Creating Livable Streets and Corridors (S526)media2.planning.org/APA2012/Presentations/S526... · University of California, Berkeley, December 2007. • Freeway reduced home values

Harrison Rue, ICF International

APA Conference, Los Angeles

April 16, 2012

Creating Livable Streets and Corridors (S526)

2 icfi.com |

Overview

What is livability in transportation?

FHWA livability resources: a new approach to

transportation planning

Incorporating livability into the transportation planning

and project development process

–Completing the streets and networks

–Multimodal corridor strategies

–Cost-effective management and operations strategies

–Design guides and policies

–Measuring performance

3 icfi.com |

HUD-DOT-EPA Livability Principles

Provide more transportation choices

Promote equitable, affordable housing

Enhance economic competitiveness

Support existing communities

Coordinate and leverage Federal policies and

investment

Value communities and neighborhoods

4 icfi.com |

Livability in Transportation Guidebook

Developed by FHWA & FTA

Designed as a general

practitioners resource

For use by State DOTs,

MPOs, and others in the

advancement of livable

communities

Available on the FHWA Livability Website http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/livability/case_studies/guidebook/

5 icfi.com |

Why livability; why now?

We have built one of the world’s largest and best

highway networks

We have not yet put the same effort into completing a

system that works as well for walking, wheeling, or

taking transit –Balanced approach can maximize the effectiveness of existing

investments

–By targeting transportation funding to support reinvestment in

existing communities, we can build more choice, convenience,

and cost-effectiveness into the transportation system

6 icfi.com |

Livability in Transportation: Background

Long practiced at local & regional level

Many state policy efforts

Variety of ‘brand names’

– livability, sustainability, smart growth, walkable communities,

new urbanism, healthy neighborhoods, active living, transit-

oriented development, complete streets, etc.

The common element is that

transportation planning is no

longer a stand-alone exercise

In service to broader community

goals

7 icfi.com |

What is livability in transportation?

Livability in transportation is about using the quality, location, & type of

transportation facilities & services available to help achieve broader

community goals such as access to good jobs, affordable housing,

quality schools, & safe streets. This includes:

Addressing road safety & capacity issues through better planning &

design

Maximizing & expanding new technologies such as intelligent

transportation systems & quiet pavements

Using travel demand management approaches in system planning &

operations

Developing high quality public transportation to foster economic

development

Community design that offers residents & workers the full range of

transportation choices

Strategically connecting the modal pieces - bikeways, pedestrian

facilities, transit services, & roadways-into a truly intermodal,

interconnected system

8 icfi.com |

Creating Livable Communities An FHWA Primer Incorporating livability into each step of the transportation planning

& decisionmaking process

http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/livability/creating_livable_communities/

9 icfi.com |

Benefits of Incorporating Livability

Transportation and land use — support compact,

connected communities

Small ‘town center’ development

guide growth to protect natural and working lands

Environmental — reduced footprint

Reduced GHGs from increased walking/biking

Compact development requires less land

Health and social — reduced obesity, improved

sense of community

Increased convenience for walking/biking to

destination

Public places created

Economic — efficiently use available resources and

boost local economy

Improve multimodal access to jobs;

reinvent/reinvest in existing corridors

10 icfi.com |

Networks and connectivity Key strategy in urban, suburban, and rural areas

11

Why complete the streets & networks? It’s the best way to maximize capacity of existing

roadways – at affordable costs

12

Boulevard Design Characteristics “People Friendly Streets”

Four-lane cross section

Two-lane cross section

Streetscape

Buildings brought to street for

enclosure / interest

Landscaped medians provide crossing refuge

On-street parking

protects pedestrians

Bus amenities

include shelters

and by-pass lanes

13

Transportation Network Reduces Auto Travel and Congestion

The proximity of

activities within

communities

promotes walking

and transit

The proximity of

communities to each other

makes auto trips shorter

The network makes travel

more efficient by

providing multiple travel

choices

A

C

B

14

Hydraulic Road - Existing conditions

15

Hydraulic Road – Complete Street

Extending & connecting the grid with complete streets,

plus block-by-block redevelopment provides Transit

Targets & mode choice

16

Hydraulic Road - Complete Street

Completing the landscaping provides enhanced walking

& wheeling choices and business environment

17

REDESIGNED INTERSECTIONS

REDESIGNED INTERSECTIONS

FUTURE PARALLEL ROAD

AS DEVELOPMENT OCCURS

FUTURE IMPROVEMENTS

Small town revitalization - Lovingston, VA

Route 50 Rural Traffic Calming, VA

Community-Driven Goals:

• Increase quality of life

• improve conditions for pedestrians,

• create safe and attractive streets

• reduce the negative effects of

automobiles on the environment.

Objectives:

• slow traffic & reduce collisions

• reduce the need for police enforcement

• provide more greenery

• enhance historical, agriculture, & natural setting

• increase access to main street

• accommodate but not invite through traffic.

Route 50 Rural Traffic Calming, VA

Rt. 50 Design context zones transition from rural highway to towns

Route 50 & Route 15

Gilberts Corner Linked Roundabouts

• A system of roundabouts

at a rural highway

intersection addresses

increasing congestion &

safety issues

• Addition of a new

triangular ‘cut-off’ road,

with two new

roundabouts, removes

excess turning

movements from the main

roundabout

• Rural character is

preserved, along with

potential for compact

growth

21 icfi.com |

Multimodal corridor strategy Key strategy in urban, suburban, and rural areas

Multimodal Investment Strategy

Integrated, multimodal T&LU planning

Link cities & suburban corridors, growing

rural counties, and small towns

All-hands-on-deck public process

Include business and developers

Inter-agency collaboration & tech team

Focus on implementing the vision

Tie to local comprehensive plans &

DOT project programming

Multimodal Investment Strategy

Use projects to demonstrate state-of-the

art practices and policy changes

Voluntary participation using

incentives, not mandates

Target $$ toward strategic solutions

Put new $$ to work in support of new ideas

Leverage private investment

Use public funds to ‘connect the dots’

24

US29 facing south toward Rio Road

Typical suburban roadway with auto-oriented shopping

25


Urban grade separation (in distance) and multimodal

boulevard – 4 lanes each direction plus turn lanes (with

median islands for safety)

26


Mixed-use infill development on existing aging shopping

centers

27


Additional block-by-block redevelopment provides Transit

Targets and enhanced walking and wheeling choices

28




29




30


Landscaping matures over time

31


Zoomed in toward grade-separated intersection

32 icfi.com |

TDM and corridor operations

33 icfi.com |

TDM and corridor operations

34

Transforming ‘Gasoline Alley’ Becoming a Transit-Ready neighborhood center

35

Transforming ‘Gasoline Alley’ Medians and pedestrian improvements

36

Transforming ‘Gasoline Alley’ Continue public improvements

37

Transforming ‘Gasoline Alley’ Mixed-use infill development on individual properties

38

Transforming ‘Gasoline Alley’ Continue infill development

39

Transforming ‘Gasoline Alley’ Landscape matures over time

40

Transforming ‘Gasoline Alley’ Add transit service as market grows

41

Street design guidelines

City of Charlotte, NC Urban Streets Design Guidelines focus on

designing roadways for all users for different community context zones

42

Rural County design guidelines

Fluvanna County, VA

43

Nelson County Comp Plan – rural area

Complete Streets in Practice

There is no unified definition of a Complete Street.

Each road segment should be planned and built within the context of its surroundings.

Some common elements of Complete Street design include:

Pedestrian infrastructure such as sidewalks or crosswalks.

Bicycle infrastructure such as bicycle lanes or bicycle parking.

•44

Coordinated transit facilities such

as bus pull-outs or transit right of

way.

Aesthetic and safety

improvements, including

landscaping, contrasting

pavement colors, and signage.

Status of Complete Streets Legislation

15 states have enacted some form of Complete Streets legislation.

