council of officials meeting eppley airfield - eppley...

Council of Officials Meeting

January 17, 2018

Eppley Airfield - Eppley Conference Center Platte Conference Room - (Upper North Terminal)

4501 Abbott Drive Omaha, NE 68110

Registration: 11:15 a.m.

Lunch & Meeting: 11:30 a.m.

This meeting of the Metropolitan Area Planning Agency Council of Officials will be conducted in compliance

with the Nebraska Open Meetings Act. Please see the recording secretary to review the Open Meeting Act

policy.

AGENDA:

A. Roll call and Introduction

B. Approval of the October 4, 2017 Meeting Minutes – (Action)

C. New Business –

1. MAPA Interlocal Agreement Update – (Information)

D. MAPA Reports and Project Updates – (Information)

1. Metro Area Travel Improvement Study (MTIS) 2. Coordinated Planning Efforts for 2018 – 2019: LRTP/CEDS/Heartland 2050 3. MAPA Annual Survey Results & Ticket Drawing

E. Eppley Airfield Presentation, Omaha Airport Authority – (Information)

F. Tour of Eppley Airfield Facilities Maintenance Building G. Adjournment

Next Meeting:

MAPA Council of Officials Meeting

Wednesday, April 11, 2018

Location TBD

Council of Officials Meeting October 4, 2017

OMAHA-COUNCIL BLUFFS METROPOLITAN AREA PLANNING AGENCY

COUNCIL OF OFFICIALS REGULAR MEETING October 4, 2017 The October 4, 2017 Council of Officials meeting was held at Livestock Exchange Ballrooms, in Omaha, Nebraska. Doug Kindig, President, opened the meeting by welcoming all Councilmembers and guest to the 2017 MAPA Council of Officials Annual Meeting. The dinner started at 7:00 p.m. with the meeting following at 7:30 p.m. MINUTES A. ROLL CALL/INTRODUCTION

Members Present: Denny Bardsley Mayor, City of Underwood Scott Belt Pottawattamie County Marty Bilek Chief of Staff, City of Omaha David Black Mayor, City of Papillion Clare Duda Commissioner, Douglas County Doug Kindig Mayor, City of La Vista Dr. Dan Kinney President, Iowa Western Community College David Klug Chairman, Papio-Missouri River NRD Daniel Lawse Board Chairman, Metro Carl Lorenzen Washington County Gary Mixan Commissioner, Sarpy County Dan Owens Executive Director, Omaha Airport Authority Vince Palermo Omaha City Council Robert Roseland Mayor, City of Springfield Rita Sanders Mayor, City of Bellevue James Timmerman Mayor, City of Gretna Carol Vinton Supervisor, Mills County Matt Walsh Mayor, City of Council Bluffs Others: Patty Albright Guest David Anderson Felsburg Holt & Ullevig Kyle Anderson Felsburg Holt & Ullevig Stuart Anderson Iowa DOT Holly Barber Guest Ginny Bardsley Guest Donna Barry Office of Senator Chuck Grassley Jamie Berglund Omaha by Design Ann Birch City of La Vista Doug Bisson HDR, Inc. Lt. Kevin Bridges Nebraska State Patrol Patti Bridges Guest David Brown Greater Omaha Chamber John Brownell Guest Michael Bruckner Felsburg Holt & Ullevig Larry Burks City of Bellevue Jason Carbee HDR, Inc. Naomi Christensen Former MAPA Board Member Mick Cornett Mayor, Oklahoma City Kate Corrigan Guest Richard Crouch Mills County Arobindu Das Iteris Hal Daub Husch Blackwell


Mary Daub Guest Adam Denney Felsburg Holt & Ullevig Donn Dierks Council Bluffs Public Health Department Jacquie Dierks Guest Scott Dobbe DLR Group Scott Dolton Office of Congressman Don Bacon Gayle Duda Guest Dean Dunn City of Bellevue Kara Eastman Omaha Healthy Kids Alliance Jan Ehrens City of Underwood Ryan Ellis PJ Morgan Real Estate Dan Emanuel Emanuel Construction Specialties David Fanslau City of Omaha Jay Ferris Veridian Credit Union Tony Fiala Guest Ellen Fitzsimmons studioINSITE Lt. Governor Mike Foley State of Nebraska Larry Foster City of Council Bluffs Barb Foster Guest Bruce Fountain Sarpy County Angie Frederick YMCA of Greater Omaha Tanya French Guest Marcy Fritter National Association of Regional Councils (NARC) Brandon Garrett City of Council Bluffs Amanda Garrett Guest Michael Geier Snyder & Associates, Inc. Michelle George Guest Joan Green E&A Consulting Group, Inc. Lynn Grobe Guest Deb Hale City of La Vista Rep. Mary Ann Hanusa Iowa Legislature Paula Hazelwood Advance Southwest Iowa Corporation Lauren Helgerson Guest Shane Hennessey Olsson Associates Chris Hennings Benesch Michael Herzog City of Springfield Doug Holle Schemmer Associates Charly Huddleston Schemmer Associates Holly Jackson Mills County Jon Jacobson Iowa House of Representatives Todd Jarosz City of Bellevue Steve Jensen Steve Jensen Consulting, Inc. Charlie Johnson Office of Congressman David Young Barbara Johnston Guest Sorin Juster Kirkham Michael Pat Kastle Benesch Don Kelly Sarpy County Loras Klostermann Schemmer Associates Ron Kohn Former MAPA Board Chairman Joanne Kohn Guest Senator Rick Kolowski State of Nebraska Ct. Brenda Konfrst Nebraska Highway State Patrol Jeff Kooistra City of Gretna Kandis Koozer City of Gretna Tara Kramer HDR, Inc. Steve Kruger Washington County Jana Kruger Guest


