12/17/2010
Regional Transitway Guidelines
Advisory Committee Meeting June 28, 2010
Information Resources
• Met Council Web Site – http://www.metrocouncil.org/planning/transportation/transitways/i ndex.htm
• “Working” Project Web Site
1 12/17/2010
Committee Reports
• Background • Existing Conditions – In the Region – In Other Regions • DRAFT Guideline Concepts • Other, Related Guidelines
Modes and Characteristics - Benchmarks
Local Bus
Express Bus with Transit Advantages
2 12/17/2010
Modes and Characteristics – Transitway Guidelines
Station Spacing & Siting Background • Definitions – Station – including on-line and off-line – Central business district – Existing • Existing Laws & Requirements – Title VI & Environmental Justice – FTA Requirements
3 12/17/2010
2030 Transportation Policy Plan - Existing Regional Policy Appendix G: Transit Standards
2030 Park & Ride Plan – Chapter 5: Existing Regional Policy Site Location Criteria
4 12/17/2010
Station Spacing & Siting Existing Conditions
Northstar Hiawatha- Cedar Ave Limited Station Commuter Central 35W BRT BRT Stop Characteristics Rail LRT Concept Concept Standard Minimum (mi) 2 0.5 1.5 0.7 0.5 Minimum Distance to CBD (mi) 5 na 2 2 na Primary access hwy/park&ride walk/transfer mix mix walk/transfer
• Ridership per Station - Handout
Northstar Commuter Rail KANABEC PINE Projected Northstar Station Market Areas
BENTON M I L L E L A C S
CHISAGO ISANTI
STEARNS
Northstar Link Lot
¨¦§94 SHERBURNE
0.5 65 0.5 É 8 0.5 0.5 ¤£ 0.5 0.5 ANOKA
0.5 0.5 35 0.5 0.5 0.5 ¨¦§ 0.5 0.5 0.5 10 ¤£ N O T G N I H S A W Big Lake Station
14 WRIGHT ¬« 0.5 0.75 0.5 0.75 169 MEEKER ¤£ 35W 0.5 94 ¨¦§ Elk River Station ¨¦§ 0.5
É610 0.33 ¨¦§35E 0.33 0.33 Anoka Station HENNEPIN 0.33 0.25 É252 0.25 0.25 ¤£61 0.25 0.25 10 0.25 ¤£ 0.25 RAMSEY Coon Rapids Riverdale Station 0.25 0.25 0.25
494 694 ¨¦§ É100 ¨¦§ ¤£12 Fridley Station 35E Station Market Areas (by TAZ) Facilities ¨¦§ É36 7-County Metro Area City/Township Big Lake St. Cloud NorthStar Link Park-and-Ride !à Coon Rapids - Riverdale Station ( Address matching Elk River Big Lake & Elk River (shared) (!à 19-County Metro Area Big Lake Station not available (!à Fridley Station Anoka Elk River & Anoka (shared) Elk River Station (!à (!à Data Collected: 9/2008 Coon Rapids Riverdale Map Created: 3/8/2010 Anoka & Coon Rapids (shared) Anoka Station 0 5 10 Fridley (!à Miles ¹
5 12/17/2010
6 12/17/2010
BRT Station Spacing In Other Regions Miles between Stations BRT System Shortest Longest Average Cleveland – Health Line 0.13 0.5 0.2 Boston – Silver Line 0.1 1.9 0.32 Eugene – Emx 0.24 0.98 0.42 Las Vegas – MAX 0.25 1 0.5 Los Angeles – Metro Rapid 0.25 1 0.7 York Region – Viva 0.16 3.07 0.93 Pittsburgh 0.51 1.7 0.97 Los Angeles – Orange Line 0.54 2.2 1.1 Halifax – MetroLink 0.45 7.7 3.28 Practices for BRT Service - APTA 2008
Station Spacing In North America
7 12/17/2010
Commuter Rail Station Spacing in Other Regions
2007/8 Fare One-way Weekday wkdy 2009 Long 2009 cust Recovery track miles train trips Stations Ave Spacing ridership Dist Fare cost/mile Est. Sounder 74 18 9 8.22 9,300 $4.75 $0.06 23% TRE 34 49 9 3.78 9,300 $2.50 $0.07 7% Tri-Rail 72 50 18 4.00 14,000 $6.90 $0.10 18% Rail Runner 55 21 7 7.86 2,300 $7.00 $0.13 na ACE 90 8 10 9.00 3,000 $11.75 $0.13 28% Caltrain 77 98 32 2.41 36,993 $11.50 $0.15 41% Front Runner 38 73 7 5.43 4,100 $5.50 $0.14 15% Coaster 41 22 8 5.13 6,800 $6.50 $0.16 38% Northstar 2010 40 12 6 6.67 3,400 $7.00 $0.18 21% Metra 565 743 239 2.36 317,400 $8.05 na 45% Average 5.48 Shaded operate multiple lines skewing spacing ave
LRT Stations • Spacing ¾ to 3 miles
8 12/17/2010
BRT Stations • Ave spacing ¾ mile • Based on capturing 85% of existing riders • MTA guideline 500 boardings per mile • FTA recommended 1,000 boardings per mile per
Station Spacing & Siting Guidelines Concepts • See handouts – Station spacing minimum outside Minneapolis/St. Paul Central Business Districts – Closest station from Minneapolis/St. Paul Central Business Districts – Minimum daily boardings for station opening year forecast – Primary market analysis factors – Primary access and site location factors – Secondary access and site location factors **See next slide – Addition of stations
9 12/17/2010
Station Spacing & Siting For More Discussion • Station Siting Factors – Land availability – Land costs – Development plans – Mix of existing land uses – Available infrastructure (and cost of providing additional infrastructure) – Proximity to affordable housing – Size of transit-dependent population – Impact on transit operations and/or passenger travel time – Pedestrian access and cost to provide (i.e., need for pedestrian/bike bridge) – On-line vs. off-line stations
Station Spacing & Siting Closely Related Guidelines • Service Operations – Competing routes – Transfers • Project Development, Governance, and Management – Travel demand and market forecasting and analysis methodologies • Stations & Facilities
10 12/17/2010
Questions or Comments?
