1
PROJECT CONNECT: LESSONS IN COLLABORATION Presented to:
Clean Air Trough Energy Efficiency CATEE Conference San AntonioDecember 18, 2013
2
• Capital Metro jurisdiction, and prior planning efforts, did not encompass entire region
• Community feedback on transit projects: “How does this fit in with big picture?”
• Growing recognition that region requires multimodal system, including transit, to meet future needs
• Need for agency coordination
PROJECT CONNECT: WHY?
3
• A partnership between Central Texas transportation agencies
• A regional, long-range high-capacity system plan for Central Texas
• The first regional transit system plan in Central Texas history
PROJECT CONNECT
4
THREE MAIN QUESTIONS
Organization: How will our region organize to develop and operate the system?
Funding: How will we pay for the system over the long term?
System: How will high capacity transit components in CAMPO 2035 plan work as a system?
Transportation Needs
and Opportuniti
es
Project Details
System: Corridors and Gaps
System Optimizati
on
Funding
Organization
5
• Staff level- formed core team and weekly meetings– Mid to senior and exec. level staff– Intermittent participation by transit CEO
and Asst. City Manager levels• Interlocal Agreement developed to
guide decision-making and funding actions
• Consultant team hired for project• Substantial public outreach effort
PROJECT CONNECT ORGANIZATION
6
• CAMPO subcommittee• Primary stakeholder group in the Project Connect process • 26 meetings over past 18
months!• Role: Evaluate and provide input
on a regional high-capacity transit plan for Central Texas
TRANSIT WORKING GROUP
7
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT PROCESS
Regional Plan
System Plan
Corridor Studies
Preliminary Design/Environmental Analysis
Final Design
Construction
Operation
8
HIGH-CAPACITY TRANSIT
• “Congestion resistant/proof”• Has one or both of the following:
• Dedicated lane/right-of way for at least a portion
• Transit priority
• Fewer stops, higher speeds, more frequent service, carries more people
9
HIGH-CAPACITY TRANSIT MODES
10
VISION MAP
• 25 Centers & ABIA• 4 Counties/13 Cities
• Bastrop: Elgin• Hays: Buda, Kyle,
San Marcos• Travis: Austin,
Manor, Pflugerville• Williamson: Cedar
Park, Georgetown, Hutto, Leander, Round Rock, Taylor
11
SYSTEM FUNDING PLAN
By 2030• Capital Cost - $1.9 B of $4.0 B • Capital Maintenance - $424 M• O&M Cost – $82 M of $151 M• 49% of the Vision
– BRT – 15 miles– Express Bus – 56 miles– Regional Rail – 74 miles– Commuter Rail – 32miles (upgrades, double tracking)– Urban Rail – 12miles (24 miles single track)– Maintenance Facilities, fare collection, replacement vehicles
12
Integrated System
Mgt.
Rail Operatio
ns
BRT & Express
Bus Operation
s
System Planning
& Business
Ops.
SYSTEM ORGANIZATION & RELATIONSHIPS
Other Capital
Investment Ops.
*Relationship will need to accommodate LSRD inter-regional service delivery and internal governance structure.
Regional Service
Committee
Other Invest
or-Owner
s
Lone Star Rail
District*
City of Austin
Capital
Metro 1. Regional services focus
2. Non-political governance
3. Scalable and adaptable
4. Urban and commuter services included
5. Seamless functionality – “single system”
6. Planning for all modes
13
THREE MAIN QUESTIONS
Organization: How will our region organize to develop and operate the system?
Funding: How will we pay for the system over the long term?
System: How will high capacity transit components in CAMPO 2035 plan work as a system?
Transportation Needs
and Opportuniti
es
Project Details
System: Corridors and Gaps
System Optimizati
on
Funding
Organization
All answered…at the system level
14
PROJECT CONNECT: CAPITAL METRO PERSPECTIVE
Lessons Learned:
- Recognition that partnerships are
only way to realize vision of regional
transit system
- ‘Leap of faith’ to actively study/plan
beyond jurisdictional boundary
- Compromise and trade-offs required,
but not always welcomed
- Funding remains as a major challenge
15
PROJECT CONNECT: CITY OF AUSTIN PERSPECTIVE
Lessons Learned:
• Citizens do not understand who is
responsible for services
• Public Agencies must continuously
work on their relationships and
develop mechanisms to resolve
conflicts
• City shaping or serving current riders
16
• CAMPO subcommittee• Primary stakeholder group in the Project Connect process • 26 meetings over past 18
months!• Role: Evaluate and provide input
on a regional high-capacity transit plan for Central Texas
TRANSIT WORKING GROUP
Lessons Learned:
- Engage key elected and stakeholders early
and often
- People support what they help create
- Simplifying complexity is hard work- needs
to be done carefully
- Be mindful not to let ‘the tail wag the dog’
17
PROJECT CONNECT SUMMARY
Lessons Learned:
- Partnerships are hard work
- Coordination meetings essential, despite
the pain
- Personalities, not just inter-jurisdictional
differences, can be the make or break
element
- Open dialogue is critical…but not always
what happened
- Maintaining momentum post-study
essential for long-term success
18
Questions and Discussion
Rob Spiller, P.E.DirectorCity of Austin Transportation Department
Javier A. Argüello, Assoc. AIA, CNU-ADirector Long Range PlanningCapital Metro