Transportation Technical Advisory Committee Meeting AgendaTransportation Technical Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda Wednesday, April 13, 2016 12:00 PM NRPC Office Main Conference

Transportation Technical Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda

Wednesday, April 13, 2016 12:00 PM NRPC Office Main Conference Room

9 Executive Park Drive, Suite 201 Merrimack, New Hampshire

1. Call to Order and Introductions

2. Approval of the Minutes of the January 13 and February 10, 2016 Meetings

3. Staff Presentation: Complete Streets Guide Update

4. S/TIP Amendment 3 (Action Item)

5. Staff Updates:

a. MTP Project List b. ITS Plan c. Final Rules: Highway Safety Improvement Program and Safety Performance

Measures

Bring a Brown Bag Lunch

Please park in the rear of the building

http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/hsip/spm/docs/measures_final_rules.pdf

DRAFT MINUTES NRPC TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING

01/13/16

Members Present: Sarah Marchant, City of Nashua

John Cashell, Town of Hudson Joe Mendola, City of Nashua Kyle Fox, Town of Merrimack Jeff Gowan, Town of Pelham Lincoln Daley, Town of Milford Others Present: Wayne Husband, City of Nashua Carol Macuch, NHDOT

STAFF PRESENT Tim Roache, Executive Director Julie Chizmas, Senior Transportation Planner Jen Czysz, Assistant Director Camille Pattison, Planning Manager Ryan Friedman, Senior GIS Planner Karen Baker, Program Assistant Cassie Mullen, NRPC Intern

CALL TO ORDER AND INTRODUCTIONS Czysz opened the meeting at 12:12pm with introductions.

APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FROM THE NOVEMBER 18, 2015 Czysz referred to the minutes of November 18, 2015 included in the agenda packet as Attachment 1. She asked for a motion to approve. Fox moved to approve the November 18, 2015 minutes with a second from Husband. All were in favor with one abstention.

S/TIP AMENDMENT 2 – ACTION REQUIRED Chizmas informed the group of S/TIP Amendment 2 which was received in December and was advertised for public comment in the Telegraph and comments were accepted through January 8th. She noted that comments were received from Nashua Transit System, Department of Transportation and NRPC had comments as well. She reviewed the comments with the group: Nashua Transit System Comments

NASHUA (14815) - NTS CNG Bus Purchase: This project should be removed from the S/TIP; bus purchase included in Nashua-5 Fleet Replacement project.

NASHUA-1a (40786) - Operating Assistance, Preventative Maintenance & ADA Operations: Funding should reflect NTS budget projection numbers (provided in spreadsheet attached to public comment email) for Non-Operating Assistance projects (80/20 split) and should not include Operating Assistance (50/50 split).

NASHUA-1 (6080) - Planning Assistance: Add project to Amendment - This project should be included in NASHUA-1A, which consolidates Non-Operating Assistance projects with 80/20 funding.

NASHUA-2 (6090) - Operating Assistance: Operating Assistance is funded 50/50 and therefore, this project should not be included in consolidated project NASHUA-1a. Funding should reflect NTS budget projection numbers (provided in spreadsheet attached to public comment).

NASHUA-5 (6099) - Fleet Replacement: Funding should include FTA 5310 and FTA 5339 funding as shown on attached spreadsheet. Also, CNG fleet being purchased is eligible for federal match of 85%, so split should be 85/7.5/7.5.

NASHUA-6 (3797) - Capital Equip: This project should be removed from the S/TIP.

NASHUA (16314) - East Hollis St: Can we change “Roundabout” to Traffic Improvements? Also, we are looking to enlarge the scope of the study area for this project as recently discussed with Hudson and Mr. Grandmaison from DOT. The study area would need to include the entryway into Hudson

ATTACHMENT 1

TTAC DRAFT Minutes

January 13, 2016

Page 2

TR/kmb

on the east, and all the way back to Armory/Temple on the west, with the inclusion of Crown St for the future rail station.

NASHUA (10136A & 10136B) - NH 101A Widening: Nashua 10136A and B – the timeframes between ROW and construction seem very long, and we would support them being shorter however we are in support of the project.

NRPC MPO Comments

Milford (14492) - Improvements in the Oval Area: Add project to Amendment, Add FY2016 PE phase to expedite project delivery.

NHDOT Comments

Roxbury –Sullivan (10439) - Not an NRPC MPO Project: Project removed from Amendment 2 resulting in updated fiscal constraint analysis.

Chizmas proceeded by summarizing the MPO Summary of changes requested through S/TIP Amendment which included updates specific to the Nashua Metropolitan Planning. Macuch questioned the NRPC comment & change for the Milford project. Roache explained that the town would be ready sooner than later this would avoid waiting for amendment 3 which may not be until April or May. After further discussion, Gowan motioned with a second from Fox to recommend approval of S/TIP Amendment #2 by the Executive Committee at the public hearing being held on January 20, 2016. All were in favor.

NRPC STAFF PRESENTATION: HUDSON FIRE RESPONSE TIME ANALYSIS Friedman provided a presentation on the Analysis completed for Hudson Fire Response Times per the request of the Hudson Fire Department. He explained how the project came about stating that the Town of Hudson approved a new fire station for the southern district in 2015 and the Hudson Fire Department requested an analysis to compare response times, geographic reach, and customers served between the new approved proposed fire station location on Lowell Road and the existing Burns Hill fire station location. This analysis was conducted using TransCad modeling software. The modeling process included inputs on station locations, complete street network, preferred response travel speeds, and analysis options included travel bands, network partitioning, and facility optimization. Friedman provided the analysis results showing side by side maps with town-wide estimated response times in minutes from the Burns Hill station location and the proposed Lowell Road location. He showed comparisons of travel time in the south district using response times for both stations from 1 to 5 minutes & 10 minutes, number of parcels served and the number of household served in each of the minute increments. Friedman then showed a combined comparison using the same criteria for all stations. In this town-wide comparison, analysis results detected a new problem related to the actual call density. Friedman noted that they used weighting system by mapping all Burns Hill response calls from 4mths in 2015 to come up with another comparison. He concluded his presentation informing the group that NRPC can help any municipality and that this is a repeatable process that can be used throughout the region using parcel & occupancy data and speed limits. He asked if there were any questions. Cashell felt it was important to note that the points shown on the town-wide comparisons were not all fires and included medical and accidents. Gowan asked if there was any mutual aid data plugged into the model. Friedman said no, as it did not come up, but that it could be included. Gowan referred to a large development happening in Pelham that would be close to the Hudson station and how it could have helped when Pelham built their new fire station.

TTAC DRAFT Minutes

January 13, 2016

Page 3

TR/kmb

PROJECT UPDATES AND DISCUSSION ITEMS

Locally Coordinated Transportation Plan (LCTP) Update Pattison provided a brief history of the LCTP stating that it was originally developed in 2006 with a minor update in 2008. It was based on the Nelson Nyggard report to pool transportation resources. She stated that this report for the Nashua region is much smaller and any Nelson Nyggard related information has been removed from this update. Pattison pointed out the updated graphics throughout the plan as well as information from the Regional Plan adopted in December of 2014, information on the Nashua Community Health Assessment as shown on page 23, and input from the RCC. She referred to the accomplishments section specifically mentioning the Souhegan Valley Transportation Collaborative (SVTC), the towns served, currently serving 6 towns to the west via NTS and the demand that continues to grow. Pattison referred to the amended project list on page 32 stating that once she received information from the Statewide Coordinating Council (SCC) and their request for proposal (RFP), another update would be done. She added that this is a statutory requirement for the NRPC. Pattison noted that the need to provided mobility management is included in the version online. Lastly, she talked about the comprehensive NTS Plan that NRPC is currently working on and that information from this plan will also be included in the updates to the LCTP. She asked if there were any questions and also said she would not mind a motion from the group to recommend approval by the Executive Committee. After further discussion, Cashell made a motion with a second from Gowan that the TTAC recommend adoption of the Draft Update to the Locally Coordinated Transportation Plan for the Greater Nashua and Milford Region by the Executive Committee. All were in favor. Ten Year Plan Update Czysz provided an update on where the Ten Year Plan process was. She noted that GACIT has adopted the Draft 2017-2026 Ten Year Plan and submitted that document to the Governor for her review and input. A schedule of legislative hearings will be held prior to approval from the legislature and then the governor will sign it during the summer of 2016. Czysz commented that there were no real changes to this version of the TYP and stated the best next step would be to provide your testimony at the committee hearings. She added that unfunded capitol corridor projects are not included in the plan. Chizmas asked how to keep those projects on the radar and where to they go. Macuch said they are pushed out to when they think they will have money to do them. She added that they are listed on the DOT website. Czysz informed the group of the letter sent from GACIT to the Governor provides an explanation of the major changes that have occurred since the last time the TYP was discussed at TTAC, Executive Committee and Commission meetings. The highlights for the NRPC region are:

Increased federal funding to NH for the next 5 years allowing greater numbers of projects to be constructed due to Fixing America’s Surface Transportation (FAST) Act program. NHDOT anticipates a 5.1% increase in funding for FY16 and 2% per year after that resulting in an additional $65 million for projects.

Unfunded Capital Corridor and future turnpike priorities are not included in the draft plan as GACIT voted to only include funded projects.

The two NRPC priority projects that were added to the draft this fall remain included in the document:

Brookline NH 13 Construct SB left turn lane onto Old Milford Rd (page 27 of 217) Nashua East Hollis St improvements from Main St to Bridge St (page 111 of 217)

FFY 15 Obligated Projects Listing Chizmas noted the federal requirement that the NRPC post the FFY 15 Obligated Projects Listing each year and informed the group that it was available on the NRPC website. Roache elaborated some on the process and how federal funding works, stating that he planned to hold a training and also have Putney from

TTAC DRAFT Minutes

January 13, 2016

Page 4

TR/kmb

Brookline come in to talk about the LPA process from a small town perspective, referring to a project that he got done quickly. Chizmas informed the group that some projects have not been in the TIP in 2 to 3 rounds due to the system change at DOT. She added that once she gets a better feel, the list will be cleaned up per all federal requirements. Roache added it will be a good tool to bring to communities as message tool. TTAC in 2016 Community Representatives/Appointments Chizmas provided a list of all current members of TTAC and also showed a list of appointments from a letter sent to municipalities in 2010. Roache informed the group that the TTAC meeting packet info was sent to Commissioners for this meeting and will be sent going forward to information purposes. Potential Change in Meeting Time Roache talked about the possibility of doing morning meetings instead of the lunchtime meetings of which participation has dropped since DOT would not reimburse for lunch anymore. He suggested a 9:00am morning meeting with bagels still on the 2nd Wednesday of each month. He asked the group for their opinion. Gowan felt that an early meeting could be challenging for him as well as others. Cashell commented on a past experience and the success of breakfast meetings. Gowan asked if Roache needed a letter indicating representatives for TTAC. Roache said letters would be sent out again for appointments/confirmations on/for current TTAC members similar to the 2010 appointment letters.

STAFF UPDATES Chizmas informed the group of the STIP Revision procedures that were updated by NH DOT and were available online. She said there were no big changes that would impact the current TIP or Amendment. Motion to adjourn came from Gowan with a second from Fox. The meeting ended at 1:12 pm.

DRAFT MINUTES NRPC TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING

02/10/16

Members Present: Wayne Husband, City of Nashua

Colleen Mailloux, Town of Amherst Jeff Gowan, Town of Pelham John Cashell, Town of Hudson Elvis Dhima, Town of Hudson Others Present: Troy Brown, Town of Litchfield Leigh Levine, FHWA Tom Young, Town of Litchfield Chris Skoglund, NHDES Kyle Fox, Town of Merrimack Patrick Woodbrey, NHDES

STAFF PRESENT Tim Roache, Executive Director Julie Chizmas, Senior Transportation Planner Jen Czysz, Assistant Director Matt Waitkins, Field Data Tech/Transp. Planner Karen Baker, Program Assistant

CALL TO ORDER AND INTRODUCTIONS Chizmas opened the meeting at 12:12pm with introductions.

APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FROM THE JANUARY 13, 2016 Czysz informed the group that due to the lack of a quorum, minutes from the January 13, 2016 meeting would be added to the March 9th meeting agenda for approval.

PRESENTATION BY PATRICK WOODBREY, NHDES: GREEN SNOW PRO CERTIFICATION PROGRAM Chizmas introduced Patrick Woodbrey, Salt Reduction Coordinator with the NH DES Watershed Management Bureau who would present on the Green Sno Pro Certification Program. Woodbrey began by noting that this certification program is the first of its kind in the US and started more than 10 years ago, when the state DOT began working on environmental impact statements for a proposed expansion of Interstate 93 from four lanes to eight lanes in a 20 mile corridor adjacent to the Massachusetts state line. The preliminary data gathered showed that four watersheds in the corridor had chloride impairments. Further monitoring, including readings every 15 minutes for a year, at more than 3 million data points, confirmed the chloride impairment. In 2008 total maximum daily load studies were completed and showed that chloride reductions ranging from 25% to 45% were needed, before taking into account the increased loading from the highway expansion. Based on the data collected, NHDES established a threshold indicating likely water quality impairment at a loading rate of 200 tons salt/square mile/year. Woodbrey added that this problem is statewide and currently there are 46 known chloride impairments in NH, mostly in the more developed southeastern part of the state. Woodbrey explained that in order to reduce salt loading, you have to know where it’s coming from. In the I-93 watersheds, as much as half the loading is from private parking lots and driveways. The Salt Reduction Work Group that formed to work on this issue quickly determined that in addition to reducing salt from state and local highway maintenance, much more had to be done to address private salt sources. To address this, NHDES began working on legislation, and invited the UNH Technology Transfer Center to participate on the I-93 Salt Reduction Work Group due to their expertise in working on winter maintenance issues with municipal public works professionals. Patrick Santoso, UNH T2 developed a 5-hour training course and began voluntarily certifying “Green SnowPros” in 2010. From discussions in the Salt Reduction Work Group they identified the issue of private sector salt loading and the liability concerns were the primary driver governing the salt application rate. The idea came about

ATTACHMENT 1

TTAC DRAFT Minutes

February 10, 2016

Page 2

TR/kmb

to create a standardized training program to improve salt application practices and at the same time, provide some kind of liability protection in state law. In 2010 a sponsor was secured for a bill that would require certification for private salt applicators. The bill was killed but a new bill was sponsored by a different legislator in 2011 and was again killed citing that most salt applicators already have adequate insurance coverage. In 2012 the bill was sponsored by a Senator from the I-93 region who saw how the bill would help the DOT meet its permit requirements for salt reduction, but felt the certification should be voluntary. The bill passed the Senate but was killed by the House. In 2013 the Senate sponsor declined to sponsor a new bill, saying that the Senate did its job in 2012 and if the House passed a bill, the Senate would go along. The bill was retained in committee, with the intent to continue working on it in 2014. Woodbrey stated that it became part of the budget bill minus the fee with liability language inserted which read “Certified salt applicators, and those who hire them, are not liable for damages due to hazards, even with actual notice thereof, when such hazards are caused solely by snow or ice…” and the bill became law. Woodbrey explained how NHDES streamlined the transition to gain liability protection by adopting rules stipulating that those who have successfully completed the Green SnowPro program are eligible for state certification. He also noted that the typical course outline includes salting practices, environmental an economic impacts of salt use information and best business practices, including contracts, pre-season preparation, and record-keeping. Calibration demonstrations and the importance of pavement temperature are also part of the course outline. Woodbrey also touched on other topics discussed in the course. Once certified, annual certification maintenance is required which includes filing annual reports which will be used to track long term trends in salt application rates. He added that NHDES also developed a Weather Severity Index to normalize winter conditions from season to season compare loading rates. Lastly, Woodbrey informed the group of the 3rd Annual Salt Symposium, the marketing to business owners to be handled by NHDES Salt Reduction Coordinator Earle Chase, establishing a certification fee, and the list-serve called “pass the salt” created for communication with peers in the commercial snow removal business. Woodbrey asked the group if they had any questions. Gowan questioned if the training program for certification was mandatory or voluntary. Woodbrey said voluntary. Mailloux asked if the property owner has liability for someone they hire. Woodbrey said yes. Gowan asked how that works for municipalities. Woodbrey said that municipalities should be covered under their own liability protection. Mailloux asked when the training is and how what the cost is for a company. Woodbrey said training is from 8-2pm with a cost of $100. He added that there are 3 different certificates with 3 different fee structures (master, individual & renewal). Mailloux asked when the certification expires. Woodbrey said every year with application and submittal of salt use report, but no training again. Another member asked if the data from the reports was available for the towns. Woodbrey said he would have to look into that but there was an aggregate report. Gowan noted the Facebook page and asked if there were any brochures for businesses related to hiring contractors and the certificate program. Woodbrey said there is on the DES website and trainings are in March in Derry and mid-April or May on the Seacoast and 1 in the fall. Fox commented that he had been through the training and it was excellent and that as a condition of any planned development in town, contractors go through the program.

PRESENTATION BY FHWA AND NHDOT: FIXING AMERICA’S SURFACE TRANSPORTATION (FAST) ACT Leigh Levine with FHWA provided a presentation on Fixing America’s Surface Transportation (FAST) Act. He stated that on December 4, 2015, President Obama signed into law the Fixing America's Surface Transportation Act, or "FAST Act" - the first Federal law in over ten years to provide long-term funding certainty for surface transportation. The FAST Act authorizes $305 billion over fiscal years 2016 through 2020 for the Department's highway, highway and motor vehicle safety, public transportation, motor carrier safety, hazardous materials safety, rail, and research, technology and statistics programs. With its enactment, States and local governments may now move forward with critical transportation projects, like

TTAC DRAFT Minutes

February 10, 2016

Page 3

TR/kmb

new highways and transit lines, with the confidence that they will have a Federal partner over the long term. Levine passed around funding sheets which showed a comparison of actual FY2015 apportionments under the highway and transportation funding act of 2014, as amended, and estimated FY2016-2020 apportionments under the FAST Act. Chizmas commented that New Hampshire was 2nd from the bottom ahead of the District of Columbia for apportionment totals. Below are some of the highlights from Levine’s presentation: KEY HIGHWAY FACTS: $226.3 B for highways over five years (FY 2016-2020); Builds on the program structure and reforms of MAP-21; Continued focus on accelerating project delivery; Adds a new freight formula and expands freight network; Adds a new discretionary program for nationally significant freight and highway projects; and Provides a new tribal self-governance option. Levine showed the growth in funding by program by average annual funding in millions and the change from FY2015. He pointed out that 92% of highway funds are apportioned totaling 207.4 billion over 5 years. He noted the changes to the NHPP, STP, TAP, CMAQ, & HSIP programs as follows: NHPP: TIFIA costs and V2I communication equipment now eligible and bridge resurfacing / preservation / reconstruction on non-NHS Federal-aid highways now eligible. STP: Renamed: Surface Transportation Block Grant Program (STBG); Eligibilities restated with none eliminated; new eligibilities for TIFIA costs, State P3 office, V2I communication equipment; In border States, up to 5% for infrastructure projects eligible under the SAFETEA-LU border program; More sub-allocation: +1%/year up to 55% (vs. 50% today); and Set-asides for Transportation Alternatives and Recreational Trails (see next slide). TAP: Same program, but no longer called TAP; no name specified; All funds set aside from STBG (vs. from all formula programs today); and Nonprofits responsible for local transportation safety programs may be project sponsors. CMAQ: V2I communication equipment eligible; Port-related equipment & vehicles eligible under PM2.5 set-aside; and Exception from PM2.5 set-aside for low population density States (under certain conditions). HSIP: Only listed project types eligible—mostly infrastructure-related; Adds eligibility for V2I communication equipment and certain pedestrian safety improvements; and State need not collect certain data on unpaved roads (but can’t use HSIP funds on those roads until it collects the data). Levine informed the group of some of the new programs specifically the National Highway Freight Program with $1.2 B / year (average), apportioned to States by formula for eligible activities like construction, operational improvements, freight planning and performance measures; Highway focus, but <10% for rail/port/intermodal projects; elimination of State freight plan and freight formula $ (beginning FY 2018); 23 USC 120 determines the Federal share and repeals special Federal share for freight projects. He also provided key points to the New National Significant Freight & Hwy. Projects with $900 M/year (average) for competitive grants or TIFIA, loans for projects >$100 M (reduced for States w/ small programs). Eligible activities include highway freight projects on National Highway Freight Network, NHS highway/bridge projects, projects in National Scenic Areas, Freight rail/intermodal/port projects (< $500 M over 5-year period), and rail-highway grade crossing or grade separation projects. States, large MPOs,

TTAC DRAFT Minutes

February 10, 2016

Page 4

TR/kmb

Tribes, localities, and FLMAs may apply. OST selects projects and Congress has 60 days to disapprove. There are also set-asides for rural areas and projects below the cost threshold. Levine touched on planning, performance and project delivery noting that a lot of this was a continuation from MAP-21. Additionally, he reviewed other programs and provisions, specifically highway design, pointing out the new cost savings via flexibility in current design guidance/regulations and the encouragement for States and MPOs to adopt standards for Federal projects that accommodate motorized and non-motorized users. Lastly, Levine talked about other provisions which specifically allow multiple similar bridge projects to be handled (“bundled”) into a single project, DOT designating national electric vehicle charging and hydrogen, natural gas, and propane fueling corridors, and encouragement of vegetation management practices that improve habitat and forage for pollinators. He asked if there were any questions. There was a question on whether toll credits would not be used for highway projects. Levine said that NH is still relying on toll credits for match. Levine responded to Cashell regarding whether not having a seatbelt law affects the apportionment. Levine said it does not and we are not penalized for not having one. He added that there will be more to come on guidance and rulemaking. Roache asked if MAP-21 would stop since not all the rules are written. Levine said he was not sure but hoped they would combine FAST Act and MAP-21.

PROJECT UPDATES AND DISCUSSION ITEMS

2017-2040 Metropolitan Transportation Plan Project List Czysz referred to the project list included in the agenda packet and explained that a project has a number next to it; it means it made it into the NHDOT list. As part of the ongoing Transportation Planning Process, NRPC is looking to ensure we are considering transportation needs beyond the Ten Year Plan. In December 2016 the full Commission will consider a formal update to the MTP project listing. Before that time, we are looking to the TTAC and communities to help us determine what the top transportation priorities are for the region? Are there any projects in the current MTP that are no longer regional priorities? Are there other projects beyond those identified for consideration in the Ten Year Plan that should be added to the list? Is there any new information we should consider? As part of this process NRPC is planning to host a series of public meetings during May and early June 2016 across the region. These big picture conversations will focus on regional corridors: The Turnpike and access across the Merrimack River, the 101 and 101A corridors, and an additional conversation dedicated to rural transportation needs. NRPC would like to request that TTAC members help get the word out as the meetings are scheduled and identify local champions in your areas that you feel should be invited. Roache added that we want to align projects with the MTP from the previous version and determine if the projects are consistent with the goals. Czysz stated that the end product and goal will be an updated list of projects for adoption at the December meeting to be included in the update to the MTP. Staff Updates Waitkins referred to the recently adopted Regional Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan and the various action steps that he would be working on and asked that TTAC also identify local champions in their communities to help move the action steps forward of the plan. He also talked the DOT pavement schedule which would require a review for biking and performance measures for sidewalks. Lastly, Waitkins informed the group of the bike/pedestrian counting program. Roache informed the group that the CMAQ Advisory Group met for the first time in 3 years and they are trying to clear up the backlog of projects before announcing the next round. Levine commented that they have to get through the legacy projects first. Roache did not think he would see the next round until early to late FY17 with maybe 5-10mil available. He added that a good use of the CMAQ funds would be a

TTAC DRAFT Minutes

February 10, 2016

Page 5

TR/kmb

implementing transit-type project from one of the communities that is ready to go and get it into the que. He added that it would need to meet the air quality and that NRPC could help with air quality and design if the project is ready. Levine said he was also waiting on the supplementary tables from the FAST Act program. Roache informed the TTAC that Mark Connors was leaving NRPC. He also informed the group that the Legislative Forum was scheduled for March 2nd from 6-8pm at the Courtyard Marriott in Nashua. Mailloux referred to the Manchester Street Project in Amherst has been constructed and is done. Skoglund informed the group that Paul Lockwood has officially retired from NHDES and that they are trying to fill the position. He added that there will be a mix of people that will come for the TTAC meetings. Chizmas informed the group of the minor revision for improvements to 101A that she would be approving unless otherwise notified by the impacted towns (Nashua, Merrimack, Amherst and Milford). The meeting ended at 1:25pm.

TTAC – April 13, 2016 Page 1 of 2

Nashua Metropolitan Planning Organization 2015 – 2018 TIP Amendment 3

MEMORANDUM

TO: Transportation Technical Advisory Committee Members

FROM: Jennifer Czysz, Assistant Director

SUBJECT: 2015 – 2018 S/TIP Amendment #3

DATE: April 8, 2016

The Nashua Regional Planning Commission (NRPC) has received from the New Hampshire Department of Transportation (NH DOT) Amendment #3 to the adopted Nashua Metropolitan Area 2015 – 2018 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). The NRPC is amending the TIP to account for changes to Statewide projects and to maintain consistency with the Statewide TIP (STIP).

Additionally, a new dataset has been provided by the NH DOT that lists the communities within which each TIP project is located. Upon review of this dataset, the Nashua MPO realized that there are several SNHPC TIP projects located in the Nashua Urbanized Area (USA) that should be listed in the Nashua MPO TIP per federal requirements. SNHPC maintains fiscal constraint of these projects through their TIP; therefore, they are not included in the Nashua MPO TIP's fiscal constraint analysis. Additionally, these projects are not located within the City of Nashua and therefore do not trigger a new conformity determination of the City of Nashua Carbon Monoxide Maintenance Area. The Nashua MPO proposes to formally add these projects to its TIP project listing through this Amendment. (Note: Project 13065 is listed below but is currently included in the Nashua MPO TIP as Amended.)

