Title: Transportation Studies in the 21st Century: Incorporating all Modes Track: Sustain Format: 90 minute panel Abstract: In the 21st century, the basic purpose of transportation studies needs to change from making it easier to drive to giving people options other than driving. This session will present case studies of alternatives to the auto-dominated Level of Service traffic impact studies in order to better address bicycling, transit and walking. Presenters: Presenter: Michelle DeRobertis Transportation Choices for Sustainable Communities Co-Presenter: Peter Albert San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency Co-Presenter: Patrick Lynch Transpo Group Co-Presenter: David Thompson City of Boulder, Colorado

1. MULTIMODAL TRANSPORTATION CONCURRENCY IN BELLINGHAM, WASHINGTON PRO WALK PRO BIKE PRO PLACE PITTSBURGH – SEPTEMBER, 10 2014

2. •Overview of Bellingham, WA
•How do you define success?
•What you measure is what you get
•Bellingham’s experience
OUTLINE

3. BELLINGHAM, WA OVERVIEW

4. BELLINGHAM, WA
•90 miles north of Seattle, WA
•60 miles south of Vancouver, BC
•Population – 83,000
•Western Washington University
•Regional/Cultural center of Whatcom County

5. WHATCOM COUNTY
2010
EMPLOYMENT DENSITY

6. LAND USE
•Urban & Suburban characteristics
•Urban Villages
•Comp Plan Land Use Element
•Increased densities
•Mixed-use
•Walkable/bikeable
•High-frequency transit

7. MODE SHIFT GOALS
TG-28: Set target goals to increase the mode share of pedestrian, bicycle, and transit trips and reduce automobile trips as a percentage of total trips, as listed below.
2004
2010
2015
2022
Auto
87%
84%
80%
75%
Transit
2%
3%
4%
6%
Bicycle
3%
4%
5%
6%
Pedestrian
8%
9%
11%
13%

8. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW ELEMENTS
Developer Requirements/ Frontage Improvements
State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA)
Transportation Impact Fees (TIF)
Timing and adequacy of facilities/services
Concurrency

9. HOW DO YOU DEFINE SUCCESS?

10. MEASURING SUCCESS
•Level of Service methodology
•Roadway volume-to-capacity (v/c)
•Intersection delay
•Corridor travel time
•Vehicle miles travel
•Other
•Each method measures “success” differently

11. TRADITIONAL THINKING

12. TRADITIONAL THINKING
Public Experience: Traffic Engineering
Grade Report Cards LOS Demand vs. Supply
Highway Capacity Manual letter value LOS classifications
contribute to public confusion and controversy

13. WHAT YOU MEASURE IS WHAT YOU GET

14. SYSTEM PERFORMANCE METRICS
Inadequate Metrics results in Inadequate Outcomes
•Tie to land use plan
•Plan for all modes
•Apply metrics

15. •Support overall mobility?
•Consistent with future land use plans?
•Additional data/staff resources needed?
BALANCING OBJECTIVES

16. THE BELLINGHAM EXPERIENCE

17. •CSA = “Mobility sheds”
•Based on land use context
•Three types
Type 1 - Urban Villages
Type 1A - Urban Institutional
Type 2 - Transition
Type 3 - Suburban
CONCURRENCY SERVICE AREAS

18. •Policy Dials
•Mode Weight Factors
•Based on Land Use Typology
CONCURRENCY SERVICE AREAS
Transportation Concurrency Service Areas Mode Type 11 Type 22 Type 33 Motorized Auto Mode weight factor4 0.70 0.80 0.90 Transit Mode weight factor5 1.00 1.00 0.80 Non-Motorized Pedestrian Percent threshold for minimum system complete6 50% 50% 50% Person trip credit for 1% greater than minimum threshold7 20 20 20 Mode weight factor8 1.00 0.90 0.80 Bicycle Percent threshold for minimum system complete 50% 50% 50% Person trip credit for 1% greater than threshold 20 20 20 Mode weight factor9 1.00 0.90 0.80 Multi-Use Trails10 Person trip credit for 1% greater than threshold11 10 10 10 Mode weight factor12 1.00 0.90 0.80

19. PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE NETWORKS

20. •Annual Calculation
•Motorized & Non-Motorized modes
•Person Trips Available by Service Area
PERSON TRIPS AVAILABLE
Define Concurrency Service Areas, Corridors, & Measurement Points
Collect Demand & Supply Data of Motorized Modes
Calculate Concurrency Service Area Total Person Trips Available
Calculate Available Person Trips for Auto & Transit Modes
Collect Data of Existing & Planned Non-Motorized Facilities
Calculate Credit Person Trips of Non-Motorized Facilities
Motorized Modes (Auto & Transit)
Non-Motorized Facilities (Bicycle, Sidewalk, Trail)
Draw Down Available Person Trips in each Impacted Concurrency Service Area for each Concurrency Application

21. TRACKING LEDGER
•Spreadsheet tool
•Drawdown ledger
•Reporting tool

22. ANNUAL REPORTING
•Provides “over horizon” view
•Informs 6-year TIP
•Communicates system performance goals and metrics

23. •There is no magic “one-size-fits-all” methodology
•Balance competing objectives
•Create tools and metrics to help accomplish what your community wants for the long term
SUMMARY

24. Thank You
Patrick Lynch, AICP
Patrick.Lynch@transpogroup.com
425.821.3665
For more information
www.cob.org/services/planning/transportation/multi-modal-trac.aspx