HomeMy WebLinkAboutWSA - SANTA ANA-GARDEN GROVE FIXED GUIDEWAY_COLORc2
City Council Study SessionCity Council Study Session
October 18, 2010October 18, 2010
1
Slide 1
c2 Changed title & date
ckrebs, 10/4/2010
c1
Santa Ana Transit VisionSanta Ana Transit Vision--Phase Phase 11
2
Slide 2
c1 This image is too fuzzy; please replace
ckrebs, 10/4/2010
Santa AnaSanta Ana--Garden Grove Fixed Guideway Garden Grove Fixed Guideway
Project PurposeProject Purpose
Provide a safe, convenient and
?
reliable public transportation
option
Spur economic development
?
opportunities and create jobs
Increase accessibility and livability
?
in the heart of Orange County
Promote sustainable and
?
environmentally responsible
transportation
Serve as a link to destinations
?
within and surrounding Santa Ana
3
Connecting Neighborhoods, Connecting Neighborhoods,
Businesses and Activity CentersBusinesses and Activity Centers
4
OCTA “Go Local” ProcessOCTA “Go Local” Process
•Identify transit concepts to link major activity & employment
centers to Metrolinkstations
Step 1
•Identify wide range of routes & transit technologies
•Refine concepts in coordination with stakeholders & the public
We are here
•Conduct alternatives analysis, conceptual engineering &
environmental review on “reduced set” of concepts
Step 2
•Refine cost estimates & develop funding plan
•Preliminary engineering (with FTA concurrence)
•Final design & construction
Step 3*
•Implementation
•Once Go Local programs are operating, OCTA will perform
additional upgrades to Metrolinkstations to ensure passengers
Step 4*
can connect seamlessly to the various transit services
5
*Steps 3 and 4 not yet funded
Step 2 of Study Process: Public OutreachStep 2 of Study Process: Public Outreach
Problem
Statement, Goals Community
& Objectives, Listening Scoping
Evaluation Sessions
2010
2009
Measures
Conceptual
Draft Conceptual
Engineering and
Environmental Definition of
Environmental
DocumentAlternatives
s
Analysi
2011
Selection of LPA,
Notice of
Final Environmental
Determination/
Document and
Go Local STEP 3
Advanced
Record of
Conceptual
Decision
Engineering
6
Stakeholder Groups We’ve Met WithStakeholder Groups We’ve Met With
Stakeholder Working
?
Group (SWG)
Downtown Inc.
?
Santa Ana Unified School
?
District
Santa Ana Merchants
?
Association
Santa Ana College
?
140+ downtown businesses on 4th and 5th Streets
?
School Board for the SAUSD
?
7
Stakeholder FeedbackStakeholder Feedback
Downtown Businesses
?
are excited about
streetcar and increased
foot traffic
Overall support for
?
streetcar concept
Need to include Civic
?
Center Dr. to Flower St.
Want convenient connections to sites not directly on
?
the route (the College and S. Main St.)
8
Stakeholder Feedback Stakeholder Feedback --continuedcontinued
Pedestrian safety concerns,
?
especially near school sites
Need more resident input
?
Concern over how project is
?
funded
Potential impact to parking
?
on 4th St.
Construction impacts on 4th St.
?
Question if the streetcar fits or
?
works on 4th St.
Questions about the future development of Willowick
?
Want it completed in a timely manner
?
9
Supporter TestimonialsSupporter Testimonials
10
Stakeholder Outreach: Next StepsStakeholder Outreach: Next Steps
Activity Center Outreach including faith-based
?
organizations
Speakers’ Bureau Opportunities
?
?City and County-wide organizations
?Neighborhood associations
?Seniors groups
One-on-one Briefings
?
Building Partnerships / Coalitions with key
?
stakeholders
11
c19
Which Technologies Are Most Suitable?Which Technologies Are Most Suitable?
PERSONAL LOW-DIESEL
COMMUTER TROLLEY MODERN
GOAL-BASED CRITERIA
RAPID SPEED MONORAILMULTIPLE LIGHT RAIL BUS
RAILBUSSTREETCAR
TRANSITMAG LEVUNITS
LIVABILITY/ACCESSIBILITY:
Doesthe project promote livability
YesYesYesYesYesYesYesYesYes
and walkability? Doesit utilize clean
fuels? Doesit reduce auto
dependency?
PROVEN FEASIBILITY:
NoNoYesYesYesYesYesYesYes
Isthe technology proven in revenue
service in the US?
AFFORDABILITY:
Can the project be implemented at a
NoNoNoYesYesYesYesYesYes
“reasonable” cost based on possible,
known funding sources?
ACCESSIBILITY:
Does the project provide the required
NoNoNoNoNoYesYesYesYes
level of accessibility ?Does itaddress
identified travel markets and needs?
COMMUNITY ACCEPTANCE/
ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP:
NoNoNoNoNoNoYesYesYes
Does the project avoid major right-of-
way impacts ? Can it operate in
existing lanes?
12
Slide 12
c19 Multiple changes
ckrebs, 10/4/2010
c5
How Well Does Each Alignment How Well Does Each Alignment
Perform?Perform?
