Presented by:
Barbara Arens, PE, PTOE
PB Vice President
Brad Strader, AICP, PTP
Managing Partner LSL Planning
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?
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


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







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

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
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

• 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 Socio-
Economic data
Projected
Deficiencies
(congestion) and
Alternatives
Analysis
Linking Land Use & Transportation
Recommended Changes – typically to add capacity




Macroscopic

Travel Demand
Forecasting Models
Mesoscopic
Modelling

DTA
Microscopic
Simulation

Detailed MOEs
Linking Land Use & Transportation

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

Connectivity: Streets Designed for Land Use
(Context) and Uses
PRIME CONNECTOR
NEIGHBORHOOD CONNECTOR
ACTIVITY | DESTINATION CORRIDOR
BUSINESS CORRIDOR
ACCESS
N.M.
1 – ½ MILE SIGNALS, 455’ DRIVE
SPACING W/ SVC DRIVES
CONSTRUCT PATHWAYS
455’ SPACING, RETRO-FIT TO REDUCE #
ESP. NEAR SIGNALS
ADD SIDEWALKS, CONNECT GAPS
Linking Land Use & Transportation
PARK AND RIDE
COMMUTER | WORKHORSE CORRIDOR
FIXED ROUTE MAJOR ROADS
RETRO-FIT AND NEW CROSS-ACCESS TO REDUCE #
ESP. SIGNALS AND POOR OFFSETS
WIDEN SIDEWALKS, ADD PED SIGNALS,
CONNECT GAPS ESP. NEAR TRANSIT
FREQUENT BUS, POTENTIAL EXPRESS BUS,
BRT/LRT/STREETCAR, TOD REDEVELOPMENT

Functional Class
Context
User Needs (LOS)
Local Streets (not shown)
Linking Land Use & Transportation

Boulevard / Commuter
Corridor
Urban Activity Center Local Street
Linking Land Use & Transportation
LSL Planning / City of Lansing, MI
Comprehensive Plan

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




How does CSS apply to Streets?
What are Complete Streets?
How do these two Connect?
Linking Land Use & Transportation
17





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

“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
Linking Land Use & Transportation
19

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

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
23 Linking Land Use & Transportation

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












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
Linking Land Use & Transportation

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



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

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

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
Linking Land Use & Transportation
29

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

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




New Jersey Route 9
Boulder, Colorado
Ann Arbor, Michigan
Transportation Plan
Update/University of
Michigan
Linking Land Use & Transportation

Matching the Road to the Community
Higher Density: Current Reality Higher Density: Future Concept
33

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

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

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

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.

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




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 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
Linking Land Use & Transportation

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

Brad
Strader strader@lslplanning.com
248.586.0505
arens@pbworld.com
313.963.4651
Barbara
Arens
Linking Land Use & Transportation