DOCSLIB.ORG

Advisory Presentation

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Advisory Presentation 12/17/2010 Regional Transitway Guidelines Advisory Committee Meeting June 28, 2010 Information Resources • Met Council Web Site – http://www.metrocouncil.org/planning/transportation/transitways/i ndex.htm • “Working” Project Web Site 1 12/17/2010 Committee Reports • Background • Existing Conditions – In the Region – In Other Regions • DRAFT Guideline Concepts • Other, Related Guidelines Modes and Characteristics - Benchmarks Local Bus Express Bus with Transit Advantages 2 12/17/2010 Modes and Characteristics – Transitway Guidelines Station Spacing & Siting Background • Definitions – Station – including on-line and off-line – Central business district – Existing • Existing Laws & Requirements – Title VI & Environmental Justice – FTA Requirements 3 12/17/2010 2030 Transportation Policy Plan - Existing Regional Policy Appendix G: Transit Standards 2030 Park & Ride Plan – Chapter 5: Existing Regional Policy Site Location Criteria 4 12/17/2010 Station Spacing & Siting Existing Conditions Northstar Hiawatha- Cedar Ave Limited Station Commuter Central 35W BRT BRT Stop Characteristics Rail LRT Concept Concept Standard Minimum (mi) 2 0.5 1.5 0.7 0.5 Minimum Distance to CBD (mi) 5 na 2 2 na Primary access hwy/park&ride walk/transfer mix mix walk/transfer • Ridership per Station - Handout Northstar Commuter Rail KANABEC PINE Projected Northstar Station Market Areas BENTON M I L L E L A C S CHISAGO ISANTI STEARNS Northstar Link Lot ¨¦§94 SHERBURNE 0.5 65 0.5 É 8 0.5 0.5 ¤£ 0.5 0.5 ANOKA 0.5 0.5 35 0.5 0.5 0.5 ¨¦§ 0.5 0.5 0.5 10 ¤£ N O T G N I H S A W Big Lake Station 14 WRIGHT ¬« 0.5 0.75 0.5 0.75 169 MEEKER ¤£ 35W 0.5 94 ¨¦§ Elk River Station ¨¦§ 0.5 É610 0.33 ¨¦§35E 0.33 0.33 Anoka Station HENNEPIN 0.33 0.25 É252 0.25 0.25 ¤£61 0.25 0.25 10 0.25 ¤£ 0.25 RAMSEY Coon Rapids Riverdale Station 0.25 0.25 0.25 494 694 ¨¦§ É100 ¨¦§ ¤£12 Fridley Station 35E Station Market Areas (by TAZ) Facilities ¨¦§ É36 7-County Metro Area City/Township Big Lake St. Cloud NorthStar Link Park-and-Ride !à Coon Rapids - Riverdale Station ( Address matching Elk River Big Lake & Elk River (shared) (!à 19-County Metro Area Big Lake Station not available (!à Fridley Station Anoka Elk River & Anoka (shared) Elk River Station (!à (!à Data Collected: 9/2008 Coon Rapids Riverdale Map Created: 3/8/2010 Anoka & Coon Rapids (shared) Anoka Station 0 5 10 Fridley (!à Miles ¹ 5 12/17/2010 6 12/17/2010 BRT Station Spacing In Other Regions Miles between Stations BRT System Shortest Longest Average Cleveland – Health Line 0.13 0.5 0.2 Boston – Silver Line 0.1 1.9 0.32 Eugene – Emx 0.24 0.98 0.42 Las Vegas – MAX 0.25 1 0.5 Los Angeles – Metro Rapid 0.25 1 0.7 York Region – Viva 0.16 3.07 0.93 Pittsburgh 0.51 1.7 0.97 Los Angeles – Orange Line 0.54 2.2 1.1 Halifax – MetroLink 0.45 7.7 3.28 Practices for BRT Service - APTA 2008 Station Spacing In North America 7 12/17/2010 Commuter Rail Station Spacing in Other Regions 2007/8 Fare One-way Weekday wkdy 2009 Long 2009 cust Recovery track miles train trips Stations Ave Spacing ridership Dist Fare cost/mile Est. Sounder 74 18 9 8.22 9,300 $4.75 $0.06 23% TRE 34 49 9 3.78 9,300 $2.50 $0.07 7% Tri-Rail 72 50 18 4.00 14,000 $6.90 $0.10 18% Rail Runner 55 21 7 7.86 2,300 $7.00 $0.13 na ACE 90 8 10 9.00 3,000 $11.75 $0.13 28% Caltrain 77 98 32 2.41 36,993 $11.50 $0.15 41% Front Runner 38 73 7 5.43 4,100 $5.50 $0.14 15% Coaster 41 22 8 5.13 6,800 $6.50 $0.16 38% Northstar 2010 40 12 6 6.67 3,400 $7.00 $0.18 21% Metra 565 743 239 2.36 317,400 $8.05 na 45% Average 5.48 Shaded operate multiple lines skewing spacing ave LRT Stations • Spacing ¾ to 3 miles 8 12/17/2010 BRT Stations • Ave spacing ¾ mile • Based on capturing 85% of existing riders • MTA guideline 500 boardings per mile • FTA recommended 1,000 boardings per mile per Station Spacing & Siting Guidelines Concepts • See handouts – Station spacing minimum outside Minneapolis/St. Paul Central Business Districts – Closest station from Minneapolis/St. Paul Central Business Districts – Minimum daily boardings for station opening year forecast – Primary market analysis factors – Primary access and site location factors – Secondary access and site location factors **See next slide – Addition of stations 9 12/17/2010 Station Spacing & Siting For More Discussion • Station Siting Factors – Land availability – Land costs – Development plans – Mix of existing land uses – Available infrastructure (and cost of providing additional infrastructure) – Proximity to affordable housing – Size of transit-dependent population – Impact on transit operations and/or passenger travel time – Pedestrian access and cost to provide (i.e., need for pedestrian/bike bridge) – On-line vs. off-line stations Station Spacing & Siting Closely Related Guidelines • Service Operations – Competing routes – Transfers • Project Development, Governance, and Management – Travel demand and market forecasting and analysis methodologies • Stations & Facilities 10 12/17/2010 Questions or Comments? Vehicles Background • LRT and Commuter rail will be compatible with existing systems • Vehicle technology, styling, vendors, etc. are evolving quickly • Different BRTs may operate differently; universal vehicle may not work • Guidelines can’t be overly