The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutSubmittal PresentationS Q U T it LtillcoAs CORRIDOR S 'T U D Y SOUTH FLORIDA EAST COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT ANALYSIS STUDY Federal Aid N2 FTAX004 FTA Grant N° FL-90-X372-07 Financial Management N° 417031-1-22-01 City of Miami Commission T May 14 2007 SUBMITT . PUBLIC RECORD Fi SFECC Transit Analysis Study • Jupiter to Miami- 85 mile corridor • Centered on the FEC Railway • FTA/NEPA two tier process • Considers Multiple, Parallel Alignments • Consolidates Multiple Past Study Efforts - Tri-rail Jupiter Extension - Miami -Dade Northeast Corridor -Qroward County Transit Improvements Florida East Coast Railway • 100-Foot Corridor through Most of Three Counties — One or Two Main Line Tracks — 233 Highway Grade Crossings • Infrastructure Matched to Current Freight Operations — Typically 26 Daily Freight Trains — No Excess Capacity for Passenger Trains • Strategies to Increase Capacity — Add Main Line Tracks — Reduce Maritime Conflicts — Reduce Grade Crossing Impacts SFECC Alignments Railroad Alignments • Florida East Coast Railway (iSouth Florida Railroad Corridor (CSXT, Tri-Rail, Amtrak) Highway Alignments • US-1 • Interstate 95 SFECC Tier 1 Recommendations • Divide Corridor into Sections for Tier 2 Study • Technology Set Appropriate for Each Section • Appropriate Alignment Choices for Each Section STUDY Freight Carriers CSX Transportation Florida E_st Coast Rai;;:ay Passenger Carriers Amtrak South Florida RTA (Tri-Rail) Miami -Dade Transit (Metrorail) Passenger Stations Tri-Rail & Amtrak o Tri-Rail Only Amtrak Only Recommended Tier 2 Sections .mot Be: • —npann Bear.ri. Jupiter West Palm Beach Lake Wrerth Langan„ 0 ::1zEor3213A4014iiuri Pompano- Beach Oakland Par: Wdld Main Ft Lauderdale Cdn Fie4Vy°a�r� Fla tanda.e '11:011 1,, arr. 6L&m: Fdvy^[a SFECC Tier 2 Study Sections • Miami — Fort Lauderdale — Pompano Beach • West Palm Beach — Jupiter • West Palm Beach — Pompano Beach • Corridor -Length Services — "Minimum Operable Segments" within Sections to be Determined — Priority Will Reflect Potential Ridership and Availability of Funding SFECC Tier 2 Modal Technologies and Alignments by Study Section Section Alignment Miami — Pompano Beach FEC West Palm Beach — Jupiter FEC West Palm Beach — Pompano Beach 1-95 Cp FEC a Corridor Solutions FEC F� Regional Bus Bus Rapid Transit Light Rail Transit Rail Rapid Transit Regional Rail , Tri-Rail EIDMU ■ ■ ■ i ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ d RGB BRT LRT RRT RGR SFECC Capital Costs Service Se• ment Ali • nment West Palm Beach - Pompano Beach Pompano Beach - Miami Jupiter- West Palm Beach FEC US1 FEC US1 fre FEC US1 Technology: Bus Rapid Transit Light Rail Transit Rail Rapid Regional Rail Transit Tri-Rail Other RGR $2.2 - 2.6 B $2.7-3.2B $2.7-3.2B $8.7 $9.2.11.0B $2.6 - 3.1 B $3.1 - 3.7 B $6.9 - 8.1 B $3.0 - 3.6 B $9.9 - 11.9 B $10.5 - 12.6 B $1.2 - 1.5 B $1.5 - 1.8 B $1.4 - 1.6 B $4.5-5.4B $4.8-5.7B BRT LRT RRT RGR AVE NE 198 St NMBNE163St NMB NE 151 St NMI NE 135 St NMI NE 125 St MIS NE 107 St Iii/MIS NE 96 St MIA NE 79 St MIA NE 71 St MIA NE 61 St MIA NE 54 St MIA NE 39 St MIA NE 29 St MIA NE 20 St A NE 11 St MIA Government Center STATION SUITABILITY HIGH MEDIUM -HIGH MEDIUM MEDIUM -LOW LOW Circle size proportional to weekday passenger boardings. SFECC Station Areas Miami -Dade County • General Station Areas — Half -Mile "Circles" — Initially Sited by Highway Access — Specific Sites to be Determined in Partnership with Communities • TO'D Suitability Assessment — 21 Factors • Land Use, Zoning, Growth Potential, Employment Density, Residential Density, Demographics, etc How Municipalities Can Help • Adopt Resolutions of Support in Favor of the Project • Identify Your General Issues and Concerns • Encourage TOD and TSLU at Stations Sites (Zoning) • Identify Financing & Funding Partners (City, County, Others) Transportation Decisions by MPOs Land Use Decisions by Counties & Cities City of Miami Issues • Grade Crossing Safety • Grade Crossing