Transportation Alternatives Set-Aside Program

Similar documents
TRANSPORTATION ALTERNATIVES SET-ASIDE PROGRAM

Best Southwest Transportation Committee. North Central Texas Council of Governments Transportation Department

DISTRICT BICYCLE PROGRAM

REGIONAL BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN DESIGN GUIDELINES

APPENDIX A: Complete Streets Checklist DRAFT NOVEMBER 2016

AMATS Complete Streets Policy

Transportation Enhancements, Safe Routes to School, and Recreational Trails to Transportation Alternatives. Pamela Liston, October 30 th, 2013

COMMUNITY SCHOOLS AND TRANSPORTATION

Transportation Alternatives Program. FY2017 Applicant Workshop

Proposed. City of Grand Junction Complete Streets Policy. Exhibit 10

Funding Sources Appendix I. Appendix I. Funding Sources. Virginia Beach Bikeways and Trails Plan 2011 Page I-1

ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION

Corpus Christi Metropolitan Transportation Plan Fiscal Year Introduction:

Bicycle Master Plan Goals, Strategies, and Policies

Pedestrian, Bicycle and Traffic Calming Strategic Implementation Plan. January 18, 2011

BICYCLE PUBLIC HEARING INTRODUCTION. Kathy Kleinschmidt, P.E. Bicycle and Pedestrian Coordinator Dallas District

Road Diets: Reconfiguring Streets for Multi-Modal Travel

RESOLUTION NO ?? A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF NEPTUNE BEACH ADOPTING A COMPLETE STREETS POLICY

TOWN OF PORTLAND, CONNECTICUT COMPLETE STREETS POLICY

INDOT Complete Streets Guideline & Policy

The Role of MPOs in Advancing Safe Routes to School through the Transportation Alternatives Program

Transportation Alternatives Set-Aside FY2018 Applicant Workshop

Overview. Illinois Bike Summit IDOT Complete Streets Policy Presentation. What is a Complete Street? And why build them? And why build them?

Agenda. Overview PRINCE GEORGE S PLAZA METRO AREA PEDESTRIAN PLAN

NJDOT Complete Streets Checklist

2017 North Texas Regional Bicycle Opinion Survey

Living Streets Policy

PRINCE GEORGE S PLAZA METRO AREA PEDESTRIAN PLAN

Perryville TOD and Greenway Plan

Developing a Regional Complete Streets Policy Statement for North Central Texas. Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee August 17, 2011

CITY OF BLOOMINGTON COMPLETE STREETS POLICY

5. RUNNINGWAY GUIDELINES

General Plan Circulation Element Update Scoping Meeting April 16, 2014 Santa Ana Senior Center, 424 W. 3rd Street, Santa Ana, CA 92701

New Measure A Expenditure Categories DEFINITIONS OF ELIGIBLE EXPENDITURES Adopted March 8, 2007

MINUTES FOR ADOPTION Bicycle Advisory Committee Teleconference Meeting 200 E. Riverside Drive, Austin TX, Classroom E May 1, 2015

Phone: Fax: Project Reference No. (to be filled out by MassHighway):

Bicycle and Pedestrian Plans and Improvements

MONTCLAIR SAFE COMPLETE STREETS IMPLEMENTATION PLAN. Monday November 13, 2017 Michael Dannemiller, Principal Engineer NV5, Inc.

Scope of Services BICYCLE/PEDESTRIAN PLAN FOR THE INDIAN RIVER COUNTY MPO

Anne Arundel County BICYCLE, PEDESTRIAN, TRANSIT ASSESSMENT GUIDELINES

Evolving Roadway Design Policies for Walking and Bicycling

SRTS IMPLEMENTATION COSTS

West Dimond Blvd Upgrade Jodhpur Street to Sand Lake Road

HOOPA DESIGN FAIR 4. IMPLEMENTATION PHASES & FUNDING

Dallas Trail Safety Initiatives. Quality of Life Committee February 14, 2011 Park and Recreation Department

Getting Your SRTS Project Funded. Ryan Snyder

Watertown Complete Streets Prioritization Plan. Public Meeting #1 December 14, 2017

Pine Hills Road Pedestrian/Bicycle Safety Study Board of County Commissioners Work Session

BICYCLE PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION UPDATE. Transportation and Trinity River Project Council Committee June 13, 2016

Pedestrian Project List and Prioritization

Gordon Proctor Director Policy on Accommodating Bicycle and Pedestrian Travel on ODOT Owned or Maintained Facilities

Bicycle and Pedestrian Chapter TPP Update Overview. TAB September 20, 2017

Prince George s County plans, policies, and projects

Complete Streets for Louisiana

FUNDING SOURCES CHAPTER 6

Bike Planning: A New Day

Madison Urban Area and Dane County. Bicycle Transportation Plan Summary. September Introduction. Bicycle Plan Scope and Planning Process

NM-POLICY 1: Improve service levels, participation, and options for non-motorized transportation modes throughout the County.

New Jersey Department of Transportation. Complete Streets Summit Shukri Abuhuzeima NJDOT-Local Aid

TxDOT Bicycle Tourism Trails Study Update. April 2017 BAC Meeting April 10, 2017

Transportation Alternatives Set-Aside Program. June 28, 2017

Click to edit Master title style

Section 8. Partnerships and Funding

USDOT Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Initiative: Safer People and Safer Streets. Barbara McCann, USDOT Office of Policy

Morristown, NJ Complete Streets Policy

Appendix 3 Roadway and Bike/Ped Design Standards

Closing Plenary Session

APPROVE A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A COMPLETE STREETS POLICY

Complete Streets Policy DAVID CRONIN, P.E., CITY ENGINEER

Chapter 9: Pedestrians and Bicyclists

Chapter 2. Bellingham Bicycle Master Plan Chapter 2: Policies and Actions

Land Use Bicycle Spaces Required Type Residential

900 BICYCLE FACILITIES Traffic Engineering Manual

Goal 3: Foster an environment of partnerships and collaboration to connect our communities and regions to one another.

2. Vision & Goals. Vision. Santa Rosa is a community where walking and bicycling are comfortable and convenient for people of all ages and abilities.

CTDOT Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety Initiatives

Non-Motorized Transportation 7-1

Bicycle and Pedestrian Planning in a Historically Car-Centric Culture: A Focus on Connectivity, Safety, & Accessibility

City of Madison, East Johnson Street North Baldwin Street to First Street Local Street Dane County

PEDESTRIAN ACTION PLAN

PURPOSE AND POLICY GUIDANCE

MASTER BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN PLAN

We believe the following comments and suggestions can help the department meet those goals.

Active Transportation Infrastructure Investment A Business Case

5. Pedestrian System. Accomplishments Over the Past Five Years

Bicycle Lanes Planning, Design, Funding South Mountain Partnership Trails Workshop Roy Gothie PennDOT Statewide Bicycle Pedestrian Coordinator

Solana Beach Comprehensive Active Transportation Strategy (CATS)

Houma-Thibodaux Metropolitan Planning Organization STP<200K Funding Application APPLICATION

Multimodal Design Guidance. October 23, 2018 ITE Fall Meeting

AGENDA ITEM NO. 5b HCAOG TAC meeting of May 8, 2014

o n - m o t o r i z e d transportation is an overlooked element that can greatly enhance the overall quality of life for the community s residents.

SUMMARY OF TRANSPORTATION INVESTMENTS

CITY OF SIGNAL HILL Cherry Avenue Signal Hill, CA

NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC CALMING PROGRAM. Policy and Procedure. Roswell Department of Transportation (770)

FY 2016 TRANSPORTATION ALTERNATIVES PROGRAM PROJECT SELECTION

Total Project Cost Federal Funds Local Match

CHAPTER 7.0 IMPLEMENTATION

Kalamazoo Area Transportation Study (KATS) Complete Streets Policy Approved: Effective: FY 2018 Projects

CHAPTER 3: Vision Statement and Goals

COMPLETE STREETS FUNDING PROGRAM

Transcription:

Transportation Alternatives Set-Aside Program 2017 Call for Projects for the North Central Texas Region Application Workshop December 14, 2016

Workshop Overview Mobility 2040 2017 TA Set-Aside Call for Projects program overview Guidelines Scoring criteria Schedule Application and budget overview Environmental checklist Common problems and best practices 2

