DOCSLIB.ORG

VMR Operating and Capital Budget

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

6/5/2020 VALLEY METRO RAIL FY21 Budget VALLEY METRO RAIL FY21 OPERATING & CAPITAL BUDGET Valley Metro Rail, Inc. PHOENIX, ARIZONA OPERATING AND CAPITAL BUDGET FISCAL YEAR 2021 (JULY 1, 2020 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2021) FIVE-YEAR OPERATING FORECAST AND CAPITAL PROGRAM FISCAL YEAR 2021 THROUGH FISCAL YEAR 2025 (JULY 1, 2020 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2025) Valleymetro.org i VALLEY METRO RAIL FY21 OPERATING & CAPITAL BUDGET BOARD OF DIRECTORS Chair Vice-Chair Kevin Hartke Robin Arredondo- Francisco Heredia Mayor Savage Councilmember Chandler Councilmember Mesa Tempe Kate Gallego Mayor Phoenix Valleymetro.org ii VALLEY METRO RAIL FY21 OPERATING & CAPITAL BUDGET EXECUTIVE MANAGEMENT TEAM Scott Smith Raymond Hillary Foose Chief Executive Abraham Director, Officer Chief Operations Communication Officer & Strategic Initiatives Wulf Grote Jim Hillyard Paul Hodgins Director, Capital Chief Chief Financial and Service Administrative Officer Development Officer Penny Lynch Michael Adrian Ruiz Director, Human Minnaugh Director, Safety, Resources General Counsel Security and Quality Assurance Vacant Chief Auditor Valleymetro.org iii VALLEY METRO RAIL FY21 OPERATING & CAPITAL BUDGET TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY & FIVE-YEAR OPERATING FORECAST & ANNUAL BUDGET CAPITAL PROGRAM EXECUTIVE SUMMARY SUMMARY OVERVIEW AGENCY OVERVIEW .................................................... 3 FIVE-YEAR OVERVIEW ............................................... 39 SERVICE CHARACTERISTICS ........................................... 4 FIVE-YEAR FORECAST................................................ 40 FARE POLICY ............................................................. 4 RIDERSHIP AND AVERAGE FARE .................................. 41 STRATEGIC PLAN, VISION, AND GOALS ........................... 5 OPERATING FORECAST PRIORITIES AND ISSUES ............................................... 5 BUDGET OVERVIEW .................................................... 6 OPERATING OVERVIEW ............................................. 44 BUDGET ANALYSIS ...................................................... 9 OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE .................................. 45 STAFFING OVERVIEW ................................................ 11 SECURITY ................................................................ 46 FIVE-YEAR OVERVIEW ............................................... 12 FUTURE PROJECT DEVELOPMENT ................................ 47 AGENCY OPERATING ................................................. 48 OPERATING BUDGET CAPITAL PROGRAM OPERATING OVERVIEW ............................................. 14 OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE .................................. 15 CAPITAL OVERVIEW .................................................. 50 LIGHT RAIL .......................................................... 15 TEMPE STREETCAR ................................................... 53 STREETCAR .......................................................... 18 SOUTH CENTRAL/DOWNTOWN HUB ........................... 55 SECURITY ................................................................ 21 NORTHWEST PHASE II ............................................... 58 LIGHT RAIL .......................................................... 21 OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE CENTER EXPANSION ...... 60 STREETCAR .......................................................... 21 GILBERT ROAD EXTENSION ........................................ 62 FUTURE PROJECT DEVELOPMENT ................................ 22 CAPITOL/I-10 WEST PHASE I ..................................... 63 AGENCY OPERATING ................................................. 24 SYSTEMWIDE IMPROVEMENTS ................................... 65 OVERHEAD ALLOCATION ........................................... 25 STATE OF GOOD REPAIR ............................................ 66 CAPITAL BUDGET OTHER CAPITAL OVERVIEW .................................................. 28 STAFFING TEMPE STREETCAR ................................................... 29 SOUTH CENTRAL/DOWNTOWN HUB ........................... 30 ORGANIZATION CHART ............................................. 69 NORTHWEST PHASE II ............................................... 31 POSITION, PAY GRADES, AND EFFORT ......................... 70 OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE CENTER EXPANSION ...... 32 APPENDICES GILBERT ROAD EXTENSION ........................................ 33 BUDGET DEVELOPMENT ............................................ 77 50TH STREET STATION .............................................. 34 SERVICE METRICS .................................................... 78 CENTRAL MESA EXTENSION ....................................... 35 STAFFING TRENDS .................................................... 79 SYSTEMWIDE IMPROVEMENTS .................................... 35 SERVICE AREA ......................................................... 81 STATE OF GOOD REPAIR ............................................ 36 SERVICE MAP .......................................................... 83 CAPITAL DEBT SERVICE .............................................. 36 GLOSSARY OF TERMS AND ACRONYMS ........................ 84 Valleymetro.org iv VALLEY METRO RAIL FY21 OPERATING & CAPITAL BUDGET Executive Summary & Annual Budget Valleymetro.org 1 VALLEY METRO RAIL FY21 OPERATING & CAPITAL BUDGET EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Valleymetro.org Executive Summary 2 VALLEY METRO RAIL FY21 OPERATING & CAPITAL BUDGET AGENCY OVERVIEW Valley Metro is comprised of two separate legal entities, the Regional Public Transportation Authority (RPTA) and Valley Metro Rail, Inc. (VMR). The two agencies operate jointly with one Chief Executive Officer and one organizational structure. Intergovernmental agreements between the agencies define the responsibilities of each agency in meeting the overall strategic mission, vision and goals for Valley Metro. Valley Metro is governed by two boards of directors. The RPTA Board consists of 19 public agencies that set the policy direction for all modes of transit except light rail. The VMR Board consists of four cities that set the policy direction for light rail high capacity transit (HCT). The boards and the agency work to improve and regionalize the public transit system. RPTA is the regional transit agency for Maricopa County. Created in 1985 with the passage of Proposition 300, RPTA is a political subdivision of Arizona overseen by a 19-member board of elected officials. Membership is open to all municipalities in Maricopa County and to the County government. The current Valley Metro RPTA Board comprises Avondale, Buckeye, Chandler, El Mirage, Fountain Hills, Gilbert, Glendale, Goodyear, Maricopa County, Mesa, Peoria, Phoenix, Queen Creek, Scottsdale, Surprise, Tempe, Tolleson, Wickenburg, and Youngtown. With the passage of Proposition 400 in November 2004, RPTA is the recipient of the transit portion of the twenty-year countywide 0.5% sales tax fund commencing in 2006 and running through 2025. VMR was formed in 2002 to design, construct, and operate a 66-mile high-capacity transit system. The current VMR Board comprises Chandler, Mesa, Phoenix, and Tempe. VMR is responsible for administration and oversight of the design, construction and operation of light rail, and for receipt and disbursement of funds from federal, state, local, and other funding sources. The VMR Board is empowered to enter into contracts for design and construction, hire or contract for staff and undertake extensions to the system. The member cities of VMR retain power of eminent domain and ownership of real estate with agreements established for property use by VMR. The cities are responsible for providing annual funding for the light rail project through their annual or biannual budgets, in addition to recommending light rail corridors within their city boundaries. The following chart depicts the policy organization for Valley Metro and the relationships to key stakeholders: Valleymetro.org Executive Summary 3 VALLEY METRO RAIL FY21 OPERATING & CAPITAL BUDGET SERVICE CHARACTERISTICS VMR operates the only light rail and streetcar systems within the Phoenix Metropolitan area. Light rail operates with an average weekday ridership of 46,000 boardings. Weekday trains run with two cars at 12-minute intervals during peak hours and 15-20-minute intervals off-peak. VMR operates a fleet of 50 light rail vehicles traveling over 10,000 miles each weekday, on a 32-mile alignment, serving 43 stations within the cities of Phoenix, Tempe, and Mesa. VMR’s light rail service area encompasses 42.8 square miles within the Phoenix Metropolitan area. Streetcar is projected to start revenue service in May 2021. Anticipated weekday service will be running with one car at 12-minute intervals during peak hours and 15-20-minute intervals off-peak. There should be a fleet of six streetcar vehicles, on a 3-mile alignment, serving 14 stops within the city of Tempe, with two connections to light rail. Streetcar service area encompasses 5.7 square miles within the city of Tempe. FARE POLICY Effective March 2013, the current Regional Fare Policy is as follows: Visit Valley Metro’s website at https://www.valleymetro.org for details regarding the fare structure. Valleymetro.org Executive Summary 4 VALLEY METRO RAIL FY21 OPERATING & CAPITAL BUDGET STRATEGIC PLAN, VISION, AND GOALS In January 2015, the Valley Metro RPTA and Valley Metro Rail Boards adopted the Valley Metro Strategic Plan for FY16 through FY20. The Strategic Plan provides clear definition of the purpose of the organization and establishes realistic goals and objectives for a five‐year
Recommended publications
  • Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) and Light Rail Transit

    Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) and Light Rail Transit

    Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) and Light Rail Transit (LRT) Performance Characteristics Stations Mixed Traffic Lanes* Service Characteristics Newest Corridor End‐to‐End Travel Departures Every 'X' Travel Speed (MPH) City Corridor Segment Open length (mi) # Spacing (mi) Miles % Time Minutes BRT Systems Boston Silver Line Washington Street ‐ SL5 2002 2.40 13 0.18 1.03 42.93% 19 7 7.58 Oakland San Pablo Rapid ‐ 72R 2003 14.79 52 0.28 14.79 100.00% 60 12 14.79 Albuquerque The Red Line (766) 2004 11.00 17 0.65 10.32 93.79% 44 18 15.00 Kansas City Main Street ‐ MAX "Orange Line" 2005 8.95 22 0.41 4.29 47.92% 40 10 13.42 Eugene Green Line 2007 3.98 10 0.40 1.59 40.00% 29 10 8.23 New York Bx12 SBS (Fordham Road ‐ Pelham Pkwy) 2008 9.00 18 0.50 5.20 57.73% 52 3 10.38 Cleveland HealthLine 2008 6.80 39 0.17 2.33 34.19% 38 8 10.74 Snohomish County Swift BRT ‐ Blue Line 2009 16.72 31 0.54 6.77 40.52% 43 12 23.33 Eugene Gateway Line 2011 7.76 14 0.55 2.59 33.33% 29 10 16.05 Kansas City Troost Avenue ‐ "Green Line" 2011 12.93 22 0.59 12.93 100.00% 50 10 15.51 New York M34 SBS (34th Street) 2011 2.00 13 0.15 2.00 100.00% 23 9 5.22 Stockton Route #44 ‐ Airport Corridor 2011 5.50 8 0.69 5.50 100.00% 23 20 14.35 Stockton Route #43 ‐ Hammer Corridor 2012 5.30 14 0.38 5.30 100.00% 28 12 11.35 Alexandria ‐ Arlington Metroway 2014 6.80 15 0.45 6.12 89.95% 24 12 17.00 Fort Collins Mason Corridor 2014 4.97 12 0.41 1.99 40.00% 24 10 12.43 San Bernardino sbX ‐ "Green Line" 2014 15.70 16 0.98 9.86 62.79% 56 10 16.82 Minneapolis A Line 2016 9.90 20 0.50 9.90 100.00% 28 10 21.21 Minneapolis Red Line 2013 13.00 5 2.60 2.00 15.38% 55 15 14.18 Chapel Hill N‐S Corridor Proposed 8.20 16 0.51 1.34 16.34% 30 7.5 16.40 LRT Systems St.
  • Prominent Mill Avenue Location for Lease

