Prioritization 6.0 Workgroup Bike/Ped Subcommittee

Meeting #5February 27, 2019

Agenda

2

• Introductions

• Recap (topics so far – NEED CONFIRMATION)

• Accessibility / Connectivity

• Safety

• Benefit/Cost

• Schedule / Next Steps

SPOT On!ine

3

Deadline for IT changes…

Anything that affects SPOT On!ine setup, such as:• Specific Improvement Types• New data• New scoring setup

Items not of immediate IT importance:• Criteria weights• Specifics of lookup tables

Recap / Confirmation

Recap / Confirmation

5

Transportation Disadvantage• Data is still not the best, and would be better when combined with a

manual score sheet / rubric – difficult to incorporate under the structure of STI and current scoring criteria

Recap / Confirmation

6

Bundling Projects• Allow across geographies and across varying project types

• Does not have to be contiguous/related• Can be multiple SITs (SIT used for submittal must be majority by cost)• Can be within a single municipality, or across multiple governments

(multiple governments will need to provide documentation of agreement on bundling, local matches, and project management – requirements documentation will be created)

• Makes projects more attractive for LIPs and easier to manage/let• Geographic limitations need to be decided – potentially must be linked

somehow (by connecting PO/Division?)

Recap / Confirmation

7

Specific Improvement Types• SIT 1 – remove route designation

• Consider moving the route designation to include in Access/Connectivity

• SITs 3/4/5 – intersection improvements• Not moving intersection improvements from SIT 5 into 3 or 4• Instead creating 5 different Safety Benefit “groups” of project

types – changing how Safety Benefit is scored, so it is not related to SIT

• Adding bicycle HAWK & protected crossing facility types to SIT 5Safety• Remove the lookup table for Speed Limit scoring and scale based on

the raw speed limit (*discuss further in next topic)• Create new Safety Benefit groupings that are NOT based on SIT

• Still have time to work on table setup for IT purposes

Safety

Safety

9

ATLAS• Data for risk of bike/ped crashes

• Systemic analysis – NCDOT roads only• Looks at past crashes and looks ahead to establish risk• Data inputs include speed limit, crash history, AADT, # lanes, land use, urbanized or

not (not infrastructure)• Makes assumptions and informs if improvements are beneficial at that location (not

just based on if crash has occurred) Could potentially replace most of existing Safety measures – Speed Limit, Number

of Crashes, Crash Severity, and Safety Benefit

Accessibility / Connectivity

Access / Connectivity

11

Goal is to simplify and consolidate data measures where possible Combine Access and Connectivity

• Automate destinations• Residential?• All permanent bus stops? (including deviated fixed route)• Would need option for submitters to edit destinations

• Combining allows for covering the concept of connecting origins and destinations, not just infrastructure/network

• Elements of the bike/ped network could also be destinations• Issues with current Connectivity:

• Does not help projects that are trying to start a network• Too much manual data entry and data review

Access / Connectivity

12

Points of Interest

• HERE• More info to come…

• ATLAS• More info to come…

Access / Connectivity

13

Connections• PBIN (Pedestrian Bicycle Infrastructure Network)

• Existing infrastructure + proposed (CTPs, bike/ped plans, MTIPs, etc.)• Data maintenance in the long-term…• Only in urbanized areas right now and only NCDOT roads (not local yet) –

potentially complete the rest of the state by summer• SPOT On!ine – could be reference layer instead of selectable

º Submitters let us know when infrastructure is missing – helps inform PBIN• Could use toward infrastructure Connectivity scores

º Buffer project and parse out existing, planned/funded, and planned/unfunded (if available attributes) – would also catch connections along the route instead of just endpoints

Access / Connectivity

14

Options:• Combine Points of Interest and Connections into single layer that is

buffered and used in criteria• Create single criteria that is 50% Access and 50% Connectivity (each

would still be scaled individually)

• Would still keep option of submitter editing Points of Interest during data review period

• Current list of Major and Secondary centers would be replaced by defined list of eligible types of points of interest

Benefit / Cost

Underway / In Question

16

Benefit / Cost• Convert Cost Effectiveness to Benefit/Cost by implementing

economic data as a benefit?

Schedule / Next Steps

P6.0 Workgroup Meeting Dates

20

Workgroup Meeting #

Date Location

6 Monday, March 4, 2019 RTP Headquarters

7 Monday, April 1, 2019 RTP Headquarters

8 Monday April 29, 2019 RTP Headquarters

9 Monday, June 3, 2019 (if needed) RTP Headquarters