AGENDA. 1. Welcome and Approval of July 27, 2017 Minutes. 2. Norfolk Westside Transit Study Jamie Jackson Results of study

Transcription

1 Meeting of the Planning and New Starts Development Committee Thursday, April 26, :30 a.m. 2nd Floor Board Room 509 E. 18 th Street, Norfolk VA. AGENDA 1. Welcome and Approval of July 27, 2017 Minutes 2. Norfolk Westside Transit Study Jamie Jackson Results of study 3. Upcoming Studies R. Amoruso 4. Old Business 5. New Business 6. Adjournment The next meeting: TBD

2 Meeting of the Planning and New Starts Development Committee Thursday, July 27, :00 p.m. 2nd Floor Board Room 3400 Victoria Blvd, Hampton VA MEETING MINUTES CALL TO ORDER: Committee Chair James Wood called the meeting to order at 12:00 pm. IN ATTENDANCE: Committee Members: Chairman Wood, Virginia Beach Commissioner Fuller, Chesapeake Commissioner Ross Hammond, Virginia Beach Commissioner Hunter, Portsmouth Honorable Dr. Woodbury, Newport News Other Commissioners Commissioner Parnell, Norfolk Commissioner Alternate Raliski, Norfolk Commissioner Alternate Solis, Virginia Beach Hampton Roads Transit Staff William Harrell, President and CEO Brandon Singleton, Chief Financial Officer Ray Amoruso, Chief Planning & Development Officer Luis Ramos, Sr. Executive Assistant to the President and CEO Robert Travers, Counsel Samantha Sink, Planner Transit Development Carleen Muncy, Executive Assistant to Planning & Development Tom Holden, Media Relations Specialist Alesia Cain, Chief Information Technology Officer Dyanne Sampson, Chief Director of Procurement Officer Sibyl Pappas, Chief Environmental and Facilities Officer Margaret Denoncourt, Internal Auditor Gene Cavasos, Director Marketing & Communications Alisa Crider, Public Relations & Social Media Coordinator Derrick Snowden, Chief Safety & Security Officer Brian Smith, Assistant to the President Other Attendees Judith Brown Steve Lambert, HRTPO

3 PNSC Meeting Minutes, Continued Page 2 of 3 The July 27, 2017 Planning and New Starts Committee meeting minutes and agenda were distributed electronically to committee members in advance of the meeting and hard copies of packets were distributed at the meeting. The meeting package consisted of: Agenda Minutes from the July 28, 2016 Meeting Peninsula Corridor Study Newsletter Peninsula Corridor Study PowerPoint Presentation Norfolk Westside Transit Study Power Point Presentation Norfolk Westside Transit Study June 2017 Newsletter Norfolk Westside Transit Study Postcard (2 sided) Approval of the July 28, 2017 Minutes A motion was made and properly seconded to approve the July 28, 2016 Planning and New Starts Committee Meeting Minutes. The July 28, 2016 Minutes were approved by a unanimous vote. Peninsula Corridor Study Ms. Samantha Sink gave the presentation regarding the Peninsula Corridor Study. The presentation provided details on the study, the purpose and need, the final three choices for alternatives, and study outcomes. She highlighted reasons why BRT would be the best choice in each of the alternatives. Ms. Sink also mentioned the various opportunities for funding of the project, as well as the reasons BRT would be a good investment for the Peninsula. Next steps included meetings with the city councils and public meetings that will occur in September. In September, the two city councils and the HRT Commission will be asked for resolutions to endorse one (or more) of the alignments, which would enable the project to move forward into the next phase of the federal project development process. Mr. William Harrell added that prior to moving into the next phase, HRT will review with each City Manager the cost of the next phase of project development. Mr. Amoruso also went over in detail the differences between the characteristics of BRT and LRT guideways, as well as the vehicles. Commission Chair, Pat Woodbury requested that extending services to Fort Eustis and to the Industrial Park areas of Newport News be kept as options, based on identifications of the city s projections of growth areas. It was stated that the three recommended options presented are based on cost effectiveness and ridership potential and the goal was to move forward only the best performing options for funding under the Capital Investment Grant program. The additional capital cost of extending the alignment to Ft. Eustis, does not generate enough ridership to warrant the extension as part of the first phase. Sam Sink stated that such an extension can be set aside, and looked at in the future after the first phase is in revenue service. Mr. Amoruso requested Chairman Wood allow Mr. Brian Smith to provide a Legislative Update to the committee, after the Norfolk Westside Transit Study presentation to cover the Federal and State legislative updates. The request was approved to add the item.

4 PNSC Meeting Minutes, Continued Page 3 of 3 Norfolk Westside Transit Study Mr. Ray Amoruso gave the presentation regarding the Norfolk Westside Transit Study, detailing the need for a high capacity transit connection from the existing Tide Light Rail System to the Naval Station Norfolk along the western part of the city of Norfolk. An overview of the study and schedule was presented to the Norfolk City Council on July 18 th. The presentation provided purpose and need, goals and objectives, analysis of alignments and modal alternatives, the project development and the next steps. Mr. Amoruso stated that FTA wrote a letter to HRT last year (since this is a federally funded process) saying HRT could not move forward with an undefined connection to the existing TIDE on the western side of the city. They requested that HRT work with stakeholders and the general public to define a Build Alternative that is sustainable and cost effective which could then be compared in the future Environmental Study with the Build Alternative in the eastern part of the city. The goal of this 12 month study is to identify an alignment and technology that could compete effectively for federal funds, and is resilient avoiding areas of persistent flooding. Mr. Amoruso stated that after the study it is possible that no viable Build Alternative can be identified. Legislative Update Mr. Brian Smith briefly shared the need for strong municipal partnerships as dialogues with state and federal elected officials begin this Fall. He gave an update on Senate Appropriations where he is advocating for better funding of bus programs to increase the life of buses in service. It was requested by the Chairman that staff draft a letter to be used as a sample letter for each municipality that can be sent to Senators regarding the importance of these funding initiatives. Old Business There was no old business discussed. New Business There was no new business discussed. Adjournment There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 12:50 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Carleen Muncy Executive Assistant Planning & Development Hampton Roads Transit

5 April 2018 Final Project Newsletter INTRODUCTION Hampton Roads Transit and the City of Norfolk are completing a study of alternatives to create stronger and more convenient transit connections between The Tide, Naval Station Norfolk, and other destinations on the west side of the City. The focus of the Norfolk Westside Transit Study was to examine potential high capacity routes and vehicle technologies to improve mobility and access on the west side of Norfolk. This study was conducted in two phases a high-level screening of fourteen potential routes to Naval Station Norfolk from The Tide, and a second, more detailed study of the most promising alignments. This second phase began in the fall of 2017 and focused on two alternatives: Alternative 7 (Monticello/Hampton) and Alternative 12 (Church/Granby). Using a variety of tools and models, the project team spent the past several months closely analyzing the benefits and impacts of Alternative 7 and Alternative 12 as they relate to the identified project needs. The study also looked at the alternatives utilizing different transit technologies, including light rail transit (LRT), streetcar, and bus rapid transit (BRT). This newsletter provides the key results of this analysis highlighted in tables on the following pages. Identified Project Needs and Measures NEED 1: Enhance Mobility and Access to Naval Station Norfolk and within the Study Area through Transit Investments Ridership Forecasts Traffic Impacts NEED 2: Encourage Development and Redevelopment Consistent with the City s Plans Environmental Considerations Impacts to Transit Operations from Flooding NEED 3: Make Fiscally Responsible Transit Investments Capital Costs Operating and Maintenance Costs Alternative 7 - Monticello/Hampton Artist rendering of light rail on Hampton Boulevard at Old Dominion University

