Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Implementation of HB2 (2014) and HB 1887 (2015)

0 views

Published on

Implementation of HB2 (2014) and HB 1887 (2015)

Board Transportation Committee

July 14, 2015

Published in: News & Politics
  • Be the first to comment

Implementation of HB2 (2014) and HB 1887 (2015)

  1. 1. County of Fairfax, Virginia Department of Transportation Implementation of HB 2 (2014) and HB 1887 (2015) Board Transportation Committee July 14, 2015 Noelle Dominguez, Legislative Liaison Department of Transportation
  2. 2. County of Fairfax, Virginia In the past two years, significant changes have been made to the way that transportation projects are funded in Virginia. Presentation will provide information on the changes to State Code and the new processes for related state and federal funding: • Legislative and Funding Background • Project Eligibility and Screening • Evaluation Criteria • Project Costs • Application Process • Project Scoring • Annual HB 2 Application Cycle • CTB Prioritization and Programming • Changes in Project Scope, Schedule, and/or Cost Department of Transportation 2 Recent Changes to the State Transportation Funding Processes
  3. 3. County of Fairfax, Virginia Department of Transportation 3 HB 2 Summary • HB 2 (2014) provides for the development of a prioritization process for projects funded by the Commonwealth Transportation Board (CTB). The bill: – Directs the CTB to develop and implement the prioritization process for roadway, transit, rail, technology operation improvements, and transportation demand management strategies that must be used for the development of the Six-Year Improvement Program (SYIP), starting July 1, 2016. • The process must consider: congestion mitigation, economic development, accessibility, safety, and environmental quality. • The CTB will weight these factors for each of the Commonwealth’s transportation districts, and the CTB assigned different weights to the factors based on location and other factors. • Congestion mitigation must be weighted highest in Northern Virginia and Hampton Roads. – Excludes maintenance, federal programs, including Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ), Highway Safety Improvement Program, Transportation Alternatives, and Regional Surface Transportation Program; and several state programs, including urban and secondary road program funds, and revenue sharing.
  4. 4. County of Fairfax, Virginia Department of Transportation 4 HB 1887 Summary • In 2015, the General Assembly approved HB 1887, which replaces the old 40-30-30 (primary – secondary – urban) roadway funding formula with a new formula. Under the old system, secondary and urban funds were allocated to projects by the localities. HB 1887 changes the old formula to the following: – 45% of the funding to state of good repair, (rehabilitation of structurally deficient bridges and deteriorating pavement) - allocated by CTB – 27.5% of the funding to the statewide high-priority projects program (projects of statewide importance to be competed under HB 2) - allocated by CTB – 27.5% of the funding to highway construction district grant programs (localities would compete for funds under a regional version of HB 2) - allocated by CTB • Also provided that any un-programmed funds in FY 2016-2020 in the SYIP would be split 50-50 between the high-priority projects program and the highway construction district grant programs.
  5. 5. County of Fairfax, Virginia Historical Funding Formula Department of Transportation 5 Revenue Source Transportation Trust Fund (New Highway Construction) Set Asides CMAQ, RSTP, Revenue Sharing, etc. Interstate Projects Federal Match Revenue Source Revenue Source Revenue Source Allocated by CTB 40% Primary System Allocated by CTB 30% Secondary System 30% Urban System County Board Sets Priorities, without restrictions City/Town Council; Sets Priorities, without restrictions
  6. 6. County of Fairfax, Virginia 2012-2015 Funding Formula Department of Transportation 6 Transportation Trust Fund (New Highway Construction) Interstate Projects Federal Match Revenue Source Allocated by CTB 40% Primary System Allocated by CTB Revenue Source Revenue Source Revenue Source $500 Million/ CTB Formula Allocated by CTB  25% - Bridge Reconstruction and Rehabilitation  25% - High Priority Projects  25% - Interstate, Primary, and Urban Primary Reconstruction  15% - PPTA Projects  5% - Unpaved Roads  5% - Technology Projects (CTB has discretion to adjust percentages) Up to 10% for rail projects that reduce road construction Allocated by CTB Set Asides CMAQ, RSTP, Revenue Sharing, etc. 30% Primary System County Board Sets Priorities, without restrictions 30% Urban System City/Town Council; Sets Priorities, without restrictions
  7. 7. County of Fairfax, Virginia New Funding Formula Department of Transportation 7 Transportation Trust Fund (New Highway Construction) Set Asides CMAQ, RSTP, Revenue Sharing, etc. * 45% - State of Good Repair Pavements and Bridges 27.5% - High Priority Projects Program: Projects and Strategies that address a need identified for a corridor of statewide significance or regional network. 27.5% - Highway Construction District Grant Program Funding available to districts based on allocations pursuant to formulas contained in historical 40-30-30 formula, so each district receives identical proportional share of what they would have previously received. Projects and strategies must address a need in the Statewide Transportation Plan Revenue Source Revenue Source Allocated by CTB Using Criteria Allocated by CTB using HB 2 criteria. Local governments, regional agencies, or transit agencies can apply. Allocated by CTB using HB 2 criteria. Local governments can apply. * new $10M set aside for County safety and operational improvements - allocated based on population and land area
  8. 8. County of Fairfax, Virginia Implementation of HB 2 and HB 1887 • On March 18, 2015, a draft HB 2 Implementation Policy Guide was released for Public Comment. Comments were accepted in March and April. – The Board of Supervisors endorsed comments at its April 28, 2016, meeting. • Following some modifications, the CTB adopted the policy on Wednesday, June 17, 2015. Department of Transportation 8
  9. 9. County of Fairfax, Virginia HB 1887 Eligibility and Screening • Projects must meet a need identified in VTrans 2040 (Virginia Multimodal Transportation Plan) for a Corridor of Statewide Significance (COSS), Regional Network or Urban Development Area (UDA) to be considered for the Programs. The screening criteria for each type of project are: – COSS – key multimodal travel corridors that move people and goods within and through Virginia, serving primarily long-distance / interregional travel. • Corridors in our region are the Northern Virginia Corridor (I-66), Seminole Corridor (Route 29), Washington to NC Corridor (I-95), and North-South Corridor. – Regional Networks – multimodal networks that facilitate intraregional travel within urbanized areas – Urban Development Areas (UDA) – areas where jurisdictions intend to concentrate future population growth and development consistent with the UDA section within the Code of Virginia. Tysons is currently Fairfax County’s only UDA. UDA’s must be designated by September 30, 2015 for this round of funding. – Transportation Safety Needs – statewide safety needs identified in VTrans2040 Department of Transportation 9
  10. 10. County of Fairfax, Virginia HB 1887 Eligibility Department of Transportation 10 Project Type Statewide High Priority Projects Program District Grant Program Capacity Need on COSS Yes Yes Capacity Need on Regional Networks Yes Yes Improvement to Support UDAs No Yes Addressing a Safety need Identified in VTrans No Yes • Applicants will need to identify which of these best fit their candidate project. • Not all types of projects are eligible for both grant programs: • Projects found to be eligible through the screening process will be forwarded to VDOT and DRPT for evaluation according to the HB 2 factors and measures.
  11. 11. County of Fairfax, Virginia Eligibility to Submit Projects • Only projects submitted by localities are eligible for the District Grant Program. • Regional entities, localities, and public transit agencies are eligible to submit projects to the High-Priority Projects Program, but may be limited in project type: Department of Transportation 11 Project Type Regional Entity (MPOs, PDCs, NVTA) Locality Public Transit Agencies COSS Yes Yes, with resolution of support from relevant regional entity Yes, with resolution of support from relevant regional entity Regional Network Yes Yes Yes, with resolution of support from relevant entity UDA No Yes No
  12. 12. County of Fairfax, Virginia Eligibility to Submit Projects (cont.) • Project must be located within the boundary of the relevant qualifying entity. • Local governments may submit a joint application for projects that cross the boundary of a single local government. • The CTB may also choose to submit up to 2 projects for consideration through the High Priority Projects Program for each application cycle, for the entire Commonwealth. Department of Transportation 12
  13. 13. County of Fairfax, Virginia Factors and Evaluation Measures The Policy Guide provides general evaluation measures for each HB 2 factor. Specific definitions are also included. • Congestion Mitigation: – 50% - Expected Reduction in Person Hours of Delay up to Posted Speed Limit – 50% - Expected Increase in Person Throughput in the Corridor • Safety: – 50% - Expected Reduction in Total Fatalities and Severe Injuries on the Facility* – 50% - Expected Reduction in the Rate of Fatalities and Several Injuries per 100 Million Vehicle Miles Traveled on the Facility • Accessibility: – 60% - Cumulative Increase in Job Accessibility (within 45 minutes by Automobile and 60 minutes for Transit) – 20% - Cumulative Increase in Job Accessibility for Disadvantaged Populations (within 45 minutes by Automobile and 60 minutes by Transit) – 20% - Increase in Access to Multimodal Choices * 100% for transit projects Department of Transportation 13
  14. 14. County of Fairfax, Virginia Factors and Evaluation Measures (cont.) • Environmental Quality – 50% - Degree to Which the Project is Expected to Reduce Air Emissions and Greenhouse Gases – 50% - Potential impact to Natural, Cultural, and Historic Resources from the Project • Economic Development: – 60% - Support for Economic Development Plans – 20% - Expected Improvements to Travel Time Reliability of the Facility – 20% - Improved Intermodal Access and Efficiency • Land Use Coordination (only for areas with population over 200,000): – 100% - Support of Transportation Efficient Land Use Patterns Details of each measure are important. Department of Transportation 14
