project advisory committee

22
1 PROJECT ADVISORY COMMITTEE June 19, 2012

Upload: sally

Post on 07-Feb-2016

43 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

DESCRIPTION

PROJECT ADVISORY COMMITTEE. June 19, 2012. 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: - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: PROJECT ADVISORY COMMITTEE

1

PROJECT ADVISORY COMMITTEE

June 19, 2012

Page 2: PROJECT ADVISORY COMMITTEE

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

Page 3: PROJECT ADVISORY COMMITTEE

3

PROJECT DEVELOPMENT PROCESS

Regional Plan

System Plan

Corridor Studies

Preliminary Design/Environmental Analysis

Final Design

Construction

Operation

Page 4: PROJECT ADVISORY COMMITTEE

4

RELATION TO OTHER PROJECTS

2040

Page 5: PROJECT ADVISORY COMMITTEE

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?

Page 6: PROJECT ADVISORY COMMITTEE

6

PROJECT CONNECTPURPOSE AND NEED

Page 7: PROJECT ADVISORY COMMITTEE

7

Tools in the Toolbox

Source: Project Connect, Dec. 2

Page 8: PROJECT ADVISORY COMMITTEE

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

Page 9: PROJECT ADVISORY COMMITTEE

9

West Austin

PREFERRED SYSTEM

ROW Preservation

Source: Project Connect

DRAFT

Page 10: PROJECT ADVISORY COMMITTEE

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

Page 11: PROJECT ADVISORY COMMITTEE

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

Page 12: PROJECT ADVISORY COMMITTEE

12

PROJECT DEVELOPMENT PROCESS

Regional Plan

System Plan

Corridor Studies

Preliminary Design/Environmental Analysis

Final Design

Construction

Operation

Page 13: PROJECT ADVISORY COMMITTEE

13

NORTH CORRIDOR STUDY AREA

Page 14: PROJECT ADVISORY COMMITTEE

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?

Page 15: PROJECT ADVISORY COMMITTEE

15

DEVELOPING THE NORTH CORRIDOR PURPOSE AND NEED

Page 16: PROJECT ADVISORY COMMITTEE

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

Page 17: PROJECT ADVISORY COMMITTEE

17

OPTIONS FOR MOVING PEOPLEDURING RUSH HOUR

Page 18: PROJECT ADVISORY COMMITTEE

18

TRANSIT MODES

Conventional Bus

Express bus in managed lanes

MetroRapid

Bus Rapid Transit(BRT)

Urban Rail

Light Rail

Commuter Rail(MetroRail)

Regional Rail

Page 19: PROJECT ADVISORY COMMITTEE

19

PROJECT CONNECT: NORTH CORRIDORAlternatives Analysis

Preliminary Schedule

Page 20: PROJECT ADVISORY COMMITTEE

20

PROJECT TEAM CONTACTS• Todd Hemingson, Capital Metro, VP Strategic Planning

[email protected]– (512) 369-6036

• John-Michael Cortez, Capital Metro, Manager - Community Involvement– [email protected]– (512) 369-6201

• Lynda Rife, Rifeline, LLC, Principal– [email protected]– (512) 797-9019

• Reed Lee, HDR Engineering, Inc., Project Manager– [email protected]– (210) 260-452

Page 21: PROJECT ADVISORY COMMITTEE

21

PROJECT CONNECT: NORTH CORRIDOR

QUESTIONS

ANSWERS

DISCUSSION

Page 22: PROJECT ADVISORY COMMITTEE

22

REGIONAL CHALLENGESAND OPPORTUNITIES

Centers Core Constraints

CongestionGrowth