1. From Cradle to Construction:
Planning for Transportation
Infrastructure
NADO Rural Transportation Conf 2013
French Broad River MPO/
Land of Sky Regional Council

2. 2040
CTP
LRTP
SPOT
STIP/TIP
NEPA
Construction
• Statewide Systems Plan
• No $ Constraint
• 30+ Years
• No $ Constraint
• 25 Years
• Based on Revenue Forecast
• Scores Projects for Effectiveness
• Results go into STIP
• 0-5 and 6-10 Years
• Specific Funding Sources Identified
• Project alternatives are assessed
• Final project design and cost
• Project Let
• Facility Opened
The Life of a Transportation Project
2

3. We Started Small
We began with smallest, most up-
to-date data set:
State Transportation
Improvement Program
– Budgeted Construction Plan
– Has counterpart MTIP at MPO
– Initial GIS files from NCDOT
STIP/Programming
– PROJECT BREAKS
3
2040
CTP
LRTP
SPOT
STIP/TIP
NEPA
Construction
• Statewide Systems Plan
• No $ Constraint
• 30+ Years
• No $ Constraint
• 25 Years
• Based on Revenue Forecast
• Scores Projects for Effectiveness
• Results go into STIP
• 0-5 and 6-10 Years
• Specific Funding Sources Identified
• Project alternatives are assessed
• Final project design and cost
• Project Let
• Facility Opened

4. STIP Data (Note Segment Breaks)
4

5. • Segmented
properly
• Not much
attribute data
5

6. Too Much of a Good Thing
• STIP also includes major resurfacing projects
– Not included in MPO capital planning process
– Part of the maintenance responsibility of the
NCDOT local highway division
– Included in STIP to meet federal requirements
• We had to cull them out; we did so in the
attributes rather than delete them
6

7. Give Me a Break
• By starting with the STIP, we also got smallest
increments of a project
• NCDOT breaks projects up by constructability
and fundability
• Sometimes the most needed part gets built
while the other part(s) languish
7

8. Example of Breaks
8

9. Next: SPOT
• The Strategic Planning Office
(for) Transportation
– A data-driven process to choose
which projects move forward into
the construction schedule
– Originated in Gov. Perdue’s
Executive Order #2
– Codified by Session Law 2012-84
9
2040
CTP
LRTP
SPOT
STIP/TIP
NEPA
Construction
• Statewide Systems Plan
• No $ Constraint
• 30+ Years
• No $ Constraint
• 25 Years
• Based on Revenue Forecast
• Scores Projects for Effectiveness
• Results go into STIP
• 0-5 and 6-10 Years
• Specific Funding Sources Identified
• Project alternatives are assessed
• Final project design and cost
• Project Let
• Facility Opened

10. SPOT Data Segmented Properly
• These ended up being the model data
for the architecture we ended up with
10

11. Termini as Attribute Became Key
11

12. Data about roads…
12

13. …becomes base score
13

14. Next Layer: LRTP
• Long Range Transportation Plan
– Federal Requirement for MPOs
– Tied to Air Quality Determination
– Fiscally Constrained
– 25 Year Time Horizon
14
2040
CTP
LRTP
SPOT
STIP/TIP
NEPA
Construction
• Statewide Systems Plan
• No $ Constraint
• 30+ Years
• No $ Constraint
• 25 Years
• Based on Revenue Forecast
• Scores Projects for Effectiveness
• Results go into STIP
• 0-5 and 6-10 Years
• Specific Funding Sources Identified
• Project alternatives are assessed
• Final project design and cost
• Project Let
• Facility Opened

15. LRTP Data Were Over-Segmented
15
We made sure each segment
had label attribute, then
dissolved.
When done, we just needed the
label (project id), and correct
termini (project extent)

16. The LRTP
16

17. Last, we added the CTP
• Comprehensive Transportation Plan
– Adopted by all local governments, MPO/RPO, and
NC Board of Transportation
– Includes initial Problem Statements/Purpose and
Need for NEPA
– 30+ year time horizon
– No Fiscal Constraint
– Unique to NC
– all modes
17
2040
CTP
LRTP
SPOT
STIP/TIP
NEPA
Construction
• Statewide Systems Plan
• No $ Constraint
• 30+ Years
• No $ Constraint
• 25 Years
• Based on Revenue Forecast
• Scores Projects for Effectiveness
• Results go into STIP
• 0-5 and 6-10 Years
• Specific Funding Sources Identified
• Project alternatives are assessed
• Final project design and cost
• Project Let
• Facility Opened

18. Data Created by NCDOT-TPB
18

19. Data Issue
• CTP data set was very early prototype with
limited attribution
• Segment identifiers only placed on segment
where label on map was to appear; made
finding termini problematic on some projects
19

20. 20
Other segments
have no MAP_ID!
MAP_ID only here
Where does A25
end and A24 start?

21. The Road to Reconciliation
21
At first, the 4 data sets didn’t want to play nice

22. End Result: A full inventory
22
2040
CTP
LRTP
SPOT
STIP/TIP
NEPA
Construction
• Statewide Systems Plan
• No $ Constraint
• 30+ Years
• No $ Constraint
• 25 Years
• Based on Revenue Forecast
• Scores Projects for Effectiveness
• Results go into STIP
• 0-5 and 6-10 Years
• Specific Funding Sources Identified
• Project alternatives are assessed
• Final project design and cost
• Project Let
• Facility Opened

23. End Result: Identify Inconsistent
Terminii, Progression
23
2040
CTP
LRTP
SPOT
STIP/TIP
NEPA
Construction
• Statewide Systems Plan
• No $ Constraint
• 30+ Years
• No $ Constraint
• 25 Years
• Based on Revenue Forecast
• Scores Projects for Effectiveness
• Results go into STIP
• 0-5 and 6-10 Years
• Specific Funding Sources
Identified• Project alternatives are
assessed
• Final project design and cost
• Project Let
• Facility Opened
Taking portion of project
Going beyond original project
Inconsistent Termini
Not following progression

24. Multiple Termini as Attribute
• We wanted to be able to see the lineage of
any project segment. We solved it by cross-
referencing the projects, and maintaining the
original project termini in the attribute data
24

25. End Result: Reconcile Plans
• Moving ahead with CTP amendments
• Drafting fiscal constraint to allow LRTP
amendments
• Reassessment of select STIP projects
25
I approve of
clean
databases!

26. 2.0
• Improve attribute table for “ideal” future cross
section and cost estimation
• Tie to 2009 NCDOT “Complete Streets” policy
• Add a freight/delivery component
26

27. Most of all
• Use the reconciled data to drive the joint
CTP/LRTP update beginning in 2014
• Use the reconciled data to improve the
projects submitted for SPOT in 2014
• Apply Complete Streets principles to all levels
of analysis to bolster construction of facilities
as Complete Streets.
27

28. So that someday we build less of this:
28

29. And more of this.
29