Technical Coordinating Meeting

1 of 34 TOM ROWLAND, CHAIRMAN 190 Church Street, N.E., P.O. Box 1519, Cleveland, TN 37364-1519 Phone (423) 479-1913 fax (423) 559 3373 http://clevelandtn.gov/index.aspx?nid=153 MPO Coordinator Greg Thomas, AICP gthomas@clevelandtn.gov MPO Technical Coordinating Committee WEDNESDAY, January 6, 2016, 10:00 O’CLOCK AM, 2nd FLOOR CITY COUNCIL MEETING ROOM, MUNICIPAL BUILDING, 190 CHURCH STREET NE, CLEVELAND, TN AGENDA 1. Call TCC meeting to order 2. Approval of meeting minutes— November 4, 2015 3. New Business a. 2040 Long-Range Transportation Plan update b. Grant application for park-ride lot c. Multi-modal access grant (sidewalks and related Multi-modal improvements on 25th Street in Cleveland) d. Review and take any action appropriate to the MPO annual meeting. The January 6, 2016 meeting of the MPO will serve as the MPO Annual Meeting for the purpose of receiving public comments pertaining to the MPO’s plans, programs, and projects to be placed in the Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) and the Transportation Improvements Program (TIP). As part of this meeting the MPO will present the annual listing of obligated projects from the previous program year. The MPO will also present and adopt its schedule of regular public meetings for the next year. e. State Route 60 Access Management Planning Study draft review  2 of 34 4. Old Business---none 5. Comments by federal, state, local agencies 6. MPO Coordinator/staff comments 7. Public comments 8. The next regular TCC meeting date is Wednesday, March 2, 2016 at 10 a.m. 9. Adjourn  3 of 34 TOM ROWLAND, CHAIRMAN 190 Church Street, N.E., P.O. Box 1519, Cleveland, TN 37364-1519 Phone (423) 479-1913 fax (423) 559 3373 http://clevelandtn.gov/index.aspx?nid=153 MPO Coordinator Greg Thomas, AICP gthomas@clevelandtn.gov MPO Technical Coordinating Committee WEDNESDAY, November 4, 2015, 10:00 O’CLOCK AM, 2nd FLOOR CITY COUNCIL MEETING ROOM, MUNICIPAL BUILDING, 190 CHURCH STREET NE, CLEVELAND, TN MINUTES 1. Call MPO TCC meeting to order --- Chairman Tommy Myers called the meeting to order and asked those present to sign in. The other TCC members in attendance were Jonathan Jobe, Brian Beck, and David Sheely of the City of Cleveland, Tad Bacon of Cleveland Utilities, Sandra Knight Collins and Bently Thomas of Bradley County, Mary Lynn Brown of SETHRA/CUATS, Chad Reese of the SETDD and RPO, Greg Thomas of City of Cleveland/Cleveland MPO, Scott Allen of the FHWA, and Joren Dunnavant of TDOT. Others in attendance included Dr. Ron Coleman (owner of Old Woolen Mill property), Joyanna Love (Cleveland Daily Banner), and Corey Divel, Brian Moran, and Teresa Torbett of the City of Cleveland. 2. Approval of meeting minutes— September 2, 2015--- Chairman Myers introduced the item and called for discussion or a motion. Brian Beck moved that they be approved and the motion was seconded by Bently Thomas and approved unanimously. 3. New Business a. 2040 Long-Range Transportation Plan update--- Chairman Myers introduced the item and Greg Thomas presented a staff report. Parsons Brinkerhoff was here for a public meeting on October 15, 2015 at the Museum center at Five Points. The October 15, 2015 public meeting asked for comments in five (5) categories: SAFETY; ROADWAYS/TRAFFIC; TRANSIT; BICYCLES/PEDESTRIANS; and FREIGHT. Greg Thomas provided the MPO with a memo summarizing the comments under each of these categories. These comments would be addressed before finalizing the 2040 RTP.  4 of 34 b. Grant application for park-ride lot--- Chairman Myers introduced the item and Greg Thomas presented a staff report. He explained that while Cleveland is not an air quality non-attainment community and not normally eligible for CMAQ funding, that there may be a possibility of funding a park and ride lot for Chattanooga commuters. The idea is to locate the lot adjacent to the Old Woolen Mill. Staff proposed that an application be developed for this project for a possible TDOT funding round that could be as early as January 2016. He pointed out that the Woolen Mill owner Dr. Coleman was present. Greg Thomas pointed out the advantages of the site and its central location in light of data shared by the Chattanooga TPO. Scott Allen asked about how close it would be to the TPO and a transit lot. Scott Allen also asked about whether the TPO would assist with modeling data and Greg Thomas expressed the belief that they would probably assist in some way. Tad Bacon asked about the adjacent Whirlpool lot and what might be planned for it; Greg Thomas did not know about the plans for the lot at this time. Greg Thomas presented a motion to recommend that the MPO pursue this grant opportunity and it was seconded by Sandra Knight Collins and approved unanimously. Dr. Coleman asked about the footprint for the proposed parking lot and whether it incorporated the lot presently owned by Whirlpool on the corner. Greg Thomas indicated that it had been looked at and considered if it were available. There was discussion of the potentially available parking on the north end of the Woolen Mill which appears to range from about 200 to 300 spaces depending upon the available land. c. Multi-modal access grant --- Chairman Myers introduced the item and Greg Thomas presented a staff report. Greg Thomas explained that there was an existing Multi-Modal Access grant for Wildwood Dalton Pike now under design. He explained that it was a TDOT funded program with 95% funding and a 5% local match. He said that it was time for a new application and that the TCC had discussed different options. Proposing a project on a State Route is important. He pointed out various preliminary ideas for Cleveland such as 25th Street and South Lee Highway. He talked about the grant criteria and the points. (He also described a meeting that he had with Calhoun about a potential application and they are not ready to move forward with a project now due to their budget). He talked about a project on 25th Street and the need to coordinate with the culvert