grant application - build19neshoba.com · best possible quality of life for residents. the sr 19...

SR 19 FRom SR 492 to PhiladelPhia NeShoba CouNty

Providing needed improvements to promote regional rural connectivity, facilitate economic growth and improved access to reliable and safe transportation facilities.

July 2018

Grant Application

Submitted by Melinda L. McGrath P.E., Executive Director, Mississippi Department of Transportation

for USDOT National Infrastructure Investments - 2018 BUILD Transportation Discretionary Grants

Proposed Improvements to SR 19 from SR 492 to Philadelphia in Neshoba County, Mississippi

SR 19 Neshoba County, Mississippi FY 2018 BUILD Grant Application | i

The Mississippi Department of Transportation is requesting $25.0 million in FY 2018 BUILD Transportation Discretionary Grant Capital Investment funds for surface transportation infra-structure improvements along an important rural corridor in the Mississippi transportation network. This transformative project will improve an existing 9.4 mile segment of a two (2) lane rural arterial facility by providing a four (4) lane divided facility for 4.5 miles to improve safety, mobility, correct existing design deficiencies by upgrading to current standards and to meet the future needs of residents. Additionally five bridges within the remaining 4.9 miles will be replaced. These improvements will improve safety and system reliability and have a positive impact on the economic vitality of the region. With broad support from a wide range of stakeholders, this important project will serve as a catalyst for positive change within the region and ultimately provide the best possible quality of life for residents.

The SR 19 from SR 492 to Philadelphia Project in Neshoba County, Mississippi will integrate trans-portation improvements within Neshoba County connecting residents, commuters, and tourists to economic destinations within the area. Under this FY 2018 BUILD Transportation Discretionary Grant program request, it is proposed to make the following engineering improvements along the project corridor:

• Two (2) additional traffic lanes;

• Replacement of five (5) structurally deficient or functionally obsolete bridges;

• Improved access management;

• Widened shoulders and dedicated turn lanes; and

• Incorporation of safety counter measures.

If funded, these improvements will bolster economic growth and stability by providing accessible and efficient connections between residences, schools, parks, industrial sites, offices, retail and recreational destinations. Proposed improvements will also directly serve the reservation communities of the Mississippi Band of the Choctaw Indians at Tucker, Bogue Chitto and Pearl River. The Tribe is one of the United States’ original first nations and is 10,000 members strong.

Project at a GlanceSAFETY

The current two (2) lane facility has experienced 69 accidents involving 106 vehicles with 42 injuries and one fatality since January of 2013. Upon performing a thorough data-driven safety analysis, design improvements to the corridor based on the Crash Modification Factors Clearinghouse predictive guidance are expected to reduce this accident rate by 21%.

STATE OF GOOD REPAIR

Allows the MDOT to better maintain and efficiently operate critical infra-structure. Addresses a critical link in the transportation system and improves the overall reliability of the system to serve all users. Replaces structurally deficient and functionally obsolete bridges. Makes a transfor-mative investment in this corridor and improves the overall condition of the transportation infrastructure to enable it to better serve all users.

ECONOMIC COMPETITIVENESS

Enhances a critical corridor and positions it for revitalization, development and additional private investment. Promotes positive economic growth opportunities by providing accessible and efficient connections between residences, employment centers, educational/training opportunities, medical service providers and recreational destinations.

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTIONThe proposed improvements to this segment of SR 19 will result in signif-icant long-term community and environmental outcomes. The additional capacity will result in positive benefits to the environment. Additionally, the MDOT is committing to the environmental excellence of the project and has and will incorporate measures to minimize or eliminate any potential negative impact to the area as documented in the approved Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact.

QUALITY OF LIFEImproves access throughout the corridor to increase mobility and allows for more sustainable development. Transportation facility improvements will promote economic development and vitality for the region. These improve-ments will serve as a catalyst for widespread positive change within the area and improve the quality of life for residents.

INNOVATIONThe proposed project has and will continue to utilize many of the innova-tions that have been promoted by the FHWA through the “Every Day Counts” program. Innovations such as Safety Edge, Warm Mix Asphalt, Rumble Stripe and Data-Driven Safety Analysis will be incorporated throughout the delivery of the project.

PARTNERSHIP

The project demonstrates support from a number of leaders, advocacy groups and stakeholders. The MDOT has made a commitment to this project by utilizing approximately $14M in combined state and federal program funds to date on the preliminary engineering and right-of-way for this project. The Mississippi Development Authority will provide $5.3M and the Mississippi Legislature will provide $0.76M of funding for the remaining right-of-way and utility relocations required for the project. The remaining construction phase will be funded using a combi-nation of $10.1M of non-federal funds from the Mississippi Department of Transportation and $25.0M of requested 2018 BUILD Transportation Grant funds.


SR 19 Neshoba County, Mississippi FY 2018 BUILD Grant Application | ii

Key Project InformatIonProject Type: Road, Bridge Replacements, Capacity, Economic Development and

Safety

Project Location: Neshoba County, Mississippi

Urban/Rural Area: Rural

Project Length: 9.4 miles - Construct two new travel lanes for 4.5 miles between Tucker and Philadelphia and replace 5 bridges in a 4.9 mile segment between SR 492 and Tucker

Project Website: http://www.build19neshoba.com

BUILD FY 2018 Funding Amount Requested: $25,000,000

BUILD FY 2018 Funds Obligation Date: Remaining Construction Funding - August 20202

Project Completion Date: September 20242

contact InformatIonMelinda L. McGrath, P.E.Executive DirectorDepartment of TransportationState of MississippiP.O. Box 1850Jackson, MS 39215-1850

2Assumes award of FY 2018 BUILD funding by December 31, 2018.

