O slideshow foi denunciado.
Seu SlideShare está sendo baixado. ×

Governor’s Infrastructure Funding Plan

Carregando em…3

Confira estes a seguir

1 de 35 Anúncio

Mais Conteúdo rRelacionado

Diapositivos para si (17)

Quem viu também gostou (18)


Semelhante a Governor’s Infrastructure Funding Plan (20)


Mais recentes (20)

Governor’s Infrastructure Funding Plan

  1. 1. A Perspective from PennDOT James D. Ritzman, P.E. Deputy Secretary for Planning
  2. 2. Transportation Goals in Pennsylvania Public Safety Commerce 1.5 million students travel by school bus daily More than 4,000 structurally deficient bridges $500 billion worth of goods and services move annually 1.4 million Amtrak riders spare highways from congestion
  3. 3. Transportation Assessments • Transportation Funding Advisory Commission Report (2011) – Modernization – Finance – Legislation – www.TFAC.pa.gov
  4. 4. Modernization Initiatives
  5. 5. Idea-link
  6. 6. Every Day Counts Initiative
  7. 7. State Transportation Innovation Council
  8. 8. Transportation Assessments • PennDOT Next Generation Progress Report (2012) – Modernization – $50-70 million in annual cost-savings – Stakeholder engagement – www.ModernDOT.pa.gov
  9. 9. Transportation Improvement Program Base Program 2009 – 2012 $9.221 Billion 2011 – 2014 $8.045 Billion 2013 – 2016 $6.905 Billion Current Program under development is less than 75% of 2009 Program.
  10. 10. www.dot.state.pa.us
  11. 11. Transportation Investment
  12. 12. Cost of Inaction 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 4,500 5,000 5,500 6,000 NumberofSDBridges Current Funding New Funding More SD Bridges Fewer SD Bridges Impact on State-Owned Structurally Deficient (SD) Bridges
  13. 13. Cost of Inaction 0 4,000 8,000 12,000 16,000 20,000 24,000 MilesofState-OwnedHighwayswithPoorIRI* Impact on Roughness of State-Owned Highways *IRI: International Roughness Index Current Funding New Funding Rougher Roads Smoother Roads
  14. 14. Pavement Reconstruction 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 Miles Year Actual Reconstructed Need Not Met
  15. 15. 25% 23% 20% 13% 5% 3.7% 3.2% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 2001-2004 2003-2006 2005 - 08 2007 - 10 2009 - 12 2011 - 14 2013-16 AxisTitle AxisTitle Capacity Adding Projects ( % of the total program)
  16. 16. Governor Corbett’s Transportation Plan • Decreases the flat tax by nearly 17 percent • Generates $1.8 billion by Year 5 • Utilizes the Public-Private Transportation Partnership Board • Ends contributions from the PA Turnpike in 10 years Financial Components
  17. 17. Governor Corbett’s Transportation Plan Timeframe Finance Action Year 1 • Uncap first one-third of OCFT • Cut $0.01 from flat tax Year 2* • Cut $0.01 from flat tax Year 3* • Uncap second one-third of OCFT Year 4 • No finance action Year 5 • Uncap final one-third of OCFT *Potential use of bond financing in Years 2 and 3. Five-Year Financial Components
  18. 18. Governor Corbett’s Transportation Plan Transportation Mode Investment by Year 1 (est.) Investment by Year 5 (est.) State Roads and Bridges $310 million $1.2 billion Public Transportation $40 million $250 million Local Roads and Bridges $70 million $200 million PA Turnpike Expansion Projects $30 million $85 million Multi-Modal Fund $60 million $80 million TOTAL $510 million $1.8 billion Investment Component* *Based on the current wholesale value of gas.
  19. 19. Governor Corbett’s Transportation Plan • Enhance customer service – 2-year registration – 6-year driver’s license • Improve public transportation • Invest in local roads and bridges • Create a Multi-Modal Fund • Continue PennDOT Next Generation Initiative Modernization Component
  20. 20. Cost of Inaction $1,000,000,000 $1,200,000,000 $1,400,000,000 $1,600,000,000 $1,800,000,000 $2,000,000,000 $2,200,000,000 $2,400,000,000 $2,600,000,000 $2,800,000,000 $3,000,000,000 Current Funding New Funding Annual Construction Lettings Note: The sharp rise in 2009 is attributed to the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.
  21. 21. Investing in Pennsylvania • Enhance safety for all Pennsylvanians – 31,000 registered school buses – 1.5 million students travel by school bus daily • Sustain interstate economic competitiveness – $500 billion worth of goods and services move annually • Improve mobility and customer service • Create 50,000 jobs as opposed to inducing 12,000 job losses
  22. 22. Just so you know…
  23. 23. Senator Rafferty Bill • Senate Bill # 1 • Additional $2.5 billion by year 5 • Updates licensing, registration , and permitting fees to reflect inflation. • $100 surcharge on traffic law violations
  24. 24. Transportation Plan Comparison Transportation Mode Corbett Plan Senate Bill 1 State Roads and Bridges $1.2 billion $1.55 billion Public Transportation $250 million $480 million Local Roads and Bridges $200 million $240 million PA Turnpike Expansion Projects $85 million $85 million Multi-Modal Fund $80 million $115 million TOTAL $1.8 billion $2.5 billion Investment Component* in Year 5 *Based on the current wholesale value of gas.
  25. 25. Better Never Stops
  26. 26. Safety First safely (adj.) free from harm or risk
  27. 27. GIS Modernization
  28. 28. Multi-Agency Capital Planning
  29. 29. Linking Planning and NEPA
  30. 30. Local Data Collection
  31. 31. Bridge Bundling/Bridge Elimination
  32. 32. HOP Assist
  33. 33. Traffic Signal Management
  34. 34. Pennsylvania Infrastructure Bank •280 loans and $176 million approved •Leveraged an additional $330 million

