DOCSLIB.ORG

Metromover System Expansion Study Final Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Metromover System Expansion Study Final Report Metromover System Expansion Study Final Report Work Order #GPC V-16 Metromover System Expansion Study Final Report Work Order #GPC V-16 Metromover System Expansion Study Final Report Work Order #GPC V-16 Metromover System Expansion Study Final Report Prepared for: Miami-Dade County Metropolitan Planning Organization Prepared by: Work Order # GPC V-16 September 2014 This Page Intentionally Left Blank Miami-Dade MPO Metromover System Expansion Study Table of Contents Table of Contents .................................................................................................................................................................................................i List of Figures ..................................................................................................................................................................................................... iv List of Tables ........................................................................................................................................................................................................ v List of Appendices ............................................................................................................................................................................................ vi 1.0 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Study Need ................................................................................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Study Purpose ............................................................................................................................................................................. 1 1.3 Organization of Report........................................................................................................................................................... 2 2.0 Study Coordination .............................................................................................................................................................................. 3 3.0 Data Collection ........................................................................................................................................................................................ 4 3.1 Review of Available Studies ................................................................................................................................................ 4 3.1.1 2025 Downtown Miami Master Plan ............................................................................................................. 5 3.1.2 Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan............................................................................................. 10 3.1.3 Downtown Miami Intermodal Terminal Feasibility Study .............................................................. 10 3.1.4 Bay Link Phase 2, Miami-Miami Beach Transportation Corridor Study .................................. 11 3.1.5 Beach Corridor Transit Connection Study ............................................................................................... 13 3.1.6 PortMiami 2035 Master Plan .......................................................................................................................... 16 3.1.7 Transit Options to PortMiami Feasibility Study.................................................................................... 16 3.1.8 Miami-Dade County Transit Development Plan.................................................................................... 19 3.1.9 Miami-Dade 2035 Long Range Transportation Plan .......................................................................... 20 3.2 Summary of Preliminary Concepts ............................................................................................................................... 21 3.3 System Review ........................................................................................................................................................................ 23 3.3.1 Worldwide Systems ............................................................................................................................................. 23 3.3.2 Technologies ............................................................................................................................................................ 24 3.3.3 Systems Matrix ....................................................................................................................................................... 30 3.3.4 System Review Summary.................................................................................................................................. 33 3.4 Metromover Passenger Survey ...................................................................................................................................... 33 3.4.1 Survey Locations ................................................................................................................................................... 34 3.4.2 Survey Process........................................................................................................................................................ 36 3.4.3 Survey Results and Findings ........................................................................................................................... 38 Miami-Dade MPO Metromover System Expansion Study Page i 4.0 Feasibility Assessment .................................................................................................................................................................... 52 4.1 Workshop................................................................................................................................................................................... 52 4.2 Field Review ............................................................................................................................................................................. 53 4.3 Qualitative Assessment....................................................................................................................................................... 53 4.3.1 Infrastructure Constraints................................................................................................................................ 53 4.3.2 Geometric Constraints ........................................................................................................................................ 53 4.3.3 Constructability...................................................................................................................................................... 54 4.3.4 Pedestrian Friendly Environment ................................................................................................................ 54 4.4 Quantitative Assessment ................................................................................................................................................... 