Uptown Transportation Study Report 11-16-06 Summary Chapter

Part A Final Report

720 East Pete Rose WaySuite 420Cincinnati, OH 45202

36 East 7th StreetSuite 2300

Cincinnati, OH 45202

November 30, 2006

UUppttoowwnn TTrraannssppoorrttaattiioonn SSttuuddyy PPaarrtt AA:: UUppttoowwnn TTrraannssppoorrttaattiioonn PPllaann

UUppttoowwnn TTrraannssppoorrttaattiioonn SSttuuddyy UURRSS CCoorrppoorraattiioonn

NNoovveemmbbeerr 22000066

Prepared For:

Ohio-Kentucky-Indiana Regional Council of Governments

and the

Uptown Transportation Study Implementation Partners

Prepared By:

URS Corporation Edwards & Kelcey

Walker Parking Manual Padron & Associates

Catt Lyon Design

November 2006


UUppttoowwnn TTrraannssppoorrttaattiioonn SSttuuddyy UURRSS CCoorrppoorraattiioonn NNoovveemmbbeerr 22000066

Implementation Partners (IP):

Ohio-Kentucky-Indiana Regional Council of Governments (OKI)

City of Cincinnati

Southwest Ohio Regional Transit Authority

Ohio Department of Transportation

Uptown Consortium

Amos Project


UUppttoowwnn TTrraannssppoorrttaattiioonn SSttuuddyy UURRSS CCoorrppoorraattiioonn


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The successful completion of the Uptown Transportation Study was only possible through the collaborative planning, review, and participation of many dedicated people. On behalf of the Study Team, OKI wishes to express our sincere appreciation and gratitude to the members of the Implementation Partners and the following participants who made the study a success.

OHIO-KENTUCKY-INDIANA REGIONAL COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS Management Mark R. Policinski, Executive Director Robert W. Koehler, P.E., Deputy Executive Director/Project Manager Administration and Communication Karen Whitaker, Project Administrator Sarah Woller Fry, Interim Communication Manager Florence Parker, Public Involvement Specialist Data Services, GIS, and Transportation Planning Staff CONSULTANT TEAM URS Corporation Edwards and Kelcey Walker Parking Consultants Manuel Padron & Associates LSA Design, Inc.


UUppttoowwnn TTrraannssppoorrttaattiioonn SSttuuddyy ii UURRSS CCoorrppoorraattiioonn


TABLE OF CONTENTS

Executive Summary

S.1 Overview S-1

S.2 Transportation Management Association S-3

S.3 Transit S-6

S.4 Signage and Wayfinding S-7

S.5 Pedestrian and Bicycle S-8

S.6 Roadway Operations S-8

S.7 Parking S-11

S.8 I-71 Interchange S-12

S.9 Implementation Plan S-12

S.10 Funding Sources S-13

1. Project Introduction

1.1. Study Area 1-1

1.2. Organizational Structure 1-2

1.3. Study Goals 1-5

2. Demographics and Land Use

2.1. Population and Employment 2-1

2.1.1. Existing Population and Employment 2-1

2.1.2. Population and Employment Growth 2-1

2.2. Current Travel Patterns 2-8

2.3. Households that Depend on Other Modes of Transportation 2-11

3. Transit

3.1. Current Transit Operations 3-1

3.1.1. Metro Bus Service 3-1

3.1.2. Shuttle Service 3-5

3.2. Recommended Transit Improvements 3-9

3.2.1. Marketing and Information 3-9

3.2.2. Transit Service 3-12

3.2.3. Facilities 3-25


UUppttoowwnn TTrraannssppoorrttaattiioonn SSttuuddyy iiii UURRSS CCoorrppoorraattiioonn


