DOCSLIB.ORG

2020 Transit Investment Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
2020 Transit Investment Report METROPOLITAN AREA TRANSIT FINANCE REPORT February 2021 The Council’s mission is to foster efficient and economic growth for a prosperous metropolitan region Metropolitan Council Members Charlie Zelle Chair Raymond Zeran District 9 Judy Johnson District 1 Peter Lindstrom District 10 Reva Chamblis District 2 Susan Vento District 11 Christopher Ferguson District 3 Francisco J. Gonzalez District 12 Deb Barber District 4 Chai Lee District 13 Molly Cummings District 5 Kris Fredson District 14 Lynnea Atlas-Ingebretson District 6 Phillip Sterner District 15 Robert Lilligren District 7 Wendy Wulff District 16 Abdirahman Muse District 8 The Metropolitan Council is the regional planning organization for the seven-county Twin Cities area. The Council operates the regional bus and rail system, collects and treats wastewater, coordinates regional water resources, plans and helps fund regional parks, and administers federal funds that provide housing opportunities for low- and moderate-income individuals and families. The 17-member Council board is appointed by and serves at the pleasure of the governor. On request, this publication will be made available in alternative formats to people with disabilities. Call Metropolitan Council information at 651-602-1140 or TTY 651-291-0904. Table of Contents Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 1 Transit’s value in a growing region ............................................................................................ 1 COVID-19 creates uncertainty for transit operations ................................................................. 1 The Regional Transit System ........................................................................................................ 3 Transit services ......................................................................................................................... 4 Transit ridership ......................................................................................................................... 5 Capacity Analysis .......................................................................................................................... 6 Existing transit system ............................................................................................................... 6 New dedicated transitways ........................................................................................................ 6 Arterial Bus Rapid Transitways ................................................................................................. 6 Other transit ............................................................................................................................... 7 Revenue and expenditure assumptions .................................................................................... 7 Capacity analysis summary ..................................................................................................... 11 Conclusions ............................................................................................................................. 31 Route Performance ..................................................................................................................... 33 Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 33 Performance standards ........................................................................................................... 33 Performance measures ........................................................................................................... 33 Appendix A – Legislative Request .............................................................................................. 47 Appendix B – Summaries: Transitway and BRT Projects in Operation, Construction or Development ............................................................................................................................... 50 METRO Blue Line (Hiawatha Light Rail Transit) ..................................................................... 50 Northstar Commuter Rail ......................................................................................................... 55 METRO Red Line Highway Bus Rapid Transit (Cedar Avenue Transitway) ........................... 60 METRO Green Line (Central Corridor) Light Rail Transit ..................................................... 64 A Line (Snelling Avenue Arterial Bus Rapid Transit) ............................................................... 69 C Line (Penn Avenue Arterial Bus Rapid Transit) ................................................................... 73 METRO Orange Line (I-35W South Highway Bus Rapid Transit) ........................................... 77 METRO Green Line Extension (Southwest Light Rail Transit) .............................................. 82 METRO Blue Line Extension (Bottineau Light Rail Transit) ................................................... 86 METRO Gold Line (Gateway Corridor Dedicated Bus Rapid Transit) ..................................... 90 Riverview Corridor Modern Streetcar ...................................................................................... 98 D Line (Chicago-Emerson-Fremont Arterial Bus Rapid Transit) ........................................... 102 Appendix C – Summaries: Corridors with Study Recommendations – Incomplete Funding Plan .................................................................................................................................................. 106 METRO B Line (Lake / Marshall / Selby Arterial Bus Rapid Transit)..................................... 106 E Line (Hennepin/France Avenue Arterial Bus Rapid Transit) .............................................. 110 Nicollet-Central Modern Streetcar ......................................................................................... 114 METRO Red Line Highway Bus Rapid Transit (Cedar Avenue Transitway) – Future Stages .............................................................................................................................................. 118 Midtown Corridor Rail ........................................................................................................... 122 Red Rock Corridor Highway Bus Rapid Transit .................................................................... 125 West Broadway Modern Streetcar ........................................................................................ 