Policy Committee Tuesday, January 26, 2016, 9:00 AM Planning Commission Boardroom, 18 th Floor I. Call To Order II. Public Comment (3 minutes per speaker, please) III. Approval of Minutes – October 27, 2015 IV. Action Items A. Election of Officers (Cameron Clark, MPO Attorney) B. Transportation Improvement Program Amendment - HART (Sarah McKinley, MPO Staff) V. Status Reports A. Complete Streets Cost-Saving Strategies: Concrete Products vs. Asphalt (Justin Fleming, Florida Concrete Assn.) B. Transportation Planning & Title VI of the Civil Rights Act (Cameron Clark, MPO Attorney & Michele Ogilvie, MPO Staff) C. MPO Mission and Vision Statements (Beth Alden) VI. Old Business & New Business A. Vision Zero Next Steps (Beth Alden) B. School Transportation Taskforce (Beth Alden) VII. Adjournment The full agenda packet is available on the MPO’s website, www.planhillsborough.org, or by calling (813) 272-5940. The MPO does not discriminate in any of its programs or services. Public participation is solicited without regard to race, color, national origin, age, sex, religion, disability or family status. Learn more about our commitment to non discrimination. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the materials attached are provided here for research and educational purposes, and are distributed without profit to MPO Board members, MPO staff, or related committees or subcommittees the MPO supports. The MPO has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of attached articles nor is the MPO endorsed or sponsored by the originator. Persons wishing to use copyrighted material for purposes of their own that go beyond ‘fair use’ must first obtain permission from the copyright owner. Commissioner Lesley “Les” Miller, Jr. Hillsborough County MPO Chairman Councilman Harry Cohen City of Tampa MPO Vice Chairman Paul Anderson Tampa Port Authority Commissioner Kevin Beckner Hillsborough County Wallace Bowers HART Mayor Frank Chillura Temple Terrace Trent Green The Planning Commission Commissioner Ken Hagan Hillsborough County Joe Lopano Hillsborough Co. Aviation Authority Mayor Rick A. Lott City of Plant City Councilman Guido Maniscalco City of Tampa Councilwoman Lisa Montelione City of Tampa Commissioner Sandra Murman Hillsborough County Cindy Stuart Hillsborough County School Board Joseph Waggoner Expressway Authority Commissioner Stacy R. White Hillsborough County Beth Alden, AICP Executive Director Plan Hillsborough planhillsborough.org [email protected]813 - 272 - 5940 601 E Kennedy Blvd 18 th floor Tampa, FL, 33602
Transcript
Policy Committee Tuesday, January 26, 2016, 9:00 AM Planning Commission Boardroom, 18th Floor
I. Call To Order
II. Public Comment (3 minutes per speaker, please)
III. Approval of Minutes – October 27, 2015
IV. Action Items
A. Election of Officers (Cameron Clark, MPO Attorney)
B. Transportation Improvement Program Amendment - HART
(Sarah McKinley, MPO Staff)
V. Status Reports
A. Complete Streets Cost-Saving Strategies: Concrete Products
vs. Asphalt (Justin Fleming, Florida Concrete Assn.)
B. Transportation Planning & Title VI of the Civil Rights Act
The full agenda packet is available on the MPO’s website, www.planhillsborough.org, or by calling (813) 272-5940. The MPO does not discriminate in any of its programs or services. Public participation is solicited without regard to race, color, national origin, age, sex, religion, disability or family status. Learn more about our commitment to non discrimination.
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the materials attached are provided here for research and educational purposes, and are distributed without profit to MPO Board members, MPO staff, or related committees or subcommittees the MPO supports. The MPO has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of attached articles nor is the MPO endorsed or sponsored by the originator. Persons wishing to use copyrighted material for purposes of their own that go beyond ‘fair use’ must first obtain permission from the copyright owner.
