EAST-WEST CORRIDOR HIGH CAPACITY TRANSIT PLAN INITIAL SCREENING
CENTRAL OHIO TRANSIT AUTHORITY REVISION #2 March 23, 2021
PREPARED FOR: Central Ohio Transit Authority 33 N. High St. Columbus, Ohio 43215
PREPARED BY: AECOM 277 W Nationwide Blvd Columbus, OH 43215 INITIAL SCREENING
REVISIONS
REVISION NO. DATE PREPARED BY 0 January 5, 2021 AECOM – Poindexter
1 February 1, 2021 AECOM – Poindexter
2 March 23, 2021 AECOM – Poindexter
EAST-WEST CORRIDOR HIGH CAPACITY TRANSIT PLAN page | ii INITIAL SCREENING
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. Introduction 1-1 1.1 Project Description ...... 1-1 1.2 Evaluation Process ...... 1-3 1.3 Summary of Evaluation Criteria ...... 1-4
2. Modal Screening 2-1 2.1 Modes Considered ...... 2-1 2.2 Modal Evaluation ...... 2-3 2.2.1 Corridor Fit ...... 2-3 2.2.2 Ridership Capacity ...... 2-4 2.2.3 Capital Cost per Mile ...... 2-4 2.2.4 Operating Cost per Hour ...... 2-5 2.2.5 Availability of Right-of-Way ...... 2-6 2.3 Mode Recommended ...... 2-7
3. Alignment Screening 3-1 3.1 Alignments Considered ...... 3-1 3.2 Alignment Evaluation ...... 3-3 3.2.1 Existing Ridership...... 3-3 3.2.2 Right-of-Way Availability...... 3-5 3.2.3 Connections to Existing and Planned HCT Corridors ...... 3-6 3.2.4 Employment Served ...... 3-8 3.2.5 Non-Employment Trip Generators Served ...... 3-10 3.2.6 Population Density ...... 3-13 3.2.7 Minority Population Served ...... 3-16 3.2.8 Population Living in Poverty Served ...... 3-18 3.2.9 Zero-Vehicle Households Served ...... 3-20 3.2.10 Legally Binding Affordable Housing Units Served ...... 3-22 3.3 Alignment Recommendations ...... 3-25
EAST-WEST CORRIDOR HIGH CAPACITY TRANSIT PLAN page | i INITIAL SCREENING
FIGURES
Figure 1. LinkUS Corridor Projects ...... 1-1 Figure 2: East-West HCT Corridor Study Area...... 1-2 Figure 3: East-West HCT Corridor Study Area Segmentation ...... 1-3 Figure 4. Examples of Modes Considered ...... 2-1 Figure 5. Mode Evaluation Criteria ...... 2-3 Figure 6. Modes for Detailed Definition and Evaluation of Alternatives ...... 2-7 Figure 7: Alignments Considered ...... 3-2 Figure 8: Downtown Columbus Alignments Considered ...... 3-2 Figure 9: Ridership in the West Corridor Study Area ...... 3-4 Figure 10: Ridership in Downtown Columbus ...... 3-4 Figure 11: Ridership in the East Corridor Study Area...... 3-5 Figure 12: Frequent Routes Intersected...... 3-7 Figure 13: Employment Density in the West Corridor Study Area ...... 3-9 Figure 14: Employment Density in Downtown Columbus ...... 3-9 Figure 15: Employment Density in the East Corridor Study Area ...... 3-10 Figure 16: Trip Generators in the West Corridor Study Area ...... 3-11 Figure 17: Trip Generators in Downtown Columbus...... 3-12 Figure 18: Trip Generators in the East Corridor Study Area ...... 3-12 Figure 19: Population Density in the West Corridor Study Area ...... 3-14 Figure 20: Population Density in Downtown Columbus ...... 3-14 Figure 21: Population Density in the East Corridor Study Area ...... 3-15 Figure 22: Minority Population in the West Corridor Study Area ...... 3-17 Figure 23: Minority Population in Downtown Columbus ...... 3-17 Figure 24: Minority Population in the East Corridor Study Area...... 3-18 Figure 25: Population in Poverty in the West Corridor Study Area ...... 3-19 Figure 26: Population in Poverty in Downtown Columbus ...... 3-19 Figure 27: Population in Poverty in the East Corridor Study Area ...... 3-20 Figure 28: Zero-Vehicle Households in the West Corridor Study Area ...... 3-21 Figure 29: Zero-Vehicle Households in Downtown Columbus ...... 3-21 Figure 30: Zero-Vehicle Households in the East Corridor Study Area ...... 3-22 Figure 31: Affordable Housing in the West Corridor ...... 3-23 Figure 32: Affordable Housing in Downtown Columbus ...... 3-24 Figure 33: Affordable Housing in the East Corridor Study Area...... 3-24
EAST-WEST CORRIDOR HIGH CAPACITY TRANSIT PLAN page | ii INITIAL SCREENING
TABLES
Table 1. Project Goals and Initial Screening Evaluation Criteria ...... 1-5 Table 2. Modes Under Consideration by Characteristic ...... 2-2 Table 3. Corridor Fit Evaluation ...... 2-3 Table 4. Ridership Evaluation (2019) ...... 2-4 Table 5. Cost per Mile Screening Results (2020$)*...... 2-5 Table 6. Operating Cost per Hour by Mode (FY 2019) ...... 2-6 Table 7. Availability of Right-of-Way Evaluation ...... 2-6 Table 8. Summary Results of the Initial Screening of Modes ...... 2-7 Table 9: Ridership Evaluation (2019) ...... 3-3 Table 10: Right-of-Way Availability Evaluation ...... 3-6 Table 11: Transit Connections Evaluation ...... 3-7 Table 12: Employment Evaluation ...... 3-8 Table 13: Trip Generator Evaluation ...... 3-11 Table 14: Population Density Evaluation...... 3-13 Table 15: Projected Population Growth Evaluation ...... 3-15 Table 16: Minority Population Evaluation ...... 3-16 Table 17: Population Living in Poverty Evaluation ...... 3-18 Table 18: Zero-Vehicle Household Evaluation ...... 3-20 Table 19: Affordable Housing Evaluation ...... 3-23 Table 20: Summary Results of the Initial Screening of Alignments ...... 3-1
EAST-WEST CORRIDOR HIGH CAPACITY TRANSIT PLAN page | iii INITIAL SCREENING
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Project Description The East-West High Capacity Transit Corridor Plan (“East-West HCT Corridor”) is part of the LinkUS Mobility initiative, Central Ohio’s transformational and comprehensive prosperity and mobility initiative. The LinkUS Mobility initiative is a continuation of COTA’s NextGen Plan and Central Ohio’s insight2050 Report and Corridor Concepts vision to thoughtfully prepare our region as it grows from 2 million to 3 million people by 2050.
