City of Miami Electric Cars &

Vehicles on Track
Phase 1: Service Plan and Alignment Definition
RFQ No: 16-17-063
PO No.: 1807703/12

Prepared for
City of Miami

Prepared by:
WSP USA, Inc.
 City of Miami Electric Cars & Vehicles on Track
Phase 1: Service Plan and Alignment Definition

Table of Contents
1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 1

2. Potential Segment Identification........................................................................................... 2

2.1 Segment 1: Overtown Transit Village/Miami Central to PortMiami Cruise Terminal.. 4
2.2 Segment 1A: MIA to Miami Central .............................................................................. 5
2.3 Segment 2: Brickell Avenue to FTX Arena ..................................................................... 5
2.4 Segment 2A: FTX Arena to Design District...................................................................... 6
2.5 Segment 3: Miami Central to Design District ................................................................ 6
2.6 Segment 3A: Design District/Magic City Loop ............................................................. 6
2.7 Segment 4: MIA to Wynwood........................................................................................ 7
2.8 Segment 4A: Overtown Connector .............................................................................. 7
2.9 Segment 5: Douglas Road Metrorail Station to Magic City Casino ........................... 8
2.10 Segment 6: Gables Connector ..................................................................................... 8

3. Design Criteria....................................................................................................................... 10
3.1 Maximum Operating Speed ......................................................................................... 10
3.2 Horizontal Envelope....................................................................................................... 10
3.3 Maximum Grade ........................................................................................................... 12
3.4 Maximum Curvature ..................................................................................................... 12
3.5 Station Spacing.............................................................................................................. 13
3.6 Terminal Locations ......................................................................................................... 13
3.7 Station Types .................................................................................................................. 13
3.8 Electric Vehicle Charging Stations ............................................................................... 14
3.9 Required Accommodation .......................................................................................... 14
3.10 Groundwater Considerations ....................................................................................... 14
3.11 Required Accommodation .......................................................................................... 15
3.12 Emergency Egress and Fire Safety ............................................................................... 15
3.13 Geotechnical Considerations ...................................................................................... 15

4. High – Level Impact Assessment.......................................................................................... 20

4.1 Population and Employment Considerations ............................................................. 20
4.2 Land Use and Zoning .................................................................................................... 30
4.3 Environmental Justice Considerations ......................................................................... 34
4.4 Roadway Data .............................................................................................................. 38
4.5 Historic Resources .......................................................................................................... 39
4.6 Social/Cultural Resources ............................................................................................. 39
4.7 Utilities ............................................................................................................................. 40
4.8 Segment Criteria Matrix ................................................................................................ 41
4.8.1 Population (2045) ................................................................................................... 41
4.8.2 Employment (2045) ................................................................................................ 41
4.8.3 Income .................................................................................................................... 42
4.8.4 Minority Population (non-white) ............................................................................ 42
4.8.5 Right-of-Way (ROW) ............................................................................................... 42
4.8.6 Traffic ....................................................................................................................... 43

P a g e | iP a g e | i
 City of Miami Electric Cars & Vehicles on Track
Phase 1: Service Plan and Alignment Definition

4.8.7 Social/Cultural Resources ...................................................................................... 43

4.8.8 Historic Preservation ............................................................................................... 44
4.8.9 Utilities ...................................................................................................................... 44
4.9 Overall Ratings ............................................................................................................... 44

5. Initial Service Volume Assessment ....................................................................................... 48

Appendix A: Roadway Data ..................................................................................................... 50

List of Tables
Table 1: Utility Impact Table ....................................................................................................... 40
Table 2: Segment Evaluation Criteria and Rating .................................................................... 47
Table 3: Estimated Hourly Service Volumes .............................................................................. 48
Table 4: Segment 1 Roadway Data .......................................................................................... 50
Table 5: Segment 1A Roadway Data ....................................................................................... 50
Table 6: Segment 2 Roadway Data .......................................................................................... 51
Table 7: Segment 2A Roadway Data ....................................................................................... 51
Table 8: Segment 3 Roadway Data .......................................................................................... 52
Table 9: Segment 3A Roadway Data ....................................................................................... 52
Table 10: Segment 4 Roadway Data ........................................................................................ 53
Table 11: Segment 4A Roadway Data ..................................................................................... 53
Table 12: Segment 5 Roadway Data ........................................................................................ 53
Table 13: Segment 6 Roadway Data ........................................................................................ 54

P a g e | ii P a g e | ii
 City of Miami Electric Cars & Vehicles on Track
Phase 1: Service Plan and Alignment Definition

List of Figures
Figure 1: Initial Study Area ............................................................................................................ 1
Figure 2: The Miami Loop Potential Segments ............................................................................ 3
Figure 3: Miami Loop - Downtown Miami ................................................................................... 9
Figure 4: A Tesla AEV traveling inside the LVCC Tunnels (Source: LVCVA, 2021)..................................... 11
Figure 5: Schematic of the URUP method (Source: Mino, S. et al, 2010) ...................................................... 12
Figure 6: Sample Spiral Parking Ramp ....................................................................................... 17
Figure 7: LVCC Loop At Grade Station (Source: Clark County 2019, digitized public record) ..................................... 18
Figure 8: Conceptual rendering of the hotel side Resorts World loop station (Source: news3lv.com) .. 19
Figure 9: LVCC’s Central station (Source: TBC, 2021) ............................................................... 19
Figure 10: LVCC Below Grade Station (Clark County 2020, digitized public record) ............................................. 20
Figure 11: 2015 Population - Study Area ................................................................................... 22
Figure 12: 2015 Population - Downtown Miami ........................................................................ 23
Figure 13: 2045 Population – Study Area ................................................................................... 24
Figure 14: 2045 Population - Downtown Miami ........................................................................ 25
Figure 15: 2015 Employment – Study Area................................................................................ 26
Figure 16: 2015 Employment – Downtown Miami .................................................................... 27
Figure 17: 2045 Employment – Study Area................................................................................ 28
Figure 18: 2045 Employment – Downtown Miami .................................................................... 29
Figure 19: Future Land Use – Study Area ................................................................................... 30
Figure 20: Future Land Use – Downtown Miami ........................................................................ 31
Figure 21: Zoning - Study Area ................................................................................................... 32
Figure 22: Zoning - Downtown Miami ........................................................................................ 33
Figure 23: Minority Populations 2045 – Study Area ................................................................... 35
Figure 24: Minority Populations 2045 – Downtown Miami ........................................................ 36
Figure 25: Low-Income Households 2045 – Study Area ........................................................... 37
Figure 26: Low-Income Households 2045 – Downtown Miami ................................................ 38

P a g e | iii P a g e | iii
 City of Miami Electric Cars & Vehicles on Track
Phase 1: Service Plan and Alignment Definition

1. Introduction
The purpose of this study is to perform a high level evaluation of potential alignments and
service plan for Electric Cars and Vehicles on Track within the City of Miami. The system
would be running in a series of underground tunnels, using a technology similar to the Las
Vegas Convention Center Loop (LVCCL). The initial alignments within the City of Miami limits
will be developed within the boundaries highlighted on Figure 1. Potential connections to
major activity centers such as the Design District, Downtown Miami, Coral Gables, and Miami
International Airport will also be identified.

Figure 1: Initial Study Area

The following process was followed and documented in the following sections: potential
segment identification, design criteria development, and segment evaluation.

Potential segments were first identified based activity center locations and connectivity to
existing and future transit systems, including the County’s Strategic Miami Area Rapid Transit
(SMART) Plan Corridors.

Tunnel boring emerging technologies and the LVCCL were reviewed extensively to identify
the design criteria that were used in the development of tunnels for electric cars and vehicles
on track. The initial segments were further evaluated using a set of 10 criteria, as follows:

1. Population (2045)

RFQ No: 16-17-063

PO No.: 1807703/12 Page |1
 City of Miami Electric Cars & Vehicles on Track
Phase 1: Service Plan and Alignment Definition

2. Employment (2045)

3. Low-Income Households (<$25,000)

4. Minority Populations

5. Right-of-Way (ROW)
6. Traffic – AADT

7. Traffic – Number of Lanes

8. Social/Cultural Resources

9. Historic Resources

10. Major Utilities (Potential Conflicts).

A high-level service plan was then created for the potential segments within the City of
Miami.

This report summarizes the methodology and results of the analysis used to develop a
potential network of tunnels for electric cars and vehicles on tracks in the City of Miami. For
the purposes of this report, the network of potential segments is referred to as the Miami
Loop.

Decision on the feasibility of implementing a tunnel technology on any of the segments

identified should be based on in-depth evaluation including concept plans development
and ridership estimates among others.

