AN INTRODUCTION TO TRANSPORTATION PLANNING IN MONTANA Joint Engineers Conference 1 11/07/2014

1

AN INTRODUCTION TO TRANSPORTATION PLANNING IN MONTANA

Joint Engineers Conference11/07/2014

2 Introduction

Helena, MT

3

Goals of Presentation

Provide an overview of the transportation planning process

Review Montana communities that have and use LRTPs

Briefly discuss “lessons learned” for LRTP development in Montana’s small- and medium-sizes communities

4

About the Presenter

Jeff Key, P.E. 20 years of experience Large, comprehensive LRTP

projects Recently completed the Great Falls

Area Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP)

Currently leading the update to the Greater Helena Area LRTP

Registered professional engineer in MT, ID, OR and WA

Source: Fort Peck Reservoir

5 General Overview

Great Falls, MT

6

Why Develop LRTPs?

Identify needs, constraints and opportunities

Develop projects and justify expenditures

Respond to increasing public interest in transportation matters

Correlate land use decisions to transportation impacts

Mandated for MPOs! Greater than 50,000 in population

7

Federal Guidance (MAP-21) Metropolitan Planning Organizations

MPO minimum population more than 50,000

Update LRTP every 4 years in non-attainment areas and areas under a maintenance plan

In other areas, update on a 5-year cycle

Covers a minimum 20-year planning horizon, with air quality conformity and fiscal constraint

Public involvement remains a hallmark of the process

TIP updated every 4 years in conjunction with LRTP adoption

Significant provisions include………

8

State Guidance Non-Metropolitan Planning Organizations

No fiscal constraint requirement

No freight, security or environmental mitigation requirement

No air quality conformity determination

Yes to identification of issues

Yes to development of recommendations

Generally update every 10 years as a guideline

Public involvement remains a hallmark of the planning process

Similarities to MPO’s, but………

9

State GuidanceNon-Metropolitan Planning Organizations

Existing and projected conditions analysis Needs based

Address quantifiable issues Rely on local land use planning Comprehensive safety analysis

Focusing on Four E’s Link to Montana’s Comprehensive Highway

Safety Plan (CHSP) Robust public outreach

10

Montana’s Urban AreasGreater than 5,000 People

Anaconda Great Falls * Livingston Belgrade Hamilton Miles City Billings * Havre Missoula * Bozeman *

6,170 65,207 8,172 13,797 6,182 9,604 114,773 9,657 82,157 43,164

Urban Area / Cluster Population – 2010 Census

* Current MPO

* Year 2020 MPO?

Yes LRTP

11

Montana’s Urban AreasGreater than 5,000 People

Helena * Sidney Butte Kalispell Whitefish Columbia Falls Laurel Glendive Lewistown

45,055 5,438 30,287 31,785 6,300 6,029 8,505 6,494 6,090

Urban Area / Cluster Population – 2010 Census

* Year 2020 MPO?

Yes LRTP

12 Overview of Transportation Planning

Laurel, MT

13

Transportation Planning Process

INVENTORY the existing transportation system

ANALYZE data to determine performance

FORECAST future conditions

EVALUATE existing and projected conditions to determine recommendations

EXISTING

FUTURE

14

Transportation Planning Process

Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Strategies

Alternative Travel Modes (Bicycle/Pedestrian/Transit)

Traffic Calming Measures

Corridor Preservation and Access Management Guidelines

Roadway Typical Sections

Source: Great Falls Area LRTP - 2014


15

Study Area Boundary

Develop Study Area Boundary Include all outlying land expected to develop

Include areas expected to impact or influence the regional community and growth needs

20-year planning horizon

Consider previous and anticipated land use changes

16

Review and Collect Data and Reports Existing traffic data Collect turning movement

count data Assemble historic crash data

Five-year period Collect geometric data Complete pavement

condition inventory Review recent and on-going

relevant planning documents

Source: Laurel LRTP - 2014

17

Identify Goals and Objectives

Provides guidance for the LRTP

Review / reaffirm with the public

Correlate to eight planning factors contained in Title 23 USC 134

Also HUD/EPA/USDOT FTA Livability Principles

MA

P-2

1 P

lan

nin

g F

acto

rs

1 Support the economic vitality of the metropolitan area, especially by enabling global competitiveness, productivity, and efficiency.

2 Increase the safety of the transportation system for motorized and non-motorized users.

3 Increase the security of the transportation system for motorized and non-motorized users.

4 Increase the accessibility and mobility of people and for freight.

5

Protect and enhance the environment, promote energy conservation, improve the quality of life, and promote consistency between transportation improvements and State and local planned growth and economic development patterns.

