Technical Advisory Committee Meeting No. 19 July 8, 2015 Stakeholder Outreach Advisory Committee Meeting No. 15 July 9, 2015.

Transcription

1 SR 710 North Study Technical Advisory Committee Meeting No. 19 July 8, 2015 Stakeholder Outreach Advisory Committee Meeting No. 15 July 9, Agenda Public Outreach Activities Recap of TAC No. 18 and SOAC No. 14 Draft EIR/EIS Key Findings Traffic Air Quality Overview of Cost and Benefit Analysis Next Steps 2 1

2 Ground Rules Q&A after each section of the presentation Focus questions on information presented General comments and Q&A at the end 3 Public Outreach Activities 4 2

3 Draft EIR/EIS Public Comment Period Activities Public Comment Period: March 6, 2015 August 5, 2015 (150 days) Five public hearings Noticing for public hearings Workshops and Presentations Next Steps 5 Draft EIR/EIS Public Comment Period Activities Comments received via: Mail: Garrett Damrath Public Comment Period: March 6, 2015 August 5, 2015 (150 days) Caltrans District 7 Division of Environmental Planning 100 S. Main St., MS-16 Los Angeles, CA In-person at public hearings Online e-comment form 6 3

4 Public Hearings Saturday, April 11, 2015 at 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. 10 a.m a.m. Map Viewing 11 a.m. - 4 p.m. Public Hearing East Los Angeles College Rosco C. Ingalls Auditorium 1301 Avenida Cesar Chavez, Monterey Park, Wednesday, May 6, 2015 at 5 p.m. to 9 p.m. 5 p.m. - 6 p.m. Map Viewing 6 p.m. - 9 p.m. Public Hearing La Canada High School Auditorium 4463 Oak Grove Drive, La Canada, Saturday, June 20, 2015 at 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. 10 a.m a.m. Map Viewing 11 a.m. - 4 p.m. Public Hearing Griffith Middle School** Auditorium 4765 East 4th Street, Los Angeles, CA Tuesday, April 14, 2015 at 5 p.m. to 9 p.m. 5 p.m. - 6 p.m. Map Viewing 6 p.m. - 9 p.m. Public Hearing Pasadena Convention Center Ballroom** 300 East Green Street, Pasadena, Thursday, May 7, 2015 at 5 p.m. to 9 p.m. 5 p.m. - 6 p.m. Map Viewing 6 p.m. - 9 p.m. Public Hearing Los Angeles Christian Presbyterian Church** Multi-Purpose Room 2241 N. Eastern Avenue, Los Angeles, **Live webcast: ** Live webcast (also in Spanish) 7 SR 710 North Briefings Requested by Stakeholders 8 Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce: Supervisor Hilda Solis - East Los Angeles: May 13 Crescenta Valley Town Council: May 21 Gateway Cities Council of Governments: June 3 Sierra Club Transportation Committee: June 4 San Gabriel Valley Service Council: June 8 KIPP Raices Charter School: June 10 Supervisor Hilda Solis East Los Angeles: June 10 Central City Association: June 11 San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments Transportation Committee: June 11 City of San Gabriel: June 16 San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments Governing Board: June 18 Office of Congresswoman Lucille Roybal-Allard: June 22 City of Burbank: June 23 San Gabriel Valley Economic Partnership: June 24 City of San Marino: June 25 Arroyo Verdugo Cities: June 29 4

5 Ongoing Outreach Activities Preparing Outreach Documentation Report Continued communications via social media, e-blasts Available to provide information contained in Draft EIR/EIS throughout the duration of the environmental review process Updating collateral materials and FAQs 9 Recap of TAC No. 18 and SOAC No

6 Feedback Received During TAC No. 18/ SOAC No. 14 Has a contingency plan been created for a possible TBM failure? Will you be conducting further Health Risk studies to account for respiratory effects? Do you have analysis where trips start and end? Which tunnel alternative is consistent with RTP? Single bore or dual bore? Was the HRA done under the new guidelines which was released the previous week? Is the maintenance cost included in the cost reported for each alternative? 11 Feedback Received During TAC No. 18/ SOAC No. 14 Will you be extending the review period? Will the jobs created for each alternative be locally sourced? What will Caltrans do with the CT owned properties if the freeway tunnel is not selected? How well do the scrubbers filter PM2.5? Could we have another TAC/SOAC meeting before close of comment period? Are the receptor locations identified in the technical reports? 12 6

7 Draft EIR/EIS Key Findings - Traffic 13 Regional Traffic Forecast Bandwidth charts on the next series of slides Not included in the TTR, but based on the same data reported in the TTR and DEIR/DEIS In general these show volume changes between Existing and No-Build and between build alternatives and no-build (2035) 14 7

