CORE CAPACITY PROJECT DESCRIPTION TEMPLATE |
|
|
|
|
|
PROJECT NAME: |
Enter your official name for the project as you would like it reflected in the Annual Report on Funding Recommendations
|
|
|
|
|
|
Participating Agencies |
|
|
|
|
|
Lead Agency |
Name |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contact Person |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Address |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Telephone Number |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fax Number |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Email |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Metropolitan Planning Organization |
Name |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contact Person |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Address |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Telephone Number |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fax Number |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Email |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Transit Agency |
Name |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contact Person |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Address |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Telephone Number |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fax Number |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Email |
|
|
|
|
|
|
State Department of Transportation |
Name |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contact Person |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Address |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Telephone Number |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fax Number |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Email |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other Relevant Agencies |
Name |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contact Person |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Address |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Telephone Number |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fax Number |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Email |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other Relevant Agencies |
Name |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contact Person |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Address |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Telephone Number |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fax Number |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Email |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other Relevant Agencies |
Name |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contact Person |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Address |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Telephone Number |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fax Number |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Email |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CORE CAPACITY PROJECT DESCRIPTION TEMPLATE (Page 2) |
|
|
|
|
|
Project Definition |
Length (miles) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mode/Technology |
|
|
|
|
Total Number of Stations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of New Stations (if any) |
Count paired inbound/outbound boarding platforms as one station (do not report the total number of boarding platforms)
|
|
|
|
|
|
List each new station (if any) separately, including the number of park and ride spaces at each and whether structured or surface parking |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Insert additional rows if necessary
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
List each station with major transfer facilities to other modes |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Insert additional rows if necessary
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of vehicles/ rolling stock to be included as part of the project |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Type of Alignment by Segment (Number of Miles) |
Above grade |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Below grade |
|
|
|
|
|
|
At grade |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exclusive |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mixed Traffic |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Status of Existing Right of Way |
Ownership – who owns the right of way? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current Use: active freight or passenger service? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Project Planning Dates |
"Existing" is the most recent year for which the data on demographics and the existing transit system are available. It is the year used to establish eligibility.
Existing Year |
Opening Year |
|
|
|
|
|
2017 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital Cost Estimate |
2017 constant dollars |
Value linked from Finance Template
$- |
|
|
|
|
Year of Expenditure |
Value linked from Finance Template
$- |
|
|
|
|
|
Estimated Number of U.S. Jobs Related to Design, Construction, Operation and Maintenance of the Project |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Project Planning and Development Schedule |
Project Schedule |
|
|
|
|
|
Insert anticipated or actual date |
|
|
|
|
|
Anticipated NEPA Class of Action |
(Select…) |
|
|
|
|
|
Entry into Project Development |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Select NEPA class of action above) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LPA selected |
|
|
|
|
|
|
LPA included in the financially constrained long range plan |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Approval into Engineering |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anticipated FFGA Award |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Construction Duration (enter start and end dates) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Substantial Completion - (Normal Revenue Service Begins) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CORE CAPACITY PROJECT DESCRIPTION TEMPLATE (Page 3) |
|
|
|
|
|
Detail of Existing Operations |
Heavy Rail/Light Rail |
Commuter Rail |
|
|
|
|
|
Train # |
Notes on the Detail of Operations:
Enter the operating schedule for the peak hour as defined by the project definition.
"Train Line Reference" should be used to specify the line name, number, color, or other identifying characteristic of each train.
Departure time should be the time when each train enters the defined project area.
If more lines are needed to represent operations in the peak hour, please contact FTA for further instructions.
For Light Rail/Heavy Rail, the overall car length and width should be entered in Feet and Inches with no reductions. The usable space calculation will automatically deduct 6'7" of length and 8" of width as per guidance. Please enter whole feet and whole inches with no decimals or fractions.
