Transportation Advisory GroupScenarios Development Workshop           June 28, 2012
Introductions Steve Thieken, B&N     Project Manger Jamie Snow, B&N     Senior Transportation Planner & Modeler Joel Mann,...
Meeting Purpose Brainstorm and discuss concepts to include in the long range transportation plan The concepts presented an...
Agenda Part 1 - Set the Stage     Review and discuss Draft Transportation Goals, Objectives, Measures     Review Conceptua...
Process
Overall Planning Process Regional Visioning Process (basically complete) Transportation Advisory Group   Meeting 1 – Kicko...
Transportation Planning Process  LRTP ProcessSource: Transportation Planning Process KeyIssues, 2007, A Publication of the...
Improvement Ideas and Strategies Concepts should be rooted in:         Community’s                                        ...
Goals, Objectives, Measures  Transportation Advisory Group      It’s Time to Chart Our Future
Improvement Ideas and Strategies       Community’s                                             Regional Vision     Vision,...
Draft LRTP Goals   Regional Visioning Process       •Stakeholder Meetings (January)       •Idea Gathering Meetings (Januar...
Draft LRTP Goals   Regional Visioning Process       •Stakeholder Meetings (January)       •Idea Gathering Meetings (Januar...
Regional Visioning Process (quick review) Regional Visioning Group      Kickoff Meeting (November 8th)      General Worksh...
Regional Visioning Process Step 1 - Developing Goals and Vision Statements                        &       Idea Gathering  ...
Regional Visioning Process Step 2 - Developing Principles and Regional Vision                         &        Goals & Vis...
Regional Visioning Process Principles and Vision Plan feed the LRTP         Principles &          Technical        Regiona...
Transportation Vision Statement Vision Statement from Crossroads effort:   Moving… A balanced, safe, attractive, and acces...
Draft LRTP Goals   Regional Visioning Process       •Stakeholder Meetings (January)       •Idea Gathering Meetings (Januar...
TAG #1 FeedbackGROUP 1                                                                GROUP 2Goal: Preserve, Improve and E...
Draft LRTP Goals   Regional Visioning Process       •Stakeholder Meetings (January)       •Idea Gathering Meetings (Januar...
Federally Required Planning Factors  1.   Support the economic vitality of the metropolitan area, especially by       enab...
Draft LRTP Goals   Regional Visioning Process       •Stakeholder Meetings (January)       •Idea Gathering Meetings (Januar...
Goals Feedback                                                                   Rating by Person Average                 ...
LRTP Goal #1Goal #1: A multimodal transportation system that efficiently moves people and goodsOBJECTIVES                 ...
LRTP Goal #2Goal #2: A transportation system in which all modes are highly integrated and connectedOBJECTIVES             ...
LRTP Goal #3Goal #3: A multimodal transportation system that safely moves people and goodsOBJECTIVES                      ...
LRTP Goal #4Goal #4: A transportation system that maximizes the efficiency of freight movement through and within the regi...
LRTP Goal #5Goal #5: Greater collaboration between local agencies, state officials, and private interests in the pursuit a...
LRTP Goal #6Goals #6: A Transportation system that is attractive, sustainable, and livable.OBJECTIVES                     ...
LRTP Goal #7Goals #7: Reduce automobile trip demand, especially during peak travel hoursOBJECTIVES                        ...
2006 – 2008 Mode Split (commuting)                                                                        6.71%           ...
LRTP Goal #8Goals #8: A multimodal transportation system that enhances the homeland security of the regionOBJECTIVES      ...
Addressing the Eight Planning Factors                      SAFETEA-LU Planning Factors                                  Dr...
Regional Vision – Growth      Framework Transportation Advisory Group     It’s Time to Chart Our Future
Improvement Ideas and Strategies       Community’s                                             Regional Vision     Vision,...
Conceptual Framework Map Michael Insert final version
Concepts  Preserve Open – Areas that are permanently protected from development (parkland)  Reserve Open – Areas of steep ...
Conceptual Framework Map A visual representation of the Vision for growth Preliminarily based on: 1. Results of Understand...
Patterns we found in the Understanding Future Growth Workshop:                    Redevelopment at higher intensitiesExamp...
Patterns we found in the Understanding Future Growth Workshop:                            Infill DevelopmentExamples:     ...
Patterns we found in the Understanding Future Growth Workshop:              Greenfield development is limited and clustere...
Patterns we found in the Understanding Future Growth Workshop:                    Very limited development in outlying are...
Conceptual Framework Map Michael Insert final version
Conceptual Framework Map Summary A visual representation of the Vision   Represents the intended approach to growth in the...
Countywide Land Use ProjectionsHousing   •Demand for almost 17,200 more housing units by 2037   •Increase of 42.9% in 25 y...
Sub-Area Projections
Incorporating Future Growth Model Inputs        Travel Demand          Forecasted • Roadway Network   Model Process       ...
Current SystemTransportation Advisory Group    It’s Time to Chart Our Future
Improvement Ideas and Strategies       Community’s                                             Regional Vision     Vision,...
Roadways Characteristics• Nearly 17% of roadway “arterials” are at, or over  capacity with numerous “bottlenecks” in the  ...
Roadway Challenges• Very difficult (costly) to widen existing or construct  new roads due to limited right-of-way availabi...
