Cover Image

Not for Sale



View/Hide Left Panel
Click for next page ( 7


The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 6
6 Guidelines for Providing Access to Public Transportation Stations preclude station parking expansion. Access solutions may come in the form of increased bus service and pedestrian access to stations. Newer rapid transit systems with more recently-built stations in lower-density and faster- growing, auto-dependent settings, such as RTD (Denver) and MARTA (Atlanta), require large amounts of parking to serve park-and-ride customers traveling longer distances to stations. These newer stations usually offer connecting bus services, but the availability of bus services generally dwindles as the distance from the central business district (CBD) increases and as development densities decline. This is also true for system extensions in Boston (MBTA) and Washington, D.C. (WMATA). What constitutes successful utilization depends on context. In a low-density area, lightly used walk access is not likely to be viewed as a failure. On the other hand, poorly used transit and/or park-and-ride access at an end-of-line rapid transit station might be considered a failure. Successful station access also requires seamless integration with the community, connectivity to adjacent residential and commercial areas, and absence of access-related spillover effects (e.g., congestion, neighborhood parking impacts, noise, crashes). Community satisfaction with station access services and facilities is an important measure of this relationship. A close collabo- ration with local governments is essential in defining success. The station planning process should help create this environment. A vision of station build-out should be developed early, defining long range TOD goals and parking policies. To the extent feasible or appropriate for a given situation, this could also include interagency memoranda of understanding to establish agreement on key issues. The Station Access Planning Process Good station access is essential for the success of rapid transit service, but can only be successful if the service has a strong market draw and offers competitive, quality service between significant trip generators. Current and potential riders expect and demand seamless door-to-door transit services. Unless a rider's origin and destination is at the entrance to the rapid transit service (this might be the case for TOD), some kind of mobility is required for the first and last mile of the trip. Accessibility, in the case of TOD, or mobility, in the case of more distant access, are concerns and therefore the responsibility of the agency. This responsibility is usually shared with local governments, feeder transit carriers, and private landowners and developers. These entities may control station access services, the land that is or could be used for station access, and the development and traffic management policies that may constrain or support station access improvement programs. Two characteristics of the station access planning process are important contributors to success. First and most obvious, an effective process is necessary (but not sufficient) for producing good outcomes. Second, the process should bring satisfaction to participants in the process--not only to the professionals within the rapid transit agency, but more importantly, to the collaborators from local host communities, regional and state agencies, and affected private entities. The planning process can be considered successful even if it does not produce a successful outcome. In this case, it may have value as a means of moving forward to other station access planning tasks; however, outcome success is ultimately the most important. Exhibit 2-1 illustrates the relationship among the station access planning process, the context, and the access outcomes. This context will vary--sometimes substantially--among stations, communities, and regions.

OCR for page 6
Station Access Planning Tools and Process 7 Exhibit 2-1. Relationship among the station access planning process activities. Context and Station Typology Community goals and plans Rapid transit service Land use/density Population Employment Demographics Market factors Congestion Access Outcomes Service Characteristics Types (modes) Access Planning Process Agency goals and plans Capacity Collaborations Interface quality Community Utilization Private sector Rapid transit service Technical resources Access modes Professional skills Spillovers Tools and methods Traffic conflicts Data Parking Financial resources Congestion Crash risk Exhibit 2-2 presents an idealized eight-step planning process based on the unique components of planning for access to transit. This process provides a general outline of the planning process, from identifying problems and engaging stakeholders at the outset to ultimately developing and implementing a preferred option. The process described here is not intended to be prescriptive, or to add unnecessary complexity to access planning. Rather, it reflects an ideal, against which planning practices for transit station access can be measured to identify deficiencies and specific areas where improvements are desired, and is only one of many successful methods for conducting access planning. In practice, the steps may not occur in the order presented here and one or more steps may be skipped depending on the particular application. For instance, addressing the need for additional bicycle racks at a particular station may not require a detailed process, whereas introducing a feeder bus system may. Exhibit 2-3 gives examples of best practices for each of the steps that are specific to transit station access planning. Not all best practices will apply to any given transit agency; some will already have been implemented and others will not be applicable to their specific situation. Achieving some improvements, such as developing new travel demand models, requires interagency collaboration and may take several years; others may be implemented almost immediately. The remainder of this chapter describes the access planning process and potential improvements in the context of station access planning. Step 1: Identify the Need Station planning access initiatives generally fall into two categories: 1. Initiatives associated with existing and well-established stations, and often addressing problems of a long-standing nature. These needs are likely to be easily identifiable, but simple solutions may not be readily available (e.g., no space available to expand parking). Rapid transit station