Train Line Reference (e.g. Name/Color/Number) |
Departure Time |
Number of Cars |
Car Length (ft) (in) |
Car Width (ft) (in) |
Usable Space |
Seats per Car |
Seats Per Train |
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
During the Peak Hour |
|
|
|
|
- |
|
- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Detail of Operations At Project Opening |
Heavy Rail/Light Rail |
Commuter Rail |
|
|
|
|
|
Train # |
Line Reference |
Departure Time |
Number of Cars |
Car Length (ft) (in) |
Car Width (ft) (in) |
Usable Space |
Seats per Car |
Seats Per Train |
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
During the Peak Hour |
|
|
|
|
- |
|
- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CORE CAPACITY PROJECT DESCRIPTION TEMPLATE (Page 4) |
|
|
|
|
|
Project Management |
|
|
|
|
|
Project Manager |
Name |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Address |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Phone |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fax |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Email |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Agency CEO |
Name |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Address |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Phone |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fax |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Email |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Key Agency Staff: Overall Core Capacity Criteria |
Name |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Address |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Phone |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fax |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Email |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Key Agency Staff: Ridership Statistics and Data |
Name |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Address |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Phone |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fax |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Email |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Key Agency Staff: Cost Estimates |
Name |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Address |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Phone |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fax |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Email |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Key Agency Staff: Environmental Documentation |
Name |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Address |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Phone |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fax |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Email |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Key Agency Staff: Financial Assessment |
Name |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Address |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Phone |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fax |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Email |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Key Agency Staff: Project Maps |
Name |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Address |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Phone |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fax |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Email |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contractors |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current Prime Contractor |
Name |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Address |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Phone |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fax |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Email |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Prime Contractor: Project Manager |
Name |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Address |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Phone |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fax |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Email |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contractor Responsible for Ridership Data |
Name |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Address |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Phone |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fax |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Email |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contractor Responsible for Capital Cost Estimates |
Name |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Address |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Phone |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fax |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Email |