Implementing Mobility 2040 3

4

2017 TA Set-Aside Call for Projects Program Overview 5

What is the Transportation Alternatives Set-Aside (TA Set-Aside) Program? FAST Act: Fixing America s Surface Transportation (Current federal transportation funding bill) Includes the TA Set-Aside Program Similar to the previous Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP) and Transportation Enhancements (TE) Requires states to sub-allocate to areas based on population MPOs serving urbanized areas with populations over 200,000 are responsible for selecting projects through a competitive process 6

Eligible Areas for Funding Under the NCTCOG Call for Projects (CFP) 7

Eligible Areas for Funding Under the NCTCOG CFP and the State CFP State CFP Anticipated Opening: January 2017 Anticipated Deadline: May 2017 8

Entities Eligible to Apply Local Governments Regional Transportation Authorities Transit Agencies School Districts, Local Education Agencies, or Schools Tribal Governments Other local or regional governmental entity with responsibility for oversight of transportation or recreational trails 9

Eligible Project Categories and Activities 2017 Call for Projects (North Central Texas) Active Transportation Shared-use paths On-street bikeways Bicycle/pedestrian signalization Sidewalks, crosswalks, curb ramps Traffic controls, calming measures Signage Road Diets Safe Routes to School Shared-use paths On-street bikeways Bicycle/pedestrian signalization Sidewalks, crosswalks, curb ramps Traffic controls, calming measures Signage Projects must have a general public benefit 10

Road Retrofit or Road Diet Examples of eligible elements for funding as part of a road diet: New sidewalks New pedestrian lighting Adding pedestrian and bike controls to traffic signals Pedestrian crossings Bicycle pavement markings and intersection bike boxes Protected intersections Installation of separated bikeways Measures to improve on-street bicycle crash hazards (replacement of storm water grates, utility covers, etc.) *Incidental costs should be kept to a minimum. Source: NYC DOT Not Eligible for Reimbursement Street repaving or reconstruction Drainage Street lighting Traffic signals (vehicles) Other general maintenance activities (e.g., cracked or heaving sidewalks, curb ramps only, potholes) 11

Ineligible Activities Planning for Safe Routes to School, corridor studies, trail or on-street bicycle plans, etc. Promotional activities and/or Safe Routes to School noninfrastructure activities related to education, encouragement, and enforcement. General recreation and park facilities, playground equipment, sports fields, campgrounds, picnic areas and pavilions, scenic overlooks, etc. Routine maintenance and operations. 12

TA Set-Aside Funding Funding Allocation for FY16*, 17, 18, and 19 Western Subregion Fort Worth District Share (34%) Eastern Subregion Dallas and Paris District Share (66%) Total Funding Available $8,038,519 $15,407,560 $23,446,079 * Includes $238,079 of FY16 funds carried over from the 2014 TAP Call for Projects. Maximum Federal Funding Award per Project Minimum Federal Funding Award per Project $5,000,000 $150,000 13

Local Match Twenty percent (minimum) local match. Local match must be cash. Local match will be needed at the earliest in FY 2018. A resolution approved by the Governing Body confirming the availability of the local cash-match contribution is required for each application. Note: The TA Set-Aside Program is not a grant. The funds provided are on a cost reimbursement basis. 14

Program Rules Project Agreement: Applicants must commit to executing an Advanced Funding Agreement (AFA) with TxDOT within one year of project selection. Funding Obligation: Applicants must commit to advance to construction within three years of selection (by 2020) or risk the loss of funding. Cost Overruns: Are solely the responsibility of the nominating entity. 15

Implementation of Projects Consistent with other Federal-aid highway programs, TA Set-Aside funds are administered by the State Department of Transportation (TxDOT). Regardless of whether the projects are located within the right-of-way of a Federal-aid highway, the treatment of projects will require: Project Agreements Authorization to Proceed Prior to Incurring Costs Prevailing Wage Rates (Davis-Bacon) Buy America Competitive Bidding 16

Evaluation and Scoring 17

Evaluation and Scoring Criteria for Active Transportation Projects Category Regional Network Connectivity Scoring (pts) Description 25 Improves connectivity of Mobility 2040 regional Veloweb Mobility 20 Improves connections and access to transit Safety 15 Improves safety and provides facilities with a high level of comfort for users of all ages and abilities Reducing Barriers 10 Provides safe crossing of existing travel obstacles Congestion Reduction 10 Destination Density 5 Provides alternative travel options in areas with greater opportunity for walking and bicycling Provides access to areas with a high density of major employers and destinations Air Quality Benefits 5 Improves air quality by supporting non-motorized travel Equity 5 Improves access to disadvantaged populations Local Network Connectivity 5 Implements locally planned priorities 18