Vehicles Background
• LRT and Commuter rail will be compatible with existing systems • Vehicle technology, styling, vendors, etc. are evolving quickly • Different BRTs may operate differently; universal vehicle may not work • Guidelines can’t be overly prescriptive
11 12/17/2010
Vehicles Background
• BRT Station-to-Station and Arterial BRT vehicles for today’s discussion • Draft guidelines concepts, not final
Vehicle Existing Conditions
• Laws and regulations affecting vehicle guidelines – Buy America, Best Value, ADA Compliance • Regional policies and practices – Vehicle fleet policy – General fleet practices
12 12/17/2010
Vehicle Sizing and Seating
• No one-size-fits-all solution • Important considerations in determining vehicle sizing and seating/standing amenities: – Passenger load standards/Peak loads – Passenger trip lengths (min/max/avg) – Ridership demand at end of 12-year vehicle life – Service characteristics (speed, maneuvering)
Passenger Boarding
• Boarding should be as quick and convenient as possible for all passengers • Considerations: – Wheelchair access innovation – Bicycle storage – Boarding demand at each station – Level boarding – Fare collection
13 12/17/2010
Customer Comfort and Safety • Light-rail vehicle feel compared to bus vehicle feel • Vehicles should create an open (comfortable) feeling inside – Natural or artificial lighting – Window size, number, type, tint – Color scheme
Customer Comfort and Safety LRT Bus
14 12/17/2010
Interior and Exterior Styling
• Vehicles should portray the fast, sleek, modern experience of bus rapid transit service • The bus rapid transit vehicle identity will be tied closely to branding color scheme, both interior and exterior
BRT-Style Buses
Gillig Hybrid Gillig BRT
15 12/17/2010
BRT-Style Buses
New Flyer New Flyer BRT
BRT-Style Buses
New Flyer New Flyer BRT
16 12/17/2010
BRT-Style Buses
NABI NABI BRT
Interior Noise
• Baseline decibel comparisons for Bus vs. LRT • Strive to achieve interior noise levels as similar to LRT as possible
17 12/17/2010
Other
• Features of bus (customer information technology, security systems, etc.) should be integrated into the design of the bus as much as possible • Interior bike racks – Need multiple door boarding for ease of access – Need off-board fare collection for multiple door boarding – Peer examples indicate need articulated vehicle
Remaining Topics
• Cost considerations – Vehicle decision impacts on operating costs and capital facility costs – Cost of vehicle vs. regular fleet vehicle • Vehicle integration with std. fleet • Propulsion technologies – Hybrid, Electric
18 12/17/2010
Vehicle Summary and Next Steps • Handout with topic list • Continue close coordination with guidelines from other committees
Questions or Comments?
19 12/17/2010
Advisory Committee Next Steps
• Schedule of Technical Topics - Tentative – June: Vehicles; Station Spacing – July: Fare collection; Service Operations – August: No Meeting – September: Branding; Funding; Project Development, Governance, and Management – October: Runningway; Stations and Facilities; Technology – November/December: Review and comment on all draft guidelines – for recommendation to the Met Council to start the TPP amendment process
Schedule -Tentative
• Fall 2009 – Mar 2010: Project Initiation • April 2010: Project Kick-Off • April – Oct 2010: Develop Technical Content and Draft Guidelines • Oct - Dec 2010: Stakeholder Outreach 1 • Oct – Dec 2010: Revise Guidelines • Jan – April 2011: Finalize Guidelines and Adopt into TPP (Stakeholder Outreach 2)
20 12/17/2010
Guidelines Development Committees Station Spacing Leadership and Runningway and Siting Oversight Tom Thorstensen & Adam Harrington Arlene McCarthy Charles Carlson
Service Stations and Operations Public Facilities John Levin & Tom Thorstensen & Cyndi Harper Advisory Charles Carlson Committee Identity and Vehicles Branding Jan Homan Bruce Howard
Fare Collection Technology Project Funding Systems Gary Nyberg Amy Vennewitz Tom Randall
Guidelines Advisory Committee
Wendy Wulff, chair Met Council Kirstin Sersland Beach
Met Council MTS Director Arlene McCarthy
Comm. Peter McLaughlin - Henn Co Counties Transit Improvement Board Comm. Jim McDonough - Ramsey Co (CTIB) Comm. Dan Erhart - Anoka Co
Suburban Transit Association (STA) Commissioner Will Branning – MVTA Chair
Tim Henkel, Asst. Commissioner Planning Mn/DOT and Programming
Transportation Advisory Board (TAB) Russ Stark, St. Paul City Council
21 12/17/2010
Technical Committee Deliverables • Technical memorandum including committee recommendation • Guidelines document
Questions or Comments?
22 12/17/2010
Regional Transitway Guidelines
Advisory Committee Meeting June 28, 2010
23