Post on 19-Jan-2015
description
transcript
11
ULI Seattle’s Bus Rapid Transit and Land Use InitiativeDeveloping the Next Frontier
Denny OnslowChief Development Officer, Harbor Properties
Chair, ULI Seattle Sustainable Leadership Task Force
ULI Fall MeetingOctober 26, 2011
Part of the ULI/Curtis Regional Infrastructure Project
For more information contact: Kelly Mann, Executive Director, ULI Seattle, kelly.mann@uli.org
2
Bus Rapid Transit: The Emerging Opportunity
Light rail plans get the attention BUT metro areas big and small are also planning and building BRT systems BRT can go from plan to reality in just a few years
Age of austerity – BRT plans more likely to get built Opportunity to integrate workforce housing and sustainability Rail TOD – lots of work has been done already BRT and land use? Lots of questions still to be answered
3
Part of an ambitious vision for a regionally integrated transit system:
• Light Rail• Commuter Rail• Streetcars• Traditional and express buses• Arterial BRT
King County RapidRide:• A line service began in October 2010• B, C, D, E, and F lines will begin service by 2013• 64 total miles of service• High-use corridors: 10 million transit trips per year• Projected 50% ridership increase with RR
BRT in the Puget Sound Region
4
ULI Seattle’s BRT and Land Use Initiative
Developing the Next Frontier
Capitalizing on Bus Rapid Transit to Build Community
2011
5
BRT and Land Use Initiative: Project Goals Integrate land use into BRT planning and implementation• Reduce vehicle miles traveled • Achieve triple bottom line: environment, economy, equity• Encourage communication and mutual learning between the land
use community and transit providers Build capacity and expertise Coordinate and integrate ULI Seattle’s priority areas and task forces• Housing Affordability Task Force• Sustainable Leadership Task Force• Thriving Communities Task Force
6
BRT and Land Use Initiative: Project Partners City of Seattle
Department of Planning and Development
Office of Housing City of Shoreline King County Metro
Transit ULI Seattle ULI/Curtis Regional
Infrastructure Project
7
BRT and Land Use Initiative: 2011 Schedule of Activities
January Partners meeting: Conduct site tours Determine scope of analysis Develop site analysis questions
March ULI Seattle Breakfast ProgramSite analysis and recommendation development (2½ days)Presentation of recommendations to partners
June ULI Seattle BRT Workshop: report release and next steps
July Walking tour of one BRT corridor neighborhood
8
BRT and Land Use Initiative: Site Analysis TeamMark Hinshaw, LMN Architects
Richard Kendall, The Frause Group
Craig Krueger, Community Land Planning
Ann Lin, Seneca Real Estate Group
Jim Mueller, JC Mueller LLC
Salima “Sam” O’Connell, Dakota County - Office of Transit
Danny O’Connor, Kansas City Area Transportation Authority
Sarah Jo Peterson, ULI-the Urban Land Institute
Dan Stroh, City of Bellevue
Project partners and site analysis team on tour, March 22, 2011
9
BRT and Land Use Initiative: Study Methods
Three national case studies: Cedar Avenue BRT in Dakota County, MN Kansas City’s MAX system Cleveland’s Health Line in the Euclid Corridor
Analysis of three station areas on two RapidRide corridors: Ballard: RapidRide D Line–15th and Market in Ballard (City of Seattle) Bitter Lake: RapidRide E Line–130th and Aurora in Broadview/Bitter
Lake (City of Seattle) Echo Lake: RapidRide E Line–192nd and Aurora (City of Shoreline)
Cleveland Health Line Station
10
BRT and Land Use Initiative: Analysis Questions
Scope: within a ½ mile of each station and the next five years: Neighborhood design Transitioning auto-oriented corridors Range of housing Development opportunities and jobs Marketing Stakeholder institutions
Art at a BRT station in Kansas City
New housing in Ballard, near the planned RapidRide D Line
11
BRT and Land Use Initiative: Recommendations and Report
Analysis of RapidRide as BRT Summaries of the three external
case studies BRT and land use: principles and
lessons learned Recommendations related to transit
service, corridors, marketing, and stakeholder institutions
Recommendations for the three station areas
12
Key Recommendations
Focus on Corridors Develop Champions Promote Community Value
RapidRide is planned for Aurora Avenue North, already a highly used transit corridor in Seattle
13
What kind of BRT is RapidRide?
RapidRide is a form of “arterial BRT”: Routes follow commercial arterials connecting major activity centers Running ways in “business access transit” (BAT) lanes Target service level: up to 24 hours a day; peak service every 10
minutes Boarding areas about every half-mile Transit-signal priority Shelters and amenities Real-time arrival information Low-floor, three-door buses
14
How arterial BRT “works” from the perspective of land use
Provides convenient and priority access to all that is available—jobs, shopping, services, housing, and friends—in the corridor.
Convenient access: Frequent service, evenings and weekends included In corridors that are lined with diverse land uses
Priority access: Infrastructure and technology gives transit priority Stations and pedestrian infrastructure tell transit users they are a priority
Organizing catalyst
15
After the Initiative
Continued outreach Presented report to full
Seattle city council and elected officials in most of the suburban RapidRide service areas
Growing Transit Communities (HUD Sustainable Communities grant) Conduct similar initiative for light rail corridors
The city of Shoreline is rebuilding its portion of Aurora Ave North to better support pedestrians and RapidRide
16
Summary of Outcomes and Results
Recommendations Produced detailed recommendations for two RapidRide corridors and three
station areas.
“Ten Principles” Developed principles that can be applied to arterial BRT across the Puget
Sound region and elsewhere in the United States.
Break down silos Facilitated discussions of BRT and land use among elected officials and
between public sector and private sector decision-makers.
Leadership Emerged as a leading voice on transit and land use for BRT and rail.
17
Lessons Learned - Opportunities
For BRT and land use: There is a “there, there”
For taking on emerging issues: District Council/Georgetown Partnership is an effective approach• National resources• On-the-ground and practical problem-solving
ULI strength: be nimble and opportunity-driven; produce results quickly Engage existing task forces to lead effort• Use emerging issue to foster collaboration among task forces
Standard ULI toolbox is adaptable—programs and TAPs