PROJECT UPDATE
PUBLIC OPEN HOUSE #5
MARCH 12
4:00 PM – 6:00 PM
Northern Service Center
WHY ARE WE HERE?
ALTERNATIVES STUDY WRAP-UP
•
•
•
•
•
Technical evaluation and recommendations
Feedback from project partners
Study conclusion
Future steps
Input from you
2
WHAT HAS BEEN COMPLETED?
PROJECT RECAP
•
•
•
•
Project Scoping
Preliminary Screening
Conceptual Definition and Preliminary Evaluation
Advanced Definition and Evaluation
3
PROJECT GOALS
4
PRELIMINARY ALTERNATIVES
5
FINAL ALTERNATIVES
6
EVALUATION
7
KEY CONSIDERATIONS
COST
• Streetcar: $399 Million
• BRT: $29.2 Million
RIDERSHIP ESTIMATE
• About 3,100 per weekday for both modes
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
• Higher impact anticipated with streetcar
8
TECHNICAL RECOMMENDATION
LOCALLY PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE (LPA)
• Bus Rapid Transit on Robert Street
SECONDARY RECOMMENDATIONS
• Express service on TH 52
• Allow for streetcar on Robert St. in St. Paul
9
POST-RECOMMENDATION
Ongoing dialogue between counties, St. Paul, West St.
Paul
•
•
Reaction to technical recommendation
Consistency with broader city plans and goals
Broader consideration of transit policy and other plans
•
•
St. Paul streetcar study (shorter route - to C. Chavez)
Metropolitan Council Transportation Policy Plan
•
•
Need to define policy on streetcar
City comprehensive plans
•
Allow and support more intensive development near Robert?
10
POST-RECOMMENDATION
(CONT’D)
DISCUSSION OUTCOMES
Continued interest streetcar alternative
•
•
•
Interest from both cities on anticipated development benefits
Need for commitment from cities towards more intensive
development
Changes to comprehensive plans and capital investments
11
STEERING COMMITTEE/STAFF
RECOMMENDATIONS
• Conclude Alternatives Analysis without decision on
Preferred Alternative
• Carry both Robert Street alternatives forward for
additional consideration
•
•
BRT
Streetcar
• Efforts to establish express service on TH 52
12
LOOKING FORWARD
STEPS TO A PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE
• Land use planning with cities
•
•
•
Is intensified development a goal of cities along
Robert? To what extent?
How to accommodate through comprehensive plans?
Can one mode help more than another?
• Define streetcar policy
• Re-evaluate as needed
13
LOOKING FORWARD
(CONT’D)
FOLLOWING LPA DECISION
• Environmental documentation
• Engineering
• Funding
• Timeframe for each dependent on mode, decision
making process
14
HOW YOU CAN HELP
• Comments today
• Input on comprehensive plans and neighborhood
plans (2015-18)
• Input to city, county officials
• Stay in contact (email list)
• joe.morneau@co.dakota.mn.us
15
THANK YOU!
WWW.ROBERTSTREETTRANSIT.COM