The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My Public Portal About2019-06-19 packet Individuals should contact the ADA Coordinator at (573) 634-6570 to request accommodations or alternative formats as required under the Americans with Disabilities Act. Please allow three business days to process the request. Please call (573) 634-6410 with questions regarding agenda items. Board of Directors Wednesday, June 19, 2019 at 12:00 p.m. Meeting Location: Boone/Bancroft Room # 200, John G. Christy Municipal Building 320 E. McCarty, Jefferson City, MO 65101 - Enter through Main Lobby Tentative Agenda 1. Call to order, roll call, and determination of a quorum 2. Public comment 3. Adoption of the agenda as printed or amended 4. Approval of the minutes from the meeting of May 15, 2019 5. Communication Received 6. Presentation – Jefferson City Comprehensive Plan Update 7. Old Business A. CAMPO 2045 & Beyond MTP (Metropolitan Transportation Plan) Action Requested: Discussion, close of public comment period, approval. Staff Report: A draft of the CAMPO 2045 & Beyond MTP is available on the project website (https://www.campo2045.com) for review and comment. Staff is seeking the closure of a 25 day public comment period and approval by the Board of Directors. B. 2020-2024 TIP (Transportation Improvement Program) Action Requested: Discussion, close of public comment period, approval. Staff Report: CAMPO staff has completed the annual update of the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) and the draft is available for review at www.jeffersoncitymo.gov/campo. Staff is seeking the closure of a 25 day public comment period and approval by the Board of Directors. 8. Other Business A. Status of current work tasks B. MoDOT/Planning partner prioritization exercise 9. Next Meeting Date – Wednesday, July 17, 2019 at 12:00 p.m. in the Boone/Bancroft Room #200 10. Adjournment NOTES Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization Room 120 320 E. McCarty, Jefferson City, MO 65101 Phone 573.634.6410 Fax 573.634.64 57 MINUTES Board of Directors CAPITAL AREA METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION May 15, 2019 12:00 p.m. BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT Larry Benz, P.E., Cole County Jeff Hoelscher, Vice Chairman, Cole County Ron Fitzwater, Chairman, Jefferson City Jon Hensley, Jefferson City David Kemna, Jefferson City Sonny Sanders, Jefferson City Doug Reece, St. Martins, Small Cities Representative Rick Mihalevich, Jefferson City Mark Tate, Holt Summit (for Hannah Lechner *Arrived Late BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT Hannah Lechner, Holts Summit Matt Morasch, Jefferson City David Silvester, MoDOT Mark Mehmert, Jefferson City Roger Fisher, Callaway County EX-OFFICIO MEMBERS PRESENT (Non-Voting) Michael Henderson, MoDOT Marty Wilson, Callaway County Economic Development Representative EX-OFFICIO MEMBERS ABSENT (Non-Voting) Randy Allen, Jefferson City Chamber of Commerce Jeremiah Shuler, FTA Brad McMahon, FHWA Cathy Brown CAMPO STAFF PRESENT (Non-Voting) Eric Barron, Planning Manager Alex Rotenberry, Transportation Planner Katrina Williams, Transportation Planner Beth Sweeten, Administrative Assistant 1. Call to order, roll call, and determination of a quorum. Chairman Fitzwater called the meeting to order at 12:00 p.m. Ms. Sweeten took roll call. A quorum was present with 10 of 13 members present. 2. Public Comment No comments were received. 3. Adoption of the agenda as printed or amended Mr. Benz moved and Mr. Kemna seconded to adopt the agenda as printed. The motion passed unanimously. 4. Approval of the minutes from the meeting of February 20, 2019 Mr. Benz moved and Mr. Reece seconded to approve the minutes from the Regular Meeting of April 17, 2019 as printed. The motion passed unanimously. Minutes/Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization Board of Directors May 15 , 2019 Page 2 5. Communications Received None 6. Old Business A. 2045 Metropolitan Transportation Plan Development Ms. Williams stated that CAMPO continues the update of the CAMPO 2045 & Beyond Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP). A draft of the MTP is included was included and can be found on the project website at www.campo2045.com. She explained that two public meetings have been held (October 2018 and March 2019) as part of the MTP update process . Mr. Kinzel, our consultant with HDR, gave a brief presentation. Ms. Williams stated that staff now ready to make the CAMPO 2045 & Beyond MTP, open to public coments. Mr. Benz made a motion to open a 25 day public comment period for the draft CAMPO 2045 & Beyond MTP. Mr. Reece seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. B. 2020 Unified Planning Work Program UPWP Ms. Williams explained that staff has completed and the Technical Committee has forwarded the UPWP to the Board of Directors. The UPWP serves two functions: 1) the budget for CAMPO; and 2) determines work products and tasks to be completed between Novembe r 1, 2019 and October 31, 2020. Please refer to staff report and draft copy of the 2020 Unified Planning Work Program. Staff is seeking approval by the Board of Directors of the Fiscal Year 2020 UPWP . Mr. Benz made a motion to close the public comment period and approve the FY2020 UPWP. Mr. Kemna seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. 7. New Business A. 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) Draft Mr. Rotenberry stated that CAMPO staff has completed the annual update of the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) and the draft is available for review. In preparing the TIP, CAMPO staff contacted member jurisdictions for budget information, to review existing projects in the TIP, and ask for projects for inclusion into the new TIP. After short discussion, a motion was made by Mr. Kemna to open a 25 day public comment period for the draft 2020-2024 TIP. Mr. Hensley seconded the motion and all were in favor. The motion passed unanimously. 8. Other Business A. Status of current work tasks  2045 MTP update – staff has completed a draft plan.  2020-2024 TIP Update – presentation was given  JEFFTRAN new route- staff completed the update of JEFFTRAN route guides..  Taos Sewer Map – CAMPO staff working with the Village of Taos in Summer 2019 to update their sewer map.  FY2020 UPWP – presentation was given Mr. Rotenberry was presented a certificate of achievement for his many years of dedication to CAMPO. The committee wishes him well on his new career. 9. Next Meeting Date – Wednesday, June 19, 2019 p.m. in the Boone/Bancroft Room #200 10. Adjournment Mr. Mihalevich moved and Mr. Benz seconded to adjourn the meeting at 12:48 p.m. The motion passed unanimously. Respectfully Submitted, Beth Sweeten, Administrative Assistant Individuals should contact the ADA Coordinator at (573) 634-6570 to request accommodations or alternative formats as required under the Americans with Disabilities Act. Please allow three business days to process the request. CAMPO Technical Committee Staff Report CAMPO 2045 & Beyond Metropolitan Transportation Plan June 19, 2019 Summary A Draft of the CAMPO 2045 & Beyond Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) has been reviewed and approved by the CAMPO Technical Committee. The Technical Committee has recommended approval by the Board of Directors. The CAMPO Board of Directors opened a 25-day public comment period for the draft MTP on May 15, 2019. No general public comments were received. Comments were received from FHWA, FTA, and MoDOT and were addressed. The plan is available at http://www.jeffersoncitymo.gov/campo. The CAMPO 2045 & Beyond MTP, updated every five years, is the Long Range Transportation Plan for the CAMPO. Looking to a 2045 planning horizon, the MTP anticipates transportation trends and needs throughout the CAMPO Region and includes goals and strategies to meet those needs. The MTP contains tools and resources to assist CAMPO and member jurisdictions with implementation of the plan, including a schedule for addressing strategies and actions and provides staff with guidance in the development of an annual work program. The 2045 MTP addresses topics and processes that were not included in previous iterations, including; Scenario Planning, performance measures and targets, a refined illustrative list, updated funding resources and projections, and a more concise plan for implementation. Recently adopted plans, such as the Coordinated Public Transit-Human Services Transportation Plan and the Capital Area Pedestrian and Bicycle Plan, have been incorporated into the MTP. The plan also includes an updated travel-demand model which will provide the foundation for the development of a new Major Thoroughfare Plan. Public Outreach and Comments Three public meetings were held (October 2018 and March 2019) as part of the MTP update process and a public and stakeholder surveys were used to develop the plan. These results were presented to the Technical Committee and Board of Directors to aide in development of the plan. A full report of the survey results are included as an appendix in the MTP. Edits During Public Comment Period  Edits to Section 6: Financial Plan – incorporation of additional funding sources and amounts, changes to operations and maintenance totals, incorporation of finalized 2020-2024 TIP tables, transit funding totals and sources, 2025-2045 fiscal constraint.  Edits to Section 4: Regional Overview – insertion of more data and maps  Other general edits include changes to figure numbers, titles, grammar and formatting Staff Recommendation Staff recommends closure of the public comment period and approval of the resolution to adopt the CAMPO 2045 & Beyond Metropolitan Transportation Plan. Recommended Form of Motion: Motion to close the public comment period and approve by resolution, the adoption of the CAMPO 2045 & Beyond Metropolitan Transportation Plan. Agenda Item 7A Metropolitan Transportation Plan The Long Range Transportation Plan for the Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization Adopted June 19, 2019 The preparation of this report was financed in part by the U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, and Federal Transit Administration in cooperation with the Missouri Department of Transportation. The opinions, findings, and conclusions expressed in this report are not necessarily those of the Federal Highway Administration, Federal Transit Administration, or the Missouri Department of Transportation. DRAFT Acknowledgement: A large number of people took the time and effort to attend public meetings, respond to questions and surveys, and attend working meetings. Without the dedication of local stakeholders, the CAMPO Board of Directors, the CAMPO Technical Committee, and the residents of the CAMPO Region this plan would not be possible. CAMPO staff wishes to thank those who participated in the development of the plan. Plan Produced by the Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization Consultant services for the development of the Travel Demand Model provided by HDR, Inc. and City Explained, Inc. MPO Administration is provided by the City of Jefferson Department of Planning and Protective Services/ Planning Division Room 120 John G. Christy Municipal Building 320 East McCarty Jefferson City, Missouri Telephone 573-634-6410 http://www.jeffersoncitymo.gov/campo/ DRAFT Adoption Resolution DRAFT Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization Board of Directors Chairman – Ron Fitzwater, City Council Member, City of Jefferson Vice-Chairman –Jeff Hoelscher, Eastern District Commissioner, Cole County City of Jefferson Jon Hensley, City Council Member David Kemna, City Council Member Rick Mihalevich, City Council Member Sonny Sanders, AICP, Director, Planning & Protective Services Matt Morasch, PE, Director, Public Works Mark Mehmert, Director, Transit Division Cole County Larry Benz, PE, Director, Public Works Doug Reece, City Administrator, St. Martins Callaway County Roger Fischer, Western District Commissioner Holts Summit Hanna Lechner, City Administrator, City of Holts Summit Missouri Department of Transportation (MoDOT) David Silvester, PE, District Engineer Ex-Officio Members Randall Allen, Jefferson City Area Chamber of Commerce Daniel Nguyen, Federal Transit Administration, Region VII Joan Roeseler, MoDOT, Transit Section Cathy Brown, Office of Administration, Facilities Management Michael Henderson, AICP, MoDOT, Transportation Planning Brad McMahon, Federal Highway Administration, Missouri Marty Wilson, Callaway County Economic Development Technical Committee Chairman – Sonny Sanders, AICP, Director, Planning and Protective Services, City of Jefferson Vice-Chairman – David Bange, PE, Engineering Supervisor, Department of Public Works, City of Jefferson City of Jefferson Todd Spalding, Director, Parks, Recreation & Forestry Matt Morasch, PE, Director of Public Works Mark Mehmert, Director, Transit Division Eric Barron, AICP, Transportation Planner Britt Smith, PE, Operations & Maintenance Cole County Larry Benz, PE, Director of Public Works Eric Landwehr, PE, County Engineer Callaway County Paul Winkelmann, PE, County Highway Administrator Small City Representative - Callaway Mark Tate, Streets Department, City of Holts Summit Small City Representative - Cole Paul Stonner/Brian Schrimpf, Alderman, Wardsville Missouri Department of Transportation (MoDOT) Steve Engelbrecht, PE, District Planning Manager Michael Henderson, AICP, Transportation Planning Specialist Bob Lynch, PE, Area Engineer Private Transportation Interest Joe Scheppers, N.H. Scheppers Distributing Company. Pedestrian or Biking Interest Cary Maloney Ex-Officio Members: Daniel Nguyen, Federal Transit Administration, Region VII Brad McMahon, Federal Highway Administration, Missouri - June 2019 CAMPO Staff Sonny Sanders, AICP, GISP – Director, Planning & Protective Services Eric Barron, AICP - Planning Manager Katrina Williams, GISP, AICP – Planner II Alex Rotenberry, AICP - Planner I Beth Sweeten – Administrative Assistant DRAFT Table of Contents Executive Summary.............................................................................................................................................. i 1 Introduction & Federal Compliance .................................................................................................................. 1 What Is Campo? ........................................................................................................................................................................... 2 Federal Compliance ..................................................................................................................................................................... 5 Performance-Based Planning And Programing ...................................................................................................................... 6 MoDOT’s Long-Range Transportation Plan ............................................................................................................................. 8 Progress since 2013 ..................................................................................................................................................................... 9 2 Planning Factors ............................................................................................................................................ 10 Federal Planning Factors........................................................................................................................................................... 11 Safety & Security ....................................................................................................................................................................... 12 Accessibility, Mobility, & Connectivity .................................................................................................................................... 19 Environment & Quality of Life .................................................................................................................................................. 20 System Management, Preservation, & Resileincy ................................................................................................................. 22 Economic Vitality, Travel & Tourism ........................................................................................................................................ 23 3 Visioning & Plan Development ...................................................................................................................... 25 The Planning Process .................................................................................................................................................................. 28 Updating the MTP ...................................................................................................................................................................... 32 Incorporation Of Other Plans And Studies ............................................................................................................................ 33 Scenario Planning ....................................................................................................................................................................... 34 Travel Demand Model (TDM) Analysis ................................................................................................................................... 37 4 Regional Overview ........................................................................................................................................ 40 Population Trends ....................................................................................................................................................................... 41 Economic Activity ......................................................................................................................................................................... 49 Land Use ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 53 5 The Transportation System ............................................................................................................................. 54 Roads and Bridges ..................................................................................................................................................................... 55 Pedestrian & Non-Motorized ................................................................................................................................................... 64 Transit ............................................................................................................................................................................................ 68 Air Travel ...................................................................................................................................................................................... 70 Waterways & Ports ................................................................................................................................................................... 71 Freight & Intermodal Facilities ................................................................................................................................................. 73 Rail ................................................................................................................................................................................................. 76 Trends In transportation ............................................................................................................................................................. 78 6 The Financial Plan & Implementation ............................................................................................................ 79 The Financial Plan ....................................................................................................................................................................... 81 Fiscal Constraint 2020-2024 ................................................................................................................................................... 82 Fiscal Constraint 2025-2045 ................................................................................................................................................... 91 Cost & Revenue Estimates ......................................................................................................................................................... 92 Illustrative Projects ...................................................................................................................................................................... 96 Local Funding Sources ............................................................................................................................................................. 107 State Funding Sources ............................................................................................................................................................. 109 Federal Funding sources ......................................................................................................................................................... 111 Implementation ......................................................................................................................................................................... 113 DRAFT APPENDICES Appendix A MTP Planning Requirements - §450.324 CFR Appendix B Amendments & Modifications Appendix C System Performance Report Appendix D Surveys and Public Comments Appendix E Transportation Improvement Program Appendix F 2016 Capital Area Pedestrian and Bicycle Plan Appendix G 2017 Coordinated Public Transit-Human Services Transportation Plan Appendix H Travel Demand Model Report Appendix I 2015 CAMPO Regional Wayfinding Plan Appendix J Major Thoroughfare Plan (will be completed in 2020) LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS CAMPO Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization EPA Environmental Protection Agency FAST Act Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act FHWA Federal Highway Administration FTA Federal Transit Administration FTA 5303 Metropolitan & Statewide Planning and Non-Metropolitan Transportation Planning FTA 5307 Urbanized Area Formula Grants FTA 5310 Enhanced Mobility of Seniors and Individuals with Disabilities FTA 5339 Bus and Bus Facilities HSIP Highway Safety Improvement Program MAP-21 Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century MoDOT Missouri Department of Transportation MPO Metropolitan Planning Organization MTP Metropolitan Transportation Plan NHFP National Highway Freight Program NHPP National Highway Performance Program ONE DOT Collaboration between FHWA and FTA PBPP Performance Based Planning and Programming POP Program of Projects STIP State Transportation Improvement Program STBG Surface Transportation Block Grant Program TAP Transportation Alternatives TCOS Taking Care of the System TERM Transit Economic Requirements Model TDM Travel Demand Model TIP Transportation Improvement Program TPM Transportation Performance Management VMT Vehicle Miles of Travel DRAFT Executive Summary CAMPO 2045 & Beyond Metropolitan Transportation Plan THE LONG-RANGE TRANSPORTATION PLAN FOR THE CAPITAL AREA METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION ORGANIZATION The Capital Area Metropolitan Transportation Organization (CAMPO) is responsible for long range multimodal transportation planning in an area that includes five communities and a population of more than 73,000. The CAMPO 2045 & Beyond Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP), updated every five years, is the Long Range Transportation Plan for the CAMPO. Looking to a 2045 planning horizon, and through a large amount of stakeholder and public input, the MTP anticipates transportation trends and needs throughout the CAMPO Region and includes goals and strategies to meet those needs. The MTP contains tools and resources to assist CAMPO and member jurisdictions with the implementation. The Implementation Plan outlined in Section 6 includes a schedule for addressing strategies and actions and provides staff with guidance in the development of an annual work program. The 2045 MTP addresses topics and processes that were not included in previous iterations, including; Scenario Planning, performance measures and targets, a refined illustrative list, updated funding resources and projections, and a more concise plan for implementation. Other plans, such as the Coordinated Public Transit-Human Services Transportation Plan and the Capital Area Pedestrian and Bicycle Plan have been better incorporated into the planning process used in the development of this iteration of the MTP. The updated travel-demand model will provide the foundation for the development of a Major Thoroughfare Plan. The MTP also includes a Financial Plan, outlined in Section 6. This section includes information on funding resources, forecasted revenue and lists fiscally constrained and unconstrained projects. The projects listed in the Financial Plan are reflective of the plan’s goals, strategies and vision that guide the planning process. VISION Maintain and support a resilient multi-modal network that improves quality of life and promote economic vitality through planning for smart community growth. GOALS 1. Improve safety and security for all travel modes 2. Support economic development and tourism throughout the region 3. Support regional partnerships and planning continuity across the region. 4. Improve efficiency in system management, operations, and movement of people and freight 5. Support land use practices that promote quality of life and economic vitality 6. Seek secure and reliable funding 7. Improve accessibility and mobility 8. Maintain a resilient transportation system 9. Provide a platform for multi-modal transportation education DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 1 1 Introduction & Federal Compliance DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 2 The MTP, also referred to as a Long-Range Transportation Plan, assesses regional transportation needs over a twenty years planning horizon. The MTP sets goals and defines policies, programs, strategies, and projects to meet the transportation needs of the CAMPO region. The MTP is central to the MPO planning process and addresses all transportation modes, including the following: • Surface Transportation (roads and bridges) • Pedestrian and Non-Motorized • Transit • Air • Waterways & Ports • Freight • Rail WHAT IS CAMPO? CAMPO was formally established in March of 2003 and is the designated metropolitan planning organization for the Jefferson City urbanized area. The CAMPO Metropolitan Planning Area (MPA), see Figure 1.1, has an estimated population of more than 77,000 and includes the jurisdictions of Holts Summit, Jefferson City, St. Martins, Taos, Wardsville, and portions of unincorporated, non-urbanized Cole and Callaway Counties. The boundary, based on US Census data, was created by the CAMPO Board of Directors and approved by the Governor. The most recent boundary was approved in 2013. CORE FUNCTIONS OF AN MPO • To establish and manage a fair and impartial setting for effective regional decision- making in the metropolitan planning area. • Evaluate transportation alternatives, scaled to the size and complexity of the region, to the nature of its transportation issues, and to the realistically available options. • Develop and update a Metropolitan Transportation Plan for the planning area covering a planning horizon of at least 20 years that fosters (1) mobility and access for people and goods, (2) efficient system performance and preservation, and (3) quality of life. • Develop a Transportation Improvement Program based on the Metropolitan Transportation Plan and designed to serve the area’s goals, using spending, regulating, operating, management, and financial tools. • Involve the general public and all the significantly affected sub-groups in the four essential functions listed above. Metropolitan transportation planning is the process of examining travel and transportation issues and needs in metropolitan areas. It includes a demographic analysis of the community in question, as well as an examination of travel patterns and trends. The planning process includes an analysis of alternatives to meet projected future demands, and for providing a safe and efficient transportation system that meets mobility while not creating adverse impacts to the environment. In metropolitan areas over 50,000 in population, the responsibility for transportation planning lies with designated Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPO).” – Federal Highway Administration DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 3 Figure 1.1 CAMPO Metropolitan Planning Area Source: CAMPO CAMPO BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND TECHNICAL COMMITTEE CAMPO is governed by a Board of Directors consisting of representatives from jurisdictions within the planning area, Federal and State transportation agencies, and economic development representatives, with some serving as ex-officio (non-voting) members. The Board of Directors is responsible for providing official action on federally required plans, documents, and programs. The Board is also responsible for changes in the bylaws and changes to the MPO boundary. The Technical Committee consists of representatives from the member jurisdictions’ professional staff and act in an advisory capacity. A full list of members of the Board of Directors and Technical Committee can be found at the front of this document. Board of Directors Non-Voting Ex-Officio Members (6) MoDOT (1) FTA (1) FHWA (1) Other Federal Agency (1) Jefferson City Economic Develop.Rep. (1) Callaway County Economic Develop. Rep. (1) Voting Members (13) Jefferson City (7) Cole County (3) Callaway County (1) MoDOT (1) Holts Summit (1) DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 4 REGIONAL COORDINATION As a regional organization, CAMPO coordinates and collaborates with a number of partners, including: Missouri Department of Transportation (MoDOT), the Federal Transit Administration (FTA), Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), Chambers of Commerce, Convention and Visitors Bureaus, the Mid-Missouri Regional Planning Commission, and other various public and private groups. Several meetings are held throughout the year at the MoDOT Central District level to encourage collaboration between regional planning partners. Collaboration with the partner agencies shown in Figure 1.2 is important in achieving CAMPO’s core functions and responsibilities as listed above. This collaboration provides the opportunity to coordinate planning and implementation activities. Thus, efficiency is improved and funding is maximized. Figure 1.2 Planning Partners - MoDOT Central District Source: CAMPO DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 5 FEDERAL COMPLIANCE Development and maintenance of an MTP is a requirement for all Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPO). The MTP is prepared in accordance with federal statute 23 CFR Part §450.324, which requires CAMPO to develop and update the MTP at least every 5 years to maintain validity and consistency with current and forecasted transportation and land use conditions. The MTP must be compliant with federal regulations issued by the United States Department of Transportation (Federal Highway Administration and Federal Transit Administration), which governs the development of transportation plans and programs for Urbanized Areas (UA). A UA is comprised of a densely settled core of census tracts and/or census blocks that contains 50,000 or more in population plus the incorporated surrounding areas meeting size or density criteria as defined by the U.S. Census Bureau. Federal law requires that every UA be represented by an MPO which carries out the metropolitan transportation planning process for the UA and surrounding planning area. CAMPO is the designated MPO for the Jefferson City UA. The CAMPO Metropolitan Planning Area (MPA), which encompasses the Jefferson City UA, is depicted in Figure 1.3. The MPA encompasses 153 square miles. An outline of the MTP requirements as stated in §450.324 CFR and how they are addressed in the MTP can be found in Appendix A. Figure 1.3 CAMPO Metropolitan Planning Area and Urbanized Area Source: CAMPO DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 6 PERFORMANCE-BASED PLANNING AND PROGRAMING Performance-based Planning and Programing (PBPP) is a requirement of the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation (FAST) Act and impacts both the MTP and the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). PBPP refers to the application of transportation performance management (TPM) principles within the planning and programming processes of transportation agencies to achieve desired performance outcomes for the multimodal transportation system. CAMPO is required to use a performance-based approach to transportation decision making to support the national federal highway performance goals listed below. Source: FHWA NATIONAL FEDERAL HIGHWAY PERFORMANCE GOALS • Safety - To achieve a significant reduction in traffic fatalities and serious injuries on all public roads. • Infrastructure Condition - To maintain the highway infrastructure asset system in a state of good repair • Congestion Reduction - To achieve a significant reduction in congestion on the National Highway System • System Reliability - To improve the efficiency of the surface transportation system • Freight Movement and Economic Vitality - To improve the national freight network, strengthen the ability of rural communities to access national and international trade markets, and support regional economic development. • Environmental Sustainability - To enhance the performance of the transportation system while protecting and enhancing the natural environment. • Reduced Project Delivery Delays - To reduce project costs, promote jobs and the economy, and expedite the movement of people and goods by accelerating project completion through eliminating delays in the project development and delivery process, including reducing regulatory burdens and improving agencies' work practices DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 7 FEDERAL PERFORMANCE MEASURES The FAST Act continued a federal requirement for annual target setting collaboration between State DOTs and planning partners on national performance measures. The System Performance Report, part of the federal performance requirements, presents the condition and performance of the transportation system with regard to performance measures, records performance targets, and marks progress achieved in meeting the targets. MPOs may choose between programing projects (1) in support of all the State targets, (2) establishing specific numeric targets for all of the performance measures, or (3) establishing specific numeric targets for one or more individual performance measures and supporting the State target on other performance measures. The CAMPO Board of Directors has voted to support state targets and measures in four areas listed below. Please note that there are several additional targets MoDOT has adopted that CAMPO was not required to support that are not listed below. CAMPO’s performance measures and targets are outlined in detail in the System Performance Report located in Appendix C. •Number of Fatalities; •Rate of Fatalities per 100 Million Vehicle Miles traveled (VMT); •Number of Serious Injuries; •Rate of Serious Injuries per 100 Million VMT; and •Number of Non-motorized Fatalities and Non- motorized Serious Injuries Safety •percentage of pavements on the National Highway System (NHS) in Good condition (excluding the Interstate System) •percentage of pavements on the NHS (excluding the Interstate System) in Poor condition •percentage of NHS bridges in Good condition •percentage of NHS bridges in Poor condition Pavement & Bridge •A measure that will assess the percent of reliable person-miles traveled on the non-Interstate NHS. Travel Time Reliability & Freight Reliability •Asset Inventory •Condition Assessment •Management Approach – Decision Support Tools •Investment Prioritization Transit Asset Management (TAM) DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 8 MODOT’S LONG-RANGE TRANSPORTATION PLAN The current MoDOT Long-Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) was updated and approved by the Missouri Highways and Transportation Commission and adopted on June 6, 2018. In addition to collecting comments from stakeholders and the general public, the 2018 update included a large amount of outreach and coordination with planning agencies around the state. Like the CAMPO 2045 MTP, MoDOT’s LRTP is a 25-year vision for the state's transportation system; establishing goals, objectives and performance management metrics. The LRTP analyzes existing and emerging trends, both nationally and in Missouri. These trends included aging populations, increases in urbanization, advancing technologies, and a younger population that isn’t as interested in driving. The LRTP also included an analysis of emerging technology, such as autonomous and connected vehicles (AV/CV), and their potential impact. Statewide system needs and revenue forecasts are also identified in the LRTP. Figure 1.4, taken from the LRTP, demonstrates the many high-priority unfunded annual needs. Figure 1.4 Missouri High-Priority Unfunded Annual Transportation Needs Source: Citizen’s Guide to Transportation Funding in Missouri (November 2018) In order to meet transportation needs the LRTP outlines the following goals: • Take care of the transportation system and services we enjoy today • Keep all travelers safe, no matter the mode of transportation • Invest in projects that spur economic growth and create jobs • Give Missourians better transportation choices • Improve reliability and reduce congestion on Missouri’s transportation system The goals, as well as data and public input collected during the update of the LRTP have been considered in the update of the CAMPO MTP. Most of the needs identified in the State’s LRTP are identified in the CAMPO MTP and the MTP’s goals are reflective of those in the LRTP. DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 9 PROGRESS SINCE 2013 The previous MTP was adopted in 2013. Since that time many projects, programs, and activities have taken place throughout the region. Many of these achievements were outlined as strategies or projects in the previous 2013-2035 MTP. It is important to highlight these achievements when discussing long-range planning with the general public and stakeholders in the region. Between 2013 and 2019 more than $203 Million in in transportation projects have been completed using federal transportation funding, see Figure 1.5. This total does not include local projects using local revenue. Figure 1.5 Federally Funded Transportation Projects and Activities Completed Since 2013 Transportation Projects and Activities 2013-2019 Total Cost Road, Bridge, and Safety Projects $192,847,500 Pedestrian, Multi-Modal, and other Non-Motorized Projects $10,123,362 Consultant services for CAMPO studies, modeling, and planning $400,00 Scoping $740,000 Total $203,710,862 Source: Data compiled from Transportation Improvement Programs between 2013 and 2019. The construction projects include rehabilitation of bridges and roads, pavement upgrades, shoulders, new and updated sidewalks and trails. Consulting services resulted in a Wayfinding Plan, an updated Travel Demand Model, and a transit study. Federal funds have also been used for scoping and engineering projects such as looking at new configurations for intersections or traffic studies. DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 10 2 Planning Factors DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 11 FEDERAL PLANNING FACTORS The Fixing America’s Surface Transportation (FAST) Act includes 10 planning factors that are required to be considered as part of the MTP development process. Eight original factors were defined in the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU), originally enacted in 2005. These were carried forward by MAP-21 in 2012. The FAST Act, signed into law in 2015, included the addition of two planning factors, for a total of ten. The planning factors are reflected in the goals, strategies, and projects contained in this plan and are addressed in greater detail throughout this section. The following sub-sections illustrate how the MTP goals align with the federal planning factors to ensure recommendations contained in the plan conform to federal guidelines. Economic Vitality •Support the economic vitality of the metropolitan area Safety •Increase the safety of the transportation system for motorized and non-motorized users Security •Increase the security of the transportation system for motorized and non-motorized users Accessibility & Mobility •Increase the accessibility and mobility of people and for freight Environmental Protection & Quality of Life •Protect and enhance the environment, promote energy conservation, and improve the quality of life System Integration & Connectivity •Enhance the integration and connectivity of the transportation system, across and between modes, for people and freight System Management & Operations •Promote efficient system management and operations System Preservation •Emphasize the preservation of the existing transportation system Resilency & Reliability •Improve the resiliency and reliability of the transportation system and reduce or mitigate stormwater impacts of surface transportation Travel & Tourism •Enhance travel and tourism DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 12 SAFETY & SECURITY Planning for the safety and security of the transportation network is central to several agencies and organizations at the local, regional, state, and federal levels. The CAMPO Region is home more than 73,000 people and includes a complicated network of infrastructure, utilities, services, and employment centers. The safety and security of people and resources is addressed cooperatively and collaboratively by several planning partners throughout the region, including transportation, public safety, and emergency management. Their relevant plans and responsibilities are detailed further in this section. SAFETY PERFORMANCE MEASURES The FAST Act requires target setting collaboration between State DOTs and planning partners on national performance measures such as safety. Targets were required to be set in 2017 for five safety performance measures. Annual targets must be set by State DOTs, then by each MPO, with the choice of adopting state targets and/or establishing their own for: • Number of Fatalities • Rate of Fatalities per 100 Million Vehicle Miles traveled (VMT) • Number of Serious Injuries • Rate of Serious Injuries per 100 Million VMT • Number of Non-motorized Fatalities and Non- motorized Serious Injuries More information on safety performance measures can be found in Appendix C. FAST ACT PLANNING FACTORS: 2. INCREASE THE SAFETY OF THE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM FOR MOTORIZED AND NON-MOTORIZED USERS; 3. INCREASE THE SECURITY OF THE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM FOR MOTORIZED AND NON-MOTORIZED USERS; CAMPO 2045 Goals: Goal 1: Improve safety and security for all travel modes. Goal 3: Support regional partnerships and planning continuity across the region. Goal 4: Improve efficiency in system management, operations, and movement of people and freight. Goal 6: Seek secure and reliable funding. Goal 7: Improve accessibility and mobility. Goal 8: Maintain a resilient transportation system. . DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 13 CRASH STATISTICS The Missouri State Highway Patrol and MoDOT cooperate to report state-system roadway crash statistics. Figures 4.1-4.3 provide a breakdown of crashes in the CAMPO region and compare them to state-wide numbers. Figure 4.1 Fatal and Disabling Injury Crashes 2013-2017 Source: MoDOT, MSHP Figure 4.2 Crashes by Type: 2013-2017 Number of Crashes by type Fatal Disabling Injury Minor Injury Property Damage Total Crashes CAMPO State CAMPO State CAMPO State CAMPO State CAMPO State 2013 5 683 61 3,938 289 26,604 1,115 88,455 1,470 119,680 2014 6 696 42 3,706 329 28,343 1,130 93,490 1,507 126,235 2015 5 803 35 3,703 354 32,973 1,149 109,491 1,543 146,970 2016 7 873 37 3,894 391 35,978 1,255 116,649 1,690 157,394 2017 5 866 29 3,672 359 35,823 1,135 114,495 1,528 154,856 Total 28 3,921 204 18,913 1,722 159,721 5784 522,580 7738 705,135 Source: MoDOT, MSHP 2017 Data DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 14 Figure 4.3 Number of Injuries by Type: 2013-2017 Number of Injuries by type Total Number Killed Total Number Disabling Injuries Total Number Minor Injuries Total Number Killed or Injured CAMPO State CAMPO State CAMPO State CAMPO State 2013 5 757 76 4,937 422 39,543 503 45,237 2014 7 766 59 4,660 480 41,522 546 46,948 2015 8 870 45 4,574 506 49,049 559 54,493 2016 8 948 45 4,744 546 52,920 599 58,612 2017 6 933 42 4,882 536 52,762 584 58,577 Total 34 4,274 267 23,797 2,490 235,796 2,791 263,867 Source: MoDOT, MSHP 2017 Data MISSOURI COALITION FOR ROADWAY SAFETY (MCRS) The Missouri Coalition for Roadway Safety (MCRS) is a wide ranging group of safety advocates who originally came together in 2004 to create Missouri's Blueprint for Safer Roadways. Planning partners include law enforcement, educators, emergency responders, and engineers who have launched statewide efforts to reduce fatalities and create safer roads in Missouri. The Coalition is responsible for the implementation of several safety campaigns, including: • Seatbelt Use • Work Zone Awareness • Impaired Driving • Pedestrian Safety Awareness • Distracted Driving • Commercial Motor Vehicle Awareness • Motorcycle Awareness • Youth Alcohol Enforcement • Child Passenger Safety The Blueprint, Missouri’s Strategic Highway Safety Plan (HSP) Missouri’s Blueprint – A partnership Toward Zero Deaths is a collective effort of the MCRS and safety professionals throughout the state. The MCRS leads the charge to implement the Blueprint and encourages safety partners to focus their activities and programs in support of the “Focused Five” and subsequent emphasis areas, focus areas, and strategies. The state is divided into seven regional coalitions that develop annual safety plans. These coalitions meet on a regular basis to discuss their concerns, review how their countermeasures are working, and consider ways to improve their efforts. Approximately $2 million of state road funds is dedicated to this effort. The Blueprint is an overarching strategic highway safety plan for the State of Missouri while the state’s Highway Safety Plan serves as one of the implementation components in support of the Blueprint efforts. According to the HSP, Missouri’s ultimate Blueprint goal is that no lives are lost due to a traffic crash. However, an interim goal of 700 or fewer fatalities must be met in order to reach zero deaths. DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 15 CAMPO staff participates to MCRS meetings and provides support to planning partners as needed to assist in meeting the above goal. Staff receives crash data annually from MoDOT and uses this and other datasets to provide regional partners with maps and statistics as requested. Additionally, staff provides a quarterly crash report to the CAMPO Technical Committee and Board of Directors. PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE SAFETY There are several plans, documents, or initiatives in the CAMPO Region in addition the strategies in the MTP that address the infrastructure and safety needs of pedestrians and bicyclists: • Capital Area Pedestrian and Bicycle Plan • Jefferson City Area Greenway Master Plan • Holts Summit Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Transit Plan • Missouri Boulevard Safety Assessment • Jefferson City Sidewalk Plan • Healthy Schools Healthy Communities Program Capital Area Pedestrian and Bicycle Plan The Capital Area Pedestrian & Bicycle Plan, adopted in 2016, is intended as a resource to improve safety, connectivity, and mobility for pedestrian and bicycle users in the CAMPO planning area. The goals, recommendations, and strategies outlined in the plan can be used by jurisdictions to develop an individualized implementation strategy to fit the unique pedestrian and bicycle needs of that community. The plan is also intended to be a guide for future growth by recommending strategies, policies, and procedures to guide future development and improve existing infrastructure. The process to develop the plan included intensive amount of public outreach that facilitate the development of goals and strategies that would improve conditions for pedestrians and bicyclists. The plan has been used by Jefferson City, Holts Summit, and St. Martins in the development of grant applications seeking to improve pedestrian and bicycle safety in their communities. Both Jefferson City and St. Martins adopted the plan. The Capital Area Pedestrian & Bicycle Plan can be found in Appendix F. Missouri Boulevard Safety Assessment In September 2014, United States Department of Transportation Secretary, Anthony Foxx, launched “Safer People, Safer Streets” with the goal of reducing the growing number of pedestrian, transit user, and bicyclist injuries and fatalities across the United States. As part of this ongoing initiative, US Department of Transportation field offices are convened transportation agencies to conduct road safety assessments in every state, launching a Mayors' Challenge for Safer People and Safer Streets, and working with University Transportation Centers (UTCs) and other stakeholders to identify and remove barriers to improving non-motorized safety. In 2016, Jefferson City joined Kansas City in being the first two cities in the State of Missouri to have conducted this type of safety assessment as part of the Safer People, Safer Streets initiative. The 3.4 mile assessment of Missouri Boulevard qualitatively estimated and reported on potential safety issues and identified opportunities for improvement. The assessment followed a model used by federal partners who had conducted similar assessments across the United States. The DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 16 project was a collaborative effort by CAMPO and several planning partners, including; Jefferson City Police Department, Jefferson City Public Works, JEFFTRAN, MoDOT, Federal Transit Administration (FTA), Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), and Capital Region Medical Center. Mid-America Regional Council, MPO for Kansas City, provided support to CAMPO staff in facilitating the event. The Missouri Boulevard Safety Assessment has been cited by Jefferson City staff in seeking funding for or planning for improvements to the corridor. The assessment is available on the CAMPO website at www.jeffersoncitymo.gov/campo. HAZARD MITIGATION PLANNING Hazard mitigation is the effort to reduce loss of life and property by lessening the impact of disasters. It is most effective when implemented under a comprehensive, long-term mitigation plan. The plans identify risks and vulnerabilities associated with natural disasters, and develop long-term strategies for protecting people and property from future hazard events. Mitigation plans are key to breaking the cycle of disaster damage, reconstruction, and repeated damage. Developing hazard mitigation plans enables state, tribal, and local governments to: • Increase education and awareness around threats, hazards, and vulnerabilities; • Build partnerships for risk reduction involving government, organizations, businesses, and the public; • Identify long-term, broadly-supported strategies for risk reduction; • Align risk reduction with other state, tribal, or community objectives; • Identify implementation approaches that focus resources on the greatest risks and vulnerabilities; and • Communicate priorities to potential sources of funding. Moreover, a Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)-approved hazard mitigation plan is a condition for receiving certain types of non-emergency disaster assistance, including funding for mitigation projects. Ultimately, hazard mitigation planning enables action to reduce loss of life and property, lessening the impact of disasters. Both Callaway and Cole Counties have approved Hazard Mitigation Plans. These plans include data and strategies that address the impacts of natural and man-made disasters on the transportation system. In addition to evaluating eleven natural hazards, the plan evaluates risks associated with major rail or air transportation incidents, mass casualty events, and hazardous materials release. All of these hazards can impact the transportation network and the people and resources dependent upon that network. The plans include a mitigation strategy that lays out prioritized actions and incorporates benefits and costs associated with implementation of those actions. The plans can be found on the Mid- Missouri Regional Planning Commission website at www.midmorpc.org. THE STRATEGIC HIGHWAY NETWORK (STRAHNET) The Strategic Highway Network is critical to the Department of Defense's (DoD's) domestic operations. According FHWA, The STRAHNET is a 62,791-mile system of roads deemed necessary for emergency mobilization and peacetime movement of heavy armor, fuel, DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 17 ammunition, repair parts, food, and other commodities to support U.S. military operations. Even though DoD primarily deploys heavy equipment by rail, highways play a critical role. The Surface Deployment and Distribution Command Transportation Engineering Agency (SDDCTEA) is the DoD designated agent for public highway matters, including STRAHNET and STRAHNET Connectors. The SDDCTEA identified STRAHNET and the Connector routes in coordination with the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), the State transportation departments, the military Services and installations, and the ports. Together, STRAHNET and the Connectors define the total minimum defense public highway network needed to support a defense emergency. While the CAMPO Region does not include any STRAHNET routes or connectors, it does include the intersection of three US Highways that provide additional connectivity to these routes. Interstate 70, which lies 25 miles north, is a designated STRAHNET route. Fort Leonard Wood and Whiteman Air Force Base are both located within 80 miles of the CAMPO Region and are directly connected to the STRAHNET. Jefferson City is also home to the Missouri National Guard Headquarters, which uses the network for the movement of certain equipment and would be dependent upon it during certain types of activation. RAIL SAFETY There is only one Class I double track rail line and a short spur that runs through the CAMPO region, supporting both passenger and freight service. Owned by Union Pacific, the rail line connects St. Louis and Kansas City. Safety concerns in the CAMPO Region include at-grade crossings, pedestrian access to tracks, and general rail car safety. While CAMPO has minimal interaction with rail activity and safety, this mode is addressed the goals and strategies of the MTP. CAMPO may provide support to regional planning partners or member jurisdictions in accessing data or applying for grants to meet these strategies. Missouri Highway-Rail Crossing Safety Program Under MoDOT’s Multimodal Operations Division-Railroad Section, Missouri’s Highway-Railroad Crossing Safety Program aims to improve highway-rail grade crossings throughout the state. The program is funded by a combination of federal and state funds. The FHWA Section 130 Program is a Federal-Aid program authorized by United States Code Title 23, Section 130, and administered through the state by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). The state Grade Crossing Safety Account is funded by a 25 cent assessment on all Missouri motor vehicle registrations or renewals authorized by Section 389.612, RSMO. According to MoDOT, Missouri receives $6 million in Section 130 funds and another $1.2 million per year through the state’s Grade Crossing Safety Account. These funds can only be spent on improvements at public crossings for safety devices like flashing lights, gates or warning bells; pavement markings; or the closure of a crossing. Every year public crossings are reviewed, taking into account factors like train and vehicle traffic counts, speed, sight distance, and accident history to select crossings for improvements. Missouri has seen dramatic reduction in rail related safety accidents and injuries since the late 1970’s: • Rail Collisions – reduced by 87% • Rail Fatalities – reduced by 98% DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 18 • Rail Injuries – reduced by 82% MoDOT’s Multimodal Operations Division-Railroad Section also administers a Rail Safety Inspection Program and conducts a railroad safety outreach activities. AIR SAFETY Jefferson City Memorial Airport is the sole airport in the CAMPO region. It is a general aviation facility with no commercial airline passenger services. CAMPO has been only minimally involved in airport planning but is available if contacted for any type of data or planning assistance. Jefferson City Memorial Airport began development of an updated Airport Master Plan in 2018. This plan will address a wide range of needs and opportunities including improvements to the control tower. MoDOT’s Aviation Section performs airport safety inspections at all public use general aviation airports in Missouri; inspecting them once every three years. Inspections focus on identifying safety concerns such as obstructions in the runway protection zones, nonstandard lighting and pavement markings, and poor pavement conditions. DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 19 ACCESSIBILITY, MOBILITY, & CONNECTIVITY Increasing accessibility and mobility options in the region has been identified as a need by residents and stakeholders in the region. It is important to understand the various transportation needs of the region and acknowledge the balance necessary to provide accessibility for both people and freight. Land use and transportation policies are important tools used to create more compact development patterns at activity centers that enhance the efficient movement of people and freight through the system. CAMPO has been involved in several projects and programs aimed at improving accessibility and mobility in the region. Many of these activities have been highlighted in other sections of the MTP. In addition to the goals set in the MTP to address these planning factors, CAMPO has been involved in the following activities: • Capital Area Pedestrian and Bicycle Plan • Missouri Boulevard Safety & Transit Assessment • Support of the Heartland Port Authority • Funding support for traffic studies and support of scoping activities to improve intersections • Mapping and publication support to JEFFTRAN • Staff attendance at ADA compliance training ACCESS MANAGEMENT According to FHWA, Access Management is the proactive management of vehicular access points to land parcels adjacent to all manner of roadways. Good access management promotes safe and efficient use of the transportation network. Access Management encompasses a set of techniques that state and local governments can use to control access to highways, major arterials, and other roadways. These techniques including; Access Spacing, Driveway Spacing, Safe Turning Lanes, Median Treatments, and Right-of-Way Management No jurisdiction within the CAMPO region has an Access Management Plan. That being said, Jefferson City does have language in city code requiring traffic impact studies to be completed for high peak-traffic developments. Access management may also be addressed further in the development of the CAMPO thoroughfare plan. FAST ACT PLANNING FACTORS: 4. INCREASE ACCESSIBILITY AND MOBILITY OF PEOPLE AND FREIGHT 6. ENHANCE THE INTEGRATION AND CONNECTIVITY OF THE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM, ACROSS AND BETWEEN MODES, FOR PEOPLE AND FREIGHT CAMPO 2045 Goals: Goal 1: Improve safety and security for all travel modes. Goal 6: Seek secure and reliable funding. Goal 7: Improve accessibility and mobility. Goal 8: Maintain a resilient transportation system. Goal 9: Provide a platform for multi-modal transportation education. DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 20 ENVIRONMENT & QUALITY OF LIFE The MTP’s vision of improving quality of life is complimented by addressing the resiliency and reliability of the transportation system as it relates to the preservation and conservation of the environment. The MTP includes many goals and strategies that provide for consideration of environmental impacts such as supporting tourism, improving accessibility to recreational and cultural opportunities, improving transit, regional collaboration, congestion improvements, and providing opportunities for public engagement. Source: USGS July, 1993 - Aerial view of the Missouri River flooding on July 30, 1993 north of Jefferson City, Missouri, looking south. The CAMPO region and Mid-Missouri as a whole is home to several important natural resources, open spaces, outdoor recreational opportunities, and cultural and historic attractions. The transportation system should support these resources and attractions in order to improve quality of life throughout the region. The Missouri River bisects the CAMPO region and flooding stemming from upstream dam releases and localized rainfall are a constant concern in the region. Additional issues with flash flooding also present challenges when planning for changes in land use and transportation improvements. Figure 4.4 depicts the 100 year floodplain in the CAMPO region. The 100 year floodplain represents areas with a 1% annual chance of flooding. The areas shown in the map have experienced varying amounts of flooding throughout recorded history. Major floods in 1993, 1995, 2007, and 2011 produced major impacts on the transportation system. CAMPO invites comment from environmental agencies and groups in the region and continues to encourage comment and participation from these stakeholders. FAST ACT PLANNING FACTORS: 5. PROTECT AND ENHANCE THE ENVIRONMENT, PROMOTE ENERGY CONSERVATION, IMPROVE THE QUALITY OF LIFE, AND PROMOTE CONSISTENCY BETWEEN TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS AND STATE AND LOCAL PLANNED GROWTH AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS CAMPO 2045 Goals: Goal 1: Improve safety and security for all travel modes. Goal 2: Support economic development and tourism throughout the region Goal 3: Support regional partnerships and planning continuity across the region. Goal 4: Improve efficiency in system management, operations, and movement of people and freight Goal 5: Support land use practices that promote quality of life and economic vitality Goal 6: Seek secure and reliable funding. Goal 7: Improve accessibility and mobility. Goal 8: Maintain a resilient transportation system. DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 21 Figure 4.4 Population Density (Persons Per Square Mile) Source: FEMA National Flood Hazard Data DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 22 SYSTEM MANAGEMENT, PRESERVATION, & RESILEINCY CAMPO works closely with staff from member jurisdictions, MoDOT, and Federal Partners to develop plans and projects that seek to enhance system management, preservation, & resiliency. Efforts are made for early collaboration between CAMPO, local jurisdictions, and the state to ensure that plans and projects are implemented as efficiently as possible. While CAMPO does not have funding to implement projects at this time, staff is available to assist with facilitation, education, and planning. MODOT’S TRANSPORTATION ASSET MANAGEMENT PLAN (TAMP) Federal legislation has required each state to complete a Transportation Asset Management Plan that includes inventory, condition, life cycle cost, and a financial plan to maintain its system. Transportation asset management is a strategic framework for making cost-effective decisions about allocating resources and managing infrastructure. It is based on a process of monitoring the physical condition of assets, predicting deterioration over time and providing information on how to invest in order to maintain or enhance the performance of assets over their useful life. MoDOT’s Transportation Asset Management Plan is a crucial element in achieving MoDOT’s strategic goal of keeping roads and bridges in good condition. The TAMP ensures MoDOT is using taxpayer money wisely by: • Minimizing life cycle costs • Maximizing system performance • Supporting an objective decision making process • Balancing public expectations with limited funding to create a sustainable plan The TAMP is updated annually with the assistance of planning partners such as CAMPO. CAMPO integrates data from the TAMP into planning documents and studies. LOCAL SYSTEM MANAGEMENT AND MONITORING Local jurisdictions regularly collect data on system condition and track condition and capacity. This is done through collecting traffic counts on road segments, bridges, and intersections; or by conducting studies on traffic flow, pavement condition, or material strength. This locally collected data is utilized by CAMPO staff, MoDOT staff, and others to facilitate projects and program that will improve system performance and resiliency. FAST ACT PLANNING FACTORS: 7. PROMOTE EFFICIENT SYSTEM MANAGEMENT AND OPERATION 8. EMPHASIZE THE PRESERVATION OF THE EXISTING TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM 9. IMPROVE THE RESILIENCY AND RELIABILITY OF THE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM AND REDUCE OR MITIGATE STORMWATER IMPACTS OF SURFACE TRANSPORTATION CAMPO 2045 Goals: Goal 3: Support regional partnerships and planning continuity across the region. Goal 4: Improve efficiency in system management, operations, and movement of people and freight. Goal 7: Improve accessibility and mobility. Goal 8: Maintain a resilient transportation system. DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 23 ECONOMIC VITALITY, TRAVEL & TOURISM According to the Missouri Division of Tourism, travel supports 3,680 tourism jobs in Cole County and visitor expenditures in Cole County’s tourism-related industries were $144,254,234 in 2018. The CAMPO region includes 88% of Cole County’s population and the Missouri State Capital, Jefferson City. An efficient transportation system is an integral part of the regional economy and, in turn, travel and tourism. CAMPO partners with member jurisdictions, state agencies, and private industry to ensure transportation is supportive of broader economic development initiatives. Annually, CAMPO coordinates with MoDOT and other regional planning partners to prioritize and program transportation projects as part of the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) process. A transportation system is a crucial component of facilitating travel and tourism throughout the area and CAMPO works closely with partners such as the Jefferson City Area Chamber of Commerce, Convention and Visitors Bureau, Mid-Missouri Regional Planning Commission and other local organizations to promote awareness of regional concerns. The CAMPO region is home to several important historic sites, annual events, and recreational opportunities that draw many visitors from around the state and the nation, including: • Missouri State Capitol • Missouri State Museum • Missouri Supreme Court • Missouri State Penitentiary Historic Site • Governor’s Mansion • Katy Trail State Park • Annual festivals in local communities FAST ACT PLANNING FACTORS: 1. SUPPORT THE ECONOMIC VITALITY OF THE METROPOLITAN AREA, ESPECIALLY BY ENABLING GLOBAL COMPETITIVENESS, PRODUCTIVITY, AND EFFICIENCY 10. ENHANCE TRAVEL AND TOURISM CAMPO 2045 Goals: Goal 1: Improve safety and security for all travel modes. Goal 2: Support economic development and tourism throughout the region. Goal 3: Support regional partnerships and planning continuity across the region. Goal 4: Improve efficiency in system management, operations, and movement of people and freight. Goal 5: Support land use practices that promote q uality of life and economic vitality. Goal 6: Seek secure and reliable funding. Goal 7: Improve accessibility and mobility. Goal 8: Maintain a resilient transportation system. DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 24 MISSOURI STATE PENITENTIARY REDEVELOPMENT Authorized in 1832 and approved by the General Assembly in 1833, the Missouri State Penitentiary was the first prison built west of the Mississippi River. A portion of this historic site is owned by the Missouri State Office of Administration and another portion by the City of Jefferson. The tourist site had more than 33,000 visitors in 2016 according to the Jefferson City New Tribune. The site is a focal point for tourism and economic development in the region. Future development of the site will likely include housing, office space, restaurants, new roads and pedestrian access that will be developed in coordination with local stakeholders. Source: Missouri Office of Administration DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 25 3 Visioning & Plan Development DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 26 The Vision: MAINTAIN AND SUPPORT A RESILIENT MULTI-MODAL NETWORK THAT IMPROVES QUALITY OF LIFE AND PROMOTE ECONOMIC VITALITY THROUGH PLANNING FOR SMART COMMUNITY GROWTH. GOALS & STRATEGIES The following list of strategies was developed input from stakeholders and public surveys to aid in achieving the goals listed above. These strategies provide guidance to staff and the CAMPO Board of Directors in developing work programs, policies, and projects. 