Program Development Session F-1

The Metropolitan Transportation Planning Process

Session F-1 - Slide 2

Session Objectives

Define what is meant by “programming” Identify common elements in programming Describe how programming leads to the TIP

Key Elements of the Planning Process

Session F-1 - Slide 3

ProblemIdentification

Objectives & MOEs

Visioning &Goals

Analysis &Evaluation

Alternatives

Monitoring

Plan Approval

ProjectDevelopment& Operation The

PublicProgram

Development

Session F-1 - Slide 4

What is Programming and Why Do We Do It?

Programming is identifying top priority projects for funding

The total cost of worthy projects always exceeds available funding – hence the need to set priorities

Programming decisions are documented in the TIP and STIP

Session F-1 - Slide 5

Common Elements in Programming

1. Open solicitation of projects

2. An initial screening

3. A technical scoring process

4. A selection process

Broad Solicitation

Technical Review

Consensual Decision

Coarse Screen

Fine Screen

Prioritized Projects

Session F-1 - Slide 6

Approach 1: Common Technical Scoring Process

All projects are examined with the same evaluative measures

Broad Solicitation

Common Evaluative

Criteria

Consensual Decision

Prioritized Projects

Session F-1 - Slide 7

Programming in St. Louis

1. Broad regional solicitation

2. Screening – eligibility, financial plan, clear need

3. Evaluation – all projects examined using seven Focus Areas

4. Projects rank ordered by score

Session F-1 - Slide 8

Weighting System for Each Category: St. Louis

Approach 2: Program Specific Technical Scoring Process

Selection from Top Ranking Projects

All Roadway Expansion Projects

All Roadway Preservation ProjectsAll Transit Projects

Preservation Criteria

Transit Criteria

Roadway Flow Criteria

Prioritized Projects Session F-1 - Slide 9

Session F-1 - Slide 10

Characteristics of aSuccessful Programming Process

Early consensus on planning goals Effective communication among technical and

policy leaders Continuous public involvement Qualitative as well as quantitative criteria

Session F-1 - Slide 11

Florida’s Public Involvement

In Florida, smaller MPOs are experimenting with “games” for project prioritization

Source: Beever and Wagner, 2000

Session F-1 - Slide 12

Albany’s Quantitative and Qualitative Evaluation

Quantitative procedure uses measures that cut across modes, such as relative cost effectiveness

Qualitative benefits of projects are incorporated into this evaluation procedure with narrative text

Session F-1 - Slide 13

Albany’s Use of Quantitative Analysis

Albany’s formula for benefit/cost ratio is the sum of five categories of quantifiable project benefits divided by the annualized cost of the project. Safety Travel Time Energy/User Life Cycle Other  

Session F-1 - Slide 14

Albany’s Use of Qualitative Analysis

Congestion relief  Air quality benefit  Regional system linkage  Land use compatibility (planned or existing)  Contribution to community or economic

development  Environmental issues  Business or housing relocations

Session F-1 - Slide 15

How Does Programming Lead to the TIP? -- Kansas City

Technical Criteria

Project Submittals

Policy Criteria

Project Evaluation

TTPC Review of Draft TIP*Conformity

Determination

*TTPC is the TIP Priorities Committees

TIP Final Draft

Public Comment

TTPC Approval*

Policy Board ActionSource: Mid-America Regional Council

Session F-1 - Slide 16

Summary

What is meant by “programming”? List some common programming elements How does programming lead to the TIP?