1 / 26

Polk County 2035 Mobility Vision Plan: Comprehensive Transportation Strategies

The Polk Transportation Planning Organization's 2035 Mobility Vision Plan outlines strategic priorities for enhancing transit, highways, and non-motorized facilities through 2035. This plan prioritizes projects based on various criteria, including regional connectivity, demographic indicators, public input, and environmental sustainability. Key considerations include the anticipated productivity of routes and the effective allocation of financial resources. Public involvement is emphasized, featuring workshops and updates to ensure community engagement. The plan aims for cost-effective improvements while addressing growth and development needs.

alvin-sears
Télécharger la présentation

Polk County 2035 Mobility Vision Plan: Comprehensive Transportation Strategies

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Polk Transportation Planning Organization 2035 Mobility Vision Plan July 2010 Polk Transportation Planning Organization

  2. Topics • Project Prioritization • Transit • Highways • Non-Motorized Facilities • Financial Resources • Public Outreach • Schedule

  3. Transit Prioritization

  4. Eight Scoring Criteria address: • Previous Planning Efforts (2060 TVP, PTA Expansion Plan) • Regional Connectivity and Accessibility (Transit Centers/Park and Ride Lots) • Demographic and Socio-Economic Indicators (Transit Potential Areas) • Urban Form and Planned Growth (TSDA, TCCO) • Public Input Transit Evaluation Criteria & Scoring

  5. Additional Considerations • PTA Plan represents first five years of cost affordable transit improvements • Subsequent phasing will be based on project ranking with the following considerations emphasized: • Anticipated route productivity (ridership) • Available projected revenues • Public input • Timing of growth – implement improvements in growth areas concurrent with anticipated development

  6. Highway Prioritization

  7. State Intermodal System (SIS) Cost-Feasible Projects in Polk County Source: SIS Long Range Capacity Plan (Approved 2009)

  8. Highway Project Prioritization – Non-SIS Roads • Based on Approved 2035 Goals & Objectives • Multi-Modal System Development • Environmental Sustainability • Regional Support • Freight & Goods Movement • Efficiency & Interconnectivity • Safety & Security • Public Input

  9. Non-SIS Road Project Prioritization (cont’d) • Candidate projects evaluated by whether they would: • Complete or fill gap(s) in system • Connect directly to desired destinations or facilities • Be within specific designated areas • Address problems or enhance designated facilities • Satisfy need(s) expressed by public to date

  10. Non-SIS Project Evaluation Criteria & Scoring Methodology

  11. Non-SIS Project Evaluation Criteria & Scoring Methodology (Cont’d.) • Environmental Screening GIS Tool Used to Evaluate Potential Degree of Effect on Natural & Man-Made Environment • Analyzed project impact within 500’ buffer • Scores based on # of features found or % of buffer area falling within: Wetland Areas Recreational Areas Wildlife & Habitat Areas Prime Farmlands Flood Hazard Areas Historic/Arch. Sites Special Areas (e.g. Green Swamp Contaminated Sites

  12. Non-SIS Road Project Prioritization (cont’d) • Relative Weight (%) assigned to each category divided by maximum points for that category to arrive at weighted scores • Ranking based on weighted scores • Ranked project list divided into Tiers I, II and III

  13. Non-Motorized Prioritization

  14. Total Funding = $1,668 M Total Project Cost Est. = $6,946 M Difference = ($5,278 M) DRAFT

  15. Total Funding = $892 M Total Capital Cost Est. = $2,004 M Total Operating Cost Est.* = $998 M Difference = ($2,110 M) DRAFT * Assumes constant rate of growth in service & rail service starting in 2035

  16. Next Steps: • Finalize project evaluation & rankings (still draft at this point) • Assign funding sources to candidate projects to determine cost feasibility • Break large projects into smaller segments • Confirm funding assumptions • Obtain and consider public input on project priorities

  17. Public Involvement – Outreach • Website -www.2035mobilityvisionplan.org • Public Workshops • August/September • West, Central and East/Ridge • Updated Newsletter • Specific input on projects in the Plan

  18. Project Schedule July 2010

  19. Questions / Comments • Review & Concur with Project Prioritization

More Related