University of Florida Thesis Or Dissertation

INTERCITY GROUND TRANSPORTATION: A FLORIDA CASE STUDY

ANDREW MORRIS

A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER IN URBAN AND REGIONAL PLANNING

UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA

2019

To my Grandma, Arlene Delman

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I want to thank my parents for supporting me through my time at the University of

Florida and for pushing me to get a higher education. I also want to thank my grandma, Arlene

Delman. She has always been there for me and always makes time to talk. She is one of the reasons why I went back to school.

TABLE OF CONTENTS page

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ...... 4

LIST OF TABLES ...... 7

LIST OF FIGURES ...... 8

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ...... 9

ABSTRACT ...... 10

1 INTRODUCTION ...... 11

2 LITERATURE REVIEW ...... 13

Multimodal Planning for Intercity Travel ...... 13 Intercity Transportation Modes ...... 16 Intercity Passenger Rail ...... 16 Highway Travel (Cars and Buses) ...... 21 Air Travel ...... 23 Domestic and International Examples of Good Intercity Travel Planning ...... 25 International Example: Switzerland ...... 25 Domestic Example: California ...... 27 Summary ...... 31

3 METHODOLOGY ...... 34

4 RESULTS ...... 38

Florida Case Study: Interstate 75 Corridor versus Interstate 95 Southeast Florida Corridor ...... 38 General Public Policy Related to Intercity Travel in Florida ...... 38 A Historic Look at Intercity Travel Public Policies in Florida ...... 39 Florida Corridor Studies: Interstate 75 Corridor ...... 42 Interstate 75 Relief Task Force ...... 42 Rail Feasibility Analysis Summary Report ...... 46 Overview of Study Area ...... 50 Counties and Cities located in Study Area ...... 50 General Overview of Transportation Facilities and Corridors within Study Area ...... 50 Existing Ground Transportation Modes Along Corridor ...... 51 Intercity Passenger Rail ...... 51 Highway Ground Transportation ...... 52 Multimodal Connectivity ...... 52 Interstate 95 Corridor in South Florida ...... 53 Overview of Study Area ...... 53 Counties and Cities located in Study Area ...... 53

General Overview of Transportation Facilities and Corridors within Study Area ...... 54 Existing Ground Transportation Modes Along Corridor ...... 55 Highway Ground Transportation ...... 55 Intercity Passenger Rail ...... 57 Multimodal Connectivity ...... 59

5 DISCUSSION ...... 68

Existing Limitations ...... 68 Next Steps to Improve Florida’s Intercity Transportation Network ...... 69

6 CONCLUSION...... 72

LIST OF REFERENCES ...... 74

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH ...... 80

LIST OF TABLES

Table page

2-1 FRA Designations for Intercity Passenger Rail Corridors ...... 33

2-2 Amtrak California Overview ...... 33

4-1 Population Estimates for Counties located in Interstate 75 Study Area ...... 61

4-2 Population and Median Household Income for Cities in Interstate 75 Study Area ...... 62

4-3 Ground transportation intercity travel choices between Jacksonville and Tampa Bay to Northeast Florida study area overview ...... 62

4-4 Ground transportation intercity choices between Jacksonville and Tampa Bay to Northeast Florida multimodal connections ...... 63

4-5 Southeast Interstate 95 Corridor County Population ...... 65

4-6 Southeast Interstate 95 Corridor City Populations, Density, and Median Household Income...... 65

4-7 The Southeast Interstate 95 Corridor Intercity Ground Transportation Overview ...... 66

4-8 Interstate 95 corridor in Southeast Florida intercity, ground transportation multimodal connections ...... 67

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure page

2-1 Comparison between High-Speed Rail and Intercity Passenger Rail ...... 32

3-1 Overview of Methodology ...... 37

4-1 Map of Interstate 75 Study Area Intercity Ground Transportation Map ...... 60

4-2 An overview map of Southeast Interstate 95 Corridor ...... 64

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

Amtrak The National Railroad Passenger Corporation

Caltrans California Department of Transportation

CSX A private Class 1 freight railroad that operates in Florida

FDOT Florida Department of Transportation

JTA Jacksonville Transportation Authority

PRIIA Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act

SFRTA South Florida Regional Transportation Authority

Abstract of Thesis Presented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for Master in Urban and Regional Planning

INTERCITY GROUND TRANSPORTATION: A FLORIDA CASE STUDY

Andrew L. Morris

May 2019

Chair: Ruth Steiner Cochair: Stanley Latimer Major: Urban and Regional Planning

Intercity ground transportation provides important connections between cities in

America. Public policy can have a major influence on intercity travel. The focus of my study is on intercity ground transportation for distances of 100-to 500-miles. Air travel dominates long- distance travel in America, but is not as relevant for short-to medium-distance travel. Intercity passenger rail and express coach services are examples of ground transportation useful for trips of 100-to 500-mile distances. Driving still dominates short-to medium-distance travel in

America, but existing challenges with our interstate highway system reduce the reliability of road-based forms of transportation.

State and international best practice examples for intercity travel and multimodal planning were explored. The main case study is related to public policy for intercity travel in

Florida. Two major travel corridors were compared to see how Florida intercity travel policies have been implemented. Suggestions are given for some of the solutions Florida could adopt to improve intercity ground transportation. Some of these solutions include developing a realistic and comprehensive passenger plan, expanding toll lanes to manage demand on Interstate 75, and creating more multimodal facilities to connect intercity passenger rail, and express coach service with local public transit.

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION

Intercity transportation, in an ideal world, should connect cities safely, reliably, and at an affordable price. Highway-travel by car for most of the 20th Century was seen as the future for intercity ground transportation (Waqar, 2016). In the last few decades, the concept of multimodal planning for intercity travel has become popular. However single-occupancy vehicles still dominate short-to medium-distance travel on most corridors in the US (O’Neil, Schwieterman,

Smith, 2017).

Intercity transportation has received national attention in the media recently because of

Representative Ocasio-Cortez’s Green New Deal. Transportation is an important component of the outline, which would include investment in high-speed rail (Kurtzleben, 2018). Since high- speed rail is fully electric, it can be powered by renewable energy (Kurtzleban, 2018). The investment in high-speed rail connects back to the Green New Deal’s goal to reduce fossil fuel dependence (Kurtzleban, 2018). Fossil fuels are main source of energy used for intercity travel in the US (Kurtzleban, 2018). As the Green New Deal evolves from the existing outline, hopefully, more information will be included about what specifically would be done related to intercity travel.

Improving existing corridors or building new corridors to relieve pressure from existing infrastructure has become politically controversial, especially related to the eminent domain

(Long, 2019). Highway expansion in America has had a complicated history related to the environmental, economic, and social impact they can have on a community (Waqar, 2016).

Florida has been experiencing these challenges with proposing building a toll-road through

North-Central Florida to relieve traffic from Interstate 75. Owners of horse-farms located in

Marion County, Florida have been trying to block toll-road expansion through Marion County

(Long, 2019). Many of the residents are worried that the toll-road would lead to farmland being redeveloped into suburban-style developments (Long, 2019). With a new push to extend the

Suncoast Parkway all the way to Georgia, the battle will continue (Pittman, 2019).

With all the news attention related to intercity transportation, it would be important to explore the subject further. My study addresses these questions: What concepts and public policies are necessary to develop a multimodal intercity transportation system in Florida? What are the best practices of policies and concepts that other states and countries have adopted?

What policies has Florida created to improve intercity transportation, and have these policies been successful?

CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW

The first place to start is to understand some of the basic concepts and theories behind intercity transportation. This includes looking at why the qualities and length of a corridor can be factors in determining which modes of intercity travel fit the context of the corridor. The modes that will be further explored are intercity passenger rail, air travel, express coach service, and travel by single-occupancy vehicle. The goal of the literature review is to show which qualities and policies must be developed to improve intercity travel.

Multimodal Planning for Intercity Travel

Intercity passenger rail and high-speed rail both function best when they are serving multiple mid-to large-size cities in a mega-region. (Hagler & Todorovich, 2011). For high-speed rail, the recommended distance of a corridor is 100-to 600-miles (Hagler & Todorovich, 2011).

Conventional intercity passenger rail is usually the most competitive along 100-to 400-mile-long corridors (O’Neil et al., 2017).

For intercity transportation to be convenient and attractive, multimodal connections are vital. In the United States, we have struggled to provide good multimodal connections for intercity travel (Kanafani, 2008). Focusing on maximizing connections with using existing infrastructure would help improve intercity travel (Kanafani, 2008). The challenge is that planning for various transportation modes has been treated as almost separate entities battling for resources (Kanafani, 2008). The lack of coordination among various intercity travel modes

(such as rail, buses, highways, and air travel) leads to unequal allocation of resources (Kanafani,

2008). Certain modes like rail might see inadequate investment, while resources might go into highway expansion instead of maintenance of existing infrastructure (Kanafani, 2008). When

there is an investment for expansion related to intercity transportation, it is usually focused just on an individual corridor and not how it will impact a transportation network (Maxwell, 1999).

Another challenge with lack of multimodal coordination for intercity travel is that certain modes get excessive use (such as air and highway travel), which can lead to congestion and costly expansions being required, while other modes are not being used (Kanafani, 2008). The

United States has a weak and disconnected intercity passenger rail system (Maxwell, 1999).

Many markets lack any frequent intercity passenger rail system (O’Neil et al., 2017). Since many corridors lack frequent passenger rail service, highway travel usually dominates for short- to-medium distances, and air travel does well on high-usage corridors and long-distance travel

(O’Neil et al., 2017). The number of intercity travel choices also varies among cities. Certain major city pairs might have a high frequency of relatively affordable air travel, but midsize and smaller cities lack this level of air service (O’Neil et al., 2017). The lack of connections with other modes can restrict ridership to all modes of public transit, and can lead to inefficient use of resources, higher operating costs, and poor use of infrastructure (Maxwell, 1999). To improve multimodal planning for intercity travel, transportation professionals should focus on improving connectivity, managing demand, and maximizing existing infrastructure.

A major concept related to multimodal planning is the idea of using a fixed-interval, timed transfer system (ITF) for scheduling (Maxwell, 1999). The main focus of the fixed- interval, time transfer concept is to have intercity passenger rail operations on a frequent, fixed- interval schedule and to connect multimodal hubs (Maxwell, 1999). A fixed interval schedule would have the train operate at a set time, such as every half an hour, or on the hour (Maxwell,

1999). Operating on a fixed-interval schedule would make it easier for people to connect to other modes of transit, like regional trains, buses, ferries, and local public transit (Maxwell,

1999). Passengers would transfer at designated multimodal hubs that would connect local public transit and thruway bus service to intercity passenger rail (Caltrans, 2018). Smaller communities would benefit from being able to connect into a larger transportation system, even if they do not have a direct rail connection (Caltrans, 2018). Making transferring between modes of travel easier will allow for people to make inter-regional trips more conveniently and reduce reliance on driving (Caltrans, 2018). A major goal of the fixed-interval schedule is to maximize current infrastructure, and only making investments when necessary (Maxwell, 1999).

Implementing fixed-interval scheduling requires various actors (planners, engineers, and marketing) to develop a schedule map which has a proposed frequency of service whose goal is to meet the estimated demand (Maxwell, 1999). On the schedule map, trains would be on a pulsed schedule, with trains arriving and departing around the same time (Maxwell, 1999). The schedule map needs to be clear enough that the public and politicians can see value in expanding intercity passenger rail service (Maxwell, 1999). Time goals would be set to make the pulsed scheduling possible (Maxwell, 1999).

The next part of the concept is developing symmetrical train graphs (Maxwell, 1999).

Symmetrical train graphs make possible a cost-benefit analysis of investment required to implement the service from a schedule map (Maxwell, 1999). Service to each major hub would be broken into modules (Maxwell, 1999). Breaking the service into modules would make it show the most efficient use of resources for the investment to meet the time goal (Maxwell, 1999).

Examples of less expensive investments to improve service would be upgrading signaling or acquiring double-decker equipment to increase capacity (Maxwall, 1999). The more expensive end of investment would mean adding a new mainline track or building a new bridge (Maxwell,

1999). Picking the right mode for the service is also important because it could impact how cost-

effective and efficient the service is (Maxwell, 1999). Any new investment would connect back to making sure the timed-transfers are possible for various modes, and that the route has the capacity to handle the fixed-interval service (Maxwell, 1999).

Intercity Transportation Modes

To understand the qualities of each mode of intercity travel will require an overview of what purpose they serve for the context of intercity travel. The modes that will be explored include intercity passenger rail, intercity bus service, air travel, and driving. Air travel for inter- regional travel is not furthered explored outside of this section.

Intercity Passenger Rail

Intercity passenger rail and high-speed rail are considered viable modes of travel between major cities (Hagler & Todorovich, 2011). Intercity passenger rail over 100-to 500-mile distances in America is nearly all provided by Amtrak (Kane, Puentos, Tomer, 2013). For

Amtrak, 83% of ridership is for distances of 400 miles or less (Kane et al., 2013). Much of

Amtrak’s ridership growth between 1997 and 2012 was because of state-funded Amtrak services focused on serving distances less than 400 miles (Kane et al., 2013).

The Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 had a major influence on the way state-funded Amtrak services are handled. One main goal of the act was to develop a consistent framework for state-funded Amtrak service (National Academies of Sciences,

Engineering, and Medicine, 2016a). At the time, Amtrak’s cost structure with the state-funded services was inconsistent, and the subsidies that states received for operating costs were inconsistent (National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, 2016a). The Act led routes under 750 miles to have operating costs subsidized by the state (Kane et al., 2013).

Federal money would be still available through grants to start up new service and expand existing service (National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, 2016a). Federal

grants related to rail improvements require states to develop state rail plans for passenger and freight rail service (National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, 2016a).

Making a state rail plan would allow states to be able to do long-term planning on ways to improve rail service and work with various public and private-sector actors to accomplish their goals (National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, 2016a).

