DOCSLIB.ORG

Alternatives Analysis Final Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Alternatives Analysis Final Report Alternatives Analysis Final Report Prepared for the Gateway Corridor Commission By February 2013 This page intentionally left blank. Funding Partners This Alternatives Analysis Study was supported by funds from the Regional Railroad Authorities of Washington and Ramsey Counties (WCRRA and RCRRA, respectively), the Metropolitan Council, the Federal Transit Administration (FTA), and the Counties Transit Improvement Board. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS FINAL REPORT FEBRUARY 2013 FUNDING PARTNERS PAGE III This page intentionally left blank. FEBRUARY 2013 ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS FINAL REPORT PAGE IV FUNDING PARTNERS Acknowledgements Gateway Corridor Commission Mike Huggins, City of Eau Claire, WI Lisa Weik, Chair; WCRRA (alternate) Dean Johnston, Vice-Chair; City of Lake Dean Johnston, City of Lake Elmo Elmo Gary Kriesel, Washington County Rafael Ortega, RCRRA Brian Lamb, Metro Transit Randy Nelson, City of Afton Peg Larsen, City of Lakeland (alternate) Brian Zeller, City of Lakeland Scott McBride, Minnesota DOT Will Rossbach, City of Maplewood Arlene McCarthy, Metropolitan Council Paul Reinke, City of Oakdale (alternate) Kathy Lantry, City of St. Paul Tom McCarty, Eau Claire County, WI Dan Kyllo, West Lakeland Township (alternate) Mary Giuliani-Stephens, City of Harry Melander, Metropolitan Council Woodbury Randy Nelson, City of Afton Ex-Officio Members: 3M, Baytown Rafael Ortega, Ramsey County Township, Oakdale Business and Jackie Pavelski, City of Eau Claire, WI Professional Association, St. Paul Area Lowell Prange, City of Menomonie, WI Chamber of Commerce, Wisconsin Tim Ramberg, St. Croix County, WI Gateway Corridor Coalition, Woodbury Steve Rasmussen, Dunn County, WI Chamber of Commerce (alternate) Paul Reinke, City of Oakdale Regional Railroad Authorities Will Rossbach, City of Maplewood Andy Gitzlaff, Washington County Carmen Sarrack, City of Oakdale Lyssa Leitner, Washington County (alternate) Ted Schoenecker, Washington County Ann Schell, W. Central WI Reg. Mike Rogers, Ramsey County Planning Com./Chippewa-Eau Claire MPO (alternate) Policy Advisory Committee Jayson Smith, Chippewa Falls, WI Mike Amundson, Baytown Township Pat Snyder, City of Afton Thomas Beekman, Wisconsin DOT Bruce Stelzner, Chippewa County, WI Pat Bursaw, Minnesota DOT (alternate) Raymond Stevens, West Lakeland Richard Creaser, W. Central WI Reg. Township Planning Com. Peter Wagenius, City of Minneapolis Erin Dady, City of St. Paul Lisa Weik, WCRRA (alternate) James Dunning, Eau Claire County, WI Brian Zeller, City of Lakeland Jeff Durkee, St. Croix County (alternate) Randy Eide, City of Menomonie, WI Technical Advisory Committee (alternate) Jeff Abboud, Wisconsin DOT Sally Eral, City of Landfall Chuck Ahl, City of Maplewood Dan Fedderley, Dunn County, WI Brian Amundson, City of Eau Claire, WI Mike Golat, City of Altoona, WI Mike Amundson, Baytown Township Mary Giuliani-Stephens, City of Ann Schell, W. Central WI Reg. Woodbury Planning Com./Chippewa-Eau Claire Leif Halverson, City of Hudson MPO Bill Hargis, City of Woodbury Dave Schultz, West Lakeland Township Frederick Horne, City of New Richmond, Pat Snyder, Afton WI Brian Bachmeier, City of Oakdale ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS FINAL REPORT FEBRUARY 2013 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS PAGE V Robert Barbian, City of New Richmond, Bob Streetar, City of Oakdale (alternate) WI Jay Tappen, W. Central WI Reg. Mully Brenden, Dunn County, WI Planning Com. (alternate) (alternate) Scott Thompson, Metro Transit Mark Bristol, Union Pacific Railroad Rodney Thorson, Eau Claire County, WI Charles Carlson, Metro Transit (alternate) (alternate) Bill Wheeler, Federal Transit Tracy Carlson, City of Baldwin, WI Administration Dennis Darnold, City of Hudson, WI Kimberly Zlimen, Hennepin County Jeff Durkee, St. Croix County, WI (alternate) Klayton Eckles, City of Woodbury (alternate) Randy Eide, City of Menomonie, WI Consulting Team Steve Elmer, Metropolitan Council Sally Eral, City of Landfall Marcus Evans, Eau Claire County, WI Doug Abere Blake Fry, River Falls, WI Carlos Alvarado Bill Goff, Minnesota DOT Stephanie Eiler Mike Golat, City of Altoona, WI Nikki Farrington Adam Harrington, Metro Transit Mary Gute (alternate) Carlos Salas Brian Isaacson, Minnesota DOT Jonathan Spencer David Jessup, City of Woodbury Don Ulrich Richard Kern, Chippewa County, WI Kyle Klatt, City of Lake Elmo Steve Kotke, City of Minneapolis Connie Kozlak, Metropolitan Council (alternate) Dan Krom, Minnesota DOT (alternate) Mark Dierling Allen Lovejoy, City of St. Paul Chris Hiniker Judy Mitchell, Canadian Pacific Railroad Scott Hotchkin Susan Moe, Federal Highway Mike Steuernagel Administration Mark Nagel, Lakeland Doug Perry, BNSF Railway Don Emerson Don Pflaum, City of Minneapolis Tim Rosenberger Lowell Prange, City of Menomonie, WI Steve Ruegg (alternate) Tim Ramberg, St. Croix County, WI Jesse Rintala, Dunn County, WI Maurice Roers, Metro Transit (alternate) Charleen Zimmer Rick Rubenzer, Chippewa Falls, WI Ross Spitz, City of Eau Claire, WI Ryan Stempski, City of Lake Elmo Angela Popenhagen