PRINCIPLES

Planning and investment principles guide decision-making at CDTC. As statements of principle, they provide a framework for funding decisions, project selection criteria, and corridor-level planning. Each of the nine New Visions task forces proposed planning and investment principles to guide CDTC's decisions during "Phase 2" of plan development. Some task forces found this an easy task because a great deal of agreement existed. Others discovered that careful "wordsmithing" was necessary to create a statement that all of the participants could buy into. The principles crafted by the task forces were intentionally broad in order to lead to convergence rather than divergence of opinion among New Visions participants, the public, and elected officials. The full set of 58 proposed principles were circulated for public comment in the New Visions Workbook, stating that re-organization and consolidation to better reflect overlap and points of consensus between task forces would likely occur.

Public comment on the proposed principles was wide-ranging, including suggestions for specific wording changes, as well as several pleas for simplification. Overall, the general direction and emphasis of the principles received support from public reviewers. The comments blurred the distinctions of task force origin and highlighted common themes as well as some contradictions between different issues. The principles were subsequently shortened and revised to provide internal consistency. This reorganization "cuts to the chase" of what CDTC participants are able to agree upon in terms of where we should be spending our limited planning resources and transportation dollars.

Four basic themes emerged from the public review of the principles. Organizing the specific principles around these themes and eliminating redundancies allowed the substance of the hard-earned task force consensus to be preserved, while simplifying the presentation. The principles provide a framework for transportation investment in the Capital Region over the long term. They will have significant impacts on how transportation planning is approached and where public transportation investments are made.

The principles are organized under four broad themes:

1. Preserve and Manage. CDTC's highest priority is preserving and managing existing investment in the region's transportation system. Capital investments will be directed by the CDTC based on function and need. The priority for improved design and condition of major facilities should not depend upon whether the facility is owned by the state, county, city, town or village.

2. Develop the Region's Potential. The Capital Region is a single economic unit containing a rich heritage, historic communities that cannot be replicated elsewhere, vibrant suburban areas, abundant open space and recreational opportunities, great natural resources and a highly educated work force. This region can grow into a uniquely attractive, vibrant and diverse metropolitan area. CDTC will consider community and economic development plans as essential factors in making transportation investment decisions.

3. Link Transportation and Land Use. Local land use decisions impact the function of the transportation system -- and vice versa. This relationship is paramount to all transportation planning and programming decisions. Achieving the plan's goals depends as much on achieving unprecedented success in the land use area as on improving the transportation system.

4. Plan and Build for All Modes. Transportation planning and project design need to consider and accommodate more than cars. Pedestrians, bicyclists, delivery vehicles, long-distance trucks, rail crossings and intermodal terminal access are among the modes and modal considerations elevated by the plan.

The principles state when and how CDTC believes transportation investment is warranted, and when it believes such investment is not warranted.

Preserve and Manage

CDTC's highest priority is maintaining our investment in the existing transportation system. Strategically improving system performance, managing congestion, and balancing access concerns with safety are part of an overall principle that treats the transportation system as an asset and an investment. Continuous improvement to the planning process must be coupled with improvements to project design and delivery. Future transportation investments must be wisely and carefully chosen in a fair process that results in timely project implementation. Improving the way we do business provides a limitless opportunity and a daunting challenge.

Improve System Performance

1) CDTC is committed to the maintenance, repair and renewal of the existing highway and bridge system in a cost-effective manner that protects and enhances rideability, public safety and accessibility.

Minimizing the overall costs of providing and using the system is a goal. Appropriate investment in repair and renewal of existing facilities is a higher priority than investment in expanded capacity. Appropriate investment includes balancing access and mobility needs, considering all modes, and coordinating infrastructure renewal with local land use planning efforts. Geometric standards for lane and shoulder width, provision of bike lanes and sidewalks, transit accommodations, vertical and horizontal alignment, and clearances will be based on the function of the facility, its adjacent land use, and the cost-effectiveness of the repair. Greater latitude in adjusting design parameters to local conditions is critical to providing highway and bridge infrastructure in a cost-effective manner.

Public transit, sidewalks, and bicycle facilities require routine consideration as part of the transportation infrastructure. Increased opportunities for public transit use and walking provide an alternative to auto travel that can reduce congestion and traffic conflict levels along Capital District arterials. Transit service works best when it is considered as an integral part of roadway design, development, and urban revitalization. Furthermore, the success of transit service is directly tied to accommodation of the pedestrian. While there are growth markets for park-and-ride services and for bike-transit connections, transit usually provides the middle leg of walking trips. Unless the pedestrian can travel quickly, safely and conveniently to and from the bus stop, there can be little success in maintaining or expanding the contribution of transit to the community. Wide, paved shoulders and/or sidewalks connecting residential areas to bus routes make bus travel more attractive. Cyclists are more inclined to bike to bus stops when there are safe shoulders or bike lanes, secure bike storage facilities, and/or bike racks on the buses. These types of improvements need to be routinely considered in project design.

Bicycle and pedestrian facilities require maintenance to a higher standard than motor vehicle facilities to insulate bicyclists and pedestrians from danger. Broken glass, snow, ice, and rough surfaces are common hazards on road shoulders. Frequent sweeping, plowing, and rehabilitation (repaving) is required. Increasing motorist awareness of cyclists and pedestrians by clearly signed and marked crosswalks and bike lanes is another requirement. Pedestrian phases at busy intersections (and near transit stops) provide additional protection. Separate bicycle stop lines at intersections increase visibility and give cyclists a chance to "pull away" ahead of turning vehicles.

2) Funding for appropriate repair and renewal will be based on the function and condition of the facility -- not ownership.

All principal arterials and other major facilities in the Capital District are vital to the economic life of the region, regardless of whether they are currently owned by a city, village, town or the state. Providing consistent and continuous systems and/or appropriate transition zones is a priority. State numbered highways and other facilities serving regional needs within city limits need equitable access to federal, state and county transportation funding.

3) Encouraging bicycle and pedestrian travel is a socially, economically and environmentally responsible approach to improving the performance of our transportation system.

Cycling and walking are legitimate components of a multimodal transportation system. According to the 1990 Census, more people commute to work by bicycle or on foot than by using transit in the Capital District. In addition, most transit trips start with a walk. Aside from sidewalks in the downtown areas and a small number of paths or bike lanes, there has been minimal direct investment in bicycle or pedestrian infrastructure in the Capital District. Investments in new bicycle and pedestrian facilities will tap the latent demand for travel via these modes, encouraging people who would travel these ways "if it was safe" to do so. Even conservative estimates of use which take weather into account show that making bicycling and walking feasible can make a significant difference in people's choices. Importantly, many of the trips with the greatest potential for shifts from driving to cycling or walking are the very trips that contribute the most to air pollution (short "cold starts") and to congestion (summer, non-commute trips).

Many barriers to transit, bicycle and pedestrian travel can be removed quickly and inexpensively. Whether by smoothing over a rough shoulder with some blacktop or re-timing a traffic signal to allow pedestrians (and wheelchairs) adequate time to cross a busy intersection, bicycle and pedestrian accommodations are often low cost. This is particularly true when compared to roadway projects. They can be built both as additions to planned highway projects and as free standing efforts. Design features such as bus stops/shelters, pedestrian refuge medians on major arterials, crosswalks and pedestrian-actuated signals at intersections are central to successful urban project design -- not extras.

It is important that pedestrian initiatives appropriately address the needs of the mobility impaired and elderly population. Creation of crosswalks and incorporating walk phases into signal timing plans at the busiest Capital District intersections will not necessarily accommodate the elderly or mobility-impaired user unless curb cuts, refuge areas, and adequate crossing times are also provided. As more mobility impaired persons are mainstreamed with regard to public transportation (as per the Americans with Disabilities Act), and our population ages, such considerations must become the norm.

4) In addition to supporting desired land settlement patterns, transit service helps meet multiple regional objectives in the Capital District.

· Transit contributes to congestion management, air quality and energy savings;

· Transit offers an alternative travel mode, reducing auto dependence; and

· Transit provides essential mobility for those who do not operate a private vehicle.

These separate roles have distinct demands on resource requirements and differing implications for service design. The value of public investment in transit facilities and services must be considered in relation to these multiple objectives. Comparison of transit investment with other alternative uses of public resources, including other transportation investments, must fairly examine costs and benefits to transit users and non-users. Congestion management benefits accrue primarily to automobile users, for example, while emissions reductions provide a broad social benefit. Alternative mobility benefits a targeted segment of the population.

The provision of essential mobility to those with few alternatives requires explicit recognition in transportation funding decisions. Cities currently shoulder an unequal proportion of the region's special needs populations, poor people, and households without cars. The drain that the provision of social services places on urban areas lessens the amount of money available in municipal budgets for basic maintenance and rehabilitation of the transportation infrastructure. Social equity argues for emphasis in those areas where the need is the greatest.

5) The needs of the older driver will be considered as transportation facilities are maintained and rehabilitated.

By 2015, over one fifth of the population will be age 60 and above. The elderly population of 2015 will have grown up in an era of automobile dependency. These older people will tend to remain in the suburbs and have high expectations about driving and mobility. At the same time, aging causes problems related to depth perception, visual field, visual acuity and glare sensitivity. Research by the federal government suggests that improving sign reflectivity, increasing letter heights, and improving stopping sight distances will help tremendously to accommodate the needs of the older driver. This allows them to maintain their independence and mobility. The New York State Department of Transportation and local transportation departments can enhance sign reflectivity and letter sizes to accommodate the needs of the older user.

6) Increased efficiency in current vehicles/programs is preferable to fleet expansion to provide for special transportation needs.

Adding more buses to the transit fleet and/or adding more STAR vehicles is not the whole answer to accommodating increased demand for special transportation service. A wealth of transportation inventory is owned and operated by human service agencies; much of it is underutilized. An "action plan" to integrate the services offered by these agencies and those offered by CDTA is required. If there is still a transportation shortfall after implementation of effective coordination, then fleet additions can be considered.

The ability of a disabled person to independently select transportation mode and time of travel is preferable to travel arranged by an agency or transit authority. The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990 stresses the importance of independence and mainstreaming. Mobility disabled persons are encouraged to use the fixed route transit system to the extent possible. Increased investment in mobility training will aid in the transition from dependence on paratransit transportation service to fixed route service.

Manage Congestion

7) Management of demand is preferable to accommodation of single-occupant vehicle demand.

All things being equal, actions that shift demand from single occupant vehicles to other modes, shift travel to uncongested periods of the day, or reduce the need for travel are preferred to actions that accommodate the desire for unconstrained travel. Demand management actions have both a spillover and a cumulative effect not present with physical actions. Demand management actions taken to relieve congestion in one corridor spill benefits over to other corridors by simultaneously moderating demand in those corridors, as well. Over time, a cumulative benefit comes from developing a critical mass of transit use that supports more frequent transit service. Additional benefits accrue from voluntary accommodation of pedestrian and bicyclists in site design, or from establishing acceptance of innovative work schedules and telecommuting. These benefits don't accrue from actions that accommodate unconstrained single-occupant auto travel.

8) Cost-effective operational actions are preferable to capacity expansion.

Historic financial constraints and categorical funding programs have provided resources more readily for capital investment than for operating the system. In the Capital District, a third of the 400 signalized intersections analyzed by CDTC staff over a four-year period had congested conditions that would respond to low cost signal timing and lane striping changes. Where applicable, these operational actions are many times more cost-effective than physical expansion. Coupled with proactive corridor management practices, such as limiting driveway cuts, providing service roads, and coordinating development, such operational actions can stretch our arterial capacity and help avoid building new capacity.

9) Capital projects that provide significant physical highway capacity expansion are appropriate congestion management actions only under compelling conditions.

These are the following:

a. "Critical" levels of congestion are currently present or are expected to be present under short-range (no greater than ten year) forecasts;

b. Demand management (including appropriate application of non-auto actions) and operational actions are not expected to reduce congestion from "critical" levels;

c. Demand management (including appropriate application of non-auto actions) and operational actions are incorporated into the design of the physical expansion to minimize expansion requirements and maximize the service life of the improvement;

d. New development and/or existing trip generators contribute appropriately to the cost of the action (including the demand management and other non-construction aspects);

e. A land use management program or agreement exists to provide reasonable assurance that the new capacity created will be effectively managed and preserved;[1] and,

f. The expansion is considered consistent with regional, county and local land use and development plans.

g. The project is designed to have the least possible environmental impact and appropriate mitigations are included.

Projects primarily intended to serve through traffic or designed to serve statewide purposes are not subject to these criteria.

10) Significant capacity additions carried out in the context of major infrastructure renewal are appropriate only under compelling conditions.

