Skip to main content

When the TIGER Discretionary Grants are awarded, there are going to be a lot of unhappy people

Tonight I was curious in knowing what other projects have other state's applied for the $1.5 billion in TIGER Discretionary Funds that will be awarded next month.  My original thinking was that it was only one project per state, and it would be a neat idea to maybe research and blog about them  Bzzzztttt, was I wrong!

The USDOT received 1380, yes 1380, applications from all 50 states, plus Guam, the Virgin Islands, Puerto Rico, and the District of Columbia.  The total amount of requests total $56.5 billion.  That is nearly 38 times the amount that will be awarded!!!!  No wonder why the final decisions have been delayed.

Texas led with 125 applications - followed closely by California (117), and Florida (115).  The least amount of applications came from Hawaii with only 1. New Hampshire, South Dakota, and North Dakota only had two applications.

It appears that any organization could apply for the TIGER Grants - and that would explain why SCDOT encouraged Horry County to put in an application for upgrading SC 22 to Interstate standards a number of months ago.

The amount of money asked for in each applications was varied also. 514 of the 1380 (37.2%) applications were asking for amounts of less than $20 million.  Over 56% (785) were applications for $20-100 million in funds.  The rest, 81 applications, were from $100 billion to the maximum of $300 billion.

Applications came in for highway improvements, transit improvements, rail improvements, and other.  (Most likely pedestrian and bike projects.)

Check out the USDOT's two page summary of the TIGER Grant applications here.

I'm going to start looking into what projects applied for grant money and what they are for.

One of the first ones I did find was an application by NYSDOT for completing the final upgrades for the US 15/I-99 project.  The amount of the application was for $38 million.

Exit question: What are some of the projects being applied for in your state?  And which of them are the most pressing? So leave a comment.

Comments

Unknown said…
Adam,

I linked to this item on my Inside Lane page.

http://www.inside-lane.com/2010/01/28/blog-tiger-grant-applications-1380-requests-totaling-56-5-billion-for-only-1-5-billion-available-colorado-total-requests-1-1-billion/

Kevin Flynn
Adam said…
Kevin,

Thanks! I find it amazing how many applications were made for such few funds. It will be interesting to see what projects are awarded the grants and for how much.

If one project gets the maximum of $300 million, that's 20% of the total money available. It will be interesting to see the reactions.

Here in NC, local leaders near the I-85 Yadkin River Project are not as optimistic as they were a few months ago. And NCDOT is already trying to come up with alternative funding plans based on how much if any grant dollars they receive.
Matt Salek said…
Colorado DOT submitted 7 projects totaling $463M. Here's a list: http://milepost61.wordpress.com/2009/08/20/cdot-pursuing-7-tiger-grants/
Arnold said…
I thought the exact same thing!

Here in Ann Arbor, we applied for $22 million for a Bridge that goes over a train track in conjunction with one that goes over a residential street.

I wrote the Tiger Grant people to inform them that the train is used twice a day - between 10pm and 6am, and that the residential road is typical to many in the city that never - ever have had any discussion about putting up a bridge to avoid a stoplight.

Instead of replacing the current bridges, I asked the Tiger Group to reject the application due to the waste. Ann Arbor could put in at grade roads at a cost less than $10 million. They just don't want to.

The interesting part in my discussions with the Tiger Group is there seems to be little puclic input. Nor does there appear to be much investigation into the need / honesty of the applications.

I hope they - The Tiger Grant people - can weed out the pork and give the money to the truly needy.

www.theannarborbridgetonowhere.com
Brian said…
@Arnold:

Unfortunately, there's just no decent way to possibly make Stadium and State at-grade without significantly encroaching upon adjacent property, as the city's letter points out. This is just one of those cases where the original bridges were built to address the traffic issues of that time, development was allowed in the adjacent areas, and thus no good way to just remove the overpasses. And as one of my friends points out, construction is well under way. I admire you for wanting to speak out, though.

Popular posts from this blog

Yes, the color of your nearby fire hydrant matters...

...and here's why. You will find White, Red, Yellow and Violet colored fire hydrants pretty much everywhere.  But there's a reason for this - and it's because of the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA).  This association has issued guidelines for color coding standards for fire hydrants.  These color codes from the body of the hydrant, top of the hydrant, and in some municipalities the outlet caps are designed to allow fire fighters to know what type of system, water flow rate (Gallons Per Minute or GPM), and level of water pressure.  This guideline is known as NFPA 291 and is intended to be used universally throughout the United States. The NFPA guidelines are specific to the body and the top cap of the hydrant.  If a hydrant is WHITE or YELLOW - it means that it is connected to a public/municipal water system.  If a hydrant is RED - the hydrant is connected to a private system, typically a well.  These are most common in rural or unincorporated areas

Phase 1 of the California State Route 132 West Expressway (in the making since 1947)

On September 15, 2022, the Phase 1 of the California State Route 132 West Expressway opened in the city of Modesto from California State Route 99 west to North Dakota Avenue.  Phase 1 of the California State Route 132 West Expressway was built upon a corridor which was tentatively to designated to become the branching point for Interstate 5W in the 1947 concept of the Interstate Highway System.  The present California State Route 132 West Expressway corridor was adopted by the California Highway Commission on June 20, 1956.  Despite almost being rescinded during the 1970s the concept of the California State Route 132 West Expressway corridor lingered on for over half a century and became likely the oldest undeveloped right-of-way owned by California Transportation Commission.  Pictured above is the planned California State Route 132 freeway west of US Route 99 in Modesto as featured in the May/June 1962 California Highways & Public Works.   The history of the California State Route

Aptos Creek Road to the Loma Prieta ghost town site

Aptos Creek Road is a roadway in Santa Cruz County, California which connects the community of Aptos north to The Forest of Nisene Marks State Parks.  Aptos Creek Road north of Aptos is largely unpaved and is where the town site of Loma Prieta can be located.  Loma Prieta was a sawmill community which operated from 1883-1923 and reached a peak population of approximately three hundred.  Loma Prieta included a railroad which is now occupied by Aptos Creek Road along with a spur to Bridge Creek which now the Loma Prieta Grade Trail.  The site of the Loma Prieta Mill and company town burned in 1942.   Part 1; the history of Aptos Creek Road and the Loma Prieta town site Modern Aptos traces its origin to Mexican Rancho Aptos.  Rancho Aptos was granted by the Mexican Government in 1833 Rafael Castro.  Rancho Aptos took its name from Aptos Creek which coursed through from the Santa Cruz Mountains to Monterey Bay.  Castro initially used Rancho Aptos to raise cattle for their hides.  Following