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

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Green Impacts of Public Transportation on our Communities Help Florida Turn the Corner with Transit.
Advertisements

Interim Guidance on the Application of Travel and Land Use Forecasting in NEPA Statewide Travel Demand Modeling Committee October 14, 2010.
Title VI and Fares March 18, 2013 Jonathan Ocana Equal Opportunity Specialist.
Improvements to Project Development and Program Management of New Starts Projects FY 2008 Proposed Effective April 30, 2006.
1 What Would it Take? To Reduce Mobile CO2 Emissions Ronald F. Kirby Director of Transportation Planning Presentation to the COG Climate Change Steering.
FTA’s Small Starts Program Charlotte, North Carolina October 11, 2007.
Southwest LRT Project Craig Lamothe, AICP Senior Project Manager 2011 MN State Planning Conference September 29, 2011.
Complete & Connected: Tools for Planning a Balanced Transportation System Technical Workshop.
Briefing on a Cost-Benefit Analysis Framework for Transit Investments in the Washington Region David Lewis Ph.D. Chief Economist HDR|Decision Economics.
1 U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Transit Administration NEW STARTS AND SMALL STARTS Notice of Proposed Rulemaking February 2012.
Capital Investment Program Listening Session Presented at APTA Annual Meeting -- 10/03/2012 RailVolution /14/
Public Information Sessions November 30, 2010: City Center at Oyster Point December 1, 2010: HRT Norfolk.
Copyright © 2011 Holland & Knight LLP. All Rights Reserved Capital Investment Grants Proposed Interim Policy Guidance April 15, 2015 Jeffrey F. Boothe.
Joe Olson SW Region Director December 8,  History/Background  Next Steps (Planning & Environmental Linkages (PEL)  PEL Process  Schedule  Questions.
1 SAFETEA-LU Major Public Transportation Provisions of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users Federal.
Presentation to the AMP Leadership Team Moving forward. April 17, 2013.
VRE Gainesville-Haymarket Extension Feasibility Study and Alternatives Analysis Public Workshop Wednesday, October 22 nd, :30 – 9:00 pm Battlefield.
Federal Transit Administration New Starts Project Development Process
ACT CANADA 2014: Using Business Cases To Get Great Projects Financed and Delivered December 1, 2014| Michael Sutherland.
Environmental Justice: Policies, Guidance, and Answers to Frequently Asked Questions FTA Region VII Civil Rights Training.
Guidance on New Starts Policies and Procedures and FY 2008 New Starts Reporting.
Totnes Biofuel Hub & Community Transport Study A Technical & Financial Analysis Oct 2012 Photo:
FY2007 New Starts Annual Report & Introduction To Discussions New Starts/Small Starts Listening Session and Seminar San Francisco, CA February 15-16, 2006.
Materials developed by K. Watkins, J. LaMondia and C. Brakewood Planning Process & Alternatives Analysis Unit 7: Forecasting and Encouraging Ridership.
TRB Transportation Planning Applications Conference Houston, Texas May 2009 Ann Arbor Transportation Plan Update-- Connecting the Land Use & Transportation.
Project Briefing Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments Transportation Policy Board Project Briefing Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments.
MnDOT-ACEC Annual Conference March 5,  Capital planning and programming at MnDOT  Major considerations  A more transparent and collaborative.
New Starts/Small Starts Program APTA Annual Meeting San Diego, CA October 4, 2008.
Briefing on Comprehensive Value Analysis Framework for Transit Investments HDR|Decision Economics National Capital Region Transportation Planning Board.
Rome Energy Meeting 2008 Rome, November 2008 Investments Opportunities and Project Finance in the Energy Market Luigi Marsullo President Finpublic.
MAP-21: Impacts to New Starts and Small Starts Senate Transportation Finance and Policy Committee Mark W. Fuhrmann Program Director, New Starts February.
Portland North Small Starts Alternatives Analysis Coordination Meeting June 16, 2009.
NPRM Overview, Subpart A and Discussion Items for Comment New/Small Starts Outreach Session Charlotte, NC October 9, 2007 Rich Steinmann Assistant to the.
