BUS RAPID TRANSIT Silicon Valley Leadership Group October 3 2012 BUS RAPID TRANSIT Mixed Flow Configuration 2 Dedicated Lane Configuration Cities Choose Street Configuration January 2012 Staff Recommendation ID: 226688
Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "BUS RAPID TRANSIT" is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
Slide1
BUS RAPID TRANSIT
BUS RAPID TRANSIT
Silicon Valley Leadership Group
October 3, 2012Slide2
BUS RAPID TRANSIT
Mixed Flow Configuration
2
Dedicated Lane Configuration
Cities Choose Street ConfigurationSlide3
January 2012 Staff Recommendation
BUS RAPID TRANSIT
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
3Slide4
City Actions on Optimal Project, Spring 2012
BUS RAPID TRANSIT
4
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 flowSlide5
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
5Slide6
BUS RAPID TRANSIT
BUS RAPID TRANSIT
Revised Project
Ridership:
11,198 daily
boardings
Cost:
$125 million
Federal funding potential:
Good
Net annual operating cost:
$12.7 millionSlide7
BUS RAPID TRANSIT
Project is only 6,100 daily
boardings
No improvements from Palo Alto to Sunnyvale
Project Ridership:
6,100 daily
boardings
Cost:
$75 million
Federal funding potential:
Poor
Net annual operating cost:
$12.9 million
SC & SJ Only ProjectSlide8
BUS RAPID TRANSIT
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 millionSlide9
BUS RAPID TRANSIT
BUS RAPID TRANSIT
No Project
Ridership:
5,748 daily
boardings
Cost:
$0
Federal funding potential:
None
Net annual operating cost:
$15.6 million
No improvementsSlide10
El Camino Real BRT Project Options
BUS RAPID TRANSIT
Revised Project
Santa
Clara & San Jose Only Project
All Mixed Flow Project
No Project
Optimal Project
Miles
of dedicated lane
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
10Slide11
VTA Board Direction
BUS RAPID TRANSIT
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
11Slide12
Next Steps
BUS RAPID TRANSIT
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
12Slide13
BUS RAPID TRANSIT
End
BUS RAPID TRANSITSlide14
BUS RAPID TRANSIT
Board Direction on BRT
2008 SCAR Final EIR
BRT selected as the Phase I preferred alternative
Project definition and components adopted
2009 BRT Strategic Plan
Timeline for implementation adopted
BRT definition adopted
2007 Transit Sustainability Policy
Performance expectation adopted
Station and corridor design standards adopted
2008 COA
Emphasis on core network of 15 frequently traveled bus routes
Acknowledged future BRT corridors as next step for service improvement
2010 Short Range Transit Plan
Capital and operating funds allocated
Assumes BRT network in place with opening of BART
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
14Slide15
BUS RAPID TRANSIT
BRT Program Implementation
BUS RAPID TRANSIT
Project Origin
Analysis/Assessment
Staff Recommendation = Implementation
City Action
VTA Board Action
Near-term Implementation
Santa Clara/Alum Rock
El Camino Real
Stevens
Creek
Long-term Implementation
Monterey Highway
King Road
Sunnyvale-Cupertino
Project Implementation
15Slide16
BUS RAPID TRANSIT
VTA’s Transit Service Standards
BUS RAPID TRANSIT
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
Upgrade must be 30% faster than local bus
Upgrade must achieve a 20-25%
farebox
recovery rate
Service Design Guidelines Goals
16Slide17
BRT Design Approach
BUS RAPID TRANSIT
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
17
Bike Lanes
New, shorter pedestrian crossings
New Signal
Curb
Bulbouts
BRT Lanes
Station Platform
Landscaping
Removal of pork-chop islands
Shorter pedestrian crossingsSlide18
BUS RAPID TRANSIT
Bus Crowding: Line 23 Westbound
Seated capacity: 35 passengers
18Slide19
Lines 522/22 - Sunnyvale passenger loads (2011)
BUS RAPID TRANSIT
Line 22
4,493 riders per day
4,084 car equivalents per day
Line 522
2,530 riders per day
2,300 car equivalents per day
Peak period in Sunnyvale
44-52 riders per bus
Riders per bus (May 2011)
Line 22/522 Stops
19Slide20
BUS RAPID TRANSIT
Change in Federal Funding Structure
BUS RAPID TRANSIT
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.
20Slide21
El Camino Real Corridor Person-Throughput
BUS RAPID TRANSIT
PM peak hour throughput by travel mode
21Slide22
TSP BRT Standards: Optimal Project vs. Mixed Flow
BUS RAPID TRANSIT
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
22Slide23
Pedestrian and Bicycle Collisions (2007-2010)
BUS RAPID TRANSIT
Bicycle Collisions
Pedestrian Collisions
1
2
3-5
1
2
3-5Slide24
Cities Choose Street Configuration
BUS RAPID TRANSIT
Dedicated Lane Configuration
Mixed Flow Configuration
24Slide25
BUS RAPID TRANSIT
25
Curb
bulbout
BRT vehicle stops in travel lane
How is BRT different from a local bus?
Mixed Flow Configuration