UATS Director’s Workshop Agenda April 30, 2001  Introduction (12:30 – 12:35)  Development Review and Mitigation (12:35 – 2:10) Break (2:10 – 2:15) 

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
A PERSPECTIVE ON APPLICATION OF A PAIR OF PLANNING AND MICRO SIMULATION MODELS: EXPERIENCE FROM I-405 CORRIDOR STUDY PROGRAM Murli K. Adury Youssef Dehghani.
Advertisements

New Public Transit Alliance (NuPTA) RIPEC Study: Transportation at a Crossroads (2002) Growing Smart with Transit: A Report of the Transit 2020 Working.
Tysons Tysons Corner Circulator Study Board Transportation Committee June 12, 2012.
General Update March Background As the region grows, increased travel demand on our aging Metro Highway System will continue to create additional.
City of Hubbard Transportation System Plan Update April 25, 2012.
Public Involvement Open Houses Develop Problem Statement Review plans, policies, regulations, and standards Identify and assess Alternate Mobility.
CITY OF MIAMI CITY OF MIAMI. Health District Traffic Study July 21, 2008 Miami Partnership.
Paula J. Trigg, County Engineer Public Works and Transportation Committee April 2, 2014 OVERVIEW | SOURCE OF PROJECTS PROPOSED HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENT.
Getting Started with Congestion Pricing A Workshop for Local Partners Federal Highway Administration Office of Operations.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT 0 David Hutchinson Office of Policy Planning Department of Transportation Proportionate Fair Share Mitigation.
Infrastructure Planning and Funding MID-REGION COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS MID-REGION METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION MARCH 19, 2015 NAIOP-NEW MEXICO CHAPTER.
Background Why Plan For Transportation? Facts You Should Know Expectations Projects and Costs Conclusions/ Next Steps.
Route 17 Corridor Study Public Workshop II – November 29, 2012 Orange / Sullivan County 1.
NEW YORK CITY TRAFFIC CONGESTION MITIGATION COMMISSION NYSDOT Comments on New York City Traffic Congestion Mitigation Plan Bob Zerrillo, Director, Office.
Multimodal Concurrency: Response to 2005 Legislative Session Briefing for House Local Government Committee November 30, 2006 King Cushman Puget Sound Regional.
Multi-Modal Concurrency PSRC TRAC-UW Depart of Urban Design and Planning Evans School.
TRANSPORTATION POLICY COMMITTEE FINAL REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS PROFESSIONAL AND TECHNICAL STAFF COUNCIL ALUMNI CENTER APRIL 2, 2003.
Board of Supervisors General Plan Study Session Circulation Element Traffic, Circulation, Land Use Correlation Traffic, Circulation, Land Use Correlation.
King County Metro Long Range Public Transportation Plan Kirkland Transportation Commission_ April 10, 2015.
Developing a Regional Express Lane Network Hercules City Council Meeting April 28, 2009 Doug Kimsey MTC Planning Director.
1. 2 VIA Long Range Plan  Vision for High-Capacity Transit across VIA service area by 2035  From extensive public and stakeholder input  Prioritization.
1 Multi-Sector Approach to Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions in the Metropolitan Washington Region Land Use and Transportation Strategies Prepared for:
Navigating SB 375: CEQA Streamlining and SB 743 Transportation Analysis 2014 San Joaquin Valley Fall Policy Conference.
1 1 Executive Board January 22, 2009 Update to the Regional Transportation Plan TRANSPORTATION 2040.
Capital Facilities Planning Under the Growth Management Act CFP Webinar #1 November 18, 2014.
Moving the Most People for the Least Cost Preserving the American Dream Conference Friday, September 24, 2010.
BPAC. “Congestion management is the application of strategies to improve transportation system performance and reliability by reducing the adverse impacts.
Jeff’s slides. Transportation Kitchener Transportation Master Plan Define and prioritize a transportation network that is supportive of all modes of.
14 th NW Tribal Transportation Symposium Pete Field, Transportation Planner FHWA – Western Federal Lands Developing a Long Range Transportation Planning.
Presentation to ***(group) on ***(date) 1.  Cities - 11  Highway districts – 3  Ada and Canyon Counties  School districts – 2  Valley Regional Transit.
2030 Mobility Plan City of Jacksonville Planning and Development Department January 2011.
Jennifer Murray Traffic Forecasting Section Chief, WisDOT Metropolitan Planning Organization Quarterly Meeting July 28 th, 2015.
North Central Texas Council of Governments Transportation Department Summary Presentation January 2004 MOBILITY 2025: THE METROPOLITAN.
Department of Transportation Consideration of Potential City of Pasadena Position Related to SR710 Extension Alternatives Being Considered By Metro City.