Delay/Congestion • Coordination with Streetcar • Linkage with Metrorail • Project Coordination with Development Proposals • Affordable Housing/Jobs/Job Training Project Status • Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement — May 2007 • Regional Record of Decision from FTA- August 2007 • Tier 2 Notice to Proceed- August 2007 (36-54 months) • FDOT and FEC Industries negotiations continue • Earliest date of service in City- 2015 • Walking/bicycle path adjacent to FEC included in alternatives 10 u r H COAS CORRIDOR $ T UDY SOUTH FLORIDA EAST COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT ANALYSIS STUDY Federal Aid N° FTAXOO4 FTA Grant W. FL-90-X372-07 Financial Management W 417031-1-22-01 PLEASE VISIT US AT WWW SFECCS TUD Y. COM SOUTH COGS CORRIDOR STUDY SOUTH FLORIDA EAST COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT ANALYSIS STUDY Federal Aid N° FTAX0'04 FTA Grant N° FL-90-X372-07 Financial Management N° 417O31-1-22-01 1NF0RMATl0NAL SLIDES (Not Being Presented) SFECC Modal Technologies RAIL RAPID TRANSIT • Represented in Southeast Florida by Metrorail. • Requires 100% grade -separated, exclusive right-of-way. • Electric self-propelled trains up to eight cars. 15 SFECC Modal Technologies LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT Electric LRT (Type 3 EMU) _ Diesel LRT (Type 3 DMU) • No Southeast Florida example at present. • Shares railroad rights -of -way (but not tracks) or public streets. • Electric or diesel self-propelled trains up to four cars. SFECC Modal Technologies BUS RAPID TRANSIT • Represented in Southeast Florida by MDT South Dade Busway • Exclusive busways in railroad rights -of -way or public streets. • Articulated buses up to 60-foot in length. 17 SFECC Modal Technologies REGIONAL BUS • No Southeast Florida example at present. • Over -the -Road Motorcoach • Considered for Tri-Rail Extensions in Palm Beach County. Locomotive with Push -Pull Coaches Diesel Railcar ('Type 1 DAM SFECC Modal Technologies REGIONAL RAIL (FRA Compliant Options) r wit �14a • Represented in Southeast Florida by Tri-Rail. • Shares railroad tracks with Amtrak and freight trains. • Electric or Diesel Propulsion • Locomotive -hauled Push -Pull trains or Self -Propelled Railcars (MUs) 19 SFECC Modal Technologies REGIONAL RAIL (Non-FRA Compliant Options) Diesel Railcar (Type 2 DMU) • No Southeast Florida example at present. • Shares railroad rights -of -way (but not tracks) with Amtrak, Tri-Rail and freight trains. • Self-propelled railcars (DMUs) in trains up to four cars. • Diesel (or alternative -fueled) propulsion. STATION SUITABILITY HIGH MEDIUM -HIGH MEDIUM MEDIUM -LOW Inter LOW Circle size proportional to weekday passenger boardings. Cypress Creek ldan Hol yw od-Slado ry DRF E Hillsboro Blvd PMP E Sample Rd PMP E Atlantic Blvd OAK Cypress Creek Rd OAK Commercial Blvd OAK NE 38 St WLT NE 26 St FTL Sunrise Blvd FTL Government Center FTL SW 12 St FTL-SW 24 St FLL Terminal Dr DAN Dania Beach Blvd HLY Sheridan St HLY Hollywood Blvd HAL E Hallandale Beach Blvd SFECC Station Areas Broward County • General Station Areas — Half -Mile "Circles" — Initially Sited by Highway Access — Specific Sites to be Determined in Partnership with Communities • TOD Suitability Assessment — 21 Factors • Land Use, Zoning, Growth. Potential, Employment Density, Residential Density, Demographics, etc 21 ''), TEO Tequesta Dr JUP Irdiantewn Rd. ulugc-`: a Pax WPB TraiypprtaCon JUP Donald Ross Rd NPB Northlake Blvd RIV Blue Heron Blvd WPB IS St STATION SUITABILITY • HIGH • MEDIUM HIGH SFECC Station Areas MEDIUM MEDIUM LOW Palm Beach County • LOW WPB 21 St PB Palm Beach Lakes Blvd WPB Government Center WPB City Place Belvedere Rd WPB Southern Blvd WPB Forest I45Is Blvd LAVA SV0.