Public Meeting #2 -...
Transcript of Public Meeting #2 -...
La Entrada al Pacifico
February 19th, 2008 –
AlpineFebruary 20th, 2008 -
PresidioFebruary 25th, 2008 –
Midland/OdessaFebruary 26th, 2008 –
Fort Stockton
Public Meeting #2
Purpose of This Public Meeting
•
Second of Three Rounds•
Meetings in:–
Alpine
–
Presidio
–
Midland/Odessa
–
Ft. Stockton
•
Purpose:–
Provide information on the study process
–
Gather feedback on the process and issues
Meeting Format
•
Open House•
Presentation–
Project overview
–
Freight diversion analysis
–
Conceptual alternative evaluation
–
Where do we go from here
•
10 Minute Recess•
Comment Period
Project Overview
Project Overview
•
Data Collection•
Environmental Constraints Mapping
•
Freight Diversion Analysis•
Corridor Analysis
•
Economic Analysis•
Corridor Development Plan
•
Finance Plan•
Public Involvement/Outreach
Three Step Study Process
Step OneData CollectionFreight Diversion Analysis
Step Two
Alternative Development and Analysis
Step Three
Corridor DevelopmentPlan
Public Involvement
Project Study Area
Presidio
Marfa Alpine
Ft Stockton
Monohans
Odessa
Midland
Van Horn Balmohrea
Ft Davis
Pecos
Why are We Doing this Study
•
To determine the volume of freight and overall vehicle volumes that can reasonably
be
expected in this study area.
•
To determine the level of improvements required to effectively invest transportation dollars.
•
To provide proactive planning for the roadway network and communities in the area.
Summary of Results
• Freight Diversion to Presidio (Year 2030)–
Scenario
A
–
338 Trucks/Day Inbound
–
Scenario
B
–
739 Trucks/Day Inbound
• Based on These Numbers–
2 Lanes sufficient in southern segments
–
Existing infrastructure sufficient in the study area–
Urban areas will be evaluated in next phase
• Freight Diversion Analysis Looked at 2 Scenarios–
Scenario
A
–
All Mexico infrastructure completed
after the year 2030–
Scenario B
–
All Mexico infrastructure completed
prior to the year 2020
Freight Diversion Analysis
Freight Diversion Process
•
Identify key factors likely to influence future freight demand at the Presidio port-of-entry.
•
Develop a freight model through a risk analysis process to determine probable freight distribution.
•
Refine model assumptions to estimate a likely range of future freight demand given different Mexican infrastructure completion scenarios.
•
Converted freight to trucks for discussion purposes. Numbers can easily be converted to rail.
Key Factors Considered
•
Diversion from Port of Los Angeles/Port of Long Beach–
Other US Ports (West Coast and Gulf Coast)
–
Other Mexico West Coast Ports•
Share of Freight at Topolobampo–
Lazaro Cardenas
–
Manzanillo–
Others
•
Diversion From Other Border Ports of Entry–
El Paso
–
Santa Teresa–
Others
•
Internal Mexico Freight Growth–
Maquiladora interviews from previous studies
–
Historical trends
Freight Model/Risk Analysis Process (RAP)
• Detailed data collection process
• Assigned estimates and ranges (probability distributions) to each variable
• Gathered feedback from local Technical Advisory Committee members and expert sources
• Modified model results to reflect feedback
• Finalized draft results
Freight Forecast Results
Looked at two scenarios for Mexico infrastructure completion
•
Scenario A
-
Mexico infrastructure completion after 2030
•
Scenario B
-
Mexico infrastructure completion prior to 2020
Mexico infrastructure completion includes:•
Improvements at the port of Topolobampo
•
Roadway and/or rail improvements through the Copper Canyon
Freight Forecast Results Inbound Truck Volume at Presidio
2010 2020 2030Low Forecast Value 25 63 233Median (“Most Likely”) 47 195 739High Forecast Value 75 527 2224
Scenario A -
Mexico Infrastructure After 20302010 2020 2030
Low Forecast Value 25 43 37Median (“Most Likely”) 47 174 338High Forecast Value 75 501 1851
Scenario B -
Mexico Infrastructure Prior to 2020
Freight Forecast Results
Scenario Comparison
–
“Most Likely”Includes 2010 2020 2030
Baseline• Internal Mexico Growth
44 82 152
Scenario
A
•
Internal Mexico Growth•
Diversion from other ports of entry
47 174 338
Scenario
B
•
Internal Mexico Growth•
Diversion from other ports of entry
•
Mexico Infrastructure Completion
47 195 739
Other Factors That Could Influence Results
•
Mexico infrastructure completion date
•
Mexico’s emphasis on rail versus roadway
•
Potential route through Torreon and Camargo to Presidio via Mexico highway 67
•
Future competing ports (Puerto Colonet)
•
Others
