Tag Archives: infrastructure

Partial Funding for I-69 Section 6 in New State Plan

22 Jul

I69bridgeThis posting is a brief follow-up on a report on Indiana Public Media: How Much Money is Included For I-69 in the State’s New Roads Plan? As the report pointed out, the state’s new 5-year infrastructure investment plan (so-called Next Level Indiana) provides some funding for the final section of I-69 in Indiana, Section 6, which runs from Martinsville to I-465 in Indianapolis. However, as the report also notes, I-69 is not fully funded in the report.

The investment plan breaks out the investments by county. The following table shows the funding for I-69 by county (and also by segment in Marion County):

Screenshot 2017-07-15 07.28.51

So, a total of $554M has been allocated for I-69 through 2022. It appears that the segments going through Morgan County have been fully funded, with allocations going down from there.

How does this compare to the overall costs of the project? The Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS), Chapter 6 Comparison of Alternatives provides the following summary of the estimated costs by segment:

Screenshot 2017-07-22 12.01.51

Alternative C4 (of which there are two variants) is estimated to cost approximately $1.5B. So at first blush it appears that Section 6 has been funded at around 36% through 2022.

Screenshot 2017-07-22 11.58.46Although the subsections don’t line up perfectly with county boundaries, they are pretty close. Subsections 1-4 are in Morgan County, going from Indian Creek (where Section 6 begins) to Banta Road in Morgan County. Using Alt C4A, total estimated costs are $515.7M, of which $263M (approximately 50%) is funded. Subsection 5 is in Johnson County, and it appears that approximately $153.2M out of $203.5M, or 75%, is funded. And Subsections 6-8 in Marion County appear to be funded at $138.1M out of a total cost of $785.1M (18%). There could, however, be some additional funding in the 5-year plan that isn’t labeled as I-69 — for examples, I-465 improvements — but are part of the overall cost of I-69 Section 6; I don’t know.

So I think one can draw two conclusions from this 5-year plan: (1) the final section of I-69 is not fully funded — not by a long shot. It isn’t clear whether the state will fund the gap by sustaining this level of investment beyond 2022, or through some sort of public-private partnership, or some other approach entirely; and (2) that while section 6 is not fully funded, the state has earmarked a substantial amount of funding for it, belying the claims of some that the state would just “declare victory” after section 5, and leave 37 to Indianapolis as-is. It is clear that the state is serious about completing the project, and is already committing substantial resources to complete it.

MPO Meeting Today: Trail Project and Bike Bridge

9 Jun
Creek Crossing at the INDOT Mitigation Property

Creek Crossing at the INDOT Mitigation Property

Today’s Policy Committee meeting of the Bloomington Metropolitan Planning Organization (1:30PM, in City Council Chambers in the Showers Building) has a pretty light agenda decision-wise, but features two important active transportation/trail projects:

1. The County is asking the MPO to amend both the FY2016-2019 and FY 2018-2021 Transportation Improvement Programs (TIPs) to add a Monroe County greenway project running along the Illinois Central railroad corridor from the existing Clear Creek Trailhead at Church Lane to an INDOT I-69 mitigation property that could be the future site of a county nature park. The mitigation property is a property where INDOT was required to plant and maintain trees to compensate for the trees it cut down for I-69.  I have spoken about this exciting project many times. The purpose of this amendment is to allow the County to spend a $200,000 Recreational Trail Program (RTP) grant it received from the Indiana Department of Natural Resources to develop the trail, which will continue the existing Bloomington Rail Trail and Clear Creek Trail south. The County is putting up the value of the railroad corridor, which the County owns, as the match.

Here is a map I made of the project:

Illinois Central Corridor Greenway Phase 1

Illinois Central Corridor Greenway Phase 1

Incidentally, although I refer to it as the Illinois Central Corridor Greenway, this trail does not yet have an official name.

2. The Bloomington Bicycle Club has long advocated for a bicycle-pedestrian-only bridge over I-69. They have put out some additional information here: http://www.bloomingtonbicycleclub.org/BikePedBridge/. There are also some maps and slides in the MPO Policy Committee Packet that are definitely worth looking at!

They are asking the MPO to formally support the project in principle; however, no funding is being allocated or requested here. I definitely support moving forward on the project (i.e., doing a feasibility analysis to determine usage and costs), and will be supporting the request of the bicycle club to endorse the project.

The packet for the MPO Policy Committee meeting is here: 2017-06-09 MPO Policy Committee Packet.

 

 

Public Information Meeting on 2018-2021 Transportation Projects Tomorrow at 5:30PM

28 Mar

 

Capture

B-Line Extension Project (Illustrative Only)

For whatever reason the City of Bloomington doesn’t have an official press release out yet, so I am trying to do whatever I can to publicize a public information meeting scheduled for tomorrow evening (Wednesday, March 29, 2017 at 5:30PM at the Downtown Bloomington Transit Center, corner of N. Walnut and E. Third Streets) sponsored by the Bloomington/Monroe County Metropolitan Planning Organization (BMCMPO). This meeting will provide the public with information and take feedback on the transportation projects being considered for the 2018-2021 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP).

The MPO coordinates the allocation of Federal transportation funding coming into the area and includes projects from the City of Bloomington, Monroe County, INDOT, Bloomington Transit, Rural Transit, and IU Bus.

The proposed fiscal plan that is being presented to MPO committees is here: FY1821TIP_Memo_032217. This plan provides the breakdowns of local vs. federal funding by project/local agency and by fiscal year. It is just the starting point for discussions, and could change based on feedback from MPO committees and the public. This public information meeting provides one — but not the only — opportunity to provide feedback. But this memo only shows the financial breakdowns — it doesn’t actually provide any detail on the projects themselves.

I’m hoping that a more public-friendly version of the project descriptions can be made available soon — but for now all I could find is the packet for the MPO Policy Committee from February 10, 2017. I extracted the relevant section here: MPO Policy Committee Project Descriptions From 2017-02-10 (warning: it is a pretty big document!).

There are several projects that I think the public will be particularly interested, including the County’s Fullerton Pike project (Phases 1 and 2), the County’s proposed roundabouts to improve safety at Curry Pike/Woodyard Road/Smith Pike, the City’s Tapp Road & Rockport Road Intersection project, Henderson Street, Winslow Road, and Jackson Creek trail projects, and the project I’m most excited about — a proposed extension of the B-Line trail west, to connect to the multi-use path going over I-69 at 17th Street and ultimately connecting to the County’s Karst Farm Greenway.

Hope to see members of the public at the meeting!

Here’s a draft of a press release from the MPO:

“The Bloomington/Monroe County Metropolitan Planning Organization (BMCMPO) will hold a Public Information Meeting with the goal of gaining public input for development of the Fiscal Year 2018-2021 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP).

The TIP documents a comprehensive fiscally-constrained list of multi-modal federal-aid transportation projects programmed for Bloomington, Bloomington Transit, Ellettsville, INDOT, Indiana University Transit, Monroe County, and Rural Transit.

The Public Information Meeting will be held on Wednesday, March 29, 2017 from 5:30 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. at the Downtown Bloomington Transit Center, located at the corner of N. Walnut and E. Third Streets.

Development of the new TIP requires a public involvement process which includes a public review by the BMCMPO Citizens Advisory Committee, the Technical Advisory Committee, and adoption by the Policy Committee before submission to state and federal agencies.

Public Meeting attendees will provide feedback on the proposed list of TIP projects and to help shape the project funding priorities of the MPO for the next three (3) years. The BMCMPO staff looks forward to discussing these and other important transportation issues with residents at the public meeting.

For more information or written comments on the FY 2018-2021 TIP, please contact BMCMPO Director Josh Desmond at 812.349.3423 or desmondj@bloomington.in.gov.”

Public-Private Partnerships and the Proposed Indianapolis Justice Center

15 Mar

Interesting article in yesterday’s Indy Star about the $1.75B justice complex being proposed for Marion County: Weighing the scales: $1.75B justice center could be a bargain or a boondoggle.

The article in the Indy Star is less about the justice center itself (which nearly everyone seems to agree is needed) than about the procurement method being selected to build and operate it — so-called performance-based infrastructure. This is a form of public-private partnership (often called P3) that will be familiar to Monroe County residents, because it is being used for construction and operation of I-69 Section 5 (I have written about P3 used for Section 5 here). It has already been used as well for the Ohio River Bridges project near Louisville (and note that this method is NOT what was used with the Indiana Toll Road).

Per the studies cited in this article, the results of performance-based infrastructure (PBI) have been mixed. However, the most interesting aspect to me from a public policy perspective is how dependent these cost-benefit analyses (comparing the performance-based infrastructure procurement method against the traditional method, where the government bids out the construction, bonds for the funding, and then operates the facilities) are on the assessment of risk. Depending on how much risk you build into your cost-benefit model, the savings from performance-based infrastructure can be made to appear much larger or much smaller. This is because one of the primary benefits from PBI is that the contractor absorbs cost and schedule overruns (along with other risks), not the government. However, how much actual risk is avoided can often (always?) be a matter of disagreement and dispute.

This also leads to another question: how do you fairly assess the success of such a project after the fact? Once the project is completed, the risk that was avoided is obviously no longer a factor. But did the government still get the benefit of avoiding a risk of an event that wound up not happening anyway? Did you get the benefit of having car insurance last year even though you didn’t have any accidents or making any claims?

In any case, the article is worth reading. We will undoubtedly be seeing more, not less, of these P3/PBI deals, as local and state governments continue to try to build and operate infrastructure with flat or diminishing tax revenues.