Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority Board Action/Information Summary Action Information MEAD Number: Resolution: Yes No TITLE: LRT and Streetcar Interoperability Study PURPOSE: To brief the Board on the Light Rail (LRT) and Streetcar Interoperability study underway to facilitate regional coordination on the surface transit projects being advanced around the region. DESCRIPTION: The LRT and Streetcar Interoperability study was initiated in recognition of the many LRT and Streetcar systems being advanced in the region. Arlington County, the District of Columbia, Fairfax County and Maryland are advancing the planning and design of the several projects. In addition, several other LRT and streetcar alignments have been proposed in the District of Columbia, Maryland and Northern Virginia. Metro is leading this effort to promote regional coordination. Specifically, Metro is aiming to promote customer convenience, cost efficiency, and regional transit network coherence by maximizing the degree to which these diverse projects around the region can adopt compatible power, control, track, fare, and passenger information systems and - to the extent possible - make physical connections with one another. To the extent that vehicle technologies can be conformed and storage and maintenance facilities consolidated, these also are being explored. It is hoped that the findings of this study will support project sponsors as they develop engineering specifications for bidders to bid on at later stages of project progress. Metro staff has established quarterly working group meetings with the project sponsors of these LRT and streetcar systems. The first meeting was held in October 2010 and focused on understanding the purpose of each project and identifying opportunities for interface/integration among the projects. Breakout sessions were held to generate ideas on Crossing Boundaries, Transit Riders of the Future and Transit Operations/Organization of the Future. Each future meeting will focus on different component(s) for LRT and streetcar system such as vehicles, traction power, heavy maintenance, station and customer interface, etc. and explore the opportunities for interface/integration. The proliferation of the light rail and streetcar projects around the region poses a range of policy issues for Metro. These issues include project governance, operations and management; regional funding and system affordability; Metro station area design; safety and security; and more. This study does not address these questions per se, as it is focused more narrowly on the technical challenge of maximizing the degree of systems interoperability. Broader policy issues are raised by this presentation, and will be assessed and evaluated in separate, later policy and planning presentations to the Board.
This study will be completed by fall of 2011 and will document the consensus on the levels of systems interface/integration achievable based on implementation timeframes of each project. A follow-on phase will be initiated to develop an implementation roadmap for the agreed to interface/integration level. FUNDING IMPACT: This project is funded through the regional allocation of the FY 2010 and FY 2011 Project Development Program. This item has no additional impact on funding. Project Manager: E. Robin McElhenny Project Department/Office: Planning and Joint Development/ Station Area Planning and Asset Management RECOMMENDATION: For information only.
Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority LRT and Streetcar Interoperability Study Policy, Program Development & Intergovernmental Relations Committee February 10, 2011
Purpose T b i f th B d th Li ht R il T it (LRT) d St t To brief the Board on the Light Rail Transit (LRT) and Streetcar Interoperability study underway to facilitate regional coordination on the surface transit projects being advanced around the region.
Background Numerous surface transit projects are being advanced around the region Without coordination, these projects might miss opportunities to coordinate system designs, connections, and efficiencies Metro is facilitating regional coordination among project sponsors and stakeholders to maximize potential compatibility of the proposed p systems Goal is to promote customer convenience and to identify potential cost savings; operating efficiencies; network connections; and fare and information systems integration First regional stakeholders workshop was held in October 2010 and focused on identifying opportunities for interface /integration
Regional LRT and Streetcar Projects District of Columbia is advancing streetcar starter lines and planning for a broader streetcar system Maryland is initiating i i i preliminary i engineering for Purple Line LRT and finalizing Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for the Corridor Cities Transitway Arlington and Fairfax Counties have g Columbia Pike Streetcar project in NEPA; other corridors are under study in the City of Alexandria
1 st Regional Stakeholders Workshop: Crossing Boundaries DC Streetcar connection into Silver Spring (Georgia Avenue streetcar intersecting with Purple Line) Possible Future Connection in Silver i i i h P l Spring Streetcar alignment Possible Future connections and common maintenance locations among gproposed p Northern Virginia streetcar systems Connection across Potomac River
1 st Regional Stakeholders Workshop: Transit Riders of Future Common fare media, fare collection system and contactless Smart card media Real-time information systems Common web-based route and schedule information Common pedestrian safety measures and signage: uniformity desired to assist visitors and those who speak languages other than English
1 st Regional Stakeholders Workshop: Transit Operations Central communications: central hub to monitor all lines and transfers, providing patrons with good trip time information Commonality among energy storage (onboard or wayside) and operating voltage between systems Incident management response (police and other emergency services) Shared standards for design and/or possibility to share functions
Policy Issues Who leads project development Who manages system operation Regional funding and affordability Competition for Federal funds (New Starts/Small Starts, formula funds) Financial capacity of the compact members Safety and Security Oversight Impact on Bus Operations Fare policy (transfer discounts, payment systems)
Next Steps Continue quarterly working group meetings to: Assess interface opportunities building on preliminary discussions Identify critical time points for making decisions on systems interface/integration Define achievable levels of interface/integration Complete study by Fall 2011: Develop guidance on levels of systems interface/integration based on project implementation timeframes Initiate Phase 2 effort in Fall 2011: Develop roadmap for implementation of interface/integration Establish working groups focused on specific project components
Appendix LRT and Streetcar Interoperability Considerations
Interoperability Considerations Project Component Key Opportunities i Limiting i i Factors Vehicles Shared design standards: joint Differing vehicle capacity vehicle and parts procurement More efficient training and use requirements may lead to different vehicle selection of maintenance and operations Vehicle dimensions may impact staff ability to share track and station locations Track and Shared design standards Streetcar functional with tighter Structures Joint procurement and materials Potential for interconnected track turning radii than LRT Different geometry and clearances would limit interoperability Traction Power Shared design standards: joint procurement of equipment and spare parts Consistent maintenance practices and systems integration Different systems may have different overhead contact system configuration (trolley wire or catenary) Different utilities could constrain equipment consistency
Interoperability Considerations Project Component Key Opportunities Limiting Factors Heavy Shared heavy maintenance Difficult to find site(s) of Maintenance facility could service and appropriate size and Customer Interface maintain several types of vehicles, saving on the cost of the facility and equipment Common fare collection and fare medium Coordinated image of vehicles and stations configuration in locations with good connection to the rail lines Degree to which project sponsors support consistent t image Communications Common passenger information systems Unified strategy for emergency response Complexity of an integrated communications system (ownership/liability and data integrity/reliability)