Main content start

Document Viewer

TCTAB Prioritization Matrix

Search this PDF in the browser, review county metadata, and fall back to the original file at any time.

Commissiondepartment

Informational Literaturetopic

—known pages

Back To Documents

Searchable Text View

TCTAB Prioritization Matrix

HTML View PDF View Open Original PDF

HTML-first viewing

This HTML record preserves the readable text of the county PDF for browser-first access. The original county PDF remains available as the downloadable file of record.

Use this text-first HTML view to read and search the document in the browser. Use the original PDF when you need the official page layout, bid tab formatting, or the county file itself.

Taney County Transportation Advisory Board
Project Prioritization List
July 24, 2018

C u rre n t TCTAB Roadway/
Ranking Proj. N o. P roject Name P roject Type Scale Intersection Status o f Project D ate

1 1-9 Taney C ounty Expressway C onnectivity Regional Roadway G rant Application Submitted
2 6-10 76 C o u n try Boulevard C om plete Street Facility Upgrade Regional Roadway Planning and Design
3 6-6 M O -165 (M O -76 to M O -265) Capacity Large Roadway Planning
4 3-7 US-160 W idening through Forsyth Capacity Large Roadway Planning
5 1-3 M O -76 and Lakeshore D r Traffic Safety Medium Intersection Planning and Design 2018
6 1-1 N e w A rte ria l C o nn ector (Birch St to Maple St) Traffic Safety Large Roadway G rant Application Submitted
7 4-3 Rockaway Beach and US-160 Intersection Traffic Safety Small Intersection Planning and Design
8 1-2 US Bus Rte 65 (H w y 76 to N o rth Birch) Geometric/Safety Large Roadway Planning and Design
9 1-10 US 65 Upgrade to Freeway Standards Capacity Regional Intersection Planning
10 5-2 M O -248 and Branson Hills Pkwy Intersection Geometric/Safety Medium Intersection Planning
11 2-4 US-160 and Y Hw y Traffic Safety Medium Intersection Planning
12 3-6 H w y 76 & US-160 Traffic Safety Medium Intersection C onstruction 2018
13 4-4 US-160 and M O -248 Intersection Traffic Safety Small Intersection Planning
14 6-1 M O -165 and Fall C reek Road Intersection Geometric/Safety Medium Intersection G rant Application Submitted
15 1-12 H w y 86 at Amanda Road Traffic Safety Small Intersection Planning
16 7-1 C oon C reek Rd (H w y Bb to M O -76) C onnectivity Medium Roadway C onstruction 2018
17 1-6 N e w Interchange at M O -86 & US-65 Capacity Regional Intersection Planning
18 6-4 Fall C reek Rd (W ild w o o d D rive to MO -165) Geometric/Safety Large Roadway Planning
19 1-7 Access Rd (US-65 to Branson C reek Blvd) C onnectivity Regional Roadway Planning
20 1-11 Transload Facility Multimodal Regional Intersection Planning
21 1-13 H w y 86 Extension C onnectivity Regional Roadway Planning
22 3-4 Hulls Ford Rd (M O -76 to End o f Road) Traffic Calming Small Roadway Planning
23 1-8 N e w Interchange at US-65 & connection to JJ C onnectivity Regional Roadway Planning
24 4-2 M O -176 and US-160 Rockaway T u rn o ff Int. Traffic Safety Small Intersection Planning
25 6-2 Fall C reek Rd and Summer Ln Geometric/Safety Medium Intersection Planning
26 1-5 N e w Interchange at M O -265 & US-65 Capacity Regional Intersection Planning
27 6-5 M O -165 and Pointe Royale D r Intersection O perations Small Intersection Planning
28 6-8 T ablerock Acres Subdivision Facility Upgrade Medium Roadway Planning
29 6-11 N e w Interchange at M O -76 & M O -376 Capacity Regional Intersection Planning
30 6-9 Im prove Skyview D rive (M O -265 to Luster D r) Traffic Safety Medium Roadway Planning
31 6-3 Safari Rd (Sharp Curve Area to M O -165) Geometric/Safety Medium Roadway Planning
32 4-5 Round Mountain Road Bridge Q uality o f Com m unities Medium Roadway C onstruction 2019
33 5-1 M O -248 and Buchanan Rd Intersection Traffic Safety Small Intersection Planning
34 2-6 H w y 76 - Kirbyville School T urn Lanes Traffic Safety Small Intersection Planning
35 3-8 Hulls Ford Bridge Q uality o f Com m unities Medium Roadway Planning
36 7-5 H w y Bb (H ill Billy Lane to Gobbler's Knob) Traffic Safety Large Roadway Planning
37 5-3 M O -248 and Flynn Road Intersection Geometric/Safety Medium Intersection Planning
38 3-1 Forsyth/Taneyville Rd (Straw berry Rd to M O -76) Geometric/Safety Medium Roadway Planning
39 2-5 J-Hwy at Trigger Creek C onnectivity Medium Roadway Planning
40 5-6 M O -248 and Emory C reek Blvd Traffic Safety Small Intersection Planning
41 5-4 M O -248 and Buena Vista Intersection Geometric/Safety Small Intersection Planning
42 5-7 Buchanan Rd and Sunrise D r Intersection Traffic Safety Small Intersection Planning
43 3-2 G arrison C u to ff Road (M O -76 to C ounty Line) Geometric/Safety Medium Roadway Planning
44 5-5 Bee C reek Road and Rinehart Road Capacity Small Intersection Planning
3-5 Caney C reek Rd (W H w y to Skyline D r) Traffic Safety Medium Roadway Planning
6-7 Spring C reek Road at Branson C ity Limits Geometric/Safety Medium Roadway Planning
4-1 F H w y and US-160 Intersection Traffic Safety Small Intersection Com pleted 2016
2-1 K H w y/W arre n Rd at Bull Shoals Lake C onnectivity Medium Intersection Com pleted 2012
1-4 Acacia Club Rd (Sun Valley C ircle to M O -165/V Hwy) C onnectivity Medium Roadway Com pleted 2017
3-3 Brace Hill Rd (Slough H o llo w Rd to M Hwy) Geometric/Safety Medium Roadway Com pleted 2016
7-2 Iowa C olony Rd (M O -165 to Diamond Hill C rt) Traffic Safety Medium Roadway Com pleted 2010
2-2 Slough H o llo w Rd (Fishermans Nose to Brace Hill) C onnectivity Large Roadway Com pleted 2013
2-3 M H w y at Brace Hill and Nazarene Church Rd Geometric/Safety Medium Intersection Com pleted
7-4 M O -165 and MO -265 Intersection Traffic Safety Medium Intersection Com pleted
7-3 Lakeshore D rive (End) Traffic Safety Small Roadway Com pleted
Taney County Transportation Advisory Board
Project Prioritization List
July 24, 2018

INPUTS SCORING

Access to Efficient Movement Environm ental Access to Efficient Movement Environm ental
Congestion Relief Economic Compet. Quality of Communities Safety Taking Care of the System Congestion Relief Economic Compet. Quality of Communities Safety Taking Care of the System
Opportunity of Freight Protection Opportunity of Freight Protection

Roadway/
Type scale Intersection Status of Project

1 1-9 Taney County Expressway Connectivity Regional Roadway Grant Application Submitted 20% No 100% F 50% 2000 100% Yes Yes 100% 100% Yes 100 100% Yes Yes No 100% Yes Yes Yes 25% 0.8 Yes Yes Yes 75% Good Yes Major Arteria l2000 25% 0.3 0.0 2.5 3.8 1.9 0.1 3.8 4 6 4.0 6.0 3.0 0.7 4 3 3 0 2.0 4.5 4.5 3 0.8 6.0 1.0 10 1.0 5.3 0.3 1.0 0.3 0.0 0.5 76.89 1
2 6-10 76 Country Boulevard Complete Street Facility Upgrade Regional Roadway Planning and Design 100% Yes 100% F 50% 11850 100% Yes Yes 30% 75% No 355 25% Yes No Yes 75% Yes Yes Yes 75% 1.2 Yes Yes No 75% Good No Major Arteria 11850 100% 1.3 1.3 2.5 3.8 1.9 2.3 3.8 4 6 1.2 4.5 0.0 1.3 1 3 0 2 1.5 4.5 4.5 3 2.3 8.9 1.0 10 0.0 5.3 0.3 0.0 0.3 0.3 2.0 74.40 2
3 6-6 MO-165 (MO-76 to MO-265) Capacity Large Roadway Planning 20% No 50% C 40% 4550 100% Yes Yes 15% 100% Yes 230 75% Yes Yes No 75% Yes Yes Yes 25% 1.2 Yes Yes Yes 100% Good No Minor Arteria l4550 100% 0.3 0.0 1.3 1.5 1.5 0.5 3.8 4 6 0.6 6.0 3.0 1.0 3 3 3 0 1.5 4.5 4.5 3 0.8 8.8 1.0 10 1.0 7.0 0.3 0.0 0.2 0.1 2.0 73.98 3
4 3-7 US-160 Widening through Forsyth Capacity Large Roadway Planning 40% No 75% E 40% 4750 75% Yes Yes 30% 100% Yes 237.5 75% Yes Yes No 75% Yes Yes Yes 50% 0.7 Yes Yes Yes 100% Good No Minor Arteria l4750 100% 0.5 0.0 1.9 3.0 1.5 0.6 2.8 4 6 1.2 6.0 3.0 1.0 3 3 3 0 1.5 4.5 4.5 3 1.5 5.4 1.0 10 1.0 7.0 0.3 0.0 0.2 0.1 2.0 73.39 5
5 1-3 MO-76 and Lakeshore Dr Traffic Safety Medium Intersection Planning and Design 20% No 0% F 40% 8350 100% Yes Yes 85% 50%Partial Y 167 50% No Yes No 50% Yes Yes Yes 50% 1.2 Yes Yes No 100% Good Yes Minor Arteria l8350 100% 0.3 0.0 0.0 2.5 1.0 1.7 2.5 3 2 1.7 1.5 1.5 0.9 2 0 3 0 1.0 1.5 1.5 0.5 13.2 1.5 15 0.0 10.5 1.0 4.0 0.8 1.4 8.0 70.98 6
6 1-1 New Arterial Connector (Birch St to Maple St) Traffic Safety Large Roadway Grant Application Submitted 100% No 100% F 40% 625 100% Yes Yes 85% 100% Yes 12.5 100% Yes Yes No 100% Yes Yes Yes 75% 0.2 Yes Yes Yes 25% Fair No Minor Arteria l 625 50% 1.3 0.0 2.5 3.8 1.5 0.0 3.8 4 6 3.4 6.0 3.0 0.2 4 3 3 0 2.0 4.5 4.5 3 2.3 1.2 1.0 10 1.0 1.8 0.5 0.0 0.2 0.0 1.0 69.28 7
7 4-3 Rockaway Beach and US-160 Intersection Traffic Safety Small Intersection Planning and Design 20% No 75% C 40% 5500 50% Yes No 60% 100% artial Yes275 50% No Yes No 50% Yes Yes Yes 75% 1.4 Yes Yes Yes 100% Fair No Minor Arteria l5500 75% 0.3 0.0 1.9 1.0 1.0 2.5 1.3 3 0 1.2 3.0 1.5 1.1 2 0 3 0 1.0 1.5 1.5 0.8 15.0 1.5 15 1.5 10.5 2.0 0.0 0.8 2.0 6.0 69.24 8
8 1-2 US Bus Rte 65 (Hwy 76 to North Birch) Geometric/Safety Large Roadway Planning and Design 40% No 75% F 40% 7050 100% Yes No 85% 100% Yes 423 50% No Yes No 75% Yes Yes Yes 25% 0.8 Yes Yes Yes 100% Good No Minor Arteria l7050 100% 0.5 0.0 1.9 3.8 1.5 1.3 3.8 4 0 3.4 6.0 3.0 1.4 2 0 3 0 1.5 4.5 4.5 3 0.8 6.0 1.0 10 1.0 7.0 0.3 0.0 0.2 0.2 2.0 68.34 9
9 1-10 US 65 Upgrade to Freeway Standards Capacity Regional Intersection Planning 0% Yes 25% B 100% 5153 25% Yes Yes 85% 75%Partial Ye3s47.5 50% Yes Yes No 50% Yes Yes Yes 75% 0.6 Yes Yes No 75% Good Yes Freeway 5153 50% 0.0 1.3 0.6 0.8 3.8 0.4 0.9 4 6 3.4 4.5 1.5 1.3 2 3 3 0 1.0 4.5 4.5 3 2.3 4.5 1.0 10 0.0 5.3 0.3 1.0 0.5 0.1 1.0 66.25 10
10 5-2 MO-248 and Branson Hills Pkwy Intersection Geometric/Safety Medium Intersection Planning 40% No 50% C 30% 3300 75% No Yes 0% 100% artial Yes65 50% No No Yes 75% Yes No Yes 75% 1.8 Yes Yes No 100% Fair Yes Collector 3300 100% 0.5 0.0 1.3 1.0 0.8 0.3 1.9 0 2 0.0 3.0 1.5 0.5 2 0 0 2 1.5 1.5 0.0 0.8 15.0 1.5 15 0.0 10.5 2.0 4.0 0.6 0.2 8.0 64.76 11
2-4 US-160 and Y Hwy Traffic Safety Medium Intersection Planning 40% No 100% F 40% 5350 100% Yes Yes 100% 100% artial Y 105 50% Yes Yes Yes 100% Yes Yes Yes 75% 0.3 Yes Yes No 50% Good Yes Minor Arteria l5350 100% 0.5 0.0 2.5 2.5 1.0 0.7 2.5 3 2 2.0 3.0 1.5 0.7 2 3 3 2 2.0 1.5 1.5 0.8 2.9 1.5 15 0.0 5.3 1.0 4.0 0.8 0.6 8.0 64.19 12
3-6 Hwy 76 & US-160 Traffic Safety Medium Intersection Construction 40% No 50% D 40% 4000 100% Yes Yes 85% 100% artial Yes320 75% Yes Yes Yes 100% Yes No Yes 50% 0.9 No Yes No 50% Good No Minor Arteria l4000 100% 0.5 0.0 1.3 1.5 1.0 0.4 2.5 3 2 1.7 3.0 1.5 1.2 3 3 3 2 2.0 1.5 0.0 0.5 9.8 0.0 15 0.0 5.3 1.0 0.0 0.8 0.3 8.0 62.19 13
4-4 US-160 and MO-248 Intersection Traffic Safety Small Intersection Planning 20% No 50% A 30% 1350 50% Yes No 85% 100% artial Y 110 75% Yes Yes No 50% Yes Yes Yes 75% 0.8 Yes Yes No 75% Very Goo d Yes Collector 1350 75% 0.3 0.0 1.3 0.0 0.8 0.2 1.3 3 0 1.7 3.0 1.5 0.7 3 3 3 0 1.0 1.5 1.5 0.8 9.2 1.5 15 0.0 7.9 0.0 4.0 0.6 0.1 6.0 59.08 14
14 6-1 MO-165 and Fall Creek Road Intersection Geometric/Safety Medium Intersection Grant Application Submitted 40% No 50% F 30% 4550 100% Yes No 0% 50%Partial Yes230 50% Yes Yes No 75% Yes No Yes 25% 0.7 Yes Yes No 75% Good Yes Collector 4550 75% 0.5 0.0 1.3 2.5 0.8 0.5 2.5 3 0 0.0 1.5 1.5 1.0 2 3 3 0 1.5 1.5 0.0 0.3 8.1 1.5 15 0.0 7.9 1.0 4.0 0.6 0.4 6.0 58.31 '5
15 1-12 Hwy 86 at Amanda Road Traffic Safety Small Intersection Planning 20% No 50% C 40% 3350 50% No Yes 70% 75%Partial Y 167.5 50% No No No 50% Yes Yes Yes 75% 1.3 Yes Yes Yes 100% Fair No Minor Arteria l3350 50% 0.3 0.0 1.3 1.0 1.0 0.9 1.3 0 2 1.4 2.3 1.5 0.9 2 0 0 0 1.0 1.5 1.5 0.8 14.3 1.5 15 1.5 10.5 2.0 0.0 0.8 0.7 4.0 58.27 16
16 7-1 Coon Creek Rd (Hwy Bb to MO-76) Connectivity Medium Roadway Construction 0% No 25% B 30% 1500 100% No No 85% 100% artial Y 120 50% No Yes No 100% Yes No Yes 75% 0.9 Yes Yes Yes 75% Good Yes Collector 1500 100% 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.5 0.8 0.1 2.5 0 0 1.7 3.0 1.5 0.7 2 0 3 0 2.0 1.5 0.0 0.8 9.6 1.5 15 1.5 7.9 1.0 4.0 0.6 0.0 8.0 57.26 '7
17 1-6 New Interchange at MO-86 & US-65 Capacity Regional Intersection Planning 100% No 50% B 100% 4450 50% Yes Yes 45% 100% Yes 275 75% Yes Yes No 100% Yes No Yes 0% 0.5 No Yes No 25% Good No Freeway 4450 0% 1.3 0.0 1.3 0.8 3.8 0.3 1.9 4 6 1.8 6.0 3.0 1.1 3 3 3 0 2.0 4.5 0.0 3 0.0 3.9 0.0 10 0.0 1.8 0.3 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 57.05 '8
18 6-4 Fall Creek Rd (Wildwood Drive to MO-165) Geometric/Safety Large Roadway Planning 20% No 75% D 30% 2600 50% No No 70% 50% Yes 50 50% Yes Yes No 75% Yes Yes Yes 75% 0.5 Yes Yes No 100% Fair Yes Collector 2600 100% 0.3 0.0 1.9 2.3 1.1 0.2 1.9 0 0 2.8 3.0 3.0 0.5 2 3 3 0 1.5 4.5 4.5 3 2.3 3.5 1.0 10 0.0 7.0 0.5 1.0 0.2 0.0 2.0 56.80 '9
19 1-7 Access Rd (US-65 to Branson Creek Blvd) Connectivity Regional Roadway Planning 100% Yes 100% B 40% 4000 75% Yes Yes 85% 60% Yes 400 100% Yes Yes Yes 100% Yes No Yes 0% -1.0 25% Very Goo d No Minor Arteria l4000 0% 1.3 1.3 2.5 0.8 1.5 0.3 2.8 4 6 3.4 3.6 3.0 1.3 4 3 3 2 2.0 4.5 0.0 3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.8 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 56.16 20

Y
N
N
o
o

e
20 1-11 Transload Facility Multimodal Regional Intersection Planning 0% No 0% B 0% 250 25% Yes Yes 85% 100% Yes 125 100% Yes No No 50% Yes Yes Yes 50% -1.0 75% Fair No Other 250 75% 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.9 4 6 3.4 6.0 3.0 3.0 4 3 0 0 1.0 4.5 4.5 3 1.5 0.0 0.0 00 0.0 5.3 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 55.84 2'

o
N
o
N

o
21 1-13 Hwy 86 Extension 22 3-4 Hulls Ford Rd (MO-76 to End of Road) 23 1-8 New Interchange at US-65 & connection to JJ 24 4-2 MO-176 and US-160 Rockaway Turnoff Int. 25 6-2 Fall Creek Rd and Summer Ln 26 1-5 New Interchange at MO-265 & US-65 27 6-5 MO-165 and Pointe Royale D r Intersection 28 6-8 Tablerock Acres Subdivision 29 6-11 New Interchange at MO-76 & MO-376 30 6-9 Improve Skyview Drive (MO-265 to Luster Dr) 31 6-3 Safari Rd (Sharp Curve Area to MO-165) 32 4-5 Round Mountain Road Bridge 33 5-1 MO-248 and Buchanan Rd Intersection 34 2-6 Hwy 76 - Kirbyville School Turn Lanes 35 3-8 Hulls Ford Bridge 36 7-5 Hwy Bb (Hill Billy Lane to Gobbler's Knob) 37 5-3 MO-248 and Flynn Road Intersection 38 3-1 Forsyth/Taneyville Rd (Strawberry Rd to MO-76) 39 2-5 J-Hwy at Trigger Creek 40 5-6 MO-248 and Emory Creek Blvd 41 5-4 MO-248 and Buena Vista Intersection 42 5-7 Buchanan Rd and Sunrise D r Intersection 43 3-2 Garrison Cutoff Road (MO-76 to County Line) 44 5-5 Bee Creek Road and Rinehart Road 45 3-5 Caney Creek Rd (W Hwy to Skyline Dr) 46 6-7 Spring Creek Road at Branson City Limits 47 4-1 F Hwy and US-160 Intersection 48 2-1 K Hwy/Warren Rd at Bull Shoals Lake 49 -4 Acacia Club Rd (Sun Valley Circle 50 3-3 Brace Hill Rd (Slough Hollow Rd to M Hwy) 51 7-2 Iowa Colony Rd (MO-165 to Diamond Hill Crt) 52 2-2 Slough Hollow Rd (Fishermans Nose to Brace Hill) 53 2-3 M Hwy at Brace Hill and Nazarene Church Rd 54 7-4 MO-165 and MO-265 Intersection Proj. #: 1-1 Project Name: N
Connectivity Regional Roadway Planning 20% No 100% F 50% 4000 50% Yes Yes 70% 75% Yes 400 100% Yes Yes No 100% Yes No Yes 0% -1.0 No Yes Yes 25% Very Goo d No Major Arterial4000 0% 0.3 0.0 2.5 3.8 1.9 0.3 1.9 4 6 2.8 4.5 3.0 1.3 4 3 3 0 2.0 4.5 0.0 3 0.0 0.0 0.0 10 1.0 1.8 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 55.69 22
Traffic Calming Small Roadway Planning 20% No 100% A 20% 250 50% No No 100% 25% No 5 0% No No Yes 100% Yes Yes Yes 50% 1.3 Yes Yes No 100% Fair Yes Local 250 50% 0.3 0.0 2.5 0.0 0.5 0.0 1.3 0 0 2.0 0.8 0.0 0.2 0 0 0 2 2.0 1.5 1.5 0.5 15.0 1.5 15 0.0 10.5 2.0 4.0 0.4 0.0 4.0 54.81 23
Connectivity Regional Roadway Planning 100% No 50% B 30% 2000 50% Yes Yes 85% 100% Yes 200 100% No No No 50% Yes No Yes 0% 1.0 No Yes No 50% Very Goo d No Collector 2000 0% 1.3 0.0 1.3 0.8 1.1 0.1 1.9 4 6 3.4 6.0 3.0 0.9 4 0 0 0 1.0 4.5 0.0 3 0.0 7.9 0.0 10 0.0 3.5 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 54.70 24
Traffic Safety Small Intersection Planning 20% No 50% D 40% 5250 50% Yes No 100% 100% artial Yes265 50% No Yes No 50% Yes Yes Yes 75% 0.7 Yes Yes No 50% Good No Minor Arteria l5250 75% 0.3 0.0 1.3 1.5 1.0 2.3 1.3 3 0 2.0 3.0 1.5 1.1 2 0 3 0 1.0 1.5 1.5 0.8 7.6 1.5 15 0.0 5.3 1.0 0.0 0.8 1.8 6.0 54.33 25
Geometric/Safety Medium Intersection Planning 20% No 25% C 20% 2650 50% No Yes 70% 75%Partial Yes55 50% Yes No Yes 50% Yes Yes Yes 50% 0.6 Yes Yes No 75% Fair Yes Local 2650 75% 0.3 0.0 0.6 1.0 0.5 0.2 1.3 0 2 1.4 2.3 1.5 0.5 2 3 0 2 1.0 1.5 1.5 0.5 6.3 1.5 15 0.0 7.9 2.0 4.0 0.4 0.1 6.0 53.71 26
Capacity Regional Intersection Planning 100% No 50% B 100% 4450 50% Yes Yes 85% 100% Yes 275 100% No Yes No 50% Yes No Yes 0% 0.2 No Yes No 25% Good No Freeway 4450 0% 1.3 0.0 1.3 0.8 3.8 0.3 1.9 4 6 3.4 6.0 3.0 1.1 4 0 3 0 1.0 4.5 0.0 3 0.0 1.7 0.0 10 0.0 1.8 0.3 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 53.41 27
Operations Small Intersection Planning 40% No 50% E 30% 4550 100% Yes No 0% 75%Partial Yes230 25% Yes No Yes 75% Yes Yes Yes 50% 0.5 Yes Yes No 50% Good No Collector 4550 100% 0.5 0.0 1.3 2.0 0.8 1.7 2.5 3 0 0.0 2.3 1.5 1.0 1 3 0 2 1.5 1.5 1.5 0.5 5.3 1.5 15 0.0 5.3 1.0 0.0 0.6 1.4 8.0 53.04 28
Facility Upgrade Medium Roadway Planning 100% No 100% C 20% 1500 25% No No 0% 25% No 15 0% No No Yes 100% Yes Yes Yes 100% 1.8 Yes Yes No 50% Poor Yes Local 1500 75% 1.3 0.0 2.5 1.0 0.5 0.1 0.6 0 0 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.3 0 0 0 2 2.0 1.5 1.5 1.0 15.0 1.5 15 0.0 5.3 3.0 4.0 0.4 0.0 6.0 52.64 29
Capacity Regional Intersection Planning 100% No 25% E 50% 6400 75% Yes Yes 30% 50% Yes 125 50% No Yes No 50% Yes No Yes 0% 0.5 No Yes No 25% Good No Major Arteria l6400 25% 1.3 0.0 0.6 3.0 1.9 0.7 2.8 4 6 1.2 3.0 3.0 0.8 2 0 3 0 1.0 4.5 0.0 3 0.0 4.0 0.0 10 0.0 1.8 0.3 0.0 0.3 0.1 0.5 49.51 30
Traffic Safety Medium Roadway Planning 20% No 75% B 20% 750 25% No No 0% 25% No 0 25% No No No 25% Yes Yes Yes 75% 1.6 Yes Yes No 50% Fair Yes Local 750 100% 0.3 0.0 1.9 0.5 0.5 0.0 0.6 0 0 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.0 1 0 0 0 0.5 1.5 1.5 0.8 15.0 1.5 15 0.0 5.3 2.0 4.0 0.4 0.0 8.0 48.43 32
Geometric/Safety Medium Roadway Planning 40% No 50% C 20% 1300 50% No No 0% 50%Partial Yes25 0% No Yes No 75% Yes No Yes 0% 0.8 Yes Yes No 100% Good Yes Local 1300 75% 0.5 0.0 1.3 1.0 0.5 0.0 1.3 0 0 0.0 1.5 1.5 0.3 0 0 3 0 1.5 1.5 0.0 0.0 8.6 1.5 15 0.0 10.5 1.0 4.0 0.4 0.0 6.0 48.41 33
Quality of Communities Medium Roadway Construction 20% No 50% A 20% 100 100% No Yes 30% 100% No 2 25% No Yes No 25% Yes No Yes 25% 11.5 No Yes No 25% Poor Yes Local 100 50% 0.3 0.0 1.3 0.0 0.5 0.0 2.5 0 2 0.6 3.0 0.0 0.1 1 0 3 0 0.5 1.5 0.0 0.3 15.0 0.0 15 0.0 2.6 3.0 4.0 0.4 0.0 4.0 47.97 35
Traffic Safety Small Intersection Planning 40% No 50% B 30% 2650 100% No No 0% 25%Partial Yes55 25% No No No 75% Yes Yes Yes 50% 0.5 Yes Yes No 100% Good Yes Collector 2650 75% 0.5 0.0 1.3 0.5 0.8 0.6 2.5 0 0 0.0 0.8 1.5 0.5 1 0 0 0 1.5 1.5 1.5 0.5 5.7 1.5 15 0.0 10.5 1.0 4.0 0.6 0.5 6.0 47.07 36
Traffic Safety Small Intersection Planning 0% No 50% A 40% 3100 50% Yes No 70% 100% Yes 205 50% No Yes No 75% Yes Yes Yes 75% -1.0 Yes Yes No 75% Good No Minor Arteria 3100 75% 0.0 0.0 1.3 0.0 1.0 0.8 1.3 3 0 1.4 3.0 3.0 1.0 2 0 3 0 1.5 1.5 1.5 0.8 0.0 1.5 15 0.0 7.9 1.0 0.0 0.8 0.6 6.0 46.22 39
Quality of Communities Medium Roadway Planning 20% No 50% A 20% 100 100% No No 100% 50% No 1 0% No No Yes 25% Yes No Yes 25% 11.5 No Yes No 25% Poor Yes Local 100 75% 0.3 0.0 1.3 0.0 0.5 0.0 2.5 0 0 2.0 1.5 0.0 0.1 0 0 0 2 0.5 1.5 0.0 0.3 15.0 0.0 15 0.0 2.6 3.0 4.0 0.4 0.0 6.0 45.84 40
Traffic Safety Large Roadway Planning 20% No 100% C 30% 1750 50% No No 85% 50%Partial Y 133 50% No No No 50% Yes Yes Yes 75% 0.5 Yes Yes No 75% Very Goo d No Collector 1750 25% 0.3 0.0 2.5 1.5 1.1 0.1 1.9 0 0 3.4 3.0 1.5 0.8 2 0 0 0 1.0 4.5 4.5 3 2.3 3.8 1.0 10 0.0 5.3 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.5 44.96 4'
Geometric/Safety Medium Intersection Planning 20% No 75% E 30% 6500 75% No No 0% 0% artial Y 130 25% No No No 75% Yes Yes Yes 50% 0.0 Yes Yes No 75% Fair Yes Collector 6500 100% 0.3 0.0 1.9 2.0 0.8 1.1 1.9 0 0 0.0 0.0 1.5 0.8 1 0 0 0 1.5 1.5 1.5 0.5 0.0 1.5 15 0.0 7.9 2.0 4.0 0.6 0.8 8.0 43.39 42
Geometric/Safety Medium Roadway Planning 20% No 50% B 20% 750 75% No No 100% 50%Partial Y 15 25% No Yes No 50% Yes Yes Yes 50% 0.4 Yes Yes No 50% Fair No Local 750 100% 0.3 0.0 1.3 0.5 0.5 0.0 1.9 0 0 2.0 1.5 1.5 0.3 1 0 3 0 1.0 1.5 1.5 0.5 4.8 1.5 15 0.0 5.3 2.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 8.0 42.63 43
Connectivity Medium Roadway Planning 0% No 25% B 30% 350 25% No No 85% 25%Partial Yes7 25% No Yes No 75% Yes Yes Yes 50% -1.0 Yes Yes Yes 50% Fair Yes Collector 350 100% 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.5 0.8 0.0 0.6 0 0 1.7 0.8 1.5 0.2 1 0 3 0 1.5 1.5 1.5 0.5 0.0 1.5 15 1.5 5.3 2.0 4.0 0.6 0.0 8.0 40.98 44
Traffic Safety Small Intersection Planning 20% No 50% A 30% 1200 50% No No 100% 50%Partial Y 115 25% No No No 50% Yes Yes Yes 50% 0.1 Yes Yes No 75% Good Yes Collector 1200 75% 0.3 0.0 1.3 0.0 0.8 0.1 1.3 0 0 2.0 1.5 1.5 0.7 1 0 0 0 1.0 1.5 1.5 0.5 0.8 1.5 15 0.0 7.9 1.0 4.0 0.6 0.1 6.0 39.23 45
Geometric/Safety Small Intersection Planning 0% No 0% D 30% 5050 50% No Yes 0% 75%Partial Y 100 75% No No No 25% Yes Yes Yes 50% 0.2 Yes Yes No 50% Fair No Collector 5050 50% 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 0.8 2.1 1.3 0 2 0.0 2.3 1.5 0.7 3 0 0 0 0.5 1.5 1.5 0.5 2.3 1.5 15 0.0 5.3 2.0 0.0 0.6 1.7 4.0 38.90 46
Traffic Safety Small Intersection Planning 20% No 50% B 20% 1400 100% No No 0% 25%Partial Yes70 25% No No No 100% Yes Yes Yes 75% -0.2 Yes Yes No 100% Fair No Local 1400 75% 0.3 0.0 1.3 0.5 0.5 0.2 2.5 0 0 0.0 0.8 1.5 0.6 1 0 0 0 2.0 1.5 1.5 0.8 0.0 1.5 15 0.0 10.5 2.0 0.0 0.4 0.1 6.0 37.75 47
Geometric/Safety Medium Roadway Planning 20% No 25% A 20% 100 50% No No 100% 25%Partial Yes2 25% No Yes No 25% Yes Yes Yes 75% 0.0 Yes Yes Yes 25% Good Yes Local 100 100% 0.3 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.5 0.0 1.3 0 0 2.0 0.8 1.5 0.1 1 0 3 0 0.5 1.5 1.5 0.8 0.0 1.5 15 1.5 2.6 1.0 4.0 0.4 0.0 8.0 36.75 48
Capacity Small Intersection Planning 0% No 0% C 20% 2450 75% No Yes 70% 100% artial Yes25 75% No No No 25% Yes Yes Yes 50% 0.0 Yes Yes No 50% Very Goo d No Local 2450 75% 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.5 0.5 1.9 0 2 1.4 3.0 1.5 0.3 3 0 0 0 0.5 1.5 1.5 0.5 0.0 1.5 15 0.0 5.3 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.4 6.0 35.15 49
Traffic Safety Medium Roadway Planning 20% No 25% A 20% 50 25% No No 100% 25% Yes 1 25% No Yes No 25% Yes Yes Yes 25% 0.0 Yes Yes Yes 50% Poor No Local 50 50% 0.3 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.6 0 0 2.0 0.8 3.0 0.1 1 0 3 0 0.5 1.5 1.5 0.3 0.0 1.5 15 1.5 5.3 3.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 4.0 33.72 53
Geometric/Safety Medium Roadway Planning 0% No 25% B 20% 600 25% No No 0% 0% No 10 25% No No No 50% Yes Yes Yes 50% -1.0 Yes Yes No 50% Fair Yes Local 600 50% 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.0 0.6 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 1 0 0 0 1.0 1.5 1.5 0.5 0.0 1.5 15 0.0 5.3 2.0 4.0 0.4 0.0 4.0 27.63 55
Traffic Safety Small Intersection Completed 20% No 50% D 40% 5250 75% Yes No 100% 100% artial Yes265 75% Yes Yes No 100% Yes Yes Yes 75% 2.0 Yes Yes No 100% Fair No Minor Arteria l5250 75% 0.3 0.0 1.3 1.5 1.0 2.3 1.9 3 0 2.0 3.0 1.5 1.1 3 3 3 0 2.0 1.5 1.5 0.8 15.0 1.5 15 0.0 10.5 2.0 0.0 0.8 1.8 6.0 73.62 4
Connectivity Medium Intersection Completed 0% No 50% B 30% 350 75% No No 85% 50% No 7 0% No Yes Yes 100% Yes No Yes 25% -1.0 Yes Yes Yes 100% Very Poc Yes Collector 350 100% 0.0 0.0 1.3 0.5 0.8 0.0 1.9 0 0 1.7 1.5 0.0 0.2 0 0 3 2 2.0 1.5 0.0 0.3 0.0 1.5 15 1.5 10.5 4.0 4.0 0.6 0.0 8.0 49.11 3'
to MO-165/V Hwy) Connectivity Medium Roadway Completed 40% No 50% B 20% 1300 25% No Yes 85% 75% Yes 26 25% No No Yes 50% Yes No Yes 50% 0.4 Yes Yes Yes 50% Fair Yes Local 1300 100% 0.5 0.0 1.3 0.5 0.5 0.0 0.6 0 2 1.7 2.3 3.0 0.3 1 0 0 2 1.0 1.5 0.0 0.5 4.2 1.5 15 1.5 5.3 2.0 4.0 0.4 0.0 8.0 48.14 34
Geometric/Safety Medium Roadway Completed 20% No 50% A 20% 100 50% No No 100% 25%Partial Yes2 25% No Yes No 25% Yes Yes Yes 50% 0.4 Yes Yes Yes 100% Poor Yes Local 100 50% 0.3 0.0 1.3 0.0 0.5 0.0 1.3 0 0 2.0 0.8 1.5 0.1 1 0 3 0 0.5 1.5 1.5 0.5 4.0 1.5 15 1.5 10.5 3.0 4.0 0.4 0.0 4.0 47.00 37
Traffic Safety Medium Roadway Completed 20% No 50% B 20% 600 25% No No 85% 25%Partial Yes0 25% No No No 50% Yes Yes Yes 75% 1.2 Yes Yes No 50% Very Goo d Yes Local 600 75% 0.3 0.0 1.3 0.5 0.5 0.0 0.6 0 0 1.7 0.8 1.5 0.0 1 0 0 0 1.0 1.5 1.5 0.8 13.9 1.5 15 0.0 5.3 0.0 4.0 0.4 0.0 6.0 46.37 38
Connectivity Large Roadway Completed 0% No 25% A 20% 100 100% No No 100% 0% No 2 0% No Yes No 50% Yes No Yes 0% 0.6 Yes Yes No 50% Poor Yes Local 100 100% 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.8 0.0 3.8 0 0 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0 0 3 0 1.0 4.5 0.0 3 0.0 4.6 1.0 10 0.0 3.5 0.8 1.0 0.1 0.0 2.0 34.67 50
Geometric/Safety Medium Intersection Completed 20% No 50% A 30% 150 0% No No 100% 0% artial Yes3 25% No No No 50% Yes Yes Yes 75% 0.0 Yes Yes No 50% Good Yes Collector 150 100% 0.3 0.0 1.3 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.0 0 0 2.0 0.0 1.5 0.1 1 0 0 0 1.0 1.5 1.5 0.8 0.0 1.5 15 0.0 5.3 1.0 4.0 0.6 0.0 8.0 34.47 5'
Traffic Safety Medium Intersection Completed 0% No 0% C 30% 2150 0% No No 85% 50%Partial Y 120 50% No No No 0% Yes Yes Yes 100% 0.0 Yes Yes No 50% Good Yes Collector 2150 75% 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.8 0.1 0.0 0 0 1.7 1.5 1.5 0.7 2 0 0 0 0.0 1.5 1.5 1.0 0.0 1.5 15 0.0 5.3 1.0 4.0 0.6 0.1 6.0 34.24 52
New Arterial Connector (Birch St to Maple St) E fficient M ovem ent o f Freight Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 7.2 | of 10

Project Type: Traffic Safety Total S c o r ^ 69.3 | out of 100 Large Vehicle Friendly Facilities Yes 30 30.0 3.0
Project Description: Construct a new 3,400 foot connector from Birch Street east to Widens Road Yes
Maple Street. The roadway is proposed as a five-lane highway with pedestrian and
Improves Geometry Yes
bicycle facilites. Approximaetly 1,500 feet of Birch Street, from just south of the new
Improves Load Rating Yes
connection north to Industrial Park Dr, would also be upgraded to a five-lane section with
pedestrian and bicycle provisions. Truck Usage 12.5 30 2.4 0.2 MoDOT formula

Status: Grant Application Submitted Length: 0.93 miles Local Efficient Movement of Freight Factors 100% 40 40.0 4.0 Road assumed to be built to meet criteria for trucks

Project Scale: Large Roadway or Intersection Roadway
Functional Classification: Minor Arterial (for the major street) Q uality o f C om m unities Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 8.0 | of 10

Avg. Annual Daily Traffic (AADT): 2,500 (est. 2012, avg. for major street) Local/Regional Land Use Plans Yes 30 30.0 3.0
Daily Truck Traffic: 50 (est. 2012, avg. for major street) Consistent with Local Plans Yes On local plans and submitted as TIGER I & II Applications
Through Lanes: 4 (through lanes on major street) Consistent with Regional Plans Yes East-West Roadway listed as need in SMCOG regional plan
Project Discussion: Project provides a needed connection between the I-65 / Industrial Connectivity Yes 30 30.0 3.0 First section of the East-West Roadway (Hollister to Kirbyville)
Park Dr interchange and the existing and future residential development on Maple
Scenic and Visual No 20 0.0 0.0 No major scenic or visual elements
Street. It reduces travel time for residents on Maple Street; provides a more safe travel
route (diverting traffic from the Bus 65 / Maple St intersection); opens development Local Quality of Communities Factors 100% 20 20.0 2.0 Important to the local and regional community quality
opportunities (commercial, industrial, and residential); and potentially initiates the
proposed East-West Roadway project linking southern Hollister with MO-76 in Kirbyville.
Environm ental Protection Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =15% Total Points = | 14.3 | of 15 |
Consistent with Stormwater Goals Yes 30 30.0 4.5 Assume excess runoff mitigated(new stormwater detention faciliti

Consistent with Environmental Goals Yes 30 30.0 4.5 Unmitigated environmental impacts are not expected
Access to O pportunity Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 5% Total Points = | 3.8 | of 5 Avoids Historical Impacts Yes 20 20.0 3.0 No known historical impacts

Eliminate Bike/Ped Barriers (ADA) 100% 25 25.0 1.3 Local Environmental Protection Factors 75% 20 15.0 2.3 Few small wetlands in area, project includes stormwater BMP

Project provides bike connections Yes Roadway will include bike facilities (per TIGER II app.)

