Post on 07-Feb-2016
description
1
PROJECT ADVISORY COMMITTEE
June 19, 2012
2
PROJECT ADVISORY GROUP
The Project Connect: North Corridor Project Advisory Group will:
• Meet periodically through the life of the project;• Review and comment on information and analyses provided by
Capital Metro staff and the consultant team on:– Identification of transportation problems and issues within the
corridor;– Development of reasonable and feasible transportation alternatives; – Evaluation and refinement of alternatives;– Recommendation for a preferred solution to the Capital Metro
Board; and – Advise the Capital Metro staff and consultant team
3
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT PROCESS
Regional Plan
System Plan
Corridor Studies
Preliminary Design/Environmental Analysis
Final Design
Construction
Operation
4
RELATION TO OTHER PROJECTS
2040
5
PROJECT CONNECT’S THREE QUESTIONS
• System: How will high capacity transit components in CAMPO 2035 plan work as a system?
• Organization: How will our region organize to develop and operate the system?
• Funding: How will we pay for the system over the long term?
6
PROJECT CONNECTPURPOSE AND NEED
7
Tools in the Toolbox
Source: Project Connect, Dec. 2
8
RANKING OF PROJECT CONNECT CORRIDORS FOR HIGH-CAPACITY TRANSIT
NorthCentral
(NC)
Southwest(SW)
Northeast(NE)
Southeast(SE)
SouthCentral
(SC)
Northwest(NW)
Central(C)
West(W)
East(E)
15
20
25
30
35
10
5
0
Source: Project Connect
9
West Austin
PREFERRED SYSTEM
ROW Preservation
Source: Project Connect
DRAFT
10
CENTRAL TEXAS MOBILITY ISSUES
• Traffic congestion in central Texas is a serious problem and must be addressed
• Because of central Texas’ growth and constraints to expanding highways alternative transportation options should be explored
• High capacity transit can be an effective part of the solution for improving mobility in central Texas
Source: Project Connect, TWG, Dec. 2012
11
MOBILITY: U.S. vs. AUSTIN
• Annual delay per commuter:– US: 31 hours– Austin: 38 hours
• Annual cost of congestion per commuter:– US: $642– Austin: $743
• Additional length of peak period trip vs. off-peak– US: 17%– Austin: 28%
Source: Project Connect, Jan. 2012
12
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT PROCESS
Regional Plan
System Plan
Corridor Studies
Preliminary Design/Environmental Analysis
Final Design
Construction
Operation
13
NORTH CORRIDOR STUDY AREA
14
PROJECT CONNECT: NORTH CORRIDORAlternatives Analysis
What are the mobility problems in the corridor?
What are their underlying causes?
What are the viable options to addressthese problems?
What are their costs?
What are their benefits?
What are the constraints?
15
DEVELOPING THE NORTH CORRIDOR PURPOSE AND NEED
16
ALTERNATIVES SELECTION PROCESS
LPA
Alternative A
Alternative F
Alternative D
Alternative C
Alternative B
Alternative E
Alternative A
Alternative C
Alternative F
Initial and suggested alternatives identified
Evaluation criteria identification and screening
Remaining alternative(s) carried forward for detailed evaluation.
Selection of a Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA)
Screening Project Development
Detailed Screening
17
OPTIONS FOR MOVING PEOPLEDURING RUSH HOUR
18
TRANSIT MODES
Conventional Bus
Express bus in managed lanes
MetroRapid
Bus Rapid Transit(BRT)
Urban Rail
Light Rail
Commuter Rail(MetroRail)
Regional Rail
19
PROJECT CONNECT: NORTH CORRIDORAlternatives Analysis
Preliminary Schedule
20
PROJECT TEAM CONTACTS• Todd Hemingson, Capital Metro, VP Strategic Planning
– todd.hemingson@capmetro.org– (512) 369-6036
• John-Michael Cortez, Capital Metro, Manager - Community Involvement– john-michael.cortez@capmetro.org– (512) 369-6201
• Lynda Rife, Rifeline, LLC, Principal– lrife@rifeline.com– (512) 797-9019
• Reed Lee, HDR Engineering, Inc., Project Manager– reed.lee@hdrinc.com– (210) 260-452
21
PROJECT CONNECT: NORTH CORRIDOR
QUESTIONS
ANSWERS
DISCUSSION
22
REGIONAL CHALLENGESAND OPPORTUNITIES
Centers Core Constraints
CongestionGrowth