Technical Report # 8 Envision 2035 Cost Feasible Plan. July 2010

Transcription

1 Envision 2035 Cost Feasible Plan July 2010

2 Technical Report #8 Envision 2035 Cost Feasible Plan Envision 2035 Long Range Plan Update Prepared for North Florida Transportation Planning Organization 1022 Prudential Drive Jacksonville, Florida Prepared by 7406 Fullerton Street, Suite 350 Jacksonville, Florida (904) In Association with Renaissance Planning Group The Corradino Group, Inc. M. Victoria Pennington, Marketing & Public Affairs June 29, 2010

3 Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction Project Cost Estimations Transit Projects Project Scoring Emerging Issues Florida Transportation Plan Evaluation Criteria Application of the Evaluation Criteria Financial Resources Forecasts Existing Federal and State Sources of Revenue Federal Funding Sources State Fuel Taxes Fuel Sales Tax Taxes for Local Government Distribution Other Fuel Taxes/Fees Summary of Federal and State Revenues Capacity Programs Funding Summaries Optional Revenue Sources Local Option Gas Taxes (LOGT) First LOGT (Six Cents) Second LOGT (Five Cents) Ninth-Cent Gas Tax Toll Revenues Bond Issues Impact Fees / Local Government Transportation Concurrency Municipal Services Taxing Unit Ad Valorem Taxes Transportation Regional Incentive Program (TRIP) Jacksonville Transportation Authority User Fees i

4 Public Private Partnerships Local Sales Tax Local Government Infrastructure Surtax Small County Surtax Summary of Existing Local Revenue Forecasting Revenue Sources Federal and State Fuel Tax Revenues Summary Year 2035 Cost Feasible Plan Year of Expenditure Summary and Conclusions List of Tables Table 2.1 FDOT Generic Cost Per Mile... 5 Table 2.2 Adopted Needs Plan Cost Estimates... 7 Table 3.1 Eight SAFETEA-LU Planning Factors Table 3.2 Inclusion of Planning Factors in Envision 2035 Update Table 3.3 Emerging Issues Incorporation in Envision Table 3.4 Incorporation of Florida Transportation Plan Goals in Envision Table 3.5 Needs Plan Evaluation Matrix Table 4.1 Federal Highway User Fees Table 4.2 Summary of State of Florida Taxes and Fees Table 4.3 Federal and State Revenues forecasted for the North Florida Region Table 4.4 Existing and Potential Taxes for Transportation by County Table 4.5 Federal and State Revenues for the North Florida Region through Table 5.1 Envision 2035 Cost Feasible Plan Project List Table 5.2 Modal Subtotals Summary Table Table 5.3 Revenue Estimates in Year of Expenditure (Millions) Table 5.4 Adopted Cost Feasible Plan by Year of Expenditure Table 5.4 Adopted Cost Feasible Plan by Year of Expenditure Table 5.4 Adopted Cost Feasible Plan by Year of Expenditure Table 5.4 Adopted Cost Feasible Plan by Year of Expenditure ii

5 Table 5.5 YOE Revenues VS. YOE Project Costs List of Figures Figure 5.1 Envision 2035 Adopted Cost Feasible Plan Figure 5.2 Envision 2035 Adopted Cost Feasible Plan Nassau County Figure 5.3 Envision 2035 Adopted Cost Feasible Plan Duval County Figure 5.4 Envision 2035 Adopted Cost Feasible Plan Duval County Downtown Inset Figure 5.5 Envision 2035 Adopted Cost Feasible Plan Clay County Figure 5.6 Envision 2035 Adopted Cost Feasible Plan St Johns County Appendix A Envision 2035 Long Range Transportation Plan Master Project List Appendix B Bicycle/Pedestrian Goals and Objectives iii

6 1.0 Introduction The development of the Cost Feasible Plan for the North Florida TPO requires an evaluation of overall transportation system needs within the context of available financial resources for mobility projects. This is consistent with SAFETEA-LU requirements for the development of long-range transportation plan (LRTPs), which requires that transportation plans developed for urbanized areas be financially constrained and as of December 11, 2007, that the Cost Feasible Plan reflect the Year of Expenditure for each project. This requirement calls for the Cost Feasible Plan to identify revenue in five-year increments as well as the development of project costs to reflect future year costs. This has caused the Cost Feasible Plan to be developed in a way that creates five-year funding stages. Project Costs are then budgeted against forecasted revenues for each period while matching the mobility demands of the periods. Therefore, the Cost Feasible Plan typically matches the highest priority needs with the anticipated revenue. The Cost Feasible Plan establishes the priorities for needed mobility projects and underscores the value the community places on investments in various modes of travel. How an area chooses to spend its limited financial resources present the clearest picture of its priorities for long-range mobility improvements as a means to achieve community objectives, such as quality of life, economic development, and protecting the environment. The North Florida TPO, its advisory committees, the LRTP stakeholders committee, along with members of the general public, participated in the development of the Cost Feasible Plan through several public workshops, numerous Focus Group meetings, advisory committee meetings, and a formal public hearing. This report documents the development of the Cost Feasible Plan, and identifies transportation system improvements associated with the adopted Envision 2035 Cost Feasible Plan for the North Florida TPO study area. 1

7 2.0 Project Cost Estimations The first step in the development of the Cost Feasible Plan is to develop project cost estimates for all projects included in the adopted Needs Plan. This task was completed by PBS&J with assistance from the TPO staff, FDOT staff and local government staff. Project costs were developed through the use of various forms of information including the following: FDOT District Two general transportation costs Specific project costs from completed PD&E studies Specific project costs from local government design plans Project costs are primarily based on estimates developed through the use of the FDOT District Two general costs per mile. This is a publication developed by the District to develop planning level project costs and is regularly updated based on actual costs the District is incurring. Where specific data was unavailable from a completed PD&E study, an assumption was made about the costs per mile for new construction or widening an existing facility, and whether the project was in an urban or rural area. Project cost estimates were developed for each phase of the project where applicable. These typical phases include the following: The first phase is the Project Development and Environmental (PD&E) study, which must be completed for transportation projects to evaluate corridor alternatives, solicit public input, and receive concept approvals. The second phase is Final Design, which is the development of a complete set of detailed design drawings of the selected corridor concept. (Final Design also is referred to as Preliminary Engineering (P.E.) The third phase is Right-of-Way (ROW), which involves purchasing needed land and easements for construction and wetland or drainage mitigation. 2

8 The fourth phase is Construction, which involves the actual construction of the mobility project. A parallel phase is Construction Engineering and Inspection (CEI), which involves inspection of the construction project to insure compliance with the final design specifications. The total construction cost for a new project is the summation of costs for all five phases. Therefore, to develop total project costs, estimates for all phases are required. Costs for different phases have been assumed to be a within a range of the percentage of construction cost, as outlined below: PD&E 2% to 10% of Construction Cost Final Design 10% to 20% of Construction Cost Right-of-Way 10% to 100% of Construction Cost CEI 10% to 15% of Construction Costs Each project was reviewed to determine the complexities and issues facing it in order to estimate the appropriate percentage for each phase. These assumptions were reviewed by the LRTP Steering Committee, the TPO staff and the FDOT Staff. Construction costs, where possible, were obtained from authoritative studies either completed or underway. These studies include the Florida Strategic Intermodal System (SIS), local Capital Improvement Programs (CIP), or the FDOT Work Program. Project costs presented in this technical report were estimated by applying the above mentioned assumptions, wherever applicable, to PD&E, final design, or construction costs obtained from PD&E and or final design studies from the before mentioned sources. 3

9 Barring any readily available cost estimates from these sources, costs for construction phases were estimated by using cost data available from the FDOT. The unit cost method estimates the total construction cost of a roadway project, (Transit estimates were obtained from the Jacksonville Transportation Authority), by multiplying the total length of a project by the unit cost of construction for the particular facility type. Unit costs for highway are categorized based on construction type (new or widening project), location (urban or rural), existing number of lanes (ranging from zero to six), proposed number of lanes (ranging from two to eight), and facility type (divided or undivided, arterial or interstate). In developing the cost estimates for the Envision 2035 Needs Plan projects through this method, unit cost values have been obtained from FDOT s District Two general project costs. Table 2.1 provides a summary of the unit costs used for the development of the project cost estimates. 4

10 Table 2.1 FDOT Generic Cost Per Mile Area Type Number of Lanes Description Cost Per Mile Rural 2 New Construction Undivided Arterial $2,486,073 4 New Construction Divided Arterial $3,545,579 6 New Construction Divided Arterial $5,898,440 4 Widen Existing 2 Lane to 4 Lane Divided Arterial $2,716,845 6 Widen Existing 4 Lane to 6 Lane Divided Arterial $3,033,083 Urban 2 New Construction Undivided Arterial $4,939,337 4 New Construction Divided Arterial $7,482,557 6 New Construction Divided Arterial $8,391,013 4 Widen Existing 2 Lane to 4 Lane Divided Arterial $5,131,985 6 Widen Existing 4 Lane to 6 Lane Divided Arterial $4,522,407 8 Widen Existing 6 Lane to 8 Lane Divided Arterial $4,898,534 6 Widen 4 Lane Interstate to 6 Lane Interstate $7,349,223 8 Widen 6 Lane Interstate to 8 Lane Interstate $7,880,091 Source: FDOT Generic Cost Per Mile updated as of: 07/02/09 These unit costs were reviewed by the LRTP Steering Committee and accepted for use in the development of planning level costs for the Envision 2035 LRTP update. 5

11 2.1 Transit Projects The transit projects included in the Envision 2035 Needs Plan go well beyond any transit projects included in previous LRTPs. This plan focused on the long-range, high capacity, regional transit projects vs. the local JTA bus system that is in place today. Therefore, little consideration was given to increasing headways, purchase of new busses, creating new local bus routes and the like. Instead, this LRTP took the visionary step of identifying a multi-modal system in which commuter rail, Bus Rapid Transit (BRT), street car, and Skyway facilities which will be supported by a restructured local bus system and the roadway network. Through the partnership with JTA, the TPO has included the JTA regional transit strategies in the Envision 2035 Needs Plan. Through information developed by JTA, cost estimates for each of their strategic initiatives have been used in the development of the Cost Feasible Plan. These costs include construction of parallel rail, commuter rail stations, BRT lanes, and purchase of vehicles. These transit investments will likely have similar phases to the major roadway phases discussed earlier. Table 2.2 presents the estimated projects costs for the Envision 2035 Adopted Needs Plan. 6

12 Table 2.2 Adopted Needs Plan Cost Estimates Roadway Project Cost Corridor From To Description (2009 $) Blanding Blvd (SR 21) CR 218 Old Jennings Rd Clay Widen to 6 Lanes $40.1 Cheswick Oak Ave Extension Branan-Field Rd (SR 23) Cheswick Oak Ave Clay New 4 Lane Road $37.1 College Dr Extension Blanding Blvd (SR 21) Cheswick Oak Ave Clay New 4 Lane Road $41.4 CR 218 US 301 SR 21 Clay Widen to 4 Lanes $95.6 CR 218 SR 21 Henley Road (CR 739) Clay Widen to 4 Lanes $38.7 CR 218 Extension Henley Road (CR 739) First Coast Outer Beltway Clay New 4 Lane Road $33.4 CR 218 Extension First Coast Outer Beltway CR 315 Clay New 4 Lane Road $26.0 CR 315 SR 16 CR 315B Clay Widen to 4 Lanes $29.5 CR 315 CR 315B US 17 Clay Widen to 4 Lanes $7.1 Doctors Inlet Rd (CR 220) Blanding Blvd (SR 21) College Ave Clay Widen to 4 Lanes $48.6 Doctors Inlet Rd (CR 220) College Ave US 17 Clay Widen to 6 Lanes $30.0 First Coast Outer Beltway Blanding Blvd (SR 21) US 17 Clay New 4 Lane Expressway $522.0 First Coast Outer CR 218 Clay New Interchange $42.0 Governors Park Rd US 17 SR 16 Clay New 4 Lane Road $71.8 Henley Rd / Russell Rd (CR 739) CR 218 Doctors Inlet Rd (CR 220) Clay Widen to 4 Lanes $38.7 SR 16 CR 218 Oakridge Ave (SR 15A) Clay Widen to 4 Lanes $54.7 SR 21 SR 16 Blanding Blvd (CR 215) Clay Widen to 4 Lanes $34.3 US 17 Town Center Blvd CR 315 Clay Widen to 6 Lanes $18.1 US 17 Clay Interchange Modification $9.8 First Coast Outer Beltway US 17 I-95 Clay / St. Johns New 6 Lane Expressway $810.0 Clay County Sub Total $2,028.8 Total 7

