North and Southeast lines: full funding on its way (and it’s looking pretty good for the University Line, too.)
Perhaps the most anticipated words in the world of rail transit are “full funding grant agreement:” the Federal Transit Authority’s promise to pay a share of a transit project. Two of Houston’s new rail lines have now moved tantalizing close to that milestone. As part of the federal budget process, the FTA releases a “Annual Report on Funding Recommendations” (12 MB pdf) that contains its recommendations for federal transit funding for the next fiscal year. These recommendations are incorporated in the president’s budget.
The report notes:
Five projects are likely to be ready for an FFGA or Early Systems Work Agreement in FY 2010. These projects are in Final Design or expected to be approved into Final Design before summer 2009, the environmental process has been completed, and any needed railroad agreements have been negotiated and are at or near completion.
and goes on to recommend $75 million in construction funds each for both the North and Southeast lines. But that’s just the first installment: a FFGA would mean $331.7 million and $333.5, respectively, for the two projects. We don’t have a signed check yet. But this is a good sign that check is coming soon.
The University Line doesn’t show up in the report yet. But the list of projects in here is a useful snapshot of the projects it will be competing with for federal funding. Here are all the projects in the report that are large enough to require cost-effectiveness ratings under the New Starts program, in order of cost, with the University Line inserted:
- Access to the Region’s Core Commuter Rail, Northern New Jersey, $8,699.98 Million, 254,200 riders (final design, FFGA expected FY 2010)
Three New York City projects lead off the list. Their costs are huge, but so are the benefits. This project will double rail capacity under the Hudson River into Penn Station, allowing more trains on currently overcroweded lines and adding service on other lines which previously didn’t have direct service into Manhattan. - Long Island Rail Road East Side Access commuter rail, New York, New York, $7,386.00 million, 160,000 riders (FFGA in 2006, under construction, complete 2015)
This project will give Long Island commuter the choice of direct train service ito Gran Central Station, which is located closer to the Midtown employment core than the current terminal at Penn Station. - Second Avenue Subway Phase I heavy rail, New York, New York, $4,866.61 million, 200,000 riders ( FFGA in 2007, under construction, complete 2016)
This project has been in the works longer than any other project on this list: it was approved in 1929, and construction started in the 1960s and again in 1972. - Dulles Corridor Metrorail Project to Wiehle Avenue heavy rail, Northern Virginia, $3,142.47 million, 85,700 riders (FFGA in 2009, complete in 2014)
Ignore the “Dulles” here; the airport extension is in the next phase. This phase is about connecting Tyson’s Corner, whose 115,000 jobs makes it the nation’s 12th largest employment center, to the Metrorail system. - Central Link LRT, Seattle, Washington, $2,436.90, 42,500 riders (opens in July, FFGA in 2003)
The first step in Seattle’s light rail system. A short extension to the airport will open next year; voters have approved extensions to the north and east. The cost is high due to extensive tunneling in Seattle’s hilly landscape. - East Corridor commuter rail, Denver, Colorado, $2,043.77, 37,900 riders (preliminary engineering)
This is one of three Denver projects on the list, all part of the ambitious FasTracks program. It will connect Downtown’s Union Station to the airport with 4 intermediate stops. - Silver Line Phase III, Boston, Massachusetts, $2,106.54 Million, 84,600 riders (preliminary engineering)
This was one of the dumbest transit projects in the United States, building a new bus suway parallel to an out-of-service light rail subway. But “was” is the operative word — Massachusetts just decided to cancel the project. - University Link LRT, Seattle, Washington, $1,947.68 million, 40,200 riders (begins construction 2009, complete in 2016, FFGA 2009)
Extends the light rail system to the University of Washington (or at least to parking lot next to its stadium.) The high cost is because all 3.15 miles are in subway. - North Corridor heavy rail, Miami, Florida, $1,504.7 Million, 22,600 riders (preliminary engineering)
This project is on indefinite hold due to a shortage of local funds. - Portland-Milwaukie LRT, Portland, Oregon, $1,471.76 Mi, 27,400 riders (preliminary engineering)
A southwards extension of Portland’s light rail. This will be the 6th segment of Portland’s light rail system. - Northwest / Southeast LRT, Dallas, Texas, $1,406.22 million, 45,900 riders (under construction, complete in 2011, FFGA in 2006)
More light rail in abandoned railroad corridors in Dallas; it goes vaguely near some important destinations and has lots of park-and-ride lots. - Central Subway LRT, San Francisco, California, $1,297.95 Million, 42,200 riders (preliminary engineering)
One of the dumbest transit projects (though not nearly as dumb as BART to San Jose); if San Francisco weren’t represented by Nancy Pelosi it would have been dead a long time ago. San Francisco needs more light rail badly, but this 1.7 mile new subway segment doesn’t add much to the system, at least until it’s eventually extended. - Central Corridor LRT, St. Paul-Minneapolis, Minnesota, $914.89 Million, 41,700 Average riders (preliminary engineering)
Probably the best analogy to the University Line anywhere elase in the country; it connects Downtown St. Paul, the University of Minnesota, and Downtown Minneapolis (with transfers to commuter rail and the existing light rail to the airport.) The entire 11-mile line will be in city streets. - Metro Gold Line Eastside Extension LRT, Los Angeles, California, $898.81 million, 23,000 riders (FFGA in 2004, opens in June
This budget is a good indication of how much costs have risen recently; nobody could build 6 miles of light rail including a 1.8-mile tunnel and an elevated section for this little today. - Gold Line commuter rail, Denver, Colorado, $859.51 Million, 16,800 riders (preliminary engineering)
- Northeast Corridor LRT, Charlotte, North Carolina, $748.96 Million, 10,500 riders (preliminary engineering)
An extension of the light rail line which opened in 2007, doubling first year ridership estimates. It will serve UNC Charlotte and a suburban employment center. - West Corridor LRT, Denver, Colorado, $709.83 million, 29,700 riders (FFGA in 2009)Compare cost and ridership to the Denver commuter rail lines.