Project provides pedestrian connections Yes Roadway will include pedestrian facilities (per TIGER II app. Safety Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =20% Total Points = | 5.9 | of 20

shes (Major Road
Project brings existing facilities up to ADA Regulations No use if first two do not apply PDO 10 Safety Index 0.16 50 5.9 1.2 (Modified MoDOT formula)

>r Intersection)
Project provides some bike/pedestrian facilities No use if first two do not apply Injury 3 Crash Rate 92.72 Crash data 2009-2011, used vol data from Bus 65 at Maple Int.

Transit No 0.0 No effect on Branson Shuttle or Jefferson Lines Fatal 0 Accident Index 0.53 used crashes for Bus 65 at Maple intersection
0
2
5

..
0

Local Access to Opportunity Factors 100% 50 50.0 2.5 Directly connects year-round housing with jobs and shoppir Years 3 Severity Index 1.58

6 2010 AADT 13768 Safety Concern Yes 5 5.0 1.0 Safety mentioned as important issue in TIGER II application

Congestion Relief Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =15% Total Points = | 9.0 | of 15 Safety Enhancements Yes 5 5.0 1.0 Shift traffic from BUS 65 and new ped/bike connections

Level of Service F 25 25.0 3.8 Estimated current LOS for left-out at Maple & BUS 65 Emergency Response Yes 5 5.0 1.0 Could improve emergency response times and access/egress

Functional Classification1 Minor Arterial 40% 25 10.0 1.5 Local Safety Factors 25% 35 8.8 1.8 Improves safety for area residents

Daily Usage 625 25 0.1 0.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Local Congestion Relief Factors 100% 25 25.0 3.8 diverts traffic from congested area, new direct connection Taking Care o f the System Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 5% Total Points = | 1.7 | of 5

Roadway or Bridge Conditions Fair 20 10.0 0.5 Existing portion of Birch Street

Econom ic Com petitiveness Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 20% Total Points = | 19.4 | of 20 Substandard Roadway or Bridge Feature No 20 0.0 0.0

Strategic Regional Economic Corridor Yes 20 20.0 4.0 Affects BUS 65 Functional Classification2 Minor Arterial 40% 10 4.0 0.2

Support Regional Economic Opportunities Yes 30 30.0 6.0 Future development area, prior initiatives in corridor Daily Vehicle Usage 625 10 0.0 0.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Level of Economic Distress 85% 20 17.0 3.4 Local Taking Care of the System Factors 50% 40 20.0 1.0 Mainly new roadway, but benefits existing roadways

Poverty (Block Group) 18.0% 2006-2010 ACS block group data - 2 block groups

Unemployment (tract) 8.0% 2006-2010 ACS tract data - 1 tract

Local Economic Competitiveness Factors 100% 30 30.0 6.0 Important future development area, important linkage

Data Check3 OK Data Checkl OK Data Check2 OK
Proj. #: 1-2 Project Name: US Bus Rte 65 (Hwy 76 to North Birch) E fficient M ovem ent o f Freight Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 6.4 | of 10

<0
CO
CO
Project Type: Geometric/Safety Total Score Large Vehicle Friendly Facilities Yes 30 30.0 3.0

0
0
o
u
o
t
f
Project Description: Widen Business 65 from the Roundabout at Hwy 76 to North Widens Road Yes roadway widening project
Birch. The widening would add a center two-way left-turn lane through the center of
Improves Geometry Yes adds turn lanes
Hollister. It is assumed that the widening project will also include appropriate pedestrian
Improves Load Rating No
improvements.
Truck Usage 423 30 13.8 1.4 MoDOT formula
Status: Planning and Design Length: 1.5 miles Local Efficient Movement of Freight Factors 50% 40 20.0 2.0 Should benefit truck traffic; important connector in Taney County

Avg. Annual Daily Traffic (AADT): 14,100 (estimated, avg. for major street) Local/Regional Land Use Plans No 30 0.0 0.0
Daily Truck Traffic: 846 (estimated, avg. for major street) Consistent with Local Plans No not shown in applicable local plan (though a local project exists)
Through Lanes: 2 (through lanes on major street) Consistent with Regional Plans No not mentioned in SMCOG regional plan
Project Discussion: This portion of Business 65 had 2013 volumes of 12,000 to 16,000 Connectivity Yes 30 30.0 3.0 important Hollister through route
vehicles per day. This is a considerable increase over prior counts, therefore these
Scenic and Visual No 20 0.0 0.0 limited scenic benefits
volumes were used in the ratings. There are safety issues on this segment of highway.
There is a need for left-turn storage as well as improved pedestrian faciities. This project Local Quality of Communities Factors 75% 20 15.0 1.5 important improvement in the heart of Hollister
would connect the improved segments at either end of the project.

Environm ental Protection Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 15% Total Points = | 12.8 | of 15
Consistent with Stormwater Goals Yes 30 30.0 4.5 Assume excess runoff mitigated
Consistent with Environmental Goals Yes 30 30.0 4.5 Unmitigated environmental impacts are not expected

Access to O pportunity Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 2.4 | of 5 Avoids Historical Impacts Yes 20 20.0 3.0 No known historical impacts

Eliminate Bike/Ped Barriers (ADA) 40% 25 10.0 0.5 Local Environmental Protection Factors 25% 20 5.0 0.8 No known environmental impacts, historical impacts possible

Project provides bike connections No assume no bike facility will be included with the project

Project provides pedestrian connections Yes assumes pedestrian facilities inc. ped signals Safety Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =20% Total Points = | 16.0 | of 20

Crashes (Major Road
’roject brings existing facilities up to ADA Regulations No use if first two do not apply PDO 54 Safety Index 0.80 50 30.1 6.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)

or Intersection)
Project provides some bike/pedestrian facilities No use if first two do not apply Injury Crash Rate 336.09 Crash data 2009-2011

2
Transit No 25 0.0 0.0 No effect on Branson Shuttle or Jefferson Lines Fatal Accident Index 1.92

0
Local Access to Opportunity Factors 75% 50 37.5 1.9 Improved roadway and intersection could benefit ped acces Years 3 Severity Index 1.72

Avg AADT 13768 Safety Concern Yes 5 5.0 1.0 Concern raised by local leaders

C ongestion Relief Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 15% Total Points = | 10.3 | of 15 Safety Enhancements Yes 5 5.0 1.0 Will result in widened road and other improvements

Level of Service F 25 25.0 3.8 based on volume/capacity on roadway Emergency Response Yes 5 5.0 1.0 will improve response time, fire dept. < 1 mile east of project

Functional Classification1 Minor Arterial 40% 25 10.0 1.5 Local Safety Factors 100% 35 35.0 7.0 High number of crashes confirms local safety concern

Daily Usage 7050 25 8.6 1.3 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Local Congestion Relief Factors 100% 25 25.0 3.8 moderate to high traffic, key location Taking Care o f the System Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 5% Total Points = | 2.6 | of 5

Roadway or Bridge Conditions Good 20 5.0 0.3 Both the Roadway and Bridges are in good condition

Econom ic C om petitiveness Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 20% Total Points = | 13.4 | of 20 Substandard Roadway or Bridge Feature No 20 0.0 0.0

Strategic Regional Economic Corridor Yes 20 20.0 4.0 Business 65 Functional Classification2 Minor Arterial 40% 10 4.0 0.2

Support Regional Economic Opportunities No 30 0.0 0.0 No directly linked to regional economic dev. opportunities Daily Vehicle Usage 7050 10 3.5 0.2 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Level of Economic Distress 85% 20 17.0 3.4 Local Taking Care of the System Factors 100% 40 40.0 2.0 improving roadway operations benefits existing system

Poverty (Block Group) 17.0% 2006-2010 ACS block group data - Comb. 2 block groups

Unemployment (tract) 8.0% 2006-2010 ACS tract data - 1 tract

Local Economic Competitiveness Factors 100% 30 30.0 6.0 Business 65 is an important economic corridor

Data Check3 OK Data Checkl OK Data Check2 OK
Proj. #: 1-3 Project Name: MO-76 and Lakeshore Dr E fficient M ovem ent o f Freight Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 4.4 | of 10

Project Type: Traffic Safety Total Score 71.0 | out of 100 Large Vehicle Friendly Facilities Partial Yes 30 15.0 1.5
Project Description: Improve intersection to address safety issues. Improvements Widens Road No
include possible turn lanes, raised islands, and modified traffic control. A continuous
Improves Geometry Yes turn lanes to be added
Green-T intersection could also be considered at this location.
Improves Load Rating No
Truck Usage 167 30 8.7 0.9 MoDOT formula

Status: Planning and Design 2018 Length: NA Local Efficient Movement of Freight Factors 50% 40 20.0 2.0 MO-76 is an important commerce route, Lakeshore is not

Avg. Annual Daily Traffic (AADT): 16,700 (estimated, avg. for major street) Local/Regional Land Use Plans No 30 0.0 0.0
Daily Truck Traffic: 334 (estimated, avg. for major street) Consistent with Local Plans No no applicable local plans (not in Hollister or Branson)
Through Lanes: 2 (through lanes on major street) Consistent with Regional Plans No not mentioned in SMCOG regional plan
Project Discussion: Both roads are two lane roads. MO-76 hs a high volume of traffic. Connectivity Yes 30 30.0 3.0 Important connection for the Branson, Hollister & Kirbyville areas
There are no turn lanes on MO-76. The intersection is large and is not level (it slopes
Scenic and Visual No 20 0.0 0.0 no major scenic or visual benefits, except possibly landscaping
from northeast to southwest). The curvature of the road and grade limit sight lines to the
east. Lakeshore is stop controlled. The posted speed on MO-76 is 35 mph, though the Local Quality of Communities Factors 50% 20 10.0 1.0 this is an important intersection in the area
85th percentile traffic liekly exceeds that speed. Left turn traffic during peak periods can
have a longer than desirable delay. Traffic volumes fluctuate with seasonal activity and
Environm ental Protection Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 4.5 | of 5
may meet signal warrants during peak times.
Consistent with Stormwater Goals Yes 30 30.0 1.5 Modest project, few stormwater issues expected

Consistent with Environmental Goals Yes 30 30.0 1.5 Unmitigated environmental impacts are not expected
Access to O pportunity Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 5% Total Points = | 0.3 | of 5 Avoids Historical Impacts Yes 20 20.0 1.0 No known historical impacts

Eliminate Bike/Ped Barriers (ADA) 20% 25 5.0 0.3 Local Environmental Protection Factors 50% 20 10.0 0.5 no major mitigation expected

Project provides bike connections No does not apply

Project provides pedestrian connections No does not apply Safety Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =30% Total Points = | 26.7 | of 30

Crashes (Major Road
’reject brings existing facilities up to ADA Regulations No use if first two do not apply assumes no sidewalks or bike lanes PDO 14 Safety Index 1.18 50 44.1 13.2 (Modified MoDOT formula)

or Intersection)
Project provides some bike/pedestrian facilities Yes use if first two do not apply assume int control would incorporate ped provisions Injury 12 Crash Rate 145.61 Crash data 2009-2011

Transit No 25 0.0 0.0 No effect on Branson Shuttle or Jefferson Lines Fatal 0 Accident Index 2.21

Local Access to Opportunity Factors 0% 50 0.0 0.0 no bike/ped improvements are currently assumed Years 3 Severity Index 2.15

Avg AADT 16306 Safety Concern Yes 5 5.0 1.5 Concern raised by local leaders

Congestion Relief Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =10% Total Points = | 7.7 | of 10 Safety Enhancements Yes 5 5.0 1.5 improvements expected to address safety concerns

Level of Service F 25 25.0 2.5 westbound left turn LOS for stop control (Synchro) Emergency Response No 5 0.0 0.0 no major effect on response times

Functional Classification1 Minor Arterial 40% 25 10.0 1.0 Local Safety Factors 100% 35 35.0 10.5 crash data confirms local concerns

Daily Usage 8350 25 17.4 1.7 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Local Congestion Relief Factors 100% 25 25.0 2.5 moderate to high traffic, key location, can have high delay Taking Care o f the System Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 20% Total Points = | 15.2 | of 20

Roadway or Bridge Conditions Good 20 5.0 1.0 MO-76 assumed to be good or very good, Lakeshore Fair

Econom ic Com petitiveness Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 8.2 | of 10 Substandard Roadway or Bridge Feature Yes 20 20.0 4.0 alignment decreases sight distance east of intersection

Strategic Regional Economic Corridor Yes 30 30.0 3.0 MO-76 Functional Classification2 Minor Arterial 40% 10 4.0 0.8

Support Regional Economic Opportunities Yes 20 20.0 2.0 supports rec development in the Lakeshore corridor Daily Vehicle Usage 8350 10 7.0 1.4 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Level of Economic Distress 85% 20 17.0 1.7 Local Taking Care of the System Factors 100% 40 40.0 8.0 Important local intersection

Poverty (Block Group) 14.0% 2006-2010 ACS block group data - Comb. 4 block groups

Unemployment (tract) 7.0% 2006-2010 ACS tract data - Combining 3 tracts

Local Economic Competitiveness Factors 50% 30 15.0 1.5 important local intersection

Data Check3 OK Data Check1 OK Data Check2 OK
Proj. #: 1-4 Project Name Acacia Club Rd (Sun Valley Circle to MO-165/V Hwy) E fficient M ovem ent o f Freight Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 4.3 | of 10

Project Type: Connectivity Total Score| 48.1 | out of 100 ' Large Vehicle Friendly Facilities Yes 30 30.0 3.0
Project Description: Construct Acacia Club Rd along a new alignment south of the Widens Road Yes
existing alignment. This would essentially replace the existing two-lane road for through
Improves Geometry Yes realignment of the roadway
traffic.
Improves Load Rating Yes
Truck Usage 26 30 3.4 0.3 MoDOT formula
Status: Completed 2017 Length: 0.89 miles Local Efficient Movement of Freight Factors 25% 40 10.0 1.0 not a major truck route

Project Scale: Medium Roadway or Intersection Roadway
Functional Classification: Local (for the major street) Q uality o f C om m unities Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 3.0 | of 10

Avg. Annual Daily Traffic (AADT): 2,600 (estimated, avg. for major street) Local/Regional Land Use Plans No 30 0.0 0.0
Daily Truck Traffic: 52 (estimated, avg. for major street) Consistent with Local Plans No no applicable local plan
Through Lanes: 2 (through lanes on major street) Consistent with Regional Plans No not mentioned in SMCOG regional plan
Project Discussion: The existing two-lane road is narrow (<20 ft) and has limited Connectivity No 30 0.0 0.0 Project begins and ends in Hollister
shoulders. This new roadway could be constructed to current design standards and
Scenic and Visual Yes 20 20.0 2.0 shifts traffic away from the water
could safely and efficiently accommodate additional traffic and development. It is
possible that most if not all of the right-of-way required for the project could be obtained Local Quality of Communities Factors 50% 20 10.0 1.0 benefits local residents
at minimal cost to the County. College of the Ozarks is currently working on relocating a
portion of this road so a partnering opportunity may be available for the County.
Environm ental Protection Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 3.0 | of 5 |
Consistent with Stormwater Goals Yes 30 30.0 1.5 Assume new runoff mitigated (new stormwater detention facilities
Consistent with Environmental Goals No 30 0.0 0.0 environmental mitigation possible

Access to O pportunity Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 1.8 | of 5 Avoids Historical Impacts Yes 20 20.0 1.0 No known historical impacts

Eliminate Bike/Ped Barriers (ADA) 40% 25 10.0 0.5 Local Environmental Protection Factors 50% 20 10.0 0.5 unknown environmental issues

Project provides bike connections No it is not assumed that bike facilities would be constructed

Project provides pedestrian connections Yes it is assumed that sidewalks would be constructed Safety Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =30% Total Points = | 14.0 | of 30
d
’roject brings existing facilities up to ADA Regulations No use if first two do not apply a PDO 2 Safety Index 0.38 50 14.1 4.2 (Modified MoDOT formula)
oR ))n
o
Project provides some bike/pedestrian facilities No use if first two do not apply r oi Injury 1 Crash Rate 121.26 Crash data 2009-2011
oj tc
a e
Transit No 25 0.0 0.0 No effect on Branson Shuttle or Jefferson Lines (M e
sr Fatal 0 Accident Index 0.69
s( e t
Local Access to Opportunity Factors 50% 50 25.0 1.3 sidewalks and an improved road offer more ped/bike option <D _E Years 3 Severity Index 1.83
sa o
r
C Avg AADT 2539 Safety Concern Yes 5 5.0 1.5 Concern raised by local leaders

C ongestion Relief Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =10% Total Points = | 1.7 | of 10 Safety Enhancements Yes 5 5.0 1.5 project will result in new road that meets design stds

Level of Service B 25 5.0 0.5 congestion is not expected to be a major issue Emergency Response Yes 5 5.0 1.5 no major impact on response times or service

Functional Classification1 Local 20% 25 5.0 0.5 Local Safety Factors 50% 35 17.5 5.3 project benefits safety through better design

Daily Usage 1300 25 0.4 0.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Local Congestion Relief Factors 25% 25 6.3 0.6 congestion is not expected to be a major issue Taking Care o f the System Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 20% Total Points = | 14.4 | of 20

Roadway or Bridge Conditions Fair 20 10.0 2.0 existing road assumed to be in fair condition

Econom ic C om petitiveness Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =10% Total Points = | 6.0 | of 10 Substandard Roadway or Bridge Feature Yes 20 20.0 4.0 existing road narrower than current standards

Strategic Regional Economic Corridor No 30 0.0 0.0 Functional Classification2 Local 20% 10 2.0 0.4

Support Regional Economic Opportunities Yes 20 20.0 2.0 expected to support education/business/residential dev Daily Vehicle Usage 1300 10 0.2 0.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Level of Economic Distress 85% 20 17.0 1.7 Local Taking Care of the System Factors 100% 40 40.0 8.0 opportunity to upgrade the existing system

Poverty (Block Group) 17.0% 2006-2010 ACS block group data - Comb. 2 block groups

Unemployment (tract) 8.0% 2006-2010 ACS tract data - 1 tract

Local Economic Competitiveness Factors 75% 30 22.5 2.3 would support continued development in the project area

Data Check3 OK Data Check1 OK Data Check2 OK
Proj. #: 1-5 Project Name: New Interchange at MO-265 & US-65 E fficient M ovem ent o f Freight Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 8.1 | of 10

Project Type: Capacity Total Score| 53.4 | out of 100 Large Vehicle Friendly Facilities Yes 30 30.0 3.0
Project Description: Construct new interchange to replace existing at-grade Widens Road No
intersection.
Improves Geometry Yes
Improves Load Rating Yes
Truck Usage 275 30 11.1 1.1 MoDOT formula

Status: Planning Length: NA Local Efficient Movement of Freight Factors 100% 40 40.0 4.0 Interchange to meet criteria for freight; US-65 is an important faci

Project Scale: Regional Roadway or Intersection Intersection
Functional Classification: Freeway (for the major street) Q uality o f C om m unities Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 4.0 | of 10

Avg. Annual Daily Traffic (AADT): 17,800 (est. 2012, avg. for major street) Local/Regional Land Use Plans No 30 0.0 0.0
Daily Truck Traffic: 1,100 (est. 2012, avg. for major street) Consistent with Local Plans No no applicable local plan (not in Hollister or Branson)
Through Lanes: 4 (through lanes on major street) Consistent with Regional Plans No not mentioned in SMCOG regional plan
Project Discussion: Project will facilitate access/egress and development in the Connectivity Yes 30 30.0 3.0 US-65 connects to Branson & Hollister and points beyond
interchange vicinity. The project is proposed in conjunction with major economic
Scenic and Visual No 20 0.0 0.0 Interchange, no scenic benefits
initiatives in the US-65 corridor.
Local Quality of Communities Factors 50% 20 10.0 1.0 interchange could spur growth, could also cause more competitio

Environm ental Protection Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =15% Total Points = | 7.5 | of 15 |
/ / t - - .s
Consistent with Stormwater Goals Yes 30 30.0 4.5 Assume new runoff mitigated (new stormwater detention facilities

Consistent with Environmental Goals No 30 0.0 0.0 large project; environmental mitigation possible
Access to O pportunity Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 5% Total Points = | 2.5 |of 5 Avoids Historical Impacts Yes 20 20.0 3.0 no known historical impacts

Eliminate Bike/Ped Barriers (ADA) 100% 25 25.0 1.3 Local Environmental Protection Factors 0% 20 0.0 0.0 due to size of project, mitigation likely

Project provides bike connections Yes assumes bike facilities will be part of project

Project provides pedestrian connections Yes assumes sidewalks will be part of project Safety Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =20% Total Points = | 4.4 | of 20
d
’reject brings existing facilities up to ADA Regulations No use if first two do not apply a PDO 7 Safety Index 0.22 50 8.3 1.7 (Modified MoDOT formula)
oR ) )n
o
Project provides some bike/pedestrian facilities No use if first two do not apply r oi Injury 2 Crash Rate 47.29 Crash data 2009-2011
oj ct
a e
Transit No 0.0 No effect on Branson Shuttle or Jefferson Lines (M sr Fatal 0 Accident Index 0.72
0
2
5

0
..

s( e t
Local Access to Opportunity Factors 50% 50 25.0 1.3 interchange could offer improved bike/ped crossing facilities <D _E Years 3 Severity Index 1.56
sa o
r Safety Concern No
C Avg AADT 17380 5 0.0 0.0

Congestion Relief Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =15% Total Points = | 6.7 | of 15 Safety Enhancements Yes 5 5.0 1.0 Interchange will improve safety over the at-grade intersection

Level of Service B 25 5.0 0.8 congestion is not a major issue at this location Emergency Response No 5 0.0 0.0

Functional Classification1 Freeway 100% 25 25.0 3.8 Local Safety Factors 25% 35 8.8 1.8 crash rate not significant relative to other projects

Daily Usage 4450 25 2.2 0.3 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Local Congestion Relief Factors 50% 25 12.5 1.9 moderate to high traffic, but limited congestion Taking Care o f the System Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 5% Total Points = | 0.8 | of 5

Roadway or Bridge Conditions Good 20 5.0 0.3

Econom ic Com petitiveness Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 20% Total Points = | 19.4 | of 20 Substandard Roadway or Bridge Feature No 20 0.0 0.0

Strategic Regional Economic Corridor Yes 20 20.0 4.0 US-65 Functional Classification2 Freeway 100% 10 10.0 0.5

Support Regional Economic Opportunities Yes 30 30.0 6.0 Interchange allows for large scale economic possibilities Daily Vehicle Usage 4450 10 0.9 0.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Level of Economic Distress 85% 20 17.0 3.4 Local Taking Care of the System Factors 0% 40 0.0 0.0 system expansion / econ dev project

Poverty (Block Group) 14.0% 2006-2010 ACS block group data - Comb. 3 block groups

Unemployment (tract) 8.0% 2006-2010 ACS tract data - Combining 2 tracts

Local Economic Competitiveness Factors 100% 30 30.0 6.0 US-65 is an important economic corridor

Data Check3 OK Data Checkl OK Data Check2 OK
Proj. #: 1-6 Project Name: New Interchange at MO-86 & US-65 | E fficient Movement o f Freight Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =10% Total Points = | 7.1 | of 10

Project Type: Capacity Total Score| 57.1 out of 100 | Large Vehicle Friendly Facilities Yes 30 30.0 3.0
Project Description: Construct new interchange to replace existing at-grade Widens Road No
intersection.
Improves Geometry Yes
Improves Load Rating Yes
Truck Usage 275 30 11.1 1.1 MoDOT formula

Status: Planning Length : NA Local Efficient Movement of Freight Factors 75% 40 30.0 3.0 Interchange to meet criteria for freight; US-65 is an important faci

Project Scale: Regional Roadway or Intersection Intersection
Functional Classification: Freeway (for the major street) Quality o f Com m unities Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =10% Total Points = | 8.0 | of 10

Avg. Annual Daily Traffic (AADT): 17,800 (est. 2012, avg. for major street) Local/Regional Land Use Plans Yes 30 30.0 3.0
Daily Truck Traffic: 1,100 (est. 2012, avg. for major street) Consistent with Local Plans Yes correlated to the airport, which is mentioned in Branson plan
Through Lanes: 4 (through lanes on major street) Consistent with Regional Plans Yes airports in general are mentioned in SMCOG regional plan
Project Discussion: Project will facilitate access/egress and development in the Connectivity Yes 30 30.0 3.0 US-65 connects to Branson & Hollister and points beyond
interchange vicinity. The project is proposed in conjunction with major economic
Scenic and Visual No 20 0.0 0.0 no scenic benefits
initiatives in the US-65 corridor.
Local Quality of Communities Factors 100% 20 20.0 2.0 Interchange could serve new development and airport traffic

Environm ental Protection Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =15% Total Points = | 7.5 | of 15

Consistent with Stormwater Goals Yes 30 30.0 4.5 Assume new runoff mitigated (new stormwater detention facilities

Consistent with Environmental Goals No 30 0.0 0.0 large project; environmental mitigation possible

Access to O pportunity Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 2.5 | of 5 Avoids Historical Impacts Yes 20 20.0 3.0 no known historical impacts

Eliminate Bike/Ped Barriers (ADA) 100% 25 25.0 1.3 Local Environmental Protection Factors 0% 20 0.0 0.0 due to size of project, mitigation likely

Project provides bike connections Yes assumes bike facilities will be part of project

Project provides pedestrian connections Yes assumes sidewalks will be part of project Safety Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =20% Total Points = | 6.6 |of 20
d
5roject brings existing facilities up to ADA Regulations No use if first two do not apply a PDO 6 Safety Index 0.52 50 19.5 3.9 (Modified MoDOT formula)
o
o R ) )n
Project provides some bike/pedestrian facilities No use if first two do not apply r oi Injury 4 Crash Rate 52.54 Crash data 2009-2011
o
j tc
a e
o
o

Transit No 0.0 No effect on Branson Shuttle or Jefferson Lines (M e sr Fatal 0 Accident Index 0.80
2
5

s( te
Local Access to Opportunity Factors 50% 50 25.0 1.3 interchange could offer improved bike/ped crossing facilities CD _E Years 3 Severity Index 2.00
sa
r o
C Avg AADT 17380 Safety Concern No 5 0.0 0.0

Congestion Relief Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =15% Total Points = | 6.7 | of 15 Safety Enhancements Yes 5 5.0 1.0 Interchange will improve safety over the at-grade intersection

Level of Service B 25 5.0 0.8 congestion is not a major issue at this location Emergency Response No 5 0.0 0.0

Functional Classificatio n Freeway 100% 25 25.0 3.8 Local Safety Factors 25% 35 8.8 1.8 crash rate not significant relative to other projects

Daily Usage 4450 25 2.2 0.3 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Local Congestion Relief Factors 50% 25 12.5 1.9 moderate to high traffic, but limited congestion Taking Care o f the System Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 0.8 | of 5

Roadway or Bridge Conditions Good 20 5.0 0.3

Econom ic C om petitiveness Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 20% Total Points = | 17.8 | of 20 Substandard Roadway or Bridge Feature No 20 0.0 0.0

Strategic Regional Economic Corridor Yes 20 20.0 4.0 US-65 Functional Classification2 Freeway 100% 10 10.0 0.5

Support Regional Economic Opportunities Yes 30 30.0 6.0 Interchange allows for large scale economic possibilities Daily Vehicle Usage 4450 10 0.9 0.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Level of Economic Distress 45% 20 9.0 1.8 Local Taking Care of the System Factors 0% 40 0.0 0.0 system expansion / econ dev project

Poverty (Block Group) 12.0% 2006-2010 ACS block group data - Comb. 2 block groups

Unemployment (tract) 8.0% 2006-2010 ACS tract data - Combining 2 tracts

Local Economic Competitiveness Factors 100% 30 30.0 6.0 essential to current regional econ dev efforts

Data Check3 OK Data Check1 OK Data Check2 OK
Proj. #: 1-7 Project Name: Access Rd (US-65 to Branson Creek Blvd) E fficient M ovem ent o f Freight Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =10% Total Points = | 8.3 | of 10

Project Type: Connectivity Total S c o r ^ 56.2 | out of 100 Large Vehicle Friendly Facilities Yes 30 30.0 3.0
Project Description: Construct a new 3-lane minor arterial between US-65 and the Widens Road Yes
Branson Regional Airport. The project would serve new development in the corridor
Improves Geometry Yes
including a proposed new racetrack facility (Racetrack is likely not going to be
Improves Load Rating Yes
constructed as of this update). It would also serve the airport with a second
access/egress route. Truck Usage 400 30 13.4 1.3 MoDOT formula

Status: Planning Length: 3.3 miles Local Efficient Movement of Freight Factors 100% 40 40.0 4.0 Road assumed to meet criteria for freight; 65 is an important facil

Project Scale: Regional Roadway or Intersection Roadway
Functional Classification: Minor Arterial (for the major street) Q uality o f C om m unities Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =10% Total Points = | 10.0 | of 10
Avg. Annual Daily Traffic (AADT): 8,000 (estimated, avg. for major street) Local/Regional Land Use Plans Yes 30 30.0 3.0
Daily Truck Traffic: 800 (estimated, avg. for major street) Consistent with Local Plans Yes correlated to the airport, which is mentioned in Branson plan
Through Lanes: 2 (through lanes on major street) Consistent with Regional Plans Yes airports in general are mentioned in SMCOG regional plan
Project Discussion: This roadway would provide a direct high-speed connection Connectivity Yes 30 30.0 3.0 connects proposed development and airport to US-65 & beyond
between US-65 and the airport. It could be designed with appropriate turn lanes and
Scenic and Visual Yes 20 20.0 2.0 Landscaping, signage, art, etc.
traffic control such that travel delay is minimized. If volumes grow past the assumed
baseline of 8,000 ADT, the roadway could be expanded to 5 lanes with a center raised Local Quality of Communities Factors 100% 20 20.0 2.0 Connects US-65 directly to airport
median.

Environm ental Protection Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =15% Total Points = | 7.5 | of 15 |
Consistent with Stormwater Goals Yes 30 30.0 4.5 Assume new runoff mitigated (new stormwater detention facilities

Consistent with Environmental Goals No 30 0.0 0.0 new road, proximity to airport; environmental mitigation possible
Access to O pportunity Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 5% Total Points = | 5.0 | of 5 Avoids Historical Impacts Yes 20 20.0 3.0 No known historical impacts

Eliminate Bike/Ped Barriers (ADA) 100% 25 25.0 1.3 Local Environmental Protection Factors 0% 20 0.0 0.0 environmental mitigation likely

Project provides bike connections Yes assume bike provisions are incorporated into the project

Project provides pedestrian connections Yes assume ped provisions are incorporated into the project Safety Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =20% Total Points = | 2.8 | of 20

Crashes (Major Road
Project brings existing facilities up to ADA Regulations No use if first two do not apply PDO N/A Safety Index -1.00 50 0.0 0.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)

or Intersection)
Project provides some bike/pedestrian facilities No use if first two do not apply Injury N/A Crash Rate 0.00 Crash data 2009-2011

Transit Yes 25 25.0 1.3 Provides alternate route for airport-hotel shuttles Fatal N/A Accident Index 0.00

Local Access to Opportunity Factors 100% 50 50.0 2.5 assumes new bike/ped facilities incorporated into corridor Years N/A Severity Index 0.00

Avg AADT 7811 Safety Concern No 5 0.0 0.0 Project driven by economic opportunities

Congestion Relief Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =15% Total Points = | 5.3 | of 15 Safety Enhancements No 5 0.0 0.0

Level of Service B 25 5.0 0.8 design LOS B, street access restricted to maintain flow Emergency Response Yes 5 5.0 1.0 could improve response time to / from airport

Functional Classification1 Minor Arterial 40% 25 10.0 1.5 Local Safety Factors 25% 35 8.8 1.8 provides alt route to/from airport if needed

Daily Usage 4000 25 1.8 0.3 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Local Congestion Relief Factors 75% 25 18.8 2.8 moderate to high traffic Taking Care o f the System Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 0.2 | of 5

Roadway or Bridge Conditions Very Good 20 0.0 0.0 Future project

Econom ic Com petitiveness Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 20% Total Points = | 17.0 | of 20 Substandard Roadway or Bridge Feature No 20 0.0 0.0 Future project

Strategic Regional Economic Corridor Yes 20 20.0 4.0 US-65 Functional Classification2 Minor Arterial 40% 10 4.0 0.2

Support Regional Economic Opportunities Yes 30 30.0 6.0 Supports regional econ efforts (racetrack, commerce, airpor Daily Vehicle Usage 4000 10 0.7 0.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Level of Economic Distress 85% 20 17.0 3.4 Local Taking Care of the System Factors 0% 40 0.0 0.0 Future project

Poverty (Block Group) 14.0% 2006-2010 ACS block group data - Comb. 3 block groups

Unemployment (tract) 8.0% 2006-2010 ACS tract data - Combining 3 tracts

Local Economic Competitiveness Factors 60% 30 18.0 3.6 Important to current regional econ efforts

Data Check3 OK Data Checkl OK Data Check2 OK
Proj. #: 1-8 Project Name: New Interchange at US-65 & connection to JJ E fficient M ovem ent o f Freight Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =10% Total Points = | 7.9 | of 10

Project Type: Connectivity Total Score 54.7 | out of 100 Large Vehicle Friendly Facilities Yes 30 30.0 3.0
Project Description: Construct a new interchange near Ridgedale and a roadway Widens Road Yes
connector between US-65 and Hwy-JJ.
Improves Geometry Yes
Improves Load Rating Yes
Truck Usage 200 30 9.5 0.9 MoDOT formula
Status: Planning Length: 1.7 miles Local Efficient Movement of Freight Factors 100% 40 40.0 4.0 Road assumed to meet criteria for freight; 65 is an important facil

Project Scale: Regional Roadway or Intersection Roadway
Functional Classification: Collector (for the major street) Q uality o f C om m unities Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 1.0 | of 10

Avg. Annual Daily Traffic (AADT): 4,000 (est. 2012, avg. for major street) Local/Regional Land Use Plans No 30 0.0 0.0
Daily Truck Traffic: 400 (est. 2012, avg. for major street) Consistent with Local Plans No no applicable local plan (not in Hollister or Branson)
Through Lanes: 2 (through lanes on major street) Consistent with Regional Plans No not mentioned in SMCOG regional plan
Project Discussion: This would provide an additional east-west connection and the only Connectivity No 30 0.0 0.0 Ridgedale (does not meet criteria for activity center) to Highway j
east-west connection toUS-65 in MO, south of the airport. There does not appear to be
Scenic and Visual No 20 0.0 0.0 Interchange & roadway, no scenic benefits
significant background demand for this connector, therefore future development should
be a major part of the plan. An assumed 4,000 ADT was selected as the baseline for Local Quality of Communities Factors 50% 20 10.0 1.0 benefits to Ridgedale area residents
this two-lane road. If significant development occurs along the corridor, a higher
capacity facility could be considered. Also, if this roadway were connected to the airport
Environm ental Protection Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =15% Total Points = | 7.5 | of 15 |
the project definition and ratings would change.
Consistent with Stormwater Goals Yes 30 30.0 4.5 Assume new runoff mitigated (new stormwater detention facilities
Consistent with Environmental Goals No 30 0.0 0.0 new road, proximity to airport; environmental mitigation possible

Access to O pportunity Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 2.5 | of 5 Avoids Historical Impacts Yes 20 20.0 3.0 No known historical impacts

Eliminate Bike/Ped Barriers (ADA) 100% 25 25.0 1.3 Local Environmental Protection Factors 0% 20 0.0 0.0 environmental mitigation likely

Project provides bike connections Yes assume bike provisions are incorporated into the project

Project provides pedestrian connections Yes assume ped provisions are incorporated into the project Safety Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =20% Total Points = | 12.4 | of 20
d
Project brings existing facilities up to ADA Regulations No use if first two do not apply a PDO 2 Safety Index 1.05 50 39.4 7.9 (Modified MoDOT formula)
oR ))n
o
Project provides some bike/pedestrian facilities No use if first two do not apply r o it Injury 7 Crash Rate 123.79 Crash data 2009-2011 (interchange area)
oj tc
a e
Transit No 25 0.0 0.0 No effect on Branson Shuttle or Jefferson Lines (M e sr Fatal 0 Accident Index 0.71
(s et
Local Access to Opportunity Factors 50% 50 25.0 1.3 assumes new bike/ped facilities in corridor (moderate use) <D _E Years 3 Severity Index 2.94
sa o
r
C Avg AADT 3906 Safety Concern No 5 0.0 0.0

C ongestion Relief Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =15% Total Points = | 3.8 | of 15 Safety Enhancements Yes 5 5.0 1.0 Interchange will provide numerous safety features

Level of Service B 25 5.0 0.8 design LOS B, street access restricted to maintain flow Emergency Response No 5 0.0 0.0

Functional Classification1 Collector 30% 25 7.5 1.1 Local Safety Factors 50% 35 17.5 3.5 crash rate not significant relative to other projects

Daily Usage 2000 25 0.4 0.1 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Local Congestion Relief Factors 50% 25 12.5 1.9 moderate to low traffic Taking Care o f the System Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 0.2 | of 5

Roadway or Bridge Conditions Very Good 20 0.0 0.0 Future project

Econom ic C om petitiveness Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 20% Total Points = | 19.4 | of 20 Substandard Roadway or Bridge Feature No 20 0.0 0.0 Future project

Strategic Regional Economic Corridor Yes 20 20.0 4.0 US-65 Functional Classification2 Collector 30% 10 3.0 0.2

Support Regional Economic Opportunities Yes 30 30.0 6.0 Interchange allows for large scale economic possibilities Daily Vehicle Usage 2000 10 0.2 0.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Level of Economic Distress 85% 20 17.0 3.4 Local Taking Care of the System Factors 0% 40 0.0 0.0 Future project

Poverty (Block Group) 14.0% 2006-2010 ACS block group data - Comb. 3 block groups

Unemployment (tract) 8.0% 2006-2010 ACS tract data - Combining 3 tracts

Local Economic Competitiveness Factors 100% 30 30.0 6.0 important part of current econ. dev efforts

Data Check3 OK Data Check1 OK Data Check2 OK
Proj. #: 1-9 Project Name: Taney County Expressway E fficient M ovem ent o f Freight Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 7.7 | of 10

Project Type: Connectivity Total S c o r ^ 76.9 | out of 100 Large Vehicle Friendly Facilities Yes 30 30.0 3.0
Project Description: Construct a new approximately 4.6 mile highway connection from Widens Road Yes
Birch Street in Hollister to Hwy 76 in Kirbyville. The roadway is proposed as a two-lane
Improves Geometry Yes
highway. All intersections will be at-grade and likely stop-controlled. Multiple bridges will
Improves Load Rating Yes
be required.
Truck Usage 100 30 6.7 0.7 MoDOT formula

Status: Grant Application Submitted Length: 4.6 miles Local Efficient Movement of Freight Factors 100% 40 40.0 4.0 Road assumed to be built to meet criteria for trucks

Project Scale: Regional Roadway or Intersection Roadway
Functional Classification: Major Arterial (for the major street) Q uality o f C om m unities Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 8.0 | of 10

Avg. Annual Daily Traffic (AADT): 4,000 (est. 2012, avg. for major street) Local/Regional Land Use Plans Yes 30 30.0 3.0
Daily Truck Traffic: 200 (est. 2012, avg. for major street) Consistent with Local Plans Yes On local plans and submitted as TIGER Application
Through Lanes: 2 (through lanes on major street) Consistent with Regional Plans Yes East-West Roadway listed as need in SMCOG regional plan
Project Discussion: Project would provide a needed connection between the Hwy 65 / Connectivity Yes 30 30.0 3.0 Hollister to Kirbyville
Industrial Park Dr interchange and the east side of Taney County. It would reduce traffic
Scenic and Visual No 20 0.0 0.0 No major scenic or visual elements
volumes on Hwy 76 in the Lakeshore area; provide a more safe travel route (diverting
traffic from Hwy 76); and open development opportunities (commercial, industrial, and Local Quality of Communities Factors 100% 20 20.0 2.0 Important to the local and regional community quality
residential). It would also divert traffic from Hwy Bb and Coon Creek Road, providing an
alternative to Coon Creek Road in high water conditions. This project includes project 1
Environm ental Protection Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =15% Total Points = | 12.8 | of 15 |
1 and it could address some of the needs identified in project 7-1.
Consistent with Stormwater Goals Yes 30 30.0 4.5 Assume excess runoff mitigated(new stormwater detention faciliti

Consistent with Environmental Goals Yes 30 30.0 4.5 Unmitigated environmental impacts are not expected
Access to O pportunity Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 5% Total Points = | 2.8 | of 5 Avoids Historical Impacts Yes 20 20.0 3.0 No known historical impacts

Eliminate Bike/Ped Barriers (ADA) 20% 25 5.0 0.3 Local Environmental Protection Factors 25% 20 5.0 0.8 Will require several bridge crossings and greenfield construction

Project provides bike connections No Only for a portion of the entire length (see below)

Project provides pedestrian connections No Only for a portion of the entire length (see below) Safety Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =20% Total Points = | 14.3 | of 20

shes (Major Road
Project brings existing facilities up to ADA Regulations No use if first two do not apply PDO 54 Safety Index 0.80 50 30.1 6.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)

r Intersection)
Project provides some bike/pedestrian facilities Yes use if first two do not apply Portion of highway will have sidewalk and bike lanes Injury 22 Crash Rate 336.09 Crash data 2009-2011, used crash and volume data for Bus 65

Transit No 25 0.0 0.0 No effect on Branson Shuttle or Jefferson Lines Fatal 0 Accident Index 1.92 used length data from BUS 65

Local Access to Opportunity Factors 100% 50 50.0 2.5 Directly connects year-round housing with jobs and shoppin Years 3 Severity Index 1.72

6 2010 AADT 13768 Safety Concern Yes 5 5.0 1.0 Safety mentioned as important issue in TIGER II application

Congestion Relief Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 15% Total Points = | 9.4 | of 15 Safety Enhancements Yes 5 5.0 1.0 Shift traffic from Hwy 76 and BUS 65

Level of Service F 25 25.0 3.8 Indirectly addresses LOS F condition identified for 1-2 & 1-3 Emergency Response Yes 5 5.0 1.0 Could improve emergency response times and access/egress

Functional Classification1 Major Arterial 50% 25 12.5 1.9 Local Safety Factors 75% 35 26.3 5.3 Improves safety for area residents

Daily Usage 2000 25 0.4 0.1 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Local Congestion Relief Factors 100% 25 25.0 3.8 Diverts traffic from congested area, new direct connection Taking Care o f the System Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 5% Total Points = | 2.0 | of 5

Roadway or Bridge Conditions Good 20 5.0 0.3 New roadway, but relieves traffic on other roads

Econom ic Com petitiveness Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 20% Total Points = | 20.0 | of 20 Substandard Roadway or Bridge Feature Yes 20 20.0 1.0 Provides alternate to Coon Creek Road and Hwy 76

Strategic Regional Economic Corridor Yes 20 20.0 4.0 Affects BUS 65 and Eastern Taney County Functional Classification2 Major Arterial 50% 10 5.0 0.3

Support Regional Economic Opportunities Yes 30 30.0 6.0 Future development area, prior initiatives in corridor Daily Vehicle Usage 2000 10 0.2 0.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Level of Economic Distress 100% 20 20.0 4.0 Local Taking Care of the System Factors 25% 40 10.0 0.5 Mainly new roadway, but benefits existing roadways
Sp

Poverty (Block Group) 2011-2015 ACS block group data - 3 block groups
2
0
%
..0

Unemployment (tract) 10.0% 2011-2015 ACS tract data - 2 tracts

Local Economic Competitiveness Factors 100% 30 30.0 6.0 Important future development area, important linkage

Data Check3 OK Data Check1 OK Data Check2 OK
Proj. #: 1-10 Project Name: US 65 Upgrade to Freeway Standards E fficient M ovem ent o f Freight Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 4.8 | of 10

Project Type: Capacity Total Score| 66.2 | out of 100 ~ Large Vehicle Friendly Facilities Partial Yes 30 15.0 1.5
Project Description: Upgrade Highway 65 to meet freeway standards throughout Taney Widens Road No
County. Upgrades would include improving Hwy 65 access points to grade-seprated
Improves Geometry Yes Will upgrade intersections and corridor to Interstate standards
interchanges. This includes four intersections in the southern part of the county and up
Improves Load Rating No
to three in the northern part of the county (though some access consolidation may be
necesary). Some segment improvements signage upgrades may also be required. Truck Usage 347.5 30 12.5 1.3 MoDOT formula
Status: Planning Length: NA miles Local Efficient Movement of Freight Factors 50% 40 20.0 2.0 Will benefit freight primarily at access points

Avg. Annual Daily Traffic (AADT): 20,611 2015 MoDOT Vehicle Count Map Local/Regional Land Use Plans Yes 30 30.0 3.0
Daily Truck Traffic: 1,390 2015 MoDOT Vehicle Count Map Consistent with Local Plans Yes Local priority, intersections on plans, now corridor being added
Through Lanes: 4 (through lanes on major street) Consistent with Regional Plans Yes Listed as need in SMCOG regional plan
Project Discussion: Highway 65 is the primary north-south highway through Taney Connectivity Yes 30 30.0 3.0 Countywide
County. It was upgraded to 4-lanes with a median in the 1990's. Several grade-
Scenic and Visual No 20 0.0 0.0 No major scenic or visual elements
separated interchanges have also been built; however, there are seven at-grade
intersections that still remain. These intersections must be upgraded to full grade- Local Quality of Communities Factors 50% 20 10.0 1.0 Important to the local and regional community quality
seprated interchanges or closed to meet Interstate standards. Other design features
such as fencing, signage, ramp tapers, and clear-zones must also be examined and
Environm ental Protection Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =15% Total Points = | 14.3 | of 15 |
possibly improved. The focus of the evaluation is on the southern four intersections.
Consistent with Stormwater Goals Yes 30 30.0 4.5 Assume excess runoff mitigated(new stormwater detention faciliti
Consistent with Environmental Goals Yes 30 30.0 4.5 Unmitigated environmental impacts are not expected

Access to O pportunity Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 1.9 | of 5 Avoids Historical Impacts Yes 20 20.0 3.0 No known historical impacts

Eliminate Bike/Ped Barriers (ADA) 0% 25 0.0 0.0 Local Environmental Protection Factors 75% 20 15.0 2.3 Few small wetlands in area, project includes stormwater BMP

Project provides bike connections No
Project provides pedestrian connections No Safety Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =20% Total Points = | 11.8 | of 20

shes (Major Road
’roject brings existing facilities up to ADA Regulations No use if first two do not apply PDO 34 Safety Index 0.60 50 22.7 4.5 (Modified MoDOT formula)

r Intersection)
Project provides some bike/pedestrian facilities No use if first two do not apply Injury 24 Crash Rate 40.31 Crash data 2009-2011,

Transit Yes 25 25.0 1.3 Affects Branson Shuttle and Jefferson Lines Fatal 2 Accident Index 0.61 at all non-interchange access locations (7) along US 65

Local Access to Opportunity Factors 25% 50 12.5 0.6 Will not significantly change ped/bike/ransit access Years 3 Severity Index 2.27 volume multiplied by 7 for 7 intersections

6 2010 AADT 19418 Safety Concern Yes 5 5.0 1.0

C ongestion Relief Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =15% Total Points = | 5.9 | of 15 Safety Enhancements Yes 5 5.0 1.0 Reduces conflict points

Level of Service B 25 5.0 0.8 Intersections typically operate at LOS B or better Emergency Response No 5 0.0 0.0 Unlikely to have a major impact on emergency response

Functional Classification1 Freeway 100% 25 25.0 3.8 Local Safety Factors 75% 35 26.3 5.3 Improves safety for area residents

Daily Usage 5152.8 25 3.0 0.4 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Local Congestion Relief Factors 25% 25 6.3 0.9 Not a major congestion relief project Taking Care o f the System Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 5% Total Points = | 2.8 | of 5

Roadway or Bridge Conditions Good 20 5.0 0.3 Existing Hwy 65

Econom ic C om petitiveness Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 20% Total Points = | 17.9 | of 20 Substandard Roadway or Bridge Feature Yes 20 20.0 1.0 Does not meet FHWA standards for interstates

Strategic Regional Economic Corridor Yes 20 20.0 4.0 Affects all of Taney County Functional Classification2 Freeway 100% 10 10.0 0.5

Support Regional Economic Opportunities Yes 30 30.0 6.0 Beneficial for attracting new businesses & development Daily Vehicle Usage 5152.75 10 1.2 0.1 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Level of Economic Distress 85% 20 17.0 3.4 Local Taking Care of the System Factors 50% 40 20.0 1.0 Mainly new intersections, but benefits existing roadways

Poverty (Block Group) 17.0% 2011-2015 ACS block group data - 4 block groups, near ints

Unemployment (tract) 9.0% 2011-2015 ACS tract data - 3 tracts, near ints.

Local Economic Competitiveness Factors 75% 30 22.5 4.5 New development often favors Interstate access

Data Check3 OK Data Check1 OK Data Check2 OK
Proj. #: 1-11 Project Name: Transload Facility E fficient M ovem ent o f Freight Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 10.0 | of 10

in
CO
m

O
O
Project Type: Multimodal Total Score Large Vehicle Friendly Facilities Yes 30 30.0 3.0

o
u
o
t
f
Project Description: Construct a new transload facility near the airport with railroad Widens Road Yes Project effectively improves freight facilities
acces. The site must have easy access to Hwy 65.
Improves Geometry Yes Project effectively improves freight facilities
Improves Load Rating Yes Project effectively improves freight facilities
Truck Usage 125 30 30.0 3.0 Adjusted to provide full points given project type
Status: Planning Length: N/A miles Local Efficient Movement of Freight Factors 100% 40 40.0 4.0 Project is designed to improve freight movements

Project Scale: Regional Roadway or Intersection Intersection
Functional Classification: Other (for the major street) Q uality o f C om m unities Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 4.0 | of 10

Avg. Annual Daily Traffic (AADT): 500 (est. 2012, avg. for major street) Local/Regional Land Use Plans Yes 30 30.0 3.0
Daily Truck Traffic: 250 (est. 2012, avg. for major street) Consistent with Local Plans Yes MoDOT Statewide Freight Study recommends strengthening
Through Lanes: 2 (through lanes on major street) Consistent with Regional Plans Yes Intermodal connectors
Project Discussion: The transload facility could provide economic benefits to the area. Connectivity No 30 0.0 0.0
It could promote manufacturing and industrial development in the County and specifically
Scenic and Visual No 20 0.0 0.0 No major scenic or visual elements
near the new facility. It could promote job growth and make Taney County a hub for
distribution services. Local Quality of Communities Factors 50% 20 10.0 1.0 Important to the local and regional community quality

Environm ental Protection Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 15% Total Points = | 13.5 | of 15
Consistent with Stormwater Goals Yes 30 30.0 4.5
Consistent with Environmental Goals Yes 30 30.0 4.5

Access to O pportunity Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 0.0 | of 5 Avoids Historical Impacts Yes 20 20.0 3.0

Eliminate Bike/Ped Barriers (ADA) 0% 25 0.0 0.0 Local Environmental Protection Factors 50% 20 10.0 1.5 Project provides an efficient means of transporting freight

Project provides bike connections No
Project provides pedestrian connections No Safety Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =20% Total Points = | 5.3 | of 20

shes (Major Road
’roject brings existing facilities up to ADA Regulations No use if first two do not apply PDO Safety Index -1.00 50 0.0 0.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)

>r Intersection)
Project provides some bike/pedestrian facilities No use if first two do not apply Injury Crash Rate 0.00

Transit No 25 0.0 0.0 No effect on Branson Shuttle or Jefferson Lines Fatal Accident Index 0.00

Local Access to Opportunity Factors 0% 50 0.0 0.0 This project does not affect bike/ped/transit access. Years Severity Index 0.00

6 2010 AADT Safety Concern No 5 0.0 0.0

C ongestion Relief Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =15% Total Points = | 1.7 | of 15 Safety Enhancements No 5 0.0 0.0

Level of Service B 25 5.0 0.8 Could reduce regional truck traffic, but increase local traffic Emergency Response No 5 0.0 0.0

Functional Classification1 Other 0% 25 0.0 0.0 Local Safety Factors 75% 35 26.3 5.3 Project provides a safe way of moving freight

Daily Usage 250 25 0.0 0.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Local Congestion Relief Factors 25% 25 6.3 0.9 Could reduce regional truck traffic, but increase local traffic Taking Care o f the System Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 5% Total Points = | 2.0 | of 5

Roadway or Bridge Conditions Fair 20 10.0 0.5

Econom ic C om petitiveness Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 20% Total Points = | 19.4 | of 20 Substandard Roadway or Bridge Feature No 20 0.0 0.0

Strategic Regional Economic Corridor Yes 20 20.0 4.0 Functional Classification2 Other 0% 10 0.0 0.0

Support Regional Economic Opportunities Yes 30 30.0 6.0 Future development area, prior initiatives in corridor Daily Vehicle Usage 250 10 0.0 0.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Level of Economic Distress 85% 20 17.0 3.4 Local Taking Care of the System Factors 75% 40 30.0 1.5 Project provides an efficient multimodal way of moving freight

Poverty (Block Group) 18.0% 2011-2015 ACS block group data - countywide

Unemployment (tract) 9.0% 2006-2010 ACS tract data - countywide

Local Economic Competitiveness Factors 100% 30 30.0 6.0 This project is focused on local and regional development

Data Check3 OK Data Check1 OK Data Check2 OK
Proj. #: 1-12 Project Name: Hwy 86 at Amanda Road E fficient M ovem ent o f Freight Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 4.4 | of 10

CO
CO
m
Project Type: Traffic Safety Total Score Large Vehicle Friendly Facilities Partial Yes 30 15.0 1.5

f
o
0
0
u
t
Project Description: Improve safety at the intersection by modifying or upgrading the Widens Road No
traffic control, signage, and geometry.
Improves Geometry Yes intersection safety improvements
Improves Load Rating No
Truck Usage 167.5 30 8.7 0.9 MoDOT formula
Status: Planning Length: NA Local Efficient Movement of Freight Factors 50% 40 20.0 2.0 Minimal criteria met; Hwy 86 is an important arterial

Project Scale: Small Roadway or Intersection Intersection
Functional Classification: Minor Arterial (for the major street) Q uality o f C om m unities Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 1.0 | of 10

Avg. Annual Daily Traffic (AADT): 6,700 (2017 counts, avg. for major street) Local/Regional Land Use Plans No 30 0.0 0.0
Daily Truck Traffic: 335 (estimated, avg. for major street) Consistent with Local Plans No no applicable local plans
Through Lanes: 2 (through lanes on major street) Consistent with Regional Plans No not mentioned in SMCOG regional plan
Project Discussion: Traffic has increased at this intersection due to Long Creek Marina Connectivity No 30 0.0 0.0 Localized project only
access by turning south. Sight distances are limited due to topography. There are no
Scenic and Visual No 20 0.0 0.0 Intersection improvements, no scenic benefits
turn lanes at the intersection. MoDOT traffic counts indicate that this intersection likely
does meet the turn lane warrant thresholds. Turn lanes may be the best option for Local Quality of Communities Factors 50% 20 10.0 1.0 Minimal criteria met; Hwy 86 is an important facility in Taney Co
improving safety at this location.

Environm ental Protection Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 4.8 | of 5

Consistent with Stormwater Goals Yes 30 30.0 1.5 Modest project, few stormwater issues expected
Consistent with Environmental Goals Yes 30 30.0 1.5 Modest project, no mitigation expected

Access to O pportunity Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 1.5 |of 5 Avoids Historical Impacts Yes 20 20.0 1.0 No known historical impacts

Eliminate Bike/Ped Barriers (ADA) 20% 25 5.0 0.3 Local Environmental Protection Factors 75% 20 15.0 0.8 Modest project, few issues expected

Project provides bike connections No does not apply

Project provides pedestrian connections No does not apply Safety Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =30% Total Points = | 29.3 | of 30
d
’roject brings existing facilities up to ADA Regulations No use if first two do not apply assumes no sidewalks or bike lanes a PDO 0 Safety Index 1.27 50 47.6 14.3 (Modified MoDOT formula)
oR ))n
o
Project provides some bike/pedestrian facilities Yes use if first two do not apply assumes widened shoulders at intersection r oi Injury 2 Crash Rate 27.92 Crash data 2014-2016
oj tc
a e
Transit No 25 0.0 0.0 not on transit route (M e
sr Fatal 0 Accident Index 0.42
s( e t
Local Access to Opportunity Factors 50% 50 25.0 1.3 widened shoulders benefit bikes/peds <D _E Years 3 Severity Index 3.50
sa o
r
C Avg AADT 6542 Safety Concern Yes 5 5.0 1.5 Concern raised by local leaders

C ongestion Relief Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =10% Total Points = | 4.2 | of 10 Safety Enhancements Yes 5 5.0 1.5 Will result in intersection improvements (traffic control and safety)

Level of Service C 25 10.0 1.0 estimated peak hour LOS Emergency Response Yes 5 5.0 1.5 Improves intersection near emergency responder (ambulance)

Functional Classificationl Minor Arterial 40% 25 10.0 1.0 Local Safety Factors 100% 35 35.0 10.5 All criteria met; crash rate is noteworthy

Daily Usage 3350 25 9.3 0.9 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Local Congestion Relief Factors 50% 25 12.5 1.3 moderate localized congestion Taking Care o f the System Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 20% Total Points = | 7.5 | of 20

Roadway or Bridge Conditions Fair 20 10.0 2.0 Roadway cracking

Econom ic C om petitiveness Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =10% Total Points = | 5.7 | of 10 Substandard Roadway or Bridge Feature No 20 0.0 0.0

Strategic Regional Economic Corridor No 30 0.0 0.0 US-86 Functional Classification2 Minor Arterial 40% 10 4.0 0.8

Support Regional Economic Opportunities Yes 20 20.0 2.0 Big Cedar / Bass Pro Resort Area Development Daily Vehicle Usage 3350 10 3.7 0.7 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Level of Economic Distress 70% 20 14.0 1.4 Local Taking Care of the System Factors 50% 40 20.0 4.0 Important local intersection; provides access to marina

Poverty (Block Group) 18% 2012-2016 ACS 5-year estimates for countywide

Unemployment (tract) 4% 2012-2016 ACS 5-year estimates for countywide

Local Economic Competitiveness Factors 75% 30 22.5 2.3 MO-86 is an important arterial and economic link

Data Check3 OK Data Checkl OK Data Check2 OK
Proj. #: 1-13 Project Name: Hwy 86 Extension E fficient M ovem ent o f Freight Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 8.3 | of 10

Project Type: Connectivity Total S c o r^ 55.7 | out of 100 Large Vehicle Friendly Facilities Yes 30 30.0 3.0
Project Description: Construct a new approximately 7.5 mile highway connection from Widens Road Yes
Hwy 86 to the Branson Airport and eventually to Hwy 76 in Kirbyville via the East-West
Improves Geometry Yes
Corridor. The roadway is proposed as a two-lane highway. All intersections will be at-
Improves Load Rating Yes
grade and likely stop-controlled. Multiple bridges will be required. A portion of this
project is included in project 1-7. Truck Usage 400 30 13.4 1.3 MoDOT formula
Status: Planning Length: 7.5 miles Local Efficient Movement of Freight Factors 100% 40 40.0 4.0 Road assumed to be built to meet criteria for trucks

Avg. Annual Daily Traffic (AADT): 8,000 (estimated, avg. for major street) Local/Regional Land Use Plans Yes 30 30.0 3.0
Daily Truck Traffic: 800 (estimated, avg. for major street) Consistent with Local Plans Yes Not on any plans
Through Lanes: 2 (through lanes on major street) Consistent with Regional Plans Yes Not on any plans
Project Discussion: Project would provide a needed connection between the Hwy 65 / Connectivity Yes 30 30.0 3.0 Hollister/Ridgedale to Kirbyville
Hwy 86 intersection and the east side of Taney County. It would reduce traffic volumes
Scenic and Visual No 20 0.0 0.0 No major scenic or visual elements
on Hwy 76 in the Lakeshore area; provide a more safe travel route (diverting traffic from
Hwy 76); and open development opportunities (commercial, industrial, and residential). It Local Quality of Communities Factors 100% 20 20.0 2.0 Important to the local and regional community quality
would also divert traffic from Hwy Bb and Coon Creek Road, providing an alternative to
Coon Creek Road in high water conditions.
Environm ental Protection Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =15% Total Points = | 7.5 | of 15 |
Consistent with Stormwater Goals Yes 30 30.0 4.5 Assume excess runoff mitigated(new stormwater detention faciliti
Consistent with Environmental Goals No 30 0.0 0.0 Unmitigated environmental impacts are not expected

Access to O pportunity Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 2.8 | of 5 Avoids Historical Impacts Yes 20 20.0 3.0 No known historical impacts

Eliminate Bike/Ped Barriers (ADA) 20% 25 5.0 0.3 Local Environmental Protection Factors 0% 20 0.0 0.0 Will require several bridge crossings and greenfield construction

Project provides bike connections No Only for a portion of the entire length (see below)

Project provides pedestrian connections No Only for a portion of the entire length (see below) Safety Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =20% Total Points = | 3.8 | of 20

Crashes (Major Road
’roject brings existing facilities up to ADA Regulations No use if first two do not apply PDO NA Safety Index -1.00 50 0.0 0.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)

or Intersection)
Project provides some bike/pedestrian facilities Yes use if first two do not apply Portion of highway will have sidewalk and bike lanes Injury NA Crash Rate 0.00

Transit No 25 0.0 0.0 No effect on Branson Shuttle or Jefferson Lines Fatal NA Accident Index 0.00

Local Access to Opportunity Factors 100% 50 50.0 2.5 Directly connects year-round housing with jobs and shoppir Years NA Severity Index 0.00

Avg AADT 7811 Safety Concern No 5 0.0 0.0 No safety concerns currently

C ongestion Relief Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =15% Total Points = | 7.8 | of 15 Safety Enhancements Yes 5 5.0 1.0 Shift traffic from Hwy 76 and BUS 65

Level of Service F 25 25.0 3.8 Indirectly addresses LOS F condition identified for 1-2 & 1-3 Emergency Response Yes 5 5.0 1.0 Could improve emergency response times and access/egress

Functional Classification1 Major Arterial 50% 25 12.5 1.9 Local Safety Factors 25% 35 8.8 1.8 Improves safety for area residents

Daily Usage 4000 25 1.8 0.3 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Local Congestion Relief Factors 50% 25 12.5 1.9 Diverts traffic from congested area, new direct connection Taking Care o f the System Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 5% Total Points = | 0.3 | of 5

Roadway or Bridge Conditions Very Good 20 0.0 0.0 New project

Econom ic C om petitiveness Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 20% Total Points = | 17.3 | of 20 Substandard Roadway or Bridge Feature No 20 0.0 0.0 New project

Strategic Regional Economic Corridor Yes 20 20.0 4.0 Affects BUS 65 and Eastern Taney County Functional Classification2 Major Arterial 50% 10 5.0 0.3

Support Regional Economic Opportunities Yes 30 30.0 6.0 Future development area, prior initiatives in corridor Daily Vehicle Usage 4000 10 0.7 0.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Level of Economic Distress 70% 20 14.0 2.8 Local Taking Care of the System Factors 0% 40 0.0 0.0 Mainly new roadway, but benefits existing roadways

Poverty (Block Group) 18.0% 2012-2016 ACS 5-year estimates for countywide

Unemployment (tract) 4.0% 2012-2016 ACS 5-year estimates for countywide

Local Economic Competitiveness Factors 75% 30 22.5 4.5 Important future development area, important linkage

Data Check3 OK Data Checkl OK Data Check2 OK
Proj. #: 2-1 Project Name: K Hwy/Warren Rd at Bull Shoals Lake E fficient M ovem ent o f Freight Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 0.2 | of 10

Project Type: Connectivity Total Score 49.1 out of 100 Large Vehicle Friendly Facilities No 30 0.0 0.0
Project Description: Raise roadway connection across waterway leading into Bull Widens Road No
Shoals Lake to provide an all weather connection from K-Highway to Warren Road. The
m m Improves Geometry No
project would eliminate (or greatly minimize) the problem of flooding closing the roadway
Improves Load Rating No
at this location.
Truck Usage 7 30 1.8 0.2 MoDOT formula
Status: Completed 2012 Length: NA Local Efficient Movement of Freight Factors 0% 40 0.0 0.0 Assumes no major truck accommodations in roadway improvemei
v - V' 1
Project Scale: Medium Roadway or Intersection Intersection
Functional Classification: Collector (for the major street) Q uality o f C om m unities Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 7.0 | of 10

Avg. Annual Daily Traffic (AADT): 700 (est. 2012, avg. for major street) Local/Regional Land Use Plans No 30 0.0 0.0
Daily Truck Traffic: 14 (est. 2012, avg. for major street) Consistent with Local Plans No no applicable local plan
Through Lanes: 2 (through lanes on major street) Consistent with Regional Plans No not mentioned in SMCOG regional plan
Project Discussion: There are about a dozen homes on Warren Road and Parksley Connectivity Yes 30 30.0 3.0 provides all-weather connectivity
Lane that could benefit from this improved connection, as well as the K-Dock Marina.
Scenic and Visual Yes 20 20.0 2.0 Roadway carries recreational traffic; reduction of flooding impact
This connection has flooded a number of times in the last few years. During those events
residents, employees, and customers/visitors have considerable difficulty travel to and Local Quality of Communities Factors 100% 20 20.0 2.0 Critical for local community (residents/businesses)
from the homes and marina. K-Highway along the lake frontage was recently improved,
but this does not eliminate the flooding problem. 1 " •% . - 1
Environm ental Protection Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 2.8 | of 5
'• ■ 1
Consistent with Stormwater Goals Yes 30 30.0 1.5 Will address stormwater and flooding issues
Consistent with Environmental Goals No 30 0.0 0.0 Raising roadway; environmental impacts possible

Access to O pportunity Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 1.3 | of 5 Avoids Historical Impacts Yes 20 20.0 1.0 No known historical impacts

Eliminate Bike/Ped Barriers (ADA) 0% 25 0.0 0.0 Local Environmental Protection Factors 25% 20 5.0 0.3 Floodplain and/or wetlands impacts possible

Project provides bike connections No does not apply

Project provides pedestrian connections No does not apply Safety Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =30% Total Points = | 15.0 | of 30
d
’roject brings existing facilities up to ADA Regulations No use if first two do not apply assumes no sidewalks or bike lanes a PDO 0 Safety Index -1.00 50 0.0 0.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)
o
oR ))n
Project provides some bike/pedestrian facilities No use if first two do not apply assumes no sidewalk, bike lanes, or widened shoulders r oi Injury 0 Crash Rate 0.00 Crash data 2009-2011
oj tc
a e
Transit No 25 0.0 0.0 No effect on Branson Shuttle or Jefferson Lines (M e
sr Fatal 0 Accident Index 0.00
s( e t
Local Access to Opportunity Factors 50% 50 25.0 1.3 Flooding mitigation will be beneficial to bikes/peds as well <D _E Years 3 Severity Index 0.00
sa o
r
C Avg AADT 700 Safety Concern Yes 5 5.0 1.5 Concern raised by local leaders

C ongestion Relief Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =10% Total Points = | 3.1 | of 10 Safety Enhancements Yes 5 5.0 1.5 Raising the roadway will reduce impact from flooding

Level of Service B 25 5.0 0.5 LOS is not an issue here Emergency Response Yes 5 5.0 1.5 Emergency access not possible in severe flooding

Functional Classification1 Collector 30% 25 7.5 0.8 Local Safety Factors 100% 35 35.0 10.5 Emergency response issue is critical

Daily Usage 350 25 0.0 0.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Local Congestion Relief Factors 75% 25 18.8 1.9 addresses non-recurring delay due to weather Taking Care o f the System Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 20% Total Points = | 16.6 | of 20

Roadway or Bridge Conditions Very Poor 20 20.0 4.0 crossing in poor condition, new road is by water

Econom ic C om petitiveness Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =10% Total Points = | 3.2 | of 10 Substandard Roadway or Bridge Feature Yes 20 20.0 4.0 floods in high water

Strategic Regional Economic Corridor No 30 0.0 0.0 Functional Classification2 Collector 30% 10 3.0 0.6

Support Regional Economic Opportunities No 20 0.0 0.0 Not linked to any planned econ. dev. projects Daily Vehicle Usage 350 10 0.0 0.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Level of Economic Distress 85% 20 17.0 1.7 Local Taking Care of the System Factors 100% 40 40.0 8.0 important to maintain all weather access
Sp

Poverty (Block Group) 2006-2010 ACS block group data - 1 block group
2
0
%
..0

Unemployment (tract) 7.0% 2006-2010 ACS tract data - 1 tract

Local Economic Competitiveness Factors 50% 30 15.0 1.5 Important to marina / lake activity

Data Check3 OK Data Checkl OK Data Check2 OK
Proj. #: 2-2 Project Name Slough Hollow Rd (Fishermans Nose to Brace Hill) E fficient M ovem ent o f Freight Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | M | of 10

Project Type: Connectivity Total Score| 34.7 | out of 100 Large Vehicle Friendly Facilities No 30 0.0 0.0
Project Description: Raise roadway to reduce the impact of flooding. This could Widens Road No
include a combination of fill and/or structure. It would need to run the entire length of the
Improves Geometry No
roadway as it parallels the creek (approx. 3200 feet) at an estimated elevation of at least
Improves Load Rating No
four feet..
Truck Usage 2 30 0.9 0.1 MoDOT formula
Status: Completed 2013 Length: 1.03 miles Local Efficient Movement of Freight Factors 0% 40 0.0 0.0 not a major truck route

Project Scale: Large Roadway or Intersection Roadway
Functional Classification: Local (for the major street) Q uality o f C om m unities Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 4.0 | of 10

Avg. Annual Daily Traffic (AADT): 200 (est. 2012, avg. for major street) Local/Regional Land Use Plans No 30 0.0 0.0
Daily Truck Traffic: 4 (est. 2012, avg. for major street) Consistent with Local Plans No no applicable local plan
Through Lanes: 2 (through lanes on major street) Consistent with Regional Plans No not mentioned in SMCOG regional plan
Project Discussion: This roadway section floods in high water and becomes Connectivity Yes 30 30.0 3.0 provides all-weather connectivity
impassable. It is necessary to raise about a third of a mile of the roadway to eliminate
Scenic and Visual No 20 0.0 0.0
this problem. This project would require coordination with state and federal agencies
and would likelty require some environmental mitigation. It could also be difficult and Local Quality of Communities Factors 50% 20 10.0 1.0 benefits local residents
expensive (but not impossible) to implement.

Environm ental Protection Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =15% Total Points = | 7.5 | of 15 |
Consistent with Stormwater Goals Yes 30 30.0 4.5 Assume excess runoff mitigated(new stormwater detention faciliti
Consistent with Environmental Goals No 30 0.0 0.0 Raising roadway; environmental impacts possible

Access to O pportunity Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 0.6 | of 5 Avoids Historical Impacts Yes 20 20.0 3.0 No known historical impacts

Eliminate Bike/Ped Barriers (ADA) 0% 25 0.0 0.0 Local Environmental Protection Factors 0% 20 0.0 0.0 Floodplain and wetlands impacts likely

Project provides bike connections No does not apply

Project provides pedestrian connections No does not apply Safety Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =20% Total Points = | 10.1 | of 20
d
*roject brings existing facilities up to ADA Regulations No use if first two do not apply assumes no sidewalks or bike lanes a PDO 1 Safety Index 0.61 50 23.0 4.6 (Modified MoDOT formula)
o
oR ))n
Project provides some bike/pedestrian facilities No use if first two do not apply assumes no sidewalks, bike lanes, or widened shoulders r oi Injury 0 Crash Rate 443.32 Crash data 2009-2011
oj tc
a e
Transit No 25 0.0 0.0 No effect on Branson Shuttle or Jefferson Lines (M esr Fatal 0 Accident Index 2.53
(s et
Local Access to Opportunity Factors 25% 50 12.5 0.6 road improvements will be beneficial to bikes/peds as well <D _E Years 3 Severity Index 1.00
sa o
r
C Avg AADT 200 Safety Concern Yes 5 5.0 1.0 Concern raised by local leaders

C ongestion Relief Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =15% Total Points = | 4.5 | of 15 Safety Enhancements Yes 5 5.0 1.0 Raising the roadway will reduce impact from flooding

Level of Service A 25 0.0 0.0 peak hour congestion not a major issue Emergency Response No 5 0.0 0.0

Functional Classification1 Local 20% 25 5.0 0.8 Local Safety Factors 50% 35 17.5 3.5 crash rate high given low volume, but only one crash

Daily Usage 100 25 0.0 0.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Local Congestion Relief Factors 100% 25 25.0 3.8 road closure causes non-recurring congestion Taking Care o f the System Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 5% Total Points = | 3.9 | of 5

Roadway or Bridge Conditions Poor 20 15.0 0.8 roadway in poor-fair condition based on field observations

Econom ic C om petitiveness Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 20% Total Points = | 4.0 | of 20 Substandard Roadway or Bridge Feature Yes 20 20.0 1.0 flooding problem

Strategic Regional Economic Corridor No 20 0.0 0.0 Functional Classification2 Local 20% 10 2.0 0.1

Support Regional Economic Opportunities No 30 0.0 0.0 not linked to any planned econ. dev. projects Daily Vehicle Usage 100 10 0.0 0.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Level of Economic Distress 100% 20 20.0 4.0 Local Taking Care of the System Factors 100% 40 40.0 2.0 improvement would benefit existing roadway system

Poverty (Block Group) 18.0% 2006-2010 ACS block group data - Comb. 3 block groups

Unemployment (tract) 10.0% 2006-2010 ACS tract data - 1 tract

Local Economic Competitiveness Factors 0% 30 0.0 0.0 not linked to any planned econ. dev. projects

Data Check3 OK Data Check1 OK Data Check2 OK
Proj. #: 2-3 Project Name: M Hwy at Brace Hill and Nazarene Church Rd E fficient M ovem ent o f Freight Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 2.6 | of 10

Project Type: Geometric/Safety Total Score| 34.5 J iout of 100 Large Vehicle Friendly Facilities Partial Yes 30 15.0 1.5
Project Description: Improve intersection to improve safety and address poor lines of Widens Road No
sight, especially to from the north on Hwy-M. Improvements could include signage,
Improves Geometry Yes improves turns for trucks and other large vehicles
striping, flashing beacons, tree removal, or realignment.
Improves Load Rating No
Truck Usage 1.2 0.1 MoDOT formula

3
0
Status: Completed 2016 Length: NA Local Efficient Movement of Freight Factors 25% 40 10.0 1.0 not a major truck route

Project Scale: Medium Roadway or Intersection Intersection
Functional Classification: Collector (for the major street) Q uality o f C om m unities Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 1.0 | of 10

Avg. Annual Daily Traffic (AADT): 300 (est 2012, avg. for major street) Local/Regional Land Use Plans No 30 0.0 0.0
Daily Truck Traffic: 6 (est 2012, avg. for major street) Consistent with Local Plans No no applicable local plan
Through Lanes: 2 (through lanes on major street) Consistent with Regional Plans No not mentioned in SMCOG regional plan
Project Discussion: All of the roads intersecting in this area are two-lane roads without Connectivity No 30 0.0 0.0
turn lanes. Vehicles turning onto M-Hwy have limited sight distance to the north.
Scenic and Visual No 20 0.0 0.0 Intersection improvements, no scenic benefits

Local Quality of Communities Factors 50% 20 10.0 1.0 important to and beneficial for local residents

Environm ental Protection Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 4.8 | of 5

Consistent with Stormwater Goals Yes 30 30.0 1.5 Modest project, few stormwater issues expected

Consistent with Environmental Goals Yes 30 30.0 1.5 Modest project, no mitigation expected
Access to O pportunity Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 5% Total Points = | 1.5 |of 5 Avoids Historical Impacts Yes 20 20.0 1.0 No known historical impacts

Eliminate Bike/Ped Barriers (ADA) 20% 25 5.0 0.3 Local Environmental Protection Factors 75% 20 15.0 0.8 Modest project, few issues expected

Project provides bike connections No does not apply

Project provides pedestrian connections No does not apply Safety Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =30% Total Points = | 8.3 | of 30
d
’reject brings existing facilities up to ADA Regulations No use if first two do not apply assumes no sidewalks or bike lanes a PDO 0 Safety Index 0.00 50 0.0 0.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)
o
oR ) )n
Project provides some bike/pedestrian facilities Yes use if first two do not apply assumes improved shoulders at intersection r oi Injury 0 Crash Rate 0.00 Crash data 2009-2011
oj ct
a e
Transit No 25 0.0 0.0 No effect on Branson Shuttle or Jefferson Lines (M sr Fatal 0 Accident Index 0.00
s( e t
Local Access to Opportunity Factors 50% 50 25.0 1.3 Assumes improved shoulders at intersection <D _E Years 3 Severity Index 0.00
sa o
r Safety Concern Yes
C Avg AADT 300 5 5.0 1.5 Concern raised by local leaders

Congestion Relief Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =10% Total Points = | 0.8 | of 10 Safety Enhancements Yes 5 5.0 1.5 Sight distance improvements

Level of Service A 25 0.0 0.0 congestion not a major issue Emergency Response No 5 0.0 0.0

Functional Classification1 Collector 30% 25 7.5 0.8 Local Safety Factors 50% 35 17.5 5.3 no reported crashes from 2007-2011

Daily Usage 150 25 0.0 0.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Local Congestion Relief Factors 0% 25 0.0 0.0 congestion not a major issue, safety project Taking Care o f the System Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 20% Total Points = | 13.6 | of 20

Roadway or Bridge Conditions Good 20 5.0 1.0 road in good condition based on field observations

Econom ic Com petitiveness Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 2.0 | of 10 Substandard Roadway or Bridge Feature Yes 20 20.0 4.0 limited sight distance

Strategic Regional Economic Corridor No 30 0.0 0.0 Functional Classification2 Collector 30% 10 3.0 0.6

