How to Conduct a CostEffective Transit Alternatives Analysis

1
How to Conduct a Cost-Effective Transit
Alternatives Analysis

• Jim Czarnecky, AICP, DMJM Harris
• David Schmitt, AICP, AECOM Consult
• 11th TRB Planning Applications Conference
• Daytona Beach, Florida May
  6th-10th, 2007

2
What is a Cost Effective AA?

• A Cost Effective AA facilitates informed
  decisions earlier in the project development
  process
• Intended to reduce risk of delays, budget
  overruns and do-overs due to
• Inadequate funding
• Lack of data and/or adequate analysis tools
• Contractual scope changes
• Flawed process
• Untimely redirection from other agencies
• There are exceptions, as each project is unique
  to its own environment

3
Optimize Project Development
AA
PE/EIS
FD



Historical Pattern
Potential time cost savings

New Pattern


4
Motivations

• Planning projects dont die, they simply mutate
• Make managers aware of common pitfalls/issues
  that contribute to a loss of focus while in the
  AA process
• FTA is increasing its involvement in AAs
• Recent trends indicate projects are reaching
  critical decisions in AA rather than PE phases
• Stresses importance on best data available in AA
  ? importance of preparation!

5

• Preparing for the study
• Before the AA
• Alternatives evaluation
• During the AA
• Preparing for the next phase
• After the AA

6
Funding

• Secure full funding for the study prior to
  issuing RFP
• Temptation is to issue NTP prior to having all
  the funding in place ? Often leads to project
  delays
• AAs are time sensitive
• Politics, land development, joint venture
  opportunities etc. change
• Risk loosing intellectual property during delays
  based on staff availability
• Budgets are tied to duration

7
Understand the Local Federal Expectations

• Sponsor needs to understand the local objectives
  the federal requirements for New Starts funding
• Common purpose of the AA should be to identify
  the project
• Mode, alignment, benefits and costs
• Develop realistic and conservative estimates
• Dominant Federal criteria is the transportation
  Cost Effectiveness
• Cost of travel time savings compared to a low
  cost option
• Local need may be to provide a catalyst for
  economic development
• Build it and they will come philosophy

8
Address Local Federal Differences

• Possible divergence from a New Starts project to
  a local project needs to be explicit
• RFP and scope need to deal with differing
  dominant criteria
• Educate the public, stakeholders and decision
  makers
• Establish milestones where the type of project
  is identified
• New Starts, Small Starts, Very Small Starts,
  Local Project, No-build)
• Final scope and deliverables dictated by the
  type of project identified at the milestone

9
Know Your Corridor

• Knowing corridor can help mid-stream redeployment
  or backtracking
• Be honest! Tendency to get caught up in hype
• Need to know
• Travel and transit use patterns
• Transportation systemwhat is the real problem?
  Is there one?
• Identify activity centers
• Population employment trends
• Needs to be expressed in travel markets,
  congestion
• Will be foundation of purpose need,
  make-the-case memo

10
Travel Demand Model Check-Up

• Addressing major modeling issues during AA causes
  slowdowns lack of momentum
• When the numbers change mid-streamits awkward
• Cannot eliminate/address all issues prior to AA
• Why? Evolving regulations, standards, knowledge
• What you should know
• Is your latest transit on-board survey less than
  5 years old?
• Do you have recent traffic counts of highways and
  arterials across the region, and especially in
  your corridor?
• Can the model meet New Starts modeling needs?
• Lack of immediate yes probably means no!
• How recent is your travel demand model validation?

11

• Preparing for the study
• Before the AA
• Alternatives evaluation
• During the AA
• Preparing for the next phase
• After the AA

12
Ridership Forecasts

• Lack of FTA participation will lead to surprises
• Engage the FTA early and often
• Review model results to date
• Establish the No-build and Baseline early
• Solicit FTA feedback regarding the evaluation of
  the build alternatives

13
Know Whos Who

• Lack of authority may lead to gridlock -
  exclusionism definitely will
• Establish Technical Workgroup
• Works with the project team frequently to address
  technical aspects of the study ? avoids
  cumbersome protocol to minimize project schedule
• Typically technical specialists from various
  agencies
• Advises the Steering Workgroup
• Establish Steering Workgroup
• Decision making body
• Meets less frequently to make milestone decisions
  to advance project
• Consultants should not be advocate planners
• They provide data so others can make informed
  decisions

