University Link LRT Extension

Similar documents
TEX Rail Fort Worth, Texas Project Development (Rating Assigned November 2012)

Annual Report on New Starts Proposed Allocations of Funds for Fiscal Year 2007

Columbia River Crossing Project Vancouver, Washington Engineering (Rating Assigned November 2012)

Portal North Bridge Project Hudson County, New Jersey Core Capacity Project Development (Rating Assigned February 2017)

Chapter 9 Financial Considerations. 9.1 Introduction

Central Puget Sound Regional Transit Authority

Central Puget Sound Regional Transit Authority

Vancouver Columbia River Crossing. (November 2009)

Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority Metro Budget Overview

SOUND TRANSIT STAFF REPORT MOTION NO. M Select a draft Sounder fare structure change and fare increase for public review and comment

Cancelled. Final Action

Peer Agency: King County Metro

CENTRAL CITY LINE PROJECT UPDATE AND SMALL STARTS EVALUATION & RATINGS APPLICATION UPDATED & REVISED 4/20/17

CHAPTER 9 FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS

CHAPTER 9 FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS

8. FINANCIAL ANALYSIS

MOTION NO. M Agreement with the City of Seattle and King County Metro for Downtown Seattle Transit Tunnel Mitigation

This chapter describes the initial financial analysis and planning for the construction and operations of the Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA).

The DRAFT Bus and Rail Investment Plan in Orange County

8.0 FINANCIAL ANALYSIS

Central Puget Sound Regional Transit Authority

Review and Update of Year 2035 Regional Transportation Plan

Executive Summary - Fiscal Year 2016 Valley Metro Rail Preliminary Annual Operating and Capital Budget

Travel Forecasting for Corridor Alternatives Analysis

SOUND TRANSIT RESOLUTION NO. R

Central Puget Sound Regional Transit Authority

RESOLUTION NO. R Baseline Budget and Schedule, and Approve Gates 5 and 6 for the East Link Extension

Total Operating Activities for FY17 are $56.9 million, an increase of $5.1M or 9.8% from FY16.

Transit Development Plan (FY ) Executive Summary

10 Financial Analysis

Honolulu High-Capacity Transit Corridor Project Alternatives Analysis

May 31, 2016 Financial Report

2.0 PROJECT FINANCIAL PLAN...

DURHAM-ORANGE LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT PROJECT FINANCIAL RISKS AND MITIGATION STRATEGIES APRIL 2017

VALLEY METRO RAIL FY18 Budget EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

INVESTING STRATEGICALLY

Public Transit Services Summary of Submitted 2015 Budget From Rates

STAFF REPORT Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) Scenario Performance Update for Board Direction

MOTION NO. M Funding and Cooperative Agreement with the City of Shoreline related to the Lynnwood Link Extension

Final Interim Policy Guidance Federal Transit Administration Capital Investment Grant Program

Wake County. People love to be connected. In our cyberspace. transit plan CONNECTING PEOPLE, CONNECTING THE COUNTY

The Bus and Rail Investment Plan in Orange County

August 31, 2016 Financial Report

February 2016 Financial Report

MEETING: DATE: TYPE OF ACTION: STAFF CONTACT:

RESOLUTION NO. R Tacoma Link Expansion Baseline Budget, Schedule, Phase Gate 5, and Project Naming

Regional Connector Transit Corridor Draft Environmental Impact Statement/ Draft Environmental Impact Report APPENDIX HH FINANCIAL ANALYSIS REPORT

QUALITY TRANSPORTATION SUMMARY

Overview of the Final New Starts / Small Starts Regulation and Frequently Asked Questions

FIVE-YEAR OPERATING FORECAST AND CAPITAL PROGRAM

April 30, 2016 Financial Report

Sound Transit seeks billions more in taxing authority from legislature Key Findings Introduction

Contents. Alamo Area Metropolitan Planning Organization. Introduction S. St. Mary s Street San Antonio, Texas 78205

Northern Virginia Transportation Commission: 2018 Legislative and Policy Agenda

CENTRAL PUGET SOUND REGIONAL TRANSIT AUTHORITY. Schedule of Sources and Uses of Funds by Subarea. Years Ending December 31, 2010 and 2009

MEMORANDUM. Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority Board of Directors. Michael T. Burns General Manager. DATE: August 4, 2008

Last year, transit spent almost $1.1 billion on materials and services contracts with more than 2,000 Pennsylvania businesses.

