Michigan Transportation Alternatives Program Michigan Suburbs Alliance November 18, 2013

Michigan Transportation Alternatives Program

Michigan Suburbs AllianceNovember 18, 2013

Transportation Enhancement Program

•Popular program with most states and local communities•Some states didn’t embrace TE•Some states used TE funds only on their system•Some Members of Congress thought TE was frivolous

Congressional Compromise • Consolidate 3 federal programs (TE, RTP and SRTS)

into one program – TAP• Eliminate some TE program categories• Substantial reduction in overall funding• Allow transfer provisions to give states flexibility• Strengthen input of locals by mandating a role for

Metropolitan Planning Organization’s

TE, SRTS, & RTP in Michigan before MAP-21TE, SRTS, & RTP in Michigan before MAP-21

TE – centralized DOT review and selection process

SRTS – centralized DOT review and selection process after school-based planning process

• Open call for applications, quarterly review meetings• Quarterly communication between DOT and MPO’s sending TE

and SRTS application and approved project lists• All Local TE and SRTS projects implemented by Local Agencies

through MDOT’s letting process and with MDOT oversight• Both TE and SRTS Programs were and are in the same

MDOT office

RTP – administered by the MDNR

Funding Distribution

Statewide TAP Apportionment

$26 Million

Rec. Trails $2.9

million

50% by Population

50% Any Area

SEMCOG Region Receives about $5

Million

MAP-21 Challenges:MAP-21 Challenges:MDOT perspectiveMDOT perspective

• Less than 90 days to prepare new program• Many unknowns• Grant IT system was scheduled for August 2013

implementation and designed with “TE” in mind• 6 Large MPO’s and State received direct suballocation

- could result in 7 different TAP Programs• Avoid disruption of existing TE projects that • were “in the pipeline”• Let’s not make the same mistakes again!• Direction from MDOT Director

MAP-21 Challenges:MAP-21 Challenges:SEMCOG perspectiveSEMCOG perspective

• Less than 90 days to prepare new program• Many unknowns• SEMCOG did not have a system established to

process TAP projects• SEMCOG did not have staff available to solely

dedicate to TAP• Because of “Fiscal Constraint”, there is pressure to

obligate all available funds within a FY• Pressure to show value of projects

Answer: Answer: DOT/MPO CollaborationDOT/MPO Collaboration

• MDOT and SEMCOG began meeting to coordinate respective TAP’s

• MDOT Selection Advisory Committee utilized by SEMCOG for project comment and technical review

• Schedules have been coordinated to fully integrate MDOT’s Selection Advisory Team into SEMCOG’s TAP application process

• SEMCOG funded some projects from MDOT’s FY 2013 Conditional Commitment list

Answer: Answer: DOT/MPO CollaborationDOT/MPO Collaboration

• SEMCOG (and the 5 other Large MPO’s in MI) adopted the MDOT Grant System for TAP applications and review documentation

• Monthly meetings are held between MDOT and MPO’s to discuss the implementation status of all TAP projects (MPO selected and MDOT selected)

• Reports have been developed to track project progress through the grant application, review, selection, and implementation processes

Advantages:Advantages:MDOT’s perspectiveMDOT’s perspective

• Win-win for customers! One application, DOT and MPO’s will coordinate reviews and negotiate funding

• MDOT grant system makes statewide TAP reporting much more efficient

• More collaboration can lead to better projects that are more likely to be implemented • “$ on the ground”, benefitting MI communities

• Good government in action!

Advantages:Advantages:SEMCOG’s perspectiveSEMCOG’s perspective

• Staff time savings - didn’t have to “reinvent the wheel”

• Did not require a new application portal• Take advantage of MDOT’s experience with TE and

SRTS projects• Builds even more professional links between MDOT

and SEMCOG• SEMCOG can consider funding all or part of an application submitted to MDOT, and vice versa

Other AdvantagesOther Advantages

• Jointly funding projects – MPO’s use all or a portion of their suballocated TAP funding and MDOT uses “Any Area” funds on the same project• Helps the Large MPO’s with small TAP suballocations

(examples: Niles area receives $43,000/year from the South Bend, IN urbanized area and Kalamazoo receives $246,000/year)

• So far, MDOT and the MPO’s have jointly funded 6 TAP projects

• More collaboration likely

• Proactive and joint approach to outreach/education of TAP to public• Two TAP workshops held

• Focus on best practices, advice to getting projects funded, & technical assistance on navigating both MGS and eligibility requirements

• One specific to SRTS - changes under MAP-21/TAP, planning process, eligibility, case studies

• Ongoing MDOT/SEMCOG outreach to communities• Emphasis on meeting prior to application (recommendations;

potential other funding sources; meeting match requirements; etc.)

