Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDocumentation_Regular_Tab 7D_8/15/1991 1 _ \ VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA -- Olk � Post Office Box 3273 • 357 Tequesta Drive �1g. r '& Tequesta, Florida 33469-0273 • (407) 575-6200 "����� 9 FAX: (407) 575-6203 RCN coUtki MEMORANDUM - TO: Village Council FROM: Thomas G. Bradford, Village Manager --7—. DATE: August 7, 1991 SUBJECT: Resolution No. 29-90/91; Agenda Item On behalf of the Village, I attended the Public Hearing held on August 1st at the Town of Jupiter Activity Building to review the recommendations of the Northern Palm Beach County TransitJStudy, copy attached for your review. At the meeting, see attached news article, County Commissioner Marcus urged residents and municipal officials to call or write to the other cities and County Commissioners and ask for their support in the adoption of the Study. The Study recommends the provision of North County bus service to Tequesta, Jupiter and Juno Beach. If approved, Tequesta would have six day per week service that will allow connections all the way to Boca Raton. The proposed Tequesta route is Tequesta Drive, Seabrook Road, County Line Road, U.S. Highway One. Service could begin as early as April 1, 1992. There is no reason why Tequesta should not have public bus transportation as it is provided to the remainder of the County. Many of our residents from students to senior citizens will utilize this service to provide them with the mobility that so many of us take for granted in our daily lives. On the assumption that the Village Council is desirous of having bus service provided to Tequesta, I have prepared the attached Resolution for your adoption which will inform County Commissioners and others of your desire for this service. • TGB/mk • Attachments Recycled Paper . 2 THE PALM BEACH POST FRIDAY, AUGUST 2, 1991 c 200 rallyfor northr o � countybuy service • • 4 p p Tom Anderson said. "But the only Jupiter Hospital and the city halls Area lost public transportation in U 8 thing that will make it work is of Jupiter, Tequesta and Juno ByJOE BROGAN ridership. It will boil down to dol- Beach. can be done properly." lars." The southern terminus would be. Palm Beach Post Staff Writer Sol Silverman, another Jupiter Anderson said he was initially The Gardens mall in Palm Beach JUPITER — About 200 north- resident, agreed. "Students and skeptical of the proposal because Gardens, which would make con-. ern Palm Beach County residents working people would be helped," previous north county bus service nections with routes as far south as. showed their support Thursday he said. was used only a little."But I'm not Boca Raton. night for resumption of public bus "Our job is to make sure the (skeptical) any more. I cannot be- If the County Commission au-• transportation in Jupiter,Tequesta buses will be utilized. If hundreds lieve the spirit in this area. This is thorizes the service,which could be. and Juno Beach. of people leave their cars at home, one of the largest turnouts for any partly paid for with a $1 million: Nearly a dozen speakers told we're doing something as far as of our hearings in the last 15 state grant,it could begin as early r CoTran Director Irving Cure, congestion and the environment years." , as April 1,Cure said. County Commissioner Karen Mar- are concerned." The last time the north county Marcus;urged residents to call. cus and the county's Transports- North county residents with - had six-days-a-week service was in or write the other six county com- tion Advisory Board that the area's cars should agree to take the bus 1981. missioners and ask for their sup-. growing population will support once a week or once a month in When service stopped in 1988 it. port. the service that was cut off in 1988. order to do their part, Silverman was twice a week. "This is a tough budget year "I hope we can.be treated like said. If it starts again, it would run with a lot of budgetary constraints,- the rest of the county," Jupiter "This time we want to make it every day but Sunday and would but hopefully, we'll have bus ser-. resident Cy Winkler said."I think it work," advisory board chairman connect Carlin Park, Jupiter Mall, vice by April,"she said. • • TIVN 6 ittie . --- --- 1 494,4014:61c. • e • .."1/ 1731 DRAFT • • , • • • • • • NORTHERN PALM BEACirt. COUNTY TRANSI1T STUDY • .