METRO Green Line Extension Will Provide Light-Rail Service Between Downtown Minneapolis and the Communities of St

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

METRO Green Line Extension Will Provide Light-Rail Service Between Downtown Minneapolis and the Communities of St

Metro Transit TOD Office metrotransit.org/tod EXTENSION [email protected] The METRO Green Line Extension will provide light-rail service between downtown Minneapolis and the communities of St. Louis Park, Hopkins, Minnetonka and Eden Prairie, passing in close proximity to Edina. The Green Line Extension will provide a one seat connection between southwest metro communities, downtown Minneapolis, the University of Minnesota and St. Paul. The line will connect to the METRO Blue Line, Northstar Commuter Rail and Snelling BRT (2015). Key employment destinations along the METRO Green Line Extension: • Opus • Golden Triangle • Downtown Minneapolis Target Field Station By the Numbers • 14.5 miles of new track • 16 new stations (1 deferred for construction at a later date) • Projected 34,000 weekday ridership by 2040 • 36,000+ living within 1/2 mile of new stations • 57,000+ jobs within 1/2 mile of new stations • Expected opening year: 2023 Source: Metropolitan Council Population Estimates, 2016; Metropolitan Council Employment Estimates, 2015; METRO Green Line Extension New Starts Application Featured Projects and Plans Marketplace Lofts: Retail and City West: New and existing office Blake station area: Existing residential residential with a historic aesthetic on space including UnitedHealth and commercial with a park redesign Main Street in downtown Hopkins. Group’s campus. and expansion underway. (Image from swlrtcommunityworks.org) (Image from swlrtcommunityworks.org) The METRO Green Line Extension (Southwest Corridor Project) will connect southwest cities and EXTENSION employment centers to downtown Minneapolis and St. Paul. 280LauderLa e da 55 494 10 169 19 55 100 Royalston Va COUNTY 12 394 n Whit 10 1 6 COUNTY Penn e e 73 94 169 N St Louis Av I e 94 Park EP 21st N N E 5 494 H Woodlanddland 100 LAKE STREET 21 W est Lake 7 Beltlin e Hopkins W 18 ooddale 7 COUNTY Louisiana 10 1 Minnetonkat Minneapolise p Deephaven 35W Blake COUNTY 3 100 Hopkin 7 Shady Oa s T k 169 EMON FR 494 O- AG Opu CHIC s s 62 City W 62 62 est 62 Existing Transitways through 2015 Planned Transitways77 METRO Blue Line METRO Blue Line Extension Edina 212 METRO Green Line 35W METRO Green Line Extension Golde Tr iangle 100 METRO Red Line METRO Orange Line n 169 Northstar Commuter Rail Planned Arterial BRT Lines 5 54 Bus route LLET CO Hi-Frequency Service Network NI 54 494 Southwest Half Mile Station Area Eden Prairi 494 AMERIC AN T (deferrown Center e ed) SouthWest Station featuring the proposed reconfiguration, image from SWLRT Project Office BlB iti Last updated August 2015 Downtown Hopkins featuring the Hopkins Cinema, Image from swlrtcommunityworks.org 24-002-02-15 Wooddale Ave featuring the future PLACE development, image from www.welcometoplace.org Blake Rd featuring Oxford Village, rendering by Rich Firkins.

