official informal business discussion minutes tuesday, may ...€¦ · official . informal business...

Official

Informal Business Discussion Minutes Tuesday, May 3, 2016 – 3:00 PM

Present: Charlotte J. Nash, Jace Brooks, Lynette Howard, Tommy Hunter, John Heard

1. Transportation Comprehensive Transportation Plan Update/Transit Discussion Transportation Director Alan Chapman provided an overview of the Comprehensive Transportation Plan Update and the Board discussed transit options. No Official Action Taken.

TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT

Comprehensive Transportation Plan Update and Transit Discussion

May 3, 2016

CTP Background • Contract with Kimley-Horn awarded in July 2015

• Funding provided by Gwinnett County and the Atlanta Regional Commission

• 20-month process

• Addresses short-term and long-term needs

• Addresses all modes of transportation

CTP Current Status • Briefed BOC on February 16 • Completed draft Assessment of Existing Conditions • Completed Stakeholder meetings on February 29 • Held six public meetings from March 15 through April

21 • Currently visiting parks (11), senior meetings (8) and

community events (6) • Currently conducting MetroQuest online survey

(March through May) • Currently conducting Stakeholder interviews

(approx. 25 interviews from April through June)

CTP Draft Goals • Improve safety and mobility for all people

across all modes of travel • Continue to serve as responsible stewards

of transportation resources • Leverage the County’s transportation

system to improve economic vitality and quality of life

• Improve connectivity • Proactively embrace future transportation

opportunities

Outreach Opportunities Public Meetings • March 15, 2016 – Bogan Park

Community Recreation Center – 6:00pm to 8:00pm

• March 19, 2016 (Saturday) – Shorty Howell Activity Building – 10:00am to Noon

• March 21, 2016 – Lucky Shoals Park Community Room – 6:00pm to 8:00pm

• March 29, 2016 – Snellville City Hall Community Room – 6:00pm to 8:00pm

• April 18, 2016 – Dacula Park Activity Building – 6:00pm to 8:00pm

• April 21, 2016 – Gwinnett Planning and Development One Justice Square – 6:00pm to 8:00pm

Outreach Opportunities

Transportation Priorities

Parks / Seniors / Events

Parks Results

Priority 1

Priority 2

Priority 3

Priority 4

Access to Transportation 23 17 27 30

Connectivity 39 23 33 60 Economic Vitality 13 21 32 31 Maintenance 74 49 44 51 Transit Service 26 39 25 11 Transportation Safety 37 68 56 34 Vehicular Travel 60 59 42 31 Walking/Biking 37 37 54 69

Total outreach 313

Senior Meetings Results

Priority 1

Priority 2

Priority 3

Priority 4



Total outreach 92

Events Results

Priority 1

Priority 2

Priority 3

Priority 4



Total outreach 297


Priority 1

Priority 2

Priority 3

Priority 4



Total outreach 702

Overall Results

Overall Priority Rankings


1

Public Meetings

Public Meetings Bogan Park – March 15, 2016

Total in attendance 30

Priority 1

Priority 2

Priority 3

Priority 4



Public Meetings


Priority 1

Priority 2

Priority 3

Priority 4



Shorty Howell Park – March 19, 2016

Public Meetings


Priority 1

Priority 2

Priority 3

Priority 4



Lucky Shoals Park – March 21, 2016

Public Meetings


Priority 1

Priority 2

Priority 3

Priority 4



Snellville – March 29, 2016

Public Meetings


Priority 1

Priority 2

Priority 3

Priority 4



Dacula Park – April 18, 2016


Priority 1

Priority 2

Priority 3

Priority 4



Lawrenceville – April 21, 2016

Public Meetings

Public Meetings Overall Results


Priority 1

Priority 2

Priority 3

Priority 4



Public Meetings

1 Overall Priority Rankings

MetroQuest Online Survey

• Over 3,270 surveys completed as of May 1

Transportation Priorities

Maintenance/Roadway Repair

Resurfacing costs – $60k per lane mile • Approximately 6,000 total lane miles in County • 2014 SPLOST – $30 million allocation, approx.

500 lane miles Bridge replacement cost – $3 to $4 million (typical) • 2014 SPLOST – $30 million allocation, 9 projects

Transportation Safety Safety & Alignment – $1.5 to $2.5 million (typical) • 2014 SPLOST – $15 million allocation, 6 projects

School Safety – $1 to $2 million (typical) • 2014 SPLOST – $15 million allocation, 13 projects

Walking/Biking Pedestrian Safety – $750k to $1 million per mile (typical for engineered projects) • 2014 SPLOST – $27 million, 59 projects

Vehicular Travel Intersection improvements – $2 to $4 million (typical) • 2014 SPLOST – $33 million, 11 projects

Major road improvements* • 2014 SPLOST – $47.6 million, 7 projects • Widening – $7 to $9 million per mile (typical) • New location – $10 to $30 million per mile (varies) • Interchange – $50 million (varies)