13 Table 2.2 Adopted Needs Plan Cost Estimates Roadway Project Cost Corridor From To Description (2009 $) North of New Berlin Rd Alta Drive Realignment Zoo Pkwy (SR 105) (south) Duval New 4 Lane Road $13.1 Alta Drive New Berlin Rd (south) SR 9A (I-295) Duval Widen to 4 Lanes $8.9 Alta Drive / Yellow Bluff Rd SR 9A (I-295) New Berlin Rd (north) Duval Widen to 4 Lanes $17.0 Baymeadows Rd Philips Hwy (US 1) Baymeadows Way Duval Widen to 6 Lanes $5.3 Baymeadows Rd Western Way Southside Blvd (SR 115) Duval Widen to 6 Lanes $8.8 Beaver Street (US 90) Otis Rd I-295 Duval Widen to 4 Lanes $56.4 Beaver Street (US 90) I-295 Edgewood Ave Duval Widen to 4 Lanes $22.6 Blanding Blvd (SR 21) I-295 Morse Ave Duval Widen to 6 Lanes $16.5 Branan-Field/Chaffee Rd (SR 23) Blanding Blvd (SR 21) 103rd St (SR 134) Duval Convert to 4/6 Lane Expwy $140.4 Branan-Field/Chaffee Rd (SR 23) 103rd St (SR 134) New World Avenue Duval Widen to 4/6 Lane Expwy $36.4 New/Modified Branan-Field/Chaffee Rd (SR 23) I-10 Beaver Street (US 90) Duval Interchanges $78.0 Collins Rd Blanding Blvd (SR 21) Pine Verde Duval Widen to 4 Lanes $9.8 Collins Rd Realignment Pine Verde Roosevelt Blvd (US 17) Duval New 4 Lane Road $63.0 Duval Rd Airport Center Dr Main St (US 17) Duval Widen to 4 Lanes $11.6 Eastport Rd / Pulaski Rd Heckscher Dr (SR 105) SR 9A (I-295) Duval Widen to 3 Lanes $17.9 Hart / Mathews Bridge Gator Bowl Blvd A. Phillip Randolph Blvd Ramps Duval Widen to 6 Lanes $6.3 Girvin Rd Atlantic Blvd (SR 10) Ashley Melisse Duval Widen to 4 Lanes $17.0 Girvin Rd Ashley Melisse Wonderwood Dr Duval Widen to 3 Lanes $8.6 Hart Expwy - Downtown Hart Bridge (SR 228) (SR 228) Atlantic Blvd (SR 10) Duval New 6 Lane Bridge $198.0 Hart Expwy - Downtown (SR 228) Hart Bridge Downtown Duval Rehabilitate $40.5 Hartley Rd San Jose Blvd (SR 13) Old St. Augustine Rd Duval Widen to 3 Lanes $9.6 Total 8

14 Table 2.2 Adopted Needs Plan Cost Estimates Roadway Project Cost Corridor From To Description (2009 $) US 301 Duval Interchange Modification $124.9 I-10 US 301 Branan Field/Chaffee Rd (SR 23) Duval Widen to 6 Lanes $113.1 I-295 I-95 (South) SR 13 Duval Add Aux. Lanes (8 Lanes) $77.0 I-295 I-10 Commonwealth Blvd Duval Widen to 6 Lanes** $35.2 Pritchard Rd Duval Interchange Modification $19.5 I-295 Commonwealth Blvd I-95 (North) Duval Widen to 6 Lanes** $151.8 Southside Blvd (SR 115) Duval Interchange Modification $57.0 I-95 State/Union St Zoo Pkwy (SR 105) Duval Widen to 8 Lanes** $78.9 I-295 / SR 9A (North) Duval Interchange Modification $57.0 Duval Rd / Airport Rd Duval Interchange Modification $57.0 J. Turner Butler Blvd (SR 202) Philips Hwy (US 1) I-95 Duval Interchange Modification $116.3 JIA North Access Road Airport Rd I-95 (Pecan Park Rd Interchange) Duval New 4 Lane Road $40.8 Kernan Blvd J. Turner Butler Blvd (SR 202) Glen Kernan Pkwy Duval Widen to 6 Lanes $9.7 Main St (US 17) New Berlin Rd Duval Road Duval Widen to 4 Lanes $24.5 Main St (US 17) Duval Road Pecan Park Rd Duval Widen to 4 Lanes $22.0 New 6 Lane Bridge Mathews Bridge (US 90 / SR 115) MLK Jr. Pkwy. (Alt. US 1) University Blvd (SR 109) Duval (+Transit) $255.0 MLK Jr. Pkwy (Alt US 21st St Duval New/Modified Interchange $57.0 New Kings Rd (US 1 / 23) Edgewood Ave (SR 111) I-295 Duval Widen to 6 Lanes $24.5 New Kings Rd (US 1 / 23) I-295 Old Kings Rd Duval Widen to 6 Lanes $40.1 Norfolk Southern Railroad Overpass West 12th St New Kings Rd (US 23) Duval New 3 Lane Road/Bridge $24.9 Normandy Blvd (SR 228) US 301 Bell Road (Equestrian Park) Duval Widen to 4 Lanes $54.7 Total 9

15 Table 2.2 Adopted Needs Plan Cost Estimates Roadway Project Cost Corridor From To Description (2009 $) Normandy Blvd (SR 228) First Coast Outer Beltway Cassat Ave (SR 111) Duval Widen to 6 Lanes $69.3 Old St. Augustine Rd Greenland / Loretto Rd I-295 Duval Widen to 6 Lanes $6.1 Old St. Augustine Rd Bartam Park Blvd Philips Hwy (US 1) Duval Widen to 6 Lanes $15.8 US 301 / Northern Outer Outer Beltway Connector Beaver Street (US 90) Beltway Duval New 4 Lane Expressway $133.1 Pecan Park Rd I-95 Main St (US 17) Duval Widen to 4 Lanes $5.4 Nocatee Pkwy / Racetrack Philips Hwy (US 1) Rd SR 9B Duval Widen to 6 Lanes $19.9 Philips Hwy (US 1) SR 9B SR 9A (I-295) Duval Widen to 6 Lanes $23.0 Philips Hwy (US 1) I-95 (Avenues) J. Turner Butler Blvd (SR 202) Duval Widen to 6 Lanes $37.5 J. Turner Butler Blvd (SR Philips Hwy (US 1) 202) Emerson St (SR 126) Duval Widen to 6 Lanes $31.6 Pulaski Rd / Starratt Rd SR 9A (I-295) Duval Station Rd Duval Widen to 4 Lanes $25.1 Rampart / Firestone Rd Argyle Forest Blvd 103rd St (SR 134) Duval Widen to 4 Lanes $31.2 Salisbury Rd Extension Belfort Rd Baymeadows Rd (SR 152) Duval New 3 Lane Road $16.1 Shindler Drive Argyle Forest Blvd Collins Rd Duval Widen to 3 Lanes $5.9 Shindler Drive Collins Rd 103rd St (SR 134) Duval Widen to 3 Lanes $7.4 Southside Blvd (SR 115) Philips Hwy (US 1) I-95 Ramps Duval Widen to 6 Lanes $15.0 J. Turner Butler Blvd (SR Southside Blvd (SR 115) 202) Beach Blvd (US 90) Duval Widen to 6 Lanes $20.5 Southside Blvd (SR 115) Beach Blvd (US 90) Atlantic Blvd (SR 10) Duval Widen to 6 Lanes $19.7 Southside Blvd (SR Atlantic Duval New Interchange $57.0 SR 9A (I-295) I-95 (South) SR 9B Duval Widen to 6 Lanes** $22.1 SR 9A (I-295) SR 9B J. Turner Butler Blvd (SR 202) Duval Widen to 6 Lanes** $35.3 J. Turner Butler Blvd (SR Southside Connector (SR SR 9A (I-295) 202) 113) Duval Widen to 6 Lanes** $57.5 Total 10

16 Table 2.2 Adopted Needs Plan Cost Estimates Roadway Project Cost Corridor From To Description (2009 $) SR 9A Heckscher Dr Duval Interchange Modification $57.0 SR 9A (I-295) Heckscher Drive (SR 105) I-95 (North) Duval Widen to 6 Lanes** $65.0 SR 9B I-95 US1 Duval New 4 Lane Expressway $121.0 SR 9B Extension Racetrack Rd I-95 Duval New 4 Lane Expressway $59.6 Touchton Rd Belfort Rd Southside Blvd (SR 115) Duval Widen to 4 Lanes $7.0 US 301 / SR 200 US 301 (south of Baldwin) US 301 (north of Baldwin) Duval New 4-Lane Road (Bypass) $161.7 Commonwealth Av Duval Interchange Modification $57.0 Trout River Blvd Garden St New Kings Rd (US 1 / 23) Duval Widen to 4 Lanes $19.9 Old Middleburg Rd 103rd St (SR 134) Wilson Blvd Duval Widen to 4 Lanes $17.9 Dunn Ave (SR 104) New Kings Rd (US 1/23) I-295 Duval Widen to 4 Lanes $22.9 Dunn Ave Extension Old Kings Rd New Kings Rd (US 1 / 23) Duval New 4 Lane Road $5.1 Duval Station Rd Main St (US 17) Starrat Rd Duval Widen to 4 Lanes $12.9 Eastport Rd Main St (US 17) Pulaski Rd Duval Widen to 3 Lanes $11.8 MLK Pkwy (US 1) RR Crossing Duval Overpass $21.0 MLK Pkwy (US 1) RR Crossing Duval Overpass $21.0 Old Kings Rd RR Crossing Duval Overpass $14.0 SR A1A Wonderwood Dr NS Mayport Gate Duval Widen to 4 Lanes $15.9 Wonderwood Mayport Rd Duval New Interchange $57.0 Arlington University Blvd Duval Interchange Modification $12.5 SR 9B US1 SR 9A (I-295) Duval New 4 Lane Expressway $43.0 First Coast Outer Beltway I-10 Blanding Blvd (SR 21) Duval / Clay New 6 Lane Expressway $468.0 Lem Turner Rd (SR 115) I-295 New Kings Rd (US 1 / 23) Duval / Nassau Widen to 4 Lanes $87.0 Total 11

17 Table 2.2 Adopted Needs Plan Cost Estimates Roadway Project Cost Corridor From To Description (2009 $) Main St (US 17) Pecan Park Rd SR 200 / A1A Duval / Nassau Widen to 4 Lanes $69.8 Northern Outer Beltway I-10 I-95 Duval / Nassau New 4 Lane Expressway $787.9 I-10 Nassau/Baker County Line US 301 Duval / Nassau / Baker Widen to 6 Lanes $76.3 I-95 International Golf Pkwy SR 9A (I-295) Duval / St. Johns Widen to 8 Lanes* $278.2 Duval County Subtotal $5,451.0 East Nassau Connector I-95 Chester Rd Nassau New 4 Lane Road $93.4 East Nassau Connector Nassau New Interchange $49.5 SR 200 / A1A I-95 East of CR 107 Nassau Widen to 6 Lanes $142.7 US 301 / SR 200 North of Baldwin South of Callahan Nassau Widen to 4 Lanes $258.7 Chester Rd SR A1A Green Pine Road Nassau Widen to 4 Lanes $20.9 I-10 Parallel Corridor SR 121 (Baker County) US 301 Nassau / Baker New 4 Lane Road $162.8 Nassau County Subtotal $727.9 CR 16A SR 16 First Coast Outer Beltway St. Johns Widen to 4 Lanes $32.9 CR 16A / CR 210 SR 13 Greenbriar Rd St. Johns Widen to 4 Lanes $31.2 CR 210 Greenbriar Rd Cimmarone Blvd St. Johns Widen to 4 Lanes $19.9 C E Wilson Road (east of I- CR ) US 1 St. Johns Widen to 4 Lanes $23.4 CR US 1 St. Johns New Interchange $55.5 CR 210 Roscoe Blvd Mickler Rd St. Johns Widen to 4 Lanes $12.1 CR 2209 Extension CR 208 SR 16 St. Johns New 4 Lane Road $47.0 Total 12

