Community Task Force March 14, 2018

Similar documents
Community Task Force October 5, 2017

Technical Working Group November 15, 2017

Community Task Force July 25, 2017

Community Task Force November 15, 2017

Community Task Force August 8, 2018

Bus Rapid Transit ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS. Open House

BID Workshop September 12, 2017

Eliminate on-street parking where it will allow for a dedicated bus only lane %

A District Council of the Urban Land Institute

Telegraph Avenue Complete Streets DRAFT Recommendations. Oakland Public Works Department September 11 and 13, 2014 Open Houses

In station areas, new pedestrian links can increase network connectivity and provide direct access to stations.

BETHEL ROAD AND SEDGWICK ROAD CORRIDOR STUDY

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

Providence Downtown Transit Connector STAKEHOLDER MEETING #2. Stakeholder Meeting #1 October 24, 2016

THE ALAMEDA CONCEPT DESIGN COMMUNITY MEETING 3. A Plan for The Beautiful Way JANUARY 28, 2010

Tonight is for you. Learn everything you can. Share all your ideas.

122 Avenue: 107 Street to Fort Road

Item B1 November 19, 2009

Capital Metro Downtown Multimodal Station

Better Market Street Project Update. Urban Forestry Council September 17, 2014

Arterial Transitway Corridors Study. Ave

WELCOME! Please complete a comment sheet as we value your feedback. 4 pm to 8 pm. September 15, Hosted by: AECOM on behalf of City of Calgary

Preliminary Transportation Analysis

Chapter 3 BUS IMPROVEMENT CONCEPTS

Downtown Naples Mobility and Connectivity Study. Naples City Council Presentation January 2017

Richmond-Adelaide Cycle Tracks

Afeasibility study to evaluate bus rapid transit service in the East-West Corridor connecting major employment and activity centers between downtown

Downtown BRT Corridor Alternatives Review: 1 st, 2 nd, 3 rd and 4 th Avenue. Bus Rapid and Conventional Transit Planning and Design Services

City of Sammamish. Welcome. Issaquah-Fall City Road Improvements Project Phase I Design: 242nd Avenue SE to Klahanie Drive SE

Corridor Advisory Group and Task Force Meeting #10. July 27, 2011

EL CAMINO REAL BUS RAPID TRANSIT PROJECT

Wyldewood Estates. Pre-Application Public Engagement Summary of Issues and Responses

Main-McVay Transit Study: Phase 2 Options Definition and High Level Constraints Evaluation

Arterial Transitway Corridors Study. Sept. 26, 2011

PROJECT OVERVIEW. 20th Avenue Project Limits (Lincoln Way to Wawona St)

Ann Arbor Downtown Street Plan

Beach Cities Living Streets Design Manual and Aviation Boulevard Multimodal Corridor Plan

Transportation Assessment

Data Analysis February to March Identified safety needs from reported collisions and existing travel patterns.

Chapter 6 Transportation Plan

Roadways. Roadways III.

Kennedy Plaza and Providence Downtown Transit Connector PUBLIC MEETING. Stakeholder Meeting #1 October 24, 2016

North Shore Transportation Improvement Strategy

95 th Street Corridor Transportation Plan. Steering Committee Meeting #2

WELCOME. Stakeholder Involvement Group Meeting #2 Round Lake Public Works October 24, 2018

Caltrans Sloat Boulevard Pedestrian Safety Project Response to Community Questions, Comments & Concerns

Appendix A-2: Screen 1 Alternatives Report

Agenda. Overview PRINCE GEORGE S PLAZA METRO AREA PEDESTRIAN PLAN

FOLSOM-HOWARD STREETSCAPE OVERVIEW

Cherry Creek Transportation and Land Use Forum September 25, 2013 Meeting Summary

Seattle Transit Master Plan

CITY OF SLO SEEKS INPUT ON PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE FOR BROAD STREET BICYCLE BOULEVARD PROJECT

Appendix A-K Public Information Centre 2 Materials

APPENDIX 2 LAKESHORE ROAD TRANSPORTATION REVIEW STUDY EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Bike/Multipurpose Trail Study for Glynn County, Georgia MAY 16, 2016

September 20, 2016 L Taraval Rapid Project SFMTA Board of Directors Meeting

Citizen Advisory Group Meeting #8 May 5, Welcome. Today s meeting will focus on: Land Use & Transportation CHARLOTTEPLANNING.