* Funding sometimes leveraged with Federal and State dollars

Transit Improvements

Existing Conditions and Trends

Show all four – one per page

Transit

Gwinnett County Transit

• 2015 Budget Implementation • Restored Saturday service to all local routes • Added 2 new departure times on the Express

Route 102/Indian Trail Road Park and Ride Lot (am peak)

• 2016 – 2018 Transit Service Enhancements

• Additional express service • Additional local and complementary

paratransit service • New flex service

Gwinnett County Transit

January 2016 State Road and Tollway Authority (SRTA) Transit Capital Grant requests:

Gwinnett Place Area Transit Center $1,845,440 New SR 316 at Harbins Road Park and Ride $4,567,769 New SR 316/Lawrenceville Area Park and Ride $2,776,960 Upgrades to existing Park and Ride lots (Sugarloaf, Indian Trail and Hewatt Road) $795,770

Replacement of existing local fleet (28 buses) $2,000,000 5 New Local Buses $400,000

Total $12,385,939

Public Meetings

Public Meetings Bogan Shorty

Howell Lucky Shoals

Snell- ville Dacula Lawrence-

ville Total

Improved local bus service 4 2 2 9 17 6 40

Improved express bus service 2 2 1 5 3 1 14

High capacity transit with dedicated space

14 12 8 28 17 19 98

Transit for people with mobility challenges

0 2 1 8 7 3 21

I don’t know 1 0 0 9 13 1 24

What public transportation/transit improvement do you think is the most needed in Gwinnett County?

From “The Atlanta Region’s Plan”

Managed Lane Implementation Plan –

Express/Commuter Bus

Express/Commuter Bus Direct Access to Managed Lanes

Transit Mode FTA Definitions

Bus Rapid Transit System - a bus transit system in which: (A) The majority of each line operates in a separated right-of-way dedicated for public transportation use during peak periods; and/or (B) Includes features that emulate the services provided by rail including defined stations, traffic signal priority, and short headway bidirectional services for a substantial part of weekdays and weekend days Light Rail (LRT) The term light rail refers more to this mode’s relative simplicity and operational flexibility than to actual vehicle weight or cost. With an overhead power supply, light rail systems can operate in mixed traffic and widely ranging alignment configurations. Heavy Rail (HRT) The term heavy rail refers to a mode of transportation that is defined less by its vehicle weight than by its complexity and operational rigidity. Heavy rail systems typically consist of steel-wheeled, electric powered vehicles operating in trains of two or more cars on a fully grade-separated right-of-way.

Bus Rapid Transit A: Running Ways – exclusive guideways or dedicated lanes that allow BRT vehicles to be free of conflicting automobile traffic, parked or stopped vehicles, and other obstructions – maximizing BRT operating speeds. In some situations, BRT vehicles also may operate in general traffic, trading speed and reliability for flexibility. "Queue jumper" is a term that refers to short exclusive lanes at signalized intersections that are used to allow BRT vehicles to jump to the head of the line and bypass stopped automobiles and traffic. B: Vehicles – modern, low-floor, high capacity rubber-tired vehicles that accommodate high volumes of riders and fast boarding and exiting. BRT vehicles often use clean fuels or alternative power. C: Stations – ranging from protected shelters to large transit centers, BRT stations are located within the communities they serve and provide easy access to the system. D: Route Structure and Schedule – established to maximize direct, no-transfer rides to multiple destinations and to create more flexible and continuous service (reducing the need for a schedule) for local and express bus service. E: Fare Collection – designed to make it fast and easy to pay, often before boarding the vehicle, BRT fare collection systems include the use of self-service proof-of-payment systems or pre-paid stored-value fare cards, such as a "Smart Card" system. F: Advanced Technology – the use of advanced technologies (or Intelligent Transportation Systems) to improve customer convenience, speed, reliability, and safety. Examples include systems that provide traffic signal preference for buses at intersections and cross streets, as well as Global Positioning Systems (GPS) to provide passenger information such as real-time bus arrival information.

MARYLAND DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Bus Rapid Transit

MARYLAND DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Bus Rapid Transit

BRT Infrastructure Example - Before and After (Wake County Transit Plan)

Typical existing arterial Arterial with potential center-running BRT

Bus Rapid Transit

• BRT alignments can vary between 5 to 30 miles depending on the service area. Frequent service is provided, with headways ranging from 3 to 20 minutes

• Travel speeds range from 20 to 40 miles per hour • Typical right-of-way needs average between 12 and

32 feet, depending on whether the BRT is in mixed traffic or is operated along a dedicated transit corridor, respectively

• Stations are typically spaced a quarter-mile to 2 miles apart and incorporate platform stations with amenities and possible park and ride lots

Connect Cobb Northwest Transit Corridor AA Study December 2012

Light Rail

Light Rail

• LRT systems can operate in close proximity to mixed traffic, and alignments can also exist within shared space on a city street, even in mixed traffic on a limited basis

• Alignments can range between 10 to 30 miles with a typical operating frequency of 5 to 30 minutes