18 Table 2.2 Adopted Needs Plan Cost Estimates Roadway Project Cost Corridor From To Description (2009 $) CR 2209 Extension SR 16 International Golf Pkwy St. Johns New 4 Lane Road $11.5 CR 2209 Extension International Golf Pkwy First Coast Outer Beltway St. Johns New 4 Lane Road $49.5 CR 2209 Extension First Coast Outer Beltway CR 210 St. Johns New 4 Lane Road $34.7 First Coast Outer CR 2209 St. Johns New Interchange $42.0 CR 210 St. Johns Interchange Modification $57.0 Leo Maguire Pkwy Extension CR 16A CR 2209 Extension St. Johns New 4 Lane Road $44.4 Mickler Rd Palm Valley Rd (CR 210) A1A St. Johns Widen to 4 Lanes $12.1 Racetrack Rd (west of SR Racetrack Rd Realignment 9B) US 1 St. Johns New 4 Lane Road $40.8 SR 16 CR 16A CR 13A St. Johns Widen to 4 Lanes $13.4 SR 16 CR 13A CR 2209 Extension St. Johns Widen to 4 Lanes $9.3 SR 16 CR 2209 Extension Prime Outlet Mall St. Johns Widen to 4 Lanes $37.9 SR 16 I-95 SR 313 (SR 312 Extension) St. Johns Widen to 6 Lanes $20.5 SR 16 Connector SR 16 CR 2209 Extension St. Johns New 4 Lane Road $26.0 SR 207 I-95 South Holmes Blvd St. Johns Widen to 6 Lanes $26.0 SR 312 US 1 SR A1A St. Johns Widen to 6 Lanes $22.8 SR 313 (SR 312 Extension) SR 207 CR 214 (King St) St. Johns New 4 Lane Road $24.3 SR 313 (SR 312 Extension) CR 214 (King St) SR 16 St. Johns New 6 Lane Road $36.3 SR 313 (SR 312 Extension) SR 16 US 1 St. Johns New 6 Lane Road $66.5 SR 9B Extension CR 2209 Extension Racetrack Rd St. Johns New 4 Lane Road $25.5 SR A1A Mickler Rd South of CR 210 St. Johns Widen to 4 Lanes $25.9 SR A1A Solana Rd J. Turner Butler Blvd (SR 202) St. Johns Widen to 6 Lanes $15.3 US 1 SR 206 Lewis Point Rd St. Johns Widen to 6 Lanes $47.5 Total 13

19 Table 2.2 Adopted Needs Plan Cost Estimates Roadway Project Cost Corridor From To Description (2009 $) US 1 SR 313 (SR 312 Extension) International Golf Pkwy St. Johns Widen to 6 Lanes $22.2 US 1 International Golf Pkwy Nocatee Pkwy / Racetrack Rd St. Johns Widen to 6 Lanes $60.9 SR 206 St. Johns Interchange Modification $57.0 SR 207 St. Johns Interchange Modification $57.0 St Johns County Subtotal $1,108.3 Roadway Subtotal $9,316.0 Notes: * Additional lanes on I-95 south of I-295 should be tolled lanes to discourage competition with the FEC commuter rail line ** Where appropriate, new capacity should be managed lanes *** If necessary, additional funds may be available from Bridge Reconstruction/Maintenance Total 14

20 Table 2.2 Adopted Needs Plan Cost Estimates Transit Project Cost Corridor From To Description (2009 $) Commuter Rail Southwest Ext. Green Cove Springs Palatka Clay / Putnam Limited Service (CSX) $236.3 BRT East Downtown Jacksonville Jax. Beach (via Regency) Duval High Frequency Service $36.3 BRT North Gateway Mall Jacksonville International Airport Duval High Frequency Service $12.2 BRT Northwest Downtown Jacksonville I-295 / SR 115 (via Gateway Mall) Duval High Frequency Service $26.2 BRT South Regency Square Mall Avenues Mall (via Southside Blvd) Duval High Frequency Service $27.0 BRT Southeast Downtown Jacksonville Avenues Mall (via Philips Hwy) Duval High Frequency Service $23.6 BRT Southwest Downtown Jacksonville Orange Park (via Blanding Blvd) Duval High Frequency Service $37.5 Commuter Rail West Downtown Jacksonville Baldwin Duval Limited Service (CSX) $170.1 Skyway Extension Downtown Jacksonville Forest Street (Brooklyn) Duval High Frequency Service $14.0 Skyway Extension Kings Ave. Station Atlantic Blvd (San Marco) Duval High Frequency Service $21.0 Jacksonville Municipal Streetcar East Downtown Jacksonville Stadium Duval High Frequency Service $14.0 Streetcar North Downtown Jacksonville Springfield (Shands) Duval High Frequency Service $42.0 Streetcar South Baptist Hospital / MOSH Kings Avenue Duval High Frequency Service $35.0 Streetcar West Downtown Jacksonville Five Points Duval High Frequency Service $35.0 Total 15

21 Table 2.2 Adopted Needs Plan Cost Estimates Transit Project Cost Corridor From To Description (2009 $) Streetcar West Phase 2 Five Points Riverside (King Street) Duval High Frequency Service $14.0 Streetcar West Phase 3 Riverside (King Street) Avondale (FSCJ) Duval High Frequency Service $28.0 Transportation Center Duval Intermodal Facility $96.0 JAXPORT Container Terminal Duval Intermodal Facility $108.8 Commuter Rail Southwest Downtown Jacksonville Green Cove Springs Duval / Clay Limited Service (CSX) $263.3 Green Cove Springs / Duval / Clay / Waterborne Transit Service Downtown Jacksonville Orangedale St. Johns Limited Service $56.0 Commuter Rail North Downtown Jacksonville Yulee Duval / Nassau Limited Service (CSX) $322.7 Commuter Rail Northwest Downtown Jacksonville Callahan Duval / Nassau Limited Service (CSX) $179.6 Duval / St. Commuter Rail Southeast Downtown Jacksonville St. Augustine Johns Limited Service (FEC) $232.2 Commuter Rail North Ext. Yulee Fernandina Beach Nassau Limited Service (CSX) $122.9 Commuter Rail West Ext. Baldwin MacClenny Nassau / Baker Limited Service (CSX) $85.1 St. Johns / Commuter Rail Southeast Ext. St. Augustine Palm Coast Flagler Limited Service (FEC) $255.2 Transit Subtotal $2,493.6 Grand Total $11,809.6 Total 16

22 3.0 Project Scoring The Envision 2035 LRTP Update was guided by a series of goals and objectives. Creating goals and objectives is an important step to update the North Florida TPO Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) and guides the plan s development. These goals and objectives are the policy statement of the North Florida TPO. In crafting the goals and objectives, federal transportation legislation, local government comprehensive plans, the North Florida Regional Council s Strategic Regional Policy Plan, and the 2030 LRTP goals and objectives were utilized as sources to help shape the 2035 LRTP goals and objectives. Planning requirements of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) were used as a guide when drafting the goals and objectives and are shown below. Table 3.1 Eight SAFETEA-LU Planning Factors 1 Support the economic vitality of the metropolitan area, especially by enabling global competitiveness, productivity, and efficiency. 2 Increase the safety of the transportation system for motorized and non-motorized users. 3 Increase the security of the transportation system for motorized and non-motorized users. 4 Increase the accessibility and mobility of people and for freight. 5 Protect and enhance the environment, promote energy conservation, improve the quality of life, and promote consistency between transportation improvements and State and local planned growth and economic development patterns. 6 Enhance the integration and connectivity of the transportation system, across and between modes, for people and freight. 7 Promote efficient system management and operation. 8 Emphasize the preservation of the existing transportation system. 17

23 Table 3.2 below presents the relationship between the 8 Planning Factors and the Goals and Objectives developed for the Envision 2035 Plan Update. Table 3.2 Inclusion of Planning Factors in Envision 2035 Update Objective A.1 A.2 A.3 A.4 A.5 B.1 B.2 B.3 B.4 B.5 C.1 C.2 C.3 C.4 C.5 C.6 C.7 D.1 D.2 D.3 D.4 D.5 D.6 D.7 E.1 E.2 E.3 E.4 E.5 F.1 F.2 F.3 F.4 G.1 Planning Factor 1 Planning Factor 2 Planning Factor 3 Planning Factor 4 Planning Factor 5 Planning Factor 6 Planning Factor 7 Planning Factor 8 18

24 Table 3.2 Inclusion of Planning Factors in Envision 2035 Objective G.2 G.3 G.4 G.5 G.6 G.7 G.8 G.9 G.10 H.1 H.2 H.3 H.4 H.5 H.6 I.1 I.2 J.1 J.2 J.3 J.4 Planning Factor 1 Planning Factor 2 Planning Factor 3 Planning Factor 4 Planning Factor 5 Planning Factor 6 Planning Factor 7 Planning Factor 8 Emerging Issues The following issues were outlined by the FDOT Office of Policy Planning as a part of their Metropolitan and Regional Planning Support coordination efforts in the support document entitled, FHWA Strategies for LRTP Updates. These topics are not currently required by federal laws and rules to be addressed in LRTPs. As such, TPOs are not required to include these considerations in their current planning processes and plans. However, given the nature of the issues, FDOT encourages each TPO to begin addressing these emerging issues. Each TPO has the discretion to determine whether or not to address these topics in their LRTP, and the appropriate level of detail. Depending upon when new federal surface transportation 19

25 legislation is enacted, new requirements may have to be addressed just prior to this round of LRTP adoptions, or LRTP amendments may be needed soon after this round of LRTPs is adopted to comply with the new legislation. Addressing these issues early on may minimize the level of future effort needed to achieve compliance. Indirect and Cumulative Impacts: A discussion of indirect and cumulative effects and an evaluation of the level of effect would be appropriate at the overall plan level, rather than just at the project level. This information could be expanded upon during the project development project phase, but the initial groundwork can be laid during LRTP development. Mulitmodal Feasibility: The analysis for utilizing other modes, particularly evaluating transit on a plan and system wide level, as opposed to project level, could and should be explored to provide more efficient and effective mobility and connectivity of the entire multimodal transportation system. This process is especially relevant given the current situation with limited resources for transportation being a major issue. Performance Measurement: As funding for transportation capacity projects becomes more limited, increasing emphasis will be placed on maximizing the efficiency and effectiveness of our current transportation system. As congestion management processes and operations strategies are evaluated to determine their effectiveness in improving system performance, it is likely to follow that LRTPs will also need to be evaluated on their ability to improve system performance. As TPOs begin the LRTP update process, performance measures to assess the LRTP s effectiveness in increasing system performance should be developed. Air Quality: Although Florida is currently in attainment for all pollutants, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has recently proposed changes to lower the threshold for ground level ozone which will affect the attainment status of a number of TPO areas within Florida. Although the effects and the exact areas affected are not certain at this time, it is prudent to begin looking at what would be required to meet the new standards if/when they are implemented, which could be in the next few years. This is particularly important for those TPOs in areas that have been identified as potential areas that may not meet new standards. Discussions will be initiated with EPA, the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (DEP), FHWA and FDOT 20

26 to decide how best address this issue. Training has been requested by FHWA for FDOT and the TPOs on Air Quality and Conformity for the coming year. Climate Change: Much attention has been given by all levels of government to the issue of climate change and how it affects all aspects of life, including the transportation system. Legislation was recently passed in Florida that encourages each TPO to consider strategies that integrate transportation and land use planning in their LRTP to provide for sustainable development and reduce greenhouse gas emissions, as well as include energy considerations in all state, regional and local planning. As a result, it is anticipated that the TPO LRTP Updates will include discussions and strategies aimed addressing this issue. FHWA also supports and recognizes the importance of exploring the effects of climate change on transportation, as well as the limited environmental resources and fuel alternatives. FHWA s recently released report; Integrating Climate Change Considerations into the Transportation Planning Process ( serves as a good resource on this topic. These emerging issues were considered and addressed in the formulation of the Goals for the Envision 2035 Long-Range Transportation Plan Update. The following table shows which Envision 2035 LRTP Goals correspond to the emerging issues outlined above. Table 3.3 Emerging Issues Incorporation in Envision 2035 Emerging Issue Corresponding LRTP Goal Indirect & Cumulative Impacts Goals #A & G Multimodal Feasibility Goal #B, E, & F Performance Measurement Goal #E Air Quality Goal #G Climate Change Goal #G 21

27 Florida Transportation Plan The 2025 Florida Transportation Plan (FTP) identifies goals, objectives, and strategies to guide transportation decisions in Florida over the next 20 years. The FTP addresses how Florida s transportation system can meet the mobility needs of our growing population, help make our economy more competitive, help build great communities, and help preserve our natural environment. The FTP also addresses how to ensure that our transportation system is safe and secure in a time of unprecedented public concern. Finally, the FTP provides guidance on how transportation investments should be focused during a time of constrained funding, as well as how public and private transportation partners can most effectively work together to make these decisions. The FTP includes five adopted Goals: A. Goal: A safer and more secure transportation system for residents, businesses, and visitors. B. Goal: Enriched quality of life and responsible environmental stewardship. C. Goal: Adequate and cost-efficient maintenance and preservation of Florida s transportation assets. D. Goal: A stronger economy through enhanced mobility for people and freight. E. Goal: Sustainable transportation investments for Florida s future. The table below shows how the Envision 2035 Goals incorporate the five identified Goals of the 2025 FTP. 22

