Safe Routes to School Program 2012 Overview New York State Department of Transportation Safe Routes to School Program.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Bob Vasek Cooperative Agreements Engineer Mn/DOT Metro State Aid Overview and Planning and Programming Tom Leibli Cooperative Agreements Project Manager.
Advertisements

Federal Safety Funding for Local Governments Martin Andersen Local Government Section Manager February 19, 2010.
Safe Routes to School Program Presentation by the 3 Rivers Bicycle Coalition.
FEDERAL PROGRAM OUTLINE What is Safe Routes? A Federal transportation program to …enable and encourage children, including those with disabilities,
Applicants Videoconference January 17,  MnDOT funding began in 2005 with federal transportation bill (SAFETEA-LU)  This solictation uses remaining.
Louisiana Safe Routes To School Program
Idaho Safe Routes to School (SR2S). Purpose of SR2S Reverse the national trend of fewer children walking or biking to school Alleviate barriers that prevent.
Safe Routes to School Basics April Morrison-Harke SR2S Contracts Coordinator
Environmental Justice (EJ) & Community-Based Transportation Planning (CBTP) Grant Programs California Department of Transportation District 3 January 25,
Bicycle and Pedestrian Funding Overview NYS Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Council August 2, 2010 Albany, New York.
Florida’s School Crossing Guard Training (FSCGT) Program Presented by: Carol Pulley University of Florida Safety Administrator Florida School Crossing.
WalkSafe’s Approach : Five E’s Prevention Model Parent and community involvement Monroe County Public Schools Funded by SRTS infrastructure Dept of Public.
York Region’s Pedestrian and Cycling Municipal Partnership Program Presentation to 2014 Sustainable Mobility and Healthy Communities Summit ACT Canada.
Transportation Alternatives. MAP-21 & TAP MAP-21 requires the following with respect to the allocation & selection of projects: ◦TAP funds sub-allocated.
Federal Transit Administration New Starts Project Development Process
Overview of the Federal Aid Process for Transportation Projects.
Green Light-Go Program Pennsylvania’s Municipal Signal Partnership Program April 7, 2015 Daniel Farley Chief, Traffic Signal and Arterial Management Section.
Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users SAFETEA-LU Key Highway Safety Provisions Elizabeth Alicandri FHWA.
Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users SAFETEA-LU Key Safety Provisions Federal Highway Administration.
Safe Routes to School in the ATP Jeanie Ward-Waller Senior California Policy Manager Active Transportation Program Cycle 2 Caltrans District Workshops.
Safe Routes to School: An update on programs, practice and how public health is playing a role Nancy Pullen, MPH, Program Manager September 14, 2006.
Mapping the Way to Success: the Arkansas Safe Routes to School Program.
Funding Levels Similar funding levels to the Transportation Enhancement Activities under SAFETEA-LU: FY 2013: $808,760,000 FY 2014: $819,900,000 Total.
Statewide Local Agency Project Delivery Conference SAFETEA-LU: Earmarks and Federal Programs Relating to Local Agencies Travis Brouwer ODOT Federal Affairs.
Louisiana Safe Routes to School Program Department of Transportation and Development Louisiana Safe Routes to School Program The Application.
COMPLIANCE WITH GRANT IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURES TxDot Grant Fund Project.
October Prop K Strategic Plan & 5-Year Prioritization Programs Presentation to the Citizens Advisory Committee October 24, 2007.
Transportation Enhancement Funds Workshop April 19, 2004 MAG Saguaro Room.
2010 Wisconsin Safe Routes to School Funding SRTS Project Application Cycle Applications available January 2010 Applications due April 2, 2010 Approximately.
From Planning to Pouring: The Evolution of Safe Routes to School Julie Walcoff, Ohio DOT, Columbus, OH Alex Smith, Columbus Public Health, Columbus, OH.
School-based projects from a Transportation Act program.
MnDOT-ACEC Annual Conference March 5,  Capital planning and programming at MnDOT  Major considerations  A more transparent and collaborative.
Oconee County Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Kickoff Meeting Brian Laughlin Hazard Mitigation Planner Georgia Emergency.
