Chapter 4: Funding and Implementation

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

Americans with Disabilities Act Transition Plan for Public Right-of-Way Improvements

4 GENERIC COST ESTIMATING TOOL

Non-Motorized Transportation 7-1

Building Great Neighbourhoods BELLEVUE AND VIRGINIA PARK

APPROVE A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A COMPLETE STREETS POLICY

DISTRICT BICYCLE PROGRAM

PRESS RELEASE San Joaquin Council of Governments

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

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

4APNOIPF Vh, YII PTC CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT. Honorable Mayor and City Council Members. 8K TH 63 River Crossing Bridge Replacement Project

Brooklyn Boulevard (County Road 152) Reconstruction Project Phase I. OPEN HOUSE June 20, 2017

Hennepin County Transportation Department

RESOLUTION NO A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MENLO PARK ADOPTING A COMPLETE STREETS POLICY

MEASURE B AND MEASURE BB Annual Program Compliance Report Reporting Fiscal Year AGENCY CONTACT INFORMATION

REGIONAL BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN DESIGN GUIDELINES

MAG Town of Cave Creek Bike Study Task 6 Executive Summary and Regional Significance Report

Omaha s Complete Streets Policy

CITY OF KASSON TRANSPORTATION ALTERNATIVES KASSON SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL

Building Great Neighbourhoods QUEEN ALEXANDRA

U.S. HIGHWAY 50 IMPROVEMENT PROJECT

Mandan Commission Meeting August 2, 2016 Mandan City Hall

Pre-Construction Meeting

CSAH 101 Preliminary Design

Building Great Neighbourhoods LANSDOWNE

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

ADA on Construction. Guidance for Section C Plan Preparers

Improvements Infrastructure Gap Assessment and Improvements Street Striping

Accommodating Pedestrians in the Work Zone

APPENDIX L: COST ESTIMATING TOOLS

Building Great Neighbourhoods STRATHEARN

5. RUNNINGWAY GUIDELINES

San Tomas Expressway

CHAPTER 16 PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES DESIGN AND TECHNICAL CRITERIA TABLE OF CONTENTS

CITY OF PORTSMOUTH PLANNING DEPARTMENT

Pavement Management Report. City Council Meeting of May 21, 2013

City of Albert Lea Policy and Procedure Manual 4.10 ALBERT LEA CROSSWALK POLICY

HARRISON STREET/OAKLAND AVENUE COMMUNITY TRANSPORTATION PLAN

Oakland Pedestrian Master Plan Oakland Pedestrian Plan Draft Recommendations Chapter Outline

APPENDIX A: Complete Streets Checklist DRAFT NOVEMBER 2016

IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES

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

Item No. 14 Town of Atherton

Engineering - Bicycle and Pedestrian

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

Executive Summary Route 30 Corridor Master Plan

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

FUNDING SOURCES CHAPTER 6

Bicycle Master Plan Goals, Strategies, and Policies

S.R. 3009, Section A20 South Park & Logan Road Intersection Improvement Project

Welcome to the Quebec Alternatives Analysis Public Meeting

Environment and Public Works Committee Presentation

83 AVENUE PRE-CONSTRUCTION MEETING

RZC Appendix 8A Marymoor Subarea Street Requirements

Chapter 3.6 Elementary School Z. Volusia County MPO. March Page 13.0

City of Scotts Valley CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT

Chapter 2: Standards for Access, Non-Motorized, and Transit

F L E T C H E R A V E N U E

CONNECTIVITY PLAN. Adopted December 5, 2017 City of Virginia Beach

Michael Parmer, Management Aide, City Manager's Office

Basalt Creek Transportation Refinement Plan Recommendations

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

May 10, 2013 Meredith Cruz, (561) Palm Beach County Traffic Report May 10 through May 17, 2013

Downtown Davidson Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety Plan

Safe Routes to School Action Plan Aberdeen, Idaho

ADA Transition Plan. City of Gainesville FY19-FY28. Date: November 5, Prepared by: City Of Gainesville Department of Mobility

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

Building Great Neighbourhoods BONNIE DOON

US 19 Pedestrian and Bicycle Safe Access to Transit Corridor Study

CHAPTER 8 STAKING SIGNALS AND LIGHTING FIELD GUIDE. 8.1 Staking Traffic Control Signal Systems

