MAP-21 Overview

• 2 year bill• October 1, 2012- September 30, 2014• Extends funding at current level

Themes• Consolidate programs• Streamline project delivery• Give states more flexibility

MAP-21 Changes to Biking and Walking

• Transportation Alternatives– Eligible activities– Funding and opt outs– Distribution of Funds

• Changes to other funding programs– Highway Safety Improvement Program– STP– CMAQ– Federal Lands

Transportation Alternatives

• Combines programs: – Transportation Enhancements

(now Transportation Alternatives)– Safe Routes to School– Recreational Trails– Redevelopment of underused

highways to boulevards

Transportation Alternatives (formerly TE)

ADDS:

• Safe Routes for Non- Drivers (networks)

• ANY Environmental Mitigation

• Scenic Byway uses

SUBTRACTS

• Funding For Bicycle and Pedestrian Education

• Streetscaping• Acquisition of Scenic or

Historic sites• Transportation

Museums

Changes eligibilities from Transportation Enhancements

Reduction in Funding

SAFETEA LU- FY 2011

TOTAL: $1.2 BILLION

MAP-21

TOTAL: $808 MILLION

TE

$928 MILLION

SRTS $202 M

RTP $97

TRANSPORT-ATION

ALTERNATIVES

$808 M

SOURCE: FHWA, Revised Fiscal Year (FY) 2011 Supplementary Tables – Apportionments Pursuant to the Surface Transportation Extension Act of 2010, as Amended. Feb 1, 2012

Distribution of Funding

1. TA funding is 2% of State’s highway funds (minus safety , etc.)

2. Recreational Trails Program funded3. Funding is divided into 2 equal pots;– One distributed by population– One to a grant program

4. State has the ability to transfer funding out of Transportation Alternatives

Transportation AlternativesFunding Distribution

2. Recreational Trails Program funding gets taken off the top (unless Governor Opts out)

• Maintains Rec Trails Program process and funding (2009 levels)

• Opt-out date is 30 days before money is available

• Opt-out decision made every year• Rec Trails projects eligible under TA

and STP

Transportation AlternativesFunding Distribution

3. Remaining funding is divided into 2 equal potsPOT 1- distributed by population

• MPOs Population > 200,000• Funding is sub-allocated• MPOs must run competitive grant process

• Communities with a population < 200,000• State will run a competitive grant process

• Rural areas population < 5000• State will run a competitive grant process

Oregon Example Funds Distributed by Population

MPO/ Metropolitan area

Percent of Pot 1 Funding (estimated)

Portland 39%

Salem 6%

Eugene 6.5%

Other areas of the state

48%

Map and Data source: Rails to Trails Conservancy, http://www.railstotrails.org/resources/documents/ourWork/MPOs_by_state

Transportation Alternatives Funding Distribution

3. Remaining funding is divided into 2 equal potsPOT 2- distributed through competitive grant process

run by state.

Eligible Entities• Local/regional governments• Tribes• Local/regional transportation agencies• Public land agencies• Other local/regional entities state deems eligible

STATE DOT

State Ability to Transfer Funds

Transfer option-– up to 50% of TA to any other program– Only out of Pot 2

Coburn Opt- out- – based on unobligated balance– Doesn’t apply until year 2– Unique to TA

State of Emergency– Can transfer funding to fix damaged infrastructure– If State gets federal funds for emergency later, must reimburse TA

4. State can choose to transfer funding out

Other MAP-21 Changes to Biking and Walking

• Coordinators:– Bicycle and Pedestrian Coordinators are still

required– Safe Routes to School Coordinators eligible

• Clearinghouses- Not funded in MAP-21– Bicycle Pedestrian Information Center• Under contract until Summer 2013

– Safe Routes to School National Center• Under contract until January 2013

Eligibility in Other Programs

• Expediting Project Delivery• Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP)• Surface Transportation Program (STP)• Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ)• Federal Lands Programs

Expediting Projects/ Streamlining

• Streamlining of regulations• Categorical Exclusion (CE)

SAFETEA LU Categorical Exclusions

• Biking and walking projects

MAP-21 Categorical Exclusions

• Biking and walking projects

• Projects within the right-of-way

• Projects with a total cost of less than $5 million

Highway Safety Improvement Program

• HSIP funding increases under MAP-21

• In writing plans, states must consult with:– State nonmotorized representative– May include representatives from

stakeholder groups

Highway Safety Improvement Program

• New data and research requirements for states– nonmotorized crash data– motor vehicle crashes that include pedestrians

and bicyclists– Crash frequency and crash rate data– Identify roadway elements/ features• that constitute hazard...• [and/or] safe conditions

Surface Transportation Program (STP)

• Higher funding, more competition on non sub-allocated funds

• Sub-allocation to metropolitan areas– Same dollar amount as before

Eligibility: •Transportation Alternatives activities eligible•Rec Trails projects eligible•SRTS not listed as eligible, but similar projects fit under Safe Routes for non-drivers

Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ)

• New Eligibility– Project or program that shifts traffic demand to…

other transportation modes

• Transferability– States can transfer up to 50% of CMAQ– Increase from ~ 21% in SAFETEA LU

• Evaluation and Assessments– Require cost benefit analysis– Health Impact Assessment

Federal Lands Program

• Consolidated programs; cuts funding overall

• Bicycling and walking facilities eligible

• Eliminated the Transit in the Parks program (AKA- Sarbanes TRIP Program)

• Mandatory Sidepath Law

• National Federal Lands Facility Inventory– Important to ensure bike/ped projects get on this TIP

Summary

Transportation Alternatives– Changes to eligibility– Lower funding– Funding distribution changes

• 50% by population• 50% by grant program

Eligibility• Increased opportunity for data and funding under HSIP• Continued eligibility under CMAQ, STP, and Federal Lands• Side path law on federal lands