|
|
|
|
|
|
CORE CAPACITY MOBILITY IMPROVEMENT AND COST-EFFECTIVENESS TEMPLATE |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PROJECT NAME: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mobility Improvements |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Line |
Item |
Daily |
Annualization Factor* |
Annualized (annualization factor x daily) |
Source/Calculation |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1a |
Existing Daily Linked Trips on the existing line(s) as defined in the project definition |
Non-transit-dependent |
|
|
0 |
Average Weekday On/Off Counts, see Reporting Instructions |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1b |
Transit-dependent |
|
0 |
<select source of transit-dependent data> |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1c |
Overall percentage of transit-dependent trips |
- |
Line 1b / (Line 1a+Line 1b) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
Total trips with extra weight given to transit dependent trips (value used in rating) |
0 |
Line 1a annualized + 2*(Line 1b annualized) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
*Attach documentation describing annualization factor assumed. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost Effectiveness |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Line |
Item |
Values |
Source/Calculation |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
Annualized Core Capacity capital cost (constant 2017 dollars) |
|
Source: SCC Build Annualized worksheet |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4 |
Annual linked trips on the existing line(s) as defined in the project definition (no extra weight given for transit dependent trips) |
0 |
Line 1a + Line 1b (unweighted annualized sum) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5 |
Annualized Core Capacity cost per annual linked trip (value used in rating) |
$0.00 |
Line 3 / Line 4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CORE CAPACITY NEEDS AND CONGESTION RELIEF TEMPLATE |
PROJECT NAME: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vehicle and Service Characteristics |
Line |
Item |
Existing |
At Opening |
Increase |
Source/Calculation |
1 |
Total usable space per peak hour, in the peak direction |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
From Project Description Template, Page 3 |
2 |
Total available seats per peak hour, in the peak direction |
|
- |
- |
- |
From Project Description Template, Page 3 |
|
Capacity Needs |
Line |
Item |
Existing |
|
|
Source/Calculation |
3 |
Existing Ridership per peak hour, in the peak direction |
|
|
|
|
Peak hour average load from counts, see Reporting Instructions |
4 |
Total Usable space per passenger per peak hour, in the peak direction |
|
|
|
|
Line 1 / Line 3 (Light Rail/Heavy Rail only) |
5 |
Percent Seated Load per peak hour, in the peak direction |
|
- |
|
|
Line 3 / Line 2 (Commuter Rail only) |
6 |
Existing Capacity Needs (Value used in Rating) |
|
Line 4 (Light Rail/Heavy Rail) or Line 5 (Commuter Rail) |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Congestion Relief |
Line |
Item |
Existing |
At Opening |
Increase |
Source/Calculation |
7 |
Total usable space per passenger, in the peak hour, in the peak direction |
|
|
|
|
Line 1 /Line 3 (Light Rail/Heavy Rail only) |
8 |
Percent Seated Load per peak hour, in the peak direction |
|
- |
- |
- |
Line 3/ Line 2 (Commuter Rail Only) |
9 |
Congestion Relief (Value used in Rating) |
|
Line 7 (Light Rail/Heavy Rail) or Line 8 (Commuter Rail) |
|
|
|
- |
|
CORE CAPACITY FINANCE TEMPLATE |
|
|
PROJECT NAME: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Core Capacity Capital Cost of Project in Constant 2017 Dollars (from the SCC Main Worksheet)
|
Please enter entire numbers in the cells in this worksheet. Do not abbreviate or round. For example, enter $1,000,105 rather than $1.0 or $1,000,000. Otherwise calculations will not work correctly.
|
Core Capacity Capital Cost of Project in YOE dollars (including finance charges, costs of Project Development and Engineering, and construction): (from SCC Main Worksheet) |
|
|
|
Section 5309 Core Capacity Funding Anticipated (YOE $): |
|
Section 5309 CIG Share of Core Capacity Project Cost: |
0.0% |
|
|
Estimated Cost of Project Development (YOE $): |
|
Estimated Cost of Engineering (YOE $): |
|
|
|
Total Finance Charges Included in Capital Cost (include finance charges that are expected prior to either the revenue operations date or the fulfillment of the Section 5309 Core Capacity funding commitment, whichever is later in time): (from SCC Main Worksheet) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other Federal Capital Funding Sources |
Type of Funds |
Dollar Amount (YOE) |
