neighborhood conservation program review › wp-content › ... · 25-07-2019 · (including...

Neighborhood ConservationProgram ReviewWorking Group Meeting #3

July 25, 2019

2

Meeting Agenda

1. Opening

2. Updates to Draft “Work Plan” document

3. Overview of Select County Infrastructure Delivery Programs

4. Civic Engagement

5. Next Steps

6. Adjourn

(approx. time)

5 min

10 min

75 min

25 min

5 min

3

Updates to Draft “Work Plan” Document

4

Introduction to Draft “Work Plan” Document

(see accompanying deck)

A. Policy and Planning Considerations

5



B. Infrastructure Delivery Programs

6



C. Prioritizing Projects to Advance

7



D. Project Execution

8



E. Funding, Costs and Timing: Then and Now

9



F. Spatial Distribution and Equity Aspects

10



G. Civic Engagement Elements

11



G. Tentative Schedule for DiscoveryMEETING POTENTIAL TOPICS

June 20, 2019 A. Policy and Planning Considerations

(including “Deep Dive” into NC Program / NCProject life cycle timeline and scoring)

July 25 B. Infrastructure Delivery Programs C. Prioritizing Projects to Advance G. Civic Engagement

Sept. 3 , 4 or 5? D. Project Execution F. Spatial / Equity Aspects G. Civic Engagement

Sept. - week of TBD

E. Funding / Costs / Timing: Then and Now G. Civic Engagement

12

Select Infrastructure Delivery Programs Overview

13

Purpose of Overview

• Strengthen understanding of the various County programs that delivery “like” infrastructure to NC Program

• Gain awareness of processes, decision criteria, funding levels, and other basic elements of each

• Obtain new insights or observations on patterns, trends, and differences among programs

(What’s Missing? What More do we need to Know? Critiquing comes later)

14

Discovery Questions

B. Infrastructure Delivery Programs C. Prioritizing Projects to Advance

15

Transportation Programs OverviewTransportation Program Funding Summary – FY 2019-28 CIP

CompleteArlingtonStreets

Arlington Transit

Program*

Maintenance Capital+ + =

($561M) ($459M) ($152M)

($1.32B)**

County’s Total Transportation Program

NOTES* Does not include Arlington’s annual funding commitments to Metro as part of “dedicated funding” beginning in FY 2019.** Inclusive of other Program Administration and Operating Costs not itemized above

• Bridge Maintenance• Capital Bikeshare• Commuter Services• Intelligent Transportation Systems• Parking Meters• Parking Technology• Regulatory Signage• Street Lighting• Transportation Asset Management• Transportation Systems & Traffic Signals

16

Complete StreetsIncluded Programs

• ANCC Emergency Access Drive• Army Navy Drive Complete Street• Boundary Channel Dr. Interchange

• Columbia Pike Streets• Crystal City, Pentagon City, Potomac

Yard Streets• East Falls Church Streets• Lee Highway Multimodal

Improvements• Rosslyn-Ballston Arterial Street

Improvements

• BIKEArlington• Improvements Outside Major

Corridors• Neighborhood Complete Streets• Safe Routes to Schools• Strategic Network Analysis and

Planning• WALKArlington

17

TransitIncluded Programs

• ART Bus Fareboxes Upgrade• ART Facilities • ART Fleet & Equipment Replacement• ART Fleet Rehab & Major Repairs

• Bus Stop Accessibility Improvements• Bus Stop and Shelter Program• Transit Development Plan Updates

• Ballston Multimodal Improvements• Ballston-MU Metro West Entrance• Bus Bay Expansion – East Falls Church

Metro Station• Courthouse Metro Station 2nd Elevator• Crystal City Metro Station East Entrance• East Falls Church Metro Station 2nd

Entrance• Pentagon City Metro Station 2nd Elevator• Shirlington Bus Station Expansion

PrTN (Premium Transit Network)

• ART Fleet Expansion• Columbia Pike Transit Stations• Off Vehicle Fare Collection• Transit ITS and Security Program• Transitway Extension to Pentagon City• Transitway Extension (Potomac Ave-

Alexandria)

18

Maintenance CapitalIncluded Programs

• Curb & Gutter Missing Links• Bridge Maintenance• Traffic Calming Device Replacement• Trail Light Maintenance Program• ITS Device Replacement• Paving

19

Parks Programs OverviewParks and Recreation Funding Plan –FY 2019-28 CIP

Maintenance Capital

Park Master Plans

Synthetic Turf

Program+ + =

($75M)

($223M)

Local Parks and Recreation Program

TrailModern-ization

Parks Land

Acquisition and Open

Space

+ +($95M) ($29M) ($6.3M) ($17M)

20

Transportation ProgramsDelivering Project Types aligning with Scope of

NC Projects

21

BIKEArlingtonOverview

PROGRAMGOALS

This program produces a safer and more comfortable environment for bicycling in Arlington (though many projects are for shared bicycle and pedestrian use).

TYPICAL PROJECTS

• On-street and off-street bicycle facilities

• Upgrades to existing bike lanes and multi-use trails

• Bicycle parking, bike & pedestrian counting devices, and wayfinding signage

PROJECT LOCATIONS

• Primarily on arterial roads, but also off-street in park corridors

COORDINATES WITH

• Staff across the organization during the design review process to assess potential impacts on other projects

22

BIKEArlingtonProcess Fundamentals

PROGRAMGoverning Policy or Documents

• Master Transportation Plan (MTP) Policies• ADA Regulations are also involved

PROJECT Identification

• County Staff / Plans (MTP Appendix D)• Bicycle Advisory Committee • Residents

PROJECT Advancement

• Bicycle Program Manager and staff review concepts• Factors: safety, utility, ADA needs, location• Prospect of outside funding

RESIDENTInvolvement

• Advisory committee input on projects• Extensive civic engagement during MTP-Bike Update• Public engagement during capital project process

COORDINATION with NC

• NC staff engaged to avoid duplication/overlap or identify complementary project opportunities

23

BIKEArlingtonFunding Considerations

FUNDINGGovernance

County Board through CIP Process• DES Transportation• Department of Management and Finance• External agencies

FUNDINGSources

• County bonds• Pay as you Go• Federal and State grants (on larger projects)

FUNDINGLevels (avg.)

• Approx. $2,000,000 annually• May vary higher or lower depending on specific projects and

supporting grants

POTENTIALLimitations

• Large projects rely heavily on grant funds (Federal/State)• Not all projects qualify/compete well for grants• Reliance on grants adds difficulty in starting new projects or

fully funding existing projects

24

BIKEArlingtonRepresentative Projects

Washington Boulevard Trail

Approximate project cost range: $5,000 to $3,000,000

25

WALKArlingtonOverview

PROGRAMGOALS

This program upgrades the physical conditions of street, intersections and sidewalks to enhance safety and accessibility of walking in Arlington

TYPICAL PROJECTS

Varies from:

• Small intersection improvements (curb ramps, curb extensions), to

• Sidewalk upgrades and construction

PROJECT LOCATIONS

• May include arterial and/or neighborhood streets, but primarily on arterial roads.

COORDINATES WITH


26

WALKArlingtonProcess Fundamentals


• Master Transportation Plan (MTP) Policies• ADA Regulations are also involved


• County Staff / Plans • Pedestrian Advisory Committee • Residents

PROJECT Advancement

• Pedestrian Program Manager and staff review concepts• Factors: safety, utility, ADA needs, location• Cost vs. Benefit considerations

RESIDENTInvolvement

• Concepts often arise from resident concerns• Advisory committee input on projects• Civic engagement developing MTP-Pedestrian Element• Public engagement on capital projects


• NC staff engaged to avoid duplication/overlap or identify complementary project opportunities

27

WALKArlingtonFunding Considerations

FUNDINGGovernance


FUNDINGSources

• County bonds• Pay as you Go• Federal and State grants (on larger projects)


• Approx. $500,000 - $600,000 annually• May vary higher or lower depending on specific projects and

supporting grants


• Budget levels limit the number of expensive projects ($250k+) that can be built

• Limited resources drive program focus on small, high-impact projects

28

WALKArlington

• Clarendon Boulevard at 15th Street NorthPedestrian Safety Improvements

• Pedestrian Safety and Accessibility Spot Improvements

- Reconstruction of intersections and crossings at locations with significant need

- Bring existing crosswalks up to ADAstandards with curb ramps and landing areas

Representative Projects

Approximate project cost range: $5,000 - $1,000,000

29

Improvements Outside Major CorridorsOverview

PROGRAMGOALS

This program improves travel corridors outside principal business districts, primarily through multimodal enhancements such as bicycle, pedestrian and transit improvements.

TYPICAL PROJECTS

• Road reconstruction• Sidewalks, curb and gutter• Street lights• Striping • Traffic signals• Utility relocations

PROJECT LOCATIONS

• Program primarily focused on arterial streets, through commercial or residential areas (such as: Arlington Ridge Road, Carlin Springs Road, Pershing Drive, Old Dominion Drive, and Military Road)

COORDINATES WITH


30

Improvements Outside Major CorridorsProcess Fundamentals


• Master Transportation Plan (MTP) Policies• Sector Plans / Small Area Plans • ADA Regulations are also involved


• Staff driven, collaborative process across Division of Transportation

• Based on staff technical expertise

PROJECT Advancement

• Availability of funds

RESIDENTInvolvement

• Custom civic-engagement plans developed for each project• Involves adjacent property owners/stakeholders, civic

associations, etc.