1. Improve safety and security for all travel modes a. Identify locations for safety improvements b. Improve collaboration between CAMPO and public safety agencies c. Assist with railroad related safety and access improvements such as the boarding platform, crossings, and right-of-way areas d. Encourage collaboration between law enforcement and transit agencies concerning security camera use 2. Support economic development and tourism throughout the region a. Seek funding and provide support for improvements and access to the airport, transit, and the river port b. Improve accessibility to recreational and cultural opportunities c. Expanding wayfinding throughout the region d. Support creation of shuttle services for local and regional events 3. Support regional partnerships and planning continuity across the region. a. Develop data in support of member jurisdictions’ comprehensive plans b. Provide a forum for sharing planning best practices or processes c. Strengthen collaboration with regional planning agencies 4. Improve efficiency in system management, operations, and movement of people and freight a. Maintain and update a regional travel demand model b. Support access management programs c. Identify current or potential congestion locations or bottlenecks d. Identify potential locations for connection improvements e. Improve existing inter-modal and multi-modal facilities f. Support improvements to freight and people movement via rail, air, and river port access g. Improve inter-city and inter-regional transit operations and connectivity h. Improve parking and services specific to freight hauler needs i. Support development and implementation of local parking studies 5. Support land use practices that promote quality of life and economic vitality a. Develop and maintain land use data in support of MPO and regional planning partner needs b. Support member jurisdictions’ plans for connectivity to parks, trails, and open space c. Provide mapping and data development support to local communities DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 27 6. Seek secure and reliable funding a. Provide assistance to regional stakeholders in seeking grants and completing applications b. Maintain a prioritized comprehensive list of illustrative transportation projects c. Continue to maintain a Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP) d. Maintain a list of funding sources and opportunities e. Alert member jurisdictions of available funding resources as they are announced f. Collaborate with regional partners in leveraging funds or applying for grants 7. Improve accessibility and mobility a. Identify barriers to accessibility and mobility (sidewalks, crosswalks, signals, signage, etc.) b. Support development of ADA transition plans among member jurisdictions c. Support improvements to and expansion of passenger rail service d. Maintain and update the Capital Area Pedestrian and Bicycle Plan e. Maintain and update the Coordinated Public Transit-Human Services Transportation Plan f. Review and update documents that support improvements to accessibility such as the Title VI Plan, Limited English Proficiency Plan (LEP), and Public Participation Plan (PPP) 8. Maintain a resilient transportation system a. Encourage preservation of motorized and non-motorized transportation corridors for future growth b. Maintain a database of existing infrastructure and assets for use by regional partners c. Develop and maintain an accurate Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) d. Provide support in maintaining the MoDOT Transportation Management System (TMS) e. Support implementation of individual or collaborative pavement and bridge management systems f. Maintain an updated performance management plan 9. Provide a platform for multi-modal transportation education a. Facilitate, promote and participate in local and regional educational activities b. Develop and disseminate educational tools and resources such as brochures, maps, videos, and other media c. Maintain a consistent public outreach schedule to keep members, planning partners, and the public informed about new innovations or transportation trends d. Strengthen CAMPO’s social media presence DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 28 THE PLANNING PROCESS The MTP was developed through the use of inclusive public outreach, integration of federal planning factors, and scenario planning resulting in the development of the goals and strategies listed in the previous section. The development process followed a national policy of facilitating a “continuing, cooperative, and comprehensive performance- based multimodal” process. In the spring of 2017, the CAMPO Board of Directors moved forward with a full update of the entire Metropolitan Transportation Plan. The Technical Committee members were the key reviewers during in the update of the plan. A full list of participants of Technical Committee members is located at the front of this plan. Source: CAMPO Staff – October, 2018 Holts Summit Open House CAMPO 2045 & Beyond MTP Planning Factors National Goals Performance Measures Stakeholder/ Public Input State Goals Data Analysis Scenario Planning DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 29 PUBLIC OUTREACH From Fall 2018 to Spring of 2019 several meetings, presentation, and public outreach events were held to collect input, including; three stakeholder meetings, one workgroup meeting, and three open house events. Additionally, presentations were given to the Planning and Zoning Commissions in Holts Summit and Jefferson City, and regular updates were provided at Technical Committee meetings and Board of Directors meetings. All of these meetings and events are listed below. • Technical Committee Meetings – September 2018 through May 2019 • Board of Directors Meetings – September 2018 through May 2019 • St. Martins Council Meeting – October 11, 2018 • Open House (Jefferson City) – October 10, 2018 • Holts Summit City Council Meeting – October 11, 2018 • Cole County Commission Meeting – October 16 • Open House (Holts Summit) – October 16, 2018 • Stakeholder Meeting – November 13, 2018 • Jefferson City Planning and Zoning Commission – March 14, 2019 • Open House (Jefferson City) – March 19, 2019 • Holts Summit Planning and Zoning Commission – March 21, 2019 • Work Group Meeting – March 26, 2019 Topics at these meetings or events included discussion and identification of problem areas, opportunities for improvement, and gaps in connectivity. Meeting participants provided staff with data and insight that facilitated the development of goals, strategies, projects, programs, and policies that would further the MTP vision. In addition to the public meetings and committee meetings CAMPO also invited comment and participation of several other stakeholders including: • Local Law Enforcement • State and Federal Agencies • Freight Representatives • Private Schools • Tourism Promoters • Local Non-Profits and Advocacy Groups DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 30 OUTREACH TO CAMPO JURISDICTIONS Presentations were given and/or meetings held with each CAMPO jurisdiction during the development of the plan. Each jurisdiction was given the opportunity provide input on the development of the goals, strategies, and projects in the MTP. Presentations were made at Zoning Commission meetings in Holts Summit and Jefferson City. STAKEHOLDER SURVEYS A survey was sent to all member jurisdictions, board members, and technical committee members requesting input on short term and long term needs throughout the region. The questionnaire was used to identify high-priority needs and possible solutions. Stakeholders were asked to think about these needs in two categories; Near-Term (<5 years) and Long-Term (beyond 5 years). Stakeholder Responses o Congestion on US 54/63 North of the Missouri River Bridge o US 50/63/Rex-Whitton Expressway Congestion Improvements. o Safety and congestion issues at Dix Road and US50 o Halifax, Nieman & Major Intersection Improvements o Safety and congestion issues at Clark Avenue, US 50/63, and Dunkin o E. Simon drainage improvements o West Edgewood and Stadium Intersection Improvements o US 54/Holts Summit - Pedestrian access across highway on Central and E. Simon o Missouri Boulevard Capacity/Safety o Bald Hill and Seven Hills Intersection improvements o Safety Improvements on W. Truman at Scott Station Road and Ventura Ave. o Sidewalks in Holts Summit along Karen, Halifax, and S. Summit o Safety Improvements at Swifts Hwy/Jefferson St. o Katy Trail connectivity to Holts Summit o Safety and congestion issues Christy Drive/ Tanner Bridge/ Jefferson/ US 54 o U 54 interchange improvements at Ellis, Southwest, and Stadium. o Madison Street Safety and Capacity Issues o Tri-level Improvements (US50,63, 54 interchange) o South Summit Drive sidewalk, drainage, and intersection improvements o Extension of runways at Jefferson City Memorial Airport o Spalding Road and Park Place Drainage issues o Construction of new transit facilities for JEFFTRAN o Van Horn & Julie Lane intersection improvements o Rt T/D and US 50 intersection and pedestrian issues o Greenway crossings and extensions o Construction of a port on the Missouri River o Renovation or replacement of the Amtrak Train Station in Jefferson City o Additional overpass exit ramps at South Summit and US-54 in Callaway County o intersection improvements at Routes B, M, W, and Ashbury Way in Wardsville o South Country Club and US 50 Interchange Improvements o Bike Lane installation o E. Miller St. Roadway improvements o Ellis Boulevard and Moreau Drive Intersection improvements DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 31 PUBLIC COMMENTS More than 100 members of the public provided staff with comments during the MTP planning process. A public survey was used to ask people what they saw as needs and trends in the region. The survey was given to residents and non-residents alike. 44% of survey respondents live in Jefferson City, 20% live in Holts Summit, with the remainder living in other nearby comminutes inside and outside the CAMPO region. 85% stated that they work in Jefferson City. This is consistent with the large amount of commuters that work in Jefferson City and drive in from the surrounding rural areas. WHEN ASKED ABOUT TRANSPORTATION NEEDS IN THE REGION… WHEN ASKED ABOUT TRENDS AFFECTING THE FUTURE OF THE REGION… WHEN ASKED WHAT IS IMPORTANT TO THE OVERALL VISION OF THE REGION… DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 32 UPDATING THE MTP The MTP is federally mandated to be updated every five years to reflect the changing needs and capacities of the region. The next update of this plan will take place in 2023-2024. That being said, if there are significant changes to growth patterns, demographics, technology or the transportation network modifications or amendments may be made. As an example, the 2020 Decennial Census may facilitate changes to certain growth patterns or show a shift in regional dynamics. This may also result in a change to the CAMPO boundary. New funding sources, changes in legislation, or shifts in revenue may also trigger modifications to the plan. For these reasons, routine review of the plan is necessary. AMENDMENTS & MODIFICATIONS Between updates the MTP may be changed through an amendment or administrative modification. An amendment to the MTP is subject to a 7-day public comment period after being reviewed by the Technical Committee and before being approved by the Board of Directors. If staff conducts an administrative modification, notice will be provided to the Board of Directors either prior to or immediately following the modification. Appendix B contains a list of amendments and administrative modifications. Definitions of an amendment or administrative modification, according to 23 CFR §450.104, are as follows: Administrative modification means a minor revision to a long-range statewide or metropolitan transportation plan, Transportation Improvement Program (TIP), or Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) that includes minor changes to project/project phase costs, minor changes to funding sources of previously included projects, and minor changes to project/project phase initiation dates. An administrative modification is a revision that does not require public review and comment, a redemonstration of fiscal constraint, or a conformity determination (in nonattainment and maintenance areas). Amendment means a revision to a long-range statewide or metropolitan transportation plan, TIP, or STIP that involves a major change to a project included in a metropolitan transportation plan, TIP, or STIP, including the addition or deletion of a project or a major change in project cost, project/project phase initiation dates, or a major change in design concept or design scope (e.g., changing project termini or the number of through traffic lanes or changing the number of stations in the case of fixed guideway transit projects). Changes to projects that are included only for illustrative purposes do not require an amendment. An amendment is a revision that requires public review and comment and a redemonstration of fiscal constraint. If an amendment involves “non- exempt” projects in nonattainment and maintenance areas, a conformity determination is required. DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 33 INCORPORATION OF OTHER PLANS AND STUDIES The Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) takes into consideration several local and regional planning efforts and studies. Many of these previous planning efforts have identified projects, strategies, and activities that are aligned with the goals outlined in the MTP. PLANS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE CAMPO Transportation Improvement Program (updated annually) Appendix E Capital Area Pedestrian and Bicycle Plan – 2016 Appendix F CAMPO Coordinated Public Transit-Human Services Transportation Plan – 2017 Appendix G CAMPO Travel Demand Model Report Appendix H CAMPO Wayfinding Plan – 2016 Appendix I Thoroughfare Plan (To be completed in late 2020, following completion of MTP) Appendix J OTHER IMPORTANT PLANS AND STUDIES The following list includes several other plans, studies, and assessments that have influenced the development of the MTP and guide decision making within the MPO. • Callaway County Hazard Mitigation Plan • Callaway County Emergency Management Plan • Central Missouri Multimodal Port Feasibility Study • Cole County Master Plan • Cole County Hazard Mitigation Plan • Cole County Emergency Management Plan • Cole County/Jefferson City, County-Wide Transportation Study (2003) • Holts Summit Transportation Plan • Holts Summit Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Transit Plan • Jefferson City Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice • Jefferson City Central East Side Neighborhood Plan • Jefferson City CDBG Program Consolidated Plan • Jefferson City Comprehensive Plan • Jefferson City Greenways Master Plan • Jefferson City Historic Preservation Plan • Jefferson City Memorial Airport Master Plan • Jefferson City Parking Study Update (2017) • Jefferson City Sewerage Master Plan • Jefferson City Southside Redevelopment Plan • Jefferson City Transit Feasibility Study • Jefferson City Transit System Wide Assessment (2017) • Missouri River Freight Corridor Assessment & Development Plan • Mid-Missouri Regional Planning Commission Regional Transportation Plan • Mid-Missouri Regional Planning Commission Coordinated Public Transit-Human Services Transportation Plan • MoDOT Long-Range Transportation Plan DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 34 Strategies, Policies, Projects Forecasting Data Analysis SCENARIO PLANNING Scenario planning is a way to achieve a shared vision for the future by analyzing various factors that can impact the way in which a region develops. A framework is developed to assist stakeholders in making decisions to reach a shared vision. Transportation planning utilizes scenarios by considering how changes in transportation, land use, resources, demographics, or other factors may affect connectivity, mobility, and resiliency throughout the region. For the 2045 MTP, four land use scenarios were created and a preferred scenario was chosen as the most likely scenario for future development. The preferred scenario was then used as part of a Travel Demand Model (TDM). The TDM takes the preferred land use scenario and analyzes the impacts of development on the transportation system, highlighting points of congestion, capacity, and increased demands on the road network. CAMPO staff worked with City Explained, Inc. and used their scenario planning software, CommunityViz, to develop the land use scenarios. THE FOUR SCENARIOS Figure 3.1 provides a comparison of the four scenarios, including future residential density and traffic impacts. Trend •This scenario reflects an anticipated development based on current trends. The Trend Scenario looked at current landuse, 20-30 years of population growth, adopted plans and policies, zoning, and stakeholder input. Central City Development •This scenario uses the Trend Scenario as a base and then imagines more infill in downtown Jefferson City. A filling in of vacant or abandoned properties with residential and commercial development that is consistent with recent neighborhood plans and changes in zoning. Unincorporated Growth •This scenario uses the Trend Scenario as a base and then imagines more intensive development of the unincorporated portions of the CAMPO region just west of Jefferson City and just outside of Holts Summit. Aggressive Growth •This scenario assumes much more aggressive growth rates, more than double those of the other scenarios and stands as a “stress test” on metro-area systems over the coming decades. DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 35 Figure 3.1 Scenario Comparisons DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 36 THE PREFERRED SCENARIO After evaluating the four scenarios and gathering public and stakeholder input the Trend Scenario, highlighted in Figure 3.2, was chosen as the preferred scenario. This scenario represented a middle ground between the Central City Scenario and the Unincorporated Growth Scenario. These scenarios both reflect current trends seen in the community with larger amounts of new housing developments occurring in unincorporated areas, and neighborhood plans and rezoning occurring in the central part of Jefferson City and Holts Summit. Both scenarios are reflected in the Trend. The Aggressive Growth Scenario provided staff and stakeholders with an opportunity to better identify weak points in the transportation network that may be exacerbated during peak times, special events, or potentially larger than expected growth were to occur. Figure 3.2: Preferred Scenario Overview Indicator Today 2045 Change Population 77,727 92,105 18.50% Jobs 55,596 62,563 12.50% Jobs per person 0.72 0.68 -5.60% Dwelling Units 36,761 43,561 18.50% Commercial ft2 11 Million 12.3 Million 11.90% Industrial ft2 9.2 Million 10.7 Million 17.20% In the development of the scenarios, housing and residential growth were the focus of analysis. Figure 3.3 illustrates the projected residential density for the 2045 planning horizon. • 20% of new residential growth and 16% of commercial/ industrial growth will occur north of the Missouri River in the Holts Summit area, while 80% of new residential growth and 84% of commercial/ industrial growth will occur south of the river in Jefferson City and Unincorporated Cole County. • Currently, over 75% of existing housing in the region is detached, single family residences and approximately 25% of housing occurs either as multi-family housing, typically either townhomes or apartments. In the preferred scenario, this pattern continues with 88% of new housing expected to be detached, single family housing. • While all communities in the area will experience some growth in the preferred scenario, some communities will grow more than others. Approximately 22% of new residential growth will occur in Jefferson City, followed by Holts Summit with 10%. Most other communities will experience between 3-5% of new growth with the remainder in the unincorporated areas. • While most of the region’s housing stock is within existing incorporated communities, 61% of the residential growth in the preferred scenario occurs in areas that are currently in unincorporated Cole or Callaway Counties. DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 37 Figure 3.3: Preferred Scenario – 2045 Projected Future Residential Density TRAVEL DEMAND MODEL (TDM) ANALYSIS Using land use data and other demographic data the TDM provides an analysis of current and projected transportation demands on the transportation system over a 25 year planning horizon. The modeling process is a system-level effort. Although individual links of a highway network can be analyzed, the results are intended for determination of system-wide impacts. The TDM provides a list of recommended improvements that are then incorporated into the MTP’s Illustrative Project List. CAMPO contracted with HDR, Inc. to develop the 2045 TDM and subsequent report, located in Appendix H. METHOD The TDM forecasts include current travel demand using a 2015 base year and models demand out to the 2045 long term planning horizon. The model uses current population and development information, based on census data and parcel data to determine existing generalized land use, and forecasted future population and land use development to 2045 as inputs. The following methods were used to determine residential and commercial development out to year 2045. DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 38  The functional classification of the road network had been developed earlier, so traffic counts on roadway links, and turning movements at selected intersections were conducted for calibration purposes.  2010 census population data formed the baseline population.  2010 to 2020 growth rates were identified for CAMPO area, and then future growth rates for Callaway and Cole County portions of CAMPO area were calculated.  Municipal populations within CAMPO area were calculated, along with the urban and rural portions of CAMPO.  Parcel data for Cole and Callaway Counties, from County Assessor files were used to help determine an initial land use classification and specific facility size and class of properties.  Properties were defined using both general land use classification codes and ITE (Institute of Transportation Engineers) land use classifications codes.  GIS data was used to evaluate development potential for currently undeveloped areas within CAMPO. Development constraints, such as flood plains, steep slopes, and provision of sewers and utilities were used to identify physical limitations to future development.  Significant identifiable commercial and residential developments, (within 5-10 years) were included in the future land use map. Other less identifiable development (15-25 years out) was added to the future land use map later, but with less detail.  New roads were added to the network first, as projects that clearly were going on the network such as interchanges, arterials, and corridors for arterial roads. PROJECTED TRAVEL DEMAND FOR PEOPLE AND FREIGHT The number of vehicle miles of travel (or VMT) is an indicator of the roadway system travel levels by motor vehicles and is an estimate, based upon traffic volume counts and roadway lengths, for a specific point in time. Regional daily VMT in 2010 was 1.75 Million and the 2045 projected daily VMT is 2.56 Million, doubling over a 35 year period. Figure 3.4: 2045 Congested Roadways PROJECTED TRAFFIC VOLUMES TO CAPACITY (V/C) Generally, intersections are the congestion points in the roadways. Intersections generate conflicts with turning movements, differences in vehicle speeds, and cross traffic requirements for stoplights. Intersections that have reached their maximum ability to move traffic through that point are said to have reached 100% of their capacity and the result is traffic backup, delays, and possible “gridlock” during peak hours in the morning and evening. Figures 3.4-3.6 depict congested and over capacity roadways and intersections throughout the CAMPO Region. Source: CAMPO 2045 TDM Report April 2019 DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 39 Figure 3.5: 2045 PM Peak Hour Intersection Analysis (Table 4-6 in TDM Report) Source: CAMPO 2045 TDM Report May 2019 Figure 3.6: 2045 PM Peak Hour Intersection Analysis (Table 4-6 in TDM Report) Source: CAMPO 2045 TDM Report April 2019 DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 40 4 Regional Overview DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 41 POPULATION TRENDS The CAMPO region is a generally slow growth area with pockets of more intense growth. Growth within the CAMPO region is currently calculated at approximately 0.8% annually. Based on 2000 and 2010 decennial census data the fastest growing communities in the CAMPO region are Holts Summit with a 22% population increase and Wardsville at more than 50%. While these communities do not have dense populations, they are growing quickly. Figure 4.1depicts percent of population change within the CAMPO region. Figure 4.1 Population Change 2000-2010 Source: 2000 and 2010 Decennial Census DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 42 The most densely populated areas are in central Jefferson City and unincorporated areas between Jefferson City and St. Martins as shown in Figure 4.2. An overview of population by jurisdiction is provided in Figure 4.3. Figure 4.2 Population Density (Persons Per Square Mile) Source: 2000 and 2010 Decennial Census Figure 4.3 Population by Jurisdiction Jurisdiction 2016 ACS 5-YR Estimated Population 2010 Decennial Census Percent of CAMPO Planning Area Holts Summit 4,182 3,597 5.0% Jefferson City 42,895 43,079 59.8% St. Martins 1,177 1,140 1.6% Taos 1144 878 1.2% Wardsville 1,550 1,506 2.1% Unincorporated Cole County *18,507 18,507 25.7% Unincorporated Callaway County *3,290 3,290 4.6% Totals **77,727 71,997 100% * Population totals for unincorporated areas of the CAMPO planning area are not available in the 5-YR ACS Data. ACS is only available as the Block Group Level which is aligned with the CAMPO Boundary. The 2016 ACS total for the MPA is an estimate. **This population estimate was developed through the scenario planning process using several data sources, more information about this estimate can be found in the Travel Demand Model in Appendix H. Source: US Census Bureau and 2019 Travel Demand Model DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 43 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE Environmental Justice, in terms of transportation planning, means identifying and addressing disproportionately high and adverse effects of transportation projects, programs, and policies on minority populations and low-income populations to achieve an equitable distribution of benefits and burdens across the region. Environmental Justice is important because it helps to ensure full and fair participation by potentially affected communities in every phase of the transportation decision-making process. When this is accomplished, the development, construction, operation and maintenance of transportation projects should reflect an equitable distribution of benefits and burdens. In 1994 an Executive Order, by President Clinton, was issued directing federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable, to identify and address disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs, policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income populations. In 1997, the Department of Transportation issued an Order to address Environmental Justice in minority populations and low-income populations to summarize and expand upon the previous 1994 Order. The Federal Highway Administration then issued its own Order in 1998 in an effort to address the effects of their programs, policies, and activities. Another Executive Order in 2000, expanded protection against national origin discrimination, by ensuring programs are accessible by people with limited English proficiency. Recipients of federal funding are to ensure that there are no disproportionate adverse impacts in the above mentioned communities, or those considered transportation dependent due to age or physical limitations, when allocating or spending federal funds. The MTP identifies the locations of the following groups in order to better understand impacts of transportation programs, policies, and activities. • low-income • elderly and youth • disabled • minority • limited English proficiency Federal guidance identifies significant areas as those which contain more of the vulnerable population than the average for the region. The location of these populations has been compared to the location of the constrained projects included in the Transportation Improvement Program once they are determined. Most state-system projects and local-system projects generally occur in these higher population areas with greater concentrations of vulnerable populations. Recent transportation improvements in these areas consist of improved capacity for vehicles and improved access for pedestrians, cyclists, and transit users. DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 44 LOW-INCOME Low-income or poverty is determined by the federal poverty guidelines and are represented by individuals living below 185% of the poverty line, which are generated annually based on family size and composition. Low-income individuals and families may be more likely to seek public transportation or other transportation alternatives to automobiles. Figure 4.4 depicts the percent of low-income populations within the CAMPO planning area. The inner core of Jefferson City has block groups with significantly higher percentages, 40% to 65% or greater, of persons living below the poverty line as compared to the outlying areas. Western portions of the planning also have higher levels of poverty with 15% to 40%. Figure 4.4 Population in Poverty Source: 2012-2016 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 45 ELDERLY Figure 4.5 shows the distribution of the elderly population, 65 years of age or older, within the CAMPO planning area. As the “Baby Boomer” generation (individuals born in the United States between mid-1946 and mid-1964) continues to reach retirement age, municipalities across the country will be faced with the transportation needs of an increasingly aging population. The western portion of the planning area and much of the surrounding rural area has higher percentages of elderly individuals. The central core of Jefferson City is home to a high concentration of elderly individuals living in senior housing, public housing, and assisted living facilities. This concentration is crossed by two transit routes, is close to the Jefferson City greenway system, accessible by sidewalk, and lies close to three major US Highways. Figure 4.5 Population Over the Age of 65 Source: 2012-2016 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 46 MINORITY POPULATIONS Figure 4.6 shows the distribution of minority populations within the CAMPO planning area. The core, and historically oldest, sections of Jefferson City has the highest density of minorities. There are some higher concentrations of minorities that can be found in parts of unincorporated Cole County as well. Figure 4.6 Population Over the Age of 65 Source: 2012-2016 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 47 POPULATIONS WITH DISABILITIES Figure 4.7 provides an overview of Callaway and Cole county populations with a disability. The 2010 Decennial Census provides the best data for this type of demographic. Questions about disability status in the American Community Survey data since the decennial census are not comparable after 2010. Figure 4.7 Percent of Population With a Disability Callaway County Cole County Total civilian non-institutionalized population 14.2% 13.2% Population under 5 years 1.1% 0.4% With a hearing difficulty 1.1% 0.3% With a vision difficulty 0.5% 0.1% Population 5 to 17 years 7.9% 5.4% With a hearing difficulty 0.8% 0.4% With a vision difficulty 1.3% 0.5% With a cognitive difficulty 6.4% 3.1% With an ambulatory difficulty 2.3% 1.2% With a self-care difficulty 2.0% 0.6% Population 18 to 64 years 12.1% 12.1% With a hearing difficulty 3.3% 2.8% With a vision difficulty 1.2% 2.9% With a cognitive difficulty 4.5% 5.4% With an ambulatory difficulty 6.6% 6.2% With a self-care difficulty 1.7% 1.5% With an independent living difficulty 3.4% 3.8% Population 65 years and over 40.2% 37.4% With a hearing difficulty 19.5% 16.5% With a vision difficulty 5.4% 6.7% With a cognitive difficulty 7.6% 8.1% With an ambulatory difficulty 23.1% 23.0% With a self-care difficulty 5.9% 5.8% With an independent living difficulty 14.2% 14.1% Source: 2010 US Census DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 48 TITLE VI It is the policy of CAMPO that no person is excluded from participation in, denied the benefit of, or subjected to, discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance on the basis of race, color, or national origin under Title VI and related nondiscrimination statutes. To certify compliance with environmental justice requirements, CAMPO incorporates the following activities into the planning processes and works towards the following: 1. Enhancement of analytical capabilities to ensure that the Metropolitan Transportation Plan and the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) comply with Title VI. 2. Identify residential, employment, and transportation patterns of low-income and minority populations so that their needs can be identified and addressed, and the benefits and burdens of transportation investments will be fairly distributed. 3. Evaluate, and where necessary, improve public involvement processes to eliminate participation barriers and engage minority and low-income populations in transportation decision-making. The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) requires funding recipients to report certain general information to determine compliance with Title VI. The collection and reporting of this information constitutes a recipient’s Title VI Program. To ensure compliance with 49 CFR Section 21.9 (b), the FTA requires that all recipients document their compliance with this chapter by submitting a Title VI Program to the FTA’s regional civil rights officer once every three years. As subrecipients, CAMPO submits a Titile VI Plan to their primary recipient, MoDOT. Limited English Proficieny CAMPO maintains a Limited English Proficiency Plan (LEP) as part of Title VI requirements. The plan provides an analysis of LEP populations in the region. According to 2016 5-Year American Community Survey data there are as few as 37 LEP households in the region, only 1.1% of total households. DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 49 ECONOMIC ACTIVITY The CAMPO region lies in the center of the Jefferson City Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA). The Jefferson City MSA includes the counties of Callaway, Cole, Moniteau, and Osage. Defined by the US Office of Management and Budget, the MSA is anchored by the city of Jefferson City and had a 2017 population of approximately 151,056. Generally, an MSA is an economically and socially connected region with concentrated population center (Jefferson City). Jefferson City and the CAMPO region as a whole is heavily impacted by and connected to the larger MSA region. This section will include data and statistics that provided at the MSA level. Figure 4.8 provides a comparison between the Jefferson City MSA and the State of Missouri. Figure 4.8 Comparison of Jefferson City MSA to State of Missouri Source: CAMPO, datausa.io DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 50 EMPLOYMENT The largest industries in the MSA are Public Administration, Health Care & Social Assistance, and Retail/Services. Within the CAMPO region, state government is by far the largest employer. All state agency headquarters are located in Jefferson City. Figure 4.9 provides a list of major employers in the CAMPO region. Figure 4.10 provides a breakdown of jobs by sector within the Jefferson City MSA using the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS). Figure 4.9 Major Employers Employer Employees Employer Employees State of Missouri 14,174 Lincoln University 369 Jefferson City Public Schools 1,627 County of Cole 363 Capital Region Medical Center 1,527 Gerbes Super Market (2) 294 Scholastic Inc. 1,500 Missouri Farm Bureau 283 Quaker Windows & Doors 1,051 McDonald's Restaurants 250 Central Bancompany 1,020 State Technical College of Missouri 229 SSM Health - St. Mary's Hospital 982 Meyer Electric Co. 216 ABB, Inc. 865 Command Web 200 City of Jefferson 830 Modern Litho/Brown Printing 193 Wal-Mart Supercenter (2) 665 Modine Manufacturing Co. 191 Jefferson City Medical Group (JCMG) 629 Sam's Club 182 Unilever Home & Personal Care 467 Lowe's Home Improvements 178 WIPRO Infocrossing 461 Learfield Communications 171 Hy-Vee Food Stores 455 DeLong's, Inc. 154 Source: Jefferson City Chamber of Commerce Figure 4.10 Jobs by Industry Sector 2015 Jefferson City MSA - Jobs by NAICS* Industry Sector 2015 Industry Sector Count Share Industry Sector Count Share Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting 548 0.8% Real Estate and Rental and Leasing 465 0.7% Mining, Quarrying, and Oil and Gas Extraction 135 0.2% Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services 2,319 3.6% Utilities 861 1.3% Management of Companies and Enterprises 1,330 2.1% Construction 3,501 5.4% Administration & Support, Waste Management and Remediation 2,676 4.1% Manufacturing 5,034 7.8% Educational Services 5,378 8.3% Wholesale Trade 2,060 3.2% Health Care and Social Assistance 8,412 13.0% Retail Trade 7,582 11.7% Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation 847 1.3% Transportation and Warehousing 1,731 2.7% Accommodation and Food Services 4,467 6.9% Information 1,060 1.6% Other Services (excluding Public Administration) 1,711 2.6% Finance and Insurance 2,316 3.6% Public Administration 12,259 18.9% Source: https://onthemap.ces.census.gov/ DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 51 JOB DENSITY Most jobs in the CAMPO region are located in Jefferson City and many people commute to the CAMPO region for employment opportunities. Fulton, MO, which is in the Jefferson City MSA lies 25 mile north of Jefferson City and also has high concentrations of employment opportunities. Figure 4.11 depicts jobs density - where people work within 25 miles of Jefferson City. Figure 4.12 depicts jobs density - where people live within 25 miles of Jefferson City. Figure 4.11 Jefferson City MSA Jobs Density by where people work within 25 miles of Jefferson City Source: https://onthemap.ces.census.gov/ DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 52 Figure 4.12 Jefferson City MSA Jobs Density by where people live within 25 miles of Jefferson City Source: https://onthemap.ces.census.gov/ DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 53 LAND USE Figure 4.13 Proportions of 2018 land use by category Several trends emerged from the land use study and travel demand modeling. Residential unit numbers are decreasing in the downtown area as redevelopment occurs, but residential development is occurring at high rates south and west of Jefferson City and north into Callaway County around Holts Summit. New commercial development is occurring along Missouri Boulevard with major street improvements and big box retailers. New schools, Pioneer Trails Elementary and the soon to be complete Capital City High School, will prompt more residential development. Figure 4.13 and 4.14 provide a general overview of land use in the CAMPO region. Figure 4.14 Current Land Use Commercial 3% Commercial/ Residential 1% Agriculture 64% Industrial 2% Institutional 3% Public Use 4% Residential 23% DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 54 5 The Transportation System DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 55 ROADS AND BRIDGES The CAMPO planning area consists of an extensive network of roadways and bridges. This network ranges from local streets serving neighborhood needs to highways and expressways serving national and regional trip purposes. This network is the primary system used to support the efficient movement of people and goods within and through the region. The network includes at least 6,874 total miles of roads and 159 bridges. ROAD NETWORK Of the 642 total miles of roads in the CAMPO Region, 66% (422 miles) are maintained by municipalities (cities or counties). The major routes into and through the region are US highways 54, 50, and 63, intersecting directly south of the Missouri River bridge, near the center of Jefferson City. In 2016 the Missouri River bridge crossing carried an Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) of 53,542 vehicles as seen in Figure 5.1. Figure 5.1: 2016 MoDOT Traffic Volume and Commercial Vehicle Counts for the Jefferson City Urbanized Area Source: Image cropped from the 2016 MoDOT Central District Traffic Volume and Commercial Vehicle Count Map. AADT = Annual Average Daily Traffic. Some AADTs on this map are estimates. All data is processed and reported in accordance with the Federal Highway Administration Traffic Monitoring Guide. DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 56 THE NATIONAL HIGHWAY SYSTEM (NHS) The NHS consists of roadways important to the nation's economy, defense, and mobility. NHS Routes in the CAMPO planning area consist of US 50, US 54, US 63. The National Highway System (NHS) includes the following subsystems of roadways: 1. Interstate: The Eisenhower Interstate System of highways retains its separate identity within the NHS. The CAMPO region does not include any Interstate roadways. 2. Other Principal Arterials: Highways in rural and urban areas that provide access between an arterial and a major port, airport, public transportation facility, or other intermodal transportation facility. 3. Strategic Highway Network (STRAHNET): A highway network important to the United States' strategic defense policy, providing defense access, continuity and emergency capabilities for defense purposes. 4. Major Strategic Highway Network Connectors: Highways that provide access between major military installations and highways that are part of the Strategic Highway Network. 5. Intermodal Connectors: These highways provide access between major intermodal facilities and the other four subsystems making up the National Highway System. DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 57 FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION Functional classification, governed by federal guidelines, is the process by which roads, streets and highways are grouped into classes according to the character of service they are intended to provide. It defines the role that any particular road or street should play in serving the flow of trips through a highway network. Functional classification progresses from a lower classification handling short, local trips to a higher classification as the trips become longer and connect regional and inter-regional traffic generators. Functional classification changes are submitted to FHWA every year for review and approval. Functional classifications are periodically reviewed by MoDOT and local representatives, but are usually updated every ten years, coinciding with U.S. Census revisions of urban boundaries. The CAMPO functional classification system was last reviewed and revised in early 2013. Functional classification is used in transportation planning, roadway design and determining the funding eligibility of transportation projects. Private roads are not included in the CAMPO functional classification network nor are interstate highways, tribal lands roadways, or federal lands roadways. Functionally classed roadways in the CAMPO network include US highways, state highways, county roads, and some municipal roads/streets. These roadways are divided into urban and rural, and are further classified as local, collector, or arterial as seen in Figure 5.2. Figure 5.2 Federal System for Functional Classifications Source: FHWA Functional Classification Guidelines DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 58 Figure 5.3 Functional Classifications of CAMPO Roadways Source: MoDOT 2017 Data Federal-Aid Highway Program The Federal-Aid Highway Program supports State highway systems by providing financial assistance for the construction, maintenance, and operations of the Nation's 3.9 million-mile highway network, including Interstates, primary highways and secondary local roads. FHWA is charged with implementing the Federal-Aid Highway Program in cooperation with the States and local governments. Nationally, local governments own and operate about 75 percent of the Nation's highway network. The Program applies to all “functionally classed” roads, with the exception of Minor Collectors or Local. Figure 5.3 provides a map of functionally classed roadways In the CAMPO region. Figure 5.4 provides a breakdown of miles of federal-aide eligible roadways. DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 59 Figure 5.4: CAMPO Federal-Aide Eligible Lane Miles by Jurisdiction Jurisdiction Lane Miles Total State System Off System Callaway 31.14 10.98 42.12 Holts Summit 17.04 14.37 31.4 Jefferson City 1.64 18.43 Cole 116.44 28.46 144.89 Jefferson City 152.17 143.84 276.58 St. Martins 10.11 4.39 14.5 Taos 8.66 0 8.66 Wardsville 7.65 0 7.65 Total 343.21 201.04 544.23 CONDITION There are 543 miles of Federal-Aid eligible roadway in the CAMPO region. This total includes both MoDOT maintained (On-System) roads and locally maintained roads. MoDOT maintains 363 miles of Federal-Aid roadways within the region. Local governments maintain the remaining 180 miles of Federal-Aid roadways. According to 2017 MoDOT pavement condition data, 55% of all Federal-Aid eligible roadways in the CAMPO region are in “good” condition and 45% are in “not good” condition. Roadway condition has been calculated based on MoDOT’s “Tracker Condition”, with good condition suggesting no major investment is needed and poor condition suggesting major reconstruction investment is needed. Figure 5.5 provides an overview of system condition. Figure 5.5 Condition of Functionally Classed Federal-Aid Eligible CAMPO Roadways Source: MoDOT 2017 Data – Tracker Condition FREEWAY (216 miles) PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL (16 miles) MINOR ARTERIAL (152 miles) MAJOR COLLECTOR (156 miles) Not Good 21%1%73%55% Good 79%99%27%45% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Not Good Good DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 60 Jefferson City 35 Callaway County 2 Cole County 22 Taos 2 61 Off-System Bridges Jefferson City 69 Callaway County 6 Cole County 20 St. Martins 1 Holts Summit 2 98 State-System Bridges BRIDGES Based on a data provided by MoDOT’s Transportation Management System (TMS), there are 159 bridges in the CAMPO planning area. 98 of these bridges are “state-system” bridges that are inspected, maintained, and rehabilitated by MoDOT. The other 61 bridges are “off-system” structures that are the responsibility of local jurisdictions, although MoDOT may provide some support in inspection. Figure 5.6 provides a breakdown of bridges by jurisdiction. Figure 5.6 Distribution of Off-System and State-System Bridges Source: MoDOT 2017 Data The Missouri River Bridge The Missouri River crossing in Jefferson City carries US 54 and US 63 and consists of two separate bridges, northbound and southbound. The southbound bridge, opened in 1955, has a total length of 3,093 feet and a deck width of 38 feet. The northbound bridge, opened in 1991, has a total length of 3,124.2 feet and a deck width of 47 feet. An eight foot wide pedestrian bridge, opened in April 2011, is located on the East side of the northbound bridge. Only open to bicycle and foot traffic, the bridge provides connectivity between Jefferson City on the South side and the Katy Trail and parks on the North side of the river. The pedestrian bridge includes two look out points. Source: CAMPO Staff DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 61 The Missouri River Bridge in Jefferson City has been identified as part of the regional critical transportation infrastructure with more than 53,000 vehicles crossing the river on an average day. The nearest alternative Missouri River bridge crossing is at Hermann (40 miles to the east) or at Rocheport (32 miles to the northwest) on Interstate 70. Both Jefferson City bridges had some rehabilitation in 2016 and are expected to have more rehabilitation in 2021. The bridge is inspected regularly. Rocheport Bridge Impacts While not in the CAMPO region, the I-70 Rocheport Bridge is very important to the flow of traffic through Mid-Missouri and the nation. MoDOT announced in 2018 that the Rocheport Bridge, which is 60 years old, will last only ten more years even with rehabilitation. If closed, for rehabilitation or replacement, the impacts on the CAMPO region would be significant. Source: MoDOT I-70 and the Rocheport Bridge are at the heart of national and regional distribution carrying approximately 100 million tons of freight, worth more than $154 billion, annually. More than 20 percent of this freight is through-traffic, traveling from rural areas in the west on to New York, New England, and the Mid-Atlantic. Rehabilitation of Rocheport Bridge will require closing two lanes for seven to nine months, with predicted traffic modeling of three to eight hour backups. The Rocheport Bridge carries 12.5 million vehicles per year, including 3.6 million trucks. While the surrounding area is rural, there are a number of mid-sized cities within close proximity to the bridge – including Columbia and Jefferson City – and it connects Missouri’s two largest cities of St. Louis and Kansas City. During traffic delays, long distance trucking would likely divert to Arkansas or Iowa to move across the U.S., while local traffic is expected to re- route on US Routes 40, 36, 63 and 50. The Jefferson City Missouri River crossing, which carries US 63 and US 54, is the closest major river crossing in the Mid-Missouri area and would be heavily impacted. The Booneville crossing, which is quite close to Rocheport, would not have the capacity to handle large amounts of detour traffic and most travelers and freight would detour through Jefferson City. DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 62 BRIDGE CONDITION Figure 5.7: Bridge Condition Ratings MoDOT inspects state-system bridges and culverts on a two-year inspection cycle. Bridges and culverts that are rated “serious” to “poor,” or other bridges with unique structural features such as major truss structures, are inspected more frequently on an annual basis. Bridges and culverts that are referred to as “Off-System Bridges” may be inspected by a variety of personnel. These personnel include MoDOT staff, city and county staff, and some by consultant. According to the National Bridge Inspection Standards (NBIS), condition ratings are used to describe an existing bridge or culvert compared with its condition if it were new. The ratings are based on the materials, physical condition of the deck (riding surface), the superstructure (supports immediately beneath the driving surface) and the substructures (foundation and supporting posts and piers). General condition ratings range from 0 to 9. Through periodic safety inspections, data is collected on the condition of the primary components of a bridge structure. Condition ratings are collected and ratings of 4 or less on one of the following items classifies a bridge as structurally deficient: • The bridge deck, including the wearing surface • The superstructure, including all primary load-carrying members and connections • The substructure, considering the abutments and all piers The deck, superstructure and substructure are each rated separately. If any of the three structures rate a 2 or lower, the bridge is typically closed. The overall condition of the bridge is the lowest rating of the three structures. Figure 5.7 depicts the rating system used to inspect bridges. Figure 5.8 depicts the location of bridges their condition ratings. (9)Excellent excellent condition (8)Very Good no problems noted (7)Good some minor problems (6)Satisfactory structural elements show some minor deterioration (5)Fair all primary structural elements are sound but may have minor section loss, cracking, spalling or scour (4)Poor advanced section loss, deterioration, spalling or s cour (3)Serious loss of section, deterioration, spalling or s cour have seriously affected primary structural members. Local failures are possible. Fatigue cracks in steel or shear cracks in concrete may be present. (2)Critical advanced deterioration of primary structural elements. Fatigue cracks in steel or shear cracks in concrete may be present or scour may have removed substructure support. Unless closely monitored it may be necessary to close the bridge until corrective action is taken. (1)Imminent Failure major deterioration or section loss present in critical structural members or obvious vertical or horizontal movement affecting structure stability. Bridge is closed to traffic until corrective action is completed. (0)Failed out of service – beyond corrective action Source: MoDOT N o t D e f i c i e n t De f i c i e n t DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 63 Figure 5.8: CAMPO Off-System and State-System Bridges and Condition Ratings Source: MODOT 2017 Data DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 64 PEDESTRIAN & NON-MOTORIZED Walking and bicycling are important aspects of a community’s public health, economic vitality, safety, environmental sustainability, and mobility. These modes of transportation are especially important for children, the elderly, the disabled, and those with fixed or low incomes. Walkability and bikeability are important to attracting tourists and attracting or retaining residents alike. The CAMPO planning area encompasses both urban and rural areas. The communities of Holts Summit and Jefferson City are generally walkable with sidewalks, trails, and connectivity to Katy Trail State Park. Smaller communities have limited connectivity and have little to no public sidewalks. The need for greater connectivity, access, and safety are important. Improving connectivity and access will provide more direct, convenient, and safe travel routes for walking and bicycling while also providing more travel choices, reduce dependency on automobiles, and improve general quality of the life. Source: July 2016 Salute to America “Red, Bike, and Blue” bicycle event CAPITAL AREA PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE PLAN Adopted in 2017, the Capital Area Pedestrian & Bicycle Plan is intended as a resource to improve safety, connectivity, and mobility for pedestrian and bicycle users in the CAMPO planning area. The goals, recommendations, and strategies outlined in the plan can be used by jurisdictions to develop an individualized implementation strategy to fit the unique pedestrian and bicycle needs of that community. The plan, located in Appendix F, has been incorporated into the CAMPO 2045 & Beyond MTP. RECENT TRENDS Bicycle and Scooter Rental Recent trends in non-motorized travel in the CAMPO region includes the 2018 introduction of motorized dockless scooters and bicycles to Jefferson City. The bicycle and scooter program is owned and operated by SPIN, a private company running similar operations across the nation. There were 2,037 bicycles in calendar year 2018. Scooters were introduced in late 2018 and statistics for ridership is not available yet. New Bike Lanes Both Jefferson City and Holts Summit have added marked bike routes and lanes to their communities in 2018. In Holts Summit, sharrows have been painted on S. Summit Drive, DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 65 connecting bicycle riders to the Holts Summit Katy Trail Spur. In Jefferson City, Capital Avenue, High Street, and Dunklin Street have had bike lanes and signage added. The 2019 addition of shared bike lanes on Miller Street will provide connectivity between the Dunklin Street Greenway Trailhead and the McCarty Street Greenway Trailhead. SIDEWALKS, GREENWAYS, AND TRAILS Sidewalk accessibility and connectivity is limited by gaps, obstructions, and poor conditions in some areas. That being said, there are several areas in the CAMPO region where recent improvements have increased accessibility and condition dramatically. Figure 5.9, taken from the Capital Area Pedestrian and Bicycle Plan depicts locations of sidewalks and trails in the CAMPO region. Replacement and improvement to sidewalks and crosswalks along Missouri Boulevard in 2016 provided much needed connectivity between Missouri Boulevard’s commercial strip and downtown Jefferson City. The 2014 construction along US Business 50 east of St. Martins included installation of 3.5 miles sidewalks and signalized crosswalks. The project was part of a Safe Routes to School project that provided connectivity between Pioneer Trails Elementary School, nearby residential areas, and Binder Lake Park. Recent construction of sidewalks and crosswalks in Holts Summit also improved connectivity and accessibility between nearby schools, parks, and residences. Figure 5.9 Sidewalks and Trails in the CAMPO Region Source: 2016 Capital Area Pedestrian and Bicycle Plan DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 66 All sidewalks have been assessed and inventoried in the CAMPO region, reflecting the improvements listed above. CAMPO staff maintains a sidewalk database that is regularly updated and incorporates data that has been collected in cooperation with several regional partners. Data collected from the 2010 Jefferson City Sidewalk Plan, Callaway County Sidewalk Inventory, and Cole County Sidewalk Inventory have been incorporated into this database. Additionally, more than 350 marked or designated crosswalks are also found in the database. Shared path greenways and unpaved trails are an important recreational and travel facility for urban areas. They are very popular with residents nationwide and a commodity that is marketed by realtors. Because of the high costs to build greenways and trails, which has ranged from $90 per foot to $465 per foot, oftentimes municipalities apply for grants from MoDOT or Missouri Department of Natural Resources Division of State Parks. Figure 5.10 provides a list of miles of sidewalk and trails by jurisdiction. Figure 5.11 provides a list of federally funded sidewalk and trail projects that have been completed since 2013. Figure 5.10 Sidewalks and Trails Mileage by Jurisdiction Sidewalks Miles Cole County 4 Holts Summit 5.6 Jefferson City 118.5 Taos 0.5 Wardsville 0.18 Trails Miles Greenway Trails and Spurs 14.9 Park/Fitness Trails 3.45 Mountain Bike Trails 15.35 State Owned Trails 3.3 Source: CAMPO DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 67 Figure 5.11 Projects Completed Using Federal Funds since 2013 Year Jurisdiction Project Type Project Name Federal Funding Category* Total Cost 2013 Jefferson City Sidewalk Missouri Blvd. Sidewalk Project Phase 2 TE $463,723 2013 Jefferson City Greenway McKay Park Area Greenway Connection RTP $260,117 2014 Jefferson City Bike Plaza Clay Street Bike Plaza TE/CDBG $163,000 2014 Jefferson City Amtrak Station AMTRAK Depot Plaza Restoration @ Historic Water St. TE $591,825 2014 Holts Summit Sidewalk Intersection & Sidewalk Improvements TE $363,865 2014 Holts Summit Greenway Trail Connector RTP $123,825 2015 Cole County Sidewalk Pioneer Trail School Safe Routes to Schools Project SRTS $707,000 2015 Holts Summit Greenway Trail Connection Project Phase 2 RTP $125,940 2015 St. Martins Greenway Niekamp Park Trailhead Phase 1 RTP $126,502 2015 Holts Summit Sidewalk North Summit Drive Sidewalk Connection Project TAP $398,100 2015 St. Martins Study Pedestrian/Bicycle Safety Analysis of Business 50 in St. Martins TEAP $10,024 2016 Jefferson City Wayfinding Wayfinding Signage TAP $267,500 2016 Jefferson City Greenway Frog Hollow Greenway Trail Extension Phase 2 RTP $502,260 2018 Jefferson City Greenway Community Park Greenway Trailhead RTP $309,000 2019 Jefferson City Sidewalk Missouri Boulevard Sidewalk – Beck to Waverly TAP $348,205 2019 St. Martins Sidewalk/ Pavement Improvements Business 50 W Bike/Ped/ADA Improvements TAP $873,530 2019 Osage Region Trail Association Trail Binder Bike Park Phase 1 RTP $49,282 Total 5,683,698 Source CAMPO Transportation Improvement Program Documents – 2013-2019 *Federal Funding Categories: TE – Transportation Enhancement, TAP – Transportation Alternatives Program, RTP – Recreational Trail Program, TEAP – Traffic Engineering Assistance Program, CDBG – Community Development Block Grant , SRTS – Safe Routes to Schools DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 68 TRANSIT There are several transportation providers that operate in the Mid-Missouri are and statewide. The CAMPO region is served by many of these agencies, including fixed-route providers like JEFFTRAN in Jefferson City and rural providers like Oats, Inc., which serves users throughout northern and central Missouri or Serve, Inc. in Callaway County. COORDINATED PUBLIC TRANSIT HUMAN SERVICES TRANSPORTATION PLAN The Coordinated Public Transit-Human Services Transportation Plan is updated every three years per federal regulation. The plan provides an overview of current conditions, capacities, and goals as they relate to transit in the CAMPO region. The CAMPO Coordinated Public Transit- Human Services Transportation Plan is located in Appendix G. FIXED ROUTE SERVICE JEFFTRAN is the public transportation provider for the City of Jefferson. Operated as a division in the Department of Public Works of the City of Jefferson, JEFFTRAN provides fixed route and paratransit services within the city limits of Jefferson City. JEFFTRAN operates six fixed routes and three commuter/school tripper routes during the school year. Regular fixed route service operates Monday through Friday from 6:45 AM to 5:45 PM (except holidays) using a “pulse” system, where all routes except the Capital Mall route converge on the transfer point at 40 minute intervals. All buses on regular scheduled routes have bicycle racks to accommodate two bicycles and is part of the JEFFTRAN Bike 'n' Ride program. When travel requires changing to a different route to complete a journey, a transfer point becomes necessary. The transfer center is on 820 East Miller Street. CAMPO staff continues to assist JEFFTRAN in consultation, programming, scheduling and maps as needed. CAMPO assists JEFFTRAN with their Program of Projects processes. No expansion is proposed, but increased efficiency in routes has been introduced by changing routes and schedules. MILLER STREET TRANSFER FACILITY IMPROVEMENTS JEFFTRAN and the City of Jefferson are anticipating construction of new or rehabilitated transfer and maintenance facilities by 2022. These facilities would improve customer service, increase maintenance capacity, and provide for better bus parking and storage. Timing of the construction of such facilities is dependent on funding availability. JEFFTRAN PARATRANSIT SERVICES “Handi-Wheels” complementary paratransit services are provided by JEFFTRAN, providing curb to curb service for individuals with disabilities and those unable to use fixed route transportation systems (an "origin to destination" service). Although the Handi-Wheels service operates entirely within the city limits, it provides services beyond the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 through a larger than required service area. Within this service area, eligible residents may receive services from 6:45 AM to 5:45 PM Monday through Friday. Handi-Wheels service utilizes eight vehicles that report 1,930 ADA qualified passengers with DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 69 daily transport of as many as 300 riders. All buses are wheelchair-lift equipped and provide transportation for those individuals who because of disability cannot travel to or from a "fixed route" bus stop or cannot get on, ride or get off a "fixed route" bus. Funding is provided through a mix of sources such as passenger fares, local funding, FTA funding and contracts. Handi-Wheels can pick up clients anywhere inside the city limits and take them to any destination within the city limits. Handi-Wheels riders must apply for and be approved in order to use this service. Applications and detailed service descriptions are available in standard print and accessible formats. RURAL TRANSIT SERVICE OATS Inc. is a not-for-profit transportation service available to the general public in the rural areas of Callaway and Cole Counties with priority service to senior citizens and persons with disabilities. Anyone living in rural areas whose needs can be met by OATS’ service schedules is eligible to ride their local OATS buses. OATS, Inc. ridership numbers remain strong after 40 years of service and the service continues to grow in popularity. Serve Inc. serves the residents of Callaway County through CALTRAN a public transportation program based in Fulton. MISSOURI RIDESHARE AND CARPOOL PROGRAM The Missouri Rideshare and Carpool Program is a free service provided by the Missouri Department of Natural Resources. The program organizes carpools by matching commuters who live and work in the same vicinity and serve many counties in Mid-Missouri. MoDOT supports carpooling through the “Carpool Connections” website at: www.modot.org/carpool-connections Carpool/Commuter lot locations: • By the municipal airport • Across US 54 at the Jefferson City Park • US 50/63 East at Route M and J OTHER SERVICES • Charter Service and Shuttles - D&K Bus Service, First Student Inc., Tyus Executive Transportation Service. • Greyhound Bus – Connection located in Jefferson City of Jefferson • Rideshare - UBER • Taxi/ limousine - Checker Cab of Jefferson City LLC., Capitol City Limousine, and Sedan Inc. and Chase Limousines. DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 70 AIR TRAVEL The CAMPO Region includes one airport, the Jefferson City Memorial Airport, and a handful of helicopter landing platforms. While there are no commercial airlines operating within the Region, Columbia Regional Airport is located 20 miles away and does provide this service. Private aircraft, the Missouri National Guard, medical transport, or other government agencies represent the majority of aircraft use in the Region. An updated Airport Master Plan will be completed in 2019. CAMPO has incorporated elements of the plan into the goals, strategies, and projects listed in the MTP. JEFFERSON CITY MEMORIAL AIRPORT Jefferson City Memorial Airport is a general aviation facility with no commercial airline passenger services. Constructed in 1948, the facility is located north of the Capitol in the Missouri River floodplain and is occasionally affected by flooding. The airport facility consists of a 4,800 square foot Airport Terminal Building, Air Traffic Control Tower, one 6,000 foot long runway with instrument approach procedures, and one crosswind runway 3,400 feet long. Both runways are equipped with parallel taxiways. The control tower operates from 6:00 a.m. until 9:30 p.m. 365 days a year and 24-hour radar approach services are provided by Mizzou Approach in Springfield, Missouri. On-site services include a restaurant, fuel services and flight products and a full service fixed base operator. Approximately 64 aircraft are based at the airport either permanently or intermittently; 70% are single-engine or multi-engine planes. Approximately 10 jet engine planes and small number of helicopters and military aircraft are also based at the airport. These numbers fluctuate and are based on 2017 staff reports. Figure 5.12 shows the fluctuations in airport traffic since 1974. Figure 5.12 Airport Traffic Counts 1974-2017. Source: Jefferson City Airport historic traffic data – Jefferson City OTHER AVIATION FACILITIES The Missouri National Guard has a small aviation facility near the Jefferson City Memorial Airport and two heliports are located at the Missouri National Guard Ike Skelton Training Site.. Capital Region Medical Center and St. Mary’s Hospital have helipads for medical transport. MODOT AND AIRPORT PLANNING Missouri is one of ten states in the State Block Grant Program, which means that MoDOT acts on behalf of the FAA in certain circumstances. MoDOT is the approving authority for all airport master planning and airport layout plans for Missouri's general aviation airports. 0 50,000 100,000 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2017To t a l A i r p o r t T r a f f i c Airport Traffic Counts 1974-2017 Jefferson City Memorial Airport DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 71 WATERWAYS & PORTS The Missouri River runs through the heart of the CAMPO region and is the only navigable waterway in the region capable of carrying commercial goods and products. The river has always played an important role in commerce and transportation by connecting the Mississippi River and points east to the West. While the current commercial use of the river has seen a strong decline over the past 30 years, some industries still use this thoroughfare for products such as sand, rock, grain and other large items that may be difficult to transport via highway or air. According to MoDOT’s Long-Range Transportation Plan, approximately 30 million tons of freight claims a Missouri port as the point of origin. The Missouri River provides commercial waterway traffic during an average of 8 months per year, during navigable water levels. According to the 2018 update to MoDOT’s Long Range Transportation Plan, river transport allows for an average of $12.5 billion in cargo annually. Freight transported this way sees an annual growth of 1.3 percent annually and is expected to increase to $15.4 billion by 2030 which amounts to a cumulative increase of 23.1 percent or 1.1 percent annually. Missouri has 1,050 miles of navigable rivers, including 500 miles of the Mississippi River and 550 miles of the Missouri River. PRIVATE PORTS The Capital Sand Company owns and operates the only private port in Mid-Missouri’s only private port. Located in Jefferson City on the north side of the Missouri River, the private port and dock facility is mostly used for the movement of rock and sand. These products are shipped locally, nationally, and internationally for use in construction, landscaping, and other industrial applications. HEARTLAND PORT AUTHORITY In the summer of 2017, the Jefferson City Area Chamber of Commerce, the counties of Cole and Callaway, and the City of Jefferson all contributed to a port feasibility study. Noting a lack of port facilities along the Missouri River between Kansas City and St. Louis, the Chamber contracted with Cambridge Systematics to conduct a two phase port feasibility study, which was released in 2018. There are two potential sites for a port location: one is north of the Missouri River in Callaway County and the other being on the south side of the Missouri River near the Missouri National Guard facility off of Militia Drive in Jefferson City. Figure 5.13 shows the potential site locations. In September 2018, the Heartland Port Authority was approved by the Missouri Highways and Transportation Commission. The Heartland Port Authority of Central Missouri Commission consists of nine-member board - three County of Callaway officials, three County of Cole officials and three City of Jefferson officials. The Port Authority is currently looking for funding to build the port facility. They applied for a Better Utilizing Investments to Leverage Development (BUILD) Transportation Grant program, which supports road, rail, transit, and port infrastructure projects across the country. The BUILD grant is a federal grant through the federal Department of Transportation. The Port Authority was not awarded the grant in 2018, but may look for future BUILD or related grants. DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 72 Figure 5.13 Potential Port Facility Locations Source: Central Missouri Multimodal Port Feasibility Study June 2018 RECREATIONAL ACCESS Area residents and visitors do not have good access to the Missouri River from the south side of the river due to rail lines and steep terrain. It is generally considered to be an underutilized resource for recreation and to a lesser degree transportation. Public access to the Missouri River, Cedar Creek, and Osage River are provided by the Missouri Department of Conservation at the following locations: • Capital View Access in Callaway County • Carl R. Noren Access in Callaway County • Mari-Osa Access in Cole County DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 73 FREIGHT & INTERMODAL FACILITIES Freight movement within and through the CAMPO region consists primarily of truck transport, river transport of bulk commodities, and rail transport. Freight movement statistics are difficult to ascertain without a more in-depth study. The most relevant freight movement data available is at the Central District level as part of the MoDOT Freight Plan. Figure 5.14 from the Central District portion of the MoDOT Freight Plan depicts freight infrastructure for the district. Figure 5.14 Missouri Passenger Rail Service Source: MoDOT Freight Plan DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 74 Eighteen counties make up the MoDOT Central District. The plan identifies several major employers in the district, including ABB Power, Brewer Science, State Farm Insurance and Tracker Marine. Comments collected through public engagement include improving connectivity throughout the district and specifically noted that improving north-south connections, including US 63 between Jefferson City and Rolla. They also stated that the Missouri River is underutilized and under-marketed. For freight in general, previous stakeholder input identified several high priority deficiencies in the regional freight environment, such as truck routing, signage, street and intersection design, lack of supporting freight accommodations such as terminals, depots, stopping areas, and refuel options, are items that need to be improved, according to freight representatives during public participation and planning sessions. There are four freight corridors in the CAMPO region, US Highways 50, 54, and 63 and the Union Pacific Rail Line. These major collectors and rail line facilitate the movement of freight between major sources of traffic, connecting Kansas City, St. Louis, and Interstates 44 and 70. While not designated as national “Major Freight Corridors” as seen in Figure 5.15 the US Highways provide important connectivity. Figure 5.15 Major US Freight Corridors Source: U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Office of Freight Management and Operations, 2008 Missouri freight is expected to increase dramatically from 600+ million tons in 2011 to an estimated 1 billion tons in 2040. In 2012, Missouri exported $13.9 billion in freight. -MoDOT Freight Plan DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 75 INTERMODAL SYSTEMS According to the Federal Highway Administration, the term "intermodal" refers to a transfer of a shipment from one transportation mode to another as the shipment moves from origin to destination. Intermodal facilities may move people or freight between modes such as seaports, airports, truck/rail terminals, pipeline/truck terminals and other inter-modal freight transportation facilities. The CAMPO region has three inter-modal facilities located in Jefferson City: (1) the AMTRAK station with rail and roadway connections, (2) the Jefferson City Memorial Airport, with limited general aviation passenger services, small freight transfers, and car rental services, and (3) a private river terminal using truck and river transport for bulk commodities. Once constructed, the Heartland River Port would serve as a fourth intermodal facility; with construction anticipated to be completed in the next five to ten years. CAMPO supports creation of a regional intermodal facility that would connect truck, rail, and river freight storage and transfer facilities. Creation of a true intermodal passenger facility is also desired by stakeholders in the region. Connectivity is desired between Amtrak, Columbia Regional Airport, Jefferson City Airport, city transit, and Greyhound Bus Services. DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 76 RAIL The CAMPO region is home to a Class I rail line carrying both freight and passenger rail services. This rail line is owned and operated by Union Pacific. Rail is a major part of the freight transportation system in Missouri and plays a significant role in the state’s economy. A substantial portion of the freight moving into, out of, and through Missouri is carried on trains. In 2011, 8.2 million rail cars carried 458.1 million tons of freight valued at $465 billion representing 38.6% of the total value of goods shipped in the state. FREIGHT RAIL The 2018 update of the MoDOT Long-Range Transportation Plan states that 40% of the freight moved in Missouri is by rail and that this percentage of freight transportation will increase in the future. Total freight tonnage shipped in or through Missouri was 352 million tons in 2016. Cargo shipped from Missouri to elsewhere include farm products, chemicals, vehicles and parts. Rail traffic carrying freight is generally through traffic on the Union Pacific Railroad. The main track is a double track line with a new second bridge crossing the Moreau River, completed in 2013, and a spur line running from the Missouri Boulevard and Water Street area to just west of MO 179/Truman Boulevard. A second branch also runs from Cole Junction Road and MO 179, while a third spur runs eastward to Militia Drive. According to the Missouri Freight and Passenger Rail Capacity Analysis of 2007 the corridor running through Jefferson City is handling between 50-60 trains per day which is at the upper limits of capacity for a double track line handling the types of freight that it does. From a train weight perspective this corridor handles a large percentage (roughly 50%) of heavy coal trains. Recent rail improvements include a new siding near California and a second bridge over the Osage River. PASSENGER RAIL Amtrak operates the only passenger rail service in Mid-Missouri, with a station located in Jefferson City. This Amtrak service line is only one of two national passenger train routes in Missouri, providing connections to Chicago, Los Angeles and San Antonio, and a state supported route, the Missouri River Runner, between St. Louis and Kansas City. The Missouri River Runner includes stops in Kirkwood, Washington, Hermann, Jefferson City, Sedalia, Warrensburg, Lee’s Summit and Independence. The Missouri River Runner provides two trips each day and, according to MoDOT’s Long Range Transportation Plan, had an 87 percent on-time performance in 2017. Each year, about 500,000 passengers ride Amtrak trains in Missouri, which includes 200,000 on the state supported route. In 2017, the Missouri River Runner provided service to approximately 171,000 passengers according to the MoDOT Long Range Transportation Plan. Passenger rail in Missouri is seen as a growing industry for business travelers, students and commuters alike. Given the expected population growth in some areas, passenger rail will continue to be an important option for travelers in Missouri. Figure 5.15 depicts passenger rail service in Missouri. DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 77 Figure 5.15 Missouri Passenger Rail Service Source: MoDOT DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 78 TRENDS IN TRANSPORTATION AUTOMATED VEHICLES There have been a number of safety advancements made by automobile companies in the last five years, but none are as likely to change the driving experience as automated vehicles. What once seemed to come straight out of the pages of science fiction, now the likelihood of full automation (automobiles being able to perform all driving functions) seems to be a foregone conclusion by 2045. This has profound implications in several arenas, such as efficient freight movement and the reduction of fatalities on roads and highways. In a society with a majority implementation of fully automated vehicles, crashes are likely to dramatically reduced, bringing savings from fewer crashes and the delays that result. Another benefit is the chance for more mobility options for those that reside in the CAMPO region. SMART CITIES As the global population continues to grow, so too will the number of people living in urban areas. By 2050, the United Nations has estimated that approximately six billion people will be living in a city. To prepare for the strain of large populations, the smart city concept was developed. This idea focuses on people, processes, and technology. That is to say, cities and its officials must understand who resides in the city and adopted policies to adapt to their needs. This is followed by technology to meet these needs to improve life in those cities. Some examples of this are electronic communications in order to finding parking, reporting nuisances such as tall weeds or overflowing trash, and alerting drivers of traffic crashes. Future examples may be something that resembles how the Google Glass worked, providing information in real time on a visual display. HYPERLOOP The hyperloop has only emerged for discussion in the last five to seven years. Because of limitations to high speed rail such as wind resistance and friction with rails, the concept of a capsule moving along a tube that is partial vacuum has been proposed. Designs vary, with some using maglev tracks and some using air pressure to levitate the capsule. Speeds could potentially reach over 700 miles per hour, which is equal to or surpasses air flight in terms of speed. Questions remain on a number of factors including air pressure buildup, acceleration effects on the human body (estimated to be a factor or two above airplane take off), and the routes. In March 2019, the Missouri legislature formed a panel on hyperloop in Missouri. The panel is composed of elected officials from both bodies, economic development and educational representatives, and other private interests. The proposed route that has been reported is between St. Louis and Kansas City, with a stop in Columbia. DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 79 6 The Financial Plan & Implementation DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 80 This section demonstrates how the CAMPO 2045 & Beyond Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) can be funded and implemented, including: • Funding resources • A fiscally constrained investment plan • Unfunded illustrative projects • A plan for implementation and a list of strategies. DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 81 THE FINANCIAL PLAN The Financial Plan demonstrates how the adopted transportation plan can be implemented. When combined with the current Transportation Improvement Program in Appendix E, this section stands as the Financial Plan for the MTP. The following paragraphs address the federal requirements as they pertain to the development of the Financial Plan. This section contains system-level estimates of costs and revenue sources that are reasonably expected to be available to adequately operate and maintain Federal-Aid highways and public transportation within the CAMPO region over the 25-year planning horizon. CAMPO works with public transportation operators, member jurisdictions, and MoDOT to cooperatively develop estimates of funds that will be available to support implementation of the MTP. All necessary financial resources from public sources that are reasonably expected to be made available to carry out the MTP are identified in this section. There are no private sector revenue sources identified as contributing to the implementation of the MTP at this time. This section also includes recommendations on additional funding sources and includes an assessment of innovative financing resources. CAMPO has taken into account all projects and strategies proposed for funding under title 23 U.S.C., title 49 U.S.C. Chapter 53 or with other Federal funds; State assistance; local sources; and private participation. As applicable, an inflation rate that reflects “year of expenditure dollars” has been applied to revenue and cost estimates. These rates are based on information developed cooperatively by CAMPO, MoDOT, member jurisdictions, and public transportation operators. An illustrative list of non-fiscally constrained projects, for which additional funding would need to be identified, is included in this section. These projects have been categorized, prioritized, and include cost ranges. DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 82 FISCAL CONSTRAINT 2020-2024 THE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (TIP) The TIP, located in Appendix E, stands as the “Fiscally Constrained” list of the first five years of the Metropolitan Transportation Plan’s Financial Plan. Developed in accordance with federal regulations CFR §450.324, the TIP is a 5-year financial program of transportation projects to be implemented within the MPA, which are funded by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and Federal Transit Administration (FTA), or are deemed regionally significant. Each project or project phase included in the TIP is to be derived from the MTP and is part of the process of applying for funds from the FHWA and FTA. Certain capital and non-capital transportation projects using funding under 23 USC and 49 USC Chapter 53 or regionally significant projects requiring action by the FHWA or the FTA are required to be included in the TIP and derived from the MTP. The TIP is developed in cooperation with the MoDOT, local jurisdictions, and public transportation operators. Figure 6.1A lists the most current TIP projects. Figures 6.1B-6.1F provides a breakdown of the funding and program years for each project. The full version of the current TIP document can be found in Appendix E. TIP PROJECT SELECTION Projects are identified by agencies with jurisdiction over the project, using their own criteria, and are submitted to the CAMPO Board of Directors for approval before being included in the TIP. Projects are approved based on their consistency with the goals and strategies outlined in the MTP. A more detailed description of the TIP application process is located in Appendix E. DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 83 Figure 6.1A 2020-2024 TIP Projects - Overview Project Sponsor TIP # MODOT# Total Cost Bridge Deck sealing over Route 54 MoDOT 2018-01 5S3261 $836,000 Bridge Improvements on US 54 Over Missouri River MoDOT 2019-01 5P3337 $5,100,000 Bridge Preventative Maintenance On US 50 Over Osage River MoDOT 2019-02 5P2190 $568,000 US 54 Pavement Improvements MoDOT 2017-05 5P3121 $6,956,000 Pavement Resurfacing on US 50 MoDOT 2019-03 5P3333 $3,487,000 Guard Cables Along US 54 MoDOT 2019-06 5P3371 $3,256,000 Business 50 W Bike/Ped/ADA Improvements St. Martins 2020-01 9901515 $873,530 Pavement Improvements on US 63 MoDOT 2020-03 5P3409 $17,064,000 High Friction Surface Treatment MoDOT 2020-04 5I3408 $1,378,000 Upgrading Signalization MoDOT 2020-13 5P3426 $1,691,000 Scoping Routes M, B, and W MoDOT 2013-16 5S2234 $2,000 Guard Cables and Guardrail Repair in Northern Central District MoDOT 2018-06 5P3405 $644,000 Slide Repair Scoping MoDOT 2015-07 5S3081 $1,000 Surveying MoDOT 2018-08 5P3402 $30,000 Pavement Improvements on Route M MODOT 2018-02 5S3230 $3,787,000 Pavement Improvements on Route U MoDOT 2020-05 5S3386 $675,000 Scoping for ADA Improvements in Various Locations MoDOT 2018-09 5P3254 $2,000 On-call Work Zone Enforcement MoDOT 2019-05 5P3313 $64,000 On-call Work Zone Enforcement MoDOT 2020-08 5P3406 $64,000 On-call Work Zone Enforcement MoDOT 2020-09 5P3407 $64,000 Traffic Safety Studies MoDOT 2020-11 5S3421 $151,000 Scoping on S. Ten Mile Drive MoDOT 2020-12 5S3418 $10,000 Intersection Improvements MoDOT 2020-14 5P3222 $7,056,000 Intersection Improvements MoDOT 2020-15 5P3195 $7,152,000 Binder Bike Park Phase 1 Osage Region Trail Association 2020-02 $49,282 Updating Pedestrian Facilities MoDOT 2020-16 5S3369 $13,291,000 Operating Assistance JEFFTRAN 2011-04 $10,959,273 Capital Funding –Vehicles OATS 2018-10 $300,000 Operating Expenses OATS 2018-11 $675,300 Total $86,186,385 Source: CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 84 Figure 6.1B 2020-2024 TIP Projects – Bridges Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA NHPP $89,600 $86,400 $176,000 MoDOT TCOS $22,400 $21,600 $44,000 TIP #2018-01 Local $0 MoDOT#5S3261 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA NHPP $582,400 $582,400 MoDOT TCOS $145,600 $145,600 Local $0 Other $0 Total $112,000 $836,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $948,000 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA NHPP $204,800 $144,000 $393,600 $742,400 MoDOT TCOS $51,200 $36,000 $98,400 $185,600 TIP #2019-01 Local $0 MoDOT#5P3337 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA NHPP $3,542,400 $3,542,400 MoDOT TCOS $885,600 $885,600 Local $0 Other $0 Total $256,000 $180,000 $4,920,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $5,356,000 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA NHPP $800 $16,000 $64,000 $100,800 $181,600 MoDOT TCOS $200 $4,000 $16,000 $20,200 TIP #2019-02 MoDOT AM $25,200 $25,200 MoDOT#5P2190 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA Adv. Con.$273,600 $273,600 MoDOT AM $68,400 $68,400 Local $0 Other $0 Total $1,000 $20,000 $80,000 $468,000 $0 $0 $0 $569,000 Comments: Project involves bridges A3451, A4265, and A4662. Award date 2020. Comments: Project involves bridge A5552. Total Project Cost: $569,000 Total Project Cost: $948,000 Project Name: Bridge Improvements On US 54 Over Missouri River MoDOT Funding Prior Funding State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 Project Name:Bridge Decksealing over Route 54 E N G Description & Location: Includes bridge decksealing on Route 94 over Little Tavern Creek in Callaway County and West Main over Route 54/63 in Cole County R O W C O N S T Project Name: Bridge Preventative Maintenance On US 50 Over Osage River E N G Description & Location: Bridge preventative maintenance over the Osage River, 0.3 mile west of the Route 63 junction. R O W C O N S T MoDOT Funding Prior Funding State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 E N G Description & Location: Bridge improvements for both bridges over the Missouri River in Jefferson City. R O W C O N S T Comments: Project involves bridges A4497 and L0550. Total Project Cost: $5,356,000 MoDOT Funding Prior Funding State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 85 Figure 6.1B 2020-2024 TIP Projects – Roadway Projects Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA NHPP $93,600 $494,400 $588,000 MoDOT TCOS $23,400 $123,600 $147,000 TIP #2017-05 Local $0 MoDOT#5P3121 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA NHPP $5,070,400 $5,070,400 MoDOT TCOS $1,267,600 $1,267,600 Local $0 Other $0 Total $117,000 $6,956,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $7,073,000 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA Adv. Con.$8,000 $11,200 $192,800 $212,000 MoDOT NHPP $2,000 $2,800 $48,200 $53,000 TIP #2019-03 Local $0 MoDOT#5P3333 MoDOT $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA Adv. Con.$2,585,600 $2,585,600 MoDOT NHPP $646,400 $646,400 Local $0 MoDOT $0 Total $10,000 $14,000 $3,473,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,497,000 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA NHPP $16,000 $439,200 $455,200 MoDOT TCOS $4,000 $109,800 $113,800 TIP #2019-06 Local $0 MoDOT#5P3371 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA NHPP $2,165,600 $2,165,600 MoDOT TCOS $541,400 $541,400 Local $0 Other $0 Total $20,000 $3,256,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,276,000 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 TIP #2020-01 Local St. Martins $62,382 $62,382 MoDOT#9901515 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA TAP $397,456 $397,456 MoDOT $0 Local St. Martins $413,692 $413,692 Other $0 Total $0 $873,530 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $873,530 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA Adv. Con.$4,000 $36,000 $927,200 $967,200 MoDOT AM $231,800 $231,800 TIP #2020-03 MoDOT TCOS $1,000 $9,000 $10,000 MoDOT#5P3409 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA Adv. Con.$12,684,000 $12,684,000 MoDOT AM $3,171,000 $3,171,000 MoDOT $0 Other $0 Total $0 $5,000 $45,000 $17,014,000 $0 $0 $0 $17,064,000 MoDOT Project Name:US 54 Pavement Improvements E N G Comments: Award Date 2020. R O W R O W C O N S T Comments: TAP grant awardee. Working with Cole County to complete the project Total Project Cost: $873,530 MoDOT Project Name:Guard Cables Along US 54 E N G Description & Location: Guard cable improvements from Miller County to near Stadium Blvd. in Jefferson City R O W C O N S T Comments: Award date Fall 2019 Prior Funding Prior Funding State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 Project Name:Pavement Resurfacing on US 50 E N G Total Project Cost: $3,497,000 C O N S T Total Project Cost: $7,073,000 MoDOT Funding State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 Description & Location: Pavement resurfacing and guard cables installation on the eastbound and westbound lanes of US 54 from Route E to near Stadium Boulevard in Jefferson City. Description & Location: Pavement resurfacing east of West Truman Blvd. to east of Kaylor Bridge Road, all lanes and from east of Route M to east of Stoney Gap Road R O W Funding C O N S T Comments: Anticipated federal reimbursement f rom NHPP. MoDOT Funding Prior Funding State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 Total Project Cost: $3,276,000 St. Martins Funding Prior Funding State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 Project Name: Business 50 W Bike/Ped/ADA Improvements E N G Description & Location: Addition of 8-foot wide asphalt bike/ped lanes for 1.1 miles in each direction along Business 50 West from Rt. T/D to west of Carel Rd. Project Name:Pavement Improvements on US 63 E N G Description & Location: Pavement improvements on US 63 from Route B to US Route 54. R O W C O N S T Comments: Anticipated federal funding category: NHPP. Award Date 2022. Total Project Cost: $17,064,000 Funding Prior Funding State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 86 Figure 6.1C 2020-2024 TIP Projects – Roadway Projects Cont. Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA HSIP $46,000 $148,800 $194,800 MoDOT Safety $11,000 $37,200 $48,200 TIP #2020-04 Local $0 MoDOT#5I3408 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA HSIP $908,000 $908,000 MoDOT Safety $227,000 $227,000 Local $0 Other $0 Total $0 $57,000 $1,321,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,378,000 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA Adv. Con.$361,600 $361,600 MoDOT TCOS $90,400 $90,400 TIP #2020-13 Local $0 MoDOT#5P3426 Other $0 FHWA Adv. Con.$4,000 $4,000 MoDOT TCOS $1,000 $1,000 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA Adv. Con.$987,200 $987,200 MoDOT TCOS $246,800 $246,800 Local $0 Other $0 Total $0 $1,691,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,691,000 Funding Prior Funding State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 Project Name:Upgrading Signalization E N G Description & Location: Upgrade signals at CC and at Rte. C and CC in Cole County and at Rte. OO and Summit Drive in Callaway County R O W C O N S T Comments: Anticipated federal funding category: STBG. Award Date 2020. MoDOT Total Project Cost: $1,691,000 Description & Location: High Friction surface treatment at various locations in Boone, Morgan, Washington, Cooper, Callaway, and Cole Counties R O W C O N S T Funding Prior Funding State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 Project Name:High Friction Surface Treatments E N G Comments: Anticipated federal funding category: HSIP. Award Date 2020. Total Project Cost: $1,378,000 MoDOT DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 87 Figure 6.1C 2020-2024 TIP Projects – Other Projects Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA HSIP $45,900 $900 $900 $47,700 MoDOT Safety $5,100 $100 $100 $5,300 TIP #2013-16 Local $0 MoDOT#5S2234 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 Total $51,000 $1,000 $1,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $53,000 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA $0 MoDOT TCOS $8,800 $8,800 TIP #2018-06 Local $0 MoDOT#5P3405 FHWA Adv. Con.$35,200 $35,200 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT TCOS $120,000 $120,000 Local $0 MoDOT Adv. Con.$480,000 $480,000 Total $0 $644,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $644,000 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA STBG $52,800 $800 $53,600 MoDOT TCOS $13,200 $200 $13,400 TIP #2015-07 MoDOT $0 MoDOT#5S3081 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 Total $66,000 $1,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $67,000 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA $0 MoDOT TCOS $15,000 $15,000 $30,000 TIP #2018-08 Local $0 MoDOT#5P3402 MoDOT $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 MoDOT $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 MoDOT $0 Total $0 $15,000 $15,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $30,000 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA $0 MoDOT TCOS $14,000 $127,400 $141,400 TIP #2018-02 Local $0 MoDOT#5S3230 FHWA STBG $56,000 $509,600 $565,600 FHWA $0 MoDOT TCOS $2,000 $2,000 Local $0 MoDOT STBG $8,000 $8,000 FHWA $0 MoDOT TCOS $628,000 $628,000 Local $0 FHWA STBG $2,512,000 $2,512,000 Total $70,000 $3,787,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,857,000 MoDOT Funding Prior Funding Comments: Anticipated federal funding category: Safety. Description & Location: Scoping for slide repairs in the northern portion of the Central District at various locations. Guard Cable & Guardrail Repair in Northern Central District E N G Project Name: MoDOT Project Name: C O N S T E N G Description & Location: Surveying to sell excess right of way parcels in the Central District. R O W MoDOT Total Project Cost: $30,000 Comments: No federal funds used for this project. Project Name:Surveying Total Project Cost: $3,857,000 Comments: Potential ADA improvements in Taos. Award date 2020. Anticipated Federal Funds: STBG. Description & Location: Scoping for safety improvements at the intersection of Route M and Route W in Wardsville. R O W State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 Funding Prior Funding State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 Total Project Cost: $67,000 Slide Repair Scoping C O N S T Comments: Award Date Spring 2019. Anticipated federal reimbursement from STBG. Total Project Cost: $644,000 Description & Location: Job order contracting for guard cables and guardrail repair on various routes in the northern portion of the Central District. MoDOT State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 Project Name:Scoping Routes M, B & W E N G Total Project Cost: $53,000 R O W C O N S T Description & Location: Pavement resurfacing and adding rumble stripes from Rte. B to Rte. 50 and on Rte. E from Rte. 54 to Rte. B. R O W C O N S T Prior Funding Funding C O N S T Comments: Anticipated Federal Funding Category - STBG. Future construction cost $2 million - 5 million. State Program Year - July 1 to June 30Prior Funding Funding Funding Prior FundingMoDOT R O W E N G State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 Project Name:Pavement improvements on Route M E N G DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 88 Figure 6.1D 2020-2024 TIP Projects – Other Projects Cont. Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA $0 MoDOT TCOS $1,000 $10,800 $11,800 TIP #2020-05 Local $0 MoDOT#5S3386 FHWA Adv. Con.$4,000 $43,200 $47,200 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT TCOS $123,200 $123,200 Local $0 FHWA Adv. Con.$492,800 $492,800 Total $0 $5,000 $670,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $675,000 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA $0 MoDOT TCOS $10,000 $400 $10,400 TIP #2018-09 Local $0 MoDOT#5P3254 FHWA Adv. Con.$40,000 $1,600 $41,600 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 Total $50,000 $2,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $52,000 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA HSIP $900 $900 MoDOT Safety $100 $100 TIP #2019-05 Local $0 MoDOT#5P3313 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA HSIP $56,700 $56,700 MoDOT Safety $6,300 $6,300 Local $0 Other $0 Total $0 $64,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $64,000 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA HSIP $900 $900 MoDOT Safety $100 $100 TIP #2020-08 Local $0 MoDOT#5P3406 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA HSIP $56,700 $56,700 MoDOT Safety $6,300 $6,300 Local $0 Other $0 Total $0 $0 $64,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $64,000 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA HSIP $900 $900 MoDOT Safety $100 $100 TIP #2020-09 Local $0 MoDOT#5P3407 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA HSIP $56,700 $56,700 MoDOT Safety $6,300 $6,300 Local $0 Other $0 Total $0 $0 $0 $64,000 $0 $0 $0 $64,000 R O W Funding Prior Funding Description & Location: On-call work zone enforcement at various locations in the Central District. Comments: 90/10 match, using federal and MoDOT safety funds. Project Name:Pavement improvements on Route U E N G Description & Location: Pavement & guardrail improvements on Rte. U. Includes Route Y from Route M in Taos, Rte W from Rte. B in Wardsville, and Rte.J from 50. R O W Total Project Cost: $64,000 Project Name:On-call Work Zone Enforcement Prior Funding E N G R O W C O N S T E N G C O N S T R O W C O N S T State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 Total Project Cost: $64,000 On-call Work Zone Enforcement E N G Description & Location: On-call work zone enforcement at various locations in the Central District. R O W C O N S T Comments: 90/10 match, using federal and MoDOT safety funds. Description & Location: Scoping for ADA improvements at various locations in Chamois, Frankenstein, Route M in Taos, and Route W in Wardsville. Total Project Cost: $52,000 Project Name:On-call Work Zone Enforcement Description & Location: On-call work zone enforcement at various locations in the Central District. MoDOT Funding Total Project Cost: $675,000 MoDOT Project Name: Scoping for ADA Improvements in Various Locations E N G State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 C O N S T Comments: Comments: Anticipated Federal Category - STBG. Includes sidewalks, curb ramps, entrances, and signals MoDOT Funding Prior Funding State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 MoDOT Funding Prior Funding State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 Project Name: Funding Prior Funding State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 MoDOT Total Project Cost: $64,000 Comments: 90/10 match, using federal and MoDOT safety funds. DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 89 Figure 6.1E 2020-2024 TIP Projects – Other Projects Cont. Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA Adv. Con.$120,000 $800 $120,800 MoDOT TCOS $30,000 $200 $30,200 TIP #2020-11 Local $0 MoDOT#5S3421 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 Total $0 $150,000 $1,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $151,000 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA HSIP $4,500 $4,500 $9,000 MoDOT Safety $500 $500 $1,000 TIP #2020-12 Local $0 MoDOT#5S3418 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 Total $0 $5,000 $5,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $10,000 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA HSIP $248,400 $540,000 $1,041,300 $1,829,700 MoDOT Safety $27,600 $60,000 $115,700 $203,300 TIP #2020-14 Local $0 MoDOT#5P3222 Other $0 FHWA HSIP $4,500 $4,500 MoDOT Safety $500 $500 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA HSIP $4,764,600 $4,764,600 MoDOT Safety $529,400 $529,400 Local $0 Other $0 Total $276,000 $600,000 $6,456,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $7,332,000 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA HSIP $18,900 $360,000 $1,331,100 $1,710,000 MoDOT Safety $2,100 $40,000 $147,900 $190,000 TIP #2020-15 Local $0 MoDOT#5P3195 Other $0 FHWA HSIP $9,000 $9,000 MoDOT Safety $1,000 $1,000 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA HSIP $4,736,700 $4,736,700 MoDOT Safety $526,300 $526,300 Local $0 Other $0 Total $21,000 $400,000 $6,752,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $7,173,000 C O N S T Comments: Total Project Cost: $7,173,000 Funding Funding Prior Funding Project Name:Scoping on S. Ten Mile Drive E N G MoDOT E N G Description & Location: Traffic safety studies at various locations in Central District R O W Description & Location: Scoping for intersection safety improvements at South Ten Mile Drive in Jefferson City R O W C O N S T Comments: Total Project Cost: $10,000 Traffic Safety Studies Prior Funding State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 Project Name: Project Name: Comments: C O N S T Comments: Total Project Cost: $151,000 MoDOT Total Project Cost: $7,332,000 MoDOT Project Name:Intersection Improvements E N G Description & Location: Intersection safety improvements at various locations in Miller and Cole County, including median openings on US 54. R O W C O N S T Prior Funding State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 Intersection Improvements E N G Description & Location: Intersection safety improvements at various locations in Boone and Callaway County. R O W Funding Prior Funding State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 MoDOT Funding DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 90 Figure 6.1F 2020-2024 TIP Projects – Pedestrian/Bicycle and Public Transportation Projects Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 TIP #2020-02 Local ORTA $2,865 $2,865 MoDOT#Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA RTP $14,149 $14,148 $28,297 Local ORTA $7,060 $7,060 $14,120 Local COJ - P&R $750 $750 $1,500 Local Private $1,250 $1,250 $2,500 Total $0 $26,074 $23,208 $0 $0 $0 $0 $49,282 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA Adv. Con.$247,200 $1,753,600 $2,000,800 MoDOT TCOS $61,800 $438,400 $500,200 TIP #2020-16 Local $0 MoDOT#5S3369 Other $0 FHWA Adv. Con.$328,800 $328,800 MoDOT TCOS $82,200 $82,200 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA Adv. Con.$8,550,400 $8,550,400 MoDOT TCOS $2,137,600 $2,137,600 Local $0 Other $0 Total $309,000 $13,291,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $13,600,000 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals Other Pass. Fares $171,377 $173,091 $174,821 $176,570 $178,335 $874,194 MoDOT State Operating $11,415 $11,415 $11,415 $11,415 $11,415 $57,075 TIP #2011-04 Local General Fund $1,156,546 $1,179,677 $1,203,271 $1,227,336 $1,251,883 $6,018,713 MoDOT#FTA 5307 $810,661 $822,821 $835,163 $847,691 $860,406 $4,176,742 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 Total $0 $2,149,999 $2,187,004 $2,224,670 $2,263,012 $2,302,039 $0 $11,126,724 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA 5310 $100,000 $100,000 $200,000 MoDOT $0 TIP #2018-10 Local $0 MoDOT#Other OATS $50,000 $50,000 $100,000 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 Total $0 $0 $150,000 $0 $150,000 $0 $0 $300,000 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FTA 5310 $30,770 $40,000 $60,000 $75,000 $75,000 $75,000 $355,770 MoDOT $0 TIP #2018-11 Local $30,770 $40,000 $60,000 $75,000 $75,000 $75,000 $355,770 MoDOT#Other $4,900 $5,000 $5,000 $5,100 $5,100 $5,100 $30,200 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 Total $66,440 $85,000 $125,000 $155,100 $155,100 $155,100 $0 $741,740 Description & Location: Upgrade pedestrian facilities to comply with the ADA Transition Plan at various locations in the Central District. R O W C O N S T Comments: $7,130,000 Statewide Transportation Alternatives funds. Potential Design/Build project. Comments: Monetary donations provided by City of Jefferson Parks and Recreation Department and Midwest Block & Brick MoDOT Funding Prior Funding Total Project Cost: $11,126,724 C O N S T Comments: Description & Location: Construction of 1.3 mi of singletrack trail, features & signage, and 0.4 mi. kid's loop trail. R O W C O N S T Project Name:Updating Pedestrian Facilities E N G Description & Location: Within the Jefferson City MPO Region-Section 5310-Seniors and Individuals w ith Disabilities R O W C O N S T Comments: Other Funding - OATS, Inc. Total Project Cost: $741,740 State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 Prior Funding State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 Public Transportation Projects Funding Binder Bike Park Phase 1 E N G Description & Location: Operating Assistance for JEFFTRAN service w ithin city limits of Jefferson City (A 3% annual inflation factor applied.) City of Jefferson - JEFFTRAN Project Name: R O W Description & Location: Requesting replacement/expansion vehicles to provide service in Jefferson City and surrounding area OATS Funding Prior Funding Capital Funding - Vehicles C A P I T R O W C O N S T Comments: Other Funding - OATS, Inc. Total Project Cost: $300,000 OATS Project Name: Project Name:Operating Assistance O P E R Funding Prior Funding O P E R Osage Region Trail Association Project Name:Operating Assistance Total Project Cost: $49,282 Total Project Cost: $13,600,000 State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 Funding Prior Funding State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 91 FISCAL CONSTRAINT 2025-2045 Figure 6.2 depicts fiscal constraint for projects that are anticipated to occur beyond 2025. Future funding for these projects is reasonably expected to be available to support the projected costs, but is not guaranteed at this time. Figure 6.2 Fiscally Constrained Projects 2025-2045 Fiscally Constrained Projects 2025-2045 Project 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031-2035 2036-2040 2041-2045 New Sidewalks /ADA Improvements* $100,000 $102,000 $104,040 $106,121 $108,243 $110,407 $563,080 $574,342 $585,828 New Stormwater Improvements* $360,000 $367,200 $374,544 $382,065 $389,676 $397,470 $2,027,093 $2,067,635 $2,108,988 Cole Co. - Militia Drive Extension to Liberty Road $2,000,000 Cole Co. - Wildwood Extension to Rock Ridge Road $3,000,000 Jefferson City - Missouri State Penitentiary Parkway $2,000,000 Jefferson City - Mission Dr. to Stadium Blvd. Connection $500,000 JEFFTRAN - Paratransit Vehicle Replacement $140,000 $140,000 $140,000 $140,000 $140,000 $140,000 $700,000 $700,000 $700,000 JEFFTRAN - Replace low- floor route buses $3,000,000 JEFFTRAN - Construct new transit facilities and central maintenance facilities $7,000,000 JEFFTRAN - Upgrade Fare Card System $300,000 Total $12,900,000 $609,200 $2,618,584 $1,128,186 $637,919 $3,647,877 $3,290,173 $3,341,976 $3,394,816 Total $31,568,731 *Inflationary factor of 2% has been applied for each year beyond 2025. DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 92 COST & REVENUE ESTIMATES This section includes estimates of costs and revenue sources that are reasonably expected to be available to adequately operate and maintain Federal-Aid highways and public transportation within the CAMPO region over the 25-year planning horizon. CAMPO works with public transportation operators, member jurisdictions, and MoDOT to cooperatively develop estimates of funds that will be available to support implementation of the MTP. All necessary financial resources from public sources that are reasonably expected to be made available to carry out the MTP are identified in this section. There are no private sector revenue sources identified as contributing to the implementation of the MTP at this time. OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE 2020-2045 It is anticipated that the CAMPO Region will have approximately $69,997,100 in Operation and Maintenance Costs over the planning horizon. The operations and maintenance costs for local governments include salaries, fringe benefits, materials, and equipment needed to deliver the street and bridge maintenance programs. This category includes basic maintenance activities like minor surface treatments such as sealing, small concrete repairs, pothole patching, mowing, snow removal, replacing signs, striping, and repairing traffic signals. These activities may be performed in-house or outsourced. Operations and maintenance budgets are requested from municipalities to aid in demonstration of fiscal constraint. Operations and maintenance totals were requested, but have not been provided by Holts Summit, Taos, or Wardsville. Some of these small communities in the CAMPO region rely entirely on county and state maintenance of their Federal-Aid roadways. Local government operations and maintenance on Federal-Aid roads calculated for the system wide average of operations & maintenance per centerline mile is determined in Figure 6.3. Figure 6.3 Operations & Maintenance 2020-2045 Jurisdiction 2019 Federal -Aide Eligible Lane Miles 2020-2025* 2026-2030 2031-2035 2036-2040 2041-2045 OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE - JURISDICTIONS - COST PER LANE MILE BY JURSIDICTION Callaway Co. $2,469 10.98 $162,658 $138,260 $141,027 $143,849 $146,726 Holts Summit** $4,870 14.37 $419,891 $356,908 $364,050 $371,321 $378,750 Cole Co. $6,724 28.46 $1,148,190 $975,950 $995,474 $1,015,396 $1,035,688 Jefferson City $5,888 142.84 $5,046,252 $4,289,342 $4,375,046 $4,462,607 $4,551,882 St. Martins $5,435 4.39 $143,158 $121,686 $124,118 $126,599 $129,132 MODOT $4,870 343.21 $10,028,596 $8,524,307 $8,694,882 $8,868,546 $9,045,986 Totals 544.25 $16,948,745 $14,406,454 $14,694,598 $14,988,318 $15,288,164 OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE - TRANSIT - OVERALL COSTS AND MAINTENANCE JEFFTRAN $2,540,950 $15,245,700 $12,958,845 $13,218,022 $13,482,382 $13,752,030 OATS, Inc. $85,000 $830,400 $791,010 $806,830 $822,967 $839,426 Totals $16,076,100 $13,480,250 $13,749,855 $14,024,852 $14,305,349 Total $147,962,685 *6-year projection. All other projects are for 5 years. ** O&M totals were not provided by city – MoDOT O&M has been used in place of local figures. Note: An inflation factor of 2% has been applied to each 5-year total beyond 2025. Source: CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 93 ANTICIPATED AVAILABLE REVENUE 2020-2045 Figure 6.4 shows forecasted revenues for CAMPO based on information provided by each jurisdiction. It is estimated that the CAMPO Region will have approximately $661,528,858 in anticipated available revenue over the planning horizon. Local revenue forecasts from the CART (County Aid Road Trust) fund, which includes State Fuel Tax and State Vehicle Sales and Use Tax, are based on past distributions and are assumed to continue a trend of a 2% inflation rate. The City of Jefferson has a ½ cent sales tax to support its Capital Improvement Program and a ½ cent sales tax for Parks and Recreation, which supports greenways and other non-motorized transportation activities. The City of Jefferson has provided its own future revenue projections from these sources. Cole County has a ½ cent sales tax to support its Capital Improvement Program and a real property tax levy of $0.27 earmarked for Road & Bridges. All small cities get $100,000 every five years from Cole County, which comes from the aforementioned sales tax. Callaway County has a real property tax levy of $0.2466 earmarked for Road & Bridges. DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 94 Figure 6.4 Anticipated Available Revenue 2020-2045 Jurisdiction & Revenue Source 2020-2025 2026-2030 2031-2035 2036-2040 2041-2045 Callaway County CART $11,173,535 $10,380,834 $11,461,280 $12,654,179 $13,971,236 Property Tax - Road & Bridge ($0.2466 levy)* $11,400,000 $9,500,000 $9,500,000 $9,500,000 $9,500,000 General Revenue Transfer $1,800,000 $1,500,000 $1,500,000 $1,500,000 $1,500,000 Cole County CART $5,229,702 $4,858,683 $5,364,379 $5,922,708 $6,539,148 Sales Tax $32,641,074 $27,200,895 $27,200,895 $27,200,895 $27,200,895 Property Tax - Road & Bridge ($0.27 levy)* $23,882,280 $19,901,900 $19,901,900 $19,901,900 $19,901,900 Motor Vehicle Sales Tax $2,208,192 $1,840,160 $1,840,160 $1,840,160 $1,840,160 Highway Bridge Program - Off-System (BRO) $519,425 $519,425 $519,425 $519,425 $519,425 Holts Summit CART $860,059 $799,043 $882,208 $974,029 $1,075,406 Jefferson City CART $11,410,689 $10,601,164 $11,704,541 $12,922,759 $14,267,771 Sales Tax – ½ cent Parks Sales Tax* $29,711,268 $24,759,390 $24,759,390 $24,759,390 $24,759,390 Sales Tax - ½ cent Capital Improvement (Expires 2022)* $8,520,000 $7,100,000 $7,100,000 $7,100,000 $7,100,000 St. Martins CART $301,961 $280,538 $309,737 $341,975 $377,568 General Revenue Funds $1,803,254 $1,137,828 $1,319,055 $1,529,146 $1,772,700 Sales Tax - ½ cent Capital Improvement** $120,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 Taos CART $232,563 $216,064 $238,552 $263,380 $290,793 Sales Tax - ½ cent Capital Improvement** $120,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 Wardsville CART $398,906 $370,606 $409,179 $451,767 $498,787 Sales Tax - ½ cent Capital Improvement** $120,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 JEFFTRAN FTA Section 5307*** $4,823,218 $4,131,085 $4,214,328 $4,299,249 $4,385,881 City of Jefferson-Local*** Operating Assistance $7,295,634 $6,778,049 $7,336,779 $7,941,565 $8,596,205 MoDOT State Operating Assistance $69,000 $57,500 $57,500 $57,500 $57,500 Farebox & Reimbursements*** $2,201,300 $1,882,143 $1,533,017 $1,248,652 $1,017,035 Capital Funds $750,000 $625,000 $625,000 $625,000 $625,000 OATS, Inc. Passenger Fare, Misc. $76,300 $71,200 $71,200 $71,200 $71,200 FTA Section 5310 $400,000 $400,000 $400,000 $400,000 $400,000 Local Contracts $400,000 $325,000 $325,000 $325,000 $325,000 Totals $156,267,060 $122,062,730 $125,106,901 $128,477,913 $132,211,379 Total $664,125,983 *Sales Taxes Anticipated to remain flat unless changed and voted upon **Distributed amount from Cole County ***5307 is a positive 0.5% increase per year. City of Jefferson-Local Operating Assistance is a positive 2% increase per year. Farebox & Reimbursements is a 5% decrease per year Note: CART Funds based on 2018 numbers from MoDOT. There is a conservative 2% increase per year, based on historical numbers. Source: CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 95 MODOT REVENUE FOR ROADS AND BRIDGES, MULTIMODAL, HIGHWAY SAFETY (DOLLARS IN THOUSANDS) MoDOT’s funding comes from both state and federal sources. Most of the money is dedicated by federal law or the state constitution and statutes to specific purposes. Figure 6.5 depicts the funds available for roads and bridges and other transportation modes. Figure 6.5 MoDOT funds available for roads and bridges and other transportation modes Source: MODOT. Citizen’s Guide to Transportation Funding (Financial Snapshot, November 2018). DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 96 ILLUSTRATIVE PROJECTS For illustrative purposes, the financial plan includes additional projects that could be completed if additional resources beyond those identified in the financial plan were to become available. Some items on these lists have cost estimates or cost ranges associated with them. This section of the MTP includes: 1. Programmatic Illustrative Projects – Approved by the Board of Directors and Technical Committee as broad regional or statewide needs. 2. Illustrative Site Specific Projects –Projects in this list were developed by a stakeholder workgroup and then reviewed, prioritized and approved by Technical Committee and Board of Directors using the Tier system outlined below. 3. JEFFTRAN Program of Projects – An Illustrative list of transit projects that may be completed in the next 5 to 10 years dependent upon the Jefferson City annual budget and availability of federal funds. 