Northeast Corridor Alternatives Analysis Public Involvement Round 2 Input on Alternatives for Further Study Feb. 7-9, 2012
Agenda Review project background Progress summary Recommended alternatives for further evaluation Get your input! 2
Housekeeping Items Silence all cell phones. Be considerate of all meeting attendees and COTA staff. When it is your turn to make a comment or ask a question, remain at your seat and we will call upon you. Comments and questions are limited to two minutes per person. Ask one question at a time so the appropriate staff member may address your comment. 3
The Northeast Corridor Existing transit facilities in corridor Transit Centers Linden and Easton P&R Northern Lights, Westerville Cleveland Avenue Second busiest route 5,000 daily riders Often has standing loads COTA awarded federal grant to study transit improvements November 2010 Study began September 2011 4
Northeast Corridor Project COTA is seeking to: Identify improved transit alternatives in the corridor. Address transportation needs in the corridor. On-time performance/service reliability Connections to jobs Streetscape improvements Mode Alignment Terminal Station Alternative 5
FTA New Start Program Very Small Starts Criteria: Stations (more amenities than a typical bus stop) Signal priority/pre-emption low-floor vehicles Special branding of service Frequent service (10 minute peak, 15 minute off peak) Service at least 14 hours per day Existing ridership is over 3,000 trips per day Less than $50 million total cost Less than $3 million per mile Kansas City Max Line Cleveland Avenue meets these funding requirements 6
What is Very Small Starts Process? Analysis is first step in the federal process to get project funding Existing conditions/project need Develop, screen, evaluate alternatives Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) FTA approval required FTA approval required: Project Construction Grant Agreement (PCGA) Alternatives Analysis Project Development Construction Operation 1 Year 1-2 Years 1-2 Years 3-5 Years 7
Purpose and Need, Project Goals The project s purpose and vision are: To expand and improve mass transit s role and contribution to the overall livability, sustainability and economic vitality of the Northeast corridor and the central Ohio region through faster and more-convenient transit service and improved amenities for mass transit users. Project goals: Goal 1: Transit level of service improvements Goal 2: Sustain and enhance economic vitality Goal 3: Promote livability principles Goal 4: Develop a financially feasible project 8
Project Outreach Working group Stakeholder/community leader group Area leader interviews Public meetings Other Stakeholder presentations On-line survey (survey also available in Spanish, Somali) Comment cards Social media First round of public outreach: November 2011 Current round of public outreach: February 2012 9
Northeast Corridor AA Progress Round 1 Public Involvement meetings Introduced project Presented existing conditions Defined goals, purpose and need Completed Purpose and Need/Existing Conditions report Initiated environmental documentation Initiated preliminary screening of alternatives Continued coordination with City, County and other agencies 10
Existing Conditions Analysis Need to connect population to jobs Major destinations Downtown Columbus State Easton St. Ann s Westerville Population West of Cleveland Avenue, north and south of Morse Road 11
Development of Alternatives Mode Alignment Terminal Station Alternative 12
Potential Transit Modes Heavy Rail Transit HOV Bus BRT Separated Guideway Limited Stop Bus Commuter Rail BRT Mixed Traffic LRT/Streetcar Mixed Traffic Automated Guideway Transit LRT Separated Guideway 13
Evaluation of Transit Modes Potential transit modes were evaluated based on suitability for study area, as determined by: Number of passengers to be carried Passengers making short or long trips Travel speed Space between stops/stations Typical cost per mile to build and operate Lane use and right-of-way considerations 14
Screening of Transit Modes Heavy Rail Transit HOV Bus BRT Separated Guideway Limited Stop Bus Commuter Rail BRT Mixed Traffic LRT/Streetcar Mixed Traffic Automated Guideway Transit LRT Separated Guideway 15