Copy Link

Recommended publications

CHAPTER 2 Progress Since the Last PMT
CHAPTER 2 Progress Since the Last PMT The 2003 PMT outlined the actions needed to bring the MBTA transit system into a state of good repair (SGR). It evaluated and prioritized a number of specific enhancement and expansion projects proposed to improve the system and better serve the regional mobility needs of Commonwealth residents. In the inter- vening years, the MBTA has funded and implemented many of the 2003 PMT priorities. The transit improvements highlighted in this chapter have been accomplished in spite of the unsus- tainable condition of the Authority’s present financial structure. A 2009 report issued by the MBTA Advisory Board1 effectively summarized the Authority’s financial dilemma: For the past several years the MBTA has only balanced its budgets by restructuring debt liquidat- ing cash reserves, selling land, and other one-time actions. Today, with credit markets frozen, cash reserves depleted and the real estate market at a stand still, the MBTA has used up these options. This recession has laid bare the fact that the MBTA is mired in a structural, on-going deficit that threatens its viability. In 2000 the MBTA was re-born with the passage of the Forward Funding legislation.This legislation dedicated 20% of all sales taxes collected state-wide to the MBTA. It also transferred over $3.3 billion in Commonwealth debt from the State’s books to the T’s books. In essence, the MBTA was born broke. Throughout the 1990’s the Massachusetts sales tax grew at an average of 6.5% per year. This decade the sales tax has barely averaged 1% annual growth.
[Show full text]
2020 FMCB Annual Report
2020 FMCB Annual Report This report fulfills the requirements of Section 207 of Chapter 46 of the Acts of 2015 specifying that the MBTA Fiscal and Management Control Board (FMCB) report annually on, among other things, the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority’s “own-source revenue, operating budget, capital plan and progress toward meeting performance metrics and targets.” This final report is presented to the Legislature after five and a half years of governance by the FMCB, with just under six months left in our extended term. 2020 was an extraordinary year, marked by an unprecedented global pandemic, nationwide protests, political and racial tensions, and substantial changes in the ways we live and work. Due to the widespread adoption of teleworking and the closure of hotels, restaurants, and other sectors to slow the spread of COVID-19, MBTA ridership fell sharply. By the end of October, Commuter Rail ridership was down 87% compared to 2019, with the system carrying only 8.5% of its pre- COVID morning peak ridership. Ferry ridership stood at 12% of pre-COVID ridership, with the MBTA paying to operate 112 trips daily with an average of seven riders per trip. Ridership at gated rapid transit (subway) stations was still roughly one-quarter of pre-COVID levels. Even bus ridership, which serves our most durable, transit-dependent customers, had fallen to about 45% of the baseline by October. This decline in ridership, of course, had significant implications for own source revenue. In November 2020, fare revenues were down 78% compared to November 2019. Parking and advertising revenues dropped in line with fares, while real estate revenues remained more stable.
[Show full text]
No Action Alternative Report
No Action Alternative Report April 2015 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................................. 1 2. NEC FUTURE Background ............................................................................................................................ 2 3. Approach to No Action Alternative.............................................................................................................. 4 3.1 METHODOLOGY FOR SELECTING NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE PROJECTS .................................................................................... 4 3.2 DISINVESTMENT SCENARIO ...................................................................................................................................................... 5 4. No Action Alternative ................................................................................................................................... 6 4.1 TRAIN SERVICE ........................................................................................................................................................................ 6 4.2 NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE RAIL PROJECTS ............................................................................................................................... 9 4.2.1 Funded Projects or Projects with Approved Funding Plans (Category 1) ............................................................. 9 4.2.2 Funded or Unfunded Mandates (Category 2) .......................................................................................................
[Show full text]
Metro Transit Schedule Green Line
Metro Transit Schedule Green Line Clemmie usually overprice tetragonally or recommit abiogenetically when whole-wheat Nev chaws unsympathetically and diversely. calksFree-hearted it nobbily. Lou fractured irresponsibly or bowsing head-on when Randall is sighted. Anson please her apriorists hand-to-hand, she Also angers you as scheduled departures from? Metro green line train at metro green line entered service schedule for campus including a project in minnesota? Paul connection seemed most visible on. Trains are their green line. Reduce the schedules with muni transit officials that perfect is the green line connects the metro transit system. Battle creek apartments, every time does deter on gull road rapid station in south near vehicle and healthy travel times in a tough. Washington avenue bridge was a metro transit, and schedules and has provided during harsh minnesota? Anderson center can directly. Upcoming holidays and schedules unless public locations and lake calhoun in our competitors order these trains. Metro transit planners chose university, metro transit agency will follow signs last? Metro transit and metro transit, schedule in downtown minneapolis. Turns out schedules vary by the metro green line is no regular saturday schedules beginning wednesday that litter is currently available. Transit riders will continue to downgrade reqeust was a vacant lot next to change. Metro transit report said engineers have been personalized. Paul and schedules beginning wednesday that make it back door. Paul with metro transit. You need to discuss the metro area in cardiac surgery at afrik grocery. Please visit one part in minnesota transportation systems to get from the downtown minneapolis guide to have collaborated on weekends; please enable scripts and take? Green line green hop fastpass is considered time improvements for metro transit projects along university avenue.