2. Potential Segment Identification

The City of Miami is home to major commercial, residential, institutional, transportation, and
employment land-use that play a crucial role in the economy of Miami-Dade County and
South Florida. The City of Miami also contributes to the global economy, providing access
to PortMiami, one of the largest and most active ports in the United States and busiest cruise-
passenger facility. With such a prominent role, an alternate mode of transportation is crucial
to maintain mobility in an area that experiences high levels of congestion. With the
advancements and emerging technologies, developing a network of tunnels for use by
electric cars and vehicles on track was identified as a potential solution to maintain mobility
in the City of Miami.

A spatial analysis of the City of Miami transportation system was performed to identify
potential segments to be included in the electric cars and vehicles on track network. Six
potential segment alignments were identified, resulting in a network of 29 miles for potential

RFQ No: 16-17-063

PO No.: 1807703/12 Page |2
 City of Miami Electric Cars & Vehicles on Track
Phase 1: Service Plan and Alignment Definition

development of the Miami Loop. The network is illustrated in Figure 2. Please note the
segments numbers are for identification purposes and are not a ranking.

Figure 2: The Miami Loop Potential Segments

The Miami Loop connects downtown Miami, PortMiami and Miami International Airport. It
supports existing Brightline, Metrorail, and Metromover, and future NorthEast Corridor,

RFQ No: 16-17-063

PO No.: 1807703/12 Page |3
 City of Miami Electric Cars & Vehicles on Track
Phase 1: Service Plan and Alignment Definition

Downtown Miami Link, and SMART Plan service. The Miami Loop also serves major
community activity centers such as Wynwood, the Design District, and the FTX Arena.

To minimize impacts, all alignments are based on running two-way operation using two 12
feet inside diameter tunnels, with turnaround between the stations connecting the tunnels
as a safety and ventilation feature. Tunnels would require approximately 16 feet clearance
from the roadway surface to minimize disruption to underground utilities. Stations would be
located approximately one mile apart. The station spacing can be adjusted to better serve
activity centers and facilitate transfer between other transit systems and/or routes.
Additional design criteria are described in the next chapter of the report.

2.1 Segment 1: Overtown Transit Village/Miami Central to PortMiami Cruise

Terminal
This segment runs from Overtown Transit Village
Metrorail Station to PortMiami. The alignment runs
parallel to the FEC Rail spur, NW 5 Street and NW 6
Street. Connection to PortMiami can be provided at-
grade or underground. In the at-grade option, the
tunnel would terminate just east of the FTX Arena and
run parallel and above ground along Port Boulevard.
In the underground option, the alignment would continue with a tunnel into the bay under
Port Boulevard.

Length: 1.3 miles.

Tunnel Stations: Overtown Transit Village, Freedom Tower, PortMiami Cruise Terminal

Transit Connections: Overtown Transit Village Metrorail Station, Brightline, SMART Plan
NorthEast Corridor, Downtown Miami Link at Miami Central.

Major Attractors: Miami Central, Future Miami World Center, Port Miami

Special Considerations: Avoid bridge pilings for the Port Boulevard bridge.

RFQ No: 16-17-063

PO No.: 1807703/12 Page |4
 City of Miami Electric Cars & Vehicles on Track
Phase 1: Service Plan and Alignment Definition

2.2 Segment 1A: MIA to Miami Central

This Segment would provide a
connection to the Miami Airport at the
Miami
Intermodal MIC and run south on NW 37 Avenue
Center (MIC) and east at NW 7 Street to Overtown

Transit Village Metrorail Station

Length: 4.9 miles

Tunnel Stations: MIC, NW 37 Avenue and Melreese/Soccer Stadium, NW

37 Avenue and NW 7 Street, NW 15 Avenue and NW 7 Street, Miami Central
Transit Connections: MIC, Miami Central Station

Major Attractions: MIC, Melreese Golf Course, Magic City Casino, Marlins
Park, Miami Central

Special Considerations: Design consideration with tunnel construction

from the MIC and under SR 836.

2.3 Segment 2: Brickell Avenue to FTX Arena

This Segment runs along Biscayne Boulevard from SW 8th Street north
underneath the Miami River, east in front of the Epic Hotel, and north
on Biscayne Boulevard to the FTX Arena.

Length: 1.2 miles

Tunnel Stations: SW 7 Street and Brickell Avenue, Biscayne Boulevard

and Flagler Street, FTX Arena

Transit Connections: Metromover at Knight Center, Bayfront Park,

Wolfson Campus of MDCC, and Freedom Tower

Major Attractions: Knight Center, Intercontinental and Epic Hotels,

Bayside Marketplace, and FTX arena.

Special Considerations: Further evaluation of utility conflicts along

Biscayne Boulevard.

RFQ No: 16-17-063

PO No.: 1807703/12 Page |5
 City of Miami Electric Cars & Vehicles on Track
Phase 1: Service Plan and Alignment Definition

2.4 Segment 2A: FTX Arena to Design District

This is an option to extend Segment 2 north to the Design District, and area that has been
experiencing tremendous growth in recent years and slated for even more expansion. The
alignment would extend from the FTX Arena north to NW 39 Street, and west to NW 1 Avenue
to provide a connection to

Length: 2.5 miles

Tunnel Stations: FTX Arena, Biscayne Boulevard at 20 Street and 36 Street, NW 39 Street and
NE 1 Avenue

Transit Connections: SMART Plan NorthEast Corridor Design District Station

Major Attractions: Design District, FTX Arena, Midtown Miami

Special Considerations: Evaluate soil, utility, and bridge/building foundation conditions

impacting tunneling between the Arena and Arsht north up to NW 39 Street.

2.5 Segment 3: Miami Central to Design District

This Segment connects to the Metrorail Orange Line at the Overtown
Transit Village and runs along NW 8 Street to North Miami Avenue,
North on north Miami Avenue to 14 Street, west on 14 Street, north on
NW 2 Avenue to NW 39 Street, east to NE 1Avenue

Length: 2.8 miles

Tunnel Stations: Overtown Transit Village/Miami Central, Miami

Avenue and 14 Street, NW 2 Avenue and NW 20 Street, NW 2 Avenue
and NW 29 Street, NW 39 Street and NE 1 Avenue

Transit Connections: Overtown Transit Village/Miami Central Station,

future NorthEast Corridor N. Miami Avenue, and 14 Street Station
Major Attractions: Miami Central, Wynwood, Midtown Miami, Design District

Special Considerations: Design consideration with turns and short station spacing.

2.6 Segment 3A: Design District/Magic City Loop

This was identified as a potential extension of Segment 3, from NE 39 Street and NE
1 Avenue, west to NW 2 Avenue, then north to 62 Street to provide access to the
Little Haiti Neighborhood. The extension would also run east to 61 Street, then south
on NE 4 Court to approximately NE 55 Terrace, connect with and continue south
on Biscayne Boulevard to NE 39 Street, then head west to NE 1 Avenue.

RFQ No: 16-17-063

PO No.: 1807703/12 Page |6
 City of Miami Electric Cars & Vehicles on Track
Phase 1: Service Plan and Alignment Definition

Length: 4.4 miles

Tunnel Stations: NE 39 Street and NE 1 Avenue, 54 Street and NW 2 Avenue, 62 Street and NE
2 Avenue, Biscayne Boulevard and 54 Street

Transit Connections: Future NorthEast Corridor Design District Station

Major Attractions: Tunnel construction under I-195 and coordination with FDOT on proposed
improvements in the area.

Special Considerations: Utilities and groundwater quality during construction on the eastern
most leg, just west of Biscayne Bay.

2.7 Segment 4: MIA to Wynwood

This Segment
runs from 20
Street at NE 2
Avenue east to
1 the east side of
the South Florida
Rail Corridor (SFRC) potentially via the rail spur in Allapattah, then south adjacent to the SFRC
to the Miami Intermodal Center (MIC).

Length: 4.1miles

Tunnel Stations: MIC, NW 27 Avenue and NW 20 Street, NW 12 Avenue and NW 20 Street,

NW 2 Avenue and NW 20 Street, Biscayne Boulevard at NE 20 Street.

Transit Connections: MIC, Allapattah Metrorail Station

Major Attractions: MIA and Miami Intermodal Center, Wynwood, Biscayne Corridor

Special Considerations: Design consideration with tunnel construction parallel to I-95 and
coordination with Underdeck project.

2.8 Segment 4A: Overtown Connector

A potential addition to Segment 4 would be a connection across I-395, allowing for potential
short-turn run between the MIC and Brickell. The alignment would run along NW 7 Avenue
from NW 7 Street to NW 20 Street

Length: 1.0 miles

Tunnel Stations: Culmer Station

Transit Connections: Segment 4 and Segment 1A

RFQ No: 16-17-063

PO No.: 1807703/12 Page |7
 City of Miami Electric Cars & Vehicles on Track
Phase 1: Service Plan and Alignment Definition

Major Attractions: Spring Garden Historic District, via Segment 4 and Segment 1A, Miami
International Airport (MIA) and Miami Intermodal Center, Wynwood, Biscayne Corridor

Special Considerations: Design consideration with tunnel construction under I-395 and
coordination with Underdeck project.