Mode Evaluation Summary Mode HOV Bus BRT Guideway Limited Stop Bus LRT/Streetcar Mixed Traffic LRT Guideway Heavy Rail Transit Commuter Rail Automatic Guideway Transit Evaluation Freeway service would not serve key corridor trip purposes; Columbus area has no HOV lanes Insufficient right-of-way in key corridor alignments; excessive capital cost per mile No real-time arrival information, traffic signal priority, street, sidewalk or other capital improvements, lack of passenger amenities and little time savings Anticipated ridership does not match high capital cost per mile; can complicate traffic patterns Insufficient right-of-way in key corridor alignments; excessive capital cost per mile Higher capacity than warranted given corridor characteristics; excessive capital cost per mile Typical station spacing is inappropriate for corridor service needs; high costs and right-of-way requirements Higher capacity than warranted given corridor characteristics; excessive 16 capital cost per mile
Recommendation: Mode to Evaluate Bus Rapid Transit Mixed Traffic Mode Alignment Terminal Station Alternative 17
What is Bus Rapid Transit (BRT)? A mix of characteristics: Special branding Unique name and identity Faster service Fewer stops Signal priority Dedicated lane during peaks Frequent service 10 min peak/15 min off peak Service offered most of the day Enhanced passenger amenities Real-time information Enhanced stations Off-board fare collection Kansas City Max Line 18
Example Benefits of BRT Kansas City MAX BRT Before MAX BRT (Troost Line, October 2010): Weekday average 7,600 boardings After MAX BRT: Service hours increased approximately 5-6 percent Weekday average 8,400 boardings (Up 10.3 percent) MAX quality rated 15 percent higher than regular bus service 23 percent of MAX riders new to transit 55 percent rated MAX excellent 69 percent definitely recommend MAX (55 percent for regular service) 19
Evaluation of Terminal Locations Many potential terminal stations considered Mode Alignment Terminal Station Alternative 20
Evaluation of Alignments/Terminal Locations Potential alignment/termini combinations were evaluated Goal 1: Transit level of service improvements Ridership on existing COTA routes Connections to other COTA routes Goal 2: Sustain and enhance economic vitality Development strength of northern terminal Alignment of job and population density Potential for TOD/redevelopment Goal 3: Promote livability principles Serve low-income/minority communities Neighborhood livability Environmental impact Bicycle connections Goal 4: Develop a financially feasible project Overall alignment length 21
Evaluation of Alignments Many alignments considered and screened Alignments connecting to Easton Cleveland Avenue south of Fifth Avenue same for all alternatives Mode Alignment Terminal Station Alternative 22
Evaluation of Alignments Many alignments considered and screened Alignments connecting to Easton Karl Road Cleveland Avenue south of Fifth Avenue same for all alternatives Mode Alignment Terminal Station Alternative 23
Evaluation of Alignments Many alignments considered and screened Alignments connecting to Easton Karl Road Cleveland Avenue South of I-270 Cleveland Avenue south of Fifth Avenue same for all alternatives Mode Alignment Terminal Station Alternative 24
Evaluation of Alignments Many alignments considered and screened Alignments connecting to Easton Karl Road Cleveland Avenue South of I-270 Cleveland Avenue North of I-270 Cleveland Avenue south of Fifth Avenue same for all alternatives Mode Alignment Terminal Station Alternative 25
Recommendation: Alternatives for Further Screening Bus Rapid Transit in Mixed Traffic Cleveland Avenue from Downtown to: Easton via Morse SR 161 via Morse/Karl SR 161 Westerville Park and Ride Cleveland Avenue south of Morse Road same for all alternatives Mode Alignment Terminal Station Alternative 26
Next Steps Alternatives Analysis remaining schedule Public Outreach Evaluate Alternatives Recommended Alternative Board Consideration of LPA Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Public Meeting Project development/construction 2013-2016 27
Contact Information Mike McCann Bus Rapid Transit Project Manager MccannMJ@cota.com Tim Rosenberger Project Manager Rosenberger@pbworld.com COTA Customer Service: (614) 228-1776 For more information and to provide feedback, go to www.cota.com. 28
Thank You Comments and questions? 29