ADA TRANSITION PLAN. For

HOOPA DESIGN FAIR 4. IMPLEMENTATION PHASES & FUNDING

Appendix T CCMP TRAIL TRAFFIC & TRANSPORTATION DESIGN STANDARD

C C C

City of Hyattsville Transportation Study Project Recommendations Planning Level Cost Estimate

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

Preparing a Curb Ramp Project. December 15, 2010

ACTIA Programs Annual Compliance Report Reporting Year Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Table 1: Summary of Expenditures and Accomplishments

This page intentionally left blank.

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

Tonight is for you. Learn everything you can. Share all your ideas.

Fulton Market Streetscape

IMPLEMENTATION WORKBOOK

S T A T I O N A R E A P L A N

Transportation Policy Manual

Final Sidewalk Feasibility Study

Complete Streets Initiative Update

TRAFFIC CALMING GUIDE FOR TORONTO CITY OF TORONTO TRANSPORTATION SERVICES DIVISION

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

Measure A Pedestrian & Bicycle Program Update. April 4, 2019 Board of Directors Agenda Item #10 (b)

UDC Street Cross Sections

Street Paving and Sidewalk Policy

Saskatchewan Drive Roadway Rehabilitation and Shared-Use Path Widening

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.

4. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS 9. TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC

FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT 7 DISTRICT WIDE BICYCLE/PEDESTRIAN ACCESS TO TRANSIT SAFETY ASSESSMENT AND IMPROVEMENT PLAN

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

CITY OF BLOOMINGTON COMPLETE STREETS POLICY

SRTS IMPLEMENTATION COSTS

Bicycle and Pedestrian Connectivity Study. Old Colony Planning Council

Transcription:

Chapter 4: Funding and Implementation 83

84

Cost Estimating Cost estimating is an iterative process. When a project is in the conceptual stage, preliminary cost estimates are also provided conceptually, utilizing a typical per-unit cost. As a project s design is refined, costs are further refined and may rise or fall, depending upon specific project needs. The Crows Landing Road corridor study represents the conceptual phase of project development, therefore cost estimates, shown in Table 2 below, are typical per-unit costs. These estimates are provided in constant 2014 dollars for materials and labor with no provision for inflation. The cost of each project will vary depending upon the specific circumstances. This includes resurfacing and restriping to include bike lanes; reconstructing curb, gutter, and sidewalk; adding signal loop detectors; relocating utilities; undergrounding a portion of the Turlock Irrigation District canal; and purchasing some right of way. Table 2 Project Implementation Cost Estimate Unit Cost Unit Quantity Project Cost Resurface (minimum thin overlay) $90 Ton 7,374 $663,660 Restripe, including bike lanes $350,000 Lump Sum 1 $350,000 Raised median (14-16 feet wide) $15 Square Foot 56,000 $840,000 Intersection signage in median $10,000 Lump Sum 1 $10,000 Remove signal $25,000 Lump Sum 1 $25,000 Add signal $400,000 Lump Sum 1 $400,000 Install concrete sidewalk only $12 Square Foot 34,650 $415,800 Install concrete sidewalk, curb, gutter $20 Square Foot 43,240 $864,800 Bulbout (one) $5,000 Each 1 $5,000 Enhanced crosswalk (overhead lighting) $20,000 Each 1 $20,000 Pedestrian overcrossing $2,500,000 Each 1 $2,500,000 Street trees (40 feet on center) $600 Each 150 $90,000 Landscaping (not trees) $8 Square Foot 56,000 $448,000 ADA Ramps $3,500 Each 60 $210,000 Traffic Detection Loops $600 Each 120 $72,000 Street Lighting $12,000 Each 70 $840,000 Adjust Street Utilities to Grade $600 Each 130 $78,000 Sub Total $7,832,260 Design (10%) $783,226 Inspection and Administration (10%) $783,226 Contingencies (8%) $626,581 Total $10,025,293 Project Implementation Complex transportation projects, such as Crows Landing Road, as often funded through a variety of sources. Transportation funding typically restricts eligibility by phase of construction (planning, preliminary design, final design and construction) or by type of improvement (pavement and striping, bicycle and pedestrian, aesthetic elements such as trees, or safety measures). Funding for construction and maintenance are made available through federal and state 85

sources, as Modesto and Stanislaus County have very limited local transportation funding sources. Transportation funding, therefore, is limited by federal and state rules and regulations and is limited to the amount of money available from various federal and state sources. The amount of money available fluctuates over time. Changes to the public right of way are identified as short term, relatively low cost actions; mid term changes; and, longterm. Practically speaking, the timing of all improvements is affected by jurisdictional issues and cost. Some improvements are relatively inexpensive and can be implemented more quickly, while others are most costly and won t be implemented until new development occurs. Where and when a change is actually implemented will not be that simple in practice for various reasons. Funding availability and jurisdictional issues will have the greatest impact on when and where changes are implemented. Modesto expects that full implementation of the adopted plan will occur incrementally over the course of many years. Modesto and Stanislaus County have a history of working together on infrastructure projects, which is expected to continue with the Crows Landing Road improvements. This will provide continuity for improvements, as the jurisdictional boundaries of the two agencies create a patchwork, as shown on Figure 1 in Chapter 1. Short-Term Actions: resurface and restripe roadway and add bicycle facilities maintain street lighting install marked crosswalks at some intersections increase size of street signs Intermediate-Term Actions: install mid-block crosswalks and warning lights install raised medians/pedestrian refuges at limited locations add street signs to medians remove signal at Butte Avenue Long-Term Actions: install street trees install complete raised medians and mid-block pedestrian crossings add street signs to medians install bulbouts widen road north of State Route 99 install pedestrian overcrossing install or widen sidewalks Funding Sources Transportation projects are typically funded through a variety of sources. Some elements of a roadway, such as pavement, are eligible for road funds, while other elements, such as new bicycle and pedestrian facilities, lighting, or street trees are eligible for more limited funding sources. Large-scale development projects often fund major changes to public right of way, but may only be responsible for public right of way immediately adjacent to their property or for changes that can clearly be shown to be needed due to the project. Funding for traffic signals or a portion of a traffic signal is a good example of this. Most transportation funding is controlled by the Stanislaus Council of Governments, which plans the use of, determines project eligibility for, and administers virtually all of the transportation funding used in Stanislaus County. Each city or county is responsible to prepare a prioritized list of projects city or county staff believes is eligible for a particular fund. The total amount of each funding source available in a particular year is subject to federal and state discretion. Therefore, the amount and type of regionally-controlled funding available to any one project is under minimal local control. Fees paid by developers and any citywide tax measures are collected and administered by the jurisdiction in which the funding is collected and each agency has generally greater discretion to spend the collected local funds. 86

Most of the short-term actions listed above will be eligible for RSTP money, although lighting and signage will probably be funded locally. Intermediate-term actions are largely eligible for ATP or local money, although traffic signal work may be eligible for RSTP. Most long-term actions will be eligible for local funding or ATP. Regionally-Controlled Funds Regional Surface Transportation Program (RSTP) Capital costs for transportation projects, reconstruction or resurfacing of roads, operational improvements, bicycle and pedestrian facilities, highway safety improvements, transportation enhancement activities, and transportation control measures are all eligible to receive RSTP funding. This fund is administered by the Stanislaus Council of Governments. Active Transportation Program (ATP) This program consolidates existing federal and state transportation programs, including the Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP), Bicycle Transportation Account (BTA), and State Safe Routes to School (SR2S), into a single program with a focus to make California a national leader in active transportation. Eligible projects increase bicycle and walking trips, improve safety for non-motorized travelers, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, improve public health, and share benefits with disadvantaged communities. This fund is administered by the Stanislaus Council of Governments. Local Funding The City of Modesto controls infrastructure funds that are raised locally. These funds can be used for a variety of purposes, including capital and operating costs. Local funding sources may include the Capital Improvement Program, Local Assessment District, or a local sales tax measure. Because regionally-controlled money requires financial participation from local agencies, local funding is often used to match regionally-controlled funds. Additionally, cities can require frontage and alley improvements from developers in conjunction with new development or property improvements that exceed 50 percent of the appraised value of the structures. 87

88