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

Kevin 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

Mineral King Road/Mountain Road 375; the unbuilt California State Route 276

Back in July of 2016 I took Mineral King Road east from California State Route 198 to Mineral King Valley in Sequoia National Park.






Mineral King Road is a 24.8 mile roadway which travels from the confluence of the Middle Fork and East Fork Kaweah River in modern day Three Rivers to Mineral King Valley.  Mineral King Road has an approximate starting elevation at about 1,000 feet above sea level in Three Rivers and ends at approximately 7,400 feet above sea level in Mineral King Valley in the High Sierras.

Mineral King Road has an average grade of 5.1% but has stretches between 15-20% in places.  Pjammycycling has a detailed breakdown on the grade levels on the entirety of Mineral King Road.

Pjammycycling on Mineral King Road

A large silver claim at the White Chief Mine was struck in Mineral King Valley in 1872.  Previous trails to Mineral King Valley were fleshed out which lead to the creation of Silver City six miles west of Mineral King Valley later in the year. The first Mineral King…

Ghost Town Tuesday; Millerton, California and the Stockton-Los Angeles Road

Back in 2016 I visited Millerton Lake in Madera County to view the 1866 Fresno County Court House which was located in Millerton on the Stockton-Los Angeles Road.


Millerton traces it's origins back to the founding of Fort Miller during the Mariposa War in May of 1851.  Fort Miller was a fortification on the south bank of the San Joaquin River originally designated as Camp Barbour but was renamed in 1852.  The community of Millerton came to grew around Fort Millerton and remained even after said Fort was abandoned in 1858.  In 1856 Fresno County was created from parts of Mariposa County, Merced County, and Tulare County.  Millerton was selected as the original County Seat of Fresno County due to it's ferry location on the Stockton-Los Angeles Road at the San Joaquin River.  Milleton's ferry was located on a narrow canyon above the San Joaquin River which made ferry crossings ideal due to the predictable width of the waters.  Later ferries such as Firebaugh's Ferry to th…

Signed County Route J37; the last Signed Tulare County Route and the Lone Pine to Porterville High Sierra Road

Recently I drove the entirety of Signed County Route J37 located in rural Tulare County.  Signed County Route J37 is notable in that it is the last Signed County Route which actually has field signage left in Tulare County and was intended to be part of a Trans-Sierra Highway known as the Lone Pine to Porterville High Sierra Road.


While researching California State Route 190 and more specifically the gap in the highway over the Sierra Nevada Range it became quickly apparent that there was far more to J37/Balch Park Road than initially thought.  The previous blog on California State Route 190 can be found here:

California State Route 190; the Trans-Sierra Highway that could have been 

On the above blog I attached an article from 1926 written by the Los Angeles Times detailing the route of the Lone Pine to Porterville High Sierra Road which was slated to begin construction in 1927.  The route of the Lone Pine to Porterville High Sierra Road would have followed Carroll Creek southward out…