recommendations and implementation - smart …€¦ · impact investing industry ......

RECOMMENDATIONS AND IMPLEMENTATION TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT FOR WASHTENAW AVENUE

DRAFT Working Paper #3

Completed in collaboration with the Michigan Department of Transportation, Michigan Economic Development Corporation and Michigan State Housing Development Authority.

This report was produced with the generous support of the Rockefeller Foundation.

The Rockefeller Foundation fosters innovative solutions to many of the world’s most pressing challenges, affirming its mission, since 1913, to “promote the well‐being” of humanity. Today, the Foundation works to ensure that more people can tap into the benefits of globalization while strengthening resilience to its risks. Foundation initiatives include efforts to mobilize an agricultural revolution in Sub‐Saharan Africa, bolster economic security for American workers, inform equitable, sustainable transportation policies in the United States, ensure access to affordable and high‐quality health systems in developing countries, accelerate the impact investing industry’s evolution, and develop strategies and services that help vulnerable communities cope with the impacts of climate change. For more information, please visit www.rockefellerfoundation.org.

Table of Contents Page

Recommendations and Implementation ........................................................................................ i Transportation Demand Management for Washtenaw Avenue................................................... i

1 Overview ......................................................................................................................................11 2 Strategies .....................................................................................................................................22

Employer‐Specific TDM Practices.........................................................................................................2‐3 TDM‐focused internship ........................................................................................................................2‐15 Model MDOT Complete STreet Policy ..............................................................................................2‐18 Predictable and consistent long term TDM requirements......................................................2‐22

Table of Figures Page

Figure 3‐1 Home Location of VA Hospital Employees by Zip Code (percent) ...................2‐10 Figure 6‐1 Sample TDM requirements.................................................................................................2‐23

1 OVERVIEW Change is the only constant – so goes the old adage – and Washtenaw Avenue is a corridor in the midst of its latest change. Once a sleepy rural corridor Washtenaw Avenue developed into a major auto oriented thoroughfare. Under the leadership of the ReImagine Washtenaw Joint Technical Committee, the corridor is preparing to transform once again into a series of distinct, vibrant, walkable nodes linked by a high functioning, multimodal transportation corridor.

The Michigan Sense of Place Council, representing numerous state agencies under the direction of Governor Snyder, has partnered with Smart Growth America to provide technical advisory services to six Michigan communities to support and advance their livable communities initiatives. The Washtenaw working group opted to focus on transportation demand management strategies in order to reduce the growth of traffic volumes on the corridor and enhance walkability, bikability and transit attraction on the corridor. The technical assistance progressed in three stages: 1) review of national leading practices and assessment of existing local resources and opportunities, 2) discussion of alternative approaches and strategies, and finally 3) development of an action strategy for implementation.

This third paper is a starting point, outlining broad actions for further exploration and pursuit, however specific implementation may require additional work and study, particularly as it relates to individual TDM plans and marketing for the major employers and continued dialogue on a formal entity capable of leading corridor improvement.

In pursuing the recommended strategy, Washtenaw Avenue corridor stakeholders should, even must, reassess and reconfirm the following:

Know where you want to go – identify clear objectives and measurable outcomes, establish a baseline for where you are now, and track progress along the way in order to make course corrections and actively learn the most effective strategies for this community.

Assess your capabilities – Thoroughly and realistically inventory the resources available for this pursuit – including budget, staff time, and leadership attention. These are vital for success. “Right size” early actions to the resources that will ensure that first success in order to propel the program and initiative on to continued and expanded effectiveness later.

Find the champions – There are many small individual/institutional actions that are required to achieve the corridor vision. Each of these actions requires its own champion and these champions must collaborate and communicate. Few of these strategies can be implemented overnight. Many will take months and years to implement. Strong, committed and capable champions will provide the visibility, energy, and persistence necessary to pursue, and accelerate, change.

Washtenaw Avenue Working Paper #3

Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 2‐2

2 STRATEGIES The Joint Technical Committee of the ReImagine Washtenaw project has achieved a substantial amount through partnerships and strong coordination among all stakeholders and jurisdictions. While this partnership has achieved a remarkable shared vision, further action and commitment will be necessary to meaningfully affect travel demand patterns on the corridor. It is also necessary to broaden the partnership even further to ensure stakeholders embrace and own the strategies for successful implementation.

Four broad strategies are recommended as priority initial actions to advance transportation demand management, enhance and enable inviting multimodal mobility and strengthen placemaking and economic development along the corridor and in the sub‐region:

1. Adoption of employer‐specific TDM practices (implemented by individual employers) 2. Investment in sponsoring a TDM‐Focused Internship (jointly funded) 3. Model MDOT complete street policies (with MDOT) 4. Predictable and consistent TDM policies for long term development (by a Corridor

Improvement Authority or other authoritative entity/ies)

ReImagine Washtenaw is envisioned as the principle entity for tracking and pursuing implementation of these strategies. While individual employers, in the near term, are anticipated to be responsible for near‐term implementation; ReImagine Washtenaw is anticipated to provide encouragement and assistance (as possible) as well as be responsible for the aggregation of results and communication of their impact on the performance of the corridor and effect on advancing the vision for Washtenaw Avenue.

While the internship may reside in any of the partner institutions, close collaboration with and guidance of ReImagine Washtenaw will be critical in having the broad effects on the corridor desired by this initiative. The organization will also be the principal contact with MDOT to pursue examination of complete street designs for the corridor and continue to advocate for long term, coordinated TDM strategies for all portions of the corridor and adjacent major traffic generators (institutions and employers).



EMPLOYERSPECIFIC TDM PRACTICES Major employers located on or near Washtenaw Avenue play a dynamic role in shaping the corridor and its future. Four of the largest employers, Eastern Michigan University, the University of Michigan, the VA Hospital, and Washtenaw Community College have actively participated in and committed to the corridor revitalization vision. Several of these already have TDM practices in place in some form or fashion and some have initiated additional TDM strategies raised over the course of this effort. Though the employers function independently, each one can implement strategies that work to achieve a benefit for all users of Washtenaw Avenue. Recommended Actions

1. Develop a joint statement of commitment adopted by major employers 2. Identify and appoint an in‐house TDM coordinator within each major institution 3. Establish individualized TDM priorities

Recommended actions

Joint statement of commitment

Many of the corridor stakeholders have already demonstrated a broad commitment to the corridor; nonetheless there is still value in developing a joint statement of commitment specifically for transportation demand management. TDM can easily succumb to the “tragedy of the commons” with a handful of employers taking aggressive action, at some cost, to reduce traffic impacts only to see that capacity created consumed by employees of other institutions who lack TDM benefits or knowledge.