prescriptive 11 12/17/2010 Vehicles Background • BRT Station-to-Station and Arterial BRT vehicles for today’s discussion • Draft guidelines concepts, not final Vehicle Existing Conditions • Laws and regulations affecting vehicle guidelines – Buy America, Best Value, ADA Compliance • Regional policies and practices – Vehicle fleet policy – General fleet practices 12 12/17/2010 Vehicle Sizing and Seating • No one-size-fits-all solution • Important considerations in determining vehicle sizing and seating/standing amenities: – Passenger load standards/Peak loads – Passenger trip lengths (min/max/avg) – Ridership demand at end of 12-year vehicle life – Service characteristics (speed, maneuvering) Passenger Boarding • Boarding should be as quick and convenient as possible for all passengers • Considerations: – Wheelchair access innovation – Bicycle storage – Boarding demand at each station – Level boarding – Fare collection 13 12/17/2010 Customer Comfort and Safety • Light-rail vehicle feel compared to bus vehicle feel • Vehicles should create an open (comfortable) feeling inside – Natural or artificial lighting – Window size, number, type, tint – Color scheme Customer Comfort and Safety LRT Bus 14 12/17/2010 Interior and Exterior Styling • Vehicles should portray the fast, sleek, modern experience of bus rapid transit service • The bus rapid transit vehicle identity will be tied closely to branding color scheme, both interior and exterior BRT-Style Buses Gillig Hybrid Gillig BRT 15 12/17/2010 BRT-Style Buses New Flyer New Flyer BRT BRT-Style Buses New Flyer New Flyer BRT 16 12/17/2010 BRT-Style Buses NABI NABI BRT Interior Noise • Baseline decibel comparisons for Bus vs. LRT • Strive to achieve interior noise levels as similar to LRT as possible 17 12/17/2010 Other • Features of bus (customer information technology, security systems, etc.) should be integrated into the design of the bus as much as possible • Interior bike racks – Need multiple door boarding for ease of access – Need off-board fare collection for multiple door boarding – Peer examples indicate need articulated vehicle Remaining Topics • Cost considerations – Vehicle decision impacts on operating costs and capital facility costs – Cost of vehicle vs. regular fleet vehicle • Vehicle integration with std. fleet • Propulsion technologies – Hybrid, Electric 18 12/17/2010 Vehicle Summary and Next Steps • Handout with topic list • Continue close coordination with guidelines from other committees Questions or Comments? 19 12/17/2010 Advisory Committee Next Steps • Schedule of Technical Topics - Tentative – June: Vehicles; Station Spacing – July: Fare collection; Service Operations – August: No Meeting – September: Branding; Funding; Project Development, Governance, and Management – October: Runningway; Stations and Facilities; Technology – November/December: Review and comment on all draft guidelines – for recommendation to the Met Council to start the TPP amendment process Schedule -Tentative • Fall 2009 – Mar 2010: Project Initiation • April 2010: Project Kick-Off • April – Oct 2010: Develop Technical Content and Draft Guidelines • Oct - Dec 2010: Stakeholder Outreach 1 • Oct – Dec 2010: Revise Guidelines • Jan – April 2011: Finalize Guidelines and Adopt into TPP (Stakeholder Outreach 2) 20 12/17/2010 Guidelines Development Committees Station Spacing Leadership and Runningway and Siting Oversight Tom Thorstensen & Adam Harrington Arlene McCarthy Charles Carlson Service Stations and Operations Public Facilities John Levin & Tom Thorstensen & Cyndi Harper Advisory Charles Carlson Committee Identity and Vehicles Branding Jan Homan Bruce Howard Fare Collection Technology Project Funding Systems Gary Nyberg Amy Vennewitz Tom Randall Guidelines Advisory Committee Wendy Wulff, chair Met Council Kirstin Sersland Beach Met Council MTS Director Arlene McCarthy Comm. Peter McLaughlin - Henn Co Counties Transit Improvement Board Comm. Jim McDonough - Ramsey Co (CTIB) Comm. Dan Erhart - Anoka Co Suburban Transit Association (STA) Commissioner Will Branning – MVTA Chair Tim Henkel, Asst. Commissioner Planning Mn/DOT and Programming Transportation Advisory Board (TAB) Russ Stark, St. Paul City Council 21 12/17/2010 Technical Committee Deliverables • Technical memorandum including committee recommendation • Guidelines document Questions or Comments? 22 12/17/2010 Regional Transitway Guidelines Advisory Committee Meeting June 28, 2010 23.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 2019 Annual Regional Park-And-Ride System
    2019 ANNUAL REGIONAL PARK & RIDE SYSTEM REPORT JANUARY 2020 Prepared for: Metropolitan Council Metro Transit Minnesota Valley Transit Authority SouthWest Transit Maple Grove Transit Plymouth Metrolink Northstar Link Minnesota Department of Transportation Prepared by: Ari Del Rosario Metro Transit Engineering and Facilities, Planning and Urban Design Table of Contents Overview ......................................................................................................................................................3 Capacity Changes........................................................................................................................................6 System Capacity and Usage by Travel Corridor .........................................................................................7 Planned Capacity Expansion .......................................................................................................................8 About the System Survey ............................................................................................................................9 Appendix A: Facility Utilization Data .......................................................................................................10 Park & Ride System Data .....................................................................................................................10 Park & Pool System Data .....................................................................................................................14 Bike & Ride
