Laserfiche WebLink
DRAFT IMPLEMENTATION/BUSINESS PLAN <br />Working Paper of September 30, 1998 -- Page 11 <br /> <br />Capital Cost Savings: Station Deferrals <br /> <br />It would also be possible to realize additional savings in the capital program, although on <br />much more modest levels, by deferring from initial implementation construction of <br />relatively unproductive stations on several lines. ~ these cases, feW'passenger losses are <br />likely, as most riders would probably shift to the nearest available station. The stations that <br />could be considered for deferral, with impacts on users and costs (2003 dollars) are: <br /> <br />Andover on Route A -- $ 3.3 Million savings for 100 riders diverted to Cedar or McKay <br />Lake; <br /> <br />Chanhassen on Route H -- $ 5.0 Million savings for 80 riders to Chaska or Eden Prarie; <br /> <br />Little Canada (35E) on Route S -- $ 4.1 Million savings for 60 riders diverted to <br /> White Bear Lake or Little Canada (694) <br /> <br />This total of $12.4 million represents less than 1% of the system capital costs. For the <br />two downtown stations, at $17 million each, it may be possible, as final design and <br />implementation plans proceed, to either scale them back or to share some of those station <br />expenditures as part of a joint development program. That would be highly dependent <br />upon Minneapolis and Saint Paul real estate markets at the time. It may also be possible to <br />reduce expenditures at outlying stations, or to look to local communities to provide these <br />facilities, as practiced by some commuter rail start-ups in North America. These station <br />cost savings or sharing possibilities are not certain enough to reduce the capital cost base: <br />of financial analyses at this time. <br /> <br />Capital Cost Savings: Staging of Routes <br /> <br />In order to create an initial implementation program markedly lower in overall cost than <br />the fidl system of $1.364 billion, or the truncated system of $1.179 billion, the routes <br />would have to be grouped into discrete development stages. Multi-line start-up systems <br />often take this approach. <br /> <br />Relevant technical factors derived from capital and operating cost estimates, ridership <br />forecasts and revenue projections are presented in the Evaluation Matrix on the following <br />page. Policy and practical considerations are also relevant to staging, including regional <br />service balance and railroad implementation arrangements. : <br /> <br /> <br />