HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem I - Site Feasibility Study1
GO Transit Site Selection Study
Oshkosh Downtown Transit Center
Prepared by: SRF Consulting
Date: December 2020
GO Transit Site Selection Study
i
Table of Contents
Study Introduction ............................................................................................................... 1
Background ............................................................................................................................. 2
Study Purpose......................................................................................................................... 2
Study Process ......................................................................................................................... 3
Long-Term versus Short-Term ................................................................................................. 3
Programming ....................................................................................................................... 4
Programming Process ............................................................................................................. 4
Programming Overview ........................................................................................................... 4
Existing Facilities and Site Condition........................................................................................ 4
Building Programming ............................................................................................................. 7
Staff Functions ........................................................................................................................ 7
Public Functions ...................................................................................................................... 7
Building Support Functions ...................................................................................................... 7
Summary of Building Programming .......................................................................................... 7
Site Programming.................................................................................................................. 10
Site Evaluation, Selection and Conceptual Designs ......................................................13
Site Evaluation and Selection ................................................................................................ 13
Screening Criteria and Evaluation Criteria .............................................................................. 13
Initial Site Identification and Selected Sites for Evaluation ...................................................... 15
Priority Site Selection and Evaluation ..................................................................................... 23
Preliminary Concept Plans ...............................................................................................25
Building Concepts ................................................................................................................. 25
Building Plans ....................................................................................................................... 27
Existing Site Concept Plan..................................................................................................... 28
Convention Center North Parking Lot Site Concept Plan ........................................................ 29
Jackson/Pearl Site Concept Plan ........................................................................................... 30
Cost Estimates ...................................................................................................................... 31
Stakeholder Outreach .......................................................................................................35
GO Transit Site Selection Study
ii
Stakeholder Input .................................................................................................................. 35
November 12th Stakeholder Meeting ..................................................................................... 35
November 16th Stakeholder Meeting ..................................................................................... 36
November 18th Transit Advisory Board (TAB) Meeting ............................................................ 37
Final Concept Plans ...........................................................................................................38
Existing Site .......................................................................................................................... 38
Jackson/Pearl Site................................................................................................................. 39
Downtown Transit Center Proof of Concept Images ............................................................... 41
Recommendation ..............................................................................................................45
Cost ...................................................................................................................................... 45
Short-Term Improvements ..................................................................................................... 45
Conclusion ............................................................................................................................ 45
GO Transit Site Selection Study
iii
Figures
Figure 1: Location of Existing Site ............................................................................................ 5
Figure 2: Potential Transit Center Sites .................................................................................. 15
Figure 3: Site #1: Existing Block............................................................................................. 16
Figure 4 Site #2: Convention Center North Parking Lot........................................................... 17
Figure 5 Site #3: Morgan District Parcels ............................................................................... 18
Figure 6 Site #4: Redevelopment Authority Parcel.................................................................. 19
Figure 7 Site #5: Park & Ride................................................................................................. 20
Figure 8 Site #6: Main St & Pearl Ave Block ........................................................................... 21
Figure 9 Site #7: Jackson Pearl Block .................................................................................... 22
Figure 10: Priority Sites ......................................................................................................... 24
Figure 11: Downtown Transit Center Functional Relationship Diagram ................................... 26
Figure 12: Downtown Transit Center Building Plan ................................................................. 27
Figure 13: Existing Site- Preliminary Concept A ..................................................................... 28
Figure 14: Existing Site- Preliminary Concept B ..................................................................... 29
Figure 15: Convention Center North Parking Lot Site- Preliminary Concept ............................ 30
Figure 16: Jackson/Pearl Site- Preliminary Concept ............................................................... 31
Figure 17: Existing Site- Final Concept Plan........................................................................... 38
Figure 18: Jackson/Pearl Site- Final Concept Plan ................................................................. 40
Figure 19: Proof of Concept- Main Elevation- South Side ....................................................... 42
Figure 20: Proof of Concept- Public Entry / Secure Public Vestibule ....................................... 42
Figure 21: Proof of Concept- Staff Entry and Building Functions ............................................. 43
Figure 22: Proof of Concept- Main Elevation- North Side ........................................................ 43
Figure 23: Proof of Concept- Public Waiting Area and Customer Service Window................... 44
Figure 24: Proof of Concept- Staff Breakroom and Computer Area ......................................... 44
GO Transit Site Selection Study
iv
Tables
Table 1: Building Space and Descriptions ................................................................................ 8
Table 2: Staff Related Functions .............................................................................................. 9
Table 3: Public Related Functions............................................................................................ 9
Table 4: Building Related Functions ....................................................................................... 10
Table 5: Site Program............................................................................................................ 11
Table 6: Additional Site Programming Elements ..................................................................... 12
Table 7: GO Transit Center Screening and Evaluation Criteria................................................ 13
Table 8: GO Transit Center Site Evaluation Results ............................................................... 23
Table 9: Existing Site- Preliminary Concept A- Cost Estimate ................................................. 31
Table 10: Existing Site- Preliminary Concept A- Building and Site Removal ............................ 32
Table 11: Existing Site- Preliminary Concept B- Cost Estimate ............................................... 32
Table 12: Existing Site- Preliminary Concept B- Building and Site Removal ............................ 32
Table 13: Convention Center North Parking Lot- Preliminary Concept- Cost Estimate ............. 32
Table 14: Convention Site- Preliminary Concept- Building and Site Removal .......................... 32
Table 15: Jackson/Peal Site- Preliminary Concept- Cost Estimate .......................................... 33
Table 16: Jackson Site- Preliminary Concept- Building and Site Removal ............................... 33
Table 17: Existing Site- Preliminary Concept B- Cost Estimate ............................................... 39
Table 18: Jackson Site- Preliminary Concept B- Cost Estimate............................................... 40
GO Transit Site Selection Study
1
Attachments
Attachment A: Summary of Surveys
Attachment B: List of Stakeholders
Attachment C: PowerPoint Presentation
Link to compiled attachments: GO Transit Site Feasibility Study Attachments
GO Transit Site Selection Study
2
Study Introduction
Background
In 2018, GO Transit completed and adopted their Strategic Plan (Transit Development Plan – TDP). As part of this plan, it was identified that there is a need, and desire, to plan for and build a new downtown transit center. The current GO Transit Downtown Transit Center was opened in February 1990. As a follow up to TDP findings, the City of Oshkosh/GO Transit along with ECWRPC applied for, and received, a Federal Transit Administration (FTA) planning grant to perform a Site Selection Study.
Study Purpose
East Central Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission (ECWRPC) and the City of Oshkosh performed this Site Selection Study to determine long term programming requirements (year 2030), perform evaluation of potential sites, and achieve consensus on selection of a site and pre-design for a new GO Transit Downtown Transit Center. ECWRPC and the City of Oshkosh initiated the study to clearly define current and future operational needs and prioritize how these needs can best be met with a new GO Transit Downtown Transit Center. The outcome of this study will support both GO Transit’s expanding ridership and transit system operations, along with supporting the goal of creating a sense of community/place making in downtown Oshkosh through potential development of a mixed-use facility. In addition, the findings of this study will be used as a basis for submitting future highly competitive Federal grants.
