New Mobi l i Metrics. Wednesday, 11/20/ 3. Marco Anderson, SCAG. Metro Ad Hoc Su~~ainabili~ty Comnni~t~e

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "New Mobi l i Metrics. Wednesday, 11/20/ 3. Marco Anderson, SCAG. Metro Ad Hoc Su~~ainabili~ty Comnni~t~e"

Myron Manning
5 years ago
Views:

1 New Mobi l i Metrics Marco Anderson, SCAG Robert A. Leiter, Urban and Environmental Planning Metro Ad Hoc Su~~ainabili~ty Comnni~t~e Wednesday, 11/20/ 3 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION Of GOVERNMENTS

2 Back g round H i g hwa y Ca p aci ~Y Model M u Iti-Moda:1 Level of.service C HAM M M LOS )p resented at SCAB 20 ~ 2 Com plebe Streets Confieren~~ LAD4T awe rded Compass BI u~pri nt grant to revise Traffic Im: p act Anal Y pis ~uid~iines No room far a uto-oriented rn iti - ations Costs biased a 9 a i nst i nfi l I develo p ment U n~ ble t~ demonstrate nexus between i m p act fees ~ nd non-auto mitigations

3 RQadw~y Engineering Mitigations

4 t ~ ~J Instructs QPR to devela p alternative to auto- oriented LAS anal v sis methodola ~y As ofi.7a n ua ry 2015 Auto LOS no longer to be considered si 9 n ifica nt i m p pct under CE A OPR wiii not ~e~ significance thresholds fiar new methodology Jurisdictions can still define LQS thresholds in zoning code using police powers AI lows cities or counties to exempt Iow VMT areas from regional congestion management plan through board or council action

SB 743 ppr T;me~;:ne Drafit M~thodolo gy Earl y 20.1.

5 SB 743 ppr T;me~;:ne Drafit M~thodolo gy Earl y Stakeholder Qutreach - Spring 2414 Final Draft Methodalo gv June 2014 Natural Resources A g Inc y Hearin 9 -Fall 2Q~4 Final Methadolo 9Y - as n ua r Y 2015

6 Ke Y Factors for M u Iti mods I Trans p ortation Im p act Anal y sis Methodolo gy..l.'fg.1 I.~::f;~' 'b a ~.~. 'if.y ~p, a~.~ ` ~a;{''' :....., a ~~, ''. a! ~.~~: ~~ ~~ : "},, ;~f,, fig: ~~ 4. ~lsl,~;,." ~y 3!~. y~~: s- d.,~j a:~~4 r 'W' i? ~~l~~ ~~y.a':~i~'~~ 't i~. x'+' ~i w ~ k a s

7 Model Ordinance Two-Tiered Approach 1. Overa I I statement of p u r p ose and applicability 2. Focused Planning Area Multimodal Tram p ortation Tm p y act Anal sis Planning area boundaries time horizons and Cumulative growth assumptions (including provisions for modifying trip generation rates based on area's land use/transportation context)

Model Ordinance Two-Tiered Approach (continued) Focused Planning Area Multimodal Transportation Impact Analysis (continued) Transportation modes and modal

8 Model Ordinance Two-Tiered Approach (continued) Focused Planning Area Multimodal Transportation Impact Analysis (continued) Transportation modes and modal performance standards p Traffic analysis methodology components Mitigation measures Allowable mitigation types Provisions regarding areawide TDM & TSM programs

9 Model Ordinance Two-Tiered Approach ~cor,tinued) l+ 3 Project-Level Multimodal ~ q ~ `~ ~~~~ -'~ T k Trans p ort~tion 1m p act ~~ ~' ~~~- ~~ Analysis :~ ~~ ~ ~. ~- ~, ~~ 'i!~~ 1 4'4 study area boundaries and tirn~ horizon Pro'ect definition and cumulative rowth ~~ ~, f i ~ ~~~ ~ ssum bons includin modifiied tri ~ ~_~~ ~ ~:~ ~`' ` ' ~ ~~`~ generation rates) ~ ~ ~-=~}-~ ~.,~~~ ~} ~, Tr n ortati n modes ~~. }~ ~ m, s ~~~~~~~~ ~ry~e~~a.: ~ ~ :~~w~.µ~~ a sp o ~--~-~ } ~ ~ ;..,~,. and modal performance standards '~`~~ b ~ ~~T~~ ~

Model Ordinance Two-Tiered Approach (continued) Tra~'fic analysis methodology components Significance thresholds Trip generation factors Mitigation measures Allowable mitigation types (priority

10 Model Ordinance Two-Tiered Approach (continued) Tra~'fic analysis methodology components Significance thresholds Trip generation factors Mitigation measures Allowable mitigation types (priority Qrder) C~Iculating mitigation credits..'~u~~` `~~~' ~.~w ~~~ Credit provisions for participating in areawide transportation demand m~na~ement programs end transportation system management programs

11 '~'...a 4' Stn. :.f: J.. ai~ tzs; M iti 9 ation Measure E~ca m p les F.~x ~- ~~4~.3ri~`" '.t~~l c...r:..:: ':#1

Case Studies and Re p orts Focused 'Planning Allowed Allowed Allowed Encouraged Area Studies TranspOrtatlon Local roadways; Local roadways; Freeways; local Freeways;.

12 Case Studies and Re p orts Focused 'Planning Allowed Allowed Allowed Encouraged Area Studies TranspOrtatlon Local roadways; Local roadways; Freeways; local Freeways;.local Modes transit; ped; bike transit; ped; bike roadways; transit; ped roadways; transit bike Performance Roadways only All modes Roadways only All modes Standards for All Modes Signifiicance Roadways only Roadways only Roadways only Not addressed Thresholds

13 Case Studies and R~ p orts Areawide Mitigation Allowed Allowed Allowed Programs Encouraged Credit for TDM and Allowed Allowed Not allowed TSM Not addressed "Fair Share" Concept Addressed Addressed Addressed Addressed How aremitigation Calculations are Not addressed in Must be Not addressed credits determined? based on factors guidelines demonstrated included in through TIA guidelines

14 Marco Anderson fir. Regional Planner Andersor~Ca~sca.ca.gov Robert A. Leiter, FAICP Urban and Environmental Planning Consultant ~~ SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION Of GOVERNMENTS

2016 Planning Conference July 26, CONNECT COLUMBUS Building Columbus Transportation Future

2016 Planning Conference July 26, 2016 CONNECT COLUMBUS Building Columbus Transportation Future What Is Connect Columbus? Project Process OUR PROCESS COMPLETE ONGOING Discovery + Desire Project Goals Columbus