Laserfiche WebLink
<br />) <br /> <br />MnDOT and is not included in the Northstar Corridor Development Authority budget. . <br />BRW was recommended for the Extension study for continuity and their familiarity with <br />the project. <br /> <br />A motion was made by Duane Grandy, seconded by Jerry Goebel and carried <br />unanimously to approve the BRW WorkPlan for the Extension of the Northstar Corridor <br />Commuter Rail Feasibility Study North of the City of Rice to Camp Ripley. <br /> <br />c) Tim Yantos reviewed the commuter rail capital cost summary estimate comparing 1999 <br />and 2003 cost elements of the Northstar Corridor (Minneapolis to East St. Cloud) and <br />LRT Connection. The total projected cost in 1999 dollars for the Northstar Corridor is <br />$196,270,000 and in 2003 dollars, the cost is estimated at $223,000,000. The projected <br />cost for the LRT Connection in 1999 dollars is $19,720,000 and in 2003 dollars, the cost <br />is estimated at $22,120,000. <br /> <br />5. Mr. Yantos reviewed the preliminary Rail Ridership Results for the Northstar Corridor (dated <br />October 11, 1999). The results represent a summary comparison for phase 1 and phase 2 of the <br />average weekday daily ridership, southbound to Minneapolis and northbound to St. Cloud and to <br />Rice, for the years 2005 and 2020. <br /> <br />6. <br /> <br />Gabriel Guevara, MnDOT, distributed and reviewed the Commuter Rail System Plan, Summary <br />of Progress, dated 11/04/99. The plan serves as a guideline only and is currently a work-in- <br />progress involving staff from Mn/DOT and the NCDA. The plan consists of Task I: <br />Development of Commuter Rail System Standards and Policies and Task II: Institutional Issues. <br />Draft technical memoranda have been prepared subsequent to analysis on the following task <br />elements: <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Task I: Locomotives, Rolling Stock, Maintenance Facilities, Communication, Station <br />Spacing / Operating Speeds, Service Levels, Station Deferrals and Line Truncations, <br />Central Corridor Schedule, Right-of-Way, Fares, Park-n-Ride Facilities, and Performance <br />Standards. <br /> <br />Task II: Governance, Railroad Negotiations, Financing Techniques, and Funding <br />Sources. <br /> <br />Robert Kirchner, representing the City of Anoka, asked Mr. Guevara why the MnDOT standards <br />(2~ to 3 miles) and the NCDA standards (minimum 5 miles) for station spacing were so different <br />and what criteria are used to identify CBD's. <br /> <br />Mr. Guevara responded that stations should generally be at least 2Y2 to 3 miles apart, perhaps <br />closer in CBD areas, but as much as seven miles apart in outlying areas. Essentially, population <br />and job density reflects station separation. Land uses near stations should be transit oriented to <br />generate ridership. <br /> <br />Mr. Kirchner stated that Mr. Guevara's answer was very significant and asked that it be reflected <br />in the minutes. <br /> <br />7. <br /> <br />Tim Yantos, reviewed the Northstar Corridor commuter rail operation and maintenance <br />(0 & M) cost estimates as follows: <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />2 <br />