The Integrated Transportation Land Use Solution Pilot Studies in

The Integrated Transportation/Land Use Solution Pilot Studies in the NYC Metropolitan Region

A Starting Point - The “MPO Thing” in a Complex Region v New York Metropolitan Transportation Council ü Loose confederation; remnant of Tri-State Regional Planning Commission ü Covers New York City, Long Island 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 v Why would we want to do this? v How in the world would we go about it? v 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 Process

So What Did We Do? v New regional goal in 1999 plan update has been carried forward in the 2005 plan update v Plan defined key target areas ü Worked with local municipal planners v Defined steps for working towards the goal

What Was Possible? • Key ingredients in activating the goal: ü Availability of federal funding ü Agreement of MPO members ü Local interest on the part of elected and planning officials

Program Approach • The Land. Tran 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 v New brand name: sustainable development studies ü Build on New York State DOT’s Arterial Access Management Program ü Bring local officials and transportation agencies to the table ü Include all aspects of transportation and land use planning ü Use community visioning as a basis for consensus building ü Use computer simulation modeling to test future scenarios coming out of the visioning ü Build final consensus around the modeling results

Key Elements of a Sustainable Development Study v Community Visioning v Scenario Development ü Land use & transportation futures ü “Range of intensity” v Scenario Testing ü Computer simulation model ü Matrix analysis v Consensus Building ü Choice of preferred futures v Implementation Planning ü Intermunicipal agreements or GEIS ü Master plan & zoning revisions ü Regional Transportation Plan & Transportation Improvement Program

Could This Approach Work? v Key ingredients: ü Buy in from local electeds • Local champion preferable ü Buy in from MPO members ü Agreement 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 v Route 303 in Rockland County ü Complete • Overlay zone passed by town board • Implementation planning underway v Routes 6/35/202/BMP in Westchester County ü Complete • Inter-municipal agreement in place • Implementation planning underway v SEEDS in Suffolk County ü Complete • Inter-municipal agreement under discussion • Implementation planning beginning v Coney Island/Gravesend in Brooklyn ü Mid point • Community visioning completed • Analysis of scenarios nearly complete

What Have We Learned So Far? v A local champion is critical!! v Local politics can derail a study ü Community visioning has largely been successful ü Election results can damage local buy in ü Instances of the use of studies to gain advantage on issues ü Consensus is not always the objective v The effectiveness of the “carrots” is not fully understood

A Case in Point; SEEDS v By far, the most extensive and complex of the pilot studies ü Sixteen municipalities ü Large study area in eastern Suffolk County ü History of joint action q“Peconic County” movement q East End Supervisors & Mayors Association ü 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