HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem #03 - Discussion ItemCITY C!4 FL•DRIDA
,�iTt i�FF'1 E M MOF ANDUP.1
TO.
FROM•
Members of the
City Commission
Joseph R. Grassie
City Manager
October 25, 1979
FILL:
S U9JF..crn Premium Funding Support
for the Downtown People Mover
Project Committee of the
REFERENCrSwhole item October 31.
ENCLOSURES:
Dade County has prepared, in conjunction
with the Downtown People Mover Advisory
Committee, a proposal for full funding of
the Downtown People Mover system total-
ing $165,000,000. It is recommended that
the Miami City Commission agree to pro-
vide the necessary local share of $9,900,000
by committing funds from the Florida
Power and Light franchise tax.
Background In 1976 the Miami City Commission approved a
Downtown People Mover proposal, and agreed to commit $2,217,000.
as the City share of the initial funding package (30). Subse-
quently the Urban Federal Mass Transit Administration authorized
the use of $19,000,000 in Federal funds for construction of the
Downtown People Mover and the initiation of the Preliminary
Engineering Program in November 1978.
Due to the Preliminary Engineering Programa DPM Policy Com-
mittee was set up with city representatives, and the City
and County Commissions in two joint sessions approved the overall
alignment of the system and the phasing of system construction.
It is now estimated that the full system will cost $165,000,000.'
In order to achieve Federal support for funding the full system,
the Dade County Office of Transportation Administration has
developed a Premium Funding proposal which is attached to this
memorandum. This approach has been endorsed by the DPM Policy
Committee as indicated by the attached resolution.
The recommended funding plan proposes to increase the local con-
tribution required for the funding of the Full System in order
that Federal funds are matched by a 2/3 to 1/3 sharing ratio.
The maximum funding share from Metropolitan Dade County to
be provided by proceeds from the Decade of Progress Bond Program
amounts to $25,400,000 for the full DPM System of 4.2 miles
which has a total cost of $165,000,000. The remaining portions
of the non-federal share would come from the Florida Department
733
r, Q 3
Members of the City Commission
Page 2
October 25, 1979
Department of Transportation in the amount of $16,500,000
and the City of Miami in the amount of $9,90.0,000.
Upon approval of the resolution supporting the Premium
Funding Proposal by the City of Miami the Office of Trans-
portation Administration will immediately begin the process
of securing the full Federal funding commitment for the
Downtown People Mover. Metropolitan Dade County has
agreed to provide its share of the additional funds required,
and a letter of commitment from the State of Floridais
expected soon.
If only the base system is funded i.e. the CBD loop, Miami's
share will be 3% of $26,000,000 or $2,280,000. Two key
charts (nos. 6 and 7) are excerpted from the Premium Funding.
package to indicate alternative funding support required from.
the City and the anticipated cash flow requirements.
The Downtown People Mover will have a tremendously beneficial
impact on the City of Miami and, therefore, it is recommended
that the. City Commission enact a resolution of supporting
full funding for the system and the approach suggested in
the Premium Funding package.
JR:mb
Encs.
79 733
AGENCY
UNTA
COUNTY
STATE
CITY
JOINT`DEV.
TOTAL
MINIMUM SYSTEM
AMOUNT
$ 19,200.000
1,200,000
2,400,000
720,000
480.000
$ 24,000,000
SHARE
FIGURE 6
MIAMI DOWNTOWN PEOPLE MOVER
FUNDING PROPOSALS
BASE SYSTEM
.80 $ 60,800.000
.05 4,840,000
.10 7,600,000
.03 2.280,000
.02 480,000
1.00
.80
.06
• 10
.03
.01
STAGE I (NORTH)
$ 81,200.000
17,080,000
11,700,000
7,020,000
.69
.15
.10
.06
STAGE I (SOUTH)
S 84,530,000
18,190,000.
12,200,000
7,080,000
FULL SYSTEM.
SHARE
.69
.15
.10
.06
S113,200,000
25.400,000
16.500,000:
9,900,000
.69
.15
.10
.06
1.00
FIGURE 7
CAPITAL EXPENDITURE CASII FLOW
($ x 000,000 PER FEDERAL FISCAL YEAR)
AGENCY
BASE SYSTEM
1980 1981 : 1982 1983 1984
STAGE I SYSTEM1
1980 1981 1982 1983 1984
FULL SYSTEM
1980 1981 1982 1983 1934
UMTA
COUNTY 2
STATE
CITY
2.6 7.0 24.7 24.9 1.5
0.3 0.6 2.2 2.2 0.1
0.3 0.9 3.1 3.1 0.2
0.1 0.3 0.9 0.9 0.1
TOTAL
3.3 8.8 30.9 31-.1 1.9
FIVE YEAR TOTAL $76,000,000.
3.3 9.4 33.1 33.9 1.5
0.7 2.0 7.0 7.1 0.3
0.5 1.3 4.8 4.9 0.2
0.3 0.8 2.9 2.9 0.1
4.7 13.6 47.7 48.8 2.2
FIVE YEAR TOTAL $117,000,000
4.8 13.6 45.8 47.2 1.8
1.1 3.0 10.3 10.6 0.4.
