Northeast Corridor      Alternatives Analysis       Public Involvement–Round 2Input on Alternatives for Further Study     ...
Agenda Review project background Progress summary Recommended alternatives for further evaluation Get your input!     ...
Housekeeping Items Silence all cell phones. Be considerate of all meeting attendees and COTA staff. When it is your tur...
The Northeast Corridor Existing transit facilities in  corridor    Transit Centers—Linden      and Easton    P&R—Northe...
Northeast Corridor Project COTA is seeking to:    Identify improved transit alternatives in the corridor.    Address tr...
FTA New Start Program Very Small Starts Criteria:    Stations (more amenities than a     typical bus stop)    Signal pr...
What is Very Small Starts Process? Analysis is first step in the federal process to get project funding    Existing cond...
Purpose and Need, Project GoalsThe project’s purpose and vision are:    To expand and improve mass transit’s role and con...
Project Outreach Working group Stakeholder/community leader group Area leader interviews Public meetings Other    St...
Northeast Corridor AA Progress Round 1 Public Involvement meetings    Introduced project    Presented existing conditio...
Existing Conditions Analysis Need to connect population to  jobs Major destinations    Downtown    Columbus State    ...
Development of Alternatives  Mode                        Terminal              Alignment                  Alternative     ...
Potential Transit ModesHeavy Rail Transit            HOV Bus                      BRT—Separated GuidewayLimited Stop Bus  ...
Evaluation of Transit Modes Potential transit modes were evaluated based on suitability for study  area, as determined by...
Screening of Transit ModesHeavy Rail Transit             HOV Bus                     BRT—Separated GuidewayLimited Stop Bu...
Mode Evaluation SummaryMode                  EvaluationHOV Bus               Freeway service would not serve key corridor ...
Recommendation: Mode to Evaluate                   Bus Rapid Transit—                       Mixed Traffic                 ...
What is Bus Rapid Transit (BRT)? A mix of characteristics:    Special branding        • Unique name and identity     Fa...
Example Benefits of BRT—Kansas City MAX BRTBefore MAX BRT (Troost Line, October 2010): Weekday average—7,600 boardingsAft...
Evaluation of Terminal Locations Many potential  terminal stations  consideredMode     Alignment    Terminal             ...
Evaluation of Alignments/Terminal Locations  Potential alignment/termini combinations were evaluated     Goal 1: Transit...
Evaluation of Alignments Many alignments considered  and screened    Alignments connecting to     Easton                ...
Evaluation of Alignments Many alignments considered  and screened    Alignments connecting to     Easton    Karl Road  ...
Evaluation of Alignments Many alignments considered  and screened    Alignments connecting to     Easton    Karl Road  ...
Evaluation of Alignments Many alignments considered  and screened    Alignments connecting to     Easton    Karl Road  ...
Recommendation: Alternatives for Further Screening Bus Rapid Transit in Mixed  Traffic    Cleveland Avenue from     Down...
Next Steps Alternatives Analysis remaining schedule                                  Feb   Mar    Apr      May    Jun   J...
Contact Information Mike McCann  Bus Rapid Transit Project Manager  MccannMJ@cota.com Tim Rosenberger  Project Manager  ...
Thank You            Comments and questions?                                      29
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

COTA NE AA Public Meeting Presentation

502 views
404 views

Published on

COTA’s Cleveland Ave. / Northeast Corridor Alternatives Analysis (NECAA) Project aims to provide faster, more convenient and more comfortable transit service, and improve bus stop amenities in the Cleveland Avenue corridor. Come to one of our public meetings to learn about alternatives being considered and give us your input!

