1 Round One Public Outreach Workshops Fall 2005 Presented to: Women’s Transportation Seminar 2007...
-
Upload
rudolph-greene -
Category
Documents
-
view
212 -
download
0
Transcript of 1 Round One Public Outreach Workshops Fall 2005 Presented to: Women’s Transportation Seminar 2007...
1
Round One Public Outreach Workshops
Fall 2005
Presented to:
Women’s Transportation Seminar2007 Annual Conference
May 2, 2007
Presented by:
Therese McMillanDeputy Executive Director, Policy
Metropolitan Transportation Commission
2
Regional Measure 2
• Approved by voters in March 2004
• Increased bridge toll by $1, raising $125 million annually
• Allocated total of $4.5 million for Regional Rail Plan
3
• Bay Area population will grow to 10 million people by 2050, a 48% increase from 2000
• Sacramento will grow by 132%
• San Joaquin will grow by 201%
Need for Regional Rail:
Population Boom
4
Need for Regional Rail:
Increased Travel
1. Transbay: San Francisco
to Oakland (+204,000 trips)
2. Peninsula: San Mateo Co. to Santa Clara Co. (+156,000 trips)
3. East Bay: Alameda Co. to Santa Clara Co. (+152,000 trips)
4. I-680: Alameda Co. to NW Contra Costa Co. (+141,000 trips)
5. I-680: Alameda Co. to Contra Costa Co. East (+104,000 trips)
Fastest Growing Corridors by 2030
5
1. Solano: 498%2. Alameda: 267%3. Napa: 223%4. San Francisco:
189%5. Santa Clara: 133%
Counties with Highest Increase in Vehicle Hours of Delay by 2030
Need for Regional Rail:
Persistent Congestion
6
• Trucks currently carry largest share of Bay Area domestic trade (80%), followed by rail (6%)
• By 2050, freight traffic will grow in excess of 350%
Need for Regional Rail:
Increased Freight Traffic
7
• Lack of action to address Bay Area transportation woes threatens our economic vitality and environmental quality
Need for Regional Rail:
High Cost to Economy & Environment
8
• To create a safe, fast, reliable and integrated passenger and freight rail network
• To establish a consistent framework for regional rail investment decisions
• To sustain and enhance economic vitality of Northern California, while minimizing environmental impacts and providing excellent transit service to downtowns and economic centers
Study Purpose
9
Planning Process – A Team Effort
• Study Partners – MTC, BART, Caltrain, &
CHSRA
• Regional Rail Steering Committee– Passenger and freight railroad
operators, county congestion management agencies & other local partners
– Neighboring regional agencies
• Advisory Group
• Community
10
Rail Plan Step-by-Step
• Phase 1 – Vision– Define rail vision, purpose and
need, and brainstorm on key issues and conceptual system alternatives
• Phase 2 – Technical Analysis– Refine study alternatives and
perform technical analysis
• Phase 3 – Draft/Final Plan– Examine support strategies,
make study findings, and prepare draft plan identifying regional and high-speed rail extensions and services for near-, mid-, and long-terms
11
Key Study Issues
BART• Focus on Core Capacity by
simplifying operations plan and increasing system throughput
• Extend in corridors where BART-type technology could potentially address regional trip needs
• Serve as Mass Transit system with infill stations, possible skip-stop and/or express trackage
12
Key Study Issues
Railroad Services• Develop separate regional
passenger rail network to ultimately provide 115 mph service with lightweight equipment operating throughout the region
• Coordinate existing passenger services shared with freight rail (railroad companies interest?)
• Establish hybrid system corridor-by-corridor using the most appropriate technologies and rights of way (also consider speed and FRA or UIC Compatibility)
13
Key Study Issues
High-Speed Rail• Approach from the South through
San Jose; links are added for service to San Francisco and Oakland?
• Approach from the East via the Tri-Valley area (Livermore / Pleasanton); links are added to connect to San Jose, Oakland and San Francisco?
• Expand regional passenger services to serve regional markets assuming no high-speed rail?
14
• Improve existing freight operations practices (wherein freight movements are dispatched by the railroads) to accommodate traffic growth
• Optimize freight dispatching to fully utilize rail infrastructure and future improvements
• Consolidate select regional rail lines and improve under public ownership with centralized dispatching; and develop freight by-pass routes to route goods traffic away from city centers
Key Study Issues
Freight
15
Key Study Issues
GovernancePotential Benefits
• Improve customer service and experience, and streamline administration and overhead
• Economies of scale through shared facilities, procurement and contracting, regional coordination, and railroad negotiations
• Centralized operations dispatch for service coordination and incident response
• Single entity to conduct all negotiations with the freight railroads.
Potential Risks
• Less autonomy; reduced local authority
• Loss of accountability, whether perceived or real
• Potential for higher labor costs
16
Phase 1 - Vision
Key Public Comments Heard• Connectivity between modes is critical• Resolve freight and passenger rail conflicts• Allow freight on high-speed rail• Need new Bay crossing for rail• Preserve & purchase rights-of-way• Explore advanced rail technologies• “One System, One Ticket”• Must foster supportive land uses • Must minimize impacts on low-income
areas• Must have safe and secure rail system
17
Phase 2
Technical Analysis(in progress)
18
Base NetworkMTC Resolution 3434 rail
extensions:
1. BART/Oakland Airport Connector
2. BART/East Contra Costa Rail (eBART)
3. BART/Fremont-Warm Springs Extension
4. BART/Warm Springs-San Jose
5. MUNI/Third Street Corridor & Central Subway
6. Caltrain/Downtown San Francisco Extension & Transbay Transit Center
7. VTA/Downtown-East Valley8. Sonoma-Marin Rail (SMART)9. Dumbarton Bridge Rail Svc.
19
Base Network• Adopted rail
projects from neighboring regions
20
12 Study Alternatives• 3 – Regional Rail without
High-Speed Rail Alternatives
• 9 – Regional Rail with High-Speed Rail Alternatives
• 3 options entering from the South via San Jose
• 6 options entering from the East via Tri Valley
21
Refinements to Alternatives• Narrowed 3 Regional Rail
without HSR alternativesdown to 2– Alternatives represent most
promising stations, alignments and service options for BART, regional rail, and freight-by pass options
• Awaiting CHSRA to identify most promising HSR stations and alignments– Bay Area to Central Valley
EIR/EIS underway
22
Project Schedule Highlights
• Technical Analysis In progress: Ridership Forecasts, Engineering Feasibility, Capital/Operating Costs, Environmental Screening
Spring 2007
• Draft Plan Release Summer 2007• Agency/Public Outreach Late Summer 2007• MTC Final Plan Adoption
Fall 2007
23
Therese McMillanDeputy Executive Director, PolicyMetropolitan Transportation [email protected]
www.mtc.ca.gov