2030 Long Range Transportation Plan for the Ithaca Metropolitan Area published by the...

7/30/2019 2030 Long Range Transportation Plan for the Ithaca Metropolitan Area published by the Ithaca-Tompkins County Tr

1/219i

ABSTRACT

TITLE: 2030 Long Range Transportation Plan

AUTHOR: Ithaca-Tompkins County Transportation Council

SUBJECT: The updated 2030 Long-Range Transportation Plan for the IthacaMetropolitan Area.

DATE: January 17, 1995 initial versionDecember 21, 1999 first update

December 14, 2004 second update

December 15, 2009 current updated version

SOURCE OF COPIES: Ithaca-Tompkins County Transportation Council121 East Court Street

Ithaca, New York 14850

(607) 274-5570

email: [email protected]

internet:www.tompkins-co.org/itctc

NUMBER OF PAGES: 130 (plus appendices)

ABSTRACT:The purpose of this document (hereafter referred to as the Plan or LRTP) is to provide members of the

Metropolitan Planning Organization, transportation providers, the general public, and other affected groups

and individuals with an updated comprehensive Long Range Transportation Plan for the Ithaca, New York

metropolitan area. The 2030 LRTP was created in response to the Metropolitan Transportation Planning

Final Rule (23 CFR Parts 450 and 500 and 49 CFR Part 613, Federal Register Volume 72, No. 30,

Wednesday, February 14, 2008). These were the implementation rules for the Safe, Accountable, Flexible,

Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU; Public Law 109-59), whichsubstantially revises titles 23 and 49 of the United States Code.

The Plan provides a twenty-year vision for the metropolitan transportation system and represents the product

of an extensive public participation effort. The Plan provides a fiscally constrained program for

transportation improvements in the amount of $1,518,991,977 over the twenty-year life of the plan. Inaddition, the LRTP provides specific recommendations for additional transportation and related planning

activities that should be carried out in order to achieve the plans Goals and Objectives.

It is anticipated that the MPO will undertake plan amendments as new data, technical tools and analytical

systems become functional or as otherwise appropriate.

The preparation of this document was financed through grants from and disseminated under the sponsorship of the Federal Transit

Administration and the Federal Highway Administration (U.S. Department of Transportation). The United States Government assumes

no liability for its contents or use thereof.
http://www.tompkins-co.org/itctchttp://www.tompkins-co.org/itctchttp://www.tompkins-co.org/itctc


2/219

2030 Long Range PlanUpdated December 2009

ADOPTION AND AMMENDEMTNS

# RESOLUTIONNUMBER

DATE ACTION

1. N/A September 24, 2009Third Public Meeting beginning of final phase of

public comment period.

2. N/A September 15, 2009 Planning Committee review of draft LRTP;

3. N/A October 20, 2009 Policy Committee review of draft LRTP;

4. N/A November 17, 2009 Planning Committee review of draft LRTP;

5. N/A December 1, 2009 End of public comment period

6. N/A December 15, 2009 Planning Committee approves Final Draft;Recommends final approval

7. 2009-07 December 15, 2009Policy Committee approves Final Draft by resolution:

Approval of the 2030 Long-Range Transportation Plan

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

ii


3/219

Ithaca-Tompkins CountyTransportation Council

RESOLUTION 09-07*

APPROVAL OF THE

2030 LONG-RANGE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

WHEREAS, the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy forUsers (SAFETEA-LU) requires that Metropolitan Planning Organizations be

established in each urbanized area of over 50,000 in population; AND

WHEREAS, the Ithaca-Tompkins County Transportation Council has been designated by theGovernor of the State of New York as the Metropolitan Planning Organization for

the Ithaca-Tompkins County Urbanized Area; AND

WHEREAS, the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy forUsers requires Metropolitan Planning Organizations to carry out a "continuing,

cooperative, and comprehensive" urban transportation planning process that

addresses all modes of transportation; AND

WHEREAS, the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy forUsers and its rules implementing Metropolitan Transportation Planning (23 CFR

