DOCSLIB.ORG

Downtown Circulator Feasibility Study

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Downtown Circulator Feasibility Study City of Sarasota Downtown Circulator Feasibility Study lindale April 2015 ~ Oliver Table of Contents Section 1: Introduction and Background ...................................................................................................................................................................... 1‐1 1.1: Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 1‐1 Section 2: Baseline Conditions and Rider Market Assessment ..................................................................................................................................... 2‐1 2.1: Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 2‐1 2.2: Overview of Study Area .............................................................................................................................................................................................. 2‐1 2.3: Demographics/Socioeconomic Characteristics ........................................................................................................................................................... 2‐3 2.4: Land Use Framework ................................................................................................................................................................................................ 2‐10 2.5: Existing/Planned Transit ........................................................................................................................................................................................... 2‐18 2.6: Summary Conclusions ............................................................................................................................................................................................... 2‐25 Section 3: Transit Demand Assessment ....................................................................................................................................................................... 3‐1 3.1: Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 3.1 3.2: Transit Rider Market Evaluation ................................................................................................................................................................................. 3‐1 3.3: Activity Center Assessment ........................................................................................................................................................................................ 3‐1 3.4: Traditional Market Assessment .................................................................................................................................................................................. 3‐4 3.5: Discretionary Market Assessment .............................................................................................................................................................................. 3‐4 3.6: Potential Ridership Estimates ................................................................................................................................................................................... 3‐10 3.7: Summary Conclusions ............................................................................................................................................................................................... 3‐16 Section 4: Engineering and Technology Assessment .................................................................................................................................................... 4‐1 4.1: Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 4‐1 4.2: Engineering Assessment ............................................................................................................................................................................................. 4‐4 4.3: Identification of Alternative Routes ............................................................................................................................................................................ 4‐7 4.4: Rolling Stock Options .................................................................................................................................................................................................. 4‐7 4.5: Conceptual Cross Sections ........................................................................................................................................................................................ 4‐16 4.6: Travel Time and Number of Vehicles ........................................................................................................................................................................ 4‐30 City of Sarasota Downtown Circulator Feasibility Study ‐ April 2015 Page i Section 5: System Costs and Potential Revenues ......................................................................................................................................................... 5‐1 5.1: Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 5‐1 5.2: Capital Costs ................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 5‐1 5.3: Operating Costs ........................................................................................................................................................................................................... 5‐3 5.4: Potential Operating Revenues .................................................................................................................................................................................... 5‐5 5.5: Capital Funding Sources .............................................................................................................................................................................................. 5‐6 5.6: Summary Conclusions ................................................................................................................................................................................................. 5‐9 Section 6: Economic Benefits of a Downtown Circulator .............................................................................................................................................. 6‐1 6.1: Introduction and Methodology .................................................................................................................................................................................. 6‐1 6.2: Economic Development Impacts of Rubber‐Tire Circulator vs. Streetcar .................................................................................................................. 6‐1 6.3: Base Case and Streetcar Case Scenarios ..................................................................................................................................................................... 6‐1 6.4: Study Area Overview................................................................................................................................................................................................... 6‐2 6.5: Study Area Results .................................................................................................................................................................................................... 6‐13 6.5.1: Circulator A Alignment Summary .................................................................................................................................................................... 6‐13 6.5.2: Circulator B Alignment Summary .................................................................................................................................................................... 6‐15 6.5.3: Circulator C Alignment Summary .................................................................................................................................................................... 6‐16 6.5.4: Cross‐Comparison of the Alignments .............................................................................................................................................................. 6‐17 6.6: Economic Impact Summary Results .......................................................................................................................................................................... 6‐18 Section 7: Organizational Business Model ................................................................................................................................................................... 7‐1 7.1: Introduction ...............................................................................................................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Transfer Newsletter Spring 2013.Cdr
    Oregon Electric Railway Historical Society Volume 18 503 Issue 2 Spring 2013 Reminder to members: Please be sure your dues In this issue: are up to date. 2013 dues were due Jan 1, 2013. Willamette Shore Trolley - Back on Track.................................1 If it has been longer than one year since you renewed, Interpretive Center Update - Greg Bonn...............................2 go to our website: oerhs.org and download an Vintage Trolley History - Richard Thompson.............................3 application by clicking: Become a Member Pacific NW Transit Update - Roy Bonn...............................8 Spotlight on Members: Charlie Philpot ................................11 Setting New Poles - Greg Bonn..............................................12 Willamette Shore Trolley ....back on track! See this issue in color on line at oerhs.org/transfer miles from Lake Oswego to Riverwood Crossing with an ultimate plan to extend to Portland. Also see the article on page 3 on the history of the cars of Vintage Trolley. Dave Rowe installing wires from Generator to Trolley. Hal Rosene at the controls of 514 on a training run emerging Gage Giest painting from the Elk Rock Tunnel on the Willamette Shore line. the front of Trolley. Wayne Jones photo The Flume car in background will be After a several-year hiatus, the Willamette Shore our emergency tow Trolley is just about ready to roll. Last minute electrical and vehicle if the Trolley mechanical details and regulatory compliance testing are breaks down on the nearing completion. With many stakeholders involved and mainline. many technical issues that had to be overcome, it has been a challenge to get the system to the 100% state. Dave Rowe and his team have been working long hours to overcome the obstacles of getting Gomaco built Vintage Trolley #514, its Doug Allen removing old stickers from side tag-along generator, track work, electrical systems, crew of Trolley training, safety compliance issues, propulsion, braking, and so many other details to a satisfactory state to begin revenue service.
    [Show full text]
  • ST Express 590 (Tacoma – Seattle) And
