Northside Intermodal Center / Amtrak Relocation at Atlantic Station
Presented by: France Campbell, PE, PTOE, AECOM
Stakeholder Workshop #2: Tuesday, January 28, 2014 Presentation Overview • Project Overview • Development Scenarios • Traffic Study Methodology • Traffic Study Preliminary Findings • Open Discussion
Stakeholder Workshop #2: Tuesday, January 28, 2014 Traffic Impacts Review Process • Current task is to evaluate the potential traffic impacts of relocating Amtrak station and developing an intermodal center at the proposed site.
• Development of a new intermodal center southeast corner of Northside Drive and 17th Street near Atlantic Station.
• Project would initially accommodate a relocated Amtrak station plus local, regional, and intercity bus services.
• Later phases may provide potential connections to additional transit services: BRT, light rail, other passenger rail?
Stakeholder Workshop #2: Tuesday, January 28, 2014 Project Purpose & Need (P&N) • An improved Amtrak station that adequately accommodates current/future passenger needs without delaying freight movement. • An intermodal center for the Northside Drive corridor and Atlantic Station area. • Optimal transit service connections, vehicle access and parking that benefit Amtrak passengers. • ADA-compliant passenger facilities. • Structurally sound infrastructure maintained to a state of good repair.
Source: Examiner.com Source: SRTA Stakeholder Workshop #2: Tuesday, January 28, 2014 Project Location • SRTA-owned parcel bound by Lionstone parcel, 17th Street, and Norfolk-Southern railroad corridor. • Atlantic Station shuttle could provide direct access to Arts Center MARTA station. • Adjacent privately-owned property will be evaluated (Lionstone parcel), but not currently included as part of the intermodal site.
Stakeholder Workshop #2: Tuesday, January 28, 2014 Existing Conditions – Brookwood/Peachtree Station • Existing Amtrak Station and parking areas are inadequate. • No dedicated layover tracks for Amtrak – trains must stop on Norfolk Southern mainline track for boarding/de-boarding, resulting in delays within freight network. • Passenger platform access is not ADA-compliant • Limited space and engineering constraints make expansion on existing site infeasible. • Conditions cannot meet projected passenger growth
Stakeholder Workshop #2: Tuesday, January 28, 2014 Regional Transit Vision • Northside Intermodal Center would be one of three intermodal passenger centers envisioned by Concept 3. • These intermodal centers will complement and facilitate transit operations at the Georgia Multimodal Passenger Terminal (MMPT). Doraville/ Northside Norcross
MMPT
Southern Crescent
Stakeholder Workshop #2: Tuesday, January 28, 2014 Potential Project Phasing Phase 1 (Short-Term) • Fulfills immediate need to relocate Amtrak station. • Intermodal center for local bus, regional bus, and intercity bus. Phase 2 (Long-Term) • Provide additional intermodal services by connecting to planned or programmed transit corridors. • Could include potential connections to Cobb BRT, transit improvements within Northside Drive corridor, and Atlanta Streetcar/Atlanta BeltLine. Phase 3 (Aspirations) • Could fulfill longer term regional vision for other passenger rail services. • Concept 3 vision of three intermodal centers feeding into downtown MMPT.
Source: SRTA Stakeholder Workshop #2: Tuesday, January 28, 2014 Project Funding • Amtrak Station Relocation project was recently recommended to be included in the ARC PLAN 2040 RTP Project List as programmed for construction in 2019.
Stakeholder Workshop #2: Tuesday, January 28, 2014 Transit-Oriented Development and Joint Development • Study will evaluate impacts/benefits of developing high-density development around the Northside Intermodal Center to help create transit-oriented development (TOD) and increase economic development opportunities in Atlantic Station area.
• The 13-acre site (SRTA parcel + Lionstone parcel) will be evaluated, although intermodal construction is only being considered for the SRTA-owned property and within Norfolk Southern-owned rights-of-way.