Evaluation and Scoring Criteria for Safe Routes to School Projects Category Implements a Local Plan Scoring (pts) 20 Safety 20 Congestion Reduction 20 Equity 20 Community Support and Stakeholder Involvement 15 Air Quality Benefits 5 Description Implements a project identified as a priority in a local Safe Routes to School plan Improves the safety of students walking and bicycling to school Strong potential for the project to increase walking and bicycling by students to and from school Improves school access for disadvantaged populations and underserved communities Builds upon demonstrated community support for walking and bicycling to school Improves air quality by supporting non-motorized travel 19

Additional Considerations Active Transportation and Safe Routes to School Applications: Category Project Readiness and Other Factors Scoring (pts) 20 Project Innovation 5 Description Project readiness/ability to obligate funds and initiate construction quickly. Other factors related to project impact upon the community. Project implements innovative or new treatments and technology that can serve as a model for the region. 20

Additional Considerations: Project Readiness and Other Factors Level of stakeholder/community support Engineering/design complete or underway Environmental approvals complete or underway Easement acquisition (if applicable) complete or underway Additional local funding overmatch Innovative technology and treatments 21

Safe Routes to School (SRTS) Applications for SRTS projects will not compete for funding with Active Transportation projects. Eligible entities should submit a separate application for each school campus and the associated infrastructure project(s) that would benefit students walking/bicycling to that campus. The total amount of federal funding requested by an eligible entity for all of their SRTS projects must be between $150,000 - $5 million. Projects implementing recommendations of a SRTS Plan are strongly encouraged (but a Plan is not required). 22

Safe Routes to School Plans What: A plan for how to improve pedestrian and bicycle travel to and from school in order to increase the number of students who walk and bicycle and improve safety. A list of the schools with SRTS plans that have been submitted to TxDOT is available here: http://saferoutestx.com/srts-plans.php 23

Safe Routes to School Plans (cont.) Developing a SRTS Plan? Steps for Getting Started: Identify schools with safety issues or where many students walk/bicycle (school district feedback, high crash areas, etc.) Meet with school principals and other stakeholders to assess existing conditions and identify barriers/concerns What Should be Included in the Plan: School Description SRTS Team and Partnerships Existing Travel Environment Walk/Bike Barriers and Opportunities Goals and Actions Determine appropriate countermeasures 24

Schedule 25

Schedule BPAC / Transportation Alternatives Call for Projects Public Meeting 11/16/16 STTC Action (CFP Guidelines) 12/2/16 RTC Action (CFP Guidelines) 12/8/16 Call for Projects Opens 12/12/16 Application Workshop 12/14/16 Deadline for Meetings to Review Applications for Completeness 2/10/17 Call for Projects Closes Resolutions Due (If not included with the Application) Review of Projects / Scoring by NCTCOG Public Meetings 2/24/17; 5:00pm 4/21/17; 5:00pm March April Early May STTC Action (Selected Projects) 5/26/17 RTC Action (Selected Projects) 6/8/17 Workshop for Selected Projects 6/21/17 Submittal Deadline for Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) modifications (November 2017 cycle) 7/28/17 Approval of Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) Nov/Dec 2017 26

Next Steps Coordinate with independent school districts (ISDs), neighboring communities, your county, transit agency, etc. Coordinate with NCTCOG on any questions regarding project ideas or eligibility. 27

Questions? Contact Information Karla Weaver, AICP Sustainable Development Program Manager kweaver@nctcog.org 817-608-2376 Kevin Kokes, AICP Principal Transportation Planner kkokes@nctcog.org 817-695-9275 Daniel Snyder Transportation Planner II dsnyder@nctcog.org 817-608-2394 www.nctcog.org/tap Kathryn Rush Transportation Planner I krush@nctcog.org 817-701-5601 28 28

Application Overview 29

General Description Purpose of the Project Existing conditions Purpose of the project Supplemental materials (e.g., pictures, diagrams, etc.) 30

