CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS Hennepin/First Transportation Study NIEBNA Board Meeting November 10, 2016 11/10/2016 1
Study Overview Evaluate transportation system and alternatives Coordinate with County, Metro Transit, and MnDOT Examine one-way, two-way, and hybrid configurations Document pros and cons Consideration for quality of life, access, safety, connectivity, and mobility for all modes No improvements programmed or funding identified for such improvements* *MnDOT Projects: Intersection/Signal ADA Upgrades (2016-18) Central Avenue Bridge (2019-20) Source: Nicollet Island-East Bank Neighborhood Association 2
Study Overview 3
Study Stakeholders Technical Advisory Committee City of Minneapolis Hennepin County Metro Transit MnDOT Study Advisory Committee Chair (1) NIEBNA (2) Marcy Holmes (2) Northeast Business Association (2) Ward 3 Appointees (2) Hennepin County Appointees (2) 4
Study Approach and Process Approach Setting Values and Goals Understanding Problems Criteria and Measures of Effectiveness Developing and Screening Alternatives Identifying Tradeoffs and Balancing Goals Process One- Way Two- Way Hybrid Corridor Alternatives Criteria and Stakeholder Guidance Detailed Evaluation and Summary Concept Development Analysis of Alternatives Documentation 5
Key Tasks and Elements Key tasks: Data Collection Existing Conditions Inventory and Analysis Concept Development Traffic Analysis Alternatives Analysis and Evaluation Documentation and Final Report Key Elements: Access to and from primary destination points, Innovative pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure, Providing a safe environment for all travel modes, Alignment with future development plans, Changes in traffic operations and parking demand, Existing and planned transit service, and Consideration of travel through the study area. 6
Issues and Constraints 7
Relevant Corridor Plans and Guidelines Nicollet-Central Modern Streetcar (Adopted LPA) Hennepin County Bike Plan (Planned Corridors) Minneapolis Protected Bikeway Plan (Tier II) 8
Evaluation Process Identification of Cross-Sections Coordinated approach with technical and stakeholder groups Adapt SAC s objectives into qualitative and quantitative technical metrics Identified technical and design fatal flaws Screened concepts to identify leading concepts Development of Corridor Concepts Balanced approach Phasing/Staging Small / Large Scale 9
Concept Development Design Considerations 10
Concepts Moving Forward Leading One-Way Concepts 1-1B: Two Lanes (Transit Right Side) 1-2B: Three Lanes with Off-Peak Parking (Streetcar Left Side) 1-2C: Three Lanes (Transit Right Side) Leading Two-Way Concepts 2-1A: Three Lanes (Retrofit) 2-1B: Three Lanes and One-Sided Parking (Transit Right Side) 2-1C: Three Lanes and Two-Sided Parking (Transit Right Side)* * Results in a reduced pedestrian zone Designs are conceptual and for planning purposes only: Do not include (but does not preclude) conversion of 4th Avenue to two-way operations or modifications to Hennepin/Central/5th intersection Lourdes Place two-way restoration independent of Hennepin Ave design Require more detailed engineering and interagency coordination Input needed from residents, businesses, neighborhood, advisory committees, etc. Continued coordination with Streetcar EA Study 11
One-Way Concepts Concept 1-1B Two-Lanes Summary Pedestrian Realm: 20 Bicycles: Protected Bike Lane Transit: Streetcar Compatible Travel Lanes: 2 Parking: One Side Implementation: Reconstruction More Space Less Space No Change Varies 12
One-Way Concepts Concept 1-2B Flexible Peak/Off-Peak Lane Summary Pedestrian Realm: 19 Bicycles: Protected Bike Lane Transit: Streetcar Compatible Travel Lanes: 2 Off-Peak, 3 Peak Parking: One Side Peak, Two Sides Off-Peak Implementation: Retrofit and Reconstruction More Space Less Space No Change Varies 13
One-Way Concepts Concept 1-2C Three Lanes Summary Pedestrian Realm: 19 Bicycles: Protected Bike Lane Transit: Streetcar Compatible Travel Lanes: 3 Parking: One Side Implementation: Retrofit and Reconstruction More Space Less Space No Change Varies 14
Two-Way Concepts Concept 2-1A Two-Way: Three-Lanes Summary Pedestrian Realm: 12 Bicycles: Standard Bike Lane Transit: Streetcar Compatible Travel Lanes: 3 Parking: Both Sides Implementation: Retrofit and Reconstruction More Space Less Space No Change Varies 15
Two-Way Concepts Concept 2-1B Three-Lanes Summary Pedestrian Realm: 19 Bicycles: Protected Bike Lane Transit: Streetcar Compatible Travel Lanes: 3 Parking: One Side Implementation: Reconstruction More Space Less Space No Change Varies 16
Two-Way Concepts Concept 2-1C Three-Lanes Two Sided Parking Summary Pedestrian Realm: 9-12 Bicycles: Protected Bike Lane Transit: Streetcar Compatible Travel Lanes: 3 Parking: Both Side Implementation: Reconstruction More Space Less Space No Change Varies 17
Corridor Concepts 18
Traffic Analysis Detailed Simulation Model Transit schedules and stop locations Bicycle and Pedestrian interactions Existing and Future conditions Afternoon Peak: Limited bridge crossings from downtown Closer intersection spacing along Hennepin Largest volumes at bridge out of downtown and across river Expected Congestion: Hennepin/Main intersection represents bottleneck into Northeast Higher demand out of downtown, travel concentrated at same period Most delay for One-Way 2-Lane and Two-Way Concepts 2-Lane alternatives: Left-turns and transit stops may block both thru lanes 19
Discussion and Next Steps Final Documentation and Resources http://www.minneapolismn.gov/cip/2016/wcmsp-174777 Agency Coordination Meetings External Agency Meetings Neighborhood, NEBA, and Advisory Committees (Ongoing) Thank you! Nathan Koster nathan.koster@minneapolismn.gov 612.673.3638 20