**North Corridor Metrorail Extension**

**Miami, Florida**

(November 2003)

# Description 

The Miami-Dade Transit Agency (MDTA) has proposed construction of a
9.5-mile Metrorail extension along NW 27^th^ Avenue between the existing
Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Metrorail station and the Broward County
line. The project includes seven stations and five park-and-ride lots
providing a total of 2,650 spaces.

NW 27^th^ Avenue is one of the few continuous north-south facilities in
Miami-Dade County and serves as an alternative to the severely congested
north-south I-95 and State Route 826. The proposed project is intended
to provide an additional travel alternative in the corridor that will
have direct connections with the existing Metrorail system, Tri-Rail
(regional commuter rail), the Miami Intermodal Center, and the Miami
International Airport. The project is further intended to provide direct
service to the Miami central business district and Medical Center, as
well as Miami-Dade Community College-North Campus and the Pro Player
Stadium.

+------------------------------------+---------------------------------+
| **Summary Description**            |                                 |
+------------------------------------+---------------------------------+
| **Proposed Project:**              | Heavy Rail                      |
+------------------------------------+---------------------------------+
| ** **                              | 9.5 Miles, 7 Stations           |
+------------------------------------+---------------------------------+
| **Total Capital Cost (\$YOE):**    | \$872.9 Million                 |
+------------------------------------+---------------------------------+
| **Section 5309 New Starts Share    | \$434.5 Million (50%)           |
| (\$YOE):**                         |                                 |
+------------------------------------+---------------------------------+
| **Annual Operating Cost (2025      | \$55.2 Million                  |
| \$YOE):**                          |                                 |
+------------------------------------+---------------------------------+
| **Ridership Forecast (2025):**     | 14,800 Average Weekday          |
|                                    | Boardings                       |
+------------------------------------+---------------------------------+
| ** **                              | 8,100 Daily New Riders          |
+------------------------------------+---------------------------------+
| **Opening Year Ridership Forecast  | 9,600 Average Weekday Boardings |
| (2012):**                          |                                 |
+------------------------------------+---------------------------------+
| **FY 2005 Finance Rating:**        | # Medium                        |
+------------------------------------+---------------------------------+
| **FY 2005 Project Justification    | ### Not Rated                   |
| Rating:**                          |                                 |
+------------------------------------+---------------------------------+
| **FY 2005 Overall Project          | **Not Rated**                   |
| Rating:**                          |                                 |
+------------------------------------+---------------------------------+

The project has not been rated. Although FTA is reporting MDTA's
ridership forecasts for the project above, FTA has concerns about their
validity and is thus not evaluating the project's justification
criteria. FTA intends to work with MDTA over the next several months to
improve its ability to accurately portray the project's benefits. The
absence of a project rating applies to this *Annual Report on New
Starts* and reflects the information available 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, the estimates of cost, benefits, schedules and impacts are
refined. FTA's ratings and recommendation will be updated annually to
reflect new information, changing conditions, and refined financing
plans.

##### Status

The project has gone through several changes, originally starting out as
a heavy rail extension when the project was approved to enter
preliminary engineering, then changing to a lower cost bus rapid transit
project when a one-cent sales tax referendum was rejected by voters in
1999, and reverting back to a Metrorail extension due to the passage of
a ½-cent sales tax referendum placed before voters in November 2002. The
referendum passed by a margin of two to one. The referendum identified
for voters a list of specific projects, known as the *People's
Transportation Plan*, to be funded with the additional revenues,
including the North Corridor Metrorail Extension, a number of other
fixed guideway projects, and a significant expansion of bus service.

Subsequent to the passage of the *People's Transportation Plan* and the
submission to FTA of detailed financial information on the North
Corridor Metrorail Extension, FTA re-evaluated the project's local
financial information and rated the project *Recommended*. In the months
since, MDTA updated its travel forecasting model and revised its travel
forecasts for the project, which had been originally developed in 1995.
FTA has questions about MDTA's revised travel forecasts for the North
Corridor project, which is why the project is now not rated. FTA will
work with MDTA to improve its ability to accurately portray project
benefits.

In addition, the North Corridor Metrorail Extension capital cost
increased from \$731.9 million to \$872.9 million because of the
inclusion of the purchase of 66 rail vehicles that were not included in
previous years. FTA is concerned about the high number of rail vehicles
proposed and has indicated to MDTA that the need for these cars will be
examined closely. The capital cost estimate submitted by MDTA is based
on conceptual engineering performed in 1999, with an inflation factor
added to bring the estimate into current year dollars.

