COTA NE AA Public Meeting Presentation
29
Northeast Corridor Alternatives Analysis Public Involvement–Round 2 Input on Alternatives for Further Study Feb. 7-9, 2012
description
COTA’s Cleveland Ave. / Northeast Corridor Alternatives Analysis (NECAA) Project aims to provide faster, more convenient and more comfortable transit service, and improve bus stop amenities in the Cleveland Avenue corridor. Come to one of our public meetings to learn about alternatives being considered and give us your input!
Transcript of COTA NE AA Public Meeting Presentation
Northeast Corridor Alternatives Analysis
Public Involvement–Round 2Input on Alternatives for Further Study
Feb. 7-9, 2012
Agenda
Review project background
Progress summary
Recommended alternatives for further evaluation
Get your input!
2
Housekeeping Items Silence all cell phones.
Be considerate of all meeting attendees and COTA staff.
When it is your turn to make a comment or ask a question, remain at your seat and we will call upon you.
Comments and questions are limited to two minutes per person.
Ask one question at a time so the appropriate staff member may address your comment.
3
4
Existing transit facilities in corridor Transit Centers—Linden
and Easton P&R—Northern Lights,
Westerville
Cleveland Avenue Second busiest route—
5,000 daily riders Often has standing loads
COTA awarded federal grant to study transit improvements November 2010
Study began September 2011
The Northeast Corridor
Northeast Corridor Project COTA is seeking to:
Identify improved transit alternatives in the corridor. Address transportation needs in the corridor.
• On-time performance/service reliability• Connections to jobs• Streetscape improvements
5
Mode Alignment Terminal Station Alternative
FTA New Start Program
6
Very Small Starts Criteria: Stations (more amenities than a
typical bus stop) Signal priority/pre-emption low-floor vehicles Special branding of service Frequent service (10 minute peak,
15 minute off peak) Service at least 14 hours per day Existing ridership is over 3,000
trips per day Less than $50 million total cost Less than $3 million per mile
Cleveland Avenue meets these funding requirements
Kansas City Max Line
OperationAlternatives
AnalysisProject
DevelopmentConstruction
FTA approval required
FTA approval required:
Project Construction Grant Agreement
(PCGA)
1 Year 1-2 Years 1-2 Years
3-5 Years
What is Very Small Starts Process? Analysis is first step in the federal process to get project funding
Existing conditions/project need Develop, screen, evaluate alternatives Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA)
7
Purpose and Need, Project Goals
8
The project’s purpose and vision are: To expand and improve mass transit’s role and contribution to
the overall livability, sustainability and economic vitality of the Northeast corridor and the central Ohio region through faster and more-convenient transit service and improved amenities for mass transit users.
Project goals: Goal 1: Transit level of service improvements Goal 2: Sustain and enhance economic vitality Goal 3: Promote livability principles Goal 4: Develop a financially feasible project
Project Outreach Working group Stakeholder/community leader group Area leader interviews Public meetings Other
Stakeholder presentations On-line survey (survey also available in
Spanish, Somali) Comment cards Social media
First round of public outreach: November 2011 Current round of public outreach: February 2012
9
10
Northeast Corridor AA Progress Round 1 Public Involvement meetings
Introduced project Presented existing conditions Defined goals, purpose and need
Completed Purpose and Need/Existing Conditions report
Initiated environmental documentation
Initiated preliminary screening of alternatives
Continued coordination with City, County and other agencies
Existing Conditions Analysis
11
Need to connect population to jobs
Major destinations Downtown Columbus State Easton St. Ann’s—Westerville
Population West of Cleveland
Avenue, north and south of Morse Road
Development of Alternatives
12
Mode Alignment
Terminal
Station
Alternative
Potential Transit ModesHeavy Rail Transit
13
HOV Bus BRT—Separated Guideway
Limited Stop Bus Commuter Rail BRT—Mixed Traffic
LRT/Streetcar—Mixed Traffic Automated Guideway Transit LRT—Separated Guideway
Potential transit modes were evaluated based on suitability for study area, as determined by: Number of passengers to be carried Passengers making short or long trips Travel speed Space between stops/stations Typical cost per mile to build and operate Lane use and right-of-way considerations
Evaluation of Transit Modes
14
Screening of Transit ModesHeavy Rail Transit
15
HOV Bus BRT—Separated Guideway
Limited Stop Bus Commuter Rail BRT—Mixed Traffic
LRT/Streetcar—Mixed Traffic Automated Guideway Transit LRT—Separated Guideway
Mode Evaluation
HOV Bus Freeway service would not serve key corridor trip purposes; Columbus area has no HOV lanes
BRT—Guideway Insufficient right-of-way in key corridor alignments; excessive capital cost per mile
Limited Stop Bus No real-time arrival information, traffic signal priority, street, sidewalk or other capital improvements, lack of passenger amenities and little time savings
LRT/Streetcar—Mixed Traffic
Anticipated ridership does not match high capital cost per mile; can complicate traffic patterns
LRT—Guideway Insufficient right-of-way in key corridor alignments; excessive capital cost per mile
Heavy Rail Transit Higher capacity than warranted given corridor characteristics; excessive capital cost per mile
Commuter Rail Typical station spacing is inappropriate for corridor service needs; high costs and right-of-way requirements
Automatic Guideway Transit
Higher capacity than warranted given corridor characteristics; excessive capital cost per mile
Mode Evaluation Summary
16
Recommendation: Mode to Evaluate
Bus Rapid Transit—Mixed Traffic
17
Mode Alignment Terminal Station Alternative
What is Bus Rapid Transit (BRT)?