Source: SRTA Source: San Francisco Transbay Center Stakeholder Workshop #2: Tuesday, January 28, 2014 Development Scenarios: Development Assumptions
Scenario Land Area Development 1 SRTA Site Only Low-density commercial development
2 SRTA Site Only Maximize commercial development allowed under of existing I-2 zoning district 3 Rezoning to C-4: SRTA Site Only Maximum residential + commercial
development FAR allowed 4 Rezoning to C-4: SRTA+Lionstone Maximum residential + commercial development FAR allowed 5a 5a: Mixed-use Rezoning to C-4: Mid-rise development, SRTA Site Only 5a similar to The District in Atl. Station 5b: Non- residential 6a 6a: Mixed-use Rezoning to C-4: Mid-rise development, SRTA+Lionstone 6b similar to The District in Atl. Station 6b: Non- residential
Stakeholder Workshop #2: Tuesday, January 28, 2014 Development Scenarios: Development Assumptions
Scenario Land Area Development 1 SRTA Site Only Low-density commercial development
2 SRTA Site Only Maximize commercial development allowed under of existing I-2 zoning district 3 Rezoning to C-4: SRTA Site Only Maximum residential + commercial
development FAR allowed 4 Rezoning to C-4: SRTA+Lionstone Maximum residential + commercial development FAR allowed 5a 5a: Mixed-use Rezoning to C-4: Mid-rise development, SRTA Site Only 5a similar to The District in Atl. Station 5b: Non- residential 6a 6a: Mixed-use Rezoning to C-4: Mid-rise development, SRTA+Lionstone 6b similar to The District in Atl. Station 6b: Non- residential
Stakeholder Workshop #2: Tuesday, January 28, 2014 Development Scenarios: Development Assumptions
Scenario Land Area Development 1 SRTA Site Only Low-density commercial development
2 SRTA Site Only Maximize commercial development allowed under of existing I-2 zoning district 3 Rezoning to C-4: SRTA Site Only Maximum residential + commercial
development FAR allowed 4 Rezoning to C-4: SRTA+Lionstone Maximum residential + commercial development FAR allowed 5a 5a: Mixed-use Rezoning to C-4: Mid-rise development, SRTA Site Only 5a similar to The District in Atl. Station 5b: Non- residential 6a 6a: Mixed-use Rezoning to C-4: Mid-rise development, SRTA+Lionstone 6b similar to The District in Atl. Station 6b: Non- residential
Stakeholder Workshop #2: Tuesday, January 28, 2014 Development Scenarios: Development Assumptions
Scenario Land Area Development 1 SRTA Site Only Low-density commercial development
2 SRTA Site Only Maximize commercial development allowed under of existing I-2 zoning district 3 Rezoning to C-4: SRTA Site Only Maximum residential + commercial
development FAR allowed 4 Rezoning to C-4: SRTA+Lionstone Maximum residential + commercial development FAR allowed 5a 5a: Mixed-use Rezoning to C-4: Mid-rise development, SRTA Site Only 5a similar to The District in Atl. Station 5b: Non- residential 6a 6a: Mixed-use Rezoning to C-4: Mid-rise development, SRTA+Lionstone 6b similar to The District in Atl. Station 6b: Non- residential
Stakeholder Workshop #2: Tuesday, January 28, 2014 Development Scenarios: Development Assumptions
Scenario Land Area Development 1 SRTA Site Only Low-density commercial development
2 SRTA Site Only Maximize commercial development allowed under of existing I-2 zoning district 3 Rezoning to C-4: SRTA Site Only Maximum residential + commercial
