Download TAP Scoring 2016

TRANSPORTATION ALTERNATIVES PROGRAM
2016 Project Scoring Update Workshop
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.
“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.”
Under Community improvement activities:
In summary, the nine( 9) eligible activities
5. Inventory, control or removal of outdoor
include:
advertising
1. Construction, planning and design of on
6. Historic preservation and rehabilitation of
and off road facilities for bicyclists,
historic transportation facilities
pedestrians, and other forms of non
motorized transportation
7. Vegetation management practices in
transportation rights of way
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
8. Archeological activities related to impacts
from transportation projects eligible under
Title23
9. Environmental mitigation activities
Quick Facts about the TAP Program at the
TPO Level
•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.
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
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
Workshop Comments
 Crash data – projects with greater mileage have the possibility to
accumulate more points than smaller intersection projects.
 Suggested that total length of project be supplied to the TPO as an
informational item.
 Add points for projects that are designed to avoid high risk areas
 Traffic Counts – include local traffic counts
 Methodology for data collection must be verified
 Location Efficiency - Rural Road Bike Routes should be moved to
“Moderate Interest”
 Public Support – Define the age of letters of support
 Environmental- Encourage the use of semi-permeable materials
 Promote bike-ped access to deter automobile access to environmentally
sensitive areas.
Workshop Comments
 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
 Former bonus points were incorporated into the general scoring
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.
TRANSPORTATION ALTERNATIVES PROGRAM
2016 Project Scoring Update Workshop