Commissioner Lesley “Les” Miller, Jr. Hillsborough County
HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY METROPOLITAN PLANNIG ORGANZIATION
POLICY COMMITTEE MEETING OCTOBER 27, 2015
MINUTES
CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Commissioner Sandra Murman at 9:09 AM and was held in the Planning Commission boardroom. Members present: Councilwoman Lisa Montelione (arrived at 9:10 am), Derek Doughty, Commissioner Sandra Murman Members excused: Councilman Harry Cohen Others present: Beth Alden, Rich Clarendon, Lisa Silva, Sarah McKinley, Allison Yeh, Linda Ferraro, MPO Staff; Commissioner Les Miller, MPO Chairman; Cindy Stuart, School Board/MPO Member; Cameron Clark, MPO Attorney; Bob Frey, Tampa Hillsborough Expressway Authority (THEA); Bill Oliver, Kittleson and Associates; Lee Royal, FDOT; Gary Cloud, citizen; Gina Evans, TIA; Calvin Hardie, City of Tampa TSS; Wiatt Bowers, Atkins Consulting. PUBLIC COMMENT No public comment. (Chairperson Montelione entered the meeting at 9:10 AM) APPROVAL OF MINUTES (September 29, 2015) Mr. Doughty made a motion to approve the September 29, 2015 Policy minutes. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Murman and carried. ACTION ITEMS A. FDOT District 7 Tentative Work Program
- Highlights (FDOT Representative
- MPO Comments (MPO Staff) Mr. Roger Roscoe, FDOT staff presented District Seven’s Tentative Work Program.
Project phases in the work program include Project Development and Environment,
Preliminary Engineering, Right-of-Way, Construction, Design Build and Grants. He
reviewed projects in Hillsborough County that are in the program. Mr. Roscoe broke
down the amount of money to be used in Hillsborough County. For Aviation the amount
is $327.5 million; Transit $142.9 million; Seaports $34.2 million and Safety
Improvements $6.6 million. From October 26-30, FDOT will hold an on-line public
hearing for the program with an expected adoption date of July 1, 2016.
Commissioner Murman asked how an entity would move a project up. Mr. Roscoe said it must go through the process. She then asked if legislative influence would help. Motion made by Commissioner Murman to move the FDOT Work Program
forward to the full MPO Board and to direct staff to prepare a letter enumerating
the concerns of the Policy Committee which will be reviewed by the MPO Board
at its next meeting. The motion was seconded by Mr. Doughty and carried.
B. 46th Street & 131st Avenue Complete Streets Studies Mr. Wiatt Bowers of Atkins Consulting said that they are studying these two corridors in the USF area for enhancements to improve the safety, function and aesthetics of the roadways. The project limits are from Nebraska Avenue to Bruce B. Downs Boulevard and from Fletcher Avenue to Bruce B. Downs on 46th Street/Skipper Road. Commissioner Murman made a motion to accept the report and transmit it to the
MPO for consideration in the Innovation District Master Plan. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Doughty and carried.
C. Transportation Improvement Program Amendments:1-5 School Sidewalks and Himes Avenue Bike Lanes
Ms. Sarah McKinley, MPO Staff stated that FDOT has requested five amendments to
the FY 2015/16 TIP. Four of the amendments are for Safe Routes to School sidewalk
projects and the fifth is for a separated bike lane along Himes Avenue.
Amendment 1 is at Cypress Creek Elementary at 19th Avenue NE from west of Salida Del Sol Drive to Beth Sheilds Way at a cost of $19,030. Amendment 2 is located at Stowers Elementary and the sidewalk is from the west side of Boyette Road from Gentle Wood Avenue to South of Barrington Stowers Drive. The cost is $18,895. Amendment 3 is at Summerfield Elementary with the sidewalk at Big Bend Road from Heritage Green Parkway to east of Heritage Green Parkway and a cost of $19,888. Amendment 4 is at Eisenhower Middle School. The sidewalk would be built from Old Big Bend Road from west of Covington Garden Drive to Lincoln Road and would cost $27,196. Amendment 5 is to add, extend and widen traffic separator for bike lanes along Himes Avenue from SR 60/Kennedy Boulevard to Columbus Drive. Cost is $199,120. Commissioner Murman made a motion that the Policy Committee recommends approval of all five TIP Amendments and forwards them to the MPO for approval. The motion was seconded by Mr. Doughty and carried.