    [Show full text]
  • Metro Transit: 2018 Annual Regional Park-And-Ride System Report
    2018 ANNUAL REGIONAL PARK-AND-RIDE SYSTEM REPORT JANUARY 2019 Prepared for: Metropolitan Council Metro Transit Minnesota Valley Transit Authority SouthWest Transit Maple Grove Transit Plymouth Metrolink Northstar Link Minnesota Department of Transportation Wisconsin Department of Transportation Prepared by: Emma Pickett Metro Transit Engineering and Facilities, Planning and Urban Design Table of Contents Overview ......................................................................................................................................................3 Capacity Changes........................................................................................................................................6 System Capacity and Usage by Travel Corridor .........................................................................................7 Planned Capacity Expansion .......................................................................................................................8 License Plate User Home Origin Data ........................................................................................................9 About the System Survey ..........................................................................................................................11 Appendix A: Facility Utilization Data .......................................................................................................12 Park-and-Ride System Data .................................................................................................................12
    [Show full text]
  • 2017 Annual Regional Park-And-Ride System Report
    2017 ANNUAL REGIONAL PARK-AND-RIDE SYSTEM REPORT JANUARY 2018 Prepared for: Metropolitan Council Metro Transit Minnesota Valley Transit Authority SouthWest Transit Maple Grove Transit Plymouth Metrolink Northstar Link Minnesota Department of Transportation Wisconsin Department of Transportation Prepared by: Soobin Choi Metro Transit Engineering and Facilities, Planning and Urban Design 2016 Annual Regional Park-and-Ride System Report | 1 Table of Contents Executive Summary .....................................................................................................................................3 Overview ......................................................................................................................................................6 Regional System Profile ...............................................................................................................................7 Capacity Changes........................................................................................................................................8 System Capacity and Usage by Travel Corridor .......................................................................................10 System Capacity and Usage by Transitway ..............................................................................................13 Facilities with Significant Utilization Changes ..........................................................................................15 Utlilization Increase in Large Facilities .................................................................................................15
    [Show full text]
  • TOD Adjacent to the Proposed Northstar Commuter Rail Stations Is Already Occurring and Gaining Momentum
    TOD adjacent to the proposed Northstar commuter rail stations is already occurring and gaining momentum. Station area TOD plans range from medium to high density residential units above street level retail, to town homes and senior housing, as well as to commercial office space and include structured parking areas. The cities of Anoka and Elk River have adopted development plans for the Commuter Rail Transit Village and the Elk River station respectively, which include all of these components. The cities of Fridley and Coon Rapids have each developed three different plans that include various combinations of these components and are currently in the process of evaluating options. Proposed plans for land adjacent to the Downtown Minneapolis Intermodal station include either a 1,000 condominium development alongside a professional baseball stadium, or a primarily residential project with 3,000 condominiums and no stadium. Appendix A.1 provides a summary of mix-use developments that are recently completed, under construction or proposed. TOD is occurring around the proposed station sites in response to market demand. Each station area in the Northstar Corridor has unique character, displaying a wide range of cultural activities, office development, housing development, retail businesses, educational institutions, industrial employment, transit use, and parking. A summary of station area planning activities for each of the stations included in the MOS is described in the following sections. This information is considered an update to the land use/economic development information presented in the DEIS and FEIS documents. The area around the six stations is zoned for medium and high-density residential housing and office/retail.
    [Show full text]
  • Transportation Committee Meeting Date: September 26, 2016 for the Metropolitan Council Meeting of September 28, 2016
    Business Item No. 2016-190-SW Transportation Committee Meeting date: September 26, 2016 For the Metropolitan Council meeting of September 28, 2016 Subject: Designation of potential TOD sites District(s), Member(s): Policy/Legal Reference: TOD Policy Staff Prepared/Presented: Brian Lamb, GM 612-349-7510 Lucy Galbraith, TOD Director 612 349-7669 Ed Petrie, Director of Finance 612-349-7624 Division/Department: Metro Transit/Transit Oriented Development Proposed Action That the Metropolitan Council designate the attached list of Council properties as potential TOD projects eligible for use of the TOD fund allocated to the TOD Office. Funds will be used for expenses necessary to pursue TOD opportunities on these sites. Examples of expenses include due diligence work such as title reports, surveys, appraisals, etc. Background It has been determined that the TOD Funding can be used for TOD projects designated by Council. At this time, only two sites have been so designated through Council approval of specific opportunities. These two are the Snelling site and the 38th Street Station site. Expenses related to these two projects are now allocated to the TOD Fund. The TOD Office has compiled a list of possible TOD sites from the Council’s property portfolio that might be suitable for development. In order to explore TOD potential, these sites requires varying tasks for due diligence that should be allocated to the TOD fund. This item will allow the preliminary exploration and any resulting standard competitive solicitation process for TOD sites. Any non-competitive proposed TOD project and any final decision concerning any specific TOD project would require separate Council action.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix H – Technical Memorandum on Capital Cost Estimates
    Northstar Commuter Rail Extension Feasibility Assessment Appendix H – Technical Memorandum on Capital Cost Estimates July 31, 2020 Photo Credit: Dave Gonzalez Prepared for by Northstar Commuter Rail Extension Feasibility Assessment Appendix H – Technical Memorandum on Capital Cost Estimates Table of Contents Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 1 Capital Cost Methodology..................................................................................................................... 1 2.1. Standard Cost Categories and Unit Costs ..................................................................................... 1 2.2. Assumptions for Proposed Capital Improvements ....................................................................... 1 2.2.1. Guideway & Track Elements ................................................................................................. 2 2.2.2. Stations, Stops, Terminals, Intermodals ............................................................................... 3 2.2.3. Support Facilities: Yards, Shops, Admin. Bldgs ..................................................................... 3 2.2.4. Sitework & Special Conditions .............................................................................................. 4 2.2.5. Systems ................................................................................................................................. 4 2.2.6. ROW, Land, Existing
    [Show full text]
  • A New Way to Connect to Travel Northstar Commuter Rail Community Ryan Quast Theoretical Premise
    A New Way To Connect To Travel Northstar Commuter Rail Community Ryan Quast Theoretical Premise This thesis examines how architecture can make mass transit more accessible and desirable to the public, while also taking the considerations of the public to mould the design into a more improved form and function. Specifically, it examines how making downtown areas accessible through public transportation and creating an on-site living population would enhance the lives of those that would be using the system. A key focus was to create a community of these on-site mass transit commuters that have ways of connecting amongst each other, while also connecting with the urban and suburban communities it neighbors and connects to. This transportation hub and multi-family living complex in the suburbs also looks to enhance the image of public transportation to that of an advanced transportation system that is both safe and reliable for the public. Case Studies D.A.R.T. (Dallas Area Rapid Transit) An example of how communities connected to a major downtown center thrive and create a huge economic benefit for those cities and its citizens The Residence at the COR The focus of a larger Ramsey, MN community that was similarly built along the Northstar Commuter Rail line. A larger community development than this thesis, it was largely a failure due to it being disconnected from transit and commercial developments Union Station: Raleigh’s Multi-Modal Transit Center A redesign of a large part of an older industrial district in Raleigh, North Carolina that took a modern approach amongst these historic buildings.
