Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

- Light Rail Transit Improving mobility Easing congestion Strengthening our communities Central Corridor Metropolitan Council – Project Update May 14,

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "- Light Rail Transit Improving mobility Easing congestion Strengthening our communities Central Corridor Metropolitan Council – Project Update May 14,"— Presentation transcript:

1 - Light Rail Transit Improving mobility Easing congestion Strengthening our communities Central Corridor Metropolitan Council – Project Update May 14, 2008

2 2 Today’s Agenda Washington Ave. at-grade alignment –Bus scenario operational costs –Traffic Study #4 update –Electromagnetic Interference –Mitigation for transit/pedestrian mall Northern Alignment –Alignment –Outstanding issues Light Rail Transit Central Corridor

3 3 Bus Scenario Operational Costs Light Rail Transit Central Corridor

4 4 Transit/Pedestrian Mall Scenarios Ridership, Cost and CEI Review Scenario B Transit/Pedestrian Mall Scenarios 12A2B3 Buses terminate at edges of campus * Bus service via 10 th Ave.* Bus service via Pleasant* Buses remain on transit/ped mall Capital Costs$909.1 MM Cost Effectiveness Index $23.80$24.09$24.56$24.57$23.92 Ridership Estimate41,97045,32044,78045,04042,960 Intermodal Station Construction Costs NA$15 MM NA Adjusted Capital Costs $909.1 MM$924.1 MM $909.1 MM * A concern of Scenarios 1, 2A and 2B is the diversion of riders from the UofM Campus Connector to LRT which may lead to exceeding available train capacity.

5 5 Transit/Pedestrian Mall Scenarios Corridor Bus Operation Cost Estimates Scenario B Transit/Pedestrian Mall Scenarios 12A2B3 Buses terminate at edges of campus* Bus service via 10 th Ave.* Bus service via Pleasant* Buses remain on transit/ped mall Operational Costs ($) 38,183,60036,765,65037,719,58037,794,10038,183,600 Difference ($)--(1,417,950)(464,020)(389,500)-0- % Change-3.7%-1.2%-1.0%0.0% CEI$23.80$24.09$24.56$24.57$23.92 Assumptions: Annual O&M Costs for bus route modifications consistent with comparable Rail Build Alternatives costs escalated to 2007 dollars using 3.5% Fleet buses assume a 20% spare ratio Metro Bus O&M costs represent corridor impacted routes only. * A concern of Scenarios 1, 2A and 2B is the diversion of riders from the UofM Campus Connector to LRT which may lead to exceeding available train capacity.

6 6 Traffic Study #4 Update Light Rail Transit Central Corridor

7 7 Traffic Study 4 Intra-campus Roadway Network Mitigation Strategies Light Rail Transit Central Corridor Proposed new roadway connections Converted to 2-way streets Intersection traffic control and/or capacity improvements Stripe NB left turn lane Modify signal phasing Install traffic signal Construct turn lanes Install traffic signals Construct turn lanes Install traffic signal Construct turn lanes Install all way stop Construct turn lanes Mill and overlay E. River Rd Construct new segment and overlay existing

8 8 Traffic Study 4.1 VISSIM Traffic Model VISSIM traffic analysis considers –Pedestrian –Vehicle –Bus Level of Service –Washington Avenue intersections –Harvard and Delaware intersection Light Rail Transit Central Corridor

9 9 Light Rail Transit Central Corridor Washington Study to determine impacts to Washington Ave. with LRT transit/pedestrian mall Traffic Study 4.1 Pleasant to Harvard Oak ChurchUnion Harvard Walnut Pleasant Delaware A BBC C D A Level of Service Indicator

10 10 Light Rail Transit Central Corridor Washington Study to determine impacts to Washington Ave. with LRT transit/pedestrian mall Traffic Study 4.1 Pleasant to Walnut Oak ChurchUnion Harvard Walnut Pleasant Delaware A BBC C D A Level of Service Indicator

11 11 Geomagnetic and Electromagnetic Interference Light Rail Transit Central Corridor

12 12 Locations of Sensitive Equipment Light Rail Transit Central Corridor

13 13 Geomagnetic Perturbation (Steel Mass) Light Rail Transit Central Corridor Maximum allowed at 77’ = 2.0 mG mG = millegauss (units of magnetic force)

14 14 Electromagnetic Measurements Light Rail Transit Central Corridor

15 15 Electromagnetic Measurements Light Rail Transit Central Corridor Maximum allowed at 77’ = 2.0 mG

16 16 Electromagnetic Technical Solutions Light Rail Transit Central Corridor

17 17 Washington Ave. Transit/Ped Mall Mitigation Light Rail Transit Central Corridor

