The URL can be used to link to this page

R2007-203 2007-12-17RESOLUTION NO. R2007-203 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PEARLAND, TEXAS, AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER OR HIS DESIGNEE TO ENTER INTO A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITH THE METROPOLITAN TRANSIT AUTHORITY OF HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PEARLAND, TEXAS: Section 1. That City Manager or his designee is hereby authorized to enter into a Memorandum of Understanding, with The Metropolitan Transit Authority of Harris County ("METRO"), providing for cooperation in s~;curing a temporary site for Park and Ride services, authorizing City staff to cooperate with the Houston Galveston Area Council ("HGAC") in applying for a Pilot Project in the event a temporary site is secured as well as cooperation in applying for federal capital funds for the construction of a permanent facility, and providing for cooperation with METRO to secure and develop a permanent location for a Park and Ride facility. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this the 17"' day o tuber, A.D., 2007. !~ ,•~'Q~yAFtl.;g~;• TOM REID =o``•~ ''~,.~: MAYOR °.>.; SF-; X? ~: ATTEST: '"'' ~~~ Y NG RFIIV ~ , MC Y S RETARY APPROVED AS TO FORM: DARRIN M. COKER CITY ATTORNEY INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF PEARLAND FOR AN EXTRATERRITORIAL PARK AND RIDE FACILITY THE STATE OF TEXAS § COUNTY OF HARRIS § COUNTY OF BRAZORIA § This Agreement made and entered into by and between the City of Pearland, a home rule municipal corporation under the laws of the State of Texas, hereinafter called "City" and the Metropolitan Transit Authority of Harris.County, Texas, a metropolitan transit authority under the laws ofthe State of Texas,hereinafter called "METRO." WITNESSETH WHEREAS, METRO and the City find that the operation of a park and ride facility will facilitate the provision of transportation services within the City and METRO;and WHEREAS, the. City has agreed to contract-with METRO for the operation of the Pearland.Park and Ride Facility.(the "Facility") within the corporate limits of the City; and, WHEREAS, METRO and the City each have legal authority to provide public transportation services under Texas law; and, WHEREAS, the City and METRO are empowered to cooperate and contract with other governmental entities to provide governmental services;and, WHEREAS, Section 451.056(a)(2) of the Transportation Code authorizes METRO to contract with the City for public transportation services outside of the authority; and, WHEREAS, the City and METRO have agreed to the provision of these governmental services in accordance with the terms,rights and duties set forth in this agreement. II:DATA\Pcarland Park&Ride 7 Page 1 12/6/2007 • NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the mutual covenants, agreements and benefits to the parties herein named, it is agreed as follows: ARTICLE 1. 1.1. Scope of Agreement. This Agreement specifies the terms and conditions under which METRO will provide governmental transportation services at the Facility. The parties agree that each will cooperate and coordinate with the. other in all activities covered by this Agreement and any supplemental agreements hereto. 1.2. Definitions. For the purpose of this Agreement, the following terms shall have the meanings set forth below: 1.2.1. "METRO" means the Metropolitan Transit Authority of Harris County,Texas. 1.2:2. "City" means the City of Pearland, Texas, a Texas home-rule. municipal corporation. 1.2.3. "City Council" means the City Council, the governing body of the City of Pearland,Texas. 1.2.4. "Facility" shall mean the Pearland Park and Ride Facility described in.Exhibit A, attached hereto and made a part of this Agreement. ARTICLE 2. METRO's Obligation to"Provide Services. 2.1. METRO agrees to operate and provide park and ride service to and from the Facility to the METRO.Transit Systems METRO will construct, or provide for the:construction, of a Pearland:Park & Ride Facility at State Highway 288 and FM 518 in the city of.Pearland. Pending,construction of the Facility, METRO will:begin initial transit services at a designated location of the parking lot at Silverlake Village Shopping Center(Cinemark Theater)in the.city H:DATA\Pcarland.Park Ride Lot 7 Page 2 12/62007 of Pearland. Patrons will board and de-board transit vehicles owned and operated by METRO for transportation to and from destinations within the METRO service.area. 2.2. METRO agrees to operate the Facility, including the initial service at the Silverlake Village Shopping Center (Cinemark Theater) location and provide necessary transit vehicles. Times for operation of the service will be determined by METRO based on service planning. METRO.will determine the fares and routes for such service and will determine the kind and number of buses to be utilized for the service. ARTICLE 3. City Obligations 3.1. Each month this contract is in effect, the City agrees to pay for METRO's.public. transportation services within 30 days upon the receipt of an invoice from METRO in the amounts and for the services described in Exhibit B. Tn compliance with Texas law,'the City agrees to make payment to METRO from current revenues then available to the'City. METRO's invoice for services shall include a description of the services provided and costs incurred by METRO.-inn providing-the services to the City under this Agreement. City agrees to pay net operating costs after receipt of fare revenue and not to exceed $35,700 per-month for the first twenty-four (24)Months. Monthly payments for the remaining period of this agreement-shall be calculated based on.METRO's system-wide cost per revenue hour for the services described.in. Exhibit (based on annual audited financial data) less the fare revenue. ARTICLE 4. Management of Services 4.1. Overall management and direction of this Agreement is assigned to' the , for METRO and , for the -City. These designated officials are authorized to approve and direct the provision of services under this H:DATA\Pearland Park Ride Lot 7 Page 3 12/6/2007 • Agreement, except where, by City Charter or state law, the City Council is'required to act on behalf of the City. These officials shall be responsible for coordinating all aspects of their employer's work in-prop%iding the services. They shall ensure that the,services and the tasks related thereto are. completed expeditiously and economically, and shall be the contact persons through: whom METRO and the City shall communicate officially, and shall coordinate and expedite all actions relating to the City's and METRO's decision-making relating to the services. ARTICLE 5. Indemnification EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE PROVIDED IN THIS PARAGRAPH, THE CITY 'WILL BE SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR, AND SHALL INDEMNIFY, DEFEND AND HOLD HARMLESS METRO OF, FROM AND AGAINST ALL CLAIMS, DAMAGES, LAWSUITS, JUDGMENTS, COSTS, ATTORNEYS FEES AND EXPENSES, INCLUDING LOSSES OR DAMAGES TO THE CITY OR METRO, AND INCLUDING ANY ACTUAL OR.ALLEGED JOINT OR CONCURRENT NEGLIGENT ACTS OR OMISSIONS OF METRO, ITS OFFICIALS, OFFICERS OR EMPLOYEES (IN BOTH THEIR PUBLIC AND PRIVATE CAPACITIES), AND ANY OTHER PERSON OR ENTITY,.ARISING OUT OF OR AS A RESULT OF OPERATION OR MAINTENANCE OF METRO VEHICLES UNDER THIS: AGREEMENT. NOTWITHSTANDING THE FOREGOING, THE CITY'S OBLIGATIONS SHALL NOT INCLUDE INDEMNIFYING METRO WHERE DAMAGES OR LOSS RESULT FROM THE ACTUAL SOLE NEGLIGENT ACTS OF METRO, ITS OFFICERS OR.EMPLOYEES OR WHERE METRO, 'ITS OFFICERS OR EMPLOYEES ARE GROSSLY NEGLIGENT AND THE CITY'S OFFICERS, EMPLOYEES OR CONTRACTORS ARE NOT GROSSLY NEGLIGENT. IN THE EVENT THAT IN A MATTER INCLUDED ABOVE, METRO, OR ANY OF ITS OFFICERS OR EMPLOYEES ARE NAMED AS A GROSSLY NEGLIGENT DEFENDANT, OR THE CITY IMPLEAD.S METRO, OR ANY OF ITS OFFICERS OR EMPLOYEES AS A GROSSLY NEGLIGENT DEFENDANT, AND THE COURT (OR JURY) WITH JURISDICTION OVER THE MATTER DETERMINES METRO, ITS OFFICERS OR EMPLOYEES ARE NOT GROSSLY NEGLIGENT, OR THAT BOTH METRO (OR ITS OFFICERS, EMPLOYEES OR CONTRACTORS).AND THE CITY (OR ITS OFFICERS OR EMPLOYEES) WERE GROSSLY NEGLIGENT, THE. CITY, IN ADDITION TO THE INDEMNIFICATION PROVIDED FOR ABOVE, WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE PAYMENT OF METRO'S ATTORNEYS FEES AND REASONABLE EXPENSES IN THE DEFENSE OF METRO,ITS OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES IN THE MATTER. I-I:DATASPcarland Park Ride Lot 7 Page 4 12/6/2007 THE PROVISIONS OF THIS SECTION ARE SOLELY FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE CITY AND METRO, AND THEIR INDEMNIFIED OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES, AND NOT INTENDED TO CREATE OR GRANT ANY RIGHTS, CONTRACTUAL OR OTHERWISE, TO ANY OTHER ENTITY OR PERSON. ARTICLE 6. Termination and Default 6.1. Termination by METRO or the City. Notwithstanding any other provision,of this Agreement, either METRO or the City may,in its sole discretion,terminate the provisions of services under this Agreement, if it determines that it is in its best interest to do so. The City agrees to pay METRO for the cost of the governmental services provided under this Agreement to the time that either METRO or the City terminates this Agreement. 6.2. Notice of Default, 6.2.1. The City or METRO shall be deemed in default under this Agreement if the City or METRO in any material respect fails to perform,observe or comply with any of its;covenants, agreements or obligation, or breaches or violates any of its representations contained in this Agreement. 