Matt Kruse Lamp Rynearson Amber Kummer City of Papillion Russell Kurth Harrison County Jeff Kutash Peter Kiewit Foundation Angie Lauritsen City of Gretna David Levy Baird Holm Derick Lewin PJ Morgan Real Estate Fr. Ryan Lewis Gross Catholic High School Lt. Craig Loveless Nebraska Highway State Patrol Linda Lovgren Lovgren Marketing Group Mike Luchtel Olsson Associates Jay Lund Green Slate Management Donna Lynam Sarpy County Brian Madison Bellevue Public Works Department Joe Mangiamelli City of Bellevue Jon Markt HDR, Inc. Chad Marsh Kirkham Michael Aubrey Martinez Guest Colleen Mason PJ Morgan Real Estate Steve McCoy Guest Matt McFadden Felsburg Holt & Ullevig Mark Meisinger Felsburg Holt & Ullevig Shannon Meister Guest Craig Mielke Benesch Derek Miller City of Omaha Cindy Miserez City of La Vista Karen Mullen Guest Paul Mullen Former MAPA Executive Director Christine Myers City of Papillion Tom Nemitz Lovgren Marketing Group Stephen Osberg City of Omaha Mark Peters Olsson Associates Todd Pfitzer Lamp Rynearson Nancy Pridal Lamp Rynearson Bart Pugh Schemmer Associates Vicki Quaites-Ferris The Empowerment Network Terrilynn Quick City of La Vista Epiphany Ramos Bellevue Public Works Department Stephanie Rittershaus HDR, Inc. Jeff Roberts Bellevue Public Works Department Carol Robertson Mills County Chris Rolling Olsson Associates Allison Sambol Felsburg Holt & Ullevig Clint Sargent City of Missouri Valley Kevin Sasse Olsson Associates Wendy Schultz City of Council Bluffs Justin Schultz Pottawattamie County Matt Selinger HDR, Inc. Rich Severson City of Bellevue Jim Shada City of Bellevue Pat Shannon City of Bellevue Chris Shewchuk City of Bellevue Dan Sitorius Kirkham Michael Sarah Sjolie Live Well Omaha Jeffrey Sockel Benesch Chris Solberg City of La Vista


Joe Soucie City of La Vista Jason Stahr City of Gretna Bob Stubbe City of Omaha John Sullivan BCDM Architects Matt Sutton Schemmer Associates Carrie Svendsen City of Papillion Todd Swirczek City of Omaha Shane Swope Schemmer Associates Jim Thompson Sarpy County Jim Thompson Papio Missouri River NRD Tammy Tisdall City of Gretna Debbie Tritsch Council Bluffs Health Department David Tritsch Guest William Troe SRF Consulting Pete Tulipana Iowa West Foundation Kody Unstad Felsburg Holt & Ullevig Brett Wawers Lamp Rynearson Nick Weander Olsson Associates Tim Weander Nebraska DOT Alice Weander Guest Jacob Weiss HDR, Inc. Ken West DLR Group Jill Willard City of Underwood Nate Williams Olsson Associates Joy Willoughby Metro Transit Dennis Wilson Sarpy County Laurie Wilson Guest Leslie Wollack National Association of Regional Councils (NARC) Tracie Youell Guest Brian Zuger Sarpy County Mark Zumdohme Graepel North America Inc. Heike Zumdohme Guest MAPA Staff:

Grant Anderson Court Barber Natasha Barrett Christina Brownell Josh Corrigan Sue Cutsforth Melissa Engel Don Gross Travis Halm Mike Helgerson Karna Loewenstein Patti McCoy Amanda Morales Annie Pigaga Matt Roth Jeff Spiehs Owen Stuckey Madison Woodrum Greg Youell

B. CALL TO ORDER – (Information) Mayor Doug Kindig, President, called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. and welcomed all members and guests. Mr. Kindig noted that MAPA is celebrating its 50th Anniversary. President Kindig introduced Omaha Chief of Staff, Marty Bilek and Douglas County Commissioner, Clare Duda.

