Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Statement 1977/04/05 Item 06CITY OF CHULA VISTA COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT ITEM NO 6 FOR MEETING OF: 4/5/77 ITEM TITLE: Resolution 8567: Establishing Policies for Guideway Transit Alignment in Chula Vista SUBMITTED BY~ Director of Public Works/City Engineer ~/ ITEM EXPLANATION The. Metoropolitan Transit Development Board (MTDB) is charged with the planning and construction of fixed guideway transit in the San Diego area. In pursuing this charge they have recently issued two reports prepared by T. H. Lipscomb, the Consultant, outlining possible fixed guideway align- ments in the San Diego region. The MTDB has also adopted a set of princi- ples regarding study of design and transit development for the San Diego region. Since the proposed alignment will go through Chula Vista, it is Staff's recommendation that the City Council adopt policies relative to the align- ment in Chula Vista and forward those policies to the MTDB. The attached report was prepared by David Connor, Transit Coordinator, Chairman; Norm Williams, Assistant Director of Planning; and Gary Hansen, Traffic Engineer. This report discusses the MTDB policies and provides background relative to the existing transit stance of the MTDB. It also explores, in a brief way, potential or possible alignments in the City of Chula Vista and discusses their relative merits and demerits. Policy recommendations for the City Council are ultimately set forth. Since the MTDB is expected to select the "most feasible" alignment at its April 11, 1977 meeting, it is recommended that the City Council adopt the policy recommendations contained in the report by Resolution and that the recommendations be forwarded immediately to the MTDB. tXNltil 15 X11 1 Al~l-itU Agreement Resolution x Ordinance Plat Other x Environmental Document; Attached Submitted on Report STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Resolution. BOARD/ COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION COUNCIL ACTION Approved as amended. Form A-113 (Rev 5 - March 17, 1977 File No. DY 005 TO: Bill Robens FROM: Fixed Guideway Transit Policy Committee SUBJECT: Guideway Transit Alignments in Chula Vista BACKGROUND MTDB Policy At its December 27, 1976 meeting, the Metropolitan Transit Develop- ment Board (MTDB) adopted a set of principles regarding the study and design of guideway transit for the San Diego region. The adopted principles were: • The first increment should extend a long distance and offer high speed operation; • It should be designed so its capital cost would be low; • Construction should be primarily at-grade with mostly exclusive rights of way; • The operating deficits should be minimized; and • The impact on residential growth should be examined in detail. The first three principles adopted by the Board have effectively narrowed the range of candidate corridors to those which exhibit feasibility identified by low cost and low environmental impact. In application this has essentially limited the candidate corridors to those within existing public transportation rights of way (i.e., freeways, railroads, etc.); alignments which would traverse private property would be costly and would have high impact in terms of per- sonal and business relocation. T. H. Lipscomb, consultant to the MTDB, has issued two reports which outline possible fixed guideway alignments within the San Diego region. In a report entitled "Most Feasible First Increment Guideway for San Diego - a First Approximation," Mr. Lipscomb presents a plan for a first increment guideway which would have a north/south alignment 21 miles in length extending from University City to Chula Vista. In this plan, Mr. Lipscomb identifies use of the existing railroad and highway alignments for the guideway transit system. This proposal would locate the guideway transit system along the Interstate 5/SD&AE Railroad corridor in Chula Vista. -2- Lipscomb's work was intended to provide guidance to the Board and the MTDB staff in identifying the most feasible corridor for subsequent study and preliminary engineering. The present MTDB staff schedule is to present alternative alignment data to the Board at its March 28, 1977 meeting. Selection of the "most feasible" alignment by the Board is expected at its April 11, 1977 meeting. Thereafter, the MTDB will move swiftly to hire a consultant and complete preliminary engineer- ing and environmental analyses of the selected alignment in order to reach a "go/no-go" decision by July, 1978. Chula Vista Poli If the City of Chula Vista desires to have meaningful, substantive input regarding the nature and location of guideway transit within its boundaries, it must establish policy positions in the immediate future so that the MTDB can consider the City's input in its delibera- tions. Once the Board adopts a single alignment for engineering study, the major questions which will then be answered are design decisions. Based on recent failures to approve rapid transit proposals in Cali- fornia, it may be concluded that fixed guideway transit will not be built in this area in the near future. If, however, guideway transit is approved and built in San Diego, the decisions and planning presently being conducted by the MTDB will be the basis of the project. Accord- ingly, it is in the City's best interest to adopt policies now to guide future planning/design decisions at the staff level. RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Adopt, by resolution, the conclusions of this report as the policy guidelines for fixed guideway transit in Chula Vista. 