The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About01.14.08 Work Session Packet City of Farmington 325 Oak Street Farmington, MN 55024 Mission Statement Through teamwork and cooperation, the City of Farmington provides quality services that preserve our proud past and foster a promising future. AGENDA CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP JANUARY 14, 2008 6:30 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1. CaUTo Order 2. Approve Agenda 3. Boards and Commissions 4. Cell Phone Allowance S. MVTA 6. Adjourn PUBLIC INFORMATION STATEMENT Council workshops are conducted as an informal work session, all discussions shall be considered fact-finding, hypothetical and unofficial critical thinking exercises, which do not reflect an official public position. Council work session outcomes should not be construed by the attending public and/or reporting media as the articulation of a formal City policy position. Only official Council action normally taken at a regularly scheduled Council meeting should be considered as a formal expression of the City's position on any given ma(ter, Council Workshop January 14,2008 Attachments Boards and Commissions E-mail from Joel Jamnik regarding EDA composition Boards and Commissions Interview Packet (sent as a separate item) Cell Phone Allowance List of department heads that currently have a City cell phone MVTA 2008 Board of Directors Meeting Schedule MVTA Update December 2007 - January 2008 December 17, 2007 MVT A letter Lakeville Transit Plan Message Page 1 of2 Peter Herlofsky Fu.: Joel Jamnik [JJamnik@ck-law.com] Wednesday, January 09,200810:15 AM To: Peter Herlofsky Subject: Size and Composition of EDA Peter, State law, copied below (with underlining for the important sections answering your question) provides some flexibility regarding size and composition of the EDA, including going to a 7 member EDA with all of the Council serving plus two citizen members. Size must be 3,5 or 7. For a 7 member commission, at least two members must be Councilmembers (see Subd. 2, below), and the resolution/ordinance can provide for more councilmembers (see Subd. 2 (e), below) 469.095 COMMISSIONERS; APPOINTMENT, TERMS, VACANCIES, PAY, REMOVAL. Subdivision 1, Commissioners. Except as provided in subdivision 2, paragraph (d). an economic development authority shall consist of either three, five, or seven commissioners who shall be appointed after the enabling resolution provided for in section 469.093 becomes effective. The resolution must indicate the number of commissioners constituting the authority, Subd, 2. Appointment, terms; vacancies. (a) Three-member authority: the commissioners constituting a three-member authority, one of whom must be a member of the city council, shall be appointed by the mayor with the approval of the city council. Those initially appointed shall be appointed for terms of two, four, and six years, respectively. Thereafter all commissioners shall be appointed for six-year terms. (b) Five-member authority: the commissioners constituting a five-member authority, two of whom must be members of the city council, shall be appointed by the mayor with the approval of the city council. Those initially appointed shall be appointed for terms of two, three, four, five, and six years respectively. Thereafter all commissioners shall be appointed for six-year terms. (c) Seven-member authority: the commissioners constituting a seven-member authority. two of whom must be members of the city council. shall be appointed by the mayor with the approval of the city council. Those initially appointed shall be appointed for terms of one, two, three, four, and five years respectively and two members for six years. Thereafter all commissioners shall be appointed for six-year terms, (d) The enabling resolution may provide that the members of the city council shall serve as the commissioners, (e) The enabling resolution may provide for the appointment of members of the city council in excess of the number required in paragraphs (a). (b). and (c), (f) A vacancy is created in the membership of an authority when a city council member of the authority ends council membership, A vacancy for this or another reason must be filled for the balance of the unexpired term, in the manner in which the original appointment was made. The city council may set the term of the commissioners who are members of the city council to coincide with their term of office as members of the city council. Subd. 3, Increase in commission members. An authority may be increased from three to five or seven members, or from five to seven members by a resolution adopted by the city council following the procedure provided for modifying the enabling resolution in section 469.093. If the composition of the EDA is changed to provide for all councilmembers to serve, I'd recommend as part of the changes that we also consider removing some of the reporting requirements/budgetary approval language since those items would become redundant, but I haven't reviewed the resolution/ordinance to determine exactly what those changes should be. I have a meeting or two this morning yet, but should be available by cell if you need to talk about this issue before your meeting with Councilmember Pritzlaff. As for the performance review issue, I previously emailed the performance surveys used in 1/10/2008 Message Page 2 of2 Burnsville and Plymouth. Do you still have them or want me to send them again, or do you think another approach would be better? Joel Joel J. Jamnik Campbell Knutson, P.A. 317 Eagandale Office Center 1380 Corporate Center Curve Eagan, MN 55121 Direct Dial: 651- 234-6219 Fax: 651-452-5550 Email: liamnik@ck-Iaw.com CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email is not, nor shall it be deemed to be, legal advice or counsel, unless the recipient already has an attorney-client relationship with the firm or me. This email does not create an attorney-client relationship, Information contained in this e-mail transmission is privileged, confidential and covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U,S,C, Sections 2510-2521. If you are not the intended recipient, do not read, distribute, or reproduce this transmission, If you have received this e-mail transmission in error, please notify us immediately of the error by return email and please delete the message from your system, Thank you, 1/10/2008 Department Heads With City Cell Phones Lisa Shadick Randy Distad Brian Lindquist Tim Pietsch Kevin Schorzman Todd Reiten Brenda Wendlandt - Has requested a phone allowance for personal phone in place of City phone Robin Roland - Uses her personal cell phone MVT A 2008 Board of Directors Meeting Schedule Wednesday, January 23,2008 - 4:30 p.m. Eagan Bus Garage Wednesday, February 27,2008 - 4:30 p.m. Casper's Cherokee Sirloin Room, 4625 Nicols Road, Eagan Wednesday, March 26,2008 - 4:30 p.m. Eagan Bus Garage Wednesday, April 23, 2008 - 4:30 p.m. Eagan Bus Garage Wednesday, May 28, 2008 - 4:30 p.m. Eagan Bus Garage Wednesday, June 25,2008 - 4:30 p.m. Eagan Bus Garage Wednesday, July 23,2008 - 4:30 p.m. Eagan Bus Garage Wednesday, August 27,2008 - 4:30 p.m. Eagan Bus Garage Wednesday, September 24, 2008 - 4:30 p.m. Eagan Bus Garage Wednesday, October 22, 2008 - 4:30 p.m. Eagan Bus Garage Wednesday, December lO, 2008 - 4:30 p.m. (combined NovemberlDecember meeting) Eagan Bus Garage The Minnesota Valley Transit Authority 2008 meetings are scheduled for the fourth Wednesday of the month unless otherwise notified in advance or canceled. All meetings will be held as noted on the calendar, unless otherwise notified or canceled. When a meeting needs to be changed, all efforts will be made by staff to accommodate the wishes of the commissioners such as offering alternate dates to choose from and giving sufficient advance notice. If a meeting is canceled, staff will notify all commissioners as far in advance as possible. 12/12/2007 Mm.'''' f"':'\" j\_' ;:i ....',.:~ <~i. ":" ' " -',,~ " -.' MVTA Update December 2007-January 2008 Minnesota Valley Transit Authority STRATEGIC AREA SERVICE DELIVERY MVTA Awards Bus Service Contract to Schmitty & Sons Transit The Minnesota Valley Transit Authority (MVTA) recently completed a "request for proposal" process for one or more transit service providers. The winning proposal was submit- Schmitty & Sons Transit Service began operations from the MVTA ted by Schmitty & Sons Burnsville Bus Garage on Dec, 31, Transit Service (SST) of Lakeville, MN. Schmitty & Sons began operating from the MVTA's Bumsville Bus Garage on Monday, Dec. 31, The company had been one of two providers, already operating from the MVTA's Eagan Bus Garage. III The five-year agreement is valued at $10.3 million annually, which is less than the $10,7 million paid by the MVTA for service in 2007. The RFP process was "very thorough" according to Jon Ulrich, MVTA Chair and Scott County Commissioner. He said that the MVTA received three proposals, Dan Schmitt, one of the owners of one of which was determined to be Schmitty & Sons Transit, helps with the move into the new garage, Schmitty & non-responsive. "The MVTA's Sons also operates transit service from the Finance Committee met at least MVTA s Eagan Bus Garage, four times," Ulrich said, "includ- ing multiple meetings with the proposers, and careful review of the qualifications and financial impact of this decision. We believe we made the best decision for the MVTA." The contract was actually awarded at the MVTA Board's September 26th meeting, and MVTA and SST staffs have been working diligently for the past three months to ensure a smooth transition, Tina Blaz, morning Operations Manager for Schmitty & Sons at the Burnsville Bus Garage, sets up her new office, "We are excited to take on this expanded role with the MVTA," said Schmitty & Sons owner Paul Leidner. "We have had a good working relationship with the Transit Authority, and we look forward to providing solid service to their riders," Schmitty & Sons also operates school buses for the Lakeville Area Public Schools. "Schmitty & Sons has provided stellar service to us in the past few years - we receive lots of driver compliments and few complaints about the service they have AGndy Sa7~s~rom (cent~?, Burnsvi~lhe Bu~ , " , . ",,' arage mamtenance manager, Wit tramer prOVIded for us, saId Beverley MIller, MVTA ExecutIve DIrector. We belIeve that Bill Eslinger (left) and Eagan Bus Garage MVTA riders will have a great experience riding our buses, with Schmitty & Sons Mainenance Manager, Tom Delmonico operating all of our service," she said. "We also look forward to having SST oper- (right), ate our Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) service in the 1-35W and Cedar Avenue corridors in late 2009," MVTA December 2007-January 2008 Update - page 2 MVTA Operations Manager, Samantha Porter reports that "Our weekly transition meeting were very helpful," and "It went so much smoother than it could have." She said, "Schmitty's did an awesome job, as usual, and we are looking for- ward to some 'friendly competition' (most driver compliments, fewest customer complaints, etc.) between the Burnsville and Eagan bus garage staffs. It was truly a team effort, with help from the Eagan and Lakeville garages and from the owners of Schmitty & Sons. There is a new mood at the Burnsville Bus Garage - a 'can-do' attitude." Some 23 drivers, two dispatchers, one supervisor and two mechanics transitioned from Laidlaw to Schmitty & Sons. All had to apply for positions. The remaining Laidlaw employees found positions at other Laidlaw locations across the Twin Cities, or moved to another company., Glenn Boden, MVTA Maintenance Manager, said "we made the right move" in making this transition. A few bus main- tenance issues remain unresolved, but he said maintenance is always a "work in progress," He is happy to see routine maintenance items occurring, such as replacing batteries and fixing a number of small things. His next focus will be on ensuring that the MVTA image is not tarnished, by requiring buses to be clean when they leave the garages each morn- mg. "The transition went very smooth," echoed Facilities Manager, Tom Bright. He said that was, in large part, due to Schmitty's "can-do" attitude and their experience opeating their own garages in other locations. A few issues remain, including the installation of lockers for the drivers, checking the water softening system for repair or replacement, adding some floor drains near the bus wash and in the maintenance area and minor repairs which will improve ease of use of the building as a bus garage. The MVTA is also looking as using waste oil to heat the Burnsville Bus Garage, as is the case in Eagan. MVTA Planner Offers Ideas for 2030 Regional Transit Master Plan MVTA Planner Michael Abegg has been spending a significant amount of time offering input to the Regional Transit Master Plan, Input has included feedback on the proposed transitways, as well as ideas regarding the south area service plan. Information will be presented at an upcoming MVTA Board meeting regarding the Regional Plan. STRATEGIC AREA LEADERSHIP AND GOVERNANCE January Board Meeting set for Jan. 23 The next regular meeting of the MVTA Board is set for Wednesday, January 23 at 4:30 p.m. at the Eagan Bus Garage, Welcome to Farmington! The City of Farmington has submitted a letter to the MVTA indicating they would like to be an ex-officio member of the MVTA, attending meetings for the next 6-12 months to determine "the most optimum way for us to continue to work together in the future." Representatives from , i - .., .l. STA Full Board Meeting set for Jan. 11 The full Suburban Transit Association Providers (STAP) Board of Directors will meet at 9 a.m. on Friday, January 11 at the League of Minnesota Cities Building in St. Paul. Please contact Patrict Murray (pmurray@MesserliKramer.com or 651/228-9757) if you are unable to attend the meeting, It is important that there be a quorum at this session. / MVTA December 2007-January 2008 Update - page 3 Farmington will be Administrator Peter Herlofsky and Councilmember David Pritzlaff. Provider South of the River The MVTA distributed letters to nearly 20 cities and townships near the I-35W and Cedar Avenue corridors in Dakota and Scott county, asking them to name the MVTA as their preferred transit provider South of the River, consistent with the MVTA's Strategic Plan adopted in May 2007, Subsequently, upon request from several cities, the MVTA provided a draft resolution for the cities and townships to adopt and forward to the MVTA. A