**South Corridor I-205 / Portland Mall LRT**

**Portland, Oregon**

(November 2004)

The Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation District (TriMet) and
Portland Metro, the region's metropolitan planning organization, are
proposing to construct 8.3 miles of new light rail transit (LRT)
guideway consisting of two segments connecting to the existing "MAX" LRT
system along I-84 (Banfield Expressway). Long-range regional forecasts
point toward increasing traffic congestion along the I-205 corridor, for
trips both originating and terminating in the southeastern metropolitan
Portland area. The intent of the South Corridor I-205/Portland Mall LRT
project is to address increased travel demand in this rapidly growing
corridor; to provide additional fixed guideway access between regional
activity centers; and to help the Portland region achieve its land use,
development, and growth management goals and objectives.

The first segment of the proposed project is a 6.5-mile double-track
line that runs north/south and parallel to I-205, connecting the
Clackamas Regional Center in southeast Portland with the Gateway Transit
Center east of downtown on TriMet's existing LRT system. The I-205 line
will also include eight new stations with approximately 2,100
park-and-ride spaces which are intended to draw commuters from
throughout the southeastern metropolitan Portland area to downtown and
other major employment centers located along the regional MAX system.
The second segment of the project is a 1.8-mile LRT spur which would
begin at the existing Rose Quarter Transit Center and terminate at
Portland State University (PSU) in south downtown Portland. This new LRT
alignment, which would run along the existing downtown bus mall on 5^th^
and 6^th^ Avenues, is needed because TriMet's existing downtown LRT line
(to the region's west side) does not have the capacity to carry the
additional eight trains per peak hour into the central business district
(CBD) that will result from the I-205 extension.

+------------------------------------+---------------------------------+
| **Summary Description**            |                                 |
+------------------------------------+---------------------------------+
| **Proposed Project:**              | Light Rail Transit              |
+------------------------------------+---------------------------------+
| ** **                              | 8.3 Miles                       |
|                                    |                                 |
|                                    | 15 Stations                     |
+------------------------------------+---------------------------------+
| **Total Capital Cost (\$YOE):**    | \$502.1 Million (includes \$8.7 |
|                                    | million in finance charges)     |
+------------------------------------+---------------------------------+
| **Section 5309 New Starts Share    | \$296.2 Million (59.0%)         |
| (\$YOE):**                         |                                 |
+------------------------------------+---------------------------------+
| **Annual Forecast Year Operating   | \$27.9 Million                  |
| Cost:**                            |                                 |
+------------------------------------+---------------------------------+
| **Ridership Forecast (2025):**     | 46,500 Average Weekday          |
|                                    | Boardings                       |
+------------------------------------+---------------------------------+
| ** **                              | 9,400 Daily New Riders          |
+------------------------------------+---------------------------------+
| **Opening Year Ridership Forecast  | 25,300 Average Weekday          |
| (2009):**                          | Boardings                       |
+------------------------------------+---------------------------------+
| **FY 2006 Finance Rating:**        | # Medium                        |
+------------------------------------+---------------------------------+
| **FY 2006 Project Justification    | **Medium-High**                 |
| Rating:**                          |                                 |
+------------------------------------+---------------------------------+
| **FY 2006 Overall Project          | **Recommended**                 |
| Rating:**                          |                                 |
+------------------------------------+---------------------------------+

**Project Development History and Current Status**

The *South/North Major Investment Study* covering the travel shed
connecting the cities of Oregon City and Milwaukie, the Clackamas
Regional Center area, downtown, north, and southeast Portland, and the
city of Vancouver, Washington, was initiated in 1993 and completed in
1995. In 1998, Metro issued a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
and adopted LRT as the locally preferred alternative (LPA). The failure
of a November 1998 ballot measure that would have provided local funding
for the LPA triggered the need to re-evaluate the potential
improvements, including a separate analysis of the I-205 corridor within
the southern portion of the MIS study area. A Supplemental Draft EIS
that focused on transportation alternatives in the I-205 corridor was
completed in December 2002. In October 2003, TriMet completed an
Amendment to the Supplemental Draft EIS that examined the potential
impacts of a downtown LRT spur, an improvement that had not been
included in the previous environmental work. A revised LPA that included
the downtown spur alignment was approved by FTA into preliminary
engineering in March 2004. The Final EIS is expected to be complete in
late 2004, with a NEPA Record of Decision anticipated in early 2005 and
final design approval anticipated in Summer 2005.

