Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL
CALIFORNIA NETWORK
MARCH MEETING
MARCH 28, 2013 9AM
Meeting agendas and materials:
saferoutescalifornia.wordpress.com/category/get -
involved/agendas/state/
Jeanie Ward-Waller, California Advocacy Organizer
MARCH AGENDA
1. Welcome and technology
2. Monthly Update from the SRTS Technical Assistance Resource
Center - Kendra Bridges (CA Department of Public Health)
3. Highway Safety Improvement Program: funding opportunity for
SRTS projects - Ted Davini (Caltrans Safety Program Coordinator)
4. Upcoming Events – Healthy by Design: Creating
Neighborhoods that Promote Wellness – Sarah de Guia
(California Pan-Ethnic Health Network)
5. Update on proposed state program changes and impact to
SRTS - Jeanie Ward-Waller (SRTSNP)
6. Announcements, next meeting
Open or hide your control panel Join audio: • Choose “Telephone” and dial-
in using numbers on screen OR • Choose “Mic & Speakers” to
use your computer’s sound
AUDIO
Submit your text questions and comments using the Questions Panel Technical difficulties [email protected]
QUESTIONS & COMMENTS
TARC UPDATE
Kendra Bridges, Project Coordinator
SRTS Technical Assistance Resource Center (CDPH)
Welcome Kendra!
Access the TARC monthly update:
Saferoutescalifornia.wordpress.com
Click State Network > Meeting Agendas
Click on the link for TARC monthly update in the March meeting
agenda
SRTS IN THE HSIP CALL
FOR PROJECTS
Ted Davini, Safety Program Coordinator
Caltrans Division of Local Assistance
More info:
TARC website
http://www.casaferoutestoschool.org/
Dawn Foster, SRTS/SR2S Coordinator
1
Planning for SRTS funding in 2013
◦ Existing SRTS Projects that meet SRTS Delivery Requirements will continue to be funded
◦ Not anticipating another SRTS Call for Projects in 2013
Bike and Pedestrian improvements competed well in past cycles of HSIP!
◦ Funding for a new call for projects specific to SRTS will be contingent on outcome of state budget process
◦ In the mean time, HSIP Cycle 6 is an opportunity for funding safety needs in school zones!
8
◦ Bike and Pedestrian Safety Infrastructure Improvements are eligible, but HSIP projects are selected based on a data driven process to reduce fatalities and serious injuries.
◦ A Benefit/Cost criteria is used for project selection in HSIP.
◦ Under MAP-21, HSIP Program also must be aligned with the State’s Strategic Highway Safety Plan.
◦ SRTS Project funded with HSIP funds does not follow federal regulations for SRTS, but follows HSIP regulations
◦ A local match of 10% is required for HSIP
10
◦ Stand-alone non-infrastructure projects are not eligible for Cycle 6 HSIP funding
◦ Safety Education, Enforcement, and Emergency Medical Services are expected to be eligible costs in an infrastructure application under HSIP Cycle 6
11
B/C (Benefit/Cost): calculation that utilizes the CRF, Crashes, Severity of Crash, Crash Costs, the Expected Service Life of the Improvement and compares it to the overall cost of the project. The higher the B/C, the more competitive the project.
See Local Roadway Safety Manual for more details: http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LocalPrograms/HSIP/safetymanual-2012-04-22.pdf
14
SRTS Project is developed through typical HSIP Approach – (See page 13 of LRSM)
Project improvement(s) are at crash location(s)
May include a spot location in school zone or multiple school zone locations
View Examples of Cycle 5 Successful Applications at: http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LocalPrograms/HSIP/prepare4nextcall.html
19
Evaluate crash data within school zones.
Consider pedestrian crossings or other locations that tend to have more pedestrian or bicycle type crashes
Then review other potential “school crossings” or pedestrian crossing locations, that would benefit from same improvement/countermeasure
20
This approach is considered “systemic”
Analyzing similar roadway characteristics or conditions and applying same improvements/countermeasures at other similar locations would be considered a more “proactive” approach to roadway safety
Goal: Prevent collisions before they occur by identifying crash potential based on collision history of similar “high risk” roadway characteristics
21
This approach may be appropriate for SRTS projects already planned and prioritized!
35
Pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure needs within school zones are not restricted by distance to school or by school type
Strategies may still include School Route Planning, SRTS Plans, Walkability Studies, Parent Surveys
Crash Data is Important! Local Agency crash data or UC Berkeley TIMS website: SRTS Maps and B/C Calculator (more information to follow)
This funding cycle will be the first time HSIP funds a comprehensive safety approach in a single project!
53
Local Agency safety practitioners are best resource for analysis of their entire roadway network to determine the scope of work on their local safety projects.
What does this mean for SRTS? A strong partnership with the local agency Engineer – typically the Traffic Engineer/Safety Specialist is important!