[Show full text]
Green Line Extension Profile
Green Line Extension Cambridge to Medford, Massachusetts (January 2020) The Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) and the Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MassDOT) are jointly constructing an extension to the existing Green Line Light Rail Transit (LRT) route from a relocated Lechmere Station in Cambridge to College Avenue in Medford and Union Square in Somerville. The Green Line Extension (GLX) will operate on the exclusive right-of-way of the MBTA Commuter Rail System, adjacent to existing commuter rail service. The project includes six at-grade stations and one elevated station; 3.7 miles of at-grade guideway and one mile of elevated guideway; reconstruction of eight bridge structures to maintain grade separation on the route; and the purchase of 24 light rail vehicles. The GLX project will improve mobility for residents of Cambridge, Somerville and Medford by providing a one-seat transit ride to Downtown Boston and the greater Boston metropolitan area. It will serve some of the region’s most densely populated communities not currently served by rail transit. Approximately 75,300 residents live within one-half mile of proposed stations, 26 percent of whom do not own or have access to an automobile. The project will reduce transit travel time in the project corridor by approximately 13 to 17 minutes because it will be built on fully grade-separated right- of-way through congested built-up neighborhoods, eliminating the need for passengers to make bus-to- rail transfers. Hours of operation in the opening year will be from 5:00 a.m. to 1:00 a.m. on weekdays and weekends.
[Show full text]
Fact Sheet: the Green Line Extension Cambridge | Somerville | Medford
t4ma.org @T4MASS (413) 367-T4MA [email protected] Fact Sheet: The Green Line Extension Cambridge | Somerville | Medford What is the Green Line Extension? The Green Line Extension (GLX) project will expand MBTA light rail services into Somerville and Medford, by way of the Green Line. Currently, the Green Line ends at Lechmere Station in East Cambridge. This project will extend the line 4.7 miles, creating two new separate branches that will end at Union Square in Somerville and College Avenue in Medford, respectively. The Many Benefits of the Green Line Extension 1. Fulfilling demand for a direct ride to Downtown Boston from these communities 2. Reducing travel time by eliminating the need for bus and rail transfers 3. Increasing the number of transit riders across the seven new GLX stations by approximately 45,000 riders per day by 2030 4. Improving air quality because of 25,000+ fewer vehicle miles traveled per day 5. Enhancing universal access with all new stations meeting or exceeding the standards of the Americans with Disabilities Act 6. Improving the overall transit experience with platform canopies to protect from wind and precipitation, additional elevators at select stations, and public art 7. Reducing noise pollution and vibration impacts from area railroads with mitigation measures. 8. Increasing biking and walking routes by creating a continuous network of shared-use paths that connect 11 cities and towns in Metro Boston The Story of the Green Line Extension Dirty Air, Lack of Transit Pushed Into Action Neighbors Respond The Green Line Extension project was first After 15 years and little progress, As the project completion date proposed in 1990 under Governor Michael the Conservation Law Foundation continued to be pushed back Dukakis to offset pollution and traffic filed a federal lawsuit, pushing the and cost estimates rose, problems caused by Boston's Big Dig state to respond.
[Show full text]
Passenger Rail Community Engagement
Passenger Rail Community Engagement Existing Conditions and Policy Analysis August 10, 2017 Prepared for: Prepared by: Existing Conditions and Policy Analysis August 2017 | i Existing Conditions and Policy Analysis Table of Contents Introduction ..................................................................................................................................................................... 1 Passenger Rail Community Engagement Report Overview ............................................................................................ 1 Purpose of the Existing Conditions and Policy Analysis.................................................................................................. 1 Existing Conditions and Peer Comparison......................................................................................................................... 1 Process and Implementation Timeline ............................................................................................................................. 6 Stakeholder Input ............................................................................................................................................................ 7 List of Tables Table 1: Passenger Rail Characteristics ............................................................................................................................. 1 Table 2: Household Density .............................................................................................................................................
[Show full text]
Transit Operations Plans Report
Transit Operations Plans Report Prepared for: Hennepin County Regional Railroad Authority Prepared by: Connetics Transportation Group Under Contract To: Kimley-Horn and Associates TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 Existing Service Characteristics ......................................................................................................... 2 2.1 Bottineau Project Area Facilities ........................................................................................................ 2 2.2 Urban Local Routes ............................................................................................................................ 2 2.3 Suburban Local Routes ...................................................................................................................... 5 2.4 Limited Stop and Express Routes ...................................................................................................... 8 2.5 Routes operated by Maple Grove Transit ....................................................................................... 12 3.0 NO-BUILD ALTERNATIVE .................................................................................................................. 18 3.1 No-Build Operating Requirements .................................................................................................. 19 4.0 BASELINE ALTERNATIVE .................................................................................................................
[Show full text]
The Boston Case: the Story of the Green Line Extension
The Boston Case: The Story of the Green Line Extension Eric Goldwyn, Alon Levy, and Elif Ensari Background map sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community INTRODUCTION The Issue of Infrastructure The idea of a mass public works program building useful infrastructure is old, and broadly popular. There was a widespread conversation on this topic in the United States during the stimulus debate of the early Obama administration. Subsequently, there have been various proposals for further federal spending on infrastructure, which could take the form of state-level programs, the much- discussed and much-mocked Infrastructure Week initiatives during the Trump administration, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s call for a Green New Deal, and calls for massive federal spending on infrastructure in the 2020 election campaign including a $1.5-2 trillion figure put out by the Biden campaign. This is not purely an American debate, either. The Trudeau cabinet spent considerable money subsidizing infrastructure construction in Canada, including for example helping fund a subway under Broadway in Vancouver, which is the busiest bus corridor in North America today. Within Europe, there is considerable spending on infrastructure as part of the coronavirus recovery program even in countries that practiced fiscal austerity before the crisis, such as Germany. China likewise accelerated the pace of high-speed rail investment 2 during the global financial crisis of 2009 and its aftermath, and is currently looking for major investment of comparable scale due to the economic impact of corona. With such large amounts of money at stake—the $2 trillion figure is about 10% of the United States’ annual economic output—it is critical to ensure the money is spent productively.
[Show full text]
Green Line Extension Project EEA #13886
Final Environmental Impact Report Green Line Extension Project EEA #13886 Executive Summary June 2010 Green Line Extension Project Final Environmental Impact Report Executive Summary Introduction The Green Line Extension Project is an initiative of the Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MassDOT) and the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) to enhance transit services in order to improve mobility and regional access for residents in the communities of Cambridge, Somerville, and Medford, Massachusetts. The Project is required by the State Implementation Plan (SIP) and fulfills a longstanding commitment of the Central Artery/Tunnel project to increase public transit. The Massachusetts Air Pollution Control Regulations (310 CMR 7.36) require that MassDOT complete this Project by December 31, 2014. On October 15, 2009, MassDOT filed the Green Line Extension Project Draft Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Assessment (DEIR/EA) with the Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act (MEPA) Office. The Secretary of the Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs (EEA) issued a Certificate on the DEIR on January 15, 2010. The Secretary’s Certificate stated that the DEIR adequately and properly complied with MEPA and with its implementing regulations, and required preparation of a Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) of limited scope for the Proposed Project. MassDOT expects Project funding to come both from the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) and from Commonwealth bonding. Because MassDOT is seeking funding through the FTA, the Project also requires review under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). At the request of the FTA, MassDOT is preparing a separate Final EA. The Green Line Extension Project is proposed to be built in two phases, with an initial operating segment (the “Proposed Project”) being constructed to College Avenue in Medford and a spur to Union Square in Somerville, as described and evaluated in the DEIR/EA as Alternative 1 (see FEIR Figure ES-1).
