4/9/2018. April 5, Item #1 CITIZENS PARTICIPATION

Transcription

1 April 5, 2018 Item #1 CITIZENS PARTICIPATION 1

2 Item #2 APPROVAL OF MINUTES Item #3 TRAC GOALS, FRAMEWORK & AGENDA REVIEW 2

3 COMMITTEE GOALS Learn about Southern Nevada s mobility challenges, new developments and opportunities. Learn about smart communities, emerging technologies and how these efforts can impact and improve mobility, accessibility and safety in Southern Nevada. Obtain feedback and recommendations on how to best address and prioritize mobility solutions. MEETING FRAMEWORK Meeting 5 June 7, 2018 On Board High Capacity Transit and Maryland Parkway Recommendations; Pedestrian Safety Discussion; Smart Mobility and Innovation Update; Projects of Regional Significance Update; Transit Funding Discussion and Peer Communities Meeting 6 August 2, 2018 On Board High Capacity Transit, Resort Corridor, Maryland Parkway, and Traditional Transit Updates and Recommendations; Smart Mobility and Innovation Update; Projects of Regional Significance Update; Transit Funding Discussion Meeting 7 October 4, 2018 On Board Study Overall Update; Smart Mobility and Innovation Update; Transit Funding Discussion and Peer Communities Review Meeting 8 December 6, 2018 Final Recommendations and Next Steps 3

4 AGENDA REVIEW Salt Lake City High Capacity Transit (HCT) and Transit Oriented Development (TOD) Field Trip Recap NextGen Transit Panel Discussion Maryland Parkway Corridor Upcoming Events Item #4 SALT LAKE CITY HIGH CAPACITY TRANSIT (HCT) AND TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT (TOD) FIELD TRIP RECAP 4

5 5

6 Item #5 NEXTGEN TRANSIT PANEL DISCUSSION NEXTGEN TRANSIT PANEL RAHUL KUMAR, National Director of Emerging Mobility, TransLoc JOSH SIKICH, Transportation Technology Program Manager, HDR STEVE BLAND, CEO, Nashville Metropolitan Transit Authority (MTA) 6

7 NEXTGEN TRANSIT DEFINITION NextGen Transit is the evolution of public transportation leveraging advanced technologies, such as autonomous systems, clean energy, predictive analytics and dynamic responsiveness to optimize movement, enhance safety, offer sustainable mobility choices, and spur new economic development. Nashville is growing rapidly 7

8 Roads alone won t fix it 8

9 Let s Move Nashville: What do we get? More buses, more often Light rail More sidewalks Mobility on Demand Safer intersections Neighborhood transit centers Downtown tunnel A responsible investment 47% paid for by those outside Davidson County 9

10 Item #6 MARYLAND PARKWAY CORRIDOR MARYLAND PARKWAY Differences between light rail transit (LRT) and bus rapid transit (BRT) 10

11 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PANEL DR. IAN CARLTON, Project Director, ECONorthwest MICHAEL SALTMAN, President, The Vista Group WINDOM KIMSEY, President and CEO, TSK Architects SCOTT ADAMS, City Manager, City of Las Vegas Real Estate Investment Near Transit 11

12 Methods Potential and likely development: o without transit o with transit Three complementary methods: 1. Corridor Market Conditions Demand (trends and forecasts for population, employment, and building activity) Supply (land supply, cost of development) 2. Development effects in other cities 3. User benefits (forecasted ridership) in the corridor Parsons ECONorthwest, MIG & Dr. Arthur Nelson Supply: Land Suitability Redevelopment Propensity High Medium Low Acres of Vacant + Redevelopable Land: ~600 Development Status Geography Vacant Partially Vacant Redevelopable Developed Outside Analysis Grand Total Downtown Segment Segment Segment Segment Segment Grand Total ,265 4,361 ECONorthwest, MIG & Dr. Arthur Nelson 12

