West Broadway Transit Study. Minnesota APA Conference Charles Carlson, Metro Transit Adele Hall, SRF Consulting September 24, 2015

Similar documents
West Broadway Transit Study. Community Advisory Committee September 17, 2015

Midtown Corridor Alternatives Analysis. Policy Advisory Committee Meeting February 12, 2014

Midtown Corridor Alternatives Analysis Initial Screening Analysis

Public Meeting. March 21, 2013 Mimosa Elementary School

Policy Advisory Committee Meeting November 13, 2013

Needs and Community Characteristics

Valley Metro Overview. ITE/IMSA Spring Conference March 6, 2014

Public Meeting. City of Chicago Department of Transportation & Department of Housing and Economic Development

Operating & Maintenance Cost Results Report

5. OPPORTUNITIES AND NEXT STEPS

Charlotte-Mecklenburg Region Rapid Transit and Land-Use Integration

Rapid Transit and Land-Use Integration a Reality

What is the Connector?

MIDTOWN CORRIDOR ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS FINAL REPORT APRIL 2014

Community Advisory Committee. October 5, 2015

6/6/2018. June 7, Item #1 CITIZENS PARTICIPATION

Green Line Long-Term Investments

I-20 EAST TRANSIT INITIATIVE Tier 1 and Tier 2 Alternatives Screening Report EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Charlotte Area Transit System: Moving Forward John Lewis CATS Chief Executive Officer

US 29 Bus Rapid Transit Planning Board Briefing. February 16, 2017

CITY OF LONDON STRATEGIC MULTI-YEAR BUDGET ADDITIONAL INVESTMENTS BUSINESS CASE # 6

CEDAR AVENUE TRANSITWAY Implementation Plan Update

PEACHTREE CORRIDOR PARTNERSHIP. Current Status & Next Steps

Executive Summary. Draft Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report ES-1

Draft Results and Recommendations

FINAL. Sound Transit Long-Range Plan Update. Issue Paper S.1: Tacoma Link Integration with Central Link. Prepared for: Sound Transit

6/11/2018. June 7, Item #1 CITIZENS PARTICIPATION

10/4/2016. October 6, Item #1 CITIZENS PARTICIPATION

Midtown Corridor Alternatives Analysis Key Issues Memo

4.0 TIER 2 ALTERNATIVES

Draft Results and Open House

Public Meeting. June 15, :30 7:30 p.m.

I-35W Past, Present, and Future: METRO Orange Line

Restoration of Historic Streetcar Services in Downtown Los Angeles

West Broadway Reconstruction/LRT Design. March 19, 2015

Northeast Corridor Alternatives Analysis. Public Involvement Round 2 Input on Alternatives for Further Study

Mass Transit in Charlotte and San Antonio. Keith T. Parker, AICP

Downtown Transit Connector. Making Transit Work for Rhode Island

Navigating in Different Rivers

2 EXISTING ROUTE STRUCTURE AND SERVICE LEVELS

Mississauga Bus Rapid Transit Preliminary Design Project

I-10 West AA/EIS Pre-Screening and Tier 1 Analysis Results. Public Meeting. Wulf Grote, Director Project Development Rick Pilgrim, Project Manager

THE WILSHIRE CORRIDOR: RAIL AND ITS ALTERNATIVES. Prepared By: Jacki Murdock Transportation and Environmental Planner

Alternatives Analysis Summary Report

I-26 Fixed Guideway Alternatives Analysis

SUPPORTING TOD IN METRO CHICAGO

METRO Orange Line BRT American Boulevard Station Options

STRATEGIC PRIORITIES AND POLICY COMMITTEE MAY 5, 2016

Metropolitan Council Budget Overview SFY

Executive Summary. Treasure Valley High Capacity Transit Study Priority Corridor Phase 1 Alternatives Analysis October 13, 2009.

Point A Point B Point C Point D. Fulton County Board of Commissioners and Mayors Meeting December 14, 2017

2/1/2018. February 1, Item #1 CITIZENS PARTICIPATION

I-26 Fixed Guideway Alternatives Analysis

METRONext. Vision & Moving Forward Plans. Board Workshop. December 11, DRAFT For Preliminary Discussion Only

2030 Multimodal Transportation Study

Transitways. Chapter 4

V03. APTA Multimodal Operations Planning Workshop August Green Line LRT

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS

Tier 1 and Tier 2 Alternatives Screening Report

Hennepin County Transit Oriented Development Program. The Ellipse, St. Louis Park, 2009

C LINE: LONG-TERM GLENWOOD REALIGNMENT STUDY

Preliminary Definition of Alternatives. 3.0 Preliminary Definition of Alternatives

ConnectGreaterWashington: Can the Region Grow Differently?