2.9 Segment 5: Douglas Road Metrorail Station to Magic City Casino

Segment 5 could be extended to connect to the City of Coral Gables via NW 37 Avenue.
The alignment runs south from NW 7 Street along NW 37 Avenue, south to US 1 at the Douglas
Metrorail Station.

Length: 3.2 miles

Tunnel Stations: NW 37 Avenue and NW 7 Street, SW 8 Street, and SW 22 Street, and US1

Transit Connections: Douglas Road Metrorail Station

Major Attractions: Magic City Casino, The Roads, The Village of Merrick Park, Coconut Grove
via the City of Miami Trolley

Special Considerations: Design consideration with tunnel construction and potential utility
conflicts along NW 37Avenue.

2.10 Segment 6: Gables Connector

This Segment provides East-West
connection from NW 37 Avenue,
along NW 8 Street to Brickell Avenue.
This Segment could also provide
direct connection to the Brickell area
by running north to NE 7 Street, the southern leg of Segment 2.

Length: 4.1 miles

Tunnel Stations: NW 37 Avenue and SW 8 Street, SW 8 Street and 22 Avenue, 12 Avenue and
NW 2 Avenue, and Brickell Avenue and NE 7 Street

Transit Connection: Eighth Street Metromover Station

Major Attractions: Coral Gables, Little Havana, Brickell Avenue

Special Considerations: Design consideration with tunnel construction under I-95 and utilities
on Brickell Avenue.

As seen on Figure 3, comprehensive coverage in Downtown Miami can be achieved by

combining Segments 1, 2,/2A, 3/3A.

RFQ No: 16-17-063

PO No.: 1807703/12 Page |8
 City of Miami Electric Cars & Vehicles on Track
Phase 1: Service Plan and Alignment Definition

Figure 3: Miami Loop - Downtown Miami

RFQ No: 16-17-063

PO No.: 1807703/12 Page |9
 City of Miami Electric Cars & Vehicles on Track
Phase 1: Service Plan and Alignment Definition

3. Design Criteria
The following design criteria should be considered when developing a conceptual
underground Miami Loop alignment. They were developed to include operational and
physical characteristics necessary for an underground tunnel transit service. As a peer
underground tunnel transit system, the characteristics of the Las Vegas Convention Center
Loop were incorporated into these criteria.

The goal of the criteria is to identify a continuous segment “window” where underground
Miami Loop service is feasible.

3.1 Maximum Operating Speed

Current LVCC Loop tunnel speed limits are set at 10 mph at the stations and at 40 mph in
straight tunnels. Because the proposed Miami-Dade County transit tunnel system also is a
two-tunnel system like the LVCC Loop, similar speed limits are anticipated at 10 mph at the
stations and at 40 mph in straight tunnels. (PCMag.com, Tunnel Vision: What It's Like to Ride
in Elon Musk's Vegas Loop, Rob Pegoraro, January 7, 2022)

However, operating speed is tied to the geometry and conditions of the alignment and may
vary from the LVCC Loop example.

3.2 Horizontal Envelope

The transit tunnel horizontal envelope is estimated to be 40 feet deep, 12 feet inside tunnel
diameter, 13.5 feet outside tunnel diameter tunnel envelope, 9 feet wide by 12 feet high
vehicle envelope.

Because the Miami-Dade County transit tunnel system would operate in urban conditions
and under utilities like the LVCC Loop, the dimensions of the LVCC Loop transit tunnels
provide a guide to the envelope of the transit tunnel. The transit tunnels are bored
approximately 40 feet below grade, with a 12 feet inside tunnel diameter and at 13.5 feet
outside tunnel diameter.

Design engineers traditionally apply the automated people mover (APM) vehicle envelope
to accommodate vehicles within transit tunnels. The APM vehicle envelope is 9 feet wide by
12 feet high.

Autonomous electric vehicles (AEVs) operate on a pavement surface constructed at the

bottom of the transit tunnels.

Graphic showing diagrams of horizontal transit tunnel envelopes are shown below. An
example from the LVCC Loop is shown in Figure 4, URUP refers to Ultra Rapid Underpass in

RFQ No: 16-17-063

PO No.: 1807703/12 P a g e | 10
 City of Miami Electric Cars & Vehicles on Track
Phase 1: Service Plan and Alignment Definition

RFQ No: 16-17-063

PO No.: 1807703/12 P a g e | 11
 City of Miami Electric Cars & Vehicles on Track
Phase 1: Service Plan and Alignment Definition

Figure 5, which shows two approaches to transit tunnel surface connections.

Figure 4: A Tesla AEV traveling inside the LVCC Tunnels (Source: LVCVA, 2021)

RFQ No: 16-17-063

PO No.: 1807703/12 P a g e | 12
 City of Miami Electric Cars & Vehicles on Track
Phase 1: Service Plan and Alignment Definition

Figure 5: Schematic of the URUP method (Source: Mino, S. et al, 2010)

3.3 Maximum Grade

The American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) roadway
standard of 8 percent may apply to transit tunnels as electric vehicles are being used. Based
on the LVCC Loop example, cars are currently the primary vehicle used in the LVCC Loop
tunnel.

For comparison purposes, the LVCC Loop travels from -40 feet at Central Station to the West
Station/ South Station in 0.4 mile, a grade of approximately 10 percent.

3.4 Maximum Curvature

Transit tunnel curvature varies from 700 to 900 feet in the tightest situation. Curvatures of
1,000 to 2,000 feet are more common. Specifics depend on the individual transit tunnel
alignment.

RFQ No: 16-17-063

PO No.: 1807703/12 P a g e | 13
 City of Miami Electric Cars & Vehicles on Track
Phase 1: Service Plan and Alignment Definition

3.5 Station Spacing

Transit tunnel stations are generally spaced about 1 mile apart, and at major social/cultural
resource locations. Some variations may occur for transit tunnel stations at larger local
activity centers and social/cultural resource locations.

3.6 Terminal Locations

Primary transit tunnel terminals – Connection to the existing Miami-Dade County transit
terminals, existing Metrorail stations, and future SMART Plan stations are prioritized. Transit
tunnel stations are anticipated to be offset from existing Metrorail, Metromover, or Brightline
stations in order to preserve their structural integrity. Primary terminal connections in the
County are the Dolphin Terminal, Dadeland South Metrorail Station, Dadeland North
Metrorail Station, University Metrorail Station, Douglas Road Metrorail Station, Miami Central,
Golden Glades Transit Terminal, Miami Intermodal Center, and the future Aventura Brightline
Station.

End of the line transit tunnel terminals – Baptist Health at SW 162 Avenue, Florida International
University, Dolphin Terminal, Downtown Doral, Tropical Park, Coral Gables City Hall,
PortMiami, Design District/Magic City, Collins Avenue in the Cities of Sunny Isles and Miami
Beach, and Miami Lakes.

3.7 Station Types

Option 1: Based on the LVCC Loop example, below grade transit tunnel stations are 92 feet
wide by 210 feet long with an approximately 34 feet central platform/passenger queuing
area, 10 feet wide parking area, and 10 feet outer vehicle access. If there are space
constraints, a narrower 15 feet to 20 feet center platform transit tunnel station could be
considered.

Option 2: Based on the LVCC Loop example, at grade transit tunnel stations are 48 feet wide
and 240 feet long with a center platform/passenger queuing area, 10 feet wide parking
area, and 10 feet outer vehicle access. The transit tunnel is accessed via a spiral, angled
ramp. Examples of spiral ramps are shown in Figure 2.

Passengers enter and exit the LVCC Loop via a station. At grade transit tunnel stations
access the transit tunnel via an angled loop. Passenger access to below grade transit tunnel
stations is via an elevator to an underground station, connected to multiple small diameter
transit tunnels.

Because the geography and context of each station area is different, station parking, and
drop off areas will be evaluated for prioritized segments in the next phase of study. Also,

RFQ No: 16-17-063

PO No.: 1807703/12 P a g e | 14
 City of Miami Electric Cars & Vehicles on Track
Phase 1: Service Plan and Alignment Definition

determination of at grad or below grade station for each station location will be evaluated
for prioritized segments in the next phase of study.

From the LVCC Loop transit tunnel station, passengers travel to the next transit tunnel station
via the transit tunnels aboard up to 6-7 passenger class autonomous electric vehicles (AEV’s)
or specially designed electric multi-person vehicles. The transit tunnel stations can be either
underground or at grade with ramped roadway (or guideway) leading traffic to and from
the underground transit tunnels. Transit tunnel stations include waiting and
embarking/disembarking areas or surface platforms. There is also a turnaround loop in the
transit tunnel system to help manage traffic flow and emergency situations.