^C^.5R't3.. •1 LBW Lama -tisammArro Bayraen iSracrt sly Baca Rams S4 LAN Lantana Rd BYN Royal Palmas BYN Boynyon Beach Blvd BYN SE15 Ay GST Gultstream Blvd DLR Atlantic Av DLR Linton Blvd BOC NW 51 St Circle size proportional to weekday passenger boardings. BOC Palmetto Park Rd • General Station Areas — Half -Mile "Circles" — Initially Sited by Highway Access — Specific Sites to be Determined in Partnership with Communities • TOD Suitability Assessment — 21 Factors • Land Use, Zoning, Growth Potential, Employment Density, Residential Density, Demographics, etc TSM Finding 1: There are Unmet Travel Demands in the Corridor ENE No Build Weekday Ridership Forecasts (Year 2030) 1,000,000 - No Action Alternatives 900,000 800,000 700,000 600,000 111 500,000 400,000 300,000 200,000 100,000 0 No Build TSM All Service Segments 78,300 More Weekday Trips than the TSM Alternative Segments 5 & 6 LRT & BRT on FEC RGR on FEC LRT & BRT on US1 RRT on FEC 0 Alternative 85,200 120,649 42,613 76,122 TnRail 36,700 51,759 18,597 14,539 30,054 29,579 Metrorail 214,144 213,756 CI Bus 595,065 617,365 218,545 593,064 220,240 216,882 219,668 605,764 592,925 604,665 23 Finding 2: Tri-Rail Service Alone is Not Sufficient 400 350 300 250 O ; e• 200 1150 a a 100 50 0 0 MIAMI-DADE COUNTY BROWARD COUNTY PALM BEACH COUNTY Significant Trip Attractors within Walking Distance of FEC & USI Alignments Not Found along Present Tri-Rail Alignment ALIGNMENTS Florida East Coast Railway — USRoute 1 Interstate 95(Tri-Rail) O(O A. 4y 4. 2'A. Ltd 40 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 Half -Miles from Ori in Miami Government Center 24 Finding 3: Travel Demand is Regional, Spanning County Lines 2030 Weekday Ridership Forecasts (RGR on FEC) Significant Travel Across County Lines PALM BEACH COON ROWARD COUNTY MIAMI-DADE CCU! BOARD/NOS ALIGHT/NOS North Palm Beach Co. North Palm Beach Co. (9 stations) (9 stations) West Palm Beach CBD (3 stations) Central Palm Beach Co. (7 stations) South Palm Beach Co. (6 stations) • RIM Min North Broward Co. (10 stations) Fort Lauderdale CBD (1 station) South Broward Co. (7 stations) Northeast Miami -Dade Co. (7 stations) Northeast Miami (8 stations) Miami CBD (1 station) 14r- ?-,.:.:4". _er- 4111141010„4...._"*%-- 4W7411Z71PF ,410S iiig: Ai.,,, N M MIN ia West Palm Beach CBD (3 stations) Central Palm Beach Co. (7 stations) South Palm Beach Co. (6 stations) North Broward Co. (10 stations) Fort Lauderdale CBD (1 station) South Broward Co. (7 stations) Northeast Miami -Dade Co (7 stations) Northeast Miami (8 stations) Miami CBD (1 station) Y-/ LLiii LYLO.O.,1 ! Getad Lr 11 r 1 LikUYiiAKU I:UUN V IVriAGrii-UiMUL i 25 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 Finding 4: The FEC is Most Cost -Effective Alignment Daily Ridership Forecasts by Mile (Year 2030) Segment 1 West Palm Beach North Segment 2 North Palm Beach County Segment 3 West Palm Beach South Segment 4 East Broward County Segment Ft Lauderdale- Miami 5 Segment Miami Norttst 6 ifC frfle LRidership for US 1 & 1-95 Alternatives consistently LOWER than FEC CA ne rr^`.J 51n ER ea 0 0 11 a rii 0 rfe �r 0 nmr ii== T _ i rn 1 0 I fi Till COre re N CO N 0 CO re [0 N E ¢ F F F F E F F F F E — F F F 2 F F F F i- E F F F F F 2 F 0 E cc cc cc cc 0 cc cc cc cc 0 ce cc cc cc 0 cc cc cc cc cc 0 cc cc cc ce cc o 0 coN N N • N m ▪ 01 M CI m M m V m V Lo m LO Lo co LO cc co CO m CO m Regional Rail Light Rail Transit Bus Rapid Transit Rail Rapid Transit Regional Bus 26 Finding 4: The FEC is the Most Cost -Effective Alignments $500,000,000 $450,000,000 $400,000,000 $350,000,000 $300,000,000 $250,000,000 $200,000,000 $150,000,000 $100,000,000 $50,000,000 Estimated Capital Costs by Mile (Year 2030) Q N m CC o m o CC 0 CC Segment 1 Segment 2 Segment 3 Segment 4 West Palm North Palm West Palm East Broward beach North ._,,, _Beach County Boac1LSouth _County H H CC Segment 5 Segment 6 Ft Lauderdale- Miami Northeast Miami — Costs for US 1 & 1-95 Alternatives consistently HIGHER than FEC N N N N r - N N N N cN cN Q' I% I— I— I— R H I— I— I— Q' H H 1- 1- Q' 1- H I— I— '— I— I— C� CC CC CC CC 0 CC CC CC CC 0 CC CC CL CC 0 CC CC CC CC CC Q' CL Q0 m CO -I CC CN4 N m N Q' CO M CO M Cr m -I CO -I C' CO `J m Lc) Q' Regional Rail Light Rail Transit Bus Rapid Transit Rail Rapid Transit H H COCC CC J Regional Bus CV CV I— I— CC CC CC m J CC 27