Valley Metro Rail FY18 Preliminary Budget Overview

Intercity Transit Community Update

Adopted 2010 Budget DECEMBER 2009

FY17 FY16 Valley Metro RPTA Sources of Funds FY17 vs FY16

INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN METRO AND WASHINGTON COUNTY FOR THE SOUTHWEST CORRIDOR PLAN

2040 Transit System Plan

DRAFT REGIONAL TRANSIT SYSTEM PLAN Regional Task Force July 8, 2011

MiWay Business Plan and 2015 Budget

FY2011 Budget Forum. District of Columbia. October 19, 2009

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS BUSINESS MEETING ACTION ITEM

Report by Finance and Administration Committee (B) Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority Board Action/Information Summary

Public Transit: The Funding Crisis and A Need for Action

FY2020 Budget Outlook

VALLEY METRO RPTA FY18 Budget EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Transit Subsidy. Projected FY17 Transit Subsidy

Subdivision Staging Policy (SSP) By Dan Wilhelm, As of 11/15/2016

INVESTMENT STRATEGIES

Georgetown Planning Department Plan Annual Update: Background

Chapter 3: Regional Transportation Finance

Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority

TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT IN THE PORTLAND METRO REGION

Proposed Service Change Title VI Compliance Review

METRO. Metro Funding. Associated Master Plan: Comprehensive Master Transportation Plan (MTP) for Arlington. Neighborhood(s):

Regional Travel Study

Regional Transportation District FasTracks Financial Plan. April 22,

Columbia Pike Transit Initiative: Comparative Return on Investment Study

Adopted Budget. December 2014

SOUND TRANSIT STAFF REPORT MOTION NO. M D Street-to-M Street Track & Signal Project Preferred Alternative

SOUTHERN BELTWAY US-22 TO I-79 PROJECT 2013 FINANCIAL PLAN. Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission Allegheny and Washington Counties, Pennsylvania

Arlington Transportation Demand Managment Strategic Plan FY FY2040

RTD Pass Program Portfolio: The Current State. An Overview of RTD Pass Programs June 6, 2017

RTD Pass Program Portfolio: The Current State. An Overview of RTD Pass Programs June 6, 2017

TSCC Budget Review TriMet

Recommendation to the Board Final Action

Pasco County, Florida. Multi-Modal Mobility Fee 2018 Update Study

MOTION NO. M Sole-Source Contract Amendment for Operational Reporting Technology Tools

Sec Transportation management special use permits Purpose and intent.

Financial Plan. Section 8 STATUS QUO PLAN STATUS QUO PLAN ASSUMPTIONS STATUS QUO PLAN BUDGET ITEMS

SFY 2018 (July 1, 2017 to June 30, 2018) Annual Report

PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT FY 2004/05 VENTURA INTERCITY SERVICE TRANSIT AUTHORITY (VISTA) CONEJO CONNECTION

Columbia River Crossing Project Portland, Oregon New Starts Engineering (Rating Assigned January 2014)

Technical Memorandum #1: Baseline Conditions. This section provides an overview of the main services operated and assets maintained by PRTC.