Negotiation of a joint statement requires focused dialogue and contemplation of options. It develops greater ownership and peer accountability. It also allows for collaborative action and shared reporting to assess the effectiveness of various strategies for unique users and conditions. This statement would not only serve to bring employers to the table, but would also raise awareness and confidence among smaller employers and residents of the efforts along Washtenaw Avenue.

Drafting and approving this statement does not require a huge commitment of time, nor does it require a commitment of funds, just a shared commitment to action. We recommend that the ReImagine Washtenaw coordinator convene this effort and facilitate negotiations.

Identify and appoint inhouse TDM coordinators

Each large employer should appoint an in‐house transportation coordinator. This position is typically most effective and informed when located within the human resources or administrative department. In this way, the transportation coordinator will have annual opportunities (through open enrollment seasons or other personnel encounters) to work closely with existing employees and can reach new employees as they begin. Ideally, the appointed coordinator will have experience and/or interest in transportation services and adequate capacity (given other required duties) to perform this additional service. Activities of this multi‐faceted coordinator typically include:



• Education, training and information distribution to employees about the commuting options available to them.

• Trip coaching in and encouragement of the use of alternative commute methods such as taking transit, biking, and walking, and providing information about telework and flexible schedules, if allowed.

• Developing and implementing programs that encourage, enable, and facilitate carpools, vanpools, and other car‐sharing programs.

• Coordinating service for employees with disabilities.

• Liasoning with local transportation providers to better serve the employer and employees.

• Advising the development of viable and effective benefit programs and marketing and promoting not only the benefits and options available to employees, but also the services offered by transportation providers.

• Distributing bus passes, vouchers, etc.

• Tracking and measuring usage and impact on demands for more expensive accommodations such as structured parking and/or benefits to corridor objectives such as peak auto travel, retail sales, and live‐near‐work residential.

Collaboration and communication between institutions and their coordinators can yield even broader benefits and further information sharing. For instance, University of Michigan (UM) routinely has a representative from the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority (AATA) speak to incoming freshmen at orientation about getting around UM, Ann Arbor, and the region.

The region and corridor is fortunate to have local examples of highly effective TDM programs in both the getDowntown program and UM program. These are terrific local resources to leverage in training and supporting the efforts of individual in‐house coordinators for other major employers and institutions.

Costs

A full‐time transportation coordinator salary would range between $45,000‐$60,000. With the addition of benefits (assumed at 30%), the total cost would be $60,000‐$80,000 annually. Additional costs include staff time to hire, select, and train the coordinator. However, this position does not have to be fulltime, or a new position, at least in the initial phases. The employer must weigh their needs with the costs to determine the right option for them to maximize effectiveness. Most places have found that the cost savings produced by TDM programs (in the form of reduced necessary parking construction, employee productivity and other measures) covers the cost of the position several times over. In addition to salary, the coordinator may also require basic supplies and funding for marketing materials, benefit development, and promotion activities. These costs can range from negligible to $20,000 based on the number of employees reached and aggressiveness of the program.

Strategy Estimated Cost In‐house TDM coordinator (additional duty of existing employee) $0 In‐house TDM coordinator (full‐time) $60,000‐$80,000 Supplies and marketing $1,000‐$20,000 Estimated Total $1,000$100,000



Initial Tasks

As this effort to establish TDM practices along Washtenaw Avenue grows, so will demands on transportation coordinators. However, in the first year, we recommend each coordinator focus on six initial tasks:

1. Identify and assemble multimodal transportation system information (bike and bus maps, fare and schedule information, ride matching, guaranteed ride home, smart phone apps, etc.) and available transportation benefits (pre‐tax benefits, carpool incentives, etc.). Assemble into a package for incoming employees.

2. Establish baseline conditions (how many employees currently utilize alternative commuting modes? What are current parking rates and demands? Etc.) and measures of success to track and regularly report and maintain (e.g. number of employees reached, number participating in the program, current parking demand, employee satisfaction surveys, etc.). Set data collection system and protocols.

3. Organize quarterly “fairs” or information booth/tables in lobby or major location to reach out to existing employees. Largest information push should be in conjunction with open enrollment period.

4. Establish “office hours”, drop in periods, or scheduled times for one‐on‐one transportation options help or “trip coaching” for employees (literally walking new users through how to use the transit, carpool, bikeshare, or other systems).

5. Ensure that the employer offers the commuter payroll tax deduction to their employees. Set up necessary systems to do so.

6. Meet with transportation service providers. This will help each employer understand the service provided to them currently and will establish good relationships that ease the process of expanding or changing service in the future, if desired.

7. Work with corridor intern (below) to develop corridor‐wide TDM programs, such as a marketing campaign, commuter challenge, pilot programs, etc. Though each employer will continue to work independently in the short‐term, this small amount of collaboration can set the stage for greater and more direct collaboration in the future. This collaboration also helps each employer realize their role in what Washtenaw Avenue looks like today and what it can look like in the future.

8. Draft a simple five‐year TDM plan for their employer that prioritizes certain strategies, sets specific goals and targets, and provides details on implementation. As a starting point, the TDM coordinator can draw upon the priorities discussed below.

Establish individualized TDM priorities

Each of the large employers should develop individualized TDM priorities. As a result of discussions with major institutions about their objectives and abilities, several initial actions are recommended as feasible and effective. These are a general guide for achieving the greatest benefits, however each employer must refine these based on the resources available. The most important aspect of each of these suggestions is developing metrics beforehand and developing tracking mechanisms, so that costs, benefits, and areas for improvement are clear.



Eastern Michigan University

Eastern Michigan University (EMU), located at the eastern limit of the corridor, has approximately 23,000 students and 1,700 faculty and staff, the majority of whom live off campus. Having experienced traffic circulation problems associated with Washtenaw Avenue, the university has tried to do its part to offer alternative transportation options. Though utilization has been mixed, EMU sees great potential in improving their existing TDM programs and policies – and trying new ones – to achieve a reduction in driving alone to campus.

In 2013, EMU conducted a survey to learn more about attitudes toward commuting to campus. The survey gathered responses from about 30 percent of the faculty and staff and about 7 percent of the students. A few highlights from the survey:

• The majority of students live off‐campus (91 percent). Of those, 65 percent live more than six miles away.

• More than 80 percent of students drive alone to school. Over 90 percent of faculty and staff do. A similar percentage agreed that owning a vehicle is "absolutely necessary" for their current transportation situation.

• Though the drive alone rate is high, 13 percent of students walk or bike to campus. Nearly three percent use AATA and one percent share rides.

