Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Linking Land Use & Transportation Presented by: Barbara Arens, PE, PTOE Vice President PB Brad Strader, AICP, PTP Managing PartnerLSL Planning LINKING.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Linking Land Use & Transportation Presented by: Barbara Arens, PE, PTOE Vice President PB Brad Strader, AICP, PTP Managing PartnerLSL Planning LINKING."— Presentation transcript:

1 Linking Land Use & Transportation Presented by: Barbara Arens, PE, PTOE Vice President PB Brad Strader, AICP, PTP Managing PartnerLSL Planning LINKING LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION TO CREATE A LEGACY

2 Linking Land Use & Transportation 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?

3 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

4 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 Washtenaw Access Management Plan: One-Way 3-to-2 Road Diet Concept Charlotte, NC Light Rail

5 Linking Land Use & Transportation Transportation – Land Use Disconnect  Different agencies or departments  Different educational background  Different time horizons  Future land use: optimism versus reality  Separate planning processes/tools Site Plan Approvals Public Right-of-Way Private Properties Road Agency Permits

6 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)

7 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

8 Linking Land Use & Transportation Typical Land Use Planning Existing Uses/Traffic & Traffic for Planned U se = Traffic would increase 150% = Significant future congestion Community would not accept extent of widening needed Transportation Improvements Plan Ypsilanti Township, MI

9 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

10 Linking Land Use & Transportation How to Better Integrate Land Use with Transportation Planning Local Future Land Use Plans Employment & Household Projections and Socio- Economic data Projected Deficiencies (congestion) and Alternatives Analysis Recommended Changes – typically to add capacity Long Range Transportation Plans assume community will develop per its plan Analyze macro, meso, & micro level Long Range Plans adopted by agency Tied to funding Fiscally constrained

11 Linking Land Use & Transportation Transportation Analysis Tools (Macro, Meso, and Micro)  Macroscopic  Travel Demand Forecasting Models  Mesoscopic Modelling  DTA  Microscopic Simulation  Detailed MOEs

12 Traffic Analysis Tools  Crash  Roadway and Intersection Assessment  Travel Forecasting Models  Isolated intersection analyses  Microsimulation of network

13 Linking Land Use & Transportation PRIME CONNECTORACTIVITY | DESTINATION CORRIDOR NEIGHBORHOOD CONNECTORBUSINESS CORRIDOR COMMUTER | WORKHORSE CORRIDOR 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 CONSTRUCT PATHWAYSADD SIDEWALKS, CONNECT GAPS WIDEN SIDEWALKS, ADD PED SIGNALS, CONNECT GAPS ESP. NEAR TRANSIT DEMAND RESPONSE PARK AND RIDE FIXED ROUTE MAJOR ROADS FREQUENT BUS, POTENTIAL EXPRESS BUS, BRT/LRT/STREETCAR, TOD REDEVELOPMENT TYPOLOGIES Connectivity: Streets Designed for Land Use (Context) and Uses ACCESS N.M. TRANSIT

14 Linking Land Use & Transportation Functional ClassContextUser Needs (LOS) Street Typologies Local Streets (not shown) TYPOLOGIES

15 Linking Land Use & Transportation Boulevard / Commuter Corridor Urban Activity Center Local Street Target “LOS by Mode” by Street LSL Planning / City of Lansing, MI Comprehensive Plan

16 Different Corridor Treatments  Medians – size & width  Access control  Super streets  Intersection control  Roundabouts  Stop signs  Signals  Urban design (streetscape)  Bike lanes  Traffic calming

17 Linking Land Use & Transportation 17 Context Sensitive Solutions (CSS) at Street Level  How does CSS apply to Streets?  What are Complete Streets?  How do these two Connect?

18 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

19 Linking Land Use & Transportation 19 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

20 Linking Land Use & Transportation 20 Great Places Have Great Streets  Accessibility  Attractiveness  Livability  Community  Interactions  Safety

21 Linking Land Use & Transportation 21 Elements of Complete Streets  Connect to Land Use  Walking  Biking  Lighting  Traffic Management  Transit Availability  Street Furniture  Landscaping  People Places

22 Linking Land Use & Transportation 22 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!

23 Linking Land Use & Transportation Contextually Complete Streets: Approach 23 Application of Context Sensitive Solutions to Complete Streets: Proactive Stakeholder Involvement Project Focused Inter-Disciplinary Team Communication and Collaboration

24 Linking Land Use & Transportation Successful Contextually Complete Streets Have:  Urban Planners/Designers  Environmental  Landscape Architects  Engineers  Civil  Traffic  Utility  Lighting  Drainage  Construction  Maintenance  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 Project-Focused Interdisciplinary Team Proactive Stakeholder Involvement 24

25 Linking Land Use & Transportation 25  Accommodating Transit  Designing for Bikes & Pedestrians  The Grid  Road Diets  Managing Lanes  Traffic Calming  On-street Parking  Green Treatments  New Design Guidelines Contextually Complete Streets: Tools

26 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 Washtenaw County Access Management Plan: One-Way 3-to-2 Road Diet Concept

27 Linking Land Use & Transportation Tools - Road Diets 27  Simple as re-striping  Cost-effective  Optional enhancements  Enhances environment

28 Linking Land Use & Transportation Road Diet Concept  Surface arterial “downscale”  Reduces through lanes  Adds turn lanes  May accommodate traffic without widening  Improves safety  Community context benefits 28 Smaller Can Be Better

29 Linking Land Use & Transportation 29 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

30 Linking Land Use & Transportation Tools - Designing for Bicyclists  Bicycle racks  Bicycle lanes/Cycle track  Multi-use paths  Wider curb lane  Smooth surfaces  Regular maintenance  Curb inlets/bicycle-safe grates 30

31 Linking Land Use & Transportation 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 31 Photo by Jennifer Rosales, PB

32 Linking Land Use & Transportation Applying all the Tools for Successful Complete Streets  New Jersey Route 9  Boulder, Colorado  Ann Arbor, Michigan Transportation Plan Update/University of Michigan

33 33 Higher Density: Current Reality New Jersey Route 9: Matching the Road to the Community Higher Density: Future Concept

34 Linking Land Use & Transportation 34 Boulder, CO Known for Streets That are Destinations

35 Linking Land Use & Transportation 35 Boulder, Colorado: All arterials should be multi-modal corridors for auto, pedestrian, bicycle, and transit use.

36 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

37 Linking Land Use & Transportation *Zupan and Pushkarev Public Transportation and Land Use Policy. TOD Corridor Overlay Zoning Transit-Oriented Should Have  5-7+ Units per acre (bus)  employees + residents per acre*  Compact development  Appropriate mix of uses Transit-Oriented Should NOT have  Low density residential  Deep building setbacks  Auto related uses

38 Linking Land Use & Transportation 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)

39 Linking Land Use & Transportation Leesburg Crescent District Plan & Form-Based Code 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

40 Linking Land Use & Transportation Case Study: Birmingham Triangle Plan  Street redesign and parking to stimulate change  Urban Plan and Form- Based Code  Within two days of plan approval, submittal of plans for $25-million development and major mixed-use building City of Birmingham Triangle Plan

41 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 Opportunity to change our mindset......from avoiding negatives to creating positives Courtesy FMLA What will you do to leave your legacy?

42 Linking Land Use & Transportation Contact Information Brad Strader Barbara Arens


Download ppt "Linking Land Use & Transportation Presented by: Barbara Arens, PE, PTOE Vice President PB Brad Strader, AICP, PTP Managing PartnerLSL Planning LINKING."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google