GO Transit currently operates nine fixed routes in-house (Routes 1-9), and contracts for service in partnership with Winnebago County to provide service to Neenah, WI on Route 10. Of these ten routes, seven make scheduled “pulses” at the Downtown Transit Center. GO Transit also oversees the provision of four demand response services that complement its core fixed routes. These include GO Plus ADA Paratransit, GO Plus Senior Dial-a-Ride, Rural Over 60/Rural Under 60, and Access to Jobs. In addition to public and specialized transit services operated by GO Transit, the Oshkosh market is also served by intercity bus providers (Lamers Connect, Amtrak Thruway) and private transportation services that offer travel to medical patients, university students, and taxi customers.
GO Transit has two primary facilities: its Downtown Transit Center, located at 110 Pearl Avenue, and the administrative and maintenance facility, located at 926 Dempsey Trail. The Downtown Transit Center features sheltered waiting areas, benches, maps, and route information. Constructed in 1989, the facility is in fair condition and is located on the edge of downtown Oshkosh. The 2018 City of Oshkosh Transit Development Plan included a recommendation to redesign/replace the Downtown Transit Center. This recommendation was based on the current lack of crucial amenities, age, and isolation from downtown activity. While there is no considerable expansion planned in the near-term for GO Transit service, the system’s primary hub should be able to accommodate new modes of transportation and mobility, and potential investments in transit frequency and interregional commuter services.
GO Transit Site Selection Study
3
In recent years there has been considerable investment in downtown Oshkosh, both in terms of
private development and public infrastructure. While the current downtown facility serves a pure
function, industry standards have advanced to incorporate more technology and passenger
amenities than are currently offered. Additionally, there is interest in having transit investment
keep pace with other downtown development, and this study will explore how to better create a
sense of place, accommodate future growth, and the feasibility and needs to incorporate a mix
of uses or jointly developed property.
Study Process
A Project Management Team (PMT) was created to provide direction to the consultant team
throughout the study. The PMT consisted of Kim Biedermann -East Central Wisconsin Regional
Planning (ECWRPC), Adam BellCorelli (ECWRPC), Jim Collins – GO Transit, Steve Tomasik –
GO Transit, and Allen Davis – City of Oshkosh. The consultant team consisted of Jo Ann Olsen,
SRF Consulting, Rachel Burand, SRF Consulting, Jake Knight, SRF Consulting and Andrew
Cooper, Oertel Architects. The PMT and consultant team held bi-monthly virtual PMT meetings
to review the status of the workplan and task deliverables. Due to COVID-19, all meetings and
workshops were held virtually. The scope of the study covered the following:
1. Programming for Go Transit Long-Term Needs (2030)
2. Selection of Potential Sites and Site Evaluation
3. Selection of Priority Sites/Conceptual Designs
4. Stakeholder Outreach
5. Final Concept Plans
6. Findings and Next Steps
Long-Term versus Short-Term
The focus of this study is on the long-term needs of GO Transit (2030). At the initiation of this
study, GO Transit received notification of receipt of CARES Act funds. CARES Act is an
economic stimulus bill in response to the economic fallout of COVID-19. The CARES Act
provided funding to transit agencies and GO Transit designated some of their funds to be used
for immediate improvements to the existing transit center and to complement the long-term
design, should their current site be selected. Concurrently with this study, a building and site
space needs program, proposed building and site plan, and cost estimates were prepared for
immediate short-term needs at the existing site. It is desired that these immediate
improvements be incorporated into the long-term plan as much as is feasible.
GO Transit Site Selection Study
4
Programming
Programming Process
Programming Overview
The programming process focused around two key approaches: 1) Space requirements based
on building code and industry standard, and 2) Space demands and priorities identified via user
group surveys. Space needs were also influenced by the timing of this study. The study began
at the onset of the COVID-19 Global Pandemic. Thus, personal space and physical separation,
building material and ability to clean were also considered in building program and subsequent
facility conceptual layouts.
Two surveys were conducted to influence the space need and demand: 1) Staff Survey of
Operators / Drivers and Administrative / Supervisory Staff and 2) Rider/Public User Survey. The
Staff survey had 18 participants, or roughly half of the entire staff. This included 10 operator /
drivers and eight administration and operational supervision staff. Though the group of operator
/ drivers is larger than the number of respondents, it was understood that responses would be
representative of the group and some operators would lean on their peers to provide response
to the survey questions. Key takeaways from the staff survey included the ranking of facility
priorities for space needs and characteristics, including building durability, staff and building
security, breakroom amenity and space, and dedicated staff restrooms. The public survey
included 48 responses that placed a high priority on temperature-controlled waiting areas, public
restrooms, and ticketing / customer service interactions. The public also placed a priority on
building security and durability. Attachment A provides a summary of the surveys.
The size for each space and amenity were derived using space industry standards and building
code-established space requirements. This included standard sizing for ADA restrooms, space
per occupant for breakrooms and public waiting areas, personal space requirements influenced
by the need to address physical security and personal health, related to the COVID pandemic.
Building Programming focused specifically on the Downtown Transit Center functions only and
did not include space needs for any mixed use, joint-venture, public-private partnership potential
with this facility. This element was included as a potential component as part of the conceptual
designs, based on stakeholder feedback and partnership potential.
Existing Facilities and Site Condition
The GO Transit Downtown Oshkosh Transit Center is located at the corners of Pearl Avenue
and Market Street in Downtown Oshkosh Wisconsin. Figure 1 provides the location of the
existing site.
GO Transit Site Selection Study
5
Figure 1: Location of Existing Site
The location has two primary structures, a passenger shelter / bus terminal and small utility
building. The passenger shelter is open air, with smaller enclosed shleter areas integrated into
the layout. The structure serves as the bus terminal for passengers accessing routes. Most GO
Transit routes access this location. The site is entirely paved in concrete with minimal
greenspace.
GO Transit Site Selection Study
6
The small utility building houses electrical equipment and single user restrooms, which are for
GO Transit staff use only. The building storage area is limited and has been appropriated as a
driver break area. The restrooms at this facility are small and do not meet ADA standards. The
break area that has been appropriated for the driver break area is difficult for more than two
drivers to utilize at any one given time and is undesirable for breaks due to the proximity of the
restrooms. During layover times, the facility will have six to eight buses at the location, with up
to 10 minutes between arrival and depature. This results in demand for the break area that
exceeds the space for two drivers. This is also the only sheltered area for drivers that need to
take their lunch break downtown.
The existing transit center shelter is solely for the use of passenger waiting. The 30-year-old
building is structurally sound, but is dated in finish and condition of materials that are in need of
repair or replacement. There are no opportunities at this location to purchase fares or passes
for transit riders.
The site area where the Transit Center is located is in need of several improvements in order to
provide additional years of service, meet current maintenance standards, improve ADA features
and improve rider experience. These include:
1. Additional pavement improvements not associated with the building expansion project.
2. Platform paver removal and replacement
3. Cleaning and Painting
4. Metal Roof Replacement
5. Lighting upgrades and replacement
6. Bench and site furnishing upgrades
7. Greenspace enhancements.
The current Transit Center does not provide areas for Operator / Driver use, such as a defined
break area, ADA Restrooms or office / work area for Operations Supervisors. Extensive
improvement options to the existing passenger shelter facility are not recommended due to
structure size and orientation and use as public / rider area. Other improvement options on site
to address this staff need would be limited to new construction, possibly attached to the existing
utility building. This would require elimination of limited site area for parking and greenspace
and placing the staff area building within that space.