OCR for page 6
8 Guidelines for Providing Access to Public Transportation Stations Exhibit 2-2. Eight-step station access planning flowchart. Step 1: Identify the Need Step 2: Establish a Collaborative Environment Step 3: Develop Objectives and Principles Step 4: Establish Evaluation Criteria Step 5: Build a Rich Set of Appropriate Options Step 6: Predict Outcomes and Apply Criteria Step 7: Trade-offs, Negotiation, and Choice Step 8: Implementation and Monitoring access planning for existing stations is often done on a station-by-station basis, and was often identified in the stakeholder interviews as "ad hoc," "context sensitive," or local in nature, and not related to larger concerns or part of an overriding set of agency goals and objectives. 2. Initiatives associated with long-term planning, new stations, new lines, or a combination of these. In these cases, station access planning is more likely to fall into a well-established and comprehensive planning strategy, and is often integrated into NEPA and New Starts analysis. The objectives for these planning processes are related to regional goals, and intertwined with regional objectives such as congestion mitigation, environmental greening, and TOD. These objectives are incorporated into the design and operating plans for the new lines and stations. Such efforts are more comprehensive than developing improvements for existing stations and are often contained in agency guidebooks. Concerns with access to transit stations often follow patterns that can be addressed in a sys- tematic fashion through an overall planning process. This helps organize activities and provides

OCR for page 6
Station Access Planning Tools and Process 9 Exhibit 2-3. Summary of station access planning process. Step Examples of Best Practices 1. Identify the need Organize agency thinking/planning upfront Fully understand issues from multiple perspectives Recognize external (non-transit agency) problems 2. Establish a collaborative Identify and include all stakeholders environment Acknowledge inter-relatedness of various stakeholder groups Establish shared goals for transportation, environment, and economic development Understand the traveler's perspective 3. Develop objectives and Address concerns of multiple stakeholders principles Recognize the commonalities between different stations Develop a standard set of access goals and objectives that can be applied throughout system Identify opportunities and constraints 4. Establish evaluation criteria Develop criteria related to a range of objectives, including ridership, costs, and local impacts Limit evaluation criteria to a manageable number (typically fewer than 10) Establish data collection program to support evaluation criteria 5. Build a rich set of appropriate Address existing and future needs options Consider station access and ridership in route alignments and station designations Integrate community design into station development Coordinate station access design with land development Consider a wide range of improvements 6. Predict outcomes and apply Improve sensitivity of travel demand models to transit criteria access improvements Use quantitative tools to assess TOD and parking replacement Engage economic and land use forecasters Develop a strategy to measure emissions Use advanced service coverage measures to more comprehensively understand market 7. Trade-offs, negotiation, and Involve MPOs in regional decision making choice Develop balance sheets to illustrate costs and benefits for multiple stakeholders Work with adjacent transit agencies to develop integrated fare structure and service plans Refine concepts to build consensus 8. Implementation and monitoring Provide dedicated funding for access improvements Collect data and monitor the results of any improvements to inform future decisions uniformity to the solutions that are applied. Planning for access to transit does not have to be ad hoc, and may be approached through an overall planning process that helps organize activities and provide uniformity to the solutions that are applied. Organizing agency thinking about station access planning at the beginning of the process can illustrate how commonalities among individual stations can be used to form a unified process. Identifying needs at a detailed level helps to develop a better understanding of the situation and to link to potential solutions. In so doing, transit agencies can broaden their selection of improvement options and more clearly consider the applicability of solutions from one location to another.

