Development for Your Transit Dollar
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
BRTOD – State of the Practice in the United States
BRTOD – State of the Practice in the United States By: Andrew Degerstrom September 2018 Contents Introduction .............................................................................................1 Purpose of this Report .............................................................................1 Economic Development and Transit-Oriented Development ...................2 Definition of Bus Rapid Transit .................................................................2 Literature Review ..................................................................................3 BRT Economic Development Outcomes ...................................................3 Factors that Affect the Success of BRTOD Implementation .....................5 Case Studies ...........................................................................................7 Cleveland HealthLine ................................................................................7 Pittsburgh Martin Luther King, Jr. East Busway East Liberty Station ..... 11 Pittsburgh Uptown-Oakland BRT and the EcoInnovation District .......... 16 BRTOD at home, the rapid bus A Line and the METRO Gold Line .........20 Conclusion .............................................................................................23 References .............................................................................................24 Artist rendering of Pittsburgh's East Liberty neighborhood and the Martin Luther King, Jr. East Busway Introduction Purpose of this Report If Light Rail Transit (LRT) -
CONTRACT AGREEMENT MRT Blue Line Extension Project Hua
Contract Agreement CA-1 CONTRACT AGREEMENT MRT Blue Line Extension Project Hua Lamphong - Bang Khae and Bang Sue - Tha Phra Sections Contract 4: Elevated Civil Works Tha Phra - Lak Song Section This Contract is made at the Mass Rapid Transit Authority of Thailand, 175 Rama IX Road, Huay Khwang, Bangkok 10320 on 17 day of February B.E. 2554 (A.O. 2011) between: (1) MASS RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY OF THAILAND by Mr.Ronnachit Yaemsaard, the MRTA Acting Governor, with office located at 175 Rama IX Road, Huay Khwang, Bangkok 10320, hereinafter referred to as the "MRTA" or the "Employer", as the case may be, of the one part and ; (2) SINO-THAI ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTION PUBLIC COMPANY LIMITED a company registered and existing under the laws of Thailand, with head office located at 27th floor, Sino-Thai Tower, 32/59-60, Sukhumvit 21 Road , Klang Toey Nua Sub-District, Wattana District, Bangkok, 10110, Thailand by Mr. Vallop Rungkijvorasathien authorized to sign and bind the company, hereinafter referred to as the "Contractor" of the other part. WHEREAS the Employer is desirous that certain Works should be executed by the Contractor, viz, the construction of Elevated Structure at Tha Phra - Lak Song Section with precast segment box girder viaduct of approximately 10.5 km. in length, elevated approximately 17 meters above existing ground, transition structure, with the construction of 7 elevated stations, architectural works and building services within the stations, and the intermodal transfer facilities (ITF), Depot, Operation and Control Center (OCC), Park & Ride Buildings and other works as defined in the Contract, and has accepted a Tender by the Contractor for execution and completion of such Works and the remedying of any defects therein. -
Bangkok Expressway and Metro Public Company Limited (BEM) FEBRUARY 2021 Business Overview