letter was also send to the Metropolitan Council from the entire MVTA Board, along with a copy of the MVTA's Strategic Plan, indicating the MVTA's intention to be the premiere transit provider South of the River. Met Council Members Receive Open Invitation to Attend MVTA Board Meetings Upon adoption of the MVTA's 2008 meeting calendar, letters were sent to Daniel Wolter and Brian McDaniel inviting them to attend MVTA Board meetings. Subsequently a letter of introduction was sent to Craig Peterson, new representa- tive in District 4 (covering Savage), providing him with information about the MVTA. Legislator Awards to be Presented at January Board Meeting Sen. Jim Carlson and Sen. John Doll have been invited to attend the MVTA's January Board meeting, to receive awards for their efforts in moving STA agenda items forward in the State Legislature. Each STA member has been asked to honor one or more of its legislators, thanking them for their support and encouraging additional work on STA's behalf, STRATEGIC AREA IMAGE MVTA Plans Schedule Re-design in 2008 MVTA staff will work with our graphics consultant, Rick Schuster of THINK Graphic Design, in completing a schedule redesign in 2008. The purpose of the project is to improve the readability and usefulness of the pocket schedule, while not cluttering it with too much information. Customer Service Manager Robin Selvig will lead the project, with input from MVTA's Planner and Operations Manager. Initial Meeting Set with MVTA Marketing Consultant In order to best address marketing issues raised as part of the MVTA's Strategic Planning discussions in 2007, the MVTA will be working with Shar Lueders of Kaleidoscope Marketing to develop a simple marketing plan, create a tag-line to accompany the MVTA's new logo, and other tasks identified in the Strategic Plan. Branding of the MVTA's BRT prod- uct will also be included in discussions, and will include input from the MVTA's graphic designer. STA Factsheet Gets a Facelift Robin Selvig, MVTA Customer Relations Manager, is updating the Suburban Transit Association Providers (STAP) fact- sheet for distribution to legislators and others. The document will have a different look in 2008, and a draft of the new document is expected to be presented at the STAP Board meeting on Jan. 11. STRATEGIC AREA ASSET MANAGEMENT MVTA Assumes Ownership of Watson's The MVTA has received the title transfer ofthe Watson's property, and will begin moving additional cars into the lot as soon as possi- ble. Watson's will have an auction on Jan. 19, and will complete clean-up of the existing site by the end of January. TKDA is work- ing on the demolition of the existing buildings on that site. MVTA December 2007-January 2008 Update - page 4 New Gillig Buses Arrive The MVTA has nine new low-floor Gillig buses in service. These buses were equipped with a Seon camera system, and MVTA staff have determined that future bus purchases will also be "camera-ready" when they arrive at the MVTA. Fleet Maintenance Manager Glenn Boden and Operations Manager Samantha Porter have been working to determine the best camera system to install on MVTA buses, and an RFP will be issued early this year. Funds are available from the RTSWG to install cameras on buses, and will also be budgeted as part of the cost of any new vehicles. MVTA Seeks Partner, Vehicles The MVTA has started its search for expansion vehicles to meet the UPA plans for late 2009. Planner Michael Abegg indicated that the MVTA will be seeking partnerships with other transit agencies regarding vehicle design and procure- ment. Re-Iamping Under Way at Burnsville, Eagan Transit Stations A re-lamping project is complete in the parking deck at the Burnsville Transit Station, and a circuit is being examined to determine if re-lamping is required or a circuit needs to be replaced to ensure lights come on at the Eagan Transit Station. RFP In Process for Architectural/Engineering Service Finance Office Lois Spear has drafted a Request for Proposal for architectural and engineering services to begin work on the Cedar Grove and 140th St. park & rides that are part of the Cedar Ave BRT project. The RFP is expected to be released early this year. Army National Guard Assessment Priorities Being Reviewed In an effort to budget priorities and capital costs, MVTA Facilities Manager, Tom Bright, and Operations Manager, Samantha Porter, are reviewing the recommendations offered by the Army National Guard as part of their threat assess- ment. A document will be completed soon that will identify the priorities and associated costs. HVAC Work in Progress at Eagan Bus Garage Duct work is being installed and HVAC control improvements are in process at the Eagan Bus Garage in an effort to improve the operation of the waste oil heater. When completed, these efforts should help to reduce heating costs at the Eagan Bus Garage. Plans Under Way for Computer Consulting Vendor Change MVTA staff has met with LOGIS regarding the plan to move to LOGIS for network and computer consulting support. Several members of the LOGIS staff will be at the MVTA offices the week of Jan. 7 to assess how best to proceed with the project. LOGIS is slated to assume responsibility for the MVTA's network and "helpdesk" support as of Feb. 1, 2008, Robin Selvig and Tom Bright are leading the transition team for the MVTA. STRATEGIC AREA PERSONNEL MVTA Staff to be Trained on LOGIS Financial System MVTA staff will participate in training at the LOGIS offices in Golden Valley in early February. The training will include an overview of the system, log-in IDs, and information on reports available. It is anticipated that the MVTA pro- fessional staff will have access the system in order to better complete their tasks. Personnel Committee Meeting Set for Jan. 31 The MVTA Personnel Committee is scheduled to meet on Thursday, Jan. 31 at 2 p.m. at the Burnsville Transit Station. Lori Peterson will lead the meeting with a discussion of the MVTA's our rating system (meets, exceeds and far exceeds), how to achieve those measures, and what communication tools are used to define progress and to put them into a policy for adoption. Lori Peterson is also working to update the MVTA staff job descriptions, based on the assessment complet- ed in late 2007, MVTA December 2007-January 2008 Update - page 5 STRATEGIC AREA FINANCE Contracts Completed Prior to Year End A number of contracts were completed prior to Dec. 31, including the Schmitty & Sons Transit Service agreement and the ITS Agreement with the University of Minnesota, A number of routine contracts were also executed and are now being managed with new vendors or terms. With the Schmitty & Sons agreement, it is anticipated that expenses will continue to be tracked by garage (Bumsville vs. Eagan), but it is anticpated to be easier to manage due to a single system being used to create the invoices. NTD Reporting to Take Place in January Lois Spear, Finance Officer, will participate in some training on NTD reporting that is required annually in January. The MVTA qualified for some funds based on our input into the national reporting system. Total Annual MVST Revenues at $8,655,276 At year end, MVST revenues were 99 percent of budget and up from the State's February 2007 forecast. They were also up from 2006 (by $162,733), a dubious recognition given that 2006 was the lowest amount received since the implemen- tation of MVST for transit funding. 1 ,200,000 1,000,000 800,000 ~ ~ 600,000 - 0 c 400,000 200,000 0 MVEl REVENUES . - - - / i - - - - .,1 -I I ! .! "I - - - - - - " II '~ ., ~ ," ;1 ! -I- - f- I- - - . , :~I " , '.. . " ,. , T I I T I Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nav Dee Month D 2002 112003 D 2004 D 2005 .2006 D 2007 IMVTA December 2007-January 2008 Update - page 6 Ridership MVTA's 2007 ridership remained strong through the end of2007. Ridership throughout the Suburban Transit Association Providers (STAP) ended 2007 on a very high note, with South West Transit breaking the 1,000,000 mark; Plymouth Metrolink service offering more than 500,000 rides in one year; Maple Grove Transit ridership growing 14 percent to 684,000; MVTA ridership up about seven percent; and Shakopee Transit ridership growing significantly with the opening of the Southbridge Crossings Park & Ride. Nationally, the American Public Transportation Association (APTA) reported that Americans took nearly 50 million more trips on public transportation during the third quarter of 2007, compared to the third quarter of 2006, representing a two percent increase in ridership. Noting that more and more Americans are choosing to ride public transportation as gas prices remain high and traffic congestion remains a problem, APTA President William W. Millar said, "The greater use of public transit in the third quarter of 2007 demonstrates the importance of a community having a good public transportation system to help its residents save time and money," 2007 Suburban Transit Association Providers Ridership 6,000,000 5,000,000 4,000,000 Q. :c l!! 3,000,000 .. " ii2 2,000,000 1,000,000 0 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Year o Shakopee Transit . Plymouth Metrolink . Maple Grove Transit . SouthWest Transit . Minnesota Valley Transit ~I \..0 o o N [] I.t) o o N . ~ o o N . ("() o o N ~. .1""4 ..c: fIJ ~ aJ "'0 .1""4 ~t-.. >,0 ~~ "'0' ~~ aJO aJM ~ .;;' aJ s:: 000 ~ e t >. >.0 < ~ :> ~ to.. o o N I':'E B 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lf'l 0 Lf'l 0 Lf'l 0 Lf'l 0 Lf'l 0 Lf'l 0 Lf'l 0 Lf'l 0 Lf'l 0 Lf'l 0 0\ 0\ 00 00' l'.' l'.' ~' ..D u) Lf'l' '<1" .,; rr) rr) C'l' C'l' .....< .....< .--< Aep'IaaM lad S~U!pleog a~elaAV U QJ Cl ;;- o Z .... u o 0... QJ C/) co ;j <t:: :3 -- ..= - s:: o ~ l:::: ;j -- >, ttl :2 .... 0... <t:: .... ttl :2 .0 QJ ..... l:::: <tl -- Cot ..-1 ..ci rrJ ~ QJ ~ ..-1 ~ t--.::::... 0'- ~ oii ~ N.... ~ I~ QJ tf),- ~ 0.... QJ ol:: QJ N~ ~ ... .J::~ -"" QJ s::..... CO 0 V'J tU e~ t~ ;;. ..0>-: < ~ ~ :> ~ u Q) Cl r-... 0 0 N ~ \0 > 0 0 0 C'-l Z IiIl U"l 8 C'-l . .... ~ u 0 0 0 C'-l . M 0 0 C'-l 0... . Q) Cfl o Ir') t'-... ......' o o o ......' o o Ir') o Ir') N o o Ir') ......' o Ir') N ~ o Ir') t'-... PU~}[~~M .I~d S~U1p.Ieog ~~e.I~AV 00 ::s <t: "5 -.. .J:: - s:: o ~ c= ::s -.. >, ra :::; ... 0... <t: ... ra :::; ..c Q) ..... c= ra -.. Minnesota Valley Transit Authority December 17, 2007 Mr. Peter Herlofsky City of Farmington 325 Oak St. Farmington, MN 55024 Dear Mr. Herlofsky: The Minnesota Valley Transit Authority (MVTA) is one of several agencies participating in the Urban Partnership Agreement (UPA) recently granted to help ease congestion in the Twin Cities area by the US Department of Transportation. A draft map of the UPA is attached. The MVTA, a joint powers agreement of the cities of Apple Valley, Burnsville, Eagan, Rosemount and Savage, has adopted a strategic plan with one of its goals to be the transit service provider south of the Minnesota River. The MVT A Board, comprised of elected officials from each of the five cities and two counties in the service area (a list of Board members is attached), is seeking support from the other communities in our corridors (Cedar Avenue and I-35W) as cities and townships adopt their 2030 comprehensive plans. We have a solid track record, with ridership growth nearly every year of our existence (the only exception being the year we had to cut service due to a funding shortfall when transferring from property tax to Motor Vehicle Sales Tax dollars), MVT A Ridership History 2,500,000 500,000 2,000,000 1,500,000 Number of Riders 1,000,000 o 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 Year Currently, the MVTA offers express service to downtown Minneapolis and St. Paul, with local service to the Mall of America where riders can make connections to the light rail line. We also offer connections to the Hiawatha Line at the 46th St. Station, Reverse commute service operates between downtown Minneapolis 100 East Highway 13 Burnsville, Minnesota 55337 www.mvta.com MVTA office 952-882-7500 fax 952-882-7600 Page 2 and Burnsville, between downtown St. Paul and Eagan, and between south Minneapolis and the Mall of America and Apple Valley, Burnsville or Eagan. Finally, local service operates between Apple Valley and Rosemount, Eagan or Burnsville; and between Burnsville and Savage or Eagan. A system map of our service is enclosed for your reference. Also enclosed is a factsheet about the MVT A, including our budget, information about our fleet and our facilities. We ask that you provide a resolution of support to the MVT A, identifying us as your preferred transit provider, and that you include this information in your 2030 Comprehensive Plan update. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact Beverley Miller, executive director of the MVTA. Thank you for your consideration, Sincerely, ~~iC~ 1111 J- Chair, MVTA Board Scott County Commissioner Encl. MVD\ Minnesota Valley Transit Authority Background The Minnesota Valley Transit Authority (MVTA) is the public transit agency Ooint Powers Agreement) for the cities of Apple Valley, Burnsville, Eagan, Rosemount and Savage, within Dakota and Scott Counties, The MVTA was founded in 1990 under Minnesota Statute 473.388. The MVTA began operating its own services in 1991. The agency is one of five Suburban Transit Association Providers (STAP), operating outside the core cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul. The MVTA is headed by an eight-member Board of Directors, comprised of elected offi- cials from each of the Joint Powers jurisdic- tions, as well as the two counties in the service area. One member is elected "at-large" and is frequently a bus rider. The Board is responsi- ble for approving operating and capital budgets and making key purchasing decisions, as well as monitoring day-to-day operations (route planning and implementation, market- ing, customer service, facilities management) which are under the direction of an Executive Director hired by the Board and a small staff, The MVTA has been a leader in innovation and creative thinking within the Twin Cities and the broader transit-related communities, Examples include: · Developing "flex" routes to meet changing demands of riders. . Contracting for service, rather than managing drivers, mechanics and all related aspects of the system. . Using private providers to reduce day-to-day costs, and therefore allowing for '~...