Upload
anonymous-0rawqwyjv
View
222
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
8/13/2019 St. Louis BRT Recommendations Feb 2014
1/32
NOTICE OF MEETING AND AGENDABI-STATE DEVELOPMENT AGENCY / METRO
OPERATIONS COMMITTEETuesday, February 18, 2014, 8:00 A.M.
Headquarters Building707 North First Street, Board Room
St. Louis, MO 63102
This location is accessible to persons with disabilities. Individuals with disabilities needinginformation or communication accommodations should call Metro at (314) 982-1400, for TTYaccess, call Relay 711. Sign language interpreter services or other accommodations for personswith hearing or speech disabilities will be arranged if a request for such service is made at least twodays in advance of the meeting. Large print material, Braille material or other formats will also beprovided upon request.
Agenda Disposition Presentation1. Call to Order2. Roll Call
ApprovalQuorum
Chairman ScottShirley Bryant
3. Public Comment*4. Minutes from December 17, 2013 Operations Committee
InformationApproval
Chairman ScottChairman Scott
8/13/2019 St. Louis BRT Recommendations Feb 2014
2/32
Bi-State Development Agency / MetroOperations Committee
Agenda ItemFebruary 18, 2014
From: Raymond A. FriemChief Operating Officer Transit Services
Subject: St. Louis Rapid Transit Connector Study RecommendationDisposition: ApprovalPresentation: Raymond A. Friem, Chief Operating Officer - Transit Services; Jessica Mefford-
Miller, Chief of Planning and System Development; Mark Phillips, Long-RangePlanner
Objective:
To obtain Operations Committee approval to forward to the Board of Commissioners the resultsand recommendations of the recently-completed St. Louis Rapid Transit Connecter Study (RTCS ), which sought to advance high-performance transit service, namely bus rapid transit
(BRT ), in the St. Louis region. Note: This is not a request to approve a given BRT plan; rather,it is a recommendation that, based on the results of the RTCS, staff believes that further study ofthese opportunities is warranted.
Board Policy:
Board Policy regarding major changes in service structure is contained within the Metro ServiceStandards guide, adopted in December of 2003, which outlines the requirement that the Board
formally approve service change proposals requiring new facilities and/or capital expenditures atcost levels consistent with Board Procurement Policies.
8/13/2019 St. Louis BRT Recommendations Feb 2014
3/32
Operations CommitteeSt. Louis Rapid Transit Connector Study RecommendationFebruary 18, 2014Page 2
consists of staff from Metro, EWGCOG, the City of St. Louis, St. Louis County, and MoDOT.The TCIG met monthly and provided input and guidance to Metro and the study team.
Moving Transit Forward targeted four Missouri interstate corridors including I-70, I-64, I-44,and I-55 as potential candidates for high-performance transit service. Community andstakeholder input during the long-range planning process preliminarily identified BRT as theideal mode for these four corridors, in line with the nine core values that shaped the long-range
plan:
Expand premium service area into new communities and travel markets. Improve transits image as a regional asset. Enhance mobility for transit-dependent populations. Prove cost-effectiveness. Attract federal funding. Impact/support economic development. Protect the natural environment. Strengthen the regional core. Consider time and cost of implementation.
The first phase of the RTCS narrowed those four interstate corridors to the two that offer the bestopportunities for premium transit service in the near future, I-64 and I-70. The second phaseformulated four BRT options within that study area, two east-west corridors and two north-south
corridors. I-70 emerged as a strong option, but it was removed for further consideration pendingcompletion of MoDOT's I-70 Planning & Environmental Linkages Study, as well as politicalsupport from St. Charles County. The final phase of the alternatives analysis measured the
8/13/2019 St. Louis BRT Recommendations Feb 2014
4/32
Operations CommitteeSt. Louis Rapid Transit Connector Study RecommendationFebruary 18, 2014Page 3
Avenue into Downtown St. Louis, making a loop through Downtown before ending at the CivicCenter Station. As currently proposed, its service frequencies would match MetroLink, andtransit prioritization strategies would be implemented along the corridor to speed transit travel.
The I-64 BRT would serve a Central Corridor that hosts 55,000 people and 115,500 jobs withinone half-mile, outside of Downtown St. Louis. The addition of this high-performance service tothe Metro System would provide the region's first rail-like transit option in West St. Louis
County, offering the first opportunity for all-day, single-seat service between Chesterfield andDowntown St. Louis, and reducing transfers from other areas by half. Along with reducingtransfers, it would improve transit travel time within the corridor by 30%, making it a much moreattractive alternative to the personal automobile. Ridership projections from EWGCOG'sregional travel demand model show a potential ridership market of 5,100 weekday riders, 2,100(41%) of whom would be new "choice" riders. That market is projected to grow to 6,800weekday riders by 2040.
West Florissant - Natural Bridge BRTThe other transit project included in the LPA is an arterial-based BRT route connecting North St.Louis County to Downtown St. Louis. This service would operate out of the new North CountyTransit Center, running 16 miles to Downtown via West Florissant Avenue, Lucas and HuntRoad, and Natural Bridge Avenue. As currently proposed, its service frequencies would matchMetroLink; stations with a high level of customer amenities would be spaced a minimum of onemile apart; and transit prioritization strategies would be implemented to speed travel.
The combined West Florissant-Natural Bridge corridor hosts 70,000 people and 18,000 jobswithin a half-mile, not counting Downtown St. Louis. Supplementing the local bus network inhi d i k ill i id f N h S L i Ci d N h
8/13/2019 St. Louis BRT Recommendations Feb 2014
5/32
Metro Operations CommitteeFebruary 18, 2014
1
8/13/2019 St. Louis BRT Recommendations Feb 2014
6/32
Presentation Purpose System Design Concept
RTCS Overview Locally Preferred Alternative Financial Strategy
Next Steps
AGENDA
2
8/13/2019 St. Louis BRT Recommendations Feb 2014
7/32
Rapid Transit Connector Study is analternatives analysis directed by MovingTransit Forward
Completed by TCIG Oct 2012 Dec 2013 Seeking Board approval of locally preferred
alternative (LPA) consisting of two projects
If approved, LPA would be advanced to East-West Gateway Council of Governments forinclusion in regional TIP
PRESENTATION PURPOSE
3
8/13/2019 St. Louis BRT Recommendations Feb 2014
8/32
Alternatives analysis evaluates mode andalignment options for a corridor Purpose is to inform local officials and
community members on costs and benefits ofoptions
Culminates when local / regional decision
makers select a locally preferred alternative,which is adopted by the MPO into regionallong-range transportation plan
STUDY PURPOSE
4
8/13/2019 St. Louis BRT Recommendations Feb 2014
9/32
FEDERAL NEW STARTS PROCESS
PlanningProject
Develop-ment
Engineering FFGA
2 year limit
New Starts
Small Starts
PlanningProject
Development Grant
FTA Acceptance
FTA Evaluation, Rating, Approval
5
8/13/2019 St. Louis BRT Recommendations Feb 2014
10/32
METRO SYSTEM DESIGN CONCEPT
MetroLink is the systems primary highperformance line, carrying many peoplequickly: Routing is fixed and should be tied to economic
development opportunities Capital investment is high
MetroBus is the reach of the hub-and-spoke system: Transit centers & ML stations serve as hubs Many different levels of service
Routing is flexible, capital investment relativelylow
6
8/13/2019 St. Louis BRT Recommendations Feb 2014
11/32
High performance services include several basic
elements: Frequent service Dedicated stations Limited stops
Can be rail, BRT, or enhanced express Configuration depends on market demand,
development patterns & desired development
impact, funding resources Typically requires significant capital investment
Must be integrated with supporting services (local
bus routes, circulators)
HIGH PERFORMANCE TRANSIT
Low wait times Quick fare payment Transit prioritization strategies
7
8/13/2019 St. Louis BRT Recommendations Feb 2014
12/32
8
8/13/2019 St. Louis BRT Recommendations Feb 2014
13/32