In bridge replacement cases, long-lasting decisions about capacity expansion often must be reached long before critical congestion levels are reached and before local demand management actions are in place. Traditional design policies and procedures require revision in order to assure consistency of these decisions with CDTC's Congestion Management System (CMS). Traditionally, facilities have been designed sufficient to accommodate projected demand at acceptable levels-of-service throughout the physical design life of the facility. For a bridge structure, for example, this involves designing to accommodate traffic projections for a date thirty or forty years beyond the expected date of completion of the project. Variance from this policy has been granted primarily in situations in which there are practical impediments to full accommodation of future demand.

The CMS-driven design approach reaches a determination of facility design through a risk assessment (tradeoff analysis) that focuses on the opportunity cost of selecting alternative designs. If a bridge reaches the end of its "useful life" and requires replacement in the same location, the risk assessment focuses on several factors:

a. Incremental costs and benefits of designs that add capacity to accommodate future traffic, relative to less-accommodating designs;

b. The projected amount of time that will lapse before a given design with greater capacity would be expected to have annual benefits sufficient to return an incremental benefit/cost ratio comparable to other capacity projects included in the TIP;

c. The additional expense involved in providing the incremental capacity at that later date, rather than during the initial project;

d. The degree of uncertainty present regarding future demand forecasts; and,

e. The compatibility of the additional capacity with regional, county and local land use plans.

In these cases, capacity expansions can be considered consistent with the Congestion Management System under the following conditions:

a. The risk assessment indicates that, even with effective operational and demand management actions, critical congestion is likely to occur at the location during the life of the facility;

b. The combination of time lapse until a competitive incremental benefit/cost ratio is reached and the additional expense of providing the capacity later points to doing the work now; and,

c. The capacity expansion is compatible with regional, county, and local land use plans.

d. The project is designed to have the least possible environmental impact and appropriate mitigations are included.

In all cases, the desirability of the expansion must be clear before the investment is made.

11) Incident management is essential to effective congestion management.

While most congestion management actions are targeted at recurring congestion, congested corridors also experience significant "non-recurring" congestion due to accidents, vehicle breakdowns and other incidents. This experience is most severely felt on limited access, high-speed facilities operating at high traffic densities. Minor incidents can generate significant delays. Effective incident detection and management can save as much time and operating cost as major investments in physical expansion.

Protect Our Investment

12) Managing traffic flows on the Capital District expressway and arterial system is critical for both economic and social reasons.

The Capital District's economic competitiveness relies on the use of its expressway system for over-the-road freight movement and for connections with air, water and rail modes. In addition, the expressway system is heavily used for commuting and general circulation within the region. It enhances the region's quality of life by providing access to a wide range of local activities and to those of other regions. Investments in traffic management, particularly related to construction and incidents, are cost-effective investments in the safety of the highway system.

The Capital District's expressway "system" includes technology and human resources that are critical to its effectiveness. The complete system includes traffic monitoring and control technologies that facilitate maintenance of traffic flows, as well as the staffs of transportation, police, fire, and medical service agencies that maintain traffic mobility or safety. The system includes the following activities or functions:

· traffic and weather condition monitoring;

· traffic control;

· inter-agency communication and coordination;

· appropriate incident response; and

· traveler information.

Proper management of the expressway system must also include management of arterial feeders and receivers that connect the expressways to the remainder of the roadway network. Expressways are not entities unto themselves, and access to and from arterials cannot be considered a "given." Making optimal use of the expressway system requires elimination of difficulties in connecting to/from local land uses. Guidelines for arterial corridor management have been developed within the existing regulatory and policy framework, and can be used in conjunction with existing land use and zoning control mechanisms such as site plan review and subdivision regulations.

Arterial corridor management planning also allows for and can increase economic activity. The region's economy cannot afford to allow private investments in land development to be impaired by obsolescence of the highway facilities on which they depend. Good arterial corridor management planning designs facilities that adequately serve traffic yet guide surrounding development in a sustainable manner. Development opportunities can be embraced when access, transit, and pedestrian issues are properly addressed. When proper planning occurs, the conflict with arterial function is minimized.

13) Major capital projects must have a plan for operating budgets for the life of the project.

An emphasis on congestion management requires increased budgets for operations and maintenance. To ensure that our capital investments continue to yield benefits throughout their service lives, it is important to provide for the essential "upkeep" of these installations, whether they are of a structural or technological nature. Future transportation investments should include ongoing operations and maintenance commitments.

14) Maintaining the health and improving the efficiency of the existing freight facilities in the region through public/private partnerships is a high priority.