APPENDIX I: [FIXED-GUIDEWAY TRANSIT FEASIBILITY]

Committee Report. Transportation Committee. Business Item No

State Avenue Corridor Bus Rapid Transit (BRT)

Snelling Bus Rapid Transit. May 13, 2013 Technical Advisory Committee Meeting #1

Background Information for MPRB Community Advisory Committee for 2010 Southwest Light Rail Transit Project DEIS Comment Letter Section 2

UTA Transportation Equity Study and Staff Analysis. Board Workshop January 6, 2018

Tempe Streetcar. March 2, 2016

Waco Rapid Transit Corridor (RTC) Feasibility Study

Bus Rapid Transit. Jennifer Flynn and Cheryl Thole Senior Research Associates Commuter Choice Workshop January 2012 Tampa, FL

Sales and Use Transportation Tax Implementation Plan

I-35W & Lake Street Station

QUALITY OF LIFE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY REPORT I O N S TAT I O N

Appendix G: Rapid Transit Technology Backgrounder July 2017

Troost Corridor Transit Study

MARTA s blueprint for the future. COFFEE AND CONVERSATION Kyle Keahey, More MARTA Atlanta Dec. 5, 2018

Recommended Vision for the Downtown Rapid Transit Network

Metro Transit Update. Christina Morrison, Senior Planner Metro Transit BRT/Small Starts Project Office. John Dillery, Senior Transit Planner

TORONTO TRANSIT COMMISSION REPORT NO.

KANSAS CITY STREETCAR

Multnomah County Commission December 15, 2016

PAWG Meeting #3a Tier 1 Evaluation

Michigan/Grand River Avenue Transportation Study TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM #18 PROJECTED CARBON DIOXIDE (CO 2 ) EMISSIONS

Kendall Drive Premium Transit PD&E Study Project Kick-Off Meeting SR 94/Kendall Drive/SW 88 Street Project Development and Environment (PD&E) Study

Bi-County Transitway/ Bethesda Station Access Demand Analysis

Executive Summary. Phase 2 Evaluation Report. Introduction

Pacific Electric Right-of-Way / West Santa Ana Branch Corridor Alternatives Analysis

EUGENE-SPRINGFIELD, OREGON EAST WEST PILOT BRT LANE TRANSIT DISTRICT

Kenosha-Racine-Milwaukee (KRM)

Click to edit Master title style

BRT: What is it & Where Does it Fit? Sam Zimmerman

Regional Transit Extension Studies. Hampton Roads Transportation Planning Organization Passenger Rail Task Force Meeting December 17, 2013

Project Scoping Report Appendix B Project Web Site. APPENDIX B Project Web Site

Strategic Plan

Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority. Joe Calabrese CEO/General Manager

BROWARD BOULEVARD CORRIDOR TRANSIT STUDY

Subarea Study. Manning Avenue (CSAH 15) Corridor Management and Safety Improvement Project. Final Version 1. Washington County.

Arterial BRT Quarterly Update

Transcription:

West Broadway Transit Study Minnesota APA Conference Charles Carlson, Metro Transit Adele Hall, SRF Consulting September 24, 2015

Study Context: Blue Line Planning 2

Study Context: Arterial BRT Study completed April 2012 Added corridors in 2013 w/ Blue Line Added Penn Avenue Extended Chicago to North Mpls System Benefits 90,000 rides today 160,000 rides in 2030 w/brt 3

Study Context: Minneapolis Streetcar Feasibility Study (2007) 7 corridors recommended for long-term network Central 4th/University Chicago Nicollet Hennepin West Broadway/ Washington Midtown Corridor

2013-2014: Why Pursue a W. Broadway Study? Smaller geographic area- more focus Consistent, updated methodology across mode and alignment options Reflects Bottineau LPA decision More detailed analysis than past work Focused, increased community engagement Economic development effects evaluated Increased Community Engagement Past studies included broader geographic areas Lessons learned and new engagement techniques, new engagement capacity 5

CORRIDOR CONTEXT 6

NORTH LOOP 7

NORTH WASHINGTON JOBS PARK 8

WEST BROADWAY 9

ROBBINSDALE 10

TRANSIT ALTERNATIVES 11

Streetcar Arterial Bus Rapid Transit Runningway Typically operates in mixed-traffic lanes, but Enhanced bus vehicles operate in mixed traffic can also be in streetcar-exclusive right-of-way Station Spacing Station located every ¼ to ½ mile Stations can be located every ¼ to ½ mile Station Amenities Vehicle Type Passenger Capacity Example Operating Locations Locally Planned Projects Stations can range from basic stops with minimal passenger amenities to LRT-like stations Electrically powered vehicles with overhead wires. Some vehicles are testing on-board batteries for short distances Between 115 and 160 passengers per vehicle. Unlike LRT, vehicles operate as single units. Portland, Seattle, Toronto Nicollet-Central Streetcar Stations can range from basic stops with minimal passenger amenities to LRT-like stations Diesel or diesel-electric hybrid vehicles. Some vehicles testing battery electric-only operation. Between 60 and 105 passengers per vehicle. Kansas City, Oakland, Seattle A-Line (Snelling Avenue), C-Line (Penn Avenue)

Arterial BRT Alternative Arterial BRT Alternative from downtown Minneapolis to downtown Robbinsdale Operates in mixed traffic Stations approximately every ¼ mile Connects to LRT and many local and express bus routes downtown Connects to planned Blue Line Extension LRT at Robbinsdale Transit Center

Streetcar Alternative from downtown Minneapolis to North Memorial Medical Center Operates in mixed traffic Stations approximately every ¼ mile Connects to LRT and many local and express bus routes downtown 14 Video Link

COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT 15

Phase 1: Study Awareness and General Input Spring and Summer 2015 Bus Stops Busy locations: North Loop Whole Foods North Memorial Hospital Downtown Robbinsdale Cedar Lake Trail Community Events FLOW Juneteenth Whiz Bang Days Farmer s Market National Night Out Open Streets Urban League Family Day Outdoor Open House at YMCA 16

Engagement Techniques Zine Family Feud Spin Wheel Jar Voting Postcards FUN 17

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS 18

Service Plan Route Frequencies (minutes) Alternative Route 14 Streetcar Arterial BRT Peak Midday Peak Midday Peak Midday Existing 20 30 - - - - Streetcar 30 30 15 15 - - Arterial BRT 60 60 - - 15 15 19

Alternative Service Plan Trips per hour Route 14 Streetcar Arterial BRT Peak Midday Peak Midday Peak Midday Existing 3 2 - - - - Streetcar 2 2 4 4 - - Arterial BRT 1 1 - - 4 4 20

Daily Ridership (2040) Local Bus (No Build) Streetcar Arterial BRT (Existing-2014) Station-to-Station 3,900 4,800 Local Bus 8,410* 11,300* 9,600 8,900 Streetcar Arterial BRT New Riders over no-build +900 +1,550 Transit Dependent Riders 1,550 1,900 Daily Vehicle Miles Traveled -4,200-11,300 * Includes ridership on Routes 7, 30, 32 and northern portion of 14 21

Daily Ridership Summary Ridership balanced between peak and off-peak and work and non-work 30% of the 2040 ridership is dependent on development 40% of the 2040 daily ridership is associated with zero car households 22

Cost Estimates Alternative Capital Operating (annual) Streetcar $229* $9.6 Arterial BRT $40 $5.5 (figures in millions) * Cost increases to $256 million when Nicollet Mall Streetcar stations are included 23

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IMPACTS OF ALTERNATIVES 24

Analyzed the projected impact of enhanced bus versus streetcar service with regards to: Real estate value appreciation Quantity and timing of new real estate development Form of new development Employment growth ROBBINSD ALE WEST BROADWAY JORDAN HAWTHORNE WILLARD-HAY NEAR NORTH NORTH WASHINGTON NORTH LOOP 25

To assess the impacts of transit investment, we: Analyzed corridor real estate market conditions Assessed local developer perceptions Analyzed existing transit systems Synthesized findings to estimate project development impacts

Literature review and case study findings: Peer system transit-oriented development TOD succeeds when coordinated with supportive public policy along corridors with favorable market conditions Generally, fixed rail is more influential than BRT, but market strength and public interventions are the much stronger predictors of development. In weak markets, institutional or philanthropic investment can catalyze growth. 27

