Measure R Funded Transit Projects

Transcription

1 Measure R Funded ransit Projects

2 Crenshaw/LAX ransit Corridor

3 New Potential LAWA erminal & Ground Access Facilities

4 ypes of Connections Direct Light Rail ransit (LR) Branch Metro goes to the airport Metro Green Line direct connection Circulator Airport (Circulator) goes to Metro New transit system tailored to address the airport s unique travel demands/operating environment Intermediate LR and Circulator Metro (LR) and Airport (Circulator) meet in the middle Modified LR runk Metro goes through the airport Direct connection for Metro Green & Crenshaw/LAX lines Parallels an alignment to be constructed as part of the Crenshaw/LAX line

5 Previous Studies 1988: Coastal Corridor Rail ransit Project 1991: LAX/Metro Green Line Interagency ask Force 1994: Metro Green Line Northern Extension Supplemental Environmental Impact Report : LAX Master Plan 2004 Present: LAX Specific Plan Amendment Study (SPAS) 2007 Present: Crenshaw/LAX ransit Corridor Project 2008: LAX/Metro Green Line Interagency askforce

6 Project Development Process 5 Phases of Project Development We Are Here Identify Required Funding Initial Public Meetings Define, Analyze and Screen s (wo Stage Screening) Preliminary Costs Foundation for Draft EIS/EIS Identify Who Builds, Operates, and Maintains the Potential Project Refine Designs, Analyze Environmental Impacts Obtain Community/ Stakeholder Input Select Final Project

7 Comparison of SPAS to Metro Green Line to LAX Specific Plan Amendment Study (SPAS) Sponsor: LAWA Program-level environmental review focused on airport-wide improvements Focus: support modernization of LAX to accommodate nearly 79 million annual passengers Address concerns about certain LAX Master Plan projects Projects under study: Bus Rapid ransit (BR) or Automated People Mover (APM) erminal, runway, and taxiway improvements Completion of Draft EIR expected early 2012; Final EIR expected early 2013 Metro Green Line to LAX Sponsor: Metro Project-level environmental study of transit connections to LAX Focus: connect regional transit networks to LAX terminals Measure R funded project: $200M (2008$) Modes being considered: Bus Rapid ransit (BR) Light Rail ransit (LR) Automated People Mover (APM) Completion of Draft EIS/EIR expected early 2013; Final EIS/EIR expected 2014 Common Goal: Connect regional travelers to LAX

8 Who is raveling to LAX? Where do Air Passenger rips Begin? Where do LAX Employees Live? Daily rips South Bay: 10,300 Central/East LA: 9,900 West Side: 8,500 Orange County: 7,900 Gateway Cities: 5,100 San Fernando Valley: 4,400 San Gabriel Valley: 3,400 Other: 4,200 How do Air Passengers ravel to LAX? How do LAX Employees ravel to LAX? 60% 55% 80% 73% 50% 70% 40% 60% 50% 30% 40% 20% 30% 11% 10% 9% 10% 5% 20% 3% 3% 2% 1% 10% 0% 0% 15% 9% 0.1% Sources: LAWA Air Passenger Survey, 2006; LAWA Employee Data, 2011

9 Purpose and Need Objectives 1. Provide a reliable, fast, and convenient connection for passengers traveling between LAX area and the regional transit system. 2. Satisfy the surface transportation and travel demands of the high volume of passengers connecting to LAX. 3. Increase the share of transit trips to and from LAX and reduce air pollution with minimal impact on airport facilities and surrounding communities. 4. Integrate with existing and future transit connections and airport facilities.