ALTERNATIVES EVALUATED
SCREENING CRITERIA/
BRT 2 -STREETCAR 1 -STREETCAR 2 -STREETCAR 3 -
MEASURES OF EFFECTIVENESS
BRT 1 -SANTA ANA BLVD./ SANTA ANA BLVD./ SANTA ANA BLVD./ 3RD STREET/
CIVIC CENTER DR.5TH STREET5TH STREET4TH STREET4TH STREET
Alternative provides service to City's
0%29.8%33.9%27.0%29.5%
adopted transit corridors
Number of residents within a 1/4 mile
4343454242
walking distance of proposed alignment (in
thousands)
Number of employees within a 1/4 mile
2627272625
walking distance of proposed alignment (in
thousands)
LowLowHighHighHigh
Would promotes principles of "Livability"
LowMedium-HighHighMedium-HighMedium
Would serve transit-supportive land use
Will be perceived as a significant long-term
MediumMediumHighHighHigh
public investment in infrastructure by
potential investors/developers
LowLowMediumMediumMedium
Total estimated capital cost
5th4th1st2nd3rd
RECOMMENDED RANKING
13
Alternatives to be carried forward for further study
Slide 13
c5 Changed slide title
ckrebs, 10/4/2010
Top Technology Being ConsideredTop Technology Being Considered
Modern Streetcar
?
?
Runs in street traffic or in exclusive
guideway
?
Electrically powered through single
overhead wire
Portland Streetcar
?
Typical Vehicle Capacity: 50 seated, up to
100 standing
CPUC Compliant Streetcar
Reduced Set of Alternatives Reduced Set of Alternatives
No Build Alternative
?
?
Depicts what happens if project is not built
?
No further transportation improvements beyond what has
.
already been funded and committed through the year 2035
Transportation Systems Management (TSM)
?
Alternative
?
Explores what can be achieved with low level investments such
as traffic signal synchronization
?
Relatively inexpensive projects, operational improvements, or
policy actions such as increases in existing bus service,
improved signal timing, and incentives to carpooling.
Streetcar 1 along Santa Ana Blvd. and 4 th St.
?
Streetcar 2 along Santa Ana Blvd. and 5 th St.
?
Streetcar 1 Streetcar 1 ––Santa Ana Blvd./4Santa Ana Blvd./4 thth StreetStreet
Streetcar 2 Streetcar 2 ––Santa Ana Blvd./5Santa Ana Blvd./5 thth StreetStreet
Santa Ana Blvd. at Garfield St.Santa Ana Blvd. at Garfield St.
(Looking East)(Looking East)
Santa Ana Blvd. at Parton St.Santa Ana Blvd. at Parton St.
(Looking West) (Looking West)
19
Refinements to Reduced AlternativesRefinements to Reduced Alternatives
Streetcar 1 –Parking on 4 th Street
?
?
Option 1: Remove diagonal parking along south side
of 4th Street; widen sidewalk 16 feet on south side.
?
Option 2: Replace diagonal parking along south side
of 4th Street with parallel parking; widen sidewalk 8
feet.
Streetcar 2 –Civic Center Drive Loop
?
20
thth
Streetcar 1 Streetcar 1 ––44Street Parking Option 1Street Parking Option 1
Remove diagonal parking along south side of 4th Street;
?
Widen sidewalk 16 feet on south side
?
21
thth
Streetcar 1 Streetcar 1 ––44Street Parking Option 2Street Parking Option 2
Replace diagonal parking along south side of 4th Street
?
with parallel parking
22
Widen sidewalk 8 feet
?
44Street Station at Main StreetStreet Station at Main Street
thth
23
4th Street at Sycamore St.4th Street at Sycamore St.
(Looking West) (Looking West)
24
Streetcar 2 Streetcar 2 ––Santa Ana Blvd./5Santa Ana Blvd./5 thth StreetStreet
with Civic Center Loopwith Civic Center Loop
Civic Center Dr. near Flower St. Civic Center Dr. near Flower St.
(Looking East) (Looking East)
How Will the Preferred Alternative How Will the Preferred Alternative
Be Selected?Be Selected?
Accessibility and Livability
?
Economic Development, Transit Supportive
?
Land Uses and Community Goals
Environmental Responsibility and
?
Sustainability
Travel Benefits, Choice, and Reliability
?
Cost Effectiveness and Financial Feasibility
?
27
Next StepsNext Steps
c16c15
Summer 2010 -Detailed Evaluation of
?
Spring 2011Reduced Set of Alternatives
Summer 2011Draft Environmental
?
Document
Spring 2012Final Engineering Complete
?
July 2013Construction Start
?
2015Phase1 (SARTC to Bristol)
?
Opening Year
Slide 28
c15 Font color changed - please use prior color
ckrebs, 10/4/2010
c16 Font color changed; please use prior color
ckrebs, 10/4/2010
Who Is Your Consultant Team?Who Is Your Consultant Team?
Cordoba Corporation
in association with:
URS Corporation
HNTB Corporation
David Evans and Associates
LTK Engineering
Cambridge Systematics, Inc.
29
DiscussionDiscussion
30
Refinements to Reduced Alternatives Streetcar 1Refinements to Reduced Alternatives Streetcar 1
4SP
TH
TREETARKING
Option 1
?
?
Remove diagonal
parking along south
side of 4th Street;
?
Widen sidewalk 16 feet
on south side.
Option 2
?
?
Replace diagonal
parking along south
side of 4th Street with
parallel parking
?
Widen sidewalk 8
feet.
31