February 11, 2016 MPO & TCC Workshop

Prioritization 4.0 (P4.0) Local Input Points

Overview

1. • Review CRTPO’s Local Input Point Methodology

2. • Discuss Public Involvement Strategy

for P4.0 Local Input Point Allocation Periods

3. • Case Studies of Local Input Points

Methodology using Prioritization 3.0 projects

Action Requested at March 16 MPO Meeting

P4.0 General Assumptions

SPOT* office requires each MPO develop local input points methodology with at least one quantitative , one qualitative & public involvement component

CRTPO & both NCDOT Divisions each receive 2,500 points for Regional Impact & Division Needs tiers - Use all points allocated to CRTPO

NCDOT will calculate P4.0 scores for all

projects

CRTPO assigns points in increments of ‘100’ per project unless the

project crosses into another MPO * NCDOT Strategic Prioritization

Office of Transportation (SPOT)

November 2015-March 2016

• NCDOT-SPOT office scores all P4.0 Projects • CRTPO to review its local input point methodology • CRTPO to develop public involvement strategy for local

input points allocation

April-May 2016

• NCDOT opens 60-Day Regional Impact Local Input Points Window

• CRTPO will assign local points to Regional Impact projects o Local jurisdictions to consider local contributions

August-September 2016

• NCDOT opens 60-Day Division Needs Local Input Points Window

• CRTPO will assign local points to Division Needs projects o Local jurisdictions to consider local contributions

December 2016: NCDOT releases DRAFT 2018-2027 STIP

CRTPO Public

Comment Period(s) on Points

Assignment

Local Points Allocation Options

Option A Option B Option C

Point Allocation Period(s)

2 Periods: Allocate points separately to

Regional and Division Needs tiers

2 Periods: Allocate points separately to

Regional and Division Needs tiers

1 Period: Allocate points to both

Regional and Division tiers during first

window in April - May

Public Comment Period

2 Periods: April/May; July/August (14-27

days)

1 Period: April/May (14-27 days)

1 Period: April/May (14-27 days)

Pros Keep options open on

assigning Division Needs points

Keep options open on assigning Division

Needs points

Simplify the process; reduce confusion

Cons

Confusion about project tier

classification during public comment

Confusion about project tier

classification during point assignment

Lose out on opportunity to

account for cascading

Pro: More time for staff to compile the final public comments received before TCC meeting

Pro: TCC will have an opportunity to review summary of public comments prior to taking action

Con: Length of time is not consistent with prior public involvement efforts

Pro: Closer to preferred period for public involvement Con: TCC will not be able to consider final public

comment list when taking action. Con: Length of time is not consistent with prior public

involvement efforts

14-20 Day Public

Comment Period

21-27 Day Public

Comment Period

Length of Public Involvement Period

SPOT has reduced the local input point allocation windows from 90 to 60 days in P4.0.

MPO Actions on P4.0 Items in 2016

Approve P4.0 Local Input Points Methodology & determine Public Involvement Strategy

Request to open a public involvement period on “draft” allocation of local input points to Regional Impact and/or Division projects

Request to approve the local input points allocations to Regional Impact and/or Division Needs projects

March 16 MPO Meeting

May 18 MPO Meeting

April 20 MPO Meeting

Based upon Staff Recommendation of Option C:

Methodology Revisions

SPOT office does not require changes to MPO methodologies for P4.0

P4.0 Local Points Methodology did not change - P3.0 Methodology successfully identified

competitive projects funded by STIP

MPOs can make minor changes without board

approval

Significant changes to methodology would require SPOT office

approval, MPO approval, & public comment period

Methodology Steps

Project Screening

Revenue Assumptions => Division of Points by Mode

Proposed Criteria

Highway Points Assignment

Non-Highway Points Assignment

Public Involvement Process during Assignment

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

Step 1. Project Screening

A. Divide projects into highway vs. non-highway

B. Categorize Projects by STI Funding Tier (Division needs tier or regional impact tier)

C. Identify project with lowest P4.0 score that can be funded based upon assumptions ▫ Total available Funds per tier by NCDOT

Step 2. Current Criteria

Highway Projects Priority

Non-Highway Projects Priority

If project in 2040 MTP ▫ MTP horizon year ▫ MTP score

If no MTP score available

▫ P4.0 score

▫ P4.0 score Regardless of mode

Revenue Assumptions & Division of Points by Mode

Regional Impact 2,500 Total Points 15% of local points to non-highway ▫ MPO assumption to allocate 15% of anticipated revenues to non-highway Regional Impact projects

2,200 points for highway projects

300 points for non-highway

projects

Division Needs 2,500 Total Points 20% of local points to non-highway ▫ MPO assumption to allocate 20% of anticipated revenues to non-highway Division Needs projects

2,000 points for highway projects

500 points for non-highway

projects

Step 3.

