Transcript LINKING LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION

LINKING LAND USE AND
TRANSPORTATION
TO CREATE A LEGACY
Presented by:
Barbara Arens, PE, PTOE
Vice President
PB
Brad Strader, AICP, PTP
Managing Partner
Linking Land Use & Transportation
LSL Planning
Legacy = Bequest, Heritage
Linking transportation and land use
can
 Improve safety
 Revitalize areas
 Support commerce/jobs
 Alter the environment
 Influence community health and
quality of life
How will you make your mark?
Linking Land Use & Transportation
Land Use Influences Transportation
Arrangement and density affects
number, length, and type of trip:
 People living close to work
 Commercial and schools within
walking distance of residential
 Residential and employment
densities that support transit
 Isolated land uses at low
density
Linking Land Use & Transportation
Transportation Can Influence Land Use

Street design

Adding/removing parking

Adding/removing lanes

1-way versus 2-way streets

New roads or interchanges

Add walking/biking paths


Availability of transit, its
type
Build By-Pass
Linking Land Use & Transportation
Charlotte, NC
Light Rail
Washtenaw Access Management Plan:
One-Way 3-to-2 Road Diet Concept
Transportation – Land Use
Disconnect





Different agencies or
departments
Different educational
background
Different time horizons
Future land use: optimism
versus reality
Separate planning
processes/tools
Linking Land Use & Transportation
Land Use Tools to Reduce # and
Length of Auto Trips
Compact walkable design
 Development where transportation
capacity exists or is programmed
 Street connections


Density, nodes and design to support
transit (TOD)
Linking Land Use & Transportation
Mixed-Use Development/TOD






Models need to acknowledge
the trip-making distinctions of
different land use patterns
Diversity of housing, jobs &
retail in close proximity
Complementary uses
More walking and transit use
10-40% Internal Trip Capture
May impact travel time
Linking Land Use & Transportation
Typical Land Use Planning
Existing Uses/Traffic & Traffic
for Planned Use
= Traffic would increase 150%
= Significant future congestion
Community would not accept extent
of widening needed
Transportation Improvements
Plan
Ypsilanti Township, MI
Linking Land Use & Transportation
Revised to Consider New Land Use
Arrangement as Part of Solution
• Revised Future Land Use Map
• Rearranged land uses/Shifted
densities
• LOS D in most cases
• Community acceptance
Transportation
Improvements Plan (New)
Ypsilanti Township, MI
Linking Land Use & Transportation
How to Better Integrate Land Use
with Transportation Planning
• Long Range
Plans adopted
by agency
• Tied to funding
• Fiscally
constrained
Local Future Land
Use Plans
•Long Range
Transportation Plans
assume community
will develop per its
plan
•Analyze macro,
meso, & micro level
Employment &
Household
Projections
and SocioEconomic data
Linking Land Use & Transportation
Projected
Deficiencies
(congestion) and
Alternatives
Analysis
Recommended Changes –
typically to add capacity
Transportation Analysis Tools
(Macro, Meso, and Micro)