6 Enhance the integration and connectivity of the transportation system, across and between modes, people and freight.

7 Promote efficient system management and operation.

8 Emphasize the preservation of the existing transportation system.

Liv

abili

ty P

rin

cip

les

1 Provide more transportation choices.

2 Promote equitable, affordable housing.

3 Enhance economic competitiveness.

4 Support existing communities.

5 Coordinate policies and leverage investment.

6 Value communities and neighborhoods.


18

Socioeconomic and Land Use Forecasts

Develop socioeconomic and land use data Forecast population,

housing, and employment Where will housing & jobs

go? Existing business and

employment information important for baseline TransCad model

26T

H S

T S

FLO

OD

RD

C EN TR AL AVE W

RAINBOW DAM RDGIANT SPRINGS RD

8TH AVE N

SMELTER AVE

24TH AVE S

BO

OT

LEG

GE

R T

R

3 1S

T S

T S

W

36TH AVE NE

18TH AVE N

33R

D S

T S

SUN RIVER RD

4TH

ST

S

46T

H S

T S

PARK GARDEN RD

8TH

ST

NE

UP

PE

R R

IVE

R R

D

6TH

ST

NW

52N

DS

T N

WILSON

BUTTE RD

MC IVER RD

RIVERVIEW DR E

40T

H S

T S

W

5THAVE SW

20T

H S

T S

20T

H S

T S

W

53RD AVE SW

13TH AVE S

14T

H S

T S

W

FO

X F

AR

M R

D

39T

H S

T S

9TH

ST

NW

ST

ON

EG

ATE

RD

BLACK

EAGLE RD

PARK D

R N

DICK ROAD

3 4T

H S

T N

W

17TH AVE S

32N

D S

T S

7TH AVE N

40TH AVE S

33RD AVE S

TRI HILL FRONTAGERD

CENTRAL AVE

3RD AVE S

DIVIS ION

RD 6T

H S

T N

E

26T

H S

T S

N RIVER RD

5TH

ST

S

FO

X F

AR

M R

DAIRPO

RT R

D

LO

WE

R R

IVE

R R

D

2 ND

ST

S

2ND AVE S

14T

H S

T S

W

SMELTER AVE

VAUGHN S FRONTAGE RD

38T

H S

T N

13T

H S

T S

6TH

ST

NW

RI VE

RD

RS

6TH

ST

S

55THAVE S

25T

H S

T S

1ST AVE S

VAUGHNR

D

VAUGHN RD

9TH

ST

S

14T

H S

T S

15T

H S

T S

CENTRAL AVE W

9TH

ST

N

RIVER DR N

57T

H S

T N

6TH

ST

SW

NW BYPASS

10TH AVE S

2ND AVE N

3RD

ST

NW

1ST AVE N

FLOOD RD

3 8T

H S

T S

57T

H S

T S

OLD

HA

VR

E H

WY

26T

H S

T N

25T

H S

T N

15T

H S

T N

14T

H S

T N

315

15

87

87

89

2003

225

330

226

228

227

15

Malmstrom AirForce Base

Great FallsInternational Airport

Misso

uriRiver

Sun Rive r

100

670

250

325

750

50

100

100

200

250

50

100140

200

70

300

100

300

100

200

200

60

115

100

50

100

200

20

50

200

100

50

50

50

10

70 35

30

60

Map Legend

City Boundary

Study Area

*An additional 1,130 housing units were allocatedoutside of the study area.