Transcription:

(November 2007) The Central Puget Sound Regional Transit Authority, commonly known as Sound Transit, is proposing to implement an extension of the Central Link light rail transit (LRT) Initial Segment currently under construction from the Segment s northern terminus at Westlake Station in downtown Seattle to the University of Washington, 3.1 miles to the northeast. The all-tunnel alignment includes a station at Capitol Hill. Twenty-seven vehicles would be procured as part of the project, which would permit fiveminute peak-period operations throughout the entire Central Link line. University Link is the first phase of Sound Transit s planned North Link LRT extension to the Northgate Transit Center in North Seattle. The University Link corridor is the most densely developed residential and employment area in Seattle and the state of Washington. The three largest urban centers in the state downtown Seattle, Capitol Hill/First Hill, and the University District are located along the alignment. Travel by private vehicle and bus between these areas is extremely congested due to high traffic volumes and the corridor s geography. First Hill and Capitol Hill rise sharply northeast of downtown Seattle, and Interstate 5 (I-5) the region s primary north-south freeway corridor runs along the base of these hills, separating them from downtown. Farther to the north, the University District is separated from Capitol Hill and downtown by Portage Bay and the Lake Washington Ship Canal; only three crossings (two of them drawbridges) connect the University with the southern portion of the corridor. Reversible express lanes on I-5 north of downtown result in a disparity between northbound and southbound transit travel times during peak periods. The University Link LRT Extension is intended to provide more reliable and faster bi-directional transit service to and between downtown Seattle, Capitol Hill/First Hill, and the University District, while supporting local land use goals and contributing to the maintenance of 1990 traffic levels at the University of Washington. Summary Description Proposed Project: Light Rail Transit 3.1 Miles 2 Stations Total Capital Cost ($YOE): $1,798.12 Million (Includes $184.11 million in finance charges) Section 5309 New Starts Share ($YOE): $750.00 Million (41.7%) Annual Forecast Year Operating Cost: $21.28 Million Ridership Forecast (2030): 40,200 Average Weekday Boardings 17,400 Daily New Riders Opening Year Ridership Forecast (2016): 28,600 Average Weekday Boardings FY 2009 Local Financial Commitment Rating: Medium-High FY 2009 Project Justification Rating: Medium-High FY 2009 Overall Project Rating: High FTA expects to execute a Full Funding Grant Agreement (FFGA) for the University Link LRT Extension in Summer 2008. Pending Full Funding Grant Agreement A - 79

Project Development History and Current Status The University Link LRT Extension is part of the Central Link LRT system that has been in planning for more than two decades. In 1999, Sound Transit published an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for a Central Link alignment extending from South 200 th Street in the City of SeaTac to North 103 rd Street in the City of Seattle. Due to financial constraints, Sound Transit identified three operable segments for implementation, the first of which extended from just south of downtown Seattle to the University of Washington. FTA awarded an FFGA for this project in January 2001, which was suspended later that year due to cost increases. Sound Transit redefined the project as an Initial Segment from Westlake Station in the Downtown Seattle Transit Tunnel south to Tukwila, which is currently being constructed under an FFGA executed by FTA in October 2003. Sound Transit completed a Supplemental Draft EIS for the North Link segment in December 2003, and the Sound Transit Board selected the 3.1-mile University Link Extension as the first phase in August 2005. FTA issued a limited-scope Supplemental Draft EIS in October 2005 to address changes in the preferred alternative, including an alternative route through the University of Washington. FTA approved the project into preliminary engineering in December 2005. FTA issued a Final EIS in April 2006, and Record of Decision (ROD) in June 2006. FTA approved the project into final design in December 2006, and recommended the project for an FFGA in the FY 2008 President s Budget. Significant Changes Since FY 2008 Evaluation (November 2006) Sound Transit updated the project cost estimate and financial plan, reflecting increased finance costs of approximately $50 million, and a net capital cost increase of approximately $100 million due to advanced design, evolution of staffing plans, and increased real estate costs. Sound Transit also revised the revenue operations date from June to September 2016. The number of light rail vehicles was reduced from 30 to 27, consistent with a revised fleet plan analysis. Project Justification Rating: Medium-High The Medium-High rating for project justification is based on a Medium rating for cost effectiveness and a Medium-High rating for transit-supportive land use. Cost Effectiveness Rating: Medium The Medium rating is based on the level of travel-time benefits (14,500 average weekday hours) relative to the project s annualized costs. Cost Effectiveness Cost per Hour of Transportation System User Benefit Incremental Cost per Incremental Trip New Start vs. Baseline $22.21* $18.81 * Indicates that measure is a component of Cost Effectiveness rating. The University Link LRT Extension is intended to provide improved bi-directional transit access and faster travel times between Capitol Hill, the University District, downtown Seattle, and points south. Over one-half of project travel-time benefits accrue to travelers destined for the University District or Capitol Hill, while 25 percent of benefits are for trips originating in these station areas destined for other parts of the region. Over 20 percent of travel-time benefits accrue to trips internal to the project corridor. Approximately 10 percent of project benefits are the result of improved LRT frequencies throughout the entire Central Link line necessitated by the higher passenger loads caused by the extension. The project scope, cost and schedule are consistent with the June 2006 ROD. The cost estimate and schedule appear to be reasonable and achievable. A -80 Pending Full Funding Grant Agreement

