements of the
Northstar Corridor Commuter Rail project development process
undertaken by the NCDA, summarizing key products, activities and
results. The summary includes key components of the Project
completed during the period of May 1997-May 2001.
Northstar Corridor Development Authority
Draft Status Report on the Northstar Commuter Rail Project. June 7, 2001
Federal Transit
Administration
Federal Transit Administration (FTA)
A. Introduction
On June 9, 1998, the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century
(TEA-21) was enacted. It requires the U.S. Department of
Transportation to submit an annual report to Congress that
includes its recommendations for allocating funding for candidate
New Starts projects. In addition, TEA-21 requires that FTA
evaluate and rate candidate New Starts projects as the basis for
approving project entry into the preliminary engineering and final
design phases of project development, as well as for approving
projects for full funding grant agreements.
Because federal funding is being sought for the Northstar
Commuter Rail Project, the Project is considered a federal New
Start Project, and it must comply with the planning and project
development process required by the FTA. The process is set forth
in the following flow chart. (Chart 1)
The NCDA has closely followed each step of the process from
system planning through the completion of preliminary engineering.
Specifically, it performed the Major Investment Study, (see Section
III), selected the Locally Preferred Transportation Investment
Strategy requested and secured approval by the St. Cloud APO
and the Metropolitan Council to include the Northstar Project in the
long-range transportation plans, requested and secured approval
from the FTA to begin Preliminary Engineering and conducted the
necessary environmental (NEPA) evaluation including the
preparation of a Final Environmental Impact Statement.
Over the course of its work, the NCDA has worked to keep the FTA
fully informed of its activities and progress. The NCDA provided
formal briefings to the FTA on:
February 26, 1999
March 23, 1999
September 30, 1999
October 28, 1997
February 1, 2000
March 17, 2000
In addition, NCDA staff and consultants were in close contact with
FTA Region 5 during the preparation of the Draft Environmental
Northstar Corridor Development Authority 2
Chart 1
FTA New Starts Planning and Project Development Proce§s
System Planning
Corridor Study
Altematives Analysis (MIS)
MPO adopts the
LPA into the Regions
Long Range Plan
+
Preliminary Engineering
Complete NEPA Documentation
Implement Financial Plan
Final Design
Financial Commitment
Construction Plans, Estirnatas
ROW, FFGA Negotiations
System Planning
· LPA in
Regional Long
Range Plan
Preliminary
Engineering
Final Design
Full Funding
Grant Agreement
Begin Construction
co.,t~o. M,.,geme.t Construction
VehicleStart-up Procurement
NCDA
Mn~OT
FTA Action
Decision Point
TPL-22, 3/1/99
Draft Status Report on the Northstar Commuter Rail Project. June 7, 2001
Impact States (DEIS). Note that the FTA is the lead federal agency
for the ElS. Mn/DOT and the NCDA are joint local lead agencies.
(For more detail on the ElS, see Section IV of this Report).
B. Request to Enter Preliminary Engineering ('PE")
On March 15, 2000, the NCDA submitted to the FTA a Request to
Enter Preliminary Engineering. (Document on file at the Anoka
County Government Center.) The document was prepared to
respond to the FTA "Guidance and Requests for New Starts
Projects and Enter Preliminary Engineering and Final Design",
September, 1999. As required, the document demonstrated that
the MIS was completed, the locally preferred alternative selected
and the project included in the regional long-range plan. A Project
Management Plan was included, showing the technical capability
and capacity of NCDA and Mn/DOT to carry out PE. In addition,
the Request included an evaluation of the project with respect to
the New Starts criteria, showing that commuter rail will be a
significant and cost-effective benefit to the corridor. The Request
contained a comprehensive land use assessment documenting that
the Northstar commuter rail will serve as a catalyst for transit
oriented development throughout the corridor.
Finally, the Plan demonstrated the local financial commitment to
the Project. Most significantly, the NCDA was able to show the
commitment of 10% of the capital costs by its member counties
and regional railroad authorities. This commitment has been an
influential first step in convincing the other funding partners (State
of Minnesota and Congress) that the Northstar Commuter Rail
Project is a serious candidate for implementation.
C. Results: "Recommended" Rating
On June 22, 2000, the FTA notified the NCDA that it had approved
its request to enter into preliminary engineering. Further, in
accordance with the New Starts Criteria, the FTA assigned an
overall project rating of "recommended".
The NCDA commenced the PE process on July of 2000. (See
Section VII of this report.) Note that Mn/DOT submitted all PE
documentation to FTA on June 1, 2001. Within the next few
weeks, Mn/DOT will submit an application to FTA to begin final
design, the next phase of project development.
Northstar Corridor Development Authority 4
~'-aft Status Report on the Northstar Commuter Rail Project. June 7, 2001
MAJOR
INVESTMENT
STUDY
Major Investment Study
A. Introduction
In 1998, the Northstar Corridor Development Authority (NCDA)
initiated a Major Investment Study (MIS) to evaluate and select the
most appropriate transportation improvements for the TH 10/47
corridor between downtown Minneapolis and the St. Cloud area.
The MIS is the first step in the FTA's project development process.
The MIS was conducted in two phases. The Phase I MIS defined
and evaluated the universe of alternative transportation
improvements in the corridor and identified five multi-modal
strategies for further consideration. The Phase II MIS further
refines the five strategies, evaluates the strategies, and identifies a
Locally Preferred Transportation Investment Strategy (LPTIS).
(Document on file at the Anoka County Government Center.)
B. Purpose and Need
The need for transportation improvements in the TH 10/47 corridor
is based on the following factors:
Imbalance Between Travel Demand and Travel Supply- The
Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT) projects peak
period congestion on TH 10 from Elk River to the east and capacity
deficiencies on highways and bridges throughout the corridor by
2020.
Lack of Multi-Modal Transportation Choices - An effective, long-
term, coordinated response to congestion will require a
commitment by affected governmental units to implement
strategies that provide alternative modes of travel and encourage
behavioral and land use changes that reduce travel demand.
Lack of Coordination Between Transportation Investments and
Land Use Development - At present there is no system in place to
address corridor-wide changing land use and transportation
conditions.
High Accident Rate Along the TH 10/47 Corridor - Accident rates in
the majority of the corridor are currently higher than the Mn/DOT
statewide average for the same type of roadway.
Increase Mobility on TH 10/47 - Many segments of TH 10 have
closely spaced signalized intersections and access driveways that
conflict with the mobility function of a principal arterial.
Northstar Corridor Development Authority 5
Draft Status Report on the Northstar Commuter Rail Project. June 7, 2001
Lack of Corridor-Wide Transit Service - Currently there is no
corridor-wide transit service between the Twin Cities and St. Cloud
metropolitan areas.
Lack of Non-Motorized Facilities - There is a lack of alternative
facilities such as recreational trails for non-motorized travel.
C. Goals and Objectives
In response to the identified transportation needs in the corridor,
the overall goal of the project is to identify a transportation
investment strategy that meets the future transportation needs of
the Northstar Corridor. The following goals were adopted by the
NCDA to guide the selection of a transportation strategy:
· Improve mobility and safety in 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.
D. Alternatives
The Phase I MIS defined and evaluated a wide variety of transit
and highway improvements for the corridor. Transit technologies
considered included bus system improvements, commuter rail, light
rail, diesel multiple units, heavy rail, monorail, automated guideway
transit and personal rapid transit. Highway options considered
included HOV lanes, freeway upgrades, bypasses, additional
Mississippi River crossings, and minor highway upgrades such as
adding turn lanes, access consolidation, development of frontage
roads, construction of interchanges and selected lane additions.
An initial screening process was used to focus on the most
promising modal elements. The individual elements were then
combined to form multi-modal strategies. A more detailed
evaluation of those strategies led to the selection of the following
five strategies recommended for further study in the Phase II MIS:
· No-Build
· Transportation Management and Bus Improvements
· Commuter Rail and Feeder Bus
Northstar Corridor Development Authority 6
Status Report on the Northstar Commuter Rail Project. June 7, 2001
Commuter Rail, Feeder Bus and TH 10 Minor Upgrades
Commuter Rail, Feeder Bus, TH 10 Minor Upgrades and River
Crossings
E. Evaluation Criteria
The goals of the Northstar Corridor project were used to define the
following criteria for evaluation of the project alternatives.
· Transit system usage
· Roadway system operations
· Safety
· Proximity impacts (displacements, parks, wetlands, floodplains,
historic properties)
· Air quality
· Energy
· Noise
· Environmental justice
· Land Use
· Development form
· Economic development
· Cost
· Cost effectiveness
F. Evaluation
The results of the evaluation process are summarized below.
Relative to the No-Build Alternative:
Alt. 2 Transportation System Management
· Increases 2020 transit ridership by 4,900 trips per day
· Insignificant change in roadway system operations and safety
· No significant environmental effects
· Promotes environmental justice by providing reverse commute
· No significant influence on land use development
· Capital cost approximately $43 million + $6 million for right-of-
way (19995)
Alt. 3 Commuter Rail and Feeder Bus
· Increases 2020 transit ridership by 10,000 trips per day
· Small decrease in vehicle miles of travel
· Reduction in regional air pollutant emissions and energy
Northstar Corridor Development Authority 7
Draft Status Report on the Northstar Commuter Rail Project. June 7, 2001
consumption
· No perceptible change in noise levels
· No significant negative environmental effects
· Promotes environmental justice by providing reverse commute
· Provides opportunity to focus economic growth
· Capital cost approximately $190 million + $6 million for right-of-
way (19995)
Alt. 4 TH 10 Improvements, Commuter Rail and Feeder Bus
· Increases 2020 transit ridership by 9,800 trips per day
· Small decrease in regional vehicle miles of travel
· Reduces traffic in the 1-94 corridor
· Reduced highway accident potential
· Reduction in regional air pollutant emissions and energy
consumption
· No perceptible change in noise levels
· Potential parkland and floodplain impacts
· Promotes environmental justice by providing reverse commute
· Provides opportunity to focus economic growth
· Capital cost approximately $304 million ($190 million rail + $114
million roadways) + $6 million for rail right-of-way + $52 million
for roadway right-of-way (19995)
Alt. 5 New River Crossings, TH 10 Improvements, Commuter Rail
and Feeder Bus
· Increases 2020 transit ridership by 9,750 trips per day
· Small decrease in regional vehicle miles of travel
· Reduces traffic in the 1-94 corridor
· Reduced highway accident potential
· Small reduction in vehicle hours of travel and delay
· Provides additional river crossing capacity
· Reduction in regional air pollutant emissions and energy
consumption
· No perceptible change in noise levels
· Potential parkland and floodplain impacts including severance
of a portion of Elm Creek Park
· Promotes environmental justice by providing reverse commute
· Provides opportunity to focus economic growth
· Capital cost approximately $361 million ($190 million rail + $114
million roadways + $57 million river crossings) + $6 million for
rail right-of-way + $54 million for roadway right-of-way (19995)
Northstar Corridor Development Authority
~ft Status Report on the Northstar Commuter Rail Project. June 7, 2001
G. Results Locally Preferred Transportation Investment
Strategy (LPTIS)
Considering the results of the evaluation of the alternatives, the
NCDA concluded that a comprehensive, multi-modal transportation
investment strategy best meets the goals and objectives of the
Northstar Corridor. The recommended elements of the LPTIS are
as follows:
· Commuter Rail between Downtown Minneapolis and St.
