Mountainland MPO CONCEPT REPORT]

[PROJECT PRIORITAZION Mountainland MPO CONCEPT REPORT]

1.0 | Project Summary Information

MPO Concept Report 1

[PROJECT PRIORITAZION Mountainland MPO CONCEPT REPORT]

1.0 | Project Summary Information

1.1 Project Name (35 letters max) Northern Utah County Park & Ride

1.2 Project Type Transit ‐ New Service

1.3 Limits (descriptions should be identifiable. i.e: intersections, place names, landmarks, 35 characters max) Funding to provide a Park & Ride stop

1.4 Project Description (summary of project) This request is for property for a joint project between UTA & Lehi City to add a Park & Ride stop in the vicinity of 2100 North 1200 West as per the Northern Utah County Transit Study completed in 2015. This property is located in a quickly developing area and the property is needed in order to preserve it ahead of future development. As a second phase, pricing for construction of 200 stalls is also given in section 2.8 of this appliction. These stalls could be funded now, or constructed with help from UDOT when they rebuild the 2100 North interchange and close the lot currently there. This Park & Ride stop would be located within approximately 1/4 mile of the Mountain Point Hospital, as well as key employers in the area. Also, this location would allow for the walk- up ridership of approximately 600 homeowners and/or renters directly across the tracks, north-east of this location. Finally, the Park & Ride stop will allow for a future TRAX Station as per the Northern Utah County Study and the MAG RTP.

1.5 Sponsor (jurisdiction, agency name) UTA & Lehi City

1.6 Project Manager Jim McNulty Office Phone 801-237-1954 Cell Phone 801-888-6923 Fax enter fax Email [email protected]

1.7 Total Project Cost (includes local match and additional funds) enter cost PE Cost $0 ROW Cost Property Costs = $2,190,000 Construction Cost $0 Funds already available to project (less local match) $0 MPO Federal Funds Request (includes 6.77% local match) $2,190,000 includes the local match of $148,263

1.8 Local/Regional Significance

MPO Concept Report 2

[PROJECT PRIORITAZION Mountainland MPO CONCEPT REPORT]

2.0 | Project Scope Enter NA for answers to questions not applicable to your project.

2.1 Describe purpose and need of project. The purpose of this request is to procure funds to allow for a Park & Ride stop at approximately 2100 North 1200 West in Lehi City. The need is to allow for a connection to transit in the immediate area. This will allow for local residents, hospital users/employees, and employees of major companies in the area to utilize transit. It would also allow for a better connection to the Lehi FrontRunner Station to the west. The most pressing need is for property preservation. The need for stall construction will be determined when UDOT closes the park-and-ride at the 2100 South interchange. The need for a rail station will come when TRAX is extended past point of the mountian.

2.2 Describe existing service/conditions The existing conditions include an unimproved lot located within the Botanical Point Subdivision in Lehi City. The lot is located within close proximity to the UTA owned rail corridor in the area.

2.3 Highway Project Information

SR# or FA# NA

Beginning Mile Post NA

End Mile Post NA

Length of project NA

Existing number of Travel Lanes NA

Width of facility. NA

Facility surface type. NA

2.4 Transit / Pedestrian Facility Project Information

Route# Future TRAX line will come here. Local buses will also service the lot then, and possible MPO Concept Report 4

[PROJECT PRIORITAZION Mountainland MPO CONCEPT REPORT]

before then when parking stalls are installed.

Length of project Property purchase to be done in funded year.

What is the expected use of the facility or program? Property preservation for Park & Ride lot and TRAX stop.

What services are provided in the operating of this project? Connection to a local bus route in the near future, with connection to the future TRAX extension from Draper to Orem at a later date.

2.5 Describe any equipment to be purchased (buses, ITS, etc.). None at this time. Property purchase for a Park & Ride lot in Northern Utah County.

2.6 Describe how project is consistent with local plans. The Lehi City General Plan supports a vision of developing transportation, transit and land use together to improve their community.

2.7 Describe how project is consistent with Utah County ITS plan. Rail information systems can tie into the ITS plans, and would make information about travel options available as the traveling public plan their trips.

2.8 If phased or segmented, describe how the phase has logical termini and what will future phases consist of. The amounts listed sections 1.7 and 5.1 are only for purchase of the property for the park-and- ride and rail station. Here are the 2019 costs for construction or 200 stalls, which could be funded now, or when UDOT closes the 2100 North lot: PE - $101,000; Construction - $1,340,000; CE - $126,000; Contingency - $67,000 TOTAL- $1,634,000 (federal request of $1,523,378 with local match of $110,622)

The final phase will be construction of the TRAX station with associated bus improvements and additional stalls when the extension is made into Utah County.

2.9 Is project being coordinated with or constructed with a larger project? Yes. This project is part of the future TRAX extension from Draper to Orem which is supported by the MAG RTP.

2.10 Describe how project will alleviate congestion on this or other facilities. The Park & Ride will allow residents, hospital users/employees, and employees of other major companies in the area to use transit. This will help alleviate congestion in the Thanksgiving Point area.

2.11 Describe any traffic improvements. (i.e lanes, signal coordination, ITS, turn lanes, bus pullouts, etc.)

MPO Concept Report 5

[PROJECT PRIORITAZION Mountainland MPO CONCEPT REPORT]

Would help provide a better passenger through put on State and city roads in the area.

2.12 Describe any safety improvements for vehicular and pedestrian traffic. (i.e. raised median, channelization of turn movements, barriers, parkway strips, etc.) The Park & Ride would provide a safe and efficient location for transit users to board and alight transit vehicles; and for car and van pool users to meet.

2.13 How are complete streets addressed with this project? (plan for pedestrians, bikes, transit, trails, ITS) This type of project would enhance the complete street concept by allowing pedestrians and bicyclists access to transit.

2.14 Describe traffic control changes at intersections. (include info to warrant changes) None now. UTA will work with the developer and Lehi City to properly control access on 1200 West and other public streets.

2.15 What right‐of‐way is already secured? UTA owns the existing rail line that this Park & Ride stop would be adjacent to allowing for the Future extension of TRAX.

2.16 What additional right‐of‐way is needed? Property for the park-and-ride and future station.

2.17 Describe utility work to be performed and indicate who will do the work. Property puchase will not require utility work. Area being purchased for the parking is vacant so existing utilities should not come into play, other than an irrigation ditch on the site. Utility work needed to supply the parking and future station will be designed as parts of those projects.

2.18 What type of environmental work will most likely be needed? Categorical Exclusion

2.19 Facility Design

Design Year Current Design Year w/o Click here to Conditions Improvements enter Average Daily Enter Text Enter Text Enter Text Traffic Level of Service Enter Text Enter Text Enter Text

Functional Class Enter Text Enter Text Enter Text

Design Speed Enter Text Enter Text Enter Text

MPO Concept Report 6

[PROJECT PRIORITAZION Mountainland MPO CONCEPT REPORT]

*Accident Rate Enter Text Enter Text Enter Text

Transit Ridership Enter Text Enter Text Enter Text

Ped/Trail Usage Enter Text Enter Text Enter Text Amenities such as Unimproved paved parking property which is stalls, shelters, No site improvements, Park and Ride located within benches, trash with no way to Usage the Botanical receptacles, board or alight signage. Ease of Point Subdivision transit safely in Lehi City use for transit users

MPO Concept Report 7

[PROJECT PRIORITAZION Mountainland MPO CONCEPT REPORT]

3.0 | Project Ranking The following categories will be used by MPO staff to score each project. The points associated with each category show what total points MPO staff can give. MPO staff’s recommendations will be made available to the MPO TAC Committee for their use in making final project selection recommendations. MPO staff ranking is a tool to aid the MPO TAC Committee in their final selection. The committee is not required to pick projects solely on MPO staff ranks. Please note, if questions pertinent to the project are not answered, zero points will be given.