Road Diets FDOT Process

Southview Blvd & 3 rd Avenue Improvement Project. Public Open House December 4, to 7pm

MARKET/JFK VISION ZERO PILOT PROJECT FEBRUARY 2019 EVALUATION REPORT


Bicycle Master Plan Goals, Strategies, and Policies

Advancing Transportation Choices in Des Moines. MPO Environmental Roundtable January 9, 2018

Public Information Meeting

West Capitol Avenue Road Rehabilitation and Safety Enhancement Project

Southwest Bus Rapid Transit (SW BRT) Functional Planning Study - Executive Summary January 19 LPT ATTACHMENT 2.

Arterial Transitway Corridors Study

6 Screen 3 Analysis and Results

Report. Typical Sections. City of Middleton, WI

Project Kickoff Meeting February 15, 2018

GEARY CORRIDOR BUS RAPID TRANSIT Environmental Analysis. Special Intersections: Preliminary Concepts

BID Strategy Group and Stakeholders Meeting. April 17, 2018

Data Analysis February to March Identified safety needs from reported collisions and existing travel patterns.

Exhibit 1 PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA ITEM

9. TRANSIT ACCOMMODATIONS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY. Vision

Feasibility Study. Expo-Downtown Bicycle Connector

Pine Hills Road Pedestrian/Bicycle Safety Study Board of County Commissioners Work Session

MASTER BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN PLAN

Bikeway action plan. Bicycle Friendly Community Workshop March 5, 2007 Rochester, MN

City of Birmingham Draft Multi-modal Transportation Plan

Broad Street Bicycle Boulevard Design Guidelines

Pre-Plan Consultation Summary

Thank you for attending

Better Market Street Project. Project Update January 15, 2015

Public Works Committee Meeting Richard E. Mastrangelo Council Chamber November 20, 2017

CITY OF COCOA BEACH 2025 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. Section VIII Mobility Element Goals, Objectives, and Policies

Columbia Pike Implementation Team (CPIT) Meeting

Major Bike Routes 102 Avenue Workshop April 21, 2015

Transportation Planning Division

WELCOME BUS RAPID TRANSIT PUBLIC MEETING. MEETING TIME: 5 p.m. - 8 p.m.

Project Goal and Description. Why Broadway? Broadway SFMTA.COM/BROADWAY. The goal of the Broadway Safety Improvement

Lee s Summit Road Improvement Study Public Open House June 7, 2007 Summary of Comment Card Responses

Sixth Line Development - Transit Facilities Plan

Third Street Bridge & Corridor Project

Transportation Planning Division

Los Altos Hills Town Council - June 18, 2015 Palo Alto City Council June 22, AGENDA ITEM #2.B Presentation

TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Agenda Staff Report

Governance and Priorities Committee Report For the July 2, 2015 Meeting

Public Event 1 Community Workshops

Transcription:

Community Task Force March 14, 2018

Welcome and Introductions

Project Partners Regional Transportation District (RTD) City of Aurora Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) Denver Regional Council of Governments (DRCOG)

Meeting Purpose and Agenda

Meeting Purpose Summary of community feedback on center-running BRT Review/discuss areas of emphasis for detailed design: Traffic analysis Local access Stop spacing/connectivity Decision-making process and next steps

Agenda Project update Community input summary Traffic analysis Local access Stop spacing Breakout group discussion Next steps

Project Update

Corridor Development Timeline Opportunity for Stakeholders and Public To Influence Project Design Broad Definition of Project Alternatives Analysis Conceptual Design & Environmental Analysis Design Detail Engineering & Design Construction 12-18 18 months 18-24 months months Federal Transit Administration Project Development Revenue Service Ongoing We Are Here Locally Preferred Alternative Definition of mode & alignment Conceptual station locations Operating plan Local decision Concept Design & Environmental Clearances Design detail determined Environmental impacts identified Fully Designed and Funded Project Design complete Finance package

