HomeMy Public PortalAbout2021-01-20 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, January 20, 2021 at 12:00 p.m.
DUE TO COVID-19/SOCIAL DISTANCING RECOMMENDATIONS, THIS MEETING WILL BE VIRTUAL ONLY.
TO JOIN VIRTUALLY: CLICK HERE
CALL-IN AVAILABLE AT: 1-404-397-1516
MEETING NUMBER: 146 524 8456 MEETING PASSWORD: 1234
All interested parties will be given a chance to be heard.
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 27, 2020
5. Communications Received
A. ONE DOT approval of 2021-2025 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP)
B. ONE DOT approval of FY 2021 Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP)
C. FY 2021 Consolidated Planning Grant (CPG) Agreement with MoDOT
D. 2020 Request for Nominations for Alternative Fuel Corridor (AFC) Designations - Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA)
6. New Business
A. Traffic Crash Analysis Report – Staff Presentation
Action Requested: Review and discussion
Staff Report: Staff has a prepared report on crash statistics as they relate to major intersections and thoroughfares
that are currently included in the CAMPO Illustrative List. See the attached report for more detail.
B. Federal Performance Measures - Safety
Action Requested: Review, discussion, and approval the updated 2021 Safety Performance targets
Staff Report: Refer to staff report on the update of the federal safety performance targets and how they were
determined.
C. Illustrative List Update
Action Requested: Review, discussion, and approval of the updated Illustrative List.
Staff Report: Refer to staff report on the update of the illustrative list.
D. Voting Procedures Analysis
Action Requested: Review and discussion.
Staff Report: Refer to staff report and attached document.
7. Other Business
A. Status of Current Work Tasks
B. 2022-2026 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) – Annual update of the TIP is underway
C. FY 2022 Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP) – Annual development of the UPWP is underway
D. 2021 Coordinated Public Transit – Human Services Transportation Plan Update
E. Election of Officers
F. 2021 Meeting Calendar
G. Announcements
8. Next Meeting Date – Wednesday, February 17, 2020 at 12:00 p.m. – Planned to be virtual meeting.
9. Adjournment
Capital Area Metropolitan
Planning Organization
320 E. McCarty, Jefferson City, MO 65101 Phone 573.634.6410 Fax 573.634.6457
Minutes/Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization Board of Directors
May 27, 2020 1
MINUTES
Board of Directors
CAPITAL AREA M ETROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION
May 27, 2020
12:00 p.m.
BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT
Larry Benz, P.E., Cole County
Roger Fisher, Callaway County
Ron Fitzwater, Chairman, Jefferson City
Jon Hensley, Jefferson City
Jeff Hoelscher, Vice Chairman, Cole County
Mark Mehmert, Jefferson City
Matt Morasch, Jefferson City
Doug Reece, St. Martins, Small Cities Representative
Sonny Sanders, Jefferson City
Machelle Watkins, MoDOT
BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT
David Kemna, Jefferson City
Hannah Lechner, Holts Summit
Rick Mihalevich, Jefferson City
EX-OFFICIO MEMBERS PRESENT (Non-Voting)
Michael Henderson, MoDOT
EX-OFFICIO MEMBERS ABSENT (Non-Voting)
Randy Allen, Jefferson City Chamber of Commerce
Cathy Monroe, FTA
Brad McMahon, FHWA
Cathy Brown
CAMPO STAFF PRESENT (Non-Voting)
Eric Barron, Planning Manager
Beth Sweeten, Administrative Assistant
Lee Bowden, Planner
Katrina Williams, Planner
1. Call to order, roll call, and determination of a quorum.
Chairman Fitzwater called the meeting to order at 12:01 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. Morasch moved and Mr. Benz seconded to adopt the agenda. The motion passed
unanimously.
4. Approval of the minutes from the meeting of February 19, 2020
Mr. Morasch moved and Mr. Benz seconded to approve the minutes from the Regular Meeting of
February 19, 2020 as printed. The motion passed unanimously.
5. Communications Received
Mr. Barron went over one correspondence received from MoDOT regarding their decision to
delay adoption of the MoDOT Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP).
Minutes/Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization Board of Directors
May 27, 2020 2
6. New Business
A. 2021-2025 TIP (Transportation Improvement Program)
Mr. Bowden explained that the Transportation Improvement Program (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. The TIP is updated annually by
CAMPO in cooperation with local jurisdictions, the Missouri Department of Transportation, and
local public transportation operators.
He stated 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 adoption of the
2021-2025 TIP.
Mr. Barron mentioned that staff was not able to get a recommendation from the CAMPO
Technical Committee, due to Covid-19. A public comment period was opened and closes today
at the meeting.
Mr. Morasch moved and Mr. Benz seconded to approve by resolution the adoption of the
Program Year 2021-2025 Transportation Improvement Program. The motion passed
unanimously.
B. 2021 UPWP (Unified Planning Work Program)
Ms. Williams stated that Staff completed work on the FY2021 Unified Planning Work Program
(UPWP). The UPWP is CAMPO’s annual statement of work identifying the budget, planning
priorities, and activities to be carried out for the year (November 1to October 31). The UPWP
contains many ongoing, periodic, and one-time activities required to perform the essential
functions of CAMPO. The annual process of developing the UPWP starts very early due to the
City of Jefferson’s budget process. Comments and edits received from internal staff, Technical
Committee members, MoDOT, and the Federal Highway Administration have been addressed.
The FY 2021 UPWP is included as an attachment to this staff report. The budget for FY2021 is
$233,975.
Mr. Barron stated that a 7 day public comment period was opened and it closed yesterday. He
also mentioned that we were not able to get a recommendation from the CAMPO Technical
Committee, due to Covid-19, but that they are familiar with the program.
Mr. Morasch moved and Mr. Benz seconded to approve of the Resolution Adopting the Fiscal
Year 2021 Unified Planning Work Program. The motion passed unanimously.
7. Other Business
A. Status of current work tasks
2021-2025 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). Staff has completed the
2021-2025 TIP.
FY 2021 Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP) Development. Staff has completed
the FY 2021 UPWP.
Federal Performance Measures. Staff continues collaborating with MODOT staff
concerning various federal performance measures required by the FAST Act.
Jefferson City Data Assistance. Staff is working with Jefferson City planners in
providing data and mapping assistance in the update of the of the City’s Comprehensive
Plan.
JEFFTRAN Assistance. Staff is assisting JEFFTRAN staff with making modifications to
Minutes/Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization Board of Directors
May 27, 2020 3
route guides.
Major Thoroughfare Plan Development. Staff continues work on the Major
Thoroughfare Plan in conjunction with the development of the Jefferson City
Comprehensive Plan. The Major Thoroughfare Plan will be developed through
stakeholder input and will pull directly from the recently completed Travel Demand Model.
Board of Directors Voting Procedures. Staff, as directed by the Board of Directors,
continues to research voting procedures at other MPOs. Staff will provide a report at the
next CAMPO Board of Directors meeting.
Traffic Crash Analysis Report. Staff has developed a report on crash statistics as they
relate to major intersections and thoroughfares that are currently included in the CAMPO
Illustrative List. A report will be given at a future Board of Directors meeting.
8. Next Meeting Date – Wednesday, June 17, 2020 p.m. in the Boone/Bancroft Room #200
9. Adjournment
Mr. Morasch moved and Mr. Benz seconded to adjourn the meeting at 12:39 p.m. The motion
passed unanimously.
Respectfully Submitted,
Beth Sweeten, Administrative Assistant
CAMPO Board of Directors Staff Report
Traffic Crash Report
January 20, 2021
Summary
Staff has a prepared report on Traffic Crashes from 2014-2018 for the CAMPO Board of Directors. The
CAMPO Board of Directors requested the report. See the attached report for more detail.
Agenda Item 6A
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.
Page | 1
Traffic Crash Analysis 2020
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.
AGENDA ITEM 6A
Page | 2
Table of Contents
Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................................ 3
Crash Analysis ......................................................................................................................................................................... 3
Holts Summit ......................................................................................................................................................................... 10
St. Martins ............................................................................................................................................................................. 12
Taos ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 14
Wardsville ............................................................................................................................................................................. 16
Jefferson City ......................................................................................................................................................................... 18
1. Missouri River Bridge .................................................................................................................................................... 25
2. US 50/63, US 54 to Lafayette Street ............................................................................................................................. 27
3. The Tri-Level .................................................................................................................................................................. 30
4. Missouri Blvd, Stoneridge Pkwy to US 50 ..................................................................................................................... 32
Missouri Blvd Continued ................................................................................................................................................... 38
5. Missouri Blvd, Country Club Dr to Stoneridge Pkwy ..................................................................................................... 42
6. Jefferson St. and US 54 ................................................................................................................................................. 46
7. Ellis Blvd and US 54 ....................................................................................................................................................... 48
8. US 50/Dix Rd ................................................................................................................................................................. 50
9. Truman Blvd and US 50 ................................................................................................................................................. 52
10. MO 179 Interchange .................................................................................................................................................. 54
11. Edgewood Dr. and MO 179 ......................................................................................................................................... 56
Summary ............................................................................................................................................................................... 58
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
AGENDA ITEM 6A
Page | 3
Introduction
This Traffic Crash Analysis is designed to provide an overview of the crash data for the Capital Area Metropolitan
Planning Organization (CAMPO). It focuses specifically on the number of crashes that have occurred overall and in
specific areas that have resulted in significant property damage, injury, or death. Data was provided by the Missouri
Department of Transportation (MoDOT), with the assistance of the Missouri State Highway Patrol (MSHP) for traffic
incidents in the CAMPO region from 2014 to 2018. This Traffic Crash Analysis is intended to be used internally by
CAMPO planners to identify and address areas of safety concerns.
Crash Analysis
From 2014 to 2018 there were 7,833 crashes within the CAMPO region. Of those 7,833 crashes, 1,952 of them
resulted in both minor and serious injuries, and 30 resulted in fatalities. The fatality ratio for the CAMPO region is well
below the national rate of 0.67%, with only 0.31% of all crashes in the CAMPO region resulting in a fatality. To reduce
that number of fatalities to 0, we need to look at specific areas that may be of concern. Through statistical analysis of
the available data we will be able to make more informed decisions, seek out hot spot locations, and find real solutions
to get CAMPO and MoDOT to that zero fatality goal. The table below looks at the number of crashes per year. We see
an outlier in 2016 where crash numbers spiked in the CAMPO region, then leveled out afterwards.
AGENDA ITEM 6A
Page | 4
When we look at the Fatalities per year we see that the numbers remained steady from 2014 to 2017 then
dropped in 2018. In 2018 the fatalities dropped to only one fatality in the CAMPO region. The MoDOT statewide safety
targets show that they want to see a 13% decrease in fatalities. CAMPO supports these targets and likes to see numbers
region wide to be in line with the statewide targets. MoDOT set a fatality rate goal of just over 1 per 100 million vehicle
miles traveled. MoDOT’s final goal is to have 0 fatalities on Missouri roadways. The CAMPO counties and townships
have made many safety improvements over the past several years and it is reflected in the number of fatalities per year.
The following is a look at the Disabling injuries per year. From 2014 to 2018 we have seen that number fall from
42 serious injuries to just 31. That is a 26% reduction is severe injuries in a 5 year span. From 2016 to 2018 CAMPO only
saw an 8.8% decrease in serious injuries. MoDOT set a statewide safety target of 8% decrease per year. Also MoDOT
set a serious injury rate of just under 6 severe injuries per 100 million vehicle miles traveled. Again because of the safety
measures the CAMPO region jurisdictions have put in place we see that the numbers are moving to meet all of MoDOT’s
safety targets.
AGENDA ITEM 6A
Page | 5
AGENDA ITEM 6A
Page | 6
There are 28 crash type categories that crashes are placed into when reported. In the CAMPO region the most
common crash type is the Rear End collision, with 2,281 crashes making up 29% of all crashes in the region. Out of
Control crashes are the second most reported crash type in the CAMPO area with 1,441 crashes and making up just over
18% of all crashes in the region. Other classifications include Pedestrians, Pedal-cycles, and Other Animals just to name
a few.