10 Modes Under Consideration Light Rail ransit (LR) Electrically powered by overhead wires Vehicles can be linked together to accommodate up to 335 passengers per 2- car train set Requires traction power substations every mile along tracks Can share maintenance facility with light rail system Considered for Direct LR Branch, Intermediate LR & Circulator, and Modified LR runk s Source: Metro Automated People Mover (APM) Low- to medium-capacity automated (i.e., driverless) vehicles that are not interoperable with Metro rail lines Can accommodate up to 50 passenger per train Utilizes electric cars operating on grade-separated and exclusive tracks Suited for short-distance circulation within major activity centers like airports Requires additional maintenance facility Considered for Circulator, Intermediate LR & Circulator, and Modified LR runk (Airport Blvd) s Source: SFMA Bus Rapid ransit (BR) Low- to medium-capacity vehicles that are comparable to the existing Metro Orange Line Can accommodate up to 60 passengers per bus Utilizes technologically-advanced buses and dedicated bus lanes to offer raillike service at a lower cost and with greater flexibility Suited for all trip lengths and where trips have dispersed origins Can share maintenance facility with bus system, if available Can accommodate curbside service Considered for Circulator, Intermediate LR & Circulator, and Modified LR runk (Airport Blvd) s Source: Metro

11 Alignments Considered in Stage I Screening Alignments On-Airport Alignments Off-Airport

12 wo Stage Screening Process Initial Concepts Stage I Screening Screened s (27) Stage II Screening s Carried into EIS/EIR Additional Funding needs to be Identified Direct LR Branch Mode + Alignments Circulator Build Mode + Alignments Intermediate LR & Circulator Mode + Alignments Build Modified LR runk Mode + Alignments

13 Off-Airport Alignments Advanced to Stage II Screening Direct LR Branch Circulator Station and Route Options* 98 th North 98 th St Century Blvd Pedestrian Bridge Century Blvd * Exact route and station location dependent on future LAX plans in area Intermediate LR and Circulator Station and Route Options* 98 th North Century Blvd Pedestrian Bridge * Exact route and station location dependent on future LAX plans in area

14 Off-Airport Alignments Advanced to Stage II Screening Modified LR runk Airport Blvd with Circulator Airport Blvd Modified LR runk hrough LAX hrough LAX Connection to Existing Metro Green Line Aerial Structure near Douglas St

15 On-Airport Alignments Advanced to Stage II Screening Aerial (Rail) Lowest Rail Cost unnel (Rail) Best Average ravel ime Aerial (Rail) Balances Cost and ravel ime At-Grade (BR) Lowest Cost and Walk ime Alignments not advanced to Stage II Screening

16 27 s Analyzed in Stage II Screening Direct Light Rail ransit (LR) Branch LR 98th North 2 Aerial CA LR Century 2 Aerial CA LR 98th North 2 unnel CA LR Century 2 unnel CA LR 98th North 3 Aerial CA LR Century 3 Aerial CA Circulator APM 98th 2 Aerial CA APM Century 2 Aerial CA APM 98th 2 unnel CA APM Century 2 unnel CA APM 98th 3 Aerial CA APM Century 3 Aerial CA BR 98th 8 AtGrade CA BR Century 8 At-Grade CA Intermediate LR and Circulator LR/APM 98th North 2 Aerial CA LR/APM 1994 SEIR 2 Aerial CA LR/APM 98th North 2 unnel CA LR/APM 1994 SEIR 2 unnel CA LR/APM 98th North 3 Aerial CA LR/APM 1994 SEIR 3 Aerial CA LR/BR 98th North 8 AtGrade CA LR/BR 1994 SEIR 8 AtGrade CA Modified LR runk LR hrough 1 unnel CA Station LR/APM Airport Blvd 2 Aerial CA LR/APM Airport Blvd 2 unnel CA LR/APM Airport Blvd 3 Aerial CA LR/BR Airport Blvd 8 At-Grade CA

17 Funding U.S. Airport ransit Systems Airport System San Francisco (SFO) 39.3 million * otal Capital Cost ($M) (indexed to 2010$) $2,347 Funding Contributions ($M) (indexed to 2010$) $770 Local $509 Airport $180 State $888 Federal BAR Airrain (APM) New York (JFK) 46.5 million * $2,338 $2,338 Airport Airrain (APM) Miami (MIA) 35.7 million * $1,014 $557 Local $262 Airport Metro Rail MIA Mover (APM) Minneapolis (MSP) 32.0 million * $85 Local $122 State $195 State $724 $429 Federal Metro ransit *Annual Airport Passengers (2010) $88 Airport 59.1 million annual passengers passed through LAX in 2010