STATUS REPORTS A. Approach to Connected Vehicles Pilot Program
Mr. Bob Frey, Planning Director for Tampa-Hillsborough Expressway Authority (THEA) was awarded a $2.4 million dollars by the US Department of Transportation to begin the first phase of a three-phase Connected Vehicle Pilot Program. If the plan is accepted, THEA will then receive an additional $14 million to complete the pilot program, which will take 18 months. After that time, there will be a three-year study of the program. Tampa was one of three states selected by the US DOT. The other two states were New York and Wyoming. B. MPO Mission/Vision/Logo Survey Ms. Alden said that staff is working on the MPO’s mission and new logo and will come back to the committee with conceptual ideas. Once the logo is decided upon, staff would like to begin using it in 2016. OLD BUSINESS AND NEW BUSINESS A. Research Cost Savings Strategies Ms. Alden stated that staff has been meeting to discuss cost savings and suggested using speakers to highlight materials used in other local areas. Chairman Montelione said that Plant City uses recycled materials for parks and drainage. She will research this and report back. B. 2016 MPO Meeting Schedule – provided in the packet C. Tampa Bay TMA Meeting – November 6th, 9:00 AM at Atkins Consulting
D. Cancel November Policy Committee Meeting – Consent at November MPO Meeting
E. Other Business ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 10:39 AM.
Board & Committee Agenda Item
Agenda Item: Election of Officers
Presenter: Cameron Clark, MPO Attorney
Summary: The MPO By-Laws require that officers are to be elected at the first meeting of each year. There are no term limits for officers, therefore they can be re-elected and serve indefinitely. The By-Laws state:
Officers of Standing Committees: The committee shall hold an organizational
meeting each year for the purpose of electing a committee chair … a committee vice-chair, and, at the discretion of the committee chair, an officer-at-large. Officers shall be elected by a majority vote of a quorum of the members.
The current Policy Committee officers are:
Chair Councilwoman Montelione
Vice Chair Councilman Cohen
Officer-at-large None Members can nominate themselves or any other member. No second is needed, and each nomination is voted on individually until one member receives a majority of votes for an officer’s position.
Recommended Action: Hold election of officers for 2016
Agenda Item: TIP/STIP Amendment – HART State of Good Repair - Fixed Guideway
Presenter: Sarah McKinley (MPO Staff)
Summary: All HART grants must be included in the current year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) and State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) so that the grants can be executed prior to September 30, 2016. The proposed amendment is described below.
State of Good Repair Program (Section 5337) Funds - $1,533,525
The State of Good Repair Program (Section 5337) provides capital assistance for maintenance, rehabilitation and replacement of existing fixed guideway systems and high intensity motorbus systems to maintain a state of good repair. Section 5337 funds can also be used to assist with the development of the required Transit Asset Management (TAM) plan.
HART will submit a grant application (FL-54-0009) to the Federal Transit Administration for $515,490. Funds in this grant will be used for streetcar maintenance projects that include replacement of axles and wheels, repair of traction motors, controllers, inverters and other streetcar components. A portion of the funds will be used to procure consultant services to assist with the development of the TAM. The budget lines for this grant application are described below.
Streetcar Maintenance Projects $444,888
Consultant Services $70,602
Total $515,490
HART will develop and submit a grant application for the remaining funds ($1,018,035) later this fiscal year.
TIP/STIP Amendment Summary Table
This table describes the grant and the action required by the MPO so that the grant will be included in the FY 2016 TIP and STIP.
The preparation of this report has been financed in part through grant[s] from the Federal Highway Administration and Federal Transit Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, under the State
Planning and Research Program, Section 505 [or Metropolitan Planning Program, Section 104(f)] of Title 23, U.S. Code.
The contents of this report do not necessarily reflect the official views or policy of the U.S. Department of Transportation.
Transportation Improvement Program AmendmentFY2015/16 - 2019 /20 STIP Amendment Number:** This STIP is in an MPO Area ** TIP Page Number: AttachedOn Tuesday, February 02, 2016, the Hillsborough MPO Metropolitan Planning Organization amended the Transportation Improvement Program that was developed and adopted in compliance with Title 23 and Title 49 in a continuing, cooperative and comprehensive transportation planning process as a condition to the receipt of federal assistance. By signature below, the MPO representative certifies that the TIP amendment was adopted by the MPO Board as documented in the supporting attachments. This amendment will be subsequently incorporated into the MPOs TIP for public disclosure.
The amendment does not adversely impact the air quality conformity or financial constraints of the STIP.
