Counties Transit Improvement Board: Program of Projects & Transit Investment Framework Workshop 3 Board Workshop October 16, 2013.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Project Prioritization Framework Principles
Advertisements

General Update March Background As the region grows, increased travel demand on our aging Metro Highway System will continue to create additional.
Orange County Transportation Authority Measure M2 M2020 Update and Select Project Highlights Orange County Business Council Infrastructure Committee December.
County Transportation System Governor’s Transportation Advisory Committee September 14, 2012 Abbey Bryduck, AMC Policy Analyst.
Northwest Rail Update Nadine Lee, Northwest Rail Project Manager Regional Transportation District March 21, 2012.
April 8, 2008 Dakota County Regional Chamber of Commerce Dakota County Transportation Update.
Counties Transit Improvement Board Structure and Performance: MN House Transportation Policy and Finance Committee February 2, 2015.
PRESENTATION BY MARK VANDER SCHAAF & ALLISON BRUMMEL TO THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL September 14, 2011.
FasTracks Moving Forward: Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) Amendment Staff Recommendation Phillip A. Washington and Team August 7, 2012.
SB 360 and Multi-Modal Impact Fees & Efficiently Managing a Street Lightning System.
Citizens Advisory Committee Quarterly Meeting Rick Clarke, Assistant GM – Capital Programs June 20, 2012.
Fiscal Years Outlook Preliminary Six-Year Financial Plan and Six-Year Improvement Plan Strategy John W. Lawson, Chief Financial Officer Reta.
U.S Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration Federal Transit Administration MAP-21 Moving Ahead with Progress in the 21 st Century Linking.
Community Development & Planning Grant Pre-Application Meeting April 17,
1 Program of Projects Study The Impacts of Regional Transit Investment Forum March 21, 2013 Move LA - "LA's Got Lines"
Water Supply Planning Initiative State Water Commission November 22, 2004.
Metro Cities Transportation Policy Committee August 10, 2015 Overview of Minnesota Highway and Transit Finance.
Urban Partnership Agreement Summary August 27, 2007.
Citizens Advisory Committee Quarterly Update Bill Van Meter, Assistant General Manager, Planning September 19, 2012.
AGENDA OPEN HOUSE 6:00 – 8:00 PM  Review materials  Ask questions  Provide feedback on purpose, needs, and alternatives  Sign up for list  Fill.
OPEN HOUSE #4 JUNE AGENDA OPEN HOUSE 6:00 PM  Review materials  Ask questions  Provide feedback  Sign up for list  Fill out comment.
February 24, “Moving Transit Forward”  A fiscally responsible, community-driven vision for restoring, enhancing, and expanding the Metro Transit.
Ohio Department of Transportation Steering Committee Meeting #3 Steering Committee Meeting #1May 30, 2012 Steering Committee Meeting #1 WELCOME Steering.
1 MetropolitanCouncil Transit CapitalImprovement ProgramOctober 22, 2008.
PROJECT UPDATE PUBLIC OPEN HOUSE #3 OCTOBER 17 4:30 PM – 6:30 PM Dakota County Northern Service Center.
“Connecting People and Places” REGIONAL MOBILITY PLAN CRTPA Board September 20, 2010.
City of Rio Vista Budget 101 An Overview of Essential Tools CITIZENS OF RIO VISTA CITY STAFF CITY COUNCIL.
Transportation Funding Workshop Nova Southeastern University December 10, 2012.
Regional Transit Study Final Recommendations March 15, 2010.
June 9, 2009 VTA 2009 Annual Conference DRPT Annual Update 2009 VTA Conference Chip Badger Agency Director.
2040 LONG RANGE PLAN UPDATE 2040 LRTP Update – Needs Plan Development October 6, 2015 City of Lynn Haven.
What is a TSP? Provides City with guidance for operating and improving a multimodal transportation system Focuses on priority projects, policies, and programs.
PROJECT UPDATE PUBLIC OPEN HOUSE #5 MARCH 12 4:00 PM – 6:00 PM Northern Service Center.
Regional Transportation Council Mobility Plan Workshop North Central Texas Council of Governments November 12, 2015.
Transportation Project Process: From Concept to Completion Kate Daniel, TPO Staff October 8, 2015.
Metropolitan Council 1 Twin Cities Region Transportation Policy Plan Nacho Diaz Metropolitan Council Evaluating Economic and Community Impacts of Transit.
The Kern Regional Transportation Plan A Vision and Guidebook for Kern County in 2025.
Chittenden County Metropolitan Planning Organization Communities working together to meet Chittenden County’s transportation needs 30 Kimball Ave., Suite.
Planning Commission Study Session: Preferred Plan July 23, 2015.
Valley Metro Update Open House and Public Hearing March 9, 2007.
A Strategic Agenda for Pinellas County’s Future Growth Whit Blanton, FAICP Pinellas Planning Council & Pinellas Metropolitan Planning Organization August.
Capital Improvements Program (CIP) Council Workshop January 29, 2008 Council Chambers 6:00 p.m.
TIF 9 (Trinity River Vision) Expansion and Updated Project and Financing Plans Jay Chapa, Director Housing and Economic Development.
Christopher M. Quinn, MACC, CPA, CFE, CGFO, CGMA Finance Director Lina Williams Budget & Financial Analyst Tuesday, June 7 th 2016.
Outcomes, Values and Priorities Workshop 1 Redesign Board 10 th May 2016.
Metropolitan Council Transit Capital Improvement Program October 10, 2007.
Review of 2016–2021 Strategic Budget Plan Development Process and 2016 Budget Assumptions Financial Administration and Audit Committee April 14,
2014 Annual Program Evaluation (APE) Status Update April 1, 2014.
What is Planning for Progress?
Central Minnesota Area Transportation Partnership Primer Welcome
Office of Transportation Planning Modal Planning Update
Regional Railroad Authority (WCRRA)
2016 POP Investment Strategy: Funding Options
TRANSIT WALKING BICYCLING THOUGHTFUL DEVELOPMENT
2018 Preliminary budget and tax levy SEPTEMBER 25, 2017
Finance Advisory Committee – October 17, 2017
Votran Transit Development Plan (TDP)
Greater Minnesota Transportation Sales And Use Tax
San Mateo Countywide Transportation Plan update
Regional Railroad Authority (WCRRA)
2040 Long Range Transportation Plan Update
Capital Region Climate Readiness Quarterly Meeting February 24, 2015
I-85 Corridor Light Rail Transit Feasibility Study
February 2017 New Starts Financial Plan
2014 Annual Program Evaluation (APE) Status Update
2020 RTP Update - Proposed Changes to Transit Projects
April 25, 2018 CRCOG Policy Board
City of Santa Paula Water and Sewer Rate Study Results Public Workshop
Dakota County Board of Commissioners Meeting September 24, 2019
Dakota County Regional Railroad Authority
Presentation transcript:

Counties Transit Improvement Board: Program of Projects & Transit Investment Framework Workshop 3 Board Workshop October 16, 2013

Today’s Presentation Review Goal & CTIB Vision Technical readiness – Phase 1, 2, and 3 Workshop 1 and 2 PoP Investment Strategies Phase 1 with current resources Phase 1 and 2 with expanded resources Proposed revisions to the Transit Investment Framework Page 2

Program of Projects (PoP) Goal Accelerate the development and construction of multiple transitways to serve the region Page 3

CTIB’s PoP Vision for catalytic transitway development Page 4

Technical Readiness Page 5

Phase I Phase 2 Phase 3 Page 6

Funding CTIB’s PoP Page 7

August workshop Limited resources Phase 2 CTIB 30%/50% 0.25% Phase 1 CTIB 30%/50% Funding Partners’ Challenges Page 8

September workshop Options to resolve funding constraints Shrink PoP 0.25% Additional revenue Deliver PoP Increase revenue Shrink PoP - or - Page 9

October workshop PoP Investment Strategies Phase 1 within current resources –Phase 1 projects funded at current shares –No expansion of 0.25% sales tax Phase 1 & 2 with expanded resources –Phase 1 and 2 projects funded with greater CTIB share –Sales tax expanded by 0.25% Page 10

PoP Investment Strategy: Phase 1 Page 11

Projects Funded Southwest at CMC budget level Gateway as exclusive BRT Streetcars (SCAR) not funded by CTIB CTIF Funding for Phase 1: √ Southwest LRT √ Bottineau LRT √ I35W S HBRT √ Cedar Ave Stage 2 HBRT √ Gateway EBRT/LRT □ Robert St. SCAR/HBRT □ Red Rock HBRT/Com □ Rush Line HBRT/LRT □ Riverview HBRT/LRT CTIF Funding for Phase 1: √ Southwest LRT √ Bottineau LRT √ I35W S HBRT √ Cedar Ave Stage 2 HBRT √ Gateway EBRT/LRT □ Robert St. SCAR/HBRT □ Red Rock HBRT/Com □ Rush Line HBRT/LRT □ Riverview HBRT/LRT Page 12