• Potential coordination with NC Staff on project adjacency

31

Improvements Outside Major CorridorsFunding Considerations

FUNDINGGovernance


FUNDINGSources

• Transportation Capital Fund (TCF) Commercial & Industrial tax• TCF - NVTA Local, • Federal and State grants• Pay as you Go• County Bonds


• 10-year CIP @ $31 Million, (incl. $20M previously approved)• Approx. $9M in funding FY19-20, quickly declining down to

$600K annually in CIP out-years• Declining trends due to availability/eligibility of funding

sources


• Transportation specific due to funding restrictions• Focuses on arterial and collector streets not addressed other

under program areas

32

Improvements Outside Major CorridorsRepresentative Projects

Pershing Drive - Proposed Plan

Approximate project cost range: $500,000 - $6,000,000

Old Dominion Dr. & Rock Spring Rd.Before After

33

Neighborhood Complete StreetsOverview

PROGRAMGOALS

This program improves and completes neighborhood infrastructure to create streets safe and inviting for all users

TYPICAL PROJECTS(anticipated)

• Sidewalks, curb and gutter• Curb ramps• Street lights• Traffic calming• Tactical measures

PROJECT LOCATIONS

• Neighborhood Streets Only

COORDINATES WITH


34

Neighborhood Complete StreetsProcess Fundamentals


• Neighborhood Complete Streets Commission (NCSC) (Board-appointed commission, representing NCAC, BAC, PAC, P&RC, TC, and “at-large”)


• Nominated by public (anyone can apply, no residency requirement, and no Civic Association approval needed)

PROJECT Advancement

• Projects scored and ranked according to a County Board-approved evaluation criteria framework

• NCSC selects projects based on scoring

RESIDENTInvolvement

• The public invited to nominate projects• Advisory commission engagement (NCSC)• Engagement with stakeholders on individual projects


• Yes

35

Neighborhood Complete StreetsFunding Considerations

FUNDINGGovernance


FUNDINGSources

• TCF - NVTA Local• County Bonds


• 2019 CIP has combined $1.5 million for next 2 years• Future funding reduced to $690K-920K in out years


• Challenges associated with starting up a new program• Stability and extent of funding levels• Projects cannot include failed or withdrawn NC projects over

past four years• No arterial streets

36

Neighborhood Complete StreetsRepresentative Pilot Projects

Approximate project cost range: $TBD

6th Street South at South Adams Street

6th Street North at Edison Street North

37

Transportation Maintenance CapitalOverview

PROGRAMGOALS

This program covers six discrete areas pertaining to maintenance of County transportation facilities.

TYPICAL PROJECTS

• Bridge Maintenance• Curb & Gutter Missing Links• Paving• Traffic Calming Device Replacement• Trail Light Maintenance• Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) Device Replacment

PROJECT LOCATIONS

Arterial and Neighborhood Streets

COORDINATES WITH

• BikeArlington, WalkArlington, and NCS to identify low-cost opportunities for improved treatment of ped/bike facilities as part of re-paving projects

• Occasional overlap between Curb & Gutter Missing Links and NCS or NC Programs (maintenance capital used for small, targeted “fixes”, not entire block improvements w/ NCS or NC

38

Transportation Maintenance CapitalProcess Fundamentals


• County maintenance needs set priorities


• Paving needs based on annual survey of pavement condition index (PCI) on 1,059 lane-miles of network

• Bridge maintenance needs based on annual inspections• Traffic calming device repair generally aligns w/ paving• Trail light maintenance (new): input from C3, resident input

and staff observations• ITS device replacement based on useful life and failure rates

PROJECT Advancement

• County maintenance needs

RESIDENTInvolvement

• Varies by project


• Not likely

39

Transportation Maintenance CapitalFunding Considerations

FUNDINGGovernance


FUNDINGSources

• County Bonds• Pay as you Go


• Ranges $14.1M to $16.8M annually over FY19-28 CIP• Total of $152.7M over FY19-20 CIP


• Scope focuses on required maintenance to keep transportation systems in State of Good Repair

• Scope does not include “betterments” or “improvements”

40

Transportation Maintenance CapitalFunding by Project

PROJECT 10 Year CIP Funding Level

Bridge Maintenance $6.3 Million

Curb & Gutter Missing Links $1.2 Million

Paving $137.8 Million

Traffic Calming Device Replacement $1.6 Million

Trail Light Maintenance Program $1.2 Million

ITS Device Replacement $4.4 Million

TOTAL $152.7 Million

Approximate project cost range: Maintenance project costs vary by functional area. Paving represents 90% of the total program budget. Curb & Gutter Missing Links typically $15K to $25K per project.

