STEP 3 PUBLIC WORKSHOP. Select a Priority Sub-Corridor Where are we going next? November 7, 2013 St. David s Episcopal Church

Transcription

1 STEP 3 PUBLIC WORKSHOP Select a Priority Sub-Corridor Where are we going next? November 7, 2013 St. David s Episcopal Church

2 Agenda 1) Welcome & Who s Here? 2) Project Connect 3) Central Corridor Study Area 4) Sub-Corridors 5) Problem Statements 6) Evaluation Process & Criteria 7) Sub-Corridor Data 8) Next Steps 2

3 How will your input be used? We need your help in evaluating where our next transit investment should go We will evaluate several different parts of central Austin (Sub-Corridors) Tonight, you will help prioritize problem statements and evaluation criteria Your prioritization will help inform the Project Team s weighting of criteria during evaluation of sub-corridors Your feedback on data and process will help improve our evaluation process. 3

4 Introduce yourself to your table. Why are you here today? Table Discussion (5 minutes) 4

5 Who has the best queso? A. Maudie s B. Chuy s C. Serrano s D. El Mercado E. Kerbey Lane F. Matt s El Rancho G. Other 5

6 In what part of town do you live? A. East Austin B. Northeast Austin C. North Austin D. Northwest Austin E. West Austin F. Downtown G. Southwest Austin H. South Austin I. Southeast Austin 6

7 How often do you use public transportation? A. Everyday B. A few times per week C. A few times per month D. A few times per year E. Never 7

8 Is this the first time you have participated in a Project Connect activity? A. Yes B. No C. I don t know 8

9 Project Connect 9

10 Regional Challenges & Opportunities Centers Core Constraints Growth Congestion 10

11 Project Connect Vision 11

12 Project Connect Next Steps 12

13 Project Connect Corridors 9 Project Connect Corridors 5 High Priority: North East Southwest Northwest Central NORTH NORTHWEST EAST CENTRAL SOUTHWEST 13

14 Central Corridor Study Work Plan Data-Driven Driven Decision-Making Process Phase 1: Select Priority Sub-Corridor Where are we going next? next? Ends December 2013 Phase 2: Select Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) How will we get there? January 2014 June

15 Central Corridor Study Area 15

16 Where are we going next? Evaluation Criteria 16

17 Study Area Definition Limits 9 Project Connect Corridors PROJECT CONNECT REGIONAL CORRIDORS p2 17

18 Study Area Definition Limits Purpose of limits is to focus analysis and identify problems Loosely bound by : N: North of RM 2222 E: Springdale/Grove S: Oltorf W: MoPac PROJECT CONNECT REGIONAL CORRIDORS p2 18

19 Sub-Corridors A defined geographic area with characteristics and facilities serving similar travel patterns. 19

20 Sub-Corridors Where are we going next? next? 10 Sub-Corridors identified with community feedback Some Sub-Corridors overlap Core defined for this study as Downtown, Capitol Complex, UT Core part of each Sub- Corridor, but not used in comparison Core will be served 20

21 Which sub-corridor do you currently prefer for our next transit investment? A. East Riverside (ERC) B. East Austin C. MLK D. Mueller E. Highland F. Lamar G. Mopac H. West Austin I. SoLa J. SoCo 21

22 Why do you prefer that sub-corridor for the next transit investment? Table Discussion (5 Minutes) 22

23 Where are we going next? Evaluation Criteria 23

24 Problem Statements Excessive roadway congestion surrounding the core and lack of Congestion transportation alternatives make travel time to the Central Corridor unreliable. Existing and planned regional transit investments converge System on the Central Corridor without adequate system integration The Central Corridor lacks multimodal Centers connectivity between activity centers. Central Corridor mobility is constrained by existing physical infrastructure and & anticipated Growth employment and population growth. Constraints The economic health of the region s core is at risk access to the core Core is critical to the region's continued success. 24

25 Problem Statements Excessive roadway congestion surrounding the core and lack of transportation alternatives make travel time to the Central Corridor unreliable. Existing and planned regional transit investments converge on the Central Corridor without adequate system integration The Central Corridor lacks multimodal connectivity between activity centers. Central Corridor mobility is constrained by existing physical infrastructure and anticipated employment and population growth. The economic health of the region s core is at risk access to the core is critical to the region's continued success. 25

26 Which problems are the most important for us to address? Table Discussion (5 Minutes) Rank Problems 1 5 (1 = Most Important) 26

27 Rank the importance of the Central Corridor problems from 1 to 5 (1 = Most Important) A. Congestion B. Constraints & Growth C. Core D. Centers E. System 27

28 Evaluation Process & Criteria 28

29 Where are we going next? Evaluation Criteria 29

30 Evaluation Process Collect Pertinent Data Graphic Representation of Key Data Develop Evaluation Matrix Develop Criteria (Indices) Public Input on Evaluation Recommendation 30

31 Evaluation Criteria Criteria flow from Problem Statements, Goals & Objectives Use to compare and prioritize Sub-Corridors Not for selecting alignments Using existing data sources Problems Goals Objectives Criteria 31

32 Evaluation Process Collect Pertinent Data Graphic Representation of Key Data Develop Evaluation Matrix Develop Criteria (Indices) Public Input on Evaluation Recommendation 32

33 Map Book Working Working reference Used to define sub- corridors Foundation for evaluation Data table will be provided Data Dictionary Quality Control on-going 33

34 Evaluation Process Collect Pertinent Data Graphic Representation of Key Data Develop Evaluation Matrix Develop Criteria (Indices) Public Input on Evaluation Recommendation 34

35 Develop Evaluation Criteria Criteria have evolved Started with broad categories Socioeconomic Transportation Centers Social Equity Other Sought input from public at open houses 35

36 Evaluation Criteria Refinement Transitioned to index-based approach What is an index? Combine specific data measures to create a common score Benefits of indices Aid in evaluation Allow weighting factors to be applied 36

37 Evaluation Criteria Guide SAMPLE 37 DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT

38 Evaluation Process Collect Pertinent Data Graphic Representation of Key Data Develop Evaluation Matrix Develop Criteria (Indices) Public Input on Evaluation Recommendation 38

39 Evaluation Criteria CONGESTION Congestion Index - How congested is this sub- corridor? Travel Demand Index - How much travel occurs in each sub-corridor? 39

40 Evaluation Criteria CONSTRAINTS AND GROWTH Constraints Index - Physical factors, such as crossing Lady Bird Lake, that can significantly affect the cost of a project in that sub-corridor Growth Index - How much growth in population and employment is anticipated in each sub- corridor 40

41 Evaluation Criteria CORE Affordability Index An indication of where household affordability is most at risk and needs to be protected Economic Development Index - Economic growth potential based on anticipated increase in development and sales and property tax revenue from new development 41

42 Evaluation Criteria CENTERS Centers Index - Are there lots of areas in this sub-corridor that are planned to be transit friendly in our City s comprehensive plan, Imagine Austin? Consistency Index - Would putting transit in this corridor be in agreement with local plans and policies? 42

43 Evaluation Criteria SYSTEM Ridership Potential An estimate of future transit ridership in each sub-corridor Connectivity Index How easy would it be to connect to other transit in this sub-corridor corridor-- --existing and planned? Transit Demand Index - An estimate of current transit ridership in each sub-corridor 43

44 How important are each of these criteria? Table Discussion (5 Minutes) Rate importance of each 44

45 Congestion Index A. Very Important B. Moderately Important C. Neutral D. Moderately Unimportant E. Unimportant 45

46 Travel Demand Index A. Very Important B. Moderately Important C. Neutral D. Moderately Unimportant E. Unimportant 46

47 Constraints Index A. Very Important B. Moderately Important C. Neutral D. Moderately Unimportant E. Unimportant 47

48 Growth Index A. Very Important B. Moderately Important C. Neutral D. Moderately Unimportant E. Unimportant 48

49 Affordability Index A. Very Important B. Moderately Important C. Neutral D. Moderately Unimportant E. Unimportant 49

50 Economic Development Index A. Very Important B. Moderately Important C. Neutral D. Moderately Unimportant E. Unimportant 50

51 Centers Index A. Very Important B. Moderately Important C. Neutral D. Moderately Unimportant E. Unimportant 51

52 Consistency Index A. Very Important B. Moderately Important C. Neutral D. Moderately Unimportant E. Unimportant 52

53 Ridership Potential A. Very Important B. Moderately Important C. Neutral D. Moderately Unimportant E. Unimportant 53

54 Connectivity Index A. Very Important B. Moderately Important C. Neutral D. Moderately Unimportant E. Unimportant 54

55 Transit Demand Index A. Very Important B. Moderately Important C. Neutral D. Moderately Unimportant E. Unimportant 55

56 Evaluation Process Collect Pertinent Data Graphic Representation of Key Data Develop Evaluation Matrix Develop Criteria (Indices) Public Input on Evaluation Recommendation 56

57 Evaluation Matrix DRAFT 57

58 Preliminary Sub-Corridor Data 58

59 Preliminary Sub-Corridor Data Congestion Congestion Index Travel Demand Index 59 West Austin MoPac Lamar Highland Mueller MLK East Austin ERC SoCo SoLa

60 Preliminary Sub-Corridor Data 60

61 Preliminary Sub-Corridor Data Core Affordability Index Economic Development Index 61 West Austin MoPac Lamar Highland Mueller MLK East Austin ERC SoCo SoLa

62 Preliminary Sub-Corridor Data Centers Centers Index Consistency With Plans 62 West Austin MoPac Lamar Highland Mueller MLK East Austin ERC SoCo SoLa

63 Preliminary Sub-Corridor Data System Ridership Potential Connectivity Index Transit Demand Index 63 West Austin MoPac Lamar Highland Mueller MLK East Austin ERC SoCo SoLa

64 Evaluation Process Collect Pertinent Data Graphic Representation of Key Data Develop Evaluation Matrix Develop Criteria (Indices) Public Input on Evaluation Recommendation 64

65 The process used to evaluate subcorridors is appropriate. A. Strongly Agree B. Agree C. Neutral D. Disagree E. Strongly Disagree 65

66 Now that you have seen more data Which sub-corridor should we prioritize for our community s next transit investment? Why? Table Discussion (5 Minutes) 66

67 Which sub-corridor should we prioritize for our community's next transit investment? A. East Riverside (ERC) B. East Austin C. MLK D. Mueller E. Highland F. Lamar G. Mopac H. West Austin I. SoLa J. SoCo 67

68 Next Steps Continue public involvement Complete data collection and evaluation matrix Consider public and stakeholder input to develop Team recommendation Present Team recommendation and public input to Central Corridor Advisory Group (11/15) CCAG action on sub-corridor recommendation (December) Brief Council & Capital Metro Board (December) 68

69 I found this workshop to be useful. A. Strongly Agree B. Agree C. Neutral D. Disagree E. Strongly Disagree 69

70 STAY INVOLVED! Please complete Exit Survey Leave Clicker on table 70

71 More Information Project Connect & Central Corridor HCT Study projectconnect.com 71