The Federal Railroad Administration developed designations for high-speed rail and intercity passenger rail corridors (FRA, 2009) (Table 2-1). The Obama Administration wanted to invest resources into developing high-speed rail and intercity passenger rail corridors for travel between 100-600 miles (FRA, 2009). High-Speed Rail Express and High-Speed Rail

Regional were designations for corridors that would have high-frequency, high-speed rail service

(Table 2-1). High-Speed Rail Express corridors would require dedicated infrastructure and separate right-of-way, grade separation, and electrification to support speeds over 150 mph

(FRA, 2009). An example of this type of corridor would be California High-Speed Rail (FRA,

2009). High-Speed Rail Regional corridors can have up to 150 mph service and would have a mix of shared and dedicated trackage (FRA, 2009) (Table 2-1). The Northeast Corridor would be an example of this kind of corridor since it has both the Amtrak Acela and conventional

Amtrak trains sharing the same corridor (Hagler & Todorovich, 2011). Both corridors would be designated to serve major population centers along the corridor and would have a limited number of intermediate stops (FRA, 2009). Both types of corridors would directly compete with short-to medium-distance air travel.

Emerging High-Speed Rail and Conventional Rail are intercity passenger rail corridors that operate on shared infrastructure with freight trains (FRA, 2009) (Table 2-1). Emerging

High-Speed Rail and Conventional Rail can function as their own corridor to serve cities that

might not be able to support a dedicated high-speed rail line but can support improved intercity passenger rail (Hagler & Todorovich, 2011) (Table 2-1). They can also serve as branches to connect passengers to High-Speed Rail Express and High-Speed Rail Regional corridors serving as the trunk of the system between major cities (Hagler & Todorovich, 2011). Emerging High-

Speed rail would require upgrades like partial grade separation, upgraded crossings, and positive train control to support speeds up to 110 miles per hour (FRA, 2009). An example of an

Emerging High-Speed Rail Corridor would be Amtrak’s Michigan services that have recently been upgraded to 110 mph in some sections (Amtrak, 2018c). Conventional rail corridors would use existing shared right-of-way with top speeds between 79 to 90 mph (FRA, 2009). The

Amtrak Cascades service would be an example of a Conventional Rail Corridor (Hagler &

Todorovich, 2011). A study of the corridor would be needed to figure out what type of intercity passenger rail would be feasible.

When studying a corridor’s viability for intercity passenger rail, a few variables must be explored: transit connectivity, road congestion, population density, employment density, and regional air ridership (Hagler & Todorovich, 2011). With population density, it is important to look at the population near the proposed stations, and to look at the overall regional population in a metro area (Hagler & Todorovich, 2011). Population density can also include future population growth in a region (Hagler & Todorovich, 2011). Population growth leads to a demand for more intercity travel (Hagler & Todorovich, 2011). It is ideal to have the station be in the heavily-populated urban core of a city, near the central business district (National

Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, 2016a, 2016b). That would make the station more accessible to public transit and help strengthen the urban core of the city. In

addition to serving the urban core, an intercity passenger rail station is also able to serve the area

25 miles around the station (Hagler & Todorvich, 2011).

For intercity passenger rail to serve the urban core of a city, metro area transit connectivity becomes important (Hagler & Todorvich, 2011) (Figure 2-1). For an intercity passenger rail station to be able to serve a large metro-area population, regional commuter rail becomes necessary, so travelers can transfer seamlessly between intercity passenger rail and commuter rail (Hagler & Todorvich, 2011). Frequent local public transit can connect passengers in the urban core to the intercity passenger rail station (National Academies of Sciences,

Engineering, and Medicine, 2016a).

Looking at existing forms of intercity travel along a corridor is another important task when doing a corridor analysis (Hagler & Todorvich, 2011). For highway travel, this would be looking at the amount of congestion along major highways within the corridor (Hagler &

Todorvich, 2011). Highway corridors with high congestion help make passenger rail an attractive alternative (Morgan et al., 2016).

If passenger rail exists on the corridor, it is important to examine the current demand for existing service (Hagler & Todorvich, 2011). Unfortunately, many major travel corridors in the

US lack frequent intercity passenger rail; therefore, examining infrequent long-distance service along the corridor is not a fair comparison (Morgan et al., 2016). Air travel between major cities along the route is another variable that should be included (Hagler, Todorvich, 2011).

Internationally, high-speed rail has done well on short-to medium-distance corridors and gives air travel good competition (Morgan et al., 2016). Corridors that have frequent flights for intercity travel over short-to medium-distance are attractive for intercity passenger rail or high- speed rail (Hagler & Todorvich, 2011).

Employment is also another important variable, to see if there is a demand for intercity passenger rail and high-speed rail (Hagler & Todorvich, 2011). Intercity passenger rail and high- speed rail function best when they connect dense central business districts with many employment opportunities (Hagler & Todorvich, 2011). Abundant jobs within access to public transit or near the main station in a city are important indicators for the viability of passenger rail service (Hagler & Todorvich, 2011). Denser Northeast cities like New York, Boston, and

Washington DC are example cities with large amounts of employment that are accessible to public transit (Hagler & Todorvich, 2011). Many cities in the Sunbelt like Miami, Houston, and

Charlotte do not have centralized employment centers and jobs are spread through a large metro area instead (Hagler & Todorvich, 2011). Decentralized metro-areas can have challenges with employment and transit accessibility (Hagler & Todorvich, 2011). The type of employment also is important in determining the demand for intercity passenger rail (Hagler & Todorvich, 2011).

A city with numerous high-skilled jobs requiring a higher education is an indicator that there could be demand for expanded passenger rail service (Hagler & Todorvich, 2011). Business travelers want frequent and reliable service between major employment centers, which intercity passenger rail and high-speed rail can provide (Hagler & Todorvich, 2011).

Passenger rail expansion faces some challenges in the US. One challenge is that passenger rail makes up a very small portion of inter-regional trips within 100 to 500 miles

(National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine 2016a, 2016b). Even on the

Northeast Corridor, rail makes up about 25% of the trips between New York City and

Washington DC (National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine 2016b). Out of the top 200 busiest travel corridors among major city pairs, 118 have no passenger rail service at all (National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine 2016). Only 82 corridors out of

the 200 top busiest travel corridors in America are rail served (National Academies of Sciences,

Engineering, and Medicine 2016). Out of those 82 rail-served corridors, only 49 have more than one train a day (National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine 2016b). Since many major travel corridors lack passenger rail, the level of mode share is limited.

Outside of the Northeast Corridor, Amtrak mostly relies on private freight rail infrastructure, which leads to another set of problems. Freight railroads in America do not want to invest in improvements for passenger rail unless the public sector is subsidizing the improvements (National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, 2016a). Freight rail makes up about 37% of the ton-miles of freight carried in America, which leads to freight taking priority (National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine 2016a). The fastest top speed recommended for passenger rail to avoid a negative impact on freight trains operating on the same corridor is 90 miles per hour. (National Academies of Sciences,

Engineering, and Medicine, 201a6). For speeds above 110 mph, it is necessary to have a fully- separated corridor, which adds significant cost to expanding passenger rail (National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, 2016a). Despite some of these challenges related to passenger rail in America, it is still worth giving the mode a fair chance when improving a major travel corridor.

Highway Travel (Cars and Buses)

Highways are an important component of our intercity transportation network. For trips less than 500 miles, traveling by single occupancy vehicle dominates intercity trips (National

Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine 2016b). Intercity bus service declined for the latter part of the 20th century, but recently has seen a resurgence because of express coach services (National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, 2016b). Express coach service is limited-stop intercity bus service focused on connecting major metro areas at

affordable prices (O’Neil et al., 2017). Many express coach services pick up passengers on the curbside to keep overhead costs low; however cities often require a facility or a bus terminal

(O’Neil et al., 2017). Seats on the bus are reservation-only, and the tickets are bought online

(O’Neil et al., 2017). Express coach service had a dramatic ridership increase, from 2.3 million riders to over 11.6 million riders, between 2008 and 2015 (O’Neil et al., 2017). Express coach services and conventional bus services compete against conventional intercity passenger rail

(O’Neil et al., 2017). Conventional bus service like Greyhound has physical stations where it is possible to buy tickets (O’Neil et al., 2017). Conventional bus services also serve some secondary markets and lower-traffic corridors (O’Neil et al., 2017).

Congestion and crumbling infrastructure have both been major factors in making our highway network less effective (Kahn & Levinson, 2011). We spend around 35% of the

National Highway System’s budget on adding new capacity, while only 32% of that budget goes to maintenance (Kahn & Levinson, 2011). Much of our highway infrastructure was designed with a 40-to 50-year life cycle, and maintenance and replacement costs continue to climb for existing highway infrastructure (Kahn & Levinson, 2011). The federal gas tax has not kept up with inflation, which has led to declining gas tax revenue (Kahn, Levinson, 2011). The decline in gas tax revenue has led the Federal Highway Trust Fund to run a yearly deficit (Kahn &

Levinson, 2011). Congestion costs in urban areas of America create an economic loss of 120 billion dollars a year (Kahn & Levinson, 2011). Congestion has also made intercity travel less reliable by car (O’Neil et al., 2017).

Protecting the US’s Interstate Highway system will require increasing various sources of revenue collected to fund highway infrastructure maintenance and improvements (Kahn &

Levinson, 2011). Managing demand for highway infrastructure is necessary to create new

revenue and reduce congestion (Kanafani, 2008). Examples of managing demand are dedicated to toll lanes or congestion pricing (Kahn, Levinson, 2011). The advantage of toll lanes is that the pricing can be set based on time of day to keep traffic flowing (Kahn & Levisnon, 2011).

Additionally, toll lane revenue can be used to pay off any loans needed to build the project (Kahn

& Levinson, 2011). Internationally, many cities have adopted congestion pricing for driving through the urban centers of cities (Kahn & Levinson, 2011). For any new highway capacity, it will be necessary to make sure the project can be self-sustaining through user fees. Self- sustaining highway project reduces the burden of maintaining the road for the longterm (Kahn &

Levinson, 2011).

Air Travel

Air travel in the US has seen massive changes in the level of service airlines provide for short-haul air travel and to secondary airports (Swelbar & Wittman, 2013). Major network carrier airlines have been reducing service to small and midsize airports, and their focus has moved toward mostly serving major hubs as their focus (Swelbar & Wittman, 2013). Between

2007 and 2012, airlines saw a decline in flights (Swelbar & Wittman, 2013). During that 5-year period, a major recession hit, and jet fuel prices rose significantly (Swelbar, Wittman, 2013).

This led to a dramatic cut in flights to small and midsize airports (Swelbar & Wittman, 2013).

Small airports lost 21.3% of their flights between 2007 and 2012 (Swelbar & Wittman, 2013).

Medium-hub airports lost even more flights, with 26.2% of their flights discontinued between

2007 and 2012 (Swelbar & Wittman, 2013).

Since the recession, low-cost airline carriers have tried to fill in the service gaps left by network carriers pulling out of certain airports (Swelbar & Wittman, 2013). Network carriers are made up of airlines like Delta, American, and United (Swelbar & Wittman, 2013). Low-cost airline carriers are made up of airlines like Southwest and Spirit (Swelbar & Wittman, 2013).

Southwest Airlines has used medium-hub airports to serve major metro areas without having to use a large-hub airport (Swelbar & Wittman, 2013). Most budget airlines’ expansions since the recession have focused on using secondary airports in large metro areas to connect major vacation destinations (Swelbar & Wittman, 2013). Even if these small and midsize airports continue to offer service, they lost the connectivity they had previously, when more network carriers had flights to these airports pre-recession (Swelbar & Wittman, 2013). Essential Air service airports were able to retain most of their flights during the recession since they benefit from subsidies covering part of the cost of the flight (Swelbar & Wittman, 2013). Network carriers have been moving away from providing service to these airports, while certain regional airlines like Cape Air have been attracted to those markets (Swelbar & Wittman, 2013).

Small and midsize airports do have some positive qualities, like offering more convenience and a less-stressful air travel experience (Swelbar & Wittman, 2013). Certain small and midsize airports have been able to retain flights because they promote those qualities to the public (Swelbar & Wittman, 2013). The challenge is that large-hub airports benefit by having more destinations and lower prices, which is an attractive selling point (Swelbar & Wittman,

2013). Certain cities and towns have invested money in trying to attract or retain more flights, but in the long run with the direction air travel has been going, that might be a losing battle

(Swelbar & Wittman, 2013). Airlines do benefit from economies of scale by providing service along busy routes between hubs (Swelbar & Wittman, 2013).

Air travel, when compared to high-speed rail, has been a divisive topic in America. For international examples of major travel corridors, high-speed rail has been successful at taking market share away from air travel for inter-regional travel of 100-to 500-miles (Morgan et al.,

2016). One major example is Tokyo to Osaka, where rail takes up around 81% of mode share

for inter-regional travel (Morgan et al., 2016). On this route, the train averages 100 miles per hour, which is about one-fifth the speed of a commercial jet plane (Morgan et al., 2016). The 2- hour and 30-minute travel time for the train with has a major advantage over air travel because it provides direct service between city centers (Morgan et al., 2016).

Air travel in America has been able to dominate the long-distance intercity travel market

(National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, 2016a, 2016b). According to the American

Travel Survey, around half of the 600-to 699-miles trips are made by air (National Academics of

Sciences Engineering, 2016b). Since air travel has been losing relevance for short-and medium- distance corridors, the focus should instead be on expanding passenger rail and intercity bus service on these corridors (Kanafani, 2008).

Domestic and International Examples of Good Intercity Travel Planning

The next section looks at domestic and international examples of good intercity travel planning. Both of these examples have adopted practices discussed in the previous sections of the literature review related to multimodal planning. The international example is Switzerland, and the domestic example is California.

International Example: Switzerland

Switzerland adopted various concepts that improved their multimodal connectivity

(Maxwell, 1999). Switzerland implemented a fixed-interval, timed-transfer system for its Swiss

Rail + Bus 2000 Plan (Maxwell, 1999). Switzerland, like many other developing countries during the latter part of the 20th Century, was expanding highway capacity while letting their railroads decline (Maxwell, 1999). Attempts at high-speed rail failed because certain local governments were upset about their cities and towns being left out of the plan (Maxwell, 1999).

Modernization was still necessary to save Switzerland's rail system, leading to the adoption of the fixed-interval, timed-transfer system (Maxwell, 1999). Adopting schedule-related plans

before focusing on the engineering costs was unheard of during that era (Maxwell, 1999). The travel time savings of the plan and how it would benefit the whole nation, led to the plan getting public and political support (Maxwell, 1999).

The Swiss Rail + Bus 2000 Plan had a goal of fixing the current issues with train travel that people did not like, including lack of regularly-timed service, challenges related to transferring, poor accessibility, and freight congestion (Maxwell, 1999). To fix the lack of regularly timed service, intercity passenger trains operated on a set-interval schedule during the day (Maxwell, 1999). The benefit of a set schedule is to make sure hubs had regular service and passengers would be able to connect between trains without any problems (Maxwell, 1999).

When pulse scheduling was adopted, trains arrived and departed around the same time at major hubs (Maxwell, 1999). To increase accessibility, Switzerland converted to high-level platforms

(Maxwell, 1999) The goal of the high-level platforms and compatible equipment was to reduce boarding times (Maxwell, 1999). Reducing freight congestion required investment in expanding track capacity and signaling (Maxwell, 1999). A goal with these improvements was to increase freight train speeds and reliability so, they would not negatively impact passenger service

(Maxwell, 1999). The Swiss discovered that a top speed of 125 mph for their intercity passenger rail service would allow them to use most of their current infrastructure without having to develop the costly new right-of-way for high-speed rail (Maxwell, 1999). Using tilting-train equipment made it possible to increase speeds on current infrastructure, reducing the need for expensive right-of-way realignment (Maxwell, 1999).

Switzerland also invested heavily in improving ground transportation connections into major airports. Zurich Airport connected passenger rail service to the airport in 1980, which made it one of the first major airports in Europe to offer a rail-to-airport connection (National

Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, 2015). The airport has a multimodal hub with regional and intercity passenger rail, trams, and bus service (National Academies of

Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, 2015). Zurich Airport’s rail connectivity allows it to be accessible to most of Switzerland, and even cities in surrounding countries like Germany and

France (National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine, 2015). Of the 14.9 million passengers who originate or terminate at Zurich airport, 42% came by rail (National Academies of Science, 2015). Of the 6.3 million people who come by rail, 3.8 million are traveling longer distances outside the metro area of Zurich (National Academies of Science, Engineering, and

Medicine, 2015). Zurich airport has higher long-distance, passenger-rail ridership compared to other major European airports, like Paris’s Charles de Gaulle Airport (National Academies of

Science, Engineering, and Medicine, 2015). Swiss Federal Railways developed a baggage system, making it possible for airline passengers to pay a fee to pick up their luggage at their destination train station (National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine, 2015).

Switzerland has had major success with adopting multimodal planning concepts, as they have managed to build a world-class intercity transportation system.

Domestic Example: California

The state of California has been successful at improving intercity travel, California has long-term goals to adopt multimodal concepts like fixed-interval scheduling, expanding intercity passenger rail, and adopting policies to manage highway demand (Caltrans, 2018). The

California Long-Range Transportation Plan 2040 developed policies that reduce greenhouse gas and carbon emissions (Caltrans, 2016a, 2016b). The California State Rail Plan goes into further detail on how to meet their and medium-and long-term goals for passenger and freight rail in

California (Caltrans, 2018).

California considers intercity passenger rail an integral part of intercity travel. In the last few decades, California has made major improvements to service, leading to ridership increases

(Caltrans, 2018). Caltrans funds the operations of these services, since they are less than 750 miles-long (Kane et al., 2013) Caltrans contracts the operations of the service out to Amtrak

(Caltrans, 2018). A Joint Powers Authority is used to manage the corridor the service operates on

(Caltrans, 2018). Caltrans still develops an overall vision for intercity passenger rail (Caltran,

2018). Caltrans then delegates out to the Joint Powers Authority to manage the service which allows for some specialization, so the service can fulfill local needs (Caltrans, 2018).

The three state-funded Amtrak services in California are the Pacific Surfliner, Capitol

Corridor, and San Joaquins (Caltrans, 2018) (Table 2-2). Of the three services, the Pacific

Surfliner is the busiest, with over 2.9 million riders using the service in 2016 (Caltrans, 2018)

(Table 2-2). The core of the service is between Los Angeles and San Diego, with 12 trains a day in each direction (Caltrans, 2018). The Pacific Surfliner was expanded all the way to San Luis

Obispo, but service north of Los Angeles is less frequent (Caltrans, 2018). Five trains a day continue north from Los Angeles to Santa Barbara, while two of those trains continue on towards

San Luis Obispo (Caltrans, 2018). The second-busiest California state-funded Amtrak service is the Capitol Corridor (Caltrans, 2018) (Table 2-2). The Capitol Corridor sees over 1.5 million passengers riding the service (Caltrans, 2018) (Table 2-2). The Capitol Corridor provides service to Sacramento, Oakland, San Jose, and Auburn (Caltrans, 2018). Oakland to Sacramento is the busiest, with 15 trains in each direction (Caltrans, 2018). The San Jose to Oakland corridor sees 7 trains a day in each direction (Caltrans, 2018). Auburn to Sacramento sees one daily train

(Caltrans, 2018). The third-busiest state-funded Amtrak corridor in California is the San

Jouquins (Caltrans, 2018) (Table 2-2). Around 1.12 million people a year use the service

(Caltrans, 2018) (Table 2-2). The San Jouquins provides 7 trains in each direction between

Stockton and Bakersfield (Caltrans, 2018). At Stockton, 5 of the trains continue onward to

Oakland; and 2 continue toward Sacramento (Caltrans, 2018). Amtrak Thruway bus service connects communities to the state-funded Amtrak service (Caltrans, 2018).

California’s state highway system has an important role in intercity travel. In

California’s Long-Range Transportation Plan, California developed policies related to modernizing state highway infrastructure, while meeting their goals to reduce greenhouse gas emissions (Caltrans, 2016a, 2016b). California has 15,104 centerline miles in their state highway system, and 15,022 centerline miles are federally-owned roads (Caltrans, 2016a).

Caltrans made it a major focus to maintain and maximize existing highway corridors while trying to lower the number of vehicle-miles-traveled per capita (Caltrans, 2016a).

Caltrans’ solution to protect and improve highway infrastructure takes a multimodal approach. To generate revenue and reduce vehicle miles traveled, Caltrans wants to increase the number of toll lanes on California highways. This would allow Caltrans to manage the demand for highway infrastructure to reducing congestion, it would generate revenue sources to maintain infrastructure, and it would allow buses not to have to deal with traffic (Caltrans, 2016a). High- occupancy vehicle lanes will continue to be an important tool to promote carpooling and reduce the number of single-occupancy vehicle trips (Caltrans, 2016a).

Modernizing highway infrastructure and modernizing rail infrastructure are equal priorities. High-speed rail and state-funded Amtrak are the core of their passenger rail network

(Caltrans, 2018). By 2040, Los Angeles to San Francisco will have direct, high-speed rail service with a top speed of 220 mph, and frequencies every 60 minutes or less (Caltrans, 2018).

Their state-funded Amtrak corridors will be upgraded, with many having 125 mph top speed and

frequencies every 60 minutes or less (Caltrans, 2018). High-speed rail would mostly operate on its own rights-of-way (Caltrans, 2018). State-funded Amtrak services will be operating on mixed corridors with freight trains (Caltrans, 2018). Capacity improvements like adding additional tracks, partial grade separation and electrification on some corridors will be necessary to increase passenger and freight rail capacity (Caltrans, 2018).

To maximize its intercity and local public transit infrastructure, Caltrans will adopt pulse- scheduling (Caltrans, 2018). California’s pulse-scheduling will function similarly to

Switzerland’s fixed-interval scheduling (Maxwell, 1999). The concept behind pulse scheduling is making transfers to various modes of transportation as seamless as possible (Caltrans, 2018).

To make transfers seamless, it will require high-frequency service for intercity transportation and local public transportation (Caltrans, 2018). The schedule would be designed around trains meeting and departing from intermodal hubs around the same time (Caltrans, 2018). This will allow passengers to transfer seamlessly, and will increase connectivity within the system

(Caltrans, 2018). High-frequency public transit would connect to these intermodal hubs to connect passengers to their first-and last-mile destinations (Caltrans, 2018).

Ideally, Caltrans wants to eventually make it possible for people to travel on one ticket, through a smartphone app. This would allow people to plan trips using transit for the whole trip

(Caltrans, 2018). California also wants to use intercity passenger rail and high-speed rail as a replacement for short-haul air travel in California (Caltrans, 2018). Partnering with the airlines to make a possible combination air-and-rail ticket would benefit both parties (Caltrans, 2018).

Airport congestion would be reduced because of fewer short-haul flights, people would be able to travel from small to medium-size cities to large-hub airports (Caltrans, 2018). Overall,

Caltrans plans in their Long-Range Transportation Plan and State Rail Plan connect back to the concepts discussed in the literature review.

Summary

Ground transportation modes like intercity passenger rail and intercity bus service are considered viable alternatives on corridors between 100-to 500-miles. Looking at travel along these 100-to 500-mile-long corridors is relevant because 79% of person trips are within distances of 100-to 500-miles for inter-regional long-distance travel (National Academies of Sciences,

Engineering, 2016b). Both intercity passenger rail and intercity bus service can serve high-travel corridors between major-and intermediate-cities. Multimodal connections between local public transit and intercity transportation help make it possible for people to make complete trips.

Connecting ground intercity transportation and air travel can benefit both modes and allow an airport to be able to serve a larger region. In America, single-occupancy vehicle transportation still dominates travel for distances of 100-to 500-miles (National Academies of Sciences,

2016b). For distances less than 500 miles, air travel makes up a much smaller portion of trips

(National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, 2016b). Air travel for short-to medium-distance will not be further explored because of existing market trends making it less relevant.

Switzerland and California have both adopted many of the multimodal planning concepts discussed in the literature to improve their inter-regional travel and better utilize their existing corridors.

Figure 2-1. Comparison between High-Speed Rail and Intercity Passenger Rail (FRA, 2009) (Hagler & Todovich, 2011)

Table 2-1. FRA Designations for Intercity Passenger Rail Corridors Type of Rail Definition Infrastructure Required Length Frequenc Top Example Service of y Speed of Corridor Service s

HSR- High-Speed Rail Full grade-separation 200-600 Frequent Over Californi Express operating on and dedicated track mile 150 a High- dedicated MPH Speed infrastructure Rail

HSR- High-Speed Rail Full grade-separation 100-500 Frequent 110-150 Northeast Regional operating on and a mix of dedicated miles MPH Corridor dedicated and shared tracks and shared tracks infrastructure

Emerging Intercity passenger Shared track with 100-500 Frequent 90-110 Amtrak HSR rail corridors that partial grade separation miles MPH Michigan could be later and crossing Services converted to HSR improvements

Conventiona Conventional Shared track Over 100 1-12 79-90 Amtrak l Rail intercity passenger Miles Daily MPH Cascades rail Trains

(Amtrak, 2018c) (FRA, 2009)

Table 2-2. Amtrak California Overview Name of Service Ridership Number of Round Trips Between City Pairs (Millions)

Pacific Surfliner 2.9 12 LA and San Diego; 5 Santa Barbara to LA; 2 San Louis Obispo to LA

Capital Corridor 1.5 15 Oakland to Sacramento; 7 San Jose to Oakland; 1 Sacramento to Auburn

San Jouquins 1.12 7 Bakersfield to Stockton; Oakland to Stockton 5; 2 Stockton to Sacramento

(Caltrans, 2018)

CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY

Florida was the main focus area for my case study. To understand how intercity travel functions in Florida, it would be important to explore public policy, by looking at existing plans related to multimodal planning and intercity travel. In the case study, state rail plans, highway plans, corridor studies, multimodal plans, and intercity travel related statutes were further examined (Figure 3-1). Understanding the historical context of the state’s plans is an important part in predicting which sections of the current plans are most likely to be implemented in the future. These aspects it possible to formulate paths toward expansion and improvement of intercity travel. Determining whether these plans were successfully implemented requires looking specifically at corridors. The corridors chosen should be ones that the FDOT considers important for inter-regional travel and future growth (FDOT, 2019).

The two corridors that were focused on in the study were the Interstate 75 Corridor between Tampa Bay and Northeast Florida and the Southeast Interstate 95 Corridor between

Miami-Dade County and Palm Beach County. These corridors were chosen for the comparison because of the unique characteristics of both corridors. To compare both corridors will require looking at population data. An existing population size of counties and the cities that are located within the study area will be included. Estimates related to future population in 2040 will be included because a growing population can make an area more attractive for developing alternatives forms of transportation (Hagler, Todorvich, 2011). Looking at population density per square mile of the cities will be important to see if the population is dispersed over a large amount of land or if it is densely-packed (Hagler, Todorvich, 2011). Median household income will be included for important cities located in the study areas to see if there is a gap in household income between large urban areas and medium-sized cities. The Interstate 75 corridor

travels through less dense, mostly semi-rural and suburban areas, with a few medium-sized cities like Ocala and Gainesville between Tampa and Jacksonville (FDOT, 2016b). The Southeast

Interstate 95 Corridor travels through some of the densest parts of Florida, where corridor right- of-way has been constrained by urban growth (FDOT, 2014). State-level public policies have to serve both urban, suburban and semi-rural corridors. Looking at corridors creates a specific study area where a qualitative analysis can determine the quality of service and multimodal connections for existing modes of travel. Analyzing corridors makes it possible to look at the influence of the existing policies. Examining any future long-range transportation plans for the corridor will show if current issues along these corridors are planned to be fixed. Examining future long-range transportation plans for these corridors will also show if the state’s existing inter-regional transportation goals are being implemented in these plans.

