Download to read offline
Dan Ross NextGen ppt FINAL
- 1. Bridging the Gap Strategiesfor Transit and Active Transportation Next Generation Transportation Certificate
- 2. Happy Projects Stories ofsuccess are often similar. Stories of failure are plentiful, diverse, and entertaining.
- 3. Course Outline 1. Introduction 2.Define Strategies and Skills 3. Positive and Negative Examples Approximately 45 minutes
- 4. Course Presenter Dan Ross,CPEng. (NZ), MUP Senior Transportation Planner, Opus International Consultants, Ltd. North Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada Formerly - Transit Planner – Edmonton Transit System - Senior Transportation Consultant – Opus, Auckland, NZ - Traffic Planner/Borough Planner – New York City DOT - Associate City Planner – New York City DCP
- 5. Why This Topic? Similaritiestowards active transportation and transit Burden of proof is on you - Gatekeepers - Prejudices - Responsive strategies - Different delivery and outcomes
- 6. Why This Topic? HighLevel plans have similar intentions • Higher PT/AT trips • Reduced emissions • Denser development • Translate ‘down’ to specific plans New York, NY Auckland, NZ Vancouver, BC Edmonton, AB
- 7. A Common Path HighLevel Policy Priority Statement Program/Schedule of Projects Feasibility? Planners Engineers Investigation
- 8. Some Success 1st AveComplete Street – New York, NY Dunsmuir St. bike lanes – Vancouver, BC Beach Rd cycle lanes – Auckland, NZ
- 9. Some Success –NYC NYCDOT - Cycle mode increases, not at expense of transit - Fewer crashes, reduced risk
- 10. Other Success Auckland, NZ– North Shore to CBD New Zealand Transport Agency
- 11. Other Success Vancouver, BC Cityof Vancouver Metro Vancouver
- 12.
- 13.
- 14. Obstacles – PublicOpposition Bike lanes vs. Parking/Business loss Brooklynpaper.com Chicago Gazette
- 15. Obstacles – PublicOpposition Malcolm MayesElitism/’Social Engineering’ Edmonton Sun NY Daily News The Onion
- 16. Old Perceptions DyingHard ‘Boondoggle’ and Public Menace Double Standard New Zealand Herald, 2007
- 17. Old Perceptions DyingHard Calgary Sun NY Daily News ‘Boondoggle’ and Public Menace Double Standard
- 18. What Could PossiblyGo Wrong? High Level Policy Priority Statement Program/Schedule of Projects Feasibility? Planners Engineers Investigation
- 19. Planners and Engineers PlannersEngineers Responsible for this Responsible for this
- 20. Traffic Engineers Decision MakingFactors • Applied Precedence • Common Sense • Methodology • Ethics • Empathy - for motorists
- 21.
- 22. Considerations • Design/Engineering StandardsGuidelines • Need for defensible decisions • What’s worked before? Guiding Methodology
- 23. 1. Effects onTraffic – short and long term 2. Constructability – how much and where? 3. Whole life costs – operations and maintenance Minimal Considerations
- 24. ‘Business Case’ 1. TrafficImpacts 2. Constructability 3. Operations and Maintenance 4. Other elements to consider
- 25. Traffic Impacts Do Minimum/DoNothing vs. Proposal
- 26. 2. What willhappen to affected/displaced traffic? - modelling, route analyses, mode shift? Traffic Impacts Be Prepared to Discuss 1. What is an ‘acceptable’ impact? - i.e., LOS, v/c ratio, peak impacts 3. How many people are affected? Not just cars - Quantify comparative impacts
- 27. Example 1 Broadway Blvd– New York, NY • Road diet for major Manhattan street; 33rd St – 59th St • Not possible without extensive network modelling • Led to Greenlight for Midtown projects • Continuously monitored and updated
- 28. Example 1 –con’t. Broadway Blvd – New York, NY • Willingness to experiment • Reduced capacity impacts verified • Low-cost treatments in short term • Adjustments made with monitoring
- 29. Example 1 –con’t. Broadway Blvd – New York, NY Before After B’way south of 59th St
- 30. Example 1 –con’t. Broadway Blvd – New York, NY Before After Times Square
- 31. Example 2 Cycle Boulevards– Auckland, NZ Hillsborough Rd /Quona Ave Dominion Rd /Memorial Ave • 1st attempt at Portland-style bike boulevards • Suburban areas with few impacts, design changes • Some capacity analysis ultimately required
- 32. Example 2 –con’t. Auckland Cycle Boulevards • Originally rerouted 0.5km to south to new signalized intersection • Crossing impacts forced into scope • No adverse impacts – approved Dominion Rd/Memorial Ave
- 33. Example 2 –con’t. Auckland Cycle Boulevards Hillsborough Rd/Quona Ave • Full signalization preferred • Alternative scenarios forced into scope • Impacts deemed too severe; signalized crossing accepted
- 34. Constructability • Schedule/Programme? • Simpleand cheap is good
- 35. Example 3 Ngahue Drive– Auckland, NZ New Stonefields Development (former quarry) Auckland Council GIS Viewer cycling facilities cycling facilities • 1.5km connecting cycle way • On strategic network • 3m-5m wide boulevard/berm next to golf course • No room for on- road facilities
- 36. Example 3 –con’t. Ngahue Drive – Auckland, NZ • Utility poles, drainage, structural, encroachment, arboreal issues • $2.1M - $6.4M cost • Residential side imperfect but cheaper • Optics of cost vs. inability to provide quality (it’s only money) Google Street View
- 37. Example 4 Materials Auckland, NZ FortStreet Shared Space • High-quality redesign • Full consultation • NZ$23M for 800m Jean Batten Place Before After
- 38. Example 4 –con’t. Materials New York, NY NYCDOT Plaza Program Pearl St Plaza, Brooklyn • Concrete, asphalt only • Local partnerships • Minimal design, cost • Potential for staging Corona Plaza, Queens
- 39.
- 40. Edmonton Complete StreetsPilot Projects Design Elements Example 5 • Sustainability initiative from Transportation Master Plan • NACTO-influenced • Application constraints - curb build-outs - lane widths www.edmonton.ca
- 41. Edmonton Complete StreetsPilot Projects Design Elements Example 5 – con’t. Curb Extensions City of Edmonton – Complete Streets Guidelines, 2013
- 42. Edmonton Complete StreetsPilot Projects Design Elements Example 5 – con’t. City of Edmonton – Complete Streets Guidelines, 2013 Preferred Lane Widths
- 43. Edmonton Complete StreetsPilot Projects Design Elements Example 5 – con’t. Bad for Bulb-outs Curb Extensions • No plow equipment for curb extensions • Delay until existing fleet is upgraded
- 44. Edmonton Complete StreetsPilot Projects Design Elements Example 5 – con’t. Preferred Lane Widths Seasonal Road Diet • ‘Windrow’s reduce curbside widths • Alberta min. is 4.2m to compensate
- 45. • National Ass’nof City Transportation Officials (NACTO) • Vehicle-Miles Traveled (VMT) over LOS – CEQA • Multimodal LOS Analyses • Improved GIS applications • Data collection techniques • Social Media outreach • Tasteful Obstinacy – not new New-ish Resources
- 46. New-ish Resources –con`t `NYCDOT Current Projects` http://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/html/about/current-projects.shtml ‘California Senate Bill (SB) 743’ http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_i d=201320140SB743 ‘Updating Transportation Impacts Analysis in the CEQA Guidelines’
- 47. Summary • Burden ofProof is on you • Know your implementation context • Consider risks during planning • Challenge engineers • Build your Business Case
- 48. Building a BetterBusiness Case 1. Traffic Impacts 2. Constructability 3. Operations & Maintenance • What will happen to traffic? • Analysis in scope or RFP • How will this thing be built? • Timing of construction • Materials • Minimum access requirements? • How will it function? • Who will maintain? Burden of proof is on you
- 49. THANK YOU Dan.Ross@opusinternational.ca Dan Ross- LinkedIn ca.linkedin.com/pub/dan-ross