Transcript Presentation: Michigan Transportation Alternatives Program

Michigan Transportation
Alternatives Program
Michigan Suburbs Alliance
November 18, 2013
Transportation Enhancement Program
• Popular program with most states and local
communities
• Some states didn’t embrace TE
• Some states used TE funds only on their system
• Some Members of Congress thought TE was
frivolous
Congressional Compromise
• Consolidate 3 federal programs (TE, RTP and SRTS)
into one program – TAP
• Eliminate some TE program categories
• Substantial reduction in overall funding
• Allow transfer provisions to give states flexibility
• Strengthen input of locals by mandating a role for
Metropolitan Planning Organization’s
TE, SRTS, & RTP in Michigan before MAP-21
TE – centralized DOT review and selection process
SRTS – centralized DOT review and selection process
after school-based planning process
• Open call for applications, quarterly review meetings
• Quarterly communication between DOT and MPO’s sending TE
and SRTS application and approved project lists
• All Local TE and SRTS projects implemented by Local Agencies
through MDOT’s letting process and with MDOT oversight
• Both TE and SRTS Programs were and are in the same
MDOT office
RTP – administered by the MDNR
Funding Distribution
Statewide TAP
Apportionment $26
Million
50% by
Population
SEMCOG Region
Receives about $5
Million
Rec. Trails
$2.9
million
50% Any Area
MAP-21 Challenges:
MDOT perspective
• Less than 90 days to prepare new program
• Many unknowns
• Grant IT system was scheduled for August 2013
implementation and designed with “TE” in mind
• 6 Large MPO’s and State received direct suballocation
- could result in 7 different TAP Programs
• Avoid disruption of existing TE projects that
•
were “in the pipeline”
• Let’s not make the same mistakes again!
• Direction from MDOT Director
MAP-21 Challenges:
SEMCOG perspective
• Less than 90 days to prepare new program
• Many unknowns
• SEMCOG did not have a system established to
process TAP projects
• SEMCOG did not have staff available to solely
dedicate to TAP
• Because of “Fiscal Constraint”, there is pressure to
obligate all available funds within a FY
• Pressure to show value of projects
Answer:
DOT/MPO Collaboration
• MDOT and SEMCOG began meeting to coordinate
respective TAP’s
• MDOT Selection Advisory Committee utilized by
SEMCOG for project comment and technical review
• Schedules have been coordinated to fully integrate
MDOT’s Selection Advisory Team into SEMCOG’s
TAP application process
• SEMCOG funded some projects from MDOT’s FY
2013 Conditional Commitment list
Answer:
DOT/MPO Collaboration
• SEMCOG (and the 5 other Large MPO’s in MI)
adopted the MDOT Grant System for TAP applications
and review documentation
• Monthly meetings are held between MDOT and MPO’s
to discuss the implementation status of all TAP projects
(MPO selected and MDOT selected)
• Reports have been developed to track project progress
through the grant application, review, selection, and
implementation processes
Advantages:
MDOT’s perspective
• Win-win for customers! One application, DOT and
MPO’s will coordinate reviews and negotiate
funding
• MDOT grant system makes statewide TAP
reporting much more efficient
• More collaboration can lead to better projects that
are more likely to be implemented
• “$ on the ground”, benefitting MI communities
• Good government in action!
Advantages:
SEMCOG’s perspective
• Staff time savings - didn’t have to “reinvent the
wheel”
• Did not require a new application portal
• Take advantage of MDOT’s experience with TE and
SRTS projects
• Builds even more professional links between MDOT
and SEMCOG
• SEMCOG can consider funding all or part
of an application submitted to MDOT, and
vice versa
Other Advantages
• Jointly funding projects – MPO’s use all or a portion
of their suballocated TAP funding and MDOT uses
“Any Area” funds on the same project
• Helps the Large MPO’s with small TAP suballocations
(examples: Niles area receives $43,000/year from the
South Bend, IN urbanized area and Kalamazoo receives
$246,000/year)
• So far, MDOT and the MPO’s have jointly funded 6
TAP projects
• More collaboration likely
Other Advantages
• Proactive and joint approach to outreach/education
of TAP to public
• Two TAP workshops held
• Focus on best practices, advice to getting projects funded, &
technical assistance on navigating both MGS and eligibility
requirements
• One specific to SRTS - changes under MAP-21/TAP, planning
process, eligibility, case studies
• Ongoing MDOT/SEMCOG outreach to communities
• Emphasis on meeting prior to application (recommendations;
potential other funding sources; meeting match requirements;
etc.)
