HB2 Quick Guide To view the latest version of the HB2 Policy Guide:

Similar documents
SMART SCALE Policy Guide

Purpose. Funding. Eligible Projects

SMART SCALE Application Guide

ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA. County Board Agenda Item Meeting of July 14, 2018

HB2 Application Guide

HB2 Update October, 2014

Project Selection Policy Update. Philip Schaffner June 20, 2018

Long Range Land Use Plan Map and Classifications

Submission: House Bill2 Legislation and Implementation

LAP Manual 7-1 February 2014 Compliance Assessment Program Requirements

OF VIRGINIA S FY2018-FY2021 STATEWIDE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM

AGENDA Rural Technical Advisory Committee Tuesday, February 16 th, :00 p.m. Water Street Center, 401 East Water Street, Charlottesville

FAMPO RSTP AND CMAQ FUNDING PROJECT SELECTION AND PRIORITIZATION CRITERIA METHODOLOGY

TRANSPORTATION ALTERNATIVES (TA) SET ASIDE PROGRAM July 2016

3. Update on the North Winchester Area Plan John Madera, NSVRC & Terry Short, VDOT

2018 Regional Project Evaluation Criteria For PSRC s FHWA Funds

PROJECT SELECTION Educational Series

2018 Call for Projects Guidebook

Funding Programs / Applications A Help Guide on Obtaining Federal and State Funds Breakout Session #3

Highway Safety Improvement Program Procedures Manual

NC General Statutes - Chapter 136 Article 19 1

Welcome to the WebEx. The presentation for the 2018 Unified Transportation Program (UTP) Public Meeting will begin shortly.

2040 Transportation Policy Plan Update. Council Committee of the Whole December 6, 2017

Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) Fiscal Year

SMALL CITY PROGRAM. ocuments/forms/allitems.

ADMINISTRATIVE CODE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

Summary of. Overview. existing law. to coal ash. billion in FY. funding in FY 2013 FY 2014

Caltrans Sustainable Transportation Planning Grant Program

DEPARTMENT OF RAIL AND PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION REPORT ON AUDIT FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2005

Update on Transportation Funding and Potential Sources for Additional Revenue. June 19, 2017

2018 POLICY FRAMEWORK FOR PSRC S FEDERAL FUNDS

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS BUSINESS MEETING ACTION ITEM

Expected Roadway Project Crash Reductions for SMART SCALE Safety Factor Evaluation. September 2016

Special State Funding Programs Breakout Session #5C Funding Programs Track. October 25, 2012

HIGH COUNTRY RURAL PLANNING ORGANIZATION (RPO) 2015 STIP PROJECT SOLICITATION AND RANKING PROCESS

PROJECT DELIVERY MODELS ARKANSAS PLANNING RETREAT ON P3S. J. Douglas Koelemay, Director October 7, 2015

I-66 Inside the Beltway Initial Traffic Analysis and Framework Agreement

Appendix E Federal and State Funding Categories

FY 2018 Application Support Guide

Update on HB2 Preparation. Presentation to FAMPO May, 2016

Transportation Improvement Program. Mid-America Regional Council Transportation Department

AGENDA Rural Transportation Advisory Committee Tuesday, September 20 th, :00 p.m. Water Street Center, 401 East Water Street, Charlottesville

Surface Transportation Program (STP) Project Prioritization & Selection Process. For the Tulsa Urbanized Area. Revised December 22, 2017

Together: Planning for Transportation. Collaborating to Address Transportation and Economic Resilience

George Washington Region Scenario Planning Study Phase II

Overview of the Procurement and Project Milestones

Module 2 Planning and Programming

LPA Programs How They Work

Capital District September 26, 2017 Transportation Committee. The Community and Transportation Linkage Planning Program for

Value Engineering Program Administration Manual (05/16/2018)

2014 TRAC Funding Application. Cost ODOT greater than $12 million dollars Increase roadway capacity or reduce congestion.

