DOCSLIB.ORG

Arterial BRT Corridor Concepts

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Arterial BRT Corridor Concepts Arterial BRT Corridor Concepts December 2020 Table of Contents Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................................................................. 3 Concept Development Methods ...................................................................................................................................................................... 5 Alignment and Termini ................................................................................................................................................................................... 5 Concept Station Locations............................................................................................................................................................................. 5 Concept Service Plans ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 6 Downtown Alignments ....................................................................................................................................................................................7 Corridor Concepts ................................................................................................................................................................................................ 11 63rd Avenue/ Zane ......................................................................................................................................................................................... 12 Central .................................................................................................................................................................................................................14 Como/ Maryland .............................................................................................................................................................................................. 18 Grand .................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 22 Johnson/ Lyndale ............................................................................................................................................................................................ 24 Lowry ................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 28 Nicollet ................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 31 Randolph/ East 7th ......................................................................................................................................................................................... 35 Rice/ Robert ...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 39 West Broadway/ Cedar ................................................................................................................................................................................. 43 Appendix: Station Location Tables ................................................................................................................................................................ 46 63rd Avenue/ Zane ........................................................................................................................................................................................ 46 Central ................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 48 Como/ Maryland .............................................................................................................................................................................................. 51 Grand .................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 54 Johnson/ Lyndale ............................................................................................................................................................................................ 56 Lowry ................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 59 Nicollet ................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 61 Randolph/ East 7th ......................................................................................................................................................................................... 63 Rice/ Robert ...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 66 West Broadway/ Cedar ................................................................................................................................................................................. 69 Network Next | Arterial BRT Corridor Concepts 2 Introduction The project team developed corridor concepts for each of the eleven corridors, shown in Table 1, that were advanced through the arterial BRT candidate corridor screening phase. Corridor concepts include alignments, termini, concept station locations, and concept service plans; these elements form the basis of the corridor evaluation. This memo outlines the station siting methods and criteria applied to the corridors and introduces each of the corridor concepts in greater detail. Advancing Corridors Corridor Approximate Length (mi) 63rd Avenue/ Zane 6.0 Central 13.0 Como/ Maryland 16.6 Grand 8.5 Johnson/ Lyndale 17.1 Lowry 10.5 Nicollet 9.2 Randolph/ East 7th 11.5 Rice/ Robert 11.5 West Broadway/ Cedar 10.5 West 7th/ White Bear Corridor Screening In fall 2020, Metro Transit engaged stakeholders around the 11 advanced corridors that emerged from the screening step. During this period, Ramsey County requested that Metro Transit remove the West 7th/ White Bear corridor from continued consideration in the Network Next process as the County advances efforts on the Riverview Corridor Modern Streetcar. The locally preferred alternative for the Riverview Corridor, a Modern Streetcar from downtown St. Paul to the airport and Mall of America along West 7th Street, was adopted into the regional Transportation Policy Plan (TPP) in 