The STIP Amendment is consistent with the Adopted Long Range Transportation Plan. (Page Number:TBD)This document has not been approved
Metropolitan Planning Organization Chairman or DesigneeHillsborough MPO
This document has not been approved
FDOT District Representative or Designee District 07This document has not been approved
Federal Aid Management Manager or DesigneeThis document has not been approved
Federal AuthorizationSTIP amendment criteria:
A - The change adds new individual projects to the current STIP
An air conformity determination must be made by the MPO on amended projects within the non-attainment or maintenance areasE - The MPO is not in an air quality non-attainment or maintenance area.
Project Name#415172-1 Hart Fixed Guideway Section 5309/5337Status ITEM Ver Description
Fund Phase < FY 2016 FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018 FY 2019 FY 2020 > FY 2020 All YearsOriginal STIP 415172 1 AD HART FIXED GUIDEWAY SECTION 5309/5337
SECTION 5309/5337 MANAGED BY HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY
FTA CAP 1,985,300.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1,985,300.00 Proposed Project 415172 1 AM HART FIXED GUIDEWAY SECTION 5309/5337
SECTION 5309/5337 MANAGED BY HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY
FTA CAP 1,100,035.00 1,533,525.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2,633,560.00 Funding Source After Change
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Funding Source Balance Before Change -885,265.00 1,533,525.00 648,260.00
Funding Source Balance After Change Net Change to Funding Source 885,265.00 -1,533,525.00 -648,260.00
Proposed Project Before Change 1,985,300.00 1,985,300.00
Proposed Project After Change 1,100,035.00 1,533,525.00 2,633,560.00
Net Change to Project -885,265.00 1,533,525.00 648,260.00
Net Change to Funding Source 885,265.00 -1,533,525.00 -648,260.00
Net Change to Proposed Project -885,265.00 1,533,525.00 648,260.00
Net Change to STIP
Page 1 of 2FlDOT OWPB - STIP Amendments; Update Amendments
Board & Committee Agenda Item
Agenda Item: Complete Streets Cost-Saving Strategies: Concrete vs. Asphalt
Presenter: Justin Fleming, Florida Concrete and Products Association
Summary: Complete Streets Cost-Saving Strategies: Concrete Products vs. Asphalt Concrete has been used to build some of the longest-lasting streets and roadways
in the world. No other paving material, no matter how commonly used, has been able to achieve the same performance as concrete.
Across Florida, there are concrete roadways that were designed to last 20 years,
but have instead lasted 30, 40, 50 years or longer. Many of these pavements are carrying significantly more traffic, including larger trucks carrying heavier loads, than originally planned, but because of concrete’s strength, are still carrying traffic years after they were expected to be repaired or replaced.
No matter where you live, you have probably experienced the frequent replacement
of roads made from materials inferior in quality to concrete. These pavements may have been a little cheaper to build up front, but in the long run they are robbing us all with their high maintenance costs, as well as lost time from frequent delays for maintenance, resurfacing and replacement.
A very simple combination of water, sand, stone, and a small amount of cement
create strong, long-lasting concrete pavements. Concrete’s basic ingredients have not changed much in 100 years, but new technology is enhancing its features. For example, embedded fibers and special chemical additives—created by some of the brightest minds in the industry—make concrete even tougher and able to stand up to today’s heavy traffic and heavier loads.