% of Total Capital Cost |
|
|
(Non-5309 CIG Funds such as FTA Section 5307, Section 5337, Surface Transportation Program (STP), Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ), etc.) |
|
|
1. |
|
|
0.0% |
|
|
2. |
|
|
0.0% |
|
|
3. |
|
|
0.0% |
|
|
4. |
|
|
0.0% |
|
|
State Capital Funding Sources |
Type of Funds |
Dollar Amount (YOE) |
% of Total Capital Cost |
|
|
(Funds provided by State agencies or legislatures such as bonds, dedicated sales tax, annual legislative appropriation, transportation trust funds, etc.) |
|
|
1. |
|
|
0.0% |
|
|
2. |
|
|
0.0% |
|
|
3. |
|
|
0.0% |
|
|
4. |
|
|
0.0% |
|
|
Local Capital Funding Sources |
Type of Funds |
Dollar Amount (YOE) |
% of Total Capital Cost |
|
|
(Municipal, City, County, Township, or Regional funding such as bonds, sales tax, legislative appropriation, transportation trust funds, etc.) |
|
|
1. |
|
|
0.0% |
|
|
2. |
|
|
0.0% |
|
|
3. |
|
|
0.0% |
|
|
4. |
|
|
0.0% |
|
|
5. |
|
|
|
0.0% |
|
|
6. |
|
|
|
0.0% |
|
|
7. |
|
|
|
0.0% |
|
|
8. |
|
|
0.0% |
|
|
Private Sector/In-kind match/Other |
Type of Funds |
Dollar Amount (YOE) |
% of Total Capital Cost |
|
|
(Donations of right-of-way, construction of stations or parking, or funding for the project from a non-governmental entity, business, or business assoc.) |
|
|
1. |
|
|
0.0% |
|
|
2. |
|
|
0.0% |
|
|
3. |
|
|
0.0% |
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL NON-SECTION 5309 FUNDING (YOE dollars) |
$0 |
0.0% |
|
|
QA/QC CHECK: TOTAL CAPITAL COSTS LESS SEC. 5309 FUNDING LESS NON-SEC. 5309 FUNDING (SHOULD EQUAL $0) |
$0 |
--- |
|
|
|
|
|
CORE CAPACITY FINANCE TEMPLATE (Page 2) |
|
|
Core Capacity Project Financial Commitment |
|
|
Other Federal Sources |
Specify Whether New or Existing Funding Source |
Specify Status of Funds --Committed, Budgeted, or Planned (See notes below) |
Identify Supporting Documentation Submitted to Verify Funding Source If a public referendum is needed, provide the anticipated date |
|
|
(Linked from page 1) |
|
|
1. |
|
|
|
|
|
2. |
|
|
|
|
|
3. |
|
|
|
|
|
4. |
|
|
|
|
|
State Sources |
|
|
|
|
|
(Linked from page 1) |
|
|
1. |
|
|
|
|
|
2. |
|
|
|
|
|
3. |
|
|
|
|
|
4. |
|
|
|
|
|
Local Sources |
|
|
|
|
|
(Linked from page 1) |
|
|
1. |
|
|
|
|
|
2. |
|
|
|
|
|
3. |
|
|
|
|
|
4. |
|
|
|
|
|
5. |
|
|
|
|
|
6. |
|
|
|
|
|
Private Sector/In-kind Match/Other |
|
|
|
|
|
(Linked from page 1) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1. |
|
|
|
|
|
2. |
|
|
|
|
|
3. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reference Notes: The following categories and definitions are applied to funding sources: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Committed: Committed sources are programmed funds that have all the necessary approvals (legislative or referendum) to be used to fund the proposed project without any additional action. These funds have been formally programmed in the MPO’s TIP and/or any related local, regional, or state CIP or appropriation. Examples include dedicated or approved tax revenues, state grants that have been approved by all required legislative bodies, cash reserves that have been dedicated to the proposed project, and additional debt capacity that requires no further approvals and has been dedicated by the transit agency to the proposed project. |
|
|
Budgeted: This category is for funds that have been budgeted and/or programmed for use on the proposed project but remain uncommitted, i.e., the funds have not yet received statutory approval. Examples include debt financing in an agency-adopted CIP that has yet to receive final legislative approval, or state grants that have been included in the state budget, but are still awaiting legislative approval. These funds are almost certain to be committed in the near future. Funds will be classified as budgeted where available funding cannot be committed until the Full Funding Grant Agreement (FFGA) is executed, or due to local practices outside of the project sponsor’s control (e.g., the project development schedule extends beyond the TIP period). |
|
|
Planned: This category is for funds that are identified and have a reasonable chance of being committed, but are neither committed nor budgeted. Examples include proposed sources that require a scheduled referendum, reasonable requests for state/local grants, and proposed debt financing that has not yet been adopted in the agency’s CIP. |
|
|
|
|
|
CORE CAPACITY FINANCE TEMPLATE (Page 3) |
|
|
Innovative Financing Methods |
|
|
(Unconventional sources of funding which may include TIFIA, State Infrastructure Banks, Public/Private partnerships, Toll Credits, etc.) |
|
|
Innovative Funding Source |
Anticipated Funding Amount |
Identify Supporting Documentation Submitted |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Summary Information from the Operating Finance Plan |
