OCTA staff kills Bravo! rapid bus project

For better or worse, the Transit Committee (including Directors Brown, Dalton, Dixon, Green, Nguyen, Pulido, and Winterbottom) voted November 12, 2009 to kill the Bravo! rapid bus project. OCTA's plans for improving countywide transit have been politically unpopular, and my impression has been that the general public and politicians have never been enamored with the concept of true bus rapid transit. This unfortunately means that OCTA's transit riders are saddled with the same long travel times that plague OCTA's crippled transportation system. Will Kempton's excuse for killing the project: "current restructuring of the bus system and financial pressures."

Instead, OCTA staff will shelve Bravo into its 2010 Long-Range Transportation Plan. And, as a replacement, it will pour the money into traffic signal synchronization along Harbor Blvd, Westminster Blvd, and Bristol St/State College Blvd. The final Board vote comes this Monday during the Board of Directors meeting.

The Bravo! bus rapid transit — a replacement for their light rail program — was supposed to have launched in 2007 and faced continuous delays in its implementation. I can't help but feel envious watching Los Angeles continuously improving their public transit experience — they just opened the new Gold Line light rail extension, they'll be launching the Silver Line bus rapid transit later this year, and they've got several more light rail lines planned.

More gory details after the break.

Here's the OCR'd version of the report that recommends that Bravo! be killed:

Background

Transportation Control Measures (TCMs) are specific transportation projects and programs committed to help improve air quality. TCMs are required by the federal Clean Air Act (CM) in areas that must meet specific air quality standards. The South Coast Air Basin including Orange County is one of those areas. In the Southern California Association of Government (SCAG) region, TCMs are considered committed when funds have been programmed for implementation in an approved SCAG Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP). When a committed TCM cannot be delivered or will be significantly delayed, the substitution of the TCM follows a process specified in the federal CM §176(c). In that event, the implementing agency and SCAG work together to overcome the delay or identify a substitute project with similar air quality benefits serving the same geographic area (among other criteria discussed below).

The Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) currently has three TCMs in the RTIP that are difficult to implement given current economic conditions and recent state actions related to the diversion of State Transit Assistance funds. The three projects are bus rapid transit (BRT) services on Harbor Boulevard, Westminster Avenue/17th Street, and the "28-mile" route that will travel between north, central, and south Orange County on various streets. Gross operating costs are estimated at $12 million annually. The first line, Harbor Boulevard, is scheduled to start in June 2010, and all three lines must be in service by June 2011 based on committed RTIP implementation dates.

Discussion

OCTA staff is recommending deferral of the three BRT lines until transit funding is stabilized. For air quality conformity purposes, OCTA is proposing three replacement projects for the BRT service on Harbor Boulevard, Westminster Avenue/17th Street, and the 28-mile line. Project descriptions and air quality modeling results are discussed below. SCAG, in implementing the federal CM, requires that TCM replacement projects meet the substitution criteria spelled out in the Air Quality Management Plan, prepared and adopted by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (AQMD). The criteria require substitute TCM projects to Replacement of Bus Rapid Transit Transportation Control Measure provide an equivalent emissions reduction, serve a similar geographic area, have a similar implementation schedule, and include a demonstrated financial commitment to complete the project on time. The criteria offer limited discretion given that the first replacement project must be in place by June 2010. As a result, OCTA staff is recommending that the three replacement projects focus on signal synchronization on major portions of the BRT corridors. The proposed replacement projects are listed below.

• Harbor Boulevard Signal Synchronization (Chapman Avenue to Newport Boulevard)
• Westminster Boulevard Signal Synchronization (Seal Beach Boulevard to the Costa Mesa Freeway {State Route 55})
• Bristol Street/State College Boulevard Signal Synchronization (Imperial Highway {Highway 90} to Sunflower Avenue)

Staff believes these projects can be implemented on the same schedule as the BRT service and will have equivalent air quality benefits to the region. Current Federal Transportation Administration, Section 5309 funds planned for BRT can be used for traffic signal synchronization. Staff recommends that the Board of Directors (Board) direct staff to return by February 2010, with an implementation plan for traffic signal synchronization on these corridors. The implementation plan will define the scope, cost, funding, and schedule for each project consistent with the committed BRT schedule included in the RTIP.

Staff also recommends that the Board consider including the three deferred BRT lines in the upcoming 2010 Long-Range Transportation Plan (LRTP). Development of the LRTP is starting now and early direction from the Board on how to treat BRT in the plan would prove beneficial. As part of the LRTP, phasing recommendations will also be developed and BRT would be included in the phasing plan. A status report on the LRTP will be provided to the Board in early 2010.

Air Quality Analysis

The air quality forecasts with the three BRT TCMs were compared with those of the proposed projects above using a stepwise method built on SCAG's emissions methodology, the Orange County Transportation Analysis Model, and the California Air Resources Board EMission FACtors (EMFAC) model. EMFAC is used throughout California to calculate emission rates from Replacement of Bus Rapid Transit Transportation Control Measure motor vehicles, such as passenger cars and heavy-duty trucks, operating on freeways and local roads. The results of this process provide a summary of emissions reductions for reactive organic gases (ROG), nitrogen oxides (NOx), carbon monoxide (CO), and particulate matter with a diameter measuring 10 micrometers or less (PM-10). Outputs, provided below, are measured in daily metric tons. OCTA compared the results to all the projects in the approved RTIP (with BRT and without BRT and including the replacement projects) using 2035 demographics.

