Transportation for Communities - Advancing Projects Through Partnerships
- User Portals
- Applications
Transportation Phases
- Long Range Transportation Planning
- Integrated Programming and Fiscal Constraint
- Corridor Planning
- Environmental Review Merged with Permitting
Check out the Understanding the Decision Guide page
LRP-5
Approve Financial Assumptions
Description: At this key decision information from the Programming / Fiscal Constraint Phase is introduced into the LRTP decision making process. This information includes potential revenue sources, a methodology for identifying costs of individual projects, and acknowledgement of restrictions and requirements associated with each funding source. In order for the adopted LRTP to meet the fiscal constraint requirement, this information must be approved by the decision makers as the basis for the LRTP development.
There is information developed in prior key decisions that informs this step. There is essential information provided from PRO-1 and PRO-2 at this key decision.
Purpose
To reach agreement on potential revenue source, the restrictions and requirements for allocating revenue and the methodology for identifying costs so that scenarios can be fully considered.
Outcome
Approved project cost methodology and revenue sources for evaluation and comparison of scenarios.
Partner Roles | ||
|---|---|---|
FHWA |
Advisor |
Ensures the fiscal constraint requirement is met and funding is used appropriately |
MPO |
Decision Maker |
Approves revenue sources and project costs that are reasonable and reflect fiscal constraint |
Resource Agency |
Advisor |
Advise that data on funding and long-term management options and cost data associated with ecosystem crediting is considered. Advise if conservation and mitigation spending is planned for in the LRTP and STIP. |
State DOT |
Advisor |
Ensures assumptions of anticipated revenue is consistent with state perspective |
Process |
Integration Type |
Integration Description |
|---|---|---|
| Land Use and Smart Growth | None. | None. |
| Air Quality Conformity | None. | None. |
| Natural Environment and the IEF | Data Between IEF Step 1 - Build & Strengthen Collaborative Partnerships & Vision and LRP-5 | IEF Sub-step 1f is "Initially explore funding and long-term management options, how conservation and restoration actions can be funded in advance of transportation projects, as well as for long-term management." Data generated through this process should inform the financial assumptions in the LRP. How will advance mitigation be paid for? This data was collected at LRP-1 and will also be used at PRO-1. |
| Data From IEF Step 6 - Develop Crediting Strategy | If a crediting strategy has been developed, there could be data available associated with the costs of mitigation credits. This data should inform financial assumptions in long range planning. | |
| Capital Improvement | Data | Infrastructure plans and financial resources that have been identified for specific capital improvements in order to validate consistency with restrictions and requirements established in the capital improvement plan. |
| Safety and Security | None. | None. |
| Human Environment | None. | None. |
| Economic Development | Data | Funding and financing options that have been identified for projects that offer economic development benefits. |
| Greenhouse Gas | Data | Information about potential funding sources and eligibility criteria or partners which may provide funding to inform the benefit/cost analysis during scenario evaluation. |
Linkages to other Phases of Transportation Decision Making | ||
|---|---|---|
Key Decision |
What is Linked? |
Purpose of Linkage |
To Corridor Planning Studies |
||
COR-5 - Approve Evaluation Criteria, Methods and Measures |
Financial assumptions |
To inform the evaluation criteria, methods and measures in corridor planning. |
From Integrated Programming and Fiscal Constraint |
||
PRO-1 - Approve Revenue Sources |
Identified revenue sources with requirements and restrictions |
To support fiscal constraint assumptions for the LRTP |
PRO-2 - Approve Methodology for Identifying Project Costs and Criteria for Allocating Revenue |
Methodology for developing project costs and revenue allocation |
• To support fiscal constraint assumptions |
Policy Questions |
|
|---|---|
Questions about purpose and roles |
Does the consideration of specific funding resources require additional sharing of decision making that is not currently in place? For example, with a private partner. |
Questions about stakeholders |
Do stakeholders agree on the inclusion of innovative financing options and sources of revenue? |
Questions about the transportation process supporting the decision |
Are formal agreements (for example MOA/MOU, contracts, loan agreements, pre-development options, etc.) necessary to ensure funding availability? |
Are the methodology and documentation clearly stated so that it can be easily understood by all? | |
Are there any alternative revenue and finance sources (e.g., tolls or user fees)? | |
Do any of the funding resources require action outside of the transportation decision making process? | |
