Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Solving the SR-520 Problem © 2005 Chaisy, Hurvitz, Jiang, Jun, ShinnersSlide 1 (of 37) Solving the SR-520 Problem prepared for UTRAN prepared by INSTEP.

Published byJanel Thornton Modified over 8 years ago

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Solving the SR-520 Problem © 2005 Chaisy, Hurvitz, Jiang, Jun, ShinnersSlide 1 (of 37) Solving the SR-520 Problem prepared for UTRAN prepared by INSTEP."— Presentation transcript:

1 Solving the SR-520 Problem © 2005 Chaisy, Hurvitz, Jiang, Jun, ShinnersSlide 1 (of 37) Solving the SR-520 Problem prepared for UTRAN prepared by INSTEP LLC INtelligent Solutions for Transportation Engineering and Planning Chaisy, Hurvitz, Jiang, Jun, Shinners CEE 416 / CEE 580 / URBPD 598 2005.12.05

2 Solving the SR-520 Problem © 2005 Chaisy, Hurvitz, Jiang, Jun, ShinnersSlide 2 (of 37) Overview Background: current problems, goals, objectives (Jiang) Alternatives Basic six-lane alternative (Shinners) Six-lane alternative with light rail transit and variable tolls (Hurvitz) Four-lane alternative with higher transit support (Chaisy) Final Recommendation (Jun)

3 Solving the SR-520 Problem © 2005 Chaisy, Hurvitz, Jiang, Jun, ShinnersSlide 3 (of 37) Overview Background: current problems, goals, objectives (Jiang) Alternatives Basic six-lane alternative (Shinners) Six-lane alternative with light rail transit and variable tolls (Hurvitz) Four-lane alternative with higher transit support (Chaisy) Recommendation (Jun)

4 Solving the SR-520 Problem © 2005 Chaisy, Hurvitz, Jiang, Jun, ShinnersSlide 4 (of 37) Background: Current Problems Safety/reliability Congestion Public transit Environmental impacts Community connection

5 Solving the SR-520 Problem © 2005 Chaisy, Hurvitz, Jiang, Jun, ShinnersSlide 5 (of 37) Background: Safety/reliability

6 Solving the SR-520 Problem © 2005 Chaisy, Hurvitz, Jiang, Jun, ShinnersSlide 6 (of 37) Background: Congestion

7 Solving the SR-520 Problem © 2005 Chaisy, Hurvitz, Jiang, Jun, ShinnersSlide 7 (of 37) Public Transit Delay Connection Ridership Environmental impacts Runoff Noise Community connections Background: Other Concerns

8 Solving the SR-520 Problem © 2005 Chaisy, Hurvitz, Jiang, Jun, ShinnersSlide 8 (of 37) Background: Future needs Safety increase Congestion relief Public transit improvement Environmental mitigation

9 Solving the SR-520 Problem © 2005 Chaisy, Hurvitz, Jiang, Jun, ShinnersSlide 9 (of 37) Background: Goals To improve mobility for people and goods across SR 520 corridor in a manner that is safe, reliable, and cost effective while minimizing impacts on affected neighborhoods and the environment

10 Solving the SR-520 Problem © 2005 Chaisy, Hurvitz, Jiang, Jun, ShinnersSlide 10 (of 37) Background: Objectives New bridge: safe and reliable General purpose lane: LOS C HOV lane: LOS B Connections with other corridor runoff and noise level

11 Solving the SR-520 Problem © 2005 Chaisy, Hurvitz, Jiang, Jun, ShinnersSlide 11 (of 37) Overview Background: current problems, goals, objectives (Jiang) Alternatives Basic six-lane alternative (Shinners) Six-lane alternative with light rail transit and variable tolls (Hurvitz) Four-lane alternative with higher transit support (Chaisy) Recommendation (Jun)

12 Solving the SR-520 Problem © 2005 Chaisy, Hurvitz, Jiang, Jun, ShinnersSlide 12 (of 37) Six-lane Alternative: Introduction

13 Solving the SR-520 Problem © 2005 Chaisy, Hurvitz, Jiang, Jun, ShinnersSlide 13 (of 37) Six-lane Alternative: Primary Benefits Congestion Relief Safety Environmental Mitigation Community Development

14 Solving the SR-520 Problem © 2005 Chaisy, Hurvitz, Jiang, Jun, ShinnersSlide 14 (of 37) Six-lane Alternative: Environmental Impacts and Constraints Wetlands Noise Pollution

15 Solving the SR-520 Problem © 2005 Chaisy, Hurvitz, Jiang, Jun, ShinnersSlide 15 (of 37) Six-lane Alternative: Public Opinion What does the public want? Roadway Capacity vs. Mass Transit? Toll Concerns Environmental Concerns