AGENDA ITEM 6A
Page | 7
As was established by the previous graph, the majority of crashes are rear end collisions, resulting in injury
almost 25% of the time and make up about 29% of all crashes in the area. We see that the CAMPO average is injury
occurs in 25% of all crashes in the region. Then we see numbers that jump out are the pedestrian and pedal-cycle both
result in injury over 90% of the time. The region had 1 pedestrian fatality in that 5 year span. 12 of the fatalities were
from out of control crashes, all out of control crashes resulted in injuries one out of every 3 crashes. Out of control
crashes are generally a result of excess speed. Another number that stands out is Right Angle crashes, these crashes
result in injury 37% of the time. Other numbers that we have to look at are Head On crashes and Avoiding crashes.
Both result in injuries more that 46% of the time.
Type of Crash Fatalities Disabling
Injury Minor Injury Damage Only Grand Total
% of Total
Crashes
% that Result
in Injury
REAR END 2 19 538 1722 2281 29.12% 24.51%
OUT OF CONTROL 12 70 396 964 1441 18.40% 33.17%
LEFT TURN RIGHT ANGLE
COLLISION 0 10 141 516 667 8.52% 22.64%
RIGHT ANGLE 1 16 196 362 575 7.34% 37.04%
PARKING OR PARKED CAR 0 2 42 482 526 6.72% 8.37%
PASSING 0 4 44 467 515 6.57% 9.32%
LEFT TURN 2 9 132 362 505 6.45% 28.32%
HEAD ON 7 10 97 125 235 3.00% 48.51%
DEER 1 1 20 187 209 2.67% 10.53%
RIGHT TURN RIGHT ANGLE
COLLISION 0 0 23 142 165 2.11% 13.94%
OTHER 2 2 18 117 138 1.76% 15.94%
CHANGING LANE 0 1 11 83 95 1.21% 12.63%
PEDESTRIAN 1 19 50 5 75 0.96% 93.33%
BACKING 0 0 74 74 0.94% 0.00%
SIDESWIPE 0 4 10 55 69 0.88% 20.29%
RIGHT TURN 0 1 5 51 57 0.73% 10.53%
FIXED OBJECT 1 0 6 36 43 0.55% 16.28%
U - TURN 0 1 7 33 41 0.52% 19.51%
AVOIDING 0 4 15 18 37 0.47% 51.35%
PEDALCYCLE 0 5 16 2 23 0.29% 91.30%
DUAL LEFTS COLLIDE 0 0 1 16 17 0.22% 5.88%
ANIMAL NOT
DEER/DOG/FARM ANIMAL 0 1 0 9 10 0.13% 10.00%
DOG 0 0 0 9 9 0.11% 0.00%
CROSS MEDIAN 1 0 4 3 8 0.10% 62.50%
FARM ANIMAL 0 0 0 6 6 0.08% 0.00%
JACKKNIFE 0 0 0 5 5 0.06% 0.00%
DUAL RIGHTS COLLIDE 0 0 1 3 4 0.05% 25.00%
DEBRIS 0 0 0 3 3 0.04% 0.00%
Grand Total 30 179 1773 5857 7833 100.00% 25.30%
AGENDA ITEM 6A
Page | 8
AGENDA ITEM 6A
Page | 9
When we look at the CAMPO region as a whole we can see that there are some clusters in certain areas that we
need a closer look at. The population of the CAMPO region is 71,347 people according to the 2010 census. Jefferson
City is the largest city in the CAMPO region holding a population of 43,203, which is 60% of the population of the CAMPO
region, but Jefferson City has 86% of all the crashes in the CAMPO Region. We also need to look at the other townships
in the CAMPO region so that we get the full picture of all the crashes in the area. Holts Summit has almost 4% of all
crashes in the CAMPO region, St. Martins has just over 1%, Taos has over 1%, and Wardsville has just fewer than 2% of
all the crashes in the area. That leaves just over 5% of all the crashes that take place in Cole and Callaway counties. So
we will take a closer look at each township.
Fatalities Disabling
Injury Minor Injury Damage Only Grand Total
% of Total
Crashes
% that Result
in Injury
Holts Summit 3 9 60 236 308 3.93% 23.38%
St. Martins 0 3 25 74 102 1.30% 27.45%
Taos 2 12 22 90 126 1.61% 28.57%
Wardsville 1 3 29 100 133 1.70% 24.81%
Jefferson City 12 136 1535 5080 6763 86.34% 24.89%
City Totals 18 163 1671 5580 7432 94.88% 24.92%
AGENDA ITEM 6A
Page | 10
Holts Summit
The first area we look at is Holts Summit. Holts Summit is the farthest north township in the CAMPO region.
There are 3,926 people in Holts Summit, which makes up about 5.5% of the population in the area. There were 308
crashes in Holts Summit from 2014 to 2018, which is just under 4% of all the crashes. As you can see in the map below
the majority of the crashes in Holts Summit happen along US 54. US 54 sees a traffic volume of just under 15,000
vehicles per day. Simon Blvd between US 54 and Summit Drive sees just over 6,000 vehicles per day.
AGENDA ITEM 6A
Page | 11
When looking at the numbers of the crashes in Holts Summit we can see a few things that stand out. First we
see that a third of all the crashes in Holts Summit are Out of Control crashes. These crashes result in an injury just under
40% of the time. That is higher than the 25% of the time for the entire CAMPO region. All the accidents in Holts Summit
only result in injury just over 23% of the time, which is slightly lower than the entire area sees. Holts Summit also saw 3
fatalities between 2014 and 2018.
Type of Crash Fatalities Disabling
Injury Minor Injury Damage Only Grand Total
% of Total
Crashes
% that Result
in Injury
OUT OF CONTROL 0 5 35 63 103 33.44% 38.83%
REAR END 1 2 9 52 64 20.78% 18.75%
PARKING OR PARKED CAR 0 0 2 23 25 8.12% 8.00%
LEFT TURN RIGHT ANGLE
COLLISION 0 0 2 17 19 6.17% 10.53%
OTHER 0 0 2 14 16 5.19% 12.50%
RIGHT ANGLE 0 0 1 13 14 4.55% 7.14%
HEAD ON 2 1 5 5 13 4.22% 61.54%
LEFT TURN 0 1 1 11 13 4.22% 15.38%
PASSING 0 0 0 13 13 4.22% 0.00%
BACKING 0 0 0 6 6 1.95% 0.00%
SIDESWIPE 0 0 0 6 6 1.95% 0.00%
CROSS MEDIAN 0 0 1 3 4 1.30% 25.00%
FIXED OBJECT 0 0 1 3 4 1.30% 25.00%
RIGHT TURN RIGHT ANGLE
COLLISION 0 0 0 3 3 0.97% 0.00%
CHANGING LANE 0 0 1 1 2 0.65% 50.00%
DEBRIS 0 0 0 1 1 0.32% 0.00%
RIGHT TURN 0 0 0 1 1 0.32% 0.00%
U - TURN 0 0 0 1 1 0.32% 0.00%
Grand Total 3 9 60 236 308 100.00% 23.38%
AGENDA ITEM 6A
Page | 12
St. Martins
Next we look at the St. Martins crashes. St. Martins has a population of 1,188 people, making up 1.7% of the
CAMPO Region. With that population we see 102 crashes, which is only 1.3% of all the crashes in the region. When
looking at the map we can see that the majority of the wrecks happen on US 50. US 50 sees just over 12,000 cars per
day. Route T sees just fewer than 1,300 vehicles per day.
AGENDA ITEM 6A
Page | 13
When diving into the numbers of the crashes in St. Martins we see that there were 102 crashes making up 1.3%
of all the crashes in the area, and it resulted in injuries more than 27% of the time. The injury rate is slightly higher than
the rate we see for all of CAMPO. The majority of the crashes in St. Martins are Out of Control crashes. They make up
36% of all crashes in St. Martins. Out of Control crashes resulted in injuries just over 32% of the time. Another number
that stands out is Left Turn collisions; they make up just fewer than 5% of all the wrecks in St. Martins but result in injury
60% of the time.
Type of Crash Fatalities Disabling
Injury Minor Injury Damage Only Grand Total
% of Total
Crashes
% that Result
in Injury
OUT OF CONTROL 0 1 11 25 37 36.27% 32.43%
REAR END 0 0 3 10 13 12.75% 23.08%
RIGHT ANGLE 0 0 2 7 9 8.82% 22.22%
DEER 0 0 0 7 7 6.86% 0.00%
HEAD ON 0 0 2 4 6 5.88% 33.33%
LEFT TURN 0 1 2 2 5 4.90% 60.00%
PASSING 0 0 0 5 5 4.90% 0.00%
OTHER 0 0 0 4 4 3.92% 0.00%
LEFT TURN RIGHT ANGLE
COLLISION 0 1 1 1 3 2.94% 66.67%
PARKING OR PARKED CAR 0 0 1 2 3 2.94% 33.33%
PEDALCYCLE 0 0 2 2 1.96% 100.00%
BACKING 0 0 0 2 2 1.96% 0.00%
U - TURN 0 0 1 0 1 0.98% 100.00%
AVOIDING 0 0 0 1 1 0.98% 0.00%
DOG 0 0 0 1 1 0.98% 0.00%
FIXED OBJECT 0 0 0 1 1 0.98% 0.00%
RIGHT TURN RIGHT ANGLE
COLLISION 0 0 0 1 1 0.98% 0.00%
SIDESWIPE 0 0 0 1 1 0.98% 0.00%
Grand Total 0 3 25 74 102 100.00% 27.45%
AGENDA ITEM 6A
Page | 14
Taos
The next area we want to look at are the Taos crashes. Included in the numbers are the crashes located on
Route M and US 50 exit to Taos. In this area there were 126 crashes from 2014 to 2018. These made up 1.6% of all the
crashes in the CAMPO region. As you can see in the map below the majority of the crashes takes place on route M and
on US 50. US 50 sees just over 16,000 vehicles a day through Taos. Route M sees just over 1,800 vehicles per day.
AGENDA ITEM 6A
Page | 15
When we dig deeper into the crashes that take place in Taos we see that almost half of the crashes were Out of
Control crashes, 48% to be exact. These crashes resulted in injury 36% of the time. Another concerning number of
these crashes are the Deer caused wrecks, these result in injury 36% of the time. When looking at the total numbers we
see that injuries occur more that 28% of all crashes, that is slightly higher than the 25% average for the CAMPO region.
Taos also saw 2 fatalities between 2014 and 2018.
Type of Crash Fatalities Disabling
Injury Minor Injury Damage Only G rand Total % of Total
Crashes
% that Result
in Injury
OUT OF CONTROL 1 7 14 39 61 48.41% 36.07%
REAR END 0 0 1 11 12 9.52% 8.33%
DEER 0 1 3 7 11 8.73% 36.36%
PARKING OR PARKED CAR 0 0 0 8 8 6.35% 0.00%
RIGHT ANGLE 0 1 2 4 7 5.56% 42.86%
OTHER 0 1 0 5 6 4.76% 16.67%
LEFT TURN RIGHT ANGLE 0 1 0 3 4 3.17% 25.00%
PASSING 0 0 1 2 3 2.38% 33.33%
HEAD ON 1 0 1 0 2 1.59% 100.00%
ANIMAL NOT 0 0 0 2 2 1.59% 0.00%
SIDESWIPE 0 0 0 2 2 1.59% 0.00%
PEDESTRIAN 0 1 0 0 1 0.79% 100.00%
AVOIDING 0 0 0 1 1 0.79% 0.00%
BACKING 0 0 0 1 1 0.79% 0.00%
CHANGING LANE 0 0 0 1 1 0.79% 0.00%
FIXED OBJECT 0 0 0 1 1 0.79% 0.00%
JACKKNIFE 0 0 0 1 1 0.79% 0.00%
LEFT TURN 0 0 0 1 1 0.79% 0.00%
RIGHT TURN RIGHT ANGLE 0 0 0 1 1 0.79% 0.00%
Grand Total 2 12 22 90 126 100.00% 28.57%
AGENDA ITEM 6A
Page | 16
Wardsville
As we move on to Wardsville we see that there were 133 crashes in Wardsville between 2014 and 2018. The
133 crashes make up 1.7% of all the crashes in the CAMPO region. When looking at these wrecks we see that the
majority of the crashes happen on routes B, M, and W. Route B through Wardsville sees just over 3,400 vehicles per
day. Routes M and W together see just less than 1,300 vehicles per day in Wardsville.
AGENDA ITEM 6A
Page | 17
When we look at these numbers closely we see that 49% of all the crashes in Wardsville are Out of Control
crashes. The Out of Control crashes resulted in injury 23% of the time. Rear End collisions made up just below 29% of all
the Wardsville crashes, these resulted in injury just over 23% of the time. In all 133 crashes in Wardsville we see an
injury rate of just fewer than 25% of the crashes result in injury. We also saw one fatality in Wardsville.