General Description Project Scope of Work Source: NCTCOG Identify the type of facilities for construction (sidewalks, crossings, path/trail, bike lanes, signage, etc.). Identify any innovative treatments and technology to be included in the project design. Source: NCTCOG Project elements should be consistent with the itemized construction cost worksheet (budget). Source: NCTCOG 31

Project Elements The project includes the following facilities: (Select all that apply) Sidewalks % New Construction Width (ft.) of sidewalks Crosswalks Curb Ramps On-Street Bicycle Facilities Bicycle Lane Shared Lane Markings Separated Bicycle Lane Bicycle Boxes Colored Pavement for Bicycle Lanes Shared-Use Path/Trail Width (ft.) (minimum 10 14 ft.) Pedestrian and Bicycle Signalization/Traffic Control Bicycle Parking/Racks/Amenities Pedestrian Amenities/Streetscape (lighting, landscaping, etc.) Transit Stops and Amenities Traffic Calming Signage Bicycle/Pedestrian Traffic Count Equipment Other Identify the percentage that is new vs. repair/ maintenance Must comply with AASHTO Less than 10-ft. width is considered a sidewalk Note: All elements noted on this section must be included in the Project Budget. 32

Project Elements (cont.) Consistent with AASHTO, NACTO, FHWA, and other relevant guides. Note: Per AASHTO a shared-use path/trail has a minimum 10-14 ft. width. 33

Project Location Map of project location, alignment or boundary Clearly identify project segments/phases Clearly identify location and length of various facility types (e.g., trail, on-street, sidewalk) Clearly identify other existing and planned facilities in the area, key land uses, and other connecting destinations 34

Project Location (cont.) 35

General Tips - Safety and Barriers Provide documentation of the issues and the recommended safety countermeasures. Safe Routes to School report Data source, safety report/study, benefit vs. cost Note: Regional pedestrian and bicycle crash data is available at www.nctcog.org/trans/sustdev/bikeped/bikepedcrashinfo.asp 36

General Tips - Safety and Barriers Is the project design suitable for All Ages and Abilities? Does the project implement FHWA-recommended safety countermeasures? Is the project design appropriate for the context in which it is located? Does the project implement a low stress/high level of comfort facility? Source: FHWA Source: NACTO 37

General Tips What is a low stress/high comfort level facility? For purposes of this Call for Projects: A wide sidewalk for pedestrians: minimum 5 ft. width Off-street shared-use path for pedestrians and bicyclists: minimum 10-14 ft. width Separated/protected bike lanes or on-street bike lanes with a suitable design for bicyclists based on the context of the project location (e.g., projected traffic volumes, speeds, adjoining land uses, etc.) Such project designs must be consistent with relevant design guidelines and resources including AASHTO, NACTO, ITE, FHWA, and TxDOT. 38

Minimum Requirements Right-of-Way/Easement Must be under public ownership. Official Funding Resolution by the Governing Body Confirm the availability of the local match contribution if the project is awarded funding. Environmental Checklist SRTS Partnerships Provide a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) or resolution of support between the ISD and local government. 39

Resolutions Local Match Commitment SRTS Partnerships Either resolutions must be included within the application OR a letter of commitment signed by the Chief Administrator or Elected Official to provide the resolution by April 21, 2017. 40

Project Budget Summary Complete itemized project activities and costs proposed to be reimbursed by Federal TA Set- Aside Program funds. Budget Summary Tab Construction and Design Tabs If part of a larger project, upload complete project budget as part of Attachment G or H. 41

Submittal and Attachments Complete the Checklist. Submit hard copies and electronic copies. Submittals prior to Feb. 10, 2017 will be reviewed for completeness if requested. Additional information cannot be submitted after the February 24, 2017 5pm deadline (per RTC Policy). 42

Resources nctcog.org/tap 43

Environmental Review 44

Environmental Review Purpose of the review is to identify any major issues that could delay environmental approval of the proposed project. All projects that receive TA-Set Aside funding will be required to follow the federal environmental process (i.e., NEPA). Determine type of environmental document needed. The checklist is not a NEPA document. A separate environmental analysis is required for all projects. 45

