HomeMy WebLinkAbout9A - Downtown Park and Ride Report
o~ PRIO/,>
t ,,~ 4646 Dakota Street S.E.
U '.W't; Prior Lake, MN 55372-1714
"rlNNESO~l'- CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE:
AGENDA #:
PREPARED BY:
AGENDA ITEM:
DISCUSSION:
MARCH 15, 2010
9A
JANE KANSIER, BUILDING AND TRANSPORTATION SERVICES DIRECTOR
CONSIDER APPROVAL OF A REPORT ON A DOWNTOWN PARK AND RIDE
Introduction
The purpose of this report is to provide information on the potential for a transit
park and ride lot in downtown Prior Lake. On February 1, 2010, the City Council
considered a report on the potential purchase of a new park and ride site in
Shakopee. The City Council directed staff to continue working with Scott County
staff, the Metropolitan Council and the City of Shakopee to continue further
exploration of the Marshall Road site. The Council also discussed the potential
for an additional park and ride site in the downtown Prior Lake area. The Council
directed staff to evaluate opportunities for using transit funds for a combination
of a parking facility and a park and ride in the downtown area.
Historv
In January 2001, the City Council chose to opt-out of the Minnesota Valley
Transit Authority (MVT A) in order to provide improved local transit services to
Prior Lake residents. At that time, the City began operating Laker Lines,
consisting of an express bus to downtown Minneapolis from the municipal
parking lot on Colorado Street in downtown Prior Lake. There are approximately
40 parking spaces in this lot. In 2006, the City made the decision to lease 110
parking spaces from Shepherd's Path church on McKenna Road for use as a
park and ride lot. This move was intended to preserve the spaces in the
municipal lot for downtown businesses. Additional parking stalls at the church
site also enabled the City to begin operation of a second express bus.
In March 2003, Scott County, the Scott County HRA, and the cities of Prior Lake,
Shakopee, Savage, Belle Plaine, Elko, Jordan, New Market, and New Prague
created a Transit Review Board (TRB) and Transit Planning Team (TPT). The
mission of both the TRB and the TPT is to enhance the transit options of all Scott
County residents through an intergovernmental best management process. The
TRB and TPT developed a Unified Transit Management Plan (UTMP) which was
adopted by Scott County and the cities within Scott County in 2005.
The UTMP identified the need for 1,100 park and ride spaces along the TH 169
corridor. With that in mind, the TRB developed Southbridge Crossing Transit
Station, a 550-stalllot. At the same time, planning for the Eagle Creek Transit
Station, a 550-stalllot on CSAH 21 and CSAH 16, began. This lot will be
constructed with the CSAH 21 expansion project.
In July, 2007, the City of Prior Lake and the City of Shakopee began operating
BlueXpress, an express service to downtown Minneapolis, from South bridge
Crossing Transit Station. Prior Lake contributes three buses, the operating costs
of these buses, and a portion of the operating expenses for the Southbridge
www.cityofpriorlake.com
I::>honef)5:?A47.9800 / Fax 952.447.4245
Crossing Transit Station. The City also operates a 90-stall park and ride at Safe
Haven for Youth on McKenna Road. This location will eventually be replaced by
the Eagle Creek Transit Station at CSAH 21 and CSAH 16 in 2012.
The Metropolitan Council has also prepared a regional park and ride plan. In
addition to the 1,100 spaces, this plan identifies the need for an additional 400
park and ride spaces in the area by 2030. The plan currently identifies these
spaces on CR 17 near TH 169, and at the 282/13 intersection with CR 17.
Current Circumstances
The City has a Transit Reserve fund that is used to operate our transit services.
We can also use these funds for capital projects relating to transit, such as the
construction of park and ride facilities.
The City transit funding comes from a share of the Minnesota Vehicle Sales Tax
(MVST). Thus far, these funds have covered the costs of our transit program, so
we have not levied any property tax for transit.
Conclusion
The City has a transit fund that is intended for transit, both operational costs and
capital costs. The City has the ability to use these funds for a transit related
parking structure in downtown Prior Lake.
ISSUES:
The construction of a parking structure in downtown Prior Lake for transit
purposes raises two major questions:
1. Is downtown an appropriate transit location?
2. Is a downtown parking structure the most effective use of transit funds?
Location: The original park and ride downtown was moved to make the
municipal lot available for parking for local businesses. We can reestablish this
lot, but there are factors to be considered. First of all, the lot is small and can
only accommodate 40 cars. Research has shown that small facilities often have
less than 30% utilization, as opposed to larger facilities, which have up 70%
utilization (see attached memorandum from Charles Carlson, Metro Transit
Facilities Planner). Second, downtown is difficult for the buses to navigate. An
additional stop at the municipal lot will add at least 15 minutes to each run in the
morning and in the evening. The cost of this extra half hour per day for the three
Prior Lake buses will exceed $27,000 per year. Finally, the use of the existing
municipal lot is only temporary. To properly locate a new structure, we need to
determine the future of CSAH 21 in downtown Prior Lake. This will dictate
access to all of downtown.
