Public Transportation
and
Bicycle & Pedestrian
Stakeholder Webinar
January 8, 2014
Agenda
•
•
•
•
•
•
Modal Needs
Baseline Revenue
Modal Scenarios
Website
Public Transportation Plans
Bicycle and Pedestrian
Jeff Carroll
MULTIMODAL TRANSPORTATION
NEEDS
2030 MTP vs. 2040 MTP
Technical Changes
FHWA has developed analytical tools to identify future needs
2030 MTP
•
Databases
2040 MTP
•
 2011 HPMS
 2011 NBI
 Transearch
 None
•
Analysis Tools
 Maintenance Assessment Tool
•
Agency Coordination
•
Modes




Highway
Bridges
Mass Transit
Premium Transit / Passenger Rail
Analysis Tools
 HERS-ST (Highways)
 NBIAS (Bridges)
 Yes
•
Databases
•
Agency Coordination
 Yes
•
Modes





Highway
Bridges
Mass Transit
Premium Transit / Passenger Rail
Freight Rail, Ports, Aviation, Bike/Ped
Assumptions and
Engineering Analysis
• HERS-ST – Roadways
 Highway Performance Monitoring System
 SCDOT staff input and review
• NBIAS - Bridges
 National Bridge Inventory
 SCDOT staff input and review
• Non-highway Modes
 Plans, reports, and studies
 SCDOT and agency staff input and review
• Planning horizon
 2030 to 2033 linear growth estimate
 Seven additional years (2033 to 2040)
Modal Needs
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Highways
New Database driven tools in 2040 MTP
Bridges
Mass Transit
Premium Transit / Passenger Rail
Rail Freight
Ports
New in 2040 MTP
Aviation
Bicycle and Pedestrian
QUESTIONS
Amanda Spencer
BASELINE REVENUE PROJECTIONS
Purpose
• Provides an estimate of revenues
expected to be available for capital
improvements to 2040
• Identifies the funding gap between
revenues and modal needs
Methodology
• Projection of baseline revenues by
mode
– No new revenues
– Business as usual – conservative estimate
• Based on current year revenues and
short-term budgeted revenues, grown
annually at assumed rates
• Converted to “real” dollars to account
for inflation
Baseline Revenue Forecast
Results
Total Available
2011-2040:
$27.04 Billion
(in 2011 Dollars)
SIB
$2.04
8%
State
Transit
$0.04
0.1%
Federal
Transit
$1.01
4%
SPLOST
$4.24
16%
C-Fund
$0.85
3%
State
Highway
$5.53
20%
Federal
Highway
$13.33
49%
Total Available Revenue
$1,800,000,000
$1,600,000,000
$1,400,000,000
$1,200,000,000
$1,000,000,000
$800,000,000
$600,000,000
$400,000,000
$200,000,000
$0
2011
2016
2021
Total Available Revenue (Nominal Dollars)
2026
2031
2036
Total Available Revenue (Real Dollars)
QUESTIONS
Don Vary
Developing and Evaluating Modal
Scenarios – Status Update
Modal Scenarios
• Develop different allocations of longrange plan transportation revenue
– Revenue levels, investment types
• Evaluate according to quantitative and
qualitative criteria
• Develop implementation strategies
Inputs
• Uses plan outputs
–
–
–
–
Vision, goals, objectives
Plan performance measures
Needs, gap
Baseline revenue forecast
• …And creates new inputs
– Allocate fixed revenue levels into investment
categories
– Measures of effectiveness
SCMTP Scenarios
• About $14.3B of $27.04B in available revenues is dedicated
to current programs
• Remainder ($12.7B) treated as discretionary
Total Needs by Category ($billions)
Program Dedications by Category ($billions)
$30.00
$30.00
$25.00
$25.00
$20.00
$20.00
Preservation/
Modernization
Capacity
$15.00
Preservation/
Modernization
$15.00
Capacity
$10.00
$10.00
$5.00
$5.00
$0.00
$0.00
Interstate
Other
Federal-aid
Local
Passenger
rail/bus
Freight
Interstate
Other
Federal-aid
Local
Passenger
rail/bus
Freight
SCMTP Scenario
Themes
1. Keep the Highway Core (Baseline) – emphasis on
primary (core) system
– Well maintained, congestion addressed, high access to
key areas and within cities
2. Multi-modal Core System
– Maintain and expand highway, transit, rail and nonmotorized system linking cities and towns
SCMTP Scenario
Themes
3. Serve the Drivers – investments to spur business
attraction and retention
–
Ports, distribution facilities, airports, leisure destinations
4. Right Size System
–
What size system will future revenue support?