TA Set-Aside Program Environmental Considerations To complete this form: Review recent aerial/satellite photos Conduct a site visit Do research (such as using available mapping and data including the Regional Ecosystem Framework site http://www.nctcog.org/traces/ Ref.asp) 46

Park Lands For publicly-owned property, verify the ownership, zoning, and funding source used to purchase the land (i.e., were Federal and/or State funds used). USDOT Section 4(f) regulations apply to publicly-owned: Designated park land, Recreational land, or Wildlife and waterfowl refuges. Check with your parks department. 47

Historic Properties or Structures Typically 50 years old, or older, and: Associated with an important event or person Represents a distinctive architectural style An important part of the heritage of a religious group, ethnic group, or local society Property is listed on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), State Antiquities Landmark, and/or Recorded Texas Historic Landmark Locations of listed properties: http://atlas.thc.state.tx.us/ Check with Texas Historical Commission, NRHP, and local historic commission or society. 48

Historic Properties or Structures (cont.) Property is eligible for listing on the NRHP Historic properties can include: Buildings Roadway elements (i.e., brick, markers, light post, railings) Bridges or culverts Cemeteries Neighborhoods Archaeological sites 49

Land Use Cemeteries - both historical and current require additional coordination for the project. Railroad Corridors - require agreements with the railroad companies. Determine if this process has been initiated or is completed. Utility Corridors - require permission and agreements with the utility company to utilize. Determine if this process has been initiated or is completed. 50

Section 404 Permitting Through the Section 404 permitting process, the USACE regulates the placement of fill (dirt, columns, roadway, etc.) in streams, ponds, lakes, or wetlands. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas. In most cases, a permit is necessary for projects that would require fill. Permits could be individual or nationwide. 51

Section 404 Permitting (cont.) Typical permits used for transportation construction projects include: NWP 7 Outfall Structures and Associated Intake NWP 13 Bank Stabilization NWP 14 Linear Transportation Projects NWP 18 Minor Discharges NWP 25 Structural Discharges NWP 33 Temporary Construction, Access, and Dewatering Less fill or impacts may result in smaller permits and/or quicker approvals. Check with your engineering department. 52

Threatened/Endangered Species Identify any state or federal threatened or endangered species listed by the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department or US Fish and Wildlife Service in the project area or the presences of their habitat. The list of threatened and endangered species: State species: http://www.tpwd.state.tx.us/landwater/land/maps/gis/ris/enda ngered_species/ Federal species: http://www.fws.gov/southwest/es/es_lists_main.cfm 53

Threatened/Endangered Species (cont.) Typical Species in North Texas Bald Eagle Interior Least Tern American Peregrine Falcon Black-Capped VireoAlligator Snapping Turtle Timber Rattlesnake Texas Heelsplitter 54

Regulated Materials and Special Permits Identify areas where right-of-way would be required near known locations of regulated materials, such as: Gas stations Automotive repair facilities Industrial and chemical plants Factories Determine any potential specialized permits that may be required: USACE Section 408 (levees, flood control) Section 9/Section 10 Waters (navigable waters (i.e., portions of the Trinity River)) FAA Airway clearance near airports 55

Project Implementation 56

Project Implementation/Schedule Complete the Environmental Checklist Status of Environmental Approvals Status of Planning/Initial Schematic Plans Status of Design/Construction Plans Project Schedule Planning Environmental Clearance Utilities Design and Construction Package Construction/Implementation 57

Project Schedule Anticipated approval of STIP and availability of TA Set- Aside Program funds is November/December 2017. Entity must be prepared to execute an agreement (LPAFA) with TxDOT quickly after approval of the STIP. All TA Set-Aside Program funded projects must obligate funds for construction within three years (or less) of project selection. Projects unable to be completed within the required timeframe are at risk of losing TA Set-Aside Program funding due to federal regulations. 58

Cost Estimates and Budget Issues Cost estimates based on sound professional judgement. Local funds must be available starting FY18. Project s scope of work will not change after application is submitted. The applicant is responsible for any and all cost overruns. 59

Contact Information Karla Weaver, AICP Program Manager (817) 608-2376 / kweaver@nctcog.org Questions? Comments? Kevin Kokes, AICP Principal Transportation Planner (817) 695-9275 / kkokes@nctcog.org Nathan Drozd Senior Transportation Planner (817) 704-5635 / ndrozd@nctcog.org 60