TEA-21 Section 3030 (a) (45) authorized the Miami North 27^th^ Avenue
project for final design and construction. Through FY 2003, Congress has
appropriated \$11.92 million in Section 5309 New Starts funds for this
proposed 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, and the results
provided to Congress and other interested parties, when MDTA has
remedied its travel forecasting problems. The project will also
re-evaluated when it is ready to advance into 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 | 2,510         |               |
| Per Project Passenger Mile           |               |               |
| (Minutes)**                          | 390           |               |
|                                      |               |               |
|                                      | 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 is not available for this measure.

# 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 \$25.10 per hour of transportation
system user benefit. However, FTA has concerns about the information
submitted for this measure. FTA will continue to work with MDTA to
improve its travel demand projections. FTA further notes that unless
MDTA improves the cost effectiveness of the project, its ability to
advance into final design may be jeopardized.

Based on 2000 Census data, there are an estimated 2,720 low-income
households within a ½‑mile radius of the proposed project, roughly 24
percent of the total households within ½ mile of the proposed stations.
There are approximately 17,586 jobs within ½ mile of the proposed
stations. The Miami-Fort Lauderdale-West Palm Beach metropolitan area is
designated as a moderate maintenance area for ozone.

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

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

The *Low-Medium* land use rating reflects the poor transit-supportive
development in the corridor, which exists despite the presence of strong
State and local land use and growth management tools.

**Existing Conditions:** Land uses along the North Corridor consist of a
relatively uniform mix of strip commercial and low- to medium-density
residential development, interspersed with several major activity
centers, including Pro Player Stadium, St. Thomas University, and the
north campus of Miami-Dade Community College. Population and employment
density in the corridor is below average, with approximately 4,700
persons and 2,200 jobs per square mile. In addition, existing land use
patterns provide limited opportunities for pedestrian connections and
ample parking exists throughout the corridor. The corridor contains one
of the few areas where relatively large parcels of underdeveloped land
are available for conversion to higher density land uses.

#### 

**Future Plans, Policies and Performance:** In 2025, population density
in the corridor is forecast to be approximately 6,100 persons per square
mile, while employment density is forecast to be approximately 3,200
persons per square mile. Almost 18,000 employees are projected to work
within ½ mile of the stations. Population growth in the corridor is
forecast to be lower than growth in the rest of the region.

Miami-Dade County and the State of Florida have existing infrastructure
and growth management policies that focus development in existing
centers and corridors within an urban growth boundary that has been in
place since 1978. Miami-Dade County's *Comprehensive Development Master
Plan* (CDMP) includes policies to encourage development around transit
stations. The county's *Fixed Guideway Rapid Transit System-Development
Zone Ordinance,* established in 1978, provides standards for building
heights, densities, parking, open space, setbacks, gross/net land areas,
and pedestrian/vehicular circulation. In addition, the county's Board of
Commissioners established an Infill Strategy Task Force which issued
recommendations in 1997 for promoting development in neighborhoods with
the greatest need for economic development and for upgrading transit
service to support higher density land uses. Despite these policies, few
demonstrated cases of successful transit-supportive development have
emerged since the *Transit Development Zone Ordinance* was implemented
in 1978.

#### 

#### Local Financial Commitment 

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

The *Medium* local financial commitment rating was determined by the
significant capacity of MDTA to cover capital and operating expenses
with funding from the recently passed sales tax referendum, tempered by
the outdated capital cost estimate and the lack of inclusion of a number
of projects from the *People's Transportation Plan* in the financial
plan.

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

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

MDTA plans to use Section 5309 New Starts funds to fund just under 50
percent of project capital costs. A State transit block grant and
revenues from the recently approved ½-cent sales tax to construct the
proposed project would fund the balance of capital requirements.

