Waco Metropolitan Planning Organization Technical... · 20.09.2007 · Hyperloop Maglev Train...

Waco Metropolitan Planning Organization

Thursday, July 9, 20202:00 p.m..

Roll Call of Committee MembersMPO Director will ask each Technical

Committee member to respond present on the conference call

2

Reading of Public CommentsUnder social distancing guidelines, visitors were

requested to submit comments in advance

MPO Staff will read into the record any comments received

Visitors are allowed to listen to the meeting, but will not have an opportunity to speak

3

UPWP AmendmentsConsideration and action regarding a

recommendation to the MPO Policy Board on adoption of amendments to the FY 2020-2021 Unified Planning Work Program

4

What is the Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP)? UPWP serves as the operating budget for the MPO for

FY 2020 & 2021

Identifies how federal highway and transit planning funds are intended to be used

Identifies each task the MPO intends to accomplish and total funds to be used

5

FY 2020 - 2021 UPWPProposed Amendments Amend Subtask 1.5 – Travel & Training

Reduce by $10,000 for FY 2020 Budget Total = $4,000

Reduce by $7,000 for FY 2021 Budget Total = $5,000

Amend Subtask 5.1 – Waco Transit System Fixed Route Realignment Study Moves beginning of project from FY 2020 to FY 2021 Reassigns $93,750 in FTA 5307 funds & local match

6

Public Involvement Public Process

Conducted 15 day comment period June 22, 2020 – July 7, 2020 No formal comments received

Conducted virtual public informational meetings June 22, 2020 at 12:00 noon and 5:30 p.m.

June 29, 2020 at 12:00 noon and 5:30 p.m.

All materials posted on MPO website

7

Technical Committee Recommendation

Proposed Amendments to the FY 2020-2021 Unified Planning Work Program

8

High Speed Transportation Study

Review and Discussion regarding final consultant report for the Fort Worth to Laredo High Speed Transportation Study

9

PROJECT PURPOSE

Fort WorthWacoKilleen-TempleAustin

San Antonio

Laredo

• The project purpose is to conduct aHigh-Speed Transportation (HST) study that connects Fort Worth, Waco, Killeen-Temple, Austin, San Antonio, and Laredo.

• It will evaluate various technologyoptions and modes of travel.

• It will recommend corridorsand potential station locationsto include in future NEPA documents.

10

LEVEL 1: CITY PAIRIDENTIFICATION

Fort Worth-Austin-SanAntonio-Laredo

Fort Worth Waco Killeen/Temple Austin San Antonio Laredo

Fort Worth Austin San Antonio Laredo

Fort WorthWaco Killeen/Temple

Austin San AntonioLaredo

NCTCOG

2 corridor wide routes to be consideredService Area Population

Corridor WideRoutes

Fort Worth to Laredo-All stops

11

TECHNOLOGIES: PRIMARY(INTER-REGIONAL)Hyperloop Maglev Train High-Speed Rail (Over 150 mph)

~40- 60 ft right-of-way ~75 - 95ft right-of-way ~45 - 65ft right-of-way

12

High Speed Rail• Traditional steel wheel on steel rail• Max Speed about 200mph, typical about 150mph• Proven technology, engineering and operational costs well known

Maglev• Magnetic levitation over center beam• Eliminates drag / resistance from steel wheels• Max Speed about 350mph, typical about 250mph• One operational line in China, operational costs estimated

Hyperloop• Sort of a maglev train operating within a vacuum sealed tube• Vacuum eliminates drag from air resistance• Max speed estimated near 500mph, no estimate about typical• No estimates on design, construction or operational costs

Primary Technology Definitions

13

Guaranteed Transit Conventional Rail Higher-Speed Rail (Up to 150 mph)

TECHNOLOGIES: INFILL(INTRA-REGIONAL)

Typical managed laneright-of-way

Typical Conventional Rail right-of-way

Typical Higher-SpeedRail right-of-way

14

POTENTIAL STATION DISTANCEFindings• For Level 1:

• Optimal station distances and service area population find thatHyperloop, Maglev and High-Speed Rail are appropriate for all stops, as well as a Fort Worth-Austin-San Antonio-Laredo stopping pattern




Fort Worth Austin San Antonio Laredo


15

90 miles 60 miles 70 miles 80 miles 155 miles

LEVEL 1 - SUMMARY

Primary technologymodes

Hyperloop Maglev High-SpeedRail



Not recommendedHigher relative time savings Lower relative time savings

• Based on this analysis, five single mode options were generated for primary technologymodes. Two of these options stop at all stations.

• 9 double mode (Primary + Infill) options were generated. These cover all stops.• Primary technology modes provide at least 50% savings in time compared to driving time.

16

• Applied high-level criteria to narrow down feasiblesegments from TOPRS

• A total of 23 city-to-citysegments evaluated.

• Corridor types included:o Greenfield (new location)o Existing highway corridorso Existing railroad corridorso Existing utility corridors

LEVEL: 2 TOPRS SEGMENT & PRIMARY TECHNOLOGYCOMPATIBILITY

17

Highway Corridors• Maglev and HSR cannot operate along highway routes because both have more

restrictive horizontal and vertical design criteria. To follow an existing highway, the speed of the technology would be greatly reduced.