6.2.2. Before any failure of either the City or METRO shall be deemed,to be a breach of this Agreement, the party claiming such failure shall notify, in writing, the party alleged to have failed to perform, of the,alleged failure and shall demand the party cure the default within thirty (30) calendar days. If the allegedly failing party has not cured the default, that party will be in default of this Agreement,unless the City and METRO agree to extend time for cure. ARTICLE 7.- Term The initial term of this Agreement shall be one year from the date of this Agreement is executed and delivered by both parties; and this Agreement shall be thereafter automatically renewed for up to additional terms of one year each, unless not less than 90 days before the 1-1:DATA\Peariand Park Ride.Lot 7 Page 5 .12/612007' end of the then-current term of this Agreement, the City Council or the METRO Board of Directors acts to terminate this Agreement ARTICLE8. Miscellaneous 8.1. Approvals, Further Documents. Where this Agreement requires approval, consent, permission, agreement, or authorization by either party, such approval, consent, permission, agreement or authorization shall not be unreasonably withheld nor delayed. 8.2. The parties agree to execute such further doCuments, agreements, instruments and notices as may be necessary or appropriate to effectuate_the purposes of this agreement. 8.3. Maintenance af Records. The City and METRO shall maintain records to show actual time involved in the provision of the services, and the cost incurred for the period of time specified. To the extent applicable to the service, the City and METRO shall cooperate in good faith to provide records satisfactory to the federal government. 8.4. Audit and Inspection Records. The City and METRO shall permit the authorized representatives,ofMETRO,the City,the State of Texas and the federal government to- inspect ,and:audit all data and records of METRO and the City relating to their performances Under this Agteement. City representatives may perforth, or have performed, an audit Of' METRO's books and records. METRO shall keep its books, and records available for this putpose for at least four(4)years after this Agreement terminates. 8.5. Notices. Any notices required or permitted to be given under the terms of this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be deemed to be given as of the time of hand delivery to the addresses set forth below, or five (5) days after deposit in the Unites States mail, postage prepaid,by registered or certified mail,return receipt requested,addressed as follows: 14;DATA1Pcarland Park Ride Lot 7 Page 6 12/62007 To the City: The City of Pentland,Texas Attention: To METRO: Metropolitan Transit Authority of Harris County,Texas 1900 Main Street Houston;Texas 77002 If by U.S. Mail: P.O:Box 61429 Houston,Texas 77208-1429 8.6. Waiver.. The failure of any party at any time or times.to require performance of any provision hereof shall in no manner affect the right at a later time to enforce the same. No waiver of any party of any condition, or of any breach of any term, covenant, representation or warranty;contained herein, in any;one or more instances, shall- be deemed to be constructed a. further or continuing waiver of any such condition or breach or waiver of any other condition or of any breach,of any other term,;covenant,representation or warranty. Entire Agreement. This Agreement contains the entire agreement of the parties. with regard to the matters addressed herein. This Agreement may not be amended, Modified, superseded pr canceled, nor may any of the terms, covenants, representations, warranties or conditions be waived except by written instrument executed by the party against which such amendment,modification,supersedure, cancellation or waiver is to be:charged. 8.8. Force Majeure. Neither party shall be held liable for any loss or damage due to delay or failure'in performance of any part of this Agreement from any cause beyond its control and without it fault or negligence, which causes may include acts of God, acts of civil or military authority, government regulations(except those promulgated by the party seeking the benefit of H:DATAU'earland Park Ride Lot 7 Page 7 12/6/2007 this provision), embargoes, epidemics, war, terrorist acts, riots, insurrections, fires, explosions, earthquakes, nuclear accidents, floods, strikes, power blackouts, other major environmental disturbances or unusually severe weather conditions. 8.9. Governing .Law.. This Agreement shall be constructed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of Texas. Any legal action to enforce the terms of this Agreement shall be brought in Harris County,Texas. 8.10. Headings.: Headings and captions contained herein are inserted for convenience and of reference only, and are riot deemed part of or to be Used in constructing this Agreement._ 8.11. Survival. Each party shall remain obligated to other party under all clauses of this Agreement that expressly or by their nature extend beyond the expiration or termination of this Agreement, including the indemnification_obligation under Article 5 of this Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused the Agreement to be executed as of the date first"written above: IN TESTIMONY OF WHICH,this Agreement, in duplicate originals,each having equal force has:been executed_on behalf of'the parties hereto as follows: a: It has on the day of , been executed on behalf of the City by pursuant to a of the City Councll. authorizing such execution. b. It has on the _day of , ., been executed on behalf of METRO. by , and attested by its Assistant Secretary, pursuant to the Resolution of its Board of Directors authorizing such execution. H:DATA\Pearland Part:Ride Lot 7 Page 8 12/6/2007 City of Pearland, Texas Metropolitan Transit Authority of Harris County,Texas By: By: Frank J. Wilson Attest: President& Chief Executive Officer City Secretary Executed for and on behalf of the Metropolitan Transit Authority pursuant.to Resolution No. the.Board of Directors passed on the day of. _ , , and on file in the office of the Assistant Secretary of METRO Attest: Assistant Secretary APPROVED: Paula J.Alexander General Counsel Louise T.Richman Chief Financial Officer H:DATA\Pearland Park Ride Lot 7 Page 9 12/6/2007 PEARLANDITMC PARK &.RIDE (Revised September 10,2007) Implementation Date Jan-08 Type of Service Weekday Only Peak Buses 7 Type of Bus 45'Suburban Revenue Hours per day 33 400,600- space surface Additional Spaces lot FY08 FY09 Total Revenue.Hours 5,742 8,382 COSTS Total Variable Costs $ 405,615 $ 592,104 P&R.Capital Lease (1) $ 90,000 ) $ 402,000 (2) $ 1.00,500 TOTAL DOLLARS $ 596,115 $ 994,104 REVENUE Proposed Ridership Increases in Boardings (4) 108`,225, (4) 179,580 Fares©$3.15(90%of$3.50) $ 340,909 5 565,677 NET OPERATING COSTS $ 255,206 $ 428,427 (1)Proposed P&R Lease Temporary Lot-6 Months @$15,000 (2) Proposed P&R.Lease-Permanent Lot.-3 Months @$33,500 35 7as • (3)Proposed P&R Lease-12 months at$33,500 (4) Based on service:plan proposed by Operations Planing as of 8/3/07,approximately 300per day parking at thstemporary'lot,,approxlmatly 350 per day parking at the permanent lot. 9/18/2007 G:1Pearland-Real.Estate 2 Sep 10 2007 Community Services City of Pearland Memo To: Bill Eisen,City Manager Mayor and City Council From: Nicholas J. Finan,Assistant City Manager CC: Darrin Coker,Claire Manthei Date: December 7,2007 Re: Metro's Park and Ride Proposal City Council had directed staff to work with HGAC to understand the proposals submitted by Metro and Connect Transportation in the Spring of 2007. John Sedlak of Metro sent a request and new figures for the city to accept a lesser lease agreement of roughly$35,000 per month for the remainder of fiscal year 2007/2008 with a temporary Park and Ride in the parking lot of the movie theater in Sliver Lake in September. Council directed staff to continue to work with HGAC. Metro's September proposal was anticipated to begin in January of 2008 and cost the city roughly$255,000 for the remainder of the fiscal year and then in year two cost the city roughly$455,000 for a full year. The proposal did not include any federal assistance or third party participants that may be able to contribute. With respect to the latest proposal provided on December 6th,here are some very preliminary comments by Mr.Eisen and staff and Metro has responded in blue: 1) Section 2.1 —Should state the Park and Ride Facility should be noted to be at or near one mile south of Broadway on Business Center Drive and not SH288 and FM 518. Also,it should be noted within that same section that the Cinemark Theater is located with the City's ETJ not city limits. At the end of the section it should state that Patrons will also board and deboard in the Pearland area. That's fine, it can be more clearly defined. Cinemark in ETJ, noted. 2) Does City Council feel it should at least have an opportunity to comment on fares or routes? Comment on fares and route is fine and will be taken into consideration, but Metro would reserve the right to make decisions on routes and fares. 3) Should a Section 2.3 be added that has Metro obligated to assist the City in obtaining federal grants,and outside financial assistance?Will definitely assist in every way possible, but cannot be obligated for the funds. 4) Should a Section 3.2 be added that the primary responsibility to obtain federal assistance or other outside financial assistance is the city's? We may need to discuss this, but I see it as a mutual effort. 1 5) Section 3.1 either needs to add a system-wide exhibit and formula for calculating or another way would be when requested and justified based upon cost of service analysis a CPI rule could be put in place.We thought about using CPI, and would have preferred that, however to use CPI, a "baseline"is needed, and our formula is more fluid. Operations costs will change every year or few years and the amount from the farebox will vary(and increase),therefore, lack of a firm baseline. 6) Also,within that section there needs to be a time frame that the city has to review the increase before it goes into effect,such as 45 to 60 days or possibly the 90 days mentioned prior to the automatic renewal. Can include a timeframe for review if you like. 7) Section 6.1 should state some sort of time frame for notice of termination from either Metro or the City. As mentioned in a voicemail to Nick,the termination and term sections were held over from a previous version where we would own the land.Obviously if we're tied to a long-term lease with NewQuest,we would need a similar commitment from the City. I will replace the term with 30 years, and ask our senior management about a termination clause. 8) Article 7 needs to outline the number of terms,but it seems no matter what the term is,it is stated it is still an annual contract. (see above)cannot be an annual contract. 9) A section needs to be added that allows the city to survey the riders to determine satisfaction,fares, where they are from,where they are going,and other questions that would assist the city determine an appropriate participation level. We can work with you on survey of riders and other market info. 10) It appears this is a turn-key proposal with no additional funding requested for security,marketing, increase in service levels,additional or upgraded capital. Would like confirmation. No additional funding requested for marketing. No anticipated funding for security. Our Metro Police need to meet with City and County law enforcement to coordinate efforts, but it is not expected to be a funding issue.There would be an increase to the City for increased bus service. However,the level of bus service would not increase unless the ridership needs indicate more service is justified. Perhaps the most important thing to remember here, is based on the service and financial model,we could only add one or two more trips before we've reached a maximum level of service equaling the number of cars parked at the facility, so there is a very fixed ceiling on capacity. On numbers 7, 8, and 10 staff will continue to work with Metro before Monday's meeting. Based upon Metro's previous proposal and comments from HGAC of the likelihood of obtaining at least contributions of 50%from the federal government to assist in covering the city's share,this proposal appears to be quite good. HGAC will be available to comment. The City budgeted$200,000 for this fiscal year. Should we obtain the federal assistance at 50%only for operations,that could bring the city's out of pocket down to roughly$127,500. Year two could be in the$214,000 range. There may be some capital participation,also which could affect the city's share also. Prior questions or concerns were: The Texas Medical Center is a beneficiary of the Park and Ride,could TMC or its hospitals or other employers contribute? This has been discussed with HGAC,and it has been determined that TMC and its employers contribute through fare reimbursement to its employers. The fare charged is the highest currently charged by Metro which typically bases fares on distances—this is a short ride and has no HOV access,so Metro feels the fare is quite high to help offset the City of Pearland's contribution. Silver Lake residents that were not citizens would benefit,could the county or other entity contribute? This needs to be explored,but the county has made no indication to provide financial commitment to commuter transit needs.It is not likely a MUD could contribute or that an HOA could provide enough support through its current fee structure. •Page 2 Manvel residents would benefit,could Manvel contribute? Would need to still be contacted and discussed. With federal assistance and Metro's discounting,does that offset contributions by outsiders? That is a question for city council to still decide. Metro feels that it has done a great deal in its contributions and fare and will assist in gaining federal assistance to give the city residents a great deal, but it would apply universally to all riders. Is the benefit of lessened congestion on SH288 for Pearland residents enough for the city to contribute to a Park and Ride that included non-residents? After the Park and Ride is up and running,could the City of Pearland still seek outside assistance besides federal funds? Yes. Metro has no problem with other entities assisting on the city's share of the cost.Metro is even willing to assist the City in gaining the financial support of other entities. •Page 3 Transportation Policy Council For the Houston-Galveston Transportation Management Area tU f = 3555 Timmons Lane P.O.Box 22777 Telephone:713.627.3200 /- r Houston,Texas 77027 Houston,Texas 77227-2777 Fax:713.993.4508 December 7, 2007 Mr. Bill Eisen City Manager City of Pearland 3519 Liberty Drive Pearland, Texas 77581 RE:Analysis of Proposed Park and Ride Services to the Texas Medical Center Dear Mr. Eisen: Please find enclosed an assessment performed by H-GAC staff of three possible Park and Ride locations within the SH 288 corridor. This report analyzes the potential for each location to attract transit riders as well as their ability to support complementary development within Pearland and future, locally destined transit services. In addition, the City of Pearland requested my review of two unsolicited proposals to develop and operate a Park and Ride service from Pearland to the Texas Medical Center. Based on my review and conversations with City of Pearland staff, I wish to make the following observations and recommendations: - The potential ridership for Park and Ride transit service appears to be conservatively estimated by both METRO and Connect Transportation (the Connect estimate matches the METRO estimate in 2010). Any agreement with the City and a transit provider should indicate if and how additional bus service and/or expansion of parking spaces will be considered. - The proposed operating cost of transit services is significantly less per bus hour for METRO than that shown by Connect Transportation. METRO has also proposed (initially) higher transit fares. As a consequence, METRO's Operating Revenue is almost equal to its operating cost(without lease payments). - Cost for construction and operation of a Park and Ride facility is highly dependent on the cost of land, cost to develop site access, use of surface versus multi-level parking and the need for environmental mitigation. As a consequence there is no direct comparison possible between the Connect and METRO costs for a parking facility. - Capitalizing the Park and Ride facility costs would substantially reduce the net costs of the proposed transit service. However, no uncommitted federal transportation funding currently available would likely be commensurate with the costs for acquisition or construction of a Mr. Bill Eisen Page 2 of 2 Park and Ride lot of the size envisioned for Pearland. Moreover, use of federal funds for such a purpose would require additional federal approvals for environmental impact analysis of potential sites, site selection, design, right of way acquisition, etc. Receipt of federal transit funds also carries additional requirements for certification as a transit grant recipient. Should the City desire to develop a publicly owned Park and Ride facility, I strongly encourage working in partnership with an existing transit grant recipient and service provider certified to receive federal transit funds and experienced in their use for the development of capital projects. - It is likely that federal funding assistance could be available for both the near term (1 to 3 years)and long term (4 or more years)operation of Park and Ride service (including lease costs for the parking lot). Both H-GAC (through its Transportation Policy Council)and Connect Transportation have short term federal funding for which Park and Ride expenses incurred by Pearland could qualify for reimbursement. Federal rules limit the eligibility of federal assistance (generally up to 80%for capital costs and up to 50%for operating costs). Other requirements for a funding award must also be met. - Neither proposal explicitly described marketing and community outreach efforts necessary for successful start up of new transit services. Responsibility for security at a Park and Ride should also be identified. Both of these activities merit inclusion in a final agreement. Provision of transit services in a community can yield many benefits by improving access to job opportunities to the citizens of Pearland as well as enhancing the City's ability to attract new employers. However, it initiates a potentially significant, long term commitment of scarce public resources. Therefore, H-GAC is pleased to support you in your consideration of transit services now and in the future. Sincerely, qe eq Alan C. Clark Director of Transportation Planning Cc: Hon. Tom Reed, Mayor, City of Pearland Mr. John Sedlak, METRO Mr. Nick Finan, Pearland Mr. Steve Flippo, METRO ACC City of Pearland Park and Ride Transit-Oriented Development Feasibility Study Executive Summary As the City of Pearland continues to grow,providing effective transportation alternatives will become increasingly important. To continue to position itself as a regional leader in quality of life,the City of Pearland is exploring the possibility.of implementing a Park and Ride facility at three potential locations along SH288, as shown in the map below. 