Automobile Traffic Characteristics• Peak travel times and traffic operations are  highly influenced by WVU schedule• Trave...
Primary Public Transit Service Providers• Mountain Line Transit Authority     Focus on the urban core with reach into the ...
Transit Characteristics• Good transit service coverage in key populated  areas• Frequency of service is deficient in most ...
Pedestrian System Characteristics Primarily sidewalks and multi-use trails Grade/topography a major concern Sidewalk cover...
Pedestrian Safety 1998 through 2008   226 reported pedestrian injuries   Consistently 20 to 25 pedestrian injuries per yea...
Pedestrian Demand Local demographics lead to:   Walking more prevalent in Morgantown than   anywhere else in WV   Signific...
Bicycling Characteristics On-street travel:    Narrow lanes and steep grades can make bicycling    difficult on many roadw...
Bicycling Characteristics Trails    Excellent opportunities for cycling (recreational and    commuting) on trails    Nearl...
Bicycling Characteristics Parking    Numerous racks in City and WVU Campus    Parking rings already added to several downt...
Freight Trucking   Designated truck routes: I-68, I-79, US 119, US 19,   WV 7, and CR 857 Two Active Rail Lines Monongahel...
Air Travel Morgantown Municipal Airport (Hart Field)    Commercial passenger travel available 7 days    Private hangers
Funding the Plan
Funding Trends Gas consumption is down   Price, fuel economy, unemployment   Flat tax per gallon   Revenue down Limited/no...
State Forecast Transportation revenue expected to stay flat       STATE ROAD FUND REVENUE ESTIMATES*            FY        ...
Purchasing Power Decreasing “Due to declining revenue and inflation, the Agency’s purchasing power will effectively be cut...
TABLE # 12                  25-YEAR STATEWIDE REVENUE PROJECTIONSStatewide                     FY 2013 - FY 2037          ...
Funding Forecast forWV MPO LRTPs IMPROVEMENT 2011 DOLLARS (000s) (FY 2013-2037)                         FORECAST SUMMARY  ...
GMA LRTP 25-YR IMPROVEMENT FUNDING FORECAST (IN 2011 DOLLARS)                     VALUES AS OF 1/15/11 AND PRESENTED IN TH...
Alternative Funding Thoughts Local taxes Impact fees Developer contributions Tolling User fees Contracts Private-public pa...
Scenario Planning Targets Green Wave!   $300M – Optimistic (lay it all out there) Status Quo (State Projection)   $150M – ...
Scenario Toolbox
Past/Current/Future Projects Most of 2004 MPO priority projects list is complete   Turn lanes, lane additions, signals, sa...
Mileground Estimates    Estimated Cost - $40M +    Preliminary estimates                              Approx.Phase        ...
Break
ScenariosDevelopment Exercise
Next Steps Refine goals, objectives, and measures Technical Analysis of Scenarios   Further detailing   Field reviews as n...
June 28, 2012 Transportation Advisory Group Presentation
June 28, 2012 Transportation Advisory Group Presentation
June 28, 2012 Transportation Advisory Group Presentation
June 28, 2012 Transportation Advisory Group Presentation
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

June 28, 2012 Transportation Advisory Group Presentation

429 views
381 views

Published on

Published in: Business
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
429
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
198
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
1
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

June 28, 2012 Transportation Advisory Group Presentation

  1. 1. Transportation Advisory GroupScenarios Development Workshop June 28, 2012
  2. 2. Introductions Steve Thieken, B&N Project Manger Jamie Snow, B&N Senior Transportation Planner & Modeler Joel Mann, Kittelson & Associates Senior Planner
  3. 3. Meeting Purpose Brainstorm and discuss concepts to include in the long range transportation plan The concepts presented and scenarios developed will form the basis/first step for the project team’s analysis of alternatives and ultimately the recommended plan
  4. 4. Agenda Part 1 - Set the Stage Review and discuss Draft Transportation Goals, Objectives, Measures Review Conceptual Development Map (from regional visioning process) Overview of current transportation Discuss funding Review the “toolbox” of concepts Part 2 - Build the Scenarios Develop three Scenarios (small group work) Report-out from each group (larger group) Compare/contrast scenarios and discussion (larger group) Work to merge into three consensus “hybrid” Scenarios (larger group)
  5. 5. Process
  6. 6. Overall Planning Process Regional Visioning Process (basically complete) Transportation Advisory Group Meeting 1 – Kickoff/Existing Conditions/Goals (May 17th) Meeting 2 – Alternatives Workshop (today) Meeting 3 – Alternatives Analysis Review (September) Meeting 4 – Draft Recommended Plan Review (late October) Public Engagement Open House (late October) Stakeholder Discussions (ongoing) Website
  7. 7. Transportation Planning Process LRTP ProcessSource: Transportation Planning Process KeyIssues, 2007, A Publication of theTransportation Planning Capacity BuildingProgram
  8. 8. Improvement Ideas and Strategies Concepts should be rooted in: Community’s Regional Vision Vision, Goals and for Growth Objectives Improvement Ideas and Strategies Deficiencies and Needs in System
  9. 9. Goals, Objectives, Measures Transportation Advisory Group It’s Time to Chart Our Future
  10. 10. Improvement Ideas and Strategies Community’s Regional Vision Vision, Goals and for Growth Objectives Improvement Ideas and Strategies Deficiencies and Needs in System
  11. 11. Draft LRTP Goals Regional Visioning Process •Stakeholder Meetings (January) •Idea Gathering Meetings (January) Draft LRTP Goals, TAG Meeting #1 (May 17th) •Goals Exercise Objectives, and Measures Eight Metropolitan Planning Factors •FHWA •SAFETEA-LU
  12. 12. Draft LRTP Goals Regional Visioning Process •Stakeholder Meetings (January) •Idea Gathering Meetings (January) Draft LRTP Goals, TAG Meeting #1 (May 17th) •Goals Exercise Objectives, and Measures Eight Metropolitan Planning Factors •FHWA •SAFETEA-LU
  13. 13. Regional Visioning Process (quick review) Regional Visioning Group Kickoff Meeting (November 8th) General Workshop (December 7th) Goal Writing Workshop (February 29th) Stakeholder Interviews (January 24th – 26th) Public Meetings Idea Gathering (January 25th and 26th) Understanding Future Growth (March 28th) Community Choices Workshop (June 6th)
  14. 14. Regional Visioning Process Step 1 - Developing Goals and Vision Statements & Idea Gathering Stakeholder Meetings Interviews Goals & Vision Statements
  15. 15. Regional Visioning Process Step 2 - Developing Principles and Regional Vision & Goals & Vision Understanding Statements Future Growth Principles & Regional Vision
  16. 16. Regional Visioning Process Principles and Vision Plan feed the LRTP Principles & Technical Regional Vision Findings Transportation and Comprehensive Plans
  17. 17. Transportation Vision Statement Vision Statement from Crossroads effort: Moving… A balanced, safe, attractive, and accessible transportation system will reduce congestion, improve connectivity and support and direct future growth integrating private vehicles and expanding public transportation, biking, and walking networks. One of the five broad vision statements for the region Crossroads also produced goals and objective that were at the last TAG meeting
  18. 18. Draft LRTP Goals Regional Visioning Process •Stakeholder Meetings (January) •Idea Gathering Meetings (January) Draft LRTP Goals, TAG Meeting #1 (May 17th) •Goals Exercise Objectives, and Measures Eight Metropolitan Planning Factors •FHWA •SAFETEA-LU
  19. 19. TAG #1 FeedbackGROUP 1 GROUP 2Goal: Preserve, Improve and Enhance LOS on Arteries and Goal: Improve Ingress/Egress to the Core (density) of theConnector roads. community.Objective 1.1- Improve travel times. Objective 1- Reduce time for people to core.Objective 1.2- More people per vehicle. -Travel time for people (all modes).Goal: An Operational system that all modes can use efficiently. Objective 2- Increase ability to get more people to/from core.Objective 2.1- By [DATE] we will have a set of operational and - Number of people (all modes) trips.enforcement guidelines. - Commuting (Population, Jobs, Students).Objective 2.2- Add the human touch back into operations. Objective 3- Increase route options (all modes).Goal: Promote pedestrian traffic outside municipal boundaries. Goal: Increase Alternatives to traveling (using traditionalGoal: New freight infrastructure that is not based on roads/trucks. transportation systems)Goal: Expand airport for Multi functional air travel. Objective 1- Increase telecommuting /Electronic technology capacity, students to classes.GROUP 3 -Number of people telecommuting andGoal: Integrated Transportation system that includes where all number of students taking classes remotelymodes are viable to the public. -Efficiency of broadband system (or other).Objective 1- 5% bicycle trips 2030. Objective 2- Support Development/Land Use patterns thatObjective 2- 20% of all trips on foot. decrease need to travel.Objective 3- Public transit system 15min headways in urban areas. -Increase in mixed use neighborhoods.Goal: Transportation system that provides an acceptable traffic flow -Trips.during peak commuting periods. Goal: Reduce personal auto use.Objective 1 - Improving Key congestion areas. Objective 1- Reduce number of people reliant on personalObjective 2- Increase vehicle occupancy by 30%. autos.Goal: Reduce injury & death -Personal Auto OwnershipObjective 1 - Design of future transportation project reduce -Auto Volumesaccidents. Objective 2- Reduce land area needed for personal travel -Land Area used for parking
  20. 20. Draft LRTP Goals Regional Visioning Process •Stakeholder Meetings (January) •Idea Gathering Meetings (January) Draft LRTP Goals, TAG Meeting #1 (May 17th) •Goals Exercise Objectives, and Measures Eight Metropolitan Planning Factors •FHWA •SAFETEA-LU
  21. 21. Federally Required Planning Factors 1. Support the economic vitality of the metropolitan area, especially by enabling global competitiveness, productivity, and efficiency; 2. Increase the safety of the transportation system for motorized and non-motorized users; 3. Increase the security of the transportation system for motorized and non-motorized users; 4. Increase accessibility and mobility of people and freight; 5. Protect and enhance the environment, promote energy conservation, improve the quality of life, and promote consistency between transportation improvements and State and local planned growth and economic development patterns; 6. Enhance the integration and connectivity of the transportation system, across and between modes, for people and freight; 7. Promote efficient system management and operation; and 8. Emphasize the preservation of the existing transportation system. Resource: SAFETEA-LU
  22. 22. Draft LRTP Goals Regional Visioning Process •Stakeholder Meetings (January) •Idea Gathering Meetings (January) Draft LRTP Goals, TAG Meeting #1 (May 17th) •Goals Exercise Objectives, and Measures Eight Metropolitan Planning Factors •FHWA •SAFETEA-LU
  23. 23. Goals Feedback Rating by Person Average 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 RatingHow well do these eight transportation goals and respective 3 4 2 3 3 3 3 3objectives capture the communitys needs and desires? Goal #1 8 10 9 10 10 3 8.3 Goal #2 10 9 2 8 8 7 7.3 Goal #3 7 9 2 9 4 10 6.8 Goal #4 7 8 7 9 6 5 7How important do you believe this goal is? Goal #5 10 10 10 10 5 7 8.7 Goal #6 10 8 5 9 7 8 7.8 Goal #7 10 10 10 10 2 6 8 Goal #8 5 5 5 6 1 2 4
  24. 24. LRTP Goal #1Goal #1: A multimodal transportation system that efficiently moves people and goodsOBJECTIVES MEASUREMENTSObjective 1A: To eliminate/reduce current congestion Change in delay Change in delay Change in Change inand multimodal traffic flow restrictions on arterial and and travel time and travel time delay and delay andcollector roadways for pedestrians for bicyclists travel time travel time for for bus and automobiles PRTObjective 1B: To ensure that future development and Change in number of transportation improvements builtrelated transportation improvements address capacity prior to and concurrently with growth and developmentand connectivity needs proactively rather than (rather than reactive to)reactivelyObjective 1C: Improve ingress/egress to the most Change in time to Change in number Change in number of routes anddensely developed / highest activity areas of region travel to and from of people connection options to and from(the core) core traveling to and the core (all modes) from coreObjective 1D: Provide adequate transportation Change in access Change in travelcapacity and access to support current businesses to current time to current clusters of clusters of businesses businessesObjective 1E: Focus capacity improvements for all Change in number of improvements Change in amount of growthmodes in areas of desired future growth and planned, designed, and/or constructed in and development in areasdevelopment that support the public’s vision for the areas of desired growth identified as priority areas inregion regional vision
  25. 25. LRTP Goal #2Goal #2: A transportation system in which all modes are highly integrated and connectedOBJECTIVES MEASUREMENTSObjective 2A: To allow for convenient transfer Change in number of Change in travel time / Change in cost of travelfrom one mode to another in the region (i.e. multimodal trips travel delay for tripsbiking to bus, vanpooling to bus, etc) tomaximize travel efficiencyObjective 2B: To encourage the use of the most Change in number of Change in number of Change in number ofefficient mode based on the characteristics of a people walking people bicycling people riding the busparticular trip and PRTObjective 2C: Increase the geographic area in Change in number of Change in amount of county served by non-autowhich people have convenient access to non- travel options to transportation modesautomobile modes individuals in all populated areasObjective 2D: Reduce reliance on automobile Change in number of Change in auto ownershipfor travel person trips by non- automobile modesObjective 2E: Better serve those who do Change in number of Change in travel times for those who do not drivenot/cannot own and drive a personal opportunities to travelautomobile. for those who do not drive
  26. 26. LRTP Goal #3Goal #3: A multimodal transportation system that safely moves people and goodsOBJECTIVES MEASUREMENTSObjective 3A: To minimize crashes, especially injury/fatality Change in frequency and Change in frequency of injury/fatalitycrashes by 50% through improvement of high crash locations rate of crashes (all crashes (all modes)(all modes) modes)Objective 3B: To ensure that future growth and related Change in crash Transportation improvements built priortransportation improvements address transportation safety frequency and rates in to and concurrently with growth andneeds in planning and design areas affected by development (rather than in reaction to development and growth) growth
  27. 27. LRTP Goal #4Goal #4: A transportation system that maximizes the efficiency of freight movement through and within the regionwith minimal impacts on neighborhood and campus areas, especially areas of higher bicycle and pedestrian demandOBJECTIVES MEASUREMENTSObjective 4A: Reduce truck traffic in residential Change in number of Change in number of trucks in other pedestrian/bicycle activityneighborhoods and on other streets where trucks in areassignificant numbers of bicycles and pedestrians neighborhoodsare presentObjective 4B: Improve truck access to key Change in time to Change in amount of Change in amount of freightindustrial areas deliver freight freight moved dependent industriesObjective 4C: Increase options for freight Change in amount of freight moved by non-truck modemovement that minimizes truck traffic on non-interstate roadways
  28. 28. LRTP Goal #5Goal #5: Greater collaboration between local agencies, state officials, and private interests in the pursuit and fundingof transportation improvementsOBJECTIVES MEASUREMENTSObjective 5A: More effective and less costly Change in number of Change in number of Change in number of projectstransportation improvements by capitalizing on policies and projects co- projects funded by multiple that physically crosscommon goals and needs between communities sponsored by multiple jurisdictions jurisdictional linesand agencies in the region jurisdictionsObjective 5B: Higher quality transportation system Change in the ratio of Change in public opinion related to quality of transportationimprovements due to cost sharing and funding by state sources improvementscollaboration. versus local sources for projectsObjective 5C: Transportation improvements that Change in number of Change in public satisfaction related to transportationsupport the public’s long-term vision for the regional goals supported projectsregion by projects