FEBRUARY 2013 ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS FINAL REPORT PAGE VI ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Supporting Documentation (available under separate cover) 1. Gateway Corridor Coordination Plan, February 2011 2. Public Involvement Plan, February 2011 3. Federal Transit Administration Initiation Package, February 2012 4. Detailed Definition of Alternatives Report, June 2012 5. Final Detailed Definition of Alternatives Report, August 2012 6. Capital Cost Estimating Methodology & Results Report, August 2012 7. Environmental and Community Impact Assessment Methodology & Results Report, August 2012 8. Evaluation Criteria Technical Memorandum, May 2011 9. Evaluation of Alternatives with Analysis Results Methodology Report, August 2012 10. Land Use Technical Methodology & Results Report, August 2012 11. Operating and Maintenance Cost Estimating Methodology and Results Report, August 2012 12. Traffic Analysis Methodology & Results Report, August 2012 13. Travel Demand Forecasting Methodology & Results Report, August 2012 14. Summary of Comments from the Draft Gateway Corridor Alternatives Analysis Final Report, January 2013 ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS FINAL REPORT FEBRUARY 2013 SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION PAGE IX This page intentionally left blank. FEBRUARY 2013 ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS FINAL REPORT PAGE X SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION Contents Funding Partners ....................................................................................................................... iii Acknowledgements .................................................................................................................... v Gateway Corridor Commission ......................................................................................... v Regional Railroad Authorities ............................................................................................ v Policy Advisory Committee ............................................................................................... v Technical Advisory Committee .......................................................................................... v Consulting Team .............................................................................................................. vi Supporting Documentation (available under separate cover) ............................................... ix Executive Summary .............................................................................................................. ES-1 Introduction and Project Background .......................................................................... ES-1 Report Purpose ........................................................................................................... ES-1 Public and Agency Involvement .................................................................................. ES-2 Problem Statement, Goals and Objectives ................................................................. ES-3 Alternatives Considered, Defined, and Evaluated ....................................................... ES-4 Alternative Refinements and Optimization ................................................................ ES-10 Alternatives to Advance into Draft Environmental Impact Statement ........................ ES-12 Next Steps: Gateway Alternatives Advance into Project Development ..................... ES-14 1. Introduction .................................................................................................................. 1-1 1.1 Study Purpose .................................................................................................... 1-1 1.2 FTA New Starts Process .................................................................................... 1-2 1.3 Study Area .......................................................................................................... 1-3 1.3.1 Land Use ................................................................................................ 1-3 1.3.2 Transportation......................................................................................... 1-4 1.3.3 Regional Connections............................................................................. 1-5 1.4 Previously Completed Studies and Reports ....................................................... 1-6 1.5 Gateway AA Overview ....................................................................................... 1-8 2. Public and Agency Involvement
Load more

Recommended publications
  • East Metro Rail Capacity Study October 2012
    EAST METRO RAIL CAPACITY STUDY OCTOBER 2012 PREPARED FOR: IN PARTNERSHIP WITH: PREPARED BY: East Metro Rail Capacity Study Prepared for Ramsey County Regional Railroad Authority in partnership with Red Rock Corridor Commission By the Study Team of: TranSystems Corporation Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Rani Engineering The 106 Group Ltd. American Engineering Testing, Inc. LTK Engineering Services David Simpson Consultants HAD-Rail Consulting Services David Evans and Associates, Inc. Table of Contents Definitions Abbreviations EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................. ES-1 1.0 Study Background and Purpose .................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Study Area .................................................................................................................................... 3 1.2 Project Partners ............................................................................................................................ 3 1.3 Scope of Study .............................................................................................................................. 6 2.0 Study Process ................................................................................................................................ 7 2.1 Project Development Process ....................................................................................................... 7 2.2 Study
    [Show full text]
  • State Rail Plan
    State Rail Plan DRAFT MARCH 2015 CONTACT LIST MnDOT Dave Christianson, Project Manager Office of Freight and Commercial Vehicle Operations [email protected] 651-366-3710 Dan Krom, Director Passenger Rail Office [email protected] 651-366-3193 Consultant Team Andreas Aeppli, Project Manager Cambridge Systematics, Inc. [email protected] 617-234-0433 Brian Smalkoski Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. [email protected] 651-643-0472 MINNESOTA GO STATEWIDE RAIL PLAN Draft Plan PAGE i TABLE OF CONTENTS CONTACT LIST ............................................................................................................................................. I TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................................................ II EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................. VII Overview of the Study .................................................................................................................................... vii Context of the 2015 Rail Plan Update ........................................................................................................... viii The Vision for Minnesota’s Multimodal Transportation System ...................................................................... ix Minnesota’s Existing and Future Rail System .................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Minnesota Comprehensive Statewide Freight and Passenger Rail Plan
    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 Minnesota Comprehensive Statewide Freight and Passenger Rail Plan Draft Final Report December 2009 Minnesota Comprehensive Statewide Freight and Passenger Rail Plan draft final report Minnesota Comprehensive Statewide Freight and Passenger Rail Plan prepared for Minnesota Department of Transportation prepared by Cambridge Systematics, Inc. with Kimley Horn and Associates, Inc. TKDA, Inc. December 2009 Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Minnesota Comprehensive Statewide Freight and Passenger Rail Plan Table of Contents Executive Summary ................................................................................................................... ES-1 Vision for Rail...................................................................................................................... ES-2 System Costs ..................................................................................................................... ES-5 Passenger Rail Performance and Benefits ......................................................................... ES-5 Rail System Development and Funding Responsibilities .................................................... ES-6 1 Overview and Vision ........................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Background and Purpose of Study .........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Freight Tech Memo
    Minnesota Comprehensive Statewide Freight and Passenger Rail Plan Freight and Passenger Rail System Planning draft technical memorandum 4 prepared for Minnesota Department of Transportation prepared by Cambridge Systematics, Inc. with Kimley Horn & Associates August 2009 www.camsys.com technical memorandum Minnesota Comprehensive Statewide Freight and Passenger Rail Plan Freight and Passenger Rail System Planning Technical Memorandum prepared for Minnesota Department of Transportation prepared by Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 100 CambridgePark Drive, Suite 400 Cambridge, Massachusetts 02140 August 2009 Minnesota Comprehensive Statewide Freight and Passenger Rail Plan Freight and Passenger Rail System Planning Technical Memorandum Table of Contents Executive Summary .............................................................................................................. ES-1 1.0 Objective ........................................................................................................................ 1-1 2.0 Methodology ................................................................................................................. 2-1 3.0 Existing and Projected Rail Demand........................................................................ 3-1 4.0 Freight/Passenger Rail Capacity and Constraints .................................................. 4-1 5.0 Conclusion ..................................................................................................................... 5-1 6.0 Sources...........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Freight Tech Memo