0 1 2 30.5Miles

Future Housing Allocation*50


19

Travel Demand Modeling

Initial model run includes the “no build” model Analyze results on a

network-wide basis Identify specific locations

with capacity-related deficiencies or opportunities


20

Existing and Projected Conditions Analysis

Identify traffic-related problems

Operational conditions for major intersections

Levels of service

Assess crash data

Examine safety from a proactive, rather than a reactive, manner

Results provide direction to the planning process

90

212

310

212

532

LaurelMunicipal

Airport

LaurelGolf Club

Montana Fish,Wildlife

and Parks

US Bureauof Land

Management

MontanaState Trust

Lands

Yellowston

e Riv er

Yellowstone R

iver

ClarksForkYellowston

e River

S 1

ST

AV

E

E MAIN ST

S 5

6TH

ST

W

WO

LD

RD

19T

H A

VE

W

OLD HIGHWAY 10 W

S FRONTAGE R

D

YA

RD

OF

FIC

E R

D

W 12TH ST

LAU

RE

L NO

RT

H R

D

SH

AY

RO

AD

LAUREL AIRPORT ROAD

W RAILROAD ST

8TH

AV

E

1ST

AV

E

W MAIN STE RAILROAD ST

E MARYLAND LN

SHANNON RD

US H

IGHW

AY 212 S

W MARYLAND LN

GO

LF

CO

UR

SE

RD

SE

ITZ

RO

NA

N R

D

S 7

2ND

ST

W

S 6

4TH

ST

W

DANFORD RD DANFORD RD

RUDIO RD

DU

CK

CR

EE

K R

D

W 6TH ST E 6TH ST

W 9TH ST

FRANK RD

S 8

TH

AV

E

SE 4TH STC F

B B

B C

B D

B B

B B

B D

C C

C C

E D

B B

A B

0 10.5Miles

Map Legend

Study Area

County Boundary

Railroad

City Boundary

Principal Arterial

Collector

Local

Interstate

Minor Arterial

A, B, C, D, E, F = Existing LOS

Signalized Intersection

AM PMA C

Unsignalized Intersection

AM PMC D

90

212

310

212

532

LaurelMunicipal

Airport

LaurelGolf Club

Montana Fish,Wildlife

and Parks

US Bureauof Land

Management

MontanaState Trust

Lands

Yellowston

e River

Yellowstone Ri

ver

ClarksForkYellowston

e River

S 1

ST

AV

E

E MAIN ST

S 5

6TH

ST

W

WO

LD

RD

19T

H A

VE

W

OLD HIGHWAY 10 W

S FRONTA

GE RD

YA

RD

OF

FIC

E R

D

W 12TH ST

LAU

RE

L NO

RTH

RD

SH

AY

RO

AD

LAUREL AIRPORT ROAD

W RAILROAD ST

8TH

AV

E

1ST

AV

E

W MAIN STE RAILROAD ST

E MARYLAND LN

SHANNON RD

US HIGHW

AY 212 S

W MARYLAND LN

GO

LF

CO

UR

SE

RD

SE

ITZ

RO

NA

N R

D

S 7

2ND

ST

W

S 6

4TH

ST

W

DANFORD RD DANFORD RD

RUDIO RD

DU

CK

CR

EE

K R

D

W 6TH ST E 6TH ST

W 9TH ST

FRANK RD

S 8

TH

AV

E

SE 4TH ST

0 10.5Miles

Map Legend

Study Area

County Boundary

Railroad

City Boundary

*Jan 01, 2008 to Dec 31, 2012

Crashes per 500x500 ft grid*

1 - 2

3 - 5

6 - 10

11 - 20

21 - 31



Non-Motorized Mode Share

21

Source: Greater Helena Area LRTP - 2014

Non-Motorized Mode Share

22

The National Household Transportation Survey indicates:

For every bike commute trip, there are:

1.6 other utilitarian trips

0.5 bike to school trips

4.8 social/recreational trips

Meaning: overall bike mode share is likely much higher than just the measured commute mode share.


Types of Bicycle Facilities

23

Paved Shoulder

Canyon Ferry Road



24

Shared Roadways (urban and rural conditions)

Lewis & Clark County, MT

Helena, MT



25

Bike Lanes

Canyon Ferry Road



26

Buffered Bike Lanes

Billings, MT



27

Shared Use Paths

Custer Avenue



28

Cycle Track

Missoula, MT

Missoula, MT Source: Greater Helena Area LRTP - 2014


29

Bicycle Boulevards Pavement markings Wayfinding Potential for:

Flipping stop signs Volume management Speed management


30

Transit Analysis

Review existing transit documents and data

Review existing transit system and ridership

Identify transit needs Develop transit

recommendations Develop transit

improvement cost estimates Identify transit funding

sources

Source: Mountain Line Transit website (accessed 09/30/2014)

Source: Mountain Line Transit website (accessed 09/30/2014)

