List of ables able Crossing Comparison* able West Bank Station rea Year PM Peak /C atio and LOS 7 able West Bank Station rea Year PM Peak Queue Lengths 7 able Stadium illage Station rea Year PM Peak LOS8 able istoric Properties/P-Listed and P-ligible Locally Designated Properties (ot on P) able ext Steps in the Cultural esources Process able 7 Parks and rails Within Feet of the orthern lignment8 able 8 Population, ouseholds and ace Census able 9 Income and Poverty Census able Contaminated Properties 7 able Project rea Wells 7 able P nvironmental Issues7 able Cost ffectiveness Breakpoints 77 Central Corridor L orthern lignment lternative Feasibility Study iv
Introduction Purpose of Feasibility Study he purpose of this Feasibility Study is to pursue the stated goals and guiding principles for the Central Corridor he University of Minnesota has undertaken this study to investigate the feasibility and potential benefits of an alternate orthern lignment for the CCL through the U of M his Feasibility Study is not intended to be an exhaustive or definitive analysis of the orthern lignment dditional engineering, design, environmental, and cost effectiveness analysis is required to further advance the orthern lignment through the regional, state, and federal project development process Background he -mile Central Corridor Light ail ransit (CCL) line runs between downtown St Paul and downtown Minneapolis, serving the heart of the win Cities Metropolitan rea It connects some of the largest traffic generators in the win Cities, notably the two downtowns, Midway area, and the University of Minnesota (U of M or University) he University is the third largest trip generator in the State of Minnesota, with over 8, people coming to its win Cities campus daily pproximately two-thirds of daily commuters to campus walk, bike, bus, or carpool he U of M generates an estimated one-third of the projected daily riders for CCL his high modal split makes the U of M s population more transit dependent than other parts of the region s part of the nvironmental Impact Statement (IS) Scoping process, the Central Corridor ransit Study stakeholders group adopted the following three project goals hese three goals were the basis for determining the preferred alternative and corridor alignment he Central Corridor ransit Study stakeholders group adopted three project goals for determining the preferred alternative and corridor alignment: Goal : conomic Opportunity and Investment Goal : Communities and nvironment Goal : ransportation and Mobility Goal : conomic Opportunity and Investment he Central Corridor should support investments in infrastructure, business, and community that sustain the heart of the region It should promote a reliable transit system that allows an efficient, effective land use development pattern in major activity centers which minimizes parking demand, facilitates the highest and best use of adjacent properties, and gives employers confidence that employees can travel to and from work Goal : Communities and nvironment he Central Corridor should facilitate the preservation and enhancement of neighborhoods within the corridor; acknowledge the individual character and aspirations of each place served and of the region as a whole; and support regional goals for cleaner air and water, more efficient energy use, and a safer and healthier environment Goal : ransportation and Mobility he Central Corridor should create transportation improvements that add people carrying capacity, minimize operating costs, improve operating efficiency, provide high quality modal alternatives, and reinforce the region s transportation system It should expand opportunities for all users to move freely to, through, and within the Central Corridor as well as enhance the existing transportation infrastructure to serve the high number of transit dependent persons in the corridor DF /9/8 Central Corridor L orthern lignment lternative Feasibility Study
he appropriate placement of transit service, in particular a future CCL line that connects the Minneapolis campus to the regional transit system, is paramount to the continued functioning of the University and its community he existing U of M roadway and transit system functions adequately today Placement of the CCL line will affect existing mission-critical activities, including academic and research programs, access to the U of M hospital and clinics, and future campus redevelopment and expansion opportunities o mitigate the potential impacts on the campus, the University had been supporting an alternative that placed the L line through the University in a tunnel following the alignment of Washington venue On February 7, 8, the Metropolitan Council approved an at-grade Washington venue lignment for the CCL, citing that a CCL tunnel under Washington