54
Official Call is planned to start in early-April 2013
• Using Cyc-6 Guidelines, Application and other documents
• Start Now! Call only allows 3 months to prepare & submit apps
Largest Call: Up to $150 million in Fed Funds
• Looking for multiple applications from each agency!
• Greater of: $3M or 2 x the agency’s population ratio
HR3 projects are still eligible and needed
• MAP-21 includes special rule: CA to obligate $17.6M
Cities, Counties and Tribal Governments
• Cannot have a Delivery Flag at the time apps are due
Selection will be based entirely on B/C ratios
• Flawed applications will be rejected!
http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LocalPrograms/hsip.htm 56
Q&A from March 11 Caltrans HSIP/SRTS:
http://www.casaferoutestoschool.org/
64
UPCOMING CONVENINGS – HEALTHY BY
DESIGN: CREATING NEIGHBORHOODS
THAT PROMOTE WELLNESS
Sarah de Guia, Director of Government Affairs
California Pan-Ethnic Health Network
ABOUT THE CONVENING
Organized by CPEHN and ChangeLab Solutions
Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) updating the
state's general plan guidelines - Staff from OPR will be in
attendance
Discussion topics:
• Connection between community planning and health
• Local community best practices - health in general plans
• Ideas for Office of Planning and Research
MORE DETAILS
• April 4, 2013 - Oakland, The California Endowment, 1111
Broadway, 7th Floor, 9:30 am to 2:00 pm
• April 9, 2013 - Fresno, United Way of Fresno County, 4949
East Kings Canyon Road, 9:30 am to 2:00 pm
• April 15, 2013 - Los Angeles, The California Endowment,
1000 North Alameda Street, 9:30 am to 2:00 pm
• April 16, 2013 - San Diego, Sherman Heights Community
Center, 2258 Island Avenue, 9:30 am to 2:00 pm
Registration: $25 (General Public), $10 (CPEHN Network)
Continental breakfast and lunch provided.
Scholarships available!
More info: www.cpehn.org/
UPDATE – PROPOSED STATE
PROGRAM CHANGES AND
SRTS IMPACT
Jeanie Ward-Waller, California Advocacy Organizer
Safe Routes to School National Partnership
OVERVIEW
• Governor’s proposal - Active Transportation
Program
• SRTS impact
• Recent updates
• AB-1194: Safe Routes to School bill
GOVERNOR’S BUDGET –
ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION
PROGRAM (ATP)
• Announced in November, released in Governor’s budget on
Jan 10 and budget trailer bill on Feb 1
• New focus on active transportation, future funding, and SB375
• Consolidates 5 programs into $134M pot:
• Safe Routes to School (state – SR2S)
• Safe Routes to School (federal – SRTS)
• Transportation Alternatives (federal)
• Bicycle Transportation Account (state)
• Environmental Enhancement and Mitigation (state)
• 40/60 regional/state control of funds
• California Transportation Commission will set guidelines
• Cuts staff at Caltrans from 8 to 3 on active transportation
ATP – IMPACT TO SAFE
ROUTES TO SCHOOL
• Safe Routes to School projects eligible for regional and state
grants
• Compete with other ATP project eligibilities
• State SRTS Coordinator eliminated
• Scoring and selection process unknown:
• Lower-income schools?
• Community engagement process?
• % of funding?
• % to non-infrastructure?
• TARC?
ATP - RECENT UPDATES
• Budget reviewed in subcommittees on transportation
• March 13 and 14 hearings
• Deb Hubsmith on panel for Assembly hearing
• Public comments in support of SRTS, equity, health
• Senate budget subcommittee – strong support
• Administration and statewide orgs will meet in April
Next decision point: Governor’s revised budget in mid-May
AB-1194: SAFE ROUTES TO
SCHOOL BILL
• Author: Assemblymember Tom Ammiano (San Francisco)
• Sponsor: Safe Routes to School National Partnership
• Maintains a state-managed SRTS program at level $46M/year
• Keeps provisions for project selection, safe routes to bus stops
• 20% to non-infrastructure, with 4% for technical assistance
• SRTS Coordinator
Next decision point: Transportation Committee will hear AB-1194
on April 15
FOR MORE INFORMATION:
Jeanie Ward-Waller, California Advocacy Organizer
Safe Routes to School National Partnership
saferoutescalifornia.wordpress.com
ANNOUNCEMENTS
• Get ready for April call for HSIP projects
• Register for CPEHN Healthy by Design Convening
www.cpehn.org/
• Transportation Choices Summit in Sacramento,
April 22-24 www.transformca.org/
• Safe Routes to School National Conference in
Sacramento, August 13-15
saferoutesconference.org/
• Webinar recording and presentation will be
available on our website:
saferoutescalifornia.wordpress.com
THANKS!
Mark your calendars:
April 25th, 2013 9am
