Thurs1415.Grey.McMahon

Loading...

Flash Player 9 (or above) is needed to view presentations.
We have detected that you do not have it on your computer. To install it, go here.

0 comments

Post a comment

    Post a comment
    Embed Video
    Edit your comment Cancel

    1 Favorite

    Thurs1415.Grey.McMahon - Presentation Transcript

    1. Greening the Old City: Baltimore’s Sustainability Program
      • Introduction
      • Background on Baltimore
      • Overview of Baltimore’s Sustainability Program
      • Transportation Initiatives prior to the Sustainability Program
      • Crafting a “Vision”
      • Goals, Strategies, & Indicators
    2. Introduction
      • Patrick J. McMahon, AICP
      • Professional Background
        • Master’s in City & Regional Planning, UNC-Chapel Hill
        • 4 years at Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
        • Prior work with non-profits
      • Advocacy
        • Greater Baltimore Sierra Club Transportation Chair
        • Bike & bus commuter
        • MPO Citizen Advisory Committee
    3. Baltimore History
      • First settled in 1729
        • Early settlements merged in 1745, City incorporated in 1796
      • Significant growth between Civil & World Wars
        • Dense rowhomes
          • Over ½ of current City housing stock, roughly 30 units/acre)
        • Extensive streetcar network (300+ miles of track in the ’40s)
      • Post-War decline
        • Loss of manufacturing jobs
        • Drugs, crime, jobs, & schools all contribute to population loss
        • Loss of 1/3 of population in City between 1950 & 2000
      • Waterfront “renaissance”
        • Stopped freeways, removed docks, built tourist attractions
      • New political leadership
        • Cleaner, Greener, Healthier, & Safer
    4. Existing Transportation Conditions Proximity of Jobs to Downtown Density 43.54% 56.46% 17.60% 890,673 Baltimore, MD PMSA Share outside 10 mile Within 10 miles of CBD Within 3 miles of CBD Total employment Metro Region +/-0.9 28.2 Mean travel time to work (minutes) 2% +/-983 5,946 Worked at home 2% +/-1,172 4,645 Other means 8% +/-2,475 20,549 Walked 20% +/-4,270 50,519 Public transportation (excluding taxicab) 10% +/-2,680 27,017 Car, truck, or van -- carpooled 58% +/-5,834 149,697 Car, truck, or van -- drove alone +/-6,056 258,373 Workers 16 years and over Baltimore Commuting Patterns (2006 American Community Survey) Density City 7,054/mi² Oakland, California 25 7,217/mi² Buffalo, New York 24 7,693/mi² Baltimore, Maryland 23 7,972/mi² Los Angeles, California 22 9,070/mi² Washington, District of Columbia 21 10,780/mi² Yonkers, New York 20 10,852/mi² Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19 11,534/mi² Miami, Florida 18 11,548/mi² Newark, New Jersey 17 11,750/mi² Hamtramck, Michigan 16 11,768/mi² Hialeah, Florida 15 12,166/mi² Boston, Massachusetts 14 12,306/mi² Santa Ana, California 13 12,502/mi² Miami Beach, Florida 12 12,603/mi² Chicago, Illinois 11 15,471/mi² [3] Central Falls, Rhode Island 10 15,852/mi² Jersey City, New Jersey 9 16,086/mi² Chelsea, Massachusetts 8 16,443/mi² San Francisco, California 7 17,675.4/mi² Paterson, New Jersey 6 18,633/mi² [1] [2] Somerville, Massachusetts 5 26,348/mi² New York, New York 4 30,239/mi² Hoboken, New Jersey 3 44,352/mi² West New York, New Jersey 2 52,978/mi² Union City, New Jersey 1
    5. Major US Cities Non-Auto Commuting & Carless Households 27.32% 14.05% 1.19% 20.59% 5.35% 484,674 New Orleans city, Louisiana 11 26.71% 11.60% 0.56% 15.91% 3.75% 362,563 Miami city, Florida 12 25.17% 10.90% 0.35% 15.36% 4.11% 348,189 St. Louis city, Missouri 13 24.57% 12.20% 0.22% 16.52% 4.10% 478,393 Cleveland city, Ohio 14 28.56% 44.54% 32.64% 9.82% 2.08% 776,733 San Francisco city, California 10 2000 Census % Households w/o a car % Total Non-Car Commuters % Public Transit Commuters % Pedestrian Commuters % Bike Commuters Population Place Rank 23.58% 15.61% 0.33% 19.58% 3.64% 416,629 Atlanta city, Georgia 15 28.85% 33.02% 26.71% 5.80% 0.51% 2,895,964 Chicago city, Illinois 9 29.44% 16.65% 11.11% 5.30% 0.23% 334,563 Pittsburgh city, Pennsylvania 8 31.42% 18.39% 12.52% 5.43% 0.44% 292,648 Buffalo city, New York 7 34.91% 47.42% 33.07% 13.36% 0.99% 589,141 Boston city, Massachusetts 6 35.73% 19.04% 13.70% 4.87% 0.46% 1,517,550 Philadelphia city, Pennsylvania 5 35.89% 27.56% 19.94% 7.28% 0.34% 651,154 Baltimore City, Maryland 4 36.93% 47.95% 34.47% 12.27% 1.21% 572,059 Washington city, DC 3 44.17% 35.06% 26.81% 8.03% 0.22% 273,546 Newark city, New Jersey 2 55.70% 65.55% 54.35% 10.72% 0.48% 8,008,278 New York city, New York 1
    6. Economic Sustainability
      • A study by the Center for Housing Policy found that the average annual transportation cost for low- to moderate-income residents in Baltimore was $9,506, or 29% of their income.
    7. Past Missteps
      • Extensive transit network proposed in 1968 has had limited implementation
      • Light rail line built fast and cheap
        • Shortcuts have had lasting negative impact on service & perception of transit
      • Poor management of traffic signals in past
      • Extensive construction of downtown parking garages
        • Targeted towards commuter use to maintain office tenants
      • Limited coordination between City and (State) Transit Agency