extension. Tad Bacon spoke in favor of a 25th Street project. Brian Beck mentioned North Lee Highway as a possibility for a project because it is already graded for sidewalk; Greg Thomas mentioned that it did go by a good bit of vacant land to reach the area around the old airport that is populated. A question was also asked about multi-modal and transit coordination. Brian Beck recommended that 25th Street be recommended as the project area to pursue and it was seconded by Greg Thomas and approved unanimously. There was a discussion of the Safe Routes to School Grant program that is now open. Greg Thomas described the funding criteria, the limits on funding and what has to be done, and the lack of success in getting funded for Arnold School area. There was some discussion of an application in the Hopewell area but Bradley County representatives were not aware of a clear project idea or intent to go forward with a funding application at this time.  5 of 34 4. Old Business---none 5. Comments by federal, state, local agencies--- There was a discussion of the Safe Routes to School Grant program that is now open. Greg Thomas described the funding criteria, the limits on funding and what has to be done, and the lack of success in getting funded for Arnold School area. There was some discussion of an application in the Hopewell area but Bradley County representatives were not aware of a clear project idea or intent to go forward with a funding application at this time. There was more discussion and a motion by Greg Thomas that would recommend endorsement by the MPO if one of the member communities should decide to go forth with a safe Routes application, and it was seconded by Sandra Knight Collins and approved unanimously. Scott Allen from FHWA provided a legislative update noting recent action by Congress; it was possible that there could be a long-term highway funding bill as early as Thanksgiving. 6. MPO Coordinator/staff comments--- Greg Thomas announced that the January 6, 2016 meeting would need to be held as the MPO annual meeting, and include comments from the public on the TIP and RTP, the annual list of obligated projects, and the setting of the meeting calendar for the coming year 7. Public comments---none 8. The next regular TCC meeting date is Wednesday, January 6, 2016 at 10 a.m. 9. Adjourn  6 of 34 PROGRESS REPORT #6 To: Greg Thomas Project Name: Cleveland 2040 Regional Transportation Plan From: Jeanne Stevens Project Number: 173635A Date: December 2, 2015 Period: 7/1/15 – 11/30/15 Work Completed this Period (July 1 through Nov. 30, 2015) x Performed travel demand model runs for the base year and 2040 Existing + Committed roadway network to identify and map locations where projected volume/capacity ratios indicate unacceptable future levels of congestion. x Using previously summarized crash data, identified roadway intersections and segments where crash rates significantly exceed the statewide average for that type of facility. x Obtained and analyzed recent highway-rail grade crossing crash data, type of warning equipment, and predicted crash potential. x Reviewed existing bus routes operated by CARTA in northeastern Hamilton County and identified opportunities to establish connections with CUATS service. Followed up with CUATS staff on outstanding data needs for further transit planning and analysis. x Compiled recent data on local and state expenditures for capital, as well as systems operations and maintenance, to develop trend data. Produced long-term revenue forecasts for federal, state and local sources for the roadway and transit systems in preparation for fiscal constraint analysis. x Conducted interviews with major employers to obtain information on local freight patterns, concerns about the area’s transportation system, and potential employee demand for transit. x Prepared for and conducted public meeting Oct. 15, 2015 to present existing and projected conditions for the regional transportation system and obtain additional input on the area’s needs. Summarized comments received. x Began evaluation of roadway projects still outstanding from the 2035 RTP, as well as potential new candidate projects, using Steering Committee input, public comments, and the results of technical analysis on congestion, safety and freight needs.  7 of 34 MEMORANDUM TO: MPO and TCC FROM: Greg Thomas, AICP, MPO Coordinator DATE: December 22, 2015 SUBJECT: CMAQ Park and Ride --- The non-italicized text below is from your November 4, 2015 meeting. Since that time staff has continued to work with the Woolen Mill owner and the Chattanooga TPO. An application round for CMAQ funding is still anticipated in January 2015. Staff is working with the TPO to develop estimates of the air quality benefit for the TPO resulting from the availability of the park and ride lot. In addition a proposal will need to be developed along with a budget. The proposal should provide the sorts of benefits anticipated by the CMAQ program. What is envisioned is a parking lot with preferential parking for park and ride users, some amenities attractive to park and ride users, a linkage to transit perhaps including an interconnection with the Chattanooga transit system, and a system for administration and promotion of the use of the park and ride facility perhaps with a linkage to the Chattanooga Green Trips system that works with employers, businesses, and system users to facilitate ride matching, user incentives, etc. Along with the proposal there would need to be a budget to cover construction and other operating and administrative costs. The budget would be 80/20.It is anticipated that the proposal would be developed for your March 2, 2016 meeting. City of Cleveland staff are investigating the possibility of applying for funds under the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement (CMAQ) program for the purpose of constructing a “Park and Ride” lot at the Old Woolen Mill site. The possibility has been discussed with the owner and he is in favor of pursuing the idea. The