*Updated* Interim Guidance and Instructions

Small Starts Provision of the Section 5309 Capital Investment Grants
Program

July 20, 2007

Prepared by:

Federal Transit Administration

Office of Planning and Environment

US Department of Transportation

[http://www.fta.dot.gov](http://www.fta.dot.gov/)

Contents

Note on the Updated Interim Guidance
[2](#note-on-the-updated-interim-guidance)

1 Purpose [3](#purpose)

2 Eligibility [4](#eligibility)

2.1 Small Starts [5](#small-starts)

2.2 Very Small Starts [5](#very-small-starts)

2.3 Subdividing Small Starts [6](#subdividing-small-starts)

2.4 Submission Requirements to Prove Eligibility
[6](#submission-requirements-to-prove-eligibility)

3 Small Starts Planning Requirements
[7](#small-starts-planning-requirements)

3.1 Alternatives Analysis [7](#alternatives-analysis)

3.1.1 Small Starts [7](#small-starts-1)

3.1.2 Very Small Starts [8](#very-small-starts-1)

3.2 Small Starts Baseline Alternative
[8](#small-starts-baseline-alternative)

3.2.1 Small Starts [8](#small-starts-2)

3.2.2 Very Small Starts [9](#very-small-starts-2)

3.3 Travel Forecasting for Small Starts
[9](#travel-forecasting-for-small-starts)

4 Evaluation Criteria and Measures
[9](#evaluation-criteria-and-measures)

4.1 Project Justification [10](#project-justification)

4.1.1 Small Starts [10](#small-starts-3)

4.1.2 Very Small Starts [11](#very-small-starts-3)

4.2 Local Financial Commitment [12](#local-financial-commitment)

5 Entry into Project Development [13](#entry-into-project-development)

5.1 Small Starts [13](#small-starts-4)

5.2 Very Small Starts [14](#very-small-starts-4)

5.3 Technical Capacity [14](#technical-capacity)

6 FTA Funding Recommendations [14](#fta-funding-recommendations)

7 Project Construction Grant Agreement
[14](#project-construction-grant-agreement)

8 Small Starts/Very Small Starts Reporting Checklist
[16](#small-startsvery-small-starts-reporting-checklist)

APPENDIX A: transit supportive land use: Reporting for Small Starts
Projects [18](#appendix-a)

#  {#section .unnumbered}

# Note on the Updated Interim Guidance {#note-on-the-updated-interim-guidance .unnumbered}

This updated guidance reflects several "lessons learned" gleaned from a)
FTA's work with Small Starts project sponsors over the past several
months; and b) the preliminary results of the Government Accountability
Office's recent survey of Small Starts project sponsors. In sum, updates
included in this guidance are intended to clarify and simplify - where
possible - the determination of Small Starts eligibility, the
performance of ridership forecasts for Small Starts, and the reporting
(by project sponsors) and evaluation (by FTA) of the Small Starts
criteria. Specifically, this update addresses the following items:

-   clarification of Small Starts eligibility in transit corridors where
    certain elements of bus-based Small Starts have already been
    deployed;

-   clarification of FTA's consideration of alternative travel
    forecasting procedures and opening year ridership analyses for Small
    Starts projects;

-   implementation of modest changes to the Small Starts evaluation and
    rating process, as promulgated by FTA's June 4, 2007, *Final
    Guidance on New Starts/Small Starts Policies and Procedures*;

-   clarification of the need to demonstrate project sponsor technical
    capacity;

-   a revised checklist for the reporting of Small Starts and Very Small
    Starts information; and

-   a revised Appendix A, which presents simplified reporting for the
    transit supportive land use criteria for Small Starts projects.

> In addition, Small Starts-specific templates, which are linked to
> reduce duplicative data entry, have been developed to ease in the
> reporting of Small Starts information; these templates are available
> at FTA's website at
> <http://www.fta.dot.gov/planning/newstarts/planning_environment_222.html>.

Updates to the July 31, 2006, guidance are presented in **bold**.
Appendix A has been completely revised and is therefore not in bold.

# Purpose

SAFETEA-LU amended 49 U.S.C. 5309, which authorizes the Federal Transit
Administration's (FTA's) capital investment program, to add subsection
(e) containing a new capital investment program category for projects
requesting Section 5309 Capital Investment Grant funding of less than
\$75,000,000 with a total project cost of less than \$250,000,000. That
new capital investment program category, referred to as "Small Starts"
is to be funded starting in FY 2007.

The "Small Starts" program category resulted from a blending of the
Administration's reauthorization proposal and the House and
Senate-passed surface transportation authorization bills. Provisions
allowing for "Small Starts" were included by the Administration in its
proposed reauthorization bill in order to create a simplified process
for smaller projects and to extend eligibility to include bus corridor
improvements (i.e., "Bus Rapid Transit"). No separate funding category
was proposed. Eligibility would have been extended to any bus corridor
project which successfully met the justification and financial criteria
based on the results of the project development process. The bill which
passed the Senate had similar goals to the Administration's bill by
expanding eligibility to include bus corridor projects, but had a more
detailed eligibility definition and included more specificity on process
simplification. As in the Administration's proposal, it did not include
a separate category of funding for Small Starts. The Senate provisions
were intended to allow smaller cities to compete for Capital Investment
funding by providing a simpler process and broader eligibility,
including bus rapid transit. In contrast, the House bill provided for a
separate funding category and expanded eligibility only to bus corridor
projects which operated at least one half in a fixed guideway. A major
goal of the House bill was to provide funding for streetcar projects.
The provisions included in SAFETEA-LU represent a blend of the
provisions and goals from the Administration, House, and Senate bills.
Taking this legislative history into account, FTA believes that the
Small Starts funding category is intended to provide for a simplified
process commensurate with the smaller scale of eligible projects.
Further, the Small Starts category is intended to fund a wide range of
modal alternatives, including bus rapid transit, streetcar, commuter
rail, and other fixed guideway projects.

FTA is in the process of undertaking a rulemaking, as required by
SAFETEA-LU, but the current schedule for completing the "Final Rule for
Capital Investment Grants" is Summer 2008. Therefore, as an initial
step, FTA is issuing interim guidance and reporting instructions to
allow projects into project development as well as for evaluating and
rating projects as part of the *Annual Report on Funding
Recommendations* and making funding recommendations until the Final Rule
is in effect.

Like all transit capital investments, FTA intends to seek out those
projects that address significant transportation problems or
opportunities and provide significant mobility and economic development
benefits in a cost-effective manner. And as congestion is one of the
Nation's most daunting transportation challenges, FTA will facilitate
meritorious projects that are a significant element of a congestion
reduction strategy, in general, and a pricing strategy, in particular.
This guidance further reflects FTA's intent to minimize changes to
established New Starts processes, *except* where it provides for
streamlining these processes in the spirit of SAFETEA-LU until any such
changes are the subject of the aforementioned rulemaking.

In sum, this interim guidance provides sponsors of potential Small
Starts projects with the information required to apply for funding for
their projects before the Final Rule for Capital Investment Grants
projects becomes effective. It also describes the process that FTA will
use to evaluate proposed Small Starts projects to support the decision
to approve or disapprove those projects into project development and to
support decisions on Project Construction Grant Agreements. The guidance
also defines "Very Small Starts" projects and explains how these
projects will be evaluated and rated.

This interim guidance [does not]{.underline} address how the FTA will
make its funding decision nor does it address the division of funding
between Small Starts and Very Small Starts. Like all projects in the
Section 5309 Capital Investment Grant program, the evaluation and rating
process for Small Starts is separate and distinct from the decision to
recommend a project for funding. That decision is driven by a number of
factors, including the "readiness" of projects for capital funding,
geographic equity, the amount of available funds versus the number and
size of the projects in the pipeline, and the project's overall rating.
As with the New Starts program, funding for Small Starts projects is
subject to the availability of appropriations.

FTA further notes that SAFETEA-LU addressed the issue of the current
exemption from the New Starts rating and evaluation process for projects
requesting less than \$25 million in New Starts funds. These projects
will remain exempt until the Final Rule becomes effective. At that
point, all exempt projects will need to be evaluated as Small Starts
projects. Since a project cannot always predict how long it may take to
move through the pipeline, projects that are currently exempt may choose
to remain exempt until the Final Rule becomes effective and hope that
they will be in construction by that time, or they may choose to be
evaluated and rated according to the procedures described in this
interim guidance to ensure that they are eligible under the Small Starts
criteria. Earmarks for exempt projects will come from the Small Starts
portion of the Section 5309 Capital Investment Grants budget.