  29. 29. LRTP Goal #6Goals #6: A Transportation system that is attractive, sustainable, and livable.OBJECTIVES MEASUREMENTSObjective 6A: Integrate the local context of the Change in the quality and Change in public satisfaction Change in property values.area into the planning, design, and livability of the built related to transportationconstruction of transportation improvements environment projectsObjective 6B: Include sustainability features in Change in storm water Change in vehicle emissions Change in negative impacts todesign of transportation improvements that run-off due to impact on air-quality environment due tominimize environmental impacts transportation transportation infrastructure and runoff related to vehicular byproducts.Objective 6C: Address multimodal system Change in number of non- Change in comfort, safety and convenience for travel (allneeds in all planning, design, and construction automobile focused modes)of transportation improvements transportation projects planned, designed, and constructed
  30. 30. LRTP Goal #7Goals #7: Reduce automobile trip demand, especially during peak travel hoursOBJECTIVES MEASUREMENTSObjective 7A: Reduce the need to construct costly Change in project funding required to meet the region’s transportation and parkingtransportation and parking infrastructure needsimprovementsObjective 7B: Invest in transportation improvements Change in number of projects that support mixed-use, transit oriented, and non-autothat encourage and support development/land use centric land developmentpatterns that decrease need to travelObjective 7C: Reduce automobile emissions and Change in air-quality measuresimprove air qualityObjective 7D: 20% of all trips made by walking Change in walking tripsObjective 7E: 5% of all trips made by bicycle Change in bicycle tripsObjective 7F: Increase number of trips made by Change in bus trips Change in PRT trips Change in other public transitpublic transit by 200% tripsObjective 7F: Increase work telecommuting and Change in number of Change in number of Change in person trips to/fromvirtual lectures (WVU) employees working from students taking classes work and classes home or other remote remotely locationsObjective 7E: Increase average vehicle occupancy by Change in average occupants per vehicle100%
  31. 31. 2006 – 2008 Mode Split (commuting) 6.71% 0.22% Monongalia County 0.10% 4.09% 0.66% 1.91% Drive Alone 3.25% 0.08% WV State Drive Alone 10.97% Shared Ride Transit 0.18% 0.10% Shared Ride 0.93% Bicycle 3.09% 0.90% Transit 75.35% Walking 10.85% Motorcycle Bicycle Telecommute Walking Other Taxi 80.63% Motorcycle City of Morgantown 1.05% Telecommute 6.78% Drive Alone Other 20.14% Shared Ride Transit 59.72% BicycleSource: Census Transportation Planning Products (CTPP) 0.14% 10.21% 1.96% Walking Telecommute Other
  32. 32. LRTP Goal #8Goals #8: A multimodal transportation system that enhances the homeland security of the regionOBJECTIVES MEASUREMENTSObjective 8A: Heighten awareness of homeland security Change in occurrences of security issues being consideredneeds related to transportationObjective 8B: Improve understanding of critical Change in knowledge of critical homeland security issuestransportation system related homeland security issues in theregionObjective 8C: Incorporate homeland security needs in Change in number of projects and policies that include homeland securitytransportation project planning, design, and construction considerations
  33. 33. Addressing the Eight Planning Factors SAFETEA-LU Planning Factors Draft LRTP Goal 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 81. Support the economic vitality of the metropolitan area, especially by X X X X X Xenabling global competitiveness, productivity, and efficiency.2. Increase the safety of the transportation system for motorized and X X X X X Xnon-motorized users.3. Increase the security of the transportation system for motorized and X X Xnon-motorized users.4. Increase accessibility and mobility of people and freight. X X X X X X5. Protect and enhance the environment, promote energy conservation,improve the quality of life, and promote consistency between X X X X X X Xtransportation improvements and State and local planned growth andeconomic development patterns.6. Enhance the integration and connectivity of the transportation X X X X Xsystem, across and between modes, for people and freight.7. Promote efficient system management and operation. X X X X X X8. Emphasize the preservation of the existing transportation system. X X X X X X
  34. 34. Regional Vision – Growth Framework Transportation Advisory Group It’s Time to Chart Our Future
  35. 35. Improvement Ideas and Strategies Community’s Regional Vision Vision, Goals and for Growth Objectives Improvement Ideas and Strategies Deficiencies and Needs in System
  36. 36. Conceptual Framework Map Michael Insert final version
  37. 37. Concepts Preserve Open – Areas that are permanently protected from development (parkland) Reserve Open – Areas of steep slopes that are subject to development but should be protected. Restricted (floodplain) – Areas that are subject to development, but where development is restricted due to a high risk of flooding. Priority Growth – Areas where development should be encouraged. Includes growth in new areas and redevelopment within existing areas. Development should be consistent with the Principles (enhance the community’s vitality, provide for a greater mix of uses, improve mobility, expand housing choices, and attractive) Infill and Redevelopment – Existing developed areas where additional growth, consistent with the Principles is generally appropriate, but not a strategic priority. Controlled Growth – Developing areas, or currently undeveloped land where more growth is likely due to proximity to existing thoroughfares, infrastructure and adjacency to recent development. Growth in these areas generally expands the footprint of the urban area and should be controlled to minimize negative impacts. Limited Growth – All other areas of that are subject to development, but where increased intensity is generally not desired. These areas include both existing open space and existing development.
