Upload
others
View
11
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Waco Rapid Transit Corridor (RTC) Feasibility Study
September 19, 2017 Steering Committee Meeting #2
Chris Evilia, Director of Waco Metropolitan Planning Organization John Hendrickson, General Manager Waco Transit System Jimi Mitchell, Project Manager AECOM
Study Objectives
2
Rapid Transit Corridor (RTC) as a catalyst Increase the efficiency of WTS
operations and decrease overall transit travel times
Support and promote regional
economic growth Increase access to employment
opportunities and critical services
Develop an implementation strategy leverage available local, state and
Federal funding opportunities
Existing WTS System
Developing an RTC Step 1: Assess existing conditions Where are people coming from and where are they going? What are the primary travel corridors and roadways? How will the RTC support existing transit?
Step 2: Develop potential solutions and evaluation metrics What are the right infrastructure, technology and service components? What are the effects to riders, stakeholders, and transportation
providers? How much will the solutions cost to implement and operate?
Step 3: Select a locally preferred alternative (LPA) Is this what the community wants? How do we pay for it?
3
Step 2: Infrastructure & Technology Alternatives Components and operational characteristics Frequent service (< 15 minutes) Partially dedicated facilities (lanes) Premium, rail-like stations Longer stop spacing (0.5 to 1 mile) Branding Higher capacity vehicles (seating up to 60) On-board technologies (i.e. payment options) curbside technologies (i.e. information displays)
4
Step 3: Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) Project-specific website http://www.waco-texas.com/cms-mpo/ http://www.aecomconnect.com/WacoRTC/
Stakeholder Charrette Workshop – June 2017
Public Preference Survey Existing riders and online Inform development of Alternatives
Public Open House (Oct/Nov) Draft Alternatives and evaluation approach / data
5
RTC Public Preference Survey Results
Roughly 200 responders June 15 thru Sept 4
Public Preferences Alignment Station shelter type Station amenities Reasons for using transit Trip Attractions /
Destinations
7
Preferred Alignment Segments
8
46%
20%
34%
Downtown Segment
A – Franklin Avenue (91)
B – LaSalle Avenue (40)
C – US 84 / Waco Drive (66)
A
B
C
Total: 197 responses
Preferred Alignment Segments
9
A B
C
Total: 195 responses
28%
28%
44%
North River Segment
A – Taylor Street / Bus US 77 (54)
B – Taylor Street / Bellmead Drive (55)
C – US 84 / Waco Drive (86)
Preferred Alignment Segments
10
A B
C
Total: 193 responses
35%
15% 51%
North Extension Segment
A – Bus US 77 to Crest Drive (67)
B – US 84 to Air Base Road (28)
C – Bellmead Drive / US 84 to Loop 340 (98)
Draft Alignment Alternatives
11
Preferred Station Shelters
35 (20%) 58 (33%)* 38 (21%) 46 (26%)*
13
Total: 177 responses
Preferred Station Amenities
14
Total: 133 responses
Arrival Information Bike Storage Trash Cans Newspaper Pedestrian Safety
Public WiFi Route Information Landscaping Bike Share Bike Repair
Device Charging Ticket Vending Area information Emergency Call Box Safety Infrastructure
1st Tier 2nd Tier
Definition of Alternatives Evaluation Infrastructure Alignment options Guideway (mixed use vs
dedicated) Station shelters, amenities
and pedestrian access Technology Real-time arrival, passenger
ticketing and information Traffic signal priority
Operations Hours of operation Local bus modifications
16
Evaluation Criteria Ridership Projections Traditional travel demand modeling effort FTA simplified existing-benefiting ridership analysis
Economic Development Potential Current / future land uses Redevelopment potential
Mobility Impacts Roadway operations: volume / capacity and intersections Parking, bicycle, pedestrian
Capital and Operating Costs
17
Preferred Destinations
Gov’t Services Daycare Doctor’s Office Grocery Store Library
Parks Post Office Restaurants Farmer’s Market Hospital
Shopping Sporting Events Work / Job Community Events School
20
1st Tier 2nd Tier Total: 133 responses
Overview of the FTA Small Starts Evaluation
Federal Share
Non-Federal Share
Total Capital Costs $$$
Capital Improvement Grant Program (CIG) New Starts, Small Starts, Core Capacity
What is Small Starts? Maximum capital cost - $300 M Maximum FTA SS funding - $100 M Nationally competitive and subject to future Federal Funding
availability
22
Source: Final Interim Policy Guidance FTA CIG Program (June 2016)
Milestone Schedule Task Description Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Technical Analysis
Task 3 Major Trip Generators
Task 4 Corridor Conditions
Task 5 Develop Screening Criteria
Task 6 Ridership Analysis
Task 7 Technology Assessment & Design Criteria
Task 8 Evaluation & Selection
Task 9 Funding & Implementation Plan
Public Involvement (Task 2)
Steering Committee Mtgs
Public Meetings
Approvals
Stakeholder Charrette Workshop Proposed meeting date (TBD)
Not shown: Project Management (Task 1) 23
Next steps for development Assuming selection of Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) investment in rapid transit service: Conduct engineering and design study Determine funding sources Estimated cost $2 M - $5 M (pending level of infrastructure) Approximately 2 years
Obtain any necessary right of way
Construction/ purchase of rolling stock Approximately 2 - 3 years (pending level of infrastructure)