Beyond First First Last Last Mile Strategies. APA National Conference April 3, 2016 Chelsea Richer, AICP Fehr & Peers

Similar documents
WALKNBIKE DRAFT PLAN NASHVILLE, TENNESSEE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY NASHVILLE, TENNESSEE

CITY OF COCOA BEACH 2025 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. Section VIII Mobility Element Goals, Objectives, and Policies

Performance Criteria for 2035 Long Range Transportation Plan

City of Charlottesville Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan Update

95 th Street Corridor Transportation Plan. Steering Committee Meeting #2

Bicycle and Pedestrian Chapter TPP Update Overview. TAB September 20, 2017

MAG Town of Cave Creek Bike Study Task 6 Executive Summary and Regional Significance Report

Sacramento Grid 2.0. The Downtown Transportation Study

CONNECTING PEOPLE TO PLACES

San Mateo County Comprehensive Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan Open House

Executive Summary Route 30 Corridor Master Plan

Active Transportation Goals

Chapter 9: Pedestrians and Bicyclists

First Mile, Last Mile: Plans for all Shapes and Sizes. Hannah Lindelof, Principal Planner San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit September 18, 2017

Technical Working Group November 15, 2017

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY... vii 1 STUDY OVERVIEW Study Scope Study Area Study Objectives

Omaha s Complete Streets Policy

Vision. Goals and Objectives. Walking

Complete Streets. Complete Streets and other City Initiatives. City & County Initiatives. Honolulu Complete Streets Program

Welcome. Background. Goals. Vision

Community Transportation Plan Acknowledgements

Solana Beach Comprehensive Active Transportation Strategy (CATS)

TRANSIT & NON-MOTORIZED PLAN DRAFT FINAL REPORT Butte County Association of Governments

Moving Cambridge. City of Cambridge Transportation Master Plan Public Consultation Centre. March 7, :00 8:00 PM.

Chapter 7. Transportation. Transportation Road Network Plan Transit Cyclists Pedestrians Multi-Use and Equestrian Trails

Appendix C 3. Bicycle / Pedestrian Planning

APPENDIX A: Complete Streets Checklist DRAFT NOVEMBER 2016

Chapter 7: Six-Step Implementation Process

BIKE PLAN CONTENTS GATEWAY

City of Waterloo Complete Streets Policy

Hennepin County Bicycle and Pedestrian Planning

Community Task Force November 15, 2017

Chapter 5 Future Transportation

NM-POLICY 1: Improve service levels, participation, and options for non-motorized transportation modes throughout the County.

Physical Implications of Complete Streets Policies

Stakeholder Meeting Handouts. January 2013

Bus Rapid Transit Plans

El Centro Mobility Hub

PRINCE GEORGE S PLAZA METRO AREA PEDESTRIAN PLAN

PEDESTRIAN ACTION PLAN

How To Encourage More Efficient Transportation in Brazilian Cities

Intro Strategic Plan SFTP TDM Facilities Transit Bicycle Pedestrian Taxi BICYCLE UPDATE. Presented by Timothy Papandreou, Strategic Planning & Policy

Intermodal Connections with Light Rail in Phoenix, AZ Wulf Grote, P.E. Director, Planning & Development

CITY OF BLOOMINGTON COMPLETE STREETS POLICY

Welcome! Public Open House on UBC s Transportation Plan

PEDESTRIAN ACTION PLAN

ACTIA Programs Annual Compliance Report Reporting Year Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Table 1: Summary of Expenditures and Accomplishments

El Camino Real Specific Plan. TAC/CAC Meeting #2 Aug 1, 2018

ADOT Statewide Bicycle and Pedestrian Program Summary of Phase IV Activities APPENDIX B PEDESTRIAN DEMAND INDEX

Chapter 2. Bellingham Bicycle Master Plan Chapter 2: Policies and Actions

Bicycle Facilities Planning

Access BART: TOD and Improved Connections. October 29, 2008

CITY OF PORTSMOUTH PLANNING DEPARTMENT

Active Transportation Access to Transit

MCTC 2018 RTP SCS and Madera County RIFP Multi-Modal Project Eval Criteria GV13.xlsx