Cloud/Rice
· Expanded Feeder Bus Service
· Roadway Improvements in the TH 10 Corridor
· Two New River Crossings
· Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) Initiatives
· Bicycle/Pedestrian Improvements
In addition to these specific elements, the NCDA recommended
that the appropriate governmental entities work to implement
additional transportation connections at both ends of the Northstar
Corridor to ensure safe and efficient travel throughout the Twin
Cities and St. Cloud metropolitan areas. (See Resolution 1999-06
in Appendix B)
Northstar Corridor Development Authority 9
Draft Status Report on the Northstar Commuter Rail Project. June 7, 2001
V
ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT
STATEMENT
Environmental Impact Statement
A. Introduction
The National Environmental Policy Act CNEPA") and the Minnesota
Environmental Policy Act ("MEPA") prescribe procedures that are
separate and distinct from the Advanced Corridor Planning
Process. To satisfy these environmental review procedures, the
NCDA decided to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement
CEIS") as part of the commuter rail development process. An ElS
is a comprehensive study of the various potential environmental
consequences of a proposed land use development. (Northstar
ElS Documents are on file in the Anoka County Government
Center.
B. Environmental Impact Statement (ELS) Scoping
The initiation of the ElS for the Northstar Corridor project began
with a formal scoping process. The scoping process is used to
publicly announce the alternatives being considered for inclusion in
the Draft ElS and to seek out additional options which could be
examined. The purpose of scoping is to determine the scope and
significance of social, economic, and environmental issues
associated with the potential alternatives and the proposed action.
The process provides opportunities to inform the public,
government agencies, elected officials, organizations and
businesses that the ElS process is commencing and to hear about
issues of concern to notified participants. In addition to initiating
dialogue on the alternatives, scoping is instrumental in identifying
issues to be considered and/or resolved during the ElS.
The Notice of Intent to prepare an ElS on the project was published
in the Federal Register on June 7, 1999. In addition, the Notice of
Availability of the Scoping Booklet and announcements of the
Scoping Meetings were published in the Minnesota EQB Monitor
on June 28, 1999 which began the scoping period. The formal
scoping comment period extended from June 28 to August 20,
1999. The NCDA distributed over 1,000 Scoping Booklets to
federal, state and local agencies having jurisdiction in the project,
all interested parties on the NCDA mailing list, elected officials,
neighborhood organizations and civic groups. The Scoping Booklet
included descriptions of the project, alternatives, and issues
identified for consideration in the ElS.
Northstar Corridor Development Authority 10
· aft Status Report on the Northstar Commuter Rail Project. June 7, 2001
Four scoping meetings were held to review the background
materials distributed in the Scoping Booklet. For more information
on the scoping meetings, see Section IX.G
C. Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) and
Supplemental Environmental Documentation
Mn/DOT and the NCDA widely circulated the DEIS and
Supplemental Environmental Document to affected local
jurisdictions, regional, state and federal agencies, Native American
tribes, and interested groups. The DEIS was issued on November
13, 2000. The DEIS comment period ran through January 12,
2001. During that review and comment period, three public
hearings were held at various locations along the project corridor to
take oral testimony. On February 5, 2001 a Supplemental
Environmental document to the DEIS was distributed that identified
the potential impacts associated with a proposed commuter rail
station at 7th Street Northeast in northeast Minneapolis. The DEIS
review and comment period was therefore reopened from February
7 to March 7, 2001. An additional public hearing was also held on
February 27, 2001, which focused on the proposed Minneapolis
Northeast station.
As presented in Section III, the following project goals were
adopted for the project during the MIS process:
· Improve mobility and safety within the corridor
· Minimize adverse environmental impacts and foster positive
environmental effects
· Encourage transportation-supportive land use and development
patterns
· Provide a cost-effective and efficient transportation system
Section 6.2 of the October 2000 DEIS summarized the results of
the impact evaluation against the measures used to establish the
effectiveness of the alternatives in satisfying the goals of the
Northstar project.
The identification of a Preferred Alternative for the Northstar
Corridor is a specific step in the project development process
following the public review and comment period on the Draft ElS.
The preferred alternative is based on balancing the design and
environmental information, goals and objectives of the project,
community comments, and technical data (such as ridership,
Northstar Corridor Development Authority l l
Draft Status Report on the Northstar Commuter Rail Project. June 7, 2001
integration with other transit systems, cost-effectiveness, and
financial feasibility). This step identifies the commuter rail route,
station locations, maintenance and layover facility locations, feeder
bus operations, and connection to the Hiawatha Light Rail Transit
line. The NCDA recommended a preferred alternative to the
Minnesota DOT commissioner on May 3, 2001. (See Resolution
2001-04 in Appendix C.)
D. Final ElS and Next Steps
The FEIS evaluates the Preferred Alternative, using the No-Build
Alternative as a baseline for comparison. The impact evaluation
and mitigation measures presented in the FEIS reflect the identified
commuter rail system changes documented in the previous section.
The changes have taken place in response to public and agency
comments, newly available engineering information, financial
constraints of the system and efforts to avoid and minimize
potentially adverse impacts to the greatest extent possible.
The FEIS was prepared concurrently with preliminary engineering.
Preliminary engineering advances the level of design detail to
incorporate committed mitigation measures into the project design
and to more closely estimate project costs. The FEIS documents
and responds to comments received on the DEIS and the
Supplemental Environmental document.
The FEIS will be submitted to FTA on June 7, 2001. Following
FTA's review, there will be a 30 day review and comment period
(anticipated to be August 1-September 5, 2001.) The final step in
the ElS process is the issuance of the Record of Decision by FTA,
in September, 2001.
Northstar Corridor Development Authority 12
· aft Status Report on the Northstar Commuter Rail Project. June 7, 2001
STATION AREA
PLANNING
Station Area Planning
A. Introduction
One of the key criteria that the FTA uses to determine whether a
project is justified is an assessment of the project's transit
supportive existing land use and future patterns. Since 1998, the
NCDA has worked with communities on station area planning
activities and on the adoption of transit supportive land use
policies. The NCDA recognized that the development of land use
policies and tools should take place as early in the planning
process as possible. As discussed below, the policies and tools
have become more concrete as the Project progressed from
planning though preliminary engineering.
B. Interactive Workshop on Land Use and Station Area
Planning
A Land Use/Station Area Planning Forum was held on Friday, June
26, 1998 from 8:00 AM to 11:30 AM at the Sherburne County
Courthouse in Elk River. Over 70 people attended representing all
the communities along the Corridor. The format for the day
included speakers from San Diego who shared their experiences in
implementing and operating commuter rail. This was followed by
breakout sessions where each of the small groups focused on
identifying potential station locations for each of the communities
along the Corridor. The results of the workshop were presented at
the July 9, 1998, NCDA meeting where the NCDA approved the
initial proposed station locations for the preliminary technical
analysis of ridership forecasting and capacity modeling.
C. Station Area Planning Activities
On June 3, 1999, NCDA adopted Guiding Principles for Station
Area Location and Planning. The Principles include a Land Use
element. (See Appendix D. 1)
Throughout May-June 1999, NCDA/BRW conducted meetings with
each city staff along the Corridor to discuss/review station location
options. A summary of meeting dates and attendees is recorded in
memo from BRW date June 16, 1999.
On September 2, 1999 NCDA approved fourteen station sites.
The approval was based upon previously adopted principles for
station locations and community discussions. To assist the
Northstar Corridor Development Authority
13
Draft Status Report on the Northstar Commuter Rail Project. June 7, 2001
communities in the development of land use tools, the NCDA
retained the law firm of Lindquist & Vennum and renowned land
use lawyer Dick Nowlin. Legal serviced included the development
of potential land ordinances, moratoriums and the research
necessary to implement land use tools in accordance with
Minnesota law.
In February 2000, NCDA published a document entitled Transit
Supportive Existing Land Use and Future Pattern. It includes
documentation of existing land use, planned land use and a
description of policies necessary to support transit. The document
was included in the March 15, 2000, PE application to FTA.
A supporting handbook, Station Neighborhood Development
Principles and Guidelines, was also produced in February 2000.
The handbook was developed by NCDA/BRW and distributed to
cities throughout the Corridor. The intent was to educate city staff,
planning commissions, and councils about Transit Oriented
Development (TOD) potential, process, and tools. In addition the
document was meant to encourage cities to be proactive and
supportive in modifying planning and zoning ordinances and
comprehensive plans in consideration of transit supportive
development.
The handbook includes the following:
1. Principles of Station Neighborhood Development
2. Station Neighborhood Classification System
3. Guidelines for Neighborhood Development
4. Implementation Tools
(See Appendix D.2)
On March 2, 2000, NCDA authorized a contract for land use
planning assistance with IBI Group and Hoisington Koegler Group
inc. On May 9, 2000, IBI/HKGi began work in the Northstar
Corridor. Their work plan included the following:
1. Facilitate better understanding by planing professionals and city
staff throughout Northstar Corridor of Station Area Planning and
TOD.
2. Generate enthusiasm for TOD principles.
3. To provide direct assistance to communities in understanding
Northstar Corridor Development Authority
-aft Status Report on the Northstar Commuter Rail Project. June 7, 2001
principles, guidelines, and implementation tools.
On June 7 and July 12, NCDA/IBI hosted Workshops for
City/County staff. The Goals of the Workshop were:
1. Generate a better understanding of TOD
2. Develop station area plans (concept)
During the months of August - March 2001 HKGi met with City
Planning Commission/Council throughout the Corridor to assist the
station cities with planning, zoning, and comprehensive plan issues
supportive of TOD.
In December, 2000 an Economic Feasibility Report was developed
by IBI. The report evaluates the economic feasibility of Transit
Oriented Development in the Northstar Corridor.
Result: The IBI conclusion was that the potential for TOD in the
Northstar Corridor varied greatly by station location. Also, it would
likely take a concerted effort to realize TOD potential in the
Northstar Corridor.
Metropolitan council staff have continued to work with all Northstar
station cities within the Metropolitan area to encourage and assist
them with planning, zoning, and comprehensive plan modifications
to support transit oriented development.
David Loch and Hoisington Koegler Group have continued to work
with all Northstar station cities outside the Metropolitan area.
Result: The following cities have passed resolutions committing to
comprehensive plan amendments that support transit oriented
development: (to be developed)
Northstar Corridor Development Authority 15
Draft Status Report on the Northstar Commuter Rail Project. June 7, 2001
ADVANCED
CORRIDOR
PLAN
Advanced Corridor Plan
A. Introduction and Statutory Requirements
The Advanced Corridor Plan is the first of three documents
(advanced corridor plan, preliminary engineering plan, and final
design plan) to be developed in the State commuter rail planning
process. According to Minn. Statutes {}174.80, the Advanced
Corridor Plan contains the following components:
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
(9)
(10)
contains a physical design component that identifies the
physical design of facilities, including:
(a) location, length, and termini of routes;
(b) maintenance facility locations;
(c) station locations and design;
(d) related park and ride, parking, and other
transportation facilities;
specifies track and signal improvements;
addresses handicapped access;
specifies intermodal coordination and connections with bus
and light rail transit operation and routes;
projects ridership, capital costs, operating costs, and revenues;
identifies sources of funds for operating subsidies and
funding for final design, construction, and operation;
describes an implementation method;
describes a plan for public involvement and public
information;
defines anticipated agreements with the railroads; and
addresses land use impacts
The advanced corridor planning process, outlined in Minn. Statutes
[}174.86, provides a process to develop commuter rail physical
design components. The process affords opportunities for public
involvement at many junctures, both to solicit input from cities,
counties and planning organizations and to conduct public
hearings, at which affected parties have opportunity to present their
views. NCDA staff and consultants worked with city staffs
throughout the Corridor to respond to questions regarding the ACP.
