Process
- Details
- Last Updated on Wednesday, 11 March 2015
Article
Corridor/project planning is structured, collaborative decision-making process. Successful transportation planning, in particular, results from an understanding of the needs of adjacent property and business owners, facility users, local residents, and the facility owner. The needs and priorities of these stakeholders should be used to shape key decisions.
A successful planning process must also involve professionals with a variety of technical backgrounds, including engineers, landscape architects, urban designers, and other specialists.
The transportation projects which come as a result of the planning process should:
- Address the transportation need;
- Be an asset to the community; and
- Be compatible with the natural and built environment.
While there are unique considerations involved in planning every project, successful plans have a number of common elements, outlined above. The process should always be collaborative, interactive and transparent to both participants and observers. The resulting Plan document serves as a useful record of the logic of the process and its outcomes.
There are five major steps involved in planning, including:
-
Endorsing the process;
-
Developing the evaluation criteria;
-
Developing and analyzing ideas, concepts and strategies;
-
Defining, refining and selecting the preferred alternative; and
-
Documenting the process.
Step 1: Endorsement of the process is often overlooked or shortchanged because of anxiousness to move forward with the project. During the endorsement stage, the team should begin by identifying stakeholders with an interest in the outcome of the corridor plan. Next, they should work towards understanding the context of the project so the solutions take into account transportation, land use, economic development, and historic preservation issues, among others. Lastly, the team will finalize the document outlining the planning process approach and how the team will arrive at a preferred design solution.
Gaining stakeholder endorsement of the process used to select the preferred alternative prevents the perception that the solution or design was predetermined. At the outset of the process, it is important to set aside time to discuss the "rules of the game" with everyone affected by the solution. This step helps create stakeholder buy-in and builds trust in the process.
Step 2: The second step in the planning process is to develop detailed evaluation criteria based on stakeholder input, comments, concerns and values. Each criterion should be clear and measurable. Working with technical staff and stakeholders also deepens the team's understanding of the project context and the impact a facility will have in the community.
Step 3: At this point in the process, the team should begin analyzing ideas based on discussions with stakeholders. Ideas may be screened for feasibility, combined, or refined to better solve the problems identified in Step 1.
Step 4: In this step the team identifies the best strategies and determines a preferred alternative. The types of strategies utilized to create great streets will often involve motorized and non-motorized transportation improvements, and design/development ideas for adjacent properties, including new development and redevelopment. The proposed solutions may require public-private partnerships or agreements between multiple agencies.
Step 5: In practice, documentation is often carried out concurrently with other steps in the planning process to ensure detailed, accurate, and compliant record-keeping.
While the steps prescribed above are logical and somewhat intuitive, they are often completed out of sequence or neglected entirely. As a result, sometimes projects are delayed, participants fail to reach consensus, or the issues standing in the way of unique, responsive solutions are not addressed.
Adapted from: NCHRP Report 480
- Details
- Last Updated on Wednesday, 11 March 2015
Article
City planning refers to the process by which cities, counties, states and other jurisdictions develop a plan for growth and development. The planning process allows planning professionals to engage all the relevant stakeholders in the development of a, public works professionals, officials and residents to develop a responsible timeline and process for the development of public facilities, development and even
In St. Louis, the planning process is carried out by several jurisdiction-specific entities: the City of St. Louis Planning and Urban Design Agency, the St. Louis County Planning Department, the East-West Gateway Council of Governments (COG), and other city and county governments.
The City of St. Louis Planning and Urban Design Agency was created in 1999 to focus on planning the city's future. The agency is divided into four sections: Planning and Urban Design, Research, Graphics and Computer Mapping, and a Cultural Resources Office. The City Planning Agency has prepared a Five Year Consolidated Plan which outlines a series of short- and long-term goals designed to address areas of need in the city, including housing, economic development, planning and development regulations, health, public facilities and infrastructure, public safety, and the environment.
