Measuring Connectivity as Implementation of Sustainable Communities Strength in Numbers……..Safety in Network Powered by:
Presentation Outline <ul><li>Connectivity & Safety – CNU Re-cap </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Macro-scale  connectivity measur...
Garrick / Marshall – Connectivity & Safe Streets <ul><li>Better connected cities are safer </li></ul><ul><li>Intersection ...
Charlier Associates - Connectivity <ul><li>Connectivity Measures: </li></ul><ul><li>Block Length / Perimeter Length </li><...
City of Charlotte <ul><li>Leading city in application of policy and macro-level connectivity measures for transit and fire...
<ul><li>Drawbacks of Macro-Level Measures </li></ul><ul><li>Assumes a barrier-free landscape, measures only crow-flight di...
Local Need for Micro-scale Measures <ul><li>Macro-scale  measures – key findings of public safety and establishing standar...
Refining Route Directness Index <ul><li>straight-line distance “A” </li></ul>RDI = A  /  B actual route distance “B” B A
RDI Applied - Neighborhood Example shared-use path RDI = 0.20 RDI = 0.83 shared-use path
Comparing Connectivity Measures <ul><li>Following three Case Studies compare connectivity measures: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>...
Comparing Connectivity Measures <ul><li>Fire Station / Emergency Response </li></ul>
<ul><li>RDI Baseline </li></ul><ul><li>RDI  - Project Impact </li></ul>Fire Station / Emergency Response
<ul><li>Change in RDI </li></ul><ul><li>Shows affected parcels and relative impact </li></ul>Fire Station / Emergency Resp...
Fire Station Route Directness Index Before After Change Intersection Density Link-Node Ratio 55.9 56.0 0.48 0.57 19% 1.09 ...
Comparing Connectivity Measures <ul><li>Public Transport Planning </li></ul>
<ul><li>Lakewood Example </li></ul>Improving Station Connections
RDI Analysis Before – without connections versus  After – with connections study area is 1.0 mile radius Non-motorized con...
Rail Station RDI Baseline RDI  - Project Impact
<ul><li>Shows affected parcels and relative impact </li></ul><ul><li>Impacted parcels can be numbered for project prioriti...
Land Use Density and RDI taller parcels = higher land use density (address points per acre) Before After Change
Rail Station Route Directness Index Before After Change Intersection Density Link-Node Ratio 144 146 0.63 0.77 23% 1.29 1....
Draft FTA Policy – Connectivity Nexus <ul><li>FTA encourages the use of its funds for the type of well-designed pedestrian...
Comparing Connectivity Measures <ul><li>System-wide Transportation Planning </li></ul>
Anywhere USA:  Variation in RDI Cul-de-sac Hybrid Grid Poor Fair Good Street Network Typology Route Directness Index Ave R...
Neighborhood Plan Baseline Connectivity Ped-Bike Plan
Neighborhood Plan <ul><li>Shows affected parcels and relative impact </li></ul><ul><li>Impacted parcels can be numbered fo...
Neighborhood Plan Route Directness Index Before After Change Intersection Density Link-Node Ratio 107 0.63 0.67 6% 1.43 1....
<ul><li>City-Wide RDI Scoring: Olympia, WA </li></ul><ul><li>Pre-Planning Gap Analysis to </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Efficientl...
Contact <ul><li>Andy Mortensen </li></ul><ul><li>ViaCity  Program Manager Sr. Transportation Planner </li></ul><ul><li>[em...
Supplemental Slidedeck
Neighborhood Baseline Conditions Average RDI Scoring for Individual Tax Parcels
Impact of New Shared-Use Paths Average RDI Scoring for Individual Tax Parcels
RDI Sensitivity to Smart Growth Design Principles Block Length Cul-de-Sac Length 305 ft 330ft
Scoring Plan and Project Impacts Shared-Use Path Connections
ViaCity software
Data Needs <ul><li>Aerial Photos </li></ul><ul><li>Transit Facilities </li></ul><ul><li>Ped/Bike Facilities </li></ul><ul>...
Network Editing Identify link endpoints Adapt for pedestrian-scale connections (major roads only) Add existing internal co...
Adding Impedances <ul><li>Impedances apply a factor to original street centerline length </li></ul><ul><li>Good  attribute...
ViaCity Software
ViaCity Software
RDI Analysis <ul><li>Error checking </li></ul><ul><li>Large parcel methods </li></ul><ul><li>Opportunities for connections...
<ul><li>Patent pending </li></ul><ul><li>Transit Sites </li></ul><ul><li>Bike/Ped Plans </li></ul><ul><li>Project Prioriti...
<ul><li>RDI Solutions – Work-In-Progress </li></ul><ul><li>Transit Station Area Project Prioritization </li></ul><ul><li>C...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