41

Transportation Engineering & OpsGENERAL PROJECTS - Overview

PROGRAMGOALS

The TE&O Design & Site Plan Review team evaluates/recommends intersection improvements, initiates and designs projects to address safety issues on County streets, ensure appropriate transportation engineering is incorporated in all projects, develop marking plans for the repaving program.

TYPICAL PROJECTS

• Pavement markings• Signage• Curb ramps• Tactical measures

PROJECT LOCATIONS

Primarily arterial streets

COORDINATES WITH


42

Transportation Engineering & OpsGENERAL PROJECTS - Process Fundamentals


• County staff


• Requests from the public – C3• Crash analysis• Operational analysis• Other staff analysis

PROJECT Advancement

• Projects primarily identified for advancement based on data driven analysis such as crash or operational analysis

RESIDENTInvolvement

• Public engagement on projects that result in significant alteration of the street function


• Yes, during scoping and plan review stages

43

Transportation Engineering & OpsFunding Considerations

FUNDINGGovernance


FUNDINGSources

• General Fund• Other CIP funding sources


• Markings allocated budget approximately $300K-750K per year, combined General Fund and CIP


• Program does not implement any long-term, large capital project expenditures

44

Transportation Engineering & OpsRepresentative Projects

before after

N Pershing Dr. at N Cleveland St.

45

Street Lighting Overview

PROGRAMGOALS

Implement street lighting projects to enhance public safety and economic activities in the County and increase operational reliability. Continue to employ and convert to smart LED streetlights, for centrally/remotely controlled and environmentally friendly benefits.

TYPICAL PROJECTS

• Installation of streetlights

PROJECT LOCATIONS

Mostly arterial streets and commercial corridors

COORDINATES WITH


46

Street Lighting Process Fundamentals


• DES Transportation Engineering & Operations manages the program under the guidance of the Streetlight Management Plan that is reviewed by County Leadership.


• Streetlight Management Plan guides identification of potential projects

• Other criteria include ownership, districting, and safety• Most projects focus on arterial roads and other high-intensity

activity areas

PROJECT Advancement

• Projects advanced based on evaluation that involves ranking and prioritizing projects using pertinent data

RESIDENTInvolvement

• Staff informs residents as projects are selected for implementation based on data and feasibility


• Yes, review of NC Projects for compliance with Streetlight Management plan as well as coordination on project areas

47

Street Lighting Funding Considerations

FUNDINGGovernance


FUNDINGSources

• Pay as you Go• County Bonds• Tax Increment Financing Fund (for CC/PC/PY)


• Current adopted CIP (FY2019-28) shows an average of $2.1 million of funding per year


• Demand for projects is greater than the resources available

48

Parks, Public Art and Historic Preservation Programs

Delivering Project Types aligning with Scope of

NC Projects

49

Parks Maintenance CapitalOverview

PROGRAMGOALS

This program in essence seeks to “maintain what we have.” This is achieved by the replacement or major renovation of different types of outdoor park and recreation facilities.

TYPICAL PROJECTS

• Athletic courts and fields• Lighting• Picnicking shelters• Parking lots• Playgrounds• Restrooms• Site amenities• Special facilities: skate park

PROJECT LOCATIONS

County parks, shared outdoor public spaces with APS

COORDINATES WITH

• Staff across all County departments - DES; CPHD; Libraries; DHS; Fire; DTS; CMO and APS.

50

Parks Maintenance CapitalProcess Fundamentals


• Public Space Master Plan• Park Assessment Database• Advisory: Parks and Recreation Commission, Sports

Commission and Urban Forestry Commission


• Park Asset Management database • Maintenance requirements• Current condition • Program adequacy • Special Considerations • Adopted master plans• County Board priorities

PROJECT Advancement

• DPR Staff

RESIDENTInvolvement

• County Six-Step Public Engagement Guide (Communicate and Consult)


NC staff engaged to avoid the duplication/overlap or to identify complimentary project opportunities.

51

Parks Maintenance CapitalFunding Considerations

FUNDINGGovernance

• County Board adopted CIP every other year, Pay as you Go (PAYG) every year.

• Funds administered by DPR staff

FUNDINGSources

• Pay as you Go• County Bonds


• Adopted CIP (2019-2028): $75M over 10 years, averaging $7.5M per year


• Upgrades or renovations are limited to existing facilities or amenities

52

Parks Maintenance CapitalRepresentative Projects

Quincy Park Playground Picnic Shelter at Glencarlyn Park

Approximate project cost range: Varies. $500K to $3M.

53

Arlington Public ArtOverview

PROGRAMGOALS

This program is responsible for permanent and temporary public art projects through partnerships with various organizations, developers and directly commissioned projects.

TYPICAL PROJECTS

• Artist-designed enhancements to buildings, open space and infrastructure

• stand-alone permanent and temporary works of art• artist residencies• artist-led community engagement• exhibitions and interpretive programming.

PROJECT LOCATIONS

Program focused on arterial streets and neighborhood streets, public and private buildings and properties.

COORDINATES WITH

• Staff across all County departments - DES; CPHD; Parks; Libraries; DHS; Fire; DTS; CMO and APS.

54

Arlington Public ArtProcess Fundamentals


• Public Art Policy (CB adopted)• Public Art Master Plan (CB adopted)• Public Art Guidelines (CM adopted)• annual Projects Plan (CM adopted).


• Annual projects plan, guided by CIP and Public Art Master Plan.

PROJECT Advancement

• Staff recommendation to Public Art Committee and CMO.

RESIDENTInvolvement

• Arlington Commission for the Arts• Public Art Committee• individual project art advisory panels• various community engagement on individual projects in

collaboration with host project outreach.


Yes - collaborate on NC projects. Examples:• currently working as part of the Oakland Park project team• In 2004, collaborated with NC to create a new entrance to

the Halls Hill High View Park community

55

Arlington Public ArtFunding Considerations

FUNDINGGovernance

• Arlington Commission for the Arts (ACA)• the ACA Public Art Committee

FUNDINGSources

• CIP• developer contributions negotiated through the site plan

process• Other – NC Program


• $47,000 is the annual budget through the General Fund• For FY19 - Capital Improvement Program $220,000• (amounts vary) Developer/Partner funding + Public Art Trust

in Agency Fund = $3,530,000• County Public Art funding leverages Developer / Partner

funding by nearly 13:1


• CIP projects often take years to complete• public art staff and funding is limited• can only provide public art for a select few CIP projects.

56

Arlington Public ArtRepresentative Projects

Oakland Park - Public Art Installation

Halls Hill High View Park - Memory Bricks Installation

Approximate project cost range: Varies.Public Art Master Plan recommends public art budget of .5 - 2% of host project budget with a minimum of $50,000 for permanent projects.

57

Stormwater Management ProgramOverview

PROGRAMGOALS

This program has two focus areas.• Flood control and storm water capacity, managed by the

Stormwater Infrastructure Team• Environmental protection and regulatory

compliance, managed by the Watershed Projects Team

TYPICAL PROJECTS

Stormwater - protect public safety and infrastructure, meet requirements for the cleanup of the Chesapeake Bay, address system under-capacity or insufficiency or antiquated assets.Watershed - installs green infrastructure and stream, pond, and wetland restoration projects to support environmental recovery and restoration needs.

PROJECT LOCATIONS

Throughout the County on arterial and neighborhood streets, parks, and County right of ways.

COORDINATES WITH

• Staff across several County departments - DES; CPHD; Parks.

58

Stormwater Management Program

Process FundamentalsPROGRAMGoverning Policy or Documents

Arlington County Staff


Stormwater Master Plan

PROJECTAdvancement

• Where there is prioritization through the Stormwater Master Plan

• In response to emergencies and public safety risks• Identified locations where can partner with other programs

RESIDENTInvolvement

• Utilize Civic Engagement Guide on neighborhood projects, and the NC Guide when partnering with the Neighborhood Conservation Program.


Yes - partner with the NC Program on street improvement projects when opportunities exist, where joint goals and objectives can be met in other project types.

59

Stormwater Management Program

Funding Considerations

FUNDINGGovernance

County Board through CIP Process

FUNDINGSources

• Primarily through a dedicated fund - the "Sanitary District Tax"

• Federal and State grant funds• Developer contributions to meet site plan conditions


Varies.On a typical NC project, average is between $100,000 and $250,000.


• Physical layout of streets, watersheds, space, utilities, storm sewer configurations, etc.

• Balance between cost effective projects and providing the greatest environmental benefits.

60

Stormwater Management ProgramRepresentative Projects

Approximate project cost range: Varies.

Historic Preservation

61

PROGRAMGOALS

This program provides planning, resource identification, and design review for historically designated and other significant properties, staff support for the Historical Affairs and Landmark Review Board (HALRB), increased awareness about the County’s historic resources and evolving cultural heritage, for the protection of Arlington's Local Historic Districts and its historic preservation easement portfolio, participation in Countywide planning studies, redevelopment projects, and Federal and/or state compliance-related reviews for historic preservation projects, planning & hosting outreach events such as lectures and workshops, and publications and educational materials.

TYPICAL PROJECTS

• Design review of building construction/alterations in Historic Districts

• Historic District designations• Participate in planning studies and new development proposals

with historic and/or cultural resource impact• Cultivate community partnerships

Overview


62

Process FundamentalsPROJECT LOCATIONS

Throughout the County.

COORDINATES WITH

• Units across CPHD; also regularly coordinates with Libraries/Center for Local History, Economic Development/Cultural Affairs/Public Art Program; Parks and Recreation; DES Facilities; Real Estate Bureau; County Attorney's Office.