450) require the development and approval of a comprehensive long-rangetransportation plan; AND

WHEREAS, on December 15, 2009 the Ithaca-Tompkins County Transportation Councilapproved the latest update to its comprehensive long-range transportation plan for

the Ithaca-Tompkins County Metropolitan Area in accordance with the requirements

of 23 CFR 450; AND

WHEREAS, the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy forUsers and its rules implementing Metropolitan Transportation Planning (23 CFR

450) require the transportation plans be reviewed and updated at least every five

years in attainments areas; AND

WHEREAS, in accordance with the adopted Unified Operations Procedures (section II.B.7.g) ofthe Ithaca-Tompkins County Transportation Council, an updated comprehensive

long-range transportation plan, titled as the 2030 Long-Range Transportation Plan,

has been developed for the Ithaca-Tompkins County Metropolitan Area; AND

iii


4/219

iv

WHEREAS, there have been numerous opportunities throughout the update of the comprehensive long-range transportation plan for the public to provide input to the planning process and to

participate in the review of the proposed comprehensive long-range transportation plan;

AND

WHEREAS, the Ithaca-Tompkins County Transportation Council attests that this Plan has beendeveloped in compliance with the requirements of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient

Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users and the joint rules for metropolitan planning,

23 CFR Parts 450 and 500; 49 CFR Part 613; AND

WHEREAS, the Transportation Planning Committee of the Ithaca-Tompkins County TransportationCouncil has reviewed said Plan and has recommended that the Transportation Policy

Committee approve the 2030 Long-Range Transportation Plan;

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Transportation Policy Committee of the Ithaca-

Tompkins County Transportation Council has reviewed the 2030 Long-RangeTransportation Plan for the Ithaca-Tompkins County Metropolitan Area and hereby approves

said Plan;

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Transportation Policy Committee of theIthaca-Tompkins County Transportation Council hereby agrees that the 2030 Long-Range

Transportation Plan will be reviewed and updated to appropriately reflect changes in needs,

conditions, and assumptions on a regular basis and not less than every five years;

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Transportation Policy Committee of theIthaca-Tompkins County Transportation Council hereby authorizes and instructs its Staff Director

to submit the necessary copies of the approved Plan to the pertinent State and Federal

agencies.

This resolution having been considered and approved on December 15, 2009.

_______________________________ _______________________________Carolyn K. Peterson, Chair Carl Ford, Secretary

*signed original available for review at the ITCTC offices.


5/219

v

ITHACA-TOMPKINS COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COUNCIL

MEMBERSHIP(as of November 1, 2009)

TRANSPORTATION POLICY COMMITTEECarolyn K. Peterson, Chair Mayor, City of Ithaca

Dooley Kiefer, Vice Chair Tompkins County LegislatorCarl Ford, Secretary New York State Department of Transportation

Donald Hartill Mayor, Village of Lansing

Mary Ann Sumner Supervisor, Town of Dryden

Herb Engman Supervisor, Town of Ithaca

Ron Anderson Village of Cayuga Heights

Roy Staley Village of Cayuga Heights Trustee

vacant Town of Caroline

Laura Shawley Highway Department, Town of Danby

Frank Podufalski Supervisor, Town of Enfield

Glenn Morey Supervisor, Town of Groton

Scott Pinney Supervisor, Town of Lansing

Charles Berggren Supervisor, Town of Newfield

Dick Coogan Deputy Supervisor, Town of Ulysses

Bill Wendt TCAT Board

Victor Waldron Federal Transit Administration

Richard F. Beers, Jr. Federal Highway Administration

TRANSPORTATION PLANNING COMMITTEEWilliam J. Gray, Chair Public Works Superintendent, City of Ithaca

Dan Kwasnowski, Vice Chair Environmental Planner, Town of Dryden

Ed Marx Commissioner of Planning & Public Works, Tompkins County

William Sczesny Highway Manager, Tompkins County

John Lampman Highway Department, Tompkins County

Jonathan Kanter, AICP Director of Planning, Town of Ithaca

Fred Noteboom Highway Superintendent, Town of Ithaca

Sue Ritter Town Planner, Town of Ithaca

John W. Courtney Superintendent of Public Works, Village of LansingBrent A. Cross, P.E. Superintendent of Public Works, Village of Cayuga Heights

Tim Logue Transportation Engineer, City of Ithaca

John Gutenberger Director of Community Relations, Cornell University

Bill Wendt Director of Transportation Services, Cornell University

Joseph Turcotte General Manager, TCAT

Nicole Tedesco Service/Operations Analyst, TCAT

vacant Town of Caroline

Laura Shawley Highway Department, Town of Danby

vacant Town of Enfield

vacant Town of Groton

Jack French, Jr. Highway Superintendent, Town of Lansing

vacant Town of Newfield

Sue Poelvoorde Town of UlyssesJoseph Flint New York State Department of Transportation

Janis Gross New York State Department of Transportation

Richard F. Beers Federal Highway Administration

Victor Waldron Federal Transit Administration

STAFFFernando de Aragn, AICP, Director Emily Hunter, Intern

Teresa L. Linde, Administrative Assistant Anna Stokes, Intern

Victor A. Jorrin, Transportation Analyst

Tom Mank, Planning Analyst


6/219

vi

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CLIMATE CHANGE AND ENERGY POSITION STATEMENT

1. BACKGROUND FOR THE MPO AND THE LONG RANGETRANSPORTATION PLAN

The Metropolitan Planning Organization & The Long Range Transportation Plan................. 1.1What is a Metropolitan Planning Organization................................................................. 1.1What is the Long Range Transportation Plan ................................................................... 1.1ITCTC Organizational Structure ........................................................................................ 1.1Public Involvement................................................................................................................. 1.2

2. DEMOGRAPHIC OVERVIEW..........................................................2.1Introduction to Tompkins County ................................................................................................... 2.1

Demographic Characteristics ............................................................................................... 2.1Employment Characteristics .............................................................................................. 2.11

Travel Trends & Characteristics....................................................................................................2.14General Travel Trends ........................................................................................................2.14Commutation........................................................................................................................ 2.16Journey-to-Work..................................................................................................................2.16Vehicle Population................................................................................................................ 2.17Driving Population............................................................................................................... 2.18Trip Length ...........................................................................................................................2.18Traffic Accidents .................................................................................................................. 2.18Public Transportation.......................................................................................................... 2.18Bus and Paratransit ............................................................................................................. 2.19Paratransit.............................................................................................................................2.19Carshare ................................................................................................................................2.19Mobility Management .........................................................................................................2.19

3. VISION STATEMENTSSustainable Accessibility ...................................................................................................................3.1

Sustainable Accessibility........................................................................................................ 3.1Mobility....................................................................................................................................3.1Proximity................................................................................................................................. 3.2

Connectivity ............................................................................................................................ 3.2Integration...............................................................................................................................3.2Quality of Life......................................................................................................................... 3.2Environment ........................................................................................................................... 3.3

Vision Statement Goals & Objectives .............................................................................................. 3.4Integration...............................................................................................................................3.4Mobility....................................................................................................................................3.5Proximity................................................................................................................................. 3.5Connectivity ............................................................................................................................ 3.6Quality of Life ........................................................................................................................ 3.6Environment ........................................................................................................................... 3.7


7/219

vii

4. TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM A SUSTAINABLE VIEWIntroduction.........................................................................................................................................4.1Connectivity.........................................................................................................................................4.1

Roadways................................................................................................................................. 4.1Bridges .....................................................................................................................................4.5

Transit...................................................................................................................................... 4.5Paratransit............................................................................................................................... 4.6Coordination Plan.................................................................................................................. 4.7Multimodal and Intermodal Facilities................................................................................. 4.7Bicycle and Pedestrian Programs ......................................................................................4.14

Bicycles ............................................................................................................................4.15Pedestrians...................................................................................................................... 4.17