venue would be cost prohibitive he current CCL lignment in the vicinity of the U of M, referred to as the Washington venue lignment is completely atgrade and connects to the existing iawatha L line west of I-W It then follows Washington venue through the West Bank campus, across the Mississippi iver, and through the ast Bank campus On the east end of campus, the alignment shifts to the northeast, providing a station at the new CF stadium, then enters the U of M ransitway enroute to University venue and downtown St Paul his alignment is shown in blue in Figure Based upon expressed concerns from the U of M with the ability of the current at-grade CCL Washington venue lignment to meet the Central Corridor s stated project goals, impacts to the University s mission-critical services, safety, and traffic circulation in and around the U of M s Minneapolis campus, consideration of an alternate route from the current Washington venue lignment between I-W and the U of M ransitway was undertaken Identification and due diligence of the orthern lignment (depicted in red in Figure ) as a potentially feasible alternative to the Washington venue lignment is being pursued by the U of M in good faith to better understand the potential impacts and benefits of the orthern lignment iew of the proposed orthern lignment, west toward the th Street S Bridge, Dinkytown and downtown Minneapolis he orthern lignment joins the iawatha line at the same location as the Washington venue lignment From there the orthern lignment crosses over I-W to the south side of Washington venue to a station located under Cedar venue S xiting this first station, the alignment turns north, crossing Washington venue to parallel 9th venue S to nd Street S after which the alignment swings to the northeast to the site of the existing Mississippi iver Bridge 9 fter crossing a new bridge at this site, the alignment enters the right-of-way of an existing railroad and follows this path to st venue S second station is located on this rightof-way at th venue he alignment leaves the railroad right-of-way at rd venue S and proceeds south to the University of Minnesota ransitway, curving to the east where a third station is located between rd venue S and th venue S t th venue S, the alignment rejoins the current CCL lignment and continues east along the U of M ransitway more detailed description of the orthern lignment, its stations, and operations are discussed in the subsequent chapters of this feasibility study DF /9/8 Central Corridor L orthern lignment lternative Feasibility Study
+ POPOSD o8 UOU + + COSS-O POPOSD o8 POPOSD o8 COSS-O DOUBL at ha L w ia + : + + + University of Minnesota Central Corridor L orthern lignment lternative itle of Graphic Washington venue lignment and orthern lignment h:\projects\99\i-mu\lyou\fsibiliy SUDY\99_alignment_comparisondgn + B WS BK SIO g d ri 9 + 7+ 8+ 9+ + + + + + + + 8+ + S BK SIO 7+ + + + + + + 7+ 8+ 9+ 7+ 7 88 8 8 7 7 7 7+ 7+ 7+ FLG POL 7+ BO FILD) (O 8 -" 8 77+ 7 7 78+ 7 79+ 8+ 8 8 7 + 8 7 7 9 8 SDIUM ILLG SIO + 7+ 9 IL L S Since the Central Corridor Management Committee meeting of pril, 8, continued feasibility design development of the orthern lignment has resulted in further enhancements which are described in Chapter 8 of this report S BK SIO + 7+ 8 CF Bank Stadium IU D S + e + + 8 + S BK SIO Washington venue lignment nhancements in this area are described in Chapter 8 O Match Point - west end COSS-O POPOSD o8 POCK CK C 7 S XC PXC 99 //8 UOU POPOSD o8 WS BK SIO 8 8 nt + nme 8 9 lig ern + orth 8 DIKYOW SIO 8 G + 8 I M M + 8 89 + + + + + o C 8 O SS -O 7+ IO 8 8+ o U OU + + + 7+ 9+ CK PO C K + + + + 8 o U OU U o f M ra n si t Sidewalk/rail (By Others) Structure (By Others) oad (By Others) Sidewalk/rail Structure oad Washington ve t Grade orthern lignment Legend W ay Consulting Group, Inc scale Match Point - east end 8+ Figure Figure X feet SDIUM ILLG SIO
University s Guiding Principals In an effort to support and complement the stated goals for the Central Corridor and the region in the Draft nvironmental Impact Statement (DIS), the University adopted the following five guiding principles for the CCL he optimal operation of the CCL line is vital to a strong, regional, and multi-modal transportation system Safety is fundamental to the success of the operation of the CCL line he CCL should realize development opportunities while reducing impact to the urban environment he CCL should support a balanced, integrated and multi-modal transportation system in the vicinity of the U of M campus he functionality and aesthetics of the University campus must be enhanced by the CCL orthern lignment Feasibility Criteria In order to determine the feasibility of the orthern lignment, the following four feasibility criteria and respective questions were used to evaluate the orthern lignment s overall feasibility ngineering, Safety, and ccessibility Is the orthern lignment feasible from an engineering basis? Does it meet F standards for light rail systems? Does the orthern lignment accommodate existing and planned roadways and trails? Does the orthern lignment ensure safe, inter-modal interactions by minimizing the number of potential L conflict points with public roads, private driveways and pedestrian crossings? re the three orthern lignment stations accessible to pedestrians, bicyclists, and people with disabilities? CCL and oadway raffic etwork Operations Does the orthern lignment enhance or adversely impact the overall operations of the CCL with regard to ridership, travel time, and equipment requirements? Does the orthern lignment provide reasonable and appropriate roadway circulation in and around the vicinity of the U of M that does not result in failing intersections? DF /9/8 Central Corridor L orthern lignment lternative Feasibility Study
nvironmental and Land Use Impacts Do reasonable mitigation measures exist to address potential environmental impacts to make the orthern lignment feasible? Do compatible land uses currently exist and is their potential for future development along the orthern lignment? Cost ffectiveness Is the fully-loaded capital cost for the orthern lignment reasonable? Does the proposed orthern lignment have a Cost ffectiveness Index (CI) that qualifies for federal funding? DF /9/8 Central Corridor L orthern lignment lternative Feasibility Study
orthern lignment Proposed rack lignment he proposed CCL lignment in the vicinity of the University of Minnesota, known as the orthern lignment is an alternative to the current CCL lignment from I-W to the U of M ransitway (Figure ) he orthern lignment joins the iawatha line at the same location as the CCL lignment From there it crosses over I-W to the south side of Washington venue to a station located under Cedar venue xiting this first station, the alignment turns north, crossing Washington venue to parallel 9th venue S to nd Street S, after which the alignment swings to the northeast to the site of an existing Mississippi iver bridge (Bridge 9) fter crossing a new bridge at this site, the alignment enters the right-of-way of an existing railroad and follows this path to rd venue second station is located on this right-of-way in the vicinity of th venue S he alignment continues east to rd venue S where it turns south and parallels rd venue S to the U of M ransitway, curving to the east where a third station is located between rd venue S and th venue S, just south of the ransitway From this point, the alignment rejoins the current CCL lignment In order to facilitate discussion of the orthern lignment, it is separated into the following three segments: West Bank From I-W to the ast Bank of the Mississippi, including West Bank Station and the river crossing at Bridge 9 (Figure ) he entire orthern lignment would be double-track and conform to the design specifications of the CCL in all other respects ast Bank From the ast Bank of the Mississippi through Dinkytown to st venue S, including the Dinkytown Station (Figure ) Stadium illage From st venue S to the U of M ransitway, including the Stadium illage Station (Figure ) rack Constructability he entire orthern lignment would be double-track and conform to the design specifications of the CCL in all respects Most of the alignment will be ballasted, although some sections will be embedded or direct fixation (Figure ) he embedded track sections are located as follows: ast of the West Bank Station platform to accommodate the pedestrian crossing that provides access to the station t the grade crossing of Washington venue Between the eastbound (B) and westbound (WB) platforms at the Dinkytown Station to accommodate the pedestrian crossing that provides access to the station long rd venue S and within the Stadium illage Station he direct fixation section is the portion of the alignment that is on the Mississippi iver Bridge ote: dditional enhancements are proposed in Chapter 8 that refines the alignment and mitigates potential impacts DF /9/8 Central Corridor L orthern lignment lternative Feasibility Study
h:\projects\99\i-mu\lyou\fsibiliy SUDY\99_gradgn University of Minnesota scale in feet W W D S S B S W D B B LL LL LL BLG S S LL WILLY S W I- S Since the Central Corridor Management Committee meeting of pril, 8, continued feasibility design development of the orthern lignment has resulted in further enhancements which are described in Chapter 8 of this report S : B Sidewalk/rail (By Others) Structure (By Others) oad (By Others) Sidewalk/rail Structure oad L Platform racks C D G O 9 I S 9 Legend W D D SI I S W SI G O Consulting Group, Inc described in Chapter 8 nhancements in this area are Bridge 9 B
99 //8 Sidewalk/rail (By Others) S S Consulting Group, Inc O O S Figure (O 8 -" Since the Central Corridor Management Committee meeting of pril, 8, continued feasibility design development of the orthern lignment has resulted in further enhancements which are described in Chapter 8 of this report Y SI I U Y D S University of Minnesota Structure (By Others) oad (By Others) Sidewalk/rail Structure oad L Platform racks Legend described in Chapter 8 nhancements in this area are 8 G scale in feet D S B8 Central Corridor L orthern lignment lternative Y U B S IL L P S B9 Proposed ast Bank lignment W I- BUILDIG SCICS B7 DUCIO S 7 B Bridge 9 B PL IG W Y SI I XC XC h:\projects\99\i-mu\lyou\fsibiliy SUDY\99_grbdgn I U 7 S S S K M D I
D University of Minnesota UISIY S Y S 8 O 7 9 8 O U D BL S D scale in feet U of M SI WY S Since the Central Corridor Management Committee meeting of pril, 8, continued feasibility design development of the orthern lignment has resulted in further enhancements which are described in Chapter 8 of this report CF Bank Stadium S described in Chapter 8 9 XC XCP h:\projects\99\i-mu\lyou\fsibiliy SUDY\99_grcdgn G OK S nhancements in this area are O K S S S M I Consulting Group, Inc Sidewalk/rail (By Others) Structure (By Others) oad (By Others) Sidewalk/rail Structure oad L Platform racks Legend
XC PXC 99 //8 University of Minnesota Since the Central Corridor Management Committee meeting of pril, 8, continued feasibility design development of the orthern lignment has resulted in further enhancements which are described in Chapter 8 of this report DOUBL COSSO DIC FIXIO MBDDD CK BLLSD CK Legend FLG POL BO FILD) (O 8 -" 8 7 7 8 9 88 7 7 8 8 8 7 8 7 7 7 7 7 9 8 Consulting Group, Inc scale Central Corridor L orthern lignment lternative itle of Graphic CK YPS nhancements in this area are described in Chapter 8 : 7 8 h:\projects\99\i-mu\lyou\fsibiliy SUDY\99_CKYPS_FIGUdgn I M 9 S O Figure Figure X feet
he number, design and location of crossovers would conform to Central Corridor design and Metro ransit operational requirements wo double crossovers have been assumed within the orthern lignment (he number, design and location of crossovers would be determined during preliminary/final design) ail Crossings here are considerable differences between the number of impacted crossing points for the two alignments as shown in able he Washington venue lignment has nine at-grade intersecting streets whereas the orthern lignment only has four Furthermore, there are seven private access points onto Washington venue compared to one on the orthern lignment Finally, the proposed Washington venue transit mall will create at-grade pedestrian crossing points along the Washington venue lignment at each of the nine grade crossings In contrast, the orthern lignment will only intersect four pedestrian crosswalks s previously discussed, there are four locations where there are intersecting streets and pedestrian crossings along the orthern lignment wo of these at-grade public street/pedestrian crossings occur near the Stadium illage Station at the track s intersection with rd venue S and th Street S he other two crossings occur on the West Bank at the track s intersection with st Street S and Washington venue With the addition of the proposed Granary oad (including accompanying street connections) and trails/sidewalks alongside portions of the orthern lignment, there will be two additional at-grade public intersecting streets and two more pedestrian crossings of the tracks able Crossing Comparison* Crossings orthern lignment Washington venue lignment Intersecting t-grade Public Streets 9 Intersecting t-grade Private ccess Points 7 Intersecting Pedestrian Crossings / *his table does not include pedestrian crosswalks that lead onto a station platform or crossings associated with the future construction of Granary oad DF /9/8 Central Corridor L orthern lignment lternative Feasibility Study
West Bank rack lignment Beginning on the West, the CCL lignment joins the iawatha L on the west side of I-W, near the Xcel nergy sub-station (Figure ; ) With the addition of a single crossover, a double crossover and a third track, the junction of these two alignments allows trains from the CCL to interchange with the existing iawatha line he orthern lignment would join the iawatha line in the same manner he CCL, after leaving the existing iawatha lignment, crosses I-W on a new bridge to the side slope of the northbound (B) to eastbound (B) ramp from I-W to Washington venue (Figure ; ) It is at this point that the orthern lignment deviates from the Washington venue lignment fter crossing over I-W, the orthern lignment would drop to the level of Washington venue, which is below the elevation of the surrounding development (Figure, ) his would allow the track to pass underneath both the new Cedar venue S Bridge and the existing 9th venue S Bridge he West Bank Station would be located under the Cedar venue S Bridge (Figure ; S) fter leaving the West Bank Station, the track alignment would curve to the north, cross Washington venue at-grade and enter what would be a -foot wide cut, with retaining walls on each side, passing between 9th venue S and the University of Minnesota Law School (Figure ; ) cross-section of this cut is shown in Figure he track follows this alignment to nd Street S, where it leaves the law school cut and crosses an open area that is owned by the University of Minnesota (Figure ; ) he -unit iverview ower would not be affected, but four of the iverbluff UD subsidized units would be impacted by the orthern lignment In the vicinity of st Street S and nd venue S are located a group of two-story townhomes buildings (iverbluff) and a 7-story high rise condominium building called iverview ower (Figure ; ) he -unit iverview ower would not be affected, but four of the iverbluff UD subsidized units would be impacted to accommodate the orthern lignment ccess to townhomes and high-rise would be re-organized off a new local road constructed in this area Further analysis is underway regarding the impacts to the housing units to minimize the impact and provide the optimum rail separation (see Chapter 8: orthern lignment nhancements) orth of these apartment buildings, the alignment crosses from the West Bank to the ast Bank of the Mississippi iver at the site of a former railroad bridge (now carrying a recreational trail) called Bridge 9 (Figure ; B) West of the bridge, the former railroad alignment, which used to provide a rail connection to downtown Minneapolis, is now permanently blocked owever, to the east, the railroad alignment remains in place he orthern lignment would cross this bridge and enter the existing railroad corridor east of the river ote: additional enhancements are proposed in Chapter 8 that refines the alignment and mitigates potential impacts DF /9/8 Central Corridor L orthern lignment lternative Feasibility Study
Structures Bridges Bridge 9 he existing Bridge umber 9, as it is commonly referred to, is not structurally capable of accommodating L (Figure ; B) Bridge 9 is a fracture critical steel pratt truss that spans the Mississippi iver and steel girder approach spans on each bank between the University of Minnesota s east and west bank campuses he bridge is owned and maintained by the City of Minneapolis and carries the designation of City Bridge umber 7 and Minnesota Department of ransportation Bridge umber 9 he bridge was built in 9 by orthern Pacific ailway ailroad use of the bridge ended in 98, and in 999 the bridge was converted to bicycle and pedestrian use he existing bridge is considered fracture-critical due the nonredundant nature of this type of structure Fracture critical bridges are generally recommended to be replaced as they approach the end of their design life instead of being rehabilitated since the failure of a single member would likely lead to the catastrophic failure of the entire bridge Given the age of the bridge and its fracture critical status, full replacement is proposed as part of the feasibility study Figure shows the replacement concept for Bridge 9 iew northeast along the existing trail as it approaches Bridge o 9 and the Mississippi iver Full replacement of Bridge 9, with the potential reuse of the ornamental railing or other accoutrements, is assumed for purposes of this study he proposed replacement bridge is a four-span steel girder bridge with a concrete deck to accommodate two L tracks and a -foot wide trail for bicycle and pedestrian use he new bridge will lie on the same alignment as the existing bridge he new bridge would have one pier in the middle of the river utilizing the same cofferdam as the existing bridge here would be one less pier on each bank of the river by using a deeper steel girder section than the original approach spans It should also be noted that the existing center pier in the river has a cofferdam that was constructed in 9 to protect the pier his existing cofferdam will help aid the construction of the new pier Cedar venue he Cedar venue Bridge across Washington venue would need to be replaced as part of this project (Figure ; B) he new bridge would be similar in size and function as the existing bridge but slightly longer to accommodate the CCL alignment crossing underneath on the south side here would be sufficient width for five traffic lanes (four travel lanes and one center left turn lane) and sidewalks on each side he Cedar venue Bridge across Washington venue would need to be replaced as part of this project here would be sufficient width for five traffic lanes and sidewalks on each side DF /9/8 Central Corridor L orthern lignment lternative Feasibility Study