Transportation Concurrency

The provision of “adequate transportation

facilities”

Integrating land use and transportation

Concurrency (the ideal):

The measurement process used to regulate* the inter-relationship between

development and transportation facilities and

services

*Assumes that at some point transportation services will be provided that allow attainment of growth called for in the comprehensive plan

Concurrency

• State law allows each jurisdiction to define its own concurrency system

Concurrency

Once you define “adequate transportation facilities”

(performance)

You can not allow development unless those facilities

(performance levels) exist

Concurrency

Is (currently) almost always defined in

terms of roadway congestion

• But you can define it differently if you wish – and new legislation encourages a more multi-modal approach to concurrency

Concurrency As Implemented

•You get what you measure

– If you only measure road congestion

– All problems/solutions are associated with cars and roadway capacity

– Other transportation services are nearly irrelevant

Multi-Modal Concurrency?

Currently: “multi-modal” means that:

a mode split calculation is done before assigning vehicle

volumes to the roadway network

Concurrency: A Local Issue

• Different jurisdictions have – Different goals/objectives for concurrency

– Different performance standards

• Your concurrency rules only apply within your jurisdiction– There is little / no regional coordination or outlook

Cities

• Use concurrency to manage/direct their development and/or transportation infrastructure expansion– Or they basically ignore it

• Design their procedures differently– Because city goals differ– The politics are different in each city

Different Uses of Concurrency

• To increase funding for transportation projects

• To limit growth

• To regulate the speed of growth

Different Political Goals Means

• “Adequate” facilities change by jurisdiction

– What is acceptable to me is not acceptable to my neighbor

A Downside of Local Application

• Once traffic crosses a border (including onto a state highway), its “not your problem”

– Congestion that meets my standards but not yours, is not my problem

– Trips I generate that cause your congestion are not my problem

So

• Our problems/procedures are local,

But

• Many of our problems/causes/solutions are regional

Concurrency As Implemented

•You get what you measure

– If you don’t measure state highways of significance, then

– Don’t be surprised when those roads•“generate” congestion on your local roads

•have very large congestion problems that cause popular resistance to growth

How Do We Measure Roadway Congestion?

• Level of Service (A- F)– Delay, Speed, Density of Traffic

• Cheap mathematical estimation is– Volume / capacity (v/c)

– So for concurrency, cities often use some combination of v/c calculations

Changing the Rules Is Allowed

• State law allows jurisdictions to change their concurrency system

• The changes must be made openly– Limits are placed primarily to ensure Nexus and Proportionality

– There are other legal restrictions

Nexus and Proportionality

• Nexus – the impact (standard) you are measuring must be directly associated with that development

• Proportionality – the mitigation you require must be in proportion to the development’s impact on that standard

So You Want A New Process?

• Selecting new performance measures requires that cities understand

– What they want their transportation system (and land use) to look like

So You Want A New Process?

• Cities must understand

– What they want out of their concurrency program•Money (or specific facility improvements)

•Control over the timing of development

•Ease of use, application and public understanding

•To stop further development

A New Process• Can be multi-modal

– Must be if you desire a multi-modal solution

• Requires an honest assessment that specific transportation services can/will/should be used by selected land uses– Road performance is the correct measure in some places

– But even in exurban cities, the congestion effects on state routes may need to be considered

Honest Assessment?• For example, if transit use is your goal:

– Are there sufficient park and ride spaces?– Is the new development within walking distance of frequent bus service? (1/8 – 1/4 mile)

– Is the bus service attractive? (frequent, goes to logical places, etc.)

• This may mean one development is OK, but another development 2-blocks over is not

Working Regionally

• Means giving up tight local control in order to gain more regional control

• Without regional cooperation, the best designed concurrency program can easily fail due to regional pressures

Legislative Interest

• Current concurrency regulation is a decent first shot, but is not achieving what was intended

– Do we assert more state control?– Do we tweak the existing regulations?

– Do we require more consistency in process?

Legislative Concerns/Interest

• Congestion based concurrency measures increase the cost of growth in urban centers

• Decreases relative cost of growth in far suburbs

• While causing increasing congestion on major routes

Study Team Issues

• What is the real intention of Concurrency?– Growth control (timing or denial?)

– Methodology? (Mathematics?)– Funding?– Politics?– Institutional controls/directions

Study Team Issues

• Can/do we shift from purely local control to more regional or statewide control?

Current Study Issues

• Do we provide a mechanism for funding alternative modes?

• Do we empower the region to enforce regional solutions or at least regional coordination?

Current Study

• How do we address:– Transit– Walking– Biking– Freight

More Information on Concurrency

•http://depts.washington.edu/trac/concurrency/index.html

•Will be updated once we start to produce new material