REGIONAL TRANSIT FEASIBILITY PLAN The Regional Transit Feasibility Plan continues to make progress, having completed Steps One and Two of the process to evaluate opportunities for premium transit within the urbanized areas of Hillsborough, Pasco, and Pinellas Counties. The schedule is defined in two phases. The first is a three-step process to identify where the best connections are located, the best type of transit to serve those connections, and an implementation plan that identifies the catalyst project or projects that could be the starting point for building regional transit in the Tampa Bay area. The second phase will vet the Draft Implementation Plan with the public through a comprehensive and intense community outreach effort. work completed so far Workshops were held in Hillsborough, Pasco, and Pinellas Counties in August to talk with the community about the plan and the initial technical results of Step Two. The workshops are discussed on page 10. Pasco County Workshop, August 22, 2017 Hillsborough County Workshop, August 24, 2017 The first step of the effort identified the Regional Transit Vision (shown on page 2). To identify the Vision, more than 65 connections were evaluated for their ability to do three things: 1) serve key regional activity centers and regional travel needs, 2) provide access to jobs and redevelopment areas, and 3) serve community amenities. This Vision outlines the connections where premium regional transit are most needed in Tampa Bay. It also presents the transit network that is the basis for the Draft Implementation Plan. Pinellas County Workshop, August 29, 2017 The top five performing connections from the Vision were then advanced to Step Two. For more information on Step One, check out Technical Bulletin #2 on the documents page of the website, www.tbregionaltransit.com. Technical Bulletin #3 October 2017 Page 1
Regional Transit Vision To be successful, projects must be part of a complete network of regional transit service. Components of the Regional Transit Vision include: Step One Top Performing Connections (dark blue): hhwestshore to Brandon hhdowntown Tampa to USF hhwesley Chapel, USF, Tampa, St. Petersburg hhclearwater, Gateway, St. Petersburg hhsouth Tampa to Downtown Tampa Critical Regional Connections (light blue) Commuter Services (orange) The downtown St. Petersburg to the Gulf Beaches connection is also included in the Regional Transit Vision. This important project is already on its way to being built! the Top Performers and Critical Regional Connections Would Serve The following Within 1/2 Mile of Each Connection by 2040 Serves approx. 2,100 jobs per mile (2040) Serves approx. 3,000 residents per mile (2040) Serves approx. 5 in 10 residents (2040) Serves approx. 6 in 10 jobs (2040) Serves approx. 6 in 10 residents WITHOUT cars (2040) Technical Bulletin #3 October 2017 Page 2
Gearing Up for Step Two Prior to the start of the Step Two Evaluation, modeling software was used to estimate several characteristics about the top performing connections. Understanding who would likely use the service, the types of trips they would make, and the average length of those trips helped the team to understand the transit modes that would best serve the needs. Assigning Transit Modes To identify the projects to evaluate during Step Two, the team considered several transit modes based on the characteristics of each connection and the type of service that could be successful in serving the connection. Connection + Mode = Project The transit modes evaluated during Step Two are pictured to the right. Rubber-tire modes included vehicles operating in toll lanes (similar to Express Bus) and in dedicated lanes (similar to bus rapid transit, or BRT), as well as autonomous solutions. Steel wheel or rail modes including light rail or modern streetcar, commuter rail, or elevated. Water ferry and aerial cable transit were also considered but will be further analyzed where they may be appropriate, such as crossing the Bay. For more information about the transit modes considered, check out the transit mode brochure on the documents page of the website: www.tbregionaltransit.com. RUBBER TIRE: IN TOLL LANE RUBBER TIRE: IN DEDICATED LANE RUBBER TIRE: AUTONOMOUS SOLUTIONS MODERN STREETCAR/ LIGHT RAIL COMMUTER RAIL ELEVATED RAIL Photo Credit: Creative Solutions Technical Bulletin #3 October 2017 Page 3
Step Two: WHAT are the best projects? Each connection was paired with the appropriate transit modes for a total of 15 projects going into the Step Two evaluation. Five criteria were used to evaluate each of the projects in Step Two. Each category accounted for 20 percent of the total score. Projects were then compared to one another to identify which performed best. The range of performance totals were divided into five statistical quintiles, with 5 being the highest score possible. The evaluation criteria and how they meet the purpose of the plan are shown below: Preliminary FTA Rating Return on Investment Feasibility Community Benefits Public Opinion Compete for state and federal grants Best serves our region today while supporting tomorrow s growth The following pages present the results of the sensitivity analysis and the results of the Step Two Evaluation, organized by connection. The top half of each page presents the information used to assign transit modes - demographics along the connection, who would likely use