Cartersville-Bartow County Metropolitan Planning Organization Long-Range Regional Transportation Plan Project Evaluation Process Joint Policy Committee & Transportation Coordinating Committee Meeting September 16, 2015
LRTP Development
LRTP Development Completed Goals & Objectives 2010 Socio-Economic Data Existing Conditions 2040 Socio-Economic Data Evaluation Methodology & Performance Measures Needs Assessment Project Evaluation Underway Draft Recommendations & Constrain Plan Upcoming 30-Day Public Comment Period - Jan 2016 LRTP Adoption - Feb 2016
Performance-Based Planning Evaluate Projects
Project-Level Evaluation Process E+C Collect Clean Up Evaluate Constrain Began with Existing + Committed network E+C evaluation Previous plans GDOT project database Local jurisdiction & MPO project nominations Overlaps Feasibility Completed Logical termini Utilized evaluation measures Projects grouped into tiers based on technical score Technical score/tier Cost Known support
Project-Level Evaluation Project evaluation measures link directly back to adopted goals and objectives Evaluated by project type: Roadway Capacity Roadway Operations, Maintenance & Safety Bicycle & Pedestrian Transit - no projects evaluated Projects placed into tiers based on overall score Technical evaluation was objective did not take into account constructability, political support/priorities or public support
Roadway Capacity Project-Level Evaluation GOAL/ OBJECTIVE G1A1 G1A2 G1C1 G1D1 G2B1 G2C1 G4A2 G4B1 G4C1 MEASURE Is the proposed project on or parallel to a facility with a poor LOS? Ratio of congested travel time to free flow travel time Is the proposed project on a NHS highway or a freight corridor identified in previous plans? Is the proposed project on a segment or an intersection with a high number of crashes, or are there a high number of injury and fatal crashes? Does the proposed project improve existing facilities between community resources? Does the proposed project come within 200 feet of national hydrography dataset, historic facilities/areas, or state parks. Population served by the proposed project Does the project connect to a state or national highway either directly or indirectly? Does the project match the goals and objectives of these plans? SCORING Difference in V/C ratio from 2040 no build. Top 33% - 3 points, 33-66% - 2 points, 0-33% - 1point Difference in VHD from 2040 no build. Top 33% - 3 points, 33-66% - 2 points Proposed project is on an NHS highway and freight corridor or potential freight corridor - 3 points, on the NHS or a freight corridor - 2 points, on neither - 1 point Proposed project is at or intersects high crash locations developed by Arcadis and CBMPO. Yes - 3 points, No - 1 point Project is within.5 mile of: city, Cartersville Medical Center, Avatron, LakePoint, Schools, Allatoona Resource Center, or North Bartow Community Services Center. >= 3-3 points, 2-2 points, <=1-1 point No potential impacts identified - 3 points, limited potential impacts (1) - 2 points, significant potential impacts (>=2) - 1 point. If the total population within 1 mile of the project in the top 1/3 rd - 3 points, middle 1/3 rd - 2 points, lowest 1/3 rd - 1 point. On a state or national highway - 3 points, 2 points for connecting with a state or national highway, 1 connection to facility that connects to it. Mostly - 3 points, somewhat - 2, points, not at all - 1 point.
Roadway Ops, Maint, Safety Project-Level Evaluation GOAL/ OBJECTIVE G1A1 G1A2 G1C1 G1D1 G2C1 G4A2 G4C1 MEASURE Is the proposed project on or parallel to a facility with a poor LOS? Ratio of congested travel time to free flow travel time Is the proposed project on a NHS highway or a freight corridor identified in previous plans? Is the proposed project on a segment or an intersection with a high number of crashes, or are there a high number of injury and fatal crashes? Does the proposed project come within 200 feet of national hydrography dataset, historic facilities/areas, or state parks. Population served by the proposed project Does the project match the goals and objectives of these plans? SCORING Proposed project is on or adjacent to a facility with (2040 No Build): LOS of F - 3 points, LOS E or D - 2 points, LOS C or better - 1 point. Is the ratio of congested to free flow travel time? >=3-3 points, between 2 and 3-2 points, 1 or less - 1 point Proposed project is on an NHS highway and freight corridor or potential freight corridor - 3 points, on the NHS or a freight corridor - 2 points, on neither - 1 point Proposed project is at or intersects high crash locations developed by Arcadis and CBMPO. Yes - 3 points, No - 1 point No potential impacts identified - 3 points, limited potential impacts (1) - 2 points, significant potential impacts (>=2) - 1 point. If the total population within 1 mile of the project in the top 1/3 rd - 3 points, middle 1/3 rd - 2 points, lowest 1/3 rd - 1 point. Mostly - 3 points, somewhat - 2, points, not at all - 1 point.
Bicycle & Pedestrian Project-Level Evaluation GOAL/ OBJECTIVE G1B1 G1D1 G2B1 G2C1 G4A2 G4C1 MEASURE Does the proposed project connect with any existing bike/ped trails or schools? Is the proposed project on a segment or an intersection with a high number of crashes, or are there a high number of injury and fatal crashes? Does the proposed project improve existing facilities between community resources? Does the proposed project come within 200 feet of national hydrography dataset, historic facilities/areas, or state parks. Population served by the proposed project Does the project match the goals and objectives of these plans? SCORING Does Bike/Ped project connect to current bike paths/trails, schools? >= 2-3 points, =1-2 points, =0-1 point Proposed project is at or intersects high crash locations developed by Arcadis and CBMPO. Yes - 3 points, No - 1 point Project is within. 5 mile of: city, Cartersville Medical Center, Avatron, LakePoint, Schools, Allatoona Resource Center, or North Bartow Community Services Center. >= 3-3 points, 2-2 points, <=1-1 point No potential impacts identified - 3 points, limited potential impacts (1) - 2 points, significant potential impacts (>=2) - 1 point. If the total population within 1 mile of the project in the top 1/3 rd - 3 points, middle 1/3 rd - 2 points, lowest 1/3 rd - 1 point. Mostly - 3 points, somewhat - 2, points, not at all - 1 point.
Constraining the LRTP ARCADIS developed preliminary draft recommendations based on: Objective technical evaluation Project costs Projected revenue Known support MPO staff then consulted with local jurisdictions and adjusted draft recommendations
Feedback & Questions