1. MAP-21 Overview
• 2 year bill
• October 1, 2012- September 30, 2014
• Extends funding at current level
Themes
• Consolidate programs
• Streamline project delivery
• Give states more flexibility

2. MAP-21 Changes to
Biking and Walking
• Transportation Alternatives
– Eligible activities
– Funding and opt outs
– Distribution of Funds
• Changes to other funding programs
– Highway Safety Improvement Program
– STP
– CMAQ
– Federal Lands

3. Transportation Alternatives
• Combines programs:
– Transportation Enhancements
(now Transportation Alternatives)
– Safe Routes to School
– Recreational Trails
– Redevelopment of underused
highways to boulevards

4. Transportation Alternatives
(formerly TE)
Changes eligibilities from Transportation Enhancements
ADDS: SUBTRACTS
• Safe Routes for Non- • Funding For Bicycle and
Drivers (networks) Pedestrian Education
• ANY Environmental • Streetscaping
Mitigation • Acquisition of Scenic or
• Scenic Byway uses Historic sites
• Transportation
Museums

5. Reduction in Funding
SAFETEA LU- FY 2011 MAP-21
SRTS
$202 M
TE TRANSPORT-
ATION
$928 ALTERNATIVES
MILLION
RTP $808 M
$97
TOTAL: $1.2 BILLION TOTAL: $808
MILLION
SOURCE: FHWA, Revised Fiscal Year (FY) 2011 Supplementary Tables – Apportionments Pursuant to
the Surface Transportation Extension Act of 2010, as Amended. Feb 1, 2012

6. Distribution of Funding
1. TA funding is 2% of State’s highway funds
(minus safety , etc.)
2. Recreational Trails Program funded
3. Funding is divided into 2 equal pots;
– One distributed by population
– One to a grant program
4. State has the ability to transfer funding out of
Transportation Alternatives

7. Transportation Alternatives
Funding Distribution
2. Recreational Trails Program funding gets taken
off the top (unless Governor Opts out)
• Maintains Rec Trails Program
process and funding (2009 levels)
• Opt-out date is 30 days before
money is available
• Opt-out decision made every year
• Rec Trails projects eligible under TA
and STP

8. Transportation Alternatives
Funding Distribution
3. Remaining funding is divided into 2 equal pots
POT 1- distributed by population
• MPOs Population > 200,000
• Funding is sub-allocated
• MPOs must run competitive grant process
• Communities with a population < 200,000
• State will run a competitive grant process
• Rural areas population < 5000
• State will run a competitive grant process

9. Oregon Example
Funds Distributed by Population
MPO/ Metropolitan Percent of Pot 1
area Funding (estimated)
Portland 39%
Salem 6%
Eugene 6.5%
Other areas of the 48%
state
Map and Data source: Rails to Trails Conservancy, http://www.railstotrails.org/resources/documents/ourWork/MPOs_by_state

10. Transportation Alternatives
Funding Distribution
3. Remaining funding is divided into 2 equal pots
POT 2- distributed through competitive grant process
run by state.
Eligible Entities STATE
• Local/regional governments DOT
• Tribes
• Local/regional transportation agencies
• Public land agencies
• Other local/regional entities state deems eligible

11. State Ability to Transfer Funds
4. State can choose to transfer funding out
Transfer option-
– up to 50% of TA to any other program
– Only out of Pot 2
Coburn Opt- out-
– based on unobligated balance
– Doesn’t apply until year 2
– Unique to TA
State of Emergency
– Can transfer funding to fix damaged infrastructure
– If State gets federal funds for emergency later, must reimburse TA

12. Other MAP-21 Changes to
Biking and Walking
• Coordinators:
– Bicycle and Pedestrian Coordinators are still
required
– Safe Routes to School Coordinators eligible
• Clearinghouses- Not funded in MAP-21
– Bicycle Pedestrian Information Center
• Under contract until Summer 2013
– Safe Routes to School National Center
• Under contract until January 2013

13. Eligibility in Other Programs
• Expediting Project Delivery
• Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP)
• Surface Transportation Program (STP)
• Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ)
• Federal Lands Programs

14. Expediting Projects/
Streamlining
• Streamlining of regulations
• Categorical Exclusion (CE)
SAFETEA LU Categorical MAP-21
Exclusions CategoricalExclusions
• Biking and walking • Biking and walking
projects
projects
• Projects within the right-
of-way
• Projects with a total cost
of less than $5 million

15. Highway Safety
Improvement Program
• HSIP funding increases under MAP-21
• In writing plans, states must consult with:
– State nonmotorized representative
– May include representatives from
stakeholder groups

16. Highway Safety
Improvement Program
• New data and research requirements for
states
– nonmotorized crash data
– motor vehicle crashes that include pedestrians
and bicyclists
– Crash frequency and crash rate data
– Identify roadway elements/ features
• that constitute hazard...
• [and/or] safe conditions

17. Surface Transportation
Program (STP)
• Higher funding, more competition on non sub-
allocated funds
• Sub-allocation to metropolitan areas
– Same dollar amount as before
Eligibility:
•Transportation Alternatives activities eligible
•Rec Trails projects eligible
•SRTS not listed as eligible, but similar projects fit under Safe
Routes for non-drivers

18. Congestion Mitigation and
Air Quality (CMAQ)
• New Eligibility
– Project or program that shifts traffic demand to…
other transportation modes
• Transferability
– States can transfer up to 50% of CMAQ
– Increase from ~ 21% in SAFETEA LU
• Evaluation and Assessments
– Require cost benefit analysis
– Health Impact Assessment

19. Federal Lands
Program
• Consolidated programs; cuts funding overall
• Bicycling and walking facilities eligible
• Eliminated the Transit in the Parks program
(AKA- Sarbanes TRIP Program)
• Mandatory Sidepath Law
• National Federal Lands Facility Inventory
– Important to ensure bike/ped projects
get on this TIP

20. Summary
Transportation Alternatives
– Changes to eligibility
– Lower funding
– Funding distribution changes
• 50% by population
• 50% by grant program
Eligibility
• Increased opportunity for data and funding under HSIP
• Continued eligibility under CMAQ, STP, and Federal Lands
• Side path law on federal lands