GO Transit Site Selection Study
7
Building Programming
Building programming requirements were developed from PMT input and the collected survey
responses. The building program and space needs were broken down into three general
functions: Staff Functions, Public Functions, Building Support Functions.
Staff Functions
Key programmatic components for staff functions include break room, staff locker, personal
belongings storage, separated staff restrooms, computer access, supervisor office, customer
service office, staff wellness room and general storage needs. Additional considerations noted
by staff were to provide access to exterior views for the buses, access to an outdoor staff only
break areas, greenspace where possible, dedicated secured entry for staff only and visual
access to any public space functions for security, and cleanliness of those spaces.
Public Functions
Key needs for public functions were focused on comfort, ease-of-use, safety and security of
riders. These functions include interior temperature-controlled waiting area, public kiosk and
information access, access to GO Transit customer service, visual access to arriving and
departing buses, clean and secure public restrooms. Restroom design and access is a concern
for GO Transit Administration as well as Oshkosh Public Safety. Public Safety would prefer to
see multiple user restrooms that prevent locking of the entire space by the user. This would
grant police officers access to the space with greater ease in the event of a safety concern.
Public Safety also recommended visual access by GO Transit staff of the restroom entries for
an “eyes-on” security measure and also recommended that restrooms only be accessible from
an interior waiting area, rather than accessible directly from the exterior.
Building Support Functions
The building program also includes key spaces to allow for a building’s general function. These
spaces include Informational Technology (IT) closet, general storage rooms and supply closets,
janitorial spaces, and mechanical and electrical rooms for building utility. Additional space
consideration was also included for the area dedicated to circulation (hallway and corridor).
Summary of Building Programming
Table #1 provides a list of required building spaces and a brief description of each, that will be
defined within the programming requirements summary and illustrated in the conceptual design
plan.
GO Transit Site Selection Study
8
Table 1: Building Space and Descriptions
Space/Function Description
Vestibule Secure Entry to provide air lock and temperature control
Supervisor Office Private, secure office for single user
Customer Service Open Office with direct public contact through secure transaction
Operator Computer Access to a single user workstation
Copy Area / Work Area Open office function for printer, copier and document storage
Universal Restroom ADA single user restroom, typical for smaller office/staff functions
Breakroom Area for staff to rest during prescribed break times
Staff Locker Room Personal belonging storage area
Wellness Room Single user room for personal space, Mother’s Room
IT Closet Dedicated space for technology racking and digital infrastructure
General Storage Standard Storage room, various non-hazardous materials
Janitorial Closet Storage and operational area for facility cleaning
Waiting Area Interior, climate controlled space for riders
Vending Area Snack, Beverage vending machines with waste and recycling
Public Kiosk Digital or paper informational areas
Public Restroom Multi-user restrooms
Mechanical Room Heating / Cooling equipment, Electrical equipment, Water Service
Tables #2 through #4 provide a summary of the Building Programming, quantity, size and total
square footage. The tables are separated into Staff Related Functions, Public Related Functions
and Building Functions. These initial building needs programming result in a total square
footage of 4,780 square feet for the building footprint.
GO Transit Site Selection Study
9
Table 2: Staff Related Functions
Space/Function Quantity Size Total Square Footage (sf)
Vestibule 2 7’ x 7’ 98 sf
Supervisor
Office
1 10’ x 15’ 150 sf
Customer
Service
1 10’ x 12’ 120 sf
Operator
Computer
6 6’ x 6’ 216 sf
Copy Area /
Work Area
1 8’ x 8’ 64 sf
Universal
Restroom
2 8 x 9’ 144 sf
Breakroom 1 15’ x 25’ 375 sf
Staff Locker
Room
1 10’ x 12’ 120 sf
Wellness Room 1 9’ x 11’ 99 sf
IT Closet 1 6’ x 8’ 48 sf
General
Storage
1 10’ x 10’ 100 sf
Janitorial Closet 1 9’ x 7’ 63 sf
Table 3: Public Related Functions
Space/Function Quantity Size Total Square Footage (sf)
Waiting Area 1 Varies 1,050 sf
Vending and
Waste/Recycling
1 Varies 36 sf
Public Kiosk
Space
6 4’ x 4.5’ 108 sf
Men’s Public
Restroom
1 Varies 134 sf
Women’s Public
Restroom
1 Varies 137 sf
GO Transit Site Selection Study
10
Table 4: Building Related Functions
Space/Function Quantity Size Total Square Footage (sf)
IT Closet 1 6’ x 8’ 48 sf
General Storage /
Supply
1 10’ x 10’ 100 sf
Janitorial 1 7’ x 9’ 63 sf
Mechanical /
Electrical Room
allowance
310 sf
Building Circulation
Allowance
1,366 sf
Site Programming
In addition to space planning for the building, the design team outlined a program for the
primary site features. The PMT established a long-term goal of accommodating 12 buses on
site. The existing Transit Center accommodates six GO Transit buses and 1 additional bus
along the street. Site programming elements were based on the stated long-term goal of
accommodating space for 12 buses. It was also stated that site programming should
accommodate independent bus movement. On-site circulation for buses, cars, and pedestrians
was accounted for as well as space for a new transit center facility. Stormwater treatment,
landscape areas, snow storage, and site setbacks were estimated as a percentage of the
overall area to incorporate some flexibility. Combined with the building program, an estimated
overall site size need of two acres was established. Table 5 shows a breakdown of how the site
programming elements provided an overall area to reference when determining the site size.
GO Transit Site Selection Study
11
Table 5: Site Program
Space or Function Description Quantity
Long
Term
Width
(Ft)
Length
(Ft)
Area
(Sq Ft)
1. Shelter Enclosed building area. See
architectural programming.
1 40 112 4,780
2. Bus Stall Area for parked bus. Includes space for
pedestrian movement during passenger
drop off and pick up.
12 12 60 8,640
3. Bus
Circulation
Assumes sawtooth layout, free-in/free-
out operation, and bypass lane.
12 20 60 14,400
4. Driveway
Access
Bus entrance and exit routes between
street and transit center.
2 30 50 3,000
5. Layover Bus
Parking
Parking space for bus(es) on a break,
temporarily not on routes.
1 12 60 720
6. Passenger
Waiting /
Seating
Area for benches, lean rails, and waiting
area beyond circulation path.
12 12 60 8,640
7. Walkway /
Pedestrian
Circulation
Thru-routes along waiting/seating areas
and connecting to sidewalk access
routes.
12 6 60 4,320
8. Passenger
Drop Off
Typically, one parallel parking space
with access aisle for drop off by non-bus
vehicle.
2 13 30 780
9. Bicycle
Parking
Bicycle racks and/or secured bicycle
storage.
12 3 10 360
10. Staff Vehicle
Parking
GO Transit Administration and on-site
personal vehicle parking. Area calculation per parking stall includes
additional 9’x12’ area to accommodate
drive aisles, islands, and circulation.
3 9 19 1,004
11. Snow Storage Space for snow clearing in addition to
stormwater, landscape, and easement
areas.
