CSX Corridor Evaluation History:

Passenger Use of the CSX-owned Freight Rail Corridors through Tampa

Strategic Planning and External Relations Committee Meeting

February 17, 2020

1 How many studies have there been?

• Commuter Rail Authority – two studies in the early 1990s • HART Major Investment Study, late 1990s • HART Environmental Impact Study for the Tampa Rail Project, completed 2002 • FDOT Strategic Regional Transit Needs Assessment, mid 2000s • MPO 2050 Transit Study, 2007 • TBARTA Master Plan, 2009 • HART Alternatives Analysis, 2010 • MPO Post-Referendum Analysis, 2012 • MPO Transit Assets & Opportunities Study, 2014 • HART/TBARTA Regional Transit Feasibility Plan, 2018 • MPO Long Range Transportation Plans adopted 1998, 2001, 2004, 2009, 2014, 2019 also typically included ridership forecasts and cost estimates 2 Why do we keep talking about this?

• Hillsborough County has four major job clusters which comprise about 300,000 jobs. CSX lines connect three of the four: Downtown, USF Area, Brandon. • Without removing lanes on roads, there is no other continuous right of way available for rapid transit between Downtown and USF (per HART AA, 2010). • The Downtown-USF line also passes through multiple neighborhoods where bus ridership is high. • CSX’s use of the lines north of Ybor City for freight is minimal. CSX offered in 2015 to work with interested parties towards a joint use agreement. • In study after study, the Downtown-USF line in particular has shown good ridership potential and favorable public opinion.

3 Tampa Area Rail Lines

2015 4 Clearwater Subdivision (“Sub”)

2015 5 Brooksville Sub

2015 6 Regional Employment: Jobs Per Acre - 2025

< 5 6 - 15 16 - 30 31 - 65 66 - 170 Legend 171 - 300 Employment Density > 301 2025 2003 7 Jobs…. Total Daily Car Trips

~20058 Jobs…. 3 Mile USF

2 Mile Westshore 3 Mile Brandon

2 Mile Downtown

42.1 % of Jobs

2010 9 “Key Econo- mic Spaces”

201410 2045 Forecast: Hillsborough County will grow to over 2 million people.

Job Density

Population Density

Assumes the urban service boundary is not expanded much, through 2045.

201911 Rail to high density population and job areas

200912 201013 In 2009, the TBARTA Board voted to support rail plans in Hillsborough County as a first phase of TBARTA’s Regional Master Plan.

14 Why did they do that? Good ridership demand. TBARTA Ridership Demand for Rail and Bus Service 2035 – Hillsborough County

200915 Fixed Guideway Ridership Forecast for 2040

USF-to-Downtown was modeled similar to Sunrail, has about Station Activity the same boardings, (On’s + Off’s): but is only 1/3 as long as Sunrail.

16 2014 Ridership Forecast 2019 for 2045 • Strongest ridership:  Downtown to Westshore/TPA  Downtown to USF • Other routes performed moderately with an average of 240 passengers per mile • Improving frequency from 30/60 min to 10/20 min increased ridership 180 - 240% On’s & Off’s at Stations17 Riders Per Mile

201918 Public Support for Rail?

Major Projects for Job Growth: Survey Says……

200 600 1000 Slide2014 19 Public Opinion Nuances Focus group participants who were in favor of expanding mass transit were generally supportive of a more incremental approach.

Common perception that Tampa area is too sprawling, car-centric, and dispersed for mass transit to work.

Did view transit as a basic public service, even though they were largely unfamiliar with HART services. … So, expand bus service… but also expand public info about bus service!

No clear, accurate understanding of rail modes, how they function, how to get to them– i.e., “If I did take a train or bus, how do I get where I really want to go?”

“Create familiarity” with rail with a demonstration line— but address high cost concerns. 201220 Rail was most widely supported when described as a demonstration line, on under-used freight Sidewalks, Crosswalks, Safer Pedestrian tracks, and with the Connections ability to be expanded to serve other areas in the future. Demonstration Rail Line “on Under-used Freight Tracks & that can be expanded to serve other areas in future” As I read each [item], please tell me whether it should be a very high priority, somewhat high, 2012 somewhat low, or a very low priority. 21 Rail Still Popular in Recent Surveys 2018 Tri-County Survey: Priorities

Nearly 10,000 citizens responded to the 2018 regional survey!

