Memo- Hopkins, Minnetonka, St. Louis Park Transit Study
I Administration Department I
Memorandum
From:
Date:
Subject:
Mayor Chuck Redepenning and City Council
City Manager Steve Mielke
Jim Parsons
August 5, 1999
Hopkins-Minnetonka-St. Louis Park Transit Study, Phase II
To:
Attached is the preliminary report from Metro Transit for phase II of the 3-city transit
study. The report identifies near-term and long-term improvements to transit services
and facilities. Improvements to reverse-commute service and to suburb-to-suburb
connections are a major feature of the report. The major facility improvement proposed
by the report is the Hopkins Station on Excelsior Boulevard. The Hopkins Station
would function as a regional transit center.
The ridership checks done last fall as part of phase II of the study show that bus
ridership in Hopkins is at a high level, as measured in passengers per revenue hour.
This means that bus service in Hopkins is well used, and that there are few route
segments in Hopkins with low ridership. So, Hopkins should receive the same or more
bus service that it does now. Metro Transit does not expect to cut the overall level of
bus service in Hopkins.
Steve Mahowald from Metro Transit will present the report to the Council
##
PRELIMINARY REPORT, PHASE II STUDY
The cities of Minnetonka, St. Louis Park, and Hopkins have joined with Metro Transit to
study specific opportunities to improve transit service and facilities. In part, the study is
prompted by the following trends:
Increasing Congestion
All principal arterial roadways within the study area are presently congested
during the afternoon rush hour period. This includes Interstates 394 and 494
and Highways 7, 100, and 169. Alternate routes are also increasingly
congested. Projections indicate that by the year 2010, there will be 63,000
additional trips per day originating from the study area - a 14% increase from
today. Without additional miles of highway lanes, transit service and facility
improvements are necessary in order to help maintain current mobility levels
and quality of life in the study area.
Economic Vitality
By the year 2000, there will be approximately 100,000 jobs in the three city
area. Many of these jobs will be filled with workers from other parts of the
region. Study area employers, including Hopkins Care Center and others, are
having difficulty in filling positions because of inadequate transit service.
Regional work force access to jobs via transit will continue to be a pressing
issue in the future.
Changing Travel Patterns
Travel patterns which were once primarily oriented to and concentrated on
downtown Minneapolis and St. Paul have changed dramatically. Current
travel patterns are, and future travel patterns will continue to be, primarily
oriented among many suburban locations. However, the greatest single
concentration of trips continues to be to the center cities, although suburban
activity and employment centers will continue to account for more total trips.
These changing travel patterns require more effective delivery of transit
service in suburban areas to build ridership beyond the current 1700 weekday
transit trips occurring in the City of Hopkins.
PHASE II OVERVIEW
Phase I of the Study quantified and described existing transit services and identified
potential improvements. Updated ridership checks were completed in Phase II (Fall,
1998) and were used to evaluate the performance of fixed route services and to further
identify opportunities for improvement and potential new markets for transit service.
The products of the Phase II study will be transit service and facility improvement
recommendations for the three cities and an Implementation Plan spelling out
improvement costs and the roles and responsibilities for implementing the
improvements.
1
PHASE II STRATEGIES
The Phase II study identified the following key areas for improved service:
· Express Service Improvements
Improve the efficiency and effectiveness of express service to downtown
Minneapolis.
· Reverse Commute Service Improvements
Improve and expand reverse commute services from Minneapolis to
employment centers in the three cities.
. Community Connection Improvements
Develop and strengthen community to community transit connections, and
connections to regional transit stations.
· Facility Improvements
Develop transit infrastructure, including transitways, stations, park and rides,
and boarding points necessary to support service improvements, and to
enhance passenger comfort.
PHASE II ApPROACH
When evaluating potential improvements, the Phase II Study uses two operational
models, and also emphasizes the importance of appropriate facility improvements.
· Operational models:
Transit services typically operate by attempting to strike a balance between
two models. On the one hand, transit should maximize the number of people
it serves (productivity model). On the other hand, transit should serve as
much area as possible (coverage model).
Bringing People to Transit -
When we bring people to transit, through park and ride facilities, focused
boarding points, or ultimately through intensified land use, productivity
increases and costs per passenger drop. Bringing people to transit is an
important emphasis of the Phase II study, through improvements to commuter
and reverse commute express services, and by linking reverse commute
service to major employment centers. Most of the facility improvements also
emphasize bringing people to transit, by adding shelters to certain park and
ride locations, for example.
Bringing Transit to People -
When we bring transit to people by covering a large area in a door-to-door
fashion, productivity drops as more time is spent serving passengers in
dispersed locations, so costs and subsidies increase. Bringing transit to
people has less emphasis in the Phase II study, but remains important in
serving the transit dependent, through dial-a-ride service, for example.
2
LONG TERM IMPROVEMENTS (5-10 YEAR TIMELlNE)
· Develop a Busway in the Southwest Corridor with Potential for
Future LRT
Busways (transitways) have the benefit of being similar to LRT in attracting
riders through increased convenience and reliability and encouraging
development around stations. Particular benefits to busways include being:
· more affordable than light rail
· fundable from multiple sources
· more flexible in routing
· faster to build
· potentially convertible to light rail
Examples: Transitway Option 1 follows railroad right-of-way between
downtown Minneapolis and a terminal station at the 1-494/Hwy 62 area.
Transitway Option 2 (see map) follows railroad right-of-way between
downtown Minneapolis and downtown Hopkins, and then dedicated bus
shoulder lanes from downtown Hopkins out to the Hwy 7/Co. Rd. 101 area.
The Minnetonka City Council has expressed a preliminary preference for
Transitway Option 2 over Option 1.
· Develop Transit Centers and Transfer Stops
Examples: Hopkins Station; Blakerrransitway Transfer Stop;
MainstreeUShady Oak Transfer Stop
· Improve Transit Services
Develop a simplified trunk-feeder/dial-a-ride service system for radial services
and a modified grid system for community connection services. Examples:
Feeder and reverse commute to/from Transit Centers; north-south transit
corridors along Hopkins Crossroad and 11th Avenue South; improved
connections from areas north of Hwy 7 and west of Hwy 169 to downtown
Hopkins.
3
NEAR-TERM IMPROVEMENTS (1-5 YEAR TIMELlNE)
The near-term objective is to make the first steps towards better serving Hopkins
and neighboring communities through selective reallocation of existing transit
resources. (Longer-term improvements look to adding new resources to the
system.) Near-term service improvement concepts reallocate revenue hours that
are currently spent in low productivity areas to other areas where there is either a
greater expressed need and/or greater likelihood of increased productivity.
Productivity is measured through the number of passengers per revenue hour,
and Metro Transit's regional average is 40 passengers per revenue hour. A
revenue hour is the time that the bus is "on duty," picking up and dropping off
passengers. Currently there are a total of 37.3 revenue hours of service per
weekday in Hopkins, with an average of 46 passengers per revenue hour (see
Productivity Table). This compares with 107.9 revenue hours in 51. Louis Park
and 46.5 revenue hours in Minnetonka. (These revenue hours do not include
routes 73,74, and 75, which operate on 1-394.)
· EXPRESS IMPROVEMENTS
Objectives: Add midday express trips; establish bus shoulder lanes in areas
of congestion.
Example: NEW-Route 664 Midday Express Service operates express
service from downtown Minneapolis to Park NicolletlPark Commons and the
Hopkins Station. This service would run the same routing as the existing
Route 64 express service that currently has no midday service. An important
difference is that the midday service would serve the Park Commons area
east of Highway 100. It is proposed for hourly midday service (supplementing
the existing peak hour express service) operating from 9:00 AM to 3:30 PM.
It would cost 1.5 hours in revenue service (Hopkins' share) with an estimated
36 daily passengers or approximately 24 passengers per revenue hour.
· REVERSE COMMUTE IMPROVEMENTS
Objectives: Target employers located in blue-shaded areas on the enclosed
maps for additional reverse commute services; add reverse commute express
service for Hopkins and its major employers; serve later and earlier shifts.
Examples: NEW-Route 618 Reverse Commute Service to Southern
Hopkins and Minnetonka Corporate Center operates from the Hopkins
Station to the K-Tel Drive and Minnetonka Corporate Center areas with 30
minute frequency from 5:30am-8:30am, 3pm-6pm, and 1 0:30pm-11 :30pm,
serving 1 st, 2nd, and 3rd shift employees. Route 618 will cost 1.96 revenue
hours, carry 40 passengers, and average 20 passengers per revenue hour for
the Hopkins portion of the service. See also Route 609 below for service to
Alliant Techsystems and northeastern Hopkins area employers and Route
616 for service to the Opus II area.
4
· COMMUNITY CONNECTIONS IMPROVEMENTS
Objectives: Begin developing County Road 73 (Hopkins Crossroad) as a
north-south Transit Corridor. Increase transit connections within the three
cities, such as between downtown Hopkins, the Westbrooke area, and
Eisenhower Community Center.
Examples: NEW-Route 609 Hopkins Station-Knollwood Mall Circulator
operates from the Hopkins Station to Mainstreet/5th Avenue and Knollwood
Mall via the Ramsgate area. This service replaces part of the existing Route
614, and provides improved service to the Ramsgate area. The service will
operate on 30 minute frequency from 6am-12midnight, serving 210
passengers per day (21.6 passengers per revenue for 9.72 revenue hours in
Hopkins).
REVISED-Route 614 Hopkins Station-Eisenhower-RidgedaJe Circulator
operates between the hours of 6am-10pm on a 60 minute frequency via a
more direct routing than the current 614. The revised route is projected to
serve 70 passengers per day in Hopkins (12.1 passengers per revenue hour
over 5.76 revenue hours.) This is an increase over the existing Route 614,
which currently serves 32 passengers per day in Hopkins (6 passengers per
revenue hour over 5.6 revenue hours).
NEW-Route 616 Downtown Hopkins-Hopkins Station-Westbrooke Area
Circulator operating on 30 minute frequency from 9am-3:30pm and 6pm-
12midnight (supplemented by Route 70 service in the morning and afternoon
peak periods), this route will serve 200 passengers per day in Hopkins (40
passengers per revenue hour over 5 revenue hours of service).
· IMPROVEMENTS FOR TRANSIT DEPENDENT POPULATION
Objective: Increase frequency and number of regular route trips serving
pockets of transit dependents.
Examples: Routes 609, 614,616,664 described above.
· FACILITY IMPROVEMENTS
Objectives: Expand park and ride capacity and amenities, develop waiting
and transfer facilities to better serve existing and potential customers, develop
travel time advantages for transit riders and to increase travel time reliability.
Examples: Establish Hopkins Station facility, enhance boarding points along
Mainstreet and at Eisenhower, Ramsgate and Westbrooke areas, create
transit vehicle priority/preemption systems for services on Excelsior
Boulevard, particularly at 5th Avenue.
5
OTHER SERVICE IMPROVEMENTS RECENTLY IMPLEMENTED
· Route 614 - New north/south community connector.
· Route 12 - Added midday and evening service to Westbrook; improved
weekend service; add reverse commute service for Hopkins Care Center.
· Route 64 - Added later express trip.
The working team for the three cities, Metro Transit, and LSA Design is interested in
hearing City Council comments and suggestions about the preliminary report.
NEXT STEPS OF THE STUDY
As indicated below, more steps be completed in August and September, 1999 to finish
the study. Near-term service improvements will begin in September, 1999.
1. Develop Ridership/Cost Estimates
2. Develop Implementation Plan
3. Complete and Deliver Study Report to Councils
4. Continued Public Involvement
5. Phased Implementation of Near Term Service Improvements
6. Phased Implementation of Near Term Facility Improvements
7. Phase III - Transitway Feasibility/Alternatives Analysis
6
Aug 1999
Aug 1999
Sept 1999
Sept 1999 and ongoing
Sept 1999 and ongoing
Spring 2000 and ongoing
Future
Hopkins' Current Weekday
Transit Revenue Hours and Productivity
Revenue Total Passengers per
Minutes # Revenue Segment Total Revenue
Route Section per Trip Trips Hours Description Passenger Hour*
12 3 1 25 0.4 11 th/5th St S-5th St S/K- Tel 30 72
12 5 5 79 6.6 Main/17th Ave-5th AlCo 3 466 71
12 7 4 98 6.5 5th Av/Co 3-Excel/321' e Mdbk 402 62
12 2 3 44 2.2 Semtana Rd/llth-llth/5th St S 132 60
12 4 2 79 2.6 Co 61/Co 3-Main/17th Av 100 38
12 6 3 19 1.0 11th/5th St S-5th Av/Co 3 30 32
Total 19.3 1160 60
17 1 3 21 1.1 Blake/Hwy7-2nd St/Tyler 78 74
17 2 4 21 1.4 2nd St/Tyler-Blake/Hwy7 88 63
Total 2.5 166 68
64 3 5 12 1.0 5th Av/Co 3-Excel/321' e Mdbk 82 82
64 2 5 12 1.0 Main/17th Ave-5th AlCo 3 70 70
64 1 2 8 0.3 Co 61/Co 3-Main/17th A v 13 49
64 4 7 6 0.7 Excel/Hwy1 OO-Hen/Wash at 44% na na
64 5 5 2 0.2 Excel/Hwyl00-Hen/Wash at 30% na na
64 6 11 2 0.4 Excel/Hwyl00-Hen/Wash at 71% na na
64 7 9 2 0.3 Excel/Hwyl00-Hen/Wash at 56% na na
Total 3.8 165 43
66 1 2 6 0.2 Excel/321' e Mdbk-ExcellBlake 2 10
66 2 3 6 0.3 ExcellBlake-Blake/Hwy7 0 0
Total 0.5 2 4
67 3 7 4 0.5 2nd St/Tyler- TexasIDivision 58 124
67 2 4 4 0.3 TexasIDivision-2nd St/Tyler 12 45
67 1 2 8 0.3 MtkaIHoneywood-Mtka! Atwater 2 8
67 4 1 6 0.1 Mtka/HwylOO-Nic/3rd at 4% na na
67 5 1 3 0.1 MtkaIHwylOO-Nic/3rd at 3% na na
67 6 9 4 0.6 MtkaIHwylOO-Nic/3rd at 44% na na
67 7 1 1 0.0 Mtka/HwyI69-Nic/3rd at 6% na na
Total 1.8 72 41
70 2 1 6 0.1 Semtana!Opp Ct-Semtana!11 th 16 160
70 1 2 8 0.3 Hwy7/Co73-Hwy7/HwyI69 32 120
70 3 7 6 0.7 Semtana!11 th-Co3/5thA v 60 86
70 4 2 6 0.2 Hwy7 /HwyI69-Nic/W ash@6% na na
70 5 1 2 0.0 LTC-Nic/Wash@6% na na
70 6 26 6 2.6 Co3/5thA v-Nic/Wash@100% na na
Total 3.9 108 28
*Metro Transit's regional system average
is 40 passengers/revenue hour
8/4/99,4:55 PM
Hopkhis' Current Weekday
Transit Revenue Hours and Productivity
Revenue Total Passengers per
Minutes # Revenue Segment Total Revenue
Route Section per Trip Trips Hours Description Passenger Hour*
614 1 5 16 1.3 Main/17thAve-5thAv/Co3 26 20
614 3 3 16 0.8 ExcellBlake-Blake/Hwy7 4 5
614 4 4 16 1.1 Blake/Hwy7-Hwy7/12thAv 2 2
614 2 5 16 1.3 5thA v/Co3-Excel/Blake 0 0
614 5 4 16 1.1 H wy7 112thA v-Co 73/RRxing 0 0
Total 5.6 32 6
Grand Total 37.3 1705 46
*Metro Transit's regional system average
is 40 passengers/revenue hour
8/4/99,4:55 PM
~
~
~ ~
~>~
r.I)~O ,........
~a~<oO
~~~~~
.3 ~~~
~v5 ~ r.I) ~
-( ~
w 0
~ Q -
+-'
't7)
C.
roo
F~l- ~i
H
~i
b
C
~
o
~
Q)
'0 ell
ii: ~
c ~ <(
g- g ~12.sa
a. .z. (;):5_ ~1il -:go E
o - .2.... 0 ell .- c: Q) c: ~
>. -,!: :J Q)e... c: 2:: c: (,):Js= E
- (/) 0 - E """ 0 Q) 0 ._ 0 0 0
'2 liie... ~ E ~ g>'Cllii (/) u ~ CO ., Sl (,)
, -~o. ...-._-~ -<.0
E Q) rJl c: .- Q) 0 32 1-...."0 a:: C:Q) ~..... (/) ell I::: c( rJl
c: ,- 0>- U a::.... ~ ,_ a. ,_ ....
g~ l!!~ &,~ "O"O~~ al~ .3 5E ~ ~ :2 ~,~ ~
(,) I- 0 \oJ Q) c: rJl...... rJl ,- c: Q) Q) c: ~ '- Q)
~"E ~m :? 1l ~. 8. 6 8. ~ .ll E ~" ~ ~ ~ ~
< · .. 6 1ii < ~i! 0'" e. . 8 w 0 , 1
]Hn; ~~"-.":>- ~~~~~ r
<II .
rJ'J
~
;::::S
o
~
~
Q)
~
I
.--..
rJ'J
~
ro
Q)
~
tn
I
~
'-'
rJ'J
~
d
Q)
S
Q)
:>
o
~
~
S
~
rJ'J S
d ~
.l"""'I Q)
~t::
~ro
o Q)
~Z
en
- r./:J Q)
- .... -
0.. .-
~ v ~
ro u
~ d T"""
~ 0
U
~L()
~ .
d 0
'''';
~ S
'<t, .1""'"'l,
% ~ 0
t:t
LO
o
<1z
rJJ
~
::::s
o
=:r=
~
(l)
~
~
o
I
".-...
rJJ
~
ro
(l)
~
tr)
I
.,....,--l
"-"
rJJ
~
=
(l)
s
(l)
:>
o
~
~
s
~
rJJ S
= ~
.~ (l)
~t
~ro
o (l)
~z
r./)
~
~
t=>=~
r./)o~
z~~~8
~j~.I~1
~~~~r./):I:
:;'-;;'~,
~ " "
~ Q -
+-'
'iIi
C ~
cu-
t=~
Ois
.f1 ~I
~ I!'
Z""'O~
'.
H
.,
.~
~
d
~
CIJ
~ Q)
(I)~~ ~ ==
- g. C ~ ~ gJlQ) ~~
g._ >< - _ 0 ro 0:: ... I r:n Q)
~ - .5 '2 (f).5 _ Q) 't3 "" Iii <II <( 'I - U
._ (f) 0 ::]... 0 ('0 U Q) .... 0- , III I.'" ..... T"""
5 ... a.. Iii E ~ a.. C 'S: C ('0 0 c..:5 I..... loooI
III C en 0 ... C III -c ~ 0 E 1- 0
E III 'ti g> 0'" E III C g>'6>'" Q) 0 U 5 -2:I: I ~
E -c c '6 '6> $ 0 -c l!!.- Q) $ (f) u .~ 0 0 '" E U
o c:: l!!... Q) 55 u c:: l-"E 0:: cQ) Iii >< III III Q; ro ,S Sl UO I L()
U l-('OO::u-c -c('O-c U:t: (f) - c::~~.. C
Cl"g Cldl Cl_ 5l"g 5l dl 5l ~ ..9 5 rJ) -c ~.s <( g.:i: 5l .
.5 ('0 .5... .5'00 0 ('0 0 ... 0'00 C E l3 $ '(3 ~ ~ :I: ~ :;; _ 0
Ui ~ Ui 0 Ui C c.~ c. 0 c. C ('0 E ... Ill'- 0- 0- - I.'"
'x Iii 'x offi' 'x l!! e Iii e'ffi' e l!!..c c. (jj 5 ~ ~ ~ ~ Iii I $:1
",.D-W.h: "-.'-'-.":>- ~~~~ i zoo zoot], i ] a
Q)
l-4
~L()
o
<Iz
00
~
ffi
::E
~~
~>'-...
00.;.::0 IJ"""'"
~~~i@
~.s~~~
~c;:;~~oo
'"
c:
~
o
:I:
1< ~~i
<1> "" t;I I
I,.; c _
+-'
"(7)
c,
co "
i=i
~ij
j.
II
~
~
o
~
~
-<=
a.-a ..c
i!;> .s Q. i!
"2 ~ ~ (ij
::J; <<1.- C
E 1;) 'E 0
E <= '" '0,
o co 0 CD
U ., ~ CD a::
0):2 0) ~ 0)
~~~ ~ ~
.- ....- (.) .-
x m x 0 ><
WQ.Wu.. W
.
..
.
.,
8f :2 Q) ro
I:: 'f ~ ~
,- '" ~ <(
Q) ~ CD ~ g ~~ ~ Q)
"C <II "C <II "" .,.<::0 Q..-
Ea::Ei3 E ECfEi3 E ~ ,~~o:l ~ E
Q)~Q)o m .!-t:.!lo.!! cQ)~'O"'2 ~
1:: (Q ffi!:!:: - '5 0) ('Q a!:!:: - C> S (.) c8 c 0 C'-I E
31 Q. ., 0.,5 .,..c 5 Q. 5 0..5 5..c U '1: _ .- _ '" .c: '" 0
Zi!;> z~& zi!....Ii!;> ....I~&....Ii! >< i!;> c9l ~ .~ ~ ~ %~U
'0'2" 0)'0- -0-2 '0 L... C'J"C- m '2 0 2 ~ <( (5'1Q.. Q)
~~ ~~-B ~g ~~ ~~-B Sg.~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ :t.~~1
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~.~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ e-.e m ~.~ ~ ~ a; i
Q.U Q.t-CD Q.a:: Q.U Q.t-CD Q.~ I- U W :l Q. zoo zooD::,
... .... .~~~~~ JI
I
..-..
rJ:.J
a
~
~
o
"l"""""'l
I
l.r)
"-'
rJ:.J
~
d
~
a
~
:>
o
~
~
a
~
rJ:.J a
d ~
.~ ~
~ OJ)
~d
o 0
::r:~
en
Q)
~CI:l:':::
~-+-'.::::
~o..
CI:l~T"""
~ U
~=
~o
ULO
~o
s::::::
.-
So
.-
,......;
~
~LO
o
~ <1z
Q)
en
~
E
E
o
U
Q)
l!!
.,
~
a::
I
LJ
N
~
ro
~
~
.~
rJ:.J
~
ro
~
I
III
~
~
,;,
~
c