    Minnesota Comprehensive Statewide Freight and Passenger Rail Plan Freight Rail Supply and Demand draft technical memorandum prepared for Minnesota Department of Transportation prepared by Cambridge Systematics, Inc. July 31, 2009 www.camsys.com Part One Freight Rail Supply technical memorandum Minnesota Comprehensive Statewide Freight and Passenger Rail Plan Freight Rail Supply Technical Memorandum prepared for Minnesota Department of Transportation prepared by Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 100 CambridgePark Drive, Suite 400 Cambridge, Massachusetts 02140 July 31, 2009 Minnesota Comprehensive Statewide Freight and Passenger Rail Plan Freight Rail Supply Technical Memorandum Table of Contents Executive Summary .............................................................................................................. ES-1 1.0 Objective ........................................................................................................................ 1-1 2.0 Methodology ................................................................................................................. 2-1 3.0 Freight Rail System Infrastructure ............................................................................ 3-1 3.1 Class I Rail Lines ................................................................................................... 3-3 3.2 Regional and Shortline Railroads ....................................................................... 3-18 3.3 Industrial Railroads .............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Minnesota Comprehensive Statewide Freight and Passenger Rail Plan
    Minnesota Comprehensive Statewide Freight and Passenger Rail Plan Final Report February 2010 Minnesota Department of Transportation Transportation Building 395 John Ireland Boulevard Saint Paul, MN 55155 February 9, 2010 Dear Citizens of Minnesota, I am pleased to share with you this adopted Minnesota Comprehensive Statewide Freight and Passenger Rail Plan. This plan is the result of extensive collaboration during the past year between the Minnesota Department of Transportation and citizens, stakeholders and partners throughout Minnesota. I want to thank everyone who took the time to participate in our outreach meetings and provide comments and suggestions on the draft plan. The Comprehensive Statewide Freight and Passenger Rail Plan establishes a vision for rail in Minnesota. A vibrant freight rail system, together with a comprehensive passenger rail system, will help ensure Minnesota economic competitiveness and quality of life. As the state's transportation leader, Mn/DOT embraces its responsibility to uphold the vision and policies presented in this plan. The success of Minnesota's transportation system depends on the coordinated efforts of many public and private providers, and the policies and strategies outlined in this plan provide the framework for our joint efforts. Mn/DOT will continue to look for opportunities to involve citizens, stakeholders and partners in the implementation of this plan and in future investment and policy decisions. Together, we can realize the shared vision of a safe, efficient and sustainable transportation system. Sincerely, Thomas K. Sorel Commissioner An Equal Opportunity Employer Minnesota Comprehensive Statewide Freight and Passenger Rail Plan final report Minnesota Comprehensive Statewide Freight and Passenger Rail Plan prepared for Minnesota Department of Transportation prepared by Cambridge Systematics, Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • State Rail Plan
    State Rail Plan DRAFT MARCH 2015 CONTACT LIST MnDOT Dave Christianson, Project Manager Office of Freight and Commercial Vehicle Operations [email protected] 651-366-3710 Dan Krom, Director Passenger Rail Office [email protected] 651-366-3193 Consultant Team Andreas Aeppli, Project Manager Cambridge Systematics, Inc. [email protected] 617-234-0433 Brian Smalkoski Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. [email protected] 651-643-0472 MINNESOTA GO STATEWIDE RAIL PLAN Draft Plan PAGE i TABLE OF CONTENTS CONTACT LIST ............................................................................................................................................. I TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................................................ II EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................. VII Overview of the Study .................................................................................................................................... vii Context of the 2015 Rail Plan Update ........................................................................................................... viii The Vision for Minnesota’s Multimodal Transportation System ...................................................................... ix Minnesota’s Existing and Future Rail System .................................................................................................
    [Show full text]