Part 1 - Downtown Transit Center & Downtown Circulator .

2y ago
27 Views
2 Downloads
8.82 MB
88 Pages
Last View : 2m ago
Last Download : 3m ago
Upload by : Vicente Bone
Transcription

Howard Research and Development CorporationDowntown ColumbiaDowntown Transit Center and CirculatorShuttle Feasibility Study:TFARPart 1 - Downtown Transit Center & DowntownCirculator Shuttle (Part of CEPPA #5)DDecember 2011Note:This is an initial draft report presented to Howard County by the Howard HughesCorporation. The County staff is in the process of reviewing this document and has notyet accepted it. Any questions or concerns regarding this draft report should be directedto the Howard Hughes Corporation.

Table of ContentsIntroduction . ivChapter 1. Downtown Columbia Transit Center. 1Chapter 2. Downtown Columbia Circulator Shuttle . 12Regional Transit System Evaluation . 21Appendix B.Regional Transit Market Analysis . 46Appendix C.Transit Circulator Design . 64Appendix D.Transit Center Site Evaluation . 764Appendix E.Transit Development Plan . 79DRAFTAppendix A.Page i Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.

Table of FiguresAFTExisting Howard Transit Routes . 4Howard Transit Ridership Trends . 5Existing MTA Routes . 6Short-Term Transit Center . 9Long-Term Transit Center. 11Short-Term Circulator . 14Long-Term Circulator Route . 16Clear Channel Outdoor Bus Advertising Rates, San Marcos, CA . 18State and Federal Funding Programs . 20Howard Transit Routes . 22Average Daily Ridership, June 2010 . 23Operating Statistics, 4th Quarter FY2010 . 25Howard Transit Ridership Trends . 26Average Weekday Ridership by Route . 27Average Daily Saturday Ridership . 27Average Daily Sunday Ridership . 28Connect-A-Ride Routes . 29Route E Characteristics . 29MTA Bus Routes . 30MTA Route Characteristics . 31Howard County Park & Rides . 32MTA Ridership Trends . 33MTA Operating Characteristics, September 2009 . 33Existing Transit Services. 35Baltimore Region Rail System Plan, March 2002 . 39Purple Line . 40Columbia Gateway Route . 42Restructured Clarksville/Downtown Columbia Blue Route . 43Existing Land Use in Howard County. 47Land Use Projections in Howard County - 2035 . 48Major Centers of Activity . 49Population and Employment Transit Service Density Thresholds. 50Population Density by TAZ 2015 - Region . 51Population Density by TAZ 2015 - Columbia . 52Employment Density by TAZ 2015 - Region . 53Employment Density by TAZ 2015 - Columbia . 54Columbia, Surrounding County, &State Population Changes, 1990-2008 . 55Population Density by TAZ 2035 - Columbia . 56DRFigure 1Figure 2Figure 3Figure 4Figure 5Figure 6Figure 7Figure 8Figure 9Figure 10Figure 11Figure 12Figure 13Figure 14Figure 15Figure 16Figure 17Figure 18Figure 19Figure 20Figure 21Figure 22Figure 23Figure 24Figure 25Figure 26Figure 27Figure 28Figure 29Figure 30Figure 31Figure 32Figure 33Figure 34Figure 35Figure 36Figure 37Figure 38Page ii Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.

AFTPopulation and Employment Density Matrix 2015 . 57Journey to Work From Selected Census Tracts . 58Journey to Work around Columbia by Census Tract . 59Density of Transit-Dependent Populations. 60Origins for Employees at or Relocating to Fort Meade . 61Locations for Increased Transit Service . 62Short-Term Circulator . 65Long-Term Circulator Route . 67Transit Level of Service . 69Short-Term Circulator System Schedule. 70Long-Term Circulator System Schedule . 70Cutaway Characteristics . 71Capital Costs. 71Recommended Bus Stop Design . 72Short-Term operating costs . 73Long-Term Operating Costs . 73Difference in Costs - Short Term . 74Difference in Costs – Long-Term . 74Vehicle Costs – Alternative Fuels . 74Fuel Prices, July 2011. 753Short-Term Transit Center . 76Transit Center Site Analysis. 79Long-Term Transit Center. 80DRFigure 39Figure 40Figure 41Figure 42Figure 43Figure 44Figure 45Figure 46Figure 47Figure 48Figure 49Figure 50Figure 51Figure 52Figure 53Figure 54Figure 55Figure 56Figure 57Figure 58Figure 59Figure 60Figure 61Page iii Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.