2019. The Engineering and Pre-Environmental study phase of the Riverview project began in October 2020 and is planned to continue through 2023. This process will examine impacts and gather detailed information to inform the project’s preliminary design. These efforts will include detailed, corridor-specific analysis of both the Modern Streetcar locally preferred alternative and a BRT alternative. The West 7th/ White Bear corridor will not advance in Network Next, leaving the 10 corridors listed above advancing for technical evaluation and prioritization. Network Next | Arterial BRT Corridor Concepts: Preliminary Alignments, Stations, and Service Plans 3 Figure 1. Advancing Corridors Network Next | Arterial BRT Corridor Concepts: Preliminary Alignments, Stations, and Service Plans 4 Concept Development Methods Corridor concepts are meant to represent the application of arterial BRT in each corridor and provide adequate definition to facilitate corridor evaluation. Concept station locations are shown at the intersection level. Generally, a station intersection is representative of two station platforms, one in each direction; an intersection located on a one-way street represents one station platform. Corridor service plans were developed to represent approximate level of arterial BRT and connecting/ supporting service within the corridors. Further planning and stakeholder engagement will refine station locations and service plans in future phases of corridor development. Alignment and Termini Alignment and termini shown in the corridor concepts are generally consistent with the corridors as defined by Metro Transit for the candidate corridor screening. In the few cases where alternate routing is proposed it is noted in the concept. Concept Station Locations The project team identified concept station locations by creating a base map that incorporated trip generators and future land use, stop-level boarding and alighting counts and schedule transit trips, as well as transit connections. Key stations were assigned near major land use trip generators, stops with high existing ridership, and major transfer points to local and METRO routes. Table 3 lists the data sources used to facilitate the station
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Regional Transit Technical Advisory Committee October 29, 2014 Full
    MEETING OF THE REGIONAL TRANSIT TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE Wednesday, October 29, 2014 10:00 a.m. – 12:00 p.m. SCAG Los Angeles Main Office 818 W. 7th Street, 12th Floor, Policy Committee Room A Los Angeles, California 90017 (213) 236-1800 Teleconferencing Available: Please RSVP with Ed Rodriguez at [email protected] 24 hours in advance. Videoconferencing Available: Orange SCAG Office Ventura SCAG Office 600 S. Main St, Ste. 906 Orange, CA 92863 950 County Square Dr, Ste 101 Ventura, CA 93003 Imperial SCAG Office Riverside SCAG Office 1405 North Imperial Ave., Suite 1 , CA 92243 3403 10th Street, Suite 805 Riverside, CA 92501 SCAG San Bernardino Office 1170 W. 3rd St, Ste. 140 San Bernardino, CA 92410 If members of the public wish to review the attachments or have any questions on any of the agenda items, please contact Matt Gleason at (213) 236-1832 or [email protected]. REGIONALTRANSIT TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE AGENDA October 29, 2014 The Regional Transit Technical Advisory Committee may consider and act upon any TIME PG# of the items listed on the agenda regardless of whether they are listed as information or action items. 1.0 CALL TO ORDER (Wayne Wassell, Metro, Regional Transit TAC Chair) 2.0 PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD - Members of the public desiring to speak on items on the agenda, or items not on the agenda, but within the purview of the Regional Transit Technical Advisory Committee, must fill out and present a speaker’s card to the assistant prior to speaking. Comments will be limited to three minutes.
    [Show full text]
  • Virtual Construction Update Meeting March 30, 2021 | 6 PM Using Zoom & Submitting Questions
    Virtual Construction Update Meeting March 30, 2021 | 6 PM Using Zoom & Submitting Questions This meeting is being recorded. Video file will be posted on our web site at metro.net/crenshaw Public video and mics are disabled. We cannot hear you or see you. Submit a question/comment via text: Please ask questions and submit comments via the Q&A feature or text us. Welcome, thank you for joining us! 10 min Project Overview Annette Cortez, Community Relations Manager 10 min North Segment Ron Macias, Principal Community Relations Officer 10 min South Segment Saroya Sandiford, Principal Community Relations Officer 15 min On The Move Riders Program Brittany Mullins, Principal Community Relations Officer Sidney Urmancheev, Transportation Associate 10 min Business Support Programs Kyle Wagner, (Interim) Business Interruption Fund Manager 5 min Eat Shop Play Program Jesus Galeno, Transportation Associate Robyn Lopez, Community Relations Officer 30 min Moderation / Q&A Isai Rosa, Principal Community Relations Officer 3 COVID-19 Compliance 4 Project Overview Walsh Shea Corridor Constructors (WSCC) Main Line & Stations Contractor​ Hensel Phelps Herzog (HPH) Southwestern Maintenance Yard Contractor​, Completed March 2019​ • 8.5-mile light-rail servicing the Cities of Los Angeles, Inglewood and El Segundo​ • 8 new stations:​ • 3 underground​ • 4 at-grade​ • 1 aerial • Life of Project Budget: $2.148 Billion • Project has reached 98% completion 5 Northern Segment Overview Crenshaw Bl between Metro E Line (Expo) and 67th St Structural Elements of Stations • Three underground • One at-grade Civil Elements of Tunnels and Trackwork​ • Dual parallel bored tunnels​ • Hyde Park “Cut and Cover” tunnel Street Restoration Segments • Underground station areas​ • Hyde Park underground tunnel Underground Station Construction Underground Station Construction • Expo/Crenshaw Station • Martin Luther King Jr.
