MPO Policy and Procedures Manual - Indianapolis Metropolitan ...
MPO Policy and Procedures Manual - Indianapolis Metropolitan ... MPO Policy and Procedures Manual - Indianapolis Metropolitan ...
• Highway Safety Improvement Program implementation. • Traffic control devices and operating assistance other than signalization projects. • Railroad/highway crossing warning devices. • Guardrails, median barriers, crash cushions. • Pavement resurfacing and/or rehabilitation. • Pavement marking. • Emergency relief (23 U.S.C. 125). • Fencing. • Skid treatments. • Safety roadside rest areas. • Adding medians. • Truck climbing lanes outside the urbanized area. • Lighting improvements. • Widening narrow pavements or reconstructing bridges (no additional travel lanes). • Emergency truck pullovers. Mass Transit • Operating assistance to transit agencies. • Purchase of support vehicles. • Rehabilitation of transit vehicles 1 . • Purchase of office, shop, and operating equipment for existing facilities. • Purchase of operating equipment for vehicles (e.g., radios, fareboxes, lifts, etc.). • Construction or renovation of power, signal, and communications systems. • Construction of small passenger shelters and information kiosks. • Reconstruction or renovation of transit buildings and structures (e.g., rail or bus buildings, storage and maintenance facilities, stations, terminals, and ancillary structures). • Rehabilitation or reconstruction of track structures, track, and trackbed in existing rightsof-way. • Purchase of new buses and rail cars to replace existing vehicles or for minor expansions of the fleet 1 . • Construction of new bus or rail storage/maintenance facilities categorically excluded in 23 CFR Part 771. Air Quality • Continuation of ride-sharing and van-pooling promotion activities at current levels. • Bicycle and pedestrian facilities. • Other Specific activities which do not involve or lead directly to construction, such as: Planning and technical studies. Grants for training and research programs. Planning activities conducted pursuant to titles 23 and 49 U.S.C. Federal-aid systems revisions. • Engineering to assess social, economic, and environmental effects of the proposed action or alternatives to that action. • Noise attenuation. • Emergency or hardship advance land acquisitions (23 CFR 710.503). • Acquisition of scenic easements. • Plantings, landscaping, etc. • Sign removal. • Directional and informational signs. 14
• Transportation enhancement activities (except rehabilitation and operation of historic transportation buildings, structures, or facilities). • Repair of damage caused by natural disasters, civil unrest, or terrorist acts, except projects involving substantial functional, locational or capacity changes. NOTE: 1 In PM10 and PM2.5 nonattainment or maintenance areas, such projects are exempt only if they are in compliance with control measures in the applicable implementation plan. [62 FR 43801, Aug. 15, 1997, as amended at 69 FR 40081, July 1, 2004; 71 FR 12510, Mar. 10, 2006; 73 FR 4441, Jan. 24, 2008] Long-Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) Amendment Process The LRTP contains a paradox. On the one hand, it is a general policy document with a longterm horizon. Comparably long-range documents in other fields of planning (such as a comprehensive land use plan) typically are very conceptual in nature so that their strategic direction is not undermined by day-to-day changes in the policy environment. However, the LRTP also lists individual projects, including project type and implementation time period, with a degree of specificity that belies its general policy purpose. Projects, particularly in the near-term, are constantly undergoing revisions in scope and schedule as environmental or financial conditions emerge. The purpose of the amendment process is to incorporate the latest project information in the LRTP, without changing the Plan’s general policy direction. Such amendments may arise for several reasons, including a change in the schedule of an existing project, a determination that an existing project is regionally significant, or the addition of a new project that is judged a priority. Due to the comprehensive nature of the LRTP, the amendment process should be strictly adhered to: 1. LRTP amendments trigger air quality conformity analyses; therefore, the procedure must consider these requirements. From beginning to end, a five-month process is generally required (see air quality section, below). For this reason, amendments are limited to once per year, and only emergency or administrative amendments are allowed in special situations such as new funding programs or project ear marks. 2. In order to end the five-month process with sufficient margin before the beginning of the construction season (usually April), final approval is targeted for February requiring the amendment process to begin the prior September. Local agencies wishing to submit an amendment must have the necessary information by that time. 3. For administrative amendments, the process developed for the IRTIP will be used. Please note that these processes will only be used in special situations that do not trigger a new air quality conformity determination. 4. One important issue to consider is that the LRTP lists projects by the year in which they are open to traffic, not by their funding or implementation year. Local agencies must be aware of this potential discrepancy in preparing their project requests. 15