• Hyperloop has less restrictive design criteria and could follow highway routes but a reduction in speed would be necessary.

Freight Corridors• Hyperloop, Maglev and HSR cannot operate on existing railroad tracks.• Track gauge for high-speed systems is incompatible with freight rail and potential

interference with overhead catenary systems for electrical HSR vehicles.• High-speed transit systems require 100 percent grade-separation to achieve high speeds.

Utility Corridors• Primary technologies are feasible generally following utility corridors, and favorable in

Texas due to geography and long segments of uninterrupted linear paths.

LEVEL: 2 TOPRS SEGMENT & PRIMARY TECHNOLOGY COMPATIBILITY

18

LEVEL: 2 – HIGHEST SCORING TECHNOLOGY AND ALIGNMENT

Maglev

HSR

HL5

SP1

HL4

SP1

HL6

SP1

HL1

1SP

2

HL1

2SP

2H

L3SP

1H

L10

SP2

HL9

SP2

HL2

SP1

HL1

SP1

HL7

SP2

MLE

V2SP

2H

SR1

SP1

HL8

SP2

HSR

2SP

2

High LowHyperloop

MLE

V1SP

1

HL– Hyperloop MLEV- MaglevHSR- High Speed Rail

SP1- Stopping Pattern 1- All (6) StopsSP2- Stopping Pattern 2 – Fort Worth- Austin- San Antonio- Laredo (4) Stops

19

LEVEL: 2 PRELIMINARYFINDINGS HIGHEST SCORINGEND-TO-END TECHNOLOGY AND ALIGNMENT

• Hyperloop with six potential stops in:• Fort Worth• Waco• Killeen/Temple• Austin• San Antonio• Laredo

• Alignment generally follows:• Traveling south from Fort Worth to Waco

generally following a UtilityCorridor.• From Temple to San Antonio, generally

following IH-35.• From San Antonio to Laredo in a greenfield

corridor.

20

STATION ANALYSISAssessed station suitability based on identifiedmetrics:

Multimodal Connectivity• Access to transit stops• Transit connectivity• Existing railroads• Existing transit hubs and park & rides

Major Activity Centers/Access to Regional Tourism• Modal suitability density (population+ employment)

Environmental Considerations• Feature coverage (Floodplain, wetland, historic sites,

etc.)

Existing and Future Land Use/Available Land• Land usecompatibility

Not Used• Geometric design, alignments, grade

21

STATION ANALYSISKTMPO- Killeen- Temple

22

WMPO- WacoNCTCOG- Fort Worth

LEVEL 3: OTHER FACTORS TOCONSIDER

Station Location Benefits• Urban vs. suburbanlocation• Freight co-benefit of station location

Operational• Required area for ancillary facilities• Reliability• O&M costs• Technology Maturity

Interoperability• Compatibility with existing technologies

Regulatory• Regulatory environment• Public and institutional plan consistency• Public support

Convenience• Passenger experience• Travel efficiency

Safety &Resilience• Vehicle and track safety measures

• Level 3: Develop a discussion and ranking of difficult to quantify criteria applicable totechnologies.

• Outcomes: Provide an additional qualitative assessment of technologies in relationto the outcomes of Level2.

23

PRELIMINARY FINDINGS

24

After screening, Hyperloop stopping at all identifiedcity pairsranked as the highest technology and alignmentcombination.

• Hyperloop potential stops:• Fort Worth• Waco• Killeen/Temple• Austin• San Antonio• Laredo

• Alignment generally follows:• Traveling south from Fort Worth to Waco

generally following a UtilityCorridor.• From Temple to San Antonio, generally following

IH-35.• From San Antonio to Laredo in a

greenfield corridor.

MPO Comments & NCTCOG Responses Concerned with recommended corridor alignments. Report

suggests Hyperloop technology could use IH-35 alignments with minimal deviations whereas Maglev could not

Design challenges with following existing IH-35 alignment Although Hyperloop can operate at higher speeds than Maglev,

operational limitations may negate advantages of the technology Similar speed & alignment limitations may apply to both Hyperloop

and Maglev Significantly higher right of way acquisition cost than identified by

study Could result in changes to final technology recommendations

Response – Hyperloop staff suggests technology can use a tighter curve radius than Maglev Note: November presentation acknowledged lower travel speeds

25

MPO Comments & NCTCOG Responses Questions regarding station analysis

Census Tract Analysis Property acquisition (ROW costs) not included in the criteria A high level analysis to flag high scoring census tracts with access

challenges should have been a part of study

Station Approaches Through Urban Areas Station approaches would require through services to use slower

speeds through each urbanized area greatly reducing the advantages of higher speed technologies

Station analysis should have been thoroughly vetted through 6 MPO Boards

Response – Purpose of the HST study is to: Identify if emerging technologies are viable for the corridor Provide information for the Tier II NEPA study Indicate general location of each station for further study

26

Laredo to Fort Worth High Speed Transportation Study MPO Policy / Technical Considerations

Any technology above 150 mph is beneficial to Waco Region Proven Technology vs. Cutting Edge (Level of Risk?)