LinkUS will provide equitable mobility options for residents and visitors, ensure access to jobs and affordable housing, promote economic growth and improve sustainability. The innovative approach will include high capacity and advanced rapid transit, bikeways, green space, roadways, pedestrian improvements, and Southeast development along key regional corridors throughout Central Ohio.
LinkUS seeks to provide a complete mobility system along six key Figure 1. LinkUS Corridor Projects regional corridors. The Northwest Corridor is currently underway and through the first phase of implementation analysis. This study seeks to advance the East-West HCT Corridor, the second corridor underway. LinkUS corridor identifies the following corridors for future initiatives - the North Corridor, Northeast Corridor, Southeast Corridor, and Airport-Easton Corridor (Figure 1). In 2018, the Central Ohio Transit Authority (COTA) made improvements to the Northeast Corridor by implementing its first Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) service along Cleveland Avenue - the CMAX. Future improvements will build off the CMAX’s and Northeast Corridor progress.
COTA is the lead local agency and is partnering in the East-West HCT Corridor with the cities of Columbus, Bexley, Whitehall and Reynoldsburg; Prairie, Franklin and Jefferson Townships; Franklin County; and Mid-Ohio Regional Planning Commission (MORPC) (Figure 2). This collaboration strives to implement affordable housing, transportation and development policies that support inward, focused growth that spurs job growth and a high quality of life. The selection of mode, the preferred alignment, and termini for the East-West HCT Corridor will ultimately lead to the adoption of a community-supported Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) that is optimized for implementation.
The East-West HCT Corridor study area spans: u West Broad Street from Galloway Road to Downtown Columbus; u The Downtown Columbus area and Central Business District; and u East Broad Street/East Main Street from Downtown Columbus to the Franklin-Licking County boundary.
EAST-WEST CORRIDOR HIGH CAPACITY TRANSIT PLAN page | 1-1 INITIAL SCREENING
Figure 2: East-West HCT Corridor Study Area
The East-West HCT Corridor study area has been organized into 10 defined segments, shown in Figure 3. The study area is divided into segments to simplify the alternative definition and evaluation process. This segmentation will facilitate the identification and comparison of various design configurations through the modular organization of data. Consistent data collection and analyses will be applied along the full length of the corridor study area, but the results will be reported in segments, where possible. These segments represent natural breakpoints in either corridor development character or right-of-way geometry.
EAST-WEST CORRIDOR HIGH CAPACITY TRANSIT PLAN page | 1-2 INITIAL SCREENING
Figure 3: East-West HCT Corridor Study Area Segmentation
1.2 Evaluation Process In order to evaluate the different transit modes and alignment options and identify the appropriate mode- alignment pairings that will define the detailed alternatives, the East West HCT Corridor Study will follow a two- step method. u The first step (“Initial Screening”) will entail the assessment of modes and initial alignments relative to overall implementation viability. u The second step (“Detailed Evaluation”) will assess the mode/alignment pairings that passed the Initial Screening and select a Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) that fares best against the detailed criteria. The evaluation criteria associated with each step are a combination of quantitative and qualitative performance measures. Note that each successive step builds upon the criteria from the previous step, ensuring a consistent rating throughout. The Initial Screening phase will apply fewer and broader measures, including information from previous corridor studies. Each mode and alignment in the Initial Screening phase will be evaluated with a series of criterion. Modes and alignment criteria are given a rating of “best”, “good”, “fair”, or “poor”. Any mode or alignment that receives one or more “poor” ratings will be removed from consideration in the Detailed Evaluation. The Detailed Evaluation phase will apply more and finer performance measures and will result in the selection of an LPA. Throughout the evaluation process, both stakeholders (Technical Group, Stakeholder Group,
EAST-WEST CORRIDOR HIGH CAPACITY TRANSIT PLAN page | 1-3 INITIAL SCREENING
and LinkUS Mobility Corridors Executive Group) and the public will be engaged through one-on-one and public meetings, social media, surveys and other engagement. This two-step process will result in the identification of an LPA that not only meets locally identified project purpose and needs, but aligns with the way people want to move about and ultimately how they live and thrive, and is competitive for federal funding. The Detailed Evaluation methodology and results, organized into a series of technical memoranda, include the following:
u Transit Travel Demand
u Capital Costs
u Operating and Maintenance Costs
u Transportation & Parking Analysis
u Environmental Analysis
u Economic Development Opportunity
1.3 Summary of Evaluation Criteria In the Purpose and Need Report, a series of purpose and need statements were developed to support the evaluation of transit investment alternatives within the East-West HCT Corridor study area. Additionally, the Purpose and Need Report outlined a series of needs, goals, and objectives which have been utilized to develop the evaluation criteria for the modes and alignments under consideration.
Table 1 outlines the East-West HCT Corridor project goals and summarizes the evaluation criteria for both mode and alignment evaluation that will be addressed in the first step - Initial Screening. The remaining goals not incorporated in the Initial Screening will be considered in the second step - the Detailed Evaluation, and additional evaluation criteria will be applied only to the modes and alignments recommended to advance forward.