2016 DOT Discretionary Grants

DCHC MPO Funding Source Overview & Guidance draft January 2015

PARTNERSHIPS ACCELERATE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT & JOB CREATION. J. Douglas Koelemay, Director

Route 58 PPTA Project Finance Plan Annual Update Hillsville to Stuart Corridor. Submitted By:

HIGH COUNTRY RURAL PLANNING ORGANIZATION (RPO) 2014 STIP PROJECT SOLICITATION AND RANKING PROCESS

Falling Forward: A Guide to the FAST Act

HOW DOES A PROJECT GET INTO THE STIP?

Highway Safety Program Update

2007 Annual List of Obligated Projects

A FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DISTRICTS FOUR AND SIX COMMUTER SERVICES SCOPE OF SERVICES

Virginia Association of Counties

Urban Construction Initiative Annual Meeting Minutes City of Harrisonburg May 20 th and 21 st, 2015

KYOVA Interstate Planning Commission

SAFETEA-LU. Overview. Background

Oregon Statewide Transportation Improvement Program. STIP Users Guide

Appendix 5 Freight Funding Programs

Transportation Demand Management Workshop Region of Peel. Stuart M. Anderson David Ungemah Joddie Gray July 11, 2003

Economic Vitality and Quality of Life Unlocking Hampton Roads HRTAC Overview Kevin B. Page Executive Director

2018 STP & CMAQ Project Selection Process

FLORENCE AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY

Project Selection Advisory Council

National Capital Region Transportation Planning Board

Jessica Monahan Associate Legislative Director Transportation, NACo. Michael Paddock Chief Executive Officer, Grants Office

SUNIGA/LEMAY MULTI-MODAL AND FREIGHT CONNECTIVITY PROJECT

Is Virginia Meeting Its Needs for Transportation?

States Approaches to Transportation Project Prioritization

Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MassDOT) Route 3 South Managed Lanes Project DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY

Charlottesville-Albemarle Metropolitan Planning Organization

Welcome to the WebEx. The presentation for the 2019 Unified Transportation Program (UTP) Public Meeting will begin shortly.

Understanding the. Program

Association of Metropolitan Planning Organizations Fixing America s Surface Transportation (FAST) Act

Transportation. Fiscal Research Division. March 24, Justification Review

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS

County of Fairfax, Virginia

Overview of the Regional Transportation Improvement Program

2018 Project Selection Process

APPENDIX METROFUTURE OVERVIEW OVERVIEW

South Dakota Transportation Alternatives

Surface Transportation Program (STP) Project Prioritization & Selection Process. For the Tulsa Urbanized Area. Revised July 31, 2013

COMMUTER CONNECTIONS TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT EVALUATION PROJECT

Future Trends & Themes Summary. Presented to Executive Steering Committee: April 12, 2017

ATTACHMENT G-1 LOS ANGELES COUNTY REGIONAL ITS ARCHITECTURE CONSISTENCY SELF-CERTIFICATION FORM

TRI-CITIES AREA TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM. Fiscal Years

AGENDA. Regional Transportation Council Thursday, September 13, 2018 North Central Texas Council of Governments

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS. Uptown Main Street/US 25 Traffic Calming Analysis. Date Issued: June 5, 2018

Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization Project Call

MiTIP APPLICATION PACKET

FUNDING POLICY GUIDELINES

Roanoke Valley Area Metropolitan Planning Organization

Transcription:

HB2 Quick Guide To view the latest version of the HB2 Policy Guide: http://virginiahb2.com/resources.html What funds are available to projects through HB2? (See Policy Guide Section 1.0 1.1 and Policy Guide Section 2.0) There are two main pathways to funding within the HB2 process the Construction District Grant Program and the High-Priority Projects Program. These two grant programs were established this year under House Bill 1887. The Construction District Grant Program (CDGP) is open only to localities and replaces the old 40-30-30 construction fund allocation model. A project applying for funds from the CDGP is prioritized with projects from the same construction district. A project applying for funds from the HPPP is prioritized with projects statewide. The Commonwealth Transportation Board (CTB) then makes a final decision on which projects to fund. Who is eligible to submit projects? (See Policy Guide Section 2.0) Projects may be submitted by regional entities including Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) and Planning District Commissions (PDCs), along with public transit agencies; counties; and cities and towns that maintain their own infrastructure. Table 2.1: Eligibility to Submit Projects Project Type Corridor of Statewide Significance (CoSS) Regional Entity (MPOs, PDCs) Yes Regional Network Yes Yes Locality* (Counties, Cities, Towns) Yes, with a resolution of support from relevant regional entity Urban Development Area (UDA) No Yes No Public Transit Agencies Yes, with resolution of support from relevant regional entity Yes, with resolution of support from relevant regional entity * Localities are also eligible to submit projects addressing a safety need identified in VTrans 2040 under the District Grant Program What projects are eligible for HB2 funding? (See Policy Guide Section 2.0) Though all of these entities may submit projects, there are limitations on the types of projects they can submit. Project types included: Highway improvements Widening Operational improvements Access management Intelligent transportation systems Transit and rail capacity expansion Transportation demand management Park & Ride facilities Project types excluded: Asset management Asset management Bridge repair/replacement Pavement repair/replacement Guardrail replacement/upgrade 1

How does the screening process work? (See Policy Guide Section 2.2) Once a project has been submitted, it will be screened by a technical evaluation team to verify its conformance to the above table (Policy Guide Table 2.1) and to ensure that the project meets the capacity and operations needs of VTrans2040. VTrans 2040 divides the Commonwealth s needs into three types; each receives their own set of principles: 1. Corridors of Statewide Significance (CoSS) Interregional travel market 2. Regional Networks Intraregional travel market 3. Urban Development Areas (UDA) Local activity center market 4. Safety Need Figure 2: Map of CoSS, Regional Networks, and UDA Study Areas In general, submitted projects must meet a need for network on which the project is proposed. Further details and screening criteria for each project type can be found in Section 2.2 of the HB2 Policy Guide. How are projects scored? (See Policy Guide Section 4.5) Projects are only scored after they pass through the screening process. A scoring evaluation team will then take the project and begin collecting additional data required for evaluating each of the six factors required by HB2 legislation. After the data has been collected for each project sufficient to evaluate each factor, factor scores will be calculated and weighted according to the typology of the project location. After factor scores have been weighted and summed, the final score will be determined by dividing the total factor score by the HB2 cost (project score relative to total cost also will be provided 2

as supplemental information to the CTB). Projects will then be ranked and provided to the CTB for funding consideration. Throughout this process, several teams will perform quality assurance/quality control tasks to maintain consistency and integrity in project scoring. What are the factor areas and measures? (See Policy Guide Section 3.0 3.6 and Appendices A through F) There are six factors required by HB2 legislation. Each factor is made up of several measures that quantify the benefit of a given project for that factor area. The factors with their respective measures are: Congestion Mitigation Economic Development Accessibility Safety Environmental Quality Land Use * (*Only applicable to Area Types A and B) Person throughput Person hours of delay Project consistency with economic development plans, local support, and development activity Intermodal access and efficiency Improving travel time reliability Access to work destinations Access to jobs for disadvantaged populations Access to multimodal choices Expected reduction in the number of fatal and severe injury crashes Expected reduction in the rate of fatal and severe injury per 100 million vehicle miles traveled Air quality and energy environmental effect Impact to natural and cultural resources Land use policy consistency What are the Area Typologies and how are they used? (See Policy Guide Section 4.3) Area typologies are used to evaluate each project s benefit on a scale relative to the needs of that region. Four area typologies with associated factor weighting have been established to meet the various needs across the Commonwealth as shown in Table 4.2. Table 4.2: Factor Weights by Category Factor Congestion Mitigation Economic Development Accessibility Safety Environmental Quality Land Use Category A 45% 5% 15% 5% 10% 20% Category B 15% 20% 25% 20% 10% 10% Category C 15% 25% 25% 25% 10% Category D 10% 35% 15% 30% 10% 3

