• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
November 18 TWG Meeting Presentaion

November 18 TWG Meeting Presentaion






Total Views
Views on SlideShare
Embed Views



0 Embeds 0

No embeds


Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
Post Comment
Edit your comment
  • hgkjhgkjhgkjhgkhjg
  • Growth is primarily along major transportation corridors

November 18 TWG Meeting Presentaion November 18 TWG Meeting Presentaion Presentation Transcript

  • Transit Working GroupMeetingNovember 18, 20111:30 PM – 3:30 PM
  • 1) Welcome & Introductions2) Meeting Goals and Public Input Process  Project Connect Outline3) Regional Needs and Opportunities4) How High-Capacity Transit fits in CAMPO 2035  CAMPO 2035 Transportation Modes  High-Capacity Transit Modes  High-Capacity Transit Project Development & Status5) Citizen Comment6) Adjourn
  • • Review TWG topic outline• Understand transportation challenges and opportunities• TWG input sought • Challenge and opportunity statements
  • How will high-capacity transitcomponents in CAMPO 2035 plan work asa system? How will our regionorganize to develop and operate thesystem? How will we pay for the systemover the long term?
  • 1. CAMPO 2035 Transportation Plan overview2. Overview of Project Connect process, goals, and schedule3. Regional Problems, Needs, and Opportunities4. Transit planning process General agreement on problem statements and goals1. How high-capacity projects help to address problems and needs2. Identification of transit service gaps and service ideas General agreement on high-capacity transit as a choice for citizens Service gaps and new/modified transit service ideas to bring forward
  • 1. High-capacity transit system integration ideas2. Conceptual organization goals and approach General agreement on possible integration ideas and how high- capacity projects work together as a system1. Financial analysis and potential revenue and funding sources General agreement on conceptual approach to how we organize1. What does the draft high-capacity transit system look like?2. O&M costs for the alternatives. General agreement on funding – How do we pay for it?
  • 1. Discuss high-capacity transit project phasing and/or priorities General agreement on project phasing and/or priorities General agreement on work group comments/input1. Project Connect report complete
  • Bi-weekly (Nov, Dec), Monthly (Jan – Apr) Nov 18, May Dec 6, 8 & 9, Mar &May Dec 12, Mar & May Forum (Jan/Feb), asneeded www.connectcentraltexas.com
  • • Congestion• Core• Growth• Constraints• Centers
  • • Point 1• Point 2• Point 3• Point 4• Point 5 or more
  • What are the most important issues to addressto ensure a positive future for Central Texas?2008 ECT SurveyTransportation/Congestion 67%Land Use 34%Cost of Living 31%Water Availability 28%Air Quality 28%
  • Central Texas Person-Hours of 2010 US Worst Travel Time Indices Delay in 2009 (Millions) 1.47.0 1.366.05.0 1.324.0 1.241.0 1.2 - LA DC Mid 6 AM Noon 6 PM Mid Austin NYC San Fran • Our region tied with New York and San Francisco for 3rd worst Travel Time Index • Central Texans spend average 44 (ratio of rush hour travel time to free-flow hours/year stuck in traffic travel time) in US • Difference is LA, DC, NYC and San Francisco have options
  • Free Flow• Mobility contracts  Peak Flow during Peak Periods due to congestion Travel Time (Mins) 2.50 5.00 7.50 10.00 12.50 15.00 30 Minute Travel Distances 17.50 20.00 22.50 25.00 27.50 30.00 0 5 10 15 Miles
  • Free Flow Peak Flow Georgetown Georgetown And Kyle • Mobility contracts during Peak Periods due Peak Flow Kyle to congestion  Travel Time (Mins) 2.50 5.00 7.50 10.00 12.50 15.00 30 Minute Travel Distances 17.50 20.00 22.50 25.00 27.50 30.00 0 5 10 15 Miles
  • • IH-35: SH 71 to US 183• US 290: Mopac to RM 1826• Mopac: US 183 to US 290• US 183: Mopac to IH-35• SL 343: US 290 to IH-35• N. Lamar: US 183 to W. 8th St.• SL 360: US 290 to RM 2244• SL 360: US 183 to RM 2222• US 183: IH-35 to SH 71• FM 734: Mopac to Tech Ridge Blvd
  • Congestion• Core
  • • Over half a million vehicles enter and exit central Austin during a 24- hour period
  • • 2009: nearly 30% of all jobs in the Austin Region were located in 78701, 78703, 78704, 78705• 51,000 students at UT (80% live off campus) and approximately 9,000 at ACC’s Rio Grande campus downtown CBD Share of Total Urban Area• 2000: nearly 18% of all jobs in Employment Austin Region were located 20% downtown 18% 16%  4th highest % in the 14% nation! 12% 10%
  • CongestionCore• Growth
  • • Central Texas has received numerous accolades in recent years• Important relocation criteria for corporations: In 2010 Forbes named Austin – Good workforce connections 10th Best Place for Business & Career – Evidence that cities are doing everything possible to address In 2010 Kiplingers named Austin 1st in 10 congestion Best Cities for the Next Decade• Retention of existing regional In 2008 Kiplingers named Round Rock 6th In 2010 Monster.com named companies is key Best Place to Live/Work/Play Austin Best U.S. City for Jobs• 63% of existing companies in the region state transportation or access In 2008 Fortune Magazine named Georgetown Best Place to Launch a Small to transit as a concern Business (received only perfect score)
  • Employment Density (2005-2035) • Employment base will increase by 135% between 2005 and 2035 • Growth in employment primarily along major transportation corridors 3,000,000 2,000,000 1,000,000 Employment 1970 1980 1990 2000 2005 2015 2025 2035