**Significant Changes Since Last Evaluation** (**March 2004**)

TriMet and Metro have updated the travel forecasts for the project to
reflect a 2025 design year. The project scope was refined to eliminate
approximately 400 park-and-ride spaces and reduce total vehicle
requirements. In August 2004, the TriMet Board approved an increase in
the regional payroll tax, which will increase revenues for the operation
of the regional transit system, including the proposed South Corridor
I-205/Portland Mall LRT project.

**[Project Justification Rating: Medium-High]{.underline}**

The project is rated *Medium-High* based on a *Medium* rating for cost
effectiveness and a *Medium-High* rating for transit-supportive land
use.

####### *Cost Effectiveness Rating: Medium*

The *Medium* cost effectiveness rating reflects a good level of
travel-time benefits (7,700 hours each weekday) relative to the
project's annualized costs. The estimate of both costs and benefits of
the project at this stage of development is considered reliable.

+------------------------------------------+---------------------------+
| **Cost Effectiveness**                   |                           |
+------------------------------------------+---------------------------+
| Cost per Hour of Transportation System   | **[New Start vs.          |
| User Benefit                             | Baseline]{.underline}**   |
|                                          |                           |
| Incremental Cost per Incremental Trip    | \$14.88\*                 |
|                                          |                           |
|                                          | \$9.86                    |
+------------------------------------------+---------------------------+

####### \* Indicates that measure is a component of Cost Effectiveness rating.

The implementation of fixed guideway transit in a congested regional
transportation corridor is expected to improve travel times between the
southeastern metropolitan Portland area and downtown Portland.
Eighty-three percent of total project boardings and 60 percent of
travel-time benefits will result from trips with at least one end in the
I-205 corridor. Downtown Portland is the primary destination for trips
originating in the corridor. The second downtown LRT alignment will
penetrate areas in the southern part of the CBD not presently served by
MAX and will provide over 30 percent of the project's travel-time
benefits. Less than six percent of travel-time benefits are attributable
to increased service frequencies along the existing I-84 MAX alignment
resulting from the South Corridor I-205/Portland Mall LRT project.

The South Corridor I-205 / Portland Mall LRT project's cost estimate is
comparable to those of other LRT at-grade projects in the New Starts
pipeline. TriMet has an excellent track record of constructing LRT
projects on schedule and within budget.

####### *Transit-Supportive Land Use Rating: Medium-High*

The *Medium-High* rating reflects the *Medium-High* ratings assigned to
transit-supportive plans and policies and their performance and impacts,
and the *Medium* rating for existing land use in the project corridor.

**Existing Land Use: Medium**

-   The I-205 South segment of the corridor currently is characterized
    by auto-oriented development in the form of detached, single-family
    homes and low-density commercial and light industrial development.
    Population density is low to moderate, averaging 4,200 persons per
    square mile.

-   The proposed new downtown segment serves a high-density, mixed-use,
    pedestrian-friendly environment, and proposed station areas contain
    over 150,000 jobs.

-   There is little vacant land available for development, so most
    transit-oriented development will require developers to assemble
    parcels as they become available.

-   Portland encourages alternatives to auto trips to its downtown by
    limiting the supply of surface parking lots; however, ample parking
    for auto-oriented uses exists along the I-205 segment. Including
    monthly discounts, the average daily rate for parking in the central
    city is \$7.43.

**Transit-Supportive Plans and Policies: Medium-High**

-   Oregon's comprehensive planning system has been in place for more
    than 25 years, and the Portland urban growth boundary has
    effectively constrained development to designated areas. Metro (the
    regional government) has unparalleled authority to establish and
    enforce land use policy. Its *Urban Growth Management Functional
    Plan* identifies growth centers and requires that local
    jurisdictions require minimum densities in these centers as well as
    policies that support pedestrian and transit access.

-   Numerous State, regional, and local plans and policies strongly
    emphasize corridor and station area development. Two stations in the
    I-205 segment of the corridor serve designated local or regional
    centers, where a mix of land uses and high-density, transit-oriented
    development is specified in planning documents. Other stations
    largely include established single-family neighborhoods.

-   Regional policies require local jurisdictions to adopt
    transit-supportive zoning ordinances. Minimum and maximum parking
    requirements in South Corridor station areas are lower than those
    generally found in suburban areas, and include allowances for
    reduced parking based on proximity to transit.