|
|
Core Capacity Project Annual Operating Cost in the Opening Year (YOE$): |
|
Total Transit System (including Core Capacity Project) Annual Operating Cost in the Opening Year (YOE$) |
|
|
|
Proposed Sources of Operating Funds (Proposed sources of operating funds that are anticipated to support operating expenses of the transit system including the Core Capacity project in the opening year.) |
Dollar Amount |
Type of Funding Source |
Committed, Budgeted or Planned |
Specify Whether New or Existing Funding Source |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
$0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Transit System Operating Characteristics |
|
|
Current Systemwide Characteristics |
Number/Value |
Future Transit System with Core Capacity Project (Systemwide characteristics at completion of the Core Capacity Project) |
Number/Value |
|
|
(Can be the same data as reported to the FTA for the National Transit Database) |
|
|
Farebox Recovery Percent |
|
Farebox Recovery Percent |
|
|
|
Number of Buses |
|
Number of Buses |
|
|
|
Number of Rail Vehicles |
|
Number of Rail Vehicles |
|
|
|
Average Fare |
|
Average Fare |
|
|
|
Average Age of Buses |
|
|
|
|
|
Average Age of Rail Vehicles |
|
|
|
|
|
Revenue Miles of Service Provided |
|
Revenue Miles of Service |
|
|
|
Revenue Hours of Service Provided |
|
Revenue Hours of Service |
|
|
|
CORE CAPACITY RATING ESTIMATION |
PROJECT NAME: |
|
Use this tool to calculate potential ratings for your Core Capacity project. Complete yellow cells with the ratings you anticipate for local financial commitment. * |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Project Justification |
|
Local Financial Commitment |
Criterion |
Weight |
Estimated Rating |
Source/Calculation |
|
Do you anticipate that your project will qualify for the simplified financial assessment? (See the Local Financial Commitment section of the Core Capacity portion of the CIG Program Final Interim Policy Guidance for the qualifying criteria.) |
<Select YES/NO> |
Mobility Improvements |
16.66% |
- |
Mobility & Cost-Effectiveness Template |
|
Cost Effectiveness |
16.66% |
- |
|
Criterion |
Weight |
Estimated Rating |
Source/Calculation |
Congestion Relief |
16.66% |
- |
Capacity Need & Congestion Relief Template |
|
Current Financial Condition |
25% |
<select> |
Enter your estimations of these ratings. See the Local Financial Commitment section in the New Starts chapter of the CIG Program Final Interim Policy Guidance for information on how FTA rates these factors. |
Capacity Needs |
16.66% |
- |
|
Commitment of Capital and Operating Funds |
25% |
<select> |
Environmental Benefits |
16.66% |
MEDIUM |
Automatic MEDIUM for Core Capacity projects |
|
Reasonableness of Financial Plan |
50% |
<select> |
Economic Development |
16.66% |
MEDIUM |
Automatic MEDIUM for Core Capacity projects |
|
Core Capacity Share (Please complete the Finance Template) |
- |
- |
Finance Template |
Summary Rating |
|
- |
Ratings are assigned to each criterion on a five-point scale, with Low = 1, Medium-Low =2, Medium = 3, Medium-High = 4, and High = 5. Individual criterion ratings are then weighted 16.66% each to develop the summary Project Justification rating. |
|
Summary Rating |
|
- |
Ratings are assigned to each subfactor on a five-point scale, with Low = 1, Medium-Low=2, Medium=3, Medium-High =4, and High = 5. Individual subfactror ratings are then weighted as shown to develop the summary Local Financial Commitment rating. If the summary rating is at least Medium and Core Capacity share is less than 50%, the summary rating is increased one level. If project qualifies for the simplified financial evaluation, the rating is High if the Core Capacity share is 50 percent or less; otherwise it is Medium. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Estimated Overall Project Rating: (The Project Justification and Local Financial Commitment summary ratings are each weighted equally at 50%. However, both must be at least Medium to obtain a Medium or better overall rating.) |
|
Complete all templates and the highlighted cells in this worksheet to see the estimated overall rating. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Link to CIG Program Guidance on the FTA Website |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* FTA is providing this tool solely to help project sponsors understand how their projects may rate. Any anticipated ratings entered into this spreadsheet will not inform the ratings that FTA assigns, and any ratings computed in the templates are subject to verification by FTA. FTA has sole responsibility for assigning project ratings according to the evaluation and rating framework described in the Capital Investment Grants Program Final Interim Policy Guidance. |