A mix of characteristics: Special branding
• Unique name and identity Faster service
• Fewer stops• Signal priority• Dedicated lane during peaks
Frequent service• 10 min peak/15 min off peak
Service offered most of the day Enhanced passenger amenities
• Real-time information• Enhanced stations• Off-board fare collection
18
Kansas City Max Line
Before MAX BRT (Troost Line, October 2010): Weekday average—7,600 boardings
After MAX BRT: Service hours increased approximately 5-6 percent Weekday average—8,400 boardings (Up 10.3 percent) MAX quality rated 15 percent higher than regular bus service 23 percent of MAX riders new to transit 55 percent rated MAX excellent 69 percent “definitely recommend” MAX (55 percent for regular
service)
19
Example Benefits of BRT—Kansas City MAX BRT
Evaluation of Terminal Locations
20
Many potential terminal stations considered
Mode Alignment Terminal Station Alternative
Potential alignment/termini combinations were evaluated Goal 1: Transit level of service improvements
• Ridership on existing COTA routes • Connections to other COTA routes
Goal 2: Sustain and enhance economic vitality• Development strength of northern terminal • Alignment of job and population density• Potential for TOD/redevelopment
Goal 3: Promote livability principles• Serve low-income/minority communities• Neighborhood livability • Environmental impact• Bicycle connections
Goal 4: Develop a financially feasible project• Overall alignment length
Evaluation of Alignments/Terminal Locations
21
Evaluation of Alignments
22
Many alignments considered and screened Alignments connecting to
Easton
Mode Alignment Terminal Station Alternative
Cleveland Avenue south
of Fifth Avenue—same for all alternatives
Evaluation of Alignments
23
Many alignments considered and screened Alignments connecting to
Easton Karl Road
Mode Alignment Terminal Station Alternative
Cleveland Avenue south
of Fifth Avenue—same for all alternatives
Evaluation of Alignments
24
Many alignments considered and screened Alignments connecting to
Easton Karl Road Cleveland Avenue South
of I-270
Mode Alignment Terminal Station Alternative
Cleveland Avenue south
of Fifth Avenue—same for all alternatives
Evaluation of Alignments
25
Many alignments considered and screened Alignments connecting to
Easton Karl Road Cleveland Avenue South
of I-270 Cleveland Avenue North
of I-270
Mode Alignment Terminal Station Alternative
Cleveland Avenue south
of Fifth Avenue—same for all alternatives
Cleveland Avenue south of Morse Road—same for all alternatives
Recommendation: Alternatives for Further Screening
26
Bus Rapid Transit in Mixed Traffic Cleveland Avenue from
Downtown to:• Easton via Morse• SR 161 via Morse/Karl• SR 161• Westerville Park and Ride
Mode Alignment Terminal Station Alternative
Next Steps
27
Alternatives Analysis remaining schedule
Project development/construction—2013-2016
Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep
Public Outreach
Evaluate Alternatives
Recommended Alternative
Board Consideration of LPA
Public Meeting
Contact Information
Mike McCannBus Rapid Transit Project [email protected]
Tim RosenbergerProject [email protected]
COTA Customer Service: (614) 228-1776
For more information and to provide feedback, go to www.cota.com.
28
Thank You
Comments and questions?
29