• Average travel speeds range from 20 to 60 miles per hour

• Typical right-of-way needs average between 10 and 32 feet

• Stations are typically a quarter-mile to 2 miles apart and incorporate platform stations with passenger amenities and possible park and ride lots


Heavy Rail

Heavy Rail

• Dedicated railway with the capacity and frequency to handle a heavy traffic volume

• Service is provided by steel-wheel, electrically-powered vehicles operating two or more (most between six and ten) cars on a fully grade-separated right-of-way, in underground or elevated structures providing service to regional and urban areas

• Alignments stretch anywhere from 10 to 125 miles, typically operating at intervals of 5 to 10 minutes

• Travel speeds range from 30 to 80 miles per hour • Typical right-of-way needs average between 24 and 48 feet • Stations are usually spaced at a distance of approximately 1

mile apart in high density urban areas and up to 5 miles apart in surrounding suburban areas


Mode Costs

Express/Commuter bus • Park and Ride lots - $2.5 to $5 million (typical)

• Vehicle costs - $800,000 to $1 million (typical)

• GDOT expansion of managed lanes system

• 10 miles of I-85 from Old Peachtree Road to Hamilton Mill Road – $190 million

• Revive 285 – two managed lanes in each direction between I-85 and I-75

Mode Costs

BRT in mixed traffic and in exclusive ROW

• Cleveland, OH – 6.8 miles – $200 million project cost – completed 2008 ($29 million per mile)

• Los Angles Orange Line – 18 miles – $324 million project cost – completed 2005 ($18 million per mile) (used existing rail line)

• Connect Cobb 2012 Northwest Transit Corridor AA Study – 25.3 miles – $492 million estimated cost ($19 million per mile)

Mode Costs

Light Rail • Norfolk – 7.4 miles – $318 million to construct –

completed 2011 ($43 million per mile) • Seattle – 13 miles – $2.3 billion to construct –

completed 2009 ($177 million per mile) • MARTA Clifton Corridor – (Lindbergh to North

Decatur) – 6 miles – $1.74 billion estimated cost ($290 million per mile)

• Cobb County 2010 Light Rail Study – Trunk line 14.6 miles – $1.67 billion estimated cost ($115 per mile)

Mode Costs

Heavy Rail • Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority

Silver Line – 11.4 miles – $2.9 billion actual cost – completed 2014 ($254 million per mile)

• Doraville to Gwinnett Place Mall – 2007 Discussion Paper – 10.9 miles – $2.249 to $2.485 billion estimated cost ($206 – $ 228 million per mile)

• MARTA North Springs to Holcomb Bridge – 5.5 miles – $1.3 billion estimated cost ($234 million per mile)

CTP Breakout Session Transit Connections

Doraville Station to Jimmy Carter Boulevard

4.2 miles

Jimmy Carter Boulevard to Gwinnett Transit Center

5.9 miles

Gwinnett Transit Center to Infinite Energy Arena

3.2 miles

Infinite Energy Arena to Mall of Georgia 8.5 miles

Gwinnett Transit Center to Downtown Lawrenceville

8.2 miles

CTP Breakout Session Transit Connections

Doraville to Jimmy

Carter Blvd 4.2 miles

Jimmy Carter Blvd to

Gwinnett Transit Center

5.9 miles

Gwinnett Transit Center

to Infinite Energy Arena

3.2 miles

Infinite Energy

Arena to Mall of Georgia 8.5 miles

Gwinnett Transit Center to Downtown Lawrenceville

8.2 miles

Total 30

miles

BRT Avg. $22 million

$92.4 million $130 million $70.4

million $187

million $180 million $660 million

Light Rail Avg. $112 million*

$470.4 million

$660.8 million

$358.2 million

$952 million

$918.4 million

$3.36 billion

Heavy Rail Avg. $235 million

$987 million

$1.387 billion $752 million $1.998

billion $1.927 billion

$7.05 billion

*Excludes MARTA Clifton Corridor project

Federal Funding Availability

Federal Local Total

Connect Cobb BRT $222,216,667 (45%)

$270,483,333 (55%) $492,700,000

MARTA Clifton Corridor Light Rail

$781,424,661 (45%)

$955,074,585 (55%) $1,736,499,246

MARTA North Springs to Holcomb Bridge Heavy Rail

$579,946,050 (45%)

$708,822,950 (55%) $1,288,769,000

MARTA I-20 East Heavy Rail and BRT

$659,070,450 (45%)

$805,535,550 (55%) $1,464,606,000

Federal Funding Availability

Region’s Plan Transit Project Review – Transportation Coordination Committee – July 17, 2015

Other Considerations

• Competition for Federal funding

• Mode implementation timeframe

• Ability to phase improvements

• Cost to operate

• Disruptors

TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT

Comprehensive Transportation Plan Update and Transit Discussion

May 3, 2016

official informal business discussion minutes tuesday, may ...€¦ · official . informal business...

Documents