Charlottesville Albemarle MPO:

Transcription

1 Charlottesville Albemarle MPO: Applying The Eco-Logical Approach To Small MPOs September 21, 2015 Charlottesville Albemarle Metropolitan Planning Organization (CAMPO) and The Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission

2 MPO Background Covers the City of Charlottesville and the urbanized areas of Albemarle County Economy centered around the University of Virginia Population 122,638 (2010) 24,297 Students The population is forecasted to grow by 34% by the year 2040 TJPDC encompasses Charlottesville, Albemarle, Nelson, Fluvanna, Louisa, and Greene

3 MPO and Eco-Logical The Charlottesville Albemarle MPO and the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission have been local leaders in exploring the link between environment, transportation and land use: 1998 TJPDC and partners adopted Sustainability accords 2009 Green Infrastructure assessment for the Region 2011 Worked with State and local partners to develop a Regional Environmental Framework (REF) using Eco- Logical principals 2013 Used the (REF) and a key environmental performance measure in the LRTP process 2013 Began implementing Eco-Logical into project planning by applying it to a stalled project to add additional road capacity across a river

4 CA-MPO REF Tool CA-MPO REF tool was created to be easy to use and is built on a readily available platform. It also uses datasets that are available for the whole of the State. GIS based Tool Rasterized dataset The result of combining 10 datasets related to species and habitats All input datasets and attributes were ranked by experts on a scale of 2-10 Uses existing GIS functions and tools to conduct analyses

5 REF Tool

6 Eco-Logical Datasets Built with existing datasets Tiered Species Habitat Threatened and and Endangered Species Waters Species observations Natural Landscape Assessment Cores and and Corridors Priority Conservation Sites Sites Important Bird Bird Areas National Wetlands Inventory VCLNA Watershed Integrity Model Cold Cold Water Stream Survey National Hydrography Dataset Ranking Raster system: Ranking 2 system: High scores representing highest value ecosystem areas Prioritizes preservation for for ecosystem areas (especially wetlands)

7 Eco-Logical and Performance Based Planning Quantitative measure Score per mile/per acre Total impact score Provides a way to benchmark projects and scenarios Comparable Allows for multiple environmental considerations

8 Performance Measures Map 21 Establishes a performance based program MPO s Approach Develop regional specific performance measures 16 measures organized into 4 categories Apply performance measures to a scenario based approach Mobility Measures Economic Measures Environmental Measures Community Measures

9 Performance Measures MEASURE DESCRIPTION Mobility Congestion The total percentage of roads that will have a level of service E or F in Delay The total daily hours of delay that congestion will cause in the year Mode Share The percentage of trips across the four main travel modes, automotive, transit, bike and walk for Vehicle Mobility The total system-wide vehicle miles traveled for Vehicle Crashes The total system-wide crashes per year for Economy Access to Jobs The average travel time to work. Transit Accessibility The percentage of population and the percentage of employed individuals within the MPO with access to transit. Environment Habitat Air Quality Water Quality Flood Plain Historical/Archeological sites Community Land Use Environmental Justice and Title VI: Transit Access Environmental Justice and Title VI: Impacts The aggregate impact of projects on natural resources and habitats within 500 foot buffer of project. The percent change in air quality gases and particulates in tons per year. The percent change in the amount of stormwater pollutants in tons per year. The total acreage of flood plain within a 500 foot buffer of the projects. The total number of historic or archeological sites within a 500 foot buffer of these projects. The total number of land parcels within a 500 foot buffer of the potential projects by usage: residential, comm./ind., parks, educ./religious/charitable, and agricultural/undeveloped. The total percentage of Environmental Justice or Title VI groups with access to transit: minorities, 65 and older, limited-english speaking, and household income of less than $25,000. The total percentage of Environmental Justice or Title VI groups potentially impacted due to projects: minorities, 65 and older, limited-english speaking, and household income of less than $25,000.

10 Eco-Logical as a Quantitative Measure Calculated a base score per mile for existing and committed projects Compared the change in the base score between scenarios Expressed as a percent Performance Measure Base Scenario 1A Environmental Measures Value Unit of Measure Value % Change Habitat 1,775.5 Eco-Logical Score/Mile 1, % Air Quality 13,321.0 Tons/Year 13, % Water Quality (% change in 1,079.1 Tons/Year 1, % stormwater pollutants) (tons per year) Flood Plain (acres of 100 year flood plain affected) Historical (designated historic sites within 500 ft. of projects Archeological (designated archeological sites within 500 ft. of projects) 99.1 Acres % 1,141 # of Sites 1, % 264 # of Sites %

11 Eco-Logical s Application to Free Bridge What: Why: How: Development of decision support tools to assist public officials, decision makers, planners, administrators, and the public in reducing conflicts between the built environment and ecosystems. Ecosystem services are provided by green infrastructure. Cost avoidance and revenue are also considerations. Integrate infrastructure and natural resources plans. Allow the Regional Ecological Framework to inform project alternatives. Strategically identify mitigation projects that provide the maximum ecological benefit for the dollars spent. 11

12 History of Free Bridge Constraints of topography and development make capacity improvements to US250 very expensive. Eco-logical: flexible approach to identify best alternative. Allowed MPO to implement a stakeholderdriven process. Previously Discussed Solutions South Pantops Drive 2-Lane Eastern Connector 4-Lane Eastern Connector Limited Access on 250 State Farm Boulevard Widening US 29/250 & 64 Pantops: 1957 (Farms) Pantops: 2013 (Suburban Growth) 12

13 Free Bridge Area Congestion Relief Project 18 month project focused on applying the Eco-Logical approach to a bridge project Key components Building support & understanding for Eco-Logical Stakeholder group of Local experts and advocacy groups Use of a professional facilitator Scenario and project prioritization Ranking of alternatives Alternative Estimated Cost Traffic reduction Construction Feasibility REF Impacts Overall Rank D-2 High Moderate Moderate Moderate High A-1 High High Low Low High G Moderate Low Moderate Low Mod/High F Moderate Low High Moderate Mod/High B LOW n/a Moderate High Moderate I Low n/a High Low Low A-2 LOW n/a High Low Low

14 Stakeholders: Albemarle Board of Supervisors Albemarle County Parks and Recreation Albemarle Planning Commission Albemarle Planning Department CAT Charlottesville Area Transit Charlottesville Bike + Pedestrian Safety Committee Charlottesville City Council Charlottesville Neighborhood Development Services Charlottesville Parks and Recreation Charlottesville Planning Commission Citizens Commercial Property Managers Department of Conservation and Recreation Department of Environmental Quality Department of Game and Inland Fisheries Department of Historic Resources Federal Highway Administration JAUNT Lewis and Clark Exploratory Center Martha Jefferson Hospital Piedmont Environmental Council Rivanna Conservation Society Rivanna Sewer and Water Authority Sierra Club Southern Environmental Law Center StreamWatch Virginia Department of Transportation 14

15 Outcomes Integrated Eco-Logical into Planning MPO LRTP Planning Rural Transportation Planning Project Prioritization for State Funding Pilot Project Demonstrated the use of Eco-Logical on local scale Built support for approach Improved project planning delivery time

16 Links: Project Website: Contact Information: Wood Hudson Sr. Environmental Planner Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission