Laserfiche WebLink
Implementation and Staaina Considerations <br />Implementation and staging of light rail transit corridors by 2010 will depend primarily on availability of <br />funding, completion of environmental and engineering studies to further ascertain the cost-effectiveness <br />of light rail transit on specific alignments and scheduling of complementary improvements such as <br />highway construction in the same right-of-way. While it is recognized that some of these factors may <br />cause a second -priority corridor to be constructed before a first -priority corridor, it is in the region's best <br />interest to ensure that sufficient funding be available for first -priority corridors when it becomes possible <br />to implement them. <br />Staging of the regional light rail transit system will be determined by the Regional Transit Board's light <br />rail transit development and financial plan, as mandated by the 1989 Minnesota Legislature. Because <br />federal, state and regional resources are limited, staging should be based primarily on the most cost- <br />effective use of resources. <br />Corridors that may be cost-effective for light rail transit in a 20-year horizon may not be appropriate for <br />initial stages of system development. In corridors where ridership forecasts are based on fast-growing <br />population and employment levels rather than existing transit ridership, light rail transit may not be cost- <br />effective in initial stages of system construction. Light rail transit development plans should be <br />periodically reassecsed in light of regional development trends ensure that the timing and location of <br />light rail transit implementation is cost-effective. <br />Further engineering and design studies are needed in each of the above corridors and those corridors <br />and extensions of corridors proposed by regional railroad authorities to refine the initial analysis <br />performed and further ascertain the cost-effectiveness of light rail transit on specific alignments. Certain <br />alignments in those corridors may be more efficient and effective light rail applications than others. The <br />Council will evaluate the cost-effectiveness of specific light rail transit proposals based upon the <br />evaluation indicators contained in Policy 2. <br />Cost -Effectiveness Considerations <br />Two factors in light rail development are critical in terms of cost-effectiveness: ride6hip and cost. The <br />cost-effectiveness of light rail in comparison to other transportation alternatives (including "doing <br />nothing") is directly related to its ability to carry more people at an equal or lower cost while achieving <br />public policy goals. The cost-effectiveness of light rail transit increases when ridership increases and <br />total cost decreases. In general, cost-effective light rail applications will include selecting alignments <br />that: <br />are efficient in reducing the overall operating cost of transit in a corridor, including feeder -bus <br />service and other remaining transit services; <br />best serve transit -dependent populations; <br />best reduce automobile traffic on the metropolitan highway system; <br />are cost-effective in recovering the initial capital investment over the economic life of the light <br />rail facility. <br />All light rail transit proposals, including the six corridors already in the plan, must be compared to the <br />performance evaluation measures of Policy 2 using a consistent methodology before implementation <br />decisions are made. The level of analysis should be appropriate for what is likely to be one of the <br />largest public infrastructure investments in the region in the next 20 years. <br />4 <br />