2 2 2018 Survey: Rating of Ingredients

23 Public Engagement Ph. 2: “It’s TIME Hillsborough”

5,219 89% 90% PARTICIPANTS HILLSBOROUGH HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY COUNTY RESIDENTS WORKERS 93,000+ DATA POINTS

3,000+ COMMENTS 24 Major Investments – 2019 Survey Results

Reuse freight rail tracks Rapid transit DowntownAirport Extend Downtown Streetcar GreenwayTrail corridors Rightsizing Tampa multilane roads Elevated Exp Lanes major roads New water transit system I4 I75 Interchange area roads USF New Tampa Temple Terrace InterstateExpressway toll lanes Bloomingdale Fishhawk roads Airport North Westchase roads SouthShore roads Road widenings near rural area Plant City new wider roads 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Percent Positive Percent Abstain Percent Negative 25 Technology: Light Rail vs. Commuter Rail Lower Cost Transit Projects: "Hybrid Rail" Concept • Modern self-propelled vehicles – No overhead wires

– Not much larger than LRT Austin, TX – Nimble turning & $5M/mile acceleration • Reuse existing tracks – Little right-of-way needed Denton, TX – Freight trains run at night, passenger during day – Solidly built vehicles per FRA San Diego, CA • Lower frequency service $20M/mile – Focus on rush hours to reduce operating costs Trenton/Camden, NJ 2012 Lower Cost Transit Projects "Hybrid Rail" Concept

USF Area • Reuse existing rail corridor 46,000 students 25,000+ jobs – Requires agreement with CSX – Could be operational sooner than Light Rail Busch Gardens 4M visitors/year – Requires FRA waiver to use lighter vehicles on freight tracks – But unlike Light Rail, does not require 50’ 70,000 separation and a crash barrier between residents the freight and passenger tracks! • Cost to build (high level, very preliminary): – Light Rail: $862 M – Hybrid Rail: $157-$393 M Downtown 70,000+ jobs 6,000 students 2012 Lower Cost Transit Projects "Hybrid Rail" Concept

Capital Costs O&M Costs (per mile) (per year) Light Rail (in 2035 LRTP) $62.4 M $15.1 M Hybrid Rail $13 - 29 M $7.9 – 20.1 M

• Capital costs include: • Operating and maintenance – Right-of-way for additional costs include: passing tracks - Labor and staff – Laying new rail tracks (approximately 2.5 miles) - Fuel to run vehicles – Stations - Maintenance of tracks and – Vehicles stations – Systems (signals, - Maintenance of vehicles communication, fare collection) O&M costs are calculated as a factor – Parking of revenue train-hours – Sitework – Resurfacing near crossings 2012 2018 2018 2018 2018 2018 2018 41 9 miles miles

2018 Tampa Bay Transportation Management Leadership Group

36 September 4, 2015 CSX’s Rail Network is an Economic Development Asset

Montreal  Founded in 1827 as B&O (1st U.S. Railroad)

Selkirk Boston Syracuse  Headquartered in Jacksonville, FL Buffalo Detroit Newark Chicago New York City Toledo Harrisburg Willard Philadelphia  Employees: 31,000 (5,000 in FL) Pittsburgh Columbus Baltimore Cumberland Indianapolis Cincinnati Washington D.C. Charleston  21,000 Miles of Rail Network East St. Louis Huntington Louisville Norfolk Rocky Mount  Operates an Average of 1,350 Trains/Day Nashville Knoxville Charlotte Hamlet Memphis Atlanta  $2.3 billion in infrastructure investments in Charleston Birmingham 2014 Savannah Montgomery Waycross Jacksonville Pensacola  Serves 70 ocean, lake and river ports New Orleans

Orlando Tampa West Palm Beach  Connects Tampa area businesses with domestic and international markets 2015 37 Additional Guidelines

 The Brooksville and Clearwater subdivisions are the only CSX lines that could potentially accommodate passenger rail.  As with Tri-Rail and SunRail, FDOT must be involved. This is especially crucial with single-county MPOs and transit agencies in the Tampa Bay region.  As with SunRail and Tri-Rail, FDOT or lead local agency must own, maintain and dispatch the corridors used for local passenger rail.  Only complete line segments will be sold, so planning and implementation of the system must be done regionally.  As with Tri-Rail and SunRail, CSX must retain exclusive and perpetual freight rights to serve freight customers on the lines.  The passenger system must be compatible with CSX freight operation. Light rail cannot operate on or adjacent to CSX rail lines.  Any LRT or new streetcar crossings of freight rail lines must be grade separated. 2015 38 Passenger Access Principles

 Safety

 Capacity

 Liability

 Compensation

2015 39 Regional Potential: the SunRail Example ‒ More than 100 miles of low- use CSX track in Tampa Bay ‒ Potential for future expansion to South Tampa, Clearwater, Wesley Chapel ‒ In SunRail’s case, FDOT purchased 61.5 miles of tracks from CSX for $150 million ($2.4 million/mile) ‒ CSX was operating up to 30 freight trains/day on the SunRail corridor, 6 times the volume as our dead-end line 201240 Latest estimate of trains per day/ week

201941 Tampa’s Adopted Provisions for TOD

Sketches

May 2010

Project Target Project Total Station Area Total Type Neighborhood Center - Urban Acres 55 Acres 182 Acres Total FAR 1.0 – 2.5 1.15 0.4 Residential Density 20 – 30 Dus/Acre 23 Dus/Acre 9 Dus/Acre Mix of Uses 35% Residential / 65% Non-Residential HART obtained a federal record of decision (ROD) on its 2002 Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) of putting passenger service on this rail corridor. If HART wanted to revisit the project, a Supplemental EIS (or SEIS) would allow HART to update the impact information and move forward.

47 48 Passenger Use of the CSX-owned Freight Rail Corridors through Tampa

Questions?

49