HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012 12.03 City Council Work Session Agenda PPACkf4,
•
C zty of_Apoche Junction
Home of the Super:ttttton Mountains
APACHE JUNCTION CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
300 EAST SUPERSTITION BOULEVARD
APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA 85219
Monday, December 3, 2012
7:00 PM
AGENDA
1. CALL TO ORDER.
2 ROLL CALL.
3 PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION WITH REPRESENTATIVES OF THE CITY OF CASA GRANDE AND THE ARIZONA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ON METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATIONS(MPO).
The City of Casa Grande has recently reached an urban area population of greater than 50,000. Current Federal law mandates that Casa
Grande be a Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO)as a result of reaching that population threshold. This new MPO may include portions
of Pinal County and other Municipalities within the county Representatives from both the City of Casa Grande and the Arizona Department of
Transportation will discuss what an MPO is,the process for forming them,and other pertinent information related to the formation of this new
MPO as well as MPOs in general
4 PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION ON ASSIGNMENT OF BURKE'S TOWING AGREEMENT.
Pursuant to competitive bids on April 2,2012, Burke's Towing was awarded one of five police department towing contracts for a five year term
Since the contract was awarded,the owners of Burke's Towing sold the business to Norm and Michelle Shafer,who desire to accept all
assigned rights and obligations under§11 of the Towing Agreement. Police Department Management has confirmed the new owners and
their operation of the business meet all requirements of the current towing regulations. The new owners have requested assignment of all
rights and obligations through the end of the term of the agreement,which ends on April 2,2017
PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION ON PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE PARK NAMING POLICY.
The Parks and Recreation Commission is proposing changes to the current park naming policy. The commission is suggesting new criteria be
added to allow for the dedication of park amenities to recognize and honor individuals or groups contributing to the park system They are not
recommending changing the naming criteria which requires substantial cash or land donations to have a park named after an individual or
group Staff will be in attendance at the meeting to further describe the proposed changes and address any questions.
6. PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION ON AN AMENDMENT TO THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT/JOINT POWERS
AGREEMENT#11-089 WITH THE ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR SAFETY MEDIAN IMPROVEMENTS
ON IDAHO ROAD AND OLD WEST HIGHWAY.
Staff will present to council the proposed amendments to the Intergovernmental Agreement-Joint Powers Agreement#11-089 The amendment
is necessary due to the increase of design work and estimated costs due to both state and federal processes The design will include analysis
which will include raised medians along Idaho Road,ADA compliant sidewalk ramps and crosswalks at the intersection of Idaho Road and Old
West Hwy.
7 PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION OF AWARD OF GRANT FROM THE ARIZONA PEACE OFFICERS STANDARDS AND
TRAINING BOARD IN THE AMOUNT OF$30,000.00 FOR RANGE ENHANCEMENTS.
$30,000 00 was awarded to the City of Apache Junction by the Arizona Peace Officers Standards and Training Board from their Peace Officer
Training Fund for range enhancements. The amount of city funds to be expended will not exceed$10,000 00.
8 ADJOURNMENT.
Copies of this agenda and additional info,,nation regarding any of the items listed above may obtained from
the City Clerk's office
300 East Superstition Boulevard,Apache Junction,AZ
Monday through Thursdays,7 OOa—6.00p,excluding holidays.
If any person with a disability needs any type of accommodation,please notify the Human Resources Office,at
(480)474-2617 or(480)983-0095(TDD)at least 72 hours prior to the scheduled time
PgACHF�G
y0
_°4 ti o City of Apache junction
z
Home of the .S'iipe;:stition Mountains
gRjzos*
Print
TO: City Manager's Office
FROM: George Hoffman, City Manager
DATE: December 3, 2012
.genda Type : Work Session Agenda
Council Priority Focus Area:
TITLE OF AGENDA ITEM:
PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION WITH REPRESENTATIVES OF THE CITY OF CASA GRANDE AND THE ARIZONA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ON METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATIONS (MPO)
ACTION REQUESTED:
Presentation and Discussion
DISCUSSION/ BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
The City of Casa Grande has recently reached an urban area population of greater than 50,000 Current Federal law
mandates that Casa Grande be a Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) as a result of reaching that population
threshold This new MPO may include portions of Pinal County and other Municipalities within the county. Representatives
from both the City of Casa Grande and the Arizona Department of Transportation will discuss what an MPO is,the process for
forming them, and other pertinent information related to the formation of this new MPO as well as MPOs in general.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Budgetary Approval Not Required
OPTIONS/ALTERNATIVES:
RECOMMENDATION:
ATTACHMENTS:
Click to download
Q CAG MPO White Paper
I
Central Arizona Association
of Governments CA G
; 'A
Draft
Task 8: MPO Research -
Case Studies & Institutional Options
Prepared by:
w1LSON
&COMPANY
June 2012
CAAG Regional Transportation Plan
TABLE OF CONTENTS
10 INTRODUCTION. . 1.1 B
1.1 WHAT IS AN URBANIZED AREA? 1-1 L
1 2 URBANIZED AREAS DEFINED .. .. 1-1
1.3 DEFINING A METROPOLITAN PLANNING AREA 1-2
2.0 WHAT IS A METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION? .2-1
2 1 SUMMARY OF LEGAL FRAMEWORK . . ....2-1 0
2.1.1 Historical Perspective 2-1
21 2 Legal Authority 2-2
2.1.3 Current Enabling Legislation—SAFETEA-LU. 2-2
2 1.4 Timing and Framework... . . 2-3
2.2 MAP 21—DRAFT REAUTHORIZATION BILL . .. 2-3 C
2.3 UNDERSTANDING MPO REQUIREMENTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES 2-4
3.0 CASE STUDIES ... 3-1
3.1 SCAG 3-1 N
311 Background 3-1 T
312 Organization 3-2
3.1.3 Population... 3-2
31 4 Metropolitan Planning Area 3-2
3.2 CAPITAL AREA MPO(CAMPO) 3-3
3 2 1 Background 3-3 T
3.2.2 Organization 3-4
3 2 3 Population 3-4
3 2 4 Metropolitan Planning Area 3-5
3.3 CENTRAL YAVAPAI MPO 3-5
3.31 Background 3-6
3 3 2 Organization 3-6
3 3 3 Population 3-6
3.3.4 Metropolitan Planning Area 3-7
3 4 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION OF SOUTH NEVADA 3-7
3.4.1 Background 3-8
3 4 2 Organization 3-8
3 4 3 Population 3-8
3.4.4 Metropolitan Planning Area 3-8
3 5 ASSOCIATION OF MONTEREY BAY AREA GOVERNMENTS 3-9
3 51 Background 3-9
3 5.2 Organization. 3-10
3 5 3 Population 3-10
3.5 4 Metropolitan Planning Area 3-10
3 6 SUMMARY . . . .. 3-12
3 7 OTHER AVAILABLE MPO CASE STUDIES 3-12
3.8 RELEVANT SOURCES OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION 3-12
Page I I
DRAFT Public Participation Plan
Vision,Values,Goals&Objectives
o • o - ! 0
@ii-ilCMgiolTrartain Plan
., .
4.0 MPO STRUCTURE AND RESPONSIBILITIES 4-1 A
4.1 INSTITUTIONAL STRUCTURE 4-1
4 1 1 Hosted MPOs . . 4-1 B
4.1.2 Independent MPOs 4-2
4 1 POTENTIAL MEMBERSHIP STRUCTURE OF THE LOCAL MPO POLICY BOARD 4-2
4.2 TECHNICAL AND STRUCTURAL REQUIREMENTS OF AN MPO 4-28110
4.2.1 Board Size . . 4-3
4 2 2 Policy Committee 4-3
4.3 RESPONSIBILITIES OF AN MPO 4-3
4 31 Plan Creation . 4-3
4 3.2 Special Technical Responsibilities 4-5 F
4 3.3 Travel Demand Modeling 4-7
APPENDICES C
Appendix A Legislative Authority 0
N
T
E
N
T
S
III
Page 1 ii
DRAFT Public Participation Plan
Vision,Values,Goals&Objectives
CAAG Regional Transportation Plan
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The U.S. Census Bureau defines urbanized areas (UZAs) as areas with a population of at
least 50,000.1 An identified UZA encompasses the area expected to become urbanized in
the next 20 years. In accordance with 23 USC 134(b) and 49 USC 5303(c), every UZA must Rs
/1„\ be represented by a designated Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO). An MPO is a
regional planning organization established under Federal law to assure a continuing, 0
comprehensive and cooperative (3C) transportation planning and decision-making process D
for metropolitan areas containing a population of 50,000 people or more.
The 3C planning process involves comprehensive examination of transportation issues and
needs in metropolitan areas. It includes a demographic analysis of the community in C
question, as well as examination of travel patterns and trends. The 3C planning process -`
also includes analysis of alternatives to meet projected future demands and for provide a
safe and efficient transportation system that meets mobility needs while not creating
adverse environmental impacts. Major responsibilities include the development of a Long-
Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) and managing a project review and approval process at
the local level to guide the use of federal transportation dollars. N
1.1 WHAT IS AN URBANIZED AREA?
An Urbanized Area is a statistical geographic entity delineated by the U.S. Census Bureau,
consisting of densely settled census tracts, census blocks, and adjacent densely settled
territory that together contain at least 50,000 people.
• A UZA is delineated in a process that begins by establishing Initial Urban Area Cores,
which starts with identifying and aggregating contiguous census tracts each having
a land area of less than three (3) square miles and a population density of at least
1,000 population per square mile(ppsm)
• Additional census tracts with a land area of less than three square miles and
population density of at least 500 ppsm are included,if contiguous
• Noncontiguous qualifying territory may be added based on distance criteria
• Noncontiguous territory also can be added via"Hops"and"Jumps,"if it meets the
qualifying criteria set forth for the Initial Urban Core Areas.
Political subdivision boundaries also may be included during the delineation process.
Often, counties are considered too large to be entirely included within the UZA, but a small
city may be included based upon the manner in which the census tract is drawn.
1.2 URBANIZED AREAS DEFINED
UZAs are statistically defined based on results of the each decennial Census and any special
censuses that may be taken by request of a recognized governing jurisdiction (e.g., city,
county, state, etc) The latest designations were accomplished based on data reported
' Note The U S Department of Transportation(USDOT)typically refers to Urbanized Areas, employing the acronym'UZA' The Census
Bureau refers to Urban Areas and uses the acronym"UA" These two terms are synonymous
Page I 1-1
DRAFT Public Participation Plan
Vision,Values,Goals&Objectives
o • 00000 • oo41111
CAAG Regional Transportation Plan
CAAG
though the 2010 Census. UZAs are identified through a listing published in the Federal
Register, the most recent listing appeared March 27, 2012.
The Federal Register listing identified the following changes in the status of several
communities in the CAAG Region.
• Delineation of the Phoenix UZA was extended into the SanTan Valley in Pinal County R.
• Casa Grande is a newly delineated UZA ce
• Several Urban Clusters (2,500 to 49,999 persons) have been delineated within Gila d
and Pinal counties; these may become urbanized areas by or prior to the next u
census
Figure 1 1 provides a graphic representation of the UZAs delineated for Central Arizona as C
a result of the 2010 Census
1.3 DEFINING A METROPOLITAN PLANNING AREA
A Metropolitan Planning Area (MPA) is a geographic area in which the transportation 0
planning process (3C) required by 23 U.S.C. 134 and Section 8 or the Federal Transit Act N
(49 U.S.C. app. 1607) must be accomplished per 23 CFR 420. This area is determined by
agreement between the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) for the area and the
Governor The MPA encompasses the urbanized area and the contiguous area expected to
become urbanized within a 20-year forecast period for the Regional Transportation Plan
(RTP). The MPA may encompass the entire Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) or
Consolidate Metropolitan Statistical Area (CMSA),as defined by the U.S. Census Bureau. An
MSA simply is a geographical region with a relatively high population density at its core
and close economic ties throughout the area
An MPA must be defined for all UZAs, as this is the formal geographic area within which
planning actions will be implemented. MPAs also area defined by the U.S. Census Bureau
and confirmed through collaboration between the local MPO and the Governor. The
adopted MPA, as defined by this collaborative effort, is sent to the Federal government for •
administrative purposes. As a result of the 2010 Census, the urban area of Casa Grande has
been designated a UZA. This will require definition of an MPA under current federal
guidelines Because the Phoenix UZA has been expanded to include the San Tan Valley in
Pinal County, the definition of the Phoenix MPA will need to revisited by MAG, the local
MPO,and the Governor
Page I 1-2
DRAFT Public Participation Plan
Vision,Values,Goals&Objectives
CAAG Regional
nal Transportation Plan
Figure 1.1 Graphic Representation of Urbanized Areas Delineated for Central Arizona
r -•.-V
Urban Areas N
2010 US Census ' '' T
Payson
or
` Gila County
U
Phoenix C
Ji
� � • I
• • a
Coolidge
ei
Casa Grande N
• •
i•inal Count «
• • • Oro Valley
410
Sout Tucson
1r
•
Legend I NOTE. USDOT typically refers to• r
• Jiban Cluster N Urbanized Areas and uses the acronym
QUrbanized Areas A "UZA" The Census Bureau refers to
Urban Areas and uses the acronym
cm CAAG Planning Boundary
MAC.;Boundary 1 inch•-:28 miles "UA"They are synonymous il
Page 11-3
DRAFT Public Participation Plan
Vision,Values,Goals&Objectives
OO 10 0
00.
CAAG Regional Transportation Plan
2.0 WHAT IS A METROPOLITAN PLANNING V11
ORGANIZATION? H
The Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) is responsible for planning, programming A
and coordination of federal highway and transit investments in urbanized areas within the T
defined MPA.
1110
2.1 SUMMARY OF LEGAL FRAMEWORK
The federal requirement for urban transportation planning was initiated with passage of S
the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1962. This requirement was considered necessary to
assure coordinated planning for routes of the Interstate Highway System (IHS) through and
around urban areas. It also was a means by which federal transportation financial A
assistance could be overseen. Transportation projects in urbanized areas of 50,000 or more in population were to be based on a continuing,comprehensive,urban transportation
planning process undertaken cooperatively by the states and local governments. This was
the birth of the so-called 3C, "continuing, comprehensive, and cooperative" planning process.
2.1 1 HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE
Between 1962 and the 1990s,requirements for urban 0
transportation planning evolved, incorporating $
short-range capital improvements programs,
long-range planning, attention to environmental k;
concerns, and corridor planning. A major sea-changelt7Ii
occurred with passage of the Intermodal Surface n
p Guide to
Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA). With the HIS Metropolitan j+
nearly complete (based on initial and amendment Transportation ,
system elements), ISTEA focused on system Planning
preservation rather than the construction of new Under ISTEA
410 facilities. The Act recognized "...changing is -4 How the Pieces Fit Together ,
development patterns, economic and cultural
•
diversity of metropolitan areas, and the need to
provide metropolitan areas with more control over
transportation in their own regions." It was oriented e oso �"
to strengthening planning activities and coordination
among major stakeholders. ISTEA established a new
framework for integrated planning that expanded the
3C planning process to incorporate meaningful
engagement of diverse interests.
ISTEA emphasized improved, more comprehensive planning and better decisionmaking to
support investments leading to " .safe and efficient mobility and accessibility and
protection of the human and natural environments" The new planning process included
six major elements.
Page 12-1
DRAFT Public Participation Plan
Vision,Values,Goals&Objectives
C11) 0 4..
• • e e - G O
CAAG Regional Transportation Plan
eAAG
• A proactive and inclusive public involvement process,
• Consideration of 15 specific planning factors to ensure that the transportation
planning process reflects a variety of issues and considers other concerns such as
land-use planning, energy conservation,and environmental management, ;t
• As part of plan development,major investment studies are conducted to address
significant transportation problems in a corridor or subarea that might involve the
oa'`, use of Federal funds;
• Development and implementation of management systems including: intermodal
management system
o congestion management system S
o public transit facilities management system
o pavement management system
o bridge management system A
o safety management system
• Development of financial plans for implementing the transportation plan and TIP,
and
• Assurance that the transportation plan and UP conform to the State Implementation ,i
Plan (SIP) pursuant to the standards of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990
(CAAA). P
2.1.2 LEGAL AUTHORITY
• Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) - Created an enhanced ?
role for local governments
• Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA21) - Established seven broad
areas defining the planning process
• The Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for
Users (SAFETEA-LU) -Expanded planning areas to eight
• Pending MAP21 legislation
/'1
• Title 49. Transportation, US Code§ 5303-Metropolitan Transportation Planning
• Title 23: Highways, US Code§ 134- Metropolitan Transportation Planning
• Arizona statutes provide guidance regarding Transportation Planning (Chapter 2,
Article 7; Chapter 17,Article 2)
2.1.3 CURRENT ENABLING LEGISLATION - SAFETEA-LU
The current Federal transportation legislation governing MPO programs, funding formulas,
and other activities of the Federal government in support of local transportation
improvement actions was initially signed into law in August, 2005. It expired in
September, 2009, and has been extended several times. The current authorization,
established under the the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act:
A Legacy for Users (Public Law 109-59; referred to as SAFETEA-LU) expires June, 2012.
The legislation, as amended, establishes eight planning factors to guide long-range plan
Page 12-2
DRAFT Public Participation Plan
Vision,Values,Goals&Objectives
CAAG Regional Transportation Plan
development and current framework for plan revisions, boundary definitions, and multi- o�M :
modal planning considerations:
1 Support the economic vitality of the metropolitan area, especially by enabling global
competitiveness,productivity,and efficiency; 8 i.