55 4.4.1 Residential Population ....................................................................................................................................... 55 4.4.2 Average Corridor Density ................................................................................................................................. 55 4.4.3 Bus Ridership .......................................................................................................................................................... 56 4.4.4 Proposed Development...................................................................................................................................... 56 4.4.5 Length ......................................................................................................................................................................... 56 4.4.6 Walk Score® ............................................................................................................................................................. 56 4.4.7 Relative Capital Costs .......................................................................................................................................... 57 5.0 Concept Alternatives Development .......................................................................................................................................... 58 5.1 North Concept Alternatives .............................................................................................................................................. 58 5.1.1 North Extension Concept Alternative ......................................................................................................... 58 5.1.2 North Loop Concept Alternative ................................................................................................................... 64 5.1.3 North Concept Comparisons ........................................................................................................................... 68 5.2 South Concept Alternatives .............................................................................................................................................. 70 5.2.1 South Extension Concept Alternative ........................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Wilderness on the Edge: a History of Everglades National Park
    Wilderness on the Edge: A History of Everglades National Park Robert W Blythe Chicago, Illinois 2017 Prepared under the National Park Service/Organization of American Historians cooperative agreement Table of Contents List of Figures iii Preface xi Acknowledgements xiii Abbreviations and Acronyms Used in Footnotes xv Chapter 1: The Everglades to the 1920s 1 Chapter 2: Early Conservation Efforts in the Everglades 40 Chapter 3: The Movement for a National Park in the Everglades 62 Chapter 4: The Long and Winding Road to Park Establishment 92 Chapter 5: First a Wildlife Refuge, Then a National Park 131 Chapter 6: Land Acquisition 150 Chapter 7: Developing the Park 176 Chapter 8: The Water Needs of a Wetland Park: From Establishment (1947) to Congress’s Water Guarantee (1970) 213 Chapter 9: Water Issues, 1970 to 1992: The Rise of Environmentalism and the Path to the Restudy of the C&SF Project 237 Chapter 10: Wilderness Values and Wilderness Designations 270 Chapter 11: Park Science 288 Chapter 12: Wildlife, Native Plants, and Endangered Species 309 Chapter 13: Marine Fisheries, Fisheries Management, and Florida Bay 353 Chapter 14: Control of Invasive Species and Native Pests 373 Chapter 15: Wildland Fire 398 Chapter 16: Hurricanes and Storms 416 Chapter 17: Archeological and Historic Resources 430 Chapter 18: Museum Collection and Library 449 Chapter 19: Relationships with Cultural Communities 466 Chapter 20: Interpretive and Educational Programs 492 Chapter 21: Resource and Visitor Protection 526 Chapter 22: Relationships with the Military
    [Show full text]
  • Some Pre-Boom Developers of Dade County : Tequesta
    Some Pre-Boom Developers of Dade County By ADAM G. ADAMS The great land boom in Florida was centered in 1925. Since that time much has been written about the more colorful participants in developments leading to the climax. John S. Collins, the Lummus brothers and Carl Fisher at Miami Beach and George E. Merrick at Coral Gables, have had much well deserved attention. Many others whose names were household words before and during the boom are now all but forgotten. This is an effort, necessarily limited, to give a brief description of the times and to recall the names of a few of those less prominent, withal important develop- ers of Dade County. It seems strange now that South Florida was so long in being discovered. The great migration westward which went on for most of the 19th Century in the United States had done little to change the Southeast. The cities along the coast, Charleston, Savannah, Jacksonville, Pensacola, Mobile and New Orleans were very old communities. They had been settled for a hundred years or more. These old communities were still struggling to overcome the domination of an economy controlled by the North. By the turn of the century Progressives were beginning to be heard, those who were rebelling against the alleged strangle hold the Corporations had on the People. This struggle was vehement in Florida, including Dade County. Florida had almost been forgotten since the Seminole Wars. There were no roads penetrating the 350 miles to Miami. All traffic was through Jacksonville, by rail or water. There resided the big merchants, the promi- nent lawyers and the ruling politicians.
    [Show full text]
  • Everglades National Park and the Seminole Problem
    EVERGLADES NATIONAL PARK 21 7 Invaders and Swamps Large numbers of Americans began migrating into south Florida during the late nineteenth century after railroads had cut through the forests and wetlands below Lake Okeechobee. By the 1880s engineers and land developers began promoting drainage projects, convinced that technology could transform this water-sogged country into land suitable for agriculture. At the turn of the cen- EVERGLADES NATIONAL PARK AND THE tury, steam shovels and dredges hissed and wheezed their way into the Ever- glades, bent on draining the Southeast's last wilderness. They were the latest of SEMlNOLE PROBLEM many intruders. Although Spanish explorers had arrived on the Florida coast early in the sixteenth century, Spain's imperial toehold never grew beyond a few fragile It seems we can't do anything but harm to those people even outposts. Inland remained mysterious, a cartographic void, El Laguno del Es- when we try to help them. pirito Santo. Following Spain, the British too had little success colonizing the -Old Man Temple, Key Largo, 1948 interior. After several centuries, all that Europeans had established were a few scattered coastal forts. Nonetheless, Europe's hand fell heavily through disease and warfare upon the aboriginal Xmucuan, Apalachee, and Calusa people. By 1700 the peninsula's interior and both coasts were almost devoid of Indians. Swollen by tropical rains and overflowing every summer for millennia, Lake The vacuum did not last long. Creeks from Georgia and Alabama soon Filtered Okeechobee releases a sheet of water that drains south over grass-covered marl into Florida's panhandle and beyond, occupying native hunting grounds.
    [Show full text]
  • Macy's Redevelopment Site Investment Opportunity
    Macy’s Redevelopment Site Investment Opportunity JOINT VENTURE OR 100% SALE FLAGLER STREET & MIAMI AVENUE, DOWNTOWN MIAMI CLAUDE PEPPER FEDERAL BUILDING TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION 13 CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT OVERVIEW 24 MARKET OVERVIEW 42 ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT 57 DEVELOPMENT SCENARIO 64 FINANCIAL OVERVIEW 68 LEASE ABSTRACT 71 FOR MORE INFORMATION, CONTACT: PRIMARY CONTACT: ADDITIONAL CONTACT: JOHN F. BELL MARIANO PEREZ Managing Director Senior Associate [email protected] [email protected] Direct: 305.808.7820 Direct: 305.808.7314 Cell: 305.798.7438 Cell: 305.542.2700 100 SE 2ND STREET, SUITE 3100 MIAMI, FLORIDA 33131 305.961.2223 www.transwestern.com/miami NO WARRANTY OR REPRESENTATION, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, IS MADE AS TO THE ACCURACY OF THE INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN, AND SAME IS SUBMITTED SUBJECT TO OMISSIONS, CHANGE OF PRICE, RENTAL OR OTHER CONDITION, WITHOUT NOTICE, AND TO ANY LISTING CONDITIONS, IMPOSED BY THE OWNER. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY MACY’S SITE MIAMI, FLORIDA EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Downtown Miami CBD Redevelopment Opportunity - JV or 100% Sale Residential/Office/Hotel /Retail Development Allowed POTENTIAL FOR UNIT SALES IN EXCESS OF $985 MILLION The Macy’s Site represents 1.79 acres of prime development MACY’S PROJECT land situated on two parcels located at the Main and Main Price Unpriced center of Downtown Miami, the intersection of Flagler Street 22 E. Flagler St. 332,920 SF and Miami Avenue. Macy’s currently has a store on the site, Size encompassing 522,965 square feet of commercial space at 8 W. Flagler St. 189,945 SF 8 West Flagler Street (“West Building”) and 22 East Flagler Total Project 522,865 SF Street (“Store Building”) that are collectively referred to as the 22 E.
    [Show full text]
  • MDTA Metromover Extensions Transfer Analysis Final Technical Memorandum 3, April 1994
    Center for Urban Transportation Research METRO-DADE TRANSIT AGENCY MDTA Metromover Extensions Transfer Analysis FINAL Technical Memorandum Number 3 Analysis of Impacts of Proposed Transfers Between Bus and Mover CUllR University of South Florida College of Engineering (Cf~-~- METRO-DADE TRANSIT AGENCY MDTA Metromover Extensions Transfer Analysis FINAL Technical Memorandum Number 3 Analysis of Impacts of Proposed Transfers Between Bus and Mover Prepared for Metro-Dade.. Transit Agency lft M E T R 0 D A D E 1 'I'··.·-.·.· ... .· ','··-,·.~ ... • R,,,.""' . ,~'.'~:; ·.... :.:~·-·· ,.,.,.,_, ,"\i :··-·· ".1 •... ,:~.: .. ::;·~·~·;;·'-_i; ·•· s· .,,.· - I ·1· Prepared by Center for Urban Transportation Research College of Engineering University of South Florida Tampa, Florida CUTR APRIL 1994 TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM NUMBER 3 Analysis of Impacts of Proposed Transfers between Bus and Mover Technical Memorandum Number 3 analyzes the impacts of the proposed transfers between Metrobus and the new legs of the Metromover scheduled to begin operation in late May 1994. Impacts on passengers walk distance from mover stations versus current bus stops, and station capacity will also be examined. STATION CAPACITY The following sections briefly describe the bus terminal/transfer locations for the Omni and Brickell Metromover Stations. Bus to mover transfers and bus route service levels are presented for each of the two Metromover stations. Figure 1 presents the Traffic Analysis Zones (TAZ) in the CBD, as well as a graphical representation of the Metromover alignment. Omni Station The Omni bus terminal adjacent to the Omni Metromover Station is scheduled to open along with the opening of the Metromover extensions in late May 1994. The Omni bus terminal/Metromover Station is bounded by Biscayne Boulevard, 14th Terrace, Bayshore Drive, and NE 15th Street.