3.3. Transit Signal Priority 3-29

3.3.1. Overview of TSP Strategies and Signal Operating Techniques 3-30

3.3.2. Case Studies 3-31

3.3.3. Applicability of TSP to Route 17 Operations 3-38

4. Signage and Wayfinding

4.1. Existing Conditions 4-1

4.1.1. Sign Audit 4-1

4.1.2. Survey of Current Conditions 4-1

4.1.3. Analysis of Wayfinding Problems in Uptown 4-3

4.2. Signage Recommendations 4-5

5. Pedestrian/Bicycle Facilities


5.1.1. Pedestrians 5-1

5.1.2. Bicyclists 5-1

5.2. Proposed Improvements 5-2

5.2.1. Bicycle Enhancements 5-2

5.2.2. Pedestrian Enhancements 5-5

5.2.3. Bicycle and Pedestrian Best Practices 5-6

6. Roadway Operations


6.1.1. Average Weekday Traffic Volumes 6-1

6.1.2. Level of Service Analysis 6-4

6.1.3. Functional Street System 6-7

6.1.4. Crash Data and Analysis 6-9

6.2. Traffic Forecast Year 2030 6-17

6.3. Recommended Improvements 6-24

6.3.1. Introduction 6-24

6.3.2. Corridor Projects 6-25

6.3.3. Key Intersections 6-35

6.3.4. Project Priority 6-38


UUppttoowwnn TTrraannssppoorrttaattiioonn SSttuuddyy iiiiii UURRSS CCoorrppoorraattiioonn


7. Parking


7.1.1. Management and Operations 7-1

7.1.2. Parking Supply 7-5

7.1.3. Parking Demand 7-13

7.2. Issues and Needs 7-16

7.2.1. Uptown Neighborhood Parking 7-16

7.2.2. Future Parking Demand 7-16

7.3. Potential Solutions 7-25

7.3.1. Neighborhood Parking Permit Programs 7-25

7.3.2. Parking Benefit Districts 7-26

7.3.3. Parking Management Alternatives 7-26

7.4. Recommended Solutions 7-35

7.4.1. Uptown Transportation Management Association 7-35

7.4.2. Uptown Travel Demand Management 7-39

7.4.3. Neighborhood Parking Permit Programs 7-50

7.4.4. New Parking Facilities 7-50

7.4.5. Summary of Parking Recommendations 7-58

8. I-71 Access Improvements 8-1


UUppttoowwnn TTrraannssppoorrttaattiioonn SSttuuddyy iivv UURRSS CCoorrppoorraattiioonn


LIST OF TABLES

S-1 Recommended Corridor Improvements S-10

S-2 Summary of Recommendations S-13

1-1 Implementation Partners 1-3

1-2 Advisory Committee Members 1-4

2-1 Population, Households and Employment 2-2

2-2 Major Land Development Projects 2-4

3-1 Uptown Metro Bus Service 3-2

3-2 Forecast Change in Transit Ridership 3-19

3-3 Pierce Transit Reduction in Signal Delay with TSP 3-34

3-4 Route 17 Delay Survey 3-39

3-5 Route 17 Delay Survey – Southbound Afternoon Peak 3-40

3-6 Route 17 Delay Survey – Southbound Morning Peak 3-41

3-7 Route 17 Delay Survey – Northbound Afternoon Peak 3-42

3-8 Route 17 Delay Survey – Northbound Morning Peak 3-43

3-9 Route 17 Delay Survey – AM Peak Summary 3-46

3-10 Route 17 Delay Survey – PM Peak Summary 3-47

3-11 Route 17 Delay Survey – Directional Summary 3-47

3-12 Travel Time Savings and Delay Reduction with TSP 3-48

3-13 Potential Benefits of TSP on Clifton/Ludlow Corridor 3-48

4-1 Estimated Sign Costs 4-9

6-1 Level of Service Criteria 6-4

6-2 Functional Street Classification 6-7

6-3 Accident Severity and Crash Rate 6-14

6-4 Intersections with Deficient Peak Hour LOS Capacity 6-21

6-5 Key Intersections Recommended for Improvements 6-36

7-1 Parking Meter Locations 7-6


UUppttoowwnn TTrraannssppoorrttaattiioonn SSttuuddyy vv UURRSS CCoorrppoorraattiioonn