It is important to look at existing modes of travel along the corridors (Kanafani, 2008)

(O’Neil et al., 2017) (Figure 3-1). Because car travel is still dominant, it is important to look at the existing highway infrastructure to see if it is designed to manage demand. The modes focused on are public-sector intercity passenger rail, private-sector intercity passenger rail, express coach, conventional bus, and highway travel. Data was collected from secondary sources including from the website of each service, state transportation plans, and google maps.

Each mode within the study area required an overview of the existing service. When looking at each mode, it was important to examine factors like frequency, cost, travel time, and who operates the service.

Since multimodal connections were considered an important requirement for a well- designed intercity transportation system, how intercity travel modes connect to other modes would be of interest (Figure 3-1). Major connections that are important included large-hub

airports and multimodal centers. Another important characteristic to examine is whether modes of intercity travel connect directly to these facilities or require multiple transfers on local public transit to reach them. To collect data about multimodal connections required looking at existing state plans related to transportation and google maps. A direct connection would be considered a seamless transfer between two modes at the same facility.

After looking at what exists, the next step would be to look at challenges or limitations along these corridors (Figure 3-1). Perhaps certain modes received fewer resources than others, or certain modes of travel might not serve a corridor at all. After looking at the challenges, it is important to provide suggestions for improving public policy, to move toward creating better intercity travel solutions in Florida.

Public Policy would Look at existing Look at price point, Explore Public include looking at See if there are any Compare two vital ground travel times, Policy and Historical existing state plans challenges along intercity travel transportation frequency, Context for Intercity and statutes related these corridors and corridors modes along both multimodal Travel in Florida to intercity travel suggest solutions corridors connections and corridors

Figure 3-1. Overview of Methodology

CHAPTER 4 RESULTS

Florida Case Study: Interstate 75 Corridor versus Interstate 95 Southeast Florida Corridor

General Public Policy Related to Intercity Travel in Florida

The Strategic Intermodal System has an overall focus on multimodal planning and to maximizing current facilities. The main three SIS Objectives connect back to this multimodal planning focus. The three main objectives are intermodal connectivity, inter-regional connectivity, and economic development (FDOT, 2016a). Intermodal Connectivity relates to improving facilities used to connect hubs together, and connect a hub to a major corridor (FDOT,

2016a). Improving these facilities would help make the first and last mile of a trip seamless

(FDOT, 2016a). Examples include having local public transit and regional transit connect to a major hub, like an airport or downtown intermodal hub (FDOT, 2016a). Another important goal is to make sure there are freight rail and direct highway connections to a port. Having a highway or major road connection from an intermodal rail facility is another example (FDOT, 2016a).

The next objective is the inter-regional connectivity. Inter-regional connectivity relates to the movements of people and freight for regional trips within Florida, to national and international destinations (FDOT, 2016a). One aspect of this objective is to maximize current rail and road corridors by making improvements to them (FDOT, 2016a). Part of the objective is to improve connections among local public transit, intercity passenger rail, and air travel to facilitate complete, end-to-end trips (FDOT, 2016a). One example includes making rail corridor improvements in order to support passenger rail and commuter rail on the same right of way as freight trains (FDOT, 2016a). Another example is using a highway-corridor right-of-way to support public transit or intercity passenger rail (FDOT, 2016a).

The last objective is economic development. This relates to using transportation facilities in Florida to help continue to grow Florida’s economy (FDOT, 2016a). One aspect of economic development is making it easier for tourists and business travelers to get from cruise ports and airports to other destinations by improving local and regional transit. (FDOT, 2016a). Another part of this objective is to locate transportation facilities near clusters of specific industries and businesses. This could mean having an intermodal rail facility near a major industrial park, or connecting local public and regional transit to a major tech hub near a university (FDOT, 2016a).

Improvements to transportation corridors and facilities can also be used to help redevelop economically-distressed areas in Florida (FDOT, 2016a).

The Strategic Intermodal System Plan places a strong emphasis on improving major corridors in Florida. Major corridors the FDOT has focused on are Interstate 75 and Interstate 95

(FDOT, 2019). FDOT must interact with a variety of actors (local governments, regional planning agencies, and people along these corridors) to figure out a solution that makes all parties happy (FDOT, 2019). The FDOT developed a process for analyzing corridors. They first must understand how these corridors currently function, and their current limitations (FDOT,

2019). Next, the FDOT looks at estimated growth along the corridor and how it would impact existing capacity (FDOT, 2019). Looking at alternatives, the FDOT could also investigate other modes of travel, improving other road capacities, and building new bypass highways (FDOT,

2019). The FDOT looks at implementing recommended improvements and must figure out which improvements are needed in the short-term and in the long-term (FDOT, 2019).

A Historic Look at Intercity Travel Public Policies in Florida

Florida historically has had trouble following through with public policy related to intercity travel. In the last 60 years, various intercity passenger rail and high-speed rail proposals have come and gone (Grovdahl, 2007). Florida’s only state-funded Amtrak train, the Silver

Palm, was discontinued after less than three years of service (Sarasota-Herald Tribune, 1985).

The state-funded Amtrak service connected to Miami and Tampa (Sarasota-Herald Tribune,

1985). The FDOT said the train was not reaching the 60% fare-box recovery-ratio they wanted

(Sarasota-Herald Tribune, 1985). When the FDOT calculated the fare-box recovery-ratio, they did not include the federal subsidy they were receiving to operate the train (Sarasota-Herald

Tribune, 1985). The Florida Coalition of Railroad Passengers battled the state in the courts, challenging the decision to discontinue service, but they unfortunately lost (Sarasota-Herald

Tribune, 1985). Other attempts were made to start state-funded Amtrak service on the Florida

East Coast Railway mainline (FDOT, 2010). In the most recent state rail plan, any mention of state-funded Amtrak service was removed (FDOT, 2018).

The public-private partnership, Florida Overland Express (FOX) was an example of one these attempts to jump-start high-speed rail in Florida (FDOT, 2010). The FOX partnership would have used electric high-speed rail equipment similar to the French TGV, and the service would have connected Miami, Orlando, and Tampa (Grovdahl, 2007). The partnership would have required the state to put 70 million dollars to the project annually (Grovdahl, 2007). When he became Governor, Jeb Bush questioned the project because he thought Florida’s taxpayers would have to take on too much risk to fund part of the project (Grovdahl, 2007). He recommended that the money would be better used to making other transportation improvements in the state (Grovdahl, 2007). Jeb Bush pulled state funding on the project in 1999, and that was the end of the FOX public-private partnership (Grovdahl, 2007).

The 2000s brought more attempts at high-speed rail in Florida (FDOT, 2010). A High-

Speed Rail amendment was approved in 2000 (Grovdahl, 2007). The amendment required

Florida to start building high-speed rail between its five largest cities, and that they would have

to start construction no later than November 1st, 2003 (Grovdahl, 2007). Jeb Bush and various special interest groups challenged the future of the project (Grovdahl, 2007). The high-speed rail amendment was later repealed in 2004 (FDOT, 2010). At the end of the decade, the state of

Florida received $2.4 billion of federal funding to build the first phase of the state’s high-speed rail project (Domonoske, 2018). The arrangement would have been a public-private partnership with state and federal money subsidizing the cost to begin service (FDOT, 2010). Phase 1 would have connected Orlando to Tampa, with 168 mph electrified high-speed rail (FDOT, 2010).

Governor Rick Scott challenged the project, arguing that the Florida Tax Payer would have to subsidize the operating costs of the service and thought that the upfront construction costs would increase (Domonoske, 2018). In 2011, Governor Rick Scott sent back the federal money that was allocated to Florida High-Speed Rail, and the high-speed rail project was dead once again

(Domonoske, 2018).

In the 2010s, the private passenger rail project All Aboard Florida, later called Brightline, is in the process of building diesel-powered intercity passenger rail between Miami and Orlando, with their next phase focusing on Tampa (FDOT, 2018b). Brightline relied on state rights-of- way for Cocoa, Orlando, and Tampa (FDOT, 2018b). Rick Scott scrapped any attempt to expand intercity passenger rail with public funding that was in the FDOT’s previous 2010 rail plan

(FDOT, 2018b, 2018c). Even if Brightline does get built to Orlando, we would still be decades behind where the state expected we would be in 2020 with intercity passenger rail and high- speed rail in Florida (FDOT, 2006, 2009, 2010). Unfortunately, the lack of follow-through for implementing our intercity transportation goals led to certain corridors having fewer options for service than others. What exists along the Interstate 95 Southeast Corridor versus Interstate 75

Corridor between Tampa Bay and Northeast Florida is another example of inconsistent and failed policy implementation at the state level.

Florida Corridor Studies: Interstate 75 Corridor

To understand how the FDOT analyzes a corridor, it is important to look at existing public corridor plans of Interstate 75. The two public plans that will be explored are the

Interstate 75 Relief Task Force Recommendations Report and Interstate 75 Rail Feasibility

Analysis Summary Report: Tampa Bay to Northeast Florida. The FDOT developed an Initial

Focus Area that was used by the Interstate 75 Relief Task Force, which included counties and major corridors between Tampa and Jacksonville (FDOT, 2016). The study area that will be used to analyze existing intercity transportation options between Tampa and Jacksonville will include all the counties that were included in the FDOT’s Initial Focus Area. Existing SIS corridors, hubs, and airports will also be further explored in the study area.

Interstate 75 Relief Task Force

In October 2016, the Interstate 75 Relief Task Force released a recommendations report for improving Interstate 75 and the connections between Northeast Florida and Tampa Bay. This task force had people with diverse backgrounds including county commissioners, regional planning agencies, and conservation organizations. The Initial Focus Area stretched from Tampa

Bay, all the way to Jacksonville, and included a mixture of rural, suburban, and urban areas

(FDOT, 2016). There were also state-level employees from the Florida Department of

Environmental Protection, Florida Department of Transportation, and the Florida Department of

Economic Opportunity (FDOT, 2016b).

The task force used a framework for developing a plan around four themes called the 4

C’s (FDOT, 2016b). These four themes have opportunities and constraints that limit them. The first theme was centers and communities, which is investing in corridors connected to current

and future commercial and industrial development (FDOT, 2016b). The main part of this theme was making sure that improvements happen to current corridors, and that new corridors are compatible with current and future land-use goals (FDOT, 2016b). Another goal is to make sure there is a balance between economic and population growth (FDOT, 2016b). The benefits of having a balance between the two can prevent the declining quality of life for current citizens living in these communities (FDOT, 2016b). An example of a limitation of this theme is that any corridor investment cannot violate a county’s comprehensive plan (FDOT, 2016b). If the comprehensive plan has restrictions to protect rural farmland, those restrictions must be respected (FDOT, 2016).

The next theme is the countryside, which connects to the various industries and tourist destinations existing in rural parts of each county in the study area. A variety of industries like mining, forestry, and agriculture exist in the study area (FDOT, 2016b). The equestrian industry, historic downtown areas, and various state parks attract tourists to the region (FDOT, 2016b).

Corridor improvements could make tourism more accessible and make it easier to ship out products from our industries (FDOT, 2016b). A major constraint is protecting rural land for equestrian use, forestry, and agriculture from becoming more attractive for redevelopment because of increased accessibility (FDOT, 2016b).

The next them of the framework is corridors. This includes major rail, highway, and state road corridors (FDOT, 2016b). The theme of corridors is to improve current rail and highway corridors first, before building new ones (FDOT, 2016b). The Initial Focus Area of the Interstate

75 Relief Study has many SIS corridors and facilities vital to Florida. The CSX S-line is the main rail corridor through the study area between Tampa and Jacksonville (FDOT, 2016b,

2018a). CSX and the Florida Northern both have secondary routes located in the study area

(FDOT, 2016b, 2018a). Expanding rail transit and public transit in the study area is an example of trying to maximize current corridors (FDOT, 2016b). Any public transit or intercity passenger rail project needs to be able to promote transit-oriented development (FDOT, 2016b). Any new corridor connections between Tampa Bay to Northeast Florida would have to be multimodal

(FDOT, 2016b). The main interstate highway through the study area is Interstate 75. (FDOT,

2016b). U.S 301 is a vital state highway in the initial focus area (FDOT, 2016b). Toll Road 589 also known as the Suncoast Parkway is a major North-South toll road currently being extended to State-Road 44 in Lecanto (FDOT, 2018f). The main driving routes between Tampa and

Jacksonville are Interstate 4 to Interstate 95; taking Interstate 75 and transferring to US 301 in

Ocala; or taking Interstate 75 all the way to Lake City; and getting on Interstate 10 to head east toward Jacksonville (FDOT, 2016b, 2018a). A major constraint is the lack of choices for different modes of travel between Tampa and Jacksonville (FDOT, 2016b, 2018a).

Conservation is the last theme of the framework. Major corridors like US-301 and

Interstate 75 go through environmentally-sensitive land (FDOT, 2016b). Avoiding conservation land and environmentally sensitive land is a top priority (FDOT, 2016b). Improving these corridors means being less intrusive to the environment and improving drainage and wildlife crossings (FDOT, 2016b). With any corridor improvement, one constraint will be to reduce the construction’s impact on local waterways and springs (FDOT, 2016b).

