Integrating Community Development and Transportation Strategies
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Integrating Community Development and Transportation Strategies

on

  • 498 views

Arlington’s strategies have yielded substantial economic, transportation, and environmental benefits - allowing continued growth with less reliance on auto trips, and more use of transit and other ...

Arlington’s strategies have yielded substantial economic, transportation, and environmental benefits - allowing continued growth with less reliance on auto trips, and more use of transit and other travel options. It isn’t just one policy but many that contribute to enhanced performance

Statistics

Views

Total Views
498
Views on SlideShare
302
Embed Views
196

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
8
Comments
0

4 Embeds 196

http://mobilitylab.org 188
http://feedly.com 4
http://inoreader.com 3
http://wordpress.com 1

Accessibility

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment
  • Arlington Residents: Drive Alone Primary Commute Mode – 54% (2007 Arlington State of the Commute)Arlington Residents: Drive Alone Second Only to DC (47%) in Region
  • So put it together, and you get …

Integrating Community Development and Transportation Strategies Integrating Community Development and Transportation Strategies Presentation Transcript

  • R-B CORRIDOR 1970 R-B CORRIDOR TODAY Integrating Community Development and Transportation Strategies TRB Annual Meeting Transportation and Land Development Committee Wednesday, January 15, 2014 (4:30 – 6:00 pm)
  • The Community Development – Transportation Question • Can communities support increased economic activity, improved environmental performance and quality of life while reducing reliance on auto travel and associated VMT growth? – In Arlington, the answer is yes, but it takes commitment and continued innovation – Transportation infrastructure investments and services must be closely aligned with development • Are there other ancillary community benefits? – The reduced reliance on auto travel yields many other community benefits: more efficient use of land, reduced environmental impacts, lower energy use, a lower carbon footprint, improved public health 2
  • Topics to be covered • Overview of development and transportation in Arlington • Selected community performance indicators • Lesson learned • Areas for further investigation 3
  • Context 400,000 Households Residents Jobs 300,000 200,000 100,000 0 19701980199020002010202020302040 • Arlington, Virginia – 25.8 sq. miles in area including federal lands • Continuing to grow – with over 276,000 residents and 308,000 jobs projected by 2040 (212,900 residents and 228,700 jobs in January 2013) • Over 88.5% of all housing/household/population growth and 96% of all employment growth forecasts for established transit districts (Rosslyn-Ballston, Jefferson Davis and Columbia Pike Corridors) 4
  • Development Concepts • Concentrate high and middensity redevelopment around transit stations (highly targeted) and taper down to existing neighborhoods • Encourage a mix of uses and services in station areas • Create high quality pedestrian environments and enhanced open space • Preserve and reinvest in established residential neighborhoods 5
  • General Land Use Plan Rosslyn-Ballston Corridor Columbia Pike Jefferson Davis Corridor 6
  • Development Characteristics • • • 44.5 million sq. ft. of office space*, 41 million sq. ft. in Metro station areas* with over 4 million sq. ft. of supporting retail & services 108,000 housing units (over 43,000 in Metro station areas) Over 3,250 housing units, 1.6 million sq. ft. of office, 190,000 sq. ft. of retail under construction as of January 2013. * Includes the Pentagon @ 5 million sq. Ft. 7
  • Transportation Facilities & Services – Expanding Travel Options • • • • • • • • • 1,094 lane-miles of streets and 19 miles of HOV lanes Over 5,400 on-street metered parking spaces 12 miles of Metrorail lines and 11 stations VRE commuter rail Extensive regional (Metrobus) and local bus (ART) service And expanding car-share program with over 86 cars A growing bikesharing program with 70 stations w/ 20 additional stations funded 50 miles of multi-use trails and 36 miles of on-street bike lanes and sharrows Extensive and growing network of sidewalks 8