0.7 2.0 6.7 6.9 0.2
0.4 1.2 4.0 4.1 0.2
7.0 19.8 66.7 68.8 2.7
FIVE YEAR TOTAL $165,000,000
1. Loop plus north leg
2. Includes private sector funding for base system.
, and was passed by voice vote.
Mayor Maurice Ferre
Co -Chairperson, DPM
Committee
RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, the Downtown.People Mover Policy Committee;:
desires to accomplish the purposes outlined in the Premium
Funding Proposal, a copy of which is attached to this resolution,
for the reasons delineated therein,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE DOWNTOWN
PEOPLE MOVER POLICY COMMITTEE, that this body approves and
endorses the concepts stated in the Premium Funding Proposal
and urges the City of Miami Commission and the Dade County
Board of Commissioners to expeditiously proceed with the process
to obtain a Federal financial commitment for construction of the
Full System Downtown People Mover Alignment
Ferre.
The foregoing resolution was offered by Mayor Maurice
, who moved its adoption. The motion was seconded
by Mr. William Rubin
adopted September 29, 1979.
Barbara Levenson
Co -Chairperson, DPM Policy
Committee
Commissioner William G. Oliver
Co -Chairperson, DPM Policy Committee
''79.77,
METROPOLITAN DARE COUNTY • FLORIDA
OFFICE OF COUNTY MANAGER
911 COURTHOUSE
MIAMI, FLORIDA 33130
TEL: 579--5311
1.0 BACKGROUND
October 1, 1979
DOWNTOWN PEOPLE MOVER
PREMIUM FUNDING PROPOSAL
In June, 1976, Dade County submitted a proposal for a Downtown People
Mover (DPM) Project as part of the national competition encouraged by
the. Urban Mass Transportation Administration (UMTA) in guidelines pub-
lished in April, 1976. On December 22, 1976, the UMTA Administrator
approved Dade County's Stage I Rapid Transit System and authorized the
reprogramming of any funds that could be saved to be used in the DPM
project.
In December, 1977, UMTA again continued the authorization to Dade County
to reprogram funds within its existing Federal transit commitment for
the funding of a Downtown People Mover. As a result of the authorization,
Dade County has reserved $24 million for construction of the DPM. The
basis for this fund reservation was that the County would construct a
minimum DPM of approximately .7 miles in length.
79-733
The Downtown People Mover system is one of three major elements of
Dade County' s planned Unified Transportation System. The first
element is an aerial rail rapid transit system, 50.1 miles in total
length, the initial stage of which is 20.5 miles. Construction on
the rail system began in June, 1979. The second element is a feeder
bus system of 1,000 buses. The third element is the Downtown People
Mover. The DPM is the downtown distributor and is designated to be
integrated both with the rapid transit and feeder bus systems.
Based on the December, 1977, letter from the UMTA Administrator, Dade
County received in May, 1978, final approval from UMTA to carry out a
$1.35 million Preliminary Engineering Program. Subsequently, Dade
County entered into a professional services contract with Gannett Fleming/
SKBB, a joint venture, to perform the preliminary engineering for the DPM
project.
In March, 1979, the Full System alignment was adopted jointly by the
Dade County and City of Miami Commissions. The adopted system is 4.1
miles in length and is estimated to cost $165 million.
Following the Full System definition, a staging analysis was undertaken
to determine the highest priority system increment. One of the conclusions
of this analysis was that the minimum system was not as cost effective as
other systems and, therefore, should be expanded to better meet the trans-
portation needs of downtown as well as the region.
The DPM project is of enormous importance to accomplishing the land use,
urban development, and transportation goals of the region, the metropol-
itan area, and the downtown area. Therefore, Dade County, along with
the City of Miami, is committed to paying a premium for additional
Federal funding.
As an inducement to convince the U. S. Department of Transportation of
the overriding importance of the Downtown People Mover project and to
persuade them to participate in the capital funding of the Full System,
Dade County proposes to increase the local contribution to the project
in order that additional Federal funds are matched by a 66.7% to 33.3%
ratio. This is equivalent to more than a 13% reduction in Federal funds
than would otherwise be required. A combination of existing funds from
Dade County bonds, contributions from the City of Miami, the Downtown
Development Authority, the private sector and the Florida Department of
Transportation, along with the utilization of Federal funds has been
developed in order to provide an attractive alternative for consideration
by 1J TA. The premium nature of this proposal also has other dimensions
which are established in this proposal.
•
2. G' DPM' PROJECT SUMMARY
Preliminary engineering for the Miami DPM system is currently nearing
completion. This phase of the project, which began in November, 1978, includes
the following major elements: (1) preliminary investigation and definition
of the Full System; (2) capital cost analysis and staging plan; (3) system
criteria and requirements; (4) preliminary design; (5) right-of-way acqui-
sition requirements; (6) performance specifications; (7) safety and security
program; (8) cost estimate and implementation schedule; (9) environmental
impact statement; and (10) the procurement bid package.
2.1 DPM Full System
Working with a Downtown People Mover Policy Committee consisting of
elected public officials of the City and County, and representatives
of downtown businesses, major downtown developers, citizen groups,
and quasi -public agencies, the. Dade. County Office of Transportation
Administration and its General Engineering Consultant have defined
the complete DPM system route alignment.
