New Jersey Department of Transportation

2014 New Jersey Bike & Walk Summit Bloustein School of Planning and Public Policy Rutgers New Brunswick February 8, 2014

Presented By: Michael Russo Director: Local Aid and Economic Development

State Funded Programs
• Municipal Aid

Federal Funded Programs
• Local Lead

• County Aid
• Local Bridges • Safe Streets to Transit • Transit Village • Bikeways • Local Aid Infrastructure Fund • Safe Corridors Highway Safety Funds

• Transportation Alternatives
• Safe Routes to School • Local Safety/High Risk Rural Roads Program • Emergency Relief • High Priority Projects • Transportation and Community System Preservation


Number of Applications

Requested Amount

Number of Grants

Programmed Amount

Municipal Aid

677 95

$247.0M $32.8M

370 12

$78.75M $2.0M

Safe Streets to Transit Transit Villages






Number of Applications

Requested Amount

Number of Grants

Programmed Amount

Safe Routes to Schools Transportation Enhancements





      

Funded by the Transportation Trust Fund Governed by Municipal Aid and County Aid regulations; N.J.A.C. 16:20A & 16:20B Projects advertised and awarded in accordance with Local Public Contracts Law Ineligible costs: utility relocations, engineering, ROW acquisition Projects must be awarded to construction within 18 months of agreement 75% of award/grant amount available at time of award 25% at construction completion and final acceptance Engineer/CFO certifications required at project close-out Close-out documents required within 6 months of final acceptance

 

 

All municipalities eligible Competitive application based process $78.75 M - TTF Roadway rehabilitation & reconstruction, pedestrian safety, bikeway, and streetscapes

Roadway  Pavement condition  Traffic volumes  Truck percentages  Bus route  Improves safety  Serves public facilities  Consideration given to Designated Center, Transit Villages, Complete Streets towns  Construction ready  Project award and close-out performance

Pedestrian Safety, Bikeway & Streetscapes  Rehabilitation vs. new construction  Improves safety  Connectivity  Part of a larger plan  Shared roadway vs. dedicated facility  Mixed Use  Serves public facilities  Consideration given to Designated Centers, Transit Villages, Complete Streets towns  Construction ready  Project award and close-out performance

  

Municipalities and Counties eligible Competitive application based process $1.0 M - TTF Promotes bicycling as an alternate mode of transportation.

     

  

Physically separated from vehicular traffic. Shared used facilities also eligible Creates new bikeway mileage Connectivity with other bike facilities Linkage to centers of activity Consideration given to Designated Centers, Transit Village, and Complete Streets towns Part of an approved Master Plan Readiness to construct Contract award and close-out performance

 

Municipalities and Counties eligible Competitive application based process $0.5 M -TTF Improves pedestrian access to transit facilities and all modes of public transportation

   

 

Within 1/2 mile of transit facility Improves pedestrian safety: crosswalks, pedestrian signals, ADA upgrades, traffic calming, lighting, signage, wayfinding, sidewalk construction Provides pedestrian accommodations and network connectivity where none exists Close proximity to schools Incidence of pedestrian accidents Included in approved Master Plan Consideration given to Designated Centers, Transit Villages, and Complete Streets towns Construction ready Contract award and close-out performance

 

Municipalities and Counties eligible Non competitive - need based review process $7.5 M - TTF Established to address emergent or regional needs

  

 

Counties eligible Non–competitive Formula allocations based on County population and road mileage $78.75 M – TTF Transportation projects including improvements to county owned roads and bridges

   

Counties eligible $25.M - TTF $1.0M per County Remaining $4.0M competitive based on cost benefit assessment Eligibility Criteria: Structurally deficient, functionally obsolete, and scour critical County owned bridges Minor bridges (<20’) eligible for FY 2014

2005 Act - SAFETEA-LU (Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users) 2012 Act - MAP 21(Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century) Fiscal Years 2013 & 2014

   

TAP established in 2012 under MAP 21 Includes much of what was known as Transportation Enhancements and Safe Routes to Schools TAP does not provide for a standalone Transportation Enhancement program 50% of the State’s TAP apportionment is suballocated based on population Requires a competitive project selection process Eligible recipients include local governments, regional transportation authorities, transit agencies, natural resource or public land agencies, school districts or schools, tribal governments

 

Nonprofit organizations no longer eligible as direct recipients Four previously eligible activities not included in MAP-21

MAP-21 permits the use of carryover SAFETEA-LU funds
◦ MAP-21 regulations apply to MAP-21 funds ◦ SAFETEA-LU regulations apply to SAFETEA-LU funds

◦ Pedestrian and bicycle safety and educational programs ◦ Acquisition of scenic or historic easements and sites ◦ Scenic or historic highway programs including tourist and welcome centers ◦ Establishment of transportation museums

 

NJ will maintain separate Safe Routes to Schools and Transportation Alternative programs Request for applications, project selection and funding awards will be administered jointly by NJDOT and MPO’s (50/50 funding share) Hybrid program will utilize SAFETEA-LU and MAP-21 funds to maximize use of funds Anticipate solicitation for SRTS and TA programs in March

