Table 11. Project Evaluation Criteria

Evaluation Results

The results of the scoring process for pedestrian and bicycle projects are shown in Map 21 and Map 22, respectively. Pedestrian projects consist of sidewalks and sidepaths along County-owned roads, while bicycle projects consist of on-street bicycle facilities and sidepaths along County-owned roads. As such, there is overlap between both maps through the inclusion of sidepaths, which support both walking and bicycling activity.

For both pedestrian and bicycle recommendations, projects are grouped into three categories based on the results of the evaluation: high impact, medium impact, and low impact. These categories reflect the extent to which each project advances the vision and values of the plan and will be considered by the Department of Transportation in future project scoping and programming efforts. High impact projects, for example, address multiple plan goals, while low impact projects may only address one or two goals.

While high impact pedestrian and bicycle projects are located in nearly all areas of the county, the prevalence of high impact projects in north St. Louis County reflects the higher scores for health and equity factors. Many residents in north St. Louis County rely on pedestrian and bicycle facilities to access transit, schools, employment, and other local destinations.

The impact evaluation score does not reflect prioritization, project phasing, or sequential development of project recommendations, but rather is intended to serve as an additional metric through which the Department of Transportation can analyze pedestrian and bicycle projects to pursue in combination with a variety of other important factors.

PROJECT EVALUATION RATING

High Impact

Medium Impact

Low Impact

LOCAL JURISDICTIONS

Incorporated Areas

Unincorporated St. Louis County

PROJECT EVALUATION RATING

High Impact

Medium Impact

Low Impact

LOCAL JURISDICTIONS

Incorporated Areas

Unincorporated St. Louis County

Project Programming

St. Louis County Department of Transportation is responsible for maintaining, operating, and improving the second largest roadway system in the State of Missouri. Pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure represent one of the many important elements of this multimodal transportation system. Given the current state of the County’s transportation system and its limited ability to fully fund even basic maintenance needs, the Department of Transportation must take an opportunistic approach to pedestrian and bicycle improvements. This includes leveraging limited resources to secure external grants and funding sources, partnering with local agencies and institutions to pursue projects that achieve mutually beneficial goals and objectives, and identifying opportunities to align recommended projects in the Action Plan with scheduled roadway improvements.

This opportunity-based strategy highlights the importance of regular review of potential projects as part of the programming process. Roadway resurfacing projects comprise a significant portion of the Department of Transportations annual budget. Many of these projects provide opportunities to incorporate recommendations for on-street bikeway facility installation through re-striping modifications like lane narrowing or road diets. They may also present the opportunity to incorporate adjacent sidewalks or ADA improvements and achieve economies of scale.

As the Department of Transportation reviews potential projects for inclusion in its annual and five-year capital improvements plans, the recommendations in the Action Plan and the impact ratings described in the previous section can serve as a valuable guide for incorporating multimodal, Complete Streets design elements into future transportation projects.

Corridor Studies

Many of the recommendations for pedestrian and bicycle improvements included in the Action Plan include substantial changes to the built environment. Whether adding a new sidewalk or sidepath adjacent to the road, or reconfiguring travel lanes to add on-street bike lanes, these improvements impact not just the look and feel of a roadway, but oftentimes the roadway’s capacity and other operational considerations.

The County studied 12 corridors in additional detail to better understand the opportunities and challenges of implementing recommendations proposed in the Action Plan. These corridors were selected based on preliminary recommendations for bicycle and pedestrian facilities that included, in most cases, a road diet or reconfiguration to the existing cross section. The 12 corridors, which constitute nearly 40 miles of roadways on the County Arterial Road System, are shown in Map 23 on the following page and are listed in Table 12 below.