The St. Louis County Planning Department is divided into five departments that are responsible for a variety of planning and zoning activities, including Countywide and Community Plans, Mapping and Data, Community Development, Zoning and Subdivision, and Neighborhood Services.
East-West Gateway Council of Governments is the metropolitan planning organization (MPO) for the region encompassing Franklin, Jefferson, St. Charles, and St. Louis counties in Missouri, the city of St. Louis, and Madison, Monroe, and St. Clair counties in Illinois. The organization is responsible for developing and adopting short- and long-range transportation plans for the region and selecting the projects that will receive federal funds, based on the 20-year Transportation Plan.
Legacy 2035: the Transportation Plan for the Gateway Region will be used to guide the region's transportation investments over the next 20 years. The long range transportation plan is formally updated every three years - Legacy 2030, the most recent update, was adopted in 2005.
A number of short-range plans and corridor studies have also been created to support and expand upon the 20-year plan. The Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) is a specific, three to five-year implementation schedule for federally funded projects in the St. Louis Region. The final TMP for 2011 - 2014 and a draft of the most recent TIP covering the period from 2012 - 2015 are available from the East-West Gateway site.
A number of MetroLink and Major Transportation Investment Analysis (MTIA) corridor studies have also been completed over the past several years. Corridor studies are used to evaluate and advance specific projects and investments. These studies are a vital link between the long range plan and actual project development.
East-West Gateway is also responsible for planning aviation, pedestrian and bicycle, and transit systems. The first draft of the St. Louis Regional Bicycling and Walking Transportation Plan was completed in June of 2005. The plan is the product of several public workshops and open houses that were held to allow public comment. The MPO is also working on the region's first aviation system plan and moving forward on the planning and implementation of light rail lines along several corridors.
Planning Strategies
There are a number of key planning strategies that can help communities make great streets possible.
Ensure great street design is possible. Great street design includes recommendations such as narrower travel lanes (less than 12-feet wide) and the use of medians to help reduce travel speeds and improve safety. However, some communities have adopted street standards that make the implementation of these elements difficult or impossible. At a minimum, street standards need to include the allowance of variances in appropriate areas, such as great street thoroughfares. Ideally, municipalities should consider overlay districts or the adoption of new street standards that not only allow but promote street design consistent with great streets.
Involve all agencies early in the planning process. For every aspect of great street design, there is a department or agency responsible for it. Therefore, a city hoping to make great streets happen, must include all the relevant stakeholders from the professional community. Environmental impacts, traffic, architectural review, DOT, FHWA when appropriate, public works, public art, access management are just examples of the many entities that can help plan successfully for great streets.
Prioritize public involvement. Community members are the most meaningful advocates of great streets. When citizens are given the opportunity to collaborate meaningfully in the development of a great street plan, not only does it build consensus but it results in a plan that meets the needs of the community-at-large.
Incentivize great streets. Many communities have prioritized desired development patterns by providing incentives. The incentive may target private development or for umbrella agencies, it may target member jurisdictions. Incentives for the private sector may include expedited review processes, tax incentives or complementary public investments. Incentives for jurisdictions may include matching funds or prioritized funding for qualifying projects.
Plan and coordinate improvements with neighboring agencies. Thoroughfares that are good candidates for great street improvements may cross jurisdictions. To avoid piecemeal implementation of great streets, communities should collaborate with neighboring communities and the MPO to ensure sensible planning, design, and implementation.
Create overlay districts. Overlay districts are special zoning districts that may be applied 'on top' or in addition to existing zoning. Overlay districts vary in size and may incorporate a thoroughfare, a commercial center or a neighborhood. The point of overlay districts to make possible a special set of regulations and standards that encourage development whose size, scale, mass, architectural design, among other qualities, respects the existing or desired character of the district. Overlay zoning districts typically supersede or supplement the regulations of the base zoning districts. Local governments can create overlay districts with special standards that not only allow, but encourage planning and design consistent with the recommendations for great streets.
