WEST END TRANSITWAY Policy Advisory Group Meeting December 3, 2015
MEETING AGENDA • Project Background 1 • West End Transitway Key Elements 2 • Completing the Current Phase of Work 3 • Next Steps 4 • Discussion 5 • 6 Resolution of Support 2
1 PROJECT BACKGROUND 3
History of Transitway Decision Making 2008 2009 2011 2012 2010 2014 2016 4
High Capacity Transit West End Transitway (Current Effort) Corridors Study (2011) • Participants • Advance West End Transitway project and o High Capacity Transit Corridor Work Group address Corridor Work o City residents Group caveats through: o City staff and leadership o Environmental document • Resolutions of Support o Conceptual engineering plans o High Capacity Transit Corridor (10% design) Work Group o Capital and operating costs o Transportation Commission o Re- concurrence of ‘Resolution of Support’ o Planning Commission o City Council o 2 caveats to be addressed in future work 5
Project Purpose and Need Land Use and Economic Development Project Corridor Traffic Congestion Need Issues Transit Service 6
Primary Goals of Current Work Underway • Re-concurrence by the City of the Locally-Preferred Alternative defining: • Transit technology • Route • Configuration • Refined planning-level project cost estimate • Approved environmental document o Decision is made by Federal Transit Administration in cooperation with other supporting agencies • The current work underway will not result in not a final engineering design, operating plan, phasing plan, or financial plan those things come later. 7
WEST END TRANSITWAY 2 KEY ELEMENTS 8
By the Numbers 10
COMPLETING 3 THE CURRENT PHASE OF WORK 12
Project Policy Guidance • Minimize Impact to Private Property • Minimize Parking Impacts • Avoid Reconstruction of Bridges • Avoid Parklands • Avoid Natural Resources • Comply with New Stormwater Regulations • Consistency with Existing Land Use and Adopted Plans 13
Recent Coordination • City Council • Alexandria Transit Company (DASH) Board • Transportation of Directors Commission • DASH and WMATA • Planning Commission • Arlington County • Parks and Recreation • Fairfax County Commission • Environmental Policy • Southern Towers Commission • Summers Grove • Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee • Budget and Fiscal Affairs Committee 14
2012 Council Resolution: Caveats Addressed Caveats Action Taken Transitway Recommendation Evaluated To enhance access to NVCC, project Optimize alignment to better serve the Northern multiple station includes: Virginia Community location and - Pedestrian safety/accommodation College (NVCC) alignment enhancements at Braddock Road alternatives - Stations at Fillmore and Braddock - Build Alternative does not preclude other (potential future) services from directly serving main campus No action Transportation Commission to discuss Monitor transition from Alternative D (Bus Rapid required at this when appropriate Transit) to Alternative G time by the (Streetcar) current project 15
Other Key Items Addressed Key Item Action Taken Transitway Recommendation • Selected cross-sectional alternative with multiuse Multiple Provide Adequate Bicycle alternatives path along one side where corridor is modified • Updated layout to best address comments received Accommodation on S. evaluated Van Dorn Street (path width, intersection/driveway-related features) • Select alternative that reduces parking/property Minimize Multiple alternatives impacts from 33 spaces lost to 3 spaces lost. Land Parking/Property evaluated owner (JBG) supports this alternative as does the Impacts on Van Dorn Street near Sanger community. Avenue • Establish future policy ROW line Minimize Right-of- Multiple • Phased cross section implementation establishing Way/Property Impacts alternatives evaluated location of permanent Transitway and providing along S. Van Dorn minimum adequate bike/ped accommodations Street through corridor constrictions • Require redevelopment/development to build/provide funds for/ construct full cross section consistent with adopted plans (policies) • Reduced impacts along Van Dorn street (vicinity of Adjusted alignment Minimize residential and cross section Stevenson) and along Beauregard Street use parking impacts (overall) • Alignment will enter mall property and connect to the Establish Landmark Multiple Mall-related Alignment alternatives transit center • Locate station at or adjacent to transit center evaluated 16