The Interstate 75 Relief Study task force created a recommendations section to show what must be prioritized, and the next steps to implementing these recommendations. The first recommendation is to focus on improving current corridors and bringing them to their full potential before creating new ones (FDOT, 2016b). Making sure Interstate 75 can continue to function as the main corridor through the initial study area is a major part of these

recommendations. Some of their ideas include removing local traffic from Interstate 75 by upgrading nearby roads to handle additional trips (FDOT, 2016b). Restricting the number of new exits and making sure land use along the corridor is compatible with highways will keep

Interstate 75’s primary use focused on being a high-speed road corridor (FDOT, 2016). Adding truck or express lanes to Interstate 75 to increase capacity and make the road more reliable should be a top priority (FDOT, 2016b). US 301 was considered another corridor worth improving. Some of the recommendations included partial grade separation, access roads to serve residential and commercial property along the corridor, and building a connection in Ocala between US 301 and Interstate 75 (FDOT, 2016b).

The task force also recommended examining ways to reduce the current issues Interstate

75 currently faces. The focus would be to make rail improvements to the CSX S-line to increase capacity for future freight growth, and to make it possible to operate intercity passenger rail on the same tracks (FDOT, 2016b, 2018a). The task force specifically recommends that the FDOT further study the feasibility of creating an intercity passenger rail service that would connect

Gainesville and Ocala, to regional and national connections (FDOT, 2016b, 2018a). The FDOT should also investigate rebuilding the existing branch lines and the abandoned rail rights-of-way to expand freight and passenger rail service, if necessary (FDOT, 2016b, 2018a).

When the task force was asked about building a new road corridor west of Interstate 75 from where the Suncoast Parkway II would end, they recommended no further investigating it

(FDOT, 2016b). Their main complaints were that it would have a negative impact on current agriculture and conservation lands (FDOT, 2016b). They also said it could have a negative impact on rural communities along the proposed routing (FDOT, 2016b).

Rail Feasibility Analysis Summary Report

The FDOT in February 2018 released a rail feasibility report related to the Interstate 75

Relief Study task force’s recommendation about further pursuing intercity passenger rail between Tampa and Jacksonville (FDOT, 2018a). The feasibility report examined whether there is a need for intercity passenger rail along the corridor through 2040 (FDOT, 2018a). The feasibility report examined a variety of parameters to see if passenger rail is feasible for both regions. The study examined the current demographics of the study area and expected future growth (FDOT, 2018a). It examines the services currently existing between Jacksonville and

Tampa (FDOT, 2018a). The report looked at current rail corridors like the CSX S-line and examined the viability of rebuilding current branch lines and former rail rights-of-way to support passenger rail (FDOT, 2018a). The report also discussed current and future local and regional transit, and whether the proposed passenger rail would benefit from those services to promote multimodal connections (FDOT, 2018a). These parameters included seeing the impact on current freight rail service, cost of service, and ridership demand (FDOT, 2018a).

The study area between Tampa and Jacksonville has seen dramatic growth, and various communities have various reasons for improving inter-regional travel. These reasons include growth in Gainesville and Alachua County, because of the University of Florida (FDOT, 2018a).

Travel demand is impacted by the students leaving for holidays and University events on campus

(FDOT, 2018a). The University of Florida has attracted biotech jobs to the region (FDOT,

2018a). Marion County and the city of Ocala have grown dramatically over the years; the equestrian industry attracts people to the community (FDOT, 2018a). Retirement Communities like the Villages in Sumter County have large retiree populations and continue to grow rapidly

(FDOT, 2018a). The report says that any passenger rail expansion in the region would require

planning and investment into making it possible to seamlessly transfer between local public transit and intercity passenger rail (FDOT, 2018a)

The feasibility study discussed the main active rail corridors, branch lines, and abandoned rail routes in the study area. Currently, the CSX S-Line and A-Line are the main rail routes between Tampa and Jacksonville (FDOT, 2018a, 2018b). The private freight railroad CSX sold

61 miles of the A-Line to the FDOT to use for SunRail (FDOT, 2018a, 2018b). Since 2014, because of SunRail, most freight traffic has been rerouted on to the S-Line (FDOT, 2018a,

2018b). CSX also has some branch lines in the region, such as between Brooksville and Tampa, and as well as Starke to Newberry, with another branch to Gainesville (FDOT, 2018b, 2018c).

The short-line railroad, Florida Northern, also has freight operations in the study area, including a 24.3-mile branch line in Ocala and a branch line that goes from Red Level near Crystal River to Newberry (FDOT, 2018b, 2018c). The study area also has many abandoned rail corridors

(FDOT, 2018b). Unfortunately, ownership of these abandoned rail corridors can vary (FDOT,

2018b). Much of the land was sold, and some of it was built over, but some became rails to trails

(State of Florida, 1985).

The FDOT examined various forms of transit technology, but went with intercity passenger rail for the study for a few reasons. Intercity passenger rail could operate on current corridors in mixed traffic using diesel locomotives (FDOT, 2018a). High-speed rail was rejected because of its high infrastructure costs per mile (FDOT, 2018a). High-speed rail was also not chosen for this corridor because it would require a separate right-of-way, grade separation, and electrification, which they said was too costly (FDOT, 2018a).

When modeling the estimated passenger rail ridership, the FDOT used four different scenarios. Scenario 1 used the A-Line via Orlando to connect Jacksonville and Tampa, using the

same stops currently used by the Silver Star (FDOT, 2018a). Scenario 2 would use the same routing and stations along the S-line that Palmetto used, before it was discontinued in Florida

(FDOT, 2018a). Scenario 3 used the S-line but with a brand new direct-rail connection to

Gainesville, instead of using Waldo as the station. Scenario 4 used abandoned rail rights-of-way to connect CSX’s current line that ends in Brooksville with the Florida Northern Line in

Dunnellon (FDOT, 2018a). This scenario would also require a new connection for Dunnellon,

Gainesville, and Jacksonville, using abandoned rail rights-of-way that would have to be restored

(FDOT, 2018). All the routes in the scenario would need two trains daily, and ridership was based on a model from the Interstate 75 Relief Study (FDOT, 2018a).

The FDOT projected ridership makes a few assumptions. They considered the travel times between Jacksonville and Tampa as not competitive with driving (FDOT, 2018a). With the current Amtrak Silver Service, Jacksonville, Tampa, and Orlando are high-ridership stations; most of their projected ridership would still be focused on there (FDOT, 2018a). The estimated ridership numbers include alightings and boardings combined (FDOT, 2018a). The FDOT used average capital costs related to long-distance passenger rail service data from the national transit database (FDOT, 2018a).

Scenario 4 had the highest ridership at 531 people, and the lowest time at 3 hours 50 minutes (FDOT, 2018a). It had the highest capital costs because it would require rebuilding currently abandoned rail rights-of-way, and would miss Ocala and the Villages (FDOT, 2018a).

Restoring the Palmetto routing via the S-line, in Scenario 2 had the lowest ridership at 313 people (FDOT, 2018a). Scenario 3 included a connection to Gainesville from the S-line and had ridership at 410 people; the travel time for Scenario 3 is 4 hours and 30 minutes. The A-line

routing via Orlando in Scenario 1 had the second lowest ridership at 364 people a day; and the highest travel time at 5 hours 23 minutes (FDOT, 2018a).

The FDOT concluded that investing in state-funded passenger rail service was not feasible because of high capital cost and low ridership (FDOT, 2018a). The FDOT said Amtrak ridership on the Silver Service trains in Florida between Tampa and Jacksonville is low, and assumes that people are using the service because they have no other option, or are choosing to use rail specifically (FDOT, 2018a). Since private-sector air and bus service is limited on the route between Tampa and Jacksonville, the FDOT assumes there is little demand for alternatives to driving (FDOT, 2018a).

The FDOT asked CSX their opinion, whether the S-line is viable for passenger rail, and they said no because of current freight traffic and future expected growth (FDOT, 2018a). CSX says since the route is mostly single-track with passing sidings, there would be too much interference, which would reduce their quality of service by adding 2 daily passenger trains on the route (FDOT, 2018a, 2018c). CSX said they would support passenger rail service on the

Gainesville and Brooksville branchlines used in Scenario 4 (FDOT, 2018a, 2018c). Scenario 4, though, would require building new rail lines on abandoned rail rights-of-way, and enhancing current ones; all of this would be expensive and would not significantly reduce congestion on

Interstate 75 (FDOT, 2018a). Projected ridership would not cover the yearly maintenance and operational costs (FDOT, 2018a). The report concluded that through the year 2040, expanded intercity passenger rail would not be viable between Tampa and Jacksonville (FDOT, 2018a).

The FDOT wants to make sure to keep major rail corridors like the CSX S-line functioning for freight as their primary use (FDOT, 2018b, 2018c). The FDOT expects that a rise in demand for

freight rail could lead to congestion issues that will limit opportunities for passenger rail on current corridors (FDOT, 2018b, 2018c).

Overview of Study Area

Counties and Cities located in Study Area

The counties located within the Interstate 75 study area are a mix of rural counties, formerly rural counties that have rapidly grown, and urban counties (Table 4-1). Tampa and

Jacksonville and their respective counties are the most populated areas in the region (Table 4-2).

Counties like Alachua, Marion, Sumter, Pasco, Clay, St. Johns are expected to continue to grow in population through 2040 (Rayer & Wang, 2018) (Table 4-1). Rural counties like Levy,

Putnam, and Bradford are not expected to change much in population through 2040 (Rayer &

Wany, 2018) (Table 4-1). Tampa was the densest city per square mile out of the four cities explored in the study area (U.S. Department of Commerce, 2018a) (Table 4-2). Jacksonville, because of the cities land area being so large, made it have the lowest density per square mile out of the cities included (U.S. Department of Commerce, 2018a) (Table 4-2). The overall population in the study area is expected to grow from 5,658,949 million in 2017 to be nearly

7,294,195 million people by 2040 (Rayer & Wang, 2018) (Table 4-1). Median household income was the highest in Jacksonville at $50,555, while Gainesville was the lowest out of the four cities focused at $34,004 (U.S. Department of Commerce, 2018a) (Table 4-2).

General Overview of Transportation Facilities and Corridors within Study Area

The main SIS road corridors through the study area are Interstate 75, Interstate 10,

Interstate 275, Interstate 4, US 301, the Suncoast Parkway, and US 19 (FDOT, 2017) (Figure 4-

1). The main SIS rail corridor through the study area is the CSX S-line, which directly connects

Jacksonville and Tampa (FDOT, 2017) (Figure 4-1). The freight railroad CSX has secondary

routes like the Brooksville Subdivision, and the branches to Alachua and Newberry are designated emerging SIS rail corridors (FDOT, 2017). Both Tampa and Jacksonville have SIS- designated port facilities and SIS-designated freight rail intermodal facilities (FDOT, 2017).

Both Tampa’s and Jacksonville’s current Amtrak stations are designated SIS facilities (FDOT,

2017). Greyhound’s current stations in Gainesville and Tampa are both SIS facilities (FDOT,

2017). Greyhound has moved into the Jacksonville Regional Transportation Center in downtown Jacksonville (Greyhound, 2019). For Ocala, both Greyhound and Red Coach have stops located at gas stations located off Interstate 75 (Greyhound, 2019) (Red Coach, 2019).

Amtrak will eventually move into Jacksonville Regional Transportation Center (FDOT, 2017)

(Jacksonville Transportation Authority, 2018). Jacksonville and Tampa have designated SIS airport facilities, while Gainesville’s Airport is designated as an emerging SIS Airport (FDOT,

2017).

Existing Ground Transportation Modes Along Corridor

Intercity Passenger Rail

Amtrak currently operates two daily long-distance trains in each direction, between

Miami and New York City (Amtrak, 2018b) (Table 4-3). Tampa has a direct passenger-rail connection with the Silver Star, but also has a bus connection to Orlando so passengers can transfer to the Silver Meteor (Amtrak, 2018b). The CSX S-Line, from the start of Amtrak in

1971 to 2004, had daily passenger-rail service (FDOT, 2005). The last iteration of the service, called the Palmetto, was a long-distance train between New York and Miami (FDOT, 2005). In

2004, the Palmetto service was discontinued in Florida after the train made Savannah its new endpoint (FDOT, 2018a). Thruway bus service to connect Amtrak customers to current existing long-distance trains replaced the Palmetto (Amtrak, 2018b). The Amtrak Silver Meteor makes the trip in 4 hours 56 minutes, which is slower than driving, but still slightly faster than taking

Greyhound (Amtrak, 2018b). Amtrak Silver Star, which directly serves Tampa, takes 5 hours 24 minutes (Amtrak, 2018b). For ticket costs, a one-way ticket between Tampa and Jacksonville costs between $33.00 to $41.00 for a saver ticket (Amtrak, 2018a).

Highway Ground Transportation

The fastest ground transportation mode of travel between Jacksonville and Tampa is still driving, which takes around 3 hours and 30 minutes on Interstate 10 and Interstate 75 (FDOT,

2018a). Greyhound makes the trip in 5 hours and 45 minutes to 6 hours and 35 minutes, but some of the frequencies do require a transfer in Orlando (Greyhound, 2019) (Table 4-3).

Megabus and Red Coach both do not have direct service between Jacksonville, Tampa (FDOT,

2018a).

Multimodal Connectivity

In the study area regional connectivity between local public transit systems are lackluster

(FDOT, 2018a) (Table 4-3). Some of the major gaps include the lack of local public transit service between Citrus, and Marion Counties; Sumter, and Marion Counties; and Marion, and

Alachua Counties (FDOT, 2018a). Since the Greyhound station moved from Ocala Union

Station, there is no direct connection between SunTran and Greyhound (Googlemaps, 2019).

The FDOT and Hillsborough Regional Transit Authority conducted a study related to creating a regional public transit system, but have not moved forward with them yet (FDOT, 2018a).

Currently, in Jacksonville, a downtown intermodal facility called the Jacksonville Regional

Transportation Center is being built (FDOT, 2018a). The facility has the option to add a connection to the current Amtrak service if funding becomes available to pay for it (FDOT,

2018a). Greyhound uses the Jacksonville Regional Transportation Center (Greyhound, 2019).

