EFGB - Trans Sur-Este

Transcription

Southeastern Transit System
(“Trans-Sureste”)
Humacao, Yabucoa, Maunabo and Patillas
!
Prepared for:
ALDL / Sureste
Área Local Desarrollo Laboral / Sureste
Prepared by:
EFGB Consulting Engineers
Estudios Técnicos Inc.
Global Advisor Group
Submitted: December, 2015
E
!
!
F
G
B
!
!
!
!
!
!
TABLE&OF&CONTENTS&
ACRONYMS)............................................................................................................................................)6!
INTRODUCTION)......................................................................................................................................)7!
DESCRIPTION)..........................................................................................................................................)8!
OBJECTIVE)..............................................................................................................................................)9!
METHODOLOGY).....................................................................................................................................)9!
GENERAL)VISION)CONCEPT)...................................................................................................................)10!
SELECTION)OF)THE)COMMUNITY)OF)CONCERN)AND)THE)STATISTICAL)REFERENCE)AREA)......................)10!
SOCIOECONOMIC)ANALYSIS).................................................................................................................)11!
Socioeconomic(.....................................................................................................................................(12!
Housing(characteristics(........................................................................................................................(12!
POPULATION!ANALYSIS!..................................................................................................................................!12!
EDUCATION!.................................................................................................................................................!15!
INCOME!......................................................................................................................................................!16!
HOUSING!CHARACTERISTICS!............................................................................................................................!16!
EXISTING)CONDITIONS).........................................................................................................................)18!
TRANSPORTATION!PATTERNS!..........................................................................................................................!21!
TRANSPORTATION!INFRASTRUCTURE!AND!SERVICES!.............................................................................................!24!
MUNICIPALITY!OF!HUMACAO!..........................................................................................................................!24!
Públicos(................................................................................................................................................(24!
Trolley(..................................................................................................................................................(25!
MUNICIPALITY!OF!YABUCOA!............................................................................................................................!26!
Públicos(................................................................................................................................................(26!
Trolley(..................................................................................................................................................(26!
MUNICIPALITY!OF!MAUNABO!..........................................................................................................................!27!
Públicos(................................................................................................................................................(27!
MUNICIPALITY!OF!PATILLAS!.............................................................................................................................!28!
Públicos(................................................................................................................................................(28!
NEEDS)..................................................................................................................................................)28!
ROUTES)ALIGNMENTS)..........................................................................................................................)29!
INTER>MUNICIPAL!LINES!.................................................................................................................................!29!
INTRA>MUNICIPAL!LINES!................................................................................................................................!33!
Municipality(of(Humacao:(...................................................................................................................(33!
Municipality(of(Yabucoa:(.....................................................................................................................(33!
Municipality(of(Maunabo:(...................................................................................................................(34!
Municipality(of(Patillas:(.......................................................................................................................(34!
RIDERSHIP)............................................................................................................................................)40!
MODE!CHOICE!PROBABILITY!...........................................................................................................................!40!
!
!
INTER>MUNICIPAL!ROUTE!..............................................................................................................................!41!
INTRA>MUNICIPAL!ROUTES!.............................................................................................................................!42!
Municipality(of(Humacao(....................................................................................................................(42!
Municipality(of(Yabucoa(......................................................................................................................(43!
Municipality(of(Maunabo(....................................................................................................................(44!
General(Summary(................................................................................................................................(45!
SYSTEM)DESIGN)...................................................................................................................................)47!
OPERATIONAL!CONCEPT!.................................................................................................................................!47!
VISION)..................................................................................................................................................)47!
Policy(...................................................................................................................................................(48!
Integration(...........................................................................................................................................(48!
ORGANIZATIONAL!PLAN!.................................................................................................................................!49!
BUS!STOP!LOCATION!.....................................................................................................................................!49!
FLEET!DESCRIPTION!.......................................................................................................................................!50!
HOURS!OF!OPERATION!...................................................................................................................................!52!
InterGMunicipal(Routes(........................................................................................................................(52!
IntarGMunicipal(Routes(........................................................................................................................(52!
EDUCATIONAL)CAMPAIGN)...................................................................................................................)53!
BENEFIT)COST)ANALYSIS).......................................................................................................................)54!
BENEFIT!COST!ASSUMPTIONS!..........................................................................................................................!54!
Traffic(and(design(assumptions(...........................................................................................................(54!
Economic(Assumptions(........................................................................................................................(55!
ECONOMIC!BENEFITS!OF!MASS!TRANSIT!............................................................................................................!57!
ECONOMIC!COMPETITIVENESS!.........................................................................................................................!58!
Travel(Time(Savings(.............................................................................................................................(58!
Vehicle(Operating(Cost((VOC)(Savings(.................................................................................................(58!
Accident(Cost(Savings(..........................................................................................................................(59!
ENVIRONMENTAL!SUSTAINABILITY!....................................................................................................................!60!
Emission(Reduction(Benefits(................................................................................................................(60!
COSTS!OF!PROJECT!.......................................................................................................................................!62!
Initial(Investment(.................................................................................................................................(62!
BENEFIT!COST!RESULTS!..................................................................................................................................!63!
SYSTEM)JUSTIFICATION)........................................................................................................................)65!
CONCLUSIONS)AND)RECOMMENDATIONS)............................................................................................)65!
GENERAL!CONCLUSIONS!.................................................................................................................................!65!
BIBLIOGRAPHY).....................................................................................................................................)67!
!
Page 3 of 69
List of Tables
Table!1:!Population!Analyses!for!Impacted!Wards,!SRA!&!PR!...........................!13!
Table!2:!Population!Distribution!&!Race!for!Impacted!Wards,!SRA!&!PR!..........!14!
Table!3:!Education!Analyses!for!Impacted!Wards,!SRA!&!PR!............................!15!
Table!4:!Income!Analyses!for!Impacted!Wards,!SRA!&!PR!................................!17!
Table!5:!Household!Analyses!for!Impacted!Wards,!SRA!&!PR!..........................!19!
Table!6:!Origin!Destination!Parings!based!on!Labor!Mobility!.............................!23!
Table!7:!Existing!Público!Routes!in!Humacao!....................................................!24!
Table!8:!Existing!Público!Routes!in!Yabucoa!......................................................!26!
Table!9:!Existing!Público!Routes!in!Maunabo!.....................................................!28!
Table!10:!Existing!Público!Routes!in!Patillas!......................................................!28!
Table!11:!System!Route!Summary!.....................................................................!40!
Table!12:!Expected!UPT!for!the!Intermunicipal!Route!........................................!42!
Table!13:!Expected!UPT!for!the!IntarTMunicipal!Routes!for!Humacao!...............!43!
Table!14:!Expected!UPT!for!the!IntarTMunicipal!Routes!for!Yabucoa!.................!44!
Table!15:!Expected!UPT!for!the!IntarTMunicipal!Routes!for!Maunabo!................!44!
Table!16:!Expected!UPT!for!the!IntarTMunicipal!Routes!for!Patillas!...................!45!
Table!17:!General!Summary!of!Expected!UPT’s!................................................!46!
Table!18:!Projected!ADT!for!2016!and!2036!.......................................................!54!
Table!19:!Assumed!Cost!per!Injury!in!Highway!Accidents!..................................!56!
Table!20:!Emissions!Factors!...............................................................................!57!
Table!21:!Summary!of!Vehicle!Operating!Costs!Benefits!...................................!59!
Table!22:!Summary!of!Accident!Reduction!Benefits!...........................................!61!
Table!23:!Summary!of!Emission!Reduction!Benefits!..........................................!62!
Table!24:!Projected!Project!Cost!.........................................................................!63!
Table!25:!Benefit!Cost!Analysis!Summary!..........................................................!64!
!
Page 4 of 69
List of Figures
Figure!1!Southeast!Region!of!Puerto!Rico!(Source:!PRPB)!.................................!7!
Figure!2:!Map!with!the!Community!of!Concern!...................................................!11!
Figure!3:!Southeast!Region!of!Puerto!Rico!(Source:!PRPB)!..............................!20!
Figure!4:!SITRAH!Route!Map!!(Source:!Humacao!Comprehensive!Transportation!
Study,!November!2010)!......................................................................................!25!
Figure!5:!Yabucoa!Trolley!Route!.........................................................................!27!
Figure!6!System!Wide!Proposed!Routes!............................................................!30!
Figure!7!System!Wide!Proposed!Routes!compared!to!Population!.....................!32!
Figure!8!System!Wide!Proposed!Routes!compared!to!Poverty!..........................!32!
Figure!9!System!Wide!Proposed!Routes!compared!to!Auto!Availability!.............!33!
Figure!10!Humacao!Proposed!Routes!compared!to!Poverty!..............................!35!
Figure!11!Humacao!Proposed!Routes!compared!to!Auto!Availability!.................!36!
Figure!12!Yabucoa!and!Maunabo!Proposed!Routes!compared!to!Poverty!........!37!
Figure! 13! Yabucoa! and! Maunabo! Proposed! Routes! compared! to! Auto!
Availability!...........................................................................................................!38!
Figure!14!Patillas!Proposed!Routes!compared!to!Poverty!..................................!38!
Figure!15!Patillas!Proposed!Routes!compared!to!Auto!Availability!....................!39!
Figure!16!Interior!LayTout!of!vehicle!recommended!for!IntreTMunnicipal!Routes!50!
Figure!17!Exterior!of!vehicle!recommended!for!IntreTMunnicipal!Routes!...........!51!
Figure!18!Vehicle!recommended!for!IntraTMunnicipal!Routes!............................!51!
Figure!19!Interior!of!Vehicle!recommended!for!IntraTMunnicipal!Routes!............!52!
Figure!20:!Average!Fuel!Prices!...........................................................................!56!
!
Page 5 of 69
ACRONYMS))
Acronym
Meaning
ADT
ALDL
Average Daily Traffic
Área Local Desarrollo Laboral
CBD
Central Business District
CoC
Community of Concern
DTPW
FTA
Department of Transportation and Public Works
Federal Transit Administration
HTA
Highway and Transportation Authority
INTECO
Iniciativa Tecnologica Centro Oriental
O/D
Origin / Destination
PRPB
Puerto Rico Planning Board
ROW
Right of Way
SITRAH
Sistema de Transportación de Humacao
SRC
Statistical Reference Region
UTP
Unlink Passenger Trip
!
Page 6 of 69
INTRODUCTION)
The south-eastern Local Labor Development Area (ALDL, for its Spanish
acronym) is comprised of six (6) municipalities in the region. And has the
objective of cohesively collaborate as partners in their social and
economic development. This region of Puerto Rico is secluded from the
rest of the island by mountainous land, providing for adverse conditions
regarding economic development and accessibility to employment
opportunities. Figure 1 shows a regional map, obtained from the Puerto
Rico Planning Board (PRPB).
Figure 1 Southeastern Region of Puerto Rico (Source: PRPB)
0
1
Límites
Límites
Barrios
SubBarrios
Límites
Municipios
(oprima para definir título)
[-]
2mi
The municipalities of Humacao, Yabucoa, Maunabo and Patillas do not
currently have a functional transit system that can communicate the four
(4) municipalities in an efficient and effective way.
Through the
combined effort of the above-mentioned municipalities, this study will
evaluate the viability and possibility of developing a mass transit system
that provides effective and reliable inter- and intra-municipal service to
users.
!
Page 7 of 69
The system shall provide residents and visitors of the four (4) municipalities
access to goods and services, improve quality of life for those who do not
have private transportation, promote growth of local businesses, increase
job opportunities, and contain the reduction in population.
This study provides the underlying foundation to support the
implementation of a mass transit system between the municipalities of
Humacao, Yabucoa, Maunabo and Patillas in the Southeastern Region of
Puerto Rico. The main goal of this system is to provide efficient and
reliable transit service that will satisfy the need of the general public for
public transportation. The system will also provide an alternative to the
private automobile, promoting the revitalization of the urban landscape in
all municipalities.
DESCRIPTION)
The Municipalities of Humacao, Yabucoa, Maunabo, and Patillas propose
the creation of a Mass Transit Project that will serve inter- and intraMunicipal travel to regional residents and visitors. Two (2) inter-Municipal
routes will provide access to the central business districts (CBD’s) of the
four (4) municipalities. One of the routes will begin at the North transit
terminal of the Municipality of Humacao and end at the CBD of
Maunabo, after traversing through Humacao and Yabucoa. The second
inter-Municipal line will connect the CBD’s of Maunabo and Patillas.
These two (2) lines will travel through State Road PR-3 and PR-901.
The proposed Mass Transit Project will also include eleven intra-municipal
lines that will enhance coverage of the inter-Municipal lines, allowing users
to reach outlying locations at each of the municipalities served. The intraMunicipal lines will provide service to people who do not have private
transportation, as well as to those seeking alternate modes to reach the
CBD. By stopping at the corresponding CBD, all intra-Municipal lines will
have interconnection to the inter-Municipal lines.
!
Page 8 of 69
The proposed system will traverse across a 45-mile path and serve
approximately 1,122 daily commuters from Humacao to Patillas. The
system will require a total of 14 vehicles to operate on the established
timeframes and frequencies, at an approximate total annual cost of $3.25
million.
OBJECTIVE)
The main objective of this project is to provide a common transit system
that can communicate the municipalities of Humacao, Yabucoa,
Maunabo, and Patillas. The system shall provide the citizens of the four
municipalities with improved access to goods and services, improve the
quality of life for those that have no transportation, promote growth of the
local business, increase the job opportunities, and contain the reduction
in population.
