Central Corridor Light Rail Transit Easing congestion February - - PDF document

▶
central corridor
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Central Corridor Light Rail Transit Easing congestion February - - PDF document

Jan 19, 2023 454 likes •916 views

Central Corridor Light Rail Transit Easing congestion February 27, 2008 Strengthening our communities Improving mobility - Todays Agenda Central Corridor Light Rail Transit Public comments summary Washington Ave. Updates

slide-1
SLIDE 1
  • Light Rail Transit

Improving mobility Easing congestion Strengthening

  • ur communities

Central Corridor

February 27, 2008

slide-2
SLIDE 2

2

Today’s Agenda

  • Public comments summary
  • Washington Ave. Updates

– Traffic studies – Northern Alignment

  • University Avenue Updates

– Infill station build out – Construction impacts

  • Scope scenarios

Light Rail Transit

Central Corridor

slide-3
SLIDE 3

3

Summary of Public Comments

Light Rail Transit

Central Corridor

slide-4
SLIDE 4

4

Public Involvement and Input

  • 7 public update meetings
  • 4 listening sessions

– 300+ people attended – 88 people spoke

  • Other methods

– 154 emails – 26 letters received – 17 comment cards – 3 petitions submitted

Light Rail Transit

Central Corridor

slide-5
SLIDE 5

5

Summary of Comments

  • Add stations (126)
  • Support tunnel under Washington (44)
  • Support at grade on Washington (43)
  • Build 3-car platforms (15)
  • Study northern alignment (17)
  • Support diagonal at Cedar/4th (15)
  • Maintain Rte 16 has frequency (14)
  • Oppose additional stations (11)
  • Construction impacts (7)

Light Rail Transit

Central Corridor

slide-6
SLIDE 6

6

Community Advisory Committee Comments

  • Strengths of Scenario B

– Meets CEI – Keeps the project moving – 3-car platforms – Maintenance facility in St. Paul – New connecting bus routes – Improved access and mobility for people with disabilities

Light Rail Transit

Central Corridor

slide-7
SLIDE 7

7

Community Advisory Committee Comments

  • Weaknesses of Scenario B

– Does not build out 3 infill station;

  • nly includes infrastructure

– Does not include a tunnel on Washington – Traffic impacts – Union Depot station in front instead

  • f concourse

– Maintenance facility in St. Paul

Light Rail Transit

Central Corridor

slide-8
SLIDE 8

8

Washington Ave. Updates

Light Rail Transit

Central Corridor

slide-9
SLIDE 9

9

Washington Ave. Traffic Analysis

  • Evaluate traffic with & without

LRT

  • Conduct three traffic analyses
  • Identify mitigation measures
  • Design and estimate cost of

mitigation

  • Determine what improvements

are responsibility of project, city, county, University

Light Rail Transit

Central Corridor

slide-10
SLIDE 10

10

Traffic Analyses Overview

  • Study 1: Operation of Wash Ave

with LRT and traffic, 2014

  • Study 2: Impacts due to

shortened tunnel, 2014

  • Study 3: Small area study,

function of 48 intersections, 2030

– LRT at grade, Washington Ave.

  • pen to auto traffic

– LRT at grade, transit/pedestrian mall, closed to auto traffic

Light Rail Transit

Central Corridor

slide-11
SLIDE 11

11

Light Rail Transit

Central Corridor

Washington Ave.

Study to determine impacts to Washington Ave. with LRT

  • perating at-grade or in tunnel

Traffic Study 1

Operation of Washington with LRT and vehicles, 2014

slide-12
SLIDE 12

12

Traffic Study 1

Initial Analysis, LRT At-Grade

December 2007 Work

Light Rail Transit

Central Corridor

Level of Service E or F, 2014

slide-13
SLIDE 13

13

Traffic Study 1

Revised Analysis, LRT At-Grade

January 2008 Work

Light Rail Transit

Central Corridor

Mitigation strategies

  • Left turn lanes at Harvard, Walnut, Oak, and Huron.
  • Conversion of Walnut to one-way southbound.
  • New bus stops at Walnut with pullouts

Level of Service E or F, 2014

slide-14
SLIDE 14

14

Traffic Study 1

Revised Analysis, LRT At-Grade

Early February 2008 Work

Light Rail Transit

Central Corridor

Additional mitigation strategies

  • Closure of Union St. access to Washington Ave.
  • Redistribution of parking ramp traffic
  • Longer west bound left turn lane at Oak St.
  • Prohibit east bound left turn lane at Huron

