vre gainesville haymarket extension · vre gainesville‐haymarket extension feasibility study and...
TRANSCRIPT
VRE GainesvilleVRE Gainesville‐‐Haymarket ExtensionHaymarket ExtensionFeasibility Study and Alternatives Analysis
Public Workshop
Tuesday, May 5, 20096:30 – 9:00 pm
Gravely Elementary School
1
Agenda
2
Background
Schedule
Study Process
Findings
Summary
Decision Points/Next Steps
G‐H Corridor History
3
1999 VDOT MIS and Multimodal Transportation and Environmental Study
» Considered highway improvements, VRE expansion, Metrorail extension, bus service
» A mix of transportation improvements best serves the corridor
2004 VRE Strategic Plan ‐ Recommended G‐H extension
2005 G‐H Implementation Plan ‐ Investigated possible implementation strategies and preliminary costs
2008 G‐H Alternatives Analysis and Feasibility Study
2009 DRPT I‐66 Transit/TDM study
4
G‐H Study Corridor
Study Schedule
5
Stakeholder Meetings – June 2008 through Jan. 2009
Public Workshops – July and Oct. 2008 and May 5, 2009
Draft AA to DRPT – Feb. 27, 2009
Final AA to DRPT – May 29, 2009
Study PurposeConsider the range of transportation alternatives to improve mobility and regional access in the Gainesville and Haymarket areas:
Reduce regional traffic congestion
Improve regional air quality and minimize environmental impacts
Advance sustainable development land use goals
Inform recommended transportation investment strategies
6
Study Method
Evaluate environmental impacts, infrastructure needs, ridership, and cost
Tier 1 screening reduced initial set of alternatives to those that meet the Purpose and Need
Tier 2 screening evaluated five alternatives in detail
FTA New Starts criteria applied to the model results
Modeling results allow comparison to earlier planning efforts
Decision points include future funding requests and project limits
7
Environmental and Infrastructure Findings
Potential impacts to wetlands and floodplains; noise and vibration impacts are also a concern
Non‐rail alternatives have less potential for environmental impacts
Rail alternatives can generally be implemented within the existing ROW with additional land for stations/parking
Commonwealth of Virginia REF investment has reduced infrastructure needs
Existing capacity constraint between Alexandria and Union Station limits VRE frequency
8
9
Existing VRE Rider Origins
Insert graphic of study area
Ridership and Cost FindingsNo Build I‐66 Bus Enhanced
VRE BR service + Feeder Bus
VRE
Split BR/GH service
VRE
BR/GH service + GH rail shuttle
VRE
GH + BR turnback service
Baseline 1 Baseline 2 1B 1C 1D
Total VRE Manassas Line Trips
Total Manassas Line Study Area Trips
Total Study Area Commuter Bus Trips
9,194
5,234
734
7,952
3,992
2,258
12,544
6,156
978
11,394
6,126
676
17,500
9,156
562
12,156
6,582
652
Capital Cost $6 M $18 M $102 M $153 M $244 M $203 M
Equipment Needed 2 Coaches 18 Buses 2 Locos
26 Coaches
5 Buses
1 Loco
12 Coaches
6 Locos
30 Coaches
2 Locos
26 Coaches
Gross O&M Cost $19 M $25 M $25 M $27 M $44 M $30 M
10
Alternatives Comparison
11
Expanding/enhancing transit in the study corridor generates new transit riders
Gainesville is more favorable than Haymarket as an end of the line station
VRE service at headways of 25 minutes or less generates the highest number of riders
BR/GH service + GH rail shuttle (Alternative 1C), generates approx. 90% more VRE riders than the NB
I‐66 bus (Baseline 1) generates more transit riders than the NB, but fewer VRE riders
Enhanced VRE service plus feeder bus (Baseline 2) generates approx. 35% more VRE riders than the NB
VRE G‐H AA ResultsEstimated 1,000 to 3,600 trips attributable to G‐H extension
Based on approved regional model
Model Assumptions
»Operating plans defined within current VRE capacity constraints
» Land use consistent with current approved forecasts
»Model very sensitive to service frequencies
12
VRE Strategic Plan ResultsEstimated 3,000 to 5,000 trips attributable to G‐H extension
Forecasts developed for different purpose; results cannot be applied to FTA process
Model assumptions
» No constraint on number of trains to/from Union Station
» Approximately 30 minute headways on both BR and G‐H branches = 15 minute headways from Manassas
»Model waiting time calculations tailored to commuter rail
13
Summary Findings
14
Rail extension would add needed capacity and choice to corridor
G‐H ridership potential refined
» Low – 1,000 trips
» High – 5,000 trips
Enhanced Manassas Line service + feeder bus and an extension of VRE service to G‐H should advance into the next phase of study
Gainesville terminus has merit as an initial phase
» Range of alternatives drops from $127 M to $218 M versus $153 M to $244 M
Decision Points/Next Steps
15
Federal Funding
» Full New Starts? Not likely
» Small Starts? Potential candidate
»Other federal sources? Potential candidate
State Funding
» Rail Enhancement Fund
»Other
Local Funding
» Local jurisdictions
» Private sector contributions
» Innovative financing opportunities
Decision Points/Next StepsStudy Terminus
» Should a Minimum Operating Segment (MOS) to Gainesville be pursued?
Study vs. Implementation
» Should Haymarket continue to be studied if MOS is pursued?
VRE Ops. Board, Commissions, and stakeholder guidance will be sought
» Potential start next phase in fall 2009
16
Feedback?
For more information contact us at:
Phone (703) 684‐1001
Email: [email protected]
Internet: www.vre.org
Train Talk List Serve: Sign up on www.vre.org
Thank you for your participation!
17
Questions?
18