Literature review and case study findings: Value premiums Light rail systems and streetcars have generated significant value premiums for multifamily and commercial uses. BRT with dedicated lanes can create value premiums comparable to fixed rail premiums, particularly with a dedicated guideway. 28

Developer interview findings Developers generally believe both streetcar and BRT would have a positive impact, but 6 out of 9 developers thought that streetcar would be more transformative. Perceived permanence of rail infrastructure is a driving factor for developers. Development would affect each corridor submarket differently, with West Broadway standing to benefit. However, transit investment is not a silver bullet. 29

Baseline and alternative development scenarios for the corridor were established 1) Project total corridor land-use capacity for redevelopment 2) Estimate portion of capacity built-out in baseline scenario over 25 years 3) Estimate additional build-out of corridor given BRT or streetcar investment 4) Determine present value of real estate value created over 25 years in baseline vs. BRT vs. streetcar scenario 30

Streetcar is expected to drive more residential development than BRT 10,000 9,000 8,000 7,000 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 Residential Units 8,050 North Loop 8,800 9,300 Baseline BRT Streetcar Central Robbinsdale West Broadway 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Corridor Residential Build- Out Achieved 76% 82% 88% Baseline BRT Streetcar Corridor build out is over 25 years 31

Streetcar is also expected to drive more office development than BRT 2,000,000 1,800,000 1,600,000 1,400,000 1,200,000 1,000,000 800,000 600,000 400,000 200,000 0 North Loop 940k West Broadway Office SF 1.25M 1.52M Baseline BRT Streetcar North Washington Central Robbinsdale 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Corridor Office Build-Out Achieved 30% 40% 49% Baseline BRT Streetcar Corridor build out is over 25 years 32

Retail build-out is anticipated to coincide with residential build-out 200,000 175,000 150,000 125,000 100,000 75,000 50,000 25,000 0 Retail SF 155k 163k 144k Baseline BRT Streetcar North Loop West Broadway Central Robbinsdale 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Retail Build-Out Achieved 61% 63% 57% Baseline BRT Streetcar Retail Corridor build out is over 25 years 33

Projected development impacts: Value and Jobs Incremental Real Estate Value Generated*: BRT: $280-$390M Streetcar: $480-$640M Incremental Jobs Supported: BRT: 1,400 Streetcar: 2,600 *Applies discount rate of 3% to 7% to future incremental real estate value 34

EVALUATION MEASURES 35

Evaluation Measures Tie back to goals and objectives identified in the Problem Statement as adopted by PAC on April 8, 2015 Are a mix of qualitative and quantitative information Used to differentiate amongst alternatives 36

Little difference in: Demographic factors Evaluation Measures Service improvements (span, frequencies, station amenities) 37

Differentiating Evaluation Measures New commercial development/job creation Underused land available for TOD Connections to existing and planned transitways Potential business impacts Potential impacts to historic and cultural resources, and parkland Potential right-of-way impacts Capital costs Ridership 38

Criteria DRAFT Streetcar Alternative Arterial BRT Alternative Goal 1: Catalyze and support housing and economic development along the corridor Opportunities for new commercial development/job creation Foster transit-oriented development Goal 2: Improve local and regional mobility with improved access to jobs and activities Connections to existing & planned transitways Forecasted change in employment Number of jobs within a 45 minute transit ride Goal 3: Address equity issues in the West Broadway Corridor to ensure that corridor residents as well as patrons of area businesses and institutions have access to opportunities for success, prosperity, and quality of life Potential business impacts Potential impacts to business revenue Employment and population densities served Goal 4: Build upon the vibrancy and diversity of the corridor by supporting healthy, active communities and the environment Potential impacts to historic and cultural resources Potential impacts to park land Potential right-of-way impacts Goal 5: Improve upon existing transit service in the corridor Capital cost of the Project Goal 6: Increase transit use among corridor residents, employees, and visitors Daily Trips on West Broadway and connecting transit routes Daily Trips by new transit riders Daily Trips by transit-dependent riders 39

STUDY NEXT STEPS 40

Next Steps Fall: Public engagement continues Bus stops Farmers Market Open Streets Mosque Day of Dignity North Memorial Vendor Fair November: Video Premiere November: CAC considers action on potential LPA December: PAC considers action on potential LPA December: Study Phase Complete Next Steps: Funding identification and plan updates 41

West Broadway Transit Study Video Premiere and Red Carpet Event Tuesday, November 3 Capri Theatre West Broadway, Minneapolis 42