Summary of Community Feedback

Outreach Snapshot Center-Running BRT (July 2017 - February 2018)

Community Survey Survey Nov. 15 through early March Over 1,400 responses 500+ open-ended comments Top zip codes 80220 (~30%) 80206 (~15%) 80218 (~7%) 80203, 80205 (~5%) 80207 (~4%) 80202 (~3%)

Survey Responses Do you agree with the recommendation for centerrunning BRT on East Colfax? Disagree 23% Neutral 4% Agree: 932 respondents Neutral: 53 respondents Disagree: 298 respondents Agree 73%

Breakdown By Neighborhood Zip Code Percentage Agree/Disagree 80220 (East Colfax/ Mayfair / Montclair / Park Hill) 80206 (Congress Park / City Park / Cherry Creek) 80218 (Cheesman Park/ Capitol Hill / Uptown) 80203 (Capitol Hill / Uptown) 80205 (Five Points / Whittier / City Park) 80207 (Park Hill) 80202 (Downtown) 30.8% 16.0% 7.2% 5.5% 5.3% 4.0% 3.3% 52.4% Agree 30.2% Disagree 60.8% Agree 20.7% Disagree 76.0% Agree 13.5% Disagree 73.8% Agree 5.0% Disagree 85.5% Agree 7.9% Disagree 50% Agree 32.8% Disagree 72.34% Agree 4.3% Disagree

What We ve Heard : Using The Current System 1000 How often do you use transit on Colfax? 900 800 58.11% 700 600 500 41.89% 400 300 200 100 0 Daily, Weekly or Monthly Rarely *Responses indicating daily and weekly use totaled 39.19%

What We ve Heard: Using The BRT System 1000 Are you likely to use the new center-running BRT? 75.90% 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 24.10% 200 100 0 Yes No

What We re Hearing: Opportunities Top benefits and opportunities: Speed: Faster transit travel-time and improved schedule reliability Moves more people: Increases the number of people who can safely travel the corridor Safety: Improved safety for pedestrians, vehicles and transit users Look and feel: Improved streetscape and placemaking opportunities

What We re Hearing: Challenges Top challenges and concerns: Moving cars: Potential vehicle traffic delays and/or diversion of traffic to side streets Local access: Maintaining local access with vehicle left turns at signalized intersections Stop locations and connectivity: Consolidation and location of bus stops and connectivity with other transit-services and bike/pedestrian facilities Building it: Maintaining the vision and intent of the project through construction

Areas of Emphasis for Detailed Design - Traffic - Local Access - Stop Spacing and Connectivity

Traffic

Traffic Analysis The Bottom Line: Vehicle travel times increase with or without the project. Center Running BRT results in transit travel times in 2035 that are competitive with general traffic travel times. Traffic impacts are expected to be limited to a few intersections; these will be the focus of mitigations that may include: Speed reduction and safety improvements Signal optimization Potential for extending or providing new turn lanes Minor capacity adjustments through restriping or curb/gutter relocation Tradeoffs/Other Considerations: Some vehicle shift to parallel corridors, use alternative routes, or choose alternate modes. It is anticipated that vehicle growth on parallel corridors due to Center Running BRT in 2035 will be less than 10% compared to if nothing is done. Total vehicle volume on corridor is reduced, but person throughput and access increases with Center Running BRT. Auto trips are more susceptible to minor delays due to parallel parking and truck loading. Opportunity for safety and operational improvements to aid vehicle/transit operations.

Traffic Analysis: Methodology Microsimulation traffic modeling was performed as part of the 2016-2017 Center Running Feasibility Study Methodology was developed for calculating additional traffic expected to divert off of Colfax as a result of the Center Running BRT NOTE: Colfax Connections will continue to analyze traffic as the project progresses. Additional locations for left turns and/or additional traffic signal locations will be incorporated once determined.

