Transitional Analysis to Locally Preferred Alternatives Final Report - September, 2006 Prepared by STV Incorporated In Association with Karen Brean Associates Michael Baker, Jr. Inc. Eastern Corridor Transit Study Transitional Analysis to Locally Preferred Alternatives Final Report - September, 2006 Table of Contents 1 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................................1-1 1.1 STUDY HISTORY (ECTS) ....................................................................................................................1-1 1.2 STUDY PURPOSE AND FEDERAL PLANNING PROCESS ..........................................................................1-3 1.3 ECTS-TA STUDY PROCESS................................................................................................................1-5 2 PUBLIC OUTREACH AND AGENCY COORDINATION .........................................................................2-1 2.1 STEERING COMMITTEE........................................................................................................................2-1 2.2 ELECTED OFFICIALS ...........................................................................................................................2-1 2.3 TARGETED/PUBLIC OUTREACH ...........................................................................................................2-1 2.4 COORDINATION WITH OTHER STUDY EFFORTS .....................................................................................2-3 2.5 NEWSLETTER .....................................................................................................................................2-5 2.6 WEBSITE ............................................................................................................................................2-5 3 ALTERNATIVES UNDER CONSIDERATION..........................................................................................3-1 3.1 ALLEGHENY VALLEY COMMUTER RAIL ................................................................................................3-3 3.2 EAST BUSWAY EXTENSION .................................................................................................................3-5 3.3 NORFOLK SOUTHERN COMMUTER RAIL ...............................................................................................3-7 3.4 MON VALLEY LIGHT RAIL....................................................................................................................3-9 3.5 SPINE LINE LIGHT RAIL .....................................................................................................................3-11 3.6 DOWNTOWN PITTSBURGH TO OAKLAND BUS RAPID TRANSIT.............................................................3-14 4 EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVES.........................................................................................................4-1 4.1 EVALUATION.......................................................................................................................................4-1 4.2 FINAL RECOMMENDATIONS / LOCALLY PREFERRED ALTERNATIVES....................................................4-10 5 NEXT STEPS ............................................................................................................................................5-1 5.1 ENTRY INTO SPC LONG RANGE PLAN.................................................................................................5-1 5.2 NEXT STUDY PHASES – ADVANCED PLANNING AND DEIS OR EA .........................................................5-1 5.3 INCORPORATION OF OTHER STUDIES AND ALTERNATIVES ....................................................................5-3 5.4 IDENTIFICATION OF POTENTIAL FUNDING SOURCES..............................................................................5-3 APPENDIX A: STUDY NEWSLETTER STV Incorporated Page i Eastern Corridor Transit Study Transitional Analysis to Locally Preferred Alternatives Final Report - September, 2006 Tables TABLE 4-1: SAMPLE EVALUATION MATRIX ................................................................................................................ 4-1 TABLE 4-2: EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVES - IMPROVED TRANSIT SERVICE QUALITY AND ALTERNATIVES TO DRIVING .. 4-4 TABLE 4-3: EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVES - CONVENIENT, CONTINUOUSLY LINKED TRANSIT NETWORK..................... 4-5 TABLE 4-4: EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVES- COST EFFECTIVENESS .......................................................................... 4-6 TABLE 4-5: EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVES - EXISTING RESOURCES AND COMMUNITY COORDINATION ....................... 4-7 TABLE 4-6: EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVES - PUBLIC SUPPORT ................................................................................. 4-8 TABLE 4-7: SUMMARY OF EVALUATION CHARACTERISTICS ........................................................................................ 4-9 Figures FIGURE 1-1: STUDY AREA MAP................................................................................................................................1-2 FIGURE 1-2: FEDERAL MAJOR INVESTMENT PLANNING AND PROJECT DEVELOPMENT PROCESS ................................. 1-4 FIGURE 1-3: ECTS-TA STUDY PROCESS................................................................................................................. 1-6 FIGURE 2-1: STUDY WEBSITE .................................................................................................................................. 2-2 FIGURE 3-1: ALLEGHENY VALLEY COMMUTER RAIL MAP ........................................................................................... 3-4 FIGURE 3-2: EAST BUSWAY EXTENSION MAP ........................................................................................................... 3-6 FIGURE 3-3: NORFOLK SOUTHERN COMMUTER RAIL MAP ......................................................................................... 3-8 FIGURE 3-4: MON VALLEY LIGHT RAIL MAP ............................................................................................................ 3-10 FIGURE 3-5: SPINE LINE (WILKINSBURG) LIGHT RAIL MAP....................................................................................... 3-12 FIGURE 3-6: SPINE LINE (HOMESTEAD) LIGHT RAIL MAP......................................................................................... 3-13 STV Incorporated Page ii Eastern Corridor Transit Study Transitional Analysis to Locally Preferred Alternatives Final Report - September, 2006 1 INTRODUCTION The Eastern Corridor Transit Study Transitional Analysis to Locally Preferred Alternatives (ECTS-TA) was sponsored by the Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission (SPC), Westmoreland County Transit Authority (WCTA), Allegheny County and the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PennDOT) to advance the results of the earlier Eastern Corridor Transit Study (ECTS) toward implementation of one or more transit investments. 1.1 STUDY HISTORY (ECTS) The ECTS, sponsored by the Port Authority of Allegheny County (PAAC), the SPC and WCTA, was a multi-corridor Major Investment Study completed in December of 2003 that identified the public transportation needs and community concerns in an area bounded by Pittsburgh’s Golden Triangle in the west, Greensburg in the east, the Allegheny River to the north and the Monongahela River to the south (see Figure 1-1). As part of the effort to systematically identify transit solutions to the region’s transportation needs, an extensive public outreach campaign was conducted to allow the public, stakeholders and elected officials to participate in the definition of those needs. The result of this process was a Statement of Needs for the study area1. 1 ECTS Statement of Needs: 1. Improve transit choices in the Study Corridor – Provide more rapid transit service and choices in the study area, inclusive of community circulator routes within neighborhoods and improved connections to through routes. Improve access to Oakland from the Airport and other locations in the corridor. Consider serving areas beyond the study corridor (e.g. Pittsburgh International Airport, Cranberry) and improve service and connections to developing areas such as the Waterfront (Homestead), Monroeville, RIDC and Penn Township. Provide more park-and-ride lots for convenient access to both fixed guideway transit and fixed-route bus service. 2. Improve the quality of service and amenities at station stops and transfer points – Provide more direct and more efficient links between the suburbs, urban areas and activity centers. Lengthen transit service periods and provide more frequent service to allow more flexibility to access jobs and recreational activities during non-business hours. Upgrade transit stops with sufficient seating areas, protection from the elements and visually aesthetic designs. Provide better information about transit service routes, transfer points and intermodal connections including those between service providers. 3. Preserve, protect and utilize existing transportation resources – Identify a mechanism to preserve rail rights-of- way within the study corridor and region. Improve transit service and access in the Allegheny Valley through the use of an underutilized transportation facility (e.g. Allegheny Valley Railroad) to accommodate transit service to areas in Lawrenceville, Oakmont and New Kensington. Provide dedicated bus lanes and/or transit prioritization to speed up service between areas in Westmoreland and Allegheny