MIDTOWN CORRIDOR ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS FINAL REPORT APRIL 2014 TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary i Introduction 1 Study Area Existing Conditions 7 Project Goals 11 Initial Alternatives 15 Concept Development 21 Results & Evaluation 30 Locally Preferred Alternative Recommendation 37 Next Steps 41 For additional project information, please see online project library Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Midtown Corridor Alternatives Analysis throughout the AA process to guide the project meets these needs The following five broad goals (AA) evaluated the benefits, costs, and impacts Besides the formal committee structure, the were established to guide the project process: of implementing a transitway in the Midtown process also included a multitude of public out- Corridor – a corridor located in the City of Min- reach and events all designed to meet people 1. Increase transit use among the growing neapolis, Minnesota The study was initiated to ‘where they were’ (i e , at community events and number of corridor residents, employees, and identify a transit alternative that best meets the neighborhood gatherings) instead of insisting the visitors transportation needs of the local community in public come to the project terms of technical feasibility, costs, and benefits 2. Improve corridor equity with better mobility and access to jobs and activities Project Purpose and Goals Project Process and Public 3. Catalyze and support housing and economic Involvement The purpose of the Midtown Corridor Transitway development along the corridor Project is to provide transit service that meets cur- The AA was an 18 month collaborative effort rent and future travel needs, attracts new riders, 4. Develop a cost-effective transitway that is between Metro Transit, the City of Minneapo- connects users with job centers and key desti- well-positioned for implementation lis, Hennepin County, the Metropolitan Council nations, and supports environmentally sustain- and multiple community businesses, groups able growth and development The AA sought to 5. Build upon the vibrancy and diversity of the and stakeholders Stakeholders from these determine the type of transit investment that best corridor by supporting healthy, active com- groups staffed four project committees that met munities and the environment ) n o i Study Area s n e Blue Line LRT t x Lake of the Isles E e in L Hennepin Ave Bloomington Bloomington Lyndale Ave Lyndale Ave Nicollet Chicago Ave Ave Cedar n I-35W Ave Portland e re (G Midtown Greenway T LR W S Lake Street Lake Calhoun = Transit Center 0 0.25 miles 0.5 Executive Summary i Determining the Alternatives Also, an enhanced bus extension was designed analysis demonstrated that the dual alternative, and studied in response to stakeholder feedback with the enhanced bus extension, was the stron- The project initially considered ten transitway The enhanced bus extension extended transit gest alternative Public feedback from a series of alternatives Each one combined an alignment service from the project study area into Saint Paul public meetings and an online survey supported within the corridor –Lake Street, the Midtown to connect with the METRO Green Line LRT this conclusions Greenway, or both – with a transit mode The 10 initial combinations are shown below Analyzing the Alternatives Project Outcome: Locally Alternatives Initially Under Consider- Preferred Alternative ation The study analyzed the benefits, costs, and impacts of the three most promising alternatives Recommendation and the enhanced bus extension The cost esti- Lake Street After reviewing the technical results and listening mate and ridership projections are highlighted 1. Enhanced Bus to feedback from the project committees and the on the next page 2. Streetcar public, the project’s Policy Advisory Committee (PAC) unanimously recommended the dual alter- 3. Light Rail Transit (LRT) Evaluating the Alternatives native, with the enhanced bus extension to Saint 4. Dedicated Busway Paul, as the locally preferred alternative (LPA) for The results of each alternative’s benefits, costs, and the Midtown Corridor Midtown Greenway impacts were comparatively evaluated against 5. Double/Single-Track Rail each other The results of the technical 6. Full Double-Track Rail 7. Dedicated Busway 8. Personal Rapid Transit 9. Commuter Rail 10. Streetcar Lake Street/Greenway Loop A collaborative, iterative process, based on dis- cussions with stakeholders, was used to narrow down the initial set of alternatives down to the three most promising alternatives within the cor- ridor Those alternatives were: • Enhanced bus on Lake Street • Double/single-track rail in the Greenway • Dual alternative (i e , a combination of enhanced bus on Lake Street