  15. 15. County of Fairfax, Virginia Factor Weighting • The guide includes four categories for Factor Weighting throughout the Commonwealth. – Category A - primarily includes urban regions (Northern Virginia, Hampton Roads, Fredericksburg). – Category B - combination of high anticipated growth and above average travel demand with high density in some areas and low density in others. – Category C - median population growth, and diverse outcomes on travel demand and existing density. – Category D - below average population growth, travel demand and existing density. • Weighting schemes for each Category are: Department of Transportation 15 Congestion Mitigation Economic Development Accessibility Safety Environmental Quality Land Use Category A 45% 5% 15% 5% 10% 20% Category B 15% 20% 25% 20% 10% 10% Category C 15% 25% 25% 25% 10% Category D 10% 35% 15% 30% 10%
  16. 16. County of Fairfax, Virginia Project Cost • HB 2 requires that the prioritization process be based on the factors relative to the cost of the project. • For HB 2 project scoring, project benefits will be calculated relative to HB2-funded costs only. The calculation of scores based on total cost will be provided to the CTB for comparison purposes. – Regional stakeholders, included the County and NVTA, commented that the funds that the Authority and its member jurisdictions allocate should not be considered in any statewide cost- benefit analysis. Department of Transportation 16
  17. 17. County of Fairfax, Virginia Application Process • Project sponsors will need to coordinate with VDOT and DRPT early in the process to share information on prospective applications. – This will allow project descriptions, cost estimates, and potential benefits to be developed and refined, and will facilitate the application and evaluation process. • If an applicant submits more than one project for consideration, must rank their submitted projects in priority order. VDOT and DRPT will evaluate projects in priority order. • The application, currently being finalized, is expected to be “simple and straightforward.” Specific information on projects, including data for certain measures must be provided by the applicant. Department of Transportation 17
  18. 18. County of Fairfax, Virginia Application Process (cont.) • HB2 project applications must include the following information: – Scope - limits of the project, its physical and operational characteristics, and physical and/or operational footprint. – Schedule - the expected process for further project development including key milestones, work activities, related activities, approvals/approval timelines. The schedule should be realistic and reflect the complexity of the project, and identify durations for project phases – Cost –be realistic and account for applicable risk and contingencies based on the size and complexity of the project. • Projects that are based on conceptual planning-level recommendations, or have not been formally scoped or defined, may require additional planning/ pre-scoping before their benefits can be adequately assessed through HB 2. Department of Transportation 18
  19. 19. County of Fairfax, Virginia Application Process (cont.) • Cost Estimates: – For VDOT administered projects, VDOT to provide the applicant with a cost estimate. If the applicant has provided an estimate, it must be validated by VDOT. – For locally administered projects and for all DRPT oversight projects, the applicant may provide a cost estimate for each project application, however it must be validated by VDOT and/or DRPT. – If there is disagreement concerning the estimate that cannot be resolved between the applicant and the VDOT/DRPT local contact, the applicant may request resolution from the VDOT District Engineer/Administrator or the DRPT Director. Department of Transportation 19
  20. 20. County of Fairfax, Virginia Project Scoring Department of Transportation 20 • Each project will be scored by: – Calculating values for each of the evaluation measures – Converting those values into a score for each factor – Then by weighting the factor scores according to one of several potential weighting frameworks approved by the CTB. • The best project within each measure dictates scores for all projects: VDOT HB 2 Presentation Document - July 9, 2015
  21. 21. County of Fairfax, Virginia Project Scoring (cont.) Department of Transportation 21  Apply Measure Weights: Once each measure’s score has been assigned, the weighting is applied. The sum of weighted measure scores will produce the raw factor score.  Apply Factor Weights. The raw factor score is multiplied by the assigned weighting percentage.  Project Score. All weighted factor scores are added together to provide the project score.  Calculate Cost-Effectiveness. The project score is divided by the HB2-funded cost of the project (in $10 millions). • For example with a project, with a total score of $30 million scores 61.5: o If the project is requesting $15 million in HB2 funds, the cost- effectiveness index would be 41 per $ 10 million dollars of HB2 funds invested. o If the total project costs were used, the cost-effectiveness index would be 21 per $ 10 million dollars of cost.