• About 35 percent of students and faculty live within walking distance of an AATA bus route.

• Over 36 percent of students, 19 percent of faculty, and 21 percent of staff said that they would consider using the AATA bus if EMU paid the fare. An additional 20 percent of students, 22 percent of staff, and 14 percent of faculty answered "maybe."

Revise AATA bus pass program (12 years)

EMU sells AATA bus passes to its students and faculty at a 30 percent discount ‐ $40 each month instead of AATA's $58. EMU pays the remaining $18 per person. Despite offering a convenient alternative to driving, the pass program is not well‐utilized. Less than one percent of students and one percent of faculty take advantage of the discount, with about five faculty purchasing a monthly pass and about 70 students. Annually, this amounts to about $16,000 of expenses for EMU, funded through the student transportation fee of $0.97 per credit hour.

Over one‐third of students and about 20 percent of faculty and staff would consider using AATA bus if a free pass were available. Currently, the pass costs significantly more over the course of the

Stanford University

In the 1990s, Stanford University adopted a multi‐pronged transportation demand management policy aimed at shifting its mode split away from driving alone to campus. Stanford used both incentives – like parking cash‐outs – and disincentives – like raising parking prices – to coax students and employees to use transit and bike or walk. The university also invested $4 million in creating a bike‐friendly campus. More than 900 individuals switched from driving to other modes, and the University estimates it saved $18 million in new parking construction costs. Following this initial success, Stanford expanded the size of its campus by 20% but without any effect on traffic in Palo Alto.



academic year than a parking pass; if the bus pass were free to the rider, the utilization of the passes would likely greatly increase.

A pass program would offer several benefits to EMU, beyond the obvious benefit to students and faculty. A pass program could:

• Defray the costs of parking management and infrastructure, reducing the need to build new parking structures or acquire new parcels for parking lots.

• Serve as a perk for attracting new faculty and students to campus.

• Decrease driving rates and requisite traffic on campus and on surrounding roadways.

• Increase transit mode share and enhance EMU's image as a "green" institution.

Steps towards implementation include:

1. Meet with AATA to outline program parameters. EMU currently pays AATA about $50,000 per year for bus passes (about $35,000 of which is passed on to students and faculty who purchase passes) and an additional $150,000 annually for fares on Route 33. These funding streams should all be considered as part of EMU's support package for AATA.

2. Calculate formula to ensure benefit/fairness to EMU and AATA. Pass programs are typically funded with a discounted per‐ride fee, which means the university would not know the cost of its program ahead of time. Some universities choose instead to pay a flat supporting rate.

3. Incorporate park‐and‐ride shuttles. EMU has one shuttle that brings students to campus who park in a nearby free lot. Since only 35 percent of the students live within walking distance of a bus stop, park and ride lots may help bring students closer to campus, but would not require them to drive on campus.

4. Expand marketing. Students and faculty should be exposed to the AATA bus pass at every opportunity, not just once at orientation or within their welcome packet. AATA should be involved in on‐campus events and activities and can conduct travel training workshops at orientation and other monthly or bi‐annual campus life events.

Advocate for better bicycle connections (14 years)

Thirteen percent (13 percent) of students walk or bike to campus, and EMU recognizes that it needs to accommodate this growing mode. As of winter 2013, campus had 690 bike rack spots for bike parking, with more coming in the next year. In recent years, bike facilities have been expanded on campus.

Connections leading from the surrounding communities to campus are still gaps in the bike network, however. The only road connecting to campus with an on‐street facility is Cross Avenue. The West Campus Bike Path and Huron River Road off‐street trail are two good connections, but no bicycle connections are available to the south and west. An off street trail on Washtenaw Avenue could become an important cycling connection.


1. Continue on‐campus efforts, including working with student groups to cite bicycle racks and holding bicycling events/campaigns on campus, such as National Bike Month events in May.

2. Work with jurisdictional partners to identify appropriate and safe bicycle connection from the south and/or west, either creating a safe crossing of Washtenaw Avenue or a safe facility along it.



3. Work with local cycling advocates, ReImagine Washtenaw, and individual jurisdictions along Washtenaw to develop area bicycling priorities.

Offer targeted parking management programs (24 years)

EMU does not have a parking shortage; only five of its 21 lots average more than 50 percent utilization in a recent survey.1 With abundant parking and a strong driving culture, evidenced by the survey, EMU will have to adopt a few tactics to persuade students and faculty to use other modes. EMU already offers tiered parking fees for faculty. The university could also offer cash‐out options for those faculty or staff who may only want to drive some of the time and use other modes at other times, especially since Ypsilanti experiences such seasonal fluctuations in driving conditions.

These unused parking spaces are a sunk cost to the university that is currently going unrecovered. At the same time, there are limited park and ride facilities along the corridor for commuters into Ann Arbor or Detroit. EMU should explore the viability of offering these underutilized spaces, at a cost, for park and ride activities and dedicate any proceeds to defray costs of the transit pass.


1. Document and analyze existing parking utilization, rates, revenue, and full parking costs.

2. Conduct discussion groups with employees and administrative staff to educate them about the program, determine where reservations lie, and understand what amount of subsidy may incentivize employees to not drive.

3. Gather information on existing parking cash‐out programs in similar areas.

4. Using the above research and quantitative analysis, determine the market for this type of program.

5. Set a subsidy amount. Employers can simply add cash on to participating employees' paychecks or, depending upon the situation, may choose to use vouchers or Commuter Checks in place of actual cash. Cash is taxable, but Commuter Checks are not.

6. Determine how the university will monitor compliance. One strategy that has been used to verify voluntary compliance is to have participating employees sign an initial pledge form that is updated with periodic monitoring forms. The pledge should detail how employees plan to commute without using a parking space.

7. Set goals for the program by semester.

8. Conduct extensive marketing of the program through campus events and activities, orientations, commuting fairs or informational sessions/workshops, etc.

9. Track utilization and progress, and report findings to program coordinator. Optimize offsite parking shuttle (24 years)

EMU operates a shuttle to off‐site parking at the athletic facilities. The shuttle used to be very popular, but ridership has waned in recent years, and typically is only about 10 riders per trip. Service operates from 7:20 AM to 10:20 PM at 20‐minute headways. The shuttle makes stops at Rynearson Parking Lot, Bowen Field House, EMU Student Center, and the Fletcher School.

1 EMU Parking Lot Counts, Winter 2013.



EMU initially discussed having AATA operate the service, but AATA quoted an annual cost of $200,000; EMU spends about $80,000 on the service annually.