129 Highway 169 Mobility Study (Highway Bus Rapid Transit).................................................... 132 Appendix D – Summaries: Corridors without Study Recommendations ................................... 135 Robert Street Corridor ........................................................................................................... 135 METRO Orange Line Extension ............................................................................................ 140 Ford Corridor ......................................................................................................................... 143 Appendix E – Intercity Passenger Rail Corridors ...................................................................... 145 Northern Lights Express (NLX) - Minneapolis to Duluth High Speed Passenger Rail .......... 145 Twin Cities-Milwaukee-Chicago Intercity Passenger Rail Service Phase 1 Study ................ 149 Twin Cities to Milwaukee Portion - High Speed Rail Corridor to Chicago .......................... 153 Appendix F – Other Transit ....................................................................................................... 156 University of Minnesota ......................................................................................................... 156 Minnesota Department of Transportation – Team Transit ..................................................... 157 Appendix G – Transit System Financial Summary ................................................................... 159 Appendix H – Regional Route Performance Data Summaries ................................................. 160 2017 Route Performance Detail ............................................................................................ 160 2018 Route Performance Detail ............................................................................................ 174 2019 Route Performance Detail ............................................................................................ 189 Introduction In 2010, the Minnesota Legislature adopted Minn. Stat. 174.93, which required the Minnesota Department of Transportation to prepare, in collaboration with the Metropolitan Council, a biennial report on the status of “guideway” projects in the state, with an emphasis on funding sources and project progress. MnDOT, with the Council’s assistance, produced four versions of the Guideway Status report in 2012, 2013, 2015, and 2017. In 2017 (HF3, Ch. 3, Art. 3, Sec. 104), the legislature amended the statute to require that the Council, rather than MnDOT, prepare the report, and that the report take a transit system view as well as a project view. It also required inclusion of comprehensive financial information for the metropolitan area transit system projected out over ten years. The first iteration of this new report was produced in October 2018; this is the second. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the
Load more

Recommended publications
  • EQUITY CONSIDERATIONS for PLACE-BASED DECISIONS and ADVOCACY User Guide
    EQUITY CONSIDERATIONS FOR PLACE-BASED DECISIONS AND ADVOCACY User Guide The Council’s mission is to foster efficient and economic growth for a prosperous metropolitan region Metropolitan Council Members Charlie Zelle Chair Raymond Zeran District 9 Judy Johnson District 1 Peter Lindstrom District 10 Reva Chamblis District 2 Susan Vento District 11 Christopher Ferguson District 3 Francisco J. Gonzalez District 12 Deb Barber District 4 Chai Lee District 13 Molly Cummings District 5 Kris Fredson District 14 Lynnea Atlas-Ingebretson District 6 Phillip Sterner District 15 Robert Lilligren District 7 Wendy Wulff District 16 Abdirahman Muse District 8 The Metropolitan Council is the regional planning organization for the seven-county Twin Cities area. The Council operates the regional bus and rail system, collects and treats wastewater, coordinates regional water resources, plans and helps fund regional parks, and administers federal funds that provide housing opportunities for low- and moderate-income individuals and families. The 17-member Council board is appointed by and serves at the pleasure of the governor. On request, this publication will be made available in alternative formats to people with disabilities. Call Metropolitan Council information at 651-602-1140 or TTY 651-291-0904. Contents Foreword ................................................................................................................................................ i Engagement completes the Equity Considerations dataset ..................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 147Th Street Station Area Sustainability Master Plan Acknowledgements
    147th Street Station Area Sustainability Master Plan Acknowledgements Humphrey School of Public Affairs Master of Urban and Regional Planning Capstone Project in cooperation with The City of Apple Valley, Minnesota May 13, 2011 Special Thanks to City of Apple Valley Staff: PA 8081 -- Sustainability Capstone Project Bruce Nordquist -- Community Development Director Tom Lovelace -- City Planner Henry Stroud, Justin Svingen, Jill Townley, and Katie Young Kathy Bodmer -- Associate City Planner with the support of Assistant Professor Carissa Schively Margaret Dykes -- Associate City Planner Slotterback, PhD Barbara Wolff -- Department Assistant Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY i CHAPTER 1 : INTRODUCTION 1 BACKGROUND 1 PURPOSE OF THE PLAN 7 PLANNING PROCESS 7 CHAPTER 2 : VISION AND MASTER PLAN 11 OPPORTUNITIES AND CONTRAINTS 12 VISION STATEMENT AND GOALS 12 PROPOSED LAND USE CONCEPT 13 CHAPTER 3 : ECONOMICS 21 CHAPTER 4 : LIVABILITY 33 CHAPTER 5 : SOCIAL EQUITY 49 CHAPTER 6 : THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT 63 CHAPTER 7 : SUMMARY 81 PHASING 82 RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY TABLE 83 APPENDIX 87 Endnotes 88 Works Cited 90 147th STREET STATION AREA SUSTAINABILITY MASTER PLAN i 147th STREET STATION AREA SUSTAINABILITY MASTER PLAN Executive Summary Background Station Area Context The City of Apple Valley is planning for change along the Cedar This plan focuses specifically on the walk-up station that will be Avenue corridor with the introduction of the State of Minnesota’s located just north of the intersection of 147th Street and Cedar first Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) system. BRT is an enhanced bus Avenue. The Station Area is defined as a ½ mile radius, with its system that combines the advantages often associated with light origin at the intersection of 147th Street and Cedar Avenue.
