Guiding Principles for Development of Interim Small Start

1
Proposed Interim Guidance Small Starts
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
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
General Approach

• Adapt a Simplified Version of Existing New Starts
  process for Small Starts
• Implement a Warrants system for Very Small
  Starts

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
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
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
Alternatives Analysis for Small Starts

• Refer to existing alternatives analysis guidance
  for New Starts
• Narrower range of alternatives
• Potentially less complex analytical methods

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
Baseline Alternative

• Very Small Starts Existing conditions
• Small Starts Transportation System Management
  (TSM) alternative
• Similar to Very Small Start

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
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
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
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 OM 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
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
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
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
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