Level of Service E or F, 2014

slide-15
SLIDE 15

15

Traffic Study 1

Revised Analysis, LRT At-Grade

Latest February 2008 Work

Light Rail Transit

Central Corridor

Additional mitigation strategies

  • Harvard St and Walnut St. south of Washington converted to one-way

south bound

  • Walnut St. closed to through traffic north of hotel parking lot
  • Ontario St. converted to right in-right out

All intersections operate at an acceptable level

  • f service in 2014 and 2030(D or Better)
slide-16
SLIDE 16

16

Traffic Study 1

Next Steps

  • Identify all mitigation actions
  • Estimate cost of actions
  • Develop funding plan with

partners

Light Rail Transit

Central Corridor

slide-17
SLIDE 17

17

Light Rail Transit

Central Corridor

Traffic Study 3

East Bank Area Traffic Study

  • Study to determine impacts at

48 major intersections

  • Study area covers 2.9 square

miles

  • Vicinity of the East Bank and

West Bank

  • Assumes a portion of

Washington Ave. is closed and transit/ pedestrian mall is created

slide-18
SLIDE 18

18

Traffic Study 3

Study Area & Intersections

slide-19
SLIDE 19

19

Traffic Study 3

Impacts with LRT at grade, Washington open to traffic,

2030

slide-20
SLIDE 20

20

Traffic Study 3

Impacts with LRT at grade, transit/ped mall, 2030

  • E. River Rd @

Washington

  • Install traffic signal
  • Add 2nd approach lane

Franklin @ Cromwell

  • Remove parking on nort

side of Franklin Cedar @Riverside

  • 2nd WB right turn lane on

Riverside

  • NB left turn on Cedar
  • Traffic signal detection
  • Retime signal

Riverside at 19th and 20th Avenues

  • Reduce backup @ Cedar and

Riverside

  • Eliminate parking on east side of

20th

slide-21
SLIDE 21

21

Traffic Study 3

Next Steps

  • Identify all the mitigation

actions

  • Estimate cost of actions
  • Develop funding plan with

partners

Light Rail Transit

Central Corridor

slide-22
SLIDE 22

22

Northern Alignment Alternatives

Light Rail Transit

Central Corridor

slide-23
SLIDE 23

23

Northern Alignment

  • Considered Bridge #9

alignment in Alternatives Analysis (2001-02)

– Bridge #9 not wide enough – Impacts to Mississippi National River and Recreation Area – Distance from destinations – Eliminated from further study

Light Rail Transit

Central Corridor

slide-24
SLIDE 24

24

Northern Alignment Alternatives

Complete draft feasibility study Stakeholder review Scope decision

Light Rail Transit

Central Corridor

May/June May/June

  • Sept. ‘09
  • Sept. ‘09

June/July June/July August August Sept ‘08 Sept ‘08

Request to enter Final Design Reject Alternative Accept Alternative Request to enter Final Design

slide-25
SLIDE 25

25

FTA Submittal Deadline

2008 Timeline

Light Rail Transit

Central Corridor

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec

Project alignment and key features defined Submit LRT Plans to MnDOT, RCRRA, HCRRA Draft SDEIS to FTA MnDOT, RCRRA, HCRRA hearing on LRT plans Publish SDEIS in Federal Register City/County hearing on LRT plans SDEIS Public hearing City/County approval of LRT plans SDEIS comment period ends Met Council resolution of LPA New Start Submittal

slide-26
SLIDE 26

26

University Ave. Updates

Light Rail Transit

Central Corridor

  • Bus Service
  • Infill Stations
  • Reconstruction
slide-27
SLIDE 27

27

Central Corridor Bus Transit Service

  • Compliments light rail service
  • Connecting bus routes

– Integrate existing radial and crosstown routes with LRT – Restructure bus routes so most residents will be within ¼ mile of transit service