Support Regional Economic Opportunities No 20 0.0 0.0 Not linked to any planned econ. dev. projects Daily Vehicle Usage 150 10 0.0 0.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Level of Economic Distress 100% 20 20.0 2.0 Local Taking Care of the System Factors 100% 40 40.0 8.0 beneficial improvements to existing system

Poverty (Block Group) 17.0% 2006-2010 ACS block group data - Comb. 2 block groups

Unemployment (tract) 10.0% 2006-2010 ACS tract data - 1 tract

Local Economic Competitiveness Factors 0% 30 0.0 0.0 Not linked to any planned econ. dev. projects

Data Check3 OK Data Checkl OK Data Check2 OK
Proj. #: 2-4 Project Name: US-160 and Y Hwy E fficient M ovem ent o f Freight Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 4.2 | of 10

Project Type: Traffic Safety Total Score| 64.2 | out of 100 Large Vehicle Friendly Facilities Partial Yes 30 15.0 1.5
Project Description: Improve intersection to address traffic control, delay, and safety. Widens Road No
Improvements could include signalization, a roundabout, or signage/striping.
Improves Geometry Yes location will be improved in a manner that benefits large vehicles

Improves Load Rating No

CO
Truck Usage 6.9 0.7 MoDOT formula

0
5

0
Status: Planning Length: NA Local Efficient Movement of Freight Factors 50% 40 20.0 2.0 trucks will benefit from the improved geometry and/or traffic contr

Project Scale: Medium Roadway or Intersection Intersection
Functional Classification: Minor Arterial (for the major street) Q uality o f C om m unities Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 10.0 | of 10
Avg. Annual Daily Traffic (AADT): 10,700 (est. 2012, avg. for major street) Local/Regional Land Use Plans Yes 30 30.0 3.0
Daily Truck Traffic: 210 (est. 2012, avg. for major street) Consistent with Local Plans Yes 160 roadway improvements mentioned in Forsyth Strategic Plan
Through Lanes: 2 (through lanes on major street) Consistent with Regional Plans Yes 160 roadway improvements mentioned in SMCOG regional plan
Project Discussion: The intersection is an all-way stop control intersection. The Connectivity Yes 30 30.0 3.0 160 connects Forsyth to 176 (Merriam Woods/Rockaway Beach)
volumes are not balanced and some movements therefore have higher delay values.
Scenic and Visual Yes 20 20.0 2.0 possible conversion to roundabout; location of county seat
The volumes are also near and possibly above the threshold for signal warrants. A
roundabout could also work at this location. Local Quality of Communities Factors 100% 20 20.0 2.0 Critical intersection; 160 is important corridor through Forsyth
y

Environm ental Protection Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 4.8 | of 5

Consistent with Stormwater Goals Yes 30 30.0 1.5 Modest project, few stormwater issues expected

Consistent with Environmental Goals Yes 30 30.0 1.5 Modest project, no mitigation expected
Access to O pportunity Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 5% Total Points = | 3.0 |of 5 Avoids Historical Impacts Yes 20 20.0 1.0 No known historical impacts

Eliminate Bike/Ped Barriers (ADA) 40% 25 10.0 0.5 Local Environmental Protection Factors 75% 20 15.0 0.8 Assume nearby floodplains & wetlands has no bearing on project

Project provides bike connections No consider adding bike lane or multi-use facility

Project provides pedestrian connections Yes assumed ped provisions are part of project Safety Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =30% Total Points = | 11.2 | of 30
d
’roject brings existing facilities up to ADA Regulations No use if first two do not apply a PDO 2 Safety Index 0.26 50 9.7 2.9 (Modified MoDOT formula)
o
oR ) )n
Project provides some bike/pedestrian facilities No use if first two do not apply r oi Injury 1 Crash Rate 26.22 Crash data 2009-2011
oj ct
a e
Transit No 0.0 No effect on Branson Shuttle or Jefferson Lines (M sr Fatal 0 Accident Index 0.40
0
2
5

0
..

s( e t
Local Access to Opportunity Factors 100% 50 50.0 2.5 project would benefit pedestrians crossing at the intersectio <D _E Years 3 Severity Index 1.83
sa o
r Safety Concern Yes
C Avg AADT 10448 5 5.0 1.5 Concern raised by local leaders

Congestion Relief Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =10% Total Points = | 6.7 | of 10 Safety Enhancements Yes 5 5.0 1.5 Intersection and traffic control improvements

Level of Service F 25 25.0 2.5 westbound movements LOS for stop control (Synchro) Emergency Response No 5 0.0 0.0

Functional Classification1 Minor Arterial 40% 25 10.0 1.0 conservative assumption Local Safety Factors 50% 35 17.5 5.3 crash rate not significant relative to other projects

Daily Usage 5350 25 7.2 0.7 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Local Congestion Relief Factors 100% 25 25.0 2.5 moderate to high traffic, key location Taking Care o f the System Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 20% Total Points = | 14.4 | of 20

Roadway or Bridge Conditions Good 20 5.0 1.0

Econom ic Com petitiveness Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 10.0 | of 10 Substandard Roadway or Bridge Feature Yes 20 20.0 4.0 LOS E and even F condition during peak times

Strategic Regional Economic Corridor Yes 30 30.0 3.0 US-160 Functional Classification2 Minor Arterial 40% 10 4.0 0.8

Support Regional Economic Opportunities Yes 20 20.0 2.0 supports continued development and activity in Forsyth Daily Vehicle Usage 5350 10 2.9 0.6 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Level of Economic Distress 100% 20 20.0 2.0 Local Taking Care of the System Factors 100% 40 40.0 8.0 Important local intersection

Poverty (Block Group) 13.0% 2006-2010 ACS block group data - Comb. 3 block groups

Unemployment (tract) 12.0% 2006-2010 ACS tract data - 1 tract

Local Economic Competitiveness Factors 100% 30 30.0 3.0 MO-160 is an important arterial and economic link

Data Check3 OK Data Check1 OK Data Check2 OK
Proj. #: 2-5 Project Name: J-Hwy at Trigger Creek E fficient M ovement o f Freight Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =10% Total Points = | 2.7 | of 10

Project Type: Connectivity Total Score| 41.0 [o u t of 100 Large Vehicle Friendly Facilities Partial Yes 30 15.0 1.5
Project Description: Improve the roadway to address the section that floods (existing Widens Road No
culverts) at Trigger Creek. This could include using fill and/or a structure to raise the
Improves Geometry Yes improve alignment (low water area)
roadway.
Improves Load Rating No
Truck Usage 30 1.8 0.2 MoDOT formula
Status: Planning Length: 0.1 miles Local Efficient Movement of Freight Factors 25% 40 10.0 1.0 benefits truck traffic, but not major truck focused improvement

Project Scale: Medium Roadway or Intersection Roadway
Functional Classification: Collector (for the major street) Q uality o f C om m unities Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =10% Total Points = | 4.5 | of 10

Environm ental Protection Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 4.5 | of 5

Consistent with Stormwater Goals Yes 30 30.0 1.5 stormwater issues should be mitigatable
Consistent with Environmental Goals Yes 30 30.0 1.5 stream/floodplain crossing, but impacts should be mitigated

Access to O p portunity Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 5% Total Points = | 0.6 | of 5 Avoids Historical Impacts Yes 20 20.0 1.0 No known historical impacts

Eliminate Bike/Ped Barriers (ADA) 0% 25 0.0 0.0 Local Environmental Protection Factors 50% 20 10.0 0.5 environmental issues may require mitigation

Project provides bike connections No does not apply

Project provides pedestrian connections No does not apply Safety Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =30% Total Points = | 9.8 | of 30

Crashes (Major Road
Project brings existing facilities up to ADA Regulations No use if first two do not apply assumes no sidewalks or bike lanes PDO 0 Safety Index -1.00 50 0.0 0.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)

or Intersection)
Project provides some bike/pedestrian facilities No use if first two do not apply assumes no sidewalks, bike lanes, or widened shoulders Injury 0 Crash Rate 0.00 Crash data 2009-2011

Transit No 25 0.0 0.0 no effect on Branson Shuttle or Jefferson Lines Fatal 0 Accident Index 0.00

Local Access to Opportunity Factors 25% 50 12.5 0.6 minimal pedestrian/bicycle benefits Years 3 Severity Index 0.00

Avg AADT 700 Safety Concern Yes 5 5.0 1.5 concern raised by local leaders

Congestion Relief Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =10% Total Points = | 1.9 | of 10 Safety Enhancements Yes 5 5.0 1.5 reduced flooding

Level of Service B 25 5.0 0.5 estimated peak hour LOS Emergency Response Yes 5 5.0 1.5 Could improve response times

Functional Classificatio n Collector 30% 25 7.5 0.8 Local Safety Factors 50% 35 17.5 5.3 project offers a number of safety benefits to the local community

Daily Usage 350 25 0.0 0.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Local Congestion Relief Factors 25% 25 6.3 0.6 addresses an infrequent delay issue Taking Care o f the System Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 20% Total Points = | 14.6 | of 20

Roadway or Bridge Conditions Fair 20 10.0 2.0 roadway and culvert appear to be in fair condition

Econom ic C om petitiveness Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =10% Total Points = | 2.5 | of 10 Substandard Roadway or Bridge Feature Yes 20 20.0 4.0 road impassable during high water events

Strategic Regional Economic Corridor No 30 0.0 0.0 Functional Classification2 Collector 30% 10 3.0 0.6

Support Regional Economic Opportunities No 20 0.0 0.0 Not linked to any planned econ. dev. projects Daily Vehicle Usage 350 10 0.0 0.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Level of Economic Distress 85% 20 17.0 1.7 Local Taking Care of the System Factors 100% 40 40.0 8.0 important to maintain all weather access

Poverty (Block Group) 22% 2006-2010 ACS block group data - Comb. 2 block groups

Unemployment (tract) 7% 2006-2010 ACS tract data - 1 tract

Local Economic Competitiveness Factors 25% 30 7.5 0.8 minimal commerce on roadway

Data Check3 OK Data Checkl OK Data Check2 OK
Proj. #: 2-6 Project Name: Hwy 76 - Kirbyville School Turn Lanes E fficient M ovem ent o f Freight Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 6.0 | of 10

Project Type: Traffic Safety Total S c o r^ 46.2 | out of 100 Large Vehicle Friendly Facilities Yes 30 30.0 3.0
Project Description: Addition of a turn lane and/or acceleration/deceleration lanes to Widens Road Yes additional turn lanes
improve safety for Middle School entrance.
Improves Geometry Yes additional lanes
Improves Load Rating No
Truck Usage 205 30 9.6 1.0 MoDOT formula
Status: Planning Length: NA Local Efficient Movement of Freight Factors 50% 40 20.0 2.0 Hwy 76 is an important arterial

Avg. Annual Daily Traffic (AADT): 6,200 (est. 2016, avg. for major street) Local/Regional Land Use Plans No 30 0.0 0.0
Daily Truck Traffic: 410 (est. 2016, avg. for major street) Consistent with Local Plans No no applicable local plans
Through Lanes: 2 (through lanes on major street) Consistent with Regional Plans No not mentioned in SMCOG regional plan
Project Discussion: Highway 76 is a two-lane roadway at the entrance to the Kirbyville Connectivity Yes 30 30.0 3.0 Connects western and eastern Taney County
Middle School. The posted speed limit is 55 mph with a 45 mph school zone. Flashing
Scenic and Visual No 20 0.0 0.0 Intersection improvements, no scenic benefits
lights have recently been installed to alert motorists to the school zone. Concerns have
been expressed over the safety of buses and school traffic entering and exiting. Local Quality of Communities Factors 75% 20 15.0 1.5 Minimal criteria met; Hwy 76 is an important facility in Taney Co
Proposed improvements may include some combination of turn lanes and acceleration
and deceleration lanes. Previous study by MoDOT has indicated a traffic signal or
Environm ental Protection Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 4.8 | of 5
additional lanes were warranted, but funding was not available.
Consistent with Stormwater Goals Yes 30 30.0 1.5 Moderate project, few stormwater issues expected
Consistent with Environmental Goals Yes 30 30.0 1.5 Moderate project, no mitigation expected

Access to O pportunity Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 1.3 | of 5 Avoids Historical Impacts Yes 20 20.0 1.0 No known historical impacts

Eliminate Bike/Ped Barriers (ADA) 0% 25 0.0 0.0 Local Environmental Protection Factors 75% 20 15.0 0.8 Moderate project, few issues expected

Project provides bike connections No does not apply

Project provides pedestrian connections No does not apply Safety Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =30% Total Points = | 10.9 | of 30
d
’roject brings existing facilities up to ADA Regulations No use if first two do not apply assumes no sidewalks or bike lanes a PDO 0 Safety Index -1.00 50 0.0 0.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)
oR ))n
o
Project provides some bike/pedestrian facilities No use if first two do not apply assumes no bike/pedestrian facilities r oi Injury 0 Crash Rate 0.00 Crash data 2014-2016
oj tc
a e
Transit No 25 0.0 0.0 no effect on Branson Shuttle or Jefferson Lines (M esr Fatal 0 Accident Index 0.00
s( te
Local Access to Opportunity Factors 50% 50 25.0 1.3 assumes widened shoulders at intersection <D _E Years 3 Severity Index 0.00
sa o
r
C Avg AADT 6054 Safety Concern Yes 5 5.0 1.5 Concern raised by local leaders

C ongestion Relief Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =10% Total Points = | 3.0 | of 10 Safety Enhancements Yes 5 5.0 1.5 Improves intersection (traffic control and safety)

Level of Service A 25 0.0 0.0 Int. LOS in PM Peak and School Dismissal Peak (Synchro) Emergency Response No 5 0.0 0.0

Functional Classification1 Minor Arterial 40% 25 10.0 1.0 Local Safety Factors 75% 35 26.3 7.9 crash rate not as high as some other projects

Daily Usage 3100 25 7.9 0.8 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Local Congestion Relief Factors 50% 25 12.5 1.3 localized congestion Taking Care o f the System Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 20% Total Points = | 8.4 | of 20

Roadway or Bridge Conditions Good 20 5.0 1.0 based on field observations and pictures considered good

Econom ic C om petitiveness Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =10% Total Points = | 7.4 | of 10 Substandard Roadway or Bridge Feature No 20 0.0 0.0

Strategic Regional Economic Corridor Yes 30 30.0 3.0 Hwy 76 Functional Classification2 Minor Arterial 40% 10 4.0 0.8

Support Regional Economic Opportunities No 20 0.0 0.0 Not linked to any planned econ. dev. projects Daily Vehicle Usage 3100 10 3.2 0.6 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Level of Economic Distress 70% 20 14.0 1.4 Local Taking Care of the System Factors 75% 40 30.0 6.0

Poverty (Block Group) 18.0% 2012-2016 ACS 5-year estimates for countywide

Unemployment (tract) 4.0% 2012-2016 ACS 5-year estimates for countywide

Local Economic Competitiveness Factors 100% 30 30.0 3.0 MO-76 is an important arterial and economic link

Data Check3 OK Data Checkl OK Data Check2 OK
Proj. #: 3-1 Project Name: Forsyth/Taneyville Rd (Strawberry Rd to MO-76) E fficient M ovem ent o f Freight Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 2.8 | of 10

<0
Project Type: Geometric/Safety Total Score Large Vehicle Friendly Facilities Partial Yes 30 15.0 1.5

o
f
0
0
u
t
Project Description: Widen the lanes and shoulders and improve drainage along this Widens Road Yes widen lanes and shoulders
low density rural roadway. The improvements may require additional right-of-way as
Improves Geometry No
well as utility and stormwater swale relocation.
Improves Load Rating No
Truck Usage 15 30 2.6 0.3 MoDOT formula
Status: Planning Length: 3.62 miles Local Efficient Movement of Freight Factors 25% 40 10.0 1.0 not a major freight route

Avg. Annual Daily Traffic (AADT): 1,500 (estimated, avg. for major street) Local/Regional Land Use Plans No 30 0.0 0.0
Daily Truck Traffic: 30 (estimated, avg. for major street) Consistent with Local Plans No not mentioned in Forsyth Strategic Plan
Through Lanes: 2 (through lanes on major street) Consistent with Regional Plans No not mentioned in SMCOG regional plan
Project Discussion: The roadway has moderate to low daily traffic volumes; however, it Connectivity Yes 30 30.0 3.0 Connects Forsyth and T aneyville
also has narrow lanes (approx. 9 feet), no shoulders and what appears to be a narrow
Scenic and Visual No 20 0.0 0.0 Roadway improvements, no scenic benefits
right-of-way. Improvements are appropriate for this roadway, which is essentially a
collector roadway (though it is currently classified as a local street). This roadway Local Quality of Communities Factors 50% 20 10.0 1.0 provides alt. route btwn Forsyth & T aneyville
provides an alternate to MO-76 for travel between Forsyth and Taneyville .

Environm ental Protection Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 4.5 | of 5

Consistent with Stormwater Goals Yes 30 30.0 1.5 Project includes drainage improvements
Consistent with Environmental Goals Yes 30 30.0 1.5 Little mitigation expected due to size of project

Access to O pportunity Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 1.5 | of 5 Avoids Historical Impacts Yes 20 20.0 1.0 No known historical impacts

Eliminate Bike/Ped Barriers (ADA) 20% 25 5.0 0.3 Local Environmental Protection Factors 50% 20 10.0 0.5 Few issues expected; A few small wetlands (ponds) near road

Project provides bike connections No does not apply

Project provides pedestrian connections No does not apply Safety Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =30% Total Points = | 13.1 | of 30
d
’roject brings existing facilities up to ADA Regulations No use if first two do not apply assumes no sidewalks or bike lanes a PDO 1 Safety Index 0.43 50 16.1 4.8 (Modified MoDOT formula)
oR ))n
o
Project provides some bike/pedestrian facilities Yes use if first two do not apply assumes improved shoulders r oi Injury 1 Crash Rate 34.45 Crash data 2009-2011
oj tc
a e
Transit No 25 0.0 0.0 No effect on Branson Shuttle or Jefferson Lines (M esr Fatal 0 Accident Index 0.20
s( te
Local Access to Opportunity Factors 50% 50 25.0 1.3 Assumes improved shoulders <D _E Years 3 Severity Index 2.25
sa o
r
C Avg AADT 1465 Safety Concern Yes 5 5.0 1.5 Concern raised by local leaders

C ongestion Relief Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =10% Total Points = | 2.9 | of 10 Safety Enhancements Yes 5 5.0 1.5 Widen lanes & shoulders, improve drainage

Level of Service B 25 5.0 0.5 congestion not a major issue Emergency Response No 5 0.0 0.0

Functional Classification1 Local 20% 25 5.0 0.5 Local Safety Factors 50% 35 17.5 5.3 crash rate not significant relative to other projects

Daily Usage 750 25 0.1 0.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Local Congestion Relief Factors 75% 25 18.8 1.9 moderate to low volumes, time spent following possible issu Taking Care o f the System Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 20% Total Points = | 10.4 | of 20

Roadway or Bridge Conditions Fair 20 10.0 2.0 Chip and seal in fair condition

Econom ic C om petitiveness Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =10% Total Points = | 3.5 | of 10 Substandard Roadway or Bridge Feature No 20 0.0 0.0

Strategic Regional Economic Corridor No 30 0.0 0.0 Functional Classification2 Local 20% 10 2.0 0.4

Support Regional Economic Opportunities No 20 0.0 0.0 Not linked to any planned econ. dev. projects Daily Vehicle Usage 750 10 0.1 0.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Level of Economic Distress 100% 20 20.0 2.0 Local Taking Care of the System Factors 100% 40 40.0 8.0 improvements upgrade a connecting element of current system

Poverty (Block Group) 15.0% 2006-2010 ACS block group data - 1 block group

Unemployment (tract) 12.0% 2006-2010 ACS tract data - 1 tract

Local Economic Competitiveness Factors 50% 30 15.0 1.5 minor economic linkages

Data Check3 OK Data Checkl OK Data Check2 OK
Proj. #: 3-2 Project Name: Garrison Cutoff Road (MO-76 to County Line) E fficient M ovem ent o f Freight Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 2.6 | of 10

Project Type: Geometric/Safety Total Score| 36.7 [o u t of 100 Large Vehicle Friendly Facilities Partial Yes 30 15.0 1.5
Project Description: Widen the lanes and shoulders and improve drainage along this Widens Road Yes widen lanes and shoulders
low density rural roadway. The improvements may require additional right-of-way. The
Improves Geometry No
project may also result in moderate realignments. Garrison Cutoff Road connects Hwy
Improves Load Rating No
76 in northern Taney County to Hines Lane/Hwy 125 in southern Christian County.
Truck Usage 2 30 0.9 0.1 MoDOT formula
Status: Planning Length: 2.18 miles Local Efficient Movement of Freight Factors 25% 40 10.0 1.0 not a major truck route

Avg. Annual Daily Traffic (AADT): 200 (estimated, avg. for major street) Local/Regional Land Use Plans No 30 0.0 0.0
Daily Truck Traffic: 4 (estimated, avg. for major street) Consistent with Local Plans No no applicable local plan
Through Lanes: 2 (through lanes on major street) Consistent with Regional Plans No not mentioned in SMCOG regional plan
Project Discussion: The lanes and shoulders on this roadway are narrow, with lane Connectivity Yes 30 30.0 3.0 Connectivity important to local rural residents
widths of approximately 9 feet. Drainage is handled in swales at the roadway edge. The
Scenic and Visual No 20 0.0 0.0 Roadway improvements, no scenic benefits
corridor is somewhat forested and a utility line (utility poles) run parallel to the roadway.
Expanding the lanes and shoulders would improve safety and driver operations. It could Local Quality of Communities Factors 25% 20 5.0 0.5 beneficial to residents
also benefit pedestrians and bicyclists. The improvements may require expanding the
right-of-way and/or relocating utilities to accomplish this. However, minor improvements
Environm ental Protection Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 4.8 | of 5
may be possible without a major right-of-way expansion.
Consistent with Stormwater Goals Yes 30 30.0 1.5 Project includes drainage improvements
Consistent with Environmental Goals Yes 30 30.0 1.5 limited mitigation expected

Access to O pportunity Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 0.9 | of 5 Avoids Historical Impacts Yes 20 20.0 1.0 No known historical impacts

Eliminate Bike/Ped Barriers (ADA) 20% 25 5.0 0.3 Local Environmental Protection Factors 75% 20 15.0 0.8 Few issues expected

Project provides bike connections No does not apply

Project provides pedestrian connections No does not apply Safety Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =30% Total Points = | 7.1 | of 30
d
’roject brings existing facilities up to ADA Regulations No use if first two do not apply assumes no sidewalks or bike lanes a PDO 0 Safety Index 0.00 50 0.0 0.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)
o
o R ))n
Project provides some bike/pedestrian facilities Yes use if first two do not apply assumes improved shoulders r oi Injury 0 Crash Rate 0.00 Crash data 2009-2011
oj tc
a e
Transit No 25 0.0 0.0 No effect on Branson Shuttle or Jefferson Lines (M esr Fatal 0 Accident Index 0.00
s( te
Local Access to Opportunity Factors 25% 50 12.5 0.6 Very rural; local access is limited even with improvements <D _E Years 3 Severity Index 0.00
sa o
r
C Avg AADT 200 Safety Concern Yes 5 5.0 1.5 Concern raised by local leaders

C ongestion Relief Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =10% Total Points = | 1.8 | of 10 Safety Enhancements Yes 5 5.0 1.5 Widen lanes & shoulders, improve drainage

Level of Service A 25 0.0 0.0 congestion not a major issue Emergency Response Yes 5 5.0 1.5 Could slightly improve rural emergency response times

Functional Classification1 Local 20% 25 5.0 0.5 Local Safety Factors 25% 35 8.8 2.6 no reported crashes from 2007-2011

Daily Usage 100 25 0.0 0.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Local Congestion Relief Factors 50% 25 12.5 1.3 moderate to low volumes, time spent following possible issu Taking Care o f the System Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 20% Total Points = | 13.4 | of 20

Roadway or Bridge Conditions Good 20 5.0 1.0 road in fair to good condition

Econom ic C om petitiveness Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =10% Total Points = | 2.8 | of 10 Substandard Roadway or Bridge Feature Yes 20 20.0 4.0 Narrow lane widths; no shoulders

Strategic Regional Economic Corridor No 30 0.0 0.0 Functional Classification2 Local 20% 10 2.0 0.4

Support Regional Economic Opportunities No 20 0.0 0.0 Not linked to any planned econ. dev. projects Daily Vehicle Usage 100 10 0.0 0.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Level of Economic Distress 100% 20 20.0 2.0 Local Taking Care of the System Factors 100% 40 40.0 8.0 Important local connection

Poverty (Block Group) 15.0% 2006-2010 ACS block group data - 1 block group

Unemployment (tract) 12.0% 2006-2010 ACS tract data - 1 tract

Local Economic Competitiveness Factors 25% 30 7.5 0.8 removed from most economic dev activity

Data Check3 OK Data Checkl OK Data Check2 OK
Proj. #: 3-3 Project Name: Brace Hill Rd (Slough Hollow Rd to M Hwy) E fficient M ovem ent o f Freight Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 2.6 | of 10

Project Type: Geometric/Safety Total Score| 47.0 [o u t of 100 Large Vehicle Friendly Facilities Partial Yes 30 15.0 1.5
Project Description: Widen lanes and/or add shoulders, repave roadway, possibly Widens Road Yes widen lanes and shoulders
expand right-of-way.
Improves Geometry No
Improves Load Rating No
Truck Usage 2 30 0.9 0.1 MoDOT formula
Status: Completed 2016 Length: 1.38 miles Local Efficient Movement of Freight Factors 25% 40 10.0 1.0 not a major truck route

Environm ental Protection Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 4.5 | of 5

Consistent with Stormwater Goals Yes 30 30.0 1.5 Few stormwater issues expected
Consistent with Environmental Goals Yes 30 30.0 1.5 No mitigation expected due to size of project

Access to O pportunity Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 1.5 | of 5 Avoids Historical Impacts Yes 20 20.0 1.0 No known historical impacts

Eliminate Bike/Ped Barriers (ADA) 20% 25 5.0 0.3 Local Environmental Protection Factors 50% 20 10.0 0.5 Few issues expected; A few small wetlands (ponds) near road

Project provides bike connections No does not apply

Project provides pedestrian connections No does not apply Safety Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =30% Total Points = | 19.0 | of 30
d
'roject brings existing facilities up to ADA Regulations No use if first two do not apply assumes no sidewalks or bike lanes a PDO 1 Safety Index 0.36 50 13.4 4.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)
o
oR ))n
Project provides some bike/pedestrian facilities Yes use if first two do not apply assumes improved shoulders r oi Injury 0 Crash Rate 330.88 Crash data 2009-2011
oj tc
a e
Transit No 25 0.0 0.0 No effect on Branson Shuttle or Jefferson Lines (M e
sr Fatal 0 Accident Index 1.89
s( e t
Local Access to Opportunity Factors 50% 50 25.0 1.3 Assumes improved shoulders for ped/bike use <D _E Years 3 Severity Index 1.00
sa o
r
C Avg AADT 200 Safety Concern Yes 5 5.0 1.5 Concern raised by local leaders

C ongestion Relief Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =10% Total Points = | 1.8 | of 10 Safety Enhancements Yes 5 5.0 1.5 Widen roadway and possibly add shoulders

Level of Service A 25 0.0 0.0 congestion not a major issue Emergency Response Yes 5 5.0 1.5 Could slightly improve local emergency response times; alt route

Functional Classification1 Local 20% 25 5.0 0.5 Local Safety Factors 100% 35 35.0 10.5 one reported crash from 2007-2011

Daily Usage 100 25 0.0 0.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Roadway or Bridge Conditions Poor 20 15.0 3.0 roadway condition poor based on pictures and observations

Econom ic C om petitiveness Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =10% Total Points = | 2.8 | of 10 Substandard Roadway or Bridge Feature Yes 20 20.0 4.0 narrow lanes

Strategic Regional Economic Corridor No 30 0.0 0.0 Functional Classification2 Local 20% 10 2.0 0.4

Support Regional Economic Opportunities No 20 0.0 0.0 Not linked to any planned econ. dev. projects Daily Vehicle Usage 100 10 0.0 0.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Level of Economic Distress 100% 20 20.0 2.0 Local Taking Care of the System Factors 50% 40 20.0 4.0 improvements beneficial to existing system
Sp

Poverty (Block Group) 2006-2010 ACS block group data - 1 block group
21
%
.0

Unemployment (tract) 10.0% 2006-2010 ACS tract data - 1 tract

Local Economic Competitiveness Factors 25% 30 7.5 0.8 Not linked to any planned econ. dev. projects

Data Check3 OK Data Check1 OK Data Check2 OK
Proj. #: 3-4 Project Name: Hulls Ford Rd (MO-76 to End of Road) E fficient M ovem ent o f Freight Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =10% Total Points = | ° .2 |of 10
Project Type: Traffic Calming Total Score| 54.8 | out of 100 Large Vehicle Friendly Facilities No 30 0.0 0.0
Project Description: Traffic control and/or traffic calming improvements to limit Widens Road No
vehicular speeds and promote safe use of the roadway by all users (peds, bikes, autos,
Improves Geometry No
trucks). This could take the form of signage or even more aggressive traffic calming
Improves Load Rating No
measures such as chicanes, speed humps, or rumble strips. Of course maintenance
and proper use should be considered before any of these options are implemented. Truck Usage 5 30 1.5 0.2 MoDOT formula
Status: Planning Length: 3.81 miles Local Efficient Movement of Freight Factors 0% 40 0.0 0.0 not a major truck route

Project Scale: Small Roadway or Intersection Roadway
Functional Classification: Local (for the major street) Q uality o f C om m unities Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 4.0 | of 10

Avg. Annual Daily Traffic (AADT): 500 (estimated, avg. for major street) Local/Regional Land Use Plans No 30 0.0 0.0
Daily Truck Traffic: 10 (estimated, avg. for major street) Consistent with Local Plans No no applicable local plan
Through Lanes: 2 (through lanes on major street) Consistent with Regional Plans No not mentioned in SMCOG regional plan
Project Discussion: This project is intended to improve both the vehicular and Connectivity No 30 0.0 0.0
pedestrian safety on Hulls Ford Road. For reference, the lanes are 9 feet wide, there is
Scenic and Visual Yes 20 20.0 2.0 promotes safe travel to/from swimming hole
essentially no shoulder and drainage is handled in swales at the roadside edge. While
the ADT is estimated at 500 vehicles per day, there have been five crashes on the road Local Quality of Communities Factors 100% 20 20.0 2.0 very important to local residents - safety
in the last 3 years. Additionally, this road is used by residents to reach a popular
swimming hole. It is expected that low cost measures should be possible to better
Environm ental Protection Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 4.5 | of 5
restrain traffic speeds on this roadway and promote safe travel for all users.
Consistent with Stormwater Goals Yes 30 30.0 1.5 Modest project, few stormwater issues expected
Consistent with Environmental Goals Yes 30 30.0 1.5 Signage is very unlikely to cause impacts

Access to O pportunity Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 2.8 | of 5 Avoids Historical Impacts Yes 20 20.0 1.0 No known historical impacts

Eliminate Bike/Ped Barriers (ADA) 20% 25 5.0 0.3 Local Environmental Protection Factors 50% 20 10.0 0.5 Road crosses floodplain & wetland; but impacts not expected

Project provides bike connections No does not apply

Project provides pedestrian connections No does not apply Safety Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =30% Total Points = | 28.5 | of 30
d
’roject brings existing facilities up to ADA Regulations No use if first two do not apply assumes no sidewalks or bike lanes a PDO 1 Safety Index 1.35 50 50.0 15.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)
o
oR ))n
Project provides some bike/pedestrian facilities Yes use if first two do not apply project designed to increase pedestrian safety r oi Injury 4 Crash Rate 239.70 Crash data 2009-2011
oj tc
a e
Transit No 25 0.0 0.0 No effect on Branson Shuttle or Jefferson Lines (M e sr Fatal 0 Accident Index 1.37
(s te
Local Access to Opportunity Factors 100% 50 50.0 2.5 Traffic controls intended to make facility more ped friendly <D _E Years 3 Severity Index 3.00
sa o
r
C Avg AADT 500 Safety Concern Yes 5 5.0 1.5 Concern raised by local leaders

C ongestion Relief Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =10% Total Points = | 1.8 | of 10 Safety Enhancements Yes 5 5.0 1.5 Speed slowing mechanisms (i.e. signs)

Level of Service A 25 0.0 0.0 congestion not a major issue Emergency Response No 5 0.0 0.0

Functional Classification1 Local 20% 25 5.0 0.5 Local Safety Factors 100% 35 35.0 10.5 four reported crashes, including 4 injuries

Daily Usage 250 25 0.1 0.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Roadway or Bridge Conditions Fair 20 10.0 2.0 chip and seal - fair condition - some gravel

Econom ic C om petitiveness Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =10% Total Points = | 2.8 | of 10 Substandard Roadway or Bridge Feature Yes 20 20.0 4.0 unsafe pedestrian travel conditions

Strategic Regional Economic Corridor No 30 0.0 0.0 Functional Classification2 Local 20% 10 2.0 0.4

Support Regional Economic Opportunities No 20 0.0 0.0 Not linked to any planned econ. dev. projects Daily Vehicle Usage 250 10 0.0 0.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Level of Economic Distress 100% 20 20.0 2.0 Local Taking Care of the System Factors 50% 40 20.0 4.0 improvements beneficial to existing system

Poverty (Block Group) 15.0% 2006-2010 ACS block group data - 1 block group

Unemployment (tract) 12.0% 2006-2010 ACS tract data - 1 tract

Local Economic Competitiveness Factors 25% 30 7.5 0.8 Not linked to any planned econ. dev. projects

Data Check3 OK Data Checkl OK Data Check2 OK
Proj. #: 3-5 Project Name: Caney Creek Rd (W Hwy to Skyline Dr) E fficient M ovem ent o f Freight Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 4.1 | of 10

Project Type: Traffic Safety Total S c o r^ 33.7 | out of 100 Large Vehicle Friendly Facilities Yes 30 30.0 3.0
Project Description: Widen lanes and shoulders and potentially straighten horizontal Widens Road Yes widen lanes and shoulders
curves.
Improves Geometry Yes straightening curves
Improves Load Rating No
Truck Usage 30 0.7 0.1 MoDOT formula
Status: Planning Length: 5.46 miles Local Efficient Movement of Freight Factors 25% 40 10.0 1.0 not a major truck route

Avg. Annual Daily Traffic (AADT): 100 (estimated, avg. for major street) Local/Regional Land Use Plans No 30 0.0 0.0
Daily Truck Traffic: 2 (estimated, avg. for major street) Consistent with Local Plans No no applicable local plan
Through Lanes: 2 (through lanes on major street) Consistent with Regional Plans No not mentioned in SMCOG regional plan
Project Discussion: This low volume road has approximately 9 foot lanes (18 foot Connectivity Yes 30 30.0 3.0 Only N-S connector in a large rural area
travelway). There are no pavement markings on the roadway. It also has sharp curves
Scenic and Visual No 20 0.0 0.0 Roadway improvements, no scenic benefits
in a number of locations. Improving these curves and providing shoulders would
improve safety and benefit the users of this roadway. Local Quality of Communities Factors 25% 20 5.0 0.5 valuable to local residents

Environm ental Protection Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 4.3 | of 5

Consistent with Stormwater Goals Yes 30 30.0 1.5 Few stormwater issues expected
Consistent with Environmental Goals Yes 30 30.0 1.5 Proximity to floodplains & wetlands may be an issue

Access to O pportunity Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 0.9 | of 5 Avoids Historical Impacts Yes 20 20.0 1.0 No known historical impacts

Eliminate Bike/Ped Barriers (ADA) 20% 25 5.0 0.3 Local Environmental Protection Factors 25% 20 5.0 0.3 Roadway travels in/along floodplain area; small wetlands (ponds)

Project provides bike connections No does not apply

Project provides pedestrian connections No does not apply Safety Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =30% Total Points = | 9.8 | of 30
d
’roject brings existing facilities up to ADA Regulations No use if first two do not apply assumes no sidewalks or bike lanes a PDO 1 Safety Index 0.00 50 0.0 0.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)
o
oR ))n
Project provides some bike/pedestrian facilities Yes use if first two do not apply assumes improved shoulders r oi Injury 0 Crash Rate 167.26 Crash data 2009-2011
oj tc
a e
Transit No 25 0.0 0.0 No effect on Branson Shuttle or Jefferson Lines (M esr Fatal 0 Accident Index 0.96
s( te
Local Access to Opportunity Factors 25% 50 12.5 0.6 Very rural; local access is limited even with improvements <D _E Years 3 Severity Index 1.00
sa o
r
C Avg AADT 100 Safety Concern Yes 5 5.0 1.5 Concern raised by local leaders

C ongestion Relief Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =10% Total Points = | 1.1 | of 10 Safety Enhancements Yes 5 5.0 1.5 Widen lanes & shoulders, straighten curves

Level of Service A 25 0.0 0.0 congestion not a major issue Emergency Response Yes 5 5.0 1.5 Could slightly improve rural response times

Functional Classification1 Local 20% 25 5.0 0.5 Local Safety Factors 50% 35 17.5 5.3 one reported crash from 2007-2011

Daily Usage 50 25 0.0 0.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Local Congestion Relief Factors 25% 25 6.3 0.6 low volumes Taking Care o f the System Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 20% Total Points = | 7.4 | of 20

Roadway or Bridge Conditions Poor 20 15.0 3.0 Roadway in worse condition than bridge

Econom ic C om petitiveness Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =10% Total Points = | 2.8 | of 10 Substandard Roadway or Bridge Feature No 20 0.0 0.0

Strategic Regional Economic Corridor No 30 0.0 0.0 Functional Classification2 Local 20% 10 2.0 0.4

Support Regional Economic Opportunities No 20 0.0 0.0 Not linked to any planned econ. dev. projects Daily Vehicle Usage 50 10 0.0 0.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Level of Economic Distress 100% 20 20.0 2.0 Local Taking Care of the System Factors 50% 40 20.0 4.0 improvements beneficial to existing system

Poverty (Block Group) 15.0% 2006-2010 ACS block group data - 1 block group

Unemployment (tract) 10.0% 2006-2010 ACS tract data - 1 tract

Local Economic Competitiveness Factors 25% 30 7.5 0.8 Not linked to any planned econ. dev. projects

Data Check3 OK Data Checkl OK Data Check2 OK
Proj. #: 3-6 Project Name: Hwy 76 & US-160 E fficient M ovem ent o f Freight Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 5.7 | of 10

Project Type: Traffic Safety Total Score| 62.2 | out of 100 Large Vehicle Friendly Facilities Partial Yes 30 15.0 1.5
Project Description: Improve intersection to address traffic control, delay, and safety. Widens Road No
Improvements could include signalization, a roundabout, or signage/striping.
Improves Geometry Yes location will be improved in a manner that benefits large vehicles

Improves Load Rating No
Truck Usage 320 30 12.0 1.2 MoDOT formula

Status: Construction 2018 Length: NA Local Efficient Movement of Freight Factors 75% 40 30.0 3.0 trucks will benefit from the improved geometry and/or traffic contr

Project Scale: Medium Roadway or Intersection Intersection
Functional Classification: Minor Arterial (for the major street) Q uality o f C om m unities Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 10.0 | of 10
Avg. Annual Daily Traffic (AADT): 8,000 (est. 2012, avg. for major street) Local/Regional Land Use Plans Yes 30 30.0 3.0
Daily Truck Traffic: 640 (est. 2012, avg. for major street) Consistent with Local Plans Yes 160 roadway improvements mentioned in Forsyth Strategic Plan
Through Lanes: 2 (through lanes on major street) Consistent with Regional Plans Yes 160 roadway improvements mentioned in SMCOG regional plan
Project Discussion: The intersection is a three-way stop control intersection. The Connectivity Yes 30 30.0 3.0 160 connects Forsyth to 76 (Kirbyville)
volumes are not balanced and some movements therefore have higher delay values.
Scenic and Visual Yes 20 20.0 2.0 possible conversion to roundabout; location of county seat
The volumes are also near and possibly above the threshold for signal warrants. A
roundabout could also work at this location. Local Quality of Communities Factors 100% 20 20.0 2.0 Critical intersection; 160 is important corridor through Forsyth

Environm ental Protection Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 3.0 | of 5

Consistent with Stormwater Goals Yes 30 30.0 1.5 Small increase in stormwater - could be mitigated

Consistent with Environmental Goals No 30 0.0 0.0 May have fill in Corps of Engineer's Floodplain
Access to O pportunity Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 5% Total Points = | 1.8 |of 5 Avoids Historical Impacts Yes 20 20.0 1.0 No known historical impacts

Eliminate Bike/Ped Barriers (ADA) 40% 25 10.0 0.5 Local Environmental Protection Factors 50% 20 10.0 0.5 Corps of Engineer's floodplain impacts

Project provides bike connections No
Project provides pedestrian connections Yes assumed ped provisions are part of project Safety Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =30% Total Points = | 16.5 | of 30
d
Project brings existing facilities up to ADA Regulations No use if first two do not apply a PDO 10 Safety Index 0.87 50 32.6 9.8 (Modified MoDOT formula)
o
oR ) )n
Project provides some bike/pedestrian facilities No use if first two do not apply r oi Injury 3 Crash Rate 151.98 Crash data 2009-2011
oj ct
a e
Transit No 25 0.0 0.0 (M sr Fatal 0 Accident Index 2.31
(s e t
Local Access to Opportunity Factors 50% 50 25.0 1.3 project could benefit peds crossing at the intersection <D _E Years 3 Severity Index 1.58
sa o
r Safety Concern No
C Avg AADT 7811 5 0.0 0.0

Congestion Relief Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =10% Total Points = | 5.4 | of 10 Safety Enhancements Yes 5 5.0 1.5 Intersection and traffic control improvements

Level of Service D 25 15.0 1.5 Lowest movement LOS for stop control (Synchro) Emergency Response No 5 0.0 0.0

Functional Classification1 Minor Arterial 40% 25 10.0 1.0 conservative assumption Local Safety Factors 50% 35 17.5 5.3 Safety is an issue, most crashes are rear-end crashes

Daily Usage 4000 25 4.0 0.4 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Local Congestion Relief Factors 100% 25 25.0 2.5 moderate to high traffic, key location Taking Care o f the System Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 20% Total Points = | 10.1 | of 20

Roadway or Bridge Conditions Good 20 5.0 1.0

Econom ic Com petitiveness Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 9.7 | of 10 Substandard Roadway or Bridge Feature No 20 0.0 0.0

Strategic Regional Economic Corridor Yes 30 30.0 3.0 US-160 and Hwy 76 Functional Classification2 Minor Arterial 40% 10 4.0 0.8

Support Regional Economic Opportunities Yes 20 20.0 2.0 supports continued development and activity in Forsyth Daily Vehicle Usage 4000 10 1.6 0.3 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Level of Economic Distress 85% 20 17.0 1.7 Local Taking Care of the System Factors 100% 40 40.0 8.0 Important local intersection

Poverty (Block Group) 16.0% 2006-2010 ACS block group data - Comb. 4 block groups

Unemployment (tract) 8.0% 2006-2010 ACS tract data - Comb. 3 tracts

Local Economic Competitiveness Factors 100% 30 30.0 3.0 US-160 and Hwy 76 are important corridors

Data Check3 OK Data Check1 OK Data Check2 OK
Proj. #: 3-7 Project Name: US-160 Widening through Forsyth E fficient M ovem ent o f Freight Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 7.0 | of 10

Project Type: Capacity Total S c o r^ 73.4 | out of 100 Large Vehicle Friendly Facilities Yes 30 30.0 3.0
Project Description: Widen US 160 from west of the Hwy 76 Intersection to Casey Widens Road Yes roadway widening project
Road. The widening would add a center two-way left-turn lane through the center of
Improves Geometry Yes adds turn lanes
Forsyth. It is assumed that the widening project will also include appropriate pedestrian
Improves Load Rating No
improvements. Existing stormwater ditches may have to be converted to an enclosed
system. Truck Usage 237.5 30 10.3 1.0 MoDOT formula
Status: Planning Length: 2.8 miles Local Efficient Movement of Freight Factors 75% 40 30.0 3.0 Should benefit truck traffic; important connector in Taney County

Avg. Annual Daily Traffic (AADT): 9,500 (est. 2012, avg. for major street) Local/Regional Land Use Plans Yes 30 30.0 3.0
Daily Truck Traffic: 475 (est. 2012, avg. for major street) Consistent with Local Plans Yes mentioned in Forsyth strategic plan
Through Lanes: 2 (through lanes on major street) Consistent with Regional Plans Yes mentioned in SMCOG regional plan
Project Discussion: This portion of US-160 has daily traffic volumes of between 8,500 Connectivity Yes 30 30.0 3.0 important Forsyth through route
and 10,500. It is the main street through Forsyth and is important for both local and
Scenic and Visual No 20 0.0 0.0 limited scenic benefits
through traffic. There are safety, access, and capacity issues on this highway. The
addition of a center two-way left-turn lane as well as possible access improvements and Local Quality of Communities Factors 75% 20 15.0 1.5 important improvement in the heart of Forsyth
consolidations would help address these issues.