site offers three strategic advantages: it is centrally located for Cleveland work trips to Chattanooga (about 6300); it is served by transit and near the transit terminal; and it supports key economic development objectives. There are two parking lot locations on the Woolen Mill site (see attached). The current parking location, a gravel lot at the north end of the site could have about 200 spaces as currently designed, but could be expanded to about 300 spaces with adjacent property. Economic Development staff have recommended a public parking lot in this location constructed so as to accommodate a future garage to serve adjacent development as well as patrons of the Woolen Mill redevelopment. The south parking lot location is not Page 1 of 2  8 of 34 presently developed for parking but it could accommodate about 50 spaces. This south lot location is adjacent to the proposed arts incubator space. Another CMAQ funding round is anticipated to open in January 2016. It is proposed that staff develop cost estimates and other information related to the optional parking sites and work with TDOT staff to develop the most viable application should the City of Cleveland want to move forward with this project in cooperation with the owner. Page 2 of 2  9 of 34 MEMORANDUM TO: MPO and TCC FROM: Greg Thomas, AICP, MPO Coordinator DATE: December 22, 2015 SUBJECT: Multi-Modal Access grant The Multi-modal Access grant program is open for another funding round at TDOT. Applications are due January 16, 2016. The funding is 95% State and 5% local match with a project maximum of $1M. The Cleveland City Council has already adopted a resolution providing the matching funds. Staff has worked to develop a competitive and functional grant application for multi- modal improvements on the 25th Street corridor, coordinating with CUATS to provide a transit connection with sidewalk that serves the State Route, and consulting with TDOT and professionals at Ragan Smith in the project concept development. The proposed project would be part of a larger phased plan that would provide multi-modal improvements along 25th Street between Georgetown Road/Westside Drive and Keith Street, and including key connecting streets. This project is proposed to connect the existing Peerless Road sidewalk near the Bradley County Nursing Home with the existing 25th Street sidewalk at the Old 25th Street intersection by the former Captain D’s restaurant. The concept map below shows the proposed project in general terms. The project would include a pedestrian crossing on one leg of the 25th Street/Peerless Road intersection and on the four legs of the Keith Street/25th Street intersection (this crossing substitutes for a previously considered mid-block crossing concept that would interfere more with signal timing on the corridor). By running the sidewalk on the north side of 25th Street, a more direct connection to the existing sidewalk is gained and problems associated with designing a sidewalk near the channelized creek are avoided (a culvert extension that is planned to improve the radius on the NE corner of 25th and Peerless is necessary also to accommodate the sidewalk but the existing turn lane presents a serious impediment to running sidewalk along the north side of 25th Street in this location). Transit users and pedestrians want to access the shopping center on the north side of 25th Street and this would be accomplished through the parking lot from the sidewalk extending along Peerless Road and from sidewalk extending down the north side of 25th Street from the proposed crossing at Keith Street (there is room to Page 1 of 3  10 of 34 avoid the creek on this end); overall these two access points would mitigate the amount of open parking lot that pedestrians would have to cross---a design concern-- to reach various businesses inside the shopping center. The Keith Street/25th Street intersection crossing would provide crucial connectivity to the Greenway and the sidewalk system serving the downtown core (Keith Street is a pedestrian barrier for which there are no crossings south of the Greenway underpass at Cooke’s Plaza). The preferred location for the transit stop is in aproposed bus pull-out on Keith Street by Rite Aid: it is centrally located (it would serve Greenway users, the shopping center and other nearby businesses, and nearby residents including the anticipated womens shelter); it would be out of traffic; it can be located in existing ROW; and it would not require modification to the Gold Route in order to implement (a location near Old 25th Street was examined but it would have required a route modification, additional ROW, and a potentially expensive retaining wall). This concept is currently under review by the City Manager and department heads. A public meeting is scheduled January 5, 2015 at the Westmore Church of God fellowship hall at 6:00 p.m. to discuss the project proposal and get public input (this location is adjacent to the project site). Pending the City’s review as just decribed, refinement of cost estimates that could require a modification of the intial phase, public comments, and further input from TDOT field review, staff is seeking the MPO’s authorization for the Chairman to submit the application as presented above and to sign all necessary documents. Page 2 of 3  11 of 34 Page 3 of 3 12 of 34 13 of 34  14 of 34 OBLIGATIONS FOR * Entire project, or a portion of the project, is in the MPO planning area but outside the urbanized area boundary CLEVELAND MPO FED FUNDS OBLIGATED: $2,927,445.18 FY 2015 TIP/STIP TOTAL FUNDS IN DATE PROJECT NUMBER COUNTY ROUTE TERMINI ACTION/PHASE TYPE REFERENCE FEDERAL FUNDS TIP 10/03/14 HSIP-R00S(108) Bradley 8th St NE at Norfolk Southern R/R, LM 0.79 in Cleveland ADJUST CONST HSIP 06095 ($125,000.00) $4,000,000.00 11/03/14 HSIP-IE-75-1(135)* Bradley I-75 Interchange at SR-308 (Exit 33) (RSAR) ADJUST CONST HSIP 06095 $17,220.00 $4,000,000.00 ADJUST PE-N; 11/03/14 IM/NH-75-1(133) Bradley I-75 Interchange at SR-60 in Cleveland