Title: Understanding the Bicycle Project Planning and Implementation Process Track: Connect Format: 90 minute panel Abstract: This session focuses on the different approaches cities are taking with their bicycle projects and programs, with a focus on how to improve decision making and project/program delivery. Presenters: Presenter: Johann Weber Georgia Tech Co-Presenter: Darren Flusche League of American Bicyclists & Advocacy Advance Co-Presenter: Joshuah Mello Alta Planning + Design Co-Presenter: Byron Rushing Atlanta Regional Commission

1. Understanding the Bicycle Project Planning and Implementation Process
Johann Weber, Georgia Institute of Technology
Darren Flusche, League of American Bicyclists
Byron Rushing, Atlanta Regional Commission
Josh Mello, Alta Planning + Design

2. Our Distinguished Panel
Darren Flusche – Policy Director, League of American Bicyclists and Advocacy Advance
Byron Rushing – Atlanta Regional Commission Bike/Ped Planner, former State Bike/Ped Coordinator for GDOT
Josh Mello – Senior Associate, Alta Planning & Design, former Assistant Director of Planning for Transportation, City of Atlanta, and planner for city of Wilmington, NC

3. Why?

4. Why?
Local Community
Regional Government (MPO/RC)
State Government
Federal Government
You are here

5. Why?
Local Community
Regional Government (MPO/RC)
State Government
Federal Government
(Or here)

6. Why?
Local Community
Regional Government (MPO/RC)
State Government
Federal Government
(Or here)

7. Why?
Local Community
Regional Government (MPO/RC)
State Government
Federal Government
(Or here)

8. Why?
Step back and think about the way the pieces fit together

9. What we’re talking about
Decision-Making
Planning
Implementation

10. Scales
Local Community
Regional Government (MPO/RC)
State Government
Federal Government

11. Governance Questions
Who is involved? How?
How is power concentrated or distributed?
Are resources centralized or distributed?

12. Institutions
How are decisions made?
What formal or informal structures (rules, norms, etc.) influence these decisions?
Where do these institutions come from? How do they function?

13. Institutions - Obvious
•Federal Policies
•Funding
•Special Grants
•Funding Allocations
•Priorities/Planning
•Policies
•Regional Project Implementation
•Implementation
•Planning
•Etc.

14. Institutions – Less Obvious
•Guidance
•Best practices
•Norms and practices of operation
•Expectations
•Traditions & Training
•Norms and practices of operation (expectations)
•Traditions & Training
•Interpretations of Guidance
•Norms and practices of operation
•Context-specific (traditions, values)

15. Institutions – Not unidirectional
•Needs/Goals/Priorities
•Attitudes and Practices
•Interpretation and compilation of local needs and visions
•Attitudes and Practices
•Attempt at shared national priorities
•Broad shared practice/attitude

16. Commonalities and Differences?
Commonalities
Formal Processes (CTP/RTP/TIP)
Regular funding (general fund, CIDs)
Grant access
Leadership
Differences
Informal Processes
Special revenue (TADs, bonds)
Grant usage
Participation

17. Sit down and let the experts talk!

18. Federal Role in Active Transportation Planning
Pro Walk Pro Bike Pro Place
Wednesday, September 10

19. Federal Role in Planning and Funding Walking and Biking
Darren Flusche
Policy Director
League of American Bicyclists Advocacy Advance Darren@BikeLeague.org

22. $0
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1,000
$1,200
Millions
Bicycling & Walking Spending
State spending of Federal-Aid Highway Funds
from 1992 to 2013
Total with American Recovery & Reinvestment Act (ARRA)
Total without ARRA
Data Source: FHWA Financial Management Information System

23. CMAQ 10.3%
TE & TAP 47.9%
STP 8.7%
SRTS 8.6%
HSIP 0.5%
RTP 2.2%
ARRA 7.7%
Other 14.2%
Bicycling and Walking Spending
State decision on how to spend Federal-Aid Highway
Funds from 1992 to 2013
Data Source: FHWA Financial Management Information System

24. How “Federal” is it?
Federal Revenue (Gas Tax)
State/Local Project Selection
Federal-Aid Highway Program, 1992-2013:
•29,330 Bicycling/Walking Projects paid for w/ $9.5 billion in federal funds
•All selected through state and regional processes
•($3.7B in TIGER an exception)

25. How does Federal Government impact state and local planning process?
Authorization Bill
•Defines programs
–Activities & eligibilities
•Authorizes amount that can be spent
•Lays out planning requirements (E.G. MPOs)
Guidance and Policy

26. How does Federal Government impact state and local planning process?
Guidance and Policy
•Planning requirements
•Clarifying guidance
•Performance Measures
•Metropolitan planning rulemaking

28. How does the Federal government impact the planning process?
USDOT Priorities
•TIGER grants
•Distracted Driving & bicycling (LaHood)
•Ladders of Opportunity (Foxx)
•Bicycling and Walking Plan Update

30. Pennsylvania STIP

34. Contact
Darren Flusche
Policy Director
League of American Bicyclists
Darren@AdvocacyAdvance.org
www.AdvocacyAdvance.org

35. Thank you!
advocacyadvance.org

36. Regional Commission & Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) Roles & Responsibilities for Bicycle, Pedestrian, & Trail Planning
Presentation for ProWalk/ProBike/ProPlace
September 2014

37. Atlanta Regional Commission (ARC)
“The Atlanta Regional Commission is the Regional Leader in identifying Values, developing Policies, and executing Plans that matter to residents and communities that ensure Competitive Advantage and that preserve long term Sustainability.”
•Founded in 1947 (oldest in the country)
•Covering parts of 18 counties and nearly 70 municipalities for transportation planning
•Nearly 5 million residents covering over 8,300 square miles
•Roughly half of the State of Georgia’s population, a continuing political balance
•World’s largest toll-free calling area!

39. Federal Mandate
•Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPO): federally mandated and federally funded transportation policy-making organizations made up of representatives from local government and governmental transportation authorities;
•Established by Congress per Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1962;
•Required for any urbanized area (UZA) with a population greater than 50,000;
•Federal funding for transportation projects and programs are channeled through this planning process;
•Core functions: establish a setting; evaluate alternatives; maintain a long-range transportation plan (LRTP) for mobility and access for people and goods, efficient system performance and preservation, and quality of life; develop a transportation improvement program (TIP); involve the public; protect air quality
•Transparency through public access to participation in the planning process and electronic publication of plans required by federal law.
•Received direct sub-allocation of many Federal funds under MAP-21
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metropolitan_planning_organization

40. State Mandate
•Georgia is fundamentally a home rule state – no non-local, regional, or state control over zoning or comprehensive planning…
•However 12 regional commissions in Georgia “assist local governments on a regional basis and to develop, promote and assist in establishing coordinated and comprehensive planning in the state.”
•ARC engages in a continuous program of research, study, and planning of matters affecting its area: Land Use; Transportation; Solid Waste; Storm Water; Parks & Open Space; Air & Water Quality; Environmental Quality; Law Enforcement & Criminal Justice; Health Facilities & Services; Consolidation of common services between political jurisdictions.
•ARC develops and maintains Federally-mandated RTP, TIP, and SIP (air quality) as well as State-mandated Regional Development Plan to “anticipate and apply comprehensive approaches to accommodate economic and population growth that will occur in the Atlanta region during the next 25 years.”

41. Regional Impact, Local Relevance: Translating Priorities into Projects
•Sub-allocation of Federal funds, including Surface Transportation Program (STP- Urban), Transportation Alternatives (TAP), and various public transit funds;
•Reciprocal agreement to proportionally distribute Congestion Mitigation & Air Quality (CMAQ) funds in partnership with Georgia DOT;
•Both Federal and State mandates allow a higher emphasis on connections between land use, transportation, air quality, and quality-of-life than state agencies;
•Significant effort research, writing, and publishing reports on the state of various factors in the region – relied upon heavily by many local governments;
•A continual balancing act between deciding which projects qualify as “regionally significant” versus purely local;
•Consensus building between political leaders at the local, regional, and state levels – as well as our peer agencies and partners;
•Emphasizing transparency, outreach, and equity in our regional plans and processes

42. Factor
Weight
Population
16
MARTA Rail
12
Regional Center
12
Colleges /
Universities
10
Total Employment
10
Existing Bikeways
8
GRTA Bus
8
High ETA / Equity
8
MARTA Bus
8
Retail Employment
6
Schools
4
Planning: Estimating Regional Active Transportation Demand

43. Project Prioritization

44. Programming & Funding

45. Project Implementation

46. Project Implementation

47. Project Implementation

48. Byron Rushing
Bicycle & Pedestrian Planner
Transportation Division
Atlanta Regional Commission
brushing@atlantaregional.com
404-463-3345

49. Bicycle + Pedestrian Planning + Implementation Local Level
September 10, 2014 – ProWalk/ProBike/ProPlace

50. “Make a business for yourself, boy, set some goals. Make a fat diamond out of dusty coals.” -Outkast

51. Pause Planning & Start Building
• What percentage of your plans have been implemented?
• How can more stuff get built?
• Spend staff time on grant writing and partnership maintenance
• Consider in-house resources first to fill gaps
• Follow the money and the public pressure

52. Exploit Partnerships
• Why do what someone else is already doing?
• Can you influence what they are doing instead?
• Can they do it better than you? (CIDs, PATH Foundation, GDOT, etc.)
• Find out what they need from you (public involvement, permitting, etc.)
• Don’t layer on more bureaucracy on top. Instead, be a connector.

53. Grab the Cabbage
• Select the project to fit the funding (TAP, CycleAtlanta: Phase 1.0, etc.)
• Own the stuff built through partnerships (demonstrated track record)
• Recognize what you can’t do (Memorial Dr project hand-off, etc.)
• Set-up mechanisms to spend the money (streetcar LCI, FTA flex, etc.)

54. Every Opportunity Counts
• GDOT safety & DPW resurfacing projects
• CID streetscape projects
• Development review
• MARTA East Atlanta Village service
• Bikes Belong, Green Lane Project, Walkable Communities, etc.

55. “Brush the dirt off your jersey then go for the cup Or the trophy or the ring, champion no matter what Cause when you got the belt and the ring People with you popping bottles, taking pictures look around As soon as you fall down all the haters pass a judgment Surprise, I’m here to show that I’ma rise above this”
-T.I.

56. Joshuah Mello, AICP Senior Associate* O 916-662-7143 M 916-469-5386 joshmello@altaplanning.com @joshuahmel linkedin.com/in/joshuahmel *Former Assistant Director of Planning – Transportation for the City of Atlanta