• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
2040 RTP Leadership Symposium II 3.13.13
 

2040 RTP Leadership Symposium II 3.13.13

on

  • 217 views

Presentation from our 2nd Leadership Symposium for the 2040 Regional Transportation Plan, held at the Chattanoogan on March 13, 2013

Presentation from our 2nd Leadership Symposium for the 2040 Regional Transportation Plan, held at the Chattanoogan on March 13, 2013

Statistics

Views

Total Views
217
Views on SlideShare
217
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment
  • Welcome and acknowledge TPO/RPA Executives
  • Explain the TPO, geographic representation, and process
  • Explain the TPO, geographic representation, and process
  • Developed set of goals/objectives based on extensive public outreach conducted summer 2012.We heard a lot about transportation needs, challenges, frustrations, opportunities.Much of the time, needs were presented from two rather distinct perspectives; one perspective driven by a broad set of stakeholders approaching the 2040 RTP from a more local, community-oriented perspective (focused on advancing livability, quality of life principles, and healthy, multimodal travel options for broad set of users), and the other from stakeholders focused on more systems-level, regional investments (focused on reducing congestion, improving mobility for people and goods … e.g., the “bypass” crowd) to ensure region is well-positioned and competitive from economic standpoint.Difference in perspectives is not unique to the plan process. TPO has developed a performance-framework to help strike the right balance, in terms of addressing needs of both (community/regional). Presented here as the “community to region” transect which is intended to help illustrate the transition in perspectives related to transportation needs as you move from community scale up to regional scale. This “community to region” approach is the foundation for our 2040 RTP performance framework and has been used to guide development of goals and objectives.
  • USE UPDATED TABLE-TRACY TO PROVIDE
  • Findings generally organized around performance measure categories to ensure that needs analysis conducted in context of long range goals/objectives .
  • Historically this was the primary focus of the LRTP processExplain E+C
  • Historically this was the primary focus of the LRTP processExplain E+C
  • Exchange the map for higher resolution
  • “Active Transportation Facilities” Measured in the Analysis:- Bicycle facilities (BLOS of B or better)- Parks and Open Space - Trails- CARTA Transit Stops “Health-Related Destinations” Measured in the Analysis:- Healthcare Facilities (i.e hospitals, clinics)- Grocery Stores and Supermarkets- Farmers Markets /Community Gardens/ Mobile Markets- Public and Private Schools
  • 49% of Homes in Hamilton County are within 100 feet of sidewalks
  • :Areas of highest demand:ChattanoogaEast RidgeRidgeside, Collegedale, and Red Bank in Hamilton County, and in Rossville, Lakeview, Fort Oglethorpe, and Ringgold in Georgia.
  • The locations of highest biking demand are located in the jurisdictions of Chattanooga, East Ridge, Ridgeside, Lookout Mountain and Red Bank in Hamilton County, and in Rossville, Lakeview and Fort Oglethorpe in Georgia. The Chattanooga Area Regional Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan from 2010 recommended a:Primary Bikeway Network - focuses on the major commuting corridors and corridors that provide connectivity throughout the region.Secondary Bikeway Network - consists of corridors and roadways that link residential communities, activity centers, and other destinations to the Primary Bikeway Network
  • locations of highest walking demand are located in the jurisdictions of Chattanooga, East Ridge, Ridgeside, Lookout Mountain and Red Bank in Hamilton County, in Rossville, Lakeview and Fort Oglethorpe in Georgia.The Chattanooga Area Regional Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan from 2010 identified Pedestrian Network Recommendations that focus on providing sidewalks on arterial roadways that serve as major commuting corridors, commercial corridors and corridors of commerce, and that connect communities, activity centers, transit, and major destinations throughout the region.
  • Insert kenny’s list of corridors we are evaluating to address all three of the above via ISAAll are very difficult in terms of adding physical capacity – need different solution set. Limted from what we can do from capital perspective.Note – City of Chatt first place KV knows of with citywide wireless mesh communications system. Very advanced. Provides real opportunity for enhancing system ops.