Light Rail Transit

Central Corridor

slide-28
SLIDE 28

28

Central Corridor Bus Transit Service

Light Rail Transit

Central Corridor

Lexington Pkwy Snelling Ave Fairview Ave Westgate Ave Raymond Ave

29th Ave SE

Dale St 16 16

94 94 94 51 51

67 84

280 State Fairgrounds U of M Saint Paul Como Park MISSISSIPPI RIVER

3 3 3 3 65 65 67 67 63 63 63 21 21 21 60 60 94 94 94

8

84 84 121 83 83 53 53 53 53 53 87 87 87

GRAND AVE SELBY AVE UNIVERSITY AVE W MARSHALL AVE THOMAS AVE M I N N E H A H A A V E W CONCORDIA AVE WESTERN AVE N PRIOR AVE N DALE ST N PIERCE BUTLER RTE FRONT AVE SNELLING AVE N SAINT ANTHONY AVE COMO AVE FAIRVIEW AVE N SUMMIT AVE ENERGY PARK DR LEXINGTON PKWY N 42ND AVE S LAKE ST E WEST RIVER PKWY S HAMLINE AVE N AYD MILL RD 46TH AVE S VANDALIA ST CRETIN AVE N KASOTA AVE MARYLAND AVE W HORTON AVE RIVER RD E T R A N S F E R R D HAMPDEN AVE PELHAM BLVD V I C T O R I A S T N GATEWAY DR UNIVERSITY AVE SE COMO LAKE DR E FRANKLIN AVE FRANKLIN AVE SE RAYMOND AVE 34TH ST E CLEVELAND AVE N M I D W A Y P K W Y C R E T I N A V E S HERSEY ST M I S S I S S I P P I R I V E R B L V D N VICTORIA ST S CAPP RD FAIRVIEW AVE S S N E L L I N G A V E S ELLIS AVE C L E V E L A N D A V E S LEXINGTON PKWY S EAST RIVER RD WHEELOCK PKWY W COMO BLVD E D O R M A N A V E HAMLINE AVE N S A I N T A N T H O N Y A V E C R E T I N A V E N VICTORIA ST N COMO AVE HAMLINE AVE N CLEVELAND AVE N CONCORDIA COLLEGE MACALESTER COLLEGE HAMLINE UNIVERSITY SAINT PAUL SEMINARY ST MARK CATHOLIC SCHOOL CENTRAL LUTHERAN SCHOOL UNIVERSITY OF SAINT THOMAS
  • WM. MITCHELL COLLEGE OF LAW

Proposed Central Corridor Bus Network

Central Corridor Stations Central Corridor Alignment

3/22/07

H:\ServDev\PROJECTS\Corridor & Area Studies\Central\GIS and Graghics\MXD\Central_Corridor_Route_Map.mxd

DRAFT

0.5 1 0.25 Miles

280 55 61 61 36 35W 35E 94 394 35W

Proposed Central Corridor Bus Network Midway Detail

Central Corridor Stations Central Corridor Alignment

6/20/07

Rte 83 Rte 60

slide-29
SLIDE 29

29

Central Corridor LRT Stations

Light Rail Transit

Central Corridor

Hamline Victoria Western Snelling Lexington Dale Rice

slide-30
SLIDE 30

30

Next Steps

Build-out of Infill Station

  • After Central Corridor LRT

constructed

– Follow process for American Blvd/34th Ave. HLRT Station – Assemble funding plan; non New Start monies

  • Prior to Central Corridor LRT

completion

– Construction negatively impacts travel time, user benefits & CEI – FTA unlikely to allow use of New Start funds if CEI exceeds threshold

Light Rail Transit

Central Corridor

slide-31
SLIDE 31

31

Next Steps

Service Planning

  • Analyzed project scope

scenario with Rte 16 to improved 15 min. frequency

  • Continue to review bus

service plans as part of PE

Light Rail Transit

Central Corridor

slide-32
SLIDE 32

32

University Avenue Reconstruction

  • DEIS assumed full

reconstruction including street, curb and sidewalk

  • Preliminary Engineering

findings

– Roadway condition good – 85% of curb, gutters and sidewalk impacted

Light Rail Transit

Central Corridor

slide-33
SLIDE 33

33

University Ave. Reconstruction

Light Rail Transit

Central Corridor University Ave. Sidewalk & Curb Feet % Impacted by LRT, requires reconstruction 43,435 85% Not impacted by LRT, does not require reconstruction 7,665 15%

slide-34
SLIDE 34

34

University Ave. Reconstruction

  • Resurface University Avenue

– Saves $24-27 Million – Reduces construction time and impacts

  • Replace curb, gutter &

sidewalk

– 85% by the project – 15% at local cost

Light Rail Transit

Central Corridor

slide-35
SLIDE 35

35

University Ave. Reconstruction

Next Steps

  • Outreach staff survey

businesses

  • Business Advisory Council

– Identify impacts – Develop mitigation strategies – Seek funding sources

  • Engineers develop construction

plan and schedule

Light Rail Transit

Central Corridor

slide-36
SLIDE 36

36

Scope Scenarios

Light Rail Transit

Central Corridor

slide-37
SLIDE 37

37

Decision Elements

  • East Bank- at grade/tunnel
  • Infill stations –Hamline/Victoria/Western
  • Union Depot – front/concourse
  • Hiawatha connection
  • Two track connection to maintenance facility
  • Vehicle maintenance facility (VMF)
  • Washington Ave. Bridge retrofit
  • University Ave. reconstruction savings
  • Cedar/4th streets intersection
  • Additional mitigation
  • 2 or 3-car platforms
  • Route 16 frequency
  • Public Art

