BICYCLE/PEDESTRIAN ACCESS TO TRANSIT SAFETY ASSESSMENT FOR EXISTING AND PLANNED SECTIONS OF US 19

Transcription

1 BICYCLE/PEDESTRIAN ACCESS TO TRANSIT SAFETY ASSESSMENT FOR EXISTING AND PLANNED SECTIONS OF US 19 Project Advisory Committee Meeting January 27, 2016 A JOINT EFFORT OF THE PINELLAS METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION AND THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT 7 1

2 Purpose Identify, understand, and improve transit access and crossings for existing and proposed conditions along US 19 2

3 Overview Progress Update Purpose and Need Statement Benefit Cost Methodology/Evaluation Pedestrian/Transit Access Strategies Other Efforts 3

4 Overview Progress Update Purpose and Need Statement Benefit Cost Methodology/Evaluation Pedestrian/Transit Access Strategies Other Efforts 4

5 Progress Update Advisory Group Meeting #1 Introduce Study Review Data Collection and Public Outreach Efforts Advisory Group Meeting #2 Review Tech Memo #1 Advisory Group Meeting #3 Identify Priority Review Locations Review Detailed Ped/Bike Crash Diagrams Active Stop Location Review Advisory Group Meeting #4 Purpose & Need Statement Benefit Cost Evaluation Ped/Transit Access Strategies 5

6 Overview Progress Update Purpose and Need Statement Benefit Cost Methodology/Evaluation Pedestrian/Transit Access Strategies Other Efforts 6

7 Purpose and Need Statement What is the Purpose and Need Statement? It defines what you are trying to accomplish and why you think it is necessary. This is not a P&N statement for the Study, but for the US 19 Corridor moving forward Intended to be a living document, capable of serving and adapting to a dynamic and evolving community. 7

8 Purpose and Need Statement Meeting was held to discuss the development of a Purpose and Need Statement Topics Included: Traffic Demand and Capacity Needs (daily and peak) Accommodations for Existing and Future Transit Needs and Goals Accommodations for Pedestrian and Bicycle Mobility Needs Support of Future Land Use Plans/Goals 8

9 Draft Purpose and Need Statement DRAFT Purpose: Provide a safe and efficient transportation facility throughout the US 19 corridor that accommodates regional travel and local access while meeting the existing and future transportation demand for all modes. 9

10 Draft Purpose and Need Statement DRAFT Need: Sufficient capacity for travel demand Address traffic safety issues Transit that is connected and accessible Pedestrian and bicycle accessibility Regional connectivity and linkages Promote economic growth and development 10

11 Overview Progress Update Purpose and Need Statement Benefit Cost Methodology/Evaluation Pedestrian/Transit Access Strategies Other Efforts 11

12 Benefit Cost Methodology/Evaluation Purpose: Establish a methodology to evaluate various crossing options along US 19. Why? Inform future planning discussions and decision making 12

13 Benefit Cost Methodology/Evaluation Assumptions: Benefit: Provide safe pedestrian/bicycle (cross) access to bus stop pairs, Cost: Capital and Operating Cost of assumed life cycle investment (50 years) 13

14 Benefit Cost Methodology/Evaluation Evaluated Alternatives: No Build Overpass (vehicular) Underpass (vehicular) Pedestrian Overpass Pedestrian Underpass Transit Circulator Service 14

15 Benefit Cost Methodology/Evaluation Estimated Capital Costs: Alternative No Build Vehicular Overpass Vehicular Underpass Pedestrian Overpass Pedestrian Underpass Estimated Capital Cost No direct costs (no enhancement to existing/planned cross connections) $10 20 Million $5 20 Million $1 $7 Million $2 $8 Million Transit Circulator* $200,000 *Does not include operating costs 15

16 Cost Benefit Methodology/Evaluation Comparing the cost of a Pedestrian Overpass to a Transit Circulator Pedestrian Overpass Transit Circulator Capital Cost $4,000,000 Capital Cost (3 buses) $187,500 Annual Maintenance $1,000 Annual Maintenance $15,000 ($5,000 per vehicle) Annual Operations $10,000 Annual Operations 1 $540,500 Major Capital Maintenance (25 years) $50,000 Fare Revenue 2 $54,000 Painting (5 years) $10,000 Life Span 50 Years Vehicle Life Span 10 Years 1 Service vehicles operate 20 hours per day, for 359 days per year resulting in 14,360 revenue hours passengers per day at average fare of $

17 Cost Benefit Methodology/Evaluation Comparing the cost of a Pedestrian Overpass to a Transit Circulator Present value cost, including capital and operations: Pedestrian Overpass Transit Circulator $4,400,000 $16,300,000 17

18 Overview Progress Update Purpose and Need Statement Benefit Cost Methodology/Evaluation Pedestrian/Transit Access Strategies Other Efforts 18

19 Purpose of Strategies Look at longer term transit operating alternatives and develop a set of potential access and phasing strategies 19

20 Purpose of Strategies Three Parts: Transit Alternatives Access Strategies Phasing Strategies 20

21 Transit Alternatives Separate Transit from US 19 Status Quo (Local Route Service) Local and Circulator Route Service Local Route with Express Service Mainline Express Service on Shoulder Mainline Express/Rapid Service in Center Median 21