Scenarios – Themes
Baseline Keep the
Core
Mobility &
System
Reliability
Safety
Infrastructure
Condition
Economic &
Community
Vitality
Environmental
Equity
Serve the
Drivers
Multimodal
Core System
Right Size
System
Scenario Fulfillment of Full
Capacity Needs
Baseline Multimodal Drivers Right-Size
Interstate
Low+
Other
Federal-aid Moderate+
Low
Moderate
Local
Passenger
Rail/Bus
Low
Low
Low
Moderate
Freight Rail
Low
Low
Low
Low+
Moderate Moderate+
Low
LowModerate
LowModerate
Low
Low
Low
Scenario Fulfillment of Full
Modernization and
Preservation Needs
Baseline Multimodal Drivers Right-Size
Interstate
Other
Federal-aid
Moderate+
LowModerate+
Moderate+ Moderate Moderate
LowLowLowModerate+ Moderate Moderate
Local
Passenger
Rail/Bus
High
LowModerate
High
High
High
LowLowLowModerate+ Moderate+ Moderate
Freight Rail
Low
Low+
Low+
Low
Scenario Next Steps
• Analyze scenario performance according to goal
areas
• Summarize trade-offs and policy implementation
implications
Measures of
Effectiveness
• Estimated pavement and bridge condition
• Estimated travel time and vehicle operating
costs
• User costs
• Goal needs met based on funding
QUESTIONS
Karen Hadley
WEBSITE
Live Website
Corinne Donahue
PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION
Big Picture
• “Blueprint for the Future”
• Develop statewide short & long –
range plans
• Updating Regional transit &
coordination plans
• Multimodal options/partnerships
Public Transportation Overview
Transit Tasks
Update 10 Regional
Transit Plans
Update Statewide
Public Transportation
Plan, including Human
Services Transportation
Coordination
Prepare Transit Section
of the SC MTP
What have we
completed?
• Draft Regional Transit & Coordination
Plans
– 10 Regions
• Draft Statewide Public Transportation
& Coordination Plan
– Going through internal review now
Regional Transit &
Coordination Plans
• Existing Transit Service w/in the
region
• Demographic Profile
• Updated Coordination Data
• Future Transit Needs/Demand
• Constrained Financial Plan
Regional Transit &
Coordination Report
• Data Resources:
– Transit provider data supplied to SCDOT annually
for the OpStats report
– Previous Regional Transit Plans
– Transit provider Needs Survey, Dec. 2012
– SCDOT Transit Trends Report, FY2007-2011
– Locally adopted plans
• Existing transit ridership
– Statewide Public Transit FY2011
• 11.5M one-way trips
• 416,000 Medicaid trips
• 7,400 Alternate Programs (vanpool, etc.)
Ridership by Region
SC Statewide
Ridership by Region
5,000,000
4,500,000
4,000,000
3,500,000
3,000,000
2,500,000
2,000,000
1,500,000
1,000,000
500,000
Appalachian
BCD
Catawba
Central
Midlands
Low Country
Lower
Savannah
Pee Dee
Santee
Upper
Savannah
Waccamaw
2009
3,290,559
4,197,333
124,270
2,199,264
188,449
113,865
184,734
280,647
33,133
571,356
2010
3,304,784
4,396,686
87,883
2,023,820
151,264
100,996
186,636
232,742
34,398
652,303
2011
3,355,458
4,453,788
79,807
1,905,909
151,056
114,824
261,136
252,954
28,848
847,172
SC Statewide
Ridership Trends
SC Statewide - Public Transportation Ridership
14,000,000
12,000,000
10,000,000
8,000,000
6,000,000
4,000,000
2,000,000
0
2009
2010
Public Transportation
2011
Statewide - Updated Human
Services Coordination Plan
Information
• Data resources
– Review of 2008 Human Services
Coordination Plans
– COG outreach/survey – Winter 2013
– Variety of responses
• State of Coordination
• Coordination Barriers/Needs
• Strategies/Actions
Overall Coordination
Summary
• Since previous 2008 plan:
– Some regions, forging ahead
• Taking advantage of mobility manager
options
• Coordination trip sharing and transfers at
informal locations
• Continuation of coordination meetings
– Some regions, little change
– Some regions highly affected by statewide
Medicaid brokerage system
Coordination Needs
Summary
• Transportation to/from rural areas –
– limited service
• hours, service area, days, etc.
•
•
•
•
Access to/from jobs
Regional fare structure
Increasing needs for elderly population
Need human service providers to be interested in
coordination
• Understanding of all funds to assist in paying for
coordinated trips
• Support from local community/elected officials for
public transit and for human services transportation
Coordination
Strategies Summary
• Utilize Mobility Managers
• Develop trip cost sharing
• Continue coordination meetings w/ all transit
providers
• Continue Medicaid coordination
• Pursue & coordinate technology
implementation to ensure maximum
efficiencies in trip planning and scheduling
• Continue to pursue sustainable local funding
• Look beyond regional boundaries for trip
coordination
Vision & Goals
• Comprehensive Vision/Goals/Measures for
Public Transportation
– State, region
– SCDOT Strategic Plan
• Significance
– Focus at Federal level on performance levels
– Examples:
• Category: Mobility/System Reliability:
– Percent of transit needs met
• Category: Infrastructure Condition:
– Percent of active duty vehicles past designated useful life
Transit Needs
• Data Resources:
– Transit provider Needs Survey, Dec. 2012
– Previous Regional Transit Plans
– Locally adopted plans
• Needs Defined:
– Operating Costs
– Capital Costs
• Scenarios
– Maintain Existing Services
– Enhanced Services
Transit Demand
• 2 Methodologies used to measure demand in
2008 Plan
– Arkansas Public Transportation Needs Assessment
Method (APTNA)
– Mobility Gap Method
• Methodologies based upon:
– Demographic data
– Trip rates
• 2008 Plan Adjusted Demand, based upon local
feed back from regions
– 2010, 2020, 2030, 2040
• Demand compared to existing transit ridership
Transit Demand –
Regional Summary
Public Transit Demand
Public Transportation Outreach
• Kick-off Meeting – June 2012
• SC Interagency Transportation Coordination
Council Meeting – September 2012
• Transit Agency outreach – December 2012 via
email
• SC Councils of Government Transit Planner
Workshop – February 2013
• SC Council of Government Transit Planner Human
Services Outreach – Feb 2013
• Public Transportation Opinion Survey – Survey
Monkey – Mar 2013
• Draft Regional Transit & Coordination Plans –
Reviewed by SCDOT/COGs – Fall 2013
Next Steps
• SCDOT Consolidating State and COG
Comments for Regional Transit &
Coordination Plans
• Draft Statewide Public Transportation
& Coordination Plan
– SCDOT Review
– Local Stakeholders Review
Corinne Donahue
QUESTIONS & ANSWERS
Jack Cebe
BICYCLE & PEDESTRIAN
Bicycle and Pedestrian
Review
Outline:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Legislature Best Practices
Policy Review
Design Review
Funding Best Practices
