Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 02 Lane Transit District (LTD) Alternatives Analysis, Main Street and McVay Highway Corridors AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY Meeting Date: 6/25/2012 Meeting Type:Work Session Staff Contact/Dept.: Tom Boyatt, DPW Staff Phone No: 541-744-3373 Estimated Time: 45 Minutes S P R I N G F I E L D C I T Y C O U N C I L Council Goals: Maintain and Improve Infrastructure and Facilities ITEM TITLE: LANE TRANSIT DISTRICT (LTD) ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS, MAIN STREET AND MCVAY HIGHWAY CORRIDORS ACTION REQUESTED: None. The work session provides Council an opportunity to learn more about the project and to discuss with LTD the desired project outcomes, and the oversight and governance process for the Project. A follow up meeting between Council and LTD is set for work session on July 9, 2012. ISSUE STATEMENT: The Lane Transit District has been awarded $750,000 by the Federal Transit Administration to complete an Alternatives Analysis for improving transit services in the Main Street (OR 126B) and McVay Highway corridors. Both of these corridors are currently State highways within the Springfield urban growth boundary, and a successful outcome will require strong collaboration between the City and LTD. ATTACHMENTS: 1.Study Corridor Project Area 2.Overview of Alternatives Analysis Process 3.Discussion Topics DISCUSSION/ FINANCIAL IPACT: The City and LTD have partnered successfully on two bus rapid transit projects in Springfield: the downtown to downtown EmX project which included the construction of the Springfield Station, and the Gateway EmX line. Experience on these projects has shown that a successful outcome is greatly enhanced by identifying key values and priorities for each agency regarding the project, and by reaching agreement early about how the two agencies will interact during the project. This work session is an opportunity for Council to share its thinking about what will be important for the City during the Alternatives Analysis. Attachment 3 to the AIS is a list of issues potentially of interest to the Council for the conversation with LTD. The list is by no means inclusive, and is provided as a starting point to stimulate thinking about how to proceed with the project. As noted above, this is the first of two work sessions in a two week period. City and LTD staff expects that this first work session is an opportunity for Council to provide input to LTD on the project. At the July 9th work session it is anticipated that LTD will provide information and recommendations in response to Council input. Attachment 1, Page 1 of 1 Attachment 2  Page 1 of 1      Overview of Alternatives Analysis Process (Note – this summary is drawn from FTA’s Fact Sheet describing the Alternatives Analysis Process)  The Alternatives Analysis (AA) process is intended by FTA to be the local forum for evaluating the costs, benefits, and impacts of a range of transportation alternatives designed to address mobility problems and other locally-identified objectives in a defined transportation corridor, and for determining which particular investment strategy should be advanced for more focused study and development. At its core, alternatives analysis is about providing the public, local officials, and potential funding partners with sufficient information for the decision-at-hand: that is, “What is the best solution for addressing our problems? What are its benefits? How much is it going to cost? And how are we going to pay for it?” Typical Alternatives Analysis Process Flow: 1. Alternatives analysis begins with a solid understanding of the transportation problems in need of solving – that is, a corridor’s purpose and need. 2. Once the purpose and need is known, work is done (by staff, public, and decision makers) to identify and design a number of alternatives that meet the purpose and need. 3. The definition of these alternatives should reflect a range of high and low cost capital improvements, including non-guideway options which can serve as a “baseline” for measuring the merits of higher level investments. 4. Measures for evaluating the relative merits of alternatives are identified, as are technical methodologies for generating the information used to support such measures; these will typically include disciplines such as travel forecasting, capital and operations and maintenance costing and environmental and land use analyses. 5. Finally, costs, benefits, and impacts of each alternative are developed and evaluated, funding strategies are analyzed, and a locally preferred alternative (LPA) is selected (a joint process by the Springfield city council, LTD board, and MPC) to be advanced for further development.   Discussion Topics  LTD Alternatives Analysis Project, Main Street and McVay Highway  The following are potential issues Council may wish to discuss with LTD:  • How to insure an open and transparent project process          )                                  o How to communicate consistently with business and property owners o Methods for public involvement and how to involve the larger community   • Methods for project oversight and Council involvement o Ideas for how to structure project oversight and management o Council representation on project team(s o How to process key project decisions, e.g. trade‐offs between service improvements concepts and potential impacts to the built environment    • The City’s values for both the process and the outcomes o Treat stakeholders fairly and with respect o Minimize impacts to existing businesses o Access management strategy   • How to assure transit objectives coordinate with broader City goals, such as economic development and planned redevelopment, in the study corridor  o Integration with comprehensive land use planning o Coordination with current zoning and permitting regulations o Coordination with ODOT   • Avoiding preconceived solutions on the front end o Not starting with lines already on a map o Remaining open to creative and flexible solutions   • Insuring a clear understanding of the different types of service o Understandable communications about project pros, cons and trade‐offs   • Reimbursement for City staff time during the project     Attachment 3  Page 1 of 1