18th Annual Congress of the New Urbanism "Building Safer Streets for Healthier Neighborhoods"

1,695 views

Published on

Presentation to the 18th Annual Congress of the New Urbanism – CNU 18: Atlanta, Georgia / May 2010 by Andy Mortensen

Published in: Technology, Real Estate
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,695
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
52
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
27
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Slide illustrates the RDI calculation for a select O-D pair of dwellings within a hierarchical (non-grid, cul-de-sac focused) neighborhood.
  • New Sounder Station in Lakewood, Washington Commuter Rail route to Tacoma and Downtown Seattle Non-Motorized Plan identifies Interstate Freeway and Railroad Over-crossing enhancements, major impediments to bicycle and pedestrian travel and access to new Sounder Station.
  • RDI scores can be at the parcel level, which allows scores to be related to land use information. In other words, a transportation-land use nexus.
  • Andy Mortensen of Transpo Group GIS Measures of Connectivity | 05/26/09
  • Building GIS database to measure “crow flight between potential origin-destination pairs (example: tax lot-to-tax lot). Base values reflect averaged RDI for each tax lot origin, with destinations originally set at a one-half mile maximum walking distance.
  • RDI re-calculated based on added shared-use path connectors
  • Note RDI measures for tax lots in relation to adjacent block length and cul-de-sac length
  • A delta plot is easily mapped to illustrate the tax lots which directly benefit from improved access, or connectivity.
  • 18th Annual Congress of the New Urbanism "Building Safer Streets for Healthier Neighborhoods"

