Session 2: So You’ve Heard About Prioritization - PowerPoint Presentation

Session 2: So You’ve Heard About Prioritization NCDOT STI Prioritization and Programming Training May 2019

History of Prioritization

3 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2008 Strategic Prioritization Office of Transportation (SPOT) is created 2007-2008 McKinsey Consulting conducts evaluation of NCDOT and works with NCDOT staff on transformation History of Prioritization Session 2: So you’ve heard about prioritization

Strategic Prioritization: Why Prioritize? 4 FROM McKinsey Diagnostic stated NCDOT has an inconsistent, ineffective, and ad-hoc prioritization process - Too many decision-makers - Not visible - Statewide needs underemphasized Portfolio of projects, programs, services, and initiatives not explicitly linked to NCDOT’s goals Portfolio is near-term oriented, rather than focused on meeting long-term needs TO Formal, documented, and visible prioritization process Collaborative between NCDOT and stakeholders Ranking with appropriate perspective (statewide, regional, local) Allows for the business case to be made for additional flexibility and funding Outcome and data-driven approach, geared towards meeting Goals and Objectives Session 2: So you’ve heard about prioritization

5 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2009 Governor signs Exec. Order #2 2008 Strategic Prioritization Office of Transportation (SPOT) is created 2009 Prioritization 1.0 (P1.0) is implemented 2010-2011 Urban Loop Prioritization Process is implemented 2007-2008 McKinsey Consulting conducts evaluation of NCDOT and works with NCDOT staff on transformation History of Prioritization Session 2: So you’ve heard about prioritization

Previous Perception 6 What do you guys think about funding the widening of I-40? There’s a lot of congestion out there. I’ll agree to the I-40 project, but in return let’s also fund the new road near my property at the beach. Session 2: So you’ve heard about prioritization

Transportation Reform Public wanted politics removed from decision-making Session 2: So you’ve heard about prioritization 7

2009 – 2010 Executive Order #2 Prioritization 1.0 (P1.0) Highway mobility and modernization projects Simplistic scoring approach Quant. Data (70%-30% of score): Congestion, Crashes, Pavement Qualitative/Local Ranking (30%-70% of score): Ranking top 25 projects Results used to guide Programming of STIP Evaluated nearly 1100 highway projects 8 “The Secretary of the Department of Transportation shall implement throughout the Department a professional approval process for all highway construction programs, highway construction contracts, highway construction projects, and plans for the construction of projects.” Session 2: So you’ve heard about prioritization

2009 – 2010 Urban Loop Prioritization ProcessEvaluated sections of 10 Urban Loops (25+ projects)100% data-driven: (Congestion, Safety, Future Traffic, Economic Development, Connectivity, and Freight) / Cost to NCDOT Results used to program Urban Loop funds ($150m/ yr ) 9 Session 2: So you’ve heard about prioritization

10 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2009 Governor signs Exec. Order #2 2008 Strategic Prioritization Office of Transportation (SPOT) is created 2009 Prioritization 1.0 (P1.0) is implemented 2010-2011 Urban Loop Prioritization Process is implemented 2011 P2.0 is implemented 2012 Mobility Fund Prioritization Process is implemented 2012 Legislature codifies Prioritization Process into Law 2007-2008 McKinsey Consulting conducts evaluation of NCDOT and works with NCDOT staff on transformation History of Prioritization Session 2: So you’ve heard about prioritization

2011 – 2012 2nd Generation of Prioritization (P2.0) – 2011 Highway and bike/pedestrian projects (separate scoring) ~1300 highways & 600 bike/ ped projects Expanded Highway scoring: Quant. Data (70%-30% of score): Congestion, Crashes, Pavement, Economic Competitiveness, [Travel Time] Benefit/Cost Qualitative/Local Ranking (30%-70% of score): Ranking of top 25 projects or 1300 pts Results used to guide Programming of STIP 11 Session 2: So you’ve heard about prioritization

2011 – 2012 Mobility Fund – 2012 Statewide/Regional projects across all modes ready for construction within 5 yrs High Impact projects, some with low cost (evaluated 95 projects) Travel Time Benefit/Cost = 80% of score; Multimodal = 20% Results used to program Mobility Funds (~$52M year) 12 Session 2: So you’ve heard about prioritization