Assumes 5% of impervious
area to be cleared (Items 2-
10).
2,093
12. Stormwater
Treatment
Could be incorporated into green space.
Size dependent upon overall impervious
area.
Typically, 10% of overall
impervious area (Items 1-
10).
4,634
13. Landscape /
Green Space
/
Beautification
May include moveable/permanent planters, at-grade or raised planting
beds, trees, vines, hanging baskets.
Typically, 20-30% of overall impervious area. Assumed
30% of Items 1-10.
13,903
14. Setback Area / Site
Constraints
Code and ordinance-based reductions in usable site area; zoning based.
Setbacks and easements.
Typically, 30% of all other
area (Items 1-13).
20,093
Total Sq. Ft. 87,368
Total Acres 2.0
GO Transit Site Selection Study
12
Additional programming elements were considered within the site area, as outlined in Table 6,
below.
Table 6: Additional Site Programming Elements
Space or Function Description Quantity
Long
Term
Width
(Ft)
Length
(Ft)
Area
(Sq Ft)
Safety Station /
Emergency Call Phone or lighted emergency call button. Included within pedestrian circulation
(Item 7).
Camera / Site
Security Both site and building security cameras. Secured to building and/or lighting
units.
Site Lighting Lighting units to promote safety and
security at night.
Included within pedestrian circulation
(Item 7).
Child Activity Area
Elements of play (swings, art) to occupy
children during wait time. Optional area
to include within outdoor site. Size
varies.
1 10 10 100
Information
Display /
Wayfinding
Paper or digital routes and schedule
display.
Included within shelter footprint (Item
1).
Electric Vehicle
Charging Charging stations for electric buses. 12 4 3 12
Technology Center Wi-Fi access and charging ports. Included within shelter footprint (Item
1).
Joint Development Potential public/private partnership. Size varies, site dependent.
GO Transit Site Selection Study
13
Site Evaluation, Selection and Conceptual Designs
Site Evaluation and Selection
The PMT identified several potential sites to be evaluated based on location, size, availability,
and community development potential. The screening process involved GIS site analysis, parcel
data research, review of pedestrian and bicycle trail systems, and research into historical
designations and environmental documentation. The site evaluation process is provided below.
Screening Criteria and Evaluation Criteria
The following criteria and scoring matrix were used for the screening of the potential Transit
Center sites as shown in Table 7.
Table 7: GO Transit Center Screening and Evaluation Criteria
Criteria and Description Measure and Points (24 Total)
Land Use 7 Points
Zoning. Evaluates if the site is currently zoned to
accommodate a transit facility. Sites that do not
require rezoning are preferred.
[1] Appropriately zoned
[0] Not appropriately zoned, but amendable
[-1] Not appropriately zoned, not likely to change
Community Development Potential. Assesses
impact of a transit facility on surrounding
businesses and proximity to the downtown core.
Sites where the transit facility will be a focal
point, or integral component of Oshkosh area,
and do not impact existing uses are preferred.
[+3] Close proximity and high potential to support
community development on, or near, the site.
Does not impact existing uses.
[0] Close proximity and some potential to support
community development on, or near the site.
Minimal impact to existing uses.
[-3] Close proximity and little or no potential to
support community development on, or near the
site. Significant impact to existing uses.
Joint Development Opportunity. Evaluates
whether mixed uses are permitted and if the site
can accommodate joint development. Sites
where mixed use is permitted, and the site can
accommodate joint development are preferred.
[+3] Mixed Uses permitted
[0] Mixed Uses not permitted, but amendable
[-3] Mixed Uses not permitted, not likely to
change.
Site Access and Location 5 Points
Ease of Bus Flow & Turns. Assesses if the site
has adequate street frontage, square footage and lot configuration to accommodate bus
turning movements into, through and from the
site. Sites that support bus flow and turning
movements are preferred.
[+3] Adequate street frontage, square footage and
configuration to accommodate bus flow and turns. Transit can fit entirely within the parcel
boundaries
[0] Limited street frontage, square footage and
configuration to accommodate bus flow and turns. Transit needs to utilize street frontage and
sidewalk area in the right-of-way.
[-3] Site cannot support ease of bus flow and
turns
GO Transit Site Selection Study
14
Pedestrian Access. Assesses potential for safe
pedestrian access to and from the site. Sites with
sidewalks, ADA accessible crosswalk and
signalized intersection are preferred.
[+1] Existing sidewalk, ADA accessible crosswalk,
signalized intersection
[0] Existing sidewalk, no ADA accessible crosswalk
or signalized intersection
[-1] No sidewalk, ADA accessible crosswalk or
signalized intersection
Bicycle Access. Assesses the ease of access for
bicycles to and from the site. Sites adjacent to
local or county bicycle trail system are preferred.
[+1] Trail system adjacent to site
[0] Trail system within 1/4 mile
[-1] Trail system beyond 1/4 mile
Site Characteristics 6 Points
Environmental concerns. Identifies
environmental conditions that would make development of a transit facility difficult or costly.
Sites not listed on the Wisconsin Department of
Environmental Quality (DEQ) are preferred.
[+2] No DEQ listed sites within one block of
potential transit sites
[0] One or more DEQ listed sites within one block
of potential transit sites
[-2] Potential transit site on DEQ list
Presence of utilities. Identifies whether utilities
are available to the site. Sites that have access to existing utilities, including fiber optic, are
preferred.
[+2] All utilities available on-site
[0] Require some additional utility work
[-2] Require extensive utility connections
Publicly Held. Identifies potential for GO Transit/City of Oshkosh ownership and control of
the site. Sites that are publicly held and available
for sale are preferred.
[+2] Available for sale & publicly held
[0] Available for sale & not publicly held
[-2] Not available for sale
Cost Effectiveness 6 Points
Land ownership and site acquisition cost.
Assesses ownership of the land and the estimated market value (EMV) per square foot
compared to other identified sites. Sites with
lower cost per square foot are preferred.
[+2] Lowest acquisition costs
[0] Moderate acquisition costs
[-2] Highest acquisition costs
Improvement costs. Estimates the cost to
relocate and/or install utilities, cost for facility, busway improvements, etc. on the site. Sites with
lowest estimated improvement costs are
preferred.
[+2] Lowest improvement costs
[0] Moderate improvement costs
[-2] Highest improvement costs
Operating cost impacts. Estimates the site
location impact on transit operating costs.
Estimated costs are based on assumed operating
plan, any route revisions, and issues with later
conversion to straight line routes.
[+2] Lowest operating costs
[0] Moderate operating costs
[-2] Highest operating costs
GO Transit Site Selection Study
15
Initial Site Identification and Selected Sites for Evaluation
Seven sites were identified to be evaluated as potential Transit Center Sites. Figure #2 provides
a graphic illustrating the seven sites.
Figure 2: Potential Transit Center Sites
The following provides a summary of the initial evaluation of the seven sites.
Site #1: Existing Block
In order to accommodate 12 buses at the existing Transit Center site, additional parcels on the
block (highlighted below in Figure 3) would need to be acquired. This site offers no impact to
operating costs due to its use of the existing location. Potential challenges to this site include
acquisition costs to purchase additional parcels and environmental contamination in some of the
northwest parcels (designations include both “Open Site” and “Closed Activity with Continuing
Obligations” per WDNR).