    [Show full text]
  • Wynwood Development Table of Contents 03 Project Overview
    TOTAL AREA: 60,238 SQ.FT. Wynwood Development Table of Contents 03 Project Overview 15 Conceptual Drawings 17 Location 20 Demographics 23 Site Plan 26 Building Efficiency 29 RelatedISG Project Overview Project This featured property is centrally located in one of Miami’s hottest and trendiest neighborhood, Wynwood. The 60,238 SF site offers the unique possibility to develop one of South Florida’s most ground-breaking projects. There has only been a select amount of land deals in the past few years available in this neighborhood, and it is not common to find anything over 20,000 SF on average. With its desirable size and mixed use zoning, one can develop over 300 units with a retail component. Wynwood has experienced some of the highest rental rates of any area of South Florida, exceeding $3 per SF, and retail rates exceeding $100 SF. As the area continues to grow and evolve into a world renowned destination, it is forecasted that both residential and retail rental rates will keep increasing. Major landmark projects such as the Florida Brightline and Society Wynwood, as well as major groups such as Goldman Sachs, Zafra Bank, Thor Equity and Related Group investing here, it is positioned to keep growing at an unprecedented rate. Name Wynwood Development Style Development Site Location Edgewater - Miami 51 NE 22th Street Miami, FL 33137 Total Size 60,238 SQ. FT. (1.3829 ACRES) Lot A 50 NE 23nd STREET Folio # 01-3125-015-0140 Lot B 60 NE 23nd STREET Folio 01-3125-011-0330 Lot C 68 NE 23rd STREET Folio 01-3125-011-0320 Lot D 76 NE 23rd STREET Folio 01-3125-011-0310 Lot E 49 NE 23rd STREET Folio 01-3125-015-0140 Lot F 51 NE 23rd STREET Folio 01-3125-015-0130 Zoning T6-8-O URBAN CORE TRANSECT ZONE 04 Development Regulations And Area Requirements DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS AND AREA REQUIREMENTS DESCRIPTION VALUE CODE SECTION REQUIRED PERMITTED PROVIDED CATEGORY RESIDENTIAL PERMITTED COMMERCIAL LODGING RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL LODGING RESIDENTIAL LODGING PERMITTED GENERAL COMMERCIAL PERMITTED LOT AREA / DENSITY MIN.5,000 SF LOT AREA MAX.
    [Show full text]
  • RKW RESIDENTIAL Continues South Florida Growth with Edgewater
    Media Contact: Eric Kalis, BoardroomPR [email protected] 954-370-8999 RIVERGATE KW RESIDENTIAL Continues South Florida Growth with Edgewater Community Leading property management company tapped for lease up and management of 2500 Biscayne MIAMI (Oct. 3, 2017) — RIVERGATE KW RESIDENTIAL, a leading multifamily property management company, has expanded its South Florida portfolio as exclusive property manager and leasing agents for 2500 Biscayne in Miami’s Edgewater neighborhood. The brand new apartment tower will begin leasing in later this month. One- and two-bedroom units at 2500 Biscayne are designed with open floor layouts that include chef-inspired kitchens with European cabinets, quartz countertops, walk-in closets, private patios and balconies, in-unit washer and dryers, porcelain tile floors, energy-efficient stainless steel appliances and oversized windows to maximize natural light. Residents of the sleek, pet-friendly, 19-story apartment tower can enjoy a rooftop lounge, views of Biscayne Bay, a saltwater pool, private cabanas, lounge with coffee bar, and fitness center. “2500 Biscayne is a premier property in one of Miami’s most desirable neighborhoods that offers a mix of amenities, retail and culture, and we are excited to contribute to its success,” said Marcie Williams, president of RIVERGATE KW RESIDENTIAL. “We look forward to the opportunity to work with Greystone Development on this stunning community.” Surrounding neighborhoods include Wynwood, Brickell and Downtown, making local attractions such as the Wynwood Farmers’ Market, Margaret Pace Park, the Design District and other shopping, dining, theaters and bars easily accessible. “With the opening of 2500 Biscayne, we are thrilled to bring on RIVERGATE KW Residential to bring the property to market with a rapid lease-up,” said Jeff Simpson of Greystone Development.
