Developing the Constrained Plan

In meetings on November 8, and November 15, 2000, the TAC met to pare down the Unconstrained Plan to the Constrained Plan.  Funding marks for various categories of projects were provided by the AHTD.  The funding projections are not a guarantee, they are used as a possible scenario to establish the parameters of the Constrained Plan.  AHTD views the State as a whole when determining project priorities.  The following guidelines were used by the Committee to show the types of projects, project qualifications, and amounts of money allotted to each type by five-year increments. 

FUNDING GUIDELINES

National Highway System/Surface Transportation Program (NHS/STP)

Surface Transportation Program/Urban  (STP-U)

Bridge

 Transportation Enhancements

Trails

·        In-kind matching is allowed

Transit

 THE PROCESS

The main task of the TAC meetings was to establish the Constrained List for the NHS/STP and the STP-U funds.   The funding available for bridges is so limited that it is reserved for bridge repairs that the State deems as critical.  Enhancement funding is based on a first come first served application process. The Committee did not prioritize either of these two categories.  Transit money also did not need prioritization since it is designated for the established providers.

The Federal funding categories distinguish between projects that are on the State Highway System and local streets that are not on the State System but classified as Collector or above. 

  Prioritizing the funding for the NHS/STP and STP-U funding was accomplished by a round table method.  The representatives from each government entity had prepared list of project priorities with an estimated cost.  Work sheets were distributed to the participants with the allowed funding levels per five-year period.  With Chairman Dr. Alguire acting as moderator the representatives would suggest their highest priority projects while the estimated costs were tallied.  Each government unit participating would chose one project in turn until all had a project per given five year increment.  As funding conflicts occurred there would be some give and take around the table.  One common occurrence would be for a city with a large project to reduce its size by dividing it into two phases thus allowing other projects from another city onto the working list.  This process involved two meetings and both the NHS-STP and STP-U funding categories were handled in this matter.  There was a noteworthy spirit of cooperation between the represented governments and all parties seemed to be satisfied with the outcome.

The projects were highlighted on a regional map as the process went forward and this allowed all parties to visually see the others project priorities. This allowed for some priority adjustments that benefited the regional cohesiveness of the Transportation Plan.  It was agreed upon that it is very beneficial for the cities and counties of the Region to be more aware of each other’s plans.  It will be a goal of the NARTS members to develop more of an ongoing dialog among its participants, as we face even greater needs for regional cooperation.

An early product of the Constrained Plan is the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) for 2001-2003 which was approved by the TAC and Policy Committee on September 19, 2000.  The funding commitments already represented by this document had to be subtracted from the funding levels for the first five year (2000-2005) of the 2025 Plan.  The current TIP thus is the first document of the Constrained Plan since it represents projects with funding commitments.  This document follows on the next several pages.

The Constrained Lists for Future Funding Priorities:

The following lists show the project priorites for funding beyond the 2001-2003 TIP.   They represent the bulk of the work performed by the TAC, and approved by the Policy Committee on December 6, 2000.  The first two lists cover the funding categories of NHS-STP funds and STP-U funds.  They are followed by Constrained Lists for Bridges, Enhancement, and Transit.  These last three lists did not require committee prioritization but they were listed and approved by the Policy Committee.

2025 TRANSPORTATION PLAN
CONSTRAINED LIST
(NHS/STP)

NHS/STP    2002-2005

City                              Route               Begin                            End                      Est. Cost                                                                                                          

                         All other funds available for this time period are already
                         incorporated in the 2001-2003 TIP:

NHS/STP    2006-2010  Available $31,750,000

City                              Route               Begin                            End                          Est. Cost

                                                                                                                            (in millions)

NHS/STP    2011-2015  Available $31,750,000

City                              Route               Begin                            End                        Est. Cost

NHS/STP    2016-2020  Available $31,750,000

City                              Route               Begin                            End                  Est. Cost

NHS/STP    2021-2025  Available $31,750,000

City                              Route               Begin                            End                  Est. Cost

ILLUSTRATIVE PROJECTS:

412 NORTHERN SPRINGDALE BYPASS

OLD WIRE ROAD CORRIDOR EAST OF LOWELL, ROGERS

FAYETTEVILLE/SPRINGDALE EASTERN BYPASS.

2025 TRANSPORTATION PLAN
CONSTRAINED LIST
(STP-U)

STP-U   2002-2005   Available $2,590,000

$1,330,000 of the funds available for this time period are already
incorporated in the 2001-2003 TIP

City                              Route                      Begin                       End                     Est. Cost

STP-U  2006-2010   Available $4,900,000

City                              Route                           Begin                End                     Est. Cost