2011 – 2012 13 “The Department shall develop and utilize a process for selection of transportation projects that is based on professional standards in order to most efficiently use limited resources to benefit all citizens of the State. The strategic prioritization process should be a systematic, data-driven process that includes a combination of quantitative data, qualitative input, and multimodal characteristics, and should include local input. The Department shall develop a process for standardizing or approving local methodology used in Metropolitan Planning Organization and Rural Transportation Planning Organization prioritization.“ - S.L. 2012-84 Prioritization Process is now in Law Session 2: So you’ve heard about prioritization

14 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2013 Strategic Transportation Investment (STI) legislation is signed into law, directs transportation funding to results of Prioritization Process 2009 Governor signs Exec. Order #2 2008 Strategic Prioritization Office of Transportation (SPOT) is created 2009 Prioritization 1.0 (P1.0) is implemented 2010-2011 Urban Loop Prioritization Process is implemented 2011 P2.0 is implemented 2012 Mobility Fund Prioritization Process is implemented 2012 Legislature codifies Prioritization Process into Law 2007-2008 McKinsey Consulting conducts evaluation of NCDOT and works with NCDOT staff on transformation 2014 P3.0 is implemented in accordance with STI law 2015 P4.0 is implemented History of Prioritization Session 2: So you’ve heard about prioritization

15 Justin Green, P.E. Prioritization Office (SPOT) Highway Mode (919) 707-4613 jdgreen@ncdot.gov Session 2: So you’ve heard about prioritization Jason Schronce, P.E. SPOT Manager Prioritization Office (SPOT) (919) 707-4646 jschronce@ncdot.gov Austin Chamberlain Prioritization Office (SPOT) TOP 3 S / GIS Support (919) 707-4650 sachamberlain@ncdot.gov Sarah E. Lee Prioritization Office (SPOT) Non-Highway Modes (919) 707-4742 selee@ncdot.gov

Background NCDOT funds six modes of transportation Annual Budget of approx. $4.8B ($2.8B for STI) Key Partners Session 2: So you’ve heard about prioritization 17

Session 2: So you’ve heard about prioritization 18 Expected Population Growth by 2035 2035 Population Ranking

Strategic Transportation Investments (STI) Law – The Why Growing state Modernize funding formula and remove politics Better connect people, products, and places Successful prioritization e fforts 19 Session 2: So you’ve heard about prioritization

Strategic Transportation Investments (STI) Law Overwhelming support Prioritizes Capital Expenditures across all modes (Mobility/Expansion + Modernization) Needs-based Directly ties funding to prioritization r esults 20 Session 2: So you’ve heard about prioritization

Strategic Transportation Investments (STI) Law Prioritization Workgroup charged with providingrecommendations to NCDOT on weights and criteria MPOs & RPOs NCDOT Division Engineers Local Government Advocacy Groups Funding (Highway Trust Fund and Federal Aid) Bonus Allocation (Highway) 50% of local commitment of non-State/Federal funds will be returned to local area for other high scoring projects in that area GS 136-189.10 and .11 21 Session 2: So you’ve heard about prioritization

22 40% of Funds 30% of Funds 30% of Funds Statewide Mobility Regional Impact Division Needs Focus  Address Local Needs Selection based on 50% Data & 50% Local Input Funding based on equal share for each Division (14) = ~$50M / yr Focus  Address Significant Congestion and Bottlenecks Selection based on 100% Data Projects Programmed prior to Local Input Ranking Focus  Improve Connectivity within Regions Selection based on 70% Data & 30% Local Input Funding based on population within Region (7) How STI Works Session 2: So you’ve heard about prioritization

23 regions & divisions Session 2: So you’ve heard about prioritization

STI Law Eligibility Definitions   Mode Statewide Mobility Highway Interstates (existing & future) NHS routes (July 1, 2012) STRAHNET ADHS Routes Uncompleted Intrastate projects Designated Toll Facilities Aviation Large Commercial Service Airports ($500K cap) Bicycle -Pedestrian N/A Public Transportation N/A Ferry N/A Rail Freight Service on Class I Railroad Corridors Regional Impact Other US and NC Routes Other Commercial Service Airports not in Statewide ($300K cap) N/A Service spanning two or more counties (10% cap) Vessel or infrastructure expansion Rail service spanning two or more counties not in Statewide 24 Session 2: So you’ve heard about prioritization Division Needs All County (SR) Routes Federal-Aid Eligible Local Roads All Airports without Commercial Service (General Aviation) ($18.5M cap) All projects ($0 state funds) All other service, including terminals and stations Replacement vessels All other service, including terminals and stations (no short lines)

