DOCSLIB.ORG

El Camino Real Bus Rapid Transit Phasing Study El

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
El Camino Real Bus Rapid Transit Phasing Study El December 2014 San Mateo County Transit District El Camino Real Bus Rapid Transit Phasing Study El Camino Real Bus Rapid Transit Phasing Study – Final Report Prepared for: December 2014 SF13-0692 El Camino Real BRT Phasing Study Final Report - December 2014 Table of Contents Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................................ i Study Goals and Objectives .............................................................................................................................................. i Study Analysis Timeframe ................................................................................................................................................ ii Screening Process ................................................................................................................................................................ ii Service Concepts Considered for the BRT Phasing Plan ..................................................................................... iii Alternatives Analysis and Findings.............................................................................................................................. vii Recommended Near-Term Strategy Options ....................................................................................... viii Recommended Phasing Plan Options ...................................................................................................................... viii 1.0 Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Background of the Study ................................................................................................................................. 1 1.2 The El Camino Real Corridor........................................................................................................................... 2 1.3 Purpose of the Study ......................................................................................................................................... 4 1.4 Study Goals ............................................................................................................................................................ 5 1.5 Study Approach ................................................................................................................................................... 6 1.6 Report Contents .................................................................................................................................................. 6 2.0 Introduction to Rapid Bus and Bus Rapid Transit ........................................................................... 8 2.1 Rapid vs. Bus Rapid Transit Distinction ...................................................................................................... 8 2.2 Typical Attributes of BRT .................................................................................................................................. 9 2.2.1 Frequent All-Day Service ................................................................................................................ 10 2.2.2 Fast and Reliable Service ................................................................................................................ 11 2.2.3 Enhanced Passenger Amenities ................................................................................................... 13 2.2.4 Distinctive Branded Service ........................................................................................................... 13 3.0 Corridor Characteristics .....................................................................................................................14 3.1 Demographics and Land Use ...................................................................................................................... 14 3.1.1 Key Destinations ................................................................................................................................ 15 3.1.2 Travel Characteristics ....................................................................................................................... 15 3.2 Roadway Facilities and Performance ........................................................................................................ 16 El Camino Real BRT Phasing Study Final Report - December 2014 3.3 Transit Facilities and performance ............................................................................................................ 17 3.3.1 SamTrans .............................................................................................................................................. 17 3.3.2 Caltrain ................................................................................................................................................... 21 3.3.3 SFMTA (MUNI) .................................................................................................................................... 21 3.3.4 VTA .......................................................................................................................................................... 21 3.3.5 BART ....................................................................................................................................................... 22 3.3.6 Public and Private Shuttles ............................................................................................................ 22 3.4 Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities ................................................................................................................. 22 4.0 Study Goals & Objectives ..................................................................................................................24 5.0 Study Screening Process & Evaluation Framework ......................................................................25 5.1 Screening Process ............................................................................................................................................ 25 5.2 Evaluation Framework .................................................................................................................................... 26 6.0 Initial Service Concepts and Screening – Phase 1 .........................................................................33 6.1 Phase 1 Service Concepts ............................................................................................................................. 33 6.2 Phase 1 Screening Criteria ............................................................................................................................ 38 6.3 Initial Screening Recommendations ......................................................................................................... 39 7.0 Rapid Bus & BRT Alternatives Development – Phase 2 ...............................................................42 7.1 Phase 2 Service Concept Families .............................................................................................................. 42 7.2 Rapid Stop Selection Process – Full, Peak, Truncated ....................................................................... 