HIGHWAY/UTILITY PROGRAM OVERVIEW ROADWAY CONFERENCE APRIL 20, 2009.
Broward Complete Streets Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) Meeting Monday August 10, 2015.
Transportation Enhancements Application Workshop Welcome!! October 3 & 4, 2012.
ADOT Multimodal Planning Division Planning Assistance for Rural Areas (PARA) Program Overview December 4, 2013.
Funding Opportunities Safe Routes to School program Approximately $1.5 million available per year Future funding is uncertain Held 5 application cycles.
Transit Revitalization Investment Districts Planning and Implementation of Act 238 of 2004 July 2006 Getting to TRID Lynn Colosi Clear View Strategies.
South East Europe Transnational Cooperation Programme Bologna, 15° June 2009 Kick-off meeting of project SARMa SEE Joint Technical Secretariat.
Local Government Section Welcome Marty Andersen ODOT Local Government Section 355 Capitol Street NE, Rm. 326 Salem, Oregon Ph:
SAFETEA-LU Section 6002 “ Efficient Environmental Reviews for Project Decisionmaking”
Safe Routes to School  First word is “Safe”  Physical fitness.  Reduced congestion.  Clean air.  A fun way to get to school.
April 9, 2011 Mike Wieszchowski, P.E., PTOE Professional Traffic Operations Engineer Road Use Planning Guidelines to Protect Your Roadways.
INTRODUCTION TO FEDERAL HIGHWAY FUNDING AND ELIGIBILITY Steve Baumann Financial Specialist (503) Mike Morrow(Field Operations Engineer) Mike.
Louisiana Safe Routes to School. Where it’s safe, get kids walking and biking Where it’s not safe, make it safe Safe Routes to School goals.
TIFIA Credit Program Overview Updated October 2012 T ransportation I nfrastructure F inance and I nnovation A ct (TIFIA)
STAKEHOLDER CALL/MEETING TO DISCUSS AND PROVIDE INPUT ON ZEV INCENTIVE PROGRAM GUIDELINES CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCES BOARD March 7,
City Leadership & Bike Edina Task Force Annual Work Session February 16 th, 2010.
Phil Pratt, PE Highway Engineer FHWA, Wyoming Division
What is a TSP? Provides City with guidance for operating and improving a multimodal transportation system Focuses on priority projects, policies, and programs.
Consolidated Funding Application Environmental Protection Fund Local Waterfront Revitalization Program Eligible Applicants Villages, towns, or cities,
Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users Advancing Safety through SAFETEA-LU Michael Halladay FHWA Office of.
TRANSPORTATION ALTERNATIVES PROGRAM 2016 Project Scoring Update Workshop.
Safety Data Initiatives in Reauthorization – What Can We Expect? Kathy Krause, FHWA Office of Safety 30 th Annual International Traffic Records Forum July.
1 Section 5310: Elderly Individuals and Individuals with Disabilities Program U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Transit Administration SAFETEA-LU.
Texas Department of Transportation Corpus Christi District U.S. 181 Harbor Bridge Project Environmental Documentation and Schematic Development Public.
Livingston County Transportation Connectivity Plan Final Report December 2013.
The Right Things to Know about Right- of-Way April 8, 2016 Tammy M. Keeley Realty Officer FHWA – AL Divisi on.
Vermont Agency of Transportation Safe Routes to School Program at [INSERT NAME OF SCHOOL] Date.
MISSOULA SCHOOL ZONE SPEED LIMITS PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE NOVEMBER, 9, 2011.
Governor’s Office of Emergency Services 1 The Governor’s Office of Emergency Services Application and Benefit Cost Analysis (BCA) Training.
Metropolitan Planning Organization Advisory Council Florida Department of TRANSPORTATION Carmen Monroy Director, Office of Policy Planning April 28, 2016.
Improvements to Stockton Street
Central Minnesota Area Transportation Partnership Primer Welcome
CONTRACT AWARD TO ALTA PLANNING AND DESIGN FOR CONSULTANT SERVICES TO CONDUCT SAFETY OUTREACH AND UPDATE THE SUGGESTED ROUTES TO SCHOOL MAPS FOR THE SAFER.
Finance Committee & City Council August 8, 2016
State Aid Programs.
Update on Route 1 Efforts Transportation Advisory Committee October 20, 2015 Leonard Wolfenstein, FCDOT Jane Rosenbaum, FCDOT Doug Miller, FCDOT Department.
Safe Routes to School John Schaefer State Coordinator.
Presentation transcript:

Safe Routes to School Program 2012 Overview New York State Department of Transportation Safe Routes to School Program

Overview SRTS Program Section 1404 of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) New York awarded $27.4m in 2008 to 70 Sponsors SAFETEA-LU Extensions provided additional funds –$24 million available Statewide, available by NYSDOT Region based on K-8 enrollment SRTS Program Oversight within NYSDOT Local Programs Bureau (LPB) New York State Department of Transportation Safe Routes to School Program

SRTS Program Overview The SRTS program is to be administered by each State’s Department of Transportation Each state is required to have a full-time Safe Routes to School coordinator position: –Each DOT Region has a part-time SRTS coordinator (RLPL) percent of program funds for non- infrastructure activities (statewide goal – not project specific) New York State Department of Transportation Safe Routes to School Program Federal Program Structure

Mary Harding, Statewide Coordinator Coordinators in each Region (RLPL) –Manage application and contract process –Liaison for project Sponsors Metropolitan Planning Organizations New York State Department of Transportation Safe Routes to School program Contacts

SRTS Program Overview The Regional Local Projects Liaison (RLPL) – Interprets regulations, manuals and guidelines – Monitoring – Completeness reviews – Consulting with NYSDOT Main Office and FHWA – Standard Federal-Aid Local Project Agreement – Periodic Program Update Meetings New York State Department of Transportation Safe Routes to School Program

SRTS Program Overview SRTS Program goals : 1.Enable and encourage children, including those with disabilities, to walk and bicycle to school; 2.Make bicycling and walking to school a safer and more appealing transportation alternative, thereby encouraging a healthy and active lifestyle from an early age; and 3.Facilitate the planning, development, and implementation of projects and activities that will improve safety and reduce traffic, fuel consumption, and air pollution in the vicinity of schools. New York State Department of Transportation Safe Routes to School Program

SRTS Guidebook New York State Department of Transportation Safe Routes to School Program Guidebook Program Information Sponsor expectations Eligible costs How to apply Timeline and Expectations

SRTS Program – The 5 E’s SRTS efforts focus on five components, often referred to as the “5E’s”. The 5 E’s are: A.Engineering B.Education C.Enforcement D.Encouragement E.Evaluation New York State Department of Transportation Safe Routes to School Program

SRTS Program – The 5 E’s Engineering Pedestrian and bicycle crossing improvements Pavement markings, signs and signals Sidewalk improvements On and off street bicycle facilities and parking Traffic calming New York State Department of Transportation Safe Routes to School Program

SRTS Program – The 5 E’s Education School assemblies Implementation of education curriculum Safety events and activities Efforts to teach safety and promote walking and bicycling to school New York State Department of Transportation Safe Routes to School Program

SRTS Program – The 5 E’s Enforcement Law enforcement partnerships Crossing Guard Program Vehicle Speed Feedback Safety Patrols New York State Department of Transportation Safe Routes to School Program

SRTS Program – The 5 E’s Encouragement Walk to School Day activities Promote walking and bicycling Complementary activities to Education New York State Department of Transportation Safe Routes to School Program

SRTS Program – The 5 E’s Evaluation Review and Evaluation –Safety benefits –Behavioral changes –Student participation –Surveys (required) New York State Department of Transportation Safe Routes to School Program

SRTS Program Overview SRTS Program funds should supplement, rather than supplant, current funding streams that support bicycling and walking Existing state and local bicycle and pedestrian safety programs should be sustained and coordinated with the Federal SRTS program Existing program receiving Federal SRTS funds must satisfy the requirement and purpose of the SRTS program New York State Department of Transportation Safe Routes to School Program Supplement Existing Programs

Section 2 Project Eligibility New York State Department of Transportation Safe Routes to School program

Project Location Guidebook provides details Infrastructure projects must be: –within the public right-of-way Includes lands owned by public school districts or individual public schools* (if open to the public) –within a two mile radius of a primary or middle school (K-8) Schools with grades that extend higher than Grade 8, but include K-8, are eligible –a logical connection from homes to school New York State Department of Transportation Safe Routes to School program New York State Department of Transportation Safe Routes to School program

Project Location Infrastructure project sponsors must –Design and construct to State Highway Design Standards –Obtain authorization from NYSDOT if work is proposed on a State Roadway A Highway Work Permit is required: Start coordination early New York State Department of Transportation Safe Routes to School program New York State Department of Transportation Safe Routes to School program

Must Benefit the Public Interest Infrastructure projects funded under the SRTS program must be accessible to the public Joint public / private projects – SRTS funds are limited to use within the public ROW Infrastructure funds may only be used to support the intended purpose of the program, (e.g. initiatives which promote safety, or bicycling and walking to school) New York State Department of Transportation Safe Routes to School program

Ineligible Expenses Maintenance and operation expenses (e.g. sweeping, snow & ice removal, etc) Crossing guard or law enforcement salaries (salaries for first two years only) Projects that reorganize pickup and drop-off areas near bus stops Improvements to bus stops Bus safety education programs New York State Department of Transportation Safe Routes to School program

Ineligible Expenses Any costs incurred prior to Federal authorization approval (e.g. Application preparation) Acquisition and purchase of ROW Work conducted outside of the public ROW Any activities that do not specifically promote the stated purpose of the SRTS program Reoccurring expenses New York State Department of Transportation Safe Routes to School program

Must Benefit the Public Interest The Failure to comply with SRTS Program and Federal requirements may result in the repayment of all or a portion of the Federal funds received for the project. New York State Department of Transportation Safe Routes to School program This includes regular reporting of project status to the Regional Coordinator and progressing the project in a reasonable timeframe.