Type of Crash Fatalities Disabling
Injury Minor Injury Damage Only Grand Total
% of Total
Crashes
% that Result
in Injury
OUT OF CONTROL 0 2 13 50 65 48.87% 23.08%
REAR END 0 0 9 29 38 28.57% 23.68%
RIGHT ANGLE 0 0 3 4 7 5.26% 42.86%
OTHER 1 0 0 4 5 3.76% 20.00%
LEFT TURN RIGHT ANGLE
COLLISION 0 0 0 4 4 3.01% 0.00%
LEFT TURN 0 0 1 2 3 2.26% 33.33%
SIDESWIPE 0 0 1 2 3 2.26% 33.33%
HEAD ON 0 0 1 1 2 1.50% 50.00%
PARKING OR PARKED CAR 0 0 1 1 2 1.50% 50.00%
AVOIDING 0 1 0 0 1 0.75% 100.00%
ANIMAL NOT 0 0 0 1 1 0.75% 0.00%
BACKING 0 0 0 1 1 0.75% 0.00%
PASSING 0 0 0 1 1 0.75% 0.00%
Grand Total 1 3 29 100 133 100.00% 24.81%
AGENDA ITEM 6A
Page | 18
Jefferson City
When taking a deeper look at where the majority of total crashes within the CAMPO region take place, the area
of focus narrows to Jefferson City, with 86% of all the crashes in the CAMPO region happen in Jefferson City. That’s not
to say that bad crashes don’t happen in the outer communities within the CAMPO area such as Holts Summit, St.
Martins, Taos, and Wardsville. It is worth noting that a little over half of the fatalities in the region occurred on US 50 or
US 54 outside the city limits. With Jefferson City hosting the bulk of the area’s residents and a major producer of
employment it is understandable that the large quantities of travelers within city limits result in such a high rate of
crashes of all types for the region. Below is a map depicting the various crash types clustered throughout the city.
AGENDA ITEM 6A
Page | 19
When we look at the breakdown of the types of crashes that happen in Jefferson City we see several things stick
out. First we see that almost a third of all crashes are Rear End collisions. Almost a quarter of all Rear End collisions
result in injuries and even on fatality. Next we have to look at the Out of Control crashes. Here we see almost 15% of all
the Jefferson City crashes are Out of Control crashes, resulting in injury 31% of the time and included 5 fatalities. We
also need to look at the Right Angle collisions. We know that these hard angles are more likely to cause injury and we
see that here in Jefferson City. But we still need to narrow these numbers down to get a better look at what is going on,
so we need to see where these crashes happen.
Type of Crash Fatalities Disabling
Injury Minor Injury Damage Only G rand Total % of Total
Crashes
% that Result
in Injury
REAR END 1 16 503 1595 2115 31.27% 24.59%
OUT OF CONTROL 5 46 263 691 1005 14.86% 31.24%
LEFT TURN RIGHT ANGLE
COLLISION 0 8 132 486 626 9.26% 22.36%
RIGHT ANGLE 0 13 181 325 519 7.67% 37.38%
PARKING OR PARKED CAR 0 2 37 442 481 7.11% 8.11%
PASSING 0 4 43 428 475 7.02% 9.89%
LEFT TURN 2 7 124 341 474 7.01% 28.06%
HEAD ON 0 6 88 110 204 3.02% 46.08%
RIGHT TURN RIGHT ANGLE
COLLISION 0 0 23 134 157 2.32% 14.65%
DEER 1 0 13 120 134 1.98% 10.45%
OTHER 0 1 15 75 91 1.35% 17.58%
CHANGING LANE 0 1 10 78 89 1.32% 12.36%
PEDESTRIAN 1 17 47 3 68 1.01% 95.59%
BACKING 0 0 0 65 65 0.96% 0.00%
SIDESWIPE 0 4 9 43 56 0.83% 23.21%
RIGHT TURN 0 1 5 49 55 0.81% 10.91%
U - TURN 0 1 6 32 39 0.58% 17.95%
FIXED OBJECT 1 0 5 25 31 0.46% 19.35%
AVOIDING 0 3 12 11 26 0.38% 57.69%
PEDALCYCLE 0 5 15 2 22 0.33% 90.91%
DUAL LEFTS COLLIDE 0 0 1 16 17 0.25% 5.88%
ANIMAL NOT 0 1 0 4 5 0.07% 20.00%
DUAL RIGHTS COLLIDE 0 0 1 3 4 0.06% 25.00%
CROSS MEDIAN 1 0 2 0 3 0.04% 100.00%
DEBRIS 0 0 0 2 2 0.03% 0.00%
Grand Total 12 136 1535 5080 6763 100.00% 24.89%
AGENDA ITEM 6A
Page | 20
AGENDA ITEM 6A
Page | 21
To search out the hotspots with higher rates of crashes each crash within the city was assigned to the segment
of road it occurred on. Once that is done we could take each section and classify them to figure out what section has
the most crashes in it. As you can see in the map below it really highlights sections of road that we need to look at, such
as sections of Missouri Blvd, the Missouri River Bridge, Truman Blvd, Ellis Blvd, and Edgewood Dr.
AGENDA ITEM 6A
Page | 22
After looking at that map it still leaves a lot of questions that need to be answered. One being that every stretch
of road is of a different length. To more evenly weight longer segments of roads to shorter segments of roads the
crashes were calculated to a crash frequency which tells a little different crash story in some areas. This analysis
highlighted a few more areas to look at like Truman Blvd, Ellis Blvd, and MO 179.
AGENDA ITEM 6A
Page | 23
Knowing that the roads in Jefferson City are not just made up with road segments, these segments do cross at
intersections and interchanges. To look at this every crash within 100 feet of an intersection was assigned to that
intersection. From there we could look at the crash frequency at each intersection to see which one has the most
crashes at it. This brought on most of the same areas we looked at before.
AGENDA ITEM 6A
Page | 24
When combining the different analysis we found 11 areas that we need to focus on more were highlighted.
These 11 areas host the most congestion and highest traffic counts inside the CAMPO region. While these 11 areas
make up less than 5% of total miles inside the CAMPO region, they have just fewer than 45% of the total crashes in the
region.
Fatalities Disabling
Injury Minor Injury Damage Only Grand Total
% of Total
Crashes
% that Result
in Injury
MO River Bridge 0 2 61 197 260 3.32% 24.23%
US 50/63, US 54 to Lafayette St 0 11 121 366 498 6.36% 26.51%
Tri Level 0 5 43 120 168 2.14% 28.57%
MO Blvd, Stoneridge Pkwy to US
50 3 12 239 705 959 12.24% 26.49%
MO Blvd, Country Club to
Stoneridge 0 8 110 309 427 5.45% 27.63%
Jefferson St and 54 Hwy 0 2 27 150 179 2.29% 16.20%
Ellis Blvd and 54 Hwy 1 2 51 213 267 3.41% 20.22%
US 50 / Dix Rd 0 5 47 115 167 2.13% 31.14%
Truman Blvd 0 2 74 225 301 3.84% 25.25%
MO 179 0 3 44 149 196 2.50% 23.98%
Edgewood 0 0 18 80 98 1.25% 18.37%
Eleven Areas 4 52 835 2629 3520 44.94% 25.31%
All CAMPO Region 30 179 1773 5857 7833 100.00% 25.30%
AGENDA ITEM 6A
Page | 25
1. Missouri River Bridge
The bridge over the Missouri River is the convergence of major highways US 54 and US 63. It is one of the most
congested roads in our area because it is one of the few Missouri River crossings in Central Missouri, and separates
Jefferson City from everything to the north. Traffic counts on the bridge show just under 60,000 cars cross the bridge on
a daily basis. From 2014 to 2018, 260 crashes took place on the Missouri River Bridge. This comes out to 3.32% of all
crashes in the CAMPO area for less than 2 miles of road. The 5 year total crash numbers are down from where it was
between 2013 and 2017. Due to the crashes and the congestion on the bridge, it becomes one of our main areas of
focus and is on top of the CAMPO’s Illustrative Projects list in the Metropolitan Transportation Plan.
AGENDA ITEM 6A
Page | 26
The data of the crashes on the bridge shows that most crashes and injuries that happen are due to Rear End and
Passing collisions. As the first project in our system performance projects list, we look at MoDOT to construct direct
connector for northbound to westbound movement to improve capacity and to widen US 54/63 to provide three
continuous lanes in each direction as well as additional acceleration and deceleration lanes. Dispersing vehicles across
more lanes should decrease congestion and as a result should decrease the chances of crashes.
Type of Crash Fatalities Disabling
Injury Minor Injury Damage Only G rand Total % of Total
Crashes
% that Result
in Injury
REAR END 0 2 47 116 165 63.46% 29.70%
PASSING 0 0 6 53 59 22.69% 10.17%
CHANGING LANE 0 0 1 9 10 3.85% 10.00%
LEFT TURN RIGHT ANGLE
COLLISION 0 0 1 5 6 2.31% 16.67%
OUT OF CONTROL 0 0 2 4 6 2.31% 33.33%
HEAD ON 0 0 1 2 3 1.15% 33.33%
OTHER 0 0 0 3 3 1.15% 0.00%
RIGHT ANGLE 0 0 2 1 3 1.15% 66.67%
PARKING OR PARKED CAR 0 0 0 2 2 0.77% 0.00%
AVOIDING 0 0 0 1 1 0.38% 0.00%
LEFT TURN 0 0 1 0 1 0.38% 100.00%
U - TURN 0 0 0 1 1 0.38% 0.00%
Grand Total 0 2 61 197 260 100.00% 24.23%
AGENDA ITEM 6A
Page | 27
2. US 50/63, US 54 to Lafayette Street
The second area we want to look at is US 50/63 from US 54 to Lafayette Street. We see that 6.36% of all crashes
inside of the CAMPO region happen on this stretch of road. This single stretch of road serves as a converging point for 2
major highways, US 50 and US 63, with several stop lights that prevent smooth continuous movement through this
segment that boasts an average daily traffic count of 41,000 vehicles. Congestion from the series of traffic signals, and a
high traffic count, factor into why this section has such a high rate of crash incidents, leading to why it shows up 2nd on
our Illustrative Projects list. But keep in mind that again this area actually saw a decrease in the 5 year number of
crashes verses where they were from 2013 to 2017.
AGENDA ITEM 6A
Page | 28
Over 50% of the crashes along this section of road are Rear End collisions. Having stoplights on a major highway
running through town, those numbers are to be expected. More concerning are the Right Angle and Left Turn collisions.
Because of the laws of physics we know that crashes get increasingly hazardous at higher speeds (more energy), quicker
stops (dispersing energy), and sharp angles (opposing energies). Right Angle and Left Turn collisions tend to be sharp
angle crashes and because of that are more hazardous. As evidenced by the higher injury rates. Through cooperation
with MoDOT we look to implement major capacity improvements, which could include mainline widening, grade
separations, and/or outer roads as suggested in our Illustrative Projects list. That should improve some of the
congestion in this area.
Type of Crash Fatalities Disabling
Injury Minor Injury Damage Only Grand Total
% of Total
Crashes
% that Result
in Injury
REAR END 0 1 69 222 292 58.63% 23.97%
RIGHT ANGLE 0 3 22 32 57 11.45% 43.86%
PASSING 0 1 2 35 38 7.63% 7.89%
OUT OF CONTROL 0 0 8 19 27 5.42% 29.63%
LEFT TURN 0 3 5 13 21 4.22% 38.10%
LEFT TURN RIGHT ANGLE
COLLISION 0 0 4 9 13 2.61% 30.77%
HEAD ON 0 1 6 5 12 2.41% 58.33%
CHANGING LANE 0 0 0 12 12 2.41% 0.00%
RIGHT TURN RIGHT ANGLE
COLLISION 0 0 3 7 10 2.01% 30.00%
PARKING OR PARKED CAR 0 0 0 5 5 1.00% 0.00%
PEDESTRIAN 0 2 2 0 4 0.80% 100.00%
OTHER 0 0 0 3 3 0.60% 0.00%
RIGHT TURN 0 0 0 2 2 0.40% 0.00%
DUAL LEFTS COLLIDE 0 0 0 1 1 0.20% 0.00%
SIDESWIPE 0 0 0 1 1 0.20% 0.00%
Grand Total 0 11 121 366 498 100.00% 26.51%
AGENDA ITEM 6A
Page | 29
One more analysis we wanted to look at were crashes per intersection on US 50/63. When we ran this analysis
few intersections stood out. The intersection of US 50/63 and Missouri Blvd has had over 100 crashes in the 5 year span.
