Advocacy Advance Action 2020 Workshop Jefferson City, MO August 17, 2012 Advocacy Advance Action 2020 Workshop Action 2020 Workshop Action 2020 Workshop

Welcome Partnership funded by SRAM Double federal funding for bike/ped projects Work with state, local, and regional partners Reports, technical assistance & coaching, grants, workshops

Action 2020 Workshops Advocates, agency staff & elected officials Work collaboratively to increase bicycle & pedestrian investments Materials are available online: advocacyadvance.org

Navigating MAP-21 State strategies MPO Working Group Resources and tools Webinars www.AdvocacyAdvance.org/MAP21

Agenda 8:30 Introductions 9:00 MAP-21 and Funding Program Overview 10:30 Break 10:45 Funding from the Local Context 11:15 Keynote Speaker Darwin Hindman 11:45 Lunch 12:45 Road Map for Success 1:00 Opportunities and Next Steps in MAP-21 1:45 Closing 2:00 Adjourn

Working Together Elected Officials Advocates Agency Staff Set priorities Vision Budget Public Accountability Advocates Knowledge of local needs Represent the public will Demonstrate community support Organize Agency Staff Technical expertise Knowledge of the process Project selection Get stuff done

Introductions Name Organization / Agency Position Why are you here today?

The ABCs of MAP-21 Basics of the new federal transportation law, how it affects biking and walking and how we can take advantage of new opportunities to fund biking and walking projects and programs.

Federal-Aid Bike/Ped Spending 1992-2010

MAP-21 Overview 2 year bill October 1, 2012- September 30, 2014 Extends funding at current level Themes Consolidate programs Streamline project delivery Give states more flexibility

MAP-21 Changes to Biking and Walking Transportation Alternatives Eligible activities Funding and opt outs Distribution of Funds Changes to other funding programs Highway Safety Improvement Program STP CMAQ Federal Lands

Transportation Alternatives (Formerly TE) Combines programs: Transportation Enhancements (now Transportation Alternatives) Safe Routes to School Recreational Trails Redevelopment of underused highways to boulevards

Transportation Alternatives Changes eligibilities from Transportation Enhancements ADDS: Safe Routes for Non- Drivers (networks) ANY Environmental Mitigation Scenic Byway uses SUBTRACTS Funding For Bicycle and Pedestrian Education Streetscaping Acquisition of Scenic or Historic sites Transportation Museums

Reduction in Funding MAP-21 TOTAL: $808 MILLION SAFETEA LU- FY 2011 TOTAL: $1.2 BILLION MAP-21 TOTAL: $808 MILLION SRTS $202 M TE $928 MILLION TRANSPORT-ATION ALTERNATIVES $808 M RTP $97 SOURCE: FHWA, Revised Fiscal Year (FY) 2011 Supplementary Tables – Apportionments Pursuant to the Surface Transportation Extension Act of 2010, as Amended. Feb 1, 2012

Comparison of Dedicated funding in 2012 vs. 2013 funding for TA

Distribution of Funding 1. State gets funding equivalent of 2% of highway funds (minus safety , etc.) 2. Recreational Trails Program funded 3. Funding is divided into 2 equal pots; One distributed by population One to a grant program 4. State has the ability to transfer funding out of Transportation Alternatives

Grant Program Mechanics

Transportation Alternatives Funding Distribution 2. Recreational Trails Program funding gets taken off the top (unless Governor Opts out) Maintains Rec Trails Program process and funding (2009 levels) Opt-out date is 30 days before money is available Opt-out decision made every year Rec Trails projects eligible under TA and STP

Transportation Alternatives Funding Distribution 3. Remaining funding is divided into 2 equal pots POT 1- distributed by population MPOs Population > 200,000 Funding is sub-allocated MPOs must run competitive grant process Urban areas population < 200,000 State will run a competitive grant process Rural areas population < 5000

Missouri Example Funds Distributed by Population MPO/ Metropolitan area Percent of Pot 1 Funding (estimated) Kansas City 14.2% St. Louis 29.6% Springfield 4.5% Rest of state 51.4% Map and Data source: Rails to Trails Conservancy, http://www.railstotrails.org/resources/documents/ourWork/MPOs_by_state

Transportation Alternatives Funding Distribution 3. Remaining funding is divided into 2 equal pots POT 2- distributed through competitive grant process run by state. Eligible Entities Local/regional governments Tribes Local/regional transportation agencies Public land agencies Other local/regional entities state deems eligible STATE DOT

State Ability to Transfer Funds 4. State can choose to transfer funding out Transfer option: up to 50% of TA to any other program Only out of Pot 2 Coburn Opt-out: based on unobligated balance Doesn’t apply until year 2 Unique to TA State of Emergency Can transfer funding in state of emergency If State gets federal funds for emergency, must reimburse TA

Other MAP-21 Changes to Biking and Walking Coordinators: Bicycle and Pedestrian Coordinators are still required Safe Routes to School Coordinators eligible Clearinghouses- Not funded in MAP-21 Bicycle Pedestrian Information Center Under contract until Summer 2013 Safe Routes to School National Center Under contract until January 2013

Eligibility in Other Programs Expediting Project Delivery Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) Surface Transportation Program (STP) Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) Federal Lands Programs

Expediting Projects/Streamlining Streamlining of regulations Categorical Exclusion (CE) SAFETEA-LU Categorical Exclusions Biking and walking projects MAP-21 Categorical Exclusions Biking and walking projects Projects within the right-of-way Projects with a total cost of less than $5 million

Program Overview Characteristics, requirements, and opportunities of under-utilized funding sources that exist for biking and walking projects and programs

Outline Funding Overview History Today Program features Bike/ped eligibility Project examples Case study Think about Systems not projects Federal vs. state and regional policy Programming decisions Who, What, Where, When, How Policy and politics Resources in folder

Federal-Aid Highway Programs Surface Transportation Program (STP) Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement (CMAQ) Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) Section 402 Safety Grants

Federal-Aid Bike/Ped Spending 1992-2010

Use of Federal Funds for Bicycle and Pedestrian Projects, 1992 - 2011

Growth in Bicycle Commuting

Suggested Approaches Guidance & Policy Application Prioritization Committee Membership Political Support Focus on Safety Warsaw, MO

Surface Transportation Program (STP) Flexible funding Construction of bicycle transportation facilities and walkways Non-construction projects related to safe bicycle use 80% Federal Share Image Source and References: http://www.pedbikeimages.org/pubdetail.cfm?picid=1422 photo by: Dan Burden location: Boulder, CO Federal Highway Administration. (2009). Funding programs, projects, and activities. Training module in How to develop a pedestrian safety action plan.

STP Example: Peoria Project Rating Criteria Before 2006, project selection was not quantified MPO asked League of Illinois Bicyclists for suggestions Peoria MPO created new quantitative criteria Most projects now include bike/ped accommodations

Congestion Mitigation & Air Quality Improvement Program (CMAQ) Emission-reductions Must be non- attainment area for eligibility Construction and non- construction projects and programs eligible Typically 80% federal share

CMAQ Examples Capital Bikeshare (Washington, DC & Arlington, VA) Millennium Park Cycling Center (Chicago, IL) Bike racks (Sacramento, CA)

CMAQ Examples: Non-Construction Bike education (Louisville, KY) Bike promotion (Washington, DC) City employee bike fleet (Chicago, IL) Bike map (Milwaukee, WI & Sacramento, CA) Bike plan (Philadelphia, PA & Birmingham, AL)

CMAQ cities, # of B/P projects, 10 yrs City # of CMAQ projects # Ped - Bicycle Projects % Ped - Bicycle Projects Seattle, WA 181 88 48.6 Milwaukee, WI 124 58 46.7 Sacramento, CA 210 95 45.2 San Francisco, CA 469 209 44.5 Portland, OR 90 37 41.1 Atlanta, GA 230 75 32.6 Chicago, IL 454 138 30.3 Boston, MA 152 39 25.6 Buffalo, NY 45 11 24 Cincinnati, OH 86 14 16.2 City # of CMAQ projects # Ped - Bicycle Projects % Ped - Bicycle Projects Philadelphia, PA 231 35 15.1 Washington, DC 530 79 14.9 New York, NY 275 33 12 Denver, CO 117 13 11.1 Columbus, OH 72 5 6.9 St. Louis, MO 167 11 6.5 Cleveland, OH 120 1 0.8 Pittsburgh, PA 179 0.5 Baltimore, MD 45 (Source: BikePGH, data source: FHWA, 2000-2009)

CMAQ cities, $ for Bike/Ped, 5 yrs Percent of total CMAQ funding to bicycle/pedestrian projects Dollars per capita (annual average) Washington, D.C. 88% $7.41 San Jose, CA 57% $0.47 Seattle, WA 38% $0.69 Kansas City, MO 36% $1.03 Milwaukee, MN 16% $0.54 Philadelphia, PA 12% $0.45 Sacramento, CA 10% $3.72 Phoenix, AZ 8% $0.23 Honolulu, HI 7% $0.67 San Francisco, CA 6% $2.11 Chicago, IL $0.20 Among 50 largest U.S. cities. Source 2012 Benchmarking Report, source data: FMIS, 2006 – 2010.

Bicycle-friendly policies Regional decision- making (California, Illinois) Projects rated by type (Chicago, Kansas City) Set-aside (Seattle) Intentional planning (Milwaukee) Local advocacy support, quality applications (Milwaukee)

Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) Safety infrastructure All public roads are eligible Bike lanes, roadway shoulders, crosswalks, signage Data driven 90% Federal Share

HSIP Examples: Virginia and Florida “Fair share for safety” 10% set-aside Project selection focused on corridors Florida: High bicycle fatalities $5 million in 2009 $5.5 million in 2010

Section 402 State and Community Highway Safety Grant Program NHTSA & FHWA Non-infrastructure Bicycle and pedestrian safety and education programs Can be run by local advocacy groups Reimbursement

Section 402 Examples BikeEd (Bike Texas) Share the Road program (Atlanta) BikeSchool (New Jersey) Helmet distribution (Florida) Pedestrian safety for older adults Training on ped/bike design guidelines Bike Safety Month

Section 402 Example: Bike Walk CT CRCOG received $20,000 grant for bike education program Bike Walk CT actively involved Close agency and advocacy relationship in development of bike education program

Example: GA Bikes Local Match Share the Road Plates 3 year grant

Questions?

Break Back at 10:45

Local Context

Keynote Speaker Darwin Hindman

Questions?

Lunch Back at 12:15

Road Map for Success Favorable factors for bicycling and walking investments Content developed by Peter Lagerwey.

Learning Objectives Identify opportunities for funding and support of bicycle and pedestrian projects Explore the meaning of institutionalizing bicycle and pedestrian planning

Outline Implementation through institutionalization 19 ways to fund your bicycle and pedestrian programs Modifying Planning and Design Documents and Regulations Finding Sustainable Funding Building Communication, Collaboration, and Support Slide Summary: This lecture focuses on building support and leveraging funding for bicycle and pedestrian programs. These funding opportunities are categorized into 6 different strategies. These strategies range in focus – some describe ways to use funds more efficiently, some describe how strengthening communication and partnerships may open doors for funding opportunities and project implementation, and others identify programs and procedures that already exist but could be amended to include bicycle and pedestrian safety issues. As becomes apparent in this lecture, funding opportunities are frequently not readily apparent and direct funding sources will likely be insufficient to cover the costs of bicycle and pedestrian projects sustainably. In this way, institutionalizing bicycle and pedestrian planning is often key in ensuring its sustainability.

Introduction Perception of a lack of funding can be one of the biggest barriers keeping communities from investing in bicycle and pedestrian programs Funding and support for bicycle and pedestrian projects can come from many different sources – some are obvious, others are not 1. Slide Summary: Since transportation funding allocations do not vary that much from community to community, it is the way the funding is leveraged and allocated that will determine how extensively communities invest in bicycle and pedestrian facilities, programs, and infrastructure. In many cases, building community and institutional support can be one of the most important steps in finding funding for bicycle and pedestrian projects. Communities that have invested in bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure typically do not have more money than others, they have simply spent it differently. This lecture aims to show some ways communities can build support that can help fund and implement pedestrian and bicycle projects. Remember, these ideas are a starting point and this list is not exhaustive.

Institutionalization Bicyclist and pedestrian needs are part of the agency's mission and corporate culture Entire organization/agency focuses on reducing crashes involving bicyclists and pedestrians Pedestrian and bicycle considerations are automatically included in all plans, policies and projects Slide Summary: Institutions with a role in pedestrian and bicycle accommodation include state, regional, and local authorities. Each entity has established policies and processes. Integrating pedestrian and bicycle considerations into policies and processes is referred to as "institutionalization.” Institutionalization doesn't just happen. It takes a well thought out plan that may require years to implement. It requires both internal work by staff and external work by pedestrian advocates. The intent is to change bicycling and walking from being perceived as "alternative" activities to being treated as "mainstream" activities by including them in documents used by decision makers. The policies, plans, and processes that guide institutions are constantly being revised and updated. This is the ideal time to make changes that begin to institutionalize bicyclist and pedestrian considerations. Every community differs and can find unique and effective ways to institutionalize pedestrian improvements. Once successful, there would no longer be a need for a bicycle/pedestrian coordinator just like there is currently no need for a "car" coordinator. It is a matter of taking what is often a "special project" and making it the norm. As you will see in this lecture, institutionalization plays a significant role in leveraging funding and implementing bicycle and pedestrian projects.

Ways to Fund Bicycle & Pedestrian Programs Modifying Planning and Design Documents and Regulations Finding Sustainable Funding Building Communication, Collaboration, and Support Slide Summary: This lecture will discuss a variety of different means of funding bicycle and pedestrian programs. These funding opportunities are organized into the 3 categories listed here.

Modifying Planning and Design Documents and Regulations 1. Policy Documents Set the tone of the agency or organization Include mission statements that indicate the organization’s priorities

Modifying Planning and Design Documents and Regulations 2. Planning Documents Provide an opportunity for purposefully including bicycle and pedestrian needs into the planning process Integrate pedestrian considerations into planning documents Slide Summary: For some agencies these may be the same as the policy documents. These may include transportation, land use, or comprehensive plans for municipalities. Frequently, bicycle and pedestrian issues are not addressed in planning documents because the authors don’t think of it, not because they are purposefully left out. Planning documents provide a means to increase awareness of bicyclist and pedestrian issues and a dedication to addressing these issues. Increasingly, these documents are being taken more seriously when making funding decisions on capital projects. It is critical to integrate pedestrian considerations into planning documents at the time they are revised or developed. One may actually want to go so far as to make sure the words pedestrian and bicycle appear on an average of once every third page of a planning document. 2. Image Source and References: http://www.pedbikeimages.org/Dan Burden.

Modifying Planning and Design Documents and Regulations 3. Design Guidelines and Standards Include specifications for street width, sidewalk design, intersection construction, and crossing facilities

Modifying Planning and Design Documents and Regulations 4. Zoning Codes and Land Use Regulations Residential & Commercial Redevelopment zones Include amenities Slide Summary: Local agencies generally have residential and commercial development zoning codes. Since most pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure is built in conjunction with development and redevelopment, zoning codes and land use regulations should be amended to include bicycle and pedestrian concerns if they do not already. These codes and regulations should include requirements for sidewalks and paths accessible to persons of all abilities. They should include amenities such as planting strips, street trees, and public restrooms. Provisions should also ensure pedestrian and bicycle safety and access during construction. 2. Image Source and References: http://www.pedbikeimages.org/Dan Burden

Modifying Planning and Design Documents and Regulations 5. Maintenance Starts with good design Prioritize location & frequency Follow the money; 51% of money to critical bridges in Pennsylvania Paint is your friend Often related to water Starts with good design Change maintenance policies & procedures Prioritize location & frequency Follow the money; 51% of money to critical bridges in Pennsylvania Paint is your friend Often related to water

Modifying Planning and Design Documents and Regulations 6. Trails and Rural Communities Local control Opportunities for input

Finding Sustainable Funding 7. Needs Prioritization and Funding Criteria Ensure bicycle/pedestrian projects are competitive with other transportation projects Slide Summary: States, Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs), counties, and cities all create lists prioritizing particular projects based on a set of criteria. It is essential that these criteria do not exclude or disadvantage valuable bicycle and pedestrian projects. Similarly, application forms for grants and other types of funding criteria should allow bicycle and pedestrian projects to be competitive with other types of projects. Also, the inclusion of bicycle and pedestrian elements in other transportation projects ought to score higher than narrowly focused projects because they are creating more value. -- see Peoria example from earlier 2. Image Source and References: http://www.pedbikeimages.org/Dan Burden.

Finding Sustainable Funding 8. Routine Accommodation Complete Streets Consider bicycle/pedestrian needs in every transportation project Slide Summary: Routine accommodation essentially summarizes many of the previous points made in this lecture. Through institutionalization, agencies should reach a point where bicyclist and pedestrian needs are considered in every transportation project. A specific example of this is the Complete Streets movement, which raises the idea of routine accommodation to another level by requiring that all modes are considered when planning and constructing streets. Complete Streets consider the entire street environment, including street trees, sidewalk seating, transit stops, bicycle lanes, and public space. 2. Image Source and References: http://www.pedbikeimages.org/Carl Sundstrom. Photo taken in Brainbridge Island, Washington.

Finding Sustainable Funding 9. Combined Projects Bundle smaller projects with larger ones Slide Summary: By combining several projects together transportation agencies can take advantage of economies of scale. Fixed costs associated with projects, such as permitting fees and equipment rental, can be minimized by combining projects. By bundling smaller projects, like striping bicycle lanes, with larger projects, like road construction, agencies can see smaller costs per project. 2. Image Source and References: http://www.pedbikeimages.org/Dan Burden. Photo taken in Woodbridge, Michigan.

Finding Sustainable Funding 10. Shovel-Ready and Match One project ahead One match ahead Warsaw, MO

Finding Sustainable Funding 11. Environmental Impact Statements Mitigation Restoration Slide Summary: The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires federal agencies to complete environmental impact statements that detail the effects that proposed actions will have on the environment. There may be opportunities to fulfill NEPA mitigation and restoration requirements by incorporating bicycle and pedestrian facilities into projects. For instance, if a proposed development is anticipated to increase traffic congestion, constructing bicycle and pedestrian facilities may be an acceptable mitigation action. In many cases developments are amenable to mitigation efforts like this as it can help foster community acceptance of the project. Utility companies may also be willing to construct trails along utility rights of way. It is wise to familiarize yourself with the long term plans of public and private utility companies to stay aware of restoration opportunities that could potentially incorporate trails. 2. Image Source and References: http://www.pedbikeimages.org/Dan Burden. Photo taken in Jackson, Wyoming.

Finding Sustainable Funding 12. Health Impact Assessments Consider both adverse & beneficial health effects Incorporate various types of evidence Engage communities and stakeholders in a deliberative process

Finding Sustainable Funding 13. Transit “Alternative modes” - FTA funding Street Crossings - signals, schools & access Station area planning - Neighborhood Connectivity Social Equity

Building Communication, Collaboration & Support 14. Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Boards Creates an ongoing system for citizen input Slide Summary: Having an effective PAC is critical to building public support for pedestrian improvements. An effective board ensures that the program will be accountable to citizens. It creates a systematic method for ongoing citizen input into development of important policies, plans and projects. The group should be created by legislation, ordinance or resolution, not by a department head or director. This will ensure that it will survive changes in administration and personnel. If possible, it should have only citizens as members. PACs that include professional staff may not be as effective since it will be difficult to avoid conflicts of interest. PACs should be involved in developing relevant policy and planning documents, setting priorities, reviewing annual pedestrian program work plans, and reviewing major public and private projects. Ongoing volunteer involvement and participation is best ensured by having the PAC chairperson assign projects to each individual PAC member. This builds ownership through personal investment as a member follows a project from beginning to end. 2. Image Source and References: http://www.pedbikeimages.org/Dan Burden. Photo taken in Chico, California.

Building Communication, Collaboration & Support 15. Advocacy Groups Raise awareness 25 – 2 – 2 – 2 Slide Summary: Advocacy groups can help institutionalize pedestrian considerations and sustained funding. They can raise awareness and change attitudes. Their efforts can result in the routine inclusion of bicyclist and pedestrian needs in transportation programs and projects. It does not take a large organization to be effective. For example, if 25 people commit to attend two public hearings, write two letters, meet with two elected officials and serve on one committee over the period of one year, decision makers will perceive the public support for improving walking and bicycling conditions. 2. Image Source and References: http://www.pedbikeimages.org/Dan Burden.

Building Communication, Collaboration & Support 16. Neighborhood Groups Macro-paradigm shifts 36/36 plans Gap between what agency thinks they want and what they really want Know the problem, not the correct solution

Building Communication, Collaboration & Support 17. Boards and Commissions Provide policy direction and recommendations to state and local government Slide Summary: State and local governments often rely on boards and commissions to provide policy direction and project review. A state or a mid-sized city may have up to 50 relevant boards and commissions. Advocates need to provide input on projects and programs that impact bicycling and walking. Agencies should work to ensure that pedestrian advocates are appointed to applicable board and commissions. Advocacy groups should also work to ensure that members of boards and commissions have an accurate understanding of pedestrian and bicycle issues. 2. Image Source and References: http://www.pedbikeimages.org/Dan Burden.

Building Communication, Collaboration & Support 18. Interagency Coordination Establish cooperative relationships and consistent regional priorities Slide Summary: Cooperation between public agencies and between departments within agencies can help integrate pedestrian considerations into decision making processes. For example, the SAFETEA_LU legislation requires entities to cooperate to develop regional funding priorities. It also requires all state departments of transportation to hire Safe Routes to School coordinators. Consequently, walking issues must be institutionalized as part of the regional agenda. It is up to the local agency to do this by establishing cooperative relationships with key people (increasingly this includes health department professionals) and by serving on appropriate committees and work groups. 2. Image Source and References: http://www.pedbikeimages.org/Dan Burden. Photo taken in Chico, California.

Building Communication, Collaboration & Support 19. Recognition for Good Work Show support for bicycle/pedestrian champions Slide Summary: Every year, give recognition to employees who do outstanding work promoting bicycling and walking. It can be an award, plaque or other pubic recognition. The intent is to give the clear message that promoting bicycling and walking is part of the mission and corporate culture of a transportation agency. People count and, when they are energized, they become instruments of change. 2. Image Source and References: http://www.pedbikeimages.org/Dan Burden. Photo taken in Birmingham, Alabama. ASK FOR QUESTIONS

Questions?

Opportunities and Next Steps in MAP-21 Photo by: Evren Sonmez Location: Tucson, AZ Opportunities and Next Steps in MAP-21

Next Steps What will you do tomorrow? What do you need help with? Who will you connect with?

Advocacy Advance Resources Navigating MAP-21 resources and webinars: www.AdvocacyAdvance.org/MAP21 Rapid Response Grants Reports, technical assistance Winning Campaigns Training Kansas City, MO: October 19-21 info@AdvocacyAdvance.org

Thank You! Mobikefed.org Macogonline.org

Advocacy Advance Action 2020 Workshop Concordia, MO August 15, 2012 Advocacy Advance Action 2020 Workshop Training for Trainers Action 2020 Workshop

Agenda Introduction to Training Q & A Localizing and Colaboration Workshop Implementation Adjourn and Optional Happy Hour

Q & A Gain clarity and understanding of the content and facilitation of the Action 2020 Workshop

Collaboration Tools Using the workshops to develop local priorities and act on them

Discussion of Local Issues Suggested topics include Regional Transportation Plan, statewide trails inventory, sidewalk inventory, uniqueness of rural communities, projects and plans that are happening, Missouri’s plan for MAP-21

Implementation and Next Steps What will you do next?

Thank You! Join us for an optional happy hour at: Biffles Smokehouse BBQ 103 NE 2nd St.