Laserfiche WebLink
MnDOT has moved.to performance -based funding decisions as its pavement and..brdges <br />continue to age; Giventhe greater proportion of highway lane -miles and bridges that exist <br />outside of the Twin Cities metropolitan area, a decreasing percentage of MnDOT funds are <br />being spent in the Twin Cities, The past and anticipated. future M.n DOT funding pattern is shown <br />in TPP Figure 5-7. <br />The region has completed many important mobility projects since 2015, led by both MnDOT and <br />local units of government, as shown in TPP Figure 5-4. <br />Transit System —Chapter to <br />The implementation of the transitway network planned for in the 2015 TPP has progressed significantly: <br />Since the adoption of the 2015 TPP. several transitways have gone into operation inc.ludingMETRO A <br />and C lines and METRO Orange Line. Some planned transitways have had alignment changes.as. they <br />progress through the planning process. As additional funding has been identified to build out the <br />regional transitway network, some transitways have shifted from the "Increased Revenue Scenario", <br />which includes projects forwhich there is no identifier! funding, to the "Current Revenue Scenario"., <br />which includes projects with identified funding sources. <br />Updates to the Transit chapter also include the identification of new transitways. Metro Transit's <br />Network Next planning document identified new corridors as candidates for arterial bus rapid transit <br />(ABRT) service in the region: New tran sitways have also been idehtifled through coriidorplanning <br />efforts undertaken by counties, cities, and other regional stakeholders. <br />Amendments have also resulted.in the elimination of some transitways thatwere included in the 2015 <br />TPP: Since 2015, the County Transportation Improvement Board (CT IB) disbanded,.which removed the <br />CT1B Phase 1 Program of Projects frorn the Current Revenue Scenario. Network Next's arterial bus <br />rapid transit network also reconsidered the prioritization of BRT corridors in the region, resulting in the <br />elimination of some arterial BRT corridors.for considerationfor implementation inthe plan, <br />The following changes have occurred in the Transitway System Investment Plane <br />■ Three transitways, METRO A, C, and Orange lines, have been completed and have entered <br />operation <br />Seven transitways now have identified funding, mode, and alignment and have been added to <br />the Current Revenue Scenario <br />o Purple Line Dedicated BRT (Rush, Line) <br />o Riverview Modern Streetcar <br />a B Line Arterial BRT (Lake/Marsha111Selby) <br />o D Line Arterial BRT (Chicago/Fremont) <br />.o E Line -Arterial BRT (Hennepin/France). <br />o F Line Arterial BRT (Central) <br />o G Line Arterial BRT .(Rice/Robert) <br />The alignment for METRO Gold Line has been updated <br />Red Rock. Highway BRT has identified.a mode and alignment and. been moved to the: Increased <br />Revenue Scenario from the Current Revenue Scenario <br />Six transitways in the Increased Revenue Scenario have updated modes and/or alignments <br />a Midtown Rail <br />o Highway 159 Highway BRT <br />o Orange Line: Extension Highway BRT <br />o. 1-35►N North <br />o: Nicollet Ave.Arterial BRT <br />o West Broadway/Cedar.Arterial BRT <br />■ Ten transitways and corridors understudy have been added to the Increased Revenue <br />Scenario' <br />o H Line:Arterial BRT (Como/Maryland) <br />o Johnson/Lyndale Arterial BRT <br />Page - 3 1 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL <br />