ACECKDOT Partnering Conference October 18, 2005

1
ACEC-KDOT Partnering ConferenceOctober 18, 2005

• Changes in Local ProgramsFor Local Government
  ProjectsOverview
• Larry Emig, P.E.
• Bureau of Local Projects

2
Topics

• Local Program Contacts
• Federal Programs summary
• Current Programs
• Revision to Programs
• Funding Levels for Five-Year Plans, etc.
• State Programs
• Questions
• Thanks to Dennis Slimmer Suellen Markley for
  funding slides

3
KDOT Programs Contacts for Local
AgenciesCities Counties Roads, Streets and
Bridges

• 5-Year Plan Prog. (STP BR) and Safety (STP)
• Contact Bureau of Local Projects (785)
  296-3861- Lee Holmes Lynn Berges
• Local Partnership Prog. (ED Both KLINK ,GI --
  Cty)
• Contact Bureau of Prog. Proj. Management
  [phone] Melinda Desch or Mark Taylor
• Railroad Crossing Funding Programs (State and
  Federal)
• Contact Bureau of Design [phone] - Al
  Cathcart
• Transportation Revolving Fund Loan Program
• Contact Bureau of Fiscal Services (785)
  296-4782 - Evelyn Fitzpatrick

4
KDOT Programs for Local AgenciesCities
Counties - Roads Streets and Bridges (Cont.)

• Safety Studies TASK Seminars
• Contact Bureau of Local Projects (785)
  296-3861 Lynn Berges
• Emergency Relief on Major Local Routes
• Contact Bureau of Local Projects (785)
  296-0413 Ron Seitz
• Public Lands or Other Special Federally Funded
  Projects)
• Contact Bureau of Local Projects (785)
  296-3861- Lee Holmes
• Roundabouts Plans Review
• Contact Bur. Local Proj.[phone] Lynn
  Berges or Bureau of Traffic Engr. (785)
  296-3618 David Church

5
KDOT Programs for Local AgenciesCities
Counties Other Modes and Special Programs

• Transportation Enhancements (trails, historical
  or scenic)
• Contact Bureau of Prog. Proj. Management
  [phone] Kyle Schneweis
• Traffic Safety Programs (occupant restraint,
  Safe Not Sorry, etc.)
• Contact Bureau of Traffic Safety [phone]
  Pete Bodyk
• Public Transit Program
• Contact Bureau of Transportation Planning
  [phone] Jim Van Sickel
• Aviation Program
• Contact Division of Aviation [phone]
  Ed Young
• LTAP (Tech. Transfer) and Road Scholar Program
  (RSP)
• Contact KU Transportation Center [phone]
  Rose Lichtenberg (both) or Local Projs (785)
  296-3861 - Larry Emig (RSP)

6
KDOT - Bureau of Local ProjectsContact Numbers
and Web Site785/296-3861 FAX
785/296-2079(Newsletter had BLP Staffs Phone
Numbers)www.accesskansas.org (State of Kansas)
www.ksdot.org (KDOT)http//www.ksdot.org/bur
localproj (Local Projects)
7
Federal Programs Administered by KDOT for Local
Governments

• Surface Transportation Program (STP) Roads, St.
  Br., RR, HHS, TE (each have own requirements)
  
• Bridge Replacement (BR)
• Congestion Mitigation/Air Quality
• STP - Safety (to change in 2006 and Add Safety
  Program for funding 2006-2009)
• Other Planning, Transit, Research, Airports,
  Technology Transfer ( LTAP)

8
SAFETEA-LU MAINTAINS TEA-21s CORE PROGRAM
STRUCTURE

• Surface Transportation Program (STP)
• Bridge Program (BR)
• Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement
  Program (CMAQ)s
• National Highway System (NHS)
• Interstate Maintenance Program (IM)

9
SAFETEA-LU MAINTAINS TEA-21s CORE PROGRAM
STRUCTURE, Cont.

• Surface Transportation Program (STP)
• Continues STP existing Eligibilities
• Continues 10 setaside for Transportation
  Enhancements (TE) Program
• Continues Safety setaside for 2005 and eliminates
  10 Safety setaside starts FY 2006
• Increases attributable funds to Metro areas

10
SAFETEA-LU Changes in Federal aid Core
Program/Structure

• Adds New Highway Safety Improvement Program
  (HSIP)
• Safety is no longer a 10 percent setaside from
  STP effective 2006
• Adds a new Equity Bonus Program
• Replaces the Minimum Guarantee Program
• Earmarked Projects (19/44 in SAFETEA-LU) High
  Priority Transp. Imp. Proj.

11
HIGHWAY SAFETY IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (HSIP)

• New HSIP includes
• Purpose to reduce fatalities and serious injuries
  on public roads, 220 M for RR setaside, St.
  Strategic Highway Safety Plan
• High Risk Rural Roads Program (HRRR)
  
• State Strategic Highway Safety Plan
• Projects on any public road or publicly owned
  bicycle and pedestrian path/trail
• Without SHSP in 2007, fund RR and HES
• Completed SHSP for 10 funds for three Es
• Data driven program

12
High Risk Rural Roads Program (HRRR)

• Part of new HSIP Core Program beginning with FFY
  2006 Funds
• Purpose is to achieve reduction in traffic
  fatalities and serious injuries on public roads
• Definition of a HRRR Rural Major Minor
  Collectors and rural local roads with fatality
  and incapacitating injury crash rate gt statewide
  average for same classification of routes

13
SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOLS PROGRAM

• Focus on primary and secondary level school
  children and on projects that will help them
  walk/bicycle to school
• Funding for infrastructure-related projects
• Set-aside for non-infrastructure-related
  activities
• State must fund a full-time coordinator position
• Projects are 100 percent Federal share

14
BEHAVIORAL SAFETY PROGRAMS

• No New Sanctions
• Grants for Primary Safety Belt Use
• Alcohol-Impaired Driving Countermeasures
• Motorcyclist Safety Programs
• Work Zone Safety Programs

15
SAFETEA-LU (KANSAS FUNDING FACTS)

• Kansas highway funds increased by 19.25 percent
  from an annual average of 321 million in TEA-21
  to an annual average of 383 million in
  SAFETEA-LU
• Kansas percentage share increase of highway funds
  from ISTEA to TEA-21 was 45 percent (221m-321m)
• The States average annual transit apportionments
  FFY 2004-2009 20.8m
• Kansas will receive 172 percent more in transit
  formula funding under SAFETEA-LU than under TEA-21

16
PRINCIPLES FOR SHARING SAFETEA-LU FUNDS

• Share the growth with Local Governments same
  approach
• Jurisdictions remain the same
• KDOT for CTP
• County
• Urban
• Metropolitan

17
PRINCIPLES FOR SHARING SAFETEA-LU FUNDS, cont.

• Other Federal Programs
• CMAQ
• Rail/Highway Crossing
• Safety Construction
• Transportation Enhancements
• State Planning and Research
• Metropolitan Planning
• High Priority and Transportation Improvement
  Projects

18
SAFTETEA-LU DISTRIBUTION METHOD

• Local percentage increase is the same as KDOTs
  increase
• Safe Routes to Schools funding is part of local
  growth
• High Risk Rural Roads funding is part of
  counties growth
• CMAQ to Metros held at TEA-21 avg.
• HPPs (Earmarked) are not included in KDOT or
  local growth (19/44 Projects are Local)

19
HIGHWAY SPECIAL (Earmarked) PROJECTS

• Distribution of authorizations for High Priority
  Projects 20 percent per year
• Distribution of authorizations for Transportation
  Improvements Projects 10 FY 2005 20 FY 2006
  25 FY 2007 25 FY 2008 20 FY 2009

20
HIGHWAY SPECIAL (Earmarked) PROJECTS, Cont.

• Funds are available until expended
• Projects have their own Obligation Authority
  which is available until expended
• Federal share is 80 percent

21
SAFETEA-LU / Sharing FundsWith Local Governments
Counties(in millions)

• Time Frame/ KDOT CTP Counties
• FFY 2003 198.5 27.2
• FFY 2004 233.6 32.5
• FFY 2005 231.1 31.7
• Avg. TEA 21 206.3 28.3
• Avg. SAFE.-LU 236.0 32.3
• Increase 14.4 14.4
• Estimates (STP, BR, HRRR, and SRS
  Apportionments)

22
SAFETEA-LU / Sharing FundsWith Local Governments
Urban and Metros (in Millions)

• Time Frame/ KDOT CTP Urban Metro
• FFY 2003 198.5 10.1 18.8
• FFY 2004 233.6 12.1 22.8
• FFY 2005 231.1 11.9 22.4
• Avg. TEA 21 206.3 10.5 19.8
• Avg. SAFE.-LU 236.0 12.0 22.7
• Increase 14.4 14.4 14.4
• Estimates (STP, BR, SRS Apportionments and CMAQ
  for Metros)

