crcog n th t c id st dcrcog northwest corridor study ...€¦ · 236 3,336 across market st. 2,419...
Post on 09-Aug-2020
0 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
CRCOG N th t C id St dCRCOG Northwest Corridor StudyDowntown Circulation and Union Station Findings and Recommendations
Steering Committee MeetingMay 12, 2009, 10 AM
Agenda
1. Welcome and Introductions
2 Overview of Study Objectives and Existing Conditions:2. Overview of Study Objectives and Existing Conditions:
Union Station
Downtown Circulation
3. Review Transit Center Alternatives and Recommendations3. Review Transit Center Alternatives and Recommendations
4. Review of Union Station Findings and Recommendations
5. Discussion
6. Next Steps6 e t Steps
2
Study ChallengesHow can we make the How can we make the existing bus services and new bus services work better for:
PassengersConnecticut TransitDowntown trafficD t b i Downtown businesses and residents
Can a bus transit center help?Can we make better use of historic Union Station?
Public Workshop for Union Station and
Downtown Bus Stops and Routes, June 18, 2008
Why are we looking at Union Station?
I U i St ti t t ti h b Improve Union Station as a transportation hub and destination
Improve operations for existing servicesImprove operations for existing servicesAddition of busway and commuter railEncourage joint developmentg j pInvestigate Union Station for transit buses
Union Station Current Condition
Current UsesOffices and retail activityIntercity bus terminalIntercity bus terminalAmtrak station
Public Workshop for Union Station and Downtown Bus Stops and Routes, June 18, 2008
Union Station Challenges and Opportunities
I t hi l i l tiImprove current vehicular circulationAccommodate taxis Short term parkingShort term parkingPedestrian and bicycle access
Improve Station User experiencep pInsure Ability to
Be focal point for some or all of city busesAccommodate new bus rapid transitAccommodate commuter rail service
I h i l diti f t tImprove physical condition of structure
Public Workshop for Union Station and Downtown Bus Stops and Routes, June 18, 2008
Building Condition
Structure good shape (except Amtrak trestle) Structure – good shape (except Amtrak trestle) Mechanicals – boilers, chillers, water heater, piping need replacingIntercity bus loading area: Intercity bus loading area:
Pavement needs repairDrainage problemsg p
Transportation Center: Update and Renovate; Roof Drainage IssuesEnergy improvements
WindowsLighting
Utilization of space:Inaccessible space on second floorGreat Hall underutilized
Existing and Future Conditions: Downtown Circulation
Current downtown transit services Through routesTerminating routesTerminating routes
Current downtown ridership:Where are riders destined?Where are riders destined?How many transferWhat are the key downtown connections and destinations
Future busway routes, ridership, and transfers
Wh t k h t d ’t?What works, what doesn’t?Could a transit center help?
8
Downtown PM Peak Period Bus Trips
48705
eet
t Marke
t Stre
Asylum Street
275
10
Main
Stre
etM
13 6610
Public Workshop for Union Station and Downtown Bus Stops and Routes, June 18, 2008
Findings: Transfers
Est. 16,900 daily local bus boardings in the study area14,774 at just a few stops on Main, Market and Central Rowj p
Est.11,238 daily transfers to local buses in and around downtown10,326 on Main, Market and Central Row
70% of Main Street area local bus boardings are transfersThere are also about 1,280 through riders on seven through routes
Only about 9% of commuter bus boardings are transfers
10
Daily Estimated Downtown Local Bus Transfer Movements
Old State House2,044
Market Street1,667
(49)3 275
(1,027)
3 336
3,275across
Main St.
Main Street(Pearl to Gold)
236
3,336across
Market St.2,419across
Central Row(Pearl to Gold)2,929 Travelers
2,188765
844
(1,196)(161)
Central Row
Atheneum440
876440 Transfer Boardings 000Transfers Between Stops 000Transfers Within Stops (000)
11
Findings: Through routes
Many more riders transfer than travel through
Major through routes (A, K, Q, T) seem to make sense
Some through routes (N, U and W) have few through riders
Through routing helps keep operating costs downThrough-routing helps keep operating costs down
No need for overlap between north and south routesNo need to turn buses around on side streets in the downtownNo need to turn buses around on side streets in the downtown
12
Findings: Key Downtown Nodes and Connections
NodesMain Street remains an important destination
M i St t/A l i t id f d t l tMain Street/Asylum is centroid of downtown employmentOther important nodes:
Asylum Hill employersAsylum Hill employersCapitol Ave. Government officesDowntown residentialEntertainment district/Union Station areaConvention Center Area
13
Findings: Key Downtown Nodes and Connections
ConnectionsMaintain through connectionsStrengthen connections to west side of downtownStrengthen connections to east side of downtown (including convention center)Maintain commuter services to the downtownMaintain Star Shuttle service for visitor marketProvide a pathway for busway vehicles - Union Stn. to Main St.