Published in: Business
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
502
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
4
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

COTA NE AA Public Meeting Presentation

  1. 1. Northeast Corridor Alternatives Analysis Public Involvement–Round 2Input on Alternatives for Further Study Feb. 7-9, 2012
  2. 2. Agenda Review project background Progress summary Recommended alternatives for further evaluation Get your input! 2
  3. 3. Housekeeping Items Silence all cell phones. Be considerate of all meeting attendees and COTA staff. When it is your turn to make a comment or ask a question, remain at your seat and we will call upon you. Comments and questions are limited to two minutes per person. Ask one question at a time so the appropriate staff member may address your comment. 3
  4. 4. The Northeast Corridor Existing transit facilities in corridor  Transit Centers—Linden and Easton  P&R—Northern Lights, Westerville Cleveland Avenue  Second busiest route— 5,000 daily riders  Often has standing loads COTA awarded federal grant to study transit improvements November 2010 Study began September 2011 4
  5. 5. Northeast Corridor Project COTA is seeking to:  Identify improved transit alternatives in the corridor.  Address transportation needs in the corridor. • On-time performance/service reliability • Connections to jobs • Streetscape improvements Terminal Mode Alignment Alternative Station 5
  6. 6. FTA New Start Program Very Small Starts Criteria:  Stations (more amenities than a typical bus stop)  Signal priority/pre-emption  low-floor vehicles  Special branding of service  Frequent service (10 minute peak, 15 minute off peak)  Service at least 14 hours per day  Existing ridership is over 3,000 trips per day  Less than $50 million total cost Kansas City Max Line  Less than $3 million per mile Cleveland Avenue meets these funding requirements 6
  7. 7. What is Very Small Starts Process? Analysis is first step in the federal process to get project funding  Existing conditions/project need  Develop, screen, evaluate alternatives  Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) FTA approval required: Project Construction FTA approval Grant Agreement required (PCGA) Alternatives Project Construction Operation Analysis Development 1 Year 1-2 Years 1-2 Years 3-5 Years 7
  8. 8. Purpose and Need, Project GoalsThe project’s purpose and vision are:  To expand and improve mass transit’s role and contribution to the overall livability, sustainability and economic vitality of the Northeast corridor and the central Ohio region through faster and more-convenient transit service and improved amenities for mass transit users.Project goals:  Goal 1: Transit level of service improvements  Goal 2: Sustain and enhance economic vitality  Goal 3: Promote livability principles  Goal 4: Develop a financially feasible project 8
  9. 9. Project Outreach Working group Stakeholder/community leader group Area leader interviews Public meetings Other  Stakeholder presentations  On-line survey (survey also available in Spanish, Somali)  Comment cards  Social media First round of public outreach: November 2011 Current round of public outreach: February 2012 9
  10. 10. Northeast Corridor AA Progress Round 1 Public Involvement meetings  Introduced project  Presented existing conditions  Defined goals, purpose and need Completed Purpose and Need/Existing Conditions report Initiated environmental documentation Initiated preliminary screening of alternatives Continued coordination with City, County and other agencies 10
  11. 11. Existing Conditions Analysis Need to connect population to jobs Major destinations  Downtown  Columbus State  Easton  St. Ann’s—Westerville Population  West of Cleveland Avenue, north and south of Morse Road 11
  12. 12. Development of Alternatives Mode Terminal Alignment Alternative Station 12
  13. 13. Potential Transit ModesHeavy Rail Transit HOV Bus BRT—Separated GuidewayLimited Stop Bus Commuter Rail BRT—Mixed TrafficLRT/Streetcar—Mixed Traffic Automated Guideway Transit LRT—Separated Guideway 13
  14. 14. Evaluation of Transit Modes Potential transit modes were evaluated based on suitability for study area, as determined by:  Number of passengers to be carried  Passengers making short or long trips  Travel speed  Space between stops/stations  Typical cost per mile to build and operate  Lane use and right-of-way considerations 14
  15. 15. Screening of Transit ModesHeavy Rail Transit HOV Bus BRT—Separated GuidewayLimited Stop Bus Commuter Rail BRT—Mixed TrafficLRT/Streetcar—Mixed Traffic Automated Guideway Transit LRT—Separated Guideway 15
