Memorandum

Date:     April 3, 2014

To:          Boston Region Metropolitan Planning Organization

From:     Sean Pfalzer, Transportation Improvement Program Manager,

                 MPO Staff

Re:           FFYs 2015-18 Transportation Improvement Program Highway Target Funding

The purpose of this memorandum is to present issues and concerns in developing a staff recommendation for the Highway Target funds for federal fiscal years (FFYs) 2015–18 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). The staff recommendation typically proposes transportation projects and programs to fund with the MPO’s Regional Highway Target Funding over the upcoming TIP’s four federal fiscal years. In developing a staff recommendation, MPO staff works with the target funding levels to:

•   Address cost increases and schedule changes of existing projects

•   Allocate funding to current and ongoing TIP commitments

•   Propose new projects to receive funding that advance the MPO’s priorities

This memo does not propose a staff recommendation, but instead discusses the issues that have emerged in the development process for the upcoming TIP: 1) the Regional Highway Target Funding amounts by year and funding program; and 2) project cost increases and schedule changes of existing projects that need to be addressed in the staff recommendation and their impact on fulfilling ongoing commitments. Also included is this year’s First-Tier List of Projects, which, as in any year, would serve as the primary source of new projects for the TIP.

REGIONAL HIGHWAY TARGET FUNDING

MassDOT released the draft Regional Highway Targets on February 28, 2014. The Regional Targets indicate that the MPO has approximately $293.3 million to spend on projects and programs in the FFYs 2015-18 TIP. Table 1 compares the funding levels of the current TIP and the FFYs 2015-18 TIP. As shown in the table, there are minor increases in target funding in FFYs 2015-17. In FFY 2018, the Regional Target remains constant with FFYs 2016 and 2017 levels, at approximately $75 million.

TABLE 1.

Comparison of Regional Target Funding, Current vs. FFYs 2015-18 TIP

The Regional Highway Target Funds contain annual targets for three of the eligible funding programs: 1) Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement (CMAQ) Program, 2) Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP), and 3) Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP). Under the federal transportation bill, Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21), the CMAQ Program provides a flexible funding source for transportation projects and programs that help meet the requirements of the Clean Air Act; HSIP aims to achieve a significant reduction in traffic fatalities and serious injuries; and TAP supports the implementation of on- and off-road pedestrian and bicycle facilities, infrastructure projects for improving bicycle and pedestrian access to public transportation, and safe-routes-to-school projects.

For the FFYs 2015-18 TIP, the funding targets decrease the minimum amount of CMAQ spending on CMAQ-eligible projects to about $56.4 million; reduce the amount available to be programmed with HSIP funds to roughly $17.7 million; and increase TAP program funds to roughly $12.5 million. In developing the staff recommendation, staff considers project funding eligibility in order to allow the MPO to meet its funding targets.

TABLE 2.

Comparison of Regional Targets by Funding Program,

Current vs. FFYs 2015-18 TIP

The remaining portion of funding is eligible to be programmed under the Surface Transportation Program (STP) or the National Highway Performance Program (NHPP). The funding level for these two programs combined is capped at approximately $206.6 million over FFYs 2015-18.

PROJECT COST INCREASES AND SCHEDULE CHANGES

In working on a staff recommendation, MPO staff first addressed project cost increases and schedule changes for projects currently programmed in the FFYs 2014-17 TIP. There were six projects programmed to be advertised in FFYs 2014-17 that have had cost increases. Table 3 lists the projects with cost increases and the difference between the TIP amount needed and the TIP amount programmed. These project cost increases total approximately $36 million.  

TABLE 3.

Summary of Project Cost Increases

** Indicates a project that has experienced multiple cost increases.

In addition to needing to address project cost increases, the recommendation also needs to account for updates to project design schedules. There are four projects programmed in the current TIP that likely would not be made ready for advertisement in their current fiscal year of programming.