28 Table 3.4 Incorporation of Florida Transportation Plan Goals in Envision 2035 FTP Goal Corresponding LRTP Goal A Goals #H & I B Goal # G C Goal #E D Goal #B E Goals #E & G Technical Report 1A provides additional detail on the development of the Goals and Objectives. 3.1 Evaluation Criteria Evaluation criteria were drafted that stem from the goals and objectives created for the Envision 2035 LRTP. The purpose of crafting evaluation criteria is to have a tool to measure whether potential projects are aligned with the policy goals of the North Florida TPO. To create the evaluation criteria, the goals and objectives of the LRTP were translated into Key Performance Indicators. These indicators are measured numerically. Each indicator was assigned a score of zero, one, or two. An indicator with zero points describes the least desirable result, while an indicator with two points described the most desirable result. Therefore, the project that yielded the highest total cumulative score is most aligned with the policies identified in the LRTP goals and objectives. As with the process of creating the Envision 2035 Goals and Objectives, the formulation of the evaluation criteria involved much review and revision by TPO committees and by the public. Prior to being released to the TPO Committees and the public, the draft evaluation criteria were applied to six TPO FY 2013 / 2014 Priority Projects. The top three State Highway Capacity Projects (Clay St. Johns Connector, Matthews Bridge, and Branan Field / Chaffee Road), top one SIS Highway Project (SR AIA / SR 200), and top two mass transit projects (Jacksonville Regional Transportation Center and Regional Rapid Transit System) were selected to score. The purpose of scoring the priority projects with the evaluation criteria is to give context to how the 23

29 evaluation criteria function when applied to real projects. By using this method, the TPO committees and the public were able to view the draft evaluation criteria and to see how these five priority projects would rank using the evaluation criteria. This allowed the stakeholders to be more informed when making recommendations for revisions to the evaluation criteria. This test of the evaluation criteria resulted in the projects receiving scores consistent with their current ranking. Based on this test, it was felt the evaluation criteria were tracking with the current methodology for establishing project priorities. The set of evaluation criteria, which has been revised based on stakeholder comments, are listed below (Please note that Goal A did not pertain to the project identification or evaluation process and therefore no evaluation criteria was drafted related to it). GOAL B: TO KEEP PEOPLE AND GOODS MOVING AND HELP OUR REGION S ECONOMY GROW. Key Performance Indicators: Promote Intermodal Access Score Project will not enhance or create access to a port, airport, rail or other intermodal facility. Project will enhance or create access to a port, airport, rail or other intermodal facility

30 Promote Access to Major Employment Centers Score Project will not increase access to a major employment center. 0 Project will increase access to a major employment center. 1 Promote Transportation Corridor Connectivity Project will not increase connectivity / continuity between existing or planned transportation corridors. Project will increase connectivity / continuity between existing or planned transportation corridors. Score 0 1 GOAL C: TO INCREASE THE ACCESSIBILITY OF OUR TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM. Key Performance Indicators: Mobility Options / Transit Accessibility Score Project unlikely to diversify current mobility options. 0 Project supports rideshare, van pool programs, transit-friendly design including bicycle and pedestrian facilities, and fully accessible bus stops. Project provides for enhanced transit capacity and transit-friendly design

31 GOAL D: PROMOTE CONSISTENCY WITH THE PLANS OF EACH CITY AND COUNTY, OTHER REGIONAL AGENCIES, AND THE STATE AND RECOGNIZE THE INTER-RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LAND USE, TRANSPORTATION, AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. Key Performance Indicators: Consistency with Local Government Comprehensive Plan Goals, Objectives, and Policies Project not consistent with the local government comprehensive plan goals, objectives, and policies. Project consistent with the local government comprehensive plan goals, objectives, and policies. Score 0 1 Consistency with Regional Plan Goals, Objectives, and Policies Project not consistent with applicable regional plan goals, objectives, and policies, including those produced by the FDOT, the Northeast Florida Regional Council, and other local and regional authorities. Project is consistent with applicable regional plan goals, objectives, and policies, including those produced by the FDOT, the Northeast Florida Regional Council, and other local and regional authorities. Score 0 1 Consistency with TPO Plans Score Project not consistent with TPO plans and policies. 0 Project consistent with TPO plans and policies. 1 26

32 Project Status Score Project with no funding in TIP. 0 Project listed as TPO project priority but not included in the TIP. 1 Project with one or more phases funded in current TIP. 2 GOAL E: MAXIMIZE THE EXISTING TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM TO MEET THE NEEDS OF TODAY AND TOMORROW. Key Performance Indicators: Congestion Management Strategies Score (ITS, signal coordination, intersection modification, queue jumping, bus only lanes) Congestion management strategies have not been considered. 0 Congestion management strategies have been analyzed. 1 Congestion management strategies have been included. 2 Existing Capacity Deficiency Give priority to facilities that are currently deficient or projects that relieve congestion. Score Presently LOS A-D or less than 90% of capacity 0 Presently LOS E or 90-99% of capacity 1 Presently LOS F, 100% or higher 2 27

33 Add Travel Lanes only when Congestion Management Strategies are insufficient Year 2035 V/C Ratio without additional improvements Score GOAL F: TO IMPROVE THE CONNECTIVITY OF OUR TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM BY BETTER CONNECTING TRAVEL MODES. Key Performance Indicators: Multi-Modal or Intermodal Connectivity The project does not improve options for multi-modal travel (for example, a transfer point from one mode to another such as a parkand-ride or an intermodal rail yard). Score 0 The project enhances opportunities for connections between modes. 1 The project is designed to create an opportunity for connections between modes. 2 28

34 GOAL G: TO PROTECT OUR ENVIRONMENT, CONSERVE ENERGY AND ENHANCE OUR QUALITY OF LIFE. Key Performance Indicators: Promote Sustainable Development Score Project could promote urban sprawl. 0 Project could promote urban infill or Transit-oriented development. 2 Community Impacts Score Project likely to have a severe impact on residential, commercial, environmental or cultural features. 0 Project will have a moderate negative impact. 1 Project not likely to have a negative impact. 2 Title VI Area Impacts Score Project has no positive impact to/from/within Title VI areas. 0 Project may improve accessibility to/from/within Title VI areas. 1 Project likely to improve economic opportunities to/from/within Title VI areas. 2 29

35 GOAL H: TO MAKE OUR TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM SAFER. Evacuation Routes Score The project is not on a designated hurricane evacuation route. 0 The project is on a hurricane evacuation route. 2 Road Safety Score The project is not a road or intersection safety project. 0 The project is a road or intersection safety project. 2 Railroad Crossing Safety The project impacts a railroad crossing and does not provide an enhanced crossing that will reduce vehicle / train conflict points The project impacts a railroad crossing and provides an enhanced crossing that reduces vehicle / train conflict points Score 0 1 The project does impact a railroad crossing safely by providing for the closure / elimination of one or more railroad grade crossings. 2 30

36 3.2 Application of the Evaluation Criteria An evaluation matrix was created to apply the evaluation criteria scores to individual projects. Projects included in the Envision 2035 adopted Needs Plan and the evaluation criteria discussed above were combined in this matrix and ranked according to the sum of all individual scores. Table 3.5 provides individual scores against evaluation criteria measures for all projects adopted in the Envision 2035 Needs Plan The scoring presented in Table 3.5 was reviewed and ultimately agreed upon by the LRTP Steering Committee. 31

37 Project # Table 3.5 Needs Plan Evaluation Matrix Project Name From To Description Average Score Roadway Projects 79 Mathews Bridge (US 90 / SR 115) MLK Jr. Pkwy. (Alt. US 1) University Blvd (SR 109) New 6 Lane Bridge (+Transit) MLK Jr. Pkwy (Alt US 21st St New/Modified Interchange Arlington University Blvd Interchange Modification Southside Blvd (SR 115) J. Turner Butler Blvd (SR 202) Beach Blvd (US 90) Widen to 6 Lanes Alta Drive Realignment Zoo Pkwy (SR 105) New Berlin Rd (south) New 4 Lane Road Duval Rd / Airport Rd Interchange Modification Philips Hwy (US 1) I-95 (Avenues) J. Turner Butler Blvd (SR 202) Widen to 6 Lanes Blanding Blvd (SR 21) I-295 Morse Ave Widen to 6 Lanes SR 200 / A1A I-95 East of CR 107 Widen to 6 Lanes CR US 1 New Interchange Blanding Blvd (SR 21) CR 218 Old Jennings Rd Widen to 6 Lanes 0.88 Hart / Mathews Bridge 43 Gator Bowl Blvd A. Phillip Randolph Blvd Ramps Widen to 6 Lanes I-295 I-10 Commonwealth Widen to 6 Lanes J. Turner Butler Blvd (SR 202) Philips Hwy (US 1) I-95 Interchange Modification SR 312 US 1 SR A1A Widen to 6 Lanes Branan-Field/Chaffee Rd (SR 23) Blanding Blvd (SR 21) 103rd St (SR 134) Convert to 4/6 Lane Expwy Commonwealth Av Interchange Modification I-295 / SR 9A Interchange Modification JIA North Access Road Airport Rd I-95 (Pecan Park Rd Interchange) New 4 Lane Road SR 9A Heckscher Dr Interchange Modification Hart Expwy - Downtown (SR 228) Hart Bridge Downtown Rehabilitate 0.82 Bold Italics denote TPO Priority Projects 32

38 Project # Roadway Projects Table 3.5 Needs Plan Evaluation Matrix Project Name From To Description 143 Old Middleburg Rd 103rd St (SR 134) Wilson Blvd Widen to 4 Lanes SR 9A (I-295) SR 9B J. Turner Butler Blvd (SR 202) Widen to 6 Lanes SR 9A (I-295) J. Turner Butler Blvd (SR 202) Southside Connector (SR 113) Widen to 6 Lanes SR A1A Solana Rd J. Turner Butler Blvd (SR 202) Widen to 6 Lanes Touchton Rd Belfort Rd Southside Blvd (SR 115) Widen to 4 Lanes Collins Rd Realignment Pine Verde Roosevelt Blvd (US 17) New 4 Lane Road 0.81 US 301 (north of 134 US 301 / SR 200 US 301 (south of Baldwin) Baldwin) New 4-Lane Road (Bypass) Branan-Field/Chaffee Rd (SR 23) 103rd St (SR 134) New World Avenue Widen to 4/6 Lane Expwy SR 313 (SR 312 Extension) SR 207 CR 214 (King St) New 4 Lane Road Beaver Street (US 90) I-295 Edgewood Ave Widen to 4 Lanes Eastport Rd Main St (US 17) Pulaski Rd Widen to 3 Lanes Eastport Rd / Pulaski Rd Heckscher Dr (SR 105) SR 9A (I-295) Widen to 3 Lanes Philips Hwy (US 1) J. Turner Butler Blvd (SR 202) Emerson St (SR 126) Widen to 6 Lanes Baymeadows Rd Philips Hwy (US 1) Baymeadows Way Widen to 6 Lanes Baymeadows Rd Western Way Southside Blvd (SR 115) Widen to 6 Lanes Southside Blvd (SR 115) Beach Blvd (US 90) Atlantic Blvd (SR 10) Widen to 6 Lanes SR 9A (I-295) Heckscher Drive (SR 105) I-95 (North) Widen to 6 Lanes US 1 SR 206 Lewis Point Rd Widen to 6 Lanes US 17 Town Center Blvd CR 315 Widen to 6 Lanes US 301 / SR 200 North of Baldwin South of Callahan Widen to 4 Lanes MLK Pkwy (US 1) RR Crossing Overpass 0.75 Bold Italics denote TPO Priority Projects Average Score 33

39 Project # Roadway Projects Table 3.5 Needs Plan Evaluation Matrix Project Name From To Description 149 MLK Pkwy (US 1) RR Crossing Overpass Norfolk Southern Railroad Overpass West 12th Street New Kings Rd (US 23) New 2 Lane Road/Bridge Old Kings Rd RR Crossing Overpass First Coast Outer Beltway I-10 Blanding Blvd (SR 21) New 6 Lane Expressway First Coast Outer Beltway Blanding Blvd (SR 21) US 17 New 4 Lane Expressway First Coast Outer Beltway US 17 I-95 New 6 Lane Expressway Pritchard Rd Interchange Modification US 17 Interchange Modification SR 206 Interchange Modification SR 207 Interchange Modification Southside Blvd (SR Atlantic New Interchange Alta Drive New Berlin Rd (south) SR 9A (I-295) Widen to 4 Lanes Alta Drive / Yellow Bluff Rd SR 9A (I-295) New Berlin Rd (north) Widen to 4 Lanes CR 210 C E Wilson Road (east of I-95) US 1 Widen to 4 Lanes Doctors Inlet Rd (CR 220) Blanding Blvd (SR 21) College Ave Widen to 4 Lanes Dunn Ave (SR 104) New Kings Rd (US 1/23) I-295 Widen to 4 Lanes Hart Bridge (SR 228) Hart Expwy - Downtown (SR 228) Atlantic Blvd (SR 10) New 6 Lane Bridge Henley Rd / Russell Rd (CR 739) CR 218 Doctors Inlet Rd (CR 220) Widen to 4 Lanes I-10 US 301 Branan Field/Chaffee Rd (SR 23) Widen to 6 Lanes Southside Blvd (SR 115) Philips Hwy (US 1) I-95 Ramps Widen to 6 Lanes SR 207 I-95 South Holmes Blvd Widen to 6 Lanes SR A1A Mickler Rd South of CR 210 Widen to 4 Lanes 0.71 Bold Italics denote TPO Priority Projects Average Score 34