2. Increase the safety of the transportation system for motorized and nonmotorized I
users,
3 Increase the security of the transportation system for motorized and nonmotorized
users,
4. Increase the accessibility and mobility of people and for freight; S
5. Protect and enhance the environment, promote energy conservation, improve the
quality of life, and promote consistency between transportation improvements and A
State and local planned growth and economic development patterns, N
6. Enhance the integration and connectivity of the transportation system, across and
between modes,for people and freight;
7. Promote efficient system management and operation,and; Ir
8. Emphasize the preservation of the existing transportation system P
2.1.4 TIMING AND FRAMEWORK 0
• Governors and local officials shall establish an MPO within twelve months of a place
being designated an Urbanized Area (UA) by the U S Census Bureau (FHWA use
"UZA")
• An MPO and its MPA boundaries (as noted above) are established and designated by
agreement between the Governor and units of general purpose local government
that together represent at least 75% of the affected population to be included in the
MPA
• The agreement includes identification of planning boundaries and by-laws that
1111
include membership and voting structure
• An initial MPO Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP) should include tasks that
will lead to a Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) and Regional
Transportation Plan (RTP)
2.2 MAP 21 - DRAFT REAUTHORIZATION BILL
Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century (MAP-21) reauthorizes the Federal-aid
highway program at the Congressional Budget Office's baseline level—equal to current
funding levels plus inflation—for two fiscal years. MAP-21 consolidates the number of
Federal programs by two-thirds, from about 90 programs down to less than 30, to focus
resources on key national goals and reduce duplicative programs. The draft bill creates a
new title called "America Fast Forward," which is intended to strengthen Transportation
Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Program (TIFIA) Program to leverage federal dollars
Page 12-3
DRAFT Public Participation Plan
Vision,Values,Goals&Objectives
f;;) • •
•••
AO
CAAG Regional Transportation Plan
CRAG,
further than they have been stretched before. It also consolidates certain programs into a Niki
focused freight program to improve the movement of goods Certain other provisions of
MAP-21 include
• MPOs for an urbanized area with a population less than 200,000 shall be terminated
3-4 years following passage of MAP 21 (as currently written), unless reaffirmed by
the existing MPO and the applicable Governor and approved by the Secretary on the
Amok, basis of meeting the minimum regulatory requirements established by the Secretary
• Regional Transportation Plan revisions occur within three years of the passage of I
I this bill
S
• Eliminates earmarks
• Expedites project delivery while protecting the environment A
• Existing MPOs may request designation as a Tier II MPO if requirements are met N
2.3 UNDERSTANDING MPO REQUIREMENTS AND
RESPONSIBILITIES
As noted above, an MPO is the recognized governing agency that manages a MPA The MPO
prepares, maintains, and manages all required documents relating to regional P
transportation planning,funding,and implementation,including
• Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP) 2
• Regional Transportation Plan (RTP)
• Transportation Improvement Program (TIP)
The MPO also prepares, publishes, and manages an Air Quality Conformity Plan (AQCP), if
the area is designated as non-attainment status. MPOs also are tasked with examining the
MPA every ten years to ensure consistency with Federal and State regulations. The
following table summarizes the specific parameters defining responsibilities of the MPO
regarding the UPWP, RTP,and TIP.
I C
I
Page 12-4
DRAFT Public Participation Plan
Vision,Values,Goals&Objectives
AIt'4 P ional Transportation Plan
PRIMARY MPO PRODUCTS r
H
Time Horizon Contents Update A
Requirements T
Unified Planning Work Program 1-2 Years Planning Studies,Tasks, Budget Annual IP
(UPWP)
I
Regional Transportation Plan 20 Years(min.) Future Goals.Stra-. ., y S
(RTP) 25 Years(preferred) Projects Every 4'i
Transportation Improvement 4 Years Transportation Every 1-2 years
Program(TIP) Investments/Projects (varies by state)
N
Prepared by Wilson&Company,May,2012
Source MPC)Planning Process(49 U S.0 §5303)
M
P
0
0
Page 12-5
DRAFT Public Participation Plan
Vision,Values,Goals&Objectives
000 •s6 � 0 GI
CAAG Regional Transportation Plan
EMA
3.0 CASE STUDIES
Five MPOs in the United States were selected to review,as they reflected a range of size and r
organization. S
3.1 SCAG E
Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) is the nation's largest MPO. This
MPO represents six counties and 191 cities with a population of more than 18 million
residents. SCAG undertakes a variety of planning and policy initiatives directed toward
encouraging a more sustainable Southern California now and in the future. I
3.1.1 BACKGROUND U
SCAG was formed on October 28, 1965, when elected officials from 56 cities and five (�
counties met in downtown Los Angeles SCAG,initially governed by a 20-member Executive
Committee, was charged with conducting growth forecasts and regional planning. To help
accommodate new responsibilities mandated by the federal and state law, as well as to E
provide more broad-based representation of Southern California's many cities and S
counties, SCAG's Bylaws were amended in 1992 to expand the Executive Committee to a
70-member Regional Council. SCAG changed its regional representation to correspond to
population size and established districts based in part upon population.
Currently, SCAG is governed by an 83-member board known as the Regional Council. The
Regional Council has four Officers (President, First Vice President, Second Vice President
and Immediate Past President). The Regional Council is comprised of elected officials from
67 Districts,which consist of one or more cities in the SCAG region.
During the past four decades, SCAG has become the largest of nearly 700 councils of
government in the United States, functioning as the Metropolitan Planning Organization
(MPO) for Southern California. SCAG is mandated by federal and state law to develop
regional plans for transportation, growth management, housing development, air quality
All I\ and other issues of regional significance.
In addition to the six counties and 191 cities that make up SCAG's region today, there are
five County Transportation Commissions (CTCs), the Tribal Government Regional Planning
Board and the Imperial Valley Association of Governments that have primary responsibility
for programming and administering transportation projects,programs and services in their
respective jurisdictions.
Page 13-1
DRAFT Public Participation Plan
Vision,Values,Goals&Objectives
(1) GO
Qfib CP
Amok oak.
WIIA CAAG Regional Transportation Plan
3.1.2 ORGANIZATION C
The SCAG organization chart shown here reveals three primary operating arms of the A
agency: Planning& Programs,Administration, and Strategy,Policy,& Public Affairs.
S
SCAG Organizational Chart E
lirSwpnuitound AM..
um*Wow T
4.90 S.M! bsq.r.Y hem
ii.ef Cwalal AN.?ws.y
kw.Mega
DeJ.w.l.q.le....e/l is.nrew•e S.nve
D
Igehe„.i ,.a,o....
—_.__- . I
1
NunNq b N.t.we, itinamowsikto Se.Ygy.4.,1e,4PMa Lbw+
nor.faro...NC. t.iwy("tom Motor (A►+N'Mu,w.01.10100
Dcv9A137171 tea.,t400 a.rb.wAy
r l r 1
1.Mi.o4nle/Ps .; L.dUrbG..w..ti1Y ?,.p i'S f,....,. A4e1.11:0•kro b.,t...Om
Demo fire.w414n3r 4aM4see. ,:re 01[4o Dwra... -
9b&ran Nwf.lu *Sr.Nova H. ..Kann..,
w;prtsaew ...pstea✓.<N....) - Now It,: u.ln bf.&S AM, _
N ta..ni ammo — itvl alt fl.%.L:wrer.x .4115.Ga.en
tam",:ub Agbtl[RA A.%5 molt _A 5
-
4r.sxt..<wN..+ee - ,d{;t.yiy= iMa kw1wl.kw Tp.g. 4y:to Co.w ; eob.
Li...H. Ifob Wen L1Ceewe T..2: LcMb)ChM legw 4'tiw:Y
Swot:meow/.47444.9 L..h..-r.tMi 0. Itx as
Ay Jr....b Cenk.,aN. - Assess...ier.., fanMb '3a^' -
C.a.a+4.ivwM Sa.gn
Noah.NsIR UCffi l M �.pNn:r.ros. '1:Iw
,edea 6rgpyy,
lava..n'.0 tro{um •
faaewury tnl.
Source. Southern California Association of Governments Web Site.
313 POPULATION
The SCAG region is home to more than 18 million people, which equates to 49 percent of
California's population.
3.1.4 METROPOLITAN PLANNING AREA
The SCAG MPA (shown on the following page) encompasses 38,130 square miles, fully
one-quarter of the land area of the State of California.
Page 13-2
DRAFT Public Participation Plan
Vision,Values,Goals&Objectives
Southern California Association Of G k a411
(SCAG)
Metropolitan Planning Area (MPA)
Is NtV*OA
\f S
Ventura San Bernardino
•,<,. -Cos Angeles j D
r. .. _...Rvsr � ,•,-
Or. r '•^ t t
\ � t Riverside
tit Granger,
AR ZONA(
l•� N 1...tt Y.. i S1i' Oreqn -
1 t
• .Imperial
,
.;t* ••�. MEXICO ""A A' if
Source Southern California Association of Governments(SCAG)Web Site
3.2 CAPITAL AREA MPO (CAMPO)
The Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization incorporates five counties in Central
Texas.