• Reconstruction on Canal Street in Salem is programmed in FFY 2014, but because of right-of-way (ROW) issues it likely would not be made ready for advertisement by September 30, 2014.
• Intersection and Signal Improvements at Route 9 and Village Square in Brookline is programmed in FFY 2015; however, the current design schedule likely would not be made ready for advertisement by September 30, 2015.  
• Reconstruction of Route 85 in Marlborough is programmed in FFY 2015; however, the current design schedule likely would not be made ready for advertisement by September 30, 2015. 
• Middlesex Turnpike Improvements (Phase III) in Bedford, Billerica, and Burlington is programmed in FFY 2016; but because of significant bridge design that still needs to be completed, it likely would not be made ready for advertisement by September 30, 2016.

CURRENT AND ONGOING COMMITMENTS TO THE GREEN LINE EXTENSION, PHASE 2

Staff next identified current and ongoing programming commitments to the Green Line Extension, Phase 2, from College Avenue to Route 16. The MPO has supported this project in the LRTP, programmed it in the FFYs 2014-17 TIP, and expects to continue programming it in the FFYs 2015-18 TIP. Table 4 lists the currently anticipated programming amounts for the project in FFYs 2016-18 and future TIP years beyond FFY 2018. Table 4 indicates that the Green Line Extension, Phase 2, from College Avenue to Route 16 in Somerville and Medford, accounting for 11% of MPO target funding in FFY 2016, becomes an even larger share of the MPO’s investments in FFY 2017 (40%) and FFY 2018 (59%). The remaining balance shown in the table represents funding that would need to be programmed in subsequent TIP years. Based on the current cost and schedule, the project would require programming through FFY 2021.

TABLE 4.

Summary of Current and Ongoing Commitments

OVERVIEW OF FFYS 2014-18 TIP

Based on the project cost increases, schedule changes, and ongoing commitments, MPO staff attempted to prepare a staff recommendation that would satisfy the needs of all projects. However, project funding needs exceed the amount of funding available to the MPO. MPO staff encountered funding challenges in FFYs 2017 and 2018, in which there was not enough funding available to fully program existing projects and also meet currently projected cash flows for the Green Line Extension, Phase 2. As it is, the overall MPO target program falls $7.1 million short of funding its commitment by almost $2.4 million in FFY 2017 and $4.7 million in FFY 2018. An overview of the existing funding commitments and funding shortfalls is detailed in Table 7, at the end of this memorandum. 

ISSUES AND CONCERNS

The funding constraint displayed in Table 7 generates concerns about FFYs 2015-18 and beyond. The MPO has several LRTP commitments, including four roadway expansion projects and one transit expansion project that utilize a majority of the MPO’s target funding in FFYs 2016 and 2017, and even exceed the MPO’s target funding in FFY 2018. Table 5 below lists the Long-Range Transportation Plan commitments currently programmed and those commitments scheduled to be implemented through the TIP in the future. Table 5 indicates that the MPO is currently overcommitted to LRTP projects in FFY 2018 and likely would remain overcommitted in FFYs 2019-20.

TABLE 5.

Implementation of Long-Range Transportation Plan Commitments

MPO staff is also concerned about the schedule and cost for the Green Line Extension, Phase 2 project. The project is still at the early planning, pre-conceptual design stage. Based on past TIP-funding experience, the project cost very likely would increase when the project begins design and advances through the design process. Cost increases associated with major infrastructure projects typically have a greater impact on the MPO’s total target funding, and future cost increases would place additional pressure on the target funds in the years beyond. 

FIRST-TIER LIST OF HIGHWAY PROJECTS 

Following the MPO TIP development program, MPO staff created the First-Tier List of Highway Projects using project-evaluation results and information on readiness. The First-Tier List comprises projects that have received high scores through the TIP evaluation process, and which could be made ready for advertisement within FFYs 2015-18. The First-Tier List and staff recommendation work within the framework set by the LRTP. LRTP projects with high scores in the 2016-20 time band are included in the First-Tier List of Projects; however, projects with high scores in later LRTP time bands (not within the scope of this TIP) are not included. Table 6 presents the First-Tier List of Highway Projects. This year’s First-Tier List contains ten projects, totaling almost $100 million worth of transportation infrastructure investments.

TABLE 6.

First-Tier List of Highway Projects

SP/sp

TABLE 7a.

TIP Overview