CNU XVII: Experiencing the Urbanism: The Convenient Remedy

Balancing Mobility & CommunityCost Saving for Freeway Teardowns: Replace, Prevent, Remove

Prepared by:

TROY RUSS, AICPPrincipalGlatting Jackson Kercher Anglin, Inc.

June 13, 2009

Past & FutureBaton Rouge

Early Settlement Pattern: 1700s-1900

• Population: 11,000• River & Rail Economy

Baker

Zachary

Plaquemine

Addis

Brusly

Port Allen

Denham Springs

Walker

Baton Rouge

Initial Suburban Growth:1900 – 1960

• Population: 125,000• Industrial Expansion (Oil)• Growing road infrastructure

Baker

Zachary

Plaquemine

Addis

Brusly

Port Allen

Denham Springs

Walker

Baton Rouge

Highway Expansion:1960 – Present

• Population: 230,000 (Baton Rouge)

• 412,000 (East Baton Rouge Parish)

• Interstate access and urban expansion

I-12

US 61

US 6

1 Baker

Zachary

Plaquemine

Addis

Brusly

Port Allen

Denham Springs

Walker

Baton Rouge

I-10

Central

What’s Next? 21st Century

• Horizon Plan: Focused Growth Centers (Major Regional, Regional, Community)

• Intensified Corridors?• Town intensification?

(Baker, Zachary, etc.)

I-12

I-10

US 61

US 6

1

Baker

Zachary

Plaquemine

Addis

Brusly

Port Allen

Denham Springs

Walker

Baton Rouge

Central

What’s Next? 21st Century

• Baton Rouge Loop??• Intercity Passenger

Rail??

I-12

I-10

US 61

US 190

US 6

1

Baker

Zachary

Plaquemine

Addis

Brusly

Port Allen

Denham Springs

Walker

Baton Rouge

Central

What’s Next? 21st Century

• Baton Rouge Loop??• Intercity Passenger

Rail??

I-12

I-10

US 61

US 190

US 6

1

Baker

Zachary

Plaquemine

Addis

Brusly

Port Allen

Denham Springs

Walker

Baton Rouge

Central

Relationship

Transportation / Land Use

Conventi

onal A

ppro

ach

MoreEfficiency

Syst

em

M

an

ag

em

ent

More Pavement

More

Lanes

More

Roads

ITS

More

Cars

Conventional Approach

Land Use/Transportation“The Concept”

Anticipate Forecast Accommodate

Land Use Travel Road Capacity

generates

demands

Plan

ProgramEnginee

r

Traffic Needs

Local Plans Local InputPublic

Information

OtherBuild

1 2 3 4 5

Project

Widen

Words

Typical Regional Program

Public InputTechnicians Input

Wid

en

20-Year Forecast

Capacity

Years

Land Use & Transportation – Ideal Traffic Planning

Actual

Induced Traffic

Forecast

Capacity

Years

Wid

en

Land Use & Transportation – The Reality

Widen Road

Reduce Delay

Reduce Cost

Move Home

Range Farther

Drive More

Own More Cars

FIRST ORDE

R

SECOND

ORDER

THIRD ORDER

Chain of Impacts

HigherCarbon

Footprint

Increased Energy Demand

LoseBusiness &

Jobs

Community

Disinvestment

Big Box

InactivityEpidemic

More VMT

IncreasedHouseholdTransportat

ion Costs

Congestion

Wid

en

Congestion

Congestion

Tra

ffic

Wid

en

Capacity

Years

Choice

Reduced Options

No Option

Road Size, Not Congestion, is the Choice

Transportation Statistics

Results Over the Last 50-Years

1) Vehicle Miles of Travel (VMT) Growing Faster Than Population Growth

2) Longer Commute Times

3) Decreased Transit Ridership

Charlotte’s Population Per Acre1950-2005

3.63.483.563.52

4.964.85

6.98

1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2005

Persons Per Acre

Land Use Statistics

Decreased Density . . Increased Sprawl

The physical impacts of all this inactivity

• Increased risk of obesity

• Increased risk of major diseases• Diabetes• Cardiovascular

disease• Colon cancer

• Increased symptoms of depressionand anxiety

• Poorer development and maintenance of bones and muscles

Social Statistics

Shelter 19Transportation 17.9Food 13.7Insurance & Pensions 9.6Other Household 7.5Utilities 6.8Health Care 5.4Entertainment 5Apparel & Services 4.8Education 2.1Miscellaneous 8.2

Total 100

Shelter 19%

Transportation 17.9%

Food 13.7%

Insurance & Pensions 9.6%

Other Household 7.5%

Utilities 6.8%

Health Care 5.4%

Entertainment 5.0%

Apparel & Services 4.8%

Education 2.1%Misc. 8.2%

Source: Surface Transportation Policy Project: Driven to Spend – The Impact of Sprawl on Transportation Expenditure

Household Statistics

Photographer: rosevita. Used through license agreement with morguefile.com

Environmental Statistics

Cultural Statistics

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

Cumulative Needs Existing Sources of Revenue

Current Dollars (in Billions)

Cost to “Improve” = $3.4 trillion

Cost to “Maintain” = $2.8 trillion

$2.4 trillion

Gap to “Improve" = $1.0 trillion

Gap to “Maintain" = $415 billion

Source: Cambridge Systematics, April 2006

Budgetary Statistics(PENNDOT 2006-2015)

“The problems we have created cannot be solved with the same thinking that created them….”

