Polk Transit Park-and-Ride Facility Study
Prepared for:
Polk Transportation Planning Organization 330 West Church Street Bartow, FL 33830 www.polktpo.com
Prepared by:
Tindale-Oliver & Associates, Inc. 545 North Broadway Avenue Bartow, FL 33830 Phone: (863) 533-8454
May 2012
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section 1: INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................. Background .................................................................................................................... FDOT State Park-and-Ride Lot Program ........................................................................ Organization of Study .....................................................................................................
1-1 1-1 1-1 1-2
Section 2: METHODOLOGY AND ANALYSIS ............................................................................... Park-and-Ride Site Identification .................................................................................... Park-and-Ride Site Evaluation ....................................................................................... Park-and-Ride Facility Demand, Impact, and Economic Analysis ..............................
2-1 2-1 2-3 2-9
Section 3: PROJECT JUSTIFICATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................ Project Justification ......................................................................................................... Facility Operation and Maintenance ................................................................................
3-1 3-1 3-4
LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1:
Polk Park-and-Ride Facility Evaluation Methodology ....................................................
2-2
LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Table 2: Table 3: Table 4: Table 5: Table 6: Table 7: Table 8: Table 9: Table 10: Table 11: Table 12:
Summary of Evaluation Criteria ..................................................................................... Candidate Sites Score Summary by Criteria ................................................................. Summary of Site Advantages and Disadvantages......................................................... Traffic Data Summary for I-4 and Polk Parkway ............................................................ Design Period Summary by AADT ................................................................................ Demand and Size Estimate Results .............................................................................. Summary of Highway Travel Path Distances between Park-and-ride Lot and Major Destinations................................................................................................................... 2025 Daily Person Trips Summary ................................................................................ Annual VMT Reduction by Major Destination ................................................................ Top Four Candidate Sites Just Market Value Summary ................................................ Capital Costs Summary ................................................................................................. FDOT Priorities and Project Justification .......................................................................
2-5 2-7 2-8 2-11 2-11 2-12 2-13 2-14 2-15 2-16 2-17 3-3
LIST OF MAPS Map 1:
Park-and-Ride Candidate Sites .....................................................................................
Consolidated Transit Development Plan FY 2013 – FY 2022 Park-and-Ride Facility Study
2-4 i
SECTION 1 INTRODUCTION A Park-and-Ride study, sponsored by the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT), was conducted for the Polk Transportation Planning Organization (TPO) to identify a specific location for a park-and-ride facility in the vicinity of the intersection of I-4 and the Polk Parkway. The prospective park-and-ride facility would serve three major trip activity centers, including the Florida Polytechnic University campus, the Williams Property Development of Regional Impact (DRI), and the Polk Commerce Center DRI, and would connect public transportation service users with other major destinations throughout the County. BACKGROUND The I-4 corridor is ideally suited to support park-and-ride facilities in Polk County as it serves as the major transportation corridor connecting Polk County to Hillsborough County, Osceola County, and Orange County. There have been several “potential” locations identified in the I-4 corridor that would provide connectivity; however, an in-depth study is needed to determine a specific location based on future transportation plans that are under consideration in this high profile corridor, including express bus service, service to the new Polytechnic campus and future rail. Development of two park-and-ride projects in the I-4 corridor is currently in progress. Groundbreaking just occurred for a park-and-ride facility to be located at Highway 98 and I-4 with construction taking place in 2012. There is also a multi-modal facility to be located at Highway 27 and I-4 as a development requirement at the Posner Center. The outcome of this study will be the identification of a specific location for a park-and-ride lot in the I-4 corridor, which would have adequate right-of-way initially for a park-and-ride lot, but would allow for expansion to serve as a multimodal transfer center in the future. The study scope includes identifying any land or right-of-way that may be owned and donated by a city, county or state governmental agency. It is visualized that once constructed, the park-and-ride lot would include amenities such as paving, lighting, transit shelter, benches, and other passenger amenities to be inviting and comfortable for commuters and regional travelers. FDOT STATE PARK-AND-RIDE LOT PROGRAM To ensure consistency with the FDOT Park-and-Ride Lot Program, the Program’s office was contacted and the FDOT State Park-and-Ride Lot Program Planning Manual (FDOT Manual) was reviewed and consulted. FDOT has identified three factors used to prioritize projects for funding. Those factors include:
Consolidated Transit Development Plan FY 2013 – FY 2022 Park-and-Ride Facility Study
1-1
Linkages to local transit services – Will existing and future transit services tie in to the proposed facility? Local funding levels – What is the level of commitment by the local agencies? Completion schedule – How quickly can the project be implemented?
In regard to the FDOT Manual, there are five major steps for the evaluation of potential park-and-ride facilities. These five steps include:
Facility Site Selection Demand and Size Estimation Assessment of Local Impacts Economic Analysis Project Justification
The manual also presents the specific criteria or methodology to follow for each step. Based on the guidelines and procedures provided in the FDOT Manual, this park-and-ride study identifies and prioritizes a list of four park-and-ride lot locations in the study area. The final conclusion includes documentation that respond to FDOT’s priority factors, and recommendations on operational and maintenance arrangements for the facility. ORGANIZATION OF STUDY In addition to this Introduction, this Park-and-Ride Study includes the following sections: Section 2 presents the Methodology and Analysis utilized to perform the park-and-ride lot assessment. A detailed description of the process, analysis, and preliminary results is presented. Section 3 includes the Project Justification. This section summarizes how the proposed park-and-ride facility addresses FDOT’s priority factors and includes recommendations on operational and maintenance arrangements.
