BRT-Powerpoint - Silicon Valley Leadership Group

Report
BUS RAPID TRANSIT
Silicon Valley Leadership Group
October 3, 2012
BUS RAPID TRANSIT
Cities Choose Street Configuration
Dedicated Lane Configuration
Mixed Flow Configuration
2
BUS RAPID TRANSIT
January 2012 Staff Recommendation
Using PAB, city general plan and VTA policy guidance, VTA staff identifies optimal
project: dedicated lanes from Mountain View to Santa Clara; mixed flow elsewhere
Optimal Project
3
BUS RAPID TRANSIT
City Actions on Optimal Project, Spring 2012
City
Optimal Project
City Action
Palo Alto
Mixed Flow
Council expressed mixed views
Los Altos
Mixed Flow
Council expressed mixed views
Mountain View
Dedicated Lanes
Straw vote 5-2 in favor of mixed flow
Sunnyvale
Dedicated Lanes
Voted 4-3 against dedicated lanes
Santa Clara
Dedicated Lanes
Unanimously supported dedicated lanes
San Jose
Mixed Flow
Unanimously supported mixed flow
4
BUS RAPID TRANSIT
VTA Board Consideration…
• City Policy direction
• Effectiveness of revised project
• Competitiveness for outside funding
• Santa Clara and San Jose’s commitment to BRT
• Today’s needs, tomorrow’s needs
5
BUS RAPID TRANSIT
Revised Project
Ridership: 11,198 daily boardings
Cost: $125 million
Federal funding potential: Good
Net annual operating cost: $12.7 million
BUS RAPID TRANSIT
SC & SJ Only Project
Project Ridership: 6,100 daily boardings
Cost: $75 million
Federal funding potential: Poor
Net annual operating cost: $12.9 million
No improvements from
Palo Alto to Sunnyvale
Project is only 6,100
daily boardings
BUS RAPID TRANSIT
All Mixed Flow Project
Ridership: 9,950 daily boardings
Cost: $66-82 million
Federal funding potential: Good
Net annual operating cost: $14.5 million
BUS RAPID TRANSIT
No Project
Ridership: 5,748 daily boardings
Cost: $0
Federal funding potential: None
Net annual operating cost: $15.6 million
No improvements
BUS RAPID TRANSIT
El Camino Real BRT Project Options
Revised Project
Santa Clara
& San Jose
Only Project
All Mixed
Flow Project
No Project
Optimal
Project
2.97
2.97
0
0
10.3
Daily 522 ridership
11,198
10,680
9,950
5,748
12,374
Capital cost estimate
$125m
$75m
$83m
$0
$199m
Net annual operating cost
(2020)
$12.7m
$12.9m
$14.5m
$15.6m
$7.8m
Federal funding potential
$62.5m
$0
$41.5m
---
$75m
Anticipated local funds
$62.5m
$75m
$41.5m
---
$124m
Miles of dedicated lane
10
BUS RAPID TRANSIT
VTA Board Direction
• Include the Optimal Project along with the Revised Project in
the Caltrans, FTA and environmental review process
• VTA staff check in with MTC to encourage regional support of
the project
• Return to the six cities to share analysis throughout the
environmental study process
• Return to the VTA Board with status reports and the results of
the analysis
11
BUS RAPID TRANSIT
Next Steps
2012 Board of Directors Actions
• Adopt an Investment Strategy for El Camino Real
• Authorize GM to enter Caltrans design review process
• Authorize GM to apply for federal funding for El Camino Real BRT
• Authorize GM to amend consultant contract to bring
environmental consultant onboard to undertake environmental
analysis
• Approve BRT vehicle procurement for 522/22 corridor
12
BUS RAPID TRANSIT
End
BUS RAPID TRANSIT
Board Direction on BRT
2007 Transit Sustainability Policy
• Performance expectation adopted
• Station and corridor design standards
adopted
2009 BRT Strategic Plan
• Timeline for implementation
adopted
• BRT definition adopted
2008 SCAR Final EIR
• BRT selected as the Phase I
preferred alternative
• Project definition and components
adopted
2010 Short Range Transit Plan
• Capital and operating funds
allocated
• Assumes BRT network in place with
opening of BART
2008 COA
• Emphasis on core network of 15
frequently traveled bus routes
• Acknowledged future BRT
corridors as next step for service
improvement
2012-13 Capital Budget
• Funded preliminary and final
design activities for SCAR
• Funded conceptual engineering
for Stevens Creek and El Camino
• Funded feasibility study for
Berryessa BRT/King Road
14
BUS RAPID TRANSIT
BRT Program Implementation
Project Origin
Analysis/Assessment
Staff Recommendation = Implementation
Near-term Implementation
Santa Clara/Alum Rock
El Camino Real
Stevens Creek
City Action
VTA Board Action
Long-term Implementation
Monterey Highway
King Road
Sunnyvale-Cupertino
Project Implementation
15
BUS RAPID TRANSIT
VTA’s Transit Service Standards
In 2007, VTA’s Board of Directors adopted the Transit Sustainability Policy and
Service Design Guidelines, with these goals:
• Be responsive to market needs
• Cost-effective use of funds
• Increase transit ridership
Boardings per
revenue hour
Boardings per
station
Boardings per
mile
BRT 1 (Mixed flow)
45
150
200
BRT 2 (Dedicated lane)
55
350
350-475
Service Design Guidelines Goals
• Upgrade must be 30% faster than local bus
• Upgrade must achieve a 20-25% farebox recovery rate
16
BUS RAPID TRANSIT
BRT Design Approach
• Can offer light rail-like service at much lower cost
• Flexible configuration – can be dedicated lanes or mixed flow traffic
• Incremental implementation – designed to light rail standards
• Improves attractiveness of transit, increases farebox recovery, lowers operating
costs and attracts “choice” riders
• Decrease in VMT means lower greenhouse gas emissions
• Opportunity for complete street, transformative project
Bike Lanes
Landscaping
New Signal
New, shorter
pedestrian crossings
Curb Bulbouts
BRT Lanes
Station Platform
Shorter pedestrian
crossings
Removal of porkchop islands 17
BUS RAPID TRANSIT
Bus Crowding: Line 23 Westbound
Seated capacity: 35 passengers
18
BUS RAPID TRANSIT
Riders per bus (May 2011)
Lines 522/22 - Sunnyvale passenger loads (2011)
Peak period in Sunnyvale
44-52 riders per bus
Line 522
2,530 riders per day
2,300 car equivalents per day
Line 22
4,493 riders per day
4,084 car equivalents per day
Line 22/522 Stops
19
BUS RAPID TRANSIT
Change in Federal Funding Structure
SAFETEA-LU (2005-2012)
Small Starts – FTA regulations encourage “majority of BRT projects
to be dedicated lanes.”
MAP-21 (2012)
Creates new corridor-based BRT category for Small Starts requiring
defined rail-like stations, transit signal priority, frequent service but
not dedicated transit right-of-way.
20
BUS RAPID TRANSIT
El Camino Real Corridor Person-Throughput
PM peak hour throughput by travel mode
21
BUS RAPID TRANSIT
TSP BRT Standards: Optimal Project vs. Mixed Flow
Boardings per
revenue hour
Boardings per
station
Boardings per
mile
Standard: BRT 1 (Mixed flow)
45
150
200
All Mixed Flow Project (2020)
35
622
286
Boardings per
revenue hour
Boardings per
station
Boardings per
mile
Standard: BRT 2 (Dedicated lane)
55
350
350-475
Optimal Project (2020)
59
773
356
22
BUS RAPID TRANSIT
Pedestrian and Bicycle Collisions (2007-2010)
Pedestrian Collisions
Bicycle Collisions
1
2
3-5
1
2
3-5
BUS RAPID TRANSIT
Cities Choose Street Configuration
Dedicated Lane Configuration
Mixed Flow Configuration
24
BUS RAPID TRANSIT
How is BRT different from a local bus?
Mixed Flow Configuration
Curb bulbout
BRT vehicle stops
in travel lane
25

similar documents