31

Alternative Network Modeling and Assessment

Examine possible alterations to network

Test effectiveness of: Individual major projects or

policies Groups of similar projects Network-wide investment

strategies Alternative growth projections

Review, post-process and evaluate model run results and report the findings

PROSPECT AVE

CEDAR ST

N M

ON

TAN

A AV

E

11TH AVE

PROSPECT AVE

EUCLID AVE

YORK RD

LYNDALE AVE

LAST

CHA

NCE

GUL

CH

CAR

TER

DR

11TH AVE

YORK RD

W MAIN ST

LAM

BOR

N S

T

CUSTER AVE

6TH AVE

COLONIAL DR

AIRPORT RD

N M

ONT

ANA

AVE

PARK A

VE

HAUSER BLVD

SADDLE DR

WAS

HIN

GTO

N S

T

NEILL AVE

CANYON FERRY RD

HEND

ERSO

N ST

CRUSE

AVE

HELENA AVE

BEN

TON

AVE

GR

EEN

MEA

DO

W D

R

S M

ON

TAN

A AV

E

OR

OFI

NO

GUL

CH

RD

SKYWAY DR

BROADWAY BROADWAY

WINNE AVE

GOLD RUSH AVE

CAL I

FOR N

IA

DAVI

S ST

RODN

EY S

T

CUSTER AVE

MC

HUG

H LN

VILL

ARD

AVE

COLE AVE

MILL RD

FRANKLIN MINE RD

COUNTRY CLUB LN

HEA D

LN

PEOSTA AVE

BRADY ST

JOSL

YN S

T

GRA

NIT

E ST

WIL L IAM

S S T

KELLEHER D

R

BELT VIEW DR

SADD

LE DR

SA ND

E RS ST

STATE ST

LAWRENCE ST

NATION

AL AVE RAILROAD AVE

POPLAR ST

ROBER

TS ST

HARRIS STPHOENIX AVE

CHESTNUT ST

VALL

EY D

R

Floweree Dr

Sevenmile C reek

Prickly Pear Creek

Tenmil e Cree k

15

287

12

454

430

231

280

15

Helena Regional Airport

MT Helena Park

Bill RobertsGolf Course

CentennialPark

Siebel Soccer ComplexRyan Park

L&C CountyFairgrounds

Mount Ascension

Alt-1Alt-2

Alt-3

Alt-4

Alt-5

Alt-6

Alt-7

Alt-8

Alt-9

Alt-10

0 0.5 10.25Miles

Map Legend

Helena City Limits

Park Lands


32

Freight Considerations

Assess overall goods movement

Identify major truck/rail freight

destinations, hubs, and travel routes

Analyze roadway system for trucks

MAP-21 also has significant implications for freight planning Freight projects formally identified are eligible

to compete for funding in the Freight Project of National and Regional Significance Program

Projects must be identified in state freight plans to compete for this funding

Inclusion in local LRTPs is an obvious first step to consideration for the state freight plan

Source: Montana Freight Value by Mode (2007, Billions of U.S. Dollars)

33

Security Considerations

Spatial analysis to assess system redundancy, capacity, and related factors

Ability to effectively respond to natural and man-made disasters

Identify policies or longer term investment suggestions

Hazard No.

Hazard Name Occurrence Probability

Primary Risk Factors

1 Winter storm Medium Widespread isolated people and livestock

2 Wind Event High Life safety and property damage

3 Flood / Dam Failure

Medium Life safety and property damage

4 Communication Failure

Low Life safety and disruption of response coordination

5 Earthquake Low Widespread structural collapse people entrapped

6 HAZMAT transportation

High Toxic environment for people near incident

7 Utility failure electric / gas

Medium Widespread disruption and life safety

8 Transportation motor vehicle

High Life safety

9 HAZMAT fixed facility

High Large amounts of toxic materials

10 Transportation air Low Mass casualty for commercial carrier

11 Transportation rail

Low Life safety

Source: Great Falls Area LRTP (March 17, 2014)

34

Environmental Mitigation

MAP-21 requires environmental mitigation opportunities Requires coordination & outreach with

federal, state and local agencies

List of potential environmental mitigation methods and opportunities

Mitigation measures may include: Avoidance Minimizing impacts by limiting scope Rehabilitating or restoring the affected

environment Compensating for the impact by

replacing or providing substitute resources

Possible Mitigation Measures or Actions

Potential Information Sources

Agencies to Consult

Noise

Sound-dampening walls, earthen berms, and/or buffering landscaping.

Soundproofing structures at impacted noise-sensitive uses.

Low-noise pavements.

Relocation of impacted uses.

Innovative design features (depressed roadways) to reduce impacts.

Implement local land use planning measures to help avoid development of new noise sensitive uses in proximity to transportation corridors.