C. WELCOME – (Information)

Mr. Marty Bilek, Omaha Chief of Staff, welcomed Mayor Mick Cornett, the Council of Officials and guest to the City of Omaha. Mr. Bilek spoke briefly about Omaha’s changes and growth over the last 50 years. Mr. Bilek highlighted the leadership of Oklahoma City and their efforts to revitalize the city core and make Oklahoma City economically diverse and prosperous. Clare Duda, Douglas County Commissioner – District 7, welcomed the Council of Officials and guest to Douglas County. Mr. Duda recognized MAPA and the ability to bring together a wide-range and diverse group of leaders and officials with one goal of collaboration and moving our region forward, together. Mayor Kindig acknowledge and thanked our sponsors for the evening: Bronze Sponsors – Iteris, Kirkham Michael and


Schemmer. Silver Sponsor – Benesch. Gold Sponsors – FHU, HDR and Lamp Rynearson. Platinum Sponsor – Olsson Associates. Mayor Kindig introduced Lt. Governor Mike Foley.

D. NEBRASKA REMARKS – (Information)

Lt. Governor Foley thanked the Council for their efforts in planning and strategizing for the Greater Omaha and Council Bluffs region. The governor’s goal is to grow Nebraska and economic development is central to that effort. Lt. Gov. Foley stated that workforce and demographic issues will dominate planning decisions in the decades to come. Lt. Governor Foley thanked the group for all they are doing for the State of Nebraska.

[Break for dinner]

E. BUSINESS – (Action) President Kindig reconvened the meeting after dinner and read the Open Meetings Act.

1. Approval of the June 14, 2017 Council of Officials Meeting Minutes – (Action) MOTION by Duda, SECOND by Vinton to approve the June 14, 2017 minutes. Motion Carried.

F. IOWA REMARKS – (Information)

Mr. Stu Anderson, Iowa Department of Transportation, Director of Planning, Programming and Modal Division, congratulated MAPA on 50 years and thanked MAPA for their role in developing Regional Planning Affiliations in Iowa.

G. DIRECTORS REMARKS – (Information)

Mr. Greg Youell, MAPA Executive Director, introduced MAPA staff and noted the Annual Reports for 2017. Mr. Youell acknowledged the work of MAPA over the last 50 years in assisting communities and coordinating the region. Mr. Youell noted an entry in the journals of Lewis and Clark in July 1804 acknowledging the beauty of the Omaha-Council Bluffs region over 200 years ago.

H. KEYNOTE SPEAKER – (Information) Mayor Kindig introduced keynote speaker, Mayor Mick Cornett, Oklahoma City. Mayor Mick Cornett is in the final months of a successful 14-year run as Oklahoma City’s first four-term mayor. His leadership has been instrumental in the “Oklahoma City Renaissance”, one of the most remarkable transformations in American history. Mayor Cornett has been a strong champion for infrastructure investments that have transformed the region. His priorities have included improving standards in health and education, and he has worked to change the culture of the community in those important areas.

I. PRESENTATION OF 2017 REGIONAL ANNUAL AWARDS – (Information)

MAPA Board of Directors Chair and Mayor of the City of Bellevue, Rita Sanders, presented the 2017 Regional Regional Citizenship Award. This award is given to an individual who recognizes that regional problems transcend boundaries and has contributed to the regional quality of life. This year’s recipient is Donn Dierks, Public Health Department Director for the City of Council Bluffs. Mr. Youell presented the 2017 Regional Service Award. This award is given to a group or organization who has made a contribution on the metro area and helped to improve or grow it. This year’s recipient is the City of Bellevue Public Works Department, for their response to the June 29, 2017 tornadoes.

Mayor Kindig presented the final award for the evening, the Award of Merit. MAPA occasionally recognizes those whose service is truly extraordinary with the Agency’s Award of Merit. It is MAPA’s highest award for service, and this year’s recipient is Lieutenant Kevin Bridges of the Nebraska State Patrol in his work with the Metro Area Motorist Assist Program.

J. ADJOURNMENT – (Information)

The meeting was adjourned at 9:00 p.m.

02

METRO AREA TRAVEL IMPROVEMENT STUDYPhase 2 Executive Summary - December 2017

OverviewThe Metro Area Travel Improvement Study (MTIS) is a collaborative effort between the Nebraska Department of Transportation (NDOT) and the Omaha-Council Bluffs Metropolitan Area Planning Agency (MAPA). MTIS is a comprehensive transportation study that recognizes future interstate and freeway system needs are intrinsically linked with arterial, local roads and transit system needs and investment decisions in the MAPA region. This approach will help identify the transportation network that will best meet the long-term needs of the community and will take advantage of innovative strategies to guide decisions about funding. MTIS is being conducted in coordination and collaboration with other regional planning studies and projects.

The purpose of MTIS is to: • Develop a comprehensive, multi-modal plan for the interstate and major roadways in

the region • Prioritize projects for short-term, mid-term, and long-term • Consider shortfalls in existing sources of local, state, and federal funding

The study area boundary and study area roadways are shown to the right. The study area boundary is based on MAPA’s designated Transportation Management Area. Study area roadways include all National Highway System (NHS) routes (shown in black) and non-NHS routes that were considered priority corridors by NDOT and MAPA (shown in red). The study area includes 83 miles of interstate freeway, 39 miles of other freeways/expressways, 180 miles of state highways and 176 miles of local roads.

Study Goals and Performance Measures

$SYSTEM PRESERVATIONAchieve state-of-good-repair by effectively maximizing the life span of existing infrastructure.

CONGESTION REDUCTIONReduce the growth of peak-period delay on freeways and improve system reliability and overall performance.

MOBILITY & ACCESSIBILITYReduce the growth of peak-period travel times for all modes and increase transit access and ridership.

STEWARDSHIP & ENVIRONMENTAddress air quality concerns, consider land use in all improvements and incorporate economic, social and environmental criteria in project selection and programming decisions.

SAFETYReduce fatalities and serious injuries.

MAP OF THE STUDY AREA

02

FREEWAY CAPACITY IMPROVEMENTSA comprehensive program to add capacity to an entire freeway corridor.

SYSTEM PRESERVATION STRATEGIESAchieve a state-of-good-repair by prioritizing projects that address timely and cost-beneficial asset rehabilitation.

03


TRAFFIC SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTSMore effective signal timings, coordination, and new technologies to decrease intersection delay.

INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS STRATEGIESUse of technology and traffic management to improve traffic conditions, minimize delay, and improve safety.

RAMP METERINGManaging or regulating traffic entering the freeway system via ramps during peak periods with the objective of improving mainline freeway operations and safety.

ARTERIAL/NON-FREEWAY CAPACITY IMPROVEMENTSA set of roadway improvements to add capacity to an arterial corridor.

MANAGED LANE CONCEPTSStrategies that maximize throughput of highway facilities or defined lanes by giving incentives for travelers to use the roadway more efficiently.

PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE STRATEGIESA range of options from pavement markings to new bicycle and pedestrian-dedicated facilities that aim to improve the safety and efficiency of bicycle and pedestrian travel.

TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGIESA range of potential improvements to bus and rail transit, including more frequent service and new transit technologies.

SAFETY IMPROVEMENT STRATEGIESEnforcement, pavement treatment and marking options, roadway geometry improvements, and technology options.

TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT STRATEGIESStrategies that aim to manage how and when people travel in order to use the transportation system more efficiently.

$

Study ApproachThe study is being conducted in phases:

• Phase 1: Existing/Future No-Build Conditions Review (Complete - Fall 2015) ° Identify needs and issues

• Phase 2: Strategy/Alternative Development and Evaluation (Complete - Summer 2017) ° Develop potential solutions and strategies ° Screen potential strategies ° Test packages of strategies ° Develop preferred strategy package ° Prioritize projects within preferred strategy package

• Phase 3: Freeway Alternative Design and Implementation Plan ° Develop detailed freeway plan

MAPA is in the process of updating its 2040 Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP). The technical analyses completed as part of MTIS will help drive the next LRTP. The 2050 LRTP will align with the horizon year of MAPA’s Heartland 2050 Plan, a community-driven process that developed future land use scenarios for the metropolitan area.

The following multimodal strategies were developed and assessed to determine their potential impact on the existing and planned transportation system and regional performance measures:

Menu of Options

MTIS will also assist NDOT in developing its long term vision for the Omaha area freeway system. NDOT’s last freeway master plan was completed in 1985 and was fully constructed over the following two decades. Although NDOT has continued to make improvements to address localized bottlenecks on the freeway system, the time is now for a new system-wide vision to guide improvements in the decades to come.

Identified NeedsThe issues identified in Phase 1 required a comprehensive and performance-based set of solutions. Issues and potential strategies were evaluated at the corridor level. Thus, “menus” of potential strategies were investigated for each corridor or issue area. The needs that were further addressed for potential solutions in Phase 2, focused on these areas:

• Pavement & Bridge System Preservation

• Traffic Congestion • Gaps in the System

• Traffic Safety • Transit Service • Bicycle Facilities • Pedestrian Facilities

03

HIGH LEVELS OF BALANCED INVESTMENTHigh level of investments on freeway and arterial system addressing all operational needs. Significant transit investment and TDM implementation Highest-benefit gaps. Parallel routes improved.