All within 5 square miles and at the doorstep of ARTIC Study Area Approximately 73,000 employees Home for 25,000 residents Approximately 20 million visitors.
OPEN HOUSE #4 JUNE AGENDA OPEN HOUSE 6:00 PM  Review materials  Ask questions  Provide feedback  Sign up for list  Fill out comment.
CEO, Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority
1 Transit and Climate Change April 10, 2008 Deborah Lipman Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority.
New Starts/Small Starts and BRT: An Update APTA Bus Conference Seattle, WA May 5, 2009.
Portland North Small Starts Alternatives Analysis Coordination Meeting June 15, 2009.
Metro South Planning MetroLink in South St. Louis County Metro South MetroLink Extension Alternatives Analysis and Draft Environmental.
TIGGER Program Public Webinar April 8, 2009 The American Recovery & Reinvestment Act of 2009.
PROJECT UPDATE PUBLIC OPEN HOUSE #3 OCTOBER 17 4:30 PM – 6:30 PM Dakota County Northern Service Center.
Purpose To develop and evaluate a range of transit and transportation alternatives throughout the MPO area, considering: u Regional Goals and Objectives.
New Starts/Small Starts Workshop APTA’s Legislative Conference March 14, 2007.
S.H. 121 – Dallas, Texas Case Study Presentation National Summit on Future Transportation Funding and Finance Strategies April 11, 2007 Michael Morris,
Projects of National and Regional Significance Program.
1 Presented to the Transportation Planning Board October 15, 2008 Item 9 Metrobus Priority Corridor Network.
Prop 1B: Infrastructure Bonds 2007 Bay Area Vendor Fair Oakland, CA May 24,2007 Bay Area Transportation:
PRESENTED BY PRISCILLA MARTINEZ-VELEZ CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DIVISION OF TRANSPORTATION PLANNING SACRAMENTO, CA (916)
FlexBRT Project Briefing. Background Feasibility Study began in – $750,000 TEA-21 Grant to study an ITS Circulator in North Orange County/South.
NEW STARTS/SMALL STARTS. New Starts Eligibility  Based on the results of planning and Alternatives Analysis  At least 50% or more of the total project.
TPB CLRP Aspirations Scenario 2012 CLRP and Version 2.3 Travel Forecasting Model Update Initial Results Ron Kirby Department of Transportation Planning.
1 New Starts Dialogue Welcome to the FTA Webinar March 21, 2005 Jennifer L. Dorn FTA Administrator.
New Starts/Small Starts Program APTA Rail Conference San Francisco, CA June 5, 2008.
Investment decision making
1 Climate Change: Impact on Transportation (And Transportation Impact on Climate Change) August 14, 2008 Mike Clifford Metropolitan Washington Council.
Federal Funding Strategies Update Internal Working Document Update on Federal Funding California High-Speed Rail Authority In Partnership with: Kadesh.
New Starts/Small Starts Program APTA Legislative Conference Washington, DC March 12, 2008.
Metropolitan Council 1 Twin Cities Region Transportation Policy Plan Nacho Diaz Metropolitan Council Evaluating Economic and Community Impacts of Transit.
Federal Transit Funding for Transportation, Community & System Preservation U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Transit Administration.
Proposed Interim Guidance – Small Starts. 2 Purpose Before Final Rule, evaluate and rate projects to: Advance projects into project development Provide.
Industry Briefing 25 May 2016.
1.146 Application Portfolio: Construction of a new Rapid Transit Corridor André Carrel.
Review of 2016–2021 Strategic Budget Plan Development Process and 2016 Budget Assumptions Financial Administration and Audit Committee April 14,
Greater Toronto Transportation System
Regional Roads Committee
Future Construction FasTracks Corridors Federal Funding Analysis
Southwest LRT Project Craig Lamothe, AICP Senior Project Manager
Transit Systems Planning
DART Financial Plan and Fare Structure
Presentation transcript:

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

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

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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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