Improve transit access to major population andemployment concentrations Residential concentrations north-south Major employment concentrations east-west
Focus on service complimentary to (existing &planned) MetroLink Meet community demands
Expand reach of high performance transit Invest in communities with no immediate access to ML Attract new riders while improving service and travel time
for current customers
Stimulate development or stabilize communities
MTF GOALS AND SERVICE NEEDS
9
8/13/2019 St. Louis BRT Recommendations Feb 2014
14/32
Imperative: Expansion of higher-speed,higher-capacity transit services to keymarkets Complementary to existing transit network Cost-effective and sustainable Competitive for capital funding
Explored high-performance modes withlower costs than light rail Bus rapid transit, enhanced express bus,
premium arterial service
TCIG SOLUTION APPROACH
10
8/13/2019 St. Louis BRT Recommendations Feb 2014
15/32
LPA presented here as two separateprojects Projects could be designed, funded, and
implemented simultaneously or separately
Project design and components can bechanged in next phase depending on localpreference, cost effectiveness, and resources
However, any bus project that does notemulate rail will not qualify for Small Starts
PRELIMINARY PROJECT DESIGN
11
8/13/2019 St. Louis BRT Recommendations Feb 2014
16/32
TCIG RECOMMENDED LPA
I-64 BRT
West Florissant Nat. Bridge BRT
12
8/13/2019 St. Louis BRT Recommendations Feb 2014
17/32
Service characteristics similar toMetroLink Span of service Frequency Bi-directional travel
Connectivity to major destinations Improves regional mobility
High performance corridors willsupport improved / more efficientlocal bus service More productive connecting routes Circulators to major nearby destinations
13
LPA OPERATING GOALS
8/13/2019 St. Louis BRT Recommendations Feb 2014
18/32
LPA SYSTEM COMPONENTS Higher level of investment =
improved level of service
Needed to be competitive for federalcapital funding
Right-of-way & systems strategies
Mixed traffic, some business accessand transit (BAT) lanes
Transit signal prioritization (TSP)
Station & branding strategies Attractive, comfortable, branded,
high-capacity vehicles
Limited stops
Off-board fare payment14
8/13/2019 St. Louis BRT Recommendations Feb 2014
19/32
I-64 BRT
Brentwood(Existing) Downtown
I-64 BRT Highest ridership by 2040 Strongest share of new riders, choice riders Most diverse trip purposes Public support Most improved access to job and activity Centers
Lowest capital cost of four alternatives Improves efficiency of local bus system
15
8/13/2019 St. Louis BRT Recommendations Feb 2014
20/32
23-mile corridor operating on I-64, Forest Park Ave, andDowntown streets
Land use mix of major institutions, offices, culturalattractions, regional retail
55,000 people & 115,500 jobs 9 stations at major activity centers and transit connection
points
Dominated by park-ride access, with some bus/rail-based reverse commute demand
Parking and circulator routes at several stations
16
I-64 BRT
8/13/2019 St. Louis BRT Recommendations Feb 2014
21/32
End-to-end transit travel time reduced from 76 minutes to53 minutes Compared to auto travel time of 25 minutes
Offers motorists option of comfortable, affordable, productivecommute
Corridor ridership projected to increase 357% from 1,115 to5,100 weekday riders opening year; 6,800 in 2040 2,100 (41%) new choice riders opening year
Enhanced service BRT option provides single-seat service not currently available
Reduce transfers by 50%
End-to-end service available all day, rather than only peak
Create additional hubs to make local bus service more efficient
I-64 BRT CONSUMER BENEFIT
17
8/13/2019 St. Louis BRT Recommendations Feb 2014
22/32
W. FLORISSANTNATURAL BRIDGE BRT
North CountyTransit Center
Chambers
Lucas & Hunt
Natural BridgeGoodfellow
Kingshighway
Newstead
Grand
CassN. Florissant
Downtown
W. Florissant Natural Bridge BRT Highest N-S ridership by 2040 Strongest reverse commute market High density of people, particularly
transit-dependent Public support
Strong opportunity for neighborhoodrevitalization
18
8/13/2019 St. Louis BRT Recommendations Feb 2014