3.8 Electric Vehicle Charging Stations

The vehicles used in this transit tunnel system are anticipated to be electric seven person
vehicles or potentially electric twelve person passenger vans.

The goal is to include one electric charging station per station.

The final number and type of electric vehicle charging stations should be based on vehicle
specifications, amount of vehicle charging required and location of vehicle charging
stations at vehicle maintenance facilities, park-and-ride facilities and within the system
alignment. Location of vehicle charging stations may also be dependent on high ridership
locations and real estate availability.

3.9 Required Accommodation

The Miami Loop will be designed to meet current ADA requirements.

Per the LVCC Loop Contract agreement the LVCC Loop is ADA compliant.

The LVCC Loop did not provide additional emergency egress walkways (emergency
catwalk) on the sidewall of the tunnels separated from the pavement grade. No additional
information is available as to the accessibility and safety design features of the tunnels and
integrated systems. Design criteria would need to be discussed and finalized including the
fire department.

3.10 Groundwater Considerations

Advances in tunneling technology have helped to address the impacts of groundwater on
tunnels. Below are ways that project engineers manage groundwater considerations.

• Mechanized tunneling under high groundwater conditions is feasible with closed face
(pressurized) TBM shield technology, such as Slurry Shields, Earth Pressure Balanced (EPB)
shields and other hybrid types of machines (i.e., Variable Density TBMs) able to tunnel in soft
ground and/or under high water pressures;

RFQ No: 16-17-063

PO No.: 1807703/12 P a g e | 15
 City of Miami Electric Cars & Vehicles on Track
Phase 1: Service Plan and Alignment Definition

• Gasketed precast concrete segmental lining forms a watertight final lining for the
tunnel. Any areas of observed leakage through the joints of the installed segmental lining
can be addressed using grouting through the segments, which should be designed to allow
grouting through ports;
• Depending on the ground conditions, tunneling depth and proximity to surface
structures, grouting from the surface may be required so as to decrease the permeability of
the tunneled ground; and

• Construction logistics and TBM maintenance should be coordinated by the

contractor so as to minimize or eliminate the likelihood of TBM downtime in areas of
suspected high groundwater pressures or combined with poor ground conditions. Selecting
the TBM which would allow rapid cutting tool replacement under atmospheric conditions
can aid in maintaining schedule without reverting to more complex hyperbaric cutterhead
interventions.

3.11 Required Accommodation

The Miami-Dade County transit tunnel alignment should be designed to meet current ADA
requirements.

Per the LVCC Loop Contract, the LVCC Loop is ADA compliant.

3.12 Emergency Egress and Fire Safety

The LVCC Loop did not provide additional emergency egress walkways (emergency
catwalk) on the sidewall of the transit tunnels separated from the pavement grade.

No additional LVCC Loop information is available as to the accessibility and safety design
features of the tunnels and integrated systems.

Additional, general design information regarding emergency egress and fire safety need to
be established including input from the fire department.

3.13 Geotechnical Considerations

Geotechnical considerations are identified and addressed in project planning. Below are
ways that project engineers managed geotechnical considerations.

• The water pressure profile and the subsurface profile along the tunnel alignment
(which would be the focus of an extensive subsurface investigation program and
Geotechnical Baselining) would inform the selection of the alignment in terms of
both vertical and lateral position, so as to avoid, if possible, potentially high risk
areas or areas with known limestone solution features;

RFQ No: 16-17-063

PO No.: 1807703/12 P a g e | 16
 City of Miami Electric Cars & Vehicles on Track
Phase 1: Service Plan and Alignment Definition

• The investigations should be comprehensive and detailed enough, to assess the

frequency of solution features in limestone (karst, landscape underlain by
limestone which has been eroded by dissolution, producing ridges, towers, fissures,
sinkholes, and other characteristic landforms), their content (i.e., water bearing
unconsolidated soft soils) and the probability of the alignment encountering such
features. A comprehensive risk assessment study should focus on the ground
variability, the rock mass conditions and consider all ground surface conditions
(infrastructure, buildings, utilities etc.);

• Although modern properly and project specific-designed TBMs can bore

successfully through a multitude of conditions both in soil and rock with or without
high groundwater pressures, it is the rapid ground variability or unforeseen
transition from hard medium to water bearing soft soils (i.e., filled karst cavities)
that can create serious problems and downtimes;

• Grouting from the ground surface should be explored for all high risk areas
suspected of solution features in limestone; and

• The Contractor should -in accordance with baseline geotechnical documents,

select appropriate TBM technology that allows for well controlled and timely
transition between operation modes, and allows for fast response when
transitioning from hard medium (i.e., rock) to soft (i.e., soft soil deposits).

RFQ No: 16-17-063

PO No.: 1807703/12 P a g e | 17
 City of Miami Electric Cars & Vehicles on Track
Phase 1: Service Plan and Alignment Definition

Figure 6: Sample Spiral Parking Ramp

RFQ No: 16-17-063

PO No.: 1807703/12 P a g e | 18
 City of Miami Electric Cars & Vehicles on Track
Phase 1: Service Plan and Alignment Definition

Figure 7: LVCC Loop At Grade Station (Source: Clark County 2019, digitized public record)

RFQ No: 16-17-063

PO No.: 1807703/12 P a g e | 19
 City of Miami Electric Cars & Vehicles on Track
Phase 1: Service Plan and Alignment Definition

Figure 8: Conceptual rendering of the hotel side Resorts World loop station (Source:
news3lv.com)

Figure 9: LVCC’s Central station (Source: TBC, 2021)

RFQ No: 16-17-063

PO No.: 1807703/12 P a g e | 20
 City of Miami Electric Cars & Vehicles on Track
Phase 1: Service Plan and Alignment Definition

Figure 10: LVCC Below Grade Station (Clark County 2020, digitized public record)

4. High – Level Impact Assessment

After the development of design criteria, a high-level impact assessment was performed to
identify opportunities and challenges associated with the proposed alignment. Parameters
for assessment included:
1. Population and Employment
2. Land Use and Zoning
3. Environmental Justice
4. Right-of-way – based on readily available digitized maps
5. Traffic – based on available annual average daily traffic (AADT) from FDOT or
County database
6. Social/cultural/historical – desktop analysis of potential sites within 50 feet of
roadway edge of pavement along tunnel alignments
7. Major Utilities – based on information from utility owners
4.1 Population and Employment Considerations
Population within the proposed station areas along the segments ranges from none at the
PortMiami station to 13,500 at the Biscayne Station located at Biscayne Boulevard and NE 20

RFQ No: 16-17-063

PO No.: 1807703/12 P a g e | 21
 City of Miami Electric Cars & Vehicles on Track
Phase 1: Service Plan and Alignment Definition

Street. The locations with the highest station area population are the Biscayne Station
(13,500) on Segment 3, 13,250 at the 22 Avenue station (22 Avenue and SW 8 Street) on
Segment 6, and 13,000 at the 12 Avenue Station (12 Avenue and SW 8 Street) on Segment
6.

The locations with the lowest station area population are the PortMiami Station on Segment
1, 1,330 at the MIC on Segments 4 and 5, and the Freedom Park Station adjacent to the
Melreese Golf Course on Segment 5 with 4,700. A map and table of 2045 study area
population data are shown in Figure 13. A map and table of 2045 downtown Miami popu-
lation data are shown in Figure 14.

Employment at the proposed station areas along the segments ranges from 943 at the
Freedom Park Station adjacent to the Melreese Golf Course on Segment 5, to 32,000 at the
Bayfront Park Station in Downtown Miami on Segment 3. The locations with the highest
station area employment are Miami Central Station in Downtown Miami on Segments 1,3
and 5 with 24,000, the Coral Way Station (SW 37 Avenue and Coral Way) on Segment 5 with
25,000, and the Bayfront Park Station with 32,000 jobs. A map and table of study area 2045
employment data are shown in Figure 15. A map and table of 2045 Downtown Miami
employment data are shown in Figure 16.

RFQ No: 16-17-063

PO No.: 1807703/12 P a g e | 22
 City of Miami Electric Cars & Vehicles on Track
Phase 1: Service Plan and Alignment Definition

Figure 11: 2015 Population - Study Area

RFQ No: 16-17-063

PO No.: 1807703/12 P a g e | 23
 City of Miami Electric Cars & Vehicles on Track
Phase 1: Service Plan and Alignment Definition

Figure 12: 2015 Population - Downtown Miami

RFQ No: 16-17-063

PO No.: 1807703/12 P a g e | 24
 City of Miami Electric Cars & Vehicles on Track
Phase 1: Service Plan and Alignment Definition

Figure 13: 2045 Population – Study Area

RFQ No: 16-17-063

PO No.: 1807703/12 P a g e | 25
 City of Miami Electric Cars & Vehicles on Track
Phase 1: Service Plan and Alignment Definition

Figure 14: 2045 Population - Downtown Miami

RFQ No: 16-17-063

PO No.: 1807703/12 P a g e | 26
 City of Miami Electric Cars & Vehicles on Track
Phase 1: Service Plan and Alignment Definition

Figure 15: 2015 Employment – Study Area

RFQ No: 16-17-063

PO No.: 1807703/12 P a g e | 27
 City of Miami Electric Cars & Vehicles on Track
Phase 1: Service Plan and Alignment Definition

Figure 16: 2015 Employment – Downtown Miami

RFQ No: 16-17-063

PO No.: 1807703/12 P a g e | 28
 City of Miami Electric Cars & Vehicles on Track
Phase 1: Service Plan and Alignment Definition

Figure 17: 2045 Employment – Study Area

RFQ No: 16-17-063

PO No.: 1807703/12 P a g e | 29
 City of Miami Electric Cars & Vehicles on Track
Phase 1: Service Plan and Alignment Definition

Figure 18: 2045 Employment – Downtown Miami

RFQ No: 16-17-063

PO No.: 1807703/12 P a g e | 30
 City of Miami Electric Cars & Vehicles on Track
Phase 1: Service Plan and Alignment Definition

4.2 Land Use and Zoning

Future land use is primarily commercial in the southeastern and central portions of the study
area, and primarily residential in the northern and western portions. Study area future land
use is shown in Figure 19. Future land use in Downtown Miami is shown in Figure 20. Zoning is
comprised of primarily urban zoning categories in Downtown Miami, with sub-urban zoning
categories located primarily in the northern and western portions of the study area. Study
area zoning is shown in Figure 21. Figure 22 illustrates the zoning in Downtown Miami.

Figure 19: Future Land Use – Study Area

RFQ No: 16-17-063

PO No.: 1807703/12 P a g e | 31
 City of Miami Electric Cars & Vehicles on Track
Phase 1: Service Plan and Alignment Definition

Figure 20: Future Land Use – Downtown Miami

RFQ No: 16-17-063

PO No.: 1807703/12 P a g e | 32
 City of Miami Electric Cars & Vehicles on Track
Phase 1: Service Plan and Alignment Definition

Figure 21: Zoning - Study Area

RFQ No: 16-17-063

PO No.: 1807703/12 P a g e | 33
 City of Miami Electric Cars & Vehicles on Track
Phase 1: Service Plan and Alignment Definition

Figure 22: Zoning - Downtown Miami

RFQ No: 16-17-063

PO No.: 1807703/12 P a g e | 34
 City of Miami Electric Cars & Vehicles on Track
Phase 1: Service Plan and Alignment Definition

4.3 Environmental Justice Considerations

Environmental justice aspects of transportation infrastructure development must be
considered to ensure that construction impacts are not excessively burdened on minority
and low-income neighborhoods. Inversely, the services provided by this technology should
also be considered to ensure that disadvantaged communities are not excluded and are
provided access to the service areas.

Maps were prepared identifying areas with significant minority populations, and areas with
significant low-income areas. These maps are presented in this section. These maps are
based on the SERPM 8 model data.

For the purposes of this study, Minority Population was calculated by subtracting the white
population from the total population. For the purposes of this study, Low Income is defined
as household with an annual Income Less than $25,000.

RFQ No: 16-17-063

PO No.: 1807703/12 P a g e | 35
 City of Miami Electric Cars & Vehicles on Track
Phase 1: Service Plan and Alignment Definition

Figure 23: Minority Populations 2045 – Study Area

RFQ No: 16-17-063

PO No.: 1807703/12 P a g e | 36
 City of Miami Electric Cars & Vehicles on Track
Phase 1: Service Plan and Alignment Definition

Figure 24: Minority Populations 2045 – Downtown Miami

RFQ No: 16-17-063

PO No.: 1807703/12 P a g e | 37
 City of Miami Electric Cars & Vehicles on Track
Phase 1: Service Plan and Alignment Definition

Figure 25: Low-Income Households 2045 – Study Area

RFQ No: 16-17-063

PO No.: 1807703/12 P a g e | 38
 City of Miami Electric Cars & Vehicles on Track
Phase 1: Service Plan and Alignment Definition

Figure 26: Low-Income Households 2045 – Downtown Miami

4.4 Roadway Data

The tables in Appendix A show the backup for the roadway data shown in Table 2, rows 1-3.
The bullets below define the columns in the roadway data tables.
• Right-of-way width was based on GIS data using the edge of pavement layer. For
each segment, the lower value of the right-of-way minimum width was used. For
example, if the segment measured 62.31 to 63.04 feet, 62 feet was used.

RFQ No: 16-17-063

PO No.: 1807703/12 P a g e | 39
 City of Miami Electric Cars & Vehicles on Track
Phase 1: Service Plan and Alignment Definition

• One-way - the segment provides traffic movement in only one direction.

• Two-way – the segment provides bi-directional traffic movement. The roadway may
or may not include a median.
• Through lanes – traffic goes straight but may turn when turns are possible, the number
is per direction.
• Turn lanes – traffic lane is only for turning traffic it may be on the side (right turn lane)
or the middle (left turn lanes); the number is per direction.
• Lane total – number of through lanes and turn lanes for all directions.
• Length – this is the roadway length for that segment. All analysis for this segment was
based on existing roadway alignments.
4.5 Historic Resources
National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) listed, eligible, likely eligible, ineligible, and not
recorded sites are summarized by segment in Table 2. The review of the database shows
four properties listed on the NRHP within 50 feet of the edge of pavement of the segments
identified as part of the Miami Loop ROW. They are located at the following locations:
• Intersection of Segments 1 and 2: The Freedom Tower at 601 Biscayne Boulevard.
• Segment 3: Fire Station No. 2 located at 1401 North Miami Avenue.
• Segment 3A: Miami Edison Senior High School at 6101B NW 2 Avenue.
• Intersection of Segment 5 and Segment 6: Douglas Entrance at SW 8 Street and SW
37 Avenue.
There are twenty sites that are likely to be eligible, and eight sites that are potentially eligible.

There are an additional 173 existing sites which are ineligible for the NRHP, and 207 sites that
have been surveyed but have not been evaluated.

4.6 Social/Cultural Resources

An essential function of a transportation system and a segment in particular is to provide
connectivity to the social/cultural resource of the community and major transportation hubs.
• Connections to major transportation hubs are provided at PortMiami, Miami
International Airport and Overtown Transit Village/Miami Central are provided.
• Connections to recreational, entertainment and civic facilities are provided at FTX
Arena, Melreese Golf Course, Magic City Casino, Marlins Park.
• Connections to major shopping destinations at Midtown Miami, the Design District,
and The Village of Merrick Park are provided.
• Connections to future developments at Magic City (62 Street) and One World (east
of Miami Central) are also provided.

RFQ No: 16-17-063

PO No.: 1807703/12 P a g e | 40
 City of Miami Electric Cars & Vehicles on Track
Phase 1: Service Plan and Alignment Definition

4.7 Utilities
A desk-top analysis of underground records provided by the City of Miami was performed to
understand potential utility impacts for major utility systems along the potential Miami Loop
transit tunnel segments. Major utilities were assumed as the ones larger than 30 inches in
diameter and/or determined to be critical for the utility network. Only utilities below 10 feet
were considered for potential impacts.

The records obtained show presence of major sanitary sewer interceptors, storm sewers,
potable watermains distribution, electrical distribution lines, telecommunication, and gas,
within the limits of all the identified segments. Major utilities were generally found along the
main arterial streets such as Biscayne Boulevard, while roadways with lower hierarchy carried
fewer major utilities (i.e., NW 20 Street).