14
Current Service – Peak Hour Local and Commuter Bus Volumes
North-South Through RoutesNorth or South Terminating Routes
34 / 47
MarketAsylum
East Terminating RoutesWest Terminating RoutesPM Commuter Routes
31
34 / 47
31
StatePearlPM Peak Hour Bus Volumes(for each side of the street)
0000
2031
2025
029
032
41 / 82
332
019
Main
(for each side of the street)
41 / 382112
32
12
Busway Service and Transfer Assumptions
29 peak hour buses Local and busway only (19)
3 000 daily riders destined to downtown3,000 daily riders destined to downtownAssume same transfer rate as local bus routes (~70%)Assume riders will transfer to other routes like K, P, Q, and W ridersApprox. 2,000 transfers to and 2,000 transfers from local busway servicesRoutes should make transfer connections like local bus routes
Express commute (10)From Bristol, Cheshire, Meriden and Waterbury
f ( )Assume riders will transfer like commuter bus riders (almost none)Should serve downtown like commuter routes and serve Asylum Hill
16
Downtown Stops and Routes: Conclusions
Hi h t f tHigh transfer rateMost other passengers destined for Main Streetdestined for Main StreetTight curb space for buses on Main Streeton Main StreetCrowded sidewalks with people waiting for buses p p gMany bus stops don’t have sheltersConflicts between vehicle traffic and transferring passengers
Findings: What a Transit Center Can Do
Provide a better environment for transferring passengersSafe – no need to cross streetDry more shelters and/or a waiting roomDry – more shelters and/or a waiting roomConvenient – rest rooms and concessionsInformative - Schedule and bus arrival information
Move waiting passengers away from downtown businessesImproved perception of downtown area
Eliminate bus layover time on downtown streetsNo more vehicles idling on streetsL t t d d t d t bLess on-street space needed to accommodate buses
Provide a better quality of serviceMore layover space available to improve on time performanceMore layover space available to improve on-time performance
18
Possible Transit Center Sites
Park & Main
Possible Transit Center SitesUnder Consideration
Not Available
Not Feasible Park & Main
19
Strategy for Improving Downtown Service
Maintain stop on all routes at or near the central area of Main StProvide a transit centerI t f ti / iti f t f t id th Improve transfer connections/amenities for transfers outside the transit centerMinimize the number of transfers at unimproved facilitiesMinimize the number of transfers at unimproved facilitiesReduce the overall number of transfers with through-routing (Maximize through routing)Expand service to the west side of downtown as well as Union StationC id i f i t f M i St t t d l t Consider expansion of service east of Main Street to developments along Columbus Boulevard
20
Alternative 1 – Peak Hour Local and Commuter Bus Volumes28 7 / 2028
North-South Through RoutesEast-Southwest Routes
7 / 20
57
29
31
West RoutesPM Commuter Routes (including busway express)57 / 70
21
192045
3122
2752
025
57 / 91
210
0000
PM Peak Hour Bus Volumes(for each side of the street)
57
10
27 / 333125
1812
230
325
CRCOG Northwest Corridor Transit Study Task 3Downtown Circulation Steering Committee October 20, 2008
30
Alternative 2 – Peak Hour Local and Commuter Bus Volumes27 7 / 20
North-South RoutesEast-West Routes
27
10
7 / 20
Busway Local RoutesPM Commuter Routes (including busway express)
53
29
10
37 21 53 / 47
19
0 / 19029
2045
3728
054
210
2954
82 / 68350
0000
PM Peak Hour Bus Volumes(for each side of the street)
4
49 / 34
1610
0 / 25
0
230
10
CRCOG Northwest Corridor Transit Study Task 3Downtown Circulation Steering Committee October 20, 2008
30
Alternative 3 – Peak Hour Local and Commuter Bus Volumes
7 / 2028
North-South RoutesEast-West Routes
7 / 20
20
28
Busway Local RoutesPM Commuter Routes (including busway express)2344 32 / 45
46 44 1546
0000
PM Peak Hour Bus Volumes(for each side of the street)
19
55 / 70
071250
0
048
04637
025
0 / 25
0
1610
55 / 36
30 2
CRCOG Northwest Corridor Transit Study Task 3Downtown Circulation Steering Committee October 20, 2008
Alternative 4 – Peak Hour Local and Commuter Bus Volumes 27 8/ 2127
North-South RoutesEast-West Routes20
8/ 21
27
19Other Through RoutesBusway Local RoutesPM Commuter routes
100
0/ 61 80 / 02141
2746
0 / 32
19
(including busway express)
0000
PM Peak Hour Bus Volumes(for each side of the street)
0
2045
4132
41 / 75
8086
025
41
00 (for each side of the street)
2115
0 / 6
230
CRCOG Northwest Corridor Transit Study Task 3Downtown Circulation Steering Committee October 20, 2008
30
Downtown Circulation Alternatives
Alternative 1 – Through-route most services and develop a transit center on the southwest side of downtown East and North routes center on the southwest side of downtown. East and North routes serve stops near main street before continuing to the transit center where they would be through-routed to the West and South routes.
Alternative 2 –Through-route most services and develop a transit t th th t id f d t E t d S th t center on the northwest side of downtown. East and South routes
serve stops near Main street before continuing to the transit center where they would be through-routed to the West and North routes. y g
25
Additional Downtown Circulation Alternatives
Alternative 3 – Spread bus layovers among three smaller transit centers with each route serving two of the centers so that all centers with each route serving two of the centers so that all transfer connections can be made
Alternative 4 – Minimize added travel time and mileage by maintaining a centrally located transfer point and developing an on-t t t it t t f M i St tstreet transit center east of Main Street
26
Advantages of All Alternatives
All Alternatives…Include improved transfer facilitiesMove a sizeable majority of transfers into a Transit CenterMove a sizeable majority of transfers into a Transit CenterHave all routes serving a transit centerHave all routes serving a downtown stop on or near Main Streetg pMinimize the number of transfers across the streetMinimize bus volumes through increased through-routing
27
Evaluation of Alternatives
Effective use of Transit CenterEffective use of Transit CenterUtilization of Transit CentersCapital costCapacity/quality of Center
Efficiency and Effectiveness of ServiceThrough and Transferring RidersThrough and Transferring RidersRiders into DowntownRiders Within DowntownO ti C tOperating Costs
Traffic ImpactsTraffic Issues and Circulation Changes NeededgBus volumes
28
Evaluation of Alternatives
Alt. 1(Main St.)
Alt. 2(Union Station)
Alt. 3(3 Centers)
Alt. 4(East Side)
Utilization of Transit Centers o + ++ ++Through & Transferring Riders - ++ o oRiders into Downtown - o - - +Riders within Downtown - + - +B V lBus Volumes o - - - -Traffic Issues & Circulation Changes + - - - oOperating Costs + o +Operating Costs - + o +Capital Cost o o - +Capacity/Quality of Transit Centers + + o -Capacity/Quality of Transit Centers + + o
29
Preferred Alternative: 2
Alternative 2 –Through-route most services and develop a transit center on the northwest side of downtown. East and South routes serve stops near Main street before continuing to the transit center serve stops near Main street before continuing to the transit center where they would be through-routed to the West and North routes.
30
Preferred Alternative: Possible Transit Center Sites
Possible Transit Center Sites
Under Consideration
31
Alternative 2 – Peak Hour Local and Commuter Bus VolumesJunk27 7 / 20
North-South RoutesEast-West Routes
27
10
7 / 20
Busway Local RoutesPM Commuter Routes (including busway express)
53
29
10
37 21 53 / 47
19
0 / 19029
2045
3728
054
210
2954
82 / 68350
0000
PM Peak Hour Bus Volumes(for each side of the street)
4
49 / 34
1610
0 / 25
0
230
10
30
Alternative 2 – Transit Center Needs
AccessAccessHighest volumes to/from Church Street
Some could approach via Asylum/High for High Street sitesHi h h l f S /M tl St t High approach volumes from Spruce/Myrtle Streets North routes would be diverted from Main Street
via High for High Street sitespossibly via Edwards for Spruce Street sites (except K)
East routes would approach from Ford Streetvia High for High Street sitesvia High/Church or Asylum/Spruce for Spruce Street sites
Capacity135 local buses (including busway) in peak hour135 local buses (including busway) in peak hour11-16 bays for local service (most through-routed)3 bays for busway (non-terminating) – 1 for IB unloading, 2 for OB loadingAssuming no commuter buses or busway express
33
Minimum Transit Center Needs
14 to 19 bus bays3 minimum for bus rapid transit11 minimum for local bus11 minimum for local bus
Climate Controlled waiting spaceRectangular space most efficientRectangular space most efficient
Transit Center – Bridgeport, CT
Transit Center – Bridgeport, CT
Transit Center – Bridgeport, CT
• Downtown• 17bus bays 17bus bays • 10,000 sf building• 3,000 sf waiting area• Pedestrian bridge
connecting to Metro North platformplatform
• Owned by the City of Bridgeport
• Managed (under lease) by Greater Bridgeport Transit
Overview of Site Locations—5 basic locations
Option B1— Union Place/Allyn Transit Only (sawtoothed bays)
Option B2— Union Place/Allyn Transit Only—Straight Curb
Option D2— Spruce On Street with Sawtoothed Bays
