Capital Metro Downtown Multimodal Station Stakeholder Briefing December 11, 2015
Agenda 1 2 3 4 5 Project Summary Downtown Station Concept Evaluation 4 th Street Traffic Analysis 5 th Street Traffic Analysis Next Steps 2
Project Summary Downtown Multimodal Station 3
Project Goals & Objectives 1 2 3 4 Address near- and long- term MetroRail operational needs Address existing safety issues and modal conflicts (pedestrian, bicycle, transit, auto) Accommodate future multimodal needs Improve aesthetics and compatibility with urban context 5-minute terminal arrival / departure headway Platforms to accommodate longer 2-vehicle consists Movements of various modes are not compatible in constrained space Additional rail and local circulator routes Great Streets principles PROJECT SUMMARY 4
Concept 1 3 platform positions that accommodate (future) 2-car consists Vacate auto access on 4 th St (between Red River and Trinity) Pedestrian and transit queuing Plaza (Neches to Trinity) Lance Armstrong Bikeway (modified for enhanced safety and awareness through platform/plaza area) PROJECT SUMMARY 5
Concept 2 3 platform positions that accommodate (future) 2-car consists Shared-use auto/bicycle access on 4 th St (Sabine to Neches) Pedestrian and transit queuing Plaza (Neches to Trinity) Lance Armstrong Bikeway (modified for enhanced safety and awareness through platform/plaza area) PROJECT SUMMARY 6
Project Context PROJECT SUMMARY 7
Downtown Station Concept Evaluation Downtown Multimodal Station 8
Concept Confirmation Process 1 2 Concept Confirmation Strategy Technical Evaluation Criteria Concept Confirmation Process Building Support Public Involvement Public & Stakeholder Input Safety Station Operations Traffic & Accessibility Context Sensitive Compatibility DOWNTOWN STATION CONCEPT EVALUATION 9
Concept Confirmation Process Stakeholder/Agency Input Public Input Technical Evaluation Criteria Concept Confirmation Preferred Concept DOWNTOWN STATION CONCEPT EVALUATION 10
Building Support Recent Stakeholder Coordination Austin Transportation Department Austin Fire Department, Police Department and EMS Austin Convention Center Austin Energy Hilton Hotel City of Austin Economic Development City of Austin Parks and Recreation City of Austin Public Works City of Austin ROW City of Austin Special Events City of Austin Urban Design / Great Streets City of Austin Watershed Protection Downtown Austin Alliance TxDOT Waller Creek Conservancy DOWNTOWN STATION CONCEPT EVALUATION 11
Public & Stakeholder Input Many recognize the benefits of a conflict-free pedestrian space Stakeholders and coordinating agencies in favor of safety improvements and supporting multimodal mobility improvements Some public input has expressed traffic concerns with removing autos from this segment 4 th street. I like the idea of having more pedestrian area. The vehicle lane isn t really that useful anyway. Citizen Feedback I lean more toward this concept to free more space for pedestrians and bikes. Seems like a better use of space but worried about flow of extra traffic displaced from lane of street. Good park space. Concept Preference No Preference 12% Concept 2 19% Concept 1 69% DOWNTOWN STATION CONCEPT EVALUATION 12
Concept Confirmation - Technical Evaluation Criteria 1. Safety 1 2 3 4 2. Station Operations 3. Traffic & Accessibility 4. Context- Sensitive Compatibility a. Mitigation of Multimodal Conflicts b. Rail Crossing Protection Requirements a. MetroRail Station and Platform b. Multimodal Access to Project Area a. Pedestrian, Bicycle and Auto Circulation b. Lane Configurations and Utility a. Mitigate Impacts to Adjacent Projects and Stakeholders b. Great Streets Compatibility c. Stakeholder Accessibility c. Supportive of Future Development DOWNTOWN STATION CONCEPT EVALUATION 13