Bangkok Expressway and Metro Public Company Limited (BEM) FEBRUARY 2021 Business Overview COMMERCIAL ROAD INVESTMENT RAIL DEVELOPMENT Total Expressway Total Rail BL = IBL + BL Ex Infrastructure portfolio SES 38.50 km BL 48 km 38 stations For advertising in Stations & • Owns 99.99% in NECL Sector C+ 32.00 km PPL 23 km 16 stations Trains, Retailing and • Owns 90.52% in BMN SOE 17.06 km Total 71 km 54 stations Telecommunications • Owns 18.47% in TTW Total 87.56 km • Owns 16.64% in CKP BL Ridership PPL to be negotiated with MRTA Traffic Volume Jan 2021 Profit sharing in P&L Jan 2021 151,237 trips/day Expressway Ads on SES Y2019 173 MB 799,583 trips/day Growth -61.95% YoY 9M/2020 - MB Growth -34.30% YoY Avg. 2021 CD Revenue Avg. 2021 151,237 trips/day Y2019 783 MB Cash Dividend Received 799,583 trips/day Growth -61.95% YoY 9M/2020 586 MB Y2019 489 MB Growth -34.30% YoY Growth 4.30% YoY 9M/2020 483 MB BL farebox Tolls Revenue Jan 2021 Jan 2021 4.24 MB/day 17.33 MB/day Growth -60.05% YoY Growth -37.67% YoY Avg. 2021 Avg. 2021 4.24 MB/day 17.33 MB/day Growth -60.05% YoY Growth -37.67% YoY PPL O&M service income Annual Income apx.1,800 - 2,000 MB/year 2 Financial Highlights & Earnings Outlook REVENUE STRUCTURE TOTAL REVENUE As of 9M/2020 Unit: MB SteadyRevenue with Growth 20,404 trong Earnings with Good Dividend 19,087 S Rail : 34% 15,393 13,232 Stable Cash Flow Road : 60% 10,589 Road Gearing for new investment Rail Commercial CD Development : Other 6% 2016 2017 2018 2019 9M/2020 NET PROFIT DPS / EPS NET IBD/E Unit: MB Unit: THB Unit : Times 5,317* 5,435** 1.44 3,123 0.35* 0.36** 1.38 2,606 1.37 1.34 1,482 0.20 1.33 0.17 0.15 0.15 0.11 0.13 0.10 DPS EPS 2016 2017 2018 2019 9M/2020 2016 2017 2018 2019 9M/2020 2016 2017 2018 2019 9M/2020 Remark : * Including non - cash extra item from reclassified the investment in CKP ** Including non - cash extra item from reclassified the investment in TTW 3 Expressway Map Expressway Network Distance (km) Operator 1. -
ESCAP PPP Case Study #1
Public-Private Partnerships Case Study #1 Traffic Demand Risk: The case of Bangkok’s Skytrain (BTS) by Mathieu Verougstraete and Isabelle Enders (March 2014) The following case study examines the issue of traffic demand risk and sheds light on how the problem of inaccurate ridership forecasts can impact a PPP project by using the example of the Bangkok SkyTrain. TRAFFIC DEMAND RISK FIGURE 1 : ACTUAL/FORECAST TRAFFIC Even though literature is rich about theory and practice of traffic forecasting, insufficient attention has been paid to the predicted accuracy of traffic forecasting models and the consequences of occurring errors. Emperical studies suggest however that traffic forecasts in the transport sector are characterized by large errors and considerable optimism bias.1 This statement goes in line with the review conducted on PPP projects financed by the European Investment Bank which states that major issues in road projects BANGKOK BTS: CASE SUMMARY occurred because of traffic performance has been overestimated. Findings disclose that Bangkok covers about 606 square miles 1/2 of toll road projects failed to meet their and is densely populated. By 1990 it was early-year forecasts; often by some margin renowned for its chronic traffic congestion, 2 (errors of 50% - 70%). and over the subsequent decade vehicle ESCAP supports govern- ownership more than doubled. Heavy traffic ments in Asia-Pacific in This pattern of forecasting error and volume which is caused by bus, car and implementing measures systematic optimism-bias is even more motorbike journeys was making Bangkok to efficiently involve marked in the case of toll roads compared the private sector in one of the worst cities in the world in terms infrastructure develop- to toll-free road as illustrated in figure 1, of congestion and air pollution caused by which compares two samples of international ment. -
Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) What Is the MUTCD?