Important Notes
• MDOT and MPO’s still retain separate competitive
selection processes
• See MDOT’s competitiveness criteria at:
www.michigan.gov/tap
www.saferoutesmichigan.org
• See SEMCOG’s competitiveness criteria at:
www.semcog.org/TAPCall.aspx
• Former TE activities and SRTS are still being treated as
two separate programs at the DOT level, however, they
share the same review schedules
• RTP is still being administered by the MDNR
Eligible Activities
On-road and off-road trail facilities for pedestrians,
bicyclists, and other nonmotorized forms of
transportation including:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Sidewalks
Bicycle infrastructure
Pedestrian and bicycle signals
Traffic calming techniques
Lighting and other safety-related infrastructure
ADA compliance
Eligible Activities
Examples: Pedestrian/Bicycle Facilities
Marine City
Broadway
Streetscape
Detroit Midtown Loop
Eligible Activities
Examples: Pedestrian/Bicycle Facilities
South Lyon Southwest Connector
Detroit Riverwalk at
Milliken State Park
Eligible Activities
Examples: Pedestrian/Bicycle Facilities
Macomb Orchard Trail Bridge over M-53
DDOT Bike Racks on Buses
Eligible Activities
Examples: Pedestrian/Bicycle Facilities
Detroit West Vernor
Bike Lanes
Eligible Activities
Infrastructure-related projects and systems that will
provide safe routes for non-drivers including
children, older adults, and individuals with
disabilities to access daily needs
Eligible Activities
Conversion and use of abandoned railroad
corridors for trails for nonmotorized users.
Detroit Dequindre
Cut Greenway
Polly Ann Trail
Eligible Activities
Construction of turnouts and overlooks
M-26 Great Sand Bay
Overlook
M-25 White Rock Overlook
Eligible Activities
Community improvement activities, including:
• Inventory, control, or removal of outdoor advertising
• Preservation and rehabilitation of historic transportation facilities
• Vegetation management practices in transportation rights-ofway to improve roadway safety, prevent against invasive
species, and provide erosion control
• Archeological activities relating to impacts from implementation
of transportation projects eligible under title 23.
Houghton Historic
Brick Street
Eligible Activities
Any environmental mitigation activity, including
pollution prevention and pollution abatement
activities and mitigation to:
• Address stormwater management, control and water pollution
prevention or abatement related to highway construction or due
to highway runoff, including activities described in sections
133(b)(11), 328(a), and 329 of title 23
• Reduce vehicle-caused wildlife mortality or to restore and
maintain connectivity among terrestrial or aquatic habitats
http://youtu.be/kLYX6tp_6zg
Grand Rapids Plainfield
Avenue Bio-retention Basins
Match Requirements
• 20 percent minimum from non-federal sources
• Encourage partnerships with foundations,
businesses, nonprofits
• Higher match is welcomed
Eligible Entities
• Southeast Michigan Act 51 agencies are
eligible to submit projects
•
•
•
•
County road agencies
Cities/villages
Transit agencies
Others through eligible entities (need
Sponsorship Agreement)
Master Grant System (MGS)
TAP Online Application
Application Process
• Discuss your project idea with MDOT/SEMCOG
• Online application: MDOT Grant System
• Register at https://sso.state.mi.us/
Application Process
MDOT Timeline
MDOT Project
Competitiveness Details
Please visit www.michigan.gov/tap for TAP
Competitiveness Details
Please visit www.saferoutesmichigan.org for SRTS
Competitiveness Details
Discuss project with an MDOT or MFF grant
coordinator
Project Implementation
MDOT Local Agency Programs (LAP) will assist you
through the federal aid implementation process
www.michigan.gov/mdotlap
Contacts
• Bruce Kadzban, P.E. LAP Manager
•
517.335.2229 | [email protected]
• Landon Johnson, P.E. LAP Staff Engineer
517.335.6779 | [email protected]
Project Implementation
Construction Phase - Federal funding requirements
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Davis Bacon wage rates
1999/2012 AASHTO design standards
2011 Michigan Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MMUTCD)
Environmental clearance
•
Permits
•
SHPO approval
•
Right of way certification
Historic Preservation Covenant
Matching funds must comply w/ FHWA
Resolution from transportation agency governing body to certify a
fully funded project and maintenance
Competitive bid process through MDOT Local Agency
Programs (LAP) referred to as the MDOT let process
Project Implementation
Construction Phase - MDOT letting process
•
•
Letting Schedule found at www.michigan.gov/mdotlap
Complete Grade Inspection (GI) package must be submitted to LAP
• Plans (80% complete)
• Special provisions
• Cost estimate
• Programming application (MDOT form #0259)
Contact Us
SEMCOG Contacts:
•
•
•
•
Kevin Vettraino, TAP
313.324.3357 | [email protected]
Kajal Patel, SRTS
313.324.3329 | [email protected]
MDOT Contacts (TAP):
•
•
Vince Ranger, Grant Coordinator
248.483.5130 | [email protected]
MFF Contacts (SRTS):

Adrianna Jordan, Grant Coordinator
517.908.3826 | [email protected]
Questions?