ARTERIAL OPERATIONSFREEWAY OPERATIONSTRANSITDEMAND MANAGEMENTSYSTEM GAPSSAFETYBIKE & PEDESTRIAN

$

$

$

$

$

$

$

04


SP 1

A range of potential Regional Strategy Packages were identified based on the needs identified in Phase 1 and the potential strategies reviewed in Phase 2. An initial set of six (6) working Strategy Packages was developed based on public and stakeholder input.

In general, the initial six strategy packages were intended to test the extremes of potential investment levels by putting high levels of investment in one or two areas, and neglecting other areas to see how these combinations affected the various performance measures.

Regional Strategy PackagesThe Strategy Packages were organized based on themes, with one strategy package representing the high-end of investment in most categories (Strategy Package 1) and one strategy package representing the low-end of investment in most categories (Strategy Package 5).

FREEWAY-FOCUSED IMPROVEMENTSFocuses improvements on freeway system. Highest priority arterial system improvements only. Limited transit system expansion. No arterial gap investments.


$

$

$

$

$

$

$

SP 2ARTERIAL-FOCUSED IMPROVEMENTSFocuses improvements on arterial system. Enhance existing transit routes. Bottleneck only on freeway system. Highest-benefit parallel routes improved.


$

$

$

$

$

$

$

SP 3

SYSTEM MANAGEMENT & TRANSIT FOCUS Targeted arterial and freeway investments only. Highest-level of transit investment. System management and TDM implementation.


$

$

$

$

$

$

$

SP 4LIMITED LEVELS OF INVESTMENTRelatively low investment levels in arterial and freeway systems. No additional non-roadway investments.


$

$

$

$

$

$

$

SP 5GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION SCENARIO Provide different strategies in “Central City” and “Suburban” parts of the metro area. Recognizes the different streetscape and development patterns typically present in the older and newer portions of the urban area.


$

$

$

$

$

$

$

SP 6

$

Suburban Central

$

$

$

$

$

05


Strategy Package AssessmentEach strategy package was assessed based on:

• Study Goals and Performance Measures: Initially developed from the priorities identified in Phase 1, performance measures were used to assign a numerical value to how well each strategy package met regional goals.

• Public Input: At various public meetings held by MAPA in 2016 for the 2050 LRTP, individuals were encouraged to identify their preferred strategy package.

• Stakeholder (Public Agency) Input: At the July 2016 Stakeholder Committee meeting, public agency staff were polled on their strategy package preferences.

RESULTSBased on the performance scoring results and the preferences provided by the public and stakeholders, the following three packages ranked the highest:

• Strategy Package 1: High Levels of Balanced Investment • Strategy Package 4: System Management and Transit Focus • Strategy Package 6: Geographic Distribution Scenario

Preferred Strategy PackageTo develop the preferred regional strategy package, a set of guiding principles were developed based on the public and stakeholder preferences and input received on Strategy Packages 1 through 6.

05

Preserving the Existing Transportation SystemMaintaining our current transportation system and assets in a state-of-good-repair is a regional goal. This includes roads, bridges, and transit assets. To understand the resources required to maintain the transportation system, a potential system preservation investment program that meets regional goals was developed. The preservation program was based on current and forecasted asset conditions in the study area, and included identifying preservation costs associated with the potential maintenance program. The investment levels required between 2017 and 2040 to preserve the MTIS system for all strategy packages include:

• $816 million for pavement preservation ($141 million in Iowa, $675 million in Nebraska) • $450 million for bridge preservation ($75 million in Iowa, $375 million in Nebraska) • $1,071 million for transit system operations and maintenance • $522 million for transit system capital replacement

Note that the bridge and pavement costs are only for the MTIS roadway system, which accounts for 46% of total arterial, collector, and freeway lane miles in the region. The financial requirements associated with the system preservation program are included in the overall investment needs of all strategy packages.

BALANCED INVESTMENTS across modes and systems.

SIGNIFICANT EXPANSION of the transit system.

TARGETED INVESTMENTS on the arterial system to address the highest arterial congestion issues.

HIGH LEVELS OF INVESTMENT in system safety needs.

EXPANSION of the freeway system to meet wider regional mobility and freight service needs.

MODERATE LEVELS OF TRAVEL DEMAND management expansion.

APPLICATION OF TECHNOLOGY and system management approaches to get more out of the current system.