Overall Traffic Forecast Results
• Utilized the results of the freight diversion analysis
• Use of SAM model to forecast volumes in the study area
• Developed threshold table to:•
Identify areas of needed improvement
•
Provide a basis for improvements if forecast volumes are reached sooner than projected
Level of Service
LOS DescriptionA Free flow operationsB Reasonable traffic flow conditions
C Near free flow operations, some minor flow restrictions
D Some minor congestionE Operation at roadway capacity
F Severe congestion, stop and go operation
Roadway Threshold Table
LOSAverage Daily Traffic
2 Lane Roadway 4 Lane RoadwayA 1,800 13,400B 3,300 21,900C 5,900 31,400D 10,200 40,100E 17,500 44,500F > 17,500 > 44,500
Alpine
Monohans
Odessa
Midland
Van Horn
Pecos
Presidio
Marfa
Ft Stockton
Ft Davis
Balmohrea
Crane
McCamey
LOS A or B
LOS C or D
LOS E or F
Year 2030LOS Results
Scenario BMost Aggressive
Alternative
67
6790
38510
10
20385
Overall Traffic Forecast Results
Recommendation of Corridor NeedsFocus on Safety and Mobility Improvements
–
Mexico freight diversion does not warrant additional capacity improvements
–
4 lane widening not warranted in southern segments
–
Existing infrastructure sufficient in the study area
–
Urban areas will be evaluated in next phase
Safety and Mobility Improvements
•
Passing Lanes
•
Clearance Issues
•
Roadway Geometric Improvements
•
Reliever Route Evaluations
•
Others
Reliever Route Evaluation
•
Reliever Routes will be reviewed in the next phase of the study based on the need in urban areas
•
Environmental, engineering and mobility criteria will be evaluated
•
Several options will be proposed along with a no-build alternative
•
Further evaluation and NEPA compliance will occur in subsequent studies
Alternative Analysis
Conceptual Alternative Analysis
•
To identify routes to develop potential safety and mobility improvements
•
To prepare a proactive plan in the event that the threshold is ever
met.
•
This Study will not make the final determination of location, rather recommend improvement type and location
•
The No-Build Alternative will remain through the end of this study for any improvements proposed
•
Subsequent NEPA studies will determine final location and detailed impacts analysis
Conceptual Alternative Analysis
Alternative Identification–
No-build
–
Upgrade Designated Corridor–
Other Alternatives
Determination of Feasibility–
Engineering
–
Environmental–
Mobility
–
Public Involvement
Presidio
Marfa Alpine
Ft Stockton
MonohansOdessa
Van Horn
Ft Davis
Pecos
Midland
McCamey
Crane
Conceptual Alternatives
Recommended Viable Alternatives
•
Propose to eliminate the new corridor alternatives
•
Reliever routes to be reviewed in the next phase of the study based on the need in urban areas
•
Rail alternative to be included in viable alternatives
•
No-build alternative will be included for all proposed improvements
•
Viable alternatives will be screened to the proposed routes for improvements
Project Summary
Summary of Freight and Traffic Results
•
Freight Traffic Numbers (Year 2030)–
Baseline –
152
trucks per day
–
Scenario A –
338
trucks per day
–
Scenario B –
739
trucks per day
•
Roadway Improvements–
Existing infrastructure is sufficient to handle forecasted traffic
–
Study to focus on safety and mobility improvements
•
Conceptual Alternative Screening–
New corridor alternatives eliminated
Where Do We Go From Here?
Data CollectionPublic Meeting #1Freight Diversion AnalysisConceptual Alt. ScreeningPublic Meeting #2Viable Alt. ScreeningPublic Meeting #3Corridor Development PlanStudy Complete
Dec 2006Mar 2007Jan 2008Jan 2008Feb 2008May 2008Aug 2008Oct 2008Oct 2008
Public Feedback is Vital to the Study
•
Three Rounds of Public Meetings•
Project Newsletter
•
Project Web-page:www.dot.state.tx.usKeyword: La Entrada
•
Project Hotline: 1-800-517-4652
•
Project Email:[email protected]
•
Written Comments To:Peggy Thurin, PE
Texas Department of Transportation17111 Preston Road, Suite 200
Dallas, Texas 75248-1232
10 Minute Recess
Comment Period
–
Names will be called from those who have filled out a comment card
–
The name of the following speaker will also be called
–
Please keep comments concise to provide an opportunity for everyone to speak
–
Once everyone has had a chance to speak an opportunity for additional comments will be provided
La Entrada al Pacifico
February 19th, 2008 –
AlpineFebruary 20th, 2008 -
PresidioFebruary 25th, 2008 –
Midland/OdessaFebruary 26th, 2008 –
Fort Stockton
Public Meeting #2