National Committee on Uniform Traffic Control Devices Bus/BRT Applications Introduction • I am Steve Andrle from TRB standing in for Randy McCourt, DKS Associates and 2019 ITE International Vice President • I co-manage with Claire Randall15 TRB public transit standing committees. • I want to bring you up to date on planned bus- oriented improvements to the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) What is the MUTCD? • Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) – Standards for roadway signs, signals, and markings • Authorized in 23 CFR, Part 655: It is an FHWA document. • National Committee on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (NCUTCD) develops content • Sponsored by 19 organizations including ITE, AASHTO, APTA and ATSSA (American Traffic Safety Services Association) Background • Bus rapid transit, busways, and other bus applications have expanded greatly since the last edition of the MUTCD in 2009 • The bus-related sections need to be updated • Much of the available research speaks to proposed systems, not actual experience • The NCUTCD felt it was a good time to survey actual systems to see what has worked, what didn’t work, and to identify gaps. National Survey • The NCUTCD established a task force with APTA and FTA • Working together they issued a survey in April of 2018. I am sure some of you received it. • The results will be released to the NCUTCD on June 20 – effectively now • I cannot give you any details until the NCUTCD releases the findings Survey Questions • Have you participated in design and/or operations of -
Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority
Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority Joe Calabrese - General Manager RTA Ridership by Mode ! 500 Buses - 75 % ! 60 Heavy Rail Vehicles - 10% ! 24 RTV’s (BRT) - 8% ! 48 Light Rail Vehicles - 6% ! Paratransit - 100 vehicles - 1% RTA Fleet GCRTA HealthLine Euclid Avenue Transformation Euclid Avenue History Euclid Avenue History Alternatives Analysis - late 1990’s ! Subway ! Light Rail ! Do Nothing (keep the #6 bus) ! Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Mode Selection Criteria ! Capacity (30,000 + daily customers) ! Connectivity ! Funding possibilities (FTA) ! Cost - capital and operating ! Economic development potential " Renew Aging Infrastructure Vision for the “Silver Line” BRT ! “Rail Like” Image ! Fast ! Simple ! Safe ! First Class ! Help Revitalize Corridor Euclid Corridor Project ! 9.38 miles long ! 36 stations (from 100 bus stops) ! Travel time from 40 to 28 minutes ! Building face to building face ! Pedestrian and bicycle friendly ! Landscape/hardscape treatment ! Pubic Art - Integrated/stand-alone Exclusive Right of Way Funding Pie Charts FTA 80% ODOT 20% 2000 ODOT FTA 25% 50% City MPO RTA 2004 Ground Breaking October 2004 “Silver Line” Construction “Silver Line” Construction (3.5 years) “Silver Line” Construction “Silver Line” Construction “Silver Line” Construction “Rail Like” Image ! Reduced Travel Time " Multi-Door Boarding " Exclusive Right-of-Way " Traffic Signal Prioritization " Higher Travel Speeds " Level Boarding " Precision Docking " Rear Facing Wheel Chair Restraints " Off-Board Fare Collection “Rail Like” Image ! Hi-Frequency -
BUS STATIONS AS TOD ANCHORS REPORT Prepared in Accordance with California Senate Bill 961, 2017-2018 Regular Session
Housing Financing Tools and Equitable, Location-Efficient Development in California BUS STATIONS AS TOD ANCHORS REPORT Prepared in Accordance with California Senate Bill 961, 2017-2018 Regular Session Prepared for: Governor's Office of Planning and Research December 29, 2020 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................... 1 I. INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................... 5 Report Purpose ....................................................................................................................... 5 Report Organization ................................................................................................................ 5 II. BACKGROUND ON THE SECOND NEIGHBORHOOD INFILL FINANCE AND TRANSIT IMPROVEMENTS ACT ................................................................................................................ 7 Definition of Bus Transit ......................................................................................................... 7 Extent of Use ........................................................................................................................... 7 III. LITERATURE REVIEW ............................................................................................................ 9 Literature Overview ................................................................................................................ -
Next Steps Study
Prepared for: City of Englewood 1000 Englewood Parkway Englewood, CO 80110-2373 City of Sheridan 4101 S. Federal Boulevard Sheridan, CO 80110-5399 Prepared by: Felsburg Holt & Ullevig 6300 S. Syracuse Way, Suite 600 Centennial, CO 80111 In Association With: ArLand LLC Bachman PR Design Workshop Toole Design Group Table of Contents Page Executive Summary -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ES-1 Acknowledgements ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ES-18 1.0 Introduction -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 1.1 Study Location and Description -------------------------------------------------2 1.2 Vision ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5 1.3 Objectives ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 5 1.4 Planning Context ---------------------------------------------------------------- 5 1.4.1 South Santa Fe Drive Corridor Improvements Study ------------------- 6 1.4.2 North Englewood Small Area Plan -------------------------------------- 6 1.4.3 CityCenter Englewood: Redevelopment of the Cinderella City Mall -- 6 1.4.4 Englewood Industrial Urban Renewal Plan and the General Ironworks Development Plan ------------------------------------------- 7 1.4.5 Southwest Light Rail Transit Line Major Investment Study ------------- 7 1.4.6 Englewood Civic Center Pedestrian Underpass Feasibility Study ----- 7 -
Railroad Postcards Collection 1995.229
Railroad postcards collection 1995.229 This finding aid was produced using ArchivesSpace on September 14, 2021. Description is written in: English. Describing Archives: A Content Standard Audiovisual Collections PO Box 3630 Wilmington, Delaware 19807 [email protected] URL: http://www.hagley.org/library Railroad postcards collection 1995.229 Table of Contents Summary Information .................................................................................................................................... 4 Historical Note ............................................................................................................................................... 4 Scope and Content ......................................................................................................................................... 5 Administrative Information ............................................................................................................................ 5 Controlled Access Headings .......................................................................................................................... 6 Collection Inventory ....................................................................................................................................... 6 Railroad stations .......................................................................................................................................... 6 Alabama ................................................................................................................................................... -
Llght Rall Translt Statlon Deslgn Guldellnes
PORT AUTHORITY OF ALLEGHENY COUNTY LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT V.4.0 7/20/18 STATION DESIGN GUIDELINES ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Port Authority of Allegheny County (PAAC) provides public transportation throughout Pittsburgh and Allegheny County. The Authority’s 2,600 employees operate, maintain, and support bus, light rail, incline, and paratransit services for approximately 200,000 daily riders. Port Authority is currently focused on enacting several improvements to make service more efficient and easier to use. Numerous projects are either underway or in the planning stages, including implementation of smart card technology, real-time vehicle tracking, and on-street bus rapid transit. Port Authority is governed by an 11-member Board of Directors – unpaid volunteers who are appointed by the Allegheny County Executive, leaders from both parties in the Pennsylvania House of Representatives and Senate, and the Governor of Pennsylvania. The Board holds monthly public meetings. Port Authority’s budget is funded by fare and advertising revenue, along with money from county, state, and federal sources. The Authority’s finances and operations are audited on a regular basis, both internally and by external agencies. Port Authority began serving the community in March 1964. The Authority was created in 1959 when the Pennsylvania Legislature authorized the consolidation of 33 private transit carriers, many of which were failing financially. The consolidation included the Pittsburgh Railways Company, along with 32 independent bus and inclined plane companies. By combining fare structures and centralizing operations, Port Authority established the first unified transit system in Allegheny County. Participants Port Authority of Allegheny County would like to thank agency partners for supporting the Light Rail Transportation Station Guidelines, as well as those who participated by dedicating their time and expertise. -
National Register of Historic Places Multiple Property Documentation
.NFS Form. 10-900-b ,, .... .... , ...... 0MB No 1024-0018 (Jan. 1987) . ...- United States Department of the Interior National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Multiple Property Documentation Form NATIONAL REGISTER This form is for use in documenting multiple property groups relating to one or several historic contexts. See instructions in Guidelines for Completing National Register Forms (National Register Bulletin 16). Complete each item by marking "x" in the appropriate box or by entering the requested information. For additional space use continuation sheets (Form 10-900-a). Type all entries. A. Name of Multiple Property Listing_________________________________ Historic and Architectural Resources of the lower Prospect/Huron _____District of Cleveland, Ohio________________________ B. Associated Historic Contexts Commercial Development of Downtown Cleveland, C. Geographical Data___________________________________________________ Downtown Cleveland, Ohio, bounded approximately by Ontario Street, Huron Road NW, and West 9th Street on the west; Lake Brie on the north; and the Innerbelt Jreeway on the east and south* I I See continuation sheet D. Certification As the designated authority under the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, I hereby certify that this documentation form meets the National Register documentation standards and sets forth requirements for the listing of related properties consistent with the National Register criteria. This submission meets the procedural and professional requirements set forth in>36 CFR Part 60 and the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Planning and Evaluation. 2-3-93 _____ Signature of certifying official Date Ohio Historic Preservation Office State or Federal agency and bureau I, hereby, certify that this multiple property documentation form has been approved by the National Register as a basis for evaluating related properties for listing in the National Register. -
Regional Bus Rapid Transit Feasiblity Study
TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................................................................................................... 1 2 MODES AND TRENDS THAT FACILITATE BRT ........................................................................................................................................................ 2 2.1 Microtransit ................................................................................................................................................................................................ 2 2.2 Shared Mobility .......................................................................................................................................................................................... 2 2.3 Mobility Hubs ............................................................................................................................................................................................. 3 2.4 Curbside Management .............................................................................................................................................................................. 3 3 VEHICLES THAT SUPPORT BRT OPERATIONS ....................................................................................................................................................... 4 3.1 Automated Vehicles .................................................................................................................................................................................