Eligible recipients
◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ Local governments Regional transportation authorities Transit Agencies Natural resource or public land agencies Tribal governments Any other local or regional governmental entity with responsibility for oversight of transportation(other than an MPO or State agency)

$15.5M programmed in FY 2014
◦ $8.24M TAP ◦ $7.24 STP-TE

Eligible Categories ◦ Provision of facilities for bicycles and pedestrians ◦ Scenic or historic highway programs, including provision of tourist and welcome centers, scenic turnouts, overlooks and viewing areas ◦ Landscaping and other scenic beautification ◦ Historic preservation ◦ Rehabilitation of historic transportation buildings, structures, and facilities (including historic railroad facilities and canals) ◦ Preservation of abandoned railway corridors (including conversion to pedestrian and bicycle trails) ◦ Environmental mitigation to address water pollution due to highway runoff or reduce vehicle-caused wildlife mortality while maintaining habitat connectivity

        

Local maintenance commitment Economic and/or tourism benefits Promotes use of non-automotive forms of transportation Benefits quality of life, the community, or environment Local support Part of a larger transportation, land use, or economic development plan Consideration given to Designated Center, Transit Villages, Complete Streets towns Enhances, preserves or protects historical/archeological resources Construction ready Project award and close-out performance Urgency. Is it possible the resource could be lost?

    

Municipalities, counties & school districts eligible Competitive application based process Infrastructure projects only. Construction only. $5.6M programmed in FY 2014 Provides funds for projects to encourage and enable children in grades K-8 to walk and bicycle to school

          

Within 2 miles of a K-8 school Support from school board and municipality Potential to improve safety Potential to increase students walking or biking to school Connects to existing bicycle or pedestrian networks Within a School Development Authority District or Urban Aid community Ongoing activities to promote walking and biking Included in Master Plan or School Travel Plan Policy supporting walking or biking to school Railroad crossings within project limits Performance measures Construction ready Supporting documentation such as accident records, speed surveys, survey results, photos, maps

    

MPO subregions eligible MPO project selection process – competitive Federal-aid routes and bridges eligible $105M Federal Provides Federal funds to advance projects through preliminary engineering, final design, right of way, and construction.

23 CFR – Title 23 – Highways

49 CFR – Title 49 - Transportation

◦ Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) requirements for the administration of federal-aid for highways
◦ Office of Management and Budget (OMB) requirements grants management common rule for U.S. Department of Transportation ◦ Defines terms and conditions governing federal grants ◦ 49 CFR Part 18 – grants management common rule for State and Local governments ◦ 2 CFR Part 225 – Cost Principals – defines federal principals for determining allowable costs ◦ A-133 Circular – defines Single Audit requirements

Funds are provided on a reimbursement basis Costs incurred prior to authorization of funds are ineligible for reimbursement LPA’s are not recognized as direct recipients of Federal-aid NJDOT serves as pass-through As the direct recipient of federal funds, NJDOT is responsible for ensuring project sponsors comply with applicable federal laws and regulations. NJDOT is responsible for ensuring project sponsors have adequate project delivery systems and internal financial controls to manage federal funds.

The State DOT may arrange for Local Public Agencies to perform Federal-aid projects on roads under local jurisdiction provided
◦ LPA meets all federal-aid requirements ◦ LPA is adequately staffed and suitably equipped to undertake and satisfactorily complete the work of the project. “ ◦ LPA provides adequate supervision and inspection to insure projects are completed in conformance with approved plans and specifications ◦ LPA provides a full time employee to be in responsible charge of the project

LPA’s receiving Federal-aid funds through NJDOT must have adequate internal controls in place All LPA’s will be assessed by NJDOT prior to authorization of Federal- aid funds to determine the adequacy of the organization’s accounting controls, and administrative and project management systems. Assessment will be based on the requirements set forth in 49 CFR 18 & 19, 2 CFR 225 & 230, A-133, and 23 CFR

◦ Assesses LPA’s internal controls governing project management & construction contract administration
 Responsible Charge  Construction inspection  Source documents (if its not documented, it didn’t happen)  Buy America  ADA Compliance  DBE Compliance  Contract Changes – Change Orders  Progress Schedules  Project Billings  Contract Time and Liquidated Damages

           

Pick the correct program for the project Apply for multiple programs if appropriate Review NJDOT guidance material Prepare application based on program criteria Be thorough. Rating based on content of application. Include all requested information such as maintenance commitments, letters of support etc. Don’t assume raters know the project. Application must stand on its own merit. Indicate construction readiness. Discuss status of permits, right of way, and utility relocations Include maps and photos Secure local support Past performance counts. Ensure previously funded projects are awarded and closed-out within required time frames Assess your organization’s ability to administer a federal-aid project and prepare accordingly

Rutgers Center for Advanced Infrastructure and Transportation (CAIT)
◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ Federal Aid Compliance and LPA Stewardship Highway Inspection Procedures for Federal-aid Projects Design of ADA curb Ramps Compliance to the American with Disabilities Act Grant Management for Federal Aid Projects

NJDOT Local Aid and Economic Development

LPA Training-Rutgers Center for Advanced Infrastructure and Transportation (CAIT)

FHWA Federal-aid Essentials for Local Public Agencies

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful