Laserfiche WebLink
B. Tong, B. Post, 0. Jaff <br />d� G QYefrxQd %�i1 �S18�!�cviect ' 1. (�' W 4TH ST _ <br />One electronic and 12 hard copies of the draft FMP <br />Task 5 — Quality Management Plan (QMP) <br />9 0' <br />Cordoba will produce the QMP for the implementation of the Project with assistance from URS, Appropriate levels of <br />reporting, documentation and accountability will be outlined that ensure compliance with FTA's 2002 guidelines, <br />S. Cuevas, B. Post I One electronic and 12 hard copies of the draft and the final <br />Task 6 -- Real Estate Acquisition Management Plan (RAMP) <br />The land use and zoning for Santa Ana - Garden Grove supports the development of higher density mixed use <br />development that can be served with a fixed guideway transit. Cordoba will lead the preparation of this document <br />with support from SOJ and URS Engineering. This locally -led team understands very well the local real estate along <br />the alternative routes and their use 1 characteristics, and the rights -of -way, facilities ! Improvements, ownership, <br />leases and politics related to major land tracts affected. The full documentation of local plans and commitments will <br />be included, all in full compliance with 49 CFR Part 24. The transit route does serve important attractions in Santa <br />Ana, supports transit oriented development for the future and connects to the multi -modal transit center. <br />B. Tong, D. Davies, D. Levinsohn 11 One electronic and 12 hard copies of the draft and the final RAMP <br />Tasks -7 and 8: Ridership Forecasting /Reporting <br />As noted in the Approach, the Cost Effectiveness criterion represents 33% of the federal rating for the project. Cost <br />effectiveness is determined by comparing the total cost of the project to the total benefits generated from the project. <br />The result of the comparison is an estimated cost per benefit. A cost per benefit below $24,99 results in a medium <br />rating. Costs higher than that result in a low rating. Portland ($29,42) and Tucson ($36 approximately) both received <br />low ratings. <br />Project benefits are substantially determined from information provided by travel demand forecasting models, The <br />required information Is developed by applying the FTA SUMMIT software to the travel forecast results, Fixed <br />guideway projects are judged against a baseline case of improved bus transit. Current FTA methodology does not <br />account for the benefits of streetcar. The methodology is based substantially on travel time savings. Streetcar does <br />not generate travel time savings over a bus operating on the same street system. <br />The ridership forecasting effort and subsequent FTA SUMMIT analysis require careful management and policy <br />direction to obtain the desired outcomes while maintaining cost control given the budget allocation for this phase,. <br />The cost for conducting these elements of work iteratively can easily dominate the budget and could require more <br />funding than is allocated. In recognition that the prospect for obtaining a medium rating is very low, it needs to be <br />determined, in consultation with FTA, how extensive these efforts should be if the Cost Effectiveness category rating <br />for the project will not change substantially. <br />Section Three - Work Plan 33 <br />25D -37 <br />