    Prominent Mill Avenue Location for Lease

    THE OPPORTUNITY OF A LIFETIME: MAIN & MAIN IN DOWNTOWN TEMPE ON TOP OF MILL AVENUE FORMER GORDON BIERSCH 420 S MILL AVE TEMPE, AZ 85281 Kevin Weller 480.425.5513 [email protected] Mary Nollenberger 480.425.5520 [email protected] Nicole Ridberg 480.425.5514 [email protected] Downtown Tempe: The 1 Downtown Tempe: The 3 Rent Comparables 5 Opportunity Development Projects Rent Comps Property Summary Tempe Street Car Rent Comps Summary Property Location Phoenix Light Rail Expansion Rent Comps MaP Regional MaP NOVUS Innovation Corridor Demographic Information 6 Daytme Signage Example Mirabella Demographic Report Exteriors Photos Marina Heights Bar & Dining Room I.D.E.A. Tempe Balcony Photos Hotel Developments Brewery Equipment Hotel Developments (Cont) Kitchen Oace Developments Second Story Floorplan Apartment Developments Recently Completed Apartments Downtown Tempe: A Place Like 2 ASU Developments & Renovations No Other The City Downtown Tempe: Meet Your 4 The Employers Neighbors The University The Restaurants The Events The Entertainers The Travelers The Retailers The Recognition FORMER GORDON BIERSCH | 420 S MILL AVE, TEMPE, AZ 85281 OFFERING MEMORANDUM 1 DOWNTOWN TEMPE: THE OPPORTUNITY 420 S Mill Ave Tempe, AZ 85281 FORMER GORDON BIERSCH | 420 S MILL AVE TEMPE, AZ 85281 SVN | Desert Commercial Advisors | Page 3 Property Summary OFFERING SUMMARY PROPERTY HIGHLIGHTS Lease Rate: $33.00 SF/yr (NNN) • One of a kind location with a one of the most diverse sets of potential customers in the United States Building Size: 15,966 SF
  • Alternatives Analysis for High Capacity Public Transit on the Rail

    Alternatives Analysis for High Capacity Public Transit on the Rail

    Proposal Alternatives Analysis for High Capacity Public Transit on the Rail Right of Way Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission in Partnership with Santa Cruz Metropolitan Transit District (METRO) RFP 2020-08-05 September 3, 2019 Contents 01 Transmittal Letter I 02 Work Plan 01 03 Schedule 09 04 Cost Proposal 10 05 Firm Qualifi cations 12 06 Project Team, Organization Chart, and Staffi ng Plan 16 07 Qualifi cations and Relevant Experience 19 08 Federally/State-Funded Transportation Project Experience 23 09 Management Approach 24 10 References 26 Appendix A Additional Information Appendix B Resumes Appendix C Exceptions and Deviations Appendix D Cost Proposal Detail by Task Appendix E Required Forms HDR supports sustainable resource conservation and material recycling practices. This proposal package is 100% recyclable. This page is intentionally left blank. September 3, 2019 Ginger Dykaar Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission 1523 Pacifi c Avenue Santa Cruz, CA 95060 RE: Proposal for Alternatives Analysis for High Capacity Public Transit on the Rail Right of Way RFP 2020-08-05 Dear Ms. Dykaar, HDR, a full service Planning and Engineering Corporation with a long-history of transportation planning and alternatives analysis experience, is pleased to submit this proposal to assist the Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission (RTC) and Santa Cruz Metropolitan Transit District (METRO) to conduct a high capacity transit alternatives analysis for the Santa Cruz Branch Rail Line. We have thoughtfully developed a complete team to meet every technical challenge required of the RTC and METRO including expertise across all transit modes and systems; federal, state, and local transport fi nance; travel modeling and market assessment; active transportation and trails; performance-based planning using triple bottom line processes and linkages to vision and goals; economic growth analysis; environmental and engineering constraints and design needs; value engineering and business planning; and engaging public and stakeholder partners.
  • 21 New Tramways to Open This Year