The municipalities of Humacao, Yabucoa, Maunabo, and Patillas, have
identified that the lack of a transit service connecting the region has been
a limitation to the economic growth of the region and the residents of the
municipalities. Mainly, this is given by limited mobility and access to
economic opportunities, jobs, and education.
METHODOLOGY)
The following general methodology was followed in the development of
the project, and the final written report:
1.!
2.!
3.!
4.!
5.!
Definition of the vision for the system
Analysis and evaluation of existing conditions
Analysis of current conditions
Estimation of future demand and transit ridership
Design of Regional Transit System and its implementation plan
a.! Conceptual and physical design
b.! Transit service operations design
c.! Benefit Cost Analysis
6.! Promotional and Educational Campaign
!
Page 9 of 69
GENERAL)VISION)CONCEPT)
Based on the above, the general vision that will serve as a base line for
the system is that of providing increased mobility inside the region, and
provide greater access to economic development through access to
economic opportunities, jobs, and education.
SELECTION) OF) THE) COMMUNITY) OF) CONCERN) AND) THE)
STATISTICAL)REFERENCE)AREA)
For the purpose of analyzing sociodemographic trends in the area a
community of concern (CoC) is defined and its geographical boundaries
are identified. The community of concern is defined as the directly
impacted community as for its boundaries are defined by political limits,
roads, US Census boundaries, among others. For this study the following
census wards (geographical units) illustrated in the map were selected as
the CoC.
Even though commuters from wards outside the project area could have
an impact by the proposed Mass Transit project, the geographic
boundaries chosen were the immediate impacted wards located
adjacent to the proposed project alignment and Bus route. To avoid the
possible dilution of populations, a larger geographical area was not
selected. As per EPA and FTA guidelines1 Commuters and transient
population were not considered in the CoC.
After selecting the CoC, it was compared against other geographical
areas to have a comparative framework for its socioeconomic situation.
As previously mentioned, this comparison area is known as the Statistical
Reference Area (SRA). For this report, the CoC was compared to the
following areas:
1
!Transit!Administration!Recipients!FTA!Circular!4703.1!section!B>2!dated!August!15,!2012!
http://www.fta.dot.gov/documents/FTA_EJ_Circular_7.14>12_FINAL.pdf!
!
!
Page 10 of 69
•! the totals and averages for the municipalities of Humacao,
Yabucoa, Maunabo and Patillas, and
•! Puerto Rico Total / Average.
!
Figure 2: Map with the Community of Concern
SOCIOECONOMIC)ANALYSIS)
The socioeconomic conditions of the CoC were evaluated utilizing the
most recent data available for each category. Estimates from the 2009
and the 2013 Puerto Rico Community Survey were used to analyze
variables.
This section presents a discussion of each Census variable CoC wards and
the Municipalities as a whole and Puerto Rico. Variables analyzed are the
following:
!
Page 11 of 69
SOCIOECONOMIC
•! Population
o! Density per square mile
o! Population growth
o! Age and Race distribution
•! Education for the population 25 years and over
•! Income
o! Per capita income
o! Median Household Income
o! Households below the Poverty Level
HOUSING CHARACTERISTICS
•! Total Households, Average Growth
•! Household size
POPULATION)ANALYSIS)
According to 2013 Census data, the CoC had a population of 86,077
people, which represents 68% of the SRA composed of the municipalities
of Humacao, Yabucoa, Maunabo and Patillas. Out of the CoC, Maunabo
Pueblo ward in Maunabo had the least amount of population while Mabú
ward in Humacao had the most. The wards with the largest population
growth were in the Municipality of Patillas (Pueblo & Apeadero) while
most of the other wards contracted. However, the contraction of
population in the CoC is less than the average for the statistical reference
region (SRA) and for the average in Puerto Rico of 1.7% each year.
The wards in the Municipality of Humacao are the densest in the CoC
while the wards in Patillas are the least dense among the CoC. On the
other hand, wards with the highest population density are urban centers
of the municipalities such as Humacao pueblo, Yabucoa pueblo and
Patillas pueblo. Overall the population density of the CoC is about the
same as the average of Puerto Rico of 1,067 people per square mile, but
higher than the SRA which has 750 people per square mile.
!
Page 12 of 69
Population Analysis for Impacted Wards, SRA & PR
Area
Municipality
Impacted Wards / CoC
Buena Vista
Humacao
Candelero Abajo
Humacao
Candelero Arriba
Humacao
Cataño
Humacao
Humacao -pueblo
Humacao
Mabú
Humacao
Tejas
Humacao
Calzada
Maunabo
Emajagua
Maunabo
Maunabo -pueblo
Maunabo
Palo Seco
Maunabo
Quebrada Arenas
Maunabo
Talante
Maunabo
Apeadero
Patillas
Bajo
Patillas
Cacao Alto
Patillas
Cacao Bajo
Patillas
Guardarraya
Patillas
Jacaboa
Patillas
Mamey
Patillas
Patillas -pueblo
Patillas
Pollos
Patillas
Aguacate
Yabucoa
Calabazas
Yabucoa
Juan Martín
Yabucoa
Limones
Yabucoa
Playa
Yabucoa
Yabucoa -pueblo
Yabucoa
Humacao Municipality - Total
Maunabo Municipality - Total
Patillas Municipality - Total
Yabucoa Municipality - Total
SRA (statistical reference region)
Puerto Rico
Population Population Population Area Density 2013
2009
2013
Grow th (miles2 ) (pop/mile2 )
89,901
3,908
5,200
3,667
3,066
4,165
8,843
7,240
801
4,978
468
1,714
1,788
808
295
1,841
1,868
1,204
1,965
1,509
1,895
832
4,405
3,280
7,471
3,674
3,998
6,198
2,820
60,682
12,669
20,001
40,463
86,077
4,228
4,968
4,352
3,573
3,618
8,177
6,668
934
4,041
307
1,616
1,821
1,169
557
1,891
2,257
1,442
1,844
1,087
1,608
2,210
3,058
2,714
7,079
4,186
3,210
4,785
2,677
57,823
12,070
19,017
37,404
-1.1%
2.0%
-1.1%
4.4%
3.9%
-3.5%
-1.9%
-2.0%
3.9%
-5.1%
-10.0%
-1.5%
0.5%
9.7%
17.2%
0.7%
4.8%
4.6%
-1.6%
-7.9%
-4.0%
27.7%
-8.7%
-4.6%
-1.3%
3.3%
-5.3%
-6.3%
-1.3%
-1.2%
-1.2%
-1.3%
-1.9%
80.8
2.0
4.5
4.9
1.5
0.6
2.9
3.0
3.2
4.1
0.1
1.4
1.7
1.6
2.3
1.2
1.2
2.4
2.8
3.5
1.3
0.5
3.3
5.4
10.4
5.8
3.8
4.7
0.5
45.0
21.1
47.0
55.2
1,065
2,083
1,098
895
2,445
5,635
2,785
2,233
288
983
2,207
1,146
1,061
736
241
1,590
1,850
595
651
312
1,217
4,453
932
502
678
725
843
1,025
5,071
1,286
572
404
677
133,815
3,940,109
126,314
3,682,966
-1.4%
-1.7%
168.3
3,451.5
750
1,067
Source: ACS 2013 and 2009 5 year estim ates
Table 1: Population Analyses for Impacted Wards, SRA & PR
The age distribution in the CoC is exactly the same as the age distribution
in the SRA and in Puerto Rico Total. As for race, it is noted that the CoC
has a larger population of African American people with its largest
concentration in the wards of the Municipality of Maunabo.
!
Page 13 of 69
Population Distribution and Race for Impacted Wards, SRA & PR
Population distribution 2013
less than
19 years
20 to 59
years
60 and
ov er
Buena Vista
Humacao
Candelero Abajo
Humacao
Candelero Arriba
Humacao
Cataño
Humacao
Humacao -pueblo
Humacao
Mabú
Humacao
Tejas
Humacao
Calzada
Maunabo
Emajagua
Maunabo
Maunabo -pueblo
Maunabo
Palo Seco
Maunabo
Quebrada Arenas
Maunabo
Talante
Maunabo
Apeadero
Patillas
Bajo
Patillas
Cacao Alto
Patillas
Cacao Bajo
Patillas
Guardarraya
Patillas
Jacaboa
Patillas
Mamey
Patillas
Patillas -pueblo
Patillas
Pollos
Patillas
Aguacate
Yabucoa
Calabazas
Yabucoa
Juan Martín
Yabucoa
Limones
Yabucoa
Playa
Yabucoa
Yabucoa -pueblo
Yabucoa
26.7%
52.4%
21.0%
Race distribution 2013
Black or
Other
White
African
race
American
57.2%
11.6%
31.2%
30.5%
31.8%
21.8%
35.1%
28.7%
23.2%
26.2%
24.2%
25.9%
15.3%
25.3%
30.7%
20.6%
33.8%
18.4%
36.3%
12.3%
14.9%
44.1%
20.0%
24.5%
35.9%
28.8%
24.1%
32.2%
20.9%
30.4%
31.3%
26.2%
26.3%
26.5%
27.3%
53.1%
54.3%
53.6%
48.3%
40.7%
53.3%
51.0%
51.3%
52.3%
49.6%
55.3%
46.0%
57.7%
53.0%
57.3%
49.7%
63.6%
50.6%
46.5%
59.2%
56.8%
46.3%
54.5%
53.5%
52.1%
56.5%
54.1%
45.6%
52.3%
51.5%
52.3%
53.7%
16.4%
13.9%
24.6%
16.6%
30.6%
23.5%
22.8%
24.5%
21.8%
35.1%
19.4%
23.3%
21.7%
13.2%
24.3%
14.0%
24.1%
34.5%
9.4%
20.8%
18.7%
17.8%
16.7%
22.4%
15.7%
22.6%
15.5%
23.1%
21.5%
22.2%
21.2%
19.0%
50.0%
68.8%
61.1%
65.6%
60.0%
59.3%
57.2%
36.7%
39.3%
60.3%
39.8%
60.9%
54.2%
71.1%
53.5%
43.8%
65.0%
58.9%
32.4%
41.2%
74.7%
62.4%
65.8%
63.0%
65.6%
69.7%
57.5%
64.2%
60.1%
42.8%
58.3%
65.8%
6.3%
2.1%
3.7%
4.9%
8.4%
6.5%
8.4%
12.8%
21.5%
18.9%
31.5%
19.8%
17.0%
1.4%
17.6%
25.0%
10.8%
12.5%
4.1%
17.2%
9.8%
7.5%
5.6%
9.6%
8.5%
8.8%
11.7%
13.1%
6.3%
24.4%
12.7%
9.1%
43.7%
29.1%
35.2%
29.5%
31.6%
34.2%
34.4%
50.5%
39.2%
20.8%
28.7%
19.3%
28.8%
27.5%
28.9%
31.2%
24.2%
28.6%
63.5%
41.6%
15.5%
30.1%
28.6%
27.4%
25.9%
21.5%
30.8%
22.7%
33.6%
32.8%
29.0%
25.1%
Puerto Rico
26.6%
26.6%
52.5%
52.1%
21.0%
21.3%
56.8%
69.9%
13.1%
7.7%
30.1%
22.3%
Area
Municipality
Source: ACS 2013, 5 year estim ates
Table 2: Population Distribution & Race for Impacted Wards, SRA & PR
!
Page 14 of 69
EDUCATION)
The most common highest academic degrees attained by the population
aged 25 or more in the CoC were High School diplomas (28.8%) followed
by less than 9th grade (20.8%), some college (12.7%) and finally Bachelor’s
degrees (12.4%).
Education Analysis for the Impacted Wards, SRA & PR
Educational Attainment - 2013
Area
Municipality
Population Less 9th to 12th High school
Some
Graduate or
Associate's Bachelor's
25 years than 9th grade, no graduate & college,
professional
degree
degree
and ov er grade diploma
GED
no degree
degree
Buena Vista
Humacao
Candelero Abajo
Humacao
Candelero Arriba
Humacao
Cataño
Humacao
Humacao -pueblo Humacao
Mabú
Humacao
Tejas
Humacao
Calzada
Maunabo
Emajagua
Maunabo
Maunabo -pueblo Maunabo
Palo Seco
Maunabo
Quebrada Arenas Maunabo
Talante
Maunabo
Apeadero
Patillas
Bajo
Patillas
Cacao Alto
Patillas
Cacao Bajo
Patillas
Guardarraya
Patillas
Jacaboa
Patillas
Mamey
Patillas
Patillas -pueblo
Patillas
Pollos
Patillas
Aguacate
Yabucoa
Calabazas
Yabucoa
Juan Martín
Yabucoa
Limones
Yabucoa
Playa
Yabucoa
Yabucoa -pueblo
Yabucoa
56,783
2756
3160
3006
2093
2318
5724
4370
649
2,808
201
1,083
1,190
822
335
1,389
1,346
1,072
1,431
530
1,088
1,508
1,779
1,842
4,892
2,486
2,304
3,021
1,580
38,669
8,036
12,618
24,591
20.8%
17.80%
13.60%
21.80%
21.40%
18.20%
19.70%
16.10%
34.7%
17.2%
2.5%
31.7%
24.3%
30.4%
30.7%
31.7%
15.5%
21.5%
26.7%
8.3%
15.1%
22.6%
19.7%
22.8%
27.7%
12.6%
26.6%
15.1%
16.6%
17.2%
24.5%
22.8%
24.2%
10.6%
11.60%
7.00%
9.40%
9.10%
14.40%
8.30%
7.40%
2.6%
9.9%
10.9%
12.8%
15.7%
17.9%
23.3%
9.6%
12.5%
12.7%
12.5%
5.7%
5.1%
6.4%
9.0%
9.7%
14.5%
6.0%
11.5%
13.1%
7.7%
9.5%
12.0%
10.5%
11.2%
28.8%
31.20%
19.60%
33.50%
18.90%
29.60%
31.70%
34.70%
25.7%
29.2%
30.3%
26.3%
20.3%
26.5%
23.6%
27.6%
25.6%
37.6%
23.9%
33.2%
43.8%
26.5%
25.6%
36.9%
30.8%
28.0%
26.0%
32.9%
27.2%
30.4%
27.9%
29.6%
30.3%
12.7%
7.00%
9.70%
9.90%
10.80%
9.00%
11.90%
15.80%
9.1%
10.1%
21.4%
7.1%
11.9%
13.0%
14.3%
10.4%
19.0%
6.5%
11.3%
24.5%
21.9%
5.2%
17.9%
8.3%
7.9%
13.0%
16.2%
13.4%
18.9%
12.0%
10.4%
13.3%
11.1%
9.7%
7.70%
4.80%
7.80%
7.60%
13.60%
13.80%
9.90%
3.4%
9.7%
18.4%
8.5%
13.3%
3.4%
5.7%
7.6%
15.5%
9.7%
5.8%
15.3%
9.5%
5.4%
12.5%
6.9%
9.4%
14.1%
12.1%
13.2%
6.4%
10.0%
9.2%
8.6%
9.9%
12.4%
16.50%
30.90%
9.40%
18.80%
13.00%
9.20%
11.00%
17.7%
15.3%
12.9%
11.0%
11.3%
8.8%
2.4%
8.6%
11.9%
7.6%
11.4%
5.1%
2.2%
28.2%
13.6%
9.6%
8.3%
19.0%
5.3%
10.8%
18.2%
14.3%
11.4%
11.7%
10.5%
5.0%
8.20%
14.30%
8.30%
13.40%
2.20%
5.50%
5.10%
6.8%
8.5%
3.5%
2.6%
3.1%
0.0%
0.0%
4.5%
0.0%
4.4%
8.5%
7.9%
2.5%
5.7%
1.6%
5.9%
1.3%
7.3%
2.3%
1.5%
4.9%
6.6%
4.7%
3.5%
2.8%
Puerto Rico
83,914
2,438,932
22.2%
19.1%
10.8%
10.0%
29.6%
26.3%
11.7%
12.6%
9.4%
8.9%
12.0%
16.8%
4.4%
6.3%
Source: ACS 2013 5 year estim ates
Table 3: Education Analyses for Impacted Wards, SRA & PR
!
Page 15 of 69
The population in the Coc and SRA are less educated than the average
for Puerto Rico. In the CoC 27% of people 25 years or more have an
associate’s degree or higher, which is lower than the norm in Puerto Rico
(32%).
INCOME))
This section analyzes various income related variables: Per-capita income
and Household Income. The US Census Bureau defines income as the sum
of the amounts reported separately for a range of sources including:
wages, salary, commissions, bonuses, tips, self-employment income, Social
Security,
public
assistance,
disability
pensions,
unemployment
compensation, and child support, among others.
According to the US Census Bureau, the Per Capita Income is obtained by
dividing aggregate income by the total population of an area. The CoC
has an average per capita income of $8,923, which is lower than the
average of Puerto Rico of $10,850 but higher than its region (SRA) with
$8,717. The low per capita income is primarily due to low paying jobs that
require little to no education in the area. The wards with the lowest
income per capita are found in the municipalities of Patillas (Apeadero &
Cacao Alto) and Maunabo (Palo Seco). The wards with the highest per
capita income are found in the Municipality of Humacao, particularly in
the wards of Candelero Abajo and Cataño.
The average median household income in the CoC of $18,131 which was
also lower than the average household income in Puerto Rico of $19,624
and but higher than the SRA of $17,593. The wards with the highest
household incomes are Candelero Abajo and Cataño in Humacao.
HOUSING)CHARACTERISTICS)
This section describes total households, household growth and average
size. According to the 2013 Puerto Rico Community Survey, there were
28,550 households in the CoC. This amount has been increasing at a rate
!
Page 16 of 69
of 0.7% each year since 2009. This increase in households is primarily due
to the high growth in households in the wards of Pueblo in Patillas, Talante
in Maunabo and Cataño in Humacao. The annual household growth of
0.7% per year in the CoC is higher than Puerto Rico’s and the SRA
average growth of 0.3% per year. The average household size in the CoC
is of 2.98, which is similar to Puerto Rico’s average of 2.96 people per
household.
Income Analysis for the Impacted Wards, SRA & PR
Area
Municipality
Buena Vista
Humacao
Candelero Abajo
Humacao
Candelero Arriba
Humacao
Cataño
Humacao
Humacao -pueblo
Humacao
Mabú
Humacao
Tejas
Humacao
Calzada
Maunabo
Emajagua
Maunabo
Maunabo -pueblo
Maunabo
Palo Seco
Maunabo
Quebrada Arenas
Maunabo
Talante
Maunabo
Apeadero
Patillas
Bajo
Patillas
Cacao Alto
Patillas
Cacao Bajo
Patillas
Guardarraya
Patillas
Jacaboa
Patillas
Mamey
Patillas
Patillas -pueblo
Patillas
Pollos
Patillas
Aguacate
Yabucoa
Calabazas
Yabucoa
Juan Martín
Yabucoa
Limones
Yabucoa
Playa
Yabucoa
Yabucoa -pueblo
Yabucoa
Puerto Rico
Median
Household
I ncome
Per capita
I ncome
$
$
$
$
$
$
18,131
16,093
48,316
20,958
26,437
17,563
17,484
20,223
12,581
23,750
12,308
14,897
17,083
20,095
4,980
15,195
14,223
13,891
16,615
19,595
15,579
12,245
14,468
23,088
17,133
23,475
17,353
19,041
13,006
20,156
18,446
14,506
17,264
$
$
$
$
8,923
7,802
20,913
10,115
12,061
8,246
9,192
9,113
10,003
10,607
10,445
6,321
7,230
7,715
2,911
8,168
6,529
10,861
9,143
7,132
8,669
9,823
7,070
8,839
7,692
9,939
7,292
8,278
7,741
10,927
8,134
7,851
7,956
$
$
17,593
19,624
$
$
8,717
10,850
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
Source: ACS 2013 5 year estim ates
Table 4: Income Analyses for Impacted Wards, SRA & PR
!
Page 17 of 69
The Census Bureau uses a set of money income thresholds that vary by
family size and composition to classify those "below the poverty level."
According to the Puerto Rico Community Survey of 2013, 41.2% of
households in Puerto Rico were below poverty levels. Poverty levels in the
CoC og 47.5% are higher than the average for Puerto Rico but lower than
the average poverty level in the region (SRA) of 51.6%. The ward with the
lowest poverty level is Candelaro Abajo (21.8%) in Humacao while the
highest poverty level is found in the ward of Apeadero (91.7%) in Patillas.
These high poverty levels indicate that the affected population is below
the average income in Puerto Rico.
The CoC presents a below average community with low incomes, low
education levels, and high concentration of minorities. The affected
wards and communities are a disadvantage community when compared
to the statistical region or to Puerto Rico’s averages. The development of
the proposed Mass transit project would be beneficial in a social and
economic way to this below average and low-income community.
EXISTING)CONDITIONS)
This section briefly describes the most relevant descriptions of the existing
condition at the Region, based on existing data. These conditions are
related to:
•! Geographical and topographical background
•! Land use
•! Socio-economical characteristics like population, housing, travel
patterns, among others
Geographical and Topographical Background
The Southeastern region of Puerto Rico extends from the Municipality of
Naguabo, to the North, along the East coast of the Island, to the
Municipality if Guayama, to the South. The municipalities in the Region
are naturally and physically bounded to the North by the Caribbean
Tropical Rainforest of El Yunque and the Sierra de Luquillo. The Region is
bounded to the West and Southwest by the Cordillera Central and Sierra
de Cayey mountainous areas. To the East, all municipalities in the Region
are bounded by the Vieques Channel and Caribbean Sea.
!
Page 18 of 69
Comment'[AM1]:'Evan,!trabaja!tú!con!esta!info.!
Household Analysis for Impacted Wards, SRA & PR
Total
Total
Total
Av erage Family under
Household
Municipality Households Households
Household
pov erty
Grow th
2009
2013
size 2013
lev el
2009-2013
27,786
28,550
0.7%
2.98
47.5%
Area
Buena Vista
Humacao
Candelero Abajo
Humacao
Candelero Arriba
Humacao
Cataño
Humacao
Humacao -pueblo
Humacao
Mabú
Humacao
Tejas
Humacao
Calzada
Maunabo
Emajagua
Maunabo
Maunabo -pueblo
Maunabo
Palo Seco
Maunabo
Quebrada Arenas
Maunabo
Talante
Maunabo
Apeadero
Patillas
Bajo
Patillas
Cacao Alto
Patillas
Cacao Bajo
Patillas
Guardarraya
Patillas
Jacaboa
Patillas
Mamey
Patillas
Patillas -pueblo
Patillas
Pollos
Patillas
Aguacate
Yabucoa
Calabazas
Yabucoa
Juan Martín
Yabucoa
Limones
Yabucoa
Playa
Yabucoa
Yabucoa -pueblo
Yabucoa
1,201
1,345
1092
954
1,401
3,018
2,330
222
1,518
160
434
642
251
90
578
532
440
644
444
668
229
1,339
953
2,164
1,245
1,117
1,781
994
18,772
3,928
6,407
11,824
1,372
1,569
1335
1,221
1,179
2,812
2,183
354
1,483
124
492
587
459
187
626
715
527
664
314
545
770
1,013
828
2,226
1,410
1,004
1,550
1,001
18,741
4,133
6,398
11,908
3.4%
3.9%
5.2%
6.4%
-4.2%
-1.8%
-1.6%
12.4%
-0.6%
-6.2%
3.2%
-2.2%
16.3%
20.1%
2.0%
7.7%
4.6%
0.8%
-8.3%
-5.0%
35.4%
-6.7%
-3.5%
0.7%
3.2%
-2.6%
-3.4%
0.2%
0.0%
1.3%
0.0%
0.2%
3.08
3.17
3.26
2.91
2.95
2.88
3.03
2.64
2.72
2.46
3.28
3.10
2.55
2.98
3.02
3.16
2.74
2.77
3.46
2.95
2.87
3.02
3.27
3.15
2.96
3.20
3.07
2.66
3.05
2.92
2.97
3.13
50.1%
21.8%
46.4%
42.6%
43.9%
42.3%
39.7%
43.2%
33.3%
38.5%
62.7%
50.8%
56.7%
91.7%
53.2%
56.5%
59.1%
35.3%
42.1%
42.8%
47.9%
50.1%
44.7%
48.6%
41.1%
42.8%
50.6%
52.2%
43.0%
56.2%
55.7%
51.5%
Puerto Rico
40,931
1,213,939
41,180
1,230,868
0.2%
0.3%
3.02
2.96
51.6%
41.2%
Source: ACS 2013 and 2009 5 year estim ates
Table 5: Household Analyses for Impacted Wards, SRA & PR
The region has access to the North, South, and West of the Island through
the following principal arterials:
•! State Road PR-3
These municipalities show a diverse topographical variety. Humacao is
mainly composed of level terrain, with some hills inland. Yabucoa has a
defined central level terrain leading to its port, which is surrounded by
mountains. Maunabo and Patillas also have areas of level terrain, but
most of their territory is comprised of hills and mountainous areas. As with
!
Page 19 of 69
other coastal municipalities, the mountains reach the coastal plains within
their jurisdictional limits. Figure 3 shows a satellite image obtained from
PRPB that shows the coastal plains and surrounding mountainous areas of
each of the above-mentioned municipalities.
Figure 3: Southeastern Region of Puerto Rico (Source: PRPB)
Límites
Municipios
Southeast Region of Puerto Rico
[-]
0
1
2mi
Land Use
The municipalities located in the Southeastern Region of Puerto Rico share
similarities in land use to other jurisdictions in the Island. A well-defined
CBD concentrates most urban residential and commercial activities.
Outlying residential communities are observed in surrounding rural sectors
of every Municipality. The major residential development outside the
municipal CBD in the region is Palmas del Mar, on the eastern cast of
Humacao. However, the remaining municipalities, especially Maunabo
and Patillas show and increasing number of residential communities
growing closer to the coast.
!
Page 20 of 69
TRANSPORTATION)PATTERNS)
In this section of the report the mobility patterns between the four
municipalities of the region will be presented. In other words how many
people travel from Maunabo to Humacao or vice versa, or between
Patillas and Yabucoa.
Given the basic objective of increasing
accessibility to the labor market, trip patterns for the four municipalities
included in this study will be ascertained by using the Labor mobility survey
of the 2010 Census.
Based on the information from the US Census, the total number of
employees in the region are 48,757 people, of which an average of 44.50
percent travel to another Municipality to work, thus a 55.5 percent stay in
their Municipality of residence to work. As can be seen there is a very
good balance of workers traveling outside their Municipality to work when
compared to those that stay in their Municipality of residence, thus
needing to provide for both intra-municipal and inter-municipal routes.
Next the individual trip patterns of each Municipality will be evaluated.
Regarding trip pattern for the Municipality of Humacao, it presents a 59.94
percent of trip that are internal trips, thus originate and are destined to
the Municipality of Humacao, while a 2.04 percent are destined to
Yabucoa, a 0.41 percent to Maunabo, and a 0.06 percent to Patillas. In
summary Humacao presents a 62.46 percent of trips are inside the study
region compared to a 37.54 percent that are destined outside the region.
When the trip pattern for the Municipality of Yabucoa is evaluated, a
38.62 percent of trips are internal trips, a 32.69 percent are destined to
Humacao, a 0.81 percent are destined to Maunabo, and a 0.32 percent
to Patillas. In summary Yabucoa presents a 72.44 percent of trips are
inside the study region compared to a 27.56 percent that are destined
outside the region.
When the trip pattern for the Municipality of Maunabo is evaluated, a
55.35 percent are internal trips, a 12.30 percent are destined to Humacao,
a 4.78 percent are destined to Yabucoa, and a 1.94 percent to Patillas. In
!
Page 21 of 69
summary Maunabo presents a 74.37 percent of trips are inside the study
region compared to a 25.63 percent that are destined outside the region.
Finally, when the trip pattern for the Municipality of Patillas is evaluated a
39.22 percent are internal trips, a 26.52 percent are destined to
Guayama, an 8.89 percent are destined to Arroyo; thus a 35.41 percent or
the mayor destinations are municipalities that are not part of this project.
Regarding the municipalities in the region, a 4.41 percent are destined to
Maunabo, 1.57 percent are destined to Humacao, and 0.66 percent are
destined to Yabucoa. In summary Patillas presents a 45.86 percent of trips
are inside the study region compared to a 54.14 percent that are
destined outside the region.
These percentages of origin destination pairs will be used to estimate
ridership for the future system, and will be presented later on in this report.
!
Page 22 of 69
Employees
that Live and
Work in the
Municipality
Employees
that Travel
Total
% Travel
Humacao
Arroyo
Guayama
Maunabo
Patillas
Yabucoa
Regional Trips
Non-Regional
Trips
Table 6: Origin Destination Parings based on Labor Mobility
Humacao
9,545
6,379
15,924
40.06%
59.94%
0.06%
0.14%
0.41%
0.06%
2.04%
62.459%
37.541%
Arroyo
1,860
2,531
4,391
57.64%
0.68%
42.36%
38.12%
0.46%
6.19%
0.00%
7.333%
92.667%
Guayama
8,988
3,490
12,478
27.97%
0.16%
5.24%
72.03%
0.00%
2.33%
0.13%
2.621%
97.379%
Maunabo
1,598
1,289
2,887
44.65%
12.30%
2.49%
2.46%
55.35%
1.94%
4.78%
74.368%
25.632%
Patillas
1,671
2,590
4,261
60.78%
1.57%
8.89%
26.52%
4.41%
39.22%
0.66%
45.858%
54.142%
Yabucoa
3,405
5,411
8,816
61.38%
32.69%
0.17%
0.19%
0.81%
0.32%
38.62%
72.436%
27.564%
27,067
21,690
48,757
44.49%
Municipality
Total
!
!
TRANSPORTATION)INFRASTRUCTURE)AND)SERVICES)
This section presents existing public transit infrastructure and services
currently available in the municipalities. The information included on
existing service lines is based on the 2014 Público Service Survey and
information provided by the municipal governments of Humacao,
Yabucoa, Maunabo, and Patillas.
MUNICIPALITY)OF)HUMACAO)
PÚBLICOS
Based on the 2014 Público Service Survey, in Humacao has 8 active
Público routes and terminal staging areas. As can be seen from the data
presented in table 1, of the 8 active routes 5 have an average vehicle
count of 1 on a typical day. The Punta Santiago route presents an
average of two vehicles on a typical day, and the Humacao to Juncos
route, an inter-municipal route, presents an average of 4 vehicles on a
typical day.
Table 7: Existing Público Routes in Humacao
Code
Avg.
Veh.
Active Humacao - Bo. Buena Vista
L-36-01
1
5
4
20
Active Humacao - Bo. Candelero Abajo
L-36-15
1
6
3
18
Active Humacao - Bo. Candelero Arriba
L-36-03
Active Humacao - Bo. Cataño
L-36-12
1
10
3
30
Humacao - Bo. Tejas Vía Bo. Los
Active
Laureles
L-36-08
1
6
2
12
Active Humacao - Juncos Vía Las Piedras
I-36-40
4
22
9
198
Active Humacao - Playa Guayanes
L-36-17
1
10
8
80
Active Humacao - Playa, Punta Santiago
L-36-13
2
8
4
32
Status
Name
Daily
Avg.
Avg.
Trips Passengers Passengers
/ Trip
/ Day
Important wards population wise such as Antón Ruíz, Collores, Buena Vista
have no active transportation services, placing a burden on the residents
of these wards to own a private automobile in order to provide
transportation for the house hold.
TROLLEY
Humacao operates the Transportation System of Humacao (SITRAH, for its
Spanish acronym), a trolley system, that circulates in downtown
Humacao. The operating hours are from 6:00 AM to 4:00 PM on weekdays
and Saturdays.
The route starts at the North Público Terminal, running to the East, turning
right at the Cruz Ortiz Stella street, on which it continues to Dufresne Street
where it takes a left turn; it follow on Dufresne to its intersection with
Antonio López Street where it makes a left turn on PR-3; where it continues
eastbound to its intersection with Boulevard Del Río where it makes a right
turn on to Boulevard del Río Street continuing west on Boulevard Del Río to
the South Terminal of Humacao, where it makes a stop. At the exit from
the South Terminal it makes a right turn on to Ulises Martínez Street
completing the route at the North terminal. Figure 4: , presents the STRAH
route as operational today.
Figure 4: SITRAH Route Map
(Source: Humacao Comprehensive Transportation Study, November 2010)
!
Page 25 of 69
MUNICIPALITY)OF)YABUCOA)
PÚBLICOS
Based on the 2014 Público Service Survey, Yabucoa has 4 active Público
routes and terminal staging areas. As can be seen, of the four active
routes the Yabuco to Humacao route presents an average vehicle count
of 4 Públicos on a typical day. The Camino Nuevo and Playita ward
present two Público vehicles on a typical day, and the Martorrel Sector
route presents one Público on a typical day.
Table 8: Existing Público Routes in Yabucoa
Status
Name
Code
Avg.
Veh.
Daily
Trips
Active
Yabucoa - Bo. Camino Nuevo L-79-02
2
14
Active
Yabucoa - Bo. Playita
L-79-07
2
26
Active
Yabucoa - Humacao
I-79-36
4
15
Active
Yabucoa - Parcelas Martorel L-79-08
1
4
Avg.
Avg.
Passengers Passengers
/ Trip
/ Day
TROLLEY
The Municipality of Yabucoa operates a trolley system that circulates in
the downtown area of the Municipality. The route starts in the parking lot
of Ralph’s Food Warehouse, where it turns left on PR-901, it continues on
PR-901 to its intersection with Cristobal Colon Street where it makes right
turn crossing downtown Yabuco to the intersection with Luis Muñoz Rivera
Street where it makes a right turn; it continues on Luis Muñoz Rivera Street
to its intersection with PR-3 where it makes a left turn on to PR-9909, it
continues on PR-9909 to its intersection with PR-182 where it makes a left
turn, where it continues on PR-182 to its intersection with PR-901; it
continues on PR-901 to the intersection with Access to the University where
it loops around the university entrance and returns to the point of origin.
!
Page 26 of 69
Figure 5: Yabucoa Trolley Route
MUNICIPALITY)OF)MAUNABO)
PÚBLICOS
Based on the 2014 Público Service Survey, in Humacao has 4 active
Público routes and no terminal staging area, the Públicos line up at a
designated curb-side. Of the four active routes in the Emajagua Ward
and Patillas routes present an average of 3 Público vehicles per day,
meanwhile the Matruya Alto and Palo Seco routes present an average of
2 Público vehicles per day. Unfortunately the only route that has average
passenger data is the Maunabo to Patillas route, which presents and
average of 5 passengers per trip or 65 passengers per day.
!
Page 27 of 69
Table 9: Existing Público Routes in Maunabo
Status
Name
Avg.
Veh.
Code
Daily
Avg.
Avg.
Trips Passengers Passengers
/ Trip
/ Day
Active
Maunabo - Bo. Emajagua, Bo. Bordaleza,
L-49-01
Playa
3"
36"
Active
Maunabo - Bo. Matruya Alto
L-49-05
2"
13"
Active
Maunabo - Palo Seco
L-49-06
2"
13"
Active
Maunabo - Patillas
I-49-56
3"
13"
65"
5"
MUNICIPALITY)OF)PATILLAS)
PÚBLICOS
Based on the 2014 Público Service Survey, Patillas has 3 active Público
routes and a new terminal staging area. Of the three routes only two
service the region being evaluated in this study and both of them present
and average of 1 Público per typical day. Regarding passenger data
both routes present an average of 2 passengers per trip.
Table 10: Existing Público Routes in Patillas
Status
Name
Avg. Veh.
Daily Trips
Code
Avg.
Avg.
Passengers Passengers
/ Trip
/ Day
Active
Patillas - Bo. Los Pollos
L-56-04
1"
10"
2"
20"
Active
Patillas - Bo. Real
L-56-05
1"
6"
2"
12"
Active
Patillas - Guayama
NEEDS)
Based on the socioeconomic data, and the existing transportation
services in the four municipalities it can be established that the
Southeastern Region of Puerto Rico has high unemployment and poverty
rates, and no recognizable public transportation services.
!
Page 28 of 69
Based on the above, the Southeastern Region is in need of an efficient
and reliable transit system that can provide alternatives to the residents in
the area, provide greater mobility, access to job opportunities, and
promote economic development and urban revitalization.
ROUTES)ALIGNMENTS)
The alignment of the proposed transit lines was done using Remix, a GISbased online tool developed for transit planning and design. Remix
incorporates maps, satellite imagery, and census information layers to
facilitate analysis and route modeling.
The software also includes
mathematical tools to calculate the number of vehicles needed, costs,
population served, and other information, based on proposed frequency,
distances traveled, average vehicle speed, and driver rest time.
The benefits of the proposed transit service will be twofold: local and
regional mobility. Two (2) inter-municipal lines will connect the
Southeastern municipalities of Humacao, Yabucoa, Maunabo, and
Patillas. The latter will be complemented by eleven (11) intra-Municipal
lines that will serve outlying areas in each of the above-mentioned
municipalities from their respective CBD's, significantly augmenting
accessibility to transit services for the population in the entire region.
INTER6MUNICIPAL)LINES)
The two (2) proposed lines interconnecting the municipalities in the region
are the following:
•! Humacao to Maunabo, stopping at Yabucoa CBD
•! Maunabo to Patillas
The decision to have two (2) separate lines serving as connector between
the four (4) municipalities was made to reduce distances traversed, in
order to minimize possible disruption in service, and to provide efficient
service to users based on population travel patterns. Having a reliable
service is a key factor to the success of any transit system, and reducing
!
Page 29 of 69
distances traveled by buses is a significant factor to avoid variance in
service times.
Figure 6 System Wide Proposed Routes
The route from Humacao to Maunabo will begin at the North transit
terminal of the former and will have a stop at the South terminal
Humacao, thus making it accessible to everyone within the CBD. The
route will continue its southbound trip to the CBD of Yabucoa, via State
Road PR-3. After stopping in Yabucoa, the system will continue south
towards Maunabo CBD, traversing State Road PR-901. In addition, we
must point out that this route will assist as an intra-municipal route from
Maunabo Playa to Maunabo CBD and from Camino Nuevo to Yabucoa
CBD along PR-901.
This line will have a total distance of approximately 66.56 km, a runtime of
approximately 100 minutes, a layover time of 10 minutes, and will require
two (2) vehicles.
The inter-Municipal route from Maunabo to Patillas will connect both
CBD’s via State Road PR-3. The route will cover an approximate total
!
Page 30 of 69
distance of 35.91 km, a runtime of approximately 54 minutes, a layover
time of 5 minutes, and will require one (1) vehicle to operate.
Inbound
(km)
Outbound
(km)
Runtime
(min)
Layover
(min)
Buses
Humacao - Maunabo
32.5
34.1
99.8
10.0
2
Maunabo - Patillas
17.9
18.0
5.4
40.0
1
Route
Route alignment considered population density and ease of travel along
the existing highways. The two (2) inter-Municipal lines have terminals at
the corresponding municipal CBD, with the exception of Yabucoa and
the South terminal of Humacao, which will serve as stops to the
corresponding lines. By stopping at each municipal CBD, the intermunicipal lines will allow users to transfer to the local lines of each
Municipality, thus providing regional transit coverage to residents and
visitors to the region.
The following figures provide a graphical representation of the
interrelation ship of the routes and various census data. The first figure
presents the relationship of the proposed routes and population. As can
be most of the areas being covered by the system have population of
over 12 to 23 people per square mile.
!
Page 31 of 69
Figure 7 System Wide Proposed Routes compared to Population
Figure 8 System Wide Proposed Routes compared to Poverty
!
Page 32 of 69
Figure 9 System Wide Proposed Routes compared to Auto Availability
INTRA6MUNICIPAL)LINES)))
Eleven (11) lines will complement the inter-municipal lines serving the
region, enhancing coverage and accessibility to users. The local lines that
have been proposed to serve the four (4) municipalities are the following:
MUNICIPALITY OF HUMACAO:
•! CBD to Buena Vista Sector
•! CBD to Punta Santiago Sector (Playa)
•! CBD to Antón Ruiz Sector
MUNICIPALITY OF YABUCOA:
•! CBD to Martorell Sector
•! CBD to Playita Sector
!