Second are the intersection of US 50/63 and Jefferson, Maddison, and Monroe. These three intersections have had over
100 crashes in the 5 year span. We may need to look at these intersections a little closer in the future to determine
what makes them more hazardous than others and to find any possible solutions.
AGENDA ITEM 6A
Page | 30
3. The Tri-Level
The third area we want to look at is the Tri-Level. This intersection complex is the convergence of 3 major
highways, US 50, 63, and 54. Nearly 80,000 vehicles travel through this interchange on a daily basis. This is the largest
traffic count totals for one area in the entire CAMPO region. This segment accounts for 2.14% of all crashes. Crashes
and slowdowns in the vicinity of the Tri-level lead to compounding congestion and backups throughout the rest of the
city as travelers sit and wait for traffic to start moving again, or others detour into other parts of town onto roads with
less capacity in an attempt to avoid or go around the trouble zone.
AGENDA ITEM 6A
Page | 31
When looking at the numbers of all crashes that happened in the Tri-Level interchange we can see that the
majority of crashes are Out of Control and Rear End collisions. While crash totals may not be as high on the Tri-level as
other places, it’s impossible to ignore how important crash reduction is for this area. Over a 5 year span 5 crashes
resulted in serious injury. Current design conditions on the Tri-level force travelers to navigate merging and lane
crossing for exits in a tight space that can be confusing and distracting for drivers. In the Illustrative Projects list MoDOT
has indicated this same issue. The project proposes to reconfigure the interchange to provide non-conflicting system-to-
system movement. This complete reconfiguration of the interchange would help improve congestion not only in the Tri-
Level but on the highways and several outer roads in the area.
Type of Crash Fatalities Disabling
Injury Minor Injury Damage Only G rand Total % of Total
Crashes
% that Result
in Injury
OUT OF CONTROL 0 4 18 35 57 33.93% 38.60%
REAR END 0 0 11 46 57 33.93% 19.30%
PASSING 0 0 1 20 21 12.50% 4.76%
RIGHT ANGLE 0 0 4 6 10 5.95% 40.00%
PEDESTRIAN 0 0 3 0 3 1.79% 100.00%
FIXED OBJECT 0 0 2 1 3 1.79% 66.67%
LEFT TURN 0 0 1 2 3 1.79% 33.33%
RIGHT TURN RIGHT ANGLE
COLLISION 0 0 1 2 3 1.79% 33.33%
HEAD ON 0 0 1 1 2 1.19% 50.00%
CHANGING LANE 0 0 0 2 2 1.19% 0.00%
OTHER 0 0 0 2 2 1.19% 0.00%
PARKING OR PARKED CAR 0 0 0 2 2 1.19% 0.00%
DEER 0 0 1 0 1 0.60% 100.00%
SIDESWIPE 0 1 0 0 1 0.60% 100.00%
DUAL LEFTS COLLIDE 0 0 0 1 1 0.60% 0.00%
Grand Total 0 5 43 120 168 100.00% 28.57%
AGENDA ITEM 6A
Page | 32
4. Missouri Blvd, Stoneridge Pkwy to US 50
Because Missouri Blvd is a long stretch of road we split it into two sections. First we are going to look at the east
section that runs from Stoneridge Pkwy to US 50. This is one of the most congested business and retail sections in the
CAMPO region. This section of Missouri Blvd receives around 40,000 vehicles on a daily basis. Just over 12% of all
crashes in the CAMPO region happen in this several mile stretch of road and over our 5 year span this segment saw 3
fatalities. Due to these numbers on this stretch of road it shows up as number 26 on CAMPO’s Illustrative Projects
System Performance list. This stretch of road saw an increase in the number of crashes in the 5 year total from 2014 to
2018.
AGENDA ITEM 6A
Page | 33
When we look at the numbers we see that most of the crashes in this stretch of road are Rear End collisions, like
most areas in Jefferson City, and Left Turn Right Angle collisions. Of the 959 crashes over 60% of all injuries happen
because of Rear End and Left Turn Right Angle crashes. Another concern on this part of the road is pedestrian crashes, 7
crashes, 2 of which were serious injuries, and 1 resulting in a fatality over our 5 year period of interest. These crashes
took place before the latest construction of sidewalks along this stretch. With MoDOT’s cooperation, the project looks
to improve access management along Missouri Blvd, including improvements to intersection, restrictions to turning
movements, and improvements to pedestrian safety. Accomplishing this project in a cost effective manner without
hurting businesses in the area while improving safety will be a challenge that will require many levels of partnerships to
be formed.
Type of Crash Fatalities Disabling
Injury Minor Injury Damage Only Grand Total
% of Total
Crashes
% that Result
in Injury
REAR END 0 1 94 284 379 39.52% 25.07%
LEFT TURN RIGHT ANGLE
COLLISION 0 2 41 124 167 17.41% 25.75%
PASSING 0 0 6 79 85 8.86% 7.06%
LEFT TURN 0 3 28 46 77 8.03% 40.26%
RIGHT ANGLE 0 1 23 38 62 6.47% 38.71%
RIGHT TURN RIGHT ANGLE
COLLISION 0 0 10 27 37 3.86% 27.03%
OUT OF CONTROL 1 0 10 25 36 3.75% 30.56%
HEAD ON 0 1 14 18 33 3.44% 45.45%
CHANGING LANE 0 0 2 17 19 1.98% 10.53%
RIGHT TURN 0 1 1 16 18 1.88% 11.11%
DUAL LEFTS COLLIDE 0 0 0 8 8 0.83% 0.00%
PEDESTRIAN 1 2 4 0 7 0.73% 100.00%
PARKING OR PARKED CAR 0 0 0 7 7 0.73% 0.00%
OTHER 0 1 2 2 5 0.52% 60.00%
SIDESWIPE 0 0 1 4 5 0.52% 20.00%
BACKING 0 0 0 5 5 0.52% 0.00%
DEER 0 0 1 2 3 0.31% 33.33%
PEDALCYCLE 0 0 1 1 2 0.21% 50.00%
AVOIDING 0 0 1 0 1 0.10% 100.00%
CROSS MEDIAN 1 0 0 0 1 0.10% 100.00%
U - TURN 0 0 0 1 1 0.10% 0.00%
FIXED OBJECT 0 0 0 1 1 0.10% 0.00%
Grand Total 3 12 239 705 959 100.00% 26.49%
AGENDA ITEM 6A
Page | 34
AGENDA ITEM 6A
Page | 35
Now we wanted to narrow the scope even more on this section of Missouri Blvd to see where these crashes
took place the most. By assigning the crashes to a section of road we can see that 2 sections are highlighted by this
analysis. The first area of interest is between Stadium Blvd and Heisinger Rd. This area has several large businesses in
that area resulting in a lot of vehicles pulling in and out of parking lots. Knowing that there are no stop lights between
Stadium Blvd and Dix Rd, you can see how turning across traffic into one of these businesses without a break in traffic is
a challenge. The second section of concern is between Dunklin Rd and US 50/63. Most of these crashes assigned to this
section happened in the intersection of Missouri Blvd and US 50/63, and was covered in a previous section. Three other
sections are still concerning but less so in this analysis.
AGENDA ITEM 6A
Page | 36
To paint a more thorough picture, we wanted to see the crash frequency on this section of road. This shows
that there are sections of road that crashes happen every 15 feet or less. First we see a section again around Blair and
Heisinger Roads and, as stated by the previous analysis, we know that that section lacks stop lights to break up the
traffic and allows access for people turning in and out of area businesses. The second section is from Dix Rd east
through the light at Southwest Blvd in front of a large grocery store. That area again has a lot of larger businesses in the
area with people turning in and out of parking lots. This section however has lights to create traffic breaks, but results in
more rear end collisions at those lights. The last section is from Kansas St to US 50/63. This section has several lights
that stop traffic and result in the majority of crashes happening at these intersections, most of which are rear end
collisions.
AGENDA ITEM 6A
Page | 37
When we look at the intersections in this stretch of Missouri Blvd we see a few that stand out. First is the
intersection of Missouri Blvd and US 50/63. We talked about that several times before and know that it is a problem
intersection to look at. The next intersection that stands out is Dix Rd and Southwest Blvd along Missouri Blvd. As one
of the few connectors that allow traffic to flow to and from US 50, the intersection of Dix Rd and Missouri Blvd sees a lot
of travelers on a daily basis and boasts crash numbers to match. As we have discussed before there is a big grocery
store and other businesses along Southwest and Missouri Blvd keeping traffic counts up and resulting in traffic crossing
lanes entering and exiting the roadway. When we look at the stretch of road from Kansas to Dunklin we see several
stoplights in a small stretch of road, with those stoplights we see a lot of Rear End collisions along that stretch of road.
Rear end collisions go up at stop lights, so when you see an intersection without a stop light having elevated
numbers it raises some questions. Looking at Blair Dr. we see that there are 2 larger fast food restaurants at that
intersection, but no stop light. We will look at it in a little more detail in the maps below.
AGENDA ITEM 6A
Page | 38
Missouri Blvd Continued
In the maps below, it shows where each crash happened along Missouri Blvd starting at the intersection of US
50/63 and moving east till we get to Stoneridge. The First map you can see the section that we discussed earlier
between US 50/63 and Virginia St shows the majority of the crashes taking place at the intersection of US 50/63, and the
majority of those are rear end collisions as indicated in green. There are several other clusters that show up like the one
at Dunklin Street, there we see a lot of turning collisions. Then we see a stretched cluster of crashes from Delaware to
Kansas Street. Those crashes are made up of turning collisions and a majority of Rear End collisions.
AGENDA ITEM 6A
Page | 39
As we move down Missouri Blvd, we see where a few more clusters are located. First we see a large cluster of
turning collisions in front of a well-known fast food restaurant. Then as we move up Missouri Blvd we see the section
around Dix Rd and Southwest Blvd that was indicated in a previous analysis. There we see a large cluster of all kinds of
accidents including a fatality.
AGENDA ITEM 6A
Page | 40
We keep moving down Missouri Blvd we see a few more clusters showing up. First we can see again the cluster
around Dix Road. The majority of these crashes are Rear End collisions be we also see several turning collisions as well.
There are several entrances and exits to business parking lots near Dix Rd where these turning collisions are taking place.
Next we see the clusters around Blair and Heisinger Road. Again there are a lot of businesses through there and we see
a lot of turning collisions along that stretch. Then we move further up the road and we see even more turning crashes
before we get to Stadium Blvd. There are a lot of businesses on this stretch and it is worth noting that there is no stop
lights between Dix Rd and Stadium Blvd, because of that we also see some speed related crashes on this section.
AGENDA ITEM 6A
Page | 41
The last portion of this part of Missouri Blvd is from Stadium Blvd to Stoneridge Pkwy. This section sees a lot less
traffic counts and less crashes. The only clusters we see are at the stoplights where we see a majority of Rear End
collisions.
AGENDA ITEM 6A
Page | 42
5. Missouri Blvd, Country Club Dr to Stoneridge Pkwy
Fifth on our list is Missouri Blvd from Country Club Dr. to Stoneridge Pkwy. This section of road contains several
large businesses as well as a few auto dealerships and one major highway interchange. This section of Missouri Blvd
sees just over 33,000 vehicles daily. Because of the known issues on this section of road it also shows up in CAMPO’s
Illustrative Projects list. And just like the previous section of Missouri Blvd, the 5 year total number of crashes increased
from 2014 to 2018.
AGENDA ITEM 6A
Page | 43
When we look a little deeper at the statistics of the crashes on this stretch of Missouri Blvd we see a few things
that stick out. Like every other area in the CAMPO region Rear End collisions are the highest number of collisions. We
also see that several crashes are Left Turn collisions. As we talked about before we know that this type of wreck is
hazardous because of the angles of the collisions. This is a concern for all of Missouri Blvd. This area also sees high
numbers of Out of Control crashes, Passing, and Head On collisions.