Table 01. Improvements to SR 19 in Neshoba County, Mississippi – Project Funding Summary1

Completed preliminary engineering

Completed

right-of-Way

remaining

right-of-Way

remaining

ConstruCtion

remaining total

% of share remaining

MDOT State Funds $1,607,267 $2,571,551 $10,100,000 $10,100,000 24.5%

Mississippi Development Authority State Funds $5,300,000 $5,300,000 12.9%

MDOT Federal Program Funds $10,131,764

Proposed BUILD Grant Funds $25,000,000 $25,000,000 60.7%

Mississippi Legislature State Funds $760,000 $760,000 1.9%

Total $1,607,267 $12,703,315 $6,060,000 $35,100,000 $41,160,000

1 A more detailed project construction cost estimate can be found in Appendix C.

http://www.build19neshoba.com

https://www.build19neshoba.com/appendix-c-cost-estimates.html


SR 19 Neshoba County, Mississippi FY 2018 BUILD Grant Application | iii

Figure 01. Project Location


SR 19 Neshoba County, Mississippi FY 2018 BUILD Grant Application | iv

contentsProject at a Glance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iKey Project Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .iiContact Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .iiAppendix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vProject Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1Proposed Project . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Project Location . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3Project Parties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Grant Funds, Sources and Uses of Project Funds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4Right-of-Way Phase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4Construction Phase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Merit Criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5Safety . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5State of Good Repair . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5Economic Competitiveness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

Job Creation & Near-Term Economic Activity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6Environmental Protection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7Quality of Life . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8Innovation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

Safety Edge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8Warm Mix Asphalt (WMA). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8Rumble Stripe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9Data Driven Safety Analysis (DDSA) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9Reducing Rural Roadway Departures. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

Partnerships . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9Jurisdictional and Stakeholder Collaboration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

Project Readiness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10Technical Feasibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10Value Engineering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10Project Schedule. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10Required Approvals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

National Environmental Policy Act . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10Permits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11Legislative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11State and Metropolitan Planning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

Assessment of Project Risks and Mitigation Strategies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11Benefit-Cost Analysis (BCA) Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

Approach. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11Benefit Categories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

Economic Competitiveness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12


SR 19 Neshoba County, Mississippi FY 2018 BUILD Grant Application | v

Safety . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12Environmental Sustainability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13State of Good Repair . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13Quality of Life . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

Federal Wage Rate Certifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13Index of Supporting Information on Website . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

tablesTable 01. Freight and Capacity Improvements to SR 19 in Neshoba County, Mississippi - Project Funding Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .iiTable 02. Traffic Data for the SR 19 Project Corridor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2Table 03. Right-of-Way Phase Budget . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4Table 04. Construction Phase Budget . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4Table 05. Job Creations by Year and Quarter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7Table 06. Project Schedule . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11Table 07. Benefit-Cost Analysis Summary ($1000) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

aPPendIxAppendix A: Commitment/Support LettersAppendix B: Plans and StudiesAppendix C: Cost EstimatesAppendix D: Detailed Benefit-Cost AnalysisAppendix E: ScheduleAppendix F: Environmental ClearanceAppendix G: Federal Wage Certifications

fIGuresFigure 01. Project Location . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iiiFigure 02. Existing SR 19 Project Segment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2Figure 03. Typical Proposed Project . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2Figure 04. Project Location . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3Figure 05. Project Funding Source Breakdown . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4Figure 06. Middle Class Job Creation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

https://www.build19neshoba.com/appendix-a-commitmentsupport-letters.html

https://www.build19neshoba.com/appendix-b-plans-and-studies.html


https://www.build19neshoba.com/appendix-d-detailed-benefit-cost-analysis.html

Appendix E: Schedule

https://www.build19neshoba.com/appendix-f-environmental-clearance.html

https://www.build19neshoba.com/appendix-g-federal-wage-certifications.html


SR 19 Neshoba County, Mississippi FY 2018 BUILD Grant Application | 1

Project descrIPtIon BackgroundThe SR 19 Corridor is the principal transportation link between the urban areas of Meridian and Philadelphia in Mississippi. In recent years, MDOT has made a investment of approximately $104 million to upgrade the existing two (2) lane rural arterial facility to a four (4) lane divided facility to improve safety, mobility and correct existing design deficiencies by upgrading to current standards to meet the future needs of users of this corridor between Meridian and Philadelphia. The proposed 9.4 mile project is the final segment that remains to be improved in the 22.5 mile corridor as defined by the approved Environmental Assessment (EA) and Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) documents. FHWA approved the original EA & FONSI for the project corridor on September 30, 1999. Recently in preparation for this proposed project, MDOT received FHWA approval of the required re-evaluation of the Environmental documents on June 15, 2018. All Environmental documentation related to the project can be found in Appendix F.

Proposed ProjectThe SR 19 Corridor as defined by the approved EA and FONSI extends from Meridian, MS to Philadelphia MS. MDOT has upgraded this rural arterial route to a four-lane divided facility in all but the following two segments of independent utility totaling 9.4 miles of this 22.5-mile corridor:

4.5 Miles Between Tucker and PhiladelphiaThis project proposes to construct two new parallel lanes and rehabilitate the existing two lanes to create a four-lane divided facility between Tucker and Philadelphia. Safety measures and other innovations as described in this application will be incorporated through this 4.5-mile segment.