    [Show full text]
  • Adapting Automated People Mover Capacity on Airports to Real-Time Demand Via Model-Based Predictive Control
    Adapting Automated People Mover Capacity on Airports to Real-Time Demand via Model-Based Predictive Control M.P. van Doorne1, G. Lodewijks2, W.W.A. Beelaerts van Blokland3 1 Airbiz Aviation Strategies Ltd., 92 Albert Embankment, SE1 7TY, London, United Kingdom 2 University of New South Wales, School of Aviation, NSW 2052, Sydney, Australia 3Delft University of Technology, Mekelweg 2, 2628 CD, Delft, The Netherlands Abstract The Automated People Mover (APM) is an important asset for many airports to transport passengers inside or between terminal and satellite buildings An APM system normally runs on fixed schedules throughout the day, which means that the capacity of the APM is pre-determined and not depending on the actual demand. This at times can cause either an overcapacity, which leads to a waste of resources, or an under capacity, which results in passengers waiting at the station. Especially the latter factor is problematic, as it reduced passenger experience and can negatively affect the transfer process between airport facilities. In order to better match the offered APM capacity with the demand, it is proposed in this paper to use sensor-based predictive control system, which adapts the APM system capacity to real-time demand. By means of sensor data, passenger numbers are determined before they walk onto the stations platforms, and subsequently the APM system capacity is adjusted to the measured demand. In principle there are two methods to change the APM system capacity, i.e.: 1) by changing the APM capacity (i.e. more cars per train) or 2) by changing the frequency.
    [Show full text]
  • Metromover Fleet Management Plan
    Miami-Dade Transit Metromover Fleet Management Plan _______________________________________________________ _________________________________________________ Roosevelt Bradley Director June 2003 Revision III Mission Statement “To meet the needs of the public for the highest quality transit service: safe, reliable, efficient and courteous.” ________________________________________________________________ Metromover Fleet Management Plan June 2003 Revision III MIAMI-DADE TRANSIT METROMOVER FLEET MANAGEMENT PLAN June 2003 This document is a statement of the processes and practices by which Miami- Dade Transit (MDT) establishes current and projected Metromover revenue- vehicle fleet size requirements and operating spare ratio. It serves as an update of the October 2000 Fleet Management Plan and includes a description of the system, planned revenue service, projected growth of the system, and an assessment of vehicle maintenance current and future needs. Revisions of the October 2000 Fleet Management Plan contained in the current plan include: • Use of 2-car trains as a service improvement to address overcrowding during peak periods • Implementation of a rotation program to normalize vehicle mileage within the fleet • Plans to complete a mid-life modernization of the vehicle fleet Metromover’s processes and practices, as outlined in this plan, comply not only with Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Circular 9030.1B, Chapter V, Section 15 entitled, “Fixed Guideway Rolling Stock,” but also with supplemental information received from FTA. This plan is a living document based on current realities and assumptions and is, therefore, subject to future revision. The plan is updated on a regular basis to assist in the planning and operation of Metromover. The Fleet Management Plan is structured to present the demand for service and methodology for analysis of that demand in Section Two.
