OPEN HOUSE #4JUNE 2014

2

AGENDA

OPEN HOUSE 6:00 PM Review materials Ask questions Provide feedback Sign up for email list Fill out comment cards

PRESENTATION 6:30 PMQUESTIONS & ANSWERSOPEN HOUSE 7:00 PM

INTRODUCTIONS

3

WHO IS ON THE PROJECT TEAM? Dakota County Regional Railroad Authority Ramsey County Regional Railroad Authority Consultant Team (led by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.)

PURPOSE OF OPEN HOUSE

WHY ARE WE HERE TODAY? Provide information on:

Project progress since Open House #3 Final evaluation technical results

Scoring system Key differentiators

Next Steps Get your input on:

Technical evaluation

4

PROJECT UPDATE

5

We are here

PROJECT UPDATE

6

OCTOBER OPEN HOUSE October 17 and October 24 51 total attendees Provided information on:

Three Alternatives Final Evaluation: Goals, Objectives,

Measures Activities for Input:

Downtown Destination Activity Station Development Comment

Sheet Map Plots

TECHNICAL EVALUATION

7

ADVANCED DEFINITION AND FINAL EVALUATION

ADVANCED DEFINITION INCLUDES: Runningway alignment Stations Service plans Traffic controls Operating facilities design

8

ADVANCED DEFINITION AND FINAL EVALUATION

ADVANCED DEFINITION EVALUATED:• Cost estimates• Economic development and land use• Environmental and natural resources• Environmental justice• Mobility• Traffic operations• Travel demand

9

ADVANCED DEFINITION AND FINAL EVALUATION

INFORMED BY:• Purpose and Need local

• Adopted goals, objectives, and evaluation measures

• Metropolitan Council Regional Transitway Guidelines regional• Capital Investment Criteria – Section 10.8

• FTA New Starts national• Project Justification Criteria

10

ALTERNATIVES

11

Three Alternatives underwent final definition and evaluation: Robert St Arterial

BRT Robert St

Streetcar TH 52 Highway

BRT

ALTERNATIVES

12

Also considered: TH 52 Highway

BRT via Cesar Chavez

Evaluation Areas

SCORING SYSTEM

5 Goals

13

22 Objectives

33 Evaluation Measures

+ + + +

Overall Technical Score

Mobility & Accessibility

BenefitsTransit

Benefits Costs Opportunities Impacts

GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

14

Goals Objectives

1. Improve mobility and accessibility

• Maximize total transit riders• Maximize transit access to housing, employment, schools, community services, and activity centers• Maximize transportation system linkages and access to multimodal transportation opportunities • Improve east-west connections• Maximize service to people who depend on transit • Expand reverse commute and off-peak transit service options.

2. Enhance the effectiveness of transit service within the corridor

• Maximize new transit riders• Maximize transit operating efficiency • Maximize traveler time savings• Maximize access to park and ride facilities

3. Provide cost effective and financially feasible transit solutions

• Seek competitive project capital and operating costs • Maximize competitiveness for potential funding sources

4. Support and enhance existing communities and planned development

• Maximize consistency with local and regional land use plans• Maximize proximity to planned development and redevelopment• Encourage transit-oriented development in areas identified for future development or redevelopment

5. Support healthy communities and sound environmental practices

• Minimize need for new right-of-way• Minimize short- and long-term impacts to property and property access• Minimize area traffic impacts• Minimize adverse impacts on community resources (parks, schools, facilities)• Minimize disproportionately high and adverse impacts on minority and/or low-income communities• Minimize adverse impacts on water resources (wetlands, lakes, floodplains)• Maximize benefits due to decreased vehicle travel