8T ''Y` �ltriy g vtr�` ems.< . { ., 6+�' 3rez� rf V Y � � k *� , ' r,� This report analyzes the three ; XaT .` ��Il potential locations for the park and M, . , ,„ 411 ride facility, assessing the strengths r ,, ,� I,�e , � and weaknesses of each,as well as the a i `, } ps �'! i1 ' overall potential fortransit-oriented , 'f, 'q- , 'I,, �# development,reverse commuting,and �� , �r -, < 6. local transit service. { ,t E �y :� �r� - -:.'f. r s@. - aF` " ' 0 r' Location 1 is between South Spectrum �� y4'' �j Blvd and SH288. This location has �i �{ the advantage of being sited in the ' Waterlights District development "NA 7;;Sig5:71,''''::415;:::--,"7".7.:::N„. r,: $'1} 2j •' x�� rwhichhasthe largestnumberof st�� residential units planned of the three : � e> ff I�- locations increasing the likelihood of�;} ` `€ generating ridership within the site. !--1:4;?;":4-:.76',-;';:;:' . " -° ' t ° ',t "` The location has thedisadvantage of °: 7 :, �� `sf:;3 , . having low accessibility,both due to . "- the current lack of thru streets on the s f, � ,� ' n ': 3, ��; site, and its proximity to BWB. V 7 .V-1:4 f I . < Location 1 also has the disadvantage ..*.. a ' 14 `'f �" of being at the northern end of the park and ride market shed,meaning that its ridership potential maybe lower than the other sites, as potential users are more likely to utilize a facility that is closer to their origin than their destination. If location 1 is chosen for the Park and Ride site,it is recommended that the City work closely with the Waterlights District developer and the transit agency to help ensure proper accessibility to the site and potential coordination as a transit-oriented development. Location 2 is between Discovery Bay Dr. and Memorial Herman Dr. and SH288. This location has the advantage of being in the center of the SH288 corridor and proposed circulator route. The site is not in coordination with any proposed development,which is a disadvantage from a transit-oriented development perspective. An additional disadvantage is the sites current accessibility due to the lack of frontage roads along this section of 288. If location 2 is chosen for the Park and Ride site,it is recommended that the City develop a vision for future development surrounding the site to ensure that it will be compatible and coordinated with the transit. If location 2 is chosen the City should also work to increase accessibility to the site, either through frontage roads or continuation of Discovery Bay Dr. over SH288. Location 3 is at the intersection of FM 518 and SH288. 'This location has the advantage of being highly accessible for potential transit users, as FM518 is a major cross-street and has direct access from SH288. In addition,the location has the advantage of being coordinated with the Pearland Town Center development,which could provide additional ridership and transit-oriented development opportunities. This location has the disadvantage of being located at the southern end of current development along the SH288 corridor,which places it at the south of the potential circulator route. However, the southern location may be an advantage as far as maximizing ridership levels. If site 3 is chosen,the City should coordinate the facility with the Pearland Town Center developer and the transit agency to ensure that the facility is easily accessible and integrated with the development utilizing best design practices. City of Pearland Park and Ride Transit-Oriented Development Feasibility Study Background: The City of Pearland Texas is the fasting growing city in Brazoria County. The population has risen from 33,000 in 1990 to over 59,000 in 2000 and as of 2007 the population is over 81,000. This growth trend is projected to continue in the future with a projected population of close to 100,000 by 2011. Pearland's growth may be partly attributed to its location close to the Houston Central Business District and Texas Medical Center and the high quality of life its residents enjoy. As the city of Pearland and its neighbors continue to grow,providing effective transportation alternatives will become increasingly important. Although vanpools are used by residents traveling to the Texas Medical Center from SH288, currently there are no fixed route transit options for residents of Pearland or surrounding cities. The major transportation routes into the city, I-45 and SH288, are increasingly experiencing travel delays and heavy commutes. With continued population growth this congestion will likely continue to worsen, depreciating Pearland's high quality of life. To continue to position itself as a regional leader in quality of life,the City of Pearland is exploring the possibility of implementing a Park and Ride facility at three potential locations along SH 288. Park and Ride facilities range from surface parking lots to parking garages integrated into developments and providing amenities for users. The purpose of the proposed Park and Ride facility is to facilitate commuter bus service between the City of Pearland and the City of Houston. The Park and Ride facility would provide the first significant transit alternative for Pearland residents. Through this project,the City of Pearland has an opportunity to not only improve mobility and reduce congestion,but also to enhance the community through supporting land uses,public spaces, and quality design of transit supportive development. The 2002 Brazoria County Mobility Plan identified the 3,500 county residents who work in the Texas Medical Center and Houston Central Business District and commute daily using SH288 as the target population for park and ride services. The plan estimated demand for 67,900 average annual passenger trips with an estimated growth rate in ridership of 1.5%.1 If properly designed and located,the park and ride facility could result in the following benefits for the City of Pearland and surrounding developments: • Provide residents with alternatives to driving alone • Reduce vehicle miles traveled(VMT) and improve air quality • Stimulate new,transit supportive development • Enhance feasibility of local transit service 1 H-GAC Brazoria County Mobility Plan,2002 1 The Houston-Galveston Area Council has prepared this report to assess the feasibility of generating local transit ridership and transit supportive development surrounding the proposed Park and Ride locations. The report contains four major elements: • An alternatives analysis of the three proposed Park and Ride locations • A discussion of best practices design practices for park and ride facilities and transit-oriented development • An analysis of the reverse commute potential of the park and ride facility and • An analysis of the potential for local transit circulation. This report will be a valuable tool for the City to use in evaluating the Park and Ride proposals and in reviewing future developments around the selected Park and Ride site for transit compatibility. Location Alternatives Analysis: Correct siting of the park and ride facility is a critical variable in the success of the facility, affecting its potential ridership and transit-oriented development potential. The City of Pearland has identified three potential locations for the Park and Ride facility2: Location 1: South Spectrum Blvd and SH288 in conjunction with future `Waterlights District' development. Location 2: Between Discovery Bay Dr. and Memorial Herman Dr. and SH288 Location 3: Intersection of FM 518 and SH288 in conjunction with `Pearland Town —8 : ,iii i = Center' Development. �5. - xa i Map 1:Locations of proposed Park . and Ride Facilities in the City of . ° ' 't , o ,n ,, Pearland. * , - � ,'° ;r j . _ D The three proposed locations are all in c • die 4 �.'> i4 � K , t r 'Y .; p the same general vicinity: along the 1 ,', r .\: �K'c -' ' iii�+ Y i.,,': western side of SH288. ; g 4 l ..® j r Approximately two miles separate • . location 1 from location 3,with d i 4 � ..°<1` ti,'� - location 2 being approximately one ` ,� i; mile from each. Due to their v` �� r it ��;6 .�4 � � t =� � it:,:'-' proximity, several traditional metrics �'• :' �63,4-1 ' "' r itfor locating transit facilities will score .w� k. . u'' � the same for each of the sites. _, ' '' f' }k However, differences do still exist , , rib } zi.` S. •1 1 ;' S two €- yam. �3 .� " ' '' between the locations due to their "�� '� �' � � lit.:'.*�.