1

Arterial Bus Rapid Transit Study

Board of Directors WorkshopAugust 26, 2020

PresentersChristopher Cochran, Director of Service Development, HART

Justin Willits, Senior Planner, HARTJoel Rey, Principle in Charge, TindaleOliver

Demian Miller, Senior Project Advisor, TindaleOliver

BRT Study Approach

2

Phase 1

Phase 2

Decision Point

Task 1 – Project Management & Public InvolvementTask 2 – Define & Evaluate Preliminary AlternativesTask 3 – Recommended Alternative, Supporting Transit Project Opportunities &

Complementary Non-Motorized Mobility Improvements

Pursue FTA Funding for Recommended

BRT Alternative

Pursue Implementation of Supporting Transit and Non-Motorized Mobility

ImprovementsTask 4 – Supporting Project Engineering Plans & PermittingTask 5 – Recommended Alternative PD&ETask 6 – Owner’s Representation During Construction & Project Management Support

BRT Study Introduction

3

• Purpose: Identify a corridor, using some combination of Florida, Nebraska and/or Fowler avenues to connect Downtown Tampa to the USF Tampa Campus

BRT Study Goals

4

• Improve safety and transit operating conditions

• Improve connectivity for east-west routes

• Improve local transit access for communities between USF and Downtown Tampa, including bicycle and pedestrian connectivity and signalized crossing improvements

BRT Study Approach

5

• Seventeen (17) alternatives identified

• Florida Ave to Fowler Ave

• Nebraska Ave to Fowler Ave

• Remaining use 1 of 15 cross-streets to connect from Florida Ave to Nebraska Ave

• Conducted 2 screenings:

• Fatal Flaw Analysis

• Preliminary Alternatives Analysis

Removed due to BRT guideway limitations

Seventeen (17) alternatives identified

Fatal Flaw AnalysisFatal Flaw Analysis

Recommended Initial AlignmentRecommended Initial Alignment

LinebaughAvenue

PalmAvenue

(Nebraska Ave.)

3 Preliminary Alternatives

Preliminary Alternatives Analysis

WatersAvenue

Recommended BRT Alignment

6

Downtown Tampa stations to be aligned with Streetcar

Extension

Recommended BRT Guideways

7

Dedicated Bus Lane or Business Access Transit (BAT) LaneRight Lane Mixed TrafficMedian Guideway (Bi-Directional or Two Lanes)

Median Station Access

8

CC

BB

AA

FF

EE

DDHH

GG

BB

CC

Modern BRT Station Concept

9

Trash and recycling containers

Bicycle parking/ sharing

AA

BB

CC

DD

EE

FF

GG

HH

Shelters with lighting

Pre-board ticketing machines

Security and lighting fixtures

Real-time/ accessible displays

Level boarding and detectable edges

Benches

Comparative Travel Times

10

Recommended BRT Alternative Operational CharacteristicsSpan of Service

• Monday – Thursday: 5:30 AM to 12:00 AM• Friday: 5:30 AM to 1:00 AM• Saturday: 6:00 AM to 1:00 AM• Sunday: 7:00 AM to 11:00 PM

Frequency• Peak Frequency: 10-minutes• Off-peak Frequency: 15-minutes

Midpoint Travel Times

Heavy Congestion Route 1 Travel Time (PM peak)

Scheduled Route 1 Travel Time (PM peak)

Estimated BRT Travel Time (PM peak)

TravelSegment

Heavy Congestion Route 1

(PM Peak)

ScheduledRoute 1

(PM Peak)

Estimated BRT Travel Time(PM Peak)

Sligh Avenue to USF 40+ minutes

34 minutes 16-17 minutes

Sligh Avenue to Downtown Tampa

32+ minutes

28 minutes 14-15 minutes

Northbound: Downtown to USF Southbound: USF to Downtown

Projected Ridership and Costs

11

Alternative

Weekday Ridership

Transit Dependent Ridership New Riders

Low High Low High Low HighRecommended Stations 9,000 11,200 5,100 6,400 3,200 4,900

All Stations 8,500 10,900 4,700 6,000 3,000 4,700

Projected Capital Cost (High Level Planning Estimate) - $95 to 119 Million

Projected Operating Cost (High Level Planning Estimate) - $2.8 to 4.6 Million

Supporting Transit Projects

12

• Allows bus to pull out of travel lane at stops.

• Improves safety for bus and riders.• Reduces congestion.

• Allows bus “jump” in front of traffic at intersection.

• Requires an additional lane (e.g. existing right turn)

• Improves travel time on congested corridors.

• Bus communicates with signal to extend green or shorten red light times.

• Improves travel time reliability.

• Accessible pathways between points noted on map.

Supporting Non-Motorized Projects

13

Potential Non-Motorized Improvements Northern Corridor

Supporting Non-Motorized Projects

14

Potential Non-Motorized Improvements Southern Corridor

910 11

12 13

14 15

16

17

18 19 2021

22

I J K

L

M

N

Project Prioritization Process

15

• Step #1 Prioritization by Project Type

• Transit or Non-Motorized

• Step #2 Prioritization of Entire Group by Cost-Benefit Analysis

• Cost per person benefitted

• Step #3 Final Prioritization through Collaboration with Committees and HART Board

Transit Prioritization Criteria

Non-Motorized Prioritization Criteria

Combined Prioritized List

16

Project ID No. Bicycle Projects Roadway / Location From / To Final Rank

A 15th Street Shared Lane Markings 15th Street 131st Avenue to Fletcher Avenue 5

E Country Club Drive Shared Lane Markings Country Club Drive N Boulevard to Florida Avenue 5

G Bougainvillea Avenue Shared Lane Markings Bougainvillea Avenue Florida Avenue to Nebraska Avenue 5

L Hillsborough Avenue Separated Bike Lanes Hillsborough Avenue I-275 to Nebraska Avenue 5

N Indiana Avenue Shared Lane Markings Indiana Avenue Ola Avenue to Florida Avenue 5

Project ID No. Sidewalk Projects Roadway / Location From / To Final RankP-04 Bougainvillea Avenue South Side Florida Avenue to Central Avenue 5P-05 Bougainvillea Avenue South Side Central Avenue to Nebraska Avenue 5P-08 Broad Street North Side Highland Avenue to Florida Avenue 5P-18 26th Avenue South Side Ola Avenue to Tampa Street 5P-22 Ross Avenue South Side Tampa Street to Florida Avenue 5

Cost Estimates $608,000 to $907,000

Cost Estimates $327,000 to $521,000

Combined Prioritized List

17

Project ID No.

Supporting Transit Projects Roadway / Location From / To Final Rank

T-18 Open Bus Bay Busch Blvd (WB) West of Florida Ave 5T-23 Basic TSP Intersection of Florida Ave & Bird St N/A 5T-24 Basic TSP Intersection of Florida Ave & Broad St N/A 5T-26 Basic TSP Intersection of Florida Ave & Sligh Ave N/A 5T-28 Basic TSP Intersection of Florida Ave & Hanna Ave N/A 5T-33 Open Bus Bay Hillsborough Ave (WB) West of Florida Ave 5

T-34 Curb Extension Intersection of Florida Ave & Hillsborough Ave NW Corner 5

T-35 Basic TSP Intersection of Florida Ave & Hillsborough Ave N/A 5

T-43 New Crosswalk Intersection of Highland Ave & MLK Jr Blvd East Leg 5

T-45 Basic TSP Intersection of Florida Ave & Lake Ave N/A 5

T-50 Basic TSP Intersection of Florida Ave & Henderson Ave N/A 5

T-51 Basic TSP Intersection of Tampa St & Kay St N/A 5

Cost Estimates $470,000 to $941,000

Collaboration

18

•Technical Committee on April 8, 2020 (virtual meeting) voted unanimously to pursue BRT project

•Stakeholder Committee on April 9, 2020 (virtual meeting) voted unanimously to pursue BRT project

Staff Recommendation

19

• Begin Phase 2A work:• Advance Non-Motorized Improvements

> Coordinate with Tampa, County, and FDOT

• Advance Transit Supportive Improvements along Recommended BRT Alignment> Identify priorities

> Conduct supporting analyses and coordinate with partner agencies> Develop concept plans

• Further Refine Recommended Arterial BRT Project> Address concerns at specific locations

> Identify a Transportation Systems Management (TSM) alternative

> Establish Class of Action and begin FTA coordination

• New Phase 2B to Advance Arterial BRT Project (no additional fee)• FTA Small Starts or advance design and construction of TSM

BRT Revised Study Approach

20Task 4 – Supporting Project Engineering Plans & PermittingTask 6 – Owner’s Representation & Project Management Support

Phase 1

Phase 2ADecision Point

Task 1 – Project Management & Public InvolvementTask 2 – Define & Evaluate Preliminary AlternativesTask 3 – Recommended Alternative, Supporting Transit Project Opportunities &

Complementary Non-Motorized Mobility Improvements

Pursue FTA Funding for Recommended

BRT Alternative

Pursue Implementation of Supporting Transit and Non-Motorized

Mobility Improvements

Task 5 – Recommended Alternative PD&E

Phase 2B

Action for Next Board Meeting

21

• Approve letter to FDOT endorsing the Recommended Alignment from the Planning Study and supporting lane elimination as part of the Heights Project south of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard.

• Lane Elimination Report under development by FDOT Heights Project Team; FDOT workshop planned in October.

• Lane Elimination is important for the BRT project but also enhances existing service and helps support the Streetcar Extension project.

• Heights project from north of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard to Waters still under evaluation in coordination with BRT study.

Design Oct. 2021/

Construction FY 25

Design Jan. 2020/

Construction FY 24

Next Steps

22

• Complete Phase 2A work (9 months):• Advance Non-Motorized Improvements

• Advance Transit Supportive Improvements along Recommended BRT Alignment

• Further Refine Recommended Arterial BRT Project

• Present results of Phase 2A to Board with recommendation for Phase 2B

• Begin Phase 2B to Advance Arterial BRT Project (no additional fee, included in project budget)

• FTA Small Starts or advance design and construction of TSM

Conclusion

23

QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS