Waco Metropolitan Planning Organization - Thursday, July 9, 2020 2:00 p.m..
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Waco Metropolitan Planning Organization
Thursday, July 9, 2020
2:00 p.m..
Roll Call of Committee Members
MPO Director will ask each Technical
Committee member to respond present on the
conference call
2
Reading of Public Comments
Under social distancing guidelines, visitors were
requested to submit comments in advance
MPO Staff will read into the record any
comments received
Visitors are allowed to listen to the meeting, but
will not have an opportunity to speak
3
UPWP Amendments
Consideration and action regarding a
recommendation to the MPO Policy Board on
adoption of amendments to the FY 2020-2021
Unified Planning Work Program
4
What is the Unified Planning Work
Program (UPWP)?
UPWP serves as the operating budget for the MPO for
FY 2020 & 2021
Identifies how federal highway and transit planning
funds are intended to be used
Identifies each task the MPO intends to accomplish
and total funds to be used
5
FY 2020 - 2021 UPWP
Proposed Amendments
Amend Subtask 1.5 – Travel & Training
Reduce by $10,000 for FY 2020
Budget Total = $4,000
Reduce by $7,000 for FY 2021
Budget Total = $5,000
Amend Subtask 5.1 – Waco Transit System Fixed
Route Realignment Study
Moves beginning of project from FY 2020 to FY 2021
Reassigns $93,750 in FTA 5307 funds & local match
6
Public Involvement
Public Process
Conducted 15 day comment period
June 22, 2020 – July 7, 2020
No formal comments received
Conducted virtual public informational meetings
June 22, 2020 at 12:00 noon and 5:30 p.m.
June 29, 2020 at 12:00 noon and 5:30 p.m.
All materials posted on MPO website
7
Technical Committee Recommendation
Proposed Amendments to the FY 2020-2021
Unified Planning Work Program
8
High Speed Transportation Study
Review and Discussion regarding final
consultant report for the Fort Worth to
Laredo High Speed Transportation Study
9
PROJECT PURPOSE
• The project purpose is to conduct a
High-Speed Transportation (HST)
study that connects Fort Worth, Fort
Waco, Killeen-Temple, Austin, San Worth
Waco
Antonio, and Laredo. Killeen-Temple
Austin
• It will evaluate various technology San Antonio
options and modes of travel.
Laredo
• It will recommend corridors
and potential station locations
to include in future NEPA
documents.
10LEVEL 1: CITY PAIR
IDENTIFICATION
2 corridor wide routes to be considered
Service Area Population
Fort Worth Austin San Antonio
Waco Killeen/Temple Laredo
NCTCOG
Corridor Wide Routes
Fort Worth to Laredo-All stops
Fort Worth Waco Killeen/Temple Austin San Antonio Laredo
Fort Worth-Austin-SanAntonio-Laredo
Fort Worth Austin San Antonio Laredo
11TECHNOLOGIES: PRIMARY
(INTER-REGIONAL)
Hyperloop Maglev Train High-Speed Rail (Over 150 mph)
~40- 60 ft right-of-way ~75 - 95ft right-of-way ~45 - 65ft right-of-way
12Primary Technology Definitions
High Speed Rail
• Traditional steel wheel on steel rail
• Max Speed about 200mph, typical about 150mph
• Proven technology, engineering and operational costs well known
Maglev
• Magnetic levitation over center beam
• Eliminates drag / resistance from steel wheels
• Max Speed about 350mph, typical about 250mph
• One operational line in China, operational costs estimated
Hyperloop
• Sort of a maglev train operating within a vacuum sealed tube
• Vacuum eliminates drag from air resistance
• Max speed estimated near 500mph, no estimate about typical
• No estimates on design, construction or operational costs
13TECHNOLOGIES: INFILL
(INTRA-REGIONAL)
Guaranteed Transit Conventional Rail Higher-Speed Rail (Up to 150 mph)
Typical managed lane Typical Conventional Rail Typical Higher-Speed Rail
right-of-way right-of-way right-of-way
14POTENTIAL STATION DISTANCE
Findings
• For Level 1:
• Optimal station distances and service area population find that
Hyperloop, Maglev and High-Speed Rail are appropriate for all stops,
as well as a Fort Worth-Austin-San Antonio-Laredo stopping pattern
90 miles 60 miles 70 miles 80 miles 155 miles
Fort Worth Waco Killeen/Temple Austin San Antonio Laredo
Fort Worth to Laredo-All stops
Fort Worth Waco Killeen/Temple Austin San Antonio Laredo
Fort Worth-Austin-SanAntonio-Laredo Fort Worth Austin San Antonio Laredo
15LEVEL 1 - SUMMARY
• Based on this analysis, five single mode options were generated for primary technology
modes. Two of these options stop at all stations.