P4.0 Highway Project Inventory

STI Tier Number of Projects Available Local Input Points from SPOT (in increments of 100)

Region E (Mecklenburg and Union Counties)

18 22

Region F (Iredell) 8

Division 10 (Mecklenburg and Union Counties)

22 20

Division 12 (Iredell) 1

Note: In P3.0, CRTPO had 86 projects in the Regional Impact and Division Needs tiers

Step 4. Highway Points Assignment

P4.0 subcommittee uses scores from criteria in Step 2

Coordination with NCDOT Divisions 10 & 12

MPO Input – ▫ Final project list using methodology ▫ Public comments on preliminary point

assignments will be presented Elements of Highway Point Assignment

Step 5. Non-Highway Points Assignment

Use P4.0 score to prioritize projects

Attempt to assign one allocation of local points to each mode with a P4.0 project

Regional Impact Tier (300 Points for two projects)

1 Transit & 1 Rail project ▫ Reallocate remaining 100

points to Regional Impact tier highway project

Division Needs Tier (500 points for 45 Projects)

Each Aviation, Rail, Transit & Bike/Ped project with

highest P4.0 score ▫ Reallocate remaining 100

points to highest scoring non-highway project

Public Involvement Process during Assignment Step 6.

Minimum two-week public comment period(s) for citizens to review draft local input point assignment

Information to share Methodology posted to website(www.crtpo.org) Quantitative scores from SPOT office shared with

TCC, MPO board & posted to website Final allocation of local input points & public

comment summary posted to website

MPO board’s final action regarding local input point allocation may be based upon comments received

Recommendations to MPO

Endorse Public involvement strategy

Endorse Local Input Points Methodology

(unchanged from P3.0)

1 public comment period vs.

2 public comment periods (One period each for

Regional & Division point assignment periods)

1. Project Screening 2. Proposed Criteria 3. Revenue Assumptions =>

Division of Points by Mode 4. Highway Points Assignment 5. Non-Highway Points

Assignment 6. Public Involvement Process

during Assignment

Action items at March 16 MPO meeting

Prioritization 3.0 (P3.0) Local Input Point Case Studies

Midnight Lane/Oates Road Overpass

* New grade separation across I-77 in Mooresville *

▫ Submitted for P3.0 in 2014 ▫ P3.0 Division Needs tier

score 35.81 out of 50 ▫ CRTPO & Division 12 applied

local input points

▫ 2040 MTP fiscally constrained project list

▫ 2040 MTP composite score 155/200

▫ $9.5M cost estimate & high scores made project competitive for funding in Division 12

Result: Project programmed

in 2016-2025 STIP for right-of-way in 2019 & construction in 2021 Project committed

with no future prioritization (Right of way occurs prior to 2021)

Midnight Lane/Oates Road Overpass

* Widen roadway from Toddville Rd to I-485 in Charlotte*

NC 27/Freedom Drive Widening

▫ Submitted for P1.0 in 2009 ▫ P3.0 Reginal Impact tier

score 17.95 out of 70 ▫ CRTPO & Division 10 did not

apply local input points

▫ Not on 2040 MTP fiscally constrained project list

▫ 2040 MTP composite score 79/200

▫ $33M cost estimate & low scores made project not competitive for funding in Region E

Result: Project not

programmed in 2016-2025 STIP Project being

resubmitted for scoring in P4.0 with revised project limits

NC 27/Freedom Drive Widening

* Convert roadway to include bike lanes from North Tryon St to The Plaza/Parkwood Ave in Charlotte*

Matheson Avenue Bike Lane

▫ Submitted for P3.0 in 2014 ▫ P3.0 Division Needs tier

score 36.05 out of 50 ▫ CRTPO & Division 10 applied

local input points

▫ $400K cost estimate & high score made project competitive for funding in Division 10

Result: Project programmed

in 2016-2025 STIP for preliminary engineering in 2017 & construction in 2018 Project committed

with no future prioritization (Right of way occurs prior to 2021)

Matheson Avenue Bike Lane