    [Show full text]
  • The Copenhagenization of Nicollet Avenue
    The Copenhagenization of Nicollet Avenue Derek Holmer COPENHAGENIZATION OF NICOLLET AVENUE DEREK HOLMER Acknowledgments I would like to extend my sincerest thanks to my faculty advisor, Gayla Lindt, who has the powers of Wonder Woman. Without her calm demeanor and guidance, this project would have derailed long ago. Thanks are also due to my reader, Carrie Christensen. Her expertise, attention to detail, and encouragement helped keep my eyes on the bigger picture. Finally, I would like to express my gratitude to Katherine Solomonson. Her role as Devil’s Advocate kept my project grounded from day one and allowed my argument to remain based on real issues facing American cities today. I am indebted to each of you. II III COPENHAGENIZATION OF NICOLLET AVENUE DEREK HOLMER Abstract This thesis investigates the potential for Nicollet Avenue in Minneapolis to become a bicycle- and pedestrian-only corridor for a one and a half mile stretch from downtown south to Lake Street. This investigation begins with the imagined, but very possible, scenario that the K-Mart building that blocks the Nicollet Avenue corridor north of Lake Street has been removed. The avenue is examined through the lens of Copenhagenization, as outlined in Jan Gehl’s book Cities for People. These principles are most manifest along Nørrebrogade in Copenhagen, which serves as the primary precedent for this investigation. Key concepts and design elements from this two and a half kilometer (one and a half mile) Danish corridor are identified, analyzed, and translated into a mid-western American context at a scale not yet attempted. The current Minneapolis Bicycle Master Plan (2005) calls for no bicycles along Nicollet Avenue.
    [Show full text]
  • Transportation
    visionHagerstown 2035 5 | Transportation Transportation Introduction An adequate vehicular circulation system is vital for Hagerstown to remain a desirable place to live, work, and visit. Road projects that add highway capacity and new road links will be necessary to meet the Comprehensive Plan’s goals for growth management, economic development, and the downtown. This chapter addresses the City of Hagerstown’s existing transportation system and establishes priorities for improvements to roads, transit, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities over the next 20 years. Goals 1. The city’s transportation network, including roads, transit, and bicycle and pedestrian facilities, will meet the mobility needs of its residents, businesses, and visitors of all ages, abilities, and socioeconomic backgrounds. 2. Transportation projects will support the City’s growth management goals. 3. Long-distance traffic will use major highways to travel around Hagerstown rather than through the city. Issues Addressed by this Element 1. Hagerstown’s transportation network needs to be enhanced to maintain safe and efficient flow of people and goods in and around the city. 2. Hagerstown’s network of major roads is generally complete, with many missing or partially complete segments in the Medium-Range Growth Area. 3. Without upgrades, the existing road network will not be sufficient to accommodate future traffic in and around Hagerstown. 4. Hagerstown’s transportation network needs more alternatives to the automobile, including transit and bicycle facilities and pedestrian opportunities. Existing Transportation Network Known as “Hub City,” Hagerstown has long served as a transportation center, first as a waypoint on the National Road—America’s first Dual Highway (US Route 40) federally funded highway—and later as a railway node.