40 Project # Roadway Projects Table 3.5 Needs Plan Evaluation Matrix Project Name From To Description 118 SR 313 (SR 312 Extension) SR 16 US 1 New 6 Lane Road Duval Rd Airport Center Dr Main St (US 17) Widen to 4 Lanes US 301 Interchange Modification CR 210 Interchange Modification Philips Hwy (US 1) SR 9B SR 9A (I-295) Widen to 6 Lanes SR 313 (SR 312 Extension) CR 214 (King St) SR 16 New 6 Lane Road I-295 Commonwealth I-95 (North) Widen to 6 Lanes I-95 Bowden Rd Philips Hwy (US 1) Widen to 8 Lanes Kernan Blvd J. Turner Butler Blvd (SR 202) Glen Kernan Pkwy Widen to 6 Lanes US 1 SR 313 (SR 312 Extension) International Golf Pkwy Widen to 6 Lanes Main St (US 17) New Berlin Rd Duval Road Widen to 4 Lanes Main St (US 17) Duval Road Pecan Park Rd Widen to 4 Lanes Philips Hwy (US 1) Nocatee Pkwy / Racetrack Rd SR 9B Widen to 6 Lanes First Coast Outer CR 218 New Interchange First Coast Outer CR 2209 New Interchange Southside Blvd (SR 115) Interchange Modification Salisbury Rd Extension Belfort Rd Baymeadows Rd (SR 152) New 3 Lane Road CR 16A / CR 210 SR 13 Greenbriar Rd Widen to 4 Lanes CR 218 US 301 SR 21 Widen to 4 Lanes CR 218 SR 21 Henley Road (CR 739) Widen to 4 Lanes Duval Station Rd Main St (US 17) Starrat Rd Widen to 4 Lanes I-10 Brannan-Field/Chafee Rd (SR 23) I-295 Widen to 8 Lanes 0.59 Bold Italics denote TPO Priority Projects Average Score 35

41 Project # Roadway Projects Table 3.5 Needs Plan Evaluation Matrix Project Name From To Description 57 I-295 I-95 (South) SR 13 Add Aux. Lanes (8 Lanes) I-95 State/Union St Zoo Pkwy (SR 105) Widen to 8 Lanes New Kings Rd (US 1 / 23) Edgewood Ave (SR 111) I-295 Widen to 6 Lanes Pecan Park Rd I-95 Main St (US 17) Widen to 4 Lanes SR 16 CR 218 Oakridge Ave (SR 15A) Widen to 4 Lanes 0.59 SR 313 (SR SR 16 I-95 Extension) Widen to 6 Lanes SR 21 SR 16 CR 215 Widen to 4 Lanes SR 9A (I-295) I-95 (South) SR 9B Widen to 6 Lanes Trout River Blvd Garden St New Kings Rd (US 1 / 23) Widen to 4 Lanes US 1 International Golf Pkwy Nocatee Pkwy / Racetrack Rd Widen to 6 Lanes Governors Park Rd US 17 SR 16 New 4 Lane Road Racetrack Rd Realignment Racetrack Rd (west of SR 9B) US 1 New 4 Lane Road Wonderwood Mayport Road New Interchange Chester Rd SR A1A Green Pine Road Widen to 4 Lanes Doctors Inlet Rd (CR 220) College Ave US 17 Widen to 6 Lanes Branan-Field/Chaffee Rd (SR 23) I-10 Beaver Street (US 90) New/Modified Interchanges 0.53 First Coast Outer 25 CR 218 Extension Henley Road (CR 739) Beltway New 4 Lane Road CR 218 Extension First Coast Outer Beltway CR 315 New 4 Lane Road 0.53 New Kings Rd (US 1 / 145 Dunn Ave Extension Old Kings Rd 23) New 4 Lane Road East Nassau Connector New Interchange SR 16 Connector SR 16 CR 2209 Extension New 4 Lane Road 0.53 Bold Italics denote TPO Priority Projects Average Score 36

42 Project # Roadway Projects Table 3.5 Needs Plan Evaluation Matrix Project Name From To Description 124 SR 9B I-95 SR 9A (I-295) New 4 Lane Expressway SR 9B Extension Racetrack Rd I-95 New 4 Lane Expressway SR A1A Wonderwood Dr NS Mayport Gate Widen to 4 Lanes Beaver Street (US 90) Otis Rd I-295 Widen to 4 Lanes Collins Rd Blanding Blvd (SR 21) Pine Verde Widen to 4 Lanes CR 315 SR 16 CR 315B Widen to 4 Lanes CR 315 CR 315B US 17 Widen to 4 Lanes I-10 I-295 Roosevelt Expwy (US 17) Widen to 8 Lanes I-95 Southside Blvd (SR 115) Ramps J. Turner Butler Blvd (SR 202) Widen to 8 Lanes Lem Turner Rd (SR 115) I-295 New Kings Rd (US 1 / 23) Widen to 4 Lanes Old St. Augustine Rd Greenland / Loretto Rd I-295 Widen to 6 Lanes Shindler Drive Argyle Forest Blvd Collins Rd Widen to 3 Lanes Shindler Drive Collins Rd 103rd St (SR 134) Widen to 3 Lanes SR 16 CR 13A CR 2209 Extension Widen to 4 Lanes SR 16 CR 2209 Extension Prime Outlet Mall Widen to 4 Lanes Main St (US 17) Pecan Park Rd SR 200 / A1A Widen to 4 Lanes CR 210 Greenbriar Rd Cimmarone Blvd Widen to 4 Lanes CR 210 Roscoe Blvd Mickler Rd Widen to 4 Lanes Girvin Rd Atlantic Blvd (SR 10) Ashley Melisse Widen to 4 Lanes Girvin Rd Ashley Melisse Wonderwood Dr Widen to 3 Lanes I-10 CR 125 (Baker County) US 301 Widen to 6 Lanes I-95 International Golf Pkwy SR 9A (I-295) Widen to 8 Lanes 0.47 Bold Italics denote TPO Priority Projects Average Score 37

43 Project # Roadway Projects Table 3.5 Needs Plan Evaluation Matrix Project Name From To Description 69 I-95 Duval Rd SR 200 / A1A Widen to 8 Lanes Old St. Augustine Rd Bartam Park Blvd Philips Hwy (US 1) Widen to 6 Lanes Pulaski Rd / Starratt Rd SR 9A (I-295) Duval Station Rd Widen to 4 Lanes SR 16 CR 16A CR 13A Widen to 4 Lanes College Dr Extension Blanding Blvd (SR 21) Cheswick Oak Ave New 4 Lane Road SR 9B Extension CR 2209 Extension Racetrack Rd New 4 Lane Road East Nassau Connector I-95 Chester Rd New 4 Lane Road Outer Beltway Connector Beaver Street (US 90) US 301 / Northern Outer Beltway New 4 Lane Expressway CR 16A SR 16 First Coast Outer Beltway Widen to 4 Lanes Hartley Rd San Jose Blvd (SR 13) Old St. Augustine Rd Widen to 3 Lanes Mickler Rd Palm Valley Rd (CR 210) A1A Widen to 4 Lanes New Kings Rd (US 1 / 23) I-295 Old Kings Rd Widen to 6 Lanes 0.41 Bell Road (Equestrian 86 Normandy Blvd (SR 228) US 301 Park) Widen to 4 Lanes Normandy Blvd (SR 228) First Coast Outer Beltway Cassat Ave (SR 111) Widen to 6 Lanes Rampart / Firestone Rd Argyle Forest Blvd 103rd St (SR 134) Widen to 4 Lanes CR 2209 Extension CR 208 SR 16 New 4 Lane Road CR 2209 Extension SR 16 International Golf Pkwy New 4 Lane Road 0.40 First Coast Outer 29 CR 2209 Extension International Golf Pkwy Beltway New 4 Lane Road CR 2209 Extension First Coast Outer Beltway CR 210 New 4 Lane Road I-10 Parallel Corridor SR 121 (Baker County) US 301 New 4 Lane Road 0.40 Bold Italics denote TPO Priority Projects Average Score 38

44 Project # Roadway Projects Table 3.5 Needs Plan Evaluation Matrix Project Name From To Description 75 Leo Maguire Pkwy Extension CR 16A CR 2209 Extension New 4 Lane Road Northern Outer Beltway I-10 I-95 New 4 Lane Expressway Cheswick Oak Ave Extension Branan-Field Rd (SR 23) Cheswick Oak Ave New 4 Lane Road 0.33 Transit Projects X Transportation Center Multimodal Hub 1.46 G Commuter Rail North Downtown Jacksonville Yulee Limited Service (CSX) 1.43 H Commuter Rail North Ext. Yulee Fernandina Beach Limited Service (CSX) 1.43 I Commuter Rail Northwest Downtown Jacksonville Callahan Limited Service (CSX) 1.43 J Commuter Rail Southeast Downtown Jacksonville St. Augustine Limited Service (FEC) 1.43 K Commuter Rail Southeast Ext. St. Augustine Palm Coast Limited Service (FEC) 1.43 L Commuter Rail Southwest Downtown Jacksonville Green Cove Springs Limited Service (CSX) 1.43 M Commuter Rail Southwest Ext. Green Cove Springs Palatka Limited Service (CSX) 1.43 N Commuter Rail West Downtown Jacksonville Baldwin Limited Service (CSX) 1.43 O Commuter Rail West Ext. Baldwin Macclenney Limited Service (CSX) 1.43 A BRT East Downtown Jacksonville Jax. Beach (via Regency) High Frequency Service 1.38 B BRT North Gateway Mall Jacksonville International Airport High Frequency Service 1.38 C BRT Northwest Downtown Jacksonville I-295 / SR 115 (via Gateway Mall) High Frequency Service 1.38 D BRT South Regency Square Mall Avenues Mall (via Southside Blvd) High Frequency Service 1.38 E BRT Southeast Downtown Jacksonville Avenues Mall (via Philips Hwy) High Frequency Service 1.38 Bold Italics denote TPO Priority Projects Average Score 39

45 Project # Transit Projects Table 3.5 Needs Plan Evaluation Matrix Project Name From To Description F BRT Southwest Downtown Jacksonville Average Score Orange Park (via Blanding Blvd) High Frequency Service 1.38 P Skyway Extension Downtown Jacksonville Forest Street (Brooklyn) High Frequency Service 1.38 Q Skyway Extension Kings Ave. Station Atlantic Blvd (San Marco) High Frequency Service 1.38 R Streetcar East Downtown Jacksonville Jacksonville Municipal Stadium High Frequency Service 1.38 S Streetcar North Downtown Jacksonville Springfield (Shands) High Frequency Service 1.38 T Streetcar South Baptist Hospital / MOSH Kings Avenue High Frequency Service 1.38 U Streetcar West Downtown Jacksonville Five Points High Frequency Service 1.38 V Streetcar West Phase 2 Five Points Riverside (King Street) High Frequency Service 1.38 W Streetcar West Phase 3 Riverside (King Street) Avondale (FSCJ) High Frequency Service 1.38 Y Waterborne Transit Service Downtown Jacksonville Green Cove Springs (Orangedale) Limited Service 1.23 Bold Italics denote TPO Priority Projects 40

46 4.0 Financial Resources Forecasts As stated in the introduction, the adopted Envision 2035 Needs Plan is unconstrained by financial resources. Thus, a key component to the development of the Cost Feasible Plan is the identification of the funding sources that can reasonably be expected to be available through the year The importance of this step has been highlighted by federal regulations requiring the plan to be financially constrained and staged into the Year of Expenditure. In accordance with these regulations, a financial plan was developed which was used in the development of the Cost Feasible Plan. Some of the information contained in the financial resources document was the result of financial projections prepared by the Central Office of FDOT on behalf of the Districts and the TPOs. 4.1 Existing Federal and State Sources of Revenue Transportation funding sources based on motor vehicle fuel taxes tend to fluctuate with changes in fuel prices and fuel consumption. Traditional transportation revenue sources are no longer considered constant over extended periods. One reason for this is an increase in the unwillingness of state and local elected officials to modify fuel-taxing levels. Another reason is the realization that transportation facilities throughout Florida are in need of improvement, and available sources are scarce to accomplish major transportation projects. 4.2 Federal Funding Sources Federal funding for transportation in the North Florida region consists primarily of distributions from the Federal Highway Trust Fund. The Federal government imposes taxes on gasoline, diesel fuel, special fuels, neat alcohol, compressed natural gas, gasohol, tires, truck and trailer sales, and heavy vehicle use. Revenues from these Federal taxes are deposited into either the Highway Account or the Mass Transit Account of the Federal Highway Trust Fund. The Federal 41