    [Show full text]
  • Northstar Corridor Rail Project
    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 NORTHSTAR CORRIDOR RAIL PROJECT Findings of Fact and Conclusions/ Final Section 4(f) Evaluation February 23, 2006 Minnesota Department of Transportation in cooperation with the Northstar Corridor Development Authority the Metropolitan Council and the Federal Transit Administration Northstar Project Office 155 Fifth Avenue South, Suite 755 Minneapolis, MN 55401 (612) 215-8200 TABLE OF CONTENTS STATEMENT OF ISSUE...........................................................................................................................1 FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS .........................................................................................1 1.0 ADMINISTRATIVE BACKGROUND........................................................................................1 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ..........................................................................................................3 3.0 CHANGES IN THE PROJECT SINCE THE EA/DRAFT 4(F) WAS RELEASED ...............4 4.0 ADDITIONS/CORRECTIONS TO THE EA/DRAFT 4(f) EVALUATION............................5 4.1 Alternative Definition…………………………………………………………………………...5 4.2 Farmlands Section........................................................................................................................5 4.3 Wetland Mitigation Plan..............................................................................................................5
    [Show full text]
  • Northstar Commuter Rail Extension Feasibility Assessment
    Northstar Commuter Rail Extension Feasibility Assessment Summary Report July 31, 2020 Photo Credit: Dave Gonzalez Prepared for by Northstar Commuter Rail Extension Feasibility Assessment Summary Report Table of Contents Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 1 Objective ............................................................................................................................................... 1 Existing Conditions ................................................................................................................................ 2 3.1. Technical Terms ............................................................................................................................ 2 3.2. Existing Conditions ........................................................................................................................ 5 3.2.1. St. Cloud to Big Lake .............................................................................................................. 6 3.2.2. Between CP Big Lake and CP Coon Creek ............................................................................. 6 3.2.3. CP Coon Creek and Target Field Station in Minneapolis ....................................................... 7 Alternatives Considered ........................................................................................................................ 8 Development of Operating Assumptions ..........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Green of the Irish BN Green Boats
    Volume 47 #3 Northstar Railway Historical Society March 2016 Publishers of the Minnesota Rail Calendar The Green of the Irish BN Green boats Left: SD-40-2’s lead a WB train in Fridley MN early 2000’s. Right: SD60M leads a WB freight in 2000 Everett WA Pics by R Tubbesing from Video Table of Contents Meeting Notice Meeting Notice Page 1 Next business meeting will be held on Officer Contact Directory Page 1, 2 Saturday March 19th 2016 6:30 pm, at Roseville Lutheran Church at 1215 Roselawn Avenue, midway between Lexington and Editors Column Page 2 Hamline Avenues in Roseville. See map on page 2. Siemens Installs Cummins Engine Page 2 January Meeting Minutes Page 3 Program after the meeting – February Meeting Minutes Page 3 Twin City Railroads Slides from the Past by John Kennedy. John is a St Cloud Commuter Extension Costs Page 3 fantastic photographer and we will be privileged to view some of his historical work. Student Trip on the Great Northern Part 2 Page 4, 5 CP to Cut Jobs Page 6 There will be a pre-meeting get-together January 9, 2016 at the Keys CP Pictures Page 6 Cafe and Bakery at the northeast corner of Lexington and Larpenteur RPCA Conference Part 2 Page 7 starting about 4:45 pm. PLEASE CALL Bob Clarkson at 651-636- Steam Locomotive #28 Progress Page 8 2323 and leave a message with your name and the number of persons coming with you. St Paul Union Depot Anniversary Celebration Page 9,10 Laker Rail Page 10 Thanks must go to H Martin Swan, first for his article and generous C&NW #1385 progress Page 10 donation to the chapter to fund our monthly meeting costs for 2016.
