Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21 st Century (MAP-21) Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP) ATP 6 Discussion June 28, 2013
Minnesota Overview: MAP-21 vs. SAFETEA-LU Overall apportionment consistent with FY 2012 funding Matching requirements vary by program but resemble SAFETEA-LU requirements Population-based formulas for STP and TAP TAP requires a competitive grant process Up to 50% of apportionment from each program can be transferred among the six core programs Enhanced emphasis on performance measurement (incl. minimum condition levels)
Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP) Incorporates eligibilities from many current programs Most (but not all) formerly TE-eligible activities Recreational Trails program Safe Routes to School (SRTS) program Planning, designing, or constructing roadways within the right-of-way of former Interstate and divided highways Total TAP funds equal to 2% of MAP-21 highway funding Funded via takedown from each state s formula funds
On-road and off-road trail facilities for pedestrians, bicyclists, and other non-motorized forms of transportation Transportation projects to achieve Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 compliance Safe routes for non-drivers, including children, older adults, and individuals with disabilities to access daily needs. Conversion and use of abandoned railroad corridors
Construction of turnouts, overlooks, and viewing areas Inventory, control, or removal of outdoor advertising Historic preservation and rehabilitation of historic transportation facilities Archaeological activities
Vegetation management to improve roadway safety Vegetation management to provide erosion control Reduce vehicle-caused wildlife mortality or restore/maintain habitat connectivity Environmental mitigation to address storm water management
Recreational trails program Safe Routes to School
Transportation activities no longer eligible for TAP funding: Scenic easements Transportation museums Visitor centers Marketing and marketing plans Interpretive plans Scenic Byway corridor management plans Bicycling and pedestrian safety and education programs for adults. Adult safety and education programs are eligible under the Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) and the Surface Transportation Program (STP).
Minnesota State Legislature (2013) Statute 174.42 Transportation Alternative Projects MnDOT is required to deliver as much (or more) in transportation alternatives projects as they have in the previous fiscal years MPR This provision now creates a risk for the Commissioner in how transportation alternative projects can be delivered within the overall program 99% of these projects are delivered by locals Historically 66% of all transportation alternative projects are not being delivered
How projects are selected on a statewide level Safe Routes to School: Project development, solicitation and selection process Local team defines SRTS planning or construction goals Local team submits planning or construction grant application to SRTS coordinators MnDOT Transit and State Aid for Local Transportation (SALT) Office reviews and selects planning or construction projects
How projects are selected on a statewide level Scenic Byway: Project development, solicitation and selection process Local byway team defines eligible planning or construction projects Local byway team submits eligible planning or construction grant application to MnDOT Scenic Byway Coordinator MnDOT Environmental Stewardship Office and the Minnesota Scenic Byway Commission reviews and ranks planning or construction projects FHWA DC Office reviews and selects planning or construction projects
How will this input be used?
Discussion Format: Review key strengths and weaknesses identified through the outreach meetings last month and thoughts they had on decision making at regional and statewide levels Discuss ways for ATPs to capitalize on strengths and mitigate weaknesses Review feasibility of ATPs delivering projects formally outside of their scope