Safe Routes to School Guidebook Procedures for Locally Administered Federal-Aid Projects (PLAFAP) –Referred to as “The Manual” – Regional Safe Routes to School Coordinator New York State Department of Transportation Safe Routes to School program Resources and Tools

Section 3 Roles and Responsibilities of the Sponsor, Applicant, & NYSDOT New York State Department of Transportation Safe Routes to School program

Sponsor/Applicant Each infrastructure project must have a municipal sponsor – County, City, Town or Village –School Districts may partner with a municipality as an Applicant Non-Infrastructure projects may be sponsored by a school, school district or municipality. New York State Department of Transportation Safe Routes to School program

Sponsor/Applicant All Sponsors must have –Knowledge of federal process: Federal Aid 101 Uniform Act SRTS specific rules NYSDOT will enter into a formal agreement with each sponsor prior to project implementation New York State Department of Transportation Safe Routes to School program

Sponsor The sponsor must be willing to assume responsibility for all aspects of an approved SRTS project, including –Development and Implementation –Compliance with federal requirements –First instance project costs Infrastructure projects must be sponsored by a municipality New York State Department of Transportation Safe Routes to School program

Applicant A project applicant may be: – A county, city, town or village – A public school district – A charter, private or parochial school – A not-for-profit organization The applicant and sponsor should: –Clearly describe both the sponsor – applicant responsibilities (i.e. resolution or agreement) –Agreement /resolution must be in place prior to initiating any SRTS work New York State Department of Transportation Safe Routes to School program

NYSDOT NYSDOT engineering and landscape architecture services –Request and cost estimates must be included in your application –Counts toward maximum amount requested Services include: –Preparing design approval documents –Preparing final Plans, Specifications, & Estimate (PS&E) package and contract bid documents –Compliance with the NEPA process New York State Department of Transportation Safe Routes to School program

Section 4 Financing Projects New York State Department of Transportation Safe Routes to School program

General Information The SRTS Program is a reimbursement program, not a grant program The SRTS program will reimburse for 100 percent of eligible costs: – No local match is required – SRTS program monies cannot be used as a match for other fund sources New York State Department of Transportation Safe Routes to School program

General Information The SRTS program has maximum project participation limits is: – Infrastructure maximum fixed total cost; $500,000 – Non-infrastructure maximum fixed total cost; $150,000 – The maximum amount for combined infrastructure and non- infrastructure projects is $650,000 New York State Department of Transportation Safe Routes to School program

General Information NYSDOT expects each SRTS project to be delivered in compliance with the approved scope SRTS funding for a project is capped at approval All proposed modifications to the scope of a project must be approved by the NYSDOT New York State Department of Transportation Safe Routes to School program

Project Progress Information Every SRTS project is expected to progress through development in a reasonable time frame –All work complete within 5 years of award for Non- Infrastructure and Infrastructure projects –Timeline is noted in the Guidebook. Be sure you can comply with the process and the steps before applying The failure to deliver SRTS project within a reasonable time frame may result in a withdrawal or repayment of Federal funds for the project. New York State Department of Transportation Safe Routes to School program

Project Progress Information Implementation expectations for SRTS Infrastructure project include: – The NYSDOT and Sponsor agreement (State-Local Agreement) is to be (locally) executed within 3 months of the project award funding approval – Sponsor should complete the development and design work within 18 months of project award and funding approval – The total project is to be completed within 5 years of funding award New York State Department of Transportation Safe Routes to School program

Private Property and Facilities Where private investment of joint-use activities are part of the proposed SRTS project: – SRTS funds are limited to the portion of the project that benefits the public interest – Privately owned or commercially used portions of a project must be paid for with private investment New York State Department of Transportation Safe Routes to School program

Section 5 Project Selection Process New York State Department of Transportation Safe Routes to School program

Project Rating Criteria 1.Evaluation of Proposed Safety Benefits 2.Cost effective/high impact solutions 3.Comprehensive proposal 4.Community outreach and support 5.Relationship to the 5 E’s 6.Sponsor Prior Performance with Federal Aid 7.Proposed Schedule and Budget Accuracy New York State Department of Transportation Safe Routes to School program

May 2012Program Announcement May-June SRTS Information Workshops August 31Pre-Submission Review Deadline October 5Application Deadline Oct – NovRegional Review Process NovemberMain Office Final Review December Announce Awards New York State Department of Transportation Safe Routes to School program Timeline

Regional Review Committee – MPO – NYSDOT – FHWA – Partner Agencies – Advocates Review and Rank Applications using Rater’s Guide Recommendations to Main Office Review by Commissioner Announce Awards by December 2012 New York State Department of Transportation Safe Routes to School program Review Process

Questions?

Thank You for Your Interest in the Safe Routes to School Program! Mary Harding Statewide Safe Routes to School Coordinator NYSDOT Main Office, Albany, NY Phone: (518)