The known issues on this section of road brings 2 projects to CAMPO’s Illustrative Projects System Performance
list. First shows up as number 7, which is on Missouri Blvd, the eastern Lowe’s entrance to S. 10 Mile Dr. The project
looks to address access management along the corridor, including turn restrictions, additional traffic control, and safety
along that stretch of road. The second shows up as number 22 on that list. It proposes a project on Missouri Blvd from
Country Club Dr. to Howerton Ct. to widen the road to 5 lanes that will include a right turn lane at Howerton Ct. Both
projects should really help with the safety by reducing the number of left turn collisions. The second project in
particular should help reduce the number of out of control and head on crashes.
Type of Crash Fatalities Disabling
Injury Minor Injury Damage Only Grand Total
% of Total
Crashes
% that Result
in Injury
REAR END 0 3 36 125 164 38.41% 23.78%
LEFT TURN RIGHT ANGLE
COLLISION 0 0 20 51 71 16.63% 28.17%
LEFT TURN 0 1 18 32 51 11.94% 37.25%
PASSING 0 0 3 32 35 8.20% 8.57%
OUT OF CONTROL 0 1 9 17 27 6.32% 37.04%
HEAD ON 0 1 16 7 24 5.62% 70.83%
RIGHT ANGLE 0 1 3 8 12 2.81% 33.33%
CHANGING LANE 0 0 1 9 10 2.34% 10.00%
RIGHT TURN RIGHT ANGLE
COLLISION 0 0 0 7 7 1.64% 0.00%
OTHER 0 0 1 5 6 1.41% 16.67%
AVOIDING 0 0 1 3 4 0.94% 25.00%
U - TURN 0 0 1 3 4 0.94% 25.00%
DEER 0 0 0 4 4 0.94% 0.00%
RIGHT TURN 0 0 0 2 2 0.47% 0.00%
DEBRIS 0 0 0 1 1 0.23% 0.00%
DUAL LEFTS COLLIDE 0 0 0 1 1 0.23% 0.00%
DUAL RIGHTS COLLIDE 0 0 1 0 1 0.23% 100.00%
BACKING 0 0 0 1 1 0.23% 0.00%
SIDESWIPE 0 0 0 1 1 0.23% 0.00%
PEDESTRIAN 0 1 0 0 1 0.23% 100.00%
Grand Total 0 8 110 309 427 100.00% 27.63%
AGENDA ITEM 6A
Page | 44
AGENDA ITEM 6A
Page | 45
When we look at this stretch of Missouri Blvd we can see three distinct areas where the majority of the
crashes are taking place. First is a section of road just west of S Ten Mile Dr. Here there is an average of just about
20,000 vehicles a day through this section. Here we see a lot of Rear end collisions and a few turning collisions as well.
There are a few car dealerships along this stretch of road leading to people turning in and out of traffic. The second
cluster we see is in front of a large electronics store. These are almost all turning collisions. The final cluster is at the
intersection of Wildwood Dr. And like we see in most of Jefferson City, where there is a light you see more Rear End
crashes.
AGENDA ITEM 6A
Page | 46
6. Jefferson St. and US 54
The 6th area we want to look at is intersections of Jefferson St, Stadium Blvd, Christy Dr., and US 54. If you have
ever driven through this area you know it is a confusing group of intersections and short runout lanes onto a major
highway. With just under 40,000 vehicles going through this area on US 54 per day and about 8,000 vehicles per
intersection it isn’t hard to see why we want to look at it. We see about 2.3% of all the crashes that happen in the
CAMPO region happen in this complex of intersection. Now you have to note that there have been improvements
during these 5 years like the roundabout. So some of the data is pre improvements and some are post. It is important
to note that the number of crashes in this area have gone down since the improvements have been made.
AGENDA ITEM 6A
Page | 47
When we look into the crashes that happen in this area we see much of the same as we see in most of the
CAMPO region. First we see most of the crashes are Rear End collisions. Second we see Out of Control crashes, these
tend to be more speed related. With the small acceleration and deceleration lanes on and off of US 54, the disparity of
speeds it creates an environment for crashes. In CAMPO’s Illustrative Projects list, with MoDOT’s help, project number 9
proposes installing roundabouts at both hook ramp intersections to improve operations and address offsets and angles
of these roads. Logic says that should help with some of these wrecks. It does not change the small runout lanes on and
off of US 54 but does keep from stopping traffic on these ramps. This may still be an issue that we need to look at in the
future to address the rest of the issues with this group of intersections.
Type of Crash Fatalities Disabling
Injury Minor Injury Damage Only Grand Total
% of Total
Crashes
% that Result
in Injury
REAR END 0 1 7 53 61 34.08% 13.11%
OUT OF CONTROL 0 0 8 26 34 18.99% 23.53%
PASSING 0 0 2 22 24 13.41% 8.33%
RIGHT ANGLE 0 0 6 10 16 8.94% 37.50%
LEFT TURN RIGHT ANGLE
COLLISION 0 0 0 12 12 6.70% 0.00%
LEFT TURN 0 0 0 6 6 3.35% 0.00%
RIGHT TURN RIGHT ANGLE
COLLISION 0 0 0 6 6 3.35% 0.00%
HEAD ON 0 0 2 2 4 2.23% 50.00%
CHANGING LANE 0 0 0 4 4 2.23% 0.00%
RIGHT TURN 0 0 1 2 3 1.68% 33.33%
OTHER 0 0 0 3 3 1.68% 0.00%
FIXED OBJECT 0 0 1 1 2 1.12% 50.00%
PEDESTRIAN 0 1 0 0 1 0.56% 100.00%
SIDESWIPE 0 0 0 1 1 0.56% 0.00%
U - TURN 0 0 0 1 1 0.56% 0.00%
PARKING OR PARKED CAR 0 0 0 1 1 0.56% 0.00%
Grand Total 0 2 27 150 179 100.00% 16.20%
AGENDA ITEM 6A
Page | 48
7. Ellis Blvd and US 54
The 7th area we want to look at is the Ellis Blvd and US 54 interchange. This area sees about 40,000 vehicles on
US 54 through this interchange and around 20,000 vehicles on Ellis Blvd through these intersections. Congestion issues
at this interchange results in about 3.4% of all crashes in the CAMPO region. For anyone who travels this area, the
grouping of lights through this interchange slows traffic flow particularly during rush hour times. Again because this is a
known issue area it shows up on CAMPO’s Illustrative Projects list. Similarly to Missouri Blvd, this section of road has
seen an increase in the number of crashes from 2014 to 2018.
AGENDA ITEM 6A
Page | 49
When we dig into the numbers at the Ellis Blvd interchange we see a large number of Left Turn and Right Angle
crashes. These crashes are hazardous because of the angles that happen in the collision. This hazardous collision type
has resulted in a fatality wreck in this interchange. Knowing that there are several larger businesses in this stretch of
road gives insight into why there are so many vehicles that cross traffic resulting in wrecks. As was indicated earlier, this
area is a known issue and with MoDOT’s help, it shows up in CAMPO’s Illustrative Projects list as number 13. The project
proposes a reconfiguration of the interchange to address capacity and close spacing of outer roads and create
pedestrian connections on Southwest Blvd and Ellis Blvd from Ford St to Southridge Dr. This should help with the
congestion in the interchange but it may need to look at addressing the turning across traffic issue.
Type of Crash Fatalities Disabling
Injury Minor Injury Damage Only G rand Total % of Total
Crashes
% that Result
in Injury
REAR END 0 1 15 58 74 27.72% 21.62%
LEFT TURN 1 0 13 53 67 25.09% 20.90%
LEFT TURN RIGHT ANGLE
COLLISION 0 0 3 33 36 13.48% 8.33%
RIGHT ANGLE 0 0 5 15 20 7.49% 25.00%
HEAD ON 0 1 8 8 17 6.37% 52.94%
PASSING 0 0 3 12 15 5.62% 20.00%
RIGHT TURN RIGHT ANGLE
COLLISION 0 0 2 12 14 5.24% 14.29%
OUT OF CONTROL 0 0 1 9 10 3.75% 10.00%
RIGHT TURN 0 0 0 4 4 1.50% 0.00%
CHANGING LANE 0 0 0 2 2 0.75% 0.00%
PARKING OR PARKED CAR 0 0 0 2 2 0.75% 0.00%
CROSS MEDIAN 0 0 1 0 1 0.37% 100.00%
AVOIDING 0 0 0 1 1 0.37% 0.00%
DUAL LEFTS COLLIDE 0 0 0 1 1 0.37% 0.00%
SIDESWIPE 0 0 0 1 1 0.37% 0.00%
U - TURN 0 0 0 1 1 0.37% 0.00%
DEER 0 0 0 1 1 0.37% 0.00%
Grand Total 1 2 51 213 267 100.00% 20.22%
AGENDA ITEM 6A
Page | 50
8. US 50/Dix Rd
The 8th area we want to look at is Dix Rd. This stretch of road accounts for 2.1% of all crashes in the CAMPO
region. The biggest concern with this stretch of road is that whatever happens in the interchange of Dix Rd and US 50
causes congestion on a major highway in the city and on a principal artery for the city, Missouri Blvd. Around 40,000
vehicles cross this area on US 50 every day. About 13,000 vehicles cross this interchange on Dix Rd each day. With that
much volume in the area it is easy to see why it is an issue with congestion every time something happens. Just like all
the other areas of concern, this area is a known issue to MoDOT as well as CAMPO. And just like the other areas it
shows up in CAMPO’s Illustrative Projects list.
AGENDA ITEM 6A
Page | 51
When we dive into the numbers we see like so many other areas in the CAMPO region most of the crashes are
rear end collisions. Because of the volume of traffic and the setup of the intersection as well as the business along Dix
Rd, we see a lot of right angle collisions as well. As discussed earlier any time you have hard angle collisions the
seriousness and likelihood of injuries goes up. Because this is a known issue area it shows up on CAMPO’s Illustrative
Projects System Performance list. The project proposes reconfiguring interchange and Dix Rd approaches to address
capacity issues including lack of left-turn lanes, possibly consider a dumbbell roundabout interchange, as well as
widening Dix Rd to provide center turn lane and pedestrian access from US 50 to Missouri Blvd.
Type of Crash Fatalities Disabling
Injury Minor Injury Damage Only Grand Total
% of Total
Crashes
% that Result
in Injury
REAR END 0 1 20 54 75 44.91% 28.00%
LEFT TURN RIGHT ANGLE
COLLISION 0 3 7 11 21 12.57% 47.62%
RIGHT ANGLE 0 0 6 10 16 9.58% 37.50%
OUT OF CONTROL 0 0 4 10 14 8.38% 28.57%
LEFT TURN 0 0 2 9 11 6.59% 18.18%
PASSING 0 1 1 7 9 5.39% 22.22%
HEAD ON 0 0 5 3 8 4.79% 62.50%
RIGHT TURN RIGHT ANGLE
COLLISION 0 0 1 4 5 2.99% 20.00%
DEER 0 0 1 3 4 2.40% 25.00%
OTHER 0 0 0 2 2 1.20% 0.00%
AVOIDING 0 0 0 1 1 0.60% 0.00%
RIGHT TURN 0 0 0 1 1 0.60% 0.00%
Grand Total 0 5 47 115 167 100.00% 31.14%
AGENDA ITEM 6A
Page | 52
9. Truman Blvd and US 50
The 9th area we want to look at is the area of Truman Blvd, US 50, and Country Club Dr. This complex of
intersections makes up just over 3.8% of all crashes in the CAMPO region. Around 20,000 people a day use Truman Blvd
through these intersections. Some improvements have already been made to this area but more safety improvements
are needed. Any issue in these intersections not only blocks access too many large businesses in the area but it can also
back up traffic causing congestion on US 50. It is a known issue like all the other areas of concern, and like them does
show up on CAMPO’s Illustrative Projects list.
AGENDA ITEM 6A
Page | 53
When we look at the numbers from the crashes we see 301 crashes occurred over the 5 year period. Just under
half of the crashes being rear end collisions. Another major concern is left turn crashes. With as much congestion in the
area as this road has it is not hard to figure out why there are as many left turn crashes as there are. Congestion makes
it difficult to turn across traffic. This area shows up as number 17 on CAMPO’s Illustrative Projects list. The project
proposes reconfiguring the interchange to address close outer road spacing, widening the westbound off-ramp to
improve capacity, and incorporate pedestrian facilities into the interchange. This project should help reduce the
congestion and the number of crashes in the area.
