STI Prioritization and Programming Process Brendan Merithew, NCDOT Division 13 Steve Williams, NCDOT Division 14 August 10, 2017

Strategic Prioritization Funding Plan for Transportation Investments. “Article 14B. Strategic Prioritization Funding Plan for Transportation Investments. § 136-189.10. Definitions. The following definitions apply in this Article: Goal of this slide is to visualize (at a very high level) how the STI legislation specifies not only that projects will be prioritized and ranked by scoring, but also how the funds will be divided for programming. These parameters lead to the development of the STIP (next slide). $ Statewide Mobility Regional Impact Division Needs

2 Volumes Volume 1 (Divisions 1-7) Volume 2 (Divisions 8-14)

Today’s Roadmap State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) STI Prioritization and Programming Process Today’s Roadmap State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) Strategic Transportation Investments (STI) Law P5.0 Scoring Scoring and Programming Process P5.0 for YOUR RPO

State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP)

State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) STI Prioritization and Programming Process State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) STIP identifies funding and scheduling of projects in NCDOT’s capital program (55% of DOT Budget) 10 Year Program (currently 2018-2027) 1st Five Years is “Delivery STIP” – committed projects 2nd Five Years is “Developmental STIP” – projects in early scoping and environmental development stage Updated every 2 years Current STIP contains over $28 Billion of projects Highway, non-highway, bridges, safety, Interstate Maintenance, CMAQ Alternate criteria projects (bridges, safety, IM, etc.) are evaluated by NCDOT experts, who have defined ways to evaluate/prioritize those projects CMAQ (Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program)

Types of Projects in the STIP STI Prioritization and Programming Process Types of Projects in the STIP Statewide Mobility Projects Exempt programs and transition projects Regional Impact Projects STIP The STIP is built in sections, reflecting the structure of the STI law. Alternate criteria - bridges, IM, CMAQ, etc. Transition period projects - ones that were far into the pipeline and not subject to STI (let dates were scheduled before July 2015) Division Needs Projects Alternate Criteria Projects

Strategic Transportation Investments Law

Strategic Transportation Investments (STI) Law STI Prioritization and Programming Process Strategic Transportation Investments (STI) Law Prioritizes Capital Expenditures across all modes (Mobility/Expansion + Modernization) Needs-based Directly ties funding to Prioritization Results Workgroup Funds come primarily from the Highway Trust Fund (primarily Highway Use Tax and DMV fees) Needs-based = data-driven (combination of quantitative data and local input) and removes politics from decision making process Workgroup – STI law formally recognizes its use – makes recommendations on how projects should be scored in Prioritization process

How STI Works 40% of Funds 30% of Funds 30% of Funds STI Prioritization and Programming Process How STI Works 40% of Funds 30% of Funds 30% of Funds Estimated $23B in Funds for SFY 2018-2027 Statewide Mobility Focus  Address Significant Congestion and Bottlenecks Selection based on 100% Data Projects Programmed prior to Local Input Ranking Regional Impact Focus  Improve Connectivity within Regions Selection based on 70% Data & 30% Local Input Funding based on population within Region (7) Division Needs Focus  Address Local Needs Selection based on 50% Data & 50% Local Input Funding based on equal share for each Division (14) = ~$42M / yr Emphasize the cascading possibility of projects from Statewide Mobility to Regional Impact to Division Needs

regions & divisions STI Prioritization and Programming Process 2 Highway Divisions make up a Funding Region

STI Law Eligibility Definitions STI Prioritization and Programming Process STI Law Eligibility Definitions  Mode Statewide Mobility Highway Interstates (existing & future) NHS routes (July 1, 2012) STRAHNET ADHS Routes Uncompleted Intrastate projects Designated Toll Facilities Aviation Large Commercial Service Airports ($500K cap) Bicycle-Pedestrian N/A Public Transportation Ferry Rail Freight Capacity Service on Class I Railroad Corridors Regional Impact Other US and NC Routes Other Commercial Service Airports not in Statewide ($300K cap) N/A Service spanning two or more counties (10% cap) Ferry expansion Rail service spanning two or more counties not Statewide Division Needs All County (SR) Routes All Airports without Commercial Service ($18.5M cap) All projects ($0 state funds) All other service, including terminals and stations Replacement vessels Rail service not included on Statewide or Regional NHS = National Highway System STRAHNET = Military Routes ADHS = Appalachian Development Highway System - Any project on a “shielded route” (US or NC) will at least qualify for Regional Funding