Figure 4.2: PDC MPO Factor Weighting Typology Map What information will applicants have to provide, and what information is provided by the state? (See Policy Guide Section 2.3) The most critical information that will be needed for each submitted project is a well-defined scope and project description and a reasonable cost estimate. A well-defined scope is needed to calculate many of the measure that will be used to evaluate the project benefit. A detailed scope is critical to having a reasonable cost estimate. If a project is selected for funding and the cost increases significantly ($5,000,000 or less >20 percent increase, $5,000,001 to $10,000,000 >= $1,000,000 increase, greater than $10,000,000 >10% increase), the project will have to be rescored through the process. Though the State will be using many different data sources to compile the data and calculate the measures needed to score the projects, there will be some measure-related data that must be provided by the applicant. Table 2.2 provides an overview of what measures will be the responsibility of the state versus the applicant. What is the general schedule for HB2? (See Policy Guide Section 1.4 and Figure 1.1) All projects must be submitted by September 30th. Prior to submittal, all entities are encouraged to coordinate with their local Virginia Department of Transportation and Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation representatives. Projects may be submitted via the online web application any time from August 1st September 30th. Once all projects have been submitted, evaluation teams will work through December to screen and score all projects and provide project rankings to the CTB in January. 4

Table 2.2: HB2 Measure Data Responsibility All Measures Detailed description of improvement Project location Responsibility State Applicant Safety S1. Reduction in # of Fatal and Severe Injury Crashes S2. Reduction in # of Fatal and Severe Injury Crash Rate * Congestion Mitigation C1. Increase in Person Throughput * C2. Decrease in Person Hours Delay * Accessibility A1. Increase Access to Jobs A2. Access to jobs for disadvantaged population A3. Checklist of multimodal elements included in the project (transit, bike/ped, park&ride, etc.) A3. Number of non-sov users * Environment E1. Checklist of project elements that contribute to reduced pollutant emissions and/or energy use (transit, bike/ped, park&ride, energy-efficient facilities, etc.) E1. Location of improvement on roadways with truck use > 8% E1. Improvements that benefit freight rail or intermodal facilities E2. Environmental/Natural resource impacts Economic Development ED1. Transportation project consistency with Local Comprehensive Plan or Local Economic Development Strategy ED1. Transportation project consistency with Regional Economic Development Strategy ED1. List of Development projects supported by the transportation improvement (within roughly 1 mile) including description, square footage, distance from the transportation project, and directness of access that the transportation improvement provides ED1. Development project consistency with locality Comprehensive Plan/Zoning ED1. Development project site plan status ED1. Development project site utilities status ED2. Improve access to distribution, intermodal and manufacturing facilities ED2. Improve STAA truck route ED2. Improve access reduce congestion ports/airports ED2. Tonnage (1000's) per day ED3. Improvement in Travel Time Reliability Land Use and Transportation Coordination L1. Promotes walk/bike-friendly, mixed-use development L1. Promotes in-fill development L1. Corridor/Access management plan that exceeds VDOT standards * On non-vdot roadway facilities, the applicant will need to provide year 2025 peak period volume data. For nonroadway (transit, park & ride, bike/pedestrian) projects, applicant will need to provide expected year 2025 peak period usage. Applicants will be encouraged to provide supplemental data and analysis, but will not be required. 5

The CTB will review the evaluated projects for inclusion into the Six-Year Improvement Program (SYIP) with the draft SYIP released in April 2015. April through June will be public hearings and revisions to the SYIP with the adoption of the final SYIP in June 2015. See the draft cycle below: Figure 1.1: Anticipated HB2 Yearly Cycle 6