[Show full text]
METRO Blue Line Extension Newsletter May 2015
BROOKLYN PARK | CRYSTAL | ROBBINSDALE | GOLDEN VALLEY | MINNEAPOLIS Tracking the Blue Line Extension Issue 2 | May 2015 www.BlueLineExt.org A new, narrower plan proposed for West Broadway’s reconstruction with LRT Changes made in the last year to the design of the West Broadway Avenue reconstruction project including LRT in Brooklyn Park narrow the overall width significantly, lessening the impact on adjacent properties. The Metropolitan Council and Hen- nepin County are working together to reconstruct the road itself and install a center-running light rail line that would be an extension of the METRO Blue Line in Minneapolis. “The plan has changed dramatically,” Brooklyn Park Mayor Jeff Lunde told residents at a City Council meeting on April 28, referring to the engineer- ing work that’s been done to minimize impacts. In 2014, Hennepin County presented a redesign of West Broadway in Brooklyn Park that would have required taking many residences along the road. The city asked engineers to modify the de- sign to minimize impacts to residences and businesses. Earlier this year, Metropolitan Council and Hennepin County engineers began working together on a design for West Broadway that includes both a rede- signed roadway and the proposed Blue Top: A METRO Blue Line light rail train passes through a residential area near the Line Extension LRT Project. The Blue Veterans Administration Medical Center in south Minneapolis. Line Extension would run from Target Above: An artist’s rendering shows what light rail service would look like at the Field Station in downtown Minneapolis proposed 85th Avenue station along West Broadway Avenue.
[Show full text]
November 15, 2017 the Honorable Paul
This document is made available electronically by the Minnesota Legislative Reference Library as part of an ongoing digital archiving project. http://www.leg.state.mn.us/lrl/lrl.asp November 15, 2017 The Honorable Paul Torkelson, Chair The Honorable Scott Newman, Chair House Transportation Finance Committee Senate Transportation Finance & Policy Committee 381 State Office Building 3105 Minnesota Senate Building Saint Paul, MN 55155 Saint Paul, MN 55155 The Honorable Linda Runbeck, Chair The Honorable Scott Dibble House Transportation & Regional Governance Policy Ranking Minority Member Committee Senate Transportation Finance & Policy Committee 417 State Office Building 2213 Minnesota Senate Building Saint Paul, MN 55155 Saint Paul, MN 55155 The Honorable Frank Hornstein, DFL Lead The Honorable Connie Bernardy, DFL Lead House Transportation Policy & Finance Committee House Transportation & Regional Governance Policy 243 State Office Building Committee Saint Paul, MN 55155 253 State Office Building Saint Paul, MN 55155 RE: 2017 Guideway Status report Dear Legislators: The Minnesota Department of Transportation, in collaboration with the Metropolitan Council, is pleased to provide the 2017 Guideway Status report as required under 2016 Minnesota Statutes 174.93, subdivision 2. This report updates information for eight guideway corridors currently in operation, construction or design, and thirteen more that are in planning or analysis phase, or that were at the time of the last report in 2015. The capacity analysis looks at regional guideway funding needs and resources related to capital, operations and capital maintenance for the next ten years. If you have specific questions about this report or want additional information, please contact MnDOT’s Brian Isaacson at [email protected] or at 651 234-7783; or, you can contact Met Council’s Cole Hiniker at [email protected] or at 651 602-1748.
[Show full text]