    Eastlake Ave E ST Express Eastlake Ave E StewartStewart StSt Yale Ave N Yale Yale Ave N Yale 6th Ave 6th Ave 9th Ave 9th Ave HowellHowell StSt 7th Ave 590 TacomaDOWNTOWNDOWNTOWN – Seattle 7th Ave Adult fares $3.25 4th Ave SEATTLESEATTLE 4th Ave 594 Lakewood – Seattle Olive Way 2nd Ave Olive Way 2nd Ave Effective September 19, 2021 – March 19, 2022 PikePike StSt SenecaSeneca StSt ConnectingConnecting routesroutes 2nd2nd AveAve ExtExt CherryCherry StSt LakewoodLakewood StationStation Eastlake Ave E SS WashingtonWashington StSt ITIT Stewart St Yale Ave N Yale 612612 620620 SS JacksonJackson StSt 6th Ave STST 9th Ave Howell St 580580 592592 7th Ave Lumen Field Lumen Field SS RoyalRoyal BroughamBrougham WyWy SS LineLine DOWNTOWN T-MobileT-Mobile ParkPark 4th Ave SR 512 Park & Ride SEATTLE SS HolgateHolgate StSt SR 512 Park & Ride IT Olive Way IT 2nd Ave 612612 620620 PugetPuget SS LanderLander StSt PT SoundSoundPike St PT SS SpokaneSpokane StSt 33 44 Seneca St STST STST STST Connecting routes 574574 580580 592592 2nd Ave Ext Cherry St 590590 Lakewood Station594 Downtown Tacoma/ S Washington St IT 594 Downtown Tacoma/ SODO Busway SODO Busway 612 620 CommerceCommerce StSt Commerce St S Jackson St Commerce St Downtown Tacoma/ ST PTPT Downtown Tacoma/ 580 592 CommerceCommerce StSt SS 10th10th StSt 11 1313 4545 400400 Lumen Field S Royal Brougham Wy S Line 22 1616 4848 500500 T-Mobile Park DOWNTOWNDOWNTOWN 33 4141 5757 501501 1111 4242 6363 S Holgate St TACOMATACOMA SR 512 Park & Ride 594594IT STST Pacific Ave Pacific Pacific Ave Pacific 612 620
    [Show full text]
  • 2018 Transit Integraction Report
    2018 Transit Integration Report NOVEMBER 2018 Puget Sound Regional Council Puget Sound Regional Council 2018 TRANSIT INTEGRATION REPORT / November 2018 Funding for this document provided in part by member jurisdictions, grants from U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Federal Highway Administration and Washington State Department of Transportation. PSRC fully complies with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and related statutes and regulations in all programs and activities. For more information, or to obtain a Title VI Complaint Form, see https://www.psrc.org/title-vi or call 206-587-4819. Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Information: Individuals requiring reasonable accommodations may request written materials in alternate formats, sign language interpreters, physical accessibility accommodations, or other reasonable accommodations by contacting the ADA Coordinator, Thu Le at 206-464-6175, with two weeks advance notice. Persons who are deaf or hard of hearing may contact the ADA Coordinator, Thu Le through TTY Relay 711. Additional copies of this document may be obtained by contacting: Puget Sound Regional Council • Information Center 1011 Western Ave., Suite 500 • Seattle, WA 98104-1035 206-464-7532 • [email protected] • psrc.org 2018 Transit Integration Report Introduction .................................................................................... 1 Building an Integrated Transit System ................................................. 2 Long-range planning and Remix ...............................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 1973) Is, by Almost Any Means of Reconing, a Little Late
    MUN SURV __..___._ ........_~~ ... it if ii ':, "i I ' ~ .11; ~ ' Ii; I Ii; it ' ' I .. ,\ .~ ' ' ~ .;, l -6, l ' 'I .,__ I I . I L I ' L L L • . L I .t.lii i~ h • I • . I •I I I ' I I I I i I I I I L_ "- L L I 'I '- I I 'I I I I I I ! I I I l I '-- '- ._ I - - L_ ' q I i ! i - .L - ,-I 1 I I' ' - I I I I I I ' I I I - ' I - I I I I I ' I - - ! I j ! I - -- - , .:..._ I I I -- I I l MUNICIPAL RAILWAY SURVEY -- 1969-1970 I F O R E W O R D: The Municipal Railway Survey -- 1969-1970 is the fourth in a series of in-depth looks at the operations of various public transit systems in the Western United States (the 1967 SCRTD Survey, Pasadena City Lines I and Denver Tramway were the other three). The publication of this article at this time (January, 1973) is, by almost any means of reconing, a little late. The reason for the lack of timeliness is simply that it took the volunteer workers who prepared this article in their s pare time this long to produce it! The reader might well ask hims elf why the material herein wasn't updated and the article titled Munici­ I pal Railway Survey -- 1972-1973, The answer to this question is that the 1969-1970 fis cal year represented a sign i ficant t urning point in the history of the SAN FRANC ISCO MUNICIPAL RAILWAY.
    [Show full text]
  • Streetcarsstreetcars Development-Orienteddevelopment-Oriented Transittransit
    STREETCARSSTREETCARS DEVELOPMENT-ORIENTEDDEVELOPMENT-ORIENTED TRANSITTRANSIT It’s all about easy transit connections: The Portland streetcar connects the South Waterfront redevelopment district (foreground) with downtown Portland (center) and the Pearl (top right). Bruce Forster Photography/Viewfi nders. (Opposite) San Francisco’s F-Line is this country’s most successful new streetcar line, with 20,000 riders a day. A PCC car, dressed in the yellow-and-orange “livery” of the old Los Angeles Yellow Cars, stops at the Embarcadero. Photo by Zach Maggio. WHY STREETCARS STREETCARS AND WHY NOW? By Shelley Poticha and Gloria Ohland, Reconnecting America Streetcar systems were ubiquitous at the turn of the last cen- Central West End in St. Louis, and Midtown Sacramento. Enter, or rather reenter, the streetcar. Almost every U.S. city tury and are uniquely suited now to serve all the high-density once had an extensive streetcar system, which extended the development underway in downtowns across the United States. pedestrian environment out into neighborhoods, served as a collector for intercity rail systems, and stopped at every street They’re much cheaper than light rail, are hugely successful in corner to stimulate a density and an intensity of uses that made for promoting development and street life, and fi t easily into built exemplary and engaging downtowns. If the high cost of providing parking drives development today, streetcars make it possible for environments with little disruption to existing businesses, resi- developers to provide less parking and put their money into high- dents, and traffi c. They can provide high-quality transit service quality design, building materials, and community benefi ts like affordable housing and parks.