AUTHORIZE CONST NHPP 6006 $1,225,800.00 $3,000,000.00 11/03/14 HPP/STP/M/NH-311(28) Bradley SR-311 (US-74), Interchange Between I-75 (Exit 20) and SR-2 (US-11) in Cleveland ADJUST CONST L-STP 06010 ($134,545.00) $517,000.00 11/03/14 HPP/STP/M/NH-311(28) Bradley SR-311 (US-74), Interchange Between I-75 (Exit 20) and SR-2 (US-11) in Cleveland ADJUST CONST STP 06010 ($1,473,058.00) $26,491,000.00 11/13/14 PHSIP/STP-SIP-311(30) Bradley SR-311 Intersection at King St in Cleveland (RSAR) AUTHORIZE PE-D PHSIP 06095 $4,000.00 $1,000,000.00 11/13/14 PHSIP/STP-SIP-311(30) Bradley SR-311 Intersection at King St in Cleveland (RSAR) ADJUST PE-N S-STP -- $16,000.00 $200,000.00 12/05/14 PHSIP/STP-SIP-1156(3) Bradley 20th Street NE, Intersection at SR-60 Northbound Ramps In Cleveland AUTHORIZE PE-D PHSIP 06095 $5,000.00 $1,000,000.00 01/05/15 IM/NH-75-1(133) Bradley I-75 Interchange at SR-60 in Cleveland ADJUST CONST NHPP 6006 $682,992.00 $3,000,000.00 01/08/15 HSIP-308(7) Bradley SR-308 Intersection at Walker Valley Rd AUTHORIZE PE-N HSIP 06095 $36,000.00 $4,000,000.00 DE-OBLIGATE FUNDS (PE-N 02/11/15 STP-M-4271(3) Bradley Mouse Creek Rd, From Eldredge Ave to Hunters Run Place PHASE) U-STP 2010-02 ($22,400.00) $4,964,789.00 CLOSE PROJECT 03/04/15 HSIP-R00S(79) Bradley Old Federal Rd at Norfolk Southern R/R, LM 0.18 near Cleveland (2ND CLOSE) HSIP 06095 $31,490.35 $4,000,000.00 17th St, From SR-2 (Keith St NW) to SR-74 (Ocoee St) and 20th St, From Harle Ave 03/24/15 STP-M-9203(21) Bradley NW to Neely Circle in Cleveland AUTHORIZE PE-D U-STP 2010-02 $82,869.00 $875,000.00 03/25/15 HSIP-4271(4) Bradley Mouse Creek Rd, From near East Circle Dr to Hunters Cove in Cleveland WITHDRAW PROJ HSIP 06095 ($36,000.00) $4,000,000.00 04/02/15 STP-NH/HSIP-60(28) Bradley SR-60 From Spring Creek Dr to N of Crown Colony Dr AUTHORIZE CONST STP 06111 $1,296,000.00 $2,248,997.00 05/12/15 STP-M-3647(3) Bradley Stuart Rd, From SR-2 (N. Lee Hwy) to Michigan Ave AUTHORIZE CONST U-STP 2010-02 $587,613.00 $875,000.00 05/12/15 STP-M-3647(3) Bradley Stuart Rd, From SR-2 (N. Lee Hwy) to Michigan Ave AUTHORIZE CONST U-STP 2009-001 $52,000.00 $145,000.00 06/05/15 STP/HSIP-74(8) Bradley SR-74 From SR-60 Ramp to SR-40 (US-64) ADJUST CONST STP 06111 ($38,560.00) $2,248,997.00 06/05/15 STP/HSIP-74(8) Bradley SR-74 From SR-60 Ramp to SR-40 (US-64) ADJUST CONST HSIP 06095 ($14,940.00) $4,000,000.00 06/12/15 STP-NH/HSIP-60(28) Bradley SR-60 From Spring Creek Dr to N of Crown Colony Dr ADJUST CONST STP 06111 $214,965.00 $2,248,997.00 CONVERT ADV 06/12/15 STP-NH/HSIP-60(28) Bradley SR-60 From Spring Creek Dr to N of Crown Colony Dr CONST & ADJUST HSIP 06095 $187,469.00 $4,000,000.00 ADJUST PE-D & 06/18/15 STP-M-NHE-311(27) Bradley SR-311 (US-74, Appalachian Hwy), From I-75 to Blackburn Rd in Cleveland CONST U-STP 2007-05 ($100,000.00) $1,210,000.00 ADJUST PE-N & 07/21/15 HSIP-312(15)* Bradley SR-312 From Hamilton County Line to near Quill Dr (RSAR) AUTHORIZE PE-D HSIP 06095 ($9,000.00) $4,000,000.00 08/05/15 STP-M-9203(22) Bradley Central Ave N.E., From SR-74 (Ocoee St) to Gaut St N.E. AUTHORIZE PE-D U-STP 2010-02 $49,320.00 $875,000.00 08/11/15 HPP/STP/M/NH-311(28) Bradley SR-311 (US-74), Interchange Between I-75 (Exit 20) and SR-2 (US-11) in Cleveland ADJUST PE-D STP 06010 $324,000.00 $50,000.00 Bradley, 08/11/15 STP-60(9) Hamilton, Meigs SR-60 From 4-Lane N of I-75 (Westlake Dr) to SR-58 in Hamilton County ADJUST PE-D STP STIP 99584 $64,000.00 $15,000,000.00 08/27/15 BRZE-600(32) Bradley Mouse Creek Rd, Bridge over Mouse Creek, LM 0.44 in Cleveland ADJUST CONST BRR-L 06061 $4,209.83 $40,000.00 FY 2015 Obligations Cleveland MPO Page 1 of 1  15 of 34 11/19/2015 The only 5307 funding that is obligated thru TEAM at this time is TN‐90‐X395‐00, $689,850.00 Federal, $261,767.00 State and Local totaling $1,213,384.00, this is FY12 allocation. We will be applying for 5307 fund in the amount of $834,551.00 Federal (FY 13 allocation) as soon as the new grant system opens up and the budget is approved. These are both capital and operating grants. We have an operating assistance Grant (Z15UROP17‐00) in the amount of $372,200.00 that runs Jan 1, 2015 Through Dec 2015. I am not aware of the next round for this, or if it will be available for 2016. We also have a 5310 Grant (Elderly and Disabled) for 4 buses totaling $171,136.00; these will be used in both Demand Response and Fixed Route transportation. I do not have a contract # for this as of yet. I have also applied for a 5310 Grant in the same amount $171,136.00 for 4 more buses , the Phase 1 application is due Dec 16th. 16 of 34 17 of 34  18 of 34 MEMORANDUM TO: MPO Executive Board and TCC FROM: Greg Thomas, AICP, MPO Coordinator DATE: December 22, 2015, 2015 SUBJECT: SR 60 Access Management Planning Study The SR60 Access Management Planning Study (sent to MPO and TCC by separate email) provides a detailed review of conditions along the 25 mile stretch of SR60 inside Bradley County (Dalton Pike, APD-40, 25th Street, and Georgetown Road). The study describes the conflicts between turning vehicles (access) and the safe and efficient movement of through traffic along an arterial street, and the need to accommodate other modes (pedestrian, bicycle, transit). The study examines various tools that are used to solve the access versus traffic movement issues along an arterial roadway: driveway spacing; intersection and signal spacing, median openings and median design, shared driveways and other treatments on adjacent property to mitigate traffic impacts on the roadway from the adjacent property. The Study divides SR60 into six (6) subareas that each have differing characteristics in terms of roadway design, existing land use, and future land use, all of which have implications for managing access to ensure that the capacity of the roadway is enhanced and preserved, that the safety of motorists and other users of the roadway is protected, and that the various sections of the roadway provide reasonable and appropriate access and opportunity for growth and economic