3 - Jobs to Population Balance ProjectTO: Members of Planning Board
Members of the Transportation Advisory Board
FROM: Ruth McHeyser, Director of Long Range Planning
SUBJ: November 27, Z001 Joint TAB/ Planning Board Study Session
Jobs to Population Balance Project
DATE: November 21, 2001
BACKGROUND
The purpose of this agenda item is discuss how the Jobs to Population Project should integrate
with transportation projects such as the Transportation Master Plan (TMP) Update and the city-
wide Travel Demand Management (TDM) project. A brief description of the jobs-to-population
project, the project timeline, and the major milestones are provided in Attachment A.
The focus of the project, as stated in the BVCP poticy that sets the project's framework, is a
public process to determine the appropriate and acceptable jobs to population ratio for the
city. The final product will ba "a combination of actions that will reduce the amount of
commercial growth, create more affordable housing, and mitigate the impacts of traffic
congestion."
The project will involve land use, housing and transportation issues. The method that has been
agreed upon to identify the appropriate combination of actions to achieve the desired future is fhe
creation of a range of future land use and transportation scenarios.
Developing Scenarios
Scenarios are a set of reasonably plausible, but structurally different futures. They should reflect
an integrated, consistent storyline-an explanation of how an underlying reality can unfold under
feasible circumstances. Some of the components of a scenario will be:
• Concept or storvline which includes a statement of what is to be achieved and ganeral
information about how to get there
• Location, type, and numbers of housing units
• Location, type, and square footage of nonresidential uses (commercial and industrial)
• Transportation demand management strategies
• General statement of policies necessary to attain this target
Each scenario will be evaluated against a set of criteria to be developed with the Task Force, e.g.
traffic impact, economic impact, etc.
TRAVEL DEMAND MANAGEMENT
For background on Travel Demand Management (TDM) Strategies, see that separate agenda
item. One of the goals of the jobs-to-population project is to clarify to what extent the impacts of
the city's jobs to population imbalance can be mitigated by implernenting city-wide travel
demand strategies. Each scenario that will be developed for the project will include TDM
measures, and each scenario will be analyzed for costs and benefits.
RELATIONSHIP TO THE TMP
For background informa"tion on the TMP Update, see that sepazate agenda item. The main areas
of integration of these two projects relate to a) the TDM strategies developed in conjunction with
the jobs to population scenarios and b) the traffic analysis of the city's projected future growth in
housing and employment.
At this time it is anticipated that city-wide TDM measures and implementation strategies will be
recommended in the jobs-to-population project. This work will be coordinated with and
ultimately integrated into the TMP.
Since the city's growth projections are likely to change as part of the jobs to population balance
project and the jobs-to-population scenarios will require analysis of transportation as well as
other impacts, Transportation and Planning staffs have discussed coordinating on the timing of
the two projects. Since the scenarios are expected to developed and evaluated from February to
May, 2002, we are hoping that the transportation mode] can be up and running in March or April.
ATTACHMENT A
Jobs to Population Balance Project
Project Description:
As a result of the population and employment projections developed for the major five-year update to the
$oulder Valley Comprehensive Plan (BVCP), a "Jobs-to-Population Balance" policy was adopted. The
policy grew out of concern for Boulder's current imbalance; there are approximately 50,000 workers who
commute into Boulder. This number could increase by over 60 percent over the next 20 years resulting in
worsening traffic, escalating housing prices, and decreasing community involvement. The adopted BVCP
policy explains why the city and county are concerned about potential imbalance between jobs and
population and states that:
The city will therefore embark on a public process to determine whether or not (aJ I:1 ratio is
appropriate. This will be accomplished through a public process that will establish an
appropriate and acceptable jobs-to population ratio and identify a combination ofactions that
will reduce the amount of commercial growth, create more affordable housing, and mitigate the
impacts of traj~c congestion.
The project will involve land use, housing and transportation issues. It is expected to take
approximately one year to complete, with implementation to begin shortly after.
Status:
An interdepartmental staff team from Planning, Housing, Transportation, BURR, and the City
Attorneys Office has begun work on the project. A task force has been appointed by the City
Manager to work with city staff to define an appropriate public process for the project and develop a
range of future alternatives for the community to consider. The first task force meeting was held October
30. Planning Board received a copy of some of the materials developed for the task force, including the
draft 2001 draft Data Sourcebook and a series of briefing papers.
Maior Milestones:
• Task Force agrees on the data regarding existing and projected housing units, population and
jobs. (December, 2001)
Task Force agrees on the public process. (December, 2001)
• Planning Board and City Council review draft scenarios developed by task force and staff:
are these the right number and range of scenarios to develop and analyze? (January, 2001)
• Task force develops and refines the scenarios selected by Planning Board and Council and
agrees that the costs and benefits are fairly and accurately analyzed. (February- May, 2002)
• Planning Board and City Council agree that the scenarios and cost/ benefit analysis are ready
for distribution to the public for comment and discussion. Task force work is complete.
(May, 2002)
• Formal public process (not yet designed) begins. (May -July, 2002)
• Public comments are summarized and discussed with Planning Board and City Council.
• Planning Board and City Council hold public hearings and select a preferred
scenario. (August-September, 2002)
• Implementation of the scenario that's selected begins (+/- 2003)
S:\PLAN\Users\MCHERI\11-27-O1TAB-PB Jobs-pop.doc
TO: Members of Planning Board
Members of the Transportation Advisory Board (TAB)
FROM: Ruth McHeyser, Director of Long Range Planning
5USd: November 27, 2001 Joint TAB/ Planning Board Study Session
Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan
DATE: November 21, 2001
The purpose of this item on the agenda is to summarize the changes that were approved in the
Year 2000 Major Update to the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan, and to list the actions that
will be taken in the coming years to implement the approved changes.
Background
The Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan (BVCP) is a joint plan between the city of Boulder and
Boulder County, providing shared land use decision-making in the Boulder Valley. It sets a
course for the future growth and development of the city and the lands just outside our. city
boundaries. The current version of the BVCP was adopted in 1996. The plan is adopted by four
bodies: The city of Boulder Planning Board, the City Council, the County Planning Commission,
and the Board of County Commissioners. It provides a statement of the community's desired
long-term future development pattern and sets the city's land use and development policy,
guiding day-to-day development review decisions. It has been one of the most important tools
for managing Boulder's growth.
The Year 2000 Update to the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan
The BVCP uses a 15-year timeframe that allows present-day decisions to be made in a context of
desired long-term goals. It provides for major updates every five years to reflect changes in
circumstances and community desires. The approval process for the Year 2000 Major Update
was completed in September of this year. At the beginning of the process in 1999, two key
themes were identified for the update:
• Increase affordable housing opportunities
• Enhance the overall character and urban form of the community, in particular, focusing on
the city's commercial areas and opportunities for mixed use.
The key issue that emerged as the update progressed was jobs: housing balance. Today,
approximately 53,000 in-commuters and the jobs: population ratio is .94;1. The projected ratio
under current policy/ current trends is approximately 1.16:1.
The adopted policies most relevant to the issues that overlap TAB and Planning Board issues are
provided in Attachment A. The full set of BVCP policies are available on the web at
http://www.ci.boulder.co.us/planning/BVCP2000/bpbvcp2000.htm. The approved land use map
changes are provided in Attachment B. Below are highlights of the changes:
Changes to the Area III -Planning Reserve
In September, 2000, 159 acres were approved for a change from Area III -Planning Reserve to
Area III -Rural Preservation Area.
Changes to the Land Use Map, Land Use Mao Definitions, and Area I, II, III Map
In September, 2001 changes to the Land Use Map were approved, resulting in addition of
approximately 1500 residential units and reduction of approximately 4000 projected jobs.
Area I
• Designation of several sites for mixed use development including Crossroads and several
other sites along the 28~h Street Corridor.
• Changes in designation to preserve existing residential uses, provide better transitions
between residential and non-residential areas, and to provide consistency with existing use.
Area II
• Increase in density on some parcels.
• Preservation of rural character of parcels not suitable for development by designation for
Environmental Preservation or moving to Area III
De£nitions
• New Manufactured Housing and Environmental Preservation designations
• changes to the Open Space designation to differentiate between acquired, properties with
development restrictions, other
Policies
• Significant enhancement of policies on sustainability
• Revisions to annexation policy
• New jobs:population policy
• New policies encouraging mixed use development
• Update of economic policies to reflect City Council goals
• Major revision of transportation policies to reflect the 1996 Transportation Master Plan
Implementation
The action plan in Attachment C lists the actions that are expected to be taken in the coming
years to implement the changes approved in the Year 2000 BVCP Update. The action plan sets
priorities and identifies work program items to implement the policies and vision set in the Plan.
It has been recommended for approval by Planning Board and will be reviewed by City Council
in January. It will be reviewed and updated at each update of the Comprehensive Plan. It will
provide a benchmark for the annual and 5-year updates as to what has been accomplished. The
action plan is not a definitive work program, but a tool to help determine work programs. Work
program priorities are set by City Council, suggestions from boards and commissions, and
-2-
unique opportunities. Each piece will need to be assessed in terms of available resources and
approved through the city or county budgeting process.
Attachments:
A: Relevant Comprehensive Plan Policies
B: BVCP Approved Land Use Map Changes
C: BVCP Action Plan
-3-
ATTACHMENT A
RELEVANT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES
POLICY 1.03
PRINCIPLES OF SUSTAINABILITY. Sustainable development meets the needs of the
present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. The city
and county adopt the following principles to interpret and guide the implementation of the
Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan:
• .Renewable resources should not be used faster than they are recharged or replenished by
the environment.
• Non-renewable resources should be used with the greatest practical efficiency, and some
of those should be used to develop renewable replacements. "Greatest practical
efficiency" means a use that is technically and financially feasible.
• Waste should not be dumped into nature any faster than nature can absorb it.
• The economy is a subsystem of the environment and depends upon the environment both
as a source of raw material inputs and as a sink for waste outputs.
POLICY 1.04
COMMUNITY SUSTAINABILITY. The city and county recognize that the earth is a closed
system, and that there are limits to the land and soil available for food production, to available
water, to renewable resources such as trees, fish and wildlife, to industrial resources like oil and
metals, and to the ability of nature to absorb our waste. The city and county seek to maintain
and enhance the livability, health and vitality of the Boulder Valley and the natural systems of
which it is a part now and in the long-term future. Maintaining the long-term health of the
natural environment and the economy and community livability in the Boulder Valley and
beyond are inextricably linked. The city and county seek to preserve choices for future
generations and to anticipate and adapt to changing community needs and external influences.
POLICY 1.05
INDICATORS OF SUSTAINABILITY. The city and county shall work with other entities to
develop indicators of sustainability specific to the Boulder Valley. The choice of indicators will
be based on their ability to provide feedback that will support and strengthen efforts taken to
move the community to sustainability in a reasonable period of time,
POLICY 1.06
LEADERSHIP IN SUSTAINABILITY. The city will apply the principles of sustainability to
its actions and decisions. The city will act as a community leader and steward of our resources,
serving as a role model for others and striving to create a sustainable community that lives
conscientiously as part of the planet and ecosystems we inhabit and that are influenced by our
actions. Through its master plans, regulations, policies and programs, the city will strive to
create a healthy, vibrant and sustainable community for future generations.
POLICY 1.10
-4-
PLAN INTEGRATION. A variety of community plans exists to guide day-to-day decision
making. The city is committed to achieving a high level of coordination and integration
development and implementation of the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan, subcommunity
plans, area plans, and functional master plans.
POLICY 1.11
REGIONAL COOPERATION. Many of the most significant problems and opportunities
faced by Boulder and other jurisdictions, particularly affordable housing, the jobs-housing
balance, regional transportation, and growth management can only be dealt with effectively
through regional cooperation and solutions. Therefore, the city and county shall aggressively
pursue joint plannirig and close cooperation with each other and among other cities,
unincorporated communities, the University of Colorado, the school districts, regional
organizations, and other policy-making bodies (e.g., other counties, the Regional Transportation
District (RTD), the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT), the County Board of
Health, utility and fire service entities). These entities should address issues of mutual concern
in order to avoid conflicts, provide a means by which each entity may more fully benefit from a
multi jurisdictional perspective, and achieve mutually beneficial solutions.
POLICY 1.15
CITY'S ROLE IN MANAGING GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT. In order to achieve
community goals and policies, the city will implement growth management tools that control the
scale, location, type, intensity and timing of new development and redevelopment. Where
appropriate, the county will work with the city in developing and implementing growth
management tools.
POLICY 1.16
ADAPTING TO LIMITS ON PHYSICAL EXPANSION. As the community expands to its
planned physical boundaries, the city and county will increasingly emphasize preservation and
enhancement of the physical, social and economic assets of the community. Cooperative efforts
and resources shall be focused on maintaining and improving the quality of life within defined
physical boundaries, with only limited expansion of the city.
POLICY 1.17
GROWTH PROJECTIONS. In order to ensure that past and projected growth impacts can be
better mitigated or avoided, and to maintain a desirable community size, the city shall set
projections for population and employment for the year 2020. Projected growth will be limited
unless sufficient progress is made in reducing the cumulative negative growth impacts to an
acceptable level and other significant community benefits can be achieved.
POLICY 1.19
JOBS: POPULATION BALANCE. In recent years, employment in the city has grown
significantly more than housing. This has resulted in increased in-commuting, a greater daytime
population and a general increase in traffic congestion and housing prices. In the year 2000, the
ratio of the number of jobs to the population in the Boulder Valley was estimated at .92:1
(107,074 jobs: 114,580 population). If cunent trends continue, the ratio is projected to become
1.21:1 by the year 2020.
-5-
The generally accepted planning standard for a balanced jobs-to-population ratio is .65 to 1.
Given current policies, the city and county agree that the current ratio within the Boulder Valley
exceeds an appropriate ratio and the planning standard, and that a worsening of that ratio beyond
1:1 will lead to greater regional traffic congestion, affordable housing shortfalls, and other
negative impacts on the community as a whole. The city will therefore embark on a public
process to determine whether or not the I:1 ratio is appropriate. This will be accomplished
through a public process that will establish an appropriate and acceptable jobs-to-population ratio
and identify a combination of actions that will reduce the amount of commercial growth, create
more affordable housing, and mitigate the impacts of traffic congestion.
POLICY 2.03 .
COMMUNITY/REGIONAL DESIGN. The city and county support improved design of
individual urban areas, rural areas and the region through design features such as: clear urban
boundaries, open land buffers separating compact communities, vital activity centers,
preservation of critical natural areas and vistas, appropriate connection of trail systems, efficient
multi-modal travel corridors, a balanced distribution of housing and job opportunities, provision
of diverse housing, and conservation of physical and social resources.
POLICY 2.04
COMPACT LAND USE PATTERN. The city and county will, by implementing the
Comprehensive Plan, ensure that development will take place in an orderly fashion which will
take advantage of existing urban services and shall avoid, insofar as possible, patterns of
leapfrog, noncontiguous, scattered development within the Boulder Valley. The city prefers
redevelopment and infill as compared to development in an expanded service area, in order to
prevent urban sprawl and create a compact conununity.
POLICY 2.07
DESIGN OF MAJOR ENTRYWAYS. Major entryways into the Boulder Valley shall be
identified, protected and enhanced in order to emphasize and preserve the natural setting and
appearance of the community. Future strip commercial development shall be discouraged.
POLICY 2.28
COMMITMENT TO A WALKABLE CITY. The city and county will promote the
development of a walkable city by designing neighborhoods and business areas to provide easy
and safe access by foot to places such as neighborhood centers, community facilities, transit
stops or centers, and shared public spaces and amenities.
POLICY 2.29
TRAIL CORRIDORS/LINKAGES. In the process of considering development proposals, the
city and county shall encourage the development of trails and trail linkages for appropriate uses
such as hiking, bicycling or horseback riding, so as to provide a variety of alternative recreation
and transportation opportunities. Implementation of this goal shall be achieved through the
coordinated efforts of the private and public sectors.
POLICY 4.31
-6-
INTEGRATION OF AIR QUALITY/TRANSPORTATION PLANNING. The city and
county will integrate air quality planning into the transportation planning and traffic management
processes. The city will promote transportation strategies which encourage alternatives to travel
in single-occupant vehicles.
POLICY 4.32
INTEGRATION OF AIR QUALITY/LAND USE PLANNING.. The city and county will
integrate air quality planning into the land use planning process. Land use patterns that reduce
travel and air emissions will be encouraged. Local development plans will be reviewed for their
impacts on air quality, with special emphasis on stabilization of soils, appropriate monitoring of
construction and mining operations, and minimizing exposure to both mobile and stationary
sources of air pollution.
POLICY 4.39
ENERGY-EFFICIENT LAND USE. The city and county shall encourage the conservation of
energy through land use policies and regulations governing placement, orientation and clustering
of development and through housing policies and regulations. The conservation of energy is
served by the development of more intense land use patterns; the provision of recreation,
employment and essential services in proximity to housing; the development of mass transit
corridors, efficient transportation, and resource conservation measures in all demolition and
construction projects.
POLICY 4.46
NOISE ABATEMENT. Noise abatement shall be a continuing environmental concern that
shall be implemented through improved land use relationships, as well as by ordinance, with
particular attention being given to the impact of transportation and industrial facilities and proper
acoustical design.
POLICY 6.01
ALL-MODE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM. The Boulder Valley will be served by an
integrated all-mode transportation system. The city and county shall work together to develop a
balanced transportation system including completed networks for each mode and safe and
convenient connections between modes.
The network of public rights-of--way and easements that create travel corridors are the primary
infrastructure for all modes and will be managed and expanded to balance their use among all
modes. Pedestrian travel is involved in every trip and is the basis for all other modes of travel.
Improvements to the travel comdors network will be made in a manner that preserves or
improves the capacity or efficiency of all modes.
POLICY 6.02
REDUCTION OF SINGLE OCCUPANCY AUTO TRIPS. The city and county will pursue
the quality of life goals of residents by promoting greater use of alternatives to single occupancy
automobile travel. It is the city's specific objective to achieve 'no long-term growth in traffic
through the year 2020 within the Boulder Valley, while providing for increased mobility.
_~_
POLICY 6.03
SYSTEM COMPLETION. The city and county will strive to make bicycling, walking, and
transit more convenient and safe by completing the systems for these modes and providing
seamless connections between the systems developed in the city and county.
The city will provide a combination of on-street and off-street bicycle and pedestrian facilities to
accommodate a variety of user types and to provide users with a choice of the type of
environment in which to walk or bike.
The city will seek to cooperate with RTD to incrementally increase the community-based,
high-frequency transit system in the designated multimodal corridors.
The city and county will seek to cooperate with RTD to develop high quality, high frequency
transit service between the communities of the region and between centers of employment and
housing.
POLICY 6.04
MULTIMODAL STRATEGIES. The city and county will work cooperatively to design
collaborative multimodal strategies for achieving the desired objective of limiting traffic growth
while accommodating increases in anticipated travel. The city may engage neighboring
communities and other entities such as the University of Colorado, Boulder Valley School
District, and private employers in developing these programs. This will include developing and
implementing travel demand management programs reflecting an integrated approach including
marketing, education, pass programs, improved facilities and new services.
As part of the city's strategy for growth to pay its own way, new developments will be required
to consider and include travel demand management approaches such as the Eco Pass, parking
cash out, parking pricing, employer trip reduction programs, flex-time and telecommunicating in
their efforts to reduce the Vehicle Miles of Travel (VMT) produced by the development.
The city will focus its efficiency and capacity investment within the identified multimodal
corridors of the Transportation Management Plan (TMP) and this plan.
The city will work cooperatively with the county and neighboring communities to create
multimodal comdors linking the communities and linking Boulder County to the region.
POLICY 6.05
ACCESSIBILITY. The city and county will develop a balanced all-mode transportation system
that provides transportation choices, services and facilities for mobility-impaired persons, as well
as youth, elderly, and low-income persons.
POLICY 6.06
MULTIMODAL INVESTMENT. To protect previous investments and ensure efficient use of
existing travel corridors, the city and county shall prioritize their investment first to maintenance
and safety improvements of the existing modal systems. Second priority is given to capacity
additidns for the non-automotive modes and efficiency improvements for existing road facilities
_g.
such as adding signals, turn lanes, and signage that increase levels of service without adding
through-lanes.
The city will focus its efficiency and capacity investment within the identified multimodal
corridors of the TMP and this plan.
The city will work cooperatively with the county and neighboring communities to create
multimodal corridors linking the communities and linking Boulder County to the region.
POLICY 6.07
CONGESTION. The city will increase the efficiency of the travel corridor system, develop the
non-automotive systems, promote innovative strategies and implement travel demand
management strategies to limit the increase in congestion while accommodating the expected
increase in travel.
The city and county shall promote the greater use of alternatives to single-occupancy automobile
travel with the objective of limiting the extent and duration of congestion to 20 percent of the
roadway system within the Boulder Valley while providing for increased mobility.
POLICY 6.08
TRANSPORTATION IMPACT. Traffic impacts from a proposed development that cause
unacceptable community or environmental impacts or unacceptable reduction in level of service
shall be mitigated. All development will include strategies to reduce the vehicle miles traveled
(VMT) generated by the development.
New development will be designed and built to be multimodal and pedestrian-oriented.
Strategies to reduce the VMT generated by new development will include all modes of travel as
well as travel management programs such as the Eco Pass. The design of new development will
especially focus on providing continuous modal systems through the development, on connecting
these systems to those surrounding the development and on providing connections between the
modes.
POLICY 6.09
MULTIMODAL DEVELOPMENT. The transportation system will accommodate the planned
land use pattern, which includes higher densities and mixed use in the core area and activity
centers, a variety of densities in the fringe areas, compact community size, and the possibility of
one or more city auto-free zones in the future.
Three intetmodal centers will be developed or maintained in the downtown, the Boulder Valley
Regional Center, and on the university's main campus to anchor these three activity centers to
regional transit connections and to serve as hubs for connecting pedestrian, bicycle and local
transit to regional services.
The land along multimodal corridors will be designated as multimodal transportation zones when
transit service is provided on that corridor. The city shall consider parking maximums in
multimodal transportation zones which are expected to provide a higher level of design,
-9-
accommodation for non-automotive modes and travel management programs such as the Eco
Pass in exchange for parking requirement reductions and incentives for mixed use development.
POLICY 6.10
MANAGING PARHING SUPPLY. The city will actively manage parking supply in the
community consistent with the desire to reduce single-occupant vehicle travel and limit
congestion. Parking needs will be accommodated in the most efficient way possible with the
least number of new parking spaces. The city will promote parking reductions through parking
maximums, shared parking, parking districts and parking management programs where
appropriate and taking into account impacts to surrounding areas.
POLICY 6.11
NEIGHBORHOOD INTEGRATION. The city and county shall strive to protect and improve
the quality of life within neighborhoods while at the same time facilitating the movement of
vehicular; bike and pedestrian traffic. Improving access and safety within neighborhoods by
controlling vehicle speeds will be given priority over vehicle mobility.
Transportation actions will not be implemented solely to shift a problem or impact from one
location to another. Neighborhood needs and goals will be balanced against the community
benefit of a transportation improvement.
POLICY 6.12
INTEGRATED DESIGN. The city and county shall design all transportation facilities to
contribute to a positive and attractive visual image and the desired community character.
POLICY 6.13
IMPROVING AIR QUALITY. The city will develop a highly connected and continuous
transportation system for all modes, including agrid-based transportation pattern allowing for
convenient and efficient travel by all modes. The city will look for opportunities to complete
missing links of the current transportation grid through the use of area transportation plans and at
the time of parcel redevelopment.
The city and county shall design the transportation system to minimize air pollution by
promoting the use of non-automotive transportation modes, reducing auto traffic, maintaining
acceptable traffic flow, and siting facilities so they do not block air drainage corridors. The city
and county will cooperate with other entities that make transportation decisions to achieve these
ends.
POLICY 6.14
NOISE ABATEMENT. The city and county shall design and construct new transportation
facilities so as to minimize noise levels.
S:\PLAN\Users\MCHERI\l 1-27-O1TAB-PB BVCP.doc
-10-
ATTACHMENT C
Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Action Plan
General Policies
1.05 Indicators of Work with the Boulder County Civic Forum
Sustainability and other entities to develop indicator goals
specific to the Boulder Valley.
1.06 Leadership in Develop and implement an environmental
Sustainability and management system for city operations.
4.38 City Leadership in
Resource Conservation
1.19 Jobs:Population
Balance
1.24 Annexation
• Involve the public in identifying the
desired future for the city's commercial
areas and reduce the city's projected jobs:
population imbalance. Revise zoning
districts and rezone as needed to
implement desired future.
• ' Revise jobs:population policy following
completion of Jobs: population balance
project
• Work with county to implement the
application of city standards on fully
developed Area II sites when
substantial changes are proposed.
• Complete economic analysis of
costs/benefits to property owners, and
develop preliminary policy options
• Develop annexation plan for fully
developed Area II properties.
As part of the next BVCP major
update, develop community
wide indicators.
Planning and
Environmental
Affairs
Environmental
Affairs
Planning
Planning
Community Design-
2.13 Preservation of
Community Character
2.38 Sensitive Infill and
Redevelopment
2.14 Accessory Units
2.15 Preservation of
Existing Residential Uses
2.20 Mixed Use
2.21 Incentives for Mixed
Use
2.35 Preservation of
Archaeological Sites and
Cultural Landscapes
Environment
4.06 Natural Ecosystems
4.20 Water Resource
Planning
4.23 Groundwater
4.40 Energy Efficient
Building Design and
Construction
4.41 Waste Minimization
and Recycling
4.43 Integrated Pest
Management
Identify existing policies and regulations
that maybe adjusted to add incentives or
disincentives
Prepare report on number and location of
accessory units, including trends in number of
units approved in recent years.
Revise use criteria for residential zones; as
part of jobs:population project, revise
commercial zoning district standards to
preserve residential uses or require in-kind
replacement.
As part of the jobs:population project, review
commercial zoning districts for changes to
provide incentives for mixed use.
Adopt a local species of special concern list as
part of BVCP Annual Update.
Develop and implement review criteria for
measuring impacts of new development on
groundwater and stormwater quality.
Develop and implement anon-residential
Green Points program (using LEED as a
model).
Develop an integrated pest management plan
for Parks and Recreation Department
operations.
Conduct a public process to
identify potential approaches to
address concerns about "pop-
ups" and "scrape-offs'; develop
proposed ordinances/programs.
Conduct a public process and
potentially revise regulations to
encourage accessory units in
selected locations.
Prepare area plans as needed.
Develop a plan and process for
identification, designation, and
protection of archaeological and
cultural landscape resources.
Develop integrated pest
management plans for other city
departments.
Planning
Planning
Planning
Planning
Planning
Planning
Water Quality
Environmental
Affairs, Planning
and Development
Services
Environmental
Services
Economy f
5.03 Balance of
Employment and Housing
5.08 Vital and Productive
Retail Base
5.09 Economic
Sustainability Strategic Plan
As part of jobs:population project, revise
industrial zoning districts to allow/encourage
housing where appropriate
As part of jobs:population project, explore
methods such as identifying opportunities or
gaps, encouraging mixed-use development,
revisions to regulations.
Transporfatiori -`
6.04 Multimodal strategies Coordinate with jobs: population project
to implement TDM strategies in
commercial zoning districts.
• Develop community-wide TDM options as
part of TMP Update.
• Develop menu of TDM measures as part
of TMP Update.
• Include expanded transportation demand
management (TDM) requirements as part
of the city approval process.
6.07 Multimodal • Secure site and finalize development plans
Development for the Boulder Valley Regional Center
intermodal center.
• Develop the concept and implementation
tools for multimodal transportation zones.
• Coordinate with CU's Micro Master Plan
for Transportation.
6.10 Managing Parking Investigate the issue of parking maximum and
Supply minimums.
Propose new Comprehensive
Plan policies to implement
Boulder's Healthy Economy
Strategic Plan.
Planning
Planning
Planning/ City
Manager's Office
Expand the menu of TDM Monitor the results Transportation / ...
measures. of TDM Engineering
requirements and Review/ Planning
adjust as needed.
• Cooperate with CU in Transportation/
planning for the UMC Planning
Intermodal Center.
• Revise regulations as
needed to implement
multimodal zones.
Revise parking requirements as Monitor or adjust Planning/
appropriate. parking Transportation
requirements as
needed.
Housing
7.11 Keeping Low and Through jobs:population project and
Moderate Income Workers in annexation opportunities, provide for
Boulder additional permanently affordable housin in
7.12 Strengthening
Community Housing
Partnerships
Conversion of Residential
Uses in the Community
Center
University Hill
Trails Map
g
the community
Provide city support and technical assistance
to Williams Village development.
Establish mitigation criteria for residential
uses lost to redevelopment and non-
residential conversion. (will be addressed wish
2.15 Preservation of Existing Residential Uses)
• Revise /Update Urban Renewal Plan
• Select developer and complete
development agreement and approved
development plan for Crossroads Mall
redevelopment
Implement the University Hill Market Plan
• Transportation Master Plan
• Fire Master Plan
• Police Master Plan
• Arts Master Plan
• Comprehensive Drainage Utility Master
Plan
As part of the annual update, draft criteria for
trails map designations, explore concept of
study azeas, and develop new processfor
trails map changes.
Update the:
• Facilities and Asset
Management Master Plan
• Parks and Recreation
Master Plan
• Library Master Plan
• Airport Master Plan
Housing/Plamring
Housing
Planning/Housing
BURR
UHGID
Respective city
departments
Planning
S:\PLAN\data\longrang\compplg\BVCP\2000PLAN\Text changes\actnplan4.doc
- AREA I -.the areawithin the Gty of Boulde[~' _. "
1a. west of folsum. S. of Canyon High Density Residential Mixed Usc - Residential
ic. East of Folsom, North n( Pearl General Business Mizell Use -Business
]d. East of Folsom, South of Spruce General Rosiness Affixed Use- Residential
le. West of 2Rlh, North of Spruce General Business -I ransitional Business
1f. West o[ Zftth, North of Spruce General Business Mixed Use-Business
lg. East and Wesl of 28th, North of Mapleton General Business Mixed Use -Business
lh. East of 2Rth, North of Mapleton General Business Transitional Business
lj. West of 30th, North of Mapleton General Business PublicJSemi-Public
lk. West of 30th, North of Mapleton General Business Mixed Use -Industrial
ln. Fast of 30th, Nonh of Mapleton General Business Transitional Business
]p. East of 30th, North & South of BWFf General Business Mixed Use -Business
1u. West of 2Rth, Nnrth nF Valmont General Rosiness High Density Residential
2a. East of 26th, North of Arapahoe Regional Business Mixed Use -Business
26. West of 28th, North of Canyon Regional Rosiness Mixed Use -Business
2f. West of 30th, South of Baseline Community Business Mixed-0se -Business
3. Fast of 30th, North of Mapleton Community Industrial Mixed Use- Industrial
9a. West n(Broadway, South of Alpine Fligh Density Residential Transitional Business
96. West of Broadway, North of Alpine high Density Residential Public/Semi-Public
4c. West of Broadway, South of North High Density Residential Mixed Use -Residential
5. East of Diagonal, North of Mineral Light Industrial Transitional Business
6. Fast of 30th, South of Baseline Medium Density Public/Semi-Public
Residential & Open Space k Open Space
7. Multiple Locations Arterial Business 7a. Transitional Business
7b. High Density Residential
7c. Community Rosiness
7d. General Business
7e. West of 55th, North of Arapahoe Light Industrial Transitional Business
8. Glenwood Court General Business High Density Residential
9. Fos[ vF 28th, South of Myine Low Density Residential Medium Density Residential
10. Mobile Home Parks Medium Density Residential Manufactured Housing
& High Uensity Residential
71. East of Broadway, South of Lee Hill Road Medium Density Residendat Mixed Density Residential
a
20. Multiple sites (city-owned] Varies I'u6lic/Semi-Public
21. Multiple sites (city parks) Varies Urban & Other Parks
22. North of Arapahoe, West of Cherryvale 22a. Light Industrial 22a. High Density Residential
22b. Community Indusvial 22b. Light btdustrial
ARGAJ1rUie`areaatljacent-toihe<ci}}=plarndedCorattnexatiori.•.;. - ~,.
12b. East of 47th, South of Jay Road
Residential
13d. Past o[ 30th, Noah of Kalmia
19. Fast o[ 55th, South of Baseline
ISc. S. of East Boulder Recreation Center
16. E. of Cherryvale, South of Arapahoe
i7. E, of Foothills Parkway, North o[ Arapahoe
18. Mobile Home Parks
Low Density Residential ]2b. Medium Density
Public/Semi-Public 13d. bledinm Density Residential
Low Density Residential 14a. Medium Density Residential
196. No change
19c. Area III - Urban k Other Parks
14d. Area 01 -
No land use designation
Low Density Residential 16c. Environmental Preservation
Performance Industrial
& Open Space
Light Industrial
Low Density Residential,
Medium Density Resident
k Performance Industrial
19. Multiple Sites
16a. Low Density
Residential
166. Open Space -Other
17a. Environmental Preservation
176. Public/Semi-Public
ManuFactued housing
ial,
19a. Light Industrial 19a. Open Space -Acquired
19b. Light Industrial 796. Open Space -
Developmen[ Restrictions
19c Open Space 19c. Area III -Open Space Acquired
TO: Members of Planning Boazd
.Members of the Transportation Advisory Boazd
FROM: Mike Gardner-Sweeney, Transportation Planning and Operations Coordinator
Ruth McHeyser, Director of Long Range Planning
SUBJECT: Travel Demand Management Strategies
The purpose of this item on the agenda is to provide an overview of travel demand management
(TDM) strategies and their relationship to Development Review and the Transportation Master
Plan Update. See Agenda item III for a discussion of TDM measures in relation to the Jobs to
Population Balance Project.
Background
Traditional transportation plans and programs have focused on increasing the supply of
transportation facilities to meet the projected travel demand. While this approach has provided a
comprehensive road network, the ability to build additional roadways and the benefit they
provide is significantly limited in developed areas. Consequently, mature areas such as Boulder
increasingly focus on the other side of the supply-demand equation, which means managing the
demand for travel. Transportation Demand Management is a general term for strategies that
result in more efficient use of transportation resources by managing the transportation system to
limit the demand for single occupant vehicle (SOV) travel. TDM strategies are intended to either
shift travel out of the peak hours when the road system is most congested or to replace the need
to travel altogether. This can be accomplished by changing the time of travel, the mode of travel,
the travel route, or by replacing travel through land use changes or substitutes for physical travel
such as telecommunications. Amore detailed explanation and listing of TDM techniques is
contained in Attachment A.
TDM measures incorporated into Development Review Standards
The Boulder Revised Code (1981) and the Design and Construction Standards have provisions to
require TDM strategies for discretionary review and to offset impacts of parking reductions,
however the level of required TDM efforts has not been well defined. This leaves staff in a
position of having to negotiate with developers and at times not able to put in pace an effective
TDM strategy. Planning and Development Review staff is working to put in place a point system
modeled after the Greenpoints program to define what level of TDM effort must be achieved for
developments and for requested parking reductions. This program will also encompass by-right
developments which previously have been exempt.
City-Wide TDM Programs and Policies
TDM measures are broadly classified. as incentive based and disincentive based. Since the ] 989
TMP, the city has been actively involved in incentive-based TDM. The programs created and
promoted by GO Boulder such as the Eco Pass, Bike Week, Walk Our Children to schools, and
all education, marketing and promotion of travel choices and how to use modes other than the
SOV are incentive based TDM. The 1996 TMP identified the need to both continue with
incentive based strategies and to begin work on disincentive strategies. The 1996 TMP
identified ashort-term list of disincentive strategies that included public and private parking
pricing, employee parking cash-out, and private parking supply limits. As shown in Figure 1,
the city is currently involved in developing an employee cash-out program for city employees
and is involved in short term and long terms projects to address parking supply. These programs
TDM
w: ~x'?.:'si
A. ''6A
~~~e
*~GF:,
k `~.a'
.~~~°
~~
Development
Review
City of
Boulder
City Wide Policies
& Programs
11/29 Planning Board
12/01 City Council
Model Employer Program
• Parking Cash-out
demonstrations
Programs
• N. 26th St. TNP
• Arapahoe TNP
• CU coordination
• CAGTD TMO
• Crossroads
Figure 1 City of Boulder TDM Activities Policies
Jobs to Population Project
- Scenarios
(incl. Land Use &TDM)
-TDM tool kit
-Scenario Evaluation
(incl. traffic analysis)
•TMP
are intended to put the city as an employer in a leadership position in terms of TDM anti to
integrate and enhance the TDM approach across a[1 levels of city activity.
Attachment A Transportation Demand Management (TDM)
2
Transportation Demand Management (TDM)
Transportation Demand Management is a general term for strategies that result in more efficient
use of transportation resources by managing the transportation system to limit demand. TDM
recognizes the road system as a physically limited resource with chazacteristics similaz to other
systems where we manage demand. We are familiaz with many systems where demand is
managed through price signals, and we respond to these when we make a persona] phone call
during non-business hours or take ared-eye plane flight for a reduced faze. TDM includes many
different strategies with a variety of transportation impacts in addition to price signals. Some
improve transportation choices to make it easier to use a mode. Some encourage changes in
travel time, route, destination or mode in ways that increase efficiency. Others reduce the need
for travel altogether through land use changes or substitutes for physical travel.
Transportation Demand Management is an increasingly common response to congestion and air
quality problems. Although most individual TDM strategies only affect a small portion of total
travel, the cumulative impacts of a comprehensive TDM program can be significant.
Transportation Demand Management can provide many benefits including congestion reduction,
road and parking facility cost savings, consumer savings, increased transportation choice,
improved road safety, increased environmental quality, greater community livability, more
efficient land use, and greater equity. As a result, total benefits are often much greater than
provided by other solutions that only address one or two problems.
TDM Options
These are options that developers, employers, employees and residents can choose from to
customize programs that fit their specific needs. These options increase people's travel choices..
offering an opportunity to choose how, when and if they will commute by car or in some other
way. Options can be as obvious as the improved transit service offered in Boulder through its
growing Community Transit System of HOP, SKIP, JUMP, LEAP and BOUND buses, to more
innovative ideas such as teleworking or parking cash out. Integration of a number of elements
combined with a strong educational and promotional effort are key to a successful program. A
short list of TDM measures includes;
Transportation Center Walking
Employee Transportation Coordinators Telework
Employee Shuttle Variable Work Hours
Eco Pass Centralized Parking
Neighborhood Eco Pass Parking Cash Out
Transit Passes Parking Pricing
Transit Shelters/Facilities Transportation Allowance
1Zideshazing ,Marketing and Promotion
Vehicle Pools
Bicycling
(Incl. showers, lockers etc)
The TDM measures listed above are briefly described below.
Transportation Center
Provides a lobby where employees, neighbors, patrons and visitors can find assistance and
information on all of their transportation needs. The center could include: an interactive kiosk,
which provides alterriative transportation information, including real-time bus (possibly van or
shuttle) information and schedules, transit maps, schedules, bike/pedestrian maps and a
computerized ridematching board, safe bike storage and could be an outlet for the purchase of
bus passes and tickets and to obtain Eco Passes. The center could also house and administer pool
cars and bikes. As afull-service site, it might also include changing rooms and showers.
Employee Transportation Coordinators
ETCs promote transportation options to coworkers, resolve employee transportation concerns,
sign up employees for, and track the success of programs. ETCs also help design and implement
trip reduction programs. ETCs attend monthly meetings where they are exposed to information
on available transportation options and are offered the opportunity to network with other area
business ETCs on what is working for them. Currently, the city of Boulder has a 10-year old
ETC program that includes 140 organizations, representing 55,000 of the city's 105,740
employees.
Employee Shuttle
Shuttle programs that take employees to various sites in the community and which are sponsored by
larger or multiple organizations have been successfizl and are a good option. NCAR offers a good ,
model of this service. Trip destinations should include major activity centers and the service could
be an on-demand service as well.
Eco Pass
RTD's Business Eco Pass is an unlimited bus pass available to businesses. Employees with an Eco
Pass consider it to be an employee benefit. The cost to the employer currently is $25-$85 per
employee, per yeaz. If an employee were to purchase the pass outside of this program it would cost
about $1000.
The Eco Pass offers holders unlimited use of RTD services (except special services like Rockies
or BroncosRide), including all local and regional buses, the "N" to Eldora Mountain Resort,
skyltide to DIA and Boulder's own Growing Community Transit System of HOP, SKIP, JUMP,
LEAP and BOUND buses known for their quick, convenient and schedule free service all around
town and to and from Lafayette.
The pass also provides the Guazanteed Ride Home program that allows any employee in an
emergency situation, such as a sick child or spouse, to get a free taxi ride to take caze of the
emergency. This program provides transportation "insurance", allowing people the security to leave
their car at home.
Additional Eco Pass concepts similar to the Business Eco Pass aze the Student ValuPass,
Neighborhood Eco (NECO) Pass, CU Student Pass and Business Master Contract Eco Pass (this
pass is currently available in Boulder to businesses in the Central Area General Improvement
District and to members of the Boulder Chamber of Commerce.)
Neighborhood Eco (NECO) Pass
Together with RTD, the city of Boulder has created a model bus pass program for
neighborhoods. Currently 17 neighborhoods and 3,700 neighbors in Boulder have the NECO
pass. The annual cost for this pass is approximately $40 to $100 per household-there is also a
50% discount to first time NECO Pass neighborhoods (discount does not apply to new
development). The pass is valued at $850 to $1,000 if it is purchased outside of this
program.Transit Passes Transit programs such as TransitChek®, authorized by IRS code sectior
132(f), enable employers to allow emp]oyees to set aside a portion of their salary to pay for
transit and vanpool commuting costs. Employees can use Transit Chek regardless of whether
their employer has a parking management program in place. Employees can set aside up to $65
each month ($780 per year) of their gross income before federal (and in some instances, state)
taxes to pay for commuting costs. The benefit amount will rise to $100 each month in January
2002. This is an untaxed benefit. Employers save on payroll taxes as well. So, both employees
and employers save. (This applies to other alternative transportation programs as well.) If an
employer offers cash back benefits in lieu of parking that cash is taxable.
Ridesharing
Ridesharing includes carpool and vanpool programs and can be accomplished in three ways:
Informally through employees and neighbors themselves.
The Denver Regional Council of Governments (DRCOG) offers a free computerized ridematching
service assisting employees and schools in forming both carpools and vanpools. DRCOG's School
Pool program is specifically geazed towazd schools.
Employers or new developments can develop and offer their own ridematching se
Once carpools and vanpools aze formed employers are encouraged to offer free parking for carpool
and vanpool vehicles that is close to the site. Employers may also want to consider offering a gas
subsidy to caz and van poolers.
Vehicle Pool Availabi
For larger organizations and developments offering a vehicle pool during the workday is a great
option to compliment transit and other transportation options. Pool vehicles can be traditional autos
or alternatively fueled vehicles. By having a vehicle pool on site, single occupant vehicle trips and
miles traveled are reduced because employees do not have to drive to work to get to meetings or
take care of other professional and personal business during the workday. Boulder RideShaze group
may be available to administer this type of program.
Bicycling to Work
Cycling and walking can replace the estimated 60% of all vehicle trips that aze between'/~ and 5
miles.
5
To encourage use it is important to connect to and offer easy access to and from neighborhoods,
existing bicycle routes and transit stops. Convenient, safe bicycle parking should be provided on site
for both employees and customers.
Economic incentives are also an option. The IRS pemtits reimbursement of automobile travel for
work related purposes at a rate of about $0.31 per mile. Employees that use their own bikes should
be reimbursed as well. The rate could be set anywhere from $0.10 to $0.31 per mile. Prizes,
vouchers and discounts aze some other popular economic incentives for employees to try
alternatives.
Bicycle lockers and bicycle parking, especially in covered or protected areas have proved effective
as have shower and changing facilities. For short-term bike pazking, it is advantageous for it to be
accessible, protected from the weather, and visible to discourage theft.
Pedestrian Amenities
Pedestrian facilities with easy access to and from neighborhoods, existing pedestrian routes, and
transit stops are vital amenities that offer pedestrian safety and opportunities for employees and
customers to walk to and from businesses. Pedestrian links should be safe, convenient, well lit and
maintained and should offer access to all employee work sites and other activity centers. Pedestrian
facilities include paths, sidewalks, crosswalks, walkways, stairs, ramps, and building entranceways.
Telework
Telework programs have proven to maintain and increase employee productivity while reducing
vehicle miles traveled and peak-hour congestion.
Variable Work Hours
Work hour policies govern the time period in which employees travel to and from work. The
policies influence the volume of employees traveling at a particular time as well as what mode of
travel they choose. Supporting a variable work hour program can influence congestion.
There aze three types of variable work hour programs
. Staggered hours-the employer offers varying start times for employees. This helps to spread
out peak traffic.
. Compressed workweeks-this is the concept of employees working more hours in fewer days.
A common option is the 4/10, where an employee works a 10-hour day over four days. This
accomplishes two goals, employees aze leaving and arriving outside of peak hours and they are
avoiding driving to work altogether one day each week.
. Flextime-allows employees to set their own arrival and departure time within a band of time.
Employees arrive and depart outside of peak travel times. Flextime encourages rideshaze
candidates to coordinate arrival and departures where they previously could not.
Centralized Parking
Centralized pazking facilities, such as those in downtown Boulder, can reduce the total number
of parking spaces needed and increase the amount of development and activity in the area. Since
not all of the development will require parking at the same time of day and new development
Figure 12
Average Impacts of Parking Cash Out on Emp loyee Commuting
Single Occupant Vehicle Commuting 13% decrease
Vehicle Miles Traveled 12% decrease
Carpool Use ~ 9% increase
Public Transit Use 3% increase
Bicycling and Walking 1% increase
Chaneine the Price SienaF-International Council For Locel Environmental Initiatives-2000
will encourage alternative modes, centralized parking can reduce the amount o parkint` g required,
For residential areas, it might be preferable to reduce the minimum parking requirements and
allow more on-street parking, organize a neighborhood Eco Pass program, and encourage
parking to be located behind the residences.
Parking Cash Out and Parking Pricing (eliminating parking subsidies)
Parking Cash Out is the idea of offering employees a cash incentive such as one dollar per day
for using transportation options to get to work. Parking Cash Out allows employers to continue
to provide free pazking while offering employees an incentive not to drive alone to work.
Numerous studies from across the country indicate that parking availability and price directly
influence employees' transportation choices. Average results of parking cash out are shown in
Figure 12, thought parking cash out in azeas rich with transportation choices have shown close to
a 50 percent reduction in SOV commuting. To seriously reduce single occupant vehicle trips
new devetopment/businesses should charge employees for parking. The charge should be a
straight daily rate. It should, however, be charged in such a way that would promote and/or
reward employees that choose alternatives to driving alone. Combined with providing quality
and convenient travel choices, parking management is a positive approach to influencing
transportation "demand." The fees collected for employee parking can be used as a revenue
stream to offset the cost of purchasing and supporting incentive programs such as the Eco Pass
Program or teleworking.
Transportation Allowance
Employees can be offered a set amount of money each month for transportation costs.
Employees decide how to get to work and individually pay for transportation, using this
allowance. If they decide to drive to work alone, they pay for their parking space. The space
should cost more than the offered allowance. The revenue could then go to a transportation
options fund supporting other programs such as Eco Pass, carpooling, vanpooling, teleworking
and an employee transportation coordinator.
Marketing and Promotion of Alternative Modes Programs
To encourage the use of transportation options, programs need to be packaged, marketed and
promoted in the same way that any product or company is packaged, mazketed, promoted and
sold. This could include: printed pieces, transportation fairs, participating in Walk and 13ikeWeek
company challenges, and other promotional events, tours and opportunities.
The Potential Effects of TDM Strategies
While much has been written about the benefits of TDM measures, it is more difficult to
document or predict the effects of a specific TDM measure. This is due to the unique
circumstances of any particular situation and the complex nature of the human behavior that
TDM strategies are trying to affect. The potential effects also vary depending on the mix of
measures, the travel alternatives available and the scale of the TDM application. For example,
while an individual measure might reduce SOV trips by 8 percent, when combined with other
strategies it will likely have a smaller effect as people will have other options to choose from. A
measure applied in an azea rich with transportation choices will have a much greater effect than
in an area with few choices. And while measures applied at an individual work site have shown
almost a 50 percent reduction in vehicle trips', these same measures applied over a larger area
will have a smaller effect due to the increased vaziety of trip types and purposes involved with a
larger area. The expected effect of TDM measures is then not cumulative and depends on scale
and location. To be most effective, the development of a TDM program should strive for a set of
complementary actions that maximize available choices and are consistent with the existing
transportation system.
A recent study prepared for the Regional Transportation Task Force (RTTF) by Charlier
Associates and BRW Inc." looked at the application ofnon-pricing TDM measures on the
119/Longmont Diagonal corridor. This study predicted a 7.6 percent reduction in total trips if an
aggressive TDM plan were adopted for the corridor. TDM elements considered by the study and
their estimated effects are shown in Table 1. The RTTF concluded that increased transit,
.employee TDM, improved urban design and parking management through incentives would be
applicable to Boulder County, and did not support parking disincentives such as parking pricing.
Table 1 Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Strategies
Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Strategies
Strategy Corridor Specific Potential
Trip Reduction Regional Potential Trip
Reduction
Iucreased bus service 0-8% 0-3%
Employee TDM 0-5% 0-2%
Improved urban design 0-IS% 0-6%
Regional Growth
Management Not applicable at corridor
level 0-17% if applied on a
regional basis
Parking Management 0-5% 0-2%
Pricing Measures 0-9% 0-9%
The application of pricing strategies represents a quantitative and qualitative leap in the
effectiveness of TDM measures. Transportation demand is surprisingly elastic, and the
application of even a relatively small charge or subsidy will significantly affect travel choices.
But any additional charges on travel, whether on parking or in the form of something like an
increased gas tax, are notoriously controversial and need to be balanced against a vaziety of other
community goals. The most well documented example of applying pricing is in the area of
parking management. Table 2 shows a summary of the results of the application of parking
pricing classified by the availability of public transportation. Other work by Shoup"'shows a
reduction in SOV mode share of 3 to 22 percent due to the application of pazking cash out at
work sites in Los Angeles. While the 1996 TMP includes TDM strategies for managing and
pricing pazking, to date the Boulder community has relied on incentive based TDM strategies
such as the Eco Pass, marketing and education in influence travel behavior.
Table 2 Demonstrated Effects of Financial Incentives
No. of Incentive Parking
Employees per mo. Demand
Group A: Areas with little or no public transportation
Century City District, West 3500 employees surveyed at 3
500 81 0.15
Los Angleles 100+ £rms ,
i Cornell University Ithaca, 9000 faculty & staff 9,000 34 0.26
INY
San Fernando Valley, Los 1 large employer (850
850
37
0
30
Angles employees) .
i Bellevue, WA 1 medium-sized firm (430 430' S4 D
39
employees) .
~ Weighted Average of 13,780 46.75 0.24
Group
Group B: Areas with fair public transportation
Los Angeles Civic Canter 10000+ employees at several 10,000 125 0.36
organizations
Mid-Wilshire Blvd., Los 1 mid-size firm 430 89 38
0
Angleles .
Washington DC Suburbs 5500 employees at 3 worksi[es 5,500 68 0.26
Downtown Los Angeles 5000 employees surveyed at 5,000 126 O.15 '
118 firms
Weighted Average of
20,930
109.52
0.31
Group
Group C: Areas with good public transportation
University of Washington, .50,000 faculty, staff & 50,000 18 0.24
Seattle Wa students
Downtown Ottowa, Canada 3500+ government staff 3,500 72 0,18
Weighted Average of
53,500
21.53
0.24
Group
Weighted Average Over 3 88
210 46.35 0.26
Groups ,
Other studies have shown the effect of different levels of subsidy to non-drivers. The Alameda
County (East San Francisco Bay area, including suburban and rural areas} Congestion
Management Program enlisted four employers to provide
financial incentives to encourage reduced driving. The table below summazizes the results at the
four work sites. The program managers conclude that financial.
incentives alone typically reduce automobile commute trips by 16-20%, and significantly more if
combined with other TDM strategies.
Table 3 Alameda County Commute Incentive Program
Alameda Albany Oakland Pleasanton
Incentive offered $1.50/day $2.50/day $40/mo transit $2,00/day
pass
Average combined fuel
savings and financial $268/year $381/year $407/year $282/year
benefit
Eligible Employees 573 130 400 380
Participants before 12 (3%) 7 (5%) 11 (3%) 147 (40%)
Participants afrer 108 (19%) 30 (23%) 93 (23%) 130 (34%)
An major report by the Comsis Corporation for the Federal Highway and Transit
Administrations1° provided the following synthesis of the effects of vazious subsidies to transit
users and carpoolers (High Occupant Vehicles- HOV).
Table 4 Percent Vehicle Trips Reduced by Daily Transit Subsidy
Worksite Setting $0.50 $1 $2 $4
Low density suburb, rideshare oriented 0.1 0.2 0.6 1.9
Low density suburb, mode neutral 1.5 3.3 7.9 21.7
Low density suburb, transit oriented 2.0 4.2 9.9 23.2
Activity center, rideshare oriented 1.1 2.4 5.8 16.5
Activity center, mode neutral 3.4 7.3 16.4 38.7
Activity center, transit oriented 5.2 10.9 23.5 49.7
Regional CBD/Corridor, rideshare oriented 2.2 4.7 10.9 28.3
Regional CBD/Corridor, mode neutral 6.2 12.9 26.9 54.3
Regional CBD/Corridor, transit oriented 9.1 18.1 35.5 64.0
Table 5 Percent Vehicle Trips Reduced by Daily HOV Subsidy
Worksite Setting $1 $2 $3 $4
Low density suburb, rideshare oriented 6.5 12.6 20.2 27.6
Low density suburb, mode neutral 2.5 6.1 11.0 17.0
Low density suburb, transit oriented 1.4 3.6 6.8 11.1
Activity center, rideshare oriented 8.4 17.0 24.9 31.4
Activity center, mode neutral 4.1 9.4 15.3 21.3
10
Worksite Setting $7 $2 $3 $4
Activity center, transit oriented 0.5 I.2 2.4 4.3
Regional CBD/Comdor, rideshaze oriented 8.1 14.7 19.6 23.0
Regional CBD/Corridor, mode neutral 3.9 8.1 2.3 15.9
Regional CBD/Corridor, transit oriented 0.5 1.2 2.3 3.8
' Implementing effective Travel Demand Management Measures: Inventory of Measures and Synthesis of
Experience, Comsis Corporation, prepared for the Federal highway Adminstration and Federal Transit
Administration, DOT-T-94-02, September 1993.
"Transportation Demand Management, in Regions( Transportation Task Force Final Repott to the Consortium of
Cities, tune 1998
"' Evaluating The Effects Of Cashing Out Employer-Paid Pazking:Eight Case Studies, Donald C. Shoup, October
1997
'" Comsis, ibid.
11
Transportatiori Master Plan Update
for the Boulder Valley,
City of Boulder
~~" July, 1996
executive summary
implementation plan
tmp update policies
~,
~~ Boulder Transportation Master Plan
executive summary
p. es-7
Introduction
'T'his document provides an overview of the
issues and policies contained in the
Transportation Master Plan Update.
Background: The 1989 TMP
The Transportation Master Plan (TMP) was
adopted by the City of Boulder in 1989,
establishing goals designed to help the
transportation system respond to the
community's values and expectations. These
goals are shown in figure es-1.
The TMP provides the policy basis for how
transportation funding is spent, and what
projects or programs the City focuses on to
provide transportation services for its citizens.
The TMP attempts to reconcile two often
conflicting goals. The first goal is to provide
mobility and access to the Boulder Valley in a
way that is safe and convenient. The second
goal is to preserve what makes Boulder a good
place to live -- its quality of life -- by
minimizing the impacts of auto traffic such as
air pollution, congestion, and noise.
In addition to linking transportation decision
making to community goals, the 1989 TMP also
called for specific new policy directions to help
meet those goals.
figure es-1. 1989 transportation master plan -goals and policies
"the goals are to provide:"
"a transportation system supportive of community goals;
an integrated, multimodal transportation system;
sufficient, timely, and equitable financing mechanisms
for transportation;
public participation and regional coordination in
transportation planning; and,
a transportation system supportive of desired land use
patterns and functional, attractive urban design."
"approach"
"target"
"The Plan establishes
a goal of shifting 15
percent of all rsips
currently made by
single-occupant auto
to other forms of
transportation...•
"The Mty shall first develop incentives that encourage the shift to alternatives
to the single-occupancy automobile. If the goals of the plan are not met, the
City may also develop disincentives to achieve the desired transportation system."
~~~~~ Boulder Transportation Master Plar~
executive summary
The first of these was the recognition of all
modes of travel as important parts of the
transportation system, and the commitment to
completing the bicycle and pedestrian systems
as soon as possible.
The TMP attempts to maintain and improve the
road system but gives preference to completing
the bike and pedestrian network over adding
new roads for the automobile.
The 1989 TMP also targets a reduction in the
share of travel made in the single occupant
vehicle lSOV) and a corresponding increase in
the share of trips made by walking, bicycle,
transit and multi-occupant autos. The amount
of this "mode shift" target in the 1989 TMP is a
15 percent shift in travel mode from the single
occupant auto to other modes by the year 2010.
Recognizing the challenge of this shirt and the
need to provide options to auto use, the TMP
committed to completing other systems and' to
encouraging the shift through a variety of
incentives.
The creation of the Alternative Transportation
Division (GO Boulder), of marketing and
education programs promoting alternative
modes, of programs such as the EcoPass and CU
Pass, and establishing the HOP circulator bus
service are part of the incentive programs
developed by the City.
In addition, more than 80 miles of bike
facilities have been completed including 35
grade-separated underpasses.
Implicit in the goal of a 15 percent mode shift is
the need for changes in travel behavior. This
relatively modest shift was seen as compatible
with the community's values and responsive to
increases in travel demand.
The 1989 TMP also committed to using an
incentive based approach to encourage this
shift, but recognized that the time would come
when other approaches would be needed.
~~~
p. es-Z
Through a variety of successful incentive-based
efforts the community is "on track" to achieving
the mode shift goal, with a mode shift of six
percent between 1990 and 1994. Despite this
success, many Boulder citizens believe traffic
conditions have gotten worse. Traffic was the
number one complain! that emerged from the
Integrated Planning Process (IPP).
Current Trends
Factors in Traffic Growth
The reality is that traffic has, gotten worse,
with more cars traveling more miles on
Boulder's streets despite the success in mode
shift. This results from a variety of Factors
reflected in travel behavior at both the local
and national levels.
'Continued dispersal of land uses, increases in
the number of two income households with
dispersed work locations, increases in the
number of cars and gasoline prices at early
1950's levels in real dollars all contribute to
more and longer trips.
The Boulder-specific trends are shown in figure
es-2 on the next page. The number of trips per
resident is increasing as well as the length of
trips, resulting in a five percent annual increase
in the per capita miles of travel. In Boulder
this trend is compounded by rapid population
growth in the county and Denver region,
resulting in increasing trips into Boulder from
the outside.
Because Boulder maintains its position as a
regional center for retail, tourism and
employment, external traffic is expected to
grow faster than internal traffic.
The result of these forces is that while •tkie ~ ~ :"~~"
mode shift objective of the 1989 TMP is being
achieved, it is being overwhelmed by the
growth in.auto traffic.
Boulder Transportation Master Plan
executive summary
Traffic Forecasting
As part of the technical work for the 1995 TMP
Update, improved forecasting and computer
modeling of future traffic was used to see what
these trends might mean for Boulder's
transportation future.
This modeling was based on the "medium
scenario" of the IPP, reptesenting growth only
in currently annexed lands, as well as a
significant decrease in "build-out" employment
and population from previous plans.
A summary of these results for the year 2020 is
shown in figure es-3 on the next page.
//~
p. es-3
Modeling this scenario indicated that, if
current trends continue, traffic on major
roadways would increase by 50 to 100 percent by
the year 2020. This would create congestion on
60 percent of main streets and increase "spill-
over" traffic through neighborhoods as
frustrated drivers look for other routes. A trip
along Broadway in 2020 during "rush hour"
would take about twice as long as today.
The total number of miles driven in town would
increase by over 60 percent due both to increased
driving by Boulder residents and increased
traffic from additional autos entering town
from the outside. The number of vehicles
entering Boulder from east Boulder County and
Denver is expected to about double.
Boulder Transportation Master Plan
executive summary
p. es-4
figure es-3. 2020,outcomes - no intervention"`
* Scenario A
VMT
9 3.9
3 ~ 25 29
2
1
1990 1994 200D 2020
vdlBOre of vWa~ mlla N Boulder V~By
Traffic
13
800 ~r0
600 517 575
900
200
1990 1994 2000 2020
flnuuM~ of vW W
Y. of lore mlia of IAS F
The 60 percent level of congestion on main
streets in 2020 would compare to about 16
percent today, and will have direct effects on
anyone trying to move around town. For the car,
rush hour congestion in 2020 will exist on the
majority of roads comparable to current rush
hour congestion around 28th and Arapahoe.
Traffic would be "bumper-to-bumper" with low
speeds and several cycles would be required to
get through traffic lights. Additional local
streets would become alternative routes much
like Ninth Street or Balsam have today.
Pedestrians and bicyclists would increasingly
confront heavy traffic and irritated drivers,
making street crossings dangerous and walking
or biking difficult. Increasing congestion would
also lead to demands for additional road
construction, although such construction would
~~~
entail huge costs and the demolition of existing
buildings and homes.
The projection of current trends suggests the
current TMP and its target of a 15 percent mode
shift may not be adequate to meet the
community's long-term goals.
Traffic would continue to increase along with
congestion, impacting the quality of life in
Boulder. Increased demands for road
construction would also be difficult to meet, as
many of the major projects proposed in the
current TMP rely on federal transportation
dollars which are rapidly disappearing.
Road widening and overpass projects also entail
impacts on adjacent neighborhoods as well as
high fiscal and environmental costs that may
be unacceptable.
Boulder Transportation Master Plan
executive summary
Finally, the community has increasingly
expressed concern with traffic issues. Continued
traffic growth conflicts with desires to become
a "sustainable" community. Boulder is
increasingly becoming a "mature" community
where transportation issues are only one of a
wide range of factors that make up the quality
of life in the community.
The 1995 TMP Update
The 1995 TMP Update is a "mid-course
correction" of the 1989 TMP, responding to the
issues discussed above and public concern about
congestion by proposing a new objective of "no
long-term growth in auto traffic over 1994
levels" (technically described as a 0°/a increase
in vehicle miles traveled- VMT).
p. es-5
This objective aims to "keep things from getting
worse" and recognizes that the current goal of a
15 percent shift will result in continuing traffic
increases inconsistent. with discussions about
becoming a sustainable community. This
objective will require a greater shift away from
SOV than the 1989 TMP as shown in figure es-4
and is a greater challenge than the original
objective.
Reaching this objective will require reducing
SOV trips from 44 percent to 25 percent of all
trips by the year 2020 -- a 19 percent mode
shift. This would result in more trips by
ridesharing, walking, biking and transit, or
replaced through telecommunications or land
use changes. Stated another way, the
percentage of daily travel taking place by SOV
would decrease by nearly half by 2020.
figure es-4. reevalution of effort required
lanni horizon-TMPu tlale
50% ........................................................... ...........................................................................
~ planning Mezon -original TMP
Vi
.~
40%
...........................................................
.....................................................
'' '95 TMP Objective
7
~ ~ reduce SOV trips
30% ........................................................... ............................................ from 44%to 25%
(43% reduction over 25 y
G
.b 20% .......................................................... ... .. .................
.......................................
~i
'89 TMP Objective
1994
attu
l
SO°/a e
..........
...............
................
........ .................................. ............................. redUCB SOV trips
from 73°/a to 58°/. (78.59
6'K 1' (21 % reduction over 21 y
base 1969-90
condition I
1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
~ Boulder Transportation Master Plan
executive summary
p. es-6
1995 TMP Update Strategies
Successfully achieving this target will require
a range of strategies and numerous small
changes. The Update recognizes there is no
"silver .bullet" that will solve our
transportation problems or that will work for
everyone. However a number of different
strategies in the areas of growth management,
capital investment, travel demand
management and partnerships can provide the
changes needed.
The collection of strategies adopted in the
Update was modeled in the same way as the
current trends, producing the results shown in
figure es-5. These strategies would result in
traffic levels in 2020 averaging about the same
as in 1994, with some roads experiencing a 10 to
20 percent increase in traffic.
Congestion would increase only slightly, with a
trip along Broadway during rush hour taking
about the same amount of time as today. Local
vehicle trips would decrease while vehicles
coming into Boulder from surrounding areas
would increase by 20 percent. Overall vehicle
traffic would remain about the same as today,
with the expected increase in trips
accommodated by a large increase in walking,
biking, transit, multi-occupant autos, combined
trips or replaced entirely through
telecommunications and land use changes.
The required changes in travel behavior are
shown in figure es-6 (for Boulder residents) and
es-7 (for travelers coming into Boulder from
surrounding communities). Drivers in Boulder
would experience traffic much like today's, but
close to half of today's SOV trips would occur
by other alternatives instead.
figure es-5. 2020 outcomes -with intervention"'
* Scenarios C/D/E
Daily VMT
4
3 2.2 2.5 2S 2.5
2
1
1990 1994 2000 2020
mOliotu
Traffic
B00
600 517 575 575 503
400
200
1990 1999 2000 2020
Congestion
Nts o(hytlrootbon •.wimeday
ton of ouriaJ.tr.winte e.v
40%
30°/
20% 1~, 17% 19% 15%
10°k
1990 1994 2000 2020
x«t... mur x ws t m eowaa
~~~\
Boulder Transportation Master Plan
executive summary
p. es-7
figure es-b. travel patterns required figure es-7. travel patterns required
(residents of Boulder) (residents of neighboring communities)
person trips/day
of trips by SOV*
ioo
so
60
40
20
--- _____
of trips by other modes
100
80
60
40
20
person trips/day
5.0
4.0
3.0
2.0
1.0
of trips by SOV*
ioo
ao
60
40
20
of trips by other modes
100
80
60
40
20
note: the 25% objective described elsewhere in this plan is a combinaiion of resident and
non-resident travel.
//~
Boulder Transportation Master Plan
today 2020
today 2020
today 2020
today 2020
today 2020
today 2020
executive summary
p. es;3
Actions Adopted in the Update
Achieving the transportation future suggested
by the TMP Update requires actions in the
areas of growth management, funding, travel
demand management and partnerships. The
Update adopts a balance of actions in these
areas designed to maximize the contribution of
each compared to the costs.
Other combinations of actions are possible.
However the tradeoffs between the areas are
complex, such that costs of some increment of
change in one cannot necessarily be balanced by
the same change in cost in another. Achieving
the goals of the Update depends on successfully
meeting expectations in each of these areas.
Growth Management
The land use and growth assumptions used in
the Update were selected from a range of
alternatives.
The land use inputs assume no further
annexations to the City and reflect expected
changes in the Comprehensive Plan Land Use
Map and the adopted Commercial Growth
Management ordinance. These changes result in
a reduction of 1,200 households and 7,800
employees from previous plan projections for
the Boulder Valley. The resulting population
and employment increases between 1990 and
2020 for the Boulder Valley are 18 percent and
48 percent, respectively.
The City is also developing urban design
strategies oriented away from the car as part of
its growth management strategies. Achieving
these assumptions is substantially within the
control of the City and is reflected in proposed
and adopted plans and ordinances.
The Update also assumes substantial growth in
the region based on approved county and
regional projections. While recent growth has
been at a rate even higher than the long-range
projections, the trend is expected to slow with
//~
changes in the economic cycle. Regional growth
responds to economic conditions and is largely
outside the control of the City.
Funding
Successfully accommodating expected increases
in tripmaking requires increased investment in
a wide range of facilities. The Update
proposes projects to maintain existing systems,
to improve safety, to improve the efficienc.• of
the street system, and to move to~~xrd
cor^.pieting the bicycle and pedestrian systems.
A major effort o the TMP Update was the
development of a comprehensive inventbry of
the existing systems and an exhaustive
analysis of the needs to complete these systems.
This information was collected through public
input at a number of forums and through a City
analysis of repair and maintenance needs.
The results of this analysis of transportation
investment needs and desires is a potential cost
that greatly exceeds expected revenues. The
estimated cost of the identified transportation
projects including roadway efficiency
improvements, transit improvements and
completion of the bike and pedestrian systems
is about 1.1 billion dollars. During the same
time period, expected revenues for
transportation spending are predicted to be
about $0.7 billion. The Update would deal
with the shortfall of $390 million with an
investment program that limits expenditures to
forecast revenues for the first six years.
The Update further notes a clear need to find
additional funds or to eliminate items from the
investment program after the first six years.
The large unfunded amount contains some
identified maintenance needs that remain
unfunded past the first six years. The Update's
investment program needed to accommodate
expected increased trip making depends on
finding the needed $390 million to build the
planned facilities. Success in funding the
program will require political acceptance of
raising new revenues for transportation versus
other community needs.
Boulder Transportation Master Plan
executive summary
p. es-9
Travel Demand Management
Investment programs are aimed at meeting the
demand for travel by increasing the cu__ oolT of
travel capacity. Demand management
programs are aimed at affecting slem3nd.
While demand management programs can
encompass many different strategies, they all
aim to shift travel demand away from
congested facilities and travel times. Demand
management includes efforts to shift the time of
travel, the mode of travel, the travel route, or
to avoid the trip altogether. Such shifting
results in more efficient use of the existing
transportation system, as most roadways are
congested only during the "rush hour" periods.
New programs under demand management
effectively create capacity on the roadway
network by encouraging these shifts.
The 1989 TMP focused on incentive programs,
providing low cost access to transit through
programs like the Eco Pass and CU Student
Pass, and encouraging bike and pedestrian
travel through education, marketing and
activities like Bike Week.
However, the TMP Update indicates that, to
achieve the more aggressive mode shift of 19
percent, demand management programs will
have to go beyond incentives and begin reducing
the existing subsidy to single occupant
automobile travel. Doing so recognizes the
market reality that underpriced goods will
tend to beover-consumed by users.
The Update identifies a short list of both
incentive and disincentive measures that will
continue to move the City toward its mode shift
goals over the next two years. These include
the incentive strategies of:
expanding the Eco Pass program;
improving the pedestrian network; and,
completion of the bike system.
as well as the disincentive strategies of:
public and private parking pricing;
employee parking "cash-out" where the
cash benefits of previously free parking
are provided to employees to spend as
they wish including for parking;
private parking supply limits.
The suggested strategies would achieve a mode
shift of up to six percent away from SOV travel
over the next five years. Short-term
disincentive strategies would increase the cost
of parking a moderate amount but provide cash
back to those who do not use existing parking.
How parking strategies would be applied still
needs to be developed, taking into account
concerns about equity and impacts on the
downtown. Other measures will be explored
and their appropriateness for Boulder
determined through the Congestion Relief
Study.
Partnerships
The Update recognizes that a variety of
creative partnerships are available with other
organizations in the community, at the
neighborhood level, in the County and in the
region. Such partnerships will be necessary to
achieve success in growth management,
transportation funding and travel demand
management.
Partnerships will also increase political
support, will apply additional resources and
creative energies to addressing transportation
issues, and are necessary to affect those areas
over which the City does not have any control.
Key opportunities include building on existing
partnerships with:
University of Colorado (e.g., CU Student
Pass and HOP);
~ Boulder Transportation Master Plan
executive summary
p. es-10
Boulder Valley School District (e.g.,
testing student passes); ,
the business community through
activities such as Bike Week and the
ECO Pass program; and,
other communities through cooperative
efforts such as the US 36 Corridor Study
and the Congestion Relief Study.
The potential of these efforts is unknown.
Many are just getting started, but such efforts
are vitally important, particularly on the
regional scale if Boulder remains an attractor
for retail, employment and entertainment
activities.
Integrating All Modes of Travel
After addressing the priorities of maintenance
and travel safety, the TMP Update Focuses
transportation investments in six east-west and
four north-south transportation corridors.
This approach recognizes that all travel modes
must share the street system, and proposes that
all protects developed in these corridors should
benefit all modes of travel. A project could not
be built that would negatively affect one or
more modes unless the impacts were properly
mitigated.
The emphasis on all modes also recognizes the
high cost and community and environmental
impacts that result from any roadway
expansion in Boulder. Expected increases in
travel demand in these corridors would be
accommodated through a combination of
improvements to all modes of travel. The
strategy of investing in all modes results in
changes to a number of road projects that were
included in the 1989 TMP. Principal among
those are previously-planned interchanges
along Foothills Parkway and the Pearl
Parkway extension. These are no longer
anticipated to be built within the time Frame of
the Update (2020).
//~
Transportation forecasting as part of the TMP
Update shows that while new Foothills
interchanges would improve traffic conditions
on Foothills itself, this would be negated by
increased congestion at the southern end and at
all crossing streets. The forecasting suggests the
net result of spending a large amount of money
on these interchanges would lead to net delays
for citizens over today's levels. These
interchanges would serve "pass through"
traffic while increasing congestion in the
surrounding neighborhoods.
The forecasting also shows there would not be
enough travel between Gunbarrel and
Downtown (under Update forecast assumptions)
to warrant investment in the extension of Pearl
Parkway given the funding shortfall.
Improvements to the existing roadway and in
other modes along this corridor will
accommodate the expected traffic.
Assumptions and Risks
Success in achieving the goals of the TMP
Update lies in meeting the expectations
outlined for each of the action areas. The City
has a degree of control in each of these areas
ranging from high in terms of growth
management within Boulder Valley to low in
the areas of demand management, regional
growth management and partnerships.
The degree to which the Update achieves the
necessary actions will be dependent on
community agreement that transportation
issues are pressing and that the Update
presents the right balance of actions to meet
these issues. Not achieving the goals of the
Update will involve a different set of risks and
tradeoffs for the community.
Risks Associated with the TMP l.ipdate Plan
There are significant risks involved in
accomplishing the "no growth in traffic" goal
of the Update.
Boulder Transportation Master Plan
executive summary
These include:
(1)
(2)
(3)
The City has little influence in the
growth policies of other jurisdictions in
the County and the region.
Completing the bike, pedestrian and
transit systems necessary to provide
alternatives to the auto, as well as to
maintain and make more efficient the
street system in town, requires significant
additional funding of $390 million over
the next 25 years.
The plan assumes Boulder residents and
employees will change their travel
habits by increasing use of other modes
and reducing use of the single occupant
auto, either voluntarily or through
demand management measures
Some amount of this change can be
accommodated by replacing trips through
telecommunications and land use changes.
Most of the change must occur by shifting
travel from SOV to ridesharing, walking,
biking or transit. For every 10 single
occupant auto trips made today, 4 trips
would be eliminated by such strategies.
Risks Associated With Not taking Action
There are also risks to the community
associated with not intervening in
transportation trends, either as proposed in the
TMP update or in some other manner.
These risks include:
(1)
(2)
Continued traffic growth could occur,
causing substantially increased congestion
- more than three times today's levels.
The community could be unwilling to
accept major roadway projects to reduce
congestion because of negative neighbor-
hood and environmental impacts.
p. es-11
(3) It could be difficult or impossible to raise
the large amount of funds needed to
finance major roadway projects.
(4) Quality of life for Boulder residents could
decline due to increased congestion and
increased impacts of automobile traffic.
The citizens of Boulder have a history of
investing in their future to assure the
community's quality of life. The TMP Update
concludes that similar actions and investments
will be needed to meet transportation goals.
Policies and Implementation
On the following pages, the immediate
implementation program and the policies
resulting from this TMP Update are
summarized. These replace the policies
adopted in the 1989 TMP.
Overall, this TMP Update seeks to establish a
balanced transportation system in Boulder
Valley. A balanced system will be
characterized by the following conditions:
• anyone about to make a trip will normally
have a choice of more than one possible
means, or mode, of travel;
• the shared public space contained in the
right-of-way of the City's streets network
will be designed, maintained and managed
so as to accommodate safe and convenient
travel by all modes;
• the objectives of both mobility and access
will be addressed so that property values
and quality of life are balanced with the
need for efficient travel; and,
• the needs of today are balanced with the
needs of future generations so that the
City's transportation system is sustainable
over the long term.
i~/~ Boulder Transportation Master Plan
executive summary
p. es-12
figure es-7.
implementation plan
Investment policies
The TMP Update prioritizes transportation needs within the limited funding available to the City. The highest
priority investments are those winch contribute to maintaining the existing system and to increasmg safety. The
lowest priority will be additions to roadway capacity Eor motor vehicles. These priorities will be applied over
the next five years "
highest priority:
next priority:
next lowest priority:
highest priority:
Two-year acti:m initiative
!n addition to the investment policies, there are number of programs and policies in the TMP Update which
represent high priority actions which will be undertaken over the next two years. These include the seven items:
(1) Provide an on-going funding solution for the HOP.
(2) Initiate the SIQP and establish long-term funding commitments.
(3) Establish a school bus pass program that would provide all middle school and high school
students with a "youth ECO Pass."
(4) Initiate an expanded education and enforcement program focused on behavior that endangers
other system users.
S51 Partici~ppate actively in the Consortium of Cities regional transportation initiatives, including the
Kegiona] Transportation Corridors" study.
(6) Develop and implement a "mini-grant" proggmm to support neighborhood groups and other entities
in their efforts to reduce single-occupant-vehicle travel.
(~ Parking pricing should be pursued as an important component of the Demand Management
Program during the Two-year Action Initiative. This should include, but not be limned to,
charging for parking at City facilities and increasing current parking rates white pursuing equity
between commercial areas.
"Note: Within each priority level, all categories are equal.
~~~~ Boulder Transportation Master Plan
executive summary p. es•13
financial plan policies
The Ci[y shell 91ve nen-au[o craneporca[1on sodas lnereuad fundlnp priori cy Sn order to mcourapa [he shift
trom sinAla-occupancy aucomobl3ae to slearnse• modae. (1989 TMP)
Ths atnat nsMOrk s1uL M Ma primary Mfmbuemn for W mocha and ahW ba mwgad and apndad ao u m ba4nn drr ur of pubU<apsn among
W mopes.
The City shall genenlty Hire priority m trwporbtlm inveememb n mllowa•:
> highest pdarky • ayatem pnrmMm aM Invel u(ety
nee priority •tnnsit funtkmal npacky; (urruimal af(icienry, pedwtrim sYebm cmmactivily and funatimai opacity; end, birycle ryalem
cormectivity and (unctlmal upatity
next Iowa! pdadty quality o(Uh
Iowa! priority mm (rmcbmal opatiry
Invaatmenb M all otegodr ehdl ba made any U Me mllawmg obieetfres an met rwdwq eyetam mveamrmb shall be made b a mamrer Mat
praervaa or impmvea Ma lave) of urvlu of nmrum mode; Ind, Me Ciry ahW nn make hnpnvemmq ro fhe smtl naMOrk which inertua maaway
capuity far mm cinubkon at the apenee of nmrum modes.
The City a1vU develop and mwge ib atnet network m a marrrrer tlut bran boner utiliratim of Ma ax4tfng ayatem over ayslam apaiuion.
The highest priority for fnvrlmmb M funmimal npaNry ah W M mWfimodai mrtidon which M<luda dwignaud blka primary mutt and transit wN:
muba.
The following polkir should bs gmanky mllowed~
Needs <mled by new devalopmmt (•gnwM needs') eh.ll be paid for by vw doulapmen[ Ravenuaa derived tram Me enrupomtian atke bx and
from Ixal and general fmpmvemmt d4bicb an appmprbb for this ubgory of ezpendimns. Tnrult ar erwponatim W WMu mq be used m carve boM
new and aialb:g davelopmen[.
"GmwM"needs shall fnNude all modes. The bu4 mr utimating the amount a(fnrespaNHm needs auoriated wkh development pm)eeb eluU be Me
fW 1 range of pedrtrim, biryAe, tnruk m6 moor whlele med.
•GnwM" needs shall Mclude man Mm caplbl crab. In the futwe, the Cky wUl p4tt Mtnwd nkmn m spending senteglea tlut include demmd
mane Rement programs and tnmil operations. A portion of Meu needs art dirtatly aMdbWable m gmwM and shoWd be funded acmnlengly. The
amount of gmwM rtaporulbkity should be based on • 2fryear arvrwlvatim of recurring crab converbg 1o a one•10w payment, bin maybe colleebd m
an ongoing or amrwl bas4.
Nan•growM needs, inNuding nude due to inrnawd <rtvd by ezbting nafdan4 and bwinwas, shall be paid for Mrnrgh City-wide fudding. N
genanl, the Trmaportakm rend and able and fedenl monies an appnpdak far M4 cabgory of apendinarts. Such foredo shW not pay far gnwN
recede, except as needed to pry crtdib agabut development hr ar exc4e taxu wanaed against new develapmen5
The City may spend cute or fedenl funds on •gmwM needs" only if these (uncle are not avakabb for other pmjesb and their me dot nee affect Me
finding of `non gnwM" pmje<b, orb provide advanttd funding, subjeetm Wtimab nimbunemmt from grtwM•n4bd ensnare,
' Nae that within each priority level, ail categories are given equal priordy.
roadway infrastructure policies
In order ca protect prevloua invae[mmce and anaure of tl <f enc use of cha road eyeum, the Clcy aha11 Alva
high priorley to ongolna malncanance and cranaporce[SOn system maneAeman[ Improvements Eor exieclnp road
fact llclee. 11989 TMP)
Tree Chy shall strive to maintain m atteplable level a(mrvitt on rotla (1989 TMP) wIM the objegwe Net no more thin TAX m roadways wW trod: level of
service F.
The Ciy shall develop and mwge ib sheet network N • mover Mat pons nUmn m Behar utllvatim of Me a4Mng eysbm before apandMg Mal
syanm.
The inns! network shall be Me primary infraatmtmre for ail mode and shall be managed and expanded ao w m ba4nce Ms we of publk spatt among
all modes.
With tapnt to sertetr, Me C{ry shall sire pdariry m invaetmmtr ae mkaws•r
Ill highrl.pdority • syalem pnwrvatim and lnvei w(ety
I9 not priority • !recut! (unNonal opaciry; (unMluul effiekncy; pedrtrim eyaum connaclivlty and funttiwl upatlty; end, bicycle rysbm
mrmectiviry and funRiorul upacky.
U) next faweet priority-quallry ofah
N) lowest priority frmctlorbl opacity
NrsaMmb ht fun<timal effibmry and (urtctiarul opacity shall be made aNy U Me following abjattlve 4 mee maMray Mvntmmb ehW be made M a
warmer Wt pnwrvr or impmvr W level of wrvin of non•aum modes; Me Clty shall nol make improvemeMa m Me mnM neMark which inrnue
wdway npaciry far aum eku4t/on at the eaprw of Me upriry aretfxieruy of non+WO modes.
The highet priority mr mvagmmb m (wnlmal efftcimry and tsmAional upeiy shall b Mow strew wWeh include drigrrmad bIW prhsary rrmW
and tnruk bunk routes (mWtimodd nrridon).
• Note Mat w1Mm oth prlmlty keel, all otegorlr an given equal priority.
~~~~ Boulder Transportation Master Plan
Ducontinuitiea oared by plueyy of brge pnjwb wi8 not be allowed to otcor. Sldewallu rvgWrM b cmme[tim wtM daelopment pmlecb slu8 be
built N the fins phase along the mtirt property involr+d fn development review, unbaa eorutnctien arlivitiea planned in Ne near fuhrc wouM
squirt Met Mne sidewalW be tlemolbhed.
When Merc an exbting. but belowabnd+rd, pedestrian ryebma, Me City will eneBtae and +pmd Ne pnttu of upgrading Them by making +vdbble
a modest grant pmgnm for cast paMcipatian b the needed ®pmr+mmb whh adjnmt lend owner.
The City w W unden+ke a complab review of ib aidewa8c abndaNa The mbw wi8 addnu Mo quadona:
• art the nendarda erusenllY N use appnpriate7
• art Me enndards impond b dsvelopmml +pprovn rnr+bbnt wiM Lnguage in City onihrenneT
The City w81 work to complete the rewHt of all pedmteian hAltlee to ADA wMaNa u it Impkmmb M< 1993 Sidewalk Pcognm.
N commercial +rc+e, the Clty will rcgWrt Imd ownan to bu8d aidew+IW M arrordenn whh adapbd abndardr.
In naidentbl areas, the City wBl identify allematrve maw of merting d+finad nnda. If M<nud un be met nhly wWehr the traveled way of + low-
volume, law•apttd Iocal street, Men aidewaike w W not be developed. If Me read arms be met ufely wihin Me env+led way, the ndewalka wi8 be
built attarding to Me lA/SO ant pnidP+tian formW+wlM adjacent bred awn+n.
The City w81 ieentffy a short Iue of high-priority mbrbtg Iir<W end rnne uprtbl program h addreu Mem.
The City will identify a 8e1 of faastble, low•roat pedeatrbn uhry improvement pmjetb which waWd rem be difficolt b Implement.
The City wi8 conduct en invenmry of un patW and dotumenl which coos appear /o provide nttded eonneetrvhy or continuity.
The Clty wi8 underbke a demanetn<ion pmgnm to determine Me tan and feuibllity of providing mow rcmovJ and Weening of lnnett atnss '
facililin.
The City wi8 work n improve pedeetdan +ccees fo publc travail hops
The City w81 adopt a eyabm of wamnb m guide duisioro-maldng about pedntrim crowing lnatmenb. However, Ne City wel aW work to rcbfone
public undenbnding of Me low cmceming pedeetrien dghb•o(•wey.
The City'[ traruponatian ewff w81 work wiM Me Po8<e Depanment to develop mutually rompetible po8ciee which wi8 be rt8ehd b Ne Public Safery
Master Plan.
transit policies
The City wi8 work to intttmenta8y improve and incnue Me level of BauldeYa local Inruil eervltt by building on Me cottns of brgahd programs
such +a Me HOP.
The City w811oak (or oppoeNnities b serorc funding !or rontmwtlan of Me HOP
The City w81 seek • memo of ineroducbB one similar, brgahd mnsit nrviee b + NoNr•SouM Corridor (Me 'Skip') end +natlter W m Ean•Wot
Corridor IMe"lump'~.
The City wi8 develop lattl trunk Mfgh frtquanry) a<rvice N • Iimiled number of key rorddon, inhoduring timed tnro(en, and b:plemmtbrg +n
expanded transit Wannalion eyelem.
The City wi8 work wiM RTD, BoWder County and other airy govemmenb to provide birycle lockers or nmre, covered birycle parking at all tnmi!
centers and park and Aide fat8fties within Me region The City w81 work to pnvide Benue birycle parkin6 at tnrmit sbq .
The City w81 work wfM ATD la <ruun ihaf all BoWder trarui! routes ac[ommad+b bikes on buses by early 1996,
The City will work <o improve travail acnea Mrough + vadaty of aplbl baprovemmb inciudmg neighbadtoad tr+n+it cmhn.
The City wW Work to improve rcgimd nrvin, npeebBY between Boulder and W abbr thin M BoWder County.
The City wW work to brmau +erviar in Na US 96 corridor balwean Boulder and DenverwlM amphasb m Me commme inb Boulder.
The CBy w81 continue to work with RTD to expend Me eadsbng qu pngnme (ECD flsy CU Pax, BVSD Pus) and develop new +pplintloru of Me
getup pm ronnpt m break down Me barren b lrwit we arW bvaman demand.
The Cirv wi8 work to phan b vehicle Heet imprarmema which include Me me of clam bumbry appropri+hly aleed rahielaa.
/~~~
Boulder Transportation Master Plan
executive summary
bicycle policy statements -summary
p. es-15
The City will separate pedestrian end bicycle treval on multi-use pech fae111c1as wherever passible
through the use of pech merkl n0. clpna or mnecruccl on of eeparece fecal tea ae. 11989 TMP)
Tha Clcy will ensure the[ all acraew aie made sate end ecceae lble ca bl cyc lea end will cone ider bi cy<le
needs 1n ell road proJac~~. 11989 TMP)
The City wtll develop a cmtinuaw bieyde system thrmyh Me duigrutim of • ayelem of PNmary and Seeondery Conidon
The City wW ecevelY work ro rompitb Me mmdor neMOrk Mrough a combhution a/ CIP fundvrg. (adml fundvrg, street pmjecta end
oppanunitlee whlth arise tlrrodgh Me development and tedevelopmmt proem.
Th<City will coordirub whh Boulder County, the UNvenky of Cmlondo, M<Bwlder Urbm Rmewel AuthoNty (RURA), ndghboMood plow, City
ParW end Rernatian Daperlmanh Me Open Spen Deparbnmt and oMer gwerrmtml mtltiea end pkne to croon tlbl alt Ciry and Cmmry pmjeen
conneN with and/or help ro mmpbb Ne corridor network.
The City wIB un Me pnkrnd abndard for bicycle lane wldM whenever pouRle for new eowwetimt The Ciry wi8 we mad roneW Nion
project ee oppomutidrc to upgnde ezblbrg biryN< Imes to meet the new prchrnd NmdeMa.
Tha City wiR work with pmpeNy amen, developers, Ne BI1fU, Me Boulder VaBry School D4biN BVSDI, Ne PuW end Rernatian DepaNmmt
and Me University of Colondo to ewun Mat eommendal, public, mired use and muhi•rmk midmtbl Nha prorlde dinN, ufe and ronveNmt
intemel biryele Nmdelion oriented alrn6 the lure of sigh! from Memel tmmettimu ro ercu nnr buRdirrg mtvnrce and oMer oneib delirutiow.
The Clty wIB combbr< eduutim end aNortemmt efkro b help Wtie ufe and rourteow uN of Me ehand public medwry.
The City w81 collabonle wiM Me Bmadar Valley School DutriN (6VSD1, Me UNvenity of Calonda, and pnvale and public delving eehoo4 ro
terser educate eNdenb on how ro properly eherc the read with bityclub, patleatriew end users of tlaneib.
The City will develop • strong •SMrt Me Road" pub4e eduudm tempeign to loafer inrnewd twrrcey and mpeN among dl modes.
The City wiR work wIM HaW der County, Me Denver Regiowi ComrcB of Govemmenb (DRCOG), and other Nty goverrrmenb to ewurc Met bicycle
facilities ar adequme eheulden en included M all mad cowtwdim project.
The City wIR work with R7D, Boulder County and other city gavemmenb ro provide biryele lockers ar emurt, cav<rcd biryte parking et dl tnmit
«nron and park'n' Ride hci0ties within Me rtgion.
The Ciry wBI work with R7D ro croon Mat aR Bouder trentlt rputea accouurndale bike on bush by 1996
~~^ Boulder Transportation Master Plan
g 7 R
~ ~i~ '~ d ] .ne~ 91rd i ~i's~)G. '~RR7RERR ~ ~~ ~~~ - ~~ r
CmN" ~ ,' KI , i
'prd - ~ ~ ~~F`3TF~~~r~-, ~ ~~ ~ ".-„-.i~ / ~'~i ~ ia~ ~Rnv_ +..,_.. A ,~ _ i ~;~-a_--~~.~._~=
Inp~w~ ~_ "`j1 ^1 i ~ ... ~ -._'c ~~ij '~~i C 'tl' :--~ ,~ ~' ~ ~~ i _ .. ..
\~-•~~~ ~ - ~1 .. - ~. j is ~~ ~s~~ I
1
1 ~ A ~
~~~1 °°NN°° 3i ~'~~~~ ~"1 T ) 1 ~ 1 i
_ ___
~ _ S ~ c / J /
~ ~ (~ £ ~ m
/ ~~ ~ J , , msux r ~ ; m
_~ . ~ n
'~-~. ~/ Yi / /~
~ ! ~~~.,~ ~, ~ it \~~.
Rv~eF ~~
i ~~? Muldmodal Corridor
- 3 ° _ .. _. ~ _ .. _
atia - ~3` - Transit Corridor High Frequency -
i ,_ .._ r.: , ,...
° ~ Bicycle Corridor -
Parks -
4'
E`do<ad° 5409