The full system, illustrated in Figure 1, consists of 4.1 miles of aerial
double guideway connecting the Brickell, Flagler Street and Omni areas
of downtown. A total of 19 stations are spaced throughout the route
length, based on approximately 1,000 foot station spacing to serve
major activity centers. Two DPM stations, the Brickell and Government
Center Stations, will interface directly with the Stage I rail line.
It is anticipated that construction of the Fu11 System will be com-
pleted by July 1984, the scheduled opening date of the Stage I Rapid
Transit. Approximately 70,500 daily riders will use the system in 1985.,
Capital cost for the Full System alignment, projected to the midpoint
of construction, has been estimated at $165 million. Operating and
maintenance costs have been estimated at $4.9 million per year, in
current dollars.
2.2 DPN Staging Concepts
Recognizing that the availability of funds will dictate the extent to which
the Full System alignment can be initially implemented, several staging con-
cepts were developed and studied in detail. Based on operational reliability,
cost effectiveness, service performance and other such criteria, agreement was.
reached on that segment of the Full System having the highest implementation
priority.
The Base System alignment, shown in Figure 1 on the following page, consists
of a double guideway approximately 1.9 miles long in a loop configuration
around the CBD. This alignment includes ten stations and operates with ten
vehicles, five on each guideway at two minute headways The round trip time
on each guideway will not exceed 11 minutes. In 1985, approximately 45,000
daily riders will use the Base System. The capital cost for thesystem, pro-
jected to midpoint of construction, has been estimated at $76 million. Operating
and maintenance costs have been estimated at $1.79 million per year, in 1979
dollars.
For purposes of this Premium Funding Proposal, an additional staging concept
is proposed. The desirable Stage ISystem isa combination of the Base System
loop plus a double guideway leg either north to the Omni area, or south to the
Brickell area (See Figure 1). The General Engineering Consultants, in their
evaluation of the merits of the north versus the south leg concluded that tech-
nical differences between the two were not great enough to form the basis for a
recommendation on priority. Accordingly, no recommendation is made at this time.
In either case, this system would be approximately three miles long and would be
utilized by more than 50,000 daily riders in 1985. The estimated capital cost,
projected to the midpoint of construction, is $117 million if the route to the
north is selected and $122 million if the south leg is selected. Operating and
maintenance costs per year, based on 1979 dollars, are estimated at $3.0 million
:or the loop plus north leg and $3.7 million for the loop plus south lea.
7'9- 7 33 4
.$TALE I;
SYSTEM ('
SOUTH ;.
LEGEND
DPM ALIGNMENT
--- DPM STATION
- RAPID TRANSIT LINE
-!- RAPID TRANSIT STATION
2.3 Rapid Transit System Interface
A key function of the DPM system will be to provide downtown dis-
tribution for the Dade County rapid transit system. By virtue of
the alignment of the rapid transit system, the. Full DPM System will
have two stations which are fully integrated within rapid transit
stations. The opportunity to develop a coordinated people mover
system fully integrated with a rapid transit line is unique in the
United States. It insures that the combined ridership on the two
systems will be more than would occur on both if they operated
separately. The rapid transit line has only three stations in the
downtown area. The DPM system expands this by adding another 19
stations.
2.4 Urban Development and Revitalization
Downtown Miami is currently experiencing a period of redevelopment
and revitalization of unparalleled size and scope. The Comprehensive.
Development Master Plan of Dade County and the Miami Comprehensive
Neighborhood Plan focus on downtown Miami as the major activity center
of the region emphasizing commercial and residential uses in order to
conserve energy, promote downtown revitalization and accomplish land
use goals for the urban area.
In excess of $1.3 billion dollars worth of projects are now underway
or in the advanced planning stages in downtown Miami. This downtown
revival has extended into all areas of economic activity. Virtually
no ground floor retail rental area is currently available in the main
commercial districts, despite the addition of more than 170 new shops
8
to the rental inventory over the last six months. Office occupancy
rates are approaching all time highs and eight major new office
buildings are ready or are under construction. These structures
will comprise more than two million square feet of space and represent
an investment of more than $150 million dollars. One new hotel with
600 rooms is underway and two others are in the final design stages.
The first new residential project to be constructed in downtown in
more than two decades is nearing completion, providing 300 new rental
housing units at a cost of $23 million. Several other condominium
buildings are on the verge of ground breaking.
The public sector has been responding to the revitalization of down-
town as well. Publicly funded. projects include a $200 million govern-
ment complex, a $58.6 million convention complex, and expansion of the
downtown Community College complex to more than double its present
size. A $40 million World Trade Center containing 400,000 square
feet is in the advanced planning stages.
The Downtown People Mover is viewed by local officials and business-
men as the thread which ties these widespread projects into the ex-
isting commercial and governmental fabric of the downtown area. All
of the projects described above are, within 500 feet or less of the
DPM line and stations. Additionally, the DPM is a critical factor
in achieving the energy goals of Dade County and the City of Miami.
Once the system is in place, pressures to substantially increase.
roadway and parking capacitywill be relieved and short auto trips
between downtown destinations will not occur. In short, the DPM
will assist in providing the physical infrastructure necessary to
achieve the goal of the Master Plan and downtown development plans
in a cost effective manner.
