**Tampa Bay Regional Rail**

**Tampa Bay, Florida**

(November 2003)

# Description 

The Hillsborough Area Regional Transit Authority (HART), in cooperation
with the Hillsborough County Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO),
the city of Tampa, and the Florida Department of Transportation, is
proposing to implement the Tampa Bay Regional Rail System. The proposed
project is a light rail transit (LRT) system in three corridors: the
13.4-mile Northeast Corridor, the 1.5-mile Southwest Corridor, and the
5.2-mile West Corridor. The capital cost of the project includes the
purchase of 34 light rail vehicles and construction of 26 stations and
3,250 park-and-ride spaces.

The Tampa Bay Regional Rail System would connect several major activity
centers in the area including the University of South Florida, downtown
Tampa, and the Westshore/Airport area.

HART has indicated that the proposed project would provide accessibility
and travel-time benefits from increased transit usage.

+------------------------------------+---------------------------------+
| **Summary Description**            |                                 |
+------------------------------------+---------------------------------+
| **Proposed Project:**              | Light Rail Transit              |
+------------------------------------+---------------------------------+
| ** **                              | 20.1 Miles, 27 Stations         |
+------------------------------------+---------------------------------+
| **Total Capital Cost (\$YOE):**    | \$1,455.5 Million               |
+------------------------------------+---------------------------------+
| **Section 5309 New Starts Share    | \$727.7 Million (50%)           |
| (\$YOE):**                         |                                 |
+------------------------------------+---------------------------------+
| **Annual Operating Cost (2025      | \$53.3 Million                  |
| \$YOE):**                          |                                 |
+------------------------------------+---------------------------------+
| **Ridership Forecast (2025):**     | 38,700 Average Weekday          |
|                                    | Boardings                       |
+------------------------------------+---------------------------------+
| ** **                              | 21,600 Daily New Riders         |
+------------------------------------+---------------------------------+
| **Opening Year Ridership Forecast  | 38,700 Average Weekday          |
| (2020):**                          | Boardings                       |
+------------------------------------+---------------------------------+
| **FY 2005 Finance Rating:**        | # Low-Medium                    |
+------------------------------------+---------------------------------+
| **FY 2005 Project Justification    | **Not Rated**                   |
| Rating:**                          |                                 |
+------------------------------------+---------------------------------+
| **FY 2005 Overall Project          | **Not Recommeded**              |
| Rating:**                          |                                 |
+------------------------------------+---------------------------------+

The project is ***Not Recommended*** due to the lack of financial
commitment to the project and the heavy reliance of the financial plan
on the passage of a local sales tax referendum that is not expected to
occur until at least November 2004. In addition, although FTA is
reporting HART's ridership forecasts for the project, FTA has concerns
about their accuracy and is thus not evaluating the project's
justification criteria. The overall project rating applies to this
*Annual Report on New Starts* and reflects conditions as of November
2003. Project cost estimates and proposed New Starts share are developed
by local project sponsors and are not FTA assumptions. Project
evaluation is an ongoing process. As New Starts projects proceed through
project development, estimates of cost, benefits, and impacts are
refined. FTA's ratings and recommendation will be updated annually to
reflect new information, changing conditions, and refined financing
plans.

##### 

FTA will continue to assist HART to improve its ability to accurately
portray the benefits of the Regional Rail project. The project has been
in preliminary engineering since January 1999. If reliable information
on the merits and impacts of the Tampa Bay Regional Rail project are not
developed in the coming year, or if progress is not made on improving
its financial plan, the project may lose its preliminary engineering
status.

##### Status

A major investment study (MIS) to address alternatives for enhancing
mobility throughout Tampa, Hillsborough County, Lakeland, and Polk
County was completed in April 1998, with the selection by local
stakeholders of a multimodal locally preferred strategy, including a
71-mile Regional Rail System. The MIS also identified 28.5 miles of rail
investment in the Northeast, Southwest, and West Corridors to be
included in a regional *Early Action Plan* minimum operable segment. FTA
approved initiation of preliminary engineering for the three corridors
in the *Early Action Plan* in January 1999.

In July 2001, HART released the Draft Environmental Impact Statement
(EIS) for the project. Based on comments received on the Draft EIS, the
HART Board formally adopted a revised locally preferred alternative
(LPA) for the three corridors in October 2001. The revised LPA is the
20.1-mile, 26 station LRT system, which is the subject of this
evaluation. HART completed the Final EIS and received a Record of
Decision in April 2003. A public referendum to establish a local funding
mechanism to cover the local share of capital and operating costs for
the project is anticipated in November 2004.

The project's New Starts share is \$727.7 million. FTA notes that,
historically, more than \$500 million in New Starts funding has rarely
been provided to any single major capital transit investment project.

TEA-21 Section 3030(a)(89) authorized the Tampa Regional Rail System for
final design and construction. Through FY 2003, Congress has
appropriated \$5.94 million in Section 5309 New Starts funds for this
project.

####### Evaluation 

The following criteria have been estimated in conformance with FTA\'s
*Reporting Instructions for the Section 5309 New Starts Criteria*,
updated in June 2003. The project will be re-evaluated when it is ready
to advance to final design and for next year's *Annual Report on New
Starts*.

+--------------------------------------+---------------+---------------+
| **Project Justification Quantitative |               |               |
| Criteria**                           |               |               |
+--------------------------------------+---------------+---------------+
| **Mobility Improvements Rating: Not  |               |               |
| Rated**                              |               |               |
+--------------------------------------+---------------+---------------+
| **Average Employment Per Station**   | **[New Start  |               |
|                                      | vs.           |               |
| **Average Low Income Households Per  | Baseline]{    |               |
| Station**                            | .underline}** |               |
|                                      |               |               |
| **Transportation System User Benefit | 7,355         |               |
| Per Project Passenger Mile           |               |               |
| (Minutes)**                          | 261           |               |
|                                      |               |               |
|                                      | N/A           |               |
+--------------------------------------+---------------+---------------+
| **Environmental Benefits Rating:     |               |               |
| Medium**                             |               |               |
+--------------------------------------+---------------+---------------+
| **[Criteria Pollutant                | **[New Start  |               |
| Reduced]{.underline} (Tons)**        | vs.           |               |
|                                      | Baseline]{    |               |
| **Carbon Monoxide (CO)**             | .underline}** |               |
|                                      |               |               |
| **Nitrogen Oxide (NO~x~)**           | N/A           |               |
|                                      |               |               |
| **Volatile Organic Compounds**       | N/A           |               |
|                                      |               |               |
| **Particulate Matter (PM~10~)**      | N/A           |               |
|                                      |               |               |
| **Carbon Dioxide (CO~2~)**           | N/A           |               |
|                                      |               |               |
| **[Annual Energy                     | N/A           |               |
| Savings]{.underline} (millions of    |               |               |
| BTU)**                               | N/A           |               |
+--------------------------------------+---------------+---------------+
| **Cost Effectiveness Rating: Not     |               |               |
| Rated**                              |               |               |
+--------------------------------------+---------------+---------------+
| **Cost per Transportation System     | **[New Start  |               |
| User Benefit (current year           | vs.           |               |
| dollars/hour)**                      | Baseline]{    |               |
|                                      | .underline}** |               |
|                                      |               |               |
|                                      | N/A           |               |
+--------------------------------------+---------------+---------------+
| **Operating Efficiencies Rating: Not |               |               |
| Rated**                              |               |               |
+--------------------------------------+---------------+---------------+
| **System Operating Cost per**        | >             | **[New        |
|                                      | **[Baseline]{ | Start]{       |
| **Passenger Mile (current year       | .underline}** | .underline}** |
| dollars)**                           | >             |               |
|                                      | > N/A         | N/A           |
+--------------------------------------+---------------+---------------+

N/A indicates that information for this measure is not available.

# 

# Project Justification 

# [Rating: Not-Rated]{.underline} 

This project is *Not Rated* for project justification because FTA could
not evaluate the benefits of the project. The project sponsor calculated
the project's cost effectiveness at \$12.95 per hour of transportation
system user benefit. However, FTA has concerns about the information
submitted for this measure. FTA will continue to work with HART to
improve its travel demand projections.

Based on 2000 Census data, there are an estimated 6,791 low-income
households within a ½-mile radius of the proposed stations, or roughly
26 percent of the total households within ½ mile of the proposed
stations. There are an estimated 191,226 jobs located within ½ mile of
the proposed stations. The Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater metropolitan
area is designated as a marginal maintenance area for ozone.

####### Transit-Supportive Existing Land Use and Future Patterns

**[Rating: Medium]{.underline}**

The *Medium* rating balances consideration of existing land use
conditions in the corridor (which are not highly transit-supportive)
with projected high rates of future growth that have the potential to
create land use patterns that are significantly more transit-oriented.
Reaching this potential will depend upon the successful implementation
of regional and corridor policies through zoning, financial incentives,
and measures to restrict parking supplies.

**Existing Conditions:** Population totals and densities are low in the
project corridor, with an average of 4,537 persons per square mile.
Employment totals and densities are somewhat higher with an average of
8,065 jobs per square mile but are still relatively low compared to most
urban areas with LRT systems. Parking is plentiful throughout the
corridor and only a few station areas can be considered moderately
transit-supportive in terms of densities or character of development. A
few significant activity generators, including the University of South
Florida and University of Tampa, are located in the corridor.

#### Future Plans, Policies and Performance: The high rates of regional population and economic growth experienced over the last several decades are expected to continue in the future. In the Tampa metropolitan area, population is projected to increase by over 40 percent and employment by over 60 percent by 2020. The *Urban Growth Boundary* and other policies included in *Comprehensive Plans for the City of Tampa and Hillsborough County* are projected to channel a significant share of regional growth into downtown Tampa and other areas that would be served by the project. Employment is projected to grow by over 40 percent in the CBD and by 58 percent in station areas through 2025. Station area population is projected to grow at a more modest rate of 28 percent. The city of Tampa has taken initial steps to implement the transit-supportive policies included in its comprehensive plan by adopting overlay zoning that reduces parking requirements and requires pedestrian-friendly design features in several districts served by proposed transit stations. The city also offers incentives for mixed use, higher-density development that are not targeted specifically to transit. Tampa has initiated community-based station area planning. 

#### 

A number of large development projects incorporating transit-supportive
design elements are planned in the corridor. Campus plans for the
University of South Florida and University of Tampa incorporate
transit-friendly features oriented to the proposed LRT service. The
project sponsor has worked with the city and State on the development of
conceptual transit-supportive land use plans for a number of station
areas. This interagency working group, which has conducted workshops
with developers and the business community over the past year, is
considering potential implementation tools, including regulations,
zoning waivers, fee incentives, tax increment financing, property tax
abatement, and tax credits.

#### 

#### Local Financial Commitment 

**[Rating: Low-Medium]{.underline}**

The *Low-Medium* local financial commitment rating was determined by the
lack of committed funding for the project despite the lengthy amount of
time the project has been in preliminary engineering.

**Proposed Non-Section 5309 New Starts Share of Total Project Costs:
50%**

## Rating: Medium

HART proposes to use Section 5309 New Starts funds to cover 50 percent
of project capital costs. State funds and proposed local dedicated sales
tax revenues would fund the balance of capital costs.

+------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| **Locally Proposed     |                      |                      |
| Financial Plan**       |                      |                      |
+------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| **[Proposed Source of  | **[Total Funding     | **[Percent of        |
| Funds]{.underline}**   | (\$mil               | Total]{.underline}** |
|                        | lion)]{.underline}** |                      |
+------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| **Federal:**           | \$727.7              | 50.0 %               |
|                        |                      |                      |
| Section 5309 New       |                      |                      |
| Starts                 |                      |                      |
+------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| **State:**             | \$73.8               | 5.1 %                |
|                        |                      |                      |
| FDOT TMA Funds         | \$138.4              | 9.5 %                |
|                        |                      |                      |
| FDOT "Other Arterial"  | \$16.9               | 1.2 %                |
| Funds                  |                      |                      |
|                        | \$498.6              | 34.3 %               |
| Florida Public         |                      |                      |
| Transportation         |                      |                      |
|                        |                      |                      |
| Office Discretionary   |                      |                      |
| Funds                  |                      |                      |
|                        |                      |                      |
| **Local:**             |                      |                      |
|                        |                      |                      |
| Local Dedicated Sales  |                      |                      |
| Tax                    |                      |                      |
+------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| **Total:**             | **\$1,455.5**        | 100.0 %              |
+------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+

**NOTE:** Funding statements reflected in this table have been made by
project sponsors and are not DOT or FTA assumptions. Sum of figures may
differ from total as listed due to rounding.

####### Stability and Reliability of Capital Financing Plan

**[Rating: Low-Medium]{.underline}**

The *Low-Medium* rating reflects the large number of new funding sources
proposed for the project and the lack of any committed capital funding.
Although HART provided a detailed and well-structured financial plan, it
is completely reliant on passage of a dedicated sales tax referendum
that is not proposed to be placed on the ballot until November 2004.
Moreover, a proposal before the County Commissioners to place a sales
tax referendum on the November 2004 ballot failed in October 2003.

**Agency Capital Financial Condition:** HART's financial condition is
average. The average age of the bus fleet is 9.5 years, which is
relatively old. According to the financial plan submitted by HART,
maintenance and administration buildings are old and in need of
comprehensive rehabilitation.

**Capital Cost Estimate and Contingencies:** The project's capital cost
estimate includes a 25 percent project contingency for each cost
component, which is considered reasonable for a project in preliminary
engineering. Other soft costs, such as construction management and
consulting services, were estimated as percentages of the total
estimated capital cost. Capital costs also include a three percent cost
escalation factor, which is standard for the industry.

Existing and Committed Funding: None of the non-Section 5309 New Starts
funding is existing or committed to the project at this time.

New and Proposed Funding Sources: All State and local funding sources
proposed by HART are new sources. State sources include Florida DOT
Transportation Management Association Funds, arterial funds, and Florida
Public Transportation funds. Local funding is assumed to come from a
dedicated sales tax, which is subject to a public referendum and has yet
to be placed on the ballot. Under the best circumstances, the issue
would not come up for a vote until November 2004.

# Stability and Reliability of Operating Finance Plan 

**[Rating: Medium]{.underline}**

The *Medium* rating reflects the thorough and detailed operating plan
submitted by HART and the inclusion of a revenue management reserve fund
to cover operating funding shortfalls or cost overruns, tempered by
reliance on an as-yet established funding source for a significant
portion of LRT operating costs.

**Agency Operating Financial Condition:** HART currently receives
operating funds from an ad valorem property tax collected from all
Hillsborough County property owners at a rate of 0.5 mill (a mill is
equal to \$1.00 of tax for each \$1,000 of assessment). In recent years,
tax revenues have been insufficient to cover HART's operating expenses.
Consequently, service reductions have been necessary in order to satisfy
the balanced budget requirements of the Florida State Constitution. The
ratio of current assets to current liabilities according to the audited
financial statements for HART from 1999 to 2002 was at least 2.0, which
is considered good.

### Operating Cost Estimates and Contingencies: Annual operating and maintenance expenses for the proposed LRT system are projected to be \$53.3 million in forecast year 2025 (escalated dollars). This estimate is based on a methodology that examines recent actual experiences of nine peer systems, which is a reasonable approach for an agency which does not yet operate LRT. The operating financial plan includes creation of a revenue management reserve fund using excess tax revenues from the proposed dedicated local sales tax, which will contain enough funding to cover at least 3 months of operating expenses.

Existing and Committed Funding: The proposed dedicated local sales tax
would provide 48 percent of necessary revenues for the operations and
maintenance of the proposed LRT system. Farebox revenues are assumed to
provide 52 percent of annual operating and maintenance funds for the LRT
system, which is optimistic.

New and Proposed Funding Sources: Local operating and maintenance
funding is assumed to come from a new dedicated local sales tax. This
referendum has yet to be placed on the ballot; November 2004 is the
target date for placing the issue before the county's voters.

MAP