Macroscopic


Mesoscopic
Modelling


Travel Demand
Forecasting Models
DTA
Microscopic
Simulation

Detailed MOEs
Linking Land Use & Transportation
Traffic Analysis
Tools


Crash
Roadway and
Intersection
Assessment



Travel Forecasting
Models
Isolated
intersection
analyses
Microsimulation
of network
TYPOLOGIES
Connectivity: Streets Designed for Land Use
(Context) and Uses
PRIME CONNECTOR
ACTIVITY | DESTINATION CORRIDOR
NEIGHBORHOOD CONNECTOR
BUSINESS CORRIDOR
COMMUTER | WORKHORSE CORRIDOR
ACCESS
1 – ½ MILE SIGNALS, 455’ DRIVE
SPACING W/ SVC DRIVES
455’ SPACING, RETRO-FIT TO REDUCE #
ESP. NEAR SIGNALS
RETRO-FIT AND NEW CROSS-ACCESS TO REDUCE #
ESP. SIGNALS AND POOR OFFSETS
N.M.
CONSTRUCT PATHWAYS
ADD SIDEWALKS, CONNECT GAPS
WIDEN SIDEWALKS, ADD PED SIGNALS,
CONNECT GAPS ESP. NEAR TRANSIT
PARK AND RIDE
TRANSIT
RESPONSE
Linking
LandDEMAND
Use &
Transportation FIXED ROUTE MAJOR ROADS
FREQUENT BUS, POTENTIAL EXPRESS BUS,
BRT/LRT/STREETCAR, TOD REDEVELOPMENT
Street
Typologies
TYPOLOGIES
Functional Class
Context
User Needs (LOS)
Local Streets (not shown)
Linking Land Use & Transportation
Target “LOS by Mode” by Street
Boulevard / Commuter
Corridor
Linking Land Use & Transportation
Urban Activity Center
Local Street
LSL Planning / City of Lansing, MI
Comprehensive Plan
Different Corridor
Treatments




Medians – size & width
Access control
Super streets
Intersection control






Roundabouts
Stop signs
Signals
Urban design (streetscape)
Bike lanes
Traffic calming
Context Sensitive Solutions (CSS)
at Street Level



How does CSS apply to Streets?
What are Complete Streets?
How do these two Connect?
17
Linking Land Use & Transportation
Complete Streets




Streets planned, designed
and operated for all users,
ages, and abilities
Interconnected network of
roads, sidewalks, pathways
& transit
Facilitate movement along
and across streets
Match street design to user
needs and context
Streets have a “Place” Function
“There is magic to great streets. We are attracted to
the best of them not because we have to go there
but because we want to be there.”
-Allan B. Jacobs, Great Streets
19
Linking Land Use & Transportation
Great Places Have Great Streets

Accessibility

Attractiveness

Livability

Community

Interactions

Safety
20
Linking Land Use & Transportation
Elements of Complete Streets

Connect to Land Use

Walking

Biking

Lighting

Traffic Management

Transit Availability

Street Furniture

Landscaping

People Places
21
Linking Land Use & Transportation
Contextually Complete Streets &
CSS
What is different about CONTEXTUALLY Complete Streets?
Context & Stakeholders Define What is Meant by
“Complete”
One Size Does Not Fit All!
22
Linking Land Use & Transportation
Contextually Complete Streets:
Approach
Application of Context Sensitive Solutions to
Complete Streets:
• Proactive Stakeholder Involvement
• Project Focused Inter-Disciplinary Team
• Communication and Collaboration
Linking Land Use & Transportation
23
Successful Contextually Complete
Streets Have:
Project-Focused
Interdisciplinary Team




Urban Planners/Designers
Environmental
Landscape Architects
Engineers







Civil
Traffic
Utility
Lighting
Drainage
Construction
Maintenance
Proactive Stakeholder Involvement












Linking Land Use & Transportation
Transit
Pedestrians
Cyclists
Truckers
Passenger Vehicles/Taxis
Parking Agencies
Law Enforcement/Fire Departments
Residents/Land Owners
Businesses/Chamber of Commerce
Citizen Groups
Environmental Groups
Utility Companies
24
Contextually Complete Streets: Tools









Accommodating Transit
Designing for Bikes & Pedestrians
The Grid
Road Diets
Managing Lanes
Traffic Calming
On-street Parking
Green Treatments
New Design Guidelines
25
Linking Land Use & Transportation
Road Diets – Reduce # of Lanes

Consider:






Function & environment
Traffic volumes (consider for
8,500 – 24,000 vpd)
Peak hour operations
Crash types, all modes
Impact on parallel roads
Space for amenities



On-street parking
Bike lanes
More green space
Linking Land Use & Transportation
Washtenaw County Access
Management Plan:
One-Way 3-to-2 Road Diet Concept
Tools - Road Diets