47 Highway Administration (FHWA) and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) distribute the funds in the Highway Account and the Mass Transit Account to each state through a system of formula grants and discretionary allocations. Federal excise taxes on fuel have been adjusted several times over the past 50 years. Currently, the motor fuel tax on gasoline is 18.4 cents per gallon. Tax on diesel fuels is currently 24.4 cents per gallon and the tax on neat alcohol is set at 9.25 cents per gallon. Table 4.1 depicts the rates for all fuels and other user fees as of September

48 Table 4.1 Federal Highway User Fees Distribution of Tax (Cents per Gallon) User Fee Tax Rate (Cents per Gallon) Highway Trust Fund Highway Account Mass Transit Account Leaking Underground Storage Tank Trust Fund General Fund Gasoline Diesel and Kerosene Fuel Special Fuels Liquefied Petroleum Gas Liquefied Natural Gas Gasohol Compressed Natural Gas Other Taxes All Proceeds to Highway Account Tires Truck and Trailer Sales Heavy Vehicle Use Tax is imposed on tires sold by manufacturers, producers, or importers at the rate of $.0945 ($ in the case of a bias ply or super single tire) for each 10 pounds of the maximum rated load capacity over 3,500 pounds. 12 percent of retailer s sales price for tractors and trucks over 33,000 pounds gross vehicle weight (GVW) and trailers over 26,000 pounds GVW. Annual Tax: Trucks 55,000-75,000 pounds GVW, $100 plus $22 for each 1,000 pounds (or fraction thereof) in excess of 55,000 pounds Trucks over 75,000 pounds GVW, $550 Source: FHWA Office of Highway Policy Information, Highway Statistics 2007, Table FE-21B. September

49 4.3 State Fuel Taxes The state highway fuel tax was initiated in 1921 at the rate of one cent per gallon. Periodic increases occurred until 1971, when the rate changed to eight cents per gallon. The proceeds of this fuel tax were shared equally between FDOT and local governments. In April 1983, FDOT s share of the state fuel tax was repealed. The remaining four cents continues to be distributed to counties (three cents per gallon) and municipalities (one cent per gallon). Fuel Sales Tax In place of the repealed FDOT share of the state fuel tax, a sales tax was applied on all gasoline and diesel fuels. The revenue generated by the sales tax was distributed to FDOT. The state fuel sales tax was applied at the State s general sales tax rate of five percent. The application of this tax to fuel sales differs considerably from the method used on all eligible sales. Whereas a sales tax is typically applied against the total amount of a retail sale at the time of the purchase, the sales tax on fuel is applied at the wholesale point of distribution against a legislated retail price per gallon. Currently, the state fuel sales tax is 12.1 cents per gallon. Taxes for Local Government Distribution Constitutional Gas Tax A state tax of 2 cents per gallon on motor fuel is levied and distributed to Florida counties based on a formula contained in the State Constitution. The priority for the proceeds of the Constitutional Gas Tax is to meet the debt service requirements, if any, on local bond issues. Any remaining resources are credited to the counties transportation trust funds. Eighty percent of the surplus may be distributed to FDOT for the construction and maintenance of 44

50 state roads and bridges. The remaining 20 percent of resources may aid Boards of County Commissioners on county road and bridge projects. County Gas Tax The county fuel tax is levied on motor fuel at the rate of 1 cent per gallon. The proceeds are to be used by counties for transportation-related expenses, including the reduction of bond indebtedness incurred for transportation purposes. It is the legislative intent that these proceeds be used for such purposes in order to reduce the burden of county ad valorem taxes. The proceeds are allocated to each county via the same distribution formula used for distributing the constitutional fuel tax. Municipal Fuel Tax Revenues from this one cent per gallon are transferred into the Revenue Sharing Trust Fund for Municipalities. Municipal Gas Tax revenues may be used for transportation-related expenditures within incorporated areas. These include the purchase of transportation facilities and rights-of-way, construction, or maintenance of roads. State Comprehensive Enhanced Transportation System (SCETS) Tax The State Comprehensive Enhanced Transportation System (SCETS) Tax was initially set in each county at two-thirds of all local option fuel taxes that existed in each county. For example, in counties where six cents of Local Option Gas Tax were levied, the SCETS Tax was equal to four cents. While the proceeds of the SCETS Tax are not shared directly with local governments, they must be spent in the respective FDOT District, and to the extent feasible, in the county in which they were collected. Currently, the SCETS Tax rate is 6.7 cents in all counties within the North Florida TPO. 45

51 4.4 Other Fuel Taxes/Fees Other fuel taxes and vehicle fees exist in the State of Florida as well. These include the following: Aviation Fuel Tax The State of Florida imposes an aviation fuel tax of 6.9 cents per gallon. The fuel is used in aircraft, and also includes aviation gasoline and aviation turbine fuels and kerosene. The revenues generated from this tax are limited to aviation projects only. The funds are deposited into the Fuel Tax Collection Trust Fund, and then distributed to the State Transportation Trust Fund. Motor Vehicle License Tax The Motor Vehicle License Tax charges an annual fee for operating motor vehicles, mopeds, motorized bicycles, and mobile homes. These revenues are deposited into the State Transportation Trust Fund to support the Florida Seaport Transportation and Economic Development Program. A onetime fee on $100 is charged in the State of Florida for first time registration of newly purchased vehicles. Seventy percent of these revenues go into the State Transportation Trust Fund. The remaining proceeds are directed to the General Revenue Fund. Title Fee A $24 fee is charged to all motor vehicles when issuing a certification of title. A total of $21 is deposited into the State Transportation Trust Fund. The remaining $3 is distributed to the General Fund. 46

52 Rental Car Surcharge A $2.00 per day surcharge exists throughout Florida on car rentals. This surcharge applies for only the first thirty days of the rental. Seventy-five percent of these proceeds are deposited into the State Transportation Fund. In addition to the previous listed taxes, the State of Florida requires a series of special purpose additional Fuel Taxes and fees. The following elements make up the total of 2.2 cents per gallon charged to consumers: Coastal Protection Tax Pursuant to Section (1), Florida Statutes, resources are set aside to provide assistance in Coastal Protection. This fund requires a tax of two cents per barrel on diesel, gasoline, and gasohol. Water Quality Tax An additional five cents per barrel of diesel, gasoline, and gasohol purchased is directed toward the Water Quality Fund. Inland Protection Tax Pursuant to Section (3), Florida Statutes, 80 cents per barrel of diesel, gasoline, gasohol purchased are levied for the Inland Protection. Agricultural Inspection Fee All diesel, gasoline, gasohol purchases are taxed at cents per gallon, pursuant to Section , Florida Statutes. Table 4.2 shows a summary of all fuel and vehicle taxes that are collected at the state level. 47

53 Table 4.2 Summary of State of Florida Taxes and Fees Source Rate Fuel Sales Tax 12.1 cents per gallon Local Government Taxes Constitutional Tax County Tax Municipality Tax SCETS Tax 2.0 cents per gallon 1.0 cents per gallon 1.0 cents per gallon 6.7 cents per gallon Other Fuel Taxes/Fees Aviation Fuel Tax Motor Vehicle License Tax 6.9 cents per gallon Varies Title Fee $24.00 per title 1 Rental Car Surcharge $2.00 per day 1 Coastal Protection Tax Water Quality Tax Inland Protection Tax Agricultural Inspection Tax cents per gallon 0.12 cents per gallon 1.9 cents per gallon cents per gallon 1 Only a portion of the revenues generated by the Title Fee and the Rental Car Surcharge go to the State Transportation Trust Fund. 48

54 4.5 Summary of Federal and State Revenues The FDOT District 2 Planning office provided estimates of state and federal transportation funding for the North Florida TPO area for years 2014 through The forecast categorizes FDOT s major programs into capacity and non-capacity programs. Each category is described below. Capacity Programs Revenues from the capacity programs are used to expand the capacity of existing transportation systems. The capacity programs support two main goals: economic competitiveness and quality of life. Funds are distributed among the following categories: Economic Competitiveness Strategic Intermodal System (SIS) / Florida Intrastate Highway System (FIHS) Eligible activities under this program include construction, improvement, and associated rightof-way for roads that are classified as part of the FIHS. Examples of roadways that are part of the FIHS include I-95, I-10, I-295, US 301, and SR 9A. Quality of Life Other Arterial Construction/ROW This program provides funding for improvements on the State Highway System (SHS) roadways that are not designated as FIHS. Activities funded through this program include capacity and traffic operations improvements, and land acquisition. Transit Funding assistance for operations and capital investments of transit, paratransit, and ridesharing programs. Transportation Management Area Funds (TMA) Areas with a population over 200,000 qualify for TMA funds. These areas must comply with special transportation planning requirements. The North Florida TPO is a TMA. 49

55 Non-Capacity Programs Revenues dedicated to the non-capacity program are typically used for preservation of the existing system. Some of the characteristic activities include the following: Resurfacing Maintenance of Bridges Operations and Maintenance Programs Engineering and Safety Programs Administration Activities In a typical Work Program cycle the non-capacity dollars make up approximately 50% to 60% of the Work Program s budget. Funding Summaries Table 4.3 details the level of funding estimated by FDOT to be available to the North Florida region in each of the capacity program categories as discussed above. This information is shown in Year of Expenditure dollars. 50

56 Table 4.3 Federal and State Revenues forecasted for the North Florida Region 2035 Revenue Forecast Update (Millions) In Year of Expenditure Dollars Fiscal Year Capacity Program Emphasis Area Year Total Economic Competitiveness SIS/FIHS Construction/ROW $83.6 $461.2 $758.6 $521.4 $586.2 $2,411.0 Quality of Life Other Arterial Construction*/ROW Transit** TMA Funds Total Capacity Programs $ $ $ $ $1, $4, *Other Arterial Construction forecasted revenues include Enhancement Program revenues, which are defined by SAFETEA-LU. See Supplement to the 2035 Revenue Forecast for additional information. **Transit forecasted revenues are considered minimums that should be provided for transit projects and programs to meet statutory requirements. Note: SIS values are based on projects within the NFTPO in the FDOT Draft 2035 SIS Cost Feasible Plan and are not based on allocation formulas. Source: FDOT District 2 Planning Office 51

57 4.6 Optional Revenue Sources Beyond the traditional Federal and State fuel taxes, several optional revenue sources are available for funding transportation improvement projects. These alternative revenue sources are the first local option gas tax, the second local option gas tax, and the Ninth-Cent gas tax. Additional sources consist of the Local Government Infrastructure Surtax, Toll Revenues, Bond Issues, Impact Fees, Municipal Services Taxing Units, the Transportation Outreach Program, and the County Incentive Grant Program. Local Option Gas Taxes (LOGT) In 1983, the Florida Legislature provided local governments with a major new source of revenue called the Local Option Gas Tax (LOGT). Up to 11 cents per gallon may now be levied to help fund a variety of transportation projects. These include the First LOGT (six cents) enacted in 1983, and the second LOGT (five cents) enacted in While each county within the study area currently collects LOGTs, the proceeds are commonly used for operations and maintenance activities as opposed to funding capacity improvements. First LOGT (Six Cents) A Local Option Gas Tax of up to six cents per gallon may now be levied for a maximum duration of 30 years. Implementation of one to six cents per gallon tax requires only a simple majority vote of the county commissioners. The proceeds of the tax must be shared with municipalities, either by a mutually agreed upon distribution scheme or, if agreement cannot be reached, by using a formula contained in the Florida Statutes. The formula requires the distribution of tax proceeds to be based on the transportation expenditures of each local government for the preceding five fiscal years, as a 52

58 proportion of the total of such expenditures for the county and all municipalities within the county. Local governments may pledge revenues from any portion of the First Local Option Gas Tax to repay state bonds issued on their behalf. In addition, a local government must use First Local Option Gas Tax revenues for transportation expenditures on the state or local highway systems or transit oriented capital purchases or operations. Transportation expenditures include rightof-way activities, roadway maintenance, and the construction of roads. Clay, Duval, Nassau, and St. Johns Counties all currently charge six cents per gallon on diesel, gasoline, and gasohol. The proceeds from this tax have historically been used for operations and maintenance activities. No funding assumptions were made in this plan update that included revenues from the LOGT. The tax may be relieved with a majority vote of the governing body of the county and provided that a redetermination of the method of distribution is established pursuant to F.S Second LOGT (Five Cents) The 1993 Florida Legislature extended the scope of the Local Option Gas Tax to include an additional fuel tax of up to five cents per gallon on motor fuel, including gasohol. Diesel fuel is not subject to this tax. The proceeds of the tax must be shared with municipalities, either by a mutually agreed upon distribution scheme, or by using the state formula. Pursuant to Section 336, Florida Statutes, local governments may only use revenues from the tax for transportation expenditures needed to meet the requirements of the capital improvements element of an adopted comprehensive plan. The Second Local Option Gas Tax has not been implemented in any county within the North Florida Region. Therefore, additional revenues are available for transportation projects with the implementation of up to five cents in all four counties. 53