EVALUATION RESULTSRobert St. Arterial

BRTRobert St. Streetcar

TH 52 Highway BRT via Lafayette

Goal 1Mobility & Accessibility Benefits

85 83 42

Goal 2 Transit Benefits 60 50 85

Goal 3Cost 90 60 70

Goal 4Opportunities 100 100 47

Goal 5 Impacts 51 34 57

TOTAL 77 65 60

EVALUATION RESULTSRobert St. Arterial

BRTRobert St. Streetcar

TH 52 Highway BRT via Lafayette

Goal 1Mobility & Accessibility Benefits

85 83 42

Goal 2 Transit Benefits 60 50 85

Goal 3Cost 90 60 70

Goal 4Opportunities 100 100 47

Goal 5 Impacts 51 34 57

TOTAL 77 65 60

GOAL 1: IMPROVE MOBILITY AND ACCESSIBILITY

KEY DIFFERENTIATOR: TOTAL RIDERS

17

Robert St. Ar-terial BRT

Robert St. Streetcar

TH 52 Highway BRT via

Lafayette

TH 52 Highway BRT via Cesar

Chavez

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

3,10

0

3,00

0

2,30

0 3,00

0

2030

Ave

rage

Wee

kday

Boa

rdin

gs

Score 5 5 2 4Maximize riders

Maximize access

Maximize linkages & multimodal access

Improve east-west connections

Maximize service to transit dependents

Expand reverse commute and off-peak transit

OBJ

ECTI

VE

GOAL 1: IMPROVE MOBILITY AND ACCESSIBILITY

KEY DIFFERENTIATOR: ACCESSIBILITY

18

Score 4 5 1 2

Robert St. Ar-terial BRT

Robert St. Streetcar

TH 52 Highway BRT via

Lafayette

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

962 11

31

426

Acre

s with

in 5

Min

ute

Wal

kshe

d fr

om S

tatio

ns

Maximize riders

Maximize access

Maximize linkages & multimodal access

Improve east-west connections

Maximize service to transit dependents

Expand reverse commute and off-peak transit

OBJ

ECTI

VE

INFLUENCE AREAS

19

Robert St Arterial BRT

INFLUENCE AREAS

20

Robert St Streetcar

INFLUENCE AREAS

21

TH 52 Highway BRT

Robert St. Ar-terial BRT

Robert St. Streetcar

TH 52 Highway BRT via

Lafayette

TH 52 Highway BRT via Cesar

Chavez

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

2,00

0

1,80

0

1,00

0 1,50

0

2030

Ave

rage

Dai

ly R

ider

s fro

m Z

ero-

Car

Hous

ehol

ds

GOAL 1: IMPROVE MOBILITY AND ACCESSIBILITY

KEY DIFFERENTIATOR: RIDERS FROM ZERO-CAR HOUSEHOLDS

22

Score 5 4 1 3Maximize riders

Maximize access

Maximize linkages & multimodal access

Improve east-west connections

Maximize service to transit dependents

Expand reverse commute and off-peak transit

OBJ

ECTI

VE

GOAL 1: IMPROVE MOBILITY AND ACCESSIBILITY

OVERVIEW

23

ObjectiveRobert St

Arterial BRTRobert St Streetcar

TH 52 Highway BRT

Maximize total transit riders 100 100 60

Maximize transit access to housing, employment, schools, community services, and activity centers 100 100 50

Maximize transportation system linkages and access to multimodal opportunities 100 100 50