2. Request that the MTDB evaluate a Fifth Avenue (Chula Vista) align- ment during preliminary engineering of the project. DISCUSSION Previous studies performed by the County of San Diego and transpor- tation consultants have investigated the feasibility of alternative corridors for guideway transit. Exhibit A illustrates three alter- native transit alignments in relation to Chula Vista activity centers. Within Chula Vista the alternative alignments include the Interstate 5 corridor; a downtown corridor, presumably in the vicinity of Fifth Avenue; and the Interstate 805 corridor. In evaluating these corri- dors, the criteria can be grouped into three major sections: • Cost; • Environmental impact; and • Ridership potential. For the most part, the three alternative alignments can be classified relative to these three criteria. The Interstate 5 alignment can best be described as the "least" alternative. This is, it has the ppp W J Q < V = H 8 W Q m Z x O K a a X O < W ~, /~ V / = ¢ {~ W C ~ 1- Z ~ W ~ O N ~- Z F 7 ~ H = I W W O U Z W S ~ < mH F<,W V!~ ~ Q W O < y~j O N Z ` ~ O 8 ~ W y U < F N J ~ W ~- W N W Z >O ` J W t- ¢ ~ Y ~ c~ O F- < x W F W 0 J 7N <1<- O N US = U N H O ~ O UO O O O O O O O Z F" Q O N C N W 1' < C CU ~W C MW- U ' ~ H Q fy LL 0 ~ Z ~ J < a f W ~ ~ W U ~ > V~ a 3r oz J ~ a o U a d o = Z W F- O 7 0 Q 2 W K a O O = _J d o N > U ~ N > FW -d-d yOJ ~W = J < W z N ~ N > d . W ~ J W N QQ i 2 W SW V' < = - a / 0 0 0 00 0 0 - ,~- , - - - moo- -f~ ~"j'= ~~~ ~. 10 Q 'w • t ~ 9 ~o~o '~s - 3 - least cost, the least negative impact, and the least ridership po- tential. The downtown corridor can best be described as the "most" alternative. That is, it has the most cost, the most negative impact and the most ridership potential. The Interstate 805 alignment lies somewhere within the range of the other two and is adjacent to Chula Vista's major growth area. Table 1 qualitatively summarizes each alignment's relative impact based on each of ten evaluation criteria. Based on the summary in Table 1, three general conclusions can be reached: • The I-5/SD&AE alignment is most suitable if the City adopts a "minimum impact" policy. This alternative most closely complies with the MTDB principles; it would have minimal cost and construction impacts; and has the lowest service and rider- ship potential and accordingly, the least potential benefit to Chula Vista. • The I-805 alignment is a minimum construction impact alter- native and is most suitable if the City adopts a policy to use guideway transit as a development tool in the City's growth areas. This alternative would not provide direct service to Chula Vista commerce, but can be linked to down- town and residential areas by feeder bus and it is located near the City's growth areas. An I-805 alignment complies with the MTDB's design principles and is being considered by MTDB staff. • A downtown alignment is most suitable if the City adopts a policy to use guideway transit as a redevelopment tool. This alternative is contrary to the MTDB's adopted low-cost/ low-impact principles; it is not among the alternatives presently being considered by the MTDB staff. The downtown alignment has the highest service/ridership potential and the greatest opportunity for joint development (e.g., at Chula Vista Shopping Center). It also has the greatest po- tential benefit to the City. MTDB staff currently estimates the cost of the project to be approxi- mately $380 million (1975 dollars; minimum cost proposal). While low capital cost is a proper principal project objective, the value of short-term capital cost savings must be weighed against the long- term operating deficits on a low ridership line. The objective of low capital cost should not override cost-effectiveness considera- tions in selecting an alignment for detailed study. The MTDB staff has estimated that a segment of the Interstate 5 align- ment, from San Ysidro to downtown San Diego, would cost approximately $217 million. Comparable costs for I-805 alignments range from $252 million to $277 million. A downtown Chula Vista alignment could cost more, but has not been estimated by the MTDB. If a segment is to be constructed in Chula Vista, the cost-effectiveness of each alter- native should be evaluated to maximize the return on the investment. TABLE 1 COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVE FIXED GUIDEWAY ALIGNMENTS IN CHULA VISTA(1) Alternative Alignment Fifth Criteria I-5 Avenue I-805 Construction Cost Low High Middle Property Acquisition Low High Low Aesthetic Impact Low High Middle Existing land use dislocations: Right of Way Low High Low Station(s) Middle Low Low Patronage Potential Low High Low Auto Access: North/South Good Fair Good East/West Poor Fair Fair Bus Access Poor Good Fair Service to Chula Vista Activity Centers Poor Good Poor Service to Chula Vista Residential Areas Poor Good Fair Joint Development Potential Poor Good Fair (1) Based on present development/land use conditions. - 4 - If an end-of-line station were located in Chula Vista, the following additional impacts must be considered: o There would be land required for a turnaround track; o The land area required for parking would be larger than normal, since the station would serve all the area south of Chula Vista; o City streets would be more heavily impacted by both automobiles and buses accessing the station; o Bus service from the border would be diverted to servicing the transit station, away from the commercial areas in Chula Vista. CONCLUSIONS 1) The City should support a fixed guideway transit which maximizes: o transit service to Chula Vista's commercial areas; o transportation opportunities for Chula Vistans; and o the potential for redevelopment/joint development in down- town Chula Vista. 2) The City should oppose termination of the transit line within the City limits. DLC:et Attachment cc: Jim Peterson John Lippitt P.S. At a March 17, 1977 meeting of the Technical Advisory Committee, it was approved that the Committee recommend to the MTDB that two corridors be considered for further engineering study. The two corridors recommended by the TAC were E1 Cajon to the San Diego CBD via Interstate 8 and the San Diego CBD to the Sweetwater Valley via the Interstate 5/SD&AE alignment. The second recommendation would be the Interstate 5 interim terminal north of Chula Vista in the Sweetwater Valley.