    [Show full text]
  • Parking for WIAA Mat Classic and State Gymnastic's Championships
    Parking for Mat Classic and State Gymnastic Championships at the Tacoma Dome The Tacoma Dome will have limited $10 cash only parking for patrons attending the Mat ClassicParking and State for Gymnastic WIAA Mat Championships Classic and on February State Gymnastic’s 18 & 19. Championships at the Tacoma Dome Alternate parking options are available in the downtown area at a reduced special Theevent Tacoma rate Domeincluding will Parkhave Plaza,limited Convention$10 cash only Center parking Parking for patrons and attendingNorth Pacific the WIAAPlaza. Mat Classic and StateFrom Gymnastic’s these lots Championshipstake the Link light on Februaryrail with departures18 & 19. along Commerce Street every 10 minutes to the Sound Transit/Pierce Transit Tacoma Dome Station located 3 blocks Alternate parking options are available in the downtown area at a reduced special event rate including Park north of the Tacoma Dome. Check the Link light rail schedule at www.soundtransit.org Plaza, Convention Center Parking and North Pacific Plaza for five dollars at each lot. From these lots take the Linkfor hourslight rail of withoperation. departures along Commerce Street every 10 minutes to the Sound Transit/Pierce Transit Tacoma Dome Station located 3 blocks north of the Tacoma Dome. The Link light rail is free. Directions to downtown lots: DirectionsFrom North to &downtown South I-5 lots:take exit 133 to I-705. Take the 15th Street / “A” Street exit, see Frommap North below. & South I-5 take exit 133 to I-705. Take the 15th Street / “A” Street exit, see
    [Show full text]
  • September 2010 Color.Pub
    MINNESOTA STREETCAR MUSEUM September 2010 Minneapolis & Excelsior, Minnesota Our summer oper- Class of 2020 Rod Eaton—General Supt. ating season is al- “Well, it’s not really for catching cows. How many cows do you think lived in the city?” most over t just a little past 10 AM on · After Labor Day the A an August morning, Bill operations schedules Arends walked eight boys for both railways around DSR No. 265 pointing change. See Ops news- out its parts. The boys, 8 to 11 letter #10-5 for the details. years old, were attending our very first Streetcar Camp. After · Get ready for the spe- looking the car over, they were cial events this fall and given tape measures and, work- winter. Ghost trolley and Santa Claus trol- ing in pairs, took the car’s meas- leys are popular at ure, counted windows and seats, both railways. figured out how many passen- gers it might be able to carry, · Talk to your friends, neighbors and co- and recorded it all in their activ- workers about our Mu- ity book. The Graduating Class from our first Streetcar Camp seum and CHSL and The morning started with a trip down the Como-Harriet line. Following along on ESL. Encourage them a route map, our campers learned what the Motorman, in this case new Museum to come and ride. member Bill Hubbard, is doing at various locations as he operates the car. They examined the track and had a close up look at ballast, ties and spikes. They tried to throw a switch and discovered that there’s a frog involved.
    [Show full text]
  • Guide to Art: Sounder Commuter Rail
    Sounder commuter rail Art adds interest and meaning to public places. Art celebrates the history, culture and people of a community. Art tells a story. The Sound Transit art program, STart, brings an artist’s perspective to what is mainly an engineering and architectural undertaking. Many aspects of the Sound Transit system of buses and trains are transformed by art. Community representatives help select the artists and approve the artwork. ALL STATIONS Artist-designed “Welcome Mats” serve as door markers on the station platforms. The “Welcome Mats” mark where the commuter train doors open when the train pulls into the station. The “Welcome Mat” design was derived from a late 1800’s quilt pattern called “Railroad Quilt.” KING STREET STATION The Sounder station canopy support columns feature 26 stainless steel and aluminum wind-activated sculptures. A series of articulated metal strips hanging from the pivoting vane “Welcome Mats” at a Sounder allows the artwork to not only reveal the direction of the wind but also its shape. “The brushed surface station designed by artist Jerry Mayer of the metal reflects the colors of the sky and the nearby buildings. The metaphor is one of passage, glints of light reflecting from a field of metallic grass.” Artist Ned Kahn. “Moto/motor/to move/motion- that’s the starting point”, says Jerry Mayer of his artwork “Moto,” traffic- type 4’x4’ signs covered in a range of colorful reflective material. These are attached to sixteen columns opposite the commuter rail platform. Each sign/artwork has imagery of a simple black shape made up of a combination of traffic sign symbols from arrows, crosses, “Y”s and “T”s.