Type of Crash Fatalities Disabling
Injury Minor Injury Damage Only Grand Total
% of Total
Crashes
% that Result
in Injury
REAR END 0 0 34 101 135 44.85% 25.19%
LEFT TURN 0 0 15 45 60 19.93% 25.00%
LEFT TURN RIGHT ANGLE
COLLISION 0 0 7 24 31 10.30% 22.58%
PASSING 0 0 3 16 19 6.31% 15.79%
HEAD ON 0 1 8 6 15 4.98% 60.00%
RIGHT ANGLE 0 0 3 11 14 4.65% 21.43%
RIGHT TURN RIGHT ANGLE
COLLISION 0 0 0 10 10 3.32% 0.00%
OUT OF CONTROL 0 1 2 4 7 2.33% 42.86%
SIDESWIPE 0 0 1 3 4 1.33% 25.00%
PEDALCYCLE 0 0 1 0 1 0.33% 100.00%
BACKING 0 0 0 1 1 0.33% 0.00%
CHANGING LANE 0 0 0 1 1 0.33% 0.00%
U - TURN 0 0 0 1 1 0.33% 0.00%
FIXED OBJECT 0 0 0 1 1 0.33% 0.00%
DOG 0 0 0 1 1 0.33% 0.00%
Grand Total 0 2 74 225 301 100.00% 25.25%
AGENDA ITEM 6A
Page | 54
10. MO 179 Interchange
The 10th area we want to look at is the MO 179 interchange. This is a new area we want to look at as this is the
first year our analysis shows we need to take a closer look at this section of road. This is a very important interchange
on MO 179 as it feeds traffic to and from both US 50 and Missouri Blvd. These intersections see over 50,000 vehicles a
day. We have seen 196 crashes in this interchange complex from 2014 to 2018. It is important to look at this
interchange closely because anything that happens here effects congestion and traffic flow through most of the west
end of Jefferson City.
AGENDA ITEM 6A
Page | 55
When we take a closer look at the numbers at this interchange we see much of the same as we have with many
other major intersections in Jefferson City. First off the majority of crashes are Rear End collisions. The more
concerning numbers are the left turn crashes. As we have discussed in previous sections, we see a higher rate of injuries
with these left turn collisions. As of right now there are no projects at this interchange. It may be something to keep in
mind for the future if the number of crash numbers increase over the next few years.
Type of Crash Fatalities Disabling
Injury Minor Injury Damage Only G rand Total % of Total
Crashes
% that Result
in Injury
REAR END 0 0 14 60 74 37.76% 18.92%
LEFT TURN 0 0 10 19 29 14.80% 34.48%
PASSING 0 0 1 23 24 12.24% 4.17%
LEFT TURN RIGHT ANGLE 0 1 5 17 23 11.73% 26.09%
OUT OF CONTROL 0 0 3 6 9 4.59% 33.33%
HEAD ON 0 0 4 4 8 4.08% 50.00%
CHANGING LANE 0 1 2 4 7 3.57% 42.86%
OTHER 0 0 1 4 5 2.55% 20.00%
RIGHT TURN RIGHT ANGLE 0 0 0 5 5 2.55% 0.00%
RIGHT ANGLE 0 1 2 1 4 2.04% 75.00%
DUAL LEFTS COLLIDE 0 0 0 3 3 1.53% 0.00%
RIGHT TURN 0 0 0 2 2 1.02% 0.00%
DUAL RIGHTS COLLIDE 0 0 1 0 1 0.51% 100.00%
U - TURN 0 0 1 0 1 0.51% 100.00%
DEER 0 0 0 1 1 0.51% 0.00%
Grand Total 0 3 44 149 196 100.00% 23.98%
AGENDA ITEM 6A
Page | 56
11. Edgewood Dr. and MO 179
The 11th and final area we want to look at is the intersection of Edgewood Dr. and MO 179. This is a new area
we want to look at because of the intersection analysis we did. This intersection sees nearly 20,000 vehicles through it a
day. One thing to note in the map is that the majority of the crashes happen in the southbound lane on MO 179 coming
up to the light at Edgewood Dr. This is something that we may need to do a study on in the future.
AGENDA ITEM 6A
Page | 57
When we look at the break down of the number of crashes we see that there were 98 crashes at this
intersection between 2014 and 2018. The biggest thing to point out is that at this intersection we see the lowest injury
rate of all the areas we look at. Almost two thirds of these crashes are Rear End collisions. The other number to keep an
eye on are the Right Angle collisions, they resulted in injury at a higher rate than any other. As of right now we have no
projects at this location, but it is something we may need to keep an eye on in the next several years.
Type of Crash Fatalities Disabling
Injury Minor Injury Damage Only G rand Total % of Total
Crashes
% that Result
in Injury
REAR END 0 0 11 50 61 62.24% 18.03%
LEFT TURN 0 0 1 5 6 6.12% 16.67%
LEFT TURN RIGHT ANGLE
COLLISION 0 0 1 4 5 5.10% 20.00%
PASSING 0 0 0 5 5 5.10% 0.00%
HEAD ON 0 0 0 4 4 4.08% 0.00%
RIGHT ANGLE 0 0 4 0 4 4.08% 100.00%
RIGHT TURN RIGHT ANGLE
COLLISION 0 0 0 3 3 3.06% 0.00%
CHANGING LANE 0 0 0 2 2 2.04% 0.00%
DEER 0 0 0 2 2 2.04% 0.00%
OUT OF CONTROL 0 0 0 2 2 2.04% 0.00%
DUAL LEFTS COLLIDE 0 0 0 1 1 1.02% 0.00%
PEDALCYCLE 0 0 1 0 1 1.02% 100.00%
SIDESWIPE 0 0 0 1 1 1.02% 0.00%
RIGHT TURN 0 0 0 1 1 1.02% 0.00%
Grand Total 0 0 18 80 98 100.00% 18.37%
AGENDA ITEM 6A
Page | 58
Summary
In conclusion we understand that crashes happen, but as members of CAMPO we have to look at areas and ways
to better create a safe travel environment for ourselves, our families, and everyone traveling through the CAMPO
region. While a zero death goal for all Missouri roads is important, it’s not enough to only focus on areas of fatalities. A
safer, crash free, road system requires us to broaden our definition of crash to all types and level of crashes when
analyzing the data for projects. Through geospatial analysis we have focused on 11 areas that make up 45% of all
crashes in the CAMPO region. With help from MoDOT and Jefferson City Public Works we can look into the proposed
projects to address these areas that we brought up in this report. So the city, the state, and the region have made many
improvements to make the roads safer but if we address what we can and work with MoDOT to reach the statewide
safety targets and we could keep moving to the goal of zero fatalities.
AGENDA ITEM 6A
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
Federal Safety Performance Measures Update
January 20, 2021
Summary
Within the Fixing America's Surface Transportation (FAST) Act, the Federal Highway Administration
established 5 performance measures to assess performance and carry out the Highway Safety
Improvement Program: (1) number of fatalities, (2) rate of fatalities per 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.
CAMPO must adopt safety targets, as outlined in the FAST Act, by February 27, 2021. 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.
Performance Measure
5-Year
Rolling
Average
(2015-2019)
5-year Rolling
Average Statewide
Target for CY2021
Number of Fatalities 910.0 871.6
Fatality Rate per 100 Million Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) 1.213 1.119
Number of Serious Injuries 4681.2 4463.9
Serious Injury Rate per 100 Million VMT 6.241 5.829
Number of Non-Motorized Fatalities and Serious Injuries 462.2 462.2
Targets are based on Zero by 2030 fatality reduction, Zero by 2040 serious injury reduction, 1%
VMT increase, and non-motorized reduction based on overall fatality and serious injury reductions.
An exception is made for instances where the baseline 5-year rolling average is less than the calculated
target using the parameters previously described. When this occurs, the baseline will be used as the
target.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends that CAMPO adopt the state targets, all of which are the targets established by
MoDOT. While the state safety targets are an important measure with respect to transportation planning,
there are no repercussions to the CAMPO area for failing to achieve safety targets.
Technical Committee Recommendation
The Technical Committee reviewed the Illustrative list at their meeting of January 7 and voted to
recommend approval of the safety targets established by MoDOT.
Recommended Form of Motion:
Motion for adoption of the safety targets established by MoDOT.
Agenda Item 6B
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
Illustrative Projects List Review
Site Specific Projects
January 20, 2021
Summary
Staff are bringing the Site Specific Illustrative List Projects forward for review by the Technical
Committee and Board. Staff try to bring the list up for review on a regular basis (preferably
annually). It is helpful to review the list in advance of MoDOT STIP preparation so that
CAMPO Staff can provide fresh local transportation priority information to MoDOT staff.
Projects contained in the Illustrative List are separated into different “Tiers” based on the impact
or underlying need of the project, as follows: (Projects are not prioritized within each Tier)
Tier 1 – Regionally Significant projects that are supported by the travel demand model and
recognized as a high priority by the Board of Directors, stakeholders, and the general
public.
Tier 2 – Projects with a more localized area of impact that are (mostly) supported by the travel
demand model and recognized as a high priority by the Board of Directors,
stakeholders, and the general public
Tier 3 – Projects recognized as a need by stakeholders and the general public and may or may
not be supported by the travel demand model.
Projects are also classified type as follows:
System Performance – Typically vehicle oriented Highway/Roadway and intersection projects.
Multi-Modal – Transit, Airport, Rail, and River projects.
Pedestrian and Non-Motorized – Sidewalk, crosswalk, bicycle, and greenway projects.
The following are attached for review by the Techincal Committee:
1. Complete List of Illustrative Projects - excerpt pages 97-104 from the 2045 MTP.
2. Report focused on System Performance Projects, categorized by type of project (8
categories) and including maps, traffic counts, crashes, and generalized cost estimates.
Staff Recommendation
Staff are not aware of any necessary additions or deletions of projects from the existing illustrative list.
Staff recommend affirmation of the existing list by the Board of Directors.
Technical Committee Recommendation
The Technical Committee reviewed the Illustrative list at their meeting of January 7 and voted to
recommend approval of the list with no changes to the Board of Directors.
Recommended Form of Motion:
Motion to approve the Illustrative list.
Agenda Item 6C
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
AGENDA ITEM 6C
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
AGENDA ITEM 6C
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
AGENDA ITEM 6C
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
AGENDA ITEM 6C
CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN
101
Figure 6.8A Illustrative Projects – Multi-Modal
Source: CAMPO
AGENDA ITEM 6C
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<
AGENDA ITEM 6C
CAMPO 2045 & BEYOND METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN
103
Figure 6.9A Illustrative Projects – Pedestrian and Non-Motorized
Source: CAMPO
AGENDA ITEM 6C
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
AGENDA ITEM 6C
Page 0
Illustrative Projects List Review
This report is designed to take a more focused look at the Illustrative Projects – System Performance list. This list is
broken down into the following categories.
1.Regionally Significant (Tier 1) Projects
2.Highway Interchange Projects
3.Missouri Boulevard Projects
4.Intersection Arterial Projects
5.Intersection Collector Projects
6.Street Widening / Turn Lane Projects
7.Other / Misc. Projects
8.Future Roads
AGENDA ITEM 6C
Page 1
Regionally Significant (Tier 1) Projects
Num Tier City / County Location Project Est. Cost Traffic Counts Crashes
1 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/accel/decel lanes)
$10M<54100 352
2 1 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
$10M<41350 572
3 1 Jefferson City US 50 / 63 /54 (Tri-
Level)
Reconfigure interchange to provide non-conflicting
system-to-system movements
$5M-
$10M
79968 234
AGENDA ITEM 6C
Page 2
Highway Interchange Projects
Num Tier City / County Location Project Est. Cost Traffic Counts Crashes
4 2 Callaway
County
US 54 / S. Summit
Dr. Ramps
Addition of ramps to westbound and eastbound US 54
completing the S. Summit Dr. overpass
$1M-$5M 28451 31
5 2 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
$5M-
$10M
35714 116
9 2 Jefferson City US-54 NB Ramps /
Christy Dr / Stadium
/ Jefferson St
Install roundabous at both hook ramp intersections to
improve operations and address offsets/angles
$1M-
$10M
15212 53
13 2 Jefferson City US 54 / Ellis Bl /
Southwest Bl
Reconfigure interchange to address capacity and close
spacing of outer roads. Create a pedestrian connection
along Southwest Bl / Ellis Bl from Ford St to Southridge Dr
$5M-
$10M
19448 222
17 2 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
$5M-
$10M
19576 160
25 2 Holts Summit US 54 / Route OO /
Simon Bl
Reconfigure interchange to address close outer road
spacing and capacity issues (may involve roundabouts);
incorporate pedestrian facilities crossing US 54
$5M-
$10M
7652 45
30 3 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
$1M-
$10M
9692 57
31 3 Holts Summit US 54 / Center St Improve interchange capacity and east-side outer road
spacing with roundabouts at terminals
$1M-
$10M
3636 28
AGENDA ITEM 6C
Page 3
Missouri Boulevard Projects
Num Tier City / County Location Project Est. Cost Traffic Counts Crashes
7 2 Jefferson City Missouri Blvd,
Eastern Lowe's
entranc e t o S 10
Mile Dr
Address access management along the corridor,
including turn restrictions, additional traffic control,
and safety .