- Page 1 and 2: Indianapolis Metropolitan Planning
- Page 3 and 4: Table of Contents 1. INTRODUCTION B
- Page 5 and 6: 1. Introduction Background Metropol
- Page 7 and 8: The current Metropolitan Planning A
- Page 9 and 10: 2. Work Program and Products SAFETE
- Page 11 and 12: 6. Be adopted and transmitted to IN
- Page 13 and 14: 3. Indianapolis Long-Range Transpor
- Page 16 and 17: Air Quality Conformity The 9-county
- Page 20 and 21: Air Quality Conformity Determinatio
- Page 22 and 23: 18 (this page intentionally left bl
- Page 24 and 25: The funding for projects shown in t
- Page 26 and 27: ‣ Provide improvements to air qua
- Page 28 and 29: Formal Amendment Process The MPO pr
- Page 30 and 31: • Moving any project phase progra
- Page 32 and 33: attached in PDF format. No hard cop
- Page 34 and 35: 30 federal fiscal year (October 1)
- Page 36 and 37: Federal legislation and the State o
- Page 38 and 39: FTA Funding FTA funds are distribut
- Page 40 and 41: new formula grant program allocated
- Page 42 and 43: those traditionally underserved by
- Page 44 and 45: their neighborhoods. The EJ Program
- Page 46 and 47: evisited. As a rule, however, the M
- Page 48 and 49: scope, schedule, and budget, and re
- Page 50 and 51: 46 (this page intentionally left bl
- Page 52 and 53: Responsibilities It is somewhat mis
- Page 54 and 55: e reallocated from slower activitie
- Page 56 and 57: Data The primary data source for de
- Page 58 and 59: 54 that it feels is unsupportable o
- Page 60 and 61: 56 (this page intentionally left bl
- Page 62 and 63: 58 developed to fund local programs
- Page 64 and 65: 60 (this page intentionally left bl
- Page 66 and 67: BACKGROUND Federal legislation requ
• Transportation enhancement activities (except rehabilitation <strong>and</strong> operation of historic<br />
transportation buildings, structures, or facilities).<br />
• Repair of damage caused by natural disasters, civil unrest, or terrorist acts, except<br />
projects involving substantial functional, locational or capacity changes.<br />
NOTE: 1 In PM10 <strong>and</strong> PM2.5 nonattainment or maintenance areas, such projects are exempt<br />
only if they are in compliance with control measures in the applicable implementation plan. [62<br />
FR 43801, Aug. 15, 1997, as amended at 69 FR 40081, July 1, 2004; 71 FR 12510, Mar. 10,<br />
2006; 73 FR 4441, Jan. 24, 2008]<br />
Long-Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) Amendment Process<br />
The LRTP contains a paradox. On the one h<strong>and</strong>, it is a general policy document with a longterm<br />
horizon. Comparably long-range documents in other fields of planning (such as a<br />
comprehensive l<strong>and</strong> use plan) typically are very conceptual in nature so that their strategic<br />
direction is not undermined by day-to-day changes in the policy environment. However, the<br />
LRTP also lists individual projects, including project type <strong>and</strong> implementation time period, with a<br />
degree of specificity that belies its general policy purpose. Projects, particularly in the near-term,<br />
are constantly undergoing revisions in scope <strong>and</strong> schedule as environmental or financial<br />
conditions emerge.<br />
The purpose of the amendment process is to incorporate the latest project information in the<br />
LRTP, without changing the Plan’s general policy direction.<br />
Such amendments may arise for several reasons, including a change in the schedule of an<br />
existing project, a determination that an existing project is regionally significant, or the addition<br />
of a new project that is judged a priority. Due to the comprehensive nature of the LRTP, the<br />
amendment process should be strictly adhered to:<br />
1. LRTP amendments trigger air quality conformity analyses; therefore, the procedure must<br />
consider these requirements. From beginning to end, a five-month process is generally<br />
required (see air quality section, below). For this reason, amendments are limited to once<br />
per year, <strong>and</strong> only emergency or administrative amendments are allowed in special<br />
situations such as new funding programs or project ear marks.<br />
2. In order to end the five-month process with sufficient margin before the beginning of the<br />
construction season (usually April), final approval is targeted for February requiring the<br />
amendment process to begin the prior September. Local agencies wishing to submit an<br />
amendment must have the necessary information by that time.<br />
3. For administrative amendments, the process developed for the IRTIP will be used. Please<br />
note that these processes will only be used in special situations that do not trigger a new air<br />
quality conformity determination.<br />
4. One important issue to consider is that the LRTP lists projects by the year in which they are<br />
open to traffic, not by their funding or implementation year. Local agencies must be aware of<br />
this potential discrepancy in preparing their project requests.<br />
15