4.9 Miles Between SR 492 and TuckerCurrently there are five (5) either structurally deficient or functionally obsolete bridges over the Cushtusia Creek basin that will be replaced with five (5) new structures located on the future new parallel two-lane alignment. Approximately 1-mile total of new two-lane roadway will be incorporated at the new bridge approaches so the new structures can be utilized upon completion of this project. The existing structures will be removed but will

not be immediately replaced. At some point in the future upon the completion of this project, MDOT will construct new structures on the existing alignment, rehabilitate the existing alignment and construct the remaining new two lanes parallel to the existing two lanes to complete the four-lane divided facility for this 4.9-mile segment.

The implementation of this SR 19 from SR 492 to Philadelphia Project in Neshoba County, Mississippi will improve the safety, efficiency and reliability within a critical segment of the transportation system in Mississippi. The proposed project will improve an existing 9.4 mile segment of SR 19 by incorporating various engineering improvements throughout the project corridor. SR 19 is a north-south corridor currently classified as a “Minor Arterial” with a federal aid numerical designation of twenty-six (26).

If funded these improvements will bolster economic growth and stability by providing accessible and efficient connections between residences, schools, parks, indus-trial sites, offices, retail and recreational destinations.

Commercial vehicles traveling on a two lane highway can pose a risk to other motorists as there is more potential for vehicles to run off the road and potentially fatal accidents to occur.




Additionally, this project will serve as a catalyst for economic growth within the Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indian’s Tribal Communities at Tucker, Bogue Chitto and Pearl River.

2016 Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) counts within the project corridor is 6,100. Traffic is forecasted to exhibit annual growth rates of approximately 2.0%; however, potential expansion at the Weyerhaeuser Company’s facility in Philadelphia, fueled by a recent $57M modern-ization investment at this Weyerhaeuser facility and the improved transportation infrastructure that the proposed project would provide, could increase that projected growth significantly. See Table 02 for a summary of the AADTs related to the project segment.

AADT

2016 2020 2030

MS 19 from Tucker to Philadelphia 6,100 6,500 7,500

3 Traffic Data provided by the Mississippi Department of Transportation.

Table 02. Traffic Data for the SR 19 Project Corridor3

Figure 02. Existing SR 19 Project Segment

Figure 03. Typical Proposed Project Section for 4.5 Miles Between Tucker and Philadelphia



Project locatIonThe proposed project is located on MS 19 in Neshoba County, Mississippi. The BOP for the new 4-lane segment is located just south of the intersection with County Road 24 in Tucker (32°42’08”N 89°03’00”W) and extends approximately 4.5 miles to the EOP at the Philadelphia City Limits (32°45’16”N 89°06’11”W). The project is not located in an Urbanized Area and meets the require-ments of a rural project as defined by the Notice of Funding Opportunity.

Project PartiesThe MDOT (DUNS Number: 80934067) will serve as the primary sponsor and lead agency for this BUILD grant application. In addition to MDOT, the Mis-sissippi Development Authority and the State of Missis-sippi are contributing non-federal funding to this much needed project.

Figure 04. Project Location



Grant funds, sources and uses of all Project fundInG Based on a projected award date of the requested BUILD Transportation Grant Discretionary Fund of December 31, 2018, MDOT will have completed the Preliminary Engineering phase for the project. Additionally, MDOT has already completed approximately 70% of the Right-of-Way phase. The following is a summary of the remaining Right-of-Way and Construction activities needed to complete the project.

Right-of-Way PhaseMDOT is immediately obligating the $760,000 of Mississippi Legislative Bond funding to enable the ROW acquisition and utility relocation to be completed in accordance with the schedule presented in this application. Upon notifi-cation of the award of the requested BUILD grant funds to the project, MDOT will obligate the remaining $5.3M of funding provided by the Mississippi Development Authority to obtain the remaining needed Right-of-Way and relocate remaining utilities. Based on the amount of parcels needing acquisition (approximately 70% have already been acquired for the project) and the amount of additional utility relocation, MDOT estimates the Right-of-Way Phase will take approximately 24 months to complete.

It should be noted, that the Mississippi Development Authority funding is contingent on the successful awardof the requested BUILD Transportation Discretionary Grant

right-of-Way phase Budget

funding sourCenon-federal funds

Build funds

other federal funds

mississippi development authority

$5,300,000

mississippi legislature funds

$760,000

total $6,060,000

% share 100% 0% 0%

Table 03. Right-of-Way Phase Budget

Funds for the Construction phase. If this project is unable to obtain the $25.0M in BUILD funds, the $5.3M of Mississippi Development Authority funding will not be made available for the remainder of the Right-of-Way Phase at this time.

Construction PhaseMDOT will obligate the $35.1M estimated for construction no later than August 2020. An itemized construction cost breakdown by pay item can be found in Appendix C. MDOT estimates the construction phase will take approximately 42 months to complete upon issuance of the Notice to Proceed to the lowest responsive bidder.

ConstruCtion phase Budget

funding sourCe non-federal funds

Build funds other federal funds

united states department of transportation

$25,000,000

mississippi department of transportation

$10,100,000

total $10,100,000 $25,000,000

% share 28.8% 71.2% 0%

Table 04. Construction Phase Budget

Figure 05. Project Funding Source Breakdown

non-federal funds Build funds other federal funds

$16,160,000 $25,000,000 $0




merIt crIterIaSafety

According to MDOT’s Safety Analysis Management System (SAMS) data, the current two (2) lane facility from Tucker to Philadelphia has experienced 69 accidents involving 106 vehicles with 42 injuries and

1 fatality during the period of January 1, 2013 to December 31, 2017. Data from the Crash Modification Factors Clearinghouse on 25 rural projects with AADTs less than 10,000 where an existing two lane facility was converted to a four lane divided roadway shows that on average the four lane facility exhibits a 21% reduction in crashes.

A safety analysis of the proposed project shows that the improvements will result in a reduction in the number, rate, and consequences of surface transportation-related accidents, serious injuries, and fatalities among transportation users. Safety benefits are calculated in BCA.Net from estimated traffic volumes and crash rates (accidents per million vehicle miles traveled). Crash rates are categorized into property damage only (PDO), minor injury, serious injury, and fatal injury crashes. The model assigns severities based on accident type categorizations and applies the valuation for each type of crash input by the user. The monetized values for various crash types used in this analysis are based on those specified in the Benefit-Cost Analysis provided in Appendix D.

State of Good RepairState of Good Repair (SGR) is typically defined as, “the condition of an asset where the asset, at a minimum, is capable of deliv-ering the required performance safely and reliably for a predetermined period of time.”

The MS 19 from SR 492 to Philadelphia Project in Neshoba County, Mississippi will make roadway and bridge improvements which will ensure this corridor operates as efficiently as possible under both routine daily condi-tions and emergency situations. In other words, the project is intended to sustain it in a state where it can deliver the required performance - facilitating the movement of people - safely and reliably.

To estimate the user operating cost due to the roadway conditions through the corridor, the impacts of roadway International Roughness Index (IRI) on fuel, tire, and

maintenance and repair costs can be quantified. A study by Chatti and Zaabar (2012) on the effects of pavement condition on vehicle operating costs conducted under the National Cooperative Highway Research program (NCHRP) Report 720, shows an average reduction of 63.4 inch/mile in IRI results in 4.8% reduction in vehicle operating costs.

MDOT utilizes a composite index, known as the Replacement Index (RI), to prioritize needed bridge replacements statewide. The RI, which uses a 0-100 scale with a higher value indicative of a higher replacement priority, accounts for the following factors:

• Traffic level;

• Detour length if bridge was closed; and

• Structural evaluation (NBI).

To model the exponential damage effect traffic has on a bridge as it further deteriorates, the structural evalu-ation is weighted so that as a bridge condition worsens the structural evaluation element of the RI plays a larger role in determining the final index value. The structurally deficient bridge at Cushtusia Creek has a RI value of 71.

Currently MDOT maintains approximately 5800 bridges statewide and after removing all bridges currently under construction from the RI prioritization, this bridge at Cushtusia is tied with several other structures as the 31st most needed bridge replacement (99+ percentile) statewide.

On April 10, 2018, Mississippi Governor Phil Bryant declared a state of emergency, ordering the Mississippi Department of transportation to immediately close 83 city and county bridges statewide that had been rated structurally deficient by the National Bridge Inspection Standards and the Mississippi Office of State Aid Road

“These bridges have been deemed unsafe for the traveling public,” Mississippi Governor Phil Bryant said in a statement about his order to close 83 bridges.




Construction. This action came after the United States Transportation Secretary, Elaine Chao, notified the Governor that these bridges remaining open constitute an unacceptable safety risk and that keeping them open could result in the loss of federal funds for transportation programs in the state.

While the structurally deficient bridge at Cushtusia Creek is not on the current list of bridges needing closure, the failure to replace the current structure in a timely manner could ultimately result in its need to be closed in the future.

Economic CompetitivenessHighway congestion and the resulting negative effect of travel delays and the lack of system reliability can have a severe impact on the economic vitality of a region. Truck traffic delays often result in increased

transportation costs for freight, which are typically passed on to consumers in the form of higher retail prices. Additionally, user costs (fuel, tire, maintenance and repair costs) also increase due to poor infrastructure conditions. Once completed, this project will improve the infra-structure condition, congestion and reliability through the project segment and allow for better accessibility to employment, retail, educational and medical service centers.

Economic competitiveness benefits show that this project will contribute to the economic competitiveness of the U.S. by decreasing transportation costs, improving long-term efficiency and reliability in the movement of workers and goods, and facilitating freight movement. Economic competitiveness benefits are calculated in

BCA.Net as travel time savings and vehicle operating cost savings.

Travel time savings represents the difference in the value of travel time incurred between the base and alternate cases. If the alternate case saves travel time relative to the base case, the time savings value will be positive. BCA.Net calculates travel time savings by comparing the speed and volume of the traffic flow of the alternate case to that of the base case, factoring in future traffic growth, design speeds, congestion levels, vehicle occupancy, traffic peaks, and other data. The value of time for personal, business, and freight travel used in this analysis are those specified in the Benefit-Cost Analysis.

Vehicle operating cost savings consist of the non-travel time cost changes incurred by vehicle operators when traveling at higher or lower speeds and due to wear and tear on vehicles associated with different pavement conditions.

The SR 19 Improvement Project in Neshoba County, Mississippi will decrease transportation costs and improve reliable access for users. The project will provide accessible and efficient connections between residences, employment centers, educational/training opportunities, medical service providers and recreational destinations.