EAST-WEST CORRIDOR HIGH CAPACITY TRANSIT PLAN page | 1-4 INITIAL SCREENING
Table 1. Project Goals and Initial Screening Evaluation Criteria1
East-West HCT Corridor Project Goals High capacity transit that transit capacity High the meets efficiently demand. to connections Easy corridors. HCT planned support Community through Implementable programs. FTA existing and service reliable More times. travel shorter a greater Provide Ohio of Central proportion to access with residents through services and jobs transit. to ability residents Expand to go need they get where a car. without adverse Minimize impacts. environmental to access improved Provide core and employment minorities, for services poverty, in living persons access without persons and automobile. an to on service transit Focus nodes. community existing and infill planned Support the along redevelopment corridor. housing affordable Retain character. community and
Corridor Fit X Ridership Capacity X Capital Cost per Mile X
Criteria Operating Cost per Hour X Availability of Right-of-Way Mode Evaluation Mode X Existing Ridership X Availability of Right-of-Way X Connections to existing & X planned HCT Corridors a Community Support X Corridor Employment X Served Corridor Non-Employment X trip generators served Population Density X Corridor % population Detailed Evaluation Criteria Detailed Evaluation Criteria Detailed Evaluation Criteria Detailed Evaluation Criteria Detailed Evaluation X Criteria Detailed Evaluation Criteria Detailed Evaluation served that is minority Corridor % population X served living in poverty Alignment Evaluation Criteri Evaluation Alignment Corridor % population X without access to a car Corridor Legally Binding X X Affordable Housing Units Served
1 The Initial Screening criteria applies fewer and broader measures relative to the overall implementation viability. The next phase, the Detailed Evaluation, will apply additional criteria that assess the mode/alignment pairing(s) that passed the Initial Screening as outlined in this document
EAST-WEST CORRIDOR HIGH CAPACITY TRANSIT PLAN page | 1-5 INITIAL SCREENING
2. MODAL SCREENING
2.1 Modes Considered The first step of the Initial Screening was to identify the modes that are appropriate for the East-West HCT Corridor and to screen out those modes that do not meet the needs of the corridor. COTA’s NextGen Plan Vision and MORPC’s insight2050 Corridor Concepts Study identified a few potential HCT modes including, but not limited to Bus Rapid Transit (BRT), Light Rail Transit (LRT), Streetcar, and Commuter Rail service (Figure 4). The modes under consideration and their associated characteristics are outlined in Table 2. In order to offer a point of comparison, modes will be compared to COTA’s existing transit network, specifically the portions of Route 2 and Route 10 in the East-West Corridor.
Figure 4. Examples of Modes Considered
Bus Rapid Transit Light Rail Transit Modern Streetcar Commuter Rail
Source: Photo’s Courtesy Transit Agency Public Access Photo streams from left to right: The Rapid Laker Line, Valley Metro LRT, Kansas City Streetcar, and Metro Transit Northstar Line.
During mode discussions for the East-West HCT Corridor, MORPC and COTA identified Hyperloop, Monorail, and Heavy Rail as potential HCT modes; however, none of these modes were included in formal corridor plans (i.e. insight2050 or NextGen). u In 2019, as part of MORPC’s Rapid-Speed Transportation Initiative (RSTI), MORPC conducted a feasibility study of Hyperloop technology for the region. Only recently, in November 2020 did the company leading Hyperloop technology conduct its first test of Hyperloop with actual passengers. However, before Hyperloop can be implemented in the Central Ohio Region key milestones will need to be met including the certification of the technology itself as well the system development regulations. The Hyperloop corridor studied spans roughly 525 miles – a corridor with a span 21 times longer than the proposed East-West HCT Corridor study area.
u Monorail and Heavy Rail were removed from the universe of modes for evaluation due to the high capital cost per mile exceeding $250 and $370 million, respectively. Additionally, Monorail has a historically low rate of implementation in the United States and high operating costs per hour (up to $530). Monorails in the United States have also not been federally funded and are either privately funded or fully funded by designated local sources. While Hyperloop, Monorail, and Heavy Rail were identified as potential HCT modes, at this time, these modes cannot reasonably or feasibly be evaluated in direct comparison to the other modes identified; therefore, these three modes will not be defined as distinct modes in the initial screening or detailed evaluation for the East-West HCT Corridor.
EAST-WEST CORRIDOR HIGH CAPACITY TRANSIT PLAN page | 2-1 INITIAL SCREENING
Table 2. Modes Under Consideration by Characteristic Mode Choices Service Frequency Typical Range of Right-of-Way Typical Station Vehicle Types Technology/Other Corridor Operating Spacing Length Speed Existing East- Frequent 15 -minute service 20 Miles 12 – 15 MPH Mixed Traffic Stops spacing varies Single (40-foot) COTA Connector-Cash-less West HCT all day Operations between 1/8 mile to low-floor CNG smart card. Corridor 1/2 mile buses Web-Based Alerts for Transit Service Schedules & Real-Time Info by cellphone
Bus Rapid Frequent 10- minute service in 5 – 25 Miles 25 – 55 MPH Dedicated Lanes Level boarding at 40 or 60-foot In person “Real time” bus Transit (BRT) peak; 15 -20 minutes in off And/or high-quality stations buses that have arrival information peak. Mixed traffic multiple doors available ½ and one mile Traffic signal apart priority for transit Off-board fare payment vehicles Light Rail Frequent 10-minute service in 10 – 20 Miles 30 – 55 MPH Dedicated lanes Level boarding at 1 to 3 car trains In person “Real time” Transit (LRT) peak; 15-20 minutes in off with overhead high-quality stations vehicle arrival information peak. electrical systems Low-floor vehicle; available Every 1 to 2 miles Traffic signal apart priority for transit Off-board fare payment vehicles
Streetcar Frequent 10-minute service in 2 – 5 miles 20 – 45 MPH Mixed traffic with Level boarding at 1-2 car trains In person “Real time” peak; 15-20 minutes in off overhead high-quality stations Low-floor vehicle vehicle arrival information peak. electrical systems Traffic signal available Stops spaced priority for transit ¼ - ⅓ mile apart vehicles Off-board fare payment
Commuter Rail Frequent in peak 25 – 80 Miles 30 – 55 MPH Exclusive right-of- Stations are typically Heavy rail using In person “Real time” (10 – 30 Minutes); infrequent way, often on every electrified or vehicle arrival information in off peak. existing rail lines 5 – 10 miles diesel trains; Up to available 5 trains Off-board fare payment Sources: COTA; APTA Recommended Practices; National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO); National Transit Database
EAST-WEST CORRIDOR HIGH CAPACITY TRANSIT PLAN page | 2-2 INITIAL SCREENING
2.2 Modal Evaluation This analysis is structured to efficiently identify the HCT modes that do not meet the East-West HCT Corridor project’s purpose and need or goals and objectives and to remove them from further consideration in future phases of the project. A series of evaluation criteria were developed to assess each of the modes’ ability to meet the stated project purpose and the needs of the East-West HCT Corridor and ultimately be competitive for federal funding. The evaluation criteria for the modal evaluation are outlined in Figure 5. The evaluation criteria for mode choices were identified to align the mode with the project goals, specifically for high capacity transit that effectively meets the demand. Each mode was evaluated for each criterion and given a rating of “best”, “good”, “fair”, or “poor”. Any mode that receives one or more “poor” ratings will be removed from consideration in future phases of evaluation. For each evaluation criteria, modes were assigned a rating based on order of magnitude when comparing each mode against each other.