  • Transportation System Users • Residents – – – – • Employees commuting to Arlington-based jobs – – – • Over 228,700 jobs in 2013 200,000+ jobs clustered around transit in Arlington’s high-density corridors. 160,000+ workers commute into Arlington daily Over 40% take transit, walk or bike to work. Visitors – – – • Over 212,900 in January 2013 Over 140,000 workers with 70% working outside the County Lowest resident drive-alone commute rate in all VA regions 46% residents use non-SOV as primary commute mode 4 million plus visitors to Arlington National Cemetery Over 10,500 hotel rooms used as a base for visitors from outside the region Many daily visitors from adjacent jurisdictions Through travelers & commuters 9
  • Transportation System Use • > 4 million vehicle-miles of travel per day • • 220,000 Metrorail boardings/alightings > 64,000 bus trips • • > 3,000 commuter rail boardings/alightings > 8,000 car-share members • • > 200,000 transit-related walking trips < 50% of all resident and worker trips in the Metro Corridors by SOV 10
  • Transportation System Use 64,000 daily bus boardings
  • Transportation System Use 41,000 regional members 261,000 trips taken Oct. 2013 12
  • Transportation System Use 8,000+ Carsharing Members
  • Transportation Strategies to Influence Travel Patterns • Concentrate mixed use development around transit stations • Create environments rich in travel choices • Time transportation improvements including expansion of transit service to development • Provide comprehensive travel information and encouragement • Expand development-specific TDM requirements • Increase focus on parking management (supply and pricing) 14
  • View of Rosslyn-Ballston Metro Corridor The Capitol Rosslyn Courthouse Lower Density Zoning Potomac River M Lower Density Zoning M M Clarendon M Virginia Square M Ballston 15
  • Corridor Development Columbia Pike Population Housing Units Employment 2010 36,000 16,400 9,600 2040 71,900 30,400 11,500 Pentagon City & Crystal City Population Housing Units Employment 2010 17,400 13,100 54,700 2040 25,900 20,000 90,100 16
  • Corridor Development Quarter Mile from all Proposed Streetcar Stations Population Housing Units Employment 2010 2040 39,400 81,500 22,600 42,700 62,900 100,100 17
  • Creating Environments Rich in Travel Choices • • • • Site Plan Development County Infrastructure Investments Expanded Transit Service Support for Emerging Travel Options 18
  • Rosslyn Station Access Improvements Location 19
  • Clarendon Metro Plaza Improvements View from Highland St. View of Escalators Existing Planned Location 20
  • Columbia Pike “Multimodal” Improvements Before After Location
  • Rte. 1/Crystal City Streetcar Conversion Location of Planned Alignment Rendering of Proposed 12th Street Station Example of Streetcar Elsewhere
  • Providing Comprehensive Travel Information and Encouragement • Sales – Arlington Transportation Partners • Retail Commuter Information and Support – three commuter stores, one mobile store • Operations & Logistics 23
  • Providing Comprehensive Travel Information and Encouragement • Marketing • BikeArlington, • WalkArlington, • Carsharing, • Bikesharing • Transportation research • (Mobility Lab) 24
  • Requiring Development-Specific Transportation Demand Management • Participation in Countywide Commuter Services programs • Transit subsidies • On-site improvements including sidewalk/streetscape and bicycle facilities • On-site travel information • Parking management • Transportation performance surveys EPA – Potomac Yard (completed 2006) ATP participant Employee transit subsidies Dedicated transitway and station Sidewalk and bicycle improvements Market-rate parking charges On-site transportation coordinator 25
  • TDM - Site Plan Development • TDM Structure – Work directly with Developers to mitigate transportation impacts – Agree to a plan – Actively monitor – Document performance at year 2, 5 and every 5 years for the life of the project • Objectives – Reduce SOV trips – Incorporate infrastructure features (showers, bike lockers, van accessible garages and carpool spaces) – Promote participation in transit, carpooling, vanpooling and offer transit subsidies – Provide information on transportation choices 26