    1. 1. Measuring Connectivity as Implementation of Sustainable Communities Strength in Numbers……..Safety in Network Powered by:
    2. 2. Presentation Outline <ul><li>Connectivity & Safety – CNU Re-cap </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Macro-scale connectivity measures </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>Local need for Micro-scale measures and tools </li></ul><ul><li>Comparing connectivity measures </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Fire Station – Emergency Response </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Transit Station Access (Sound Transit Pilot Study) </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Sustainable Neighborhood Network Planning </li></ul></ul></ul>
    3. 3. Garrick / Marshall – Connectivity & Safe Streets <ul><li>Better connected cities are safer </li></ul><ul><li>Intersection Density (better measure) & Link-Node Ratio </li></ul><ul><li>Both measures – difficult for people to understand intuitively </li></ul>Source: Wesley Marshall and Norman Garrick | New Urban News and CNU safer less safe Characteristic Safer Cities Less Safe Cities Percent Difference Average year of incorporation 1895 1932 Average year of block development 1957 1972 Population (2000 Census) 65,719 58,845 -8.9 Real intersection density (per sq mi) 106.2 62.7 -41.0 Average block size (acres) 18.2 34.5 89.6 Link to node ratio 1.34 1.29 -3.7 Fatal crashes 3.1 10.1 225.8 Fatal crashes not on limited access highways 2.3 8.6 273.9 Source: Wesley E. Marshall and Norman Glick, Street Network Types and Road Safety: A Study of 24 California Cities
    4. 4. Charlier Associates - Connectivity <ul><li>Connectivity Measures: </li></ul><ul><li>Block Length / Perimeter Length </li></ul><ul><li>Intersection Spacing </li></ul><ul><li>Link-Node Ratio </li></ul><ul><li>Intersection Density </li></ul><ul><li>Route Directness Index </li></ul>Source: Charlier Associates, Scott McCarey Presentation | CNU
    5. 5. City of Charlotte <ul><li>Leading city in application of policy and macro-level connectivity measures for transit and fire station analyses </li></ul>Connectivity Ratio Response Area (sq mi) Emergency Response Service Area as a Function of Connectivity Ratio poor good Source: City of Charlotte, Danny Pleasant Study Presentation | CNU 2008
    6. 6. <ul><li>Drawbacks of Macro-Level Measures </li></ul><ul><li>Assumes a barrier-free landscape, measures only crow-flight distance linking selective land use. </li></ul>Intersection Density Walk Score Link-Node Ratio Only reflects cul-de-sac activity - insensitive to block length. Reflects density of street development (block size). None of the methods directly measure connectivity between individual land uses (parcel-level) and they are difficult to interpret and explain to policy-makers and the general public.
    7. 7. Local Need for Micro-scale Measures <ul><li>Macro-scale measures – key findings of public safety and establishing standards with good urban design principles </li></ul><ul><li>Micro-scale (direct measurement) tools are needed to advance standards at the individual land use (parcel) level. </li></ul><ul><li>Need Examples: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Transit Station - FTA/HUD/EPA draft policy emphasizing performance measures and importance of network and inter-modal connectivity </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Sustainable Neighborhood Network Planning - non-motorized QOS (emphasis on network) in balanced, multi-modal planning - Smart Growth and / or concurrency management </li></ul></ul>
    8. 8. Refining Route Directness Index <ul><li>straight-line distance “A” </li></ul>RDI = A / B actual route distance “B” B A
    9. 9. RDI Applied - Neighborhood Example shared-use path RDI = 0.20 RDI = 0.83 shared-use path
    10. 10. Comparing Connectivity Measures <ul><li>Following three Case Studies compare connectivity measures: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Node-Link ratio </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Intersection Density </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Walk Score </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Route Directness Index (RDI) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Micro-level measure success indicators: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Recognizable individual land use (parcel) connectivity, and </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Sensitivity to New Urban design principles: </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>(a) short block, and </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>(b) minimal dead-ends </li></ul></ul></ul>
    11. 11. Comparing Connectivity Measures <ul><li>Fire Station / Emergency Response </li></ul>
    12. 12. <ul><li>RDI Baseline </li></ul><ul><li>RDI - Project Impact </li></ul>Fire Station / Emergency Response
    13. 13. <ul><li>Change in RDI </li></ul><ul><li>Shows affected parcels and relative impact </li></ul>Fire Station / Emergency Response
    14. 14. Fire Station Route Directness Index Before After Change Intersection Density Link-Node Ratio 55.9 56.0 0.48 0.57 19% 1.09 1.10 Walk Score 22 of 100 <1% <1% 1,115 (increased Fire Station Service Area by 17%) -- -- Parcel Impact -- -- --
    15. 15. Comparing Connectivity Measures <ul><li>Public Transport Planning </li></ul>
    16. 16. <ul><li>Lakewood Example </li></ul>Improving Station Connections
    17. 17. RDI Analysis Before – without connections versus After – with connections study area is 1.0 mile radius Non-motorized connection across tracks with supporting pathways
    18. 18. Rail Station RDI Baseline RDI - Project Impact
    19. 19. <ul><li>Shows affected parcels and relative impact </li></ul><ul><li>Impacted parcels can be numbered for project prioritization </li></ul>Rail Station RDI Change
    20. 20. Land Use Density and RDI taller parcels = higher land use density (address points per acre) Before After Change
    21. 21. Rail Station Route Directness Index Before After Change Intersection Density Link-Node Ratio 144 146 0.63 0.77 23% 1.29 1.30 Walk Score 89 of 100 1.4% < 1% 2,300 -- -- Parcel Impact -- -- --
    22. 22. Draft FTA Policy – Connectivity Nexus <ul><li>FTA encourages the use of its funds for the type of well-designed pedestrian and bicycle amenities that attract new public transportation riders by expanding the catchment area and utility of public transportation stations. </li></ul><ul><li>Key requirement for determining the eligibility of a pedestrian or bicycle improvement is whether it has a functional relationship to a public transportation facility. </li></ul><ul><li>Pedestrian Improvements – within one-half mile </li></ul><ul><li>Bicycle Improvements – within three miles </li></ul><ul><li>(Proposed FTA Policy Statement on the Eligibility of Pedestrian and Bicycle Improvements Under Federal Transit Law. November 6, 2009) </li></ul>“ ”
    23. 23. Comparing Connectivity Measures <ul><li>System-wide Transportation Planning </li></ul>
    24. 24. Anywhere USA: Variation in RDI Cul-de-sac Hybrid Grid Poor Fair Good Street Network Typology Route Directness Index Ave RDI = 0.58 Ave RDI = 0.68 Ave RDI = 0.75
    25. 25. Neighborhood Plan Baseline Connectivity Ped-Bike Plan
    26. 26. Neighborhood Plan <ul><li>Shows affected parcels and relative impact </li></ul><ul><li>Impacted parcels can be numbered for project prioritization </li></ul>
    27. 27. Neighborhood Plan Route Directness Index Before After Change Intersection Density Link-Node Ratio 107 0.63 0.67 6% 1.43 1.55 Walk Score 38 of 100 9% 8% 268 -- -- Parcel Impact -- -- -- 117
    28. 28. <ul><li>City-Wide RDI Scoring: Olympia, WA </li></ul><ul><li>Pre-Planning Gap Analysis to </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Efficiently focus expensive data collection </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Begin community involvement process </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Establish Concurrency Quality of Service Thresholds and Policy to Guide Site Planning </li></ul><ul><li>Gauge success of non-motorized projects and program (Plan) impacts on connectivity </li></ul>
    29. 29. Contact <ul><li>Andy Mortensen </li></ul><ul><li>ViaCity Program Manager Sr. Transportation Planner </li></ul><ul><li>[email_address] </li></ul><ul><li> T 800.593.0597 Cell 503.313.6946 </li></ul><ul><li>Bruce Haldors </li></ul><ul><li>President </li></ul><ul><li>[email_address] </li></ul><ul><li> T 800.593.0597 Cell 206.300.8907 </li></ul><ul><li>www.viacity.info </li></ul>
    30. 30. Supplemental Slidedeck
    31. 31. Neighborhood Baseline Conditions Average RDI Scoring for Individual Tax Parcels
    32. 32. Impact of New Shared-Use Paths Average RDI Scoring for Individual Tax Parcels
    33. 33. RDI Sensitivity to Smart Growth Design Principles Block Length Cul-de-Sac Length 305 ft 330ft
    34. 34. Scoring Plan and Project Impacts Shared-Use Path Connections
    35. 35. ViaCity software
    36. 36. Data Needs <ul><li>Aerial Photos </li></ul><ul><li>Transit Facilities </li></ul><ul><li>Ped/Bike Facilities </li></ul><ul><li>Ped/Bike Plans </li></ul><ul><li>Planned Improvements </li></ul><ul><li>Topography </li></ul><ul><li>Redevelopment plans or ideas </li></ul>Parcels or Tax Lots Street Centerlines Supplemental Information (Analysis Layer) (Network Layer)
    37. 37. Network Editing Identify link endpoints Adapt for pedestrian-scale connections (major roads only) Add existing internal connections Add possible connections (scenarios) 1 2 3 4
    38. 38. Adding Impedances <ul><li>Impedances apply a factor to original street centerline length </li></ul><ul><li>Good attributes reduce effective street length </li></ul><ul><li>Bad attributes increase effective street length </li></ul>Original length = 1.0 mile Effective length = 0.8 mile (bike lanes, good sidewalks) Effective length = 1.2 mile (high traffic volumes, steep, no sidewalks)
    39. 39. ViaCity Software
    40. 40. ViaCity Software
    41. 41. RDI Analysis <ul><li>Error checking </li></ul><ul><li>Large parcel methods </li></ul><ul><li>Opportunities for connections </li></ul><ul><li>Review statistics </li></ul><ul><li>Correlate to demographics </li></ul>
    42. 42. <ul><li>Patent pending </li></ul><ul><li>Transit Sites </li></ul><ul><li>Bike/Ped Plans </li></ul><ul><li>Project Prioritization </li></ul><ul><li>Incorporate </li></ul><ul><li>Impedances </li></ul><ul><li>Land use </li></ul><ul><li>Land value </li></ul><ul><li>Any GIS data </li></ul>
    43. 43. <ul><li>RDI Solutions – Work-In-Progress </li></ul><ul><li>Transit Station Area Project Prioritization </li></ul><ul><li>Cost / Benefit Analysis </li></ul>

    ×