1. Proposed Interim Guidance – Small Starts

2. 2 Purpose Before Final Rule, evaluate and rate projects to: Advance projects into project development Provide ratings for the upcoming New Starts Report Provide a basis for funding recommendations

3. 3 Guiding Principles for Development of Interim Small Starts Guidance Evaluation process should accurately reflect the merits of projects Requirements should ensure level playing field for all projects Requirements should be mode-neutral Costs, benefits and impacts should be developed using established methodologies So as not to harm projects, interim criteria should be as strict or stricter than final rule

4. 4 General Approach Adapt a Simplified Version of Existing New Starts process for Small Starts Implement a “Warrants” system for Very Small Starts

5. 5 Eligibility - Costs Total cost ≤ $250 million New Starts share ≤ $75 million Exempt projects (≤ $25 million New Starts share) may: –Remain exempt until Final Rule – then be evaluated and rated –Be evaluated and rated now

6. 6 Eligibility - Project Definition Project a fixed guideway for 50% or more of its length during peak, or Project a corridor bus project including at least: –Transit stations –Traffic signal priority or pre-emption –Low floor buses or level boarding –Premium service branding –10 min peak/15 min off-peak headways at least 14 hours a day

7. 7 Eligibility – Very Small Starts Simple, low-cost projects that qualify for streamlined process Very Small Starts eligibility criteria: –Existing guideway –Existing daily riders over 3,000 (1,000 at terminals) –Total cost under $50 million –Under $3 million per mile, excluding rolling stock

8. 8 Alternatives Analysis for Small Starts Refer to existing alternatives analysis guidance for New Starts Narrower range of alternatives Potentially less complex analytical methods

9. 9 Alternatives Analysis for Very Small Starts Identification of corridor problems or opportunities Definition of the project Analysis of costs, benefits, and impacts of the project compared to existing conditions Determination of financial viability Explanation of choice of preferred alternative Implementation Plan

10. 10 Baseline Alternative Very Small Starts – Existing conditions Small Starts – Transportation System Management (TSM) alternative –Similar to Very Small Start

11. 11 Evaluation of Small Starts Use Existing New Starts Criteria for Small Starts –Project Justification -Land-use -Cost-effectiveness -Other factors, including economic development, congestion and pricing strategies –Local Financial Commitment Simplifications to New Starts Framework –Fewer criteria –Opening year forecasts –Simpler travel forecasting procedures possible

12. 12 Evaluation of Small Starts Cost Effectiveness Rating Proposed Approach –Use current breakpoints for ratings –Increase opening year user benefits to reflect average national 20-year growth rate Other Approaches –Use current breakpoints with opening year benefits –Develop breakpoints based on logical groupings of cost effectiveness measure for opening year user benefits

13. 13 Evaluation of Very Small Starts - Justification No additional submission requirements - projects “Warranted” Required project elements produce significant mobility benefits that support economic development –“Medium” rating for Economic Development Projects in corridors with sufficient existing ridership have appropriate level of transit supportive land-use –“Medium” rating for Land-Use Projects that meet the Very Small Starts cost and ridership limits are, by definition, cost-effective –“Medium rating for Cost-Effectiveness Congestion management plan with pricing –Increase in the rating

14. 14 Evaluation of Very Small Starts – Local Financial Commitment Very Small Starts projects receive “medium” for local financial commitment if: –Reasonable plan to secure local share (all non-New Starts funding committed for PCGA) –Project O&M under 5 percent of agency operating budget –Agency in solid financial condition Projects that cannot meet the conditions above submit a financial plan –According to FTA guidance –Covering period up to and including opening year –Evaluated based on criteria used for New Starts

15. 15 Entry into Project Development – Small Starts Submission Same as traditional New Starts except: –User benefits and related travel forecasting results for opening year –Land-use submission appropriate to the importance of land-use in project success –Financial plan up to and including opening year –Templates 4, 5, 6, 7, and 10 not required

16. 16 Entry into Project Development – Very Small Starts Submission Alternatives analysis report LPA selection and LRP adoption NEPA requirements met (notice of intent, scoping unless CE or EA) Proof of eligibility –Costs, –Project definition, and –Corridor conditions Financial submission

17. 17 Before-and-After Study Required Small Starts follow New Starts guidance disregarding Final Design step Very Small Starts report the following, two years after opening –Actual project costs compared to entry into project development and PCGA –Actual ridership compared to existing ridership at entry into project development and PCGA –Actual service levels compared to service levels at entry into project development and PCGA

18. 18 FTA Funding Recommendations Small Starts/Very Small Starts eligible for funding if: –In project development –“Ready” to implement project –Summary rating of “Medium” or better Like all New Starts - No funding guarantee