Hyperloop appears to be viable Test track in Middle East If I-35 corridor developed and successful, other systems likely to

connect Tier II study likely needs to revisit alignments

Station location Closer to downtown better, but Potts Interchange area could have

significant benefits (BRT service) Dependent upon design geometrics

27

Laredo to Fort Worth High Speed Transportation StudyWhat’s Next? Report submitted by NCTCOG to TxDOT Rail

Division Likelihood of Tier 2 study?

Private sector interest? Hyperloop: I-35 corridor top 20 global corridor

How does COVID-19 change interest?

28

Laredo to Fort Worth High Speed Transportation Study

Discussion of Final Consultant Report

29

TxDOT Construction UpdateDiscussion and Updates from the Texas

Department of Transportation regarding significant highway construction within the Waco Metropolitan Area

30

Footer Text July 9, 2020

TxDOT Waco AreaProject UpdatesBuilding the Texas Transportation System

July 9, 2020


US 84 SPEEGLEVILEE OVERPASS

ROADWAY: US 84COST: $28,651,608.00LIMITS: Harris Creek Rd. to Bosque RiverSCOPE: GRD, STRS & SURFTIMELINE: APRIL 2018 – AUGUST 2020

• Contractor opened new overpass bridges in early June.

• Completing signing and remaining frontage road and intersection work.

• Total project completion expected this Summer.

32


FM 939

33

ROADWAY: FM 939COST: $6,842,742.00LIMITS: SH 31 TO FM 2937SCOPE: REHAB/WIDENTIMELINE: APRIL 2019 – Summer 2020

• Contractor has completed all paving and striping throughout project.

• Contractor installing permanent signs.

• Total project completion expected this Summer.


FM 938 @ Tonk Creek

34

ROADWAY: FM 938COST: $663,129.76LIMITS: FM 938 @ Tonk CreekSCOPE: REPLC BR & APPRSTIMELINE: FEB 2020 – SUMMER 2020

• Roadway closed and bridge removed in early March.

• Contractor anticipates reopening bridge in July.

• Total project completion expected in Summer 2020.


FM 1637 PH II

35

ROADWAY: CHINA SPRINGS HWY COST: $14,452,070.00LIMITS: .37 MI W of FM 2490 to .482 MI W of FM 185SCOPE: WDN GR SURFTIMELINE: JUNE 2018 – SPRING 2020

• Work complete with the exception of punch list items.


FM 1637 PH III

36

ROADWAY: FM 1637COST: $9,968,707.00LIMITS: Bosque Co. Line/FM 185 TO FM 56SCOPE: Hazard Elimination, shoulder widening, and overlayTIMELINE: AUGUST 2019 – FALL 2020

• Contractor has completed widening in Bosque County and will continue working in one mile sections towards China Spring.

• Total project completion expected in Fall 2020.


IH 35 4B Update

Contractor has completed over $150 million of work through June 2020

Contractor’s schedule still projects on-time finish

Project Wide:

– Water and Wastewater Relocations continue throughout the project – anticipate completing in next 4-6 months

– 24” Waterline replacement scheduled for this summer and will impact 4th St for several weeks

37


IH 35 4B Update

Southbound Frontage Road:

– Installing storm drain between 5th and 12th St. Anticipate paving and opening new frontage road later this summer.

Northbound Frontage Road:

– Working subgrade from south end of project to U Parks. Anticipate paving later this summer.

– Paving operations continuing north of Forrest St this week and will be ongoing through the summer.

Cross Streets:

– University Parks: Working on connection of NBFR and EB University Parks.

– US 84: Opened new EB lanes on east side of IH 35.

– Behrens: Beginning construction of intersection with new NBFR.

38


IH 35 4B Update

Mainlanes:

– Continuing demo of UPRR bridge.

– Constructing new bridges at 11/12th St, 4/5th St, University Parks, Brazos River, MLK Blvd, BU 77, US 84, Behrens Circle, and LP 340. Will start working on new bridge at UPRR this Summer. Installed new bridge beams at 11th/12th St and will continue setting beams at U Parks and 4th/5th St this week. Other locations to continue being set through the Summer. Will impact cross street and frontage road traffic.

– Earthwork continues entire length of new mainlanes with retaining wall work started at several new bridges (LP 340, US 84, U Parks, 4th/5th St).

39

Director’s ReportA. Request for agenda items to be considered

for future meetings• Next Technical Committee meeting:

• Thursday, September 3, 2020 at 2:00pm

• Discussion and Updates from TxDOT regarding significant highway construction

40

Waco Metropolitan Planning Organization

Thursday, July 9, 202002:00 p.m.

Waco Metropolitan Planning Organization Technical... · 20.09.2007 · Hyperloop Maglev Train...

Documents

Transcript of Waco Metropolitan Planning Organization Technical... · 20.09.2007 · Hyperloop Maglev Train...