Figure 5. Mode Evaluation Criteria
Ridership Capital Cost per Operating Cost Availability of Corridor Fit Capacity Mile per Hour Right-of-Way
2.2.1 Corridor Fit The mode selected for the planned East-West HCT Corridor should align with the characteristics of the corridor, specifically station spacing and length of the corridor. Currently, COTA’s existing bus service operates within a 20 mile long corridor with bus stops between 1/8 to 1/2 mile apart (Table 3).
Overall Corridor Fit Assessment: BRT received a rating of “best” for its alignment with average length of the corridor and frequency of bus stops. LRT received a “good” rating for range of corridor length; however, with typical LRT station spacing, fewer people have direct access to the service. The Modern Streetcar and Commuter Rail both received a rating of “poor”. In the case of the streetcar the stops are too frequent and for commuter rail the length of the corridor typically served far exceeds the extent of the East-West HCT Corridor study area and requires existing and protected railroad through the length of the corridor, which is not available.
Table 3. Corridor Fit Evaluation Mode Range of Corridor Average Project Station Spacing Overall Lengths in Miles Length* Assessment East-West Corridor 20 miles N/A Every 1/8 to 1/2 mile – BRT 5 to 25 Miles 16 miles Every ½ to 1 mile Best LRT 10 to 20 Miles 15 miles Every 1 to 2 miles Good Modern Streetcar 2 to 5 miles 4 miles Every 1/8 to ¼ mile Poor Commuter Rail 25 to 80 Miles 38 miles Every 2 to 5 miles Poor Source: National Association of City Transportation Officials; FTA Capital Investment Grants Project Profiles
EAST-WEST CORRIDOR HIGH CAPACITY TRANSIT PLAN page | 2-3 INITIAL SCREENING
2.2.2 Ridership Capacity Matching a mode’s ridership capacity and future ridership potential are important criteria in mode selection. A mode that receives a “best” rating provides capacity to meet the needs of COTA’s existing ridership but also allows for future expansion in ridership as population is expected to grow by 2040, while not providing excess capacity. For this evaluation each mode outlines vehicle capacity and the average number of weekday riders based on peer analysis (Table 4). As a point of comparison, COTA existing routes, Route 2 and Route 10, span the length of the East-West HCT Corridor study area. Ridership on existing Route 2 and Route 10 along West Broad Street is 3,400, along East Broad Street is 3,400, and along East Main Street is 4,100. COTA’s existing buses are between 35 feet and 40 feet long with a vehicle capacity of 30 to 50 passengers. When high capacity transit is implemented, on average, ridership grows between 20 percent and 40 percent. For comparison, after the implementation of COTA’s first bus rapid transit line – the CMAX – ridership on that route increased by 20 percent.
Overall Ridership Assessment: For the ridership capacity evaluation, BRT and Commuter Rail scored “best” compared to other modes because each mode had the capacity to accommodate COTA’s existing ridership and future ridership growth. LRT and Streetcar both received a poor rating because the number of riders per average weekday either far exceeded or was too far below both the current ridership and anticipated ridership capacity for the East-West HCT Corridor.
Table 4. Ridership Evaluation (2019) Mode Vehicle Capacity Number of Riders per Overall Capacity Considerations Average Weekday Ridership Assessment BRT 48 - 75 Passengers Varies Depending 4,000 – 15,000* Best on Vehicle Size LRT 170 - 225 passengers Capacity based per 20,000 – 90,000 Poor car; Up to 3 cars per Train Streetcar 120 - 150 passengers Per Car; Up to 2 1,500 – 6,000 Poor cars per Train Commuter Rail 140 - 400 passengers Capacity based per 3,000 – 20,000 Best car; Up to 5 cars per Train *Approximate average weekday riders for COTA’s CMAX in 2019 was 4,200 Source: National Transit Database; FY 2019 Annual Ridership Reports for Selected Peer Agencies
2.2.3 Capital Cost per Mile For the second mode evaluation, a qualitative assessment of the financial viability of implementing each of the transit modes was determined by reviewing typical per-mile capital costs (Table 5). The FTA provides the status of projects in Project Profiles which are in various stages of project development as outlined by FTA’s Capital
EAST-WEST CORRIDOR HIGH CAPACITY TRANSIT PLAN page | 2-4 INITIAL SCREENING
Investment Program. Peers were selected from the FY 2020 list of project profiles in order to determine the capital cost of the project as well as the length in miles of the proposed project by mode.
In order to compare capital cost ranges across modes, all capital cost dollars were inflated to 2020, which accounts for previously implemented projects such as commuter rail lines which were built in the early 2000s2. The broad range of costs demonstrates the variability that can result from design, engineering and construction decisions. This range does, however, still enable a high-level qualitative analysis of which modes are not considered to be financially viable within the context of the East-West HCT Corridor project.
Overall Cost per Mile Assessment: Each of the modes were given a score based on the range of capital cost per mile compared to the East-West HCT Corridor study area which is 20 miles long. Across modes, BRT has the lowest capital cost per mile between $2.5 million and $20 million and thus received a score of “best”. LRT received a “poor” score for exceeding $140 million per mile. The modern streetcar and commuter rail received ratings of fair and good, respectively, due to the range of capital costs; however, commuter rail costs are reflective of projects with an existing rail right-of-way owned by a transit agency.
Table 5. Cost per Mile Screening Results (2020$)* Mode Range of Capital Cost per Overall Assessment Mile BRT $2.5 – $20 million Best LRT $145 – $250 million Poor
Modern Streetcar $40 – $100 million Fair
Commuter Rail $10 – $20 million** Good
*Average based on project miles outlined in FTA’s Capital Investment Grants Program Project Profile ** Costs are reflective of commuter rail projects with existing rail right-of-way owned by transit agencies Source: FTA Capital Investment Grants Project Profiles; FTA Annual Reports (FY 2012- FY 2019)
2.2.4 Operating Cost per Hour Peers who are currently operating each mode were selected for comparison. Transit agencies report both operating costs and annual revenue hours to the National Transit Database which were used to calculate the operating cost per hour. The range of those calculated operating costs by peer agency are used as the basis of the evaluation for operating cost per hour (Table 6).
Overall Operating Cost per Hour Assessment: BRT has the lowest range of operating cost per hour: between $100 and $199 per hour, thus receiving an assessment of “best”. In comparison, COTA’s operating bus costs which are fully allocated costs are approximately $136 per hour in 2019 dollars. Commuter Rail has one of the largest ranges of operating costs and the highest national average, thus receiving a rating of “poor”. Both
2 Analysis excludes planned extensions of existing commuter lines which may be in the FTA Capital Investment Grants process.
EAST-WEST CORRIDOR HIGH CAPACITY TRANSIT PLAN page | 2-5 INITIAL SCREENING
streetcar and light rail received a score of good because they have a similar operating cost per hour that exceeds BRT but falls below Commuter Rail.
Table 6. Operating Cost per Hour by Mode (FY 2019) Mode Range of Operating Cost National Weighted Overall Operating Cost per Hour Average Operating Cost per Hour Assessment (Modal Peers) per Hour (FY19) BRT $100 – $199 per hour $170 Best LRT $200 – $400 per hour $330 Good
Modern Streetcar $220 – $500 per hour $243 Good
Commuter Rail $250 – $1300 per hour $571 Poor Source: National Transit Database, Transit Agency Profiles (FY 2019)
2.2.5 Availability of Right-of-Way The availability of right-of-way evaluates the typical cross-section width of each of the modes and considers key additions such as stations. Right-of-way availability and determination was evaluated based on previous design and engineering experience as well as American Public Transportation Association (APTA) Recommended Best Practices (Table 7).
Overall Availability of Right-of-Way Assessment: COTA’s existing bus service for Route 10 and Route 2 utilizes 11- to 12-foot lanes with de facto bus lanes along the curb in peak hours and operates in mixed traffic. BRT received a rating of “best” for right-of-way and station spacing because it most closely aligns with the existing conditions of COTA bus service. Additionally, BRT is a versatile mode and can adapt to different right-of-way conditions and segments. Comparatively, Commuter Rail received a rating of “poor” because it requires existing and protected railroad through the length of the East-West HCT Corridor study area, which is not available.
Table 7. Availability of Right-of-Way Evaluation Mode Cross-Section Requirement ROW Assessment BRT u 22–24 ft. on street u Stops minimum 10 ft Best u Dedicated lane or mixed traffic LRT u 28 – 32 ft. on street u Stops minimum 12 ft Good u Dedicated guideway Modern Streetcar u 28 – 32 ft on street u Stops minimum 12 ft Good u Mixed traffic Commuter Rail u 36 ft. for separated 2- track corridor u Stops minimum 8 ft Poor u Separate Dedicated guideway Source: APTA’s Recommended Best Practices for BRT Runningways, 2020
EAST-WEST CORRIDOR HIGH CAPACITY TRANSIT PLAN page | 2-6 INITIAL SCREENING
2.3 Mode Recommended Each of the modes were evaluated for corridor fit, ridership capacity, cost per mile per station, operating cost per hour, and availability of right-of-way. Each of the modal options were evaluated against the criteria and rated as “best,” “good,” “fair,” or “poor”. Only those modes that don’t receive a poor rating in one or more categories will be advanced for detailed evaluation. Table 8 outlines the summary of criteria ratings for each mode option. As shown in Figure 6, Bus Rapid Transit is the only mode that did not receive one or more “poor” ratings and is recommended for more detailed definition and evaluation in subsequent project phases.
Table 8. Summary Results of the Initial Screening of Modes HCT Modes Corridor Fit Ridership Cost per Mile Operating Cost Availability of Capacity per Station per Hour Right-of-Way
BRT Best Best Best Best Best
LRT Good Poor Poor Good Good
Modern Streetcar Poor Poor Fair Good Good
Commuter Rail Poor Best Good Poor Poor
Figure 6. Modes for Detailed Definition and Evaluation of Alternatives
Bus Rapid Transit Light Rail Transit Modern Streetcar Commuter Rail PASS FAIL FAIL FAIL
EAST-WEST CORRIDOR HIGH CAPACITY TRANSIT PLAN page | 2-7 INITIAL SCREENING
3. ALIGNMENT SCREENING
3.1 Alignments Considered The initial alignments of the East-West HCT Corridor are broken into three study areas for alignment screening: the West Corridor study area, Downtown Columbus, and the East Corridor study area. The West and East Corridor study area initial alignments were selected based on COTA’s NextGen Plan. The Downtown Columbus alignments were selected to optimize for direct routes on through/continuous streets that avoid jogging, routes that coincide with and connect to existing transit service, and routes that draw from the greatest ridership pool possible. A Front Street alignment in Downtown Columbus, for example, was removed from consideration due to its proximity to the river, which limits the number of riders who would access the route from the west. The initial alignments selected, shown in Figure 7 and Figure 8, are:
u West Corridor Study Area:
— West Broad Street: Hilliard Rome Rd / Westwoods Blvd to the CSX tracks on the Scioto Peninsula
u Downtown Columbus Study Area:
— Broad Street: the CSX tracks on the Scioto Peninsula to I-71
— High Street: o Eastbound: Broad Street from the CSX tracks on the Scioto Peninsula to High Street, High Street to Main Street, Main Street to I-71 o Westbound: Main Street from I-71 to Rich Street, Rich Street to High Street, High Street to Broad Street, Broad Street to the CSX tracks on the Scioto Peninsula
— 3rd/4th Street: o Eastbound: Broad Street from the CSX tracks on the Scioto Peninsula to 3rd Street, 3rd Street to Main Street, Main Street to I-71 o Westbound: Main Street from I-71 to Rich Street, Rich Street to 4th Street, 4th Street to Broad Street, Broad Street to the CSX tracks on the Scioto Peninsula
— Grant Ave o Eastbound: Broad Street from the CSX tracks on the Scioto Peninsula to Grant Ave, Grant Ave to Main Street, Main Street to I-71 o Westbound: Main Street from I-71 to Rich Street, Rich Street to Grant Ave, Grant Ave to Broad Street, Broad Street to the CSX tracks on the Scioto Peninsula
u East Corridor Study Area:
— East Broad Street: I-71 to County Line
— East Main Street: I-71 to County Line
EAST-WEST CORRIDOR HIGH CAPACITY TRANSIT PLAN page | 3-1 INITIAL SCREENING
Figure 7: Alignments Considered
Figure 8: Downtown Columbus Alignments Considered
EAST-WEST CORRIDOR HIGH CAPACITY TRANSIT PLAN page | 3-2 INITIAL SCREENING
3.2 Alignment Evaluation Each initial alignment described above is evaluated based on the criteria set forth by the Purpose and Need for the East-West Corridor HCT Plan: existing ridership, right-of-way availability, connections to planned and existing HCT corridors, employment served, non-employment trip generators served, population density, minority population served, population living in poverty served, zero-vehicle households served, and legally binding affordable housing units served. Each initial alignment was given a rating of “best”, “good”, “fair”, or “poor” for each criterion based on the magnitude of that criterion’s metric, relative to the other alignments. The Downtown Columbus alignments have a greater magnitude for most metrics simply by virtue of being in the downtown area; the alignment evaluation ratings take this into account. Any initial alignment that receives one or more “poor” ratings will be removed from consideration in future phases of evaluation.
