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