~ .., more service on the street. · Purchasing a variety of bus sizes and types to allow for better matching of vehicle type (small bus, mid-size bus, standard transit bus, coach) to the service being provided, . Being among the first area transit agencies to implement joint-use develop- ment, thus providing an on-going revenue stream to address the maintenance issues associated with operating transit facilities. · Partnering with neighboring jurisdictions including Dakota, Hennepin and Scott Counties on a variety of transit studies (including service on the Cedar Avenue Corridor Study committees since the first study). . Partnering with services such as Jefferson Lines to bring more transportation options to local citizens. . -..--. .w Metropolitan i ~Council The MVTA receives funding from a portion of the Motor Vehicle Sales Tax (MVST), as well as through fare box recovery. While the MVTA is its own agency, it lobbies for federal and local funding through the Suburban Transit Association Providers, in cooperation with the Metropolitan Council. Most capital dollars are obtained through a competitive process for federal dollars such as ISTEA, TEA21 and similar programs or through the Met Council bonding authority, The MVTA has received federal funding for a variety of facilities projects (park & rides, bus arage, etc.), including funding from the FTA, FHWA, and DHS, Ridership Since its founding, the MVTA has grown to be the third-largest transit agency in the State of Minnesota, currently trans- Background The Minnesota Valley Transit Authority (MVTA) is the public transit agency Uoint Powers Agreement) for the cities of Apple Valley, Burnsville, Eagan, Rosemount and Savage, within Dakota and Scott Counties. The MVTA was founded in 1990 under Minnesota Statute 473.388. The MVTA began operating its own services in 1991. The agency is one of five Suburban Transit Association Providers (STAP), operating outside the core cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul. MVT A Ride rship History 2,500,000 500,000 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ - - -. - - I I I I I I I 2,000,000 Number of 1,500,000 Riders 1,000,000 o 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 Year The MVTA is headed by an eight-member Board of Directors, comprised of elected officials from each of the Joint Powers jurisdictions, as well as the two counties in the 2006 Operating Expenditures - General Fund 2006 Operating Revenues - General Fund Subcontracted Transit Srvcs 82.0% Capital Lease ~ Payments 3.2% .dministration 1,8% - Capital Outlay 1.9% Motor Vehicle Sales Tax 53% Personnel 4.6% ~Professional ~ Services . ~ 0.7% Insuran~ Occupancy 0.5% 5.3% Passenger Fares 29% State --------------- Ap prop ri ati 0 ns Interest 5% Operating Grants 2% 9% service area, One member is elected "at-large" and is fre- quently a bus rider. The Board is responsible for approving operating and capital budgets and making key purchasing decisions, as well as monitoring day-to-day operations (route planning and implementation. marketing, customer serv- ice, facilities management) which are under the direction of an Executive Director hired by the Board and a small staff. The MVTA has been a leader in innovation and creative thinking within the Twin Cities and the broader transit-related communities. Examples include: · Developing "flex" routes to meet changing demands of rid- ers. . Contracting for service, rather than managing drivers. mechanics and all related aspects of the system. · Using private providers to reduce day-to-day costs, and therefore allowing for more service on the street, · Purchasing a vari- ety of bus sizes and types to allow for better matching of vehicle type (small bus, mid- size bus, standard transit bus, coach) to the service being pro- "el vided. 122007 2007 Board Member Listinl! Jon Ulrich '01, Chair (Scott Cty) 14043 Walters Way Savage, MN 55378 Home: (952) 447-2286 cell: (612) 716-6724 Fax: (952) 447-6278 email: ion@.ionulrich.com Committees: Development William Droste, '03 13832 Danbnry Path Rosemount, MN 55068-3630 home: 651/423-1944 City Hall: 651/322-2050 Cell: 651/587-8131 fax: 651/423-4424 email: wdroste@frontiemet.net Committees: Development, Personnel, Strat Planning Jane Victorey, '06 4897 W. 139th St. Savage, MN 55378 home: (952) 894-2105 work: 952/935-1432 exl 1207 email: ivictorev@,ci.savage.mn.us (prefer e-mail to work) or i.victorev@ihmcs.org cell: 952-210-8240 Committees: Finance, Personnel Meg Tilley, '01, Vice Chair 10 18 Boston Hill Road Eagan, MN 55123 home: 651/454-7819 work: 651/366-3391 Cell: 651/485-5558 email: megtillev2002ilPhotmail.com Committees: Development, STA Elizabeth B. Kautz, '97, Secretary 12501 Nicollet Ave. S., Apt. 406 Burnsville, MN 55337 home: (952) 894-5138 fax: (952) 707-6418 Work: Cell: (612) 834-0600 email: elizabeth.kautz@.ci.bmnsville.mn.ns Committees: ST A, Personnel, Marketing, Strat Plan Ruth Grendahl, '97 Treasurer 13685 Pennock Avenue Apple Valley, MN 55124 h: (952) 432-3828 f: (952) 997-2327 Committees: Finance, Development email: l!fendahl@.charter.net "Margaret Schreiner '01. 1590 West Highway 55 Hastings, MN 55033-2372 Phone: (651) 438-4529 fax: (651) 438-4405 Cell: 651/303-6050 Home: 651/454-1744 home fax: (651) 454-0718 email: mar~aret.schreiner@co.dakota.mn.us home: mschreiner@isDwest.com Committee: S T A, Marketing, Strat Planning Will Branning, '97 (Oak Cty) 13775 Guild Av. Apple Valley, MN 55124 Home: (952) 432-7825 VM/Fax: (952) 891-8319 Cell: (612) 790-5840 Committees: Development, Strat Planning, Personnel email: wiILbranning@.co.dakota.mn.us *Member At-Large MINNESOTA V ALLEY TRANSIT AUTHORITY TWG/Alternate Listinl! Barbara Marschall '97/Alt 6701 Rustie Road Prior Lake, MN 55372 Home: (952) 447-5748 Troy Beam '05 TWG Scott County Transit 200 Fourth Ave. W. Shakopee, MN 55379 (952) 496-8277 email: tbeam@.co.scott.nm.us committee: Eric Zweber Senior Planner 2875 145th St. West Rosemount, MN 55068 Work: (651) 322-2052 Committee: email: eric.zweber@ci.rosemount.mn.us AltffWG - Bryan Tucker, 03 City of Savage 6000 McColl Dr, Savage, MN 55378 Work: (952) 882-2692 email: btucker@ci.savage.mn.us Tom Pepper, '98 City of Eagan - Chief Financial Officer 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 Work: (651) 675-5017 fax: (651) 675-5012 Committee: Finance eroail: tneooer@ci.eae:an.mn.lls Lori Peterson, '06 City of Eagan - Personnel Director 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 Work: (651) 675-5002 fax: (651) 675-5012 Committee: Personnel loeterson@citvofeae:an.com Bud Osmundson, '05 City of Burnsville 100 Civic Center Dr, Burnsville, MN 55337 Work: (952) 895-4544 Committee: email: bud.osmundson@.ci.bllmsville.mn.us Tom Lovelace, '06 City of Apple Valley 7100 W. 147th St. Apple Valley, MN 55124 Work: (952) 953-2572 Committees: Email: tlovelace@citvofaoolevallev.org Wally Lyslo '00 913 Woodlawn Ct.. Burnsville, MN 55337 home/fax: (952) 894-1583 email: wallvlvslo@msn.com Committee: Finance, Development Dan Krom '05 (TWG) 14955 Galaxie Ave. Apple Valley, MN 55124 Phone: (952) 891-7146 fax: (952) 891-7031 email: daniel.krom{alco.dakota.mn.us Committee: Development Tom Egan '05 (alt) 864 Great Oaks Trail Eagan, MN 55123 Home: (651/452-3957) Office: (651) 438-4429 email: thomas.egan@co.dakota.mn.us MVTA Information MVTA Offices: Burnsville Transit Station 100 East Highway 13 Burnsville, MN 55337 Phone: (952) 882-7500 Fax: (952) 882.7600 Burnsville Bus Garage 11550 Rupp Dr, Burnsville, MN 55337 Phone: (952) 882-7500 Eagan Bus Garage 3600 Blackhawk Rd Eagan, MN 55122 Apple Valley Transit Station 15584 Gaslight Dr. Apple Valley, MN 55124 Phone: (952) 432-1710 Eagan Transit Station 3470 Pilot Knob Rd Eagan, MN 55122 (651) 209-0581 MVT A Staff: General email: mvta@mvta.com Beverley Miller, Executive Director email: bmiller(qlmvta.com Michael Abegg, Planner email: mabegg@mvta.com Robin Selvig, Customer Relations Manager email: rselvig@.mvta.com Tom Bright, Facilities Manager email: tbright{almvta.com Lois Spear, Finance Officer email: ISDear{almvta.com Samantha Porter, Operations Manager email: sDorter(qlmvta.com Glenn Boden, Fleet Maintenance Manager email: gboden@.mvta.com MVTA Attorney: Barbara Ross Best & Flanagan 4000 First Bank Place 225 S. 6th St. Minneapolis, MN 55402-4331 Phone: (612) 341-9722 Fax: (612) 339-5897 email: bross{albestlaw.com Met Council Reps Brian McDaniel - Dist 16 Brian Lundquist - Dist 4 13954 Flagstaff 390 N. Robert St. Apple Valley, MN 55124 St. Paul, MN 55101 952/997-9731 952-975-0635 brian. mcdaniel{almetc.state.mn.us brian.lundquist@ metc.state.mn.us Daniel Wolter - Dist 15 390 N. Robert St.. St. Paul, MN 55101 651/882-7814 daniel. wolter{almetc. state.mn. us City Managers: Tom Lawell - Apple Valley Craig Ebeling - Burnsville Tom Hedges - Eagan Barry Stock - Savage Jamie Verbrugge - Rosemount County Administrators: Brandt Richardson - Dakota Dave Unmacht - Scott City Hall Phone Numbers: Apple Valley (952) 953-2500 Fax:(952) 953-2515 Burnsville (952) 895-4400 Fax:(952) 895-4404 Eagan (651) 675-5000 Fax: (651) 675-5012 Rosemount (651) 423-4411 Fax: (651) 423-5203 Savage (952) 882-2660 Fax: (952) 882-2656 Dakota Cty (651) 437-3191 Fax: (651) 438-4405 AV Office: (952) 891-7570 Fax: (952) 891-7031 14955 Galaxie Av., Apple Valley, MN 55124 Scott Cty (952) 496-8100 Fax: (952) 496-8430 City CounciVCounty Commission Meetings: Apple Valley 2nd/4th Thursdays Burnsville 1 st/3rd Mondays Eagan 1 st/3rd Tuesdays Rosemount 1st/3rd Tuesdays Savage 1 st/3rd Mondays Scott County Tuesdays Dakota County Tuesdays 12/20/2007 CITY OF RESOLUTION NO. 08- RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE MINNESOTA VALLEY TRANSIT AUTHORITY AS THE PREFERRED TRANSIT PROVIDER SOUTH OF THE MINNESOTA RIVER WHEREAS, the Minnesota Valley Transit Authority (MVT A) currently provides transit service for the cities of Apple Valley, Burnsville, Eagan, Rosemount and Savage; and WHEREAS, the MVT A is one of several agencies participating in the Urban Partnership Agreement (UP A) recently granted to help ease congestion in the Twin Cities area by the US Department of Transportation; and WHEREAS, the MVT A adopted its Strategic Plan in May 2007, with one of its goals to be the transit service provider south of the Minnesota River; and WHEREAS, the MVT A offers express service to downtown Minneapolis, downtown St. Paul, and local service to the Mall of America where riders can make connections to the light rail line, in addition to local service between communities and reverse commute service from the core cities to the suburbs; WHEREAS, the MVT A is already working in two of the corridors identified as part of the UPA's (I-3SW and Trunk Highway 77 - Cedar Avenue) effort to utilize new initiatives to reduce congestion; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of support the Minnesota Valley Transit Authority's goal of serving as the premier transit provider South of the Minnesota River. Motion by: Seconded by: Ayes: Nays: Resolution adopted by City of on Mayor Attest: . MINNEAPOLIS o Transit Lanes on Marquette and Second Ave Lead Agency: Minneapolis Description: Adds second bus lone and improved transit stops on each street Opens: December 2009 Q) Priced Dynamic Shoulder Lanes on northbound 1-35W Lead Agency: Mn/DOT Description: Convert northbound left shoulder to 0 High Occupancy Toll lone during periods of congestion, From 42nd Street to Hwy 65 Downtown Exit Opens: September 2009 o High Occupancy Toll lane Lead Agency: Mn/DOT Description: Construct northbound and southbound MnPASS HOT between 66th Street and 4Td Street. This is under construction with 1-35W /Hwy 62 Crosstown project, Opens: October 201 0 e High Occupancy Toll lane Conversion Lead Agency: Mn/DOT Description: Convert existing HOV lone on northbound and southbound 1-35W into MnPASS HOT lone Opens: September 2009 @ Collector Distributor Ramp Lead Ager.C}': Mn/DOT Description: Construct auxiliary lone and collector distributor ramp on northbound 1-35W between 90th St and 494. Opens: September 2009 @ Add Auxilary Lane Lead Agency: Mn/DOT Description: Construct new lone on southbound 1-35W from 1 06'h St. Entrance to westbound TH 13 exit, Opens: September 2009 e Bus Bypass Ramp Lead Agency: Mn/DOT Description: Construct Transit Advantage for buses traveling from northbound Hwy 77 to westbound Hwy 62 Opens: Fall 2008 @ 1-35W South Park and 66TH 5T W Ride Lead Agency: Metro Transit Description: Construct 0 new park and ride facility with express bus service in Bloomington near 1-35W. Opens: September 2009 82ND 5T W @ N A ~ 26TH lTE URBAN PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT 28TH IT E LAKE 5T E 315T 5TE 01"""0, A, ((~) 'W: ~~~~:f:~,~~:~'":~:~~~"'"re ~l'o,.f1',,# ".,-'.... Q) \l \\1\f't 35TH 5T E 36TH STE " 38TH lTE 42ND 5T E 46TH STE 1 50TH 5T E @ DIAMDND LA KEKD ~ VI u.J >- <C ::z::: I- ea ~ ~ > - <=> ~ 66TH 5T E RICHFIELD > - t;;:: 8 z ~ ~ ~ > > -"" '" '" ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~ 494 494 LINDAU LA 81lT lTE KILLEBREW DR 86THSTW (2) Traffic Management and Bus Priority Systems Lead Agency: Mn/DOT Description: Add cameras, dynamic signs, communications, signal interconnect and signal priority for transit on TH 13 from Nicollet Ave to Hwy 169, Opens: September 2009 e 1-35W Lakeville Park and Ride Lead Agency: TBD Description: Convert former truck weigh station to surface park and ride with express bus service. Opens: September 2009 @ Transit station and surface park and ride Lead Agencies: MVTA and Eagan Description: Construct new Cedar Grove Transit Station, park and ride, and add express bus service. Opens: September 2009 @ Park and Ride Improvements Lead Agency: MVTA and Apple Valley Description: Install technology, add service and make access improvements to Palomino Hill Station Opens: September 2009 e BRT Transit Station Lead Agencies: MVTA and Apple Valley Description: Construct BRT Transit Station on Cedar Avenue near 140th Street Opens: September 2009 (9 BRT Transit Stop Lead Agency: MVTA and Apple Valley Description: Construct BRT Transit Stop on Cedar Avenue near 14 7th Street Opens: September 2009 @ BRT Park and Ride Lead Agency: Dakota County and Lakeville Description: Construct surface park and ride near 185'h St and Cedar Avenue Opens: September 2009 _ 1-35 North Park and Ride Lead Agency: Metro Transit Description: Construct surface park and ride, and add express bus service near 1-35W and 1-694, Opens: September 2009 90TH ST W 98TH STW N A EAGAN ~ I i 18 BLOOMINGTON 106TH ST W CUFF RD BURNSVILLE PALOMINO RD o APPLE VALLEY MCANDREWS RD 12lTH S\ ~ ~ 140TH ST 8 @ Technology Lead Agencies: Mn/DOT, Metro Transit, CRYSTAL LAKE RD MVTA, U of M 147TH ST Q) map not to scale Updated 11.21,07 LAKEVILLE 185TH ST @ \b'l.1H ST W January 3, 2008 Peter Herlofsky Jr City Administrator 325 Oak St Farmington, MN 55024 Re: Lakeville Transit Plan. To Peter Herlofsky Jr, The Lakeville City Council has recently authorized SRF Consulting Group Inc. to complete a study on Lakeville's transit options. The enclosed draft Lakeville Transit Plan will assist Lakeville in determining the best transit solutions for Lakeville residents. The draft plan contains information regarding suburban transit, funding issues, potential ridership, transit system conceptual plans, future park-and-ride and transit facilities, and pubic transit options for Lakeville. The Lakeville City Council has reviewed the draft Lakeville Transit Plan and is requesting various agencies to comment on the draft plan. Upon receiving feedback, Lakeville will consider those comments and prepare a final plan for City Council to adopt at a City Council meeting in February. The Lakeville Transit Plan will then become a component of the Lakeville Transportation Plan that will be submitted as part of the 2008 Comprehensive Plan. Please send your written comments by January 23rd, 2008 to City of Lakeville, Brian Anderson, Assistant to City Administrator, 20195 Holyoke Ave, Lakeville MN 55044. Best Regards, City of Lakeville 2~~5 r ~ ~ Steve Mielke City Administrator enc: 1 City of Lakeville 20195 Holyoke Avenue -Lakeville, MN 55044 Phone (952-985-4400) - FAX (952) 985-4499 - www.ci,lakeville.mn.us 2007 lakeville Transit Plan November 2007 SRF Consulting Group, Inc. 2007 Lakeville Transit Plan Table of Contents A, Overview...,....."......,.....,......".......,...........,...............,.......................". 1 8, Suburban Transit........,...................,.................,............,.......,.............. 2 1. History.,.,.,..,.".....,....." ,.......,.,............................" ,....... ........ ......2 2. Significance of The Suburban Transit Authorities ......................4 3. ADA Services..,.................................,..........................,............. 5 4. Recent Legislative Changes ...................................................... 6 5. Future Issues", ..... .......',..,..,.."..... ........... ...... .........' ........... ......, 6 C. Funding Issues................................,...................................,.....",......,. 7 1. Operating Funds ...........,......,..................."............".".............., 7 2, Capital Funds.............,..,......................,....,........................,....... 8 D. Potential Ridership.......................................................................,....... 9 1, Express Commuter Ridership .................................................... 9 2. Circulator Services............................."..............................."... 1 0 3. Dial-A-Ride Services,............................................................... 10 4, Ridership Trends ..........................,.."...........,.......................... 1 0 E. Transit System Characteristics And Conceptual Plans....................... 10 1.' Transit Service Areas............................................................... 10 2, Types of Services ............,..,............,.."...........".................,..,.11 3. Management and Regulatory Considerations.......................... 12 4. Transit Support Facilities .......................................................,.. 13 5. Transit Service Contractors .......,............................................. 14 6. Finance and 8udgets.............,.................................................14 7, Other System Activities and Participation ................................ 15 F, Future Park-and-Ride and Transit Facilities ....................................,.. 16 1, Plan Projections and Future Facilities...................................... 16 2, Potential Regional Transitways................................................ 18 G. Public Transit Options For Lakeville ................................................... 19 Appendix A: Suburban Transit Operations Review Appendix B: Draft Peak Express Bus Schedules - i - 2007 Lakeville Transit Plan Table 1 Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 List of Tables Express Commute Ridership.......,.,...................,.......,...,...,..........., 9 Lakeville Park and Ride Projected Use 2010-2030 List of Figures Conceptual Circulator Routes.,."...,............,..,..................".......... 12 Regional Park and Ride Facility Site Recommendations.............. 17 Regional Transitways....... ............,...,......"...,.."......"....... ....."..,... 18 H:\Projects\6243\Lakeville Transit Plan Draft 102907,doc -ii- 2007 Lakeville Transit Plan A. OVERVIEW The City of Lakeville is unique in the Twin Cities region in that it has grown to be a major suburban community outside of the Metropolitan Area Transit Taxing District, which has defined the Twin Cities' transit service area since it was written into law 1977. As the City has grown, there have been several evaluations of whether transit should be extended into the City and neighboring communities. A moderate level of demand complete with the availability of good transit options in adjacent cities and the potential of higher property taxes to pay for a public transit expansion have all worked against these considerations in the past. With suburban development outside of the transit service area showing significant growth in several areas in addition to Lakeville, and current system resources stretched to their limit, several long distance transit system additions are being planned to handle traffic in these outer growth zones. Two of these transitways, ranked as high regional priorities, are planned in Lakeville. There is growing pressure at all levels of government to expand the transit service area and rationalize the operational and funding boundaries that have limited past efforts, in order to respond to the newest ring of population growth and transportation needs, The Lakeville Transit Plan has been prepared to provide historic context for City staff and officials along with options for'Lakeville participation in the transit expansion initiatives. The scope of this plan includes the following: . History of regional and suburban public transit in the Twin Cities area - public transit startup, transit taxing district, suburban replacement transit (opt-out) systems, ADA services, community-based transit, contracting, regulations, etc., from 1968 to present. Particular emphasis on peer cities, neighboring transit systems such as Minnesota Valley Transit Authority (MVT A) and Prior Lake. Future trends and issues are also included. . Public transit funding - tral1sit funding sources for operating and capital funds, historic and current formulas and agreements, potential City obligations, and allocation of state and regional financial resources. . Future transit demand - planning-level forecast of regular route bus ridership to central business districts, and local service trends and demands. Validation based on current Lakeville transit usage, park & ride data, paratransit service data, and demographic trends influencing future needs. . Conceptual plan for transit services - based on current practice, policy, and cost effectiveness, a planning-level concept for a Lakeville transit system is outlined. Service types, frequencies, vehicle options, markets, facilities, potential routes, traffic generators, and related costs are addressed. Concepts draw on the experience of similar city operations, including Maple Grove, Plymouth, Shakopee, and others, Concepts address land-use considerations and policies that enhance transit, Travel Demand Management strategies, administration and management needs, and other operational aspects of a complete system, SRF Consulting Group, Inc, -1 - November 2007 2007 Lakeville Transit Plan . Future facilities and transitway expansion - The current facilities in use, their capacity and utilization, amenities, access, safety, and condition are identified, as well as the region's plans for Park and Ride improvements and expansions, and Transitway development that will impact Lakeville. . Opportunities to combine or coordinate operations with neighboring cities or transit authorities - joint, merged, or contracted operations that may have benefits in economies of scale, broader service options, and the possibility of forming a service organization with an enhanced professional focus on transit and future expansion in modes and services for the suburban market. B. SUBURBAN TRANSIT 1. HISTORY Mass transit in the Twin Cities had its start with the establishment of electric streetcar lines in Minneapolis and St. Paul in 1875. By 1890, the streetcar tracks had reached from Lake Minnetonka to Stillwater, and covered most of the urban area. The modem era of the downtown central business districts and the spread of the suburbs as population and business grew were directly related to the presence of good public transit on "the cars" during the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Thomas Lowry, it major Jand developer, owned this extensive private system, As roads improved ~d the' <;1-utomobile became ubiquitous in the 1920's, the Twin Cities Rapid Transit Company responded with both better streetcars and service, and expansion into buses and taxis, After World War II, the Lowry family sold their interests to other corporate owners. After several changes of ownership, pressures to control costs and maintain profits resulted in the last streetcars being replaced by motor buses system-wide in 1954. From the 1930's on, other entrepreneurs also started new bus lines particularly to serve suburban expansion beyond the reach of the declining streetcar routes, including operators such as South St. Paul, Richfield, Medicine Lake, and North Suburban Lines, In 1967, the Twin Cities Rapid Transit Company, still the major transit provider in the region, began to record serious financial losses in its operations, and ultimately appealed to the State Legislature for assistance. The Metropolitan Transit Commission (the MTC) was formed that year to administer the State assistance. By 1972, the MTC bought out all of the assets of the TCRT and began to consolidate the operations.of other private operators. In 1977, the State Legislature established the Transit Taxing District, allowing the MTC to raise operating and capital funds from property tax levies as a 'permanent' solution to ongoing deficits. At the time, Lakeville was considered an undeveloped rural community, and was not included in the Taxing District. The 1977 legislation phased in a levy to cover immediate needs, and was then doubled in 1979 by a supplemental act. During this period, the MTC effectively bought out, contracted with, or eliminated essentially every other provider in the Twin Cities. As the trend of dropping public transit ridership and rising costs that emerged after World War II continued, the 1979 funding levels began to fall behind needs. This led the MTC to allocate funds to its SRF Consulting Group,lnc, - 2- November 2007 2007 Lakeville Transit Plan system in the urban,core and the first ring suburbs, at the expense of emerging outer ring suburbs. While' they were paying taxes in the Transit Taxing District, requests for service expansion in these outer suburbs were being routinely denied, During this period, most of that suburban growth into auto-oriented, 'bedroom' communities was concentrated to the west and south of Minneapolis. In 1982, the situation reached a peak when the Legislature passed legislation that allowed certain cities the option to "opt-out" of the MTC, The criteria included any city in the Transit Taxing District which did not have at least two scheduled inid- day trips in their area. The law allowed each qualified city a two-year window to declare its intention to start a replacement system, using 88 percent of the transit operating levies collected from property taxes within its jurisdiction. Twelve cities, including seven cities south of the Minnesota River in Dakota and Scott Counties and five cities west of Minneapolis, elected to "opt out" by 1984. By 1994, they had all begun independent operations within six suburban transit authorities. Six of the seven southern cities entered into a joint powers agreement, forming the Minnesota Valley' Transit Authority, These cities included Apple Valley, Burnsville, Eagan, Prior Lake, Rosemount, and Savage, In 2000, Prior Lake pulled out of this joint powers agreement and formed their own replacement transit system, and is currently sharing facilities and operations for express commuter services with Shakopee, the seventh Minnesota River Valley opt-out community. The Transit Taxing District's geographic area has remained unchanged since its inception in 1977, even as significant growth continued up to and then beyond the District boundaries, particularly in the area of Lakeville and its neighbors. Other issues concerning control and equity in transit services during this period also played significant roles in suburban transit. The continuing use of property taxes to pay for transit operations and capital caused other cities to demand a "fair share" of services based on tax payments, This led to tax feathering, where low-service areas were granted lower tax rates, up through 2000. A call for a more responsive transit authority than the MTC also resulted in the establishment of the Regional Transit Board (RTB) in 1984 that was charged with mid-range planning, regional transit coordination and contracting, and oversight of the MTC. It shared this latter oversight role in some regards with the Metropolitan Council, the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) that was federally mandated and charged with long- range planning. Responses to the equity issue by the Metropolitan Council and the RTB included support for community-based dial-a-ride transit operations, many inherited from the Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT). These systems were provided assistance under state-authorized formulas. DARTS service in Dakota County falls into this category. Expansion of other suburban and express services followed including suburban circulators like the BE Line (Bloomington-Edina) and Roseville, and express extensions to other growing suburbs like Woodbury and Oakdale. In Anoka County, regional support allowed the establishment of a county system that ranged from volunteer drivers and dial-a-ride vans to a system of local regular routes. SRF Consulting Group, Inc. - 3 - November 2007 2007 Lakeville Transit Plan Dissatisfaction with the RTB and its performance and responsiveness, as noted by both local governments and the legislature, resulted in a further governance change in 1995. The State Legislature merged the RTB, the MTC, and other regional services such as sewer treatment and parks into the Metropolitan Council, giving that planning agency significant operating responsibilities. This arrangement continues in place today, with the public bus agency, Metro Transit, providing well over 90 percentof the transit trips in the Twin Cities metro region, as well as a host of regional services such as commuter services, trip planning, a common fare system, and emergency coordination. While the board of the Metropolitan Council is wholly appointed by the governor, control by elected officials over capital projects and federal funds allocation is provided by the associated Transportation Advisory Board (TAB). 2, SIGNIFICANCE OF THE SUBURBAN TRANSIT AUTHORITIES The initial purpose of the Replacement Transit System legislation, authored by Representative Caroline Rodriguez in 1982 (later to become a long-standing councilmember of the Metropolitan Council), was to return control of local property taxes to under-served cities, with a specific mandate that they in turn use the money to provide transit services. By 1991, all twelve cities that had elected to opt out were operating some form of transit. Some, such as Shakopee, began with exclusively. dial-a-ride (demand-response) local service, and all of the cities provided some level of dial-a-ride services. Other cities established local suburban regular-route bus circulators, and most also began peak express commuter services to one or both of the downtowns. MTC, soon to become Metro Transit, operated a large share of the initial suburban regular-route services under contract, but a trend toward contracting with private providers to save money on the hourly contract rates developed in subsequent years, This resulted in savings of up to 30 percent per service hour by some suburban contracting authorities under competitively secured contracts. Others, such as Maple Grove, continued to use Metro Transit for part or all of their service based on performance, driver and fleet reserves, and supporting services. Metro Transit continues to bid on these suburban service contracts and has been successful in becoming more cost competitive, while consolidation among the private providers has somewhat reduced competitive pressures and allowed rates to float upward. The result has been the reduction of the cost advantage of using private providers to a range of 10 to 15 percent with recent suburban transit service procurements. The re-distribution of transit operating funds to the suburban transit authorities has created a high level of suburban transit service, particularly on commuter routes, that would probably not have been realized under the MTC. This has brought increased transit advantages to the central business districts and provided an enhanced level of congestion relief during peak periods tied to these commuter services. Their responsiveness to local elected officials, riders, and their communities has also resulted in some significant innovations, including high-quality transit stations and other facilities, an emphasis on larger park-and-ride lots and structures (a trend equally supported by Metro Transit), the use of SRF Consulting Group, Inc, - 4 - November 2007 2007 Lakeville Transit Plan 45- foot commuter coach buses, and several specific Transit-Oriented Development (TaD) projects. Both the competitive cost pressures and these innovations have also served to provide friendly competition and benchmarks for Metro Transit and Metropolitan Council transit services, including the previously mentioned service expansions to other northern and eastern suburban areas in the 1990's, Other innovation and experimentation by the suburban transit authorities is notable, but not always as successful as the express service expansion, An initial focus on local and suburb-to-suburb service resulted in a large range of service and route experiments, including flex-route scheduled services, subscription services, local 'collector' zones at the ends of express routes, van pools, and expanded reverse commute routes. Coordination with local businesses, non-profits, and government units have also been routinely employed, Many of these service innovations have been responsive to very localized conditions, and as such have exhibited low usage and high subsidies, As the suburban systems have grown and matured, with expanding pressure on budgets, many of these experiments have been retired. Much of the dial-a-ride service, van pools, and other services could not compete for limited funds with the much more productive commuter express services. Currently, every suburban transit authority has the majority of its services and budget dedicated to'~egular-route express commuter services, 3. ADA SERVICES Beginning in 1992~ the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), a federal Civil Rights Act, required the region to begin providing demand-response service complementary to the regular-route transit system for the disabled. This was an unfunded federal mandate that was covered by specific general-fund appropriations from the Minnesota Legislature, Actions that were implemented included Metro Mobility dial-a-ride services for all cities in the transit service area, and the procurement of accessible buses with lifts or ramps for wheelchairs and other users. In suburban areas, much of this complementary service was provided by county- operated dial-a-ride networks under contract to Metro Mobility, including DARTS, Anoka Transit, and Washington County's R.S.L Transporter. While express. services may be legally exempted from needing the complementary ADA service, all local regular routes must be covered. Because of client needs and federal regulatory requirements, virtually all of the Metro Transit/Metropolitan Council areas and the suburban transit authorities are covered by Metro Mobility even where local dial-a-rides may be part of the service mix. Metro Mobility utilizes about 15 percent of the regional transit budget and provides service above the minimums required under federal law on several fronts. While the allocation of these ADA costs to individual transit authorities has been proposed in the past, legal and legislative challenges have resulted in this remaining a regional responsibility of the Metropolitan Council. SRF Consulting Group, Inc, - 5- November 2007 2007 Lakeville Transit Plan 4. RECENT LEGISLATIVE CHANGES 2001 marked the end of the use of property taxes to fund operations, and the start of the Motor Vehicle Sales Tax (MVST) to replace this source, However, property tax formulas were still used to determine the split between transit authorities. In 2006, a constitutional amendment was passed by referendum that dedicated all of the MVST to transportation, with 40 percent going to transit. Along with this phased-in major increase in transit funding, the property tax-based formulas were eliminated, A minimum funding support is still provided to the suburban transit authorities at least equal to 2001 funding levels but the total amount of operating assistance is negotiated each year. The result has been to replace property taxes with a more volatile revenue source, distributed through an administrative process rather than by formula, This represents a significant change from the past. Also in 200 I, two other western suburban communities, Minnetonka and Shorewood, were given a statutory right to opt out of the regional transit system, with a two year window of opportunity. Of the two, Minnetonka elected to opt-out but then contracted with the Metropolitan Council to continue to provide its city transit service. 5, FUTURE ISSUES' Several factors are influencing the future direction of transit in the region. A wave of proposals for transitways similar to the Hiawatha LRT and NorthStar Commuter Rail have been initiated by local government jurisdictions. While engendering support for transit on the whole, this has put pressure on the MVST distribution to pay for current and future projects from this one source. The end result may limit long-term growth to the regional bus system, outside of these transitways. The actual control and development of the transitways has become de-centralized, with various projects being pursued by the MetropolitanCouncil, Mn/DOT, and at least three of the seven metro.area counties, Lakeville is being effected by this, as two transitways, the 1-35 busway and the Cedar Avenue busway, are both planned to begin in Lakeville. ' These projects are following independent plans and schedules from the MetropolitanCounci1 and Dakota County, who are the lead agencies. Some of the construction on these projects is expected to be in place as early as 2009. This will place a significant focus on Lakeville's role in the future transit system of the region. A second factor is the growing pressure to expand or revise the 1977 Transit Taxing District boundaries. Although taxing district levies no longer support transit operations, they are used to back Regional Transit Capital bonds, Cities to the south and northwest that are rapidly growing but outside of the District have requested transit services, but have been denied to date because of the equity issues surrounding use of this funding source. One option is to increase the size of the district, but alternative proposals to eliminate the district altogether are also being discussed. SRF Consulting Group, Inc. - 6 - November 2007 2007 Lakeville Transit Plan Because of transit authority operating boundaries that may complicate the development of future transitways, and a non-geographic source of future funds MVST, some have suggested that the suburban transit authorities or "opt-outs" are no longer relevant or useful for the long term. This may lead to discussion about the establishment of a broader regional transit entity and the role of local control, participation, and input. This debate will affect the suburban transit authorities, as well as county and community transit systems, that could experience a loss in their local control. c. FUNDING ISSUES 1. OPERATING FUNDS Transit operating costs are usually covered from several revenue sources. Fares, dictated at levels approved for the entire region by the Metropolitan Council, normally cover about 30 percent of the costs for Metro Transit, and from 15 to 25-percent of the costs for Metropolitan Council contracted routes and the Suburban Transit Authorities. Most community-based dial-a-rides and Metro Mobility generally cover from 8 to 12 percent of their costs from the fare-box because of lower productivity. Beyond fares, the 'bulk of the costs are covered by government assistance or subsidy, While Metro Mobility's ADA service has historically been funded from the state general fund, some minor level of federal operating assistance has been phased in over the last few years, Community-based transit is covered about 60 from Metropolitan Council formula funding, and the rest from fares and local assistance usually paid out of property taxes. The bulk of the regional regular-route transit system is subsidized from regional and state sources. Despite the implications of public subsidies, transit in the Twin Cities has been measured as more efficient than in most peer cities, with lower costs and better fare-box recovery rates, The actual cost of transportation in the region, per passenger mile, is routinely equal to or lower than that of a comparable trip taken in a single-occupant vehicle (SOV). From 1977 until 2001, transit funds for operations were tied directly to property taxes. Transit Taxing District levies were split about one-third for payment of capital bonds, and two-thirds for operating assistance. Of the tax levies for operations, a suburban "opt-out" city was allowed 88 percent of the city-originated receipts with the balance going to the Metropolitan Council to pay for regional services and administration. An additional 2 percent could be earned if it was demonstrated that the local system's reverse commute ridership grew each year, This formula provided an adequate, stable, and growing source of assistance, Property taxes were considered a limited and politically restrictive funding source for the long run, leading 'to the substitution of Motor Vehicle Sales Tax (MVST) revenues in 2001, SRF Consulting Group, Inc, - 7 - November 2007 2007 Lakeville Transit Plan The use of MVST receipts began with a minor percentage of the receipts being dedicated to transit in the name of property tax reduction. The legislation mandated that funding for the suburban transit authorities would not fall beneath the 2001 property tax operating fund levels, It also allowed the Metropolitan Council limited, one year authority to levy property taxes in case of a funding shortfall, and gave the cities the authority to levy local property taxes if necessary to satisfy local transit bond obligations promised but not able to be paid by the Metropolitan Council. After a strong first year of tax receipts, car sales began to drop and the MVST receipts decreased, thereby becoming unpredictable for the next several years, In 2006, approval of a constitutional amendment to dedicate 100 percent of MVST to transportation, including 40 percent to transit, was passed by referendum, The amendment had a five-year phase-in period, insuring that the first several years would have a negligible effect on state revenue flows. Also, there was no legislated formula to distribute a portion to the suburban transit authorities, as there had been with the 1982 "opt-out" legislation, but rather a negotiated distribution administered by a regional finance committee. These new MVST funds are also expected to help fund LR T operations and transitway expansion, making any increase in funds for the suburban systems problematic. Short of legislative action or policy changes on the part of the Metropolitan Council, this arrangement will continue for the foreseeable future. ' 2, CAPITAL FUNDS '. Capital funds for vehicles, facilities, and equipment are allocated by the Metropolitan Council. The region receives some of its capital funding from federal formula funds administered by the Federal Transit Administration in the form of Section 5307 program funds, Each system in the region has a designated portion of this annual funding with allocation based on their ridership, population, and miles. The Council also controls Regional Transit Capital (RTC), which is funded by legislatively authorized bonding and supported by property tax levies. RTC provides both local match for federal funds, and the balance of most capital funding for non-Metro Transit operators, The Council sets the actual levy limits at or below the legislative authorization, after determining needs and long term financial liabilities and tax loads. The Metropolitan Council also holds title on all of the assets acquired with these funds, and provides the federally required asset management. The actual distribution of these funds to specific projects or procurements is handled through a competitive needs evaluation process, tied closely to other capital grant and fund programs for transportation in the region. The rates of the property tax levies that support the RTC bonding vary inside and outside of the Transit Taxing District. The Metropolitan Council estimates that the average levy for a $250,000 home in 2008 within the district will be $47.39, while a home outside of the district will carry a comparable tax load of $18.58. The city of Lakeville estimates that being brought into the Transit Taxing District will cost the average homeowner about $40,00 per year tax increase while providing approximately $700,000 towards servicing RTC bonds. SRF Consulting Group, Inc, -8- November 2007 2007 Lakeville Transit Plan D. POTENTIAL RIDERSHIP 1. EXPRESS COMMUTER SERVICE: An estimate of potential future ridership was completed using regional modeling methodologies and Metropolitan Council population databases. The estimate assumed a commuter travel shed that incorporated the communities within a five-mile radius to the west, south and east, who would be expected to be attracted to new express services. No draw was assumed from northern residential areas, in the direction of the existing transit services of the Minnesota Valley Transit Authority. Table I presents an estimate of central-city commuters that would use the bus, Two park-and-ride sites were assumed, and encompasses travel to both downtowns. Normal peak-express loads for the purposes of calculating bus needs would be 40 passengers for standard transit bus, 50 passengers for a commuter coach, and 65 passengers for an articulated transit bus, Table 1: Express Commuter Ridership Lakeville Park and Ride Projected Use 2010-2030 \ .~ 1- -'. ) POTENTIAL RIDERSHIP ,. r ~" l~ '1- 2010 2020 Park & Ride Saint Saint M Is Paul Paul 1-35 340 34 62 Cedar 308 39 62 Totals 648 73 124 2030 Saint Paul 100 88 188 The estimates show relatively weak ridership initially to 81. Paul. Normal transit planning parameters suggest a minimum of three bus trips per peak period to a given destination, ., This would not be supported by the 2010 estimate for Saint Paul-based service:.An acceptable alternative would be a local connector from ,!~: c ~ ' ~' , . :' Lakeville to connect with MVTA 51. Paul destined express services offered at locations such as Black;hawk Park and Ride. As a validation to these estimates, Metropolitan Council and MVTA license plate surveys from 2004-2006 showed approximately 240 Lakeville residents currently using transit at MVTA's Apple Valley Station, and 200 at Burnsville Station, In addition, another 250 riders from non-MVTA jurisdictions adjacent to Lakeville were using these Park and Rides, The surveys also documented a growth of 14 per cent from 2004 to 2006 in riders from these areas. This closely tracks the projected Total 2010 ridership of 721 riders from Lakeville and adjacent communities that would prefer to use a new service at closer, more convenient stations. Besides demonstrating a base of riders for a new transit service, this also indicates that expanded service would have a positive regional effect on facility overflows in SRF Consulting Group, Inc, - 9 - November 2007 2007 Lakeville Transit Plan Apple Valley and bus overloads in the MVT A system. This could help mitigate service problems and free up resources for current and future needs. As shown, the forecasted volumes are based on the commuter watersheds served by the two potential Park-and-Ride locations suggested in the Regional Park-and-Ride Facility Plan, The assumption is that each Park-and-Ride lot's traffic would travel north on a specific corridor, either 1-35W or Cedar Avenue/Highway 77. Current travel times as modeled in Appendix B show a travel time advantage for 1-3SW over Cedar Avenue, which would be equalized for any commuters that might choose to travel from the east of the Cedar Avenue Station to get to 1-35W station, Future improvements envisioned for the Cedar Avenue Bus Rapid Transit corridor would tend to erase this travel time inequity between the two planned lots. An alternative to two stations in Lakeville would be to concentrate available parking space and facility improvements at one site, such as the 1-35W Weigh Station south of County Road 46, and run all buses from that site. This would increase bus frequency to a minimum of twenty minutes apart and allow as little as ten minute headways at the peak of the peak period. This level of service would significantly improve travel options and convenience, and tied to high quality vehicles and station facilities, would tend to draw a much larger share of the commuter market and possibly improve on the forecasted numbers. This reflects proven regional lexpet{ence for commuter Park-and-Ride services. Other improvements, such as "enhanced shoulder and HOV lanes on 1-3SW and the dual high-capacity bus l~nes' in Downtown Minneapolis on 2nd and Marquette, would further enhance the travel times and draw riders. As a supplement to this alternative, a portion of the buses could still originate in east Lakeville to serve Lakeville, Farmington, and Empire Township residents, and then run to and through the main Park-and-Ride facility before going downtown, to maintain that facility's concentrated service level. SRF Consulting Group, Inc. -10- November 2007 2007 Lakeville Transit Plan 2, CIRCULATOR SERVICES, Forecasts were based on peer city experience, including Plymouth, Maple Grove, and Anoka. Peak period collector-type services. may yield approximately 12 riders per hour, while off-peak circulator service will expect to see 6 to 8 riders per hour, For an all day service, a maximum of 112,000 riders per year would be expected, while express feeder service would generate around 60,000 riders per year. In a community like Lakeville, these must be considered valid only for a fully matured and accepted system, and are most likely overly optimistic in the short term. 3, DIAL-A-RIDE SERVICES, Data from cities with similar populations and comparable levels of service suggests that Lakeville should expect to see roughly 24,000 annual trips, This compares to DARTS' current ridership of approximately 6,000 annual trips taken by Lakeville residents in and near the city, with 2,000 of those trips completely within Lakeville. This is with a 24 to 48 hour reservation requirement and without buses dedicated to the Lakeville area. 4. RIDERSHIP TRENDS During the 1990's, suburban ridership was growing at a rate of 6 to 10 percent per year, well above that of the urban local routes, This accelerated even more through 2002 as economic growth continued and congestion increased. Following economic slowdowns and fare increases during 2003-2005, ridership growth slowed somewhat but has recently accelerated again, particularly on express routes, A suburban ridership growth of 6 to 10 percent over the next several years may be sustained if economic conditions are positive and fuel prices remain high, Other contributing factors that would lead to increased transit demand in Lakeville include the development of the east central area, and commercial development with related job growth on the southern edge of the city. Commuters from and to these areas can be well served by new Lakeville express services particularly if these services are anchored near major thoroughfares, offer adequate parking capacity and facilities, and can benefit from the speed and reliability of proposed busways and HOV lanes, This level of growth would likely meet the long-term regional ridership goals targeted in the Metropolitan Council's 2030 Transportation Policy Plan. E. TRANSIT SYSTEM CHARACTERISTICS AND CONCEPTUAL PLANS 1. TRANSIT SERVICE AREAS The Metropolitan Council Transportation Policy Plan identifies four transit service or market areas, ranging from Market Area 1, concentrated urban, to Market Area 4, low density suburban and rural. Guidance is provided in the Policy Plan for the level and type of service deemed most appropriate for each service area. SRF Consulting Group, Inc, - 11 - November 2007 2007 Lakeville Transit Plan The majority of Lakeville is consistent with the definition of Market Area 3, characterized as generally lower concentrations of jobs, housing, and activities with pockets of moderate concentrations. The Policy Plan suggests the most appropriate transit service in this area is peak-only express, dial-a-ride, some mid-day circulators, and special needs paratransit. Pockets of moderate concentrations may be served at increased levels as is appropriate. 2. TYPES OF SERVICE Three basic types of transit service may be considered for implementation in Lakeville, Based on peer city experience, the largest portion of a future service package would probably consist of regular-route express commuter services, connecting Lakeville to downtown Minneapolis and St. Paul. Reverse commute service from the central urban areas to Lakeville employment sites can also be provided on the return runs. Commuter express service normally operates Monday through Friday from roughly 5:45 a.m. to 9:00 a.m., and 3:45 p.m. to 7:45 p.m. Mid-day trips may also be included to provide better travel options, A service level offering 15 trips per peak from one or two transit stations, accounting for approximately 6,000 hours of revenue service in the peak direction, and costing roughly $1,000,000 per year would be reasonable to start with. The second type of service is regular-route, scheduled local circulator bus service. This could be limited to circulation within Lakeville to facilitate travel to and from express services and transit hubs, and between other local destinations, or reach outside city boundaries to connect with other destinations, Local bus service might operate Monday to Friday from 6:00 a.m. to 6:30 p,m., with service concentrated around the peak periods to collect riders for the express services. Four routes and buses could essentially cover most of the city with acceptable walking distances, if adequate pedestrian amenities (sidewalks, stops, and shelters) are provided. The conceptual circulator route plan is presented in Figure I, Under the plan, each route would be anchored at one of two key transit facilities, This maximizes bus utilization and route efficiency. Schedules would be coordinated with the express buses, and 'pulsed' so that all four routes meet at each end, offering the largest possible number of options for local travelers to get around the city. A maximum level of all-day circulator service would require approximately 12,500 hours of revenue service, at an annual cost estimated at $930,000, This base operation adjusted if needed by: . expansion to nights and weekends, . using mid-day dial-a-ride in place of route service . not utilized at all in favor of dial-a-ride, including possible standing-order and subscription arrangements for regular trips, such as express feeders, SRF Consulting Group, Inc, -12 - November 2007 2007 Lakeville Transit Plan Figure 1: Conceptual Circulator Routes ~ Figure X The third type of available service is dial-a-ride. This is a curb-to-curb demand- response bus service that generally offers rides on a pre-arranged or reserved basis within the city, or beyond as desired. This service offers the maximum trip flexibility for a transit rider, but less convenience and predictability than scheduled circulators. Dial-a-ride service could operate Monday to Friday from 6:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., with expanded service nights and weekends as desired. Two to three small, accessible buses supported by a central reservations/dispatch office would probably provide all service necessary, based on peer system examples. Such a service would provide 8,000 hours of service per year and cost $450,000. If circulator service would be downplayed as a preference, dial-a-ride service during the peak periods, including standing orders (regular daily arranged pick-ups) or a subscription service, could provide local commuter connections at a somewhat lower capacity and flexibility but higher convenience (essentially door-to-door) for some riders. 3. MANAGEMENT AND REGULATORY CONSIDERATIONS An issue with operating any transit system is management and administration. Metro Transit maintains a central office staff that covers finance, federal grant administration and reporting, short-term service planning, labor relations and human resources, procurement, advertising, security, fare collection and disbursement, and other needs. Southwest Metro and MVT A maintain staffs to run SRF Consulting Group, Inc. -13 - November 2007 2007 Lakeville Transit Plan their joint-powers operations. Individual cities generally employ one or two persons dedicated to transit to run a contracted operation, relying on city departments, the contractor's staff, and Metropolitan Council/Metro Transit technical assistance to perform many of the support functions. Besides meeting all ADA requirements, the transit system must by law also respond to several other federal mandates. All operating personnel, including drivers, mechanics, and operating supervisors, must be covered by a Drug and Alcohol program. Elements of the program include employment and random drug screening, daily contact with supervision, access to testing laboratories and clinical support, and formal FTA-approved policies and protocols. Reporting of financial and operating statistics to the FTA on a monthly, quarterly, and annual basis are also mandatory. EEO compliance must be regularly reported and documented. The system will be subject to regular spot and scheduled regional, state, and federal audits. Safety incident reporting and record keeping is required, contracting and procurement must meet federal and regional standards, and many actions and activities are subject to proscribed public hearings. All public transit agencies, from community-based dial-a-rides and County systems up to the major regular-route carriers are subject to these requirements without exception. 4. TRANSIT SUPPORT FACILITIES Transit operations require a range of support facilities to be successful, reliable, and effective. Garages for storage, servicing, and maintenance of the transit vehicles is of primary importance. These generally provide space for the vehicles and their upkeep, fare collection, spare parts inventories, fueling, personnel areas, and office space for dispatchers and administrators. If possible, they are sized to allow 50 to 250 vehicles in order to maximize efficiency, and located near the transit routes and terminals to minimize 'deadheading', the repositioning or return of empty buses to the shop. Transit stations and major shelters have proved to be effective especially in suburban settings. They provide a space for waiting, facilitate transfers between routes and services offer a central site for information and other customer services, and are the meeting place for both express and local routes. They also serve as a focus for local development efforts, especially when considering more concentrated, transit-oriented development (TOD). Park-and-ride lots in the suburbs are also important to transit service effectiveness. Whether linked to a transit hub or station, or standing alone, park and ride lots offer a site for commuters to drive to and park at before getting on express services. This eliminates the high cost of local bus circulation to the transit operator, and provides the commuter an alternative to downtown paid parking and highway congestion. Larger centralized lots with good highway access that draw several hundred to several thousand commuters can in turn drive very high frequency bus service, improving convenience and flexibility in timing of trips. These lots serve an additional purpose as meeting points for car and van pools, and can offer bicycle storage and pedestrian shelters and facilities to promote local use by these modes. SRF Consulting Group, Inc. -14 - November 2007 2007 Lakeville Transit Plan 5. TRANSIT SERVICE CONTRACTORS There are two basic types of agency organization for transit operations. The first is directly operated public service, where all management and employees work directly for the public agency. This carries the usual human resources and financial responsibilities, including hiring, supervision, training, wages, insurance, and pensions. This model is employed by Metro Transit and is being adopted by Southwest Metro. The second type of organization is some version of contracted service. Several local and national companies offer full or partial transit services under contract, including Metro Transit, Jefferson Lines, Laidlaw Transit Services, Lorenz,Schmitty and Sons, DARTS, and others. Contracts may be configured to provide any type of service, vehicles, maintenance, garage facilities, reservation and dispatch centers, management and administrative services, customer services, or any combination thereof. Many systems have Metropolitan Council-supplied vehicles operated and maintained by the contractor. Other contracts provide little more than labor resources, and some may provide only management. Any procurement of these contracts, since they are in the highly regulated realm of public transit, must be compliant with city, regional, state, and federal competitive procurement laws and regulations. Technical assistance and contract and procurement templates are readily available from the Metropolitan Council and other active transit systems. 6. FINANCE AND BUDGETS An operating budget scenario has been developed to provide the City with information on what it will take to operate as an independent transit system, and be brought into the Transit Taxing District on comparable terms with neighboring suburban transit authority cities. The budget is based on the following assumptions: . MVST distribution equal to 2001 calculated levies . Ridership on the express commute service at the 2010 level . Net revenue per express trip at $2.00 . Circulator service operated at about 75 percent of plan outline . Net revenue per circulator trip at $1.00 or less, allowing for transfers onto express servIces . DAR operating at 100 percent of plan outline . Net revenue per DAR trip at $1.50, allowing for senior and other discounts . Management & overhead at approximately 15 percent of costs (peer experience suggests 12 to 15 percent is normal) SRF Consulting Group, Inc. -15 - November 2007 2007 Lakeville Transit Plan LAKEVILLE TRANSIT SYSTEM- CONCEPTUAL BUDGET FOR START-UP YEAR REVENUES: MVST Allocation Fares: - Express - Circulator* - OAR Total, all revenue $ 1,700,000 $ 700,000 $ 30,000 $ 36,000 $ 2,466,000 EXPENSES: Contract Services: - Express - Circulator* - OAR $ 1,000,000 $ 700,000 $ 450,000 $ 316,000 $ 2,466,000 Manaqement & Overhead Total, all costs (Metropolitan Council Finance may calculate an exact Property Tax levy amount for Lakeville, 2001.) *This level of circulator service is a modification from the previously discussed service plan, in order to balance costs against available revenues. It assumes full peak period service on circulator routes, but reduced service mid-day in recognition of probable lighter ridership. Note that this generally assumes that the fare structure is consistent with the Regional Fare Structure of the Metropolitan Council, and that regional fareboxes, fare media,. discounts, and reimbursement rates from Metro Transit all apply. The issue of receiving an MVST distribution from the Regional Transit Fund raises issues with existing transit operations funding, in that if the available pool of funds is assumed to be limited, a new distribution would necessarily reduce the shares available for all other operators in the region. While Lakeville may have a demonstrable need, and provide a local and regional benefit, it will be in competition with other transit providers and the new transitways. 7. OTHER SYSTEM ACTIVITIES AND PARTICIPATION SRF Consulting Group, Inc. -16 - November 2007 2007 Lakeville Transit Plan The city, whether involved in transit operations or not, has available a range of Travel Demand Management (TDM) services provided by the regional transportation management organization (TMO), Metro Commuter Services, a service of the Metropolitan Council, and five local TMO's in the region. These groups offer professional assistance with TDM services that include ride matching, trip planning, car and van pooling, telecommuting, transit promotion, and commuter fairs to assist area employers. They coordinate their efforts closely with all of the regional transit operators and Mn/DOT. All of the TMO's are funded with 80 percent long-term Congestion Mitigation & Air Quality grants administered through the Metropolitan Council combined, with local matching funds. Their two most applicable products are Guaranteed Ride Home, where commuters can sign up for vouchers to cover expenses on up to two emergency trips every six months, enhancing their options while using transit or carpools, and Van-Go, a subsidized van-pool program offering transportation to commuters in areas or at times not served by regular route transit. If operating an independent transit system, the city may wish to affiliate itself with the Suburban Transit Association, an organization of the independent suburban transit authorities that coordinates common interests in operational, funding, planning, and political issues. Another regularly convened regional transit group is the Metropolitan Council's Transit Providers Advisory Committee, which disseminates regional information and advises the Transportation Committee of the Metropolitan Council. F. FUTURE PARK-AND-RIDE AND TRANSIT FACILITIES 1. PLAN PROJECTIONS AND FUTURE FACILITIES In 2005, the Metropolitan Council completed a 2030 Park and Ride Facilities Study to identify future sites for suburban and urban park and ride lots across the entire Twin Cities region. At each potential site, a minimum of 200 vehicles can be accommodated. Since 2000, regional policy on park and rides had changed from small joint use lots feeding local routes, to large strategically placed lots that would allow enough parking to support frequent bus service, offering much improved service options and personal flexibility to riders. The sites were also located with convenient highway access for drivers in mind, and intended to intercept streams of commuters. (Figure 2) The study located sites within an approximate one-mile radius, noting that highway access and land availability will dictate actual site selection. Two potential sites with significant projected use were in the City of Lakeville. These were as follows: . 1-35 and County Road 50 . Cedar Avenue and 180th Street SRF Consulting Group, Inc. -17 - November 2007 2007 Lakeville Transit Plan Figure 2: Regional Park and Ride Facility Site Recommendations Figure 5-3 South Metro Area Potential Site Location .Areas n:~1) .. CllIUMlNlLAcft.. .C4IftIltP..&; _ ElQIl1lMllIft .-.....a_ .. Pet!: 11 RIOt ElIlI_ JfTtMslliolIl)' li....=== i i 1'alI.lIlllMUtif4~ MIIt~....... 2m ,:",:__OTowbttl fII..maa ':Ulf '3M -- _---511: SRF Consulting Group, Inc. -18 - November 2007 2007 Lakeville Transit Plan 2. POTENTIAL REGIONAL TRANSITW A YS The Metropolitan Council's 2030 Transportation Plan studied and recommended several feasible transit corridors that could support enhanced transit service on dedicated right of way or fixed guideways, including new Light Rail Transit and Bus Rapid Transit routes. The two southern corridors, designated for possible Bus Rapid Transit service, both terminate in Lakeville. The Cedar Avenue BRT, with Dakota County as the lead agency, is already partially funded and moving into early implementation phases. The regional network is shown below. (Figure 3) Figure 3: Regional Transitways 2030 Transitway System Fill".e<l' 2 Transltway~ on Oedkal.e1:l ROW illY 1 Norlhsta. Northwest Cod;:,r Avt::l"!l.<:: h35W Central 119'2 R4ld Rock RushU'U!' Sc.ltl1Wlnt """Transitways on Dedicated ROW "'''' Expre5s Cormnuter lkiS System "",,"nl111H 65 SRF Consulting Group, Inc. -19 - November 2007 2007 Lakeville Transit Plan G. PUBLIC TRANSIT OPTIONS FOR LAKEVILLE OPTIONS PRO CON 1 No Action - No immediate liabilities or - Legislative action proposed responsibilities for operation by others may bring - Property tax effect potentially Lakeville into Taxing District without voice; nil Potential $40/home - No legislative action needed. increase - No future transit presence assured 2 Implement Local City Transit - Full local control - Full cost on city budget. - Not tied immediately to Need to reprioritize budget, may result in property tax federal, regional, or other increase up to $100/home agency rules or direction - operational, implementation - negates regional, state responsibility for public flexibility transit, no access to MVST - Regular route may initiate or RTC Metro Mobility presence - No legislative action needed 3 Implement Local City Action - Access to MVT A - Full cost on city budget. to join MVT A management, resources, Need to reprioritize budget, active presence with region, may result in property tax FT A, etc. increase up to $100/home. - Suburban Transit Association - Negates regional, state - ADA presence likely responsibility for public transit, will only marginally - Voice on board improve MVT A access to - No legislative action needed MVST, capital funds unless legislated or negotiated. 4 Petition to Join Transit Taxing - Greater potential for transit - RTC bond levy increase of District without transit authority service from a regional $40 Ihome (opt-out) Status provider - No guarantee of any benefit - minor legislative action needed SRF Consulting Group, Inc. - 20- November 2007 2007 Lakeville Transit Plan OPTIONS PRO CON 5 Petition to Join Transit Taxing - Lakeville has voice in local - Legislative action needed District with transit authority transit planning - Only indirect control over status, and MOU with Met Council for service - Allows regional government service design & levels, flexibility in timing, amount of future expansion service - RTC bond levy increase - ADA presence assured - Mitigates some opposition re: governmental, legislative concerns 6 Petition to Join Transit Taxing - Expand area, regional - Significant legislative action District with transit authority service and benefits to necessary status, join MVT A or other commuters, adjacent cities. - Potential negative funding suburban agency (assumes Congestion, overload relief MVST allocation secured) impact on other regional - Voice on MVT A or other providers including Metro board Transit, Met Council - Access to existing transit - RTC bond levy increase management, resources - ADA presence assured 7 Petition to Join Transit Taxing - Minimal management - Significant legislative action District with transit authority exposure necessary status, contract with Metro - Direct access to all Metro - Potential negative funding Transit (assumes MVST allocation secured) Transit and regional impact on all non-Metro resources Transit providers - May mitigate some - Potential conflict with opposition, resources stay operating territories of with central transit authority adjacent transit authorities; - ADA presence assured possible "closed door" service through neighbor cities 8 Petition to Join Transit Taxing - Maximum local control, with - Increased management. District with transit authority city (elected) board liability, responsibility status, contract with private - Lower cost per ride, direct - Significant legislative action provider (assumes MVST secured) control of expenses needed - flexibility in contract structure, - Potential negative funding services impact on all other - ADA presence likely providers - Voice on regional bodies, - RTC bond levy increase access to resources SRF Consulting Group, Inc. - 21 - November 2007 2007 Lakeville Transit Plan APPENDIX A: SUBURBAN TRANSIT OPERATIONS REVIEW 1. PEER SYSTEM SERVICE EVALUATIONS A general review of suburban transit operations offers additional information and context about what other systems have done with their services. The following is a short review of peer systems that was developed from interviews and management plan summaries. SUBURBAN TRANSIT PROVIDERS: . Minnesota Valley Transit is a joint powers authority of five southern suburbs. Their budget tops $12 million per year, and their fleet totals almost 100 buses. Most of the fleet are 40-foot heavy-duty transit buses and 45-foot commuter coaches. They have a small circulator and local service operation, including a flex route, and mostly peak