® ® focus on place types. ® ® focus on: approach and classification transitions guidance

®

®

Focus on Place Types

®

®

Focus on:

Approach and Classification

Transitions

Guidance

3

®

®

Workshop 1

How can the Smart Mobility Framework project make a single definition and a single set of smart mobility principles meaningful for application throughout the state?

4

Places Types in Use

Blueprint Planning

Context Sensitive Solutions

TOD

Form Based Codes

5

®

®

Smart Mobility Place Types

For classifying towns, cities and larger areas to identify an appropriate Smart Mobility Framework

A basis for making investment, planning and management decisions that support smart mobility

6

®

®

Smart Mobility Place Types

1. Urban Centers

2. Close-in Compact Communities

3. Compact Communities

4. Suburban Communities

5. Rural and Agricultural Lands

6. Protected Lands

7. Special Use Areas

7

Complete Community Design

Regional Accessibility

Urban Centers Highest High

Close In Compact High High

Compact High Moderate to low

Suburban Variable Variable

Rural / Ag Variable Low

Protected Very Low Variable

Special Use Low Variable

Place Types and Location Efficiency

8

®

®

Achieving Location EfficiencyAchieving Location Efficiency

9

®

®

Exhibit 7: Smart Mobility Place Types & Location Efficiency

A Closer Look

10

Urban Centers Urban Cores

Urban Centers

Close-in Compact Communities

Centers

Corridors

Neighborhoods

Dedicated Use Areas

Compact Communities

Suburban Communities

Rural & Agricultural Lands

Rural Towns

Rural settlements and Agricultural Lands

Protected Lands

Special Use Areas

11

®

®

Exhibit 6: Place Type DetailRank on Smart Mobility

Factors Place Type

Summary Description (existing or planned character) Complete

Community Design

Regional Accessibility

(Preliminary)

Examples

1. Urban Centers

High density, mixed use places with high jobs-housing ratios overall, well-connected street networks, high levels of transit service and pedestrian supportive environments. Transit-oriented development (TOD) fits into all of the urban place types.

1a. Urban Cores

Central cities and downtowns of major cities, with full range of horizontally- and vertically-mixed land uses and with high capacity transit stations/corridors present or planned. Hubs of transit systems with excellent transit coverage, service levels, and intermodal passenger transfer opportunities.

Highest Highest

Downtowns of Long Beach, San Francisco, San J ose, Sacramento, Los Angeles, San Diego, Oakland

1b. Urban Centers

Major activity centers within urban areas, with full range of horizontally- and vertically-mixed land uses and with high capacity transit stations/corridors present or planned.

High High

I rvine, Berkeley, Palo Alto, Pasadena, Walnut Creek, Santa Rosa, Century City, Fresno, Stockton, Bakersfield, Modesto

Page 23

®

®

Discussion

Approach and Classification

Transitions

Guidance

®

®

Focus on:

Approach and Classification

Transitions

Guidance

14

®

®

Place Type Transitions

Place types are tools for strategic decision-making about projects and programs that will support smart mobility as cities and towns change over time

15

®

®

Place Type Transitions

Anchored Places. Ranking on the Smart Mobility factors may change somewhat but place type designation will not change.

Transitional Places. Targeted for significant change that will result in a change in place type designation.

Place Type Transition

16

Place Type Transition

17

Place Type Transition

18

Change in Anchored Place Type

19

20

®

®

Place Type Transitions: Implications for Investments

Anchored Places. Investment decisions emphasize enhancing Smart Mobility factors.

Transitional Places. Investment emphasis is on supporting evolution to different place type with greater potential for Smart Mobility benefits.

(Page 28, related exhibit p. 29)

21

Place Type Transition

Place TypeSM

EmphasisUltimate Place Type

Urban Centers Urban Center

Close-in Compact Communities

orClose-in compact communitiesorUrban Centers

Compact Communities

Compact Communities

Exhibit 8, page 29

®

®

Discussion

Approach and Classification

Transitions

Guidance

®

®

Focus on:

Approach and Classification

Transitions

Guidance

24

®

®

Place Type Guidance

For Each Place Type Smart Mobility Framework Relevance of Principles Key Activities

Planning Transportation Projects & Programs Development & Conservation Projects &

Programs

25

®

®

FrameworkMinimize creation of new

places ranking low on both factors

Transition suburban centers and corridors to close-in compact centers and corridors

Create benefits for surrounding suburban areas

Example: Suburban Communities

LOW

High

High

26

®

®

Example: Guidance for Suburban Communities

Planning: Key Activities Identify centers and corridors that can be

transformed into more location-efficient places.

Prioritize locations to align with market potential and other community objectives.

Identify near term opportunities to improve health and safety

Identify opportunities to improve reliability through operational improvements

27

®

®

Example: Guidance for Suburban Communities

Likely transportation priorities Improving operational efficiency Improving connectivity “Complete streets” and safe routes to

school Access management and speed

management Commute transit service and

rideshare promotion.

28

®

®

Example: Guidance for Suburban Communities

Likely land use development priorities:

Transit oriented development along high capacity transit corridors

Strategic redevelopment of commercial corridors and dedicated use areas

Complete community design elements for all new construction

29

®

®

Place Types in the Handbook

Introduction Place Types and Location Efficiency Place Type Transitions Matching the Place Types to Real

Places Guidance for Place Types Applying Performance Measures to

Place Types

®

®

Discussion in Small Groups

Approach and Classification

Transitions

Guidance