3.2.1 BACKGROUND
The Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (CAMPO), established in 1973, is the
Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) for the Bastrop, Caldwell, Hays, Travis, and
Williamson Counties in central Texas. CAMPO is governed by a Transportation Policy
Board comprised of regional and local officials. On January 20, 2010, the Board voted to
expand the organization's planning boundary to cover all of Bastrop,Caldwell,Hays,Travis,
and Williamson Counties in Central Texas.
CAMPO coordinates regional transportation planning with counties, cities, the Capital
Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Capital Metro), the Capital Area Rural
Transportation System (CARTS), Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) and other
transportation providers in the region It oversees the Federal 3C planning process
supporting the application of federal transportation funds within its planning area. The
two main products of CAMPO are the Long Range Transportation Plan (20+ years), the
Page 13-3
DRAFT Public Participation Plan
Vision,Values,Goals&Objectives
! GO C;)
•'•
,t
CAAG Regional Transportation Plan
ta
CAMPO Mobility 2030 Plan, and the Short-Range Transportation Improvement Program C
(TIP).
Capital Area Council of Governments (CAPCOG), which predates CAMPO, was organized in A
1970 to serve local governments in the ten-county region in Central Texas, known as State S
Planning Region 12. The CAPCOG includes CAMPO. CAPCOG is a regional planning E
commission organized under Chapter 391, Local Government Code,and is one of 24 within
the State of Texas. The primary focus of CAPCOG is to serve as advocate, planner, and 1111.
coordinator of initiatives that, when undertaken on a regional basis, can be more effective S
and efficient. These include emergency services, elderly assistance, law enforcement
training, criminal justice planning, solid waste reduction, infrastructure development, and T
housing and economic development. U
3.2.2 ORGANIZATION D
The CAMPO organization chart shown here reveals two primary operating arms of the 1
agency: Modeling/GIS and Environmental Planning and Capital.
E
S
October 20'I
I I s y.s..
Na�.e,Y.cCor
-wrnanat.
Coesut n;
a sw..0..ctar
Li...,r q.:.i 2 Erwin?,rw, Ill
Dater. ra<.,.�,.y
Pannnp Ct!.-.r ! ' VPh�'
Ptanrenp filar
S.*"' .J-r..'2 f�arnw P'}Aria' $Mst, , _5,,,,, _.--'—_—
Nrne• htb� Cwiema- .Y.'?M Pta^nY 9ar^e" PnlegV PUnre.t Ptrr�e. .4,,,,3 FlannM 2
�ancasar WA,. -an•eme Flanne. 4naet G.�r• Pone aaq.v+cs
Nona. Cvemr..re
Source http.//www campotexas.orJpdfs/CAMPO OreChart10-11.pdf 2012
3.2.3 POPULATION
Between 1980 and 2000, the population of the five-county region increased by 114% from
585,000 to 1,252,000. Much of the new population was accommodated in low-density,
Page 13-4
DRAFT Public Participation Plan
Vision,Values,Goals&Objectives
Irg
CRAG Regional Transportation Plan
single-family developments on the fringe of the existing urban area. By 2010, the region's C
population exceeded 1,170,000.
A
3.2.4 METROPOLITAN PLANNING AREA S
The CAMPO MPA (shown below) encompasses 38,130 square miles in the State of Texas.
Central Area Metropolitan Planning Association
(CAMPO)
Metropolitan Planning Area (MPA)
x Austin-Round Rock-San Marcos
CAMPO MSA Boundary U
CAMPO R.g.mn
y• Q ~
C.ArttAA ali+S t, A.4404.4,24.-4,04ia7 aF
Source. Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization(CAMPO)Web Site
3.3 CENTRAL YAVAPAI MPO
The Central Yavapai Metropolitan Planning Organization (CYMPO) is located within the
Prescott Urbanized Area is located in central Arizona in the central basin area of Yavapai
Page 3-5
DRAFT Public Participation Plan
Vision,Values,Goals&Objectives
(1111) (1)
f .I 1
QQ
CAAG Regional Transportation Plan
County, which is about the same size as the State of New Jersey and much larger than each
of the states of Connecticut,Delaware, and Rhode Island
A
3.3.1 BACKGROUND
The Central Yavapai Metropolitan Planning Organization (CYMPO), a partnership of Chino
Valley, City of Prescott, Dewey-Humboldt, Prescott Valley, Yavapai County and the Arizona E
Department of Transportation, was established in June 2003 by federal mandate when the
1110
region achieved a population of 50,000 Its purpose is to cooperatively plan the
transportation future of the Central Yavapai region that falls within the 401.46 square S
miles of the MPO Planning Boundary
3.3.2 ORGANIZATION U
EXECUTIVE BOARD
The member agencies of the Central Yavapai Metropolitan Planning Organization are
represented on the CYMPO Executive Board by elected officials E
The positions of Chair, Vice-Chair, and Secretary-Treasurer are rotated between City of J
Prescott, Prescott Valley, Town of Chino Valley, Town of Dewey-Humboldt and Yavapai
County on a yearly basis.
In addition to the five jurisdictions an ADOT State Transportation Board Representative is
a voting member of the CYMPO Executive Board
TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEES
MULTIMODAL TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE(M-TAC)
The member agencies of the Central Yavapai Metropolitan Planning Organization are
represented on the Multimodal Technical Advisory Committee by their technical staff.
The positions of Chair and Vice-Chair are rotated between Chino Valley, City of Prescott,
Prescott Valley, Dewey-Humboldt, and Yavapai County on a yearly basis In addition to the
four jurisdictions, ADOT Prescott District Office and Transportation Planning Division are IP
voting members of the M-TAC,as is the U.S.D.A. Forest Service.
TRANSIT TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE(T-TAC)
Voting members of the T-TAC are representatives of the City of Prescott, the Town of
Prescott Valley and Yavapai County In addition to these three jurisdictions, ADOT's Public
Transportation Division representative is a voting member as well.The positions of Chair
and Vice-Chair are rotated between the City of Prescott, Town of Prescott Valley and
Yavapai County on a yearly basis
3.3.3 POPULATION
The Central Yavapai Region has grown rapidly at an average estimated rate of four percent
per year from 2000 to 2004.The Region's population in 2004 was about 117,700.
Page 13-6
DRAFT Public Participation Plan
Vision,Values,Goals&Objectives
f.
lf444 CAAG Regional Transportation Plan
3.3.4 METROPOLITAN PLANNING AREA C
Yavapai County totals approximately 8,125 square miles. Of the 8,125 square miles in A
Yavapai County, approximately 401 square miles are encompassed within the CYMPO MPA.
S
Central Yavapai Metropolitan Planning Organization E
(CYMPO)
Metropolitan Planning Area (MPA)
S
CY ",PO Plarinrrt9 Boundary
- T
L u
` 1,
•
E
\ ,, S
l
r .r _1\ 5-'~„
,. d r'
LI,•=,.,,
.. , i r
j�i • .
Source. Central Yavapai Metropolitan Planning Organization(CYMPO)Web Site.
3.4 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION OF SOUTH
NEVADA
The Regional Transportation Commission of South Nevada (RTC) is transportation-
planning agency for Southern Nevada The RTC also is the local transit authority for
Southern Nevada.
Page 13-7
DRAFT Public Participation Plan
Vision,Values,Goals&Objectives
QQQ gr 0 0 0 •1 CO 0
CAAG Regional Transportation Plan
CgA G
3.4.1 BACKGROUND c
The Regional Transportation Commission of Southern Nevada (RTC) is a regional
transportation planning entity. The RTC is both the transit authority and the
transportation-planning agency for Southern Nevada S,
The regional government agency was created in 1965 by State Statute. Sixteen years later, E
in 1981, the RTC was named the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) for Southern •
Nevada. As the region's MPO, the agency is responsible to state and federal governments
for maintaining a continuing, cooperative, and comprehensive (3-C) transportation S
planning process ensuring that transit plans and programs involve public input and r,
recommendations and conform to approved air quality standards
As the MPO, the RTC oversees the federally mandated transportation planning process for U
Southern Nevada and plans the Valley's roadways and transit infrastructure to p
accommodate the demands of the region's current population in addition to that of 50
years from now Included in the MPO planning process are projects that require state and
federal funding. Additionally, the RTC manages the distribution of funds from• the Federal E
Transit Administration (FTA), the Federal Highway Trust Fund, the County Option Motor
Vehicle Fuel Tax for regional, street, and highway construction, and, the County sales tax
designated for transportation.