# Eligibility 

Small Starts projects are defined as projects requesting under \$75
million in Section 5309 Capital Investment Grant funding with a total
cost of less than \$250 million, both in year of expenditure dollars.
FTA has scaled the planning and project development analysis to the size
and complexity of the proposed projects. To this end, FTA has defined a
class of projects that are very simple, low-cost and demonstrably
effective called Very Small Starts projects within the Small Starts
Program. Very Small Starts will qualify for an even simpler and
expedited evaluation and rating process as described in Section 4.

As described in Section 4, Small Starts projects that do not meet the
criteria for Very Small Starts will be evaluated and rated in a similar
but much simpler manner as traditional New Starts projects, that is,
only against the evaluation criteria that coincide with the criteria
specified in Section 5309 (e) and based on information for the opening
year of the project. Any public body is eligible to apply for Small
Starts funds, as long as it has the legal, technical and financial
capacity to carry out the project. If the applicant is not expected to
be the operator of the project, the applicant must demonstrate how the
project will be operated and maintained and provide an executed
agreement before a Project Construction Grant Agreement can be
finalized.

## Small Starts

In addition to the cost and funding limits specified above, a Small
Starts project must either (a) meet the definition of a fixed guideway
for at least 50 percent of the project length in the peak period[^1],
(b) be a **new** fixed guideway project, or (c) be **new**
corridor-based bus project with **all of** the following minimum
elements:

-   Substantial transit stations,

-   Traffic signal priority/pre-emption, to the extent, if any, that
    there are traffic signals on the corridor,

-   Low-floor vehicles or level boarding,

-   Branding of the proposed service, and

-   10 minute peak/15 minute off peak headways or better while operating
    at least 14 hours per weekday.

These elements have been identified because experience shows that they
represent key features which contribute to transportation and economic
development benefits.  Further, research has shown that the service
frequencies represent the maximum wait times for which passengers are
likely to arrive randomly rather than having to consult schedules.  

**Only projects which feature all of these elements are eligible for
Small Starts funding.  Projects proposed in corridors with any
pre-existing elements are not eligible for Small Starts funding, but
would be eligible under FTA's formula capital and discretionary bus
programs.**

## Very Small Starts

Very Small Starts projects are simple, low-risk projects that, based on
their characteristics and the context in which they are proposed to
operate, qualify for a highly simplified project evaluation and rating
process.  Small Starts projects that qualify as Very Small Starts are
bus, rail, or ferry projects that possess the general elements described
above, but which include other attributes which distinguish them from
Small Starts.  Very Small Starts must include the following features:

-   Substantial transit stations,

-   Traffic signal priority/pre-emption, to the extent, if any, that
    there are traffic signals on the corridor,

-   Low-floor vehicles or level boarding,

-   Branding of the proposed service,

-   10 minute peak/15 minute off peak headways or better while operating
    at least 14 hours per weekday (not required for commuter rail or
    ferries),

-   Are in corridors with existing riders who will benefit from the
    proposed project that exceed 3,000 per average weekday, and

-   Have a total capital cost less than \$50 million (including all
    project elements) and less than \$3 million per mile, exclusive of
    rolling stock.

If a project does not meet all of these criteria, it will be evaluated
as a Small Starts project.  **As noted above, projects proposed in
corridors with any pre-existing elements are not eligible for Small
Starts funding, but would be eligible under FTA's formula capital and
discretionary bus programs.**

## Subdividing Small Starts

Projects that would otherwise qualify for funding as a New Starts
project may not be subdivided into several Small Starts projects.
Projects may be built in phases or a series of minimum operable
segments, but all potential Small Starts projects envisioned for a
single corridor will be evaluated together as a single project. If the
combined cost or total requested funding amount, both expressed in
year-of-expenditure dollars, is over the Small Starts limits, the
projects will be evaluated as traditional New Starts projects. The same
principle applies to Very Small Starts. All phases of a proposed project
in a single corridor must meet the eligibility criteria for a Very Small
Start when evaluated as a single project.

## Submission Requirements to Prove Eligibility

To prove that the proposed project qualifies as a Small Starts project
based on project costs, sponsors shall submit a detailed cost estimate
using FTA's Standardized Cost Categories. Further, project sponsors must
document the funding strategy for the project, specifying the dollar
amount and percent of Small Starts funds requested and the sources of
the proposed non-Small Starts funds to demonstrate eligibility under the
Small Starts share criterion. Project sponsors may request up to 80
percent of the net project cost in Small Starts funds, up to \$75
million, but, because of the competitive nature of the program, are
encouraged to request the smallest amount necessary to complete the
project. This does not preclude the grantee from applying Federal funds,
other than Small Starts funds, to the project.

To prove the proposed project qualifies as a Very Small Starts, project
sponsors shall submit:

-   A detailed definition of the locally preferred alternative,
    describing the project elements demonstrating eligibility under this
    section;

-   Documentation demonstrating that existing transit riders in the
    project corridor that will [demonstrably benefit]{.underline} from
    the proposed Small Starts project exceed 3,000 per average weekday.
    This documentation will include the following:

1.  Raw data on transit vehicle loadings in the corridor based on ride
    checks of on's and off's for existing services for 3 days of typical
    ridership and service

2.  Description of the methods used to count riders in the corridor

3.  Grantee verification of reliable data collection practices

-   A transit operating plan that documents the transit services to be
    impacted by the proposed Very Small Starts project. The operating
    plan should document the number of existing riders on each affected
    bus or rail line whose passengers will directly benefit from the
    proposed Small Starts project. The operating plan must demonstrate
    the manner in which existing riders will benefit in terms of reduced
    travel time, added frequency, or improved passenger amenities.

# Small Starts Planning Requirements 

As required by SAFETEA-LU, Small Starts projects must be the result of
planning and alternatives analysis. The following sections describe the
general requirements for an alternatives analysis appropriate to
projects that are seeking funding as a Small Start to support decisions
on entry into project development and to support eligibility for a
Project Construction Grant Agreement.

## Alternatives Analysis

While larger projects require that a number of alternatives be
considered in an alternatives analysis to assess the numerous tradeoffs
in costs, benefits, and impacts, the consideration of Small Starts often
implies that fewer useful alternatives exist and in some cases, there
may only be two alternatives, one representing the Small Start and the
other today's service levels. Nevertheless, the number of alternatives
considered must continue to meet the environmental requirements, good
planning practices, and proper identification of project costs and
benefits for funding recommendations.

In addition, SAFETEA-LU states that the results of planning and
alternatives analysis (AA) will be analyzed and considered when
evaluating proposed Small Starts projects. Therefore, the alternatives
analysis report should address the evaluation and rating criteria
specified in this guidance that FTA will use to support a decision
regarding entry into project development.

Given its limited staff resources, FTA does not expect to participate in
Small Starts alternatives analysis studies to the extent that it desires
to be involved in more complex New Starts planning efforts. However, FTA
Regional Office and Office of Planning and Environment staff are always
available to answer questions on both the technical and procedural
aspects of AA studies. Moreover, Small Starts study sponsors are
encouraged to submit to FTA key study deliverables such as ridership
forecasts and capital costs as they are developed -- and before formally
requesting entry into project development -- to ensure the acceptability
of this information to support FTA's evaluation and rating of proposed
projects.

### Small Starts

FTA envisions that a simplified AA process will be possible for all
Small Starts projects as long as one of the alternatives is
[not]{.underline} a potential New Starts project requesting Section 5309
Capital Investment Grant funds over \$75 million or with a total cost
over \$250 million. Projects that cannot qualify as a Very Small Starts
project should follow FTA's current guidance on alternatives analysis
and proceed through planning; see the [New Starts Project Planning and
Development
page](http://www.fta.dot.gov/planning/newstarts/planning_environment_213.html)
on FTA's website for this guidance. This guidance is flexible enough to
take into account the size and nature of the proposed capital
investment. As noted previously, the nature of Small Starts investments
may lend themselves to an evaluation of a more narrow range of
alternatives. Furthermore, less complex analytical methods may be
appropriate for estimating project costs, benefits, and impacts. FTA
Office of Planning and Environment staff should be consulted with any
questions on an appropriate level of analysis to support the planning
and development of Small Starts projects.