�2E,, �'i��$"�� era, '' : ,� , accessibility, proposed development x�u - ',,aI densities, and other variables. RP A F" E " '`'' t` Park and Ride Siting Metrics: v A a ;� n. a{ i., t ,, ¢ gq �rt ; :ti, < A wide variety of factors should be 2 Specific addresses for proposed locations were unavailable at the time of this report 2 examined to determine the proper location for a park and ride facility. Table 1 summarizes the most commonly used siting metrics and the rating for each of the proposed park and ride facility locations. An equal sign denotes that there is no perceptible difference between the three locations. A positive sign denotes that the location is more favorable for a particular variable while a negative sign denotes that the location is less favorable for a particular variable. These metrics have not been weighted for importance. Table 1: Siting Metric Evaluation of Proposed Park and Ride Locations Metric Location#1 Location#2 Location#3 Visibility of facility Accessibility of facility — — + Surrounding density Immediate density + — — Distance to reach facility — + + Traffic volume Lot spacing Distance to destination — + + • Visibility of facility: Park and Ride facilities that are located at sites that have good visibility from the high-volume corridor that it serves tend to be more successful. The visibility increases awareness of the facility, as many potential patrons learn about the facility by driving past it. High visibility can also increase the perception of safety for users. All three proposed locations should receive good visibility from SH288,the primary corridor it will be serving. o Location 1: Location 1 may receive the additional benefit of being visible from BW8. Review of the Waterlights District development proposal finds a`proposed transit stop' on the concept design map located at the intersection of Kirby Drive and South Spectrum Blvd. The proposal references a future light rail extension, but such a project is not currently part of any adopted transit system plan. Location of the park and ride facility at Kirby and South Spectrum would be reduced in visibility from a location along SH288. o Location 2: Location 2, in comparison to locations 1 or 3, does not have the benefit of having a large cross-street to increase visibility. o Location 3: Location 3 has the benefit of being visible from FM518 as well as SH288. • Accessibility of facility from major roads and arterials: the accessibility of the routes that would be taken by potential transit rider to get to the facility will impact the ridership as riders are hesitant to traverse certain facilities and/or back- track to reach the transit destination. An additional accessibility concern that should be considered is the coordination of the facility location with any future high occupancy vehicle lanes/managed lanes proposed for SH288 and/or future rail expansion including potential commuter rail service along FM521. There are 3 also several proposed grade separations with SH288 that would facilitate access to the Park and Ride facility if it was located nearby. o Location 1: The presence of BW8 north of location 1 both increases and decreases the accessibility of Location 1. Although locating near the intersection of two major highways increases the potential reach of the facility, at the same time locating near a major interchange can be a deterrent as potential riders will have to maneuver multiple frontage roads and back-track to reach the facility. In addition, location 1 has the disadvantage of not currently having a complete street network north of Shadow Creek Parkway. Although internal streets may be developed in conjunction with the Waterlights District development, currently this site is inaccessible from SH288. o Location 2: Location 2, in comparison to locations 1 or 3, does not have the benefit of having a large cross-street to increase accessibility. As there is no exit on SH288 between location 1 and location 3, and there is no frontage road alternative along this stretch of SH288, all riders would have to exit at either FM518 or FM2234 and back track to reach the location. o Location 3: Location 3 has the benefit of being accessible from FM518 as well as SH288. As there is an exit from SH288 at FM518,riders traveling either north or south to reach the facility will be able to do so without back-tracking. The only deterrent to the accessibility of location 3 is the heavy congestion on FM518. • Origin and destination (Ridership catchment) density: Origin density refers to the number of residents located within the facilities market-shed area.Destination density refers to the density of employment at the destination of the park and ride facility. All three of the proposed locations have the same destination density as they will all be serving the same destination,Houston. The high concentration of employment in the destination is a positive indicator of the potential success of the facility. The market-shed area for the three proposed locations will not vary enough given their proximity to one another to make a perceptible difference in overall ridership figures. Any of the three proposed locations will draw riders from the same general catchment area which is depicted in Figure 1, below. 4 Figure 1: Park and Ride Facility market-shed area 85% Demand 50% CBD Demand P&R Lot 16.1 km (10 Miles) 4.0 km (2.5 Miles) • Immediate surrounding density: Although most users will access the park and ride facility by private vehicle, if properly designed and integrated,the park and ride may also be able to take advantage of riders accessing the facility by walking.Higher density in the immediate surrounding density within walking distance of the facility will increase transit ridership for the facility. Walking distance is measured as within 1/4 mile of the park and ride facility. o Location 1: The Waterlights district development has proposed 961 multi- family units in high density `residential towers' of six stories. Depending on the siting of the park and ride lot within the development,these units would all be within walking distance of the facility. In addition, the Promenade development, located directly north of the proposed Waterlights District,has planned 350 units which could also be within walking distance of the facility. o Location 2: Location 2, in comparison to locations 1 or 3, does not have the benefit of having a planned development with a residential component. The nearest major development to location 2 is Memorial Hermann hospital,which has low potential to generate walking origin trips. o Location 3: The Pearland Town Center has planned 300 residential units for the development,which depending on the siting of the units and the park and ride facility, could be within walking distance of the facility. • Distance required for user to reach facility: The majority of park and ride users come from within 5 miles of the facility and more than 80 percent travel less than 5 10 miles to the facility.3 The ridership catchment area for a suburban park and ride is often described as a parabola(see Figure 1, above)4.The catchment area, also referred to as the market shed, is the area around the facility from which most of the transit users will come. The numbers referenced in the diagram are from a study completed in the Seattle metropolitan area. Other studies have found slight differences in the distances but a remarkable similarity in the parabolic shape of the market shed. In the parabolic catchment area,the majority of riders fall within the area south of the park and ride facility as most users will not want to back track from their origin to their destination. Any of the three proposed locations will draw riders from the same general catchment area,with location 1 being at a slight disadvantage being the furthest north in the catchment area. • Distance of facility from destination: The exact proposed route of the bus lines is not available but the service will undoubtedly run between Pearland and the City of Houston, either to the medical center,the central business district, or both. Once in the city of Houston METRO Service Area,transit riders will be able to transfer to other routes and reach multiple destinations.The recommended distance from the destination to the park and rider facility is a minimum five miles and preferably greater than 10 miles. All three locations fall within the greater than ten mile range. In addition, since this will be the only available service in the area, it may be considered an end of the line facility,which tend to attract larger than average service areas for ridership. In general,the facility needs to be located closer to the user's origin than their destination to make the trip by transit worthwhile. This criteria is considered especially important for the first park and ride to locate within a particular corridor, such as the Pearland park and ride within the SH288 corridor. o As the farther the facility is from the user's origin than their destination, the less likely they will be to utilize it,the closer you site the facility to the destination(i.e.the more north on SH288 the location),the less likely that users will utilize the facility. Locations 2 and 3 thus have greater potential to serve those that will be traveling north to reach the facility, from Alvin or other nearby communities. It is unlikely that riders will travel south to the facilities as that would require back-tracking to reach the destination. • Traffic volume on adjacent facilities: Park and ride facilities that are located adjacent to heavily congested corridors experience stronger demand than in areas without similar congestion. All three of the proposed locations are along SH288, a corridor that is experiencing LOS F during peak periods. Corridors with an LOS or or lower appear to have the best potential for park and ride usage. Optimally the facility should be located in an area along the corridor directly before where the heaviest congestion occurs so users can obtain the benefit of 3 Turnbull,Katherine,and Richard Pratt,"Traveler Response to Transportation System Changes",Chapter 3—Park-and-Ride/Pool,(Transit Cooperative Research Program,Report 