3.4.2 ORGANIZATION
Membership is set by State statute and consists of two members from the Board of Clark
County Commissioners, two members from the city council of the largest incorporated city
and one member from the city council of every other incorporated city in the county. The
Director of the Nevada Department of Transportation serves as an ex-officio member.
Day-to-day operations are the responsibility of the General Manager who oversees an
agency responsible for street and highway planning and funding, freeway and arterial
development programs,traffic management,and public transportation
3.4.3 POPULATION •
With approximately 2.3 million people living in Southern Nevada and another 39 million
tourists visiting the area annually, the RTC is focused on keeping up with increasing
demands on the local transportation system and infrastructure
3.4.4 METROPOLITAN PLANNING AREA
The RTC MPA (shown on the following page) includes all of Clark County and five
communities with the county,encompassing an area of approximately 8,091 square miles.
Page 13-8
DRAFT Public Participation Plan
Vision,Values,Goals&Objectives
. . Q • Q o
CAAG Regional.Transportation Plan
Regional Transportation Commission of South Nevada C
(RTC) A
Metropolitan Planning Area (MPA)
S
Lin cc r~ Cr, rty E
n , _i_
,,
. ,
i
, ,.... S
Gi
T
C3 i ..t,$ ,4, . I U
_ L L D
e.
i _
4 I.It �4.. i E
ti i; t ,1
S
w7" '+fir... +! S 1.4.itP p t
/t
,o \ 1 Q
N
N
e ? 2s e.
1 NN*.
Source. Regional Transportation Commission of South Nevada(RTC)Web site.
3.5 ASSOCIATION OF MONTEREY BAY AREA GOVERNMENTS
The Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments (AMBAG) serves as both a
federally-designated MPO and Council of Governments (COG).
3.51 BACKGROUND
The Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments (AMBAG) was organized in 1968 for
the purpose of regional collaboration and problem solving, as it is often referred to, was
formed by a Joint Powers Authority (JPA) governed by a twenty-four member Board of
Directors comprised of elected officials from each City and County within the region. The
Page 13-9
DRAFT Public Participation Plan
Vision,Values,Goals&Objectives
CAAG Regional Transportation Plan
AMBAG region includes Monterey, San Benito and Santa Cruz counties. Membership and C
participation is voluntary. AMBAG performs metropolitan level transportation planning on
behalf of the region. Among its many duties, AMBAG manages the region's transportation A
demand model and prepares regional housing, population and employment forecast that s
are utilized in a variety of regional plans.
Membership and participation in AMBAG is voluntary on the part of its members. Funding
is primarily from state and federal transportation funds and grants as well as other project
specific grants. A small, but critical component of AMBAG funding is derived from annual S
member dues The AMBAG Board annually adopts a Strategic Plan. This Plan establishes
program and budget priorities for the coming year. T
3 5.2 ORGANIZATION U
AMBAG's Board of Directors is composed of locally elected officials appointed by their D
respective city council or board of supervisors. Each member city has one representative
on the Board,while each member county has two. Regional Analysis and Planning Services
(RAPS), Inc., is the 501 c 3 non-profit arm of the AMBAG. RAP, Inc is governed by a Board E
of Directors comprised of four AMBAG Executive Committee members and three public S
at-large representatives—one from each County RAPS, Inc. annually holds a regional
economic forum and a Community Planning Forum.
The organization chart shown on the following page reveals four primary operating units
Administration, Finance, Human Resources, & Budget, Planning, Modeling (in support of
transportation planning),and Energy Watch
3.5.3 POPULATION
The AMBAG Region has a reported 2010 population of approximately 733,000,
representing a 3 1 percent increase from the 2000 Census Monterey County accounts for
approximately 57 percent of the AMBAG Region's population.
3.5.4 METROPOLITAN PLANNING AREA
The AMBAG Region's MPA (shown on the following page) includes Monterey, San Benito
and Santa Cruz counties, encompassing an area of approximately 5,156 square miles.
Monterey County accounts for approximately 64 percent of the AMBAG MPA.
Page 13-10
DRAFT Public Participation Plan
Vision,Values,Goals&Objectives
•
• • CP CO
irliiiiii
CRAG Regional Transportation Plan
Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments(AMBAG)Organization Chart C
l .j?13.0 Ora:u:i=auouCk'v tnlo.911 I [Eu.utraDuertor I A
mhe Atrhq
E:ecu[c,r-Vs1-t:.ur 311,11re.iaii_rut: I
S,ne non, • rn
• E
. . .. . Mueitgy VI_P CM P.m.!CAS Ea, u,,vus(ENV)
Piiuilpd Fromm, ',Idol a nisporcarlmt]lakkt :pet gal Ptulecr,\llu Ell
-1.0 6ci.nK l:f r rl, -h., C
1 + J ISE
:emot krt of u:ur 61,Coo/alma T
Er-,I i",;teru
• u
[LC I,h NC ,:LL..n. D
IPL mle. `•rc,U Ptolerr,.V.-oc. EV,
1,r.,n,lskd t ICau'.i:tuck
e:Lil Proiettz.t;-_ur. EN- L1_
!Pinola • I,i,hi i I..,.,,.r 1 c
+O.,cLcnk •
rbnucr Home Cu.tv pr.nL:: ON" S
1
Association Of Monterey Bay Area Governments
(AMBAG)
Metropolitan Planning Area (MPA)
,�,...,r,Us i a..» O�
r
r S�, f...xucaua .,.r. ,AMBAG ..
I
::`' k.s r
....,.rn j'•..,wj ` UtvCFtl r 1,
z
w 1.4 'S
..�,.. .., `1s 4, 1
,.., N.
...,..a... 'W L •
0 r 4,• n t tlita•ra
'i
- F ‘a,,,,c, xx*R 1 �J
♦ oP
.. I
1
i
404 tll4 ?
Source Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments(AMBAG)
Page 13-11
DRAFT Public Participation Plan
Vision,Values,Goals&Objectives
0QQQ •�• OO - ' CI) Q
CAAG Regional Transportation Plan
3.6 SUMMARY
The following table summarizes some key characteristics of the five MPOs reviewed.
A
Metropolitan Planning Organization
Characteristic RTC of South
SCAG CAMPO CYMPO AMBAG
Nevada
Established/ 1975 1973 2003 1965/1981 1968
Organized
•::u don ?ri ion T
Governing Body Regional Council Board of Regional 3 member 4+1 from every 24 member Board
of 83 members and Local officials Executive Board incorporated city of Directors
Composition , counties,19 out"-Ids aria . j-` I° . a
cities and 5 the local all the the Iva, `' I
CTCs jurisdictions Incoys _ a cities jurisdi
therein therein' E
I: AL
Additional MPO MPO MPO MPO and Transit MPO and COG
Responsibilities Authority
Prepared by Wilson&Company,April,2012
3.7 OTHER AVAILABLE MPO CASE STUDIES
• Bowling Green/Warren County MPO, KY
• Dalton Whitfield MPO, GA
• Dixie MPO,UT
• Flagstaff MPO,AZ (ADOT)
• Kootenai County MPO, ID
• Lake Sumter MPO, FL
• MAG LRTP Development 2002-2004 at
http.//www.transportationforcommunities.com/case study/4/lrtp#Irtp
3.8 RELEVANT SOURCES OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
• Rapidly Urbanizing/Overview, FHWA, Summary of Notable Practices by Planning
Area. Strategy, Policy, Process,and Technical with Findings at
http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/metro/rapurbov.htm (Includes six MPO Case
Studies)
• 2005 Profiles of Metropolitan Planning Organizations,Association of Metropolitan
Planning Organizations,April 2006; Information about the jurisdictional
parameters,structural composition,Air Quality status, and program activities at
http.//www.ampo.org/assets/22 ampoprofilesfinal.pdf
Page 13-12
DRAFT Public Participation Plan
Vision,Values,Goals&Objectives
CAAG Regional Transportation Plan
cAA..