Environm ental Protection Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 15% Total Points = | 13.5 | of 15
Consistent with Stormwater Goals Yes 30 30.0 4.5 Assume excess runoff mitigated
Consistent with Environmental Goals Yes 30 30.0 4.5 Unmitigated environmental impacts are not expected

Access to O pportunity Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 2.4 | of 5 Avoids Historical Impacts Yes 20 20.0 3.0 No known historical impacts

Eliminate Bike/Ped Barriers (ADA) 40% 25 10.0 0.5 Local Environmental Protection Factors 50% 20 10.0 1.5 No known environmental impacts, historical impacts possible

Project provides bike connections No assume no bike facility will be included with the project

Project provides pedestrian connections Yes assumes pedestrian facilities inc. ped signals Safety Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =20% Total Points = | 15.4 | of 20

Crashes (Major Road
’roject brings existing facilities up to ADA Regulations No use if first two do not apply PDO 69 Safety Index 0.71 50 26.8 5.4 (Modified MoDOT formula)

or Intersection)
Project provides some bike/pedestrian facilities No use if first two do not apply Injury Crash Rate 323.48 Crash data 2009-2011

2
3
Transit No 25 0.0 0.0 Fatal Accident Index 1.85

0
Local Access to Opportunity Factors 75% 50 37.5 1.9 Improved roadway and intersection could benefit ped acces Years 3 Severity Index 1.63

Avg AADT 9276 Safety Concern Yes 5 5.0 1.0 Concern raised by local leaders

C ongestion Relief Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =15% Total Points = | 7.9 | of 15 Safety Enhancements Yes 5 5.0 1.0 Will result in widened road and other improvements

Level of Service E 25 20.0 3.0 planning level - based on volume/capacity on roadway Emergency Response Yes 5 5.0 1.0 will improve response time, fire dept. on north side of project

Functional Classification1 Minor Arterial 40% 25 10.0 1.5 Local Safety Factors 100% 35 35.0 7.0 High number of crashes confirms local safety concern

Daily Usage 4750 25 3.9 0.6 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Local Congestion Relief Factors 75% 25 18.8 2.8 moderate to high traffic, key location Taking Care o f the System Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 5% Total Points = | 2.5 | of 5

Roadway or Bridge Conditions Good 20 5.0 0.3 Both the Roadway and Bridges are in good condition

Econom ic C om petitiveness Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 20% Total Points = | 17.2 | of 20 Substandard Roadway or Bridge Feature No 20 0.0 0.0

Strategic Regional Economic Corridor Yes 20 20.0 4.0 US 160 Functional Classification2 Minor Arterial 40% 10 4.0 0.2

Support Regional Economic Opportunities Yes 30 30.0 6.0 supports continued development and activity in Forsyth Daily Vehicle Usage 4750 10 1.6 0.1 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Level of Economic Distress 30% 20 6.0 1.2 Local Taking Care of the System Factors 100% 40 40.0 2.0 improving roadway operations benefits existing system

Poverty (Block Group) 11.0% 2006-2010 ACS block group data - Comb. 2 block groups

Unemployment (tract) 11.0% 2006-2010 ACS tract data - 1 tract

Local Economic Competitiveness Factors 100% 30 30.0 6.0 US 160 is an important economic corridor

Data Check3 OK Data Check1 OK Data Check2 OK
Proj. #: 3-8 Project Name: Hulls Ford Bridge E fficient M ovem ent o f Freight Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 0.1 | of 10

Project Type: Quality of Commui Total Score| 45.8 [o u t of 100 Large Vehicle Friendly Facilities No 30 0.0 0.0
Project Description: Construct an all-weather river crossing (bridge) as well as all Widens Road No
weather approach roadways.
Improves Geometry No
Improves Load Rating No
Truck Usage 30 0.7 0.1 MoDOT formula
Status: Planning Length: 0.1 miles Local Efficient Movement of Freight Factors 0% 40 0.0 0.0 not a major truck route

Avg. Annual Daily Traffic (AADT): 200 (estimated, avg. for major street) Local/Regional Land Use Plans No 30 0.0 0.0
Daily Truck Traffic: 2 (estimated, avg. for major street) Consistent with Local Plans No no applicable local plans
Through Lanes: 2 (through lanes on major street) Consistent with Regional Plans No not mentioned in SMCOG regional plan
Project Discussion: Currently this is a low water crossing only. It also is only one lane Connectivity No 30 0.0 0.0
wide. It has very modest traffic. A full bridge with approach ramps would be required to
Scenic and Visual Yes 20 20.0 2.0 Popular swimming and fishing location
stay clear of the stream and floodwaters. The existing crossing is in poor condition.
Local Quality of Communities Factors 25% 20 5.0 0.5 beneficial to local area residents

Environm ental Protection Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 2.8 | of 5 |
Consistent with Stormwater Goals Yes 30 30.0 1.5 Assume new runoff mitigated (new stormwater detention facilities
Consistent with Environmental Goals No 30 0.0 0.0 Floodplains and wetland in project area

Access to O pportunity Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 1.5 | of 5 Avoids Historical Impacts Yes 20 20.0 1.0 No known historical impacts

Eliminate Bike/Ped Barriers (ADA) 20% 25 5.0 0.3 Local Environmental Protection Factors 25% 20 5.0 0.3 Possible impacts - bridge crosses floodplains and wetland area

Project provides bike connections No does not apply

Project provides pedestrian connections No does not apply Safety Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =30% Total Points = | 19.1 | of 30
d
’roject brings existing facilities up to ADA Regulations No use if first two do not apply assumes no sidewalks or bike lanes a PDO 0 Safety Index 11.54 50 50.0 15.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)
o
oR ))n
Project provides some bike/pedestrian facilities Yes use if first two do not apply all weather crossing, assumes shoulders r oi Injury 1 Crash Rate 4566.21 Crash data 2009-2011
oj tc
a e
Transit No 25 0.0 0.0 No effect on Branson Shuttle or Jefferson Lines (M e
sr Fatal 0 Accident Index 26.09
s( e t
Local Access to Opportunity Factors 50% 50 25.0 1.3 No existing connection; assumes shoulders <D _E Years 3 Severity Index 3.50
sa o
r
C Avg AADT 200 Safety Concern No 5 0.0 0.0 not main reason for project

C ongestion Relief Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =10% Total Points = | 3.0 | of 10 Safety Enhancements Yes 5 5.0 1.5 New two-lane high-water bridge

Level of Service A 25 0.0 0.0 capacity is not a major issue Emergency Response No 5 0.0 0.0

Functional Classification1 Local 20% 25 5.0 0.5 Local Safety Factors 25% 35 8.8 2.6 project driven by factors other than safety

Daily Usage 100 25 0.0 0.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Local Congestion Relief Factors 100% 25 25.0 2.5 closure causes non-recurring delay to bridge users Taking Care o f the System Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 20% Total Points = | 13.4 | of 20

Roadway or Bridge Conditions Poor 20 15.0 3.0 concrete deteriorating

Econom ic C om petitiveness Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =10% Total Points = | 3.5 | of 10 Substandard Roadway or Bridge Feature Yes 20 20.0 4.0 narrow and low water crossing

Strategic Regional Economic Corridor No 30 0.0 0.0 Functional Classification2 Local 20% 10 2.0 0.4

Support Regional Economic Opportunities No 20 0.0 0.0 very little traffic on the bridge Daily Vehicle Usage 100 10 0.0 0.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Level of Economic Distress 100% 20 20.0 2.0 Local Taking Care of the System Factors 75% 40 30.0 6.0 improvement beneficial to existing local transportation system

Poverty (Block Group) 15% 2006-2010 ACS block group data - 1 block group

Unemployment (tract) 11% 2006-2010 ACS tract data - 1 tract

Local Economic Competitiveness Factors 50% 30 15.0 1.5 development in the area not likely

Data Check3 OK Data Check1 OK Data Check2 OK
Proj. #: 4-1 Project Name: F Hwy and US-160 Intersection E fficie nt Movement o f Freight Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 5.6 | of 10

Project Type: Traffic Safety Total Score 73.6 | out of 100 Large Vehicle Friendly Facilities Partial Yes 30 15.0 1.5
Project Description: Improve intersection alignment and traffic control. Re-align the Widens Road No
through movement to connect US-160 in the southeast with F Highway in the east.
Improves Geometry Yes improves turns for trucks and other large vehicles
Convert US-160 southbound (north leg) to stop control. Ensure adequate sight distance
Improves Load Rating No
and relocate driveways as needed. A roundabout could be considered. This could
reduce speeds, while limiting vehicle stops. It could also possibly reduce sight distance Truck Usage 265 30 10.9 1.1 MoDOT formula
Status: Completed 2016 Length: NA Local Efficient Movement of Freight Factors 75% 40 30.0 3.0 important corridor

Project Scale: Small Roadway or Intersection Intersection
Functional Classification: Minor Arterial (for the major street) Q uality o f Com m unities Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 8.0 | of 10

Avg. Annual Daily Traffic (AADT): 10,500 (est 2012, avg. for major street) Local/Regional Land Use Plans Yes 30 30.0 3.0
Daily Truck Traffic: 530 (est 2012, avg. for major street) Consistent with Local Plans No no applicable local plans
Through Lanes: 2 (through lanes on major street) Consistent with Regional Plans Yes SMCOG regional plan
Project Discussion: 2010 ADTs on US-160 are 10,500 to the south and 2,700 to the Connectivity Yes 30 30.0 3.0 Connects communities north of river with Branson area
north. 2010 ADT on Hwy F is 8,500. The locations of the heavy volumes highlight the
Scenic and Visual No 20 0.0 0.0 Intersection improvements, no scenic benefits
need to adjust the through movement and/or install a roundabout. Truck traffic was
estimated at 5% based on a truck count on Hwy F west of the intersection. The crash Local Quality of Communities Factors 100% 20 20.0 2.0 Critical connection location within the County
data indicted numerous rear-end crashes on Route F. This is the only east-west
connection within Taney County between the communities north of the river and US-65.
Environm ental Protection Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 5% Total Points = | 4.8 | of 5
Nearly all east-west traffic between these areas passes through this intersection. The
traffic volumes appear to meet signal warrants, but a detailed study is in order. Consistent with Stormwater Goals Yes 30 30.0 1.5 Modest project, few stormwater issues expected
Consistent with Environmental Goals Yes 30 30.0 1.5 Modest project, no mitigation expected

Access to O pportunity Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 5% Total Points = | 1.5 | of 5 Avoids Historical Impacts Yes 20 20.0 1.0 No known historical impacts

Eliminate Bike/Ped Barriers (ADA) 20% 25 5.0 0.3 Local Environmental Protection Factors 75% 20 15.0 0.8 Modest project, few issues expected

Project provides bike connections No does not apply

Project provides pedestrian connections No does not apply Safety Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 30% Total Points = | 28.5 | of 30
d
1
1
~§
'o

'roject brings existing facilities up to ADA Regulations No assumes no sidewalks or bike lanes a PDO 26 Safety Index 1.96 50 50.0 15.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)
=5
«o

C0X
<
CX
2^

o )
Project provides some bike/pedestrian facilities Yes use if first two do not apply assumes improved shoulders at intersection orR )n
o
i Injury 10 Crash Rate 320.67 Crash data 2009-2011
ja tce
o
Transit No 0.0 no effect on Branson Shuttle or Jefferson Lines M sr Fatal 0 Accident Index 4.87
2
5

.0.
0

s( te
Local Access to Opportunity Factors 50% 50 25.0 1.3 assumes improved shoulders at intersection CD _E Years 3 Severity Index 1.69
s r
sra o
C
r Avg AADT 10252 Safety Concern Yes 5 5.0 1.5 Concern raised by local leaders

Congestion Relief Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 6.7 | of 10 Safety Enhancements Yes 5 5.0 1.5 Will result in widened shoulders

Level of Service D 25 15.0 1.5 eastbound left turn LOS for stop control Emergency Response No 5 0.0 0.0

Functional Classificatio n Minor Arterial 40% 25 10.0 1.0 Local Safety Factors 100% 35 35.0 10.5 High crash rate confirms local concerns, many rear-end crashes

Daily Usage 5250 25 22.8 2.3 (Modified MoDOT formula) on the west leg

Local Congestion Relief Factors 75% 25 18.8 1.9 moderate to high traffic, key location Taking Care o f the System Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 20% Total Points = | 10.6 | of 20

Roadway or Bridge Conditions Fair 20 10.0 2.0 roadway in fair condition based on observations

Econom ic Com petitiveness Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 8.0 | of 10 Substandard Roadway or Bridge Feature No 20 0.0 0.0

Strategic Regional Economic Corridor Yes 30 30.0 3.0 US-160 Functional Classification2 Minor Arterial 40% 10 4.0 0.8

Support Regional Economic Opportunities No 20 0.0 0.0 Not linked to any planned econ. dev. projects Daily Vehicle Usage 5250 10 9.1 1.8 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Level of Economic Distress 100% 20 20.0 2.0 Local Taking Care of the System Factors 75% 40 30.0 6.0 important intersection to maintain in good operation

Poverty (Block Group) 2006-2010 ACS block group data - Comb. 3 block groups
2
0
%
..0

Unemployment (tract) 13.0% 2006-2010 ACS tract data - 1 tract

Local Economic Competitiveness Factors 100% 30 30.0 3.0 MO-160 is an important arterial and economic link

Data Check3 OK Data Check1 OK Data Check2 OK
Proj. #: 4-2 Project Name: MO-176 and US-160 Rockaway Turnoff Int. E fficient M ovem ent o f Freight Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 4.6 | of 10

Project Type: Traffic Safety Total S c o r^ 54.3 |~out of 100 Large Vehicle Friendly Facilities Partial Yes 30 15.0 1.5
Project Description: Improve intersection alignment and traffic control. Could include Widens Road No
construction of a roundabout or installation of a traffic signal if warranted. Roundabout
Improves Geometry Yes realignment of intersection
could potentially reduce speeds without increasing vehicle stops and delay. Adequate
Improves Load Rating No
sight distance should be provided (especially east and west) and driveways may need to
be relocated and/or consolidated. Truck Usage 265 30 10.9 1.1 MoDOT formula
Status: Planning Length: NA Local Efficient Movement of Freight Factors 50% 40 20.0 2.0 US-160 is an important arterial

Avg. Annual Daily Traffic (AADT): 10,500 (est. 2012, avg. for major street) Local/Regional Land Use Plans No 30 0.0 0.0
Daily Truck Traffic: 530 (est. 2012, avg. for major street) Consistent with Local Plans No no applicable local plans
Through Lanes: 2 (through lanes on major street) Consistent with Regional Plans No not mentioned in SMCOG regional plan
Project Discussion: Both roadways are two-lanes. The northbound approach is stop Connectivity Yes 30 30.0 3.0 Connects communities north of river with Branson area
controlled; however, it splits with traffic on both sides of the island as shown on the figure
Scenic and Visual No 20 0.0 0.0 Intersection improvements, no scenic benefits
to the right. There is also a grade differential, with the northbound approach traveling up
to meet the east-west through street (US-160). In planning for improvements to this Local Quality of Communities Factors 50% 20 10.0 1.0 Minimal criteria met; US-160 is an important facility in Taney Co
intersection, the speed of traffic approaching the intersection should be taken into
account. The posted speed on US-160 is 55 mph and the posted speed on MO-176 is 45
Environm ental Protection Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 4.8 | of 5
mph. The traffic volumes at this location appear to meet or be near meeting peak hour
signal warrants. Consistent with Stormwater Goals Yes 30 30.0 1.5 Moderate project, few stormwater issues expected
Consistent with Environmental Goals Yes 30 30.0 1.5 Moderate project, no mitigation expected

Access to O pportunity Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 1.5 |of 5 Avoids Historical Impacts Yes 20 20.0 1.0 No known historical impacts

Eliminate Bike/Ped Barriers (ADA) 20% 25 5.0 0.3 Local Environmental Protection Factors 75% 20 15.0 0.8 Moderate project, few issues expected

Project provides bike connections No does not apply

Project provides pedestrian connections No does not apply Safety Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =30% Total Points = | 15.8 | of 30
d
*roject brings existing facilities up to ADA Regulations No use if first two do not apply assumes no sidewalks or bike lanes a PDO 3 Safety Index 0.67 50 25.3 7.6 (Modified MoDOT formula)
oR ))n
o
Project provides some bike/pedestrian facilities Yes use if first two do not apply widened shoulders and better ped crossing opportunities r oi Injury 3 Crash Rate 53.45 Crash data 2009-2011
oj tc
a e
Transit No 25 0.0 0.0 no effect on Branson Shuttle or Jefferson Lines (M esr Fatal 0 Accident Index 0.81
s( te
Local Access to Opportunity Factors 50% 50 25.0 1.3 assumes widened shoulders at intersection <D _E Years 3 Severity Index 2.25
sa o
r
C Avg AADT 10252 Safety Concern Yes 5 5.0 1.5 Concern raised by local leaders

C ongestion Relief Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =10% Total Points = | 6.0 | of 10 Safety Enhancements Yes 5 5.0 1.5 Improves intersection (traffic control and safety)

Level of Service D 25 15.0 1.5 northbound left LOS for stop control (Synchro) Emergency Response No 5 0.0 0.0

Functional Classification1 Minor Arterial 40% 25 10.0 1.0 Local Safety Factors 50% 35 17.5 5.3 crash rate not as high as some other projects

Daily Usage 5250 25 22.8 2.3 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Local Congestion Relief Factors 50% 25 12.5 1.3 localized congestion Taking Care o f the System Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 20% Total Points = | 9.6 | of 20

Roadway or Bridge Conditions Good 20 5.0 1.0 based on field observations and pictures considered good

Econom ic C om petitiveness Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =10% Total Points = | 8.0 | of 10 Substandard Roadway or Bridge Feature No 20 0.0 0.0

Strategic Regional Economic Corridor Yes 30 30.0 3.0 US-160 Functional Classification2 Minor Arterial 40% 10 4.0 0.8

Support Regional Economic Opportunities No 20 0.0 0.0 Not linked to any planned econ. dev. projects Daily Vehicle Usage 5250 10 9.1 1.8 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Level of Economic Distress 100% 20 20.0 2.0 Local Taking Care of the System Factors 75% 40 30.0 6.0 important intersection to maintain in good operation
Sp

Poverty (Block Group) 2006-2010 ACS block group data - Comb. 3 block groups
2
0
%
..0

Unemployment (tract) 13.0% 2006-2010 ACS tract data - 1 tract

Local Economic Competitiveness Factors 100% 30 30.0 3.0 MO-160 is an important arterial and economic link

Data Check3 OK Data Check1 OK Data Check2 OK
Proj. #: 4-3 Project Name: Rockaway Beach and US-160 Intersection E fficient M ovem ent o f Freight Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 4.6 | of 10

<£>
o>
CN|
Project Type: Traffic Safety Total Score Large Vehicle Friendly Facilities Partial Yes 30 15.0 1.5

o
f
0
0
u
t
Project Description: Improve safety at the intersection by modifying or upgrading the Widens Road No
traffic control, signage, and geometry.
Improves Geometry Yes intersection safety improvements
Improves Load Rating No
Truck Usage 275 30 11.1 1.1 MoDOT formula
Status: Planning and Design Length: NA Local Efficient Movement of Freight Factors 50% 40 20.0 2.0 Minimal criteria met; US-160 is an important arterial

Avg. Annual Daily Traffic (AADT): 11,000 (est. 2012, avg. for major street) Local/Regional Land Use Plans No 30 0.0 0.0
Daily Truck Traffic: 550 (est. 2012, avg. for major street) Consistent with Local Plans No no applicable local plans
Through Lanes: 2 (through lanes on major street) Consistent with Regional Plans No not mentioned in SMCOG regional plan
Project Discussion: Both roadways are two-lane roads. There are no turn lanes at the Connectivity Yes 30 30.0 3.0 Rockaway Beach/Merriam Woods connection to Forsyth
intersection. There was one fatal crash at the location, a head-on crash related to one
Scenic and Visual No 20 0.0 0.0 Intersection improvements, no scenic benefits
vehicle passing another vehicle. MoDOT traffic counts indicate that this intersection
likely does not meet the signal warrant thresholds. Turn lanes may be the best option fcr Local Quality of Communities Factors 50% 20 10.0 1.0 Minimal criteria met; US-160 is an important facility in Taney Co
improving safety at this location.

Environm ental Protection Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 4.8 | of 5

Consistent with Stormwater Goals Yes 30 30.0 1.5 Modest project, few stormwater issues expected
Consistent with Environmental Goals Yes 30 30.0 1.5 Modest project, no mitigation expected

Access to O pportunity Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 2.1 | of 5 Avoids Historical Impacts Yes 20 20.0 1.0 No known historical impacts

Eliminate Bike/Ped Barriers (ADA) 20% 25 5.0 0.3 Local Environmental Protection Factors 75% 20 15.0 0.8 Modest project, few issues expected

Project provides bike connections No does not apply

Project provides pedestrian connections No does not apply Safety Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =30% Total Points = | 30.0 | of 30
d
’roject brings existing facilities up to ADA Regulations No use if first two do not apply assumes no sidewalks or bike lanes a PDO 3 Safety Index 1.36 50 50.0 15.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)
o
oR ))n
Project provides some bike/pedestrian facilities Yes use if first two do not apply assumes widened shoulders at intersection r oi Injury 4 Crash Rate 68.02 Crash data 2009-2011
oj tc
a e
Transit No 25 0.0 0.0 no effect on Branson Shuttle or Jefferson Lines (M esr Fatal 1 Accident Index 1.03
s( te
Local Access to Opportunity Factors 75% 50 37.5 1.9 widened shoulders benefit bikes/peds <D _E Years 3 Severity Index 3.25
sa o
r
C Avg AADT 10741 Safety Concern Yes 5 5.0 1.5 Concern raised by local leaders

C ongestion Relief Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =10% Total Points = | 5.8 | of 10 Safety Enhancements Yes 5 5.0 1.5 Will result in intersection improvements (traffic control and safety)

Level of Service C 25 10.0 1.0 eastbound estimated peak hour LOS Emergency Response Yes 5 5.0 1.5 Improves intersection near emergency responder (ambulance)

Functional Classification1 Minor Arterial 40% 25 10.0 1.0 Local Safety Factors 100% 35 35.0 10.5 All criteria met; crash rate is noteworthy, head-on

Daily Usage 5500 25 25.0 2.5 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Local Congestion Relief Factors 50% 25 12.5 1.3 moderate localized congestion Taking Care o f the System Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 20% Total Points = | 10.8 | of 20

Roadway or Bridge Conditions Fair 20 10.0 2.0 Roadway cracking

Econom ic C om petitiveness Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =10% Total Points = | 7.2 | of 10 Substandard Roadway or Bridge Feature No 20 0.0 0.0

Strategic Regional Economic Corridor Yes 30 30.0 3.0 US-160 Functional Classification2 Minor Arterial 40% 10 4.0 0.8

Support Regional Economic Opportunities No 20 0.0 0.0 Not linked to any planned econ. dev. projects Daily Vehicle Usage 5500 10 10.0 2.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Level of Economic Distress 60% 20 12.0 1.2 Local Taking Care of the System Factors 75% 40 30.0 6.0 Important local intersection

Poverty (Block Group) 12% 2006-2010 ACS block group data - Comb. 2 block groups

Unemployment (tract) 14% 2006-2010 ACS tract data - Combining 3 tracts

Local Economic Competitiveness Factors 100% 30 30.0 3.0 MO-160 is an important arterial and economic link

Data Check3 OK Data Checkl OK Data Check2 OK
Proj. #: 4-4 Project Name US-160 and MO-248 Intersection E fficient M ovem ent o f Freight Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 5.2 | of 10

Project Type: Traffic Safety Total Score| 59.1 j out of 100 Large Vehicle Friendly Facilities Partial Yes 30 15.0 1.5
Project Description: Improve traffic safety at this intersection by either reconfiguring the Widens Road No
intersection to a more standard "T" intersection or constructing a roundabout.
Improves Geometry Yes improves turns for trucks and other large vehicles
Consideration should be given to which movements are the major through movements.
Improves Load Rating No
Also sight distance is somewhat limited for vehicles turning left onto MO-248 northbound.
This sight-distance issue may need to be addressed. Truck Usage 110 30 7.0 0.7 MoDOT formula
Status: Planning Length: NA Local Efficient Movement of Freight Factors 75% 40 30.0 3.0 fire house nearby, US-160 is an important arterial

Project Scale: Small Roadway or Intersection Intersection
Functional Classification: Collector (for the major street) Q uality o f C om m unities Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 7.0 | of 10

Avg. Annual Daily Traffic (AADT): 2,700 (est. 2012, avg. for major street) Local/Regional Land Use Plans Yes 30 30.0 3.0
Daily Truck Traffic: 220 (est. 2012, avg. for major street) Consistent with Local Plans No no applicable local plans
Through Lanes: 2 (through lanes on major street) Consistent with Regional Plans Yes US 160 mentioned in SEMCOG regional plan
Project Discussion: There is a fire house just west of the intersection on the north side Connectivity Yes 30 30.0 3.0 List communities
of MO-160. 2010 MoDOT traffic counts on all three legs. Truck count on the east leg.
Scenic and Visual No 20 0.0 0.0 Intersection improvements, no scenic benefits
Based on relatively recent MoDOT peak hour traffic counts it does not appear that the
MUTCD intersection meets the peak hour signal warrants. Local Quality of Communities Factors 50% 20 10.0 1.0

Environm ental Protection Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 4.8 | of 5

Consistent with Stormwater Goals Yes 30 30.0 1.5 Small project, few stormwater issues expected
Consistent with Environmental Goals Yes 30 30.0 1.5 Small project, no mitigation expected

Access to O pportunity Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 1.5 |of 5 Avoids Historical Impacts Yes 20 20.0 1.0 No known historical impacts

Eliminate Bike/Ped Barriers (ADA) 20% 25 5.0 0.3 Local Environmental Protection Factors 75% 20 15.0 0.8 Small project, few issues expected

Project provides bike connections No does not apply

Project provides pedestrian connections No does not apply Safety Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =30% Total Points = | 20.1 | of 30
d
*roject brings existing facilities up to ADA Regulations No use if first two do not apply assumes no sidewalks or bike lanes a PDO 3 Safety Index 0.82 50 30.6 9.2 (Modified MoDOT formula)
o
oR ))n
Project provides some bike/pedestrian facilities Yes use if first two do not apply assumes widened shoulders at intersection r oi Injury 1 Crash Rate 138.56 Crash data 2009-2011
oj tc
a e
Transit No 25 0.0 0.0 no effect on Branson Shuttle or Jefferson Lines (M e
sr Fatal 0 Accident Index 2.10
s( te
Local Access to Opportunity Factors 50% 50 25.0 1.3 assumes widened shoulders at intersection <D _E Years 3 Severity Index 1.63
sa o
r
C Avg AADT 2636 Safety Concern Yes 5 5.0 1.5 Concern raised by local leaders

C ongestion Relief Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =10% Total Points = | 2.2 | of 10 Safety Enhancements Yes 5 5.0 1.5 Will result in intersection improvements (traffic control and safety)

Level of Service A 25 0.0 0.0 estimated peak hour LOS for left turns Emergency Response No 5 0.0 0.0

Functional Classification1 Collector 30% 25 7.5 0.8 Local Safety Factors 75% 35 26.3 7.9 crash types vary

Daily Usage 1350 25 1.5 0.2 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Local Congestion Relief Factors 50% 25 12.5 1.3 Taking Care o f the System Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 20% Total Points = | 10.7 | of 20

Roadway or Bridge Conditions Very Good 20 0.0 0.0 based on pictures and field observations, very good

Econom ic C om petitiveness Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =10% Total Points = | 7.7 | of 10 Substandard Roadway or Bridge Feature Yes 20 20.0 4.0 Vertical alignment directly east of intersection

Strategic Regional Economic Corridor Yes 30 30.0 3.0 US-160 Functional Classification2 Collector 30% 10 3.0 0.6

Support Regional Economic Opportunities No 20 0.0 0.0 Not linked to any planned econ. dev. projects Daily Vehicle Usage 1350 10 0.6 0.1 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Level of Economic Distress 85% 20 17.0 1.7 Local Taking Care of the System Factors 75% 40 30.0 6.0 Important local intersection

Poverty (Block Group) 13% 2006-2010 ACS block group data - Comb. 2 block groups

Unemployment (tract) 7% 2006-2010 ACS tract data - Combining 2 tracts

Local Economic Competitiveness Factors 100% 30 30.0 3.0 MO-160 is an important arterial and economic link

Data Check3 OK Data Check1 OK Data Check2 OK
Proj. #: 4-5 Project Name: Round Mountain Road Bridge Efficient Movement o f Freight Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =10% Total Points = | 1.1 | of 10

Project Type: Quality of Commui Total Score 48.0 | out of 100 Large Vehicle Friendly Facilities No 30 0.0 0.0
Project Description: Construct and all-weather river crossing (bridge) as well as all Widens Road No
weather approach roadways.
Improves Geometry No not a freight facility
Improves Load Rating No
Truck Usage 2 30 0.9 0.1 MoDOT formula

Status: Construction 2019 Length: 0.1 miles Local Efficient Movement of Freight Factors 25% 40 10.0 1.0 Assumed to meet criteria for freight; not an important facility

Environm ental Protection Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 2.8 | of 5

Consistent with Stormwater Goals Yes 30 30.0 1.5 Assume new runoff mitigated (new stormwater detention facilities
Consistent with Environmental Goals No 30 0.0 0.0 Floodplains and wetland in project area

Access to O pportunity Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 5% Total Points = | 1.5 | of 5 Avoids Historical Impacts Yes 20 20.0 1.0 No known historical impacts

Eliminate Bike/Ped Barriers (ADA) 20% 25 5.0 0.3 Local Environmental Protection Factors 25% 20 5.0 0.3 Possible impacts - bridge crosses floodplains and wetland area

Project provides bike connections No does not apply

Project provides pedestrian connections No does not apply Safety Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =30% Total Points = | 19.1 | of 30
d
5roject brings existing facilities up to ADA Regulations No use if first two do not apply assumes no sidewalks or bike lanes a PDO 0 Safety Index 11.54 50 50.0 15.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)
o
oR ) )n
Project provides some bike/pedestrian facilities Yes use if first two do not apply assumes wide shoulders r o it Injury 1 Crash Rate 4566.21 Crash data 2009-2011
o
j tc
a e
Transit No 25 0.0 0.0 No effect on Branson Shuttle or Jefferson Lines M
( sr Fatal 0 Accident Index 26.09
s( te
Local Access to Opportunity Factors 50% 50 25.0 1.3 No existing connection; assumes wide shoulders CD _E Years 3 Severity Index 3.50
sa
r o
C Avg AADT 200 Safety Concern No 5 0.0 0.0 no main reason for project

Congestion Relief Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 3.0 | of 10 Safety Enhancements Yes 5 5.0 1.5 New two-lane bridge high-water bridge

Level of Service A 25 0.0 0.0 capacity is not a major issue Emergency Response No 5 0.0 0.0

Functional Classification Local 20% 25 5.0 0.5 Local Safety Factors 25% 35 8.8 2.6 project driven by factors other than safety

Daily Usage 100 25 0.0 0.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Local Congestion Relief Factors 100% 25 25.0 2.5 closure causes non-recurring delay to bridge users Taking Care o f the System Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 20% Total Points = | 11.4 | of 20

Roadway or Bridge Conditions Poor 20 15.0 3.0 gravel road sections

Econom ic C om petitiveness Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 5.6 | of 10 Substandard Roadway or Bridge Feature Yes 20 20.0 4.0 one lane low water bridge

Strategic Regional Economic Corridor No 30 0.0 0.0 Functional Classification2 Local 20% 10 2.0 0.4

Support Regional Economic Opportunities Yes 20 20.0 2.0 would support future development east of the bridge Daily Vehicle Usage 100 10 0.0 0.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Level of Economic Distress 30% 20 6.0 0.6 Local Taking Care of the System Factors 50% 40 20.0 4.0 improvement beneficial to existing local transportation system

Poverty (Block Group) 11% 2006-2010 ACS block group data - 1 block group

Unemployment (tract) 13% 2006-2010 ACS tract data - 1 tract

Local Economic Competitiveness Factors 100% 30 30.0 3.0 supports local econ dev efforts

Data Check3 OK Data Checkl OK Data Check2 OK
Proj. #: 5-1 Project Name: MO-248 and Buchanan Rd Intersection E fficient M ovem ent o f Freight Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 3.0 | of 10

Project Type: Traffic Safety Total Score| 47.1 J iout of 100 Large Vehicle Friendly Facilities Partial Yes 30 15.0 1.5
Project Description: Intersection improvements including potential northbound right Widens Road No
turn lane, signage and striping modifications, traffic signal, and advance warning signs.
Improves Geometry Yes intersection upgrades will better serve trucks and school buses
Other improvements such as a southbound left turn lane could also be considered.
Improves Load Rating No
Truck Usage 55 30 5.0 0.5 MoDOT formula
Status: Planning Length: NA Local Efficient Movement of Freight Factors 25% 40 10.0 1.0 MO-248 is a potential freight route (though truck vols appear low)

Avg. Annual Daily Traffic (AADT): 5300 (estimated, avg. for major street) Local/Regional Land Use Plans No 30 0.0 0.0
Daily Truck Traffic: 110 (estimated, avg. for major street) Consistent with Local Plans No no applicable local plans
Through Lanes: 2 (through lanes on major street) Consistent with Regional Plans No not mentioned in SMCOG regional plan
Project Discussion: MO-248 and Buchanan are two-lane roads without turn lanes. Connectivity No 30 0.0 0.0
Buchanan is stop controlled and approaches MO-248 on an upgrade. The posted speed
Scenic and Visual No 20 0.0 0.0 Intersection improvements, no scenic benefits
limit on MO-248 is 45 mph, leading to a design sight distance of 500 feet. Initial
measurements indicate that there is insufficient sight distance for drivers on Buchanan Local Quality of Communities Factors 75% 20 15.0 1.5 Important for school traffic
looking to the south due to vertical and horizontal alignment issues (see photo). The
intersection does not meet signal warrants based on the available sample count data.
Environm ental Protection Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 4.5 | of 5
More detailed traffic data will be required to evaluate the need for a signal at this
location, and to evaluate the need for left and right turn lanes. Consistent with Stormwater Goals Yes 30 30.0 1.5 Small project, few stormwater issues expected
Consistent with Environmental Goals Yes 30 30.0 1.5 Small project, no mitigation expected