Guiding Principles

STRATEGY PACKAGE INVESTMENT LEVELS BY MODE

Strategy Packages 1-6

Strategy Package 7 (Preferred)

Transit ($)

Road

way

($)

Low

High

Aspirational, yet attainable preferred package

273

54

6

1

06


Notes:

Committed projects off of Study Roadways are not displayed.

Freeway Widening projects add 1 or 2 general purpose lanes in each direction to all areas of need.

AC = Access ControlII = Innovative Intersection ImprovementsTI = Traditional Intersection Improvements

Notes:

Committed projects off of Study Roadways are not displayed.

Additional transit improvements include increased headways on key central city routes.

BRT = Buss Rapid Transit

PREFERRED STRATEGY PACKAGE TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT

PREFERRED STRATEGY PACKAGE ROADWAY IMPROVEMENT

MAPA held several series of public and stakeholder meetings to evaluate preferences for the first six scenarios. Based on the feedback from these meetings, Strategy Package 7 was developed. Strategy Package 7 is sensitive to different types of regional land use, balances investments across modes, invests in system preservation and management, and was developed based on the guiding principles and an assessment of the individual projects and strategies. It includes a robust investment in transit that includes Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) corridors to provide more connections to employment centers and other destinations. Strategy Package 7 was selected as the preferred strategy package and represents an aggressive, yet attainable plan.

Preferred Strategy Package

$

PREFERRED SCENARIO Represents a balanced, more attainable, yet aspirational system with emphasis on roadway investments on the state system, new transit investments, and “Central City” bicycle and pedestrian improvements.


$

$

$

$

$

Suburban Central

$

$

$

07


The performance of the Preferred Strategy Package, the preferred scenario, was compared to current conditions and Strategy Package 5 (current investment levels/status quo scenario). The performance comparisons are shown below.

Preferred Package Performance

80 14

70K

2

50% 18%

501.4

35% 12%

20 4

20K

0.4

10%2%

0.6

15%4%

0.8

20%6%

70 12

60K

1.8

45% 16%

408

40K

1.2

30%10%

10 2

10K

0.2

5%

60 10

50K

1.6

40% 14%

306

30K

1

25%8%

0 0

0

0

0 0

DAILY VMT/HOUSEHOLD DAILY MINUTES DELAY/HOUSEHOLD

DAILY TRANSIT RIDERSHIP

DAILY VHT/HOUSEHOLD

PERCENTAGE JOBS WITHIN 15 MINUTE AUTO TRIP

PERCENTAGE JOBS WITHIN 45 MINUTE TRANSIT TRIP

2010 2010

2010

62.8

5.3

14,600

28,000

61,900

1.6

43.9%

5.7%

2010

2010 2010

2040 SP5 2040 SP5

2040 SP5

69.61.9

28.1%

6.1%

2040 SP5

2040 SP5 2040 SP5

2040 SP7 2040 SP7

2040 SP7

70.2

8.1

8.1

1.8

33.3%

15.7%

2040 SP7

2040 SP7 2040 SP7

13.3

In the Preferred Strategy Package, the distance traveled by residents is about the same as the distance traveled in the status quo scenario.

In the Preferred Strategy Package, residents will spend less time traveling compared to the status quo scenario.

In the Preferred Strategy Package, the average household will spend 5 minutes less each day stuck in traffic congestion than in the status quo scenario.

In the Preferred Strategy Package, the number of transit riders will more than double compared to the status quo scenario.

In the Preferred Strategy Package, significantly more jobs will be accessible within a 15 minute auto trip compared to the status quo scenario.

In the Preferred Strategy Package, nearly 3 times more jobs will be accessible within a 45 minute transit trip for the typical resident compared to the status quo scenario.

08


STRATEGY CAPITAL COSTS

PAVEMENT & BRIDGE SYSTEM

PRESERVATION COSTSTRANSIT

O&M COSTS TOTAL COST

$4,323.60 $1,266.00 $1,832.80 $7,422.40

The Preferred Strategy Package Cost ($ Millions YOE) is provided in the following table.

ROADWAY WIDENING COSTS

TRAN

SIT

(FLE

ET

& CA

PITA

L)

TRAV

EL D

EMAN

D M

ANAG

EMEN

T

SAFE

TY

(FRE

EWAY

)

SAFE

TY

(ART

ERIA

L)

BIKE

/PED

FREE

WAY

ARTE

RIAL

SYST

EM

GAPS

$833.10 $2,044.90 $185.20 $1,132.40 $32.00 $1.30 $69.00 $25.70

A breakdown of the Preferred Strategy Capital Costs ($4,323.6 Millions YOE) is provided in the following table.