Option D3— Spruce On Street with Straight Curb
Option D1– Spruce Street Off-Street Transit Center
Option A1— SE High Street with Garage Above Center
Option E1— SW High Street Ground Level with Garage Above Center
Option C1– Cul de Sac Transit Center with Garage
Evaluation of Sites
Union Place On Street:Closes Union and block of Allyn to general trafficSawtooth creates long distance between busesSawtooth creates long distance between busesIn line layout creates operational difficulties and customer confusion
Spruce Street On StreetSpruce Street On StreetSawtooth creates long distance between usesIn line layout creates operational difficulties and customer confusionWill affect traffic on Spruce
Spruce Street Lot:N t h t d t tiNot enough space to accommodate articsNo ability to provide garage aboveWill affect traffic on SpruceWill affect traffic on Spruce
47
Evaluation of Sites
Church and High – SE Corner:Central between downtown and Union stationMultiple entrances and exits onto Church and AllynMultiple entrances and exits onto Church and AllynCould accommodate parking garage aboveLimited ability to expandy p
Church and High – SW Corner:Similar issues as SE corner, plus constrained site
North of Church:Plenty of space for current needs and expansionF t ffi i tFewer traffic impactsCould accommodate parking garage aboveIsolated further from downtownIsolated, further from downtown
48
Selected Transit Center Location
Future Traffic Analysis - Assumptions
Design analysis year = 2017Evaluated worst case scenarioDevelopments on Spruce Street lot and Capital West siteDevelopments on Spruce Street lot and Capital West siteTransit Center in Hartford Insurance lot off Spruce StreetBRT in operationpNew Haven-Hartford-Springfield Commuter in operationNo major change to street system
Traffic Evaluation of North of Church Location
Slight deterioration at several intersections, as compared to No Build:
Asylum and Spruce Street:Asylum and Spruce Street:Eastbound leftSouthbound through right
Church Street/Myrtle and Spruce:Northbound, through leftSouthbound left-through-rightSouthbound, left-through-right
Church and Union PlaceSouthbound, left-through-right
Intersection Operation Issues
Bringing it Together: the Union Station Intermodal Complex
Design FeaturesSafetyC iConvenienceOperational Functionality
Intercity BusbaysIntercity BusbaysTaxi standShortterm parkingShortterm parkingAccess: vehicle, ped, bike
Support as a “Great Place”pp
Public Workshop for Union Station and Downtown Bus Stops and Routes, June 18, 2008
Design Concept – Union Station
Design Concept – Union Station
Design Concept – Union Station
Summary of Traffic Issues
B /t i/ d t i ti t U i St tiBus/taxi/pedestrian operations at Union StationPossible intersection improvementsPedestrian safetyPedestrian safety
Next Steps for Transit Center
Feasibility StudyProgramming of space needsRefine site selection processRefine site selection processNEPAConcept Designp gPreliminary Cost Estimate
DesignConstruction
Next Steps for Union Station
Shortterm RepairsArchitectural Study
Programming of space needsProgramming of space needsNEPAConcept DesignConcept DesignPreliminary Cost Estimate
DesignConstruction
Next Steps for Study
Public Meeting: May 26 2009Public Meeting: May 26, 2009Hartford Public Library, 6 PM
Completion of Reports: June 30, 2009p p ,Integration of Study Recommendations into CRCOG LRP: September 2009Implementation
Alternative 2 – Initial Evaluation
Ad t DisadvantagesAdvantagesHigh number of transfers in Transit CenterFew transfers crossing streets
DisadvantagesHigh bus volumes on Church StreetPoor connection between east and north ro tes ( ia Union Station)Relatively low increase in operating costs
Good connection between busway and both north and west routes
routes (via Union Station)Increased local bus service on Central Row could affect commuter bus operationsModerately difficult transit center sitesGood connection between west and north
routesIncreased access to the east sideI d t U i St ti f
Moderately difficult transit center sitesTransit center sites may lack capacity and may need to be combinedTraffic modifications (contra-flow lanes) Increased access to Union Station from
all corridorsTraffic modifications (contra flow lanes) needed on High Street
CRCOG Northwest Corridor Transit Study Task 3Downtown Circulation Steering Committee October 20, 2008
top related