  • Scenario A Maps
  • Scenario A Maps
  • Scenario A Maps
  • Scenario A Maps

2040 RTP Leadership Symposium II 3.13.13 2040 RTP Leadership Symposium II 3.13.13 Presentation Transcript

  • 2040 Regional Transportation PlanLeadership SymposiumMarch 13, 2013 Chattanooga-Hamilton County/N. GA Transportation Planning Organization
  • TPO Structure & Plan RequirementChattanooga-Hamilton TPO Planning AreaCounty/North GeorgiaTransportation PlanningOrganization (TPO)-29 member regional policy board (19 governments)- staffed by the Regional Planning Agency- new plan every four years with 20+ year horizon- federally funded planning and implementation- legislative requirements including air quality standards
  • Public OutreachIn just six months…26 events/activities: 89 @ 1st Leadership Symposium 113 @ committee meetings 25 @ stakeholder discussion groups 76 @ topic-based workshops (climate change, transit, and call for projects) 58 @ public workshops+ 451 @ questionnaire 812 interactions
  • Information Gathering/Synthesis Define Goals, Objectives, and Identify Needs Identify Solutions Performance Criteria Current and Projected Transportation Deficiencies Call for Projects (Local and State) Public and Stakeholder Input •Congestion •Multimodal Connections Multimodal Gap Analysis •Safety Additional Road and Transit •Environmental Capacity Economic and Business •Access to Community Resources Considerations •System Maintenance Public and Stakeholder Input 25% Over Capacity build road condition Slightly Over Capacity Transit Gaps roads traffic flowbikeways sidewalks neighborhood 2010 traffic safety
  • Plan GoalsAdopted 2040 Goals: A Scaled & Balanced Approach Region to Region Within Community Community to Region Investment Needs Investment Needs That Support That Support • Mobility and intermodal Investment Needs • Strategic, multimodal improvements to ensure That Support connections between region is well connected • Local, multimodal communities and within the state and connections and access Regional activity/ the nation to community economic centers resources • Support economic to support economic competitiveness and • Advance livability and development advance overall economic quality of life principles development potential
  • Within CommunityGoal Within CommunityBUILD AND MAINTAIN SAFEAND HEALTHY COMMUNITIESObjectives• Support walkable and bicycle-friendly communities that promote safe connections to community resources• Provide incentives for complete streets project design• Encourage investments anchored in integrated transportation and land use planning that support desired community character• Improve safety through improved system operations, preventative maintenance, and ADA compliance• Prioritize investments in areas where local land use and development regulations support healthy, safe communities• Prioritize investment that improves multimodal access to existing or planned transit hubs or that fills gaps in existing multimodal system• Encourage connected street network 6
  • Community to RegionGoal Community to RegionCONNECT COMMUNITIES IN THE REGION BYPROVIDING MULTIMODAL TRAVEL OPTIONS TOACTIVITY AND ECONOMIC CENTERSObjectives• Preserve, maintain, and improve existing infrastructure before adding new capacity• Provide incentives for complete streets project design• Encourage corridor improvements anchored in integrated transportation and land use planning that support desired community character• Improve mobility and support economic development by providing expanded set of travel options, with emphasis on public transit• Improve travel time reliability through improved system operations• Incentive corridor protection plans 7
  • Region to RegionGoal Region to RegionGROW ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITYTHROUGH STRATEGIC INVESTMENT INCRITICAL REGIONAL INFRASTRUCTUREObjectives• Preserve, maintain, and improve existing infrastructure before adding new capacity• Support continued economic growth of the region by improving intermodal connections that reduce delay for both people and goods• Reduce delay on critical regional thoroughfares with minimal impact to community, historic and environmental resources• Improve the efficiency and reliability of freight, cargo, and goods movement by reducing delay on corridors critical to freight movement• Improve travel time reliability through improved system operations 8
  • Performance Evaluation 9
  • Question #1 (test)How pleased are you to be here today? a. Extremely happy, can’t think of anything you’d rather be doing b. Pleased to be here but concerned about how long it will last c. Are here because you were told you had to be but don’t mind participating d. Are only attending to ensure that the planners don’t screw anything up e. Would rather be at the dentist getting a root canal…
  • 2040 RTP Leadership SymposiumOVERVIEW OF FINDINGS
  • Steps of Plan Development Process Package Define Goals, Constrain and Solutions andObjectives, and Identify Identify Draft Regional Evaluate and Evaluate Performance Needs Solutions Transportation Document Alternative Criteria Plan Scenarios Current and Call for Project Projected Projects MAP-21 Bypasses and Evaluation/ Transportation (Local and Performance Public and Connectors Rankings Deficiencies State) Demonstration Stakeholder Input • Congestion • Multimodal Multimodal Available Connections Gap Analysis Revenue • Safety/ Conformity Security Big Transit Determination Additional Report • Access to Project Costs – Road and Community Capital and Transit Resources O&M Economic and Capacity Business • Maintenance Public Considerations • Operations Blend of the Involvement Public and Best Project Process and Stakeholder Phasing Report Input 12
