Chapter 7: A Visionary Transportation Future

Transcription

1 Chapter 7: A Visionary Transportation Future Introduction Chapter 7 offers a vision of what the transportation system might look like in the future. It includes the expansion of the public transit system and new technology that may enable people and goods to travel in different modes of transportation. A Vision for Transit Throughout the development of AIM Forward 2040, participants in public engagement events frequently stated the need for improved public access to transit. These participants ranged from members of the general public to business owners and entities devoted to job development in the region. Because transit funding in the State of Ohio and within the region would not accommodate the addition of significant new transit service, this section provides what an enhanced transit system might look like for the region. Visionary futures are provided based on planning efforts by the Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority (GCRTA) as well as a NOACA staff visioning exercise. The roadway and transit networks are the main platforms for daily trips, and their design plays a crucial role in providing a sufficient and efficient transportation system, giving access and mobility as well as connectivity. The envisioned future transit networks and their access are discussed and displayed in the following paragraphs. GCRTA s Interim Transportation Plan suggests the development of several new bus rapid transit (BRT) lines and premium lines as well as extensions to the eastern and western ends of the Red Line. The main transit lines based on the GCRTA s suggestions are shown in Figure In its visioning exercise, NOACA staff attempted to address the concern that job locations no longer tend to be centrally located. Staff envisioned a future where significant additions were made to the region s rail and BRT systems. The resulting system appears in Figure The costs for this visionary system are summarized in Figures through At a total cost of $7.2 billion, it is clear that a significant new funding stream(s) would need to be generated to accomplish construction of such a system. The political climate at the local, state, and federal levels at this time does not suggest that generation of such funding streams is likely in the near term. Figure 7.1-1: Walk Accessibility to Rail Stations Figure 7.1-2: Drive Accessibility to Park-and-Ride Lots Figure 7.1-3: Existing and Proposed GCRTA Infrastructure Figure 7.1-4: Walk Accessibility to Rail Stations with Proposed Infrastructure Figure 7.1-5: Drive Accessibility to Park-and-Ride Lots with Proposed Infrastructure Figure 7.1-6: NOACA Staff Vision of Future Rail and BRT System 411

2 412

3 Figure 7.1-1: Future Premium Bus, BRT and Rail Line Network 413

4 414

5 The impacts of these extensions would increase the number of people with 0.5 mile walk and 5- mile drive accesses to rail and park-and-ride stations in the NOACA region and consequently provide additional travel mode option to more residents. Red and Green shaded areas in Figures and display the current and future 0.5 mile walk and 5-mile drive accessibilities to park-and-ride and rail stations respectively. 415

6 416

7 Figure 7.1-2: 5-mile Drive Access Buffer of Park-and-Ride Stations 417

8 Figure 7.1-3: 0.5-mile Walk Access Buffer of Rail Stations 418

9 Currently, high travel demand is limited to the morning and evening peak period hours throughout the region, and considering the forecasts of population growth, traffic congestion will continue to have a similar pattern in the future. Providing alternative modes of transportation can reduce the current traffic congestion even further and perhaps attract people and business from other states to the Greater Cleveland area because of the minimal traffic congestion. In its visioning exercise, NOACA staff attempted to provide alternative modes of transportation and the objectives of this exercise were; Connecting major trip production and attraction centers, Providing sub-urban connectivity to Central Business Districts (CBDs), and Giving transit trips a higher priority over auto trips. In order to fulfill these objectives, they envisioned a future where significant additions were made to the region s rail system. Figures 7.1-4, and illustrate the envisioned rail system, its stations and 0.5-mile walk access buffer for each stations. 419

10 420

11 Figure 7.1-4: The Envisioned Future Rail Lines 421

12 Figure 7.1-5: The Envisioned Future Rail Stations and 0.5-mile Walk Access Buffer 422

13 The visionary future rail network will extended the current 37 miles of rail to 111 miles and the number stations will increase from 50 to 162. Assuming total cost of $50 million for each mile of rail extension and $25 million construction cost for each extra station, Figures through illustrate the costs for this visionary system. Figure 7.1-6: Total cost of Visionary Future Rail Lines Rail Network (Lines) Length (Miles) Cost Per Mile ($2015) Total Cost ($2015) Existing Lines 37 N/A N/A Future Lines 111 $50 Million $ 5.6 Billion Figure 7.1-7: Total cost of Visionary Future Rail Line Stations Rail Network (Stations) Number of Stations Cost Per Station ($2015) Total Cost ($2015) Existing Lines 50 N/A N/A Future Lines 162 $10 Million $ 1.6 Billion Figure 7.1-8: Total cost of Visionary Future Rail System Rail Network Component Total Cost ($2015) Future Lines $ 5.6 Billion Future Stations $ 1.6 Billion Total $ 7.2 Billion At a total cost of 7.2 Billion, it is clear that a significant new funding stream(s) would need to be generated to accomplish construction of such a system. The political climate at the local, state 423

14 and federal levels at this time does not suggest that generation of such funding streams is likely in the near term. 424

15 Visionary Transportation Technology While NOACA must plan for the existing transportation system within its mandate, the agency must be cognizant of future transportation technologies that may materialize, affecting not only how the residents and visitors travel within, to, and from the region, but also what these technologies may require from the public sector in terms of regulation and infrastructure. This chapter examines various transportation concepts that are at various stages of development from conceptual to design to testing and the policy/regulatory and infrastructure requirements needed to accommodate such developments. Staff believes that it is too early to incorporate specific outcomes or attributes of these concepts into its current long-range transportation plans future system. It hopes that over the next four years more clarity is achieved as to the likely real-world uses of these transportation approaches. Note that though this chapter focuses on the transportation policy and infrastructure needs resulting from technological innovation, important social and economic aspects may occur as well. For example, in many U.S. states, Ohio included, the job of truck driver employs thousands of people and ranks as one of the top job titles. As truckers support restaurants and other businesses along their routes, not only would millions of truck driving jobs disappear, but the secondary jobs that support truck driving would also be impacted. Autonomous Vehicles Autonomous vehicles also called self-driving cars/trucks or driverless cars/trucks) have received extensive press in recent years given significant development in the technology. As envisioned, these vehicles can drive themselves without any operator input. Connected vehicles allow a vehicle to communicate with other elements, such as passengers in the car, other vehicles on the road, wayside infrastructure, and the Cloud. Uber and Google have been testing their driverless cars with a driver in the vehicle; Tesla Motors has released new autopilot technology. Both the Uber and Google driverless cars have experienced operational errors, which can be expected as a new technology is tested. Most recently, as of this writing, the State of California ordered Uber to remove its self-driving cars from the road after several instances of them running red lights in pedestrian-heavy San Francisco. Uber responded by saying the errors were human errors caused by the persons in the vehicle monitoring the drives and suspended those persons. As if this writing, it is not clear what actions will be taken whether Uber will comply or California will enforce its order. California aside, testing could be undertaken in many places, and many see driverless vehicles and connected cars as technologies that are indeed becoming a reality. If implemented as conceived, there are numerous benefits of autonomous and connected vehicles, including: Safety, as most car accident injuries and fatalities are the result of human error; the technology would result in crash elimination the need for less infrastructure as cars could operate more closely together, making better use of limited pavement space increased productivity as commuting time could be spent on other activities besides driving new models of car ownership are anticipated as cars may be shared or owned cooperatively As discussed above, however, the safe operation of such vehicles on city streets and the nation s highways has yet to be proven. Accordingly, states and localities may require guidelines or processes to allow for the development phase of this technology. On a related 425

16 note, beyond the testing phase, states and localities need to consider specific regulations to be implemented for automated vehicles, including registration, operations, maintenance requirements, etc. Furthermore, the infrastructure requirements for the safe operation of autonomous and connected vehicles need consideration, though these are not yet fully defined by the industry. For example, overhead wires or overhead trees with wind blowing the branches may impact safe operations. Would new tree maintenance requirements be necessary? Would lane striping need to be maintained more regularly compared to the many faded painted line seen on roads today? The Hyperloop The Hyperloop is a concept currently under development speculatively. It is high-speed system that uses tubes to carry passengers and/or cargo inside capsules that operate within the tube at speeds of up to 700 or 800 miles per hour. Capsules would operate without friction inside lowpressure tubes. In addition to speeds faster than high-speed rail, the cost of construction according to its proponents are about one-tenth the cost, which could be translated into lower ticket prices for passengers. Elon Musk, the originator of the modern version of the tunnel concept, envisions an initial alignment that connects Los Angeles to San Francisco, connecting the two Downtowns (385 miles apart) in 30 minutes; a flight takes an hour between airports, and Amtrak takes 12 hours. From a Cleveland perspective, Chicago is approximately 350 miles away, meaning a Cleveland-to-Chicago trip would take less than 30 minutes. Millions of dollars and major global organizations have joined and/or supported one of three major organizations that have been created to bring Hyperloop to reality; whether Hyperloop comes to fruition remains to be seen. As a closed system that collects solar energy, it would be entirely powered self-sufficiently (and it would store excess energy during the day for operations at night). A safety and regulatory framework must be developed, not least of which is to address emergency access or evacuation methods, particularly for emergencies that occur along alignments underground or underwater. On the infrastructure side, though the Hyperloop tube may need less right of way than a highway or railroad, design issues remain, including curves gentle enough to minimize G-forces on the human body traveling at such high speeds. Given the narrower infrastructure requirements, the Hyperloop tubes would be unlikely to destroy neighborhoods as did the highway system when it was implemented. Flying Cars (On-Demand Aviation) Flying cars have long been the fantastical image of the future, though little progress has been seen on the implementation front. But on October 27, 2016, Uber, the ride-sharing company, released a 97-page white paper on the topic titled, Fast-Forwarding to a Future of On-Demand Urban Air Transportation. Calling the vehicles VTOLs for vertical takeoff and landing, the VTOLs would use vertiports, which are like heliports with electric charging stations for the vehicles which would be electrically-powered. They would also use vertistops, which are landing pads with little or no other infrastructure. Given the plethora of available locations in cities such as undeveloped lots, land along highway interchanges, and repurposed roofs of buildings and parking decks, there are many locations for such vertistops. The report states, VTOL designs will also be markedly safer than today s helicopters because VTOLs will not need to be dependent on any single part to stay airborne and will ultimately use autonomy technology to significantly reduce operator error Jeff Holden and Nikhil Goel, Uber Technologies, Fast-Forwarding to a Future of On-Demand Urban Air Transportation, October 27, 2016, 3, (last accessed June 8, 2017). 426

17 Uber initially envisions this mode for intercity transportation in road-congested corridors. From its hometown of San Francisco to Silicon Valley, a VTOL trip would take 15 minutes compared to the hour and 40 minutes currently needed by car. And the fare, they say, will be cheaper than current Uber rides. Eventually, it is envisioned that the on-demand aviation service could be used for intra-city and suburb-to-city travel as well, thus the commute from say, Strongsville or Mentor to Downtown Cleveland, could be made using VTOL. Uber would not develop the flying craft and technology itself (or internally), but states that over a dozen companies, with as many different design approaches, are passionately working to make VTOLs a reality. The closest equivalent technology in use today is the helicopter, but helicopters are too noisy, inefficient, polluting, and expensive for mass-scale use. VTOL aircraft will make use of electric propulsion so they have zero operational emissions and will likely be quiet enough to operate in cities without disturbing the neighbors. 141 Uber would create and run the platform to run the service for passengers. Uber sees its vision of flying transit vehicles as ambitious but achievable by 2030 if all the key actors in the VTOL ecosystem regulators, vehicle designers, communities, cities, and network operators collaborate effectively. 142 Such optimism aside, even if such technology were to be developed, and at volumes significant enough to minimize unit costs, the regulatory aspects would likely not be in place by For implementation, significant regulatory hurdles in terms of operations, standards, safety, and security must be overcome. On the infrastructure front, with the development of the vehicles aside, the stations or heliports must be developed at locations that are logical to origins and destinations. For example, on the origin side, the heliports must be located with sufficient parking, within a reasonable distance from users of the systems, yet far enough away from residences if noise is a factor. On the destination side, building and parking garage rooftops would need to be converted to stations, meaning adequate physical weight-bearing support of the vehicles as well as passenger access from the street, and the ability for cities to withstand the loss of parking capacity. Smart Parking Smart parking systems collect and disseminate real-time information on the occupancy and location of parking spaces whether on city streets or in surface lots or parking garages. Data may be transmitted to a driver s cell phone via an app, guiding the driver to an available parking space. Such a system minimizes the frustration a driver experiences while seeking parking. But more significantly, smart parking systems offer many benefits to cities that implement them. As drivers would no longer be driving around seeking a parking spot, there would be fewer cars on the street and, to boot, driving slowly. As a result, the city would experience less traffic congestion. Further, with less driving, air quality would improve as fewer pollutants would be emitted; vehicle emissions are major environmental pollutants of fine particulate matter (PM2.5), particulate matter (PM10), carbon monoxide (CO), volatile organic compounds (VOC), and nitrogen oxides (NOx). Better air quality would improve public health and increase a city s economic competitiveness. Safety should also improve as there would be fewer drivers focused on the parking lane (instead of the roadway ahead) or performing sudden U-turns in attempts to grab a parking spot along the curb in the opposing direction of traffic that the driver may discover. Ultimately, the smart parking system will allow the city better control of street parking and parking congestion. Although we have included smart parking as a future technology it is already here, though its effective use is limited. Los Angeles has implemented it in certain neighborhoods with known 141 Ibid., Ibid., 4 427

18 street-parking issues, such as Hollywood. Other cities that have implemented such systems include Beijing, Sao Paulo, and other smaller cities in California, among others. Smart parking systems use a sensor in the street or radar above the street to see the occupancy of a parking space. This information can be relayed in real time to the city as well as to drivers. Parking prices may be adjusted in real time based on demand, and the system provides a wealth of data on when and where parking demand is greatest. The system may also be used to dispatch parking enforcement personnel or police to address real-time violations, which may increase vehicle turnover of parking spots and mitigate traffic congestion issues from, for example, illegally double-parked vehicles. Smart parking systems may also be used in garages, which may alert drivers to how many spaces per parking level are available. Inside the garage the system may use arrows or green/red lights to indicate occupancy. Prices may also be adjusted in real time based on occupancy levels. The long-term parking garage at Cleveland Hopkins International Airport uses such a system. Little infrastructure is required for on-street parking systems. Sensors would be required in the street or radar from above, which could use existing street lights. Some systems use cameras, which may raise privacy concerns, while others do not use cameras at all. Such a system would be most beneficial in areas with high on-street parking demand, such as Downtown Cleveland, The Flats, Ohio City, University Circle, and Little Italy. 428