• Staffing and Administrative Capacity of Metropolitan Planning Organizations, c
FHWA,May 2010; Documents how MPOs have structured their organizations and
allocated staff resources and include case studies at
http•//www.cutr usf.edu/programs/pcm/files/2010-05-
Staffing Staffing and Administrative Capacity of MPOs pdf
S
T
U
D
E
S
Page 13-13
DRAFT Public Participation Plan
Vision,Values,Goals&Objectives
12 0 `S• oeo • oo
CAAG Regional Transportation Plan
G
4.0 MPO STRUCTURE AND RESPONSIBILITIES
P
MPOs vary greatly in terms of capacity and responsibilities Some MPOs serve populations 0
of less than 200,000, where as some represent millions MPOs are usually housed within a
regional planning council or a city or county government agency, but also may operate as s
an independent agency. A core function of MPOs is to establish and manage a fair and
impartial setting for effective transportation decision making in an urbanized area
All MPOs have the same basic planning requirements and are required to produce the
following
• Long-Range (20-year) Transportation Plans;
• Short-Range (4-year)Transportation Improvement Programs (TIP), T
• Annual statements of planning priorities and activities (generally called a Unified U
Planning Work Program or UPWP); and R
• Public Participation Plans E
The structure of an MPO is generally determined by agreement between relevant local
governments and the state. &
4.1 INSTITUTIONAL STRUCTURE
MPOs differ greatly in various parts of the country and even within states, there are two E
broad administrative types
• Hosted MPOs- Another organization acts as the fiscal agent and holds the power to
hire and fire MPO employees
• Independent: MPO acts as its own fiscal agent and only the Director can be hired or 0
fired by the MPO Board. N
S
MPO governance structure may include a variety of committees, as well as a professional I
staff Some have large staffs,while others may include only a director and a transportation Be
planner, as is apparent from the organization charts presented in the previous chapter
County governments or Councils of Government(COG) may also function as MPOs
4.1.1 HOSTED MPOS I
Advantages
• Reduced cost of operations E
• Financial assistance from the host agency-"Capital Float"
• Shared expertise,greater employee diversification
Disadvantages
• Blurring of responsibilities, identities,and boundaries
• MPO is subject to Host agency rules,budget,and oversight
• Potential interference with MPO policies
Page 14-1
DRAFT Public Participation Plan
Vision,Values,Goals&Objectives
�•• oe • • oo
CAAG Regional Transportation Plan
• Potential misunderstanding by Host agency of MPO mission M
4.1.2 INDEPENDENT MPOS p
0
Advantages
• Political and administrative autonomy S
^ • Clarity of"chain of command,"reduced staff confusion• Distinct identity with unique and focused mission
• Cleaner finances, eliminates administrative entanglements
Disadvantages C
• Trouble with cash flow for operating requirements T
• Trouble meeting funding match requirements U
• High cost of operation,no economies of scale p
• Greater dependence on versatile staff and outside contractors E
4.2 POTENTIAL MEMBERSHIP STRUCTURE OF THE LOCAL MPO
POLICY BOARD. &
A core function of MPOs is to establish and manage a fair and impartial setting for effective
transportation decision making in an urbanized area One of the key elements of an MPO's R
organizational structure is the composition and function of the policy board This policy E
board serves as the decision-making body of the MPO as well as the primary forum for S
stakeholder input into the MPO decision-making process Potential agencies represented
on the Policy Board could include:
• Federal Highways Administration
• Arizona Department of Transportation
• County representatives S
• Local City/Town Representatives I
B
4.3 TECHNICAL AND STRUCTURAL REQUIREMENTS OF AN MPO I
The MPO generally consists of a transportation policy-making and planning body governed L
by a Board of local elected officials. Adopted bylaws regulate Board composition and
voting rights, non-voting membership, and composition of any Advisory Committees The
number of seats is established during the designation process,which proceeds through the T
Governor's office. Typical membership includes. I
• Municipal elected officials (mayors, council members,or alderman) E
• County commissioners (e g,council member,selectman, or supervisor) S
• Other affected local entities (e g, Tribal Government, Military)
• State DOT officials and Appointees
Page 14-2
DRAFT Public Participation Plan
Vision,Values,Goals&Objectives
•• .
•• 1110 0 CP
CAAG Regional Transportation Plan
4.3.1 BOARD SIZE M
There is wide variation in governing Board size, most Boards have nine to 18 members. P
Intergovernmental politics and demographics may lead some Board seats to be treated
differently than others, e g., a dominant county could have more voting power. Also, an
imbalance among member populations is often addressed through seat rotation, allocation
of seats, and, although more exception than rule, weighted voting A dominant member S
may not be involved in the seat rotation, being designated as a permanent position on the110
Board. R
4.3.2 POLICY COMMITTEE U
A "Policy Committee" generally is the top-level, decision-making body of the MPO. Policy C
Committee members typically are an elected or appointed official of one of the MPO's T
constituent local jurisdictions The Policy Committee, may establish Advisory Committees, U
such as Technical (most common), Citizens, mode-oriented (e.g., roadway and transit), or R
issue-oriented (e.g.,sustainability),
E
The accompanying diagram on the following page provides a graphic illustration of a
typical MPO membership. The chart following shows a conceptual MPO organize structure. &
4.4 RESPONSIBILITIES OF AN MPO
The Policy Committee members have the legal authority to speak and act in the MPO R
setting on behalf of the jurisdiction he/she is representing. Federal law does not require E
the MPO Policy Committee members to be representative of the planning area's population, S
i e, the racial, ethnic, gender, etc mix does not need to reflect the mix of the MPO region. P
The Policy Committee debates and makes decisions regarding key MPO actions and issues.
It plays an active role in key decisions or at important milestones associated with MPO
plans and studies, as well as conducting public hearings and meetings. The Policy N
Committee makes specific recommendations regarding future projects in the region by S
formally adopting the UPWP, RTP,and TIP I
4.4.1 PLAN CREATION 1110
By its actions,the Policy Committee establishes a setting or forum for discussion of regional I
issues and manages an effective regional decision-making for transportation improvements L
project within the MPA It accomplishes this through evaluation of transportation I
alternatives, considering the size and complexity of MPA and an assessment of
transportation needs and issues The Policy Committee, generally through its staff or an
Advisory Committee, develops and updates a fiscally-constrained 20-year (minimum) RTP,
which is translated into a fiscally-constrained 4-Year TIP with an Annual Element. These E
are two important aspects of the regional planning process to assure eligibility for Federal S
transportation funding.
Page 14-3
DRAFT Public Participation Plan
Vision,Values,Goals&Objectives
` CRAG Regional Transportation Plan
CMG
CancQptual MQQ Membership
Elected S
Officials
Interest State
Groups Agencies
U
C
unicipailti T
Private counties,
Sector M PO / Regional U
:fi. ' R
Federal , Transit
Operators
Agencies $c
Public
R
Conceptual MPO Structure
O
PO Polio}' xecutive/Management
BO. qa - I i; Committee S
B
Technical Other Special
Citizens'Adviso Standing
m ommittee
Comitte > r `t &Ad Hoc
Committees
E
S
MPO
Professional
Staff
Page 14-4
DRAFT Public Participation Plan
Vision,Values,Goals&Objectives
QQQOO
AO.bak
CAAG Regional Transportation Plan
Fiscally-Constrained means—
• The costs to implement adopted plans and programs cannot exceed P
funding/revenues reasonably expected or projected to be available through the c
planning horizon
• Requires an understanding of funding/revenue streams S
• Requires prioritization of investment needs1111
• Requires an assessment across all travel modes, i.e., decisions and priorities for a R
"multimodal"transportation system U
Annual Element means— C
• First year of the TIP, includes transportation improvement projects proposed for
implementation in the current year U
• Represents projects for which funding is expected to be secured and disbursed R
• Submitted to the U.S. Department of Transportation as part of the Federal planning E
process to qualify for Federal funds
Thus, to be eligible for Federal funds, projects must be included in the adopted RTP and
TIP. The process followed by the Policy Committee also must assure active involvement of
the general public and all significantly affected sub-groups It is the responsibility of the R
MPO's Policy Committee to protect air quality E
4.4.2 SPECIAL TECHNICAL RESPONSIBILITIES S
Additional requirements associated with MPO regional planning functions area spelled out
in SAFETEA-LU. The MPO Policy Committee must consider projects and strategies to. 0
• Protect and enhance the environment
• Promote energy conservation S
• Improve quality of life I
• Promote consistency between transportation improvements and state and local Be
planned growth and development patterns I
To accomplish these requirements, the MPO, through its staff or a special Advisory L
Committee, must develop and maintain a regional travel demand model to support analysis
of the performance of the transportation network of services. This modeling requirement T
is especially critical with respect to air quality, if the area has been designated as 1
non-attainment.
If the planning area is a designated air quality non-attainment or maintenance area, then
the MPO must act to protect air quality. Transportation plans,programs, and projects must
conform to the relevant air quality plan, which is the State Implementation Plan (SIP)
approved by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). A process referred to as
Conformity Analysis is conducted to determine and established that plans, programs, and
projects conform to the SIP. The two graphics on the following page show that portions of
Pinal County have been designated as non-attainment.
Page 14-5
DRAFT Public Participation Plan
Vision,Values,Goals&Objectives
,..., .....
rill
66 CAAG Regional Transportation Plan
M
. .
. . : _ _ . ,..,,,,...ytv.v ,4
. p;,p-.N 4;,..:. * P
, . • .it.....----„, „:, c.....
tr.C.V I....
4,c:,
, ..
i •
_imp% , 'WV ''-• ' . . -....-
PM-2.5 s
. .. , • , ......•.,-.., T
......... [ .111r ; . A .„._...._ I
Nonattainment R
F I - I r ,. i , U
Area c,e.-... i P.• r
PM,:_t.49n arIlfINIA A Iva i•v., • Area
.---'-----------k, ----- v_
1 1-I'••••••
K a. OM rw..... [
...MIKAN Ku :::..........7.,..