6 SUMMARY OF RESULTS OF TIER 2 ANALYSIS Alternative 7 would begin at The Tide s Monticello Station (Monticello Avenue and Charlotte Street) and travel along Monticello Avenue, 26th and 27th Streets, to Hampton Boulevard. Turning north, the alternative would pass Old Dominion University, cross the Lafayette River, and end near Naval Station Norfolk Gate 2, at the intersection of Hampton Boulevard and Admiral Taussig Boulevard. For the purposes of this study, ten potential stations have been identified for Alternative 7. ALTERNATIVE 7 MONTICELLO / HAMPTON (7.2 MILES) RIDERSHIP (2040) BRT LRT STREETCAR 3,046 5,325 3,675 ANNUAL OPERATING COST (2018) $11.9 MILLION $18.8 MILLION $15.8 MILLION CAPITAL COST (2024) $141 MILLION $1.265 BILLION $600 MILLION TRAVEL TIME TO NSN FROM THE TIDE (MINS) MIN FROM NEWTOWN RD. STATION 32 Tide Station Potential Station The Tide Alignment Alternative 7 Norfolk Westside Transit Study Limits The tables above show some of the key findings of the Tier 2 Analysis. The full analysis can be found in the Final Report and technical memoranda prepared for this study. Ridership: The table above shows new riders to the HRT system in These numbers are prepared using a nationally recognized tool, the STOPS model, developed by the Federal Transit Administration. Operating and Maintenance (O&M) Costs: O&M costs are developed on a per hour basis. Costs are developed for the current year (2018) and include the costs to operate and maintain The Tide (LRT) today and the cost of the extension.

7 ALTERNATIVE 12 CHURCH / GRANBY (7.7 MILES) LIGHT RAIL BUS RIDERSHIP (2040) ANNUAL OPERATING COST (2018) CAPITAL COST (2024) BRT LRT STREETCAR 2,783 $11.9 MILLION $141 MILLION 5,626 $16.4 MILLION $1.07 BILLION 3,777 $15.6 MILLION $782 MILLION Alternative 12 would begin at The Tide s Civic Plaza Station (St. Paul s Boulevard and Plume Street) and travel along St. Paul s Boulevard, Fenchurch Street, and Church Street, to Granby Street. The alignment would turn west on W. Ocean Avenue and end near Naval Station Norfolk Gate 4 at the intersection of W. Bay Avenue and 1st View Street. For the purposes of this study, twelve potential stations have been identified for Alternative 12. TRAVEL TIME TO NSN FROM THE TIDE (MINS) MIN FROM NEWTOWN RD. STATION 32 Capital Costs: Capital costs are calculated from a variety of sources, including the Virginia Department of Transportation and propriety construction cost databases. Costs include (but are not limited to) factors such as construction, right-of-way acquisitions, vehicles, and design. Costs are escalated to a point in the future to show the actual cost of the project when it would be constructed. Travel Times: Travel times were estimated using a model that includes vehicle characteristics, including acceleration and accounts for time stopped at stations and intersections. Tide Station Potential Station The Tide Alignment Alternative 12 Norfolk Westside Transit Study Limits

8 FINAL PUBLIC MEETINGS FOR NORFOLK WESTSIDE TRANSIT STUDY MONDAY, APRIL 16TH 6:00 7:30 p.m. Hampton Roads Transit Board Room 509 E. 18th St., Norfolk, VA THURSDAY, APRIL 19TH 6:00 7:30 p.m. Lambert s Point Community Center 1251 W. 42nd St., Norfolk, VA Alternative 12 - Church/Granby Artist rendering of light rail on Granby Steet at Granby High School NEXT STEPS The Norfolk Westside Transit Study is part of a larger effort to improve transit services to Naval Station Norfolk. Following guidance from the Federal Transit Administration (FTA), HRT and the City of Norfolk initiated the Norfolk Westside Transit Study in After a year of analysis, this study has identified that based on the limited ridership potential, high capital and operating costs, the potential to impact vehicular traffic patterns, and significant flooding and resiliency challenges, a new high capacity transit alternative on the west side of Norfolk is not feasible. Based on this conclusion, HRT is recommending that the City adopt a No-Build alternative for the west side of the City of Norfolk. There continues to be an urgent need to provide high capacity transit services to the 60,000 to 70,000 military personnel and civilians who work at Naval Station Norfolk. To that end, HRT and the City of Norfolk, together with their partners at the Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation and FTA, are preparing to initiate an analysis of alternative alignments to serve the naval base on the east side of the City of Norfolk. The east side alternatives will focus on corridors along Military Highway, Little Creek Road, and I-64 in a twoyear study to look at the feasibility and environmental impacts of a high capacity transit extension on the east side of Norfolk. This study is slated to start in the fall of STARTING FALL 2018 NO BUILD CONTACT US linkedin.com/company/hampton-roads-transit Anyone requiring special assistance to attend and participate in the study process may contact HRT at or TTY 711. Para información en Español, por favor llame (757) Jamie Jackson Project Manager jjackson@hrtransit.org Jeffrey Raliski City of Norfolk jeffrey.raliski@norfolk.gov