4. Future Roads – Identified through the Travel Demand Model and approved by the Board of Directors. Additional illustrative projects can be found in the other adopted CAMPO plans in the appendices. Most of the illustrative items found in those plans are reflected in the lists below. Other plans that have identified potential illustrative projects include: • 2016 Capital Area Pedestrian and Bicycle Plan - Appendix F • 2017 Coordinated Public Transit-Human Services Transportation Plan - Appendix G • 2015 CAMPO Regional Wayfinding Plan - Appendix I PROGRAMMATIC ILLUSTRATIVE PROJECTS In addition to the site specific projects listed later in this section, there are other projects that have been identified as a need in the region that may require a shift in funding allocation at the state or local level. Figure 6.6 provides a list of programmatic illustrative projects. Figure 6.6 Programmatic Illustrative Projects Category Project Pedestrian & Non- Motorized Increase funding to support safety improvements to pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure at the local level. System Performance Fund the upgrade of US 50 to four lanes to provide an alternative route to Interstate 70. System Performance Fund expansion and improvements to Interstate 70 including replacement of the Rocheport bridge over the Missouri River. System Performance Fund expansion of shoulders (min 2’ – 4’) on Missouri numbered and lettered routes. System Performance/ Pedestrian & Non- Motorized Create/fund a safety improvement program for small cities with population of less than 5,000. The program would support small cities making safety (sidewalks, curb/gutter, crosswalk, signage, etc.) improvements along state highways that run through their town. Multi-Modal Transit Capital and Operating Program – maintain and/or increase current level of service for urban and rural public transportation. System Performance Increase funding for roadway and bridge maintenance to keep infrastructure good and safe condition. DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 97 ILLUSTRATIVE SITE SPECIFIC PROJECTS This site specific list of illustrative projects Note: The reference numbers used in the following tables and maps do not denote priority. This number is just a reference number. •Regionally Significant: Impacting network users from outside the region and having major impacts on freight movement moving through the region •Recognized as a high priority by Board of Directors, stakeholders, and public •Supported by the 2045 Travel Demand Model •Supports increased motorized and non-motorized safety and system performance •Intersections and interchanges with high numbers of crashes TIER 1 •Recognized as a high priority by Board of Directors, stakeholders, and public •Most projects in this Tier are supported by the Travel Demand Model •Supports increased motorized and non-motorized safety and system performance •Intersections and interchanges with high numbers of crashes TIER 2 •Designated as a need by stakeholders and general public •Some projects in this tier are supported by the Travel Demand Model •Projects in this tier may be completed in phases, dramatically changing cost and date of completion •Supports increased motorized and non-motorized safety and system performance •Intersections and interchanges with high numbers of crashes TIER 3 DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 98 Figure 6.7A Illustrative Projects – System Performance Source: CAMPO Figure 6.7B Illustrative Projects – System Performance – Tier 1 System Performance - Tier 1 # Jurisdiction Location Project Description Term Cost Range 1 Jefferson City US 54 / 63 / 94 (Bluff Rd) Construct direct connector for northbound-to-westbound movement to improve capacity; widen US 54/63 to provide 3 continuous through lanes in each direction (in addition to auxiliary/acceleration/deceleration lanes) Long-Term 10 years< $10M< 2 Jefferson City US 50/63, US 54 to Lafayette St Implement major capacity improvements, which could include mainline widening, grade separations, and/or outer roads Long-Term 10 years< $10M< 3 Jefferson City US 50 / 63 /54 (Tri-Level) Reconfigure interchange to provide non- conflicting system-to-system movements Long-Term 10 years< $5M-$10M DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 99 Figure 6.7C Illustrative Projects – System Performance – Tier 2 System Performance - Tier 2 # Jurisdiction Location Project Description Term Cost Range 4 Callaway County US 54 / S. Summit Dr. Ramps Addition of ramps to westbound and eastbound US 54 completing the S. Summit Dr. overpass Long-Term 10 years< $1M-$5M 5 Jefferson City US 50 / Dix Rd Reconfigure interchange and Dix Rd approaches to address capacity issues including lack of left-turn lanes; consider dumbbell roundabout interchange; widen Dix Rd to provide center turn lane and pedestrian access from US 50 to Missouri Blvd Near-Term 5-10 years $5M-$10M 6 Jefferson City West Edgewood @ Stadium Install roundabout to improve intersection capacity Near-Term 5-10 years $500k-$5M 7 Jefferson City Missouri Blvd, Eastern Lowe's entrance to S 10 Mile Dr Address access management along the corridor, including turn restrictions, additional traffic control, and safety. Near-Term 5-10 years $1M-$10M 8 Jefferson City W. Truman Blvd @ Scott Station Rd Signalize or otherwise enhance capacity Near-Term 5-10 years < $500k 9 Jefferson City US-54 NB Ramps / Christy Dr / Stadium / Jefferson St Install roundabouts at both hook ramp intersections to improve operations and address offsets/angles Near-Term 5-10 years $1M-$10M 12 Wardsville Route B, Ashbury Way to Route M Install roundabout at Rte B / Falcon / Ashbury and intersection improvements to Rte B / Rte M/ Rte W. Near-Term 5-10 years $1M-$5M 13 Jefferson City US 54 / Ellis Blvd / Southwest Blvd Reconfigure interchange to address capacity and close spacing of outer roads. Create pedestrian connection on Southwest/Ellis Blvd from Ford St to Southridge Dr Near-Term 5-10 years $5M-$10M 14 Jefferson City Southwest Blvd @ Stadium Install roundabout to improve intersection capacity Near-Term 5-10 years $500k-$5M 15 Jefferson City Ellis Bl / Green Berry Rd Install roundabout to improve intersection capacity Near-Term 5-10 years $500k-$5M 16 Jefferson City Bald Hill Rd / Seven Hills Rd Install roundabout to improve intersection capacity Near-Term 5-10 years $500k-$5M 17 Jefferson City US 50 / Truman Bl / Country Club Dr Reconfigure interchange to address close outer road spacing; widen westbound off-ramp to improve capacity; incorporate pedestrian facilities into the interchange Near-Term 5-10 years $5M-$10M 21 Jefferson City West Edgewood @ Creek Trail Install roundabout to improve intersection capacity Near-Term 5-10 years $500k-$5M 22 Jefferson City Missouri Blvd, Country Club Dr to Howerton Widen to 5 lanes; including right turn lane at Howerton Ct. Long-Term 10 years< $5M-$10M 23 Jefferson City Country Club Dr, Truman Blvd to Rainbow Dr Widen to provide left-turn lanes at existing and future access points Long-Term 10 years< $1M-$5M 25 Holts Summit US 54 / Route OO / Simon Blvd Reconfigure interchange to address close outer road spacing and capacity issues (may involve roundabouts); incorporate pedestrian facilities crossing US 54 Long-Term 10 years< $5M-$10M 26 Jefferson City Missouri Blvd, Stoneridge Pkwy to US 50 Improve access management along Missouri Blvd, including improvements to intersections, restrictions to turning movements, and improvements to pedestrian safety. Long-Term 10 years< $5M-$10M DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 100 Figure 6.7D Illustrative Projects – System Performance – Tier 3 System Performance - Tier 3 # Jurisdiction Location Project Description Term Cost Range 29 Jefferson City Madison Street, Dunklin St to US-54 Ramps Add a center turn lane via a combination of widening and parking removal; address unusual stop control configuration at Madison Atchison Near-Term 5-10 years $1M-$5M 30 Jefferson City US 50/63 / Clark Ave Reconfigure interchange to address ramp terminal capacity (likely roundabouts); include modifications to Clark/Miller and Clark/Dunklin intersections to improve corridor operations Near-Term 5-10 years $1M-$10M 31 Holts Summit US 54 / Center St Improve interchange capacity and east-side outer road spacing with roundabouts at terminals Long-Term 10 years< $1M-$10M 32 Cole County Rock Ridge Rd / Wildwood Dr extension Add left-turn lane on Rock Ridge to improve capacity after completion of extension Long-Term 10 years< $1M-$5M 33 Jefferson City MO 179, Industrial Dr to Sue Dr Add left-turn lanes at Sue Dr, Cherry Creek Ct, and Fire Station north driveway Long-Term 10 years< $500k-$5M 34 Jefferson City MO 179 and Truman Blvd Reconfigure intersection with roundabout Long-Term 10 years< $1M-$5M 35 Cole County Bridge Replacement / Tanner Bridge Rd Bridge Replacement on Tanner Bridge Rd. over Moreau River Near-Term 5-10 years $1M-$5M 36 Wardsville Route B, Tanner Bridge Rd to Friendship Rd Install roundabouts at two locations to improve capacity: Rte B / Falcon / Ashbury, Rte B / Rte M; widen to four lanes in each direction on Rte B for several hundred feet south of Tanner Bridge Rd and reconfigure intersection; Widen Rte B to provide TWLT Near-Term 5-10 years $5M-$10M 39 Jefferson City Swifts Hwy / Jefferson St Reconfigure to fix sight distance issues; widen Swifts Hwy approach Long-Term 10 years< $50K-$100k 40 Holts Summit S. Summit Dr / Perrey Dr / Hibernia Ln / Holt Ln Redesign intersection to address offset and sight distance Near-Term 5-10 years N/A 41 Holts Summit Spalding Rd/ Park Install drainage improvements. Curb and gutter could cause surface flooding for adjoining properties. Near-Term 5-10 years N/A 42 Holts Summit N. Summit Dr and Mars St Intersection Install drainage improvements -box culvert. Near-Term 5-10 years N/A 43 Holts Summit Van Horn Rd / Julie Ln Redesign intersection to address offset and sight distance Near-Term 5-10 years N/A 47 St. Martins Route T/D & Bus 50 W Intersection Reconfigure intersection with roundabout Near-Term 5-10 years $500k-$1M 48 Holts Summit Nieman Rd / Halifax Rd / Major Terr Address offset and skew by installing roundabout or realigning east leg Near-Term 5-10 years N/A 49 Holts Summit E Simon Blvd Replace undersized culvert. Install new bridge ~0.4 mi east of Jefferson Rd Near-Term 5-10 years N/A 57 Taos Routes M and Y shoulders Install minimum 2 ft. shoulders along state routes M and Y in Taos Near-Term 5-10 years $500k-$1M 60 Jefferson City High St. viaduct rehabilitation Rehabilitation of the High St. viaduct over Missouri Blvd. Long-Term 10 years< $5M-$10M DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 101 Figure 6.8A Illustrative Projects – Multi-Modal Source: CAMPO DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 102 Figure 6.8B Illustrative Projects – Multi-Modal – Tier 2 Multi-Modal - Tier 2 # Jurisdiction Location Project Description Term Cost Range 18 Jefferson City JEFFTRAN Transit Facilities Construction of a new facilities for JEFFTRAN that would provide better accommodations for transit riders and staff, including, but not limited to; a bus barn, washing bays, central maintenance facilities, and administrative offices Near-Term 5-10 years $5M-$10M 19 Jefferson City Jefferson City Amtrak Station Renovation or replacement of the Amtrak Train Station in Jefferson City Long-Term 10 years< <$100M 20 Jefferson City/ Cole County/ Callaway County Missouri River Port Construction of a port facility in either Callaway County or Cole County as specified in the Central Missouri Multimodal Port Feasibility Study. Near-Term 5-10 years $10M< 27 Jefferson City Jefferson City Memorial Airport Reconstruction of Runway 9/27 Near-Term 5-10 years $1M-$5M 28 Jefferson City Jefferson City Memorial Airport Construction of new air traffic control tower. Near-Term 5-10 years $1M-$5M Figure 6.8C Illustrative Projects – Multi-Modal – Tier 3 Multi-Modal - Tier 3 # Jurisdiction Location Project Description Term Cost Range 37 Jefferson City Jefferson City Memorial Airport - Runway 9 and 9/27 Relocate Runway 9 and Extend Runway 9/27 at the Jefferson City Memorial Airport. Long- Term 10 years< $5M-$10M 38 Jefferson City Jefferson City Memorial Airport - Runway 12/30 Extension and Widening of runway 12/30 at the Jefferson City Memorial Airport. Long- Term 10 years< $10M< DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 103 Figure 6.9A Illustrative Projects – Pedestrian and Non-Motorized Source: CAMPO DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 104 Figure 6.9B Illustrative Projects – Pedestrian & Non-Motorized – Tier 2 Pedestrian & Non-Motorized - Tier 2 # Jurisdiction Location Project Description Term Cost Range 10 Holts Summit S. Summit Drive, Simon to Center Install sidewalks with some curb and gutter and drop inlets Long- Term 10 years< $500K-$1M 11 Jefferson City Missouri Blvd, W. Main St. to Stadium Blvd. Complete connectivity between segments of sidewalk and install crosswalks/pedestrian refuges as needed. Near- Term 5- 10 years $1M-$5M Figure 6.9C Illustrative Projects – Pedestrian & Non-Motorized – Tier 3 Pedestrian & Non-Motorized - Tier 3 # Jurisdiction Location Project Description Term Cost Range 24 Jefferson City Bolivar St. Greenway Design and construct a greenway extension from the Dunklin St. Trailhead to McCarty St. Near-Term 5-10 years $500k-$1M 44 Jefferson City Southwest Blvd & Dix Rd Intersection Install pedestrian-activated beacon or similar warning device Near-Term 5-10 years < $50K 45 Jefferson City Dix Road, W. Main to Missouri Blvd Improve bicycle and pedestrian facilities along the corridor Near-Term 5-10 years < $500k 46 St. Martins/ Cole County Route T, Bus 50 to Elston Install shoulders to accommodate cyclists and pedestrians. Near-Term 5-10 years $5M-$10M 50 Holts Summit Karen Dr, Center to Thompson Install sidewalk and crosswalks Near-Term 5-10 years $500K-$1M 51 Holts Summit Halifax Rd, Center to Nieman Install sidewalk and crosswalks Near-Term 5-10 years $500K-$1M 52 St. Martins/ Cole County Route T, Henwick Ln to Bus 50 W Install curb, gutter & sidewalk in each direction Near-Term 5-10 years N/A 53 CAMPO Bike lane installation in CAMPO Region Continue expansion of bike lanes in the downtown area. Near-Term 5-10 years $50K-$100k 54 CAMPO CAMPO Greenway Connectivity Continue to expand greenways to connect cities in the CAMPO Region Long-Term 10 years< $10M< 55 Jefferson City Jefferson City Greenway Projects Locations may include; Fairgrounds Acres to County Park, South Country Club Drive to Turtle Creek subdivision, Ellis-Porter Riverside Park connector from St. Louis Road, Wears Creek to East Branch Connector, Frog Hollow Phase 4, Creek Trail to W. Edgewood Near-Term 5-10 years $50k-$1M 56 Jefferson City Missouri Blvd and S. Ten Mile, Stoneridge Pkwy to S. Country Club Install Sidewalks and crosswalks along route with pedestrian accesss over MO 179 provided via a pedestrian bridge connecting S. Ten Mile east and west segments. Near-Term 5-10 years $1M-$5M 58 Taos Sidewalk expansion Extend sidewalk along Route M north and south of existing sidewalk. Near-Term 5-10 years $1M-$5M 59 Taos Trail Connectivity Create sidewalk/trail connection between Route M sidewalk and Countryside Park trail. Near-Term 5-10 years < $500k DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 105 JEFFTRAN PROGRAM OF PROJECTS Figure 6.10 outlines an Illustrative list of transit projects that may be completed in the next 5 to 10 years dependent upon the Jefferson City annual budget and availability of federal funds. Figure 6.10 Program Projects JEFFTRAN Program of Projects Description Total Cost Other Funding Local Funding 1 Replace paratransit wide body cutaway buses $150,000 $120,000 $30,000 2 Replace paratransit software and associated hardware $30,000 $24,000 $6,000 3 Replace low-floor minivan support vehicle $40,000 $0 $40,000 4 Replace transit administration vehicle $30,000 $30,000 5 Upgrade/replace fare card system $300,000 $240,000 $60,000 6 Repair Transfer Facility Roof (Bus Transfer Shelter) $12,000 $0 $12,000 7 Transit facility improvements--ridge cap/flashing replacements/roof repair on bus barn $50,000 $40,000 $10,000 8 Security upgrades for transit facilities $30,000 $24,000 $6,000 9 Replace outdated bus security camera systems $60,000 $48,000 $12,000 10 Update/revise Transit facilities feasibility study $150,000 $0 $150,000 11 Purchase and install bus shelters at various locations in Jefferson City $30,000 $24,000 $6,000 12 Transit facility improvements, including replace overhead doors and door operators $95,000 $76,000 $19,000 13 JEFFTRAN lighted signs for exterior of transit facilities $15,000 $12,000 $3,000 14 Purchase emergency back-up generator & switches for transit and CM facilities $100,000 $80,000 $20,000 15 Replace low-floor route buses $3,000,000 $2,400,000 $600,000 16 Construct new transit facilities and central maintenance facilities $7,000,000 $5,600,000 $1,400,000 17 Transit admin facility rehab $50,000 $40,000 $10,000 18 Purchase and install additional transit traveler kiosks (each) $15,000 $12,000 $3,000 19 Add bike racks at passenger transfer facilities and selected bus stops $5,000 $0 $5,000 20 Enhance/replace security systems for buses and transit facilities $20,000 $16,000 $4,000 21 Charging systems/electrical upgrades for buses $100,000 $80,000 $20,000 22 Add crosswalks to various locations around the city $60,000 $0 $60,000 23 Rehabilitate/replace bus wash facility $100,000 $80,000 $20,000 Source: JEFFTRAN March 2019 DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 106 FUTURE ROADS The list below includes recommended or proposed future roads that have been identified by the Travel Demand Model or stakeholders. If development in the region occurs as predicted by the preferred scenario, see Section 3, these roads would improve efficiency and system performance. Figure 6.11 shows the general location of these future roadways. It should be noted that the exact placement of the road will be dictated by more intensive study and engineering as development occurs. More information about the development of the future road locations can be found in the Travel Demand Model Report in Appendix H. 1. Wildwood Extension to Rock Ridge Road 2. Mission Drive Extension to Rock Ridge Road 3. Schotthill Woods Drive Extension to Schott Road 4. Missouri State Penitentiary Parkway 5. Mission Drive to Stadium Boulevard Connection 6. Stoneridge Parkway Extension to W. Edgewood Drive 7. S. Summit Drive Ramp Additions 8. Militia Drive Extension to Liberty Road Figure 6.11 Future Roads Source: CAMPO DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 107 LOCAL FUNDING SOURCES Sales tax provides most of the transportation revenue at the local level. Local revenue sources for operations and maintenance include state fuel tax, state vehicles sales/use tax, local sales taxes, franchise fees, license & permit fees, property taxes, and other revenue sources that provide significant resources for local general funds and specific funding of transportation. Not all taxes and fees go to transportation, so the local jurisdiction will usually identify a budget specifically for transportation purposes, such as capital improvements program or operations and maintenance budgets. Local finance initiatives, otherwise known as special taxing districts, may also provide additional revenue to be used on specific transportation needs within a designated development area. TAXES All jurisdictions in the CAMPO Region receive funding via the state fuel tax or a designated sales tax or property tax, see Figure 6.12. Local revenue also supports JEFFTRAN in Jefferson City through the City’s Capital Improvement Program. These taxes are critical to transportation maintenance and improvements. Revenue projections stemming from these taxes are outlined in greater detail in Section 6 under Anticipated Available Revenue. Figure 6.12 Local Funding Sources by Jurisdiction Callaway County County Aid Road Trust - State Fuel Tax Property Tax - Road & Bridge ($.2466 levy) Sales Tax - 1/2% Capital Improvement Cole County County Aid Road Trust - State Fuel Tax Property Tax - Road & Bridge ($.27 levy) Holts Summit County Aid Road Trust - State Fuel Tax Jefferson City and JEFFTRAN County Aid Road Trust - State Fuel Tax Sales Tax - 1/2% Parks Sales Tax Sales Tax - 1/2% Capital Improvement St. Martins County Aid Road Trust - State Fuel Tax Taos County Aid Road Trust - State Fuel Tax Wardsville County Aid Road Trust - State Fuel Tax Source: CAMPO Transportation Improvement Program 2020-2024 LOCAL FINANCE INITIATIVES & SPECIAL DISTRICTS Local Finance Initiatives are incentive programs that financially assist development activities. Each program is designed to address a specific development need by or assist a specific type of developer, including local governments, not-for-profit organizations, for-profit developers, community development corporations, volunteer organizations or others. Community Improvement Districts (CID) provide funding for certain public improvements or services in the designated benefit area. Funding may be through a special tax on sales, special assessment on certain real property or by fees, rents or charges generated in the District. Local Option Economic Development Sales Tax allows citizens to authorize a supplemental sales tax dedicated exclusively for certain economic development initiatives in their home municipality. Neighborhood Improvement Districts (NID) finance certain public facilities, DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 108 improvements or redevelopment in the designated benefit area. Funding is accomplished by issue of general obligation bonds of the governing municipality. Property Tax Abatement is offered to private companies for certain urban redevelopment or industrial development projects by cities and counties. Tax Increment Financing (TIF) provides local tax financial assistance for the redevelopment of designated economically depressed areas. TIF allows the use of a portion of certain new local tax revenues generated for a limited number of years in the redevelopment area to help pay for the redevelopment. Jefferson City has four areas in the City where Tax Increment Financing (TIF) is used, Including the Capital Mall, High Street in the Downtown area, the Southside Neighborhood along Dunklin Street, and the old St. Mary’s Hospital site. Funds generated from the TIFs in these areas can assist with restoration, construction, demolition, sidewalk installation, engineering, stormwater mitigation, and more. Transportation Development Districts (TDD) are created for the purpose of developing, improving, maintaining or operating one or more projects relative to the transportation needs of the benefit area, related to streets and highways, railroads or urban light rail, aviation, bus or other mass transit, river port, ferry or any other conveyance and related infrastructures within the broad definition of transportation. DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 109 STATE FUNDING SOURCES STATE HIGHWAY USER REVENUES Cities and counties within CAMPO planning area receive State Highway Revenue each year. These revenues come from Motor Fuel Tax, Vehicle Sales Tax, and Motor Vehicle Fees. For Counties, the revenue distribution is based on the ratio of a county’s rural road mileage to the total of county rural road mileage of the state, and the ratio of the County’s assessed total county rural land valuation as portion of the total state rural land valuation. For cities, a city’s share is distributed according to population, based on the ratio of the city population to the population of all the cities in the state. *Requires certification by the Commissioner of Administration and the Missouri Highways and Transportation Commission Source: MoDOT DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 110 STATE PARTNERSHIP FUNDING PROGRAMS (REPAYMENT REQUIRED) Statewide Transportation Assistance Revolving Fund (STAR Fund) – The STAR Fund was created to assist in the planning, acquisition, development and construction of transportation facilities other than highways in the state. Missouri Transportation Finance Corporation (MTFC) – A non-profit lending corporation established to assist local transportation projects, and to administer the STAR Fund. State Infrastructure Bank (SIB) - A SIB is an investment fund at the state level with the ability to make loans and provide other forms of credit assistance to public and private entities to carry out transportation projects. STATE PARTNERSHIP DEBT-FINANCING PROGRAMS (REPAYMENT NOT REQUIRED) Cost Sharing Program: Projects where MoDOT commits a portion of project costs for projects not on the department's right-of-way and construction program, but that will benefit the state highway system. Economic Development Program: A method of funding projects that will significantly impact the economic development in a given area. Transportation Corporations: specialized, temporary, private, not-for-profit corporations that can be organized to plan, develop, and finance a particular transportation project. Transportation Corporations accounted for $10, 528,000 in funding for MO Rt. 179 from FY 2005 to 2007. MISSOURI ELDERLY AND HANDICAPPED TRANSPORTATION ASSISTANCE PROGRAM (MEHTAP) MEHTAP provides state financial assistance for public and nonprofit organizations offering transportation services to the elderly and disabled at below-cost rates. DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 111 FEDERAL FUNDING SOURCES Federal transportation funding sources include grant and loan programs administered by a handful of agencies. For the purposes of this plan, sources that cannot be used within the CAMPO planning area have been excluded. FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION (FHWA) PROGRAMS An agency within the U.S. Department of Transportation, FHWA supports State and local governments in the design, construction, and maintenance of the Nation’s highway system (Federal-Aid Highway Program) and various federally and tribal owned lands (Federal Lands Highway Program). FHWA provides State and local governments with financial and technical assistance. National Highway Performance Program (NHPP) NHPP provides support for the condition and performance of the National Highway System (NHS), for the construction of new facilities on the NHS, and to ensure that investments of Federal-Aid funds in highway construction are directed to support progress toward the achievement of performance targets established in a State's asset management plan for the NHS. Highway Bridge Program (HBP) HBP is intended for bridge rehabilitation and replacement. In Missouri, HBP funds are only available to local jurisdictions in the form of BRO (Bridge Replacement Off-System). BRO funds are annually allocated to counties and can only be applied to bridges not on the state-system. Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) HSIP supports a significant reduction in traffic fatalities and serious injuries on all public roads, including non-State-owned public roads and roads on tribal lands Railway-Highway Crossings (set-aside from HSIP) A set-aside from HSIP, this program funds safety improvements to reduce the number of fatalities, injuries, and crashes at public grade crossings. Transportation Alternatives (TA) – previously TAP Administered by MoDOT, TA replaces the previous Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP) and with a set-aside of Surface Transportation Block Grant (STBG) program funding. These set- aside funds include all projects and activities that were previously eligible under TAP. Traffic Engineering Assistance Program (TEAP) Administered by MoDOT, TEAP allows local public agencies to receive engineering assistance to study traffic engineering problems. Eligible projects include: corridor safety and/or operational analysis, intersection(s) safety and/or operational analysis, speed limit review, sign inventory, pedestrian/bike route analysis, parking issues, and other traffic studies, etc. DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 112 FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION (FTA) PROGRAMS An agency within the U.S. Department of Transportation, the FTA provides financial and technical assistance to local public transit systems, including buses, subways, light rail, commuter rail, trolleys and ferries. FTA also oversees safety measures and helps develop next-generation technology research. Section 5307 Urbanized Area Formula Grants This program provides grants to Urbanized Areas (UZA) for public transportation capital, planning, job access and reverse commute projects, as well as operating expenses in certain circumstances. Section 5310 Enhanced Mobility of Seniors and Individuals with Disabilities This program is intended to enhance mobility for seniors and persons with disabilities by providing funds for programs to serve the special needs of transit-dependent populations beyond traditional public transportation services and Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) complementary paratransit services. Section 5311 Formula Grants for Rural Areas This program provides capital, planning, and operating assistance to states to support public transportation in rural areas with populations less than 50,000, where many residents often rely on public transit to reach their destinations. Section 5339 Formula Grants for Bus and Bus Facilities This program makes Federal resources available to States and designated recipients to replace, rehabilitate, and purchase buses. Additionally, funds can be used to purchase related equipment and to construct bus-related facilities including technological changes or innovations to modify low or no emission vehicles or facilities. BUILD AMERICA BUREAU Administered by the U.S. Department of Transportation, the Build America Bureau serves as the single point of contact and coordination for states, municipalities, and project sponsors looking to utilize federal transportation expertise, apply for federal transportation credit programs, and explore ways to access private capital in public private partnerships. The Bureau streamlines credit opportunities and grants and provides access to the credit and grant programs with more speed and transparency, while also providing technical assistance and encouraging innovative best practices in project planning, financing, delivery, and monitoring. Transportation Infrastructure Financing and Innovation Act (TIFIA) - provides credit assistance for qualified projects of regional and national significance. Many large-scale, surface transportation projects, including highway, transit, rail, intermodal freight, and port access are eligible for assistance. Eligible applicants include state and local governments, transit agencies, railroad companies, special authorities/districts, and private entities. The TIFIA credit program is designed to fill market gaps and leverage private co-investment. Infrastructure for Rebuilding America (INFRA) Grants - provides dedicated, discretionary funding for projects that address critical highway and bridge issues. The grants support fixing infrastructure by creating opportunities for all levels of government and the private sector to fund infrastructure, using innovative approaches. DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 113 Public Participation Plan Limited English Proficiency Plan Title VI Plan IMPLEMENTATION CAMPO actively plans for and facilitates improvements to the region’s transportation system through an inclusive process, which includes the general public, city and county leaders, regional stakeholders, and the Technical Committee and Board of Directors. The Vision, Goals, and Strategies outlined in Section 2 guide implementation activities and play an integral role in the development of required plans and documents as outlined below. UNIFIED PLANNING WORK PROGRAM (UPWP) The UPWP in updated annually and includes a detailed budget and description of tasks and activities that CAMPO will work on during that period. The tasks and activities outline in the UPWP are directly guided by the goals and strategies outlined in the MTP. These tasks and activities are integral to CAMPO providing service to member communities and to the continued success of the planning process and state wide planning framework. TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (TIP) As stated previously in this section, the annually updated TIP is a 5-year financial program of transportation projects to be implemented within the Metropolitan Planning Area. Projects in the TIP are consistent with strategies discussed in the MTP and are developed in cooperation with the MoDOT, local jurisdictions, and public transportation operators. Projects outlined in the TIP constitute the first five years of fiscally constrained projects to be implemented in the CAMPO MPA. The TIP is located in Appendix E. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN (PPP), LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENCY PLAN (LEP), & TITLE VI PLAN The development of the MTP is consistent with the PPP. CAMPO is required to seek input from the public and stakeholders in the development of all planning documents. This process is outlined in the PPP and reflected in the strategies laid out in the LEP and Title VI Plan. CAMPO provides the following groups a reasonable opportunity to comment on the transportation plan; individuals, affected public agencies, representatives of public transportation employees, public ports, freight shippers, providers of freight transportation services, private and public transportations providers and their representatives, representatives of users of pedestrian walkways and bicycle transportation facilities, representatives of the disabled, and any other interested parties Metropolitan Transportation Plan Priorities (Projects and Strategies) Transportation Improvement Program DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 114 IMPLEMENTATION OF STRATEGIES The goals and strategies listed below re-iterate those outlined in Section 2, and include a schedule for addressing the strategies over the next five years. As strategies are implemented and funding is made available, strategies or projects may be programed into the UPWP or TIP. After being reviewed by stakeholders, public, and the CAMPO Technical Committee the strategies were categorized as follows: Ongoing Strategies that are currently activities that CAMPO is currently working on. Short Range Strategies that CAMPO will work toward addressing in the next 1-2 years. Long Range Strategies that CAMPO will work toward addressing in the next 3-5 years. 1. Improve safety and security for all travel modes a. Identify locations for safety improvements Short Range b. Improve collaboration between CAMPO and public safety agencies Short Range c. Assist with railroad related safety and access improvements such as the boarding platform, crossings, and right-of-way areas Long Range d. Encourage collaboration between law enforcement and transit agencies concerning security camera use Short Range 2. Support economic development and tourism throughout the region a. Seek funding and provide support for improvements and access to the airport, transit, and the river port Long Range b. Improve accessibility to recreational and cultural opportunities Long Range c. Expanding wayfinding throughout the region Long Range d. Support creation of shuttle services for local and regional events Short Range 3. Support regional partnerships and planning continuity across the region. a. Develop data in support of member jurisdictions’ comprehensive plans Ongoing b. Provide a forum for sharing planning best practices or processes Ongoing c. Strengthen collaboration with regional planning agencies Ongoing 4. Improve efficiency in system management, operations, and movement of people and freight a. Maintain and update a regional travel demand model Long Range b. Support access management programs Long Range c. Identify current or potential congestion locations or bottlenecks Short Range d. Identify potential locations for connection improvements Short Range e. Improve existing inter-modal and multi-modal facilities Long Range f. Support improvements to freight and people movement via rail, air, and river port access Long Range g. Improve inter-city and inter-regional transit operations and connectivity Long Range h. Improve parking and services specific to freight hauler needs Long Range i. Support development and implementation of local parking studies Short Range DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 115 5. Support land use practices that promote quality of life and economic vitality a. Develop and maintain land use data in support of MPO and regional planning partner needs Ongoing b. Support member jurisdictions’ plans for connectivity to parks, trails, and open space Ongoing c. Provide mapping and data development support to local communities Ongoing 6. Seek secure and reliable funding a. Provide assistance to regional stakeholders in seeking grants and completing applications Ongoing b. Maintain a prioritized comprehensive list of illustrative transportation projects Ongoing c. Continue to maintain a Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP) Ongoing d. Maintain a list of funding sources and opportunities Ongoing e. Alert member jurisdictions of available funding resources as they are announced Ongoing f. Collaborate with regional partners in leveraging funds or applying for grants Ongoing 7. Improve accessibility and mobility a. Identify barriers to accessibility and mobility (sidewalks, crosswalks, signals, signage, etc.) Short Range b. Support development of ADA transition plans among member jurisdictions Short Range c. Support improvements to and expansion of passenger rail service Long Range d. Maintain and update the Capital Area Pedestrian and Bicycle Plan Long Range e. Maintain and update the Coordinated Public Transit-Human Services Transportation Plan Long Range f. Review and update documents that support improvements to accessibility such as the Title VI Plan, Limited English Proficiency Plan (LEP), and Public Participation Plan (PPP) Short Range 8. Maintain a resilient transportation system a. Encourage preservation of motorized and non-motorized transportation corridors for future growth Short Range b. Maintain a database of existing infrastructure and assets for use by regional partners Ongoing c. Develop and maintain an accurate Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) Ongoing d. Provide support in maintaining the MoDOT Transportation Management System (TMS) Ongoing e. Support implementation of individual or collaborative pavement and bridge management systems Short Range f. Maintain an updated performance management plan Short Range 9. Provide a platform for multi-modal transportation education a. Facilitate, promote and participate in local and regional educational activities Ongoing b. Develop and disseminate educational tools and resources such as brochures, maps, videos, and other media Ongoing c. Maintain a consistent public outreach schedule to keep members, planning partners, and the public informed about new innovations or transportation trends Ongoing d. Strengthen CAMPO’s social media presence Ongoing DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 116 STRATEGIES FROM OTHER ADOPTED PLANS Additional strategies can be found in the other adopted CAMPO plans in the appendices. Most of the strategies found in those plans are reflected in the list above. Other plans that have identified potential illustrative projects include: • 2016 Capital Area Pedestrian and Bicycle Plan - Appendix F • 2017 Coordinated Public Transit-Human Services Transportation Plan - Appendix G • 2015 CAMPO Regional Wayfinding Plan - Appendix I MAJOR THOROUGHFARE PLAN 2020 – TO BE COMPLETED CAMPO currently depends on the County-Wide Transportation Study for Cole County and the Thoroughfare Plan for Jefferson City to illustrate an adopted future road network. After completion and adoption of the CAMPO 2045 & Beyond MTP staff will undertake the task of creating a Major Thoroughfare Plan for the CAMPO Region as a whole. The CAMPO Thoroughfare Plan will provide an indication of the general locations and capacities needed to meet the future needs of the CAMPO Region. The new plan will incorporate products from the Cole County and Jefferson City plans as well as the completed Travel Demand Model and any other pertinent recommendations from other local and regional plans. The Plan will act as a guide for both municipalities and the private sector in making future decisions involving new or existing roadways and will include future and current roadway functional classifications. Ideally, the CAMPO Thoroughfare Plan will: • Provide for the efficient movement of vehicular traffic into and throughout the Region. • Identify the right-of-way needs to be dedicated to accommodate a proposed thoroughfare. • Ensure adequate roadways to serve existing and proposed developments. • Assist in identifying Capital Improvement Program needs • Reduce the traffic volumes in residential areas by ensuring adequate arterials. • Serve as a planning tool and assist coordination with other agencies. The Thoroughfare Plan will be located in the Appendices once adopted by the CAMPO Board of Directors. CAPITAL AREA PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE PLAN The Capital Area Pedestrian & Bicycle Plan, found in Appendix F, is intended as a resource to improve safety, connectivity, and mobility for pedestrian and bicycle users in the CAMPO region. The goals and strategies outlined in the plan can be used by jurisdictions to develop an individualized implementation strategy to fit the unique pedestrian and bicycle needs of that community. The implementation section of the plan lays out a strategy for the CAMPO region to achieve the goals and objectives of the plan. Included, are strategies, performance measures, and timelines to guide and track the implementation process. Also included, is an illustrative list of projects and DRAFT CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN 117 a list of funding options that can be used to support these items. It is important to reiterate the role of CAMPO in the implementation of the Capital Area Pedestrian & Bicycle Plan. Although the CAMPO region includes six incorporated communities and portions of two counties, it has no direct influence over any jurisdiction within its borders. However, CAMPO can assist local jurisdictions with developing a community specific implementation strategy referencing the goals and recommendations laid out in this plan. It is the jurisdictions responsibility to implement the plan. DRAFT APPENDICES Appendix A MTP Planning Requirements §450.324 CFR Appendix B Amendments and Modifications Appendix C System Performance Report Appendix D Surveys and Public Comment Appendix E CAMPO Transportation Improvement Program Appendix F Capital Area Pedestrian and Bicycle Plan – 2016 Appendix G CAMPO Coordinated Public Transit-Human Services Transportation Plan – 2017 Appendix H CAMPO Travel Demand Model Report Appendix I CAMPO Wayfinding Plan – 2016 Appendix J Thoroughfare Plan (To be completed in late 2020, following completion of MTP) DRAFT Appendix A MTP Planning Requirements - §450.324 CFR §450.324 Development and content of the metropolitan transportation plan.Section (a) The metropolitan transportation planning process shall include the development of a transportation plan addressing no less than a 20-year planning horizon as of the effective date. In formulating the transportation plan, the MPO shall consider factors described in §450.306 as the factors relate to a minimum 20-year forecast period. In nonattainment and maintenance areas, the effective date of the transportation plan shall be the date of a conformity determination issued by the FHWA and the FTA. In attainment areas, the effective date of the transportation plan shall be its date of adoption by the MPO. Whole plan (b) The transportation plan shall include both long-range and short-range strategies/actions that provide for the development of an integrated multimodal transportation system (including accessible pedestrian walkways and bicycle transportation facilities) to facilitate the safe and efficient movement of people and goods in addressing current and future transportation demand. Section 6 (c) The MPO shall review and update the transportation plan at least every 4 years in air quality nonattainment and maintenance areas and at least every 5 years in attainment areas to confirm the transportation plan's validity and consistency with current and forecasted transportation and land use conditions and trends and to extend the forecast period to at least a 20-year planning horizon. In addition, the MPO may revise the transportation plan at any time using the procedures in this section without a requirement to extend the horizon year. The MPO shall approve the transportation plan (and any revisions) and submit it for information purposes to the Governor. Copies of any updated or revised transportation plans must be provided to the FHWA and the FTA. Whole Plan (d) In metropolitan areas that are in nonattainment for ozone or carbon monoxide, the MPO shall coordinate the development of the metropolitan transportation plan with the process for developing transportation control measures (TCMs) in a State Implementation Plan (SIP). Not Applicable to CAMPO (e) The MPO, the State(s), and the public transportation operator(s) shall validate data used in preparing other existing modal plans for providing input to the transportation plan. In updating the transportation plan, the MPO shall base the update on the latest available estimates and assumptions for population, land use, travel, employment, congestion, and economic activity. The MPO shall approve transportation plan contents and supporting analyses produced by a transportation plan update. Section 4 & Appendix H – TDM Report (f) The metropolitan transportation plan shall, at a minimum, include: (1) The current and projected transportation demand of persons and goods in the metropolitan planning area over the period of the transportation plan; Section 4 & Appendix H – TDM Report (2) Existing and proposed transportation facilities (including major roadways, public transportation facilities, intercity bus facilities, multimodal and intermodal facilities, nonmotorized transportation facilities (e.g., pedestrian walkways and bicycle facilities), and intermodal connectors) that should function as an integrated metropolitan transportation system, giving emphasis to those facilities that serve important national and regional transportation functions over the period of the transportation plan. Sections 5,6, & Appendix H – TDM Report (3) A description of the performance measures and performance targets used in assessing the performance of the transportation system in accordance with §450.306(d). Section 1 and Appendix C – System Performance Report (4) A system performance report and subsequent updates evaluating the condition and performance of the transportation system with respect to the performance targets described in §450.306(d), including— Appendix C - System Performance Report (i) Progress achieved by the metropolitan planning organization in meeting the performance targets in comparison with system performance recorded in previous reports, including baseline data; and (ii) For metropolitan planning organizations that voluntarily elect to develop multiple scenarios, an analysis of how the preferred scenario has improved the conditions and performance of the transportation system and how changes in local policies and investments have impacted the costs necessary to achieve the identified performance targets. DRAFT §450.324 Development and content of the metropolitan transportation plan… continued Section (5) Operational and management strategies to improve the performance of existing transportation facilities to relieve vehicular congestion and maximize the safety and mobility of people and goods; Appendix - System Performance Report (6) Consideration of the results of the congestion management process in TMAs that meet the requirements of this subpart, including the identification of SOV projects that result from a congestion management process in TMAs that are nonattainment for ozone or carbon monoxide. Not Applicable to CAMPO (7) Assessment of capital investment and other strategies to preserve the existing and projected future metropolitan transportation infrastructure, provide for multimodal capacity increases based on regional priorities and needs, and reduce the vulnerability of the existing transportation infrastructure to natural disasters. The metropolitan transportation plan may consider projects and strategies that address areas or corridors where current or projected congestion threatens the efficient functioning of key elements of the metropolitan area's transportation system. Sections 3 & 6 (8) Transportation and transit enhancement activities, including consideration of the role that intercity buses may play in reducing congestion, pollution, and energy consumption in a cost-effective manner and strategies and investments that preserve and enhance intercity bus systems, including systems that are privately owned and operated, and including transportation alternatives, as defined in 23 U.S.C. 101(a), and associated transit improvements, as described in 49 U.S.C. 5302(a), as appropriate; Sections 3, 6, & Appendix G – Coordinated Public Transit- Human Services Transportation Plan (9) Design concept and design scope descriptions of all existing and proposed transportation facilities in sufficient detail, regardless of funding source, in nonattainment and maintenance areas for conformity determinations under the EPA's transportation conformity regulations (40 CFR part 93, subpart A). In all areas (regardless of air quality designation), all proposed improvements shall be described in sufficient detail to develop cost estimates; Section 6 & Appendix E – Transportation Improvement Program (10) A discussion of types of potential environmental mitigation activities and potential areas to carry out these activities, including activities that may have the greatest potential to restore and maintain the environmental functions affected by the metropolitan transportation plan. The discussion may focus on policies, programs, or strategies, rather than at the project level. The MPO shall develop the discussion in consultation with applicable Federal, State, and Tribal land management, wildlife, and regulatory agencies. The MPO may establish reasonable timeframes for performing this consultation; Safety and Environmental Considerations & Implementation (11) A financial plan that demonstrates how the adopted transportation plan can be implemented. Section 6 & Appendix E – Transportation Improvement Program (i)For purposes of transportation system operations and maintenance, the financial plan shall contain system-level estimates of costs and revenue sources that are reasonably expected to be available to adequately operate and maintain the Federal-Aid highways (as defined by 23 U.S.C. 101(a)(5)) and public transportation (as defined by title 49 U.S.C. Chapter 53). (ii) For the purpose of developing the metropolitan transportation plan, the MPO(s), public transportation operator(s), and State shall cooperatively develop estimates of funds that will be available to support metropolitan transportation plan implementation, as required under §450.314(a). All necessary financial resources from public and private sources that are reasonably expected to be made available to carry out the transportation plan shall be identified. (iii) The financial plan shall include recommendations on any additional financing strategies to fund projects and programs included in the metropolitan transportation plan. In the case of new funding sources, strategies for ensuring their availability shall be identified. The financial plan may include an assessment of the appropriateness of innovative finance techniques (for example, tolling, pricing, bonding, public private partnerships, or other strategies) as revenue sources for projects in the plan. (iv) In developing the financial plan, the MPO shall take into account all projects and strategies proposed for funding under title 23 U.S.C., title 49 U.S.C. Chapter 53 or with other Federal funds; State assistance; local sources; and private participation. Revenue and cost estimates that support the metropolitan transportation plan must use an inflation rate(s) to reflect “year of expenditure dollars,” based on reasonable financial principles and information, developed cooperatively by the MPO, State(s), and public transportation operator(s). (v) For the outer years of the metropolitan transportation plan (i.e., beyond the first 10 years), the financial plan may reflect aggregate cost ranges/cost bands, as long as the future funding source(s) is reasonably expected to be available to support the projected cost ranges/cost bands. (vi) For nonattainment and maintenance areas, the financial plan shall address the specific financial strategies required to ensure the implementation of TCMs in the applicable SIP. (vii) For illustrative purposes, the financial plan may include additional projects that would be included in the adopted transportation plan if additional resources beyond those identified in the financial plan were to become available. (viii) In cases that the FHWA and the FTA find a metropolitan transportation plan to be fiscally constrained and a revenue source is subsequently removed or substantially reduced (i.e., by legislative or administrative actions), the FHWA and the FTA will not withdraw the original determination of fiscal constraint; however, in such cases, the FHWA and the FTA will not act on an updated or amended metropolitan transportation plan that does not reflect the changed revenue situation. DRAFT Appendix B Amendments and Modifications AMENDMENTS & MODIFICATIONS The MTP is updated every five years. Between updates the MTP may be changed through an amendment or administrative modification. An amendment to the MTP is subject to a 7-day public comment period after being reviewed by the Technical Committee and before being approved by the Board of Directors. If staff conducts an administrative modification, notice will be provided to the Board of Directors either prior to or immediately following the modification. Definitions of an amendment or administrative modification, according to 23 CFR §450.104, are as follows: Administrative modification means a minor revision to a long-range statewide or metropolitan transportation plan, Transportation Improvement Program (TIP), or Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) that includes minor changes to project/project phase costs, minor changes to funding sources of previously included projects, and minor changes to project/project phase initiation dates. An administrative modification is a revision that does not require public review and comment, a redemonstration of fiscal constraint, or a conformity determination (in nonattainment and maintenance areas). Amendment means a revision to a long-range statewide or metropolitan transportation plan, TIP, or STIP that involves a major change to a project included in a metropolitan transportation plan, TIP, or STIP, including the addition or deletion of a project or a major change in project cost, project/project phase initiation dates, or a major change in design concept or design scope (e.g., changing project termini or the number of through traffic lanes or changing the number of stations in the case of fixed guideway transit projects). Changes to projects that are included only for illustrative purposes do not require an amendment. An amendment is a revision that requires public review and comment and a redemonstration of fiscal constraint. If an amendment involves “non-exempt” projects in nonattainment and maintenance areas, a conformity determination is required. No amendments or modifications have been made at this time. Action Type DRAFT Appendix C System Performance Report The CAMPO System Performance Report presents the condition and performance of the transportation system with regard to performance measures, performance targets, and progress achieved in meeting targets. This is the first System Performance Report for CAMPO and thus reports performance measures and targets. Future reports will contain comparisons to evaluate progress made in achieving targets. PERFORMANCE-BASED PLANNING AND PROGRAMING (PBPP) Performance-based Planning and Programing (PBPP) is a requirement of the FAST Act and impacts both the MTP and the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). PBPP refers to the application of transportation performance management (TPM) principles within the planning and programming processes of transportation agencies to achieve desired performance outcomes for the multimodal transportation system. CAMPO uses a performance- based approach to transportation decision making to support the national federal highway performance goals listed below. NATIONAL FEDERAL HIGHWAY PERFORMANCE GOALS •Safety - To achieve a significant reduction in traffic fatalities and serious injuries on all public roads. •Infrastructure Condition - To maintain the highway infrastructure asset system in a state of good repair •Congestion Reduction - To achieve a significant reduction in congestion on the National Highway System •System Reliability - To improve the efficiency of the surface transportation system •Freight Movement and Economic Vitality - To improve the national freight network, strengthen the ability of rural communities to access national and international trade markets, and support regional economic development. •Environmental Sustainability - To enhance the performance of the transportation system while protecting and enhancing the natural environment. •Reduced Project Delivery Delays - To reduce project costs, promote jobs and the economy, and expedite the movement of people and goods by accelerating project completion through eliminating delays in the project development and delivery process, including reducing regulatory burdens and improving agencies' work practices DRAFT FEDERAL PERFORMANCE MEASURES CAMPO has adopted targets and measures in four areas: Safety, Pavement & Bridge, System Performance, and Transit Asset Management. Listed below are the four performance areas. SAFETY FAST Act/ MAP-21 was the first transportation reauthorization bill requiring target setting collaboration between State DOTs and planning partners on national performance measures. Targets are required to be set in 2017 for five safety performance measures using five-year rolling averages. Annual targets must be set by State DOTs, then by each MPO, with the choice of adopting state targets or establishing their own for: •Number of Fatalities; •Rate of Fatalities per 100 Million Vehicle Miles traveled (VMT); •Number of Serious Injuries; •Rate of Serious Injuries per 100 Million VMT; and •Number of Non-motorized Fatalities and Non-motorized Serious Injuries The first three performance measures must be reported in the Highway Safety Plan (HSP) for NHTSA. All five performance measures must be reported in the Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) for FHWA. When targets are not met, the State DOT must spend the full HSIP allocation in one fiscal year and submit an HSIP implementation plan to FHWA detailing how the State DOT plans to meet its targets. MoDOT established the following statewide safety targets in 2018, as seen in Figure 1, which shows the targets set by MoDOT and adopted by CAMPO. These targets are updated annually. Figure 1 – Safety Performance Targets Set by MoDOT* Performance Measure 5-year Rolling Average (2013-2017) 5-Year Rolling Average Statewide Target for CY2019 Number of Fatalities 854.4 872.3 Fatality rate per 100 Million VMT 1.176 1.160 Number of Serious Injuries 4756.4 4433.8 Serious Injury Rate per 100 Million VMT 6.566 6.168 Number of Non-Motorized Fatalities and Serious Injuries 441.3 445.4 * Targets based on the State Highway Safety Plan: Missouri Blueprint -A Partnership Towards Zero Deaths, a 9% fatality reduction, 5% serious injury reduction, 1% VMT increase and 4 % non-motorized reduction DRAFT PAVEMENT AND BRIDGE On May 20, 2017, the FHWA’s final PM2 rule on pavement and bridge condition performance measures to address new requirements established by MAP-21 and the FAST Act took effect. The Pavement and Bridge Condition Performance Measures final rule, published in the Federal Register on January 18, 2017, establishes measures for State DOTs to carry out the NHPP and to assess the condition of pavements on the non-Interstate NHS; pavements on the Interstate System; and bridges carrying the NHS, including on- and off- ramps connected to the NHS. This final rule includes six measures are: •percentage of pavements on the Interstate System in Good condition •percentage of pavements on the Interstate System in Poor condition •percentage of pavements on the NHS (excluding the Interstate System) in Good condition •percentage of pavements on the NHS (excluding the Interstate System) in Poor condition •percentage of NHS bridges in Good condition •percentage of NHS bridges in Poor condition There are no interstate highways in the CAMPO region, so those targets are not addressed. MoDOT established the following statewide pavement and bridge targets in 2018, as seen in Figure 2, which shows the targets set by MoDOT and adopted by CAMPO. These targets may be updated every other year. Figure 2 – Applicable Pavement and Bridge Targets set by MoDOT Performance Measure 2017 Baseline 2019 Target 2021 Target Percentage of NHS Bridges in Good Condition 34.0% 30.9% 30.9% Percentage of NHS Bridges in Poor Condition 7.1% 7.1% 7.1% Percentage of non-Interstate NHS Pavements in Good Condition 61.1% 61.1% 61.1% Percentage of non-Interstate NHS Pavements in Poor Condition 1.0% 1.0% 1.0% DRAFT TRAVEL TIME RELIABILITY AND FREIGHT RELIABILITY The System Performance final rule, published in the Federal Register on January 18, 2017 and effective on May 20, 2017, sets forth measures that State Departments of Transportation (DOTs) and Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) will use to report on the following characteristics within their jurisdiction: •the performance of the Interstate and non-Interstate National Highway System (NHS) to carry out the National Highway Performance Program (NHPP); •freight movement on the Interstate system; and •traffic congestion and on-road mobile source emissions for the purpose of carrying out the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement (CMAQ) Program. This System Performance/Freight/CMAQ Performance Measures final rule includes six measures: •Interstate Travel Time Reliability Measure: Percent of Person-Miles Traveled on the Interstate that are Reliable •Non-Interstate Travel Time Reliability Measure: Percent of Person-Miles Traveled on the Non-Interstate NHS that are Reliable •Freight Reliability Measure: Truck Travel Time Reliability Index •Peak Hour Excessive Delay (PHED) Measure: Annual Hours of PHED Per Capita •Non-Single Occupancy Vehicle Travel (SOV) Measure: Percent of non-SOV Travel •On-Road Mobile Emissions: Total Emissions Reduction There are no interstate highways in the CAMPO region, so those targets are not addressed. The CMAQ measures do not apply to the CAMPO region, so the PHED, Non-SOV and On-Road mobile emissions targets are not addressed. MoDOT established the following travel time reliability target in 2018, as seen in Figure 3, which shows the target set by MoDOT and adopted by CAMPO. This target may be updated every other year. Figure 3 – Applicable Travel Time Reliability Target set by MoDOT Performance Measure 2017 Baseline 2019 Target 2021 Target Non-Interstate Travel Time Reliability Measure: Percent of Reliable Person- Miles Traveled on the Non-Interstate NHS 92.3% - 87.8% DRAFT TRANSIT ASSET MANAGEMENT PLAN Transit Asset Management is the strategic and systematic practice of procuring, operating, inspecting, maintaining, rehabilitating, and replacing transit capital assets to manage their performance, risk, and costs over their life cycles for the purpose of providing safe, cost-effective, and reliable public transportation. The TAM final rule requires every transit provider that receives federal financial assistance under 49 U.S.C. Chapter 53 to develop a TAM plan or be part of a Group TAM Plan prepared by a sponsor (MoDOT). All TAM plans must contain four major components: •Asset Inventory: A register (comprehensive list) of agency’s assets and specific information about those assets. The inventory is broken into four categories: Equipment, Rolling Stock, Facilities (maintenance and administration), and Infrastructure. •Condition Assessment: The process of assessing and documenting the condition or residual life of an asset. This process provides an overall assessment of equipment, maintenance and administration facilities. •Management Approach – Decision Support Tools: An analytic process or methodology to help prioritize projects to improve and maintain the State of Good Repair of capital assets, based on available condition data, objective criteria and financial needs for asset investments over time. •Investment Prioritization: A transit provider’s ranking of capital projects or programs to achieve or maintain a SGR based on financial resources from all sources a transit provider reasonably anticipates will be available over the TAM Plan period. This section includes but is not limited to performance measures, targets, and proposed investments. MoDOT collected and evaluated existing buses and facilities to be included in the State Transit Asset Management Plan and used this information to set targets, which will be evaluated on an annual basis as inventory changes. JEFFTRAN opted to create its own Transit Asset Management Plan and set its own targets, which are identical to the state targets, as listed below, and adopted by CAMPO. Figure 4 – Transit Asset Management targets by MoDOT and JEFFTRAN JEFFTRAN TAM Plan Fiscal Year 2019 Targets Equipment: Non-revenue support-service and maintenance vehicles (exceeding $50,000 at purchase) N/A Rolling Stock: Revenue vehicles by mode and ULB*: Automobiles, Minivans, Vans 8 years 45% Cutaways 10 years 45% Buses 14 years 45% Facilities Administrative facilities and passenger stations 30% with a condition rating below 3.0 on FTA's TERM** Scale Maintenance facilities 25% with a condition rating below 3.0 on FTA's TERM Scale * ULB stands for Useful Life Benchmark ** TERM is a Federal Transit Administration Transit Economic Requirements Model which helps transit agencies assess their state of good repair backlog, level of annual investment to attain state of good repair, impact of variations in funding, and investment priorities. DRAFT Appendix D Surveys and Public Comments DRAFT 19.57%18 43.48%40 7.61%7 3.26%3 2.17%2 5.43%5 6.52%6 3.26%3 4.35%4 4.35%4 Q1 Where do you LIVE? Answered: 92 Skipped: 0 TOTAL 92 Holts Summit... Jefferson City St. Martins Taos Wardsville Boone County... Cole County... Callaway County... Osage County... Other 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES Holts Summit Jefferson City St. Martins Taos Wardsville Boone County Cole County Callaway County Osage County Other 1 / 28 CAMPO 2045 & Beyond - Metropolitan Transportation Plan Survey SurveyMonkey 2.17%2 84.78%78 2.17%2 0.00%0 0.00%0 2.17%2 1.09%1 1.09%1 0.00%0 6.52%6 Q2 Where do you WORK? Answered: 92 Skipped: 0 TOTAL 92 Holts Summit... Jefferson City St. Martins Taos Wardsville Boone County... Cole County... Callaway County... Osage County... Other 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES Holts Summit Jefferson City St. Martins Taos Wardsville Boone County Cole County Callaway County Osage County Other 2 / 28 CAMPO 2045 & Beyond - Metropolitan Transportation Plan Survey SurveyMonkey 19.57%18 27.17%25 18.48%17 27.17%25 7.61%7 Q3 How many people (including yourself) live in your household? Answered: 92 Skipped: 0 TOTAL 92 1 2 3 4 5 or more 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES 1 2 3 4 5 or more 3 / 28 CAMPO 2045 & Beyond - Metropolitan Transportation Plan Survey SurveyMonkey 3.26%3 17.39%16 42.39%39 36.96%34 Q4 How many working vehicles does your household own? Answered: 92 Skipped: 0 TOTAL 92 0 1 2 3 or more 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES 0 1 2 3 or more 4 / 28 CAMPO 2045 & Beyond - Metropolitan Transportation Plan Survey SurveyMonkey 0.00%0 1.09%1 20.65%19 31.52%29 34.78%32 10.87%10 1.09%1 Q5 Please tell us your age. Answered: 92 Skipped: 0 TOTAL 92 Under 18 18-24 25-34 35-49 50-64 65-74 75 or older 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES Under 18 18-24 25-34 35-49 50-64 65-74 75 or older 5 / 28 CAMPO 2045 & Beyond - Metropolitan Transportation Plan Survey SurveyMonkey 3.26%3 0.00%0 14.13%13 28.26%26 26.09%24 28.26%26 Q6 Please tell us your household income. Answered: 92 Skipped: 0 TOTAL 92 Under $15,000 Between $15,000 and... Between $30,000 and... Between $50,000 and... Between $75,000 and... Over $100,000 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES Under $15,000 Between $15,000 and $29,999 Between $30,000 and $49,999 Between $50,000 and $74,999 Between $75,000 and $99,999 Over $100,000 6 / 28 CAMPO 2045 & Beyond - Metropolitan Transportation Plan Survey SurveyMonkey Q7 How often do you use the following forms of transportation? Answered: 92 Skipped: 0 Car/Truck/Van - Driver Car/Truck/Van - Passenger Walk 7 / 28 CAMPO 2045 & Beyond - Metropolitan Transportation Plan Survey SurveyMonkey Every Day: Primary means of transportation Frequently: More than 5 times a month Regularly: 2 to 5 times a month Occasionally: Once a month Rarely: Less than once a month Never: Haven't in the past 12 months Bike Public Transit (JEFFTRAN,... Taxi or similar 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% 8 / 28 CAMPO 2045 & Beyond - Metropolitan Transportation Plan Survey SurveyMonkey 92.31% 84 4.40% 4 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 3.30% 3 91 11.69% 9 37.66% 29 25.97% 20 7.79% 6 9.09% 7 7.79% 6 77 9.30% 8 23.26% 20 12.79% 11 9.30% 8 22.09% 19 23.26% 20 86 2.30% 2 8.05% 7 6.90% 6 10.34% 9 19.54% 17 52.87% 46 87 3.53% 3 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 2.35% 2 9.41% 8 84.71% 72 85 0.00% 0 1.18% 1 1.18% 1 2.35% 2 11.76% 10 83.53% 71 85 EVERY DAY: PRIMARY MEANS OF TRANSPORTATION FREQUENTLY: MORE THAN 5 TIMES A MONTH REGULARLY: 2 TO 5 TIMES A MONTH OCCASIONALLY: ONCE A MONTH RARELY: LESS THAN ONCE A MONTH NEVER: HAVEN'T IN THE PAST 12 MONTHS TOTAL Car/Truck/Van - Driver Car/Truck/Van - Passenger Walk Bike Public Transit (JEFFTRAN, SERVE, OATS, etc.) Taxi or similar 9 / 28 CAMPO 2045 & Beyond - Metropolitan Transportation Plan Survey SurveyMonkey Q8 How safe do you feel using the following forms of transportation? Answered: 92 Skipped: 0 Walking Biking along roadways Biking along trails Using Transit 10 / 28 CAMPO 2045 & Beyond - Metropolitan Transportation Plan Survey SurveyMonkey 26.09% 24 40.22% 37 18.48% 17 2.17% 2 13.04% 12 92 4.35% 4 16.30% 15 36.96% 34 11.96% 11 30.43% 28 92 31.52% 29 35.87% 33 4.35% 4 2.17% 2 26.09% 24 92 17.39% 16 18.48% 17 3.26% 3 2.17% 2 58.70% 54 92 Very Safe Safe Uncomfortable Very Unsafe No opinion (I rarely or never use this mode of transportation) 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% VERY SAFE SAFE UNCOMFORTABLE VERY UNSAFE NO OPINION (I RARELY OR NEVER USE THIS MODE OF TRANSPORTATION) TOTAL Walking Biking along roadways Biking along trails Using Transit 11 / 28 CAMPO 2045 & Beyond - Metropolitan Transportation Plan Survey SurveyMonkey Q9 If you answered "uncomfortable" or "unsafe" to walking, biking, or transit, what sort of improvements would make you feel safer? Answered: 60 Skipped: 32 #RESPONSES DATE 1 Larger lanes and more education for drivers about what's dangerous to bikers/walkers 10/24/2018 4:53 PM 2 More bike lanes, expanded greenway system 10/18/2018 7:53 PM 3 Bike Lanes, diver education, shoulders on roadways 10/18/2018 3:31 PM 4 More law enforcement needed.10/17/2018 1:35 PM 5 Dedicated bike lanes 10/16/2018 2:02 PM 6 Being up on a sidewalk or having a physical divider between my bicycle and the cars on the road would help me feel more comfortable. Many people driving get too close (less than 3 feet), pull out in front of you and tend to follow too closely behind you. 10/14/2018 10:22 PM 7 More sidewalks and bike paths throughout the city.10/14/2018 10:10 AM 8 n/a 10/14/2018 8:02 AM 9 Getting hurt 10/13/2018 2:09 PM 10 There are no sidewalks, small shoulders, no bike lanes. I haven’t seen nice biking trails other than Katy trail. 10/12/2018 9:35 PM 11 It's a fear of mean aggressive dogs or people.10/12/2018 12:22 PM 12 separate greenways for biking, on street bike lanes seem unsafe or at least uncomfortable for my use. 10/12/2018 10:46 AM 13 n/a 10/12/2018 9:18 AM 14 Sidewalks along commercial corridors would be a great asset.10/12/2018 9:17 AM 15 the uncomfortable along roadways is due to the fact of driver inattention, mainly the scary amount of texting while driving that I have personally witnessed. 10/12/2018 9:06 AM 16 There could be more sidewalks or safe ways to travel along the roadways in Callaway county. Especially, along S Summit Dr or along Hwy AA from the E Simon Blvd to the Apartment complex on Hwy AA. Many pedestrians are observed on this roadway and as a driver on this roadway I feel uncomfortable with the people walking along this roadway with no sidewalk or safe area to walk. 10/12/2018 8:28 AM 17 ?10/12/2018 1:52 AM 18 Drivers make me uncomfortable when riding or running along roadways. Increased drive awareness and understanding of pedestrian rights when sharing the road may be helpful. 10/11/2018 4:53 PM 19 Though I feel it is safe, We don't currently have access to Public Transportation, therefore it isn't utilized, but maybe would be.. 10/11/2018 1:25 PM 20 n/a 10/11/2018 10:29 AM 21 sidewalks 10/11/2018 10:24 AM 22 There is no place for a biker or even a walker to go. You have no idea where sidewalks end and unless you really know the area. You do not want to be in the situation where the sidewalk ends and you have no place to go on a narrow road. 10/11/2018 10:01 AM 23 Designated bike lanes, wide enough lanes where cars give me more space to walk/ride.10/11/2018 9:32 AM 24 Wider roads so there is more shoulder. Too many distracted drivers.10/11/2018 8:37 AM 25 Sidewalks, bike lanes, crosswalks at stoplights 10/11/2018 8:28 AM 26 Drivers do NOT respect bike riders in traffic, that's my only reason for being uncomfortable with biking, especially with my child. 10/11/2018 8:10 AM 12 / 28 CAMPO 2045 & Beyond - Metropolitan Transportation Plan Survey SurveyMonkey 27 more sidewalks, safer sidewalks, safer intersections for crossing.10/11/2018 7:47 AM 28 Sidewalks! I dont want to have to herd my kids away from cars as I let them cycle or walk to the park. Not to mention so many children could walk to school safely with them. I'd like to walk my dog around the town. Holts Summit is small enough to act like a village in terms of - walking to mosers for something, picking up a sandwich at Casey's or getting my stamps at the post office - but it only has sidewalks at its epicenter. I dont want to drive somewhere in order to be able to walk around - I want to walk around period. 10/11/2018 6:55 AM 29 Education to drivers in bicycling, laws, and rules. Bike lanes 10/10/2018 10:59 PM 30 More bike lanes that are clearly marked AND educating the public on how to properly use them 10/10/2018 8:17 PM 31 no drug deals going on along greenway, in splash park area 10/10/2018 4:09 PM 32 Better Road Sharing signage. Better education for drivers regarding road sharing. Safer crosswalks, and designated cycling lanes. 10/10/2018 2:53 PM 33 Having a sidewalk or biking trail.10/10/2018 11:02 AM 34 This town needs more sidewalks!!! Also, bicycling on streets like McCarty or Dunklin can be scary with aggressive drivers! 10/9/2018 7:20 PM 35 sidewalks, video camera, restrooms 10/9/2018 3:54 PM 36 Barriers to separate high-speed traffic from bike traffic where possible.10/8/2018 5:39 PM 37 More walking and biking trails near St. Martins/Binder Park 10/8/2018 12:18 PM 38 We need a later bus to help employees, children, men and women to and from work and leisure that's affordable and dependable. 10/8/2018 9:25 AM 39 Bad idea With us right on highway and all the area human trafficking We need to think 10/5/2018 10:08 PM 40 Drivers don’t pay attention and there are no sidewalks where I live 10/5/2018 8:40 AM 41 DIdn't answer uncomfortable.10/5/2018 8:07 AM 42 Designated bike lanes, like the ones in Columbia. Not bike lanes that are shared by vehicles, like the ones currently in Jefferson City. 10/4/2018 6:00 PM 43 Separated bicycle lanes; more bicycle infrastructure in place; needs more street lighting; more sidewalks are needed here 10/4/2018 4:46 PM 44 Many drivers pay little to no attention to their surroundings. I'm not sure what you could do about that. Even the "shared" bike lanes are a scary place to ride. I have a motorcycle and even feel that way about riding that some times. 10/4/2018 4:40 PM 45 NA 10/4/2018 4:27 PM 46 Driver awareness of bicycle lanes. But I would still never put my life in jeopardy by riding a bike on a roadway. 10/3/2018 9:07 AM 47 If I were younger. If I had sidewalks.10/3/2018 8:20 AM 48 More bike lanes throughout the city. Add shoulders (or make them wider) along roads, especially in more rural areas like county roads. Or at minimum, put bicycle “share the road” signs on more roads at regular intervals, especially in more rural areas. 10/2/2018 2:53 PM 49 Sidewalks along Jefferson St in Holts Summit.10/2/2018 1:44 PM 50 Dedicated bike lanes particularly on High st downtown. Walking crossing the onramp to 63 at W Main St is very unsafe. Can't see down w main because of parked cars so there's not enough time to cross and the cars come barreling down enroute to Columbia. Needs a light for pedestrian crossing. 10/2/2018 1:24 PM 51 1. Improve bicycle infrastructure 2. Change laws to improve bicycle safety. 3. Education of roadway users. including signage. 10/2/2018 12:39 PM 52 Most streets are not safe to bike. A large number of drivers are not aware of biking rules and/or are shellfish with the road - like they own it. No safe way to utilize MO Blvd or to cross it. 10/2/2018 12:29 PM 53 A bike lane or at least a paved shoulder would be a huge improvement.10/2/2018 11:45 AM 54 more sidewalks 10/2/2018 10:35 AM 13 / 28 CAMPO 2045 & Beyond - Metropolitan Transportation Plan Survey SurveyMonkey 55 n.a 10/2/2018 10:15 AM 56 I live on Tanner bridge there is zero shoulder it’s curvy and hilly. I said uncomfortable biking on it because I feel it isn’t safe. I haul my bike elsewhere to ride it. 10/2/2018 9:45 AM 57 No designated biking or sidewalks in certain parts of town 10/2/2018 9:42 AM 58 I am never comfortable sharing the road after a bike accident as a youth. Will ride a bike on off street paths only. 10/2/2018 9:38 AM 59 sidewalks 10/2/2018 9:32 AM 60 More signs 10/1/2018 5:22 PM 14 / 28 CAMPO 2045 & Beyond - Metropolitan Transportation Plan Survey SurveyMonkey Q10 How would you like to see money spent in our region? Please rank the following, with 1 as your highest priority and 8 as your lowest priority. Answered: 92 Skipped: 0 16.30% 15 7.61% 7 16.30% 15 9.78% 9 17.39% 16 10.87% 10 14.13% 13 7.61% 7 92 4.68 5.43% 5 8.70% 8 7.61% 7 8.70% 8 9.78% 9 14.13% 13 17.39% 16 28.26% 26 92 3.38 8.70% 8 13.04% 12 15.22% 14 16.30% 15 15.22% 14 15.22% 14 7.61% 7 8.70% 8 92 4.64 14.13% 13 13.04% 12 9.78% 9 16.30% 15 15.22% 14 16.30% 15 14.13% 13 1.09% 1 92 4.84 Equity and Accessibilit... Environmental Protection -... Innovation - Implement ne... Community Development ... System Preservation... Economic Prosperity -... Safety - Reduce the... Alternatives to Driving -... 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 TOTAL SCORE Equity and Accessibility - Directly address the transportation needs of the elderly, people with disabilities and low-income. Environmental Protection - Protect environmental, cultural and historic sites, and mitigate negative impacts. Innovation - Implement new technology to improve traffic flow, roadway maintenance and overall transportation system efficiency. Community Development - Implement land-use and transportation policies that enhance communities, create connections to jobs, and promote tourism. 15 / 28 CAMPO 2045 & Beyond - Metropolitan Transportation Plan Survey SurveyMonkey 15.22% 14 11.96% 11 13.04% 12 18.48% 17 15.22% 14 5.43% 5 7.61% 7 13.04% 12 92 4.82 6.52% 6 15.22% 14 18.48% 17 9.78% 9 11.96% 11 16.30% 15 15.22% 14 6.52% 6 92 4.52 18.48% 17 18.48% 17 14.13% 13 11.96% 11 5.43% 5 13.04% 12 9.78% 9 8.70% 8 92 5.11 15.22% 14 11.96% 11 5.43% 5 8.70% 8 9.78% 9 8.70% 8 14.13% 13 26.09% 24 92 4.01 System Preservation - Preserve existing transportation assets, such as roadway pavement and bridges. Economic Prosperity - Improve infrastructure along regional transportation corridors, supporting current and future economic development. Safety - Reduce the amount and severity of crashes for all transportation users. Alternatives to Driving - Promote alternative transportation modes including bus, biking, walking, passenger rail and ride-sharing. 16 / 28 CAMPO 2045 & Beyond - Metropolitan Transportation Plan Survey SurveyMonkey Q11 What do you see as transportation needs in our region? (Think of specific projects, such as adding lanes to a certain intersection, signal timing, widening roads, fixing a curve, adding bike lanes, adding sidewalks, etc.) Answered: 81 Skipped: 11 #RESPONSES DATE 1 Invest in the bus system to have more routes 10/24/2018 4:53 PM 2 Improve tri-level interchange. Add lanes in North Jefferson City to US 54/ 63 to improve flow across bridges (southbound and northbound). 10/19/2018 9:30 AM 3 Significant rethinking and changing Missouri Blvd., continued construction of bike lanes, Reduce side street access along the Expressway, eliminate rumble strips or use a different type that is more bike friendly, attach greenway system segments to downtown area, get back to requiring mandatory sidewalk addition to every construction project 10/18/2018 7:53 PM 4 Adding Connections between systems Example projects would be: extending sidewalks along Boonville Rd (Jeff City) or Summit Dr. (Holts Summit) to connect community to schools, parks, stores, etc.; adding signage and connections along greenway trail to main roadways or into neighborhoods to aid those using them as transport; adding mass transit routes between communities (Taos - Jeff City - Holts Summit, etc.) to provide expanded options (jobs, recreation, health care) for people in all communities 10/18/2018 3:31 PM 5 Upgrading our highway system for truck lanes. Teaching the general public how to dive without using their cell phones. 10/17/2018 1:35 PM 6 Taking care of existing roads. Less time and money spent on unfunded things such as spent on bike lanes, etc. Road and bridge taxes should be spent on traditional transportation. I share the road with bicyclist, they don't need their own lanes at my cost. 10/16/2018 2:12 PM 7 sidewalks 10/16/2018 2:02 PM 8 More greenways and trails for bicyclist and pedestrians connected throughout the area. More hours and longer reaching routes for the transit system to cover outlying areas like Holts Summit. 10/14/2018 10:22 PM 9 More right turn only lanes (W. Edgewood @ W. Stadium). East-West Highway 50 corridor bypass (avoiding the traffic lights from Missouri Boulevard to Monroe Street) 10/14/2018 10:10 AM 10 A light rail system that is reliable, quick, and clean would be a great innovation for the city.10/14/2018 8:02 AM 11 Keep it Monday Thur Friday 10/13/2018 2:09 PM 12 I think bike lanes should be added to Simon/OO. S Greenway needs widened and a bike lane for people to go to the park from other neighborhoods. Pedestrian crosswalks would be nice. The pond at holt summits park is a disaster. 10/12/2018 9:35 PM 13 Industrial Drive needs to have more lanes - wider. The road needs to be resurfaced from the curve on Industrial as it turns east onto McCarty St. All streets with an Elementary School should have sidewalks. 10/12/2018 12:22 PM 14 Highway 50 4 lane bypass thru Jefferson City.10/12/2018 11:25 AM 15 fix congestion on the Mo River Bridge, Expressway and Interchanges.10/12/2018 10:46 AM 16 bike lanes and sidewalks in areas that can most benefit from that 10/12/2018 9:18 AM 17 Given the recent promise of autonomous vehicles we may be in a place where we will see dramatic changes in transportation. If the promise of these vehicles holds true, namely, a greater density of vehicles, the expansion of existing roads may not be necessary. What will be of issue is the maintenance of the system and the integration of the technology and data. 10/12/2018 9:17 AM 18 traffic flow, adding free right turn lanes and so forth 10/12/2018 9:06 AM 17 / 28 CAMPO 2045 & Beyond - Metropolitan Transportation Plan Survey SurveyMonkey 19 Signal Timing in Jefferson City is terrible. there are a lot of roads within the city that are very rough.10/12/2018 8:59 AM 20 Widening the roadways that have bike lanes. S summit Dr is difficult to navigate with the new bike lane that has been added. Add sidewalks along Hwy AA from Evergreen Apartments to E Simon Blvd. 10/12/2018 8:28 AM 21 buses on weekend.10/12/2018 1:52 AM 22 Additional sidewalks/accessible routes and repairing existing sidewalks would be nice.10/11/2018 4:53 PM 23 We need a bus or trolley routes to Jefferson City during and after work hours 10/11/2018 1:25 PM 24 For heaven's sake - please do something about Route B through Wardsville!! There is absolutely no reason that the Routes B, M & W intersection should remain as it is. With the recent and projected growth of the Blair Oaks vehicle traffic - this needs to be addressed. 10/11/2018 10:29 AM 25 a possible by-pass around JC from east/west instead of going through lights on US50; or signal timing there; longer signal timing at Country Club turning on 179 (only 2 cars getting through at a time during work hours), fixing pavements (potholes) around town; 10/11/2018 10:24 AM 26 The tri level interchange is a joke. This is the capital city, MODOT needs to pay attention to the needs of the central region instead of pouring money in St Louis and Kansas City 10/11/2018 10:01 AM 27 Holts Summit- Exit ramp from North off of Hwy 54 at Summit Drive. Widen Summit Drive all the way through town, add designated bike lanes instead of bike sharrows, sidewalks extending down Summit Drive. 10/11/2018 9:32 AM 28 Widening certain roads 10/11/2018 8:59 AM 29 Your plan to put in a "real lane' on the Mo river bridge to the Highway 63 junction is the number 1 idea. I've said that for years. And reading that plan is why I did this survey. The "third lane" needs to encompass the folks trying to get onto Highway 54 eastbound as well from 63. Someone needs to think really long and hard about allowing the main street entrance ramp onto the bridge to continue to exist. That is a wreck waiting to happen. And Whitton Expressway is hardly and expressway. It needs 3 full lanes all through the lights downtown. 10/11/2018 8:37 AM 30 Stoplight at Dix road/booneville and west main. A four way stop with 8 lanes is confusing for many drivers and is dangerous when kids are walking to school. Bike lanes and sidewalks along booneville rd. and west main would also help. 10/11/2018 8:28 AM 31 Pot holes are terrible in the area. Most of the roads I travel have sidewalks, that's a plus, but also safer intersections to keep people from running red lights, etc. 10/11/2018 8:10 AM 32 Fixing existing curbs and roads, adding sidewalks, improving intersections. Clark exit is one big accident waiting to happen. 10/11/2018 7:47 AM 33 Definitely sidewalks in holts summit connecting summit drive to the school- at least to the fire station. Something needs to be done about the Mel Ray curve on 54 as it's a death trap. You need an on ramp at the winery from 54 when heading towards Jeff - otherwise you have to go all the way to the airport before being able to turn around safely. 10/11/2018 6:55 AM 34 Adding bike lanes 10/10/2018 10:59 PM 35 More bike lanes around town and wider roads out in the county for cyclists riding on back roads. Even extending out a foot on both sides would make a huge difference with as many trucks, trailers and farm equipment that drive on them. More "Share the Road" signs couldn't hurt either. 10/10/2018 8:17 PM 36 Don't know enough to answer 10/10/2018 5:54 PM 37 Guardrails along Christy Drive in between Idlewood and Route B. It is nerve wracking driving on that road during icy weather when the curves drop down a cliff. 10/10/2018 4:28 PM 38 sidewalks on capitol ave. in buescher region 10/10/2018 4:09 PM 39 pedestrian/bike lanes 10/10/2018 3:37 PM 40 Adding bike lanes, adding signage for road sharing,10/10/2018 2:53 PM 41 The efforts to make JC more bicycle and pedestrian friendly have the impact of making our roads safer for all users. Please continue! 10/10/2018 2:11 PM 42 Adding sidewalks and bike lanes.10/10/2018 11:02 AM 18 / 28 CAMPO 2045 & Beyond - Metropolitan Transportation Plan Survey SurveyMonkey 43 Tri-level intersection of 50, 54, and 63 should be replaced with an intersection where traffic going different directions do not have to cross each other!! 10/10/2018 10:01 AM 44 Bike Lanes 10/10/2018 9:46 AM 45 Sidewalks would be good in St Martins 10/10/2018 8:02 AM 46 I moved to St. Martins because it was a more peaceful “outside” of town community. We have a lot of traffic on hwy50 and by adding the shoulder has helped a lot, for runners and such. A side walk down 50 would be great ! 10/10/2018 6:17 AM 47 Highway 50 east/west through Jefferson City-get rid of all the lights. If possible make overpass with exits to Blvd, Broadway, Jefferson, Madison, Monroe. Too much traffic for a system that was put in place long ago and we have outgrown it by 10+years. Make highway 50 three lanes through Jefferson City. Trim overhanging trees on route T as it interferes with making left turns from the West forest/McDowell street area. Take stop sign out at intersection of business 50 and route T and put in round about. Fix the horrible mess at Clark avenue and highway 50 exit. The new bridge on Clark has made it so one cannot see over the black railing and concrete barrier to be able to turn without getting out into the main roadway. This are should simply have a round about or lights. Too much traffic for nothing but stop signs. The 50/63/54 interchange needs major updating-it is not safe for exiting 54 to 50 east or 54 north to exit to 50 west. Not safe and quite stupid especially with the amount of traffic and a traffic light being right off the exit on 50 east. 10/10/2018 5:27 AM 48 Bike lanes on Missouri blvd. Sidewalk on north side of missouri blvd. Sidewalks on Southwest Blvd going up the hill. Greenways in the northwest side of the city are necessary. Lower speed the limits on some roads, McCarty comes to mind. Make the cops enforce bicycle laws and make drivers yield to pedestrians. 10/9/2018 7:20 PM 49 sidewalks and maintenance of Highway 54 and its bridges.10/9/2018 3:54 PM 50 widening roads, signal timing and adding bike lanes 10/8/2018 11:28 PM 51 Add a lane to US 54 between the Missouri River bridge and the airport exit. Expand transit access to areas outside the city limits with financial participation by Cole County. Repair/replace sidewalks in poor condition. Add sidewalks to the north side of MO Blvd. Add bike lanes where practical. Fix the tri-level. 10/8/2018 5:39 PM 52 Add bike lane,sidewalks from Binder park to St. Martins School in St. Martins - would be useful for the school and enhance use of the Binder Park complex also and provide more walking/biking opportunities for Western Cole Co. 10/8/2018 12:18 PM 53 Adding more times to commute public people. Increase the bus schedule til 7pm. Add a Saturday bus and get a bus card not a paper bus pass 10/8/2018 9:25 AM 54 Widen 2 lane roads 10/6/2018 8:32 AM 55 Where Hwy 63 South traffic merges with traffic from Hwy 50 East traffic trying to go north on 54/63 .... It is a horrible blind spot on the "tri-level". 10/6/2018 2:32 AM 56 Stop lights at both over passes Intersection by McDonalds must be addressed Summit and Center St needs addressed Karen drive needs top priority to widen and improve visibility Karen Drive needs sidewalk Walk bridge over highway 10/5/2018 10:08 PM 57 Sidewalks in all neighborhoods; connectivity of greenway to business district, schools, and parks.10/5/2018 8:42 AM 58 1. adding a stop sign (instead of a yield) to on ramp of hwy 54 at stadium. No one ever yields to the highway traffic. 2. Improving 54/50 intersection and increase visibility at hwy 54 off ramp at hwy 50 (with those large poles from the bridge, you can't ever see traffic coming until its too late). 3. Add sidewalks to Ellis blvd/Southwest blvd bridge over hwy 54. 4. Add a lane in front of the autoplex/best buy. Cars are always stopped in the middle of traffic trying to turn and its very dangerous. 10/5/2018 8:07 AM 59 Timely maintenance to current roads and bridges. I70 needs to be completely redone. Need to have lanes specifically for semi travel across the state. Making Highway 50 four lane across the state. Redesign the tri-level in Jefferson City. 10/4/2018 9:35 PM 19 / 28 CAMPO 2045 & Beyond - Metropolitan Transportation Plan Survey SurveyMonkey 60 Make the highway 63 exit ramp onto hwy 54 westbound continue all the way to the bridge, and shorten the cedar city exit ramp. traffic congestion there in the morning contributes to accidents, and the current set up encourages drivers to exit 63 at the ball fields, cut through cedar city, and re enter 54 from there...which compounds the problem.High grip surface on 54 on the hill from s summit through mel ray curve. Same for South summit as road conditions deteriorate quickly during our seasonal ice storms. 10/4/2018 6:00 PM 61 Widen County Road 4037 in Holts Summit in order to add a bike lane to connect Holts Summit to Katy Trail access near Railwood Golf course. This would give citizens on this side of Holts Summit a safe option for riding a bike to work. 10/4/2018 6:00 PM 62 Increased public transportation service hours.10/4/2018 4:54 PM 63 More bicycle lanes are needed, the more separated from vehicles the better. Sidewalks need to be added to major roads such as Missouri Blvd, Industrial, Truman, Dix. The northwest part of the city is divided except by automobile from the southwest portion of the city. Reduce speed limits and narrow lanes on bigger streets. Add those islands in the middle of the street for pedestrians. More crosswalks across heavily traveled road. Fix the Trilevel. Ellis @ 54 and Truman @ 50 are nightmares for all modes. 10/4/2018 4:46 PM 64 We have a lot of rough and hole ridden streets.10/4/2018 4:40 PM 65 adding sidewalks and bike lanes 10/4/2018 4:27 PM 66 Complete the entrance/exit ramps from Summit Drive bridge over highway 54. Improve highway 63 connectors to/from highway 54 to reduce traffic backups from/to Columbia/Ashland commuters. 10/3/2018 9:07 AM 67 Sidewalks along Route U in Centertown. Public transport extending into Centertown. We need a community center. We have been unable to get help starting one. Our citizens who most need to travel to the senior center in Jeff need transportation help. Either a local community center or public transportation is urgently needed. 10/3/2018 8:20 AM 68 Traffic congestion on the Tri-level of 54 & 50 and congestion on W. Truman Blvd. and overpass of Hwy. 50 10/3/2018 7:35 AM 69 Bike lanes and shoulders, bike lanes and shoulders (I suppose “widening roads” would fall under this). And signal timing seems . . . terrible in some places. There also really needs to be some sort of sidewalk/greenway on Missouri Blvd our west to connect from the Best Buy / Lowes area to the FedEx / Kohl’s area. A lot of people walk that stretch, and it’s dangerous as-is. 10/2/2018 2:53 PM 70 More public transportations and sidewalks 10/2/2018 1:44 PM 71 Pedestrian light w main at 63 on ramp. More bike racks downtown. No way to fit a bike lane on w high downtown unless get rid of parking on one side of road. Need a mirro across fron exit from 63 onto w main. Cant see around rail to left when turning right. 10/2/2018 1:24 PM 72 Implementing complete streets and adding bike lanes and dedicated bike paths.10/2/2018 12:39 PM 73 MO Blvd. this major street needs to be bike and walker friendly. safe crossing and safe riding. More streets need to be marked for bike lanes. All neighborhoods (starting with new ones) should be required to have sidewalks and bike lanes - connecting people to transportation options. even if the side walk goes no where at first - eventually sidewalks will go in and connect. 10/2/2018 12:29 PM 74 Adding bike lanes along Business 50 in St Martins to make it safer for students & other non- drivers. 10/2/2018 11:45 AM 75 Sidewalks along both sides of the entirety of Missouri Blvd. Pedestrian friendly crossing at all intersections along Missouri Blvd, specifically at Dix Rd. 10/2/2018 10:35 AM 76 Complete Streets policies, better bike infrastructure (bike lanes and narrower lanes reduce speed which benefits all users), Green Stripes / Lanes like in KC at key cycling intersections, greater connectivity to Greenway and Streets, Sidewalks in populated areas & existing subdivisions with lots of kids. (i.e. Boonville Rd. in JC, Westview Heights, and the Diamonds) 10/2/2018 10:30 AM 77 Adding more sidewalks in Holts Summit between AA and Outer 54 Rd.10/2/2018 10:15 AM 78 I see people walking up and down tanner bridge. It could certainly use a sidewalk or at least a wider road to keep from having to stand in a ditch while the cars go by. 10/2/2018 9:45 AM 79 Need sidewalks along Karen Drive to connect Center St and AA/OO to South Summit Drive - complete a big loop around the city. 10/2/2018 9:42 AM 20 / 28 CAMPO 2045 & Beyond - Metropolitan Transportation Plan Survey SurveyMonkey 80 Service to the aging population that recognized their needs. Short walk to stop if can't access door to door. Benches at all stops, sidewalks to all bus stops, sidewalks in area where young families live. 10/2/2018 9:38 AM 81 Transportation Coordination of transit 10/2/2018 9:32 AM 21 / 28 CAMPO 2045 & Beyond - Metropolitan Transportation Plan Survey SurveyMonkey Q12 What trends do you see affecting the future of the Capital Region, and how? (Examples might include aging population, employment, rural depopulation, on-line retailing, redevelopment, etc.) Answered: 71 Skipped: 21 #RESPONSES DATE 1 All the above.10/19/2018 9:30 AM 2 Expansion of population living in outlying areas 10/18/2018 7:53 PM 3 1) An aging population wanting to retain an independent and active lifestyle, and needing a transport system that will allow this as they lose the ability to transport themselves. 2) A general population that is more open to ride share, Lyft, and other similar options. 3) A general population that relies more on home/office delivery of goods (food, medical, entertainment, clothing, etc.) rather than going to a store. 10/18/2018 3:31 PM 4 Teaching the general public how to dive without using their cell phones.10/17/2018 1:35 PM 5 Looking to get around Jefferson City quicker...going around or getting from one side to the other without all the lights...ie by-pass. 10/16/2018 2:12 PM 6 employment, on line retailing 10/16/2018 2:02 PM 7 Elementary schools being overfilled. More motor vehicle traffic causing pollution, congestion, and making it less safe to bike on the roads. A lack of transit/affordable transportation to areas for people who can't drive so they can get to work, go out for dinner, entertainment or even do basic shopping like for food. 10/14/2018 10:22 PM 8 Stagnant growth with young people leaving the area.10/14/2018 10:10 AM 9 Redevelopment, focus on early to mid-career adults to promote growth 10/14/2018 8:02 AM 10 On-line retail port Authority 10/13/2018 2:09 PM 11 No comment 10/12/2018 9:35 PM 12 Aging population. on-line retailing is more prevalent everywhere, but parking is bad on high street so that doesn't help. 10/12/2018 12:22 PM 13 Not sure.10/12/2018 11:25 AM 14 availability of funding for local governments due to loss of retail sales tax to internet.10/12/2018 10:46 AM 15 lack of development 10/12/2018 9:18 AM 16 Again I turn to the posiblity of atonomus vehicles. Will that cause a situation in which freed of the tadk of driving that people will be willing to travel further for they job? Will it mean that travel within n urban center is easier and so people will move back to the city center. I am not sure what the answer will be. I do think it will allow older folks to remain in their homes longer and perhaps remain more independent. 10/12/2018 9:17 AM 17 on-line retailing seems to be absorbing spending habits 10/12/2018 9:06 AM 18 People are trending to be more stupid, and worse drivers 10/12/2018 8:59 AM 19 Online shopping,10/12/2018 8:28 AM 20 ?10/12/2018 1:52 AM 21 I think aging infrastructure and limited financial resources will be two main factors affecting the future of the Capital Region. 10/11/2018 4:53 PM 22 if there was a safe, economical and consistant Bus routes to stores, Doctors Offices and Hospitals, I feel they would be beneficial 10/11/2018 1:25 PM 23 no comment 10/11/2018 10:29 AM 22 / 28 CAMPO 2045 & Beyond - Metropolitan Transportation Plan Survey SurveyMonkey 24 bringing in businesses - JC is virtually dead, have to purchase on-line or go to Columbia to shop; evening activities, there is nothing to do in JC unless you go to a bar/restaurant or church activities. All else is shut down or not available; nothing for more mature adults. 10/11/2018 10:24 AM 25 I agree with all the examples given.10/11/2018 9:32 AM 26 aging population 10/11/2018 8:59 AM 27 Everything you have as an example is what I think will happen to this area. Not so much the redevelopment as no major "player" wants to invest in Jeff City because there is no money because the state won't pay a living wage. As long as the city and the state have a "wink and nod" agreement to keep competition out of Jeff City, the state will never pay state workers a decent wage. 10/11/2018 8:37 AM 28 Increased rates of death by opioid use, maternal complications, and suicide are concerning. Lack of internet access will make telemedicine difficult for rural populations. 10/11/2018 8:28 AM 29 After a recent trip to Denver, Colorado, it was very clear to me that we have an older generation living here in mid Missouri. Having more things for the younger generations to do would be ideal. Some different types of businesses, activities available to everyone, and certain activities geared towards the younger adults in the area. 10/11/2018 8:10 AM 30 online shopping is going to cause a major issue in the future.10/11/2018 7:47 AM 31 No opinion 10/11/2018 6:55 AM 32 No knowledge of this 10/10/2018 5:54 PM 33 Technological advances, more development 10/10/2018 4:28 PM 34 accomodating aging population, but also attracting early 20's to stay or move here.10/10/2018 4:09 PM 35 Jefferson City's urban renovation will lead to higher residential population. Alternative forms of transportation should be encouraged to control vehicular traffic. 10/10/2018 3:37 PM 36 The Capital Region is falling behind with regarding to road safety and road sharing. We are not doing enough to promote less cars and the road and address environmental issues. 10/10/2018 2:53 PM 37 I would like to see children to get to school on their own and the elderly who no longer drive to have a means of transportion. 10/10/2018 2:11 PM 38 Problems in local school system are resulting in unemployable young people.10/10/2018 10:01 AM 39 Redevelopment 10/10/2018 9:46 AM 40 The MSP and port project would definitely be a positive economic development for the region.10/10/2018 9:07 AM 41 N/a 10/10/2018 6:17 AM 42 Maybe Prop D will give MoDOT money so they will stop complaining and get some work done. They need to consider peds and buses into their designs, it's the 21st century now! If the state doesn't better support the state workers, that will screw up Jeff City righteously. 10/9/2018 7:20 PM 43 to many taxes lately so most may not agreeable to more taxes to fix things like roads and bridges 10/9/2018 3:54 PM 44 All the things mentioned in the question, plus the difficulty in growing good-paying jobs in our area. Much of job growth is in lower-paying occupations. 10/8/2018 5:39 PM 45 I see growth expanding West of Jefferson City into Western Cole Co 10/8/2018 12:18 PM 46 Lack of adequate transportation in the evening affects employment and commute. The bike system is new and not reliable because not everyone has a debit card to add funds. 10/8/2018 9:25 AM 47 To conservative 10/6/2018 8:32 AM 48 No comment 10/6/2018 2:32 AM 49 Aging population Online retailing Jeff City needs to tear down the old prison and develop a river walk district Growing violent crimes in JC increased shootings are big concern Increased Heroin and other drugs in Jeff City area is big concern Increased presence of tag team human traffickers along highways 50, 54, 63,and I70 is frightening. I have experienced these drivers on these roads in my daily travels and this concerns me! 10/5/2018 10:08 PM 50 redevelopment, annexation, on-line retailing 10/5/2018 8:42 AM 23 / 28 CAMPO 2045 & Beyond - Metropolitan Transportation Plan Survey SurveyMonkey 51 Online retailing, lack of things to do in Jefferson City, lack of redevelopment.10/5/2018 8:07 AM 52 Must have quality schools to attract business opportunities (not fast food or box stores) with good paying jobs. Central Missouri is too conservative. We need innovating thinking and planning for growth. People here are too happy with the status quo. 10/4/2018 9:35 PM 53 Aging population. Continue working towards rejuvenating Jefferson City with healthy and safe outdoor venues and supporting local artisans. 10/4/2018 6:00 PM 54 aging population 10/4/2018 4:54 PM 55 Without an interstate, Jefferson City will always be a smaller city. US 50/63 and 54 aren't sufficient for larger growth here, especially while they are not consistently 4 lane highways across the state. I also think travel between Columbia and Jefferson City can be too difficult without a car. Buses or rail or something is necessary. 10/4/2018 4:46 PM 56 online retailing 10/4/2018 4:40 PM 57 aging infrastructure not being maintained 10/4/2018 4:27 PM 58 More bicyclists, environmental awareness. Traffic lights need to be upgraded to change based on amount of traffic at intersections, not a timer. 10/3/2018 9:07 AM 59 Redelopment should be the trend most affecting the Capital Region but I thing, realistically, it is going to be on-line retailing. And I think an increase in rural population is the coming trend, not rural DEPOPULATION. 10/3/2018 8:20 AM 60 Lack of manufacturing jobs 10/3/2018 7:35 AM 61 Retaining all of the young people who move here for work. Too many leave after a year or two.10/2/2018 2:53 PM 62 I think it tries to keep up with what is going on and develops in that direction 10/2/2018 1:44 PM 63 Population seems stable.10/2/2018 1:24 PM 64 More people able and wanting to use alternative transportation because they are retired, concerned about the environment, exercise, pleasure. And the city is not ready nor friendly for alternative transportation 10/2/2018 12:29 PM 65 Growth in rural areas 10/2/2018 11:45 AM 66 Not enough diversity in employment outside of a state job or a retail/food service job.10/2/2018 10:35 AM 67 Employment in the area is strong but distributed which causes low population density. Infrastructure funding will continue to lag behind but vehicle usage will continue to increase. Moreover, vehicles are hard on roads and infrastructure whereas other methods of transit (bikes, pedestrian, public transit, etc.) are much friendlier. The economics don't work so we need to charge vehicular users an appropriate amount through taxes and/or continue to encourage alternative modes of transit. Let's incentivize urban renewal projects, prioritize movement throughout the day by alternative transportation (i.e. take bike share bikes to lunch instead of driving), and be very transparent about the cost of building and maintain vehicle focused infrastructure. 10/2/2018 10:30 AM 68 On-line retailing has affected this region and will continue. Incentivize the technology (AI) sector to come to this area. 10/2/2018 10:15 AM 69 Aging demographics need rural public transportation. Callaway county doesn't have public transportation. 10/2/2018 9:42 AM 70 Aging population that is mentally alert but physically limited needing convenient public transit 7 days per week. 10/2/2018 9:38 AM 71 working remotely 10/2/2018 9:32 AM 24 / 28 CAMPO 2045 & Beyond - Metropolitan Transportation Plan Survey SurveyMonkey Q13 What is important to you in considering an overall vision for our region? (Examples might include ways to use land, such as more affordable housing, developing vacant or undeveloped, more parks, more sidewalks/trails, more roadway capacity, improved schools, attracting more jobs, etc.) Answered: 78 Skipped: 14 #RESPONSES DATE 1 Increased mobile options for all income levels, more lights on sidewalks on East side 10/24/2018 4:53 PM 2 Redevelopment of commercial and residential properties needs to be the driving force within Jefferson City. Key annexation of properties on the outskirts of town still needs to be an important consideration in the future as well. 10/19/2018 9:30 AM 3 De-emphasis of car centric transportation thinking. Embrace and prioritize alternative forms of transportation within and between towns in the CAMPO area. 10/18/2018 7:53 PM 4 Teaching the general public how to dive without using their cell phones.10/17/2018 1:35 PM 5 Using the money wisely.10/16/2018 2:12 PM 6 improved schools, attracting more jobs 10/16/2018 2:02 PM 7 Grants for people to buy and fix up property could be a part of making improvements on some of the older houses for affordable housing and reasonably priced offices for small/startup businesses. Better accessibility with more connections to all areas and wider sidewalks/greenways for both bicycles and pedestrians that are separate from motor vehicles. More bus routes to cover areas outside Jefferson City's city limits and include hours running on weekends. 10/14/2018 10:22 PM 8 Sensible, managed growth of Jefferson City coupled with rehabilitation of older neighborhoods.10/14/2018 10:10 AM 9 More roadway capacity, attracting more jobs beyond retail.10/14/2018 8:02 AM 10 Get rid of the old St. Mary’s that’s a nice tour and hope the farmers do little bit better.10/13/2018 2:09 PM 11 Holts summit needs a middle and high school. A train would be nice to fast track between Jeff and holts summit. 10/12/2018 9:35 PM 12 Definitely need to develop the vacant dilapidated structures. Need a parking garage near Truman Bldg and also near JCHS. So much vital land is wasted on humongous parking lots. 10/12/2018 12:22 PM 13 Better roads and bridges.10/12/2018 11:25 AM 14 improvement of quality of life items, such as parks, greenways, etc... development and population will follow these items 10/12/2018 10:46 AM 15 public input from all entities to assess what area is the highest priority 10/12/2018 9:18 AM 16 I think it is important to continue to attract or retain young people to out area. It seams that the current trends is for there to be choices when it comes to transpiration. I think the improvement of our trail and cycling infrastructure as well as the development of a connected sidewalk system are important in making our region attractive. 10/12/2018 9:17 AM 17 maybe trying to get an on-line distribution outlet 10/12/2018 9:06 AM 18 Attracting more jobs and having better quality roads 10/12/2018 8:59 AM 19 I see a need for more affordable housing or lower income housing in the Holts Summit area. Redevelop the aging trailer parks into more energy efficient housing. I believe it would make the community look more appealing to people looking at the area. Also, making the commute from Holts Summit to Jefferson City easier to navigate during rush hour periods. During these periods of congestion, it can be very difficult for emergency personal to provide services because traffic can not move to allow access to the people in need. 10/12/2018 8:28 AM 25 / 28 CAMPO 2045 & Beyond - Metropolitan Transportation Plan Survey SurveyMonkey 20 ?10/12/2018 1:52 AM 21 It would be great to attract more jobs to the area, especially those in the industrial field. It would also be great to have increased connectivity through additional trails and sidewalks. 10/11/2018 4:53 PM 22 In Holts Summit we need to fix the disparity in the two Elementary Schools here and better Public Transportation 10/11/2018 1:25 PM 23 attracting more jobs and activities to keep younger people from moving away.10/11/2018 10:29 AM 24 Due to Jefferson City being the Capital of Missouri it is a very transient city. It is up to the mayor and council to make it more appealing for them to have people want to make this their permanent home. I've heard too many people say it's 'boring' and there's 'nothing to do here.' They need to put together a team/multiple teams of people who personally welcome new families to Jefferson City and let them know of the things that 'are' available to them, and the local artisans in the area outside JC, similar to a Welcome Wagon style greeting. I know I still stumble around attempting to find specialty shops, such as shoe repair - and phone books or the Internet don't help as many people don't advertise or have websites. It's passed along through word of mouth - if you don't know the right people, you don't find out the information. You have to think outside the box and be innovative, something that's lacking within our city. 10/11/2018 10:24 AM 25 I think the most important thing that we need to focus on is infill development. New development is great but infill development is better. 10/11/2018 10:01 AM 26 Economic development/growth. Providing access to all through multimodal opportunities.10/11/2018 9:32 AM 27 developing vacant or undeveloped land, more affordable housing for the mentally ill and people with developmental disabilities 10/11/2018 8:59 AM 28 Tear down old nasty buildings. Renovate the old nice ones that can be saved. Then the city will look better, companies may locate here, more jobs, more taxes, more economy. As long as the city looks like a dump, no company will come here. Ensure sidewalks are put in and connected to existing sidewalks. How many times can you drive around the city and see sidewalks just simply end? Hundreds. Connect the road that ends at the News Tribune printing building to Schott Road so that folks can get to the new walmart without having to get on Highway 50. Folks in motorized wheelchairs are often on highway 50. Sooner or later, they'll be run over by somone texting while driving. 10/11/2018 8:37 AM 29 It’s important to me that we foster community connectedness. When communities feel connected there are lower rates of child maltreatment, intimate partner violence, sexual violence, youth violence, suicide, and elder maltreatment. Safe places for kids and teens to play are important, as are economic security. Folks also need to feel safe in their neighborhood, so looking at sidewalks, lighting, and vacant property is also important. 10/11/2018 8:28 AM 30 Attracting more jobs I feel is always important, but bigger than that is attracting more desirable jobs. Overall, I feel like there needs to be more fun, attractive things to do for young adults. 10/11/2018 8:10 AM 31 there needs to be more things to do for families otherwise they are going to keep going elsewhere. making classes and training for business owens to help their companies flourish. 10/11/2018 7:47 AM 32 Increased safety in schools. Properly financing schools. Incorporating school gardens and ecological work at all schools not just Callaway Hills. More opportunity to walk around on 2 legs instead of having to take a car everywhere. 10/11/2018 6:55 AM 33 Parks and trails 10/10/2018 10:59 PM 34 Serving people of all walks of life including the elderly and the disabled 10/10/2018 8:17 PM 35 Attracting more jobs, developing vacant and undeveloped land 10/10/2018 5:54 PM 36 Better options for shopping and tourism 10/10/2018 4:28 PM 37 attracting more jobs 10/10/2018 4:09 PM 38 Provide easily accessible connections for pedestrian and bike traffic between residential areas and commercial areas. 10/10/2018 3:37 PM 39 Improving schools and attracting jobs is always important. We need to promote the area as more attractive to young people and to do that we need to appeal to environmentally conscious individuals. Currently JC would be one of the last places that people would consider progressive. 10/10/2018 2:53 PM 40 I wish to see more trail/sidewalk connectivity to allow people to walk where then need to go.10/10/2018 2:11 PM 26 / 28 CAMPO 2045 & Beyond - Metropolitan Transportation Plan Survey SurveyMonkey 41 Improved schools and attracting more jobs are important to economic development, accessing the riverfront is important for quality-of-life and economic development. (If you can build a pedestrian bridge across the Missouri River, don't tell me you can't figure out how to cross the railroad tracks.) 10/10/2018 10:01 AM 42 Developing vacant or undeveloped ..attractive big name companies to the Capital 10/10/2018 9:46 AM 43 Bring new business and tourism to the region will bring tax dollars which will assist in funding projects in the region to benefit our residents. 10/10/2018 9:07 AM 44 Don’t bring the “city” to st martins, it’s a quiet safe community and bringing that “city” out here will break it and foresee crime and such going up. I moved here for the community setting and peacefulness. Have a bus route that runs down 50w wouldn’t be bad thing, I would t run it on back streets just straight shot off 50 highway down business 50. 10/10/2018 6:17 AM 45 Consider all road users. More condos or higher end mixed use properties nearer downtown. Connect the greenways and add more to underserved areas. River access would be pretty cool! Commercial flight to Jeff City airport? 10/9/2018 7:20 PM 46 Middle schoo and high school in Callaway county for Holts Summit students and other nearby communities in Callaway County. Exercise facilities and more opportunities, like a Y in Holts summit. 10/9/2018 3:54 PM 47 more parks, more sidewalks/trails and developing vacant or undeveloped regions 10/8/2018 11:28 PM 48 In order to have a well-functioning area, we need the common vision implied in the question. I think visioning session(s) may be necessary to arrive at some sort of consensus on this. Overall quality of life is most important--but that likely means different things to me than to others. But we could have a superior quality of life and if there aren't quality jobs to provide a sufficient tax base, it's unsustainable. 10/8/2018 5:39 PM 49 Improved schools, more sidewalks/trails, improve existing roads/bridges 10/8/2018 12:18 PM 50 I would love to see an increase in bus availability as well as a Saturday bus. Air conditioning for public housing/low income homes. 10/8/2018 9:25 AM 51 Roadway capacity 10/6/2018 8:32 AM 52 Attracting more quality paying jobs 10/6/2018 2:32 AM 53 Not forcing me out of my land Having more walkers in front of my home This area has constant issues with people tampering with vehicles and property I would love for ourtown to focus on the square that is center street, Karen drive, Simon and Summit (between Simon and Center) 10/5/2018 10:08 PM 54 more parks, sidewalks, and trails.10/5/2018 8:42 AM 55 Improved public schools, developing vacant businesses, being more conscious of those walking and riding bicycles. We need more sidewalks at a minimum and/or bike lanes. 10/5/2018 8:07 AM 56 See answer to #12 10/4/2018 9:35 PM 57 Definitely need more affordable housing. Develop the old furniture store located near hwy 54 and 50 intersection or the old shoe factory into a City Museum, e.g like the one in St Louis. Would love to see an artisan mall,e.g. a street safe for pedestrians to stroll, lined with shops that sell items made by local artists. 10/4/2018 6:00 PM 58 Increase rental opportunities, attracting more jobs, historic preservation.10/4/2018 4:54 PM 59 Equal rights and access for all transportation users. Bicyclists, ADA, and walking has fallen so far off the priorities of this city, we need to play a serious amount of catchup to get it at a DECENT level, not a good level. We need to do better! 10/4/2018 4:46 PM 60 we need a nice riverfront property with a park, trail, possibly restaurant, dock, etc...10/4/2018 4:40 PM 61 attracting and retaining population...10/4/2018 4:27 PM 62 Better pay for State employees who will spend the additional funds in the community to help sustain and improve local business conditions and the economy. 10/3/2018 9:07 AM 63 Improved early childhood care, improved schools, more parks and public lands, more & better water & sewer systems. 10/3/2018 8:20 AM 64 Attracting more jobs and easier access for trucking to and from manufacturing.10/3/2018 7:35 AM 27 / 28 CAMPO 2045 & Beyond - Metropolitan Transportation Plan Survey SurveyMonkey 65 Having a truly comprehensive greenway system for transportation and recreation, supplemented with bike lanes or safe shoulders, would be great. 10/2/2018 2:53 PM 66 Affordable housing, more sidewalks, definitely improved schools, attracting more jobs 10/2/2018 1:44 PM 67 Historic preservation.10/2/2018 1:24 PM 68 Working to reduce urban sprawl throughout the area to keep the local communities from deteriorating. 10/2/2018 12:39 PM 69 More close in affordable housing, better and more bus routes, buses on weekends and nights, more bike friendly streets, more sidewalks, preservation of heritage, like houses. 10/2/2018 12:29 PM 70 Economic growth & quality of life issues like trails, greenways, & parks.10/2/2018 11:45 AM 71 Attracting more jobs is key, as is the improvement of the schools. Happy to see a new high school in the works (finally), please start thinking about another middle school. 10/2/2018 10:35 AM 72 It is important that we recognize and react to the Amazon effect. People like convenience and the ability to be mobile. Let's build downtown convenience by prioritizing the things people want - shopping, restaurants, entertainment, and minimizing stagnant storefronts - lobbyists, lawyers, etc. Let's shift our focus from revering longtime businesses to celebrating new as the economy continues to evolve. An influx of new small businesses will keep our employment levels high, provide more services for citizens, and diversify the skills and knowledge base of our working population. Lastly, let's capitalize on our topography by taking advantage of the natural resources around us. We should have more water based physical activity on Binder Lake - kayaks, SUPs, canoes, etc. We should have more soft surface natural mountain biking & hiking trails to appreciate nature. 10/2/2018 10:30 AM 73 Attracting more jobs and larger companies (AI and manufacturing). More social environments where individual can work/socialize with WIFI access. Currently use Panera Bread 10/2/2018 10:15 AM 74 The exit and on ramps at christy and 54 and Jefferson and 54 are terrible.10/2/2018 9:45 AM 75 The Summit has become the suburb for JC. Need to improve schools and bring in updated retail outlets and places to shop 10/2/2018 9:42 AM 76 Removing blight, increasing affordable housing both rental and for purchase, modernizing low income housing, more publicity about the free events in town to increase participation. 10/2/2018 9:38 AM 77 More parks 10/2/2018 9:32 AM 78 more affordable housing, developing vacant or undeveloped, improved schools, attracting more jobs 10/2/2018 9:30 AM 28 / 28 CAMPO 2045 & Beyond - Metropolitan Transportation Plan Survey SurveyMonkey CAMPO Aggregated Questionnaire Results - Near-Term and Long-Term Needs- MTP Update 2018 Location Need Type Issue Potential Solution (optional) Hwy 54/63 N/O Missouri River Bridge Capacity Congestion in AM and PM rush Add lanes from Bridge to Hwy 63 interchange Clark Avenue Interchange @ Hwy 50/63 Safety/Capacity Safety and congestion issues with existing interchange Roundabouts at ramp terminals Dix Road Interchange @ Hwy 50 Safety/Capacity Sight distance and congestion issues at ramp terminals Reconfiguration of the interchange and Dix Road approaches West Edgewood Intersection Improvements Capacity at Stadium intersection and Safety at Creek Trail Drive Intersection Roundabouts or Signal Missouri Boulevard Capacity/Safety The area from McDonalds to Lowes does not have a center turn lane. Access to and from S. Ten Mile Drive is difficult Add a center turn lane. Right-in/ Right-out at old Orscheln and McDonalds entrances. Possible signal at S. Ten Mile Drive Clark Avenue / Dunklin St.Safety Awkward intersection Reconfigure intersecton Signal Improvements on W. Truman Safety Scott Station Road and Ventura Ave.Signal Installation Swifts Hwy/Jefferson St.Safety Sight distance issue due to bridge barrier curb and also very narrow intersection Widen Swifts Hwy approach Christy Drive/Tanner Bridge/Hwy 54 Off/On Ramps Safety Goofy offset intersection with difficult light of sight for off ramp Roundabout Madison Street Safety / Capacity Issues with traffic congestion and safety from Dunlin Street to Capital Region Hospital Combination of widening and removal of parking, add a center turn lane and removal of 3 way stop at E. Atchison South Summit Drive Sidewalk, drainage Major thoroughfare to elementary school lacks sidewalks and curbs. Some drainage issues as well. Install sidewalks with some curb and gutter and drop inlets (Applying for grant funds) Summit Drive and Perry Intersection Intersection Poor visibility at high traffic volume intersection. Offset intersection with 5th approach leg and adjacent uncontrolled access Redesign intersection (Study completed). Could be partially funded by SRTS Grant Spalding Road: Park Place to West Simon (entire length)Drainage/culvert Drainage issue. Standing water is deteriorating subgrade.Install drainage improvements. Curb and gutter could cause surface flooding for adjoining properties. N. Summit and Mars Drainage/culvert Intermittent flooding. Culvert undersized on major thoroughfare.Install drainage improvements – box culvert. Van Horn & Julie Lane Intersection Poor visibility with offset intersection Redesign intersection (Study completed). Missouri Blvd. (W. Main to Truman Blvd.)Sidewalk/crosswalks Unsafe for pedestrians and cyclists Continue adding sidewalks. Consider bike lanes and islands or other traffic slowing features. Southwest Blvd.Greenway crossing Traffic does not stop when pedestrians or cyclists are at crossing.Install flashing yellow (or red) light activated when someone is in crossing area. Bolivar Street/McCarty St. Intersection Traffic Signal Issues Sensor does not detect cyclist to trigger traffic light and there is no crossing button available to cyclists. Adjust sensors to pick up the presence of a cyclist at the intersection to trigger the traffic signal. Dix Road (W. Main to MO Blvd. including overpass over Hwy. 50)Capacity Limited access for pedestrians and cyclists Expand the width of the road and overpass to provide access Rt T/D to Henwick on Bus. 50 W Roadway Segment Busy roadway with school, church, shopping, etc & no safe way for non- drivers to travel.Bike lanes, curb, gutter & sidewalk in each direction Intersection of R/T D & Bus 50 W Intersection Busy intersection with speeding drivers & frequent running of stop signs Add a Roundabout Route B, M & W intersection in Wardsville,Roundabout (?)Traffic is especially bad in morning and evening rush hours (including school dismissals and St. Stanislaus and Blair Oaks. Create loop around Wardsville so traffic going to and from JC to Taos and St. Thomas and beyond does not have to go thru Wardsville. Route B and Ashbury Way Safety/Congestion Diffuculty turning into Ashbury and onto Route B Traffic Signals and/or turn lanes Ellis/Southwest Interchange with Hwy 54 Interchange Improvements The outer roads are two closely spaced making turning movements difficult. The area is very congested in the peak hours. There are no accommodations for pedestrians across the overpass. Examine alternate intersection/interchange configurations. Add pedestrian overpass or create space on existing bridge. Intersection of Southwest and Stadium Intersection improvement Intersection is congested during peak hours and school dismissal Explore alternate intersection type such as a roundabout. Ellis Boulevard and Moreau Drive intersection Intersection improvement Intersection is congested during peak hours Explore alternate intersection type such as a roundabout. Bald Hill and Seven Hills Intersection Intersection improvement Intersection is congested during peak hours Explore alternate intersection type such as a roundabout. 