Technical Evaluation Safety Evaluation Metric Multimodal conflict mitigation Emergency access / egress Rail crossing protection Description Concept 1 (Vacate Auto Access on 4 th ) Concept 2 (Restricted Auto Access on 4 th ) Minimize pedestrian / bicycle conflicts through platform boarding area Minimize pedestrian / auto conflicts Minimize bicycle / auto conflicts Supports efficient access / egress to/from platform area Supports efficient access / egress to/from adjacent facilities Minimize train control / signalization needs Minimize intersection crossing protection needs Concept 1 is preferred: Reduces potential automobile conflicts with pedestrians and bicycles Allows wider boarding areas and pedestrian passage at platforms in front of Convention Center and Hilton Austin DOWNTOWN STATION CONCEPT EVALUATION 14
Technical Evaluation Station Operations Evaluation Metric MetroRail station platform Multimodal access in project area Description Concept 1 (Vacate Auto Access on 4 th ) Concept 2 (Restricted Auto Access on 4 th ) Number of boarding locations supports CMTA long-term needs Center platform width Minimize station platform access / egress conflicts Auxiliary passenger queuing / ticketing area Proximity of relocated bus stations Metro Bus Operations Car 2 Go access Transit gateway / information / wayfinding Concept 1 is preferred: Fewer multimodal conflicts in near boarding areas & widest possible boarding platform DOWNTOWN STATION CONCEPT EVALUATION 15
Technical Evaluation Traffic and Accessibility Evaluation Metric Pedestrian circulation Bicycle circulation Auto circulation Description Appropriate access to and circulation through platform Concept 1 (Vacate Auto Access on 4 th ) Concept 2 (Restricted Auto access on 4 th ) boarding area and plaza Appropriate access to and circulation through platform boarding area and plaza Maintains access to Hilton & Convention Center Austin Energy and Waller Creek (Public Works) access 4th St capacity Maintains auto capacity from Red River to Trinity Concept 1 is preferred: Better pedestrian & bicycle level-of-service in the plaza area with fewest conflicts and best accessibility However, stakeholders have expressed additional access concerns DOWNTOWN STATION CONCEPT EVALUATION 16
Technical Evaluation Context Sensitive Compatibility Evaluation Metric Description Concept 1 (Vacate Auto Access on 4 th ) Concept 2 (Restricted Auto access on 4 th ) Stakeholder needs Minimize Convention Center and Hilton Hotel emergency egress conflicts Maintains definition of Lance Armstrong Bikeway Convention Center expansion Supports future development Great Streets compatibility Future development parcel access needs (Perry Lorenz) Sabine St Promenade Dedicated spaces for pedestrian, transit, bicycle and auto uses Walkability, wayfinding, and ease of use Concept 1 is preferred: More consistent with a multimodal vision for bringing all modes together in one place harmoniously DOWNTOWN STATION CONCEPT EVALUATION 17
Technical Evaluation Overall Evaluation Metric Concept 1 (Vacate Auto Access on 4th) Concept 2 (Restricted Auto Access on 4 th ) Safety Best reduction of conflicts Auto and bikeway conflicts remain Transit Operations Meets requirements May compromise platform width to fit shared-use lane and emergency access Traffic and Accessibility Reduces auto accessibility Maintains accessibility; requires bikes & autos to share Context Sensitive Compatibility Consistent with multimodal vision & hierarchy Diminishes multimodal vision Concept 1 is the best solution for reducing safety conflicts, meeting transit operational requirements, improving multimodal accessibility, and is consistent with the urban context DOWNTOWN STATION CONCEPT EVALUATION 18
Technical Evaluation Overall Concept 1 is the best solution for reducing safety conflicts, meeting transit operational requirements, improving multimodal accessibility, and is consistent with the urban context DOWNTOWN STATION CONCEPT EVALUATION 19