•....../...
,_ ...
_, E
- • - _.• • I , \-,,,/ '
A &
R
L- , .-- .. 1 F-: E
. f .
S
PM-10 . , . .
. . . .
0
1 . 1
Nonattainrnent
1 .........
.... ....
0 Area .. . . .
1.-----• _ '-'1 .. :'1 1 I
...,
_______ ....,......
If—
,._. .
.. .
• i
s ,
. ..................._.... ,
. I
ADEQ'ti E
....y.......1-.....--,.....• S
----------- 0
.... ..............
Page I 44
DRAFT Public Participation Plan
Vision,Values,Goals&Objectives
000 3r 41, 4, fa 1 410 CI
CAAG Regional Transportation Plan
• G
4.4.3 TRAVEL DEMAND MODELING job
Regional travel demand modeling involves development of a base-year regional P
transportation model and network of transportation facilities. Future-year networks are
defined based on proposed enhanced or new transportation facility improvements.
Current and projected population and employment data, identified for specific
Transportation Analysis Zones (TAZs), are used to estimate travel demand on the S
Base-Year Model Network and the Future-Year Model Network.
Once the regional travel demand model is developed and calibrated to the region's travel R
network, the model must be maintained with additions and deletions, a may be U
appropriate, as the region's network of transportation facilities evolves. The model also C
must be coordinated with the modeling activities of other contiguous or closely proximate
MPOs. The conceptual travel demand modeling process shown below reflect the latest
structure for regional travel demand modeling under development by the ADOT for U
purposes of assuring a consistent analysis of travel demand and reliable analysis of R
conformity with the SIP E
R
0
DIP
E
S
P
N
S
T
E
S
Page 14-7
DRAFT Public Participation Plan
Vision,Values,Goals&Objectives
•
( eo , 00
CAAG Regional Transportation Plan
M
Conceptual Travel Demand
r :*-')4 r.* fTh f6"." rftr r"
Modeling Process
. A I P\P1 f I•4 II ""leirs,-),-)
S
Four-Step
Regional Travel
Lo4 pudica
Forecasting
Model
Tf p
E
genefex.n
2
•
r!.
R
a.
and
0 . 0
IM\ •••• •• 1
Caves:cd traff,e spec&
T
E
S
Page I 4-8
DRAFT Public Participation Plan
Vision,Values,Goals&Objectives
(;) (i) fri)
a.. wp — C„) wcn
o.
t
0
si.
a,
_
ca
0
I OM
as
CD
1 4
U
CAAG Regional Transportation Plan
APPENDIX A A
Legislative Authority p
23 USC 134(b) p
(b) DESIGNATION OF METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATIONS—
(1) IN GENERAL — To carry out the transportation planning process required by this
section, a metropolitan planning organization shall be designated for each urbanized
area with a population of more than 50,000 individuals—
(A) by agreement between the Governor and units of general purpose local
government that together represent at least 75 percent of the affected X
population (including the central city or cities as defined by the Bureau of the
Census), or
(B) in accordance with procedures established by applicable State or local law. A
(2) STRUCTURE — Each policy board of a metropolitan planning organization that
serves an area designated as a transportation management area, when designated or
redesignated under this subsection, shall consist of—
(A) local elected officials;
(B) officials of public agencies that administer or operate major modes of
transportation in the metropolitan area (including all transportation agencies
included in the metropolitan planning organization as of June 1, 1991), and
(C) appropriate State officials.
(3) LIMITATION ON STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION — Nothing in this subsection shall
be construed to interfere with the authority, under any State law in effect on the date of
the enactment of this section, of a public agency with multimodal transportation
responsibilities to—
AnN
(A) develop plans and programs for adoption by a metropolitan planning
organization; and
(B) develop long-range capital plans, coordinate transit services and projects,
and carry out other activities pursuant to State law.
(4) CONTINUING DESIGNATION — A designation of a metropolitan planning
organization under this subsection or any other provision of law shall remain in effect
until the metropolitan planning organization is redesignated under paragraph
(5) REDESIGNATION—
(A) PROCEDURES —A metropolitan planning organization may be redesignated
by agreement between the Governor and units of general purpose local
government that together represent at least 75 percent of the affected
population (including the central city or cities as defined by the Bureau of the
Census) as appropriate to carry out this section
CAAG Regional Transportation Plan
(B) CERTAIN REQUESTS TO REDESIGNATE — A metropolitan planning A
organization shall be redesignated upon request of a unit or units of general
purpose local government representing at least 25 percent of the affected (O
population (including the central city or cities as defined by the Bureau of the
Census) in any urbanized area (i) whose population is more than 5,000,000 but
less than 10,000,000, or (ii) which is an extreme nonattainment area for ozone e
or carbon monoxide as defined under the Clean Air Act. Such redesignation shall
be accomplished using procedures established by subparagraph (A)
(6) DESIGNATION OF MORE THAN 1 METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION —
More than 1 metropolitan planning organization may be designated within an existing
metropolitan planning area only if the Governor and the existing metropolitan planning
organization determine that the size and complexity of the existing metropolitan
planning area make designation of more than 1 metropolitan planning organization for
the area appropriate. A
49 USC 5303(c)).
(c) General Requirements—
(1) Development of long-range plans and tips — To accomplish the objectives in
subsection (a), metropolitan planning organizations designated under subsection (d), in
cooperation with the State and public transportation operators, shall develop long-
range transportation plans and transportation improvement programs for metropolitan
planning areas of the State
(2) Contents — The plans and TIPs for each metropolitan area shall provide for the
development and integrated management and operation of transportation systems and
facilities (including accessible pedestrian walkways and bicycle transportation
facilities) that will function as an intermodal transportation system for the
metropolitan planning area and as an integral part of an intermodal transportation
system for the State and the United States.
(3) Process of development — The process for developing the plans and TIPs shall
provide for consideration of all modes of transportation and shall be continuing,
cooperative, and comprehensive to the degree appropriate, based on the complexity of
the transportation problems to be addressed.
O� 1,PACHF JGti
City of/1 pache Junction
Home of the .S'`pet:cIitron Mountains
Print
TO: City Manager's Office
FROM: Clyde Allison, Sergeant
DATE: December 3, 2012
,genda Type : Work Session Agenda
Council Priority Focus Area: Public Safety
TITLE OF AGENDA ITEM:
PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION ON ASSIGNMENT OF BURKE'S TOWING AGREEMENT.
ACTION REQUESTED:
Presentation and Discussion
DISCUSSION/ BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
Pursuant to competitive bids on April 2, 2012, Burke's Towing was awarded one of five police department towing contracts for
a five year term. Since the contract was awarded, the owners of Burke's Towing sold the business to Norm and Michelle
Shafer, who desire to accept all assigned rights and obligations under§ 11 of the Towing Agreement. Police Department
Management has confirmed the new owners and their operation of the business meet all requirements of the current towing
regulations The new owners have requested assignment of all rights and obligations through the end of the term of the
agreement, which ends on April 2, 2017.
FISCAL IMPACT:
OPTIONS/ALTERNATIVES:
RECOMMENDATION:
Acceptance of Assignment
ATTACHMENTS:
Click to download
D Staff Report
D Towing Agreement-Burke's Towing
D Burke's Towing-request for reinstatement
THERE IS ADDITIONAL
INFORMATION ON THIS ITEM
IN THE REGULAR MEETING
SECTION UNDER ITEM
pRACHt
o�fpache Junction
U z
Home of the .S Lfpe/:clltlo// A1orurtcrin c
4PizoNr
Print
TO: City Manager's Office
FROM: Jeff Bell, Parks and Recreation Director
DATE: December 3, 2012
tgenda Type : Work Session Agenda
Council Priority Focus Area:
TITLE OF AGENDA ITEM:
PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION ON PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE PARK NAMING POLICY
ACTION REQUESTED:
Presentation and Discussion
DISCUSSION/ BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
The Parks and Recreation Commission is proposing changes to the current park naming policy. The commission is
suggesting new criteria be added to allow for the dedication of park amenities to recognize and honor individuals or groups
contributing to the park system. They are not recommending changing the naming criteria which requires substantial cash or
land donations to have a park named after an individual or group Staff will be in attendance at the meeting to further
describe the proposed changes and address any questions.
FISCAL IMPACT:
OPTIONS/ALTERNATIVES:
RECOMMENDATION:
ATTACHMENTS:
Click to download
D current park naming policy
D proposed park naming policy
PARR NAMING POLICY
Purpose
To establish criteria for naming parks, recreation facilities and
special areas, that will allow for representative and timely
identification of all properties managed by the City of Apache
Junction' s Parks and Recreation Department.
Responsibility
It should be the responsibility of the Parks and Recreation
Department Director to insure that the public facility naming
process takes place in compliance with the intent of this
procedure.
