Obstacles memo 10-14-05

MEMO

DATE: January 19, 2006

TO: ACTIA Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee

FROM: Victoria Eisen, Consulting Project Manager, Countywide Strategic Pedestrian Plan

RE: PEDESTRIAN PLAN prioritization process

Background

The majority of pedestrian projects, plans and programs implemented throughout Alameda County are paid for with locally-generated and/or allocated funds. This includes sidewalk repairs, pedestrian signal heads, pedestrian master plans and programs that encourage walking. A portion of these pedestrian-related expenditures – primarily those of countywide significance – are eligible for Measure B, Regional Bicycle/Pedestrian Program funds, and other regional or countywide funding sources. Ultimately, Measure B and the Regional Bicycle/Pedestrian Program fund the subset of these projects, plans and programs of countywide significance that are considered to be high priority.

The subject of this memo is the process of determining both what constitutes a project of countywide significance and the approach for prioritizing such projects. This process is one of the primary ways in which ACTIA and ACCMA will implement the Pedestrian Plan’s vision and goals. In fact, funding is perhaps the principal means by which these agencies can directly influence the pedestrian environment.

This memo addresses capital pedestrian projects only. It is envisioned that pedestrian master plans, staff training and technical assistance will be funded with Measure B and other available funding sources. These activities, along with specific types of programs to encourage walking, will be discussed at a future meeting. At that time, we will also discuss how the pedestrian prioritization process relates to the bicycle project prioritization, as included in the upcoming update to the Alameda Countywide Bicycle Plan.

Each of the funding sources that would be affected by the guidelines discussed in this memo has its own guidelines, which we will use as starting points in the development of future ACTIA and ACCMA pedestrian funding guidelines. Measure B’s Expenditure Plan, MTC’s Resolution 3644 (which governs Regional Bicycle/Pedestrian Funding), and the (draft) vision statement (discussed in an earlier agenda item) are all good starting points in the development of prioritization approaches and are included below or in Attachment C1.

A logical starting point in the development of a new approach to allocating funds is the guiding documents of these fund sources:

· Measure B Expenditure Plan (Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety category) Adopted by Alameda County voters, this guidance focuses on safety, gap closures, and intermodal connections. The excerpt below pertains to 25 percent of the program, which is designated as “regional funds” or what we are now calling “countywide funds.” Although these guidelines were written to apply to bicycle and pedestrian projects, they are more focused on bicycles.

These funds are distributed to cities in the County and to Alameda County to be spent on planning and construction of bicycle and pedestrian projects. . . This category is intended to expand and enhance bicycle and pedestrian facilities in Alameda County, focusing on high priority projects like gap closures and intermodal connections.

A total of 25% of the funding will be reserved for regional planning and regional projects, including the preparation of local master plans, design support services to local agencies, funding for a Countywide Bicycle and Pedestrian Coordinator position, and funding for high priority regional capital projects identified in the Countywide Bicycle Plan. High priority will be given to East Bay Regional Park District projects included in the Countywide Bicycle Plan. Priority will also be given to projects which significantly leverage other outside funding sources.

Furthermore, existing Measure B bicycle/pedestrian grant program guidelines state:

All projects must have countywide significance to be eligible for funding . . . (Pedestrian projects of) countywide significance (are projects that) either serve facilities or activity centers which attract users from more than one specific area or jurisdiction (such as transit stops/stations, colleges, regional parks, etc.) or (can be) a demonstration or pilot project that could be applicable to other agencies/ jurisdictions.

· MTC’s Regional Bicycle and Pedestrian Program (Full text found in Attachment C1)

Pedestrian project activities eligible for this funding program include:

Regionally significant pedestrian projects which are defined as projects that “provide access to and within regional activity centers, regional or lifeline transit service, or which meet Safe Routes to School criteria.” Regional activity centers include: universities, hospitals, major commercial districts, major employment centers, central business districts, and major public venues. Regional transit is transit serving a regional activity center and is typically a “trunkline” service. Lifeline transit serves low-income, transit-dependent communities. In all cases, projects must serve utilitarian trip purposes (i.e., reduce vehicle trips).

· Draft vision statement (discussed in an earlier agenda item):

Communities within Alameda County will inspire people to walk for everyday trips, recreation and health while promoting development patterns, connections to transit, and interconnected pedestrian networks that offer safe, attractive, and widely accessible walking routes and districts.

Pedestrian Project Prioritization Process

The steps below – discussed in more detail later in this memo – will be taken to develop a pedestrian project prioritization process in the context of the Countywide Pedestrian Plan. Steps #1-3 will be discussed at your January 26 meeting. Steps #4-5 will be discussed at your next meeting, in March.

· Step 1: Define “Areas of Countywide Significance”

This step involves both the definition of what countywide significance means for pedestrian projects and the identification of the specific places that meet this definition.

· Step 2: Refine Areas of Countywide Significance

Once we have defined what constitutes a geographic area of countywide significance, we need to refine that definition in order to identify and map these locations. For instance, if our final definition includes “transit trunklines,” then we need to develop guidance for what constitutes a trunkline as well as the distance a potential project must be from the trunkline to be eligible.

· Step 3: Determine Criteria Categories on which to Prioritize All Eligible Projects within Refined Areas of Countywide Significance

Even within a specific and limited list of geographic areas, there will be many more pedestrian projects than there are funds to provide them. Therefore, this step entails defining “scoring criteria” categories which will be used to prioritize projects based on performance measures.

· Step 4: Develop Screening Criteria to Define Basic Eligibility for Funds

Within the areas defined as being of countywide significance, we will need to identify exactly what sorts of projects will be eligible for Measure B and other countywide pedestrian funding. Such “screening criteria” would include the definition of countywide significance, project readiness, and other basic eligibility criteria, and will be discussed in more detail at the BPAC’s March 9 meeting.

· Step 5: Fully Develop Project Screening and Scoring Criteria

Finally, we will fully develop the screening and scoring criteria for the categories developed in steps # 3 and #4. These screening and scoring criteria will be used for the next bicycle/pedestrian funding cycle in 2006. Recommendations will be discussed at your March 9 meeting.

Defining Areas of Countywide Significance (Steps #1-2)

Unlike bicycle projects, pedestrian projects do not lend themselves to creating a countywide or regional network. Apart from countywide trail systems, pedestrian facilities are more nodal in nature. Therefore, regardless of the prioritization approach selected, a definition of projects of countywide significance is needed. For the purposes of this prioritization process, staff recommends defining countywide significance as, “places that serve people traveling to/from a variety of locations throughout Alameda County and beyond.” Below is a list of the proposed types of locations that follow from this definition, divided into three categories: transit, attractors and trails. At the January 26 meeting, we will discuss this definition and these areas and will ask for suggestions to further limit and refine this list.

Proposed Areas of “Countywide Significance”

You will note that this list does not include all commercial districts or primary and secondary schools. Safe walk access to schools throughout Alameda County is critical to the safety of schoolchildren and others and will be an important component of the Countywide Pedestrian Plan. It is envisioned that Measure B will address this issue primarily through programs, which will be discussed at your March meeting.

Project Prioritization Criteria Categories (Step #3)

Once we have defined where countywide projects are located, we must develop criteria with which to prioritize these projects. These will become the scoring criteria for the funding programs. The first step of this process is to develop a list of possible categories of criteria, which we will do at your January 26 meeting. Such criteria categories could include:

1. Demand

· Increase the number of people walking

· Serve existing vs. new pedestrians (priority, if any, to be discussed at March BPAC meeting)

· Function primarily as recreational vs. utilitarian routes (priority, if any, to be discussed at March meeting)

2. Social Equity

· Serve economically disadvantaged households

3. Safety

· Improve safety and/or security

4. At Risk Populations

· Serve senior citizens, the disabled and schoolchildren

5. Gap Closure

· Close gaps in inter-jurisdictional pedestrian facilities

6. Multi-modal Benefit

· Benefit bicyclists as well as pedestrians

7. Access to Transit

· Improve access to transit stops and stations

8. Access to Regional Activity Centers

· Improve access to regional activity centers;

9. Access to Regional Trails

· Improve access to regional trail systems

10. Outside Funding

· Have outside funding and/or secured operating and maintenance funding.

Screening Criteria (Step #4)

After developing the scoring criteria categories that will govern the prioritization of potential pedestrian projects, we will develop screening criteria to define what projects are eligible for countywide pedestrian funds. At a minimum, consistency with the final definition of what constitutes a project of countywide significance will be required for a project to be considered. As stated above, screening criteria will be discussed in more detail at the BPAC’s March 9 meeting.

Fully Develop Project Screening and Scoring Criteria (Step #5)

With the project scoring criteria categories developed in Step #3, we will develop the thresholds, measurements, and other quantitative evaluation tools of the scoring criteria needed to rank projects competing for funding. In addition, we will finalize the eligibility screening criteria developed in Step #4. This step will also be discussed at the March 9 BPAC meeting.

BPAC Input

At your January 26 meeting, we would like your feedback on Steps #1-3. This includes the proposed definition and corresponding list of areas of countywide significance and the ten proposed project prioritization criteria categories.

Next Steps

Rochelle will accept written comments on the definition of areas of countywide significance and proposed project selection criteria categories suggested in this memo through Friday, January 27, 2006. The highlights of your January 26 conversation, plus any written comments, will be forwarded to the Pedestrian Plan Working Group for discussion at their February 22 meeting. For your March 9 meeting, we will bring a final proposed definition of areas of countywide significance and final proposed project selection criteria categories, including the relative weight of each, based on these discussions. Finally, a corresponding approach to evaluate pedestrian plans and programs will also be presented on March 9.