4th Street Traffic Evaluation Downtown Multimodal Station 20
Traffic Data Collection Video camera set up at the corner of 4th Street and Neches 7-day, 24-hour counts (Thursday 9/3 to 9/10) Data for auto, pedestrian, and bike Historical counts on Cesar Chavez, 5 th, and 6 th Streets 4 TH STREET TRAFFIC ANALYSIS 21
Evaluation Findings Part 1 Heavy pedestrian & bicycle volumes Combined more than auto traffic Pedestrian counts only include the intersection of 4th and Neches E-W pedestrian movements along Convention Center sidewalk not included Doesn t take into account the people passing through on MetroRail Restricted vehicular access on 4th Street will provide a better environment for the many pedestrians already using this area Auto & Pedestrian Daily Volumes on 4 th Street Auto, Pedestrian & Bicycle Peak Hourly Volumes on 4 th Street 4 TH STREET TRAFFIC ANALYSIS 22
Data Summary Hourly Volumes on Typical Weekday* 1,400 100 1,200 90 Vehicles / Pedestrians per Hour 1,000 800 600 400 200 Auto Capacity of 4th 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 Bicycles per Hour 0 0 Time of Day 4th St, E of Neches (WB Auto) 4th St @ Neches (Pedestrian) Cesar Chavez, W of S 1st St (WB Auto) 6th St, W of IH 35 (WB Auto) 4 TH STREET TRAFFIC ANALYSIS 4th St @ Neches (Bicycles) * - Cesar Chavez and 6 th St traffic volumes from City of Austin historical data 23
Data Summary Hourly Volumes on Typical Weekday* 1,400 100 1,200 90 Vehicles / Pedestrians per Hour 1,000 800 600 400 200 Auto Capacity of 4th 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 Bicycles per Hour 0 0 Time of Day 4th St, E of Neches (WB Auto) 4th St @ Neches (Pedestrian) Cesar Chavez, W of S 1st St (WB Auto) 6th St, W of IH 35 (WB Auto) 4 TH STREET TRAFFIC ANALYSIS 4th St @ Neches (Bicycles) * - Cesar Chavez and 6 th St traffic volumes from City of Austin historical data 24
Data Summary Hourly Volumes on Typical Weekend* (Saturday) 1,600 160 1,400 140 Vehicles / Pedestrians per Hour 1,200 1,000 800 600 400 200 Auto Capacity of 4th 120 100 80 60 40 20 Bicycles per Hour 0 0 Time of Day 4th St, E of Neches (WB Auto) 4th St @ Neches (Pedestrian) Cesar Chavez, W of S 1st St (WB Auto) 6th St, @ Red River (WB Auto) 4th St @ Neches (Bicycles) * - Cesar Chavez and 6 th St traffic volumes from City of Austin historical data 4 TH STREET TRAFFIC ANALYSIS 25
Data Summary Hourly Volumes on Typical Weekend* (Saturday) 1,600 6 th Street entertainment period lane closure 160 1,400 140 Vehicles / Pedestrians per Hour 1,200 1,000 800 600 400 200 Auto Capacity of 4th 120 100 80 60 40 20 Bicycles per Hour 0 0 Time of Day 4th St, E of Neches (WB Auto) 4th St @ Neches (Pedestrian) Cesar Chavez, W of S 1st St (WB Auto) 6th St, @ Red River (WB Auto) 4th St @ Neches (Bicycles) * - Cesar Chavez and 6 th St traffic volumes from City of Austin historical data 4 TH STREET TRAFFIC ANALYSIS 26
Evaluation Findings Part 3 Impact on Alternate Routes Traffic time distribution on 4th Street is very different from the rest of the downtown network 4th Street is not a major commuter route Weekday peak period volumes: Street Control Lanes (WB) WB Lane Capacity Late night volumes (entertainment period): WB Total Capacity AM Peak: 8-9a V/C PM Peak: 5-6p 6th Street signal 4 900* 3600 458** 0.1 315** 0.1 4th Street stop sign 1 400* 400 193 0.5 120 0.3 Cesar Chavez signal 2 900* 1800 990** 0.6 1233** 0.7 Street Control Lanes (WB) WB Lane Capacity WB Total Capacity Entertainment Peak: 11p-12a 6th Street signal 4 900* 3600 - - 4th Street stop sign 1 400* 400 356 0.9 Cesar Chavez signal 2 900* 1800 649** 0.4 V/C V/C * Based on CAMPO s roadway capacity look-up table ** COA Traffic Data Report 4 TH STREET TRAFFIC ANALYSIS 27