95,2004),pg.3-8 4 Spillar,Robert,Park-and-Ride Planning and Design Guidelines,(Parsons Brinkerhoff Quade and Douglas,Inc, 1997)Pg.61 6 avoiding the worst congestion. All three of the proposed locations score equally well on this criteria,being located along SH288 within a two mile span. • Lot Spacing: If there are multiple park and ride lots in the same vicinity the market sheds will overlap and each lot may experience decreased ridership. However, as this park and ride facility will be the only transit facility in the area the facility should not experience any lot spacing issues. In fact,the opposite issue may occur, as there are no transit facilities in a very large and populous surrounding area it is feasible that the market shed may be much larger than is generally accepted because there is such a limited supply of transit alternatives in the area. Transit-Oriented Development Potential: The policy framework for successful park and ride development exists within the City of Pearland's current planning and zoning ordinances, specifically the City's planned development zoning category. Locations 1 and 3 for the park and ride have gone through the planning process to be designated as planned development which provides the developer a deal of flexibility in the planning process and encourages development types such as mixed-use and transit-oriented development. In order to ensure that the development and the future transit are well integrated and achieve the city's larger vision and goals it is recommended that the city, developers, and transit agency work collaboratively and proactively throughout the planning process. This will help to ensure that the resulting transit service and surrounding development are well coordinated and that the economic, community, fiscal, and regional benefits of the transit are realized. A park and ride facility that is integrated with the development may be classified as transit-oriented or transit-supportive development. Transit-oriented development refers to a type of development, generally mixed-use and higher density,that is pedestrian friendly and is located with walking distance of a transit station or stop. Development around the park and ride facility will not achieve the objective of increasing transit usage unless it is transit friendly, meaning that it contains an appropriate mix of uses, is built at an appropriate density and provides a pedestrian friendly network of sidewalks, paths, and open spaces. Transit-oriented development has many potential benefits, including: • Increasing multi-modal activity, especially walking • Boosting transit ridership on nearby transit facility • Increasing property values • Providing a quality place for the community • Coordinating land use and transportation efficiently The link between transit and increased property values has been found to be a weaker correlation in suburban locations where other factors, such as highway access and unit cost,have a stronger influence on property values. However,the strong market conditions that exist in the SH288 corridor, as evidenced by the high level of current and 7 planned development, suggest that favorable market conditions exist with or without transit access. The TOD trade-off: Locating the park and ride facility in an area such as those proposed with supporting developments may increase use of the facility by providing convenient services to the transit users and by providing a built-in transit base through residential development. It has been noted that density around the park and ride location may also act as a negative factor in the facility's usage if it makes it harder or less convenient to access the facility or, if shared-parking exists, if there is a negative effect on parking demand. This may be viewed as a trade-off between maximizing walk-on transit ridership from higher development densities close to the park and ride facility and maximizing park and ride patronage with easy auto access and ample parking.5 However,this does not necessarily have to be a trade-off. If properly designed,using best practices for transit-oriented development and park and ride facility design,the park and ride facility should be able to accommodate both auto and pedestrian users. Best Design Practices: To realize the full transit-oriented development potential of the Park and Ride location sites, it is recommended that best practices in both design of development surrounding the Park and Ride and best practices in street design are followed in the chosen facility site. Best practices for transit-oriented development include techniques to maximize the success of the development in its integration with the transit environment, ensuring that the transition between transit and the development is seamless. Quality design can also help to maximize ridership by ensuring that the transit is accessible and desirable through the provision of streetscape and transit amenities such as landscaping, shade, lighting, and signage. Quality Design: Park and Ride facility designs vary greatly across the nation, reflecting differing design goals. At one end are facilities that are designed primarily as an extension of the highway network and work to serve vehicles in the most efficient manner, often at the expense of other transportation modes. At the other end are facilities whose design integrates them into the community, encouraging multi-modal access and community acceptance. The Pearland park and ride facility has the potential to create a multi-modal facility that is well-integrated into surrounding developments by creating an appropriate mix of land uses and designing for all modes. Land Use: The land uses surrounding the park and ride facility should include a mix of residential, commercial, and retail services. This mixing of uses can encourage linking of trips that might otherwise each require a separate vehicle trip. In addition,the mix of land uses will support different functions of the park and ride facility. For example, office uses may support a reverse commute function of the facility. Understanding the travel uses associated with different land uses is an essential component in designing a park and ride that will accomplish the goals of reducing single occupancy vehicle trips. The higher the intensity and diversity of land uses, the higher the opportunity for increased off-peak travel. Encouraging off-peak travel demand will help to support 5 Turnbull,Katherine,and Richard Pratt,"Traveler Response to Transportation System Changes",Chapter 3—Park-and-Ride/Pool,(Transit Cooperative Research Program,Report 95,2004),pg.3-34 8 transit beyond the commuter service. The SH288 corridor contains a mix of uses already and the developments proposed at locations 1 and 3 (the Waterlights District and the Pearland Town Center) contain a mix of higher-density uses appropriate for transit- oriented development. Provision and Design of Parking: The design of the park and ride parking can also influence the decision of a commuter to use the facility.The design can impact the distance of the walk from the parking space to the transit stop,the provision of amenities that influence safety, and internal and external circulation and access. The size of park and ride facilities can vary widely from only a few dedicated parking spaces to several thousand. Larger lots often feature parking garages and are served by frequent headway high capacity transit, such as light rail. Parking that dominates the landscape will not be pedestrian friendly and may detract from the overall pedestrian experience of patrons to the development center. Very large lots should be avoided in transit-oriented development park and ride facilities so that long walking distances will not be necessary. Designing for pedestrian access: Although the majority of riders will access the facility by vehicle, designing for pedestrians is a critical aspect of park and ride facilities because every person accessing the facility is a pedestrian at some point of their trip. It is important to accommodate the pedestrian both within the park and ride facility and in the surrounding land uses. Making access attractive for pedestrians even across large parking lots is an essential component of designing a park and ride facility. Transit riders prefer walking distances from their parked car to the transit stop of between 400 and 650 feet with a maximum distance of 1000 feet.6 !Walking Distance Under Normal Conditions Walking 4`f Distance G a c b ea V,� "z Under 300 m(750 ft.) >.r 300 m(750 ft.)Average Of r 1) - 152 to 305 m(500 to 1,000 ft.) 400 to 533 m(1,320 to 1,750 ft.or 1/4 to 1/3 mile) Source: Adapted from A&dde to Land Use and Public Trarsporradon,Sno-Tran,December 1989 6Turnbull,Katherine,and Richard Pratt,"Traveler Response to Transportation System Changes",Chapter 3 —Park-and-Ride/Pool,(Transit Cooperative Research Program,Report 95,2004),pg.3-58 9 In addition, as walking becomes the mode of choice to access the park and ride facility within 1/4 of a mile in suburban centers,the facility should be designed to be integrated with any residential component of the three sites to take advantage of these potential transit users. Image 1 below shows an example of a pedestrian path linking a development and a park and ride facility. t 1 Image 1: Pedestrian Path7 • „ ,„; • fCr.