OCR for page 6
10 Guidelines for Providing Access to Public Transportation Stations As a result, transit agencies can sort their station issues more clearly, see commonalities across the board, and make better use of available options. Moreover, a transit agency ought not to overlook concerns that do not directly impact the organization or its service, allowing other stakeholder concerns to go unnoticed. Step 2 seeks to ensure that this collaboration takes place and that these concerns are identified. Step 2: Establish a Collaborative Environment The nature of station access planning requires participation by many stakeholders, and creating a collaborative environment early in the process is essential to success. Fostering collaboration among different operating entities can help achieve a coordinated system. Creating a coordi- nated system can be elusive, but a collaborative environment is a key step in succeeding. Several attributes, discussed below, support a collaborative environment. Acknowledge Interrelation Transit agencies should acknowledge the inter-relatedness of station access planning decisions among transportation modes and other elements of the community's structure. There may be collateral impacts of a decision regarding access to a transit station. For instance, Exhibit 2-4 summarizes some of the potential impacts associated with station access improvements. The positive effects should also be identified. For example, feeder buses can reduce parking requirements and serve the mobility disadvantaged. Park-and-ride facilities extend the reach of rapid transit lines and reduce total vehicle-miles of travel. Identify and Include all Stakeholders Stakeholders generally include cities, regional and state governments, bicycle and pedestrian advocacy groups, ADA advocacy groups, business districts, and neighborhood associations. Exhibit 2-4. Station access mode interrelationships: impacts and issues. Potential Impact/Issue Access Mode or Factor Impact on other access to Impact on other elements in the transit station mode community Feeder bus Need to widen streets or change Noise pollution and air quality during traffic signal timing, making rush hours pedestrian access to transit Upgraded bus stops create concerns stations more difficult (longer about "loitering" for adjacent intersection crossing property owners distances) Buses may interfere with auto access Park-and-ride Creates opportunity for bicycle Increased traffic on local streets lots parking Noise pollution and air quality impacts Lengthens pedestrian access distance from adjacent land uses Pedestrian Wider sidewalks affecting motor Property owner concerns about trash vehicle travel lanes and losing landscaping or lawns to new or wider sidewalks Bicycle Bicycle parking reduces spaces in Space for bicycle parking reduces parking garage available for number of auto parking spaces motor vehicles Funding Competition for funds among Competition for funds with other modes community needs

OCR for page 6
Station Access Planning Tools and Process 11 Developers and transportation officials from large institutions (e.g., colleges, universities, hospi- tals, large employers) also need to be a part of the collaborative process. Advocacy is an element in planning for public transit access that can easily be undervalued. Advocates can participate in planning in many ways, including providing individual feedback to service providers, participat- ing on advisory committees, offering testimony, and conducting community walking, bicycling, and bus stop assessments. Establish Shared Goals Establish shared goals for transportation, the environment, and economic development. Collaboration starts with shared goals in which the interests of each stakeholder are satisfied. For example, goals for reducing motor vehicle congestion and increasing pedestrian traffic to and around a transit station will serve several interests. The local government will invest fewer resources in roadway maintenance, local retailers will experience an increase in foot traffic, and the transit agency will need fewer park-and-ride spaces. Close cooperation among agencies is necessary to arrive at a set of criteria that is accepted by all stakeholders. Multiple stakeholders will have different and sometimes conflicting objectives. These objectives need to be recognized through the planning and implementation process, and balanced in some way. Understand the Traveler's Perspective Transit customers see the transportation system as a single multi-modal system and expect seamless connections between all modes. They want frequent and reliable service with good con- nections to other transit lines and short walking distances to home and work. They expect the system to work well for their trip. Automobile travelers want convenient parking near stations, and congestion-free routes of access. Step 3: Develop Objectives and Principles Long-established goals and objectives that encompass mobility concerns and environmental objectives underlie much of the work of transit agencies. In addition, consideration of station- specific opportunities and constraints will also help determine these goals and objectives. While objectives and principles can be established on a case-by-case basis, having overall station access guidelines can facilitate an impartial process. Several transit agencies have developed and use formal station access planning guidelines that provide a framework within which the access planning team operates. These guidelines, reflecting the mission of the rapid transit agency, typically define the priority access modes, which may differ between locations. They set forth goal-driven criteria for station access planning and decision making. These criteria should explain why certain factors or features are important. Some guidelines include formal design standards (e.g., walking distances, replacement parking policy where TOD consumes a parking lot). The guidelines can start from transit agency policies, but can be influenced by and updated based on local experience (i.e., what has worked before and what has not). As an example, Exhibit 2-5 provides a list of a transit agency's station access planning objectives, taken from the BART Station Access Guidelines. Station access planning guidelines should not be applied rigidly; they need to recognize the needs, values, and context around particular stations. The guidelines define goals and objectives, but should allow trade-offs among the collaborators so that reasonable station access services and facilities can be implemented. They should be flexible and not established as standards. Flexibility in the guidelines works well if planners and decision makers themselves exhibit flexibility in their actions. This underscores the need for experienced and effective professionals

OCR for page 6
12 Guidelines for Providing Access to Public Transportation Stations Exhibit 2-5. BART station access planning objectives. Source: BART leading the station access planning process--people who understand the mission and have the ability to forge compromises when appropriate to achieve agency goals. Step 4: Establish Evaluation Criteria Evaluation criteria are identified based on the goals, objectives, and principles selected in the previous steps of the station access planning process. The transit agency must select criteria that evaluate station access options against their potential to achieve the agency's station access goals and objectives. Station access improvements are generally designed to meet a specific objective, whether it is decreasing cost per rider, maximizing ridership, or encouraging station area development. Depending on the objective, the transit agency must identify evaluation criteria that measure the appropriate indicators. Objective measures are best (e.g., ridership, cost, traffic volumes, mode shares, CO2 emissions) but all objectives should be covered, and qualitative, descriptive criteria should be used where necessary. Evaluation criteria for potential station access improvements fall into three key categories. Ridership Measures of ridership (i.e., utilization) of the access mode are a primary evaluation criterion. A poorly utilized mode wastes resources, and becomes a problem as the public becomes aware of low utilization. A related but not necessarily correlated goal for access services is to bring more riders to the rapid transit service. Therefore, where both of these goals are applied, access options must be evaluated not only in terms of the riders they serve but also in terms of the incremental ridership they bring to rapid transit mode. Logically, these two outcomes are typically correlated,

OCR for page 6
Station Access Planning Tools and Process 13 but a new access mode could draw passengers from an existing mode without adding travelers to the rapid transit service. There are numerous ridership evaluation tools, including an access analysis spreadsheet developed through this research effort. Chapter 5 summarizes these tools. In general, the tools predict ridership based on station, rider, and access characteristics, and the structure of these tools is substantially consistent in terms of variables and formulations. Thus, for most transit agencies, selecting one or a small number of ridership prediction tools should not be difficult. Costs and Revenues Capital and operating costs associated with station access are important in planning and decision making. The demand for a given access mode's infrastructure influences the amount an agency will spend to accommodate that mode. A station access service carrying few riders cannot sustain high costs, while one that accommodates many riders can justify a much larger investment. Moreover, the transit agency's costs of station access infrastructure vary by access mode. Providing park-and-ride capacity requires significant land area, as well as possible payment collection and enforcement, while bicycle parking can be inexpensive and requires relatively little space. This suggests measuring access infrastructure as a cost per rider on the access service and cost per incremental rapid transit rider. Another common measure is the farebox recovery ratio (i.e., the ratio of operating revenue to operating cost). For investment planning, economic measures such as benefit-cost ratio are commonly used. Some transit agencies have developed integrated measures of costs and ridership by convert- ing riders to revenues. BART developed such an approach to compare (TOD) with use of the same land area for station parking. They use an elasticity-based demand shift model, along with judgmental forecasts, to estimate the ridership consequences of changes in parking supply and price. They convert ridership into revenue and combine the result with land rents from TOD to produce an estimate of the net revenue to the rapid transit operator. This integrated measure is useful for evaluating cost and ridership impacts of TOD parking trade-offs, but other factors, particularly local impacts, will also be important in making access service decisions. Local Strategies and Impacts The most focused consequences of station access will be on local communities surrounding the stations. These impacts may be positive (e.g., congestion relief or improved community access to rapid transit) or negative (e.g., increased congestion, noise). In some cases, local concerns may extend to the relationship between transit station access planning and community development strategy: new access service may support or oppose local development plans and desired com- munity characteristics. Consideration of these local strategies and impacts are critical components of the access planning process. Community concerns can be classified into four categories: goals, community capacity, access to the station, and vulnerabilities. Community Goals--A fundamental concern in rapid transit station access planning is the compatibility between station access design and local community goals. If a community sets its sights on making much greater use of non-motorized modes--becoming a walking and biking community--then the station access design should recognize those goals. Some com- munities welcome the potential for increasing development near the station as a desirable economic benefit, while other communities do not wish to see any increased activity in order to preserve the existing community character. Helping communities become what they want to (and can reasonably) be is a way of establishing a productive partnership between the rapid transit agency and local governments. The challenge is to balance present needs with future goals and, in the process, help the community fulfill its goals. Community Capacity--Community capacity to accept new access facilities and services is divided into two categories: (1) land availability for facilities, including parking, terminals,

OCR for page 6
14 Guidelines for Providing Access to Public Transportation Stations bicycle facilities, and access roadways; and (2) roadway capacity to handle changes in traffic demand for all important access modes. Land availability must be viewed from the perspective of both the absolute amount of land needed compared with what exists and might be acquired, and from the perspective of community goals for land development near stations: the nature of the current land use (compatibility issues), what the community desires, and what the community will tolerate. The impact of station access alternatives on roadway capacity and congestion near stations is a critical decision factor in many settings. These impacts may come in the form of community benefits through reduced reliance on the automobile as a result of demand management (e.g., pricing or limiting parking) and providing alternative services (e.g., bike, walk, and feeder transit). Alternatively, if the transit agency adds park-and-ride capacity, the neighbor- hood around the station may experience more traffic. It will be important to determine whether the street network can safely and effectively carry additional vehicles while accommodating both pedestrian and bicycle traffic. While station area congestion is an important issue to local communities, it may be of little or no interest to a regional service provider (although difficult access may discourage passenger usage). This observation illustrates the important notion that different stakeholders have different interests in the outcomes. The planning process should respond to these differing interests by introducing the issues early and addressing them effectively through participative planning that engages local agencies. Community Access to the Station--Rapid transit station access planning must consider the station access needs of the community surrounding the station. These needs will be dependent on land use (density, mix, housing types), demographics (family size, income, employment patterns), and other factors that may change through the planning time horizon. That change may be a result of natural changes over time, or as an outcome of local policy actions mixed with the impacts of the rapid transit service. Thus, it is important to consider local access needs as an evolving issue. The nature of those future needs should be determined through a collaboration of local and regional planning. Community Vulnerabilities--Community vulnerabilities include sensitive land uses, areas where increases in traffic may cause special safety concerns, historic places, and public open space. Special populations, such as children, the elderly, people with disabilities, and minority populations, may warrant special attention in planning and decision making. It will be important to address such vulnerabilities in both access service design and in the evaluation of alternatives. Much of this effort will be qualitative, and collaboration with local decision makers will be important. The collaborative process should work to limit the criteria set to the essential few, so that it is possible to understand the alternatives within the framework of the criteria. Ideally, this means 10 or fewer key criteria. Sample objectives with corresponding evaluation criteria are summarized in Exhibit 2-6. Data collection is an important factor to be considered when establishing the evaluation criteria. Throughout the transit industry, there is a need for more comprehensive data collection programs to support evaluation criteria. Data collection should be conducted regularly, and include information on access mode shares by station, parking utilization, and other information necessary to inform planning decisions. In addition, data collection programs should seek to obtain more qualitative information on such items as neighborhood plans, goals, and priorities. Step 5: Build a Rich Set of Appropriate Options Station access plans should reflect the needs and opportunities of individual transit stations, reflecting the station location, pedestrian and bicycle connections, local transit routing, and

OCR for page 6
Station Access Planning Tools and Process 15 Exhibit 2-6. Evaluation criteria by goal. Objective Evaluation Criteria Maximize Revenue Cost per passenger Cost per new passenger Farebox recovery ratio Maximize Ridership Monthly station boardings Daily linked trips Passenger-miles traveled Economic Development/TOD Station area land value Station access mode share Reduce Environmental Footprint Non-auto access mode share Greenhouse emissions generated Enhance the Local Community Aesthetic impacts Station area congestion overall roadway network. Land availability, land costs, existing land uses, and future development plans will also influence improvements. The following guidelines can be used when developing station access options: Consider All Modes. Transit agencies have a rich set of options from which to select, which is demonstrated by the wide range of solutions found across the United States. The approach taken by many agencies, however, is very often based on a single mode, such as a park-and-ride utilization survey or a bike parking study, which limits the range of options. A multi-modal approach that seeks to balance the modes of access with the goals and objectives may provide the most flexible and robust solution. Address Existing and Future Needs. Identifying options for existing and future needs ensures that the transit agency is addressing short-term needs while preparing itself for future demands. The demand presented by future needs may influence decision making about existing issues, which is critical for sustainable system growth and development. Consider Station Access in Route Alignments. Station access planning is often conducted after the high-capacity routing is established and stations are located, which can lead to suboptimal results. Considering access and ridership in the context of station and service planning affords the opportunity to maximize the benefit of potential station area features and development, including connectivity and land use. Integrate Community Design into Station Development. Incorporating local context and design elements into station planning can encourage more favorable station access features. Effective transit stations are seen by the community as an asset, not simply a means to board a bus or train. Coordinate Station Access Design with Land Development. Transit stations in urban, walkable environments can emphasize pedestrian connections to maximize the benefit of the area's land use. Similarly, high-quality and convenient feeder bus access is more appropriate at stations with less direct pedestrian connections. In addition to infrastructure and connections, transit agencies should recognize a station's function based on surrounding land uses. Stations primarily serving commercial office buildings will require much different access designs than those serving sports stadiums. Drawing on the preceding steps, various improvement opportunities can be developed along with associated constraints. Options to be explored can include adding station entrances; providing weather-protected walkways to bus terminals and parking facilities; improving bus service frequency and coverage; expanding parking spaces; relieving recurrent traffic congestion; and fostering TOD.

OCR for page 6
16 Guidelines for Providing Access to Public Transportation Stations Step 6: Predict Outcomes and Apply Criteria After identifying the objectives and evaluation criteria, and having established a set of options, transit agencies need to predict the outcomes of the improvement options and compare those outcomes against the criteria. Accurate prediction of station access improvement outcomes allows agencies and partner stakeholders to effectively evaluate alternatives. The following is a summary of the existing state-of-the-art of predictive and analytical tools. Improved Travel Demand Modeling Tools. At present, travel demand models generally do not do a good job of evaluating transit access alternatives. Transit agencies should work with metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) to develop more sophisticated models that address the questions that decision makers have. Metra (Chicago) uses a model to predict access mode shares to each of its stations, although its methods are simplistic and only differentiate between auto and non-auto station access. More sophisticated models could predict ridership impacts of station access alternatives. Tools to Assess TOD and Parking Replacement. Transit agencies are developing specialized tools for analyzing the impacts of TOD at stations. BART uses a spreadsheet-based tool designed to weigh the economic and ridership trade-offs between various station area development and parking supply alternatives. By studying alternative development scenarios at stations, analysts are able to estimate what level of parking and development investment will yield the greatest level of benefit to BART, partner transit agencies, and local municipalities. Ridership impacts include riders lost from reduced parking and riders gained through TOD. Financial impacts include changes in parking revenue and the ability of new development to pay for itself through rent. Engage Economic and Land Use Forecasters. The land use and economic impacts of transit investment are generally accepted, though difficult to measure and predict. Partnering with economic forecasters can provide the opportunity to estimate these future impacts. This can be of particular value when presenting alternatives to partner agencies or the public, as these impacts can justify upfront expense for long-term gain. Emission Measurement Tools. Although use varies by jurisdiction, environmental benefits are becoming more important across the United States as an evaluation criterion. With transit seen as a major opportunity for enhancing sustainability, transit agencies and affiliated stakeholders will benefit from a quantitative evaluation of the environmental benefits for a variety of alternatives. Advanced Service Coverage Measurement. Service coverage area is a standard performance measurement for transit agencies that defines the catchment area for transit passengers and can help agencies determine the value of a station or line and evaluate its performance. However, a basic air-distance buffer tends to overlook nuanced station area attributes which may deter- mine ridership access, particularly access mode choice. Advanced methods of measurement, particularly pedestrian and bicycle level of service, are available and can improve an agency's understanding of its service area. A detailed review of existing predictive and analytical tools, along with a description of the high- level planning tool developed as part of this research are provided in Chapter 5, Travel Demand Considerations. The outcomes of the predictive models for the base case and each option may be summarized and presented to the stakeholders for discussion and review. The strengths and weaknesses of each option against the criteria should be clearly identified, painting a future picture of the station area under each scenario. At this stage of the process, one or two preferred options may emerge that can be carried forward to the next step. Step 7: Identify Trade-offs, Negotiation, and Choices This step requires close collaboration among the transit agency, the surrounding community, and possibly private developers. Compromise is an essential feature of this collaborative decision

OCR for page 6
Station Access Planning Tools and Process 17 Exhibit 2-7. Conceptual balance sheet example. Outcome Regional Agency Municipality measure Benefits Costs Benefits Costs Ridership Increased N/A Improved N/A transit transit access ridership for residents Street traffic Reduced N/A N/A Increased local (congestion) freeway congestion congestion TOD Development Fewer long- Development Fewer long- opportunities term TOD opportunities term TOD within parking opportunities within parking opportunities structures structures Fiscal Revenue from Capital costs Shared Reduced Impact operation of Maintenance parking property/ sales park-and-ride and opportunities tax revenue facility operation Sales tax from Fewer station costs commuter area purchases development opportunities Environment Improved air Limited N/A Aesthetic quality reduction in impacts of fuel parking lots consumption making. Exhibit 2-7 shows a conceptual balance sheet summarizing costs and benefits for a hypothetical regional agency and local jurisdiction associated with increasing park-and-ride capacity. Note that not all trade-offs occur between transit agencies and local jurisdictions; other sets of stakeholders may view options differently. For instance, integrating transit fares to facilitate riding feeder bus to the station may require substantial negotiation between adjacent transit agencies to develop cost-sharing. Some transit agencies may find this an unacceptable option (due to potential losses in farebox revenue), while passengers find it very desirable. After carefully weighing the available options and analyzing outcomes and impacts, agencies and stakeholders must ultimately decide on transit station access improvements. The results of the evaluation effort will almost always lead to revised designs, or even new options. In some cases this may mean using the information gathered to reevaluate scenarios and run new analyses. Following these steps helps to ensure buy-in by all the relevant stakeholders, thereby providing the best chance for success. Not every process will result in a station access plan that meets the expectations and desires of all stakeholders. However, through an open and collaborative process based on clearly identified objectives and criteria, it is possible to develop an option that is accepted and can move forward to implementation. Step 8: Develop, Implement, and Monitor the Recommended Plan Once the preferred option has been selected, the project moves into development (planning and design) and implementation. It is critical that the agreements reached in selecting the final option are carried through into the implementation. If it becomes clear that the selected option cannot be implemented as agreed, the project should return to the trade-off and negotiation

OCR for page 6
18 Guidelines for Providing Access to Public Transportation Stations phase of the process (Step 7). In rare instances, it may even be necessary to develop a new set of options (Step 5) and go back through the process with the stakeholders. Providing funding for a station access planning program is an important element for success. Where possible, agencies should identify ongoing funding for station access improvements to ensure that concerns can be addressed and implemented over time. Understanding the likely availability of future funding will also help choices align more closely with fiscal reality. For example, BART has historically dedicated a portion of parking revenue to access improvements. Finally, implementation of access improvements should be accompanied and followed-up by a comprehensive data collection, evaluation and monitoring program. Data collection should include ridership, access mode share, method of fare payment, on-time performance of feeder service or other data dictated by the evaluation criteria. The improvements should be formally evaluated against the initial goals and objectives (Step 3) and the evaluation criteria (Step 4), typically one or two years after implementation to allow time for travel patterns to change. After the formal evaluation, data collection should continue for monitoring purposes. Such monitoring will allow agencies to understand the impacts of various access improvements and will provide valuable local information to inform future decisions.