Lone S Star R tar Reg egional al R Rail ail Pro Project - Upd - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Lone S Star R tar Reg egional al R Rail ail Pro Project - Upd pdate Jos oseph B h Black Rail ail D Dir irector, L Lone St Star ar R Rail ail D Dis istrict Jos oseph L h Lessard Plann nning Director, Knud Knudson L
Jos
h Black – Rail ail D Dir irector, L Lone St Star ar R Rail ail D Dis istrict Jos
h Lessard – Plann nning Director, Knud Knudson L LP
August 20, 20, 20 2015
ation
ar Rai Rail’s Bac ackground
y/Mo Mobil ilit ity
EIS Sta tatus us
unding ng
1
3
Georgetown, Austin, San Marcos, New Braunfels, Schertz, San Antonio
ies: Williamson, Travis, Hays, Bexar, Bastrop
Transit Agen gencies: Capital Metro, CARTS, VIA, ART
MPOs: CAMPO, AAMPO
Other E Entit ities: Austin Community College District
n’s s Board R d Repres esen entation:
22 members representing the political leadership and business community of Central/South Texas, plus “at large” members appointed by the TxTC.
3
4
freig ight t train ains p per day y rerouted to New Freight Rail Line
80+ miles of
freight r rail li line from Seguin to Taylor
40+ miles of i
freight rail ail l lin ine from San Antonio to Seguin
mic d devel elopmen pment t
New Freight Rai Rail L Line
STAR AR is is R Regional R Rail ail
intercity rail
lly 1 16 stations at full service (up to 24 with split stations service)
und tr trips a a day y at full service
mile les s of p passe senger r ra rail; l; San Antonio north to Georgetown
Pas Passenger Rail Rail
4
Servi vice: : 60 min. headway on peak 120 min. headway off peak 12 total round trips per day Weekends & holidays: per demand & budget
Base S e Ser ervice: : 30 min. headway on peak 60 min. headway off peak 21 total round trips per day, including express service Weekends & holidays: per demand & budget
Servi vice: : 15 min. headway on peak 60 min. headway off peak 28-32 total round trips per day, including express service Weekends & holidays: per demand & budget
5
Rid ider E Experience
bottlenecks
Link nks ne nearly 300,000 s stud tudents, f faculty a y and nd sta taff a at t 17 c camp mpuses es:
6
10
Hig Highway expans ansion n capabi bili lity i is li limited
11
LSTAR AR p pas assenger t train ains c can an provid ide equivalent of 2 to 8 8 ad addit itional h hig ighway la lanes s to t the re region’s t s tra ransp sportation system from W Willi lliamso son t to B Bexar r County
12
Core C Cit ity Suburb rban Cities Core c e congestion “me “meters” traffic like e an h hourg rgla lass ss – you u can p n pour ur more sand nd, b but y ut you u can’t make i it t move fa faster. Regio ional c commuter r rail ail is is una unaffected b by y highway c y cong ngestion. Growth th r results ts i in a a rin ing o
core congestion. LSTAR can a n add 1 to 4 lane nes o
capacity i y in n each d direction. Suburb rban Cities
13
San Pedro & Hildebrand Fredericksburg Rd.
n Marcos ( (2)
New Br Brau aunfel els ( (1)
rtz ( (1) San n Ant ntonio Stations (7)
p 1604
p 410/Airport
n Pedro & & H Hildebrand ( (local)
Fredericksburg Rd
local) l)
Downt ntown S San A n Ant ntonio
San n Ant ntonio (to be adde dded d to EIS) S)
no/Texas A A&M S San A n Ant ntonio (to be adde dded d to EIS) S)
14
Passenger ger
eight
15
Env nvironmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires a an n Env nvironmental I Impa pact Statement (EIS) to assess pr project altern rnative ves
NEPA PA en environme mental al i imp mpac act c cat atego egories
viro ronmental Justice considerations of NEPA assess human health, economic, and social impacts on minority and low-income populations. LSRD D has i ini nitiated an n EIS f for the pa passenger l line a and nd ne new freight line ne Proc
take approximately 3 y 3 years with r results expected S Summe mer 2 2017
18
19
An Environmental al Impact S Statement ( (EIS) is a document that describes the effects of a large
environment. The Lone Star Regional Rail EIS will be prepared
ar Rai Rail D Distric ict under the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the Federal al H Highway ay Admin inistrat ation, and the Tex Texas Dep Department of Transportatio ion. At the end of the study process, the lead federal agency (FHWA, in this case) issues a Record d of Dec Decision (R (ROD) that will determine how — if at all — a project can best move forward.
20
Fal all l 2014–Winter 2 2015
21
Fal all l 2014–Winter 2 2015
Sp Spring–Fal all 2 2015
WE AR E ARE E HER ERE 22
Fal all l 2014–Winter 2 2015
Sp Spring–Fal all 2 2015
Winter 2015–Spring 2 g 2016
23
Fal all l 2014–Winter 2 2015
Sp Spring–Fal all 2 2015
Winter 2015–Spring 2 g 2016
Summer mmer–Fall 2 2016
24
Fal all l 2014–Winter 2 2015
Sp Spring–Fal all 2 2015
Winter 2015–Spring 2 g 2016
Summer mmer–Fall 2 2016
2017-2018
25
Capital al Fund unding ng Design gn Constr tructi tion Commi mmissi sioning Operation
Local funding is the gat ateway ay to capital funding from public and private sources.
Local Fund unding
Tim imin ing
26
LSRD Pl Plan anning T Tar arget ets Bas Base
Improv
$ $ 800 m 800 mil. East Line ne $ $ 1. 1.60 60 b bil. Totals $ $ 2. 2.40 40 b bil.
27
Local j jur urisdictions NOT
OT aske
ked to fund nd majo jor c capit ital costs Capital Expenses es c covered ed o
h a combination o
Grants & & Loans ns (40%-60% 60%)
Rail l Relocation/Ot Othe her r Funds ( (20%-30% 30%)
Investment, UP Co Cost Sharing g & O Other er (15 15%-40% 40%)
al f fundin ing p prim imaril ily e establis ished t through in interlocal ag agreement
tax o
ee on station a area ea pr proper perties
ax in increase o
ion ar area a properties o
ity resid idents
Funding Approach:
28
1.
Transport rtation Infra rastructure re Zones (TIZ IZ):
a.
New growth property tax from within ½ mile of station
(50% or estimated rail influenced growth if higher)
b.
Direct contribution steps up from $499,500 beginning in FY 2016 to $2 mil.; thereafter 3% inflation applied
c.
In-kind support/contribution of
contributions
d.
Other Provisions:
29
3.
Ci City r retains fund unds i in n spe pecial a accoun unt unt until L LSRD D meets pe performance measure
4.
Per Performan ance me measures
agreement with Union Pacific Railroad
5.
When n in o n ope peration, LSRD w D will annua nnually i identify excess T TIZ f fun unding for return to contributing jurisdictions pro-rata
6.
Equitable f fund nding ng r relations nship between participating local governments
governments for funding equity
6.
Agreements t to-date:
30
31
32 32
1. 1.
2. 2.