59 The tax may be relieved with a majority vote of the governing body of the county and provided that a redetermination of the method of distribution is established pursuant to F.S Ninth-Cent Gas Tax The Ninth-Cent Gas Tax was initially authorized in 1972 by the Florida Legislature. The tax is limited to one cent per gallon on highway fuels. Originally, the tax could be proposed by a county s governing body, but it had to be approved by the electorate in a countywide referendum. The 1993 Florida Legislature allowed a county s government body to impose the tax by a majority plus one vote of its membership, without holding the referendum. Counties are not required to share revenue from the Ninth-Cent Gas Tax with municipalities; however, the proceeds of the tax may be shared with cities in whatever proportion is mutually agreed upon, and used for county or municipal transportation purposes. Clay and Nassau Counties currently charge a ninth-cent tax on all motor fuels. Duval and St. Johns Counties could realize additional revenues with implementation of the Ninth-Cent Tax on motor fuels. Toll Revenues Tolls may be collected on highways, bridges, and tunnels and can provide support for street and highway budgets. Revenues generated by tolls are normally sufficient to cover capital improvements and maintenance for the facilities where the tolls are being collected. Bond Issues Local governments are given the authority to issue General Obligation and Revenue Bonds. General Obligation Bonds are secured by full faith and credit of the issuer (a pledge of the 54

60 issuer s ad valorem taxing power). Revenue bonds are payable from a specific source of revenue and do not pledge the full faith of the issuer. These bonds must be approved by popular vote and can be used to fund major transportation projects. Impact Fees / Local Government Transportation Concurrency Transportation / roadway impact fees and performance standards place the burden of improvements on new developments. Impact fee ordinances and local government transportation concurrency requirements oblige new developments to pay a fair share for costs of improving existing roads or constructing new roads made necessary by new developments. Municipal Services Taxing Unit Municipal Services Taxing Units can be used to fund specific capital improvements, such as road and bridge maintenance by means of additional millage on taxable property. Initially, the costs of the proposed improvements are estimated, then the millage rate required to generate the revenue is determined. Ad Valorem Taxes According to Florida Statutes, local governments may levy ad valorem taxes on property subject to the following limitations: Ten mills for county purposes; Ten mills for municipal purposes; Ten mills for school purposes; A millage fixed by law for a county furnishing municipal services; and A millage authorized by law and approved by voters for special districts (e.g., the municipal services taxing units discussed above). 55

61 Transportation Regional Incentive Program (TRIP) The purpose of the program is to encourage regional planning by providing state matching funds for improvements to regionally significant transportation facilities identified and prioritized by regional partners. TRIP funds are to be used to match local or regional funds on a 50/50 basis or to match up to 50% of the total project costs for public transportation projects. Jacksonville Transportation Authority User Fees The user fees generated by JTA s transit system are another factor to consider in the revenue forecasting process. Traditionally, these revenues are used to help cover a portion of the operations and maintenance costs for the transit system. This may only be collected in Duval County. Public Private Partnerships Public-Private Partnerships (PPP) involves the private sector in the construction and / or operation of a facility in a manner that allows the government agency to effectively meet its objectives. Local Sales Tax Local Government Infrastructure Surtax The Local Option Sales Tax (also known as the Local Government Infrastructure Surtax) can be levied by county governing bodies at a rate of one-half percent or one percent for a period of up to 15 years. It is typically put in place through a countywide referendum. The tax applies to 56

62 all purchases subject to the regular six percent sales tax, except for sale amount purchases exceeding $5,000. Small County Surtax The Small County Surtax may be levied by any county having a population of 50,000 or less on April 1, 1992, at a rate of one-half percent or one percent. Nassau County was the only county in the North Florida TPO study area that met the population criterion in Nassau County implemented a 0.5 percent Small County Surtax for the period of one year on December 1993 to cover operating expenditures of the West Nassau landfill. The sales tax was reinstated at 1.0 percent in Levies from the Small County Surtax may be used for the operating costs of any infrastructure and any other purpose, excluding debt. However, levies from this revenue source currently are not used for transportation related expenditures. All four counties are eligible for the Local Infrastructure Surtax, which can be applied at either 0.5% or 1%. Clay County is the only county in the TPO Region who implements the Local Infrastructure Surtax, at a rate of 1%. Nassau County is eligible for the Small County Surtax and levies it at 1%. Counties cannot levy the Local Infrastructure Surtax and Small County Surtax in excess of a combined rate of 1%, so Nassau County cannot levy the Local Infrastructure Surtax. Duval County and St. Johns County both have additional revenue potential. Duval County Duval County currently applies 0.5 percent of the Local Infrastructure Surtax and 0.5 percent of the Charter County Transit System Surtax. Therefore, an additional 0.5 percent from each source is available for revenue generation. Revenue estimates from the sales tax levy of onehalf percent were forecasted using revenue estimates from the Florida Legislative Committee 57

63 on Intergovernmental Relations 1, and assuming an annual growth rate of five percent, based on taxable sales forecasted through 2015 developed by the University of Florida. 2 An additional one-half percent sales tax in Duval County would generate an estimated $7.1 billion (YOE dollars) between Fiscal Years 2010 and St. Johns County Currently, St. Johns County does not impose any portion of the Local Option Sales Tax. Therefore, St. Johns County can implement the Local Infrastructure Surtax up to one percent. Revenue estimates from the sales tax levy of one-half and one percent were forecasted using revenue estimates from the Florida Legislative Committee on Intergovernmental Relations 3, and assuming an annual growth rate of seven percent, based on taxable sales forecast through 2015 developed by the University of Florida. 4 The implementation of a one-half percent sales tax in St. Johns County is projected to generate an estimated $1.2 billion (YOE dollars) between Fiscal Years 2010 and Summary of Existing Local Revenue The primary purpose of this section is to present the funding sources in place for local governments of the North Florida Region to pay for transportation improvements. The next section describes the forecasting of funds expected to be available in the North Florida Region for funding transportation improvements. 1 Florida Department of Revenue, posted on the Legislative Committee of Intergovernmental Relations website 2 University of Florida, Bureau of Economic and Business Research. Florida Long-Term Economic Forecast 2002: Counties. 3 Florida Department of Revenue, posted on the Legislative Committee of Intergovernmental Relations website 4 University of Florida, Bureau of Economic and Business Research. Florida Long-Term Economic Forecast 2002: Counties. 58

64 As this section has shown, there are a variety of revenue sources available to local governments. Some provide the opportunity for a great deal of creativity by local authorities. Table 4.4 identifies which taxes are in place and to what level they are imposed in each county. Table 4.4 Existing and Potential Taxes for Transportation by County Clay Duval Tax Description Maximum Levied Remaining Maximum Levied Remaining First Local Option Gas Tax (cents / gallon) Second Local Option Gas Tax (cents / gallon) Ninth-Cent Gas Tax (cents / gallon) Constitutional Gas Tax (cents / gallon) County Gas Tax (cents / gallon) Municipality Gas Tax (cents / gallon) Local Infrastructure Surtax 1% 1% 0% 1% 0.5% 0.5% Charter County Transit System Surtax N/A N/A N/A 1% 0.5% 0.5% Nassau St. Johns Tax Description Maximum Levied Remaining Maximum Levied Remaining First Local Option Gas Tax (cents/gallon) Second Local Option Gas Tax (cents/gallon) Ninth-Cent Gas Tax (cents/gallon) Constitutional Gas Tax (cents/gallon) County Gas Tax (cents/gallon) Municipality Gas Tax (cents/gallon) Local Infrastructure Surtax / Small County Surtax 1% 1% 0% 1% 0% 1% Charter County Transit System Surtax N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Source: Local Government Financial Informational Handbook 59

65 4.7 Forecasting Revenue Sources The handbook and projections from the Florida Department of Revenue provide estimates of net proceeds from the various fuel tax revenue sources, as total revenues are subject to deductions to pay for administrative costs of collection and distribution and other statutory deductions. Therefore, one-cent revenues from the County Gas Tax are not equivalent to onecent revenues from the First LOGT. Furthermore, revenues from a one-cent tax on motor fuels are not equivalent to revenues from a one-cent tax on diesel fuels. These factors are taken into account when developing the revenue projections through the year 2035 for this LRTP update. An annual growth rate in motor fuel consumption of 1.84% was applied based on projections from Florida s Revenue Estimating Conference in March Federal and State Fuel Tax Revenues Table 4.5 contains the metropolitan area estimates at several time periods for state programs that affect the capacity of the transportation system to move people and goods. The estimates are expressed in Year of Expenditure (YOE) dollars. A total of $4.2 billion are expected to be available by the year 2035 for major roadway and transit projects. This does not include revenues from local developers, or those assumed from the First Coast Outer Beltway. 60

66 Table 4.5 Federal and State Revenues for the North Florida Region through Revenue Forecast Update (Millions) In Year of Expenditure Dollars Fiscal Year Capacity Program Emphasis Area Year Total Economic Competitiveness SIS/FIHS Construction/ROW $387.9 $758.6 $521.4 $586.2 $2, Quality of Life Other Arterial Construction*/ROW Transit** TMA Funds Total Capacity Programs $ $ $ $ $1, $4, Note: SIS values are based on projects within the NFTPO in the FDOT Draft 2035 SIS Cost Feasible Plan and are not based on allocation formulas. *Other Arterial Construction forecasted revenues include Enhancement Program revenues, which are defined by SAFETEA-LU. See Supplement to the 2035 Revenue Forecast for additional information. **Transit forecasted revenues are considered minimums that should be provided for transit projects and programs to meet statutory requirements. Source: FDOT District 2 Planning Office Of this $4.2 billion in State and Federal revenue, $2.2 billion is dedicated to the SIS/FIHS. This amount is based on the projects currently identified in the FDOT Draft 2035 SIS Cost Feasible Plan within the North Florida TPO area. Should the projects in the FDOT SIS Cost Feasible Plan change, the amount identified for SIS Highways Construction / ROW will also change. Also, $ million is dedicated to Other Arterial Construction/ROW. These funds, the TMA funds, and the Transit funds will be allocated to the entire region. 61

67 4.8 Summary The projections of traditional existing revenue sources and alternative revenue sources in this Technical Report have provided information to the North Florida TPO in preparation of the 2035 Cost Feasible Plan. The adopted 2035 Cost Feasible Plan will identify which long-range transportation improvements are recommended for implementation, and which funding sources will be used for each recommended project. The majority of the local funding sources, both traditional and alternative, identified in this document has not been nor is the expected to be available for capacity projects. Historically these funds are programmed for operational and maintenance related projects. Based on discussions with local governments, this trend is expected to continue with few exceptions. Nassau County is expected to fund the Chester Road project with funds from several of the programs listed in this document. St. Johns County is expected to fund several projects with developer contributions. These funds will come on-line as developers construct various phases of approved development. The downturn in the economy could impact the construction schedule of several of these developer funded projects and their status should be monitored going forward. Table 4.6 presents the total projections for each revenue source described in previous sections. 62

68 Revenue Source Table 4.6 Summary of Total Revenues for Capacity Projects, (In millions) Fiscal Year Ye ar-total FIHS Construction/ROW $ $ $ $ $2, Other Arterial Construction/ROW $53.70 $ $ $ $ $ Transit* $38.23 $ $ $ $ $ TM A Funds $36.50 $96.60 $ $ $ $ Enhancement Funds $6.63 $17.54 $18.52 $19.06 $19.18 $80.93 Local Clay $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Duval $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Nassau $5.70 $20.10 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $25.80 St. Johns $0.00 $0.00 $51.10 $ $0.00 $ Public Priviate Partnership $0.00 $2, $62.20 $0.00 $0.00 $2,294 JTA-Funded Projects N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Total $ $ $1, $ $1, $6, * Does not include FTA Funds 63

69 5.0 Year 2035 Cost Feasible Plan At the August 13, 2009 North Florida TPO meeting, the TPO voted unanimously to approve the Envision 2035 LRTP Needs Plan. The Needs Plan contains a list of mobility projects needed through the year 2035, and concludes an 18 month process of working with citizens, local businesses, and local governments to identify transportation improvements within the region. It is important that the Needs Plan reflect a sense of vision about how transportation can affect the future of the First Coast through system-wide improvements and inclusion of all modes of travel. As such, consideration of costs is addressed after these needs are identified. The Needs Plan serves as the foundation for development of the Cost Feasible Plan. Assuming that the community s long term mobility needs are adequately addressed by the financially unconstrained nature of the Needs Plan, the Cost Feasible Plan is then carved out of the Needs Plan (assuming needs are greater than anticipated revenues) through a process of selecting projects for funding. The Envision 2035 Needs Plan identified nearly $12 billion in needed mobility projects to meet the travel demand forecasted between today and Given the region s limited available financial resources, it is not possible to fund all of the North Florida TPO s transportation needs. Thus, projects must be identified which will receive funding. The LRTP Steering Committee worked tirelessly over the course of three months matching revenue with projects. During this period several options were explored looking at various ways to leverage the limited financial resources of the area. It should be noted that FDOT has indicated that PD&E, Final Design and CEI do not need to be accounted for when determining the costs for projects that will be funded with the Arterial/TMA funds. Funds for these phases are assumed to be set aside at the District level to cover the cost of producing projects. 64