### Very Small Starts

Projects that are Very Small Starts may utilize a very simple project
definition-based AA process. The key elements of the highly simplified
alternatives analysis report are:

-   A clear description and assessment of the transportation problem or
    opportunity to improve transportation service in the corridor;

-   A clear description of the project designed to solve the problem or
    take advantage of the opportunity to improve transit service in the
    corridor. This section should include a clearly defined scope, list
    of project elements, their associated costs and expected effect on
    transit service in the corridor;

-   A comparison of the Very Small Start to conditions today; including
    an assessment of the effectiveness of the proposed project in
    solving the problem or taking advantage of the opportunity in the
    corridor;

-   A determination of whether or not the project sponsor can afford the
    capital and operating costs of the alternatives;

-   A well supported explanation for the choice of a proposed project
    that includes an analysis of the likelihood of the proposed project
    to achieve the project goals and any uncertainties associated with
    achieving the project goals; and

-   A plan for implementing and operating the proposed project that
    addresses the project sponsor's technical capability to build,
    operate and maintain the proposed project.

The above description of an AA for Very Small Starts applies only if FTA
has determined that the project qualifies as a NEPA categorical
exclusion. (See [23 CFR
771.117](http://www.fta.dot.gov/planning/environment/planning_environment_3440.html).)
If the project will require an Environmental Assessment (EA) or an
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), and the AA is not being combined
with the NEPA document, then the requirements of the FHWA/FTA guidance
on [Linking Planning and
NEPA](http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/hep/plannepa050222.pdf) would apply in
order for the AA to have standing in the subsequent NEPA document. If
the project is not a categorical exclusion and the AA is being combined
with the EIS or EA, then the NEPA requirements of the EIS or EA
(whichever FTA has determined appropriate) would also apply, in addition
to the AA requirements listed above.

## Small Starts Baseline Alternative

The measures of mobility that support project justification are based on
a comparison between the proposed Small Starts project and a baseline
alternative. FTA will approve the baseline alternative to be used in the
evaluation of Small Starts before the project is allowed to enter into
project development.

### Small Starts

Small Starts projects and fixed guideway Very Small Starts projects will
in most cases define a transportation system management (TSM)
alternative to use as the baseline. The TSM alternative will generally
have the features and costs similar to a Very Small Starts arterial bus
project. In general, the baseline alternative for Small Starts projects
will be defined to address the problem or opportunity in the corridor
using low-cost non-fixed guideway improvements, while providing for
comparable levels of service to the proposed Small Start.

### Very Small Starts

Very Small Starts Projects that do not involve constructing a new fixed
guideway, and are composed of pre-approved low-cost elements, will use
the future no-build alternative as the baseline alternative. The future
no-build is defined as the continuation of existing transit service
policies in the study area to the forecast year. Very Small Starts
projects that include a fixed guideway will follow the Small Starts
baseline guidance above.

## Travel Forecasting for Small Starts

**For some Small Starts projects such as downtown circulators or other
proposed fixed guideway or corridor-based bus improvements that serve
markets which are not typically well captured by regional travel demand
models, the application of alternative tools and methods for estimating
transportation benefits may be desirable. In addition, where enhanced
bus service is proposed in corridors already served by transit, and
where good data exists on existing ridership patterns and travel speeds
in those corridors, "elasticity" or "pivot-point" analysis may be
sufficient to estimate the transportation benefits of such projects. FTA
is open to alternative travel forecasting approaches for Small Starts
projects and invites sponsors to discuss such techniques with technical
staff from the FTA Office of Planning and Environment.**

**In addition, sponsors of Small Starts projects should discuss with FTA
the appropriate year of travel demand forecasting and impact analysis to
be carried in alternatives analysis studies and any required
documentation required by NEPA. SAFETEA-LU requires that the cost
effectiveness of Small Starts projects be estimated using an opening
year ridership forecast. As many Small Starts projects would not be
expected to result in significant long-term environmental impacts,
limiting ridership (and ridership-induced impacts) analyses to an
opening year forecast in subsequent NEPA documents may be sufficient,
thus abrogating a commonly perceived inconsistency between SAFETEA-LU
and NEPA. FTA is developing guidance on the conditions under which an
opening year travel forecast would be sufficient for NEPA, and expects
to issue it shortly.**

# Evaluation Criteria and Measures

FTA's objectives for all project evaluation efforts are that: (1) the
evaluation measures are accurate indicators of the performance of
proposed projects, (2) the measures are readily computed by project
sponsors, (3) the measures are transit-mode-neutral, and (4) the
measures are free of inherent biases that would distort the level
playing field that is essential to FTA's management of the New and Small
Starts pipeline. Further, FTA hopes to ensure that the evaluation of
proposed projects is sensitive to their scale and complexity.

Until the issuance of the final rule, the Small Starts evaluation
framework and measures will be consistent with the framework established
for evaluating New Starts, with the exception that fewer measures are
required and their development is simplified. Specifically, FTA's
evaluation and rating process for Small Starts will diverge from
traditional New Starts in several important ways. First, project cost
effectiveness will be rated based on a shorter time frame, i.e. opening
year, and less data, as presented below and in Section 7. Second, other
technically acceptable ridership forecasting procedures, besides
traditional "four-step" travel demand models, will be allowed with FTA
concurrence. Third, while FTA intends to use the same cost-effectiveness
breakpoints that are applied to all New Starts projects, the opening
estimate of year user benefits will be adjusted upward, using a
nationally estimated 20-year growth forecast, to account for the
additional user benefits that are expected to accrue from the project
over a 20-year period. The factor used in this adjustment will be 1.5;
meaning user benefits will be increased by 50 percent. Without this
adjustment, Small Starts projects would be held to a higher standard
since the breakpoints were originally calculated assuming a 20-year
forecast. Fourth, FTA has developed simplified financial and land use
reporting requirements for Small Starts. Information for FTA's
evaluation of local financial commitment is presented below, while
Appendix A of this guidance describes the land-use submission
requirements that will apply to Small Starts projects.

Fifth, SAFETEA-LU requires that FTA consider economic development and
the reliability of cost and ridership forecasts in its evaluation of
proposed New Starts projects. The measures for these criteria and how
they will be used by FTA in its evaluation of Small Starts projects is
the subject of formal rulemaking. Until issuance of the Final Rule, FTA
will implement the statutory requirement in SAFETEA-LU to consider
economic development by evaluating this criterion as an "Other Factor"
as provided for by Section 5309(d)(3)(D) of SAFETEA-LU. This in no way
diminishes the importance of economic development as a rating factor.
Project sponsors are strongly encouraged to submit, in as much detail as
possible, any documentation that supports the finding that the proposed
project will result in economic development benefits. This documentation
should be focused on evidence showing that proposed development is
directly related to the Small Starts project and would not occur without
the Small Start being built. FTA will evaluate and rate this factor and
consider economic development in the project justification rating. In
addition, FTA will continue to qualitatively report on the reliability
of cost and ridership forecasts for specific projects in the *Annual
Report on Funding Recommendations* and correspondence with Small Starts
project sponsors.

**Effective June 4, 2007, with the issuance of FTA's [*Final Guidance on
New Starts/Small Starts Policies and
Procedures*](http://www.fta.dot.gov/planning/newstarts/planning_environment_5615.html),
Small Starts projects must also submit, for consideration as an "Other
Factor" a "Making the Case" document. While the document itself is not a
new requirement, its formal evaluation as an "Other Factor" is a new
feature of the New and Small Starts evaluation process.** Finally, if a
Small Starts project is proposed as a significant element of a
comprehensive congestion reduction strategy in general, and pricing, in
particular, this information should also be reported to FTA as an "Other
Factor." Inclusion of this information as an "Other Factor" will result
in a project's rating being increased.

With respect to Very Small Starts projects, as described below there is
an even more simplified submittal for information to support an
evaluation under the existing framework.