Access to O pportunity Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 1.8 | of 5 Avoids Historical Impacts Yes 20 20.0 1.0 No known historical impacts

Eliminate Bike/Ped Barriers (ADA) 40% 25 10.0 0.5 Local Environmental Protection Factors 50% 20 10.0 0.5 Small project, few issues expected

Project provides bike connections No does not apply

Project provides pedestrian connections No does not apply Safety Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =30% Total Points = | 19.2 | of 30
d
’roject brings existing facilities up to ADA Regulations Yes use if first two do not apply if signal is installed, ADA pedestrian provisions assumed a PDO 7 Safety Index 0.50 50 18.9 5.7 (Modified MoDOT formula)
o
oR ))n
Project provides some bike/pedestrian facilities Yes use if first two do not apply if signal is installed, pedestrians have safe crossing option r oi Injury 2 Crash Rate 94.16 Crash data 2009-2013
oj tc
a e
Transit No 25 0.0 0.0 No effect on Branson Shuttle or Jefferson Lines (M esr Fatal 0 Accident Index 1.43
s( e t
Local Access to Opportunity Factors 50% 50 25.0 1.3 Signalization would benefit bikes/peds as well <D _E Years 5 Severity Index 1.56
sa o
r
C Avg AADT 5237 Safety Concern Yes 5 5.0 1.5 Concern raised by local leaders

C ongestion Relief Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =10% Total Points = | 4.3 | of 10 Safety Enhancements Yes 5 5.0 1.5 Improvements should address key safety issues

Level of Service B 25 5.0 0.5 estimated LOS from sample count (more analysis needed) Emergency Response No 5 0.0 0.0

Functional Classification1 Collector 30% 25 7.5 0.8 Local Safety Factors 100% 35 35.0 10.5 substantial community concern, not a large number of crashes

Daily Usage 2650 25 5.8 0.6 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Local Congestion Relief Factors 100% 25 25.0 2.5 congestion during peak school traffic hours an issue Taking Care o f the System Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 20% Total Points = | 12.1 | of 20

Roadway or Bridge Conditions Good 20 5.0 1.0 roadway assumed to be in good condition

Econom ic C om petitiveness Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =10% Total Points = | 0.8 | of 10 Substandard Roadway or Bridge Feature Yes 20 20.0 4.0 sight distance issue

Strategic Regional Economic Corridor No 30 0.0 0.0 Functional Classification2 Collector 30% 10 3.0 0.6

Support Regional Economic Opportunities No 20 0.0 0.0 Not linked to any planned econ. dev. projects Daily Vehicle Usage 2650 10 2.3 0.5 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Level of Economic Distress 0% 20 0.0 0.0 Local Taking Care of the System Factors 75% 40 30.0 6.0 Important local intersection to have function well

Poverty (Block Group) 9% 2006-2010 ACS block group data - Comb. 2 block groups

Unemployment (tract) 4% 2006-2010 ACS tract data - 1 tract

Local Economic Competitiveness Factors 25% 30 7.5 0.8 not a major economic dev project

Data Check3 OK Data Checkl OK Data Check2 OK
Proj. #: 5-2 Project Name: MO-248 and Branson Hills Pkwy Intersection u' C * ' ■ ■ >-• E fficient M ovem ent o f Freight Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 4.0 | of 10

Project Type: Geometric/Safety Total Score) 64.8 [o u t of 100 Large Vehicle Friendly Facilities Partial Yes 30 15.0 1.5
M N o r t h / NTS
Project Description: Intersection improvements including a potential traffic signal, Widens Road No
IT y . ~ V '
southbound left turn lane, and advance warning signs.
Improves Geometry Yes intersection upgrades will better serve trucks
( Improves Load Rating No
'{9. - ' Truck Usage 5.4 0.5 MoDOT formula

6
5

3
0
Status: Planning Length: NA Local Efficient Movement of Freight Factors 50% 40 20.0 2.0 Branson Hills Parkway is a potential commercial route
k - . •••*
Project Scale: Medium Roadway or Intersection Intersection
Functional Classification: Collector (for the major street) Q uality o f C om m unities Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 3.5 | of 10

Avg. Annual Daily Traffic (AADT): 6600 (estimated, avg. for major street) Local/Regional Land Use Plans No 30 0.0 0.0
Daily Truck Traffic: 130 (estimated, avg. for major street) Consistent with Local Plans No Branson Rec-plex is mentioned in Branson Community Plan 2030
Through Lanes: 2 (through lanes on major street) Consistent with Regional Plans No not mentioned in SMCOG regional plan
Project Discussion: MO-248 is a two-lane, 45 mph highway without turn lanes. Connectivity No 30 0.0 0.0
Branson Hills Parkway is a four lane divided roadway with stop control at MO-248.
Scenic and Visual Yes 20 20.0 2.0 Opportunity for building on Branson Hills Parkway landscaping
Based on the sample counts it appears that the intersection may meet the peak hour
traffic signal warrants. The relatively high side-street volume contributes to this. The Local Quality of Communities Factors 75% 20 15.0 1.5 proximity to Branson Rec-plex, high school traffic uses intersectio
number and type of crashes, posted speed, and line of sight issues (to the north
especially) support at least a turn lane if not signal installation. A roundabout could also
Environm ental Protection Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 3.3 | of 5
be considered in the location.
Consistent with Stormwater Goals Yes 30 30.0 1.5 few stormwater issues expected

Consistent with Environmental Goals No 30 0.0 0.0 mitigation possible, mines could be an issue
Access to O pportunity Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 5% Total Points = | 1.8 |of 5 Avoids Historical Impacts Yes 20 20.0 1.0 No known historical impacts

Eliminate Bike/Ped Barriers (ADA) 40% 25 10.0 0.5 Local Environmental Protection Factors 75% 20 15.0 0.8 few issues expected, but mines and topography are issues

Project provides bike connections No does not apply

Project provides pedestrian connections No does not apply Safety Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =30% Total Points = | 28.5 | of 30
d
’reject brings existing facilities up to ADA Regulations Yes use if first two do not apply if signal is installed, ADA pedestrian provisions assumed a PDO 11 Safety Index 1.79 50 50.0 15.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)
o
oR ) )n
Project provides some bike/pedestrian facilities Yes use if first two do not apply if signal is installed, pedestrians have safe crossing option r oi Injury 5 Crash Rate 240.91 Crash data 2009-2011
oj ct
a e
Transit No 25 0.0 0.0 No effect on Branson Shuttle or Jefferson Lines (M sr Fatal 1 Accident Index 3.66
s( e t
Local Access to Opportunity Factors 50% 50 25.0 1.3 Signalization would benefit bikes/peds as well <D _E Years 3 Severity Index 2.21
sa o
r Safety Concern Yes
C Avg AADT 6444 5 5.0 1.5 Concern raised by local leaders

Congestion Relief Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =10% Total Points = | 3.9 | of 10 Safety Enhancements Yes 5 5.0 1.5 Improvements should address key safety issues

Level of Service C 25 10.0 1.0 estimated peak hour LOS for westbound left turn Emergency Response No 5 0.0 0.0

Functional Classification1 Collector 30% 25 7.5 0.8 Local Safety Factors 100% 35 35.0 10.5 17 crashes in 3 years, mainly angle and rear-end

Daily Usage 3300 25 2.7 0.3 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Local Congestion Relief Factors 75% 25 18.8 1.9 peak hour congestion is an issue Taking Care o f the System Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 20% Total Points = | 14.8 | of 20

Roadway or Bridge Conditions Fair 20 10.0 2.0 Roadway in fair condition

Econom ic Com petitiveness Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 5.0 | of 10 Substandard Roadway or Bridge Feature Yes 20 20.0 4.0 sight distance issues

Strategic Regional Economic Corridor No 30 0.0 0.0 Functional Classification2 Collector 30% 10 3.0 0.6

Support Regional Economic Opportunities Yes 20 20.0 2.0 Branson Hills Parkway provides key development access Daily Vehicle Usage 3300 10 1.1 0.2 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Level of Economic Distress 0% 20 0.0 0.0 Local Taking Care of the System Factors 100% 40 40.0 8.0 Important roadway and intersection to maintain high functionality

Poverty (Block Group) 9% 2006-2010 ACS block group data - Comb. 2 block groups

Unemployment (tract) 4% 2006-2010 ACS tract data - 1 tract

Local Economic Competitiveness Factors 100% 30 30.0 3.0 beneficial to make Branson Hills Parkway function better

Data Check3 OK Data Checkl OK Data Check2 OK
Proj. #: 5-3 Project Name: MO-248 and Flynn Road Intersection E fficient M ovem ent o f Freight Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 3.3 | of 10

Project Type: Geometric/Safety Total Score 43.4 | out of 100 | Large Vehicle Friendly Facilities Partial Yes 30 15.0 1.5
Project Description: Intersection safety improvements including a northbound 1 Widens Road No
acceleration lane and a northbound right turn lane. Signage and striping improvements 1
Improves Geometry Yes turn lanes to be added
are also proposed. 1
Improves Load Rating No
Truck Usage 130 30 7.6 0.8 MoDOT formula
Status: Planning Length: NA | Local Efficient Movement of Freight Factors 25% 40 10.0 1.0 not a major truck route

Project Scale: Medium Roadway or Intersection Intersection 1
Functional Classification: Collector (for the major street) 1 Q uality o f C om m unities Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 1.5 | of 10

Avg. Annual Daily Traffic (AADT): 13000 (estimated, avg. for major street) L Local/Regional Land Use Plans No 30 0.0 0.0
Daily Truck Traffic: 260 (estimated, avg. for major street) 1 Consistent with Local Plans No not mentioned in Branson Community Plan 2030
Through Lanes: 2 (through lanes on major street) 1 Consistent with Regional Plans No not mentioned in SMCOG regional plan
Project Discussion: Both roads are 2-lane roads without turn lanes. The posted speed Connectivity No 30 0.0 0.0
on MO-248 is 45 mph. There is a driveway across from Flynn Road. There is limited
Scenic and Visual No 20 0.0 0.0 Intersection improvements, no scenic benefits
sight distance to the north for both Flynn Road and the driveway. The sight distance
design value is 500 ft. Grade adjustments may be necessary to improve the sight Local Quality of Communities Factors 75% 20 15.0 1.5 important to residents that use this for access and circulation
distance. Southbound advance warning signage may be warranted. Sample counts
indicate that the intersection may be near or even meet the peak hour traffic signal
Environm ental Protection Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 4.5 | of 5
warrants. The volume of traffic as well as the number of rear-end crashes on MO-165
indicates that turn lanes may be warranted. Consistent with Stormwater Goals Yes 30 30.0 1.5 Small project, few stormwater issues expected
Consistent with Environmental Goals Yes 30 30.0 1.5 Small project, no mitigation expected

Access to O pportunity Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 2.1 | of 5 Avoids Historical Impacts Yes 20 20.0 1.0 No known historical impacts

Eliminate Bike/Ped Barriers (ADA) 20% 25 5.0 0.3 Local Environmental Protection Factors 50% 20 10.0 0.5 Small project, few issues expected

Project provides bike connections No does not apply

Project provides pedestrian connections No does not apply Safety Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =30% Total Points = | 10.9 | of 30
d
’roject brings existing facilities up to ADA Regulations No use if first two do not apply assumes no sidewalks or bike lanes a PDO 7 Safety Index 0.00 50 0.0 0.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)
oR ))n
o
Project provides some bike/pedestrian facilities Yes use if first two do not apply assumes widened shoulders at intersection r oi Injury 0 Crash Rate 50.36 Crash data 2009-2011
oj tc
a e
Transit No 25 0.0 0.0 No effect on Branson Shuttle or Jefferson Lines M
( e sr Fatal 0 Accident Index 0.76
s( te
Local Access to Opportunity Factors 75% 50 37.5 1.9 Proximity to existing businesses & residents bikes/peds <D _E Years 3 Severity Index 1.00
sa o
r
C Avg AADT 12694 Safety Concern Yes 5 5.0 1.5 Concern raised by local leaders

C ongestion Relief Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =10% Total Points = | 5.7 | of 10 Safety Enhancements Yes 5 5.0 1.5 intersection improvements could address safety issues

Level of Service E 25 20.0 2.0 estimated peak hour LOS for westbound left turns Emergency Response No 5 0.0 0.0

Functional Classification1 Collector 30% 25 7.5 0.8 Local Safety Factors 75% 35 26.3 7.9 most crashes are rear-ends on MO-165

Daily Usage 6500 25 10.6 1.1 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Local Congestion Relief Factors 75% 25 18.8 1.9 congestion appears to be a peak period issue Taking Care o f the System Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 20% Total Points = | 15.4 | of 20

Roadway or Bridge Conditions Fair 20 10.0 2.0 roadway assumed to be in fair condition

Econom ic C om petitiveness Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =10% Total Points = | 0.0 | of 10 Substandard Roadway or Bridge Feature Yes 20 20.0 4.0 sight distance and turn lane issues

Strategic Regional Economic Corridor No 30 0.0 0.0 Functional Classification2 Collector 30% 10 3.0 0.6

Support Regional Economic Opportunities No 20 0.0 0.0 Not linked to any planned econ. dev. projects Daily Vehicle Usage 6500 10 4.2 0.8 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Level of Economic Distress 0% 20 0.0 0.0 Local Taking Care of the System Factors 100% 40 40.0 8.0 important design / safety improvements

Poverty (Block Group) 9% 2006-2010 ACS block group data - Comb. 2 block groups

Unemployment (tract) 4% 2006-2010 ACS tract data - 1 tract

Local Economic Competitiveness Factors 0% 30 0.0 0.0 not an economic dev related project

Data Check3 OK Data Checkl OK Data Check2 OK
Proj. #: 5-4 Project Name: MO-248 and Buena Vista Intersection E fficient M ovem ent o f Freight Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 5.2 | of 10

Project Type: Geometric/Safety Total Score| 38.9 [o u t of~ 100 Large Vehicle Friendly Facilities Partial Yes 30 15.0 1.5
Project Description: Proposed intersection improvements include signage, striping, and Widens Road No
other safety measures. A main concern is sight distance for turns from Buena Vista
Improves Geometry Yes right turn lane could improve truck turns from MO-248
Road. Also a right-turn lane into Buena Vista Road has been proposed. Intersection and
Improves Load Rating No
advance signage/striping would be reviewed. Sample counts indicate that a right-turn
lane may be warranted in accordance with the MoDOT Access Management Guidelines. Truck Usage 100 30 6.7 0.7 MoDOT formula
Status: Planning Length: NA Local Efficient Movement of Freight Factors 75% 40 30.0 3.0 Quarry, Mountain Complex & campground

Avg. Annual Daily Traffic (AADT): 10100 (estimated, avg. for major street) Local/Regional Land Use Plans No 30 0.0 0.0
Daily Truck Traffic: 200 (estimated, avg. for major street) Consistent with Local Plans No not mentioned in Branson Community Plan 2030
Through Lanes: 2 (through lanes on major street) Consistent with Regional Plans No not mentioned in SMCOG regional plan
Project Discussion: MO-248 is a 2-iane road without turn lanes. Buena Vista Rd is a 3- Connectivity No 30 0.0 0.0
lane road with left and right turn lanes at MO-248. Traffic on MO-248 appears to be
Scenic and Visual No 20 0.0 0.0 intersection improvements, no scenic benefits
approx. 10,000 ADT; Buena Vista traffic varies seasonally (serves a campground). One
observation had very low volumes, another an est. ADT of 2,000. The 45 mph posted Local Quality of Communities Factors 25% 20 5.0 0.5 not a major community oriented project
speed on MO-248 relates to a 500 ft sight distance. From Buena Vista looking south this
should be available if the foliage is trimmed. To the north, the upgrade on Buena Vista
Environm ental Protection Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 4.5 | of 5
and the sag vertical curve on MO-248 make the lines of sight more difficult. More precise
measurements are needed. Grade work could improve the sight lines to the north. Consistent with Stormwater Goals Yes 30 30.0 1.5 Small project, few stormwater issues expected
Consistent with Environmental Goals Yes 30 30.0 1.5 Small project, no mitigation expected

Access to O pportunity Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 0.0 | of 5 Avoids Historical Impacts Yes 20 20.0 1.0 No known historical impacts

Eliminate Bike/Ped Barriers (ADA) 0% 25 0.0 0.0 Local Environmental Protection Factors 50% 20 10.0 0.5 Small project, few issues expected

Project provides bike connections No does not apply

Project provides pedestrian connections No does not apply Safety Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =30% Total Points = | 10.6 | of 30
d
’roject brings existing facilities up to ADA Regulations No use if first two do not apply assumes no sidewalks or bike lanes a PDO 6 Safety Index 0.21 50 7.8 2.3 (Modified MoDOT formula)
o
oR ))n
Project provides some bike/pedestrian facilities No use if first two do not apply assumes no sidewalks or bike lanes r oi Injury 1 Crash Rate 64.82 Crash data 2009-2011
oj tc
a e
Transit No 25 0.0 0.0 No effect on Branson Shuttle or Jefferson Lines (M esr Fatal 0 Accident Index 0.98
s( te
Local Access to Opportunity Factors 0% 50 0.0 0.0 no pedestrian/bike elements to project <D _E Years 3 Severity Index 1.36
sa o
r
C Avg AADT 9862 Safety Concern Yes 5 5.0 1.5 Concern raised by local leaders

C ongestion Relief Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =10% Total Points = | 5.6 | of 10 Safety Enhancements Yes 5 5.0 1.5 intersection improvements will improve safety

Level of Service D 25 15.0 1.5 estimated peak hour LOS for left turn out of Buena Vista Emergency Response No 5 0.0 0.0

Functional Classificationl Collector 30% 25 7.5 0.8 Local Safety Factors 50% 35 17.5 5.3 crash types vary, not clear that project can address them directly

Daily Usage 5050 25 21.1 2.1 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Local Congestion Relief Factors 50% 25 12.5 1.3 project will improve safe & efficient traffic flow Taking Care o f the System Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 20% Total Points = | 8.3 | of 20

Roadway or Bridge Conditions Fair 20 10.0 2.0 roadway considered to be in fair condition

Econom ic C om petitiveness Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =10% Total Points = | 4.3 | of 10 Substandard Roadway or Bridge Feature No 20 0.0 0.0

Strategic Regional Economic Corridor No 30 0.0 0.0 Functional Classification2 Collector 30% 10 3.0 0.6

Support Regional Economic Opportunities Yes 20 20.0 2.0 Quarry, campground & potential developments to west Daily Vehicle Usage 5050 10 8.4 1.7 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Level of Economic Distress 0% 20 0.0 0.0 Local Taking Care of the System Factors 50% 40 20.0 4.0 prudent safety improvements

Poverty (Block Group) 9% 2006-2010 ACS block group data - Comb. 2 block groups

Unemployment (tract) 4% 2006-2010 ACS tract data - 1 tract

Local Economic Competitiveness Factors 75% 30 22.5 2.3 MO-248 is an important roadway, quarry adjacent

Data Check3 OK Data Checkl OK Data Check2 OK
Proj. #: 5-5 Project Name: Bee Creek Road and Rinehart Road E fficient M ovem ent o f Freight Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 4.8 | of 10

Project Type: Capacity Total Score| 35.2 | out of 100 Large Vehicle Friendly Facilities Partial Yes 30 15.0 1.5
Project Description: Improve intersection by adding at least a northbound right-turn Widens Road No
lane and appropriate traffic control (signing and striping).
Improves Geometry Yes turn lane to be added
Improves Load Rating No
Truck Usage 25 30 3.4 0.3 MoDOT formula
Status: Planning Length: NA Local Efficient Movement of Freight Factors 75% 40 30.0 3.0 will benefit trucks turning onto Rinehart Road

Project Scale: Small Roadway or Intersection Intersection
Functional Classification: Local (for the major street) Q uality o f C om m unities Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 0.5 | of 10

Avg. Annual Daily Traffic (AADT): 4900 (estimated, avg. for major street) Local/Regional Land Use Plans No 30 0.0 0.0
Daily Truck Traffic: 50 (estimated, avg. for major street) Consistent with Local Plans No not mentioned in Branson Community Plan 2030
Through Lanes: 2 (through lanes on major street) Consistent with Regional Plans No not mentioned in SMCOG regional plan
Project Discussion: Roads are two-lane roads with no turn lanes. Rinehart Road is Connectivity No 30 0.0 0.0 does not connect any major communities
stop controlled. A church driveway is nearly aligned with Rinehart. The intersection angle
Scenic and Visual No 20 0.0 0.0 Intersection improvements, no scenic benefits
makes turns between the south and east legs more difficult. Major traffic flows appear to
be between these legs. Posted speed on Bee Creek Road is 35 mph. There are possible Local Quality of Communities Factors 25% 20 5.0 0.5 benefits local residents and businesses
sight distance issues to/from the north. At 35 mph the sight distance requirement is 390
ft (from a point 14.5 ft back from the travelway), which may not be met. County Health
Environm ental Protection Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 4.5 | of 5
Dept is located on the SE corner. Traffic volumes are predicted to increase due to
development. Right turn lane would promote safe turns onto Rinehart Rd. Consistent with Stormwater Goals Yes 30 30.0 1.5 Small project, few stormwater issues expected
Consistent with Environmental Goals Yes 30 30.0 1.5 Small project, no mitigation expected

Access to O pportunity Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 0.0 | of 5 Avoids Historical Impacts Yes 20 20.0 1.0 No known historical impacts

Eliminate Bike/Ped Barriers (ADA) 0% 25 0.0 0.0 Local Environmental Protection Factors 50% 20 10.0 0.5 Small project, few issues expected

Project provides bike connections No does not apply

Project provides pedestrian connections No does not apply Safety Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =30% Total Points = | 8.3 | of 30
d
’roject brings existing facilities up to ADA Regulations No use if first two do not apply assumes no sidewalks or bike lanes a PDO 2 Safety Index 0.00 50 0.0 0.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)
oR ))n
o
Project provides some bike/pedestrian facilities No use if first two do not apply assumes no sidewalks, bike lanes, or widened shoulders r oi Injury 0 Crash Rate 38.18 Crash data 2009-2011
oj tc
a e
Transit No 25 0.0 0.0 No effect on Branson Shuttle or Jefferson Lines (M e
sr Fatal 0 Accident Index 0.58
s( e t
Local Access to Opportunity Factors 0% 50 0.0 0.0 turn lane will not affect ped/bike activity <D _E Years 3 Severity Index 1.00
sa o
r
C Avg AADT 4784 Safety Concern Yes 5 5.0 1.5 Concern raised by local leaders

C ongestion Relief Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =10% Total Points = | 3.9 | of 10 Safety Enhancements Yes 5 5.0 1.5 will promote safety for turning vehicles

Level of Service C 25 10.0 1.0 estimated peak hour LOS for westbound left turns Emergency Response No 5 0.0 0.0 no substantial effect on emergency response

Functional Classificationl Local 20% 25 5.0 0.5 Local Safety Factors 50% 35 17.5 5.3 relatively few crashes, not a high ranking safety problem

Daily Usage 2450 25 5.0 0.5 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Local Congestion Relief Factors 75% 25 18.8 1.9 turn lane will promote smooth traffic flow Taking Care o f the System Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 20% Total Points = | 6.8 |of 20

Roadway or Bridge Conditions Very Good 20 0.0 0.0 roadway appears to be in very good condition.

Econom ic C om petitiveness Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =10% Total Points = | 6.4 | of 10 Substandard Roadway or Bridge Feature No 20 0.0 0.0 project as scoped will not address sight distance issue

Strategic Regional Economic Corridor No 30 0.0 0.0 Functional Classification2 Local 20% 10 2.0 0.4

Support Regional Economic Opportunities Yes 20 20.0 2.0 will benefit nearby industrial development Daily Vehicle Usage 2450 10 2.0 0.4 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Level of Economic Distress 70% 20 14.0 1.4 Local Taking Care of the System Factors 75% 40 30.0 6.0 important local intersection / route to business park

Poverty (Block Group) 18% 2006-2010 ACS block group data - 1 block group

Unemployment (tract) 4% 2006-2010 ACS tract data - 1 tract

Local Economic Competitiveness Factors 100% 30 30.0 3.0 important route for businesses on Rinehart Road

Data Check3 OK Data Checkl OK Data Check2 OK
Proj. #: 5-6 Project Name: MO-248 and Emory Creek Blvd E fficient M ovem ent o f Freight Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 3.2 | of 10

Project Type: Traffic Safety Total Score| 39.2 | out of 100~ ^ N o rth / Large Vehicle Friendly Facilities Partial Yes 30 15.0 1.5
Project Description: Intersection improvements including potential signage and striping Widens Road No
modifications, traffic control modifications, roadway re-grading, advance warning signs,
Improves Geometry Yes improvements would better serve trucks and school buses
and/or other modifications to improve sight distance.
Improves Load Rating No
Truck Usage 115 30 7.2 0.7 MoDOT formula
Status: Planning Length: NA Local Efficient Movement of Freight Factors 25% 40 10.0 1.0 MO-248 is a potential freight route (though truck vols appear low)

Avg. Annual Daily Traffic (AADT): 2400 (estimated, avg. for major street) Local/Regional Land Use Plans No 30 0.0 0.0
Daily Truck Traffic: 230 (estimated, avg. for major street) Consistent with Local Plans No no applicable local plans
Through Lanes: 2 (through lanes on major street) Consistent with Regional Plans No not mentioned in SMCOG regional plan
Project Discussion: MO-248 and Emory Creek Blvd are two-lane roads. Emory Creek Connectivity No 30 0.0 0.0
is stop controlled. There is a northbound right-turn lane at the intersection. Residents
Scenic and Visual No 20 0.0 0.0 Intersection improvements, no scenic benefits
have complained about safety at the intersection. One potential issue is the sight
distance for drivers on Emory Creek looking to the south, due to vertical and horizontal Local Quality of Communities Factors 50% 20 10.0 1.0 Important for local users
alignment issues (see photo). More detailed traffic analysis may be required to evaluate
the safety concerns, possible signage/traffic control changes, roadway re-grading needs,
Environm ental Protection Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 4.5 | of 5
and the need for a southbound left-turn lane. 2009 to 2011 crash data showed two single
vehicle_crashes^nojTiulthvehicJe_crashes]_on_^ Consistent with Stormwater Goals Yes 30 30.0 1.5 Small project, few stormwater issues expected
Consistent with Environmental Goals Yes 30 30.0 1.5 Small project, no mitigation expected

Access to O pportunity Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 1.5 |of 5 Avoids Historical Impacts Yes 20 20.0 1.0 No known historical impacts

Eliminate Bike/Ped Barriers (ADA) 20% 25 5.0 0.3 Local Environmental Protection Factors 50% 20 10.0 0.5 Small project, few issues expected

Project provides bike connections No does not apply

Project provides pedestrian connections No does not apply Safety Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =30% Total Points = | 11.7 | of 30
d
’roject brings existing facilities up to ADA Regulations No use if first two do not apply if signal is installed, ADA pedestrian provisions assumed a PDO 2 Safety Index 0.07 50 2.7 0.8 (Modified MoDOT formula)
Od c
Project provides some bike/pedestrian facilities Yes use if first two do not apply if signal is installed, pedestrians have safe crossing option r oi Injury 0 Crash Rate 77.94 Crash data 2009-2011
oj tc
a e
Transit No 25 0.0 0.0 No effect on Branson Shuttle or Jefferson Lines (M e
sr Fatal 0 Accident Index 1.18
s( e t
Local Access to Opportunity Factors 50% 50 25.0 1.3 Signalization could benefit bikes/peds as well <D _E Years 3 Severity Index 1.00
sa o
r
C Avg AADT 2343 Safety Concern Yes 5 5.0 1.5 Concern raised by local residents and leaders

C ongestion Relief Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =10% Total Points = | 2.1 | of 10 Safety Enhancements Yes 5 5.0 1.5 Improvements should address key safety issues

Level of Service A 25 0.0 0.0 estimated LOS from sample count (more analysis needed) Emergency Response No 5 0.0 0.0

Functional Classification1 Collector 30% 25 7.5 0.8 Local Safety Factors 75% 35 26.3 7.9 substantial community concern, not a large number of crashes

Daily Usage 1200 25 1.2 0.1 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Local Congestion Relief Factors 50% 25 12.5 1.3 improvements could benefit traffic flow, signal may add dela Taking Care o f the System Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 20% Total Points = | 11.7 | of 20

Roadway or Bridge Conditions Good 20 5.0 1.0 roadway assumed to be in good condition

Econom ic C om petitiveness Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =10% Total Points = | 3.5 | of 10 Substandard Roadway or Bridge Feature Yes 20 20.0 4.0 sight distance issue

Strategic Regional Economic Corridor No 30 0.0 0.0 Functional Classification2 Collector 30% 10 3.0 0.6

Support Regional Economic Opportunities No 20 0.0 0.0 Not linked to any planned econ. dev. projects Daily Vehicle Usage 1200 10 0.5 0.1 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Level of Economic Distress 100% 20 20.0 2.0 Local Taking Care of the System Factors 75% 40 30.0 6.0 Important local intersection, future growth area

Poverty (Block Group) 22% 2006-2010 ACS block group data - 1 block groups

Unemployment (tract) 12% 2006-2010 ACS tract data - 1 tract

Local Economic Competitiveness Factors 50% 30 15.0 1.5 not a major economic dev project, local growth area

Data Check3 OK Data Checkl OK Data Check2 OK
Proj. #: 5-7 Project Name: Buchanan Rd and Sunrise Dr Intersection E fficient M ovem ent o f Freight Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 3.1 | of 10

Project Type: Traffic Safety Total Score| 37.8 ]~iout of 100 Large Vehicle Friendly Facilities Partial Yes 30 15.0 1.5
Project Description: Improve intersection alignment and traffic control. Re-align the Widens Road No
through movement to connect Sunrise Dr in the north with Buchanan Rd in the west and
Improves Geometry Yes improves turns for trucks and other large vehicles
convert Sunrise Dr. northbound (south leg) to stop control. Alternativey, install a
Improves Load Rating No
roundabout. This may address the same issues more cost effectively.
Truck Usage 70 30 5.6 0.6 MoDOT formula

Status: Planning Length: NA Local Efficient Movement of Freight Factors 25% 40 10.0 1.0 limited truck traffic other than buses and trash trucks

Avg. Annual Daily Traffic (AADT): 2,800 (est. 2012, avg. for major street) Local/Regional Land Use Plans No 30 0.0 0.0
Daily Truck Traffic: 140 (est. 2012, avg. for major street) Consistent with Local Plans No no applicable local plans
Through Lanes: 2 (through lanes on major street) Consistent with Regional Plans No not mentioned in SMCOG regional plan
Project Discussion: Buchanan Rd is the location of the Branson High School, Connectivity No 30 0.0 0.0 No significant improved connectivity
Intermediate School, and Elementary School as well as the Taney County Transfer
Scenic and Visual No 20 0.0 0.0 Intersection improvements, no scenic benefits
Station. Traffic is heavy at peak times when school is in session. The south leg of
Sunrise Dr has only a handful of residences. The locations of the heavy volumes Local Quality of Communities Factors 100% 20 20.0 2.0 Reduces driver frustration for school traffic
highlight the need to adjust the through movement and/or install a roundabout. A
roundabout offers the benefit of reducing speeds, while limiting vehicle stops. It also
Environm ental Protection Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 4.8 | of 5
could limit the amount of new right-of-way. The final design should ensure adequate
sight distance and relocate driveways as needed. Consistent with Stormwater Goals Yes 30 30.0 1.5 Modest project, few stormwater issues expected

Eliminate Bike/Ped Barriers (ADA) 20% 25 5.0 0.3 Local Environmental Protection Factors 75% 20 15.0 0.8 Modest project, few issues expected

Project provides bike connections No does not apply

Project provides pedestrian connections No does not apply Safety Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =30% Total Points = | 13.5 | of 30
d
’roject brings existing facilities up to ADA Regulations No use if first two do not apply assumes no sidewalks or bike lanes a PDO 1 Safety Index -0.20 50 0.0 0.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)
oR ) )n
o
Project provides some bike/pedestrian facilities Yes use if first two do not apply assumes improved shoulders at intersection r oi Injury 0 Crash Rate 33.40 Crash data 2009-2011
oj tc
a e
Transit No 25 0.0 0.0 no effect on Branson Shuttle or Jefferson Lines (M sr Fatal 0 Accident Index 0.51
(s e t
Local Access to Opportunity Factors 50% 50 25.0 1.3 assumes improved shoulders at intersection <D _E Years 3 Severity Index 1.00
sa o
r Safety Concern Yes
C Avg AADT 2734 5 5.0 1.5 Concern raised by local leaders

Congestion Relief Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =10% Total Points = | 3.7 | of 10 Safety Enhancements Yes 5 5.0 1.5 Will result in widened shoulders & improved intersection design

Level of Service B 25 5.0 0.5 eastbound left turn LOS for stop control Emergency Response No 5 0.0 0.0

Functional Classification1 Local 20% 25 5.0 0.5 Local Safety Factors 100% 35 35.0 10.5 Concern raised by local leaders

Daily Usage 1400 25 1.6 0.2 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Local Congestion Relief Factors 100% 25 25.0 2.5 moderate to high traffic, key location Taking Care o f the System Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 20% Total Points = | 8.5 | of 20

Roadway or Bridge Conditions Fair 20 10.0 2.0 roadway in fair condition based on observations

Econom ic Com petitiveness Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 0.8 | of 10 Substandard Roadway or Bridge Feature No 20 0.0 0.0

Strategic Regional Economic Corridor No 30 0.0 0.0 Not a strategic corridor Functional Classification2 Local 20% 10 2.0 0.4

Support Regional Economic Opportunities No 20 0.0 0.0 Not linked to any planned econ. dev. projects Daily Vehicle Usage 1400 10 0.6 0.1 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Level of Economic Distress 0% 20 0.0 0.0 Local Taking Care of the System Factors 75% 40 30.0 6.0 important intersection to maintain in good operation

Poverty (Block Group) 7.0% 2006-2010 ACS block group data - 1 block group

Unemployment (tract) 3.0% 2006-2010 ACS tract data - 1 tract

Local Economic Competitiveness Factors 25% 30 7.5 0.8 Minimal economic impact outside of the school

Data Check3 OK Data Checkl OK Data Check2 OK
Proj. #: 6-1 Project Name: MO-165 and Fall Creek Road Intersection E fficient Movement o f Freight Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =10% Total Points = | 4.5 | of 10

Project Type: Geometric/Safety Total Score 58.3 out of 100 Large Vehicle Friendly Facilities Partial Yes 30 15.0 1.5
Project Description: Improve intersection grade, alignment, geometry, and traffic Widens Road No
control. This could include adding turn lanes and/or installing a signal. Actual alignment
Improves Geometry Yes realignment of intersection, turn lanes to be added
changes may be cost prohibitive, but could be considered.
Improves Load Rating No
J f H K l K
Truck Usage 230 30 10.2 1.0 MoDOT formula
Status: Grant Application Submitted Length: NA Local Efficient Movement of Freight Factors 50% 40 20.0 2.0 Possible benefits to buses and trucks if all movements allowed

Avg. Annual Daily Traffic (AADT): 9100 (estimated, avg. for major street) Local/Regional Land Use Plans Yes 30 30.0 3.0
ucniy iiuurv iidinu. hou avy. tvi mctjui aucctj
i f
Consistent with Local Plans Yes both facilities' mentioned in Branson Community Plan 2030
Through Lanes: 2 (through lanes on major street) Consistent with Regional Plans Yes 165 (from 76 to 265) mentioned in SMCOG regional plan
Project Discussion: The westbound approach to the intersection (Fall Creek Road) is Connectivity Yes 30 30.0 3.0 MO-165 and Fall Creek are both important connectors
on a very steep downgrade. It terminates at a stop control. There are no turn lanes at
Scenic and Visual No 20 0.0 0.0 Intersection improvements, no scenic benefits
the intersection. The posted speed on MO-165 at this location is 35 mph. There have
been 12 crashes at this location in the last 3 years (including 3 injury crashes). Three of Local Quality of Communities Factors 75% 20 15.0 1.5 Important connection location in system
the 12 crashes were angle crashes. There were also a number of rear-end crashes, ! , ' t - ,
mainly on MO-165. Buses are prohibited from making northbound right turns at this
Environm ental Protection Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 2.8 | of 5
location.
Consistent with Stormwater Goals Yes 30 30.0 1.5 few stormwater issues expected
Consistent with Environmental Goals No 30 0.0 0.0 Possible stream and/or floodplain issues

Access to O pportunity Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 1.8 | of 5 Avoids Historical Impacts Yes 20 20.0 1.0 No known historical impacts

Eliminate Bike/Ped Barriers (ADA) 40% 25 10.0 0.5 Local Environmental Protection Factors 25% 20 5.0 0.3 Project has potential to require mitigation, need to avoid bridge

Project provides bike connections No does not apply

Project provides pedestrian connections No does not apply Safety Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =30% Total Points = | 19.0 | of 30
d
'roject brings existing facilities up to ADA Regulations Yes use if first two do not apply if signal is installed, ADA pedestrian provisions assumed a PDO 9 Safety Index 0.72 50 27.1 8.1 (Modified MoDOT formula)
o
o R ) )n
Project provides some bike/pedestrian facilities Yes use if first two do not apply if signal is installed, pedestrians have safe crossing option r oi Injury 3 Crash Rate 123.34 Crash data 2009-2011
oj tc
a e
Transit No 25 0.0 0.0 No effect on Branson Shuttle or Jefferson Lines M sr Fatal 0 Accident Index 1.87
s( e t
Local Access to Opportunity Factors 50% 50 25.0 1.3 Signalization would benefit bikes/peds as well CD _E Years 3 Severity Index 1.63
sra o
C Avg AADT 8885 Safety Concern Yes 5 5.0 1.5 Concern raised by local leaders

Congestion Relief Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 6.3 | of 10 Safety Enhancements Yes 5 5.0 1.5 intersection improvements designed to improve safety

Level of Service F 25 25.0 2.5 estimated peak hour LOS (lefts out), more analysis needed Emergency Response No 5 0.0 0.0 no major impact on emergency response

Functional Classificatio n Collector 30% 25 7.5 0.8 Local Safety Factors 75% 35 26.3 7.9 crashes confirm local concerns

Daily Usage 4550 25 5.2 0.5 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Local Congestion Relief Factors 100% 25 25.0 2.5 peak period congestion is an issue Taking Care o f the System Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =20% Total Points = | 12.0 | of 20

Roadway or Bridge Conditions Good 20 5.0 1.0 roadway appears to be in good condition

Econom ic C om petitiveness Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 4.5 | of 10 Substandard Roadway or Bridge Feature Yes 20 20.0 4.0 steep grade, bus prohibition

Strategic Regional Economic Corridor Yes 30 30.0 3.0 MO-165 Functional Classification2 Collector 30% 10 3.0 0.6

Support Regional Economic Opportunities No 20 0.0 0.0 Not linked to any planned econ. dev. projects Daily Vehicle Usage 4550 10 2.1 0.4 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Level of Economic Distress 0% 20 0.0 0.0 Local Taking Care of the System Factors 75% 40 30.0 6.0 important local intersection

Poverty (Block Group) 10% 2006-2010 ACS block group data - Comb. 2 block groups

Unemployment (tract) 4% 2006-2010 ACS tract data - 1 tract

Local Economic Competitiveness Factors 50% 30 15.0 1.5 important intersection in the transportation system

Data Check3 OK Data Checkl OK Data Check2 OK
Proj. #: 6-2 Project Name: Fall Creek Rd and Summer Ln r ■n | Efficient Movement o f Freight Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =10% Total Points = | 4.0 | of 10