Have all reasonably foreseeable funding sources and associated requirements and restrictions been identified? | |
What eligibility criteria should be considered for private sector stakeholders to invest in specific projects? | |
What is the estimated funding over the life of the plan from these sources ? | |
Which transportation projects/deficiencies could attract private sector investment? | |
Questions about other phases |
What is the current funding in the TIP and the anticipated future funding from existing sources? |
Questions about non-transportation sectors/processes |
Are the proposed GHG reduction strategies expected to generate new sources of revenue to support plan improvements? If so, how will these revenues be shared between partner agencies? |
Are the revenue sources broad enough to allow consideration of transportation and non-transportation solutions to address our vision and goals? | |
Are there any grants or funds available from other public agencies like HUD, EPA, etc.? | |
Are there funding programs that target GHG-reduction strategies? | |
Does the methodology take into consideration the cost of ecological conservation, restoration and mitigation? | |
Does the methodology take into consideration the potential cost of any displacement of residents and businesses, mitigation of adverse economic impacts to environmental justice populations, and any additional economic costs? | |
Is there information associated with an ecological crediting strategy that can inform the cost of mitigation? | |
Is there information from other similar projects in the region or elsewhere that can inform the cost of mitigation? | |
What would be the impact of GHG reduction strategies that involve financial incentives (e.g., for use of alternative fueled vehicles, higher density development supporting smart growth, etc.)? | |
Questions to Gather Stakeholder Interests |
|---|
None. |
Questions to Incorporate Stakeholder Interests |
|---|
| Are the identified revenue sources; funding restrictions and requirements; and project cost methodology presented so that stakeholders can clearly understand this information? |
Case Study Example(s): |
|---|
Supporting Data for the Key Decision |
|
|
|---|---|---|
From other phases of transportation decision making |
Long Range Planning |
No Specific Data | Programming |
PRO-1: Identified revenue sources with requirements and restrictions |
PRO-2: Methodology for developing project costs and revenue allocation |
Potential partners that may support/provide funding |
Outside agreements that impact resource availability |
Budget and revenue information within jurisdictions |
Analysis associated with potential revenue from outside sources including taxes and partnerships |
Methods used for cost estimation at the state level and from previous studies |
Data from research on similar regions to inform methodology approaches |
Trend line data on cost estimating and cost over-runs where available. |
Inflation adjustments to consider |
Operating and maintenance cost for system (other than public transportation) |
Corridor Planning |
No Specific Data |
Environmental Review |
No Specific Data |
From other sectors and processes |
Land Use and Smart Growth |
No Specific Data | Air Quality Conformity |
No Specific Data |
Natural Environment and the IEF |
Data generated through the ecological planning process around how conservation and restoration actions can be funded in advance of transportation projects, as well as for long-term management. |
Capital Improvement |
Infrastructure plans and financial resources that have been identified for specific capital improvements in order to validate consistency with restrictions and requirements established in the capital improvement plan. |
Safety and Security |
No Specific Data |
Human Environment |
No Specific Data |
Economic Development |
Funding and financing options. |
Greenhouse Gas |
List of funding sources and eligibility criteria |
From the transportation technical process supporting this key decision |
Per lane mile cost for highway improvements | |
Bridge / culvert replacement costs | ||
Operating and capital costs for public transportation | ||
Right of way costs | ||
Functional classification of roads in the region related to preliminary design parameters | ||
Estimates of revenues expected from proposed strategies or projects (e.g., revenues from toll roads) | ||
Eligibility criteria for private sector partners who may provide funding | ||
From stakeholder collaboration |
No Specific Data | |
From public private partnership |
No Specific Data | |
The following is a list of data needed to support the key decision. Practitioners collect this information for decision makers to consider. You may add to this list using the comment box at the bottom of the page. Supporting Tools and Technology | |
|---|---|
Category |
Detail |
Gathering |
Financial Planning Tools: Used to gather data on available funding sources, as well as projected future sources. Searchable by MPOs, others, to locate financing opportunities. |
Key Decision Relationship to Other Topics | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Topic | Description | ||
| Visioning and Transportation |
|
||
| Public-Private Partnerships |
|
||