    [Show full text]
  • 501 First Miami
    PRESENTS PIONEERS, TRENDSETTERS, CREATIVE MINDS, FREE THINKERS, INNOVATORS – THEY ALL HAVE ONE THING IN COMMON – THEY KNOW WHAT IT MEANS TO BE FIRST. WELCOME TO 501 FIRST. DISCOVER DOWNTOWN MIAMI MUSEUM PARK Breathtaking views of the Biscayne Bay and the glittering Miami skyline around, it is a gorgeous undulating green expanse of 30 acres. The park is home to the Phillip and Patricia Frost Museum of Science and its waterfront treasure - Perez Art Museum Miami. FTX ARENA (Home of the Miami Heat) The 20,000-seat FTX Arena, home to the NBA Miami Heat, is nestled on the majestic Biscayne Bay. Besides its sports accommodation, American Airlines Arena hosts worldclass concerts and shows, from Adele to Jennifer Lopez. ADRIENNE ARSHT CENTER The Adrienne Arsht Center, designed by world-renowned architect Cesar Pelli, is one of the most important performing arts venues, with two major single-purpose halls created to present the finest in classical and popular entertainment, from ‘Hamilton’ to ‘Don Quixote’. MIAMI WORLDCENTER Miami Worldcenter is stated to be a magnetic destination for tourists and business visitors in the heart of Downtown. This is the biggest mixed-use development in the U.S. after New York’s Hudson Yards. N N E E 1 2 n MIAMI s t d INTERNATIONAL WYNWOOD A A v 13 To the Beaches v e AIRPORT e NE 13th St 395 Omni MacArthur YOU’RE ONLY Park Causeway Gibson Park N W 1 1 s MINUTES AWAY t NW 4th Ave A 2 v e NE 11th St FROM EVERYWHERE NE 10th St B Museum YOU WANT TO BE.
    [Show full text]
  • Douglas Road Transit Corridor Study Final Report, May 2014