    [Show full text]
  • 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]
  • Minnesota Department of Transportation Metro District
    MnPASS System Study Phase 3 Final Report 4/21/2018 MnPASS System Study Phase 3 | Final Report 1 Table of Contents Table of Contents ...................................................................................................................................... 2 Table of Figures ......................................................................................................................................... 4 Table of Tables .......................................................................................................................................... 6 Acronyms ................................................................................................................................................... 8 Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................... 9 1. Introduction ......................................................................................................................................... 16 2. Review of Previous Studies ................................................................................................................. 19 3. Initial Corridor Screening ..................................................................................................................... 21 4. System Scenario Evaluation Method ................................................................................................... 39 5. System Scenario No.1 .........................................................................................................................
    [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]
  • Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority
    Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority Joe Calabrese - General Manager RTA Ridership by Mode ! 500 Buses - 75 % ! 60 Heavy Rail Vehicles - 10% ! 24 RTV’s (BRT) - 8% ! 48 Light Rail Vehicles - 6% ! Paratransit - 100 vehicles - 1% RTA Fleet GCRTA HealthLine Euclid Avenue Transformation Euclid Avenue History Euclid Avenue History Alternatives Analysis - late 1990’s ! Subway ! Light Rail ! Do Nothing (keep the #6 bus) ! Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Mode Selection Criteria ! Capacity (30,000 + daily customers) ! Connectivity ! Funding possibilities (FTA) ! Cost - capital and operating ! Economic development potential " Renew Aging Infrastructure Vision for the “Silver Line” BRT ! “Rail Like” Image ! Fast ! Simple ! Safe ! First Class ! Help Revitalize Corridor Euclid Corridor Project ! 9.38 miles long ! 36 stations (from 100 bus stops) ! Travel time from 40 to 28 minutes ! Building face to building face ! Pedestrian and bicycle friendly ! Landscape/hardscape treatment ! Pubic Art - Integrated/stand-alone Exclusive Right of Way Funding Pie Charts FTA 80% ODOT 20% 2000 ODOT FTA 25% 50% City MPO RTA 2004 Ground Breaking October 2004 “Silver Line” Construction “Silver Line” Construction (3.5 years) “Silver Line” Construction “Silver Line” Construction “Silver Line” Construction “Rail Like” Image ! Reduced Travel Time " Multi-Door Boarding " Exclusive Right-of-Way " Traffic Signal Prioritization " Higher Travel Speeds " Level Boarding " Precision Docking " Rear Facing Wheel Chair Restraints " Off-Board Fare Collection “Rail Like” Image ! Hi-Frequency
    [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]
  • Station Area Plan