development. The study uses the “transects”--- areas with particular roadway and development characteristics--- that were created for a similar corridor management project along SR109 in the Nashville area, as a means of classifying the six (6) SR 60 subareas and for coming up with ideal access characteristics for each of the subareas. The Study also examines places within the each of the subareas where there is a mismatch between what is ideal and what may already exist on the ground, recognizing that the plan will need to accommodate existing conditions to some extent while focusing on making changes with future development and redevelopment. The Study makes some recommendations about the possible content of an access management plan relative to each of the six (6) subareas. The Study author Mareike Ortmann is also preparing in a separate document, a table that identifies various possible standards from different locales and transportation planning and engineering bodies (e.g. Page 1 of 2  19 of 34 AASHTO) for the various key issues such as driveway spacing, median treatments, signals, etc. The SR 60 Access Management Planning Study is presented to the MPO for review and comment in anticipation of presenting it to the SR 60 Corridor Management Committee which comprises local elected officials from City and County governments, local school system officials, representatives of TDOT and other State agencies, and persons representing the private sector. The Corridor Management Committee will review the Study and use it in the development of an access management plan for adoption by local governments. Page 2 of 2 20 of 34  21 of 34 Economic Impact One way to look at the economic impact and benefits of investing in bicycle tourism and infrastructure, such as the U.S. Bicycle Route System, is to look at the economic impact of bicycle travel and tourism, both domestically and abroad. Several states have commissioned surveys, reports, and summaries of the economic effects of bicycle travel, while several other such reports have looked at the success of cycling investments abroad. Below are the economic figures from several of those reports. INTERNATIONAL STUDIES Europe: $57 Billion Per Year from EuroVelo Bicycle Route Network The European Cyclists Federation coordinates the EuroVelo network which is signed, numbered, mapped, well promoted and supported by numerous governments across the continent. This economic impact study conducted in 2012 was funded by the European Parliament and shows an impact of $57 billion from 2.295 billion bicycle tourism trips taken on EuroVelo routes. In June 2013, ECF released another study: Calculating the Economic Benefits of Cycling in EU-27 (PDF) which takes into account everyday cycling and its health benefits. ECF estimates this impact to be well above $265 billion annually, or more than $530 for every person that lives in the EU.  22 of 34 Canada: $214 Per Day Spending on La Route Verte Network in Québec A 2014 study by UQAM’s Transat Chair in Tourism in Quebec Province shows cycle tourists spend an average $214 per day, 6% more than other types of tourists while cycling the La Route Verte network. Two-thirds of those surveyed plan to return for another trip. Read the summary on Velo Quebec's website where you can download the study highlights or (if you read French) download the full report. A older study found that La Route Verte cyclists spent a total of $95.4 million in 2000 and estimates brought the impact total to $134 by 2006, which corresponds to over $38 million in government revenues and helps support 2,861 jobs. Retombées économiques de la Route Verte. (March 2003. Read summary.) DOMESTIC STUDIES United States: Bicycling Contributes $133 Billion Annually to U.S. Economy The Outdoor Industry Foundation released a study in 2006, "The Active Outdoor Recreation Economy A $730 Billion Annual Contribution to the U.S. Economy," that valued the total outdoor recreation economy at $730 billion in the U.S., with bicycling contributing $133 billion. The study shows that the national bicycle recreation economy also supports nearly 1.1 million jobs across the U.S, generates $17.7 billion in annual federal and state tax revenue, produces $53.1 billion annually in retail sales and services, and provides sustainable growth in rural communities. Check out the summary about bicycling economic impacts. Arizona: $88 Million from Non-Resident Bicyclists In June 2013, Arizona Department of Transportation released a report, An Economic Impact Study of Bicycling in Arizona: Out of State Bicycle Tourists and Exports (PDF), which focused on the impacts from out-of-state cyclists traveling to Arizona for events, guided tours, races, and training camps. The study documented $57 million in retail sales and 721 jobs created across the state. Colorado: $1 Billion from Bicycling in 2000 The Colorado Department of Transportation commissioned an economic study that measured the benefits of bicycling in Colorado at $1 billion. Bicycling and Walking in Colorado: Economic Impact & Household Survey Results includes the economic impacts of bicycle manufacturing, retail, tourism, and events. Bicycle tourism and events contributed $250 - $300 million to the state's economy. Read this summary for an overview of the study. Colorado, Pikes Peak Region: $28 Million from Bicycling The Economic Impact of Cycling in the Pikes Peak Region is a 2015 study commissioned by the Pikes Peak Area Council of Governments and shows that 1) bicycling contributes $28 million per year and 2) bicycle tourism contributes $23 million per year in direct economic impact to the Pikes Peak region. For each dollar invested in cycling, the Pikes Peak region can yield $1.80 to $2.70 in direct economic benefits to the community, making bicycling among the most cost-effective  23 of 34 transportation investments the region can make. Check out this infographic for highlights from the study. Florida, Orange County: $33 Million from Three County Trails Between 2010-11, an economic impact survey (PDF) performed on three trails in Orange County Florida estimated 1.7 million people use the trails each year, providing $32.556 million in economic impact for the county’s economy. Georgia: $120 Million and 1,300 jobs from Silver Comet Trail A 2013 study called the Silver Comet Trail Economic Impact Analysis and Planning Study found that in its current form, the Silver Comet Trail generates about $120 million in total expenditures throughout the state each year, supporting about 1,300 jobs and about $37 million in earnings. In its expanded form, the Silver Comet Trail will generate about $180 million in total expenditures throughout the State each year, supporting about 2,000 jobs and about $55 million in earnings (3-13 through 3-15). Illinois: $30.40 Per Day Mean Trail User Expenditure Trails for Illinois studied the triple bottom line (economy, environment, and health) on six trails; 35% of trails users spend money in restaurants/bars and a majority bought gear accessories for trail use. Most telling: 70% of trail users found out about the trail through word of mouth; only 0.3% learned about the trails from tourism or visitors bureau, and 3% learn of the trail through a local park or trail agency. Iowa: $365 Million Per Year from Recreational Bicycling Iowa brings bicycle tourism to their state through RAGBRAI, their developing trail infrastructure, and emerging city networks. The Economic and Health Benefits of Bicycling in Iowa reports $365 million per year in economic spending from recreational bicyclists, and $17 million per year in spending from RAGBRAI participants. Maine: $36.3 Million Per Year from Bicycle Tourism Maine department of transportation's (DOT) Bicycle Tourism in Maine: Economic Impacts and Marketing Recommendations (Executive Summary, April 2001) documented $36.3 million in economic impact in 1999. Maine’s DOT bicycling website which links to their state-wide bicycle touring guide, gets 30,000 visitors; 22,000 unique per year, equaling 67 hits per day. Michigan: $668 Million from Bicycling Per Year; $21.9 Million from Events The Michigan Department of Transportation released Phase I of "Community and Economic Benefits of Bicycling in Michigan" in August 2014 and phase II in May 2015. The first study shows an estimated $668 million per year in economic benefits to Michigan's economy from employment, retail revenue, tourism expenditure, and increased health and productivity. Phase II examined the  24 of 34 economic impacts of bicycle touring and events and found events bring the state $21.9 million from out-of-state visitors and touring cyclists spend an average of $71/day with the average trip length of 6 days. Minnesota: $427 Million from Recreational Bicycling The University of Minnesota Tourism Center released a 2009 study, the Economic Impact of Recreational Trail Use (PDF), which reported $427 million in spending from bicyclists using Minnesota trails and $2.4 billion in total spending statewide by all trail users. In Bicycling In Minnesota by the Numbers, the Bicycle Alliance of Minnesota reported 5,000 jobs and $1 billion in revenue attributed to bicycling. Missouri: Katy Trail Generates $18.5 Million A 2012 study, Katy Trail Economic Impact Report by Synergy/PRI/JPA found that the 400,000 visitors to the Katy Trail State Park have an economic impact of $18,491,000 per year, which supports 367 jobs. About 85% of visitors bicycled the Katy Trail and 87% of respondents said the Katy Trail was the main reason for their visit to the area. One in five Katy Trail visitors stopped at a small town along the trail, contributing $8 million in total value added to the local community. Montana: $75 - $103 Per Day Spending by Touring Cyclists The Institute for Tourism and Recreation Research (ITRR) conducted a study called Analysis of Touring Cyclists: Impacts, Needs and Opportunities for Montana,"(PDF) which found that multi-day cyclists spend $75 - $103 per day while in Montana, and stay an average of eight or more nights. Researchers queried cyclists who had visited Adventure Cycling headquarters in 2013, or who had purchased Montana section maps between 2010-2013. Cylists hailed from 48 states and 18 countries. New Jersey: $497 Million Generated by Active Transportation The department of transportation in New Jersey contracted Rutgers to explore the economic impact of active transportation related infrastructure, businesses, and events on the state’s economy. New York: $253 million in sales and $531.47 overnight visitor spending on Erie Canalway Trail This study, The Economic Impact of the Erie Canalway Trail (2012), was commissioned by Parks and Trails New York and found this 277-mile trail provides $253 million annually in sales, created 3,440 jobs, sees 1.6 million annual visits and overnight travelers spend a whopping $531.47 per visit. North Carolina: $60 Million And 1,407 Jobs from Outer Banks A nearly nine-fold increase on the initial $6.7 million in public funds invested in construction of bicycle facilities. Judson J. Lawrie, Thomas P.Norman, Mary Meletiou, and Sarah W. O’Brien. Bikeways to Prosperity: Assessing the Economic Impact of Bicycle Facilities (TR News 242 January-February 2006).  