• ' ` • To minimize conflicts and increase safety • { .a pedestrian paths should be clearly distinguishable and marked with raised paths and sidewalks being preferable to walking aisles. Pedestrian flow from the parking area to the transit loading areas as well as from the adjacent land uses should be unimpeded and ter_ as direct as possible. Orienting parking stalls perpendicular to the transit boarding area allows pedestrians to use the aisles between `y.. parking stalls to walk directly to the boarding `Y area. Raised pedestrian paths between stall rows can also provide direct access to the • - transit boarding area.8 To minimize conflict and maximize efficiency, competing modes should be separated whenever possible,providing separate areas for transit vehicles, private vehicles, bicycle access,pedestrians, and drop off areas. This separate access can be accomplished through the provision of separate access driveways for buses and vehicles and a separate loading/unloading area for carpools or drop and ride activities. The graphic below demonstrates how a park and ride could be designed to separate uses and provide transit amenities.9 Spillar,Robert,Park-and-Ride Planning and Design Guidelines,(Parsons Brinckerhoff Quade and Douglas,Inc, 1997)Ch.6,Pg.8 s Spillar,Robert,Park-and-Ride Planning and Design Guidelines,(Parsons Brinckerhoff Quade and Douglas,Inc, 1997)Ch.6,Pg.20 9 Graphic from Spillar,Robert,Park-and-Ride Planning and Design Guidelines,(Parsons Brinckerhoff Quade and Douglas,Inc, 1997)Ch.6,Pg.52 10 I S ��SUOe$ 6 'A,1' - 'n s ' �` " a e a'""` y y .0 11111111 . ...f r A 11iH11 :cam 00NOT Bi Bicycle —� l_ - 'R ENTER ',3 t �Lockerj .= Shelter Bench {:' jj, .'•` z Wheelchair Ramp ' Parki•ng Area ` a. ; - v-4..4 1 ...- ., 4, „'' ' ' - ---:X', '''i. .—,:-. —..fir It '4 ' . F1 ' .ram g{ , yL Provision of transit amenities: Amenities make the transit experience more pleasurable and may increase ridership as the amenities reduce the perceived cost of riding transit versus a single occupancy vehicle. Amenities include providing shelters and benches at the bus loading area, lighting for safety and security, newspaper or other vending machines, and provision of services through the integration of the park and ride facility with the surrounding development. Studies have found a positive relationship between provision of transit station amenities and transit ridership. The highest correlations have been found between provisions of street trees, sidewalks, and lighting, street connectivity and shortness of blocks, and density of retail establishments. Bicycle Parking and Access: In addition to reaching the park and ride facility by vehicle, transit patrons may also access the facility by bicycle and provisions for bicycle parking should be made available at the site. METRO has instituted a new bike rack on buses program that allows bicycle riders to place their bicycles directly on buses. Often these racks fill up or are not available,thus secure parking for bicycles at the park and ride facility should be made available. Secure parking options include bicycle storage lockers or racks,with lockers being preferred over racks because they are more secure.to Bicycle access to the facility should also be considered in the siting and design of the park and ride facility. Integration of trails or other bicycle paths should be taken into consideration in the planning and design phase of the facility. Currently 21%of METRO park and ride users arrive to the facility by non-auto means, either transit, bicycling, or walking. This high average percentage indicates that planning for bicycle and pedestrian accessibility should remain a top priority in designing the Pearland park and ride facility. 10 Bike locker graphic from http://www.bikeiowa.com/asp/bike/images/bikelocker.gif 11 ,�. ;� '" ° Best Practices for Street Design: . " x a , r Y ,' Best practices for street design ensure that the -'' 4 1,N ,, 7 g: transit environment will be supported by the : , : � if. street network. Street designs should ;y. `' incorporate the needs not only of transit but of t '. t a,,,, ; all travel modes, including creating a safe and -' '=' vibrant pedestrian environment. K� Yyst' . .,.- ;, ' `1.-:-..-'' `, ,,- `,�,,, Access Management: Access management is a -' * -' �.�'J _ ,` ' toolbox to improve mobility and safety for i" `,-s' ' F ' transit, vehicles, and pedestrians. Access n„ f �. ‘: 4}�+#t ° ,a management techniques can provide solutions to F ,4I. �� minimize conflict points between transit and - + is vehicles such as driveway consolidation, safe A° bus pull-outs,traffic calming and signal timing modification. Driveway Consolidation: Frequent driveway spacing impedes mobility and poses a safety risk as vehicles are continually re-entering traffic. Driveway consolidation is an effective access management technique As many of the developments in which the park and ride service is proposed are yet to be fully built-out or are at the planning phase, driveway consolidation and other access management techniques can be directly incorporated into the design, which is much more cost-effective than retrofitting streets. Shared driveways, side street entrances, and creating cross access between properties are all recommended access management techniques. The Waterlights and Pearland Town Center proposals have the benefit of having one land owner which makes it easier to plan entrances and exits across a larger area. The recommended number of driveways by property frontage by ITE is below: Property Frontage (feet) Number of Driveways Oto50 1 50 to 165 2 165 to 500 3 Over 500 4 Source:ITE Guidelines for Driveway Location and Design,1987_ Bus Pull-Outs: Bus pull-outs are generally used for on-street transit service to remove buses from general traffic when loading and unloading passengers. As the proposed system will be a park and ride lot commuter system rather than an on-street bus system there should be minimal potential conflict between general traffic and the bus when passengers are loading and unloading. The position of the bus stop within the park and ride lot is essential to minimizing potential conflict points between passengers and vehicles. 12 The potential conflict point for the proposed system exists at the point the bus will re- enter general traffic after loading or unloading passengers. The bus re-entry should occur at the 'far-side' of any intersections so that the bus may safely re-enter traffic during the red phase of the signal timing. Depending on the exact location of the park and ride, an intersection may be created with a light specifically for the entry of the bus to the general traffic lanes. Traffic calming:As park and ride facilities support a variety of modes, speed control devices such as speed bumps or raised pavement can reduce conflict points between vehicles and pedestrians within the park and ride facility. " Signal timing modification: Buses ` can be given priority signaling in `1 �`- intersections to ensure that the bus :: I headways remain consistent and on- - - time. Bus signal priority systems are �' widely used throughout the nation as ha' a means improve on-street transit times in areas with traffic Raised Speed Hump Serving as; congestion. Although the Pearland Pedestrian Crosswalk system will be a commuter service with the majority of the trip occurring on the highway rather than on-street, priority signalization at intersections between the park and ride lot and the entrance to the highway system may provide an effective Intelligent Transportation System(ITS)tool. As an ITS tool, implementation of bus signal priority may be eligible for category II (operations management) funding in the Transportation Improvement Program. An effective bus signal priority system assists buses without causing excessive delay to vehicles. The placement of bus stops,the number of buses running,the volume of bus passengers, and the level of congestion all factor into the effectiveness of bus signal priority systems. The signal timing for signals entering into the park and ride locations should also be examined at peak periods once the commuter service is underway to ensure that traffic does not back up getting into the park and ride lot. Reverse Commute Potential: The currently proposed park and ride transit service consists of commuter bus service between the City of Pearland and the City of Houston. It is possible that as job growth continues in the Pearland area that reverse commuter potential from Houston to Pearland may be a viable option. Specifically the SH288 corridor and the potential location sites of the Park and Ride facility are forecasted to have large employment increases from their current levels. As of the 2000 Census less than one half of one percent of Harris County workers commute to jobs in Brazoria County. However, suburb to suburb commute patterns now account for the largest "Crosswalk graphic from Spillar,Robert Park-and-Ride Planning and Design Guidelines,(Parsons Brinckerhoff Quade and Douglas,Inc, 1997)Ch.6,Pg. 104 , 13 percentage of commute trips and the same should hold true for the Pearland area.12 Such trips are notoriously difficult to serve by transit as the trip origins are widely dispersed. Park and ride users are considered choice transit riders,meaning that they usually have an option other than transit to make their trip. Most park and ride users have an auto available and tend to have higher incomes than the average transit user. In addition,the overwhelming majority of park and ride trip purposes are journey to work trips, averaging between 95-98 percent nationally. 3 These demographics mean that in order for reverse commuting to be feasible from Houston to Pearland,there would have to be a sizable employment market in the immediate vicinity of the Pearland park and ride lot as the majority of the trips that would be made would be for employment purposes. In addition, as there is no connecting local transit service currently available in the City of Pearland,reverse commuters would be limited to the immediate walking area(usually measured within 1A mile) of the park and ride facility. The three proposed park and ride locations each contain future employment opportunities of the following magnitude: Location 1: The Waterlights District development has 392,040 square feet of office floor area planned in addition to 740,520 square feet of retail space.This translates to approximately 626 retail jobs and 1,457 office jobs.14 Location 2: Location 2 is listed as having 435,600 square feet of retail space and 958,320 square feet of office space in the City of Pearland planning materials. This translates to approximately 368 retail jobs and 3,562 office jobs. Location 3: The Pearland Town Center development is projected to have 871200 square feel of retail space and 87,120 square feet of office space. This translates to approximately 736 retail jobs and 324 office jobs. As shown in table 2, location 2 is projected to have the highest number of jobs within walking distance of the park and ride facility. However, estimates for location 2 are not in conjunction with a specific proposed development as are locations 1 and 3 and therefore may over-estimate the actual potential for employment at this location. The split between retail and office jobs should also be examined as the demographic characteristics of park and ride users suggest that a higher split toward office jobs may increase the reverse commute potential. 12 Hooper,Katherine,TCRP Synthesis of Transit Practice 14,Innovative Suburb to Suburb Transit Practices, 1995,Pg.3 13 Turnbull,Katherine,and Richard Pratt,"Traveler Response to Transportation System Changes",Chapter 3—Park-and-Ride/Pool,(Transit Cooperative Research Program,Report 95,2004),pg.3-9 14 Calculated using the following approximation: 1 retail job=1183 square feet of retail space. 1 office job =269 square feet of office space 14 Table 2: Projected employment within walking distance of park and ride locations: Retail Jobs Office Jobs Total Location 1 626 1,457 2,083 Location 2 368 3,562 3,930 Location 3 736 324 1,060 Opportunities for Local Transit Service: The reverse commuter potential could possibly be increased if local transit service existed within the City of Pearland. This transit service could take many forms, including a local bus circulator linking major employment and retail destinations within the City of Pearland. Such a local circulator has recently begun service in the Woodland Town Center. Without further study including origin-destination surveys it is difficult to predict the feasibility of local transit service in the City of Pearland. However,the concept deserves closer examination as such as service would fulfill many of the overall goals of this report, including increasing ridership for commuter bus service, making transit oriented development more feasible, and decreasing overall trips and congestion in the Pearland area. A 2004 Transportation Cooperative Research Program (TCRP) study found that park and ride circulator bus service dedicated to serving suburban employment destinations are largely unsuccessful. The distances between the park and ride lot and the destinations are usually too great to justify the use of transit for most riders.15 However, a circulator or trolley service linking the developments along the SH288 corridor has several factors that may make it successful, such as the increasing density in retail, employment, and residential uses along the SH288 corridor. Proposed Transit Routes: The lack of frontage roads along key sections of SH288 between FM2234 and FM518 makes it necessary for any transit circulator serving the SH288 corridor to use roads not fronting the highway. Not crossing major roadways can help to avoid congestion for the circulator, although the lack of connectivity in the corridor will dictate which roads are viable options for the transit service. The only current north-south roads that could serve to link the developments are Business Center Drive and Smith Ranch Road(CR94 after Discovery Bay Dr.)This route links all three possible park and ride locations with the major existing and proposed developments along the SH288 corridor. This route would allow reverse park and ride users to access any of the employment destinations in the corridor as well as allowing residents to park their cars once at any of the developments and take the circulator rather than use their cars to get between developments. The configuration shown in Figure 2 creates a loop at Discovery Bay Drive and then extends north on Business Center Dr.to Shadow Creek Parkway where it terminates. Current land uses north of Discovery Bay Drive on the east side of SH288 are predominately residential. If land uses change in the future,the route could continue up CR94 to McHard Road before crossing under SH288 to Shadow Creek Parkway. In 15 Turnbull,Katherine,and Richard Pratt,"Traveler Response to Transportation System Changes",Chapter 3—Park-and-Ride/Pool,(Transit Cooperative Research Program,Report 95,2004),pg.3-23 15 addition, if an internal street network is created within the Waterlights District, it could connect to this route and extend the circulator farther north. Figure 2: Proposed Transit Circulator Route#1 { i:;.I'''tq :''-5'.P--k-;;',,I'-- 541,.-',- -Vr. -',;--- -7"—. ---_,4J'rs---ff-g-J',,, :Y-44„Yezi -,-----L-1, '-m_ '1 k f �i „, W ad ', f—M ,� utC s —49 $-%x-fiv,,„=1 ,.-^- I 2 £ ,, I::i.,4,;,„..- 7;,, %.,-:ti,;`,..-',,, , 10 i,,- iii. liftgo;s-ex*-- - • , :- ,,,„ -� 0 f ,» / ,, ,04.0,,,v a - .- I .1 --- 7t*" r -7 i Ik.r r ,', 1.7-h L-,; "; The second proposed local transit route would link the growing SH288 corridor with the historic Pearland town center, at the junction of FM518 (Broadway) and SH35 (Main Street). This route would serve a slightly different purpose than route 1, and the City should consider both routes. Route#2 could serve to link the different sections of the City and potentially lessen congestion along Broadway,the major east/west arterial in the City. Such a transit route could also act as a catalyst for reinvestment in the traditional town center,which corresponds with the goals in the City of Pearland's Comprehensive Plan, planning initiative#1 to"reinvent the old townsite as a modern village with a compatible mix of residential and nonresidential uses." Unlike the SH288 corridor,the old townsite has the advantage of a traditional street grid which offers good connectivity for a transit circulator. This route could connect with a trolley circulator linking the activity nodes of the old townsite, such as that proposed in the Goodman Corporation's 'New Town Center' report from July 2005 which recommends a circulator along Grand Boulevard. 16 Figure 3: Proposed Transit Route#2: Linking SH288 Corridor and Historic Town Center �4 e { :)11%MOON lo4. —� •/ 14 t ! lei 3.j1,,� .�� v 'M..� ; -- «gam„ . ��s r..A I no mil' §` ..` � ilk # , 11 " h -' _ .aa 4-'sr� �. rye., l -�' .•`T'? yvi." Si .. ig S V :? .' k P .14 , 1,a to f 0 , _ a te 1 A 4 gs q - ' a � t ' ,$ I: A '. Fes®prAt " 4 a 5 Szw.WI ld.�y.." w I�` } 1 r .:-" N s sus 4' d iv M ' cam a ikf , i , "�a �il a a l y l � � t } 2 �x iv%u i a - : A ag 1y Wk kfl '' P - r s1444 r♦ r.' I' ......., .„-„,,,,.. ..„.,ff a,.,,,(1' 2—------T—__T t) I \-----; --I- HT frv , o sim tit.tii"- It is recommended that the City conduct a more detailed study specifically looking at the viability of local transit service within the City of Pearland, serving the growing SH288 corridor and linking the City of Pearland's various neighborhoods. Post-Implementation benchmarking: As there is limited research into travel demand estimation of suburban park and ride facilities,the City of Pearland, in coordination with the transit agency, should plan on conducting monitoring and benchmarking of the facilities success. Examples of benchmarking that have been used nationally include: before and after evaluations, ongoing monitoring, and transit user surveys. Surveys can ask what the prior mode of travel,how long their trip to get to the facility is, other questions to determine origin and destination. A frequent measure of park and ride success is the occupancy rate of the park and ride lot facility. Park and ride utilization rates for suburban commuter systems average between 50 and 80 percent.16 However,the occupancy rate along does not reflect the actual volume of facility usage and therefore volume,actual utilization, and mode share shift should be used as measurements if possible. 16 Turnbull,Katherine,and Richard Pratt,"Traveler Response to Transportation System Changes",Chapter 3—Park-and-Ride/Pool,(Transit Cooperative Research Program,Report 95,2004),pg.3-8 17 The three proposed locations for the park and ride facility each offer an opportunity for the City of Pearland to define its goals and create a prototype for future transit growth, both as commuter services and transit within the City of Pearland. This is a significant opportunity for the City to put its planning principles into action and create a successful, integrated, and well-designed facility that will serve the community and improve quality of life in the Pearland area. 18