    [Show full text]
  • September 10, 2020 - 4:30 P.M
    1040 County Road 4, Saint Cloud, MN 56303-0643 T. 320.252.7568 F. 320.252.6557 AGENDA APO POLICY BOARD MEETING THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 10, 2020 - 4:30 P.M. VIRTUAL MEETING VIA ZOOM 1. Roll Call/Introductions 2. Approval of Agenda 3. Public Comment Period 4. Consideration of Consent Agenda Items (Attachments A - C) a. Approve Minutes of August 13, 2020 Policy Board Meeting (Attachment A) b. Approve Actual Bills Lists for August and Estimated Bills List for September and October (Attachments B1 – B2) c. Approve Contract for Mississippi River Bridge Planning Update (Attachment C) 5. Presentation on Northstar Rail Extension Feasibility Assessment (Attachment D1 & D2) Frank Loetterle, MnDOT Project Manager a. Suggested Action: None, discussion only 6. Other Business & Announcements 7. Adjournment E. [email protected] W. stcloudapo.org English The Saint Cloud Area Planning Organization (APO) fully complies with the Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, Executive Order 12898, Executive Order 13116 and related statutes and regulations. The APO is accessible to all persons of all abilities. A person who requires a modification or accommodation, auxiliary aids, translation services, interpreter services, etc., in order to participate in a public meeting, including receiving this agenda and/or attachments in an alternative format, or language please contact the APO at 320-252-7568 or at [email protected] at least seven (7) days in advance of the meeting. Somali Ururka Qorsheynta Agagaarka Saint Cloud (APO) waxay si buuxda ugu hoggaansantay Qodobka VI ee Xeerka Xuquuqda Dadweynaha ee 1964, Sharciga Dadka Maraykanka ah ee Naafada ah ee 1990, Amarka Fulinta 12898, Amarka Fulinta 13116 iyo xeerarka iyo sharciyada la xiriira.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 6: Transportation
    Chapter 6: Transportation Introduction The transportation network, like most utilities, is something most people use daily without really thinking about how it works. Most individuals are not interested in how the various components of the transportation network (roads, rails, trails and sidewalks) function with one another or how they relate to the feel and function of a community. Most people are just interested in how to get themselves or their goods from Point A to Point B with as little of delay as possible and as safe as possible. However, integrated transportation networks that support a healthy community do not just happen. Considerable thought and planning is needed to make a system work up to its full potential and to help support the type of community desired by residents. As noted above, the transportation network can have a significant impact on the feel and look of a community. There is a natural nexus between transportation and land use planning. Neither can be successful without taking the other into account. Transportation has certainly played a key role in how Elk River has developed today (river, railroad, TH 101, US 10 and US 169) and how it will grow and redevelop in the future. As such, its planning and the issues on the network are an important part of the City’s Comprehensive and Transportation Plans. As the city progresses into the future, the needs and demands of the transportation network are changing. What once was an auto-only focus has evolved to include important connections for transit, bicycling and walking. This section of the Comprehensive Plan provides background on basic network information, summarizes studies and analyses that have been completed since the last plan update, identifies ongoing issues and concerns, identifies planned improvements and suggests practices that can be used to address future needs.
    [Show full text]