Say what? $4 million gets us what again?

By B’ Spokes

Recreational Trails Program Typical projects, awarded FY2013

Howard County Conservancy Accessible Trail Improvements 24,750
Brunswick Trailside Amenities 10,100
Boardwalks for Upper Rock Creek Trail 32,800
DNR Algonquin Cross Country trail 25,000
DNR Potomac Garrett State Forest Trail Guides 26,000
TOTAL ONGOING AWARDS 4,410,000

BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN RELATED PROJECTS in the Consolidted Transportation Program FY 2014 – 2019

I’ve talked about the Federal Recreational Trails Program before and I don’t get why Maryland caps the grant amount to $30k (with some small exceptions.) Per Recreational Trails Program: Preliminary Report on State Trail Projects on average 44% of this fund is spent on “Trail Construction or Development.” While Maryland does not provide enough information to say what we do spend on actual trail construction I am willing to bet it is no where close to 44%.

So I decided to see how Maryland’s average cost per RTP project compared to other states (data follows.) Only 9 other states had a smaller average cost per project than Maryland. Maryland’s average cost was $22k, the national average was $41k. It is worth noting that DC’s average was $232k per project and California was %122k per project. Big difference!

My main point here is I would love to see a greater diversity of projects funded through this program. And on that note I noticed the $30k cap has changed!


Funds requested per project cannot exceed $40,000 for trail construction and $30,000 for non-construction.
Please note, for the FY15 solicitation, we will consider lifting the $40K cap for
construction projects that score high with the criteria.

So things are starting to change! And remember this is a 20% local match so here’s hoping to see a lot more bicycle related projects! Speaking of changes for the good, I noticed Transportation Enhancements (TE) are back! That’s right the CTP mentions $25,355,100 worth of TE projects!!! I did not see any mention of the old draconic 50% local match requirement, nor any mention of a match requirement. Did Jim Smith decide to start spending that $40 million backlog of federal money rather then just let the feds keep that money? I would love to know the details but from what I can see from publicly available documents, things are finally starting to look up. .


State 2004-2009 Projects Total Projects Total RTP Funding Total Other Funding Avg RTP cost / Project % Match
HI 94 574 4,196,717.00 1,165,438.00 $7,311.35 27.77%
VT 285 565 6,897,933.00 21,912,930.00 $12,208.73 317.67%
NH 266 536 7,660,456.00 11,378,738.00 $14,291.90 148.54%
RI 80 151 2,516,091.00 3,573,782.00 $16,662.85 142.04%
NJ 264 559 9,733,417.00 18,501,477.00 $17,412.19 190.08%
MT 270 556 10,042,717.00 3,511,815.00 $18,062.44 34.97%
CT 58 222 4,497,878.00 1,624,456.00 $20,260.71 36.12%
MA 124 241 5,064,010.00 5,337,388.00 $21,012.49 105.40%
ME 209 394 8,362,521.00 2,267,518.00 $21,224.67 27.12%
MD 289 525 11,458,593.00 5,955,675.00 $21,825.89 51.98%
ID 105 352 8,296,709.00 13,803,952.00 $23,570.20 166.38%
AK 110 271 $7,124,052.00 $3,393,126.00 $26,288.01 47.63%
CO 206 348 9,556,288.00 19,992,409.00 $27,460.60 209.21%
WI 95 331 9,780,274.00 9,996,409.00 $29,547.66 102.21%
KY 149 318 9,526,742.00 6,256,029.00 $29,958.31 65.67%
DE 57 90 2,786,123.00 2,477,865.00 $30,956.92 88.94%
WY 148 306 10,113,148.00 9,130,383.00 $33,049.50 90.28%
SD 123 272 9,837,153.00 7,258,566.00 $36,166.00 73.79%
AR 69 236 8,903,736.00 3,429,572.00 $37,727.69 38.52%
NC 114 344 12,991,310.00 23,855,714.00 $37,765.44 183.63%
OR 91 259 10,002,728.00 13,949,762.00 $38,620.57 139.46%
KS 119 269 11,059,806.00 5,939,856.00 $41,114.52 53.71%
NV 98 211 8,702,978.00 6,005,152.00 $41,246.34 69.00%
ND 72 183 7,718,207.00 1,654,880.00 $42,175.99 21.44%
MN 104 246 10,475,270.00 26,743,647.00 $42,582.40 255.30%
WV 125 223 9,922,934.00 2,852,043.00 $44,497.46 28.74%
TX 283 12,945,553.00 7,703,811.00 $45,744.00 59.51%
LA 122 244 11,578,346.00 10,331,643.00 $47,452.24 89.23%
SC 63 172 8,212,145.00 3,656,271.00 $47,745.03 44.52%
UT 135 269 13,121,377.00 8,976,012.00 $48,778.35 68.41%
VA 95 256 13,214,126.00 6,290,588.00 $51,617.68 47.61%
PA 118 318 18,025,084.00 11,795,588.00 $56,682.65 65.44%
NM 22 90 5,152,631.00 4,086,744.00 $57,251.46 79.31%
MO 109 221 12,792,537.00 17,534,532.00 $57,884.78 137.07%
OK 68 189 11,140,186.00 5,765,342.00 $58,942.78 51.75%
WA 181 389 23,004,527.00 19,573,587.00 $59,137.60 85.09%
AL 92 234 14,091,334.00 3,990,865.00 $60,219.38 28.32%
NY 96 250 15,367,839.00 7,690,068.00 $61,471.36 50.04%
TN 81 195 12,806,328.00 4,270,393.00 $65,673.48 33.35%
MS 74 153 10,332,620.00 2,247,666.00 $67,533.46 21.75%
IL 53 162 11,079,669.00 4,944,158.00 $68,393.02 44.62%
AZ 80 116 8,024,338.00 6,167,110.00 $69,175.33 76.86%
OH 65 188 13,107,632.00 16,186,468.00 $69,721.45 123.49%
GA 79 164 14,189,089.00 16,017,452.00 $86,518.84 112.89%
NE 47 105 9,182,670.00 5,501,160.00 $87,454.00 59.91%
MI 86 189 19,127,301.00 10,169,466.00 $101,202.65 53.17%
FL 60 145 16,356,265.00 11,304,925.00 $112,801.83 69.12%
CA 73 235 28,777,426.00 11,862,897.00 $122,457.13 41.22%
IN 47 85 11,453,423.00 3,897,981.00 $134,746.15 34.03%
IA 34 76 10,322,049.00 3,231,620.00 $135,816.43 31.31%
DC 10 22 5,098,212.00 1,482,467.00 $231,736.91 29.08%
Total / Average 5614 13332 545,730,498 436,647,396 $40,933.88 80.01%

oldId.20140424233407493

Leave a Reply