5 th Street Traffic Analysis Downtown Multimodal Station 28
Data Summary Hourly Volumes on Typical Weekday* 1,600 2-lane, CBD Principal Arterial capacity 1,400 1,200 Vehicles per Hour 1,000 800 600 400 1-lane, CBD Local Street capacity 200 0 4th St, E of Neches (WB Auto) Wed '15 Cesar Chavez, W of S 1st St (WB Auto) Wed '13 6th St, W of IH 35 (WB Auto) Mon '11 5th St, W of IH 35 (EB Auto) Thur '09 5th St, E of Red River (EB Auto) Tue '09 * - Cesar Chavez, 5 th St. and 6 th St. traffic volumes from City of Austin historical data 5 TH STREET TRAFFIC ANALYSIS Time of Day 29
Data Summary Hourly Volumes on Typical Weekday* 1,600 2-lane, CBD Principal Arterial capacity 1,400 1,200 Vehicles per Hour 1,000 800 600 400 1-lane, CBD Local Street capacity 200 0 4th St, E of Neches (WB Auto) Wed '15 Cesar Chavez, W of S 1st St (WB Auto) Wed '13 6th St, W of IH 35 (WB Auto) Mon '11 5th St, W of IH 35 (EB Auto) Thur '09 5th St, E of Red River (EB Auto) Tue '09 * - Cesar Chavez, 5 th St. and 6 th St. traffic volumes from City of Austin historical data 5 TH STREET TRAFFIC ANALYSIS Time of Day 30
Data Summary Hourly Volumes on Typical Weekend* (Saturday) 1,600 2-lane, CBD Principal Arterial capacity 1,400 1,200 Vehicles per Hour 1,000 800 600 400 1-lane, CBD Local Street capacity 200 0 5 TH STREET TRAFFIC ANALYSIS Time of Day 4th St, E of Neches (WB Auto) Sat '15 Cesar Chavez, W of S 1st St (WB Auto) Sat '13 6th St, @ Red River (WB Auto) Sat '09 5th St, E of San Jacinto (EB Auto) Sat '03 * - Cesar Chavez, 5 th St. and 6 th St. traffic volumes from City of Austin historical data 31
Data Summary Hourly Volumes on Typical Weekend* (Saturday) 1,600 6 th Street entertainment period lane closure 2-lane, CBD Principal Arterial capacity 1,400 1,200 Vehicles per Hour 1,000 800 600 400 1-lane, CBD Local Street capacity 200 0 5 TH STREET TRAFFIC ANALYSIS Time of Day 4th St, E of Neches (WB Auto) Sat '15 Cesar Chavez, W of S 1st St (WB Auto) Sat '13 6th St, @ Red River (WB Auto) Sat '09 5th St, E of San Jacinto (EB Auto) Sat '03 * - Cesar Chavez, 5 th St. and 6 th St. traffic volumes from City of Austin historical data 32
Proposed 5 th Street 2-way Conversion Minimum Lane Configuration 2 EB auto lanes, 1 WB auto lane Limits of 2-way conversion (TBD): Trinity to Red River Short Term Solution o Resolves local circulation for Hilton Hotel and Convention Center Congress to IH-35 Long-Term Vision o Opportunity for multimodal repurposing of Downtown arterial; connection to E Austin 5 TH STREET TRAFFIC ANALYSIS 33
5 th Street 2-way Conversion Lane Configuration Options - Limits of 2-way conversion - Protected bicycle lanes 5 TH STREET TRAFFIC ANALYSIS 34
5 th Street 2-Way Conversion Traffic and Accessibility Concept 1 5 th St. Trinity St. Neches St. Red River St. Sabine St. 4 th St. Elimination of auto/ped. conflict points and reduction of bike conflicts Conversion of Trinity and 5 th St. to two-way has additional accessibility benefits 5 TH STREET TRAFFIC ANALYSIS 35
5 th Street 2-Way Conversion Additional Considerations Dedicated LT lanes and signal phases Center turning lane at intersections with high turning movements Additional study needed Repurposing 5 th Street to multimodal priority (pedestrian, bicycle, transit, auto) Bike lane installation in place of parallel parking Convert angled to parallel parking where possible Reduction in parking encourages alternate modes Existing garage/surface parking capacity at Brazos and Red River 5 TH STREET TRAFFIC ANALYSIS 36
Next Steps Downtown Multimodal Station 37
Concept to Reality 2015 Complete Concept Confirmation Public and Stakeholder Vetting 2016 Final Design Execution of Agreements 2016 CMTA Board Adoption 2016-2017 Construction Procurement 2016 City Council Adoption Preliminary Design and Environmental Approval 2017-2018 Project Construction 38 NEXT STEPS 38