metro tank brt

36
Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) in the Greater Cincinnati Region February 22, 2013

Upload: oki-regional-council-of-governments

Post on 14-Mar-2016

218 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

DESCRIPTION

Presentation on Bus Rapid Transit in the Greater Cincinnati area.

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Metro Tank BRT

Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) in the Greater

Cincinnati Region

February 22, 2013

Page 2: Metro Tank BRT
Page 3: Metro Tank BRT

BRT Plans for Southwest Ohio

Terry Garcia Crews, Metro Chief Executive

Officer and General Manager

Page 4: Metro Tank BRT

• Identified five corridors in Southwest Ohio and Northern Kentucky for potential BRT service

• Identified the Montgomery Road corridor as having the greatest potential to support BRT service

• Conducted a peer analysis and identified most desirable characteristics for Cincinnati region

Initial Planning Study (PB)

Page 5: Metro Tank BRT

Transit Plan 2023• Latent demand survey – 1,200 Hamilton

County households• BRT has highest latent demand of all transit

services tested• BRT to Downtown – 4.6 million trips annually• BRT to Uptown – 1.0 million trips annually• Identified Six Corridors in Metro Service Area

Suitable for BRT

Page 6: Metro Tank BRT

BRT Network

• High-frequency spine• Glenway, Hamilton,

Vine, Reading, Montgomery & Madison

• Uptown transfer connections

Page 7: Metro Tank BRT

BRT VisionSpecially designed vehicles High-profile stations

Page 8: Metro Tank BRT

BRT Vision

Off-vehicle fare collection Bicycle access

Page 9: Metro Tank BRT

BRT VisionDedicated bus lanes Platform boarding

Page 10: Metro Tank BRT

BRT Vision

Traffic Signal Priority

Page 11: Metro Tank BRT

Metro Plus

Page 12: Metro Tank BRT

Montgomery Road Corridor

• 150 Bus Stops in each direction

• Many high ridership bus stops on existing local route 4 – Primary criteria for Metro Plus stop

• Much transfer activity near uptown area – need to include Uptown in Metro Plus

Page 13: Metro Tank BRT

Metro Plus Bus Stop Spacing• Longer stop spacing (approx. 1 mile)

o Provides fastest serviceo Covers 60 -70% of existing riderso Requires higher level of local service

• Shorter stop spacing (approx. 0.5 miles)o Better service to 90%+ of existing riderso Requires less local service

Page 14: Metro Tank BRT

Corridor Land UseUniversity of Cincinnati – Blue Ash •5,200 students•Current Metro layover for Rt. 4

Page 15: Metro Tank BRT

Corridor Land UseKenwood Towne Centre•Region’s largest mall•Surrounded by multiple shopping centers•Along major I-71 Interchange

Page 16: Metro Tank BRT

Corridor Land UseNeighborhood business districts

Page 17: Metro Tank BRT

Corridor Land UseXavier University

Page 18: Metro Tank BRT

Corridor Land Use

Uptown Cincinnati

Six major hospitals

Page 19: Metro Tank BRT

Corridor Land UseUptown Cincinnati

University of Cincinnati

Page 20: Metro Tank BRT

Corridor Land Use

Downtown Cincinnati

Government Square

Page 21: Metro Tank BRT

Other Characteristics

• Operate every 15 minutes during weekdays peak times

• Operate every 30 minutes evenings to 10 p.m.

• 17 stops in each direction

Page 22: Metro Tank BRT

Metro Plus Branding

Page 23: Metro Tank BRT

Metro Plus Branding

Page 24: Metro Tank BRT

Why Metro Plus

• Provides higher-speed alternative to major destinations – 150 stops on route 4 to 17 on Metro Plus

• Makes regional travel more feasible by transit• Improves service to Uptown• Responds to public input

Page 25: Metro Tank BRT

Public Transit in the Dixie Highway

Corridor

Andrew Aiello, TANK General Manager

Page 26: Metro Tank BRT

Previous Planning Efforts Regional BRT Identified Corridors Planning Efforts Dixie Highway Findings

Page 27: Metro Tank BRT

COA ResultsDixie Hwy

2,500 Riders / Weekday Strong Generators at

Both Ends Boarding & Alighting

Activity Along Entire Route

Page 28: Metro Tank BRT
Page 29: Metro Tank BRT

Opportunities& Challenges

OpportunitiesStrong Generators at Both EndsDiversity of Land Uses Served “Low-Hanging Fruit”

ChallengesConfusing Southern AlignmentUndermines Otherwise Direct ServiceImportant and Well-Used Institutional and Commercial Destinations along Southern AlignmentCorridor does not meet FTA guidelines for true “BRT”

Page 30: Metro Tank BRT

Draft Recommendations - “Enhanced Bus”• Capital Improvements• Vehicle / Station Branding• Revised Alignment• Bus Stop ConsolidationResults:

• Better service• More riders• Increased efficiency

Page 31: Metro Tank BRT

Stop Consolidation /RealignmentGoals Consolidate boarding activity Minimize passenger loss Maximize ridership gains Improve travel times

Anticipated Results 1/3-1/4 mi. spacing vs. 300 ft. 85% existing riders retained 8% net increase* 25% improvement

• Passenger Travel Times• Operating Efficiency

Page 32: Metro Tank BRT
Page 33: Metro Tank BRT

AlternativeScenario Consolidate stops

• 145 one-way to 38 one-way Maintain a streamlined loop Invest in frequency (30 min. or <)

Anticipated Results 1/3-1/4 mi. spacing vs. 300 ft. More existing riders retained 3-5% net ridership increase 10% improvement

• Passenger Travel Times

Page 34: Metro Tank BRT
Page 35: Metro Tank BRT

Next Steps Draft an implementation plan Solicit feedback on implementation plan Back to TANK Board for review

Page 36: Metro Tank BRT

Questions?Andrew Aiello - [email protected]

Terry Garcia Crews - [email protected]