Other Key Items Addressed Key Item Action Taken Transitway Recommendation • Stop buses within Metrorail station bus facility Confirm that Van Dorn Worked with • Confirmed that station can support Transitway buses WMATA on station Metrorail Station has capacity for buses Adequate Bus Capacity Assessed project’s • Manage stormwater within right of way (ROW) Stormwater • Identification of specific treatments in specific Compliance of Project ability to meet current locations occurs in design phase • May also afford the city stormwater management requirements credits (will need future confirmation) • Match Small Area Plan (SAP) interim ROW Adjusted corridor Match Beauregard Plan SAP adopted layout/alignment interim ROW • Two-directional bus routing along Metro Road Optimize Southern Adjusted corridor • Reduced traffic impacts at Van Dorn Terminus Alignment alignment Road/Eisenhower Avenue (Metro Road) • Reduced impacts along Eisenhower Avenue • Refine during next phase of design: Minimize Multiple feasible o Parking/Property alternatives being Bus operations and access to transit o Impacts at Southern evaluated Traffic operations and parking impacts • No expected negative impact to West End Towers Transitway Project or Southern Towers 17
Metro Road – Preliminary Concept 18
Metro Road – Preferred Alignment 19
Metro Road – Summary of Evaluation Design Option Eisenhower & Metro Road Bi-Directional Along Metro Road Criteria Best – Improves accommodation along Eisenhower Good – No ped/bike enhancements to Eisenhower Transit access Avenue Avenue Good – Highly visible, but along less-traveled Metro Transit visibility Best – Highly visible along Eisenhower Avenue Road Transit travel time (in minutes) between Van Best – Shorter travel time Good – Slightly longer travel time (+/- 40 sec) Dorn Metrorail Station and Edsall Road Traffic operations quality at S. Van Dorn Street/ Good – Transit operation adds to delay at intersection Eisenhower Avenue Best – No additional delay to intersection (+/- 23 sec) intersection in seconds of delay - AM (PM) Good – Requires additional widening of one block of Construction effects Best – Best uses existing infrastructure Eisenhower Avenue Good – Approximately $1 million more than Option 2 Best – Approximately $1 million less than Option 1 Cost Good – Within ROW, but reduces existing buffer Local community impact Best – No change to roadways along Summers Grove between Eisenhower Ave and Summers Grove 20
Environmental Documentation Key Topics • Land Acquisition • Environmental Justice • Compliance with Local • Secondary & Cumulative Plans, Land Use, & Effects Zoning • Transportation • Neighborhoods & • Construction Effects Community Facilities • Economic Development Continuous coordination with FTA on development of Documented Categorical Exclusion (CE) 21
Environmental Findings • No impacts to: o Air quality o Cultural Resources and Section 106 (National Historic Preservation Act) o Noise levels o Parks o Streams (no direct impact) o Vibration • Improved stormwater quality and reduced quantity in keeping with Virginia Water Control Law • Net increase in number of trees • Visual resources changes consistent with City-adopted plans • Hazardous and contaminated materials sites further analyzed prior to construction 22
Project and Operating Costs • Refining initial cost estimates o Project cost estimates based on concept engineering Item Cost (2015 Dollars) Capital Construction (includes Roadway, stations, systems, ROW & utilities) $60 to 70 million Fleet (buses, including spares) $17 to 19.5 million Project Development (design, fees, permitting, legal, surveys, testing, etc.) $16 to 18.5 million Contingency $28 to 32 million Total Project Cost $121 to 140 million o Range of operating cost ($5 to 9 million) based on route and schedule assumptions 23
Funding Plan • Funding sources and budget process o Highly rated in NVTA list of projects for regional funding o Anticipated application for Federal Transit Administration capital grant o City will work with Commonwealth regarding potential transit funding through I-395 HOT lane project 24
Recommend
More recommend