      • Weak regional planning organization that has avoided land use
    8. Baltimore Sustainability Program
      • Office of Sustainability
      • Purpose: Coordinate City, non-governmental organizations, and private efforts toward sustainability goals. Advise and support the Sustainability Commission’s efforts. Lead programs of the Environmental Sub-Cabinet.
      • Sustainability Commission
      • Purpose: Create and implement a City-wide Sustainability Plan. Develop partnerships with government, NGO’s, businesses, and citizens to implement City-wide sustainability programs. Commission must report to City Council annually.
      • Environmental Sub-Cabinet
      • Purpose: Integrate elements of sustainability into all facets of City operations. Develop and coordinate City policies and programs that will improve environmental performance of City operations within a sustainable framework.
    9. Office of Sustainability
      • Work with the Sustainability Commission to develop and implement the Sustainability Plan
      • Complete a Baltimore Green House Gas Inventory
      • Identify and understand latest sustainability initiatives, programs and legislation
      • Develop working relationships with other groups performing related work
    10. Sustainability Commission
      • Comprised of 21 Members Representing:
        • Community Organizations
        • Environmental Groups & Interests
        • Labor Unions
        • Public Health
        • Environmental Justice
        • Private Industry
        • Mayor’s Office
        • City Agencies
    11. Environmental Sub-Cabinet
      • Develop and coordinate City policies and programs that will improve environmental performance of City operations within a sustainable framework
      • Report to the Mayor’s Cabinet on sustainability issues important to the City, initiatives, policies and programs
    12. Meeting the environmental, social, and economic needs of Baltimore without compromising the ability of future generations to meet these needs. Working Definition of Sustainability Economic Prosperity Social Equity Environmental Protection
    13. Guiding Principles of Sustainability Commission & Plan
      • Inclusiveness – Adopt a broad definition of “environment” as issues are explored
      • Engagement – Engage a wide range of the public, including those not normally connected to a traditional environmental agenda
      • Translation – Communicate issues, ideas, and goals in ways that are meaningful to all citizens
    14. Sustainability Plan - Purpose
      • Engage the Baltimore community in a comprehensive discussion on sustainability
      • Inventory existing programs, organizations, and resources
      • Articulate and prioritize sustainability goals for the Baltimore community
      • Serve as roadmap for future legislation, public/private partnerships, programs, educational campaigns, etc.
    15. Sustainability Plan - Content
      • Plan will include:
      • Baseline information on community sustainability
      • Vision statements for what a Sustainable Baltimore would look like
      • Clear goals to move us towards this vision
      • Indicators and targets to measure progress towards these goals
      • Priority initiatives to meet these goals
    16. Sustainability Plan
      • Plan goals:
      • Engage the Baltimore community in a comprehensive discussion on sustainability
      • Inventory existing programs, organizations, and resources
      • Articulate and prioritize sustainability goals for the Baltimore community
      • Serve as roadmap for future legislation, public/private partnerships, programs, educational campaigns, etc.
      • Plan content:
      • Baseline information on community sustainability
      • Vision statements for what a Sustainable Baltimore would look like
      • Clear goals to move us towards this vision
      • Indicators and targets to measure progress towards these goals
      • Priority initiatives to meet these goals
    17. Working Groups
      • Energy & Air
      • Water
      • Waste
      • Green Infrastructure
      • Built Environment
      • Transportation
    18.  
    19. Transportation Working Group
      • Gathering public input on plan content
        • 3 public “listening” meetings over this summer
      • Diverse group
        • City Staff
          • DOT & Health Dept.
        • Transit agency staff
        • Regional transportation advocacy groups
        • H.S. student
        • Bike collective
        • University Transportation Director
        • Local transit riders & advocates
        • Environmental justice researcher
    20. Sustainability Plan Timeline
      • April Commission Members Sworn-in
      • May 27 Sustainability Plan Kick-off Meeting
      • June - Sept. Working Group “Listening Sessions”
      • October 28 Next Public Presentation Meeting
      • Fall 2008 Draft of Sustainability Plan
      • Early 2009 Plan will be sent to City Council for approval
    21. Existing Transportation Initiatives
      • Transit
        • Trip planning on Google Maps
        • On-going planning for Red Line, Charles St. Trolley, & Green Line
        • Red Line Summit
        • Transit signal priority on Howard Street
        • Free City Shuttle System (Summer ’09)
      • Bicycling
        • Bike Master Plan
        • Collegetown Bike Network (bike lanes, sharrows, floating bike lanes)
        • Bike parking to be added to a downtown City garage
        • Velocipede (non-profit bike repair / build your own bike)
      • Car-sharing
        • Flexcar (now Zipcar on JHU campus)
        • City planning creation of Maryland CarShare
      • City Master Plan (Live - Earn - Play - Learn)
      • Live Near Your Work
    22. Sustainable Transportation European Council of Ministers of Transport (2004)
      • Allows the basic access and development needs of individuals, companies and society to be met safely and in a manner consistent with human and ecosystem health, and promotes equity within and between successive generations.
      • Is affordable, operates fairly and efficiently, offers a choice of transport mode and supports a competitive economy, as well as balanced regional development
      • Limits emissions and waste within the planet’s ability to absorb them, uses renewable resources at or below their rates of generation, and uses non-renewable resources at or below the rates of development of renewable substitutes, while minimizing the impact on the use of land and the generation of noise.
    23. Crafting a Transportation Vision A diverse, accessible, efficient, integrated, safe, and environmentally-responsible transportation system that promotes ease of movement, access to opportunity, and public health. First draft for discussion
    24. Possible Transportation Goals
      • Bicycling
        • Education about new facilities for drivers & cyclists
        • Bike Boulevards (in Bike Master Plan)
        • Shift in cultural perception of bicycling
      • Car-Sharing
        • Car sharing affordable and readily available in low-income neighborhoods
      • Transit
        • Real-time information for customers
        • Redesigned routes & better monitoring to reduce bus bunching
        • Streetcar network linking neighborhoods w/in 3-4 miles of downtown
        • Enhanced bus routes in major radial corridors
        • Citywide transit signal priority
        • Better coordination between City & State Transit agency
      • Land Use
        • Dense, affordable development around rail stations & bus transfer points
      • Policy
        • Regional transportation planning involving coordinated planning of land use goals
        • City advocacy against highway capacity expansion
      • Parking
        • Parking maximums in areas well served by transit
        • No new garages downtown
    25. Sustainable Transp. Indicators (Litman 2008) Up User survey results. Up Comprehensive and neutral planning Up Degree to which individual planning decisions support strategic goals Up Cost-based pricing Transport Policy and Planning Up Quality of accessibility for people with disabilities Up Affordable housing accessibility Down Portion of household budgets needed to provide adequate transport. Equity Down Habitat and cultural sites degraded by transportation facilities Down Land devoted to transport facilities Down Per capita impervious surface area Land Use Impacts Up Internet access and delivery service quality Up Quality of land use accessibility Up Quality of walking, cycling, public transit, driving, taxi, etc. Overall Accessibility Up Freight transport efficiency Down per unit of travel (cost efficiency) Expenditures on roads, public transit, parking, ports, etc. Down Per capita congestion costs Down Access to employment Down Consumer expenditures on transport Economic Productivity Down Traffic crash economic costs Down Police-reported crashes Down Crash deaths and injuries Traffic Risk Down People exposed to aircraft noise above 57 LAeq,T Down People exposed to traffic noise above 55 LAeq,T Noise Pollution Down Emissions from vehicle and facility construction Down Climate change emissions (CO2, CH4) Down Ambient air quality Down Total vehicle emissions Air Pollution Emissions Reduced automobile share Portion of trips by auto, public transit, and non-motorized modes Up for low-income, down for high-income Motor vehicle travel Up for low-income, down for high-income Motor vehicle ownership Travel Activity Desired Direction Indicator Category
    26. Conclusion
      • Baltimore just starting down this path
      • Strong political support
      • Good built environment bones
      • Need to translate to average residents
      • Transportation affordability will be a key driver
      • Many residents using transit but need to improve conditions

    + TCC08TCC08, 2 years ago

    custom

    907 views, 1 favs, 0 embeds more stats

    From Grey to Green: Rethinking Cities Built for Car more

    More info about this document

    © All Rights Reserved

    Go to text version

    • Total Views 907
      • 907 on SlideShare
      • 0 from embeds
    • Comments 0
    • Favorites 1
    • Downloads 0
    Most viewed embeds

    more

    All embeds

    less

    Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
    Flag as inappropriate

    Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate. If needed, use the feedback form to let us know more details.

    Cancel
    File a copyright complaint
    Having problems? Go to our helpdesk?

    Categories