BARRHAVEN – RIVERSIDE SOUTH RAPID TRANSIT Planning And Environmental Assessment

Public & Business Consultation Groups | Meeting #2 | August 2012

1. Project Scope

2. Corridor Features

► Preferred Design For Transit Exclusive Areas

3. Analysis of BRT Design Alternatives

► For Town Centres

► For Interim O-Train/BRT Transfer Stations

4. Next Steps

► Analysis of Alternatives for LRT/BRT Transfer Facility in Riverside South Town Centre (PCG/BCG #3 – Early September)

► Recommended Plan (POH – Late September)

AGENDA

PROJECT SCOPE

Ultimate Plan (2031 & Beyond):• BRT from Barrhaven to Riverside South Town Centre (TC)• LRT from Riverside South TC to Downtown (including Transfer)Interim Plan:• BRT from Barrhaven to Potential O-Train Extension• O-Train Extension Terminus/Transfer at Leitrim OR Bowesville Station

Near Term Operational Improvements (on Chapman Mills Drive)

Background & Existing

Conditions SPRING 2012

Generate& Evaluate Design

Alternatives SUMMER 2012

Develop Recommended

Plan FALL 2012

Federal EA & TPAP Approvals

FALL 2012/ WINTER 2013

Transit & Design

Workshop

Consultation Group

Meetings #1Consultation Group

Meetings #2(August 14, 2012)

Consultation Group Meetings #3

(September 10, 2012)

Public Open House(September 18, 2012)

Presentation to Committee and

Council(November 2012)

PROJECT SCHEDULE

Guiding Principles:► Provide high-quality rapid transit service to the

growing urban communities of Barrhaven & Riverside South► Provide transit travel free from congestion/friction► Minimize traffic signal delay for transit vehicles

► Promote the development of vibrant pedestrian-scaled mixed-use town centres

► Provide multi-use pathways or designated pedestrian and cycling facilities within the right-of-way

► Design an accessible and equitable transit facility

► Design for the safety of all road and sidewalk users

► Protect the natural environment

KEY CONSIDERATIONS

Design Requirements:► Design an at-grade transit facility

that supports fast and reliable rapid transit service

► Design for projected ridership of ~1000 passengers per hour► ~ 20 buses per hour per direction

during peak hour

► Accommodate future Park & Ride demand► 5,175 recommended stalls in

Riverside South► As per 2009 iTrans Study of city-wide

Park & Ride facilities

► Design for flexibility

KEY CONSIDERATIONS

Barrhaven Town Centre

Riverside South Town

Centre

Exclusive BRT

Exclusive BRT

Transit Priority

CHARACTER AREAS

Intersection of Southwest Transitway and Chapman Mills

KEY FEATURES

`Pop: 22,000

Jobs: 12,000

Transit Priority

KEY FEATURES

Exclusive BRT

KEY FEATURES

Exclusive BRT : Preferred Design

KEY FEATURES

Riverside South Town

Centre

KEY FEATURES

Town Centre

Exclusive BRT : Preferred Design

KEY FEATURES

Exclusive BRT

KEY FEATURES

Exclusive BRT: Park & Ride Lots

• Leitrim Park & Ride• Bowesville Park & Ride

Bowesville Park &Ride

Leitrim Park & Ride

Riverside South Town Centre

Exclusive BRT

KEY FEATURES

Exclusive BRT:Natural Environment Linkages

(Excerpt from Greenbelt Master Plan Review Project, January 2012)

TOWN CENTRESDesign Alternatives:

• Median Bus Rapid Transit (BRT)• Fast-Acting Bus Lanes

Median

Fast-Acting

ANALYSIS OF DESIGN ALTERNATIVES

Barrhaven Town Centre Riverside South Town Centre

CHAPMAN MILLS (41 m RIGHT-OF-WAY) TOWN CENTRE (43 m RIGHT-OF-WAY)

3.5 m LANE FOR TRAFFIC PER DIRECTION

2 m SEGREGATED BIKE LANE PER DIRECTION

2.5 m LANE FOR PARKING PER DIRECTION

4 m SIDEWALK & BOULEVARD 5 m SIDEWALK & BOULEVARD

Median Fast-Acting

PROPOSED EVALUATION FACTOR AREAS

Extraordinary Design

Experience for Pedestrians and Cyclists

Planting Space

Compatibility with Existing Uses

Provision of Parking and Loading Zones

URBAN DESIGN AND COMMUNITY

BUILDING

Pedestrians

Cycling

Transit

Automobile Traffic

TRANSPORTATION PERFORMANCE

PROPOSED EVALUATION FACTOR AREAS

Capital Costs

Maintenance Costs

Land Acquisition

Staging

COST AND CONSTRUCTABILITY

PROPOSED EVALUATION FACTOR AREAS

Design AlternativesUrban Design and Community Building

ANALYSIS OF DESIGN ALTERNATIVES

Median Fast-Acting

Design Alternative:• Median Bus Rapid Transit

(Mid-block)

Urban Design and Community Building

ANALYSIS OF DESIGN ALTERNATIVES

Design Alternative:• Median Bus Rapid Transit

(At Intersection)

Urban Design and Community Building

ANALYSIS OF DESIGN ALTERNATIVES

Design Alternative:• Median Bus Rapid Transit

(Example)

Urban Design and Community Building

ANALYSIS OF DESIGN ALTERNATIVES

Highway 7 BRT (VIVA - York Region)

Design Alternative:• Median Bus Rapid Transit

(Example)

Urban Design and Community Building

ANALYSIS OF DESIGN ALTERNATIVES

International Boulevard BRT (AC Transit - Oakland)

Urban Design and Community Building

Design Alternative:• Fast-Acting Bus Lanes • Example: Albert & Slater Streets

ANALYSIS OF DESIGN ALTERNATIVES

Urban Design and Community Building

Design Alternative:• Fast-Acting Bus Lanes

ANALYSIS OF DESIGN ALTERNATIVES

Urban Design and Community Building

Design Alternative:• Fast-Acting Bus Lanes

(Example)

ANALYSIS OF DESIGN ALTERNATIVES

Ottawa – Albert & Slater Streets

Urban Design and Community Building

Design Alternative:• Fast-Acting Bus Lanes

(Example)

ANALYSIS OF DESIGN ALTERNATIVES

Ottawa – Albert & Slater Streets

ANALYSIS OF DESIGN ALTERNATIVESTransportation Performance

Developed traffic model to assess traffic and transit operations:

► VISSIM analysis

► AM Peak Hour (for 2031)► Chapman Mills Drive

► Analysis from Woodroffe Park & Ride to Greenbank Road

► Representative of typical transit street in Riverside South

Factors for analysis include:► Travel Time, Delay & Reliability► Operational Flexibility & Constraints► Conflict Areas & Safety

ANALYSIS OF DESIGN ALTERNATIVESTransportation Performance – Transit Operations

Median BRTo Delay: Comparable signal delay with

appropriate pre-emption

Reliability: No side friction impacting travel time & reliability

Reliability: Right turn traffic does not weave across transit lane

× Operations: Overtaking in opposing transit lane

Fast-Acting Bus Laneso Delay: Comparable signal delay with

appropriate pre-emption

× Reliability: Side friction (parking/deliveries) can impact travel time & reliability

× Reliability: Right turn traffic weaves across transit lane

Operations: Overtaking using traffic lanes

ANALYSIS OF DESIGN ALTERNATIVESTransportation Performance – Transit Operations

Median BRTo Delay: Comparable signal delay with

appropriate pre-emption

Reliability: No side friction impacting travel time & reliability

Reliability: Right turn traffic does not weave across transit lane

× Operations: Overtaking in opposing transit lane

Fast-Acting Bus Laneso Delay: Comparable signal delay with

appropriate pre-emption

× Reliability: Side friction (parking/deliveries) can impact travel time & reliability

× Reliability: Right turn traffic weaves across transit lane

Operations: Overtaking using traffic lanes

MORE RELIABLE

MORE CONVENTIONAL

ANALYSIS OF DESIGN ALTERNATIVESTransportation Performance – Automobile Traffic

Median BRT× Less greentime for general traffic at

minor intersections

Right turn traffic does not weave across transit lane

o All movements can be adequately accommodated

Fast-Acting Bus Lanes More greentime for general traffic at

minor intersections

× Right turn traffic weaves across transit lane

o All movements can be adequately accommodated

ANALYSIS OF DESIGN ALTERNATIVESTransportation Performance – Pedestrian & Cyclists

Median BRT Pedestrian refuge at intersections

o Crossing distance to transit platform =50% - 12.5 m50% - 18 m

o Standard pedestrian crossing interval _

No cycling conflicts with transit platform

Fast-Acting Bus Lanes Pedestrian refuge at intersection

o Crossing distance to transit platform =50% - 23.5 m50% - 0 m

Potential for longer pedestrian intervals at minor intersections

× Cycling conflicts with transit platform

ANALYSIS OF DESIGN ALTERNATIVESCost and Constructability

► Capital costs are generally anticipated to be similar for both alternatives

► However, the Median BRT facility would have some higher costs associated with drainage

► Assumption: Lighting would not be provided for Median BRT Transitway lanes

► Maintenance costs are generally anticipated to be similar for both alternatives

► Both alternatives are expected to have similar construction durations

ANALYSIS OF DESIGN ALTERNATIVESCapital Cost

Existing

Median Option

Fast Acting Option

(Wide Median)

Fast Acting Option

(Narrow Median)

O-Train - BRT Transfer Facility

Design Alternatives:• Separate Platforms vs. Shared Platform• Applies to Leitrim and Bowesville Park &

Ride lots

O-TrainO-Train

Local Bus Route CirculationBRT Bus Route Circulation

► Evaluate Design Alternatives for Town Centres and O-Train Transfer Stations

► Develop and Analyze Alternatives for LRT/BRT Transfer Facility in Riverside South Town Centre

► Business Consultation Group Meeting #3 – Early September

► Public Consultation Group Meeting #3 – Early September

► Develop Final Recommended Plan

► POH – Late September

► Presentation to Committee and Council - November

NEXT STEPS

DISCUSSION