3.1 Congestion Relief (25 Points) Explain if the project…

a) Provides an alternate transportation facility that corrects an identified congested problem? Yes. The project provides parking for 200 vehicles, as well as walk‐up service for local residents, a full service hospital, and employees of major companies in the area. As a result, State and local roads in the area will be less congested.

b) Reduces congestion by reducing the number of vehicles. Yes. The project would reduce the number of single occupant vehicles in the area.

c) Reduces the need for additional highway lanes for peak hour capacity. Yes. Each bus has a capacity of 40 seats. The average passengers per hour for a UTA bus is 26 passengers per hour. Also encourages car and van pool use.

d) Increases the efficiency of transportation system through traffic management measures. Yes. Efficiency is increased because of benefits from mass transit. This part of Northern Utah County is growing very quickly, and has the potential for a TRAX extension from Draper to Orem in the near future. A direct connection to the Lehi FrontRunner Station will also be attractive to transit users.

e) Adds turning movements to relieve a congested intersection. NA

f) Design year number of users. Users include the average AADT for highways and users per day for transit, trails, and other projects. 2016 design year - 200 users per day. Future rail use will be studied as that project progresses.

g) 2020 V/C data (computed by MPO staff) MAG Staff

3.2 Mode Choice (25 points) Explain if the project…

a) Benefits multiple transportation systems (transit and highway, pedestrian and transit). Since the FrontRunner system opened in 2012, the requests for a more direct route to the employment

MPO Concept Report 8

[PROJECT PRIORITAZION Mountainland MPO CONCEPT REPORT]

centers east of I‐15 has been requested often. The project would allow transit users to have another alternative in the area. Being in close proximity to 2100 North would allow for a quick connection to the Lehi FrontRunner Station.

b) Promotes alternative transportation solution to SOV use.

Yes. Transit provides a solution to single occupant vehicle use. This site will also promote carpooling and van pooling.

c) Creates or improves linkages between transportation modes. Yes. This project would improve the linkage between bus and commuter rail for major work centers in the area.

d) Reduces physical, psychological, or economic barriers to carpool, bike, walk, or transit use. Yes. It would be located within 1/4 mile of the new Mountain Point Hospital, as well as other employers in the area, and residential housing to the east. The Park & Ride lot would allow for convenient van pooling, carpooling, bicycling, or pedestrian access to transit.

e) Provides incentives to carpool, bike, walk, or transit use. Yes. Quality facilities like a Park & Ride with paved parking and walkways will allow for safe boarding and alighting for public transit. This would be of benefit to the community and all who want access to transit. It's much more welcoming and safe than a temporary dirt or gravel facility.

3.3 Environmental Quality (15 points) Explain if the project…

a) Provides cost effective emission reductions (amount of reduction justifies cost). Yes. The project will allow for direct access to mass transit. It will attract more riders due to the increased convenience for residents, as well as employees in the area. This would allow for a reduction in single occupant car emissions.

b) Helps efforts to attain and maintain national air quality standards. Yes. The Park & Ride would increase transit ridership, thus reducing the number of single occupant vehicles in the area. Van pooling and car pooling would also be greatly encouraged.

c) Minimizes environmental impacts or reduces existing impacts (e.g. air/water/noise pollution). Yes. Less driving equals less emissions into the atmosphere.

d) Enhances the natural, cultural, or historic environment. Yes. Air quality can be vastly improved by using mass transit. Building a needed Park & Ride would improve east/west movement in the Thanksgiving Point area for UTA customers. In addition, it would improve congestion on 2100 North and 1200 West.

e) Mitigates invasive impacts to existing neighborhoods/commercial areas (minimal relocations).

MPO Concept Report 9

[PROJECT PRIORITAZION Mountainland MPO CONCEPT REPORT]

Yes. A lack of direct mass transit gives way to increased traffic congestion of single occupant vehicles. This would be a significant impact on local neighborhoods air quality and traffic congestion.

3.4 Safety (20 points) Explain if the project…

a) Corrects/improves a verified or potential safety or accident problem. Yes. The project would provide for the safe parking of vehicles for car and van pools, and allow for safe boarding or alighting of transit vehicles.

b) Improves information/communications for traffic operations and emergency responders. When the rail line is installed, cameras will be part of the project. These can benefit both traffic operations and emergency responders.

c) Reduces severity of crashes. NA

d) Enhances safe movement of pedestrian, bicycle traffic. Yes. A properly designed Park & Ride will allow for the safe movement of pedestrians and bicylists. It will allow for safe boarding and alighting. Also, bicycle racks are provided on transit vehicles for user convenience.

e) Provides an intermodal safety improvement (e.g. separation of vehicles‐trains, vehicles‐ pedestrian). Yes. The safety improvement would allow for a more direct connection between the east side of I‐15 and the FrontRunner station (west side) for transit users. A more direct connection to 2100 North via 1200 West would also improve safety in this area.