$1M-
$10M
22620 85
22 2 Jefferson City Missouri Blvd,
Country Club Dr to
Howert on Ct
Widen to 5 lanes; including right turn lane at
Howerton Ct.
$5M-
$10M
9669 26
26 2 Jefferson City Missouri Blvd,
Stoneridge Pkwy to
US 50
Impove access management along Missouri Bld,
including improvments to intersections, restrictions
to turning movements. and improvemnts to
pedestrian safety
$5M-
$10M
22193 927
AGENDA ITEM 6C
Page 4
Intersection-Arterial Projects
Num Tier City / County Location Project Est. Cost Traffic Counts Crashes
6 2 Jefferson City West Edgewood @
Stadium
Install roundabout to improve intersection capacity $500k-
$5M
5680 18
8 2 Jefferson City W. Truman Blvd /
Scot t Station Rd
Signalize or otherwise enhance capacity < $500k 8553 5
14 2 Jefferson City Southwest Blvd @
Stadium
Install roundabout to improve intersection capacity $500k-
$5M
10707 24
15 2 Jefferson City Ellis Bl / Green
Berry Rd
Install roundabout to improve intersection capacity $500k-
$5M
8128 7
16 2 Jefferson City Bald Hill Rd / Seven
Hills Rd
Install roundabout to improve intersection capacity $500k-
$5M
3359 2
21 2 Jefferson City West Edgewood @
Creek Trail
Install roundabout to improve intersection capacity $500k-
$5M
4866 12
34 3 Jefferson City MO 179 and Truman
Blvd
Reconfigure intersection with roundabout $1M-$5M 9570 76
39 3 Jefferson City Swifts Hwy /
Jefferson St
Reconfigure to fix sight distance issues; widen
Swifts Hwy approach
$50K-
$100k
7126 5
40 3 Holts Summit S. Summit Dr /
Perrey Dr / Hibernia
Ln / Holt Ln
Redesign intersection to address offset and sight
distance
N/A 3472 1
47 3 St. Martins Route T/D & Bus 50
W Intersection
Reconfigure intersection with roundabout $500k-
$1M
8456 5
AGENDA ITEM 6C
Page 5
Intersection-Collector
Num Tier City / County Location Project Est. Cost Traffic Counts Crashes
12 2 Wardsville Route B, Ashbury
Way to Route M
Install roundabout at Rte B / Falcon / Ashbury and
intersection improvment to Rte B / Rte M/ Rte W.
$1M-$5M 5456 34
36 3 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
TWLTL
$5M-
$10M
5818 42
43 3 Holts Summit Van Horn Rd /
Julie Ln
Redesign intersection to address offset and sight
distance
N/A 2494 0
48 3 Holts Summit Nieman Rd /
Halifax Rd / Major
Terr
Address offset and skew by installing roundabout or
realigning east leg
N/A 2150 2
AGENDA ITEM 6C
Page 6
Street Widening / Turn Lanes
Num Tier City / County Location Project Est. Cost Traffic Counts Crashes
23 2 Jefferson City Country Club Dr,
Truman Bl to
Rainbow Dr
Widen to provide left-turn lanes at existing and future
access points
$1M-$5M 6790 95
29 3 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
$1M-$5M 10572 60
33 3 Jefferson City MO 179, Industrial
Dr to Sue Dr
Add left-turn lanes at Sue Dr, Cherry Creek Ct, and
Fire Station north driveway
$500k-
$5M
4943 50
36 3 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
TWLTL
$5M-
$10M
5818 42
57 3 Taos Routes M and Y
shoulders
Install minimum 2 ft. shoulders along state routes
throughout Taos
Install minimum 2 ft. shoulders along state routes M
and Y in Taos
$500K-
$1M
1432 33
AGENDA ITEM 6C
Page 7
Other / Misc. Projects
Num Tier City / County Location Project Est. Cost Traffic Counts Crashes
32 3 Cole County Rock Ridge Rd /
Wildwood Dr
extension
Add left-turn lane on Rock Ridge to improve capacity
after completion of extension
$1M-$5M 2166 3
35 3 Cole County Bridge
Replacement /
Bridge Replacement on Tanner Bridge Rd. over
Moreau River
$1M-$5M 4011 2
41 3 Holts Summit Spalding Rd/ Park Install drainage improvements. Curb and gutter
could cause surface flooding for adjoining properties.
N/A 2
42 3 Holts Summit N.Summit Dr and
Mars St
Intersection
Install drainage improvements – box culvert. N/A 8280 5
49 3 Holts Summit E Simon Blvd, ~0.4
mi east of
Jefferson Rd
Replace undersized culvert. Install new bridge N/A 3576 3
60 3 Jefferson City High St. viaduct
replacement
Replace High St. viaduct over Missouri Blvd.$5M-
$10M
5730 1
AGENDA ITEM 6C
Page 8
Future Roads
Num Location
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 Stonerider Parkway extension to W. Edgewood Drive
7 S. Summit Drive Ramp Additions
8 Militia Drive Extension to Liberty Road
AGENDA ITEM 6C
CAMPO Board of Directors Staff Report
Voting Procedure Analysis
January 20, 2021
Summary
Staff has a prepared report on voting procedures for the CAMPO Board of Directors. The CAMPO
Board of Directors requested a report on the voting procedures. See the attached report for more detail.
Agenda Item 6D
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.
AGENDA ITEM 6D
Page | 1
Voting Procedure Analysis 2020
Introduction
In 2019, board members of the Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (CAMPO)
requested staff to review the voting procedures used by the CAMPO Board of Directors. The request
was to review current procedures and potential alternative procedures that other Metropolitan
Planning Organizations may be using to help address the disbursement of voting powers in different
jurisdictions. All metropolitan planning organizations are required by 23 Code of Federal Regulation
Part 450.306(i) to establish policy boards with appropriate representation from local elected officials,
public transportation agency officials and state officials.
CAMPO Voting Procedures
The current CAMPO Board of Directors membership and voting procedures are dictated by the
CAMPO Bylaws as well as the Memorandum of Understanding Concerning Transportation Planning
approved on April 15, 2015. In section 3 of the Memorandum of Understanding Concerning
Transportation Planning, it states that there shall be 13 voting members on the Board of Directors,
comprised as follows:
1. City of Jefferson: Seven (7) voting members shall be appointed by the City of Jefferson to
represent the City of Jefferson. Members shall be comprised of four (4) elected officials (e.g.
Mayor, or City Council Members) and three (3) department director level staff with
transportation related responsibilities (e.g. administration, planning, transit, public works, parks
& recreation).
2. Cole County: Three (3) voting members shall be appointed by Cole County to represent the
County of Cole. The members shall be comprised of one County Commissioner, one small city
representative and one other elected or appointed representative filled at the County’s
discretion.
3. Callaway County: One (1) voting member shall be appointed by Callaway County to represent
the County of Callaway. The member shall be a County Commissioner or an elected or
appointed representative filled at the County’s discretion.
4. Missouri Department of Transportation: One (1) voting member shall represent the Central
District of the Missouri Department of Transportation.
5. Holts Summit: One (1) voting member shall be appointed by the City of Holts Summit to
represent the City of Holts Summit.
AGENDA ITEM 6D
Page | 2
These 13 voting members have to follow Robert’s Rules of Order as indicated in Section 16.6 of
the CAMPO Bylaws. That indicates that any vote first has to have an initial motion followed by a second.
The Chairman restates the motion opening it up for discussion. Once the discussion is complete then
there is a vote. After the vote the Chairman announces the results. If the vote is not unanimous then
there is a follow up roll call vote, as indicated in Section 16.7 of the CAMPO Bylaws.
This is where the review of a split vote and how we can have a non-bias vote is important. With
Jefferson City having 7 of the 13 votes, if the votes always stick together they will always have a
majority. The first question comes from the Federal Code, is this “appropriate representation”? In the
United States the most common voting system is the Electoral System that assigns votes to entities or
jurisdictions based upon population. As of the last census, the population of the CAMPO region was
71,347 people. Jefferson City is the largest city in the CAMPO region and holds a population of 43,203
based on the last census data, meaning that Jefferson City hold 60% of the population within the
CAMPO Region. Jefferson City holds 7 of the 13 votes which mean that they hold 54% of the voting
power. Is this a common occurrence among other MPO’s?
Other MPO Voting Procedures
The first MPO we reviewed that is similar in size to CAMPO is the Joplin Area Transportation
Study Organization (JATSO). The last census showed the population of the JATSO region was 84,807,
with the city of Joplin having a population of 50,906. Similar to Jefferson City, Joplin holds 60% of the
population of JATSO. The JATSO Policy Board has a total of 12 voting members and the city of Joplin
holds 6 of the 12 voting members, meaning Joplin holds 50% of the voting power of JATSO. They hold
neither a majority, nor a minority.
The next MPO we look at is the Southeast Metropolitan Planning Organization (SEMPO) located
in Cape Girardeau. The population of the SEMPO region according to the last census was 59,448. The
parent city of the SEMPO region, Cape Girardeau holds a population of 38,110. The city of Cape
Girardeau holds 64% of the population of the SEMPO region. On the SEMPO Board of Directors there
are 7 voting members. The City of Cape Girardeau holds only 2 of the 7 voting members, giving the city
only 29% of the voting power.
The list goes on and on. But most MPOs fall in line with how CAMPO and our parent city set up
our votes. Most MPOs where the parent city holds more than 50% of the region’s population they also
hold 50% or better of the voting power. This falls in line with the common interpretation of the federal
code for “appropriate representation” in a democratic voting society.
Types of Voting Systems
Now that we understand the voting procedures we next need to understand the voting system.
AGENDA ITEM 6D
Page | 3
1. The most common voting system in the United States is “First Past the Post” or “Winner
Takes All.” In this system, all candidates, objects, or issues start on an equal level and the
candidate, object, or issue that receives the most votes wins. This gives every vote equal
weight. In this system each voting member casts just one vote. CAMPO uses this voting system
when voting in new members or voting for the chair and vice chair.
2. The second voting system to look at is a “Single Transferable Vote”, or what is
commonly called a “Ranked Choice Voting System.” In this style of voting the voting members
are given a list of candidates, objects, or issues and each voting member is given the task to rank
this list from most favorable to least favorable. In the end the candidate, object, or issue with
the most number one votes is considered the winner. CAMPO uses this voting system when
ranking projects to bring forth to MoDOT for grant money like for TAP or TEAP grants.
3. The next voting system we will look at is a “Two Round System.” This system works like
“Winner Takes All” in the first round. Multiple candidates, objects, or issues are brought before
a voting membership and voted on. If one candidate, object, or issue receives more than 50% of
the votes then it is “Winner Takes All.” If they do not receive more than 50% of the vote than
the top 2 candidates, objects, or issues move to a second round where there is a revote for just
the top 2. Then a winner is decided by who receives the most votes.
There are several more voting systems in place around the world but none of which apply to
what we deal with in the CAMPO region. When we look at MoDOT, Regional Planning Commissions
(RPCs), and other MPOs, when it comes to grants and projects, everyone uses the “Ranked Choice
Voting System” as CAMPO does. It would be prudent to keep following that same system.
Scoring Rubrics
We next need to look at the scoring rubrics that are used in a “Ranked Choice Voting System.”
We use the “Ranked Choice Voting System” because we have more than one project most of the time
and some of the time more than one project has the ability to get funded. We must know in what order
we rank these projects for our top priority to get funded. To find out how to rank these projects we use
a scoring rubric. The funding for these projects is highly competitive and we have to compete with
other MPOs and RPCs to get projects selected for a limited pool of funding. Since all projects cannot be
funded, one entity gets to decide who gets funded or not, that role falls to MoDOT. To do this MoDOT
sends provides a scoring rubric to score these projects at a local level first (see example below).