  22. 22. County of Fairfax, Virginia Project Scoring Example Department of Transportation 22 Project "A" - located in Typology A Congestion Safety Accessibility Environ. Econ. Dev. Land Use Throughput Delay F&SICrashes F&SICrashRate AccesstoJobs AccesstoJobs (Dis.Pop.) Multimodal Choices AirQuality Natural&Cult. Resources Economic Development Goods Movement TravelTim Reliability Trans.Efficient LandUse Measure Score 62 48 20 32 10 20 10 38 28 30 20 20 17 Measure Weight 50% 50% 50% 50% 60% 20% 20% 50% 50% 60% 20% 20% 100% Weighted Measure Score 31 24 10 16 6 4 2 19 14 18 4 4 17 Raw Factor Score 55 26 12 33.0 26.0 17 Factor Weighting (Typ. A) 45% 5% 15% 10% 5% 20% Weighted Factor Score 24.8 1.3 1.8 3.3 1.3 3.4 Project Score 35.9 Total Project Cost $20,000,000 Score Divided by Total Cost 18.0 HB2 Cost $10,000,000 Score Divided by HB2 Cost 35.9 VDOT HB 2 Presentation Document - July 9, 2015
  23. 23. County of Fairfax, Virginia Annual HB 2 Cycle Department of Transportation 23 Final HB 2 Implementation Policy Guide
  24. 24. County of Fairfax, Virginia Funding Available for HB 2 Process (subject to revisions) HB 2 Percentage Amount Available (in Millions) District Grant Programs $500.1 - Bristol 7.1 35.3 - Culpeper 6.2 31.1 - Fredericksburg 6.9 34.3 - Hampton Roads 20.2 100.8 - Lynchburg 7.1 35.7 - Northern Virginia 20.7 103.7 - Richmond 14.4 72.2 - Salem 9.6 48.1 - Staunton 7.8 39.0 Statewide High-Priority Projects Program 500.1 Total 100.00 1,000.2 Department of Transportation 24
  25. 25. County of Fairfax, Virginia CTB Prioritization and Programming • The HB2 review teams will present the screening and scoring results to the CTB and the public. • The CTB will give guidance on program development, and begin to narrow down their funding decisions for projects that will be funded in the draft SYIP. • After the draft SYIP is presented, VDOT and DRPT will hold a public comment period that will allow eligible entities to comment on the process, screening decisions, and scoring of individual projects. • CTB will take into account public comments on the draft SYIP, ultimately approving the final SYIP for implementation in June. Department of Transportation 25
  26. 26. County of Fairfax, Virginia CTB Prioritization and Programming (cont.) • Prioritization process does not require the CTB to funds projects in order of their scoring or to select the highest scoring project. • Additional consideration may be used to develop the SYIP, such as: – Public feedback from Fall Transportation Meetings; – Overall availability of funding and eligible uses of such funding; – Leveraging of outside funding sources – Maximizing the use of Federal funds; – Project development considerations – timeframe and extent of Federally required location studies; – Project segmentation – starting the next phase of a multi-segment roadway improvement. Department of Transportation 26
  27. 27. County of Fairfax, Virginia Changes in Project Scope/ Schedule/ Costs Following Project Selection • Projects that have been selected for funding must be rescored if: – A change in the scope of the project significant enough to impact the anticipated benefits or to require the location decision, the environmental review process, or public hearing to be revisited; OR – Significant reduction in the locally/regionally leveraged funds available for the project. – An estimate increase over certain thresholds, prior to contract award, unless local or other exempt funding is identified to support the increase. Department of Transportation 27
  28. 28. County of Fairfax, Virginia Changes in Project Costs • Projects must be re-scored when, based on the total project cost and the increase in the cost: – Total Cost Estimate <$5 million: 20% increase prior to award of the construction contract – Total Cost Estimate $5 million to $10 million: $1 million or greater increase prior to award of the construction contract – Total Cost Estimate > $10 million: 10% increase, with a $5 million maximum, prior to the award of the construction contract • To cover cost increases, funds will be reprogrammed from projects with surplus allocations due to estimate decreases, contract award savings, schedule changes, etc. or from the lowest priority project with eligible funds. • If a project is selected for funding in an approved SYIP, intent is to keep that project as a priority in subsequent SYIPs even if constraints require temporarily de-funding lower-priority HB2 selected projects beyond the current six-year program. Department of Transportation 28
  29. 29. County of Fairfax, Virginia Potential Fairfax County Projects for Submission (not in priority order) Department of Transportation 29 • Route 1 Widening from Mt Vernon Memorial Highway to Napper Road • Route 7 Widening from the Dulles Toll Road to Reston Ave • Route 28 Widening from Route Rt. 29 to the Prince William County Line • Fairfax County Parkway Improvements – Route 123 to Route 29 – Popes Head Road Interchange • I-66 and Route 28 Interchange (Phase II) & I-66 Corridor Improvements (Outside the Beltway) • I-95 and Fairfax County Parkway/Northbound Flyover • Seven Corners Interchange Improvements • Shirley Gate Road Extension
  30. 30. County of Fairfax, Virginia Department of Transportation 30 Questions?

×