Improve east-west connections 20 20 20

Maximize service to people who depend on transit 100 80 20

Expand reverse commute and off-peak transit service options. 100 100 60

EVALUATION RESULTSRobert St. Arterial

BRTRobert St. Streetcar

TH 52 Highway BRT via Lafayette

Goal 1Mobility & Accessibility Benefits

85 83 42

Goal 2 Transit Benefits 60 50 85

Goal 3Cost 90 60 70

Goal 4Opportunities 100 100 47

Goal 5 Impacts 51 34 57

TOTAL 77 65 60

EVALUATION RESULTSRobert St. Arterial

BRTRobert St. Streetcar

TH 52 Highway BRT via Lafayette

Goal 1Mobility & Accessibility Benefits

85 83 42

Goal 2 Transit Benefits 60 50 85

Goal 3Cost 90 60 70

Goal 4Opportunities 100 100 47

Goal 5 Impacts 51 34 57

TOTAL 77 65 60

GOAL 2: ENHANCE THE EFFECTIVENESS OF TRANSIT WITHIN THE CORRIDOR

KEY DIFFERENTIATOR: NEW TRANSIT RIDERS

26

Score 1 1 5 5

Robert St. Ar-terial BRT

Robert St. Streetcar

TH 52 Highway BRT via

Lafayette

TH 52 Highway BRT via Cesar

Chavez

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

400

400

800 1,

000

2030

Ave

rage

Dai

ly N

ew T

rans

it Ri

ders

Maximize new riders

Maximize transit operating efficiency

Maximize traveler time savings

Maximize access to park and ride facilities

OBJ

ECTI

VE

GOAL 2: ENHANCE THE EFFECTIVENESS OF TRANSIT WITHIN THE CORRIDOR

KEY DIFFERENTIATOR: PASSENGERS PER REVENUE HOUR OF SERVICE

27

Score 5 5 4 3

Robert St. Ar-terial BRT

Robert St. Streetcar

TH 52 Highway BRT via

Lafayette

TH 52 Highway BRT via Cesar

Chavez

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

52 48

35 37

2030

Ave

rage

Dai

ly P

asse

nger

s pe

r Rev

enue

Hou

r of S

ervi

ce

Maximize new riders

Maximize transit operating efficiency

Maximize traveler time savings

Maximize access to park and ride facilities

OBJ

ECTI

VE

GOAL 2: ENHANCE THE EFFECTIVENESS OF TRANSIT WITHIN THE CORRIDOR

OVERVIEW

28

ObjectiveRobert St

Arterial BRTRobert St Streetcar

TH 52 Highway BRT

Maximize new transit riders 20 20 100

Maximize transit operating efficiency (passengers per hour of revenue service) 100 100 40

Maximize traveler time savings 20 20 100

Maximize access to park and ride facilities 100 100 100

EVALUATION RESULTSRobert St. Arterial

BRTRobert St. Streetcar

TH 52 Highway BRT via Lafayette

Goal 1Mobility & Accessibility Benefits

85 83 42

Goal 2 Transit Benefits 60 50 85

Goal 3Cost 90 60 70

Goal 4Opportunities 100 100 47

Goal 5 Impacts 51 34 57

TOTAL 77 65 60

EVALUATION RESULTSRobert St. Arterial

BRTRobert St. Streetcar

TH 52 Highway BRT via Lafayette

Goal 1Mobility & Accessibility Benefits

85 83 42

Goal 2 Transit Benefits 60 50 85

Goal 3Cost 90 60 70

Goal 4Opportunities 100 100 47

Goal 5 Impacts 51 34 57

TOTAL 77 65 60

GOAL 3: PROVIDE COST EFFECTIVE AND FINANCIALLY FEASIBLE TRANSIT SOLUTIONS

KEY DIFFERENTIATOR: CAPITAL COSTS

31

Score 5 1 5 5

Robert St. Ar-terial BRT

Robert St. Streetcar

TH 52 Highway BRT via

Lafayette

TH 52 Highway BRT via Cesar

Chavez

-$400,000,000

-$350,000,000

-$300,000,000

-$250,000,000

-$200,000,000

-$150,000,000

-$100,000,000

-$50,000,000

$0

-$27

,479

,000

-$37

3,06

4,00

0

-$46

,089

,000

-$55

,079

,000

Tota

l Pro

ject

Cap

ital C

ost (

2013

$)

OBJ

ECTI

VE

Seek competitive project capital and operating costs Maximize competitiveness for potential funding sources

GOAL 3: PROVIDE COST EFFECTIVE AND FINANCIALLY FEASIBLE TRANSIT SOLUTIONS

KEY DIFFERENTIATOR: COST PER RIDER

32

Score 4 1 3 4

Robert St. Ar-terial BRT

Robert St. Streetcar

TH 52 Highway BRT via

Lafayette

TH 52 Highway BRT via Cesar

Chavez

-$9.00

-$8.00

-$7.00

-$6.00

-$5.00

-$4.00

-$3.00

-$2.00

-$1.00

$0.00

-$3.

97

-$8.

33

-$4.

49

$0.0

0

O&

M C

ost p

er A

nnua

l Rid

er

(201

2$/2

030

Ride

rs) O

BJEC

TIVE

Seek competitive project capital and operating costs Maximize competitiveness for potential funding sources

GOAL 3: PROVIDE COST EFFECTIVE AND FINANCIALLY FEASIBLE TRANSIT SOLUTIONS

OVERVIEW

33

ObjectiveRobert St

Arterial BRTRobert St Streetcar

TH 52 Highway BRT

Seek competitive project capital and operating costs 90 20 80

Maximize competitiveness for potential funding sources 90 60 70

EVALUATION RESULTSRobert St. Arterial

BRTRobert St. Streetcar

TH 52 Highway BRT via Lafayette

Goal 1Mobility & Accessibility Benefits

85 83 42

Goal 2 Transit Benefits 60 50 85

Goal 3Cost 90 60 70

Goal 4Opportunities 100 100 47

Goal 5 Impacts 51 34 57

TOTAL 77 65 60

EVALUATION RESULTSRobert St. Arterial

BRTRobert St. Streetcar

TH 52 Highway BRT via Lafayette

Goal 1Mobility & Accessibility Benefits

85 83 42

Goal 2 Transit Benefits 60 50 85

Goal 3Cost 90 60 70

Goal 4Opportunities 100 100 47

Goal 5 Impacts 51 34 57

TOTAL 77 65 60

Maximize consistency with local and regional land use plans 100 100 100

Maximize proximity to planned development and redevelopment 100 100 20

Encourage transit-oriented development in areas identified for future (re)development 100 100 20

GOAL 4: SUPPORT AND ENHANCE EXISTING COMMUNITIES AND PLANNED DEVELOPMENT

OVERVIEW

36

ObjectiveRobert St

Arterial BRTRobert St Streetcar

TH 52 Highway BRT

EVALUATION RESULTSRobert St. Arterial

BRTRobert St. Streetcar

TH 52 Highway BRT via Lafayette

Goal 1Mobility & Accessibility Benefits

85 83 42

Goal 2 Transit Benefits 60 50 85

Goal 3Cost 90 60 70

Goal 4Opportunities 100 100 47

Goal 5 Impacts 51 34 57

TOTAL 77 65 60

EVALUATION RESULTSRobert St. Arterial

BRTRobert St. Streetcar

TH 52 Highway BRT via Lafayette

Goal 1Mobility & Accessibility Benefits

85 83 42

Goal 2 Transit Benefits 60 50 85

Goal 3Cost 90 60 70

Goal 4Opportunities 100 100 47

Goal 5 Impacts 51 34 57

TOTAL 77 65 60

GOAL 5: SUPPORT HEALTHY COMMUNITIES AND SOUND ENVIRONMENTAL PRACTICES

OVERVIEW

39

ObjectiveRobert St

Arterial BRTRobert St Streetcar

TH 52 Highway BRT

Minimize need for new right-of-way 100 20 20

Minimize short- and long-term impacts to property and property access 20 20 100

Minimize area traffic impacts 60 20 100

Minimize adverse impacts on community resources (parks, schools, facilities) 20 20 40

Minimize impacts on minority and/or low-income communities 20 20 20

Minimize adverse impacts on water resources (wetlands, lakes, floodplains) 80 80 20

Maximize benefits due to decreased vehicle travel 60 60 100

EVALUATION RESULTSRobert St. Arterial

BRTRobert St. Streetcar

TH 52 Highway BRT via Lafayette

Goal 1Mobility & Accessibility Benefits

85 83 42

Goal 2 Transit Benefits 60 50 85

Goal 3Cost 90 60 70

Goal 4Opportunities 100 100 47

Goal 5 Impacts 51 34 57

TOTAL 77 65 60

EVALUATION RESULTSRobert St. Arterial

BRTRobert St. Streetcar

TH 52 Highway BRT via Lafayette

Goal 1Mobility & Accessibility Benefits

85 83 42

Goal 2 Transit Benefits 60 50 85

Goal 3Cost 90 60 70

Goal 4Opportunities 100 100 47

Goal 5 Impacts 51 34 57

TOTAL 77 65 60

TECHNICAL RECOMMENDATION PROCESS

TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE• Cities, Counties, MnDOT, Met Council, service operators• Provide ongoing review of study process and results

TECHNICAL RECOMMENDATION• Formed recommendation to Steering Committee on May 6, 2014• Attendees: Saint Paul, S. St. Paul, Rosemount, Met Council, Dakota

County, Ramsey County, Metro Transit, MnDOT

42

TECHNICAL RECOMMENDATION PROCESS

KEY DISCUSSION POINTS• Inclusion of real estate development analysis into evaluation• Scale of development benefits to capital costs• Roughly equal benefits for ridership, transportation objectives• Recommendations for additional study• Adoption process

43

TECHNICAL RECOMMENDATION

PROPOSED LPARobert Street Arterial BRT from Union Depot to Northern Service Center

OTHER RECOMMENDATIONS – FURTHER STUDYRobert Street Streetcar (consistent with St. Paul Streetcar Feasibility Study)TH 52 Express Service

44

NEXT STEPS

45

• Staff recommendation• Collect public feedbackJune 2014

• Locally Preferred Alternative decision/adoption process

• Public comment period• Final Report• Implementation Plan

July-December

2014

QUESTIONS?

46