-   Metro's Transit-Oriented Development Program provides technical and
    financial assistance to support transit-oriented development
    activities throughout the region. Two proposed stations on the I-205
    segment and all proposed stations along the downtown segment would
    be located within areas targeted for pedestrian improvements in
    regional and local plans.

**Performance and Impacts of Policies:** **Medium-High**

-   Portland's urban growth boundary has helped protect open space from
    rapid, low-density development, while a variety of infill projects
    and new transit-oriented developments have occurred in existing LRT
    station areas. Specific projects have not yet been demonstrated in
    proposed station areas in the I-205 South corridor.

-   The light rail expansion project is expected to help promote more
    mixed-use, transit-oriented development in the station areas over
    time and may spur redevelopment in both Clackamas Regional Center
    and Lents Town Center. The amount of vacant land available for new
    development is minimal in most station areas, though, so the
    project's impact on regional land use may be modest.

####### *Other Project Justification Criteria* 

+------------------------------------------+--------------+------------+
| **Mobility Improvements Rating: Medium** |              |            |
+------------------------------------------+--------------+------------+
| **[Within ½-mile radius of boarding      | 150,400      |            |
| areas]{.underline}:**                    |              |            |
|                                          | 221,500      |            |
| Existing Employment                      |              |            |
|                                          | 3,800 (21%)  |            |
| Projected Employment (2025)              |              |            |
|                                          | 10,026\*     |            |
| Low Income Households (% of total HH)    |              |            |
|                                          | 253\*        |            |
| **[Average Per Station]{.underline}:**   |              |            |
|                                          | **[New Start |            |
| Employment                               | vs.          |            |
|                                          | Baseline]{.  |            |
| Low Income Households                    | underline}** |            |
|                                          |              |            |
| **Transportation System User Benefit Per | 1.97\*       |            |
| Project Passenger Mile (Minutes)**       |              |            |
+------------------------------------------+--------------+------------+
| **Environmental Benefits Rating:         |              |            |
| Medium**                                 |              |            |
+------------------------------------------+--------------+------------+
| **[Criteria Pollutant (Reduction in      | **[New Start |            |
| tons)]{.underline}**                     | vs.          |            |
|                                          | Baseline]{.  |            |
| > Carbon Monoxide (CO)                   | underline}** |            |
| >                                        |              |            |
| > Nitrogen Oxide (NO~x~)                 | 195          |            |
| >                                        |              |            |
| > Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)       | 6            |            |
| >                                        |              |            |
| > Particulate Matter (PM~10~)            | 6            |            |
| >                                        |              |            |
| > Carbon Dioxide (CO~2~)                 | N/A          |            |
|                                          |              |            |
| **[Criteria Pollutant                    | 7,898        |            |
| Status]{.underline}**                    |              |            |
|                                          | **[EPA       |            |
| > Carbon Monoxide                        | De           |            |
| >                                        | signation]{. |            |
| > 1-Hour Ozone (O~3~)                    | underline}** |            |
|                                          |              |            |
| **Annual Energy Savings (million British | Maintenance  |            |
| Thermal Units)**                         | Area\*       |            |
|                                          |              |            |
|                                          | Maintenance  |            |
|                                          | Area\*       |            |
|                                          |              |            |
|                                          | 91,669       |            |
+------------------------------------------+--------------+------------+
| **Operating Efficiencies Rating:         |              |            |
| Medium**                                 |              |            |
+------------------------------------------+--------------+------------+
| **System Operating Cost per**            | > **         | **[New     |
|                                          | [Baseline]{. | Start]{.un |
| **Passenger Mile (current year           | underline}** | derline}** |
| dollars)**                               | >            |            |
|                                          | > \$0.354\*  | \$0.347\*  |
+------------------------------------------+--------------+------------+

\* Indicates that measure is a component of rating for each criterion.

N/A indicates information was not available for this entry.

# [Local Financial Commitment Rating: Medium]{.underline}

The *Medium* rating is based on the *Medium* rating for the capital
finance plan.

####### *Section 5309 New Starts Share of Total Project Costs: 59%* 

####### *Rating: Medium*

TriMet is requesting a 59 percent New Starts share of total project
costs, which results in a *Medium* rating for this measure.

