GROWTH MANAGEMENT Transit & Growth Management Tara Bartee –FDOT Public Transit Office

GROWTH MANAGEMENT Presentation Overview Transit Basics Proportionate Fair-Share Equation Examples

GROWTH MANAGEMENT Why Growth Management? To try to manage sprawl

GROWTH MANAGEMENT What works where Cost of Transit Transit is flexible

GROWTH MANAGEMENT

Automobile Space

GROWTH MANAGEMENT Person (automobile) Space

GROWTH MANAGEMENT Pedestrian / Bicycle Space

GROWTH MANAGEMENT Person/Bus Space

GROWTH MANAGEMENT What is Transit-Oriented Development? Comp Plan Language What is TOD? Define the 3Ds Design Diversity Density

GROWTH MANAGEMENT Definition “Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) is moderate to higher- density development, located within an easy walk of a major transit stop, generally with a mix of residential, employment and shopping opportunities designed for pedestrians without excluding the auto. TOD can be new construction or redevelopment of one or more buildings whose design and orientation facilitate transit use.” Caltrans Design Diversity Density

GROWTH MANAGEMENT Design for people What is a transit-oriented development?

GROWTH MANAGEMENT Density

GROWTH MANAGEMENT TOD is development that: –Contains a rich mix of uses – retail, residential, workplaces. –Has appropriate treatment of parking. Office Retail Residential Diversity

GROWTH MANAGEMENT Outcome One separates the station from the community One encourages TOD at the station

GROWTH MANAGEMENT Fronton in Miami Land use doesn’t support transit I’ve got the map

GROWTH MANAGEMENT Denver, CO Neighborhood to Urban TOD NeighborhoodUrban

GROWTH MANAGEMENT Where money is spent to improve mobility RoadwayWhere money is spent to improve mobility TransitSidewalkLand Use F Improved Transit w/ Operating costs AA Urban Core EBB Urban Center DCC General Urban CDD Sub-urban BEE Rural Reserve A RoadsFF Rural Preserve Shelters Bus Priority Signal & Intersection Improvements

GROWTH MANAGEMENT Transit Development Plan (TDP) Look at: –Specific requirement to look at goals and policies of the comp plan and LRTP. –Public Involvement –Adopted by Governing bodies (county commission) –10 year needs plan –Financially feasible to 3 years Transportation Element CIE FLUM TDP LRTP

GROWTH MANAGEMENT Calculating the Costs –Roadway improvement can be isolated to the “significantly” impacted area –Transit costs can’t be limited to one hour a day and.74 miles … O H, R E A L L Y ? ? ? ? Transit and roadways are different

GROWTH MANAGEMENT Goals of Methodology  Provide local governments with an option to incorporate transit in proportionate fair-share calculations  Provide an equitable mitigation option for different sized developments  Emphasize the need for defined transit corridor plans and transit development plans  Supports transit oriented development (TOD) concepts  Utilize existing, professionally accepted analysis techniques where feasible

GROWTH MANAGEMENT Transit Prop Share Number of Project Trips Change in Peak Hour Max Service Volume Cost = Proportionate Share

GROWTH MANAGEMENT Proposed Methodology – Project Trips Number of Project Trips Change in Peak Hour Max Service Volume Cost = Proportionate Share 10 project trips =10 needed seats/passengers on a bus

GROWTH MANAGEMENT Proposed Methodology – Change in Max Service Volume Fundamental Assumption: Providing capacity on transit satisfies identified roadway capacity issue –Does not address issue of use/ridership of service Number of Project Trips Change in Peak Hour Max Service Volume Cost = Proportionate Share Typical value of 40 seats per bus

GROWTH MANAGEMENT Proposed Methodology - Cost –3 years when TQOS A or B, –5 years when TQOS C or D, –7 years E or F or new service –Capital Investments –Technology Implementation –Operating and maintenance Number of Project Trips Change in Peak Hour Max Service Volume Cost = Proportionate Share Time (years) (Capital + Operating) $ = Cost Transit Corridor StudyAverage Cost/Revenue Hour

GROWTH MANAGEMENT Proposed Methodology - Cost Preferred methodology to have cost per passenger mile based on corridor specific transit plans that include all components necessary to achieve defined TQOS standard –Local government to set transit TQOS standard for corridor in comprehensive plan –“Cost” to include: Capital Investments: New buses, queue jump lanes, bus bays, on-street amenities, shared parking, intermodal facilities Technology Implementation: Transit signal priority, automated vehicle location, trip planning software, kiosks Operating and maintenance –Applicants can pay or contribute to cost of corridor transit plan Corridor specific transit plans should be required when large impacts are caused by development. Initial Assumption: Duration of funding is based on existing transit level of service (TQOS) –Use existing FDOT Generalized Planning data for TQOS evaluation –Assume 520 ‘peak hours’ per year to represent weekday peak conditions

GROWTH MANAGEMENT Proposed Methodology - Cost Initial Assumption: Average cost per passenger mile accounts for both capital and operating costs –Data available from National Transit Database (NTD) –Average cost data available from local transit agency Agency commitment made to conduct transit corridor study –Goal to emphasize the need for defined transit corridor plans and transit development plans. –As more detailed transit corridor plans are developed, use of average cost per passenger mile data should decrease. Alternative Methodology: Transit Corridor Study Not Available

GROWTH MANAGEMENT Proposed Methodology - Cost Initial Assumption: Entire length of transit route (sum of both directions) included in cost calculation

GROWTH MANAGEMENT General Example Development adding 50 new peak hour trips to constrained four-lane facility in urban area Agency agreement that no roadway capacity projects are planned or could reasonably be constructed Existing transit service = TQOS B –10 minute headways, 6 buses per hour Length of existing bus route = 10 miles (20 miles round trip) Small Development on Over-Capacity Facility

GROWTH MANAGEMENT Sample Calculation Small Development

GROWTH MANAGEMENT Proposed Methodology An applicant seeking to use ‘transit prop share’ incorporates transit oriented development (TOD) principles into the proposed site plan –Provisions for passenger waiting areas, sidewalk/ curb ramps, bus bays, shared parking –Local government and transit agency to review site plans –Note: ‘credits’ should not be given to applicant for providing TOD (i.e. requirement of methodology) Existing transit service is intended to serve existing development – no ‘capacity’ credit should be given for existing transit service Applicant receives bus passes equal to the number of ‘seats’ they are ‘buying’ for duration of funding period Fundamental Assumptions

GROWTH MANAGEMENT How Does the Money Get Used? Scenario 1: Corridor specific transit plan exists –Fund elements of defined transit plan to add capacity to a corridor. Capital investments, technology implementation, operating and maintenance costs Scenario 2: Transit plan not available –Money held until plan created showing transit capacity accommodates deficient trips Agency commitment to complete corridor specific transit plan

GROWTH MANAGEMENT Issues/Implications of Approach Issue: How to address what happens once developer commitment ends? –Do route improvements and new routes need to continue to be funded? Who is responsible for continued funding? Issue: Will DCA accept as part of a concurrency evaluation? –Anticipating that application of methodology within overall planning framework will need to be reviewed. Issue: Can this methodology be applied on SIS facilities? –FDOT will need to concur with application of methodology.

GROWTH MANAGEMENT Relationship to Model Ordinance Existing proportionate fair-share model ordinance will not be modified in the short term Local governments will consider whether modifications are needed to adopted/proposed proportionate fair-share ordinance Further study needed on impacts to overall ‘coordinated planning process’ Methodology provides an OPTION for local governments to consider transit in proportionate fair- share negotiations.

GROWTH MANAGEMENT Did We Meet Our Methodology Goals?  Provide local governments with an option to incorporate transit in proportionate fair-share calculations  Provide an equitable mitigation option for different sized developments  Emphasize the need for defined transit corridor plans and transit development plans  Supports transit oriented development (TOD) concepts  Utilize existing, professionally accepted analysis techniques where feasible

GROWTH MANAGEMENT Alternative Approaches Considered For constrained corridors, identify necessary roadway improvement to mitigate even if not feasible (i.e. go from 6 to 8 lanes) Determine ‘proportionate share’ of project Use average cost to determine a project cost Take proportionate share of imaginary project and give to transit agency for improvements Apply ‘Roadway Money’ to Transit Does not meet methodology goals, causes issues with roadway projects that have to use “real” costs, mixes roadway and transit concepts and costs.

GROWTH MANAGEMENT Alternate Approaches Considered Apply Transit Level of Service Standard Development contributes to upgrade of transit service to acceptable TQOS or defined standard Three potential measures from Transit Capacity and Quality of Service Manual –Service frequency measures imply availability of transit service –Hours of service (service span) measures imply availability of transit service –Transit to auto travel time measures imply improvements to reduce transit travel time (e.g. signal priority, queue jumps) What is appropriate TQOS standard in given situation?

GROWTH MANAGEMENT TCQSM Measure: Service Frequency

GROWTH MANAGEMENT TCQSM Measure: Hours of Service

GROWTH MANAGEMENT TCQSM Measure: Transit-Auto Travel Time

GROWTH MANAGEMENT Alternative Approaches Considered Most areas of Broward County are ‘built out’, many areas within TCEA Decision in long-range plan to de-emphasize roadway widening and encourage density and multi-modal options Transit Concurrency Districts DO NOT also collect roadway impact fees –‘Traditional’ roadway based system assesses concurrency for specific segments AND collects impact fees to account for system wide impacts Mitigation in the form of a proportionate share payment towards programmed transit improvements within defined District Fees based on County Transit Program ‘Broward County Transit Concurrency’ Type System

GROWTH MANAGEMENT Alternative Approaches Considered Diverse land use of an entire FDOT District presents significant implementation challenges –Non-built out areas may not want to forgo road impact fees –Broward County took a long period of time to get City ‘buy in’ on program System does not allow option: either roadway or transit Broward County still evaluating overall effectiveness of program Many elements of program included in proposed methodology –Emphasis on transit plan, use of area specific costs ‘Broward County Transit Concurrency’ Type System

GROWTH MANAGEMENT Questions?