  38. 38. Conceptual Framework Map A visual representation of the Vision for growth Preliminarily based on: 1. Results of Understanding Future Growth workshop 2. Work with Comprehensive Plan Committees
  39. 39. Patterns we found in the Understanding Future Growth Workshop: Redevelopment at higher intensitiesExamples: Group Group 5 2 • All of the groups placed at least half of their chips on areas with existing development • Many chips were stacked on specific sites that participants felt had redevelopment potential, indicating that development should occur at higher intensities.
  40. 40. Patterns we found in the Understanding Future Growth Workshop: Infill DevelopmentExamples: Group Group 4 2 • Most of the groups placed development in undeveloped areas near existing development. • This infill pattern of development would plug holes in the urban fabric, placing development in areas already served by existing infrastructure, and allowing the urban area to expand in a contiguous pattern.
  41. 41. Patterns we found in the Understanding Future Growth Workshop: Greenfield development is limited and clusteredExamples: Group Group 3 2 • Groups understood the difficulty in limiting all “greenfield” development. • Development happening in currently undeveloped areas should be both near existing development and/or clustered to “minimize sprawl” and “preserve open space” rather than occur in a haphazard “leap-frog” pattern.
  42. 42. Patterns we found in the Understanding Future Growth Workshop: Very limited development in outlying areasExamples: Group Group Group 4 3 2 • Groups allocated very limited growth for the surrounding region. • Some identified areas south, along I-79 as suitable for some development, while fewer placed development in the western part of the county.
  43. 43. Conceptual Framework Map Michael Insert final version
  44. 44. Conceptual Framework Map Summary A visual representation of the Vision Represents the intended approach to growth in the region Policy recommendations of the Comprehensive Plans and Long Range Transportation Plan should aim to make this reality Will be refined based on: Market analysis and forecasts
  45. 45. Countywide Land Use ProjectionsHousing •Demand for almost 17,200 more housing units by 2037 •Increase of 42.9% in 25 years (1.6% per year) •There are 11,700 more housing units in 2012 than in 1990 •Increase of 37.0% in 22 years (1.7% per year)Retail •Demand for 2.8 million square feet of retail space by 2037 •Increase of 47.1% in 25 years (1.9% per year) •Translates into 4,115 more retail & restaurant jobs •There are about 3,200 more retail & restaurant jobs in 2012 than in 1998 •Increase of 37.7% in 14 years (2.7% per year)
  46. 46. Sub-Area Projections
  47. 47. Incorporating Future Growth Model Inputs Travel Demand Forecasted • Roadway Network Model Process Results • Regional Vision • Trip Generation • 2040 Base Year • Economic • Trip Distribution • Transportation Development • Mode Split Scenarios Analysis • Highway Assignment
  48. 48. Current SystemTransportation Advisory Group It’s Time to Chart Our Future
  49. 49. Improvement Ideas and Strategies Community’s Regional Vision Vision, Goals and for Growth Objectives Improvement Ideas and Strategies Opportunities and Constraints in System
  50. 50. Roadways Characteristics• Nearly 17% of roadway “arterials” are at, or over capacity with numerous “bottlenecks” in the system• Many “substandard” roadways Steep grades Sharp turns/curves Narrow lane widths Narrow shoulder widths
  51. 51. Roadway Challenges• Very difficult (costly) to widen existing or construct new roads due to limited right-of-way availability and the area’s topography• Uncontrolled development patterns and lack of improvements to transportation infrastructure or access control over the years have lead to many capacity/safety problems• Lack of local consensus has stymied past attempts to construct roadway/highway improvements
  52. 52. Automobile Traffic Characteristics• Peak travel times and traffic operations are highly influenced by WVU schedule• Travel patterns influenced by parking availability and locations
  53. 53. Primary Public Transit Service Providers• Mountain Line Transit Authority Focus on the urban core with reach into the County Major service expansions are planned but not funded• WVU Focus on shuttle service connecting campuses Operates PRT Excellent reliability record Undergoing maintenance and technology upgrades No plans/funding for expansion of system
  54. 54. Transit Characteristics• Good transit service coverage in key populated areas• Frequency of service is deficient in most areas• Hours of day of service also deficient in most areas• Lacks consistent stop locations with quality amenities and good pedestrian environments
  55. 55. Pedestrian System Characteristics Primarily sidewalks and multi-use trails Grade/topography a major concern Sidewalk coverage/connectivity deficient in most areas Narrow sidewalks adjacent to high speed traffic Lack of “safe” crosswalks Many existing sidewalks are substandard with utility poles and other impediments blocking the pathway
  56. 56. Pedestrian Safety 1998 through 2008 226 reported pedestrian injuries Consistently 20 to 25 pedestrian injuries per year Leading pedestrian accident locations Spruce & Walnut (9) University/Beechurst/Fayette (5) High & Willey (8) Beechurst & Campus (5) S. University & Pleasant (8) Chestnut Ridge/Van Voorhis (5) University & College (8) High & Walnut (4) N. Willey & Prospect (7) High & Fayette (4) Spruce & Pleasant (5) University & Prospect (4) West Virginia University Injury Control Research Center January 1998 – June 2008
  57. 57. Pedestrian Demand Local demographics lead to: Walking more prevalent in Morgantown than anywhere else in WV Significant demand for walking/running for exercise University connections to off-campus residential areas especially important
  58. 58. Bicycling Characteristics On-street travel: Narrow lanes and steep grades can make bicycling difficult on many roadways Few streets with paved shoulders No on-street bike lanes exist Steep side slopes and narrow rights-of-way make bike lane improvements difficult “Bikeable” routes exist (see Morgantown Bicycle Board’s “Commuter Map”)
  59. 59. Bicycling Characteristics Trails Excellent opportunities for cycling (recreational and commuting) on trails Nearly 10-miles of paved trails Caperton Trail Decker’s Creek Trail Many more miles of nature surface trails at City and County parks
  60. 60. Bicycling Characteristics Parking Numerous racks in City and WVU Campus Parking rings already added to several downtown parking meters with possibly more in the future
  61. 61. Freight Trucking Designated truck routes: I-68, I-79, US 119, US 19, WV 7, and CR 857 Two Active Rail Lines Monongahela River
  62. 62. Air Travel Morgantown Municipal Airport (Hart Field) Commercial passenger travel available 7 days Private hangers
  63. 63. Funding the Plan
  64. 64. Funding Trends Gas consumption is down Price, fuel economy, unemployment Flat tax per gallon Revenue down Limited/no earmarks Local tax revenues down No federal transportation bill
  65. 65. State Forecast Transportation revenue expected to stay flat STATE ROAD FUND REVENUE ESTIMATES* FY STATE FEDERAL** TOTAL 2013 $715,800 $494,000 $1,209,800 2014 $750,800 $416,000 $1,166,800 2015 $747,000 $411,000 $1,158,000 2016 $747,000 $411,000 $1,158,000 2017 $751,600 $411,000 $1,162,600 TOTAL = $5,855,200 5-YR AVG = $1,171,040 * PRESENTED IN NOMINAL DOLLARS (000S) ** FEDERAL REVENUE ESTIMATES LESS ARRA
  66. 66. Purchasing Power Decreasing “Due to declining revenue and inflation, the Agency’s purchasing power will effectively be cut by 19% from FY 2013 to FY 2017. “ STATE ROAD FUND REVENUE ESTIMATES* OFFICIAL EST STATE FEDERAL** TOTAL 2013 $657,876 $454,024 $1,111,900 2014 $661,534 $366,540 $1,028,074 2015 $630,993 $347,173 $978,166 2016 $604,924 $332,830 $937,754 2017 $583,503 $319,079 $902,582 TOTAL = $4,958,476 5-YR AVG = $991,695 * PRESENTED IN CONSTANT 2011 DOLLARS (000S) ** FEDERAL REVENUE ESTIMATES LESS ARRA
  67. 67. TABLE # 12 25-YEAR STATEWIDE REVENUE PROJECTIONSStatewide FY 2013 - FY 2037 ESTIMATED ESTIMATED TOTALProjections FISCAL YEAR STATE REVENUE 2011 DOLLARS ($000s) FED REVENUE 2011 DOLLARS ($000s) REVENUE 2011 DOLLARS ($000s) 2013 $657,876 * $454,024 * $1,111,900 * 2014 $661,534 * $366,540 * $1,028,074 * 2015 $630,993 * $347,173 * $978,166 * 2016 $604,924 * $332,830 * $937,754 * 2017 $583,503 * $319,079 * $902,582 * 2018 $627,766 $363,929 $991,695 2019 $627,766 $363,929 $991,695 2020 $627,766 $363,929 $991,695 2021 $627,766 $363,929 $991,695 2022 $627,766 $363,929 $991,695 2023 $627,766 $363,929 $991,695 2024 $627,766 $363,929 $991,695 2025 $627,766 $363,929 $991,695 2026 $627,766 $363,929 $991,695 2027 $627,766 $363,929 $991,695 2028 $627,766 $363,929 $991,695 2029 $627,766 $363,929 $991,695 2030 $627,766 $363,929 $991,695 2031 $627,766 $363,929 $991,695 2032 $627,766 $363,929 $991,695 2033 $627,766 $363,929 $991,695 2034 $627,766 $363,929 $991,695 2035 $627,766 $363,929 $991,695 2036 $627,766 $363,929 $991,695 2037 $627,766 $363,929 $991,695 25-YEAR TOTAL REVENUE = $24,792,382 NOTE: *VALUES TAKEN FROM WVDOT FY 2013 BUDGET PRESENTATION LESS ARRA FEDERAL REIMBURSEMENT
