Loading...
5 - Transportation Master Plan (TMP) Progress Report CITY OFBOULDER TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY BOARD AGENDA ITEM MEETING DATE: September 14, 2009 AGENDA TITLE: Transportation Report on Progress - Outline and Discussion PRE SENTER/S: Tracy Winfree, Director of Public Works for Transportation Michael Gardner-Sweeney, Transportation Planning and Operations Coordinator Martha Roskowski, GO Boulder Program Manager Randall Rutsch, Senior Transportation Planner PURPOSE: Staff is planning a "report on progress" on transportation. Boulder is widely recognized as a leader in innovative transportation policy and implementation. The report will trace the origins of the shift to a multimodal approach, offer insights into the lessons learned, provide a snapshot of where we are today, and outline our future challenges. Readers of this document will include City Council, community members interested in transportation, and those looking to Boulder for ideas and inspiration on transforming their own communities. The city's original TMP (Transportation Master Plan) Update was adopted in October 1989, about 20 years ago. Following the 1996 TMP Update, an annual report was produced through 2001 to monitor the effects of transportation policy and document results. These reports were suspended during the update process for the 2003 TMP as that process started with a comprehensive review of progress since 1990. The first phase of the 2003 TMP Update reaffirmed the city's transportation policy direction. There have been several reaffirmations of the TMP's policy foundation through the FasTracks Local Optimization, Climate Action Plan and 2008 TMP Update processes. Staff believes that a reconstituted progress report should reflect the city's well established transportation policy and be reoriented to appeal to a broader audience. This report on progress will reflect the current plan and be much more graphical and user friendly than the previous reports. The report would recount the last 20 years of history as well as provide a snapshot of today's condition and a look toward the future. An initial proposal for this report is discussed below and a draft outline is attached. Staff is requesting TAB to provide their thoughts on this direction and suggestions on the themes, objectives and content of the report. BACKGROUND: The 1996 TMP, as the first update of the Transportation Master Plan, contained a number of policies and objectives that set the city on a new course of managing long-term growth in vehicle traffic. As there was significant concern about the likely success of the plan, it contained "Section 1.5 Assumptions and Risks." This section discussed the challenges in AGENDA ITEM # 5 PAGE 1 pursuing this policy direction and made the commitment to monitor the results of these efforts. The plan states: "The results of these efforts as well as other indicators should be assembled in to an annual report on progress toward the City's transportation goals, that would be presented as part of the annual amendment process." p. 1-9 Annual reports were published from 1987 to 2001 while the amendment process was only used formally once in this time frame. A revised amendment process was approved by Council in May 2006. During most of the time that these reports were produced, there continued to be significant controversy on the TAB around the fundamental policy direction of the plan and numerous challenges to the validity of city transportation data and surveys. As a result of this level of concern, previous reports were focused on providing a great deal of data and were structured into three chapters: • Chapter 1- an introduction and background discussion, prepared by Transportation staff • Chapter 2- the compilation and presentation of the data from the city's surveys and traffic counts, prepared by staff in the city's Audit and Evaluation Division without Transportation staff • Chapter 3- a discussion of the work efforts of Transportation, changing conditions and conclusions from the data, prepared by Transportation staff. The 2001 report was 66 pages and its Table of Contents is included as Attachment A. The 2001 Annual Report on Progress can also be found on the Web at: http://www.bouldercolorado.gov/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=467&Itemid =165 79ANNUAL . PROPOSED REPORT ON PROGRESS While the previous annual reports provided an unbiased compilation and reporting of the transportation data collected by the city, the format did not encourage a wide distribution or reading by many people. Also, while it was presented to City Council, there was little indication that many Council members read it or actively used its contents. The adoption of the 2003 TMP both confirmed support for the policy direction of the plan and established a new framework for presenting transportation information. Furthermore, through FLO, CAP and the most recent update to the TMP in 2008, the city's transportation policy direction has been reaffirmed. Given the history of the city's policy foundation and the need to provide a progress report to the community, the staff suggests that the next "Report on Progress" contain the following initial themes and objectives: Overall Theme: Providing Transportation Choice in Boulder • We are building on a successful history. • Broadway and 28tf' Street are ongoing expressions of this policy direction. • We use funds wisely to protect our existing system and leverage local dollars. • Our transportation investments contribute to Economic Vitality and Environmental Sustainability. AGENDA ITEM # 5 PAGE 2 • Our transportation choices can help build community. Overall Objective: Present Transportation policy, progress and challenges in an interesting and accessible format • Provide insights into how we got here. • Provide measures for what we want. • Make measures meaningful and real to the average person. • Highlight accomplishments. • Describe current challenges clearly. • Use photos and a highly graphical format. • Layout similar to the TMP. • Six to 12 pages total length. Staff has reviewed a number of annual reports that have been produced both locally and nationally for ideas on content and layout. A design consultant will contribute to the layout of the report with the majority of the work, data and text being provided by staff. A draft outline of the proposed report is contained in Attachment B. As part of this effort, staff is also proposing to ask community members involved with transportation in Boulder to provide their memories. Since the report A History of Boulder's Transportation 1858-1984 was prepared by Phyllis Smith in 1984, much has changed in Boulder and with Boulder transportation policy. While many of these changes have been difficult and hotly debated, others were significant innovations and breakthroughs with strong community support. Consequently, we propose asking these participants to share stories about this evolution. Participants would be asked to describe: • What was your role in the adoption and/or implementation of Boulder's Transportation Master Plan? • What was significant about the passage of the TMP in 1989 and the subsequent updates? • What changes have you seen in the Boulder community as a result of the TMP • What works, what doesn't? • Please tell a story about something that happened during the adoption or implementation of the TMP. Feel free to tell more than one story: o What was the situation and what happened? o When did this happen? o Who was involved and what were their perspectives? o Why was this important or a pivotal moment? o What are your reflections and opinions of the event? • What are Boulder's biggest transportation challenges today and in the future? These writings will be collected and published in a digital compendium and portions of these essays may be used in the report on progress. In addition, documentation was gathered during the 2003 TMP Update, which was used to create a presentation called "Transportation in Boulder: Yesterday, Today, Tomorrow." Staff will draw upon those materials to supplement what is gathered from community members. AGENDA ITEM # 5 PAGE 3 Staff would also ask the TAB to consider hosting an event to celebrate these efforts where selected authors are invited to present and be part of a community discussion on Transportation in Boulder. A list of potential community members who would be asked for their reflections is included in Attachment C. TAB ACTION REQUESTED: The TAB is asked to provide their response to this description, suggestions on the themes, objectives and content of the report, and thoughts on the desired audiences for this report. TAB is also asked for feedback on the concept of collecting community reflections and the Board's willingness to host the community discussion. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff believes that the proposed content and style of the new report will be more readable and interesting to a variety of audiences, including City Council. Staff recommends proceeding with a report on progress based on the concept and outline as modified by the TAB. NEXT STEPS Staff expects to produce this report in the revised format by the end of 2009. It will be designed as a pdf to be posted on the web as well as printed. In 2010, staff will explore possibilities for implementing this information (and perhaps additional maps, data and information) in more interactive formats on the web. Attachment A. Table of Contents from the 2001 Transportation Annual Report on Progress B. Suggested outline for the new Transportation Report on Progress C. Potential community members asked for reflections on TMP 20-year retrospective AGENDA ITEM # 5 PAGE 4 Attachment A Table of Contents Preface 1 Chapter 1. Introduction and Background 2 B. The 1996 TM P 3 i. Direction of the TMP 3 ii. The TMP Commitment to Evaluation 3 C. The Changing Context of Transportation 4 i. National Policy 4 ii. Changing Conditions 5 iii. General Indicators 8 D. Challenges in Transportation 10 i. Rsks identified in pursuing the TMP 10 (1) Regional growth 10 (2) Financial shortfall 11 (3) Behavioral change 11 ii. Rsks identified in not pursuing the TMP 11 (1) Continued traffic growth and increased congestion 12 (2) Refusal of the community to accept the impacts of capacity projects 12 (3) Inability to finance major roadway projects 12 (4) Quality of life decline due to increased congestion and traffic impacts 13 Chapter 2. Transportation Metrics Report 14 A. Summary 14 i. To keep vehicle miles traveled in Boulder Valley at 1994 levels: 14 ii. Feduce SOV travel to 25 percent of trips: 15 iii. No more than 20 percent of roadways congested (at Level of Service . 