  • TDM - Site Plan Development Standard Site Plan Conditions • Transportation Demand Management (TDM)  Contribution ($0.06 per sq ft) to Arlington County Commuter Services (on-going)  Bicycle parking/storage facilities  SmarTrip cards for building employees ($65, one time)  Performance monitoring studies • Transportation Infrastructure  Pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure  Bus stops and shelters  Contribution to traffic signals 27
  • TDM - Site Plan Development • Current Status – 120 active site plans – 60% of sites visited by staff – 12% of sites were missing TDM plans – 27% had new property managers 28
  • Managing Parking • Management of the onstreet supply – Residential permit parking – On-street metered parking • Influence off-street private parking – Parking information – Shared/public parking – Pricing – Amount provided 29
  • Reduced Parking Policy for Site Plan Office Buildings Less Parking Greater Mitigation Parking < 1:1,201 1:781 – 1:1,200 1:631 – 1:780 Parking > 1:630 $40,000 $12,500 $7,250 Base Parking < 1:1,801 1:1,101 – 1: 1,800 1:976 – 1:1,100 Parking > 1:975 1:1,251 – 1:1,900 $40,000 1:1,001 – 1:1,250 $12,500 $7,250 Base Parking > 1:1,000 Parking < 1:1,901 $40,000 $12,500 $7,250 Base Total contribution amount calculated on an annual cost over 30 years. 30
  • Selected Community Performance Indicators • Economic & Social • Transportation 31
  • Unemployment 12.0% 10.0% 8.0% 6.0% 4.0% 2.0% 0.0% 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Arlington Virginia US Note: Arlington through November 2012 Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics
  • Private Office Market Comparisons Submarket Office Inventory SF Vacancy Rate Average Asking Rate Downtown Philadelphia 44,202,474 14.7% $26.10 Chicago Central Loop 41,099,407 13.1% $31.54 Washington CBD 38,710,591 11.5% $48.52 Boston CBD 37,473,147 12.7% $43.79 Arlington County 36,735,543 16.1% $41.13 Houston CBD 36,514,081 13.7% $33.09 Los Angeles Downtown 31,125,339 18.0% $34.32 Dallas CBD 29,799,042 28.1% $18.93 Denver Downtown 25,608,414 14.1% $25.45 Minneapolis CBD 23,348,562 17.4% $12.46 Seattle CBD 20,267,129 14.4% $31.891 Atlanta Downtown 18,377,678 24.6% $18.09 1Class A only Source: CB Richard Ellis; Colliers International; 4th Quarter 2012
  • Apartment Market Comparisons Submarket District of Columbia Existing Units Vacancy Rate Average Effective Rate 130,330 5.0% $1,674 Prince George’s County 96,744 4.7% $1,258 Montgomery County 87,653 3.8% $1,595 Fairfax County 83,058 4.6% $1,622 Arlington County 52,567 3.8% $1,949 Alexandria City 38,270 4.6% $1,534 Prince William County 19,861 6.3% $1,303 Loudoun County 12,825 4.9% $1,483 Falls Church City 1,872 3.9% $1,767 Fairfax City 1,555 3.4% $1,613 551,131 4.5% $1,541 Washington Metro Source: CoStar 10/21/13
  • Regional Apartment Availability Submarket Existing Units Vacant Units Vacancy Rate Avg. Asking Rate Avg. Effective Rate RB Corridor 14,074 429 3.8% $2,295 $2,235 Washington East End 12,555 253 2.8% $2,238 $2,201 11,458 281 3.8% $2,143 $2,110 9,739 443 5.0% $2,236 $2,185 Tysons Corner 7,750 402 7.2% $1,898 $1,867 Reston 6,692 199 5.3% $1,599 $1,541 Capitol Hill 4,188 157 5.8% $1,825 $1,800 Washington CBD 4,051 97 3.6% $2,134 $2,076 U Street/Cardozo 2,989 187 9.1% $2,020 $1,986 NoMa 2,909 415 18.8% $2,437 $2,412 Capitol Riverfront 2,643 358 19.3% $2,344 $2,244 Bethesda/ Chevy Chase Crystal City/ Pentagon City Source: CoStar 10/21/13
  • Development Pipeline Summary Stage No. of Projects Office SF Retail SF Other SF Housing Units Hotel Rooms Under Construction 15 748,108 168,308 0 2,836 0 Near-term Construction Starts 10 1,956,703 110,108 12,985 1,570 316 Awaiting Market or Phasing 16 3,995,598 186,745 389,072 1,727 300 Zoning Review 13 3,129,810 156,224 110,000 3,170 816 Total Pipeline 54 9,830,219 621,295 512,057 9,386 1,432 Source: Arlington Economic Development
  • Real Estate Tax Base 65% 59% 60% 60% 58% 56% 55% 52% 50% 55% 53% 54% 51% 51% 49% 49% 47% 45% 44% 40% 54% 49% 51% 48% 45% 57% 41% 42% 46% 46% 43% 40% 35% 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Residential Commercial/Apartment Source: Arlington County Department of Management and Finance