For performance reasons, concrete pavements are the right choice beneath your
tires. For questions or assistance with a comparable pavement performance and life-
cycle cost, please visit: Florida Concrete & Products Association (FC&PA): www.FCPA.org, National Ready-Mixed Concrete Association (NRMCA): www.ConcreteStreets.com, American Concrete Paving Association (ACPA): www.StrongRoads.com
CONCRETE STREETS & LOCAL ROADS Sustainability Considerations: Although going green may be a recent thing for many industries, concrete pavements have a long history of exceptional environmental performance. Sustainability, or reaching the right balance of environmental requirements with societal needs and economic considerations, is one of the most important issues of our time. Here are just a few examples of how concrete pavements contribute to sustainability goals: Recyclability and Reuse—Concrete is the most recycled construction material in the United States, according to the Construction Materials Recycling Association. Concrete is 100% recyclable and reusable, and can be used as aggregate in new concrete pavements, base materials for new roadways, or for other uses, including erosion control and flood prevention. Local Supplies—Concrete pavements are typically produced from abundant supplies of locally available resources, such as rock, sand, cement, and water. Concrete diverts large volumes of materials away from waste stream; examples include slag, which comes from iron manufacturing, and fly ash, a byproduct of energy production. Light Reflectance—Concrete is naturally light-reflective, which reduces street lighting requirements (and saves energy). Scientists call this “albedo,” and this feature in concrete enhances safety and helps reduce urban air temperature, reducing heat island effects. Darker colored paving materials cannot provide these benefits. Durability—Because concrete pavements last longer than other pavement materials, they don’t waste additional resources, including the fuel consumed in frequent maintenance and repair of pavements made from less durable materials. This also means that there is less traffic congestion with concrete pavement which, in turn, saves fuel that would be used by cars and trucks waiting in traffic, and lowers pollution emitted from vehicles idling in long construction work zones. Fossil Fuel Savings—Vehicles traveling on concrete roadways use less fuel because the “rolling resistance” is much lower than on other paving materials. A study published by the National Research Council of Canada in 2006 shows that trucks get an average of almost 4 percent better fuel efficiency on concrete pavements. A recent study published by the University of Texas at Austin suggests similar fuel economic advantages for cars on concrete pavements during city driving. Concrete pavements also require less fuel to construct than roads built in many thin layers, like asphalt. In fact, Federal Highway Administration data concludes an asphalt roadway requires about 5.5 times more diesel fuel to construct than a comparable concrete road designed for the same traffic. For today and tomorrow, concrete pavements are the most cost-effective, most sustainable choice for streets and roads.
Innovative Solutions: It is no secret that cities and towns must do more with less. Of course, this makes roadway preservation and construction even more challenging than ever, but there are solutions to this challenge. You may be surprised to learn that concrete pavements can provide some affordable solutions. Closing the Gap – For decades, cities and towns have settled for using lower quality materials because the up front, or first costs, of concrete pavements were higher. Although concrete pavements cost about a third less during a 30- to 40- year life cycle, the simple truth is cheaper materials often won out because of lower costs. That significant first-cost gap no longer exists today, because of the volatility in prices of oil and asphalt paving material. Even if prices ease, concrete still provides a viable solution for two reasons. First, global oil supplies are limited, and second, refineries are extracting higher value products from every barrel. By comparison, local supplies of raw materials for concrete are readily available. Durable Solutions – The durability of concrete pavements means there are longer intervals between preservation, repair, and replacement. The key to this is a very simple combination of water, sand, stone, and a little cement (about 9 percent on average), which creates strong, long-lasting concrete for pavements. Many are carrying more traffic – including larger trucks with heavier loads – than engineers originally intended. How long? Many pavements designed to last 20 years are still in good condition and are carrying traffic 30 to 50 years later. True Costs of Streets & Roads – All pavements eventually will need to be resurfaced, repaired, or replaced, but concrete pavements are increasingly being used for pavement preservation and rehabilitation strategies. For example, concrete overlays can help preserve and rehabilitate existing systems. Ranging in thickness from 2 inches to 11 inches, concrete overlays can be used to extend the life of existing asphalt, concrete, or composite pavements by 15 years or more. Streetscapes Build Civic Pride – Civic leaders and people responsible for planning and building our communities are finding that it is not only possible, but very practical to balance natural elements with man-made structures. Concrete’s natural reflectance brightens roadways, parking areas, and sidewalks. It looks cleaner and stays clean-looking longer than other construction materials. Decorative and colored concrete pavements are breathing new life into urban areas, increasing civic pride. Red-colored, stamped concrete is used to simulate brick in crosswalks and other areas to create Designers have even added state symbols, pictures, and other decorative aspects to concrete roads, bridge columns, crosswalks, and more. For planners and public works officials looking to enhance the beauty, while improving the performance and cost efficiency of streets and roads, concrete pavements are the right choice.