17 iv. Continually reduce mobile source emissions of air pollutants 17 B. Introduction 18 C. Data Sources 18 D. Understanding the Data 19 E Summary of Findings 20 F. Background: Growth and Economy in the Boulder region 21 G. Transportation Indicators 24 H. Vehicle Use and Miles Traveled 26 i. Vehicle Use ................................................26 ii. Vehicle Miles Traveled 27 iii. Automobile Infrastructure 28 iv. Congestion ................................................29 v. SOV Travel 32 vi. Alternative Modes 34 (1) Transit ..............................................35 (2) Transportation Demand Management 37 i (a) Bicycling .....................................38 (b) Walking ......................................39 (c) Bicycling and Walking 40 (d) Carpooling ...................................42 (e) Telecommuting and Non-travel trips 43 (4) Downtown Travel Demand Management 43 vii. Pollution ..................................................46 viii. Safety ....................................................47 ix. Transportation Funding 49 Chapter 3. Transportation Division Work Efforts and Conclusions 50 A. Objectives: 51 B. Transportation Work Efforts 51 i. Community Transit 51 ii. Community Pass Program 52 iii. Fbgional Connections 52 iv. Travel Demand Management 52 v. Transportation Policy and Finance 53 vi. Partnerships ..................................................53 vii. Pedestrian ....................................................53 viii. Bicycle 54 ix. Fbadway .....................................................55 x. Mitigation ....................................................56 C. Financial Accounting/ Tracking 56 D. Conclusions ......................................................56 Appendix I: Data for Figures where numbers are not displayed 60 Appendix II: Inferences Cited 62 Appendix III: Transportation Expenditure Graphs 64 Appendix N: Transportation Financial Comparison 66 ii Attachment B 2009 Transportation Report on Progress 1. Introduction A. Purpose of the report B. Relationship to TMP C. Basic city facts as an insert box II. Accomplishments A. Awards and Recognitions (in side box) B. Recent work efforts C. Citizen quotes or complements D. "Report Card" facts as inserts throughout the report 111.20 years of Boulder Transportation under the TMP A. Milestones by decade: first Greenways, first major underpass, first high frequency transit, first "Eco Pass" program, first regional partnerships, travel into Boulder on US 36 outpaces travel out of Boulder, (Many people currently in town don't remember Boulder before these things and need to know that these are a direct result of the city's transportation policy direction) B. Key measures of progress (VMT saved graph, corridor travel times, the Broadway pipe, C. Basic Transportation facts as insert box D. Selected quotes from participant's histories IV. Highlights to the Present A. Progress in implementing the TMP 1. Broadway and 28th Street Project Profiles as examples of Complete Streets a) Resulting private sector investment- Econ. vitality 2. Programs- Activities to make a maturing system safer and better a) Safe routes to school and pedestrian demonstrations b) Good Stewardship of the Existing System c) Maintenance and operations highlights d) Travel time savings from signal timing B. Leveraging of Local Dollars- success under ISTEA C. Regional Partnerships 1. County partnerships 2. US 36 EIS 3. Boulder Transit Village profile Attachment B 4. CU Boulder 5. BVSD V. Looking to the Future A. Trends expected to continue 1. Population growth to the east 2. Transit ridership increases B. Expected Challenges 1. Increased cost of energy 2. Increasing construction costs 3. Eco Pass programs 4. Diminished funding C. Potential Responses VI. Budget Overview A. Graphic pie charts of revenues and expenditures B. Graphic of recent revenue history VII. Resources A. Contact information B. Web addresses C. Response request Attachment C Potential community members asked for reflections on TMP 20-year retrospective: Spense Havlick Bob Whitson Phil Weisbach Gary Lacy Ken Hotard George Karakenian sp? Francoise Poinsette Susan Osborne Leslie Durgin Mike Sweeney Tracy Winfree Debra Baskett Dave Rhodes Bill Roettker John Tayer Jim Charlier Bill Fox Steve Pomerance Bob Greenlee Will Toor Matt Appelbaum Lisa Morzel Evan Ravitz Steve Clark Dick McLean Jon Caldara Cindy Jatko Nancy Cifelli Vince Porreca Michael Caplan Tom Hoyt Who else?