PROGRAMGovernance

• HPP Section Supervisor manages the policies, short- and long-term strategies

• The HALRB consists of up to 15 Arlington residents with expertise in history, historic preservation, and/or architecture who are appointed by the CB for 4-year terms.

• HALRB, through its design review process, approves and denies Certificate of Appropriateness (CoA) requests within all Local Historic Districts.

• HALRB comments on planning studies, development projects, historic markers, and other matters


63

Process FundamentalsPROJECT Identification

• HPP Section Supervisor, CB, CM• Arlington residents - nominate historic properties for

consideration as Local Historic Districts• HALRB – recommendations to CB for Historic Designation

PROJECT Advancement

• The majority are HPP Staff recommendation• Large-scale projects typically by outside consultants (i.e.,

architectural surveys, research and/or planning studies)

RESIDENTInvolvement

• HALRB meetings/public hearings• Engagement with affected property owners• Public comment opportunities


Yes, coordinate with NC on projects within Arl. Co. Local Historic Districts and sidewalk projects. Recent examples: • Interpretive elements at Fort Ethan Allen, 2013• Beautification project at Calloway Cemetery (ongoing)• Sidewalk projects in Maywood CA and Glencarlyn CA


64

Funding Considerations

FUNDINGGovernance

• Arlington Commission for the Arts (ACA)• The ACA Public Art Committee

FUNDINGSources

• General Fund


• For FY20 HPP budget is $605,385; of which $79,172 is non-personnel funds


65

Representative Projects

Fort Ethan Allen installation

Calloway Cemetery

66

Civic Engagement

67

NC Program Civic EngagementRoles

• Neighborhood Conservation Advisory Committee (NCAC):

To represent your neighborhood as an active participant in the Neighborhood Conservation Advisory Committee and to serve as a liaison between County staff and your neighborhood regarding Neighborhood Conservation issues.

• Neighborhood Block Representative:

Serve as the volunteer neighborhood coordinator for a project, the liaison between County staff and block residents, and keep the NCAC representative notified of project status.

68

NC Staff Civic EngagementRoles

• NC Project Managers:

NC Project Managers follow a robust Civic Engagement process for each project, which includes a two step petitioning effort for street improvement projects and Civic Association approval. Park projects undergo multiple working group meetings prior to Civic Association approval.

NC Guide/Handbook – Created in the late 1990’s and codified by the NCAC in the early 2000’s.

69

Next Steps and Business Items

70



Tentative Schedule for Next MeetingsMEETING POTENTIAL TOPICS

June 20, 2019 A. Policy and Planning Considerations

(including “Deep Dive” into NC Program / NCProject life cycle timeline and scoring)

July 25 B. Infrastructure Delivery Programs C. Prioritizing Projects to Advance G. Civic Engagement

E. Funding / Costs / Timing: Then and Now

Sept. 3 of Sept. 4? D. Project Execution F. Spatial / Equity Aspects G. Civic Engagement

Sept. - week of TBD

E. Funding / Costs / Timing: Then and Now G. Civic Engagement

71

APPENDIX

72

Safe Routes to SchoolOverview

PROGRAMGOALS

This program was established with planning for Ashlawn ES and Discover ES projects to address off-site infrastructure needs associated with growing portfolio of new or expanded schools.

TYPICAL PROJECTS

• Essential pedestrian/cyclist safety and access projects

PROJECT LOCATIONS

Areas including/around:• Ashlawn ES• Discover ES• Glebe ES• McKinley ES

COORDINATES WITH

• Arlington Public Schools

73

Safe Routes to SchoolProcess Fundamentals


• DES staff and APS Staff


• Projects identified through collaboration between DES staff and Arlington Public Schools staff

PROJECT Advancement

• APS led walking audits around school sites, to help determine possible walk/bike improvements

• Going forward, critical infrastructure projects will be wrapped into school construction

RESIDENTInvolvement

• Residents typically involved as part of APS walking audits, along with school leadership

• Projects selected for implementation involve public engagement with stakeholders


• No

74

Safe Routes to SchoolFunding Considerations

FUNDINGGovernance

• DES for transportation-sourced funds• CMO/DMF/APS for JCC Funds

FUNDINGSources

• Federal (Transportation Alternatives) • County Bonds• NVTA Local• Joint Contingent Capital


• Peaked at about $2.5 million/year (JCC @ $1-$1.5M)• Currently at approx. $2.5 M for FY 19-20


• Other needs compete for JCC funding• Limited universe (and funding) of other potential, eligible

funding sources to implement such projects• Once current projects are completed, program will be closed

out (future work to be incorporated into approved/funded school project)

75

Columbia Pike StreetsOverview

PROGRAMGOALS

This program implements the Columbia Pike Multimodal project along the 3.5-mile corridor, adjusting the street section and environment to accomplish street vision set forth in plans