8 2035 Traffic Changes No Build Traffic Changes: 2035 No Build Condition (Estimated Changes in Traffic Volumes Compared to 2012 (Existing)) Note: Surface freeways traffic volume changes are for one direction of travel only. All other roadways are shown for bidirectional volume changes. Source: SR 710 North Model, calibrated for the SR 710 North study area from the SCAG Regional Travel Demand Model (version 6.1) Traffic Changes TSM/TDM 2035 Traffic Changes: TSM/TDM (Estimated Changes in Traffic Volumes Compared to No Build) Note: Surface freeways traffic volume changes are for one direction of travel only. All other roadways are shown for bidirectional volume changes. Source: SR 710 North Model, calibrated for the SR 710 North study area from the SCAG Regional Travel Demand Model (version 6.1). 16 8

9 2035 Traffic Changes BRT 2035 Traffic Changes: BRT (Estimated Changes in Traffic Volumes Compared to No Build) Note: Surface freeways traffic volume changes are for one direction of travel only. All other roadways are shown for bidirectional volume changes. Source: SR 710 North Model, calibrated for the SR 710 North study area from the SCAG Regional Travel Demand Model (version 6.1) Traffic Changes LRT 2035 Traffic Changes: LRT (Estimated Changes in Traffic Volumes Compared to No Build) Note: Surface freeways traffic volume changes are for one direction of travel only. All other roadways are shown for bidirectional volume changes. Source: SR 710 North Model, calibrated for the SR 710 North study area from the SCAG Regional Travel Demand Model (version 6.1). 18 9

10 2035 Traffic Changes Single Bore 2035 Traffic Changes: Single Bore Tunnel with Tolls (Estimated Changes in Traffic Volumes Compared to No Build) Note: Surface freeways traffic volume changes are for one direction of travel only. All other roadways are shown for bidirectional volume changes. Source: SR 710 North Model, calibrated for the SR 710 North study area from the SCAG Regional Travel Demand Model (version 6.1) Traffic Changes Dual Bore 2035 Traffic Changes: Dual Bore Tunnel with Tolls (Estimated Changes in Traffic Volumes Compared to No Build) Note: Surface freeways traffic volume changes are for one direction of travel only. All other roadways are shown for bidirectional volume changes. Source: SR 710 North Model, calibrated for the SR 710 North study area from the SCAG Regional Travel Demand Model (version 6.1)

11 21 Travel Time Improvement Clarification on the traffic travel time improvement (2.5 minute) performance measure Section of the TTR Focus Source: SR 710 North Model, calibrated for the SR 710 North study area from the SCAG Regional Travel Demand Model (version 6.1). Travel time benefits of the build alternatives All trips not just those that use the build alternative: Private vehicle trip in the LRT alternative that has improved travel time due to others shifting to transit Private vehicle trip in the Freeway Tunnel Alternative that has improved travel time on a local street due to other shifting to the tunnel Basic measure how many trips will have a travel time savings of more than 2.5 minutes. Requires complex travel modeling calculations Travel Time Improvement Source: SR 710 North Model, calibrated for the SR 710 North study area from the SCAG Regional Travel Demand Model (version 6.1). 2.5 minute measure was summarized in Figure 4-29 This is for all trips in the capture area (basically anyone that could conceivably take the tunnel) 22 *Travelers in the region who may consider using the tunnel. These travelers were identified as traveling between the northwest (San Fernando Valley, La Canada Flintridge areas), the study area (Pasadena, South Pasadena, Alhambra), and the southeast LA county and Orange County area whose trip is longer than 20 minutes. 11

12 Time Savings for Tunnel Users Source: SR 710 North Model, calibrated for the SR 710 North study area from the SCAG Regional Travel Demand Model (version 6.1). Single-Bore Toll Dual-Bore No Toll Percent of all capture area* users who will save 2.5 minutes or more 13% 6.5% Percent of tunnel users who will save 2.5 minutes 97% 72% or more Non-tunnel users who will save at least , ,000 minutes, daily Tunnel users who will save at least 2.5 minutes, 82, ,000 daily Tunnel users, daily ~90,000 ~180,000 Average peak period tunnel user travel time 7 4 savings (minutes) Maximum savings, tunnel users (minutes) * Travelers in the region who may consider using the tunnel. These travelers were identified as traveling between the northwest (San Fernando Valley, La Canada Flintridge areas), the study area (Pasadena, South Pasadena, Alhambra), and the southeast LA county and Orange County area whose trip is longer than 20 minutes. Vehicles Miles Traveled (VMT) Estimates These statements are Not Correct Source:

13 VMT Estimates Reported by Beyond the % Vehicle Miles Traveled -11% Vehicle Miles Traveled PER CAPITA Source: 25 VMT Estimates Actual +0.5% to 1.5% VMT (Study Area) +0% VMT (Study Area) Source:

14 VMT Estimates Actual +0.5% to 1.5% VMT (Study Area) -0.02% to +0.01% VMT (Region) +0% VMT (Study Area) +0% VMT (Region) Source: 27 VMT Estimates Actual +0.5% to 1.5% VMT (Study Area) -0.02% to +0.01% VMT (Region) 0% VMT/Capita (Region) +0% VMT (Study Area) +0% VMT (Region) 0% VMT/Capita (Region) Source:

15 VMT Estimates Actual +0.5% to 1.5% VMT (Study Area) -0.02% to +0.01% VMT (Region) 0% VMT/Capita (Region) +0% VMT (Study Area) +0% VMT (Region) 0% VMT/Capita (Region) Source: 29 Draft EIR/EIS Key Findings Air Quality 30 Preliminary - Not for Distribution 15

16 Clarification Air Quality Reactive Organic Gases (ROG) Emissions Source: SR 710 North Model, calibrated for the SR 710 North study area from the SCAG Regional Travel Demand Model (version 6.1) Reactive Organic Gases (ROG) Emissions Change, 2035 Build vs No Build 0.25% 0.43% 0.26% 1.00% % % 0.05% 0.01% lb/day % No Build ROG Emissions: 4,600 lb/day 0.21% 0.18% 0.29% TSM/TDM BRT LRT SingleBore Toll Single Bore Toll, Single Bore Toll Dual Bore No No Trucks with Express Bus Toll Dual Bore No Dual Bore Toll Toll, No Trucks 0.50% 1.00% Emission Change: Non Tunnel Freeways Emission Change: Arterials Emission Change: Tunnel Freeways % Total Project Area Emission Change 31 Clarification Air Quality Carbon Monoxide (CO) Emissions Source: SR 710 North Model, calibrated for the SR 710 North study area from the SCAG Regional Travel Demand Model (version 6.1) Carbon Monoxide (CO) Emissions Change, 2035 Build vs No Build) 1.00% % 0.37% 0.18% % % 0.08% 0.14% lb/day % % No Build CO Emissions: 40,059 lb/day 0.15% 0.14% 0.19% TSM/TDM BRT LRT SingleBore Toll Single Bore Toll, Single Bore Toll Dual Bore No No Trucks with Express Bus Toll Dual Bore No Dual Bore Toll Toll, No Trucks 1.00% Emission Change: Non Tunnel Freeways Emission Change: Tunnel Freeways Emission Change: Arterials % Total Project Area Emission Change 32 16

17 Clarification Air Quality Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) Emissions Source: SR 710 North Model, calibrated for the SR 710 North study area from the SCAG Regional Travel Demand Model (version 6.1). 500 Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) Emissions Change, 2035 Build vs No Build 1.00% % 0.08% 0.04% 0.22% 0.41% 0.25% 0.50% lb/day % No Build NOx Emissions: 12,406 lb/day 0.19% 0.16% 0.24% TSM/TDM BRT LRT SingleBore Toll Single Bore Toll, Single Bore Toll Dual Bore No No Trucks with Express Bus Toll Dual Bore No Dual Bore Toll Toll, No Trucks 0.50% 1.00% Emission Change: Non Tunnel Freeways Emission Change: Tunnel Freeways Emission Change: Arterials % Total Project Area Emission Change 33 Clarification Air Quality Particulate Matter Less Than or Equal to 10 Micron (PM10) Emissions Source: SR 710 North Model, calibrated for the SR 710 North study area from the SCAG Regional Travel Demand Model (version 6.1) Particulate Matter Less Than or Equal to 10 Micron (PM10) Emissions Change, 2035 Build vs No Build % 0.500% lb/day % 0.180% 0.108% 0.791% 0.759% 0.841% 0.000% 0.500% 1.000% No Build PM10 Emissions: 3,252 lb/day 1.333% 1.100% 1.127% TSM/TDM BRT LRT SingleBore Toll Single Bore Single Bore Toll Dual Bore No Dual Bore No Dual Bore Toll Toll, No Trucks with Express Bus Toll Toll, No Trucks 1.500% 2.000% Emission Change: Non Tunnel Freeways Emission Change: Tunnel Freeways Emission Change: Arterials % Total Project Area Emission Change 34 17

18 Clarification Air Quality Particulate Matter Less Than or Equal to 2.5 Micron (PM2.5) Emissions 20 Source: SR 710 North Model, calibrated for the SR 710 North study area from the SCAG Regional Travel Demand Model (version 6.1). Particulate Matter Less Than or Equal to 2.5 Micron (PM2.5) Emissions Change, 2035 Build vs No Build 1.00% % 0.16% 0.06% 0.50% % lb/day % % 0.87% 0.95% 1.00% % 40 No Build PM2.5 Emissions: 1,486 lb/day TSM/TDM BRT LRT SingleBore Toll Single Bore Toll, Single Bore Toll Dual Bore No No Trucks with Express Bus Toll 1.46% 1.23% 1.25% Dual Bore No Dual Bore Toll Toll, No Trucks 2.00% Emission Change: Non Tunnel Freeways Emission Change: Tunnel Freeways Emission Change: Arterials % Total Project Area Emission Change 35 Key Findings Cost and Benefit Analysis (CBA) 36 18