- Details
- Last Updated on Wednesday, 11 March 2015
Article
Local Budgets Should Prioritize Great Streets
Talking about building great streets is one thing , but building them requires funding. The magnitude of great street construction costs will vary based on the type of improvements. Funding is related to the discussion in the Fiscal Policy and Economics article, which refers to the public infrastructure as an investment of taxpayer money. Great streets indeed are an investment.
Before design and construction is possible, great streets must be made a budgetary priority. For most local governments, needs typically exceed the monies available, especially for aging transportation systems. Maintaining the existing system is all that some local government budgets can manage. Developing great streets, though, requires appropriate planning, budgeting and prioritization, which may often mean temporarily putting other projects on the back burner. Consider the following points when making budget decisions to prioritize great streets:
- Investing in great streets can spur sustainable economic growth
- Investing in great streets enhances community livability
- Cities with great streets seem like great cities, and can attract new businesses and residents
- Investing to add vehicular capacity is counter-productive to great streets
- The region is beginning to prioritize great street development, which may be reflected in future TIP funding selection
All of these factors need to be considered when planning local budgets, and should encourage local governments to prioritize great streets. They are a healthy investment with great potential for high returns. In terms of transportation infrastructure, great streets are one of the best ways for local governments to add value to their communities.
Great Streets Can Be Cost-Effective
As the cost of labor and materials continues to rise, more and more funding is required to maintain and improve our transportation system. Some of the major costs associated with street improvements are:
- Right-of-way acquisition
- Utility relocation
- Stormwater management
- New pavement
These major components account for the majority of the costs associated with street improvement projects. For great streets, some or all of these components may be required. However, it is possible to make low-cost, yet still effective improvements that can begin to transform a tired thoroughfare into a great street. Starting the process of transformation can generate momentum, and in most cases can be done with relatively modest funding. Once momentum builds, it will likely be easier to secure additional funding for continued build-out of the plan.
Every street has potential:
The transformation of the Delmar Loop is a great example of how small, incremental investments can transform localities over time.
Right-of-way acquisition, as noted above, can be a major component influencing the cost of street improvements. It is not surprising, then, that minimizing the amount of new right-of-way can help to keep these costs down. As described throughout the design section of this guide, how we choose to allocate space along the thoroughfare is a fundamental decision in great street development. Widening the thoroughfare to add vehicular capacity will usually have negative impacts on the pedestrian realm and on abutting land uses. It will also usually require additional right-of-way, and consequently will drive costs up. We must think differently about space allocation along the thoroughfare.
Rather than widen the thoroughfare, consider concepts such as road diets or lane width reduction to minimize the amount of space allocated for vehicular travel. Doing so creates additional space for other uses along the thoroughfare, such as wider sidewalks, tree lawns, on-street parking, bicycle lanes, and many others. Be sure to consider the resultant impact to vehicular operations when doing so, but remember, high speeds and free flowing traffic are not necessarily desirable attributes of great streets. Thinking about space allocation in this way can help keep right-of-way acquisition costs at a minimum, thereby making great street development more affordable for local governments and owning agencies.
Utility relocation, specifically the relocation of overhead utilities below ground, can certainly enhance the aesthetic environment along a thoroughfare. The cost of doing so, however, is significant. Investing in such relocation can reduce the budget available for other more important improvements along the street. Consider ways to work with the overhead utilities, such as decorative treatment of utility poles, traffic signal cabinets, and street lights. These elements can add value to the streetscape, while avoiding the high cost of burying overhead utilities.
Stormwater management is another high-cost element of most thoroughfares. Stormwater is often managed via underground enclosed systems that are costly to build and to maintain. Consideration of green stormwater management techniques can help to reduce the cost of such underground systems. If green techniques are not an option, remember that moving the curb line will usually require significant reconstruction (and cost) of the underground stormwater system. If new dimensions for thoroughfare cross-section are desired, consider holding one curb line fixed to minimize these costs to one side only. See the stormwater article for more information.
Construction of new pavement is also a significant cost associated with street improvement. Pavement is obviously an essential element, both for vehicular travel and the pedestrian realm. Consideration of ways to minimize new pavement requirements, though, can help to keep costs down. It can also reduce the impervious surface area along the thoroughfare, creating green benefits as well.
Consider Phased Implementation
Great street developments, in their entirety, often require significant financial investment. This can be a major roadblock for many entities that lack the funding for such initiatives. The ultimate vision, though, does not have to be built all at once. Phased implementation over time can be an effective way to spread the costs of great streets across a greater period of time, thereby reducing the immediate investment required. When phased implementation is used, it is very important to first establish a vision for the desired improvements. This vision must then control the short- and long-term planning of phased implementation, and all phases must be built consistent with the respective vision. Having the resolve to remain committed to the initial vision and plan is essential for long-term success when phased implementation is considered.
One effective way of utilizing phased implementation is to plan low-cost but still effective phases first. For example: re-striping a thoroughfare for a "road diet" at the time of regularly scheduled resurfacing. This low-cost improvement can dramatically improve a thoroughfare. If successful, it can be a catalyst for future investment (both public and private).
Consider Private Cost-Sharing Opportunities
Transforming thoroughfares from auto-dominated places into great streets is good for local businesses and for local residents. Great streets improve quality of life, increase local property values, attract visitors who will spend money, and attract new businesses and residents. All of these results are worthy of investment. Helping private businesses and citizens to recognize these benefits can encourage cost-sharing of improvements and maintenance requirements. This is obviously not easily done, and it requires genuine community involvement on the part of local governments. If successful, though, such collaboration can increase the amount of money available for great street development.
Consider Private Cost-Sharing Opportunities
Transforming thoroughfares from auto-dominated places into great streets is good for local businesses and for local residents. Great streets improve quality of life, increase local property values, attract visitors who will spend money, and attract new businesses and residents. All of these results are worthy of investment. Helping private businesses and citizens to recognize these benefits can encourage cost-sharing of improvements and maintenance requirements. This is obviously not easily done, and it requires genuine community involvement on the part of local governments. If successful, though, such collaboration can increase the amount of money available for great street development.
When deciding to invest in great streets, early coordination with neighborhood associations, chambers of commerce, and other local citizens groups can greatly improve the chances for cost-sharing opportunities. Cost-sharing can take a variety of forms, such as special taxes, public landscaping maintenance, right-of-way donation, and others. Success is dependent on a public involvement process that is open to all and that effectively conveys the benefits that can result from investment in great streets.
Special Taxing Districts Can Help Pay for Great Streets
Special taxing districts are not uncommon in our region. Mechanisms such as Tax Increment Financing are economic tools intended to help finance improvements within a defined district, and to consequently spur development. Both Missouri and Illinois have information on how this tool can be used within their respective jurisdictions:
It is important to remember that special taxing districts are intended to spur development and economic growth in areas that need help doing so. When communities that are already well-established begin to utilize special taxing mechanisms, they can negatively impact those communities struggling to establish their own great streets. We should think regionally about these issues, beyond individual districts. The resources tab includes articles related to growth and tax increment financing in the metro area.
East-West Gateway Wants to Support Great Streets
This guide has been developed by East-West Gateway because the agency believes that great streets can enhance the quality of life throughout the St. Louis region. The agency believes that great streets development should be a priority for our region. The Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) process, conducted by East-West Gateway, is the primary mechanism by which regional transportation projects of any type, including great streets, receive funding.
The TIP is a financial and implementation schedule for projects receiving federal transportation funding in the St. Louis metropolitan area. Projects identified in the TIP are prioritized from, and must be consistent with, the region's 20-year Long-Range Transportation Plan, entitled Legacy 2030. The TIP consists of a five-year program: the current year plus the next four consecutive years. Each year the TIP is modified by adding a new fifth year and advancing the first of its future years to current status. While the projects in the TIP are shown for a five-year time period, the emphasis is on the first three years. Presenting a five-year span allows for a more systematic forecast of funding needs during a five-year planning cycle, and provides a more comprehensive view of the program for public information purposes.
The application process for TIP funding is spelled out in detail by East-West Gateway. Their web page EWG TIP Funding contains all the necessary information for local governments to apply. The workbook entitled Missouri Transportation Enhancement Funds is particularly helpful.
To learn more about how to move your great street project through the TIP process, contact the project programming staff at East-West Gateway.
- Details
- Last Updated on Wednesday, 11 March 2015
Article
A Brief History
Design standards and guidelines as they apply to great streets, are the result of decades of research, observation and experience. The need for standardization of streets became clear as the role of the private automobile became central to the culture evolving out of the 1950s. Standards helped create a safe, cohesive transportation network in the face of rapid expansion.
How wide should streets be? How fast should automobiles be allowed to travel on them? What elements shall be permitted on the roadside? What constitutes a safe street? How shall we evaluate alternatives for a new street, and how shall we deal with their respective impacts? What types of materials should be used to build our streets, and what are their specifications? These are just a few of the questions that the transportation industry has grappled with since the dawn of the automobile age.
One size fits all? Policies and standards that address these questions usually begin at the national level. Groups like the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), the Transportation Research Board (TRB), and many others have developed voluminous amounts of information intended to guide the planning and design of our transportation systems.
From the national level, this guidance trickles down to the states and municipalities across the country. They often then build specific guidance from these national resources. The typical end-result of these efforts is a set of "standards" intended to control the planning and development of streets across the respective jurisdictions, e.g. the IDOT Bureau of Design and Environment manual or the St. Louis County Design Criteria Manual. Over time, we have refined these standards to reflect the changes in the transportation industry: larger vehicles, increased reliance on heavy trucks, faster speeds, etc.
It is important to point out one of the indirect results of this evolution: the planning and engineering professions grew very standard-oriented. We as an industry grew to believe that everything had to meet "the standards". Take a look at the shelf in any planner's or engineer's office today, and you will undoubtedly find numerous volumes of standard regulations and practices. If the standards called for 12-foot-wide lanes and 50' setbacks, then that is what would be built. If the standards prohibited certain amenities along the roadside for a certain facility type, then they were not allowed. If the standards were not met, a lengthy "design exception" process often ensued. Obtaining such an exception often required detailed justification to warrant such a deviation from the standard, and in most locales such exceptions were deemed undesirable. Meeting the standards became an integral part of the planning and engineering professions.
Today
Standards become flexible. Today we are beginning to think differently about "standards". They provide tremendous value, no doubt; however, the industry is now reminding us that the "standards" are not "mandates". Federal guidance is very clear on this. The AASHTO Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets (often referred to as "The Green Book") has traditionally been looked to as the primary guidance document from which many state and local design manuals are developed.
While this text is an excellent reference and resource for the transportation community, it is also unequivocally clear in stating that it is flexible. This point has been so overlooked that AASHTO itself recently published a separate text entitled "A Guide for Achieving Flexibility in Highway Design" to remind the transportation industry that planning and design guidelines made in the "Green Book" are flexible. This is not to say that the "Green Book" should not be consulted; quite the opposite in fact. But every individual situation (in this case every individual street) is different and requires careful planning and design to develop the most appropriate solutions.
Great streets are by their very nature at the center of this discussion. Why? Because they are different. There is no set of standards on a shelf that we can take and apply to a roadway in Ballwin or Belleville or St. Louis and expect a great street to result. To create great streets we must approach each individual place as just that: an individual place with unique characteristics affecting its performance as a transportation route, as a place for pedestrians, as a magnet for development, and as a community resource. To create a great street, we must seek to understand these characteristics before we jump to conclusions about what planning and design guidelines may or may not apply.
Great streets require judgment. However, while there is no one-size-fits-all solution for great streets, there are some characteristics inherent to great streets in most place types that can start us off in the right direction as we seek to determine appropriate planning and design solutions.
