Regional Transit System Prioritization Process

1. Regional Transit System PrioritizationProcess ARC Model Users Group Meeting June 11, 2010

2. Purpose: Why Are We Doing This…? • Scarce and competitive transit funding at the federal, state and local levels • For planning, programming, and implementing transit projects, the Atlanta region needs a process based on factors most applicable to transit projects • IT3 initiative undertaken to develop a cost efficient manner in improving the transportation network • Prepare for upcoming Authorization of Surface Transportation Bill and position projects for Federal New Starts/Small Starts funding RTP Update IT3 MOU Group Federal Stimulus Multiple Jurisdictions Legislative Actions Federal Bill Authorization Funding Shortfalls

3. Potential Changes in Federal Funding • Obama Administration • "The days where we're just building sprawl forever, those days are over.“ President Barack Obama, February 9, 2009, West Palm Beach, FL • DOT Secretary Ray Lahood • “Addressing VMT growth plays a key role in decreasing transportation related GHG emissions and should be included in overall efforts to prevent climate change. One way to achieve significant reductions in VMT is to develop more livable communities.” • SAFETEA-LU -18 month extension • Expect to Announce Principles on Surface Transportation by year-end • Principles will embody the essence of what is expressed in Secretary Lahood’s testimony before Senate Environmental and Public Works Committee. • Don’t expect bill until after 2010 elections.

4. Transit Prioritization Framework • Contains 6 areas of performance measures and addresses major transit investments • Builds upon ARC’s Envision6 RTP addressing land use consistency, congestion mitigation, and transit incident congestion • Consistent with IT3 and GDOT’s prioritization process • Based on peer review, incorporates mode-neutral performance measures • Two-Step Process: • Pre-Screen: Determination of eligibility based on land use initiatives, community support, and O&M feasibility • Prioritization: Regionally-based project ratings for RTP update

5. Pre-screening Recommendations • Pre-screening process recommended to justify projects for inclusion in the RTP. • The items recommended subject to this pre-screening include: • Consideration of life-cycle and (O&M) costs – Demonstrated ability to fund ongoing life-cycle and/or O&M costs • Support from community/stakeholders – Evidence of community support (e.g., resolutions of support) • Land use initiatives that support transit – Specific land use ordinances, station area plans, and overlay districts have been adopted

6. Areas of Performance Evaluation • Completed sensitivity analysis of prioritization framework • Tested various weighting schemes based on areas of emphasis • Consistent with IT3 and GDOT’s prioritization process • Weighting will impact overall project ratings/priority • Weighting schemes should be based on regional policy • Weights need to be publicly vetted Accessibility and Economic Development Mobility and Congestion Mitigation Community Support Project Readiness Environmental State of Good Repair

7. Project Specific Performance Measures • Proposed project prioritization performance metrics include: • Mobility and Congestion Mitigation • Total transit boardings for project • Travelers attracted to project corridor during peak period in 2030 • Reduction of congestion based on net change in crashes resulting from project implementation Accessibility and Economic Development • Links to high-frequency transit services • Jobs in project corridor / consistency with land use plans Environmental • Air emissions reduced or increased by the project • Acres of impacted wetlands/floodplains/parks • Number of historic resources within proposed project buffer

8. Project Specific Performance Measures • Proposed project performance metrics continued: • Project Readiness • Combination of ROW availability, constraints and engineering feasibility • Funding commitment • Current stage of project development State of Good Repair • Level of enhancements to maintaining system operations Community/Agency Support • Policies enacted to promote project development

9. Rationale for Performance Measures

10. Rationale for Performance Measures

11. Potential Additional Measures • Other measures that warrant consideration within the framework as data and better analytical tools become available include: • Impacts of freight and goods movement • Asset management, and sustainability • Trips not taken/internal capture • Indirect economic benefits of investments of transit

12. Data and Analysis Limitations • Regional model currently not sanctioned by FTA – MARTA and ARC are coordinating to update model per FTA guidance • More detailed operating and conceptual planning is needed and will impact project ratings in the prioritization framework • Existing project cost estimates are preliminary and will be refined through later stages of project development (AA, DEIS, etc.) • Annualized Capital/O&M costs are not based on FTA's standard cost categories (SCC) • Conducting cost breakdowns by FTA standards may change cost estimates • Project ridership estimates likely to change with an updated model and results from regional on-board survey.

13. Modeling Coordination FTA Approved Regional Travel Demand Model November 2010 (Anticipated)

14. Major Findings • Maintaining a ‘state of good repair’ on our existing infrastructure is critical and should be prioritized BEFORE all expansion projects are considered • There is a definite need to refine ALL projects in terms of project readiness for implementation and competitiveness for federal funding • The tool should be continually updated to reflect more current data (i.e., on-board surveys) - travel demand model must be refined to optimize ability to derive New Starts related measures

15. Major Findings • Transit project prioritization must promote the overall regional vision and goals – • Performance weighting assigned should reflect regional policy and public input • Congestion mitigation is not a good standalone measure for transit prioritization • Project prioritization should address mode neutrality • Project prioritization is a product of regional partnership • Must develop system level targets during the RTP update to evaluate overall impacts of prioritized transit projects • Transit prioritization ratings should be evaluated in a manner different than roadways by incorporating transit-specific project issues

16. Regional Transit System PrioritizationProcess ARC Model Users Group Meeting June 11, 2010