13 VALLEY VIEW VALLEY VIEW VALLEY VIEW VALLEY VIEW MARTIN L KING MARTIN L KING MCLEOD MCLEOD PECOS PECOS PECOS PECOS 4/9/2018 RAMP S US95 S I15 RAMP S I15 N US95 RAMP N I15 S US95 UP RR Bonneville Transit Center Downtown East (4th and Fremont) MARYLAND FREMONT STEWART BONANZA DOWNTOWN Zoning Capacity RANCHO LAS VEGAS CHARLESTON Housing Unit SEGMENT Capacity 1 Commercial SF Capacity DESERT INN DESERT INN 15 SPRING MOUNTAIN 15 INDUSTRIAL WILBUR CLARK DI WEST City of Las Vegas CLARK COUNTY LAS VEGAS DESERT INN SAHARA MARYLAND SEGMENT 2 Sunrise Hospital & Medical Center Boulevard Mall DESERT INN EASTERN SEGMENT 3 1,600 11,000,000 PECOS MCLEOD INT BOULDER 0 700,000 UP RR PARADISE FLAMINGO University of Nevada, Las Vegas SEGMENT ,700,000 DEAN MARTIN FRANK SINATRA TROPICANA 1,300 7,100,000 RUSSELL WAYNE NEWTON SEGMENT 5 RUSSELL 1,200 2,400,000 UP RR HEND SPUR McCarran International Airport MARYLAND PARKWAY SEGMENTS Maryland Parkway Proposed Stations Likelihood to Redevelop Maryland Parkway Corridor Unlikely to Redevelop (0) Maryland Parkway Segments Low (1-5) City Limits Medium (6-10) High (10-15) AIRPORT N CONNECTOR 600 1,700,000 Source: City of Las Vegas, City of Henderson, RTC miles TOTAL: 5,000 24,600,000 DESERT INN DESERT INN 15 SPRING MOUNTAIN 15 RANCHO INDUSTRIAL City of Las Vegas CLARK COUNTY LAS VEGAS RAMP S US95 S I15 RAMP S I15 N US95 Dev t Implications With Transit WILBUR CLARK DI WEST RAMP N I15 S US95 DESERT INN UP RR LAS VEGAS Bonneville Transit Center CHARLESTON SAHARA Downtown East (4th and Fremont) MARYLAND MARYLAND 95 FREMONT DESERT INN 95 STEWART EASTERN BONANZA DOWNTOWN SEGMENT 1 (Market Ready) SEGMENT 2 Sunrise Hospital & Medical Center Boulevard Mall Housing Unit SEGMENT 3 PECOS MCLEOD INT BOULDER Commercial SF (Market Ready) 700 2,400, ,000 UP RR PARADISE FLAMINGO University of Nevada, Las Vegas SEGMENT ,600,000 DEAN MARTIN RUSSELL FRANK SINATRA UP RR HEND SPUR WAYNE NEWTON McCarran International Airport TROPICANA MARYLAND PARKWAY SEGMENTS Maryland Parkway Proposed Stations Likelihood to Redevelop Maryland Parkway Corridor Unlikely to Redevelop (0) Maryland Parkway Segments Low (1-5) City Limits Medium (6-10) High (10-15) AIRPORT N CONNECTOR SEGMENT 5 RUSSELL 500 1,400, , ,000 Source: City of Las Vegas, City of Henderson, RTC miles TOTAL: 2,600 7,200,000 **4.5% rent premium 13

14 Factors that Impact Development Outcomes Accessibility Agglomeration X-Factor Placemaking Policy Refocus Icons designed by Freepik Transit investments Transit-Related impact real estate Impacts in numerous ways Accessibility Agglomeration X-Factor Icons designed by Freepik 14

15 Transit investments impact real estate in numerous ways Government-Related Impacts Placemaking Policy Refocus Icons designed by Freepik Transit investments Factors that impact Impact real Development estate in Outcomes numerous ways Accessibility Agglomeration X-Factor Placemaking Policy Refocus Icons designed by Freepik 15

