HomeMy WebLinkAboutSubmittal-PowerPoint Presentation-SFECC Transit Study - Presentation to City Commission (2009-03-12)S OUTH
CDA
CORRIDOR
S TUDY
SOUTH FLORIDA EAST COAST
CORRIDOR TRANSIT ANALYSIS STUDY
Federal Aid N° FTAX004
FTA Grant N° FL-90-X372-07
Financial Management N° 417031-1-22-01
City of Miami Commission
Briefing
March 12, 2009
FroIpM Cartier.
- Fuwi.tS CaaI Y
PAfuga ar Cartwa.
- AoVak
- SUM Fkada RTA{Fd Ridl
- 11am-0eM Tra,ar{Wea.3.
Passnwr Maw.
TnRy 6 Amin*
PAN 0*
Ameak Uey
COM wen
C.M. na
wwa..*
Ormeo PIA
e ft LaudaFdak
7Lt111Len44 LLE
ura was
16aN
Today's Presentation
• Project Overview
• Project Schedule
• Miami Stations
• ROW Constraints
■ Other Corridor Preservation
Issues
1
Project Overview
• Net migration will continue into Southeast Florida
41V1a.or growth iiregional,popula.tion by 20
• Improvements toapy-WWNtffail and bus system
mmm � EEMMEN
��������kw�9h:. �� ��� mom �������
imit.
� es nod most
• New travel options needed
To recap travel
Florida East Coast
Railway
• A 100-foot wide corridor
— One or two main line tracks
— 26 daily freight trains
• Links all three regional CBDs
— Miami
— Fort Lauderdale
— West Palm Beach
• Traverses core of communities
east of the Interstate
— Re-establishing a link that led
to their formation
2
Schedule
_ SFECC Phase 2 Schedule
• 2009 2010
Jan Feb I ar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep
Generic Alternatives .....................
Mode Specif Alternatives .....................
Public Workshops .....................
Recommended Prefered Alternative .....................
Public Hearing .....................
MPO/RTA Approvals .....................
Suhmit "New Starts"Application....................
Opportunities for Public Input
Phase 2 Transit Technology
Assessment
3
SFECC Stations
• Stations are a gateway to
communities
— Fill gaps in the urban fabric
— Bring people to the scene
— Create opportunities
— Affect traffic circulation
• Pedestrian & vehicular
SFECC station goals
— Address new transit needs
— 'Good fit' for community
— Support development needs
— Encourage/shape
redevelopment
— Contribute life & vitality
SFECC Station Types
• Evaluation revolves around
eight basic station types:
— City Center
— Town Center
— Neighborhood
— Employment Center
— Local Park -Ride
— Regional Park -Ride
— Airport / Seaport
— Special Event Venue
4
sA ��o, n • nets a1 �.
C' O iiiIk i:a' ao!3®Ild:
3 R$��i tameroine
Airpo rtExpresswayIlt
No'dhw sl%36Sh:�7a�r�-ti�
Pli n[ 35,d9:5fi 23' N BO '11v28+74' W:,elev 1.111., 811
anaalesles 39th Street
B IT'e AA..11e
1h+ sstrsoih Streel>`�m
arriri,g', IIII111111* 100%
®®��1f'i,r�nr flNlliPi�' r `.•'WMryfllriN4
2wirarlI ! lraraa�, ;,.. ` �� ▪ MliAll ..,M,
ism
17
Airport Expressway - v„�
9Gth+fStr eati In
llgf=��
�fl.
1011p MIr rrW R9 ".'
1�"I'?' T." ',4P ptlritb n
��t4e rrfc�+,• l..... _ 14 FT'Llr
aaa. J . i 13'. 77 a.
r ] g.il
h StneeY� ye1ri w I "p 5;%•.
1 fyyy,,R fir! {. iii Y�.'+�`
ili r a n
41iOiiii.a
N wesl4a,th $tr eel s� i 'w • 3a • i
Nor=Sh s1
��-
'.rPI!: N vxa ,
.aFRmas o Fios►VD . is S ayrf74rf E`w�i
Ikb'T So .r,west 1st�Str(e' i rope
zo'o® "zabai Tele
ra -1 aft+P771
Caa-t J? r3;'Efr?"agA/•PIw' ,LY1c.`r5 ar.,71`:I' dix fl6'Iil.
•
•.
�...' Burling Island
t g111111I [II ino%. .,
5
/•
—Metrorail Streetcar — Exlattng
Metromover --- SFEC Tracks
FEC owned -real
estate parcel
6
Downtown Miami Options
• Three options-
- Three ---------
— Government Center at grade
— Government Center grade separated
— Overtown at grade
— Overtown grade separated
Government Center - At Grade
METROR JL
GOVERNMENT CENTER AT -GRADE OPTION.
SFEC l B
"9�
Government 'ail Overtown/
Center <;y r Arena
— Metrara d
Motrornover
f
Streetcar
sr:c
7
Government Center - Grade
Separated
GOVERNMENT CENTER ELEVATED OPTION
—Melrorall
Metrornover
Overtown - At Grade
FlETRORNI
Government
Center aiY
0
1
Metrora;
Metromover
GOVERNMENT CENTER AT -GRADE OPTION
0
SF EC
8
Overtown - Grade Separated
METRORAIL
OVERTOWNINW 9TH STREET ELEVATED OPTION
5EEC ........................
14i_ _1_...1 ±L_LI
1.
17,
}2M
1 c
Downtown Miami Options
I
STATION OPTIONS ADVANTAGES
DISADVANTAGES
Governments Center— at grade Brings passengers into heart of downtown.
Ties into other modes but at different levels.
Moderate cost depending on treatment of
Metro Mover.
Clearance issues with Metro Mover.
Introduces grade crossings on downtown streets.
Increases costs of development of surrounding FEC
tracts.
Government Center— grade Brings passengers into heart of downtown.
separated No grade crossings.
Ties into other modes at similar levels.
Most expensive option.
Most difficult for development of surrounding FEC
tracts.
Overtown — at grade Least costly alternative.
Avoids issues of interfering with development
of FEC tracts.
Does not bring passengers directly into heart of
downtown.
Only ties into MetroRail.
Some grade crossings.
Overtown — grade separated Less costly than going into Government
Center.
Ties into PeopleMover as well as
Metro Mover.
No grade crossings.
Avoids impacts on FEC development tracts.
More expensive than at grade options.
Does not go directly into heart of downtown (close
than at grade option.
9
10
Other Corridor Preservation Issues
• Existing track is not centered in ROW
• Additional tracks will be required for passenger service
to accommodate:
- Freight and passenger trains
- Local and express passenger service
• Non -compliant technology options may require additional
separation from freight
• Temporary community -oriented uses within the ROW
may be difficult to remove at a later date without public
opposition
11