Traffic Analysis: Capacity and Volumes 2035 CENTER RUNNING BRT VOLUMES COMPARED TO NO BUILD 2035

Traffic Analysis: Travel Times 2035 CENTER RUNNING BRT TRAVEL TIMES COMPARED TO NO BUILD 2035 10-15 MINUTES LESS

Local Access

Local Access What we are hearing: Concern for reduced direct vehicular access Businesses are open to this reduction with sufficient turn opportunities and mitigations Creating walkable business districts changes how people access destinations Concern from neighborhoods that vehicular traffic increases on local streets to access businesses Walking routes to new transit stations may have pedestrian deficiencies

Local Access Opportunities: Improves driver safety: Auto left turns allowed at signalized intersections only Improves pedestrian safety and crossing opportunities (more attractive to cross the street to access businesses) More than 60% of crashes that occur while turning or crossing an intersection involve left turns (3.1% involve right turns) Improves bicycle safety Reduction in Transit conflicts (turning movements, curb-use, etc.) Source: https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/api/public/viewpublication/811366

Reduced Conflicts Center-Running Bus Rapid Transit: How it Works Single-direction :station platforms at Intersections Left turn lanes at signals coif ax corridor connections

Improves Crossing Safety and Comfort Island stations calm traffic Pedestrian refuges reduce crossing distance Shorter crossing distances = less exposure to vehicle traffic Eliminating unprotected lefts improves pedestrian safety Station lighting enhances security Healthline, Cleveland, OH Madison BRT, Seattle

Stop Spacing and Connectivity

Stop Spacing/Connectivity The Bottom Line: Maintains or improves overall transit travel times when considering walk, wait, and ride Offers more rail-like boarding experience, making it easier for seniors and people with disabilities to ride Provides opportunities for improved sidewalks and bike and pedestrian access to corridor

Stop Locations Tradeoffs/Other Considerations: Some passengers will need to travel slightly further to access enhanced service Some local stops are consolidated Local bus service on adjacent streets is maintained Colfax has a well connected urban sidewalk network providing good access to the corridor

Project Features: Integrated Operations All corridor buses use one set of stations between Yosemite and Civic Center

Stop Spacing In Denver Local and Limited use one set of high-quality stations in Denver 3-5-minute headways Colfax has a well connected urban sidewalk network providing good access to the corridor

How stop spacing affects walking distances e BlocksTraveled by Service Provided BRT 1/4 mi. Household A 2 blocks 3 blocks Household B 3 blocks 3 blocks Household C 3 blocks 3 blocks BRT 1/2 mi. 3 blocks 5 blocks 4 blocks Walking Travel Path to Transit Stop -9- BRT Stop (112 mile stop spacing) and Path.... BRT Stop (114 mile stop spacing) and Path - - 118 mi. Service Stop and Path coif ax corridor connections

Walkshed analysis coif ax corridor connections

Roll Plot Map Discussion

37 Roll Plot Map Discussion Where are the opportunities for traffic mitigation and operational improvements (signal timing, speed reduction, safety improvements)? Where are the conceptual BRT stops and what is the spacing between them? Are there any changes to stop locations? Where are potential opportunities for new left turns and/or pedestrian crossings? Are there segments along/to Colfax that need special attention in terms of walk experience? Note: The project will continue to refine station spacing and locations, pedestrian crossing opportunities, left-turn and business access, and other detailed elements of street design.

Next Steps

Corridor Development Timeline Opportunity for Stakeholders and Public To Influence Project Design Broad Definition of Project Design Detail Alternatives Analysis Conceptual Design & Environmental Analysis Engineering & Design Construction Revenue Service 12-18 months 18 months 18-24 months Ongoing Federal Transit Administration Project Development We Are Here Locally Preferred Alternative Definition of mode & alignment Conceptual station locations Operating plan Local decision Concept Design & Environmental Clearances Design detail determined Environmental impacts identified Fully Designed and Funded Project Design complete Finance package

Where Do We Go From Here? Completion of conceptual design Coordination with project partners Planning for upcoming detailed design phase Next Task Force meeting: Spring/Summer 2018

www.colfaxcorridorconnections.com Info@ColfaxCorridorConnections.com