Northwest Area Mobility StudyTechnical Advisory Committee Meeting No. 2

June 6, 2013

Overview of Study and ScheduleNW Rail

North Metro Extension to Longmont

Agenda

• Welcome & Introductions• Rail Alternatives Process• Coordination with Other Corridors• Northwest Rail Current Status• North Metro Current Status• Wrap‐Up & Next Steps

P a g e   2

Welcome and Introductions• Introductions• Study Information Site 

– DashPort Information Portal 

P a g e   3

Collaboration Commitments Reminder

1. Support the Study Goal2. Consider All Communities3. Maintain Local and Regional Perspectives4. Share Information and Feedback5. Adhere to Deadlines6. Support the Public Involvement Process7. Identify Issues Early8. Respect the Collaborative Spirit9. Achieve Consensus. Acknowledge Dissent.

P a g e   4

Goals for this Technical Advisory Meeting• Provide Overview of the Study and Schedule

– Focus on Key Study Activities to be completed by the end of July 2013

• Provide Initial Information on:– Coordination with other Rail Corridors and Studies– NW Rail– North Metro Extension Alternatives to Longmont

• Initiate Dialogue and Follow‐up with Stakeholders on these topics, prior to any requested action

P a g e   5

Rail Alternatives Process(to end of July)

P a g e   6

• PAC and TAC Meeting Input– Development of alternatives– Review technical requirements

• Refinement of Alternatives• Technical Review Process

– Expert Rail Panel Review– Selected alternatives

• Expert Rail Panel– Comprised of rail experts from study team– Review of alternatives and criteria– Presentation of initial findings to TAC (June 28)

• BNSF Expertise and Coordination

Coordination with other Rail Corridors and Studies

North MetroICS/AGS

North Metro Rail Line 

• 18.5‐mile commuter rail line, with 8 stations from Denver Union Station to 162ndAvenue/SH7

• RTD has identified funding to complete construction to 72nd by 2018• RTD determined unsolicited proposal has merit; accelerating release of RFP to this summer

o Advertise RFP – July 1, 2013o Proposals due – September 23, 2013o Notice to Proceed – December 19, 2013

AGS Feasibility Study Update

9

NAMS TAC MeetingJune 2013

10

NAMS TAC MeetingJune 2013

The vision for the AGS Feasibility Study Project is to determine if an Advanced Guideway System is technologically and financially feasible.

11

Identify technologies that can meet the system performance & operational criteria

Complete AGS Feasibility Study & gain consensus on questions of feasibility, cost, ridership, land use & governance

Identify technological & financial feasibility of AGS in relationship to I-70 Mountain Corridor Record of Decision

Consistent and close coordination between AGS, ICS and Co-Development, including but not limited to a transfer-free connection to Denver International Airport

Endorsement from the local, state and federal levels for conclusions of the study document

12

13

Technology Seats per “Car” SpeedsUrban / Medium-speed Maglev

75-100 passengers 120 mph to 150 mph

High Speed Maglev 40 – 100 passengers 150 mph to 300 mphCommuter / High Speed Rail

80-100 passengers 110 mph to 220 mph

Point-to-Point Group to Personal Rapid Transit

2 – 40 passsengers 120 mph to 150 mph

Monorail / Guideway 8 – 50 passengers 85 mph to 120 mph

14

Alignment DesignSpeed

Max Grade Total Tunnels

Longest Tunnel

High Speed Maglev

150 mph 7% 40 miles 5 miles

High SpeedRail

150 mph 3% 65 miles 20 miles

Hybrid Maglev

100-120 mph

7% 20-40 miles 5 miles

I-70 MaglevAlignment

60-80 mph 7% 1.5 miles 1.3 miles

Land Use Development Potential◦ Land availability◦ Infrastructure capacity (water, power, etc)

Transportation Access & Capacity Transit Distribution Community & Regional Support Environmental Constraints Ridership Capture

15

18 Hour operating plan◦ 24 trains/day = Base Plan 12 hours @ 60-minute frequency 6 hours @ 30-minute frequency

◦ 36 trains / day = High Capacity Plan 12 hours @ 60-minute frequency 6 hours @ 15-minute frequency to meet 2035 design

capacity of 4,900 pphpd

16

Proximity to downtown Denver◦ Denver Union Station◦ Stockshow / Denver

Coliseum ◦ I-76 / 72nd Station =

North Metro Line Connection

Alignments to DIA◦ Through Denver◦ Beltway Around

17

Study team develops assessment of ridership, costs, engineering feasibility

Corridor Project Leadership Team provides opinion on level of local & regional support

Obtain transit industry input on the financial feasibility of the AGS through a Request for Financial Information (RFFI)

18

Recommendations on governance structure Recommended delivery structure: (DBFMO,

DBF + M&O separate, other)? AGS technology selection preferences? Public vs. private sector risk allocation? Fare box risk to cover O&M expenses? Recommended term for a concession? Concession concept preference: AGS

alone, AGS with managed lanes, other?

19

May: Balancing of Various Components◦ Capital Costs◦ Operations & Maintenance Costs◦ Ridership Results◦ Release RFFI

June◦ Receive responses to RFFI & Evaluate◦ Station location & parking assessment

July – September◦ Feasibility Determination◦ Project Reporting & Finalization

20

June 2013

Project Update to NAMS TACCDOT Interregional Connectivity Study

21

Overall Study Purposes

ICS : Provide cost-effective recommendations

for high speed rail alignments, technologies and station locations in the Denver metro area that will maximize ridership between HSIPR and RTD.

Suggest method for integrating HSIPR into the statewide multi-modal network.

Develop the basis for Next Steps.

22

23

Where are We in the Process?

Ridership Estimation Process

Open, non-proprietary methodsUse of DRCOG & other MPO inputs & review by MPO’sNew data to update inputs and to inform model

24

Proposed AGS/Train Service Characteristics

Finer Level of Geography

Station Area Impacts

Local Connectivity and Access

Long Range Plans

Local MPO Models and Data

Final Intra‐Urban Model

Appropriate Modifications

Incorporation of the AGS/Train 

Mode

Possible Airline 

Connections

Transfer Options

Air Mode Service Data

Airlines’ Competitive Response

Diverted AGS/Train Ridership

Induced AGS/Train Ridership

Total AGS/Train Ridership

Capacity Check

Modal Trip Tables

Modal Competitive Response

Modal Service Data

O&D & Behavioral 

Data

Final Intercity Model

Model Development

Intra‐Urban Travel Market

Intercity Travel Market

Airport Choice Market

Final Airport Choice Model

Model Development

Total Ticket 

Revenue

Financial Check

Ridership & Revenue

Operating Plans

Station Locations

Fare Policies

Train Consists

Stated Preference Survey

Opinion: new AGS/TrainStrongly oppose5%

Strongly favor30%

Somewhat favor29%

Neutral28%

Somewhat oppose8%

Opinion: tolls on I-25 and I-70

Strongly oppose27%

Strongly favor5%

Somewhat oppose26%

Neutral22%

Somewhat favor20%

25

Market Share by Scenario

26

A-1a A-1b A-5a A-5b C-1 B-2 B-3

Market

Mountain to Eagle 2,168,094 2,516,754 2,430,662 2,136,961 1,696,330 2,995,866 2,792520

Percent of Total 17.85% 19.12% 18.75% 16.27% 15.64% 21.63% 20.36%Mountain Daily 7,227 8,389 8,102 7,123 5,654 9,986 9,308North to FC 2,069,642 2,472,297 2,326,763 2,620,094 1,909,081 2,498,178 3,107,216

Percent of Total 17.04% 18.78% 17.95% 19.94% 17.60% 18.04% 22.66%North Daily 6,899 8,241 7,756 8,734 6,364 8,327 10,357South to Pueblo 5,451,251 5,674,676 5,584,849 5,514,986 4,994,421 6,220,862 5,596,993Percent of Total 44.87% 43.11% 43.07% 41.98% 46.06% 44.92% 40.81%South Daily 18,171 18,916 18,616 18,383 16,648 20,736 18,657Denver Interurban 2,460,154 2,499,106 2,623,452 2,865,417 2,244,474 2,133,840 2,218,226

Percent of Total 20.25% 18.99% 20.23% 21.81% 20.70% 15.41% 16.17%Denver Daily 8,201 8,330 8,745 9,551 7,483 7,113 7,394ANNUAL TOTAL 12,149,141 13,162,833 12,965,726 13,137,458 10,844,306 13,848,747 13,714,955

Ridership Benchmark Against Other HSR Corridors

Forecasted Colorado AGS/Train 2035 ridership of 12-14 million riders/year is similar to current (2012) NE Amtrak corridor ridership = 11.5 million

Projected 2016 ridership Orlando to Miami = 3 million

27

Summary of Feedback at Meetings

Choice of alignments in Denver area affects ridership in the mountain and North I-25 corridors more than South I-25Will be a challenge to get community approval on alignments through the middle of the Denver metro areaCentral Denver / Union Station and DIA are importantImportant that service / operating plans work well with RTD to provide optionsOperating ratio >1.0 means fares will pay for O&M costsB/C of 2.0 means high speed transit return on investment is a “good deal” for Colorado if/when funding can be found

28

Next Steps

ICS Public Meetings (Tentative) Colorado Springs 5/29; Pueblo 5/30; Windsor 6/5; Denver

6/6; Silverthorne 6/11Level 2 Evaluation Report - May/JuneInitiate Level 3 Evaluation - JuneNext ICS PLT Meeting – July 2013

29

Northwest Rail Environmental Evaluation Information

Northwest RailMay 2010 Environmental Evaluation

Pa g e   3 1

• 8 rail alternatives were analyzed– A.  No Action– B.  Double Track from Denver to Longmont– C.  Double track Denver to Boulder, single track Boulder to Longmont– D.  Single Track Denver to Longmont– E.  Highway Corridor– F.  BNSF adjacent to East– G.  BNSF adjacent to West– H.  BNSF adjacent East/West combination

• All alternatives except  A and B were screened out in Level 1‐Conceptual Alternative Screening process– Did not meet the Purpose and Need for the Project– Were not practical due to cost, existing technology or logistics– Did not avoid known environmental impacts

Northwest RailMay 2010 Environmental Evaluation

Pa g e   3 2

• Preferred Alternative:  B. Double track from Denver to Longmont within the BNSF ROW– 41 miles (DUS to Longmont)– Shared corridor with BNSF– DMU technology– Assumed Commuter Rail Maintenance Facility at Fox North site

o Maintenance facility ended up at I‐70/I‐25• EE Service Frequency*

– 15 min. service in morning and evening peak periods– 30 min. service between Boulder and Longmont– 30 min. service at other times

*2030 Service Plan

Northwest RailCost Information (EE) (May 2010)

Pa g e   3 3

• EE Costs: $1.0 Billion (2015 dollars)– Includes rail improvements with proposed FasTracks stations

o Church Ranch (Walnut Creek)o Flatirono Downtown Louisvilleo Boulder Transit Villageo Gunbarrelo Longmont

– Includes shared line with Gold Line (DUS to Pecos‐under construction)– Includes 4 unfunded stations*

o Westminster 88th Avenueo Broomfield/116th

o East Bouldero Twin Peaks

* Not included in the FasTracks estimate

BNSF

Northwest RailBNSF

Pa g e   3 5

• Owns, maintains and is responsible for rail ROW for Colorado and North American freight shippers 

• NW Rail is part of the Front Range Subdivision, Powder River division– Runs from Wendover, WY to Denver, CO– Part of BNSF’s main line network between the Pacific 

Northwest/Canada, Northern Plains and Texas Gulf• Design, Cost, Bid, Construct and Operate/Dispatch all rail 

within the corridor• Six to eight through freight trains per day plus locals/ will 

vary depending on need at any given time• Seven mile Lafayette Branch connects to the Front Range 

Sub at Broomfield

BNSF Area Map

Pag e   3 6

Longmont

Denver

Front Range Subdivision

Northwest RailRole of BNSF in NW Rail

P a g e   3 7

• Initial design provided to BNSF by RTD.  BNSF provided 30% rail drawings of double track option (Aug. 2011)– 55 one‐way trips per weekday (peak period) with not more than 30 min. headways– 36 one‐way trips per weekday between Boulder and Longmont– Hourly service at other times– This option was approximately $535 M*

• BNSF also priced out a less frequent operating scenario:– 9 one‐way trips between 6:00 am and 9:00– 9 one‐way trips between 3:30 pm and 6:30 pm– No weekend service– This option was approximately $410 M* 

• Provided cost for BNSF Operations and Maintenance of the line• Cost information from BNSF used by RTD to update the current estimate• Ongoing dialog with BNSF.

*Cost does not include additional ROW, stations, PNR, vehicles, main. facility

Northwest RailBNSF Operating Questions‐Letter Summary

Pa g e   3 8

• Letter sent to BNSF dated May 13, 2013• If corridor were to be segmented, 10,000 LF of 

unobstructed storage track would be required past the northwest end station for BNSF freight.– Would require grade separations of streets along storage track

• Depending on RTD train service/frequency requirements:– Would BNSF consider a shared single track operation with RTD 

within their corridor?– Would BNSF consider a new RTD track parallel to the existing 

BNSF track for RTD use during daily operations and shared by BNSF off‐hours?

– Any changes to freight operations?– Other key operating assumptions?– Other operating scenarios that would be less costly?

Northwest Rail Alternatives for NAMS

Northwest Rail‐Segments Northwest Rail: 

– Service options  – Construction phasing options:

o Westminster Center/                     88th Ave. 

o Church Ranch o Broomfield/Flatirono Louisvilleo Boulder Transit Village  o Downtown Longmont

P a g e   4 0

Typical End of Line for SegmentsPlan View

Pa g e   4 1

PLAN VIEW (NTS)

STATION10,000 LFBNSF STORAGE TRACK‐NO OBSTRUCTIONS

500’STORAGE

770’CROSSOVER

2.13 MILES  (11, 270 LF) 

Track Chart‐30% BNSF Plans‐Example

Pa g e   4 2Pierce Street

Old W

adsw

orth

Mile Post

Track Speed

Curves

Track Grade

Track Structures

Track Control

88thAv

enue

Northwest RailSegmenting Discussion Items

• Station Location• Available ROW• Universal Crossover Placement• BNSF Storage Track (10,000 LF)• Parking Requirements• Ridership• Station Access

P a g e   4 3

Northwest Rail‐Other Alternatives 

P a g e   4 4

• Operation alternatives• Changes to service 

assumptions?• Single track segments of 

corridor dependent on appropriate operating plan(requires BNSF follow up)

• Feasibility of using a portion of BNSF ROW for single track commuter services (requires BNSF follow up)

• Evaluation of rail alignment outside of BNSF corridor (screened out in EE)

Northwest Rail CostsCurrent Costs in 2013 dollars71st and Lowell to Longmont

P a g e   4 5

• BNSF Improvements $535 M– Track and Improvements within the BNSF ROW

• RTD Improvements– Stations, PNR, Additional ROW, Maintenance Facility, Vehicles $605 M

Total $1.140 B

Operations Scenario– 55 one‐way trips per weekday (peak period) with not more than 30 min. headways– 36 one‐way trips per weekday between Boulder and Longmont– Hourly service at other times

Source:  RTD Revised estimate based on BNSF costs allocated by RTD

Northwest RailNext Steps

• Receive comments from Stakeholders on TAC 2 information– Other alternatives?– Other needed information?– Other questions for BNSF?– Pros/Cons/known issues

• Segmenting Options• Operating Scenarios• Fatal Flaw analysis• Feasible alternatives by end of July

P a g e   4 6

North Metro Extension to Longmont

North Metro Extension‐Alternative ANorth Metro Extension 

Longmont:– Alternative A ‐ Preferred Alignment from the North I‐25 EIS

– 18 miles from 162ndAvenue to Longmont

P a g e   4 8

North Metro Extension‐Alternative BNorth Metro Extension 

Longmont:– Alternative B ‐ Utilize the Boulder Branch turning northward on US 287

o Includes spur to Boulder

– 21 miles  162nd Avenue to Longmont along 287

– 8.5 additional miles from 287 to Boulder Transit Village

P a g e   4 9

North Metro Extension‐Alternative CNorth Metro Extension 

Longmont:– Alternative C ‐ Utilize the CDOT North I‐25 alignment from ICS Study to SH 119

– 18 miles from 162ndAvenue to Longmont

P a g e   5 0

North Metro Extension‐Alternative DNorth Metro Extension 

Longmont:– Alternative D – Utilize Boulder Branch and connect to abandoned Lafayette line to Longmont

– 16.5 miles from 162ndAvenue to Longmont

P a g e   5 1

North Metro AlternativesNorth Metro Extension 

Longmont:– Alternative A ‐ Preferred 

Alignment from the North I‐25 EIS

– Alternative B ‐ Utilize the Boulder Branch turning northward on US 287

o includes spur to Boulder– Alternative C ‐ Utilize the 

CDOT North I‐25 alignment from ICS Study to SH 119

– Alternative D – Utilize the Boulder Branch and the abandon Lafayette line to Longmont