Simple as re-striping

Cost-effective

Optional enhancements

Enhances environment
Linking Land Use & Transportation
27
Road Diet Concept
Smaller Can Be Better

Surface arterial “downscale”

Reduces through lanes

Adds turn lanes

May accommodate traffic
without widening

Improves safety

Community context benefits
Linking Land Use & Transportation
28
Tools – Bus Lanes Differentiated

Colored Pavements – “Painted Tracks”



Provides Identity and branding of transit system
Passive enforcement for vehicular motorists
Way finding path to next station for patron
29
Linking Land Use & Transportation
Tools - Designing for Bicyclists
Linking Land Use & Transportation

Bicycle racks

Bicycle lanes/Cycle track

Multi-use paths

Wider curb lane

Smooth surfaces

Regular maintenance

Curb inlets/bicycle-safe grates
30
Tools - Designing for Pedestrians

Removing pedestrian hazards

Continuous sidewalks, minimum 5 feet

Curb extensions (bulb-outs)

Median refuge islands

Pedestrian crossings/signals

Raised pavement

Safe/Convenient transit stops

Landscaping with good visibility

Adequate lighting
Linking Land Use & Transportation
Photo by Jennifer Rosales, PB
31
Applying all the Tools for Successful
Complete Streets



New Jersey Route 9
Boulder, Colorado
Ann Arbor, Michigan
Transportation Plan
Update/University of
Michigan
Linking Land Use & Transportation
New Jersey Route 9:
Matching the Road to the Community
Higher Density: Current Reality
Higher Density: Future Concept
33
Boulder, CO
Known for Streets That are Destinations
34
Linking Land Use & Transportation
Boulder, Colorado:
All arterials should be multi-modal corridors for auto,
pedestrian, bicycle, and transit use.
35
Linking Land Use & Transportation
Case Study –
Ann Arbor, MI City
Transportation Plan
 Coordinated with transit
agency, university, city, county
& MPO
 Increased planned residential
& employment density to
encourage more
transit/walking (TOD)
 Planned transit corridors to
serve major land use changes
 Balanced investment in all
modes and phased
implementation
TOD Corridor Overlay Zoning
Transit-Oriented Should Have
 5-7+ Units per acre (bus)
 25-40 employees + residents
per acre*
 Compact development
 Appropriate mix of uses
Transit-Oriented Should NOT have
 Low density residential
 Deep building setbacks
 Auto related uses
Linking Land Use & Transportation
*Zupan and Pushkarev. 1977. Public Transportation and Land Use Policy.
Ann Arbor, MI Conclusion
Depending on part of town, implementation
included:
Increased bus service/park and ride facilities
 Road Diet locations identified
 Planned transit corridors to meet
community/University needs
 Key corridor redevelopment with signature transit
proposed/multi-modal network development
 Short, Medium, and Long Range Implementation
Plan (20 years) for all modes
 New zoning regulations (TOD, Form-Based Code)

Linking Land Use & Transportation
Form-Based Codes



Regulates physical form, with a lesser focus
on use
Defines the streetscape to ensure proper
building : street relationship
Combines zoning regulations and street
design standards into one code
Leesburg Crescent
District Plan &
Form-Based Code
Linking Land Use & Transportation
Case Study: Birmingham Triangle Plan



Street redesign and
parking to stimulate
change
Urban Plan and FormBased Code
Within two days of plan
approval, submittal of
plans for $25-million
development and major
mixed-use building
Linking Land Use & Transportation
City of Birmingham
Triangle Plan
Creating a Transportation Legacy

Understand current policies
& procedures

Identify ways to integrate
decision-making

Integrate land use and
transportation planning

Audit regulations and update

Evaluate current street design standards

Prioritize and invest in all modes
What will you do to leave your legacy?
Courtesy FMLA
Opportunity to
change our
mindset. . .
. . .from avoiding
negatives to
creating positives
Contact Information
Brad
Strader
Barbara
Arens
Linking Land Use & Transportation
[email protected]
248.586.0505
[email protected]
313.963.4651