47 7.3 Rapid Stop Selection Process – Hybrid ................................................................................................... 48 7.3.1 Hybrid Rapid A ................................................................................................................................... 48 7.3.2 Hybrid Rapid B .................................................................................................................................... 49 7.4 Rapid Concept Stops and Routing ............................................................................................................ 49 8.0 Service Concept Modeling ................................................................................................................56 8.1 C/CAG Bi-County Travel Demand Model ............................................................................................... 56 8.2 Modeling Process ............................................................................................................................................. 56 9.0 Operating Plan Development ...........................................................................................................58 9.1 Definition of Operating Plan ........................................................................................................................ 58 9.2 Operating Plan Parameters .......................................................................................................................... 59 El Camino Real BRT Phasing Study Final Report - December 2014 9.3 Route Parameters ............................................................................................................................................. 60 9.4 Headway and Span of Service Parameters ............................................................................................ 60 9.5 Revenue Vehicle Hours .................................................................................................................................. 62 10.0 Operating & Maintenance Costs ......................................................................................................64 10.1 O&M Cost
Load more

Recommended publications
  • SFO to San Francisco in 45 Minutes for Only $6.55!* in 30 Minutes for Only $5.35!*
    Fold in to the middle; outside right Back Panel Front Panel Fold in to the middle; outside left OAK to San Francisco SFO to San Francisco in 45 minutes for only $6.55!* in 30 minutes for only $5.35!* BART (Bay Area Rapid Transit) from OAK is fast, easy and BART (Bay Area Rapid Transit) provides one of the world’s inexpensive too! Just take the convenient AirBART shuttle Visitors Guide best airport-to-downtown train services. BART takes you bus from OAK to BART to catch the train to downtown San downtown in 30 minutes for only $5.35 one-way or $10.70 Francisco. The entire trip takes about 45 minutes and costs round trip. It’s the fast, easy, inexpensive way to get to only $6.55 one-way or $13.10 round trip. to BART San Francisco. The AirBART shuttle departs every 15 minutes from the The BART station is located in the SFO International Terminal. 3rd curb across from the terminals. When you get off the It’s only a five minute walk from Terminal Three and a shuttle at the Coliseum BART station, buy a round trip BART 10 minute walk from Terminal One. Both terminals have ticket from the ticket machine. Take the escalator up to the Powell Street-Plaza Entrance connecting walkways to the International Terminal. You can westbound platform and board a San Francisco or Daly City also take the free SFO Airtrain to the BART station. bound train. The BART trip to San Francisco takes about 20 minutes. Terminal 2 (under renovation) Gates 40 - 48 Gates 60 - 67 Terminal 3 Terminal 1 Gates 68 - 90 Gates 20 - 36 P Domestic Want to learn about great deals on concerts, plays, Parking museums and other activities during your visit? Go to www.mybart.org to learn about fantastic special offers for BART customers.
    [Show full text]
  • 2017-2026 Samtrans Short Range Transit Plan
    SAN MATEO COUNTY TRANSIT DISTRICT Short-Range Transit Plan Fiscal Years 2017 – 2026 May 3, 2017 Acknowledgements San Mateo County Transit District Board of Directors 2017 Rose Guilbault, Chair Charles Stone, Vice Chair Jeff Gee Carole Groom Zoe Kersteen-Tucker Karyl Matsumoto Dave Pine Josh Powell Peter Ratto Senior Staff Michelle Bouchard, Chief Operating Officer, Rail Michael Burns, Interim Chief Officer, Caltrain Planning / CalMod April Chan, Chief Officer, Planning, Grants, and Transportation Authority Jim Hartnett, General Manager/CEO Kathleen Kelly, Interim Chief Financial Officer / Treasurer Martha Martinez, Executive Officer, District Secretary, Executive Administration Seamus Murphy, Chief Communications Officer David Olmeda, Chief Operating Officer, Bus Mark Simon, Chief of Staff Short Range Transit Plan Project Staff and Contributors Douglas Kim, Director, Planning Lindsey Kiner, Senior Planner, Planning David Pape, Planner, Planning Margo Ross, Director of Transportation, Bus Transportation Karambir Cheema, Deputy Director ITS, Bus Transportation Ana Rivas, South Base Superintendent, Bus Transportation Ladi Millard, Director of Budgets, Finance Ryan Hinchman, Manager Financial Planning & Analysis, Finance Donald G. Esse, Senior Operations Financial Analyst, Bus Operations Leslie Fong, Senior Administrative Analyst, Grants Tina Dubost, Manager, Accessible Transit Services Natalie Chi, Bus Maintenance Contract Administrator, Bus Transportation Joan Cassman, Legal Counsel (Hanson Bridgett) Shayna M. van Hoften, Legal Counsel (Hanson
    [Show full text]
  • SAMTRANS CORRESPONDENCE As of 12-11-2020
    SAMTRANS CORRESPONDENCE as of 12-11-2020 December 8, 2020 The Honorable Gavin Newsom Governor, State of California State Capitol, Suite 1173 Sacramento, CA 95814 Dear Governor Newsom: Bay Area transit systems continue to struggle in the face of dramatically reduced ridership and revenues due to the COVID-19 pandemic. This challenge was already the most significant crisis in the history of public transportation, and now it has persisted far longer than any of us would have predicted. Since the beginning, our workers have been on the front lines, doing their jobs as essential workers, responsible for providing other front line workers with a way to safely travel to and from essential jobs. Now that the availability of a vaccine is on the horizon, we are proud to echo the attached call from the Amalgamated Transit Union (ATU). Specifically, we urge you to work to ensure that transit, paratransit, and school transportation workers are prioritized along with other essential workers to receive the vaccine following the critical need to vaccinate the State’s healthcare workers. Even with reduced ridership, an average of 8 million monthly riders continue to depend on Bay Area transit services. These riders are the healthcare workers, grocery clerks, caregivers, emergency services personnel and others doing the critical work that has kept California functioning during the pandemic. They cannot continue to do so without access to reliable public transportation, and are therefore dependent on the health of the transit workers that serve them every day. Our agencies have worked hard to ensure the public health of riders and transit workers during this crisis.
