by Hank Dittmar

ISTEA Planner's Workbook

The Surface Transportation Policy Project receives many requests from professionals and activists alike for a sample Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) that meets the requirements of ISTEA. The TIP is one of the most important products of the transportation planning process as it has been recast under federal law. Prior to ISTEA, the TIP was a largely meaningless wish list of projects, one source which the state used to choose projects for federal funding. ISTEA changed all that, making the TIP the document from which federal projects were selected. Both the metropolitan TIP and the state TIP thus become an important step in the transportation planning process, and thus they need to be recast as user-friendly documents that can be seen to comply with the substantive requirements of ISTEA. What follows is intended to be an outline for such a Transportation Improvement Program, either at the level of the State or the Metropolitan Planning Organization. Other outlines are clearly possible for the TIP - this is intended merely as one possible way of presenting the information. We hope that this outline can serve as a useful tool for integrating the many requirements of ISTEA into a useful programming document for professionals, decision-makers and the public.

Sample Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) Outline:

I. Executive Summary - a two page outline of the contents of the TIP which explains its purpose, the relationship of the TIP to the overall planning process, the amounts and sources of funds programmed, the major projects included and the time period covered.

II. Introduction and Background - A statement of the purpose of the TIP, the legal requirements for it in ISTEA, and the relationship of the TIP to the planning process (i.e. management systems, long range plan, major investment studies and specific project development and environmental processes). Should include a chart of the entire process, including any relevant air quality processes, so that the reader can be oriented.

III. Sources of Funds - This section should detail and explain the various sources of funds included in the Transportation Improvement Program, both federal and non-federal. It should explain the eligible uses of each category of funding and provide background on limitations and availability.

IV. Financial Plan - This section should show how much money is available for each category of funding for each year in the TIP. If innovative sources of funding or bonding are used, this plan should so indicate and explain the assumptions involved in paying back any debt. All financial assumptions should be indicated in the financial plan, including any assumptions about revenue, such as tax or rate increases, appropriation levels or obligation authority. Any parts of the TIP which rely on future action by a legislative body to raid the money should be clearly identified. Financial assumptions should be specific to the specific categories of funding. Escalation rates for project costs by program year should be outlined here as well. The TIP must be financially constrained, which means that funding must be available for a project within the time period covered by the TIP if it is to be included within the document.

The financial plan should list the annual costs for maintaining and rehabilitating the existing highway, local street and road and transit system. These estimates can be derived from the management systems, which need to be based on a life cycle cost analysis. The plan should clearly show that the TIP first addresses these costs and demonstrates that the region has financial capacity to maintain the existing physical plant per management system strategies.

V. Project Selection Criteria - This section should outline the process for selecting specific projects from those proposed generally in the plan, so that a financially constrained TIP can be put forward. A project selection process can be loosely organized into three stages: screening criteria, scoring criteria, and programming criteria. Screening criteria are those which weed out clearly ineligible or unripe projects. Scoring criteria are those which rank projects against objectives or goals identified in the planning process or deriving from ISTEA's planning factors. Programming criteria are criteria which organize the TIP into program year, fund source and jurisdiction. Project selection criteria are thus qualitative and quantitative. The TIP needs to let a person know what criteria were used to pick the mix of projects proposed within it.

VI. Project Listings - This section of the TIP lists all projects included in the TIP. It should be subdivided by year, by jurisdiction (county, city), and then by funding category. Each project listing needs to identify the route, program or facility number or name, the geographic location, a brief description of project type, scope and purpose, and an identification of costs by fund source and program year. Special information such as air quality status (exempt, TCM, etc.), whether the project involves a Major Investment Study, or status of environmental process should be flagged as well. The project listings section should include a sample page explaining how one reads this section, as this is the most technical part of the TIP.

VII. Adoption Schedule and Public Involvement Process - The draft TIP should explain the process for review and adoption of the document, including date, time and place for all hearings, and meetings where the TIP will be discussed. The draft TIP should also explain the process for submission of comments or questions on the document as well as the process the agency will use to consider and respond to comments. The draft TIP should also explain where the reader can go to examine or receive copies of background information on the TIP or projects included therein. Relevant staff and their phone numbers could also be listed.

The final TIP needs to include a documentation of public comments received as well as the responses to these comments. Any changes made to the draft in response to public comment should be clearly indicated.

VIII. Major Investment Studies - Per ISTEA's planning regulations, the planning process needs to identify what corridors in the state or region have a need for significant capacity expansion. This section should list the Major Investments Studies proposed in the plan or identified here in the TIP by corridor and briefly outline the status and schedule for each.

IX. Finding of Consistency with Plan - ISTEA requires that TIPs be drawn from conforming long range transportation plans. A brief discussion of the plan, its goals and measures of performance, and the manner in which this TIP advances those goals and meets those measures would demonstrate consistency here. Any differences should be identified as well. The relationship to the ISTEA management systems should also be discussed.

The ISTEA requirement that capacity-expanding projects first be considered through a Congestion Management System should be addressed here. Any such projects in the TIP should be listed and the CMS consideration should be documented. All demand and system management actions taken should be listed.

X. Air Quality Conformity Finding - In air quality non-attainment areas, a finding of conformity with the relevant State Implementation Plan needs to be made. This finding should have two parts: an analysis which demonstrates that all applicable Transportation Control Measures are being implemented in a timely and expeditious manner, and a demonstration that the projects and programs being financed by the TIP lead to the attainment of air quality standards. The TCM analysis should: list all relevant TCMs and the schedule for their implementation; identify funding status and implementation status for each TCM; and provide contingency TCMs for any that are stalled.

The analysis of the TIP programs and projects needs to be a quantitative analysis using the five step modeling process. The TIP should include as much documentation of the process as possible, and at the least should tell the reader where complete documentation can be obtained. The TIP should show Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT), vehicle speed and emissions for the region as a whole and for specific corridors or subareas within the region. Projects for which detailed CO analyses will be required later should be identified.

XI. Results of TIP Implementation & ISTEA Planning Factors - First, the section could summarize where the funds programmed in the TIP are going by jurisdiction, by mode and by type of project. Simple graphics can usefully tell the story, by depicting what percentage of funding is devoted to rehabilitation vs. new capacity, for example; or by detailing the split between highways, local roads, transit and walking and bicycling.

In addition, this section could summarize the benefits and costs of implementing the proposed TIP. How much time will be saved, in the aggregate or in specific corridors? What will be the impact in vehicle speed, transit use, VMT reduction or use of modes such as telecommuting, walking and cycling? What gaps in transit service or access will be filled? What improvement in access to low income persons will result? What economic benefits will result for the region as a whole or for specific communities or population groups within the region?

This section should also examine ISTEA's planning factors, as well as those added by regulation, and provide a discussion as to how the TIP considers each of these factors. For example, a consideration of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act might look at transit system coverage and auto ownership and use by ethnicity and census tract.

XII. Glossary of Terms - The TIP should include a glossary of technical or transportation terms used in it. An acronym dictionary would also be helpful.