FlexBRT Project Briefing

Background

Feasibility Study began in 1999 1999 – $750,000 TEA-21 Grant to study an ITS

Circulator in North Orange County/South Seminole County area

Maitland, Altamonte Springs, Orange County & Seminole County contributed $60,000 each as local match

Feasibility Study Evaluated use of ITS components to

provide smart transit service in North Orange/South Seminole area

Conclusion: Improved roadway LOS and high ridership

Regional partners advanced study to next phase: PD&E/PE

Identified as a Regional Priority by FDOT, LYNX and METROPLAN ORLANDO

PD&E Study Purpose

Define FlexBRT Operation Define No Build and Baseline

Alternatives No Build - existing bus services, occurs

regardless Baseline – 2 fixed route circulators @ 12

min headways Determine Physical Improvements Determine Environmental Impacts Compare Alternatives Support Project Clearance

FlexBRT Concept Flexible – routes to meet demand Transit ITS support – smart vehicles, routing, scheduling User controls trips Easy fare payment system Stations connect activity centers – to/from where people are already going No fixed schedules No fixed routes

Portland, ME

Traditional

BRT

FlexBRT

ITS = Intelligent Transportation System

Service Area and Stations

38 stations

8 remote kiosks

10 future stationsSR436

SR

434

SR414

I-4

On-vehicle systems Automated reservation, scheduling,

vehicle assignment Vehicle location/computerized dispatch Easy Payment system and boarding pass High capacity, high speed, reliable

wireless communications Portable technology – can be used

throughout Central Florida (why FTA likes the FlexBRT)

 

        ITS Driven

Operations Analysis

Objective to Optimize: Number of Vehicles O&M Costs Ridership Productivity Wait/Travel Times Cost-effectiveness

Ran 36 Scenarios Select best scenario

INPUT Scen. 11 Scen. 23 Scen. 34 Scen. 35Runs / Vehicles 20 30 40 40Speed 28 28 28 28Max Waiting Time 12 12 10 12

RESULTSTotal trips 4,379 4,379 4,379 4,379Scheduled Trips (Success) 3,368 4,163 4,281 4,319Unscheduled Trips (Failure) 1,011 216 98 60Success rate 77% 95% 98% 99%Productivity (Pass/hour) 11.32 10.19 8.21 8.83Total Distance [veh-mi] 10,527 13,332 15,610 14,372Non-Revenue Distance 2,993 3,925 5,318 4,505Revenue Distance 7,533 9,408 10,291 9,866Total Time [veh-hrs] 305 420 537 505Non-Revenue Time 80 133 221 200Revenue Time 225 287 315 304Average Trip Distance [mi] 2.38 2.32 2.32 2.31Average Ride Time [min] 7.9 7.7 7.5 7.6Av. wait [min] 6.1 5.8 4.7 5.5Av. Actual Speed [mph] 18.2 18.2 18.7 18.1Speed Ratio 64.9% 64.8% 66.6% 64.8%Daily O&M Costs [$] 12,295$ 15,662$ 17,204$ 16,608$ Annual O&M Costs [$] 3,209,093$ 4,087,785$ 4,490,364$ 4,334,748$

Average O&M cost / trip 3.65$ 3.76$ 4.02$ 3.85$

Roadway ImprovementsRoadway Improvements Total Project

Boston Avenue at SR 436 $322,047

Essex Avenue at SR 436 $491,218

Cranes Roost Drive at Central Parkway $44,164

Central Parkway at Douglas Avenue $101,663

Douglas Avenue at Central Parkway $234,589

Central Parkway at Centre Pointe Circle $103,377

Westmonte Drive at SR 436 $711,244

West Town Parkway Extension $356,588

Construction and ROW $2,364,890

Contingency $689,222

Total Roadway $3,054,112

Westmonte Drive and SR 436

Westmonte Drive and SR 436

Total Project CostsProject Cost

Elements

Roadway Improvements $3,054,112

Stations $2,316,000

Vehicles $8,910,000

ITS Components $4,421,758

Total Capital$18,701,87

0

Total Fees $4,848,911

Total Project$23,550,78

1

O&M Costs  

Vehicle Operations

$4,089,900

ITS $241,300

Stations $62,400

Total O&M Costs$4,393,60

0

Comparison of Alternatives

Evaluation CriteriaAlternative in 2020

No Build(Existing LYNX Routes)

Baseline Build

Peak Vehicle Requirement

47 78 77

Annual Ridership 5,069,338 5,632,838 6,155,881

Annual Vehicle-Revenue Hours

214,356 366,290 289,263

Productivity (Riders/VRH)

23.65 15.38 21.28

Annual O&M Cost $11,703,840$19,999,44

0$16,097,440

Annual Cost per Trip $2.31 $3.55 $2.61

Annual Revenue $6,336,672 $7,041,046 $7,694,851

Annual O&M Subsidy $5,367,168$12,958,39

4$8,402,589

Annual O&M Subsidy/Rider

$1.06 $2.30 $1.36

FlexBRT vs. Traditional Transit

Baseline FlexBRT

Ridership 563,500 1,086,543

Vehicle-Revenue Hours 151,934 74,907

Productivity (Riders/VRH)

3.71 14.51

O&M Cost per Trip $14.72 $4.04

O&M Subsidy/Trip $13.47 $2.79

FlexBRT makes economic sense… 92%92% higher ridership, generated on… 51%51% fewer revenue miles, producing… 291%291% greater productivity, that

costs… 28%28% less per rider, which is a… 79%79% reduction in the subsidy from

local governments PER rider!!

Bang for the Buck

Funding Federal State Local One of region’s priority projects

Federal50% State

25%

Local and Private

25%

Though a Federal Demonstration Project, made conservative estimates for Federal participation

FTA Letter of No Prejudice – can go up to 80% Federal Funding

Capital Funding Breakdown

Federal Appropriations 1999 - TEA-21 (1 of only 3 funded nationally) Two additional federal appropriations

State Appropriations Two state appropriations

100% Local Funding CommittedCommitted and In-PlaceIn-Place

100% Private Funding CommittedCommitted and In-PlaceIn-Place

Capital Funding

Operations & Maintenance Funding

125 Private Property Owners Contractually Committed to Funding

Proportionate Share of on-going O&M Cost Contribution is Not Capped

Altamonte Springs CRA Potential FDOT Start-up Funding (3-

Year Limit) Eligible for Funding Through

Mechanisms Under Review By TFTF

Has national significance – FTA sees it as model for extremely efficient transit alternatives

Successfully competes for funding General Accounting Office concluded BRT should

be supported as a cost-effective transit solution Public / Private Partnerships – Local Funding In-

place before we began project Portable – Applicable in other parts of Central

Florida Very cost-effective – 79%79% less subsidy per rider

by using Flex + BRT + ITS Cost Feasible – Actually Doable

FlexBRT’s Regional Significance

Schedule

PER complete Jan 2004 File CATEX Feb 2004 Public Hearing March 23, 2004 Final PER May 2004 Identify IOS of FlexBRT Final Design Fall 2004 Open FlexBRT 2007/2008

Thank You