the service, and the number and type of work trips they would make. The bottom half of each page shows the transit modes evaluated for each connection, the conceptual level cost ranges, and performance in the evaluation criteria, as discussed above. The Preliminary Ranking shows how the projects were ranked when all criteria scores were calculated. The following describes the evaluation criteria. Preliminary FTA Rating. This category evaluated each project s ability to meet the FTA Capital Investment Grant (CIG) program funding requirements (Mobility Improvements, Environmental Benefits, Congestion Relief, Cost Effectiveness, and Land Use). Return on Investment. This category evaluated each project s ability to reduce crashes and miles traveled by personal vehicles, yield farebox recovery (fares paid by riders), save energy, reduce pollutants/improve air quality, and increase revenues over existing annual capital and operating costs. Feasibility. This category evaluated projects for their potential to be built considering possible engineering challenges and impacts, such as utilities, natural resource impacts, and cultural resource impacts. Community Benefits. This category evaluated each project s ability to serve the community, specifically in regards to jobs and population in 2017 and 2040, and elderly, low income, and minority populations. Public Opinion. Public opinion was gathered through the public workshops and online survey. The results were combined with the technical results to refine the rankings. Projects were compared and statistical quintiles were assigned based on the highest and lowest raw scores in each category. The dots signify the project s performance for that category: 5 4 3 2 1 5 represents the highest (best) score possible. Technical Bulletin #3 October 2017 Page 4
Step Two Results WESTSHORE TO BRANDON Total Jobs: 149,400 9,600 jobs served per mile Work Trips: 83,000+ daily trips to activity centers 59% Professional 21% Industrial 20% Service Population: 4,800 per square mile Age: 24% under 20 years old 65% 20-64 years old 11% 65 years old or over Income: 60% $0-50k 28% $50-100k 12% over $100k Note: 2017 data within 1/2 mile of connection Mode Options Conceptual Costs fta rating return on investment feasibility community benefits Public Opinion ranking RUBBER TIRE: IN DEDICATED LANE $80-675M $3-4M/yr 7 MODERN STREETCAR/ LIGHT RAIL $360-1,850M $4-5M/yr 7 COMMUTER RAIL $180-600M $19-23M/yr 13 Detailed results and quintile scores are available on the project website. Technical Bulletin #3 October 2017 Page 5
Step Two Results DOWNTOWN TAMPA TO USF Total Jobs: 83,800 8,700 jobs served per mile Work Trips: 9,000+ daily trips to activity centers 72% Professional 14% Industrial 14% Service Population: 5,300 per square mile Age: 30% under 20 years old 60% 20-64 years old 10% 65 years old or over Income: 73% $0-50k 20% $50-100k 7% over $100k Note: 2017 data within 1/2 mile of connection Mode Options Conceptual Costs fta rating return on investment feasibility community benefits Public Opinion ranking RUBBER TIRE: IN DEDICATED LANE $115-480M* $2-3M/yr 4 MODERN STREETCAR/ LIGHT RAIL $290-1,205M* $4-5M/yr 3 COMMUTER RAIL $180-435M* $7-9M/yr 5 * May require purchase of 96-mile CSX line at a cost of approximately $400-600 million Detailed results and quintile scores are available on the project website. Technical Bulletin #3 October 2017 Page 6
Step Two Results WESLEY CHAPEL, USF, TAMPA, ST. PETERSBURG Total Jobs: 193,800 4,800 jobs served per mile Work Trips: 48,900+ daily trips to activity centers 68% Professional 16% Industrial 15% Service Population: 5,000 per square mile Age: 24% under 20 years old 64% 20-64 years old 12% 65 years old or over Income: 60% $0-50k 25% $50-100k 15% over $100k Note: 2017 data within 1/2 mile of connection Mode Options Conceptual Costs fta rating return on investment feasibility community benefits Public Opinion ranking RUBBER TIRE: IN TOLL LANE RUBBER TIRE: IN DEDICATED LANE MODERN STREETCAR/ LIGHT RAIL COMMUTER RAIL * May require additional cost for bridge crossing $75-150M* $5-6M/yr $215-1,760M* $6-8M/yr $940-4,820M* $12-14M/yr $475-1,560M* $19-23M/yr 9 2 1 5 Detailed results and quintile scores are available on the project website. Technical Bulletin #3 October 2017 Page 7
Step Two Results CLEARWATER TO ST. PETERSBURG Total Jobs: 156,200 6,500 jobs served per mile Work Trips: 25,500+ daily trips to activity centers 68% Professional 21% Industrial 12% Service Population: 4,500 per square mile Age: 18% under 20 years old 64% 20-64 years old 18% 65 years old or over Income: 64% $0-50k 25% $50-100k 11% over $100k Note: 2017 data within 1/2 mile of connection Mode Options Conceptual Costs fta rating return on investment feasibility community benefits Public Opinion ranking RUBBER TIRE: IN DEDICATED LANE $125-1,035M $3-4M/yr 12 MODERN STREETCAR/ LIGHT RAIL $555-2,840M $8-10M/yr 11 Detailed results and quintile scores are available on the project website. Technical Bulletin #3 October 2017 Page 8