GO Transit Site Selection Study
16
Figure 3: Site #1: Existing Block
GO Transit Site Selection Study
17
Site #2: Convention Center North Parking Lot
The parking lot north of the Convention Center (highlighted below in Figure 4) is City-owned and
the south portion of the parcel is underutilized on a daily basis. The site is only one block from
the Riverwalk trail system. With no acquisition costs and minimal impact to operating costs due
to its proximity to the existing site, this site initially scored high. However, despite the acreage
meeting the programming requirements, the site layout constrained potential building layouts,
significant money was spent reconstructing the parking lot recently, and surrounding one-way
streets constricted traffic and bus flow.
Figure 4 Site #2: Convention Center North Parking Lot
GO Transit Site Selection Study
18
Site #3: Morgan District Parcels
The third site in the Morgan District (highlighted below in Figure 5) offers a blank slate as
undeveloped parcels split by Oregon Street. A multi-family residential complex is planned on the
west portion of the west parcel, and future commercial development is planned on the east
portion. Acquisition costs are higher in this option due to private ownership, yet improvement
costs are lower due to the parcels being undeveloped. Its location across the river from the
existing site would have higher operating cost impacts, but the parcel is connected to the
Riverwalk trail system, offering crucial pedestrian connections.
Figure 5 Site #3: Morgan District Parcels
GO Transit Site Selection Study
19
Site #4: Redevelopment Authority Parcel
Similar to Site #3, the Redevelopment Authority site (highlighted below in Figure 6) is
undeveloped and offers lower improvement costs, while also being publicly owned. This site
offers proximity to the Riverwalk trail system, but improvements would need to be made for both
pedestrian and bicycle access to the site. Moderate impacts to operating costs and routes result
from this site. Surrounding context includes industrial, residential, and some commercial
properties nearby.
Figure 6 Site #4: Redevelopment Authority Parcel
GO Transit Site Selection Study
20
Site #5: Park & Ride
The Park & Ride site (highlighted below in Figure 7) is publicly owned and undeveloped, offering
lower acquisition and improvement costs. However, this site is the furthest from the existing
Transit Center, and therefore would result in the greatest impacts to operating costs and
redesign of most routes. Pedestrian and bicycle access would need to be added to this site as
well.
Figure 7 Site #5: Park & Ride
GO Transit Site Selection Study
21
Site #6: Main St & Pearl Ave Block
The block at Main St and Pearl Ave (highlighted below in Figure 8) was evaluated but did not
meet the size requirements identified in the programming criteria. The block has potential for
downtown visibility, but none of the three parcels are publicly owned. Buildings on site were
constructed in the 1920s and contain retail, office space, and residential units. Acquisition costs
and improvement costs are both high.
Figure 8 Site #6: Main St & Pearl Ave Block
GO Transit Site Selection Study
22
Site #7: Jackson Pearl Block
The Jackson Pearl block (highlighted below in Figure 9) contains 12 parcels, none of which are
publicly owned. Despite higher land acquisition costs and improvement costs, the block offers
the highest potential for community development. A new mixed-use development is underway in
the southwest block at Jackson and Pearl, which will include the Oshkosh Food Co-Op. The
size of the block offers enough room for both a Transit Center and potential shared use/joint
development opportunities. Its location adjacent to the existing Transit Center block offers
minimal change to operating costs and routes.
Figure 9 Site #7: Jackson Pearl Block
GO Transit Site Selection Study
23
Priority Site Selection and Evaluation
Using the criteria and scoring system identified in Table 7, Table 8 provides the scoring results
for the evaluated sites.
Table 8: GO Transit Center Site Evaluation Results
Criteria Site #1
(Existing
Block)
Site #2
(Convention
Center North
Parking Lot)
Site #3
(Morgan
District
Site)
Site #4
(Redevelo
pment Authority
Site
Site #5
(Park &
Ride
Site)
Site #6
(Main St
& Pearl Ave
Site)
Site #7
(Jackson
Pearl
Site)
Land Use
Zoning 1 1 0 0 0 0 1
Community
Development
Potential
0 0 3 3 3 -3 3
Site Access & Location
Ease of Bus
Flow and
Turns
3 2 3 2 2 -1 2
Pedestrian
Access
0 1 1 0 -1 1 0
Bicycle
Access
0 0 1 -1 -1 0 0
Site Characteristics
Environment
al Concerns
-2 0 -2 -2 0 2 -2
Presence of
Utilities
2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Publicly Held 0 2 0 2 2 -2 0
Cost Effectiveness
Land Acquisition
Cost
0 2 -2 2 2 -2 -2
Improvement
Costs
0 0 2 2 0 -2 0
Operating
Cost Impacts
2 2 0 -1 -2 2 2
Total Score
by Site
6 12 8 9 7 -3 6
GO Transit Site Selection Study
24
These initial findings were presented to the PMT. After discussing each of the site evaluations
and scoring it was determined that location in the immediate downtown area, minimal impact to
transit operations and potential for mixed use or supportive uses held the most weight in
scoring. The PMT selected the Existing Block, Convention Center North Parking Lot and the
Jackson/Pearl block as the three sites to carry forward as priority sites (Figure 10). The design
team then developed preliminary concept plans for each of these sites to review with the PMT
and for the use during the stakeholder presentations.
Figure 10: Priority Sites
GO Transit Site Selection Study
25
Preliminary Concept Plans
The design team prepared preliminary concept plans for the three priority sites. The concept
plans include the building footprint, site improvements and potential area for shared use/joint
development. The following section provides a summary of the building concept that resulted in
the building footprint used in the site concept plans for each of the three priority sites.
Building Concepts
Building concepts were developed from the long-term programming space needs as determined
in the earlier stages of the design process with GO Transit Staff. As identified in the building
program, each space was organized into a larger context of Staff, Public and Facility Support
space functions. There are key adjacency relationships that needed to be considered to provide
facility functionality and address the prioritized needs by GO Transit Staff and Public User
Survey feedback. The building concepts also need to be integrated into the immediate site and
surrounding downtown Oshkosh context. Public functions needed to have the most visual
access to the site. This allows passengers to use the facility for short durations of time during
layover and be able to identify and access their bus upon arrival and departure. Public
functions also needed to have some access to staff interactions at the customer service office
as programmed. This meant that the security separation between public areas and staff/facility
areas needed to be both visual and physical. The visual access would be provided by glass
windows and secure doors to allow staff and rider interaction. The physical security would be
provided by solid walls and secure doors where necessary. Another key component for public
functions is exposure to the surrounding area and urban context. This allows for GO Transit
staff and public safety staff to keep an eye on activity during hours and after hours of operation.
Visual exposure and access are a key component of passive urban safety measures. The
exposure also allows the facility to become part of the urban context, as a Downtown Transit
Center. This exposure of the building that serves people, allows people to access the facility
and the facility and site to be integrated into the downtown Oshkosh fabric.
Staff functions need to be secure and more private that public functions. The primary need
identified by staff in survey was private and secure break space and restroom access, that
allowed drivers to remove themselves for a short time. The spaces still need visual and direct
access to the bus area for ease of access and efficient use of the break time allotted to staff.
