1. Program Development Session F-1 The Metropolitan Transportation Planning Process

2. Session F-1 - Slide 2 Session Objectives  Define what is meant by “programming”  Identify common elements in programming  Describe how programming leads to the TIP

3. Key Elements of the Planning Process Session F-1 - Slide 3 Problem Identification Problem Identification Objectives & MOEs Objectives & MOEs Visioning & Goals Visioning & Goals Analysis & Evaluation Analysis & Evaluation Alternatives Monitoring Plan Approval Project Development & Operation Project Development & Operation The Public The Public Program Development Program Development

4. Session F-1 - Slide 4 What is Programming and Why Do We Do It?  Programming is identifying top priority projects for funding  The total cost of worthy projects always exceeds available funding – hence the need to set priorities  Programming decisions are documented in the TIP and STIP

5. Session F-1 - Slide 5 Common Elements in Programming 1.Open solicitation of projects 2.An initial screening 3.A technical scoring process 4.A selection process Broad Solicitation Technical Review Consensual Decision Coarse Screen Fine Screen Prioritized Projects

6. Session F-1 - Slide 6 Approach 1: Common Technical Scoring Process All projects are examined with the same evaluative measures Broad Solicitation Common Evaluative Criteria Consensual Decision Prioritized Projects

7. Session F-1 - Slide 7 Programming in St. Louis 1. Broad regional solicitation 2. Screening – eligibility, financial plan, clear need 3. Evaluation – all projects examined using seven Focus Areas 4. Projects rank ordered by score

8. Session F-1 - Slide 8 Weighting System for Each Category: St. Louis

9. Approach 2: Program Specific Technical Scoring Process Selection from Top Ranking Projects All Roadway Expansion Projects All Roadway Preservation Projects All Transit Projects Preservation Criteria Transit Criteria Roadway Flow Criteria Prioritized Projects Session F-1 - Slide 9

10. Session F-1 - Slide 10 Characteristics of a Successful Programming Process  Early consensus on planning goals  Effective communication among technical and policy leaders  Continuous public involvement  Qualitative as well as quantitative criteria

11. Session F-1 - Slide 11 Florida’s Public Involvement In Florida, smaller MPOs are experimenting with “games” for project prioritization Source: Beever and Wagner, 2000

12. Session F-1 - Slide 12 Albany’s Quantitative and Qualitative Evaluation  Quantitative procedure uses measures that cut across modes, such as relative cost effectiveness  Qualitative benefits of projects are incorporated into this evaluation procedure with narrative text

13. Session F-1 - Slide 13 Albany’s Use of Quantitative Analysis Albany’s formula for benefit/cost ratio is the sum of five categories of quantifiable project benefits divided by the annualized cost of the project.  Safety  Travel Time  Energy/User  Life Cycle  Other

14. Session F-1 - Slide 14 Albany’s Use of Qualitative Analysis  Congestion relief  Air quality benefit  Regional system linkage  Land use compatibility (planned or existing)  Contribution to community or economic development  Environmental issues  Business or housing relocations

15. Session F-1 - Slide 15 How Does Programming Lead to the TIP? -- Kansas City Technical Criteria Project Submittals Policy Criteria Project Evaluation TTPC Review of Draft TIP* Conformity Determination *TTPC is the TIP Priorities Committees TIP Final Draft Public Comment TTPC Approval* Policy Board Action Source: Mid-America Regional Council

16. Session F-1 - Slide 16 Summary  What is meant by “programming”?  List some common programming elements  How does programming lead to the TIP?