3.2.1 Existing Ridership Appropriate data to differentiate ridership between the Downtown Columbus alignments is not currently available. Therefore, average weekday boardings were determined by utilizing COTA’s existing Route 2 and Route 10 ridership and isolating only the parts of the existing routes that are in the East-West HCT Corridor study area. Downtown Columbus boardings are split between the West Corridor and East Corridor study area alignments. The intersection of High Street and Broad Street serves as the breakpoint between the two alignments (Table 9). Westbound boardings at High and Broad are allocated to West Broad Street (Figure 9) and eastbound boardings at High and Broad are allocated to East Broad Street (Figure 11).
COTA ridership is strongest in Downtown Columbus, especially on High Street, and on West Broad Street in Hilltop and Franklinton (Figure 10). Ridership on East Broad Street and East Main Street is concentrated between I-71 and Alum Creek and between James Road and Hamilton Road.
Table 9: Ridership Evaluation (2019) Average Weekday Study Area Alignment Boardings Overall Assessment West Corridor W Broad St 3,400 Good
East Corridor E Broad St 3,400 Good
E Main St 4,100 Best Source: 2019 COTA APC Data
EAST-WEST CORRIDOR HIGH CAPACITY TRANSIT PLAN page | 3-3 INITIAL SCREENING
Figure 9: Ridership in the West Corridor Study Area
Figure 10: Ridership in Downtown Columbus
EAST-WEST CORRIDOR HIGH CAPACITY TRANSIT PLAN page | 3-4 INITIAL SCREENING
Figure 11: Ridership in the East Corridor Study Area
3.2.2 Right-of-Way Availability Within the entire East-West Corridor study area, Broad Street represents the widest right-of-way (Table 10). Within Downtown Columbus, both Broad Street and High Street have a hundred or more feet of right-of-way. While this may be sufficient to accommodate HCT, it is important to remember that there are several existing and potential future uses for this limited right-of-way. For the purposes of this analysis, 3rd/4th Street and Main Street/Rich Street would most likely operate as one-way couplets. Grant Avenue, however, does have a logical through street that could be used as the other part of the one-way pair. This fact, combined with only having 66 feet of right-of-way, makes implementing HCT more challenging.
EAST-WEST CORRIDOR HIGH CAPACITY TRANSIT PLAN page | 3-5 INITIAL SCREENING
Table 10: Right-of-Way Availability Evaluation Right-of-Way Study Area Alignment Width Overall Assessment West Corridor W Broad St 78 – 134 ft Best
Broad St 104 – 120 ft Best
High St 100 ft Good Main St/Rich St 76-82 ft
Downtown Columbus 3rd/4th St 82 ft Fair Main St/Rich St 76-82 ft
Grant Ave 66 ft Poor Main St/Rich St 76-82 ft
East Corridor E Broad St 86 – 150 ft Best
E Main St 70-102 ft Fair
3.2.3 Connections to Existing and Planned HCT Corridors The initial alignments intersect existing frequent Route 23 in the East Corridor study area and frequent routes 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, and 8, as well as the CBUS and CMAX, in Downtown Columbus (Table 11). The East-West HCT Corridor is also planned to converge with all other planned LinkUS HCT corridors (Northwest, North, Northeast, Airport-Easton, and Southeast) in Downtown Columbus (Figure 12).
EAST-WEST CORRIDOR HIGH CAPACITY TRANSIT PLAN page | 3-6 INITIAL SCREENING
Table 11: Transit Connections Evaluation Existing and Frequent Routes Planned HCT Intersected Study Area Alignment Routes Intersected Overall Assessment West Corridor W Broad St 1* 0 Good
Broad St 5 5 Best
High St 5 5 Best Downtown Columbus 3rd/4th St 5 5 Best
Grant Ave 5 5 Best
East Corridor E Broad St 0 1 Good
E Main St 0 1 Good Source: LinkUS, NextGen Appendix H: Tier 2 Evaluation Methodology and Results *Alignment of Northwest Corridor Alignment is under review as part of a separate concurrent study.
Figure 12: Frequent Routes Intersected
EAST-WEST CORRIDOR HIGH CAPACITY TRANSIT PLAN page | 3-7 INITIAL SCREENING
3.2.4 Employment Served Jobs served in the East-West Corridor study area are clustered in Downtown Columbus, especially along High Street and 3rd/4th Streets (Table 12). The West Broad Street alignment has notably fewer jobs than the East Corridor study area alignments. In Downtown Columbus, the 3rd/4th Street and High Street alignments serve about 6,000 and 7,000 more jobs, respectively, than the Broad Street alignment. Meanwhile, the Grant Avenue alignment serves approximately 63,000 jobs, which is halfway between the 3rd/4th Street and Broad Street alternatives. Figure 13 through Figure 15 show employment density across the East-West Corridor study area.