70 Two options for developing the Cost Feasible Plan were explored. The first was the traditional method where by projects are matched to funding based on the type of project and appropriate revenue. The projects included the SIS Cost Feasible Plan, Arterial/TMA funded projects and the Outer Beltway project (this is a public private partnership). The second option explored identified potential toll funded projects that free up SIS and Arterial/TMA funds for other projects. The following projects were identified as potential toll funded projects (the improvement would be to add a Special Use Lane or lanes which would be tolled. The entire Interstate facility would not become a toll facility): 1. I-295 from I-10 to I-95 North (Projects # 58 & 60) Widen to six lanes 2. I-95 from International Golf Parkway to SR9A (Project 62) Widen to eight lanes 3. I-95 from State/Union Street to Zoo Parkway (Project #66) Widen to eight lanes 4. SR9A from I-95 (South) to the Southside Connector (Projects # 119, 120, & 121) Widen to six lanes 5. SR9A from Heckscher Drive to I-95 North (Project # 123) Widen to six lanes Funding these projects as toll facilities frees up SIS funds and allows us to add the following projects to the SIS portion of the Cost Feasible Plan: 1. I-95 at CR210 Major Interchange Modification 2. I-95 at Southside Boulevard Interchange modification 3. I-95 at I-295/SR9A (North) Interchange Modification 4. I-95 at Duval Road/Airport Road Interchange Modification 5. MLK Jr Parkway at 21 st Street New/Modified Interchange 6. Heckscher Drive Interchange modification 7. US17 from Town Center Boulevard to CR315 Widen to 6 lanes 8. I-295 at US17 Interchange modification 9. SR9B from I-95 to US1 New 4 lanes expressway 65

71 The following projects were added to the Cost Feasible Plan to be funded with Arterial/TMA Funds which were freed up based on the other projects being funded with tolls: 1. Alta Drive Realignment from Zoo Parkway to North of New Berlin Road (South) New 4 lane road 2. Alta Drive from New Berlin Road (South) to SR9A Widen to 4 lanes 3. CR315 from SR16 to CR315B Widen to 4 lanes 4. CR315 from CR315B to US17 Widen to 4 lanes 5. Philips Highway from JTB to Emerson Widen to 6 lanes 6. Chester Road from SRA1A to East Nassau Connector Widen to 4 lanes 7. Arlington Expressway at University Boulevard Interchange Modification The LRTP Steering Committee scrutinized the aggressive nature of the assumptions regarding the use of tolls and redistribution of SIS funds that were assumed as part of this option. While the exercise was viewed as creative way to leverage the limited resources, ultimately the LRTP Steering Committee felt that assuming the level of tolling presented above was too aggressive and would not likely be supported be either the elected officials or the public. At this point the LRTP Steering Committee recommended moving forward with the traditional approach of matching expected revenue with projects from the adopted 2035 Needs Plan. Presented in Table 5.1 is the Envision 2035 Cost Feasible Plan. Note: Project cost estimates for roadway projects not on the SIS developed for the purpose of the Needs Plan development include costs for the following project phases: 1. Project Development and Environmental (PD&E) Studies 2. Project Engineering or Design (PE) 3. Construction Engineering Inspection (CEI) Based on conversations with FDOT District 2, these costs are assumed in project production and were not included in the cost estimates developed for the Other Arterial/TMA projects. Due to this the costs for the Other Arterial projects in the Cost Feasible plan are lower than those in the Needs Plan. 66

72 Table 5.1 Envision 2035 Cost Feasible Plan Project List Total Project Roadway Project Cost ID Corridor From To Description County (2009 $) SIS/FIHS Cost Feasible Plan Projects (2035 Draft SIS Cost Feasible Plan Revenues = $ Million) I-10 Branan- Field/Chaffee Rd (SR 23) 52 US rd St (SR 134) Nassau/ Baker County Line 53 I-10 US 301 New World Avenue Widen to 4/6 Lane Expwy Duval $36.4 US 301 Widen to 6 Lanes Duval $76.3 Branan Field/Chaffee Rd (SR 23) Interchange Modification Duval $124.9 Widen to 6 Lanes Duval $ I-295 I-95 (South) SR 13 Add Aux. Lanes (8 Lanes) Duval $ I-295 I-10 Commonwealth Widen to 6 Lanes** Duval $ Pritchard Rd Interchange Modification Duval $ I-95 International Golf Pkwy SR 9A (I-295) Widen to 8 Lanes* St Johns $ SR 200 / A1A I-95 East of CR 107 Widen to 6 Lanes Nassau $ SR 9A (I-295) Heckscher Drive (SR 105) I-95 (North) Widen to 6 Lanes** Duval $ SR 9B I-95 US US 301 / SR 200 US 301 / SR 200 US 301 (south of Baldwin) North of Baldwin US 301 (north of Baldwin) South of Callahan New 4 Lane Expressway New 4-Lane Road (Bypass) Widen to 4 Lanes Duval $121.0 Duval $161.7 Duval/ Nassau Notes: * Additional lanes on I-95 south of I-295 should be tolled lanes to discourage competition with the FEC commuter rail line ** Where appropriate, new capacity should be managed lanes *** If necessary, additional funds may be available from Bridge Reconstruction/Maintenance $258.7 $1,

73 Table 5.1 Envision 2035 Cost Feasible Plan Project List Total Project Roadway Project Cost ID Corridor From To Description County (2009 $) Arterial/TMA Cost Feasible Projects (Revenues = $ Million) 1 Alta Drive Zoo Pkwy North of New Berlin Realignment (SR 105) Rd (south) New 4 Lane Road Duval $ Blanding Blvd (SR 21) CR 218 Old Jennings Rd Widen to 6 Lanes Clay $ Cheswick Oak Branan-Field Ave Extension Rd (SR 23) Cheswick Oak Ave New 4 Lane Road Clay $ College Dr Blanding Extension Blvd (SR 21) Cheswick Oak Ave New 4 Lane Road Clay $ CR US 1 New Interchange St Johns $ CR 210 Interchange Modification St Johns $ I-295 / SR 9A (North) Interchange Modification Duval $ J. Turner Butler Philips Hwy Interchange I-95 Blvd (SR 202) (US 1) Modification Duval $ JIA North I-95 (Pecan Park Rd Airport Rd Access Road Interchange) New 4 Lane Road Duval $ Main St (US 17) New Berlin Rd Duval Road Widen to 4 Lanes Duval $ Main St (US 17) Duval Road Pecan Park Rd Widen to 4 Lanes Duval $ Mathews Bridge (US 90 / SR 115)*** MLK Jr. Pkwy. (Alt. US 1) University Blvd (SR 109) New Bridge (6 Lanes + Transit) Duval $ MLK Jr. Pkwy (Alt US 21st St New/Modified Interchange Duval $ Southside Blvd (SR Atlantic New Interchange Duval $ SR 313 (SR 312 Extension) SR 207 CR 214 (King St) New 4 Lane Road St Johns $ SR 313 (SR 312 CR 214 (King Extension) St) SR 16 New 6 Lane Road St Johns $ SR 313 (SR 312 Extension) SR 16 US 1 New 6 Lane Road St Johns $ SR 9A (I-295) SR 9B J. Turner Butler Blvd (SR 202) Widen to 6 Lanes** Duval $26.5 Racetrack Duval/St 126 SR 9B Extension I-95 New 4 Lane Expressway $48.5 Rd Johns 127 SR A1A Mickler Rd South of CR 210 Widen to 4 Lanes St Johns $20.0 Arlington University Blvd Interchange 153 Duval $10.0 Modification Notes: * Additional lanes on I-95 south of I-295 should be tolled lanes to discourage competition with the FEC commuter rail line ** Where appropriate, new capacity should be managed lanes *** If necessary, additional funds may be available from Bridge Reconstruction/Maintenance $

74 Table 5.1 Envision 2035 Cost Feasible Plan Project List Total Project Roadway Project Cost ID Corridor From To Description County (2009 $) Other Cost Feasible Projects (Local, Private, TRIP, Public Private Partnership Revenues = $1,958.5 Million) 28 1 CR 2209 International Golf SR 16 Extension Pkwy New 4 Lane Road St. Johns $ CR 2209 International First Coast Outer 29 Extension Golf Pkwy Beltway New 4 Lane Road St. Johns $ First Coast CR 2209 Outer Extension Beltway CR 210 New 4 Lane Road St. Johns $ First Coast Blanding Blvd (SR I-10 Outer Beltway 21) New 6 Lane Expressway Duval/Clay $ First Coast Blanding 39 Outer Beltway Blvd (SR 21) US 17 New 4 Lane Expressway Clay $ First Coast Outer Beltway US 17 I-95 New 6 Lane Expressway Clay/St Johns $ First Coast Outer CR 2209 New Interchange St. Johns $ Chester Rd SR A1A East Nassau Connector Widen to 4 Lanes Nassau $20.9 $1,958.5 Notes: 1 Project to be Funded Through Developer Funds Grand Total $4, Project to be Funded Through a Public Private Partnership as a Toll Facility 3 Project to be Funded with Local County Funds 69

75 Table 5.1 Envision 2035 Cost Feasible Plan Project List Total Project Roadway Project Cost ID Corridor From To Description County (2009 $) Transit Cost Feasible Projects (Revenues = $721.6 Million) A BRT East Downtown Jacksonville Jax. Beach (via Regency) Construction of High Frequency Service Duval $36.0 C BRT Northwest Downtown Jacksonville I-295 / SR 115 (via Gateway Mall) Construction of High Frequency Service Duval $26.0 D BRT South Regency Square Mall Avenues Mall (via Southside Blvd) Construction of High Frequency Service Duval $27.0 E BRT Southeast Downtown Jacksonville Avenues Mall (via Philips Hwy) Construction of High Frequency Service Duval $24.0 F G J L N/O R S U V Y BRT Southwest Commuter Rail North Commuter Rail Southeast Commuter Rail Southwest Downtown Jacksonville Downtown Jacksonville Downtown Jacksonville Downtown Jacksonville Orange Park (via Blanding Blvd) Yulee (construct to River City / JIA) St. Augustine Green Cove Springs Commuter Rail West Downtown Jacksonville Macclenney Downtown Jacksonville Streetcar East Jacksonville Municipal Stadium Downtown Streetcar North Jacksonville Springfield (Shands) Downtown Streetcar West Jacksonville Five Points Streetcar West Phase 2 Five Points Riverside (King Street) Transportation Center Construction of High Frequency Service Duval $38.0 Study & Construction of Limited Service Duval / (CSX) Nassau $125.0 Study & Construction of Limited Service Duval / (FEC) St. Johns $225.0 Study of Limited Duval / Service (CSX) Clay $2.0 Duval/ Study of Limited Nassau/ Service (CSX) Baker $2.0 Construction of High Frequency Service Duval $14.0 Construction of High Frequency Service Duval $42.0 Construction of High Frequency Service Duval $36.0 Construction of High Frequency Service Duval $14.0 Construction of Intermodal Facility Duval $110.0 Enhancement Funds Cost Feasible Projects (Revenues = $55.8 Million Miscellaneous Bicycle/Pedestrian Projects $55.8 Total $776.8 Cost Feasible Plan Grand Total (2009 Dollars) $5,168 Notes: Current and projected Operations and Maintenance costs for transit projects provided through local tax and farebox revenues State Revenues of $360.8 million will be used to match Federal Transit Agency (FTA) dollars creation $721.6 million available for Transit Projects. 70

76 Table 5.2 Modal Subtotals Summary Table Mode Funding (Millions) 2009 $ Highway Subtotal $4,391.2 Transit Subtotal $721.0 Enhancement $55.8 Total Cost Feasible Plan $5,

77 Figure 5.1 Envision 2035 Adopted Cost Feasible Plan 72

78 Figure 5.2 Envision 2035 Adopted Cost Feasible Plan Nassau County 73

79 Figure 5.3 Envision 2035 Adopted Cost Feasible Plan Duval County 74

80 Figure 5.4 Envision 2035 Adopted Cost Feasible Plan Duval County Downtown Inset 75

81 Figure 5.5 Envision 2035 Adopted Cost Feasible Plan Clay County 76

82 Figure 5.6 Envision 2035 Adopted Cost Feasible Plan St Johns County 77