If EMU works with AATA to create a pass program, this shuttle could be incorporated into the menu of services AATA offers to EMU. AATA can assist EMU with planning this transit route to maximize ridership and potentially work with other parking lots or parking management efforts to design an appropriate park and ride shuttle service.


1. Explore potential for AATA to operate service as part of larger partnership package which may include a pass program and/or commuter access to the remote lot.

2. Discuss service statistics and ridership trends with AATA to identify enhancement opportunities that will not diminish service quality to students.

St. Joseph Mercy Hospital

St. Joseph Mercy Hospital is a 537‐bed teaching hospital located on 340 acres near Washtenaw Community College on Huron River and Golfside Drives. The hospital has approximately 3,300 employees and treats approximately 30,000 patients each year. While specific information was unavailable at the time of report, observation, context, and general area practices suggest that driving alone is likely the dominant mode of access for patients and visitors. In recent months, the hospital has begun initial discussions regarding alternative transportation measures; bringing hospital leadership to the discussion table is important. As one of the largest employers located very near Washtenaw Avenue, their participation in this process will have a significant impact on the corridor.

Subsequent to the initial drafting of this report, key leadership of St. Joseph Mercy Hospital has met with ReImagine Washtenaw staff and partners to explore opportunities for improved transit services and other transportation demand management strategies. That initial meeting was very productive and set a positive context for continued evolution and implementation of future strategies.

University of Michigan

UM has had a TDM program for UM faculty, staff, and students for many years and understands the importance of offering a myriad of options. The university has already been successful in implementing many TDM strategies discussed as part of this process, and provides good information on what the university offers through the pts.umich.edu website. Implementing an in‐house coordinator may also be difficult given how large the university is and the decentralized nature of hiring faculty and staff. Therefore, we recommend two measures for the university to take that should not require considerable effort:

1. Ensure that the pts.umich.edu website is distributed to all new employees as part of a welcome email or packet.

2. Develop metrics and tracking mechanisms for existing programs and make this information readily available to the public.

VA Hospital

The Veteran’s Administration Hospital in Ann Arbor sees more than 1,600 patients daily and employs about 2,200 people at their facility on Fuller Road. The Hospital has 2,081 parking spots for employees and 470 for patients or visitors. To manage transportation demand, the VA currently shuttles about 300 employees from off‐site parking lots offers 28 carpool parking spots, and



subsidizes 60 staff members who choose alternative transportation measures, such as local or express services on TheRide. The VA Hospital also has a bike rack available, which is well used, and has approved 23 staff members to telework for greater than three days per week. Despite these alternatives, the hospital reports a serious parking crunch and many calls for additional spaces. The VA has approved funding for a new 300‐space parking structure, though a portion of the land is currently on UM property; the two parties must agree on a land trade or purchase before construction can begin.

Though the above figures do not give specific demand, it is likely that 95 percent or more of employees at the VA drive to work. Trips between work and home make up a significant portion of the traffic along Washtenaw Avenue, so it is salient to study the home locations of employees. Nearly 30 percent of employees at the VA have their home in one of four zip codes: 48103, 48104, 48105, and 48197, as shown in Error! Reference source not found.. This area covers most of the cities of Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti and much of the region to the west and north. Washtenaw Avenue is also mostly contained within these zip codes. An additional 11 percent of employees live in zip codes 48108, 48111, and 48198, which includes additional parts of Ypsilanti and areas to the south and east of Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti.

The figure also demonstrates why Washtenaw Avenue is a critical corridor for VA employees, particularly to those in the 48104, 48108, 48197, and the southern portion of 48198 zip codes. Though Ypsilanti is broken up into multiple zip codes, making it difficult to draw definite conclusions, it is reasonable to suggest that between seven and nine percent of VA employees live in the Ypsilanti area. The other corridors included in the figure show alternate routes that feed into the VA Hospital from the eastern half of the region.

Figure 2-1 Home Location of VA Hospital Employees by Zip Code (percent)



The VA Hospital has recently met with AATA to explore alternate transportation opportunities available through the agency. The agency further confirmed their ability to subsidize employee commutes. The VA will have an AATA representative at new employee orientations and has had this same representative speak at their town hall meeting. Through discussions with the VA, they highlighted that alternative commute programs are not well used by employees citing a lack of knowledge of the cost savings benefits as well as concerns about reliability as obstacles to employees using these programs on a daily basis.

We see four areas where the VA can focus their efforts, and the hospital has shown their willingness to do much of the legwork; the implementation process is already underway on some of these measures. Advertise and market the vanpool program (12 years)

The VA has a good history of encouraging carpools. A vanpool program can build on this success to increase utilization. Steps towards implementation:2

1. Contact AATA to learn more about the program.

2. Assemble or create materials to market the program. If a one‐page flyer or similar handout is not available, this may be a task for the TDM intern (discussed in the next section).

3. Coordinate with an AATA representative or the TDM intern to speak at employee orientations.

4. Create a link on the VA Hospital’s website under a section similar to “employee resources” or “how to get to the VA.”

Improve transit connections to the hospital and market existing ones (12 years)

Route 3 between Ypsilanti and Ann Arbor via Huron Parkway and Fuller Road runs every 30 minutes on weekdays and serves a stop at the VA, though somewhat removed from the entrance to the facility. Marketing this service, along with other services, such as the express services between Chelsea and Canton, is important, as is better real time travel information for transit patrons who might be inclined to use the route. The implementation steps for this are similar to the ones discussed for the vanpool program.

The VA should continue discussions with the AATA regarding the possibility for additional connections via other routes or from area park‐n‐rides to reduce the number of transfers a rider must take. While AATA has proven to be an open and willing partner in these efforts, funding participation by the VA in new services will likely be required. Improving transit connections to the hospital will rely on continued communication and collaboration with AATA planning staff. Begin a transit pass program (24 years)

The VA has expressed interest in a transit pass program as one of the greater opportunities to encourage its employees to use alternative transportation, especially since employees could use it for both work and non‐work trips. Determining costs and finding funding are often the biggest challenge to creating a pass program. The TDM intern can assist with this by researching other hospitals that have similar programs and creating a case study. Costs are also best estimated by other local programs, which AATA can discuss in greater detail.

2 NOTE: The Veteran’s Administration has already progressed on a number of these recommended steps subsequent to the project meeting outlining alternatives. These actions remain listed here as a resource to other agencies that may wish to replicate the VA’s process and actions.



Parking programs (5 years or more)

The VA hospital has begun work on a new employee parking ramp. The new facility will ease the parking shortage for the near future, making parking programs such as parking cash‐out or daily charging somewhat less attractive. However, the VA anticipates even this expanded facility will be insufficient to meet unabated parking demands and has contemplated the need for yet another ramp at some point in the future. Such ramps are exceedingly expensive. Parking demand should be reassessed after the implementation of TDM policies such as a parking cash out benefit and other measures to shift employees away from the need to park every day. Charging daily for parking or offering parking cash‐out helps employees realize the full cost of their daily decision to drive alone, which could help assuage the need for a second structure. To prepare for these types of programs, it is critical to start discussions with hospital administration now, complete case studies, and begin goal setting. How to monitor employee usage and ensure no one is abusing the system are important aspects of the discussion.

During the review of alternative approaches, concerns were raised that federal policies prohibit agencies from providing direct travel subsidies to employees, such as parking cash outs or additional transit benefits. Further investigation revealed that this is a common misperception, but is not, in fact, the case. The capital investment in a multi‐million dollar parking ramp Is a transportation subsidy to employees of a far greater financial, environmental and social cost than TDM benefits. Even if a fee for parking is required, this is rarely at the level required for full cost recovery for the construction, maintenance and operation of that parking space. Application of the policy should give flexibility to agencies to determine the form of the subsidy in order to make the most cost effective and mission supportive decisions relative to context. Even the most aggressive TDM programs are generally far less expensive than new parking construction.

Washtenaw Community College

Washtenaw Community College (WCC), having faced a serious parking shortage recently, has attempted numerous TDM programs in the past, with varying levels of success. Further study of the programs WCC has offered, with an examination of what the College felt did and did not work about each one, would be a useful case study for the region. Ultimately, the Washtenaw Community College administrative board decided to put the funds that the college was spending on these programs towards a new parking garage. This new 473‐space garage, along with a slight decrease in enrollment from the stabilizing economy, appears to have addressed the parking problems they

Early Action

The Veteran’s Administration has already demonstrated the value of collaborative conversations around transportation demand management in the corridor area. Subsequent to the second meeting of this partnership effort, the VA was able to take action on some of the recommended strategies including pursuing conversations with AATA regarding transit service and connection enhancements, exploration of employee benefits to reduce parking demand, and enhancements to bicycle access and accommodation. The Veteran’s Administration has already proven to be a willing and engaged partner and a leader in innovative transportation demand management practices.



face, for the time being. However, the college has stated that they would like to avoid building any more parking structures in the future.

All of the roughly 2,500 parking spots at WCC are free, and there are no tiers for upperclassmen, faculty, staff, etc. Due to the convenience of a car and the provision of a free parking spot, most students, faculty, and staff drive. At the same time, the administration and student body continue to strive for a greener campus. Though they are off the corridor a little, the College understands their impact, and wishes to mitigate it. Increase marketing of existing transportation infrastructure to students (Ongoing)

If WCC is able to hire or appoint an in‐house transportation coordinator, the first and focused task should be aggressive marketing of alternative transportation options to all incoming students and a push to reach as many existing students as possible. Viable alternatives include the AATA Route 3 that runs between Ypsilanti and Ann Arbor via Huron Parkway and Fuller Road, the vanpool program offered by AATA and the Border‐to‐Border trail. Increased online information on transportation options is also critical. Improve bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure (Ongoing)

WCC is located directly on the Border‐to‐Border Trail, which runs through downtown Ypsilanti, EMU, and the northern part of Ann Arbor, and always has busy bicycle racks. Washtenaw Avenue is the most direct connection into downtown Ann Arbor for WCC, though a bike path and complete pedestrian connections along the corridor may be years away. WCC should support existing measures to increase connectivity to the trail facility, even though these may be less direct. In the meantime, the college can focus on improving winter maintenance of the trail at WCC and reviewing the existing infrastructure on campus. We recommend the following:

1. Study the condition of sidewalks, unpaved pedestrian paths, locations of bicycle racks on campus, bicycle circulation, and rack utilization rates. This could also help understand where additional connections are possible with the regional non‐motorized transportation plans of the cities of Ypsilanti and Ann Arbor.

2. Meet with winter maintenance crews to prioritize the Border‐to‐Border Trail.

3. Reach out to the cities of Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti to determine what priorities exist for the bicycling and pedestrian infrastructure. Discuss funding and opportunities to offer funding support.

Improve transit connections to WCC (12 years)

WCC students have expressed frustration with the number of transfers needed to reach the campus. Though AATA’s Route 3 provides a good east and west connection, north and south connections are more difficult. Additional connections via other routes or from area park‐n‐rides may be feasible and may reduce the number and/or improve the seamlessness of transfers a rider must take, though this depends on funding. WCC has thought specifically about tying into any redevelopment that comes at Golfside Drive and Washtenaw, possibly through a park‐n‐ride. The WCC does not have control over larger transit services, however AATA has proven to be an open and willing partner in these efforts. The College should continue discussions to improve transit access to the institution. Begin a transit pass program (24 years)

WCC has considered a more comprehensive bus pass than exists currently, but funding is a challenge. Nonetheless, WCC sees a universal transit pass program as a great opportunity to encourage its faculty, staff, and students to use alternative transportation, especially since all trips would be covered. Because it is an interest shared among many stakeholders, the TDM intern



should be tasked with researching the costs and funding for comparable community colleges and institutions. Other local programs can also provide good estimates for anticipated costs. It may be possible to tie into the university pass program already in place by UM, especially if EMU or other area colleges and universities would also like to participate, enabling a student pass program throughout the region. Parking programs (5 years or more)

The recent expansion of parking has reduced parking pressures in the near term. This makes parking programs such as parking cash‐out or daily charging somewhat less attractive to the institution and users. Nonetheless, the College should explore implementing fees for parking, likely phased in over time, and recycling these fees to offer parking cash‐out options for those who opt not to drive. Such programs advance the WCC’s green goals and allow better travel decision‐making for students and faculties as the true cost of driving becomes more evident and transparent. Over

the long term, these programs are likely to defer the need for any additional structures. To prepare

University of Colorado, Boulder

In 1996, the City of Boulder set a goal of reducing the mode share of single‐occupancy vehicle trips to 25%. They partnered with the University of Colorado at Boulder, which provided transit passes to all of its students and faculty/staff – a total of 35,000 passes; the city created an EcoPass program with employers, as well, totaling an additional 30,000 passes in 2012. Students pay a mandatory fee each term, and the faculty/staff passes are paid for through parking funds, the general fund, and a head tax on auxiliary departments. In 1990, transit comprised only 2% of student trips; in 2013, it is 17%. Most students (67%) bike or walk to campus, due to the commitment of the city to building bicycling infrastructure. Only 14% of students drive to campus. Faculty and staff ridership increased 85% in the first year of the program and has continued to grow. The average daily ridership on local transit has risen from just over 5,000 in 1990 to 28,000 in 2012. Boulder recognizes the difference in cost of accommodating trips based on mode:

$5 $10 $10 $20 $204

$597

$304 $352 $439

$2,092

$0

$500

$1,000

$1,500

$2,000

$2,500

Est. Cost per Round Trip Accommodated

Est. Cost per Net New Round Trip Accommodated

Pedestrian Bicycling EcoPass Student Transit Pass Driving (Parking)



for these types of programs, it is critical to start discussions with college administration now, complete case studies, and begin goal setting. How to monitor employee usage and ensure no one is abusing the system are important aspects of the discussion.

TDMFOCUSED INTERNSHIP As the ReImagine Washtenaw stakeholders continue to work towards their redevelopment vision, congestion mitigation through TDM will become increasingly critical. If driving habits and parking demands continue to grow with future development as has been the case in the recent past, the corridor will not have sufficient capacity to support the desired development.

Locally, TDM is still in its fledgling stages for many stakeholders. Even nationally, its use on transforming suburban corridors such as Washtenaw Avenue is a relatively new development in the field. To ensure focused attention on advancing knowledge and effectiveness of TDM programs, and institutionalize its practice in the near term, we recommend creating a TDM‐focused internship, either for the summer or on‐going part‐time throughout the year. An internship is a very achievable first step. At low cost it provides dedicated and focused attention to the TDM opportunities on the corridor. An internship can provide valuable research to build the program further and the skills developed during this time can lead to a professional position and valuable experience to the intern(s).

The members of the Joint Technical Committee and other major stakeholders should contribute resources to support the position. Shared costs dramatically reduce the burden on any one stakeholder and give each partner a vested interest in, and authority over, the activities and products of the intern. Committed support to the internship should cover at least the first three years of the internship. This minimum time period is necessary in order to develop the program and have a sufficient track record to judge the value of the investment.

While a relatively low cost activity, the intern can lay the groundwork for a more permanent and effective program. An intern who takes on some of the roles typical of a TDM coordinator can continue building on the existing work and research conducted as part of this and other studies. An intern can lay the necessary foundation for a future program. With a strong support network of involved employers and stakeholders, and a clear set of goals or tasks, an intern can maintain momentum for reaching the TDM goals established. Necessary Actions

1. Identify funding strategy and host entity 2. Define a meaningful and achievable work plan that advances TDM in the corridor 3. Selecting a suitable intern

Necessary Actions

Identify funding strategy and host entity

An internship focused on TDM is a highly cost effective and comparatively easy first step to pursue. A quality intern can range in cost from as little as $3,000 for 20 hours per week over a 10 week summer, to $10,000 for a full time summer graduate student, to roughly $20,000 for a year‐round



part time commitment. Yet even at the higher end of the spectrum, the investment in this focused internship would produce a benefit to the stakeholders many times that. Ideally, funding should be committed for a minimum of 3 years to allow sufficient time to mature the recommendations.

The host entity for the intern must also be “neutral ground” so that all stakeholders have parity in the work and recommendations of the staffer. Washtenaw Avenue crosses four jurisdictions within Washtenaw County, and is home to at least four major employers, multiple municipal agencies, and three educational institutions. While multiple options exist, the county presently leads the ReImagine Washtenaw effort and as such is the recommended host.

Vitally important, is a host agency that has the interest, ability, and basic understanding to instruct, guide and oversee the products and activities of the intern. While continuity in the internship would be desirable (rather than annual turn over), as an internship this cannot be expected. Therefore the host agency and designated supervisor will need to provide this continuity.

Define a meaningful and achievable work plan

The first three years of the internship should focus on communicating, promoting, and researching available and effective TDM strategies relevant to the major employers and other corridor travelers. The recommended workplan below is intended to provide options for meaningful and additive activities that can realistically be achieved in a 3 month span by an energetic and intelligent individual, but one who may not have specific and expansive knowledge of TDM.

In the first year, the intern should focus on:

• Gathering and creating marketing materials on existing alternative transportation options to distribute to Washtenaw Avenue businesses, including:

o Contact the A2Y Chamber of Commerce to determine the optimal way to reach the Washtenaw Avenue businesses.

o Develop and distribute a flyer or multiple flyers:

Work with AATA to provide information on the bus routes that serve the major employers in the area, where potential transfers occur, and locations of park‐n‐rides that may be useful for reaching the corridor.

Work with AATA to provide information on their vanpool program.

Provide maps that show bicycle and pedestrian connections.

• Piloted outreach to the management of the Arbor Hills shopping center, scheduled to open in August 2013. This is a good opportunity to target new employees and shape travel choices before their commuting habits and patterns are set. This will also allow rapid learning about the strategies that work and how they are received.

• Developing baseline information including where employees commute from, current modes used, and current utilization rates of existing TDM practices. The intern should work with major employers and the JTC as a whole to develop target objectives and then conduct follow‐up data on the effectiveness of the pilot or other early adopters.

• Develop case studies to demonstrate to large employers the effectiveness of TDM strategies and their associated costs, benefits, and implementation requirements. Priority should be given to case studies that explore funding mechanisms for transit pass programs, parking cash‐out programs for comparable institutions, shared parking programs, and bicycle and pedestrian improvements for college and/or hospital campuses.



During the second year, the intern should:

• Continue to distribute marketing materials to corridor businesses, make connections with businesses, and assist transportation coordinators at large businesses.

• Structure and pursue at least one additional pilot. Recommended options include:

o Exploring shared parking between the Arbor Hills and Huron Village shopping centers,

o Planning and organizing a small commuter challenge event with one or more large employers, and/or

o Developing a transit pass similar to the go!pass through a public‐private partnership but focused on the large employers.

• Establish a basic website, using getDowntown! as an example, to act as a centralized repository of information where employees and Washtenaw Avenue patrons can get information on all possible commuting options and events.

• Continue data collection and performance measurement.

In the third year, the intern program should:

• Work with the in‐house transportation coordinators and other businesses to facilitate a corridor‐wide commuting fair or information session that can take the place of or be in addition to those offered by the large employers.

• Organize a larger, branded commuter challenge event that includes more small‐ and medium‐sized businesses.

• Determine other pilot projects to carry forward and any new pilot projects needed.

• Continue data collection and performance measurement and prepare a program report for the major stakeholders.

Key to the program, is setting metrics from the beginning and establishing mechanisms for tracking progress. The ability to quantify impacts is critical and success in this area requires the establishment of a database, data collection protocols, and collection methodology.

Selecting an intern

As stated above, the workplan is designed to be appropriate to an intern – an individual that is at the very beginning of their professional career. However, the nature of the recommended activities are best suited to a more mature intern with a higher degree of education and experience such as a graduate student or second career student. The academic areas most complementary to this workplan are students focused on marketing and communication, business management, and/or planning (ideally with a focus on transportation).

Costs

Strategy Estimated Cost Summer‐only intern $3,000 – $6,000 Year‐round intern $10,000 ‐ $20,000 Work plan development N/A



MODEL MDOT COMPLETE STREET POLICY In July 2012, the Michigan State Transportation Commission adopted a complete streets policy for the Michigan Department of Transportation. This policy was developed in response to a Public Act 135 of 2010. A representative Complete Street Advisory Council was formed to develop the policy. The Council defined a vision for complete streets that included not only an objective of a safe and efficient transportation network that works for all users, but also the development of a consistent process that emphasizes partnerships, and an orientation toward achieving defined outcomes. 3

Focusing on outcomes and critically assessing how the street, and specifically the engineering design standards applied, will perform against the outcomes set by the Joint Technical Committee partners is critical to ensure state transportation investments support and enable the ReImagine Washtenaw livability initiative. The policy is a direct outcome of MDOT’s stated mission to “provide the highest quality integrated transportation services for economic benefit and improved quality of life.”4

While ReImagine Washtenaw’s focus may be smaller in scale than MDOT’s statewide view, both share the common cause of economic development and quality of life. This makes the Washtenaw Corridor project an ideal opportunity to demonstrate these values of holistic networks, broad‐based partnerships and outcome‐oriented planning and design and provide a model demonstration project for the new complete streets policy. Several actions are critical to do this. Recommended Actions

1. Work with MDOT to establish Washtenaw Avenue as a complete streets demonstration corridor

2. Clearly articulate the shared local and statewide outcomes desired and appropriate performance measures

3. Collaboratively review corridor designs and develop appropriate solutions that meet both corridor economic revitalization objectives and state transportation needs.

4. Document decision‐making process, outcomes, and performance measures and begin measurement (baseline)

Recommended Actions

Work to establish Washtenaw Avenue as a demonstration

By definition, because MDOT has already adopted a complete streets policy and because Washtenaw Avenue is a state corridor, Washtenaw Avenue will be covered by the state policy. However, there are still benefits to calling out Washtenaw Avenue as a demonstration project. This will allow the state, the county and other partners to try out new concepts and consciously work through challenges in process and design, with the responsibility of documenting and reporting

3 State Transportation Commission Policy on Complete Streets (Michigan). July 26, 2012. http://www.michigan.gov/documents/mdot/MDOT_CS_Policy_390790_7.pdf [accessed April 12, 2013] 4 MDOT Strategic Plan. http://www.michigan.gov/documents/mdot/MDOT_mission_vision_and_goals_2_375168_7.pdf [accessed April 12, 2013]



them, so that other counties and municipalities can benefit from the experience and inform a culture of continuous improvement.

The proposal to MDOT to adopt Washtenaw Avenue as a complete streets demonstration corridor should not imply an additional commitment of funds. It is a commitment to process. The demonstration should be intended to allow division engineers from across the state, as well as agency administration leadership, to observe and test what are now somewhat hypothetical approaches to state street design. Such a demonstration project can help to institutionalize the adopted policy and inform the review and revision of engineering standards presently underway.

The designation could come in the form of a simple agency directive from the Commissioner or senior leadership with an articulation of the objectives MDOT expects from this process experiment. The designation process would be determined by MDOT should they accept the proposed demonstration.

Articulation of outcomes and performance measures

The Complete Streets Advisory Council recommended the State Transportation Commission adopt economic prosperity, equity, accessibility, safety, and environmental quality as the desired outcomes of the complete streets policy. ReImagine Washtenaw has established a series of desired outcomes for the revitalization and transformation initiative as well – “a corridor that supports a high quality of life with walkable shopping options, housing choices, efficient transit service, great public spaces, bike paths, and access to educational, cultural and employment centers.”5 Document shared outcomes

If designated as a demonstration project, the first step should be for the Joint Technical Committee to collaborate with MDOT on more detailed and refined outcomes and performance objectives for the corridor. These should focus on real measureable outcomes such as measurements of pedestrian activity, safety, person throughput along the corridor, retail sales, property values, transit performance and other measures. Outcomes and measures should address both the local and state objectives – although individual measures may lean alternately toward one perspective or the other. Define performance measures

Because ReImagine Washtenaw is a revitalization initiative, it will be necessary for some of the measures to include factors beyond those traditionally used in transportation performance evaluation. These measures, such as retail sales, housing sales or job access, while not directly under the control of transportation investments are nonetheless heavily influenced by them. They should, therefore, be tracked but data collection and reporting structures should include capturing and factoring in other factors such as general economic conditions.

Successful performance measures should also be those for which information is already routinely collected and can be easily accessed and assessed. Timing of data collection is important as well. While the Census, for instance, provides very consistent and reliable information, it is only collected on ten year cycles and therefore is of limited utility in assessing shorter term impacts. Sampling data is collected more regularly and therefore may be the preferred data set. Establish clear data collection protocols and responsibilities

5 http://www.washtenawavenue.org/



Effective performance measurement is dependent on good data collection systems, consistent metadata, and clear responsibilities for collection and reporting. Setting up and staffing a data collection and performance tracking process is not easy – especially when non‐traditional measures are used. Washtenaw and the state should collaboratively determine what data is collected, how and by whom; where the data will be stored, the frequency of reporting, who is to receive the reports, and what actions are expected in response to the findings.

Collaboratively review corridor designs against outcomes

Defining outcomes and their evaluation measures is a critical element, but it is only useful if the actual designs of the corridor are then reviewed with a keen eye toward their effect on these desired outcomes. Specific details such as lane widths, posted (and design) speeds, turn radii, street tree species selection, and locations of bus stops (among many other factors) can have a profound impact on the ability of the corridor to support or deter the economic development and quality of life desired.

As a demonstration project, the locality and state should sit together and review the various elements and identify any potential conflicts between desired designs from the state and local perspectives. These elements should be carefully considered and their impact on the outcomes measured (quantitatively if possible) and documented. Various alternative design solutions should be generated in collaboration with the state and each alternative evaluated against the outcomes once more in order to determine a mutually acceptable solution that addresses these outcomes at both the state and local level.

We recommend the development of a clear scoring system based on defined, and mutually agreed upon measures. The score card should include measures that reflect the several different types of outcome – e.g. economic prosperity, equity, accessibility, safety, and environmental quality. It may be necessary or desirable to also establish mutually agreed upon weighting factors as well. Alternative designs and options should be evaluated against this score card and the findings discussed among the project team so that acceptable modifications can be made that address the previously agreed upon shared objectives and outcomes.

This process will be difficult and will require compromise and innovation. This is the value of the demonstration project– to capture that process and how resolution was finally established. This will result in a truly model corridor in both process and product.

Documentation of the process, outcomes and metrics

Document the process

As a demonstration project, Washtenaw Avenue must accept the burden of documenting the entire process and inviting in observers and contributors from across the state DOT divisions. To be a valuable learning process for other projects and locales, the process must be documented from start to finish:

• Who was involved and in what capacity?

• How were decisions made?

• How were conflicts resolved?

• What were the most difficult issues? Which were easier?

There must be an openness in the process and a willingness to fail, change and try again. Partners must come into the process willing to work together and compromise. They must also retain a very



long view of the impact of the corridor and its design – not just for the next 1, 5, or 10 years. The design and operations decisions made now will continue to influence development on the corridor and across the region for the next century and that long view about changing travel patterns and quality of life demands must be documented and consistently reflected.

Establish a baseline

Future performance can only meaningfully be judged if you capture the starting point. Existing conditions for the multi‐dimensional desired outcomes should be reported and that information retained in a place that will be remembered and accessible for points in the future when performance measurements are made.

Costs

There should not be additional costs required with this strategy. This recommendation is primarily procedural, although additional staff time and capacity will likely be needed for data collection and performance measurement and reporting if such structures are not already in place and suitable to the needs of this project.



PREDICTABLE AND CONSISTENT LONG TERM TDM REQUIREMENTS The final recommendation recognizes that the transformation of the Washtenaw Avenue corridor from an auto oriented thoroughfare to a series of urbanized nodes is not going to happen overnight. This is a process that will be measured in years, not days. It will require leadership and participation not only from the public agencies and institutions involved in the Joint Technical Committee, but also the investment and involvement of multiple private sector developers, employers and occupants.

The long term success of the corridor will depend on maintaining sufficient capacity – both person and vehicular – to meet the mobility needs of the development that will arrive on the corridor over the next 20 years and beyond. To be successful, the first projects that arrive on the corridor cannot consume all available capacity. They must invest heavily in demand management strategies and facilities that will maintain the necessary capacity for their future neighbors. Doing so will not only ensure the success of the corridor tomorrow, but will protect and increase the investment of the today’s developers. The following actions are required to develop and implement this consistent and predictable rule book over the very long term. Recommended Actions

1. Develop a shared TDM policy for development along the corridor 2. Establish authority to ensure consistent application of the policy over time 3. Monitor and track the impact of policy on corridor and development projects

Recommended Actions

Develop a shared TDM policy for development

Many jurisdictions have established transportation demand management policies and requirements for new development. These documents typically outline the types of demand management strategies that must be provided for developments of different types and intensities. The TDM measures are intended for continued application over the whole duration of the development process – a period of decades.

Depending on the existing development policies of the corridor, TDM requirements can be attached to permissions for corridor access, subdivision, or zoning adjustments. Ideally whatever mechanism is used will ensure participation by the majority of properties along the redevelopment corridor. This creates a more level playing field and predictable environment for all and avoids the “tragedy of the commons” where only certain properties bear the burden of required TDM measures while all benefit.

We recommend that ReImagine Washtenaw, or another fiduciary agent, commission the development of a clear policy and systematic approach and process for the integration of Transportation Demand Management (TDM) into the development process as a critical requirement to meet the revitalization objectives, improve multimodal mobility, and sustain the operations of the corridor and larger community transportation network. A clear and global TDM policy can provide uniformity in the requirement to participate in transportation demand

Rayla Bellis � 6/12/13 3:39 PMComment: Not a big deal, but this formatting seems weird (different color, italic AND bold)



management while at the same time providing predictable flexibility in response to different development types and intensities (Figure 2‐2).

This holistic and shared policy would ensure that TDM is not handled merely on a project‐by‐project basis, but nor should the policy be a one‐size‐fits‐all mandate. Rather it should provide differentiation for different development types, sizes, public benefits and contexts.

Establish authority to ensure consistent application

Because there are multiple jurisdictions along the corridor, ensuring consistent application of TDM policies should be a responsibility of a cross‐jurisdictional authority. Michigan legislation provides for the establishments of Corridor Improvement Authorities and Joint Planning Commissions – both of which could be the implementers of the TDM policy. Whichever is ultimately chosen, or a different model entirely, this authority and obligation should clearly be written into any authorizing document. Corridor Improvement Authority

Figure 2-2 Sample TDM requirements



According to the Michigan Municipal League, "a CIA is designed to assist economic development and redevelopment in established commercial districts. It allows communities to combine tax dollars from a variety of sources to leverage economic development dollars." A CIA has the responsibility and/or authority to:

• Invest in targeted projects – guide new development or infrastructure, including improving the aesthetics of a corridor with new landscaping or building façade improvement.

• Establish tax increment financing, levy special assessments, issue revenue bonds and notes to enable investment in acquiring or improving real estate.

• Develop plans to promote economic growth and protect properties from becoming run‐down.

• Improve transportation systems and wayfinding signage. Joint Planning Commission

A JPC acts as the governing body along a corridor or shared area of land to coordinate land development and zoning reviews and takes the place of the planning commissions of individual jurisdictions for a designated joint area. Two or more jurisdictions can either create one unified planning commission or create a special joint commission that governs only a portion of their individual jurisdictions. A joint Washtenaw Avenue commission would necessitate the latter, since the corridor only comprises small portions of each jurisdiction. The municipal boundaries are unaffected; only the planning powers are shared.

A JPC ensures uniform development policies that are appropriate to different development projects and has the responsibility and/or authority to:

• The ability to prepare, maintain, and update a development plan.

• Review rezoning requests, conduct site plan reviews, and make land use decisions.

• Adopt a master plan.

• Allocate land to developments or for specified uses.

Monitor and track impact of the policy

Demonstrated effectiveness will be vitally important. As with many other actions outlined here, measurement and tracking is a strongly recommended action. This activity should be housed in the same authority chosen to implement the policy and appropriate staffing levels must be provided. As a reference point, Arlington County in Virginia – the commonly referenced “gold standard” for county transportation demand management – has a staff of five dedicated to tracking, monitoring and reporting TDM performance.

recommendations and implementation - smart …€¦ · impact investing industry ......

Documents