In addition, staff was available for presentations and questions at
city planning commission, council, and public information meetings.
An overview of this process can be found on the next page. (Chart
#2) The Northstar Corridor Development Authority took every
opportunity for community involvement in the development of the
Advanced Corridor Plan.
Northstar Corridor Development Authority 16
o~E
8
T
Draft Status Report on the Northstar Commuter Rail Project. June 7, 2001
B. NCDA Action Approving the Advanced Corridor Plan
The NCDA unanimously approved the Advanced Corridor Plan on
August 3, 2000.
C. Comments from Counties, Cities and Towns Without
Stations
As outlined on the previous page, Minn. Statutes §174.86 require
the submission of the physical design component of the Advanced
Corridor Plan to the governing body of all counties, cities, and
towns along the Corridor for review and comment. The Northstar
Corridor Commuter Rail Advanced Corridor Plan was submitted to
each of the governing bodies on August 4, 2000. Following the
submission, a public hearing on the Advanced Corridor Plan was
held on September 7, 2000. For information on the public hearing,
see Section IX.H. In addition, many cities chose to hold their own
public hearings. Comments from the cities and counties were due
on October 23, 2000. Positive comments were received from
Anoka, Hennepin and Sherburne Counties.
D. Resolutions from Cities with Stations
As part of the Advanced Corridor Planning process, cities with
stations were to approve, approve with conditions, or disapprove
with specific amendments, the location and design of the station
proposed to be located in their city or town. The deadline for
issuance of local resolutions was October 23, 2000. Each of the
following cities/towns approved its station location and design with
conditions: Rice, St. Cloud/Haven Township, Becker, Big Lake, Elk
River, Anoka, Coon Rapids, and Minneapolis. The cities of Clear
Lake and Fridley did not approve their proposed station locations
and designs and specified the amendments that would cause the
withdrawal of the disapproval. Copies of the resolutions can be
found in Appendix E.1. A description of the follow-up to responses
from the cities of Fridley, Clear Lake and Minneapolis are
described below.
City of Clear Lake
In its resolution, the City of Clear Lake identified a preference for
"no-build" at this time, with the option of exploring a station at a
later date. The Commissioner of Transportation has agreed to this
approach, conditional on future funding. Therefore, a commuter
rail station at Clear Lake is not included in the Preferred
Northstar Corridor Development Authority 18
'-aft Status Report on the Northstar Commuter Rail Project. June 7, 2001
Alternative.
City of Fridley
In its resolution, the City of Fridley requested that Mn/DOT further
study various issues. Some issues have been reviewed with the
City and modifications have been made. Mn/DOT is in the process
of resolving the remaining issues with the City.
City of Minneapolis
In a resolution dated October 13, 2000, the City of Minneapolis
requested that Mn/DOT and the NCDA evaluate the feasibility of
locating the Northeast Minneapolis station site at 7th Street
Northeast. The Metropolitan Council requested the same
evaluation based on the sites better connections with buses, and a
link to a future commuter rail line to St. Paul and Hastings.
Following this action, the City of Minneapolis held several
community meetings and over the course of time introduced a
conceptual site plan. This plan was then revised according to
public comment and technical review. In December 2000, the city
council issued a resolution which approved the proposed 7th Street
Northeast station location, pending the findings of a supplemental
environmental document and subject to the provision of a 30-day
review and public comment period. The Supplemental
Environmental Information document to the Northstar Corridor
DEIS was issued on February 6, 2001. See Section IV for more
information on the DEIS.
E. Responses to City Resolutions from the NCDA and the
Commissioner of Transportation
Although not required to by state law, the NCDA and Mn/DOT
issued a joint response to each city's resolution. Responses can
be found in Appendix E.2.
F. Review of the Advanced Corridor Plan by the Saint
Cloud APO and the Metropolitan Council
According to Minn. Statutes §174.86, the NCDA and Mn/DOT must
submit the Advanced Corridor Plan to the Saint Cloud APO and the
Metropolitan Council for review and to ensure consistency with their
regional development guides. The Advanced Corridor Plan was
submitted to Saint Cloud APO and the Metropolitan Council on
December 14, 2000. The Saint Cloud APO held a public hearing
on January 2, 2001, and approved the Advanced Corridor Plan on
Northstar Corridor Development Authority 19
Draft Status Report on the Northstar Commuter Rail Project. June 7, 2001
January 25, 2001. The Metropolitan Council held a public hearing
on January 25, 2001, and approved the Advanced Corridor Plan on
February 14, 2001. Saint Cloud APO and Metropolitan Council
responses can be found in Appendix E.3.
G. Continued Development
Together with the Draft Environmental Impact Statement, the
Advanced Corridor Plan became part of the foundation for the next
phase of project development, the Preliminary Engineering Plan.
According to Minn. Statutes §174.80 subd. 3, Preliminary
Engineering Plan means a commuter rail plan that includes all the
items in the Advanced Corridor Plan that relate to the facilities
proposed for construction, but with additional detail and specificity
as needed for construction and operation.
NCDA received approval to enter into preliminary engineering on
June 22, 2000. See Section VII for a description of preliminary
engineering activities. Mn/DOT has agreed that the preliminary
engineering plans for stations will be submitted to the cities for
review and comment for consistency with the resolutions and other
city concerns.
Northstar Corridor Development Authority 20
-aft Status Report on the Northstar Commuter Rail Project. June 7, 2001
PRELIMINARY
ENGINEERING
Preliminary Engineering
A. Introduction
Upon completion of the planning steps required by the FTA and by
the State of Minnesota, the NCDA received approval to commence
preliminary engineering ("PE"). This phase is intended to take the
project from conceptual design to a 30% design level. For the
Northstar Project, the NCDA divided the work into three elements
as summarized below. The elements include: the PE on track and
signal improvements, BNSF preliminary engineering agreement
and PE on the stations, maintenance facility, communications and
central control facility, layover facilities and related track work.
B. Track and Signal Improvements.
1. Background
On February 3, 2000, NCDA authorized the issuance of a Request
for Proposals for Preliminary Engineering of Track and Signal
improvements on the BNSF railroad. Three responses were
received and evaluated. A contract with Toltz, King, Dural, and
Anderson (TKDA) was approved by NCDA on April 6, 2000.
The work plan for TKDA includes development of plans,
specifications and estimates for the full list of fifteen track capacity
improvements as proposed by BNSF. It was anticipated, however,
that the list of projects actually developed to full PE would be
reduced based upon the capacity modeling completed by Mainline
Management, Inc. and ultimately agreed to by BNSF. The project
timeline was six months beginning with Notice to Proceed.
The contract work effort began with a kickoff meeting on
September 6, 2000. The startup work included preparing base
mapping and general signal layouts which would accommodate all
improvements contemplated by either list. Since the BNSF and
NCDA had not reached agreement on the list of capacity
improvements, BNSF declined to provide input or review the design
of the track and signal improvements.
In February, 2001, the Project Team reviewed both lists of
improvements in an attempt to define overlap or similar projects
from each list in order to continue cost effective development of
engineering plans that would serve both lists. It was apparent that
while the base mapping, profiles, plan sheets, and signal
Northstar Corridor Development Authority 21
Draft Status Report on the Northstar Commuter Rail Project. June 7, 2001
specifications developed to date were necessary and supportive of
both lists, there were few, if any, projects that were fully correlated
with both lists. The Project Team agreed that it would not be cost
effective to proceed to full PE development of both lists of
improvements. It was therefore determined that PE work for track
and signals would continue to develop as much background
information and plan sheets as possible yet stop short of full PE for
either list pending some agreement with BNSF.
On April 5, 2001 the contract for Track and Signal improvements
was assigned by NCDA to Mn/DOT.
2. Results
Mn/DOT directed TKDA and sub-consultants to proceed to develop
a PE package for both lists of projects simultaneously. The
exception was to exclude two projects, i.e. Third Main Track and
the Siding at Coon Creek from the full list of BNSF proposed
improvements. Such development would enable Mn/DOT to
submit a dual package of PE defined improvements to FTA by the
newly imposed FTA deadline of June 1, 2000.
C. BNSF Preliminary Engineering Agreement
1. Background
Capacity improvements undertaken on the BNSF railroad will be
designed through preliminary engineering by NCDA/Mn/DOT.
Construction may commence for many of the improvements
without further design effort. More complex projects will require
additional design refinement beyond PE.
In order to assure that BNSF, the ultimate owner of the
improvements, is satisfied that appropriate standards and design
criteria are met, an agreement between NCDA and BNSF was
developed. The agreement proposed to compensate BNSF for
engineering staff time spent in reviewing engineering drawings and
providing input into design criteria and decisions.
After lengthy negotiations, contract language was agreed upon by
BNSF and NCDA staff and the agreement was submitted to BNSF
for execution on November 17, 2000. In letter from Carl Ice, BNSF
dated December 5, 2000, NCDA staff learned that BNSF would not
sign the document pending agreement on the final list of capacity
improvements for the Northstar Corridor.
Northstar Corridor Development Authority 22
'aft Status Report on the Northstar Commuter Rail Project. June 7, 2001
2. Results
Preliminary engineering for capacity improvements to the BNSF
railroad have been developed essentially by TKDA and their sub-
consultant, Twin City Signal, based upon their respective extensive
knowledge and experience with the BNSF system and standards
and without any formal BNSF input or review.
D. Preliminary Engineering on Stations, Maintenance
Facility, Communication and Control Center, Layover
Facility and Related Trade Work.
1. Background
On June 28, 2000, NCDA authorized the issuance of a Request for
Proposals for Preliminary Engineering of commuter rail stations,
maintenance facility, communication and control center, layover
facilities, and related track work. Two responses were received
and evaluated. A contract with URS/BRW was approved by NCDA
on September 7, 2000.
The work plan for URS/BRW includes development and packaging
of all documentation necessary to complete preliminary
engineering (approximately 30 percent completion of design) for 12
commuter rail stations, central control facility, vehicle maintenance,
layover facilities, and accompanying track work for the Northstar
Corridor between downtown Minneapolis and Rice. In addition, the
concept plans for system elements such as train operations,
system safety and security, and general communications would be
refined to PE level. The work plan also included development of a
refined cost estimate and a Project Management Plan. Finally, all
work would be fully documented and packaged, including work
developed by BRW in a previous contract with NCDA and track and
signal engineering developed by TKDA under separate contract
with NCDA, and submitted to FTA.
The project timeline was 6 months beginning with URS/BRW
receipt of Notice to Proceed on October 19, 2000. Per NCDA
direction, very specific project deliverable milestones were
established for the various project tasks. A monthly project Status
of Design report was submitted by the Consultant with detail
information regarding project progress, schedule, and issues by
task.
As directed by NCDA Resolution 2001-06, Mn/DOT assumed
project control on June 1, 2001.
Northstar Corridor Development Authority 23
Draft Status Report on the Northstar Commuter Rail Project. June 7, 2001
=
Results
a. On June 1, 2001, the Preliminary Engineering package
for the Northstar Corridor Project was submitted to the
FTA by Mn/DOT. (Note: All PE Documents are on file in
the Anoka County Government Center). The engineering
and project design to date includes the following
documents:
VOLUME 1
A. Rail Stations:
Standard Directive Drawings:Drawings of station
elements that are consistent throughout the system.
Examples include civil directives; landscape details;
platform drawings; architectural drawings; mechanical,
electrical, and structural drawings.