Facility support functions need to be accessed by both staff and public functions. The use of
janitorial and building mechanical and electrical systems needs to be centralized so that these
building infrastructures can be designed and operated as efficiently as possible.
To help illustrate these functional relationships, Figure 11 provides a visual representation of
these relationships.
GO Transit Site Selection Study
26
Figure 11: Downtown Transit Center Functional Relationship Diagram
Within the relationship diagram, we also start to see how the building and immediate site
interact. The flow of people in and out of each function is identified. Staff functions are dead-
end flows, where the public functions are flow through. Bus and vehicle traffic are identified as
flowing around the facility, indicating that a centralized facility within a site is the most preferable
for visibility, access and efficient transit operations. We also see where a Joint Use
Development / Mixed Use / Public-Private-Partnership can be integrated into the project either
on-site or offsite, and how that would either affect or must accommodate bus movements.
GO Transit Site Selection Study
27
Building Plans
Figure 12 provides a graphic representation of the building footprint, along with a key to identify
the various uses.
Figure 12: Downtown Transit Center Building Plan
D C
A B E F G H
H
H
I J
K L L M
N
O
P
N
A. Secure Public Vestibule
B. Passenger Waiting Area and Vending
C. Passenger Restroom – Men’s
D. Passenger Restroom – Women’s
E. Customer Service Office
F. Supervisor Office
G. IT Room
H. Staff Entry & Vestibule
I. Staff Break Room
J. Operator Computer Access
K. Staff Locker Area
L. ADA Restroom
M. Wellness / Mother’s Room
N. Mechanical Area
O. Janitor Area
B
GO Transit Site Selection Study
28
Existing Site Concept Plan
To accommodate the spatial requirements for the proposed facilities on the existing Transit
Center site, GO Transit would need to acquire a combination of adjacent parcels. Two concept
plans were developed for the existing site to provide options for parcel acquisition.
Figure 13 shows Preliminary Concept A, which would require acquisition of adjacent parcels
along the Pearl Avenue frontage. These parcels currently include the Oshkosh Community
Credit Union and the Oshkosh Opera House Foundation, Inc. This concept utilizes frontage
along Pearl Ave to accommodate the 12-bus sawtooth layout, while maintaining the northern
portion of the block intact for potential shared use/joint development.
Figure 13: Existing Site- Preliminary Concept A
In Figure 14, the parcel containing the Oshkosh Community Credit Union is preserved, and
instead the layout utilizes the parcels in the northwest corner of the block. Parcels in the
northwest corner have documented environmental contamination, and this concept would cap
the contamination. While Concept B does split up potential shared use/joint development
parcels, their lack of environmental contamination offers more desirability to developers.
This concept offers a centrally located Transit Center building, which has advantages in visibility
and safety for both passengers and staff. The layout also lends itself to more landscaped area
and potential to provide trees and shade for waiting passengers.
GO Transit Site Selection Study
29
Figure 14: Existing Site- Preliminary Concept B
Convention Center North Parking Lot Site Concept Plan
In Figure 15, the south portion of the Convention Center North Parking Lot accommodates a
more compact sawtooth bus layout. The Transit Center building options for this concept are
constrained. This concept would require some reconstruction of State Street and loss of parking
stalls in order to accommodate bus entrance and exit points. With one-way streets (Otter Ave
and Ceape Ave), and a constrained State Street (diagonal parking and medians), this site may
have traffic and bus circulation challenges.
GO Transit Site Selection Study
30
Figure 15: Convention Center North Parking Lot Site- Preliminary Concept
Jackson/Pearl Site Concept Plan
In Figure 16, the Jackson Street and Pearl Avenue block can accommodate the Transit Center
building and bus layout. The building placement in this concept along Jackson Street offers
visibility and proximity to future development on the southwest block of Jackson and Pearl,
which will house the Oshkosh Food Co-Op. This concept provides more space for landscaped
areas within pedestrian zones and around the building.
Surrounding streets pose some potential traffic and bus circulation challenges, but this site
offers the highest potential for shared use/joint development along the northern portion of the
block.
GO Transit Site Selection Study
31
Figure 16: Jackson/Pearl Site- Preliminary Concept
Cost Estimates
As part of the conceptual planning task for the three priority sites, a preliminary cost estimate
was prepared for each site. These cost estimates are based upon the conceptual plans and
should only be used as a reference to compare potential costs between the priority sites. A
more formal Independent Cost Estimate (ICE) can be completed once the building and site plan
are further developed. Tables 12 through 14 provide a cost estimate based on the preliminary
concept for Existing Site (Concept A and B), Convention Center North Parking Site, and
Jackson/Pearl Site. Please reference the footnoted Opinion of Cost notes presented after the
Cost Estimate tables for more details based on the cost estimates.
Table 9: Existing Site- Preliminary Concept A- Cost Estimate
Item Cost Notes
Site Acquisition $409,400 Market $ of 2 sites
Potential Relocation Costs 4 $1,575,000 Credit Union and Opera Office
Building Demo and Site Removals1,2 $258,000
New Building $1,456,000 $325 per Square Foot – one level
Site Improvements $635,000 Pave/Curb, Green Space, Utility
GO Transit Site Selection Study
32
Table 10: Existing Site- Preliminary Concept A- Building and Site Removal
Item Cost Notes
Building Demolition $75,000 (2) 1-level, (1) Shelter
Site Removals $183,000 61,000 SF disturbed site
$258,000
Table 11: Existing Site- Preliminary Concept B- Cost Estimate
Item Cost Notes
Site Acquisition $739,500 Market $ of 8 sites (excl. Credit Un.)
Potential Relocation Costs 4 $740,000 Opera Office, 2 small businesses
Building Demo and Site Removals1,2 $423,000
New Building $1,456,000 $325 per Square Foot – one level
Site Improvements $865,000 Pave/Curb, Green Space, Utility
Table 12: Existing Site- Preliminary Concept B- Building and Site Removal
Item Cost Notes
Building Demolition $150,000 (2) 2-level, (1) 1-level, (1) Shelter
Site Removals $273,000 91,000 SF disturbed site
$423,000
Table 13: Convention Center North Parking Lot- Preliminary Concept- Cost Estimate
Item Cost Notes
Site Acquisition 0
Potential Relocation Costs 3 $2,000,000 Recent Reconstruction Cost Lost
Building Demo and Site Removals $216,000
New Building $1,993,600 $445 per Square Foot – two story
Site Improvements $740,000 Pave/Curb, Green Space, Utility
Table 14: Convention Site- Preliminary Concept- Building and Site Removal
Item Cost Notes
Building Demolition 0
Site Removals $216,000 72,000 SF disturbed site
$216,000
GO Transit Site Selection Study
33
Table 15: Jackson/Peal Site- Preliminary Concept- Cost Estimate
Item Cost Notes
Site Acquisition $2,092,000 12 sites / Comm & Res mix
Potential Relocation Costs 5 $5,055,000 Market Value Potential Increase
Building Demo and Site Removals $945,000 See detail below
New Building $1,456,000 $325 per Square Foot – one level
Site Improvements $1,065,000 Pave/Curb, Green Space, Utility
Table 16: Jackson Site- Preliminary Concept- Building and Site Removal
Item Cost Notes
Building Demolition $125,000
$250,000
$50,000
$150,000
(5) 1 level <5,000 SF,
(5) 2 level <5,000 SF,
(1) 1 level >5,000 SF,
(1) 2 level >10,000 SF
Site Removals $370,000 72,000 SF disturbed site
$945,000
GO Transit Site Selection Study
34
Opinion of Cost Notes:
1 Building Demo Costs:
a. Building under 5,000 SF / level = $25,000 per level
b. Building over 5,000 SF / level = $50,000 per level
c. Building over 10,000 sf / level = $75,000 per level
2 Site Demo Costs
a. Removal of paving, curbs and site utilities, fill and prep for new building $3 per SF of site
area disturbed for project
3 Convention Lot recent reconstruction was also a water quality / urban stormwater
management project that has additional cost implications for reconstructing that feature,
relocating, or possibly refunding project dollars
4 Potential Relocation Costs for Existing / Acquired Properties are over the market value of the
property and account for the potential asking price, and are figured as follows:
a. Credit Union: 3,450 SF * $300/SF Reconstruction & Site Relocation Cost = $1,035,000
b. Opera Office: 2,700 SF * $200/SF Reconstruction & Site Relocation Cost = $540,000
c. Bar: $60,000 yearly profit * 2-year operation delay = $120,000
d. Operational Small Business Relocation: $40,000 yearly profit * 2-year operations =
$80,000
5 Increases in asking price to accommodate business and resident relocation cost based on
market / profit / potential of current site. These are not professional valuations of the
property.