23
OBLIGATION LIMITATION

• Apportionments reduced by Obligation Limitation
  (OL)
• Initial FFY 2005 OL lower than expected 85.5
  percent
• Barring no fiscal impacts the estimated OL for
  the life of SAFETEA-LU will be 90 percent.
• Some programs are provided 100 OL (TE, SPR, PL,
  HPP, and TIP)
• Remaining obligation is shared proportionally
  (KDOT, Counties, Urban and Metros

24
State Programs

• Local Partnership Program
• Revolving Loan Program
• Railroad Highway/RR Crossings Program
• Corridor Management
• Airport Improvement Program
• Transit program
• Technology Transfer (LTAP)

25
Summary - Questions

• Local Program Contacts
• Federal Programs summary
• Current Programs
• Revision to Programs
• Funding Levels
• State Programs
• Questions

26
PROCESS IMPROVEMENTS FORLOCAL GOVERNMENTPROJECTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
27
GOAL OF IMPROVEDPROCEDURES

• Establish procedures that address concerns of
  our partners (LPAs and consultants, as well as
  other KDOT bureaus/offices) as expressed through
  the P2 process and otherwise, and provide
  adequate plan review to confirm federal aid
  eligibility of the project and uphold KDOTs role
  as stewards of federal and state dollars.

28
SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES

• Clearly define roles and responsibilities of BLP
  and the Designer in review of plans.
• Develop procedures based on this definition that
  result in plan reviews that are consistent and
  focused on the most important items.
• Streamline the process of developing plans
  through BLP.

29
COORDINATION

• APWA/KDOT Local Projects Liaison Committee
• KCHA/KDOT Local Projects Liaison Committee
• ACEC/KDOT Local Projects Subcommittee
• KDOT Bureau of Construction Maintenance
• KDOT Office of Chief Counsel

30
COMPONENTS OF PROPOSAL

• Plan Review Procedures
• Schedules

31
PLAN REVIEW

• Quality Control vs. Quality Assurance

(Designer)
(BLP)
32
BLP PLAN REVIEW OBJECTIVES

• Maintain federal aid eligibility
• Comply with all laws regulations
• Meet prevailing criteria
• Appropriate environmental measures and document.
• Plans provide information that should result in
  fair and reasonable bids from potential
  contractors.
• Constructability
• Traffic handling/traffic control
• Clarity and completeness of plans
• Appropriate bid items properly summarized

33
REVIEW PROCEDURES

• Primary references are listed in the BLP Project
  Development Manual and include the KDOT Design
  Manuals and all applicable AASHTO publications.
• It is expected that a thorough design review will
  be performed by a designer who is experienced
  with the development of KDOT plans prior to the
  submittal of plans to the BLP at any stage of
  development.

34
REVIEW PROCEDURES

• Review will be sufficient to develop a
  reasonable level of confidence in plan
  quality/completeness and that federal or state
  funds are being spent appropriately.
• Spot check technical information, quantities.
• Concentrate on items that have greatest potential
  costs to the agency or traveling public.
• Plans without adequate information for a
  particular stage will be returned to the designer
  to address the issues.

35
PROJECT SCHEDULE RESPONSIBILITIES

• Current Schedule is 29 months long
• 9.5 months in BLP control
• 3.5 months in BOCM control
• 16 months in LPA/Consultant control

36
REVISED SCHEDULE

• Pre-Field Check Plan Preparation
• Field Check Plan Review . . . . . .
• Office Check Plan Preparation . . .
• Office Check Review. . . . . . . . . . .
• Office Check Changes . . . . . . . . .
• Final Check Review . . . . . . . . . .
• Final Check Changes . . . . . . . . .
• PSE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
• Total

• 6 mos.
• 4 mos. (-1.5 mo.)
• 6 mos.
• 2 mos.
• 2 mos.
• 1 mo. (-1 mo.)
• 1 mo. (-1 mo.)
• 3.5 mos.
• 25.5 mos.

37
OTHER INITIATIVE UNDERWAY IN BLP TO ADDRESS
SCHEDULE ISSUES

• Optional Schedules for Local Projects
• Schedule based on project type/complexity.
• KDOT review times unchanged.
• Goal to implement next year.

38
BENEFITS OF NEW PROCEDURES

• Reduces BLP plan review time by more than 25.
• The responsibility for the content/quality of the
  plans is where it should be the designer.
• KDOT performs QA role with review limited to
  major items only.
• Schedules will be more appropriate for the scope
  of a project, reducing number of letting changes.
  (Optional Schedules)

39
IMPLEMENTATION

• Plan Review Procedures Transition is
  underway.
• Schedule Changes All new 5-year plan projects
  this year.
• Optional Schedules Future