    21 New Tramways to Open This Year

    THE INTERNATIONAL LIGHT RAIL MAGAZINE www.lrta.org www.tautonline.com MARCH 2017 NO. 951 21 NEW TRAMWAYS TO OPEN THIS YEAR Pesa: From trams to metro cars – a study in growth Puebla: Mexico’s first tram-train KeolisAmey wins in Manchester Nantes plans line 4 and fleet renewal CRRC in the US Ostrava 03> £4.40 China’s giant breaks Tramway’s role in a into North America post-industrial city 9 771460 832050 Phil Long Phil MANCHESTER VVoices from the industry… “Once again your team have proved your outstanding capabilities. The content was excellent and the 18-19 July 2017 feedback from participants was great.” Simcha Ohrenstein – CTO, Jerusalem LRT The UK Light Rail Conference and exhibition returns to Manchester for 2017, bringing together over 250 decision-makers from around the world for two days of “A great event, really well organised and open debate on all aspects of tramway and urban rail the dinner, reception and exhibition space operations and development. made for great networking time.” Andy Byford – CEO, Toronto Transit Commission With over eight hours of dedicated networking time, delegates can explore the latest industry innovation within the event’s exhibition and technical areas as well as “I really enjoyed the conference and made examining LRT’s role in alleviating congestion in our towns some helpful contacts. Thanks for bringing and cities and its potential for driving economic growth. such a professional event together.” Will Marshall – Siemens Mobility USA Topics and themes for 2017 include: > Rewriting the business case
  • 3:15 PM (US Arizona) Tom Wolfe, PE Thomas W. Wilhite, PE

    3:15 PM (US Arizona) Tom Wolfe, PE Thomas W. Wilhite, PE

    ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY transportation.asu.edu TRANSPORTATION SEMINAR TEMPE STREETCAR – THE MAKING OF A NEW TRANSIT SYSTEM Friday, September 14, 2018 2:00 - 3:15 PM (US Arizona) College Avenue Commons (CAVC) Room 559 (Parking) Tom Wolfe, PE Thomas W. Wilhite, PE Transit Program Manager Streetcar Project Engineer Stantec City of Tempe Public Works About the Talk Streetcars were once the backbone of America’s urban transportation system, conveying passengers around town in cities across the country. At the turn of the 20th century, Phoenix had its own electrified streetcar railway, with plans to extend service to Tempe, Mesa, and Scottsdale – but the lines were never built. Fast forward nearly 100 years and the City of Tempe is soon to be home to the Valley’s first Modern Streetcar system, one that promises to enhance mobility as a complement to the existing transportation network. This 3.5-mile facility is a critical element to the Valley’s transit system as it circulates the perimeter of the ASU campus, through the bustling downtown, and along the rapidly growing business district on Rio Salado. So, what is a Modern Streetcar? How does it work? And what does it take to bring the Tempe Streetcar, a modern transit facility, to the community? These questions and more will be answered in this informative and entertaining presentation. About the Speakers Tom Wolf has been involved in a large variety of civil engineering projects throughout his career, from roadways and dams in rural areas to large diameter conveyance tunnels and bridge structures in major urban centers.
  • SYSTEM MAP Scale Is Approximate

    SYSTEM MAP Scale Is Approximate

    Happy Valley Rd Happy Valley 0 1 2 3 4 5 R I- LEGEND Miles SYSTEM MAP Scale is approximate. MAPA DEL SISTEMA Pinnacle Peak Rd 17 Transit Center Valley Metro Rail Local Buses Light Rail, Local, Express Phoenix-Deer Valley Municipal Airport Frequent and reliable all-day rail Main bus route 29th Ave Park-and-Ride Regular service Deer Valley Dr E Marriott Dr and RAPID Bus Routes 19th Ave 27th Ave 27th Ave 23rd service operating 365 days a year Select trips only Barry Point of Interest linking Phoenix, Tempe and Mesa Limited service Deer Valley Rd Eective/Validez 10.28.2019 Goldwater Direction of Travel with connections to Sky Harbor High School R SR Central Avenue Honeywell Airport and many bus routes. Rose Garden Ln Rose Garden Ln Desert Ridge Marketplace St 73rd 602.253.5000 | valleymetro.org Pima Fwy Scottsdale Healthcare Dr Washington Agua Fria Fwy 7th Ave 101 Rail line is on 101 E Mayo Blvd Thompson Peak Pkwy this street Train stops only at Van Buren HonorHealth Scottsdale Beardsley Rd Beardsley Rd 51 RAPID Bus light rail stations Glendale Thompson Peak 7th Street Foothills Library Fast and frequent bus service from Apache Blvd Behrend Dr Yorkshire Dr park-and-rides to downtown Phoenix 7th Avenue Utopia Rd Blvd Tatum Abrazo Arrowhead Hospital E on weekdays 5–8 a.m. and 3–6 p.m. Union Hills Dr Rd Creek Cave Light rail line Roosevelt Union Hills Dr E 56th St Mayo Clinic See light rail map on reverse for details. Phoenix Campus E Foothills Paradise Valley 101 R I-E 12th Street Aquatics Center Ave 27th 17 Community College RAPID stops only at these RAPID route(s) Buckeye Road 59th Ave 59th Arrowhead Ave 57th points and at transit centers.
  • Tempe Streetcar Profile

    Tempe Streetcar Profile

    Tempe Streetcar Tempe, Arizona Small Starts Project Development (Rating Assigned November 2018) Summary Description Proposed Project: Streetcar 3.0 Miles, 14 Stations Total Capital Cost ($YOE): $201.85 Million (Includes $9.5 million in finance charges) Section 5309 CIG Share ($YOE): $75.00 Million (37.2%) Annual Operating Cost (opening year 2022): $4.84 Million 800 Daily Linked Trips Current Year Ridership Forecast (2018): 647,500 Annual Linked Trips 1,700 Daily Linked Trips Horizon Year Ridership Forecast (2035): 1,228,200 Annual Linked Trips Overall Project Rating: Medium-High Project Justification Rating: Medium Local Financial Commitment Rating: Medium-High Project Description: Valley Metro proposes to build a streetcar line through the historic downtown Tempe area, which is the city’s government and financial center, linking with Arizona State University (ASU) and the surrounding mix of residential and commercial uses. The project includes the purchase of six streetcar vehicles. The service is planned to operate every 10 minutes during daytime hours on weekdays, every 20 minutes on weekday evenings, and every 15 minutes on weekends. Project Purpose: The streetcar is intended to connect ASU and nearby residential neighborhoods with the activity centers of downtown Tempe and Mill Avenue, and the emerging employment corridor of Rio Salado Parkway. Valley Metro anticipates the project will encourage redevelopment of underutilized buildings in downtown Tempe, and provide connections to Valley Metro’s light rail system at the existing Dorsey Avenue and Mill Avenue light rail stations. Project Development History, Status and Next Steps: Valley Metro and the City of Tempe selected the Tempe Streetcar as the locally preferred alternative in September 2010.
  • MOD Sandbox Presentation

    MOD Sandbox Presentation

    Findings and Lessons Learned from the MOD Sandbox Trip Planning and Fare Payment Deployments February 4, 2021 Sponsored by: Independent Evaluation Team: February 4, 2021 3 4 Agenda ▪ Introductions ▪ Evaluation Objectives and Approach ▪ Evaluation Findings and Lessons Learned – Valley Metro Pass2Go App – TriMet OpenTripPlanner project – VTrans Flexible Trip Planner – Cross Cutting Findings ▪ Demonstration Deployment: Agency Perspectives – Valley Metro Pass2Go App – TriMet OpenTripPlanner project – VTrans Flexible Trip Planner ▪ Panel Discussion . 2/4/2021 Introductions . 2/4/2021 Les Brown, ICF Adam Cohen, TSRC Sara Davidson, ITSA Independent Evaluation Team Panel Moderator Angie Devore, Tyler Olson, Bibiana McHugh, Ross MacDonald, Valley Metro Valley Metro TriMet VTrans Panelists: MOD Sandbox Demonstration Awardees 2/4/2021 Independent Evaluations: Objectives & Approach . 2/4/2021 Independent Evaluation: Goals / Objectives A rigorous, comprehensive evaluation of the MOD demonstrations will deliver a keen understanding of: • Lessons learned and best practices • Public policy • Successful business & partnership models • Scaling innovations • Innovations and strategies • Identifying additional use cases for other contexts Prepare for and conduct a comprehensive independent evaluation (IE) of the MOD Sandbox Demonstrations Examine issues and explore opportunities and challenges for public transportation as they relate to technology- enabled mobility services Evaluate achievement of MOD Sandbox demonstration objectives by testing preestablished hypotheses 2/4/2021 Independent Evaluation: Performance Factors Performance of MOD Sandbox Demonstrations are evaluated by their effects on variables such as the following: ▪ Transit ridership ▪ Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) ▪ Wait times ▪ Travel times ▪ Costs ▪ Access to opportunity ▪ Accessibility for persons with disabilities ▪ Equity ▪ User satisfaction 2/4/2021 Independent Evaluation: Methodology Step 6. Define Methods of Step 3.
  • Extreme Weather

    Extreme Weather

    THE INTERNATIONAL LIGHT RAIL MAGAZINE www.lrta.org www.tautonline.com MAY 2017 NO. 953 KEEPING RUNNING IN EXTREME WEATHER Los Angeles: Measure M funding boosts LRT expansion Terror targets the St Petersburg Metro US draft budget freezes out transit 14 hurt as Hong Kong tram overturns UK tram-train Chaos theory 05> £4.40 Under scrutiny yet Making sense of the looking to 2018 Charleroi Metro 9 771460 832050 Phil Long “A great event, really well organised and the dinner, reception and exhibition space made for great networking time.” Andy Byford – CEO, Toronto Transit Commission MANCHESTER “I really enjoyed the conference and made some helpful contacts. Thanks for bringing such a professional event together.” 18-19 July 2017 Will Marshall – Siemens Mobility USA Topics and themes for 2017 include: > Rewriting the business case for light rail investment > Cyber security – Responsibilities and safeguards > Models for procurement and resourcing strategies > Safety and security: Anti-vandalism measures > Putting light rail at the heart of the community > Digitisation and real-time monitoring > Street-running safety challenges > Managing obsolescence > Next-generation driver aids > Wire-free solutions > Are we delivering the best passenger environments? > Composite and materials technologies > From smartcard to smartphone ticketing > Rail and trackform innovation > Traction energy optimisation and efficiency > Major project updates Confirmed speakers include: > Paolo Carbone – Head of Public Transport Capital Programmes, Transport Infrastructure Ireland > Geoff Inskip – Chairman, UKTram > Jane Cole – Managing Director, Blackpool Transport > Allan Alaküla – Head of Tallinn EU Office, City of Tallinn > Andres Muñoz de Dios – Director General, MetroTenerife > Tobyn Hughes – Managing Director (Transport Operations), North East Combined Authority > Alejandro Moreno – Alliance Director, Midland Metro Alliance > Ana M.
  • Getting on Track Good Investments for Pennsylvania’S Public Transit System

    Getting on Track Good Investments for Pennsylvania’S Public Transit System

    Getting on Track Good Investments for Pennsylvania’s Public Transit System Getting on Track Good Investments for Pennsylvania’s Public Transit System PennPIRG Education Fund Timothy Telleen-Lawton Frontier Group James Browning PennPIRG Education Fund September 2008 Acknowledgments The authors wish to thank Lance Haver of the Philadelphia Mayor’s Office and Nathan Wilcox of PennEnvironment for their review of and assistance with this report. The au- thors would also like to thank Tony Dutzik of Frontier Group and Phineas Baxandall of U.S. PIRG for their editorial assistance. The generous financial support of the Surdna Foundation made this report possible. The authors bear responsibility for any factual errors. The recommendations are those of PennPIRG Education Fund. The views expressed in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of our funders or those who provided review. Copyright 2008 PennPIRG Education Fund With public debate around important issues often dominated by special interests pursuing their own narrow agendas, PennPIRG Education Fund offers an independent voice that works on behalf of the public interest. PennPIRG Education Fund, a 501(c)(3) organiza- tion, works to protect consumers and promote good government. We investigate problems, craft solutions, educate the public, and offer Pennsylvanians meaningful opportunities for civic participation. Frontier Group conducts independent research and policy analysis to support a cleaner, healthier and more democratic society. Our mission is to inject accurate information and compelling ideas into public policy debates at the local, state and federal levels. For more information about PennPIRG Education Fund or for additional copies of this report, please visit www.pennpirg.org.
  • February 2019 Tucson Summary Notes