development FAR allowed 4 Rezoning to C-4: SRTA + Lionstone Maximum residential + commercial development FAR allowed 5a 5a: Mixed-use Rezoning to C-4: Mid-rise development, SRTA Site Only 5a similar to The District in Atl. Station 5b: Non- residential 6a 6a: Mixed-use Rezoning to C-4: Mid-rise development, SRTA+Lionstone 6b similar to The District in Atl. Station 6b: Non- residential
Stakeholder Workshop #2: Tuesday, January 28, 2014 Development Scenarios: Development Assumptions
Scenario Land Area Development 1 SRTA Site Only Low-density commercial development
2 SRTA Site Only Maximize commercial development allowed under of existing I-2 zoning district 3 Rezoning to C-4: SRTA Site Only Maximum residential + commercial
development FAR allowed 4 Rezoning to C-4: SRTA+Lionstone Maximum residential + commercial development FAR allowed 5a 5a: Mixed-use Rezoning to C-4: Mid-rise development, SRTA Site Only 5a similar to The District in Atl. Station 5b: Non- residential 6a 6a: Mixed-use Rezoning to C-4: Mid-rise development, SRTA + Lionstone similar to The District in Atl. Station 6b: Non- residential 6b
Stakeholder Workshop #2: Tuesday, January 28, 2014 Development Scenarios: Development Assumptions
Scenario Land Area Development 1 SRTA Site Only Low-density commercial development
2 SRTA Site Only Maximize commercial development allowed under of existing I-2 zoning district 3 Rezoning to C-4: SRTA Site Only Maximum residential + commercial
development FAR allowed 4 Rezoning to C-4: SRTA+Lionstone Maximum residential + commercial development FAR allowed 5a 5a: Mixed-use Rezoning to C-4: Mid-rise development, SRTA Site Only 5a similar to The District in Atl. Station 5b: Non- residential 6a 6a: Mixed-use Rezoning to C-4: Mid-rise development, SRTA + Lionstone 6b similar to The District in Atl. Station 6b: Non- residential
Stakeholder Workshop #2: Tuesday, January 28, 2014 Traffic Study • Existing Transportation Facilities • Existing Traffic Volumes • Existing Transit • Background Growth Rate • Development Scenarios • Transportation Components • Other Development • Findings and Proposed Solutions • Summary
Stakeholder Workshop #2: Tuesday, January 28, 2014 Existing Transportation Facilities • 17th Street • Six-lane divided Urban Collector • Northern boundary of the project site • Provides the primary access to the site • Posted speed limit ranges from 25 to 35 mph • Approximately 6% of the traffic is heavy vehicles • Bus only lane in eastbound direction starting at Bishop Street
Stakeholder Workshop #2: Tuesday, January 28, 2014 Existing Transportation Facilities • Northside Drive • Four-lane undivided Urban Major Arterial • Western boundary of the Lionstone property • Provides access to both properties in several of the development scenarios • Posted speed limit is 35 mph
• Bishop Street • Two-lane undivided Urban Collector • Proposed south leg of the Bishop Street at 17th Street intersection would be the primary access point to the project site • Posted speed limit is 25 mph 17th Street at Bishop Street Stakeholder Workshop #2: Tuesday, January 28, 2014 Existing Traffic Volumes • Study Intersections • Northside Drive at 17th Street • 17th Street at Bishop Street
28,350
4,250
14,550
8,800 13,800 27,000
Stakeholder Workshop #2: Tuesday, January 28, 2014 Existing Transit • One MARTA route (Route 37 – Defoors Ferry Rd/Atlantic Station) operates in the study area along Northside Drive and 17th Street.