16 Solving the SR-520 Problem © 2005 Chaisy, Hurvitz, Jiang, Jun, ShinnersSlide 16 (of 37) Six-lane Alternative: Administrative/ Organization Impacts, Concerns, and Issues Implementation of tolls Metro/ Sound Transit

17 Solving the SR-520 Problem © 2005 Chaisy, Hurvitz, Jiang, Jun, ShinnersSlide 17 (of 37) Six-lane Alternative: Applicable/Likely Funding Mechanisms Costs: $2.6 - 2.9 billion 2005 Gas Tax Transportation 2003 Account Electronic Toll Booths

18 Solving the SR-520 Problem © 2005 Chaisy, Hurvitz, Jiang, Jun, ShinnersSlide 18 (of 37) Overview Background: current problems, goals, objectives (Jiang) Alternatives Basic six-lane alternative (Shinners) Six-lane alternative with light rail transit and variable tolls (Hurvitz) Four-lane alternative with higher transit support (Chaisy) Recommendation (Jun)

19 Solving the SR-520 Problem © 2005 Chaisy, Hurvitz, Jiang, Jun, ShinnersSlide 19 (of 37) Six-lane + Transit Alternative : Introduction Similar to basic six lane alternative Adds light rail on opposite side as pedestrian/bikeway Terminals on both sides of Lake University Hub of Sound Transit (near Husky Stadium) SR-520/I-405 interchange Variable tolling method/rates Radio Frequency IDentification Automated coin counter

20 Solving the SR-520 Problem © 2005 Chaisy, Hurvitz, Jiang, Jun, ShinnersSlide 20 (of 37) Six-lane + Transit Alternative: Primary Benefits Increased Congestion Relief Increased capacity for vehicles Dedicated transit for passengers Increased Safety Added shoulders Increased Environmental Mitigation Surface runoff treatment Increased Community Development “Smart Growth” near transit hub Increased Reliability Light rail will not be subject to delays

21 Solving the SR-520 Problem © 2005 Chaisy, Hurvitz, Jiang, Jun, ShinnersSlide 21 (of 37) Six-lane + Transit Alternative: Environmental Impacts and Constraints Wetlands Six-lane construction will impact wetlands on both sides of the Lake Will require mitigation (construction of new wetlands elsewhere) to comply with Federal regulations Noise Pollution Increased traffic will cause more noise May include caps to reduce noise for certain neighborhoods

22 Solving the SR-520 Problem © 2005 Chaisy, Hurvitz, Jiang, Jun, ShinnersSlide 22 (of 37) Six-lane + Transit Alternative: Public Opinion Better than a compromise Provides increased roadway capacity Provides increased transit capacity & reliability Toll Concerns Legalities of RFID and license plate photos must be addressed Not specifically prohibited under RCW, but likely to be challenged Environmental Concerns Local Neighborhoods Affected Montlake, University, Laurelhurst Eastside (Medina, Clyde Hill, Bellevue, Kirkland)

23 Solving the SR-520 Problem © 2005 Chaisy, Hurvitz, Jiang, Jun, ShinnersSlide 23 (of 37) Six-lane + Transit Alternative: Administrative/ Organization Impacts, Concerns, and Issues Same issues as basic six-lane alternative Implementation of tolls Metro/ Sound Transit Requires integration with Sound Transit SR-520 light rail will share station with Sound Transit at Husky Stadium

24 Solving the SR-520 Problem © 2005 Chaisy, Hurvitz, Jiang, Jun, ShinnersSlide 24 (of 37) Six-lane + Transit Alternative: Applicable/Likely Funding Mechanisms Costs (high estimate): $3.4 billion Basic six-lane alternative cost: $2.90 billion Light rail:$0.39 billion RFID, cameras, software, etc:$20 million RFID, etc. transaction costs:$7.1 million Revenues Tolls (calculated at current volume): 115,000 v/d * $4.00/crossing * 365 d/y *20 y = $3.275 B 2005 Gas Tax $500 million Nickel fund $52 million Does not require additional taxes

25 Solving the SR-520 Problem © 2005 Chaisy, Hurvitz, Jiang, Jun, ShinnersSlide 25 (of 37) Overview Background: current problems, goals, objectives (Jiang) Alternatives Basic six-lane alternative (Shinners) Six-lane alternative with light rail transit and variable tolls (Hurvitz) Four-lane alternative with higher transit support (Chaisy) Recommendation (Jun)

26 Solving the SR-520 Problem © 2005 Chaisy, Hurvitz, Jiang, Jun, ShinnersSlide 26 (of 37) Increase Transit Use: Plan Details Rebuild of SR-520 using 4 Lane Plan outlined by WSDOT Increase capacity of movement of people by increasing bus ridership Construct Large P&R at each end of SR-520 Encourage higher density and mixed use near P&R Business situated nearby Create Incentives to take Transit U-Pass HOV Lane at peak hours Increased parking fees

27 Solving the SR-520 Problem © 2005 Chaisy, Hurvitz, Jiang, Jun, ShinnersSlide 27 (of 37) Increase Transit Use: Primary Benefits Buses move more people in fewer vehicles Congestion Reduction Pollution Reduction P&R costs are lower than capacity increase costs Estimated P&R cost: $32.5 Million

28 Solving the SR-520 Problem © 2005 Chaisy, Hurvitz, Jiang, Jun, ShinnersSlide 28 (of 37) Increase Transit Use: Public Opinion Low approval ratings for transit (Sound Transit = 55%, King County Metro = 62%) Low current ridership (4.4% of commuters use transit across US) 19% of people view Puget Sound needing more transit as most important issue Bureau of Transportation Statistics – Principal Means of Transportation to Work http://www.bts.gov/publications/national_transportation_statistics/2005/html/table_01_38.html WSDOT – 2005 Focus Group Data http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/accountability/publicopinion/Documents/2005_FocusGroupData_Strat360.pdf

29 Solving the SR-520 Problem © 2005 Chaisy, Hurvitz, Jiang, Jun, ShinnersSlide 29 (of 37) Increase Transit Use: Major concerns Can ridership be increased? Is added capacity for movement of people enough to offset growth/congestion in region? Will a plan that does not increase roadway capacity be accepted by voters?

30 Solving the SR-520 Problem © 2005 Chaisy, Hurvitz, Jiang, Jun, ShinnersSlide 30 (of 37) Increase Transit Use: Funding Sources Gas Tax, Nickel Funding Vehicle Tax increases Parking taxes

31 Solving the SR-520 Problem © 2005 Chaisy, Hurvitz, Jiang, Jun, ShinnersSlide 31 (of 37) Final Recommendation Six-lane + Transit Alternative

32 Solving the SR-520 Problem © 2005 Chaisy, Hurvitz, Jiang, Jun, ShinnersSlide 32 (of 37) Final Recommendation Benefit Increased Congestion Relief Increased Safety Increased Environmental Mitigation Increased Community Development Increased Reliability Concern Environmental Impact on Wetland Noise Pollution Tolling Issues Impact on Local Neighborhood

33 Solving the SR-520 Problem © 2005 Chaisy, Hurvitz, Jiang, Jun, ShinnersSlide 33 (of 37) Final Recommendation: Comparison Vs. Basic Multi-Lane Alternative Vs. Increase Transit

34 Solving the SR-520 Problem © 2005 Chaisy, Hurvitz, Jiang, Jun, ShinnersSlide 34 (of 37) Final Recommendation: Financing Estimated Cost of the Project = $3.4 billion Revenue from Tolling = $3.275 billion Gas Tax = $500 million Nickel fund = $52 million

35 Solving the SR-520 Problem © 2005 Chaisy, Hurvitz, Jiang, Jun, ShinnersSlide 35 (of 37) Final Recommendation: Implementation Strategy Get all the necessary Data/prediction Get EIS (Environmental Impact Statement) Inform and get feedback from decision makers and public Get political and public acceptance/support Get initial financing Construction Enforcement

36 Solving the SR-520 Problem © 2005 Chaisy, Hurvitz, Jiang, Jun, ShinnersSlide 36 (of 37) Final Recommendation: Organization and Political Buy-In Metro University of Washington Political Party Who's Against putting RFID tag for Privacy issue WSDOT Sound Transit Local Business

37 Solving the SR-520 Problem © 2005 Chaisy, Hurvitz, Jiang, Jun, ShinnersSlide 37 (of 37) Questions? INSTEP LLC INtelligent Solutions for Transportation Engineering and Planning

Download ppt "Solving the SR-520 Problem © 2005 Chaisy, Hurvitz, Jiang, Jun, ShinnersSlide 1 (of 37) Solving the SR-520 Problem prepared for UTRAN prepared by INSTEP."

Similar presentations

Transportation Funding Alternatives and Outreach

Transportation Funding Alternatives and Outreach
Overview of a Timely Publication. Transportations importance has been recognized since colonial times National defense Economic vitality Quality of life.

Overview of a Timely Publication. Transportations importance has been recognized since colonial times National defense Economic vitality Quality of life.
General Update March 2010. Background As the region grows, increased travel demand on our aging Metro Highway System will continue to create additional.

General Update March Background As the region grows, increased travel demand on our aging Metro Highway System will continue to create additional.
Beltline Highway ITS – Ramp Metering Project ODOT Planners Meeting April 25, 2012.

Beltline Highway ITS – Ramp Metering Project ODOT Planners Meeting April 25, 2012.
UATS Director’s Workshop Agenda April 30, 2001  Introduction (12:30 – 12:35)  Development Review and Mitigation (12:35 – 2:10) Break (2:10 – 2:15) 

UATS Director’s Workshop Agenda April 30, 2001  Introduction (12:30 – 12:35)  Development Review and Mitigation (12:35 – 2:10) Break (2:10 – 2:15) 
D2 Roadway Discussion Sound Transit Board September 22, 2011.

D2 Roadway Discussion Sound Transit Board September 22, 2011.
Getting Started with Congestion Pricing A Workshop for Local Partners Federal Highway Administration Office of Operations.

Getting Started with Congestion Pricing A Workshop for Local Partners Federal Highway Administration Office of Operations.
Route 17 Corridor Study Public Workshop II – November 29, 2012 Orange / Sullivan County 1.

Route 17 Corridor Study Public Workshop II – November 29, 2012 Orange / Sullivan County 1.
I-15 Managed Lanes: Building on Success And Lessons Learned I-15 Managed Lanes: Building on Success And Lessons Learned.

I-15 Managed Lanes: Building on Success And Lessons Learned I-15 Managed Lanes: Building on Success And Lessons Learned.
SR520 Urban Partnership Project 2008 ITS Washington Annual Meeting November 12th, 2008 – Seattle Jennifer Charlebois, P.E. Tolling and Systems Project.

SR520 Urban Partnership Project 2008 ITS Washington Annual Meeting November 12th, 2008 – Seattle Jennifer Charlebois, P.E. Tolling and Systems Project.
Public Expenditure Analysis May 4, 2007 Cost-Benefit Analysis: Seattle Link Light Rail, Initial Segment Your presenters: Annie Gorman Hazel-Ann Petersen.

Public Expenditure Analysis May 4, 2007 Cost-Benefit Analysis: Seattle Link Light Rail, Initial Segment Your presenters: Annie Gorman Hazel-Ann Petersen.
Jeffrey F. Paniati Associate Administrator for Operations Federal Highway Administration Department of Transportation Enabling Congestion Pricing in the.

Jeffrey F. Paniati Associate Administrator for Operations Federal Highway Administration Department of Transportation Enabling Congestion Pricing in the.
1 Welcome! West Valley-Taylorsville Transit Corridor Draft Environmental Impact Statement Public Open House/Hearing July 19, 2006.

1 Welcome! West Valley-Taylorsville Transit Corridor Draft Environmental Impact Statement Public Open House/Hearing July 19, 2006.
Presented by: David Jackson & Michael Snavely, Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Robert Calix, Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority May 9,

Presented by: David Jackson & Michael Snavely, Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Robert Calix, Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority May 9,
REDUCE TRAFFIC CONGESTION Automated Toll Collection Solution Proposal

REDUCE TRAFFIC CONGESTION Automated Toll Collection Solution Proposal
Materials developed by K. Watkins, J. LaMondia and C. Brakewood Planning Process & Alternatives Analysis Unit 7: Forecasting and Encouraging Ridership.

Materials developed by K. Watkins, J. LaMondia and C. Brakewood Planning Process & Alternatives Analysis Unit 7: Forecasting and Encouraging Ridership.
A Handbook That Outlines When traffic impact studies should be required What analyses should be included How the study should be reviewed and used Who.

A Handbook That Outlines When traffic impact studies should be required What analyses should be included How the study should be reviewed and used Who.
National Road Pricing Conference June 4, 2010 Jennifer Tsien, PBS&J Angela Jacobs, Federal Highway Administration.

National Road Pricing Conference June 4, 2010 Jennifer Tsien, PBS&J Angela Jacobs, Federal Highway Administration.
National Road Pricing Conference June 4, 2010 Mark Burris, Texas Transportation Institute Jessie Yung, Federal Highway Administration.

National Road Pricing Conference June 4, 2010 Mark Burris, Texas Transportation Institute Jessie Yung, Federal Highway Administration.
TRB Transportation Planning Applications Conference Houston, Texas May 2009 Ann Arbor Transportation Plan Update-- Connecting the Land Use & Transportation.

TRB Transportation Planning Applications Conference Houston, Texas May 2009 Ann Arbor Transportation Plan Update-- Connecting the Land Use & Transportation.

Similar presentations

Ads by Google