STI Law Eligibility Definitions   Mode Statewide Mobility Highway Interstates (existing & future) NHS routes (July 1, 2012) STRAHNET ADHS Routes Uncompleted Intrastate projects Designated Toll Facilities Aviation Large Commercial Service Airports ($500K cap) Bicycle -Pedestrian N/A Public Transportation N/A Ferry N/A Rail Freight Service on Class I Railroad Corridors Regional Impact Other US and NC Routes Other Commercial Service Airports not in Statewide ($300K cap) N/A Service spanning two or more counties (10% cap) Vessel or infrastructure expansion Rail service spanning two or more counties not in Statewide Session 2: So you’ve heard about prioritization Division Needs All County (SR) Routes Federal-Aid Eligible Local Roads All Airports without Commercial Service (General Aviation) ($18.5M cap) All projects ($0 state funds) All other service, including terminals and stations Replacement vessels All other service, including terminals and stations (no short lines)

26 STI Law Highway Scoring Overview  Mode Statewide Mobility Eligible Projects Statewide Overall Weights 100% Quantitative Data Quant. Criteria Benefit-Cost Congestion Economic Comp. Safety Freight Multimodal Pavement Condition Lane Width Shoulder Width Notes: Projects Selected Prior to Local Input Regional Impact Statewide Regional 70% Quantitative Data / 30% Local Input Benefit-cost Congestion Safety Freight Multimodal Pavement Condition Lane Width Shoulder Width Accessibility and connectivity to employment centers, tourist destinations, or military installations Quant. Criteria can be different for each Region Division Needs Statewide Regional Division 50% Quantitative Data / 50% Local Input Benefit-cost Congestion. Safety Freight Multimodal Pavement Condition Lane Width Shoulder Width Accessibility and connectivity to employment centers, tourist destinations, or military installations Quant. Criteria can be different for each Division Session 2: So you’ve heard about prioritization

Non-Highway Criteria 27 Separate prioritization processes for each mode Minimum of 4 quantitative criteria Criteria based on 0-100 point scale with no bonus points Session 2: So you’ve heard about prioritization

Prioritization Workgroup

Prioritization 6.0 29 § 136-189.11. Transportation Investment Strategy Formula. (h) Improvement of Prioritization Process. – The Department shall endeavor to continually improve the methodology and criteria used to score highway and non-highway projects pursuant to this Article, including the use of normalization techniques, and methods to strengthen the data collection process. The Department is directed to continue the use of a workgroup process to develop improvements to the prioritization process. Session 2: So you’ve heard about prioritization

Workgroup Purpose Purpose Provide recommendations to NCDOT on prioritization criteria, weights, and scoring process for all modes Member Responsibilities: Provide input to improve the scoring methodologies Serve as a communication liaison between the Workgroup and your representative organization Attempt to reflect the full range of affected interests from your respective organization/unit Work in a collaborative, consensus-driven manner 30 Session 2: So you’ve heard about prioritization

P6.0 Workgroup Members 4 MPO reps 4 RPO reps Metro Mayors Coalition League of Municipalities Regional Council of Governments Association of County Commissioners NC Rural Center 13 NCDOT reps (including 4 Division Engineers) Advisory reps / technical experts 31 Session 2: So you’ve heard about prioritization

P6.0 Workgroup Meetings 32 8 Workgroup meetings (October 2018 to May 2019) with additional technical subcommittee meetings Consensus recommendations P6.0 schedule Projects to evaluate Non-Highway scoring Highway scoring Local input points Normalization All recommendations based on consensus Session 2: So you’ve heard about prioritization

How to Read the STI Law https://www.ncdot.gov/strategictransportationinvestments/ 33 Session 2: So you’ve heard about prioritization

Session 2: So You’ve Heard About Prioritization NCDOT STI Prioritization and Programming Training May 2019