- Space allocation. Most places in the urban and suburban environment are constrained by limited space. As a result, expansion and widening are difficult to accomplish without significantly impacting the existing built environment. The limited space available requires us to allocate the use of that space judiciously with respect to the abutting land uses and surrounding community.
- Multiple modes. Great streets encourage and prioritize multiple modes of travel. As such, it is important to remember that most historical "standards" were developed with a bias toward automobile travel. Other modes of travel, such as pedestrian, bicycle, and transit, should be fully considered in the planning and design of great streets, not afterthoughts or "retrofits". Failing to plan for these other modes will create "unfriendly environments" for users. The end result will be that other modes of travel will not be able to offer safe, efficient choices to travelers, contributing to the already problematic auto dominance that is preventing the development of great streets. The automobile is still an important mode of travel, but it should be one of several attractive modal choices for travelers along great streets.
- Multiple needs. Streets provide space for the movement of people and goods. This fundamental need must not be neglected. It must, however, be balanced with many other needs to establish a sense of place. Those needs must be considered at the very early planning stages in order to achieve successful implementation. Some communities may have a need for transit; others, a need for pedestrian facilities. Nearly all will have economic and social needs. Understanding the place-specific needs is essential for success. By working with agencies, businesses, stakeholders, and community citizens we will develop solutions that seek to meet the needs of the place.
- Safety. Regardless of the type of place in question, safety is always a relevant concern. When it comes to great streets, safety for all users is of paramount importance. Pedestrians, bicyclists, transit users, and automobiles must have facilities that are safe for their respective needs. See the safety section of this guide for more details.
- Details
- Last Updated on Wednesday, 11 March 2015
Article
Development review is a regulatory process within planning that allows public entities to evaluate proposed development projects. For development review to function effectively, development standards along with a master plan must first be put into place. Development standards are the criteria by which proposed plans will be reviewed and effectively, judged.
A comprehensive development review process is one that is collaborative and coordinated across all relevant jurisdictions, including city, county, state and metropolitan planning agencies. Development review empowers planners to evaluate proposed development based on a number of criteria, including but not limited to:
- Zoning
- Traffic
- Parking
- Density
- Environmental impacts
- Impacts on public facilities, such as roads, schools, sewers and emergency services
- General compatibility with neighboring uses
Other issues addressed in development review are:
- Signage
- Design
- Historic preservation
Either embedded within the development review process or following it, may be a design review process. Design review typically addresses more detailed design issues, such as building style, materials, orientation, and facade.
The development review process may begin in a number of ways. Close coordination with a public planner in the relevant jurisdiction is required for detailed steps in the process. The process should include filing of a proposed project, meetings with adjacent, confronting landowners and local residents; meetings with city staff; public meetings; and ultimately, a meeting with the planning board, during which the proposed development is evaluated in each of the relevant categories.
Development review is a formal process, during which a community has the opportunity to prevent development which is not in the interest of the public welfare and possibly to produce changes in proposed development that make it more appropriate for the community. Regardless of local economics, development review is an important planning tool.
Development review typically includes a number of approvals. It may include preliminary review, which is a city-staff-based decision about the general appropriateness of a proposed project; a site plan review, which will look at the general layout of the proposed development on the site; and a more detailed review of qualities such as bulk, density, far, etc.
Although development review is a necessary tool for all place types addressed in this web tool, it will likely play a larger role in areas where more regulatory standards apply.
Incentivize great streets with expedited development review. One way governmental agencies can encourage great streets in their community is to reward it with an expedited development review process. While this approach costs nothing for governmental agencies, it usually translates into savings for the private sector.
Make the development review process comprehensive. Too often, the development review process fails to include elements that significantly contribute to great streets. Careful access management is essential to a great street, yet access permits are often granted outside of the development review process, when negotiations are complete. All relevant departments within a local government should be involved in the development review process, including public works, transportation, urban design, pathways/recreation, forestry, in addition to planning staff. If the roadway is owned by another agency, such as the county or state, its representative should also be included.