Table 1: Utility Impact Table

Roadway
Segment segment Utility Description Observation
1 Port Boulevard Electrical Anode 18 feet below, Bay Bed
1 Biscayne Blvd Sanitary 42-inch Interceptor 12 feet below
1A NW 7 St 48-inch Storm Sewer 12 feet below
1A NW 7 St 36-inch Sanitary Interceptor 17 feet below
1A NW 7 St 48-inch Sanitary Interceptor 12 feet below
1A NW 7 St 72-inch Storm Sewer 15 feet below
1A NW 7 St 138KVA 20 feet below
1A NW 7 St 72-inch Storm Sewer 11 feet below
2 Biscayne Blvd 60-inch Sanitary Force Main 15 feet below
2A Biscayne Blvd 84-inch Storm Sewer 20 feet below
60 & 72-inch Sanitary Sewer
2A Biscayne Blvd Interceptor 20 feet below
2A Biscayne Blvd 48 & 54-inch Storm Sewer 12 feet below
3 NE 2 Ave 54-inch Storm Sewer 10 feet below
3 NE 2 Ave 30-inch Sanitary Sewer 15 feet below
3A Federal Hwy 48-inch Storm Sewer 15 feet below
4 NW 20 St 84-inch Storm Sewer 17 feet below
4 NW 20 St 72-inch Storm Sewer 15 feet below
4 NW 20 St 48 feet Storm Sewer 15 feet below
5 NW 37 Ave 36 inches Storm Sewer 12 feet below
5 NW 37 Ave 240 KVA 12 feet below
6 NW 27 Ave 5x5 feet Storm Sewer 10 feet below
6 SW 8 St 60-inch Sanitary Sewer Interceptor 20 feet below

RFQ No: 16-17-063

PO No.: 1807703/12 P a g e | 41
 City of Miami Electric Cars & Vehicles on Track
Phase 1: Service Plan and Alignment Definition

Based on the records analyzed no major utilities are below 20 feet of existing grade. Some
significant ones are found below 10 feet and are summarized in the table below. It is
important to state that some utilities have incomplete records or have unknown depth
information recorded.
Given the anticipated depth and tunneling construction method, no impacts to major
utilities lines are expected along the segment tunnel alignments. Stations on the other hand,
could have significant impacts and may require relocations. Utility impacts will play an
important role in selection of station locations, balancing constructability and relocation cost
related to the surrounding utility systems.

4.8 Segment Criteria Matrix

The parameters described in the previous sections were compiled in Table 2 for each of the
potential segments in the Miami Loop network. Across each of the parameters, the
segments were color coded to highlight potential impacts from Green most favorable
range, Yellow moderately favorable and Red least favorable. For example, the segments
with the lowest population are highlighted in red, mid-range in yellow and segments with the
highest population in green. The color coding could be used to identify segments that could
be advanced to further analysis to evaluate potential implementation of tunnels for
operation of electric cars and vehicles on track.

The segments were ranked in terms of the criteria, and the findings are summarized below.

4.8.1 Population (2045)

SERPM 8 was the source of the population data. In terms of projected 2045 population, the
following rating ranges were used:

Most Favorable: >75,000

Moderately Favorable: >50,000 to 75,000

Least Favorable: Under 50,000

Segment 1: Miami Central to PortMiami and Segment 4A: Overtown Connector had the
lowest populations.

Segment 1A: MIA to Miami Central, Segment 2A: FTX Arena to Design District, Segment 3:
Miami Central to Design District, Segment 4: MIA to Wynwood, and Segment 6: Gables
Connector had the highest populations.

4.8.2 Employment (2045)

SERPM 8 was the source of the employment data. In terms of projected 2045 employment,
the following rating ranges were used:

RFQ No: 16-17-063

PO No.: 1807703/12 P a g e | 42
 City of Miami Electric Cars & Vehicles on Track
Phase 1: Service Plan and Alignment Definition

Most Favorable: >70,000

Moderately Favorable: >50,000 to 70,000

Least Favorable: Under 50,000

Segment 1: Miami Central to PortMiami. Segment 2: Brickell Blvd. to FTX Arena, and Segment
4A: Overtown Connector had the lowest employment.

Segment 4: MIA to Wynwood, and Segment 5: Douglas Road Metrorail Station to Magic City
Casino had the highest employment.

4.8.3 Income
SERPM 8 was the source of the income data. In terms of income, the following rating ranges
were used:

Most Favorable: >15,000

Moderately Favorable: >9,000 to 15,000

Least Favorable: Under 9,000

Segment 1: Miami Central to PortMiami, Segment 3A: Design District/Magic City Loop,
Segment 4A: Overtown Connector, and Segment 5: Douglas Road Metrorail Station to
Magic City Casino had the lowest income.

Segment 1A: MIA to Miami Central and Segment 6: Gables Connector had the highest
income.

4.8.4 Minority Population (non-white)

SERPM 8 was the source of the minority population data. In terms of minority population, the
following rating ranges were used:

Most Favorable: >75,000

Moderately Favorable: >50,000 to 75,000

Least Favorable: Under 50,000

Segment 1: Miami Central to PortMiami, and Segment 4A: Overtown Connector had the
lowest minority population.

Segment 1A: MIA to Miami Central, Segment 4: MIA to Wynwood and Segment 6: Gables
Connector had the highest minority populations.

4.8.5 Right-of-Way (ROW)

ROW data was pulled from readily available digitized and FDOT online data. In terms of
ROW, the following rating ranges were used:

RFQ No: 16-17-063

PO No.: 1807703/12 P a g e | 43
 City of Miami Electric Cars & Vehicles on Track
Phase 1: Service Plan and Alignment Definition

Most Favorable: >40 feet

Moderately Favorable: Under 40 feet

Least Favorable: Not Applicable

There were no segments with least favorable ROW widths.

Segment 1A: MIA to Miami Central, Segment 2: Brickell Blvd. to FTX Arena Segment,
Segment 2A: FTX Arena to Design District, Segment 4: MIA to Wynwood, Segment 4A:
Overtown Connector, Segment 5: Douglas Road Metrorail Station to Magic City Casino, and
Segment 6: Gables Connector had the most favorable ROW widths.

4.8.6 Traffic
Traffic data used was 2019 AADT from https://tdaappsprod.dot.state.fl.us/fto. In terms of
traffic, the following ranges were used.

Most Favorable: >20,000 AADT

Moderately Favorable: >10,000 to 20,000 AADT

Least Favorable: Under 10,000 AADT

Segment 1: Miami Central to PortMiami and Segment 3: Miami Central to Design District had
the least favorable AADT volumes.

Segment 2: Brickell Blvd. to FTX Arena, Segment 2A: FTX Arena to Design District, Segment
3A: Design District/Magic City Loop, and Segment 6: Gables Connector had the most
favorable AADT volumes.

4.8.7 Social/Cultural Resources

Social/cultural resource data was taken from a scan of local and community activity
centers. In terms of social/cultural resources, the following ranges were used.

Most Favorable: 2 or greater1

Moderately Favorable: 1

Least Favorable: 0

There were no segments with no social/cultural resources.

Segment 1: Miami Central to PortMiami Segment, 1A: MIA to Miami Central, Segment 2:
Brickell Blvd. to FTX Arena, Segment 2A: FTX Arena to Design District, Segment 3: Miami
Central to Design District, Segment 3A: Design District/Magic City Loop, Segment 4: MIA to
Wynwood, Segment 5: Douglas Road Metrorail Station to Magic City Casino, and Segment
6: Gables Connector had the most favorable social/cultural resources.

RFQ No: 16-17-063

PO No.: 1807703/12 P a g e | 44
 City of Miami Electric Cars & Vehicles on Track
Phase 1: Service Plan and Alignment Definition

4.8.8 Historic Preservation

Historic preservation data was taken from Florida’s State Historic Preservation Office
database. In terms of historic preservation, the following ranges were used.

Most Favorable: 0 National Register of Historic Places listings

Moderately Favorable: 1 or 2 National Register of Historic Places listings

Least Favorable: >2 National Register of Historic Places listings

Segment 1A: MIA to Miami Central, Segment 2: Brickell Blvd. to FTX Arena Segment 4: MIA
to Wynwood, Segment 4A: Overtown Connector, and Segment 5: Douglas Road Metrorail
Station to Magic City Casino had no National Register of Historic Places listings.

There were no locations that had more than two National Register of Historic Places listings.

4.8.9 Utilities
Utility data was provided by the City of Miami and rated according to the number of
potential utility conflicts. In terms of utilities, the following ranges were used.

Most Favorable: 0 or 1 potential utility conflicts

Moderately Favorable: 2 or 3 potential utility conflicts

Least Favorable: >3 potential utility conflicts

Segment 1A: MIA to Miami Central, Segment 2A: FTX Arena to Design District, and Segment
4: MIA to Wynwood had the least favorable amount of utility conflicts.

Segment 2: Brickell Blvd. to FTX Arena, Segment 3A: Design District/Magic City Loop, and
Segment 4A: Overtown Connector had the most favorable amount of utility conflicts.

4.9 Overall Ratings

The following segments received the most favorable ratings for potential transit tunnel
technology implementation.