Image Source: Library of Congress, Prints & Photographs Division. Original copyright expired.

Accept Congest

IncreaseDelay

IncreaseCost

Improve

Home

Change Modes

Drive Less

Own Fewer Cars

FIRST ORDE

R

SECOND

ORDER

THIRD ORDER

Chain of Impacts

LowerCarbon

Footprint

DecreasedEnergy Demand

KeepBusiness &

Jobs

Community

Reinvestment

Main Street

HealthyCommuniti

es

LessVMT

DecreasedHouseholdTransportat

ion Costs

Supply and Demand

Pri

ce

Demand

New “Market” Price Points

Old Policy

USA Today,May 24, 2008

When you have eliminated the impossible whatever remains,

however improbable, must be the truth.

People will get sick and tired of traffic congestion and...

Karl RasmussenState Traffic Engineer, Minnesota

…and move into the city.

Karl RasmussenState Traffic Engineer, Minnesota

Case Study: Chattanooga, TN

Riverfront Parkway

Chattanooga: A Transformative Vision

Tennessee River

Geo

rgia

Ave

nue

Ch

est

nu

t A

ven

ue

Riverfront Parkway

4th Street

6th Street

MLK Boulevard Mab

el A

venue

3rd Street

Lin

dsay

Str

eet

Hou

ston

Str

eet

Riverfront Parkway –Traffic Flow – Year 2000

13,339 ADT(1,262) AM Peak

19,998 ADT(2,050) AM Peak

19,482 ADT(1,728) AM Peak

Tennessee River

Geo

rgia

Ave

nue

Ch

est

nu

t A

ven

ue

Riverfront Parkway

4th Street

6th Street

MLK Boulevard Mab

el A

venue

3rd Street

Lin

dsay

Str

eet

Hou

ston

Str

eet

Riverfront Parkway –Traffic Flow – Year 2005

Riverfront Parkway Looking From Walnut Street Bridge to Market Street Bridge: 2000

Riverfront Parkway Looking From Walnut Street Bridge to Market Street Bridge: Vision

Riverfront Parkway Looking From Walnut Street Bridge to Market Street Bridge: 2005

21st Century Waterfront – 2005

Chestnut S

treet

US

27

4 th Street

Chattanooga: A Transformative Vision

Case Study: Trenton, N J

Use Network to Balance Traffic Impacts

The Historic Riverfront

The Change for Mobility

Time to Reclaim the River

• Reclaim the Delaware River Waterfront• Improve Access to Waterfront• Improve Safety and Provide Traffic

Calming• Promote Urban and Economic

Redevelopment • Provide Environmental Enhancements

along Assunpink Creek and Delaware River

Project Goals

Riverfront & Park Space

Travel Time Runs

Cass Street Fro

m I-195

South Warren Street

Calhoun StreetParkside Avenue

Lee Street

Sullivan Way

13m26s

45s

1m59s2m10s42s1m15s Market

Street

1m40s

Difference AM Peak Hour = 2m 01s

Difference PM Peak Hour = 5 4s

Case Study: Flemington, NJRegulating Redevelopment to Build Transportation

Infrastructure ITE Best Project Award 2009

Existing Land Use

• Commercial strip development along Route 31 and US 202

• Undeveloped agricultural lands converting to commercial and industrial uses

• Still lots of undeveloped land (opportunity to shape future development pattern)

Industrial

Undeveloped Land

Commercial

Flemington 1850s

Flemington

South Branch River

Flemington Today

Route

202

Existin

g R

t.

31

Rt. 12 Flemington Circle

• Sparse Network

• Three routes all meet at “Flemington Circle”

Flemington – On the Books

Route

202

Existin

g R

t.

31

Rt. 12 Flemington Circle

• 4-lane Bypass

• Widen existing Rt. 31 from 2 to 4 lanes

• Grade Separate “Flemington Circle”

• 100% Designed, $100 million (not funded)

Flemington CircleFlemington Circle• Bypass

– Grade Separated Circle traffic volumes & Levels of Service

LOS C

LOS C

Development Pressure

Currently planned or approved (Red)

Considering Development (Red outline)

Undeveloped (Green)

• Lots of moving pieces that can sill be influenced

An Alternative Concept:“South Branch Parkway”

• An at grade “parkway”

• New network connections to provide parallel routes to 202 and 31

• Work with property owners to manage access and support approved development plans

• Integrated Land Use and Transportation Strategy

• $20 million

Phasing: Secondary Connections

• Private Development required to build secondary network.