These corridor studies represent an important step in the project evaluation and development process. Each study includes a SYNCHRO traffic analysis (where applicable), conceptual cross sections detailing roadway striping and other geometric changes to the roadway, and “before and after” photo simulations visualizing future improvements. The studies are not intended to provide final concepts for development, but rather to offer technical analysis, facility selection guidance, and design options to support project development, project programming, and community engagement should these corridors be selected for active transportation improvements. The full corridor studies are included in the appendix of the plan.

STUDY CORRIDORS

County-owned Arterial Roadway System (ARS)

ROADWAY SYSTEM

Interstate Roadways

Major Roadways

Secondary Roadways

LOCAL JURISDICTIONS

Incorporated Areas

Unincorporated St. Louis County

Funding the Action Plan

Building the Action Plan Pedestrian and Bicycle Networks is no small undertaking. Collectively, the projects proposed in the Action Plan constitute a $519M investment in system enhancements and new infrastructure. This $519M figure is comprised of $274M for projects on the St. Louis County Action Plan Network, and $245M for Gateway Bike Plan Network Update projects on state and local roadways. The cost does not include the necessary system upgrades to complete the County’s ADA Transition Plan. While the County and its community partners have a number of established funding mechanisms to support active transportation and Complete Streets projects, implementing the Action Plan’s proposed projects will require creative, collaborative, and opportunistic funding strategies that leverage local resources to secure outside funding, like federal and foundation grants. This section of the plan presents a breakdown of cost estimates by network and facility type, current funding strategies and challenges in implementing the Action Plan, and potential funding sources to advance the Action Plan’s proposed facilities recommendations.

Cost Estimates

Cost estimates are an essential planning tool used for programming capital improvements and drafting applications for external funding sources. Probable opinions of cost were developed for each project facility type based on initial planning-level examples of similar constructed projects and industry averages. These costs were then applied to each recommended project and refined with the assistance of County staff based on local experience and specific project conditions, like the need for right of way acquisition, roadway widening, and other important factors.

All facility designs and associated cost estimates proposed in this plan are conceptual in nature and must undergo final engineering design and review through coordination between all concerned departments in order to arrive at detailed project costs. Cost estimates are provided in 2020 dollars. Inflation should be included in costs in future years when bikeway improvements are programmed.

Construction costs will vary based on the ultimate project scope (i.e., combination with other projects) and economic conditions at the time of construction. When combined with larger roadway projects, the County can achieve economies of scale and maximize the value of every dollar spent on transportation infrastructure.

Table 13 on page 120 lists network cost estimates for St. Louis County Action Plan Network and Gateway Bike Plan Network Update projects, grouped by facility classification and facility type. Notes included below the table provide additional details regarding assumptions about right of way acquisition costs, engineering and design, and other contingencies included in these cost estimations. On-going maintenance costs are not included in these estimates, but should be considered during project development.

Table 13. Action Plan Cost Estimates

Right of Way included at 40 percent of initial project cost included for Off-Street/Shared Facilities, Physically Separated Facilities, Pedestrian Facilities, and Visually Separated Facilities that include roadway widening.

Engineering and Design at 15 percent of initial project cost included for Mixed Traffic and Visually Separated Facilities, 20 percent for Physically Separated Facilities, Off-Street/Shared Facilities, and Pedestrian Facilities.

Cut and Removal Contingency at 25 percent of initial project cost included for facilities that require roadway widening.

Current Funding Strategies

The County’s current funding strategies to support active transportation projects include a variety of internal and external sources. In addition to implementing on-street bikeways through its annual ARS Pavement Improvements Program, CRS Collector Pavement Improvements Program, and CRS Concrete Replacement/ Mill and Overlay Program, the County also incorporates bicycle and pedestrian projects into federally funded projects and has separate funding streams dedicated to safety improvements, ADA improvements, and Complete Streets trail and transit-related projects.