  • Population Density (2005 -2035) • Between 2005 and 2035 our regional population is projected to increase by 123% • Population increase will result in additional 1.2M cars by 2035 3,000,000 2,000,000 1,000,000 Population 1970 1980 1990 2000 2005 2015 2025 2035
  • CongestionCoreGrowth• Constraints
  • Historic East Austin Oakwood Hargis Hall John W. Cemetery Mount Calvary Cemetery Palm Park Frank Erwin Center Austin Police HeadquartersUniversity Medical Center Brackenridge University of Texas Practice Facilities Mike Myers Stadium
  • CongestionCoreGrowthConstraints• Centers
  • Envision Regional Plans CAMPO Central • CAMPO 2035 Texas Austin Kyle • ECT Greenprint for Growth • Imagine Austin Comp Plan – Existing population in • Round Rock General Plan Centers: 16%; 2020Round Population Goal: 31% Pflugerville • Georgetown 2030 Comp CAMPO Rock by 2035 Plan – Existing employment • San Marcos Master Plan in Centers: 36%; • Kyle Comp Plan Employment Goal: San • Leander 2010 Comp Plan Leander Update 38% by 2035 Georgetown Marcos • Pflugerville 2030 Comp Plan – Center to Center trips
  • CongestionCoreGrowthConstraintsCenters
  • • Capacity deficit• Balanced transportation system• Fiscally constrained
  • • “Congestion proof”• Any form of public transit that has one or both of the following: 1. Dedicated lane/right-of-way for at least a portion of its route 2. transit priority• Fewer stops, higher speeds, more frequent service, carries more people
  • Regional Rail Commuter Rail Express Light RailDistance Bus on Managed Urban Rail Bus Rapid Speed Lanes Transit Local Bus Streetcar # of Stops Proximity to Origin and Destination
  • How Different Modes FitRegional RailCommuter RailUrban RailBus Rapid TransitExpress Bus on Managed Lanes
  • • Different types of high-capacity transit to addressthe region’s challenges• Selecting the right mix and types of high-capacitytransit is critical•The high-capacity mix works together as a system• Project Connect and the TWG are the means tohelp identify the best fit for our region
  • – big picture, corridors, likely projects – interconnectivity, organization, sequencing – alignments, consensus, funding basis –detailed, impacts, refined budget, schedule – really detailed, final budget, funding details – build, test – open to the public
  • Commuter Rail Congestion proof servicebetween NW, NC and East Austin todowntown core, connect major activitycenters, improve transit system, andsupport economic development Operational March 2010Phase I• 32 miles, 9 stations in operation• Meeting all targetsPhase II• Near, mid, long-term improvements• Capital Metro Rail Committee
  • •Ridership is meeting projections •More than 1,700 passenger trips each weekday •Up to 6,000 trips per day with weekend service FY 2011 Performance Goal Actual Measure On TimeScore 9.66 98% 99.12% Performance MetroRail Customer Satisfaction Index <2 .5 Vehicle Accidents <1 0 Passenger Accidents Customer <5 .36 Complaints/20,000 Miles Between < 5,000 15,000 Mechanical Failures
  • 500 1500 2000 2500 3000 1000 0Mar-10Apr-10May-10Jun-10Jul-10Aug-10Sep-10Oct-10Nov-10 starts All day serviceDec-10Jan-11Feb-11Mar-11Apr-11May-11Jun-11Jul-11Aug-11 nd weekends SXSW, nights, aSep-11Oct-11
  • • More than $90M in direct investment at MetroRail Stations to date
  • Bus Rapid Transit High quality, highcapacity and frequent service formajor corridors designed to attractnew riders while improving service toexisting customers Final Design, Route1:Open 2013; Route 2: Open 2014• Signal prioritization• 37.5 total route miles; 77 stops• 10 min peak / 15 min off peak• Route 1: N. Lamar – S. Congress• Route 2: Burnett – S. Lamar
  • Express Lanes Improve mobility, transitreliability, and emergency response inthe MoPac corridor Environmental Study andPublic Involvement underway• Add one Express Lane in each direction• Construction of sound walls• Un-tolled, reliable travel for public transit buses and registered vanpools
  • Urban Rail Connects regionalsystem to core employmentdestinations; Provides increasedcapacity; Implements city’splanning goals; Reinforces andaccelerates economic activity Conceptual engineeringcomplete, phasing inprogress, environmental impactstatement in progress
  • • 16.5 miles double track• Electric powered• In-street running and dedicated track way• Compatible with urban form/geometry• Phased and Expandable
  • Regional Rail Connects majormetropolitan areas; very high capacity;can be built in existing railroadcorridors, and can operate mixed withfreight trains Environmental Impact Studyand Alternatives Analysis• 117 miles• 16 stations• 20 round trips per day• 90 maximum operating speed• Will connect with Urban Rail and San Antonio Streetcar systems
  • To Be Determined Substantial population andemployment growth coupled with limitedtransportation options Alternatives analysis to start in 2012• Transportation improvements to be considered include: – Upgrades and/or extension to the existing MetroRail Red Line – New Rail Line – Implementation of BRT – Roadway Improvements• Integral to this study is a review and refinement of the CAMPO travel demand model (currently underway) 50
  • • Different challenges within region require a multimodal and balanced transportation solution• The region’s high-capacity transit system is comprised of a range of modes that complement each other
  • • Central Texas transportation corridors• High-capacity transit projects in corridors• Integrated organization for high capacity transit system
  • • 15 minutes allotted• 3 minutes per speaker• Speakers heard in reverse order of previous meeting
  • Meeting AdjournedNext Meeting December 2, 20111:30 PM - 3:30 PMCity Hall, City of Austin