California Department of Transportation Transportation Management Systems (TMS) and their role in addressing congestion Discussion Materials Lake Arrowhead.
1 DESTINATION 2030 Update KRCC TransPol and TransTac Meeting Scoping Results Criteria Alternatives May 22, 2008.
Major Transportation Corridor Studies Using an EMME/2 Travel Demand Forecasting Model: The Trans-Lake Washington Study Carlos Espindola, Youssef Dehghani.
Transportation Planning Process Freight Transportation Planning Workshop July 11, 2001.
Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority Overview of Metro’s Transportation Program Pam O’Connor Metro Chair July 25, 2007.
Comprehensive Plan Update Kevin O’Neill Seattle Bicycle Advisory Board September 2, 2015.
MATRIX ADJUSTMENT MACRO (DEMADJ.MAC AND DEMADJT.MAC) APPLICATIONS: SEATTLE EXPERIENCE Murli K. Adury Youssef Dehghani Sujay Davuluri Parsons Brinckerhoff.
Purpose To develop and evaluate a range of transit and transportation alternatives throughout the MPO area, considering: u Regional Goals and Objectives.
S.H. 121 – Dallas, Texas Case Study Presentation National Summit on Future Transportation Funding and Finance Strategies April 11, 2007 Michael Morris,
1 Wakulla County Concurrency Management System October 6, 2011.
Growth Management Legislative Discussion: Transportation Concurrency April 24, 2012 Growth Management Legislative Discussion: Transportation Concurrency.
This project/contract is funded in whole or in part by funds made available through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.
Analyzing the Mobility Impacts of TOD Level of Service in Transit Oriented Districts Service for Who?
What is a TSP? Provides City with guidance for operating and improving a multimodal transportation system Focuses on priority projects, policies, and programs.
THE DRAFT CAMPO 2040 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN Mobile Meeting Presentation.
2040 LONG RANGE PLAN UPDATE 2040 LRTP Update – Needs Plan Development October 6, 2015 City of Lynn Haven.
What is a TSP? Provides City with guidance for operating and improving a multimodal transportation system Focuses on priority projects, policies, and programs.
The Regional Mobility and Accessibility Study Initial Results of CLRP/CLRP+ Analysis with Round 6.4 Growth Forecasts and Five Alternative Land Use Scenarios.
A Sketch Planning Assessment of Managed-Lane Options for the I-5 Freeway Corridor Master Plan William R. Loudon, DKS Associates.
The Kern Regional Transportation Plan A Vision and Guidebook for Kern County in 2025.
CEE 320 Winter 2006 Transportation Planning and Travel Demand Forecasting CEE 320 Steve Muench.
Solving the SR-520 Problem © 2005 Chaisy, Hurvitz, Jiang, Jun, ShinnersSlide 1 (of 37) Solving the SR-520 Problem prepared for UTRAN prepared by INSTEP.
DUVALL 2015 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE and SURVEY RESULTS 9:00 – 10:30 AM Survey Results 30 minutes (Lara) Comprehensive Plan, Density and Capacity, and.
1 520 Tolling Implementation Committee Cascadia Center for Regional Development Beyond Oil Conference Thursday, September 4, 2008 Richard Ford, Commissioner.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE MEETING 2 – TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT 12/12/2013.
Virginia House Bill 2 – Funding the Right Projects Intelligent Transportation System Activities May 19, 2016.
Next Steps.  To begin Planning Council discussion about the MPO’s Next Steps. Now that the 2035 Regional Transportation Plan has been updated and adopted,
2040 LONG RANGE PLAN UPDATE Congestion Management Process Plan (CMPP) Major Update February 24, 2016.
DESTINATION 2030 Regional Local Personal Adopted May 24, 2001.
Solving the SR-520 Problem © 2005 Chaisy, Hurvitz, Jiang, Jun, ShinnersSlide 1 (of 31) Solving the SR-520 Problem prepared for UTRAN prepared by INSTEP.
2005 TWG Legislative Recommendations. Fix It First ? WSDOT recommends first priority be Alaskan Way Viaduct, SR-520 with new state revenue Does the TWG.
Chelan County Transportation Element Update
Finance Committee & City Council October 10, 2016
Draft Transportation Element September 6, 2017
Transportation Management Plan Modernization Project
Transportation Management Plan Modernization Project
Presentation transcript:

UATS Director’s Workshop Agenda April 30, 2001  Introduction (12:30 – 12:35)  Development Review and Mitigation (12:35 – 2:10) Break (2:10 – 2:15)  Planning Assumptions (2:15 – 2:30)  Financing Sources (2:30 – 2:45)  Concurrency and System Performance (2:45 – 3:00)

Development Review and Mitigation Issue No. 1  How much of the impact of development and redevelopment should be mitigated by the development?