ANALYSIS: The proposed amendments to the Statewide projects are primarily administrative in nature and are necessary to ensure that the TIP and STIP reflect the anticipated project schedule and maintain fiscal constraint requirements. NH DOT has confirmed that fiscal constraint has been maintained. The proposal to list the SNHPC projects located within the Nashua UZA is also administrative in nature and meets the fiscal constraint analysis.

As of July 20, 2013, all of New Hampshire is unclassifiable/attainment for the 2008 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard (the 2008 ozone standard) and the 1997 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard (the 1997 ozone standard) is revoked for transportation conformity purposes in the Boston-Manchester-Portsmouth (SE) NH area. NRPC, in consultation with the NH DOT, NH Department of Environmental Services (NH DES), US Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA), Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), Federal Transit Administration (FTA), and the other NH MPOs, has confirmed that the proposed changes made by STIP Amendment 3 do not trigger a new conformity determination of the City of Nashua Carbon Monoxide Maintenance Area.

NRPC placed a legal notice in the Nashua Telegraph and on the NRPC website. Public comments are being accepted through April 8, 2016. A Public Hearing will be held on Wednesday, April 20, 2016 at the Nashua Regional Planning Commission at 6:00 PM at the NRPC office, 9 Executive Park Drive, Suite 201, Merrimack, NH 03054.

A complete copy of the STIP Amendment, with fiscal constraint documentation, is available online for download (http://www.nashuarpc.org/files/7814/5822/3853/1a-LegAd_03162016_STIP_A3_web.pdf)

http://www.nashuarpc.org/files/7814/5822/3853/1a-LegAd_03162016_STIP_A3_web.pdf



TTAC – April 13, 2016 Page 2 of 2

Nashua Metropolitan Planning Organization 2015 – 2018 TIP Amendment 3

RECOMMENDATION: Action is required from the TTAC to recommend approval of the proposed Amendment #3 by the Nashua Regional Planning Commission. NRPC staff has reviewed this amendment in consultation with the NH DOT, NH DES, US EPA, FHWA, FTA and representatives of the MPOs, and recommend approving the proposed changes in this amendment. Any action may be subject to further modifications to the STIP amendment based upon comments received during the remainder of the public comment period and further revisions to ensure all amendments conform to the fiscal constraint analysis.

If you have any questions or comments do not hesitate to contact Jennifer Czysz via phone at 424-2240 x 31 or e-mail at [email protected].

FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PROPOSED CHANGES TO PROJECTS IN THE NASHUA REGION:

mailto:[email protected]

Nashua Metropolitan Planning Organization

2015-2018 Transportation Improvement ProgramAmendment 3 Revision Report March 16, 2016

Statewide Projects

Statewide PVMRKScope: Statewide Pavement Marking Annual Project

Funding SourceFY Total FY Total

2015 3,100,000$ STP-State Flexible, Toll Credit 2015 3,100,000$ STP-State Flexible, Toll Credit



2018 2,181,818$ NH Highway Fund, STP-State Flexible 2018 3,100,000$ STP-State Flexible, Toll Credit

TOTAL TIP 10,563,636$ TOTAL PROPOSED 12,400,000$

Total Percent

TOTAL CHANGE 1,836,364$ 17.4%

Amendment increases Construction funding in FFYs 2017 & 2018 and updates the FFY2018 funding source

Statewide RCTRLScope: Recreational Trails Fund Act- Projects selected annually


2015 2,591,145$

Betterment, DRED, Recreational Trails,

Toll Credit, Non-Participating 2015 2,591,145$

Betterment, DRED, Recreational Trails, Toll

Credit, Non-Participating

2016 1,562,500$ DRED, Recreational Trails 2016 1,562,500$ DRED, Recreational Trails



TOTAL TIP 6,653,645$ TOTAL PROPOSED 6,774,925$

Total Percent

TOTAL CHANGE 121,280$ 1.8%

Amendment adds inflation to funding in FFYs 2017 and 2018 and changes phases for unobligated funds across all FFYs to "Other"

Statewide-RWIS 25198Scope: To install Road and Weather systems around the State


2016 431,200$ STP-State Flexible, Toll Credit 2016 448,555$

STP-State Flexible, Toll Credit, Turnpike

Capital

TOTAL TIP 431,200$ TOTAL PROPOSED 448,555$

Total Percent

TOTAL CHANGE 17,355$ 4.0%

Amendment adds a Preliminary Engineering phase in FFY2016 with $17,355 in Turnpike Capital funds

Approved Dollars Proposed Dollars



Proposed changes are shown in blue. Page 1 of 1

March 16, 2016

2015 - 2018 Transportation Improvement Program

Amendment 3 Revision Report


A new dataset has been provided by the NH DOT that lists the communities within which each TIP project is located. Upon review of this dataset, the Nashua MPO realized that there are several SNHPC TIP projects located in the Nashua Urbanized Area that should be listed in the Nashua MPO TIP per federal requirements. SNHPC maintains fiscal constraint of these projects through their TIP, therefore they are not included in the Nashua MPO TIP's fiscal constraint analysis. Additionally, these projects are not located within the City of Nashua and therefore do not trigger a new conformity determination of the City of Nashua Carbon Monoxide Maintenance Area. The Nashua MPO proposes to formally add these projects to its TIP project listing through this Amendment. (Note: Project 13065 is listed below but is currently included in the Nashua MPO TIP as Amended.)

Southern New Hampshire Planning Commission MPO Surface Transportation Projects located within the Nashua Urbanized Area

Route/Road: Transit

Scope: Preventative Maintenance for public transit (CART) in Derry-Salem region

Overall Cost

$1,268,453

CART-1 Regionally Significant

No

ProjectID

2985

CAA StatusE-23

Funding Source(s)OtherNH DOTFederalFYPhase Total

Other $160,000 $0 FTA 5307 Capital and Operating Program, Other$40,000 $200,0002015




$370,598 $0 $92,649 $463,247Total:

Route/Road: Transit

Scope: Operating Assistance for public transit (CART) in Derry-Salem region

Overall Cost

$9,310,083

CART-2 Regionally Significant

No

ProjectID

7239

CAA StatusE-21






$1,292,824 $0 $1,292,824 $2,585,648Total:

Route/Road: I-93

Scope: I-93 EXIT 4A - Construct new interchange and connecting roadway

Overall Cost

$6,035,265

DERRY - LONDONDERRY Regionally Significant

No

ProjectID

13065

CAA Status

ATT


PE $516,000 $0 STP-5 to 200K, Toll Credit$0 $516,0002016

PE $532,512 $0 STP-5 to 200K, Toll Credit$0 $532,5122017

$1,048,512 $0 $0 $1,048,512Total:

Route/Road: Boston UZA

Scope: FTA Section 5307 apportioned funds for Boston UZA for NHDOT projects.

Overall Cost

$50,521,335

FTA 5307 BOSTON UZA Regionally Significant

No

ProjectID

FTA5307

CAA Status

ATT


PE $3,097,231 $0 FTA 5307 Capital and Operating Program, Other$774,308 $3,871,5392015




$12,996,380 $0 $3,249,095 $16,245,474Total:

Page 1 of 7

March 16, 2016






Route/Road: Multi-Use Trail

Scope: Multi-Use Trail Improvements in Windham & Salem [09-47TE]

Overall Cost

$1,274,844

SALEM Regionally Significant

No

ProjectID

16031

CAA Status

ATT


PE $750 $0 STP-Enhancement, Towns$250 $1,0002015

Construction $835,433 $0 STP-Enhancement, Towns$278,478 $1,113,9112015

$836,183 $0 $278,728 $1,114,911Total:

Route/Road: I-93

Scope: I-93 - Exit 3 Park & Ride (Windham) (CMAQ Program) [Part of 04-33CM]

Overall Cost

$2,750,000

SALEM TO MANCHESTER Regionally Significant

No

ProjectID

10418H

CAA Status

ATT


Construction $567,600 $0 STP-State Flexible, Toll Credit$0 $567,6002016

Construction $2,343,053 $0 Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Program, STP-State Flexible, Toll Credit

$0 $2,343,0532017

$2,910,653 $0 $0 $2,910,653Total:

Route/Road: I-93

Scope: Implement and provide operational support for expanded commuter bus service

Overall Cost

$19,127,243


No

ProjectID

10418L

CAA StatusE-21


Construction $540,000 $692,611 National Highway System, Non Participating, Toll Credit$0 $1,232,6112015

Construction $1,684,304 $0 FTA 5307 Capital and Operating Program, National Highway System, Toll Credit

$0 $1,684,3042016

Construction $1,535,328 $0 FTA 5307 Capital and Operating Program, National Highway System, Toll Credit

$0 $1,535,3282017

Construction $725,000 $0 National Highway System, Toll Credit$0 $725,0002018

$4,484,632 $692,611 $0 $5,177,243Total:

Route/Road: I-93

Scope: Corridor Service Patrol (Salem to Manchester)

Overall Cost

$902,552


No

ProjectID

10418T

CAA Status

E-6


PE $100,000 $0 National Highway System, Toll Credit$0 $100,0002015

PE $103,200 $0 National Highway System, Toll Credit$0 $103,2002016

$203,200 $0 $0 $203,200Total:

Page 2 of 7

March 16, 2016






Route/Road: I-93

Scope: Final design services for PE & ROW

Overall Cost

$10,334,568


No

ProjectID

10418V

CAA StatusLMP


PE $2,598,935 $0 National Highway System, Toll Credit$0 $2,598,9352015

ROW $285,634 $0 National Highway System, Toll Credit$0 $285,6342015

$2,884,568 $0 $0 $2,884,568Total:

Route/Road: I-93

Scope: Chloride Reduction Efforts

Overall Cost

$5,038,787


No

ProjectID

10418W

CAA StatusLMP


PE $1,032,000 $0 FHWA Earmarks, STP-State Flexible, Toll Credit$0 $1,032,0002016

$1,032,000 $0 $0 $1,032,000Total:

Route/Road: I-93

Scope: Final Design (PE) and ROW for I-93 Salem to Manchester corridor post September 4, 2014

Overall Cost

$7,084,851


No

ProjectID

10418X

CAA StatusLMP


PE $2,229,814 $30,564 STP-Areas Over 200K, STP-State Flexible, Toll Credit, Turnpike Program

$0 $2,260,3772015

PE $1,069,558 $23,992 Non Participating, STP-Areas Over 200K, Toll Credit, Turnpike Program

$2,610 $1,096,1602016

PE $21,509 $34,332 NH Highway Fund, Non Participating, STP-Areas Over 200K, Turnpike Program

$1,598 $57,4392017

PE $21,573 $34,460 NH Highway Fund, Non Participating, STP-Areas Over 200K, Turnpike Program

$1,649 $57,6822018

ROW $2,155,000 $0 STP-Areas Over 200K, STP-State Flexible, Toll Credit$0 $2,155,0002015

ROW $454,080 $113,520 NH Highway Fund, STP-Areas Over 200K$0 $567,6002016

$5,951,534 $236,868 $5,856 $6,194,258Total:

Route/Road: I-93

Scope: I-93 Exit 3 Area - Construct NB Mainline & Ramps, NH 111A and eastern end of NH 111 (Windham)

Overall Cost

$35,694,651


No

ProjectID

13933H

CAA StatusLMP


Construction $0 $6,621,796 Betterment, Garvee Bond Initial Expenditure, Non Participating

$157,600 $6,779,3962015

Construction $9,261,339 $2,153,916 Garvee Bond Initial Expenditure, National Highway System, STP-Areas Over 200K, Toll Credit

$0 $11,415,2552016

$9,261,339 $8,775,712 $157,600 $18,194,651Total:

Page 3 of 7

March 16, 2016






Route/Road: I-93

Scope: Exit 3 Area SB Mainline and NH 111 (Windham & Salem)

Overall Cost

$35,364,052


No

ProjectID

13933I

CAA StatusLMP


Construction $0 $8,203,821 Garvee Bond Initial Expenditure$0 $8,203,8212015

Construction $0 $773,780 Garvee Bond Initial Expenditure$0 $773,7802016

$0 $8,977,601 $0 $8,977,601Total:

Route/Road: I-93

Scope: Debt Service Project for I-93 Capacity Improvements - Northern Projects

Overall Cost

$230,727,856


No

ProjectID

14633

CAA StatusLMP


Construction $0 $463,357 SB367-4-Cents$0 $463,3572017

Construction $0 $1,137,511 SB367-4-Cents$0 $1,137,5112018

$0 $1,600,868 $0 $1,600,868Total:

Route/Road: I-93

Scope: NB & SB Mainline, Weigh Station to Kendall Pond Rd (Windham & Derry)

Overall Cost

$54,700,254


No

ProjectID

14633B

CAA StatusLMP


Construction $3,448,744 $51,251,510 Anticipated FHWA Funds, STP-State Flexible, Toll Credit$0 $54,700,2552016

$3,448,744 $51,251,510 $0 $54,700,255Total:

Route/Road: I-93

Scope: Exit 4 Interchange, NB & SB Mainline & NH 102 approach work

Overall Cost

$73,386,252


No

ProjectID

14633D

CAA StatusLMP


Construction $68,721,254 $0 TIFIA$0 $68,721,2542016

Construction $1,054,374 $117,153 National Highway System, NH Highway Fund$0 $1,171,5262017


$70,863,741 $238,054 $0 $71,101,795Total:

Route/Road: I-93

Scope: I-93 NB & SB mainline reconstruction, Exit 5 to I-293 split (Londonderry & Manchester)

Overall Cost

$50,781,855


No

ProjectID

14633H

CAA StatusLMP


Construction $3,281,399 $47,500,456 Anticipated FHWA Funds, National Highway System, Toll Credit

$0 $50,781,8552016

$3,281,399 $47,500,456 $0 $50,781,855Total:

Page 4 of 7

March 16, 2016






Route/Road: I-93

Scope: NB & SB mainline between Exits 4 and 5 (Londonderry)

Overall Cost

$36,145,669


No

ProjectID

14633I

CAA StatusLMP


Construction $34,179,673 $0 TIFIA$0 $34,179,6732016

Construction $1,171,526 $0 National Highway System, Toll Credit$0 $1,171,5262017

Construction $794,469 $0 National Highway System, Toll Credit$0 $794,4692018

$36,145,669 $0 $0 $36,145,669Total:

Route/Road: I-93

Scope: CTAP Phase 3; to fund eligible TOD and TDM planning projects within the CTAP RPC Regions.

Overall Cost

$1,372,560


No

ProjectID

14633P

CAA StatusLMP


Planning $1,372,560 $0 National Highway System, Toll Credit$0 $1,372,5602016

$1,372,560 $0 $0 $1,372,560Total:

Route/Road: I-93

Scope: DES Land Grant Program

Overall Cost

$3,281,047


No

ProjectID

14633R

CAA StatusLMP


ROW $817,344 $0 National Highway System, Other$204,336 $1,021,6802016

ROW $421,750 $0 National Highway System, Other$105,437 $527,1872017

ROW $677,049 $0 National Highway System, Other$169,262 $846,3112018

$1,916,142 $0 $479,036 $2,395,178Total:

Route/Road: I-93

Scope: Corridor Smart Work Zone

Overall Cost

$1,889,166


No

ProjectID

14633Z

CAA StatusLMP


Construction $1,100,000 $0 STP-Areas Over 200K, STP-State Flexible, Toll Credit$0 $1,100,0002015

Construction $440,000 $0 STP-Areas Over 200K, Toll Credit$0 $440,0002016

Construction $349,166 $0 STP-Areas Over 200K, Toll Credit$0 $349,1662017

$1,889,166 $0 $0 $1,889,166Total:

Page 5 of 7

March 16, 2016






Route/Road: I-93

Scope: I-93 Exit 5 Interchange Reconstruction (Londonderry) - Debt Service Project

Overall Cost

$58,338,243


No

ProjectID

14800B

CAA Status

0


Construction $953,051 $135 Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Program, National Highway System, NH Highway Fund, RZED Subsidy, STP-Areas Over 200K, Toll Credit

$625,332 $1,578,5182015

Construction $989,276 $0 National Highway System, RZED Subsidy, Toll Credit$654,827 $1,644,1022016

Construction $819,066 $204,767 National Highway System, NH Highway Fund, RZED Subsidy

$672,881 $1,696,7132017

Construction $845,276 $211,319 Bridge On/Off System, NH Highway Fund, RZED Subsidy$694,413 $1,751,0082018

$3,606,669 $416,221 $2,647,452 $6,670,342Total:

Route/Road: I-93

Scope: Project initiated to track Garvee Bond debt service attributable to the 13933N project

Overall Cost

$18,362,236


No

ProjectID

14800C

CAA Status

0


Construction $416,955 $0 Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Program, Interstate Maintenance, National Highway System, Redistribution, RZED Subsidy, STP-Areas Over 200K, STP-State Flexible, Toll Credit

$219,418 $636,3732015

Construction $315,322 $0 National Highway System, RZED Subsidy, Toll Credit$208,720 $524,0412016

Construction $316,218 $0 National Highway System, RZED Subsidy, Toll Credit$207,824 $524,0412017

Construction $252,974 $63,244 National Highway System, NH Highway Fund, RZED Subsidy

$207,824 $524,0412018

$1,301,469 $63,244 $843,785 $2,208,497Total:

Route/Road: I-93

Scope: I-93 Exit 3 area - Reconstruct SB ML, NH111 & SB on ramp (Windham) - debt service project for 13933I

Overall Cost

$37,597,702


No

ProjectID

14800D

CAA Status

0


Construction $4,763,570 $0 Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Program, Toll $0 $4,763,5702015




$16,195,612 $2,858,010 $0 $19,053,622Total:

Page 6 of 7

March 16, 2016






Route/Road: I-93

Scope: I-93 Exit 3 area -NB ML connections, NB Ramps & NH 111A relocation - debt service project for 13933H

Overall Cost

$38,202,496


No

ProjectID

14800F

CAA Status

0


Construction $3,219,887 $157,600 Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Program, National Highway System, Non Participating, Toll Credit

$0 $3,377,4872015

Construction $9,991,831 $2,497,958 National Highway System, NH Highway Fund, RZED Subsidy

$39,338 $12,529,1272016

Construction $2,583,043 $645,761 National Highway System, NH Highway Fund, RZED Subsidy

$39,170 $3,267,9742017

Construction $2,582,399 $645,600 National Highway System, NH Highway Fund, RZED Subsidy

$39,170 $3,267,1682018

$18,377,160 $3,946,918 $117,678 $22,441,756Total:

Route/Road: I-93

Scope: Final Design Services for PE & ROW

Overall Cost

$11,018,183


No

ProjectID

14800H

CAA Status

0


PE $1,216,520 $0 Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Program, Toll $0 $1,216,5202015

PE $1,234,181 $0 STP-State Flexible, Toll Credit$0 $1,234,1812016

PE $1,018,998 $254,750 National Highway System, NH Highway Fund$0 $1,273,7482017

PE $1,051,339 $262,835 National Highway System, NH Highway Fund$0 $1,314,1742018

ROW $204,240 $0 Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Program, National Highway System, Toll Credit

$0 $204,2402015

ROW $207,205 $0 STP-State Flexible, Toll Credit$0 $207,2052016

ROW $171,078 $42,770 National Highway System, NH Highway Fund$0 $213,8482017

ROW $176,508 $44,127 National Highway System, NH Highway Fund$0 $220,6352018

$5,280,068 $604,481 $0 $5,884,549Total:

Page 7 of 7

*Federal Resouces State Resource Local/Other Resource Total Resource Total Programmed *Federal Resouces State Resource Local/Other Resource Total Resource Total Programmed

Available Available Available Available Inflated Available Available Available Available Inflated

FHWA (Federal-Aid with Match)

Bridge Off System 3,672,842.52$ -$ 1,320,000.00$ 4,992,842.52$ 5,465,156.01$ -$ -$ 960,000.00$ 960,000.00$ 6,852,240.00$

Bridge On System -$ -$ 1,403,141.95$ 1,403,141.95$ 37,461.85$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$

Bridge On/Off System -$ -$ -$ -$ 7,623,891.27$ -$ -$ 712,080.00$ 712,080.00$ 14,687,174.40$

Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Program 9,883,163.83$ -$ 160,927.00$ 10,044,090.83$ 12,449,222.49$ 10,102,892.00$ -$ 782,687.25$ 10,885,579.25$ 8,987,378.65$

Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) 8,813,692.22$ -$ -$ 8,813,692.22$ 8,100,000.00$ 8,366,127.00$ -$ -$ 8,366,127.00$ 8,100,000.00$

Interstate Maintenance -$ -$ -$ -$ 11,307,638.13$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 10,504,271.43$

National Highway Freight -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 4,709,130.00$ 204,336.00$ 4,913,466.00$ -$

National Highway System 51,769,470.03$ -$ -$ 51,769,470.03$ 48,551,890.57$ 89,186,940.00$ -$ -$ 89,186,940.00$ 35,079,586.73$

NSTI National Summer Transportation Institute -$ -$ -$ -$ 30,000.00$ -$ -$ 312,500.00$ 312,500.00$ 30,000.00$

RL - Rail Highway -$ 1,750,000.00$ -$ -$ 1,750,000.00$ 1,044,000.00$

Recreational Trails 1,255,265.02$ -$ 104,609.00$ 1,359,874.02$ 1,378,436.00$ 1,267,944.00$ -$ -$ 1,267,944.00$ 1,250,000.00$

Redistribution 561,527.29$ -$ -$ 561,527.29$ 2,189,994.42$ 499,732.00$ -$ -$ 499,732.00$ 44,000.00$

Restoration -$ -$ -$ -$ 716,713.60$ -$ -$ 638,420.00$ 638,420.00$ -$

Safe Routes to School -$ -$ -$ -$ 676,696.39$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 1,446,678.00$

TAP - Transportation Alternatives 2,433,051.58$ -$ 39,057.86$ 2,472,109.44$ 156,231.44$ 2,623,489.00$ -$ 719,454.22$ 3,342,943.22$ 2,553,680.00$

Transportation and Community and System Preservation -$ -$ 55,000.00$ 55,000.00$ 220,000.00$ -$ -$ 200.00$ 200.00$ -$

STP-5 to 200K 5,598,576.51$ -$ 325,783.80$ 5,924,360.31$ 3,844,220.42$ 7,266,622.00$ -$ 212,245.72$ 7,478,867.72$ 4,026,847.42$

STP-Areas Less Than 200K 8,534,433.60$ -$ -$ 8,534,433.60$ 1,775,340.03$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 75,104.00$

STP-Areas Over 200K 1,495,222.50$ -$ -$ 1,495,222.50$ 1,521,795.89$ 5,084,135.00$ -$ 4,023.80$ 5,088,158.80$ 4,548,075.93$

STP-DBE -$ -$ -$ -$ 90,000.00$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 90,000.00$

STP-Enhancement -$ -$ 1,651,112.75$ 1,651,112.75$ 8,278,835.17$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 16,095.20$

STP-Hazard Elimination -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$

STP-Non Urban Areas Under 5K 8,764,611.73$ -$ -$ 8,764,611.73$ 1,218,800.00$ 9,093,276.00$ -$ -$ 9,093,276.00$ 1,548,905.60$

STP-Off System Bridge 2,935,857.09$ -$ -$ 2,935,857.09$ -$ 3,672,842.00$ -$ -$ 3,672,842.00$ 541,200.00$

STP-Rail 1,099,999.54$ -$ -$ 1,099,999.54$ -$ -$ -$ 308,753.92$ 308,753.92$ -$

STP-Safety 662,757.15$ -$ -$ 662,757.15$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$

STP-State Flexible 50,623,418.06$ -$ 1,431,444.66$ 52,054,862.72$ 34,412,907.98$ 15,590,944.00$ -$ -$ 15,590,944.00$ 35,944,694.97$

-$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$

TIFIA -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 199,970,619.20$ -$ -$ 199,970,619.20$ 199,970,619.16$

TIGER Grants 4,642,152.80$ -$ -$ 4,642,152.80$ 4,642,152.80$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$

TIGER Grants (Maine) 25,000,000.00$ -$ -$ 25,000,000.00$ 25,000,000.00$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$

Bridge Special 1,381,040.00$ -$ -$ 1,381,040.00$ 1,381,040.00$ 640,000.00$ -$ 33,947.80$ 673,947.80$ 673,947.80$

National Scenic Byways 400,000.00$ -$ -$ 400,000.00$ 400,000.00$ 20,000.00$ -$ -$ 20,000.00$ 20,000.00$

FHWA Earmarks 3,245,163.02$ -$ 189,910.75$ 3,435,073.77$ 3,245,163.02$ 5,506,258.10$ -$ -$ 5,506,258.10$ 5,506,258.10$

Training and Education 150,000.00$ -$ -$ 150,000.00$ 150,000.00$ 150,000.00$ -$ 150,000.00$ 150,000.00$

National Highway (NHPP) Exempt 2,070,965.00$ -$ -$ 2,070,965.00$ 2,070,965.00$ 2,499,932.00$ -$ -$ 2,499,932.00$ -$

Redistribution (Year End) 10,061,275.00$ 10,061,275.00$ -$ -$

Toll Credit -$ -$ -$ -$ 24,042,513.02$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 27,841,567.48$

Total 205,054,484.49$ -$ 6,680,987.77$ 211,735,472.25$ 210,977,065.50$ 368,000,882.30$ -$ 4,888,648.72$ 372,889,531.01$ 371,532,324.87$

FTA (Federal-Aid with Match)

FTA5307 10,536,339.89$ -$ 3,451,790.31$ 13,988,130.19$ 13,880,003.00$ 10,483,937.84$ -$ 3,366,896.16$ 13,850,834.00$ 14,138,748.00$

FTA5307_NHDOT 2,889,264.42$ -$ 703,916.11$ 3,593,180.53$ 3,611,580.53$ 2,981,720.89$ -$ 726,441.42$ 3,708,162.31$ 3,727,151.11$

FTA5309 1,600,000.00$ -$ 400,000.00$ 2,000,000.00$ 2,000,000.00$ 800,000.00$ -$ 200,000.00$ 1,000,000.00$ 1,000,000.00$

FTA5310 2,052,299.20$ -$ 513,074.80$ 2,565,374.00$ 2,565,374.00$ 2,201,919.65$ -$ 544,307.35$ 2,746,227.00$ 2,746,227.00$

FTA5311 6,673,240.00$ -$ 1,668,310.00$ 8,341,550.00$ 8,341,550.00$ 6,886,784.00$ -$ 1,721,696.00$ 8,608,480.00$ 8,608,480.00$

FTA5339 2,045,178.40$ -$ 511,294.60$ 2,556,473.00$ 2,556,473.00$ 2,603,869.47$ -$ 619,665.49$ 3,223,534.96$ 3,223,534.96$

Prior Grant Funds 7,072,385.81$ -$ -$ 7,072,385.81$ 7,485,909.22$ -$ -$ -$ -$

Total 32,868,707.72$ -$ 7,248,385.81$ 40,117,093.54$ 32,954,980.53$ 33,444,141.07$ -$ 7,179,006.42$ 33,137,238.27$ 33,444,141.07$

FHWA/FTA Total 237,923,192.21$ -$ 13,929,373.58$ 251,852,565.79$ 243,932,046.03$ 401,445,023.37$ -$ 12,067,655.14$ 406,026,769.28$ 404,976,465.94$

Innovated Financing

GARVEE Bond Funds -$ 28,344,541.00$ -$ 28,344,541.00$ 28,344,541.00$ -$ 773,779.82$ -$ 773,779.82$ 773,779.82$

Total -$ 28,344,541.00$ -$ 28,344,541.00$ 28,344,541.00$ -$ 773,779.82$ -$ 773,779.82$ 773,779.82$

StateFund Sources

Turnpike Capital -$ 31,727,910.16$ -$ 31,727,910.16$ 31,727,910.16$ -$ 48,780,000.00$ -$ 48,780,000.00$ 48,780,000.00$

Turnpike Program -$ 30,563.51$ -$ 286,690.95$ 30,563.51$ -$ 23,992.12$ -$ 23,992.12$ 23,248.18$

Turnpike Renewal & Replacement -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 9,700,000.00$ -$ 9,700,000.00$ 9,700,000.00$

-$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$

-$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$

Total -$ 31,758,473.67$ -$ 54,092,355.03$ 31,758,473.67$ -$ 58,503,992.12$ -$ 58,503,992.12$ 58,503,248.18$

ALL SOURCES TOTAL 237,923,192.21$ 60,103,014.67$ 13,929,373.58$ 334,289,461.82$ 304,035,060.70$ 401,445,023.37$ 59,277,771.94$ 12,067,655.14$ 465,304,541.22$ 464,253,493.94$

2015

Improvement Program

2016

Improvement Program

juliec

Text Box

NH STIP 2015 - 2018 Financial Constraint Documentation Fiscal Constraint-Anticipated Revenues with Match Versus Programmed Funding for Projects within the STIP

Federal Resouces State Resource Local/Other Resource Total Resource Total Programmed Federal Resouces State Resource Local/Other Resource Total Resource Total Programmed

Available Available Available Available Inflated Available Available Available Available Inflated

FHWA (Federal-Aid with Match)

Bridge Off System -$ -$ 930,000.00$ 930,000.00$ 5,024,860.80$ -$ -$ 930,000.00$ 930,000.00$ 3,720,000.00$

Bridge On System -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$

Bridge On/Off System -$ -$ -$ -$ 6,812,246.85$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 7,850,943.49$

Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Program 10,634,708.23$ -$ 97,455.54$ 10,732,163.78$ 4,028,269.82$ 11,194,519.28$ -$ -$ 11,194,519.28$ 2,663,478.28$

Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) 8,806,519.93$ -$ -$ 8,806,519.93$ 8,100,000.00$ 9,270,095.13$ -$ -$ 9,270,095.13$ 8,100,000.00$

Interstate Maintenance -$ -$ -$ -$ 9,847,596.54$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 5,744,434.12$

National Highway Freight 4,957,018.60$ 105,437.38$ 5,062,455.98$ 5,217,956.06$ 5,217,956.06$

National Highway System 93,881,740.52$ -$ -$ 93,881,740.52$ 47,638,688.98$ 98,823,675.34$ -$ 169,262.13$ 98,992,937.48$ 62,001,151.90$

NSTI National Summer Transportation Institute -$ -$ 258,000.00$ 258,000.00$ 30,000.00$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 30,000.00$

RL - Rail Highway 1,842,120.00$ -$ 1,842,120.00$ 1,939,089.20$ 1,939,089.20$

Recreational Trails 1,334,688.57$ -$ -$ 1,334,688.57$ 1,032,000.00$ 1,404,946.58$ -$ 266,256.00$ 1,671,202.58$ 1,065,024.00$

Redistribution 526,037.89$ -$ -$ 526,037.89$ 45,408.00$ 553,728.53$ -$ -$ 553,728.53$ -$

Restoration -$ -$ 638,420.00$ 638,420.00$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$

Safe Routes to School -$ -$ -$ -$ 1,111,900.00$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 1,035,000.00$

TAP - Transportation Alternatives 2,761,589.46$ -$ 41,280.00$ 2,802,869.46$ 2,553,680.00$ 2,906,959.53$ -$ 638,420.00$ 3,545,379.53$ 2,553,680.00$

Transportation and Community and System Preservation -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$

STP-5 to 200K 7,649,136.98$ -$ -$ 7,649,136.98$ 1,440,767.77$ 8,051,787.55$ -$ -$ 8,051,787.55$ 4,827,978.38$

STP-Areas Less Than 200K -$ -$ -$ -$ 1,807,132.72$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 38,688.49$

STP-Areas Over 200K 5,351,763.87$ -$ -$ 5,351,763.87$ 5,924,168.52$ 5,633,480.72$ -$ -$ 5,633,480.72$ 21,573.20$

STP-DBE -$ -$ -$ -$ 90,000.00$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 90,000.00$

STP-Enhancement -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$

STP-Hazard Elimination -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$

STP-Non Urban Areas Under 5K 9,571,946.05$ -$ -$ 9,571,946.05$ 3,154,493.76$ 10,075,813.29$ -$ -$ 10,075,813.29$ 3,201,157.46$

STP-Off System Bridge 3,866,180.40$ -$ -$ 3,866,180.40$ 54,489.60$ 4,069,696.14$ -$ -$ 4,069,696.14$ 937,221.12$

STP-Rail -$ -$ 189,888.00$ 189,888.00$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$

STP-Safety -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$

STP-State Flexible 16,411,651.29$ -$ -$ 16,411,651.29$ 35,330,809.73$ 17,275,560.62$ -$ -$ 17,275,560.62$ 31,360,196.67$

-$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$

TIFIA -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$

TIGER Grants -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$

TIGER Grants (Maine) -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$

Bridge Special 673,689.60$ -$ 2,476.80$ 676,166.40$ 676,166.40$ 4,237,199.63$ -$ 64,997.35$ 4,302,196.98$ 1,299,946.99$

National Scenic Byways 400,000.00$ -$ -$ 400,000.00$ 400,000.00$ 20,000.00$ -$ -$ 20,000.00$ 20,000.00$

FHWA Earmarks 1,853,554.56$ -$ -$ 1,853,554.56$ 1,853,554.56$ 3,292,512.11$ -$ 769,940.73$ 4,062,452.84$ 4,062,452.84$

Training and Education 150,000.00$ -$ 150,000.00$ 150,000.00$ 150,000.00$ -$ -$ 150,000.00$ 150,000.00$

National Highway (NHPP) Exempt 2,631,528.42$ -$ -$ 2,631,528.42$ -$ 2,070,965.00$ -$ -$ 2,070,965.00$ -$

-$ -$

Toll Credit -$ -$ -$ -$ 28,815,285.91$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 20,197,054.81$

Total 173,303,874.38$ -$ 2,262,957.72$ 175,566,832.10$ 165,921,519.95$ 186,187,984.70$ -$ 2,838,876.21$ 189,026,860.92$ 160,969,981.76$

FTA (Federal-Aid with Match)

FTA5307 7,719,270.30$ -$ 3,029,945.20$ 10,749,215.50$ 10,868,414.08$ 7,396,379.04$ -$ 3,120,540.19$ 10,516,919.23$ 10,516,919.23$

FTA5307_NHDOT 3,037,943.07$ -$ 749,687.55$ 3,787,630.61$ 3,797,428.83$ 3,094,710.19$ -$ 773,677.55$ 3,868,387.74$ 3,868,387.74$

FTA5309 800,000.00$ -$ 200,000.00$ 1,000,000.00$ 1,000,000.00$ -$ -$

FTA5310 2,185,748.00$ -$ 546,437.00$ 2,732,185.00$ 2,732,185.00$ 2,255,692.00$ -$ 563,923.00$ 2,819,615.00$ 2,819,615.00$

FTA5311 7,107,160.80$ -$ 1,776,790.20$ 8,883,951.00$ 8,883,951.00$ 7,334,590.40$ -$ 1,833,647.60$ 9,168,238.00$ 9,168,238.00$

FTA5339 2,319,796.94$ -$ 579,949.23$ 2,899,746.17$ 2,899,746.17$ 2,470,639.80$ -$ 617,659.95$ 3,088,299.75$ 3,088,299.75$

Prior Grant Funds 7,011,805.98$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 6,909,448.29$ -$ -$ -$ -$

-$ 30,181,725.08$ -$ 6,882,809.18$ 30,052,728.28$ 30,181,725.08$ 29,461,459.72$ -$ 6,909,448.29$ 29,461,459.72$ 29,461,459.72$

Total 203,485,599.47$ -$ 9,145,766.90$ 205,619,560.38$ 196,103,245.04$ 215,649,444.42$ -$ 9,748,324.50$ 218,488,320.64$ 190,431,441.48$

Innovated Financing

GARVEE Bond Funds -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$

Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$

StateFund Sources

Turnpike Capital -$ 43,060,000.00$ -$ 43,060,000.00$ 43,060,000.00$ -$ 31,280,000.00$ -$ 31,280,000.00$ 31,280,000.00$

Turnpike Program -$ 27,187.31$ -$ 27,187.31$ 27,187.31$ -$ 26,445.48$ -$ 26,445.48$ 26,445.48$

Turnpike Renewal & Replacement -$ 9,600,000.00$ -$ 9,600,000.00$ 9,600,000.00$ -$ 11,500,000.00$ -$ 11,500,000.00$ 11,500,000.00$

-$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$

-$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$

Total -$ 52,687,187.31$ -$ 52,687,187.31$ 52,687,187.31$ -$ 42,806,445.48$ -$ 42,806,445.48$ 42,806,445.48$

Total 203,485,599.47$ 52,687,187.31$ 9,145,766.90$ 258,306,747.69$ 248,790,432.35$ 215,649,444.42$ 42,806,445.48$ 9,748,324.50$ 261,294,766.12$ 233,237,886.96$

2017

Improvement Program

2018

Improvement Program

juliec

Text Box

NH STIP 2015 - 2018 Financial Constraint Documentation Fiscal Constraint-Anticipated Revenues with Match Versus Programmed Funding for Projects within the STIP

Highway Safety Improvement Program and Safety Performance Management Measures

Final Rules Overview

Background The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) published the Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) and Safety Performance Management Measures (Safety PM) Final Rules in the Federal Register on March 15, 2016, with an effective date of April 14, 2016. The HSIP Final Rule updates the HSIP regulation under 23 CFR Part 924 to be consistent with MAP-21 and the FAST Act, and clarifies existing program requirements. The Safety PM Final Rule adds Part 490 to title 23 of the Code of Federal Regulations to implement the performance management requirements in 23 U.S.C. 150. The Safety PM rule supports the HSIP, as it establishes safety performance measures to carry out the HSIP and to assess serious injuries and fatalities on all public roads. Together, these regulations will improve data; foster transparency and accountability; and allow safety progress to be tracked at the national level. They will inform State DOT and MPO planning, programming, and decision-making for the greatest possible reduction in fatalities and serious injuries.

HSIP Final Rule The HSIP is a core Federal-aid program with the purpose to achieve a significant reduction in fatalities and serious injuries on all public roads. The HSIP requires a data-driven, strategic approach to improving highway safety on all public roads that focuses on performance. The HSIP regulation under 23 CFR 924 establishes FHWA’s HSIP policy, as well as program structure, planning, implementation, evaluation and reporting requirements for States to successfully administer the HSIP. The HSIP Final Rule contains three major policy changes related to: (1) the HSIP report content and schedule, (2) the Strategic Highway Safety Plan update cycle, and (3) the subset of the model inventory of roadway elements (MIRE), also known as the MIRE fundamental data elements.

Content and Schedule of the HSIP Report The HSIP report schedule remains the same; the HSIP and Railway-Highway Crossing Program reports are due on August 31st each year. All States must now use FHWA’s online reporting tool to submit their annual reports. In addition to the existing reporting requirements, the HSIP Final Rule also requires States to describe in their annual reports the progress toward achieving safety outcomes and performance targets, including:

• An overview of general highway safety trends; • The safety performance targets established in accordance with 23 U.S.C. 150; • A discussion of the basis of each established target and how the established target supports SHSP goals; and • In future years, a discussion of any reasons for differences in the actual outcomes and targets.

Strategic Highway Safety Plan Update Cycle The HSIP Final Rule requires States to update their SHSP at least once every 5 years, consistent with the current state of the practice. The first SHSP update is due no later than August 1, 2017.

Model Inventory of Roadway Elements (MIRE) States must collect and use the MIRE fundamental data elements on all public roads to support enhanced safety analysis and safety investment decision-making. The HSIP Final Rule establishes three categories of MIRE fundamental data .

FHWA-SA-16-023

Highway Safety Improvement Program and Safety Performance Management Measures Final Rules Overview

elements based on functional classification and surface type, as shown in the table. States must incorporate specific quantifiable and measurable anticipated improvements for the collection of MIRE fundamental data elements into their Traffic Records Strategic Plan by July 1, 2017, and have access to the complete collection of the MIRE fundamental data elements by September 30, 2026.

Safety PM Final Rule The Safety PM Final Rule supports the data-driven performance focus of the HSIP. The Safety PM Final Rule establishes five performance measures to carry out the HSIP: the five-year rolling averages for: (1) Number of Fatalities, (2) Rate of Fatalities per 100 million VMT, (3) Number of Serious Injuries, (4) Rate of Serious Injuries per 100 million VMT, and (5) Number of Non-motorized Fatalities and Non-motorized Serious Injuries. These safety performance measures are applicable to all public roads regardless of ownership or functional classification. The Safety PM Final Rule also establishes a common national definition for serious injuries.

State Targets States will establish statewide targets for each of the safety performance measures. States also have the option to establish any number of urbanized area targets and one non-urbanized area target for any or all of the measures. Targets will be established annually, beginning in August 2017 for calendar year 2018. For common performance measures (number of fatalities, rate of fatalities and number of serious injuries), targets must be identical to the targets established for the NHTSA Highway Safety Grants program. The State DOT must also coordinate with the MPOs in the State on establishment of targets, to the maximum extent practicable. States will report targets to the FHWA in the HSIP report due in August of each year.

MPO Targets MPOs will establish targets for the same five safety performance measures for all public roads in the MPO planning area within 180 days after the State establishes each target. The targets will be established in coordination with the State, to the maximum extent practicable. The MPO can either agree to support the State DOT target or establish a numerical target specific to the MPO planning area. MPOs’ targets are reported to the State DOT, which must be able to provide the targets to FHWA, upon request.

Met or Made Significant Progress Determination A State is considered to have met or made significant progress toward meeting its safety targets when at least 4 of the 5 targets are met or the outcome for the performance measure is better than the baseline performance the year prior to the target year. Optional urbanized area or non-urbanized area targets will not be evaluated. Each year that FHWA determines a State has not met or made significant progress toward meeting its performance targets, the State will be required to use obligation authority equal to the baseline year HSIP apportionment only for safety projects. States must also develop a HSIP Implementation Plan.

Additional Information The HSIP and Safety PM Final Rules are available at www.regulations.gov (Dockets: FHWA-2013-0019 and FHWA-2013-0020). FHWA will issue supplemental guidance to support implementation of the HSIP and Safety PM Final Rules. Additional information related to the HSIP and Safety PM Final Rules can be found at http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/hsip/tpm/.

Roadway Category Number of MIRE

Fundamental Data Elements

Non-local paved roads 37 Local paved roads 9 Unpaved roads 5

http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/hsip/tpm/

Documents

Transportation Technical Advisory Committee Meeting AgendaTransportation Technical Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda Wednesday, April 13, 2016 12:00 PM NRPC Office Main Conference