## Project Justification 

### Small Starts

As mentioned above, Small Starts projects that are not Very Small Starts
projects will be evaluated and rated according to the criteria
established in law using a framework similar to traditional New Starts
projects. In other words, Small Starts projects will have a separate
rating for Project Justification, which will include land use, cost
effectiveness, and other factors (including economic development). As
noted, cost effectiveness must be estimated and reported for the opening
year of service, but the number of user benefits used in the calculation
will be increased by a factor of 1.5, reflecting a national 20-year
growth assumption. Project sponsors should use the Annualized Cost
Worksheets for the Small Starts build and baseline alternatives
contained in FTA's Standard Cost Categories **and the new Cost
Effectiveness for Small Starts Template (see Section 5.1 below)** for
calculating project cost effectiveness; these resources are available on
the FTA website for *New Starts Project Planning and Development* at
<http://www.fta.dot.gov/planning/newstarts/planning_environment_222.html>.

FTA uses three primary rating categories in its evaluation of the
transit supportive land use which supports candidate New Starts. These
categories reflect the desire to clearly distinguish among three primary
aspects of land use: 1) existing land use patterns; 2) transit
supportive plans and policies; and 3) the performance and impacts of
these policies. For Small Starts, the same categories will be utilized.
However, several factors which are included under each category have
been either streamlined or eliminated, and the reporting of both
qualitative and quantitative data by project sponsors has been reduced.
Appendix A of this guidance presents simplified land use reporting
instructions for Small Starts (which are not Very Small Starts).

Finally, and as noted previously, FTA encourages candidate Small Starts
projects to report on the anticipated economic development impacts of
their proposed transit investments. In this interim period until
issuance of a Final Rule, FTA is not prescribing any specific measures
or format for the reporting of this information. Rather, FTA seeks
well-reasoned, strongly-justified, and verifiable qualitative and
quantitative explanations of the expected economic development benefits
and outcomes of the proposed Small Starts project. Care should be taken
to distinguish the economic benefits of the project from other local
factors and conditions which may contribute to favorable economic
development.

### Very Small Starts

The interim procedures used for Very Small Starts will be very simple
and streamlined compared to both traditional New Starts *and* other
Small Starts projects. FTA believes that meritorious transit projects
provide transportation benefits commensurate with the cost required to
achieve them, increase mobility for existing and new transit riders,
support transit oriented land-use, and promote economic development. For
Very Small Starts, project effectiveness will be proven simply by
qualifying as a Very Small Starts project. FTA, using a variety of
existing projects, developed the criteria for Very Small Starts projects
in such a way that such projects are "warranted" as being effective and
cost-effective at producing significant mobility benefits and supporting
land use and economic development *by their very nature*. More
specifically, FTA has identified required elements for Very Small Starts
projects (see Section 2.2) ensuring that they produce significant
transportation benefits at a very low cost. FTA has already determined
that such projects are cost-effective so no further analysis is required
and each project will receive a "medium" rating for cost-effectiveness.

In addition, FTA considers projects in corridors that meet the minimum
existing ridership threshold, noted in Section 2.2, to be in corridors
with transit supportive land use appropriate to the proposed level of
investment. Because Very Small Starts projects will demonstrably provide
more accessibility to corridors with transit supportive land uses, the
projects will provide land use/economic development benefits
commensurate with their costs. Therefore, the land use ratings for
"warranted" projects will automatically be "medium."

## Local Financial Commitment 

For all Small Starts -- including Very Small Starts - FTA will evaluate
the financial capability of the project sponsor to construct and operate
the proposed investments. However, due to the small scale and relative
simplicity of these projects, FTA will streamline the financial
evaluation significantly.

If the project sponsor can demonstrate the following, the project will
receive a "medium" financial rating:

-   A reasonable plan to secure funding for the local share of capital
    costs or sufficient available funds for the local share (all non-New
    Starts funding must be committed before receiving a Project
    Construction Grant Agreement);

-   The additional operating and maintenance cost to the agency of the
    proposed Small Starts project is less than 5 percent of the agency's
    operating budget; and

-   The agency is in reasonably good financial condition.

To prove these conditions, the project sponsor shall submit:

-   The Small Starts Project Finance Worksheet, available at
    <http://www.fta.dot.gov/planning/newstarts/planning_environment_222.html>;

-   A detailed plan to secure funding for the local share of project
    costs which includes the sources, amount, and steps needed to secure
    funding commitments;

-   A detailed operating and maintenance cost estimate;

-   The current agency budget documenting that the project's O&M costs
    would constitute no greater than 5 percent of systemwide O&M costs;
    and

-   Three years of audited financial statements documenting the
    financial health of the transit agency.

**Moreover, effective June 4, 2007, and in accordance with FTA's [*Final
Guidance on New Starts/Small Starts Policies and
Procedures*](http://www.fta.dot.gov/planning/newstarts/planning_environment_5615.html),
Small Starts and Very Small Starts projects which can prove these
conditions *and* which propose a Small Starts share of no greater than
50 percent of total project costs may boost their financial rating to
"high."**

If a sponsor for a Small Starts project does not have all of the
relevant information to prove these conditions, then the project sponsor
will need to develop and submit a financial plan consistent with [*FTA's
June 2000 Guidance for Transit Financial
Plans*](http://www.fta.dot.gov/documents/gftfp.pdf), but only covering
the period up to and including the opening year. The financial plan will
be evaluated and rated based on 1) the New Starts funding share, 2) the
strength of the capital funding plan, and 3) the strength of the
operating funding plan. The plan will be rated based on the framework
outlined in the [*FY 2009 New Starts and Small Starts Evaluation and
Rating
Process*](http://www.fta.dot.gov/planning/newstarts/planning_environment_2620.html).

# Entry into Project Development

## Small Starts 

In the Small Starts program, all preliminary engineering and final
design work is combined into one phase, referred to as "Project
Development." In general, Small Starts projects that cannot qualify as
Very Small Starts must demonstrate the same "readiness" (i.e. completion
of an alternatives analysis study, selection of a locally preferred
alternative from that study and its adoption in the region's constrained
long range plan, development of a project management plan, etc.) and
prepare and submit the same information for evaluation and rating as
traditional New Starts projects entering preliminary engineering with
the following key differences:

-   FTA's cost-effectiveness measure and related travel forecasting
    results will be calculated and reported using the opening year
    forecast,

-   The land use information should be appropriate to the importance of
    land use to the proposed project's success,

-   The financial plan need only cover the period up to and including
    the opening year, and

-   Project sponsors are not required to submit information on mobility
    improvements.

**To aid in the reporting of information for FTA evaluation and rating,
FTA has developed Small Starts-specific templates, which are available
at
<http://www.fta.dot.gov/planning/newstarts/planning_environment_222.html>.
These templates include the following:**

-   **Project Description Template**

-   **Travel Forecast Template**

-   **Cost Effectiveness for Small Starts Template**

-   **Quantitative Land Use Information for Small Starts Template**

-   **Qualitative Land Use Information for Small Starts Template**

-   **Finance Template**

**Information which supports the development of these templates and a
firm understanding of the project, its costs, and its benefits, is also
required. Such information includes project cost information summarized
in FTA's Standard Cost Category format, a "Making the Case" document
which describes the benefits of the proposed project and why it is the
most appropriate investment for addressing identified problems and/or
opportunities in the corridor (Guidance on the "Making the Case"
document can be found in the [*May 2007 Reporting Instructions for the
Section 5309 New Starts
Criteria*](http://www.fta.dot.gov/planning/newstarts/planning_environment_2619.html)),
supporting project and agency financial materials, and evidence that the
project has met metropolitan planning, technical capacity, and other
requirements.** **A checklist of information required to be reported for
the purpose of Small Starts evaluation is provided in Section 8 of this
guidance.**

All Small Starts projects will need to achieve an overall rating of
"medium" or better, comprising of a "medium" or better rating for both
project justification and local financial commitment as defined in
Section 4 of this interim guidance. FTA approval to enter into project
development will be subject to any required Congressional notice.

## Very Small Starts 

For Very Small Starts projects, while the general principles described
above apply, even fewer items are required in support of a request for
project development. Specifically, of the templates summarized above,
Very Small Starts sponsors need only submit the following:

-   **Project Description Template**

-   **Finance Template**

**Some supporting information is also required. A checklist of
information required to be reported for the purpose of the evaluation of
Very Small Starts is provided in Section 8 of this guidance.**

## Technical Capacity

**Given the wide range of the complexity of project scopes (from buses
and shelters to fixed guideway systems), capital costs (from a few
million dollars to \$250 million), and the experience of sponsors
(previous New Starts grantees to non-transportation providers) of
proposed Small Starts investments, FTA is not defining specific
requirements for the demonstration of project sponsor technical capacity
at this time. Typically, preparation of a Project Management Plan,
consistent with a) 49 CFR 633, Subpart C and b) applicable sections of
FTA's Project and Construction Management Guidelines (available at**
**<http://www.fta.dot.gov/funding/oversight/grants_financing_3875.html>)
will be the foundation for the development and implementation of any
major transit capital investment project. It is suggested that sponsors
of candidate projects contact their FTA Regional Office during
alternatives analysis to discuss the proposed management of the
subsequent project development effort and how the sponsor can best
prepare for it.**

# FTA Funding Recommendations

FTA may recommend proposed Small Starts/Very Small Starts projects for
funding after they have been approved to enter into project development,
are "ready" to implement their proposed project and continue to be rated
at least "medium" for both project justification and local financial
commitment. Projects that meet these conditions may be recommended for
funding in the *Annual Report on Funding Recommendations*, subject to
funding availability.

As with all New Starts, the rating process is separate from the budget
decisions. Projects that achieve a "medium" or better rating for project
justification and local financial commitment will be eligible to receive
Small Starts funds, but are not guaranteed to receive any funding in the
President's Budget.

# Project Construction Grant Agreement

In any instance in which FTA decides to provide financial assistance
under Section 5309 for construction of a Small Starts project, including
Very Small Starts projects; FTA will negotiate a Project Construction
Grant Agreement with the grantee during project development. The terms
and conditions of the Project Construction Grant Agreement will include,
at a minimum, the following terms:

-   The grantee will be required to complete construction of the
    project, as defined, to the point of initiation of revenue
    operations, and to absorb out of local or non-Section 5309 Capital
    Investment Grant funds, any additional costs incurred or
    necessitated by the project during construction;

-   FTA and the grantee will establish a schedule for anticipating
    Federal contributions during the construction period; and

-   Specific annual contributions under the Project Construction Grant
    Agreement will be subject to the availability of appropriations and
    the ability of the grantee to use the funds effectively.

-   The total amount of Federal funding under Project Construction Grant
    Agreements and potential funding under Letters of Intent will not
    exceed the amount authorized for Small Starts under 49 U.S.C. Sec.
    5309.

FTA may also make a "contingent commitment," which is subject to future
congressional authorizations and appropriations, pursuant to 49 U.S.C.
5309(g)(B) 5338(c), and 5338(f).

Execution of the Project Construction Grant Agreement will be subject to
a 60 day congressional review.

All Small Starts that receive a Project Construction Grant Agreement
will be subject to the Before-and-After Study requirement. The
Before-and-After Study describes the impact of the project on transit
services and ridership and evaluates the consistency of predicted versus
actual project characteristics and performance. Small Starts that cannot
qualify as Very Small Starts shall follow FTA guidance on the
Before-and-After Study requirement for New Starts. For Very Small
Starts, the Before-and-After Study will consist of a very simple
analysis of the following:

1.  A post-construction cost summary in FTA standardized cost categories
    compared to the cost estimate at the time of entry into project
    development;

2.  A comparison of actual ridership (on's and off's) in the corridor
    provided in the application to enter project development and new
    counts done two years after opening; and

3.  A comparison of transit schedules and frequencies between the
    transit services in the corridor as it existed at the time of entry
    into project development and two years after opening.

# Small Starts/Very Small Starts Reporting Checklist

The following checklist is provided to aid project sponsors in preparing
applications to enter into project development for Small Starts and Very
Small Starts. Specific information and instructions regarding reporting
Templates, Standardized Cost Categories, Summit reports, financial
plans, etc., are provided in much greater detail in the FTA guidance at
its website for [*New Starts Project Planning and
Development*](http://www.fta.dot.gov/planning/planning_environment_5221.html).

+-----------------------------+-------------------+---+-------+-------+---+
| Reporting Item              | Required          |   | Small | Very  |   |
|                             | Information       |   | S     | Small |   |
|                             |                   |   | tarts | S     |   |
|                             |                   |   |       | tarts |   |
+-----------------------------+-------------------+---+-------+-------+---+
| **Evidence of Basic Project |                   |   |       |       |   |
| Readiness**                 |                   |   |       |       |   |
+-----------------------------+-------------------+---+-------+-------+---+
| > Alternatives Analysis     | Final Report      |   |       |       |   |
| > Report                    |                   |   |       |       |   |
+-----------------------------+-------------------+---+-------+-------+---+
| > Selection of the Locally  | Proof of local    |   |       |       |   |
| > Preferred Alternative and | action            |   |       |       |   |
| > Adoption into Constrained |                   |   |       |       |   |
| > Long Range Plan           |                   |   |       |       |   |
+-----------------------------+-------------------+---+-------+-------+---+
| > Agreement on Baseline     | FTA concurrence   | [ | []{.  | []{.  | [ |
| > Alternative               |                   | ] | mark} | mark} | ] |
|                             |                   | { |       |       | { |
|                             |                   | . |       |       | . |
|                             |                   | m |       |       | m |
|                             |                   | a |       |       | a |
|                             |                   | r |       |       | r |
|                             |                   | k |       |       | k |
|                             |                   | } |       |       | } |
+-----------------------------+-------------------+---+-------+-------+---+
| > Initial Information for   | Ridership and     | [ | []{.  | []{.  | [ |
| > Before and After Study    | cost inputs and   | ] | mark} | mark} | ] |
|                             | estimates         | { |       |       | { |
|                             |                   | . |       |       | . |
|                             |                   | m |       |       | m |
|                             |                   | a |       |       | a |
|                             |                   | r |       |       | r |
|                             |                   | k |       |       | k |
|                             |                   | } |       |       | } |
+-----------------------------+-------------------+---+-------+-------+---+
| > NEPA Scoping (as          | Scoping report or | [ | []{.  | []{.  | [ |
| > appropriate to the NEPA   | memorandum        | ] | mark} | mark} | ] |
| > Class of Action)          | evincing          | { |       |       | { |
|                             | completion        | . |       |       | . |
|                             |                   | m |       |       | m |
|                             |                   | a |       |       | a |
|                             |                   | r |       |       | r |
|                             |                   | k |       |       | k |
|                             |                   | } |       |       | } |
+-----------------------------+-------------------+---+-------+-------+---+
| > Evidence of Sponsor       | Preliminary       | [ | []{.  | []{.  | [ |
| > Technical Capacity        | Project           | ] | mark} | mark} | ] |
|                             | Management Plan,  | { |       |       | { |
|                             | and/or other      | . |       |       | . |
|                             | materials         | m |       |       | m |
|                             |                   | a |       |       | a |
|                             |                   | r |       |       | r |
|                             |                   | k |       |       | k |
|                             |                   | } |       |       | } |
+-----------------------------+-------------------+---+-------+-------+---+
| **Project Background**      |                   |   |       |       |   |
+-----------------------------+-------------------+---+-------+-------+---+
| > Project Description       | Project           | [ | []{.  | []{.  | [ |
|                             | Description       | ] | mark} | mark} | ] |
|                             |                   | { |       |       | { |
|                             | Template          | . |       |       | . |
|                             |                   | m |       |       | m |
|                             |                   | a |       |       | a |
|                             |                   | r |       |       | r |
|                             |                   | k |       |       | k |
|                             |                   | } |       |       | } |
+-----------------------------+-------------------+---+-------+-------+---+
| > Make the Case Document    | Narrative, Data,  | [ | []{.  | []{.  | [ |
|                             | Maps, Graphics    | ] | mark} | mark} | ] |
|                             |                   | { |       |       | { |
|                             |                   | . |       |       | . |
|                             |                   | m |       |       | m |
|                             |                   | a |       |       | a |
|                             |                   | r |       |       | r |
|                             |                   | k |       |       | k |
|                             |                   | } |       |       | } |
+-----------------------------+-------------------+---+-------+-------+---+
| > Certification of          | Signed            | [ | []{.  | []{.  | [ |
| > Technical Methods and     |                   | ] | mark} | mark} | ] |
| > Planning Assumptions      | Certification     | { |       |       | { |
|                             |                   | . |       |       | . |
|                             |                   | m |       |       | m |
|                             |                   | a |       |       | a |
|                             |                   | r |       |       | r |
|                             |                   | k |       |       | k |
|                             |                   | } |       |       | } |
+-----------------------------+-------------------+---+-------+-------+---+
| **Project Maps**            |                   |   |       |       |   |
+-----------------------------+-------------------+---+-------+-------+---+
| > Project Site Map          | Map               |   |       |       |   |
+-----------------------------+-------------------+---+-------+-------+---+
| > Vicinity Map              | Map               |   |       |       |   |
+-----------------------------+-------------------+---+-------+-------+---+
| **Capital Costs**           |                   |   |       |       |   |
+-----------------------------+-------------------+---+-------+-------+---+
| Standard Cost Categories,   | SCC Worksheets    |   |       |       |   |
| including schedule,         |                   |   |       |       |   |
| inflation, and funding      |                   |   |       |       |   |
+-----------------------------+-------------------+---+-------+-------+---+
| Annualized Cost Worksheets  | SCC Worksheets    |   |       |       |   |
| for Build and Baseline      |                   |   |       |       |   |
+-----------------------------+-------------------+---+-------+-------+---+
| **Travel Forecasts\***      |                   |   |       |       |   |
+-----------------------------+-------------------+---+-------+-------+---+
| > User Benefits Forecasts   | Summit Reports    |   |       | []{.  | [ |
|                             |                   |   |       | mark} | ] |
|                             |                   |   |       |       | { |
|                             |                   |   |       |       | . |
|                             |                   |   |       |       | m |
|                             |                   |   |       |       | a |
|                             |                   |   |       |       | r |
|                             |                   |   |       |       | k |
|                             |                   |   |       |       | } |
+-----------------------------+-------------------+---+-------+-------+---+
| > Thematic Maps and Legend  | Summit Output     |   |       | []{.  | [ |
|                             |                   |   |       | mark} | ] |
|                             |                   |   |       |       | { |
|                             |                   |   |       |       | . |
|                             |                   |   |       |       | m |
|                             |                   |   |       |       | a |
|                             |                   |   |       |       | r |
|                             |                   |   |       |       | k |
|                             |                   |   |       |       | } |
+-----------------------------+-------------------+---+-------+-------+---+
| > Summary of Travel         | Travel Forecast   |   |       | []{.  | [ |
| > Forecasts                 | Template,         |   |       | mark} | ] |
|                             | Narrative, Data   |   |       |       | { |
|                             | (as necessary)    |   |       |       | . |
|                             |                   |   |       |       | m |
|                             |                   |   |       |       | a |
|                             |                   |   |       |       | r |
|                             |                   |   |       |       | k |
|                             |                   |   |       |       | } |
+-----------------------------+-------------------+---+-------+-------+---+
| **O/M Costs**               |                   |   |       |       |   |
+-----------------------------+-------------------+---+-------+-------+---+
| Summary of O&M Cost         | Narrative, Data   |   | []{.  | []{.  | [ |
| Productivities              |                   |   | mark} | mark} | ] |
|                             |                   |   |       |       | { |
|                             |                   |   |       |       | . |
|                             |                   |   |       |       | m |
|                             |                   |   |       |       | a |
|                             |                   |   |       |       | r |
|                             |                   |   |       |       | k |
|                             |                   |   |       |       | } |
+-----------------------------+-------------------+---+-------+-------+---+