• • , • .• • i• • PREPARED BY THE STAFF OF THE. OFFICE OF THE •• METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION OF. PALM BEACH COUNTY - IN CONJUNCTION WITH . COTRAN • MAY 1991 • • • • NORTHERN PALM BEACH COUNTY TRANSIT STUDY MAY 1991 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE I. INTRODUCTION 1 II. BACKGROUND 1 III. ROUTE ALTERNATIVES 2 SCENARIO 1 2 SCENARIO 2 3 SCENARIO 3 3 RECOMMENDED PLAN 4 IV. PRIVATE SECTOR PARTICIPATION 4 V. APPENDIX 5 FIGURE 1 (STUDY AREA) FIGURE 2 (ROUTE 1P) FIGURE 3 . (ROUTE 1T, 1J) FIGURE 4 (SCENARIO 1) FIGURE 5 (SCENARIO 2) FIGURE 6 (SCENARIO 3) TABLE 1 (PROJECTED EXPENSES, REVENUE, AND PATRONS) • • INTRODUCTION Municipal officials and residents in the northern Palm Beach County area (including Jupiter Juno Beach and Tequesta) have requested the provision of transit service to their area. The northern terminus for existing service is the Gardens Mall located on PGA Boulevard in Palm Beach Gardens. This study represents an effort by 'the Metropolitan Planning • Organization of Palm Beach County (MPO) and the Palm Beach County Transportation Authority (Cotran) to respond to the request, and propose transit service in the North County area that would be the most cost effective approach to link with existing transit service. The study involves descriptive and historical analyses of the area and consists of three alternative transit route. scenarios. The objectives of the study are to: 1) investigate transit service alternatives for the area; and 2) coordinate public/private transit involvement and citizen participation in support of the design of transit service ' in the area. BACKGROUND North county population has increased dramatically in the past ten years. Total population in the study area (Figure 1) has increased by approximately 91 percent. This population growth has brought about a change in area residents ' perception of, and need for public transportation. Figure 1 also illustrates where minority population totals (shaded areas) are more significant than other areas in question. CoTran generates approximately 8,700 trips, which equates to less than 1/2 percent of the County's daily trips. A recent survey conducted for the MPO indicated these trips are generally made by those residents who have no access to an automobile and are primarily in lower income groups. These passengers are considered captive riders. Northern Palm Beach County is regarded as a middle to upper-middle class area (with. 1989 estimated median household income levels well over $20, 000) , although there are certain sub- areas which are similar to CoTran rider profiles. The survey also indicated approximately 41 percent of current CoTran patrons use the system to go to work. Mass transit is generally regarded as a social service, serving those who are dependent- on it. North County area residents have perceived transit• as not only being available to transit dependent patrons, but as a means of reducing the number of short-range automobile trips such as work, school, shopping, and recreation. 1 • • SpecTran, a division of Palm Beach County's public transportation system, provides paratransit service. SpecTran is door-to-door demand-responsive service serving elderly and handicapped clients throughout Palm Beach County, including the north County area. Fixed-route bus service was provided in the north County area but was discontinued approximately three years ago because routes fell below minimum service standards. A main reason why those routes performed poorly was due to a lack of uniform service: Previous service included routes operating on selected days of the week which limited mobility. There were three distinct routes which operated in the north County area until they were discontinued in 1988. Route 1P served North Palm Beach to Palm Beach Gardens' (Figure 2) . Route 1T served the Tequesta area while Route 1J served the Jupiter area (Figure 3) . For financial reporting reasons, Route 1J was combined with Routes 1P and 1T.. Historical operating costs, revenue, and deficits for fiscal years 1987 and 1988 are shown below. - • Farebox Fiscal Operating • Profit Recovery Route Year Expense Revenue (Deficit) (Percent) 1PT 1987 $35, 641 $1,250 ($34,391) 3 .51 1PJ 1987 $34,931 $1,689 ($33,242) 4. 84 1PT 1988 $19,889 $793 ($19, 096) 3 . 99 1PJ 1988 • $19,928 $921 ($19, 007) 4. 62 Note: Fiscal year 1988 operating statistics does not represent a complete year. ROUTE ALTERNATIVES • • Three alternative route scenarios have been proposed to implement• transit service in the North County area. All alternatives are scheduled to provide service six days a week (Monday through Saturday) . The route structure of all three scenarios would provide bus service to various residential areas. Patrons would have access , to the beach via Carlin Park, shopping at the Jupiter Mall and other retail areas, the Jupiter Hospital, and connecting service to the Gardens Mall. The following is a detailed description of each scenario. Scenario 1 (Figure 4) : This scenario consists of two distinct routes, Route 22 and Route 23. Each route would utilize one bus. Route 22 provides northbound service from the Gardens' Mall via east on PGA Boulevard, north on U.S. 1, north on AlA, west on Donald Ross Road, and north on U.S. 1 to the Jupiter Mall. Southbound service is provided from the Jupiter Mall via south on U.S. 1, east on Donald Ross Road, South on AlA, South on U.S. 1, and west on PGA Boulevard to the Gardens Mall. Route 2 • • • 22 would be hourly service and would connect with Route 1C at the Gardens Mall for access to downtown West Palm Beach and other points south. Route 23 would serve commuters in the Jupiter-Tequesta area with hourly crosstown service. Route 23 would provide bi- directional service by operating on alternative routing (e.g. , clockwise from the Jupiter Mall beginning 5 minutes before the odd hours, and counterclockwise 5 minutes before the even hours following the same route) . All trips'would.have a timed transfer connection with Route 22 at the Jupiter Mall, with a maximum wait of ten minutes. Scenario 2 (Figure 5) : This scenario consists of one route, Route 22, utilizing two buses. Scenario 2 differs from scenario 1 in that one route would be formed instead of two. This change eliminates the need to transfer at the Jupiter Mall from one route to the other. Route 22 would have bi- directional hourly crosstown service in Jupiter-Tequesta. The crosstown service would be clockwise on trips beginning at the Gardens Mall at 30 minutes after the even hours (e.g. , 6:30, 8:30, 10:30, etc. ) , and counterclockwise on trips beginning at the Gardens Mall at 30 minutes after the odd hours (e.g. , 7:30, 9:30, 11:30, etc) . Route 22 would incorporate a timed- • transfer connection with Route 1C at the Gardens Mall. Scenario 3 (Figure 6) : This scenario consists of one Jupiter crosstown route (Route 22) utilizing two buses and modifying existing CoTran routes. Service on Route 22 would provide half-hour . bi-directional service. The crosstown service would be clockwise on trips departing the Jupiter -Mall at five minutes after each hour (e.g.., 7:05 A.M. and 6:05 P.M. ) while buses operating counterclockwise would depart the Jupiter Mall at five minutes before the hour (e.g. , between 6:55 A.M. and 6:55 P.M. ) . Route 1C would be extended northward from the Gardens Mall to the Jupiter Mall for connection' with Route • 22. In order to facilitate extending Route 1C to the Jupiter Mall, the Singer Island "loop" section of Route 1C would be eliminated and Singer Island service would be replaced by Route 3. One additional bus would have to be added to Route 1C to facilitate meeting Route 22 at the Jupiter Mall. Each scenario has its strengths and weaknesses. Scenario 1 provides two distinct bus routes, but patrons would have to transfer at the Jupiter Mall to reach the Gardens Mall. Scenario 2 eliminates the need to transfer at the Jupiter Mall to reach the Gardens Mall. Scenario 3 , offers Jup}ter residents half-hour service' while scenarios 1 and 2 offer hourly service. Scenario ' 3 also calls for major modifications to current routes, e.g. , Routes 1C and 3 . Table 3 • 1 lists projected operating costs, revenue, and ridership associated with implementing each scenario for the five year period 1992 - 1996. Recommended Plan It is recommended that scenario 