Page 33 of 69
•! CBD to Rosa Sánchez Sector
MUNICIPALITY OF MAUNABO:
•! CBD to Coast
•! CBD to Palo Seco Sector
MUNICIPALITY OF PATILLAS:
•! CBD to State Road PR-184 North
•! CBD to State Road PR-757 loop
•! CBD to Valle Alto Sector
A brief description of each of the above-mentioned route is presented
below.
Humacao - Buena Vista Line
This line will serve the community of Buena Vista, located to the Southeast
of the CBD of Humacao. The line will start at the South transit terminal of
Humacao, continue East through Boulevard Nicanor Vázquez, then
though State Road PR-3, and finally traversing through PR-923 until its
terminus at Buena Vista Sector. The line will have a total distance traveled
of approximately 16.13 km, a runtime of approximately 24 minutes, a
layover of 3 minutes, and will require one (1) vehicle.
Humacao - Playa Line
This line will depart from the North transit terminal of Humacao and run
East through PR-3 until its terminus at Punta Santiago, on the coast of the
city. The route will return through PR-3, as well, but will detour through PR60 to reach the CBD. The total distance of the route is approximately
21.70 km and will require one (1) vehicle to operate.
Humacao – PR-924 Line
This line will depart from the North transit terminal of Humacao and run
North through PR-924 until its terminus at Antón Ruiz Sector. The route will
follow the same highway to return to the CBD. The total distance of the
!
Page 34 of 69
route is approximately 12.02 km and will require one (1) vehicle to
operate.
Figure 10 Humacao Proposed Routes compared to Poverty
Yabucoa - Martorell Line
This line will depart from the transit terminal at the CBD and run North
through PR-3. The route will continue Northeast through PR-902 and PR904, having its terminus at the intersection of the latter with 16 Street, at
Martorell Sector. The return to the CBD will be through the same route.
The total distance of the line is approximately 12.11 km and will require
one (1) vehicle to operate.
Yabucoa - Playita Line
This line will depart from the transit terminal at the CBD and run West
through PR-900 until it reaches Playita Sector. The line will return to the
CBD through PR-900, with a detour through PR-182 and Calle Cristóbal
Colón, due to on-way traffic operations within the CBD. The total distance
of the line is approximately 7.74 km and will require one (1) vehicle to
operate.
!
Page 35 of 69
Figure 11 Humacao Proposed Routes compared to Auto Availability
Yabucoa - Rosa Sánchez Line
through PR-3 and then Northwest through PR-182 until it reaches Rosa
Sánchez Sector. The line will return to the CBD through PR-182. The total
distance of the line is approximately 9.26 km and will require one (1)
vehicle to operate.
Maunabo - Costa Line
This line will depart from the transit terminal at the CBD and run Southwest
through PR-939 and PR-760, reaching the coast of Maunabo, and looping
back to the CBD. The total distance of the line is approximately 11.01 km
and will require one (1) vehicle to operate.
Maunabo - Palo Seco Line
through PR-3 and PR-759, entering through PR-7762 until it reaches Palo
Seco Sector. The line will use the same route to return to the CBD. The
!
Page 36 of 69
total distance of the line is approximately 9.10 km and will require one (1)
vehicle to operate.
Figure 12 Yabucoa and Maunabo Proposed Routes compared to Poverty
Patillas - PR184 Line
This line will depart from the transit terminal at the CBD and North through
PR-184 and back to the CBD.
The total distance of the line is
approximately 26.69 km and will require one (1) vehicle to operate.
Patillas - PR757 Line
This line will depart from the transit terminal at the CBD and loop through
PR-757 and PR-3. The total distance of the line is approximately 11.46 km
and will require one (1) vehicle to operate.
Patillas - Valle Alto Line
This line will depart from the transit terminal at the CBD and loop through
PR-799. The total distance of the line is approximately 4.36 km and will
require one (1) vehicle to operate.
!
Page 37 of 69
Figure 13 Yabucoa and Maunabo Proposed Routes compared to Auto Availability
Figure 14 Patillas Proposed Routes compared to Poverty
!
Page 38 of 69
Figure 15 Patillas Proposed Routes compared to Auto Availability
The proposed system will cover the most densely populated and
underserved sectors of the four (4) municipalities. By providing an
effective and reliable transit system at the regional and local level, the
municipalities promoter sustainable development of their cities and the
revitalization of their respective urban centers. The proposed lines will
provide a true alternate mode of transportation to residents and visitors of
the municipalities, by providing access within the municipal limits, as well
as regional coverage to those traveling between the four (4)
municipalities.
!
Page 39 of 69
Table 11: System Route Summary
Inbound
(km)
Outbound
(km)
Runtime
(min)
Layover
(min)
Buses
Humacao - Buena Vista
7.9
8.2
24.2
2.4
1
Humacao - Playa
11.0
10.7
32.5
3.3
1
Humacao - PR924
5.9
6.2
18.0
1.8
1
Maunabo - Costa
5.5
5.5
16.5
1.7
1
Maunabo - Palo Seco
4.6
4.5
13.6
1.4
1
Patillas - PR184
13.3
13.3
40.0
4.0
1
Patillas - PR757
11.5
0
17.2
1.7
1
Patillas - Valle Alto
3.2
1.1
6.5
.7
1
Yabucoa - Martorell
5.1
7.0
18.2
1.8
1
Yabucoa - Playita
7.7
0
11.6
1.2
1
Yabucoa - Rosa Sánchez
9.3
0
13.9
1.4
1
Route
RIDERSHIP)
MODE)CHOICE)PROBABILITY)
Mode Choice probability for this study will be based on the model
developed by Iniciativa Tecnológica Centro Oriental, (INTECO) for the
Region Central Oriental region of Puerto Rico in 2011 and presented in
2012 in the report titled First Regional Transit System. This model was
developed from a field surveys of 11 municipalities in the region of which
Humacao and Yabucoa were part of. The model developed by to
calculate the probability of selecting the Público System, was based on a
Logit model and the utility equations as calculated by NLOGIT, an
econometric model estimation computer program which can be used to
develop nested logit, and probit models, will be applied and the system
specific parameters will be established based on the system design
parameters.
!
Page 40 of 69
From the results obtained by the model developed by INTECO, at the
regional level, the probability of selecting the Público with fixed schedules
and a headway of 60 minutes for the intra-municipal routes was 8.21%,
and for the inter-municipal the probability was 8.08%.
INTER6MUNICIPAL)ROUTE)
For the inter-municipal route the expected ridership was calculated
multiplying the CoC population for each Municipality by the expected
proportion making at least a trip per weekday expressed by population
over 19 years as presented in the socioeconomic section of this report, by
the proportion of trips between two municipalities, based on the
origin/destination (O/D) trip calculated from the 2010 Census labor
mobility data, by the probability of choosing the proposed system for
intra-municipal service with 60 minutes headway. The result of that
mathematical calculation will provide the amount of two-way trips
expected by route, to transfer those two way trips into unlinked passenger
trips (UPT’s), the two way trips will be multiplied by two.
As can be seen in Table , for each pair of municipalities an expected
number of UPT was calculated using the parameters explained above.
Trips originating in Humacao result in approximately 140 UPT’s/day, with
112 of them destined to Yabucoa. For the Municipality of Yabucoa, the
results present approximately 706 UPT’s/day with over 650 of them
destined to Humacao. For the Municipality of Maunabo, the results
present 194 UPT’s/day with 124 of them destined to Humacao and 50 of
them destined to Yabucoa. Finally, for the Municipality of Patillas, the
results present approximately 220 UPT’s/day of which 146 of them are
destined to Maunabo.
In general, it is expected that the complete route can generate
approximately 1260 UPT’s/day.
!
Page 41 of 69
INTRA6MUNICIPAL)ROUTES)
The expected ridership for each intra-municipal route was calculated by
multiplying the population of the wards being served by each route, by
the expected proportion making at least a trip per weekday expressed by
population over 19 years as presented in the socioeconomic section of
this report, by the percentage of origin/destination internal trips based on
the labor mobility census data; by the probability of choosing mass transit
service for intra-municipal service with 60 minutes headway, based on the
INTECO 2012 study. The result of that mathematical calculation will
provide the amount of two-way trips expected by route, to transfer those
two way trips into UPT’s, the two way trips will be multiplied by two.
Table 12: Expected UPT for the Intermunicipal Route
Municipality
Humacao
Yabucoa
Population
45480
17666
Humacao-Yabucoa
Humacao-Maunabo
Humacao-Patillas
Yabucoa-Humacao
Yabucoa-Maunabo
Yabucoa-Patillas
Maunabo-Humacao
Maunabo-Yabucoa
Maunabo-Patillas
Patillas-Humacao
Patillas-Yabucoa
Patillas-Maunabo
Population
Over 19
0.738
0.738
0.738
0.727
0.727
0.727
0.737
0.737
0.737
0.735
0.735
0.735
Municipality
Maunabo
Patillas
% O/D
2.04%
0.41%
0.06%
32.69%
0.81%
0.32%
12.30%
4.78%
1.94%
1.57%
0.66%
4.41%
Probability
of Use
0.0808
0.0808
0.0808
0.0808
0.0808
0.0808
0.0808
0.0808
0.0808
0.0808
0.0808
0.0808
Total UPT
Population
8459
27677
Two Way
Trips
56
12
2
340
9
4
62
25
10
26
11
73
630
UPT
112
24
4
680
18
8
124
50
20
52
22
146
1260
MUNICIPALITY OF HUMACAO
Based on sociodemographic data the wards to be served by the intramunicipal routes in Humacao are Anton Ruiz, Collores, Punta Santiago
!
Page 42 of 69
and Buena Vista. From the U.S. Census Bureau, 2010-2014 American
Community Survey 5-Year Estimates; Anton Ruiz has a projected
population of 3,648 people, Collores has a projected population of 1,918
people, Punta Santiago has a projected population of 5,138 people, and
Buena Vista has a projected population of 3,879 people.
Based on the population expected to use the system, the probability of
use and the O/D percentage, the Anton Ruiz / Collores route is expected
to generate approximately 406 UPT’s/day, meanwhile the Punta Santiago
route is expected to generate approximately 506 UPT’s/day, and finally
the Buena Vista Route is expected to generate approximately 382
UPT’s/day. Table 13, presents the summary of the results.
Table 13: Expected UPT for the Intar-Municipal Routes for Humacao
CoC
Population
Probability
Humacao
Population
Over 19
% O/D
of Use
Anton Ruiz / ColloresNorth Terminal
5566
0.738 0.5994
0.0821
Punta Santiago - North Terminal
5138
0.738 0.5994
0.0821
Buena Vista - South Terminal
3879
0.738 0.5994
0.0821
Two Way
Trips
UPT
203
253
191
406
506
382
MUNICIPALITY OF YABUCOA
Based on sociodemographic data the wards to be served by the intramunicipal routes in Yabucoa are Calabazas and Limones wards. In the
case of Yabucoa both Rosa Sánchez and Playita sectors are located in
the Calabazas Ward. From the U.S. Census Bureau, 2010-2014 American
Community Survey 5-Year Estimates; Calabazas has a projected
population of 7,136 people, and Limones has a projected population of
3,122 people.
use and the O/D percentage, the Rosa Sánchez and Playita routes are
expected to generate approximately 456 UPT’s/day, meanwhile the
Martorell route is expected to generate approximately 198 UPT’s/day.
Table 14, presents the summary of the results.
!
Page 43 of 69
Table 14: Expected UPT for the Intar-Municipal Routes for Yabucoa
CoC
Yabucoa
Population
Rosa Sánchez y Playita
to Yabucoa
7163
Martorell to Yabucoa
3122
Population
Over 19
% O/D
Probability
of Use
0.727 0.3862
0.727 0.3862
0.0821
0.0821
Two Way
Trips
228
99
UPT
456
198
MUNICIPALITY OF MAUNABO
Based on sociodemographic data the wards to be served by the intramunicipal routes in Maunabo are Emajagua and Palo Seco wards. From
the U.S. Census Bureau, 2010-2014 American Community Survey 5-Year
Estimates; Emajagua has a projected population of 3,980 people, and
Palo Seco has a projected population of 1,412 people.
use and the O/D percentage, the Emajagua route are expected to
generate approximately 268 UPT’s/day, meanwhile the Palo Seco route is
expected to generate approximately 96 UPT’s/day. Table 15, presents the
summary of the results.
Table 15: Expected UPT for the Intar-Municipal Routes for Maunabo
CoC
Maunabo
Population
Emajagua to Maunabo
3980
Palo Seco to Maunabo
1412
Population
Over 19
% O/D
0.737 0.5535
0.737 0.5535
Probability Two Way
of Use
Trips
UPT
0.0821
134 268
0.0821
48
96
Municipality of Patillas
Based on sociodemographic data the wards to be served by the intramunicipal routes in Patillas are Mamey, Apeadero, Cacao Alto, Cacao
Bajo, Jagual, and Mulas wards. From the U.S. Census Bureau, 2010-2014
American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates; Mamey has a projected
population of 1,574 people, Apeadero has a projected population of 741
people, Cacao Alto has a projected population of 2,448 people, Cacao
Bajo has a projected population of 1,380 people, Jagual has a projected
!
Page 44 of 69
population of 328 people, and Mulas has a projected population of 522
people.
use and the O/D percentage, the PR-757 route, that covers the Mamey
and Apeadero wareds is expected to generate approximately 150
UPT’s/day, meanwhile the Palo Alto route, that covers the Cacao Alto
ward is expected to generate approximately 158 UPT’s/day, and finally
the PR-184 route, which covers the Cacao Bajo, Jagual, and Mulas wards,
is pexpected to generate approximately 144 UPT’s/day. Table 15,
presents the summary of the results.