Connections to Jacksonville International Airport and Tampa International Airport are limited.

Amtrak’s station in Tampa does have a bus connection, but it must operate in local traffic and

does not have a separate right-of-way (Google Maps, 2019). Amtrak’s Silver Service connects to

SunRail in Orlando (Google Maps, 2019). There is limited connectivity between local public transit and the Silver Service in Tampa and in Jacksonville (Google Maps, 2019). Reaching

Jacksonville International Airport using Amtrak and Greyhound requires doing at least one bus transfer (Google Maps, 2019).

Interstate 95 Corridor in South Florida

Compared to the Interstate 75 Corridor in North Central Florida, The Interstate 95

Corridor in Southeast Florida is a much more urban corridor. The study area included Miami-

Dade, Broward, and Palm Beach Counties (Figure 4-2). All three of these counties are more urbanized, compared to the counties located in the Interstate 75 study area (Figure 4-2). The

Atlantic Ocean and the Everglades constrain the amount of land available; existing transportation corridors usually have development built right next to them, which can constrain certain corridors (FDOT, 2014) (Figure 4-2). Comparing the two corridor study areas in Florida with different characteristics makes it possible to see if state-transportation policy and investment to improve inter-regional travel has been implemented statewide. The South Florida Regional

Transportation Authority operates a regional passenger rail service called Tri-Rail; and

Brightline now partially owned by Virgin Trains USA operates private intercity passenger rail service to all three counties (FDOT, 2018) (SEC, 2018). The FDOT also developed a Southeast

Florida Express Lanes Network Regional Concept for Transportation Operations (RCTO) plan, and is implementing express toll lanes in Miami-Dade, Broward, and Palm Beach Counties.

Overview of Study Area

Counties and Cities located in Study Area

Miami-Dade, Broward and Palm Beach Counties combined have 6,031,209 people living in them (Rayer & Wang, 2018) (Table 4-5). By 2040, the amount of people living in Miami-

Dade, Broward, Palm Beach Counties is estimated to be around 7,485,853 people (Rayer &

Wang, 2018) (Table 4-5). The three cities in the study area that will be focused on are Miami,

Fort Lauderdale, and West Palm Beach (Table 4-6). Miami is the largest city in the study area at

463,347 people, and has a density of 11,135.90 people per square mile (U.S., Department of

Commerce, 2018b) (Table 4-6). Fort Lauderdale is the second-largest city at 180,072 people with the second-highest density of people at 4,761.10 people per square mile (U.S. Department of Commerce, 2018b) (Table 4-6). West Palm Beach is the third-largest city included in the study area, with a population of 110,222 people and a population density of 1,807.10 people per square mile (U.S. Department of Commerce, 2018b) (Table 4-6). West Palm Beach median income is $59,054, the highest median income of the three cities observed (U.S. Department of

Commerce, 2018b) (Table 4-6). Miami has the lowest median income for the cities being explored in the study area at $33,999 (U.S. Department of Commerce, 2018b) (Table 4-6). For all three cities, their populations are only a small portion of the overall population for each county the city is located in (Rayer & Wang, 2018) (Table 4-5).

General Overview of Transportation Facilities and Corridors within Study Area

The study area has two major SIS highway corridors and two major SIS rail corridors that go between West Palm Beach and Miami (Figure 4-2). The Florida Turnpike and Interstate 95 are both SIS highway corridors that are the backbone for inter-regional travel by car and bus

(FDOT, 2017) (Figure 4-2). The Florida Turnpike is a toll road, while Interstate 95 is a highway that has express toll lanes in some sections (FDOT, 2017). The South Florida Rail Corridor and

Florida East Coast Railway mainline are the two main rail corridors through the study area

(FDOT, 2018b) (Figure 4-2). The South Florida Rail Corridor is owned by the FDOT, which purchased the corridor from CSX (FDOT, 2018b). The Florida East Coast Railway owns their mainline; Brightline also has access to operate passenger service over that corridor (SEC, 2018).

Brightline and the Florida East Coast Railway have a joint agreement for dispatching along the corridor (SEC, 2018). Miami Intermodal Center and Golden Glades Multimodal Transportation

Facility are the main SIS hubs in the study area (FDOT, 2017). Red Coach and Greyhound both use Miami Intermodal Center (FDOT, 2017). Greyhound also provides service to Golden Glades

Multimodal Transportation Facility (Greyhound, 2019) (Red Coach, 2019). MiamiCentral is a major private hub in the study area this is used for Brightline Miami Station (SEC, 2018). Later in 2019, Tri-Rail will start operating service to MiamiCentral (SFRTA, 2018). The new connection will give Tri-Rail a direct connection to downtown Miami (SFRTA, 2018). Miami

International Airport, Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport, and Palm Beach

International Airport are the main SIS airports in the study area (FDOT, 2017) (Figure 4-2).

Existing Ground Transportation Modes Along Corridor

Highway Ground Transportation

For highway transportation, the focus in Southeast Florida has been to add express toll lanes on existing major highways throughout the region. Adding express toll lanes connects back to the goals the FDOT set in the Strategic Intermodal Policy Plan; improving existing highway infrastructure to make travel and commerce efficient (FDOT, 2016a). To design and implement toll lanes; the FDOT involved various local and state actors (FDOT, 2014). Some of the actors included the Miami-Dade Expressway Authority, FDOT District 4, FDOT District 6 and the Florida Turnpike Enterprise (FDOT, 2014). Some of the toll lanes, like the 595 Express

Lanes, were developed as a P3 public-private partnership (FDOT, 2014). The advantage of a P3 arrangement is it allows the FDOT to attract private-sector investment for infrastructure improvements (FDOT, 2014). Both the FDOT and their private-sector partner must negotiate which risks each party takes on (FDOT, 2014).

The advantage the express toll lanes offer is that they allow for demand to be managed

(FDOT, 2014). Miami’s metro area suffers from congestion, ranking Number 11 for traffic delays in the United States (FDOT, 2014). Converting the HOV lane to an express toll lane on

Interstate 95 nearly tripled the average speed during afternoon rush hour, with the average speed rising to 56 miles-per-hour (FDOT, 2014). Florida Statutes section 338.151 allows for the

FDOT to establish tolls on new highway capacity and on new lanes on existing state highways.

The FDOT is allowed to convert HOV lanes to toll lanes on existing highways, but is not allowed to convert conventional lanes to toll lanes, unless they had a toll before July 1st, 2012

(FDOT, 2015). The FDOT is also allowed to use toll revenue from the lanes to cover infrastructure maintenance, even after the bond is paid back (FDOT, 2015). Florida’s express toll lanes use SunPass (FDOT, 2015). Buses can use the express toll lanes; public transit vehicles are exempt from paying (FDOT, 2015). Public bus service benefits because the buses are not sitting in traffic during rush hour (FDOT, 2015). The express toll lanes increase the speed and reliability of service (FDOT, 2015).

There has already been massive investment in express toll lanes in Florida, with even more planned soon. Interstate 95 currently has 21 miles of express toll lanes in Miami-Dade and

Broward Counties (FDOT, 2018e). In Broward County, Interstate 595 has 10 miles of express toll lanes (FDOT, 2018e). In Miami-Dade and Broward Counties, Interstate 75 has 21 miles of express toll lanes in operation (FDOT, 2018e). The Florida Turnpike has 21 miles of express toll lanes under construction in Miami-Dade County (FDOT, 2018e). Interstate 95 is seeing more express toll lane construction, with 24 miles being built in Broward and Palm Beach Counties currently (FDOT, 2018e). In 2019 the Palmetto Expressway is opening 10 miles of express toll lanes (FDOT, 2018e). Eventually, the FDOT wants to expand express toll lanes on Interstate 95

all the way to Linton Blvd in Delray Beach (FDOT, 2018e). For the Florida Turnpike, the FDOT wants to expand express toll lanes from Miami, all the way to Fort Pierce (FDOT, 2018e). The

FDOT’s Express Lane policies and infrastructure for Southeast Florida are well-developed.

Intercity Passenger Rail

Compared to other parts of Florida, Southeast Florida has many options for passenger rail. Tri-Rail is an example of a public-sector solution, while Brightline is an example of a private-sector solution (Table 4-7). Tri-Rail is a 72-mile commuter rail system that serves

Miami-Dade, Broward, and Palm Beach Counties (FDOT, 2018b, 2018c). Tri-Rail is operated by the South Florida Regional Transportation Authority (SFRTA, 2018). The service is operated on the South Florida Rail Corridor; which is state-owned, former CSX mainline (FDOT, 2018b).

The South Florida Rail Corridor parallels I-95 (FDOT, 2018b, 2018c). Ridership since 1990 has grown by 4 times, to over 4 million a year, with an average of 14,000 passengers a day during weekdays (SFRTA, 2018). Since the service stretches through three counties, and serves multiple major cities along the route, it is relevant for intercity travel along the corridor (SFRTA,

2018). Amtrak operates twice-daily, long-distance service over the route with the Silver Star and

Silver Meteor (FDOT, 2018b). Both trains connect Miami with New York City (FDOT, 2018b).

The Silver Star has a direct connection to Tampa (Amtrak, 2018b). Amtrak does not give the option to book between West Palm Beach and Miami (Amtrak, 2018a). As a result, Amtrak’s long-distance service is not competing with intercity travel along I-95 between West Palm Beach and Miami.

In the 30 years since Tri-Rail’s creation, massive investments in improvements have increased the frequency and multimodal connectivity of the system. In one of the major projects, the South Florida Rail Corridor was mostly double-tracked along the 72-mile route; allowed Tri-

Rail to increase service (SFRTA, 2018). This capacity expansion allowed Tri-Rail to expand

service to the current 50-weekday trains a day and 30-weekend a day (FDOT, 2018b).

Improving multimodal connections was another focus for Tri-Rail (FDOT, 2018). Tri-Rail operates the Commuter Connector Bus Service as a first-and last-mile solution for many of its stations (SFRTA, 2018). In 2017, 945,000 people used the Commuter Connector Bus Service

(SFTRTA, 2018). Miami Intermodal Center is one of the major multi-modal hubs along the corridor. The hub connects Tri-Rail passengers with local public transit, Miami International

Airport, and intercity bus services (FDOT, 2018b). Tri-Rail is finishing their Downtown Miami

Link, a connection to MiamiCentral set to open in 2019 (SFRTA, 2018). Tri-Rail expanded service to downtown that will allow passengers to connect to local public transit, as well as connect with intercity passenger rail using Brightline (SFRTA, 2018).

Brightline is a private-sector intercity passenger rail that serves Miami, Fort Lauderdale, and West Palm Beach (SEC, 2018). In late 2018, Virgin bought a stake in Brightline (SEC,

2018). They focus on providing frequent corridor-style service to major cities (SEC, 2018).

Their West Palm Beach, Fort-Lauderdale, and Miami stations are in the urban core of each city

(SEC, 2018). Brightline’s goal in the next few years is to connect to Orlando, and eventually

Tampa (SEC, 2018). Brightline between, Miami, and West Palm Beach operates on the Florida

East Coast Railway’s right-of-way (SEC, 2018). To make sure both railroads get equal access, they jointly own a dispatching company that oversees the route (SEC, 2018). Investment has been made in infrastructure, like double tracking from Miami to West Palm Beach (SEC, 2018).

Brightline relies on leasing state-owned rights-of-way to connect the Florida East Coast

Railway mainline in Cocoa with Orlando International Airport (SEC, 2018). The land Brightline will use includes toll road right-of-way and land, as week as an intermodal terminal on airport property (SEC, 2018). Brightline fits in well with the FDOT’s Strategic Intermodal System

Policies. The FDOT wants to use existing highway rights-of-way for multimodal uses like intercity passenger rail (FDOT, 2016). Leasing out the right-of-way to Brightline is an example of that (FDOT, 2016). The FDOT values include promoting public-private partnerships to improve existing SIS corridors and facilities (FDOT, 2016). Brightline connects to the FDOT’s goal to have premium transit like intercity passenger rail to major cities in Florida (FDOT,

2016). Brightline will also benefit existing local public transit by providing multimodal connections, so people can make complete, inter-regional trips (FDOT, 2016).

Multimodal Connectivity

The Southeast Interstate 95 Corridor Study Area has multiple connections between various modes of local and intercity transportation (Figure 4-2) (Table-8). Tri-Rail has a direct connection to Miami International Airport and connecting bus shuttle services to Fort-

Lauderdale International Airport and Palm Beach International Airport (FDOT, 2018b). Tri-Rail also connects to MetroRail at the Miami Intermodal Center and the MetroRail Transfer Station

(FDOT, 2018b). Red Coach has direct connections to Fort-Lauderdale International Airport and

Miami International Airport (Red Coach, 2019). Greyhound has a direct connection to Miami

International Airport (Greyhound, 2019). Greyhound also has a stop at Golden Glades

Multimodal Transportation Facility, a facility with a connection to Tri-Rail (Greyhound, 2019).

Brightline’s MiamiCentral station has connections to MetroRail, MetroMover, and soon, to Tri-

Rail (FDOT, 2018b). MetroRail connects Brightline passengers to Miami International Airport

(FDOT, 2018b).