TYPICAL PROJECTS

• Multimodal Complete Streets (inclusive of widening sidewalks, utility undergrounding/relocation, curb and guttertraffic signals, street lights, street trees, transit stations)

• Bicycle boulevards

PROJECT LOCATIONS

Primarily Columbia Pike (Arterial), and also include some neighborhood streets (for bicycle boulevards)

COORDINATES WITH

• Plans are circulated internally among staff to identify potential impacts on other projects as part of the design review process

76

Columbia Pike StreetsProcess Fundamentals


• Columbia Pike Multimodal Transportation Study• Columbia Pike Plans (Neighborhoods Plan and Revitalization

Plan)


• Projects identified in past planning efforts and Columbia Pike Multimodal Transportation Study

PROJECT Advancement

• Program focused on delivering specific projects based on comprehensive study with infrastructure recommendations

RESIDENTInvolvement

• Ongoing communication and engagement with Columbia Pike Revitalization Organization (CPRO), adjacent property owners, civic associations regarding implementation of project sections

• Extensive community engagement involved in crafting the foundational plans for the Corridor


• No, other than plan review

77

Columbia Pike StreetsFunding Considerations

FUNDINGGovernance


FUNDINGSources

• Transportation Capital Fund – Commercial & Industrial Tax• NVTA Regional Grant Funding


• $114M in adopted CIP for all segments• Program with definitive projects, FY 2019-2023


• Transportation specific• Geographically limited to Columbia Pike, and some adjacent

streets

78

East Falls Church StreetsOverview

PROGRAMGOALS

This program implements select upgrades from the 2011 East Falls Church Area Plan, focusing on safety and access improvements. Focus is on reconstructing portions of primary streets to improve ped/bike safety and accessibility, for more complete streets with better multimodal facilities.

TYPICAL PROJECTS

• Traffic signal upgrades (w/ at-grade improvements)• Complete streets improvements (sidewalks, bicycle facilities)

PROJECT LOCATIONS

Primarily Washington Boulevard, Lee Highway, North Sycamore Street, and neighborhood streets

COORDINATES WITH

• N/A

79

East Falls Church StreetsProcess Fundamentals


• East Falls Church Area Plan adopted by County Board in 2011 identified reconfigurations for several streets in the area

• DES staff identified capital improvements for implementation with best cost/benefit outcome, and/or leverage outside funding sources


• EFC Area Plan recommendations and MTP Policy Recommendations

PROJECT Advancement

• Projects that best meet the needs of adopted policy guidance and leverage external funding

RESIDENTInvolvement

• Community engaged in the development of the EFC Area Plan

• Public engagement for capital projects, tailored to the project


• No

80

East Falls Church StreetsFunding Considerations

FUNDINGGovernance


FUNDINGSources

• County Bonds• Pay as you Go• TCF - NVTA Local • State (Revenue sharing)


• On average, approx. $1.5M• $6.7M over the 10-year CIP (focused in first 5 years)


• Current funding does not address full extent of potential projects

• Funding eligibility constrains the number/type of projects that can be completed

• Out years of CIP do not include funding based on available funds

81

Lee Highway Multimodal ImprovementsOverview

PROGRAMGOALS

This program aims to expand the multimodal transportation capacity and safety in the Lee Highway Corridor. The program and funding levels are placeholders in CIP out years pending the recommendations from the Plan Lee Highway Initiative anticipated to be completed in 2022.

TYPICAL PROJECTS(anticipated)

• Sidewalk and Crosswalk improvements• Bus stop improvements• Roadway land reconfiguration• Select intersection improvements (safety and capacity)

PROJECT LOCATIONS

Lee Highway (US Route 29), with potential directly-associated capital improvements on connecting roads

COORDINATES WITH

• Any projects that are included in the CIP will consider timing and opportunities to leverage synergy, including maintenance projects like resurfacing, restriping, etc.

82

Lee Highway Multimodal ImprovementsProcess Fundamentals


• Plan Lee Highway Initiative (future adopted plan/policy)• Review/input by Bicycle Advisory Committee, Pedestrian

Advisory Committee, Transit Advisory Committee, Transportation Commission


• Recommendations will be based on the completed Lee Highway Plan (anticipated 2022)

PROJECT Advancement

• Prioritization anticipated to occur based on the Board-adopted Plan (future) and CIP processes

RESIDENTInvolvement

• Extensive community engagement with the development of the Plan Lee Highway Initiative

• Additional community engagement would follow with implementation of ensuring capital projects


• Not expected at this time

83

Lee Highway Multimodal ImprovementsFunding Considerations

FUNDINGGovernance


FUNDINGSources

• All funding presently identified in the CIP anticipates State funding


• $24,058,000 included in the 10-year CIP (in the FY 2022-28 period)