P5.0 Scoring

P5.0 Highway Criteria & Weights (Default) STI Prioritization and Programming Process P5.0 Highway Criteria & Weights (Default) Funding Category QUANTITATIVE LOCAL INPUT Data Division MPO/RPO Statewide Mobility Congestion = 30% Benefit-Cost = 25% Freight = 25% Safety = 10% Economic Comp. = 10% -- 100% Regional Impact Congestion = 20% Benefit-Cost = 20% Safety = 10% Accessibility/Connectivity = 10% Freight = 10% 70% 15% Workgroup also defined the default weight for each criteria Slide also displays the relationship of the quantitative data vs. local input Division Needs Congestion = 15% Benefit-Cost = 15% Safety = 10% Accessibility/Connectivity = 5% Freight = 5% 50% 25% Note: Divisions 13, 14 and Planning Organizations have discussed use of Alternate Criteria & Weights

P5.0 Highway Scoring – Alternate Weights STI Prioritization and Programming Process P5.0 Highway Scoring – Alternate Weights Available for Regional Impact and Division Needs scoring Requirements: All MPOs/RPOs/Division Engineers unanimously agree on Alternate Weights by funding category (inaction does not mean non-agreement; action by TAC or DE is required for disagreement) Alternate Weights from P4.0 will not carry to P5.0 Within respective Paired Funding Region(s) or Division(s) Memo to SPOT from each MPO/RPO/Division Engineer – reference TAC Chair(s) agreement Memo must be received by September 29th, 2017

P5.0 Proposed Alternate Criteria (Division Needs Tier Only) STI Prioritization and Programming Process P5.0 Proposed Alternate Criteria (Division Needs Tier Only) Funding Category QUANTITATIVE LOCAL INPUT Data Division MPO/RPO Proposed Alternate Criteria within Division 13 Division Needs Congestion = 15% Benefit-Cost = 15% Safety = 10% 15% Accessibility/Connectivity = 5% 0% Freight = 5% 50% 25% Proposed Alternate Criteria within Division 14 Division Needs Congestion = 15% Benefit-Cost = 15% Safety = 10% Accessibility/Connectivity = 5% 0% Freight = 5% 0% Pavement Condition= 10% 50% 25%

P5.0 Non-Highway Criteria STI Prioritization and Programming Process P5.0 Non-Highway Criteria Aviation NCDOA Project Rating FAA ACIP Rating Non-State Contribution Index Benefit/Cost Bicycle & Pedestrian Safety Access Demand/Density Connectivity Cost Effectiveness Ferry Asset Condition Benefits Accessibility/ Connectivity Asset Efficiency Capacity/ Congestion Public Transportation Impact Demand/Density Efficiency Cost Effectiveness Rail Benefit-Cost System Opportunities Safety Capacity and Diversion Economic Competitiveness Objective of this slide is to simply display names of criteria so that general intent is understood Each Non-Highway mode must have at minimum 4 criteria (as required in the STI Law)

Scoring and Programming Process

Scoring Process Projects Submitted Statewide Mobility Regional Impact STI Prioritization and Programming Process Scoring Process Projects Submitted Data reviewed Quantitative scores calculated Statewide Mobility Projects programmed based on quant. score Regional Impact Local input points assigned Total scores calculated Projects programmed Division Needs This slide outlines the step-by-step process and flow from project submittal to programming all projects After scoring projects, quantitative scores are sent to the TIP unit Statewide Mobility projects that are not programmed cascade to Regional Impact to be eligible for Local Input Points Regional Impact projects that are not programmed cascade to Division Needs to be eligible for Local Input Points Local input points assigned Total scores calculated Projects programmed