AGENDA ITEM 6D
Page | 4
Some local MPOs and RPCs provide their Board of Directors their own scoring rubrics for the
boards to rank the projects easier (see example below). Others just rank their projects 1, 2, 3, and 4 and
turn that into MoDOT. These options would be at the digression of the CAMPO Board of Directors.
Local Agency City of Fulton
Description ADA Transition Plan
Project Total $10,000
Federal Request $8,000
Federal Ratio 80%
Roadway System Engineering Resources Safety Congestion Innovation Implementation Value Total
Is the study area on or
adjacent to state or local
roads? Studies on/adjacent
to locals roads will be rated
higher than studies
involving state system
roads
Does the local agency
have engineering staff?
5=agency has no traffic
engineering staff;
1=agency has a large
traffic engineering staff
Does the
project
address
traffic
safety?
Does the project
address traffic
congestion?
Does the project
consider
varying
countermeasure
s (roundabouts,
flashing yellow
arrow, j-turns,
prismatic
sheeting, etc.)?
Rank the feasibility of
the local agency
following through with
the changes as a result
of the project.
Rank the overall gain the
project could offer
compared to the total
cost.
LOCLG 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MRPC 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MMRPC 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
CAMPO 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
CATSO 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
CENTRAL DISTRICT - TEAP FUNDS - 2020-2021
Planning Partner
Rank the Projects in All Other Organizations: For each category below, score each project with a 1-5, with 5 being the highest and 1 being the lowest.
AGENDA ITEM 6D
Page | 5
MoDOT Transportation Alternative Program - Mid-MO RPC Scoring Matrix
City of Ashland -
Ashland
Pedestr ian /
Bicycle Sidewalk
(Phase 1) and
Walkway (Phase 2)
City of Fulton -
(Phase #1) and
Walkway (Phase
#2)
City of Pilot Grove -
Harris and Fourth
Street Sidewalk
Project
Safety Need and/or Emphasis - Refers to the
degree in which a bicycle/pedestrian safety
concern or need is addressed. Projects that
are adjacent to a school and provide safer
access to that school should be scored
higher.
0-10
Connectivity - Refers to the degree in which
this project connects to existing sidewalks
and trails and contributes to the overall
bicycle/pedestrian network of the
community. Projects that are "completing a
gap" in the existing bike/pedestrian network
0-10
Activity Centers - Refers to the type of
activity centers that this project will provide
access to and/or be in proximity to. These
activity centers include but are not limited to
schools, employment centers, retail centers
and recreational areas/parks.
0-8
Evidence of Public Involvement - This
includes letters of support and other
documentation that the community
considers this project a priority.
0-10
Local/Regional Plan - Refers to whether or
not this project is included in the city or
county master plan or other local or regional
plan. Projects that are a phase or segment of
a larger project that build on a previous or
future investment should be scored higher.
0-8
Match - Does the LPA's match exceed the
20% match requirement?0-2
Has the LPA completed the MoDOT LPA
training?Y or N Y Y Y
Does the LPA have incomplete federal
projects?Y or N N N N
Will ROW need to be acquired?Y or N N (City ROW)N (MoDOT ROW)N (City ROW)
Is there a plan for routine maintenance and
upkeep for the project?0-6
Timeline for construction to begin? Projects
must advance to construction within 23
months from the date of selection.
0-6
Total Application Points 0-60
Co
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
I
m
p
a
c
t
Co
m
m
u
n
t
i
y
S
u
p
p
o
r
t
a
n
d
P
l
a
n
n
i
n
g
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
R
e
a
d
i
n
e
s
s
AGENDA ITEM 6D
Page | 6
Disbursement of funds
Finally, we look at how votes have gone for CAMPO as it pertains to the disbursement of federal
funds. In figure 5.11 taken from CAMPOs MTP, we can see all the projects that have been awarded
federal funding since 2013. We see that 8 projects have been awarded to Jefferson City totaling
$2,905,630, 4 to Holts Summit totaling $1,011,730, 3 to St. Martins totaling $1,010,056, 1 to Cole
County for $707,000, and 1 to the Osage Region Trail Association for $49,282, with regional funding
totaling $5,683,698. This shows Jefferson City has been awarded 47% of all the projects and 51% of all
the total funding.
AGENDA ITEM 6D
Page | 7
Conclusion
In conclusion, we can see that with accordance to the federal code that CAMPO does have
“appropriate representation” among the voting members. Also CAMPO follows the appropriate voting
methods in accordance to MoDOT as well as other MPOs. CAMPO also has a relatively fair disbursement
of federal funds for local jurisdictions. Although some jurisdictions have not received any project
funding, it may be something we look to change in the future.
AGENDA ITEM 6D
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
January 20, 2021
Summary
The following list includes work tasks that are currently in progress or have been completed since the
previous meeting:
• Federal Performance Measures – Safety Targets. See attached staff report.
• Regional Needs and Illustrative List. See attached staff report.
• FY 2022 Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP) development. Staff has begun the
process of updating the UPWP.
• 2022-2026 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) development. Staff has
begun the process of updating the TIP.
• Jefferson City Data Assistance. Staff is working with other Jefferson City planners in
providing data and mapping assistance in the update of the of the City’s Comprehensive
Plan.
• Coordinated Public Transit-Human Services Transportation Plan. Staff has begun
the process of developing a timeline for update of the plan in 2021. Both a public survey
and stakeholder survey are open.
• Local Street Classification Update. Staff is in the process of updating local street
classifications throughout City of Jefferson and Cole County as part of the Thoroughfare
Plan development for the City of Jefferson.
• Major Thoroughfare Plan Development. Staff continues work on the Major
Thoroughfare Plan in conjunction with the development of the Jefferson City
Comprehensive Plan. The Major Thoroughfare Plan will be developed through
stakeholder input and will pull directly from the 2018 Travel Demand Model.
Agenda Item 7A
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
2022-2026 Transportation Improvement Program Update
January 20, 2021
Summary
The Transportation Improvement Program (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. The TIP is updated annually by CAMPO in cooperation with local jurisdictions, the Missouri
Department of Transportation, and local public transportation operators.
Development of the 2022-2026 TIP is starting.
We are making the 1st call for Federally Funded Transportation Projects and requesting budget
information supporting fiscal constraint. Please submit applications to CAMPO staff by 5:00pm on
Friday, February 26th, 2021.
The FY 2022-2026 TIP will be developed according to the schedule below:
Call for Projects Issued: January 7th, 2021
Application Deadline: February 26th, 2021
Preliminary Review of TIP Draft March 4th, 2021
MoDOT/OneDOT TIP Draft review March 17th, 2021
TIP Draft Review, Open Public Comment April 14th, 2021
Final TIP Submitted for Approval May 6th, 2021
Governor Approval of TIP June, 2021
Any questions or comments should be forwarded to Lee Bowden at 573-634-6525
or lbowden@jeffcitymo.org.
Agenda Item 7B
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
FY 2022 Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP)
January 20, 2021
Summary
Staff has begun work on the FY2022 UPWP. This annual process starts very early due to the City of
Jefferson’s budget process. The FY2022 UPWP is anticipated to be adopted by May 2021.
The UPWP is CAMPO’s annual statement of work identifying the budget, planning priorities, and
activities to be carried out for the year (November 1to October 31). The UPWP contains many ongoing
activities required to perform the essential functions of CAMPO, as well as, periodic and one-time
activities. The UPWP serves as the basis for funding agreements with the Missouri Department of
Transportation (MoDOT).
The estimated draft budget for FY2022 is approximately $168,881 with $135,105 (80%) funded through
the Consolidated Planning Grant (CPG) and $33,776 (20%) funded through local match. The 20% local
match is provided by Jefferson City (75%) and Cole County (25%). Based on the anticapated FY2021
expenditure and estimated FY2022 draft budget, it is projected that CAMPO will have a balance of
aprosimately $476,124 in unprogrammed CPG funds at the end of FY2022.
Staff is in the process of developing objectives and activities for FY2022. Input from the Technical
Committee, Board of Directors, stakeholders, and the general public will be used throughout the process.
These activities are categorized into five work elements:
•Work Element 1 - Program Support & Administration
•Work Element 2 - General Development and Comprehensive Planning Coordination
•Work Element 3 - Long Range Transportation Planning
•Work Element 4 - Short Range Transportation Planning & Programming
•Work Element 5 - Public Transportation Planning
Anticipated major activities in FY2022, developed thus far, include:
•Development of the FY2023 UPWP (Annual)
•Development of the 2023-2027 Transportation Improvement Program (Annual)
•Technical assistance (i.e mapping, data development/management, grants) (Continuous)
Staff will continue to develop other activities through May of 2021 and any input is welcome.
Please refer questions or comments to Katrina Williams at 573-634-6536 or by email at
kawilliams@jeffcitymo.org.
Agenda Item 7C
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
Coordinated Public Transit – Human Services Transportation Plan Update 2021
January 20, 2021
Summary
Staff has begun work on the Coordinated Public Transit – Human Services Transportation Plan (Coordinated
Plan). The Coordinated Plan is required to be updated every four to five years. The last update was
completed in 2017 and the current update process is anticipated to conclude in March or April of 2021.
Federal transit law, as amended by Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21), and
continued in the Fixing America's Surface Transportation Act (FAST Act), requires that projects selected for
funding under the Section 5310 program be “included in a locally developed, coordinated public transit-
human services transportation plan” and that the plan be “developed and approved through a process that
included participation by seniors, individuals with disabilities, representatives of public, private, and
nonprofit transportation and human services providers and other members of the public.”
The Coordinated Plan includes four components:
1.An assessment of available services that identifies current transportation providers (public, private,
and nonprofit);
2.An assessment of transportation needs for individuals with disabilities and seniors. This assessment
can be based on the experiences and perceptions of the planning partners or on more sophisticated
data collection efforts, and gaps in service;
3.Strategies, activities, and/or projects to address the identified gaps between current services and
needs, as well as opportunities to achieve efficiencies in service delivery; and
4.Priorities for implementation based on resources (from multiple program sources), time, and
feasibility for implementing specific strategies and/or activities identified.
A public survey and stakeholder survey will close in mid-January. The public survey is available on the
CAMPO webpage at: www.jeffersoncitymo.gov/campo. Due to the current COVID-19 health crisis, most of
the planned public engagement will take place virtually. Comments on the Coordinated Plan will be
accepted anytime between now and the adoption of the plan. Staff will work closely with stakeholders via
phone, email, and virtual meetings. A draft plan will be presented to the Technical Committee in February
and the public comment period will be extended beyond the required minimum to accommodate the lack of
in-person public meetings.
Draft materials will be updated on the CAMPO main webpage at: www.jeffersoncitymo.gov/campo as they
are developed.
Please refer questions or comments to Katrina Williams at 573-634-6536 or by email at
kawilliams@jeffcitymo.org.
Agenda Item 7D
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
Election of Officers
January 20, 2021
Summary
The normal meeting for election of Board of Directors Chair and Vice Chair is October. However, the
October meeting did not take place. The election would be to fill the positions of Chair and Vice Chair
with terms extending to October 2021.
Excerpt of CAMPO Bylaws regarding election of officers:
Section 13 Officers and Terms
13.1 The Board of Directors shall elect a Chairman and Vice Chairman at the end of the last meeting in
the transportation planning year. The terms of office shall be one year, to expire at the first meeting
of the transportation planning year following the first year of the position. Officers shall be eligible
for re-election, but shall be elected by a majority vote of the voting members present.
13.2 The Chairman shall preside at all meetings. The Chairman may call special meetings of the Board
of Directors.
13.3 The Vice Chairman shall assume the responsibilities of the Chairman in his or her absence.
13.4 Any appointed positions on the Board of Directors shall commence and/or conclude at the first
meeting of the transportation planning year after the term expiration, or as deemed necessary.
13.5 A modification of the Board of Directors members and officers may occur mid-year if there are
elections, resignations or changes in representative board memberships.
(Amended 4/15/2015)
Agenda Item 7E
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
2021 Meeting Schedule
January 20, 2021
Summary
Following is the staff recommended list of meeting dates for the CAMPO Board of Directors through
December 31, 2021.
The Board of Directors meets the third Wednesday of the month at 12:00 p.m. in the Boone/Bancroft Room
(Rm. #200), John G. Christy Municipal Building, 320 E. McCarty.
CAMPO members and the public will be notified if changes occur.
•January 20
•February 17
•March 17
•April 21
•May 19
•June 16
•July 21
•August 18
•September 15
•October 20
•November 17
•December 15
Agenda Item 7F