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.

RV 2014: Urban Circulator Roundtable: Shaping Cities one Challenge at a Time -All Presentations

385 views

Published on

Urban Circulator Roundtable: Shaping Cities One Challenge at a Time AICP CM 1.5
An urban circulator roundtable? How appropriate! Hear speakers from around the country -- Austin; Atlanta; Minneapolis-St. Paul; Portland-- experienced in different disciplines of urban circulator implementation. Start with short presentations from each unique perspective, then focus on the challenges and issues associated with implementation -- outreach, financing, traffic, etc. -- and how each organization overcame these challenges.
Moderator: Neil McFarlane, General Manager, TriMet, Portland, Oregon
Paul Zebell, Project Manager, Bureau of Transportation, City of Portland, Oregon
April Manlapaz, Transit Project Manager, AECOM, Minneapolis, Minnesota
Derek Benedict, PE, Transportation Engineer, URS Corporation, Austin, Texas
D.J. Baxter, Executive Director, Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City, Salt Lake City, Utah
Jim Erkel, Attorney & Program Director, Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy, St. Paul, Minnesota
Lisa Gordon, Chief Operating Officer, Atlanta Beltline, Inc., Atlanta, Georgia

Published in: Services
  • Be the first to comment

RV 2014: Urban Circulator Roundtable: Shaping Cities one Challenge at a Time -All Presentations