3.5 Other Considerations (15 points) Explain if the project…

a) Effectively distributes funding throughout the MPO area. Yes. The funding amount for this project would be minimal, and the results could be large when compared to other high cost road projects in Utah County.

b) Phases project in a manner that the MPO can use limited funds efficiently. The request can either be only for the property at this point, or improvements as described in section 2.8 can be added if available. This project could be done in one construction season if the funding allows for it.

c) Cost effectiveness is appropriate for the amount of improvement made. Yes. We believe that the associated cost is appropriate for the proposed site improvements. In addition, this location was identified in the Northern Utah County Study for a future transit stop. MPO Concept Report 10

[PROJECT PRIORITAZION Mountainland MPO CONCEPT REPORT]

d) Benefits transportation users from adjacent municipalities. Yes. It would allow for transit users to connect with the FrontRunner system which is a Regional Connector with the entire Wasatch Front. In addition, it has the potential to tie in with the TRAX extension from Draper to Orem in the future.

e) Is supported by elected officials. The collective mood of elected officials is to reduce the pollutants in the atmoshpere especially during unhealthy air days. Elected officials have been asked by the public to reduce the number of bad air days along the Wasatch Front. This type of project would help in this effort as it provides an attractive location for local residents, employees and employers in the area to access transit.

MPO Concept Report 11

[PROJECT PRIORITAZION Mountainland MPO CONCEPT REPORT]

4.0 | Air Quality Report All projects that are eligible for CM/AQ and CM/AQ‐PM2.5 funds must complete this report (see CM/AQ Eligibility list at www.mountainland.org/tipselection). These funds are eligible for projects and programs countywide.

4.1 Eligibility CM/AQ funds can only be used for projects and programs that a direct benefit to air quality can be demonstrated. Highway expansion, such as new single occupancy vehicle lanes, is not eligible. Turn lanes at congested intersections, transit programs, pedestrian and trail projects, signal modernization, ITS, and IM programs are typical eligible CM/AQ projects.

4.2 CM/AQ Program The purpose of the CM/AQ program is to fund transportation projects or programs that will contribute to attainment or maintenance of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) in Ozone (O3), Carbon monoxide (CO), Particulate Matter – 10 microns (PM10), and PM2.5 non‐attainment and maintenance areas. The city of Provo is a maintenance area for CO and Utah County is a non‐attainment area for PM10 and PM2.5.

4.3 Completing this Report All projects eligible for CM/AQ funds must complete this report. Completing this report can be quite technical, Susan Hardy, Air Quality Coordinator at Mountainland, can help with filling out this report. Contact her at 801/229‐3842 or [email protected]

4.4 Quantitative Analyses A quantitative assessment of how a proposed project or program is expected to reduce emissions is important to assist in selecting the most effective use of this fund. List below all travel benefits directly related to this project. Air quality benefit calculations must utilize Mobile 6. The air quality analysis should include assessing emission reductions of transit, traffic flow improvements, ITS projects and programs, ridesharing, bicycle and pedestrian improvements. Complete at least one of the sections below. If quantitative analyses cannot be done, do a qualitative assessment in 4.3.

a) Vehicle Miles Traveled Number of Vehicle Miles Traveled reduced (VMT): When parking is installed this could result in the reduction of trips due to car and van pools. If the 200 stalls result in 100 trips saved, and the average urban area trip is 7.5 miles; the lot could save more than 750 vehicle miles on the average weekday. Average distance of trips reduced: 7.5 Emission reduction per average weekday: NA

b) Idling Time Average idling time per vehicle reduced: NA Number of vehicles with reduced idling time: NA Emission reduction per average weekday: NA

C) Vehicle Speed

MPO Concept Report 12

[PROJECT PRIORITAZION Mountainland MPO CONCEPT REPORT]

Average change in vehicle speed (speed before and after): NA Number of vehicles affected: NA Emission reduction per average workday: NA

4.5 Qualitative Assessment Although a quantitative analyses of air quality impacts is required whenever possible, some improvements may not lend themselves to rigorous quantitative analysis, because of the projects characteristics or because practical experience is lacking to adequately analyze the project. In these cases, a qualitative assessment based on a reason and logical examination of how the project or program will decrease emissions and contribute to attainment or maintenance of a NAAQS is appropriate. The Park & Ride will provide transit service that's fast, direct, and frequent allowing for success. This success would be based upon the ability to carry enough passengers to reduce the number of single occupant vehicles. Less SOV means less emissions. The project will also promote car and van pooling at this location.

