Practices and Performance Measures for Local Public Agency Federally Funded Highway Projects (2013) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Pages 14-34
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 14... ...
14 CHAPTER TWO PRACTICES AND PERFORMANCE MEASURES USED BY DEPARTMENTS OF TRANSPORTATION (commonly called the Uniform Act)
|
From page 15... ...
15 TABLE 3 SUMMARY OF FEDERAL-AID PROGRAMS AND PROJECT TYPES AND RELATED DOT SURVEY RESPONSES Federal-aid Program Program Description and Details Percentage of Local Match Required1 Percentage of DOTs That Distribute Funds to LPAs Through This Program2 Rated as Being the Longest to Complete2 Rated as Most Risk of Not Being Completed Within Budget2 Surface Transportation Program (STP) Flexible funding for use by states, cities, and municipalities on any federal-aid highway 20% 95% 27% 38% STP Transportation Enhancements Activities Projects that relate to surface transportation and aim to improve the transportation experience for users of various types of transportation (pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure and safety, scenic and historic highways, landscaping, historic preservation, and environmental mitigation)
|
From page 16... ...
16 logical environs. Further complicating these projects are the extended consultation with regulatory agencies, development of mitigation strategies, and limited time available for construction.
|
From page 17... ...
17 ensure federal-aid eligibility. Details on these examples can be found in Appendix D
|
From page 18... ...
18 Colorado The Colorado DOT website offers detailed meeting minutes from its Local Agency Reevaluation Task Force Meeting. The 2010 meeting minutes provided more information on the fundswapping program and findings on how the same type of program is used in other states, such as California, Oregon, and Utah.
|
From page 19... ...
19 at the NACE annual conference meeting in April 2012. The program is based on the enabling federal legislation in the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (1998)
|
From page 20... ...
20 reviews. Other impacts included additional funding commitments required (42%)
|
From page 21... ...
21 on the type of work specified in the cited construction categories: (1) bike paths and miscellaneous asphalt; (2)
|
From page 22... ...
22 Louisiana During the April 2012 NACE annual conference meeting ("Streamlining LSRP Project Delivery in Louisiana" 2012) , a technical session by the Louisiana LTAP center provided a review of a streamlining method being used for local street and road project (LSRP)
|
From page 23... ...
23 project schedule that encompasses funding and construction schedules, local government decision-making phases, and turnaround and evaluation times; simplifying and clarifying existing Colorado DOT forms used in the LPA program; enhancing the Local Agency Manual for user-friendliness; providing better LPA access to training requirements; and reviewing the effectiveness of online resources. Iowa Iowa DOT applies tools in LPA oversight during the construction phase, including less stringent DOT-level materials specifications.
|
From page 24... ...
24 policy and procedures guidance, invoicing, and database management are handled by the Caltrans central office, the oversight of program development and execution is decentralized to the 12 district offices. Any jurisdiction can qualify for federal funds for any transportation project, with no cost limits, performance measures, or performance criteria.
|
From page 25... ...
25 responding to project issues throughout the life of a project in collaboration with the regional staff. Oregon DOT Regional Local Program Units were responsible for delivering the projects, including intergovernmental and contract administration throughout design and construction.
|
From page 26... ...
26 offices are responsible for standards and regulations. To be eligible for federal funding, the LPA must be a legally recognized town, city, or county.
|
From page 27... ...
27 lar match availability, size and complexity of the project, and LPA qualification. Local agencies were programmed from $60 million to $70 million in federal funds in the past fiscal year.
|
From page 28... ...
28 ment opportunity, on-the-job training, disadvantaged business enterprise, and labor compliance programs. The Construction Section is also improving its processes for training, deficiency recognition and followup, quality assurance/quality control report templates, and local agency construction projects tracking.
|
From page 29... ...
29 the practice of project bundling and in which phase of project delivery the LPA projects were being combined. For the 43% of DOTs that combine LPA projects, the majority of projects were combined in the construction contracting or inspection phase (40%)
|
From page 30... ...
30 Office for meeting its responsibilities under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. This agreement establishes a streamlined process for identifying, evaluating, and documenting whether a project will have an effect on historic properties.
|
From page 31... ...
31 In addition, Oregon DOT is developing a new programmatic agreement for use on all FHWA-funded projects. This new programmatic agreement is scheduled for publication in 2012.
|
From page 32... ...
32 included in the following sections. Thirteen DOTs set specific performance metrics for LPA projects and share them with local agencies that receive federal-aid funds.
|
From page 33... ...
33 ture bonds and ARRA projects either quarterly or monthly. This information is used to track delivery and when necessary request approval of cost, scope, and schedule changes.
|
From page 34... ...
34 aided by several management systems, including the electronic project management system. Arizona Arizona DOT presents several performance measures applied specifically to the federal-aid highway program at different project stages and for different project scopes in "The FHWA and ADOT Stewardship and Oversight Agreement" (2010)
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.