+--------------------------+---------------------+--------------------+
| **Locally Proposed       |                     |                    |
| Financial Plan**         |                     |                    |
+--------------------------+---------------------+--------------------+
| **[Source of             | **[Total Funds      | **[Percent of      |
| Funds]{.underline}**     | (\$mill             | To                 |
|                          | ion)]{.underline}** | tal]{.underline}** |
+--------------------------+---------------------+--------------------+
| **Federal:**             | \$296.2             | 59.0%              |
|                          |                     |                    |
| Section 5309 New Starts  | \$48.5              | 9.7%               |
|                          |                     |                    |
| Flexible Funds           | \$23.0              | 4.6%               |
| (STP-Regional)           |                     |                    |
|                          | \$2.9               | 0.6%               |
| Flexible Funds           |                     |                    |
| (STP-Oregon DOT)         |                     |                    |
|                          |                     |                    |
| FTA Section 5309 Bus     |                     |                    |
| Discretionary            |                     |                    |
+--------------------------+---------------------+--------------------+
| **Local:**               | \$28.8              | 5.7%               |
|                          |                     |                    |
| TriMet General Fund      | \$36.3              | 7.2%               |
|                          |                     |                    |
| Clackamas County         | \$46.3              | 9.2%               |
|                          |                     |                    |
| City of Portland         | \$20.0              | 4.0%               |
|                          |                     |                    |
| Portland Development     |                     |                    |
| Comm.                    |                     |                    |
+--------------------------+---------------------+--------------------+
| **Total:**               | **\$502.1**         | 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* 

The capital finance plan is rated *Medium*, based upon the average of
the ratings assigned to each of the subfactors listed below. The
commitment of funds subfactor received a *High* rating; plan
completeness received a *Medium-High* rating; capital funding capacity
received a *Medium-Low* rating while the remaining subfactors received
*Medium* ratings.

#### Agency Capital Condition: Medium

-   TriMet's bus fleet has an average age of 7.5 years, which is in line
    with the industry average.

-   The agency's good bond ratings, issued in January 2003, are as
    follows: Moody's Aa3 and Standard & Poor's AA.

#### Completeness of Capital Plan: Medium-High

-   The capital plan was complete and included a detailed 20-year cash
    flow statement, levels of commitment of project funds and supporting
    evidence, fleet management plans, financial statements, and more
    than 20 years of historical information. It also included a limited
    sensitivity analysis.

#### Commitment of Capital Funds: High

-   Eighty-eight percent of non-New Starts funding is committed, which
    is outstanding for a project at this stage of development. Committed
    funds deriving from existing sources include federal flexible funds,
    Clackamas County urban renewal funds, TriMet general funds from
    payroll taxes, City of Portland funds, and Portland Development
    Commission urban development funds.

#### Capital Funding Capacity: Medium-Low

-   The project's financial plan shows projected cash balances, reserve
    accounts, and/or access to credit that would allow TriMet to cover
    cost increases or funding shortfalls equal to approximately 19
    percent of project costs.

#### Capital Cost Estimate and Planning Assumptions: Medium

### All material assumptions affecting the capital plan are consistent with past trends. 

-   The capital cost estimate includes a contingency of just under 10
    percent of project costs, which is slightly lower than the norm for
    a project in preliminary engineering.

#### *Operating Finance Plan Rating: Medium-High*

The operating finance plan is rated *Medium-High*, based upon the
average of the ratings of the five subfactors listed below. The
operating funding capacity and operating cost estimates and planning
assumptions subfactors received *Medium* ratings, while all other
subfactors received *High* ratings.

#### Agency Operating Condition: High

-   TriMet is in excellent financial condition. Trimet had expanded
    transit service steadily until the past fiscal year, when service
    was stabilized due to a stagnant economy. There have been no service
    cutbacks or unfunded operating deficits in recent years.

-   TriMet's current ratio of assets to liabilities as reported in its
    most recent audited financial statement is 2.0, which is excellent.

#### Completeness of Operating Plan: High

### The operating plan submission was thorough and complete. It included an identification of all sources and uses of funds; evidence of commitment of operating funds for the project; detailed assumptions on which the operating plan was based; historical data on service levels, operating costs, and revenues dating to the early 1980s; and a sensitivity analysis.

#### Commitment of Operating Funds: High

-   All operating funding is committed. The principal sources of
    operating and maintenance funds include TriMet payroll tax revenue,
    passenger fares, and FTA Section 5307 formula funds.

#### Operating Funding Capacity: Medium

-   The project's financial plan shows projected cash balances, reserve
    accounts, and/or access to credit exceeding 12 percent of annual
    operating expenses.

#### Operating Cost Estimates and Planning Assumptions: Medium

-   Operating cost growth assumptions are conservative with respect to
    historical experience, while operating revenue assumptions are in
    line with historical experience.

Map

#### 

###