19 Cost-Benefit Discussion Topics Background on Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA) CBA process for SR 710 North Study Summary of Results Overall Metrics Individual Evaluations Sensitivity 37 Background on CBA 38 A CBA is A method of economic appraisal to determine value of a project A way of comparing the costs of a project with the benefits that it will deliver CBA is used by governments and funding agencies to Provide indicators and metrics of value for money Aid the process of screening and comparisons across modes and policy mixes Help refine a large number of options to a manageable short-list Help refine design CBA is used in conjunction with other performance measures for evaluation of alternatives 19

20 Background on CBA Evaluate Global Appraisal Tools Selection of Preferred Tool (Cal B/C*) Initial First Cut CBA Evaluating User Benefits Refined Data and Sensitivity Analysis Final CBA 39 *California Life-Cycle Benefit/Cost Analysis Model (Excel application developed for Caltrans) - covers auto, truck, rail, light rail, bus CBA Process 40 20

21 CBA Process - Calculations Time Saving Benefits - change in the time a user spends travelling from an origin to a destination, multiplied by the value of time and average vehicle occupancy Vehicle Operating Cost - captures fuel consumption and non-fuel operating costs (e.g., vehicle wear and tear) Safety Benefits - predicted volume and type of crashes (monetized) Emissions pollutants (monetized) Costs - capital expenditure, right-of-way cost, operating and maintenance expenditure Employment Benefits construction wages associated with job creation Residual Value remaining value after the 20-year appraisal period for the tunnel and right-of-way assets (assumed to have a 100-year asset life) Tolls/Fares - not included (transfer of cost/benefit as per USDOT guidance) 41 CBA Process Performance Measures Present value of costs Present value of benefits (20-year discount period for both) Net Present Value (NPV) = benefits costs (can be positive or negative) 42 21

22 Summary of Results Overall Metrics Alternative/Variation Present Value of Costs ($ million) Present Value of Benefits ($ million) NPV ($ million) TSM/TDM Freeway Tunnel 1-Bore (Toll) 1,979 3,503 1,524 Freeway Tunnel 1-Bore (Toll, No Trucks) 1,951 3,429 1,478 Freeway Tunnel 1-Bore (Toll, Express Bus) 1,997 3,587 1,590 Freeway Tunnel 2-Bore (No Toll) 3,273 3, Freeway Tunnel 2-Bore (No Toll, No Trucks) 3,227 3, Freeway Tunnel 2-Bore (Toll) 3,374 3, BRT LRT 2,163 1, Selected Summary of Results Cost Evaluations 44 22

23 Selected Summary of Results Benefit Evaluations 45 Summary of Results Sensitivity Analysis Capital and operating costs (-5% to +10%) 50-year tunnel life (instead of 100 years) VMT reduction (94% of forecast) Emissions data from the detailed air quality technical analysis TIGER discount rate of 7% (instead of 4%) Reduced annualization factor (330 instead of 365) Different VOTs for auto and transit users: $22.57 for auto and $6.35 for transit (instead of $13.25 for both auto and transit) 46 23

24 Summary of Results Sensitivity Analysis 47 Summary of Results 48 The Freeway Tunnel Alternative has the highest benefits regardless of costs. NPV is perhaps the best indicator of the additional benefits received, compared to the cost. Single-bore variations of the Freeway Tunnel Alternative have an NPV of approximately $1.5 billion. Dual-bore variations have NPVs ranging from -$0.04 billion to $0.5 billion. The TSM/TDM and BRT alternatives have similar NPVs ($0.34 billion and $0.37 billion) LRT has the lowest NPV at -$0.9 billion. A negative NPV means that the total benefits are less than the total costs. The dual-bore variations of the Freeway Tunnel Alternative have the highest cost, single-bore variations and the LRT alternative are approximately the same (2 nd highest). Sensitivity analysis indicate that the resulting range of values does not change the general findings. 24

25 Next Steps 49 Next Steps Review and Respond to Comments Received During the Public Review and Comment Period Develop/Prepare Supporting Data to Identify the Preferred Alternative Request Metro Board Concurrence on the Recommended Preferred Alternative Finalize Environmental Document Caltrans Approves the Final EIR/EIS and Record of Decision/Notice of Determination 50 25

26 Tentative Meeting Dates for TAC/SOAC 2015 TAC/SOAC Meeting Schedule: September 9/10, Open Discussion 52 26