2 be implemented for several reasons. When compared to scenario 1, scenario 2 eliminates the need to transfer at the Jupiter Mall by forming one route... A major advantage that scenario 2 has over scenario 3 is operating costs, approximately $180,000 less. In order to obtain citizen input toward implementing the recommended plan, a series of public meetings will be held in the north county area. This' input will be used to refine the • recommendation, and will be presented to the,MPO and the Palm Beach County Transportation Authority for .final adoption, respectively. PRIVATE SECTOR PARTICIPATION • On December 5, 1986, the Urban Mass Transportation Administration (UMTA) issued Circular 7005. 1 titled "Documentation of Private Enterprise Participation Required for Sections 3 and 9 Programs". This circular provides guidelines for encouraging private sector involvement in the provision of transportation services to the public. The policies are intended to provide a more competitive environment in the transit field and provide opportunities for the private sector to participate. The private sector is encouraged to become involved with the development and planning for public transportation as well as the actual implementation of service within the area. The process to be used to involve the private sector will be developed locally. In the West Palm Beach Urban Study Area, the Metropolitan Planning Organization, as the planning arm of public transit, is to work in cooperation with the county and CoTran, the operating arm of the system, in order to identify opportunities for the private sector and provide a means for private sector input. • • APPENDIX• • 5 L .:Itlll:Jlt1 II t QD.a • Yo VI ant fora clst Ulu ,CCU UM 'YL Mt c . NV • I. Wirt d3ad Aanl.s NM el MI tort • a% _ poiliiii �iii �1 out t•orot 1.01. - © • wet !A r 0z O 10 � ro ac Lixn03 NIJ IYY SLDVILL snsNND 066 L • • ROUTE 1 -P • • • FIGURE 2 • • • PREVIOUS SERVICE ROUTE • _ • r • \ \ . mcsmoi.....j . I MAK Cli \ . 111 • w[ PALM KACw I II /•A _ COLMTT COY•TM• L PLAZA (614 x © Q us i u ❑ TJIILt1000 E J O c. rums RCA • PLANT C11T MOLL R Q • awl[ RTa TOM , O DOA, { - iq' • ►ALY HACH i4R0[IN COYYYYITT MOilfTAL. g \ 9. R i • R O LAU Kv Y V - ' • .ours © , Court o: R r 11 r Z i4110LR [4i w . �S 4. WOMIMi Tilt • t t • u«f■ouu wwc L a K[ t�, r r! —~� —_--�—� -- 1 —WORTH Q . CO ,,,... ,,,.j OP5.\ II \. . _ _• ■o■fwta■c Y _ IO ono* . \. . ril • IIPART TWIN CITT ) . . \ y K•• iHO►►IK•CTR PALL p y- - 1 k I- I. • • • • PREVIOUS SERVICE ROUTE • • O - N • • `JU►IT[II MALTY COMA . • ••, • `• - E3TA •yc IT iT[OUWIY CIT BUSY 11All • • JU►ITET BUS ... IJ IVAY CITY YALL •. • _ 1 $HELTEY - • •• �►EIIHOC i ` 'wE COY•T�1 atlB r Ee.a o • • • 1• • OAK. _ • 7 IJ , wawaO • � e •OLO BIM[ MtY Xis - 3ii M O. IV • .' • I , Jam ` '' . • YE.,[[., m • lIT[II l/A1 RILIA Ii• /.LY000D t /LA[ATh [ stir /LAEA/ • IDOD �.1 I MIX. X tl M . IM TBACOIBT AL ••f, 0`+•. eip \JY/I[[Y IMl[T Cm ^ I iC. ''''` 0I6 • PUBLIC �TIIELV[ OAKS I Pi Ilo 0 T•IY CITY S J •e 3M0/,CTII. YAIl� /lOIILL ❑ a • / , ' I .ttJ•.•�1 tG 17%. B011A[[ �� • • • Ft H JUIIo - p G 1 ` I ATV ' • 3 . • • SCENARIO 1 COUNTY LINE RD 1 \ 1 TIL: 1 it r..\\ I ' EQUEST• \ ' DR 11 ui U / • CD • \ A 1:111kI\ _ 0 :I 4 1 .\r,,....../ 17- .14 //////' F TONEY PENNA DR 1 o riii)\-: ). - % . i ... • \ rkW r' g 9 T i INDIAN CREEK PKWY ci i - W C. / �C. �i. U� kr I� Q /l I.- // a / FREDERICK SMALL RD \ Iii.... i i i i i i . ! — _ DONALD - ROSS • 1 RD 0 J m o - i' 1 O Z HOOD RD 4 n - y CO\ g p 1 LT W �` \ • h` BLVD 11111111111111111111111 1 II PGA ^'� RCA BLVD iri, T 1 se; \I\ BURNS ROB- U r - \ z \ FIGURE 4 • ROUTE 23 1111111111111111111 ROUTE 22 • ' SCENARIO 2 COUNTY LINE RD T I ,, E od j .� d' \-11„ EQUE_ST=� i L.Li J .\\\\y t "i '' \LIP;_}..q4n. —:#40111.2. ..\\ %NM.710---111 IN6716. I. "'wk.P.. • 1 TONEY PENNA r /DR , ' # .. \ 1 U i �# �i INDIAN CREEK PKWY ci W D 1 yr VA 1 FREDERICK ,/ SMALL RD ` I,, I \ . 1 I Ii ; \, DONALD ROSS • nRD 1 - ,\,..\A t J m � I 17-- 04 cc.• • ZI.. • HOOD RD • RN li \ /1 ~ N ! W .. :II 1 \. yle � 11 PGA $, v . _ . . „ .. jAvD % . -. ilk . re . . \ D 1--- `/ 2 La FIGURE 5 . .S." \\\\\ ROUTE 22 SCENARIO 3 s COUNTY LINE RD — — NN - od , `\ \\ EUESTA • • \ DR o U W / CENTER rM 1 -,%:‘,46:11, • AIL I' Al oh, . \ it!lisss... 