Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Michigan Transportation Alternatives Program Michigan Suburbs Alliance November 18, 2013.

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Michigan Transportation Alternatives Program Michigan Suburbs Alliance November 18, 2013."— Presentation transcript:

1 Michigan Transportation Alternatives Program Michigan Suburbs Alliance November 18, 2013

2 Transportation Enhancement Program Popular program with most states and local communities Some states didn’t embrace TE Some states used TE funds only on their system Some Members of Congress thought TE was frivolous

3 Congressional Compromise Consolidate 3 federal programs (TE, RTP and SRTS) into one program – TAP Eliminate some TE program categories Substantial reduction in overall funding Allow transfer provisions to give states flexibility Strengthen input of locals by mandating a role for Metropolitan Planning Organization’s

4 TE, SRTS, & RTP in Michigan before MAP-21 TE – centralized DOT review and selection process SRTS – centralized DOT review and selection process after school-based planning process Open call for applications, quarterly review meetings Quarterly communication between DOT and MPO’s sending TE and SRTS application and approved project lists All Local TE and SRTS projects implemented by Local Agencies through MDOT’s letting process and with MDOT oversight Both TE and SRTS Programs were and are in the same MDOT office RTP – administered by the MDNR

5 Funding Distribution Statewide TAP Apportionment $26 Million Rec. Trails $2.9 million 50% by Population 50% Any Area SEMCOG Region Receives about $5 Million

6 MAP-21 Challenges: MAP-21 Challenges: MDOT perspective Less than 90 days to prepare new program Many unknowns Grant IT system was scheduled for August 2013 implementation and designed with “TE” in mind 6 Large MPO’s and State received direct suballocation - could result in 7 different TAP Programs Avoid disruption of existing TE projects that were “in the pipeline” Let’s not make the same mistakes again! Direction from MDOT Director

7 MAP-21 Challenges: MAP-21 Challenges: SEMCOG perspective Less than 90 days to prepare new program Many unknowns SEMCOG did not have a system established to process TAP projects SEMCOG did not have staff available to solely dedicate to TAP Because of “Fiscal Constraint”, there is pressure to obligate all available funds within a FY Pressure to show value of projects

8 Answer: Answer: DOT/MPO Collaboration MDOT and SEMCOG began meeting to coordinate respective TAP’s MDOT Selection Advisory Committee utilized by SEMCOG for project comment and technical review Schedules have been coordinated to fully integrate MDOT’s Selection Advisory Team into SEMCOG’s TAP application process SEMCOG funded some projects from MDOT’s FY 2013 Conditional Commitment list

9 Answer: Answer: DOT/MPO Collaboration SEMCOG (and the 5 other Large MPO’s in MI) adopted the MDOT Grant System for TAP applications and review documentation Monthly meetings are held between MDOT and MPO’s to discuss the implementation status of all TAP projects (MPO selected and MDOT selected) Reports have been developed to track project progress through the grant application, review, selection, and implementation processes

10 Advantages: Advantages: MDOT’s perspective Win-win for customers! One application, DOT and MPO’s will coordinate reviews and negotiate funding MDOT grant system makes statewide TAP reporting much more efficient More collaboration can lead to better projects that are more likely to be implemented “$ on the ground”, benefitting MI communities Good government in action!

11 Advantages: Advantages: SEMCOG’s perspective Staff time savings - didn’t have to “reinvent the wheel” Did not require a new application portal Take advantage of MDOT’s experience with TE and SRTS projects Builds even more professional links between MDOT and SEMCOG SEMCOG can consider funding all or part of an application submitted to MDOT, and vice versa

12 Other Advantages Other Advantages Jointly funding projects – MPO’s use all or a portion of their suballocated TAP funding and MDOT uses “Any Area” funds on the same project Helps the Large MPO’s with small TAP suballocations (examples: Niles area receives $43,000/year from the South Bend, IN urbanized area and Kalamazoo receives $246,000/year) So far, MDOT and the MPO’s have jointly funded 6 TAP projects More collaboration likely

13 Proactive and joint approach to outreach/education of TAP to public Two TAP workshops held Focus on best practices, advice to getting projects funded, & technical assistance on navigating both MGS and eligibility requirements One specific to SRTS - changes under MAP-21/TAP, planning process, eligibility, case studies Ongoing MDOT/SEMCOG outreach to communities Emphasis on meeting prior to application (recommendations; potential other funding sources; meeting match requirements; etc.) Other Advantages Other Advantages

14 Important Notes Important Notes MDOT and MPO’s still retain separate competitive selection processes See MDOT’s competitiveness criteria at: See SEMCOG’s competitiveness criteria at: Former TE activities and SRTS are still being treated as two separate programs at the DOT level, however, they share the same review schedules RTP is still being administered by the MDNR

15 Eligible Activities Eligible Activities On-road and off-road trail facilities for pedestrians, bicyclists, and other nonmotorized forms of transportation including: Sidewalks Bicycle infrastructure Pedestrian and bicycle signals Traffic calming techniques Lighting and other safety-related infrastructure ADA compliance

16 Eligible Activities Eligible Activities Examples: Pedestrian/Bicycle Facilities Detroit Midtown Loop Marine City Broadway Streetscape

17 Eligible Activities Eligible Activities South Lyon Southwest Connector Detroit Riverwalk at Milliken State Park Examples:Pedestrian/Bicycle Facilities

18 Eligible Activities Eligible Activities Macomb Orchard Trail Bridge over M-53 DDOT Bike Racks on Buses Examples: Pedestrian/Bicycle Facilities

19 Eligible Activities Eligible Activities Detroit West Vernor Bike Lanes Examples: Pedestrian/Bicycle Facilities

20 Eligible Activities Eligible Activities Infrastructure-related projects and systems that will provide safe routes for non-drivers including children, older adults, and individuals with disabilities to access daily needs

21 Eligible Activities Eligible Activities Conversion and use of abandoned railroad corridors for trails for nonmotorized users. Polly Ann Trail Detroit Dequindre Cut Greenway

22 Eligible Activities Eligible Activities Construction of turnouts and overlooks M-25 White Rock Overlook M-26 Great Sand Bay Overlook

23 Eligible Activities Eligible Activities Community improvement activities, including: Inventory, control, or removal of outdoor advertising Preservation and rehabilitation of historic transportation facilities Vegetation management practices in transportation rights-of- way to improve roadway safety, prevent against invasive species, and provide erosion control Archeological activities relating to impacts from implementation of transportation projects eligible under title 23. Houghton Historic Brick Street

24 Eligible Activities Eligible Activities Any environmental mitigation activity, including pollution prevention and pollution abatement activities and mitigation to: Address stormwater management, control and water pollution prevention or abatement related to highway construction or due to highway runoff, including activities described in sections 133(b)(11), 328(a), and 329 of title 23 Reduce vehicle-caused wildlife mortality or to restore and maintain connectivity among terrestrial or aquatic habitats Grand Rapids Plainfield Avenue Bio-retention Basins

25 Match Requirements 20 percent minimum from non-federal sources Encourage partnerships with foundations, businesses, nonprofits Higher match is welcomed

26 Eligible Entities Southeast Michigan Act 51 agencies are eligible to submit projects County road agencies Cities/villages Transit agencies Others through eligible entities (need Sponsorship Agreement)

27 Master Grant System (MGS) TAP Online Application

28 Application Process Application Process Discuss your project idea with MDOT/SEMCOG Online application: MDOT Grant System Register at

29 Application Process Application Process

30 MDOT Timeline

31 MDOT Project Competitiveness Details Please visit for TAP Competitiveness Please visit for SRTS Competitiveness Discuss project with an MDOT or MFF grant coordinator

32 Project Implementation MDOT Local Agency Programs (LAP) will assist you through the federal aid implementation process Contacts Bruce Kadzban, P.E. LAP Manager 517.335.2229 | Landon Johnson, P.E. LAP Staff Engineer 517.335.6779 |

33 Project Implementation Construction Phase - Federal funding requirements Davis Bacon wage rates 1999/2012 AASHTO design standards 2011 Michigan Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MMUTCD) Environmental clearance Permits SHPO approval Right of way certification Historic Preservation Covenant Matching funds must comply w/ FHWA Resolution from transportation agency governing body to certify a fully funded project and maintenance Competitive bid process through MDOT Local Agency Programs (LAP) referred to as the MDOT let process

34 Project Implementation Construction Phase - MDOT letting process Letting Schedule found at Complete Grade Inspection (GI) package must be submitted to LAP Plans (80% complete) Special provisions Cost estimate Programming application (MDOT form #0259)

35 Contact Us SEMCOG Contacts: Kevin Vettraino, TAP 313.324.3357 | Kajal Patel, SRTS 313.324.3329 | MDOT Contacts (TAP): Vince Ranger, Grant Coordinator 248.483.5130 | MFF Contacts (SRTS):  Adrianna Jordan, Grant Coordinator 517.908.3826 |

36 Questions?

Download ppt "Michigan Transportation Alternatives Program Michigan Suburbs Alliance November 18, 2013."

Similar presentations

Ads by Google