Nonmotorized Transportation Pilot Program Marin County

1. Nonmotorized Transportation Pilot ProgramMarin County Community Presentation March 12, 2007

2. Meeting Agenda • Welcome and Introductions • Summary of the NTPP Process • Work Stations • Suggestion Lists • Recommended Primary Network Projects • Recommended Local/Feeder Network Projects • Countywide Projects • Recommended Programs • Recommended Planning Projects • Check-in • Wrap-up and next steps

3. What is the Pilot Program? • Component of SAFETEA-LU, the six-year federal transportation bill (Section 1807) • $100 million allocated to four communities nationwide, one of which is Marin County, for bicycle and pedestrian improvements and programs. • Pilot Program runs through September, 2010, at which time a report on its outcomes is due to Congress.

4. Purpose of the Pilot • To demonstrate the extent to which bicycling and walking can carry a significant part of the transportation load and represent a major portion of the transportation solution within selected communities

5. Program Highlights • Marin receives $25 million from the program, along with Minneapolis, Minnesota; Columbia, Missouri; and Sheboygan County, Wisconsin. • The program targets ‘mode shift’, or whether bicycling and walking can account for more of the overall number of trips to work, school, or errands.

6. History of the Pilot Program • Began in 2000 building on successes of the initial federal Safe Routes to Schools (SRTS) pilot program and interest by Congressman Oberstar of Minnesota to improve nonmotorized travel in the United States. • White paper prepared by Marin advocates recommending both a national SRTS and Nonmotorized pilot program modeled on similar programs in Europe. • Advocacy by Marin County Board of Supervisors for both programs continues through 2001-02 and Congressman Oberstar introduces a bill specifically for SRTS and the Nonmotorized Pilot

7. Program History (cont’d) • In 2004, the Rails-to-Trails Conservancy endorses the inclusion of the Nonmotorized Pilot into the federal transportation bill, meaning a major national group with lobbying credentials would work to ensure the Program’s inclusion. • Congress approves SAFETEA-LU in July, 2005, including the Nonmotorized Pilot and SRTS. • Marin was selected because of its success with Safe Routes to Schools and our ability to make pilot programs work.

8. Travel to Work -- Mode Share by Local Jurisdiction in Marin County Percent of Daily Trips Source: US Census Bureau, Census 2000 Marin Travel Patterns

9. What it means locally • Focus on motor-vehicle trip reduction strategies rather than recreational opportunities • Given the list of suggested projects and programs, what are the most critical and what can be accomplished during the period of the program

10. Measuring Success • Travel habits survey conducted in Fall, 2006 and to be conducted again in Fall, 2010 in all four communities • Localized surveys for selected projects/ corridors in Marin before and after implementation

11. Project and Program Selection • Project and program suggestions identified through review of existing planning documents, meetings with local agency staff, and public input through community workshops – over $220 million in ideas. • This comprehensive list represents buildout of the network, a goal of the federal program • 19-member advisory committee appointed

12. Advisory Committee • Role is to assist the Department of Public Works with ranking of projects and programs • The Advisory Committee met six times and is comprised of: • Marin County Office of Education • Bicycle and Pedestrian Groups • City Manager • Public Works Directors • Planning Director • Business Representative • Environmental Representative • Accessibility Representative • Marin County Transit District • Health Representatives • Metropolitan Transportation Commission • Sonoma Marin Area Rail Transit • Caltrans • Transportation Authority of Marin • Federal Highway Administration

14. Screening and Categorization • Criteria adopted by advisory committee • Key filters are: • Meets objectives of legislation • Is sufficiently scoped to implement • Can be implemented in timely fashion • Has local support • Ideas sorted into one of six categories: • Primary Network Projects • Local/Feeder Network Projects • Countywide Projects • Planning Projects • Programs • Redirected to other funding programs

15. Funding Categories • Countywide – Typically smaller, dispersed projects in many neighborhoods and jurisdictions such as bike racks, striping/stenciling, and signage

16. Funding Categories • Primary Network – infrastructure improvements on the major north-south or east-west corridors

17. Funding Categories • Local/Feeder Network – infrastructure improvements connecting neighborhoods and community facilities with each other and the Primary Network

18. Funding Categories • Planning – Project ideas which, with additional study and planning, could be sufficiently scoped to be competitive for future funding opportunities.

19. Funding Categories • Programs – Educational and outreach programs to encourage bicycling and walking

20. Project/Program Ranking • Ranking criteria developed by advisory committee, such as: • Impact in achieving modal shift • Complements existing transportation network • Ability and timeliness of implementation • Cost-Benefit determination • Improves safety • Presents a unique opportunity • Ability to provide measurable results • Criteria vary between funding categories, as relevant and appropriate

21. Project/Program Ranking • Under each criterion, specific measures identified to evaluate a proposal’s merits • Advisory committee assigns weights to each criterion • Projects and programs are scored based on the criteria and then the weighting is applied to arrive at a numerical score. • Projects and programs are ordered in each funding category by numerical score – highest to lowest.

23. Funding Allocation • For the five funding categories, the advisory committee recommends a funding allocation to each category, or ‘slice’ of the funding pie • With the amount recommended for each category, projects are included for funding until the funds allocated to that category are exhausted, using the scored and ranked lists as prioritization tools. • Draft recommended projects and program lists adopted by advisory committee and presented tonight for public feedback

25. Next Steps • Final Advisory Committee meeting March 20 to discuss outcomes from today’s event and submit final project and program recommendations • County Department of Public Works reviews recommended projects and programs for consistency with Pilot objectives and verifies local agency support for implementation and maintenance • Develop leverage strategy to obtain other funds to implement projects and programs not selected for Pilot funds. • Board of Supervisors adopts final schedule of projects and programs to be funded on April 17

26. Next Steps (cont’d) • Project design and program development/ implementation begins Summer, 2007 • Countywide project category ideas solicited, prioritized, and implemented Summer-Fall of 2007 • Construction of major capital projects begins Summer, 2008 • Construction of infrastructure completed by the end of 2009 • Second travel habits survey conducted Fall, 2010 • Reports submitted to Congress Fall, 2010 and Spring, 2011.

27. Meeting Agenda • Welcome and Introductions • Summary of the NTPP Process • Work Stations • Suggestion Lists • Recommended Primary Network Projects • Recommended Local/Feeder Network Projects • Countywide Projects • Recommended Programs • Recommended Planning Projects • Check-in • Wrap-up and next steps

28. www.walkbikemarin.org