    [Show full text]
  • Work Session Virtual Meeting Held Via Webex December 8, 2020 6:15 Pm
    WORK SESSION VIRTUAL MEETING HELD VIA WEBEX DECEMBER 8, 2020 6:15 PM Call to order 1. Metropolitan Transit Project Manager Shahin Khazrajafari will be presenting an overview of the forthcoming Metro Transit D Line Bus Rapid Transit project, the anticipated construction timeline, and will be available to answer any questions. Adjournment Auxiliary aids for individuals with disabilities are available upon request. Requests must be made at least 96 hours in advance to the City Clerk at 612-861-9738. AGENDA SECTION: Work Session Items AGENDA ITEM # 1. WORK SESSION STAFF REPORT NO. 31 WORK SESSION 12/8/2020 REPORT PREPARED BY: Joe Powers, Assistant City Engineer DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: Kristin Asher, Public Works Director/City Engineer 12/2/2020 OTHER DEPARTMENT REVIEW: N/A CITY MANAGER REVIEW: Katie Rodriguez, City Manager 12/2/2020 ITEM FOR WORK SESSION: Metropolitan Transit Project Manager Shahin Khazrajafari will be presenting an overview of the forthcoming Metro Transit D Line Bus Rapid Transit project, the anticipated construction timeline, and will be available to answer any questions. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Metro Transit is moving towards construction of planned improvements to the Route 5 corridor with the D Line Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) project after securing final project funding at the legislature in the recent bonding bill. The project will be a positive asset to the City of Richfield and enhance the overall metro transit system in our region. The D Line will substantially replace Route 5, running primarily on Portland Avenue within Richfield and on Chicago, Emerson and Fremont Avenues in Minneapolis. Rapid bus brings better amenities, such as: Faster, more frequent service; Pre-boarding fare payment for faster stops; Neighborhood-scale stations with amenities; Enhanced security; and, Larger & specialized vehicles.
    [Show full text]
  • Planning a Public Transportation System with a View Towards Passengers’ Convenience
    Planning a Public Transportation System with a View Towards Passengers’ Convenience by Jonas Harbering Planning a Public Transportation System with a View Towards Passengers’ Convenience Dissertation zur Erlangung des mathematisch-naturwissenschaftlichen Doktorgrades ”Doctor rerum naturalium” der Georg-August-Universit¨atG¨ottingen im Promotionsprogramm ”PhD School of Mathematical Sciences” (SMS) der Georg-August University School of Science (GAUSS) vorgelegt von Jonas Harbering aus Flemhude G¨ottingen,2015 Betreuungsausschuss Prof. Dr. Anita Sch¨obel, Institut f¨urNumerische und Angewandte Mathematik, Georg- August-Universit¨atG¨ottingen Prof. Dr. Stephan Westphal, Institut f¨urAngewandte Stochastik und Operations Research, Technische Universit¨atClausthal Mitglieder der Pr¨ufungskommision Referentin: Prof. Dr. Anita Sch¨obel, Institut f¨urNumerische und Angewandte Mathe- matik, Georg-August-Universit¨atG¨ottingen Koreferent: Prof. Dr. Juan Antonio Mesa, Institut f¨urAngewandte Mathematik, Univer- sit¨atSevilla Weitere Mitglieder der Pr¨ufungskommision Prof. Dr. Stephan Westphal, Institut f¨urAngewandte Stochastik und Operations Research, Technische Universit¨atClausthal Prof. Dr. Andrea Krajina, Institut f¨urMathematische Stochastik, Georg-August-Universit¨at G¨ottingen Prof. Dr. Preda Mihailescu, Mathematisches Institut, Georg-August-Universit¨atG¨ottingen Prof. Dr. Jens Grabowski, Institut f¨urInformatik, Georg-August-Universit¨atG¨ottingen Tag der m¨undlichen Pr¨ufung: 1. Februar 2016 ii Contents 1. Introduction 1 2. General Literature
    [Show full text]
  • Regional Bus Rapid Transit Feasiblity Study
    TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................................................................................................... 1 2 MODES AND TRENDS THAT FACILITATE BRT ........................................................................................................................................................ 2 2.1 Microtransit ................................................................................................................................................................................................ 2 2.2 Shared Mobility .......................................................................................................................................................................................... 