    Brooklyn Park Station Area Plan Brooklyn Park, Minnesota | July 2016 ELECTED OFFICIALS HENNEPIN COUNTY, DEPT OF COMMU- COMMUNITY WORKING GROUP Jennifer Schultz Brooklyn Park Station NITY WORKS AND DEPT OF PLANNING Commissioner Mike Opat Sherry Anderson Albert Smith Darlene Walser Hennepin County, District 1 Cherno Bah Area Plan Bottineau Community Works Ben Stein Mayor Jeffrey Lunde Program Manager Susan Blood * Robert Timperley City of Brooklyn Park Denise Butler * Robin Turner Andrew Gillett Kimberly Carpenter Tonja West-Hafner Peter Crema Principal Planning Analyst Reva Chamblis Council Member, City of Brooklyn Jim White PREPARED FOR Denise Engen Park, East District Daniel Couture Jane Wilson City of Brooklyn Park Principal Planning Analyst Rebecca Dougherty Carol Woehrer Hennepin County Rich Gates Council Member, City of Brooklyn Brent Rusco Janet Durbin Yaomee Xiong * Park, Central District Administrative Engineer Michael Fowler FUNDED BY Kathy Fraser HEALTH EQUITY & ENGAGEMENT Hennepin County John Jordan Karen Nikolai COHORT Teferi Fufa Council Member, City of Brooklyn Administrative Manager African American Leadership Park, West District Jeffrey Gagnon Forum (AALF) CONSULTANT TEAM Joseph Gladke Larry Glover African Career & Education Urban Design Associates Terry Parks Assistant Department Director Resources (ACER) Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Council Member, City of Brooklyn Edmond Gray SB Friedman Development Advisors Park, East District Dan Hall Alliance for Metropolitan Stability CITY OF BROOKLYN PARK (AMS) ZAN Associates Heidi Heinzel Mike Trepanier Kim Berggren Asamblea de Derechos Civiles Westly Henrickson Council Member, City of Brooklyn Director of Community CAPI USA Park, Central District Development Shaquonica Johnson LAO Assistance Center of Michael Kisch Bob Mata Cindy Sherman Minnesota (LAC) Council Member, City of Brooklyn Planning Director Tim Korby Minnesota African Women’s Park, West District Chris Kurle Association (MAWA) Todd A.
    [Show full text]
  • Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority
    Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority Joe Calabrese – General Manager Greater Cleveland RTA Overview . Service Area 59 municipalities 500 square miles Population of 1.5 million . Customers Served 200,000 on a typical weekday 1 RTA Overview . Services Modes 500 Buses 100 Paratransit Vans 20 Job Access Vans 60 Heavy Rail Vehicles 48 Light Rail Vehicles 24 RTV’s - (HealthLine BRT) 2 RTA Fleet 3 GCRTA HealthLine Euclid Avenue Transformation Euclid Avenue History 4 Euclid Avenue History Euclid Avenue History . Streetcars disappeared in 1954 . # 6 Bus Route put in service Great Service with Low Image . Alternative Analysis Subway or Light Rail Do Nothing (keep the #6 bus) Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) 5 Mode Selection Criteria . Capacity (30,000 + daily customers) . Connectivity . Funding possibilities (FTA) . Cost Capital Operating . Economic development potential Vision for the “Silver Line” . “Rail-Like” Image . Fast . Simple . Safe . First Class . Promote Economic Development 6 Euclid Corridor Project – 9.38 Miles . 36 stations . Travel time from 28 to 40 minutes . Building face to building face . Pedestrian friendly with bike lanes . Landscape/hardscape treatment 1,500 trees with irrigation . Integrated/stand-alone public art 7 Ground Breaking October 2004 8 Funding Pie Charts - $200 Million FTA 80% ODOT 20% 2000 ODOT FTA 25% 50% City MPO RTA 2004 Exclusive Right of Way 9 10 11 “Rail-Like” Characteristics . Quicker Travel Times Exclusive Right-of-Way Higher Travel Speed Limit Traffic Signal Prioritization Precision Docking Level Boarding “Stations” Off Board Fare Collection 12 “Rail-Like” Service and Image . Hi-Frequency Service 24x7 Peak every 5 minutes Off-Peak every 8 to 15 minutes .