    [Show full text]
  • Joint International Light Rail Conference
    TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH Number E-C145 July 2010 Joint International Light Rail Conference Growth and Renewal April 19–21, 2009 Los Angeles, California Cosponsored by Transportation Research Board American Public Transportation Association TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD 2010 EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE OFFICERS Chair: Michael R. Morris, Director of Transportation, North Central Texas Council of Governments, Arlington Vice Chair: Neil J. Pedersen, Administrator, Maryland State Highway Administration, Baltimore Division Chair for NRC Oversight: C. Michael Walton, Ernest H. Cockrell Centennial Chair in Engineering, University of Texas, Austin Executive Director: Robert E. Skinner, Jr., Transportation Research Board TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD 2010–2011 TECHNICAL ACTIVITIES COUNCIL Chair: Robert C. Johns, Associate Administrator and Director, Volpe National Transportation Systems Center, Cambridge, Massachusetts Technical Activities Director: Mark R. Norman, Transportation Research Board Jeannie G. Beckett, Director of Operations, Port of Tacoma, Washington, Marine Group Chair Cindy J. Burbank, National Planning and Environment Practice Leader, PB, Washington, D.C., Policy and Organization Group Chair Ronald R. Knipling, Principal, safetyforthelonghaul.com, Arlington, Virginia, System Users Group Chair Edward V. A. Kussy, Partner, Nossaman, LLP, Washington, D.C., Legal Resources Group Chair Peter B. Mandle, Director, Jacobs Consultancy, Inc., Burlingame, California, Aviation Group Chair Mary Lou Ralls, Principal, Ralls Newman, LLC, Austin, Texas, Design and Construction Group Chair Daniel L. Roth, Managing Director, Ernst & Young Orenda Corporate Finance, Inc., Montreal, Quebec, Canada, Rail Group Chair Steven Silkunas, Director of Business Development, Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, Public Transportation Group Chair Peter F. Swan, Assistant Professor of Logistics and Operations Management, Pennsylvania State, Harrisburg, Middletown, Pennsylvania, Freight Systems Group Chair Katherine F.
    [Show full text]
  • Bring Back the Streetcars : a Conservative Vision of Tomorrow's
    Bring Back the Streetcars! A Conservative Vision of Tomorrow's Urban Transportation by Paul M. Weyrich and William S. Lind .... Free~• Foundation This study of public transportation by the Free Congress Research and Education Foundation was underwritten by the private sector Business Members of the American Public Transportation Association. The views expressed are those of the authors. Public Transportation Partnership for Tomorrow Washington, DC June 2002 BRING BACK THE STREETCARS! A Conservative Vision of Tomorrow’s Urban Transportation A Study Prepared by the Free Congress Research and Education Foundation By Paul M. Weyrich and William S. Lind The Free Congress Foundation 717 Second Street Washington, DC 20002 (202) 546-3000 June 2002 Contents Executive Summary 1 Introduction: What’s Right with This Picture? 3 Bring Back the Streetcars! 6 The Context: Restoring Our Cities and Building New Towns 6 What Is a Streetcar? 9 Vintage and Heritage Streetcars 12 Who Else Is Doing It? 13 What Does It Cost? 18 Three Case Studies: 21 Dallas, Texas 21 Memphis, Tennessee 24 Portland, Oregon 28 Conclusion 32 Appendices: 34 Appendix I: Getting Started 34 Appendix II: The Gomaco Trolley Company 37 Appendix III: Resources 39 Notes 40 E xecutive Summary For more than half a century, the context in which public transport operated was suburbanization. But recently, that has begun to change. Urban downtowns are reviving, and new towns are being built to traditional patterns. Not only can streetcars serve these non- suburban areas, they need streetcars in order to flourish. Streetcars – which we define as rail transit vehicles designed for local transportation, powered by electricity received from an overhead wire – differ from both buses and Light Rail.
