Commuter Rail Extension Alternatives Analysis - Transportation ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

CALTRAIN EXTENSION TO MONTEREY COUNTYALTERNATIVES ANALYSISestablished as part of this alternative and would operate from four Monterey County Transit Centersto the San Francisco Bay Area. An MST Transit Center/Park-n-Ride facility would be constructed atEighth Street in Marina as part of the University Villages redevelopment of Fort Ord. Additional transitcenters with park-and-ride facilities would be located in Salinas, Castroville, and Pajaro with expressbus service operating via existing surface roadways to Santa Clara and San Mateo counties,including non-stop service to selected stations.The Express Bus Alternative also includes the construction of park-and-ride facilities to supportexpress bus operations at comparable Caltrain Extension Alternative rail station locations. These willinclude Salinas, Castroville, Pajaro/Watsonville, and Marina (Fort Ord). High-speed transmission,over the road, 40-foot coaches would be acquired for this service with a capacity of 45 to 49passengers per vehicle. Twenty-five vehicles (plus five spares) would be required to operate theservice in the near term—carrying 1,028 commuters to the San Francisco Bay Area each weekday.Of these, 21 vehicles would operate to/from Santa Clara County and four vehicles would operateto/from San Mateo and San Francisco counties. This is equivalent to two Caltrain trips extended fromGilroy to Salinas. Longer term, a fleet of 60 motor coaches (50 vehicles in revenue service plus 10spares) would be required to accommodate the four Caltrain each way ridership scenario. The samefare structure as proposed for the Caltrain Extension Alternative is assumed for the Express BusAlternative. All fare revenues will be used to offset operating and maintenance expenses. Table 9-2outlines the Express Bus Alternative capital cost estimates.Table 9-2Express Bus Alternative Capital Cost Estimate ($1,000 FY 2007)Work DescriptionPajaroPark-and-RideCastrovilleParkand-RideSalinasStationSalinasBusSalinasPark-and-RideMarinaBusMarinaParkand-Ride2007TotalsYOETotalsParking and access $2,227 $1,426 — $1,215 $ 8,888 $ 485 $1,390 $15,631 $17,194Pedestrian structures — 900 — — — — — 900 990Platform and station amenities 576 453 2,301 1,298 — 1,204 — 5,832 6,415Track and signal improvements — 605 316 — — — — 921 1,013Specialty items 50 100 75 50 — — — 275 303Mobilization 285 349 269 256 889 169 139 2,356 2,592Contingencies 1,098 1,341 1,036 987 1,955 650 535 7,602 8,362Construction Total $4,236 $5,174 $3,997 $3,806 $11,732 $2,508 $2,064 $33,517 36,271Soft cost 1,398 1,707 1,319 1,256 4,106 702 681 11,169 11,741Right-of-way 2,170 409 — 4,250 1,650 74 2,622 11,175 11,593Subtotal $7,804 $7,290 $5,316 $9,312 $17,488 $3,284 $5,367 $55,861 59,605Vehicles — — — — — — — 30,000 36,383Maintenance facility — — — — — — — 6,000 6,493Unallocated contingency — — — — — — — 4,593 4,866Total $7,804 $7,290 $5,316 $9,312 $17,488 $3,284 $5,367 $96,454 $107,347parsons CHAPTER 9: SUMMARY 223
CALTRAIN EXTENSION TO MONTEREY COUNTYALTERNATIVES ANALYSISDETAILED EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVESThe Alternatives Analysis study prepared a detailed evaluation of how well each alternative/alignmentoption can meet the goals and objectives established for the project:• Improve mobility• Improve the environment• Optimize transit operating efficiencies• Provide a cost-effective solution• Support local land use plans and respond to growthThe evaluation methodology was designed to ensure that both local priorities and Federal TransitAdministration criteria are met. Table 9-3 shows some of the key results of the evaluation. Theseresults compare the Caltrain Extension Alternative and the Express Bus Alternative for the selectedevaluation criteria, including cost and various user benefits. The benefits monetized in Table 3 areexpressed as positive dollars, while costs are expressed