25 of 34 January-February 2006). Oregon: $400 Million Generated by Bicycle Tourism Travel Oregon commissioned a study, The Economic Significance of Bicycle-Related Travel in Oregon, Detailed State and Travel Region Estimates (2012) to look at the economic impact of bicycling across Oregon, including mountain biking, scenic bikeways and local bicycle amenities. Oregon: $12.4 Million from Scenic Bikeways The Economic Significance of Cycling on Oregon Scenic Bikeways study was conducted in 2014 and measured a $12.4 million economic impact from bicycling on Oregon's 14 official Scenic Bikeways. This spending directly supported over 150 jobs with earnings of approximately $3.4 million. Pennsylvania & Maryland: $114 Per Day for Overnight Stays on Great Allegheny Passage The 2012 Economic Impact Study of the Great Allegheny Passage (GAP) shows that trail users spend an average of $114 for overnight stays, which has increased from $98 in 2008. Businesses along the trail attribute 30% of their gross revenues to the GAP, and about half of the businesses said that the trail affected their decision to expand. Vermont: $83 Million from Bicycling A report from Resource Systems Group and Local Motion shows that in 2009, biking and walking created at least 1,400 jobs, $41 million in personal income (wages) and $83 million in revenue. In addition, their research finds, the health and property value benefits could bump that up by more than $400 million in economic impact. Washington State: $3.1 Billion from Recreational Bicycling A January 2015 study, Economic Analysis of Outdoor Recreation in Washington State, prepared by Earth Economics and commissioned by the Task Force on Parks and Outdoor Recreation, shows that recreational bicyclists (local and out-of-state) spend $3.1 billion per year statewide and bicycling is the third largest outdoor recreational activity in the state by total expenditures. Wisconsin: $924 Million from Bicycle Tourism & Recreation Valuing Bicycling’s Economic and Health Impacts in Wisconsin tracked health and economic benefits for bicycling at $1.9 billion annually with $924 million (and $533 million in direct impact) attributed to tourism and recreation and $410 million for health. The employment impact, as measured by full-time equivalent jobs, is 13,193. RELATED RESEARCH Economic Benefits of Trails and Greenways (PDF) is a composite of studies done about rail trails  26 of 34 across the U.S. and highlights economic benefits, property values, business investment, and quality of life. Economic Benefits of Trail Tourism is an overview by American Trails of studies measuring the many economic benefits of trails, including job creation, rural economic development, increased tax revenues and sales, etc. The Institute for Tourism and Recreation Research (ITRR) at the University of Montana which conducts non-resident surveys throughout the state of Montana, compiled data based upon visitors in 2012. Road and tour biking impact for Missoula County is estimated at $19.4 million or 8% of the county’s nonresident expenditures. Read ITRR analysis and summary (PDF), Cyclists spending per night (PDF), Nonresident spending by cyclists (PDF). Bicycle Tourism and Rural Community Development: An Asset Based Approach (PDF, 679K) by Sally Broadaway is a graduate study that demonstrates how communities can use existing assets to build bicycle tourism. Case studies of two unique communities, Collinwood, TN, and Farmington, MO, provide the model for other rural communities to meet the needs of bicycle travelers. Bicycle Tourism as a Rural Economic Development Vehicle (PDF/1.9 MB) by Heidi Beierle, MCPR at University of Oregon. This study examines the different kinds of self-contained bicycle tourists, their spending patterns and the benefits to communities along the TransAmerica Bicycle Trail. Estimating the Employment Impacts of Pedestrian, Bicycle, and Road Infrastructure (PDF) — The Political Economy Research Institute compiled data provided by the city of Baltimore to write this case study. They found that on-street bike lanes and pedestrian measures created more direct jobs, more indirect jobs, and more induced jobs per dollar than either road upgrades or road resurfacing. Guidelines for Analysis of Investment in Bicycle Facilities (PDF/4.4m) — A compilation study by the National Cooperative Highway Research Program, includes literature reviews, cost-benefit analysis, etc. Rural Friendliness Pays Dividends is the story about how the small town of Twin Bridges, Montana, has embraced bicycle tourism and benefited. Shoppers on Bikes Good for Business (PDF/1.1m) is an article claiming that patrons arriving by bicycle and on foot spend more money than those coming by car.  27 of 34 MEMORANDUM TO: MPO Executive Board and TCC FROM: Greg Thomas, AICP, MPO Coordinator DATE: December 22, 2015, 2015 SUBJECT: MPO Coordinators Report 2040 RTP update 1. September 15, 2015 and following, prepared memo and solicited input from 2040 RTP steering committee in anticipation of October 15, 2015 public input meeting. 2. Attended meeting on September 21, 2015 with TDOT Region 2 staff for coordination on 2040 RTP. 3. September 30 through October 2, 2015 attended TAPA conference and made presentation concerning SCI and its impacts including transportation related projects. 4. Prepared for and attended September 24, 2015 meeting at College Hill Recreation Center to discuss sidewalks and related improvements in the Gaut Street Area for pending Transportation Alternatives grant application, and other neighborhood sidewalk and transportation needs. 5. Prepared for and attended October 1, 2015 meeting at Blythe Avenue Family Services Center to discuss sidewalks and related improvements in the Gaut Street Area, including a bus shelter on Dooley Street by the Health Department, for pending Transportation Alternatives grant application, and other neighborhood sidewalk and transportation needs. 6. Attended October 6, 2014 MPO Coordinators meeting in Nashville. 7. Prepared for and attended October 15, 2015 public workshop for 2040 RTP. 8. Submitted application for Transportation Alternatives Grant program on November 2, 2015 for the Gaut Street Area sidewalks and related improvements Page 1 of 3  28 of 34 9. Attended Town Council meeting in Calhoun on November 2, 2015 and spoke to the Council about the TDOT Multi-modal Access Grant and their sidewalk concerns for SR 163 and US 11. To get started, these sidewalks area potential planning project for the students under the SCI program through SETDD. 10. Prepared materials for November 4, 2015 MPO meeting. 11. November 17, 2015 prepared and submitted 4th quarter PL billing. 12. November 19, 2015 attended meeting with Parsons Brinkerhoff and city staff regarding the TIP and related spreadsheet. 13. November 20, 2015 attended and participated in the United Way’s Housing Symposium. 14. November 25, 2015 and following reviewed draft SR 60 access management planning study. 15. November and December 2015 developed application concept for 25th Street area sidewalks and related multimodal improvements for 2015 Multi-modal Access grant application. 16. December 1, 2015 attended TNMUG meeting in Mt. Juliet TN. 17. December 3, 2015 prepared and submitted TDOT Multi-modal risk assessment. 18. December 7, 2015 attended meeting in Cleveland with Matt Farr of BikeWalkTN and members of the local cycling community regarding National Bicycle Route 21 19. December 8, 2015 attended Bradley County Housing Coalition meeting and participated in “Root Causes” committee which identified daycare and transportation (affordable transportation, limited auto access, and lack of public transportation in the evening) as impediments to affordable housing because these affect the ability to get and hold a job. 20. December 11, 2015 met with TDOT Region 2 staff, city officials, realtors, lenders, property owners, and school officials regarding access to the new elementary school site and adjoining commercial property on SR 60 Georgetown Road. 21. December 14, 2015 assisted SETDD and RPO in evaluating Multi-modal Access and Community Planning Grant applications for RPO communities. 22. December 15, 2015 prepared and submitted comments on National Freight Plan to FHWA. 23. December 16, 2015 participated in TDOT Bicycle Pedestrian Conference call. Page 2 of 3  29 of 34 24. December 16, 2015 conference call with FHWA and TDOT regarding FHWA Tennessee Bicycle Pedestrian Assessment tool implementation for 25th Street (kick-off anticipated April 2016). 25. December 17, 2015 meeting in Cleveland with Cleveland Officials and Deputy Commissioner Toks Omishakin and his staff (Tanisha Hall, Jim Moore, Liza Joffrion, Stacy Morrison, and Joren Dunnavant). 26. December 20, 2015 held meeting with Melissa Taylor from Chattanooga RPO regarding potential CMAQ Park and Ride lot application for lot at Old Woolen Mill. Page 3 of 3 30 of 34  31 of 34 STATE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FISCAL YEARS 2017‐2020 TDOT and MPO MILESTONE TIMELINE 2016 TIP TIMELINE Dec 2015 – Apr 2016 Request Program and Project information from transit providers and MPO member jurisdictions; Receive Project Cost Estimation Tool from TDOT February 2016 Receive Inflation Rate from TDOT Programming & Scheduling for YOE revenues & expenditures and system‐level cost/revenue for O&M Feb 2016 – May 2016 Non‐Attainment and Maintenance Areas provide IAC with TIP project list for comment Apr 1 – May 15 2016 Receive State Projects and anticipated State funds to program May 16 – May 31 2016 Submit Draft TIP to TDOT for Review (30 business day review) May 17 – Jul 15 2016 TDOT reviews MPOs’ draft TIPs Jun 28 – Jul 15 2016 Receive TDOT comments and revise TIP based on comments Jul 15 – Jul 29 2016 Submit Draft TIP to TDOT for submission to FHWA/FTA; TDOT submits Draft TIP to FHWA/FTA (20 business day review) July 18 – Sept 12 2016 FHWA/FTA reviews MPOs’ draft TIPs Aug 29 – Sept 12 2016 Receive FHWA/FTA comments and revise TIP based on comments Sept ‐ Oct 2016 Obtain Public Comment/Executive Board Approval based on Participation Plan Nov 9 2016 Deadline for Submitting Final Approved Copies of TIP to TDOT; Non‐Attainment and Maintenance MPOs must also include a TIP Conformity Determination Report and Conformity Letter. The conformity process must be completed prior to submitting the final approved TIP, and includes a 30 business day review by FHWA, FTA, and EPA. Nov 10 – Nov 14 2016 TDOT submits Rural STIP and MPO TIPs to FHWA/FTA for approval Nov 15 – Dec 13 2016 FHWA/FTA Review Period (20 business days) Dec 14 2016 FHWA/FTA Approval of STIP Yearlong Amendments to TIP as required PLEASE NOTE‐ IF YOU DO NOT SUBMIT YOUR TIP BY THE DEADLINES OUTLINED ABOVE, YOU COULD RISK A TIP LAPSE – ANY MPO’s TIP THAT IS NOT INCLUDED IN THE STIP WHEN APPROVED IS CONSIDERED IN A TIP LAPSE  32 of 34 STIP TIMELINE ‐ 2016 January Provide Project Cost Estimation Tool to MPOs February Provide Inflation Rate for YOE Revenues & Expenditures and system‐level cost/revenue for O&M to MPOs April 1 – May 15 Submit State projects to MPOs May 17 – Jul 15 2016 TDOT Reviews Draft MPO TIPs (30 business day review) June 28 – July 15 Provide comments to MPOs on Draft TIPs June 1 – 30 Submit 1st draft of STIP to FHWA/FTA Aug 1 – Sept 15 Hold Public Hearings and Obtain Public Comments Sept 15 – Oct 14 Review and incorporate public comments; Finalize document Nov 9 Deadline for submitting approved copies of MPO TIPs to TDOT Nov 10 – Nov 14 Submit Rural STIP and MPO TIPs to FHWA/FTA for approval Nov 15 – Dec 13 FHWA/FTA Review Period Dec 14 FHWA/FTA Approval of STIP Yearlong Amendments to STIP/TIP as required  33 of 34 MEMORANDUM TO: MPO Executive Board and TCC FROM: Greg Thomas, AICP, MPO Coordinator DATE: December 22, 2015, 2015 SUBJECT: November 2015 transit riders Fixed Route Fiscal Fiscal Month Fiscal Yr Fiscal Yr Fiscal Yr Year Year (11/12) (12/13) (13/14) (14/15) (15/16) July 6411 6539 7986 8184 9,058 August 8133 8454 8364 9091 9,553 September 7405 6919 7513 9643 9,774 October 6867 7847 9500 11,587 10,101 November 6475 7614 7876 7779 8,081 December 6313 6908 8073 8885 January 6500 7712 6969 8116 February 6704 7588 7433 6458 March 7760 7998 8,806 7,998 April 6913 9044 8686 7,945 May 7178 8909 8965 7,845 June 6305 7340 8229 8756 Total 82964 92,872 98400 102287 46,567 Page 1 of 2  34 of 34 Demand Response Fiscal Month Fiscal Yr Fiscal Yr Fiscal Yr Fiscal Yr YR (11/12) (12/13) (13/14) (14/15) (15/16 July 1951 2131 1930 2268 2,121 August 2191 2285 1907 2206 1957 September 2211 2012 1883 2268 1992 October 2152 2248 2120 2405 2,139 November 1775 1521 1785 1992 1856 December 1751 1402 2,090 1514 January 1947 1683 1930 2140 February 1877 1753 1860 1694 March 2124 1795 2,260 2283 April 1969 1921 2317 2,059 May 2060 2020 2161 1,961 June 2028 1683 2335 2229 Total For Fiscal Year 24036 22454 24578 25019 10,065 Page 2 of 2