Loading...
Draft Transportation Funding - Jan2254 55GuiDiNG PRiNCiPLeS GuiDiNG PRiNCiPLeS PLACE HOLDER FOR INFOGRAPHIC Transportation Funding 56 57TRANSPoRTATioN FuNDiNG TRANSPoRTATioN FuNDiNG State Recreational Trails Program (SRT): Established to create recreational trails in Iowa for the use, enjoyment and participation of the public. Revitalize Iowa’s Sound Economy (RISE): Promotes economic development in Iowa through the construction or improvement of roads. Transportation Safety Improvement Pro- gram (TSIP): Funds roadway safety improve- ments, research, studies or public information initiatives aimed to increase safety on public roads. Primary Road Fund (PRF): Funds the estab- lishment, construction, and maintenance of DOT facilities, state institutional roads, state park roads, and restoration of secondary roads and municipal streets used as primary road detours. Future Transportation Funding Financial Planning overview A sound financial plan demonstrating how the unified vision for our regional transportation system can be achieved is a critical element of the Future Forward 2050 Plan. While this long range transportation plan is not a programming document, FHWA regulations require that the plan be ‘fiscally constrained’. To accomplish this, an analysis of fiscal constraint was undertaken for the life of the Plan (2022-2050). This analysis fulfills the requirements of the current Federal transportation legislation ‘FAST Act’ outlined in 23 CFR 450.322 (10). Financial Planning overview Following are brief descriptions of the primary funding sources used to forecast future funding targets. While there are many additional State and Federal funding sources available, this list includes only those that the MPOJC urbanized area has been successful in obtaining through competitive grant processes. LOCAL FUNDING SOURCES In addition to road use tax revenue, a municipality’s general fund is often the primary funding source for operations and maintenance costs. Funding for capital improvements on public roads typically comes from the sale of bonds. General operating funds typically support pub- lic transit capital and operations. Other local funding sources that help fund transportation improvements include Tax Increment Financing (TIF) district revenues, fare or user fees and assessments, transit levies, and property tax revenue. STATE FUNDING SOURCES Fiscal constraint is a required component of long-range planning. Transportation expenditures included in this plan should not exceed rev- enue estimates during the life of the plan. Simply put, this plan includes only those transportation improvements that can be realistically com- pleted based on anticipated revenues. $ $0 $500,000 $1,000,000 $1,500,000 $2,000,000 $2,500,000 $3,000,000 $3,500,000 FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16 FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20 MPoJC Formula Funding by Program 2006-2020 STP Funding TAP/FLEX Funding 7% 26.3% 66.7% STBG Project by Type (FY2012-2022) 7% New Construction Reconstruction/ Maintenance Capacity improvements Financial Forecast To forecast future state and federal dollars available for Future Forward 2050 projects and programs, we establish a 10-year historic average of funding programs and apply a 4% inflation rate recommended by the FHWA for each fiscal year cov- ered by this plan. (2022-2050) FEDERAL FUNDING SOURCES National Highway Performance Program (NHPP): Funding for resurfacing, restoring, and rehabilitating, routes on the Eisenhower National System of Interstate and Defense Highways. DOT Surface Transportation Block Grant (STBG): Funds improvements to any roadway or bridge on the federal-aid system, transit capital projects, bicycle and pedestrian facil- ities, enhancement projects, environmental restoration, and the establishment of native species. Regional Surface Transportation Block Grant (STBG): Funds improvements to any roadway or bridge on the federal-aid system, transit capital projects, bicycle and pedestrian facilities, enhancement projects, environ- mental restoration, and the establishment of native species. Regional STBG funds are formula funds that are provided to MPOJC and programed by the Urbanized Area Policy Board using a competitive grant process. See page 59 for description of allocation process. Regional Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP): Funds enhancement activi- ties that have a direct relationship to surface transportation facilities including: facilities for bicycles and pedestrians (including safety and educational activities), landscaping and other scenic beautification, historic preservation, and