Consolidated Transit Development Plan FY 2013 – FY 2022 Park-and-Ride Facility Study
1-2
SECTION 2 METHODOLOGY AND ANALYSIS This section provides an overview of the methodology used to conduct the park-and-ride lot assessment. The methodology is derived from the FDOT Manual and consists of five major steps:
Park-and-Ride Sites Identification and Evaluation Demand and Size Estimate Local Impact Assessment Economic Analysis Project Justification
The evaluation of potential park-and-ride lot locations was conducted using the first step in the FDOT Manual guidelines, Park-and-Ride Sites Identification and Evaluation, with the purpose of selecting the top three candidate sites among a group of sites in the study area. After the top three sites were determined, quantitative and qualitative methodologies were applied to estimate the facility demand and size, assess local impacts, and to analyze economic impacts. Figure 1 illustrates the step-by-step evaluation process utilized to conduct this park-and-ride lot analysis. Each step is described based on the detailed assessment methodology outlined in the FDOT Manual. In addition, data required to perform the demand and size estimate and impact assessment are also identified in that figure. PARK-AND-RIDE SITE IDENTIFICATION In order to identify a list of potential park-and-ride lot sites, the latest Polk County parcel data were retrieved from the Polk County Property Appraiser’s office. The parcel data includes information that assisted in the initial screening of candidate sites, such as parcel ownership, parcel size, just market value, etc. In addition, TPO, transit agency, and City of Lakeland staff were consulted to identify any issues or conditions about candidate sites that were not reflected in the parcel data. Prior to developing an inventory of candidate parcels in the study area, the following basic site selection guidelines were identified based on the review of the FDOT Manual.
Candidate parcels need to be located near I-4 and/or the Polk Parkway to allow for quick ingress/egress to I-4 and the Polk Parkway. Candidate parcels that are publicly owned, have a relatively low right-of-way cost, or that may be donated for park-and-ride lot use are preferred.
Consolidated Transit Development Plan FY 2013 – FY 2022 Park-and-Ride Facility Study
2-1
Figure 1 Polk Park-and-Ride Facility Evaluation Methodology
Step 2 Demand and Size Estimate
• Use the multi-criteria assessment methodology developed in Florida PNR Manual to prioritize the preidentified candidate PNR sites.
• Use the parking demand methodology developed in Florida PNR Manual to estimate parking demand and lot size requirements.
• Use the local impact analysis methodology developed in Florida PNR Manual to estimate annual VMT reduced due to implementation of PNR facility.
• Use the project costs estimate methodology developed in Florida PNR Manual to estimate rough project costs.
• Right-of-Way
• Data Needed • 2022 AADT for I-4 and Polk Parkway segments adjacent to PNR location
• Data Needed • Parking demand calculated in Step 2
• Costs • Engineering • Construction • Operation /Maintenance
• Visibility • Vehicle/Transit Accessibility • Access Road Congestion
• 2022 K and D Factors for I-4 and Polk Parkway segments adjacent to PNR location
• Bicycle/Pedestrian Accessibility
Step 3 Impact Assessment
Step 4 Economic Analysis
Step 1 Site Identification and Evaluation
• 2022 travel flow information from PNR to major destinations • Distances between PNR Facility to major destinations
• Future Expansion Potential PNR: Park‐and Ride
Consolidated Transit Development Plan FY 2013 – FY 2022 Park-and-Ride Facility Study
2-2
Candidate parcels with the potential to be expanded for additional uses that would enhance alternative transportation opportunities are preferred.
Based on the guidelines presented above and feedback from the project team, a total of 10 candidate parcels were identified for further evaluation and are illustrated in Map 1. Of the 10 candidate parcels, Parcels 5, 6, 7, and 8 are located north of I-4 and are outside the proposed boundary of the Williams Property DRI and the Polk Commerce DRI. Parcels 1 and 2 are located in the Florida Polytechnic University campus. Sites 9 and 10 are located south of I-4 and are within the proposed boundary of the Williams DRI. Parcels 3 and 4 are located adjacent to the proposed boundary of the Polk Commerce DRI. PARK-AND RIDE SITE EVALUATION The 10 candidate park-and-ride lots identified were further evaluated utilizing a multi-criteria analysis methodology identified in the FDOT Manual and one criterion from the Evaluation of Intermodal Passenger Transfer Facilities, developed by Alan J. Horowitz and Nick A. Thompson in 1994. An additional criterion geared to assessing the suitability of sites for an intermodal transfer facility was added because of the interest expressed by local staff to possibly enhance the park-and-ride site for more comprehensive public transportation service and use. The following is a description of each criterion in the FDOT Manual. It should be noted that, of the following 9 criteria introduced, only 6 criteria were used to conduct the actual evaluation process. The reasons for excluding those three criteria can be found in Table 1.
Right-of-Way – The level of funding for park-and-ride development has forced many agencies to enter into arrangements which results in free contribution of land. Right-of-Way costs can be much more than the construction cost if right-of-way is to be purchased. The factor can be the most important as far as determining implementation feasibility. This criterion is included in the analysis.
Atmosphere – For determining the success of a park-and-ride lot, atmosphere may be the most critical factor. This includes safety and environment, both perceived and real. Lots located in areas perceived safe for both the parker and his vehicle are more frequently used. Lots should also be located in areas that are free from annoyances, such as ash emitted from an incinerator or the stench from a landfill. This criterion was not included in the analysis.