Federal Highway Administration – Noise Guidance:http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/noise/

Montana Department of Transportation – Traffic Noise Analysis and Abatement Policy:http://www.mdt.mt.gov/business/contracting/docs/npolicy-2011.pdf

Montana Department of Transportation Environmental Services BureauPO Box 200507Helena, MT 59620-0507406-444-7659


http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/noise/

http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/noise/

http://www.mdt.mt.gov/business/contracting/docs/npolicy-2011.pdf



35

Other Considerations

Corridor Preservation

Traffic Calming

Typical Sections

Transportation Demand Management Strategies

Livability and Context Sensitive Design

Source: Greater Bozeman Area LRTP – 2007 Update

36

Develop Recommendations and Major Street Network

Transportation System Management (TSM) improvements

Major Street Network (MSN) improvements

Develop engineering and construction cost estimates

Complete final model run for the 20-year planning horizon

Source: Greater Bozeman Area LRTP – 2007 Update

37

Air Quality Conformity Determination

Air quality conformity determination

Limited maintenance plan

Attainment areas Non-attainment areas

Travel demand modeling Air quality emissions

modeling Review air quality

regulations and documentation

Transportation-related criteria pollutants may include the following:

• Ozone• Carbon monoxide (CO), • Nitrogen dioxide (NO2), • Particles with an aerodynamic diameter less

than or equal to a nominal 10 micrometers (PM10); and

• Particles with an aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to a nominal 2.5 micrometers (PM2.5)


38

Transportation Funding

Evaluate transportation funding mechanisms Federal and state gas tax revenue, impact fees,

transportation bond issues, local option gas taxes, etc.

Prepare order-of-magnitude forecasts

Review peer communities and innovative funding approaches

Demonstrate fiscal constraint

39

Transportation Funding

Funding Source

Current Account Balance

Current Annual Allocation

(2014)

Projected Annual Allocation(per year)

Revenue Projection

2025

Revenue Projection

2035

NHPP – NH, IM 0 $ 2,792,000 $ 2,800,000 $ 30,800,000 $ 58,800,000

HSIP Safety* 0 $ 500,000 $ 500,000 $ 5,500,000 $ 10,500,000

STPU – Urban $ 1,500,000 $ 1,430,000 $ 1,430,000 $ 15,730,000 $ 30,030,000

STPS – Secondary* 0 $ 267,000 $ 267,000 $ 11,416,553 $ 5,607,000

STP – Bridge* 0 $ 1,773,000 $ 1,773,000 $ 19,503,000 $ 37,233,000

UPP – Preservation* 0 $ 1,392,000 $ 1,392,000 $ 15,312,000 $ 29,232,000

TA $ 674,770 $ 200,000 $ 200,000 $ 2,200,000 $ 4,200,000

MACI - CMAQ $ 200,000 $ 1,043,000 $ 1,043,000 $ 11,473,000 $ 21,903,000

Operations & Maintenance (State)

$ 1,652,600 $ 1,653,000 $ 18,183,000 $ 34,713,000

Operations & Maintenance (Local)

$ 376,100 $ 377,000 $ 4,147,000 $ 7,917,000

State Fuel Tax (City) $ 993,170 $ 1,000,000 $ 11,000,000 $ 21,000,000

State Fuel Tax (County) $ 200,920 $ 201,000 $ 2,211,000 $ 4,221,000

FTA Sec. 5307 $ 1,347,594 $ 1,150,000 $ 12,650,000 $ 24,150,000

FTA Sec. 5310 $ 125,000 $ 125,000 $ 1,375,000 $ 2,625,000

FTA Sec. 5339 $ 273,474 $ 275,000 $ 3,025,000 $ 5,775,000

Other (Private, Bonds, TIF, CBDG, etc.)Local Transit Mill Levy

$ 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 16,500,000 $ 31,500,000

TOTAL $ 181,025,553 $ 329,406,000


40

Report Preparation

All aspects of the planning process

Address all of the issues identified during the process

List all of the recommended projects and programs

Administrative draft, public draft, and final versions (for adoption)

41

Public Participation

Educate the public on critical elements of the transportation system;

Respond to increasing interest of the general public to participate in planning of the community; and

Increase the public’s investment in the LRTP

42 Lessons Learned

Helena, MT

43

Lessons Learned

Emphasize role of public in strategic visioning

Embrace emerging topics: Livability and sustainability Climate change Transit, pedestrian and bicyclists Security

Need strong local land use policies

44

Lessons Learned

Make sure local elected officials are involved throughout!

Use all tools available for public engagement Facebook Twitter Website Newsletters

Look to Federal regulations to instigate action

45

Questions or comments Follow-up: Jeff Key (406) 447-5000

Conclusion / Questions

Documents

AN INTRODUCTION TO TRANSPORTATION PLANNING IN MONTANA Joint Engineers Conference 1 11/07/2014