a. Large Property / Business – 4 times Market Value
b. Medium Property / Business – 2.5 times Market Value
c. Small Property / Business – 1.25 times Market Value
d. Residential / Small Lot – 0.75 times Market Value
GO Transit Site Selection Study
35
Stakeholder Outreach
Stakeholders and Process
Stakeholder outreach began once the priority sites were selected and concept plans were
completed. The PMT worked with the consultant team to identify the stakeholders who would be
invited to participate in the study and provide valuable insight on the process and initial findings.
Almost 50 stakeholders were identified to participate in the stakeholder outreach. This list of
stakeholders included representatives from Governmental, Public/Non-Profit/Private,
Educational agencies. An introduction to the study and invitation to participate was sent to the
stakeholder list. This introduction was followed by an invitation to attend one of two stakeholder
outreach meetings. The first stakeholder meeting was held on November 12th from 1pm to
2:30pm. The second stakeholder meeting was held on November 16th from 6:30 pm to 8pm. In
addition to the two stakeholder meetings, a presentation was made to the Transit Advisory
Board (TAB) on November 18th. Attachment B provides a list of the stakeholders and which, if
any, stakeholder meeting they attended. Attachment C provides an example of the GO Transit
Site Selection PowerPoint presentation.
The virtual stakeholder meetings were designed to provide an overview of the Site Selection
Study, site selection/evaluation and concept designs. After sharing an overview of the study and
initial findings, the project team facilitated a discussion with the stakeholders to better
understand their thoughts on the selected sites, concept designs and potential of these sites to
benefit Downtown Oshkosh and redevelopment initiatives.
Stakeholder Input
November 12th Stakeholder Meeting
Sixteen stakeholders, in addition to the PMT and consultant team, attended the November 12th
stakeholder meeting. Key takeaways from this stakeholder meeting are provided below:
• Transit passengers utilize area businesses for a significant number of bathroom visits
without purchase, use of phone, and change transactions. An example of 5,200
restroom visits without a purchase, 400 with a purchase, was provided by a nearby
business owner.
o Would like to see these services provided at the transit center.
o Important to blend of site utility with attractiveness of surrounding area.
• It is important to provide transit users with comfort and ease of use of the facility,
including seating and climate-controlled space. The existing space works well in the
ability to see through to both sides. It was suggested to allow coffee/beverages on site.
• The long-term goal was discussed and how to serve existing users (remove barriers)
and attract new users.
GO Transit Site Selection Study
36
• Integrate shared mobility into the design, such as rideshare, microtransit, accommodate
additional bus service (Lamers, etc.).
• Apply sustainable design strategies.
• Downtown is a “food desert” with limited access to grocery.
• Small businesses depend on parking downtown, and the perception of the local
businesses is that there is not enough parking in critical locations.
• A parking structure could be a “mixed use” element to address parking needs.
• Additional business/retail space or housing in not necessarily a needed use in the
downtown area.
• Jackson/Pearl Site:
o Can buses enter from Jackson (follow-up discussion confirmed that they could
not).
o Where will the low-income housing go that is on this block?
• Convention Center North Parking Lot Site:
o The parking loss resulting from developing this site as a transit center would be
too much to be supported by area businesses. Parking is at a premium
downtown and at maximum capacity when a conference is held at the
Convention Center.
o This site is heavily used at times and not seen as a viable priority site.
o Consider incorporating a parking ramp into the design to replace loss parking.
o Was the 200 Block/Kline building site considered. Yes, it had been, but the size
and configuration of the site will not support the programming needs.
November 16th Stakeholder Meeting
Seven stakeholders, in addition to the PMT and consultant team, attended the November 16th
Stakeholder meeting. Key takeaways from this stakeholder meeting are provided below:
• Housing may not be needed. There is a lot of housing development currently being
constructed or proposed.
• There may be an opportunity for more specialty retail and hospitality uses. There is a
need for more hotel beds and potential to integrate with the transit center.
• Governmental agencies that serve groups who frequently utilize public transit are
potential shared uses with the transit center.
• Retail will see a shift post COVID-19.
• A “do nothing” approach was mentioned. It was emphasized that there are short term
needs that are necessary for staff use, and the long-term needs cannot be met with the
existing facility.
• Convention Center North Parking Lot Site:
GO Transit Site Selection Study
37
o Concern for the loss of parking. The parking is needed.
• Existing Site:
o Not receptive to a design that requires relocation of the Oshkosh Credit Union.
They are invested in their current location and have a symbiotic relationship with
the immediate adjacency to the transit center, as that serves their customer
base.
o Concern for loss of parking. Opera House customers are not “urban” and want to
park close to attend performances. Would like to see more customers utilize
public transit to attend performances.
• Jackson/Pearl Site:
o This site was the preferred option by the stakeholders attending this meeting.
o It supports current investments and development along Jackson Street. Expands
the “shoppable” area in downtown Oshkosh.
o It was also noted that this location would require community buy-in from multiple
parcel owners.
November 18th Transit Advisory Board (TAB) Meeting
The same presentation made to the stakeholders was presented to the TAB. Stakeholders were
also invited to this meeting if they could not attend the other two options. Key takeaways from
the PMT meeting are provided below:
• There was excitement about the concepts with the driver and passenger improvements.
• Visibility is very important, and this transit center is something to be proud of.
• There is a need for more housing options and would like to see mixed use included in
the design.
• It is good to have the transit center near other uses.
• The open design of the facility was liked.
• Potential for shared use with health service providers, such as a satellite office.
• Consider other transportation options, such as bike repair, along with WIFI and charging
stations.
• Appreciated the building and site footprint providing additional area to provide for COVID
spacing.
• The preferred sites were Jackson/Pearl or the Existing Site. There was not support for
the Convention Center North Parking lot for similar reasons as mentioned in the other
two stakeholder meetings: loss of parking and impact to current use.