West Capitol Avenue Road Rehabilitation and Safety Enhancement Project

Transportation Master Plan Advisory Task Force

2018 Transportation Survey October 17, Prepared by:

Ajax: The Road to Complete Streets

General Plan Circulation Element Update Scoping Meeting April 16, 2014 Santa Ana Senior Center, 424 W. 3rd Street, Santa Ana, CA 92701

Overview: Phase 3 Draft Development and Circulation Plans, White Bear Station

MASTER BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN PLAN

95 th Street Corridor Transportation Plan. Steering Committee Meeting

Exhibit 1 PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA ITEM

Complete Streets: Planning, Policy & Performance

Proposed. City of Grand Junction Complete Streets Policy. Exhibit 10

Best Southwest Transportation Committee. North Central Texas Council of Governments Transportation Department

City of White Rock. Strategic Transportation Plan. May 16, 2005

Chapter 14 PARLIER RELATIONSHIP TO CITY PLANS AND POLICIES. Recommendations to Improve Pedestrian Safety in the City of Parlier (2014)

Goals, Objectives, and Policies

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY. Vision

City of Wilsonville 5 th Street to Kinsman Road Extension Project

TOWN OF PORTLAND, CONNECTICUT COMPLETE STREETS POLICY

Plant City Walk-Bike Plan

5. RUNNINGWAY GUIDELINES

ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION

Rail Station Fact Sheet CentrePort/DFW Airport Station

Bikeway action plan. Bicycle Friendly Community Workshop March 5, 2007 Rochester, MN

SANTA CLARA COUNTYWIDE BICYCLE PLAN August 2008

Transportation, Parking & Roads

Goal 3: Foster an environment of partnerships and collaboration to connect our communities and regions to one another.

Capital and Strategic Planning Committee. Item III - B. April 12, WMATA s Transit-Oriented Development Objectives

Contents. Champaign-Urbana Mass Transit District Stop Placement Guidelines

First and Last Mile Plan. April 2016

TRANSPORTATION TRAINING TOPICS. April 6, 2010

Bicycle Master Plan Goals, Strategies, and Policies

CITY OF KASSON TRANSPORTATION ALTERNATIVES KASSON SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL

City of Birmingham Draft Multi-modal Transportation Plan

A Survey of Planning, Design, and Education for Bikeways and Bus Routes on Urban Streets

Roads and Vehicular Traffic Design Principles. Roads and Vehicular Traffic Recommendations

Watertown Complete Streets Prioritization Plan. Public Meeting #1 December 14, 2017

City of Jacksonville Mobility Fee Update

LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY COMPREHENSIVE & STRATEGIC CAMPUS MASTER PLAN. APPENDIX L - Mobilitiy Component Implementation Matrix

Eliminate on-street parking where it will allow for a dedicated bus only lane %

Urbana Pedestrian Master Plan

USDOT Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Initiative: Safer People and Safer Streets. Barbara McCann, USDOT Office of Policy

REGIONAL BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN DESIGN GUIDELINES

University of Victoria Campus Cycling Plan Terms of Reference. 1.0 Project Description

REYKJAVÍK - NEW MOBILITY OPTIONS

MAYFIELD ROAD CORRIDOR MULTIMODAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN. Public Workshop

Transcription:

Beyond First First Last Last Mile Strategies APA National Conference April 3, 2016 Chelsea Richer, AICP Fehr & Peers 1

Beyond First Last Mile Strategies APA National Conference Jeremy Klop, AICP, Fehr & Peers April 3, 2016

Overview What is the Active Transportation Strategic Plan? How does it extend beyond typical first/last mile strategies? Innovative funding and implementation Barriers and challenges to the process 3

Active Transportation Planning at Metro 4

Metro s Active Transportation Planning Goals Improve access to transit Establish active transportation as integral elements of the transportation system Enhance safety Promote clean transportation options Improve public health Foster healthy, equitable, and economically vibrant communities 5

Active Transportation Strategic Plan Objectives Identify improvements that increase access to transit for people who walk and bike. Create a regional active transportation network. Develop supporting programs and policies. Guide future investments. Develop a funding strategy. 6

Active Transportation Strategic Plan Process 7

Active Transportation Strategic Plan Process 8

Active Transportation Strategic Plan Stakeholder Engagement 9

First Last Mile, Extended - 661 Station Areas 10

First Last Mile, Extended - Regional Active Transportation Network 11

First Last Mile, Extended - Data Innovations 12

First Last Mile, Extended - Data Innovations 13

First Last Mile, Extended - Data Innovations 14

First Last Mile, Extended - Regional Network Gap Analysis Facility Type Class I Shared- Use Path Class II Bicycle Lane Class III Bicycle Route Class IV Protected Bicycle Lane Eligible Under the Following Conditions Always Facilities are buffered with additional lateral striping Facilities are located on a low-stress roadway Facilities are located on a low-stress roadway Facilities incorporate auxiliary traffic calming measures to create a lowstress environment Always 15

Innovative Funding & Implementation Proposes active transportation routes that connect multiple jurisdictions, communities, & regional destinations Shows by example how to scope projects to improve station area access Pulls together progressive design resources Provides guidance on obtaining & executing funding Shares cost estimates and related tools Provides clarity on the process of implementation 16

Innovative Funding & Implementation - Regional Project List CORRIDOR AND SEGMENT TOTAL MILEAGE UNBUILT MILEAGE 17

Innovative Funding & Implementation - Case Studies 18

Innovative Funding & Implementation - Case Studies Key Access Barriers 19

Innovative Funding & Implementation - Case Studies Key Recommendations 20

Innovative Funding & Implementation - Case Studies 21

Innovative Funding & Implementation - Cost Estimates 22

Innovative Funding & Implementation - Design Resources 23

Barriers and Challenges 24

Barriers and Challenges 88 Cities and everyone is at a different place in the process Metro s role in institutionalizing How and when to engage stakeholders Methodology discussions Case study typology Specific identification of case studies Effective storytelling 25

Thanks! Jeremy Klop, AICP Principal, Fehr & Peers j.klop@fehrandpeers.com Metro Active Transportation Strategic Plan Webpage: metro.net/activetransportationstrategicplan 26

First/Last Mile Strategy Study Jennifer K. McGrath Utah Transit Authority, Active Transportation Planner

Project Team & Study Area First/Last Mile Definition Project Purpose Project Process Findings/Recommendations Phase II Funding and Implementation - 2016 TIGER Grant

UTA, UDOT, WFRC, & MAG Fehr & Peers, Nelson\Nygaard, & U of U Traffic Lab All Fixed Guideway Stations (68)

Develop recommendations for a comprehensive First/Last Mile Strategy by 2014 Increase Ridership Support 2015 customer and stakeholder satisfaction goal To recommend strategies that will increase access to stations and increase ridership

Station area audits Station area connectivity Vehicle and bicycle parking supply Future demographics Future TOD plans Open UTA Survey On-Board Origin-Destination Survey

Typologies represent the range of stations within UTA s service area Typology criteria: Walk access Active transportation mode split Densities Availability of parking supply Demographic information

Urban Walk Access: High Active Mode Split: High Auto Mode Split: Low Active+Transit Mode Split: High Parking Spaces: None Station Example: City Center Multi-Modal Walk Access: Medium/High Active Mode Split: Medium/High Auto Mode Split: Low/Medium Active+Transit Mode Split: High Parking Spaces: Low Station Example: Millcreek Institutional This typology is determined by the location, which is a single land use/user. All campus locations are included in this typology. Station Example: Orem Suburban Non-Residential Walk Access: Low-High Active Mode Split: Low-High Auto Mode Split: Low- Medium Active+Transit Mode Split: Medium/High Parking Spaces: None-High Station Example: Ogden Suburban Walk Access: Low-High Active Mode Split: Low/Medium Auto Mode Split: Low-High Active+Transit Mode Split: Low-High Parking Spaces: Low-High Station Example: Provo Auto Dependent Walk Access: Low/Medium Active Mode Split: Low Auto Mode Split: High Active+Transit Mode Split: Low Parking Spaces: High Station Example: Woods Cross

