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

2. Strategic Prioritization Funding Plan for Transportation Investments.
“Article 14B.
Strategic Prioritization Funding Plan for Transportation Investments.
§ 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

3. 2 Volumes
Volume 1 (Divisions 1-7)
Volume 2 (Divisions 8-14)

4. 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

5. State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP)

6. 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 )
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)

7. 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

8. Strategic Transportation Investments Law

9. 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

10. 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
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

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

12. 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

13. P5.0 Scoring

14. 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

15. 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

16. 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%

17. 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)

18. Scoring and Programming Process

19. 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

20. 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

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

22. P5.0 for LAND OF SKY RPO

23. 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,
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 H 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

24. 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

25. spot@ncdot.gov (David, Sarah, Jason)
STI Prioritization and Programming Process
Contact Information
Vicki Eastland
Land of Sky RPO
Coordinator
(828)
David Wasserman, P.E.
Prioritization Office (SPOT) / STIP Western Region Manager
(919)
Sarah E. Lee
Prioritization Office (SPOT)
(919)
Jason Schronce, P.E.
(919)
(David, Sarah, Jason)
Brendan Merithew, P.E.
Division 13 Planning Engineer
(828)
Steve Williams
Division 14 Planning Engineer
(828)

26. 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