1. Measuring Connectivity with Route Directness Index & Evaluating Quality of Service September2010 Powered by:

2. What is Route Directness Index? A B straight-line distance “A” actual route distance “B” RDI = A / B

3. RDI Applied - Neighborhood Example RDI = 0.20 RDI = 0.83 shared-use path shared-use path

4. Why Route Directness Index? RDI Other connectivity indices do not provide for parcel-level precision or land use consideration Focus only on transportation network instead of land use and its relationship to the system Research shows stronger correlation; previously considered hard to measure. Limited ability for other metrics to evaluate subtle changes in the connectivity of a system or to compare benefits of project alternatives. More intuitive for broader public, agency staff and elected official understanding. Intersection Density

8. Ped/Bike/Greenway

10. Asheville – Smith Mill Greenway Access Planning

11. Asheville – Proposed Smith Mill Creek Greenway Planned Urban Village Planned Urban Village

12. Asheville – Proposed Smith Mill Creek Greenway

13. Asheville – Proposed Smith Mill Creek Greenway

15. Fair Connectivity, influenced by areas south of Patton

18. Good/Fair Connectivity, influenced by new connections

20. Good/Fair Connectivity, influenced by new connections

23. Excellent Connectivity, influenced by new connections

24. 64% of parcels with RDI > 0.65Patton Louisiana

26. Excellent Connectivity, influenced by new connections

27. 64% of parcels with RDI > 0.65Patton Louisiana

28. Asheville – Smith Mill Creek Greenway RDI After: 0.71 RDI Before: 0.62

30. 208 parcels (19%) had a minor change in RDI.

31. 193 (18%) had a major change.Patton Louisiana

32. Asheville – Smith Mill Creek Greenway Parcels Total Patton/Louisiana RDI > 0.65 >0.65 Change - Baseline 0.62 47% 517 of 1092 N/A - Local 0.64 53% 582 + 6% Connectors - Crosswalks / 0.71 64% 704 + 17% Sidewalks + Connectors

33. Downtown Raleigh Removing Transportation Linkages

35. North-south connectivity vs. east-west connectivity Glenwood Jones St.

37. Conducive to walking and bicycling.

38. Redevelopment potential of city-owned properties

39. Glenwood South District and access to downtown with few impedancesGlenwood Jones St.

42. Example: Parcel to Station Station 31 Station 15 Average RDI = 0.58 Average RDI = 0.75

43. Fire Station Before After Change Parcel Impact Route Directness Index 1,115 (increased Fire Station Service Area by 17%) 0.48 0.57 19% Intersection Density 56.0 <1% -- 55.9 Link-Node Ratio -- 1.09 1.10 <1%

44. Lakewood Sounder Access to Commuter Rail Station

45. Improving Station Connections Lakewood Example

46. RDI Analysis Before – without connections versus After – with connections Non-motorized connection across tracks with supporting pathways study area is 1.0 mile radius

47. Rail Station RDI Baseline RDI - Project Impact

50. Rail Station Before After Change Parcel Impact Route Directness Index 2,300 0.63 0.77 23% Intersection Density 146 1.4% -- 144 Link-Node Ratio -- 1.29 1.30 < 1% Walk Score -- -- -- 89 of 100

51. Bellingham, wa Multi-Criteria Quality of Service

52. Quality of Service through Connectivity “Level of service” not representative of the real issue behind pedestrian & bicycle usage. Not a capacity issue or delay issue. Quality of Service Quality of the network and route/facilities and attractors that generate non-motorized travel. Emerging research on active living, VMT reduction 5 D’s: Density, Diversity, Design, Destination accessibility, Distance to transit

54. Safety (SRTS)

55. Transit

56. Active Living

57. Weighted AverageService Area #9

59. Safety (SRTS)

60. Transit

61. Active Living

62. Weighted AverageService Area #9

64. Safety (SRTS)

65. Transit

66. Active Living

67. Weighted AverageService Area #9

69. Safety (SRTS)

70. Transit

71. Active Living

72. Weighted AverageService Area #9

74. Safety (SRTS)

75. Transit

76. Active Living

77. Weighted AverageService Area #9

79. Safety (SRTS)

80. Transit

81. Active Living

82. Weighted AverageService Area #14

84. Safety (SRTS)

85. Transit

86. Active Living

87. Weighted AverageService Area #14

89. Safety (SRTS)

90. Transit

91. Active Living

92. Weighted AverageService Area #14

94. Safety (SRTS)

95. Transit

96. Active Living

97. Weighted AverageService Area #14

99. Safety (SRTS)

100. Transit

101. Active Living

102. Weighted AverageService Area #14

103. Parcel Statistics: Service Area 14

104. Seattle Northgate Light Rail Station Planning

105. Seattle LINK – Northgate Station Example (Before) Walk Time RDI I-5 I-5

106. Seattle LINK – Northgate Station Example (After) Walk Time RDI I-5 I-5

107. Seattle LINK – Northgate Station Example Composite RDI I-5 Walk Time

108. Measuring Connectivity with Route Directness Index & Evaluating Quality of Service September2010 Powered by:

109. Cassia park, boise, ID Neighborhood Access to Parks

110. Cassia Park Case Study Composite connectivity score for neighborhood planning School walk routes Elementary Schools South Junior High Borah High School Library

111. Cassia Park Case Study Input to answer improvement priority questions: Who is benefiting from the Camas Sidewalk improvement? Where should we add a crosswalk along Orchard, Cassia or Camas?

112. Scenarios Baseline With Camas Sidewalk With Sidewalk, With Cassia Crosswalk With Sidewalk, With Camas Crosswalk

113. Methodology – Routes & Destinations Franklin Rd Orchard St Roosevelt St Owyhee St Cassia Park Curtis Rd Kootenai St Overland Rd

114. Methodology - Projects Cassia St Crosswalk Camas St Crosswalk Camas St Sidewalk

115. Area Pictures

116. Area Pictures

117. Methodology – Study Parcels Jefferson Catchment Area Grace Jordan Catchment Area Monroe Catchment Area

118. Baseline RDI

119. Baseline RDI – Cassia Park

120. Baseline RDI - Library

121. Baseline RDI - Elementary

122. Scenario Results Cassia Park Only RDI

123. Baseline RDI

124. With Camas Sidewalk

125. With Cassia Crosswalk

126. With Camas Crosswalk

127. Difference (Camas Sidewalk)

128. Difference (Cassia Crosswalk)

129. Difference (Camas Crosswalk)

130. Scenario Results Parcel-Based Statistics

131. Case Study Statistics

132. Composite Metric RDI and Route Distance

133. RDI Only - Elementary

134. Composite Score – Route Distance

135. Parcel Statistics Service Area 14 Service Area 9

136. Raleigh HSR: CSX vs. NS Crossings

137. Other ViaCity Applications System Access Program Station Area, Programming Connectivity Projects & Connectivity Policy Thresholds Growth Management - Concurrency Charlotte, NC Sound Transit Olympia, WA

139. Efficiently focus expensive data collection

140. Begin community involvement process

141. Establish Concurrency Quality of Service Thresholds and Policy to Guide Site Planning

143. Quality of Service: Smart Growth

144. Quality of Service: Access

145. Quality of Service: Safety

146. Quality of Service: Active Living Walk Access to Parks