• Separate the Rt. 202, 31, &12 movements

• Transform circle to square

• Continue development of parallel street south of 202

• New site development standards that focus on the street & pedestrian environment

• Separate the Rt. 202, 31, &12 movements

• Transform circle to square

• Continue development of parallel street south of 202

• New site development standards that focus on the street & pedestrian environment

“ Circle to Square ”

“ Circle to Square”

Connectivity Planning

LOS CLOS C LOS B

LOS B

Conventional Planning

Case Study: Montgomery County, PA

Context & Fiscal Responsibility

The Concept for US 202 Has Changed Significantly Over the Years

No Build Option

NBCP Option

$111M

Project Cost

Parkway Option

$206M

$161M

Project Cost

Cost toComplete

Total Project Cost

Expressway Option

$383M

Project Cost

$465M

Cost toComplete

Total Project Cost

No Significant Relief to Section 700 or Other Local Roads

93% of the Trips are Local Trips Rather than Regional Through Trips

Most trips are best served by a complete network of local roads

Only 7% oftrips on US

202are regional

through trips.

37% of all tripsbegin or end inthe study area.

56% of all trips are

completely local,beginning andending in the

studyarea.

Travel Times and Total Travel

Which brings more travel into the corridor

The Expressway significantly reduces travel time for regional through

trips…

NB

NB

CP

Park

wa

yE

xpre

ssw

ay

0 500,000 1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

Total Travel (VMT)Travel Time from Doylestown to Plymouth Meeting (Minutes)

NB

NB

CP

Park

wa

yE

xpre

ssw

ay

60

50

403020100

Evaluation

The Goal is to Maximize Benefits to Local Trips

The Goal is to Maximize Benefits to Local Trips

NEW SOLUTION

A complete network of local roads rather than one new regional route.

Case Study: Charlotte, NCCost to Value

I- 8

5

Nor

th T

ryon

City Boulevard

The 85 Connector

Rocky River

29 / 29 WeaveThe Need

I- 8

5

Nor

th T

ryon

City Boulevard

The 85 Connector

Rocky River

29 / 29 WeaveThe “Fix” – 1998 Version

I- 8

5

Nor

th T

ryon

City Boulevard

The 85 Connector

Rocky River

City Boulevard Station

Rocky River Station

29 / 29 WeaveThe New “Fix”– 2007 Version

I- 8

5

Nor

th T

ryon

City Boulevard

The 85 Connector

Rocky River

City Boulevard Station

Rocky River Station

29 / 29 WeaveThe Problem

I- 8

5

Nor

th T

ryon

City Boulevard

The 85 Connector

Rocky River

City Boulevard Station

Process

1) Conducted one-on-one stakeholder interviews October 4th and 5th:• Crescent Resources• Stewart Family (During

UCP Study)• I-85 partnership –

Shawn McClaren & John Smith

• Diane Carter, George Shield, & Bob Henderson

• Steve Mogowan & Mary Hopper (Volvo Dealership & UCP)

• CDOT & E&PM• Office of Economic

Development• CMPC• CATS

Rocky River Station

Existing Conditions

I- 8

5

Nor

th T

ryon

City Boulevard

The 85 Connector

Rocky River

City Boulevard Station

Issues & Concerns:

1) Limited Street Network• Requires 29 / 49 to

accommodate all existing and future traffic.

• Limits the potential for an Urban Boulevard.

• Limits the Transit Oriented Development Potential of the Study Area.

2) Roadway Design Speed and Access• Limits Pedestrian Oriented

Development

• Limits Land Development Potential.

• Prohibits Rocky River Station.

Rocky River Station

These streets are critical to the success of the 29 / 49

Intersection and can be developed as

property is developed without City money:

1) Extension of the 85 Connector to City Boulevard.

2) Creation of North / South Parallel Road from connector to McCullough Drive (Harris)

3) Extension of Shopping Center Drive Over I- 85

I- 8

5

Nor

th T

ryon

City Boulevard

The 85 Connector

Rocky River

City Boulevard Station

Primary Street Network

Rocky River Station

I- 8

5

Nor

th T

ryon

City Boulevard

The 85 Connector

Rocky River

City Boulevard Station

Design of the streets should follow

those identified in the City’s Urban

Street Design Guidelines:

1) Boulevards (Red)• North Tryon• City Boulevard

2) Avenues (Blue)• Commercial• Residential

3) Main Streets (Yellow)• Rocky River Station

4) Local (Black)• Commercial• Residential

Recommended Street Classification

Rocky River Station

If?What

Community

Plan Program

Traffic Needs

Local Plans

1 2 3 4 5

ProjectOther

Widen / or Network

Design Dialogue

Vision

Plan

ConnectionsMore Small Roads

Less TravelBike Routes

Sidewalks, TreesGreat Streets

Great NeighborhoodsTraffic Calming

Partners

BusinessNeighborhoodsVisitor Needs

Public Input Throughout

Land Use/Transportation

Road Design Travel Land Usemanages

influences

• Lead Land Use

• Condition Protects

• Manage Supply

“Courage is being scared… but saddling up anyway.”

— John Wayne