Light Rail Transit

Central Corridor

slide-38
SLIDE 38

38

Assumptions

  • DEIS LRT and bus operating

plan

  • DEIS LRT train speeds
  • Ridership annualization factor
  • f 331
  • 30% contingency for

construction

  • Washington Ave Bridge retrofit

based on URS study

Light Rail Transit

Central Corridor

slide-39
SLIDE 39

39

Assumptions

  • Property donation

– RCRRA – University of Minnesota – State of Minnesota

  • No property costs for diagonal

in St. Paul

  • Private utilities, including

District Energy, incur relocation costs

Light Rail Transit

Central Corridor

slide-40
SLIDE 40

40

Project Scope Scenario B

At Grade on Washington

  • East Bank at-grade on Washington Ave.

– Open to traffic, left turns or – Conversion to transit/pedestrian mall

  • Infrastructure for 3 infill stations, Hamline, Victoria, Western
  • Stop in front of Union Depot
  • Improved HLRT connection
  • Maintenance facility in St. Paul, east of concourse
  • Two track connection to maintenance facility
  • Washington Ave. Bridge retrofit
  • University Ave. reconstruction savings
  • Diagonal at Cedar and 4th Streets
  • Additional mitigation
  • 3-car platforms
  • Route 16 frequency 20 min peak, 30 min. off peak
  • Public Art

Light Rail Transit

Central Corridor Cost $909 MM, CEI $23.80

slide-41
SLIDE 41

41

Project Scope Scenario I

At Grade, add Victoria Station

  • East Bank at-grade on Washington Ave.

– Open to traffic or – Conversion to transit/pedestrian mall

  • Victoria station, infrastructure for 2 infill stations
  • Stop in front of Union Depot
  • Improved HLRT connection
  • Maintenance facility in St. Paul, east of concourse
  • Two track connection to maintenance facility
  • Washington Ave. Bridge retrofit
  • University Ave. reconstruction savings
  • Diagonal at Cedar and 4th Streets
  • Additional mitigation
  • 3-car platforms
  • Route 16 frequency 20 min peak, 30 min. off peak
  • Public Art

Light Rail Transit

Central Corridor Cost $913.2 MM, CEI $24.16

slide-42
SLIDE 42

42

Project Scope Scenario J

At Grade, Rte 16 @ 15 min.

  • East Bank at-grade on Washington Ave.

– Open to traffic or – Conversion to transit/pedestrian mall

  • Infrastructure for 3 infill stations, Hamline, Victoria, Western
  • Stop in front of Union Depot
  • Improved HLRT connection
  • Maintenance facility in St. Paul, east of concourse
  • Two track connection to maintenance facility
  • Washington Ave. Bridge retrofit
  • University Ave. reconstruction savings
  • Diagonal at Cedar and 4th Streets
  • Additional mitigation
  • 3-car platforms
  • Route 16 frequency 15 min peak, 15 min. off peak
  • Public Art

Light Rail Transit

Central Corridor Cost $909 MM, CEI $24.39

slide-43
SLIDE 43

43

Project Scope Scenarios Summary Matrix

DEIS At-grade B Victoria I Rte 16 freq J East Bank tunnel/at grade 2050’

  • In front

Franklin Exp.

  • $55 MM

On-street

  • 2 car

20 min $3.7 MM At grade $990 MM $26.05 Infill stations (H/V/W)

Infrastructure

At grade At grade

Victoria + infra.

In front Improved

  • St. Paul

2-track $25 MM $30 MM Diagonal $20 MM 3 car 20 min $3.7 MM Union Depot In front $913.2 MM

Infrastructure

In front Improved

  • St. Paul

2-track $25 MM $30 MM Diagonal $20 MM 3 car 15 min $3.7 MM $909.1 MM Vehicle maintenance facility

  • St. Paul

Rte 16 peak frequency 20 min $24.16 $24.39 Connection to VMF 2-track

  • Wash. Ave. Bridge retrofit

$25 MM

  • Univ. Ave. reconstruction

$30 MM Cedar/4th Sts intersection Diagonal Public Art $3.7 MM 2 or 3-car platforms Hiawatha connection Improved Additional mitigation $20 MM 3 car Cost $909.1 MM CEI $23.80

slide-44
SLIDE 44

44

Light Rail Transit

Central Corridor

More Information

Check out our website:

  • www.centralcorridor.org

Contact the Central Corridor Project Office:

  • 540 Fairview Avenue North, Suite 200

Griggs Midway Building

  • St. Paul, MN 55104
  • 651-602-1940
  • centralcorridor@metc.state.mn.us