1. Large Starts Issues for the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking New Starts/Small Starts Listening Session and Seminar San Francisco, CA February 15-16, 2006

2. 2 Large Starts Issues and Possible Direction Topics Eligibility Project Evaluation and Ratings Project Development Procedures

3. 3 Eligibility – SAFETEA-LU Definition Fixed guideway means: (A)Using and occupying a separate right-of-way or rail for the exclusive use of public transportation and other high occupancy vehicles; or (B)Using a fixed catenary system and a right-of- way usable by other forms of transportation

4. 4 Eligibility Issues for BRT Use the percentage of project in fixed guideway and if so, how should project be defined? Use percentage change in travel time?

5. 5 Project Evaluation and Ratings – SAFETEA-LU Key Changes Measures of Project Justification –Mobility –Economic Development –Land-Use –Reliability of Forecasting Methods (Cost & Ridership) –Environmental benefits –Operating Efficiencies –Cost-Effectiveness Measures of Local Financial Commitment –Stability/Reliability of Capital Funding –Stability/Reliability of Operating Funding –New Starts Share Other Measures Secretary Deems Appropriate NEW

6. 6 Project Evaluation and Ratings – Option 1 Framework New project justification criteria - economic development impacts - reliability of forecasting methods for costs and ridership Existing project justification criteria - transit supportive land use policies and future patterns - - mobility improvements - environmental benefits - operating efficiencies - cost effectiveness Existing financial commitment criteria

7. 7 Project Evaluation and Ratings – Option 2: Develop New Framework Organize measures into the following categories Nature of the problem or opportunity Effectiveness of the project as a response Cost effectiveness Financial capability Risk and uncertainty –Current land use and plans and polices –Reliability of forecasting methods (ridership, costs, funding)

8. 8 Project Evaluation and Ratings - Option 2: Develop New Framework Financial Uncertainty Profile Project Merit Financial Capability Nature/Extent of Problem or Opportunity Effectiveness - Mobility - Transit Depend - Econ developmt - Env benefits Capital Funding Cost Effectiveness - Capital cost - O&M cost - Mobility Non New Starts Share O&M Funding Adjusted Financial Rating Merit Uncertainty Profile Adjusted Project Merit Rating Project Uncertainty - LAND USE: Current vs. Plans and Policies - Reliability of Forecasting Methods for Ridership, Costs, and Funding

9. 9 Project Evaluation and Ratings - Land-Use vs. Economic Development Land Use –Conduciveness of project corridor to achieving effectiveness goals –Essentially indicates the uncertainty in forecasts of mobility benefits similar to other external factors like parking costs, gas prices and CBD growth –NOT impact of the project Economic Development –Impact of Project on Land Use and Economic Growth –Project benefit measure

10. 10 Project Evaluation and Ratings - Option 2 Possible Measures Nature of the problem/opportunity Purpose: To clearly characterize the purpose of the proposed project in terms of specific problems or opportunities in the corridor –Bus travel speeds –Current highway speeds compared to projected future speeds Vacancy rates –Ratio of land value to current development –Vacancy rates

11. 11 Project Evaluation and Ratings - Option 2 Possible Measures Mobility Purpose: Indicate how much the average traveler benefits and whether many benefit –User Benefits per passenger mile –Projected transit ridership in corridor

12. 12 Project Evaluation and Ratings - Option 2 Possible Measures Mobility for Transit Dependents Purpose: Indicate how much transit dependents benefit –Share of user benefits to lowest income strata households/share of lowest strata households in region

13. 13 Project Evaluation and Ratings - Option 2 Possible Measures Economic Development Purpose: Determine the extent to which the project will contribute to economic development –Current land use in the corridor –Development plans and policies –Economic development climate –Project accessibility benefits –Permanence of the proposed investment

14. 14 Project Evaluation and Ratings - Option 2 Possible Measures Environmental Benefits Purpose: Indicate how much emissions and energy consumption is reduced - Tons of emissions - BTUs

15. 15 Project Evaluation and Ratings - Option 2 Possible Measures Operating Efficiencies Remove as separate measure because it is addressed in cost effectiveness

16. 16 Project Evaluation and Ratings - Option 2 Possible Measures Cost-Effectiveness Purpose: To determine whether the benefits are commensurate with the costs to achieve them  Annualized cost ($)  User benefits (hours)

17. 17 Project Evaluation and Ratings - Option 2 Possible Measures Financial Capability Purpose: To ensure that the project sponsor has the funds to construct the proposed project –Capital funding –O&M funding –Non-New Starts share

18. 18 Project Evaluation and Ratings - Option 2 Possible Measures Risk and Uncertainty Purpose: To support informed decision-making by understanding the uncertainty in evaluation measures –Land use - current vs. plans and policies –Forecasting methods - ridership and costs –Peer project experience –Funding reliability/ability to absorb cost increases or funding shortfalls

19. 19 Project Development Procedures Local Endorsement of the Financial Plan Sponsoring agency proposes specific funding sources, amounts and strategies to obtain funding Funding agencies endorse pursuit of funding with timeframe Rationale Strengthens commitments to financial plan

20. 20 Project Development Procedures Approval of the Baseline Alternative Baseline defined as the best that can be done without building a fixed guideway FTA concurs with the set of detailed alternatives FTA approves the baseline when final alternatives developed Rationale Clarify baseline definition and approval process

21. 21 Project Development Procedures On-Board Transit Survey Require recent (5 years?) on-board survey for PE approval Rationale Support reliable forecasts of transportation benefits Support identification of purpose and need

22. 22 Project Development Procedures Preliminary Engineering Purpose and Exit Criteria Sufficient to complete NEPA Firm cost estimate without significant unknown impacts Cost sufficient to support financing strategy Guidance on activities completed at PE completion Rationale Defines PE Supports policy of fixing new starts amount Minimizes possibility of wasted resources due to increasing capital cost estimate in FD

23. 23 Project Development Procedures New Starts Funding Share Incentive Higher share of funding available if project ’ s cost is not more than 10% higher and ridership not less than 90% of those estimates when project admitted into PE Rationale Incentive for good planning estimates