Effectiveness in adding ridership Improve safety Used by peers Costliness Stakeholder support Ease of implementation

coring System Solution was best for criteria Solution was average for criteria Solution was poor for criteria Has stakeholder support Ease of Implementation Effective in adding ridership Evaluation Criteria Improves Safety Used by peers Candidate Projects Crosswalk Improvements 3 3 2 2 1 3 14 HAWK Beacons/Ped Signals 3 2 3 3 1 2 14 1 Bike Lanes 3 2 3 2 1 3 14 1 On-site Wayfinding/Signage 3 3 3 1 1 3 14 1 Protected Bike Lanes 3 1 3 3 1 2 13 5 Costliness Wayfinding to Station 3 3 2 1 1 3 13 5 Sidewalks 3 2 2 3 1 1 12 7 Access Connections 3 1 2 3 1 2 12 7 ADA Access Improvements 2 3 1 2 1 3 12 7 Pedestrian Signage Improvements 0 3 2 2 1 3 11 11 Bike Sharing 3 3 2 2 1 1 12 7 Bus Stop Enhancements 3 2 1 2 1 2 11 11 Carsharing 2 3 2 1 1 2 11 11 Streetscape Improvements 3 2 1 1 3 10 14 Street Lighting for Pedestrians 2 2 2 2 2 10 14 Bike Paths 0 1 3 3 1 2 10 14 Bike Racks 0 3 2 1 1 3 10 14 Bike Signage 1 3 2 1 1 2 10 14 Improve Intersection Crossings 1 2 1 2 1 2 9 19 Signal Improvements 1 2 1 2 3 9 19 Bike Lockers 0 2 2 1 1 3 9 19 Bike Storage on Trains 3 1 1 1 1 2 9 19 Station Area Lighting 1 3 1 2 2 9 19 Real Time Information 3 2 1 1 1 1 9 19 Dynamic Ridesharing 2 3 1 1 2 9 19 Interchange Improvements 3 1 3 1 8 26 Bicycle Signal/Intersection Tools 0 2 1 3 2 8 26 Employer-Based TDM Tools 1 2 1 1 1 2 8 26 Improved Passenger Waiting Areas 1 1 2 1 1 2 8 26 Carpool/Vanpool 0 3 1 1 1 2 8 26 Priority Carpool Parking 0 3 1 1 3 8 26 Roadway Lighting 0 2 1 2 2 7 32 Paratransit Loading Area 1 2 2 2 7 32 Shared Bus Bays 0 3 1 1 2 7 32 Taxi Sharing 0 3 1 1 2 7 32 Residential Permit Parking 1 3 1 1 1 7 32 Integrated Fare Pay Systems 2 1 1 1 1 6 37 Transit Signal Priority 1 2 1 1 1 6 37 Bus Turnouts 1 1 1 1 2 6 37 On-site Staffing 1 2 2 1 6 37 Road Diets 1 1 2 1 5 41 Bike Stations 0 1 1 1 1 1 5 41 Shuttles 0 1 1 1 1 1 5 41 Commercial Ridesharing 0 2 1 1 1 5 41 Parking Benefit District 1 1 1 1 4 45 Queue Bypass Lanes 0 1 1 1 3 46 Score Overall Ranking

Wayfinding and information Bicycle network improvements Pedestrian network improvements Access connections Crossing treatments Bike share stations Car share stations Rail and bus stop enhancements Shuttles (including current UTA shuttle programs, Van pool, Vanpool Shuttles, Ridevan Plus)

- Phase II

Station specific plans by typology Synthesize and gather detailed station information Develop dynamic maps to show recommendations by station Package plans to create an annual program of projects

Funding and Implementation Design recommended strategies for individual stations to develop preliminary costs Identify funding options Collaborate with Cities and Counties for funding and implementation 2016 Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) Proposed Project Project Goal Reduce and remove barriers to transit access and transportation corridors in order to connect communities, employment centers, educational institutions, public services, and other community resources. This project will improve safety for pedestrians and cyclists, with an emphasis on developing mobility for transportation disadvantaged communities and the creation of ladders of opportunity.

Barriers and Challenges Project Readiness (Planning) Project Prioritization Balancing Regional Priorities FUNDING!

Jennifer K McGrath Utah Transit Authority Active Transportation Planner jmcgrath@rideuta.com or 801.237.1998

Beyond First Last Mile Strategies Questions & Answers 51