Figure 4-1. Map of Interstate 75 Study Area Intercity Ground Transportation Map (FDOT, 2018) (FGDL, 2018)

Table 4-1. Population Estimates for Counties located in Interstate 75 Study Area County 2017 Population estimates for Estimated 2040 Total Total Names Counties within Study Area Population Population for Population Study Area for Study 2017 Area 2040

Alachua 260,003 306,291 5,658,949 7,294,195

Baker 27,791 31,340

Bradford 27,642 30,004

Citrus 143,801 164,929

Clay 208,549 287,978

Columbia 68,943 77,840

Duval 936,811 1,176,738

Gilchrist 17,224 20,032

Hernando 181,882 232,225

Hillsborough 1,379,302 1,901,392

Levy 41,015 45,945

Marion 349,267 438,465

Nassau 80,456 112,302

Pasco 505,709 688,965

Pinellas 962,003 1,051,276

Putnam 73,176 75,401

St. Johns 229,715 386,587

Suwannee 44,960 50,361

Sumter 120,700 216,125

(Rayer & Wang, 2018)

Table 4-2. Population and Median Household Income for Cities in Interstate 75 Study Area City 2017 Population Population Per Square Mile Median Household Estimates (2010) Income

Gainesville 132,249 2,028.40 $34,004

Jacksonville 892,062 1,100.10 $50,555

Ocala 59,110 1,256.20 $39,238

Tampa 385,430 2,960.20 $48,245

(U.S. Department of Commerce, 2018a)

Table 4-3. Ground transportation intercity travel choices between Jacksonville and Tampa Bay to Northeast Florida study area overview Ground Operator Frequency Travel Time One-way Cost Transportation (Number of Mode Round Trips) Public Sector Amtrak Silver 1 train a day 5 hours and 24 $33.00-$41.00 Intercity Passenger Star minutes Rail/Commuter Rail Amtrak Silver 1 train a day and 4 hours and 56 Meteor bus transfer minutes

Private Sector NA NA NA NA Intercity Passenger Rail

Express Coach NA NA NA NA

Conventional Bus Greyhound 3 times a day 5 hours and 45 $19-$23 (with transfer in minutes to 6 Orlando) hours and 35 minutes

(Amtrak, 2018a, 2018b) (Greyhound, 2019)

Table 4-4. Ground transportation intercity choices between Jacksonville and Tampa Bay to Northeast Florida multimodal connections Ground Operator Multimodal Jacksonville Tampa International Transportation Connections to Airport Airport Connection Mode Type Frequent Public Connection Transit and SIS Facilities

Public-sector Amtrak Orlando Amtrak JTA bus Hart (direct bus Intercity Silver Star Station has SunRail connection connection) Passenger Amtrak Connection to Lynx (Requiring bus Rail/Regional Silver Central transfer) Rail Meteor

Private-sector NA NA NA NA Intercity Passenger Rail

Express NA NA NA NA Coach

Conventional Greyhound Jacksonville JTA bus Hart bus (direct Bus Regional connection connection) Transportation (requiring Bus Center Transfer)

(FDOT, 2018b) (Google Maps, 2019) (Jacksonville Transportation Authority, 2018)

Figure 4-2. An overview map of Southeast Interstate 95 Corridor (FDOT, 2018d) (FGDL, 2018)

Table 4-5. Southeast Interstate 95 Corridor County Population County 2017 Population Estimates for Estimated 2040 Total Total Names Counties Within Study Area Population Population Population 2017 2040

Broward 1,873,970 2,249,271 6,031,209 7,486,853

Miami- 2,743,095 3,477,569 Dade

Palm 1,414,144 1,760,013 Beach

(Rayer & Wang, 2018)

Table 4-6. Southeast Interstate 95 Corridor City Populations, Density, and Median Household Income City 2017 Population Population Per Square Mile Median Household Estimates (2010) Income

West Palm 110,222 1,807.10 $59,054 Beach

Fort Lauderdale 180,072 4,761.10 $52,315

Miami 463,347 11,135.90 $33,999

(U.S. Department of Commerce, 2018b)

Table 4-7. The Southeast Interstate 95 Corridor Intercity Ground Transportation Overview Ground Operator Frequency Travel Time One-way Ticket Transportation between West Cost Mode Palm Beach and Miami

Public-Sector Tri-Rail 50-trains 1 hour, 49 $6.90 Intercity weekdays/30- minutes Passenger trains weekends Rail/Regional Rail

Private-Sector Brightline 34 trains 1 hour, 15 $17-$45 Intercity weekdays/ 20 minutes Passenger Rail trains weekends

Express Coach Red Coach 4 buses daily 1 hour 20 $19-$48 minutes

Conventional Greyhound 7 buses daily 1 hour 55 $9-$23 Bus minutes to 2 hours 35 minutes

(Brightline, 2019) (FDOT, 2018b) (Greyhound, 2019), (Google Maps, 2019) (Redcoach, 2019)

Table 4-8. Interstate 95 corridor in Southeast Florida intercity, ground transportation multimodal connections Ground Operator Multimodal Connection Connection to Miami Transportation Connections to to Palm Fort International Mode Frequent Public Beach Lauderdale- Airport Transit System International Hollywood and SIS Airport International Facilities Airport

Public-Sector Tri-Rail Miami Shuttle bus Shuttle Bus Miami Intercity Intermodal from West from Fort Intermodal Passenger Center, Metrorail Palm Beach Lauderdale Center Rail/Regional Transfer Station, Tri-Rail Airport (Direct Rail Golden Glades Station Station Connection) Multimodal Transportation Facility

Private-Sector Brightli MiamiCentral Shuttle Bus Broward Metrorail Intercity ne from West County connection Passenger Rail Palm Beach Transit Tri-Rail Station

Express Coach Red Miami Airport, No Direct Direct Coach Fort Lauderdale- Connection Connection Hollywood International Airport

Conventional Greyhou Miami Shuttle bus Broward Direct Bus nd Intermodal from West County Connection Center, Golden Palm Beach Transit Glades Tri-Rail Multimodal station Transportation Facility

(Brightline, 2019), (FDOT, 2018b), (Google Maps, 2019),(Greyhound, 2019), (Red Coach, 2019)

CHAPTER 5 DISCUSSION

Existing Limitations

Unlike the Interstate 75 Corridor in North-Central Florida, the Interstate 95 Corridor in

Southeast Florida has adopted the policies mentioned in the Strategic Intermodal System Plan.

Public-sector passenger rail, like Tri-Rail, and private-sector passenger rail, like Brightline, exist parallel to the corridor between West Palm Beach and Miami (FDOT, 2018b). Both rail services offer frequent service seven days a week (FDOT, 2018b). Major intermodal facilities like the public-sector Miami Intermodal Center and public-private, MiamiCentral, both help increase connectivity for local public transit and intercity modes of travel (FDOT, 2018b). Southeast

Florida does have the advantage of being a more urban area, with a larger amount of people overall and a higher population density. Passenger rail service benefits from connecting urban areas along a major travel corridor.

The Interstate 75 Corridor does not have anywhere near the same amount of options.

Ground transportation options are relatively limited, compared to Southeast Florida (FDOT,

2018a). Limited long-distance Amtrak service is the only rail option between Jacksonville and

Tampa (FDOT, 2018). Currently, Ocala and Gainesville are not directly served by Amtrak; their

Thruway Bus service is needed, to catch the train in Jacksonville or Lakeland (Amtrak, 2018).

Greyhound currently does not stop at Ocala Union Station, and instead uses a gas station near

Interstate 75 (Greyhound, 2019). Red Coach’s stop in Ocala is also at a gas station, off Interstate

75, and has no transit connection to Ocala Union Station (Red Coach, 2019). In Gainesville, the express coach companies like Red Coach use the Rosa Parks Regional Transit System

Downtown Station (Google Maps, 2019). Greyhound uses a separate facility that is not downtown (Google Maps, 2019). The Interstate 75 Corridor is still mostly semi-rural between

cities; the larger cities on the corridor like Tampa and Jacksonville are not as dense as Fort-

Lauderdale or Miami. The lack of density and limited public transit options are disadvantages that make creating additional intercity ground transportation services along the corridor a challenge. But with the expected population growth in counties along the corridor, the density of cities may change in the near future.

Next Steps to Improve Florida’s Intercity Transportation Network

When examining the inconsistent implementation of Florida’s current intercity travel policies, we need to start fixing these current issues. Implementing multimodal concepts will help solve our intercity ground transportation problems in the state. This will require developing a new state rail plan, expanding express toll lanes, and improving multimodal connections for intercity modes of travel. The first major step is for the FDOT to develop a realistic state passenger-rail plan with feasible short-term, mid-term, and long-term goals. The 2010 state rail plan was overly optimistic; many of the passenger rail projects in the plan were removed from the 2018 state rail plan (FDOT, 2018b, 2018c). The existing state rail plan and the Interstate 75

Rail Feasibility Report both fail to provide a solution to the state’s intercity travel problems.

The current state rail plan relies excessively on Brightline to provide frequent intercity passenger rail service; this leaves North-Central Florida, Southwest Florida, and the Panhandle without any frequent, intercity passenger-rail service (FDOT, 2018b). Brightline is a beneficial project for intercity travel, but there is still room for the state to expand intercity passenger rail on other corridors. The Interstate 75 Rail Feasibility Report does not give a valid reason as to why the S-line would not be useable for passenger rail (FDOT, 2018a). Even in our previous state rail plans, the FDOT knows that double-tracking would be necessary to increase capacity and to avoid intercity passenger rail service having a negative impact on freight-rail service

(FDOT, 2004). The Feasibility Report avoids looking at any of the success stories related to

intercity passenger rail in the US, such as what Caltrans has managed to do with Amtrak

California (Caltrans, 2018). The report avoids common variables related to corridor studies including looking at the current population size and density of cities along the route (Hagler &

Todorovich, 2011). The next variable would be to include future population growth along the corridor (Hagler & Todorovich, 2011). Another variable would be employment density in proposed stations along the route (Hagler & Todorovich, 2011). Connections to local public transit, and connections to major hub airports should be included (Caltrans, 2018). Another advantage of intercity passenger rail that the report did not include is that passenger rail can connect multiple-city pairs to the major hub cities at each end of the corridor, while express coach services focus only direct service (O'Neil R et al. 2017). The goal with the state’s intercity passenger rail network should be to use the system to connect cities along major travel corridors.

For smaller cities and towns not located on major rail routes, Thruway Bus service will be needed to connect people to the passenger rail system (O'Neil R et al. 2017).

Even with passenger-rail improvements, it will still be necessary to fix Interstate 75.

Express toll lanes are a popular tool to manage capacity on highways because they generate revenue (FDOT, 2015). The FDOT could pursue a public-private partnership arrangement, as they have done with various other express toll-lane projects in the state (FDOT, 2015). Interstate

75, through the study area, does not have high-occupancy vehicle lanes, and adding toll lanes would require adding additional capacity (FDOT, 2015). The Florida Statutes section 338.151 prohibits converting existing non-tolled regular travel lanes, into toll lanes. The Federal

Government also has a similar prohibition, in Title 23 of the U.S. Code (FWHA, 2018). In the long-term, existing state statute and U.S. code will need to be modified to allow tolls and to

manage demand on existing interstate highways; but that would require a massive push at state and federal levels of government.

The FDOT has invested in multimodal hubs, and considers them an integral part of their

Strategic Intermodal System Plan (FDOT, 2016a). Tampa lacks a major multimodal hub for intercity transportation, and Jacksonville’s multimodal hub is only partially built (Jacksonville

Transportation Authority, 2018). Jacksonville Regional Transportation Center’s connection to

Amtrak service is currently not funded (Jacksonville Transportation Authority, 2018).

Jacksonville and Tampa both lack the intercity passenger rail connection to their airports (FDOT,

2018). Midsize cities in the study area, like Ocala and Gainesville, also lack proper multimodal facilities for intercity travel options with local public transit. Improving multimodal connectivity in the study area would be require planning to create multimodal facilities in cities along the corridor, where people can transfer to local and intercity transportation conveniently.

Connecting multimodal hubs with major airports in the study area would be beneficial (National

Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine 2015). Connecting intercity passenger rail to the airports would allow major airports to serve a larger area (National Academies of Sciences,

Engineering, and Medicine 2015). Investing in local public transit to serve as a first-and-last mile connection to these multimodal hubs is another component, and will require local governments to find more sustainable revenue to operate and expand public transit.

CHAPTER 6 CONCLUSION

Intercity ground transportation provides important connections between cities. Adopting public policies related to promoting multimodal planning for intercity ground transportation is important. In America, driving still dominates short-to medium-distance inter-regional travel, while air travel is used heavily for trips over 600 miles (National Academies of Sciences,

Engineering, and Medicine 2016b). Intercity passenger-rail and express-coach services fill a major gap for intercity travel, but America lacks an extensive network, when compared to the rest of the world. Switzerland is one of the better examples of how to maximize conventional intercity passenger rail, using existing infrastructure and adopting multimodal planning concepts.

Certain states, like California, have made major investments in improving intercity ground transportation.

Florida developed a comprehensive toll road policy but failed to promote other modes for intercity travel like intercity passenger rail. Interstate 75, between Tampa Bay and Northeast

Florida lacks choices for intercity ground transportation, compared to Southeast Florida.

Florida’s Senate President Bill Galvano returned attention to the Interstate 75 corridor (Pittman,

2019). Unfortunately, the solution he wants to pursue is to expand the Suncoast Parkway through rural North-Central and North Florida, all the way to the Georgia border (Pittman,

2019). His argument for the toll road is the vague promise of bringing economic growth to rural

Florida (Pittman, 2019). However, a new toll road though would still be heavily car focused and would take resources away from other modes of travel. With the growth Florida is experiencing, our state is at a crossroads for transportation. If the FDOT continues to put highway expansion before other modes, that will perpetuate our problems with suburban sprawl and congestion. The

FDOT needs to put its multimodal planning policies into use and follow through. Developing a

well-balanced, long-term plan to improve intercity ground transportation will make sure all parts of the state are properly served with frequent, reliable, and affordable intercity ground transportation.