\* Simplified travel forecasting procedures and results may be
acceptable. Sponsors should discuss such procedures with FTA.

+-----------------------------+-------------------+---+--------+-------+---+
| Reporting Item              | Required          |   | Small  | Very  |   |
|                             | Information       |   | Starts | Small |   |
|                             |                   |   |        | S     |   |
|                             |                   |   |        | tarts |   |
+-----------------------------+-------------------+---+--------+-------+---+
| **Project Justification**   |                   |   |        |       |   |
+-----------------------------+-------------------+---+--------+-------+---+
| > Cost Effectiveness        | Cost              | [ | []{    | []{.  | [ |
| > (Opening Year)            | Effectiveness for | ] | .mark} | mark} | ] |
|                             | Small Starts      | { |        |       | { |
|                             | Template          | . |        |       | . |
|                             |                   | m |        |       | m |
|                             |                   | a |        |       | a |
|                             |                   | r |        |       | r |
|                             |                   | k |        |       | k |
|                             |                   | } |        |       | } |
+-----------------------------+-------------------+---+--------+-------+---+
| Annualization Factor        | Narrative, Data   | [ | []{    | []{.  | [ |
| Justification               |                   | ] | .mark} | mark} | ] |
|                             |                   | { |        |       | { |
|                             |                   | . |        |       | . |
|                             |                   | m |        |       | m |
|                             |                   | a |        |       | a |
|                             |                   | r |        |       | r |
|                             |                   | k |        |       | k |
|                             |                   | } |        |       | } |
+-----------------------------+-------------------+---+--------+-------+---+
| **Transit Supportive        |                   |   |        |       |   |
| Existing Land Use and       |                   |   |        |       |   |
| Future Patterns**           |                   |   |        |       |   |
+-----------------------------+-------------------+---+--------+-------+---+
| > Quantitative Land Use     | Quantitative Land | [ | []{    | []{.  | [ |
| > Information for Small     | Use Information   | ] | .mark} | mark} | ] |
| > Starts                    | for Small Starts  | { |        |       | { |
|                             | Template          | . |        |       | . |
|                             |                   | m |        |       | m |
|                             |                   | a |        |       | a |
|                             |                   | r |        |       | r |
|                             |                   | k |        |       | k |
|                             |                   | } |        |       | } |
+-----------------------------+-------------------+---+--------+-------+---+
| > Qualitative Land Use      | Qualitative Land  | [ | []{    | []{.  | [ |
| > Information for Small     | Use Information   | ] | .mark} | mark} | ] |
| > Starts                    | for Small Starts  | { |        |       | { |
|                             | Template,         | . |        |       | . |
|                             | Narrative, Data,  | m |        |       | m |
|                             | Maps              | a |        |       | a |
|                             |                   | r |        |       | r |
|                             |                   | k |        |       | k |
|                             |                   | } |        |       | } |
+-----------------------------+-------------------+---+--------+-------+---+
| **Other Factors             |                   |   |        |       |   |
| (Optional)**                |                   |   |        |       |   |
+-----------------------------+-------------------+---+--------+-------+---+
| > Evidence of Economic      | Narrative, Data,  | [ | []{    | []{.  | [ |
| > Development, Congestion   | Maps              | ] | .mark} | mark} | ] |
| > Pricing, and other        |                   | { |        |       | { |
| > project benefits          |                   | . |        |       | . |
|                             |                   | m |        |       | m |
|                             |                   | a |        |       | a |
|                             |                   | r |        |       | r |
|                             |                   | k |        |       | k |
|                             |                   | } |        |       | } |
+-----------------------------+-------------------+---+--------+-------+---+
| **Local Financial           |                   |   |        |       |   |
| Commitment\*\***            |                   |   |        |       |   |
+-----------------------------+-------------------+---+--------+-------+---+
| > Financial Plan Summary    | Finance Template  | [ | []{    | []{.  | [ |
|                             |                   | ] | .mark} | mark} | ] |
|                             |                   | { |        |       | { |
|                             |                   | . |        |       | . |
|                             |                   | m |        |       | m |
|                             |                   | a |        |       | a |
|                             |                   | r |        |       | r |
|                             |                   | k |        |       | k |
|                             |                   | } |        |       | } |
+-----------------------------+-------------------+---+--------+-------+---+
| > Evidence of Agency        | Audited Financial | [ | []{    | []{.  |   |
| > Financial Condition       | Statements        | ] | .mark} | mark} |   |
|                             |                   | { |        |       |   |
|                             |                   | . |        |       |   |
|                             |                   | m |        |       |   |
|                             |                   | a |        |       |   |
|                             |                   | r |        |       |   |
|                             |                   | k |        |       |   |
|                             |                   | } |        |       |   |
+-----------------------------+-------------------+---+--------+-------+---+
| > Evidence that Project O/M | O/M Cost Analysis | [ | []{    | []{.  | [ |
| > Costs are Within 5% of    |                   | ] | .mark} | mark} | ] |
| > Systemwide O/M Costs      |                   | { |        |       | { |
|                             |                   | . |        |       | . |
|                             |                   | m |        |       | m |
|                             |                   | a |        |       | a |
|                             |                   | r |        |       | r |
|                             |                   | k |        |       | k |
|                             |                   | } |        |       | } |
+-----------------------------+-------------------+---+--------+-------+---+
| > Supporting Financial      | Narrative, Plans, | [ | []{    | []{.  |   |
| > Documentation             | Data, etc         | ] | .mark} | mark} |   |
|                             |                   | { |        |       |   |
|                             |                   | . |        |       |   |
|                             |                   | m |        |       |   |
|                             |                   | a |        |       |   |
|                             |                   | r |        |       |   |
|                             |                   | k |        |       |   |
|                             |                   | } |        |       |   |
+-----------------------------+-------------------+---+--------+-------+---+

\*\*Assumes Small Starts/Very Small Starts qualify for streamlined
financial evaluation. If not, New Starts financial reporting
requirements must be met.

#  {#section-1 .unnumbered}

#  {#section-2 .unnumbered}

#  {#section-3 .unnumbered}

#  {#section-4 .unnumbered}

#  {#section-5 .unnumbered}

# APPENDIX A: {#appendix-a .unnumbered}

Transit Supportive Land Use:

Reporting for Small Starts Projects

Existing Land Use, Transit Supportive Land Use Policies, and Future
Patterns

FTA gathers and reviews summary information, supporting documentation,
and quantitative data prepared by local agencies to assess the existing
land use, transit supportive land use policies, and future patterns
associated with proposed New Starts projects, including Small Starts
projects. This guidance is intended for Small Starts project sponsors to
assist in the preparation and submission of the materials that FTA uses
to assess and rate a proposed project\'s transit supportive land use.

FTA uses three primary rating categories in its evaluation of New Starts
and Small Starts projects. These rating categories reflect the desire to
clearly distinguish among three primary aspects of land use:

1.  **Existing Land Use**

2.  **Transit Supportive Plans and Policies**

3.  **Performance and Impacts of Policies**

As explained in the *Interim Guidance and Instructions*, Very Small
Starts projects do not have to report land use information for
evaluation.

Key Differences in Reporting Requirements Compared to New Starts
Requirements

The three primary categories for evaluating transit-supportive land use
-- existing land use, plans and policies, and performance and impacts --
are the same for Small Starts projects as for standard New Starts
projects. The reporting requirements have been simplified, however, to
reduce the burden on project sponsors and also to respond to
Congressional direction regarding the Small Starts program. Rather than
completing the land use reporting template for New Starts projects,
which includes narrative text and references supporting documentation
for seven land use factors and various associated subfactors, Small
Starts project sponsors are simply asked to provide a brief narrative
(up to 3 pages each) for each of the three land use rating categories.
Provision of supporting documentation is recommended (though not
required) as it allows FTA reviewers to make a more informed assessment
of the project; however, it should be limited to only the most relevant
documentation and should be submitted in the format -- electronic or
hardcopy -- which is most readily available, which should further reduce
the reporting burden.

The quantitative data requirements also are reduced compared to the
requirements for standard New Starts projects. Only metropolitan area
population and employment, central business district (CBD) employment,
and total station area population and employment (within a ½ mile buffer
of stations) are required. Station area data need not be reported for
individual stations.

The inherent nature of Small Starts projects should also reduce the
reporting burden compared to standard New Starts projects. For example,
the reporting scope for Small Starts projects is likely to be more
limited than for New Starts projects. Since Small Starts projects often
involve closely-spaced stops within a relatively small project area, it
will be sufficient in most cases to provide a description for the
project corridor as a whole (1/2 mile buffer around all station areas),
rather than for individual station areas. The fact that most Small
Starts projects will be contained within a single local jurisdiction
also simplifies reporting requirements relative to many New Starts
projects.

How FTA Evaluates Small Starts Projects

The criteria by which FTA and its contractors evaluate and rate Small
Starts projects are largely similar to the criteria for rating standard
New Starts projects. The same qualitative criteria and quantitative
benchmarks are used to evaluate factors including existing land use,
transit-supportive corridor policies, supportive zoning near transit
stations, tools to implement land use policies, performance of land use
policies, and potential impact of transit investment on regional land
use. These criteria and benchmarks are described in FTA's [*Guidelines
and Standards for Assessing Transit-Supportive Land Use* (May
2004)](http://www.fta.dot.gov/planning/newstarts/planning_environment_2620.html),
Tables 4 and 5. There are two primary differences for Small Starts
projects, however:

-   The "Growth Management" factor (referred to as factor 2A in the
    *Reporting Instructions for the Section 5309 New Starts Criteria*)
    has been eliminated, acknowledging the relatively smaller scope and
    more limited regional influence of Small Starts projects, compared
    to New Starts projects.

-   The "Other Land Use Considerations" factor has been eliminated. In
    FTA's experience, land use-related issues reported under this factor
    can generally be considered appropriately under one or more of the
    existing land use factors.

In addition, it should be noted that economic development impacts, which
can be defined as increases in employment, population, and related
factors such as personal income and business sales, are considered an
integral part of the land use criterion. In particular, the second and
third land use categories -- plans and policies, and performance and
impacts --directly assess the expected *increase* in station area
development as a result of the proposed Small Starts project, which can
be viewed as a measure of economic development impacts. Land use plans,
policies, and implementation tools include "economic development" plans
and tools that are directed at increasing development, jobs, and related
economic benefits in the Small Starts corridor. The "performance and
impacts" category directly assesses actual examples of development
occurring, as well as the potential for additional development to take
place, considering market demand as well as planning factors.

Reporting Method and Data Sources for Existing Land Use, Transit
Supportive Land Use Policies, and Future Patterns

At the time of its request to enter project development, local agencies
will submit qualitative and quantitative land use information and
supporting materials to assist in information gathering during the Small
Starts review process. FTA has developed land use templates specific to
the reporting of such information for Small Starts projects; these
templates are available on FTA's website for New Starts/Small Starts
Project Planning and Development at
<http://www.fta.dot.gov/planning/newstarts/planning_environment_222.html>.
Local agencies are not expected to generate additional analyses,
documents, or quantitative data addressing land use issues in order to
satisfy the reporting requirement for the *Existing Land Use, Transit
Supportive Land Use Policies, and Future Patterns* criterion. In most
instances, agencies will be able to rely on readily available materials
that have been prepared in conjunction with other studies and analyses,
such as station area planning activities, local comprehensive planning,
and economic development initiatives and corridor studies. Local land
use planning and economic development staff also can serve as a
knowledgeable resource to provide the requested information.

Information on the *Existing Land Use, Transit Supportive Land Use
Plans, and Future Patterns* criterion should be organized as follows:

**Table of Contents:** Local agencies should provide a Table of Contents
at the beginning of their submission, summarizing all provided
materials.

**Maps:** Project maps should be submitted that clearly indicate the
location of the project and all stations, with reference to: 1) the
major highway network; 2) other major transit connections; 3) the CBD
and other major activity centers; 4) boundaries of local jurisdictions;
and 5) boundaries of the project study corridor.

**Summary Information (Qualitative Data):** Project sponsors should
submit a summary narrative describing existing land use, land use plans
and policies, and evidence on the performance and impacts of plans and
policies. This narrative should include three parts:

-   **Part 1, Existing Land Use** -- A concise narrative (suggested 1 to
    2 pages) describing the existing land use context of the project.
    FTA suggests that the narrative address the general issues noted in
    Table A-1. It does *not* need to include a detailed,
    station-by-station description of land use characteristics.

-   **Part 2, Plans and Policies** - A concise narrative (suggested 2 to
    3 pages) summarizing planning efforts and other tools or actions
    intended to increase the transit-supportiveness of land use patterns
    in the proposed station areas. This narrative should reference land
    use and economic development planning activities and tools
    completed, underway, or proposed by local jurisdictions, the project
    sponsor, and/or the regional planning agency. As an alternative to
    completing a narrative, the project sponsor may choose to provide
    letters of support from each local jurisdiction in the project
    corridor describing their transit-supportive land use planning
    efforts. The narrative or letters of support should address the
    general questions posed in Table A-1.