Table 16: Expected UPT for the Intar-Municipal Routes for Patillas
CoC
Patillas
Population
PR-757 to Patillas
2315
Palo Alto to Patillas
2448
PR-184 to Patillas
2230
Population
Over 19
0.735
0.735
0.735
% O/D
0.3922
0.3922
0.3922
Probability of Two Way
Use
Trips
UPT
0.0821
75 150
0.0821
79 158
0.0821
72 144
GENERAL SUMMARY
Table 17, presents a summary of the expected UPT’s for each route,
summarized and expressed in an average weekly UPT’s based on the
average weekday and annual averages the Humacao to Maunabo
route can be expected to move approximately 281,320 UPT’s per year,
meanwhile the Maunabo to Patillas route can be expected to move
approximately 46,280 UPT’s/year.
When the Humacao routes are evaluated the Anton Ruiz/Collores route
can be expected to move approximately 105,560 UPT’s/year, while the
Playa route can be expected to move 131,560 UPT’s/year, and finally the
Buena Vista route can be expected to move 99,320 UPT’s/year/.
!
Page 45 of 69
Table 17: General Summary of Expected UPT’s
Humacao to Maunabo through Yabucoa
Maunabo to Patillas
Daily UPT's Weekday UPT's Annual UPT's
1,082
5,410
281,320
178
890
46,280
Anton Ruiz/Collores to Humacao North Terminal
Playa to Humacao North Terminal
Buena Vista to Humacao South Terminal
406
506
382
2,030
2,530
1,910
105,560
131,560
99,320
Rosa Sánchez y Playita
Martorell
456
198
2,280
990
118,560
51,480
Emajagua a Maunabo
Palo Seco a Maunabo
268
96
1,340
480
69,680
24,960
PR-757 to Patillas
Palo Alto a Patillas
PR-184 a Patillas
150
158
144
750
790
720
39,000
41,080
37,440
For the Municipality of Yabucoa the Rosa Sánchez and Playita routes can
be expected to move approximately 118,560 UPT’s/year, meanwhile the
Martorell route can be expected to move approximately 51,480
UPT’s/year.
For the Municipality of Maunabo the Emajagua route can be expected to
move approximately 69,680 UPT’s/year, meanwhile the Palo Seco route
can be expected to move approximately 24,960 UPT’s/year.
Finally, for the Municipality of Patillas the PR-757 route can be expected to
move approximately 39,000 UPT’s/year, meanwhile the Palo Alto and PR184 routes can be expected to move approximately 41,080 and 37,440
UPT’s/year, respectively.
As can be seen a well implemented system can be expected to generate
significant number of UPT’s per day and year in the region.
!
Page 46 of 69
SYSTEM)DESIGN)
Based on the recommended routes listed above in this section we will
present the basic set of solutions that will make public transportation
feasible between the municipalities of Humacao, Yabucoa, Maunabo
and Patillas. This system is expected to help increase mobility between
the municipalities, increase accessibility to job opportunities, reduce
unemployment, and reduce the demand for private car, reducing traffic
congestion and greenhouse emissions.
The following sections will present the different elements considered and
the design recommendations for the system.
OPERATIONAL)CONCEPT)
The following sections will describe the different components of the
concept for the operation of the Regional Transportation System between
Humacao, Yabucoa, Maunabo and Patillas.
VISION)
The vision for the project is to have a regional transportation system
composed of:
o! A collaborative and integrated effort among the four (4)
municipalities to provide inter- and intra-municipal transit lines
serving regional residents and visitors
o! Provide public transportation services that effectively satisfy
community needs of mobility across the Region
o! Provide public transportation that will increase accessibility to job
opportunities and reduce unemployment
o! While promoting livability and urban revitalization, making feasible a
reduction in private auto demand and hence reducing traffic
congestion and derived greenhouse emissions and pollutants
!
Page 47 of 69
POLICY
The policy recommended includes the following:
o! The system will have representatives from each of the four (4)
municipalities participating in the evaluation, monitoring, and
decision-making processes. However, the system will have one
leader to represent the system before the Federal Transit
Administration (FTA) and State agencies. For this system the lead
Municipality will be the Maunabo.
o! The existing trolley and Público lines serving the four (4)
municipalities will be complemented by the proposed lines,
which have the objective of providing coverage to areas that
are currently underserved or increase limited coverage by
adding additional trips to the areas.
o! Lead Municipality will be responsible for ensuring the
compliance with National Transit Database requirements.
INTEGRATION
The general strategy for the Region includes the integration of the
existing trolleys and Público System, and the planned transit service in
order to expand service area, provide more reliable service and
promote the access to economic opportunities, jobs, and education.
Some examples of integration features among different systems are:
o! Infrastructure – Common elements and language should be
used to develop a uniformity among the system elements such
as bus stops, signage, etc.
o! Modes – All modes currently available, as well as those that are
planned should be considered as part of the same system to
provide efficient integration.
o! Schedule – To improve mobility and increase desirability of usage
the integration of schedules to reduce transfer and wait times, as
well as to develop a reliable system which users can be
confident with.
!
Page 48 of 69
o! Information dissemination – Implement a mechanism to share
current transportation information between and within all
municipalities in the region and the users.
ORGANIZATIONAL)PLAN)
In an effort to promote a coordinated effort between the four
municipalities in the Region, a recommended organizational plan is
presented in which the Municipality of Maunabo will be the leader in the
effort. Although the strategy is focused mainly in the proposed regional
system, it can also serve other available modes operated by the
Municipalities in the Region.
The four (4) municipalities will have permanent representatives
participation of all decision-making processes related to the system. This
assures coordinated efforts and insight to needs in every Municipality, in
order to continuously monitor and improve service availability and quality
of service.
BUS)STOP)LOCATION)
Based on typical layout characteristics from the Municipalities and the
urban areas three subgroups of stops have been identified. First, urban
areas, second, suburban areas and finally rural areas. Based on the
characteristics of each area the following bus stop spacing is
recommended:
!! Urban areas - Between 125 to 300 meters, based on economic
activity locations,
!! Suburban areas – Between 300 to 500 meters, based on household
distribution and economic activity locations, and
!! Rural areas – On a case by case necessity, depending on amount
of and density of households, and economic activity locations.
In addition, for the Inter-Municipalities routes the principal stop will be
located at the Público terminal or the downtown square which ever be
the case for each Municipality.
Finally, additional stops will be
!
Page 49 of 69
concentrated to service special economic and tourist development
areas, with high economic activity or potential.
FLEET)DESCRIPTION)
Based on the vehicles available on the market we will divide the routes in
two principal type the inter-municipal and the intra-municipal.
For the inter-municipal routes a bus with a floor plan having a side door, 2
seats on each side and a central passageway for easy access, and it
must include a wheel chair lift to comply with federal regulations and
guaranty access for handicap people, is recommended.
In the market there are various models of buses that comply those
specifications such as the Diamond VIP 2800, which is a bus constructed
over a Ford E450 chassis and has a 24 passenger configuration with a
wheelchair lift in the back and 2 wheelchair tie downs, or the Defender
from Champion Bus Inc. which can be built over a wide range of chassis
and lengths.
Figure 16 Interior Lay-out of vehicle recommended for Intre-Munnicipal Routes
(Source: www.nationsbus.com)
For intra-municipal routes that will have to address the complication of
smaller roads and tighter spaces to traverse, a smaller vehicle that still has
!
Page 50 of 69
a floor plan having a side door, 2 seats on one side and 1 seat on the
other and a central passageway for easy access, and it must include a
wheel chair lift to comply with federal regulations and guaranty access for
handicap people, is recommended.
Figure 17 Exterior of vehicle recommended for Intre-Munnicipal Routes
(Source: www.nationsbus.com)
The market has various products, but a van similar to the Ford Transit
Wagon XL or XLT, which comes in 8, 12, and 15 passenger configurations in
a mini-buss layout similar to the ones presented in Figure 18 and Figure 19.
Figure 18 Vehicle recommended for Intra-Munnicipal Routes
(Source: www.ford.com)
!
Page 51 of 69
Figure 19 Interior of Vehicle recommended for Intra-Munnicipal Routes
(Source: www.media.ford.com)
HOURS)OF)OPERATION)
For the system
recommended:
being
design
the
following
base
schedule
is
INTER-MUNICIPAL ROUTES
For the Intre-Municipal routes headways are recommended at 60 minutes
for the peak hours from 6:00 – 9:00 am and 3:00 to 6:00 pm, and 90
minutes for the rest of the day. Inter-municipal lines are proposed to
operate as follows:
•! Weekdays, 6am to 9am, and 3pm to 6pm: every 60 minutes
•! Weekdays, 9am to 3pm, and 6pm to 9pm: every 90 minutes
•! Weekends, 7am to 9pm: every 90 min
INTAR-MUNICIPAL ROUTES
On the other hand intra-municipal routes a 60 minute headway is
recommended for the entire operation schedule. As to provide better
!
Page 52 of 69
mobility to the system users, it is important to coordinate schedules and
hours of operation, especially between intra and inter municipal routes.
•! Intra-municipal lines are proposed to operate as follows:
•! Weekdays, 6am to 9pm: every 60 minutes
•! Weekends, 7am to 9pm: every 60 minutes
EDUCATIONAL)CAMPAIGN)
For the implementation to be effective in making people change from
auto to transit mode, it is very important to establish an educational
campaign. This is especially important as current Público users are
captive.
Such campaign needs to be oriented towards the
environmental benefits of switching to a mass transit mode.
The
campaign should have data to illustrate the public of the importance of
such switch, including lowering of traffic congestion and emissions, which
will eventually improves physical and social health. The development of
such campaign can be a subject of future works.
!
Page 53 of 69
BENEFIT)COST)ANALYSIS)
BENEFIT)COST)ASSUMPTIONS))
The Benefit/Cost ratio is computed by dividing the increase in benefits by the
increase in costs of initial investment, maintenance and operational costs. Thus,
the B/C ratio shows the incremental benefits or costs for the build scenario in
comparison to the "no-build" scenario. The assumptions used in the benefits
calculations are described in the following sections.
TRAFFIC AND DESIGN ASSUMPTIONS
As per the information provided by the firm EFGB Consulting Engineers, the
Actual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) in the impacted roads, PR-3, PR-53 and PR901 is of 95,900. This average daily traffic is expected to increase to 110,285 in 20
years or at a rate of 0.75% each year. These traffic projections will remain the
same in both scenarios (build & no-build), but if the Mass Transit systems are
implemented it is estimated that the traffic will reduce approximately 748
vehicles each day, which in effect will reduce congestion and improve overall
safety in the whole corridor. The demand projection model performed resulted in
the following 20-year traffic forecasts if the Mass Transit system was built or not
built.
Table 18: Projected ADT for 2016 and 2036
Projected ADT for 2016 and 2036 in Build & No-Build Scenarios
Alternativ e
No Action
Build Alternativ e
Year
2016
2036
2016
2036
Av erage Daily Traffic
Ridership of
(ADT) of I mpacted Roads proposed
- PR-3, PR-53, PR-901
Bus Systems
95,900
110,285
95,152
1,122
109,425
1,290
Source: EFGB Consult ing Engineers
The projections consider a 45 mile long bus route along the existing roads of PR-3,
PR-53 and PR-901 from Humacao to Patillas. No additional HOV lanes are
contemplated to be constructed and the Bus transit will be an addition to the
existing ADT of the impacted roads. Average speeds in the impacted roads of
10 miles per hour will not be impacted and it is assumed that Mass Transit system
!
Page 54 of 69
will not provide any time savings. Benefits of collective mass transportation are
seen in the savings of emissions, accident costs and travel costs such as gasoline,
auto maintenance among others discussed later in the document.
ECONOMIC ASSUMPTIONS
To evaluate the benefits and the present value of the costs the following were
considered:
1.! Evaluation Periods: A construction and implementation period of one year
and an evaluation period of 20 years after the project is complete, from
2016 to 2036.
2.! Economic Update Factor: 2.5% each year which is equal to a 1.64
economic index factor (1.025^20). GNP and Growth information was
acquired from the Puerto Rico Planning Board in their publication Economic
Report to the Governor 2014. An average discount rate of 6% was used to
calculate the present value.
3.! Average Hourly Wage: an average wage of $13.52 per hour in Puerto Rico
was used. Average hourly wage was obtained from the Bureau of Labor
Statistics for Puerto Rico, for May 20142.
4.! Average Fuel Price: average fuel prices of $3.30 per gallon for regular
gasoline were obtained from Puerto Rico Department of Consumer Affairs
(DACO). Diesel fuel prices were not used due to limited use by cars in the
proposed project.
5.! Sales and Fuel Taxes: A sales tax rate of 11.5% is considered. Fuel taxes are
incorporated in the average fuel price of $3.30 per gallon. Additional state
or federal sales taxes do not apply in gasoline prices in Puerto Rico. Tax
rates were obtained from the Puerto Rico Department of the Treasury
(Hacienda).
6.! Cost of Highway Accidents and Fatalities: these were based on Federal
averages and the TIGER BCA Resource Guide 2015 that suggest values of
injuries by type of AIS level. The suggested values by accident were
adjusted to the Puerto Rico economy by applying the ratio of personal
income between Puerto Rico and the United States, and by taking into
account Puerto Rico's inflation trends. The adjustment factor considered in
2
"
http://www.bls.gov/regions/new9york9new9jersey/news9release/occupationalemploymentandwages_sanjuan.htm"
"
!
Page 55 of 69
cost per injury was of 38.8% since Puerto Rico’s personal income per capita
is 38.8% below that of the United States.
!
Figure 20: Average Fuel Prices
Table 19: Assumed Cost per Injury in Highway Accidents
COST PER INJURY
AIS Level
AI S 6
AI S 5
AI S 4
AI S 3
AI S 2
AI S 1
AI S 0
Description
Unsurv iv able $
Critical
$
Sev ere
$
Serious
$
Moderate
$
Minor
$
No I njury - PDO $
US
9,400,000
5,574,200
2,500,400
987,000
441,800
28,200
2,816
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
PR
5,753,344
3,411,733
1,530,390
604,101
270,407
17,260
1,724
Source:(FHA,%FHWA,%TIGER%BCA%Resource%Guide%2015
7.! State Highway Accident Rates: Accident rates were obtained from historical
statistics of Puerto Rico’s Department of Highway and Transportation.
8.! Construction and Operational Costs: were provided by client, EFGB
Consulting Engineers.
9.! Emission Rates / Tables: emission rates were obtained from the California Air
Resources Board, EMFAC 2011 (most recent). Below the emission tables:
!
Page 56 of 69
Table 20: Emissions Factors
Emissions'Tables
EMISSIONS'FACTORS'(g/mi)
Year'1
NOX
EMISSIONS'FACTORS'(g/mi)
Year'20
Mode
Speed
CO
CO2
Auto
0
5
5.2339
5.7109
79.62
1200.44
0.3731
0.4530
PM10
0.0044
0.0640
SOX
0.0000
0.0122
VOC
0.7131
0.6503
10
4.7606
891.61
0.3940
0.0575
0.0091
11
4.6222
850.74
0.3852
0.0567
12
4.4838
809.87
0.3764
0.0559
13
4.3453
769.00
0.3677
14
4.2069
728.13
15
4.0685
16
NOX
PM10
HEALTH'COST'OF'TRANSPORTATION'EMISSIONS
($/ton)
Mode
Speed
CO
CO2
Auto
0
5
1.3628
1.3760
80.38
1208.90
0.0771
0.1323
0.0049
0.0584
SOX
0.0000
0.0122
VOC
0.2019
0.1693
0.4751
10
1.2511
898.02
0.1160
0.0534
0.0091
0.1286
0.0087
0.4539
11
1.2273
856.86
0.1135
0.0528
0.0087
0.1235
0.0083
0.4326
12
1.2034
815.71
0.1109
0.0523
0.0083
0.1185
0.0551
0.0079
0.4114
13
1.1796
774.55
0.1084
0.0517
0.0079
0.1135
0.3589
0.0543
0.0075
0.3901
14
1.1558
733.40
0.1058
0.0511
0.0075
0.1085
687.26
0.3502
0.0535
0.0071
0.3689
15
1.1320
692.24
0.1033
0.0505
0.0071
0.1035
3.9674
659.79
0.3438
0.0531
0.0068
0.3558
16
1.1120
664.57
0.1014
0.0502
0.0068
0.1005
PASSENGER'TRAIN'EMISSIONS'FACTORS
17
18
19
3.8664
3.7653
3.6643
632.31
604.84
577.36
0.3373
0.3309
0.3245
0.0526
0.0521
0.0516
0.0065
0.0063
0.0060
0.3428
0.3298
0.3168
17
18
19
1.0920
1.0721
1.0521
636.90
609.23
581.56
0.0994
0.0975
0.0955
0.0499
0.0495
0.0492
0.0065
0.0062
0.0060
0.0975
0.0944
0.0914
(g/train9mile)
20
21
3.5632
3.4877
549.88
531.23
0.3181
0.3134
0.0512
0.0509
0.0057
0.0055
0.3038
0.2958
20
21
1.0322
1.0154
553.89
535.11
0.0936
0.0921
0.0488
0.0486
0.0057
0.0055
0.0884
0.0865
22
3.4122
512.58
0.3087
0.0506
0.0053
0.2878
22
0.9985
516.34
0.0906
0.0484
0.0053
0.0847
23
3.3367
493.93
0.3040
0.0503
0.0051
0.2798
23
0.9817
497.56
0.0891
0.0482
0.0051
0.0828
24
3.2612
475.28
0.2993
0.0500
0.0050
0.2718
24
0.9649
478.79
0.0876
0.0480
0.0049
0.0809
LIGHT'RAIL'EMISSIONS'FACTORS
25
30
3.1857
2.9010
456.63
393.55
0.2947
0.2781
0.0497
0.0487
0.0048
0.0041
0.2638
0.2387
25
30
0.9481
0.8774
460.01
396.50
0.0862
0.0806
0.0478
0.0472
0.0048
0.0041
0.0791
0.0734
(g/veh9mile)
35
40
45
2.6883
2.5368
2.4427
351.97
326.63
314.51
0.2672
0.2609
0.2589
0.0481
0.0477
0.0475
0.0037
0.0034
0.0033
0.2231
0.2142
0.2104
35
40
45
0.8188
0.7716
0.7362
354.67
329.19
317.03
0.0767
0.0740
0.0726
0.0468
0.0465
0.0464
0.0037
0.0034
0.0033
0.0701
0.0686
0.0685
50
60
2.4093
2.5851
314.17
350.18
0.2609
0.2774
0.0474
0.0476
0.0033
0.0037
0.2111
0.2270
50
60
0.7144
0.7293
316.79
353.35
0.0723
0.0750
0.0463
0.0464
0.0033
0.0037
0.0699
0.0780
70
80
3.2311
4.4902
418.75
420.01
0.3038
0.3079
0.0481
0.0482
0.0044
0.0044
0.2647
0.3186
70
80
0.9173
1.6204
422.99
425.77
0.0806
0.0828
0.0468
0.0469
0.0044
0.0044
0.0984
0.1463
Source:(California(Air(Resources(Board,(EMFAC(2011
Notes:(1)(Zero(mph(corresponds(to(starts,(2)(Other(emissions(factors(include(idling(emissions(and(exclude(diurnal(and(evaporative(emissions,(3)(Five(mph(is(best(estimate(for(idling
Benefits such as travel time savings, operating costs, accident reductions, and
Emission Costs and factors were calculated using the formulas in the Cal-B/C
model v5.03. The model was designed specifically for Highway & Mass Transit
Projects such as Rail and Bus Systems, modified to account for Puerto Rico’s
economic factors (discount rates, update factor, value of time / hourly rate,
gasoline price, accident costs) as previously discussed. All other benefits and
costs were estimated by Estudios Técnicos, Inc. using FHWA parameters. Based
on these parameters, we can calculate the economic benefits of the proposed
Mass Transit System in the Humacao, Yabucoa, Maunabo and Patillas corridor.
ECONOMIC)BENEFITS)OF)MASS)TRANSIT)
The following section identifies and groups the benefits included in the
Benefit Cost analysis for the development and implementation of the
proposed Mass Transit System in the Humacao, Yabucoa, Maunabo and
Patillas corridor.
3
"Latest"2015"model"available"al"Caltrans"http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/tpp/offices/eab/LCBC_Analysis_Model.html"
"
!
Page 57 of 69
ECONOMIC)COMPETITIVENESS)
TRAVEL TIME SAVINGS
Since the proposed mass transit system will not increase travel speeds of
commuters nor reduce travel lengths, there are no time saving benefits in the
proposed project.
VEHICLE OPERATING COST (VOC) SAVINGS
The biggest benefit of the proposed Mass Transit project is that it would create
savings in vehicle operating costs (fuel use, vehicle wear and tear, etc.) to
commuters taking the bus system. These benefits are calculated as follows:
1.! Using the base and future-year ADT projections we multiply the affected
segment length to find annual VMT (Vehicle-Miles-Traveled) in scenarios,
BUILD and NO BUILD, as well as the difference (VMT savings).
2.! Then, annual VMT savings are multiplied by the fuel consumption and the
unit fuel cost to find the dollar value for fuel VOC savings. Annual VMT
savings are multiplied by unit non-fuel VOC to find the dollar value of nonfuel VOC savings. Fuel rates used where $3.30 for regular gasoline.
3.! Future annual values of VOC savings are discounted to obtain their present
value.
The table below recaps the formulas used in the Vehicle Operating Cost Benefits
Formulas:
Vehicle'Miles*Traveled*=*Affected*Length*x*Avg.*Annual*Volume
Non'Fuel*Cost*=*VMT*x*Cost*Per*Mile
veh'miles/yr
dollars
miles
vehicles/yr
Fuel*Cost*=*VMT*x*Fuel*Consumption*x*Fuel*Price
dollars
gallons/mile
$/miles
Benefit*=*Existing*Cost*'*New*Cost
$/gallon
calculation.
The present value of the vehicle savings in operating cost benefits are of
$81.4 million over a 20-year period, which average to a savings of $4.07
million each year.
!
Page 58 of 69
Table 21: Summary of Vehicle Operating Costs Benefits
SUMMARY OF VEHICLE OPERATING COST BENEFITS
1
20
Peak
Non-HOV
$6,259,817
$2,379,294
Non-Peak
Non-HOV
$55,198
$20,980
Present
Value of
Veh Op Cost
Benefits
$6,315,015
$2,400,274
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
$5,952,110
$5,659,181
$5,380,344
$5,114,941
$4,862,345
$4,621,957
$4,393,204
$4,175,538
$3,968,438
$3,771,406
$3,583,963
$3,405,658
$3,236,054
$3,074,740
$2,921,319
$2,775,415
$2,636,669
$2,504,737
$52,484
$49,901
$47,443
$45,102
$42,875
$40,755
$38,738
$36,819
$34,993
$33,255
$31,603
$30,030
$28,535
$27,112
$25,760
$24,473
$23,250
$22,086
$6,004,594
$5,709,083
$5,427,787
$5,160,044
$4,905,220
$4,662,713
$4,431,942
$4,212,357
$4,003,431
$3,804,661
$3,615,566
$3,435,688
$3,264,589
$3,101,852
$2,947,079
$2,799,888
$2,659,918
$2,526,824
Year
Total
$80,677,130
$711,394
Constant
Dollars
$6,693,915
$7,698,003
$6,746,762
$6,799,609
$6,852,456
$6,905,302
$6,958,149
$7,010,996
$7,063,842
$7,116,689
$7,169,536
$7,222,382
$7,275,229
$7,328,076
$7,380,923
$7,433,769
$7,486,616
$7,539,463
$7,592,309
$7,645,156
$81,388,525
$143,919,183
Source:""Formulas"and"Calculations"from"Edited"Cal"B/C"Model"and"ETI"Estimates"
ACCIDENT COST SAVINGS
The benefits of accident cost savings are calculated as follows:
1.! The aggregated accident cost (per million miles) is determined by
multiplying the accident rate by accident cost for each type of accident
and adding the results. Transit accident cost savings are calculated similarly,
except that the aggregate accident cost is calculated by accident event
(i.e. fatality, injury, property damage) rather than accident type.
!
Page 59 of 69
2.! Annual VMT (in million miles) is the multiplied by aggregate accident cost
(established in parameters), to result in the annual cost of accidents for both
scenarios, BUILD and NO BUILD.
3.! The difference (BUILD minus NO BUILD, change in accident cost) is
discounted to find the preset value of future safety benefits.
The table below recaps the formulas used in the Accident Reduction Benefits
calculation.
Formulas:
Vehicle'Miles*Traveled*=*Affected*Length*x*Avg*Volume
veh'miles/yr
miles
Transit*Acc*Cost*=*Veh'Miles*x*Acc*Cost/Mile
vehicles/yr
Hwy*Acc*Cost*=*(VMT*x*Rate*x*Cost/Mile)*by*Acc*Type
Transit*Acc*Cost/Mile*from*PARAMETERS
!
The present value of Accident Reduction benefits are of $11.1 million over
a 20-year period or about $555,133 each year.
ENVIRONMENTAL)SUSTAINABILITY)
EMISSION REDUCTION BENEFITS
Reduction in ADT and traffic will create emissions benefits even though a
bus system will be implemented in the route. These benefits of emission
reductions are calculated as follows:
1.! The aggregate emissions cost (per mile) is calculated by multiplying
the emissions rate (see parameters) by the emissions cost for each
type of emission and adding the results.
2.! Annual VMT (in miles) is then multiplied by the aggregate emissions
cost to result in the annual emissions cost, with and without the project
(Build or No Build).
3.! The difference in scenarios (BUILD minus NO BUILD, change in
emissions cost) is discounted to find the preset value of future
emissions benefits.
!
Page 60 of 69
Table 22: Summary of Accident Reduction Benefits
SUMMARY OF ACCIDENT REDUCTION BENEFITS
1
20
Accident Benefits
TOTAL PV
$9,476
$3,602
Present
Value of
Accident
Benefits
$861,467
$327,435
Constant
Dollars
$913,155
$1,050,128
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
$9,010
$8,567
$8,145
$7,743
$7,361
$6,997
$6,650
$6,321
$6,007
$5,709
$5,425
$5,155
$4,899
$4,655
$4,422
$4,201
$3,991
$3,792
$819,120
$778,808
$740,435
$703,910
$669,149
$636,067
$604,586
$574,631
$546,131
$519,015
$493,220
$468,681
$445,341
$423,141
$402,028
$381,948
$362,854
$344,698
$920,364
$927,573
$934,782
$941,991
$949,200
$956,409
$963,618
$970,827
$978,037
$985,246
$992,455
$999,664
$1,006,873
$1,014,082
$1,021,291
$1,028,500
$1,035,709
$1,042,919
Total
$122,129
$11,102,665
$19,632,822
Year
!
The table below recaps the formulas used in the Emissions Reductions
Benefits calculation.
Formulas:
Vehicle'Miles*Traveled*=*Affected*Length*x*Avg.*Annual*Volume
veh'miles/yr
miles
Transit*Em*Cost*=*(Veh'Miles*x*Rate*x*Cost/Mile)*by*Em*Type
vehicles/yr
*Hwy*Emissions*Cost*=*(VMT*x*Rate*x*Cost/Mile)*by*Emissions*Type
!
!
Page 61 of 69
Table 23: Summary of Emission Reduction Benefits
SUMMARY OF EMISSION REDUCTION BENEFITS
Present
1
20
Peak
Non-HOV
$1,027,547
$474,465
Non-Peak
Non-HOV
$9,110
$4,140
Value of
Emission
Benefits
$1,036,657
$478,605
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
$989,130
$952,179
$916,636
$882,448
$849,562
$817,929
$737,587
$710,856
$685,112
$660,318
$636,438
$613,439
$591,286
$569,949
$549,397
$529,600
$510,531
$492,161
$8,762
$8,427
$8,106
$7,798
$7,501
$7,216
$6,499
$6,258
$6,026
$5,803
$5,589
$5,382
$5,184
$4,993
$4,809
$4,632
$4,461
$4,298
$997,892
$960,606
$924,742
$890,245
$857,063
$825,144
$744,086
$717,114
$691,138
$666,121
$642,027
$618,821
$596,470
$574,942
$554,206
$534,232
$514,992
$496,459
Total
$14,196,570
Year
$124,993
$14,321,563
CO2 EMI SSI ONS
SAVED
Constant
Dollars
$1,098,856
$1,534,951
tons/yr
16,235
18,802
PV $/yr
$641,155
$357,526
$1,121,231
$1,144,097
$1,167,466
$1,191,349
$1,215,760
$1,240,712
$1,185,960
$1,211,549
$1,237,724
$1,264,497
$1,291,885
$1,319,901
$1,348,562
$1,377,882
$1,407,878
$1,438,566
$1,469,962
$1,502,085
16,364
16,492
16,620
16,748
16,876
17,004
17,253
17,383
17,512
17,641
17,770
17,899
18,028
18,157
18,286
18,415
18,544
18,673
$621,831
$603,052
$584,806
$567,078
$549,855
$533,124
$520,521
$504,626
$489,190
$474,199
$459,644
$445,512
$431,792
$418,472
$405,544
$392,995
$380,815
$368,996
$25,770,872
350,702
$9,750,732
The present value of the emission reduction benefits are of $14.32 million
over a 20-year period, which average to approximate savings of $716,078
each year.
COSTS)OF)PROJECT)
INITIAL INVESTMENT
The total initial investment of the proposed Mass transit system is of
$2,000,000, which is composed of the purchase of 12 buses, each with a
cost of $150,000, for a total of $1.8 million in buses; and $200,000 in permits,
!
Page 62 of 69
administrative costs and other implementation contingencies of the bus
system.
In addition to the initial investment an operational and
maintenance costs of $2.34 million is considered in the first year of
operations. This operational cost is assumed to increase 2.5% each year
and it is considered in the operational phase of the Mass Transit system for
a 20 year period. The following table details the projects’ initial
construction cost as well as the 20 year operational costs.
Table 24: Projected Project Cost
PROJECT COSTS
Year
SUBSEQUENT COSTS
Maint./
Construction
Op.
Rehab.
R/W
Construction Period
1
$
Project Open
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Total
2,000
$2,340.00
$2,340.03
$2,340.05
$2,340.08
$2,340.10
$2,340.13
$2,340.15
$2,340.18
$2,340.20
$2,340.23
$2,340.25
$2,340.28
$2,340.30
$2,340.33
$2,340.35
$2,340.38
$2,340.40
$2,340.43
$2,340.45
$2,340.48
$2,000
$46,805
TOTAL COSTS (in dollars)
Constant
Dollars
Present
Value
$ 2,000,000
$ 2,000,000
$2,340,000
2,340,025
2,340,050
2,340,075
2,340,100
2,340,125
2,340,150
2,340,175
2,340,200
2,340,225
2,340,250
2,340,275
2,340,300
2,340,325
2,340,350
2,340,375
2,340,400
2,340,425
2,340,450
2,340,475
$2,207,547
2,082,614
1,964,751
1,853,559
1,748,659
1,649,696
1,556,333
1,468,255
1,385,161
1,306,769
1,232,815
1,163,045
1,097,224
1,035,128
976,546
921,280
869,141
819,953
773,549
729,771
$48,804,750
$28,841,796
BENEFIT)COST)RESULTS)
The proposed Mass Transit system between Humacao, Yabucoa,
Maunabo and Patillas, is beneficial with a benefit cost ratio greater than
!
Page 63 of 69
1. It is estimated that the proposed project will have a BC ratio of 3.7, a
rate of return of 270% and a payback period of 1 year. The proposed
Mass Transit system will have the potential to generate gross benefits of
$5.3 million per year and net benefits of $3.9 million each year of
operations.
Table 25: Benefit Cost Analysis Summary
Benefit Cost Analysis Summary
Benefits in
Net Present
Costant
Value of
Dollars - Total
Benefits - NPV
for 20 years
Annual
Average
ECONOMIC COMPETITIVENESS
Trav el Time Sav ings
Operating Cost Sav ings
TOTAL
$
$
$
$ 143,919,183 $ 81,388,525 $ 4,069,426
$ 143,919,183 $ 81,388,525 $ 4,069,426
SAFETY
Fatalities
I njuries
Property Damage
TOTAL
$ 9,610,457 $
5,434,862 $
$ 3,538,328 $
2,000,979 $
$ 6,484,038 $
3,666,824 $
$ 19,632,822 $ 11,102,665 $
271,743
100,049
183,341
555,133
ENVIRONMENTAL
Emission Benefits
Sav ings in CO2 ($)
Sav ings in CO2 (tons)
TOTAL
$ 8,224,962 $
4,570,832 $
$ 17,545,910 $
9,750,732 $
350,702
350,702
$ 25,770,872 $ 14,321,563 $
228,542
487,537
17,535
716,078
Total Benefits - Life Cycle Benefit
I nitial I nv estment & Maintenance Life Cycle Cost
Net Present Value of Benefit
Benefit Cost Ratio
Rate of Return on Investment
Payback Period
$ 106,812,753
$
$ 5,340,638
28,841,796 $ 1,442,090
$ 77,970,956
3.70
270.3%
1 year
$ 3,898,548
These benefits are social benefits and are not equal to operational
income or profits that the Mass Transit system may generate when
operating. This analysis only measures the social benefit of the project and
not the financial feasibility of the same.
!
Page 64 of 69
SYSTEM)JUSTIFICATION)
Based on the lack of existing systems that can provide mobility in the
region, expected ridership that can be draw to this system and the
projected Benefit to Cost Ratio calculated the proposed system will
CONCLUSIONS)AND)RECOMMENDATIONS)
GENERAL)CONCLUSIONS)
The creation of a regional transit system that provides inter- and intramunicipal lines to serve the communities in the area is a significant step
forward in providing mobility and promoting urban revitalization. Having
access to a reliable and efficient public transportation system brings social
justice to underserved communities in the region, which currently suffer
high unemployment and poverty rates.
A regional transit system provides a feasible alternative to private vehicle
users who wish to commute within any of the municipalities or across the
region.
Furthermore, having an effective and reliable public
transportation system is paramount in the revitalization of the urban
landscape of any city. Thus, by providing regional system, enhanced by
local coverage within the four (4) municipalities, economic and social
development is directly promoted.
Promoting transit use results in lower traffic congestion and the
environmental pollution and health issues associated to it, making the
municipalities in the Region more livable.
The existing surface
transportation network is also more efficiently used when traffic
congestion is reduced, therefore reducing the need for additional road
enhancement and elimination of natural and environmental resources.
!
Page 65 of 69
The proposed system will serve the CBD of each Municipality and its
outlying areas, providing accessibility to residents and visitors. The interconnection to the two (2) proposed inter-Municipal lines at each CBD will
also give access to users to regional travel. The initial coverage and
frequency of service may be, respectively, extended and reduced as
demand grows.
By introducing a reliable and efficient schedule operations, ridership can
be expected to grow in the long term. Initial frequencies of a vehicle
every 60 to 90 minutes will allow users to plan trips to and from the CBD, or
within municipalities, with assurance regarding expected waiting and
travel times. The four (4) municipal governments can continue to plan
their economic and social development in a transit-oriented fashion, in
order to maximize land use and promote livability and the protection of
environmental resources.
The estimated annual cost of operation of $3,25 million will be distributed
among the four (4) participating municipalities. The cost provides positive
benefits to the community, since coverage will extend to the areas of
most poverty and unemployment, which are currently underserved.
!
Page 66 of 69
BIBLIOGRAPHY)
“Chapter 4: Traffic and Flow Characteristics." Traffic Engineering
Handbook. Ed. James L. Pline. 5th ed. Washington, D.C.: Institute of
Transportation Engineers, 1999. Pp. 78-80, 93-94. Print.
Enciclopedia De Puerto Rico / Fundación Puertorriqueña De Las
Humanidades. "Municipios: Humacao." Enciclopedia De Puerto Rico
/ Encyclopedia of Puerto Rico. Fundación Puertorriqueña De Las
Humanidades,
2002-2011.
Web.
14
June
2011.
<http://www.enciclopediapr.org>.
Federal Emergency Management Agency website on June 8, 2011
<http://www.msc.fema.gov/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/info?storeI
d=10001&catalogId=10001&langId=1&content=floodZones&title=FEMA%20Flood%20Zone%20Designatio
ns>.
Meyer, Michael D. and Miller, Eric J. Urban Transportation Planning – A
Decision-Oriented Approach. McGraw-Hill, Inc. 1984. Pp.257-269.
National Transit Database. NTD Glossary 2010. National Transit Database,
Federal Transit Administration. 21 July 2010.
Olivieri, Luis. Hydrographic River Basins Map. Puerto Rico Water
Resources and Environmental Research Institute.
University of
Puerto Rico – Mayagüez.
Ortiz, Carmen G. "Humacao-municipio De Puerto Rico-datos Y Fotos".
Puerto Rico Poesía, Música, Arte, Historia y Cultura. Web. 15 June
2011 <http://www.prfrogui.com/home/humacao.htm>.
Puerto Rico Department of Transportation and Public Works. 2030 San
Juan Long Range Transportation Plan. 2011.
Puerto Rico Planning Board. Flooding Susceptible Zones Regulation,
Planning Regulation Num. 13, Fifth Revision. September 5, 2002.
!
Page 67 of 69
Rico Rolón, Zaida E. Characteristics and Design of Mass Transit Systems –
Comprehensive Doctoral Exam. Prepared by Alberto Figueroa,
Answers by Zaida Rico. 30 November 2009.
Rico Rolón, Zaida E. Considerations For The Schedule Integration Of Public
Transit System (Decision-Oriented Approach) Case Study: San Juan
Metropolitan Area. INCI 6047 course project. Department of Civil
and Environmental Engineering, University of Puerto Rico – Mayagüez
Campus. December 2008.
Rico Rolón, Zaida E.
Impact of Transit Organization in Ridership.
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of
Puerto Rico – Mayagüez Campus. Ongoing.
Rico Rolón, Zaida E. Potential Changes in UW Student Ridership at Madison
Metro due to Timed Transfer Terminals. Master’s Thesis, Civil and
Environmental Engineering Department, University of Wisconsin –
Madison. December 1998.
Rivera, Magaly. “Humacao”. Welcome to Puerto Rico. 1995-2011. 16
June 16 2011 <http://www.topuertorico.org/city/humacao.shtml>.
RRaosoft, Inc. "Sample Size Calculator." Web Survey Software, Online
Surveys, Email Surveys from Raosoft, Inc. 2004. Web. Oct.-Nov. 2012.
<http://www.raosoft.com/samplesize.html>.
Travel and Sports, Inc. "Humacao." Puerto Rico for Visitors, Tourists, Tourism
and Travel (English). 1986-2011. Web. 15 June 2011.
<http://travelandsports.com/espanol/humacao-puerto-ricogur.php>.
U.S. Census Bureau. Puerto Rico Community Survey, 2005-2009 American
Community Survey.
U.S. Census Bureau. Puerto Rico Community Survey, 2005-2009 American
Community Survey.
Vuchic, Vukan. Urban Transit Operations, Planning and Economics. John
Wiley & Sons, Inc. Hoboken, New Jersey. 2005. Pp. 51-54, 201-206.
!
Page 68 of 69
Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority. WMTA 2010 Metrobus
Fleet Management Plan – Final Report. Office of Long Range
Planning, Department of Planning and Joint Development, Office of
Bus Planning, Department of Bus Services. 22 July 2010.
!
Page 69 of 69

EFGB - Trans Sur-Este

Transcription

Similar documents

here - National Boricua Human Rights Network

Puerto Rico: The Face Of PH for the World

tenure track faculty position announcement librarian ii

Nationalist Heroines - Newark Public Library

Cervecera de Puerto Rico

Tropigas de Puerto Rico, Inc.: Employee Productivity and Customer

Froggy Drawing handout2 - Mid Mon Valley Transit Authority

Mr. Jossen Rossi

puerto rico