riverside county - orange county

Click to edit Master title style

• Click to edit Master text styles– Second level

• Third level– Fourth level

» Fifth level

1

Riverside County - Orange County MISRiverside County - Orange County MIS

Riverside County - Orange County


Click to edit Master text stylesSecond level

Third levelFourth level

Fifth level

1

Riverside County - Orange County Riverside County - Orange County

Major Investment StudyMajor Investment Study

Policy Committee MeetingPolicy Committee MeetingFebruary 4, 2005 February 4, 2005




» Fifth level

2


Outline• Key Study Objectives• Conceptual Corridors

– Proposed Connection Areas

• Strategic Options • Screening and Evaluation Process• Initial Fatal Flaw Criteria• Proposed Policy Direction• Next Steps




» Fifth level

3


Key Study Objectives

• Maximize improvements to the SR-91

• Identify new corridors that meet P&N

• Include multi-modal alternatives

• Plan for 2030 growth– 50% capacity over existing




» Fifth level

4


Conceptual Corridors

• Five broad corridors identified

• Many specific alignments/options to be evaluated in each corridor

• Using route optimization tools to define viable alignments in new corridors

• Costs, impacts, and benefits of screened alternative will be assessed in detail




» Fifth level

5






» Fifth level

6



• Existing SR-91 facility

• Corridor A (Santa Ana Canyon)

• Corridor B • I-15/Cajalco Road to SR-241/SR-133

• Corridor C • I-15 North of Lake Elsinore to SR-241/SR-133

• Corridor D (Ortega Highway)




» Fifth level

7


Proposed Connection Areas

• West End – Vicinity of SR-241/SR-133– Between Jeffrey Road and Portola North

• Avoids East Orange development area• Avoids Frank R. Bowerman Landfill• Avoids Irvine Lake/park

• East End – Along I-15– Vicinity of Cajalco Road

• Future Mid-County Parkway

– Vicinity of Lake St./Nichols Rd.• Undeveloped area (supported by City of Lake Elsinore)




» Fifth level

8


Sample Strategic Options




» Fifth level

9


No. Applicable Corridor* Strategy Description ADT Estimate

91-T1 SR-91 Additional HOV/HOT Lane with Commuter Bus 1,000

91-T2 SR-91Exclusive/Semi-Exclusive Right-of-Way BRT from Corona Magnolia Terminus to Orange County with Mixed-Traffic SR-55/SR-57 Link to Irvine

2,000

A-T1 A Expanded Metrolink Commuter Rail Service 17,000

A-T2 A Maglev 13,000

A-T3 A Elevated Structure—Buses and Trucks (Four Lanes) 25,000

B-T1 B Mixed-Traffic Commuter Bus 1,000

B-T2 B Exclusive/Semi-Exclusive Right-of-Way BRT from I-15 to Irvine Metrolink Station 2,000

B-T3 B New Metrolink line from Ramona to Irvine Station 10,000

C-T1 C Mixed-Traffic Commuter Bus Service <1,000

C-T2 C Exclusive/Semi-Exclusive Right-of-Way BRT from I-15 to Irvine Metrolink Station 2,000

D-T1 D Mixed-Traffic Commuter Bus Service on SR-74 <1,000

Table 2 - Transit Strategic Options




» Fifth level

10


Improve Existing SR-91• Additional General Purpose (GP) lanes• Additional carpool lanes (HOV) lanes• Additional auxiliary lanes• Collector/distributor roads• Convert Express Lanes to GP• Extend Express Lanes into Riverside County• Direct connectors SR-241/SR-71• Elevated structures• Special purpose lanes (e.g., truck, transit)




» Fifth level

11


Corridor A

• Truck bypass lanes

• Prado Expressway concept

• Direct connectors

• Collector-distributor roads




» Fifth level

12


Corridor C

Various alignments/capacities to be studied for the following concepts:

• Tunnel only

• Tunnel/surface roads

• Surface roads




» Fifth level

13


Corridor D(Ortega Highway)

• Tunnel/surface roads

• Surface roads only




» Fifth level

14


Options Previously studied but not recommended for further

consideration




» Fifth level

15


Previously Studied Options




» Fifth level

16


• Corona Bypass– Disruptive to existing communities

• BIA Alternative– High cost to benefit

• Carbon Canyon Road– Adverse impacts to existing communities

and environment– High cost to benefit




» Fifth level

17


Screening and Evaluation Process




» Fifth level

18


Pre

-Scr

een/F

atal

Fla

w A

nal

ysis

Com

bin

atio

n/S

elec

tion

Strategic Options

Screening Alternatives

91-1

91-2

91-3

A-1

A-2

B-1

B-2

C-1

ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSES ONLY

Development of Screening AlternativesScreened Options

(Eng

inee

ring

and

Phy

sica

l Con

stra

ints

)




» Fifth level

19


Screening Alternatives

Scr

een

ing

Eva

luat

ion

Detailed Analysis Alternatives

Det

aile

d E

valu

atio

n LocallyPreferred Strategies

Selection/Analysis of Screening Alternatives

ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSES ONLY

(En

viro

nmen

tal C

onst

rain

ts)




» Fifth level

20


Initial Fatal Flaw Criteria• Extensive displacements to existing and

planned communities– Large area/number of residential property takings

• Constructability issues– Physical barriers (e.g., lakes, landfills, faults)– Groundwater

• Inadequate capacity in relation to cost– Low capacity/high cost facility (e.g., elev. truck lanes)– Low capacity tunnels




» Fifth level

21


Proposed Policy Direction• Approve five conceptual corridors

– SR-91 (SR-55 to I-15)– Corridors A, B, and C– Corridor D, Ortega Hwy (SR-241 to I-15)

• Approve connection areas– West End

• Vicinity of SR-133/SR-241

– East End along I-15• Cajalco Road; Lake Street – Nichols Road




» Fifth level

22


Next Steps

• March 4, 2005 Policy Committee Meeting– Recommended screening alternatives– Specific alignments/options

riverside county - orange county

Documents