The Funding Deficit

Internal revenue dedicated to transportation projects cannot support current needs for system maintenance and preservation, let alone enhancements to the system for bicycle and pedestrian improvements. In its November 2020 presentation to the County Council, the Department of Transportation and Public Works highlighted the funding deficit between planned and needed investments to maintain the roadway system through 2030. As Figure 15 below illustrates, by the year 2025, the funding deficit will reach $50M and will be in that range for the remainder of the decade. Looking at the decade as a whole, the total deficit between needed and planned maintenance investments is more than $387M.

In light of this considerable maintenance funding shortfall, the financial picture for implementing the Action Plan is bleak without additional revenue sources. With a conservative 15 percent implementation target by 2030 (roughly $41M over 10 years, which amounts to roughly six percent of the total needed investments during that same period), the funding gap expands from $387M to $428M. This assumes a gradual increase in annual funding for Action Plan and Complete Streets projects from roughly $0.5M in 2021 to $10M by 2030.

While the 15 percent implementation target referenced on the previous page is hypothetical, it presents one of the most significant challenges to the success of the Action Plan by framing bicycle, pedestrian, and complete streets improvements in the larger context of competing funding needs and priorities. Even if that target were reduced to ten or five percent of the full cost of implementing the Action Plan, it would still be difficult to achieve.

Leveraging Resources

Given the limited funding available for active transportation, it is imperative that the County leverage its limited resources to secure outside funding and maximize investments in active transportation. Whether the County pursues these recommended improvements as standalone projects or in combination with rehabilitation activities such as concrete slab replacement and the resurfacing of asphalt streets, there are a wide variety of external funding sources available for active transportation projects, from common federal programs like the Surface Transportation Program and the Transportation Enhancement Program to less traditional sources like foundations, corporate donations, and public-private partnerships.

The list of programs and sources included in the appendix can serve as a reference for County staff to utilize while seeking financial resources to advance projects recommended in the Action Plan. This list is not exhaustive, but rather a baseline survey of available resources that should be examined regularly and added to as new funding sources are identified.

Increasing Local Revenue

While the external resources referenced above can stretch the County’s resources and maximize the value of investments in walking and biking, reliance on competitive grants and uncertain funding programs is not a sustainable longterm funding solution in and of itself.

St. Louis County must consider new revenue streams to address both system preservation and multimodal expansion. Whether through a bond issue, sales tax, gasoline tax increase, or other funding source, creating new revenue will require political will and public support. It will therefore be necessary for the Department of Transportation to demonstrate a clear and convincing need for additional revenue, provide a detailed plan for how that revenue will be spent, and a measurable benefit achieved through the projects funded with that revenue.

If and when discussions take shape regarding legislation for new revenue streams for transportation infrastructure, the Department of Transportation will be prepared to put forward specific high impact projects recommended in the Action Plan and communicate their benefit to decision makers and the general public.

Measuring Success

Performance measures track plan implementation over time. County staff and other stakeholders can reference the performance measures to routinely check that the plan is achieving its desired goals and advancing towards its overarching vision. Many variables affect the outcomes associated with each performance measure. While some variables are outside of the County’s direct control, tracking these performance measures enhances an understanding of the plan’s impact and the general state of walking and biking throughout St. Louis County.

Evaluating the plan’s progress over time is also consistent with actions described in other local and state plans. At the national level, the FHWA’s Guidebook for Measuring Multimodal Network Connectivity describes best practices for measuring pedestrian and bicycling networks. This guide can serve as an important reference for the County moving forward.

Recommended performance measures are presented in Table 14. They are not exhaustive of all metrics that the County might track over time. Rather, they are meant as baselines to begin ongoing data collection and analysis. The Interdepartmental Advisory Team (IAT) should survey available data and determine additional metrics consistent with Action Plan’s vision and goals through which the County can evaluate implementation efforts. The IAT should also explore additional performance measures with the Complete Streets Peer Advisory Committee, as dictated in the Complete Streets Ordinance. The Peer Advisory Committee can also provide assistance with data collection and synthesis from sources external to the County. This work requires staff time and data availability. The following recommendations acknowledge these constraints.