16 Dollars of TOD 4/9/2018 Real Estate Investment Near Transit $20 $- Real Estate Investment per $ of Transit Investment $3 $9 $17 Regional Light Rail Bus Rapid Transit Urban Light Rail* Observed cities: Charlotte Denver (max: $15) Los Angeles (min: $1) Phoenix Portland Boston (min: $1) Cleveland (max: $115) Eugene Kansas City Las Vegas Ottawa Pittsburgh Atlanta Detroit Kansas City Portland Salt Lake City Seattle (max: $32) Tucson (min: $5) Note: (*) Typically referred to as Modern Streetcar Rail with an average investment length under three miles. Portland s loop is the longest system in this dataset at 7.2 miles and saw roughly $9 in real estate development per dollar invested in transit. Source: Based on research related to Maryland Parkway: ECONorthwest & Arthur C. Nelson; Literature Review: Effects of Transit on Economic Activity and Land Development ; Adapted from ITDP report ( More Development for Your Transit Dollar 2013) with recent streetcar data gathered by ECONorthwest 32 PROPOSED ROUTE Las Vegas Medical District 12,000 Downtown Las Vegas 30,000 Downtown to Airport 8.7-Mile Route Technology Options: Bus Rapid Transit Light Rail 25 Station Locations 0.35-mile spacing Sunrise Hospital 4,600 Boulevard Mall 1,000 UNLV 5,500 employees 30,000 students McCarran International Airport 16,000 16

17 University District University District 17

18 University District Boulevard Mall/Sunrise Hospital Area 18

19 Boulevard Mall/Sunrise Hospital Area Boulevard Mall/Sunrise Hospital Area 19

20 Downtown District Medical District 20

21 Medical District Medical District 21

22 MARYLAND PARKWAY LIGHT RAIL AND BUS RAPID TRANSIT FUNDING OPTIONS Maryland Parkway Light Rail Transit (LRT) Funding $750 million Capital Cost Conceptual Engineering Estimate 22

23 Funding Possibilities LRT $750M Capital Cost Federal Transit Administration (FTA) New Starts Grant Up to 49% Funding Possibilities LRT $750M Capital Cost Congestion Mitigation Air Quality (CMAQ) Bonds $15 million for 15 years Estimated Bond Proceeds of $164 million RTC Board and Executive Advisory Committee (EAC) approval needed 23

24 Funding Possibilities LRT $750M Capital Cost Fuel Revenue Indexing (FRI) for road improvement costs only $125 million Value Capture Funding Possibilities LRT $750M Capital Cost Capture the increased value from surrounding properties for capital or operating costs Special Assessments Tax Increment, Property Tax & Sales Tax (Operating Expenses) 24

25 Funding Possibilities LRT $750M Capital Cost New Increment of Local Source Revenue Example: Sales Tax Potential 2020 ballot question Could fill the funding gap for capital and/or operating costs Funding Possibilities LRT Operating Cost Fare Revenue - $5.4 million Estimating increased ridership From 9,000 to 16,100 passenger trips daily Route 109 Subsidy - $3.4 million Gap to fill - $4.3 million Possibilities New Increment of Local Source Revenue Value Capture 25

26 Maryland Parkway Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Funding $335 million Capital Cost Conceptual Engineering Estimate Funding Possibilities BRT $335M Capital Cost Federal Transit Administration (FTA) New Starts Grant Up to 49% 26

27 Funding Possibilities BRT $335M Capital Cost Congestion Mitigation Air Quality (CMAQ) Funding $15.3 million for 3 years RTC Board and Executive Advisory Committee (EAC) approval needed Funding Possibilities BRT $335M Capital Cost Fuel Revenue Indexing (FRI) for road improvement costs only $125 million 27

28 Funding Possibilities BRT Operating Cost Fare Revenue - $4.5 million Estimating increased ridership From 9,000 to 13,300 passenger trips daily Route 109 Subsidy - $2.7 million Item #7 - Upcoming Events TRANSIT-ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT ROUNDTABLE 28

29 Item #8 OPEN DISCUSSION Item #9 FINAL CITIZENS PARTICIPATION 29

30 30