Project Type: Geometric/Safety Total Score | 53.7 | out of 100 Large Vehicle Friendly Facilities Partial Yes 30 15.0 1.5
k : 1 H
Project Description: Improve intersection alignment and traffic control. Could include Widens Road No
provision of turn lanes as well as realignment of intersection (vertical and horizontal).
Improves Geometry Yes intersection improvements would benefit trucks/trailers
Possible improvement options include re-grading and/or relocating the intersection. A
Improves Load Rating No
flashing beacon could be considered as an interim measure.
Truck Usage 55 30 5.0 0.5 MoDOT formula

Status: Planning Length: NA Local Efficient Movement of Freight Factors 50% 40 20.0 2.0 not a major truck/freight route, but it is a boat hauling route

Project Scale: Medium Roadway or Intersection Intersection
Functional Classification: Local (for the major street) Q uality o f Com m unities Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =10% Total Points = | 6.0 | of 10

Avg. Annual Daily Traffic (AADT): 5300 (estimated, avg. for major street) Local/Regional Land Use Plans Yes 30 30.0 3.0
Daily Truck Traffic: 110 (estimated, avg. for major street) Consistent with Local Plans Yes Fall Creek Rd mentioned in Branson Community Plan 2030
Through Lanes: 2 (through lanes on major street) Consistent with Regional Plans No not mentioned in SMCOG regional plan
Project Discussion: The intersection has stop controls for traffic turning from Summer Connectivity No 30 0.0 0.0
Lane. There is a grade differential between Fall Creek Road and Summer Lane. Posted
Scenic and Visual Yes 20 20.0 2.0 Existing recreational signage can be updated and improved
speed on Fall Creek Road is 35 mph. Two vehicle out-of-control crashes occurred at
this intersection from 2009 to 2011. It does not appear that the intersection meets the Local Quality of Communities Factors 50% 20 10.0 1.0 would improve a recreational access point
peak hour signal warrants. Possible improvement options include re-grading and/or
relocating the intersection.
Environm ental Protection Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 4.5 | of 5

Consistent with Stormwater Goals Yes 30 30.0 1.5 focused project, few stormwater issues expected

Consistent with Environmental Goals Yes 30 30.0 1.5 no substantial mitigation expected

Access to O pportunity Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 0.9 | of 5 Avoids Historical Impacts Yes 20 20.0 1.0 no known historical impacts

Eliminate Bike/Ped Barriers (ADA) 20% 25 5.0 0.3 Local Environmental Protection Factors 50% 20 10.0 0.5 no known unmitigatable issues, floodplain proximity

Project provides bike connections No does not apply

Project provides pedestrian connections No does not apply Safety Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =30% Total Points = | 17.2 | of 30
d
’roject brings existing facilities up to ADA Regulations No use if first two do not apply assumes no sidewalks or bike lanes a PDO 1 Safety Index 0.56 50 21.2 6.3 (Modified MoDOT formula)
oR ) )n
o
Project provides some bike/pedestrian facilities Yes use if first two do not apply assumes widened shoulders and improved grades r oi Injury 1 Crash Rate 35.29 Crash data 2009-2011
oj tc
aM se
Transit No 25 0.0 0.0 No effect on Branson Shuttle or Jefferson Lines r Fatal 0 Accident Index 0.54
s( e t
Local Access to Opportunity Factors 25% 50 12.5 0.6 unlikely to provide significant bike/ped improvements CD _E Years 3 Severity Index 2.25
"wsa o o
r
C Avg AADT 5175 Safety Concern Yes 5 5.0 1.5 Concern raised by local leaders

C ongestion Relief Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =10% Total Points = | 2.9 | of 10 Safety Enhancements Yes 5 5.0 1.5 Will result in intersection improvements and road re-alignment

Level of Service C 25 10.0 1.0 estimated peak hour LOS for Summer Lane lefts out Emergency Response No 5 0.0 0.0 little effect on emergency response

Functional Classificationl Local 20% 25 5.0 0.5 Local Safety Factors 75% 35 26.3 7.9 two veh. out of control crashes

Daily Usage 2650 25 1.8 0.2 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Local Congestion Relief Factors 50% 25 12.5 1.3 congestion is not a major issue Taking Care o f the System Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =20% Total Points = | 12.5 | of 20

Roadway or Bridge Conditions Fair 20 10.0 2.0 road appears to be in fair condition

Econom ic C om petitiveness Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =10% Total Points = | 5.7 | of 10 Substandard Roadway or Bridge Feature Yes 20 20.0 4.0 sharp curve does not meet design standards

Strategic Regional Economic Corridor No 30 0.0 0.0 Functional Classification2 Local 20% 10 2.0 0.4

Support Regional Economic Opportunities Yes 20 20.0 2.0 supports recreational econ dev Daily Vehicle Usage 2650 10 0.7 0.1 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Level of Economic Distress 70% 20 14.0 1.4 Local Taking Care of the System Factors 75% 40 30.0 6.0 roadway is not major, but upgrade is important

Poverty (Block Group) 18% 2006-2010 ACS block group data - Comb. 2 block groups

Unemployment (tract) 4% 2006-2010 ACS tract data - 1 tract

Local Economic Competitiveness Factors 75% 30 22.5 2.3 supports local/regional rec development

Data Check3 OK Data Checkl OK Data Check2 OK
Proj. #: 6-3 Project Name: Safari Rd (Sharp Curve Area to MO-165) E fficient M ovement o f Freight Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 1.8 | of 10

Project Type: Geometric/Safety Total Score| 48.4 ~|~iout of 100 Large Vehicle Friendly Facilities Partial Yes 30 15.0 1.5
Project Description: Improve alignment to eliminate sharp curves (especially the curve Widens Road No
in the middle of the roadway segment). A signal installation at MO-165 was also
Improves Geometry Yes eliminates sharp curves
proposed.
Improves Load Rating No
Truck Usage 25 30 3.4 0.3 MoDOT formula

Status: Planning Length: 0.88 miles Local Efficient Movement of Freight Factors 0% 40 0.0 0.0 not a major truck/freight route

Avg. Annual Daily Traffic (AADT): 2600 (est. 2012, avg. for major street) Local/Regional Land Use Plans No 30 0.0 0.0
Daily Truck Traffic: 50 (est. 2012, avg. for major street) Consistent with Local Plans No not mentioned in Branson Community Plan 2030
Through Lanes: 2 (through lanes on major street) Consistent with Regional Plans No not mentioned in SMCOG regional plan
Project Discussion: Safari Road is a two-lane road with few access points. It is Connectivity Yes 30 30.0 3.0 connects MO-165 in Branson with MO-265 in west
particularly winding where it crosses the valley in the middle of the segment. There are
Scenic and Visual No 20 0.0 0.0 Roadway improvements, no scenic benefits
no posted speed limits, so it was assumed that a 25 mph limit applied. The traffic volume
at the intersection of Safari Road and MO-165 was examined in a very preliminary Local Quality of Communities Factors 75% 20 15.0 1.5 not major community issue, could give residents a new direct rou
manner with respect to traffic signal warrants. Based on the estimated ADTs, it appears
it is near the peak hour warrant threshold. Traffic counts will be required to determine if
Environm ental Protection Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 5% Total Points = | 2.5 | of 5
the intersection fully meets one or more warrants. It may be good to split these two
projects unless the entire eastern portion of the road is to be upgraded. Consistent with Stormwater Goals Yes 30 30.0 1.5 Assume new runoff mitigated (stormwater detention facilities)

Consistent with Environmental Goals No 30 0.0 0.0 Roadway crosses stream/floodplain; small wetlands
Access to O pportunity Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 5% Total Points = | 1.8 | of 5 Avoids Historical Impacts Yes 20 20.0 1.0 No known historical impacts

Eliminate Bike/Ped Barriers (ADA) 40% 25 10.0 0.5 Local Environmental Protection Factors 0% 20 0.0 0.0 Possible impacts due to stream crossing

Project provides bike connections No does not apply

Project provides pedestrian connections No does not apply Safety Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 30% Total Points = | 22.1 | of 30
d
Project brings existing facilities up to ADA Regulations Yes use if first two do not apply signal installation would meet ADA requirements a PDO 10 Safety Index 0.76 50 28.7 8.6 (Modified MoDOT formula)
oR ) )n
o
Project provides some bike/pedestrian facilities Yes use if first two do not apply signal would benefit peds/bikes r oi Injury 1 Crash Rate 449.66 Crash data 2009-2011
o
j tc
a e sr
Transit No 25 0.0 0.0 No effect on Branson Shuttle or Jefferson Lines Fatal 0 Accident Index 2.57
s( te
Local Access to Opportunity Factors 50% 50 25.0 1.3 Assumes no new sidewalks or bike lanes on Safari CD Years 3 Severity Index 1.23
« sa o o
r
C Avg AADT 2539 Safety Concern Yes 5 5.0 1.5 Concern raised by local leaders

Congestion Relief Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 2.8 | of 10 Safety Enhancements Yes 5 5.0 1.5 Will result in signal at MO-165 and roadway re-alignment

Level of Service C 25 10.0 1.0 estimated peak LOS on Safari (likely different at intersection Emergency Response No 5 0.0 0.0

Functional Classification1 Local 20% 25 5.0 0.5 Local Safety Factors 100% 35 35.0 10.5 crashes on Safari were veh. out of control with 3 of 4 in curve

Daily Usage 1300 25 0.4 0.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Local Congestion Relief Factors 50% 25 12.5 1.3 congestion not a major issue, but seasonality could affect it Taking Care o f the System Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =20% Total Points = | 11.4 | of 20

Roadway or Bridge Conditions Good 20 5.0 1.0 road appears to be in good condition in general

Econom ic C om petitiveness Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 1.5 | of 10 Substandard Roadway or Bridge Feature Yes 20 20.0 4.0 sharp curve does not meet design standards

Strategic Regional Economic Corridor No 30 0.0 0.0 Functional Classification2 Local 20% 10 2.0 0.4

Support Regional Economic Opportunities No 20 0.0 0.0 no known regional economic opportunities Daily Vehicle Usage 1300 10 0.2 0.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Level of Economic Distress 0% 20 0.0 0.0 Local Taking Care of the System Factors 75% 40 30.0 6.0 roadway is not major, but upgrade is important

Poverty (Block Group) 10% 2006-2010 ACS block group data - Comb. 2 block groups

Unemployment (tract) 4% 2006-2010 ACS tract data - 1 tract

Local Economic Competitiveness Factors 50% 30 15.0 1.5 benefits local businesses, could be direct route to MO-265

Data Check3 OK Data Checkl OK Data Check2 OK
Proj. #: 6-4 Project Name: Fall Creek Rd (Wildwood Drive to MO-165) E fficient M ovem ent o f Freight Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 5.5 | of 10

Project Type: Geometric/Safety Total Score| 56.8 [o u t of 100 ~ Large Vehicle Friendly Facilities Yes 30 30.0 3.0
Project Description: Widen lanes and shoulders and improve alignment (lower hills). Widens Road Yes widening of shoulders
This could require right-of-way acquisition as well as utility relocation. There are
Improves Geometry Yes improved alignment (lower hills)
potential environmental issues to be addressed as well (streams, etc.).
Improves Load Rating Yes assume roadway would be upgraded if reconstructed
Truck Usage 50 30 4.7 0.5 MoDOT formula
Status: Planning Length: 2.69 miles Local Efficient Movement of Freight Factors 50% 40 20.0 2.0 not a major truck route, but benefits those that do use it

Project Scale: Large Roadway or Intersection Roadway
Functional Classification: Collector Modified from MoDOT (major st) Q uality o f C om m unities Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 7.5 | of 10

Avg. Annual Daily Traffic (AADT): 5200 (est. 2012, avg. for major street) Local/Regional Land Use Plans Yes 30 30.0 3.0
Daily Truck Traffic: 100 (est. 2012, avg. for major street) Consistent with Local Plans Yes Fall Creek Rd mentioned in Branson Community Plan 2030
Through Lanes: 2 (through lanes on major street) Consistent with Regional Plans No not mentioned in SMCOG regional plan
Project Discussion: The road is a two-lane highway with narrow shoulders. It has a Connectivity Yes 30 30.0 3.0 improved roadway could connect southern Branson to US-65
posted speed of 35 mph. One of the main challenges is the vertical alignment in the
Scenic and Visual No 20 0.0 0.0 no scenic benefits
central part of the corridor. Signs are posted that read "Danger Keep Right", due to the
poor sight distance over these vertical crests. There are horizontal alignment issues that Local Quality of Communities Factors 75% 20 15.0 1.5 benefits community, esp residential dev along corridor
could be addressed as well. There are some homes with direct access to the road,
though much of the road does not have direct residential access. This presents a good
Environm ental Protection Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =15% Total Points = | 14.3 | of 15 |
opportunity for maintaining restricted direct access.
Consistent with Stormwater Goals Yes 30 30.0 4.5 Assume new runoff mitigated (new stormwater detention facilities
Consistent with Environmental Goals Yes 30 30.0 4.5 Proximity to stream, floodplain and small wetlands

Access to O pportunity Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 2.1 | of 5 Avoids Historical Impacts Yes 20 20.0 3.0 No known historical impacts

Eliminate Bike/Ped Barriers (ADA) 20% 25 5.0 0.3 Local Environmental Protection Factors 75% 20 15.0 2.3 Large project; potential for impacts; mitigation likely

Project provides bike connections No consider adding bike lane or multi-use facility

Project provides pedestrian connections No consider multi-use facility (near residential communities) Safety Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =20% Total Points = | 12.5 | of 20
d
*roject brings existing facilities up to ADA Regulations No use if first two do not apply a PDO 15 Safety Index 0.47 50 17.7 3.5 (Modified MoDOT formula)
o
oR ))n
Project provides some bike/pedestrian facilities Yes use if first two do not apply assumes widened shoulders available for bikes/peds r oi Injury 8 Crash Rate 153.79 Crash data 2009-2011
oj tc
a e
Transit No 25 0.0 0.0 No effect on Branson Shuttle or Jefferson Lines (M e
sr Fatal 0 Accident Index 0.88
s( e t
Local Access to Opportunity Factors 75% 50 37.5 1.9 Widened shoulders benefit bike/peds <D _E Years 3 Severity Index 1.87
sa o
r
C Avg AADT 5077 Safety Concern Yes 5 5.0 1.0 Concern raised by local leaders

C ongestion Relief Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =15% Total Points = | 5.4 | of 15 Safety Enhancements Yes 5 5.0 1.0 Will result in widened shoulders and vertical re-alignment

Level of Service D 25 15.0 2.3 est. peak hour LOS based on percent time spent following Emergency Response No 5 0.0 0.0 no major effect on response times expected

Functional Classification1 Collector 30% 25 7.5 1.1 Consider upgrading to at least collector status Local Safety Factors 100% 35 35.0 7.0 Crashes confirm local concerns, also possible bus activity on roa

Daily Usage 2600 25 1.2 0.2 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Local Congestion Relief Factors 50% 25 12.5 1.9 congestion is limited issue, but there are no passing options Taking Care o f the System Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 5% Total Points = | 3.7 | of 5

Roadway or Bridge Conditions Fair 20 10.0 0.5 Fair based on field observations

Econom ic C om petitiveness Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =20% Total Points = | 5.8 | of 20 Substandard Roadway or Bridge Feature Yes 20 20.0 1.0 Vertical and horizontal alignment

Strategic Regional Economic Corridor No 20 0.0 0.0 Functional Classification2 Collector 30% 10 3.0 0.2

Support Regional Economic Opportunities No 30 0.0 0.0 Not linked to any planned econ. dev. projects Daily Vehicle Usage 2600 10 0.5 0.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Level of Economic Distress 70% 20 14.0 2.8 Local Taking Care of the System Factors 100% 40 40.0 2.0 Important local roadway

Poverty (Block Group) 18% 2006-2010 ACS block group data - Comb. 2 block groups

Unemployment (tract) 4% 2006-2010 ACS tract data - 1 tract

Local Economic Competitiveness Factors 50% 30 15.0 3.0 not a known major economic development area

Data Check3 OK Data Check1 OK Data Check2 OK
Proj. #: 6-5 Project Name: MO-165 and Pointe Royale Dr Intersection E fficient M ovem ent o f Freight Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 3.5 | of 10

CO
c>
m
Project Type: Operations Total Score Large Vehicle Friendly Facilities Partial Yes 30 15.0 1.5

o
f
0
0
t
u
Project Description: Improve intersection traffic control and/or geometric design. Widens Road No
Consider traffic signal and/or a roundabout.
Improves Geometry Yes signal/roundabout could better facilitate truck movements

Improves Load Rating No
Truck Usage 10.2 1.0 MoDOT formula

2
3
0

3
0
Status: Planning Length: NA Local Efficient Movement of Freight Factors 25% 40 10.0 1.0 New traffic signal could benefit truck access/egress

Avg. Annual Daily Traffic (AADT): 9100 (estimated, avg. for major street) Local/Regional Land Use Plans Yes 30 30.0 3.0
Daily Truck Traffic: 460 (estimated, avg. for major street) Consistent with Local Plans Yes 165 mentioned in Branson Community Plan 2030
Through Lanes: 2 (through lanes on major street) Consistent with Regional Plans Yes 165 (from 76 to 265) mentioned in SMCOG regional plan
Project Discussion: The intersection is stop controlled on the side-streets. The posted Connectivity No 30 0.0 0.0 not a major connectivity project
speed limit is 40 mph. There are left-turn lanes in both directions on MO-165. There are
Scenic and Visual Yes 20 20.0 2.0 Roundabout could enhance aesthetics
also turn lanes for the north-south direction. The intersection appears to function
acceptably during most hours of the day; however during peak periods some side-street Local Quality of Communities Factors 75% 20 15.0 1.5 benefits to residential dev. to south and businesses to north
drivers have to wait longer than desired. A sample count indicated that the location may
be close to meeting signal warrants. This is especially true if the high-speed (> 40 mph)
Environm ental Protection Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 4.5 | of 5
thresholds are employed. A speed study and traffic counts could be conducted to
determine if the warrants are met. A roundabout could also be considered. Consistent with Stormwater Goals Yes 30 30.0 1.5 Small project, few stormwater issues expected

Consistent with Environmental Goals Yes 30 30.0 1.5 Small project, no mitigation expected
Access to O pportunity Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 5% Total Points = | 1.8 | of 5 Avoids Historical Impacts Yes 20 20.0 1.0 No known historical impacts

Eliminate Bike/Ped Barriers (ADA) 40% 25 10.0 0.5 Local Environmental Protection Factors 50% 20 10.0 0.5 Small project, few issues expected

Project provides bike connections No does not apply

Project provides pedestrian connections No does not apply Safety Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =30% Total Points = | 13.6 | of 30
d
’roject brings existing facilities up to ADA Regulations Yes use if first two do not apply if signal is installed, ADA pedestrian provisions assumed a PDO 1 Safety Index 0.47 50 17.8 5.3 (Modified MoDOT formula)
oR ) )n
o
Project provides some bike/pedestrian facilities Yes use if first two do not apply if signal is installed, pedestrians have safe crossing option r oi Injury 1 Crash Rate 20.56 Crash data 2009-2011
oj ct
a e
Transit No 25 0.0 0.0 No effect on Branson Shuttle or Jefferson Lines (M sr Fatal 0 Accident Index 0.31
s( e t
Local Access to Opportunity Factors 50% 50 25.0 1.3 Signalization/roundabout would benefit bikes/peds as well <D _E Years 3 Severity Index 2.25
sa o
r Safety Concern Yes
C Avg AADT 8885 5 5.0 1.5 Concern raised by local leaders

Congestion Relief Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =10% Total Points = | 7.0 | of 10 Safety Enhancements Yes 5 5.0 1.5 Will result in intersection improvements (i.e. signal)

Level of Service E 25 20.0 2.0 estimated peak hour LOS (southbound throughs and lefts) Emergency Response No 5 0.0 0.0 no major change to emergency response times

Functional Classificationl Collector 30% 25 7.5 0.8 Local Safety Factors 50% 35 17.5 5.3 number of crashes not large relative to other projects

Daily Usage 4550 25 17.1 1.7 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Local Congestion Relief Factors 100% 25 25.0 2.5 peak period congestion is an issue Taking Care o f the System Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 20% Total Points = | 11.0 | of 20

Roadway or Bridge Conditions Good 20 5.0 1.0 intersection conditions appear good

Econom ic Com petitiveness Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 5.3 | of 10 Substandard Roadway or Bridge Feature No 20 0.0 0.0

Strategic Regional Economic Corridor Yes 30 30.0 3.0 MO-165 is an important arterial and economic link Functional Classification2 Collector 30% 10 3.0 0.6

Support Regional Economic Opportunities No 20 0.0 0.0 not a regional economic dev. Project Daily Vehicle Usage 4550 10 6.8 1.4 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Level of Economic Distress 0% 20 0.0 0.0 Local Taking Care of the System Factors 100% 40 40.0 8.0 important local intersection

Poverty (Block Group) 4% 2006-2010 ACS block group data - Comb. 2 block groups

Unemployment (tract) 4% 2006-2010 ACS tract data - 1 tract

Local Economic Competitiveness Factors 75% 30 22.5 2.3 could promote additional dev. north of intersection

Data Check3 OK Data Checkl OK Data Check2 OK
Proj. #: 6-6 Project Name: MO-165 (MO-76 to MO-265) E fficient M ovem ent o f Freight Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 7.0 | of 10

Project Type: Capacity Total S c o r^ 74.0 | out of 100 Large Vehicle Friendly Facilities Yes 30 30.0 3.0
Project Description: Widen road. Add turn lanes and widen shoulders. This could Widens Road Yes widen shoulders
require additional right-of-way as well as utility relocation work. Stormwater issues will
Improves Geometry Yes turn lanes to be added
also have to be addressed. Also, different portion of the roadway would require different
Improves Load Rating No
treatments.
Truck Usage 230 30 10.2 1.0 MoDOT formula
Status: Planning Length: 4.36 miles Local Efficient Movement of Freight Factors 75% 40 30.0 3.0 important corridor for commerce and trucks in this area

Project Scale: Large Roadway or Intersection Roadway
Functional Classification: Minor Arterial Modified from MoDOT (major st) Q uality o f C om m unities Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 7.5 | of 10

Avg. Annual Daily Traffic (AADT): 9100 (est. 2012, avg. for major street) Local/Regional Land Use Plans Yes 30 30.0 3.0
Daily Truck Traffic: 460 (est. 2012, avg. for major street) Consistent with Local Plans Yes 165 mentioned in Branson Community Plan 2030
Through Lanes: 2 (through lanes on major street) Consistent with Regional Plans Yes 165 (from 76 to 265) mentioned in SMCOG regional plan
Project Discussion: MO-165 has varying typical sections and posted speeds. 1) MO- Connectivity Yes 30 30.0 3.0 165 connects south Branson to north Branson
76 south to Van Buren Road: 2-lanes with left turn lanes at some locations (inc. several
Scenic and Visual No 20 0.0 0.0 no scenic benefits
major intersections); 2) Van Buren Road to Pointe Royale Drive: 3-lanes (center left-turn
lane); 3) Pointe Royale Dr. to Auston Ave: 2-lanes without turn lanes; 4) Auston Ave to Local Quality of Communities Factors 75% 20 15.0 1.5 benefits residents and business community
MO-265 4-lane undivided. The posted speed ranges from 35 mph near MO-76 (in
Branson) to 45 in the southwest. MoDOT ADTs range from 11,000 near MO-76 to 7000
Environm ental Protection Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =15% Total Points = | 12.8 | of 15 |
near MO-265 in the southwest (an avg. value was used in the analysis). However,
Google ADTs are as high as approx. 13,000 and sample counts showed over 15,000. Consistent with Stormwater Goals Yes 30 30.0 4.5 Assume new runoff mitigated (new stormwater detention facilities
Consistent with Environmental Goals Yes 30 30.0 4.5 Impacts likely can be mitigated, potential floodplain issues

Access to O pportunity Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 1.5 | of 5 Avoids Historical Impacts Yes 20 20.0 3.0 No known historical impacts

Eliminate Bike/Ped Barriers (ADA) 20% 25 5.0 0.3 Local Environmental Protection Factors 25% 20 5.0 0.8 Large project; possible impacts

Project provides bike connections No consider adding bike lane or multi-use facility

Project provides pedestrian connections No consider multi-use facility Safety Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =20% Total Points = | 18.8 | of 20

Crashes (Major Road
’roject brings existing facilities up to ADA Regulations No use if first two do not apply PDO 136 Safety Index 1.17 50 44.0 8.8 (Modified MoDOT formula)

or Intersection)
Project provides some bike/pedestrian facilities Yes use if first two do not apply assumes widened shoulders available for bikes/peds Injury 63 Crash Rate 471.46 Crash data 2009-2011

Transit No 25 0.0 0.0 No effect on Branson Shuttle or Jefferson Lines Fatal 1 Accident Index 2.69

Local Access to Opportunity Factors 50% 50 25.0 1.3 Widened shoulders benefit businesses & residents bikes/pe Years 3 Severity Index 1.83

Avg AADT 8885 Safety Concern Yes 5 5.0 1.0 Concern raised by local leaders

C ongestion Relief Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =15% Total Points = | 7.3 | of 15 Safety Enhancements Yes 5 5.0 1.0 Will result in widened road (shoulders and turn lanes)

Level of Service C 25 10.0 1.5 est. 2-lane LOS s/o of Fall Creek Rd, more analysis needec Emergency Response Yes 5 5.0 1.0 Additional turn lanes and widening could improve response times

Functional Classification1 Minor Arterial 40% 25 10.0 1.5 consider request to upgrade roadway classification Local Safety Factors 100% 35 35.0 7.0 High number of crashes

Daily Usage 4550 25 3.6 0.5 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Local Congestion Relief Factors 100% 25 25.0 3.8 capacity and turn lane issues likely, more doc needed Taking Care o f the System Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 5% Total Points = | 2.5 | of 5

Roadway or Bridge Conditions Good 20 5.0 0.3 bridge and roadway appear to be in good condition

Econom ic C om petitiveness Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 20% Total Points = | 16.6 | of 20 Substandard Roadway or Bridge Feature No 20 0.0 0.0 none known

Strategic Regional Economic Corridor Yes 20 20.0 4.0 MO-165 Functional Classification2 Minor Arterial 40% 10 4.0 0.2

Support Regional Economic Opportunities Yes 30 30.0 6.0 important business and access / travel corridor Daily Vehicle Usage 4550 10 1.4 0.1 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Level of Economic Distress 15% 20 3.0 0.6 Local Taking Care of the System Factors 100% 40 40.0 2.0 important to maintain functionality of corridor

Poverty (Block Group) 10% 2006-2010 ACS block group data - Comb. 5 block groups

Unemployment (tract) 5% 2006-2010 ACS tract data - Combining 2 tracts

Local Economic Competitiveness Factors 100% 30 30.0 6.0 Important arterial and economic link

Data Check3 OK Data Check1 OK Data Check2 OK
Proj. #: 6-7 Project Name: Spring Creek Road at Branson City Limits E fficient M ovem ent o f Freight Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 1.2 | of 10

Project Type: Geometric/Safety Total Score | 27.6 [o u t of 100 ~ Large Vehicle Friendly Facilities No 30 0.0 0.0
Project Description: Improve vertical alignment, lower hill to improve sight distance and Widens Road No
decrease steep grade.
Improves Geometry No not a freight oriented improvement

Improves Load Rating No
Truck Usage 10 30 2.1 0.2 MoDOT formula

Status: Planning Length: 0.1 miles Local Efficient Movement of Freight Factors 25% 40 10.0 1.0 Not freight-oriented, but would have marginal benefits

Avg. Annual Daily Traffic (AADT): 1200 (est. 2012, avg. for major street) Local/Regional Land Use Plans No 30 0.0 0.0
Daily Truck Traffic: 20 (est. 2012, avg. for major street) Consistent with Local Plans No not mentioned in Branson Community Plan 2030
Through Lanes: 2 (through lanes on major street) Consistent with Regional Plans No not mentioned in SMCOG regional plan
Project Discussion: The alignment issue occurs at the transition from the Branson city Connectivity No 30 0.0 0.0
street to the county roadway. The cross section decreases from 3 lanes to 2 lanes.
Scenic and Visual No 20 0.0 0.0 Roadway improvements, no scenic benefits
There are driveways in the vicinity. Sight distances are limited due to the vertical
alignment (i.e. drivers cannot see over the crest of the hill until they are very close to the Local Quality of Communities Factors 50% 20 10.0 1.0 benefits local residents, including bike/ped
crest). Lowering the hill would likely require additional right-of-way as well as utility
relocation.
Environm ental Protection Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 4.5 | of 5

Consistent with Stormwater Goals Yes 30 30.0 1.5 few stormwater issues expected

Consistent with Environmental Goals Yes 30 30.0 1.5 no mitigation expected
Access to O pportunity Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 5% Total Points = | 0.6 | of 5 Avoids Historical Impacts Yes 20 20.0 1.0 no known historical impacts

Eliminate Bike/Ped Barriers (ADA) 0% 25 0.0 0.0 Local Environmental Protection Factors 50% 20 10.0 0.5 few issues expected

Project provides bike connections No does not apply

Project provides pedestrian connections No does not apply Safety Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =30% Total Points = | 8.3 | of 30
d
’roject brings existing facilities up to ADA Regulations No use if first two do not apply assumes no sidewalks or bike lanes a PDO 0 Safety Index -1.00 50 0.0 0.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)
o
oR ) )n
Project provides some bike/pedestrian facilities No use if first two do not apply assumes no sidewalks, bike lanes, or widened shoulders r oi Injury 0 Crash Rate 0.00 Crash data 2009-2011
oj ct
a e
Transit No 25 0.0 0.0 No effect on Branson Shuttle or Jefferson Lines (M sr Fatal 0 Accident Index 0.00
s( e t
Local Access to Opportunity Factors 25% 50 12.5 0.6 Lowering the hill would likely benefit bikes/peds as well <D _E Years 3 Severity Index 0.00
sa o
r Safety Concern Yes
C Avg AADT 1172 5 5.0 1.5 Concern raised by local leaders

Congestion Relief Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =10% Total Points = | 1.6 | of 10 Safety Enhancements Yes 5 5.0 1.5 would result in improved sight distances

Level of Service B 25 5.0 0.5 congestion is not a main issue Emergency Response No 5 0.0 0.0 marginal response-time improvements

Functional Classification1 Local 20% 25 5.0 0.5 Local Safety Factors 50% 35 17.5 5.3 no recorded crashes from 2007 to 2011

Daily Usage 600 25 0.1 0.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Local Congestion Relief Factors 25% 25 6.3 0.6 congestion is not a main issue Taking Care o f the System Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 20% Total Points = | 10.4 | of 20

Roadway or Bridge Conditions Fair 20 10.0 2.0 Fair based on observations of the county roadway section

Econom ic Com petitiveness Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 0.0 | of 10 Substandard Roadway or Bridge Feature Yes 20 20.0 4.0 limited sight distance

Strategic Regional Economic Corridor No 30 0.0 0.0 Functional Classification2 Local 20% 10 2.0 0.4

Support Regional Economic Opportunities No 20 0.0 0.0 Not linked to any known planned econ. dev. projects Daily Vehicle Usage 600 10 0.0 0.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Level of Economic Distress 0% 20 0.0 0.0 Local Taking Care of the System Factors 50% 40 20.0 4.0 sight distance issue, but no recorded crashes in 5 years

Poverty (Block Group) 0% 2006-2010 ACS block group data - 1 block group

Unemployment (tract) 4% 2006-2010 ACS tract data - 1 tract

Local Economic Competitiveness Factors 0% 30 0.0 0.0 not an economic development related project

Data Check3 OK Data Check1 OK Data Check2 OK
Proj. #: 6-8 Project Name: Tablerock Acres Subdivision E fficient M ovement o f Freight Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =10% Total Points = | 0.3 | of 10

Project Type: Facility Upgrade Total Score 52.6 out of 100 | Large Vehicle Friendly Facilities No 30 0.0 0.0
Project Description: Install curbs, gutters, and sidewalks throughout the neighborhood. 1 Widens Road No
This could require utility relocation work and possibly new right-of-way. 1
Improves Geometry No
Improves Load Rating No
Truck Usage 15 30 2.6 0.3 MoDOT formula
Status: Planning Length: 4 miles Local Efficient Movement of Freight Factors 0% 40 0.0 0.0 Not a truck travel related project; residential roads

Project Scale: Medium Roadway or Intersection Roadway

Functional Classification: Local (for the major street) Q uality of C om m unities Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =10% Total Points = | 4.0 | of 10

Avg. Annual Daily Traffic (AADT): 3000 (estimated, avg. for major street) Local/Regional Land Use Plans No 30 0.0 0.0
Daily Truck Traffic: 30 (estimated, avg. for major street) Consistent with Local Plans No not mentioned in Branson Community Plan 2030
Through Lanes: 2 (through fanes on major street) \ Consistent with Regional Plans No not mentioned in SMCOG regional plan
Project Discussion: This neighborhood has stormwater issues. Stormwater is handled Connectivity No 30 0.0 0.0
in roadside swales. It does not have sidewalks.
Scenic and Visual Yes 20 20.0 2.0 will improve the aesthetics of the neighborhood

Local Quality of Communities Factors 100% 20 20.0 2.0 will benefit residents’ quality of life, address stormwater & ped/bik

Environm ental Protection Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 5.0 | of 5

Consistent with Stormwater Goals Yes 30 30.0 1.5 directly addresses stormwater issues
Consistent with Environmental Goals Yes 30 30.0 1.5 no mitigation expected

Access to O pportunity Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 5% Total Points = | 3.8 | of 5 Avoids Historical Impacts Yes 20 20.0 1.0 no known historical impacts

Eliminate Bike/Ped Barriers (ADA) 100% 25 25.0 1.3 Local Environmental Protection Factors 100% 20 20.0 1.0 few issues expected; addresses stormwater

Project provides bike connections Yes curb improvements

Project provides pedestrian connections Yes sidewalks to be installed Safety Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =30% Total Points = | 23.3 | of 30
d
to
Co
to

Project brings existing facilities up to ADA Regulations No does not apply a PDO 1 Safety Index 1.75 50 50.0 15.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)
u

o
d
0

a
1

o
■£

Project provides some bike/pedestrian facilities No does not apply £ o' Injury 1 Crash Rate 23.38 Crash data 2009-2011
3
C
to

1
0
c
t
&o
•cs
O

joa tce
Transit No No effect on Branson Shuttle or Jefferson Lines M sr Fatal 1 Accident Index 0.13
2
5

0.0

0
.0
.

s t
Local Access to Opportunity Factors 100% 50 50.0 2.5 New sidewalks and curb improvements benefit bikes/peds CD .E 3 Severity Index 4.50
.c s . r Years
ra
s o
C
r Avg AADT 2929 Safety Concern Yes 5 5.0 1.5 Concern raised by local leaders

Congestion Relief Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =10% Total Points = | 2.2 | of 10 Safety Enhancements Yes 5 5.0 1.5 Will result in sidewalks, curbs, and gutters

Level of Service C 25 10.0 1.0 estimated peak hour LOS Emergency Response No 5 0.0 0.0

Functional Classificatio n Local 20% 25 5.0 0.5 Local Safety Factors 50% 35 17.5 5.3 project will not likely address observed vehicle crashes

Daily Usage 1500 25 0.6 0.1 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Local Congestion Relief Factors 25% 25 6.3 0.6 Project will not significantly benefit congestion Taking Care o f the System Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =20% Total Points = | 13.4 | of 20

Roadway or Bridge Conditions Poor 20 15.0 3.0 stormwater issues

Econom ic Com petitiveness Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =10% Total Points = | 0.8 | of 10 Substandard Roadway or Bridge Feature Yes 20 20.0 4.0 lacks appropriate stormwater control

Strategic Regional Economic Corridor No 30 0.0 0.0 Functional Classification2 Local 20% 10 2.0 0.4

Support Regional Economic Opportunities No 20 0.0 0.0 Daily Vehicle Usage 1500 10 0.2 0.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Level of Economic Distress 0% 20 0.0 0.0 Local Taking Care of the System Factors 75% 40 30.0 6.0 residential streets

Poverty (Block Group) 11% 2006-2010 ACS block group data - 1 block group

Unemployment (tract) 4% 2006-2010 ACS tract data - 1 tract

Local Economic Competitiveness Factors 25% 30 7.5 0.8 not an economic dev. project, benefits existing dev.

Data Check3 OK Data Checkl OK Data Check2 OK
Proj. #: 6-9 Project Name: Improve Skyview Drive (MO-265 to Luster Dr) E fficient M ovement o f Freight Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 1.0 | of 10

Project Type: Traffic Safety Total Score| 4 8.4 |~iout of 100 Large Vehicle Friendly Facilities No 30 0.0 0.0
Project Description: Widen lanes and shoulders and improve alignment. This could Widens Road No widen lanes and shoulders
include the need for more right-of-way. Trees, landscaping, utilities, and drainage could
Improves Geometry No improve alignment
all be affected.
Improves Load Rating No
Truck Usage 0 30 0.0 0.0 MoDOT formula

Status: Planning Length: 1.49 miles Local Efficient Movement of Freight Factors 25% 40 10.0 1.0 not a major truck route, but does provide for deliveries

Avg. Annual Daily Traffic (AADT): 1500 (estimated, avg. for major street) Local/Regional Land Use Plans No 30 0.0 0.0
Daily Truck Traffic: 0 (estimated, avg. for major street) Consistent with Local Plans No not mentioned in Branson Community Plan 2030
Through Lanes: 2 (through lanes on major street) Consistent with Regional Plans No not mentioned in SMCOG regional plan
Project Discussion: The travelway on Skyview Drive appears to be less than 18 feet in Connectivity No 30 0.0 0.0
many places. The posted speed limit is 25mph and there are all-way stops located on
Scenic and Visual No 20 0.0 0.0 no scenic benefits, could impact scenery
Skyview Drive. It is a residential street with many driveways accessing the street. The
daily traffic volume was estimated based on a sample count and an estimate of dwelling Local Quality of Communities Factors 25% 20 5.0 0.5 could benefit local residents and could benefit peds/bikes
units in the corridor.

Environm ental Protection Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 5% Total Points = | 4.8 | of 5

Consistent with Stormwater Goals Yes 30 30.0 1.5 Modest project, few stormwater issues expected
Consistent with Environmental Goals Yes 30 30.0 1.5 Modest project, no mitigation expected

Access to O pportunity Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 2.1 | of 5 Avoids Historical Impacts Yes 20 20.0 1.0 No known historical impacts

Eliminate Bike/Ped Barriers (ADA) 20% 25 5.0 0.3 Local Environmental Protection Factors 75% 20 15.0 0.8 Modest project, few issues expected, some are possible though

Project provides bike connections No no bike facilities assumed to be included

Project provides pedestrian connections No no pedestrian facilities assumed to be included Safety Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 30% Total Points = | 23.3 | of 30
d
'reject brings existing facilities up to ADA Regulations No use if first two do not apply does not apply a PDO 2 Safety Index 1.56 50 50.0 15.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)
oR ) )n
o
Project provides some bike/pedestrian facilities Yes use if first two do not apply assumes widened shoulders available to bike/peds r oi Injury 1 Crash Rate 167.39 Crash data 2009-2011
oj tc
aM es
Transit No 25 0.0 0.0 No effect on Branson Shuttle or Jefferson Lines r Fatal 1 Accident Index 0.96
s( te
Local Access to Opportunity Factors 75% 50 37.5 1.9 Widened shoulders benefit bikes/peds CD _E Years 3 Severity Index 3.63
«asr o o
C Avg AADT 1465 Safety Concern Yes 5 5.0 1.5 Concern raised by local leaders

C ongestion Relief Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =10% Total Points = | 1.6 | of 10 Safety Enhancements Yes 5 5.0 1.5 would result in widened lanes, shoulders; re-alignment

Level of Service B 25 5.0 0.5 Emergency Response No 5 0.0 0.0

Functional Classificationl Local 20% 25 5.0 0.5 Local Safety Factors 50% 35 17.5 5.3 roadway width is very narrow, but width could increase speeds

Daily Usage 750 25 0.1 0.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Local Congestion Relief Factors 25% 25 6.3 0.6 capacity is not a major issue Taking Care o f the System Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 20% Total Points = | 14.4 | of 20

Roadway or Bridge Conditions Fair 20 10.0 2.0 roadway appears to be in fair condition, little roadway cracking

Econom ic C om petitiveness Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =10% Total Points = | 0.8 | of 10 Substandard Roadway or Bridge Feature Yes 20 20.0 4.0 Lane widths do not meet design standards.