Configuration Drawings: Detailed plan sheets for each
station reflecting the distinct design of the station.
Examples include: existing conditions; station layout;
grading; utilities; platform; site lighting; platform electric;
landscape; overpass/underpass.
B/C.Track and Signal Improvements
Plan sheets showing construction detail for track and
signal improvements that increase track capacity.
D. Multimodal Connection:
Alignment, profile, and construction details for the
Northstar-Hiawatha multimodal connection.
E. System Signage and Graphics:
Directive drawings of signs that provide information on
the station site, wayfinding, and system utilization.
Includes specific station site configuration drawings
indicating sign location.
F. Outline Specifications for Rail Stations and Track and
Signal Improvements:
Rail stations: Design criteria for station site development
including all circulation systems, hard surface elements,
landscaping and site amenities. The criteria are based
upon standards related to vehicle and pedestrian
Northstar Corridor Development Authority 24 __.
-aft Status Report on the Northstar Commuter Rail Project. June 7, 2001
circulation, visual aesthetics, urban development, civil
and environmental engineering, and systems
maintenance. They are generally applicable to all
stations.
The Design Criteria are also based upon goals and
objectives for station development adopted by the NCDA
Board on June 3, 1999. The NCDA also approved the
Station Design Criteria on May 3, 2001. (See Resolution
2001-03 in Appendix F.1)Additionally, the BNSF has
reviewed and provided comment on the Design Criteria.
Track and Siqnal Improvements: Includes outline
specifications for construction of the various components
of the capacity improvement projects.
VOLUME II
A. Maintenance Operations/Facilities Program Report
and Design Report: The Maintenance Service and
Inspection Facility is located at the "Cargill south" site in
Elk River, about ¼ mile south of the Elk River Station on
the southerly side of the BNSF tracks.
The Program Report provides the basis for facility
design. It describes space requirements and
relationships for the activities planned for the facility.
The Design Report builds on the Programming Report by
describing the activities that will occur at the S & I facility
at Elk River and the Layover facility at Rice. It provides
information on the site and track layout; lighting;
landscaping; structural; architectural; mechanical;
electrical codes; and outline specifications.
A detailed cost estimate and equipment catalog cut
sheets are included.
B. Maintenance/Operations Facilities: Drawings
Preliminary engineering drawings of the Service and
Inspection and Layover Facilities. The detailed site plans
include: existing conditions; site layout; grading; utilities;
and landscaping. Additionally, there are track work
plans; building architectural plans; structural, mechanical,
Northstar Corridor Development Authority 25
Draft Status Report on the Northstar Commuter Rail Project. June 7, 2001
electrical, and equipment drawings.
VOLUME III SYSTEM WIDE COMPONENTS
Provides a summary of six system wide elements
including:
A. Initial Operations Plan Describes train operating
assumptions; service schedule; equipment utilization and
the initial staffing plan.
B. Fleet Procurement and Cost Estimate: Describes the
equipment concept and fleet size: 5 locomotive, 12
trailer coaches, and 6 cab cars. Includes a detailed
procurement schedule commencing in October, 2001
and culminating with system startup in December, 2004.
C. Fare Collection Plan: Provides general design
criteria for fare collection media and equipment;
procurement strategies and a cost estimate. The general
concept is that equipment be compatible with Metro
Transit and Hiawatha LRT to capitalize on economies of
scale in equipment procurement and maintenance as
well as provide familiar equipment and seamless service
to patrons.
D. Operations Center and Communications: Describe
the communication requirements, functions and design.
Includes communication with BNSF dispatchers, train
crews, passenger information, Mn/DOT, and emergency
services.
E. Preliminary System Startup: Defines system start up
needs and cost estimate.
F. Procurement Plan: Defines and evaluates various
procurement strategies and makes recommendations for
procurement of the various elements of the Northstar
Project.
VOLUME IV PROJECT MANAGEMENT
A sixteen chapter description of the project and
organizational structure developed to manage the
Northstar Project through final design, construction and
Northstar Corridor Development Authority 26
r~raft Status Report on the Northstar Commuter Rail Project. June 7, 2001
operations.
The Chapters include:
1. Project Overview
2. Project Organization
3. Financial Requirements
4. Quality Management Plan
5. Final Design Program
6. Construction Managements Plan
7. Testing and Start-up Program
8. Program Management and Control
9. Procurement
10. Real Estate Acquisition Program
11. Human Resources and Labor Relations
12. Risk Management and Insurance
13. System Safety and Security
14. Communications and Public Involvement
15. Legal Requirements and Agreements
16. Fleet Management Plan
VOLUME V CAPITAL COST ESTIMATE
Provides current (2001) and year of construction (End of
2004) capital cost estimates for the Northstar Project.
Estimates are provided in both summary and detail.
Year 2001 costs are inflated for 3.5 years to end of 2004
at a rate of 3.75 percent per year. The estimate includes
engineering and contract administration costs of 20
percent and contingency allowances of 15 percent. The
total capital cost estimate for the Northstar Commuter
Rail project is $260,693,800 (2004 Dollars).
VOLUME VI MINIMAL OPERABLE SEGMENT (MOS)
As requested by FTA, the project was divided into shorter
segments and analyzed for cost impacts. The segments
reviewed include Minneapolis to Elk River with
incremental additions of Big Lake, East St. cloud, and
finally the full project at Rice.
The segments are reviewed for the incremental change
in capital cost, operating cost, and ridership to determine
an annualized cost per rail rider and a cost effectiveness
indicator for the initial segment to Elk River, and for each
subsequently longer section.
Northstar Corridor Development Authority 27
Draft Status Report on the Northstar Commuter Rail Project. June 7, 200'/
The NCDA Board is on record in support of the full length
project between downtown Minneapolis and Rice. (See
NCDA Resolution 2001-4 Locally Preferred Alternative)
VOLUME VII FINANCIAL PLAN
The plan identifies sources and uses of funds to support
both capital and operating plans. It also includes a cash
flow analysis.
bo
Expenditures through May 31, 2001, are ,
of a total contract amount of $998,210. It is expected
that the final invoice amount including a significant effort
to finalize and assemble all of the documentation for FTA
submittal during the month of May will result in a very
minimal contract balance.
Northstar Corridor Development Authority 28 . ~
-aft Status Report on the Northstar Commuter Rail Project. June 7, 2001
VIII
BNSF
NEGOTIATIONS
BNSF Negotiations
A. Commuter Rail Demonstration Projects
1. Background
The NCDA had discussions with BSNF regarding the two
commuter rail demonstration projects that the NCDA sponsored in
the corridor in July, 1997 and August, 2000. The NCDA had
extensive negotiations with BNSF regarding dispatching services
and the right to use the BNSF freight mainline between St. Cloud
and Minneapolis for these two demonstration projects.
2. Results
Successful demonstration projects in July, 1997, and August, 2000,
utilizing the BNSF right of way. For more information on the
demonstration projects, see Section IX.F.
Preliminary BNSF Negotiations
Letter of Commitment
The first step in the process of developing a partnership with
BNSF was to determine whether BNSF was willing to work
with the NCDA to develop the commuter rail service on the
BNSF railway. Congressman Jim Oberstar, a key proponent
of the project, requested that BNSF sign a letter of
commitment to the Northstar Project; and on May 13, 1999,
Congressman Oberstar and Northstar officials met with
BNSF officers. Matthew Rose, Chief Operating Officer,
presented a letter stating BNSF's commitment to work with
the NCDA and the conditions or principles that BNSF will
apply when commuter service is proposed on a line that
BNSF intends to continue to own.
Commuter Rail Principles
(a) In the letter of commitment, dated May 13, 1999, Mr.
Rose included the BNSF Commuter Rail Principles
(See Appendix G.1 for BNSF Correspondence and
Commuter Rail Principles). BNSF's fundamental
principle is that commuter service cannot degrade
freight service and all costs and liabilities arising out
of the commuter service must be borne by the public.
On August 18, 1999, BNSF officials presented its
Commuter Rail Principles to the NCDA Negotiating
Team.
Northstar Corridor Development Authority 29
Draft Status Report on the Northstar Commuter Rail Project. June 7, 2001
On September 28,1999, the NCDA team presented to
BNSF the Northstar's Commuter Rail Guiding
Principles. This document is intended to have the
negotiating parameters from the public perspective.
Northstar's principles set forth its expectations for
service, allocation of cost and liability, capital
investments and roles and responsibilities.
(b)
Result: BNSF and NCDA representatives generally
agreed to the principles, recognizing that the real
negotiations will occur in the translation of the
principles into contract terms and conditions.
Identification of Necessary Capacity Improvements for
Northstar Commuter Rail Project
All reports and correspondence referenced in Vll.C are
included in Appendix G.
BNSF Capacity Modeling Services.
(a) Background
On June 5, 1998, the NCDA entered into an agreement with
BNSF to complete a rail capacity study as part of an
assessment of the feasibility of the commuter rail service
between St. Cloud and Minneapolis. As part of the analysis,
BNSF simulated current (1998), projected 2003, and
projected 2020 freight traffic and then added the proposed
commuter rail service to the system. The analysis resulted
in a list of capacity improvements necessary to maintain
base levels of freight service while accommodating the
proposed commuter service.
(b) Results
BNSF concluded that addition of commuter rail service to
the BNSF line is feasible for both the 2003 and 2020
Freight/Amtrak cases subject to the implementation of the
BNSF developed list of fourteen capacity improvements.
The "Capacity Analysis for the Northstar Corridor Commuter
Rail Study", March 31, 1999, is included as reference.
Mainline Management Modeling Services
(a) Background
A thorough review of the BNSF capacity analysis was
Northstar Corridor Development Authority 30
-aft Status Report on the Northstar Commuter Rail Project. June 7, 2001
completed by Mr. David Mahle, BRW and reported on April
12, 1999. The conclusions reached were that the BNSF
Feasibility Study indicated more capacity upgrades than
should be required to accommodate BNSF freight growth
and the proposed commuter rail schedule. It was, therefore,
recommended that further simulation analysis by a separate
independent consultant be completed in order to assure
NCDA of the modeling results and required capacity
improvements.
On May 6, 1999 the NCDA retained Mainline Management,
Inc. to review all assumptions and inputs used by BNSF for
its simulation work and to independently simulate and
analyze BNSF current and projected future freight
operations as well as the proposed commuter rail service.
MLM reviewed BNSF results through state of the art
computer simulation using the Railway Analysis & Interactive
Line Simulator (RAILS). During review of the BNSF
Capacity Analysis, MLM disagreed with a number of BNSF
assumptions regarding freight operation and dispatching
methodology.
Consequently, BNSF, upon internal review of their own
March, 1999 Capacity Analysis decided that several
modifications to their initial study analysis and simulation
needed to be made. In essence, the study area was
expanded; delay at Northtown yard was arbitrarily increased;
and the refueling and inspection scheduled to move to
Minor, North Dakota, would be retained at Northtown.
(b)
Results:
(i) The BNSF issued a revised Capacity Analysis
Reports dated August 27, 1999, which documents the
revised assumption and expands the March, 1999 list
was expanded to twenty-nine improvements required
to implement the 2003 Freight/Amtrak and Commuter
Rail System. Also, BNSF identified a total of thirty-six
capacity improvements that would be required by
2018 FreightJAmtrakJcommuter Rail system. See
report BNSF August 27, 1999. The report provides
documentation for a June 30, 1999, BNSF memo
summarizing the analysis and providing a
Northstar Corridor Development Authority
Draft Status Report on the Northstar Commuter Rail Project. June 7, 2001
consolidated list of fifteen required improvements for
the 2003 Freight/AmtraldCommuter Rail System.
