The Integrated Transportation/Land Use Solution

Pilot Studies in the NYC Metropolitan Region

A Starting Point - The “MPO Thing” in a Complex Region

New York Metropolitan Transportation CouncilLoose confederation; remnant of Tri-State Regional

Planning CommissionCovers New York City, Long Island and the lower

Hudson Valley• Members include two NYC agencies, five suburban counties,

New York State DOT and MTA

• Advisory members include Port Authority of NY & NJ, FHWA, FTA, USEPA, New York State DEC and our sister MPO in New Jersey, NJTPA

An Integrated Transportation/Land Use Solution – Key Questions at the Outset

Why would we want to do this?

How in the world would we go about it?

How could we influence policy decisions in the real world?

Why Would We Want to Do This?

• Build consensus & obtain local buy-in

• Develop optimal solutions

• Develop effective transportation investments

• Address congestion management issues

• Address environmental impacts

• Enhance community involvement

How in the World Would We Go About It?

• Use the metropolitan transportation planning process as a catalyst– Think regionally and act locally– Use federal funding as a carrot– Bring the players to the table through the MPO

How Could We Influence Policy Decisions in the Real World?

• Make Federal funding contingent on integrated planning in key target areas

• Use the Regional Transportation Plan as a starting point– Establish a regional land use/transportation goal

– Identify key issues and approaches

– Define key target areas with a critical mass of development pressures and transportation issues

Metropolitan Planning ProcessUnified Planning Work

Program

Mandated Planning Products

RegionalTransportation Plan

TransportationImprovement Program

TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS

So What Did We Do?

New regional goal in 1999 plan update has been carried forward in the 2005 plan update

Plan defined key target areas Worked with local

municipal planners

Defined steps for working towards the goal

What Was Possible?

• Key ingredients in activating the goal:Availability of federal

fundingAgreement of MPO

membersLocal interest on the

part of elected and planning officials

Program Approach

• The LandTran Program– Funding for education and training programs

for local officials– Funding for local master plan updates which

reinforce the land use/transportation connection– Funding for new integrated planning

approaches in key target areas

Integrated Planning Approaches in Key Target Areas

New brand name: sustainable development studiesBuild on New York State DOT’s Arterial Access

Management ProgramBring local officials and transportation agencies to the

table Include all aspects of transportation and land use planningUse community visioning as a basis for consensus buildingUse computer simulation modeling to test future scenarios

coming out of the visioningBuild final consensus around the modeling results

Key Elements of a Sustainable Development Study

Community VisioningScenario Development

Land use & transportation futures

“Range of intensity”

Scenario TestingComputer simulation

modelMatrix analysis

Consensus Building Choice of preferred futures

Implementation Planning Intermunicipal agreements

or GEIS Master plan & zoning

revisions Regional Transportation

Plan & Transportation Improvement Program

Could This Approach Work?

Key ingredients:Buy in from local

electeds• Local champion

preferableBuy in from MPO

membersAgreement from all

parties that the approach starts with a blank canvas

Funding Pilot Studies of Different Sizes in Different Locations

• Four pilots initially funded through the Unified Planning Work Program:– Route 303 study in Rockland County

• Town of Orangetown

– Routes 6/35/202/Bear Mountain Parkway study in Westchester County

• City of Peekskill, towns of Cortlandt and Yorktown

– Sustainable East End Development Strategies (SEEDS) initiative in Suffolk County

• Five towns, eleven villages

– Coney Island/Gravesend study in Brooklyn• Several community boards

Status of the Pilot Studies

Route 303 in Rockland County Complete

• Overlay zone passed by town board

• Implementation planning underway

Routes 6/35/202/BMP in Westchester County Complete

• Inter-municipal agreement in place

• Implementation planning underway

SEEDS in Suffolk County Complete

• Inter-municipal agreement under discussion

• Implementation planning beginning

Coney Island/Gravesend in Brooklyn Mid point

• Community visioning completed

• Analysis of scenarios nearly complete

What Have We Learned So Far? A local champion is critical!! Local politics can derail a

study Community visioning has

largely been successful Election results can damage

local buy in Instances of the use of studies to

gain advantage on issues Consensus is not always the

objective The effectiveness of the

“carrots” is not fully understood

A Case in Point; SEEDS

By far, the most extensive and complex of the pilot studiesSixteen municipalitiesLarge study area in eastern Suffolk CountyHistory of joint action

“Peconic County” movement East End Supervisors & Mayors Association

Generally adversarial relationship with Suffolk County, New York State DOT and MTA Long Island Rail Road

What’s Happened So Far?• SEEDS launched in April

2001

• Two levels of community visioning– Issues sessions

– Workshops

• Fourteen meetings held throughout the East End

• Extensive, varied input generated

• Scenario development and analysis has been complex and controversial– Initial consensus building

needed– Significant credibility lost

• Significant work expended to inform new elected officials of SEEDS study status and importance– Champions lost their recent

elections– New electeds don’t understand

and/or buy in to the process

Key Lessons

• Consensus is much harder to establish in a larger, more complex area– Visibility and communication are more difficult– Shared buy in and ownership are more complex– Trust is more diffuse

• Local politics are magnified by larger numbers of municipal players– More points of conflict– More win-lose gaming– Less buy in to a larger process

Other Lessons; Technical Issues

• Simulation modeling has been complex!– Modeling of weekday and weekend travel needs

to be captured and understood by the public

– Matrix analysis requires multiple iterations

– Some elements of the future scenarios are difficult to model

• For example, “centers” concept

• Study contract had to be supplemented

How is Implementation Proceeding?• The Rockland, Westchester and Suffolk studies

are complete– All are transitioning into an implementation mode– All have chosen to convert the study steering

committees into implementation committees, which are meeting regularly

• Specific implementation steps have included:– Addressing short-term transportation issues– Programming of transportation improvements on the

regional Transportation Improvement Program– Development of inter-municipal agreements

(Westchester and Suffolk)– Adoption of an overlay zone (Rockland)

How is Implementation Proceeding?

• Implementation problems have included:– Fragile consensus– Political changes– Funding restrictions– Lengthy project development process

Prospects for This Approach

• Some interest for similar studies– Staten Island West Shore– Rockaways peninsula– Sagtikos Regional Development Zone

• Formal evaluation of the approach will be conducted– Resource requirements– Factors for success– Impacts and outcomes

• Even wider use is possible once the approach is evaluated