• 9 double mode (Primary + Infill) options were generated. These cover all stops.
• Primary technology modes provide at least 50% savings in time compared to driving time.
Primary technologymodes
Hyperloop Maglev High-Speed Rail
Fort Worth to Laredo-All stops
Fort Worth-Austin-SanAntonio-Laredo
Higher relative time savings Lower relative time savings Not recommended
16LEVEL: 2 TOPRS SEGMENT &
PRIMARY TECHNOLOGY
COMPATIBILITY
• Applied high-level criteria
to narrow down feasible
segments from TOPRS
• A total of 23 city-to-city
segments evaluated.
• Corridor types included:
o Greenfield (new location)
o Existing highway corridors
o Existing railroad corridors
o Existing utility corridors
17LEVEL: 2 TOPRS SEGMENT & PRIMARY
TECHNOLOGY COMPATIBILITY
Highway Corridors
• Maglev and HSR cannot operate along highway routes because both have more
restrictive horizontal and vertical design criteria. To follow an existing highway, the speed of
the technology would be greatly reduced.
• Hyperloop has less restrictive design criteria and could follow highway routes but a
reduction in speed would be necessary.
Freight Corridors
• Hyperloop, Maglev and HSR cannot operate on existing railroad tracks.
• Track gauge for high-speed systems is incompatible with freight rail and potential
interference with overhead catenary systems for electrical HSR vehicles.
• High-speed transit systems require 100 percent grade-separation to achieve high speeds.
Utility Corridors
• Primary technologies are feasible generally following utility corridors, and favorable in
Texas due to geography and long segments of uninterrupted linear paths.
18LEVEL: 2 – HIGHEST SCORING
TECHNOLOGY AND ALIGNMENT
HL10 SP2
HSR1
SP1
HL3
SP1
HL7
SP2
HL6
SP1
HL12 SP2
HL11 SP2
MLEV1
MLEV2
HSR2
SP1
SP2
HL1
SP1
HL2
SP1
HL8
SP2
HL5
SP1
SP2
HL9
SP2
HL4
SP1
High Low
HL– Hyperloop Hyperloop
MLEV- Maglev
HSR- High Speed Rail Maglev
SP1- Stopping Pattern 1- All (6) Stops HSR
SP2- Stopping Pattern 2 – Fort Worth- Austin- San Antonio- Laredo (4) Stops
19LEVEL: 2 PRELIMINARY FINDINGS
HIGHEST SCORING
END-TO-END TECHNOLOGY
AND ALIGNMENT
• Hyperloop with six potential stops in:
• Fort Worth
• Waco
• Killeen/Temple
• Austin
• San Antonio
• Laredo
• Alignment generally follows:
• Traveling south from Fort Worth to Waco
generally following a Utility Corridor.
• From Temple to San Antonio, generally
following IH-35.
• From San Antonio to Laredo in a greenfield
corridor.
20STATION ANALYSIS
Assessed station suitability based on identified
metrics:
Multimodal Connectivity
• Access to transit stops
• Transit connectivity
• Existing railroads
• Existing transit hubs and park & rides
Major Activity Centers/Access to Regional Tourism
• Modal suitability density (population+ employment)
Environmental Considerations
• Feature coverage (Floodplain, wetland, historic sites,
etc.)
Existing and Future Land Use/Available Land
• Land use compatibility
Not Used
• Geometric design, alignments, grade
21STATION ANALYSIS
NCTCOG- Fort Worth WMPO- Waco KTMPO- Killeen- Temple
22LEVEL 3: OTHER FACTORS TO
CONSIDER
• Level 3: Develop a discussion and ranking of difficult to quantify criteria applicable to
technologies.
• Outcomes: Provide an additional qualitative assessment of technologies in relation
to the outcomes of Level 2.
Station Location Benefits Regulatory
• Urban vs. suburban location • Regulatory environment
• Freight co-benefit of station location • Public and institutional plan consistency
• Public support
Operational
• Required area for ancillary facilities Convenience
• Reliability • Passenger experience
• O&M costs • Travel efficiency
• Technology Maturity
Safety &Resilience
Interoperability • Vehicle and track safety measures
• Compatibility with existing technologies
23PRELIMINARY FINDINGS
After screening, Hyperloop stopping at all identified
city pairs
ranked as the highest technology and alignment
combination.
• Hyperloop potential stops:
• Fort Worth
• Waco
• Killeen/Temple
• Austin
• San Antonio
• Laredo
• Alignment generally follows:
• Traveling south from Fort Worth to Waco
generally following a Utility Corridor.
• From Temple to San Antonio, generally following
IH-35.
• From San Antonio to Laredo in a
greenfield corridor.
24MPO Comments & NCTCOG Responses
Concerned with recommended corridor alignments. Report
suggests Hyperloop technology could use IH-35 alignments with
minimal deviations whereas Maglev could not
Design challenges with following existing IH-35 alignment
Although Hyperloop can operate at higher speeds than Maglev,
operational limitations may negate advantages of the technology
Similar speed & alignment limitations may apply to both Hyperloop
and Maglev
Significantly higher right of way acquisition cost than identified by
study
Could result in changes to final technology recommendations
Response – Hyperloop staff suggests technology can use a tighter
curve radius than Maglev
Note: November presentation acknowledged lower travel speeds
25MPO Comments & NCTCOG Responses
Questions regarding station analysis
Census Tract Analysis
Property acquisition (ROW costs) not included in the criteria
A high level analysis to flag high scoring census tracts with access
challenges should have been a part of study
Station Approaches Through Urban Areas
Station approaches would require through services to use slower
speeds through each urbanized area greatly reducing the advantages
of higher speed technologies
Station analysis should have been thoroughly vetted through 6
MPO Boards
Response – Purpose of the HST study is to:
Identify if emerging technologies are viable for the corridor
Provide information for the Tier II NEPA study
Indicate general location of each station for further study
26Laredo to Fort Worth High Speed
Transportation Study
MPO Policy / Technical Considerations
Any technology above 150 mph is beneficial to Waco Region
Proven Technology vs. Cutting Edge (Level of Risk?)
Hyperloop appears to be viable
Test track in Middle East
If I-35 corridor developed and successful, other systems likely to
connect
Tier II study likely needs to revisit alignments
Station location
Closer to downtown better, but Potts Interchange area could have
significant benefits (BRT service)
Dependent upon design geometrics
27Laredo to Fort Worth High Speed
Transportation Study
What’s Next?
Report submitted by NCTCOG to TxDOT Rail
Division
Likelihood of Tier 2 study?
Private sector interest?
Hyperloop: I-35 corridor top 20 global corridor
How does COVID-19 change interest?