    February 2019 Tucson Summary Notes

    American Public Transportation Association Streetcar Subcommittee 2019 Mid-Year Meeting City of Tucson Public Works Building 201 N. Stone Ave Tucson, AZ 85701 Wednesday February 27, 2019 8:00 am – 4:00 pm th 4 Floor Large Conference Room Timothy R. Borchers Chair (Not Attending) Eric Sitiko Vice Chair (Presiding) James D. Schantz Secretary Summary Notes (formerly known as “Minutes”) Pre-Meeting Events: February 23rd- El Paso Streetcar Technical Tour 2-6pm – A group of about a dozen Subcommittee members were hosted by Assistant Director of Streetcar Operations, Carl Jackson and toured the line, maintenance facility, and administrative offices. February 26th- Tucson Sun Link Streetcar Technical Tour 2-4 pm – Together with attendees of the Annual Streetcar Summit of the Community Streetcar Coalition- Subcommittee members toured the Tucson Sun Link streetcar line, maintenance facility, and administrative offices. Meeting – February 27 • Welcome & Introductions Eric Sitiko Committee Vice Chair Eric Sitiko called the meeting to order at 8:45 am, and relayed regrets from Chair Tim Borchers, who was unable to attend as he recovers from an accident. Welcome from City of Tucson Ms. Shellie Ginn Deputy Director, Tucson Dept. of Transportation Thanks to breakfast and lunch sponsors Tucson, HDR and Herzog • Meeting minutes from Nashville, TN Jim Schantz Subcommittee Secretary Jim Schantz reviewed the main points covered in the minutes of the September 23, 2018 Nashville meeting (circulated by email in advance of the meeting). Hearing no comments or corrections, the minutes were deemed to be accepted. • Presentations • Tempe Progress and Updates Dan Cleavenger, Deputy Director, Corridor Development, Valley Metro The Tempe streetcar, currently under construction, is a $200 million project, being managed on a Construction Manager at Risk format to develop a 3-mile line connecting with the Phoenix Valley Metro light rail.
  • TCRP Report 102 – Transit-Oriented

    TCRP Report 102 – Transit-Oriented

    TRANSIT COOPERATIVE RESEARCH TCRP PROGRAM REPORT 102 Transit-Oriented Sponsored by Development in the the Federal United States: Transit Administration Experiences, Challenges, and Prospects TCRP OVERSIGHT AND PROJECT TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE 2004 (Membership as of January 2004) SELECTION COMMITTEE (as of January 2004) OFFICERS CHAIR Chair: Michael S. Townes, President and CEO, Hampton Roads Transit, Hampton, VA J. BARRY BARKER Vice Chair: Joseph H. Boardman, Commissioner, New York State DOT Transit Authority of River City Executive Director: Robert E. Skinner, Jr., Transportation Research Board MEMBERS MEMBERS KAREN ANTION MICHAEL W. BEHRENS, Executive Director, Texas DOT Karen Antion Consulting SARAH C. CAMPBELL, President, TransManagement, Inc., Washington, DC GORDON AOYAGI Montgomery County Government E. DEAN CARLSON, Director, Carlson Associates, Topeka, KS RONALD L. BARNES JOHN L. CRAIG, Director, Nebraska Department of Roads Central Ohio Transit Authority DOUGLAS G. DUNCAN, President and CEO, FedEx Freight, Memphis, TN LINDA J. BOHLINGER GENEVIEVE GIULIANO, Director, Metrans Transportation Center and Professor, School of Policy, HNTB Corp. Planning, and Development, USC, Los Angeles ANDREW BONDS, JR. BERNARD S. GROSECLOSE, JR., President and CEO, South Carolina State Ports Authority Parsons Transportation Group, Inc. SUSAN HANSON, Landry University Prof. of Geography, Graduate School of Geography, Clark University JENNIFER L. DORN JAMES R. HERTWIG, President, Landstar Logistics, Inc., Jacksonville, FL FTA HENRY L. HUNGERBEELER, Director, Missouri DOT NATHANIEL P. FORD, SR. ADIB K. KANAFANI, Cahill Professor of Civil Engineering, University of California, Berkeley Metropolitan Atlanta RTA RONALD F. KIRBY, Director of Transportation Planning, Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments CONSTANCE GARBER HERBERT S. LEVINSON, Principal, Herbert S. Levinson Transportation Consultant, New Haven, CT York County Community Action Corp.