Notas do Editor

  • Overview of Governor Corbett’s plan to secure Transportation FundingSafety for allPosted bridge/closed bridges – typically travel on less “safe” roadwaysEconomic impact of longer transport distancesTransportation systems – ports, rail, aviation, and highways and transit
  • Focus on every $ currently received
  • 39 modernization initiatives that do NOT require legislationPennsylvania Turnpike CommissionDevelop Comprehensive Freight Movement StudyElectronic Highway Occupancy Permitting systemIdea LinkOutdoor advertising “compliance”
  • 737 submissions and 176 implemented to date
  • Accelerating Technology and Innovation Deployment Warm Mix Asphalt Prefabricated Bridge Elements and Systems Adaptive Signal Control Technology Safety EdgeGeosynthetic Reinforced SoilShortening Project Delivery Shortening Project Delivery Toolkit Planning and Environmental Linkages Legal Sufficiency Enhancements Expanding Use of programmatic agreements Use of In-lieu fee and mitigation banking Flexibilities in R/W, Utility accommodation and relocation Accelerated Project Delivery Methods (Design Build, Construction Manager/General Contractor)
  • Academia, industry, associations
  • Improve efficiency, better service @ less costEAGLE – ATV licensing, winter services/summer activities (Presque Isle pilot)Work more closely with other agencies - PTC, DCNR, DEP (leave GIS effort for later)
  • Precarious, Fragile System
  • FFY 2014 – Highway Trust Fund projected to be insolvent at end
  • Cost of Inaction – you will be paying more AND more
  • “painting bad wood”
  • Interstates, NHS and >2000ADT is half our system at 20,000 miles expected to last 40 years when it was built more than 40 years ago, we now expect longer life.To prevent more from passing the 40 year mark, we must reconstruct 500 miles per year = 20,000 miles / 40 years.In the past 20 years we have fallen well short of this need and the focus on bridges more recently has nearly ended the pavement reconstruction program.
  • Our Transportation Improvement Program reflects this focus as we have reduced the number of capacity adding projects over the past three updates. Though we know we need to build capacity adding projects in certain places across the state to reduce congestion, we also have a network of over 40,000 miles of roadway and 25,000 state-owned bridges that are in need of repair, and we are committed to fixing the existing system.
  • Gradually deregulates the OCFTCompetitive opportunity we didn’t have previously…unsolicited proposals to be received in May
  • Local Share = approximately an additional 50%
  • Improve Public Transportation requiring consolidation studies, eliminate duplicative administrative overhead costs, 3.33% to 20% capital, 15 to 20% operatingMulti-modal Fund – TIP planning, reducing the cost of overhead; invest in local roads up to 50% (rail example)Keep pushing the envelope…with EVERY $ seeking best practices...can’t stress this enough!
  • Website and Decade of Investment
  • Local Share = approximately an additional 50%