Transit-Supportive Land Use Rating: Medium-High The Medium-High rating is based upon the average of the ratings assigned to the subfactors below, each of which contribute one-third to the land use rating. The rating reflects conditions as of November 2007. Existing Land Use: Medium-High The University Link connects the densely developed Seattle CBD to the Capitol Hill neighborhood and the University of Washington (UW) campus. Employment in the Seattle CBD was a relatively high 183,200 in 2000. Capitol Hill, a mixed-use urban neighborhood with the most dense residential development in the Puget Sound Region, is also home to two colleges and four large medical facilities. The University of Washington is home to 35,000 students and 20,000 faculty and staff. The two project station areas have a combined population of nearly 21,000 and 23,700 jobs, with an average population density of 16,400 persons per square mile. Parking in the CBD is relatively expensive, up to $26 daily. Total parking provided for the UW campus is capped at a restrictive 12,300 which is roughly one space for every five students, faculty, and staff. In the Capitol Hill neighborhood, most parking is on-street or in small offstreet lots, and is highly utilized. Transit-Supportive Plans and Policies: High Growth management policies are strong at all levels of government. The state s Growth Management Act requires establishment of an urban growth boundary, reflected in local comprehensive plans. King County s planning policies established this boundary and designated urban centers, including downtown Seattle, Capitol Hill, and the University District. Seattle s comprehensive plan identifies both the Capitol Hill and University of Washington station areas as urban centers or villages, in which new growth will be concentrated. The region s Vision 2020 land use plan identifies policies used to guide development and control urban sprawl. Seattle s Comprehensive Plan and neighborhood plans for the Capitol Hill and University District call for the concentration of growth in compact walkable neighborhoods known as urban villages. Station area planning processes have been completed and resulted in recommendations including changes to zoning, parking policies, development opportunities, and other actions. Many of these recommendations have been implemented. For example, station area overlay districts and rezones have been accomplished to prohibit auto-oriented uses, increase densities, and reduce parking requirements in the Capitol Hill station area. The UW Campus Master Plan defines opportunities for building expansion, provides design guidelines, and recommends pedestrian improvements. A range of tools exists to implement policies that are not otherwise mandated by law. These include tax increment financing, multi-family tax abatement and exemption programs, a location efficient mortgage program, and funding provided through the Washington State Commute Trip Reduction Act. Regional, county, and city agencies have all implemented outreach activities, technical assistance, and financial incentives to promote transit-oriented development. Performance and Impacts of Policies: Medium-High Regional monitoring of growth targets in 2002 by the Puget Sound Regional Council indicates that growth is in fact occurring in targeted areas, with King County the most aggressive in targeting this growth in its urban centers. Some instances exist of coordination of development with the LRT Initial Segment planning and construction. There is not a significant amount of land available for development in either of the two University Link station areas. However, redevelopment and infill development is expected to be supportive of transit, based on policies and zoning adopted in each area. Pending Full Funding Grant Agreement A -81

Other Project Justification Criteria Mobility Improvements Rating: Medium-High Average Per Station: Employment Low Income Households Transportation System User Benefit Per Project Passenger Mile (Minutes) 23,700 35,000 New Start vs. Baseline 2.82 Environmental Benefits Rating: Medium Criteria Pollutant Status EPA Designation Maintenance or Attainment for all Pollutants Local Financial Commitment Rating: Medium-High The Medium-High local financial commitment rating is based on Medium-High ratings for the New Starts share of project costs and the capital finance plan and the High rating for the operating finance plan. Section 5309 New Starts Share of Total Project Costs: 42% Rating: Medium-High Sound Transit is requesting a less than 42 percent New Starts share of total project costs, which equates to a Medium-High rating for this measure. Locally Proposed Financial Plan Source of Funds Total Funds ($million) Percent of Total Federal: Section 5309 New Starts FHWA Flexible Funds (CMAQ) Section 5309 Fixed Guideway Modernization Local: Local Option Tax Revenues Bond Proceeds Additional Revenues $750.00 $3.00 $9.00 $248.77 $774.17 $13.18 41.7% 0.2% 0.5% 13.8% 43.1% 0.7% Total: $1,798.12 100.0% NOTE: The financial plan reflected in this table has been developed by the project sponsor and does not reflect a commitment by DOT or FTA. The sum of the figures may differ from the total as listed due to rounding. Capital Finance Plan Rating: Medium-High The capital finance plan is rated Medium-High based upon the weighted average of the ratings assigned to each of the subfactors listed below. The agency capital condition is weighted 25 percent, the commitment A -82 Pending Full Funding Grant Agreement

of capital funds is weighted 25 percent, and the capital cost estimate, planning assumptions and capital funding capacity subfactor is weighted 50 percent. Agency Capital Condition: Medium The average age of Sound Transit s bus fleet is 7.1 years, which is in line with the industry average. The age of the agency s light rail and commuter rail fleet is very young at five and six years respectively. Sound Transit s good bond ratings, which were issued in March 2005, are as follows: Moody s Investors Service Aa3 and Standard and Poor s Corporation AA-. Commitment of Capital Funds: High One hundred percent of non-new Starts funding is committed. The non-section 5309 New Starts funds are comprised of Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program (CMAQ) funds, FTA Section 5309 Fixed Guideway Modernization funds, local option sales and use taxes, bond proceeds, and additional local resources. Capital Cost Estimates, Planning Assumptions, and Financial Capacity: Medium-High The cost estimate is considered reasonable and achievable, although unallocated contingencies and cost escalation assumptions may be low. The assumptions in the capital plan are conservative compared to historical experience. The project s financial plan shows projected cash balances, reserve accounts, and/or access to credit that would allow Sound Transit to cover cost increases or funding shortfalls equal to approximately 50 percent of project costs. Operating Finance Plan Rating: High The operating finance plan is rated High based upon the weighted average of the ratings assigned to each of the subfactors listed below. The agency operating condition is weighted 25 percent, the commitment of operating funds is weighted 25 percent, and the operating cost estimates, planning assumptions and operating funding capacity subfactor is weighted 50 percent. Agency Operating Condition: High Sound Transit is in excellent financial condition, demonstrating no historical cash flow shortages and no recent service cutbacks. Sound Transit s current ratio of assets to liabilities as reported in its most recent audited financial statement is 3.4. Sounder commuter rail service continues to ramp up as additional round-trips are added, while Regional Express bus service increases gradually. Commitment of Operating and Maintenance Funds: High All operating funding is committed. Sound Transit s operating expenses are entirely funded by dedicated local option (sales and use/motor vehicle excise/car rental) taxes, fares and other system-generated revenue, including investment income and advertising. Operating Cost Estimates, Planning Assumptions, and Financial Capacity: Medium-High Sound Transit s estimates of light rail operating costs are reasonable, but fare revenue assumptions are optimistic. Sound Transit maintains a two month operating reserve fund. In addition to this reserve, the project s operating financial plan shows large cash balances, indicating significant financial capacity. Pending Full Funding Grant Agreement A -83

Map A -84 Pending Full Funding Grant Agreement