the preservation of abandoned railway corridors for bicycle and pedestrian uses. Regional TAP funds are formula funds that are provided to MPOJC and programed by the Ur- banized Area Policy Board using a competitive grant process. Congestion Mitigation & Air Quality Im- provement (CMAQ): Flexible funding for transportation projects and programs tasked with helping to meet the requirements of the Clean Air Act. These projects can include those that reduce congestion and improve air quality. Federal Recreational Trails Program (FRT): Funding for public recreational trails. The recipient must use funding for trail projects that are part of a local, regional, or statewide trails plan. FiSCAL YeARDoLLARS 58 59TRANSPoRTATioN FuNDiNG TRANSPoRTATioN FuNDiNG How much funding has each MPO entity received? Will there be sufficient funding for all our transportation infrastructure needs? Funding is not allocated based on population. Please see following page for more details on the fudning allocation process. 4% inflation rate; year of expenditures considered to the the mid-year of funding period. Historically a 40% match is typcial for projects that receive state and federal funding. For more information on state and federal funding see Supporting Documents. Funding Allocation Process for Surface Transportation Block Grant and Alternatives Funds Project Identification and Submission Each MPO community/entity identifies local transportation projects that are appropri- ate for funding through the MPO. These projects are usually selected from estab- lished local community or development plans. Funding applications are then submit- ted to the MPO. Applications include the timing for design and construction, anticipat- ed local funding as well as desired federal funding, and a general description of the elements that will be includ- ed in the project. Qualification and Scoring MPO staff review the sub- mitted projects to verify that each meets federal eligibility guidelines. Staff then use pre-approved criteria to score projects. These criteria corre- spond to the Guiding Princi- ples described on pages X-XX and are shown on page XX of the appendix. The criteria and scores help ensure the MPO is funding projects that meet the diverse goals of the organiza- tion. Recommendation and Selection The Transportation Technical Advisory Committee, (TTAC)—which includes engineers, transit, and other staff from all five MPO communities, the County, and the University—work together to provide recommen- dations for which projects should be selected and what amount of funding each project should receive. The Urbanized Area Policy Board, which includes elected officials and other representatives, makes the final selections and allocations based on the recom- mendations and priorities of the TTAC. Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) Selected projects are programmed in order to set a schedule for the availability and release of federal funds. The TIP is a short-range plan that lists all transportation projects that have been selected to receive federal transportation funding within at least a four-year horizon. MPOJC entities work cooperatively through committees and the Urbanized Area Policy Board to decide which transportation projects will receive funding. A list of projects and descrip- tions may be found at the end of the Road and Bridge, Bicycle and Pedestrian, and Transit chapters of this plan. Projects that are included in the current TIP are identified within the 2022-2030 timeline. Municipality Population 2010 Population 2020 Population Change MPOJC STBG Funds MPOJC STBG Funds per capita MPOJC TAP Funds MPOJC TAP Funds per capita Coralville 18,907 22,318 3,411 16,146,900$ 723$ 1,612,599$ 72$ Iowa City 67,862 74,828 6,966 36,121,419$ 483$ 2,318,000$ 31$ North Liberty 13,374 20,479 7,105 7,847,000$ 383$ 1,015,118$ 50$ Tiffin 1,947 4,512 2,565 2,020,000$ 448$ 592,000$ 131$ University Heights 1,051 1,228 177 1,265,440$ 1,030$ 215,000$ 175$ Johnson Co.*-6,679 -1,055,000$ 158$ 195,000$ 29$ Anticipated Funding & Needs (2022 - 2050) Short-Term (FY22-30)*$8,157,692 $6,179,840 $93,240,028 $85,844,040 $101,397,720 $92,023,880 $9,373,840 Mid-Term (FY31-40)*$12,033,378 $16,180,826 $137,537,972 $144,736,650 $149,571,350 $160,917,476 -$11,346,126 Long-Term (FY41-50)*$15,158,930 $35,052,902 $173,262,121 $247,347,763 $188,421,051 $282,400,665 -$93,979,614 TOTAL $35,350,000 $57,413,568 $404,040,121 $477,928,453 $439,390,121 $535,342,021 -$95,951,900 Total Funding Total Needs Revenue Shortfall 2022-2050Cost Band / Funding Period Bike & Ped Funding Bike & Ped Needs Road & Bridge Funding Road & Bridge Needs