Segment 6: Gables Connector

Ranking: 1 H7|M3|L0
This segment ranks high for these reasons:
- Population (2045)
- Income
- Minority pop
- (non-white)
- Right-of-Way (ROW)1

RFQ No: 16-17-063

PO No.: 1807703/12 P a g e | 45
 City of Miami Electric Cars & Vehicles on Track
Phase 1: Service Plan and Alignment Definition

- Traffic – AADT2
- Traffic – Number of Lanes
- Social/Cultural Resources

Segment 1A: MIA to Miami Central

Ranking: 2 (tie) H7|M2|L1
This segment ranks high for these reasons:
- Population (2045)
- Income
- Minority Population (Non-White)
- Right-of-Way
- Number of Travel Lanes
- Social/Cultural Resources
- Historic Resources

Segment 4: MIA to Wynwood

Ranking: 2 (tie) H7|M2|L1
This segment ranks high for these reasons:
- Population (2045)
- Employment (2045)
- Minority Population (Non-White)
- Right-of-Way
- Number of Travel Lanes
- Social/Cultural Resources
- Historic Resources

Segment 2: Brickell Blvd. to FTX Arena

Ranking: 3 H6|M3|L1
This segment ranks high for these reasons:
- Right-of-Way (ROW)
- Traffic – AADT
- Traffic – Number of Lanes

RFQ No: 16-17-063

PO No.: 1807703/12 P a g e | 46
 City of Miami Electric Cars & Vehicles on Track
Phase 1: Service Plan and Alignment Definition

- Social/Cultural Resources
- Historic Resources
- Major Utilities (Potential Conflicts)

RFQ No: 16-17-063

PO No.: 1807703/12 P a g e | 47
 City of Miami Electric Cars & Vehicles on Track
Phase 1: Service Plan and Alignment Definition

Table 2: Segment Evaluation Criteria and Rating

Segment 1A: Segment 3A: Segment 5:
Segment 1: Segment 2: Segment 2A: Segment 3: Miami Segment 4A:
MIA to Miami Design Segment 4: Douglas Road Segment 6:
Evaluation Criteria Miami Central to Brickell Blvd. to FTX FTX Arena to Central to Design Overtown
Central District/Magic City MIA to Wynwood Metrorail Station to Gables Connector
PortMiami Arena Design District District Connector
Loop Magic City Casino

1 Population (2045) 37,815 103,812 38,477 94,387 86,317 62,190 90,185 37,840 66,973 97,984

2 Employment (2045) 45,768 62,208 46,879 52,596 55,505 23,706 86,820 50,147 71,740 53,168

3 Income (annual) 5,972 17,332 9,384 12,686 13,656 8,017 14,017 7,169 8,948 24,956

Minority population
4 29,999 96,378 59,429 72,591 72,938 50,016 80,289 34,180 58,603 131,985
(non-white)

5 Right-of-Way (ROW)1 36’ 52’ 79’ 60’ 39’ 39 44’ 49 60 52

6 Traffic – AADT2 6,700 19,000 28,100 41,600 7,800 30,000 18,500 18,900 19,500 23,500

7 Traffic – Number of Lanes3 3 4 4 5 2 3 4 5 5 4

MIC, Melreese Knight Center, Magic City

Miami Central, Golf Course, Intercontinental , Miami Central, Miami Central, Casino, The Roads,
Design District, FTX Design District, Coral Gables, Little
Future Miami Magic City and Epic Hotels, Wynwood, Wynwood, Spring Garden The Village of
8 Social/Cultural Resources4 Arena, Midtown Magic City, Havana, Brickell
World Center, Port Casino, Marlins Bayside Midtown Miami, Midtown Miami, Historic District Merrick Park,
Miami Biscayne Station Avenue
Miami Park, Miami Marketplace, and Design District Design District Coconut Grove
Central FTX arena. Riverside Center
1 NRHP Listed 0 NRHP Listed 0 NRHP Listed 2 NRHP Listed 1 NRHP Listed 1 NRHP Listed 0 NRHP Listed 0 NRHP Listed 0 NRHP Listed 1 NRHP Listed
2 NRHP Eligible 0 NRHP Eligible 2 NRHP Eligible 5 NRHP Eligible 2 NRHP Eligible 3 NRHP Eligible 2 NRHP Eligible 2 NRHP Eligible 0 NRHP Eligible 2 NRHP Eligible
0 Potentially 0 Potentially 1 Potentially 5 Potentially 0 Potentially 0 Potentially 2 Potentially 0 Potentially 0 Potentially 0 Potentially
9 Historic Resources5
Eligible Eligible Eligible Eligible Eligible Eligible Eligible Eligible Eligible Eligible
7 Ineligible 18 Ineligible 2 Ineligible 31 Ineligible 39 Ineligible 15 Ineligible 17 Ineligible 23 Ineligible 2 Ineligible 19 Ineligible
1 Not Evaluated 9 Not Evaluated 12 Not Evaluated 18 Not Evaluated 6 Not Evaluated 35 Not Evaluated 14 Not Evaluated 6 Not Evaluated 5 Not Evaluated 101 Not Evaluated
Major Utilities6
10 2 6 1 3 2 1 3 0 2 2
(Potential Conflicts)

Highs (count) 1 7 6 5 2 3 7 4 5 7
Ranking

Mediums (count) 4 2 3 4 6 5 2 3 4 3
Lows (count) 5 1 1 1 2 2 1 3 1 0

Ranking 8 1 2 4 7 6 1 5 3 1
1 ROW based on readily available digitized maps
2 2019 AADT from https://tdaappsprod.dot.state.fl.us/fto/
3 ROW based on readily available digitized maps and google earth

4 Social/Cultural Resources identified based on a scan of local community activity centers

5 National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) eligible and listed resources based on State of Florida Historic Preservation Office review, and additional sites over 50 years old within 50 feet of roadway edge of pavement along the tunnel alignments

6 Utility information based on information from City of Miami

RFQ No: 16-17-063

PO No.: 1807703/12
P a g e | 48P a g e | 48
P a g e | 48
 City of Miami Electric Cars & Vehicles on Track
Phase 1: Service Plan and Alignment Definition

5. Initial Service Volume Assessment

The purpose of this task is to identify potential headway, service span and station locations
to provide connectivity to the regional transit service as well as major activity centers in the
above areas. Identification of the headway would be based on headways on existing and
proposed transit systems being connected to such as Metromover and Metrorail.

For this analysis, segment service volumes were assumed to be positively correlated to
surface street traffic congestion above ground. The greater the level of surface street traffic
congestion, the higher the need for alternate mode of transportation and higher frequency
of service.

2019 data was used to best approximate pre-Covid 19 traffic volumes. Later AADT counts
during pandemic conditions would not be an accurate baseline for this analysis as AADT
counts decreased significantly during the pandemic due to non-traffic or development
related issues.

Service volume thresholds were based on AM peak period volume to capacity ratios based
on projected 2045 traffic volumes from the regional SERPM model. Three sets of underground
vehicle headways were identified, based on varying v/c ratios:

• V/C ratio greater than 0.90 – 1 to 3-minute headways

• V/C ratio between 0.70 and 0.90 – 3 to 5-minute headways

• V/C ration less than 0.70 – Greater than 5-minute headways

Assuming an underground shuttle capacity of seven passengers per vehicle, the following
service volumes would be accommodated:

Table 3: Estimated Hourly Service Volumes

AM Peak Passenger
Hour Service
Segment Headway
Directional Volume
v/c Per Hour
#1 – Miami Central to Port Miami 0.56 > 5 minutes < 84
#1A - MIC to Miami Central 0.98 1 to 3 minutes 420 - 140
#2 – Brickell to FTX Arena 0.28 > 5 minutes < 84
#2A – FTX Arena to Design District 0.60 > 5 minutes < 84
#3 – Miami Central to Design District 0.76 3 to 5 minutes 140 – 84
#3A – Design District to Magic City Casino 0.77 3 to 5 minutes 140 - 84
#4 – Wynwood to MIC 1.16 1 to 3 minutes 420 – 140
#4A – Overtown Connector 0.69 > 5 minutes < 84
#5 – Magic City Casino to Douglas Rd 0.83 3 to 5 minutes 140 – 84
#6 – Gables Connector 0.75 3 to 5 minutes 140 – 84

RFQ No: 16-17-063

PO No.: 1807703/12
P a g e | 49P a g e | 49
P a g e | 49
 City of Miami Electric Cars & Vehicles on Track
Phase 1: Service Plan and Alignment Definition

Based on this evaluation, the Wynwood to MIC (Segment #4) and MIC to Miami Central
(Segment #5) segments would appear to warrant the highest level of service. It should be
noted that the identified headways were just assumed, and not based on estimated
ridership.
To estimate ridership and operating and maintenance costs associated with the
underground transport system, a more detailed assessment of trip origin-destination patterns,
modal shifts, and travel time comparisons will be required, using information from the SERPM
model, and required network and any other model adjustments.