Table 12: Employment Evaluation Study Area Alignment Jobs within ½-Mile Overall Assessment West W Broad St 17,100 Fair Corridor Broad St 60,100 Fair
High St 67,400 Best Downtown Columbus 3rd/4th St 66,300 Best
Grant Ave 62,800 Good
East E Broad St 32,000 Good Corridor E Main St 28,000 Good Source: Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MORPC, 2020)
EAST-WEST CORRIDOR HIGH CAPACITY TRANSIT PLAN page | 3-8 INITIAL SCREENING
Figure 13: Employment Density in the West Corridor Study Area
Figure 14: Employment Density in Downtown Columbus
EAST-WEST CORRIDOR HIGH CAPACITY TRANSIT PLAN page | 3-9 INITIAL SCREENING
Figure 15: Employment Density in the East Corridor Study Area
3.2.5 Non-Employment Trip Generators Served In the development of its NextGen plan, COTA identified a list of high trip generators throughout the Central Ohio region and used this list to weigh future transit options. High trip generators include major shopping malls, universities, sports arenas, municipal buildings, and hospitals. These points of interest were divided into “minor” and “major” categories based on the relative size of the area and the number of trips expected to be generated. Each major trip generator served by a transit option earned that option 3 points, and each minor trip generator earned 1 point. The initial alignment evaluation for trip generators served (Table 13) uses this same list of key trip generators and methodology for rating each alignment. Regardless of alignment, 4 major trip generators and 2 minor trip generators are served in Downtown Columbus (Figure 17). Several more trip generators are located within ½-mile of East Broad Street than West Broad Street or East Main Street (Figure 16; Figure 18).
EAST-WEST CORRIDOR HIGH CAPACITY TRANSIT PLAN page | 3-10 INITIAL SCREENING
Table 13: Trip Generator Evaluation Major Trip Minor Trip Generators Generators Trip within ½-Mile within ½-Mile Generator Overall Study Area Alignment (3 pts) (1 pt) Rating Assessment West Corridor W Broad St 0 2 2 Fair
Broad St 4 3 15 Best
Downtown High St 4 3 15 Best Columbus 3rd/4th St 4 3 15 Best
Grant Ave 4 3 15 Best
East Corridor E Broad St 0 6 6 Best
E Main St 1 1 4 Good Source: NextGen Appendix H: Tier 2 Evaluation Methodology and Results
Figure 16: Trip Generators in the West Corridor Study Area
EAST-WEST CORRIDOR HIGH CAPACITY TRANSIT PLAN page | 3-11 INITIAL SCREENING
Figure 17: Trip Generators in Downtown Columbus
Figure 18: Trip Generators in the East Corridor Study Area
EAST-WEST CORRIDOR HIGH CAPACITY TRANSIT PLAN page | 3-12 INITIAL SCREENING
3.2.6 Population Density The population density evaluation is summarized in Table 14. Residential population is most densely concentrated in Downtown Columbus, especially along High Street and 3rd/4th Streets (Figure 20). Population density along East Main Street is notably higher than along West Broad Street (Figure 19) and significantly higher than along East Broad Street (Figure 21).
Table 14: Population Density Evaluation 2018 Population Density Study Area Alignment within ½-Mile Overall Assessment West Corridor W Broad St 4,400 Good
Broad St 5,000 Good
High St 5,900 Best Downtown Columbus 3rd/4th St 5,800 Best
Grant Ave 5,100 Good
East Corridor E Broad St 4,000 Fair
E Main St 4,900 Best Source: Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MORPC, 2020)
EAST-WEST CORRIDOR HIGH CAPACITY TRANSIT PLAN page | 3-13 INITIAL SCREENING
Figure 19: Population Density in the West Corridor Study Area
Figure 20: Population Density in Downtown Columbus
EAST-WEST CORRIDOR HIGH CAPACITY TRANSIT PLAN page | 3-14 INITIAL SCREENING
Figure 21: Population Density in the East Corridor Study Area
High levels of population growth are projected for Downtown Columbus, especially along Broad Street and Grant Avenue (Table 15). There is also a significant level of population growth projected for West Broad Street.
Table 15: Projected Population Growth Evaluation % Change Projected 2040 from 2018 Population Density Population Study Area Alignment within ½-Mile Density Overall Assessment West Corridor W Broad St 7,700 74% Best
Broad St 21,000 317% Best
Downtown High St 18,900 220% Good Columbus 3rd/4th St 20,300 252% Best
Grant Ave 20,400 296% Best
East Corridor E Broad St 5,000 25% Fair
E Main St 6,500 32% Fair Source: Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MORPC, 2020)
EAST-WEST CORRIDOR HIGH CAPACITY TRANSIT PLAN page | 3-15 INITIAL SCREENING
3.2.7 Minority Population Served Minorities are people of any other race besides non-Hispanic white. The minority population evaluation is summarized in Table 16. Significant proportions of the residential population within the East-West Corridor study area are minorities, especially in the East Corridor study area where at least half of the population is a minority (compare Figure 22, Figure 23, and Figure 24).
Table 16: Minority Population Evaluation % Minority Population Study Area Alignment within ½-Mile Overall Assessment West Corridor W Broad St 34% Good
Broad St 34% Good
High St 27% Good Downtown Columbus 3rd/4th St 29% Good
Grant Ave 31% Good
East Corridor E Broad St 50% Best
E Main St 51% Best Source: American Community Survey 2014-2018 5-year estimates
EAST-WEST CORRIDOR HIGH CAPACITY TRANSIT PLAN page | 3-16 INITIAL SCREENING
Figure 22: Minority Population in the West Corridor Study Area
Figure 23: Minority Population in Downtown Columbus
EAST-WEST CORRIDOR HIGH CAPACITY TRANSIT PLAN page | 3-17 INITIAL SCREENING
Figure 24: Minority Population in the East Corridor Study Area
3.2.8 Population Living in Poverty Served The largest proportion of the residential population living in poverty within the East-West HCT Corridor study area is along West Broad Street (Figure 25), and the smallest proportion is along East Broad Street (Figure 27), as shown in Table 17. People living in poverty in Downtown Columbus are concentrated on the Scioto peninsula (Figure 26).