  1. 1. Portland’s Streetcar: Challenges of a Maturing System
  2. 2. PARTNERSHIP • Operating Agreement: day-to-day responsibilities and costs • Master Agreement: • City responsible for capital funding • Both share operating funding, but for successful lines TriMet’s share increases based on policy-based targets • Both must agree for future projects to move forward • Template for potential other lines in the region
  3. 3. FOCUS SHIFTS OVER TIME Development Focus Access/ Mobility Focus Development Ridership Tax Receipts
  4. 4. Lessons Learned 1. Design standards must be tailored to fit the intended functions of the project. 2. Strong, clear partnerships are crucial to success. 3. Branding the project gives the public ownership and creates an identity.
  5. 5. Embedded Track
  6. 6. Minimal Setback
  7. 7. No Z-Gates and Non-Standard Tactile Color
  8. 8. Multi-Modal
  9. 9. Create a “Green” way
  10. 10. Partnering = Strong Alliances
  11. 11. Branding
  12. 12. Brand Implementation
  13. 13. Brand Implementation
  14. 14. Brand Implementation
  15. 15. Brand Implementation
  16. 16. Brand Implementation
  17. 17. Urban Circulator Roundtable: Shaping Cities One Challenge at a Time Project Connect Central Corridor – Clarifying the “Problem” in Austin, Texas Derek Benedict, PE URS Transit & Railroads Austin, Texas
  18. 18. • Regional High- Capacity System Plan • Includes local and regional rail and other HOV services • Established priorities • Central Corridor Study
  19. 19. • 4 “C”s, “G”, and “S” – Congestion – Core – Constraints – Centers – Growth – System (added for the Central Corridor)
  20. 20. • Study area (Central Austin) divided into 10 “sub-corridors” • About 60 different data sets were used to represent the problem statements (4 Cs, G, and S) • An interval-scoring and ranking tool was developed
  21. 21. “Poor – Fair – Good – Best” Harvey Balls …Good for more discrete comparison of better-defined corridors
  22. 22. Lamar Highland Mueller ERC 3 2 4 1 52 61 51 70 Weighting/ Importance Congestion 1 3 5 3 6 Congestion Index 2 5 22 20 25 Travel Demand Index 5 38 55 29 60 Constraints & Growth 4 18 23 19 19 Growth Index 4 36 55 38 56 Constraint Index 2 32 33 33 16 Core 2 2 6 9 8 Affordability Index 3 10 17 27 25 Econ Development Index 2 7 25 40 33 Centers 3 8 8 7 10 Centers Index 4 20 24 25 40 Consistency with Plans 1 20 16 12 12 System 5 21 19 12 27 Future Ridership Potential 5 19 21 8 29 Current Ridership Potential 3 18 10 4 16 Connectivity Index 5 15 13 16 22 Transit Demand Index 4 11 12 9 15 Problem Criteria - Allowed the use of many different sets of data - Allowed sensitivity testing - Allowed for simple prioritization of corridors/future corridors - Allowed clear defense of the methodology - Allowed for the development of an interactive tool for public involvement
  23. 23. – There were some surprises, but the results elegantly reflected the Project Connect problem statements and the priorities of advisory group stakeholders – Sensitivity & scenario testing – Some critics felt the method was a “black box” or too complicated in general – On the other hand, the tool was flexible, efficient, and a good platform for interactive public involvement
  24. 24. - The recommended “sub-corridors” were advanced and a locally preferred alternative developed. - Bond referendum this November
  25. 25. A Neighborhood Circulator For North Minneapolis CONTEXT
  26. 26. A Neighborhood Circulator For North Minneapolis CONTEXT -LOCATION
  27. 27. A Neighborhood Circulator For North Minneapolis CONTEXT -LOCATION -HISTORY
  28. 28. A Neighborhood Circulator For North Minneapolis CONTEXT -LOCATION -HISTORY -PRESENT
  29. 29. A Neighborhood Circulator For North Minneapolis TRANSPORTATION -EXISTING ASSETS BUS SERVICE
  30. 30. A Neighborhood Circulator For North Minneapolis TRANSPORTATION -EXISTING ASSETS -PROPOSED PROJECTS
  31. 31. A Neighborhood Circulator For North Minneapolis TRANSPORTATION -EXISTING ASSETS -PROPOSED PROJECTS -CIRCULATOR
  32. 32. A Neighborhood Circulator For North Minneapolis TRIPLE BOTTOM LINE 1. WORKFORCE AGREEMENT WITH METRO TRANSIT 2. WORKFORCE AGREEMENT WITH UTILITIES 3. BENEFITS TO RESIDENTS
  33. 33. // Where is the Atlanta BeltLine? Atlanta BeltLine // © 2014 • In the heart of the Atlanta region • Connects many of Atlanta’s cultural destinations • Utilizes historic freight rail rights of way around the center of town
  34. 34. 1,300 ACRES of Greenspace Atlanta BeltLine // © 2014 33 MILES of Trails 22 MILES of Transit & Transportation Infrastructure Historic Preservation Streetscapes & Public Art Jobs & Economic Development 1,100 ACRES of Environmental Clean-up // The Atlanta BeltLine: Key Elements 5,600 UNITS of Affordable Workforce Housing
  35. 35. Atlanta BeltLine // © 2013 // Housing Goal: • Create a mix of housing for a variety and mix of incomes and household types • 30,000 total additional housing units • 5,600 affordable workforce housing units 1st Generation (2009-2014) • $8.8M Trust Fund capitalized • Downpayment Assistance (86 units created) • Incentives for Developers (committed to 173 units) • Property Acquisition (see Lofts at Reynoldstown Crossing) • Over 500 affordable workforce units within ½ mile.
  36. 36. Atlanta BeltLine // © 2013 // Housing What Worked Well?
  37. 37. Atlanta BeltLine // © 2013 // Housing Challenges and Lessons Learned • Scale: Need to double production to meet goals (~200-300 annually). • Funding: Existing Trust Fund is 100% committed. Need to recapitalize, align with other funding sources, and establish funding and financing for land acquisition and incentives. • Land: ABI owns land for infrastructure, but limited land for adjacent development. Increased control of land is key to ensure affordable housing and other outcomes adjacent to Atlanta BeltLine. • Low Income Housing Tax Credit: Limited projects funded annually in the City of Atlanta • Incentives are insufficient in high land price areas: Land and partnership with mission driven developers is key to production in these areas.
  38. 38. Nicollet-Central Modern Streetcar Project Modern Streetcar for a World-Class Downtown Urban Circulators: Shaping Cities One Challenge at a Time Presenter: April Manlapaz, AECOM, and for the City of Minneapolis Nicollet–Central Modern Transit Streetcar Project | Rail-Volution 2014
  39. 39. Project Facts • 3.4 miles • 9,000 rides • 55k residents and 118k jobs Nicollet–Central Modern Transit Streetcar Project | Rail-Volution 2014 within ½ mi • Special trip generators – Eat – Minneapolis Institute of Arts – Downtown Minneapolis: 6,000 hotel rooms; Convention Center – Mississippi River and Nicollet Island – East Hennepin Business District • First modern streetcar line in the Twin Cities 1 p g at Street
  40. 40. Is Streetcar a Local or Regional Benefit? Consider… • Corridor’s trip generators serve regional economy • Major connections to regional transit – All transit in downtown Minneapolis – Major east-west bus connections outside downtown • High ridership demand for short trips where light rail doesn’t fit Green and Blue LRT Orange Line (BRT) Concentrate development where desired by City and …and where transit would efficiently serve development Nicollet–Central Modern Transit Streetcar | Rail-Volution 2014 2 Region eetcar Project Rail
  41. 41. Integration with Dense Bus Corridor • Long and short trips – Bus routes cover 25 mi – Nearly half of rides within 3.4-mi streetcar line Solutions • Workshops to develop service Nicollet–Central Modern Transit Streetcar Project | Rail-Volution 2014 3 plans and costs • Ridership modeling used regional base, rail mode share, and special generators • Very helpful to have a lot of data from transit agency Diverse Stakeholders • 20% of population have no vehicles • 24% live in poverty • 4,200 legally-binding affordable housing
  42. 42. Choosing a Streetcar Vehicle Nicollet–Central Modern Transit Streetcar Project | Rail-Volution 2014 4 Considerations • Urban scale • Fleet consistency • Operating and maintenance cost • Street impacts and platform design • Passenger capacity and service frequency Discussions are ongoing
  43. 43. Acknowledgments Anna Flintoft – City of Minneapolis Charleen Zimmer – Zan Associates Dan Meyers – URS Corporation www.minneapolismn.gov/nicollet-central Nicollet–Central Modern Transit Streetcar Project | Rail-Volution 2014 5
  44. 44. Signalization Challenges of Urban circulators. PAUL ZEBELL CITY OF PORTLAND
  45. 45. Goals Safety for all modes of travel Preemption for emergency vehicles Priority for transit vehicles Accessibility for disabled users Reasonable maximum delays for all modes Maintaining some capacity for private vehicles
  46. 46. Tools IMPROVED CONTROL SOFTWARE MOVING TRANSIT BOARDING LOCATIONS CHANGING OPERATING RULES NON-STANDARD DETECTION SCHEMES
  47. 47. Train’s here
  48. 48. Serve the Bus
  49. 49. Progression Speed: Faster for cars Distance • Cars travel through without stopping Time Offset
  50. 50. Progression Speed: Slower for • Sig• nbailc tyicmlei tnragf fsiec tt rfaovre l1s 9th mropuhgh without stopping Distance Time Offset Bikes

×