+-------------------------+---------------------+---------------------+
| **Locally Proposed      |                     |                     |
| Financial Plan**        |                     |                     |
+-------------------------+---------------------+---------------------+
| **[Proposed Source of   | **[Total Funding    | **[Percent of       |
| Funds]{.underline}**    | (\$mill             | T                   |
|                         | ion)]{.underline}** | otal]{.underline}** |
+-------------------------+---------------------+---------------------+
| **Federal:**            | \$434.5             | 49.8 %              |
|                         |                     |                     |
| Section 5309 New Starts | \$3.9               | 0.5 %               |
|                         |                     |                     |
| Other                   |                     |                     |
+-------------------------+---------------------+---------------------+
| **State:**              | \$217.2             | 24.9 %              |
|                         |                     |                     |
| FDOT State Transit      | \$217.2             | 24.9 %              |
| Block Grant             |                     |                     |
|                         |                     |                     |
| **Local:**              |                     |                     |
|                         |                     |                     |
| ½ cent Sales Tax        |                     |                     |
| Revenues                |                     |                     |
+-------------------------+---------------------+---------------------+
| **Total:**              | **\$872.9**         | 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: Medium]{.underline}**

The *Medium* rating reflects the submittal by MDTA of a detailed capital
financial plan that projects significant cash balances resulting from an
estimated surplus in sales tax levies. However, the rating is tempered
by the outdated capital cost estimate and the fact that the financial
plan does not yet include the implementation of all of the projects
specified in the *People's Transportation Plan* that dictates how the
money from the sales tax is to be spent.

**Agency Capital Financial Condition:** The capital condition of MDTA is
good. The average age of the bus fleet is 5.4 years, which is very good,
and bond ratings for the agency are Aaa (Moody's) and AAA (Fitch).

**Capital Cost Estimate and Contingencies:** The North Corridor
Metrorail Extension capital cost increased from \$731.9 million to
\$872.9 million because of the inclusion of the purchase of 66 rail
vehicles that were not included in previous years. FTA is concerned
about the reasonableness of the number of vehicles, and will be looking
closely at this number in the coming year. The capital cost estimate
includes a contingency of \$71 million, equivalent to 8.1 percent of the
total project cost, which is considered inadequate for a project in
preliminary engineering. Cash balances are projected to cover at least
20 percent of the capital cost. However, the financial plan does not yet
include all of the projects specified in the *People's Transportation
Plan*.

Existing and Committed Funding: Non-Section 5309 New Starts funds
committed to the project total 25.4 percent of the capital costs. These
committed funds include the ½- cent sales tax revenues (24.9 percent)
and funds from a \$3.96 million FTA planning grant (0.5 percent) that
have been used to pay for the cost of preliminary engineering.

**New and Proposed Funding Sources:** The \$217.2 million Florida
Department of Transportation (FDOT) State Transit Block Grant funding
source, which is expected to cover 24.9 percent of the project cost, is
considered planned. MDTA has begun discussions with the State regarding
its share, but no commitments are in place.

# Stability and Reliability of Operating Finance Plan 

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

The *Medium* operating plan rating reflects the significant capacity of
MDTA to cover operating expenses with funding from the recently passed
sales tax referendum. However, the operating financial plan does not yet
contain all of the projects specified in the *People's Transportation
Plan* that dictates how the money from the sales tax is to be spent.

**Agency Operating Financial Condition:** MDTA is undergoing a
significant expansion of transit services throughout the region since
the passage of the dedicated ½-cent sales tax referendum in November
2002. Historical data show operating deficits in FY 1999 through
FY 2002. The current ratio for the agency (current assets divided by
current liabilities) based on the FY 2002 audited financial statements
is quite poor at 0.58.

### Operating Cost Estimates and Contingencies: In forecast year 2025, annual operating and maintenance costs are projected to be \$55.2 million. The financial plan projects surpluses throughout the entire 22-year planning horizon due to a significant surplus in sales tax levies. However, the plan does not yet include all of the projects specified in the *People's Transportation Plan*. These projects, once included, will likely cause the surplus in sales tax levies to decrease significantly.

Existing and Committed Funding: Operating revenues for the North
Corridor Metrorail Extension project are largely committed and are
anticipated to come from several existing funding sources including: (i)
fare revenues (25 percent of total operating funds); (ii) funds from the
local dedicated sales tax (33.3 percent); (iii) State operating
assistance and other revenues (3.8 percent); (iv) local support
including monies from local option gas taxes, county general fund
revenues, interest income, and municipal reinvestment (35.6 percent);
and (v) other agency revenues including advertising, joint development
and lease income (2.2 percent).

New and Proposed Funding Sources: None of the sources of operating and
maintenance funding proposed for the North Corridor Metrorail Extension
project are new. Funding from two existing sources are not yet
committed; these are FDOT operating assistance and local option gas tax
levies, which are subject to annual appropriations.

MAP