800 Block Miller E. Miller St.Roadway improvements Pavement, curb, gutter are breaking up Replace curb and gutter; remove asphalt and replace with concrete South Country Club and Highway 50 Interchange Interchange Improvements The area is congested during Peak Hours. Closely spaced outer roads. No pedestrian accommodation Examine alternate intersection/interchange configurations. Provide for pedestrains Near-Term Needs (<5 Years) Ca r y M a l o n e y - B i k e In t e r e s t R e p . St . M a r t i n s Co l e C o u n t y Ho l t s S u m m i t & C a l l a w a y Co u n t y Wa r d s v i l l e Je f f e r s o n C i t y CAMPO Aggregated Questionnaire Results - Near-Term and Long-Term Needs- MTP Update 2018 Location Need Type Issue Potential Solution (optional) Rex-Whitton Expressway Capacity Congestion at AM and PM rush Add a third lane in each direction from Monroe Street to Broadway St. Ellis Boulevard @ Hwy 54 Capacity Congestion Reconfiguration of the interchange and side roads Southwest Blvd/Stadium Blvd Intersection Capacity Intersection is tight and doesn’t flow well Rebuild of intersection to correct profile grade of Southwest Blvd and add capacity Route B/M/W Capacity/Safety Congestion and safety issues at awkward intersection Replace intersection with a studied alternative Halifax, Nieman & Major Intersection Intersection Poor visibility at three-way intersection.Install roundabout 400 E. Simon Bridge & roadway Intermittent flooding. Culvert needs to be resized and replaced Install new bridge $300,000 (MODOT Grant?) Highway 54 Pedestrian access There is no safe way to cross US-54 by bike or on foot.Install dedicated bike/pedestrian lane; probably at Simon Blvd. overpass. Additional overpass exit ramps at South Summit and US-54 Interchange There is a partial interchange at a site of major potential traffic flow Install additional ramps. Sidewalk needed along Karen Dr. (from Center St. north to MoDOT maintenance point)Sidewalk Sidwealk is non-existant. High pedestrian use in a residential area.Install sidewalk and crosswalks Sidewalk needed along Halifax Rd. (from existing sidewalk to Nieman Rd.)Sidewalk Sidwealk is non-existant. High pedestrian use in a residential area.Install sidewalk and crosswalks Dedicated bike path to Katy Trail Bike path There is a lack of a dedicated bike path from Holt Summit to the winery and thence to the Katy Trail Design and construct bike path Route T (St. Martins to Elston)Sidewalks/Shoulders/ Capacity There are no facilities for walkers Install sidewalks or expand the width of the road to accommodate pedestrians. Greenway system Expand Connectivity with downtown is limited.Continue greenway segments into downtown. Connect current segments to form a more extensive network. Downtown area Expand bike lanes Current bike lanes are limited (Capital Ave. and Bolivar St.)Continue expansion of bike lanes in the downtown area. St . Ma r t i n s Jefferson CIty & Cole County Greenway & small cities Connectivity Greenway, bike lanes need to be connected to connect small cities with Jefferson City & the Katy Trail & Rock Island Trail Continue to expand bike lanes & greenways to connect cities in the CAMPO jurisdiction Tri-level Improvements (US50,63, 54 interchange)Congestion/Safety/ Capacity/Connectivity Several issues ranging from congestion to safety issues. There are merging/weaving side swipe conflicts and confusion for motorists unfamiliar with the interchange due to stop and yeild intersections. Large Semi Tractor Trailers have some difficulty traveling westbound on US 50 and turning onto US 54 westbound via Missouri Blvd. and eastbound on US 54 onto eastbound US 50. The at-grade conflicts should be eliminated. Improvments to exits and entrances with US 54-Missouri Boulevard interchange and US 50/63- Missouri Boulevard intersection are needed. Signage and striping improvements would also help. US 54/63 at Missouri River Bridge 3 lanes Congestion/Safety Not enough capapcity at peak periods, holidays, or after crashes. Bottleneck for freight on norht/south traffic at Missouri River Lengthen the US 54 eastbound outer lane at the Missouri River Bridge from the Route W exit ramp to the US 63 exit ramp and lengthen the US 54 westbound outer lane at the Missouri River Bridge from the US 63 ramp to the Missouri River Bridge. (3 lanes from US 63 to Cole County) Rex Whitton Expressway Improvements (50/63) from (and including) Jackson Ave. to (and including) Missouri Boulevard. Road and Bridge/Connecticity/ Congestion Congestion issues. Improvements on Rex Whitton Expressway from, and including, Clarke Ave to, and including: Missouri Boulevard with Broadway, Jefferson, Madison and Monroe intersection improvements, and a Madison St. overpass component proposed by the EIS Extend Greenway Trail from Dunklin Trailhead to McCarty St in Jefferson City Sidewalk/Trails Connectivity with trails and sidewalks throughout Jefferson City Design and construct a combination of 10 foot wide concrete greenway with modular retaining walls, signed bike lanes, and widening of existing sidewalk. This project is a small component of a larger regional project to enhance trail connectitivity. Greenway Trail Projects Connectivity/Sidewalks better connectivity is needed between several trails and sidewalks • Fairgrounds Acres to County Park • South Country Club Drive to Turtle Creek subdivision • Ellis-Porter Riverside Park connector from St. Louis Road • Wears Creek to East Brank Connector • Frog Hollow Phase 4 – Creek Trail to W. Edgewood • JCMG to Satinwood Connector along Stadium Blvd. • Capitol City High School Spur Build a new transit facility for JEFFTRAN Extension of runway at Jefferson City Memorial Airport Renovation or replacement of the Amtrak Train Station in Jefferson City Construction of a port on the Missouri River Je f f e r s o n C i t y Construction of a 1,000’ extension of the crosswind runway at the Jefferson City Memorial Airport. The new station will be a new front door for Missouri’s capital city. The new station will be fully accessible to the disabled and able to handle student groups, both of which are now difficult to host in the current small station. The volunteers who staff the current station would be able to allocate further resources to the selling of refreshments to Construction of a port facility in either Callaway County or Cole County as specified in the Central Missouri Multimodal Port Feasibility Study. Construction of a new transit facility for JEFFTRAN that would provide better accomodations for transit riders, JEFFTRAN staff, and possible future service expansion. Mu l t i - m o d a l L o n g - Te r m Long-Term Needs (Beyond 5 Years) Ca r y M a l o n e y - Bi k e I n t e r e s t Re p . Co l e C o u n t y Ho l t s S u m m i t & C a l l a w a y C o u n t y Appendix E 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program DRAFT Transportation Improvement Program Program Years 2020-2024 July 1, 2019 – June 30, 2024 Adopted June 19, 2019 The preparation of this report was financed in part by the U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, and Federal Transit Administration in cooperation with the Missouri Department of Transportation. The opinions, findings, and conclusions expressed in this report are not necessarily those of the Federal Highway Administration, Federal Transit Administration, or the Missouri Department of Transportation. Individuals should contact the ADA Coordinator at (573) 634-6570 to request accommodations or alternative formats as required under the Americans with Disabilities Act. Please allow three business days to process the request. DRAFT Table of Contents Introduction ............................................................................................................................................. 1 Public Participation ................................................................................................................................. 2 Project Selection ...................................................................................................................................... 2 TIP Development ..................................................................................................................................... 2 TIP Amendments and Administrative Modifications ............................................................................... 3 Previous Projects ................................................................................................................................. 3 Annual Listing of Obligated Projects ...................................................................................................... 3 Air Quality Designation .......................................................................................................................... 3 Environmental Justice ............................................................................................................................. 3 Federal Performance Measures ............................................................................................................... 4 Financial Plan ......................................................................................................................................... 7 Forecast Revenue Available for Transportation Funding .................................................................... 7 Operations and Maintenance ............................................................................................................ 10 Financial Constraint .............................................................................................................................. 12 Fiscally Constrained Transportation Projects .................................................................................... 13 Program of Projects - OATS .................................................................................................................. 28 Multimodal Projects .............................................................................................................................. 30 Regionally Significant Projects ............................................................................................................. 30 Appendix A – Amendments and Administrative Modifications ........................................................... 31 Appendix B – Federal Funding Sources ................................................................................................ 32 Appendix C – Policies and Procedures ................................................................................................. 33 Appendix D – Definitions ..................................................................................................................... 36 CAMPO Title VI Nondiscrimination Policy The Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization is committed to the policy that no person shall be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be otherwise subjected to discrimination under any program or activity on the grounds of race, color, sex, age, disability or national origin, in accordance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and the Civil Rights Restoration Act of 1987 (P.L. 100.259). Administration of the Capital Area MPO is provided by the City of Jefferson Department of Planning and Protective Services Room 120 John G. Christy Municipal Building 320 East McCarty St., Jefferson City, Missouri 65101 Phone: (573) 634-6410 Fax: (573) 634-6457 http://www.jeffersoncitymo.gov/campo DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program i LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS FTA 5303 Metropolitan & Statewide Planning and Non-Metropolitan Transportation Planning FTA 5307 Urbanized Area Formula Grants FTA 5310 Enhanced Mobility of Seniors and Individuals with Disabilities FTA 5339 Bus and Bus Facilities Adv. Con. Advanced Construction AM Asset Management (Replaces TCOS in 2022) CAMPO Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization CO Carbon Monoxide (vehicle emissions) EPA Environmental Protection Agency FAST Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act FHWA Federal Highway Administration FTA Federal Transit Administration FY Fiscal Year HSIP Highway Safety Improvement Program MAP-21 Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century MoDOT Missouri Department of Transportation MPO Metropolitan Planning Organization MTP Metropolitan Transportation Plan NHFP National Highway Freight Program NHPP National Highway Performance Program NO2 Nitrogen Dioxide ONE DOT Collaboration between FHWA and FTA PBPP Performance Based Planning and Programming PM-2.5 Small Particulate Matter Lead POP Program of Projects PY Program Year SO2 Sulfur Dioxide STIP State Transportation Improvement Program STBG Surface Transportation Block Grant Program TAP Transportation Alternatives TCOS Taking Care of the System TERM Transit Economic Requirements Model TDM Travel Demand Model TIP Transportation Improvement Program TPM Transportation Performance Management VMT Vehicle Miles of Travel DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program ii (Resolution) DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program iii DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program iv Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization Board of Directors Chairman – Ron Fitzwater, City Council Member, City of Jefferson Vice-Chairman –Jeff Hoelscher, Eastern District Commissioner, Cole County City of Jefferson Jon Hensley, City Council Member David Kemna, City Council Member Rick Mihalevich, City Council Member Sonny Sanders, AICP, Director, Planning & Protective Services Matt Morasch, PE, Director, Public Works Mark Mehmert, Director, Transit Division Cole County Larry Benz, PE, Director, Public Works Doug Reece, City Administrator, St. Martins Callaway County Roger Fischer, Western District Commissioner Holts Summit Hanna Lechner, City Administrator, City of Holts Summit Missouri Department of Transportation (MoDOT) David Silvester, PE, District Engineer Ex-Officio Members Randall Allen, Jefferson City Area Chamber of Commerce Daniel Nguyen, Federal Transit Administration, Region VII Joan Roeseler, MoDOT, Transit Section Cathy Brown, Office of Administration, Facilities Management Michael Henderson, AICP, MoDOT, Transportation Planning Brad McMahon, Federal Highway Administration, Missouri Marty Wilson, Callaway County Economic Development Technical Committee Chairman – Sonny Sanders, AICP, Director, Planning and Protective Services, City of Jefferson Vice-Chairman – David Bange, PE, Engineering Supervisor, Department of Public Works, City of Jefferson City of Jefferson Todd Spalding, Director, Parks, Recreation & Forestry Matt Morasch, PE, Director of Public Works Mark Mehmert, Director, Transit Division Eric Barron, AICP, Transportation Planner Britt Smith, PE, Operations & Maintenance Cole County Larry Benz, PE, Director of Public Works Eric Landwehr, PE, County Engineer Callaway County Paul Winkelmann, PE, County Highway Administrator Small City Representative - Callaway Mark Tate, Streets Department, City of Holts Summit Small City Representative - Cole Paul Stonner/Brian Schrimpf, Alderman, Wardsville Missouri Department of Transportation (MoDOT) Steve Engelbrecht, PE, District Planning Manager Michael Henderson, AICP, Transportation Planning Specialist Bob Lynch, PE, Area Engineer Private Transportation Interest Joe Scheppers, N.H. Scheppers Distributing Company. Pedestrian or Biking Interest Cary Maloney Ex-Officio Members: Daniel Nguyen, Federal Transit Administration, Region VII Brad McMahon, Federal Highway Administration, Missouri - June 2019 CAMPO Staff Sonny Sanders, AICP, GISP – Director, Planning & Protective Services Eric Barron, AICP - Planning Manager Katrina Williams, GISP, AICP – Planner II Alex Rotenberry, AICP - Planner I Beth Sweeten – Administrative Assistant DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program 1 Introduction The Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (CAMPO) is the designated metropolitan planning organization for the Jefferson City, Missouri planning area whose purpose is to carry out a continuing, cooperative, and comprehensive long range transportation planning process. As part of this process CAMPO updates the Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) with the latest program year TIP, to address the current and future transportation needs for the Metropolitan Planning Area (MPA). The MPA includes a southern portion of Callaway County, northeastern portion of Cole County, cities of Holts Summit, Jefferson City, St. Martins, Taos, and Wardsville. Figure 1 – The CAMPO Planning Area The Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) is a 5-year financial program of transportation projects to be implemented within the MPA. The projects are funded by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and Federal Transit Administration (FTA), or are deemed “regionally significant.” Each project or project phase included in the TIP is consistent with investment strategies discussed in the MTP and is part of the process of applying for funds from the FHWA and FTA. Certain capital and non-capital transportation projects using funding under 23 U.S.C. and 49 U.S.C. Chapter 53 or regionally significant projects requiring action by the FHWA or the FTA are required to be included in the TIP. The TIP is updated annually by CAMPO in cooperation with the Missouri Department of Transportation and local public transportation operators. DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program 2 Public Participation CAMPO seeks active and meaningful involvement of the public and interested parties in the development and update of transportation plans and programs, including the TIP. All meetings of the CAMPO Technical Committee and Board of Directors are open to the public. All meeting agendas and minutes are available on the City of Jefferson website or upon request. CAMPO provides all interested parties and the public with a reasonable opportunity to comment on the proposed TIP as required by federal law. Reasonable opportunity to comment and participate on the proposed TIP is made following the policies in the CAMPO Public Participation Plan located on the CAMPO website at http://www.jeffersoncitymo.gov/campo. The approved TIP is available for review at several locations throughout the CAMPO planning area as outlined in the Public Participation Plan. The FTA allows a grantee, e.g. JEFFTRAN and OATS, Inc., to rely on locally adopted public participation plans for the submittal of their projects in lieu of a separate “Program of Projects” (POP) if the grantee has coordinated with CAMPO and has ensured that the public is aware that the TIP and the Public Participation Plan are being used to satisfy the POP public participation requirements. JEFFTRAN is the public transit provider for the City of Jefferson and OATS, Inc. is a not-for-profit 501(c)3 corporation providing specialized transportation for senior citizens, people with disabilities and the rural general public in 87 Missouri counties. Federal Transit Administration recipients of certain categories of funds, JEFFTRAN and OATS, Inc. must follow a public participation plan. Both JEFFTRAN and OATS, Inc. meet this coordination and public awareness criteria. Project Selection Transportation projects, funded by direct allocation of Federal funds to a project sponsor, award of Federal funds via competitive grant, or wholly funded by the sponsor, are selected by the agency having jurisdiction over the project using their own criteria and submitted to the CAMPO Board of Directors for inclusion in the TIP. Transportation projects included within the TIP should be consistent with investment strategies discussed in the MTP. CAMPO no longer receives any type of discretionary funding for infrastructure projects. If such funds again become available, the following prioritization process is in place. Transportation projects, funded by sub-allocated Federal funds directly to CAMPO or otherwise made available for programming at the discretion of CAMPO, are selected based on competitive process approved by the CAMPO Board of Directors. This process involves a call for projects, ranking based on CAMPO priorities by staff, and review by the CAMPO Technical Committee, prior to being forwarded to the CAMPO Board of Directors for a vote of approval. The ranking process has unique evaluation criteria for different categories of projects – roadway/intersection, bridge, non-motorized, transit, and ‘other.’ TIP Development The TIP is updated every year and covers a 5-year period starting July 1 of each year. TIP development begins with a verification of status of projects in the current TIP, solicitation of new projects, and request for budget information from local jurisdictions. Local transit providers are also requested to provide information needed to develop their “Program of Projects” for inclusion in the TIP. CAMPO staff develops the financial plan, project listings, maintenance and operations, and other components of the TIP with support from the Technical Committee, member jurisdictions, MoDOT, FHWA, and FTA. Once the draft TIP is developed, it is presented to the Technical Committee for review and recommendation to the Board of Directors. A 25 day public comment period and public hearing are held prior to the Board of Directors approval of the TIP. The Board then requests approval of the TIP by the Governor and ONE DOT (consisting of FHWA and FTA). DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program 3 TIP Amendments and Administrative Modifications Between TIP updates, if projects need to be added, removed or changed, the TIP can be changed either by amendment or administrative modifications. Definitions of an amendment or an administrative modification, and information about public participation, notifications, and other procedures regarding amendments and administrative modifications, can be found in Appendix C – Policies and Procedures of this document. Appendix A contains a listing of amendments and administrative modifications that have occurred to this document. Previous Projects The TIP will include a listing of major projects from the previous TIP that were implemented and identify any significant delays in the planned implementation of major projects. Major projects are defined as transportation improvement projects receiving Federal financial assistance with an estimated total cost of $500 million or more or that have been identified by the FHWA as being a major project. No major projects were implemented, and no significant delays or projects from the previous TIP have been identified. Annual Listing of Obligated Projects The Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act (FAST Act) requires that CAMPO publish an annual listing of federally obligated projects. The Annual Listing of Projects is an index of projects which used Federal funds that were obligated in the preceding TIP program year. Obligated projects are consistent with the funding categories identified in the TIP. An obligation is the Federal government’s legal commitment to pay the Federal share of a project’s cost. An obligated project is one that has been authorized and funds have been obligated by a Federal agency. Obligated projects are not necessarily initiated or completed in the program year, and the amount of the obligation will not necessarily equal the total cost of the project. For Federal Transit Administration projects, obligation occurs when the grant is awarded. For Federal Highway Administration projects, obligation occurs when a project agreement is executed and the State/grantee requests that the funds be obligated. CAMPO publishes the Annual Listing of Obligated Projects yearly within 90 days of the previous TIP’s program year. The Annual Listing of Obligated Projects is posted on the CAMPO website at http://www.jeffersoncitymo.gov/campo. Air Quality Designation The United States Environmental Protection Agency has designated the CAMPO Metropolitan Planning Area as being in attainment for Ozone, Carbon Monoxide (CO), Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2), Small Particulate Matter (PM-2.5) Lead, and Sulfur Dioxide (SO2). Environmental Justice Executive Order 12898 requires agencies receiving federal funding to meaningfully address low-income and minority populations in their plans, programs, policies, and activities. CAMPO staff expects project sponsors to identify and mitigate any disproportionately high and adverse effects of federal transportation programs. DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program 4 Federal Performance Measures In the passage of the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21), and continuing into the FAST Act, Congress established Transportation Performance Management (TPM). FHWA defines TPM as a strategic approach that uses system information to make investment and policy decisions to achieve national performance goals. Another new requirement is Performance Based Planning and Programming (PBPP) which impacts the TIP and the MTP. PBPP refers to the application of performance management principles within the planning and programming processes of transportation agencies to achieve desired performance outcomes for the multimodal transportation system. To comply with these new requirements, the CAMPO Board of Directors adopted targets for four performance areas: the Transit Asset Management, Safety, Pavement and Bridge, and Travel Time Reliability and Freight Reliability. Transit Asset Management Measures MoDOT collected and evaluated existing buses and facilities to be included in the State Transit Asset Management Plan and used this information to set targets, which will be evaluated on an annual basis as inventory changes. JEFFTRAN opted to create its own Transit Asset Management Plan and set its own targets, which are identical to the state targets, as listed in Figure 2. Figure 2 – Transit Asset Management targets by MoDOT and JEFFTRAN JEFFTRAN TAM Plan Fiscal Year 2019 Targets Equipment: Non-revenue support-service and maintenance vehicles (exceeding $50,000 at purchase) N/A Rolling Stock: Revenue vehicles by mode and ULB*: Automobiles, Minivans, Vans 8 years 45% Cutaways 10 years 45% Buses 14 years 45% Facilities Administrative facilities and passenger stations 30% with a condition rating below 3.0 on FTA's TERM** Scale Maintenance facilities 25% with a condition rating below 3.0 on FTA's TERM Scale * ULB stands for Useful Life Benchmark ** TERM is a Federal Transit Administration Transit Economic Requirements Model which helps transit agencies assess their state of good repair backlog, level of annual investment to attain state of good repair, impact of variations in funding, and investment priorities. JEFFTRAN has its budget, fiscally constrained projects, and Program of Projects in this document. The agency has identified $125,000 that may be utilized for bus replacement and other capital projects to help JEFFTRAN move towards these targets. DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program 5 Safety Measures The Federal Highway Administration established five performance measures to assess performance and carry out the Highway Safety Improvement Program: (1) number of fatalities, (2) rate of fatalities per vehicle mile traveled (VMT), (3) number of serious injuries, (4) rate of serious injuries per VMT, and (5) number of combined non-motorized fatalities and non-motorized serious injuries. MoDOT established the following statewide safety targets in 2018, as seen in Figure 3, which were adopted by CAMPO. These targets are updated annually. Figure 3 – Safety Performance Measures set by MoDOT* Performance Measure 5-year Rolling Average (2013-2017) 5-Year Rolling Average Statewide Target for CY2019 Number of Fatalities 854.4 872.3 Fatality rate per 100 Million VMT 1.176 1.160 Number of Serious Injuries 4,756.4 4433.8 Serious Injury Rate per 100 Million VMT 6.566 6.168 Number of Non-Motorized Fatalities and Serious Injuries 441.3 445.4 * Targets based on the State Highway Safety Plan: Missouri Blueprint -A Partnership Towards Zero Deaths, a 9% fatality reduction, 5% serious injury reduction, 1% VMT increase and 4 % non-motorized reduction There are a number of projects programmed for safety in the TIP, totaling $20,199,000 for Program Years 2020-2024, all sponsored by the Central District of MoDOT, to help the State move towards these targets. CAMPO staff also actively participates in the Central District Coalition of Roadway Safety, which works to implement Missouri’s Blueprint ultimate goal of zero fatalities on Missouri roadways, and participates in the annual Highway Safety and Traffic Blueprint Conference. DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program 6 Pavement and Bridge Measures The Federal Highway Administration established 6 performance measures to assess pavement and bridge conditions: (1) percent of interstate pavements in Good condition, (2) percent of interstate pavements in Poor condition, (3) percent of non-interstate national highway system (NHS) pavements in Good condition, (4) percent of non-interstate NHS pavements in Poor condition, (5) percent of NHS bridges by deck area classified as Good condition, and (6) percent of NHS bridges by deck area classified as Poor condition. There are no interstate highways in the CAMPO region, so those targets are not addressed. MoDOT established the following statewide pavement and bridge targets in 2018, as seen in Figure 4, which shows the targets set by MoDOT and adopted by CAMPO. These targets may be updated every other year. Figure 4 – Applicable Pavement and Bridge Targets set by MoDOT Performance Measure 2017 Baseline 2019 Target 2021 Target Percentage of NHS Bridges in Good Condition 34.0% 30.9% 30.9% Percentage of NHS Bridges in Poor Condition 7.1% 7.1% 7.1% Percentage of non-Interstate NHS Pavements in Good Condition 61.1% 61.1% 61.1% Percentage of non-Interstate NHS Pavements in Poor Condition 1.0% 1.0% 1.0% Many projects in the TIP address Asset Management, a major priority for MoDOT. There are currently $54,407,000 projects in the 2020-2024 TIP that address either work on roads or bridges to maintain or update them which will help the state maintain these targets. Travel Time Reliability and Freight Reliability The Federal Highway Administration established 3 performance measures to assess travel time reliability and assessing freight movement on the interstate system: (1) Percent of Reliable Person-Miles Traveled on the Interstate, (2) Percent of Reliable Person-Miles Traveled on the Non-Interstate NHS, and (3) Truck Travel Time Reliability Index. There are no interstate highways in the CAMPO region, so targets one and three are not applicable to CAMPO. MoDOT established the following travel time reliability targets in 2018, as seen in Figure 5, which shows the targets set by MoDOT and adopted by CAMPO. This target may be updated every other year. Figure 5 – Applicable Travel Time Reliability Target set by MoDOT Performance Measure 2017 Baseline 2019 Target 2021 Target Non-Interstate Travel Time Reliability Measure: Percent of Reliable Person-Miles Traveled on the Non-Interstate NHS 92.3% - 87.8% There are currently no projects programmed into the 2020-2024 TIP with the sole purpose of improving travel time reliability. Several of the projects within the TIP address this target indirectly which will help the state with this target. DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program 7 Financial Plan The TIP includes a financial plan that demonstrates how the approved TIP can be implemented, and indicates resources from public and private sources that are reasonably expected to be made available to carry out the TIP. CAMPO, MoDOT, and public transportation operators cooperatively develop estimates of funds that are reasonably expected to be available to support TIP implementation. Only projects for which construction or operating funds can reasonably be expected to be available may be included. In developing the financial plan, CAMPO takes into account all projects and strategies funded under Title 23 U.S.C., Title 49 U.S.C. Chapter 53, and other federal funds, and regionally significant projects that are not federally funded. For purposes of transportation operations and maintenance, the financial plan shall contain system-level estimates of costs and revenue sources that are reasonably expected to be available to adequately operate and maintain Federal-aid highways (as defined by Title 23 U.S.C. 101(a)(5) and public transportation (as defined by Title 49 U.S.C. Chapter 53). Forecast Revenue Available for Transportation Funding Federal funding forecasts, provided by MoDOT based on published notices in the Federal Register, estimate fiscal year authorization levels by the FHWA and FTA under the current highway act. Appendix B briefly describes most of the Federal transportation programs which could fund projects in the CAMPO planning area. For Federally-funded projects, the TIP must identify the appropriate “matching funds” by source. The matching funds are usually provided by state and local governments. State revenue forecasts are also provided by MoDOT based on historical data of the State Fuel Tax, State Vehicle Sales and Use Tax and General Revenue. Local revenue forecast from the County Aid Road Trust (State Fuel Tax and State Vehicle Sales and Use Tax) for each jurisdiction are based on past distributions and are assumed to continue a trend of a two percent inflation rate. The City of Jefferson has a ½ cent sales tax to support its Capital Improvement Program and a ½ cent sales tax for Parks and Recreation, which supports greenways and other non-motorized transportation activities. The City of Jefferson has provided its own future revenue projections from these sources. Cole County has a ½ cent sales tax to support its Capital Improvement Program and a real property tax levy of $0.27 earmarked for Road & Bridges. All small cities get $100,000 every five years from Cole County, which comes from the aforementioned sales tax. Callaway County has a real property tax levy of $0.2466 earmarked for Road & Bridges. Outlined in Figure 6 are local forecasts of revenue sources for over the life of the TIP available for transportation projects. DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program 8 Figure 6 – Forecast Revenue for Transportation projects Note: CART (County Aid Road Trust) includes State Fuel Tax, Vehicle Sales/Use Tax and Licensing Fees based on 2018 numbers from MoDOT. There is a conservative two (2) percent increase per year, based on historical numbers. Please see more on CART funds here: http://dor.mo.gov/publicreports/index.php#motorfuel * This is distributed from Cole County ** Holts Summit now receives Lake Mykee's CART funds after the two communities merged in 2017. Local governments may use general revenue and other sources to match transportation grants awarded and may transfer funds from one account to another at their discretion. Callaway County 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Total CART $1,771,294 $1,806,720 $1,842,854 $1,879,711 $1,917,305 $9,217,884 Property Tax - Road & Bridge ($0.2466 levy)$1,900,000 $1,900,000 $1,900,000 $1,900,000 $1,900,000 $9,500,000 Transfer from general revenue $300,000 $300,000 $300,000 $300,000 $300,000 $1,500,000 Cole County CART $829,043 $845,624 $862,536 $879,787 $897,383 $4,314,372 Sales Tax $5,440,179 $5,440,179 $5,440,179 $5,440,179 $5,440,179 $27,200,895 Property Tax - Road & Bridge ($0.27 levy)$3,980,380 $3,980,380 $3,980,380 $3,980,380 $3,980,380 $19,901,900 Motor Vehicle Sales Tax $368,032 $368,032 $368,032 $368,032 $368,032 $1,840,160 Highway Bridge Program - Off-System (BRO)$103,885 $103,885 $103,885 $103,885 $103,885 $519,425 Holts Summit CART $151,038 $154,059 $157,140 $160,283 $163,488 $786,008 City of Jefferson CART $1,808,889 $1,845,067 $1,881,968 $1,919,607 $1,957,999 $9,413,530 Sales Tax - 1/2% Parks Sales Tax $4,951,878 $4,951,878 $4,951,878 $4,951,878 $4,951,878 $24,759,390 Sales Tax - 1/2% Capital Improvement (Expires March 2022)$1,420,000 $1,420,000 $1,420,000 $1,420,000 $1,420,000 $7,100,000 City of Jefferson - JEFFTRAN Farebox & Reimbursements $416,000 $395,200 $375,000 $356,000 $338,000 $1,880,200 Sales Tax - 1/2% Capital Improvement (Expires March 2022)$80,000 $80,000 $80,000 $80,000 $80,000 $400,000 FTA Section 5307 $810,661 $822,821 $835,163 $847,691 $860,406 $4,176,742 City of Jefferson - Local Operating Assistance $1,156,546 $1,179,677 $1,203,271 $1,227,336 $1,251,883 $6,018,713 MoDOT State Operating Assistance $11,500 $11,500 $11,500 $11,500 $11,500 $57,500 Capital Funds $125,000 $125,000 $125,000 $125,000 $125,000 $625,000 St. Martins CART $47,483 $48,908 $50,375 $51,887 $53,443 $252,096 General Revenue Funds $821,754 $184,870 $190,416 $196,128 $202,013 $1,595,181 Sales Tax - 1/2% Capital Improvement*$20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $100,000 Taos CART $36,867 $37,605 $38,357 $39,124 $39,906 $191,858 Sales Tax - 1/2% Capital Improvement* $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $100,000 Wardsville CART $63,237 $64,502 $65,792 $67,108 $68,450 $329,088 Sales Tax - 1/2% Capital Improvement* $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $100,000 OATS Passenger Fares, Misc.$5,000 $5,000 $5,100 $5,100 $5,100 $25,300 Local Contracts $40,000 $60,000 $75,000 $75,000 $75,000 $325,000 $132,304,826 Available Local Transportation Funds Total Local Funds DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program 9 Figure 7 shows the total programmed project funds and available project funds by source. The project costs have inflation factored in by each project sponsor. The instructions on the form used to submit a project for inclusion in the TIP reminds the project sponsor to take inflation into account when estimating the project’s cost. Since the last iteration of the MTP, the inflation factor for the TIP has been set as two percent. Figure 7 – Programmed Funds by Source. 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Total FHWA Adv. Con.$12,124,800 $3,351,200 $13,611,200 $0 $0 $29,087,200 FHWA NHPP $9,001,200 $4,694,600 $374,400 $0 $0 $14,070,200 FHWA HSIP $1,009,000 $13,007,000 $57,600 $0 $0 $14,073,600 FHWA STBG $3,030,400 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,030,400 FHWA TAP $397,456 $0 $0 $0 $0 $397,456 FHWA SHRP2 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 FHWA RTP $14,149 $14,148 $0 $0 $0 $28,297 FTA 5307 $810,661 $822,821 $835,163 $847,691 $860,406 $4,176,742 FTA 5310 $40,000 $160,000 $75,000 $175,000 $75,000 $525,000 FTA 5311 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 FTA 5329 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 FTA 5339 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 MoDOT AM $0 $0 $3,496,400 $0 $0 $3,496,400 MoDOT MPEN $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 MoDOT Safety $118,000 $1,592,000 $6,400 $0 $0 $1,716,400 MoDOT State Oper.$11,415 $11,415 $11,415 $11,415 $11,415 $57,075 MoDOT SWIMB $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 MoDOT TCOS $6,696,600 $1,158,200 $0 $0 $0 $7,854,800 MoDOT State Rail $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Jefferson City $1,157,296 $1,180,427 $1,203,271 $1,227,336 $1,251,883 $6,020,213 Cole County $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Oats $40,000 $60,000 $75,000 $75,000 $75,000 $325,000 Holts Summit $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 St. Martins $476,074 $0 $0 $0 $0 $476,074 Other $187,552 $236,401 $179,921 $231,670 $183,435 $1,018,979 $35,114,603 $26,288,212 $19,925,770 $2,568,112 $2,457,139 $86,353,836 Programmed Funds Total Programmed Total Federal State Local Yearly Totals DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program 10 Operations and Maintenance Maintenance costs include MoDOT’s salaries, materials and equipment needed to deliver the roadway and bridge maintenance programs. This category includes basic maintenance activities like minor surface treatments such as: sealing, small concrete repairs and pothole patching; mowing right of way; snow removal; replacing signs; striping; repairing guardrail; and repairing traffic signals. Performing these activities requires employees; vehicles and other machinery; and materials such as salt, asphalt and fuel. Maintenance operations expenditures are expected to increase 1.8% annually. This makes MoDOT’s cost, $4,870 per lane mile. Operations and Maintenance - Local Government Local revenue sources for operations and maintenance include state fuel tax, state vehicles sales/use tax, local sales taxes, franchise fees, license and permit fees, property taxes, and other revenue sources that provide significant resources for local general fund and specific funding of transportation. Not all taxes and fees go to transportation, so the local jurisdiction usually will identify a budget specifically for transportation purposes, such as capital improvements, Road and Bridge funds, transit operating subsidies, road and street budgets, or operations and maintenance budgets. The operations and maintenance costs for local governments include salaries, fringe benefits, materials, and equipment needed to deliver the street and bridge maintenance programs. This category includes basic maintenance activities like minor surface treatments such as sealing, small concrete repairs, pothole patching, mowing, snow removal, replacing signs, striping, and repairing traffic signals. These activities may be performed in-house or outsourced. Local government operations and maintenance on federal aid roads calculated for the system wide average of operations & maintenance per centerline mile is determined below in Figure 8. As a further demonstration of fiscal constraint, another requirement is that municipalities report their operations and maintenance budget. Reported below are Cole and Callaway Counties, Jefferson City, St. Martins, and MoDOT. Figure 8 – 2020 Operations and Maintenance costs for local jurisdictions Municipality Cost per lane mile Cole County $6,724 Callaway County $2,469 Jefferson City $5,888 St. Martins $5,435 MoDOT $4,870 DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program 11 Figure 9 shows the various roadway types in CAMPO’s MPA and the governing body that is responsible for maintenance. Figure 9 - Federal Aid Road Mileage by Jurisdiction. Source: CAMPO Functional Classification GIS Database. In addition to the local government operations and maintenance previously discussed, JEFFTRAN expenses also cover fleet repair/maintenance, repairing/replacing bus shelters, bus washing, bus maintenance facilities, public restrooms, and fuel. Figures 10 and 11 show the estimated expenditures for transit operations and maintenance for JEFFTRAN and OATs, respectively. Figure 10 - JEFFTRAN Estimated Expenditures for Operations & Maintenance. Operations and Maintenance revenue and expenditures are based on the most recently available budgets Figure 11 – OATS Estimated Expenditures for Operations & Maintenance. Urban Other Freeway Express way Urban Other Principal Arterial Urban Minor Arterial Urban Collector Rural Other Principal Arterial Rural Minor Arterial Rural Major Collector Total Percent of Total (Jurisdiction) Callaway County 2.3 2.9 0.9 6.1 2.89% Cole County 3.6 5.9 4.6 14.1 6.63% Holts Summit 3.1 4.1 0.5 7.6 3.61% City of Jefferson*4.3 37.4 23.6 65.3 30.83% MoDOT 34.6 8.7 18.2 11.9 5.4 5.3 32.7 116.8 55.13% St. Martins 1.5 0.5 1.9 0.91% Taos 0.0 0.00% Wardsville 0.0 0.00% Total (Functional Class)34.6 13.0 66.1 48.8 5.4 6.3 37.8 211.9 100.00% Percent (Functional Class)16.3% 6.1% 31.2% 23.0% 2.5% 3.0% 17.8% *Includes Parks & Rec. FY2020 FY2021 FY2022 FY2023 FY2024 Personnel Services 1,586,000$ 1,634,000$ 1,683,000 $ 1,733,000 $ 1,785,000$ Materials and Supplies 234,000$ 241,000$ 248,000$ 255,000$ 263,000$ Contractual Services 341,000$ 351,000$ 362,000$ 373,000$ 384,000$ Utilities 31,000$ 32,000$ 33,000$ 34,000$ 35,000$ Repairs and Maintenance 450,000$ 465,000$ 480,000$ 490,000$ 500,000$ Total 2,642,000$ 2,723,000$ 2,806,000 $ 2,885,000 $ 2,967,000$ Funding Sources 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 FTA-Section 5310 40,000$ 60,000$ 75,000$ 75,000$ 75,000$ Fares 5,000$ 5,000$ 5,100$ 5,100$ 5,100$ Local Contracts 40,000$ 60,000$ 75,000$ 75,000$ 75,000$ Total 85,000$ 125,000$ 155,100$ 155,100$ 155,100$ DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program 12 Financial Constraint To exhibit financial constraint, a financial plan should address three questions: 1) What will the needs for transportation in the CAMPO planning area cost? The needs are identified by project in the following section and costs are summarized by funding source in Figure 6. 2) What revenues are available that can be applied to the needs? Specific revenues available to meet the needs are identified in Figure 6 - Forecast Revenue for Transportation projects, Operations and Maintenance, by jurisdiction and source. 3) Are the revenues sufficient to cover the costs? As shown in Figure 7 – Programmed by Source, programmed fund amounts equal anticipated fund amounts. For many jurisdictions as shown in Figure 6, available funds exceed the amounts of revenues required to fund programmed projects. DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program 13 Fiscally Constrained Transportation Projects Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA NHPP $89,600 $86,400 $176,000 MoDOT TCOS $22,400 $21,600 $44,000 TIP #2018-01 Local $0 MoDOT#5S3261 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA NHPP $582,400 $582,400 MoDOT TCOS $145,600 $145,600 Local $0 Other $0 Total $112,000 $836,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $948,000 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA NHPP $204,800 $144,000 $393,600 $742,400 MoDOT TCOS $51,200 $36,000 $98,400 $185,600 TIP #2019-01 Local $0 MoDOT#5P3337 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA NHPP $3,542,400 $3,542,400 MoDOT TCOS $885,600 $885,600 Local $0 Other $0 Total $256,000 $180,000 $4,920,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $5,356,000 Comments: Project involves bridges A3451, A4265, and A4662. Award date 2020. Bridge Projects MoDOT Funding Prior Funding State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 Project Name: Total Project Cost: $948,000 Bridge Decksealing over Route 54 E N G Description & Location: Includes bridge decksealing on Route 94 over Little Tavern Creek in Callaway County and West Main over Route 54/63 in Cole County R O W C O N S T MoDOT Funding Prior Funding State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 Project Name: Bridge Improvements On US 54 Over Missouri River E N G Description & Location: Bridge improvements for both bridges over the Missouri River in Jefferson City. R O W C O N S T Comments: Project involves bridges A4497 and L0550. Total Project Cost: $5,356,000 DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program 14 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA NHPP $800 $16,000 $64,000 $100,800 $181,600 MoDOT TCOS $200 $4,000 $16,000 $20,200 TIP #2019-02 MoDOT AM $25,200 $25,200 MoDOT#5P2190 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA Adv. Con.$273,600 $273,600 MoDOT AM $68,400 $68,400 Local $0 Other $0 Total $1,000 $20,000 $80,000 $468,000 $0 $0 $0 $569,000 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA NHPP $93,600 $494,400 $588,000 MoDOT TCOS $23,400 $123,600 $147,000 TIP #2017-05 Local $0 MoDOT#5P3121 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA NHPP $5,070,400 $5,070,400 MoDOT TCOS $1,267,600 $1,267,600 Local $0 Other $0 Total $117,000 $6,956,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $7,073,000 MoDOT Project Name:US 54 Pavement Improvements E N G Comments: Award Date 2020. R O W Comments: Project involves bridge A5552. Total Project Cost: $569,000 Prior Funding Roadway Projects Funding C O N S T Total Project Cost: $7,073,000 Project Name: Bridge Preventative Maintenance On US 50 Over Osage River E N G Description & Location: Bridge preventative maintenance over the Osage River, 0.3 mile w est of the Route 63 junction. R O W C O N S T MoDOT Funding Prior Funding State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 Description & Location: Pavement resurfacing and guard cables installation on the eastbound and westbound lanes of US 54 from Route E to near Stadium Boulevard in Jefferson City. DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program 15 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA Adv. Con.$8,000 $11,200 $192,800 $212,000 MoDOT NHPP $2,000 $2,800 $48,200 $53,000 TIP #2019-03 Local $0 MoDOT#5P3333 MoDOT $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA Adv. Con.$2,585,600 $2,585,600 MoDOT NHPP $646,400 $646,400 Local $0 MoDOT $0 Total $10,000 $14,000 $3,473,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,497,000 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA NHPP $16,000 $439,200 $455,200 MoDOT TCOS $4,000 $109,800 $113,800 TIP #2019-06 Local $0 MoDOT#5P3371 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA NHPP $2,165,600 $2,165,600 MoDOT TCOS $541,400 $541,400 Local $0 Other $0 Total $20,000 $3,256,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,276,000 Project Name:Guard Cables Along US 54 E N G Description & Location: Guard cable improvements from Miller County to near Stadium Blvd. in Jefferson City R O W C O N S T Comments: Award date Fall 2019 Prior Funding State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 Project Name:Pavement Resurfacing on US 50 E N G Total Project Cost: $3,497,000 MoDOT Funding Description & Location: Pavement resurfacing east of West Truman Blvd. to east of Kaylor Bridge Road, all lanes and from east of Route M to east of Stoney Gap Road R O W C O N S T Comments: Anticipated federal reimbursement f rom NHPP. MoDOT Funding Prior Funding State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 Total Project Cost: $3,276,000 DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program 16 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 TIP #2020-01 Local St. Martins $62,382 $62,382 MoDOT#9901515 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA TAP $397,456 $397,456 MoDOT $0 Local St. Martins $413,692 $413,692 Other $0 Total $0 $873,530 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $873,530 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA Adv. Con.$4,000 $36,000 $927,200 $967,200 MoDOT AM $231,800 $231,800 TIP #2020-03 MoDOT TCOS $1,000 $9,000 $10,000 MoDOT#5P3409 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA Adv. Con.$12,684,000 $12,684,000 MoDOT AM $3,171,000 $3,171,000 MoDOT $0 Other $0 Total $0 $5,000 $45,000 $17,014,000 $0 $0 $0 $17,064,000 R O W C O N S T Comments: TAP grant awardee. Working with Cole County to complete the project Total Project Cost: $873,530 MoDOT St. Martins Funding Prior Funding State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 Project Name: Business 50 W Bike/Ped/ADA Improvements E N G Description & Location: Addition of 8-foot wide asphalt bike/ped lanes for 1.1 miles in each direction along Business 50 West from Rt. T/D to west of Carel Rd. Total Project Cost: $17,064,000 Funding Prior Funding State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 Project Name:Pavement Improvements on US 63 E N G Description & Location: Pavement improvements on US 63 from Route B to US Route 54. R O W C O N S T Comments: Anticipated federal funding category: NHPP. Award Date 2022. DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program 17 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA HSIP $46,000 $148,800 $194,800 MoDOT Safety $11,000 $37,200 $48,200 TIP #2020-04 Local $0 MoDOT#5I3408 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA HSIP $908,000 $908,000 MoDOT Safety $227,000 $227,000 Local $0 Other $0 Total $0 $57,000 $1,321,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,378,000 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA Adv. Con.$361,600 $361,600 MoDOT TCOS $90,400 $90,400 TIP #2020-13 Local $0 MoDOT#5P3426 Other $0 FHWA Adv. Con.$4,000 $4,000 MoDOT TCOS $1,000 $1,000 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA Adv. Con.$987,200 $987,200 MoDOT TCOS $246,800 $246,800 Local $0 Other $0 Total $0 $1,691,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,691,000 Funding Prior Funding State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 Project Name:Upgrading Signalization E N G Description & Location: Upgrade signals at CC and at Rte. C and CC in Cole County and at Rte. OO and Summit Drive in Callaway County R O W C O N S T Comments: Anticipated federal funding category: STBG. Award Date 2020. MoDOT Total Project Cost: $1,691,000 Description & Location: High Friction surface treatment at various locations in Boone, Morgan, Washington, Cooper, Callaway, and Cole Counties R O W C O N S T Comments: Anticipated federal funding category: HSIP. Award Date 2020. Total Project Cost: $1,378,000 MoDOT Funding Prior Funding State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 Project Name:High Friction Surface Treatments E N G DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program 18 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA HSIP $45,900 $900 $900 $47,700 MoDOT Safety $5,100 $100 $100 $5,300 TIP #2013-16 Local $0 MoDOT#5S2234 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 Total $51,000 $1,000 $1,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $53,000 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA $0 MoDOT TCOS $8,800 $8,800 TIP #2018-06 Local $0 MoDOT#5P3405 FHWA Adv. Con.$35,200 $35,200 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT TCOS $120,000 $120,000 Local $0 MoDOT Adv. Con.$480,000 $480,000 Total $0 $644,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $644,000 Comments: Anticipated federal funding category: Safety. Guard Cable & Guardrail Repair in Northern Central District E N G Project Name: C O N S T Description & Location: Scoping for safety improvements at the intersection of Route M and Route W in Wardsville. R O W Other Projects MoDOT State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 Project Name:Scoping Routes M, B & W E N G C O N S T Comments: Award Date Spring 2019. Anticipated federal reimbursement from STBG. Total Project Cost: $644,000 Description & Location: Job order contracting for guard cables and guardrail repair on v arious routes in the northern portion of the Central District. Total Project Cost: $53,000 R O W State Program Year - July 1 to June 30FundingPrior FundingMoDOT Prior Funding Funding DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program 19 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA STBG $52,800 $800 $53,600 MoDOT TCOS $13,200 $200 $13,400 TIP #2015-07 MoDOT $0 MoDOT#5S3081 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 Total $66,000 $1,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $67,000 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA $0 MoDOT TCOS $15,000 $15,000 $30,000 TIP #2018-08 Local $0 MoDOT#5P3402 MoDOT $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 MoDOT $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 MoDOT $0 Total $0 $15,000 $15,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $30,000 Project Name: MoDOT E N G Description & Location: Surveying to sell excess right of way parcels in the Central District. R O W Total Project Cost: $30,000 Comments: No federal funds used for this project. Description & Location: Scoping for slide repairs in the northern portion of the Central District at various locations. MoDOT Project Name:Surveying Funding Prior Funding State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 Total Project Cost: $67,000 Slide Repair Scoping C O N S T Comments: Anticipated Federal Funding Category - STBG. Future construction cost $2 million - 5 million. State Program Year - July 1 to June 30Prior Funding Funding R O W E N G C O N S T DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program 20 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA $0 MoDOT TCOS $14,000 $127,400 $141,400 TIP #2018-02 Local $0 MoDOT#5S3230 FHWA STBG $56,000 $509,600 $565,600 FHWA $0 MoDOT TCOS $2,000 $2,000 Local $0 MoDOT STBG $8,000 $8,000 FHWA $0 MoDOT TCOS $628,000 $628,000 Local $0 FHWA STBG $2,512,000 $2,512,000 Total $70,000 $3,787,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,857,000 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA $0 MoDOT TCOS $1,000 $10,800 $11,800 TIP #2020-05 Local $0 MoDOT#5S3386 FHWA Adv. Con.$4,000 $43,200 $47,200 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT TCOS $123,200 $123,200 Local $0 FHWA Adv. Con.$492,800 $492,800 Total $0 $5,000 $670,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $675,000 Description & Location: Pavement resurfacing and adding rumble stripes from Rte. B to Rte. 50 and on Rte. E from Rte. 54 to Rte. B. R O W C O N S T State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 Project Name:Pavement improvements on Route M E N G MoDOT Funding Total Project Cost: $675,000 State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 Total Project Cost: $3,857,000 Prior Funding R O W C O N S T Comments: Comments: Potential ADA improvements in Taos. Award date 2020. Anticipated Federal Funds: STBG. Project Name:Pavement improvements on Route U E N G Description & Location: Pavement & guardrail improvements on Rte. U. Includes Route Y from Route M in Taos, Rte W from Rte. B in Wardsville, and Rte.J from 50. MoDOT Funding Prior Funding DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program 21 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA $0 MoDOT TCOS $10,000 $400 $10,400 TIP #2018-09 Local $0 MoDOT#5P3254 FHWA Adv. Con.$40,000 $1,600 $41,600 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 Total $50,000 $2,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $52,000 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA HSIP $900 $900 MoDOT Safety $100 $100 TIP #2019-05 Local $0 MoDOT#5P3313 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA HSIP $56,700 $56,700 MoDOT Safety $6,300 $6,300 Local $0 Other $0 Total $0 $64,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $64,000 Funding Prior Funding State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 R O W E N G C O N S T R O W C O N S T Description & Location: Scoping for ADA improvements at various locations in Chamois, Frankenstein, Route M in Taos, and Route W in Wardsville. Total Project Cost: $52,000 Project Name:On-call Work Zone Enforcement Description & Location: On-call work zone enforcement at various locations in the Central District. Comments: Anticipated Federal Category - STBG. Includes sidewalks, curb ramps, entrances, and signals MoDOT Funding Prior Funding State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 MoDOT Project Name: Scoping for ADA Improvements in Various Locations E N G Total Project Cost: $64,000 Comments: 90/10 match, using federal and MoDOT safety funds. DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program 22 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA HSIP $900 $900 MoDOT Safety $100 $100 TIP #2020-08 Local $0 MoDOT#5P3406 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA HSIP $56,700 $56,700 MoDOT Safety $6,300 $6,300 Local $0 Other $0 Total $0 $0 $64,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $64,000 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA HSIP $900 $900 MoDOT Safety $100 $100 TIP #2020-09 Local $0 MoDOT#5P3407 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA HSIP $56,700 $56,700 MoDOT Safety $6,300 $6,300 Local $0 Other $0 Total $0 $0 $0 $64,000 $0 $0 $0 $64,000 Description & Location: On-call work zone enforcement at various locations in the Central District. Comments: 90/10 match, using federal and MoDOT safety funds. Total Project Cost: $64,000 Project Name:On-call Work Zone Enforcement Funding Prior Funding State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 E N G R O W C O N S T Total Project Cost: $64,000 On-call Work Zone Enforcement E N G Description & Location: On-call work zone enforcement at various locations in the Central District. R O W C O N S T Comments: 90/10 match, using federal and MoDOT safety funds. MoDOT Funding Prior Funding State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 Project Name: MoDOT DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program 23 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA Adv. Con.$120,000 $800 $120,800 MoDOT TCOS $30,000 $200 $30,200 TIP #2020-11 Local $0 MoDOT#5S3421 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 Total $0 $150,000 $1,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $151,000 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA HSIP $4,500 $4,500 $9,000 MoDOT Safety $500 $500 $1,000 TIP #2020-12 Local $0 MoDOT#5S3418 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 Total $0 $5,000 $5,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $10,000 Funding Prior Funding Project Name:Scoping on S. Ten Mile Drive E N G MoDOT E N G Description & Location: Traffic safety studies at various locations in Central District R O W Description & Location: Scoping for intersection safety improvements at South Ten Mile Drive in Jefferson City R O W C O N S T Comments: Total Project Cost: $10,000 C O N S T Comments: Total Project Cost: $151,000 MoDOT Funding State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 Project Name:Traffic Safety Studies Prior Funding State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program 24 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA HSIP $248,400 $540,000 $1,041,300 $1,829,700 MoDOT Safety $27,600 $60,000 $115,700 $203,300 TIP #2020-14 Local $0 MoDOT#5P3222 Other $0 FHWA HSIP $4,500 $4,500 MoDOT Safety $500 $500 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA HSIP $4,764,600 $4,764,600 MoDOT Safety $529,400 $529,400 Local $0 Other $0 Total $276,000 $600,000 $6,456,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $7,332,000 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA HSIP $18,900 $360,000 $1,331,100 $1,710,000 MoDOT Safety $2,100 $40,000 $147,900 $190,000 TIP #2020-15 Local $0 MoDOT#5P3195 Other $0 FHWA HSIP $9,000 $9,000 MoDOT Safety $1,000 $1,000 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA HSIP $4,736,700 $4,736,700 MoDOT Safety $526,300 $526,300 Local $0 Other $0 Total $21,000 $400,000 $6,752,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $7,173,000 C O N S T Comments: Total Project Cost: $7,173,000 Total Project Cost: $7,332,000 MoDOT Project Name:Intersection Improvements E N G Description & Location: Intersection safety improvements at various locations in Miller and Cole County, including median openings on US 54. R O W C O N S T Comments: Funding Prior Funding State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 MoDOT Funding Prior Funding State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 Project Name:Intersection Improvements E N G Description & Location: Intersection safety improvements at various locations in Boone and Callaway County. R O W DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program 25 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 TIP #2020-02 Local ORTA $2,865 $2,865 MoDOT#Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA RTP $14,149 $14,148 $28,297 Local ORTA $7,060 $7,060 $14,120 Local COJ - P&R $750 $750 $1,500 Local Private $1,250 $1,250 $2,500 Total $0 $26,074 $23,208 $0 $0 $0 $0 $49,282 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA Adv. Con. $247,200 $1,753,600 $2,000,800 MoDOT TCOS $61,800 $438,400 $500,200 TIP #2020-16 Local $0 MoDOT#5S3369 Other $0 FHWA Adv. Con.