Procedure
1. The naming of all parks and recreation facilities shall come
to the Parks and Recreation Commission, who shall forward
their final recommendations to the City Council for final
adoption.
2 . Parks and Recreation facilities may be named to describe the
geographical area where they are located. A recognized name
within a specific community is a very acceptable means for
identifying parks. Unless a significant financial or land
contribution is made, it is suggested commercial names not be
used to name facilities.
3 . Parks may be named after something that is specifically unique
to Apache Junction, the valley, or the southwest, i.e. desert
flora, Indian or Mexican descriptive terminology.
4 . Parks may be named after an individual or organization, only
if one or more of the following criteria are met :
A. Said park site was donated.
B. An amount of money equal to the value of the park land
was donated.
C. An amount of money that would provide for 51% or more of
parks development was donated.
D Donations made over a period of time may be totaled to
equal the percentage of value that is required in A, B or
C.
E An individual who is accepted by the public as being a
local, state or national hero or has some historical
significance.
II-2a
ANW
5. Although not encouraged, park names may be changed if properly
justified and approved by the Parks and Recreation Commission
and City Council.
6 . Parks should be named prior to the beginning of the design for
development so that the area takes on an early identification
and allows for proper tracking during the development period.
7. The naming of parks and recreation facilities should be done
in conjunction with the community or neighborhood that will be
served. This may be accomplished through various means as
determined by staff and may include, naming contest at
elementary, junior or senior high schools or recommendation
made by recognized community groups.
8 . The Parks and Recreation Commission shall have the authority
to recommend the establishment of additional criteria for the
naming of parks and recreation facilities as deemed necessary.
r►
II-3a
DRAFT
PARKS, AREAS AND FACILITIES NAMING/DEDICATION
POLICY
PURPOSE:The purpose of this policy is to establish a systematic and consistent approach for the official
naming and dedication of parks, recreation areas and facilities
OBJECTIVES Ensure that parks, recreational areas and facilities are easily identified and located Ensure
that names and dedications are consistent with the value and character of the area or neighborhood
served Encourage public participation in the naming, renaming and dedication of parks, recreation
areas and facilities Encourage the dedication of lands,facilities, or donations by individuals and/or
groups
DEFINITION. Parks, recreation areas and facilities—means and includes all city parks,trails,swimming
pools, buildings, playgrounds, skate parks and/or any other public property under management and
control of the Parks and Recreation Department, owned or leased by the city for the public benefit.
RESPONSIBILITY It is the responsibility of the Parks and Recreation Director to ensure the parks,
recreation areas and facilities naming and dedication process takes place in compliance with the intent
of this policy.
NAMING CRITERIA. The policy of the Parks and Recreation Department is to name parks, recreation
areas and facilities through an adopted process utilizing established criteria emphasizing community
values and character, local history,geography and the environment. Naming may also be based on a
financial contribution made by an individual,family or group „...
1. Acceptable criteria for names of parks, recreation areas and facilities are as follows.
A The proposed name describes the geographical area where the facility is located.
B The proposed name describes something specifically unique to the Apache Junction area
(flora,fauna,geology, historical or cultural descriptive terminology).
C. The proposed name acknowledges significant financial support received from individuals or
groups that pays for or donates park land, donates an amount that would provide for 51%
or more of the parks development, and/or donates an amount that would cover the on-
going operating and maintenance needs of the park The value of volunteer time does not
apply to this criterion
2. Parks, recreation areas and facilities should be named prior to the beginning of the design for
development so that the area takes on an early identification and allows for proper tracking
during development
3 The naming of a parks, recreation areas and facilities may be done in conjunction with the
community or neighborhood that will be served.This may be accomplished through various
means as determined by staff and may include naming contest or recommendations made by
recognized community groups
4 Although not encouraged,names may be changed if properly justified and approved by the
Parks and Recreation Commission and City Council.
DEDICATION CRITERIA The policy of the Parks and Recreation Department is to utilize a dedication
program to recognize and honor individuals or groups contributing to the park system but not qualifying
under the naming criteria Parks, recreation areas,facilities or portions thereof, may be dedicated in
memory,or honor of, individuals or groups by the placement of a dedication or memorial plaque that
describes the contribution.The plaque must be made of quality material, rated for outdoor use and shall
be no larger than 8"x 10"for minor amenities and 28"x 32"for major amenities
1 Acceptable criteria for dedications of parks, recreation areas and facilities are as follows:
A Dedications are encouraged to be in the form of facility improvements or
enhancements
B. Dedications may be in recognition of outstanding service,substantial donations or
significant contribution to the facility or Parks and Recreation Department
C Dedications may be in memory of deceased individuals who have significantly
contributed to the facility or Parks and Recreation Department
D Individuals or groups sponsoring(nominating)a dedication must provide sufficient
funds to purchase and install the dedication or memorial plaque The City will make
every effort to maintain and preserve installed plaques but will not be responsible to
replace and/or repair damaged or stolen ones.
E Dedications of minor amenities (trees, benches, etc )shall be handled administratively
by the Parks and Recreation Department. Dedications of major amenities (buildings,
sports fields,etc)shall be approved by the Parks and Recreation Commission and City
•y► Council The wording, placement and/or mounting of plaque is subject to approval by
the Parks and Recreation Department
PROCEDURE:The procedure for naming/dedicating parks, recreation areas and facilities is as follows.
1 Public initiated request to name or dedicate a park, recreation area or facility shall be submitted
in writing to the Parks and Recreation Director.
2 Those submitting a naming/dedication request shall show how the proposed name/dedication is
consistent with the criteria stated in this policy When naming/dedicating after a person,the
request must describe the contributions to the facility or Parks and Recreation Department
Written documentation of approval by next of kin (if available)is required as part of the
proposal City staff will review the proposal for adherence to stated criteria and authentication
of statements of contributions before forwarding to the Parks and Recreation Commission.
3. The Parks and Recreation Commission will offer the opportunity for public input on the
proposed naming/dedication
4 The Parks and Recreation Commission shall forward their recommendation to City Council for
final decision
5 The Parks and Recreation Director and/or Parks and Recreation Commission can initiate the
naming/dedication process whenever deemed necessary and/or in the best interest of the City
6. In the absence of any naming/dedication request,the Parks and Recreation Commission shall
adhere to criteria stated in this policy in recommendation of name/dedication.
PpACHf�G
4•0= City of Apache function
Home of the Superoition Moiint,ill.l'
Print
TO: City Manager's Office
FROM: Emile Schmid, Senior Project Engineer
DATE: December 3, 2012
4genda Type : Work Session Agenda
Council Priority Focus Area:
TITLE OF AGENDA ITEM:
PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION ON AN AMENDMENT TO THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT/JOINT
POWERS AGREEMENT#11-089 WITH THE ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR SAFETY MEDIAN
IMPROVEMENTS ON IDAHO ROAD AND OLD WEST HIGHWAY
ACTION REQUESTED:
DISCUSSION/ BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
Staff will present to council the proposed amendments to the Intergovernmental Agreement-Joint Powers Agreement#11-
089 The amendment is necessary due to the increase of design work and estimated costs due to both state and federal
processes. The design will include analysis which will include raised medians along Idaho Road, ADA compliant sidewalk
ramps and crosswalks at the intersection of Idaho Road and Old West Hwy.
FISCAL IMPACT:
OPTIONS/ALTERNATIVES:
RECOMMENDATION:
ATTACHMENTS:
Click to download
O Cover Memo
U Original IGA
LI Amended IGA
THERE IS ADDITIONAL
INFORMATION ON THIS ITEM
IN THE REGULAR MEETING
SECTION UNDER ITEM s` f
Is ACHE�
G
8' 'Por City o f Apache junction
U O
Home of`the Super:t-frtron Mountains
1 Print
TO: City Manager's Office
FROM: Jerald L. Monahan, Chief of Police
DATE: December 3, 2012
.genda Type : Work Session Agenda
Council Priority Focus Area: Public Safety
TITLE OF AGENDA ITEM:
PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION OF AWARD OF GRANT FROM THE ARIZONA PEACE OFFICERS STANDARDS
AND TRAINING BOARD IN THE AMOUNT OF$30,000 00 FOR RANGE ENHANCEMENTS
ACTION REQUESTED:
Presentation and Discussion
DISCUSSION/ BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
$30,000.00 was awarded to the City of Apache Junction by the Arizona Peace Officers Standards and Training Board from
their Peace Officer Training Fund for range enhancements The amount of city funds to be expended will not exceed
$10,000.00.
FISCAL IMPACT:
OPTIONS/ALTERNATIVES:
:COMMENDATION:
ATTACHMENTS:
Click to download
D Range Enhancements
0 Range Enhancement Proposal
D Sky Engrneenng Proposal Letter
(] AZPOST Grant Agreement
THERE IS ADDITIONAL
INFORMATION ON THIS ITEM
IN THE REGULAR MEETING
SECTION UNDER ITEM : --