2 2.3 Mobility Hubs ............................................................................................................................................................................................. 3 2.4 Curbside Management .............................................................................................................................................................................. 3 3 VEHICLES THAT SUPPORT BRT OPERATIONS ....................................................................................................................................................... 4 3.1 Automated Vehicles .................................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 5 Planned Transit Service Improvements
    Metro Transit Central-South (Sector 5) Final Plan 4.5 Public Outreach Conclusions Stakeholder and public comments provided guidance to improve various elements of the plan. About one fifth of the comments favored the plan. Four cities, one county and the University of Minnesota also supported the plan. Several neighborhood groups expressed concerns about specific elements of the plan. The majority of comments (over 60 percent) were in response to the proposed route elimination or service reductions on Routes 7, 8, 18, 19, 22, 52B, 84, 538 and 539. Another frequent comment was concern regarding increased transfers and loss of direct service to key destinations. For example, the proposed elimination of some direct service to the University of Minnesota was the source of many complaints. The Concept Plan was modified to address many of the stakeholder and customer concerns within the current operating budget and the tenants identified in the previous chapters. Of the 55 routes in the sector, 32 or 58 percent of routes were modified in response to public comment. The final plan preserves geographic coverage in all of the urban area, and most of the suburban areas, and direct service to the University of Minnesota from France Avenue/ W. 50th Street, Cedar Avenue/Portland Avenue and Snelling Avenue. This final plan, as modified to address the concerns raised during the public outreach phase, is supported by all five cities and the two counties found in the study area. 5 Planned Transit Service Improvements 5.1 Planned Transit Service Network The service improvement program begins with a high-to-medium frequency grid network of local service in high-density population and employment areas such as south Minneapolis and St.
    [Show full text]
  • Locally Preferred Alternative
    Locally Preferred Alternative Work In Progress; Subject To Change Without Notice 1 Riverview Corridor Study Area • 12 mile study area between Saint Paul and Bloomington. • Connects major destinations, neighborhoods and job concentrations. • Serves growing and diverse population and employment areas. • 50,600 residents and 123,900 jobs. • Provides regional and local connectivity. Work In Progress; Subject To Change Without Notice 2 Study Process Completed August 2015 Completed August 2017 December, 2017 CORRIDOR VISION ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS LOCALLY PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE • Current and future • Initial Screening. • Vehicle and route conditions. (completed February 2016) of Locally Preferred • Review of relevant work. • Detailed Definition. Alternative. • Purpose and need. • Detailed Evaluation. • Implementation Plan. March – August 2017 • Goals and objectives. Public Engagement • Examined 60 different alternatives. • Engaged over 4,600 people via nearly 100 events responding to nearly individual 650 comments. Work In Progress; Subject To Change Without Notice 3 Community Engagement More than 4,600 people participated in the Riverview Study through community events including open houses, business outreach, presentations, pop-up events, social media, and online engagement forms. Work In Progress; Subject To Change Without Notice 4 What We Heard • Rail transit’s ease of use is preferred. • Transit system connectivity, e.g. to airport. • Transit saves employees cost of parking • Concern about business and neighborhood impacts. • Keep Ford Site in mind throughout the study. • Route 54: Good service frequency, but crowded. • Improve transit service – frequent, fast, reliable. Work In Progress; Subject To Change Without Notice 5 Community Input has Shaped the Process • Purpose and need for transit improvements. • Goals and objectives. • Routes and vehicles to study • Potential station locations.
