1 / 19

Active Transportation Program

Active Transportation Program. California Transportation Commission Mitch Weiss. Competitive program to:. Increase biking and walking trips Increase safety Increase mobility Support regional agencies GHG reduction Enhance public health Benefit disadvantaged communities (25%)

luka
Download Presentation

Active Transportation Program

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Active Transportation Program California Transportation Commission Mitch Weiss

  2. Competitive program to: • Increase biking and walking trips • Increase safety • Increase mobility • Support regional agencies GHG reduction • Enhance public health • Benefit disadvantaged communities (25%) • Include a broad spectrum of projects

  3. Program Consolidation • Transportation Alternatives • Recreational Trails (≈2/5) • Safe Routes to Schools • Bicycle Transportation Account • Environmental Enhancement & Mitigation Acct (3/10)

  4. Program Consolidation? 40% MPOs with large UZA • MPO run competition • SCAG 10% Small urban and rural • Transportation Alternative: • Small urban • Rural 50% Statewide • Safe Routes to Schools • Non-infrastructure projects • Technical Resource Center 25% disadvantaged communities Broad spectrum of projects Recreational trails

  5. Funding Distribution 40% MPOs with large UZA • SCAG 10% Small urban and rural • Transportation Alternative: • Small urban • Rural 50% Statewide • Safe Routes to Schools • Non-infrastructure projects • Technical Resource Center • Recreational trails Based on total population 25% disadvantaged communities Outside large MPOs 25% disadvantaged communities 25% disadvantaged communities

  6. SCAG Requirements • Consult with the county transportation commissions, CTC & Caltrans in the development of competitive selection criteria • Consideration of geographic equity • Priority on projects consistent with local & regional plans • Obtain concurrence from the county transportation commissions

  7. Guidelines by CTC Adopt within 6 months: • Consultation with workgroup • 2 public hearings • JLBC 45 days before adoption

  8. Program Timing • Public hearings – Jan. 22 & 29 • To JLBC - Feb. 3 • Adopt guidelines – March 20 • Initial program 2 years (2014-15 & 2015-16) • Subsequent programs 4 years • Adopt by April 1 of odd number years

  9. Program Timing • Call for projects - March 21 • Applications due - May 21 • Large MPOs submit optional guidelines to Commission - May 21 • Commission approves or rejects MPO guidelines - June 25 • Staff recommendations (statewide, rural & small urban) – Aug. 8 • CTC adoption (statewide and rural/small urban) – Aug. 20 • Projects not programmed to large MPOs – Aug. 20, • MPO project recommendations to CTC - Sept. 30 • Commission adopts MPO selected projects – Nov. 2014 Next program adopted by April 1, 2015

  10. Project Eligibility 1 of 2 • New bikeways & walkways that improve mobility, access or safety • Improvements to existing bikeways & walkways that improve mobility, access or safety • Elimination of hazardous conditions in existing bikeways and walkways • Maintenance of bikeways and walkways • Excluding routine maintenance • Traffic control devices to improve the safety of pedestrians and bicyclists • Secure bicycle parking at employment centers, park & ride lots, rail & transit stations, and ferry docks & landings • Bicycle-carrying facilities on public transit

  11. Project Eligibility 2 of 2 • Recreational trails and trailheads • Conversion of abandoned railroad corridors to trails • Park projects that facilitate trail linkages or connectivity to nonmotorized corridors • Safe Routes to Schools projects that improve the safety of children walking and bicycling to school • Safe routes to transit projects • Educational program to increase biking and walking, and other noninfrastructure investments that demonstrate effectiveness in increase active transportation • Pilot & start-up projects • Including ATP plans in disadvantaged communities

  12. Other Project Requirements 12% match except: • Disadvantaged communities • Non-infrastructure • Safe routes to schools $250,000 minimum project size except: • Non-infrastructure • Safe routes to schools • Recreational trails

  13. Project Screening Criteria • Demonstrated need of the applicant • No supplanting of state or local funds. • Allow supplanting of federal funds in the initial cycle. • Consistency with a RTP

  14. Project Selection Criteria 1 of 2 • Potential for encouraging increase walking & bicycling especially among students (0 to 30) • Potential for reducing pedestrian & bicycling injuries & fatalities (0 to 25) • Public participationand planning process that culminated in the project proposal (0 to 15) • Screening criteria for large projects in future cycles.

  15. Project Selection Criteria 3 of 3 • Cost effectiveness (0 to 10) • Compared with alternative considered • Benefit compared with total cost • Improved public health through the targeting of populations with high risk factors for obesity, physical inactivity, asthma or other health issues. (0 to 10) • Benefit to disadvantaged communities (0 to 10) • Use of Cal. Conservation Corps or community conservation corps (0 to -5) • Applicant’s performance on past grants (0 to -10) • Applications from agencies with poor performance records may be excluded from competing

  16. MPO Flexibility • Additional selection criteria • Weighting of criteria • Match • Minimum • Definition of disadvantaged communities • Recommending projects to advance if capacity

  17. Timely Use of Funds • 6 mo. to award • 3 years to spend • Inactive obligation requirements

  18. Reporting • Project types • Info on grants to disadvantaged communities • Geographic distribution • Planned and achieved improvements in mobility & safety • Benefit to disadvantaged communities • Timely use of funds

  19. Questions? Mitch Weiss California Transportation Commission 916-654-7179 mweiss@dot.ca.gov

More Related