2.5 Project Organization
The enclosed chart (Figure 2) describes the broad organization of
the Downtown People Mover project. This chart outlines the team
responsible for the development of Miami's DPM project and shows
the functional relationships among the participants. The overall
coordination and management of the Downtown People Mover Project
in the responsibility of Dade County's Office of Transportation
Administration.
F• tCORE "' 2
MIAMI DOWNTOWN PEOPLE MOVER PROJECT
PROJECT ORGANIZATION PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING PHASE
BOARD OF COUNTY 1 CITY OF MIAMI
COMMISSIONERS COMMISSIONERS
URBAN MASS
TRANSPORTAT ION
ADMINISTRATION
i
UMTA's'Project Monitor
Frederic R. Harris, Inc.
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
DPM POLICY COMMITTEE
I
DOWNTOWN PEOPLE MOVER
PROJECT
GENERAL . ENG. CONSULTANT
GANNETT FLEMING / SKBB
L G.E.C. SUBCONSULTANTS
• N.D. Leo and Assoc.
(Systems Engineering)
• Wallace McHarg -Roberts and Todd
(Environment°, Planning)
• Mitchell -Webb.
(Utility Engineering)
• Nutting Engineers, Inc.
(Soils end Foundation)
• Albert R. Perez and Assoc.
(Landscape Architecture)
• Dennis M. Elliot, P.E.
(Operations and Procurement)
• Metric Engineering. Inc
(Surveying and Mopping)
• Robert W Schaaf, P.E.
(Systems Assurance and Safety)
I• David Plummer and Assoc, Inc.
(Traffic and Transportation)
OFFICE OF
TRANSPORTATION
ADMINISTRATION
CI TY
OF
MIAMI
DOWNTOWN
DEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY
3.0 DPM FUNDING SOURCES
Funding sources for both capital and operating costs must be identified
in order to implement the DPM project. For the purposes of this dis-
cussion the two cost categories will be addressed separately.
3.1 Capital Sources
In addition to Federal funding there are three sources available
for each alternative considered in this proposal. These sources
include Dade County Decade of. Progress Bonds, funds from the
State of Florida Department of Transportation and funds from the
City of Miami Capital Improvements Budget.
A fourth non-federal source was identified for funding the minimum
. system. This involved private sector contributions through joint
development agreements. Such funds have not been included in the
alternatives discussed in this proposal because of uncertainties
involved in actually estimating the value of these agreements at
this time. However, a plan for private sector participation in
operating costs is an integral part of this premium funding pro-
posal and is discussed in Section 3.2. This contribution by
business concerns is viewed as more substantial than that of the
original 1976 proposal which allocated 2% of the capital cost to
the private sector.
The funding share from Metropolitan Dade County will be provided
by proceeds from the Decade of Progress Bond Issue which was
passed in 1972 by a 2 to 1 majority. This Bond Issue provided
for up to $132.5 million to be expended on a unified transportation
-733
12
system for Metropolitan Dade County including a fixed guideway
rapid transit system, an improved feeder bus system, and other
capital improvements as required to insure an integrated trans-
portation system.
The current total commitment for construction of the DPM is
$24 million. This commitment is only sufficient to construct
the minimum system. The. Federal share of the $24 millionis 80%
with the State of Florida providing 10%, Dade County 5%, the
City of Miami 37 and Joint Development providing the remaining
2%.
As an inducement to obtain a Federal commitment for a more
extensive project than the minimum system, it is proposed that
the necessary additional funds for the Full System be
matched by a 2/3 to 1/3 sharing ratio. In order to arrive at
this ratio it is necessary to increase local funding sources
as outlined below.
.1 The Full DPM System
The Full System is estimated to cost $165 million necessi-
tating an increment of $141 trillion over the S24 million
minimum system. The funding shares for the increment are:
UMTA 67% or an additional $94,000,000
DADE COUNTY - 17% or an additional $24,200,000
STATE - 10% or an additional $14,100,000
CITY - 6% or an additional $ 8,700,000
13
Figure 3 details the distribution of funding requirements
among the source agencies.
.2 The Desirable Stage I DPM
The proposed Stage I System has an estimated cost of
$117 million necessitating an increment of $93 million
if the north leg is selected. If the south leg is
selected, this total cost is $122 million and the
increment is $98 million. The proposed Federal/non-
Federal split for each increment is as follows:
UMTA
- 67% or an additional
$62,000,000 for the loop plus north and
$65,330,000 for the loop plus south
DADE COUNTY -
STATE
CITY
17% or an additional
$15,880,000 for the loop plus
$16,990,000 for the loop plus
10% or an additional
$ 9,300,000 for the loop plus
$ 9,800,000 for the loop plus
north and
south
north and
south
6% or an additional
$ 5,820,000,for the loop plus north and
$ 5,880,000 for the loop plus south
Figure 4 provides a detailed breakdown of the distribution.
of funding requirements among the source agencies. From
Figure 7 it can be seen that the maximum year (1983) funding
levels are $33.9 million for UMTA, $7.1 million for Dade County,
$.9 million for the State of Florida and $2.9 million for the
City.
.3 The Base DPM System
The proposed Base System has an estimated cost of $76 million,
an increment of $52 million over the $24 million minimum system.
Premium funding is not proposed for the Base System.
In the event that only the Base System is undertaken,
the increment would be funded as follows:
UMTA - 80% or an additional $41,600,000
DADE COUNTY - 7% or an additional $ 3,640,000
STATE - 10% or an additional $ 5,200,000
CITY 3% or an additional $ 1,560,000
Figure 5 summarizes the distribution of funding require-
ments among the source agencies. Figure 7 shows that
the maximum single year commitment would occur in 1983.
In this year, the Federal share would be $24.9 million.`
The County share would be $2,2 million and the State and
City would contribute $3.1 and $0.9 million respectively.
Figure 6 presents a summary of the funding distribution
for the various-DP?d funding. systems. Figure 7
illustrates generally the capital expenditure cash flow
associated with this distribution.
FIGURE'S
FULL SYSTEM
MIAMI DOWNTOWN PEOPLE MOVER
PREMIUM FUNDING PROPOSAL
AGENCY'
UMTA
COUNTY
STATE
CITY
JOINT DEV.
MINIMUM SYSTEM
$ 19,200,000
1, 200, 000,
2,400,000
720,000
480.000
1.00
cPJ
a044
FULL SYSTEM INCRE? E11T
$141,000,000
1.00
TOTALFULL SYSTEM
$165,000,000
100
11111111111111._._
MINIMUM SYSTEM
$ 24,000,000
19,200,000
1,200,000
2,400,000
720,000
480,000
FIGURE 4
DESIRABLE STAGEI SYSTEM
DOWNTOWN PEOPLEMOVER
PREMIUM FUNDING_ PROPOSALS
STAGE 1 INCREMENT
$ 62,000,000
15,880,000
9,300,000
5,820,000
$ 65,330,000
16,990,000
9,800,000
5,880,000
1.00
111111111
TOTAL STAGE I SYSTEM
$ 84,530,000
18190,000
12,200,000
7,080,000
1111111111111111.111111111111111111111111111111
1.00
1.00
FIGURE:5
BASE SYSTEM
MIAMI DOWNTOWN PEOPLE MOVER
AGENCY
MINIMUM SYSTEM
BASE INCREMENT
AMOUNT
SHARE
UMTA.
COUNTY
STATE
CITY
JOINT DEV.
$ 19,200,000
1,200,000
2,400,000
720,000
480,000
. 80
. 05
. 10
.03
.02
AMOUNT
$ 41,600,000
3,640,000
5,200,000
1,560,000
SHARE
.80
.07
.10
.03
1.00
1I
TOTAL BASE SYSTEM
AMOUNT SHARE
$ 60,800,000
4,840,000
7,600,000
2,280,000
480,000.
$ 76,000,000
.80
.06
.10
.03
.01
1.00
FIGURE'6
MIAMI DOWNTOWN PEOPLE MOVER
FUNDING PROPOSALS
FIGURE 7 .
CAPITAL EXPENDITURE CASH FLOW
($ x 000,000 PER FEDERAL FISCAL YEAR)
AGENCY BASE SYSTEM STAGE I SYSTEM'
1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984
1980 1981 1982 1983 1934
UMTA 2.6 7.0 24.7 24.9 1.5
3.3 9.4 33.1 33.9 1.5 4.8 13.6 45.8 47.2 1.8
2 1.1 3.0 10.3 10.6 0.4
0.7 2.0 7.0 7.1 0.3
COUNTY 0.3 0.6 2.2 2.2 0.1
STATE 0.5 1.3 4.8 4.9 0.2
0.7 2.0 6.7 6.9 0.2
0.3 0.9 3.1 3.1 0.2
0.1 0.3 0.9 0.9 0.1 0.3 0.8 2.9 2.9 0.1
0.4 1.2 4.0 4.1 0.2
CITY
4.7 13.6 47.7 48.8 2.2
7.0 19.8 66.7 68.8 2.7
TOTAL
3.3 8.8 30.9 31.1 1.9
FIVE YEAR TOTAL`$76,000,000
. Loop plus north leg
FULL SYSTEM
FIVE YEAR TOTAL $117,000,000
FIVE YEAR TOTAL.$165,000,000
2. Includes private sector funding for base system.
OD
�dC>
IIIII■IA ... - - .__.
20
3.2 0 erating Sources
The primary sources of funds for DPM system operating costs are
fare box revenues, private sector financial participationand
the local Dade County transit subsidies. Section 2.0 identified
operating costs for the various staging concepts in 1979 dollars.
These figures, escalated to 1985, are estimated to be $7.35 million.
for the Full System, $4.5 million for the Stage I (North) System
and $2.68 million for the Base System
.1 Fare Box Revenue
As is the case for current MTA services and the Stage I rapid
transit system, fare box revenues are not projected to pay the
entire DPM operating cost. The fare is assumed to be 25c when
the system starts full service in 1985 with free transfer from
bus and rail lines allowed.
The 1985 ridership projections and corresponding annual fare
box revenues for the DPM system are shown in Figure 8.
FIGURE 8
DPM RIDERSHIP AND REVENUE PROJECTIONS
Daily Annual Annual
Ridership Ridership Revenue
Base System ` 45,400 13,620,000 $1,702,500
Stage I System* 54,400 16,303,800 $2,038,000
Full. System 70,500 21,150,000 $2,643,750
*Loop Plus North Leg.
The revenue shortage is anticipated to be $1.0 million for the
Base System, $2.5 million for the Stage I (North) System, and
$4.7 million for the Full System in 1985.
, ?)
21
.2 Private Sector Financial Participation
The private sector property owners, retail merchants and others
located in downtown Miami are exPected to derive major economic
benefits from the operation of the DPM system. Their benefits -
would accrue in the form of premium rents, higher occupancy rates,
increased retail sales and reduced employee costs. The results of
an economic benefit study for the DPM project indicate that by 1985 the.
private sector will receive $3.5 to $4.0 million annually (stated in
1979 dollars) in DPM-induced benefits.
The accrual of these benefits to the private sector provides a
strong policy basis for private sector financial participation in
the DPM project. On this basis, the benefiting private sector has
agreed to contribute all local funds required for the maintenance
and operation of DPM stations. The contribution from the private
sector will thus be supporting those system facilities which most
directly provide benefits, since the DPM stations are the interface
point between the system and private properties.
DPM station operating costs consist almost entirely of electricity
for lighting and the communications system. In some stations, other
minor utility costs, such as water, would also be included. All station
maintenance can be carried out on a contractual basis for elevator,
escalator, landscape maintenance, janitorial services and fare collection
equipment. As such, these contractual elements are easily segregated
from overall system operational costs and all funds for contract adman-
istration come from the private sector contribution.
p 79
99
I
22
Annual maintenance and operating costs for stations have been estimated
at $21,500 per station. These costs are shown in the figure below.
METRO MIAMI DPM ANNUAL STATION MAINTENANCE
AND OPERATING COSTS
Escalator Maintenance (contract) $ 3,500
Elevator Maintenance (contract)
1,500
Station Cleaning (contract)
3,500
Landscape Maintenance (contract)
2,000
Fare Equipment Maintenance (contract) 2,000
Station. Repairs 5,000
Station Electrical 3,500
Other Station Utilities 500
$21,500
In addition, a capital improvements fund will be established to
maintain a high quality appearance in the stations. Any contribution
from the private sector not used to meet the utility and
maintenance obligations identifed above will be placed in this fund.
The fund will be used to make repairs, upgrade stations operationally,
make aesthetic improvements, or make other capital improvements.
23
Ft
For the three system configurations under consideration, the total
annual station operating and maintenance requirement will be $408,500
for the Full System (19 stations); $301,000 for the Stage I (North) System
(14 stations); and, $215,000 for the Base System (10 stations).
Additionally, it will be desirable to generate about $100,000 annually
for the capital improvement fund.
Given these assumptions, the annual private sector contribution to DPM
operating costs would be approximately $300,000 to $500,000. This
represents about 10% of the annual $3.5 to $4.0 million in economic
benefits expected to accrue to the private sector as a result of the DPM.
The mechanism under consideration for implementing the private sector
financial participation program involves the creation of a DPM Special
Tax District. The establishment of a DPM Special Tax District is possible
under Dade County or City of Miami legislative authority. The boundaries
of the district would be based on the relative accessibility of a property
to a DPM station, with those properties having a direct physical and func-
tional relationship to the DPM included in the district. A legal evaluation
indicates that the County has the authority to create such a district, pro-
vided that all County funds for the project come from the district tax levy.
The City of Miami also has the authority to create such a district.
A DPM Special Tax District with a one mill tax levy could generate the
necessary $300,000 to $500,000 annually to meet the station maintenance
and operating requirements for any of the DPM staging alternatives.
24
In the event that the DPM Special Tax District cannot be finalized
before Federal funding commitments are required, the Downtown Develop-
ment Authority (DDA) has committed a portion of its tax proceeds to
meet the DPM Station 0 & M costs. The DDA is currently funded in
part through a special tax levy on downtown property. It is expected
that the DDA taxing district will generate revenues well in excess of
. $500,000 annually by 1985. Thus, it will be possible to meet the annual
station maintenance and operating requirements for any of the DPM
staging alternatives by use of this fund The DDA commitment represents
an absolute "fall back" position if the tax district cannot be implemen-
ted. The County and City will continue to pursue. this option. Upon
implementation, the DDA commitment automatically would be voided.
Dade County Transit Subsidies
The remaining operating cost for the DPM system after deducting fare box
revenues and private sector contributions will be funded as part of Dade
County's transit operating -budget. These costs are estimated to range
from $700,000 to $4,000,000 for the various DPM alternatives. Sources
of funds for the County transit operating budget include Dade County
general fund appropriations.
25
4.0 DPM PROJECT JUSTIFICATION
4.1 Background
The transportation system in downtown Miami will require signifi-
cant changes by 1985 as energy becomes more scarce and more costly,
land use changes, urban revitalization occurs and new development
is opened throughout the area along Brickell Avenue, in DuPont
Plaza at the Government Center, in the Educational Complex and
northward to Omni. The Metrorail System will have opened, carrying
a large portion of all trips into and out of downtown. In 1985,
without any consideration of energy impacts, 8,000 persons will use
the Government Center rail transit station in the peak one hour.