$10$9$8$7$6$5$4$3$2$1

$0

REGIONAL PACKAGE COST ESTIMATES

Billi

ons

Regional Package CostsThe cost estimates (shown below) were developed based on the range of projects in each strategy package. Note that costs are provided in “Year of Expenditure” dollars, indicating that they have been inflated to future-estimated prices.

The pie chart (right) provides a detailed breakdown of the types of project costs anticipated with the Preferred Strategy Package.

Transit Capital (Current)

Freeway Capital Costs

Arterial Capital Costs

Transit Capital (New)

Transit O&M (Current)

Strategy Capital Costs Transit O&M CostPavement and Bridge System Preservation Costs

Transit O&M (New)

Pavement & Bridge

Preservation

System Gap Projects ,

Travel Demand Management Safety, Bike & Pedestrian

2%3%

PREFERRED STRATEGY PACKAGE ANTICIPATED COSTS

11%

17%27%

11%

14%

8%

7%

The Roadway Widening Costs were broken down into state (freeway and state arterial) and local percentages (right).

SP 1 SP 2 SP 3 SP 4 SP 5 SP 6 Preferred SP

Local Arterial

29%

State Freeway

27%

State Arterial

44%

09


Local Potential FundingTo provide a practical perspective in regards to how much the Nebraska metro area’s nearly $4B ($2.75B in Today’s Dollars - which represents non-inflated prices) funding gap represents in terms of local revenues, the study team developed an illustration of how much local funding a sales and property increase in Douglas and Sarpy Counties could generate. This is an illustration, and not necessarily a recommendation of the study. This illustration includes:

• 1% retail sales tax increase – would yield approximately $2.86 billion • 0.00025% property tax increase – would yield approximately $358 million

Innovative FundingThe study evaluated innovative funding approaches including State Infrastructure Banks, Loans and Credit Programs and Public-Private Partnerships. The evaluation found, based on an assessment of the Preferred Strategy Package by NDOT, there are no clear project candidates for an innovative funding or financing approach. An immediate next step for the region might be to explore the local political appetite for incremental retail sales and property tax levies.

PLAN COSTS & ANTICIPATED FUNDING BY MODE (NEBRASKA COUNTIES, IN MILLIONS OF DOLLARS YOE)

Regional FundingTransportation funding levels for the Omaha-Council Bluffs metro area were projected through 2040, to identify the funding gap and to consider alternative funding and financing sources that may bridge that gap. The anticipated transportation revenues from traditional sources through 2040 do not cover the cost of the preferred strategy package. The Iowa portion of the MAPA region is expected to have a surplus of funding through 2040, but it is anticipated that the surplus will be used on projects not on the MTIS system and on the ongoing Council Bluffs Interstate Reconstruction project.

The Nebraska portion of the MAPA region is expected to have a transportation funding shortfall by 2040. The gap between costs and anticipated funding is significant. The region’s transportation “funding capacity”, or the percentage of funding levels compared to plan costs, is 42%.

DOUGLAS AND SARPY COUNTIES ILLUSTRATIVE LOCAL POTENTIAL TO CLOSE THE FUNDING GAP

(IN MILLIONS OF DOLLARS YOE)$4,500

$3,500

$2,500

$1,500

$500

-$500

-$1,500

-$2,500

-$3,500

-$4,500

Baseline Nebraska

Gap($4,049)

Example of Additional

Local RevenuesResulting

Nebraska Gap ($827)

$2,864

$358

MODE/CATEGORY COSTS FUNDING FUNDING GAPFUNDING CAPACITY

Roadway Capital $3,187

$2,016 -$2,221 48%Roadway Preservation $1,050

Transit Capital $1,064 $396 -$668 37%

Transit O&M $1,738 $579 -$1,159 33%

TOTAL $7,040* $2,991 -$4,049 42%

*Note the total cost of the preferred strategy package including Iowa Transit and Roadway projects is $7,422 Million YOE.

10


84TH STREET: HARRISON ST TO L ST

CORRIDOR ISSUES/CHARACTERISTICS: • Highest tier of travel delays and congestion • Low travel reliability • High freight usage • Current Express Bus Route

PROJECT: Widen to 6 Lanes

BENEFITS: • Congestion Reduction • High job accessibility improvements • High freight improvements

COST: $22M (2017$)

72ND STREET: HARRISON ST TO L ST

CORRIDOR ISSUES/CHARACTERISTICS: • Highest tier of travel delays and congestion • Future Bus Rapid Transit Corridor


BENEFITS: • Congestion Reduction • High job accessibility improvements

COST: $22 M (2017$)

72nd and 84th Street Corridors

Several of the projects in the preferred package were identified as the highest tier of priorities. The prioritization was based on the performance measures developed to evaluate how well each project might reflect and promote regional goals. The figures on the following pages illustrate four of the highest priority corridors in terms of issues, project recommendations and benefits.