  68. 68. Funding Forecast forWV MPO LRTPs IMPROVEMENT 2011 DOLLARS (000s) (FY 2013-2037) FORECAST SUMMARY DESCRIPTION VALUE TOTAL PROJECTED REVENUE $24,792,382 LESS NON-IMPROVEMENT FUNDS -$12,496,138 LESS EXCLUDED IMPROVEMENTS FUNDS -$9,468,108 LESS EARMARKS (ASSUMED $0 MILL/YR) $0 STATEWIDE IMPROVEMENT FUNDS AVAILABLE FOR MPO PLANNING PURPOSES $2,828,136 IMPROVEMENT FUNDS DISTRIBUTED BY AVERAGE OF VMT, POPULATION, HIGHWAY MILEAGE AND HISTORICAL IMPROVEMENT *** FUNDING NON-MPO AREAS (58.83% ) $1,663,800 MPO AREAS (41.17% ) $1,164,336 RIC (13.63% ) $385,345 KYOVA (5.41% ) $153,039 WWW (3.44% ) $97,160 GMA (4.14% ) $117,179 BELOMAR (2.93% ) $82,757 BHJ (2.44% ) $68,954 HEP (8.48% ) $239,764 NOTE: *** INDICATES APPROVED METHODOLOGY FROM 10/07 AND RESULTS USING DATA REVISED 1/12/12
  69. 69. GMA LRTP 25-YR IMPROVEMENT FUNDING FORECAST (IN 2011 DOLLARS) VALUES AS OF 1/15/11 AND PRESENTED IN THOUSANDS MM MPO 25-yr Improvement Funding Forecast STATEWIDE GMA LRTP TOTAL NON STATEWIDE ELIMINATED ELIMINATED IMPROVEMENT IMPROVEMENT STATE IMPROVEMENT IMPROVEMENT IMPROVEMENT EARMARKED FUNDS FOR FUNDING FY REVENUE EXPENDITURES FUNDS FUNDS FUNDS MPO LRTPS @ (4.30%) 2013 $1,111,900 $499,846 $612,054 $471,282 $0 $140,773 $6,054 2014 $1,028,074 $499,846 $528,229 $406,736 $0 $121,493 $5,225 2015 $978,166 $499,846 $478,321 $368,307 $0 $110,014 $4,731 2016 $937,754 $499,846 $437,908 $337,189 $0 $100,719 $4,331 2017 $902,582 $499,846 $402,736 $310,107 $0 $92,629 $3,984 2018 $991,695 $499,846 $491,850 $378,724 $0 $113,125 $4,865 2019 $991,695 $499,846 $491,850 $378,724 $0 $113,125 $4,865 2020 2021 2022 - $136M over 28 year span of LRTP $991,695 $991,695 $991,695 $499,846 $499,846 $499,846 $491,850 $491,850 $491,850 $378,724 $378,724 $378,724 $0 $0 $0 $113,125 $113,125 $113,125 $4,865 $4,865 $4,865 2023 $991,695 $499,846 $491,850 $378,724 $0 $113,125 $4,865 2024 $991,695 $499,846 $491,850 $378,724 $0 $113,125 $4,865 2025 2026 - 2006 LRTP constraint was $233M $991,695 $991,695 $499,846 $499,846 $491,850 $491,850 $378,724 $378,724 $0 $0 $113,125 $113,125 $4,865 $4,865 2027 $991,695 $499,846 $491,850 $378,724 $0 $113,125 $4,865 2028 2029 (42% reduction) $991,695 $991,695 $499,846 $499,846 $491,850 $491,850 $378,724 $378,724 $0 $0 $113,125 $113,125 $4,865 $4,865 2030 $991,695 $499,846 $491,850 $378,724 $0 $113,125 $4,865 2031 $991,695 $499,846 $491,850 $378,724 $0 $113,125 $4,865 2032 $991,695 $499,846 $491,850 $378,724 $0 $113,125 $4,865 2033 $991,695 $499,846 $491,850 $378,724 $0 $113,125 $4,865 2034 $991,695 $499,846 $491,850 $378,724 $0 $113,125 $4,865 2035 $991,695 $499,846 $491,850 $378,724 $0 $113,125 $4,865 2036 $991,695 $499,846 $491,850 $378,724 $0 $113,125 $4,865 2037 $991,695 $499,846 $491,850 $378,724 $0 $113,125 $4,865 25-YR $24,792,382 $12,496,138 $12,296,244 $9,468,108 $0 $2,828,136 $121,626TOTALS
  70. 70. Alternative Funding Thoughts Local taxes Impact fees Developer contributions Tolling User fees Contracts Private-public partnerships Tax Increment Financing Other grants? Other?
  71. 71. Scenario Planning Targets Green Wave! $300M – Optimistic (lay it all out there) Status Quo (State Projection) $150M – Realistic (cut the fat) Tighten the Belt $75M – Pessimistic (now what do you really want?)
  72. 72. Scenario Toolbox
  73. 73. Past/Current/Future Projects Most of 2004 MPO priority projects list is complete Turn lanes, lane additions, signals, safety Mileground – widening project scheduled Osage Road/Chaplin Hill – signal work Grumbeins Island – preferred concept to lower University Ave and create plaza over Van Voorhis TSM – signal work and drainage/sidewalk WV 705 TSM – Beechurst to Mileground
  74. 74. Mileground Estimates Estimated Cost - $40M + Preliminary estimates Approx.Phase Length Approx. CostPhase I R/W $6.1 M 0.9 $ 11,300,000 per mile Construction $4.1 M $ 4,600,000 per milePhase II Construction $7.6 M 0.6 $ 12,700,000 per milePhase III R/W $10 M 0.7 $ 14,000,000 per mile Construction $14 M $ 20,000,000 per mile
  75. 75. Break
  76. 76. ScenariosDevelopment Exercise
  77. 77. Next Steps Refine goals, objectives, and measures Technical Analysis of Scenarios Further detailing Field reviews as needed Travel Demand Model analysis Modification of and development of additional concepts by consultant team Cost estimates Next TAG Meeting – Alternatives Review Workshop (September)

×