System Integration ............................................................................................................................ 4.24Mobility Impaired................................................................................................................ 4.24Parking and Circulation......................................................................................................4.24Design Issues ......................................................................................................................... 4.25Transportation Demand Management.............................................................................. 4.26Transportation System Management................................................................................ 4.27Data Needs.............................................................................................................................4.32Intermodal/Freight............................................................................................................... 4.32

Freight Movements........................................................................................................4.32Passenger Movements ...................................................................................................4.33

Environmental...................................................................................................................................4.35Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 4.35Air Quality.............................................................................................................................4.35Land Use Planning............................................................................................................... 4.37Energy....................................................................................................................................4.38Minimizing Negative Impacts............................................................................................. 4.39Locating Environmental Impacts ...................................................................................... 4.39

Safety Element...................................................................................................................................4.46Traffic Safety Issues.............................................................................................................4.46State and Regional Planning............................................................................................... 4.46Part I - New York State Highway Safety Plan ................................................................. 4.46Part II Tompkins County Emergency Preparedness...................................................4.48

Financial ............................................................................................................................................. 4.49Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 4.49Resource Estimation ............................................................................................................ 4.49Expenditure Estimation.......................................................................................................4.52

Highways......................................................................................................................... 4.54Transit .............................................................................................................................4.54

5. SCENARIO ANALYSISIntroduction.........................................................................................................................................5.1Scenarios............................................................................................................................................... 5.1Analysis................................................................................................................................................. 5.4

Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) and Vehicle Hours Traveled (VHT).............................. 5.4Air Quality and Energy.........................................................................................................5.5

Conclusions ........................................................................................................................................ 5.19


8/219

viii

6. PROJECTS FOR IMPLEMENTATONIntroduction.........................................................................................................................................6.1Transportation Initiatives..................................................................................................................6.2

Planning Efforts...................................................................................................................... 6.2Mobility Efforts ...................................................................................................................... 6.5Operations and Maintenance Efforts .................................................................................. 6.8

7. SAFETEA-LU NARRATIVEEight Planning Factors ....................................................................................................................... 7.1Ten Plan Requirements......................................................................................................................7.3

APPENDICES

A SUMMARY OF COMMENTS AND RESPONSES

B INVENTORY OF TRANSPORTATION DOCUMENTS

C GLOSSARY OF ACRONYMS, DEFINITIONS, AND

TRANSPORTATIONRELATED WEB SITES


9/219

ix

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE 1 Tompkins County Locator Map............................................................................................... 2.3

FIGURE 2 Ithaca-Tompkins County 2000 Urbanized Area Boundary For Transportation.................... 2.4

FIGURE 3 Census Block Population Density 2000 Tompkins County ...................................................2.8

FIGURE 4 Households in Tompkins County ............................................................................................ 2.9

FIGURE 5 Age of Population in Tompkins County................................................................................2.10

FIGURE 6 Employment in Tompkins County ........................................................................................ 2.13

FIGURE 7 Tompkins County Residents Who Work in Other Counties (2000) .................................... 2.21

FIGURE 8 Residence Location of Workers from Other Counties (2000).............................................. 2.21

FIGURE 9 Journey-to-Work History (Tompkins County)......................................................................2.24

FIGURE 10 Journey-to-Work History (City of Ithaca).............................................................................2.25

FIGURE 11 Journey-to-Work History (Town of Ithaca) ......................................................................... 2.26

FIGURE 12 Travel Time to Work ............................................................................................................. 2.28

FIGURE 13 Travel Time to Work Percentages ......................................................................................... 2.29

FIGURE 13-A Public Transportation Ridership in Tompkins County......................................................... 2.30

FIGURE 13-B Sustainability Accessibility Diagram ......................................................................................3.1

FIGURE 14 2004 Tompkins County Highway Functional Classification System .................................... 4.3

FIGURE 15 Bridges and Ratings in Tompkins County ..............................................................................4.8

FIGURE 16 Bridges and Ratings in City of Ithaca...................................................................................... 4.9

