a ctive t ransportation p rogram (atp) draft part b narrative questions
TRANSCRIPT
ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM (ATP)
Draft Part BNarrative Questions
PART B: NARRATIVE QUESTIONS
ATP C
ycle
2 C
altra
ns W
orksh
op
2
General Instructions:
The Part B-Narrative Questions size limit is 5,000 words. Give the highlights of the answer to each sub-question, and if you have more to add you can put it in an attachment. Including photos is encouraged.
For combined Infrastructure & non-Infrastructure applications the limit is 7,000 words.
PART B: NARRATIVE QUESTIONS
ATP C
ycle
2 C
altra
ns W
orksh
op
3
General Instructions- continued
When we asked for comments for cycle 2; several agencies said that the application instructions were too long; but most of the other comments were on things that needed to be added/clarified in the instructions.
In an attempt to please everyone:1. We will post a “clean Part B that doesn’t
have any instructions in it;2. We will post a Part B that has basic
instructions enbedded in it3. We also, have kept (and improved 40+
pages) the application instruction document.
PART B: NARRATIVE QUESTIONS
ATP C
ycle
2 C
altra
ns W
orksh
op
4
General Instructions- continued
During the post Cycle 1 scorer debriefing the scorers said:
1. They could tell which applicants followed the instructions (and they generally scored well) and which ones didn’t (and they generally didn’t score as well)
2. They could tell on the Infrastructure applications which one were just filled out by an engineer or just an Planner (and they generally didn’t score as well) and which ones were filled out by an engineer and a planner (and these usually scored better)
PART B: NARRATIVE QUESTIONS
ATP C
ycle
2 C
altra
ns W
orksh
op
5
General Instructions- continued
There is a So. Cal. Agency that submitted 5 applications in Cycle 1. 3 were selected in the Statewide solicitation, and 1 was selected by their MPO.
They did not use a consultant. They said that they made a copy of the instructions for each of their applications, they made highlights on the instructions of the points they wanted to cover for that project and comments in the margins.
Their applications were written by an engineer and a planner.
PART B: NARRATIVE QUESTIONS
ATP C
ycle
2 C
altra
ns W
orksh
op
6
The CTC Guidelines say:
If you are applying for a segment of a larger project-
Your PPR funding information should only reflect the current segment’s funding information,
Therefore you responses to the Narrative Questions should generally address the segment that is getting funded. You can describe the bigger picture; but your data needs to cover only the segment being funded.
PART B: NARRATIVE QUESTIONS ATP C
ycle
2 C
altra
ns W
orksh
op
7
Scoring break out:
Q1: Potential for increasing walking or biking (AKA Mode Shift)
Q2: Potential for reducing collisions (AKA safety)
Q3: Public Participation & Planning
Q4: Improved Public Health
Q5: Disadvantaged Communities (DAC)
Q6: Cost Effectiveness
Q7: Leveraging of Non-ATP funds
Q8: Use of CCC or Qualified CCC
Q9: Past Performance on Grants & Projects
Points
0 to 30
0 to 25
0 to 15
0 to 10
0 to 10
0 to 5
0 to 5
0 or -5
0 or -10
(AKA mode shift)A. Describe following: Current and projected types &
numbers/rates of users (5 points max.)
8
Students, bikes, peds, commuters, recreational users, seniors, etc. Include data collection methods.
B. Links or connections (20 points max)List the destinations that will be served by the project or plan, and how the project will contribute to the encouragement of ATP users.
Application Question #1 (0 to 30 points)Potential for increasing walking & biking
ATP C
ycle
2 C
altra
ns W
orksh
op
Attach a map(s) showing the facilities that will be accessed
Draft
Application Question #1C
C. Referencing answers to A & B, how does the project represent one of the Applicant’s highest unfunded non-motorized ATP priorities (5 points max)
9
As appropriate, include a letter of support form the RTPA and/or MPO which documents their understanding of the project’s relative ATP-priority.