  • Real Estate Tax Base Northern Virginia Alexandria City Arlington County Fairfax City Fairfax County Falls Church City Loudoun County Prince William County 0% 20% 40% Commercial/Apartments 60% 80% 100% Residential Source: Arlington Economic Development
  • Taxes from Business Revenue ($Mil) % of Total Taxes $286.0 32.8% Gross Receipts 61.5 7.0 Personal Property 34.3 3.9 Sales Tax 38.5 4.4 Meals Tax 32.8 3.8 Transient Occupancy 21.8 2.5 Commercial Utility 12.9 1.5 Other 17.2 2.0 $505.2 57.9% Tax Real Estate Subtotal Source: Arlington County Department of Management and Finance
  • 2012 Arlington Business Leaders Survey 40
  • 2012 Arlington Business Leaders Survey 41
  • 2012 Arlington Business Leaders Survey 42
  • 2009 Arlington Residents Survey 9 in 10 Residents Give Arlington County High Ratings for Overall Quality of Life Long + Mini Survey 5 - Excellent 59% n = 4,325 92% 4 33% 3 5% 2 1% 1 - Poor 1% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Q10 Overall, how would you rate the quality of life in Arlington County? Source: LDA Consulting / SIR 43
  • 2009 Arlington Residents Survey – cont’d Three-Quarters of Residents are Satisfied with Arlington’s Transportation System Long + Mini Survey 5 - Very satisfied 34% n = 4,204 75% 4 41% 3 19% 2 4% 1 - Not at all satisfied 2% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Q11 How satisfied are you with the transportation system in Arlington County? Source: LDA Consulting / SIR 44
  • Daily Household Travel in the Greater Metropolitan Washington Region Average Weekday Trips per Household % of of Daily Household Trips by Mode of Travel Auto Auto Walk/ School Driver Passenger Transit Bike Bus/Other Average Average Weekday Weekday % of Auto Driver Auto Regional Trips* Driver VMT HH Jurisdiction in the Greater Metropolitan Washington Region Core District of Columbia Arlington - Rosslyn-Ballston Corridor - Jefferson Davis Corridor - Columbia Pik e - Shirlington - Arlington outside activity centers Alexandria 7.0 7.8 6.0 5.6 6.5 6.2 9.6 7.1 37.0 52.9 45.0 35.2 58.2 64.5 56.0 56.1 14.4 16.5 13.4 11.2 16.0 8.2 18.5 16.9 18.3 10.7 19.0 20.6 11.3 12.3 6.8 9.2 27.5 16.6 19.7 29.2 12.1 13.9 15.1 15.9 2.5 3.3 2.9 3.8 2.4 1.1 3.6 1.9 2.6 4.1 2.7 2.0 3.9 4.0 5.4 4.0 12.8 21.6 17.4 10.9 21.2 19.3 26.1 22.1 13.60% 5.26% Inner Suburbs Fairfax County Montgomery County Prince Georges County 9.1 9.4 8.3 61.1 57.4 58.1 25.0 23.0 25.2 4.0 5.7 6.5 5.4 9.4 5.8 4.4 4.5 4.5 5.6 5.4 4.8 35.2 33.3 36.3 19.27% 18.89% 16.80% Outer Suburbs Loudoun County Prince William County Frederick County Charles County 8.8 9.9 9.8 9.4 63.3 59.7 64.7 64.5 26.4 28.9 25.0 24.9 1.3 2.2 1.3 1.8 3.9 4.1 4.8 2.5 5.2 5.1 4.2 6.2 5.6 5.9 6.3 6.1 50.1 51.0 57.4 65.6 5.42% 8.13% 2.67% 4.50% Regional Average VMT per HH Arlington Ave HH VMT/Region Ave HH VMT Arlington Metro Corridors HH VMT/Regional Average HH VMT 3.60% 34.19 63.18% 45.70% updated - June 1, 2011 Uses expanded Arlington dataset with new regional weighting factors Results updated only for Arlington 45
  • Office Building Study Overall Study Purposes • Learn about travel and parking behaviors and preferences of office employees in commercial buildings. • Provide staff and decision-makers with useful local data about influences on travel and parking behaviors. • Support a better understanding among the wider public about transportation influences and outcomes, and their relationship to Countywide objectives and national standards. Priority interest • • • • Building and neighborhood area travel profiles Influences on mode split Role of parking in trip generation and mode choice Role of transportation options in economic competitiveness 46
  • Office Worker Travel Patterns by Station Area 47
  • Resident Site Plan Building Study • 16 buildings • Voluntary online or paper survey • 1,456 completes (overall response rate of 25% of adult residents) • Full week of 24-hour garage data
  • Vehicle Trip Generation Actual vs. Standard
  • Traffic Trends - Arterial Streets Street Segment Street Type 1996 2001 2006 2009 2011/2012 % Change 1996-2012 Lee Hwy Rosslyn EW 6-lane arterial 37,770 33,632 32,428 34,000 31,951 -15.4% Wash. Blvd – VA Sq. EW 4-lane arterial 20,469 19,478 18,069 NA** 17,500 -14.5% Clarendon Blvd. EW 2-lane 1-way arterial 13,980 14,199 14,539 13,080 13,292 -5.0% Wilson Blvd. - Clarendon EW 2-lane 1-way arterial 16,368 16,265 13,797 12,194 12,603 -23.0% Arlington Blvd. EW 6-lane arterial 55,865 63,272 60,223 62,000 65,259 16.8% Glebe Road - Ballston NS 6-lane arterial 35,230 39,409 35,900 33,000 31,000 -12.0% G. Mason Drive NS 4-lane arterial 20,002 22,578 23,386 22,824 20,518 2.3% •No dicernable pattern of growth on the local road system over the 15 year period ** Location has no available data for 2009 50