2035 Comparison of BRT TCM and Traffic Signal Synchronization Replacement TCM
(in daily U.S. tons)
Traffic Signal Synchronization
BRTTCM Replacement TCM
ROG 15.35 15.35
CO 109.57 109.53
NOx 20.16 20.15
PM-10 4.48 4.48

The results indicate that the proposed replacement projects will have equivalent air quality benefit in Orange County and the region.

Next Steps
With Board approval, staff will start the TCM replacement process with SCAG. This process includes obtaining formal approval of SCAG's Transportation Conformity Working Group and related committees in early 2010. This process also includes concurrence with the federal Environmental Protection Agency to rescind the BRT TCM with the new program of replacement projects that provide equivalent air quality benefits.

Summary
A replacement program of TCM projects is recommended for Board approval in order to meet federal air quality mandates. The replacement program offers equivalent emissions reduction, serves a similar geographic area, and meets other criteria required by SCAG and AQMD. With Board approval, staff will start working with SCAG on the TCM replacement process. Staff will also Replacement of Bus Rapid Transit Transportation Control Measure return with an implementation plan defining the scope, cost, funding, and schedule for the replacement program by February 2010.

Comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Just gives me another reason...

Simon Oh's picture

...to make me want to move back to Los Angeles County after I graduate from CSU Fullerton. I can't bear continuing to live in a county that is so unwilling to improve its mass transit system. I still love Orange County for other reasons and it will always have a place in my heart. But if this is the continuing trend where mass transit projects and improvements keep getting slashed due to political and residential opposition, I don't know what to say. If people like John "warlock" and the douchebag libertarians get their wish by having all bus and rail service in Orange County eliminated, I'll be packing my bags and moving outta here within hours!

Looks like you and I...

Steven's picture

...both ended up in the wrong county. :) I myself would move back to San Francisco in a heartbeat.

The city of Kenosha, WI

Bill Cousert's picture

The city of Kenosha, WI recently built a 1.5 mile long streetcar line for less than $3 million ($2 million per mile). Streetcars are very INEXPENSIVE compared to light rail. I'm wondering if it might be possible for private companies to get back into the streetcar business. This might be the only way OC will see anything resembling light rail in this century.

Seriously, if Henry Huntington could do it a century ago, why couldn't we do it again today? It should be too difficult to raise $10 to $15 million in venture capital.

I fear that with the cutting

Spokker's picture

I fear that with the cutting of bus routes and the cancellation of Bravo!, and the widening of freeways and improvement of streets (signal synchronization won't do shit for buses), OCTA is embarking on making an already unequal transportation network even more unequal. I wonder if recent developments are grounds for lawsuits.

> I wonder if recent

Bill Cousert's picture

> I wonder if recent developments are grounds for lawsuits

Measure M mandated that a portion of the sales tax increase was to be used for light rail. OCTA used the money for something else. I think that's grounds for a major lawsuit.

It's not even that they used

Spokker's picture

It's not even that they used the money for something else, but they are using it for something that has nothing to do with transit.

Where can we find a copy of Measure M?

Steven's picture

I can't even find the original text of Measure M. Most of what I find is feel-good marketing brochures on OCTA and OC government websites. Anyone know where we could find this and whether it really mandates a rapid transit system?

Try to find a copy of the

Bill Cousert's picture

Try to find a copy of the sample ballot. The full text of Measure M should be in it.

I don't think there's

Spokker's picture

I don't think there's anything about light rail in either Measure M or Renewed Measure M literature.

http://www.octa.net/M2Home.aspx?entryid=332

The only rail OCTA cares about is the LOSSAN corridor, which is good, but it doesn't exactly serve the county as a whole well. It's regional and intercity rail.

Looking back at this...

Damon's picture

After reading this post again, I'm not sure if is accurate to say that OCTA has killed Bravo!, at least not yet. "OCTA staff is recommending deferral of the three BRT lines until transit funding is stabilized" means that they are basically pushing back the implementation date as they have unfortunately had to do already. Honestly, it makes sense to me- if they are having to cut 30% of existing service due to budget cuts, it would have been a little weird for them to add additional service on Harbor, 17th, and Bristol when other routes are getting completely deleted.

Since the signal synchronization was part of the BRT plan already (and, other than the stops, was the main infrastructure project necessary to start service), they should be able to just start running the buses whenever the money materializes., i.e. when the state's budget isn't a cluster@#%* which will hopefully be in a year or two as the economy recovers.

You're right

Steven's picture

That's true, and I missed it when I read through their memo too quickly. The project is just deferred. On the other hand, the project has been delayed many times already when there were plenty of opportunities to make this a reality (e.g. building the bus shelters as part of the Obama stimulus package, or incorporating this with Anaheim's BRT/Monorail project). I feel like this project's not getting enough political attention which makes me pessimistic about it becoming a reality.

Text of M2

Butros's picture

http://www.octa.net/MeasureM2/REST/ContentStream.ashx?entryId=1347&mode=Download

Is that not the text of the measure at the beginning of the document?

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd><img><table><th><td><tr>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

More information about formatting options

About TransitRiderOC

TransitRiderOC is a website that promotes and critiques sustainable transport in Orange County. We report on, share, and discuss news that affects bicyclists, pedestrians, the car-free, and transit riders (including but not limited to OCTA, Metrolink, Amtrak, Santa Ana light rail, Anaheim Resort Transit, the Irvine Shuttle, and Laguna Beach Transit). We support improving Orange County's transportation with complete streets and public transit to improve our communities' health, economies, and environment. Find out how you can participate.

Syndicate

Syndicate content

Recent comments