    [Show full text]
  • Realigned Capital Program Pursuant to Sound Transit Board Action of Aug
    Realigned Capital Program Pursuant to Sound Transit Board action of Aug. 5, 2021 Affordability Gap Original Earliest (2019$M) ST3 Potential Affordable Initial Target to Meet Project Schedule1 Schedule2 Schedule3 Schedule4 Target5 Tier6 Central Corridor West Seattle Link—SODO to Alaska Junction 2030 2032 2032 2032 1 NE 130th St. Infill Station 2031 2031 2025 2025 $70* 1 Graham St. Infill Station 2031 2031 2031 2031 $10* 1 Ballard Link— Denny to Smith Cove 2035 2037 2037 2037 2 Ballard Link— Smith Cove to Ballard 2035 2037 2039 2037 $1,800* 2 RapidRide C/D Investments (remaining) 2024 2025 2045 2045 4 East Corridor I-405 Stride South (no parking) 2024 2026 2026 2026 1 SR 522/NE 145th Stride (no parking) 2024 2026 2026 2026 1 I-405 Stride North – NE 85th Station 2024 2026 2026 2026 1 S Kirkland - Issaquah Link 2041 2041 2044 2041 $90* 2 I-405 Stride North (no parking) – all elements 2024 2027 2027 2027 2 except NE 85th Station North Sammamish Park-and-Ride 2024 2024+ 2045 2045 4 I-405 Stride – parking (all but Kingsgate) 2024 2026/27 2034 2034 4 I-405 Stride – Kingsgate parking 2024 2026/27 2035 2035 4 SR 522/NE 145th Stride – parking (all but Lake 2024 2026 2034 2034 4 Forest Park) SR 522/NE 145th Stride – Lake Forest Park parking 2024 2026 2044 2044 4 North Corridor Everett Link— Lynnwood to SW Everett (no 2036 2037 2037 2037 1 parking) Everett Link— SW Everett to Everett 2036 2037 2041 2037 $600* 2 Everett Link - parking 2036 2036 2046 2046 4 Edmonds & Mukilteo Parking & Access 2024 2025 2034 2034 4 South Corridor Tacoma Dome Link (no
    [Show full text]
  • Date: December 11, 2013 To: Board of Directors From
    Date: December 11, 2013 To: Board of Directors From: Neil McFarlane Subject: RESOLUTION 13-12-73 OF THE TRI-COUNTY METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT OF OREGON (TRIMET) AUTHORIZING THE TRANSFER OF VINTAGE TROLLEY CARS 511 AND 512 TO THE ST. LOUIS LOOP TROLLEY TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT ___ 1. Issue or Purpose of Item. The purpose of this item is to request that the TriMet Board of Directors (“Board”) authorize the General Manager to execute an agreement with the St. Louis Loop Trolley Transportation Development District (“Loop Trolley”) transferring Vintage Trolley cars 511 and 512 to the Loop Trolley, subject to approval by the Federal Transit Administration (“FTA”). 2. Reason for Board Action. Board authorization for this transfer is required by FTA Circular 5010.1D, Grant Administration Requirements. The attached Resolution authorizing this transfer includes specific content required by Chapter IV, Section 3(l)(7)(b) of FTA Circular 5010.D. 3. Background. In August 2013, Loop Trolley contacted TriMet, expressing interest in using TriMet's Vintage Trolley cars for operation on the new Loop Trolley Project (“Project”), which will bring heritage streetcar service to downtown St. Louis. The Project is scheduled to begin construction in early 2014 and begin operations in mid-2015, and will run 2.2 miles along Delmar Boulevard and DeBaliviere Avenue in downtown St. Louis, with 10 stops, including two connecting with St. Louis MetroLink light rail. The Project has $25 million of FTA grant funding, and a total Project budget of $43 million. Loop Trolley representatives visited TriMet early in September 2013 to assess the suitability of TriMet's Vintage Trolley cars for the Loop Trolley.
    [Show full text]