22 Transit Alternatives Separate Transit and US 19 Transit improvements along parallel corridor Status Quo (Local Route Service) Local Route service on frontage roads Some stop consolidation and placement improvements Some route modifications, such as splitting the route and/or modifying and removing deviations 22

23 Transit Alternatives Local and Circulator Route Service Local route service supplemented with circulator service to help facilitate connections Local Route with Express Service Stops on frontage roads or park and ride lots Key activity centers Local route overlay along frontage roads would support express/limited express service, Express could operate partially on mainline lanes 23

24 Transit Alternatives (continued) Mainline Express Service on Shoulder Express service along the mainline lanes with shoulder stops, supported with local/circulator service Mainline Express/Bus Rapid Transit Higher investment service Could add managed lanes for further capacity improvement Potential center/median station areas 24

25 Access Strategies How can transit users (pedestrians) access the bus stop locations for the various proposed transit alternatives? 25

26 Demonstration Location Republic Dr Evans Rd SR 580/Main St Evans Rd For Example Purpose Only 26

27 Demonstration Location 2,200 2,900 For Example Purpose Only 27

28 Demonstration Location Republic Dr ~65 bus riders For Example Purpose Only 28

29 Access Examples Proposed Design For Example Purpose Only 29

30 Access Example Frontage Rd Overpass Concept For Example Purpose Only 30

31 Access Example Frontage Rd Overpass Concept For Example Purpose Only 31

32 Access Example Frontage Rd Pedestrian Overpass For Example Purpose Only 32

33 Access Example Frontage Rd Pedestrian Overpass For Example Purpose Only 33

34 Access Example Shoulder Stop Vehicular Overpass with Mainline Shoulder Transit Stop For Example Purpose Only 34

35 Access Example Shoulder Stop Vehicular Overpass with Mainline Shoulder Transit Stop For Example Purpose Only 35

36 Access Example Shoulder Stop Pedestrian Overpass with Mainline Shoulder Transit Stop For Example Purpose Only 36

37 Access Example Shoulder Stop Pedestrian Overpass with Mainline Shoulder Transit Stop For Example Purpose Only 37

38 Access Example Shoulder Stop I 110 at Pacific Coast Hwy, Wilmington, CA (Los Angeles) For Example Purpose Only 38

39 Access Example Shoulder Stop US 36 (Denver Boulder Tpk) at W 116th Ave, Broomfield, CO For Example Purpose Only 39

40 Access Example Median Stop Vehicular Overpass with Mainline Median Transit Stop For Example Purpose Only 40

41 Access Example Median Stop Pedestrian VehicularOverpass Overpasswith withmainline Mainline Shoulder MedianTransit TransitStop Stop For Example Purpose Only 41

42 Access Example Median Stop I 405 at NE 128th St, Kirkland, WA For Example Purpose Only 42

43 Access Example Median Stop I 90 at 142nd Pl SE, Bellevue, WA Park n Ride Bus Stops For Example Purpose Only 43

44 Access Strategies Connectivity: Look at potential to connect the spaces between retailers US 19 Use shortest walking path. Nebraska Ave 16th St Pedestrian Mall, Denver, CO For Example Purpose Only 44

45 Phasing Strategies Potential Phasing Options for Transit Development and Ped/Bike Enhancements Mid Term Express Bus Some Shoulder Stops Short Term Local/Express Overlay Low Cost Mid Term Local Bus on Shoulder Frontage Rd Stops Strategic Enhancement Long Term Mainline Transit Shoulder Operation Long Term Mainline Transit BRT Long Term Mainline Station Area Development Coordinated Major Infrastructure Investments 45

46 Recap Progress Update Purpose and Need Statement Benefit Cost Methodology/Evaluation Pedestrian/Transit Access Strategies Other Efforts 46

47 Other Efforts What s left Finalize Purpose and Need Statement Finalize Benefit Cost Methodology and Incorporate into Strategies Discussion Finalize Pedestrian/Transit Access Strategies and Alternatives Present Study to MPO and PSTA Board 47

48 Other Efforts DRAFT Case Studies Document (separate FDOT effort) 48

49 Other Efforts Initial takeaways Bus stop location matters directly adjacent to crossings Plan stop spacing based on crossing opportunities Where there are intermittent signals, look at closer signal spacing Design routes to minimize out of direction travel 49

50 Other Efforts Initial takeaways Develop a clear access plan for station areas and identify a hierarchy of modes of access Use the space you have be creative Try to locate stops away from interchanges for routes along grade separated highways 50

51 Discussion & Questions 51

52 Further Information Project website: FDOT Contact: Elba Lopez Regional Transit/Intermodal Systems Planning FDOT District 7 Intermodal Systems Development (ISD) Phone: elba.lopez@dot.state.fl.us Pinellas MPO Contact: Sarah Perch Principal Planner Pinellas County Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) Phone: sperch@pinellascounty.org Consultant Contact: Chris Keller Phone: ckeller@tindaleoliver.com 52