28Laredo to Fort Worth High Speed
Transportation Study
Discussion of Final Consultant Report
29TxDOT Construction Update
Discussion and Updates from the Texas
Department of Transportation regarding
significant highway construction within the
Waco Metropolitan Area
30TxDOT Waco Area
Project Updates
Building the Texas Transportation System
Footer Text July 9, 9,
July 2020
2020US 84 SPEEGLEVILEE OVERPASS ROADWAY: US 84 COST: $28,651,608.00 LIMITS: Harris Creek Rd. to Bosque River SCOPE: GRD, STRS & SURF TIMELINE: APRIL 2018 – AUGUST 2020 • Contractor opened new overpass bridges in early June. • Completing signing and remaining frontage road and intersection work. • Total project completion expected this Summer. Footer Text July 9, 2020 32
FM 939 ROADWAY: FM 939 COST: $6,842,742.00 LIMITS: SH 31 TO FM 2937 SCOPE: REHAB/WIDEN TIMELINE: APRIL 2019 – Summer 2020 • Contractor has completed all paving and striping throughout project. • Contractor installing permanent signs. • Total project completion expected this Summer. Footer Text July 9, 2020 33
FM 938 @ Tonk Creek ROADWAY: FM 938 COST: $663,129.76 LIMITS: FM 938 @ Tonk Creek SCOPE: REPLC BR & APPRS TIMELINE: FEB 2020 – SUMMER 2020 • Roadway closed and bridge removed in early March. • Contractor anticipates reopening bridge in July. • Total project completion expected in Summer 2020. Footer Text July 9, 2020 34
FM 1637 PH II ROADWAY: CHINA SPRINGS HWY COST: $14,452,070.00 LIMITS: .37 MI W of FM 2490 to .482 MI W of FM 185 SCOPE: WDN GR SURF TIMELINE: JUNE 2018 – SPRING 2020 • Work complete with the exception of punch list items. Footer Text July 9, 2020 35
FM 1637 PH III ROADWAY: FM 1637 COST: $9,968,707.00 LIMITS: Bosque Co. Line/FM 185 TO FM 56 SCOPE: Hazard Elimination, shoulder widening, and overlay TIMELINE: AUGUST 2019 – FALL 2020 • Contractor has completed widening in Bosque County and will continue working in one mile sections towards China Spring. • Total project completion expected in Fall 2020. Footer Text July 9, 2020 36
IH 35 4B Update
Contractor has completed over $150 million of work through June 2020
Contractor’s schedule still projects on-time finish
Project Wide:
– Water and Wastewater Relocations continue throughout the project – anticipate
completing in next 4-6 months
– 24” Waterline replacement scheduled for this summer and will impact 4th St for
several weeks
Footer Text July 9, 2020 37IH 35 4B Update
Southbound Frontage Road:
– Installing storm drain between 5th and 12th St. Anticipate paving and opening new
frontage road later this summer.
Northbound Frontage Road:
– Working subgrade from south end of project to U Parks. Anticipate paving later this
summer.
– Paving operations continuing north of Forrest St this week and will be ongoing
through the summer.
Cross Streets:
– University Parks: Working on connection of NBFR and EB University Parks.
– US 84: Opened new EB lanes on east side of IH 35.
– Behrens: Beginning construction of intersection with new NBFR.
Footer Text July 9, 2020 38IH 35 4B Update
Mainlanes:
– Continuing demo of UPRR bridge.
– Constructing new bridges at 11/12th St, 4/5th St, University Parks, Brazos River,
MLK Blvd, BU 77, US 84, Behrens Circle, and LP 340. Will start working on new
bridge at UPRR this Summer. Installed new bridge beams at 11th/12th St and will
continue setting beams at U Parks and 4th/5th St this week. Other locations to
continue being set through the Summer. Will impact cross street and frontage road
traffic.
– Earthwork continues entire length of new mainlanes with retaining wall work
started at several new bridges (LP 340, US 84, U Parks, 4th/5th St).
Footer Text July 9, 2020 39Director’s Report
A. Request for agenda items to be considered
for future meetings
• Next Technical Committee meeting:
• Thursday, September 3, 2020 at 2:00pm
• Discussion and Updates from TxDOT
regarding significant highway construction
40Waco Metropolitan Planning Organization
Thursday, July 9, 2020
02:00 p.m.You can also read
