Table of Contents Executive Summary ..................................................................................................................................................... ES-1 1. Introduction ......................................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Study Purpose ............................................................................................................................................................. 1 1.2 Agency Coordination ................................................................................................................................................... 3 2. Literature Review ................................................................................................................................................. 5 2.1 Previous Studies .......................................................................................................................................................... 5 2.2 Related Studies ............................................................................................................................................................ 7 3. Existing Conditions ............................................................................................................................................... 9 3.1 Right-of-way and Infrastructure .................................................................................................................................. 9 3.2 Land Use and Density ................................................................................................................................................ 13 4. Alternatives Considered ..................................................................................................................................... 17 4.1 Transit Technologies ................................................................................................................................................. 17 4.2 Alignment Options .................................................................................................................................................... 23 4.3 Station Locations ....................................................................................................................................................... 31 4.4 Operating Scenarios .................................................................................................................................................. 32 4.5 Infrastructure Needs ................................................................................................................................................. 38 5. Impact Assessment ............................................................................................................................................ 46 5.1 Capital Costs .............................................................................................................................................................. 46 5.2 Operating and Maintenance Costs ............................................................................................................................ 47 5.3 Ridership ................................................................................................................................................................... 48 5.4 Summary of Benefits and Costs ................................................................................................................................ 49 6. Project Implementation Plan ............................................................................................................................. 50 6.1 Right-of –Way ............................................................................................................................................................ 50 6.2 Funding and Financing .............................................................................................................................................. 53 6.3 Implementation Actions ............................................................................................................................................ 59 7. Conclusion ......................................................................................................................................................... 62 Executive Summary Overview Local officials, stakeholder agencies, and the Miami Dade Metropolitan Planning organization (MPO) have undertaken the CSX East-West Rail Feasibility Study to examine the feasibility of developing a passenger rail service along the CSX East-West Lehigh rail spur, located in Miami-Dade County, Florida. The principal study area for this study is located generally along the SR 836 corridor west from Miami International Airport. The eastern portion of the rail corridor is owned by FDOT, while the western segment is owned privately by CSX. The secondary study area includes the area west of NW 137 Avenue Krome Avenue and south of the corridor to Florida International University (FIU). The study presents technical details for the primary study area. General considerations for the secondary study area are presented. This document presents findings for various transit options in the primary study and in the secondary study area that could be developed in the mid-term with a longer implementation period and a greater investment. Alternatives considered in the CSX East-West corridor included various transit mode technologies and alignment options. The modes examined were screened for potential SFRTA Commuter Rail Vehicle applicability in the CSX East-West corridor and it was determined that two modes, DMU/diesel light rail and commuter rail, were to be carried forward for further evaluation in the CSX East- West corridor. For each mode and alignment option, costs were developed and ridership was estimated. Three different alignment options were examined in this study: DMU/Di esel Light Rail in Austin, Texas • Starter Service Options, services that could be developed in the short-term using commuter rail equipment in the study corridor east of 137 th Avenue, • Western Service Options, services that could be developed in the mid-term using commuter rail equipment in the study corridor west of 137 th Avenue, and • FIU Service Options, services that could be developed in the mid-term using diesel light rail equipment in the study corridor and south to FIU. Long-term service options were also discussed during the conduct of the study as future considerations. Possible long-term expansions markets were identified to the West Dade and Kendall areas. Page ES-1 Starter Service Options Three concepts were developed to meet the Figure ES -1: Starter Service Options objectives of initial starter service (Figure ES- Concept #1 – MIC to Dolphin Station Alignment 1): • Concept #1 MIC to Dolphin Station • Concept #2 MIC to 132 nd Avenue • Concept #3 MIC to 137 th Avenue All three concepts would terminate at the MIC sharing a station with Tri-Rail and Amtrak. Along the route to the west the passenger trains would share tracks with infrequent local freight trains running to and from industrial customers to the west and south. Many travelers using the potential nd new rail service would transfer to and from Concept #2 – MIC to SW 132 Avenue Alignment the Metrorail system at the MIC (airport) station collocated with the Amtrak and Tri- Rail station tracks. The following assumptions were used in the development of all initial Starter Service Concepts: • Access to CSX-owned right-of-way for passenger rail operations can be achieved, • CSX continues to serve freight customers accessed from the line, • Starter service uses surplus conventional th locomotive hauled push-pull trainsets Concept #3 – MIC to 137 Avenue Alignment from Tri-Rail, • No changes to existing Metrorail schedules, • Six minutes allowed for transfer at MIC, • Eight minutes to turn a train at the end of its trip for schedule reliability, and • Independent, shuttle-type service with equipment dedicated for this line. The service would not be interlined with existing Tri-Rail service. Two different operating scenarios were analyzed for each of the Concepts 1) 30 Source: Jacobs Engineering, 2015. minute peak and 60 minute off peak headways, and 2) 15 minute peak and 30 minute off peak headway. Page ES-2 Western Service Options Western service options were analyzed Figure ES -2: Western Service Options th assuming use of commuter rail equipment Concept #4 – MIC to 147 Avenue Alignment operating every 30 minutes during the peak and hourly in the off peak. Three concepts were developed to the western part of the project study area (Figure ES-2): • MIC to 147 th Avenue • MIC to 157 th /Krome Avenue • MIC to Krome Avenue Concept #4 would provide rail service originating at the MIC, using the CSX right-of- way to 137 th Avenue. The Concept would th turn south at 137 Avenue on new right-of- th way, turn west at SW 8 th Street, and Concept #5 – MIC to 157 Avenue Alignment terminate at a proposed station at 147 th Avenue. This Concept would require new right-of-way south and west of 137 th Avenue, where the Concept leaves the CSX right-of- way. Concept #5 would provide rail service originating at the MIC, using the CSX right-of- way to its western terminus, turn south on new right-of-way to 157 th Avenue, turn west at SW 8 th Street, and terminate at a proposed