-   **Part 3, Performance and Impacts** -- A concise narrative (1 to 2
    pages) providing evidence of the successful application of
    transit-supportive policies (i.e., existing and/or proposed
    development and infrastructure projects exhibiting
    transit-supportive design) as well as local and regional factors
    supporting development in the proposed corridor. The narrative
    should address the general questions posed in Table A-1.

**Quantitative Data:** Quantitative data to be reported for Small Starts
projects is shown in Table A-2. The objective of gathering this data is
to better understand base year information about population and
employment associated with the project. These subjects are addressed at
the metropolitan, CBD, and station area levels. Appendix A of the
*Reporting Instructions for the Section 5309 New Starts Criteria*[^2]
provides a sample methodology for estimating station area population and
employment. FTA requests that sponsoring agencies follow this
methodology in order to ensure consistent reporting of quantitative data
among New Starts and Small Starts applicants.

FTA recognizes that some agencies may have to collect a modest amount of
data to provide the requested quantitative data. Population and
employment data for the base year may be obtained from the regional MPO
at a traffic analysis zone (TAZ) level, since these data are collected
as inputs to travel demand forecasting models. Recent population data at
a block group or tract level may also be obtained from the U.S. Census.
FTA intends to use the quantitative data to arrive at a more complete
understanding of proposed projects and to develop more thorough
information about existing population and employment densities. It is
hoped that, in cases where agencies have not prepared these data
previously, the development of this information will be as useful for
agency planning and analysis as it is for FTA\'s Small Starts project
review.

**Supporting Documentation:** FTA recommends that project sponsors
provide only enough documentation to support their narrative on existing
land use, plans and policies, and performance and impacts in the
proposed New Starts corridor. Publicly-accessible resources, such as
orthographic imagery using GoogleEarth, are available to FTA and its
reviewers, and therefore project sponsors are *not* expected to provide
similar materials[^3]. Sponsors are strongly encouraged to provide Web
links for resources available in that medium, rather than submitting
hard copies of reports. Any other information may be provided
electronically, although hard copy reports are acceptable if they have
not previously been digitized. Agencies should provide only information
that is readily available rather than generate new supporting
information if it does not exist. In the absence of documentation, FTA
and its reviewers may research and rely upon publicly available
information to verify the submitted narrative.

Specific examples of useful supporting information include:

-   Maps of existing land use

-   Maps showing street layout and sidewalk availability in proposed
    station areas

-   Aerial and/or ground-level photographs of station areas

-   Other existing documentation (for example, from an EIS, MIS, or
    station area planning study) illustrating and describing station
    area land use

-   Web links, electronic copies, or hard copies of available planning
    and policy documents addressing land use in the project corridor and
    station areas (e.g., local comprehensive or general plans, corridor
    plans, neighborhood plans, station area plans, institutional master
    plans, design guidelines)

-   Web links, electronic copies, or hard copies of zoning ordinances
    that apply to the proposed station areas (including base zoning as
    well as any applicable overlay districts, proposed revisions to
    zoning ordinances, etc.)

-   Market studies assessing the potential for economic development in
    the Small Starts corridor

-   Conceptual drawings, master plans, site plans, photographs, Web
    sites, and/or news articles describing recent and/or proposed
    development projects in station areas

-   Inventories and/or maps summarizing the locations, size, and uses of
    recent and/or proposed development projects in station areas

# TABLE A-1 {#table-a-1 .unnumbered}

**Qualitative Land Use Information**

+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **1. EXISTING LAND USE**                                              |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Address the following issues in a 1-2 page narrative:                 |
|                                                                       |
| -   What is the general character of land use in the proposed New     |
|     Starts station areas (e.g., types of uses, density of             |
|     development, pedestrian-oriented design features)?                |
|                                                                       |
| -   What major trip generators are served that are not reflected in   |
|     the reported quantitative population and employment data (e.g.,   |
|     professional sports stadiums, colleges and universities,          |
|     hospitals and medical centers)?                                   |
|                                                                       |
| -   What are typical parking costs and supply (e.g., on-street,       |
|     off-street lots, structured) in station areas?                    |
|                                                                       |
| []{.mark}                                                             |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **2. TRANSIT SUPPORTIVE PLANS AND POLICIES**                          |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Address the following issues in a 2-3 page narrative:                 |
|                                                                       |
| -   What efforts have been undertaken to develop transit-supportive   |
|     policies for the proposed Small Starts corridor (e.g., local      |
|     comprehensive plans, subarea plans, economic development plans,   |
|     transit station area planning activities)? Who is responsible,    |
|     and what is the timeframe for completion of these efforts?        |
|                                                                       |
| -   What are the approximate or typical densities, types of uses, and |
|     mix of uses allowed under existing and/or proposed zoning in the  |
|     proposed Small Starts station areas? How do existing and/or       |
|     proposed zoning regulations support pedestrian-friendly design?   |
|     What is the timeline for adopting changes to station-area zoning? |
|                                                                       |
| -   What financial, regulatory, or other tools and incentives are     |
|     available to promote transit-supportive development in station    |
|     areas (e.g., tax breaks, low-interest loans, reduced impact fees, |
|     expedited development review, assistance with land assembly,      |
|     infrastructure finance, joint development programs)? Have these   |
|     tools and incentives been applied in practice?                    |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **3. PERFORMANCE AND IMPACTS OF LAND USE POLICIES**                   |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Address the following issues in a 1-2 page narrative:                 |
|                                                                       |
| -   What examples exist of recent or proposed transit-supportive      |
|     development in the Small Starts station areas, or in other areas  |
|     served by transit in the jurisdiction?                            |
|                                                                       |
| -   To what extent do local and regional economic conditions and      |
|     market trends support development in the corridor?                |
|                                                                       |
| -   To what extent is land in the station areas available for         |
|     development or redevelopment? What barriers exist to              |
|     redevelopment (e.g., land assembly, contamination, inadequate     |
|     infrastructure)?                                                  |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+

# TABLE A-2 {#table-a-2 .unnumbered}

**Quantitative Land Use Information**

Project sponsors should adhere to the following guidelines when
reporting quantitative data:

1.  Please indicate the specific year for reporting base year estimates.

2.  Please report the density of population and employees *per mile*
    (not per acre).

3.  The base year should match what is reported in the Project
    Description Template.

+---------------------------------------------------+------------------+
|                                                   |                  |
+---------------------------------------------------+------------------+
| Data                                              | Base Year        |
|                                                   |                  |
|                                                   | 20 \_\_          |
+---------------------------------------------------+------------------+
|                                                   |                  |
+---------------------------------------------------+------------------+
| Metropolitan Area                                 |                  |
+---------------------------------------------------+------------------+
| Total Population                                  |                  |
+---------------------------------------------------+------------------+
| Total Employment                                  |                  |
+---------------------------------------------------+------------------+
| Central Business District[^4]                     |                  |
+---------------------------------------------------+------------------+
| Total Employment                                  |                  |
+---------------------------------------------------+------------------+
| All Station Areas (1/2 mile radius)               |                  |
+---------------------------------------------------+------------------+
| Total Population                                  |                  |
+---------------------------------------------------+------------------+
| Total Employment                                  |                  |
+---------------------------------------------------+------------------+
| Land Area (indicate sq. mi.)                      |                  |
+---------------------------------------------------+------------------+
| Population Density (persons per sq. mi.)          |                  |
+---------------------------------------------------+------------------+
| Employment Density (persons per sq. mi.)          |                  |
+---------------------------------------------------+------------------+

[^1]: The fixed-guideway portion need not be contiguous, but should be
    located to result in faster and more reliable running times.

[^2]: <http://www.fta.dot.gov/planning/newstarts/planning_environment_2619.html>

[^3]: Sponsors may choose to provide marked-up orthographic imagery that
    identifies station locations, local plan and policy areas, locations
    of major trip generators, etc. if they have already been prepared,
    but such documentation is not required.

[^4]: If the project does not serve a regional CBD, employment for the
    largest activity center(s) served by the Small Start project may be
    reported.