23/32
16-mile corridor connects North County Transit Center withDowntown St. Louis Southern end replicates I-64 CBD loop
70,000 people, 18,000 jobs
Corridor hosts high density of transit-dependent population
Land uses include single-family homes, medium-densityapartments, local retail, offices, shopping centers
12 stations at major activity centers
19
W. FLORISSANTNATURAL BRIDGE BRT
8/13/2019 St. Louis BRT Recommendations Feb 2014
24/32
End-to-end transit travel time reduced from 85 minutes to 42minutes Compared to auto travel time of 25 minutes
Attractive amenity package offers affordable, comfortable commute
Corridor ridership projected to increase 23% from 2,610 to3,200 opening year and 2040 (Natural Bridge) 600 (19%) new choice riders
Enhanced service BRT option supports fast single-seat ride to Downtown St. Louis
If paired with I-64 BRT, travel from North County to CWE and WestCounty would require only 1 transfer between 2 high-speed routes;currently requires multiple transfers and 2-3 local routes
W. FLORISSANTNATURAL BRIDGE BRT CONSUMER BENEFIT
20
8/13/2019 St. Louis BRT Recommendations Feb 2014
25/32
8/13/2019 St. Louis BRT Recommendations Feb 2014
26/32
CAPITAL COST
COST CATEGORY I-64 BRT
W. FLORISSANT -
NATURAL BRIDGEBRT
Guideway $1,771,000 $1,431,000Stations, Stops, Terminals $6,347,000 $7,030,000Support Facilities $0 $0
Sitework and Special Conditions $4,741,000 $3,504,000Systems $2,551,000 $3,239,000Right of Way, Land, Relocation $3,098,000 $847,000Vehicles $10,890,000 $14,025,000Professional Services $6,734,000 $7,169,000Subtotal $36,131,000 $37,245,000Unallocated Contingency $1,807,000 $1,862,000Total $37,938,000 $39,107,000Cost Per Mile $1,649,478 $2,444,188
22
8/13/2019 St. Louis BRT Recommendations Feb 2014
27/32
CAPITAL COST COMPARISON
I-64 BRT capital costs = $37.9 million / corridor Capital cost per boarding over 20 years approx. $1.24
West Florissant Natural Bridge BRT capital costs =$39.1 million / corridor Capital cost per boarding over 20 years approx. $2.04
Light rail capital costs = $600-800 million / corridor Capital cost per ML boardings over 20 years approx. $4.60
23
8/13/2019 St. Louis BRT Recommendations Feb 2014
28/32
OPERATING COST
SERVICE COST CATEGORY I-64 BRTW. FLORISSANT-NATURAL
BRIDGE BRTOperations $2,184,115 $1,708,105
40-ft.vehicle maintenance $2,200,594 $0
60-ft. vehicle maintenance $0 $1,737,026
Station cleaning & maintenance $175,000 $210,000
Park & ride pavement $40,500 $4,800*
TVM servicing $375,000 $450,000Fare collection $359,025 $280,779
TSP maintenance $126,000 $164,000
Total BRT O&M $5,460,234 $4,554,710
Operations $346,970 $0
40-ft vehicle maintenance $522,113 $0
Total Circulator O&M $869,083 $0
Operations ($1,143,519) ($1,208,957
40-ft. vehicle maintenance ($1,160,244) ($772,199
Total Local/Express O&M ($2,303,763) ($1,981,156)
Net O&M cost $4,025,554 $2,573,554
BRT service only
New Circulators
Changes toexistinglocal/expressservice
24
8/13/2019 St. Louis BRT Recommendations Feb 2014
29/32
8/13/2019 St. Louis BRT Recommendations Feb 2014
30/32
New capital and operating funding neededto support any expansion
Operations funding must be supportedlocally
Several options for capital support FTA Small Starts most logical path Competitiveness based on project rating
FUNDING PROGRAMS
26
8/13/2019 St. Louis BRT Recommendations Feb 2014
31/32
FTA NEW STARTS PROCESS
Discretionary program to fund: Fixed-guideway transit lines Core capacity projects Corridor-based BRT
Projects must receive aMedium rating or higher
MAP-21 requires BRT projects
now emulate rail: definedstations, frequent & bi-directional service, limitedstops, TSP, low wait times,etc. 27
8/13/2019 St. Louis BRT Recommendations Feb 2014
32/32
NEXT STEPS
Petition East West Gateway to amend Regional LongRange Transportation Plan (2040) to include BRT corridors.
Seek Guidance from FTA regarding project competitivenessand eligibility future federal funding Discussion will include whether these should be one project or two Discussion will also include what final attributes need to be included
to enhance project competitiveness.
28