10 additional states have put statewide Complete Streets policies, design guidelines, or administrative procedures in place.

•45

Several hundred local

governments have

enacted Complete

Streets policies.

Roles of State, Regional, and Local Government in Complete Streets

States can take the lead role in delivering Complete Streets:

Adopt statewide legislation.

Select Complete Streets projects for state funding.

Organize and train planning, engineering, and design staff.

Create design manuals and guidance.

Local governments can play an important role:

Pass ordinances supportive of Complete Streets.

Select Complete Streets projects for municipal or county funding.

Adopt design manuals and/or guidance documents.

MPOs and transit agencies can also influence the delivery of Complete Streets.

Adopt regional or agency-wide policies and design guidance, incorporate complete streets principles in project funding.

•46

47 icfi.com |

Measuring performance

EXAMPLE PERFORMANCE MEASURES

Transit Accessibility.

– How usable is the transit network in terms of getting people to the top community destinations?

Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT).

– How much are people driving on a daily basis?

Bicycle and Pedestrian Mode Share.

– How many daily trips are made by walking or biking?

48 icfi.com |

Focused investment strategies

Review available funds/projects across all partners (inc private)

Re-purpose $$ ‘accruing’ into multimodal corridor target areas

Target short-term action:

–TDM, operational & access, transit & walk-bike improvements, connect-the-dots links to private investment

Complete the Networks

49 icfi.com |

Focused investment strategies

Complete the networks & build transit-oriented &

transit-ready corridors

Align major facility design with the surrounding network

& community context

Link land use & redevelopment decisions with

transportation investments

Questions?

Harrison Rue

[email protected]

(479) 226-3232

mailto:[email protected]

Jeff Tumlin, Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates

April 16, 2012 | APA Seminar

Freeways to Boulevards: Lessons from San Francisco and other cities

Los Angeles Freeway Network – Same Scale

Vancouver Freeway Network – Same Scale

San Francisco Freeway Network – Same Scale

New Orleans – Sam Scale

San Francisco Planned Freeways, 1940s

Source: Amit Ghosh, San Francisco Planning Department

San Francisco Freeway Revolt, 1950s and 1960s


The Ferry Building and the Embarcadero Freeway, pre 1980



The Embarcadero Freeway


San Francisco Earthquake, 1989

Source: Flickr user: California Watch


Embarcadero ramps removal, 1991




Alternative Concept for Embarcadero Tunnel





San Francisco waterfront

24


Results

• Housing units up 54%, 1990-2000 (a 74% increase above nearby ‘control’ areas)

• Jobs up 23%, 1990-2005 (a 318% increase above nearby ‘control’ areas)

• 75% increase in transit commute trips

• Freeway reduced home values by average of $118,000

“From Elevated Freeways to Surface Boulevards: Neighborhood, Traffic, and Housing Price Impacts in San Francisco,” by Robert Cervero, Junhee Kang, and Kevin Shively. Department of City and Regional Planning University of California, Berkeley, December 2007.


Central Freeway removal


Octavia Boulevard, Before

Octavia Boulevard Redesign

Steve Boland, Nelson\Nygaard

Octavia Boulevard, After

Octavia Boulevard


• Freeway built 1959 • Damaged 1989 • Upper deck removed 1996 • Third vote for boulevard, 1999 • Final demolition, 2003 • Boulevard open 2005 • Before replacement, carried

90,000 cars per day • Octavia: 45,000 cars per day • September headline of the San

Francisco Chronicle : “Traffic Planners Baffled by Success: No Central Freeway, No Gridlock, and No Explanation.”

Octavia Boulevard


• Freeway reduced home

values an average of $116,000

• With freeway: Housing prices 66% of median; after: 91% of median.

• Nearly 1,000 new housing units, of which half are permanently affordable.

Caution: Social Equity After boulevard, 12% increase in whites, and 33%

decrease in African American residents in neighborhood.

To minimize displacement and provide advantages for existing residents:

Capture property value increase and invest in existing businesses, cultural institutions, neighborhood stabilization.

Limit gentrification by zoning for smaller units, less parking.

Invest in permanently affordable housing.

Form neighborhood nonprofits and direct resources to them.

Ensure that impetus for change arises from within the neighborhood.

What happened to Central Freeway traffic?

San Francisco Department of Park and Traffic, 2006

Traffic on alternate routes increased by no more than 10%

Image: sfcityscape

Image: sfcityscape

Image: sfcityscape

Image: sfcityscape

Image: sfcityscape

Image: sfcityscape

Freeway Challenges: Traffic Impacts

Major Advantage: Speed, Especially for Long Distance Travel

Major Disadvantage: Local Access Constraint

Freeway capacity limited by capacity of ramps where freeway meets city grid.

Freeways don’t always increase network capacity – they may simply move the traffic bottleneck from one place to another.

If freeways interrupt the city street grid, they may remove as much network capacity as they create

Abu Dhabi: Limited Connectivity

• 18 lanes of through traffic

• Up to 2,000 vehicles per lane hour

• Up to 36,000 vehicles per hour

Abu Dhabi: Low Connectivity

Vancouver: High Connectivity

• 100 lanes of through traffic

• Up to 700 vehicles per lane hour

• Up to 70,000 vehicles per hour

• No freeways = twice the capacity!

Freeway Challenges: Economic Impacts

Major Advantage: Real Estate Value

Freeways create real estate value for auto dependent, far away places by providing speedy access to jobs and services

Major Disadvantage: Real Estate Value

Freeways reduce real estate value around them by eliminating direct access and increasing noise

Typically, urban freeways may cut adjacent real estate value by half; removing freeways doubles adjacent real estate value (Milwaukee, San Francisco data);

Freeway Challenges: Social Impacts

Major Advantage: Convenience for Cars

High speed, simple connections for cars

Major Disadvantage: All other Modes

Urban freeways make walking uncomfortable, dangerous and/or impossible

If passengers can’t cross the street, transit does not work

By excluding other modes, freeways increase the auto trip generation rate, meaning new capacity may be filled because more people must drive.

NELSON\NYGAARD CONSULTING ASSOCIATES © 2012

Jeff Tumlin 116 New Montgomery Street, Suite 500

San Francisco, CA 94105 415. 284.1544

[email protected]

Paula Reeves

Manager, Community Design

WSDOT’s Highways & Local Programs Division

Creating Livable Streets and Corridors (S526)

Washington State’s Experience

American Planning Association Conference

Los Angeles, CA

April 16, 2012

Key Topics

• Creating livable streets – Washington example

• Working with State DOT’s

• Recent projects – success stories

What steps are we taking?

• Developing new policies and guides (planning,

design, construction and maintenance)

• Restructuring procedures to accommodate all

users

• Offering workshops and other trainings

• Instituting better ways to measure performance

• Developing a project funding mechanism

Milestones in State Policy

• WSDOT Livable Communities Policy, 2000

• CSS Executive Order, 2003

• Design Guidance and Training, 2005 – Understanding Flexibility in Transportation, Washington

• State Funding for Pedestrian & Bicycle Safety, 2005

• AASHTO Environmental Excellence Award, 2006 – Best Organizational Integration of Context Sensitive Design

• State Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan adopted, 2008

• Complete Streets Bill (ESHB 1071) passed, 2011

• Flexible Design Bill (HB 1700) passed, 2012

4

Recent Milestones in Federal Policy

• Federal Highway Administration Issues Livable Communities Policy, June 2009

http://www.dot.gov/affairs/2009/dot8009.htm

• USDOT Policy on Biking and Walking, March 2010 http://www.dot.gov/affairs/2010/bicycle-ped.html

• 2010 FHWA applies Livable Communities criteria to all discretionary grant programs:

--Provide more transportation choices.

--Promote equitable, affordable housing.

--Enhance economic competitiveness.

--Support existing communities.