18 rade-offs: Passenger Convenience Connection ypes Number of ransfers Vertical Level Changes Average ravel ime Saved (min) Airport ransit Riders per Day (2035)* Capital Cost ($M) ($200M is available) Direct LR Branch 0-1 Circulator (APM/BR) ,900-5,400 4,600-5,100 $540$1,160 $624-$1,250 (APM) $120-$140 (BR) Intermediate LR & Circulator ,600-4,300 $680-$1,370 (APM) Modified LR runk Average travel time saved/added dependent on station location 4,700-6,100 $940-$1,460 * Depending on future airport plans, there will likely be 5,000-10,000 additional riders who drive to the LAX area and then use the project alternatives to access the airport terminals Ridership for air passengers and employees go up as travel times and number of transfers decrease Direct LR Branch and Modified LR runk have fewest transfers, shortest travel times and highest ridership for airport passengers Circulator (APM/BR) ridership is slightly lower, since all Metro rail passengers transfer Intermediate LR and Circulator has the most transfers and level changes, and the lowest ridership All s, except the BR Circulator, require funding in excess of the $200M available from Metro

19 rade-offs: Direct LR Branch vs. hrough LAX Average ravel ime* (minutes) Airport ransit Riders per Day (2035)* Capital Cost ($M) ($200M is available) Constructability Issues Direct LR Branch ,300-5,400 $540 $1,160 *Average from Norwalk, Expo, and South Bay hrough LAX 25 6,100 $940 $1,130 *Average from Norwalk, Expo, and South Bay * Depending on future airport plans, there will likely be 5,000-10,000 additional riders who drive to the LAX area and then use the project alternatives to access the airport terminals Because Modified LR runk (hrough) has shorter travel time, ridership is higher than Direct LR Branch for airport passengers Modified LR runk increases travel time by 2 minutes for non-airport bound passengers between Expo (Crenshaw Corridor) and South Bay (Redondo Beach) Single station for Modified LR runk in terminal area requires a long walk (0.3 to 0.4 miles) to reach western terminals (3, 4, BI), or potential transfer to a circulator (e.g., bus, moving walkway, shuttle) to shorten walk Constructability issues: Parallels portion of Crenshaw/LAX Line that is scheduled to begin construction in 2013 Requires a complex connection to existing Metro Green Line in El Segundo that would have operational impacts during construction

20 rade-offs: Alignments in the Airport erminal Area On-Airport Options Capital Cost ($M) ($200M is available) Average ravel ime to erminal (minutes) Average Walk Dist. to erminal (feet) $1,040 $1, $1,060 $1, $620 $740 Potential Visual Impacts to heme Building Aerial (Rail) unnel (Rail) 600 Aerial (Rail) $110 $130 At-Grade (BR) Add 5-10 minutes under severe traffic conditions For LR and APM, the 2 station aerial option Costs approximately $450 million less than the 2 station subway and 3 station aerial options Runs adjacent to the heme Building, leading to potential visual impacts he 3 station aerial loop option provides the shortest walk distances to terminals among the rail alignments, but extra time to travel around the loop leads to comparable total travel times (walk + ride) to terminals BR is the least costly and has shorter walking distances than the rail (LR and APM) configurations, but Involves the longest total travel times (walk + ride) to airport terminals Is subject to airport roadway congestion

21 rade-offs: Century Boulevard vs. 98th Street 98th St Century Blvd Average Number of Vertical Level Changes Average ravel ime (minutes)* Capital Cost ($M) ($200M is available) Potential Impacts Visual raffic/access $540 $1,160 Direct LR Branch $470 $1, $620 $1,270 Circulator $600 $1,240 *Average from Norwalk, Expo, and South Bay Century Blvd LR Requires a second station at Aviation/Century Results in transfers, additional level changes, longer walks and longer travel times For both LR and APM, the aerial structure along Century Blvd may result in: Visual impacts to landscaping and art treatments Potential impacts to traffic circulation and access to businesses