GO Transit Site Selection Study
38
Final Concept Plans
The PMT and consultant team met to review the comments received during the stakeholder and TAB meetings. It was agreed to move forward with the Existing and Jackson/Pearl sites in the development of final concept plans. The final concept plans took into consideration other additions to the design that were mentioned during the outreach. In addition to the final concept plans, an updated cost estimate was developed for the two final sites. This estimate includes escalation costs for 2022, 2025 and 2030.
Existing Site
The Preliminary Concept B was selected for final design in order to preserve the Oshkosh
Community Credit Union parcel and take advantage of the opportunity to cap environmental
contamination on the northwest corner of the block. The design shown in Figure 17
accommodates space for potential future passenger drop-off (including rideshare services),
bicycle parking, bicycle and scooter share, and a potential future car share stall. Table 17
provides the updated cost estimate.
Figure 17: Existing Site- Final Concept Plan
GO Transit Site Selection Study
39
Table 17: Existing Site- Preliminary Concept B- Cost Estimate
Item Cost Notes
Site Acquisition $739,500
Potential Relocation Costs $740,000
Building Demo and Site Removals $423,000
New Building 1 $1,592,000 $325 per Square Foot – one level
Site Improvements $865,000 Pave/Curb, Green Space, Utility
Project Overhead and Profit 2 $288,000 For Contractor to perform work
Professional Fees and Testing 3 $475,000
Contingency 4 $437,000
Project Cost 2020-21 $5,559,000
Escalation 5 $5,781,000 2022
$6,448,000 2025
$7,560,000 2030
Jackson/Pearl Site
The Jackson/Pearl block was the second preferred site selected for final design. The design,
shown in Figure 18, accommodates space for potential future passenger drop-off (including
rideshare services), bicycle parking, bicycle and scooter share, and a potential future car share
stall.
GO Transit Site Selection Study
40
Figure 18: Jackson/Pearl Site- Final Concept Plan
Table 18: Jackson Site- Preliminary Concept B- Cost Estimate
Item Cost Notes
Site Acquisition $2,092,000
Potential Relocation Costs $5,055,000
Building Demo and Site Removals $945,000
New Building 1 $1,601,000 $325 per Square Foot – one level
Site Improvements $1,056,000 Pave/Curb, Green Space, Utility
Project Overhead and Profit 2 $361,000 For Contractor to perform work
Professional Fees and Testing 3 $596,000
Contingency 4 $548,000
Project Cost 2020-21 $12,263,000
Escalation 5 $12,754,000 2022
$14,225,000 2025
$16,678,000 2030
GO Transit Site Selection Study
41
Downtown Transit Center Proof of Concept Images
The final concept images shown in this section are modeled for the Existing Site Final Concept
(Figures 19 through 24). The concept of building material and general form would be
transferable to the Jackson / Pear site as well, with key differences needing to be addressed for
the location of buses and orientation of the building to the public. These images display the
initial design character of the intended facility, and to meet the building characteristics identified
in the staff and public surveys, as well as feedback from stakeholder groups.
Building materials shown are representative of the durable and secure needs that were
identified, but special detail is shown to create a public entity, that is welcoming and user
friendly. One of the key influences on the material color pallet shown in these concepts is the
location of both sites in relative proximity to the Oshkosh Downtown Historical District. At the
existing site, the buildings at the corner of Division Street and High Avenue sit within that
district, though the remainder of the site does not. While site wouldn’t likely require certain
material choices or design reviews, the context of material choices, colors, patterns and motifs
should be considered and integrated into either design location to fit within and extend the
downtown context while also creating something that is identifiable and unique within the urban
fabric.
Solid, durable exterior walls with punched window openings are utilized at the staff functions of
the building. This building materiality illustrated is a brick façade that utilizes a cream-buff brick
color that is readily identifiable on the historic building on site, as well as the Opera House. This
material and color selection meets the feedback from staff for a durable and secure area for GO
Transit staff. These staff areas still need visual and physical access to the bus parking area, as
well as access to daylight and exterior views. Thus, large, punched openings are integrated
using the tight spacing and width to height proportion motif that is seen on some of the historic
buildings nearby.
Large, glazed window walls are used at the public functions, echoing the large storefronts of a
downtown commercial district. These transparent sections provide visual access for
passengers inside and outside of the facility to encourage active use. Studies of urban context
have shown that active use buildings and site create a sense of community and visibility that
inspires inclusiveness and public safety. While glass can be identified as a security risk, the
design of these systems can include increased security measures, while still providing that level
of high visibility and transparency. One such methodology is shown in these images by
including a screened glass that can provide some visual security from the exterior, while also
providing sun control for the interior spaces.
GO Transit Site Selection Study
42
Figure 19: Proof of Concept- Main Elevation- South Side
Figure 20: Proof of Concept- Public Entry / Secure Public Vestibule
GO Transit Site Selection Study
43
Figure 21: Proof of Concept- Staff Entry and Building Functions
Figure 22: Proof of Concept- Main Elevation- North Side
GO Transit Site Selection Study
44
Figure 23: Proof of Concept- Public Waiting Area and Customer Service Window
Figure 24: Proof of Concept- Staff Breakroom and Computer Area
GO Transit Site Selection Study
45
Recommendation
The consolidated efforts of the Site Selection Study were to provide GO Transit with a thorough
analysis of their long-term needs (Year 2030). These findings were applied towards a
supportable decision-making process from which to determine the location and features of a GO
Transit Downtown Transit Center that will meet the long-term needs. It was determined that the
Existing Site and the Jackson/Pearl Site best met the needs of GO Transit and had the most
support from the stakeholders. There are two critical differentiators between the two sites: cost
and short-term improvements.
Cost
The Existing Site has an estimated Project Cost (2020-21) of $5,559,000. The Jackson/Pearl
Site has and estimated Project Cost (2020-21) of $12,263,000, over twice as much as the
existing site. This additional cost is related to the larger number of properties that will need to be
acquired, higher relocation costs, and building demolition and site removals. All properties within
the Jackson/Pearl block will need to be acquired. Not all properties on the Existing block will
need to be acquired and some of the property is already under city ownership.
Short-Term Improvements
GO Transit needs to move forward with the short-term improvements soon to utilize the CARES
Act funds in a timely manner and to address the immediate needs of GO Transit staff. The
short-term improvements provide improved facilities for GO Transit drivers and staff and must
therefore be located near the current transit center. It was also confirmed that any transit facility
improvements that are funded with federal dollars must be maintained and used for transit
purposes for the useful life of the facility of 40 years. If the transit center moves to another
location in the future and the short-term improvements are no longer utilized, GO Transit would
most likely have to pay back a percentage of the federal funding. An updated concept plan was
developed to verify that the short-term improvements could be constructed without impacting
the function of the existing transit facility and accommodate the long-term improvements.
Conclusion
In terms of meeting the long-term needs of GO Transit either of these sites could be supported
as the recommended site to move forward with in pursuit of funding, environmental approvals,
and identification of potential mixed-use partnerships. But the potential cost of the
Jackson/Pearl Site and the Existing Site’s potential to accommodate both short-term and long-
term improvements leads to a recommendation to select the Existing Site as the option to
pursue for future funding opportunities.