--Coordinate policies and leverage investment.

--Value communities and neighborhoods.

WSDOT Community Design –

Developing Streets for Everyone

Typical “Complete Street” Elements

Source: Association of Washington Cities

2008-09 Study:

State Highways as Main Streets

The Issues

• City streets operate as state highways

• Design affects community livability and safety

• Scope, schedule and budget changes on these streets/highways

The Research

1. System Analysis

2. Case Studies

Storefront Studio Program

University of Washington

College of Built Environments

Department of Architecture

http://www.storefrontstudio.org/


Variables Units of Measure State Route within City Limits Y, N

Highway of Statewide Significance Y, N

National Highway System Y, N

State Access Control Classification Y, N

Federal Functional Classification Principal arterials, Minor arterial

streets, Collector streets,

Local streets

Design Speed MPH

Posted Speed MPH

Year of Incorporation Year

Freight Classification

T-1 more than 10 million tons per year;

T-2 4 million to 10 million tons per year;

T-3 300,000 to 4 million tons per year;

T-4 100,000 to 300,000 tons per year;

T-5 at least 20,000 tons in 60 days

Collision History Number of collisions involving

bicyclists and pedestrians

What’s a Main Street Highway? Step 1: Screening

Ste

p 2

–

De

fin

ing

Main

Str

ee

t H

igh

wa

ys

Variables Units of Measure

Proportion of visible buildings that are commercial Percentage (25%, 50%, 75%, 100%)

Proportion of street frontage with dead space Percentage (25%, 50%, 75%, 100%)

Proportion of street frontage with parked cars Percentage (25%, 50%, 75%, 100%)

Proportion of street frontage with tree canopy Percentage (25%, 50%, 75%, 100%)

Number of travel lanes Number both directions

Average travel lane width Feet

Average shoulder width Feet

Average median width Feet

Average sidewalk width Feet

Total curb to curb width Feet

Total back of sidewalk to back of sidewalk width Feet

Posted speed limit MPH

Crosswalk spacing Feet

Visible curb extensions (y, n) Y,N

Average building setback Feet

Average building height (stories) Stories

Uniform building height (y, n)) Y,N

Number of pedestrians visible Count

Average daily traffic Volume

Visible bicycle lane Y ,N

Visible buildings that are historic Y,N

Findings

• Scope changes:

-- More common on Main Street Highways

-- 48% of all projects vs. 38% on other parts of the state system

• Retrospective review:

-- 40 projects or 20% of WSDOT’s scope, schedule and budget

changes could have directly benefited from additional community

design

• Average estimated saving per project:

-- Over $9 million dollars or 30% of project cost

• New Funding Program – Complete Streets (2011 Washington Legislation – ESHB 1071)

• New Design Approach (2012 Washington Legislation –HB 1700)

Implementing the Research

Example: State Route 14 – Bingen

Working with State DOT’s on joint projects

• Locate your advocate within the State DOT -Often the office administering federal aid

• Communicate early and often -Understand what is in plans and standards

• Anticipate a review process

• Involve the public in your project

• DO NOT give up -Where there is a will there is a way

• Clarify expectations, roles and responsibilities -Different goals?

-Who is the general contractor?

-Use a master contract for joint projects

Recent Success Stories

Before After

Haxton Way, Whatcom County, WA

Before After

State Route 99 - Des Moines, WA

Before After

Factoria Trail – I-405 - Bellevue, WA

Before After

State Route 203 - Carnation, WA

WSDOT Resources & Contacts…

WSDOT’s Complete Streets website

http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/LocalPrograms/Planning/MainStreets.htm

UW Storefront Studio website


State Highways as Main Streets: A Study of Community Design and Visioning

http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/Research/Reports/700/733.1.htm

Paula Reeves

Manager, Community Design Assistance

[email protected], 360-705-7258

Documents

Creating Livable Streets and Corridors (S526)media2.planning.org/APA2012/Presentations/S526... · University of California, Berkeley, December 2007. • Freeway reduced home values