The project will result in both short and long-term employment by way of project construction, fuel savings and transportation cost savings realized by users.

Job Creation & Near-Term Economic Activity

The job creation projections are based on the project’s total estimated construction cost of $35,100,0004. The projections represent the aggregate of all direct, indirect,

Figure 06. Middle Class Job Creation



and induced jobs resulting from the project. Direct and indirect employment includes all jobs that are created by the construction firms and contractors working directly on the project, or by suppliers who make the materials used in the project. Induced jobs include those created elsewhere in the economy as increases in income from the direct and indirect jobs lead to additional increases in spending by workers and firms.

Using these guidelines, the total proposed project is expected to create approximately 456 job-years. Of these 456 created jobs, roughly 73% or 333 job-years will be classified as economic middle-class jobs5. Construction is expected to take approximately 42 months to complete. Table 05 shows the expected total number of aggregate job-years for each quarter of the life of the project as well as the expected number of middle-class on-project jobs created.

Environmental ProtectionThe SR 19 Improvement Project in Neshoba County, Mississippi will provide significant positive environmental impacts. The proposed project improvements will improve overall energy efficiency and

result in a reduction in pollution. Environmental benefits are calculated in BCA.Net from traffic volumes, emission rates, and speeds. BCA.Net applies speed-based emission rates (grams of emission per mile) to segment average speeds and traffic volumes, adjusts the emissions for time spent at traffic signals, sums these amounts for periods and days, and then multiplies the tonnage weight of each emission type by the per ton cost value input by the user.

Efficiency increases resulting from this project will improve levels of service for users throughout the corridor. The reduction of emissions savings that is a byproduct of resurfaced roadway improvements and increased free-flow speed can be quantified. According to Chatti and Zaabar (2012) (NCHRP 720), average fuel consumption impact per 63.4 unit IRI change is 3%.

Based on the data provided in NCHRP 720 the average fuel consumption value of the vehicles traveling at 35 mph is 28.22 mile per gallon (MPG). The current pavement performance reduces the MPG of vehicles traveling through the corridor.

Additionally, to evaluate the benefits in reduction of emissions, emissions resulting from one (1) gallon of fuel consumption are quantified and then converted to metric tons to estimate the dollar value of benefits. The emission data are provided by Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Office of Transportation and Air Quality.

The proposed 9.4 mile project is the final segment that remains to be improved in the 22.5 mile corridor as defined by the approved Environmental Assessment (EA) and Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) documents. FHWA approved the original EA & FONSI for the project corridor on September 30, 1999. Recently in

Figure 05. Middle-class Job Creation

Table 05. Job Creations by Year and QuarterQUARTER APPROXIMATE

CONSTRUCTION EXPENDITURES

AGGREGATE JOB-YEARS13

AGGREGATE MIDDLE-CLASS

JOB-YEARS14

2021

1st quarter $500,000 6.5 4.7

2nd quarter $4,000,000 58.5 42.7

3rd quarter $4,000,000 110.5 80.7

4th quarter $1,000,000 123.5 90.2

2022

1st quarter $1,000,000 136.5 99.6

2nd quarter $4,000,000 188.5 137.6

3rd quarter $4,000,000 240.5 175.6

4th quarter $1,000,000 253.5 185.1

2023

1st quarter $1,000,000 266.5 194.5

2nd quarter $4,000,000 318.5 232.5

3rd quarter $4,000,000 370.5 270.5

4th quarter $1,000,000 383.5 280.0

2024

1st quarter $1,000,000 396.5 289.4

2nd quarter $4,000,000 448.5 327.4

3rd quarter $600,000 456.3 333.1

4 Based on September 2011, The Executive Office of the President, Council of Economic Advisers (CEA) analysis of actual job-creation experience from transportation projects under the Recovery Act, that recommends estimating one job-year per $76,923 of government spending.

5 Based on March 2012, United States Department of the Treasury, Council of Economic Advisers (CEA) economic analysis of infrastructure investment.

“. . . provide significant positive environmental

impacts. . .”



preparation for the proposed segment between SR 492 and Philadelphia, MDOT received FHWA approval of the required re-evalu ation of the Environmental documents on June 15, 2018. All Environmental documentation related to the project can be found in Appendix F.

Quality of LifeThe primary goals for this project are in line with the following livability principles of the DOT-HUD-EPA Partnership for Sustainable Communities:

1. Provide More Transportation Choices: By reducing fuel consumption and emissions through a more efficient transportation network, this project will decrease household transportation costs. A recent report by the Department of the Treasury and the Council of Economic Advisers estimated that, for middle-class American households, transpor-tation costs absorb one out of every seven dollars of household income. The proposed project has the potential to reduce these household costs thus strengthening economic opportunities for residents. Additional benefits of this project will be the reduction of our nation’s dependence on foreign oil, an improvement in air quality, a lowering of green-house gas emissions and the overall promotion of public health.

2. Promote Equitable, Affordable Housing: A benefit of lowering household transportation costs, partic-ularly within American middle-class households, will be an increase in mobility that will be provided by this project. Increased mobility provides for expanded location housing choices for people of all ages, incomes, races and ethnicities.

3. Enhance Economic Competitiveness: This project will provide more reliable and timely access to employment centers, educational opportunities, services and other basic needs by users.

4. Support Existing Communities: The SR 19 Improvement Project in Neshoba County, Mississippi will increase community revitalization and devel-opment by incorporating multi-modal transportation improvements as well as needed water and sewer upgrades throughout the project area.

