The Policy Committee for our Metropolitan Planning Organization meets on Tuesday the 25th, and they have a lot of housekeeping kinds of things. So just a few notes in passing.
On detail that is interesting is the debate on weighing factors for evaluating the applications for funding in the 2024-29 cycle:
In October 2021, staff presented information to the Policy Committee about how to link the selection of projects for the TIP to the transportation goals and objectives in the Regional Transportation System Plan (RTSP). The PC directed staff to work with the Technical Advisory Committee to develop criteria that was similar to what was used for the last update to the RTSP. See the attached memorandum that describes developing a technical score (based on criteria associated with the RTSP’s goals and objectives) and a separate score based on non-quantifiable factors. The two scores would help develop an initial ranking of projects; but the ranking would be reviewed by the TAC and public to consider other factors, with the final decision by the Policy Committee.
For the technical scoring, a decision by the Policy Committee about weighing factor is needed. (See attached memorandum for discussion of options.) This is needed to help project applicants decide which project(s) to submit as full applications for funding in the SKATS FY 2024-2029 TIP. These full applications are due to SKATS by February 25, 2022.
Staff presented three packages of weighing factors and scored three projects against them:
 |
| Comparison of weighing factors |
They write,
Under the no-weighting scenario, the McGilchrist @ 22nd Street project was ranked number one, and the pedestrian crossing project was third. Using the RTSP weighting factors, McGilchrist came in third and the pedestrian crossing project tied with transit vehicle replacements for first. The Federal Priority weighting factors resulting in the same ranking as the no-weighting scenario.
Increasing or decreasing greenhouse gas emissions is still not a criterion.
From here congestion relief as "bottleneck" is still overweighted and safety and the environment not weighted enough.
More quickly on other matters....A couple of projects are being adjusted.
Perhaps because the curve and elbow on Union Street has been deleted, or perhaps for another reason, on Union Street there is no right-of-way acquisition. It would be nice to see more about this from the City.
The city of Salem has requested that the right of way phase of Key Number 20737 - Union St NE: Commercial St NE to 12th St NE (Salem) be canceled and the funds added to the construction phase. The right of way phase has $305,000 programmed ($273,677 federal plus $21,324 local match). Moving more than $100,000 from one phase to another is considered a TIP Adjustment and requires Policy Committee approval.
At the abandoned city site of Eola/Cincinnati, the Doaks Ferry and OR-22 intersection, there is consolidation:
For efficiency purposes, ODOT proposes to combine the following three projects on OR22W into one project:
• Key Number 13188 - OR22: Corridor safety improvements –This is the original corridor safety project. Preliminary engineering was obligated in 2003.
• Key Number 18726 - Doaks Ferry Road realignment – This project was to realign Doaks Ferry Road to the west to new intersection for Riggs St NW at OR22 to improve safety that was delayed because of geotechnical issues.
• Key Number 18322 – OR22 @ Doaks Ferry Road (Salem) – This project has SKATS federal funds and was originally intended to address access issues at the intersection and was enhanced with ODOT funds to improve intersection operations and complete missing bicycle and pedestrian facilities at that location. [This may involve mitigating of the abandoned weirdness at Holman Wayside.]
In the formal Work Plan, there is still not enough attention paid to margin of error and to publishing assessments of projected to actuals each time a 20-year (or other interval) planning horizon is met. Traffic modeling is not very transparent and is insulated from feedback and assessment.
 |
| Traffic modeling plans |
They'll also be discussing priorities for the new Federal funds:
Discussion of ODOT’s draft scenarios and SKATS’ four recommendations in their letter to the OTC.
See previous notes on the MPO's earlier discussion of priorities and on the OTC meeting last week.
And finally a pie chart on funding categories. With year-to-year variation, one single year's pie is not all that meaningful, and so we may come back to this in the context of a four- or five-year pie.
 |
| Pie chart on funding project categories |
The MPO zooms at noon on Tuesday the 25. The agenda and meeting packet can be downloaded here.
 |
| Meeting info |
No comments:
Post a Comment