and rail in the Greenway) Midtown Corridor Lake Street ii Executive Summary Cost Estimates Next Steps Capital Operating The Metropolitan Council is in the process of Alternative Costs Costs (annual) updating the region’s Transportation Policy Plan, which guides the development of the region’s Enhanced Bus $50 million $7 million transportation system The Midtown Corridor LPA will be incorporated into the Transportation Pol- Rail $185 - 220 million $8 million icy Plan during this planning process Due to the funding constraints facing the region, the corridor Dual $215 - 250 million $15 million will mostly likely appear as an unfunded corridor in the 2014 Transportation Policy Plan update Ridership Projections (Year 2030) However, it is possible that the project will move forward in phases Considering the funding situa- Local Enhanced Bus Corridor Alternative Rail tion, it is likely that the enhanced bus alignment, Bus Study Extended Total the less expensive portion of the project, will be Area Corridor implemented first Existing (2012) 14,600 – – – 14,600 Also, as one of the earlier steps on the way towards 394 DOWNTOWN Enhanced Bus 8,500 – 11,000 3,000 MINNEAPOLIS22,500 the implementation of a transitway, the AA pro- cess is designed to study a corridor at a relatively Rail 9,500 11,000 – – W FRANKLIN AVE 20,500 GREEN LINE LRT high-level 94 Future phases of study will addressUniversity/ the project in greater detail Spruce Tree Dual Alignment394 6,000 9,500 8,500 8,000 32,000 SOUTHWEST LRT DOWNTOWN th W 26TH ST (GREEN LINE EXTENSION) Calhoun Hennepin Lyndale Nicollet 5 Chicago Bloomington Minnehaha MINNEAPOLISBeach Ave S Ave Ave Ave Ave Ave Ave Cleveland 31st Ave 44th Ave Otis Ave Ave Fry Street The Dual Alternative + Enhanced Bus Extension LAKE STREET W FRANKLIN AVE GREEN LINE LRT Portland Bloomington Cedar West Lake Hennepin Nicollet 94 36th Ave E 32ND ST Cretin Ave Fairview Ave Ave Ave Ave Ave University/ Station Ave S Spruce Tree Dupont Lyndale I-35 Chicago Midtown 1/2-MILE BUFFER SUMMIT AVE LAKE Ave Ave S (Stevens/2nd) Ave Station CALHOUN R SOUTHWEST LRT E th ORANGE LINE BRT W 36TH ST W 26TH ST V (GREEN LINE EXTENSION) Calhoun Hennepin Lyndale Nicollet 5 Chicago Bloomington Minnehaha I R Beach EXCELSIOR BLVDAve Ave Ave Ave Ave I Ave S Ave P P ClevelandI 35W S S 31st Ave 44th Ave Otis Ave I Ave Fry Street S SNELLING AVE S I 55 BLUE LINE M HENNEPIN AVE LAKE STREET LRT LYNDALE AVE LYNDALE CHICAGO AVE CHICAGO NICOLLET AVE BLOOMINGTON AVE BLOOMINGTON Hennepin Nicollet Portland Bloomington Cedar E 32ND ST West Lake Ave Ave Ave 36th Ave Cretin Ave Fairview Ave Station Ave S Ave Dupont Lyndale I-35 Chicago Midtown 1/2-MILE BUFFER SUMMIT AVE LAKE Ave Ave S (Stevens/2nd) Ave Station CALHOUN R E ORANGE LINE BRT W 36TH ST V I R EXCELSIOR BLVD I Legend P P I 35W S S Double/SingleI Track and Station S SNELLING AVE S EnhancedI Bus Alternative 55 BLUE LINE M HENNEPIN AVE Intermodal 0 1500 3000 6000 LRT LYNDALE AVE LYNDALE CHICAGO AVE CHICAGO NICOLLET AVE Enhanced Bus Extension Station BLOOMINGTON AVE BLOOMINGTON Executive Summary iii Legend Double/Single Track and Station Enhanced Bus Alternative 0 1500 3000 6000 Intermodal Enhanced Bus Extension Station This page left intentionally blank iv INTRODUCTION Metro Transit, in partnership with Hennepin County and the City of Minneapolis, conducted an 18-month alternatives analysis (AA) to identify possible transit improvements in the Midtown Corridor The study was initiated to identify a transit alternative that best meets the transpor- tation needs of the local community in terms of technical feasibility, costs, and benefits The proj- ect study area is shown in Figure 1 The AA was collaborative effort between Metro Transit, the City of Minneapolis, Hennepin County, the Metropolitan Council and multiple community businesses, groups and stakeholders How to Use this Document This report provides a high level overview of the AA process Detailed technical documenta- tion and technical results are contained in the project’s technical memorandums and appen- dices These documents are referenced with hyperlinks throughout the document Click- ing a hyperlink will download a PDF of the referenced material All project documenta- tion can also be found at the project website: www.midtowntransitway.org A view of the Midtown Exchange Building and surrounding neighborhood in the Midtown Corridor Introduction 1 Figure 1: Study Area 2 Introduction What Is an Alternatives Analysis (AA)? An AA is a planning study that follows Federal Transit Administration (FTA) guidelines to develop and evaluate transit alternatives An AA analyzes the benefits, cost and impacts associated with various transit alternatives and is the first step towards federal funding of a transitway project AA Study Process: The 18 month AA study process fell