7 K TONEY PENNA DR I IN 4 ,irk ,,,V,--1. 7 INDIAN CREEK PKWY 4-1- ''') \ 1 u1 V I 0 �i 1 0, 11 FREDERICK . SMALL RD i DONALD ROSS 1 RD 1 cc J m o 2 1 O I o , . ... HOOD vi RD (1 _ coo ' \ rz z Un co re y m J 1/ W !n BLVD 1 cl z PGA _________T id cd i . 1IkA RCA BLVD hi Y \ BURNS' RD z —� • t } I • r‘,,r7 i , , . \ CC \, FIGURE 6 anon��AMmEml ROUTE 22 ROUTE 1C • • • TABLE 1 FY 1992 FY 1993 FY 1994 FY 1995 FY 1996 EXPENSES $323,200 $339,360 $356,328 $374,144 $392,852 SCENARIO 1 $329,500 $345,975 $363,274 $381,437 $400,509 SCENARIO 2 $512,000 $537,600 $564,480 $592,704 $622,339 SCENARIO 3 'REVENUE $34,744 $52,465 $56,122 $59,676 $63,131 SCENARIO 1 $35,421 $53,488' $57,216 $60,839 $64,362 SCENARIO 2 $55,040 $83,113 $88,906 • $94,536 $100,010 SCENARIO 3 PATRONS 5,405 8,006 8,538 9,073 9,605 SCENARIO 1 5,405 8,006 8,538 9,073 9,605 , SCENARIO 2 8,108 12,008 12,807 13,609 14,407 SCENARIO 3 RESOLUTION NO. 29-90/91 A RESOLUTION OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA, PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA, ENDORSING THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE NORTHERN PALM BEACH COUNTY TRANSIT STUDY OF MAY 1991, WHICH RECOMMENDS THE PROVISION OF TRANSIT SERVICE TO THE TEQUESTA, JUPITER AND JUNO BEACH AREA. WHEREAS, municipal officials and residents in the Northern Palm Beach County area, including Tequesta, have requested the provision of transit service to their area; and WHEREAS, the northern terminus for existing service is the Gardens Mall located on PGA Boulevard in Palm Beach Gardens; and WHEREAS, in response to the request of municipal officials and residents in the Northern Palm Beach County area, the Metropolitan Planning Organization of Palm Beach County (MPO) and the Palm Beach County Transportation Authority (CO-TRAN) responded to the request by conducting a study entitled Northern Palm Beach County Transit Study dated May 1991; and WHEREAS, the objectives of the Study were to investigate transit service alternatives for the area and coordinate public/private transit involvement in citizen participation and support of the design of transit service in the area; and WHEREAS, the Study recommends the provision of transit service six ( 6) days per week to the Tequesta, Jupiter, and Juno Beach area; and WHEREAS, a Public Hearing on the findings of the Study was held on August 1, 1991 at the Jupiter Activity Building attended by over 200 persons, the vast majority of which spoke favorably for the provision of transit service. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE VILLAGE COUNCIL of the Village of Tequesta, Palm Beach County, Florida, as follows: Section 1. The foregoing recitals are hereby ratified and confirmed. Section 2. The Village Council hereby endorses the Northern Palm Beach County Transit Study wherein it is recommended that the transit service be provided to the Village of Tequesta, Jupiter and Juno Beach enabling Tequesta residents to avail themselves' of public bus transportation ultimately linked with the remainder of Palm Beach County. Section 3. The Board of County Commissioners for Palm Beach County are encouraged to likewise accept the recommendations of. the Northern Palm Beach County Transit Study and to request the timely implementation of this service which will cause an equitable distribution of public bus transit service to the entirety of Palm Beach County as the North County area is currently without such service. Section 4. The Village Clerk is hereby directed to provide copies of this Resolution to each individual member of the Board of County Commissioners for Palm Beach County, the Metropolitan Planning Organization, and the Palm Beach County Transportation Authority, the respective Mayors of Jupiter and Juno Beach and to the Jupiter-Tequesta-Juno Beach Chamber of Commerce. - 2 - THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION WAS OFFERED by Councilmember who moved its adoption. The Resolution was seconded by Councilmember , and upon being put to a vote, the vote was as follows: FOR ADOPTION AGAINST ADOPTION The Mayor thereupon declared the Resolution duly passed and adopted this day of August, 1991. MAYOR OF TEQUESTA Joseph N. Capretta ATTEST: Bill C. Kascavelis Village Clerk