$328,800 $328,800 MoDOT TCOS $82,200 $82,200 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA Adv. Con.$8,550,400 $8,550,400 MoDOT TCOS $2,137,600 $2,137,600 Local $0 Other $0 Total $309,000 $13,291,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $13,600,000 Description & Location: Upgrade pedestrian facilities to comply with the ADA Transition Plan at various locations in the Central District. R O W C O N S T Comments: $7,130,000 Statewide Transportation Alternatives funds. Potential Design/Build project. Comments: Monetary donations provided by City of Jefferson Parks and Recreation Department and Midwest Block & Brick MoDOT Funding Prior Funding State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 Project Name:Updating Pedestrian Facilities E N G Pedestrian & Bicycle Projects Description & Location: Construction of 1.3 mi of singletrack trail, features & signage, and 0.4 mi. kid's loop trail. R O W C O N S T Binder Bike Park Phase 1 E N G Total Project Cost: $49,282 Total Project Cost: $13,600,000 Funding Prior Funding State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 Project Name: Osage Region Trail Association DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program 26 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals Other Pass. Fares $171,377 $173,091 $174,821 $176,570 $178,335 $874,194 MoDOT State Operating $11,415 $11,415 $11,415 $11,415 $11,415 $57,075 TIP #2011-04 Local General Fund $1,156,546 $1,179,677 $1,203,271 $1,227,336 $1,251,883 $6,018,713 MoDOT#FTA 5307 $810,661 $822,821 $835,163 $847,691 $860,406 $4,176,742 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 Total $0 $2,149,999 $2,187,004 $2,224,670 $2,263,012 $2,302,039 $0 $11,126,724 O P E R Project Name:Operating Assistance State Program Year - July 1 to June 30Prior Funding Public Transportation Projects Funding Description & Location: Operating Assistance for JEFFTRAN service w ithin city limits of Jefferson City (A 3% annual inflation factor applied.) City of Jefferson - JEFFTRAN R O W C O N S T Comments: Total Project Cost: $11,126,724 DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program 27 Figure 12 - Map of Fiscally Constrained Transportation Projects DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program 28 Program of Projects - OATS Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA 5310 $100,000 $100,000 $200,000 MoDOT $0 TIP #2018-10 Local $0 MoDOT#Other OATS $50,000 $50,000 $100,000 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 Total $0 $0 $150,000 $0 $150,000 $0 $0 $300,000 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FTA 5310 $30,770 $40,000 $60,000 $75,000 $75,000 $75,000 $355,770 MoDOT $0 TIP #2018-11 Local $30,770 $40,000 $60,000 $75,000 $75,000 $75,000 $355,770 MoDOT#Other $4,900 $5,000 $5,000 $5,100 $5,100 $5,100 $30,200 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 Total $66,440 $85,000 $125,000 $155,100 $155,100 $155,100 $0 $741,740 Description & Location: Requesting replacement/expansion vehicles to provide s ervice in Jefferson City and surrounding area Total Project Cost: $741,740 OATS Project Name:Operating Assistance O P E R Capital Funding - Vehicles C A P I T Funding R O W C O N S T Comments: Other Funding - OATS, Inc. Total Project Cost: $300,000 OATS Project Name: State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 Prior Funding State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 Description & Location: Within the Jefferson City MPO Region-Section 5310-Seniors and Individuals w ith Disablilities R O W C O N S T Comments: Other Funding - OATS, Inc. Funding Prior Funding DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program 29 Figure 13 - Program of Projects - JEFFTRAN Item Description Total Funding by Others Local 1 Replace paratransit widebody cutaway buses 150,000$ $ 120,000 30,000$ 2 Replace paratransit software and associated hardware 30,000$ 24,000$ 6,000$ 3 Replace low-floor minivan support vehicle 40,000$ -$ 40,000$ 4 Replace transit administration vehicle 30,000$ 30,000$ 5 Upgrade/replace fare card system 300,000$ 240,000$ 60,000$ 6 Repair Transfer Facility Roof (Bus Transfer Shelter)12,000$ -$ 12,000$ 7 Transit facility improvements--ridge cap/flashing replacements/roof repair on bus barn 50,000$ 40,000$ 10,000$ 8 Security upgrades for transit facilities 30,000$ 24,000$ 6,000$ 9 Replace outdated bus security camera systems 60,000$ 48,000$ 12,000$ 10 Update/revise Transit facilities feasability study 150,000$ -$ 150,000$ 11 Purchase and install bus shelters at various locations in Jefferson City 30,000$ 24,000$ 6,000$ 12 Transit facility improvements, including replace overhead doors and door operators 95,000$ 76,000$ 19,000$ 13 JEFFTRAN lighted signs for exterior of transit facilities 15,000$ 12,000$ 3,000$ 14 Purchase emergency back-up generator & switches for transit and CM facilities 100,000$ 80,000$ 20,000$ 15 Replace low-floor route buses 3,000,000$ 2,400,000$ 600,000$ 16 Construct new new transit and central maintenace facilities 7,000,000$ 5,600,000$ 1,400,000$ 17 Transit admin facility rehab 50,000$ 40,000$ 10,000$ 18 Purchase and install additional transit traveler kiosks (each)15,000$ 12,000$ 3,000$ 19 Add bike racks at passenger transfer facilities and selected bus stops 5,000$ -$ 5,000$ 20 Enhance/replace security systems for buses and transit facilities 20,000$ 16,000$ 4,000$ 21 Charging systems/electrical upgrades for buses 100,000$ 80,000$ 20,000$ 22 Add crosswalks to various locations around the city 60,000$ -$ 60,000$ 23 Rehabilitate/replace bus wash facility 100,000$ 80,000$ 20,000$ JEFFTRAN Program of Projects Illustrative Projects DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program 30 Multimodal Projects In 2015, CAMPO met with federal and state planning partners in a formal planning process review. Within two recommendations made, CAMPO was urged to include more multi-modal projects into the TIP. CAMPO staff sent out written requests and reminders at CAMPO meetings for projects, including those not using federal dollars. As of the writing of this document, no projects have been submitted. However, there are a number of factors why these projects are limited. These types of projects are usually incorporated into new road projects. Many of these types of projects are highly dependent on grants, which may or may not be annually awarded. Projects are usually decided each budget year. There are several bicycle or pedestrian projects in the MTP illustrative list, but projects are not constrained and funds are not obligated. Regionally Significant Projects In 2020, MoDOT has proposed a rehabilitation of the Rocheport Bridge, located along Interstate 70 over the Missouri River between Boone and Howard Counties. During the duration of this project, travel inside the CAMPO region will be affected. I-70, and thus Rocheport Bridge, is at the heart of national and regional distribution carrying approximately 100 million tons of freight, worth more than $154 billion, annually. More than 20 percent of this freight is through-traffic, traveling from rural areas in the west on to New York, New England, and the Mid-Atlantic. Rocheport Bridge is 60 years old and will only last 10 more years, even with the planned rehabilitation. Rehabilitation of Rocheport Bridge will require closing two lanes for seven to nine months, with predicted traffic modeling of three to eight hour backups. Rocheport Bridge carries 12.5 million vehicles per year, including 3.6 million trucks. While the surrounding area is rural, there are a number of mid-sized cities within close proximity to the bridge – including Columbia and Jefferson City – and it connects Missouri’s two largest cities of St. Louis and Kansas City. During traffic delays, long distance trucking would likely divert to Arkansas or Iowa to move across the U.S., while local traffic is expected to re-route on US Routes 40, 36, 63 and 50. DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program 31 Appendix A – Amendments and Administrative Modifications Amendments TIP No. Project Description Project Sponsor Project Cost Board Approval OneDOT Approval TIP Amendment 1 Administrative Modifications TIP No. Project Description Project Sponsor Project Cost Date DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program 32 Appendix B – Federal Funding Sources FHWA Programs Eligible Activities National Highway Performance Program (NHPP) https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/fastact/factsheets/nhppfs.pd f The NHPP provides support for the condition and performance of the National Highway System (NHS), for the construction of new facilities on the NHS, and to ensure that investments of Federal-aid funds in highway construction are directed to support progress toward the achievement of performance targets established in a State's asset management plan for the NHS. Surface Transportation Program (STP) https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/fastact/factsheets/stbgfs.pdf The Surface Transportation Program (STP) provides flexible funding that may be used by States and localities for projects to preserve and improve the conditions and performance on any Federal-aid highway, bridge and tunnel projects on any public road, pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure, and transit capital projects, including intercity bus terminals. Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/hsip/ Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) is to support a significant reduction in traffic fatalities and serious injuries on all public roads, including non-State-owned public roads and roads on tribal lands Transportation Alternatives (TA) https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/fastact/factsheets/transporta tionalternativesfs.pdf The FAST Act eliminates the MAP-21 Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP) and replaces it with a set-aside of Surface Transportation Block Grant (STBG) program funding for transportation alternatives (TA). These set-aside funds include all projects and activities that were previously eligible under TAP. Railway-Highway Crossings (set-aside from HSIP) https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/fastact/factsheets/railwayhw ycrossingsfst.pdf This program funds safety improvements to reduce the number of fatalities, injuries, and crashes at public grade crossings. FTA Programs Eligible Activities Section 5307 Urbanized Area Formula Grants https://www.transit.dot.gov/funding/grants/urbanized- area-formula-grants-5307 This program provides grants to Urbanized Areas (UZA) for public transportation capital, planning, job access and reverse commute projects, as well as operating expenses in certain circumstances. Section 5310 Enhanced Mobility of Seniors and Individuals with Disabilities https://www.transit.dot.gov/funding/grants/enhanced- mobility-seniors-individuals-disabilities-section-5310 This program is intended to enhance mobility for seniors and persons with disabilities by providing funds for programs to serve the special needs of transit-dependent populations beyond traditional public transportation services and Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) complementary paratransit services. Section 5311 Formula Grants for Rural Areas https://www.transit.dot.gov/rural-formula-grants-5311 This program provides capital, planning, and operating assistance to states to support public transportation in rural areas with populations less than 50,000, where many residents often rely on public transit to reach their destinations. Section 5329 Transit Safety & Oversight https://www.transit.dot.gov/sites/fta.dot.gov/files/docs /5329_Safety_Program_Fact_Sheet.pdf This section requires FTA to implement and maintain a national public transportation safety program to improve the safety of all public transportation systems that receive federal funding. The safety program includes a national public transportation safety plan, a safety certification training program, a public transportation agency safety plan, and a state safety oversight program. Section 5339 Bus and Bus Facilities https://www.transit.dot.gov/funding/grants/busprogram Provides capital funding to replace, rehabilitate and purchase buses and related equipment and to construct bus-related facilities. DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program 33 Appendix C – Policies and Procedures Amendments An amendment involves a major change to a project and requires approval by the Board of Directors and Governor. An amendment is a revision that requires public review, allowance of comment, possible re- demonstration of fiscal constraint, and includes at least one of the following: • Addition or deletion of a project using FHWA or FTA funds (except as allowed as an administrative modification), • Major changes affecting project cost from FHWA or FTA sources (changes exceeding 20% of FHWA or FTA sources of the existing project cost or changes over $2,000,000), • Major changes in a project phase initiation date (greater than 12 months), or • Major changes in design concept or design scope, such as changing project termini (more than 1/2 mile or 10% of the total length of the project, whichever is greater) or changing the number of through traffic lanes that also includes a substantial increase in Federal cost. Amendments will be initiated by the project sponsor. Amendments to delete a project can simply be made via written correspondence identifying the project and why it is to be removed from the TIP. Amendments to include a new project can be made on the TIP Project Form for the current TIP with a cover letter or remark in the comment section requesting inclusion in the TIP as an amendment. Amendments for existing projects can be made on the TIP Project Form for the current TIP with a cover letter or remark in the comment section highlighting the change in the project and providing the CAMPO TIP Number. After an Amendment has been requested the process as follows: • Staff will review the amendment for accuracy and to verify if an amendment is required or if the change qualifies as an administrative modification. Staff may consult with MoDOT and FHWA if necessary. • The amendment will be placed on the next Technical Committee (TC) meeting agenda for review. • The Technical Committee is an advisory board to the board of directors. Regardless of whether the Technical Committee recommends approval of a project, does not recommend approval of a project, or is unable to make a recommendation, the project shall still proceed to the Board of Directors to make a final decision. • If approval is recommended by the TC to the Board of Directors, staff will post the amendment notice on the website, initiating a minimum 7 calendar day public comment period, send notices to the appropriate parties, and place the amendment on the next Board of Directors meeting agenda. • At the Board of Directors Meeting, a public hearing will close the public comment period and a vote for approval will be held. If the project sponsor indicates an emergency situation upon submitting the amendment, staff will initiate the public comment period, staff will post the amendment notice on the website, initiating a minimum 7 calendar day public comment period, send notices to the appropriate parties, and place the amendment on the next Board of Directors meeting agenda. A public hearing will close the public comment period at the next Board of Directors Meeting and hold a vote for approval. If this is not adequate to meet the emergency situation, a special Board of Directors meeting may be called and proceed as outlined in the Public Participation Plan. DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program 34 Administrative Modifications Revisions to the TIP and TIP projects that do not meet the criteria of an Amendment will be considered administrative modifications including: minor changes to project/project phase costs, minor changes to funding sources of previously-included projects, and minor changes to project/project phase initiation dates. An administrative modification is a revision that neither requires committee action, public review and comment, nor redemonstrates fiscal constraint. An administrative modification will be initiated by the project sponsor by written communication to CAMPO staff describing the change (phase cost, funding sources, or phase initiation date) warranting the modification. Staff will review the administrative modification for accuracy and to verify qualification as an administrative modification. Staff may consult with MoDOT and FHWA if necessary. Upon CAMPO staff confirmation of the administrative modification requirements being met, staff will modify the TIP appropriately, including noting the administrative modification in Appendix A of the TIP and making changes to the project listing in the body of the TIP; notify the Board of Directors, Technical Committee, MoDOT, FTA, and FHWA via email; draft a staff memo for the next Board of Directors and Technical Committee meeting; and post the modified TIP notice on the CAMPO website for a minimum of 7 calendar days. Combining or Splitting Projects Splitting a project into two or more projects or combining two or more projects can provide benefits to project scheduling, cost, and logistics. A split or combination can be made via an administrative modification to the TIP, if the project does not trigger a major change to the project as described in the amendment section and the overall scope of work does not change. When combining two or more projects, the financial and description information will be rolled up into the project which was in the TIP originally and use the previous MPO TIP number. When splitting a project into two or more projects, the financial and descriptive information will be separated appropriately into several (two or more) projects using the same MPO TIP number, but the additional projects will include alphabetic suffixes. The process for splitting or combining projects will follow the procedures of either an amendment or administrative modification. Compliance with Metropolitan Transportation Plan For a project to be eligible for the TIP, it first must be included in the adopted MTP. Large capital projects, roadway capacity, and/or general purpose roadway projects must be individually listed or clearly part of a larger project included in the fiscally‐constrained component of the plan. Certain projects seeking to improve safety, increase multi‐modal opportunities, or enhance the existing transportation system may be programmed in the TIP without individual identification in the regional plan, so long as they are consistent with the established goals and objectives of the plan. Project Delay Policy The goal of the Project Delay Policy for the Transportation Improvement Program is to maximize the federal funding obligated each fiscal year and to enable the MPO to redirect funds to different projects if any are inactive or otherwise limited from making progress. The Delay Policy applies to projects funded through the programs for which CAMPO has oversight of project selection. The intent of the Delay Policy is to provide an incentive for local agency sponsors to develop their projects according to a detailed schedule and, thereby, to obligate the federal funds assigned to each project DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program 35 within the timeframes initially shown in the TIP. The Delay Policy is primarily focused on projects that involve construction or provide transportation improvements that are handled through purchasing procedures. In the context of this Delay Policy, a “delay” occurs when a construction-related project phase does not get advertised within six months of the TIP program year in which its construction phase funding was originally programmed, or changed with an amendment, in the TIP. For non-construction projects and programs, a “delay” occurs when the “Notice to Proceed” is not issued within two months of the TIP program year in which its implementation was originally funded in the TIP. The consequence of a delay may be the withdrawal of its Federal funds from the TIP or other action by the Board. Project Funding Information When a new project is submitted for inclusion to the TIP, either during the initial development of the TIP or as an amendment, the project sponsor is required to provide information regarding the local funding sources in order to show fiscal constraint. The specific source of revenue, anticipated future, and any other financial information needed to show fiscal constraint will be required. Project Selection The CAMPO Board of Directors adopted (Resolution 2010-04) a project prioritization and selection process. This process involves a call for projects, ranking based on CAMPO priorities by staff and reviewed by the CAMPO Technical Committee, prior to being forwarded to the CAMPO Board of Directors for a vote of approval. The Board of Directors may modify the project selection it deems necessary. Project Sponsor Commitment to Projects Project sponsors hold ultimate responsibility for ensuring that project information contained in the TIP is correct, that it accurately represents the scope of work being performed, and that the amount of funding being requested is correct. The sponsor is responsible for providing CAMPO with an honest accounting of project details including: costs, implementation schedules, and local matching fund sources, at the time of the application for federal funds and anytime such details change. The project sponsor is also responsible for reviewing the TIP after a project is included or modified to ensure correctness. Scriveners’ Error Errors made the in the ministerial functions of creating and maintaining the TIP, such as cartography, typographical, spelling, minor word omissions, mathematical, and other error’s which do not alter the intent of the TIP and have little or no impact can be performed by staff and shall not be considered a revision to the TIP. DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program 36 Appendix D – Definitions Attainment area means any geographic area in which levels of a given criteria air pollutant (e.g., ozone, carbon monoxide, PM10, PM2.5, and nitrogen dioxide) meet the health-based National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for that pollutant. An area may be an attainment area for one pollutant and a nonattainment area for others. A maintenance area (see definition below) is not considered an attainment area for transportation planning purposes. Available funds means funds derived from an existing source dedicated to or historically used for transportation purposes. For Federal funds, authorized and/or appropriated funds and the extrapolation of formula and discretionary funds at historic rates of increase are considered available. A similar approach may be used for State and local funds that are dedicated to or historically used for transportation purposes. Conformity means a Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7506(c)) requirement that ensures that Federal funding and approval are given to transportation plans, programs and projects that are consistent with the air quality goals established by a State Implementation Plan (SIP). Conformity, to the purpose of the SIP, means that transportation activities will not cause new air quality violations, worsen existing violations, or delay timely attainment of the NAAQS. The transportation conformity rule (40 CFR part 93) sets forth policy, criteria, and procedures for demonstrating and assuring conformity of transportation activities. Cooperation means that the parties involved in carrying out the transportation planning and programming processes work together to achieve a common goal or objective. Coordination means the cooperative development of plans, programs, and schedules among agencies and entities with legal standing and adjustment of such plans, programs, and schedules to achieve general consistency, as appropriate. Design concept means the type of facility identified for a transportation improvement project (e.g., freeway, expressway, arterial highway, grade separated highway, toll road, reserved right-of-way rail transit, mixed-traffic rail transit, or busway). Design scope means the aspects that will affect the proposed facility’s impact on the region, usually as they relate to vehicle or person carrying capacity and control (e.g., number of lanes or tracks to be constructed or added, length of project, signalization, safety features, access control including approximate number and location of interchanges, or preferential treatment for high occupancy vehicles). Financial Plan means documentation required to be included with a metropolitan transportation plan and TIP (and optional for the long-range statewide transportation plan and STIP) that demonstrates the consistency between reasonably available and projected sources of Federal, State, local, and private revenues and the costs of implementing proposed transportation system improvements. Financially Constrained or Fiscal Constraint means that the metropolitan transportation plan, TIP, and STIP includes sufficient financial information for demonstrating that projects in the metropolitan transportation plan, TIP, and STIP can be implemented using committed, available, or reasonably available revenue sources, with reasonable assurance that the federally supported transportation system is being adequately operated and maintained. For the TIP and the STIP, financial constraint/fiscal constraint applies to each program year. Additionally, projects in air quality nonattainment and maintenance areas can be included in the first two years of the TIP and STIP only if funds are available or committed. Illustrative Project means an additional transportation project that may (but is not required to) be included in a financial plan for a metropolitan transportation plan, TIP, or STIP if reasonable additional resources were to become available. Maintenance Area means any geographic region of the United States that the EPA previously designated as a nonattainment area for one or more pollutants pursuant to the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, and subsequently redesignated as an attainment area subject to the requirement to develop a maintenance plan under section 175A of the Clean Air Act, as amended. Major Projects - These transportation improvements are defined as projects receiving Federal financial assistance 1) with an estimated total cost of $500 million or more or 2) that have been identified by the FHWA as being a Major Project. The designated projects may include those: 1) that require a substantial amount of a State Transportation Agency's program resources, 2) that have a high level of public or congressional attention, or 3) that have extraordinary implications for the national transportation system. Metropolitan Planning Area (MPA) means the geographic area determined by agreement between the metropolitan planning organization (MPO) for the area and the Governor, in which the metropolitan transportation planning process is carried out. Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) means the official multimodal transportation plan addressing no less than a 20-year planning horizon that is developed, adopted, and updated by CAMPO through the metropolitan transportation planning process. Nonattainment area means any geographic region of the United States that has been designated by the EPA as a nonattainment area under section 107 of the Clean Air Act for any pollutants for which an NAAQS exists. Obligated projects means strategies and projects funded under title 23 U.S.C. and title 49 U.S.C. Chapter 53 for which the supporting Federal funds were authorized and committed by the State or designated recipient in the preceding program year, and authorized by the FHWA or awarded as a grant by the FTA. Program of Projects (POP) is a list of projects to be funded in a grant application submitted to FTA by a designated recipient. The POP lists the subrecipients and indicates whether they are private non-profit agencies, governmental authorities, or private providers of transportation service, designates the areas served (including rural areas), and identifies any tribal entities. In addition, the POP includes a brief description of the projects, total project cost, and Federal share for each project. Project selection means the procedures followed by MPOs, States, and public transportation operators to advance projects from the first four years of an approved TIP and/or STIP to implementation, in accordance with agreed upon procedures. Project sponsor must be a city, county, state, or other transportation related government agency eligible to receive federal funding from the Federal Highway or Federal Transit Administrations. All other entities must partner with a city, county, or state agency to apply for and/or administer a transportation project. Public transportation operator means the public entity which participates in the continuing, cooperative, and comprehensive transportation planning process in accordance with 23 U.S.C. 134 and 135 and 49 U.S.C. 5303 and 5304, and is the designated recipient of Federal funds under title 49 U.S.C. Chapter 53 for transportation by a conveyance that provides regular and continuing general or special transportation to the public, but does not include school bus, charter, or intercity bus transportation or intercity passenger rail transportation provided by Amtrak. Regionally significant project means a transportation project (other than projects that may be grouped in the TIP and/or STIP or exempt projects as defined in EPA’s transportation conformity regulation (40 CFR part 93)) that is on a facility which serves regional transportation needs (such as access to and from the area outside the region; major activity centers in the region; major planned developments such as new retail malls, sports complexes, or employment centers; or transportation terminals) and would normally be included in the modeling of the metropolitan area’s transportation network. At a minimum, this includes all principal arterial highways and all fixed guideway transit facilities that offer a significant alternative to regional highway travel. Statewide transportation improvement program (STIP) means a statewide prioritized listing/program of transportation projects covering a period of four years that is consistent with the long-range statewide transportation plan, metropolitan transportation plans, and TIPs, and required for projects to be eligible for funding under title 23 U.S.C. and title 49 U.S.C. Chapter 53. Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) is a document prepared by a metropolitan planning organization that lists projects to be funded with FHWA/FTA funds for the at least next one- to three-year period. Unified Planning Work Plan (UPWP) is the management plan for the (metropolitan) planning program. Its purpose is to coordinate the planning activities of all participants in the planning process. DRAFT Appendix F 2016 Capital Area Pedestrian & Bicycle Plan DRAFT This document can be found by going to www.jeffersoncitymo.gov/campo and clicking on "Plans and Publications" Appendix G 2017 Coordinated Public Transit-Human Services Transportation Plan DRAFT This document can be found by going to www.jeffersoncitymo.gov/campo and clicking on "Plans and Publications" Appendix H Travel Demand Model Report DRAFT This document can be found by going to www.jeffersoncitymo.gov/campo and clicking on "Plans and Publications" Appendix I 2015 CAMPO Wayfinding Plan DRAFT This document can be found by going to www.jeffersoncitymo.gov/campo and clicking on "Plans and Publications" Appendix J Major Thoroughfare Plan 2020 The CAMPO Thoroughfare Plan is currently under development. It is anticipated that the plan will be completed in early 2020 as identified in the FY2020 Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP). CAMPO currently depends on the County-Wide Transportation Study for Cole County and the Thoroughfare Plan for Jefferson City to illustrate an adopted future road network. After completion and adoption of the CAMPO 2045 MTP staff will undertake the task of creating a Major Thoroughfare Plan for the CAMPO Region as a whole. The CAMPO Thoroughfare Plan will provide an indication of the general locations and capacities needed to meet the future needs of the CAMPO Region. The new plan will incorporate products from the Cole County and Jefferson City plans as well as the completed Travel Demand Model and any other pertinent recommendations from other local and regional plans. The Plan will act as a guide for both municipalities and the private sector in making future decisions involving new or existing roadways and will include future and current roadway functional classifications. Ideally, the CAMPO Thoroughfare Plan will: •Provide for the efficient movement of vehicular traffic into and throughout the Region. •Identify the right-of-way needs to be dedicated to accommodate a proposed thoroughfare. •Ensure adequate roadways to serve existing and proposed developments. •Assist in identifying Capital Improvement Program needs •Reduce the traffic volumes in residential areas by ensuring adequate arterials. •Serve as a planning tool and assist coordination with other agencies. The Thoroughfare Plan will be located in the Appendices once adopted by the CAMPO Board of Directors. DRAFT Individuals should contact the ADA Coordinator at (573) 634 -6570 to request accommodations or alternative formats as required under the Americans with Disabilities Act. Please allow three business days to process the request. CAMPO Board of Directors Staff Report Program Year 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program June 19, 2019 Summary A Draft of the Program Year 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) has been reviewed and approved by the CAMPO Technical Committee. The Technical Committee has recommended approval by the Board of Directors. The CAMPO Board of Directors open a 25-day public comment period for the draft TIP on May 15, 2019. No general public comments were received. Comments were received from FHWA, FTA, and MoDOT and were addressed. The draft plan can be found at http://www.jeffersoncitymo.gov/campo. The TIP is a 5-year financial program of transportation projects to be implemented within the Metropolitan Planning Area (MPA), which are funded by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and Federal Transit Administration (FTA), or are deemed ‘regionally significant’ ($500 million dollars or more). The TIP is updated annually in cooperation with local jurisdictions, the Missouri Department of Transportation (MoDOT), and local public transportation operators. The CAMPO TIP year runs from July 1, 2019 to June 30, 2024. The TIP includes 29 projects that total over $86 million dollars to be spent in the CAMPO region. The TIP discusses federal performance measure targets that have been approved by the Board of Directors. The TIP includes financial data for CAMPO jurisdictions demonstrating fiscal constraint and the availability of local matching funds for federal transportation dollars from FHWA or FTA. Additionally, the TIP contains the Program of Projects that public transportation agencies are required to create, and includes projects and costs, and an illustrative project list for JEFFTRAN. Changes made since last year’s TIP include:  New language on federal performance measures to include updated safety measures, travel time reliability and freight reliability measures, and road and bridge measures.  Operations and Maintenance costs.  Incorporating new MoDOT funding category  Updating financial totals for all jurisdictions  Updating list of fiscally constrained projects  Updating of the map of projects. Edits During Public Comment Period  Edits to funding totals and sources for JEFFTRAN and one MoDOT project  Edits to Section 4: Regional Overview – insertion of more data and maps  Other general edits include changes to figure numbers, titles, grammar and formatting Staff Recommendation Staff has worked extensively with local jurisdictions, public transportation providers, and MoDOT to demonstrate fiscal constraint and show projects in the CAMPO region for the next five program years. All jurisdictions active with CAMPO have consulted with staff to ensure financial details and projects are correct and appropriate. Staff recommends closure of the public comment period and approval of the resolution to adopt the Program Year 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program. Recommended Form of Motion: Motion to close the public comment period and approve by resolution, the adoption of the Program Year 2020- 2024 Transportation Improvement Program. Agenda Item 7B Transportation Improvement Program Program Years 2020-2024 July 1, 2019 – June 30, 2024 Adopted June 19, 2019 The preparation of this report was financed in part by the U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, and Federal Transit Administration in cooperation with the Missouri Department of Transportation. The opinions, findings, and conclusions expressed in this report are not necessarily those of the Federal Highway Administration, Federal Transit Administration, or the Missouri Department of Transportation. Individuals should contact the ADA Coordinator at (573) 634-6570 to request accommodations or alternative formats as required under the Americans with Disabilities Act. Please allow three business days to process the request. DRAFT Table of Contents Introduction ............................................................................................................................................. 1 Public Participation ................................................................................................................................. 2 Project Selection ...................................................................................................................................... 2 TIP Development ..................................................................................................................................... 2 TIP Amendments and Administrative Modifications ............................................................................... 3 Previous Projects ................................................................................................................................. 3 Annual Listing of Obligated Projects ...................................................................................................... 3 Air Quality Designation .......................................................................................................................... 3 Environmental Justice ............................................................................................................................. 3 Federal Performance Measures ............................................................................................................... 4 Financial Plan ......................................................................................................................................... 7 Forecast Revenue Available for Transportation Funding .................................................................... 7 Operations and Maintenance ............................................................................................................ 10 Financial Constraint .............................................................................................................................. 12 Fiscally Constrained Transportation Projects .................................................................................... 13 Program of Projects - OATS .................................................................................................................. 28 Multimodal Projects .............................................................................................................................. 30 Regionally Significant Projects ............................................................................................................. 30 Appendix A – Amendments and Administrative Modifications ........................................................... 31 Appendix B – Federal Funding Sources ................................................................................................ 32 Appendix C – Policies and Procedures ................................................................................................. 33 Appendix D – Definitions ..................................................................................................................... 36 CAMPO Title VI Nondiscrimination Policy The Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization is committed to the policy that no person shall be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be otherwise subjected to discrimination under any program or activity on the grounds of race, color, sex, age, disability or national origin, in accordance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and the Civil Rights Restoration Act of 1987 (P.L. 100.259). Administration of the Capital Area MPO is provided by the City of Jefferson Department of Planning and Protective Services Room 120 John G. Christy Municipal Building 320 East McCarty St., Jefferson City, Missouri 65101 Phone: (573) 634-6410 Fax: (573) 634-6457 http://www.jeffersoncitymo.gov/campo DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program i LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS FTA 5303 Metropolitan & Statewide Planning and Non-Metropolitan Transportation Planning FTA 5307 Urbanized Area Formula Grants FTA 5310 Enhanced Mobility of Seniors and Individuals with Disabilities FTA 5339 Bus and Bus Facilities Adv. Con. Advanced Construction AM Asset Management (Replaces TCOS in 2022) CAMPO Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization CO Carbon Monoxide (vehicle emissions) EPA Environmental Protection Agency FAST Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act FHWA Federal Highway Administration FTA Federal Transit Administration FY Fiscal Year HSIP Highway Safety Improvement Program MAP-21 Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century MoDOT Missouri Department of Transportation MPO Metropolitan Planning Organization MTP Metropolitan Transportation Plan NHFP National Highway Freight Program NHPP National Highway Performance Program NO2 Nitrogen Dioxide ONE DOT Collaboration between FHWA and FTA PBPP Performance Based Planning and Programming PM-2.5 Small Particulate Matter Lead POP Program of Projects PY Program Year SO2 Sulfur Dioxide STIP State Transportation Improvement Program STBG Surface Transportation Block Grant Program TAP Transportation Alternatives TCOS Taking Care of the System TERM Transit Economic Requirements Model TDM Travel Demand Model TIP Transportation Improvement Program TPM Transportation Performance Management VMT Vehicle Miles of Travel DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program ii (Resolution) DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program iii DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program iv Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization Board of Directors Chairman – Ron Fitzwater, City Council Member, City of Jefferson Vice-Chairman –Jeff Hoelscher, Eastern District Commissioner, Cole County City of Jefferson Jon Hensley, City Council Member David Kemna, City Council Member Rick Mihalevich, City Council Member Sonny Sanders, AICP, Director, Planning & Protective Services Matt Morasch, PE, Director, Public Works Mark Mehmert, Director, Transit Division Cole County Larry Benz, PE, Director, Public Works Doug Reece, City Administrator, St. Martins Callaway County Roger Fischer, Western District Commissioner Holts Summit Hanna Lechner, City Administrator, City of Holts Summit Missouri Department of Transportation (MoDOT) David Silvester, PE, District Engineer Ex-Officio Members Randall Allen, Jefferson City Area Chamber of Commerce Daniel Nguyen, Federal Transit Administration, Region VII Joan Roeseler, MoDOT, Transit Section Cathy Brown, Office of Administration, Facilities Management Michael Henderson, AICP, MoDOT, Transportation Planning Brad McMahon, Federal Highway Administration, Missouri Marty Wilson, Callaway County Economic Development Technical Committee Chairman – Sonny Sanders, AICP, Director, Planning and Protective Services, City of Jefferson Vice-Chairman – David Bange, PE, Engineering Supervisor, Department of Public Works, City of Jefferson City of Jefferson Todd Spalding, Director, Parks, Recreation & Forestry Matt Morasch, PE, Director of Public Works Mark Mehmert, Director, Transit Division Eric Barron, AICP, Transportation Planner Britt Smith, PE, Operations & Maintenance Cole County Larry Benz, PE, Director of Public Works Eric Landwehr, PE, County Engineer Callaway County Paul Winkelmann, PE, County Highway Administrator Small City Representative - Callaway Mark Tate, Streets Department, City of Holts Summit Small City Representative - Cole Paul Stonner/Brian Schrimpf, Alderman, Wardsville Missouri Department of Transportation (MoDOT) Steve Engelbrecht, PE, District Planning Manager Michael Henderson, AICP, Transportation Planning Specialist Bob Lynch, PE, Area Engineer Private Transportation Interest Joe Scheppers, N.H. Scheppers Distributing Company. Pedestrian or Biking Interest Cary Maloney Ex-Officio Members: Daniel Nguyen, Federal Transit Administration, Region VII Brad McMahon, Federal Highway Administration, Missouri - June 2019 CAMPO Staff Sonny Sanders, AICP, GISP – Director, Planning & Protective Services Eric Barron, AICP - Planning Manager Katrina Williams, GISP, AICP – Planner II Alex Rotenberry, AICP - Planner I Beth Sweeten – Administrative Assistant DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program 1 Introduction The Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (CAMPO) is the designated metropolitan planning organization for the Jefferson City, Missouri planning area whose purpose is to carry out a continuing, cooperative, and comprehensive long range transportation planning process. As part of this process CAMPO updates the Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) with the latest program year TIP, to address the current and future transportation needs for the Metropolitan Planning Area (MPA). The MPA includes a southern portion of Callaway County, northeastern portion of Cole County, cities of Holts Summit, Jefferson City, St. Martins, Taos, and Wardsville. Figure 1 – The CAMPO Planning Area The Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) is a 5-year financial program of transportation projects to be implemented within the MPA. The projects are funded by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and Federal Transit Administration (FTA), or are deemed “regionally significant.” Each project or project phase included in the TIP is consistent with investment strategies discussed in the MTP and is part of the process of applying for funds from the FHWA and FTA. Certain capital and non-capital transportation projects using funding under 23 U.S.C. and 49 U.S.C. Chapter 53 or regionally significant projects requiring action by the FHWA or the FTA are required to be included in the TIP. The TIP is updated annually by CAMPO in cooperation with the Missouri Department of Transportation and local public transportation operators. DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program 2 Public Participation CAMPO seeks active and meaningful involvement of the public and interested parties in the development and update of transportation plans and programs, including the TIP. All meetings of the CAMPO Technical Committee and Board of Directors are open to the public. All meeting agendas and minutes are available on the City of Jefferson website or upon request. CAMPO provides all interested parties and the public with a reasonable opportunity to comment on the proposed TIP as required by federal law. Reasonable opportunity to comment and participate on the proposed TIP is made following the policies in the CAMPO Public Participation Plan located on the CAMPO website at http://www.jeffersoncitymo.gov/campo. The approved TIP is available for review at several locations throughout the CAMPO planning area as outlined in the Public Participation Plan. The FTA allows a grantee, e.g. JEFFTRAN and OATS, Inc., to rely on locally adopted public participation plans for the submittal of their projects in lieu of a separate “Program of Projects” (POP) if the grantee has coordinated with CAMPO and has ensured that the public is aware that the TIP and the Public Participation Plan are being used to satisfy the POP public participation requirements. JEFFTRAN is the public transit provider for the City of Jefferson and OATS, Inc. is a not-for-profit 501(c)3 corporation providing specialized transportation for senior citizens, people with disabilities and the rural general public in 87 Missouri counties. Federal Transit Administration recipients of certain categories of funds, JEFFTRAN and OATS, Inc. must follow a public participation plan. Both JEFFTRAN and OATS, Inc. meet this coordination and public awareness criteria. Project Selection Transportation projects, funded by direct allocation of Federal funds to a project sponsor, award of Federal funds via competitive grant, or wholly funded by the sponsor, are selected by the agency having jurisdiction over the project using their own criteria and submitted to the CAMPO Board of Directors for inclusion in the TIP. Transportation projects included within the TIP should be consistent with investment strategies discussed in the MTP. CAMPO no longer receives any type of discretionary funding for infrastructure projects. If such funds again become available, the following prioritization process is in place. Transportation projects, funded by sub-allocated Federal funds directly to CAMPO or otherwise made available for programming at the discretion of CAMPO, are selected based on competitive process approved by the CAMPO Board of Directors. This process involves a call for projects, ranking based on CAMPO priorities by staff, and review by the CAMPO Technical Committee, prior to being forwarded to the CAMPO Board of Directors for a vote of approval. The ranking process has unique evaluation criteria for different categories of projects – roadway/intersection, bridge, non-motorized, transit, and ‘other.’ TIP Development The TIP is updated every year and covers a 5-year period starting July 1 of each year. TIP development begins with a verification of status of projects in the current TIP, solicitation of new projects, and request for budget information from local jurisdictions. Local transit providers are also requested to provide information needed to develop their “Program of Projects” for inclusion in the TIP. CAMPO staff develops the financial plan, project listings, maintenance and operations, and other components of the TIP with support from the Technical Committee, member jurisdictions, MoDOT, FHWA, and FTA. Once the draft TIP is developed, it is presented to the Technical Committee for review and recommendation to the Board of Directors. A 25 day public comment period and public hearing are held prior to the Board of Directors approval of the TIP. The Board then requests approval of the TIP by the Governor and ONE DOT (consisting of FHWA and FTA). DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program 3 TIP Amendments and Administrative Modifications Between TIP updates, if projects need to be added, removed or changed, the TIP can be changed either by amendment or administrative modifications. Definitions of an amendment or an administrative modification, and information about public participation, notifications, and other procedures regarding amendments and administrative modifications, can be found in Appendix C – Policies and Procedures of this document. Appendix A contains a listing of amendments and administrative modifications that have occurred to this document. Previous Projects The TIP will include a listing of major projects from the previous TIP that were implemented and identify any significant delays in the planned implementation of major projects. Major projects are defined as transportation improvement projects receiving Federal financial assistance with an estimated total cost of $500 million or more or that have been identified by the FHWA as being a major project. No major projects were implemented, and no significant delays or projects from the previous TIP have been identified. Annual Listing of Obligated Projects The Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act (FAST Act) requires that CAMPO publish an annual listing of federally obligated projects. The Annual Listing of Projects is an index of projects which used Federal funds that were obligated in the preceding TIP program year. Obligated projects are consistent with the funding categories identified in the TIP. An obligation is the Federal government’s legal commitment to pay the Federal share of a project’s cost. An obligated project is one that has been authorized and funds have been obligated by a Federal agency. Obligated projects are not necessarily initiated or completed in the program year, and the amount of the obligation will not necessarily equal the total cost of the project. For Federal Transit Administration projects, obligation occurs when the grant is awarded. For Federal Highway Administration projects, obligation occurs when a project agreement is executed and the State/grantee requests that the funds be obligated. CAMPO publishes the Annual Listing of Obligated Projects yearly within 90 days of the previous TIP’s program year. The Annual Listing of Obligated Projects is posted on the CAMPO website at http://www.jeffersoncitymo.gov/campo. Air Quality Designation The United States Environmental Protection Agency has designated the CAMPO Metropolitan Planning Area as being in attainment for Ozone, Carbon Monoxide (CO), Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2), Small Particulate Matter (PM-2.5) Lead, and Sulfur Dioxide (SO2). Environmental Justice Executive Order 12898 requires agencies receiving federal funding to meaningfully address low-income and minority populations in their plans, programs, policies, and activities. CAMPO staff expects project sponsors to identify and mitigate any disproportionately high and adverse effects of federal transportation programs. DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program 4 Federal Performance Measures In the passage of the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21), and continuing into the FAST Act, Congress established Transportation Performance Management (TPM). FHWA defines TPM as a strategic approach that uses system information to make investment and policy decisions to achieve national performance goals. Another new requirement is Performance Based Planning and Programming (PBPP) which impacts the TIP and the MTP. PBPP refers to the application of performance management principles within the planning and programming processes of transportation agencies to achieve desired performance outcomes for the multimodal transportation system. To comply with these new requirements, the CAMPO Board of Directors adopted targets for four performance areas: the Transit Asset Management, Safety, Pavement and Bridge, and Travel Time Reliability and Freight Reliability. Transit Asset Management Measures MoDOT collected and evaluated existing buses and facilities to be included in the State Transit Asset Management Plan and used this information to set targets, which will be evaluated on an annual basis as inventory changes. JEFFTRAN opted to create its own Transit Asset Management Plan and set its own targets, which are identical to the state targets, as listed in Figure 2. Figure 2 – Transit Asset Management targets by MoDOT and JEFFTRAN JEFFTRAN TAM Plan Fiscal Year 2019 Targets Equipment: Non-revenue support-service and maintenance vehicles (exceeding $50,000 at purchase) N/A Rolling Stock: Revenue vehicles by mode and ULB*: Automobiles, Minivans, Vans 8 years 45% Cutaways 10 years 45% Buses 14 years 45% Facilities Administrative facilities and passenger stations 30% with a condition rating below 3.0 on FTA's TERM** Scale Maintenance facilities 25% with a condition rating below 3.0 on FTA's TERM Scale * ULB stands for Useful Life Benchmark ** TERM is a Federal Transit Administration Transit Economic Requirements Model which helps transit agencies assess their state of good repair backlog, level of annual investment to attain state of good repair, impact of variations in funding, and investment priorities. JEFFTRAN has its budget, fiscally constrained projects, and Program of Projects in this document. The agency has identified $125,000 that may be utilized for bus replacement and other capital projects to help JEFFTRAN move towards these targets. DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program 5 Safety Measures The Federal Highway Administration established five performance measures to assess performance and carry out the Highway Safety Improvement Program: (1) number of fatalities, (2) rate of fatalities per vehicle mile traveled (VMT), (3) number of serious injuries, (4) rate of serious injuries per VMT, and (5) number of combined non-motorized fatalities and non-motorized serious injuries. MoDOT established the following statewide safety targets in 2018, as seen in Figure 3, which were adopted by CAMPO. These targets are updated annually. Figure 3 – Safety Performance Measures set by MoDOT* Performance Measure 5-year Rolling Average (2013-2017) 5-Year Rolling Average Statewide Target for CY2019 Number of Fatalities 854.4 872.3 Fatality rate per 100 Million VMT 1.176 1.160 Number of Serious Injuries 4,756.4 4433.8 Serious Injury Rate per 100 Million VMT 6.566 6.168 Number of Non-Motorized Fatalities and Serious Injuries 441.3 445.4 * Targets based on the State Highway Safety Plan: Missouri Blueprint -A Partnership Towards Zero Deaths, a 9% fatality reduction, 5% serious injury reduction, 1% VMT increase and 4 % non-motorized reduction There are a number of projects programmed for safety in the TIP, totaling $20,199,000 for Program Years 2020-2024, all sponsored by the Central District of MoDOT, to help the State move towards these targets. CAMPO staff also actively participates in the Central District Coalition of Roadway Safety, which works to implement Missouri’s Blueprint ultimate goal of zero fatalities on Missouri roadways, and participates in the annual Highway Safety and Traffic Blueprint Conference. DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program 6 Pavement and Bridge Measures The Federal Highway Administration established 6 performance measures to assess pavement and bridge conditions: (1) percent of interstate pavements in Good condition, (2) percent of interstate pavements in Poor condition, (3) percent of non-interstate national highway system (NHS) pavements in Good condition, (4) percent of non-interstate NHS pavements in Poor condition, (5) percent of NHS bridges by deck area classified as Good condition, and (6) percent of NHS bridges by deck area classified as Poor condition. There are no interstate highways in the CAMPO region, so those targets are not addressed. MoDOT established the following statewide pavement and bridge targets in 2018, as seen in Figure 4, which shows the targets set by MoDOT and adopted by CAMPO. These targets may be updated every other year. Figure 4 – Applicable Pavement and Bridge Targets set by MoDOT Performance Measure 2017 Baseline 2019 Target 2021 Target Percentage of NHS Bridges in Good Condition 34.0% 30.9% 30.9% Percentage of NHS Bridges in Poor Condition 7.1% 7.1% 7.1% Percentage of non-Interstate NHS Pavements in Good Condition 61.1% 61.1% 61.1% Percentage of non-Interstate NHS Pavements in Poor Condition 1.0% 1.0% 1.0% Many projects in the TIP address Asset Management, a major priority for MoDOT. There are currently $54,407,000 projects in the 2020-2024 TIP that address either work on roads or bridges to maintain or update them which will help the state maintain these targets. Travel Time Reliability and Freight Reliability The Federal Highway Administration established 3 performance measures to assess travel time reliability and assessing freight movement on the interstate system: (1) Percent of Reliable Person-Miles Traveled on the Interstate, (2) Percent of Reliable Person-Miles Traveled on the Non-Interstate NHS, and (3) Truck Travel Time Reliability Index. There are no interstate highways in the CAMPO region, so targets one and three are not applicable to CAMPO. MoDOT established the following travel time reliability targets in 2018, as seen in Figure 5, which shows the targets set by MoDOT and adopted by CAMPO. This target may be updated every other year. Figure 5 – Applicable Travel Time Reliability Target set by MoDOT Performance Measure 2017 Baseline 2019 Target 2021 Target Non-Interstate Travel Time Reliability Measure: Percent of Reliable Person-Miles Traveled on the Non-Interstate NHS 92.3% - 87.8% There are currently no projects programmed into the 2020-2024 TIP with the sole purpose of improving travel time reliability. Several of the projects within the TIP address this target indirectly which will help the state with this target. DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program 7 Financial Plan The TIP includes a financial plan that demonstrates how the approved TIP can be implemented, and indicates resources from public and private sources that are reasonably expected to be made available to carry out the TIP. CAMPO, MoDOT, and public transportation operators cooperatively develop estimates of funds that are reasonably expected to be available to support TIP implementation. Only projects for which construction or operating funds can reasonably be expected to be available may be included. In developing the financial plan, CAMPO takes into account all projects and strategies funded under Title 23 U.S.C., Title 49 U.S.C. Chapter 53, and other federal funds, and regionally significant projects that are not federally funded. For purposes of transportation operations and maintenance, the financial plan shall contain system-level estimates of costs and revenue sources that are reasonably expected to be available to adequately operate and maintain Federal-aid highways (as defined by Title 23 U.S.C. 101(a)(5) and public transportation (as defined by Title 49 U.S.C. Chapter 53). Forecast Revenue Available for Transportation Funding Federal funding forecasts, provided by MoDOT based on published notices in the Federal Register, estimate fiscal year authorization levels by the FHWA and FTA under the current highway act. Appendix B briefly describes most of the Federal transportation programs which could fund projects in the CAMPO planning area. For Federally-funded projects, the TIP must identify the appropriate “matching funds” by source. The matching funds are usually provided by state and local governments. State revenue forecasts are also provided by MoDOT based on historical data of the State Fuel Tax, State Vehicle Sales and Use Tax and General Revenue. Local revenue forecast from the County Aid Road Trust (State Fuel Tax and State Vehicle Sales and Use Tax) for each jurisdiction are based on past distributions and are assumed to continue a trend of a two percent inflation rate. The City of Jefferson has a ½ cent sales tax to support its Capital Improvement Program and a ½ cent sales tax for Parks and Recreation, which supports greenways and other non-motorized transportation activities. The City of Jefferson has provided its own future revenue projections from these sources. Cole County has a ½ cent sales tax to support its Capital Improvement Program and a real property tax levy of $0.27 earmarked for Road & Bridges. All small cities get $100,000 every five years from Cole County, which comes from the aforementioned sales tax. Callaway County has a real property tax levy of $0.2466 earmarked for Road & Bridges. Outlined in Figure 6 are local forecasts of revenue sources for over the life of the TIP available for transportation projects. DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program 8 Figure 6 – Forecast Revenue for Transportation projects Note: CART (County Aid Road Trust) includes State Fuel Tax, Vehicle Sales/Use Tax and Licensing Fees based on 2018 numbers from MoDOT. There is a conservative two (2) percent increase per year, based on historical numbers. Please see more on CART funds here: http://dor.mo.gov/publicreports/index.php#motorfuel * This is distributed from Cole County ** Holts Summit now receives Lake Mykee's CART funds after the two communities merged in 2017. Local governments may use general revenue and other sources to match transportation grants awarded and may transfer funds from one account to another at their discretion. Callaway County 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Total CART $1,771,294 $1,806,720 $1,842,854 $1,879,711 $1,917,305 $9,217,884 Property Tax - Road & Bridge ($0.2466 levy)$1,900,000 $1,900,000 $1,900,000 $1,900,000 $1,900,000 $9,500,000 Transfer from general revenue $300,000 $300,000 $300,000 $300,000 $300,000 $1,500,000 Cole County CART $829,043 $845,624 $862,536 $879,787 $897,383 $4,314,372 Sales Tax $5,440,179 $5,440,179 $5,440,179 $5,440,179 $5,440,179 $27,200,895 Property Tax - Road & Bridge ($0.27 levy)$3,980,380 $3,980,380 $3,980,380 $3,980,380 $3,980,380 $19,901,900 Motor Vehicle Sales Tax $368,032 $368,032 $368,032 $368,032 $368,032 $1,840,160 Highway Bridge Program - Off-System (BRO)$103,885 $103,885 $103,885 $103,885 $103,885 $519,425 Holts Summit CART $151,038 $154,059 $157,140 $160,283 $163,488 $786,008 City of Jefferson CART $1,808,889 $1,845,067 $1,881,968 $1,919,607 $1,957,999 $9,413,530 Sales Tax - 1/2% Parks Sales Tax $4,951,878 $4,951,878 $4,951,878 $4,951,878 $4,951,878 $24,759,390 Sales Tax - 1/2% Capital Improvement (Expires March 2022)$1,420,000 $1,420,000 $1,420,000 $1,420,000 $1,420,000 $7,100,000 City of Jefferson - JEFFTRAN Farebox & Reimbursements $416,000 $395,200 $375,000 $356,000 $338,000 $1,880,200 Sales Tax - 1/2% Capital Improvement (Expires March 2022)$80,000 $80,000 $80,000 $80,000 $80,000 $400,000 FTA Section 5307 $810,661 $822,821 $835,163 $847,691 $860,406 $4,176,742 City of Jefferson - Local Operating Assistance $1,156,546 $1,179,677 $1,203,271 $1,227,336 $1,251,883 $6,018,713 MoDOT State Operating Assistance $11,500 $11,500 $11,500 $11,500 $11,500 $57,500 Capital Funds $125,000 $125,000 $125,000 $125,000 $125,000 $625,000 St. Martins CART $47,483 $48,908 $50,375 $51,887 $53,443 $252,096 General Revenue Funds $821,754 $184,870 $190,416 $196,128 $202,013 $1,595,181 Sales Tax - 1/2% Capital Improvement*$20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $100,000 Taos CART $36,867 $37,605 $38,357 $39,124 $39,906 $191,858 Sales Tax - 1/2% Capital Improvement* $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $100,000 Wardsville CART $63,237 $64,502 $65,792 $67,108 $68,450 $329,088 Sales Tax - 1/2% Capital Improvement* $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $100,000 OATS Passenger Fares, Misc.