Consolidated Transit Development Plan FY 2013 – FY 2022 Park-and-Ride Facility Study
2-3
Polk County 2013 - 2022 Transit Development Plan
Legend
4
Top 4 Candidate Sites
3
4
1
Candidate PNR Parcel
2 Pace Road
Polk Commerce DRI Polk Park way
Williams DRI Parcel Major Road Proposed Road I-4 Interchange Research Way University Blvd
0
0.5
1
2 Miles
Map 1 Park-and-Ride Candidate Sites
Table 1 Summary of Evaluation Criteria Criteria Right-of-Way Availability
Source
Value
Description
FDOT Manual 1=High. 2=Medium. 3=Low.
No
Note All candidate sites are owned privately and need to be purchased except for Sites 9 and 10. This situation is taken into consideration in right-of-way cost analysis.
Yes
Just market value per acre. Used to compare possible right-of-way acquisition cost for park-and-ride facility on each site.
Right-of-Way Cost
FDOT Manual
Atmosphere
FDOT Manual
No
No obvious risk or chance of vandalism or car theft presented for all sites.
Site Size
FDOT Manual
No
All potential sites have adequate sizes to build the facility. (All potential parcels are large enough to accommodate a park-and-ride facility with 200 parking spaces)
Visibility from I-4 or Polk Pkwy
FDOT Manual
3
Yes
Ease of site to be visible from I-4 and the Polk Pkwy.
Vehicle/Transit Accessibility
FDOT Manual
1 to 3
Yes
Ease of vehicle/bus accessing the site from I-4/Polk Pkwy or vice versa. Includes the consideration of directness of access and driving distance between the site and I-4/Polk Pkwy
Transit Service
FDOT Manual
No
Planned transit service to the park-and-ride facility is outlined in the Transit Development Plan (TDP).
Access Road Congestion
FDOT Manual
Bicycle and Pedestrian Accessibility
Evaluation of Intermodal Passenger Transfer Facilities
Future Expansion Potential
FDOT Manual
Consolidated Transit Development Plan FY 2013 – FY 2022 Park-and-Ride Facility Study
1 to 3
Criterion Applied (Yes/No)
1=Poor access to both I-4 and Polk Pkwy. 2=Good access to either I-4 or Polk Pkwy. 3=Good access to both I-4 and Polk Pkwy.
1 to 3
1=Congested. 2=Somewhat Congested. 3=Not Congested.
Yes
Measures the potential congestion on access road, if park-and-ride facility is built.
1 to 3
1=Poor access to Florida Polytechnic campus and Polk Commerce Center. 2=Good access to either Florida Polytechnic campus or Polk Commerce Center. 3=Good access to both Florida Polytechnic campus and Polk Commerce Center.
Yes
Ease of bicycle and pedestrian access to site from Florida Polytechnic campus or Polk Commerce Center. (Includes consideration of bicycle and pedestrian travel distance to candidate site, as well as presence of sidewalks).
0=No. 1=Yes.
Yes
Potential of acquiring more right-of-way for future site expansion.
0 and 1
2-5
Site Size – Size of candidate sites is an important consideration. If large enough sites are not available, a number of smaller lots may need to be developed in an area. Sites which are too large results in an ineffective expenditure of funds. Required lot sizes can be assessed using factors of 280 to 400 total square feet per space or 108 to 153 spaces per acre. The appropriate factor depends on the size and shape of the site, stall and aisle geometrics, circulation system, and possibly the proportion of small to standard size vehicles if the designated compact parking stalls are to be provided. This criterion was not included in the analysis.
Visibility – Sites should be visible from adjacent travel routes. Visibility contributes to recognition of an available park-and-ride lot, and is a deterrent to crime. Landscaping should not be obscure the visibility of the facility. This criterion is included in the analysis.
Access – A site must be easily and directly accessible by both automobiles and transit vehicles where transit service is planned. Lots should not divert commuters more than ½ to ¾ miles out of their normal travel path. Access should be safe, with signal control if warranted. This criterion is included in the analysis.
Transit Service – Lot usage increases with transit service. Sites are best located along existing or planned transit routes. This criterion was not included in the analysis.
Access Road Congestion – Congestion between the main travel roadway and the park-and-ride facility can discourage lot usage by adding time to the trip. Sites are best located where time between the main commute roadways and the lot can be minimized. This criterion is included in the analysis.
Pedestrian and Bike Access – This criterion is obtained from “Evaluation of Intermodal Passenger Transfer Facilities”, with the consideration of future potential expansion of the candidate sites to an intermodal facility. It is used to gauge how accessible the site is to pedestrians and bike users. This criterion is included in the analysis.
Expansion Potential – Funding constraints may dictate construction of a lost that is smaller than what is needed to meet future demand. In this case, it is important to choose a site with potential for expansion. This criterion is included in the analysis.
A score was assessed for each evaluation criterion based on a comparison of the site’s features with the ideal condition associated with that criterion. The scores range from 1 to 3 or 0 to 1, depending on the nature of each criterion. Table 1 shows the summary of evaluation criteria and corresponding score value range. A field review of the candidate sites was conducted in early March 2012 to examine the actual conditions of
Consolidated Transit Development Plan FY 2013 – FY 2022 Park-and-Ride Facility Study
2-6
each site, including perceived site safety, roadway congestion levels, site visibility from adjacent major commuter corridors, presence of sidewalk availability, and to supply other information needs. Scores for all the criteria, except for right-of-way, were assigned based on the results of the field review, input from City of Lakeland staff, and professional judgment. For the right-of-way criterion, right-of-way costs were calculated using the 2011 just market value divided by the candidate site parcel area. Just market values and parcel area size data were obtained from the Polk County Property Appraiser’s database. An average and standard deviation for all site unit costs per acre was calculated and used to rank each site. The score was assigned to each site based on following the scoring rules:
If a site’s unit costs per acre was greater than one standard deviation above the average ($3,791) or, then it was assigned a score of 1. If a site’s unit costs per acre was greater than one or equal to the average ($2,471) and less than or equal to one standard deviation ($3,791), then it was assigned a score of 2. If a site’s unit costs per acre was less than the average ($2,471) or a land donation of the site is warranted, it was assigned a score of 3.
Table 2 presents the scores assigned to each candidate site by criterion. Total scores for each candidate site are summed in the last column. According to the analysis, Sites 9, 10, 1, 2 scored the highest and are selected as the top four site locations for the future park-and-ride facility. Table 2 Candidate Sites Score Summary by Criteria
Site ID 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Rightof-Way Cost 3 1 1 3 3 3 2 1 3 3
Visibility from I-4/Polk Vehicle/Transit Pkwy Accessibility 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 1 3 2 3 2 3 1 3 1 2 3 2 3
Consolidated Transit Development Plan FY 2013 – FY 2022 Park-and-Ride Facility Study
Access Road Congestion 2 2 1 1 3 3 1 1 3 3
Bicycle and Pedestrian Accessibility 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 3
Future Expansion Potential 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1
Total Score 14 12 8 10 12 12 8 7 15 15
2-7
The aerial image on the left illustrates the top four candidate sites, sites 9, 10, 1, and 2. Table 3 includes a summary of advantages and disadvantages for each of those sites. Based on the information in that table, sites 9 and 10 are the priority sites for the park-and-ride facility, beginning with Site 9. In the event that either of those sites cannot be secured, sites 1 and 2 are ideal substitutes.
1 2
10
9
Table 3 Summary of Site Advantages and Disadvantages Site Number/Location Advantages
Disadvantages
Site #9 (Northwest corner of Polk Pkwy and Pace Rd)
Right-of-way dedication by Williams DRI Visibility from Polk Pkwy Good vehicle and transit access Good bicycle and pedestrian access Future expansion potential
Visibility from I-4
Site #10 (Northeast corner of Polk Pkwy and Pace Rd)
Right-of-way dedication by Williams DRI Visibility from Polk Pkwy Good vehicle and transit access Good bicycle and pedestrian access Future expansion potential
Visibility from I-4
Site #1 (Southwest corner of Polk Pkwy and I-4)
Visibility from Polk Pkwy/I-4 Good vehicle and transit access Future expansion potential
Right-of-way acquisition Distance from Polk Commerce Center
Site #2 (Southwest corner of Polk Pkwy and I-4, adjacent to Research Way)
Visibility from Polk Pkwy/I-4 Good vehicle and transit access Future expansion potential
Right-of-way acquisition Distance from Polk Commerce Center
Consolidated Transit Development Plan FY 2013 – FY 2022 Park-and-Ride Facility Study
2-8
PARK-AND-RIDE FACILITY DEMAND, IMPACT, AND ECONOMIC ANALYSIS A total of five park-and-ride types were identified in the FDOT State Park-and-Ride Lot Program Planning Manual. Each type is characterized by a different set of unique features that include geographic conditions, traffic conditions of adjacent roadways, and surrounding area land uses. Each type also corresponds to specific methodologies to estimate demand and size, assess the impact, and analyze economic aspects. Consequently, to conduct the demand, impact, and economic analyses in the FDOT Manual, it was necessary to determine the park-and-ride type of the top ranking candidate sites identified from the site evaluation. According to the FDOT Manual, urban corridor lots are located along major commute corridors within urban/suburban areas and are served by HOV lanes or line-haul transit services such as express bus, urban rail, or commuter rail services. Trip origin patterns tend to be dispersed along the corridor, and trip destination patterns are usually concentrated in a central business district or other major employment center. The critical characteristics of a typical urban corridor lot include:
Corridor level-of-service: E or worse Corridor traffic: 50,000 Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) (based on 100-space facility) Service area dwelling units: > 2,000 dwelling units with 2 miles of lot Distance from major employment center: > 10 miles
In order to obtain relevant data for the top ranking candidate sites, several data sources were reviewed, which include Polk TPO Roadway Level-of-Service (LOS) Manual, information from the FDOT Transportation Statistics Office, Polk County 2025 TAZ projections, and the Polk County Comprehensive Plan. The following is a summary of relevant data pertaining to the top ranking candidate sites:
Transit service: lot will be served by one or more proposed express bus services 2022 I-4 LOS : D or worse/2022 Polk Parkway LOS: E or worse 2022 I-4 AADT: 77,300/2022 Polk Parkway AADT: 10,000 2025 dwelling units within 2 miles of lot: 2,572 Distances from major employment centers: 11- 22 miles 2022 land use: mixed land use development
Comparing candidate site features with critical characteristics of urban corridor lots, the top ranking candidate sites can be categorized as urban corridor lots. As a result, the methodologies used to perform the demand and size assessment, the impact assessment, and the economic analysis were based on the corresponding methodologies developed in the FDOT Manual for urban corridor park-and-ride lots.
Consolidated Transit Development Plan FY 2013 – FY 2022 Park-and-Ride Facility Study
2-9
Demand and Size Estimate The methodology for estimating facility sizes for urban corridor park-and-ride lots was taken directly from the FDOT Manual. That model assumes that parking demand is a function of the amount of traffic on roadways adjacent to the park-and-ride facility. That approach is best applied in areas where there are a limited number of commuting roadways. Commuting roadways include those major roadways that are adjacent to the proposed park-and-ride facility and serve as major paths for work trip purposes. The model assumes that commuters will not divert from their normal travel routes and that users come only from commute routes adjacent to the park-and-ride facility. These assumptions are realistic in areas with a very few number of commute routes, and the condition applies to the top ranking candidate sites as only two major commuter roadways, I-4 and the Polk Parkway, can be used by potential park-and-ride users. Data Required Data required for this model include the following:
AM peak hour traffic counts in 15-minute increments for roads from which the lot is expected to attract customers. If 15-minute counts are not available, total peak-hour counts as well as 24-hour traffic counts with appropriate K (peak hour percentage) and D (peak hour directional distribution) factors can be used. Facility type of the commute roadways adjacent to the lot. Area type of the adjacent roadways (e.g. urban, suburban, rural).
Methodology Step 1: Collect traffic data for affected roadways Identify the primary and secondary roadways that are expected to produce customers. The primary roadway is considered in the vicinity of the park-and-ride lot. Secondary roadways are commuting routes of lesser importance, producing fewer numbers of potential customers. In order to collect the traffic data for I-4 and the Polk Parkway, the 2022 AADT data forecasts and K and D factors were obtained from the FDOT Transportation Statistics Office. Since K and D factors are not available for year 2022, K and D factors from 2001 to 2010 for I-4 and from 2007 to 2010 for the Polk Parkway were retrieved and averaged, respectively, to obtain surrogate 2022 K and D factors for both corridors. Table 4 presents the traffic data collected for I-4 and the Polk Parkway. The calculated K and D factors are consistent with the generalized K and D factors for suburban freeways (e.g. I-4) and suburban multi-lane highways (e.g. the Polk Parkway) provided in the FDOT Manual.
Consolidated Transit Development Plan FY 2013 – FY 2022 Park-and-Ride Facility Study
2-10
Table 4 Traffic Data Summary for I-4 and Polk Parkway Facility Name I-4 Polk Pkwy
2022 AADT* 77,300 10,000
2022 K Factor 8.72 11.08
2022 D Factor 53.36 57.63
*Source: FDOT Transportation Statistics Office
Step 2: Determine the design period The design period should represent that time in which there is a pronounced peaking of traffic on the commuter roadways. The accuracy of the demand estimate is sensitive to the design-period traffic. It is not necessary that the design period equal the conventional peak period or peak hour. A plot of 15-minute traffic or observations of actual traffic flows in the field are useful methods for determining this time period. Table 5 presents design period values that were developed in the FDOT Manual for roadways carrying the indicated 24-hour traffic volumes shown in Table 4. Those values can be used in lieu of actual 15-minute counts or traffic observations. Since the 2022 AADT for I-4 and the Polk Parkway are 77,300 and 10,000, respectively, the design periods for I-4 and the Polk Parkway are 60 minutes and 30 minutes, respectively. Table 5 Design Period Summary by AADT AADT Above 50,000 35,000 – 49,999 Below 35,000
Design Period 60 minutes 45 minutes 30 minutes
Step 3: Estimate the lot size Compute the parking demand for the facility as flows: Demand = (a x Vp) + (b x Vs) Where: Vp = Total design period traffic on adjacent primary facilities Vs = Total design period traffic on adjacent secondary facilities a = 0.03 representing a capture of three percent on primary facilities b = 0.01 representing a capture of three percent on secondary facilities Data collected in Step 1 and Step 2 were applied in the formula above to calculate demand. Lot size requirements can then be determined by multiplying the demand by an appropriate adjustment factor and dividing the result by 300 square feet per parking space for surface facilities. It is recommended that the adjustment should provide for at least a 25 percent increase over the demand. This would plan for an 80 percent occupancy rate. Table 6 summarizes the actual value of coefficients and variables applied in the formula above and the results of the demand and size estimation process. Consolidated Transit Development Plan FY 2013 – FY 2022 Park-and-Ride Facility Study
2-11
Table 6 Demand and Size Estimate Results Coefficient Value a b
0.03 0.01
Variable Value Vp Vs
Demand (Parking Space)
Total Parking Space (125% of Demand)
Proposed Lot Size (Acre)
110
138
0.956
3596.8 319.3
The proposed lot size indicated in Table 6 only satisfies the minimum number of parking spaces that need to be provided by the park-and-ride facility. In the event of future expansion of the facility to an intermodal transfer facility, additional right-of-way may need to be acquired. Impact Assessment According to the FDOT Manual, there are several major impacts from the implementation of a new park-andride facility, which include reduced vehicle miles of travel (VMT), reduced vehicle emissions, reduced fuel consumption, and reduced travel time. These effects are achieved through two mechanisms. The first one represents the direct reduction of removing vehicles from the roadway network. Removing vehicles produces reductions in both vehicle trips and vehicle miles of travel (VMT). Second, there are indirect impacts of reduced congestion levels produced by removing vehicles from the roadways connecting park-and-ride facilities with destination areas. The effects of these secondary impacts may not be appreciable in all cases and are likely not long lasting. For example, a fully-occupied park-and-ride lot with 60 spaces and no transit service contributes to the removal of only 60 vehicles from commuting roadways. This reduction in vehicles will not have a significant impact on other users of the commuting roadways. Consequently, it is reasonable to disregard these secondary impacts for small park-and-ride lots if they are located in areas where traffic flows are not at saturation levels. For this impact assessment, only VMT reductions due to the implementation of the proposed park-and-ride facility were calculated, and other secondary impacts, including reduced fuel consumption, reduced emission levels, and reduced travel time, were excluded from the calculation, since these secondary effects are not anticipated to be significant based on the parking demand estimates presented in the demand and size assessment. Data Required The following is a summary of data required to perform the impact assessment for VMT reduction
Vehicle travel distances for all highway travel paths between park-and-ride lot and major destinations. Number of parked vehicles projected for the planning year (parking demand estimated previously). Proportion of total parked vehicles traveling via each highway travel path.
Consolidated Transit Development Plan FY 2013 – FY 2022 Park-and-Ride Facility Study
2-12
Methodology Step 1: Identify major travel paths from the park-and-ride facility to major destination area(s) Significant paths of highway travel from the park-and-ride facility to major destinations must be identified. The following recommendations, identified in the FDOT Manual, are considered for simplifying this process:
More than one path should be selected only in cases where there is more than one major destination area served by the parking facility. Only one path should be identified for each major destination area. Only major trunk facilities should be included in the travel paths.
Based on the above recommendations, a list of major destinations for the proposed park-and-ride lot was identified. Highway travel paths and distances between the park-and-ride lot and destinations were also determined. The results for this analysis are presented in Table 7. Table 7 Summary of Highway Travel Path Distances between Park-and-Ride Lot and Major Destinations Major Destinations Posner Center
Highway Travel Paths I-4
Travel Distance (Mile) 13.3
Osceola and Orange Counties
I-4
16.1
Downtown Lakeland
I-4 and US 98
11.1
Hillsborough County
I-4
15.7
Downtown Winter Haven
Polk Pkwy, US 92, SR 544, and US 17
15.1
Downtown Bartow
Polk Pkwy and US 98
21.8
Lake Davenport
I-4 and US 27
19.1
Step 2: Determine the proportion of total parked vehicles traveling via corresponding highway travel path The proportion of parked vehicles traveling via a highway travel path is dependent upon 2025 origindestination (OD) information obtained from the Polk 2035 Transportation Model files. Traffic Analysis Zones (TAZs) were grouped for major destinations identified in Table 6 and their surrounding areas. TAZ groupings were refined for model purposes and daily person trips for all trip purposes, except for truck-taxi trips, were estimated and the results are presented in Table 8. It was assumed that the distribution of person trips from the TAZs surrounding the proposed park-and-ride lot to the TAZ groupings for major destinations is proportional to the number of person trips made by park-and-ride users to each destination.
Consolidated Transit Development Plan FY 2013 – FY 2022 Park-and-Ride Facility Study
2-13
Table 8 2025 Daily Person Trips Summary Description
2025 Daily Person Trips
Proportion
Park-and-ride to Posner Center
1,450
5.2%
Park-and-ride to Osceola and Orange Counties
7,240
26.0%
Park-and-ride to Downtown Lakeland
11,362
40.8%
815
2.9%
4,261
15.3%
350
1.3%
Park-and-ride to Lake Davenport
2,360
8.5%
Total
27,838
100%
Park-and-ride to Hillsborough Park-and-ride to Downtown Winter Haven Park-and-ride to Downtown Bartow
Step 3: Estimate annual VMT reduction by major travel path The annual reduction in VMT can be calculated using the equation described below. The equation is applied to each highway travel path identified in Step 1. The distance of each path measured in Step 1, the proportion of travel by path is calculated in Step 2, and the estimate of parking demand in year 2022 are inputs to the following equation to produce values for reduced VMT: VMTi = Li x D x Pi x 2 x Afac Where: VMTi = Annual reduction in VMT for highway travel path i Li = Average distance for highway travel path i D = 110 (Parking demand estimated in demand and size estimate) Pi = Proportion of total parked vehicles traveling via highway travel path i 2 = Two trips/day per parked vehicle Afac = Factor to convert Daily VMT reduction to an annual basis; equals 233 for urban corridor lots. Based on the above formula, reduced VMT was calculated for each highway path identified in Step 2. Table 9 presents the actual value for each variable and the annual VMT reduced by major destination. The last column shows the total annual VMT reduction resulting from the implementation of a park-and-ride lot in the study area.
Consolidated Transit Development Plan FY 2013 – FY 2022 Park-and-Ride Facility Study
2-14
Table 9 Annual VMT Reduction by Major Destination
13.3 110 5.2% 233
Osceola and Orange Counties 16.1 110 26.0% 233
35,427
214,693
Posner Center
Variable L1 D P1 Afac Annual VMT Reduction
Downtown Lakeland
Hillsborough County
Downtown Winter Haven
Downtown Bartow
Lake Davenport
11.1 110 40.8% 233
15.7 110 2.9% 233
15.1 110 15.3% 233
21.8 110 1.3% 233
19.1 110 8.5% 233
231,430
23,582
118,392
14,064
82,879
Total Annual VMT Reduced
720,470
Economic Analysis The economic analysis mainly involves the estimate of capital and operating costs associated with the construction of the proposed park-and-ride facility. Capital costs for park-and-ride facilities include engineering, right-of-way, and construction costs, and operating costs include maintenance and operational costs. Each component of the capital and operating costs is described further below, followed by the calculation process to estimate each. The calculation methodology was obtained from the FDOT Manual. Construction Construction costs include supervision, staking, inspections, and testing; facility elements including earthwork, pavements, drainage, embankments, structures, and ramps; landscaping and erosion control; maintenance of traffic; and traffic control devices. The cost basis includes labor, materials, equipment, and contractor overhead and profit margin. The following typical order-of-magnitude unit construction costs can be used for preliminary cost estimates:
Garage costs: $6,000 per parking space (1989 value) Surface lot costs: $2,000 per parking space (1989 value)
A surface lot facility was assumed for the proposed park-and-ride facility. Based on the demand estimate presented previously, the following formula was used to estimate preliminary construction costs. The parkand-ride facility is assumed to be constructed at year 2018 for inflation adjustment purpose. Construction = Unit Surface Lot Cost X # of Parking Spaces X Inflation Factor = $2,000 x 138 x 2.3566 = $648,637 (2018 Value)
Consolidated Transit Development Plan FY 2013 – FY 2022 Park-and-Ride Facility Study
2-15
Engineering Engineering costs relate to preliminary engineering, final design, and construction plans and specification preparation. Other associated costs include developing design concepts, preliminary layouts, land and aerial surveys, right-of-way appraisals, environmental assessments, final design plans, and preparation of construction drawings, specifications, and bid documents. Cost estimates for those associated cost components should be developed as a percentage of construction costs. This percentage is based on the complexity and magnitude of the construction and typically ranges from 10 to 20 percent. For this analysis, 15 percent is used to estimate the engineering cost. Engineering = 0.15 x construction cost = 0.15 x $648,637 = $97,296 (2018 Value) Right-of-Way Right-of-way costs include purchase price, legal, title, and other fees related to transfer of ownership, administrative costs for negotiation, condemnation, or settlement, business, family, and utility relocation, and demolition. Currently all of the top ranking sites are vacant. Consequently, right-of-way costs may only include land acquisition. As indicated in the site assessment, two of the sites are within the William DRI which has been required to dedicate a site for a transit transfer center since the original development order was approved in 2001. With the support of this park-and-ride study, one of the two sites identified in the Williams DRI could be used as the dedicated transfer center site in order to facilitate the development of the proposed park-and-ride facility and for future expansion of the site to its required use per the development order. To obtain just market value for each of the top four ranking sites, 2011 parcel data from the Polk County Property Appraiser’s office were reviewed. Table 10 presents the just market value for each of the top ranking candidate sites. Table 10 Top Four Candidate Sites Just Market Value Summary Site Number 2011 Just Market Value Area (Acre) 9 $30,127 27.65 10 $44,544 37.11 1 $156,115 70.36 2 $412,007 100.70
Consolidated Transit Development Plan FY 2013 – FY 2022 Park-and-Ride Facility Study
2-16
Maintenance and Operation Maintenance costs include routine and periodic upkeep including patching, striping, painting, drainage cleanout, and landscaping; replacement of pavement, traffic control devices, fences, guardrails, etc. Operation costs include utility charges, safety patrols, operation of signals, garbage removal, administration of lease agreements, and traffic surveillance. These costs may be lumped together with maintenance in line with the traditional approach of estimating incremental O&M cost. Costs related to maintaining park-and-ride facilities are approximately $60 per space per year. Annual Maintenance and Operation Costs = $60 x # of Parking Spaces x Inflation Factor = $60 x 138 x 2.3566 = $19,459 (2018 Value) The cost estimates presented above do not include the cost estimate for the future potential expansion of the proposed park-and-ride facility. Table 11 summarizes the costs for each capital component excluding rightof-way acquisition. Just market values for each site are shown in Table 10. It is assumed that the park-andride facility has a 20-year life span according to the FDOT Manual. It is important to note that costs shown do not include costs associated with the implementation of passenger amenities such as benches, shelters, bathroom facilities, etc. Additional work associated with the design, engineering, and construction of those facilities will increase the cost of the park-and-ride facility.
Table 11 Capital Costs Summary Component
Value
Note
Engineering
$97,296
2018 Estimate
Construction
$648,637
2018 Estimate
Total (excluding right-of-way)
$745,933
Maintenance and Operation
$19,459
Consolidated Transit Development Plan FY 2013 – FY 2022 Park-and-Ride Facility Study
Annual Cost, 2018 Estimate
2-17
SECTION 3 PROJECT JUSTIFICATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS According to the FDOT State Park & Ride Lot Program Planning Manual, justification for proposed parkand-ride projects and related improvements must contain sufficient explanation and data to show the need and purpose of the improvement under consideration. The justification should consider alternatives and benefit and cost impacts. If applicable, the relationship of the project to local plans, programs, and projects within the impact area should be demonstrated and the impacts of the improvements on the local transportation systems should be addressed. In addition, FDOT has identified three factors used to prioritize projects for funding. Those factors include:
Linkages to local transit services – Will existing and future transit services tie in to the proposed facility? Local funding levels – What is the level of commitment by the local agencies? Completion schedule – How quickly can the project be implemented?