(ii) On December 1, 1999, MLM issued an Interim
Report Capacity Simulation for the 1998 and 2003
Base case between E. St. Cloud and Minneapolis.
MLM found that the addition of the capacity upgrades
(BNSF list of 15) proposed by BNSF would improve
overall freight transit time by 8.8 percent and reduce
freight delay by 30.2 percent. MLM stated, "The
freight performance improvements are an indication
that the capacity enhancement list provided by BNSF
is more extensive than required to mitigate the effects
of commuter operation or freight mobility across the
network."
(iii) On February 18, 2000, MLM issued a full
report on their capacity simulations for the Northstar
Corridor. The conclusion was that seven projects
included in the BNSF list could be eliminated while
still improving the overall functionality and capacity of
the corridor for freight and the proposed commuter
rail schedule.
(iv) On March 14, 2000, BNSF responded to the
MLM report. After several meetings and discussions,
BNSF concluded that the simulation program (RAILS)
utilized by MLM could not be effectively analyzed by
BNSF nor offered valid comparison to the Dispatch
Planing Model (DPM) utilized by BNSF. BNSF further
suggested that it would be possible to compare and
reconcile the two studies if MLM were to model the
project with DPM. (BNSF letter from Larry Hahn to
David Mahle, MLM dated March 14, 2000.) NCDA
agreed to model the network using DPM. (April 25,
2000, letter from Tim Yantos to D.J. Mitchell, BNSF.)
(v) On May 4, 2000, MLM reported preliminary
results of the DPM computer simulations of the 2003
freight only and 2003 freight and commuter rail
service. As expected, the DPM results using the
same improvements MLM had previously modeled in
RAILS, showed even greater improvement in freight
Northstar Corridor Development Authority 32
'r~raft Status Report on the Northstar Commuter Rail Project. June 7, 200f
delay and transit time. The DPM modeling showed
that adding the capacity improvements proposed by
MLM would reduce freight delay by 22.4 percent and
reduce total transit time by 6.5 percent. (D. Mahle
memo dated May 4, 2000.)
(vi) On May 30, 2000, a meeting with BNSF and
MLM was held at BNSF headquarters in Fort Worth,
TX to discuss results of MLM's most recent
simulations of the Northstar Corridor.
(vii) BNSF and MLM continued to meet and
exchange memoranda regarding disagreement with
model inputs, assumptions, dispatching, operations,
and physical plant. One additional important factor is
that BNSF continued to simulate using DPM version
5.27 while MLM used the latest DPM version 5.37.
The earlier version used by BNSF was no longer
supported by the vendor due to improvements made
to later releases. The earlier versions was therefore
not available to MLM because it had become
obsolete. The later version was available to BNSF,
however, they chose not to use it.
3. Final Phase of NCDA Capacity Negotiations
The final phase of the NCDA~s capacity negotiation occurred in the
Fall of 2000. The intent of this phase to reach a level of policy
agreement over the necessary improvements and to settle the
disagreements between the modelers by closing out the capacity
modeling exercises. The following summarizes the steps taken and
the exchange of positions between the NCDA and BNSF.
Results
(a) November 17, 2000. Meeting at BNSF in Chicago with DJ
Mitchell and Pat Casler. BNSF agreed to use Mainline
Management list of 14 - 15 projects as the "base". DJ Mitchell
agreed that we need to close out the capacity modeling, but
indicated that there were additional improvements that were likely
to be necessary at the Minneapolis Junction.
(b) Telephone conversation between DJ Mitchell and Tim
Yantos. DJ said that the NCDA did not need to worry about any
improvements north of Northtown. The NCDA should focus on
Northstar Corridor Development Authority 33
Draft Status Report on the Northstar Commuter Rail Project. June 7, 2001
Minneapolis Junction.
(c) December 5, 2000. Conference call with Matt Rose, et al.,
confirming that the key omissions include improvements around
Minneapolis Junction and that the focus of negotiations should be
on the scope and not the costs of the project. (See also letter from
Carl Ice, BNSF, dated December 5, 2000 and response from
Yantos and Mukhtar Thakur, dated December 13, 2000.)
(d) January 5, 2001. Letter to Betsy Wergin from Cecil Selness,
Mn/DOT, notifying the NCDA of Mn/Dot's intent to take over the
control and project management of the Northstar commuter rail
project. Mn/DOT copied Matt Rose, Carl Ice, and DJ Mitchell at
BNSF.
(e) January 19, 2001. Mn/DOT and NCDA team met with BNSF
in Fort Worth. BNSF changed its position asserting that the entire
BNSF list of previously identified capacity improvements were
necessary for commuter rail. The parties agreed that additional
modeling was necessary to resolve disputes over modeling
practices and inputs. It was further agreed that the parties would
utilize yet another new simulation model. "Rail Traffic Coordinator,
(RTC), and would identify and agree to procedures for resolving
disputes.
(f) On February 23, 2001, MLM met with BNSF to discuss the
BNSF data conversion and standards development for modeling
the Northstar Corridor with Rail Traffic Coordinator (RTC). MLM
found the model conversion incomplete and the standards lacking
in clarity. In general, operating restrictions and assumptions were
deemed overly restrictive. The Feb. 26 memorandum to T. Yantos
from Bob Patton, MLM< provides the BNSF Northstar Operating
Assumptions and the MLM analysis.
(g) On March 28, MLM again met with BNSF to review RTC
model criteria. The updated BNSF Northstar Operating
Assumptions as well as MLM analysis and critique of those
assumptions is included in the March 29 memo from Bob Patton,
MLM to Mukhtar Thakur, Mn/DOT. The MLM conclusion is that
"BNSF's latest requirements are more stringent than any we have
previously received."
Northstar Corridor Development Authority 34
'~raft Status Report on the Northstar Commuter Rail Project. June 7, 2001
D BNSF Construction and Operating Agreements
1. Background
In early discussions regarding the Northstar Commuter Rail Project,
BNSF representatives stated that a fundamental condition was that
BNSF would dispatch and operate any commuter service operating
on its railway and it would construct the necessary capacity
requirements to its property. The NCDA agreed, after clarifying with
the FTA that this approach was permissible in light of federal
procurement requirements. Recognizing the complexity of the
construction and operating agreement, the NCDA undertook a
variety of steps to prepare for negotiations. This section of the
report will summarize the steps taken and the preliminary
discussions with BNSF.
2. Discussions with other Commuter Rail Systems
The NCDA's first step in preparing for negotiations was to
understand the parameters of commuter rail service, thus NCDA
officials and staff met with elected and staff representatives of the
following commuter rail systems:
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
(g)
(h)
(i)
(J)
(k)
North County Transit District Coaster (San Diego)
Los Angeles Metrolink
San Jose ACE
Chicago Metra
Seattle Sound Transit
Vancouver West Coast Express
Philadelphia SEPTA
Dallas/Fort Worth Trinity Railway Express
Long Island Railroad
Toronto GO Transit
San Francisco Caltrans.
Results: These meetings provided valuable information regarding
the negotiation process, key terms and conditions, performance
standards, political considerations, community involvement and risk
and liability issues.
The Seattle system proved most closely analogous, because
Sound Transit was in the process of completing its negotiations
with BNSF in 1999-2000 for the construction and operations of the
Sounder. Seattle's Agreements were finalized in the summer of
2000. Further, BNSF indicated that it believed the Seattle
Agreements would be useful models for the Northstar Project. As a
result, NCDA officials and staff have had numerous discussions
Northstar Corridor Development Authority
Draft Status Report on the Northstar Commuter Rail Project. June 7, 2001
with Paul Price and other Sounder officials to garner as much
information as possible regarding negotiations and the resulting
agreements.
3. Legal research
In 1999, the NCDA issued a RFP for Legal Services to assist in
negotiating and drafting the Agreements. The NCDA retained
Harkins Cunningham and Bob Kessler, the attorneys that
represented Seattle in its negotiations with BNSF. In addition, the
NCDA retained Byron Olsen of the Fellhaber Larson & Fenlon law
firm to act as local legal counsel. When Mr. Olsen retired,
Lindquist & Vennum was retained to address issues of Minnesota
law.
Results: To build the foundation for the Agreements, the NCDA
requested its legal advisors to prepare a number of opinions,
addressing issues relating to:
· Bonding Restrictions and Financing
· State and Local Taxation
· Liability and Insurance Issues
· Amtrak Reform and Accountability Act
· Whistleblowing at railway/highway grade crossings.
4. Agreement in Principle
In the Oct.-Dec. of 2000, the NCDA negotiating team developed a
draft list of major business terms and a detailed outline of key
terms for the BNSF Construction and Operating Agreements. This
document was intended to form the basis for an Agreement in
Principle with BNSF and was viewed as a tool to further the
negotiating process. The terms and conditions were based on the
Seattle Agreements, but modified to reflect the Northstar Project.
Result: This document was not presented to BNSF, due to the
changes in project management and negotiating responsibility.
(a)
Risk Management
Goals
BNSF's Expectations.
In preliminary discussions in 1999, BNSF
representatives stressed their company's position that
the risk and liability aspects of the project would need
Northstar Corridor Development Authority 36
*aft Status Report on the Northstar Commuter Rail Project. June 7, 2001
(b)
(ii)
to be managed so that BNSF would be protected
against any liability that in any way resulted from the
Northstar commuter rail project.
NCDA's Goals.
The NCDA wished to address BNSF's expectations,
while protecting the NCDA, all of its members and
other interested stakeholders. The NCDA, its
members and Mn/DOT needed to cover risks
associated with the design and construction of the
project. It was assumed that Mn/DOT would also
need to cover risks arising from operations. The
NCDA wanted to establish a cost-effective and
comprehensive risk management program that
address these risks and avoid the need to rely on a
patchwork of contractors' insurance policies.
Risk Management Program
(i) From the inception of the project, the NCDA has
required that its contractors carry insurance naming
the NCDA and its members as additional insureds on
contractors' general liability insurance policies.
Whenever possible, the NCDA has obtained
indemnification from the contractors. In addition, the
NCDA purchased liability insurance through the
League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust to protect
the NCDA and its members for claims arising out of
NCDA operations. Coverages include Directors and
Officers and Land Use claims.
(ii) In 1999, the NCDA began to explore options for a
formal risk management program for the commuter
rail project. Because federal law caps BNSF's liability
at $200,000,000 per accident, the NCDA wished to
explore options that would provide coverage at that
level. For purpose of planning, the NCDA divided the
risk management program into two phases: the
design and construction phase and the operations
phase.
On March 16, 2000, the NCDA submitted a Request
to Enter Preliminary Engineering to the Federal
Transit Administration (FTA). This request included a
Project Management Plan which committed the
NCDA to develop a risk management plan during the
Northstar Corridor Development Authority 37
Draft Status Report on the Northstar Commuter Rail Project. June 7, 2001
(iv)
preliminary engineering phase of the project. The
Project Management Plan divided the project into
three risk management phases: the design period,
the construction/installation period and the
operational period.
Design and Construction Phases:
(1) The NCDA stated that it would explore the
feasibility of establishing an owner-controlled
insurance program (OCIP) or "wrap-up" program for
the final design and construction periods. This was
an attractive option to the NCDA because it offered
the possibility of providing comprehensive, cost-
effective coverage that would facilitate the
participation of DBE businesses in the project.
(2) In May 2000, NCDA staff met with
representatives of Minnesota Department of
Administration and Mn/DOT to discuss and
coordinate the risk management aspects of the
project. At the meeting, discussions focused on
BNSF's expectations that it would be indemnified and
insured by the State, as well as on the NCDA's desire
to establish a comprehensive risk management
program for the design and construction phase of the
project. The result of the meeting was that the NCDA
was free to explore whatever insurance program it
believed was in its best interest.
(3) The NCDA continued to explore the possibility
of an OCIP or wrap-up insurance program and
determined that it needed additional expert advice to
determine whether this would be feasible. If such a
program was feasible, the NCDA wished to
implement the program prior to entering final design
of the project.
(4) NCDA staff drafted a Request for
Qualifications for Insurance/Risk Management
Services designed to establish a list of insurance
consultants or brokers experienced in the OCIP or
wrap-up programs. The NCDA staff proposed that
the NCDA would then issue a Request for Proposals
Northstar Corridor Development Authority 38
~raft Status Report on the Northstar Commuter Rail Project. June 7, 2001
to the pre-qualified list of vendors that would require a
more comprehensive description of the risk
management program being proposed.
(5) On December 27, 2000, NCDA staff met with
representatives of Minnesota Department of
Administration and Mn/DOT to discuss the risk
management aspects of the project and the proposed
RFQ. The Department of Administration staff
believed that selection of an insurance broker was
premature and Mn/DOT refused to authorize
issuance of the RFQ.
(v) Operations Phase.
BNSF's expectation that it will be indemnified and insured
for all risk associated with operation of commuter rail service
has been discussed with representatives of Mn/DOT, the
Department of Administration and the Attorney General's
Office. This is an issue that Mn/DOT must address prior to
entering into the operating agreements.
Northstar Corridor Development Authority 39
Draft Status Report on the Northstar Commuter Rail Project. June 7, 2001
PUBLIC
INFORMATION
AND
INVOLVEMENT
ACTIVITIES
Public Information and Involvement Activities.
A. Introduction
The NCDA was created, in part, as a direct means to ensure
community representation and participation in all aspects of the
Northstar commuter rail project. As set forth in the Joint Powers
Agreement as amended, the NCDA represents all counties, cities
and townships in the Northstar Corridor, which provides these
communities the opportunity to be directly involved in the
decisionmaking process. In addition, the NCDA has conducted a
variety of public information and involvement activities to provide
residents and businesses in the Northstar Corridor an opportunity
to access information and provide input. In summary the Northstar
Corridor approach is to:
communicate with and involve local residents in refining the
proposed alternatives, especially for locating stations and
planning the land use/development around the commuter
rail alternative stations;
communicate with and educate the public, neighborhoods,
and agencies along the corridor study area on the
opportunities and impacts the project presents for their
community and/or area of interest;
involve local residents in the NCDA decision-making process
thereby creating a sense of public ownership of the project;
gain insights into issues of greatest concern or interest to the
public and municipalities of the study Corridor and
incorporate them into decision-making factors; and
meet or exceed the requirements and intent of federal, state,
and local public involvement policies in a manner that is
consistent with the National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA) process.
The NCDA can say with confidence that its public information and
involvement activities have been hugely successful. This success
is quantified by the fact that 92% of corridor residents are aware of
the Northstar Corridor Rail Project and 80% think that it's a good
idea. These activities and their outcomes are outlined in Section
IX.E. through IX.H.
Northstar Corridor Development Authority 40
~raft Status Report on the Northstar Commuter Rail Project. June 7, 2001
B. Federal Requirements
NCDA recognizes that the FTA places high priority on public
information and involvement. NCDA has repeatedly designed
highly effective public information and involvement strategies to
meet FTA requirements and serve the residents and businesses of
the Northstar Corridor. Specifically, these requirements state:
"effective public involvement process provides for an
open exchange of information and ideas between the
public and transportation decisionsmakers. The overall
objective of an area's public involvement process is that
it be proactive, provide complete information, timely
public notice, full public access to key decisions, and
opportunities for early and continuing involvement (23
CFR 450.212(a) and 450.316(b)(1))... A good indicator of
an effective public involvement process is a well informed
public which feels it has opportunities to contribute input
into transportation decisionmaking processes through a
broad array of involvement opportunities at all stages of
decisionmaking...The ISTEA specifically identifies
various segments of the public and the transportation
industry that must be given the opportunity to participate,
including citizens, affected public agencies,
representatives of transportation agency employees,
other affected employee representatives, private
providers of transportation and other interested parties
(e.g., U.S.C. 134(h))."
C. Procurement
To carryout NCDA public information and involvement activities, the
NCDA contracted with firms astute in both public information and
involvement strategy and implementation. The NCDA contracted
with Shandwick International, Inc. for the period of May 1999
through August 2000. The NCDA contracted with Himle Horner for
the period of November 2000 through December 2001.
D. Strategic Plan for Public Information and Involvement
Shandwick International developed the Strategic Plan for Public
Information and Involvement for June 1999 through December
2000, attached in Appendix H.I. The primary objective of the plan
was to involve the public in the development of the Major
Northstar Corridor Development Authority
Draft Status Report on the Northstar Commuter Rail Project. June 7, 2001
Investment Study and the Draft Environmental Impact Statement,
while at the same time adequately explaining the process and
keeping the public informed. The Plan outlines goals, key
audiences and key messages, as well as specific public information
and involvement strategies.
E. Results: Public Information Tools
1. Project Updates
The Project Update is published following each monthly NCDA
meeting. It keeps people informed about the Northstar commuter
rail project and the actions taken by the NCDA. It also acts as a
briefing for representatives to take to their local jurisdictions. The
Project Update is sent to approximately 1,000-1,500
names/addresses on a mailing list of public officials and other
interested parties. Requests to be added to the list occur
frequently. Thirty-five Project Updates have been completed as of
May 15, 2001. An example of the Project Update can be found in
Appendix H.2.
2. Newsletters
The NCDA has issued nine newsletters to its distribution list of
approximately 1,000-1,500 names/addresses. In many cases, the
newsletter served as a vehicle to inform the public of upcoming
public involvement opportunities. A sample newsletter can be
found in Appendix H.3. An example of the content of two such
newsletters is as follows:
Northstar News, Number 4 was issued in September 1998. This
newsletter focused on inviting the public to the October 1998 Open
Houses, the schedule for the commuter rail feasibility study, and
the major investment study. It also described the transit
technologies to be considered, identified the initial potential station
locations along the Corridor, and summarized coordination
activities with BNSF Railroad.
Northstar News, Number 5 was issued in April 1999. Topics
included: highlighting additional support for commuter rail,
feasibility of commuter rail, connection of the Northstar Corridor
with the Hiawatha LRT, upcoming station area planning workshops,
and next steps.
3. Corridor-wide Mailing
The NCDA has completed two corridor-wide mailings, which were
Northstar Corridor Development Authority 42
-aft Status Report on the Northstar Commuter Rail Project. June 7, 2001
distributed to approximately 300,000 names/addresses along the
Corridor. The subject of the corridor-wide mailings are described
below. See Appendix H.4 for a sample corridor-wide mailing.
Northstar News, Number 6 was issued in February 2000 to invite
the public to the Public Information Open Houses in
February/March 2000 and update the public on the status of the
project.
Northstar News, Number 9 was issued in May 2001. It announced
support for the project from the governor, an update of project
progress and detailed background information from the Advanced
Corridor Plan.
4. Fact Sheets
The Northstar Corridor fact card and fact sheet provides basic
information about the Northstar commuter rail route, stations,
estimated daily ridership, project timeline, funding, rail cars and
contact information. The fact card is wallet size for easy reference,
while the fact sheet provides more detail. Both information pieces
have been updated routinely and distributed at open houses,
workshops, presentations and events. A sample fact card and fact
sheet can be found in Appendix H.5.
5. Web Site
The Northstar Corridor Web site, created in 1998, has been an
efficient and effective way to communicate information about
Northstar commuter rail. The Web site posts information about the
Northstar transportation corridor, a route map, answers to
frequently asked questions, a selection of public comments about
the project and updates on news and events. The Web site also
encourages people to get involved in the project and contact NCDA
staff with their questions. It was overhauled in the spring of 2001
for improved ease of use and navigation and to make information
more accessible for those wishing to learn more about the project.
A new function was included that would allow people to sign up to
be sent electronic updates as new information because available.
The Web site is routinely updated to provide current information.
Visit www.northstartrain.orq to view the Web site.
6. Media Alerts and News Releases
Dozens of news releases or media alerts have been submitted to
media along the Northstar Corridor since the inception of the
Northstar Corridor Development Authority 43
Draft Status Report on the Northstar Commuter Rail Project. June 7, 2001
project. The subjects have ranged from results of major studies, to
the announcement of the selection of commuter rail as the major
component of a transportation strategy in the corridor, to the
announcement of upcoming public meetings. The last two years of
news releases are posted on the web site at
www.northstartrain.orR.
7. Newspaper, Radio and Television Coverage
The Northstar commuter rail project has received extensive media
coverage. Frequently in the news, opinion and editorial sections of
the Minneapolis Star Tribune, St. Paul Pioneer Press and St. Cloud
Times, the Northstar project was also discussed on WCCO-am,
MPR (specifically the St. Cloud station) and other Corridor radio
stations. Corridor daily and weekly newspapers ran innumerable
articles on the continuing developments of the project. Occasional
mentions on television also occurred. A recent survey showed that
92 percent of Northstar Corridor residents were aware of the
project with 80 percent approving it. Clearly, this project is an
important one to residents, media and elected officials alike.
Commuter rail demonstrations in 1997 and 2000 resulted in
saturation coverage by all television news channels as well as
numerous radio stations and print outlets.
8. Crisis Communications Plan
The purpose of the Crisis Communication Plan is to ensure that the
public would be fully informed in a reasonable manner in the event
of crisis in the Northstar Corridor. The Crisis Communications Plan
provides guidelines, techniques, reference information and
prepared documents to expedite the crisis communications
process. As a practical document, the Plan provides:
· Policies and procedures incorporating best practices from
other organizations that are adapted to NCDA's unique
situations.
· A description of the Project Administration Team and
responsibilities of members of a Crisis Communication's
Team.
· A checklist of basic steps and a compilation of information
needed in the event of a crisis situation.
Northstar Corridor Development Authority 44
~raft Status Report on the Northstar Commuter Rail Project. June 7, 2001
F. Results: Public Involvement Tools
1. Commuter Rail Demonstration Projects
Two commuter rail demonstration projects provided Northstar
Corridor residents and businesses the opportunity to learn about
commuter rail and ride the train. Both events acted as a catalyst
for media coverage and future public involvement events.
(a) July 1997
The first Demonstration Project was held on July 1, 1997,
and acted as a kick-off for Northstar Corridor public
involvement activities. More than 1,500 people rode a
commuter train (the Flexliner) and attended events in St.
Cloud, Becker, Elk River, Coon Rapids, and Minneapolis.
This demonstration project served to ignite the public and is
the foundation of the on-going public involvement program.
(b) August 2000
On August 10, 2000, the second Demonstration Project was
held. It offered one VIP and three general public trips on two
bi-level commuter rail cars provided by Bombardier and
Seattle's Sound Transit. AMTRAK provided one locomotive,
and Burlington Northern Sante Fe, the owner operator of the
rail system in the Northstar Corridor, provided the other. The
Demonstration Project achieved its goal to inform the public
about Northstar Corridor commuter rail and allowed nearly
2,000 people to ride the train.