14
Public/Stakeholder Involvement

• A robust Public Involvement plan reduces the
  chance of having to revisit dismissed
  alternatives
• Transparency
• Be proactive perception is reality in the
  public eye
• Advertise the process and provide information
  from beginning to end
• Present quantitative data whenever possible ?
  commensurate with level of confidence
• Engage in meaningful participation
• Teach the public about the need, process, project
  drivers etc.
• Explore some of publics ideas
• Respond to all comments and questions
• Get your story out by providing the media with
  information

15
Right-size the Technical Scope

• Dont get ahead of yourselfwere in the big
  picture here!
• Engineering should be limited to determining
  reasonable feasibility, costs and impacts
• Defer surveys, soil borings, traffic counts
• Environmental evaluation should focus on tangible
  differentiators (e.g. Demographics, Environmental
  Justice, Land Use, Economics, ROW Impacts)
• Architectural dog and pony show comes after you
  find out if you have a project
• Final tasks in scope can be an option based on
  the type of project

16
Avoiding Paralysis by Analysis

• Its easy to get lost in the details and stall
• Design is evolutionary not revolutionary
• Establish explicit methodology with some
  flexibility
• Agree to definitions at each step and try to
  avoid changes midstream
• Dont muddle - significant impacts to cost and
  performance requires scope changes
• If the story does not change, move on and refine
  as you go
• Recognize that ridership estimates are inherently
  limited
• Focus on deal breakers

17
Dealing with Preconceived Solutions

• Milestone decisions must be informed to avoid
  regressive analysis and surprises
• Perform equal analysis for all alternatives at
  same stage of study
• Do not dismiss alternatives prematurely
• Clearly communicate and document the key
  reasons/differentiators for dismissing an
  alternative
• Cost effective projects vs. effective projects
• Federal criteria vs. local preference
• New Starts eligibility decision point!
• When the type of project is identified, prepare
  for next phase

18

• Preparing for the study
• Before the AA
• Alternatives evaluation
• During the AA
• Preparing for the next phase
• After the AA

19
Preparing for the Next Phase

• Failure to adequately prepare for the next step
  costs time, money, project support momentum
• Establish a strong project champion and political
  support
• Prepare project approach and timeline based on
  the type of project
• Secure funding for next phase
• Gather new data (e.g. ground/aerial survey,
  utilities, census, transit surveys)
• Select consultants
• Schedule Scoping Meeting and file Notice of
  Intent (if applicable)

20
Conclusive Action

• Ambiguity leads to do-overs
• Steering Workgroup and/or Agency identifies LPA
  with formal motion
• Use specific language (i.e. one mode and one
  alignment, and next steps)
• Next steps are dictated by the type of project
• New Starts, Small Starts, Very Small Starts,
  Local project, No-build, etc.
• Amend the Long Range Plan
• Prepare and submit appropriate documentation
• New Starts application?

21
Check ListPreparing for the Study

• Local objectives and expectations are understood
• New Starts criteria is understood
• RFP and scope deals effectively with both
• Full funding is available for study
• Corridor socioeconomics and transportation
  patterns are understood
• Transit survey less than 5 years old
• Recent traffic counts on highways and arterials
• The TDM satisfies New Starts needs
• The TDM has been validated recently

22
Check ListAlternatives Evaluation

• Evaluation process and key decision milestones
  have been established
• Decision makers have been identified
• Technical advisors have been identified
• Project has been advertised and notification
  given to the FTA
• A robust Public Involvement Plan has been
  implemented
• Media kits have been utilized
• Appropriate technical scope has been established
• FTA has reviewed the TDM and project materials on
  multiple occasions
• Avoided paralysis by following methodology and
  focusing on the deal breakers
• Milestone decisions were fully informed
• Type of project is identified and next steps
  planned accordingly

23
Check ListPreparing for the Next Phase

• Project Champion and political support is
  established
• Project approach and timeline for next phase is
  developed
• Funding for next phase is secured
• New data requirements are identified/obtained
• Consultant is selected
• Scheduled Scoping Meeting and filed Notice of
  Intent (if applicable)
• LPA and next steps is identified in formal motion
  
• Long Range Transportation Plan is amended
• New Start Application is submitted or other
  materials prepared

24
Questions/Comments

• Contact Info
• Jim Czarnecky, DMJM Harris
• Jim.Czarnecky_at_dmjmharris.com
• Dave Schmitt, AECOM Consult
• David.Schmitt_at_dmjmharris.com