Life-Cycle Costs: This document provides some of the basic features of concrete pavements. Some Basic Principles • LCCA is fundamentally an economic modeling process, which should be performed with engineering inputs. • LCCA uses an equivalent pavement designs. • LCCA is not specific to either concrete or asphalt pavements; it is a systemic approach. • LCCA compares pavements over their design life. • LCCA is expressed in equivalent dollars. Comparable Pavement Designs – What are comparable pavement designs? They are designs that have the same structural capacity. They also should have similar traffic-carrying capacity over the analysis period, and they should provide a reasonably similar level of service. Factors to Evaluate – When applying LCCA to pavements, there are significant cost factors that must be considered, including construction costs, estimated preservation and rehabilitation costs, and road-user costs. A number of potentially beneficial factors also should be factored in, too. These include the pavement’s durability, performance, and sustainability factors. When evaluating these variables, it is important to weigh operational considerations to get a complete picture of the environmental "footprint" of a roadway. The more obvious factors typically linked to construction and rehabilitation, reuse, energy/resource reduction, use of recycled materials, etc.important, but so are long-term operational factors. Examples of these operational factors include vehicle fuel efficiency, pavement surface reflectivity, impact on urban heat island, fuel use associated with preservation and rehab, and other things that impact the sustainability or “ecoprofile” over the pavement’s entire life-cycle. Evaluating the Pavement System – Moving on to the actual LCCA, one of the first steps is to evaluate the pavement system, including lane miles; comparable designs; annual construction/preservation budgets and costs; first costs of pavements evaluated; relative costs of paving materials; and years of remaining service. With these general considerations in mind, you are now ready for a thorough evaluation of the engineering inputs. For questions or assistance with a comparable pavement performance and life-cycle cost analysis in your area, please visit: Florida Concrete & Products Association (FC&PA): www.FCPA.org National Ready-Mixed Concrete Association (NRMCA): www.ConcreteStreets.com American Concrete Paving Association (ACPA): www.StrongRoads.com
Agenda Item: Transportation Planning and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act
Presenter: Cameron Clark, MPO Attorney & Michele Ogilvie, MPO Staff Summary: Federal laws and guidance require metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) to
engage historically disadvantaged communities in the planning process as well as address the distribution of burdens and benefits created by projects and plans produced by the MPO. Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is a federal law that protects persons from discrimination based on their race, color, income, disability status, or national origin in programs and activities that receive federal financial assistance. Also under the umbrella of Title VI are related statutes and presidential executive orders that address persons with disabilities, environmental justice (EJ) in minority and low-income populations, and services to individuals with limited English proficiency (LEP). The Hillsborough MPO work in this area includes projects that address the need for safe, reliable, affordable and convenient transportation options to respond to the concerns and values of Title VI protected communities, many of whom rely on walking, bicycling and public transportation for access to jobs and services.
Summary: Last year, the board members met in a facilitated strategic planning session and brainstormed about the MPO's strengths, weaknesses, and opportunities moving forward. Some changes to the Mission Statement were suggested and later discussed by the Policy Committee, which recommended drafting a Vision Statement to improve clarity and focus.
Staff distributed a survey to the board members to seek input on phrases that
best belong in the MPO’s Mission Statement versus a new Vision Statement. The survey also sought feedback on the MPO’s logo, which has not been updated in more than a decade, and which ideally should convey something of the organization’s purpose.
The survey suggested support for the following phrases to be part of the MPO’s
Mission Statement: …long range transportation plan… …responds to the mobility needs…. …and economic growth of the community… …as reflected in the comprehensive plans… …cooperation and integration with state and local agencies is essential for
the plan to work… And it suggested support for the following phrases to be part of the MPO’s Vision
Statement: …long range transportation plan… …guide development of a balanced transportation system…. …encourage preservation of neighborhoods… …protect the environment… …promote public safety… …enhance quality of life…
Two phrases received several “no” votes: …develop a comprehensive, fiscally constrained… …promote public transportation…. And one new phrase was suggested: …preserve the transportation system…
Staff therefore suggests the following Hillsborough MPO Mission Statement:
The Hillsborough MPO is responsible for long-range transportation planning that responds to our communities’ needs for mobility and economic growth, as envisioned in local comprehensive plans, and in cooperation with state and local agencies.
Staff also suggests the following Hillsborough MPO Vision Statement:
The Hillsborough MPO guides the development of a balanced transportation system that promotes public safety, maintains infrastructure in good repair, protects neighborhoods and the environment, and enhances quality of life.
Once the MPO Policy Committee finds the draft statements satisfactory, staff recommends forwarding the statements to the MPO’s other advisory committees for discussion and support.