IntroductionThe following studies were conducted on behalf of the Howard Research and DevelopmentCorporation as part of commitments to complete Community Enhancements, Programs, andPublic Amenities (CEPPAs) as required by Howard County Council Bill No. 58-2009.Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates of San Francisco, California was commissioned toconduct the transit-related studies required by CEPPA 5.Prior to approval of the first final development plan, one or more studies must be commissionedto satisfy CEPPA number 5, which states:AFT“GGP [General Growth Properties] will commission at GGP’s expense and inconsultation with Howard County one or more feasibility studies for the following: (i) anew Broken Land Parkway/Route 29 north/south collector road connection to LittlePatuxent Parkway and (ii) a new Downtown transit center and Downtown CirculatorShuttle. With regard to the transit center, the study will evaluate both long and shortterm transit expectations and needs both locally and regionally so that an appropriatelocation and facility program can be determined. Consideration shall be given to how thefacility will operate initially as a free standing building, and in the future as a mixed usecomponent of the Downtown Plan. Recommendations will be provided with regard togoals, management and operations. With regard to the Shuttle, the study will evaluateand determine appropriate levels of service and phasing in of service at various levels ofdevelopment. As part of this, the study should examine the relationship between theshuttle and both long and short-term, local and regional transit expectations and needs.The shuttle feasibility study will also analyze equipment recommendations, routes andstops, proposed vehicle types, and operational and capital costs. The feasibility studyshall include an evaluation and recommendations regarding ownership, capital andoperational funding opportunities, responsibilities and accountability to provide guidanceto the Downtown Columbia Partnership and the County.RNelson\Nygaard met with GGP representatives and Howard County staff on July 21, 2010 toinitiate discussions about the appropriate scope for the studies. Final scopes were submitted tothe County in November 2010, and studies of transit center and circulator shuttle werecommenced utilizing field observations and public data available from the County and otherlocal, regional, and Federal agencies.DThis report summarizes the results of the studies for a transit center and circulator shuttle. Anumber of technical appendices describe the analysis conducted to support the enclosedfindings and recommendations.Page iv Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.

Chapter 1.Downtown Columbia TransitCenterBackgroundAFTA transit center is considered to be the point of arrival and departure for local transit routes,where riders can obtain transit information and board their bus. Transit centers are typicallyplaced in or near the core of a community where the greatest density of transit riders arelocated. Transit centers come in all shapes and sizes depending on the markets they serve, thelevel of ridership, local topography, and surrounding land uses. They range from very simplefacilities with no permanent structures that provide simple refuge and services for waiting riders,to extravagant structures serving large populations with dozens of boarding locations for varioustypes of transit vehicles.The primary transit provider serving Columbia, Howard Transit (HT), operates out of a simpletransit hub in a portion of the Columbia Mall parking lot. The available space is limited, forcingbuses to double-park while waiting to depart on their runs. Limited passenger informationsigning makes this experience confusing for new riders, and poor amenities make waiting for abus unpleasant compared to the experience riders have at other transit departure points innearby counties.With the redevelopment of Downtown Columbia into Downtown Columbia, Howard County hasidentified an opportunity to study what form of improvements can be made to Howard Transit’shub in Columbia.Key RecommendationsHoward Transit is in need of an improved short-term transfer hub at the Columbia Mallbecause the current parking lot location does not have facilities that meet any currentstandards for transfer center bus or passenger amenities. Continued operation at the currentfacility affects the quality of service throughout the HT system due to confusing transferfacilities and delayed bus departures. A new outdoor transit center can be installed atrelatively low cost (approximately 150-250,000), not including land. An improved or new transit center for Downtown Columbia should include bus berths toserve up to 12 buses at one time, which is the maximum number of buses departingDowntown Columbia on an hourly “pulse” during weekdays. This number of berths isdetermined to be sufficient for the full build-out of Downtown Columbia and for all plannedservice expansions.DR There is no requirement for dedicated transit center parking to be provided in the short- orlong-term. The majority of existing and planned transit service uses Columbia as a hub andsecondarily as an employment destination. Relatively few riders originate in Columbia tocommute inter-city, and their park and ride demand is – and will continue to be –accommodated in customer parking for the mall. Over time, ridership will grow withresidential and employment density, but such trips will not require new parking as residentswill walk to the bus from their homes and employees travel inbound by transit. The transit center should remain in or near the current location of Howard Transit’s bus hubuntil it requires relocation due to redevelopment, or until development of a building at thePage 1 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.

long-term transit center site begins. There are no operational, total developed area, orridership triggers that would necessitate relocation to the long-term site.This short-term transit center would include two outdoor bus medians each approximately280-feet long serving six double-loaded bus berths each, with three berths located curbsidewhere HT routes stop now. The remaining nine berths would be located parallel to and northof the on-street berths in three off-street lanes within the mall parking lot at a location that isplanned to become a future development parcel. The footprint of this short-term transitcenter equals that of a planned parking garage on the development parcel, potentiallyallowing the parcel’s adjacent building to be constructed without the garage while the transitcenter remains operational. The short-term transit center should include a minimum of four protected shelters withbenches and map and schedule holders, eight uncovered benches, four trash receptacles,four APBP1-compliant bicycle racks accommodating at least eight bikes each, a signpost foreach berth, pedestrian scale lighting, and full ADA access to all amenities. The long-term transit center would be integrated into the southern edge of a futuredevelopment parcel located south of the Columbia Mall’s southern entrance. This locationwas selected due to its similarly central location close to the mall, as well as the longer blocklengths ( 550 feet) which enables a single transfer median serving six buses per side to bedesigned. The recommended long-term transit center should include the same passenger amenities asthe short-term center. It’s location within a building footprint has a number of qualityadvantages that make transit attractive and well-integrated in Downtown Columbia,including:oA clear street-side presence that improves the visibility of transit in DowntownColumbia to attract ridersThe least negative impact on streetscapes, on-street parking, and street-level usesThe opportunity to co-locate retail services on and near the bus median for improvedpassenger and passerby convenience, while preserving occupied floor space on theremainder of the development parcelA covered transfer median and eastbound bus berths that will greatly improvepassenger comfort, weather protection, and enjoyment while enabling easiermaintenanceAdjacency to a mall parking garage for any park and ride demandRooAFT oDoMethodologyIn order to determine the demand for a transit center and establish its appropriate size andlocation, a broader evaluation of how transit serves Columbia is necessary. This evaluationtakes four basic steps: An evaluation of all existing transit routes that service the Columbia Mall and environs todayto establish the number of buses that must be accommodated today; An evaluation of planned future transit routes that will serve Downtown Columbia todetermine what if any additional capacity must be provided by a transit center;1Association of Pedestrian and Bicycle ProfessionalsPage 2 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.

A study of the factors that drive the demand for transit in the surrounding region todetermine if there needs to be changes in existing or future transit service to better-servethe community, which may impact the size of a transit center; and A study of the appropriate location to site a transit center that will have the capacity toaccommodate all of the existing, planned, and improved transit services.Detailed studies for each of these steps have been completed and are included in theappendices of this report. Existing and planned regional transit services are evaluated inAppendix A. The regional demand for transit is evaluated in Appendix B. The preferred designand location that also accommodates a Downtown Columbia circulator shuttle (the circulator isstudied in Appendix C) has been studied in Appendix D.Existing Service FindingsAFTToday, HT’s users are primarily those who do not have access to a car2. This includes thosewho do not have the financial or physical means to own or drive a car, as well as those who arenot licensed or insured. There are few “choice riders” who chose to ride the bus when a car alsois available to them. While Downtown Columbia may have demand management measures andincentives to employees and residents to leave their car at home, non-choice riders willdominate ridership for some time. As a result, the service has been designed to get coverage asclose to people’s destinations as possible.Howard Transit OperationsRHoward Transit operates eight fixed bus routes and one Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)complementary paratransit route in Howard Country. Seven of the eight routes3 operate as a“pulse” system4, with the primary Columbia transit hub at the Columbia Mall as the start and endpoint. The Mall in itself is not a destination for many bus riders, but a transfer point to connectingroutes. The rate of transfers per route is fairly high, ranging from 40 percent to a high of 70percent on the Silver Route.DIn general, service hours begin at 6 AM on weekdays, 8 AM on Saturdays, and 10 AM onSundays. All routes run at 60 minute headways or longer, with the exception of the Green route,which operates every 30 minutes during weekday peak hours. The Silver Route connects withMaryland Area Regional Commuter (MARC) rail service at the Dorsey Station, the BaltimoreWashington International Airport (BWI) and MARC/Amtrak Station, and the two MarylandTransit Administration (MTA) light rail stations at BWI and its business park. The Gold Routeserves the Snowden River Park & Ride. The Yellow Route connects Columbia with Ellicott City.The Red, Brown, Orange, and Green routes serve Columbia and surrounding businesses andneighborhoods.2Matthew Helfant, Planner, Central Maryland Regional Transit. Phone interview 8/16/2010.3The Purple route does not serve Columbia.4A “pulse” system, also referred to as a “line-up,” involves the coordinated departure of multiple routes from a singletransfer point at the same time. Typically used for smaller systems with headways over 20 minutes, the coordinateddeparture ensures that passengers will not miss a transfer to the next bus. Essentially all outbound buses are helduntil the pulse time so that all inbound buses have time to arrive and discharge their transferring passengers beforethe next bus departs. The time allowed for transferring is typically also the time allowed for layover of the bus, whendrivers can take a break from driving and complete required reports and inspections before heading out on the nextrun. This process repeats throughout the day until end of service.Page 3 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.

Existing Howard Transit RoutesAFTFigure 1RHoward Transit RidershipDHoward Transit fixed route ridership has steadily increased over the years, peaking at 1.1million annual rides in FY 2009, with at least half of these riders traveling to or through theColumbia Mall hub. Due to budget cuts, three routes were discontinued as of July 9, 2010.These routes included: the Blue Route, which served River Hill and Harpers Choice villages; theYellow Express, connecting Columbia to Ellicott City; and the Red Express from Columbia toGateway. Also during the 2010 service cuts, fares were increased from 1.50 to 2 for a oneway trip. Since 2009, ridership has declined 4-percent, or50,000 rides.Page 4 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.

Howardd Transit Ridership TreendsAFTFigure 2Soource: Central Maryland Regiional TransitHoward TransitTOveraall PerformannceRRegardleess of long-teerm growingg ridership, alla HT routess fall under thhe Marylandd TransitAdministration’s (MTTA) “Needs Review”Rcateegory for opeerating costss per hour and per mile,which meeans that thee cost to runn the system is high commpared to othher small urbban systemss.Howeverr, three routees (Brown, Green,Gand Red)Rcarry e nough passeengers per hhour and permile to bee deemed “SSuccessful” according too the MTA sttandards. Hoow HT routees fall within theMTA stanndards showws that the system overaall is carryingg a decent leevel of passeenger activitty,but operaating costs area high. Cosst per hour averagesaovver 75, whicch exceeds MMTA’s limit oof 50 for “NNeeds Revieew.” Cost peer mile averaages over 44.30, which eexceeds MTTA’s limit of 3.50for “Needds Review.”Marylandd Transit Admministration OverviewODThe MTAA also operates service ini Columbia separate froom HT. Onee express rouute and fivecommuteer routes connnect Colummbia with Balltimore and WWashington. In MTA’s FFiscal Year 22009,the five commutercrooutes carriedd more than 803,0008rideer trips. Howwever, only aabout 15% oofthese tripps, or 120,0000, originateed or ended in Columbiaa. The highesst ridership MMTA route foorColumbiaa, the expresss Route 150, ranks at thet low end oof MTA servvice in termss of ridershipp. Itserves about 100 riders per weekday.ough the Balttimore expreess Route 1550 carries mmore Columbbia riders thaan any otherrEven thoMTA route serving Columbia,Cbooth Columbiaa and route rridership on the three Baaltimore-bouundroutes is lower than thet Washinggton-bound routesras weell as the MTTA system aaverage, duee tothe fact that Baltimorre represents a much smmaller markeet share thann Washingtoon. Fareboxrecovery ratios for Coolumbia’s thhree routes too Washingtoon perform aabove average in relation tothe rest ofo the MTA system.sPage 55 Nelson\Nyggaard Consultiing Associatees Inc.

Existingg MTA RoutesRConnectt-A-RideAFTFigure 3DCentral MarylandMReegional Transsit (CMRT), the operato r of HT servvice among oothers, runs afixed route bus servicce called Coonnect-A-Ridde (CAR), w hich includees Connect-AA-Ride Laureeldel. While Howard Transsit routes foccus around CColumbia Mall,and Connect-A-Ride Anne ArundConnect--A-Ride servvice centers on the Laurrel Mall. Onee route (E Rooute) travelss between thheLaurel Mall and Coluumbia Mall on one-hour headways (22-hours on wweekends). It has thehighest averageaweeekday ridershhip of the Laaurel routes at 130.Plannned Serrvice FindingssWhile all Columbia trransit providers share a long-term viision of supeerior transit aaccess for thheregion, inncluding light rail, bus raapid transit, anda expandeed fixed routte bus servicce, few conccretelong-termm plans existt that can bee expected too change traansit servicee in Downtowwn Columbiaa forthe foresseeable futurre, with one exception. TheT opportunnity of increaased employyment at ForrtMeade inn the near fuuture (discusssed in moree detail beloww) has not gone unnoticced by transitproviderss. CMRT is alreadyaexplooring opporttunities to coonnect Colummbia with Foort Meadethrough twotroutes: a new Colummbia Gatewaay-Dorsey MMARC-Fort MMeade route; and aClarksville-Fort Meadde / Downtowwn Columbia-Fort Meadde route, which is a restrructuring ofCMRT’s existing Bluee Route intoo two branchhes. Howard Transit seees the opporttunity of aDowntowwn Columbiaa to Fort Meaade connection as warraanting frequeent bus rapidd transit (BRRT) inits long-rrange plans.Page 66 Nelson\Nyggaard Consultiing Associatees Inc.

Howard Transit PlansDue to systemwide financial constraints, no new Howard Transit services are planned, asidefrom a new loop route around the Odenton MARC station. However, Howard Transit doesmaintain a long-range list of service enhancements and new connections it would like to make,including:A circulator with 15-minute frequencies serving the Columbia Mall and surroundingvillages; An express between Downtown Columbia and the Howard County government offices inEllicott City; A Columbia Mall to Fort Meade bus rapid transit line (BRT) with 15-minute headways;and An express route on the successful Silver Line.LRT ExpansionAFT Meanwhile, the Baltimore Region Rail System Plan includes extending the existing light railserving Baltimore-Washington International Airport(BWI) west to Downtown Columbia. Theestimated travel time on an extended LRT from Columbia to BWI is 42 minutes. However, giventhat this plan is largely a vision for transit over the next 40 years, it is not expected that this railexpansion will occur before the build-out of Downtown Columbia is complete, so it is notconsidered in the transit center analysis.Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA) ImprovementsRWhile Howard County is not in WMATA’s current metropolitan contract, three of MTA’scommuter bus routes currently bring Columbia passengers to the Silver Spring Metro station,where a new intermodal hub is planned. This hub would facilitate transfers between MARC,Metrorail Red Line, Metrobus, other MTA commuter buses, Greyhound, and the proposedPurple Line light rail in Montgomery County.Transit Market FindingsDThere are many significant destinations in and around Columbia, many of which are likelyattractors of transit ridership. Near the Columbia Mall and at other select areas along majorsurrounding roads, there are areas of commercial and civic development with employees thatrely on transit. Johns Hopkins Applied Physics Laboratory is the single largest employer inColumbia. Shopping centers and malls are other major centers of activity, particularly theColumbia Mall.Higher Employment DestinationsSome areas in Harpers Choice (near Howard Cou

Shuttle Feasibility Study: Part 1 - Downtown Transit Center & Downtown Circulator Shuttle (Part of CEPPA #5) Howard Research and Development Corporation December 2011. Note:\rThis is an initial draft report pre

Related Documents:

16-17 Transit EZ Load Ladder Rack 18 Transit LoadsRite Ladder Rack 19 Transit Connect Grip-Lock & Utility Racks 19 Transit Utility Racks 20-21 Transit Low Roof Trade Packages 22-23 Transit Med/High Roof Trade Packages 24-25 Transit Connect Trade Packages 26-27 Index INDEX FORD TRANSIT & TRANSIT CONNECT

is a bus rapid transit system jointly funded by Community Transit and Everett Transit. Community Transit directly operates . Swift. along a 16.7-mile route on State Route SR-99, traversing the cities of Everett, Lynnwood, Edmonds, Shoreline, and unincorporated Snohomish County. The corridor includes six miles of business access/transit (BAT) lanes

TransIT Services of Frederick County, MD Brian Dean Capital Area Transit, PA Lenea England Bay Aging/Bay Transit, VA Patrick Hench Red Rose Transit, PA Dorothy Sterling Hill County of Lackawanna Transit, PA Dan Hogan Focus on Renewal, PA Dennis Howard Triangle Transit, NC Stephen Huyck River Valley Transit,

transit providers receiving Federal transit assistance to undertake certain transit asset management activities. Transit asset management leverages data to improve investment decision-making, reliability, safety, cost management, and customer service and is a cornerstone of effective performance management. Background Maintaining transit assets .

WASHINGTON, D.C. 2003 www.TRB.org TRANSIT COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAM TCRP REPORT 90 Research Sponsored by the Federal Transit Administration in Cooperation with the Transit Development Corporation SUBJECT AREAS Public Transit Bus Rapid Transit Volume 1: Case Studies in Bus Rapid Transit HERBERT LEVINSON New Haven, CT SAMUEL ZIMMERMAN DMJM .

Downtown Total: 125,246 DMA Area: 60,871 Downtown Top Industry Downtown Baltimore contains over one-third of the city's jobs despite comprising less than four percent of its geographic area. And, despite a challenging two years in the office and employment markets, Downtown employment grew from 117,970 in 2020 to 125,246 in 2021.

*The Sound Transit Board identifies preferred alternatives and other alternatives to study. Community engagement and collaboration. . Everett to West Seattle via Downtown Seattle Transit Tunnel Everett to Downtown Redmond via Downtown Seattle Transit Tunnel Ballard to Tacoma via new rail-only tunnel

Introduction to Magnetic Fields 8.1 Introduction We have seen that a charged object produces an electric field E G at all points in space. In a similar manner, a bar magnet is a source of a magnetic field B G. This can be readily demonstrated by moving a compass near the magnet. The compass needle will line up