Harlem Avenue Corridor Plan: Corridor Planning Across Municipal Boundaries

Transcription

1 Harlem Avenue Corridor Plan: Corridor Planning Across Municipal Boundaries Heather Tabbert, Manager, Local Planning and Programs Division Regional Transportation Authority (RTA) Jen McNeil Dhadwal, Principal Urban Planner URS Corporation April 24, 2012

2 RTA Local and Regional Planning RTA Planning, Oversight and Funding CTA Chicago & adjacent suburbs Metra Commuter Rail Pace Suburban Bus Paratransit Vanpool

3 RTA Local and Regional Planning 8.5 million people McHenry Lake 3,700 square miles 2M rides daily Kane Cook DuPage Chicago 3.6 bil. passenger miles 5,640 bus & rail cars 381 rail stations 334 bus routes Cook 7,200 route miles Will 650 vanpool vehicles $36 billion in assets

4 RTA Local and Regional Planning TOD and Transit Improvement County Transit Plans Kane County Randall Road County Farm Road SSMMA Cicero Avenue

5 Funding and Technical Support: Community Planning Program Transit-Oriented Development Plans Transit Improvement / Corridor Plans Available since 1998 Funded over 100 planning studies Annual Call for Projects Eligibility: Local Governments and Service Boards

6 URS Corporation Chicago Planning Team Harlem Avenue Corridor Plan o Client: Southwest Conference of Mayors (COG) o Participating Jurisdictions: 10 municipalities o Technical Committee: RTA, Pace, Metra, CTA, IDOT South Lakefront Corridor Transit Study o Client: Chicago DOT and DHED o Participating Jurisdictions: 8 wards, 13 community areas o Technical Committee: RTA, Pace, Metra, CTA o Steering Committee: numerous civic organizations and community/grass-roots groups Central Area Action Plan o Client: Chicago DHED o Participating Jurisdictions: 6 wards, 12 planning areas o Steering Committee: CDOT, RTA, Metra, CTA, major institutions, numerous civic and neighborhood organizations Michigan / Grand River Transportation Study o Client: Capital Area Transit Authority (CATA) o Participating Jurisdictions: 2 municipalities, 2 townships o Technical Committee: MPO, regional planning groups, MDOT, MSU Detroit Transit Alternatives Analysis and Woodward Avenue Light Rail Design o Client: Detroit DOT o Participating Jurisdictions: 2 municipalities, numerous neighborhoods / planning districts o Technical Committee: MDOT, MPO, Wayne County, Planning/Zoning and delegate neighborhood planning agencies o Steering Committee: numerous civic organizations, community/grass-roots groups, regional planning agencies

7 Why Multi Jurisdictional Planning is Important

8 There are a LOT of jurisdictions! Chicago Area: 7 Counties 284 Municipalities 1,400 units of local government

9 Main Players in Corridor Planning RTA IDOT Transit Service Boards Cities Counties CMAP COGS

10 Benefits of Multi Jurisdictional Planning Transportation is not local Transportation and land use coordination Avoids piecemeal approach Connectivity Consistency Common goals Consensus building Implementation Limited funding

11 Funding Availability Nature of federal funding is changing More competitive, less political Focus on projects with regional focus that benefits multiple areas Support from other agencies needed Innovative funding solutions needed

12 The Harlem Avenue Corridor Plan A Successful Multi-Jurisdictional Planning Project

13 Harlem Avenue Corridor Plan A comprehensive Corridor Plan that: Addresses mobility and accessibility, guided by Complete Streets principles Unifies the corridor while accommodating the diversity of member communities Achieves economic revitalization Focuses on implementation

14 Corridor Hot Button Issues Issue #1 Manage / mitigate roadway congestion Issue #2 Maximize redevelopment of opportunity sites Issue #3 -- Enhance commercial development Issue #4 -- Reinforce links to adjacent commercial districts Issue #5 Encourage corridor as an employment generator Issue #6 -- Strengthen corridor and community identity

15 Transportation Planning Traffic Management / ITS Heavy traffic conditions at many intersections and around expressways Freight Congestion around industrial areas throughout corridor

16 Transportation Planning Transit Pace Service Metra Service CTA Service Arterial Bus Rapid Transit Pedestrians/Bicycles Pedestrian Scale Complete Sidewalks Bicycle Facilities and Linkage to Trails

17 Land Use and Economics Land Use / Zoning Compatible & incompatible uses in close proximity Safe access to/from high trip generators Economic Development Employment corridor Encourage growth and diversification

18 Land Use and Economics Open Space/Recreation Numerous existing assets o Forest Preserve o Local and Regional Trails o Parks o Golf courses Consider stormwater management Provide connections between corridor and recreational centers

19 Urban Design Parking Curb cuts at safe locations Shared parking opportunities Design Landscaped buffers and plantings Integrate transportation, infrastructure and landscape Wayfinding and signage

20 Recommendations Economic Development Sites Transportation Improvement Projects Urban Design Projects

21

22 Toyota Park Redevelopment Site Bridgeview

23

24 95 th Street Interchange Redesign and Redevelopment Plan Oak Lawn and Bridgeview

25 Southwest Highway Improvements Palos Hills, Chicago Ridge and Worth

26

27

28

29 159 th Street Intersection Improvements Orland Park and Tinley Park

30

31 Implementation Ongoing RTA support to SWCM Corridor communities excited to move forward STP Funding availability TIGER grant applications in 2011 and 2012 for 95 th Street project Orland Park Transportation Plan Pace: Toyota Park Transit Center

32

33 The Harlem Avenue Corridor Plan In Retrospect.

34 Themes & Lessons Learned Successes Building upon strengths: o Previous collaboration o Common goals o Strong, clear leadership o Long-standing relationships Challenges Dealing with differences in: o Capacity o Information and data o Current state o Internal politics and priorities o Appetite for change

35 Capacity What did we find? Full time staff of professionals Part time staff / volunteers Jacks-of-all-trades How did we deal with this? One-on-one interviews Tailored communication and engagement approach based on skill and ability to respond

36 Information and Data What did we find? Robust, in-house Old, paper-based Black-box, externallymanaged How did we deal with this? Early and frequent detailed requests One-on-one interviews and field work Assembly of multiple sources First draft with followup, checking Line-in-the-sand stop to existing conditions task

37 Current State What did we find? Active projects and forward planning Stalled maintenance efforts How did we deal with this? Proposed range of ideas, with consistent end goal Acknowledged uniqueness and successes

38 Internal Politics and Priorities What did we find? Different levels of capacity for public investment and spending Collaboration and competition Spectrum of engagement How did we deal with this? Sought consensus on project goal and understanding of individual priorities Explicitly stated the enhancing role of project, not superseding local control Made recommendations within capacity and level of interest

39 Lessons Learned What we d repeat: o Tailored / one-on-one communication + group work sessions throughout the project o Recognizing individual community successes o Listening before talking o Proactive engagement of technical participants o Frequent communication with client / managers o Hawkeye budget management What we ll plan for next time: o Variability in data o More proactive engagement of low participators

40 Q &A Contact Information : Heather Tabbert, AICP Manager, Local Planning and Programs Regional Transportation Authority tabberth@rtachicago.org Jen McNeil Dhadwal, AICP Principal Planner URS Corporation jennifer.mcneil@urs.com