    FINAL REPORT Douglas Road Transit Corridor Study General Planning Consultant (GPC) Services Work Order #GPC V-8 Miami-Dade County, Florida Prepared for: MIAMI-DADE County Metropolitan Planning Organization Prepared by May 2014 Contents 1. Study Objective ..................................................................................................................................... 1 2. Need for Project .................................................................................................................................... 2 3. Existing Transit Service ......................................................................................................................... 3 4. Transit Level-of-Service......................................................................................................................... 8 5. Candidate Modes ................................................................................................................................ 10 6. Alternative Alignments ....................................................................................................................... 16 7. Alternatives and Variations ................................................................................................................ 23 7.1. Alternative 1 - 42nd Avenue/Le Jeune Road........................................................................... 23 7.2. Alternative 2 - Ponce de Leon Boulevard ................................................................................ 23 7.3. Alternative
    [Show full text]
  • AMR BRDIGITAL Chinese.Pdf
    㽁㷐▙㥳 㢭㲂 300 BISCAYNE BOULEVARD WAY ⿿≐イ 㱱G&G Business Developments⤇㙶⵺➂ 㽁㷐▙㥳 㢭㲂 300 BISCAYNE BOULEVARD WAY ⿿≐イ 㱱G&G Business Developments⤇㙶⵺➂ ⶪ㟫⍙㗰⏥⶙㾗㢜⵺➂㔈☨㽜㐵⒪㗰㔦タᮣ㲣⫉㐟㽜㐵⒪㗰㔦タᱨ㎫⏸ⶌ〉㩩║␋㮾⭆㱱⵺➂㔈㦢⿼⭨⫊Ⓒ㾂㑉㝗⤅☨᮶⟐⿨⹽▕㷦⒴᮷☾Ⱞ㺲㚱㮔㎳☨㢶⮔ 㑆≜よ㗁㮥㺸㊹㢭ᱨ ╚㵒よ㗁㮥㺸㮿㗯 㸊㸡☨よ㱝㱸㋶☳㨲⼵㲓▅㑉㦢㔋☨⻲⼋ᮣ ょ㝢㚴⛞㮾㣐㎮㣐ⲳ☨➝㖷⟁⡙㽥㣄わ☨㔶 ⫆ᱨ㸆㨗➝㖷⫊㦄✚㯁⮑ᱨ⫊㥨㺤㑩㢔ᮣ㮥 㗑⛑㑉☨㖨㙼㨾㖥ᮢ㮥⏩⪮⨄☨㱘㊮ᮢ㮥Ⱞ ⡮㑉㺣㔪☨㴵⿓ᮢ㮥㋁㥑㖺㸈ㅶᮢ㮥╌Ⱐ㑉 ⽃⻸㠰➕☨⟇Ⳃ᮪᮪☕㣄わ㈀㲞よ☨ⰰ㾗㖫ᱨ 㣄わ☨⡮⤵⌧╋⛑⏥㺌⏥ⴇ㺲㣄わ➂㦆㖺ⰻ 㱸⼹㮥➌Ⳃ㦣⧧㯌㯏ᮣ よ㗁㱨⧽☨ᱨⳟ㦡㎣㽂㨲㫖ᮢ㍱㨲╚㵒よ☨ ⤀Ⰷ㮥㬥ᮣ 㚳わ☨⏯⪂ᮢ㝢➶⧧⼵⡮╚㵒⼗ㅗ㮾⤜⼋☨ ⷅ㖺ⲽ㊹ᮣ ║㋨☨☒㔶 㥺タ☨⛢⻮ⲽ㔭㲓⪬⪥☨⺈㖱㵒ⳟ⼗≐㙱 ⛻ᮤ⿷⛃㵀㋽⒝ⰻ⛢㮥㣐✠☨㊹㺬ᮣ 1913ㅰ1㴨15㑓ᱨ⿨⏘㝎ᮤ⊎⡁㝎 (Robert Bamford)⧧⹁≨ㅠ✝ᮤ⿷⛃(Lionel Martin)╚⊚Bamford and Martin⤇㙶ᮣ㵀 ⿡⛺Henniker Mews㮥⢔⮈⾴☨⒝⭺⹽ᱨ 㮥⢔ザ⏥⶙㬀☨⤦㖼㱱╱⵺㋶ᮣ 㚳わ㮾㣐⶙㝪㝔☨㔤⭜㲓ⓞ⹮≼䏡☨㩂ㅢ⏠ ⫉⼗▙㺼☨㦛㦣ᱨ100✂ㅰ⨍㑉わ⛶╱㑒゜ ⼁⏥㮻ᮢ㑥Ⓗ㑥㾍ᮣ1914ㅰ⤇㙶⢚ッ㢜≐ 㙱⛻ᮤ⿷⛃(Aston Martin)ᮣ㸆㮥ⴈ⛊㗖☡ ⹁≨ㅠ✝ᮤ⿷⛃㵀㱊⥖⊅ⱄ⧔⤈⵴≐㙱⛻㓹 㓹☼㋽⒝㑺ᱤAston Hill Climbᱥ㺲⫉㖞☨㋶➂ᱨ 㱱╱⢚ッᱨ㴿⧩㗄⏥⥙ᮣⳌ㸝㮥㺓⛞⽃㝀㵀㣄わ ☨㫖㮤⹽ᮣ㽴⤇㙶⵺╚㮾⹂≐㙱⛻ᮤ⿷⛃ 㮻⒱㢜㮥⢔⍖㺠㩂㊹㈊⒱㢜㔙⪂☨㗐⤀㺨㾗ᮢ 㣐㲓⿡⌴☨よᮢㅗ㮾㺥㨳☨㩂ㅢ㲓⥖⭠㑺㖼 㑗㲦☨■ッ╰ᮣ ≐㙱⛻ᮤ⿷⛃☨ⲽ㚠 ⶄⶄ㣄わ☨㋽⒝ᱨㆀⳟㅢ㝛⪹☡㣄わ☨ⲽ㚠ᮣ ょ㮥⶜☨⭳㖵㝛㬕⛞㑁ㆀ㱨㔶ㅗ㠰ᮣ ㍿Ⲵᮢ㸕➼✚ⲽ㐵ᮢ㱨⧽㫱㺤㎒ⲽ㥨ᱷ㣄わ☨㋽⒝ 㑘⧩⍖㺠㩂☨㔤⭜ᮢ㽟㴣☨⤀㮿㲓㣐⶙㊧☴ ☨㾖⤀ᱨ⤎㟠▘㵒ㅗ㠰☨㎩⡮㝛㬕ᮣ 㽗㎳㠞よ ≐㙱⛻⿷⛃㑉㢜㣄わ☨㋽⒝㽂㑩⼗㔶 ツ⻲ᱨ㣄わ㮾╱㽴⧚ᱨ⌢⡮㸕➼ᮣ㵀▘ 㵒㐩㖺ⰻ㾎㱭よ㋽⒝☨⤎㟠㨳ㅴ☨㯧☠ 㥲ᱨ㣄わ⏥⛱㍰㨾ᮣ ょ⼊㋽⒝☨☒㔶⛞㑘㑩⼗㣄わ⛢㝎☨⭅ 㝛⭒ㅢᮢⳕⲿⶌ㬕☨⤀㮿㲓㥸ⱌ☨⭒㗯ᮣ 㣄わ☨㟹⛵㺤⻲㲂▘㋈⭞⛊☨㠞よ⍖㽜ᱨ ♂㵒⫆⻲㙼㔠㎒Ⓦ〄よ⡮☨ⲽ㽜⤀㮿ᮣ 㸆㺸㺖㽥ᱨ〉㔩㮜ⴊ㣐ⱊ㱸ᮣ ⺈㖱㱮ⳕᱨ㴿╚㢦⹂ Ⳬ㖺㣐㙣☨㔵㠯ᮢ㣐㲓⿡⌴☨⤀㮿ᮢ⤆⢙⮏㨾 ☨⍖㽜ᮣ㮥⢔✂㖺⭣㮾⹂ᱨ≐㙱⛻⿷⛃☨ッ 㽶㮻⒱㢜㋽⒝㔤⭜ⰻ⡽⒔☨■ッ╰ᱨ㮜㗁㐩㖺 ⰻ㾎⳱⍖㺠㩂⧧⍒㖰⛪☨ッ㊮ᮣょ㮥⼊㋽⒝ⴋ 㢜⛊㺨㔶␤☨╥㗐⤀㺨㾗ᱨ㷧㦄㱝㱸㸃☨⢔㩂ᮣ 㢜⼗㖯㦆⛶⿿≐イ㺲㨲300 Biscayne Boulevard Way☨㴞Ⳃᱨ≐㙱⛻⿷⛃㲓㻚 ッ☨⵺➂㔈G&G Business Developments ⤇㙶⧩㾗ᱨ⯿㚵☨║㖺㔤⭜㽊⪇㢜⛢㮥㣐✠☨ ➟␤㦞ㅅᮣ㮥㾙■⍙㽥⛇⭸㔙⪂㔶⫆ᮢ⛢㮥㣐 ✠☨⧚⪂▙㥳⯿≼☼✚㋲ᮣ ⤀㮿Ⰷ㨲⛢㴱 ᮰㵀㣄わ㸆☾㮥⢔㽁㷐⵺➂㦞ㅅ⹽ᱨ㽐㩌 ㅠ㗈㗖☡≐㙱⛻⿷⛃☨㋶➂ᱨ⏌ⶌ⿑⼗⿿≐ イ☨㑆▞㋺⨌ᮣ㣄わ☨㔤⭜⹻ㅴ⫑㲂よ㫓⭆ 㱭㺬㱫⏮ᱨ⮈☉ᮢ╥ⰴᮢ☧㝛✚㱭㫱ᮣょ㮥 ⢔㥨Ⱞ⧧⤀㮿⛞㔴㟬㽥≐㙱⛻⿷⛃☨ DNAᱨⲳ㦄㗠㗄≠㯇ᮣ㸆⛒⯼㻠㗁㢜㨮㔉 ㊹㺬⧧⤀㮿☨㑉ᮢ㢜㑆≜㱨⧽㖼㣡☨㑉✚▘ 㵒ᮣ᮱ MAREK REICHMAN 㺖㨾⡏㽼⏭⭼㗑㥟╚㯌⤵ ≐㙱⛻ᮤ⿷⛃ 㱨⧽☨㦏㝫ᱨ ⨄㢢☨㴞Ⳃ ⲽよ☨㔤⭜⛞㴚㲂㾎⮈☉☨ ㍦⌶⤐⪅ᱨ㚞㺐✚⹂☨⏯㗁㴤
    [Show full text]