Other AdvantagesOther Advantages

Important NotesImportant Notes

• MDOT and MPO’s still retain separate competitive selection processes• See MDOT’s competitiveness criteria at:

www.michigan.gov/tap www.saferoutesmichigan.org• See SEMCOG’s competitiveness criteria at:

www.semcog.org/TAPCall.aspx• Former TE activities and SRTS are still being treated as

two separate programs at the DOT level, however, they share the same review schedules

• RTP is still being administered by the MDNR

Eligible ActivitiesEligible Activities

On-road and off-road trail facilities for pedestrians, bicyclists, and other nonmotorized forms of transportation including:

• Sidewalks• Bicycle infrastructure• Pedestrian and bicycle signals• Traffic calming techniques• Lighting and other safety-related infrastructure• ADA compliance


Examples: Pedestrian/Bicycle Facilities

Detroit Midtown Loop

Marine City Broadway Streetscape


South Lyon Southwest Connector

Detroit Riverwalk at Milliken State Park

Examples:Pedestrian/Bicycle Facilities


Macomb Orchard Trail Bridge over M-53

DDOT Bike Racks on Buses



Detroit West Vernor Bike Lanes



Infrastructure-related projects and systems that will provide safe routes for non-drivers including

children, older adults, and individuals with disabilities to access daily needs


Conversion and use of abandoned railroad corridors for trails for nonmotorized users.

Polly Ann Trail

Detroit Dequindre Cut Greenway


Construction of turnouts and overlooks

M-25 White Rock Overlook

M-26 Great Sand Bay Overlook


Community improvement activities, including:• Inventory, control, or removal of outdoor advertising• Preservation and rehabilitation of historic transportation facilities• Vegetation management practices in transportation rights-of-

way to improve roadway safety, prevent against invasive species, and provide erosion control

• Archeological activities relating to impacts from implementation of transportation projects eligible under title 23.

Houghton Historic Brick Street


Any environmental mitigation activity, including pollution prevention and pollution abatement activities and mitigation to:

• Address stormwater management, control and water pollution prevention or abatement related to highway construction or due to highway runoff, including activities described in sections 133(b)(11), 328(a), and 329 of title 23

• Reduce vehicle-caused wildlife mortality or to restore and maintain connectivity among terrestrial or aquatic habitats

http://youtu.be/kLYX6tp_6zg

Grand Rapids Plainfield Avenue Bio-retention Basins

Match Requirements

• 20 percent minimum from non-federal sources• Encourage partnerships with foundations,

businesses, nonprofits• Higher match is welcomed

Eligible Entities

• Southeast Michigan Act 51 agencies are eligible to submit projects• County road agencies• Cities/villages• Transit agencies• Others through eligible entities (need

Sponsorship Agreement)

Master Grant System (MGS)

TAP Online Application

Application ProcessApplication Process

• Discuss your project idea with MDOT/SEMCOG • Online application: MDOT Grant System• Register at https://sso.state.mi.us/

Application ProcessApplication Process

MDOT TimelineMDOT Timeline

MDOT Project MDOT Project Competitiveness DetailsCompetitiveness Details

Please visit www.michigan.gov/tap for TAP Competitiveness Details

Please visit www.saferoutesmichigan.org for SRTS Competitiveness Details

Discuss project with an MDOT or MFF grant coordinator

Project ImplementationProject Implementation

MDOT Local Agency Programs (LAP) will assist you through the federal aid implementation process www.michigan.gov/mdotlap

Contacts• Bruce Kadzban, P.E. LAP Manager• 517.335.2229 | [email protected]• Landon Johnson, P.E. LAP Staff Engineer

517.335.6779 | [email protected]

Project ImplementationProject Implementation

Construction Phase - Federal funding requirements• Davis Bacon wage rates• 1999/2012 AASHTO design standards• 2011 Michigan Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices

(MMUTCD)• Environmental clearance

• Permits• SHPO approval• Right of way certification

• Historic Preservation Covenant• Matching funds must comply w/ FHWA• Resolution from transportation agency governing body to certify a

fully funded project and maintenance • Competitive bid process through MDOT Local Agency

Programs (LAP) referred to as the MDOT let process

Project ImplementationProject ImplementationConstruction Phase - MDOT letting process

• Letting Schedule found at www.michigan.gov/mdotlap• Complete Grade Inspection (GI) package must be submitted to LAP

• Plans (80% complete)• Special provisions• Cost estimate• Programming application (MDOT form #0259)

Contact UsContact UsSEMCOG Contacts:

• Kevin Vettraino, TAP• 313.324.3357 | [email protected] • Kajal Patel, SRTS• 313.324.3329 | [email protected]

MDOT Contacts (TAP):• Vince Ranger, Grant Coordinator• 248.483.5130 | [email protected]

MFF Contacts (SRTS): Adrianna Jordan, Grant Coordinator 517.908.3826 | [email protected]

Questions?

Documents

Michigan Transportation Alternatives Program Michigan Suburbs Alliance November 18, 2013