This section integrates the analysis results of Section 2 and information pertaining to the aforementioned important factors to justify the proposed park-and-ride facility. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION The following project justification focuses on consistency with local plans, programs, and projects and details the benefit and cost aspects associated with the top ranking candidate sites. In addition, the relationship between the proposed project and FDOT priorities is also included. Consistency with Local Plans In regard to capital infrastructure, the Polk 2035 Long Range Transportation Plan (2035 LRTP), includes transportation improvements for Polk County to meet community short- and long-term needs. That plan identifies 11 potential locations for the construction of park-and-ride facilities. One of the 11 locations is the I4/Polk Parkway location. In regard to transit service, the 2016-2020 transit service improvements, identified in the 2035 LRTP, also indicates the need to offer express bus service on I-4 corridor to the Disney area near Orlando, to downtown Tampa, and to Plant City. The 2013-2022 TDP Needs Plan also includes the implementation of another local bus service in this area to serve Polk City with a connection to the proposed park-and-ride facility. These transit services will benefit from a park-and-ride facility as potential park-and-ride users can utilize these transit services to fulfill their transportation needs. Consolidated Transit Development Plan FY 2013 – FY 2022 Park-and-Ride Facility Study
3-1
Programs and Projects within the Impacted Areas Two major Developments of Regional Impact (DRIs) are proposed to be built in the vicinity of the intersection of I-4 and the Polk Parkway. These two DRIs include the Williams DRI and the Polk Commerce DRI. Both of these DRIs are large-scale developments with mixed land use characteristics. They include residential, retail, and business park center developments and therefore are expected to produce large number of vehicle trips. For example, according to the Polk Commerce DRI Development Order, phase I of the Polk Commerce DRI is expected to produce 41,832 average daily trips, with 3,370 total AM peak hour trips and 4,093 PM peak hour trips. Those trip volumes are not accounted for in the transportation demand model data used to prepare the demand and impact assessments presented in Section 2 of this report. Consequently, it is possible that increases in traffic volumes resulting from the buildout of the two DRIs could result in more demand and more impacts from the development of the park-and-ride facility. In addition to the two DRIs, the new Florida Polytechnic Campus, located at the eastern intersection of I-4 and the Polk Parkway, will be completed in year 2013. Initial enrollment is expected to be approximately 16,000. That student population is considered transit-dependent and will benefit from improved transportation options. Benefits and Costs Assessment A park-and-ride facility with potential express service typically includes a series of benefits and costs. The following is a list of benefits and costs obtained from the assessment process presented in Section 2. Transit Ridership Transit ridership is one of the most important benefits provided by the proposed park-and-ride facility. The 2030 Transportation Improvement Plan identified a need to provide express service along the I-4 corridor. Express service improvement alternatives are also found in 2013-2022 Polk Transit Development Plan Needs Plan. The demand estimate for the park-and-ride facility notes that 110 park-and-ride users may utilize the facility during peak-hour period. This fact indicates the proposed park-and-ride facility may add up to 110 riders during AM peak-hour and PM peak-hour periods, respectively, to the future express service. In addition, the proximity of the park-and-ride facility to the new Florida Polytechnic Campus also benefit the campus students as they can either walk or bicycle to the facility and utilize the future express bus service and another proposed local bus service for this area. Peak-hour Highway Level of Service Assuming the estimated 110 parking spaces are fully utilized and that these park-and-ride users use future express service to fulfill their transportation needs, a total of 110 vehicles will be removed from I-4 and the Consolidated Transit Development Plan FY 2013 – FY 2022 Park-and-Ride Facility Study
3-2
Polk Parkway during the peak period. Cost effective express services fulfilling the transportation needs of those park-and-ride users can serve as a precursor to more mature public transportation services in the area once the DRI developments reach buildout. VMT Reduction Reduction of VMT is another important benefit from the park-and-ride facility. According to the impact assessment in Section 2, total VMT reduction due to the implementation of the proposed park-and-ride facility is approximately 727,500 annual vehicle-miles. Other secondary benefits associated with the reduction of VMT include the reduction of fuel consumption and vehicle emissions. Engineering, Right-of-Way, Construction, and Maintenance Costs Major capital costs related to constructing the park-and-ride facility include engineering, right-of-way, construction, and maintenance costs. These costs, except for right-of-way costs, were estimated as part of the economic analysis summarized in Table 9. Total costs, excluding right-of-way acquisition, are estimated to be $746,000. Annual maintenance costs are estimated to be $20,000. In regard to right-of-way acquisition, it is important to highlight the requirement for the Williams DRI to dedicate a site for a transfer center. That requirement will significantly reduce the right-of-way costs if Site 9 or 10 is selected for the new facility. In addition, the amended development order for the Williams DRI, approved in August 2011, also includes a condition regarding the dedication of right-of-way for roads, dedicated bus lanes, and BRT facilities. FDOT Priorities The follow table links the project justification information to the three FDOT priority factors for project implementation if Site 9 or 10 is selected for the proposed park-and-ride facility. Table 12 FDOT Priorities and Project Justification Factor
Justification
Notes
Linkages to local transit services TDP Planned Improvements TDP identifies express and fixed-route services that will connect to the proposed facility Local funding levels Completion schedule
Land dedication
The Williams DRI is required to dedicate a site for a transfer center as part of its Development Order
Land dedication
Eliminating right-of-way acquisition from development process will accelerate implementation of the facility
Consolidated Transit Development Plan FY 2013 – FY 2022 Park-and-Ride Facility Study
3-3
FACILITY OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE There are two key components to the management of the property, ownership and operation and maintenance responsibilities. Estimated annual operation and maintenance costs are approximately $20,000. If Polk Transit were to secure a dedicated funding source, then it is recommended that it assume ownership of the property and, in turn, assume responsibility for the operation and maintenance of the parkand-ride facility. Similarly, in the event that the Polk Transit was not able to secure a dedicated funding source, it is recommended that the governing transit body in the county, LAMTD, Polk County, or another agency, also assume ownership and operation and maintenance responsibilities. Such an arrangement would be consistent with and would facilitate local plans to develop and expand the facility to a transit hub or transit center in the future. The park-and-ride facility is strategically located to support a number of travel patterns within the county and throughout the region. As transit services in Polk County mature, those services can capitalize on the transit infrastructure spurred by the development of this park-and-ride facility. A second option would be to arrange a lease for the property. A long-term lease agreement between the property owner and the transit governing body for the duration of the useful life of the facility would be consistent with FDOT and FTA guidelines if funding from one of these two agencies were to be used to implement the facility. Although such an arrangement may impact the opportunity to expand the site in the future, it is still considered a viable option in the short term.
Consolidated Transit Development Plan FY 2013 – FY 2022 Park-and-Ride Facility Study
3-4