Program Best Practices
Bike/Ped GIS Database
Bicycle and Pedestrian
Review
SC Policy and Design Documents Reviewed:
–
SC Transportation Commission Resolution (SC Complete
Streets Resolution) (2003)
–
SC Highway Design Manual (2003)
–
SC Highway Design Manual Draft Chapter 11 Special Design
Elements: Bicycle Accommodations (2013)
–
SCDOT Access & Roadside Management Standards (ARMS,
2008)
–
SCDOT Engineering Directive Memorandum 22 and 53:
Considerations for Bicycle Facilities and Installation of
Longitudinal Rumble Strips
–
SCDOT Traffic Engineering Guideline TG 8, TG 24 and TG 26
–
SCDOT Traffic Calming Guidelines (2006)
–
SCDOT Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Transition Plan
(2009)
–
Signal Design Guidelines (2009)
–
SCDOT Standard Drawings
–
SCDOT Road Map to Safety (2007)
Bicycle and Pedestrian
Review
Reston, VA – Lawyers Road Before
National Best Practice Sources:
– Many Peer States Including: Wisconsin, Virginia,
Georgia and North Carolina
– National Pedestrian Facility Design Resources
(FHWA, AASHTO, US Access Board)
After Road Diet
– National Bicycle Facility Design Resources (FHWA,
AASHTO, NACTO)
– National Complete Streets, Context Sensitive
Solutions, and Smart Growth Resources (NCHRP,
ITE, Smart Growth America)
Bicycle and Pedestrian
Review
Legislature Best Practices Highlights
– Statewide texting while driving ban
– Vehicles yield/stop for pedestrians in crosswalk
law
– Legislative clarification on expected movements
at pedestrian crossings with or without signals
– 3’ or 4’ safe passing distance law
– Brake on bicycle law performance requirements
– Lamps on bicycles law
– Two-stage left-hand turn for bicyclists
– Bicyclists take the lane law
Bicycle and Pedestrian
Review
Design/Policy Review Positives
–
Recently improved bicycle and pedestrian
guidance
–
Support for bicycle and pedestrian considerations
in project planning and development
–
Support for bicycle and pedestrian considerations
in several different manuals and guidelines
–
Department supported traffic calming guidelines
–
Support for Bicycle and Pedestrian safety and
education improvements in the 2007 Road Map
to Safety
Bicycle and Pedestrian
Review
Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon – Columbia, SC
Review of SCDOT Design Elements that Affect
Bicyclists and Pedestrians Included:
• Walkways
• Un-signalized Crossings
• Crossing Beacons for use at midblock or
unsignalized crosswalks
• Signalized Intersections
• General Roadway Design
• Access Management
• Transit Stop Considerations
• Traffic Calming
• Other
Bicycle and Pedestrian
Review
Design/Policy Review Highlights:
(excerpt from Comprehensive Design Review Table)
FHWA MUTCD
(2009)
AASHTO
Guide for the
Planning,
Design, and
Operation of
Pedestrian
Facilities
(2004)
ITE Designing
Walkable
Urban
Thoroughfares:
A Context
Sensitive
Approach
(2010)
SCDOT
Traffic
Calming
Guidelines
Pedestrian Focused
Treatments
Walkways
Buffered sidewalks
Pedestrian Scale
Lighting
n/a
Included
Included
Included
n/a
Included
Included
n/a
Street trees
n/a
Included
Included
n/a
ADA Curb Ramps
Shoulders for
Pedestrian Travel
Approved
Included
Included
Included
Approved
Included
n/a
n/a
Multi-Use Paths
Approved
Included
n/a
n/a
"Sidepaths"
Compliant
Included
n/a
n/a
Bicycle and Pedestrian
Review
Design/Policy Review Highlights
–
Integrate bicycle and pedestrian considerations throughout roadway policy and
design guidance
–
Provide additional contextual sensitivity (urban vs. rural)
–
Ensure policies and guidelines are concurrent with nationally accepted best
practices and guidelines (ie. AASHTO, NACTO, ITE)
–
Add additional guidance and/or increase guidance flexibility:
•
shoulders and rumble strips
•
flexibility in travel lane width
•
facility types and selection guidelines
•
ADA guidelines
•
context sensitivity
•
signalization
•
access management
•
project prioritization
•
typical sections
•
maintenance minimum standards
•
traffic calming guidelines
Bicycle and Pedestrian
Review
SC Funding Review Positives
– Since 1992, over half of TE funds have been spent on pedestrian
and bicycle improvement projects.
– $14 million dollars has been spent on sidewalk improvements
through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA)
funds since 2009.
– Around $6 million was spent on sidewalk improvements in 2011
through TE.
Bicycle and Pedestrian
Review
National Funding Best Practices
–
–
–
–
–
–
A dedicated funding source for bicycle and pedestrian improvements can be based on
percent transportation mode share, publicly expressed need and jurisdiction expressed
need.
Several states supplement bicycle and pedestrian program funds with Surface
Transportation Program (STP) funds as necessary to meet funding requirements of the
State bicycle and pedestrian funding goals.
Most states make 100 percent of Transportation Alternative Program (TAP) (MAP-21)
funds available for eligible activities. These funds should not be redirected to other
programs.
Assign Highway Safety Improvement Program funding proportionately to the
percentage of fatal and serious pedestrian and bicycle crashes.
Some States “Flex” other non-federal funding sources, or develop funding assistance
programs, to assure that low income communities who are unable to achieve the
required 20 percent match for TAP funds are able to access these funds.
Seek innovative funding opportunities such as: public-private partnerships, regional
projects, and multi-agency and multi-objective collaboration.
Bicycle and Pedestrian
Review
National Program Best Practices from Peer States
Education Examples
-
Inter and Intra-departmental Workshops and Webinars
-
Bicycle Law Enforcement Education for Police
-
Complete Streets Workshops
Encouragement Examples
-
Pedestrian and Bicycle Commuter Incentive Programs
-
Safe Routes to School Program
-
National Bike Month and Walk and Bike to School Day Support/Participation
Enforcement Examples
-
Pedestrian and Bicycle Law Manuals and Guidebooks
-
School Crossing Guard Training Manual
-
Safety Messaging and Enforcement Programs
Bike/Ped GIS Database
• Status of Database data collected
– 28 counties / 10 COGs collected
– Over 1500 miles of State Touring Routes
Existing Bikeways on State and
Local Roads by COG
SCDOT
Road
Local Road
Appalachian
207 mi
39 mi
Berkeley-Dorchester-Charleston
144 mi
33 mi
Catawba
292 mi
11 mi
Central Midlands
35 mi
4 mi
Low Country
181 mi
19 mi
Lower Savannah
42 mi
2 mi
Pee Dee
151 mi
6 mi
Santee-Lynches
6 mi
0 mi
Waccamaw
75 mi
18 mi
Grand Total
1133 mi
132 mi
Proposed Bikeways on State and
Local Roads by COG
SCDOT Road Local Road
Appalachian
3077 mi
430 mi
Berkeley-Dorchester-Charleston
16 mi
0 mi
Catawba
514 mi
35 mi
Central Midlands
835 mi
70 mi
Low Country
99 mi
2 mi
Lower Savannah
1520 mi
24 mi
Pee Dee
110 mi
6 mi
Santee-Lynches
161 mi
1 mi
Upper Savannah
11 mi
0 mi
Waccamaw
411 mi
184 mi
Grand Total
6754 mi
752 mi
Bike/Ped GIS Database
QUESTIONS & ANSWERS
Mark Pleasant, SCDOT
PleasantMD@dot.state.sc.us
803-737-1437
Jeff Carroll, CDM Smith
carrollja@cdmsmith.com
803-251-2189
Project Website:
http://www.scdot.org/Multimodal/default.aspx