Ogden Presentation

1
Ogden Presentation

• Jeffrey F. Boothe
• 209 Pennsylvania Avenue
• Suite 100
• Washington, DC 20006
• [phone]

2
Background

• Partner in Washington, DC office of Holland
  Knight
• Lead the Transportation Team
• Spent 24 years working on transit projects and
  related issues
• Professional Staff on Senate Appropriations
  Committee
• Represented transit authorities before FTA and on
  Capitol Hill since 1987
• Worked on project teams for the past ten years
  shepherding projects through AA to final design
  and construction
• Negotiated two full funding grant agreements
• Industry Spokesperson
• Chair New Starts Working Group
• Executive Director of Community Streetcar
  Coalition

3
Bus Rapid Transit

• Interest originated during Clinton Administration
  after visit by FTA to Curitiba, Brazil
• Curitiba has dedicated right-of-way, stations and
  land use oriented around BRT
• Los Angeles Wilshire boulevard line offers
  signage, ITS, distinctive buses and signal
  priority
• Cleveland Euclid Corridor has dedicated
  right-of-way in portions of corridor, signal
  priority, ITS, signage and distinctive buses

4
Bus Rapid Transit in the United States
Bus Rapid TransitSystems in Operation
Bus Rapid Transit Systemsin Design or
Construction
5
Light Rail Transit

• Introduction in US began with San Diego and
  Portland opening systems in early 1980s
• Operate 18-20 hours per day
• 5-15 minute headways during peak
• 15-30 minute headways during off-peak
• Dedicated right-of-way even when operating on
  city streets
• Cost per mile ranges from 35-60 million per mile
  based on ROW acquisition, structures, and utility
  relocation

6
American Rail Renaissance Light Rail Systems in
the United States
Light Rail Systemsin Operation
Light Rail Systemsin Design or Construction
7
Streetcars

• Vintage
• Operate in Kenhosha, Issaquah, San Pedro, Lowell
• Restore previously operating vehicles
• Seasonal or tourist operation usually in
  historic areas
• Cost 5-10 million per mile
• Heritage
• Operate in Memphis, Tampa, Little Rock
• Connect historic and tourist areas with downtown
  areas
• Operate at 15-20 minute headways
• Vehicles manufactured by Gomaco in Iowa
• Cost 15-25 million per mile

8
Streetcars

• Modern
• Operate in Portland and Tacoma
• Operate at 5 minute headways during peak and 15
  minute headways off-peak
• Cars made by Inekon and Skoda dont meet Buy
  America
• Congress included funding in SAFTEA-LU to develop
  domestic capability
• Cost 20-25 million per mile depending upon
  utility relocation and ROW acquisition

9
American Rail Renaissance Streetcar Systems in
the United States
Streetcar Systemsin Operation
Streetcar Systemsin Planning, Design or
Construction
10
The Portland Streetcar
11
What streetcars did before
They can do again
12
Redeveloping run-down areasBefore
And After
13
Development impact in five years 1,440,000,000
14
The Tampa Streetcar
15
Little Rock Heritage Streetcar
16
Little Rock Heritage Streetcar
17
Little Rock Heritage Streetcar
18
Federal Funding

• Small Starts
• Projects seeking less than 75 million section
  5309 and total project cost below 250 million
• Intended to have a simplified project review
  process
• 200 million available in FY 07, FY 08 and FY 09
• New Starts
• Projects seeking more than 75 million section
  5309 funds
• FTA has issued draft guidelines for project
  sponsors seeking funding in FY 08
• Final rule to implement changes in program wont
  be published until end of 2007

19
Key Issues for Project Planning

• Purpose and Need
• What transportation-related problem is the
  project intended to address?
• Are there congested corridors?
• Does the project address need for circulation in
  the CBD and/or surrounding neighborhoods?
• Are there limitations on available parking in the
  CBD that require alternative solutions?
• Are there geographic constraints that limit
  non-transit alternatives?

20
Key Issues for Project Planning

• Purpose and Need (cont.)
• FTA is frustrated by communities that reach a
  conclusion regarding a specific technology and
  then work backwards to justify the project
• Systems planning must identify the corridor,
  define the alternatives and guide the analysis
  process
• Public participation throughout this phase of the
  process is crucial to both NEPA and the FTA New
  Starts process
• The conclusions reached must be justified by the
  local project sponsor

21
Key Issues for Project Planning

• What are the other objectives of the community?
• What is the regional vision for the project?
• How does a project fit into land use and
  development goals for the community?
• Is the region prepared to amend land use plans
  and regional policies to emphasize job and
  population growth in the project corridor?
• What is the fiscal and political climate in the
  community towards considering a transit
  investment?

22
Key Issues for Project Planning

• Do you have a champion(s) willing to support the
  project through an arduous and time-consuming
  process?
• Coming to consensus is critical to advancing a
  project
• FTA reads local newspapers and is aware if local
  consensus doesnt exist
• Despite seniority and support for public transit,
  Senators Robert Bennett and Orrin Hatch will not
  be able to circumvent the FTA process
• House and Senate Appropriations Committees rely
  on FTA to cull through projects and identify the
  most meritorious projects

23
Key Issues for Project Planning

• What source(s) of funds will be used to pay for
  the AA?
• AA is no longer an eligible activity under
  Section 5309
• Have to use either planning funds from MPO or
  funding from the new 25 M/year AA program
• How will it connect to the UTA commuter rail
  project?
• FTA will expect the two projects to be integrated
• Will the project be compatible, share a platform
  or be in close proximity?

24
Key Issues for Project Planning

• What kind of bus service operates in the proposed
  corridor?
• FTA will expect some level of enhanced bus
  service as the Baseline alternative
• Baseline is the best you can do with modest
  investments in increased bus service and other
  improvements
• Where the public utilities located and is
  responsible to pay the cost of relocation?

25
Key Issues for Project Planning

• Land Use/Economic Development
• What type of development is currently located in
  the corridor?
• Residential, commercial and retail each raise a
  different set of issues
• Developers/neighborhoods open to redevelopment?
• Are parcels available for redevelopment?

26
Key Issues for Project Planning

• Population and employment density in project
  corridor
• Is the proposed corridor already used as a travel
  corridor?
• Is population growth and job growth expected to
  occur in the proposed corridor?
• What steps is the region prepared to take to
  encourage residential, commercial and/or retail
  to occur in the corridor?
• What low-income or minority populations/neighborho
  ods are being served by the project?

27
Key Issues for Project Planning

• Environmental Issues
• Project operating in a public right-of-way, will
  require environmental analysis of the impacts,
  such as noise, visual, physical impacts
• Engaging in Public Outreach
• Early and often
• Assemble advisory committee of citizens, elected
  officials and business leaders to be project
  advocates
• Federal law requires opportunity for public input
  using all available tools, such as visual
  simulations, websites, etc.

28
Key Issues for Project Planning

• Ensure adequate funds for both capital for the
  fixed guideway project and operational support
  for the expanded system
• What types of financing vehicles are currently
  available?
• Availability of TIF, BADs or local tax
• Bonding capacity for capital costs of the project
  
• Will either a local vote or an action by the
  State Legislature be required to secure capital
  support the project and/or to operate system?

29
Why Does All This Matter?

• FTA is raising the bar for advancement from
  alternatives analysis to preliminary engineering
• FTA expecting locality to select their Locally
  Preferred Alternative (LPA) and then subject the
  LPA to higher level of analysis
• FTA feeling Congressional pressure to make it
  more difficult for projects to advance
• Key criteria for FTA are project
  cost-effectiveness, land use, financial plan and
  economic development
• FTA must evaluate each of these criteria on a
  five-level scale and develop an overall project
  rating
• FTA will not approve NEPA documents if it
  believes that the project wont meets its
  requirements

30
Transit Oriented Development

• Joint Development use federal transit funds for
  development at or near transit station/facility
• Funds can be used for all project work, except
  built out of commercial revenue producing space
• Cant acquire property until NEPA process
  complete
• FTA reluctant to pay for parking that isnt
  intended for transit use
• Transit Adjacent Development
• Occurs near transit station but doesnt provide
  pedestrian connections/amenities
• Develop seeks not particular connection to transit

31
Transit Oriented Development

• Good working relationship between developer and
  transit project sponsor
• Mix of uses consistent with and promote transit
  use
• Pedestrian connections exist to create seamless
  connections between development and station

32
Major Challenges to Creating High Performing TOD

• Finding a common definition of goals outcomes
• February 9-10 - Transit and Urban Form Conference
  in Dallas
• Goal is to emerge with consensus regarding goals,
  definitions and policy objectives
• Balancing the tension between making successful
  places and making successful transit systems
• Reducing complexity, time, uncertainty costs
• Creating a supportive regulatory environment
• Recognizing that transit alone wont drive
  markets
• Convincing investors that TOD makes money

33
Converging Trends Drive Demand for TOD

• Transit is in a building boom
• Urban and suburban reinvestment are on the rise
• Demographic changes mean that who we are is
  much more diverse than before
• Developers, investors and cities are recognizing
  that place-making creates value

34
National TOD Database

• 3,341 existing fixed transit stations in 27
  regions
• 630 additional stations in 15 New Starts regions
• 1/2 mile radii metropolitan comparison
• Fixed Transit includes
• Subway and Heavy Rail
• Light Rail Transit
• Commuter Rail
• Trolley and Streetcars
• Bus Rapid Transit

35
Metro Regions Including New Starts
36
Demand for TOD by 2025 will more than double

• By 2025 demand TOD residential could grow from 6
  million to 14.6 million households.
• Regions with extensive and growing transit
  systems offer the greatest potential for TOD.
• Growth is likely to be modest through 2010 and
  accelerate in later years as more transit systems
  come on line.

37
The Effect of Aging Baby Boomers on the U.S.
Population
38
Demand Likely to Outstrip Todays Supply

• New housing units needed to fulfill demand for
  TOD 8.5million
• Current New Starts Transit Zones 3,971
• Accommodating all demand would require building
  approximately 2,100 new units at every existing
  and future station.

39
Key Findings

• There is and will be a significant demand for TOD
  housing through 2025.
• Demand is likely to be modest in the next 5 years
  and accelerate as more transit systems come on
  line.
• Those regions with large and expanding transit
  systems have the greatest potential to capture
  demand.
• Few regions are now positioned to accept this
  market and much more work is needed to bring the
  public and private sectors to the table.
• The next 5 years is a opportunity to develop
  models that could be replicated and allow regions
  to capture a significant portion of future
  housing demand near transit.