    [Show full text]
  • Rush Line Bus Rapid Transit Station Area Planning Overview: White Bear Lake May 2020
    RUSH LINE BUS RAPID TRANSIT STATION AREA PLANNING OVERVIEW: WHITE BEAR LAKE MAY 2020 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.1. What is Station Area Planning? ................................................................................................. 1 1.2. Preliminary Station Area Planning ............................................................................................. 2 1.3. Available Implementation Resources......................................................................................... 8 1.4. Advanced Station Area Planning ............................................................................................. 10 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Rush Line BRT Project Advisory Committees ....................................................................... 2 Figure 2: White Bear Lake Area Rush Line BRT Stations .................................................................... 4 Figure 3: White Bear Lake Demographic Characteristics ..................................................................... 5 Figure 4: White Bear Lake Employment Characteristics ...................................................................... 6 Figure 5: Six-Step Framework for Health Impact Assessments ........................................................... 7 i The Rush Line Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project is a 15-mile proposed transit route with stops between Union Depot in Lowertown Saint Paul and downtown White Bear Lake. The project is currently in the environmental analysis phase, during which the project’s design is advanced while
    [Show full text]
  • FY 2020 Status of the Appalachian Development Highway System
    Status of the Appalachian Development Highway System as of September 30, 2020 December 2020 Status of the Appalachian Development Highway System as of September 30, 2020 APPALACHIAN DEVELOPMENT HIGHWAY SYSTEM as of September 30, 2020 N EW Y ORK W ISCONSIN T M ICHIGAN T U-1 U P ENNSYLVANIA P O-1 P-1 O M M I LLINOIS I NDIANA O HIO M O EW N N ERSEY M J C E AR WARE C-1 YLAND A D D H EL C D B-1 WEST VIRGINIA D B L B G R I B ENTUCKY V IRGINIA K I HART Q B Q J F J F B S J-1 B T ENNESSEE N ORTH C AROLINA J K K A W V V V A-2 A A-1 S OUTH C AROLINA X X-1 MISSISSIPPI G EORGIA A LABAMA ADHS Miles Open to Traffic ADHS Miles Not Open to Traffic Interstate Highway System Appalachian Development Highway System (ADHS) FY 2020 Accomplishments & Future Outlook Status of Completion of the ADHS At the end of FY 2020, a total of 2,814.0 miles, or 91.1 percent of the 3,090.1 miles authorized for the ADHS, were either complete, currently meeting traffic needs, open to traffic or under construction; 44.7 miles were in the final design or right-of-way acquisition phase, and 231.4 miles were in the location studies phase (pre- environmental). See Table 1 for the latest mileage totals by status category and state. See Appendix A for the latest mileage totals by ADHS Corridor, status category and state.
    [Show full text]
  • Bus Routes, Customers Will Be Able to Use a New App to Flag Or Call the Next Available Bus to Alternate Pickup Locations
    T&E COMMITTEE #1-10 April 25, 2019 MEMORANDUM April 23, 2019 TO: County Councileo FROM: Glenn Orlin, Deputy Director SUBJECT: FYI 9-24 Capital Improvements Program (CIP): amendments FY20 Operating Budget: Department of Transportation (DOT), Vacuum Leaf Collection Fund, General Fund, and Mass Transit Fund; Homeowners' Association Road Maintenance Reimbursement NDA; Rockville Parking District NDA; Vision Zero NDA, and Snow Removal and Storm Cleanup NDA Supplemental Appropriation to the FY19 Operating Budget, Montgomery County Government: Snow Removal/Wind and Rain Storm Cleanup, Department of Transportation- $11,584,423; Department of General Services - $3,641,663 Supplemental Appropriation to the FY19 Capital Budget, Montgomery County Government: Resurfacing: Residential/Rural Roads - $3,885,000 PURPOSE: Develop recommendations on CIP amendments and on the above portions of the FY20 Operating Budget1 Those expected to attend this worksession include: Al Roshdieh, Director, DOT Emil Wolanin, Deputy Director, DOT Christopher Conklin, Deputy Director for Transportation Policy, DOT Tim Cupples, Chief, Division of Transportation Engineering, DOT Richard Dorsey, Chief, Division of Highway Services, DOT Dan Hibbert, Chief, Division of Transit Services, DOT Fred Lees, Chief, Management Services, DOT Michael Paylor, Chief, Division of Transportation Engineering and Operations, DOT Brady Goldsmith, Alison Dollar-Sibal, and Deborah Lambert, Budget Analysts, Office of Management and Budget (0MB) I. FY19-24 CIP: transportation amendments (except Parking Lot Districts) 1. Resurfacing: Residential/Rural Roads (©I-4). In January the Executive recommended accelerating $1 million from FY22 to FYI 9-for which he requested a supplemental appropriation-and accelerating $400,000 in FY23 and $ I million from FY24 to FY20. The six-year total would be unchanged.
    [Show full text]