as (negative) dollars. Table 9-3demonstrates that the benefits of the Caltrain Extension Alternative exceed the benefits of theExpress Bus Alternative in both 2010 and 2030.Table 9-3Summary of Caltrain Extension and Express Bus Alternative Benefits2010 2030Benefit Type Caltrain Express Bus Caltrain Express BusUser BenefitsIn-vehicle travel time (Method 3) $ 252,032 $ 252,032 $ 6,985,931 $ 4,160,454Fuel costs 4,499,622 4,499,622 8,631,039 8,631,039Non-fuel operating savings 1,925,316 1,925,316 3,693,083 3,693,083Transit user fees (3,310,612) (3,310,612) (6,320,790) (6,320,790)Internal accident costs or savings—Highway 3,144,040 3,144,040 6,027,934 6,027,934Transit (150,545) (893,907) (304,004) (1,698,612)Revenue Transfers (fuel taxes) (893,915) (893,915) (1,714,681) (1,714,681)Reduction in External CostsEmissions 14,361 (105,368) (136,415) (381,210)Highway accidents 554,830 554,830 1,063,753 1,063,753Transit accidents (14,406) (148,306) (28,744) (284,432)Net Public Operating Costs (1,175,068) (5,256,095) (2,393,619) (10,812,623)Total $4,845,655 ($232,363) $15,503,487 $2,363,915The evaluation of the Caltrain Extension and Express Bus alternatives assumed equal ridership forboth the commuter rail and express bus modes. For this reason, most of the user benefits identifiedabove are equal between the Caltrain and Express bus options. By the Year 2030, in-vehicle traveltime for the Express Bus Alternative will be longer due to increased roadway congestion; however, forthe most part benefits are the same or similar between the two modal options. One significantdifference is “Net Public Operating Costs,” which is the difference between total operations and maintenanceexpense and fare revenues (transit user fees) paid to ride the service. Operation of a largebus fleet with limited seating capacity between Monterey County and San Francisco Peninsulastations is far more expensive than the incremental cost of extending Caltrain service 37 miles fromGilroy to Salinas.parsons CHAPTER 9: SUMMARY 224
Page 4 and 5:
DRAFTCALTRAIN EXTENSIONTO MONTEREY
Page 6 and 7:
CALTRAIN EXTENSION TO MONTEREY COUN
Page 8 and 9:
Page 10 and 11:
Page 12 and 13:
Page 14 and 15:
Page 16 and 17:
Page 18 and 19:
Page 20 and 21:
Page 22 and 23:
Page 24 and 25:
Page 26 and 27:
Page 28 and 29:
Page 30 and 31:
Page 32 and 33:
Page 34 and 35:
Page 36 and 37:
Page 38 and 39:
Page 40 and 41:
Page 42 and 43:
Page 44 and 45:
Page 46 and 47:
Page 48 and 49:
Page 50 and 51:
Page 52 and 53:
Page 54 and 55:
Page 56 and 57:
Page 58 and 59:
Page 60 and 61:
Page 62 and 63:
Page 64 and 65:
Page 66 and 67:
Page 68 and 69:
Page 70 and 71:
Page 72 and 73:
Page 74 and 75:
Page 76 and 77:
Page 78 and 79:
Page 80 and 81:
Page 82 and 83:
Page 84 and 85:
Page 86 and 87:
Page 88 and 89:
Page 90 and 91:
Page 92 and 93:
Page 94 and 95:
Page 96 and 97:
Page 98 and 99:
Page 100 and 101:
Page 102 and 103:
Page 104 and 105:
Page 106 and 107:
Page 108 and 109:
Page 110 and 111:
Page 112 and 113:
Page 114 and 115:
Page 116 and 117:
Page 118 and 119:
Page 120 and 121:
Page 122 and 123:
Page 124 and 125:
Page 126 and 127:
Page 128 and 129:
Page 130 and 131:
Page 132 and 133:
Page 134 and 135:
Page 136 and 137:
Page 138 and 139:
Page 140 and 141:
Page 142 and 143:
Page 144 and 145:
Page 146 and 147:
Page 148 and 149:
Page 150 and 151:
Page 152 and 153:
Page 154 and 155:
Page 156 and 157:
Page 158 and 159:
Page 160 and 161:
Page 162 and 163:
Page 164 and 165:
Page 166 and 167:
Page 168 and 169:
Page 170 and 171:
Page 172 and 173:
Page 174 and 175:
Page 176 and 177:
Page 178 and 179:
Page 180 and 181:
Page 182 and 183:
Page 184 and 185:
Page 186 and 187:
Page 188 and 189:
Page 190 and 191:
Page 192 and 193:
Page 194 and 195:
Page 196 and 197:
Page 198 and 199:
Page 200 and 201:
Page 202 and 203:
Page 204 and 205:
Page 206 and 207: CALTRAIN EXTENSION TO MONTEREY COUN
show all

Commuter Rail Extension Alternatives Analysis - Transportation ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?