For the Brickell and Washington Heights stations, 1,400 and 2,000
persons, respectively, will enter or leave the area in the same time
period. Because this rapid transit system service is focused on the
western side of the CBD, the Full Downtown People Mover System
is absolutely necessary to meet the growing need for distribution
from the rail stations to the eastern or bayfront side. The Full
System will also provide important support for north/south trips
made in the CBD
The implementation of a DPM system will be a decisive factor in the
future development and redevelopment of downtown Miami. Improved
access afforded by the DPM can create new development sites, enhance.
existing sites, and provide a strong linkage between existing activity
centers. As such, the DPM will serve as a structuring element to
focus attention on the economic development opportunities available
in the downtown area.
79 . 7 33
26
This role for the DPM has been assured through a local planning
process which established land use and development impacts as one
of the highest priority evaluation criterion for system alignment
and station location. This is also reflected in the UMTA Objectives
for the DPM program which include 'demonstrating positive economic
impacts aimed at central city urban development and enhancing the
natural and social urban environment.
The development impacts of the DPM are consistent with the goals
of the Dade County Comprehensive Development Master Plan and Miami
Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan which identify downtown as.the
major diversified activity center within the urban area. The
DPM provides the physical structure to support continued economic.
growth necessary to create a downtown that serves as
financial, and cultural hub of Dade County and the
United States.
the social,
southeastern
The DPM's-land use impacts also reflect positively on another area
of national concern. Given the current energy situation, efficient
economic use of available energy sources is no longer an idealistic
goal, but an ever growing necessity. The Federal government has long
exerted considerable influence on patterns of energy use through regu-
lations and development of technology. The present administration has
pledged substantial financial support to mass transit systems because
of the potential massive energy savings these systems represent and,
just as importantly, because of the desirable patterns of development
that public transit will encourage.
79`" 7
e3
27
Energy savings resulting from the impact of transportation facilities
on land use and development patterns cannot be ignored. A high capacity
transportation system is going to attract development because of in-
creased accessibility. The resulting development is of higher density.
At higher densities, attractions or activity centers are closer to-
gether, trips are shorter, and overall transportation energy needs are
reduced. For all its problems, New York City is by far the most energy
efficient city in the nation, with per capita consumption less than
half that of Dade County.
Miami's DPM should also be considered in the context of the region's
implementation of a rapid transit system and expanded feeder bus net-
work as one comprehensive transportation system. For instance, it is
estimated that each 1,000 bus miles that"will be saved through short-
ening bus routes to downtown will result in bus fuel savings in excess
of 300 gallons.
In order to compare the effects of staged development of the full
DPM system, transportation characteristics of this system have been
compared to an all, bus alternative and two staged development levels..
The two development levels are the Base System and the Stage I System
consisting of the loop plus the north leg.
The All -Bus Network
As an alternative to a DPM system, the All Bus downtown transit net-
work relies primarily on four circulator bus routes. These routes
are designed to serve both rapid transit distribution needs and internal
circulation requirements during peak hours. The routes operate at five
minute headways and an average eight mile per hour speed:
28
A primary feature of the All Bus alternative is the use of priority
bus lanes on Biscayne Boulevard between Omni and Flagler Street and
the conversion of Flagler Street to a pedestrian transit way. This
treatment facilitates the movement of buses through the downtown area,
particularly those buses from the north on Biscayne Boulevard and
from Miami Beach to the east. Major bus terminals are located in
the Omni area and at the Government Center station. Fares for the
circulator buses are set at 25c.
4.3 The Base System
The Base. System utilized in the comparison of DPM staging alterna-
tives includes the two-way loop people'mover system described earlier
and a substantially modified bus network. ,A major feature of this
transit system is that there are no buses operating within the core
of downtown Miami. The DPM serves as a distributor of all downtown
trips to local activity centers and feeds rail and bus lines servicing
other parts of the study area and the County. This arrangement
requires that a person in the center of the area encircled by the DPM
walk several blocks to reach a DPM station or bus route.
To reduce the inconvenience created by this distance an open air tram
is assumed to operate in an east -west Flagler Street corridor between
the DPM stations at the Government Center and Biscayne Boulevard.
There is no:fare charged and operating speeds are assumed to be five
miles per hour. The operation of this route reduces walking distances
to one or two blocks to get to the DPM system.
29
4.4 The Stage I System
The Stage 1 System substitutes a northern extension of the DPM
loop to the Omni area for the Base circulator bus route which
ran between Omni and N. B. 5th Street. A major advantage of this
leg is that the local bus network entering downtown from the north
and from Miami Beach can now be terminated in a transfer area at
Omni, thus eliminating thousands of bus miles and 200 buses daily
through the downtown area. The remaining circulator and local bus
routes are in configurations identical to the Base System.
4.5 The Full System
The Full System incorporates legs both north and south from the
downtown loop. Only one circulator bus route, between Omni and the
Washington Heights rapid transit station, operates under this option
other distribution from the rapid transit system is provided by
the people mover. Local bus routes which currently end in down-
town are terminated at their first point ofcontact with the
people mover system. Local routes which pass through downtown
are rerouted onto circumferential streets once they make connection
with the DPM.
4.6 System Performance
The principal physical characteristics of the networks are
shown in Figure 10. As DPM route miles increase, it can be seen
that` both local and circulator route miles decrease. Figure 11
illustrates the performance characteristics of the various systems.
30
Overall public transportation ridership is highest for the Full
System and lowest for the All Bus Alternative. The operating costs
required for each system are shown in Figure 12. Earlier sections
have described how the costs of the DPM portion will be met through
the fare box, downtown private sector financial participation and
the ongoing transit subsidy program. This. ongoing program will also
be utilized to subsidize the operating costs involved in operating
the bus portions of each alternative.
Clearly Figures 11 and 12 illustrate that the County is in a position
to provide greater transit service with the DPM system than with the
All Bus Alternative. Total daily person trips on all public trans-
portation modes are 122,370 for the All Bus Alternative. This number
represents actual trips made by individuals each day. In contrast,
the DPM modes each enable the production of about 135,000 person trips
per day for an increase in tripmaking on public transportation of
12,000 to 13,000 trips daily.
A downtown transportation system appropriately utilizing DPM in high.
volume corridors can be considerably less costly tooperate.
example, Figure 12 shows that, despite the increase in total transit
ridership, the daily operating costs for the Full System are approximately
60% of the costs for the All Bus Alternative ($39,370 per day vs $24,690)
This difference amounts to a direct savings of approximately $4.4
million annually in 1979 dollars. Presuming a trend of continuing
inflation for the foreseeable future, this annual savings alone would
offset a substantial portion of the capital cost of the project within
twenty years.
FIGURE 10
ALTERNATIVE BUS AND DPM
NETWORK CHARACTERISTICS
PEAK
MIDDAY
ALL BASE STAGE I* FULL
BUS SYSTEM SYSTEM SYSTEM
ALL BASE STAGE I* FULL
BUS SYSTEM SYSTEM SYSTEM
ROUTE
MILES
Local Bus 67 51 42 34
Tram 1 1 1
Circulator 15 9 6 3
DPM - 4 6 9
TOTAL 82 65 55 47
67 51 42 34
1 1 1
15 9 6 3
4 6 9
82 65 55 47
VEHICLE
MILES
Local Bus 614 283 267 212
Tram 67 67 67
Circulator 435 260 172 106
DPM 161 250 343
TOTAL 1049,E 771 756 728
530 215 212 193
- 67 67 67
437 260 138 50
- 161 250 343
967 703 667 653
VEHICLE
REQ.
Local Bus 48 35 30
Tram - 7 7
Circulator 52 30 20
DPM - 11 18
TOTAL 100 83 75
24
9
12
30
75
30 23 21
7 8
44 25 14
- 11 18
74 66 61
15
5
20
57
* Loop plus north leg -Stage I (North).
1. ,
FIGURE 11
ALTERNATIVE BUS AND DPM SYSTEM
TRANSIT PERSON TRIPS
1
32
ALL BUS BASE SYSTEM STAGE I SYSTEM FULL SYSTEM
AM E. PM Peak 67,890 76,126 76,149
Midday 54,480 58,507 59,604
TOTAL 122,370 134,633 135,753
DAILY TRANSIT. RIDERSHIP
(Unlinked Transit Trips)2
77,200
58,406
135,606
ALL BUS BASE SYSTEM STAGE I SYSTEM 1 FULL SYSTEM
Circulator Bus 49,560
Flagler Tram -
DPM -
Local Bus 87,559
Rapid Transit 24,195
TOTAL 161,314
Average Transfers
41,837
14,332
45,419
65,819
32,225
199,632.
1.32 1.48
21,576
16,324
54,346
73,700
28,795
196,842
6,939
17,482
70,463
72,773
28,399
196,056
1.45 1.45
1 Loop plus north leg - Stage I (North)
2 ..:i6ked transit trips include a separate count for each mode. Thus, persons
transferring from one mode to another on a single trip are counted twice.
FIGURE 12
ALTERNATIVE BUS AND DPM SYSTEMS
COMPARISON OF COSTS
PEAK 1 HOUR ALL BUS BASE SYSTEM
Local Bus $ 1,099 $ 507
Tram - 161
Circulator 979 585
DPM - 296
TOTAL $ 2,078 $ 1,522
MIDDAY 1 HOUR
Local Bus
Tram
Circulator
DPM
TOTAL
949
983
$ 1,932
STAGE I SYSTEM 1
$ 478
161
415.
418
$ 1,472
33
FULL SYSTEM
$ 379
161
240
573
$ 1,353
$ 358 $ 279 $ 345
161 161 161
585 333 111
269 418 578
$ 1,400 $ 1,291 $ 1,195
DAILY COST2
Local Bus $19,730 $ 8,310
Tram 3 - 3,220
Circulator $19,640 11,700
DPM 5,380
TOTAL $39,370 $28,610
1 Loop plus north leg - Stage I (North)
2 Peak 1 hour x 5+ Midday 1 hour x15
3 Tram operates for 10 hours only
$ 8,075
3,220
8,735
8,360
$28,390
$ 7,070
3,220
2,865
11,535
$24,690