GROWTH MANAGEMENT Example Applications

GROWTH MANAGEMENT Small Development Development adding 50 new peak hour trips to one segment of a constrained four-lane facility in urban area Development on ‘Failing’ Facility

GROWTH MANAGEMENT Small Development Agency agreement that no roadway capacity projects are planned or could reasonably be constructed Existing transit service on Main Street = LOS B –10 minute headways, 6 buses per hour Cost per operating hour = $75 Length of existing bus route = 10 miles ( 20 miles round trip)

GROWTH MANAGEMENT Small Development Agency agreement that no roadway capacity projects are planned or could reasonably be constructed Existing transit service on Main Street = LOS B –10 minute headways, 6 buses per hour Length of existing bus route = 10 miles (20 miles round trip) Development on ‘Failing’ Facility Local government and transit agency review site plan and negotiate so that TOD principles are included.

GROWTH MANAGEMENT Sample Calculation Small Development 50 passengers_ peak hour passengers_ bus = 1.25 bus _ peak hour 40 cost. hour number of peak hours. year Duration of Funding (yrs) = IMPROVEMENT COST cost. hour 520 peak hours. year 3 years = $75

GROWTH MANAGEMENT Sample Calculation Small Development 50 passengers_ peak hour passengers_ bus = 1.25 bus _ peak hour 40

GROWTH MANAGEMENT Medium Development Development adding peak hour trips to several segments of a constrained six-lane facility in suburban area Development on ‘Failing’ Facility

GROWTH MANAGEMENT Medium Development (Your turn) Development adding peak hour trips to several segments of a constrained six-lane facility in suburban area Development on ‘Failing’ Facility

GROWTH MANAGEMENT Medium Development Agency agreement that no roadway capacity projects could reasonably be constructed Existing transit service on SR X = LOS D Length of existing bus route = 10 miles (20 miles round trip) Development on ‘Failing’ Facility Local government and transit agency review site plan and negotiate so that TOD principles are included.

GROWTH MANAGEMENT Sample Calculation Medium Development

GROWTH MANAGEMENT Sample Calculation Medium Development

GROWTH MANAGEMENT Large Development Development adding peak hour trips to several segments of a constrained six-lane facility, segments of a constrained four-lane facility, and segments to an unconstrained facility Development on ‘Failing’ Facilities

GROWTH MANAGEMENT Large Development Agency agreement that no roadway capacity projects could reasonably be constructed on constrained facilities (SR X) Existing transit service on SR X = LOS D Length of existing bus routes = 10 miles ( 20 miles round trip)

GROWTH MANAGEMENT Large Development Agency agreement that no roadway capacity projects could reasonably be constructed on constrained facilities (SR X and Jon Street) –Roadway capacity project is possible on Karen Street Existing transit service on SR X = LOS D, on Jon Street = LOS F Length of existing bus routes = 10 miles (20 miles round trip) Development on ‘Failing’ Facilities Local government and transit agency review site plan and negotiate so that TOD principles are included.

GROWTH MANAGEMENT Sample Calculation Large Development SR X

GROWTH MANAGEMENT Sample Calculation Large Development Jon Street

GROWTH MANAGEMENT Questions?

GROWTH MANAGEMENT Areas for Future Study 1.Analyze Proposed Methodology Assumptions Cost per passenger mile –Compare costs from NTD vs cost from specific transit plans Impact of using a route length other than the entire length of transit route Alternative funding duration periods –Is the 3, 5, 7 program long enough? Provision of a vehicle occupancy factor?

GROWTH MANAGEMENT Areas for Future Study 2.Provide Instruction on Transit LOS Principles and Corridor Designation Transit improvements will need to be based on achieving a designated LOS by corridor 3.Develop Guidance on Estimating Costs from Transit Corridor Plans for Proportionate Share Provide example applications where costs were developed using actual transit plans 4.Further Develop Alternative Approaches

GROWTH MANAGEMENT Areas for Future Study What Do You Think? 1.Analyze proposed methodology assumptions 2.Provide instruction on transit LOS principles and corridor designation 3.Develop guidance on estimating costs from transit corridor plans for proportionate share 4.Further develop alternative approaches 5.Other

GROWTH MANAGEMENT Next Steps Focus groups to study methodology –Diverse geographic characteristics –Transit agencies, land use planners, and transportation planners Future workshop to report results

GROWTH MANAGEMENT Additional Information or Questions Karl Passetti, P.E. Kittelson & Associates, Inc