express service to both Minneapolis and St. Paul. They have four transit stations, numerous park and ride locations, and two bus garages. Their service is contracted out to two private operators, Laidlaw and Smitty & Sons. Average subsidy per passenger is approximately $5.00. Their ridership is at 2 million passengers per year, making them the third largest transit system in the State. Southwest Metro Transit (SWMT) is a joint powers authority of Eden Prairie, Chaska, and Chanhassen. SWMT has a budget one quarter larger than Plymouth, and operates a fleet of fifty vehicles. Almost half of the fleet are 45-foot commuter coaches (similar to charter buses), with a capacity of 55 riders each. With the exception of a limited number of feeder buses, one very limited dial-a-ride bus, and two local shuttles, all of SWMT's service is express service to Minneapolis, the University of Minnesota, and Southdale. Eden Prairie Station is the heart of the operation, and SWMT also has their own storage garage. Laidlaw provides direct labor, but all other aspects of the operation are directly controlled by the office and garage staff. They do offer extensive mid-day long-distance bus service and a high volume of reverse commutes to the Golden Triangle and Eden Prairie. Their subsidy runs around $7.00 per passenger, principally due to the length of their runs. Plymouth MetroLink has a total budget of approximately $4,000,000, and carries over 500,000 riders a year. Of all the suburban systems, Plymouth currently has the most even mix of service types, including frequent Minneapolis express service on 1-94, an extensive circulator network, and a major dial-a-ride operation, fielding an average of 5 vans per day and carrying about 55,000 passengers on a curb-to-curb service. Service is provided entirely through a private contract with a single provider, most recently procured through competitive solicitation in 2006. Average subsidy per trip for the system is well above neighboring cities primarily because of their significant use of dial-a-ride. Plymouth opened a new transit center, Station 73, in 2007 and is considering some system redesigns due to overloads on the express servIce. . . A-1 October 2007 SRF Consulting Group, Inc. 2007 Lakeville Transit Plan · Maple Grove Transit has a budget one third smaller than Plymouth, and operates a smaller fleet. All of its vehicles are standard 40-foot heavy duty transit buses except for three dial-a-ride vans. Their contractor is Metro Transit, which has historically provided a portion but not all of the City's service. With the recent cancellation of Maple Grove's contract with First Student, a private transit contractor, Metro Transit is providing all services except dial-a-ride. Maple Grove has a major transit station and park and ride at Maple Grove Mall, as well as several other lots in the City. Except for two small buses providing limited weekday dial-a-ride, virtually all services are peak express from Maple Grove to Minneapolis via 1-94. Average subsidy per passenger is below $4.00, with ridership historically above Plymouth's. Almost 40 percent of their riders are from outside the City. · Shakopee Transit is operated by the City of Shakopee. Until 2007, all of the system's operation consisted of local dial-a-ride and circulators operated by private contractors. This year, they have paired with Prior Lake Lines to initiate express service from their new park and ride in Shakopee, operated with 45-foot commuter coaches. The dial-a-ride has been drastically reduced and partially replaced by Scott County Transit. New circulators connect to MVT A Burnsville routes for mid-day service. Their budget has been less than half a million dollars per year. · Minnetonka has enjoyed Opt-Out status since 2002, but has elected to contract with the Metropolitan Council and Metro Transit to continue existing services in the City. If they ever do decide to operate independently, they would be expected to be approximately the same size and service configuration as Plymouth. · NorthStar Commuter Coach is a joint powers authority of several northwest metro and Greater Minnesota counties. They have a budget of approximately $600,000 per year, and operate exclusively with a fleet of 10 45-foot commuter coaches. They are notable on several fronts. In operation for over five years, they charge a premium (long-distance) fare, enjoy a farebox recovery rate over 80 percent, and a very low subsidy per passenger, approximately $1.00 per trip. They use no feeders or dial-a- ride, operate from a limited number of park and rides, and do not actually circulate through downtown Minneapolis as a cost-saving measure. Instead, they stop only at the Fifth Street Garage. COMMUNITY AND LOCAL DIAL-A-RIDES: · Metro Mobility is a service of the Metropolitan Council, and is dedicated to providing complementary ADA (special needs) service around the regional regular-route bus network. They are included in this review as a benchmark provider, even though their clients are in an unusual class and their average trip length is longer than almost all other dial-a-rides. They contract for all services through a mix of county operators and private contract providers. Average subsidy is approximately $17.50 per ride, with a productivity of 1.8 passengers per hour. SRF Consulting Group, Inc. A-2 October 2007 2007 Lakeville Transit Plan · At the far extreme of dial-a-ride efficiency is the City of Hastings. Operating an in-city, general public dial-a-ride, Hastings carries around 6 passengers per hour and has a subsidy per passenger of approximately $5.00 per ride. Service is provided on weekdays, 12 hours per day. · Lake Area Bus is a joint powers dial-a-ride operation in the White Bear Lake area, using two buses per day over. a twelve-hour weekday span of operation and serving the general public. With a land area of three times Plymouth, they average 30,000 riders per year with a subsidy of approximately $11.00 per passenger and a productivity of 3.6 riders per hour. · Westonka Rides, a south Lake Minnetonka service provided by Senior Community Services, offers a general public but senior-oriented dial-a-ride that uses two vehicles to carry approximately 15,000 rides per year. Subsidy is near $10.00 per person, and service has been limited to weekdays and mid-day. · Plymouth dial-a-ride currently operates 16 hours per day on weekdays, carries over 55,000 persons per year at a subsidy of $14.00 per trip, and has a current productivity of 3.2 persons per hour. Notable is Plymouth's Saturday service, and its dial-a-ride fare. At $2.00 per ride, it is the same as the price of a regular-route local mid-day trip. The Metropolitan Council's guidance for dial-a-ride fares is a minimum of $2.75 per trip. Some systems, recognizing it as a premium service and in competition with taxis and private shuttles, price it higher, such as Anoka County's charge of $4.50 per trip. Table Al presents an overview of the performance of the suburban transit providers. SRF Consulting Group, Inc. A-3 October 2007 c:: ~ Q... -LJ '- l/) c:: ~ j...:: <J.J ::::: .- ~ <J.J ~ ro ....J " a a C'\I ........ ~ "'0 ::::l <C 0) u c Cil E Q) .... (.) .g c: 0) co 0.. E E 0 2t (f) Q) ~Q. ~ U) (f) .... ~ Q) ....""C 1-'> co 0 c .... .Q Q. 0)_ 0)'- 0::: U) C") c: o co o .... C\JI- '-"'c: "I""CO <C.c Q) .... _ ::J .c.c co ::J I-tn '- '- G.l :;, 0..0 .::1: l/) . l/) > ctl G.l 0..0:: >.ui "Cl/) .- ctl l/)a.. .c :;, '- enG.l a.. '- '- G.l :;, 0..0 _::I: l/) . o > U~ G.l :;, l/) !:: '- ~ 5 G.l::l: 0:: G.l G.l :;, '- !:: ~~ G.l 0:: C) !:: .- - - l/) ~ 0 G.lU C. o l/) '- G.l C) !:: G.l l/) l/) ctl a.. E G.l - l/) >. en co f'-: C"? C"? C\I ...- O'l C"? co O'l C"? co co ...- C"? L{') ...- C\I C"? C\I ..- ...- co co C\I co co co ...- C\I L{') O'l O'l I'- ~ N C"? &9- ~ I.() o ...- &9- :!::: en C co .... I-- >- ~ co > co +-' o en Q) c c ~ -.:t ,..... co C"? 0 C"? -.:t. ,..... -.:t. C"? ...- ,..... C"? 0 co L{') -.:t -.:t co -.:t co co C"? ~ ...- ...- &9- ~ co -.:t &9- - 'w c co .... I-- o .... +-' Q) ~ +-' en Q) ?; J:: +-' ::::l o (j) ,..... L{') co '" C"? C\I C\I -.:t co co o ...- ,..... co C"? C"? ...- ...- I'- co L{') L{') co o -.:t 0 ,..... ...- -.:t ...- C\I co o C\I L{') ~ '<:I: o &9- ~ ,..... C"? &9- ~ c e +-' Q) ~ J:: +-' ::::l o E >- a... co C\I O'l O'l ...- ~ co o &9- ~ C"? C\I &9- :!::: en C co .... I-- Q) > o .... <.9 Q) 0.. co ~ co -.:t ...- l"- e> e> N Qj .c .9 (,,) o -.:t C"? c..; ..- O'l O'l cD C\I N C"? '" O'l co C"? O'l C\I r-: C\I ...- ,..... co o co -.:t ..- N ...- "<t <1: ~ C\I o o &9- ~ -.:t o o &9- ~ C"? o &9- ~ C"? o &9- - 'w c co .... I-- co Q) .... <C Q) Q) 0.. o ~ co J:: (j) en Q) c ~ Q) ~ co .-J .... o 'i:: a... cj E ci:. ::J o <9 O'l <= :;:; ::; en <= o o LL c:: (/) , . 2007 Lakeville Transit Plan There are significant differences in the performance of the systems. The characteristics of each service operated appears to greatly influence the performance. As an example, Plymouth has an almost even mix of dial-a-ride and regular route services, including express trips that lowers its cost per hour but increases its subsidy per trip. Shakopee, which provided exclusively dial-a-ride service in 2003, demonstrates an extremely low cost per hour but the highest subsidy per ride. The variances in subsidy per passenger and passengers per revenue hour, the standard measures for regional transit performance, are caused primarily by this differing mix of low-cost, low-productivity dial-a-ride and circulator service plus higher-cost but high-productivity regular route express services. ROUTE EVALUATION The key regional performance measures for transit consist of subsidy per passenger and passengers per revenue hour. All Metro Transit routes are evaluated every six months and all other regional routes are evaluated on roughly an annual basis. These measures provide a quick gauge of route performance and are especially important when considering service reductions and redesigns. These measures should always be used simply as a starting point for further detailed assessments. The measures should also compare only similar services, i.e., dial-a-ride compared to dial-a-ride, and express compared to express. Metro Transit averages about 38 passengers per hour system wide, and considers ridership below 20 passengers per hour a threshold for further study. Routes with ridership 17 passengers per revenue hour or below are considered for service reduction or curtailment. Urban locals have a relatively high standard ridership, while expresses and suburban locals are judged at lower ridership thresholds. Any route over $7.00 subsidy per passenger is also a candidate for re-evaluation on regular routes. Metropolitan Transportation Services (MTS), the Council's contracted routes, have lower ridership thresholds (down to 12 passengers per hour) and subsidy-per-passenger levels roughly equivalent to Metro Transit. This is due to their overall operating costs being somewhat lower than Metro Transit's costs. 2. TDM STRATEGIES . Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategies are currently available to Lakeville, and can successfully support and supplement transit services. These may include car and van pooling, ride matching, telecommuting, flex hours, bicycle and pedestrian use, transit fare programs and discounts, employer commuter fairs, and education. The city may routinely consult with Metro Commuter Services and local Transportation Management Organizations (TMO's such as 1-494 Commuter Services, Downtown Minneapolis, and St. Paul) about promotions and services that are applicable to the city. Targeted efforts with Lakeville employers can have tangible results in increasing transit ridership, distributing information, gathering data, and promoting commuter incentives and programs. SRF Consulting Group, Inc. A-5 October 2007 , , 2007 Lakeville Transit Plan · New TDM programs are also becoming available that can complement transit use and offer travel alternatives. Nu-Ride is a commercial ride-matching program completely different from historic programs like Minnesota Rideshare. It offers web-based access to rides or riders on a casual, e-bay like system that also has safety and rewards features built in. · Car sharing is also a new option in the Twin Cities. A non-profit program, HourCar, and a commercial car-sharing program, Zip Car, are both offering membership and access to shared fleet vehicles on an as-needed basis, with rates by the hour and mile only for that time you use it. SRF Consulting Group, Inc. A-6 October 2007 , . 2007 Lakeville Transit Plan APPENDIX B: Sample schedules, lakeville Transit A-I: Trips From and To Cedar Avenue Park and Ride, to Downtown Minneapolis AM Cedar Ave. P&R I-35W& Lake St 7th St & 2nd Ave 1st St& 2nd Ave 5:04 5:40 5:47 5:52 5:31 6:10 6:17 6:22 6:01 6:40 6:47 6:52 6:29 7:08 7:17 7:22 6:54 7:33 7:42 7:47 7:23 8:03 8:12 8:17 7:52 8:36 8:44 8;49 8:22 9:06 9:14 9:19 PM Gateway Ramp 3rd& Washington 1-35W & Lake St Cedar AveP&R 3:01 3:05 3:14 4:00 3:31 3:34 3:43 4:29 4:01 4:05 4:14 5:00 4:31 4:34 4:43 5:29 . 5:01 5:05 5:14 6:00 5:31 5:34 5:43 6:29 6:01 6:05 6:14 7:00 6:31 6:34 6:43 7:29 Trips From and To Cedar Avenue Park and Ride, to Downtown St. Paul AM Cedar Ave P&R 5th & Minnesota 5th & Broadwav 5:59 6:48 6:52 6:29 7:18 7:22 6:58 7:50 7:54 PM 5th & Broadway 6th & Cedar Cedar Ave P&R 4:05 4:09 4:49 5:05 5:09 5:49 6:05 6:09 6:49 SRF Consulting Group, Inc. A-7 October 2007 , , 2007 Lakeville Transit Plan A-2: Trips From and To I-35W Park and Ride, to Downtown Minneapolis AM I-35W Park & I-35W & Lake St 2nd Ave & 7th St Ride 5:31 5:53 6:01 6:01 6:23 6:31 6:31 6:53 7:01 7:01 7:23 7:31 7:31 7:53 8:01 8:01 8:23 8:31 8:31 8:53 9:01 PM Gateway Ramp Marquette & 4th I -35W & Lake Street I-35W Park & Ride 3:15 3:21 3:33 3:57 3:45 3:51 4:03 4:27 4:15 4:21 4:33 4:57 4:45 4:51 5:03 5:27 5:15 5:21 5:33 5:57 5:45 5:51 6:03 6:27 6:15 6:21 6:33 6:57 Trips From and To I-35W Park and Ride, to Downtown St. Paul AM I-35WPark .& Ride 5th & Minnesota Stb .~ Broadwav . 6:26 7:20 7:24 , 6:51 7:48 7:52 7:16 8: 18 8:22 PM 5th & Broadway 6th & Cedar I;.35W Park & Ride 4:05 4:09 5:05 5:05 5:09 6:05 ---c 6:05 6:09 7:05 As discussed in the Plan, services between these two Park-and-Ride sites could be consolidated and concentrate at one preferred site, or benefit from common or coordinated routing and service. Alternative to a low-frequency St. Paul service would be to run connecting service to MVTA Stations on I-35E at Eagan Transit Station or Black Hawk Station, or coordinate and overlap through services with MVT A. SRF Consulting Group, Inc. A-8 October 2007