5. Coordinate Policies and Leverage Investment: The requested funding will leverage previous investments made by the Mississippi Department

of Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration. The requested BUILD funding will also leverage future investment by the Mississippi Development Authority and the Mississippi Legislature.

InnovationThe SR 19 Improvement Project from SR 492 to Philadelphia in Neshoba County has incorporated numerous innovative design elements.

Safety Edge

Safety Edge, an innovation from the first round of FHWA’s Every Day Counts (EDC) Program, will be incorporated into the project as a safety countermeasure to mitigate pavement edge related crashes. Data from other state DOT’s has indicated that incorporating this edge treatment into pavements an result in a reduction of up to 25% in rural run-off the road crashes.

Warm Mix Asphalt (WMA)

WMA, another innovation from the first round of FHWA’s EDC Program, will be allowed for contractors to utilize on the project. WMA is produced at lower temperatures than conventional Hot Mix Asphalt, resulting in lower emissions, less fuel consumption during production, improved compaction and portability during construction and a healthier and safer working environment for construction workers. Historically, when MDOT allows for contractors to choose to utilize either WMA or HMA for asphalt paving, industry in Mississippi has chosen WMA for approximately 70% of the tonnage placed.

The Safety EdgeSM is an uncomplicated and effective solution to mitigate pavement edge-related crashes by shaping the edge of the pavement to 30 degrees to eliminate vertical drop-off.




Rumble Stripe

MDOT will utilize rumble edge striping throughout the SR 19 project. Rumble striping combines the audible benefits of a rumble strip with the raised profile reflective nighttime visibility of raised pavement markers to reduce roadway departure crashes. A rumble strip becomes a rumble stripe when the thermoplastic edge line is placed on the rumble strip.

Data Driven Safety Analysis (DDSA)

MDOT currently applies DDSA throughout their project development processes. By utilizing this innovation from the third round of FHWA’s EDC Program on all projects, MDOT can make informed decisions and target invest-ments which results in improved safety throughout their transportation network. MDOT has a robust SAMS system, which when used in conjunction with other resources such as the Crash Modification Factors Clearinghouse and the AASHTO Highway Safety Manual is helping to

advance the safety of Mississippi’s roadways towards zero deaths.

Reducing Rural Roadway Departures

Many of the innovations incorporated into the SR 19 project are countermeasures which support the FHWA EDC Round Five initiative to reduce roadway departures on rural roads. The application of rumble stripe and safety edge will help keep vehicles in their travel lanes, reduce the potential for crashes and reduce the severity of crashes should they occur.

Partnerships

Jurisdictional and Stakeholder Collaboration

This project demonstrates support from a number of civic leaders, advocacy groups and stakeholders (See Appendix A). In addi-tion to the requested 2018 BUILD Transpor-tation grant, there has been a strong initial

investment by the MDOT through the use of state and federal program funds on preliminary engineering and right of way costs to date. Should the project successfully garner the requested BUILD grant funding, the Mississip-pi Development Authority and the Mississippi Legislature will fund the remainder of the Right-of-Way phase, and the BUILD funding will leverage additional funding from the Mississippi Department of Transportation to con-struct the project. Commitment letters for these other Non-Federal funding sources can be found in Appendix A. Non-Federal funding for the project is $16.16M or 39% of the total project funds.

It should be noted that MDOT is currently in discussions with the Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians (MBCI) to secure additional Non-Federal funds for the construction phase, however obtaining final Tribal Council approval prior to the deadline for this application was not feasible. MDOT has shown the construction fully funded with with a combination of requested BUILD grant and MDOT Non-

A rumble strip becomes a “rumble stripe” when the edge line pavement marking is placed on it. In addition to the auditory benefit, the profile of the marking within the rumble provides added nighttime visibility.

Because WMA makes compaction easier, cost savings are achieved by reducing time and labor spent compacting the mix. Lower temperatures also result in less emissions and safer conditions for workers.

DDSA provides more reliable analysis than previous methods through the application of predictive and systemic tools for analyzing crash and roadway data.






Federal funds in this application, however should MBCI non-federal funding become available, those would be utilized in lieu of some of the MDOT funds.

Project readInessThe MDOT has administered numerous federally funded transportation improvement grants and is well positioned to successfully administer the proposed BUILD grant and other non-federal funds for these much needed trans-portation improvements.

Technical FeasibilityItemized project features of this Improvement Project on MS 19 in Neshoba County, Mississippi are as follows:

• Construction of two additional lanes parallel to the existing two lanes to create a four (4) lane divided facility for 4.5 miles between Tucker and Philadelphia;

• Rehabilitate existing two lanes for the 4.5 mile segment between Tucker and Philadelphia;

• Widened shoulders and dedicated turn lanes throughout the 4.5 mile segment between Tucker and Philadelphia to improve access management and safety;

• Incorporation of safety measures such as improved signage, asphalt pavement safety edge, guardrail and barrier systems, raised pavement markers and rumble edge stripe/strip throughout the 4.5 mile segment between Tucker and Philadelphia; and

• Construction of five (5) new bridges on new alignment to replace structurally deficient or functionally obsolete structures on the existing alignment within the 4.9 mile segment between SR 492 and Tucker.

Cost estimates developed for the project are based on recent historical construction bid prices received by the MDOT on projects of comparable size and scope. Cost estimates have been inflated to account for a 3.2% annual inflation rate and are presented at a 50% confidence level that construction bid unit prices will be at or below the unit cost values used for the estimate. MDOT has also included 10% for contingencies in the project estimate.

MDOT has previously completed the majority of the preliminary engineering for the project with ROW plans scheduled to be completed in July 2018. This will enable MDOT to begin acquiring the remainder of the ROW using Mississippi Legislature funding prior to the

and relocate the remaining utilities upon notification of the award of the requested BUILD grant funding. Once the BUILD grants have been awarded to the project, MDOT will obligate the MDA funding to complete the ROW acquisition and utility relocation. Secondly, final construction plans will be completed prior to December of 2019, which will allow for construction to begin in early 2021 as detailed in this application; thus, risk factors for the remaining project activities are very low.

Value EngineeringValue Engineering (VE) is an important component of the design process, that when done properly, will result in quantifiable benefits to the quality, user costs and effective delivery of needed transportation improvement projects. The MDOT has completed the VE analysis for this project on SR 19 in Neshoba County, in accordance with Title 23 CFR part 627 and the subsequent Section 1503(a)(3) of MAP-21 for projects on the NHS receiving federal assistance with an estimated total cost of $50,000,000 or greater.

The MDOT employed a multidisciplinary team of persons not involved in the design of the project to conduct the VE analysis and provide recommendations to improve the following:

• Safety

• Reliability

• Efficiency

• Value

• Quality

• Project Delivery Time

The SR 19 from SR 492 to Philadelphia Value Engineering Report has been completed and will ensure an economical final design that better serves the needs of all users. This report is available in Appendix B.

Project ScheduleThe Table 06 summary of the schedule is based on a projected award date of December 31, 2018 of the requested BUILD grant funds.

Required Approvals

National Environmental Policy Act

The proposed 9.4 mile project is the final segment that remains to be improved in the 22.5 mile corridor as




defined by the approved Environmental Assessment (EA) and Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) documents. FHWA approved the original EA & FONSI for the project corridor on September 30, 1999. Recently in preparation for the proposed segment between SR 492 and Philadelphia, MDOT received FHWA approval of the required re-evalu ation of the Environmental documents on June 15, 2018. All Environmental documentation related to the project can be found in Appendix F.

Permits

The MDOT has obtained the needed US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Nationwide Permit 14 for Linear Trans-portation Projects for this project. Additional needed permits will be obtained by the MDOT in time to meet the milestones shown in Table 06.

Legislative

There are no further legislative approvals required to implement this project; however, a number of Legislators both at the state and federal levels, have pledged their individual support to this project (See Appendix A).

State and Metropolitan Planning

The project is currently programmed in the MDOT Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). If the US DOT awards the requested BUILD funding for the

project, then the needed administrative adjustments for the funding source will be made to STIP documents.

Assessment of Project Risks and Mitigation StrategiesThere is very little risk that would prevent the project from meeting the deadline requirements for obligation of the BUILD funding based on the following:

1. The MDOT is well into the Preliminary Engineering (Planning, Environmental and Design) phase of the project and should have all Preliminary Engineering activities completed prior to December 31, 2019.

2. Much of the needed Right of Way has either already been acquired and utilities to be relocated, leaving approximately 30% of the Right of Way needing to be acquired over a 24 month period, which is a reasonable estimate. MDOT is starting this acqui-sition and relocation in August of 2018 to mitigate the risk to the proposed project schedule. The MDOT expects all needed ROW to be acquired and all needed utilities to be relocated by August 2020. Should it become necessary, MDOT will mitigate this risk by initially restricting any project areas still lacking utility relocation to ensure obligation of construction funds by the required September 30, 2020 deadline.

3. The MDOT has the construction projected for an October 2020 letting date, so all remaining project funding will be obligated in August 2020, in advance of the obligation deadline of September 30, 2020 for the requested FY 2018 BUILD funds.

4. Under the proposed schedule, all construction will be completed by September 2024 in advance of the September 30, 2025 deadline for the expenditure of FY 2018 BUILD funds.

benefIt-cost analysIs (bca) resultsApproachThe analytical approach for this BCA relied on the FHWA BCA.Net Highway Project Benefit-Cost Analysis System, available at bca.decisiontek.com. BCA.Net is a web-based decision support tool that assists decision makers in evalu-ating the benefits and costs of highway projects. The BCA

MILESTONE DATE

Complete ROW Plans July 2018

Obligate Mississippi Legislature Funds for ROW and utility relocation August 2018

USDOT awards requested BUILD Funds December 2018

Obligate MDA funds for remaining ROW and utility relocation January 2019

Complete final design plans, specifica-tions & estimates (PS&E) December 2019

Complete ROW acquisition and utility relocation August 2020

Obligate BUILD and other non-federal funds for construction August 2020

Complete construction September 2024

Table 06. Project Schedule





ratio of an investment is calculated by comparing the time-stream of expected economic benefits with the timestream of investment-related and other costs, while adjusting for the timing of the realization of the costs and benefits (discounting). Benefits calculated by BCA.Net include the value of travel time savings, vehicle operating costs, safety benefits, environmental benefits, and project residual value. This BCA presents the BCA scores using discount rates of 7 percent and 3 percent, consistent with FHWA guidance. BCA.Net’s underlying methodology is consistent with the current benefit-cost methodologies employed by FHWA. Within BCA.Net, a segment is defined as a specific highway facility with uniform physical and performance charac-teristics and traffic flows. Although BCA.Net allows for the modeling of changes to intersections, no intersections were included in this analysis. BCA.Net compares the “base” case of no improvements other than regular (10-year) resurfacing to the “alternate” case consisting of the proposed project improvements followed by regular (10-year) resurfacing. BCA.Net reports showing the 3 inputs for each segment for the base and alternate cases are shown in Appendix A, as well as the annual benefit and cost streams.