RFQ No: 16-17-063

PO No.: 1807703/12 P a g e | 50
 City of Miami Electric Cars & Vehicles on Track
Phase 1: Service Plan and Alignment Definition

Appendix A: Roadway Data

Table 4: Segment 1 Roadway Data

Table 5: Segment 1A Roadway Data

RFQ No: 16-17-063

PO No.: 1807703/12
P a g e | 51P a g e | 51
P a g e | 51
 City of Miami Electric Cars & Vehicles on Track
Phase 1: Service Plan and Alignment Definition

Table 6: Segment 2 Roadway Data

Table 7: Segment 2A Roadway Data

RFQ No: 16-17-063

PO No.: 1807703/12
P a g e | 52P a g e | 52
P a g e | 52
 City of Miami Electric Cars & Vehicles on Track
Phase 1: Service Plan and Alignment Definition

Table 8: Segment 3 Roadway Data

Table 9: Segment 3A Roadway Data

Right-of-Way Direction Lane # Lane # Percent Difference Mean AADT

Roadway Segment From To Lane Total 2017 AADT 2018 AADT 2019 AADT 2020 AADT Length (Miles)
Width (feet) (Oneway/Both) (Through) (Turn) 2017 to 2020 (2017 - 2020)

0 10,600 9,900 9,700 8,600 0.25 -18.80% 9,700.00

Northeast 61st Street Northeast 2nd Avenue Northeast 4th Court 35 Twoway 1 0 2 54,000 48,000 47,000 36,000 0.31 -33.30% 46,250.00
Northeast 4th Court Northeast 61st Street Northeast 54th Street 39 Twoway 1 0 2 55,000 61,000 59,000 53,000 0.41 -3.60% 57,000.00
US 1 Northeast 54th Street Northeast 53th Street 70 Twoway 2 1 5 40,000 40,500 41,000 34,000 0.03 -15.00% 38,875.00
US 1 Northeast 53th Street Northeast 39th Street 59 Twoway 2 1 5 38,500 38,000 38,500 29,000 0.83 -24.60% 36,000.00
Northeast 39th Street US 1 Federal Highway 27 Oneway 1 0 1 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. 0.10 N.A. N.A.
Northeast 39th Street Federal Highway Northeast 2nd Avenue 38 Twoway 1 1 3 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. 0.08 N.A. N.A.
Northeast 39th Street Northeast 2nd Avenue Northeast 1st Avenue 22 Twoway 1 0 2 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. 0.13 N.A. N.A.
Northeast 39th Street Northeast 1st Avenue Northeast Miami Court 29 Twoway 1 0 2 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. 0.08 N.A. N.A.
Northeast 39th Street Northeast Miami Court Northwest 1st Avenue 27 Twoway 1 0 2 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. 0.17 N.A. N.A.
Northeast 39th Street Northwest 1st Avenue Northwest 2nd Avenue 20 Twoway 1 0 2 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. 0.12 N.A. N.A.
Northwest 2nd Avenue Northeast 39th Street Northwest 62nd Street 48 Twoway 1 1 3 4,700 4,700 4,700 5,400 1.38 14.90% 4,875.00
Northwest 62nd Street Northwest 2nd Avenue Northeast 2nd Avenue 54 Twoway 2 1 5 10,600 9,700 9,900 8,600 0.49 -18.80% 9,700.00

TOTAL N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. 213,400 211,800 209,800 174,600 4.38 N.A. 202,400
MEAN N.A. N.A. 39 N.A. N.A. N.A. 3 30,500 30,300 30,000 25,000 N.A. -14.17% 50,600
WEIGHTED MEAN N.A. N.A. 43 N.A. N.A. N.A. 3 19,900 19,800 19,600 16,400 N.A. -5.94% 19,568

RFQ No: 16-17-063

PO No.: 1807703/12
P a g e | 53P a g e | 53
P a g e | 53
 City of Miami Electric Cars & Vehicles on Track
Phase 1: Service Plan and Alignment Definition

Table 10: Segment 4 Roadway Data

Table 11: Segment 4A Roadway Data

Right-of-Way Direction Lane # Lane # Percent Difference Mean AADT

Roadway Segment From To Lane Total 2017 AADT 2018 AADT 2019 AADT 2020 AADT Length (Miles)
Width (feet) (Oneway/Both) (Through) (Turn) 2017 to 2020 (2017 - 2020)

NW 7th Avenue NW 20th Street NW 7th Street 49 Twoway 2 1 5 17,600 17,500 18,900 14,500 1.02 -17.60% 17,125.00

TOTAL N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. 17,600 17,500 18,900 14,500 1.02 N.A. 17,125
MEAN N.A. N.A. 49 N.A. N.A. N.A. 5 17,600 17,500 18,900 14,500 N.A. -17.60% 17,125
WEIGHTED MEAN N.A. N.A. 49 N.A. N.A. N.A. 5 17,600 17,500 18,900 14,500 N.A. -17.60% 18,900

Table 12: Segment 5 Roadway Data

Right-of-Way Direction Lane # Lane # Percent Difference Mean AADT

Roadway Segment From To Lane Total 2017 AADT 2018 AADT 2019 AADT 2020 AADT Length (Miles)
Width (feet) (Oneway/Both) (Through) (Turn) 2017 to 2020 (2017 - 2020)

NW 37th Avenue NW 7th Street SW 22nd Street 62 Twoway 2 1 5 26,000 23,000 27,500 245,000 2.00 842.40% 80,375.00

NW 37th Avenue SW 22nd Street South Dixie Highway 58 Twoway 2 1 5 13,000 11,600 11,400 10,200 1.16 -21.50% 11,550.00

TOTAL N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. 39,000 34,600 38,900 255,200 3.16 N.A. 91,925
MEAN N.A. N.A. 60 N.A. N.A. N.A. 5 19,500 17,300 19500 127,600 N.A. 410.45% 61,283
WEIGHTED MEAN N.A. N.A. 61 N.A. N.A. N.A. 5 21,300 18,900 21600 158,900 N.A. 525.27% 21,590

RFQ No: 16-17-063

PO No.: 1807703/12
P a g e | 54P a g e | 54
P a g e | 54
 City of Miami Electric Cars & Vehicles on Track
Phase 1: Service Plan and Alignment Definition

Table 13: Segment 6 Roadway Data

Right-of-Way Direction Lane # Lane # Percent Difference Mean AADT

Roadway Segment From To Lane Total 2017 AADT 2018 AADT 2019 AADT 2020 AADT Length (Miles)
Width (feet) (Oneway/Both) (Through) (Turn) 2017 to 2020 (2017 - 2020)

Southwest 8th Street SW 37th Avenue SW 36th Court 57 Twoway 2 1 5 36,000 38,000 39,000 23,500 0.07 -34.70% 34,125.00
Southwest 8th Street SW 36th Court SW 22nd Avenue Road 57 Twoway 2 1 5 35,000 35,000 36,500 25,000 0.99 -28.50% 32,875.00
Southwest 8th Street SW 22nd Avenue Road SW 22nd Avenue 57 Twoway 2 1 5 19,000 18,000 17,000 17,500 0.47 -7.80% 17,875.00
Southwest 8th Street SW 22nd Avenue SW 17th Avenue 57 Twoway 2 1 5 22,500 22,000 21,500 23,500 0.51 4.50% 22,375.00
Southwest 8th Street Southwest 17th Avenue Southwest 12th Avenue 48 Oneway 3 0 3 22,500 22,000 21,500 23,500 0.50 4.50% 22,375.00
Southwest 8th Street Southwest 12th Avenue Southwest 6th Avenue 48 Oneway 3 0 3 23,500 22,500 23,000 17,500 0.64 -25.50% 21,625.00
Southwest 8th Street Southwest 6th Avenue Southwest 4th Avenue 48 Oneway 3 0 3 24,000 22,500 24,500 23,500 0.26 -2.00% 23,625.00
Southwest 8th Street Southwest 4th Avenue I-95 Ramp 61 Oneway 3 0 3 24,000 22,500 24,500 23,500 0.04 -2.00% 23,625.00
Southwest 8th Street I-95 Ramp South Miami Avenue 45 Oneway 3 0 3 14,500 12,000 13,500 12,500 0.42 -13.70% 13,125.00
Southwest 8th Street South Miami Avenue US 1 37 Oneway 3 0 3 14,500 12,000 13,500 12,500 0.17 -13.70% 13,125.00

TOTAL N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. 235,500 226,500 234,500 202,500 4 N.A. 224,750
MEAN N.A. N.A. 52 N.A. N.A. N.A. 4 23,600 22,700 23,500 20,300 N.A. -11.89% 40,864
WEIGHTED MEAN N.A. N.A. 52 N.A. N.A. N.A. 4 24,500 23,700 24,300 20,700 N.A. -13.46% 24,227

RFQ No: 16-17-063

PO No.: 1807703/12
P a g e | 55P a g e | 55
P a g e | 55