- Southeast Corridor LRT, Houston, Texas, $680.6 Million, 28,700 riders (preliminary engineering, FFGA expected FY2010)
- North Corridor LRT, Houston, Texas, $677.0 Million, 29,000 riders (preliminary engineering, FFGA expected FY2010)
- South Corridor I-205 / Portland Mall LRT, Portland, Oregon, $575.70 million, 46,500 riders (FFGA in 2007, opens in September)
Adds 6.5 miles of light rail along a suburban freeway (which already had right of way set aside in the 1970s) and a 1.5 mile second downtown spine. - New Britain – Hartford Busway, Hartford, Connecticut, $569.31 Million, 15,100 riders (final design)
- Mid-Jordan LRT, Salt Lake City, Utah, $535.37 million, 9,500 riders (FFGA in 2009, complete 2011)
Salt Lake City is aggressively expanding its light rail system. This is one of three new lines under construction right now; its the only one that’s federally funded; the other lines are being counted as local match, meaning that the feds are putting up 80% rather than 50% of the cost of the project. METRO aims to do the same thing for the University Line. - University Line, $533 million, 43,000 riders (not yet submitted to FTA)
- Ravenswood Line heavy rail reconstruction, Chicago, Illinois, $529.91, 68,000 riders (FFGA in 2004)
Rebuilds a deteriorated 1907 elevated line, speeding up trips and allowing longer trains to relieve overcrowding. - North Shore Connector LRT, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, $435.00 million, 14,300 riders (under construction, complete in 2011, FFGA in 2006)
Another stupid project: a 1.2 mile subway, $200 million over budget (the cost is lik3ly up to $530 million, compared to $330 initial estimates), that will serve two sports stadiums and next to nothing else. It’s a testament to Pennsylvania’s political power that the feds are not only funding this project but funding 80% of it. - Central Florida Commuter Rail, Orlando, Florida, $357.22 million, 7,400 riders (final design, FFGA expected FY2010)
In April, Florida’s legislature failed to pass a freight rail liability bill that was required to make this line possible; the project is likely dead. - Northstar Corridor Rail commuter rail, Minneapolis-Big Lake, Minnesota, $317.38 million, 5,900 riders (FFGA in 2007, opens 2009)
Will connect to the existing light rail line at a new Downtown station. - South Corridor Phase 2 LRT, Sacramento, California, $270.00 Million, 10,000 riders (preliminary engineering, FFGA expected FY2010)A 4-mile suburban extension
- Norfolk LRT, Norfolk, Virginia, $232.10 million, 7,100 riders (FFGA in 2007, under construction, complete in 2010)
An incredibly cost-effective startup, largely following an abandoned freight rail line that happened to connect Downtown, Eastern Virginia Medical Center, and Norfolk State University.
This list is incredibly national. Rail transit is no longer an East Coast or West Coast phenomenon; we’re seeing multiple projects in the South, the Midwest, and the Mountain West. And we’re seeing that cities that built one line tend top build more: clearly, the public is behind the idea of quality transit. Manny of the cities on the list have more projects coming: LA, for example, has three projects in planning that will go after federal funds. It’s pretty obvious that a coalition could be built in Congress for increasing federal transit funding.
The local conclusion: all three of the Houston projects stack up well in this list in terms of bang-for-the-buck (the actual funding criteria are more complicated than ridership vs. cost, but this give some idea). The University Line, for example, is predicting as much ridership as funded projects that cost three or four times as much. If METRO and city leadership keep things on track locally, the odds of getting federal funding look good.
Your comments (cost effective or not) go in our forums.