Stakeholder Workshop #2: Tuesday, January 28, 2014 Background Growth Rate • The annual growth rate was estimated from traffic volume information obtained from the GDOT’s Annual Traffic Count Data. • Historical AADT volumes and the corresponding growth rates were calculated at four traffic count locations in the vicinity of the project. • Annual growth rate of one (1) percent used to be conservative
Historical AADT Volumes and Growth Rate
TC 5018 TC 5016 TC 5675 TC 5633 (Northside Dr (Northside Dr (Howell Mill Rd (14th St east of Year north of 17th St) south of 10th St) south of 17th St) Northside Dr) 1993 32,500 22,000 13,400 13,500 2012 25,490 25,660 18,660 13,260 Annual -1.3% 0.8% 1.8% -0.1% Growth 0.3%
Stakeholder Workshop #2: Tuesday, January 28, 2014 Development Scenarios: Transportation Components • Amtrak rail station: • 1,200-foot long platform • 16,000 square foot station • Intercity bus station: • 7,000 square foot station needed in addition to Amtrak station if jointly developed with some facilities shared • Twelve bus slips • layover bus parking spaces • Other potential services: • MARTA and other local and regional bus services • New stop for Atlantic Station shuttle to Arts Center MARTA Station and/or Georgia Tech Stinger Shuttle service • Taxi stand and other rideshare and vanpools • Cobb County BRT stop by year 2040
Stakeholder Workshop #2: Tuesday, January 28, 2014 Development Scenarios: Transportation Components • Trip Generation • Amtrak Rail Station: • Observed trip generation in the field (December 6, 2013 and December 13, 2013) • Inter-city bus service: • Estimated by reviewing the bus schedule for Greyhound • Atlantic Station Shuttle: • Estimated based on the existing schedule of the Atlantic Station Shuttle • Georgia Tech Shuttle (Stinger) • Estimated based on the existing schedule of the Green Route shuttle
Stakeholder Workshop #2: Tuesday, January 28, 2014 Development Scenarios: Trip/Parking Generation Summary • Net new external trips (with Transportation Components) • Parking space requirements (with Transportation Components)
Scenario AM Pk Hr Trips PM Pk Hr Trips Parking Spaces Scenario 1 484 273 249 Scenario 2 819 1,500 2,651 Scenario 3 1,726 3,801 3,610 Scenario 4 2,728 6,547 7,511 Scenario 5a 1,067 1,168 998 Scenario 5b 1,681 1,679 1,949 Scenario 6a 1,676 2,107 1,900 Scenario 6b 2,680 3,359 3,883
Stakeholder Workshop #2: Tuesday, January 28, 2014 Development Scenarios: Trip Generation Summary • Net new external trips (with Transportation Components)
AM and PM Peak Hour Trips 7,000 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 AM Pk Hr Trips 2,000 PM Pk Hr Trips 1,000 0
Stakeholder Workshop #2: Tuesday, January 28, 2014 Development Scenarios: Parking Generation Summary • Parking space requirements (with Transportation Components)
Parking Spaces 8,000 7,000 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 Parking Spaces 2,000 1,000 0
Stakeholder Workshop #2: Tuesday, January 28, 2014 Development Scenarios: Findings Summary • The feasibility of all roadway and intersection improvements will be further evaluated and are only for baseline evaluation purposes. • Scenario 1 and Scenario 5a – Would only require intersection improvements at the study area intersections to provide adequate levels of service (LOS D or better). • Scenario 2 or Scenario 5b – Intersection improvements alone provided adequate levels of service at the 17th Street at Bishop Street intersection but the Northside Drive at 17th Street intersection operates at a LOS E in the PM peak hour. • Scenario 3, Scenario 4, Scenario 6a, and Scenario 6b – Intersection improvements alone could not provide adequate levels of service at the Northside Drive at 17th Street or at the Northside Drive and Site Access RIRO intersection . Stakeholder Workshop #2: Tuesday, January 28, 2014 Development Scenarios: Potential Improvements Summary
Scenario Optimize & Intersection Restripe EB 17th St Northside Widen 17th Coord. Turn Lane Bus Only RIRO RIRO St and/or Traffic Imps. Lane Prior Access Access Northside Signals to Bishop Dr Scenario 1 X X Scenario 2 X X X Scenario 3 X X X X Scenario 4 X X X X X X Scenario 5a X X X X Scenario 5b X X X X Scenario 6a X X X X X Scenario 6b X X X X X
Stakeholder Workshop #2: Tuesday, January 28, 2014 Open Discussion • What are your thoughts on the number of Development Scenarios?
• Does anyone have similar experience?
• Questions?
Stakeholder Workshop #2: Tuesday, January 28, 2014 Special Thanks!
• Harry Boxler, AICP Rail Planner, Division of Intermodal, GDOT • Brian Smart Senior Transit Planner, AECOM • Scott Brown Transportation Planner, AECOM
Stakeholder Workshop #2: Tuesday, January 28, 2014