  16. 16. Mode Evaluation SummaryMode EvaluationHOV Bus Freeway service would not serve key corridor trip purposes; Columbus area has no HOV lanesBRT—Guideway Insufficient right-of-way in key corridor alignments; excessive capital cost per mileLimited Stop Bus No real-time arrival information, traffic signal priority, street, sidewalk or other capital improvements, lack of passenger amenities and little time savingsLRT/Streetcar—Mixed Anticipated ridership does not match high capital cost per mile; canTraffic complicate traffic patternsLRT—Guideway Insufficient right-of-way in key corridor alignments; excessive capital cost per mileHeavy Rail Transit Higher capacity than warranted given corridor characteristics; excessive capital cost per mileCommuter Rail Typical station spacing is inappropriate for corridor service needs; high costs and right-of-way requirementsAutomatic Guideway Higher capacity than warranted given corridor characteristics; excessive 16Transit capital cost per mile
  17. 17. Recommendation: Mode to Evaluate Bus Rapid Transit— Mixed Traffic TerminalMode Alignment Alternative Station 17
  18. 18. What is Bus Rapid Transit (BRT)? A mix of characteristics:  Special branding • Unique name and identity  Faster service • Fewer stops • Signal priority • Dedicated lane during peaks  Frequent service Kansas City Max Line • 10 min peak/15 min off peak  Service offered most of the day  Enhanced passenger amenities • Real-time information • Enhanced stations • Off-board fare collection 18
  19. 19. Example Benefits of BRT—Kansas City MAX BRTBefore MAX BRT (Troost Line, October 2010): Weekday average—7,600 boardingsAfter MAX BRT: Service hours increased approximately 5-6 percent Weekday average—8,400 boardings (Up 10.3 percent) MAX quality rated 15 percent higher than regular bus service 23 percent of MAX riders new to transit 55 percent rated MAX excellent 69 percent ―definitely recommend‖ MAX (55 percent for regular service) 19
  20. 20. Evaluation of Terminal Locations Many potential terminal stations consideredMode Alignment Terminal Station Alternative 20
  21. 21. Evaluation of Alignments/Terminal Locations  Potential alignment/termini combinations were evaluated  Goal 1: Transit level of service improvements • Ridership on existing COTA routes • Connections to other COTA routes  Goal 2: Sustain and enhance economic vitality • Development strength of northern terminal • Alignment of job and population density • Potential for TOD/redevelopment  Goal 3: Promote livability principles • Serve low-income/minority communities • Neighborhood livability • Environmental impact • Bicycle connections  Goal 4: Develop a financially feasible project • Overall alignment length 21
  22. 22. Evaluation of Alignments Many alignments considered and screened  Alignments connecting to Easton Cleveland Avenue south of Fifth Avenue— same for all alternatives TerminalMode Alignment Station Alternative 22
  23. 23. Evaluation of Alignments Many alignments considered and screened  Alignments connecting to Easton  Karl Road Cleveland Avenue south of Fifth Avenue— same for all alternatives TerminalMode Alignment Station Alternative 23
  24. 24. Evaluation of Alignments Many alignments considered and screened  Alignments connecting to Easton  Karl Road  Cleveland Avenue South of I-270 Cleveland Avenue south of Fifth Avenue— same for all alternatives TerminalMode Alignment Station Alternative 24
  25. 25. Evaluation of Alignments Many alignments considered and screened  Alignments connecting to Easton  Karl Road  Cleveland Avenue South of I-270  Cleveland Avenue North of I-270 Cleveland Avenue south of Fifth Avenue— same for all alternatives TerminalMode Alignment Station Alternative 25
  26. 26. Recommendation: Alternatives for Further Screening Bus Rapid Transit in Mixed Traffic  Cleveland Avenue from Downtown to: • Easton via Morse • SR 161 via Morse/Karl • SR 161 • Westerville Park and Ride Cleveland Avenue south of Morse Road— same for all alternatives TerminalMode Alignment Station Alternative 26
  27. 27. Next Steps Alternatives Analysis remaining schedule Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Public Outreach Evaluate Alternatives Recommended Alternative Board Consideration of LPA Public Meeting Project development/construction—2013-2016 27
  28. 28. Contact Information Mike McCann Bus Rapid Transit Project Manager MccannMJ@cota.com Tim Rosenberger Project Manager Rosenberger@pbworld.com COTA Customer Service: (614) 228-1776 For more information and to provide feedback, go to www.cota.com. 28
  29. 29. Thank You Comments and questions? 29

×