Strategic Regional Economic Corridor No 30 0.0 0.0 Functional Classification2 Local 20% 10 2.0 0.4

Support Regional Economic Opportunities No 20 0.0 0.0 not linked to any known planned econ. dev. projects Daily Vehicle Usage 750 10 0.1 0.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Level of Economic Distress 0% 20 0.0 0.0 Local Taking Care of the System Factors 100% 40 40.0 8.0 roadway width is very narrow

Poverty (Block Group) 9% 2006-2010 ACS block group data - Comb. 2 block groups

Unemployment (tract) 4% 2006-2010 ACS tract data - 1 tract

Local Economic Competitiveness Factors 25% 30 7.5 0.8 not a major economic development corridor

Data Check3 OK Data Checkl OK Data Check2 OK
Proj. #: 6-10 Project Name: 76 Country Boulevard Complete Street E fficient M ovem ent o f Freight Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 2.3 | of 10

Project Type: Facility Upgrade Total Score| 74.4 [o u t of 100 Large Vehicle Friendly Facilities No 30 0.0 0.0
Project Description: Street improvement project to improve pedestrian safety and Widens Road No no change
tourist attraction to the 76 Strip. Project is in the planning and preliminary design phase.
Improves Geometry No no change
Improves Load Rating No no change
Truck Usage 355 30 12.6 1.3 MoDOT formula
Status: Planning and Design Length: 3.9 miles Local Efficient Movement of Freight Factors 25% 40 10.0 1.0 not a major truck route, but does provide for deliveries

Avg. Annual Daily Traffic (AADT): 23700 (est. 2012, avg. for major street) Local/Regional Land Use Plans Yes 30 30.0 3.0
Daily Truck Traffic: 710 (est. 2012, avg. for major street) Consistent with Local Plans Yes part of Branson's Comprehensive and Strategic plan
Through Lanes: 2 (through lanes on major street) Consistent with Regional Plans No not mentioned in SMCOG regional plan
Project Discussion: This project has been a priority for the City of Branson. The City Connectivity No 30 0.0 0.0
has committed $18 million to the project. Project will include relocation (likely
Scenic and Visual Yes 20 20.0 2.0 plan would enhance landscaping, aesthetics, and views
underground) of existing electric utilities. The goals of the project include increasing
visitor trips, managing traffic congestion, increasing safety, improving access and Local Quality of Communities Factors 75% 20 15.0 1.5 project will revive strip and increase tax revenues
mobility, improving visual appearance, preserving and celebrating heritage, encouraging
investment and development, and strengthening existing destinations and businesses.
Environm ental Protection Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 15% Total Points = | 14.3 | of 15
Consistent with Stormwater Goals Yes 30 30.0 4.5 Branson MS4 requirements will be followed
Consistent with Environmental Goals Yes 30 30.0 4.5 Rain gardens are planned

Access to O pportunity Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 5.0 | of 5 Avoids Historical Impacts Yes 20 20.0 3.0 No known historical impacts

Eliminate Bike/Ped Barriers (ADA) 100% 25 25.0 1.3 Local Environmental Protection Factors 75% 20 15.0 2.3 Environment to be showcased where possible

Project provides bike connections Yes bike/pedestrian barriers will be eliminated

Project provides pedestrian connections Yes pedestrian access is key part of project Safety Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =20% Total Points = | 16.2 | of 20

Crashes (Major Road
’roject brings existing facilities up to ADA Regulations No use if first two do not apply PDO 388 Safety Index 1.19 50 44.5 8.9 (Modified MoDOT formula)

or Intersection)
Project provides some bike/pedestrian facilities No use if first two do not apply Injury Crash Rate 527.20 Crash data 2009-2011

3 0
3
Transit Yes 25 25.0 1.3 Transit stops are to be constructed Fatal Accident Index 3.01

Local Access to Opportunity Factors 100% 50 50.0 2.5 Pedestrian/Bike/Transit considerations very prominent Years 3 Severity Index 1.64

Avg AADT 23141 Safety Concern Yes 5 5.0 1.0 Concern raised by local leaders

C ongestion Relief Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 15% Total Points = | 11.7 | of 15 Safety Enhancements Yes 5 5.0 1.0 pedestrian safety will be greatly enhanced

Level of Service F 25 25.0 3.8 extended delays and long queues common Emergency Response No 5 0.0 0.0

Functional Classification1 Major Arterial 50% 25 12.5 1.9 Local Safety Factors 75% 35 26.3 5.3 will address pedestrian safety which is a major concern

Daily Usage 11850 25 15.6 2.3 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Local Congestion Relief Factors 100% 25 25.0 3.8 project increases capacity - a major issue, worst in County Taking Care o f the System Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 5% Total Points = | 2.8 | of 5

Roadway or Bridge Conditions Good 20 5.0 0.3 roadway appears to be in good condition, little roadway cracking

Econom ic C om petitiveness Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 20% Total Points = | 15.7 | of 20 Substandard Roadway or Bridge Feature No 20 0.0 0.0

Strategic Regional Economic Corridor Yes 20 20.0 4.0 project is center of highest economic area Functional Classification2 Major Arterial 50% 10 5.0 0.3

Support Regional Economic Opportunities Yes 30 30.0 6.0 project is center of highest economic area Daily Vehicle Usage 11850 10 6.2 0.3 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Level of Economic Distress 30% 20 6.0 1.2 Local Taking Care of the System Factors 100% 40 40.0 2.0 improvements are needed for capacity

Poverty (Block Group) 12% 2006-2010 ACS block group data - Comb. 2 block groups

Unemployment (tract) 4.0% 2006-2010 ACS tract data - Combining 2 tracts

Local Economic Competitiveness Factors 75% 30 22.5 4.5 needed to keep Branson economically competitive

Data Check3 OK Data Checkl OK Data Check2 OK
Proj. #: 6-11 Project Name: New Interchange at MO-76 & MO-376 E fficient M ovem ent o f Freight Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 5 .8 | of 10
Project Type: Capacity Total Score| 49.5 | out of 100 ' Large Vehicle Friendly Facilities Yes 30 30.0 3.0
Project Description: Construct new interchange to replace existing at-grade Widens Road Yes
intersection.
Improves Geometry Yes
Improves Load Rating Yes
Truck Usage 125 30 7.5 0.8 MoDOT formula

Status: Planning Length: NA Local Efficient Movement of Freight Factors 50% 40 20.0 2.0 Interchange to meet criteria for freight

Project Scale: Regional Roadway or Intersection Intersection
Functional Classification: MajorArterial (for the major street) Q uality o f C om m unities Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 4.0 | of 10

Avg. Annual Daily Traffic (AADT): 12,800 (est. 2012, avg. for major street) Local/Regional Land Use Plans No 30 0.0 0.0
Daily Truck Traffic: 250 (est. 2012, avg. for major street) Consistent with Local Plans No not found in Branson plan
Through Lanes: 2 (through lanes on major street) Consistent with Regional Plans No not mentioned in regional plan
Project Discussion: Project would be designed to increase roadway capacity, facilitate Connectivity Yes 30 30.0 3.0 76 and 376 connect to points beyond
local circulation, and promote development in the project vicinity. Due to the
Scenic and Visual No 20 0.0 0.0 no scenic benefits
downgrades on Route 376 on both sides of Route 76, it is expected that Route 76 could
be constructed as a bridge over Route 376. There are a number of options for handling Local Quality of Communities Factors 50% 20 10.0 1.0 interchange would benefit traffic flow, but may impact ROW
the turning movements and the through movements on Route 376. Some concepts that
could be considered include: tight diamond with signals, single-point type design, ramps
Environm ental Protection Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =15% Total Points = | 7.5 | of 15 |
with roundabouts, or two-lane roundabout under Route 76. Access to nearby properties
asjA/elkjsjight^o^wa^jjrejmjDortantjss^ Consistent with Stormwater Goals Yes 30 30.0 4.5 Assume new runoff mitigated (new stormwater detention facilities

Consistent with Environmental Goals No 30 0.0 0.0 large project; environmental mitigation possible
Access to O pportunity Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 5% Total Points = | 1.9 | of 5 Avoids Historical Impacts Yes 20 20.0 3.0 no known historical impacts

Eliminate Bike/Ped Barriers (ADA) 100% 25 25.0 1.3 Local Environmental Protection Factors 0% 20 0.0 0.0 due to size of project, mitigation likely

Project provides bike connections Yes assumes bike facilities will be part of project

Project provides pedestrian connections Yes assumes sidewalks will be part of project Safety Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =20% Total Points = | 6.7 | of 20

Crashes (Major Road
’reject brings existing facilities up to ADA Regulations No use if first two do not apply PDO 15 Safety Index 0.53 50 19.9 4.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)

or Intersection)
Project provides some bike/pedestrian facilities No use if first two do not apply Injury 2 Crash Rate 124.22 Crash data 2009-2011

Transit No 25 0.0 0.0 No effect on Branson Shuttle or Jefferson Lines Fatal 0 Accident Index 1.88

Local Access to Opportunity Factors 25% 50 12.5 0.6 could increase speeds; project not pedestrian/bike scale Years 3 Severity Index 1.29

Avg AADT 12498 Safety Concern No 5 0.0 0.0

Congestion Relief Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =15% Total Points = | 8.4 | of 15 Safety Enhancements Yes 5 5.0 1.0 Interchange could improve safety over the at-grade intersection

Level of Service E 25 20.0 3.0 congestion is an issue at this location Emergency Response No 5 0.0 0.0

Functional Classificationl Major Arterial 50% 25 12.5 1.9 Local Safety Factors 25% 35 8.8 1.8 crash rate not significant relative to other projects

Daily Usage 6400 25 4.6 0.7 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Local Congestion Relief Factors 75% 25 18.8 2.8 moderate to high traffic, with congestion Taking Care o f the System Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 5% Total Points = | 1.1 | of 5

Roadway or Bridge Conditions Good 20 5.0 0.3

Econom ic Com petitiveness Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 20% Total Points = | 14.2 | of 20 Substandard Roadway or Bridge Feature No 20 0.0 0.0

Strategic Regional Economic Corridor Yes 20 20.0 4.0 Hwy 76 Functional Classification2 Major Arterial 50% 10 5.0 0.3

Support Regional Economic Opportunities Yes 30 30.0 6.0 Interchange allows for large scale economic possibilities Daily Vehicle Usage 6400 10 1.8 0.1 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Level of Economic Distress 30% 20 6.0 1.2 Local Taking Care of the System Factors 25% 40 10.0 0.5 improvement over existing intersection

Poverty (Block Group) 12.0% 2006-2010 ACS block group data - Comb. 2 block groups

Unemployment (tract) 4.0% 2006-2010 ACS tract data - Combining 2 tracts

Local Economic Competitiveness Factors 50% 30 15.0 3.0 benefit to existing economic conditions

Data Check3 OK Data Checkl OK Data Check2 OK
Proj. #: 7-1 Project Name: Coon Creek Rd (Hwy Bb to MO-76) E fficient M ovem ent o f Freight Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 4.2 | of 10

Project Type: Connectivity Total Score| 57.3 | out of 100 Large Vehicle Friendly Facilities Partial Yes 30 15.0 1.5
Project Description: Improve the roadway to address the section that floods (existing Widens Road No
culvert). This could include using fill and/or a structure to raise the roadway. Also
Improves Geometry Yes improve alignment (low water area, sharp curve)
improve the sharp curve at the west end of the corridor.
Improves Load Rating No
Truck Usage 120 30 7.3 0.7 MoDOT formula
Status: Construction 2018 Length: 1.52 miles Local Efficient Movement of Freight Factors 50% 40 20.0 2.0 benefits truck traffic, but not major truck focused improvement

Project Scale: Medium Roadway or Intersection Roadway
Functional Classification: Collector Modified from MoDOT (major st) Q uality o f C om m unities Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 5.0 | of 10

Avg. Annual Daily Traffic (AADT): 3000 (est. 2012, avg. for major street) Local/Regional Land Use Plans No 30 0.0 0.0
Daily Truck Traffic: 240 (est. 2012, avg. for major street) Consistent with Local Plans No not known to be on any applicable local plan
Through Lanes: 2 (through lanes on major street) Consistent with Regional Plans No not mentioned in SMCOG regional plan
Project Discussion: The closure of this roadway during high water events impacts east- Connectivity Yes 30 30.0 3.0 Hollister, Kirbyville
west travel and causes traffic to have to re-route MO-76. This affects commerce,
Scenic and Visual No 20 0.0 0.0 no scenic benefits
emergency response times, and general travel. The roadway appears to be in relatively
good condition with regards to pavement. There are guardrails and various advance Local Quality of Communities Factors 100% 20 20.0 2.0 links community together, especially in serious weather cond.
warning signs. The sharp curve is posted with a 15mph warning sign.

Environm ental Protection Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 3.3 | of 5

Consistent with Stormwater Goals Yes 30 30.0 1.5 stormwater issues should be mitigatable
Consistent with Environmental Goals No 30 0.0 0.0 stream/floodplain crossing, potential for impacts

Access to O pportunity Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 0.6 | of 5 Avoids Historical Impacts Yes 20 20.0 1.0 No known historical impacts

Eliminate Bike/Ped Barriers (ADA) 0% 25 0.0 0.0 Local Environmental Protection Factors 75% 20 15.0 0.8 environmental issues may require mitigation

Project provides bike connections No does not apply

Project provides pedestrian connections No does not apply Safety Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =30% Total Points = | 22.0 | of 30
d
Project brings existing facilities up to ADA Regulations No use if first two do not apply assumes no sidewalks or bike lanes a PDO 4 Safety Index 0.86 50 32.1 9.6 (Modified MoDOT formula)
o
oR ))n
Project provides some bike/pedestrian facilities No use if first two do not apply assumes no sidewalks, bike lanes, or widened shoulders r oi Injury 5 Crash Rate 184.60 Crash data 2009-2011
oj tc
a e
Transit No 25 0.0 0.0 no effect on Branson Shuttle or Jefferson Lines (M esr Fatal 0 Accident Index 1.05
(s te
Local Access to Opportunity Factors 25% 50 12.5 0.6 minimal pedestrian/bicycle benefits <D _E Years 3 Severity Index 2.39
sa o
r
C Avg AADT 2929 Safety Concern Yes 5 5.0 1.5 concern raised by local leaders

C ongestion Relief Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =10% Total Points = | 3.8 | of 10 Safety Enhancements Yes 5 5.0 1.5 roadway re-alignment

Level of Service B 25 5.0 0.5 estimated peak hour LOS (near LOS C) Emergency Response Yes 5 5.0 1.5 Could improve response times, Fire station 1 mile west

Functional Classification1 Collector 30% 25 7.5 0.8 Local Safety Factors 75% 35 26.3 7.9 project offers a number of safety benefits to the local community

Daily Usage 1500 25 0.6 0.1 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Local Congestion Relief Factors 100% 25 25.0 2.5 addresses a major non-recurring congestion/delay issue Taking Care o f the System Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 20% Total Points = | 13.6 | of 20

Roadway or Bridge Conditions Good 20 5.0 1.0 roadway and culvert appear to be in good condition

Econom ic C om petitiveness Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =10% Total Points = | 4.7 | of 10 Substandard Roadway or Bridge Feature Yes 20 20.0 4.0 road impassable during high water events

Strategic Regional Economic Corridor No 30 0.0 0.0 Functional Classification2 Collector 30% 10 3.0 0.6

Support Regional Economic Opportunities No 20 0.0 0.0 Not linked to any planned econ. dev. projects Daily Vehicle Usage 1500 10 0.2 0.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Level of Economic Distress 85% 20 17.0 1.7 Local Taking Care of the System Factors 100% 40 40.0 8.0 Important to address this connection issue

Poverty (Block Group) 19% 2006-2010 ACS block group data - Comb. 3 block groups

Unemployment (tract) 7% 2006-2010 ACS tract data - Combining 3 tracts

Local Economic Competitiveness Factors 100% 30 30.0 3.0 all weather connection/commerce, links communities

Data Check3 OK Data Check1 OK Data Check2 OK
Proj. #: 7-2 Project Name: Iowa Colony Rd (MO-165 to Diamond Hill Crt) E fficient M ovem ent o f Freight Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 2.5 | of 10

Project Type: Traffic Safety Total Score | 46.4 | out of 100 Large Vehicle Friendly Facilities Partial Yes 30 15.0 1.5
Project Description: Add shoulders to this relatively narrow residential road. This could Widens Road Yes shoulders to be added
affect drainage and right-of-way. Lanes could be widened as well, but that is not
Improves Geometry No
assumed to be part of the project.
Improves Load Rating No
Truck Usage 0 30 0.0 0.0 MoDOT formula
Status: Completed 2010 Length: 1.33 miles Local Efficient Movement of Freight Factors 25% 40 10.0 1.0 not a major truck / freight improvement project

Avg. Annual Daily Traffic (AADT): 1200 (est. 2012, avg. for major street) Local/Regional Land Use Plans No 30 0.0 0.0
Daily Truck Traffic: 0 (est. 2012, avg. for major street) Consistent with Local Plans No not known to be on any applicable local plan
Through Lanes: 2 (through lanes on major street) Consistent with Regional Plans No not mentioned in SMCOG regional plan
Project Discussion: The travelway width is approximately 20 feet, depending on the Connectivity No 30 0.0 0.0
location, with another foot of pavement outside the edge lines. Shoulders and the clear
Scenic and Visual No 20 0.0 0.0 no scenic benefits to shoulder widening on this roadway
zone are minimal in many locations. The pavement condition is good based on field
observations. Posted speed limit is 35mph. Sample traffic count was conducted near Local Quality of Communities Factors 50% 20 10.0 1.0 potential benefits to residents - esp. for walking
the south end of the roadway on a weekday in late May. The volume may be higher
further to the north and/or during a different season.
Environm ental Protection Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 4.8 | of 5

Consistent with Stormwater Goals Yes 30 30.0 1.5 few stormwater issues expected
Consistent with Environmental Goals Yes 30 30.0 1.5 little or no mitigation expected

Access to O pportunity Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 1.5 |of 5 Avoids Historical Impacts Yes 20 20.0 1.0 no known historical impacts

Eliminate Bike/Ped Barriers (ADA) 20% 25 5.0 0.3 Local Environmental Protection Factors 75% 20 15.0 0.8 few issues expected, though stormwater could be an issue

Project provides bike connections No does not apply

Project provides pedestrian connections No does not apply Safety Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =30% Total Points = | 22.1 | of 30
d
’roject brings existing facilities up to ADA Regulations No use if first two do not apply assumes no sidewalks or bike lanes a PDO 0 Safety Index 1.23 50 46.3 13.9 (Modified MoDOT formula)
oR ))n
o
Project provides some bike/pedestrian facilities Yes use if first two do not apply shoulders to be installed r oi Injury 1 Crash Rate 58.60 Crash data 2009-2011
oj tc
a e
Transit No 25 0.0 0.0 No effect on Branson Shuttle or Jefferson Lines (M e
sr Fatal 0 Accident Index 0.33
s( e t
Local Access to Opportunity Factors 50% 50 25.0 1.3 Shoulders to be installed will benefit bikes/peds <D _E Years 3 Severity Index 3.50
sa o
r
C Avg AADT 1172 Safety Concern Yes 5 5.0 1.5 concern raised by local leaders

C ongestion Relief Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =10% Total Points = | 1.6 | of 10 Safety Enhancements Yes 5 5.0 1.5 shoulders could improve auto and ped safety

Level of Service B 25 5.0 0.5 est. peak hour LOS for 2-lane roadway (HCM Class III) Emergency Response No 5 0.0 0.0 nominal benefits for emergency responders

Functional Classification1 Local 20% 25 5.0 0.5 Local Safety Factors 50% 35 17.5 5.3 local concern, does not meet design stds; only one crash in 3 yrs

Daily Usage 600 25 0.1 0.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Local Congestion Relief Factors 25% 25 6.3 0.6 congestion is not a major issue Taking Care o f the System Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 20% Total Points = | 10.4 | of 20

Roadway or Bridge Conditions Very Good 20 0.0 0.0 based on field observations

Econom ic C om petitiveness Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =10% Total Points = | 2.5 | of 10 Substandard Roadway or Bridge Feature Yes 20 20.0 4.0 lanes, shoulders, and clear zones do not meet standards

Strategic Regional Economic Corridor No 30 0.0 0.0 Functional Classification2 Local 20% 10 2.0 0.4

Support Regional Economic Opportunities No 20 0.0 0.0 Not linked to any planned econ. dev. projects Daily Vehicle Usage 600 10 0.0 0.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Level of Economic Distress 85% 20 17.0 1.7 Local Taking Care of the System Factors 75% 40 30.0 6.0 upgrades offer benefits to users and potential users

Poverty (Block Group) 13% 2006-2010 ACS block group data - Comb. 2 block groups

Unemployment (tract) 8% 2006-2010 ACS tract data - 1 tract

Local Economic Competitiveness Factors 25% 30 7.5 0.8 Not a major economic dev. issue, supports current dev.

Data Check3 OK Data Checkl OK Data Check2 OK
Proj. #: 7-3 Project Name: Lakeshore Drive (End) E fficient M ovem ent o f Freight Max Actual W^ t e d Weight Factor =10% Total Points = I ° .° Iof 10
Project Type: Traffic Safety Total Score| 31.0 | out of 100 Large Vehicle Friendly Facilities No 30 0.0 0.0
Project Description: Construct turnaround (cul-de-sac) in accordance with Taney Widens Road No
County design standards.
Improves Geometry No turnaround or cul-de-sac

Improves Load Rating No
Truck Usage 0 30 0.0 0.0 MoDOT formula

Status: Completed 2016 Length: NA Local Efficient Movement of Freight Factors 0% 40 0.0 0.0 not a truck/freight route

Avg. Annual Daily Traffic (AADT): 10 (est 2012, avg. for major street) Local/Regional Land Use Plans No 30 0.0 0.0
Daily Truck Traffic: 0 (est. 2012, avg. for major street) Consistent with Local Plans No not known to be on any applicable local plan
Through Lanes: 2 (through lanes on major street) Consistent with Regional Plans No not mentioned in SMCOG regional plan
Project Discussion: This improvement would provide emergency responders as well as Connectivity No 30 0.0 0.0
other traffic with a safe and efficient means for turning around at the end of Lakeshore
Scenic and Visual No 20 0.0 0.0
Drive. Currently, the end of the street is relatively narrow and the pavement is in poor
condition. The current roadway end does not meet Taney County's design standards Local Quality of Communities Factors 50% 20 10.0 1.0 issue to local residents and for emergency response
(minimum diameters: 100 ft ROW and 80 ft paved).

Environm ental Protection Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 5.0 | of 5

Consistent with Stormwater Goals Yes 30 30.0 1.5 Small project, few stormwater issues expected

Consistent with Environmental Goals Yes 30 30.0 1.5 Small project, no mitigation expected
Access to O pportunity Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 5% Total Points = | 0.0 |of 5 Avoids Historical Impacts Yes 20 20.0 1.0 No known historical impacts

Eliminate Bike/Ped Barriers (ADA) 0% 25 0.0 0.0 Local Environmental Protection Factors 100% 20 20.0 1.0 Small project, few issues expected; floodplain & wetland to north

Project provides bike connections No does not apply

Project provides pedestrian connections No does not apply Safety Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =30% Total Points = | 9.8 | of 30
d
’roject brings existing facilities up to ADA Regulations No use if first two do not apply assumes no sidewalks or bike lanes a PDO 0 Safety Index 0.00 50 0.0 0.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)
o
oR ) )n
Project provides some bike/pedestrian facilities No use if first two do not apply assumes no sidewalks, bike lanes, or widened shoulders r oi Injury 0 Crash Rate 0.00 Crash data 2009-2011
oj ct
a e
Transit No 25 0.0 0.0 No effect on Branson Shuttle or Jefferson Lines (M sr Fatal 0 Accident Index 0.00
s( e t
Local Access to Opportunity Factors 0% 50 0.0 0.0 Cul-de-sac or turnaround does not substantially benefit ped <D _E Years 3 Severity Index 0.00
sa o
r Safety Concern Yes
C Avg AADT NA 5 5.0 1.5 concern raised by local leaders

Congestion Relief Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =10% Total Points = | 0.5 | of 10 Safety Enhancements Yes 5 5.0 1.5 Turnaround or cul-de-sac

Level of Service A 25 0.0 0.0 no congestion issues Emergency Response Yes 5 5.0 1.5 Will allow emergency responders to turn around

Functional Classificationl Local 20% 25 5.0 0.5 Local Safety Factors 50% 35 17.5 5.3 Localized issue, no known crashes from 2007 to 2011

Daily Usage 5 25 0.0 0.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Local Congestion Relief Factors 0% 25 0.0 0.0 no congestion issues Taking Care o f the System Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 20% Total Points = | 14.4 | of 20

Roadway or Bridge Conditions Very Poor 20 20.0 4.0 Gravel Roadway

Econom ic Com petitiveness Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 0.3 | of 10 Substandard Roadway or Bridge Feature Yes 20 20.0 4.0 Dead end, does not meet typical design standards

Strategic Regional Economic Corridor No 30 0.0 0.0 Functional Classification2 Local 20% 10 2.0 0.4

Support Regional Economic Opportunities No 20 0.0 0.0 no significant direct benefits Daily Vehicle Usage 5 10 0.0 0.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Level of Economic Distress 15% 20 3.0 0.3 Local Taking Care of the System Factors 75% 40 30.0 6.0 Important local improvement

Poverty (Block Group) 4% 2006-2010 ACS block group data - 1 block group

Unemployment (tract) 6% 2006-2010 ACS tract data - 1 tract

Local Economic Competitiveness Factors 0% 30 0.0 0.0 no significant direct benefits

Data Check3 OK Data Checkl OK Data Check2 OK
Proj. #: 7-4 Project Name: MO-165 and MO-265 Intersection E fficient M ovem ent o f Freight Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 4.2 | of 10

Project Type: Traffic Safety Total Score 34.2 | out of 100 N o rth / NTS Large Vehicle Friendly Facilities Partial Yes 30 15.0 1.5
Project Description: Improve intersection to address sight distance and possible safety Widens Road No
issues. Improvements could include modified traffic control, turn lanes, or roadway
Improves Geometry Yes improve sight distance, geometry, and/or traffic control
realignment. Ip £ r . 5 . . j s*
Improves Load Rating No
Truck Usage 7.3 0.7 MoDOT formula

2
0

3
0
Status: Completed 2015 Length: NA Local Efficient Movement of Freight Factors 50% 40 20.0 2.0 will benefit truck traffic (which requires longer stopping distances)

Avg. Annual Daily Traffic (AADT): 4300 (est 2012, avg. for major street) Local/Regional Land Use Plans No 30 0.0 0.0
Daily Truck Traffic: 240 (est. 2012, avg. for major street) Consistent with Local Plans No not known to be on any applicable local plan
Through Lanes: 2 (through lanes on major street) Consistent with Regional Plans No not mentioned in SMCOG regional plan
possible sight distance
Project Discussion: Main issue is sight distance for drivers turning left from the MO-265 Connectivity No 30 0.0 0.0
issues, especially fo r
leg onto MO-165 westbound. The MO-265 side street is stop controlled. Most traffic
left-turns onto MO-165 Scenic and Visual No 20 0.0 0.0 Intersection improvements, no scenic benefits
travels between the MO-165 southwest leg and the other two legs. Very little traffic
travels between the northeast and east legs of the intersection. Posted speed limit on Local Quality of Communities Factors 0% 20 0.0 0.0 not a major community quality issue
•• • * <r%•:. « -y •.
MO-165 is 45 mph. The embankment has been cut such that there is additional sight
distance to the northeast. At 45 mph the design intersection sight distance is 500 ft
Environm ental Protection Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 5.0 | of 5
(AASHTO Green book). It appears the available sight distance in one or both directions at J ’^gassr*? f
ma^jDeJessJhanJhisvaluei Thejntereection_c^^ Consistent with Stormwater Goals Yes 30 30.0 1.5 few stormwater issues expected

Consistent with Environmental Goals Yes 30 30.0 1.5 little or no mitigation expected
Access to O pportunity Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 5% Total Points = | 0.0 | of 5 Avoids Historical Impacts Yes 20 20.0 1.0 no known historical impacts

Eliminate Bike/Ped Barriers (ADA) 0% 25 0.0 0.0 Local Environmental Protection Factors 100% 20 20.0 1.0 few issues expected (unless major earthwork is undertaken)

Project provides bike connections No does not apply

Project provides pedestrian connections No does not apply Safety Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =30% Total Points = | 8.3 | of 30
d
’reject brings existing facilities up to ADA Regulations No use if first two do not apply assumes no sidewalks or bike lanes a PDO 3 Safety Index 0.00 50 0.0 0.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)
oR ) )n
o
Project provides some bike/pedestrian facilities No use if first two do not apply assumes no sidewalks or bike lanes r oi Injury 0 Crash Rate 65.25 Crash data 2009-2011
oj ct
a e
Transit No 25 0.0 0.0 No effect on Branson Shuttle or Jefferson Lines (M sr Fatal 0 Accident Index 0.99
s( e t
Local Access to Opportunity Factors 0% 50 0.0 0.0 Assumes no new bike or ped facilities <D _E Years 3 Severity Index 1.00
sa o
r Safety Concern Yes
C Avg AADT 4199 5 5.0 1.5 concern raised by local leaders

Congestion Relief Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =10% Total Points = | 1.9 | of 10 Safety Enhancements Yes 5 5.0 1.5 Intersection improvements (sight distance)

Level of Service C 25 10.0 1.0 side-street left estimated peak hour LOS Emergency Response No 5 0.0 0.0 little impact on emergency responders

Functional Classification1 Collector 30% 25 7.5 0.8 Local Safety Factors 50% 35 17.5 5.3 crash rate not significant relative to other projects

Daily Usage 2150 25 1.2 0.1 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Local Congestion Relief Factors 0% 25 0.0 0.0 Congestion does not appear to be a major issue Taking Care o f the System Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 20% Total Points = | 11.7 | of 20

Roadway or Bridge Conditions Good 20 5.0 1.0 minor roadway rutting

Econom ic Com petitiveness Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 3.2 | of 10 Substandard Roadway or Bridge Feature Yes 20 20.0 4.0 possible sight distance issue

Strategic Regional Economic Corridor No 30 0.0 0.0 Functional Classification2 Collector 30% 10 3.0 0.6

Support Regional Economic Opportunities No 20 0.0 0.0 Not linked to any planned econ. dev. projects Daily Vehicle Usage 2150 10 0.5 0.1 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Level of Economic Distress 85% 20 17.0 1.7 Local Taking Care of the System Factors 75% 40 30.0 6.0 Important local intersection

Poverty (Block Group) 14% 2006-2010 ACS block group data - Comb. 3 block groups

Unemployment (tract) 8% 2006-2010 ACS tract data - Combining 2 tracts

Local Economic Competitiveness Factors 50% 30 15.0 1.5 Important intersection for the area

Data Check3 OK Data Checkl OK Data Check2 OK
Proj. #: 7-5 Project Name: Hwy Bb (Hill Billy Lane to Gobbler's Knob) E fficient M ovem ent o f Freight Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =10% Total Points = | 4.3 | of 10

Project Type: Traffic Safety Total S c o r^ 45.0 | out of 100 Large Vehicle Friendly Facilities Partial Yes 30 15.0 1.5
Project Description: Involves 2.3 miles of roadway improvements that could include: Widens Road Yes widen shoulders and/or lanes
shoulder and/or lane widening and the addition of turn lanes. Roadway has limited
Improves Geometry No uncertain
shoulders (if any at all). Some locations would benefit from a turn lane or center two
Improves Load Rating No uncertain
way left-turn lane. Stormwater issues should be addressed if the road is widened and
right-of-way may have to be expanded, especially in the south. Truck Usage 133 30 7.7 0.8 MoDOT formula
Status: Planning Length: 2.3 miles Local Efficient Movement of Freight Factors 50% 40 20.0 2.0 minimal criteria met, but road would be widened

Project Scale: Large Roadway or Intersection Roadway
Functional Classification: Collector (for the major street) Q uality o f C om m unities Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 10% Total Points = | 1.0 | of 10

Avg. Annual Daily Traffic (AADT): 3500 (est. 2012, avg. for major street) Local/Regional Land Use Plans No 30 0.0 0.0
Daily Truck Traffic: 266 (est. 2012, avg. for major street) Consistent with Local Plans No not known to be on any applicable local plan
Through Lanes: 2 (through lanes on major street) Consistent with Regional Plans No not mentioned in SMCOG regional plan
Project Discussion: Roadway is classified as a Major Collector. Traffic count is based Connectivity No 30 0.0 0.0
on an inflated 2007 County count for a location directly north of the high school. A 2012
Scenic and Visual No 20 0.0 0.0 no scenic benefits
sample count indicates the volume may be higher. This roadway serves the Hollister
High School. Some intersections have turn lanes, while other do not. No truck traffic Local Quality of Communities Factors 50% 20 10.0 1.0 minimal criteria met, but benefits schools and therefore communi
estimates available - assumed 3%. Drainage is handled in swales at the roadway edge.
Project might score better if pedestrian and bicycle provisions were incorporated. This
Environm ental Protection Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =15% Total Points = | 14.3 | of 15
could include the addition of a bike lane or multi-use facility. Ped/bike provisions could
connect to the school. It could also increase the cost of the project. Consistent with Stormwater Goals Yes 30 30.0 4.5 Assume excess runoff mitigated (new stormwater facilities)
Consistent with Environmental Goals Yes 30 30.0 4.5 Large project; possible impacts likely to be mitigated

Access to O pportunity Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 2.8 | of 5 Avoids Historical Impacts Yes 20 20.0 3.0 No known historical impacts

Eliminate Bike/Ped Barriers (ADA) 20% 25 5.0 0.3 Local Environmental Protection Factors 75% 20 15.0 2.3 Large project; potential for impacts, though likely to be mitigated

Project provides bike connections No consider adding bike lane or multi-use facility

Project provides pedestrian connections No consider multi-use facility Safety Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 20% Total Points = | 11.0 | of 20
d
’roject brings existing facilities up to ADA Regulations No use if first two do not apply a PDO 5 Safety Index 0.51 50 19.0 3.8 (Modified MoDOT formula)
o
oR ))n
Project provides some bike/pedestrian facilities Yes use if first two do not apply assumes widened shoulders available for bikes/peds r oi Injury 4 Crash Rate 104.57 Crash data 2009-2011
oj tc
a e
Transit No 25 0.0 0.0 No effect on Branson Shuttle or Jefferson Lines M
( e sr Fatal 0 Accident Index 0.60
s( te
Local Access to Opportunity Factors 100% 50 50.0 2.5 Widened shoulders will benefit high school bikes/peds <D _E Years 3 Severity Index 2.11
sa o
r
C Avg AADT 3417 Safety Concern Yes 5 5.0 1.0 concern raised by local leaders

C ongestion Relief Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =15% Total Points = | 4.6 | of 15 Safety Enhancements Yes 5 5.0 1.0 Will result in widened shoulders

Level of Service C 25 10.0 1.5 estimated peak hour LOS based on v/c ~0.33 Emergency Response No 5 0.0 0.0 Nominal benefits to emergency response

Functional Classification1 Collector 30% 25 7.5 1.1 Local Safety Factors 75% 35 26.3 5.3 Improves a road with possible safety and design issues

Daily Usage 1750 25 0.5 0.1 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Local Congestion Relief Factors 50% 25 12.5 1.9 benefits congestion around school Taking Care o f the System Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor =5% Total Points = | 0.7 | of 5

Roadway or Bridge Conditions Very Good 20 0.0 0.0 no known issues

Econom ic C om petitiveness Max Actual Weighted Weight Factor = 20% Total Points = | 6.4 | of 20 Substandard Roadway or Bridge Feature No 20 0.0 0.0 none known

Strategic Regional Economic Corridor No 20 0.0 0.0 Functional Classification2 Collector 30% 10 3.0 0.2

Support Regional Economic Opportunities No 30 0.0 0.0 not linked to known planned econ. dev. projects Daily Vehicle Usage 1750 10 0.2 0.0 (Modified MoDOT formula)

Level of Economic Distress 85% 20 17.0 3.4 Local Taking Care of the System Factors 25% 40 10.0 0.5 Not a major maintenance issue

Poverty (Block Group) 21% 2006-2010 ACS block group data - 2 block groups

Unemployment (tract) 8% 2006-2010 ACS tract data - Combining 2 tracts

Local Economic Competitiveness Factors 50% 30 15.0 3.0 benefits general continued development in the area

Data Check3 OK Data Checkl OK Data Check2 OK
Taney County Transportation Prio ritiza tio n
Revised Weighting Factors
A ugust 28, 2012

Category Weights Subcategory Weights

Small Medium Large Regional Small Medium Large Regional
Eliminate Bike/Ped Barriers (A D A ) 25 25 25 25
A cc ess to T ransit 25 25 25 25
5% 5% 5% 5%
O p p o rtu n ity Local Factors 50 50 50 50
100 100 100 100
Level o f Service 25 25 25 25
Functional Classification! 25 25 25 25
C o n g e stio n R e lie f 10% 10% 15% 15% D aily Usage 25 25 25 25
Local Factors 25 25 25 25
100 100 100 100
Strategic Regional Econom ic C o rr id o r 30 30 20 20
S upp ort Regional Economic O p p o rtu n itie s 20 20 30 30
E c o n o m ic
10% 10% 20% 20% Level o f Econom ic Distress 20 20 20 20
C o m p e titiv e n e s s
Local Factors 30 30 30 30
100 100 100 100
Large Vehicle Friendly Facilities 30 30 30 30
E ffic ie n t M o v e m e n t T ru c k Usage 30 30 30 30
10% 10% 10% 10%
o f F r e ig h t Local Factors 40 40 40 40
100 100 100 100
Local/Regional Land Use Plans 30 30 30 30
C on n e ctivity 30 30 30 30
Q u a lity o f
10% 10% 10% 10% Scenic and Visual 20 20 20 20
C o m m u n itie s
Local Factors 20 20 20 20
100 100 100 100
C onsiste nt w ith S to rm w a te r Goals 30 30 30 30
C onsiste nt w ith Environm ental Goals 30 30 30 30
E n v iro n m e n ta l
5% 5% 15% 15% A voids H istorical Impacts 20 20 20 20
P ro te c tio n
Local Factors 20 20 20 20
100 100 100 100
Safety Index 50 50 50 50
Emergency Response 5 5 5 5
Safety C oncern 5 5 5 5
S a fe ty 30% 30% 20% 20%
Safety Enhancements 5 5 5 5
Local Factors 35 35 35 35
100 100 100 100
Roadway o r Bridge C ond itions 20 20 20 20
Substandard Roadway o r Bridge Feature 20 20 20 20
T a k in g C a re o f th e Functional Classification2 !0 !0 !0 !0
20% 20% 5% 5%
S y s te m D aily V ehicle Usage !0 !0 !0 !0
Local factors 40 40 40 40
100 100 100 100
100% 100% 100% 100%

Readable PDF

TCTAB Prioritization Matrix

The original county PDF remains the downloadable record artifact and the printable source document.

HTML View PDF View Open Original PDF Download PDF

Rendering PDF preview...