multi modal facility feasibility study open house #3 · multi‐modal facility feasibility study...
Post on 03-May-2018
220 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
Multi‐Modal Facility Feasibility StudyCommunity Open House #3November 16, 2017
1
The presentation will begin at 7:05 p.m.
Introductions
Mike Costa – City of Elk Grove Interim Transit ManagerTom Metcalf – City of Elk Grove Project ManagerAdam Dankberg – Consultant Project ManagerKrista Pedersen – Consultant Public OutreachDaniel Harrison – Consultant Public OutreachBrynn Jensen – Consultant Public Outreach
2
Community Open House #3
Presentation
Q&A Session
Open House
3
Agenda
• Introduce the feasibility study• Identify purpose and goals of the feasibility study• Describe site selection process• Present potential sites along the Union Pacific Rail Road’s Sacramento Subdivision Line (west side line)• Answer questions• Gather community input 4
Study Goals
1. Identify and assess the feasibility of potential locations for a multi‐modal facility on existing or future passenger rail service lines
2. Evaluate potential reductions to commuter traffic3. Select a recommended location(s) using a detailed
evaluation process and public input4. Inform future planning and funding efforts for a
multi‐modal facility5
Study Process
Schedule – 8 to 9 months (June 2017 to Jan/Feb 2018)
Process:1. Identify potential site locations2. Estimate ridership and congestion relief3. Evaluate site locations based on evaluation criteria4. Present draft results to the public5. Incorporate public input6. Identify recommended multi‐modal facility site(s) 6
Partnering Agencies
San Joaquin Joint Powers Authority (SJJPA)
Sacramento Area Council of Governments (SACOG)
Sacramento Regional Transit (SacRT)
7
What is a Multi‐Modal Facility?
Many modes of transportation in one place, such as:• Bus• Rail• Car and Bicycle Parking• Pick‐up/Drop‐off• Taxi/Lyft/Uber/Shuttle• Bicycle Facilities• Pedestrian Facilities
8
Benefits of a Multi‐Modal Facility
•Provides centralized access to bus & rail transit
• Improves connectivity between modes
•Enhances access to transportation alternatives which can reduce traffic, commute times & emissions
•Potential to generate economic development activity
9
Rail Service Connectivity
Connecting to existing or future rail services will maximize the benefits of a Multi‐Modal Facility:• Gain access to national, state and regional destinations
• Leverages past and future infrastructure investments
• Potential to have Multi‐Modal Facility costs partially or fully covered by near term grant opportunities
Feasibility Study has focused on potential sites immediately adjacent to existing or future rail services
10
Existing Rail Facilities
11
UPRR Fresno Subdivision Line (East Side Line)
UPRR Sacramento Subdivision Line (West Side Line)
SacRT Light Rail(Blue Line)
UPRR West Side Line – Tonight’s Focus
12
10/25 City Council Direction• Focus on the UPRR West Side Line• Rail line of likely future passenger service as provided by the SJJPA
UPRR Sacramento Subdivision Line (West Side Line)
Site Requirements – Initial Screening
• Adjacent to a current or future passenger rail corridor
• Within or adjacent to City Limits
• Space for 1,000‐foot long platform along tracks
• 5‐10 acres for facilities including parking
• Connectivity to existing transportation system
• Prefer vacant lots or lots with low real estate impacts
• Minimize risk of environmental issues (e.g. wetlands, soil contamination)
• Avoid excessive construction/site design costs 13
Site Requirements – Detailed Evaluation Criteria
• Within City Limits
• Rail service feasibility
• Site adequacy for multimodal use
• Grant potential
• Accessibility
• Ridership estimation
• Site acquisition feasibility14
• Cost
• Other risk factors
• Congestion relief
• Changes to bus network
• Nearby bus and bike facilities
• Opportunity for supporting uses
Community OutreachThree Open Houses• August 2, 2017• September 14, 2017• Tonight (November 16, 2017)
Two Online Forums• August 2 – 16 (Questionnaire)• September 14 – 21 (Comment Forum)
City Council update on August 23rd via Consent Agenda
Preliminary Results Presented to City Council on October 25th
15
Four Sites For Consideration along UPRR West Side Line
16
Site W1 – Bilby & Willard
Site W2 –Franklin & Elk Grove Blvd
Site W3 – Laguna & Dwight
Site W4 – Dwight
Site W1 – Bilby & Willard
17
Future Kammererfrom I‐5 to Hwy 99
Future Willard extension to Future Kammerer
N
Previous Public Input on Site W1 – Bilby & Willard
18
Previous Public Input on Site W1:
• Not a centralized location.• Viewed by some as the most viable location for commuting to Sacramento Area
• Possibilities for future bay area connections
• Neighborhood concerns with home values, crime, traffic, train noise
Site W2 – Franklin & Elk Grove Blvd
19
N
Previous Public Input on Site W2 – Franklin & Elk Grove Blvd
20
Previous Public Input on Site W2:
• Concerns with impacts to the Stone Lakes National Wildlife Refuge
• Impacts to view shed of refuge open space
• Neighborhoods concerns with home values, crime, traffic, train noise
Neighborhood Impacts
21
• Crime• San Diego Association of Governments, 2009. Understanding Transit’s Impact on Public Safety. http://sandiegohealth.org/sandag/publicationid_1483_10995.pdf
• City of Tracy
• Property Values• Diaz, Roderick, 1999. Impacts of Rail Transit on Property Values. http://www.reconnectingamerica.org/assets/Uploads/bestpractice083.pdf
• University of California, Berkeley, 2017. Rail and the California Economy. http://www.dot.ca.gov/californiarail/docs/Rail_CAEconomy_Book_Report_V28_LowResPages.pdf
• Strategic Economics, 2014. Property Value and Fiscal Benefits of BART. https://www.bart.gov/sites/default/files/docs/2014‐08%20BARTPropValues_Final.pdf
• Noise• Elk Grove is currently in a designated “Quiet Zone”, where trains cannot use their horns unless there is a special circumstance requiring the horn
• Traffic
Neighborhood Impacts – City of Tracy (ACE)
22
Neighborhood Impacts – City of Tracy (ACE)
23
Site W3 & W4 – Laguna & Dwight
24
N
Previous Public Input on Sites W3 & W4
25
Previous Public Input on Sites W3 & W4:• These sites are new and are being further considered as a result of previous public input on Sites W1 & W2
• Impacts existing businesses & results in higher project costs
Current Study Recap
26
• Focus on sites along the UPRR West Side line
• Goal is to identify a preferred location based on analysis of all site factors
• City Council will receive all public input regarding all of the sites discussed at Open Houses in the Study, and either identify a preferred location for further site specific analysis, or identify multiple sites that could be considered for future site analysis/study
Next Steps
Tonight – Receive Community Input for Sites along the UPRR West Side Line
Nov/Dec – Finalize the Feasibility Study
Date TBD ‐ City Council Approval of Study
27
Thank You For Your Participation
28
Contact Information
Tom Metcalf, Project Managertmetcalf@elkgrovecity.org916‐478‐2281
8401 Laguna Palms WayElk Grove, CA 95758
Project Webpage& Online Comment Forum
bit.ly/ElkGroveMultimodal
top related