  • People Team Great Britain motto for 2012 London OlympicsThe Olympic motto is the hendiatrisCitius, Altius, Fortius, which is Latin for "Faster, Higher, Stronger". The motto was proposed by Pierre de Coubertin on the creation of the International Olympic Committee in 1894. De Coubertin borrowed it from his friend Henri Didon, a Dominican priest who, amongst other things, was an athletics enthusiast.[1]The symbol of the Olympic Games is composed of five interlocking rings, coloured blue, yellow, black, green, and red on a white field, known as the "Olympic rings". The symbol was originally designed in 1912 by Baron Pierre de Coubertin, the founder of the modern Olympic Games. According to de Coubertin, the ring colours with the white background stand for those colors that appeared on all the national flags that competed in the Olympic games at that time. Upon its initial introduction, de Coubertin stated the following in the August, 1912 edition of Olympique:[full citation needed]"...the six colours [including the flag’s white background] thus combined reproduce the colours of all the nations, with no exception. The blue and yellow of Sweden, the blue and white of Greece, the tri- colours of France, England and America, Germany, Belgium, Italy, Hungary, the yellow and red of Spain next to the novelties of Brazil or Australia, with old Japan and new China. Here is truly an international symbol."
  • Defensive Driving (1985)LTAP
  • Survey Respondents: Districts 1-0 through 12-0, BOMO, BOPD, CPDM, BIO, BPR, OMOSS, Aviation, BMSDVRPC, SPC, NCOA, DEP, PHMC, PEMA, PTCWorkshop Participants: Districts 1-0 through 3-0, and 5-0 through 12-0, BOMO, BOPD, CPDM, BPR, BMSDVRPC, SPC, NC, SEDAOAExpanded upon survey resultsIdentified Gaps and OpportunitiesMulti-voted to select priorities/importance2nd session last week (ACTIVE NEXT GEN ACTIVITY)JDR – GIS classifications!TREMENDOUS OPPORTUNITIES IN GIS
  • Met with DCNR already“slider bar”, 3 panel comparisonsMany other opportunities, numerous applications
  • LP&N – GIS “visual” vs “distance-hits”
  • Local Bridge pilot (Blair, Luzerne, Westmoreland) Tom Prestash interview…When the bridges are similar enough, it makes oversight, mobilization and construction more efficient. District 9 has begun with a pilot project of 14 bridges, all owned by Blair County. Instead of stretching design out for two or two and a half years, it should take about five months, according to Prestash.There should be a savings of about 25 percent - or $800,000, he said. Bid in Mayif bundleable – from 20% to 0%, if not…go to 30%; Elimination of Bridges – Pilot in York 7/20, consideration to be given to not replace;
  • $3 million /year programmed on FFY 2013 (total $12 million) STIPInitiative to develop a procedure that allows for PennDOT support of economic development and smart growth through the highway occupancy permitting process.This effort will address the issue of the “last developer in” being required to complete significant off-site roadway improvements since the surrounding roadways are at or beyond capacity.The ultimate goal is to help ensure economic development is aligned with sound land use principles.Consultant assistance working on asking “what really makes an incentive”?
  • Seamless to the motoristMust make Governments to work collectively togetherInventoryPriority CorridorsVolume of traffic signalsLow volume – no traffic engineer, contractor services – bundlingAgility AgreementsAllegheny County 1,517/13,890 = 10.9%
  • Active - $108 million, rest are repaid or pending.$330 million leveraged.NEXT GEN FOCUSTransparency – clarity of guidance and process and statusGreater Accountability – web automation