7-2 Parking Inventory and Effective Supply – Children’s Hospital 7-8

7-3 Parking Inventory and Effective Supply – University of Cincinnati 7-10

7-4 Parking Inventory and Effective Supply – The University Hospital 7-11

7-5 Parking Inventory and Effective Supply – The Christ Hospital 7-12

7-6 Parking Inventory and Effective Supply – Alliance Business Center 7-12

7-7 Parking Inventory and Effective Supply – Good Samaritan Hospital 7-12

7-8 Parking Inventory and Effective Supply – Cincinnati Zoo 7-13

7-9 Summary of 2005 Parking Supply and Demand 7-15

7-10 2015 Peak Parking Demand and Supply – Children’s Hospital 7-16

7-11 2015 Peak Parking Demand – University of Cincinnati 7-19

7-12 Parking Inventory Changes – University of Cincinnati 7-19

7-13 2015 Peak Parking Adequacy – University of Cincinnati 7-20

7-14 2015 Peak Parking Demand and Supply – The University Hospital 7-20

7-15 2015 Peak Parking Demand and Supply – The Christ Hospital 7-21

7-16 2015 Peak Parking Demand and Supply – Alliance Business Campus 7-21

7-17 2015 Peak Parking Demand – Good Samaritan Hospital 7-22

7-18 Parking Inventory Changes – Good Samaritan Hospital 7-23

7-19 2015 Peak Parking Adequacy – Good Samaritan Hospital 7-23

7-20 2015 Parking Inventory and Effective Supply – Cincinnati Zoo 7-24

7-21 2015 Parking Adequacy – Cincinnati Zoo 7-24

7-22 Summary of 2015 Parking Needs 7-25

7-23 Matrix Analysis of Parking Management Alternatives 7-34

7-24 International Mode Split 7-46

7-25 Means of Transportation to Work 7-47

7-26 Potential Gain from TDM 7-48

7-27 Median Operating Expenses for a Typical Parking Structure 7-53

7-28 Conceptual Parking Development Cost 7-54

7-29 Transient Parking Fees 7-55

7-30 Long Term Parking Fees 7-55

8-1 Elements of I-71 Access Improvements Recommendations 8-4


UUppttoowwnn TTrraannssppoorrttaattiioonn SSttuuddyy vvii UURRSS CCoorrppoorraattiioonn


LIST OF FIGURES

S-1 TMA Organization S-4

1-1 Project Study Area 1-2

2-1 Traffic Analysis Zones 2-3

2-2 Major Development Projects 2-9

2-3 Means of Travel to Work 2-10

2-4 Uptown Employees Home to Work Trips 2-12

2-5 Uptown Residents Home to Work Trips 2-13

2-6 Full Time Students by TAZ 2-14

2-7 Households with No Automobiles 2-15

3-1 Metro Bus Routes 3-3

3-2 Inbound Bus Boardings and Alightings 3-6

3-3 Oubound Bus Boardings and Alightings 3-7

3-4 Existing Shuttle Service 3-8

3-5 Clifton Corridor Existing Transit Service 3-13

3-6 Proposed Service on Clifton – Option 1 3-14

3-7 Proposed Service on Clifton – Option 2 3-15

3-8 Proposed Service on Vine/Jefferson – Option 2 3-17

3-9 Proposed Route of New Uptown Shuttle 3-22

3-10 Proposed Modifications to Shuttle Routes 3-24

3-11 Uptown Transit Hun Concept 3-27

3-12 Uptown Transit Hub Concept 3-28

4-1 Path from I-471 Northbound 4-6

4-2 Decision Points 4-7

4-3 Concept Sign Designs 4-8

5-1 Existing Bicycle Routes and Parking 5-3

5-2 Bicycle and Pedestrian Enhancements 5-4


UUppttoowwnn TTrraannssppoorrttaattiioonn SSttuuddyy vviiii UURRSS CCoorrppoorraattiioonn


6-1 Average Weekday Traffic Volumes 6-2

6-2 Traffic Signals and Groupings 6-3

6-3 Existing Intersection LOS 6-6

6-4 2001 Official Through Street System 6-8

6-5 2001-2003 Crash Locations 6-15

6-6 2001-2003 Crash Segment Analysis 6-16

6-7 Comparison of 2005 AWDT to 2030 No-Build 6-18

6-8 Comparison of 2005 AWDT to 2030 With Interchange 6-19

6-9 Intersection LOS 2030 No-Build 6-22

6-10 Intersection LOS 2030 With Interchange 6-23

6-11 Recommended Corridor Projects 6-26

6-12 Key Intersections 6-37

6-13 Priority Evaluation of Corridor Projects 6-39

7-1 Organization of the Uptown TMA 7-36

Documents

Uptown Transportation Study Report 11-16-06 Summary Chapter