Santa Monica Street Typologies Tumlin Cnu

1

Street Typologies for a Complete Community

A New Approach in Santa Monica CA

CNU 17 Denver COJune 12, 2009Jeffrey Tumlin

Measuring Success in Santa Monica – CNU Denver 2009

Jeffrey Tumlin, Nelson\Nygaard Consulting 2

Approach

Transportation is not an end in itself.

It is merely a means by which we support the City’s larger goals.



Conventional Measures

Auto Level of Service (LOS) Seconds of delay

experienced by vehicles, typically at intersections.

Easy to measure. Says nothing about

average travel speed over a corridor.

Says nothing about person capacity.

Ignores other modes of transportation


Jeffrey Tumlin, Nelson\Nygaard Consulting 4 4

Congestion in Santa Monica: Where we are now



Tools for Measuring

If we can’t quantify it, it won’t be considered important

Need different tools for Judging success of overall transportation

system Balancing the needs of each mode in street

improvement projects Prioritizing funding



Approach

Start with new street typologies including: Context

– Land use– intensity – transect– ground floor frontage

Mobility– Priority for each mode: cars, transit, bikes

Set Quality of Service indicators for each mode Set minimum, maximum and preferred measures

for each mode and vary according to context



Street Typologies – Start with Land Use Context

Neighborhood Retail and Downtown streets An important function is to support local retailers Need very high quality pedestrian realm – pedestrians

are more important here than any other mode For cars, LOS A is worse than LOS F. LOS C or D

are optimal, because slower auto traffic supports pedestrian quality and allows motorists to see storefronts




Residential Neighborhood Streets Most important function

is to support a high quality living environment

Need continuous sidewalks and landscape buffer

Slow traffic speeds




Industrial Area Streets Most important function is to accommodate

industrial businesses Must accommodate trucks and truck loading Pedestrian quality less important but cannot

be ignored Higher traffic speeds and volumes OK If you must have congestion, put it here!




Special Streets Ceremonial, recreational

streets have special characteristics and needs– San Vicente– 3rd Street Promenade– Olympic– Oceanfront Walk– Beach Bike Path



Street Typologies: Priority for Each Mode Convert

arterial, collector, feeder to 1st, 2nd and 3rd priority for cars



Insert auto map



Street Typologies: Priority for Each Mode Transit: Use

transit frequency map to note 1st, 2nd and 3rd priority for transit



Street Typologies: Priority for Each Mode Insert transit map



Street Typologies: Priority for Each Mode For bicycles, define where

separate facility is needed due to high motor vehicle speeds and volumes

Then, to complete the network, define priority locations where motor vehicle speeds and volumes will be made compatible with bikes

Flickr photo by SeenyRita



Street Typologies: Priority for Each Mode



Street Typologies: Priority for Each Mode All streets must work well for pedestrians, but we

need to note which streets are most important, require special considerations and should be prioritized for funding.

For pedestrians, use land use context map to note retail, residential and industrial areas, along with special facilities like schools, hospitals, care facilities, and recreational destinations

Use judgment to identify priority pedestrian connections



Streets



Quality of Service: Transit

Quality of Service (QOS) rather than Level of Service (LOS)Transit frequency: Headway (minutes)Span of service (hours)Reliability: Coefficient of variation or

Probability of delay >0.5 HLoading: Percent capacityTravel speed: Percent of posted speed

limit



Quality of Service: Cars

Travel time between specific points Standard deviation of average speed – making

sure auto travel is slow and steady, rather than start-and-stop



Quality of Service: Bicycle Compatibility Index

Geometric and roadside data: Number of through lanes Curb lane width Bicycle lane or paved shoulder presence and

width Area character (residential or non-residential)

Traffic operations data: Posted speed limit 85th percentile speed of motor vehicles Average Annual Daily Traffic volume Percentage of traffic constituted by trucks Percentage of vehicles turning right into

driveways or minor intersections Parking data:

Presence of on-street parking On-street parking occupancy Parking time limit Flickr photo by jennchantal



Quality of Service: Pedestrians

Perceived safety: Walk survey, including gender, age, ability

Quality environment: Proper sidewalk width for

land use context Active ground floor use,

including frequency of doors and percent storefront

Height and frequency of trees, and dimension of landscape setback

Ratio of pedestrians to vehicles

Frequency of protected crossings



Setting Standards and Significance Criteria Next, for each context zone and mode network,

think through the absolute minimum, acceptable and preferred Quality of Service for each mode…



Setting Standards and Significance Criteria

FUNCTION CONTEXT ZONE Minimum Desirable Preferred

Transit T-QOS T-QOS T-QOS

Primary All ≥+1 ≥+1.5 ≥+2Secondary Downtown

Retail StreetsIndustrial Single family residential areas

≥-1≥-1

≥+0.5≥+0.5

≥-0.5≥-0.5≥+1≥+1

≥+1≥+1≥+1≥+1

Other transit All - ≥-1 ≥-0.5Auto Vehicular

V:CVehicular

V:CVehicular

V:CArterial Downtown

Retail StreetsIndustrial Single family residential areas

<1.2<1.2<1.0<1.0

<0.8<1.0<0.8<0.6

>0.6>0.6>0.6<0.4

Collector/ Feeder

DowntownRetail StreetsIndustrial Single family residential areas

<1.2<1.2<1.2<1.2

<0.8<1.0<0.8<0.6

>0.6>0.6>0.6<0.4

Local All - <0.9 <0.8



Setting Standards and Significance Criteria

FUNCTION CONTEXT ZONE Minimum Desirable

Preferred

Bicycle Bicycle QOS

Bicycle QOS

Bicycle QOS

Primary Bicycle


DDCB

BCBA

AAAA

Secondary Bicycle


DDDD

BDBB

AAAA

Pedestrian

Ped QOS Ped QOS Ped QOS

Primary Pedestrian


BBCD

AAAB

AAAA

Secondary Pedestrian


CCCD

BBBB

AAAA



Application

Montana Ave: Neighborhood retail context, 1st priority for pedestrians, 2nd priority for cars and transit

Result: OK to slightly degrade auto QOS to improve transit and pedestrian QOS. Signal prioritization OK, but not dedicated transit lane.

Goal: Bring all measures into balance

FUNCTION

CONTEXT ZONE Minimum

Desirable

Preferred

Measured

Transit -0.5Secondary

Neighborhood retail

≥-1 ≥-0.5 ≥+1

Auto 0.8Secondary

Neighborhood retail

<1.2 <0.8 >0.6

Pedestrian

A

Primary Neighborhood retail

B A A



Finally, Set Citywide Performance Indicators Build from adopted policy language:

LUCE Principles– Residential Neighborhoods– Placemaking– Walkable Community– Mixed Use Neighborhoods– Parking & Transportation– The Boulevards

Circulation Element Goals Sustainable City Goals

– Resource Conservation– Environmental and Public Health– Transportation– Economic Development– Open Space and Land Use– Housing– Community Education and Participation– Human Dignity



Process

Identify local values Identify long list of performance measures Refine into short list:

Assess today’s conditions Predict future conditions Evaluate projects Conduct EIRs

Create tools and gather data Establish targets and thresholds Report back to public and Council Adopt impact fee



Start with Transportation Principles

Measure Success Management Streets Quality Public Space Environment

Health Affordability Economy Equity Safety Public Benefits



Creating a Shortlist

For each principle, a long list of potential measures – and tools for measuring

Next step: Short list: Shortest list of measures that captures Santa

Monica values Minimize data collection costs Maximize clarity

Some measures, like per capita Vehicle Miles Traveled, capture many values: Greenhouse gases, congestion, air quality, etc.



The Long List

Measure Cost/Time Consumption

Implementation EIR Project Review

Corridor

Review

Report

Card

Travel Model

MANAGEMENT

•Relative travel times by mode

Medium Can be modeled; see WeHo traffic model. Can also be collected through data collection. Transit travel times can be automated in GPS.

•Person capacity – walking, bike, transit, auto, parking, bike parking

Medium - Heavy

This is a GIS/Excel type function that can be included if there is survey data available. Can be modeled. This needs to be further defined.

? ?

•Transit LOS: productivity, farebox return, delay, reliability

Medium - Heavy

This will take extensive model development if we want to get to this level in the demand model. Direct ridership modeling would be another option and would require less data/development time. Transit LOS could also be developed and monitored separate from the model in an Excel spreadsheet. BBB already does a basic collection of this info, and full transit LOS data may be available in upcoming GPS reporting from BBB. Seattle uses transit LOS in an annual GIS report card map, focusing on transit speed and frequency. SF uses transit LOS in their EIRs

•Neighborhood spill-over Medium Either traffic volumes or driver behavior (speed, etc)

Congestion Light The sustainability report card currently measures intersection LOS. Congestion is also indirectly measured in the relative travel times by mode and the person capacity analysis above. (There is community resistance to using intersection LOS.) Adjust significance thresholds if used for EIRs.



Tools and Data

GIS mapping Transportation Demand Management reporting

data Big Blue Bus GPS data Public perception surveys Traffic counts



Existing Traffic Analysis Tool

Straight-line projection of past trends Does not consider traveler choice of mode or

route in response to congestion Cannot measure travel times Trip assignment is done by hand Trip generation and assignment does not

consider trip interaction between different land uses

Does not consider non-auto modes



New Traffic Analysis Tool

Fehr & Peers 4D model Land use based – at parcel level – allowing consideration

of interaction among land uses Consider shifts in driving patterns due to congestion Consider effects of TDM strategies and alternate modes Measure factors such as corridor travel time Ability to provide various performance indicators (e.g.,

total trips generated, travel time, VMT, VHT, etc.) and comparison plots of results

Address new statewide requirements (e.g., CO2/GHG) Provide estimates of extent of regional traffic passing

through the city Nexus analysis in support of trip fee

36Traffic Volume and Levels of Service

Davis, CA

Showing Traffic Volumes and Delay

Source: Fehr & Peers

37Differential Traffic Effects of Growth Scenarios

Petaluma, CA

Traffic Levels in Different Growth Scenarios


38

Yosemite National

Park

Tuolumne County, CA

Show Origin and Destination Patterns




Reporting Back

Measure progress every year, like Sustainable City Report Card

Establish thresholds and triggers. For example: Specific increase in net vehicle trips Specific increase in delay on key corridors Increase in per capita CO2 Loss of transit ridership or walk/bike mode

share Specific increase in injuries or fatalities



Reporting Back

Establish required response when threshold is crossed. For example: Development phasing Stronger development requirements, like TDM Increased impact fees (within what is

justifiable by nexus study) Traffic calming investments Investments in Big Blue, Safe Routes to

Schools, etc.



For More Information

Jeffrey Tumlin

Mobility Accessibility Sustainability

785 Market Street, Suite 1300San Francisco, CA 94103

415-284-1544

[email protected]

Santa Monica Street Typologies Tumlin Cnu

Business

Transcript of Santa Monica Street Typologies Tumlin Cnu