Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

F Is Fantastic Jackson


Published on

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

F Is Fantastic Jackson

  1. 1. TEN YEARS LATER… Implementing Multi-Modal LOS in Fort Collins, Colorado What worked, What didn’t, and Where are we heading? Mark Jackson, AICP Transportation Group Director City of Fort Collins, CO CNU June 19, 2009 1
  2. 2. The City of Fort Collins • Mid-size community of 137,000 in Northern CO • Home to Colorado State University • Diverse, progressive community 2
  3. 3. The City of Fort Collins • Developed and implemented Multi-Modal LOS Standards in 1999 • Created a “Complete Streets” culture within the organization (before it was cool) • Changed expectations for City Staff and Developers alike • Many positives realized, but some missteps and lessons learned • Hits, Misses & Future Direction 3
  4. 4. What Makes Great Streets? • Serve PEOPLE • All Modes - Autos, Bikes, Peds, Transit, RVs, Trucks, Trains, etc. • Functional - Mobility & Utilities • Attractive & Inviting Streetscapes • Active Land Uses – Day & Night 4
  5. 5. Multimodal Standards: •ROW •Travel Lanes Based on City Plan & Master Street Plan •Medians •Parking Design Standards Vary by Facility Type & Location •Bike Lanes •Parkway Transportation Impact Study includes all modes •Sidewalk •Utilities Street include auto, pedestrian, bicycle and transit elements 5
  6. 6. Tools for an effective Multi-modal Transportation System Complete Streets: Many tools in the toolbox: St reet •Corridor & District Plans Syst em •Land Use Code 7 Signals 10 Landscaped Medians •Master Street Plan 8 Safet y 4 Drainage 5 Buses IRRIGATION •Street Standards & Design Manuals 1 Str eet Vehicles IRRIGATION •LOS Manual & TIS Guidelines STORM SEWER 2 Bike Lanes SEWER •Outreach & Education BUS WATER DRIVEWAY 9 Parkways IRRIGATION 3 Sidewalks ELECTRIC DUCTS IRRIGATION CABLE ELECTRIC PHONE 6 Ut ilit ies CABLE •Adequate Public Facilities GAS WATER STORM SEWER •City Plan Comprehensive Plan SEWER 6
  7. 7. Multimodal LOS Standards: Automobile Goes beyond traditional volume/capacity based LOS •Access •Connectivity •Continuity Differentiates between Activity Centers, Commercial Corridors, Mixed Use Districts 7
  8. 8. Multimodal LOS Standards: Automobile Motor Vehicle LOS Standards 8
  9. 9. Multimodal LOS Standards: Destination Areas: Pedestrian •Recreation Sites •Residential Areas LOS Criteria: •Institutional Sites •Directness •Office Buildings •Continuity •Commercial Sites •Street Crossings •Industrial Sites •Visual Interest & Amenities Location Areas: •Security •Pedestrian District •Activity Center/Corridor •Transit Corridor •School Walk Area 9 •Other
  10. 10. Multimodal LOS Standards: Bicycle Based on Connectivity to Bike facilities in connecting corridors Bike Corridors may contain 1 of 3 types of facilities: On-street lanes Off-street paths On-street routes 10
  11. 11. Multimodal LOS Standards: Transit Based on Route characteristics & Land Use characteristics Standards developed during Transit Development Plan Standards evaluate service Service Level Standards: planned by 2015 Hours of service Mixed Use Centers & Frequency of service Commercial Corridors Travel time factor or Peak load factor 11 Remainder of service area
  12. 12. Integrating Multi-Modal Accessibility into the Development Review Process, Operations & Maintenance Real Life Lessons: •Hits •Misses •Next Steps 12
  13. 13. Development Review Real Life Lessons: Hits: New development provides good connectivity and continuity Proactive approach reduces City’s capital infrastructure burdens Education of & buy-in from developers, engineers & planners (eventually) Better interconnectivity between modes, higher modal splits Misses: Easy when economy and development demand is strong Difficult to implement in infill areas Qualitative criteria often confusing and inconsistent Transit service assumptions not being realized Next Steps: Update APF Policy and Process 13 Review & Update LOS standards for Infill Development
  14. 14. Results: Real Life Lessons Hits: Culture Change in the Community! •Transit Ridership up 15% in 2008; still rising •Three new transit routes added •Mason Corridor BRT becoming a reality •Gold Level Bicycle Community •Bike Culture Acceptance •Community Expectations 14
  15. 15. Hits: Rise of the Bike Culture in FC • Robust system of off street trails and on street paths • Functional and efficient • Built in Bike Population (CSU Students) • Hired Bicycle Coordinator in 2006 • Programs and Public Private Collaboration • Popularity has exploded in last two years! 15
  16. 16. Hits: Rise of the Bike Culture in FC • 2008 Gold Level Bicycle Community Award • Private Sector Jumping on the Bandwagon! 16
  17. 17. Hits: Community Expectations • At first, neighbors, developers and buyers fought “new” standards • Now, it is seen as an asset and amenity • Ped/Bike accessibility, connectivity • A different feel than “Anywhere USA” 17
  18. 18. Misses: On the Ground Realities Several Challenges & Lessons Learned over the Years: • Maintenance challenges • Enforcement issues • Dealing with other Local Agencies • Making the fit with existing development 18
  19. 19. Misses: On the Ground Realities Maintenance Challenges • Sometimes theory doesn’t quite translate into function – Setback standards vs. utility space needs – Inset parking vs. drainage and snow removal – Who maintains the ped connection? – Colored, Raised Crosswalks 19
  20. 20. Misses: Enforcement Issues Good intentions, but: – Early attempts confusing, frustrating – Eventually became self-policing – People still want to park in front 20
  21. 21. Misses: Dealing with Other Local Agencies Counter-Intuitive and Self- Defeating: • School Districts! – New School Locations – Incomplete connections – Located on major arterials – No options but SOV 21
  22. 22. Misses: Making it Fit with Existing Development • Some New Urbanist development on urban fringe • Great internal connectivity and design meets old or County standard facilities • How to link old & new? 22
  23. 23. Moving Forward: Trends & Changes • Infill Development – review & revise standards – retrofit multi-modal needs to old infrastructure – Capitalize on development opportunities – Transit Oriented Development a reality • Evolving from rigid standards to solution oriented approach • Integrate sustainability into design • Changing revenue structure threatens progress 23
  24. 24. Many Thanks To: • Kathleen Bracke, AICP: Transportation Planning Director • Ted Shepard, AICP: Chief Planner • Sheri Langenberger, PE: Engineering Dev. Review • Marc Virata,PE: Engineering Dev. Review • Many developers, designers, professionals, and leaders who have helped us make this real 24
  25. 25. City of Fort Collins – Resource List: •Multimodal Level of Service Standards: • Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards: • Fort Collins Pedestrian Level of Service Manual: Contact: Mark Jackson, AICP, Transportation Group Director phone: (970) 416-2029 or via e-mail: 25