The Demonstration Project consisted of four trips and
included stops at the following proposed station sites:
Downtown Minneapolis, Coon Rapids (Foley), Fridley, Elk
River, Big Lake, and St. Cloud.
The public information materials helped make the event a
huge success. Handout materials included:
· Cardboard train cutout,
· Fact card about Northstar Corridor commuter rail,
· Northstar Corridor button (noting the Web site),
· Brochure about the Twin Cities' Commuter Rail
System Plan, written by Mn/DOT,
· Fact sheet about the Regional Transit Master Plan,
written by the Metropolitan Council,
Northstar Corridor Development Authority 45
Draft Status Report on the Northstar Commuter Rail Project. June 7, 2001
Fact sheet about light rail transit, written about the
Hiawatha LRT Corridor,
Bag to hold the materials (noting the NCDA phone
number and Web site).
Event Participation and Description
Including VIPs and the general public, approximately 2,000 people
attended events and toured or rode the train. Everyone who
wanted to ride the train was allowed. The following information
briefly describes each event.
Over 600 VIPs were invited by formal invitation to a continental
breakfast held in downtown Minneapolis. Approximately 425 VIPs
attended the breakfast and toured or road the train. The breakfast
included a brief program, at which the following officials spoke:
Betsy Wergin, Chair, Northstar Corridor Development Authority;
Commissioner Elwyn Tinklenberg, Minnesota Department of
Transportation; Merna Pease, State Director, Office of Senator Rod
Grams; Corrine Hoeft, District Director, Office of Congressman Bill
Luther; Phil Riveness, Co-Chair, Metropolitan Council Rail
Transportation Committee. The VIP event was considered a great
success,
Approximately 800 people attended the ice cream social in Saint
Cloud. Ice cream and lemonade were served as attendees
listened to a Dixie Land band, toured the train, and had their faces
painted. The event also included a short program, at which the
following individuals spoke: Minnesota Representative Collin
Peterson, Benton County Commissioner Duane Grandy, and
Sherburne County Commissioner Betsy Wergin. Rick Speak,
Benton County Administrator, was the Master of Ceremonies for
the event.
Approximately 650 people attended the ice cream social in
Minneapolis. Ice cream and lemonade were served as attendees
listened to a Dixie Land band, toured the train, and had their faces
painted. The Minneapolis Ice Cream Social did not include a
program, but the excitement generated at this event was apparent
to all that attended.
Media Coverage
Shandwick International and Anoka County managed media
Northstar Corridor Development Authority 46
=ft Status Report on the Northstar Commuter Rail Project. June 7, 2001
involvement, resulting in an extremely successful media campaign,
including day long television and radio coverage, as well as 17
articles in the major and local newspapers. Several television
stations provided live coverage of the VIP event in the morning.
Public Outreach
(a) Presentations
An extensive public outreach program has been ongoing
throughout the Northstar project. Approximately 40
presentations have been given to entities, such as
community organizations, public agencies, planning
organizations, student associations, business associations,
elected officials, and professional transportation
organizations. For a complete list of presentations, see
Appendix H.6. Typically, a PowerPoint presentation,
adapted to each audience, was the primary presentation
tool. See Attachment H.7 for a sample presentation.
Presentations have provided a means to disseminate
information and receive the public's input. For example,
presentations have lead to the passage of five Chamber of
Commerce resolutions, a resolution from the Minneapolis
Downtown Council, a resolution from the Minnesota
American Legion, 10t' District and three letters of support
from Medtronic, Hoffman and American Payment Centers.
(b) 1998 Public Information Open Houses
A series of three Public Information Open Houses were held
in late October 1998 to provide the public with an opportunity
to discuss the Northstar Corridor project one-on-one with the
technical staff. The topics included information on the 70-
mile Northstar Corridor, the NCDA Joint Powers Board, the
MIS process, and the commuter rail service including typical
train schedules, possible commuter rail stations and
intermodal connections to bus and LRT. For coordination
amongst agencies, the Open House included information on
the progress of Mn/DOT's Commuter Rail Feasibility Study.
The Open Houses were held from 6:00 to 9:00 PM at:
· Elk River
Sherburne County Courthouse
· Fridley
Fridley City Hall
October 20, 1998
OCtober 22, 1998
Northstar Corridor Development Authority
47
Draft Status Report on the Northstar Commuter Rail Project. June 7, 2001
· St. Cloud October 27, 1998
Whitney Senior Community Center
Approximately 300 people attended the Open Houses.
There were a number of comments made, mostly in support
of the project with a sense of urgency for implementation.
(c) 2000 Public Information Open Houses
A series of three Public Information Open Houses were held
in February/March 2000 to inform the public on the status of
the Northstar Corridor Commuter Rail project and to provide
an opportunity for public input. Information was presented
on: the Commuter Rail Alternative with the 14 potential
stations and connection to Hiawatha LRT; prototypical
station drawings; operating and maintenance costs, capital
costs and funding sources; photos of existing commuter rail
systems in use; results of the MIS and the environmental
review process; linkages within the regional transportation
system; and how to contact the NCDA with comments and
issues to consider.
· Fddley February 29, 2000
Fridley City Hall
· St. Cloud March 1, 2000
Whitney Community Center
· Elk River March 2, 2000
Sherburne County Government Center
3. Surveys
NCDA has conducted three surveys of Northstar Corridor residents.
Survey results are based on telephone interviews conducted with a
randomly selected sample of adults who live within five miles of the
proposed Northstar Corridor commuter rail line. The results of all
three surveys show tremendous support for Northstar commuter
rail. The purpose of the surveys is to monitor support, evaluate the
effectiveness of the NCDA's public information campaign and
gather information for system planning purposes.
(a) 1999 Survey Results
Most Say They Will Benefit From Commuter Rail
More than one-third of residents (36 percent) say they would
personally benefit from the Northstar Corridor commuter rail
Northstar Corridor Development Authority 48
~raft Status Report on the Northstar Commuter Rail Project. June 7, 2001
line. In addition, 70 percent of residents believe commuting
workers would benefit from a commuter rail line.
A Wide Variety Of People, Groups and Communities Will
Benefit
Survey respondents agree that a wide variety of people,
groups and communities will benefit from commuter rail.
Approximately half of survey respondents say the following
will benefit:
- St. Cloud (50 percent)
- Students (50 percent)
- Small towns along the corridor (47 percent)
- Northern suburbs of Minneapolis (47 percent)
- Businesses along the corridor (46 percent)
- Senior citizens (45 percent)
- Families (42 percent)
- Minneapolis (41 percent)
Residents Perceive Multiple Uses for Northstar
Commuter Rail
Nearly 40 percent of survey respondents (37 percent)
say they would use the commuter rail line for social or
cultural activities, and one in four say they would use it to
visit friends and relatives. Nearly one in five respondents
indicates they would use the commuter as their primary
method for commuting to work (17 percent) and as a
back-up method for getting to work (19 percent).
Park-and-Ride Facilities And Cost of Fare Are Most
Influential Factors
Survey respondents point to two factors that would most
influence their use of the Northstar Corridor commuter rail
line: availability of park-and-ride facilities (40 percent) and
cost of fare (30 percent).
Many Residents Confused About the Differences Between
Light Rail and Commuter Rail
Many residents do not understand the significant differences
between light rail and commuter rail. Only one in five people
(22 percent) say there is a difference between "light rail" and
"commuter rail." Unlike light rail systems, which only carry
passenger cars, the Northstar Corridor commuter rail line
Northstar Corridor Development Authority 49
Draft Status Report on the Northstar Commuter Rail Project. June 7, 2001
would share existing tracks with the Burlington Northern
Santa Fe freight rail line.
(b) 2001 Short-survey Results
Most Say Traffic Congestion Has Gotten Worse
Seventy percent felt highway traffic congestion had "gotten
worse" during the past five years. Only twenty-five percent
thought it had "stayed the same," and a very small two
percent felt it had "gotten better." A majority of respondents
in each county indicated that congestion had worsened
during that time frame.
Residents Reveal Mixed Levels of Satisfaction About
Commute To Work
Fifty-four percent of the respondents reported "satisfaction"
with their commute to work, while twenty-four percent were
"dissatisfied." Twenty percent stated they did not commute,
either staying or working at home.
Majority Say Commuter Rail Is A "Very Good Idea" Or A
"Good Idea"
A solid sixty-eight percent thought the Northstar Commuter
Rail proposal was either a "very good idea" or a "good idea."
Twenty-three percent saw it as "not a good idea" or a "bad
idea.," while ten percent were uncertain. Benton and Wright
County residents proved to be particularly favorable toward
the plan.
Residents Perceive Multiple Uses for Northstar
Commuter Rail
The most often cited destination for using Northstar
Commuter Rail was "the airport or the Mall of America," at
sixty-one percent. Fifty-three percent also indicated they
would use this service to "go to and from sports, cultural, or
entertainment events." Twenty-eight percent thought they
would use the service to "visit friends or relatives." Eighteen
percent would use the rail service to "commute to and from
work," while seventeen percent would use it to "run errands"
and eleven percent, to "go to and from school or college."
Majority Are "Very Likely" or "Somewhat Likely" To Use
Northstar Commuter Rail
Twenty-three percent were "very likely" to use the Northstar
Northstar Corridor Development Authority 50
~-aft Status Report on the Northstar Commuter Rail Project. June 7, 2001
Commuter Rail service if it became operational in their area.
Another thirty-seven percent were "somewhat likely" to do
so. Using standard market projection techniques, twenty
percent of the households along the corridor could be
expected to use this commuter rail service.
(c) 2001 Survey Results
Residents in Area Concerned about Transportation
Problems
In an open-end question, residents surveyed cited traffic as
the third most important issue facing their area behind
education funding and taxes. Perhaps du6 to the growth in
the Northwest metro area to St. Cloud, 76% said that
highway congestion in the area had become worse in the
last five years while only 4% said better. Looking ahead,
only 9% felt the current highway and transit system in the
region will be sufficient to support growth over the next ten
years.
Solution Requires More than Just Hiqhway Improvements
67% said that both highways and transit will need to be
improved over the next ten years and 5% said to focus only
on the transit system. Only 17% said that highways, alone,
should be the focus of transportation system improvements.
Strong Local Support for Northstar Commuter Rail
80% said the Northstar Commuter Rail project was a good
idea while only 15% said it was a bad idea. 92% of those
surveyed said they had some level of awareness of the
Northstar Commuter Rail project.
Stronq Support Amonq All Political Party Affiliations
Support for the Northstar Commuter Rail service was very
strong regardless of a respondent's political affiliation. 82%
Residents Perceive Multiple Uses for Northstar Commuter
Rail
70% of those surveyed said they were very likely (31%) or
somewhat likely (39%) to use the Northstar Commuter Rail
service if it becomes operational. Only 15% said they were
not at all likely to use the service. 23% indicated they might
use Northstar to commute to and from work (which is
significantly greater than what is required for project to be
Northstar Corridor Development Authority 51
Draft Status Report on the Northstar Commuter Rail Project. June 7', 2001
successful). 72% said they might use the rail system to go
to the MSP airport; 18% may use it to commute to school or
college; 32% to visits friends or relatives. 66% said their
most frequent destination on Northstar would be
Minneapolis, while 11% cited St. Cloud, followed by Fridley
(4%), Anoka (4%), Elk River (3%) and Coon Rapids (2%).
G. Results: Public Involvement Regarding the
Development of the Environmental Impact Statement
1. July 1999 Scoping Meetings
The initiation of the ElS for the Northstar Corridor project began
with a formal scoping process, one of the very specific outreach
activities required by NEPA. The scoping process is used to
publicly announce the alternatives being considered for inclusion in
the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) and to seek out
additional options which could be examined. The purpose of
scoping is to determine the scope and significance of social,
economic, and environmental issues associated with the potential
alternatives and the proposed action. The process provides
opportunities to inform the public, government agencies, elected
officials, organizations, and businesses that the ElS process is
commencing and to hear about issues of concern to notified
participants. In addition to initiating dialogue on the alternatives,
scoping is instrumental in identifying issues to be considered
and/or resolved during the ElS.
The Notice of Intent to prepare an ElS on the project was published
in the Federal Register on June 7, 1999. In addition, the Notice of
Availability of the Scoping Booklet and announcements of the
Scoping Meetings were published in the Minnesota Environmental
Quality Board (MnEQB) Monitor on June 28, 1999, which began
the scoping period. The formal scoping comment period extended
from June 28 to August 20, 1999. The NCDA distributed over 1,000
Scoping Booklets to federal, state, and local agencies having
jurisdiction in the project, all interested parties on the NCDA mailing
list, elected officials, neighborhood organizations, and civic groups.
The Scoping Booklet included descriptions of the project,
alternatives, and issues identified for consideration in the ElS.
Four scoping meetings were held to review the background
materials distributed in the Scoping Booklet. Meeting locations and
participation are summarized in Table IX. 1.
Northstar Corridor Development Authority 52
~raft Status Report on the Northstar Commuter Rail Project. June 7, 2001
Table IX.1. Scoping Meeting Participation.
Place - Date- Tinge # Of # Of
Attendees Speakers
Whitney Senior July 27, 4:00 to 7:00 32 5
Community Center 1999 PM
1527 Northway Drive
St. Cloud
Sherburne County July 28, 4:00 to 7:00 34 6
Courthouse 1999 PM
13380 TH 10
Elk River
Fridley City Hall July 29, 4:00 to 7:00 21 3
6431 University 1999 PM
Avenue
Fridley
Interagency Meeting July 29, 1:00 to 3:00 11 3
at: 1999 PM
Fridley City Hall
6431 University
Avenue
Fridle¥
TOTALS 98 17
2. December 2000 and February 2001 Public Hearings
The Northstar Corridor DEIS was distributed in November 2000. The
comment period for the DEIS ran from November 13, 2000, to
January 12, 2001. As a result of actions taken through the Advanced
Corridor Planning Process and comments received on the October
2000 DEIS, a Supplemental Environmental Information document
was distributed in January 2001 which evaluated the impacts of a
proposed Minneapolis Northeast Station at 7th Street NE. The DEIS
public review and comment period reopened to accommodate this
document. The comment period ran from February 5, 2001, to
March 7, 2001.
Northstar Corridor Development Authority 53
Draft Status Report on the Northstar Commuter Rail Project. June 7, 2001
During both of these comment periods, four public hearings were
held throughout the Corridor:
St. Cloud, December 12, 2000, Whitney Community Center
Elk River, December 13, 2000, Sherburne County Government Center
Fddley, December 14, 2000, Fridley City Hall
Minneapolis, February 27, 2001, Webster Elementary School
Comments received in the second comment period and at the
February 27, 2000, public hearing were considered equally with
those received in the original DEIS comment period. In the two
comment periods, 49 written comments were received, for a total of
approximately 220 separate comments from federal, state and local
agencies; businesses; local organizations; and private citizens.
Approximately 60 additional comments were made at the four
public hearings, for an overall total of approximately 280 comments
made on the October 2000 DEIS and Supplemental Environmental
Information document.
H. Results: Public Involvement Regarding the
Development of the Advanced Corridor Plan
In compliance with Minnesota Statues {}174.86, the Mn/DOT
Commissioner and the NCDA held a public hearing on the
Advanced Corridor Plan for the Northstar Corridor from Downtown
Minneapolis to the St. Cloud Area. The hearing was held on
September 7, 2000, at the Sherburne County Government Center.
Representatives from Mn/DOT and the NCDA were at the meeting
to answer questions regarding the system. The Plan documents
were available for review 30 days prior to the public hearing.
Northstar Corridor'Development Authority 54
',aft Status Report on the Northstar Commuter Rail Project. June 7, 2001
FUNDING
Funding
A. Background
One of the most significant contributions of the NCDA to the
implementation of commuter rail on the Northstar Corridor was its
success in securing funding for the initial phases of project
development. This success, on a federal level, was due in large
part to the advocacy of Congressman Jim Oberstar and the support
of Congressman Martin Sabo. In addition, the NCDA has worked
to secure funding from the State Legislature to match federal
funds.
Bo
Results:
1. In TEA-21, Sections 3030(a)(90) and (91), the
Northstar Corridor was "fully" authorized for
construction, individually and as one of the Twin
Cities Transitway Corridors.
2. In addition, Congress appropriated to Northstar
Corridor the following amounts:
FY 2001 $3 million Twin Cities Transitway New Start
Funds (Northstar's portion: $1.4 million).
FY 2000 - $5 million Twin Cities Transitway New Start
Funds (Northstar's portion: unallocated)
FY 2000 - $10 million Intermodal Facility Capital
Funds
FY 1999- $6 million Intermodal Facility Capital Funds
FY 1998 - $350,000 Northstar New Start Funds
On the State level, the Legislature appropriated $1.5
million for planning and engineering for the Northstar
Corridor in 1999.
3. On a local level, in 1999, NCDA county and regional
railroad authority members (Anoka, Benton,
Sherburne and Hennepin) committed 10% of the
1999 estimated capital costs of $180,000,000. (See
County resolutions in Appendix 1.1 .)
Northstar Corridor Development Authority 55
Draft Status Report on the Northstar Commuter Rail Project. June 7, 2001
ADDITIONAL
ACTIVITIES
Additional Activities
A. Multi-modal Connection
The Northstar Corridor Draft Environmental Impact Statement
(DEIS) developed by the NCDA includes analysis of the Light Rail
Transit (LRT) connection between the Northstar commuter rail
station in downtown Minneapolis at 5th Street North and 5th Avenue
North easterly to 5t' Street North and third Avenue North. The
Hiawatha LRT Environmental Analysis ended at Third Avenue
North, thereby providing complete analysis of both projects.
In June, 2000, the FTA approved initiation of Preliminary
Engineering for the Northstar Corridor Project. The approval also
included initiation of PE for the Hiawatha LRT extension from the
Northstar Commuter Rail Station to its planned termini in downtown
Minneapolis at Ist Avenue North.
The August, 2000 Advanced Corridor Plan includes a cross-
platform transfer between the Northstar Commuter Rail service and
the Hiawatha LRT service. The alignment was developed through
a cooperative effort by representatives of Mn/DOT, Metro council,
Metro Transit, city of Minneapolis Planning and Engineering
departments, Hennepin County, and NCDA.
The Northstar Commuter Rail PE was completed under direction of
NCDA. The Hiawatha LRT PE was completed under direction of
Mn/DOT. The work plan for the Hiawatha PE included a
reevaluation of alignment alternatives previously considered and
adopted during development of the Advanced Corridor Planning
process for the LRT/Commuter Rail connection.
Results
(1) Preliminary Engineering for the Hiawatha LRT connection to
the Northstar Corridor Commuter Rail station in downtown
Minneapolis has been completed under Mn/DOT direction and
included with the Preliminary Engineering submittal for the
Northstar Project to the FTA (Northstar-Hiawatha Multi-modal
Corridor).
(2) The alignment for the Northstar-Hiawatha Multi-modal
connection was further evaluated by Mn/DOT, Metro Transit, City of
Minneapolis Planning and Engineering Departments, Hennepin
county, and NCDA. The proposed alignment is now changed to
intersect the Northstar Corridor from the 5t~ Street North bridge
Northstar Corridor Development Authority 56
'-aft Status Report on the Northstar Commuter Rail Project. June 7, 2001
creating a two level station. The revised alignment better serves
the Hiawatha LRT operations and potential future extensions. It
also provides improved opportunities for commuter rail train staging
and potential future commuter rail service additions. The Northstar
Commuter rail platform remains at BNSF track level between 5th
Street North and 7th Street North.
B. Multi-modal Facility Development
1. Introduction
At its March 2000 meeting, the NCDA requested that the Anoka
County Regional Rail Authority (ACRRA) act on behalf of the
NCDA to manage the design and construction of two multi-modal
facilities to be located in Anoka County. The design, acquisition
and construction of these facilities is funded by a congressional
appropriation to the Northstar Corridor in the amount of $10 million.
Congressman Jim Oberstar was instrumental in securing this
funding for the Corridor. Multi-modal facilities will be constructed at
potential commuter rail station locations in Elk River, Coon Rapids
(Riverdale) and possibly Ramsey. The facilities will be park-and-
ride locations serving the Commuter Bus Demonstration Project.
To relieve congestion in the Northstar Corridor and provide
travelers with an attractive alternative to single occupancy vehicles,
the Northstar Commuter Bus Service Demonstration Project will
begin in fall 2001. The Demonstration Project will provide
commuter bus service between Elk River and Downtown
Minneapolis (approximately 33 miles) during peak commuting
periods. Commuter buses will stop at the locations described in
Section XI.3 below. The service will help shape ridership behaviors
that will allow for a smooth transition to Northstar commuter rail.
2. Procurement of Multi-modal Facility Engineering and
Design Services
On March 30, 2000, the NCDA and the ACRRA released an RFP
for engineering and design services for multi-modal facilities to be
located in the City of Ramsey and the City of Coon Rapids
(Riverdale). Based on its experience providing engineering and
design services, its understanding of the tasks needed to complete
the project, and its allocation of costs, the ACRRA selected
URS/BRW on December 7, 2000.
Northstar Corridor Development Authority 57
Draft Status Report on the Northstar Commuter Rail Project. June 7, 2001
Multi-modal Facility Description and Location
At a minimum, each multi-modal station will consist of a
park-and-ride facility and a bus shelter. Stations will be
designed and constructed to allow for easy conversion to
commuter rail stations in the future. The stations will be
constructed on future commuter rail stations sites at the
following locations:
· Big Lake, Park and Ride Facility, immediately south of
Hwy. 10
-100 vehicles
· Elk River, Park and Ride Facility, East of Hwy. 10 at
171st Avenue
- 250 parking spaces
· Ramsey, Park and Ride Facility, Intersection of
Ramsey Blvd. and Highway 10
- 310 parking spaces
· Coon Rapids at the Riverdale Shopping Complex
-440 parking spaces
Commuter Bus Service Demonstration Project
ACRRA will operate the commuter bus service on behalf of
the NCDA. Laidlaw Transit Service, Inc. was retained to
provide all necessary personnel, equipment and facilities,
and participate in regional transit planning activities. At the
time of this report, the ACRRA was in the process of
reviewing proposals to conduct marketing and public
information services for the Demonstration Project.
The ACRRA and Mn/DOT have established the following
objectives for the demonstration project:
· attract and maintain ridership,
· offer commuters a safe, convenient, and economical
transportation alternative to driving their personal automobile,
· generate enthusiasm, support and a positive perception of
public transportation as a travel alternative along the corridor,
· increase public awareness of the importance of a multi-
modal transportation system,
· improve mobility within the corridor,
· develop travel patterns to and from park-and-ride
locations along the corridor, and
· coordinate with existing transit services to ensure a seamless
network of services.
Northstar Corridor Development Authority 5 8