1. TRANSPORTATION ALTERNATIVES PROGRAM 2016 Project Scoring Update Workshop

2. Transportation Alternatives Program Federal legislation under the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21) created the Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP) as a funding source for alternative transportation projects, including projects previously eligible for Transportation Enhancement and Safe Routes to Schools Funding. As advised by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), in order to allocate available TAP funds, each TPO must adopt a project ranking methodology, specific to TAP, which scores projects based on targeted project criteria. This methodology is to be determined by the individual TPO, based on the TPO’s funding and planning priorities, and must be reviewed by FHWA.

3. “Transportation Alternative (TA) projects are federally funded community based projects that expand travel choices and improve the transportation experience by improving the cultural, historic, and environmental aspects of our transportation infrastructure.”

4. In summary, the nine( 9) eligible activities include: 1. Construction, planning and design of on and off road facilities for bicyclists, pedestrians, and other forms of non motorized transportation 2. Construction, planning and design of infrastructure related projects/systems to provide safe routes for non drivers 3. Conversion and use of abandoned Railroad corridors for non motorized use 4. Construction of turnouts, overlooks, and Viewing areas Under Community improvement activities: 5. Inventory, control or removal of outdoor advertising 6. Historic preservation and rehabilitation of historic transportation facilities 7. Vegetation management practices in transportation rights of way 8. Archeological activities related to impacts from transportation projects eligible under Title23 9. Environmental mitigation activities

5. Most TAP projects submitted to the TPO are for sidewalks The TPO scoring criteria has been focused on the elements of sidewalk projects The current Prioritization Criteria does not have adequate considerations or scoring for projects outside of sidewalks and bike lanes Projects that score high on the TPO priority list might not be funded due to design limitations, cost feasibility/total cost, maintenance problems, ROW /Property acquisition or issues with environmental constraints: storm water problems, NEPA conflicts, etc. Quick Facts about the TAP Program at the TPO Level

6. Proposed Changes for 2016 TAP Project Scoring Remove weighting system –strictly point based Require that the scoring criteria be submitted with the TAP Application Add points for projects outside of the typical sidewalks Add an environmental impact section Remove bonus section – those areas are incorporated into the general ranking sections

7. Benefits for the Proposed Changes Eliminates weighting –makes point system more straight forward – simply check the item on the scoring sheet and total the points Requires the applicant to submit the scoring info with the application. This speeds up the process of TAP application review at the TPO level and increases accuracy of the application score Allows more opportunity for all projects to score well Removes ambiguity of some sections, example: Location Efficiency – destinations are better defined

8. Crash data – some projects do not receive points for crashes because the projects are designed to avoid high risk areas Criteria was added to balance this issue and award points to projects that purposefully avoid high risk areas Connectivity– increase the scoring for projects that conform/comply with TPO, Local Government, Regional or State plans for connectivity and bike-ped projects Increase the scoring for projects that fill a documented gap in an existing network Location Efficiency - move “Low Density Single Family” destination to high interest due to unique safety issues with tourist areas in residential areas Create tourist destinations in “high interest” –unique to the area Public Support – increase the scoring for public support Workshop Comments

9. Information on the Project Readiness and Funding should be provided as information items to the TPO Why was the local contribution/participation of either ROW donation, in-kind services, or funds removed as a bonus point? The local contribution information is added as an information item to the Priority Ranking for the TPO Points for ROW are included in the general scoring Bonus points were incorporated into the general scoring

10. Goals for the Proposed Changes The proposed updates for the TAP scoring allows the scoring to be more fair to all projects – allows non-sidewalk projects to accumulate points Helps the TPO Priority Projects be more enabling at the DOT funding level. Encourages applicants to have better designed projects and more complete applications Encourages applicants to create competitive applications Streamlines the application process, allows TPO staff more time to focus on the application content – rather than conducting primary research about the project The more detailed scoring criteria aims to eliminate obstacles due to design limitations, cost feasibility/total cost, maintenance problems, ROW /Property acquisition or issues with environmental constraints: storm water problems, drainage issues, NEPA conflicts, etc.

11. TRANSPORTATION ALTERNATIVES PROGRAM 2016 Project Scoring Update Workshop