MPO Concept Report 13

[PROJECT PRIORITAZION Mountainland MPO CONCEPT REPORT]

5.0 | Project Cost Estimate To development a project cost estimate, please supply a detailed cost breakdown of your unit costs, inflation, equipment, right‐of‐way, contingency, etc. To do so, use the Concept Costs Estimate Excel form provided by UDOT (available at www.mountainland.org/tipselection). Non‐construction projects such as equipment purchases, operations, administration programs, studies, etc. can use other methods to show their estimated costs. All sheets or methods used should be submitted as part of the Supplemental Information accompanying the Concept Report.

5.1 Cost Summary Summarize the information from the Costs Estimate Excel form or other method. Enter NA for items that do not apply to the project.

a) Preliminary Engineering $0 b) Environmental Work $0 c) Construction $0 d) UDOT Review (project cost <$500k = $5k, >500K = $10k) NA e) Construction Engineering $0 f) Subtotal $0 g) Inflated Cost Factor (inflate to year of construction) NA h) Total Project Cost (enter total cost, not funding request)) 2019 Property Costs = $2,190,000 i) Additional Funds (less local match) Available to Project NA j) MPO Federal Funds Request (includes 6.77% local match) $2,190,000 includes the local match of $148,263

6.0 | Supplemental Information Please submit any supporting documentation including maps, diagrams, charts, cost estimates, etc. that will allow MPO and UDOT staff and any Technical Advisory Committee to make an informed decision regarding the proposed project. Keep Supplemental Information submittals to 8 pages total.

6.1 Concept Report Submittal In order to facilitate the distribution of the Concept Reports and any supplemental information, all Concept Reports with leadership signature, shall be combined with any supplemental information and saved in PDF format as one document. Please note that this might create a large data file that might be too large to emailed. Plan accordingly to submit your report in electronic format (CD, DVD, Flash Drive) by the required due date. Concept Reports are due by Thursday 03/24/2016 at 6pm.

6.2 Contacts, Questions For help with the Concept Report or questions, please contact:

Bob Allen, AICP 586 East 800 North, Orem UT 84651 Shawn Eliot, AICP p.801/229‐3813 f.801/229‐3801 586 East 800 North, Orem, UT 84097 email [email protected] p.801/229‐3841 f.801/229‐3801

MPO Concept Report 14

[PROJECT PRIORITAZION Mountainland MPO CONCEPT REPORT]

email [email protected]

MPO Concept Report 15

12300 S. Draper Town Center Estimated TRAX Extension Draper Station Draper to Lehi Conceptual Program Costs Utah State Prison 13800 S. Environmental Analysis and Conceptual Design: Approx. $ 4 - 5 Million

Engineering and Capital Costs (2015 Dollars): 11.2 Mi - Approx. $616 Million 14600 S. (SL County 7.2 Mi - Approx. $396 Million UT County 4 Mi - Approx $220 Million)

Engineering and Capital Costs (2020 Dollars*): 11.2 Mi - Approx. $739 Million (SL County 7.2 Mi - Approx. $475 Million UT County 4 Mi - Approx. $264 Million)

Long Term Maintenance (2015 - 2045**): Point of the Mountain. Approx. $352 Million

Operating Costs Approx. $ 10 - 11 Million Annually

SR 92 Ridership (2040): 1200 W Lehi Station Approx. 7000-9000 Boardings per day 2600 N Lehi *2020 Costs assume 4% annual increase **Approx 200 Million for future vehicle repair and replacement

2100 N

American Fork Station

Existing Station Proposed Station (Conceptual) Point of Interest Existing TRAX Existing FrontRunner Potential TRAX (SL County) Potential TRAX (UT County) Preserved Corridor

Updated January 2016