  • Maintaining the System• Bridge, current Summary Bridge Conditions in Chattanooga Region conditions assessment 3% Not Deficient – 2012 National Bridge 19% Functionally Obsolete Inventory (NBI) Database Structurally Deficient – Structural deficiency status based on bridge condition – Functional obsolete status based on geometrics, e.g., 78% number and width of lanes – All bridges in region greater than 20-foot length 13
  • Maintaining the System (continued)Average bridge healthindex – 92% 14
  • Maintaining the System (continued)• Pavement, current Summary Pavement Conditions in Chattanooga Region conditions assessment – 2008 Highway 17% % Good Performance Monitoring % Fair System (HPMS) database % Poor – Percent of lanes miles in good/fair/poor condition 51% based on roughness – Thresholds defined by 32% Federal Highway Administration – Sample data 15
  • Reducing Congestion• Base-year congestion analysis – Worst congestion along I-24 and I-75 – Severe congestion at junction of I-24/I-75 – U.S. 27 north of river – Hamilton Place Mall – Northgate Mall• Downtown relatively uncongested 16
  • Reducing Congestion (continued)• Future-year congestion analysis – U.S. 27 congestion relieved (widening project underway)• Outward expansion and general increase in severity of general congestion due to population and employment growth over time 17
  • Reducing Congestion (continued)• Mobility corridor analysis – More detailed assessment of 13 mobility corridors – Geographic sample of corridors with high volume auto and truck traffic (“scale 3”) – Corridors evaluated and scored • Congestion Management Process (CMP) route • 2040 congestion levels • Key freight route • Supports high-volume external to external (through) trip movement 18
  • Improving Safety• Systemwide safety analysis 450 400 71 62 80 70 58 – Traffic crashes leading cause 350 300 47 56 44 49 60 50 of death 5-34 years old 250 40 200 – 55 deaths; 330 injuries 150 30 20 annually in region 100 50 10 404 386 366 319 261 252 332 – $1,700 per person 0 0 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009• RTP Emphasis areas Serious Injuries Fatalities Roadway Departure 33.4% – Roadway departure Aggressive 33.3% Intersection 32.6% – Aggressive driving Seat Belt Use 25.2% Young Drivers (15-24) 19.1% – Intersection crashes Motorcycles* Alcohol Impaired 12.5% 12.3% Older Drivers (65+) 8.7% Heavy Trucks 3.0% Pedestrian* 1.3% Work Zone** 0.5% Pedacylists/Bicyclists* 0.2% 0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 19
  • Improving Security• Climate adaptation analysis – Critical transportation assets defined • Chickamauga Lock and Dam • Chattanooga Airport and SR 153 access • Interchange of I-75/I-24 • Enterprise South road and rail access • Downtown bridges • Sequoyah nuclear plant – Redundant facilities and evacuation routes identified 20
  • Providing Access• Accessibility analysis to measure proximity of people and homes to – Active transportation facilities • Bicycle facilities (B-LOS of B or better) • Parks and Open Space • Trails • CARTA Transit Stops – Health-related destinations • Healthcare Facilities • Grocery Stores and Supermarkets • Farmers Markets /Community Gardens/ Mobile Markets • Public and Private Schools 21
  • Providing Access (continued) Walk and Bicycle Access:Environmental Sustainability Needs Percentage of Homes with Access to Active Transportation Facilities Trails 4% 21% Transit Stop 18% 36% Parks and Open Space 29% 76% Bicycle Street 26% 78% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 1/4 Mile Walk Access 1 Mile Bicycle Access 22
  • Connecting the System• Transit Gap Analysis – Locations of highest transit demand • Population and household density • Land use mix • Intersection density • Distance to nearest transit stop • Jobs within one mile – Mapped against existing and planned infrastructure – Low income, minority and elderly population as overlay 23
  • Connecting the System (continued)• Bicycle Gap Analysis – Locations of highest bike demand • Population and household density • Intersection density • Jobs within one mile • Distance to nearest transit stop • Distance to commercial store • Public/private schools within one mile • Parks and recreation facilities within one mile – Mapped against existing and planned infrastructure – Low income, minority and elderly population as overlay 24
  • Connecting the System (continued)• Pedestrian Gap Analysis – Locations of highest pedestrian demand • Population and household density • Intersection density • Jobs within one mile • Distance to nearest transit stop • Distance to commercial store • Public/private schools within one mile • Parks and recreation facilities within one mile – Mapped against existing and planned infrastructure – Low income, minority and elderly population as overlay 25
  • Improving Livability and the Environment• Livability corridor analysis – More detailed assessment of 24 livability corridors – Geographic sample of corridors with potential for broad multimodal enhancements and VMT reduction (“scale 2”) – Corridors evaluated and scored in terms of: • Potential complete streets corridor, 2035 Plan • Lack of bike/pedestrian/ transit infrastructure • Population and employment density • Congestion levels
  • Operating the System• Operations assessment – Extensive ITS coverage on freeways; opportunity to extend into north Georgia – Downtown Chattanooga has extensive communication network for managing key arterials in real time; opportunity to extend to more corridors with centralized management center – Opportunity for transit signal priority for key corridors 27
  • Question # 2Which of the following types of roadways should be thehighest priority for improvements: a. Freeways (e.g. I-24, I-75, US- 27) b. Major Arterials (e.g. Amnicola Highway, Lee Highway) c. Minor Arterials (e.g. Bonny Oaks, E. Brainerd Road) d. Collectors & Locals (e.g. Snow Hill Rd, Mack Smith Rd.)
  • Question # 3What’s the most important transit trip for the region? a. Trips around town for shopping or recreation b. Trips to and from work c. Trips that enhance access to social services d. There are no important trips
  • Question # 4What’s more important to bicycle and pedestriantravel? a) Connecting to places within your town (parks, schools, libraries, etc. ) b) Connecting to regional destinations (other towns and regional parks, etc.) c) Both
  • Question # 5How important is walkability to the future of the studyarea? a. Extremely important, we must have it no matter what b. Important, but only in the city limits c. Somewhat important, but primarily in transit corridors and downtowns d. Nice to have, but not necessarily needed for the area to be a future success e. Unimportant
  • 2040 RTP Leadership SymposiumFUNDING OUR NEEDS
  • Funding Needs• Level of investment needed to: – Maintain existing infrastructure – Strategically expand and operate• Define needs in context of projected revenue over life of 2040 transportation plan• Define gap/unmet needs• Scenario discussion to support best use of available funds given needs identified 33
  • Current Bridge Maintenance Funding Needs Needs (Millions of 2012 Dollars) 125 $1.3 100 $7.3 Total current needs = $105M 75 50 $96.6 Maintain, Rehabilitate, and Repair 25 Widening Replacement 0 34
  • Long Term Bridge Maintenance Funding Needs Projected Bridge Conditions in 2040 Given Funding LevelAverage HealthIndex 100% Baseline condition = 92% 80% Flag for replacement (75 avg) 60% 40% 20% Total needs over life of plan = $322M 0% 0 5 10 15 20 25 Annual Budget (Millions of 2012 Dollars) 35
  • Current Pavement Maintenance Funding NeedsNeeds (Dollars in Millions)500400 $81 Total current needs = $429M $348300200100 Reconstruction Resurfacing 0 36
  • Long Term Pavement Maintenance Funding Needs Projected Conditions in 2040 Given Funding Level Percent of Lane Miles in Good or Fair Condition 100 Baseline condition = 83% 80 60 40 20 Total needs over life of plan = $1.38B 0 0 20 40 60 80 Annual Budget (Dollars in Millions) 37
  • Total System Maintenance NeedsHow much will it cost to maintain existingtransportation system, in current conditions, over lifeof long-range plan?$1.7 billionMore than doubling current spending levels from 2035 Plan 38
  • New Investment NeedsHow much will it cost to build, operate, and maintainall additional identified needs in the region?$7.0 billion 39
  • Total Investment Needs $1.7 billion Existing System Maintenance $7.0 billion Additional Identified Needs $8.7 billion Total Needs 40
  • Revenue AvailabilityAnd how much funding is actually available betweennow and 2040?$5.7 billion 41
  • Spending the Money $1.7B $7.0B (MAINTAIN) (EXPAND) 42
  • Spending the Money (continued) $5.7B (AVAILABLE) 43
  • Spending the Money (continued) $5.7B (AVAILABLE) FUNDED UNFUNDED $1.7B $4.0B $3.0B 44
  • Spending the Money (continued) $5.7B (AVAILABLE) UNFUNDED FUNDED $1.7B $1.3B $5.7B 45
  • Spending the Money (continued) $5.7B (AVAILABLE) UNFUNDED UNFUNDED FUNDED $0.5B $1.2B $4.5B $2.5B 46
  • Spending the Money (continued) Transit Capacity Road Capacity $5.3B (AVAILABLE) $4.5B (AVAILABLE) $0.5B $1.2B $4.5B $2.5B 47
  • Question # 6Which approach do you believe is most importantwhen considering the management of ourtransportation system?a) “Fix it first,” fully maintain what we have before adding to the transportation systemb) Forego some maintenance to allow for more capacity projects
  • Question # 7With the understanding that there won’t likely besufficient funds for all identified needs, I’d be willing todefer some transportation maintenance needs forother transportation improvements. a) Strongly agree b) Agree c) Neither d) Disagree e) Strongly disagree
  • Question # 8When considering the fact that we won’t likely have fundingsufficient to build all of our priority projects within thedesired timeframe; how likely are you to support the idea ofgenerating local revenues to assist with the finance of highpriority strategic projects? a) Strongly agree b) Agree c) Neither d) Disagree e) Strongly disagree
  • 2040 RTP Leadership Symposium INTERMISSION
  • 2040 RTP Leadership SymposiumALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS
  • Alternatives Analysis• Two “bookend” scenarios to illustrate benefits of road investments and transit investments• Includes road and transit capacity investments – Includes “call for projects” – Public involvement – Technical analysis• Approximately equal cost• Want to use these to produce the “Blend of the Best”
  • Remember This?
  • BYPASSES & CONNECTORS SCENARIOPrimary investments in expanding highway accessibility and improvingexisting road corridors.
  • Bypasses andConnectors Scenario27 miles of New Roadways • Includes 16 mile Northern Hamilton County connection between US 27 and I-75 with new TN River Bridge • 230 miles of Roadway Widening • Includes almost all of I-24 and I-75 • Includes portions of US-27 and SR-153 • Includes SR 321/SR 151 as Eastern Bypass (4 lane arterial) between Collegedale, TN and Ringgold, GA23 miles of Safety/PreventativeMaintenance15 miles of complementary local bus routes
  • Bypasses & ConnectorsKey Growth Drivers: • Existing zoning & ordinances • Proximity to major roads • Interchanges & major Intersections • Large water & sewer service area • General preference for greenfield development patterns
  • Growth Characteristics• Low-density, decentralized growth• Greater maintenance cost• Expanding road network allows for increased distance between new neighborhoods and existing centers• New commercial development follows along widened corridors (linear development pattern)• Greater amount of land lost to new development.
  • BIG TRANSIT SCENARIOPlacing a greater emphasis on alternate travel modes
  • Big Transit Scenario•“Chattanooga Way” o 15 mile long new light rail line o Connects Downtown, Airport, Enterprise South•SR 153/US 27 “Bus Plus” o 19 mile long new Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) line o Connects Hamilton Place, Airport, Northgate, Soddy Daisy• “Premium Bus” Express Service on Interstates o 24 miles of new routes/extension of Route 4 o Connects Ringgold/Lookout Valley/Collegedale to Downtown
  • Big Transit Scenario• Expanded Local Bus Routes o 76 miles of new/extended routes o Expands service area to include:  Red Bank, East Ridge, Collegedale in Tennessee  Rossville, Fort Oglethorpe, Ringgold in North Georgia• Improved Frequency of Existing CARTA Routes• Free Circulator Shuttles o Builds on success of downtown electric shuttle o East-west downtown shuttle (Aquarium, Erlanger Hospital) o New Hamilton Place Mall area shuttle o Complementary Roadway Projects (85 miles)
  • Big Transit ScenarioKey Growth Drivers:• Premium transit service (bus rapid transit & light rail)• Station areas & existing centers• Existing water & sewer service area• General preference for infill development & redevelopment• Protect environmentally- sensitive areas & agriculture
  • Growth Characteristics• New: compact, higher-density growth attracted premium transit station areas (1-mile radius)• Significant number of local farms protected from new development• Maintain small town feel to outlying areas• Average household transportation costs reduced• More efficient development pattern reduces overall infrastructure cost
  • Comparison of Alternatives Bypasses and Measure of Effectiveness Big Transit Connectors 16,035,000 Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) 14,943,000 521,000 Vehicle Hours Traveled (VHT) 533,500 2,670 Delay (Hours) 3,060 3,573,00 Total Number of Trips 3,573,00 6,400 Transit Trips 12,000 28.7 Vehicle Miles Traveled / Capita 26.8 0.1%-0.3% Percent of trips by transit 0.5%-1.5%
  • Question # 9Overall, how attractive is the “Bypasses andConnectors” Investment Scenario? a. Very attractive b. Attractive c. Somewhat attractive d. Neutral e. Not very attractive at all
  • Question # 10Overall, how attractive is the “Big Transit” InvestmentScenario?a) Very attractiveb) Attractivec) Somewhat attractived) Neutrale) Not very attractive at all
  • Question # 11Which scenario best supports quality of life? a. Highways and Corridors b. Big Transit c. Combined approach d. Neither
  • Question # 12Where should transportation investments seek toencourage future growth? a) Existing corridors b) New corridors c) Existing centers d) New centers e) Outlying areas f) Grow anywhere we can
  • Lightening RoundCONSIDERING THE TRADEOFFS
  • Question # 13What will provide the biggest bang for the region’sbucks? a) Widen existing roads b) Build new roads c) Expand transit service d) Create more quality walking and biking choices
  • Question # 14What’s the most important regional transit corridor?a) Light Rail (Chattanooga Way) between downtown, airport, and Enterprise Southb) SR-153/US-27 BRT route between Hamilton Place, Airport, Northgate, and Soddy-Daisyc) Express bus on I-75/I-24 to the suburbs (Collegedale, Ringgold, Lookout Valley)d) Free Circulator Shuttles (Downtown East/West, Hamilton Place)
  • Question # 15Regarding transit…Rank the following from mostimportant to least important. a. Expand local bus service to areas not currently served (Red Bank, East Ridge, Collegedale, North Georgia) b. Frequency of service c. Length of weekday service d. Weekend service e. Low fare f. Type of transit vehicle
  • Question # 16Which intermodal facility should be the top priorityarea for coordination and collaboration? a. Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport passenger and/or freight improvements and expansion b. Chickamauga Dam and Locks Reconstruction c. Development of a freight intermodal (rail/truck/waterway) center/facility within Chattanooga d. Atlanta-Chattanooga High Speed Rail
  • Question # 17What do you believe best supports businessrecruitment and retention? a. Less congestion b. Increased choice (travel modes) c. Increased accessibility d. Attractive streets e. Complete streets
  • Question # 18It’s important to begin building a rapid transit networkin our region in the near future. a. Strongly agree b. Agree c. Neither d. Disagree e. Strongly disagree
  • Question # 19Priority transit investments in the region shouldinclude: a. Within community (Service within the cities and towns b. Community to region (Express bus from the small towns to the large employment centers) c. Region to region (Service connecting between the cities and towns)
  • Question # 20What would it take to make your community bicyclefriendly? a) Safe streets b) Greenways c) More signed routes d) Better intersection design e) All of the above
  • Question # 21What would help my daily commute most?a) Widen existing roadsb) Build new bypassesc) Add rapid transitd) Quality housing choices within close proximity to employment centers
  • Question # 22Considering that our financial resources are fixed; howwould you prioritize the following funding scenarios?a) Large/expensive transportation improvementsb) Smaller/less expensive local transportation improvementsc) System maintenance and operation enhancements (traffic control enhancements & use of technology) with remaining funds used for system expansion
  • Question # 23Considering that our financial resources are fixed; howwould you prioritize the following funding scenarios? a) Regional congestions solutions b) Project specifically intended to spur economic development c) Projects that improve the quality of life for local residents d) Other
  • Question # 24If you had control over the transportation budget, howwould you rank the following in importance? a) Neighborhood traffic safety & calming b) Sidewalk construction and repairs c) Bikeway construction on roads and greenways d) Widening and building roads e) Improving condition of roadways f) Improving traffic flow g) Public transportation h) Other
  • Question # 25If additional funding for transportation improvements isneeded, would you support any of the following sources? a) Higher gas tax b) Higher sales tax c) Higher property tax d) Toll roads e) Development impact fees f) Transportation bonds (borrowing) g) Other h) Do not support additional funding
  • Question # 26Which of the following is most important whenconsidering which projects to fund? a) Does the project open up new land for development b) Does the project reduce congestion c) Does the project result in travel time savings
  • Questions & CommentsCLOSING THOUGHTS AND REMARKS
  • Next Steps• Draft Needs Plan• Project Evaluation / Costing• Policy Board Review and Endorsement of Financial Constrained Project List• Public Review and Comments• Draft Final Plan