• Direct public infrastructure investments• Geographically focused on Lee Highway and potentially

other streets/connections along the corridor

84

Bus Stop Accessibility ImprovementsOverview

PROGRAMGOALS

Design and construct bus stop accessibility improvements at approximately 500 bus stops throughout the County that currently do not meet American with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements

TYPICAL PROJECTS

Covers both ART and Metrobus Stops• ADA-compliant bus boarding areas• Connecting sidewalks, crosswalks, ramps• Waiting areas for wheelchair users inside bus shelters

PROJECT LOCATIONS

Current bus routes

COORDINATES WITH

• DES Transportation Engineering & Operations• DES Engineering Bureau• DES Water Sewer Streets

85

Bus Stop Accessibility ImprovementsProcess Fundamentals


• Created as an ongoing program in prior CIP• Guided by goals of Transit Development Plan


• Annual work plans developed by staff by reviewing County Bus Stop Tracking document for ADA compliant and non-compliant bus stops

PROJECT Advancement

RESIDENTInvolvement

• Transit Advisory Committee


• Yes, as bus stops exist within the various NC Project areas

86

Bus Stop Accessibility ImprovementsFunding Considerations

FUNDINGGovernance


FUNDINGSources

• State Funding (DRPT)• TCF – NVTA Local• TCF – Commercial & Industrial Tax


• FY 2020 funded at approx. $515,000• Current adopted CIP (FY2019-28) shows approx. $7M over

10 years


• Focused on accessibility improvements specifically for bus stops

87

Bus Stop and Shelter ProgramOverview

PROGRAMGOALS

Replace existing or install new transit shelters with associated improvements, and provide other passenger amenities

TYPICAL PROJECTS

Covers both ART and Metrobus Stops. • Shelter replacements• Shelter installations• Freestanding bench installations• Litter receptacle installations

PROJECT LOCATIONS

Current bus routes

COORDINATES WITH

• DES Transportation Engineering & Operations• DES Engineering Bureau• DES Water Sewer Streets

88

Bus Stop and Shelter ProgramProcess Fundamentals


• Created as an ongoing program in prior CIP


• Placement of improvements/fixtures are determined by the survey data from the Bus Stop Tracking Database, current bus route strategies in the Transit Development Plan, citizen input, MTP, and through coordination with other capital projects

PROJECT Advancement

RESIDENTInvolvement

• Transit Advisory Committee• Transportation Commission• Beyond that, generally N/A, however, consider special

requests as they come in


• Yes, as bus stops exist within the various NC Project areas

89

Bus Stop and Shelter ProgramFunding Considerations

FUNDINGGovernance


FUNDINGSources

• State Funding (DRPT)• TCF – NVTA Local• TCF – Commercial & Industrial Tax


• FY 2020 funded at approx. $435,000• Current adopted CIP (FY2019-28) shows approx. $5.5M over

10 years


• Focused on bus stop shelter projects • Funding allows for replacement of 5-10 outdated shelters per

year, along with improvements and upgrades to customer information elements at ART stops

90

Curb and Gutter Missing LinksOverview

PROGRAMGOALS

The program builds sections of curb and gutter to extend the existing curb and gutter, ensure curb and gutter continuity within a neighborhood block, and/or to fix a street drainage issue

TYPICAL PROJECTS

• Curb and gutter extension, filling in gaps

PROJECT LOCATIONS

Primarily implemented on neighborhood streets, typically across frontages of one to three properties

COORDINATES WITH

• Many projects are identified by County staff investigating citizen complaints

• Referrals may also come from other County programs (such as NC), where a project is not desired or feasible to include a sidewalk

91

Curb and Gutter Missing LinksProcess Fundamentals


• DES Water Sewer Streets engineering section evaluate candidate location and determines whether this program can apply well on particular blocks


• Staff assessment/identification of areas of poor drainage needing improvement

• Resident requests• Paving program sometimes identifies areas of obvious need

PROJECT Advancement

• Projects that address street drainage issues are priorities• Projects for higher risk/hazard areas and located in areas

with community support also prioritized• Consideration also given to likelihood of another County

program addressing the same issue/project

RESIDENTInvolvement

• Residents informed and consulted at initiation of project, for general feedback

• Projects not dependent on full consensus


• Yes, get referrals to/from NC Missing Links Sidewalks or Complete Streets programs.

92

Curb and Gutter Missing LinksFunding Considerations

FUNDINGGovernance

• DES WSS Manages how funds go to project work

FUNDINGSources

• County Bonds


• Approximately $110,000 per FY (slight increases over time included in adopted CIP)


• Project types limited to curb and gutter (and sometimes sidewalk where sidewalk is straightforward and completes a simple missing connection)

• Limitations primarily size of the project and budget – focus is on small projects only

• No walls, pipes, stormwater infrastructure or other structured included in projects