Funding Assumptions Sales tax at 0.25%, five- county Historic funding levels assumed: –50/30/10/10 Federal/ CTIB/State/Local for capital –50/50 CTIB/State for net operating subsidies Funding shares: √ 50% Federal capital √ 30% CTIB capital √ 10 % State capital √ 10 % Local capital √ 50 % CTIB net op. share √ 50 % State net op. share Funding shares: √ 50% Federal capital √ 30% CTIB capital √ 10 % State capital √ 10 % Local capital √ 50 % CTIB net op. share √ 50 % State net op. share Page 13

Phase % Tax - Current shares Page 14 CTIB Funding for Phase 1 : √ Southwest LRT √ Bottineau LRT √ I35W S HBRT √ Cedar Ave Stage 2 HBRT √ Gateway EBRT/LRT □ Robert St. SCAR/HBRT □ Red Rock HBRT/Com □ Rush Line HBRT/LRT □ Riverview HBRT/LRT Funding shares: √ 50% Federal √ 30% CTIB capital √ 10% State capital √ 10% Local capital √ 50% CTIB net op. share √ 50% State net op. share CTIB Funding for Phase 1 : √ Southwest LRT √ Bottineau LRT √ I35W S HBRT √ Cedar Ave Stage 2 HBRT √ Gateway EBRT/LRT □ Robert St. SCAR/HBRT □ Red Rock HBRT/Com □ Rush Line HBRT/LRT □ Riverview HBRT/LRT Funding shares: √ 50% Federal √ 30% CTIB capital √ 10% State capital √ 10% Local capital √ 50% CTIB net op. share √ 50% State net op. share

Alternate Phase 1 - CTIB funds Robert Street streetcar capital Southwest at CMC budget level Gateway as exclusive BRT CTIB participates in Robert Street streetcar capital, but not the operating subsidy CTIB funding for Phase 1: √ Southwest LRT √ Bottineau LRT √ I35W S HBRT √ Cedar Ave Stage 2 HBRT √ Gateway EBRT/LRT √ Robert St. SCAR (no op.) □ Red Rock HBRT/Com □ Rush Line HBRT/LRT □ Riverview HBRT/LRT CTIB funding for Phase 1: √ Southwest LRT √ Bottineau LRT √ I35W S HBRT √ Cedar Ave Stage 2 HBRT √ Gateway EBRT/LRT √ Robert St. SCAR (no op.) □ Red Rock HBRT/Com □ Rush Line HBRT/LRT □ Riverview HBRT/LRT Page 15

Alternate Phase % Tax - Current funding shares* CTIB funding for Phase 1: √ Southwest LRT √ Bottineau LRT √ I35W S HBRT √ Cedar Ave Stage 2 HBRT √ Gateway EBRT/LRT √ Robert St. SCAR (no op.*) □ Red Rock HBRT/Com □ Rush Line HBRT/LRT □ Riverview HBRT/LRT Funding shares: √ 50% Federal √ 30% CTIB capital √ 10% State capital √ 10% Local capital √ 50% CTIB net op. share* √ 50% State net op. share, but 100% for streetcars CTIB funding for Phase 1: √ Southwest LRT √ Bottineau LRT √ I35W S HBRT √ Cedar Ave Stage 2 HBRT √ Gateway EBRT/LRT √ Robert St. SCAR (no op.*) □ Red Rock HBRT/Com □ Rush Line HBRT/LRT □ Riverview HBRT/LRT Funding shares: √ 50% Federal √ 30% CTIB capital √ 10% State capital √ 10% Local capital √ 50% CTIB net op. share* √ 50% State net op. share, but 100% for streetcars * CTIB capital share for Robert St. streetcar, but no net operating subsidy Page 16

Phase 1 Observations Advantages CTIB can fund its share of Phase 1 Regional balance No new taxes Disadvantages Complete vision is not accomplished Funding partners’ obstacles are not addressed No acceleration Limited/no funding available for other projects or enhancements Page 17

PoP Investment Strategy: Phase 1 and Phase 2 Page 18

Phase 1 and 2 Projects Funded Southwest at CMC budget level Gateway as exclusive BRT Robert Street illustrated as streetcar, with CTIB funding Remaining projects include 1 LRT and 2 HBRTs CTIB funding for Phase 1 & Phase 2: √ Southwest LRT √ Bottineau LRT √ I35W S HBRT √ Cedar Ave Stage 2 HBRT √ Gateway EBRT/LRT √ Robert St. SCAR/HBRT √ Red Rock HBRT/Com √ Rush Line HBRT/LRT √ Riverview HBRT/LRT CTIB funding for Phase 1 & Phase 2: √ Southwest LRT √ Bottineau LRT √ I35W S HBRT √ Cedar Ave Stage 2 HBRT √ Gateway EBRT/LRT √ Robert St. SCAR/HBRT √ Red Rock HBRT/Com √ Rush Line HBRT/LRT √ Riverview HBRT/LRT Page 19

Phase 1 and 2 Funding Assumptions Sales tax expanded 0.25%, five-county Funding levels modified to accelerate development: –45/40/5/10 Federal/CTIB/ State/Local for capital –50/50 CTIB/State for operating –¼ of new taxes distributed to counties ( ≈ 0.06% tax rate) Funding shares: √ 45% Federal √ 40% CTIB capital √ 5 % State capital √ 10 % Local capital √ ¼ of new tax County discretionary √ 50 % CTIB net op. share √ 50 % State net op. share Funding shares: √ 45% Federal √ 40% CTIB capital √ 5 % State capital √ 10 % Local capital √ ¼ of new tax County discretionary √ 50 % CTIB net op. share √ 50 % State net op. share Page 20

Phases 1 & 2 - Additional 0.25% Tax - Adjusted shares for capital & operating CTIB funding for Phase 1 & Phase 2: √ Southwest LRT ($1.56B) √ Bottineau LRT √ I35W S HBRT √ Cedar Ave Stage 2 HBRT √ Gateway EBRT/LRT √ Robert St. SCAR/HBRT √ Red Rock HBRT/Com √ Rush Line HBRT/LRT √ Riverview HBRT/LRT Funding shares: √ 45% Federal √ 40% CTIB capital √ 5 % State capital √ 10 % Local capital √ 50 % CTIB net op. share √ 50 % State net op. share √ ¼ of new tax County discretionary CTIB funding for Phase 1 & Phase 2: √ Southwest LRT ($1.56B) √ Bottineau LRT √ I35W S HBRT √ Cedar Ave Stage 2 HBRT √ Gateway EBRT/LRT √ Robert St. SCAR/HBRT √ Red Rock HBRT/Com √ Rush Line HBRT/LRT √ Riverview HBRT/LRT Funding shares: √ 45% Federal √ 40% CTIB capital √ 5 % State capital √ 10 % Local capital √ 50 % CTIB net op. share √ 50 % State net op. share √ ¼ of new tax County discretionary Page 21

Observations Phase 1 & 2 Advantages CTIB can fund its share of Phase 1 & Phase 2 Acceleration Funding partners capital shares are addressed Enhances reg. balance Funds for counties for transportation priorities, e.g. –Corridor planning –Local 10% –Roads & bridges Disadvantages Phase 3 is not addressed Requires legislative action May require action by County Boards Requires tax increase State share of net operating subsidy is not addressed Page 22

CTIB’s Goal: Resources balanced with PoP needs CTIB’s PoP Sufficient Resources Page 23

Implementation Plan for PoP Investment Strategy Page 24

Action Steps Select preferred PoP Investment Strategy –Phase 1 only –Phase 1 and 2 If Phase 1 and 2 PoP Investment Strategy is preferred –Adopt State legislative platform including additional sales tax revenues –Develop federal funding strategy –Develop local funding strategy Page 25

Action Steps Revise Transit Investment Framework –Address MAP-21 changes –Incorporate preferred PoP Investment Strategy –Update grant solicitation process Re-initiate discretionary capital grant application process for 2014 funding Provide comments to Met Council on TPP and Thrive 2040 consistent with Board’s PoP Investment Strategy Page 26

Questions? Page 27

Revisions to the Transit Improvement Plan Page 28

Schedule for revisions to TIF October 16, 2013 –Part 2: Vision –Part 3: Role of the Board –Part 4: Purpose of Transit Investment Framework –Part 5: Guiding principles and policies November 20, 2013 –Part 6: Funding commitments –Part 7: Financial principles –Part 8: Annual financial review, capacity estimates, reporting December 18, 2013 –Part 9: Process for solicitation, evaluation and award of grants –Part 10: Miscellaneous –Adoption of TIF Page 29

Draft Revisions to the Transit Improvement Plan Parts 2-5 (See document) Page 30