$5,000 $5,000 $5,100 $5,100 $5,100 $25,300 Local Contracts $40,000 $60,000 $75,000 $75,000 $75,000 $325,000 $132,304,826 Available Local Transportation Funds Total Local Funds DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program 9 Figure 7 shows the total programmed project funds and available project funds by source. The project costs have inflation factored in by each project sponsor. The instructions on the form used to submit a project for inclusion in the TIP reminds the project sponsor to take inflation into account when estimating the project’s cost. Since the last iteration of the MTP, the inflation factor for the TIP has been set as two percent. Figure 7 – Programmed Funds by Source. 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Total FHWA Adv. Con.$12,124,800 $3,351,200 $13,611,200 $0 $0 $29,087,200 FHWA NHPP $9,001,200 $4,694,600 $374,400 $0 $0 $14,070,200 FHWA HSIP $1,009,000 $13,007,000 $57,600 $0 $0 $14,073,600 FHWA STBG $3,030,400 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,030,400 FHWA TAP $397,456 $0 $0 $0 $0 $397,456 FHWA SHRP2 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 FHWA RTP $14,149 $14,148 $0 $0 $0 $28,297 FTA 5307 $810,661 $822,821 $835,163 $847,691 $860,406 $4,176,742 FTA 5310 $40,000 $160,000 $75,000 $175,000 $75,000 $525,000 FTA 5311 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 FTA 5329 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 FTA 5339 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 MoDOT AM $0 $0 $3,496,400 $0 $0 $3,496,400 MoDOT MPEN $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 MoDOT Safety $118,000 $1,592,000 $6,400 $0 $0 $1,716,400 MoDOT State Oper.$11,415 $11,415 $11,415 $11,415 $11,415 $57,075 MoDOT SWIMB $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 MoDOT TCOS $6,696,600 $1,158,200 $0 $0 $0 $7,854,800 MoDOT State Rail $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Jefferson City $1,157,296 $1,180,427 $1,203,271 $1,227,336 $1,251,883 $6,020,213 Cole County $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Oats $40,000 $60,000 $75,000 $75,000 $75,000 $325,000 Holts Summit $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 St. Martins $476,074 $0 $0 $0 $0 $476,074 Other $187,552 $236,401 $179,921 $231,670 $183,435 $1,018,979 $35,114,603 $26,288,212 $19,925,770 $2,568,112 $2,457,139 $86,353,836 Programmed Funds Total Programmed Total Federal State Local Yearly Totals DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program 10 Operations and Maintenance Maintenance costs include MoDOT’s salaries, materials and equipment needed to deliver the roadway and bridge maintenance programs. This category includes basic maintenance activities like minor surface treatments such as: sealing, small concrete repairs and pothole patching; mowing right of way; snow removal; replacing signs; striping; repairing guardrail; and repairing traffic signals. Performing these activities requires employees; vehicles and other machinery; and materials such as salt, asphalt and fuel. Maintenance operations expenditures are expected to increase 1.8% annually. This makes MoDOT’s cost, $4,870 per lane mile. Operations and Maintenance - Local Government Local revenue sources for operations and maintenance include state fuel tax, state vehicles sales/use tax, local sales taxes, franchise fees, license and permit fees, property taxes, and other revenue sources that provide significant resources for local general fund and specific funding of transportation. Not all taxes and fees go to transportation, so the local jurisdiction usually will identify a budget specifically for transportation purposes, such as capital improvements, Road and Bridge funds, transit operating subsidies, road and street budgets, or operations and maintenance budgets. The operations and maintenance costs for local governments include salaries, fringe benefits, materials, and equipment needed to deliver the street and bridge maintenance programs. This category includes basic maintenance activities like minor surface treatments such as sealing, small concrete repairs, pothole patching, mowing, snow removal, replacing signs, striping, and repairing traffic signals. These activities may be performed in-house or outsourced. Local government operations and maintenance on federal aid roads calculated for the system wide average of operations & maintenance per centerline mile is determined below in Figure 8. As a further demonstration of fiscal constraint, another requirement is that municipalities report their operations and maintenance budget. Reported below are Cole and Callaway Counties, Jefferson City, St. Martins, and MoDOT. Figure 8 – 2020 Operations and Maintenance costs for local jurisdictions Municipality Cost per lane mile Cole County $6,724 Callaway County $2,469 Jefferson City $5,888 St. Martins $5,435 MoDOT $4,870 DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program 11 Figure 9 shows the various roadway types in CAMPO’s MPA and the governing body that is responsible for maintenance. Figure 9 - Federal Aid Road Mileage by Jurisdiction. Source: CAMPO Functional Classification GIS Database. In addition to the local government operations and maintenance previously discussed, JEFFTRAN expenses also cover fleet repair/maintenance, repairing/replacing bus shelters, bus washing, bus maintenance facilities, public restrooms, and fuel. Figures 10 and 11 show the estimated expenditures for transit operations and maintenance for JEFFTRAN and OATs, respectively. Figure 10 - JEFFTRAN Estimated Expenditures for Operations & Maintenance. Operations and Maintenance revenue and expenditures are based on the most recently available budgets Figure 11 – OATS Estimated Expenditures for Operations & Maintenance. Urban Other Freeway Express way Urban Other Principal Arterial Urban Minor Arterial Urban Collector Rural Other Principal Arterial Rural Minor Arterial Rural Major Collector Total Percent of Total (Jurisdiction) Callaway County 2.3 2.9 0.9 6.1 2.89% Cole County 3.6 5.9 4.6 14.1 6.63% Holts Summit 3.1 4.1 0.5 7.6 3.61% City of Jefferson*4.3 37.4 23.6 65.3 30.83% MoDOT 34.6 8.7 18.2 11.9 5.4 5.3 32.7 116.8 55.13% St. Martins 1.5 0.5 1.9 0.91% Taos 0.0 0.00% Wardsville 0.0 0.00% Total (Functional Class)34.6 13.0 66.1 48.8 5.4 6.3 37.8 211.9 100.00% Percent (Functional Class)16.3% 6.1% 31.2% 23.0% 2.5% 3.0% 17.8% *Includes Parks & Rec. FY2020 FY2021 FY2022 FY2023 FY2024 Personnel Services 1,586,000$ 1,634,000$ 1,683,000 $ 1,733,000 $ 1,785,000$ Materials and Supplies 234,000$ 241,000$ 248,000$ 255,000$ 263,000$ Contractual Services 341,000$ 351,000$ 362,000$ 373,000$ 384,000$ Utilities 31,000$ 32,000$ 33,000$ 34,000$ 35,000$ Repairs and Maintenance 450,000$ 465,000$ 480,000$ 490,000$ 500,000$ Total 2,642,000$ 2,723,000$ 2,806,000 $ 2,885,000 $ 2,967,000$ Funding Sources 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 FTA-Section 5310 40,000$ 60,000$ 75,000$ 75,000$ 75,000$ Fares 5,000$ 5,000$ 5,100$ 5,100$ 5,100$ Local Contracts 40,000$ 60,000$ 75,000$ 75,000$ 75,000$ Total 85,000$ 125,000$ 155,100$ 155,100$ 155,100$ DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program 12 Financial Constraint To exhibit financial constraint, a financial plan should address three questions: 1) What will the needs for transportation in the CAMPO planning area cost? The needs are identified by project in the following section and costs are summarized by funding source in Figure 6. 2) What revenues are available that can be applied to the needs? Specific revenues available to meet the needs are identified in Figure 6 - Forecast Revenue for Transportation projects, Operations and Maintenance, by jurisdiction and source. 3) Are the revenues sufficient to cover the costs? As shown in Figure 7 – Programmed by Source, programmed fund amounts equal anticipated fund amounts. For many jurisdictions as shown in Figure 6, available funds exceed the amounts of revenues required to fund programmed projects. DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program 13 Fiscally Constrained Transportation Projects Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA NHPP $89,600 $86,400 $176,000 MoDOT TCOS $22,400 $21,600 $44,000 TIP #2018-01 Local $0 MoDOT#5S3261 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA NHPP $582,400 $582,400 MoDOT TCOS $145,600 $145,600 Local $0 Other $0 Total $112,000 $836,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $948,000 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA NHPP $204,800 $144,000 $393,600 $742,400 MoDOT TCOS $51,200 $36,000 $98,400 $185,600 TIP #2019-01 Local $0 MoDOT#5P3337 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA NHPP $3,542,400 $3,542,400 MoDOT TCOS $885,600 $885,600 Local $0 Other $0 Total $256,000 $180,000 $4,920,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $5,356,000 Comments: Project involves bridges A3451, A4265, and A4662. Award date 2020. Bridge Projects MoDOT Funding Prior Funding State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 Project Name: Total Project Cost: $948,000 Bridge Decksealing over Route 54 E N G Description & Location: Includes bridge decksealing on Route 94 over Little Tavern Creek in Callaway County and West Main over Route 54/63 in Cole County R O W C O N S T MoDOT Funding Prior Funding State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 Project Name: Bridge Improvements On US 54 Over Missouri River E N G Description & Location: Bridge improvements for both bridges over the Missouri River in Jefferson City. R O W C O N S T Comments: Project involves bridges A4497 and L0550. Total Project Cost: $5,356,000 DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program 14 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA NHPP $800 $16,000 $64,000 $100,800 $181,600 MoDOT TCOS $200 $4,000 $16,000 $20,200 TIP #2019-02 MoDOT AM $25,200 $25,200 MoDOT#5P2190 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA Adv. Con.$273,600 $273,600 MoDOT AM $68,400 $68,400 Local $0 Other $0 Total $1,000 $20,000 $80,000 $468,000 $0 $0 $0 $569,000 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA NHPP $93,600 $494,400 $588,000 MoDOT TCOS $23,400 $123,600 $147,000 TIP #2017-05 Local $0 MoDOT#5P3121 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA NHPP $5,070,400 $5,070,400 MoDOT TCOS $1,267,600 $1,267,600 Local $0 Other $0 Total $117,000 $6,956,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $7,073,000 MoDOT Project Name:US 54 Pavement Improvements E N G Comments: Award Date 2020. R O W Comments: Project involves bridge A5552. Total Project Cost: $569,000 Prior Funding Roadway Projects Funding C O N S T Total Project Cost: $7,073,000 Project Name: Bridge Preventative Maintenance On US 50 Over Osage River E N G Description & Location: Bridge preventative maintenance over the Osage River, 0.3 mile w est of the Route 63 junction. R O W C O N S T MoDOT Funding Prior Funding State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 Description & Location: Pavement resurfacing and guard cables installation on the eastbound and westbound lanes of US 54 from Route E to near Stadium Boulevard in Jefferson City. DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program 15 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA Adv. Con.$8,000 $11,200 $192,800 $212,000 MoDOT NHPP $2,000 $2,800 $48,200 $53,000 TIP #2019-03 Local $0 MoDOT#5P3333 MoDOT $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA Adv. Con.$2,585,600 $2,585,600 MoDOT NHPP $646,400 $646,400 Local $0 MoDOT $0 Total $10,000 $14,000 $3,473,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,497,000 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA NHPP $16,000 $439,200 $455,200 MoDOT TCOS $4,000 $109,800 $113,800 TIP #2019-06 Local $0 MoDOT#5P3371 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA NHPP $2,165,600 $2,165,600 MoDOT TCOS $541,400 $541,400 Local $0 Other $0 Total $20,000 $3,256,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,276,000 Project Name:Guard Cables Along US 54 E N G Description & Location: Guard cable improvements from Miller County to near Stadium Blvd. in Jefferson City R O W C O N S T Comments: Award date Fall 2019 Prior Funding State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 Project Name:Pavement Resurfacing on US 50 E N G Total Project Cost: $3,497,000 MoDOT Funding Description & Location: Pavement resurfacing east of West Truman Blvd. to east of Kaylor Bridge Road, all lanes and from east of Route M to east of Stoney Gap Road R O W C O N S T Comments: Anticipated federal reimbursement f rom NHPP. MoDOT Funding Prior Funding State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 Total Project Cost: $3,276,000 DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program 16 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 TIP #2020-01 Local St. Martins $62,382 $62,382 MoDOT#9901515 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA TAP $397,456 $397,456 MoDOT $0 Local St. Martins $413,692 $413,692 Other $0 Total $0 $873,530 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $873,530 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA Adv. Con.$4,000 $36,000 $927,200 $967,200 MoDOT AM $231,800 $231,800 TIP #2020-03 MoDOT TCOS $1,000 $9,000 $10,000 MoDOT#5P3409 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA Adv. Con.$12,684,000 $12,684,000 MoDOT AM $3,171,000 $3,171,000 MoDOT $0 Other $0 Total $0 $5,000 $45,000 $17,014,000 $0 $0 $0 $17,064,000 R O W C O N S T Comments: TAP grant awardee. Working with Cole County to complete the project Total Project Cost: $873,530 MoDOT St. Martins Funding Prior Funding State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 Project Name: Business 50 W Bike/Ped/ADA Improvements E N G Description & Location: Addition of 8-foot wide asphalt bike/ped lanes for 1.1 miles in each direction along Business 50 West from Rt. T/D to west of Carel Rd. Total Project Cost: $17,064,000 Funding Prior Funding State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 Project Name:Pavement Improvements on US 63 E N G Description & Location: Pavement improvements on US 63 from Route B to US Route 54. R O W C O N S T Comments: Anticipated federal funding category: NHPP. Award Date 2022. DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program 17 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA HSIP $46,000 $148,800 $194,800 MoDOT Safety $11,000 $37,200 $48,200 TIP #2020-04 Local $0 MoDOT#5I3408 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA HSIP $908,000 $908,000 MoDOT Safety $227,000 $227,000 Local $0 Other $0 Total $0 $57,000 $1,321,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,378,000 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA Adv. Con.$361,600 $361,600 MoDOT TCOS $90,400 $90,400 TIP #2020-13 Local $0 MoDOT#5P3426 Other $0 FHWA Adv. Con.$4,000 $4,000 MoDOT TCOS $1,000 $1,000 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA Adv. Con.$987,200 $987,200 MoDOT TCOS $246,800 $246,800 Local $0 Other $0 Total $0 $1,691,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,691,000 Funding Prior Funding State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 Project Name:Upgrading Signalization E N G Description & Location: Upgrade signals at CC and at Rte. C and CC in Cole County and at Rte. OO and Summit Drive in Callaway County R O W C O N S T Comments: Anticipated federal funding category: STBG. Award Date 2020. MoDOT Total Project Cost: $1,691,000 Description & Location: High Friction surface treatment at various locations in Boone, Morgan, Washington, Cooper, Callaway, and Cole Counties R O W C O N S T Comments: Anticipated federal funding category: HSIP. Award Date 2020. Total Project Cost: $1,378,000 MoDOT Funding Prior Funding State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 Project Name:High Friction Surface Treatments E N G DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program 18 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA HSIP $45,900 $900 $900 $47,700 MoDOT Safety $5,100 $100 $100 $5,300 TIP #2013-16 Local $0 MoDOT#5S2234 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 Total $51,000 $1,000 $1,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $53,000 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA $0 MoDOT TCOS $8,800 $8,800 TIP #2018-06 Local $0 MoDOT#5P3405 FHWA Adv. Con.$35,200 $35,200 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT TCOS $120,000 $120,000 Local $0 MoDOT Adv. Con.$480,000 $480,000 Total $0 $644,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $644,000 Comments: Anticipated federal funding category: Safety. Guard Cable & Guardrail Repair in Northern Central District E N G Project Name: C O N S T Description & Location: Scoping for safety improvements at the intersection of Route M and Route W in Wardsville. R O W Other Projects MoDOT State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 Project Name:Scoping Routes M, B & W E N G C O N S T Comments: Award Date Spring 2019. Anticipated federal reimbursement from STBG. Total Project Cost: $644,000 Description & Location: Job order contracting for guard cables and guardrail repair on v arious routes in the northern portion of the Central District. Total Project Cost: $53,000 R O W State Program Year - July 1 to June 30FundingPrior FundingMoDOT Prior Funding Funding DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program 19 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA STBG $52,800 $800 $53,600 MoDOT TCOS $13,200 $200 $13,400 TIP #2015-07 MoDOT $0 MoDOT#5S3081 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 Total $66,000 $1,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $67,000 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA $0 MoDOT TCOS $15,000 $15,000 $30,000 TIP #2018-08 Local $0 MoDOT#5P3402 MoDOT $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 MoDOT $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 MoDOT $0 Total $0 $15,000 $15,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $30,000 Project Name: MoDOT E N G Description & Location: Surveying to sell excess right of way parcels in the Central District. R O W Total Project Cost: $30,000 Comments: No federal funds used for this project. Description & Location: Scoping for slide repairs in the northern portion of the Central District at various locations. MoDOT Project Name:Surveying Funding Prior Funding State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 Total Project Cost: $67,000 Slide Repair Scoping C O N S T Comments: Anticipated Federal Funding Category - STBG. Future construction cost $2 million - 5 million. State Program Year - July 1 to June 30Prior Funding Funding R O W E N G C O N S T DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program 20 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA $0 MoDOT TCOS $14,000 $127,400 $141,400 TIP #2018-02 Local $0 MoDOT#5S3230 FHWA STBG $56,000 $509,600 $565,600 FHWA $0 MoDOT TCOS $2,000 $2,000 Local $0 MoDOT STBG $8,000 $8,000 FHWA $0 MoDOT TCOS $628,000 $628,000 Local $0 FHWA STBG $2,512,000 $2,512,000 Total $70,000 $3,787,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,857,000 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA $0 MoDOT TCOS $1,000 $10,800 $11,800 TIP #2020-05 Local $0 MoDOT#5S3386 FHWA Adv. Con.$4,000 $43,200 $47,200 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT TCOS $123,200 $123,200 Local $0 FHWA Adv. Con.$492,800 $492,800 Total $0 $5,000 $670,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $675,000 Description & Location: Pavement resurfacing and adding rumble stripes from Rte. B to Rte. 50 and on Rte. E from Rte. 54 to Rte. B. R O W C O N S T State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 Project Name:Pavement improvements on Route M E N G MoDOT Funding Total Project Cost: $675,000 State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 Total Project Cost: $3,857,000 Prior Funding R O W C O N S T Comments: Comments: Potential ADA improvements in Taos. Award date 2020. Anticipated Federal Funds: STBG. Project Name:Pavement improvements on Route U E N G Description & Location: Pavement & guardrail improvements on Rte. U. Includes Route Y from Route M in Taos, Rte W from Rte. B in Wardsville, and Rte.J from 50. MoDOT Funding Prior Funding DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program 21 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA $0 MoDOT TCOS $10,000 $400 $10,400 TIP #2018-09 Local $0 MoDOT#5P3254 FHWA Adv. Con.$40,000 $1,600 $41,600 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 Total $50,000 $2,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $52,000 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA HSIP $900 $900 MoDOT Safety $100 $100 TIP #2019-05 Local $0 MoDOT#5P3313 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA HSIP $56,700 $56,700 MoDOT Safety $6,300 $6,300 Local $0 Other $0 Total $0 $64,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $64,000 Funding Prior Funding State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 R O W E N G C O N S T R O W C O N S T Description & Location: Scoping for ADA improvements at various locations in Chamois, Frankenstein, Route M in Taos, and Route W in Wardsville. Total Project Cost: $52,000 Project Name:On-call Work Zone Enforcement Description & Location: On-call work zone enforcement at various locations in the Central District. Comments: Anticipated Federal Category - STBG. Includes sidewalks, curb ramps, entrances, and signals MoDOT Funding Prior Funding State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 MoDOT Project Name: Scoping for ADA Improvements in Various Locations E N G Total Project Cost: $64,000 Comments: 90/10 match, using federal and MoDOT safety funds. DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program 22 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA HSIP $900 $900 MoDOT Safety $100 $100 TIP #2020-08 Local $0 MoDOT#5P3406 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA HSIP $56,700 $56,700 MoDOT Safety $6,300 $6,300 Local $0 Other $0 Total $0 $0 $64,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $64,000 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA HSIP $900 $900 MoDOT Safety $100 $100 TIP #2020-09 Local $0 MoDOT#5P3407 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA HSIP $56,700 $56,700 MoDOT Safety $6,300 $6,300 Local $0 Other $0 Total $0 $0 $0 $64,000 $0 $0 $0 $64,000 Description & Location: On-call work zone enforcement at various locations in the Central District. Comments: 90/10 match, using federal and MoDOT safety funds. Total Project Cost: $64,000 Project Name:On-call Work Zone Enforcement Funding Prior Funding State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 E N G R O W C O N S T Total Project Cost: $64,000 On-call Work Zone Enforcement E N G Description & Location: On-call work zone enforcement at various locations in the Central District. R O W C O N S T Comments: 90/10 match, using federal and MoDOT safety funds. MoDOT Funding Prior Funding State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 Project Name: MoDOT DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program 23 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA Adv. Con.$120,000 $800 $120,800 MoDOT TCOS $30,000 $200 $30,200 TIP #2020-11 Local $0 MoDOT#5S3421 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 Total $0 $150,000 $1,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $151,000 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA HSIP $4,500 $4,500 $9,000 MoDOT Safety $500 $500 $1,000 TIP #2020-12 Local $0 MoDOT#5S3418 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 Total $0 $5,000 $5,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $10,000 Funding Prior Funding Project Name:Scoping on S. Ten Mile Drive E N G MoDOT E N G Description & Location: Traffic safety studies at various locations in Central District R O W Description & Location: Scoping for intersection safety improvements at South Ten Mile Drive in Jefferson City R O W C O N S T Comments: Total Project Cost: $10,000 C O N S T Comments: Total Project Cost: $151,000 MoDOT Funding State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 Project Name:Traffic Safety Studies Prior Funding State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program 24 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA HSIP $248,400 $540,000 $1,041,300 $1,829,700 MoDOT Safety $27,600 $60,000 $115,700 $203,300 TIP #2020-14 Local $0 MoDOT#5P3222 Other $0 FHWA HSIP $4,500 $4,500 MoDOT Safety $500 $500 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA HSIP $4,764,600 $4,764,600 MoDOT Safety $529,400 $529,400 Local $0 Other $0 Total $276,000 $600,000 $6,456,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $7,332,000 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA HSIP $18,900 $360,000 $1,331,100 $1,710,000 MoDOT Safety $2,100 $40,000 $147,900 $190,000 TIP #2020-15 Local $0 MoDOT#5P3195 Other $0 FHWA HSIP $9,000 $9,000 MoDOT Safety $1,000 $1,000 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA HSIP $4,736,700 $4,736,700 MoDOT Safety $526,300 $526,300 Local $0 Other $0 Total $21,000 $400,000 $6,752,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $7,173,000 C O N S T Comments: Total Project Cost: $7,173,000 Total Project Cost: $7,332,000 MoDOT Project Name:Intersection Improvements E N G Description & Location: Intersection safety improvements at various locations in Miller and Cole County, including median openings on US 54. R O W C O N S T Comments: Funding Prior Funding State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 MoDOT Funding Prior Funding State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 Project Name:Intersection Improvements E N G Description & Location: Intersection safety improvements at various locations in Boone and Callaway County. R O W DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program 25 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 TIP #2020-02 Local ORTA $2,865 $2,865 MoDOT#Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA RTP $14,149 $14,148 $28,297 Local ORTA $7,060 $7,060 $14,120 Local COJ - P&R $750 $750 $1,500 Local Private $1,250 $1,250 $2,500 Total $0 $26,074 $23,208 $0 $0 $0 $0 $49,282 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA Adv. Con. $247,200 $1,753,600 $2,000,800 MoDOT TCOS $61,800 $438,400 $500,200 TIP #2020-16 Local $0 MoDOT#5S3369 Other $0 FHWA Adv. Con.$328,800 $328,800 MoDOT TCOS $82,200 $82,200 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA Adv. Con.$8,550,400 $8,550,400 MoDOT TCOS $2,137,600 $2,137,600 Local $0 Other $0 Total $309,000 $13,291,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $13,600,000 Description & Location: Upgrade pedestrian facilities to comply with the ADA Transition Plan at various locations in the Central District. R O W C O N S T Comments: $7,130,000 Statewide Transportation Alternatives funds. Potential Design/Build project. Comments: Monetary donations provided by City of Jefferson Parks and Recreation Department and Midwest Block & Brick MoDOT Funding Prior Funding State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 Project Name:Updating Pedestrian Facilities E N G Pedestrian & Bicycle Projects Description & Location: Construction of 1.3 mi of singletrack trail, features & signage, and 0.4 mi. kid's loop trail. R O W C O N S T Binder Bike Park Phase 1 E N G Total Project Cost: $49,282 Total Project Cost: $13,600,000 Funding Prior Funding State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 Project Name: Osage Region Trail Association DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program 26 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals Other Pass. Fares $171,377 $173,091 $174,821 $176,570 $178,335 $874,194 MoDOT State Operating $11,415 $11,415 $11,415 $11,415 $11,415 $57,075 TIP #2011-04 Local General Fund $1,156,546 $1,179,677 $1,203,271 $1,227,336 $1,251,883 $6,018,713 MoDOT#FTA 5307 $810,661 $822,821 $835,163 $847,691 $860,406 $4,176,742 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 Total $0 $2,149,999 $2,187,004 $2,224,670 $2,263,012 $2,302,039 $0 $11,126,724 O P E R Project Name:Operating Assistance State Program Year - July 1 to June 30Prior Funding Public Transportation Projects Funding Description & Location: Operating Assistance for JEFFTRAN service w ithin city limits of Jefferson City (A 3% annual inflation factor applied.) City of Jefferson - JEFFTRAN R O W C O N S T Comments: Total Project Cost: $11,126,724 DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program 27 Figure 12 - Map of Fiscally Constrained Transportation Projects DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program 28 Program of Projects - OATS Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FHWA 5310 $100,000 $100,000 $200,000 MoDOT $0 TIP #2018-10 Local $0 MoDOT#Other OATS $50,000 $50,000 $100,000 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 Total $0 $0 $150,000 $0 $150,000 $0 $0 $300,000 Source Category 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Future Totals FTA 5310 $30,770 $40,000 $60,000 $75,000 $75,000 $75,000 $355,770 MoDOT $0 TIP #2018-11 Local $30,770 $40,000 $60,000 $75,000 $75,000 $75,000 $355,770 MoDOT#Other $4,900 $5,000 $5,000 $5,100 $5,100 $5,100 $30,200 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 FHWA $0 MoDOT $0 Local $0 Other $0 Total $66,440 $85,000 $125,000 $155,100 $155,100 $155,100 $0 $741,740 Description & Location: Requesting replacement/expansion vehicles to provide s ervice in Jefferson City and surrounding area Total Project Cost: $741,740 OATS Project Name:Operating Assistance O P E R Capital Funding - Vehicles C A P I T Funding R O W C O N S T Comments: Other Funding - OATS, Inc. Total Project Cost: $300,000 OATS Project Name: State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 Prior Funding State Program Year - July 1 to June 30 Description & Location: Within the Jefferson City MPO Region-Section 5310-Seniors and Individuals w ith Disablilities R O W C O N S T Comments: Other Funding - OATS, Inc. Funding Prior Funding DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program 29 Figure 13 - Program of Projects - JEFFTRAN Item Description Total Funding by Others Local 1 Replace paratransit widebody cutaway buses 150,000$ $ 120,000 30,000$ 2 Replace paratransit software and associated hardware 30,000$ 24,000$ 6,000$ 3 Replace low-floor minivan support vehicle 40,000$ -$ 40,000$ 4 Replace transit administration vehicle 30,000$ 30,000$ 5 Upgrade/replace fare card system 300,000$ 240,000$ 60,000$ 6 Repair Transfer Facility Roof (Bus Transfer Shelter)12,000$ -$ 12,000$ 7 Transit facility improvements--ridge cap/flashing replacements/roof repair on bus barn 50,000$ 40,000$ 10,000$ 8 Security upgrades for transit facilities 30,000$ 24,000$ 6,000$ 9 Replace outdated bus security camera systems 60,000$ 48,000$ 12,000$ 10 Update/revise Transit facilities feasability study 150,000$ -$ 150,000$ 11 Purchase and install bus shelters at various locations in Jefferson City 30,000$ 24,000$ 6,000$ 12 Transit facility improvements, including replace overhead doors and door operators 95,000$ 76,000$ 19,000$ 13 JEFFTRAN lighted signs for exterior of transit facilities 15,000$ 12,000$ 3,000$ 14 Purchase emergency back-up generator & switches for transit and CM facilities 100,000$ 80,000$ 20,000$ 15 Replace low-floor route buses 3,000,000$ 2,400,000$ 600,000$ 16 Construct new new transit and central maintenace facilities 7,000,000$ 5,600,000$ 1,400,000$ 17 Transit admin facility rehab 50,000$ 40,000$ 10,000$ 18 Purchase and install additional transit traveler kiosks (each)15,000$ 12,000$ 3,000$ 19 Add bike racks at passenger transfer facilities and selected bus stops 5,000$ -$ 5,000$ 20 Enhance/replace security systems for buses and transit facilities 20,000$ 16,000$ 4,000$ 21 Charging systems/electrical upgrades for buses 100,000$ 80,000$ 20,000$ 22 Add crosswalks to various locations around the city 60,000$ -$ 60,000$ 23 Rehabilitate/replace bus wash facility 100,000$ 80,000$ 20,000$ JEFFTRAN Program of Projects Illustrative Projects DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program 30 Multimodal Projects In 2015, CAMPO met with federal and state planning partners in a formal planning process review. Within two recommendations made, CAMPO was urged to include more multi-modal projects into the TIP. CAMPO staff sent out written requests and reminders at CAMPO meetings for projects, including those not using federal dollars. As of the writing of this document, no projects have been submitted. However, there are a number of factors why these projects are limited. These types of projects are usually incorporated into new road projects. Many of these types of projects are highly dependent on grants, which may or may not be annually awarded. Projects are usually decided each budget year. There are several bicycle or pedestrian projects in the MTP illustrative list, but projects are not constrained and funds are not obligated. Regionally Significant Projects In 2020, MoDOT has proposed a rehabilitation of the Rocheport Bridge, located along Interstate 70 over the Missouri River between Boone and Howard Counties. During the duration of this project, travel inside the CAMPO region will be affected. I-70, and thus Rocheport Bridge, is at the heart of national and regional distribution carrying approximately 100 million tons of freight, worth more than $154 billion, annually. More than 20 percent of this freight is through-traffic, traveling from rural areas in the west on to New York, New England, and the Mid-Atlantic. Rocheport Bridge is 60 years old and will only last 10 more years, even with the planned rehabilitation. Rehabilitation of Rocheport Bridge will require closing two lanes for seven to nine months, with predicted traffic modeling of three to eight hour backups. Rocheport Bridge carries 12.5 million vehicles per year, including 3.6 million trucks. While the surrounding area is rural, there are a number of mid-sized cities within close proximity to the bridge – including Columbia and Jefferson City – and it connects Missouri’s two largest cities of St. Louis and Kansas City. During traffic delays, long distance trucking would likely divert to Arkansas or Iowa to move across the U.S., while local traffic is expected to re-route on US Routes 40, 36, 63 and 50. DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program 31 Appendix A – Amendments and Administrative Modifications Amendments TIP No. Project Description Project Sponsor Project Cost Board Approval OneDOT Approval TIP Amendment 1 Administrative Modifications TIP No. Project Description Project Sponsor Project Cost Date DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program 32 Appendix B – Federal Funding Sources FHWA Programs Eligible Activities National Highway Performance Program (NHPP) https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/fastact/factsheets/nhppfs.pd f The NHPP provides support for the condition and performance of the National Highway System (NHS), for the construction of new facilities on the NHS, and to ensure that investments of Federal-aid funds in highway construction are directed to support progress toward the achievement of performance targets established in a State's asset management plan for the NHS. Surface Transportation Program (STP) https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/fastact/factsheets/stbgfs.pdf The Surface Transportation Program (STP) provides flexible funding that may be used by States and localities for projects to preserve and improve the conditions and performance on any Federal-aid highway, bridge and tunnel projects on any public road, pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure, and transit capital projects, including intercity bus terminals. Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/hsip/ Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) is to support a significant reduction in traffic fatalities and serious injuries on all public roads, including non-State-owned public roads and roads on tribal lands Transportation Alternatives (TA) https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/fastact/factsheets/transporta tionalternativesfs.pdf The FAST Act eliminates the MAP-21 Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP) and replaces it with a set-aside of Surface Transportation Block Grant (STBG) program funding for transportation alternatives (TA). These set-aside funds include all projects and activities that were previously eligible under TAP. Railway-Highway Crossings (set-aside from HSIP) https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/fastact/factsheets/railwayhw ycrossingsfst.pdf This program funds safety improvements to reduce the number of fatalities, injuries, and crashes at public grade crossings. FTA Programs Eligible Activities Section 5307 Urbanized Area Formula Grants https://www.transit.dot.gov/funding/grants/urbanized- area-formula-grants-5307 This program provides grants to Urbanized Areas (UZA) for public transportation capital, planning, job access and reverse commute projects, as well as operating expenses in certain circumstances. Section 5310 Enhanced Mobility of Seniors and Individuals with Disabilities https://www.transit.dot.gov/funding/grants/enhanced- mobility-seniors-individuals-disabilities-section-5310 This program is intended to enhance mobility for seniors and persons with disabilities by providing funds for programs to serve the special needs of transit-dependent populations beyond traditional public transportation services and Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) complementary paratransit services. Section 5311 Formula Grants for Rural Areas https://www.transit.dot.gov/rural-formula-grants-5311 This program provides capital, planning, and operating assistance to states to support public transportation in rural areas with populations less than 50,000, where many residents often rely on public transit to reach their destinations. Section 5329 Transit Safety & Oversight https://www.transit.dot.gov/sites/fta.dot.gov/files/docs /5329_Safety_Program_Fact_Sheet.pdf This section requires FTA to implement and maintain a national public transportation safety program to improve the safety of all public transportation systems that receive federal funding. The safety program includes a national public transportation safety plan, a safety certification training program, a public transportation agency safety plan, and a state safety oversight program. Section 5339 Bus and Bus Facilities https://www.transit.dot.gov/funding/grants/busprogram Provides capital funding to replace, rehabilitate and purchase buses and related equipment and to construct bus-related facilities. DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program 33 Appendix C – Policies and Procedures Amendments An amendment involves a major change to a project and requires approval by the Board of Directors and Governor. An amendment is a revision that requires public review, allowance of comment, possible re- demonstration of fiscal constraint, and includes at least one of the following: • Addition or deletion of a project using FHWA or FTA funds (except as allowed as an administrative modification), • Major changes affecting project cost from FHWA or FTA sources (changes exceeding 20% of FHWA or FTA sources of the existing project cost or changes over $2,000,000), • Major changes in a project phase initiation date (greater than 12 months), or • Major changes in design concept or design scope, such as changing project termini (more than 1/2 mile or 10% of the total length of the project, whichever is greater) or changing the number of through traffic lanes that also includes a substantial increase in Federal cost. Amendments will be initiated by the project sponsor. Amendments to delete a project can simply be made via written correspondence identifying the project and why it is to be removed from the TIP. Amendments to include a new project can be made on the TIP Project Form for the current TIP with a cover letter or remark in the comment section requesting inclusion in the TIP as an amendment. Amendments for existing projects can be made on the TIP Project Form for the current TIP with a cover letter or remark in the comment section highlighting the change in the project and providing the CAMPO TIP Number. After an Amendment has been requested the process as follows: • Staff will review the amendment for accuracy and to verify if an amendment is required or if the change qualifies as an administrative modification. Staff may consult with MoDOT and FHWA if necessary. • The amendment will be placed on the next Technical Committee (TC) meeting agenda for review. • The Technical Committee is an advisory board to the board of directors. Regardless of whether the Technical Committee recommends approval of a project, does not recommend approval of a project, or is unable to make a recommendation, the project shall still proceed to the Board of Directors to make a final decision. • If approval is recommended by the TC to the Board of Directors, staff will post the amendment notice on the website, initiating a minimum 7 calendar day public comment period, send notices to the appropriate parties, and place the amendment on the next Board of Directors meeting agenda. • At the Board of Directors Meeting, a public hearing will close the public comment period and a vote for approval will be held. If the project sponsor indicates an emergency situation upon submitting the amendment, staff will initiate the public comment period, staff will post the amendment notice on the website, initiating a minimum 7 calendar day public comment period, send notices to the appropriate parties, and place the amendment on the next Board of Directors meeting agenda. A public hearing will close the public comment period at the next Board of Directors Meeting and hold a vote for approval. If this is not adequate to meet the emergency situation, a special Board of Directors meeting may be called and proceed as outlined in the Public Participation Plan. DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program 34 Administrative Modifications Revisions to the TIP and TIP projects that do not meet the criteria of an Amendment will be considered administrative modifications including: minor changes to project/project phase costs, minor changes to funding sources of previously-included projects, and minor changes to project/project phase initiation dates. An administrative modification is a revision that neither requires committee action, public review and comment, nor redemonstrates fiscal constraint. An administrative modification will be initiated by the project sponsor by written communication to CAMPO staff describing the change (phase cost, funding sources, or phase initiation date) warranting the modification. Staff will review the administrative modification for accuracy and to verify qualification as an administrative modification. Staff may consult with MoDOT and FHWA if necessary. Upon CAMPO staff confirmation of the administrative modification requirements being met, staff will modify the TIP appropriately, including noting the administrative modification in Appendix A of the TIP and making changes to the project listing in the body of the TIP; notify the Board of Directors, Technical Committee, MoDOT, FTA, and FHWA via email; draft a staff memo for the next Board of Directors and Technical Committee meeting; and post the modified TIP notice on the CAMPO website for a minimum of 7 calendar days. Combining or Splitting Projects Splitting a project into two or more projects or combining two or more projects can provide benefits to project scheduling, cost, and logistics. A split or combination can be made via an administrative modification to the TIP, if the project does not trigger a major change to the project as described in the amendment section and the overall scope of work does not change. When combining two or more projects, the financial and description information will be rolled up into the project which was in the TIP originally and use the previous MPO TIP number. When splitting a project into two or more projects, the financial and descriptive information will be separated appropriately into several (two or more) projects using the same MPO TIP number, but the additional projects will include alphabetic suffixes. The process for splitting or combining projects will follow the procedures of either an amendment or administrative modification. Compliance with Metropolitan Transportation Plan For a project to be eligible for the TIP, it first must be included in the adopted MTP. Large capital projects, roadway capacity, and/or general purpose roadway projects must be individually listed or clearly part of a larger project included in the fiscally‐constrained component of the plan. Certain projects seeking to improve safety, increase multi‐modal opportunities, or enhance the existing transportation system may be programmed in the TIP without individual identification in the regional plan, so long as they are consistent with the established goals and objectives of the plan. Project Delay Policy The goal of the Project Delay Policy for the Transportation Improvement Program is to maximize the federal funding obligated each fiscal year and to enable the MPO to redirect funds to different projects if any are inactive or otherwise limited from making progress. The Delay Policy applies to projects funded through the programs for which CAMPO has oversight of project selection. The intent of the Delay Policy is to provide an incentive for local agency sponsors to develop their projects according to a detailed schedule and, thereby, to obligate the federal funds assigned to each project DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program 35 within the timeframes initially shown in the TIP. The Delay Policy is primarily focused on projects that involve construction or provide transportation improvements that are handled through purchasing procedures. In the context of this Delay Policy, a “delay” occurs when a construction-related project phase does not get advertised within six months of the TIP program year in which its construction phase funding was originally programmed, or changed with an amendment, in the TIP. For non-construction projects and programs, a “delay” occurs when the “Notice to Proceed” is not issued within two months of the TIP program year in which its implementation was originally funded in the TIP. The consequence of a delay may be the withdrawal of its Federal funds from the TIP or other action by the Board. Project Funding Information When a new project is submitted for inclusion to the TIP, either during the initial development of the TIP or as an amendment, the project sponsor is required to provide information regarding the local funding sources in order to show fiscal constraint. The specific source of revenue, anticipated future, and any other financial information needed to show fiscal constraint will be required. Project Selection The CAMPO Board of Directors adopted (Resolution 2010-04) a project prioritization and selection process. This process involves a call for projects, ranking based on CAMPO priorities by staff and reviewed by the CAMPO Technical Committee, prior to being forwarded to the CAMPO Board of Directors for a vote of approval. The Board of Directors may modify the project selection it deems necessary. Project Sponsor Commitment to Projects Project sponsors hold ultimate responsibility for ensuring that project information contained in the TIP is correct, that it accurately represents the scope of work being performed, and that the amount of funding being requested is correct. The sponsor is responsible for providing CAMPO with an honest accounting of project details including: costs, implementation schedules, and local matching fund sources, at the time of the application for federal funds and anytime such details change. The project sponsor is also responsible for reviewing the TIP after a project is included or modified to ensure correctness. Scriveners’ Error Errors made the in the ministerial functions of creating and maintaining the TIP, such as cartography, typographical, spelling, minor word omissions, mathematical, and other error’s which do not alter the intent of the TIP and have little or no impact can be performed by staff and shall not be considered a revision to the TIP. DRAFT CAMPO 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program 36 Appendix D – Definitions Attainment area means any geographic area in which levels of a given criteria air pollutant (e.g., ozone, carbon monoxide, PM10, PM2.5, and nitrogen dioxide) meet the health-based National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for that pollutant. An area may be an attainment area for one pollutant and a nonattainment area for others. A maintenance area (see definition below) is not considered an attainment area for transportation planning purposes. Available funds means funds derived from an existing source dedicated to or historically used for transportation purposes. For Federal funds, authorized and/or appropriated funds and the extrapolation of formula and discretionary funds at historic rates of increase are considered available. A similar approach may be used for State and local funds that are dedicated to or historically used for transportation purposes. Conformity means a Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7506(c)) requirement that ensures that Federal funding and approval are given to transportation plans, programs and projects that are consistent with the air quality goals established by a State Implementation Plan (SIP). Conformity, to the purpose of the SIP, means that transportation activities will not cause new air quality violations, worsen existing violations, or delay timely attainment of the NAAQS. The transportation conformity rule (40 CFR part 93) sets forth policy, criteria, and procedures for demonstrating and assuring conformity of transportation activities. Cooperation means that the parties involved in carrying out the transportation planning and programming processes work together to achieve a common goal or objective. Coordination means the cooperative development of plans, programs, and schedules among agencies and entities with legal standing and adjustment of such plans, programs, and schedules to achieve general consistency, as appropriate. Design concept means the type of facility identified for a transportation improvement project (e.g., freeway, expressway, arterial highway, grade separated highway, toll road, reserved right-of-way rail transit, mixed-traffic rail transit, or busway). Design scope means the aspects that will affect the proposed facility’s impact on the region, usually as they relate to vehicle or person carrying capacity and control (e.g., number of lanes or tracks to be constructed or added, length of project, signalization, safety features, access control including approximate number and location of interchanges, or preferential treatment for high occupancy vehicles). Financial Plan means documentation required to be included with a metropolitan transportation plan and TIP (and optional for the long-range statewide transportation plan and STIP) that demonstrates the consistency between reasonably available and projected sources of Federal, State, local, and private revenues and the costs of implementing proposed transportation system improvements. Financially Constrained or Fiscal Constraint means that the metropolitan transportation plan, TIP, and STIP includes sufficient financial information for demonstrating that projects in the metropolitan transportation plan, TIP, and STIP can be implemented using committed, available, or reasonably available revenue sources, with reasonable assurance that the federally supported transportation system is being adequately operated and maintained. For the TIP and the STIP, financial constraint/fiscal constraint applies to each program year. Additionally, projects in air quality nonattainment and maintenance areas can be included in the first two years of the TIP and STIP only if funds are available or committed. Illustrative Project means an additional transportation project that may (but is not required to) be included in a financial plan for a metropolitan transportation plan, TIP, or STIP if reasonable additional resources were to become available. Maintenance Area means any geographic region of the United States that the EPA previously designated as a nonattainment area for one or more pollutants pursuant to the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, and subsequently redesignated as an attainment area subject to the requirement to develop a maintenance plan under section 175A of the Clean Air Act, as amended. Major Projects - These transportation improvements are defined as projects receiving Federal financial assistance 1) with an estimated total cost of $500 million or more or 2) that have been identified by the FHWA as being a Major Project. The designated projects may include those: 1) that require a substantial amount of a State Transportation Agency's program resources, 2) that have a high level of public or congressional attention, or 3) that have extraordinary implications for the national transportation system. Metropolitan Planning Area (MPA) means the geographic area determined by agreement between the metropolitan planning organization (MPO) for the area and the Governor, in which the metropolitan transportation planning process is carried out. Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) means the official multimodal transportation plan addressing no less than a 20-year planning horizon that is developed, adopted, and updated by CAMPO through the metropolitan transportation planning process. Nonattainment area means any geographic region of the United States that has been designated by the EPA as a nonattainment area under section 107 of the Clean Air Act for any pollutants for which an NAAQS exists. Obligated projects means strategies and projects funded under title 23 U.S.C. and title 49 U.S.C. Chapter 53 for which the supporting Federal funds were authorized and committed by the State or designated recipient in the preceding program year, and authorized by the FHWA or awarded as a grant by the FTA. Program of Projects (POP) is a list of projects to be funded in a grant application submitted to FTA by a designated recipient. The POP lists the subrecipients and indicates whether they are private non-profit agencies, governmental authorities, or private providers of transportation service, designates the areas served (including rural areas), and identifies any tribal entities. In addition, the POP includes a brief description of the projects, total project cost, and Federal share for each project. Project selection means the procedures followed by MPOs, States, and public transportation operators to advance projects from the first four years of an approved TIP and/or STIP to implementation, in accordance with agreed upon procedures. Project sponsor must be a city, county, state, or other transportation related government agency eligible to receive federal funding from the Federal Highway or Federal Transit Administrations. All other entities must partner with a city, county, or state agency to apply for and/or administer a transportation project. Public transportation operator means the public entity which participates in the continuing, cooperative, and comprehensive transportation planning process in accordance with 23 U.S.C. 134 and 135 and 49 U.S.C. 5303 and 5304, and is the designated recipient of Federal funds under title 49 U.S.C. Chapter 53 for transportation by a conveyance that provides regular and continuing general or special transportation to the public, but does not include school bus, charter, or intercity bus transportation or intercity passenger rail transportation provided by Amtrak. Regionally significant project means a transportation project (other than projects that may be grouped in the TIP and/or STIP or exempt projects as defined in EPA’s transportation conformity regulation (40 CFR part 93)) that is on a facility which serves regional transportation needs (such as access to and from the area outside the region; major activity centers in the region; major planned developments such as new retail malls, sports complexes, or employment centers; or transportation terminals) and would normally be included in the modeling of the metropolitan area’s transportation network. At a minimum, this includes all principal arterial highways and all fixed guideway transit facilities that offer a significant alternative to regional highway travel. Statewide transportation improvement program (STIP) means a statewide prioritized listing/program of transportation projects covering a period of four years that is consistent with the long-range statewide transportation plan, metropolitan transportation plans, and TIPs, and required for projects to be eligible for funding under title 23 U.S.C. and title 49 U.S.C. Chapter 53. Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) is a document prepared by a metropolitan planning organization that lists projects to be funded with FHWA/FTA funds for the at least next one- to three-year period. Unified Planning Work Plan (UPWP) is the management plan for the (metropolitan) planning program. Its purpose is to coordinate the planning activities of all participants in the planning process. DRAFT Individuals should contact the ADA Coordinator at (573) 634 -6570 to request accommodations or alternative formats as required under the Americans with Disabilities Act. Please allow three business days to process the request. CAMPO Board of Directors Staff Report Status of Current Work Tasks June 19, 2019 Summary The following list includes work tasks that are currently in progress or have been completed since the previous Board of Directors meeting:  CAMPO 2045 & Beyond Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP). Completed  Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). Completed Upcoming 2020 Work Tasks CAMPO staff will being work on the following activities in summer and fall 2019:  Development of the CAMPO Major Thoroughfare Plan  Datat assistance - transportation and land use, Jefferson City Comprehensive Plan Update  Limited English Proficiency Plan - Update  Public Participation Plan - Update  Title VI Plan - Update  Local technical assistance as requested Agenda Item 8A Individuals should contact the ADA Coordinator at (573) 634 -6570 to request accommodations or alternative formats as required under the Americans with Disabilities Act. Please allow three business days to process the request. CAMPO Board of Directors Staff Report MoDOT/Planning Partner Prioritization Exercise June 19, 2019 Summary MoDOT Central District met with the 5 Planning Partner agencies on April 22 and June 3 to discuss high priority unfunded projects in response to possible future funding scenarios. The exercise envisions $186.6 Million in additional project funding within the Central District. CAMPO staff represented the illustrative priority list approved by the Board on April 17 at the Planning Partner meetings, with an emphasis on the Missouri River Bridge Corridor 3 lane expansion need (and associated improvements at the tri-level and US 50 south of downtown Jefferson City) and intersection improvement needs arising due to traffic backing up onto 4-lane roadways within the CAMPO area, including the intersections of US 50 and Country Club/Truman Boulevard, US 50 and Dix Road, US 54 and Ellis/Southwest Boulevard, and US 54 and Simon Boulevard in Holts Summit. The resulting list of projects for the Central District is attached. The two projects on the list for the CAMPO area include the US 54/63 Missouri River Bridge Corridor 3 lane expansion (which is recognized as a high traffic congestion area of regional significance) and intersection improvements at US 50 and Country Club/Truman Boulevard (which is believed by staff to be the greatest traffic volume and safety concern of the four intersections represented). MoDOT Central District is seeking any comments that the CAMPO Board may have, on both local projects and projects outside the CAMPO area, as they move the priority list forward. Agenda Item 8B