LIST OF REFERENCES

Amtrak. (2018a). Amtrak Ticket Finder. Retrieved from https://tickets.amtrak.com/itd/amtrak

Amtrak. (2018c, July 05). Michigan rail line infrastructure enhancements lead to improved Amtrak travel. Retrieved March 04, 2019, from https://media.amtrak.com/2018/01/michigan-rail-line-infrastructure-enhancements-lead- improved-amtrak-travel/

Amtrak. (2018b, June 4). Silver Service Schedule. Retrieved January 14, 2019, from https://www.amtrak.com/content/dam/projects/dotcom/english/public/documents/timetabl es/Silver-Service-Palmetto-Schedule-060418.pdf

Brightline. (2019). Brightline Schedule. Retrieved January 14, 2019, from https://gobrightline.com/trip/schedule

Caltrans. (2016a, June). California Transportation Plan 2040. Sacramento, California: Caltrans. Retrieved from http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/tpp/californiatransportationplan2040/Final%20CTP/FINALCT P2040-Report-WebReady.pdf

Caltrans. (2016b, July). California Sustainable Freight Action Plan. Sacramento, California: Caltrans. Retrieved October 07, 2018, from http://dot.ca.gov/hq/tpp/offices/ogm/cs_freight_action_plan/Documents/CSFAP_Main%2 0Document_FINAL_07272016.pdf

Caltrans. (2018, September). California State Rail Plan 2018. Sacramento, California: Caltrans. Retrieved from http://www.dot.ca.gov/californiarail/docs/CSRP_Final.pdf

Domonoske, C. (2018, August 17). Florida Gov. Rick Scott Has Convoluted Ties To Rail Company Whose Project He Supports. Retrieved January 18, 2019, from https://www.npr.org/2018/08/17/639520111/florida-gov-rick-scott-has-convoluted-ties- to-rail-company-whose-project-he-supp

FDOT. (2000). 2000 Florida Rail System Plan. Tallahassee, Florida: FDOT. Retrieved from https://fdotwww.blob.core.windows.net/sitefinity/docs/default- source/content/rail/publications/plans/2000/2000-florida-rail- plan.pdf?sfvrsn=8850e2cd_0

FDOT. (2005, June). 2004 Passenger Rail Component of the Florida Rail Plan. Tallahassee, Florida: FDOT. Retrieved from https://fdotwww.blob.core.windows.net/sitefinity/docs/default- source/content/rail/publications/plans/2004/psgrcomponentfull.pdf?sfvrsn=ddd3297c_0

FDOT. (2006, August). Florida Intercity Passenger Rail "Vision Plan" Executive Report. Tallahassee, Florida: FDOT. Retrieved from https://fdotwww.blob.core.windows.net/sitefinity/docs/default- source/content/rail/publications/plans/06visionplan/execreportfinal.pdf?sfvrsn=89280dc6 _0

FDOT. (2009, March). Policy Element of the 2009 Florida Rail System Plan. Tallahassee, Florida: FDOT. Retrieved from https://fdotwww.blob.core.windows.net/sitefinity/docs/default- source/content/rail/plandevel/documents/2009policyelementoftherailsystemplan- webfinal.pdf?sfvrsn=19e799e6_0

FDOT. (2010, September). Investment Element of the 2010 Florida Rail System Plan. Tallahassee, Florida: FDOT. Retrieved from http://www.ftc.state.fl.us/documents/presentations/Rail%20Plan%20- %20Investment%20Master.pdf

FDOT. (2014). Southeast Florida Express Lanes: Regional concepts for transportation operations. Tallahassee, Florida: FDOT. Retrieved from http://floridaexpresslanes.com/wp- content/uploads/2017/04/FINAL_SouthFla_RCTO_Report_07_18_2014_v2.pdf

FDOT. (2015). Express Lanes Handbook. Tallahassee, Florida: FDOT. Retrieved from http://floridaexpresslanes.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/FDOT-Express-Lanes- Handbook.pdf

FDOT. (2015, August). Florida Transportation Plan: Vision Element. Tallahassee, Florida: FDOT. Retrieved from http://floridatransportationplan.com/pdf/FDOT_FTP- SIS_VisionElement.pdf

FDOT. (2016a, March). Strategic Intermodal Policy Plan. Tallahassee, Florida: FDOT. Retrieved from http://www.fdot.gov/planning/ftp/SIS-PolicyPlan.pdf

FDOT. (2016b, October 1). I-75 Relief task force recommendations report. Tallahassee, Florida: FDOT. Retrieved from http://www.i75relief.com/docs/finalReport/Final%20TF%20Report_09302016.pdf

FDOT. (2017, September 6). Strategic Intermodal System Atlas. Tallahassee, Florida: FDOT. Retrieved from http://www.fdot.gov/planning/systems/programs/mspi/pdf/SIS_Atlas.pdf

FDOT. (2018a, February). Rail feasibility analysis summary report Tampa Bay to Northeast Florida (Financial Project ID: 405776-1-12-21). Tallahassee, Florida: FDOT. Retrieved from http://www.i75relief.com/docs/finalReport/Rail%20Feasibility%20Summary%20Report. pdf

FDOT. (2018b, September). Florida State Rail System Plan 2018 Update. Tallahassee, Florida: FDOT. Retrieved from https://freightmovesflorida.com/wp- content/uploads/2018/09/Draft-Rail-Plan_Updated-Sept-2018.pdf

FDOT. (2018c, September). Florida State Rail System 2018 Technical Appendix Draft. Tallahassee, Florida: FDOT. Retrieved from https://freightmovesflorida.com/wp- content/uploads/2018/09/Draft-Rail-Plan-Appendices_Updated-Sept-2018.pdf

FDOT. (2018d). Shapefiles for SIS transportation facilities [Data File]. FDOT Transportation Statistics GIS. Tallahassee, Florida: FDOT. Retrieved November 01, 2018, from http://www.fdot.gov/statistics/gis/

FDOT. (2018e). Southeast Express Lanes. Tallahassee, Florida: FDOT. Retrieved from http://floridaexpresslanes.com/southeastfl/

FDOT. (2018f). Suncoast 2 Florida's Turnpike. Tallahassee, Florida: FDOT. Retrieved from http://www.floridasturnpike.com/suncoast2.html

FDOT. (2019). Corridor Development. Tallahassee, Florida: FDOT. Retrieved from https://www.fdot.gov/planning/systems/programs/sm/corridor/default.shtm

FGDL. (2018). County Boundaries, FDOT Districts shape files [Data file]. FGDL Metadata Explorer. Retrieved November 25, 2018, from https://www.fgdl.org/metadataexplorer/explorer.jsp

FRA. (2009, April). Vision for high-speed rail in America (United States, Federal Railroad Administration, Office of the Secretary of Transportation). Retrieved March 3, 2019, from https://www.fra.dot.gov/Elib/Document/1468

Florida Strategic Intermodal System; legislative findings, declaration, and intent, §§ 339-339.61- 339.83 (Online Sunshine 2003).

FLA. STAT. § 338.151 (2018)

Federal Highway Administration. (2018). Federal highway tolling programs fact sheets. Washington, D.C.: Federal Highway Administration. Retrieved January 10, 2019, from https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ipd/fact_sheets/tolling_programs.aspx

Google Maps. (2019). Transit – Google Maps. Retrieved January 15, 2019, from https://maps.google.com/landing/transit/index.html

Greyhound. (2019). Greyhound Book a Trip. Retrieved January 15, 2019, from https://www.greyhound.com/?gclid=Cj0KCQiAg_HhBRDNARIsAGHLV50s8ZXMGdQ h6iwWUOHKg1YKSFpIT9V- 1CjfNxBAh6Rj9bHk9aAgr6IaAvGEEALw_wcB&gclsrc=aw.ds

Grovdahl, D. (2007). A Chronology of Passenger Rail Proposals in Central Florida Through Media Headlines and Story Excerpts. Retrieved January 17, 2019, from http://floridacoalitionofrailpassengers.memberlodge.com/resources/Pictures/Metroplan% 20Orlando%20Chronology%20of%20%20%20%20Passenger%20Rail.pdf

Hagler, Y., & Todorovich, P. (2011, January). High-speed rail in America: America 2050. Retrieved December 15, 2018, from http://www.america2050.org/pdf/HSR-in-America- Complete.pdf

Jacksonville Transportation Authority. (2018). Jacksonville Regional Transportation Center. Jacksonville, Florida: Jacksonville Transportation Authority. Retrieved January 15, 2019, from https://www.jtafla.com/blueprint/jacksonville-regional-transportation-center/

Kahn, M., & Levinson, D. (2011, February 25). Fix it first, expand it second, reward it third: A new strategy for America's highways. Brookings. Retrieved January 09, 2019, from https://www.brookings.edu/research/fix-it-first-expand-it-second-reward-it-third-a-new- strategy-for-americas-highways/

Kane, J., Puentes, R., & Tomer, A. (2013, March). A new alignment: strengthening america’s commitment to passenger rail. Metropolitan Policy Program at Brookings. Retrieved,from https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/passenger-rail- puentes-tomer.pdf

Kanafani, A. (2008). Multimodal Transportation in California: Connecting Planes, Trains, and Automobiles. ACCESS Magazine. Retrieved from https://www.accessmagazine.org/fall- 2008/multimodal-transportation-california-connecting-planes-trains-automobiles/

Kurtzleben, D. (2019, February 07). Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Releases Green New Deal Outline. Retrieved February 12, 2019, from https://www.npr.org/2019/02/07/691997301/rep-alexandria-ocasio-cortez-releases-green- new-deal-outline

Long, E. (2019, January 18). Coastal Connector Abandoned, Marion County Residents Upset About County's Proposed Comprehensive Plan. Retrieved January 18, 2019, from https://www.wuft.org/news/2019/01/18/coastal-connector-abandoned-marion-county- residents-upset-about-countys-proposed-comprehensive- plan/?fbclid=IwAR2M4cVnV1pfQd8gQtMLnwKbfsZ3ZSB6Efg3rM5Y4sjeDsL8iVcl1b w4938

Maxwell, R. (1999). Intercity Rail Fixed-Interval, Timed-Transfer, Multihub System: Applicability of the Integraler Taktfahrplan Strategy to North America. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 1691, 1-11. doi:10.3141/1691-01

National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2015). Integrating Aviation and Passenger Rail Planning. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/22173.

National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2016a). Guidebook for Intercity Passenger Rail Service and Development. The National Academic Press. doi:10.17226/23535

National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2016b). Interregional Travel: A New Perspective for Policy Making. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/21887.

National Association of Railroad Passengers. (2018). Amtrak Florida Ridership Numbers. Retrieved January 14, 2019, from https://www.railpassengers.org/site/assets/files/1182/fl.pdf

O'Neil, R., Schwieterman, J., & Smith, S. (2017). Ground transportation gaps: The most heavily traveled intercity routes without an express coach or rail passenger service in the United States. Chaddick Institute for Metropolitan Development at DePaul University, 1-30. Retrieved from https://las.depaul.edu/centers-and-institutes/chaddick-institute-for- metropolitan- development/Documents/ChaddickInstitute_GroundTransportationGapsStudy_20170823. pdf.

Pittman, C. (2019, January 30). Galvano calls for extending Suncoast toll road to Georgia. Tampa Bay Times. Retrieved February 07, 2019, from http://www.tampabay.com/florida- politics/buzz/2019/01/30/galvano-calls-for-extending-suncoast-toll-road-to-georgia/

Rayer, S., & Wang, Y. (2018, June). Population projections by age, sex, race, and Hispanic origin for Florida and its counties, 2020–2045, With Estimates for 2017. Retrieved September 30, 2018, from https://www.bebr.ufl.edu/sites/default/files/Research%20Reports/projections_2018_asrh. pdf

Red Coach. (2019). Red Coach Tickets. Retrieved January 15, 2019, from https://www.redcoachusa.com/

Red Coach. (2019). Routes Information - Travel Florida From Miami to Tallahassee. Retrieved January 15, 2019, from https://www.redcoachusa.com/routes-information/

Sarasota Herald-Tribune. (1985, March 29). Silver Palm Hits End of the Line in Courts. Sarasota Herald-Tribune. Retrieved January 18, 2019, from https://news.google.com/newspapers?id=q- IeAAAAIBAJ&sjid=_WgEAAAAIBAJ&pg=3490%2C3442820

Securities and Exchange Commision. (2018, November 16). Virgin Trains USA form S-1 registration statement. Retrieved January 11, 2019, from https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1737516/000114036118043289/s002218x4_s1. htm?fbclid=IwAR2KwavDH1zXMza1v0tHduoaAuebp1894UdVzb-Ed6ljRbSxV- cf7OPe9_4

SFRTA. (2018). FY 2019-2028 Transit Development Plan. Pompano Beach, Florida: SFRTA. Retrieved from https://www.trirailtdp2018.com/project-documents

State of Florida. (1985). An Inventory of Abandoned Railroads in Florida. Tallahassee, FL: Department of Natural Resources.

Swelbar, & S, W., Wittman, D, M. (2013, April 30). Trends and Market Forces Shaping Small Community Air Service in the United States. Massachusetts Institute of Technology International Center for Air Transportation. Retrieved from https://trid.trb.org/view.aspx?id=1343376

U.S. Department of Commerce. (2018a). U.S. Census Bureau QuickFacts: Miami city, Florida; Fort Lauderdale city, Florida; West Palm Beach city, Florida. Retrieved March 05, 2019, from https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/miamicityflorida,fortlauderdalecityflorida,w estpalmbeachcityflorida/PST045217

U.S. Department of Commerce. (2018b). U.S. Census Bureau QuickFacts: Ocala city, Florida; Gainesville city, Florida; Jacksonville city, Florida; Tampa city, Florida. Retrieved March 05, 2019, from https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/ocalacityflorida,gainesvillecityflorida,jacks onvillecityflorida,tampacityflorida/BZA110216#qf-flag-X

Waqar, D. (2016). The End of the Road: The State of Urban Elevated Expressways in the United States. Brookings Mountain West Publications, 1-16. Retrieved From https://digitalscholarship.unlv.edu/brookings_pubs/32

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH

Andrew Morris has a bachelor’s in International Relations from Rollins College. He is currently working towards a master’s in Urban and Regional Planning.