Step Two Results SOUTH TAMPA TO DOWNTOWN TAMPA Total Jobs: 92,800 10,200 jobs served per mile Work Trips: 43,500+ daily trips to activity centers 75% Professional 13% Industrial 12% Service Population: 6,100 per square mile Age: 22% under 20 years old 66% 20-64 years old 12% 65 years old or over Income: 46% $0-50k 26% $50-100k 28% over $100k Note: 2017 data within 1/2 mile of connection Mode Options Conceptual Costs fta rating return on investment feasibility community benefits Public Opinion ranking RUBBER TIRE: IN DEDICATED LANE $110-455M* $3-4M/yr 13 MODERN STREETCAR/ LIGHT RAIL $275-1,145M* $8-10M/yr 9 ELEVATED RAIL $1,260-5,165M* $44-52M/yr 13 * May require purchase of 9.1-miile CSX line at a cost of approximately $60-100 million Detailed results and quintile scores are available on the project website. Technical Bulletin #3 October 2017 Page 9
Public Workshops In August, three community workshops, one each in Hillsborough, Pasco, and Pinellas Counties were held. Meetings were open house format, allowing participants to take their time to review the materials and ask questions. The room was set up in stations based on the steps of the technical work that has been completed. The final station showed the technical results of Step Two, including how each project performed and allowed attendees to vote on their preferred projects. A total of 137 attendees were present at the three meetings. Many provided valuable comments and stayed to talk with the team. We received more than 350 comments on the different exercises (some of the more common comments are shown to the right). Rail has left the station, focus on rubber tire Stop talking, start building St. Pete to Tampa is where we live and work What about a Gandy connection? Use CSX Autonomous vehicles is a no brainer Need frequent rail transit Focus on land use and economic growth Need a connection to the airport Have to connect urban centers For more information about what we heard from the workshops and to view the display boards that were provided at the meeting, visit the Documents page of the website, www.tbregionaltransit.com. Station 1: Plan Overview Station 2: Step One Exercise Station 4: Step Two Voting Station 4: Step Two Results and Voting Technical Bulletin #3 October 2017 Page 10
Step Two Preliminary Rankings As shown in the previous pages, the evaluation criteria were used to rank the projects based on both technical merit and public preference. Following the ranking, the top projects rogressing to Step Three include: Rank Connection Mode 1 2 3 Wesley Chapel, USF, Tampa, Gateway, St. Petersburg Wesley Chapel, USF, Tampa, Gateway, St. Petersburg Light Rail Rubber Tire in Exclusive Lane & mixed traffic Downtown Tampa to USF Light Rail 4 Downtown Tampa to USF Rubber Tire in Exclusive Lane Next Steps Step Three will take the top projects from Step Two and identify the most competitive catalyst project or projects for federal and state funding. The projects will be refined to make them as competitive and efficient as possible. This will include revisiting the performance of each project and where appropriate, looking into suitable ways of phasing the project over time. Estimated costs to construct the projects will be calculated as well. As part of Step Three, the team will also develop a Draft Implementation Plan that outlines the steps needed to take each project from a line on the map to a route on the ground. The Implementation Plan will not only address the catalyst project or projects, but each connection in the Regional Transit Vision with varying degrees of detail. 5 6 Wesley Chapel, USF, Tampa, Gateway, St. Petersburg Commuter Rail Downtown Tampa to USF Commuter Rail The Draft Implementation Plan will be presented to the Tampa Bay Transportation Management Area Leadership Group in January 2018. At that time, the project team will kick-off an eight-month community vetting period that will include a variety of outreach events and public comment opportunities. Timeline The timeline below shows where we are in regards to the Regional Transit Feasibility Plan. The Draft Implementation Plan will be presented in January 2018, followed by an eight-month community vetting WORK PLAN SUMMARY period. The Final Implementation Plan will be unveiled in September 2018. 2016 2017 2018 We are here Oct - Dec Jan - Apr May Jun July Aug Sep Oct - Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun July Aug Sep Study Management, Coordination, and Outreach Step 1: WHERE Step 2: WHAT Step 3: HOW Draft Implementation Plan Community Vetting Period Implementation Plan Technical Bulletin #3 October 2017 Page 11
Be Part of the Plan If you have any questions or comments about the plan or ideas for public engagement related to the plan, please let us know! You can send them to TBRegionalTransit@gohart.org or tell us via Twitter @GoHART or Facebook @HillsboroughTransit and use #TBRegionalTransit. check out our project videos! You can also watch the narrated presentations step one results step two update step two results www.tbregionaltransit.com/videos Primary Points of Contact: This plan is funded by the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). The Hillsborough Area Regional Transit Authority (HART) is administering the work effort with Jacobs. For more information, contact HART s Director of Service Development and Project Manager Steve Feigenbaum, or email TBRegionalTransit@gohart.org. Advisory Support: Members of our region s business community, the Tampa Bay Transportation Management Area (TMA) Leadership Group, and a coalition of Hillsborough, Pasco, and Pinellas transit agencies are contributing to the plan. GET INVOLVED: Visit the project website www.tbregionaltransit.com to provide your input and sign up to receive email updates. Technical Bulletin #3 October 2017 Page 12