P a g e   5 2

North Metro ExtensionColorado 52/CR 7

Pag e   5 3

Colorado 52

Coun

ty Rd. 7

Alternative “A” North I‐25 EIS

Alternative “D” 

North Metro ExtensionI‐25 and Colo. 119

Pag e   5 4

ICS AlignmentAlong I‐25

Colorado 119

I‐25

Longmont

Alternative “C”  along 119

North Metro ExtensionLongmont Connection

Pag e   5 5

Alternative C

Alternative B

Alternative A

Alternative D

Colorado 119

US 287

Longmont

North Metro ExtensionUS 287/Boulder Branch

Pag e   5 6

US 287

To Longmont

To I‐25

To Boulder

Alternative B

Optional Line toBoulder

P a g e   5 7

North Metro ExtensionBoulder Branch/Boulder Connection

Valmont Rd.Foothills Pkw

y.

Baseline Rd.

Boulder TransitVillage

Alternative B

Boulder

North Metro ExtensionDiscussion Items

• ICS Coordination• Longmont served by either NW Rail or North Metro Extension‐not both

• Ridership• In/Out of District• Environmental• ROW Impacts• Station locations

P a g e   5 8

North MetroNext Steps

• Receive comments from Stakeholders on TAC 2 information– Other alternatives?– Other needed information?– Pros/Cons/known issues

• Fatal Flaw analysis• Operating Scenarios• Feasible alternatives by end of July

P a g e   5 9

Discussion, Questions, Comments, Other Information?

Next Steps

Overall Study Schedule

Pa g e   6 2

Key Decisions By End of July 2013 • Evaluation Process

– Goals, Objectives and Performance Measures– Brought to the joint PAC/TAC on June 17

• Identify Stand‐alone Alternatives to Be Evaluated – Northwest Rail ‐ Operational/Phasing Alternative(s)– North Metro Extension ‐ Alternate Alignment(s)

P a g e   6 3

Proposed Schedule of TAC/PAC MeetingsTo Reach July Decision Point

Meeting Date/Time LocationTechnical Advisory Committee Mtg 1 Thurs. May 23 

1:00pm – 3:00pmWestminster City HallMulti‐purpose Room (Lower Level) 4800 W. 92nd Avenue, Westminster, 80031

Collaboration Summit – Joint Policy and Technical Advisory Committee 

Wed. May 29, 7:30am – 11:30am

Westminster City Park Rec CenterCommunity Room10455 Sheridan Boulevard, Westminster, CO 80020

Technical Advisory Committee Mtg 2 Thurs. June 6, 1:00‐5:00pm

Broomfield City and County BuildingBal Swan and Zang Spur Conference Rooms (Basement)1 DesCombes Drive, Broomfield, 80020

Joint Policy and Technical Advisory Committee Mtg 2

Mon. June 17, 1:00 – 3:00pm

Westminster City Park Rec CenterCommunity Room10455 Sheridan Boulevard, Westminster, CO 8

Expert Rail Panel Mtg w/ Technical Advisory Committee

Fri. June 28, 1:00 – 5:00pm

Broomfield City and County BuildingBal Swan and Zang Spur Conference Rooms (Basement) 1 DesCombes Drive, Broomfield, 80020

Joint Policy and Technical  Committee Mtg 3

Tues. July 9,7:30 – 9:30am

Westminster City Park Rec CenterCommunity Room10455 Sheridan Boulevard, Westminster, CO 80020

Technical Advisory Committee Mtg 3 Wed. July 17, 1:00‐3:00pm

Louisville Library1st Floor Conference Room951 Spruce Street, Louisville, CO 80027

Joint Policy and Technical Committee Mtg 4

Tues. Jul 30,2:00‐4:00 pm

Broomfield Community CenterLakeshore Room280 Lamar StreetBroomfield, CO 80020

P a g e   6 4

Wrap‐up and Next Steps• Joint PAC/TAC meeting for Evaluation Criteria June 17

• Submit questions or comments by June 20

• Expert Rail Panel June 28

• Joint PAC/TAC meeting July 9– Follow up on NW Rail and North Metro Extension alternatives

– Responses to stakeholder questions

P a g e   6 5