Benefit Categories

Economic Competitiveness

Economic competitiveness benefits show that the project contributes to the national economic competitiveness by decreasing transportation costs, improving long-term efficiency and reliability in the movement of workers and goods, and facilitating freight movement. Economic competitiveness benefits are calculated in BCA.Net as travel time savings and vehicle operating cost savings.Travel time savings represents the difference in the value of travel time incurred between the base and alternate cases. If the alternate case saves travel time relative to the base case, the time savings value will be positive. BCA.Net calculates travel time savings by comparing the speed and volume of the traffic flow of the alternate case to that of the base case, factoring in future traffic growth, design speeds, congestion levels, vehicle occupancy, traffic peaks, and other data. The value of time for personal, business, and freight travel used in this analysis are those specified in the FHWA Benefit-Cost Analysis Guidance7.

Vehicle operating cost savings consist of the changes in non-travel time costs incurred by vehicle operators when traveling at higher or lower speeds and due to wear and tear on vehicles associated with different pavement conditions. Although it is often expected that a road improvement that saves travel time will also reduce vehicle operating costs, this is not always the case. A capacity improvement that enables faster travel speeds may reduce travel time costs by increasing vehicle operating costs due to greater fuel consumption and maintenance costs.

Safety

Safety benefits show that the project results in a reduction in the number, rate, and consequences of transportation-related crashes, property damage only (PDO), injuries, and fatalities among users. Safety benefits are calculated in BCA.Net from estimated traffic volumes and crash rates (accidents per million vehicle miles traveled). Crash rates for the base and alternate cases are 1.4 and 1.23, respec-tively. The model assigns severities based on accident type categorizations and applies the valuation for each type of crash input by the user for fatal, injury, and PDO crashes. The monetized values for various crash types used in this analysis are based on those specified in the FHWA Benefit-Cost Analysis Guidance7.

72017 TIGER and INFRA BCA Resource Guide,https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/docs/mission/office-policy/transportationpolicy/284031/benefit-cost-analysis-guidance-2017.pdf

Table 07. Benefit-Cost Analysis Summary ($1000)

7% DISCOUNT

RATE

3% DISCOUNT

RATE

Economic Competitiveness 24,292.0 60,653.4

Travel Time Savings 36,004.6 85,154.0

Travel Time Savings of Project 46,822.3 97,994.0

Disbenefit of Work Zones -10,817.8 -12,840.0

Operating Cost Savings -11,712.5 -24,500.6

Safety 10,584.4 22,418.4

Environmental Sustainability -959.1 -2,042.7

State of Good Repair / Project Residual Value 702.2 3,478.8

Quality of Life N/A N/A

Total Benefits 34,619.6 84,507.9

Total Cost 29,537.2 35,730.5

Net Benefits 5,082.4 48,777.4

BCA Score 1.17 2.37




Environmental Sustainability

Environmental sustainability benefits show that the project improves energy efficiency and reduces pollution. Environ-mental benefits are calculated in BCA.Net from traffic volumes, emission rates, and speeds. BCA.Net applies speed-based emission rates (grams of emission per mile) to segment average speeds and traffic volumes, adjusts the emissions for time spent at traffic signals, sums these amounts for periods and days, and then multiplies the tonnage weight of each emission type by the per ton cost value input by the user. Like vehicle operating cost savings, although it is often expected that a road improvement that saves travel time will also reduce emissions, this is not always the case. A capacity improvement that enables faster travel speeds may reduce travel time costs by increasing emissions due to greater fuel consumption. The monetized values of emissions used in this analysis are those specified in the FHWA Benefit-Cost Analysis Guidance7.

State of Good Repair

State of good repair benefits show that the project will improve the condition and resilience of the transportation infrastructure. If left unimproved, the condition of the asset will threaten future transportation network efficiency and the mobility of goods and people. State of good repair benefits are calculated in BCA.Net as the project residual value. Project residual value represents the total remaining value of non-land assets of the alternate case in the last year of the analysis period.

Quality of Life

Quality of life benefits show that the project will increase transportation choices and improve access to essential services. These benefits were not quantified for this project.

federal WaGe rate certIfIcatIons The applicant hereby certifies that they will comply with the requirements of Subchapter IV of Chapter 31 of Title 40, United States Code (Federal Wage Requirements), as set forth in the certification attached as Appendix G.

Index of suPPortInG InformatIon on WebsIte The primary web address for the Improvement Project on SR 19 in Neshoba, Mississippi is http://www.build19ne-shoba.com. The appendices to the application narrative are located on the website as follows:

Appendix A: Commitment/Support Letters

Appendix B: Plans and Studies

Appendix C: Cost Estimates

Appendix D: Detailed Benefit-Cost Analysis

Appendix E: Schedule

Appendix F: Environmental Clearance

Appendix G: Federal Wage Certifications








https://www.build19neshoba.com/appendix-e-schedule.html



grant application - build19neshoba.com · best possible quality of life for residents. the sr 19...

Documents