CORRIDOR DESCRIPTIONThe Central Corridor is 11 miles long, run-ning between downtown Minneapolis anddowntown St. Paul, at the heart of the TwinCities region. Running east-west, the majorroadways that run the length of the corridorare Interstate 94 and University Avenue.Several major roadways enter the corridorfrom the north and south, includingHiawatha Avenue, Interstate 35W, Highway280, Snelling Avenue and Interstate 35E. The corridor includes a string of destina-tions that generate many of the trips peo-ple take in the area, from the Universityof Minnesota to the state Capitol complexto downtown offices. The corridor alsoincludes vibrant neighborhoods, thrivingsmall businesses, important culturalresources and a plethora of other educationalinstitutions.STUDY DESCRIPTIONFor more than two decades, the CentralCorridor has been the focus of planningefforts around transit service improvements.Given the importance of the corridor and therisks posed by increasing congestion forfuture mobility, the Ramsey CountyRegional Railroad Authority (RCRRA) startedthe Central Corridor Transit Study to deter-mine the preferred transit option for the corridor. Elements include defining goals forthe corridor, defining options, screeningoptions, evaluating alternatives and identify-ing a locally preferred alternative.State legislation defined the agencies to beinvolved in the decision making. The CentralCorridor Coordinating Committee includesvoting representatives from Ramsey County,Hennepin County, St. Paul, Minneapolis, the Metropolitan Council, the MinnesotaDepartment of Transportation and theUniversity of Minnesota.This is a summary of the AlternativesAnalysis / Draft Environmental ImpactStatement (EIS), which records the findingsand research that have been gathered to-date. It is a helpful tool for interested citizensand policy makers will be asked to commenton its contents at a public hearing or in writ-ing in the fall of 2002. The Central CorridorCoordinating Committee will consider thecomments and then make a final decision ona locally preferred alternative.CONTEXT Traffic congestion is already a problem forthe Central Corridor, with traffic at severallocations along I- 94 already at capacity. Andthe traffic demand is going to keep growing.According to the Twin Cities Regional Model,between 1996 and 2020 the total number ofvehicle miles traveled on I-94 is expected toincrease an average of 48 percent.The continuation of this increase in trafficdemand may trigger a breakdown of thearea’s transportation system, with conges-tion on the freeway pushing more drivers toseek parallel routes, causing these routes tobecome overly congested as well. In fact,University Avenue and Washington Avenuealready have sections at traffic capacity lev-els. Projections for 2020 show traffic growthat every location along these roadways.Engineering, political, financial and environ-mental issues prevent lane additions to I-94.This view is confirmed by the Twin CitiesMetropolitan Long Range TransportationPlan, which does not include any plans forexpanding I-94. Transit improvements remainthe only viable alternative.Beyond congestion, another relevant issuein the corridor is the availability and cost ofparking in the two downtowns and at theCENTRAL CORRIDOR UPDATESUMMARIZING THE ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS/DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENTcontinued on next pageSUMMER 2002ALTERNATIVES Baseline: This “build nothing”option assumes improvementsto the current bus service.Bus Rapid Transit (BRT): Busesoperating either along an exclu-sive guideway, allowing them toavoid competing with other traffic,or on city streets mixed in withother traffic.Light Rail Transit (LRT): Shorttrains of electric powered railcars operating along an exclusiveguideway, allowing them to avoidcompeting with other traffic. introduction1What kinds of objectives should guide planning aroundimproving transit in the Central Corridor? Eight statementshave been created and endorsed by the Central CorridorCoordinating Committee to articulate objectives for any tran-sit improvements. They are organized here under threebroad goals: economic opportunity and investment, commu-nities and environment, and transportation and mobility.GOAL 1: ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY AND INVESTMENTObjective A — Support investments in infrastructure, busi-ness and community that sustain the heart of the region.Objective B — Promote a reliable transit system thatallows an efficient, effective land use development patternin major activity centers which minimizes parking demand,facilitates the highest and best use of adjacent propertiesand gives employers confidence that employees can travelto and from work.GOAL 2: COMMUNITIES AND ENVIRONMENTObjective A — Facilitate the preservation and enhance-ment of neighborhoods in the Central Corridor.Objective B — Acknowledge the individual character andaspirations of each place served and of the region as awhole.Objective C — Support regional goals for cleaner air andwater, more efficient energy use, and a safer and healthierenvironment.GOAL 3: TRANSPORTATION AND MOBILITYObjective A — Create transportation improvements thatadd people-carrying capacity, minimize operating costs,improve operating efficiency, provide high-quality modalalternatives and reinforce the region’s transportation system.Objective B — Expand opportunities for all users to movefreely to, through and within the Central Corridor.Objective C — Enhance the existing transportation infra-structure to serve the high number of transit-dependentpersons in the Central Corridor.Three options are now under review:Baseline – The Baseline alternative is essentially a “buildnothing” option. It assumes a 10 percent increase by 2020over current bus service to keep up with growing ridershipdemand and congestion.Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) on University Avenue – BRT isdistinct from regular bus service because parts of it run onan exclusive guideway, allowing it to avoid competing withtraffic in those areas and speeding up travel time. BRTwould be a limited-stop service, meaning it wouldn’t stopat every block, with stops spaced from one mile to a half-mile apart. Riders would pay their fares before they board,unlike current bus service.Light Rail Transit (LRT) on University Avenue – LRTwould consist of short trains of electric powered railcars operating in an exclusive guideway separated fromother traffic on existing roads. LRT
View Full Document
Unlocking...