9 PLANNING & NEW STARTS April 19, 2018

10 NORFOLK WESTSIDE TRANSIT STUDY (APRIL 2017 APRIL 2018) HRT and the City of Norfolk explored a potential high capacity transit connection from the existing Tide light rail system to Naval Station Norfolk along the western side of Norfolk. PURPOSE: SHARE RESULTS OF 12-MONTH STUDY EFFORT PROVIDE STUDY RECOMMENDATION

11 AGENDA BACKGROUND PURPOSE AND NEED SUMMARY NEXT STEPS EVALUATION FRAMEWORK TIER 2 EVALUATION Street Configuration Environmental Considerations Flooding and Resiliency Traffic Operations Transit Operations Operations Costs Capital Costs

12 STUDY BACKGROUND 2015 Naval Station Norfolk Transit Extension Study Federal Transit Administration Guidance Identify a reasonable alternative in the West Corridor prior to entry into the environmental documentation process.

13 EVALUATION FRAMEWORK A l t er nat iv e 1 Length: 6.3 miles A l t er nat iv e 3 Length: 6.5 miles A l t er nat iv e 5 Length: 7.1 miles A lt er nat i ve 7 Length: 7.2 miles A l t er nat iv e 9 Length: 8.8 miles A l t er nat iv e 11 Length: 8.6 miles A l t er nat iv e 2 Length: 6.3 miles A l t er nat iv e 4 Length: 6.5 miles A l t er nat iv e 6 Length: 7.1 miles A lt er nat i ve 8 Length: 8.0 miles A l t er nat iv e 10 Length: 7.2 miles A l t er nat iv e 12 Length: 7.7 miles

14 EVALUATION FRAMEWORK Identify Potential Alternative Routes 14 Alternatives Tier 1 Screening High Level Quantitative/Qualitative Analysis 2 Alternatives Tier 2 Screening Detailed Quantitative Analysis No more than one alternative (or nobuild) Recommended (or No-Build) Alternative Future Comparison with East Side Alternative

15 TIER 1 AND 2 - MODAL ALTERNATIVES Light Rail Transit Modern Streetcar Bus Rapid Transit

16 ALT 7: MONTICELLO/HAMPTON ALT 12: CHURCH/GRANBY

17 NEEDS AND GOALS NEED 1: Enhance Mobility and Access to Naval Station Norfolk and Within the Study Area Through Transit Investments NEED 2: Encourage Development and Redevelopment Consistent with City's Plans NEED 3: Make Fiscally Responsible Transit Investments

18 TIER 2 EVALUATION NEED 1: Enhance Mobility and Access to Naval Station Norfolk and Within the Study Area Through Transit Investments Traffic and Transportation Ridership Forecasting NEED 2: Encourage Development and Redevelopment Consistent with City's Plans Environmental Considerations Flooding and Resiliency NEED 3: Make Fiscally Responsible Transit Investments Operating and Maintenance Costs Capital Costs

19 LIGHT RAIL STREET CONFIGURATION ALT 7: MONTICELLO/HAMPTON ALT 12: CHURCH/GRANBY

20 STREETCAR STREET CONFIGURATION ALT 7: MONTICELLO/HAMPTON ALT 12: CHURCH/GRANBY

21 BUS RAPID TRANSIT STREET CONFIGURATION ALT 7: MONTICELLO/HAMPTON ALT 12: CHURCH/GRANBY

22 ALT 7: 27 th Street

23 ALT 7: Hampton Blvd at 45 th Street

24 ALT 12: Granby Street at 41st Street

25 ALT 12: Granby High School

26 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS Land Use: Future land use, development goals Parklands: Schools, communities, recreation centers. Socio-Economic Conditions: Population, demographics, jobs Historic Resources: Historic districts and buildings, viewsheds Water Resources: Rivers, Wetlands

27 FLOODING AND RESILIENCY

28 Alternative 7 Alternative 12 33% 25% 67% 75% % of alternative in flood hazard zone (standing water more than 2 in. over the top of rail) % of alternative outside of flood zone

29 CONCEPTUAL GRADE SEPARATION STRATEGY METRO Silver Line Construction, Route 7: Tyson s Corner

30 HOURS OF SERVICE

31 EXTENSION SERVICE FREQUENCY

32 TRAVEL TIME ALT 7 Monticello/Granby Newtown to Gate 2: Monticello to Gate 2: min min Newtown to Gate 2: Monticello to Gate 2: 52 min 32 min Monticello to Gate 2: 32 min DNTC to Gate 2: 22 min Auto travel times from Google Maps

33 TRAVEL TIME ALT 12 Church/Granby Newtown to Gate 4: Civic Plaza to Gate 4: min min Newtown to Gate 4: Civic Plaza to Gate 4: 46 min 32 min Civic Plaza to Gate 4: 32 min Civic Plaza to Gate 4: 24 min Auto travel times from Google Maps

34 RIDERSHIP FORECASTS Simplified Trips On Project Model (STOPS) FTA developed and supported Uses census data and data in standard formats supplied by agencies Travel demand model Developed ridership forecasts: 2015, 2020, and 2040

35 TRIPS ON PROJECT (2040 FORECAST)

36 OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE COSTS (2018 DOLLARS ($))

37 KEY CAPITAL COST CONSIDERATIONS Multiple NORFOLK SOUTHERN RAILROAD crossings Complex PHASED CONSTRUCTION along route, access to NSN and security LAFAYETTE RIVER BRIDGES (Hampton and Granby) will not support LRT LONG/COMPLEX BRIDGE would be required over Little Creek Rd/I-64/I-564 at Wards Corner (Alt 12) Several DOMINION POWER TRANSMISSION crossings that would be relocated Significant RIGHT-OF-WAY CONSTRAINTS would require takings/relocations or elevated guideway STREETCAR would require new MAINTENANCE FACILITY FLOOD MITIGATION

38 CAPITAL COSTS ($)

39 CAPITAL COSTS ($)

40 SUMMARY: NEED 1 Need 1: Enhance Mobility and Access to Naval Station Norfolk and Within the Study Area Through Transit Investments All modes and all alignments lack robust ridership potential as modeled All rail alignments would have significant impacts on vehicular traffic None of the alternatives or modes meet this need

41 SUMMARY: NEED 2 Need 2: Encourage Development and Redevelopment Consistent with City's Plans High capacity transit is generally consistent with citywide and local area plans Significant lengths of Alternative 7 and 12 are within known flood zones that affect continuity of transit operations Areas of Alternatives 7 and 12 would be permanently inundated by 3 feet or more of sea level rise Both alternatives partially meet this need; however flooding remains a significant concern

42 SUMMARY: NEED 3 Need 3: Make Fiscally Responsible Transit Investments All alternatives would require substantial local, state, and federal investment Rail alternatives would not be awarded federal funds As designed, BRT alternative not eligible for New Starts funds due to limited exclusive guideway None of the alternatives or modes meet this need

43 RECOMMENDATIONS SELECT NO-BUILD AS THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE FOR THE WESTSIDE TRANSIT STUDY Continue to study ways to enhance transit access to Naval Station Norfolk from the Westside Work with the Navy, City, ODU, and other stakeholders to improve transit services on the west side of Norfolk.

44 NEXT STEPS: GOING EAST. DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT (DEIS) Initiate DEIS on the east side to examine other potential transit markets to Naval Station Norfolk Scheduled to start in Fall months Key Components Purpose and Need for Action Alternatives & Proposed Action Affected Environment Environmental Consequences Ridership Schedule Costs Public Comment Conceptual Engineering (5-10% Design)

45 QUESTIONS?