    [Show full text]
  • Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) and Light Rail Transit
    Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) and Light Rail Transit (LRT) Performance Characteristics Stations Mixed Traffic Lanes* Service Characteristics Newest Corridor End‐to‐End Travel Departures Every 'X' Travel Speed (MPH) City Corridor Segment Open length (mi) # Spacing (mi) Miles % Time Minutes BRT Systems Boston Silver Line Washington Street ‐ SL5 2002 2.40 13 0.18 1.03 42.93% 19 7 7.58 Oakland San Pablo Rapid ‐ 72R 2003 14.79 52 0.28 14.79 100.00% 60 12 14.79 Albuquerque The Red Line (766) 2004 11.00 17 0.65 10.32 93.79% 44 18 15.00 Kansas City Main Street ‐ MAX "Orange Line" 2005 8.95 22 0.41 4.29 47.92% 40 10 13.42 Eugene Green Line 2007 3.98 10 0.40 1.59 40.00% 29 10 8.23 New York Bx12 SBS (Fordham Road ‐ Pelham Pkwy) 2008 9.00 18 0.50 5.20 57.73% 52 3 10.38 Cleveland HealthLine 2008 6.80 39 0.17 2.33 34.19% 38 8 10.74 Snohomish County Swift BRT ‐ Blue Line 2009 16.72 31 0.54 6.77 40.52% 43 12 23.33 Eugene Gateway Line 2011 7.76 14 0.55 2.59 33.33% 29 10 16.05 Kansas City Troost Avenue ‐ "Green Line" 2011 12.93 22 0.59 12.93 100.00% 50 10 15.51 New York M34 SBS (34th Street) 2011 2.00 13 0.15 2.00 100.00% 23 9 5.22 Stockton Route #44 ‐ Airport Corridor 2011 5.50 8 0.69 5.50 100.00% 23 20 14.35 Stockton Route #43 ‐ Hammer Corridor 2012 5.30 14 0.38 5.30 100.00% 28 12 11.35 Alexandria ‐ Arlington Metroway 2014 6.80 15 0.45 6.12 89.95% 24 12 17.00 Fort Collins Mason Corridor 2014 4.97 12 0.41 1.99 40.00% 24 10 12.43 San Bernardino sbX ‐ "Green Line" 2014 15.70 16 0.98 9.86 62.79% 56 10 16.82 Minneapolis A Line 2016 9.90 20 0.50 9.90 100.00% 28 10 21.21 Minneapolis Red Line 2013 13.00 5 2.60 2.00 15.38% 55 15 14.18 Chapel Hill N‐S Corridor Proposed 8.20 16 0.51 1.34 16.34% 30 7.5 16.40 LRT Systems St.
    [Show full text]
  • Bass Lake Road Station Area Plan
    Bass Lake Road Station Area Plan Crystal, Minnesota | July 2016 ELECTED OFFICIALS Brent Rusco African Career & Education Jason Zimmerman Michael Mechtenberg Bass Lake Road Station Commissioner Mike Opat Administrative Engineer Resources (ACER) City of Golden Valley Metro Transit Hennepin County, District 1 Karen Nikolai Alliance for Metropolitan Stability Rebecca Farrar Shelley Miller Area Plan (AMS) Mayor Jim Adams Administrative Manager City of Minneapolis Metro Transit City of Crystal Joseph Gladke La Asamblea de Derechos Civiles Beth Grosen Alicia Vap Laura Libby Assistant Department Director CAPI USA City of Minneapolis Metro Transit Council Member, City of Crystal, PREPARED FOR LAO Assistance Center of Ward 1 and 2 Don Pflaum Mike Larson City of Crystal CITY OF CRYSTAL Minnesota (LAC) City of Minneapolis Metropolitan Council Hennepin County Elizabeth Dahl John Sutter Minnesota African Women’s Council Member, City of Crystal, Community Development Director Association (MAWA) Jim Voll Eric Wojchik Ward 1 City of Minneapolis Metropolitan Council FUNDED BY Minnesota Center for Neighborhood Dan Olson Organization (MCNO) Hennepin County Jeff Kolb Rick Pearson Jan Youngquist City Planner Nexus Community Partners Council Member, City of Crystal, City of Robbinsdale Metropolitan Council Northwest Human Services Council CONSULTANT TEAM Ward 2 COMMUNITY WORKING GROUP (NHHSC) Chad Ellos Adam Arvidson Urban Design Associates Olga Parsons Gene Bakke Hennepin County Minneapolis Park and Recreation Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Council Member,
    [Show full text]