    [Show full text]
  • ACT BART S Ites by Region.Csv TB1 TB6 TB4 TB2 TB3 TB5 TB7
    Services Transit Outreach Materials Distribution Light Rail Station Maintenance and Inspection Photography—Capture Metadata and GPS Marketing Follow-Up Programs Service Locations Dallas, Los Angeles, Minneapolis/Saint Paul San Francisco/Oakland Bay Area Our Customer Service Pledge Our pledge is to organize and act with precision to provide you with excellent customer service. We will do all this with all the joy that comes with the morning sun! “I slept and dreamed that life was joy. I awoke and saw that life was service. I acted and behold, service was joy. “Tagore Email: [email protected] Website: URBANMARKETINGCHANNELS.COM Urban Marketing Channel’s services to businesses and organizations in Atlanta, Dallas, San Francisco, Oakland and the Twin Cities metro areas since 1981 have allowed us to develop a specialty client base providing marketing outreach with a focus on transit systems. Some examples of our services include: • Neighborhood demographic analysis • Tailored response and mailing lists • Community event monitoring • Transit site management of information display cases and kiosks • Transit center rider alerts • Community notification of construction and route changes • On-Site Surveys • Enhance photo and list data with geocoding • Photographic services Visit our website (www.urbanmarketingchannels.com) Contact us at [email protected] 612-239-5391 Bay Area Transit Sites (includes BART and AC Transit.) Prepared by Urban Marketing Channels ACT BART S ites by Region.csv TB1 TB6 TB4 TB2 TB3 TB5 TB7 UnSANtit
    [Show full text]
  • Alameda Countywide Transportation Model
    ALAMEDA COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ALAMEDA COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION MODEL PLAN BAY AREA 2040 UPDATE Draft Documentation Report January, 2019 Alameda Countywide Travel Model Project #: 19752 January 10, 2019 Page i TABLE OF CONTENTS Alameda Countywide Transportation Model .......................................................................... i Plan Bay Area 2040 Update.................................................................................................................................. i Table of Contents ....................................................................................................................... i List of Tables ............................................................................................................................. iii List of Figures ............................................................................................................................. v Summary ................................................................................................................................. vii Key Features ......................................................................................................................................................... vii Key Updates .......................................................................................................................................................... ix Selected Consistency Results ............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • COVER-FINAL PBA Project List.Indd
    Strategy for a Sustainable Region July 2013 Association of Bay Area Governments Metropolitan Final Plan Bay Area Transportation Commission Project List Metropolitan Association of Transportation Bay Area Commission Governments Representatives From Cities Amy Rein Worth, Chair Supervisor Mark Luce, In Each County Cities of Contra Costa County County of Napa President Mayor Bill Harrison, Dave Cortese, Vice Chair City of Fremont Santa Clara County Mayor Julie Pierce, Alameda City of Clayton Alicia C. Aguirre Vice President Mayor Tim Sbranti, Cities of San Mateo County City of Dublin Tom Azumbrado Alameda U.S. Department of Housing Representatives Mayor Julie Pierce, and Urban Development From Each County City of Clayton Tom Bates Contra Costa Supervisor Richard Valle Cities of Alameda County Councilmember Dave Hudson, Alameda David Campos City of San Ramon Supervisor Scott Haggerty City and County of San Francisco Contra Costa Alameda Bill Dodd Mayor Pat Eklund, Supervisor Karen Mitchoff Napa County and Cities City of Novato Contra Costa Marin Dorene M. Giacopini Supervisor John Gioia U.S. Department of Transportation Mayor Leon Garcia, Contra Costa City of American Canyon Federal D. Glover Supervisor Katie Rice Napa Contra Costa County Marin Mayor Edwin Lee Scott Haggerty Supervisor Mark Luce City And County of San Francisco Alameda County Napa Jason Elliott, Director, Legislative/ Anne W. Halsted Supervisor Eric Mar Government Affairs, Office of the Mayor San Francisco Bay Conservation San Francisco City And County of San Francisco and
    [Show full text]
  • City of Menlo Park TDM Existing Conditions
    City of Menlo Park TMA Options Analysis Study: Existing Conditions ___ Client: City of Menlo Park January 2020 Our ref: 23642101 Content 3 Introduction 4 Existing Travel Options 4 Rail and Transit 5 Public and Private Shuttles 6 Existing TDM Programming 8 Travel Patterns 9 Northern Menlo Park 10 Central Menlo Park 11 Downtown Menlo Park 12 Southern Menlo Park 13 Stakeholder Outreach 13 Interviews 16 Small Business Drop Ins 18 Employee Survey 22 Conclusions 23 Next Steps 2 | January 2020 City of Menlo Park: TDM Existing Conditions Introduction TMA Options Analysis for Menlo Park Menlo Park Focus Area Zones The four zones include: The City of Menlo Park has commissioned an Options This Existing Conditions Report (and subsequent 1. Northern Menlo Park (including Bohannon Dr. Analysis for establishing a Transportation reports and analyses) focuses on four areas or area) Management Association (TMA). “zones” within the City of Menlo Park. Each zone 2. Central Menlo Park faces unique challenges due to both its location and As has been seen across Silicon Valley and generally the specific land uses and industry housed within it. 3. Downtown Menlo Park the Bay Area, recent years have brought an increase 4. Southern Menlo Park (including SLAC area) in congestion in the City of Menlo Park. Transportation Demand Management (TDM) has Figure 1: Map of Menlo Park Zone Analysis been utilized for years to curb congestion by encouraging non single-occupancy vehicle travel across worksites, cities and counties in the Bay Area and beyond. As TDM is implemented in Menlo Park at a variety of levels, the City hopes that a TMA may help to better coordinate the efforts between public and private entities in the city, and potentially region-wide.
    [Show full text]
  • Background Statement to Bay Area Regional Government
    ~1t1!trm./ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT Latham Square Building· 508 Sixteenth Street, Oakland, California 94612 • Telephone 654-7878 April 11, 1968 Mr. Chairman and Members of the Joint Committee on Bay Area Regional Government STATEMENT BY ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT BACKGROUND AND HISTORY The Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District was created in 1956 by a vote of the electorate in the East Bay. The enabling statute I the IITransi t District Law," ,..,.as adopted by the Legislature in 1955 after a long period of study and agonizing over the transit service offered by the Key System Transit Lines. As early as 1950 a report was issued to the Mayors and City Managers of the cities of the East Bay, recommending that a public agency be created to take over and operate a transit system in the East Bay. In 1953, after the disasterous 76-day Key System strike, the cities and counties of the East Bay fashioned the legislation which eventually resulted in the creation of the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit Districto Two-thirds of the cities in the originally proposed area of the District had to vote in favor of placing the matter on the ballot. The electorate in an equal number of cities in the proposed district had to vote in favor of creating the District. The Board of Directors of the District are directly elected by the voters, two at-large and five from wards evenly dis­ tributed throughout the district. The voters of the district approved a bond issue in 1959, permitting the District to purchase facilities from Key System Transit Lines and to commence operations in 1960.
    [Show full text]
  • All Nighter Bus Routes
    ve San Pablo Bay A lo Hilltop b Mall North Concord/ a Hilltop Dr P n y 4 a Contra Costa Wa Harbor St S an Martinez Pittsburg/ 14th St San Pablo College 80 pi Ap El Sobrante Leland Rd El Portal Dr d R 4th St 4 Bay Point s Market Ave s San Pablo a Da P m R Los Medanos d ow College ill 242 W Corte 680 Railroad Ave Buchanan Rd 13th St L St 23rd St Madera Castro St A St Concord Somersville Rd 580 Diablo Valley C Richmond College o Concord Blvd n t r Bailey Rd lv a r B d ylo C MacDonald Ave El Cerrito Ta o s t Clayton Rd Cutting Blvd Wildcat a B Canyon l MarinaWay Carlson Blvd del Norte v San Pablo Ave d HarbourWay Regional Mill A rli Park Monument Blvd e ng Valley E Blithedal Ave to n Kirker Pass Rd B M Moeser Ln lv Treat Blvd i d lle r A ve 101 Black Diamond Geary Rd Pleasant Hill California State Mines Regional Shoreline H El Cerrito Plaza d w Central Ave Rd R University East Bay Preserve E y m ill Valley P H o Concord Campus p a aci r t T a n i i d Yg r n b ise Albany e u a r D o r s M n G a i B Solano Ave r e N. Main St n iz l M lv z e 1 d ly P a Marin Ave P rs R e h d a Downtown OaklandCr 800 k C e a ek B m R Tiburon lv in d d o El centro de la ciudad de Oakland Gilman St P North ab B Berkeley lo ri Walnut d g Adult ew Berkeley a School Marin y 24 Blv Creek 580 City d 40th St University Ave Downtown Berkeley MacArthur Shattuck Ave Shattuck University of California Lafayette Angel Island S a Berkeley c Peralta St San PabloAve State Park Berkeley r a College Ave College Amtrak m 800 Station e Sausalito n Durant Ave Orinda MacArthur Blvd
    [Show full text]
  • West Contra Costa High-Capacity Transit Study
    West Contra Costa High-Capacity Transit Study FINAL TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM #4 Summary and Evaluation of Prior Studies September 2015 West Contra Costa High-Capacity Transit Study Document Version Control Revision Updated By Organization Description of Revision Date Incorporate feedback from BART 8/14/2015 Doris Lee Parsons Brinckerhoff Board Member City of Richmond staff requested that South Richmond Transportation 8/20/2015 Doris Lee Parsons Brinckerhoff Connectivity Plan be included. Tech memo updated to note that this plan is covered in Section 2.15 Incorporated edits to address SMG 8/27/2015 Doris Lee Parsons Brinckerhoff and TAC feedback 9/16/15 Tam Tran Parsons Brinckerhoff Made minor edits related to tense Document Sign-off Name Date Signature Rebecca Kohlstrand 09/16/15 ii Draft Summary and Evaluation of Prior Studies September 2015 West Contra Costa High-Capacity Transit Study Table of Contents 1 Introduction ......................................................................................................... 1 1.1 West Contra Costa County Transportation Setting ........................................... 1 1.2 Study Purpose .................................................................................................. 2 1.3 Purpose of this Technical Memorandum ........................................................... 3 2 Review OF Prior Studies .................................................................................... 4 2.1 BART West Contra Costa Extension Study, 1983 ...........................................
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 3: Environmental Setting and Consequences
    CHAPTER 3: ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING AND CONSEQUENCES CHAPTER 3: ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING AND CONSEQUENCES This chapter presents information on the environmental setting in the project area as well as the environmental consequences of the No-Electrification and Electrification Program Alternatives. Environmental issue categories are organized in alphabetical order, consistent with the CEQA checklist presented in Appendix A. The project study area encompasses the geographic area potentially most affected by the project. For most issues involving physical effects this is the project “footprint,” or the area that would be disturbed for or replaced by the new project facilities. This area focuses on the Caltrain corridor from the San Francisco Fourth and King Station in the City and County of San Francisco to the Gilroy Station in downtown Gilroy in Santa Clara County and also includes the various locations proposed for traction power facilities and power connections. Air quality effects may be felt over a wider area. 3.1 AESTHETICS 3.1.1 VISUAL OR AESTHETIC SETTING The visual or aesthetic environment in the Caltrain corridor is described to establish the baseline against which to compare changes resulting from construction of project facilities and the demolition or alteration of existing structures. This discussion focuses on representative locations along the railroad corridor, including existing stations (both modern and historic), tunnel portals, railroad overpasses, locations of the proposed traction power facilities and other areas where the Electrification Program would physically change above-ground features, affecting the visual appearance of the area and views enjoyed by area residents and users. For purposes of this analysis, sensitive visual receptors are defined as corridor residents and business occupants, recreational users of parks and preserved natural areas, and students of schools in the vicinity of the proposed project.
    [Show full text]
  • Transportation Air Quality Conformity Analysis for the Amended Plan Bay
    The Final Transportation-Air Quality Conformity Analysis for the Amended Plan Bay Area 2040 and the 2021 Transportation Improvement Program February 2021 Bay Area Metro Center 375 Beale Street San Francisco, CA 94105 (415) 778-6700 phone [email protected] e-mail www.mtc.ca.gov web Project Staff Matt Maloney Acting Director, Planning Therese Trivedi Assistant Director Harold Brazil Senior Planner, Project Manager 2021 Transportation Improvement Program Conformity Analysis Page | i Table of Contents I. Summary of Conformity Analysis ...................................................................................................... 1 II. Transportation Control Measures .................................................................................................... 7 History of Transportation Control Measures .............................................................................. 7 Status of Transportation Control Measures................................................................................ 9 III. Response to Public Comments ...................................................................................................... 12 IV. Conformity Findings ...................................................................................................................... 13 Appendix A. List of Projects in the 2021 Transportation Improvement Program Appendix B. List of Projects in Amended Plan Bay Area 2040 2021 Transportation Improvement Program Conformity Analysis Page | ii I. Summary of Conformity Analysis The
    [Show full text]