High Priority Corridor Highlights84TH STREET: L ST TO I-80

CORRIDOR ISSUES/CHARACTERISTICS: • Highest tier of travel delays and congestion • Low travel reliability • High freight usage • Current Express Bus Route

PROJECT: ITS, Innovative Intersections, Access Control


COST: $5M (2017$)

72ND STREET: I-80 TO L ST

CORRIDOR ISSUES/CHARACTERISTICS: • Highest tier of travel delays and congestion • High freight usage • Future Bus Rapid Transit Corridor



COST: $11 M (2017$)

11

METRO AREA TRAVEL IMPROVEMENT STUDYPhase 2 Executive Summary - December 2017WEST CENTER RD: 180

TH ST TO INDUSTRIAL RD

CORRIDOR ISSUES/CHARACTERISTICS: • Highest tier of travel delays and congestion • Low travel reliability • Moderate freight usage • Future Bus Rapid Transit Corridor

PROJECT: • Widen to 6 Lanes • Innovative Intersections

BENEFITS: • Congestion Reduction • High job accessibility improvements

COST: $36 M (2017$)

INDUSTRIAL RD: WEST CENTER RD TO 132ND ST

CORRIDOR ISSUES/CHARACTERISTICS: • Travel delays and congestion


BENEFITS: • Congestion Reduction

COST: $30 M (2017$)

WEST CENTER RD: INDUSTRIAL RD TO I-680

CORRIDOR ISSUES/CHARACTERISTICS: • Travel delays and congestion • Future Bus Rapid Transit Corridor

PROJECT: • ITS • Innovative Intersections

BENEFITS: • Congestion Reduction

COST: $10 M (2017$)

L STREET: 132ND ST TO 108TH ST

CORRIDOR ISSUES/CHARACTERISTICS: • Highest tier of travel delays and congestion • High freight usage



COST: $41 M (2017$)

West Center Road and L Street Corridors

12


HIGHWAY 370: 180TH ST TO 144TH ST

CORRIDOR ISSUES/CHARACTERISTICS: • Highest tier of travel delays and congestion • Moderate freight usage • Future Express Bus Corridor


BENEFITS: • High Congestion Reduction • High job accessibility improvements

COST: $38 M (2017$)

HIGHWAY 370: 84TH ST TO US 75




COST: $71 M (2017$)

HIGHWAY 370: US 6 TO 180TH ST

CORRIDOR ISSUES/CHARACTERISTICS: • Moderate travel delays and congestion • High freight usage • Low travel reliability • Future Express Bus Corridor


BENEFITS: • Congestion Reduction • Freight Improvements

COST: $29 M (2017$)

Highway 370 Corridor

HIGHWAY 370: 144TH ST TO 84TH ST




COST: $66 M (2017$)

13


West Dodge Road Corridor

WEST DODGE RD: US 6/204TH ST TO I-680

CORRIDOR ISSUES/CHARACTERISTICS: • Travel Delays • High Congestion between 156th and 120th • Reliability Issues • Current Express Bus Route • Planned Future Enhanced Bus Route

PROJECT: • Widen to 8 lanes (plus Auxiliary Lanes

between interchanges as needed) • Reconfigure 192nd St Interchange • Potential Ramp Metering

BENEFITS: • Congestion Reduction • Reliability Improvements

COST: $72 M (2017$)

WEST DODGE RD: I-680 TO 72ND ST

CORRIDOR ISSUES/CHARACTERISTICS: • Highest tier of travel delays and congestion • High freight usage • Current Bus / Planned BRT Corridor

PROJECT: • Innovative Intersection at 90th St • Widen to 8 lanes 84th to 72nd St

BENEFITS: • Congestion Reduction • Freight Improvements • Reliability Improvements

COST: $34 M (2017$)

14


Focused Freeway AssessmentPHASE 2Phase 2 of MTIS focused on developing a set of alternatives for the freeway corridors highlighted in the figure to the right. These alternatives include a combination of improvements to:

• Remove bottlenecks • Improve safety and reliability • Provide additional capacity to accommodate future traffic growth

PHASE 3Phase 3 of MTIS will focus on answering the following questions related to the preferred freeway master plan:

• Which alternative is the best solution for each corridor? • How much will the preferred alternatives cost? • How do improvements in one corridor effect another corridor?

Phase 3 will also address the following strategy questions:

• What areas / issues should we focus on improving first? • Will we be able to afford it? Where will the funding come from? • How will we construct the ultimate plan?

CORRIDORS FOR FUTURE FREEWAY IMPROVEMENTS

.Council Meeting - January 17, 2018minutes Oct 4 2017MTIS_Executive_Summary_Phase_2_20180102

council of officials meeting eppley airfield - eppley...

Documents