Cost: The cost of a new parking structure is more than $5 million dollars,
depending on size. We were able to construct South bridge Crossing Transit
Station and Eagle Creek Transit Station with federal and regional funds and very
little local match ($240,000 for South bridge and $0 for Eagle Creek). Regional
funds were available for these facilities because they are part of the regional
park and ride plan. Regional funds will not be available for use in the downtown
area, because it is not included in those plans. This location is unlikely to be
included, because of its proximity to the other park and ride facilities, and the
2
lack of access to a principal arterial. In other words, the total cost of a downtown
facility will be borne by Prior Lake.
The use of some transit funds for a parking structure is not totally implausible. At
some point in the future, as downtown redevelopment occurs, it may be possible
to supplement other grants and funding sources with transit funds, as long as we
incorporate a transit component into the project.
In the short term to conserve costs the city could use existing parking facilities
and add 30 minutes each day to each bus to serve the downtown. There are
sufficient funds in the transit account for this purpose. If this were to be the
council's preferred option, a survey should be administered to determine the
numbers of riders we can expect to use this facility before any changes are
initiated.
FINANCIAL
IMPACT:
In the short term, the municipal parking lot could be reestablished downtown with
little cost; however, this would increase operating costs by more than $27,000
per year. A more significant and permanent parking structure would be
considerably more expensive and would have to be accomplished with downtown
redevelopment.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Reestablish a downtown parking area if survey results show that riders will
use it.
2. Consider a downtown parking structure in conjunction with downtown
redevelopment.
3. Take no action at this time.
RECOMMENDED As determined by the City Council.
MOTION:
/
3
Page 1 of 1
Jane Kansier
From: Carlson, Charles [charles.carlson@metc.state.mn.us]
Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2010 3:32 PM
To: Jane Kansler
Subject: Small Park-and-Rides
Hi Jane-
Thank you for your question about prospects for small park-and-ride facilities. I can offer a few observations, as well as broader
regional documentation on this issue.
Historically, park-and-rides were usually small (<100 spaces) or very small (<50 spaces) facilities oriented toward neighborhood-
scale service areas. These were served by local tails of express buses that intended to mostly pick up "walk up" riders but provide
an option for those who had to drive. Church lots, parks, or shopping centers were often used (via lease agreements) for these
facilities. Bus service to these facilities was costly by today's standards because demand was generally low and service was not
very fast. Beginning in the mid-late 1990s, a few very large facilities changed this trend, supported by bus-only shoulder
Investments region wide. Very large new facilities (>500 spaces) like Burnsville Transit Station became very successful,
supporting increased service, which further increased demand. These stations started to serve larger and larger areas, with higher
frequency as ridership grew. In contrast, small facilities offered neither the travel time advantage nor an attractive frequency, and
many of these began to close.
Some of the comparatively successful facilities are still open today, but generally have low usage. Of the facilities in 2009 with
fewer than 50 spaces, utilization is generally around 30 percent (15 carsf50 spaces). Unless the service to these facilities is
supported by other facilities or by significant local walk-up riders, they're less productive and often not cost effective to operate. In
contrast, the facilities with more than 500 spaces have around a 70 percent utilization rate. The five largest bus facilities have a
91% utilization rate. These large facilities run efficient service and generate a great deal of ridership.
We know from license plate origin data that most passengers will bypass smaller facilities to reach the larger park-and-ride
locations. As such, providers have generally restructured service to provide the better utilized, more cost effective and more
productive service to the large facilities.
Regional plans indicate a minimum size of at least 150 spaces, though Metro Transit generally prefers at least 200 for a new lot.
This corresponds to 3-4 peak period trips, the minimum level of service to attract any sustainable level of ridership. Even then, we
consider the broader corridor context for a proposed facility. If other, larger facilities in a corridor are more competitive from a
service/size perspective, we may assume the smallerlless frequent facility may be underutilized and reallocate capitalfoperating
resources accordingly. I have attached a chapter from the draft 2030 Park-and-Ride Plan, which explains some of these
considerations and provides the minimum size recommendation.
For Prior lake, I would anticipate the larger facilities and increased potential service from Southbridge Crossing or Burnsville
Transit Center would eclipse the attractiveness of a small facility in the downtown area. However, if Prior lake express service is
planned to be extended to the downtown Prior Lake area on its own accord, a small park-and-ride might support these initiatives,
or could even provide a "district parking" lot for weekends or evenings, if needed.
Charles Carlson, AICP
Facilities Planner
Metro Transit Engineering & Facilities
612-349-7639 (Direct)
Metro Transit
560 Sixth Avenue North
Minneapolis, MN 55411
3/5/2010