1. 1 6-Year Transportation Improvement Program (2009-2014) Kit Baker, Chair ( Citizen’s Transportation Advisory Committee ) Desiree’ Winkler, P.E. ( Transportation Division Manager )

2. 2 Presentation Purpose Review goals and objectives of transportation infrastructure development Provide recommendations for project prioritization Provide overview of the 6-Year TIP development Present final draft of 6-Year TIP Inform Council of the fiscal outlook Provide recommendations for revenue generation

3. 3 Vision Comprehensive Plan (ref: page 2, Ch. 6) Transportation Systems – Safe, efficient, and convenient Vehicle and freight movement vital to the economy Transit, bicycling, & walking are fundamental modes Contribute to quality of life and civic identity Integrate with land use goals

4. 4 Vision (cont’d) Joint Meeting between City Council and CTAC (March 31, 2008) City Council supports CTAC’s goal of preserving existing infrastructure Focus on Transportation corridors to move people and goods safely and efficiently (continue to update traffic signal system) Complete the Non-Motorized Transportation Plan and related projects Council requested CTAC’s input on transportation funding sources

5. 5 Objectives – 6-Year TIP Develop criteria for prioritizing projects Understand revenue forecasts versus expenditures Preserve existing infrastructure Address top safety hazards Provide infrastructure improvements consistent with City Council’s priorities (i.e. Tillicum and Pacific Highway redevelopment)

6. 6 6-Year TIP (2009-2014) Priorization Criteria (CTAC May 20, 2008) 1. Implement correctable safety improvements 2. Maintain existing infrastructure 3. Promote corridor flow 4. Maximize grant opportunities 5. Develop other improvement projects such as curb, gutter, sidewalks

7. 7 6-Year TIP (2009-2014) Priorization Criteria - Expanded (CTAC June 3, 2008) 1. Safety Improvements – top 5 correctable accident locations 2. Statutory or technical requirement 3. Pavement rehabilitation to maintain current overall pavement score 4. Existing infrastructure life expectancy of less than 2 years. 5. Projects that are under construction 6. Major corridor level of service improvements 7. Projects with over 40% SECURED grant funding that have all right-of-way secured and design is complete 8. Projects with over 40% SECURED grant funding with design set to be complete in 1 st half of following year 9. Projects with over 40% SECURED grant/developer funding with a committed inter- agency/develop partnership 10. Projects with less than 40% SECURED grant/develop funding 11. Projects with REASONABLE ANTICIPATED grant funding 12. Safety improvements – roadway, pedestrian, and bicycle facilities

8. 8 6-year TIP Development Purpose and Need Required for all Cities (RCW 35.77.010) Projects must be listed in the TIP in order to be grant eligible Annual process Subject to stakeholder review, public hearing, and City Council Adoption Provides framework for identifying and prioritizing transportation improvements

9. 9 6-Year TIP Development (cont’d) Important Points TIP does NOT include routine maintenance and operation costs Listing projects within the TIP does not commit the City to complete the project

10. 10 6-Year TIP Development (cont’d) CTAC Reviewed the Following: Comprehensive Plan – Transportation Vision, Objectives, and Goals Joint meeting results (Council and CTAC) Previous 6-Year TIP Pavement Condition History Accident Data Traffic Volumes (Level of Service) Comprehensive Plan and Requested Projects Existing infrastructure Transportation revenue and expenditure projections

11. 11 Transportation Revenue & Expenditures Need to understand available revenue and fixed expenditures 6-Year TIP is NOT required to be financially balanced Always more needs than revenue can support

12. 12 Transportation Revenue and Expenditures

13. 13 Transportation Revenue and Expenditures Challenges Reduction in revenue REET - $300,000 less than budgeted FY2008 Utility Taxes redistributed to balance the General Fund (2006) Administrative costs assessed (2006) Less fuel consumption = less fuel tax Construction costs in recent years have escalated at 10% annually (Grants received in prior years at a City match of 20% now need a 40% City match)

14. 14 Fiscal Outlook

15. 15 Fiscal Outlook – Consequences of no additional revenue Overall City Pavement Condition will fall below acceptable levels Secured Grant Funding Lost ($3,614,000) Bridgeport Way - Steilacoom to 83 rd ($734,000) 100 th Street – GLD to 59 th ($960,000) Bridgeport Way – 75 th to N. City Limits ($1,550,000) Steilacoom – BP to Fairlawn ($125,000) Kendrick Street (study only) ($245,000) Unable to Match Future Grant Funding (average $2.0 Million per year)

16. 16 Pavement Condition Ratings

17. 17 Pavement Condition Ratings (cont’d)

18. 18 Pavement Condition Rating (cont’d)

19. 19 6-Year TIP (2009-2014) Project Lists by Year and Accumulated Costs FY 2009 Fund Balance (end of 2008)$960,000 Projected Revenue*$1,482,756 Projected Fixed Costs$836,000 Minimum Fund Balance$500,000 TOTAL REVENUE AVAILABLE FOR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS* $1,106,756 *Note: does not include grant revenue.

20. 20 6-Year TIP (2009-2014) FY 2009 Project Prioritization List

21. 21 Projects and Grants Lost Secured Grant Funding Lost ($3,614,000) Bridgeport Way - Steilacoom to 83 rd ($734,000) 100 th Street – GLD to 59 th ($960,000) Bridgeport Way – 75 th to N. City Limits ($1,550,000) Steilacoom – BP to Fairlawn ($125,000) Kendrick Street (study only) ($245,000)

22. 22 6-Year TIP (2009-2014) CTAC Recommendations Safety and maintaining existing infrastructure is #1 Council needs to find additional funding Defer pavement preservation for 2-3 years in order to “partially” fund secured grant projects Limit future grant applications to safety-related and pavement preservation Pursue a voter-approved Transportation Benefit District

23. 23 6-Year TIP (2009-2014) Thank you !