Prioritization Ranking & Normalization Project Development Time STI Prioritization and Programming Process How the STIP is Developed Prioritization Ranking & Normalization Funding Category Allocations Committed Projects STIP Project Development Time STI Law Provisions After the total scores are calculated in Prioritization, there are many factors that come into play in developing a STIP. Primary impacts include (go in a circle clockwise): Prioritization scoring/ranking and adherence to the normalization thresholds (allocation of funds between Highway and Non-Highway) Intent of STI law is to pick the best projects, regardless of mode – but comparing them is difficult, so we implement normalization (minimum % of funds to Highway and NonHwy) Committed Projects – account for those already in the pipeline not subject to reprioritization (those in the first 5 years of the previous STIP) Adherence to the STI Law provisions – includes a series of caps (ex. corridor cap) and cascade-related implications Project development time is always a major constraint. Scheduling ROW and Const dates are highly dependent on the Preconstruction process and status of Environmental documents. The project with the highest Prioritization score may have no environmental work done, and must be schedule for year 9, but the project with the 10th highest Prioritization score may be ready to go and can be scheduled in an earlier year. Funding category allocations – being aware of the amounts available by category (Statewide, Regional, and Division) and by year. Also, Federal and State revenues must be adjusted to account for transfers, paying back debt service, accounting for projects under alternate prioritization such as IM and Bridges. We must also adhere to Federal requirements to produce a fiscally constrained STIP

STI Prioritization and Programming Process P5.0 Schedule WE ARE HERE

P5.0 for LAND OF SKY RPO

P5.0 Projects Committed Projects (Not subject to P5.0) STI Prioritization and Programming Process P5.0 Projects Committed Projects (Not subject to P5.0) Right-of-Way OR Construction date in first five years of STIP, 2018-2022. Example: R-5763, Upgrade Wilson Road in Transylvania Co. (ROW, 2019, Construction, 2021) Carryover Projects (Automatically Rescored in P5.0) Example: Widen US 25 from NC 251 to Smith Hollow Road in Madison County (SPOT ID H111159-A) Project Submittals (# Based on CL Miles and Population) 15 Submittals for each mode Splitting Carryover Project count towards submittals (“Segmenting” one project into two or more projects) Carryovers = Projects programmed in the STIP but not Committed (essentially the last 5 years) Siblings of programmed projects (ex. section A was programmed, but sections B and C were not – B and C are Carryover) NEPA document completed in last 10 years or currently worked on Divisions also receive their own project submittals

Most Importantly – Continue to Work with Divisions 13 &14 STI Prioritization and Programming Process P5.0 Next Steps Determine Project Submittals (submitted July 5th – Sept 29th) Consider Modifications & Deletions of carryover projects (due Aug 25th) Consider use of Alternate Weights (agreements by Sept 29th) Submit LIP Methodology revisions, if any (approved by April 1st, 2018) Assign Local Input Points for Regional Impact projects (Spring 2018) 1100 points Assign Local Input Points for Division Needs projects (Fall 2018) Division 13 Points: 2000 (7 Counties, including 3 RPOs and 2 MPOs) Division 14 Points: 1700 (10 Counties, including 3 RPOs and 1 MPO) Most Importantly – Continue to Work with Divisions 13 &14 Division will also have their own number of points to assign in Regional Impact and Division Needs

spot@ncdot.gov (David, Sarah, Jason) STI Prioritization and Programming Process Contact Information Vicki Eastland Land of Sky RPO Coordinator (828) 251-7450 vicki.eastland@landofsky.org David Wasserman, P.E. Prioritization Office (SPOT) / STIP Western Region Manager (919) 707-4743 dswasserman@ncdot.gov Sarah E. Lee Prioritization Office (SPOT) (919) 707-4742 selee@ncdot.gov Jason Schronce, P.E. (919) 707-4646 jschronce@ncdot.gov https://www.ncdot.gov/sti spot@ncdot.gov (David, Sarah, Jason) Brendan Merithew, P.E. Division 13 Planning Engineer (828) 251-6171 bwmerithew@ncdot.gov Steve Williams Division 14 Planning Engineer (828) 586-2141 sjwilliams@ncdot.gov

Highway Scoring – Eligible Criteria with P5.0 Measures STI Prioritization and Programming Process Highway Scoring – Eligible Criteria with P5.0 Measures Criteria Measure Existing Conditions Project Benefits (Future Conditions) Congestion Volume/Capacity + Volume Benefit / Cost (Travel Time Savings + Safety Benefits) / Cost to NCDOT Safety Score Critical Crash Rate, Density, Severity, Safety Benefits Economic Competitiveness % Change in Jobs + % Change in County Economy Accessibility / Connectivity County Economic Indicator, Improve Mobility Freight Truck Volume, Truck %, Future Interstate Completion Multimodal Multimodal Benefits Lane Width Existing Width vs. Standard Width Shoulder Width Pavement Score Pavement Condition Rating Workgroup defined measures to use for scoring each criteria 26 26