Development Review and Mitigation Issue No. 2  What type(s) of development, if any, should be exempt from mitigation (or allowed a lower level of mitigation)?

Development Review and Mitigation Issue No. 3  Where will the City get the money to pay for the portion of transportation improvement costs that are not paid by development?

Development Review and Mitigation Issue No. 4  Which types of transportation improvement does the City want to require development to mitigate?

Development Review and Mitigation Issue No. 5  How specific is the City willing to be about the transportation improvement that will be funded by mitigation?

Development Review and Mitigation Issue No. 6  What kind of criteria does the City want to use to determine the need for mitigation?

Development Review and Mitigation Issue No. 7  Should the mitigation program be used only in targeted areas, or does it need to be used throughout the City?

Planning Assumptions - Growth Assumptions  Is the city comfortable with the study area growth assumptions for 2010 and 2020 used by the Puget Sound Regional Council? Recommendation: Review 2000 census against the PSRC’s 2000 base. Compare the “pipeline” developments with the PSRC’s growth forecasts. If those figures are reasonable, use the PSRC growth forecast for 2010 and If not, adjustments should be made to the PSRC’s growth forecasts and create new trip tables that reflect the new growth forecasts.

Planning Assumptions - State Facilities  Should the UATS identify and evaluate facility improvement concepts located in the state right-of–way in the study area?  Should the UATS examine travel pattern shifts in the study area associated with the alternatives in the Trans-Lake Study EIS?

Planning Assumptions - State Facilities Recommendation: Identify facility improvements in state right of-way within the study area. Analyze changes in travel shifts associated with the Trans- Lake Washington Study capacity expansion options. Focus on short-term actions that the WSDOT can take to improve the SR 520 corridor in the UATS.

Planning Assumptions - Montlake Bridge  Should the UATS evaluate options to rebuild the Montlake Bridge to handle traffic and non- motorized demand in the corridor? Recommendation: Do not consider any option to widen the Montlake Bridge in the UATS. (It is possible that the Trans-Lake study could impact traffic flows in the Montlake Boulevard corridor, and major structural changes to the Montlake Bridge may be evaluated.)

Planning Assumptions - Freeway Access  Should the UATS evaluate cost and benefit of freeway access improvements in the Eastlake area, which is located outside the study area? Recommendation: Do not consider changes to freeway access in the Eastlake area in the UATS

Planning Assumptions - Sound Transit  What should the UATS assume to be the Sound Transit light rail plan? Recommendation: Assume that the light rail system in the original Sound Move Plan will be implemented with the three-year extension. Assume that the light rail system will be extended to Northgate from University District as the highest priority upon completion of the first phase. The UATS plan should prepare potential responses, such as changing prioritization of transit projects.

Financing Sources  Should the development of a transportation improvement plan be constrained?  Should the UATS investigate ways to raise additional revenues for facility improvements in the study area?

Financing Sources Recommendation: Do not constrain ideas to improve the transportation system based on city’s current financial capability. Discuss potential funding sources and identify steps needed to implement each funding source. The potential sources to be analyzed: partnership with WSDOT on the Trans-Lake Washington and I-5 studies joint funding with UW, King County Metro, and other transit agencies new sources of funding such as LIDs, and impact fees

Concurrency and System Performance – System Performance  What “performance benchmarks” should the study use to identify transportation system deficiencies? Recommendation: Roadway corridor: LOS E measured in average speed Intersection: LOS E measured in average delay Transit: Increase transit vehicle speeds and reliability, and service quality measured with headway to and from major centers. Carpool/vanpool: Provide travel time incentives and pricing incentives without quantitative benchmarks. Pedestrian/bicycle: Use qualitative benchmarks for pedestrian and bicycle systems without quantitative benchmarks.

Concurrency and System Performance - Concurrency  Is it appropriate to discuss the purpose of concurrency in the UATS? Recommendation: The UATS should not directly address changes to the adopted concurrency level of service standards. The city should update the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan. The “performance benchmarks” discussed above would be sufficient.