Table 17: Population Living in Poverty Evaluation % Population Living in Study Area Alignment Poverty within ½-Mile Overall Assessment West Corridor W Broad St 29% Best Broad St 25% Best High St 19% Good Downtown Columbus 3rd/4th St 21% Good Grant Ave 22% Good East Corridor E Broad St 15% Good E Main St 21% Best Source: American Community Survey 2014-2018 5-year estimates
EAST-WEST CORRIDOR HIGH CAPACITY TRANSIT PLAN page | 3-18 INITIAL SCREENING
Figure 25: Population in Poverty in the West Corridor Study Area
Figure 26: Population in Poverty in Downtown Columbus
EAST-WEST CORRIDOR HIGH CAPACITY TRANSIT PLAN page | 3-19 INITIAL SCREENING
Figure 27: Population in Poverty in the East Corridor Study Area
3.2.9 Zero-Vehicle Households Served There are more zero-vehicle households in Downtown Columbus (Figure 29) than other parts of the East-West HCT Corridor study area (Figure 28; Figure 30), with the smallest proportion along East Broad Street (Table 18).
Table 18: Zero-Vehicle Household Evaluation % Zero-Vehicle Households within ½- Study Area Alignment Mile Overall Assessment West Corridor W Broad St 16% Good
Broad St 27% Best
High St 22% Fair Downtown Columbus 3rd/4th St 21% Fair
Grant Ave 24% Good
East Corridor E Broad St 11% Fair
E Main St 20% Best Source: American Community Survey 2014-2018 5-year estimates
EAST-WEST CORRIDOR HIGH CAPACITY TRANSIT PLAN page | 3-20 INITIAL SCREENING
Figure 28: Zero-Vehicle Households in the West Corridor Study Area
Figure 29: Zero-Vehicle Households in Downtown Columbus
EAST-WEST CORRIDOR HIGH CAPACITY TRANSIT PLAN page | 3-21 INITIAL SCREENING
Figure 30: Zero-Vehicle Households in the East Corridor Study Area
3.2.10 Legally Binding Affordable Housing Units Served Legally-binding, affordability-restricted housing is a property and/or housing structure that restricts the cost of housing units to be affordable at specified income levels for a defined period of time; FTA is seeking legally- binding, affordability-restricted units to renters with incomes below 60 percent of the area median income and/or owners with incomes below the area median. By this definition, the East Broad Street alignment (Figure 33) serves almost three times as many affordable housing units as the other alignments (Figure 31; Figure 32), along which affordable housing units are quite evenly distributed (Table 19).
EAST-WEST CORRIDOR HIGH CAPACITY TRANSIT PLAN page | 3-22 INITIAL SCREENING
Table 20: Affordable Housing Evaluation Affordable Housing Study Area Alignment Units within ½-Mile Overall Assessment West Corridor W Broad St 2,700 Good
Broad St 1,200 Good
High St 1,300 Good Downtown Columbus 3rd/4th St 1,300 Good
Grant Ave 1,300 Good
East Corridor E Broad St 4,250 Best
E Main St 1,530 Fair Source: 2018 National Housing Preservation Database3
Figure 31: Affordable Housing in the West Corridor
3 The NHPD includes information on the following federal subsidy programs from the US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and US Department of Agriculture (USDA): HUD Project-Based Rental Assistance; Section 202 Direct Loans; HUD Insurance Programs; State Housing Finance Agency Funded Section 236; Low Income Housing Tax Credits; HOME Rental Assistance; Section 515 Rural Rental Housing Loans; Section 514 Direct Loans; Rural Development Section 538; Public Housing; Project Based Vouchers; and Mod Rehab.
EAST-WEST CORRIDOR HIGH CAPACITY TRANSIT PLAN page | 3-23 INITIAL SCREENING
Figure 32: Affordable Housing in Downtown Columbus
Figure 33: Affordable Housing in the East Corridor Study Area
EAST-WEST CORRIDOR HIGH CAPACITY TRANSIT PLAN page | 3-24 INITIAL SCREENING
3.3 Alignment Recommendations Each of the initial alignments were evaluated for existing ridership, right-of-way availability, connections to existing and planned HCT corridors, employment served, trip generators served, population density, minority population served, population living in poverty served, zero-vehicle households served, and legally binding affordable housing units served. Each of the alignments were evaluated against the criteria and rated as “best,” “good,” “fair,” or “poor”. Any alignment that received one or more “poor” ratings was removed from consideration in future phases of evaluation.
Table 21 outlines the summary results of the initial screening of the alignments. The Grant Avenue alignment in Downtown Columbus received a “poor” rating for right-of-way availability and will therefore not be considered in the next phase of detailed evaluation. Besides Grant Avenue, all other alignments passed the initial alignment screening and will be carried forward into the detailed evaluation phase for further analysis.
EAST-WEST CORRIDOR HIGH CAPACITY TRANSIT PLAN page | 3-25 INITIAL SCREENING
Table 22: Summary Results of the Initial Screening of Alignments
West Downtown Columbus East Corridor Corridor Corridor Broad High 3rd/4th Grant E Broad W Broad St E Main St St St St Ave St
Existing Ridership Good N/A N/A N/A N/A Good Best
Right-of-Way Best Best Good Fair Poor Best Fair Availability Transit Good Best Best Best Best Good Good Connections
Employment Fair Fair Best Best Good Good Good
Trip Generators Fair Best Best Best Best Best Good
Population Density Good Good Best Best Good Fair Best
Projected Best Best Good Best Best Fair Fair Population Growth Minority Good Good Good Good Good Best Best Population Population Living Best Best Good Good Good Good Best in Poverty Zero-Vehicle Good Best Fair Fair Good Fair Best Households
Affordable Housing Good Good Good Good Good Best Fair
Advancing to Detailed Definition YES YES YES YES NO YES YES and Evaluation?
EAST-WEST CORRIDOR HIGH CAPACITY TRANSIT PLAN page | 3-1