Points will be awarded based on demonstrating the project’s potential for the agency in achieving “encouraging increased use of active modes of transportation. More points will be given to projects deemed to be a key element of an agency’s active trans plan element or goal.
ATP C
ycle
2 C
altra
ns W
orksh
op
Draft
Application Question #1A Example
•Example for a Cycle 1 application:
10
- To project usage, the City used the Transportation Research Board’s National Report . . . Based on this criteria, the agency expects that bicycle commuting will increase by 80.3%,and that bicycle recreation will increase by 41.9%.This is a good response-
the info that is missing is- in what time frame?
ATP C
ycle
2 C
altra
ns W
orksh
op
Application Question #2A•Describe the location’s history collisions resulting in Fatalities & Injuries to non-motorized users, include source(s) of data used: (10 points max)
11
Applicant may use an accident rate method or possible “exposure risk” at locations where the risk limits the use of active modes of travel.
Application Question #2 (0 to 25 points)Potential for reducing fatalities & injuries
If the facility is new, or so dangerous that there isn’t any data available, select a parallel or similar facility and compare the accident data from that location. You must describe how the locations are similar, or how the new facility is configured to reduce those accidents
Provide photos of the location(s)
ATP C
ycle
2 C
altra
ns W
orksh
op
Draft
Application Question #2A
12
Specific counts must be provided in an easily understood format. Accident/incident descriptions, date of accident/incident, severity of injuries and victim type (ped/bike) must be provided at a minimum.
Application Question #2 ContinuedPotential for reducing fatalities & injuries
This is an easily understood format. It shows the project
limits and clearly shows the accident
information, and where it came from.
ATP C
ycle
2 C
altra
ns W
orksh
op
Application Question #2A
13
This project has mid-block accidents, not just intersection incidents; so it’s very appropriate that the project location is the full block. For accidents only at the intersections, a full block project may not be warranted.
Application Question #2 ContinuedPotential for reducing fatalities & injuries
ATP C
ycle
2 C
altra
ns W
orksh
op
Application Question #2B
B. Describe how the project/plan will remedy (one or more) potential safety hazards (15 points max)
14
•Reduces speed or volume of vehicle proximity to non-motorized users.• Improves sight distance & visibility between vehicles and non-motorized users.•Eliminates potential conflict points between motorized and non-motorized users• Improves compliance with local laws for both motorized and non-motorized users•Addresses inadequate traffic control devices•Eliminates or reduces behaviors that lead to collisions involving non-motorized users•Addresses inadequate or unsafe traffic control devices, bike facilities, trails, crosswalks & sidewalks
ATP C
ycle
2 C
altra
ns W
orksh
op
Draft
Application Question #2B- continuedI recommend either answering each
bullet separately, or saying “the project will Reduce vehicular speed by . . ., and Improve sight distance by …
Don’t make the scorer guess how many of these points your project will accomplish.
Don’t just say “yes your project will accomplish all of these” you need to detail how each item will be accomplished by your project.
15
ATP C
ycle
2 C
altra
ns W
orksh
op
A. Describe the alternatives that were considered and how the ATP-related benefits vs. project-costs varied between them. Explain why the final proposed alternative is considered to the highest Benefit to Cost Ratio (B/C) with respect to the ATP purpose of “increased use of active modes of transportation”. (3 points max)
16
Application Question #6 (0 to 5 points)Public Participation & Planning
Discuss how Cost Effectiveness played a role in how the project’s final scope was determined.
How do the proposed improvements represent low cost improvements per the number of non-motorized users impacted, magnitude of mode shift, and length of overall trips.
ATP C
ycle
2 C
altra
ns W
orksh
op
Draft
For developing a plan- describe to what extent the plan will incorporate all non-motorized modes, evaluate the potential use of proven low-cost safety measures, and encourage shift to active modes of transportation.
17
Application Question #6- continuedPublic Participation & Planning
ATP C
ycle
2 C
altra
ns W
orksh
op
Draft
18
Application Question #6B- Public Participation & Planning
B. Use the ATP Benefit/Cost Tool, provided by Caltrans Planning Division, to calculate the ratio of the benefits of the project relative to both the total project cost and the ATP funds requested. After calculating the B/C ratio for the project, provide constructive feedback on the tool (2 points max)
ATP C
ycle
2 C
altra
ns W
orksh
op
Caltrans Planning Division is planning to have a B/C tool webinar- tentatively April 16, 2015.
B/C questions should be directed to [email protected]
Draft
A. Points will be awarded based on the amount of non-ATP funding pledged to the project as follows:
19
Application Question #7 (0 to 5 points)Leveraging of Non-ATP funds
1 point: 1% to 4.9% of total project cost2 points: 5% to 9.9% of total project cost3 points: 10% to 14.9% of total project cost4 points: 15% to 19.9% of total project cost5 points: 20% or more of total project cost
ATP C
ycle
2 C
altra
ns W
orksh
op
Draft
Step 1: Is this application for a plan?
20
Application Question #8 (0 or -5 points)Use of the CCC or Qualified Community Conservation Corps
Yes (if this application is for a grant there is not need to submit info to the corps, there will be no penalty to the applicant (0 points)
No (If this application is not for a plan, proceed to step #2)
ATP C
ycle
2 C
altra
ns W
orksh
op
Draft
Step 2: The applicant must submit the following info via email to the CCC and Qualified CCC prior to application submittal to Caltrans.
21
Application Question #8 -continuedUse of the CCC or Qualified Community Conservation Corps
• Project Title• Project Description• Detailed Estimate• Project Schedule• Project Map• Preliminary Plan
ATP C
ycle
2 C
altra
ns W
orksh
op
CCC representativeWei [email protected]
Qualified Community CC representativeDanielle [email protected]
Draft
Step 3: The applicant has coordinated with Virginia Clark or Melanie Wallace w/the CCC AND Danielle Lynch with the Qualified Community CC and determined the following (check the appropriate box):
22
Application Question #8 -continuedUse of the CCC or Qualified Community Conservation Corps
Neither Corps can participate in the project (0 points)
Applicant intends to utilize the CCC or a Qualified Community CC on the following items listed below (0 points)
Applicant has contacted the corps but intends not to use the corps on a project in which either corps has indicated it can participate (-5 points)
Applicant has not coordinated with both corps (-5 points)
ATP C
ycle
2 C
altra
ns W
orksh
op
Draft
A. Provide a short explanation of the applicant’s (and Implementing Agency’s, if different than the applicant) project delivery history for all projects that include grants through Caltrans administered statewide programs (ATP, SRTS, BTA, HSIP, etc.)
23
Application Question #9 (0 to -10 points)Applicant’s Performance on Past Grants and Deliverability of Projects
Include a breakout of the completed projects and ongoing projects. Include the Program name and funding types (program funds and match) for each project.
Applicant must include detailed explanations for all ongoing, dropped, de-funded, and completed projects that have or have had delivery flags for not meeting the program’s delivery requirements.
ATP C
ycle
2 C
altra
ns W
orksh
op
Draft
CALTRANS IMPROVES MOBILITY ACROSS CALIFORNIA
California Department of TransportationDivision of Local AssistanceOffice of Active Transportation & Special Programs1120 N Street, MS 1Sacramento, CA 95814
April Nitsos, P.E.Office of Active Transportation and Special Projects- Chief
Office (916) 653-8450
FAX (916) 653-1905
www.dot.ca.gov
CALTRANS IMPROVES MOBILITY ACROSS CALIFORNIA
California Department of TransportationDivision of Local AssistanceOffice of Active Transportation & Special Programs1120 N Street, MS 1Sacramento, CA 95814
Kevin Atkinson, P.E.SRTS Manager & Bike/Ped. Tech. Specialist
Office (916) 653-6920
FAX (916) 653-1905
www.dot.ca.gov24
ATP C
ycle
2 C
altra
ns W
orksh
op