18 18 Stakeholder-Identified Improvement Needs Central Corridor Mitigation Participation* Washington Avenue Transit Mall$11,100,000 Free Fare Zone Stadium Village to West Bank Stakeholder Granary Road - I35W to TH 280 Stakeholder U of M Fairview Hospital Loading Dock Stakeholder Traffic light improvements on Washington Ave., intersections Base Scope Intersections directly impacted by CCLRT (Study #3)$2,800,000 Intersections not directly impacted by CCLRT (Study #3) Stakeholder East River Road/Harvard Street/Fulton Street$1,200,000 East Bank Campus Area Street Connections (Study #4)$5,100,000 Modify Huron Blvd/University Ave./23 rd Ave./25 th Ave. Base Scope Environmental Issues$6,800,000 Impact on Freeway System Stakeholder Signage and Wayfinding Base Scope Cedar Riverside Small Area Plan Stakeholder Total Central Corridor Mitigation Participation $27,000,000 * CCLRT Participation subject to FTA approval

19 19 Northern Alignment Light Rail Transit Central Corridor

20 20 Comparison of Northern Alignment and Washington Avenue Alignment

21 21 Northern Alignment: West Bank

22 22 Typical Sections: West Bank

23 23 Northern Alignment: Dinkytown

24 24 Typical Sections: Dinkytown

25 25 Northern Alignment: Stadium Village

26 26 Northern Alignment Outstanding Issues Light Rail Transit Central Corridor

27 27 Environmental Issues #9 Bridge is eligible as a historical structure #9 Bridge demolition impacts to bike/pedestrian trail Removal of Section 8 housing financed by HUD, impacts to remaining units Soil contamination Light Rail Transit Central Corridor

28 28 #9 Bridge is eligible historic structure

29 29 Demolition impacts bike/ped trail

30 30 Path to Bridge #9 Impacts to Section 8 housing

31 31 Soil contamination from former gas works 19 th Avenue South Washington Avenue 1956

32 32 Soil contamination from former gas works Former Gas Works Site Former Gas Holding Location

33 33 Additional Environmental Permits Federal Transit Administration Corp. of Engineers National Park Service/ MNRRA FEMA Coast Guard HUD Light Rail Transit Central Corridor

34 34 Design Issues 25’ deep open trench required between 19 th Ave. and Law School for LRT to cross Washington Ave. at-grade US Coast Guard jurisdiction as a navigable waterway Light Rail Transit Central Corridor

35 35 Trench required between 19 th Ave. and Law School to run at- grade with Washington Ave.

36 36 Coast Guard looking for opportunities with bridge reconstruction to remove piers

37 37 Constructability Issues 19 th Avenue trench requires retaining walls –Impacts to Law School and 19 th Ave. structure –Construction impacts and method Structural integrity of Bridge #9 coffer dam Light Rail Transit Central Corridor

38 38 Structural and construction impacts to Law School and 19 th Ave. roadway and bridge 25’ deep 30’ wide Law School 19 th Ave.

39 39 Structural integrity of coffer dam unknown

40 40 Operations and Maintenance Issues Fire, life and safety access –Difficult in 19 th Ave. trench –Limited in Dinkytown trench Snow removal from 19 th Ave. trench Maintenance crew access limited due to restricted adjacent available right-of-way Light Rail Transit Central Corridor

41 41 Fire, life, safety, maintenance and construction access limited

42 42 Railroad Issues Requires right-of-way acquisition from BNSF Railway Does not meet track separation requirements between freight and light rail Results in $200 MM insurance, indemnification package due to proximity of passenger rail to freight rail Light Rail Transit Central Corridor

43 43 Requires negotiating with freight railroad company for right-of-way acquisition

44 44 14 th Avenue University Avenue Proximity to operating freight railroad does not meet minimum standards Freight rail Light rail Future Granary Road

45 45 Roy Wilkins Hall 1212 University Ave SE Proximity to operating freight railroad requires insurance, indemnification in case of an accident or derailment

46 Project Schedule Impacts CCLRT Master Schedule Northern Alignment Schedule Start SDEIS environmental reviewJuly 9, 2007 Define Project Alignment and ElementsFeb. 27, 2008May 21, 2008 Restart SDEIS environmental review for Northern AlignmentJune/July 2008 Complete environmental analysis, prepare SDEISApril 4, 2008Feb Provide final administrative draft SDEIS to FTAApril 29, 2008March 2009 Receive SDEIS comments from FTAMay 28, 2008May 2009 Publish SDEIS in Federal RegisterJune 27, 2008June 2009 Hold Public HearingJuly 21, 2008July 2009 Adopt Revised LPA by Met CouncilAug. 27, 2008Aug Submit New Starts ApplicationSept. 5, 2008Sept. 4, 2009 Publish draft FEISJan. 11, 2009Jan FTA issues Record of Decision on FEIS (min. of 30 days)Feb. 25, 2009Feb FTA approves project to move into Final DesignMay 6, 2009May 2010 May 9, 2008

47 47 Light Rail Transit Central Corridor More Information Check out our website: Contact Central Corridor Project Office: 540 Fairview Avenue North St. Paul, MN Comment Line:


Download ppt "- Light Rail Transit Improving mobility Easing congestion Strengthening our communities Central Corridor Metropolitan Council – Project Update May 14,"

Similar presentations


Ads by Google