  • Traffic Trends - Arterial Streets Street Segment Street Type 1996 2001 2006 2009 2011/2012 % Change 1996-2012 Columbia Pike w/o Glebe EW 5-lane arterial 32,000 22,612 28,000 28,000 NA -12.5% Columbia Pike e/o Wash. Blvd. EW 4-lane arterial NA 13,000 12,000 12,000 10,000 -23.0% Glebe Rd. s/o Columbia Pike NS 4-lane arterial 29,000 32,000 28,000 26,000 27,000 -6.0% Hayes Street n/o 15th St. NS 6-lane arterial 21,426 14,200 13,900 NA 13,540 -36.8% S. Eads Street n/o 18th St. NS 4-lane arterial NA 9,140 8,270 NA 9,230 .98% Jeff Davis Hwy n/o Glebe Rd NS 6-lane arterial 52,000 NA 44,000 43,000 44,000 -15.4% Arlington Ridge Rd s/o 23rd Street NS 2-lane arterial 14,584 12,570 13,250 NA 13,680 - 2.3% •No dicernable pattern of growth on the local road system over the 15 year period 51
  • Transit Ridership Trends – Arlington-Related Trips FY1996 Actual FY 2001 Actual FY 2006 Actual FY 2009 Actual FY2012 Actual FY2013 Estimate % Growth Metrorail Arlington Stations 45,335,000 56,278,412 60,864,000 61,935,000 61,014,000 61,929,275 36.6% Metrobus Arlington Routes 12,049,000 11,614,599 13,221,100 16,135,000 15,056,000 15,206,378 26.2% VRE – Crystal City 567,000 586,069 992,600 998,903 1,142,000 1,154,800 103.7% 105,000 147,813 926,600 1,428,800 2,537,000 2,660,000 2,571% 58,076,000 68,626,893 76,004,300 81,916,996 79,749,000 80,990,453 39.6% Arlington Transit (ART) Total Annual Ridership •2+% average annual growth across all transit services over the 17 year period •40% of Virginia’s total annual transit ridership is from Arlington related trips 52
  • Growth in ART Local Transit Ridership 3,000,000 2,660,000 2,537,000 2,500,000 2,261,100 1,990,402 Annual Ridership 2,000,000 1,428,827 1,500,000 1,225,427 1,060,441 926,574 1,000,000 674,806 500,000 0 FY 05 FY 06 FY 07 FY 08 FY 09 FY 10 FY 11 FY 12 FY 13 Fiscal Year 53
  • Bicycle Usage on Trails – 2010 -2012 450000 400000 350000 300000 250000 2011 200000 2012 150000 100000 50000 0 Custis Bon Air Custis Rosslyn W&OD East Falls Church W&OD Bon Air 12% increase in selected trail use between 2011 and 2012 54
  • Bikeshare Usage 55
  • Lessons Learned – Effectiveness Coordinated Development & Transportation Strategies • Arlington’s strategies have yielded substantial economic, transportation, and environmental benefits - allowing continued growth with less reliance on auto trips, and more use of transit and other travel options. • It isn’t just one policy but many that contribute to enhanced performance such as: – – – – – Building mixed use environments with highest densities around transit stops Expanding viable and attractive transportation options Making user information readily available and providing ongoing education and encouragement Sustaining and strengthening transportation demand management (TDM) Actively managing parking • Sustaining community performance requires ongoing investments in infrastructure. • It’s not a short term commitment - to achieve the full benefits, it requires sustaining and enhancing programs and policies over time • It also requires ongoing community and institutional exposure to/and assimilation of best practices from other communities in the US and abroad 56
  • Areas for Further Investigation • Improve trip generation guidance for urban transit-oriented mixed use developments and neighborhoods • Incorporate actual site and neighborhood level performance into regional transportation models and project selection processes (better data, better models, improved decision-making) • Fully account for the supply and cost of parking in transportation and community development • Identify and document structural changes in the environment that would alter the assumptions about community development and transportation system use 57
  • Contact Information: Dennis M. Leach, AICP Director of Transportation Arlington County Department of Environmental Services Division of Transportation & Development 703-228-0588 dleach@arlingtonva.us 58