FIGURE 17 TCAT Bus Routes - 2009....................................................................................................... 4.10

FIGURE 18 TCAT Bus Routes: Ithaca - 2009 .......................................................................................... 4.11

FIGURE 19 TCAT Bus Boarding Countywide (10/15 11/16/08) ...................................................... 4.12FIGURE 20 TCAT Bus Boarding Ithaca (10/15 11/16/08) ................................................................ 4.13

FIGURE 21 Tompkins County Intermodal Facilities................................................................................ 4.14

FIGURE 22 Bike Suitability in Tompkins County.................................................................................... 4.16

FIGURE 23 Tompkins County Sidewalk Inventory.................................................................................. 4.18

FIGURE 24 Roads with Sidewalks City of Ithaca..................................................................................4.19

FIGURE 25 Multi-Use Trails in Tompkins County ..................................................................................4.21

FIGURE 26 Multi-Use Trails in City of Ithaca.......................................................................................... 4.22

FIGURE 27 Multi-Use Trails in Ithaca Urbanized Area........................................................................... 4.23

FIGURE 28 Location of Parking Areas City of Ithaca........................................................................... 4.28

FIGURE 29 Cayuga Lake Scenic Byway ..................................................................................................4.29

FIGURE 30 Tompkins County Congested Roads 2009.........................................................................4.30

FIGURE 31 City of Ithaca Congested Roads 2009 ................................................................................ 4.31

FIGURE 32 Major Freight Generators and Major Freight Corridors in Tompkins County....................4.34

FIGURE 33 Tompkins County eCO2 emissions by sector 2008.............................................................. 4.36

FIGURE 34 Natural Features Focus Areas in Tompkins County............................................................. 4.41

FIGURE 35 Natural Features Focus Areas in Ithaca.................................................................................4.42

FIGURE 36 Unique Natural Areas, Federal and State Wetlands in Tompkins County...........................4.43

FIGURE 37 Historic Bridges and Structures in Tompkins County .......................................................... 4.44

FIGURE 38 Historic Bridges and Structures in Ithaca..............................................................................4.45

FIGURE 39 2010-2030 Summary of Estimated Transportation Resources.............................................4.52

FIGURE 40 Existing Development.............................................................................................................. 5.7


10/219

x

LIST OF FIGURES continued

FIGURE 41 Trend-Based Scenario..............................................................................................................5.8

FIGURE 42 Plan-Based Scenario.................................................................................................................5.9

FIGURE 43 Tompkins County Congested Roads - 2009.......................................................................... 5.11

FIGURE 44 City of Ithaca Congested Roads - 2009................................................................................. 5.12

FIGURE 45 Tompkins County Congested Roads 2030 Trend Scenario...............................................5.13

FIGURE 46 City of Ithaca Congested Roads 2030 Trend Scenario......................................................5.14

FIGURE 47 Tompkins County Congested Roads 2030 Plan-Based.....................................................5.15

FIGURE 48 City of Ithaca Congested Roads 2030 Plan-Based ............................................................ 5.16

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE 1 Population Totals for Tompkins County Municipalities ........................................................2.5

TABLE 2 Population Totals for Tompkins County Villages .................................................................. 2.5

TABLE 3 Population Trends in Urban and Rural Areas ......................................................................... 2.6TABLE 4 Population Size and Density Figures for Tompkins County 1990-2007 ............................... 2.6

TABLE 5 Population Size and Density Figures for the Villages of Tompkins County 1990-2007 ...... 2.7

TABLE 6 Persons per Household in Tompkins County..........................................................................2.9

TABLE 7 Age of Population in Tompkins County................................................................................2.11

TABLE 8 Employment of Tompkins County Residents Age 16+........................................................ 2.12

TABLE 9 Trips Per Person per Day by Trip Purpose 1995 & 2001 estimates.................................. 2.15

TABLE 10 Trips Per Person per Day by Mode of Transportation 1995 & 2001 estimates................2.15

TABLE 11 Tompkins County Commutation Patterns.............................................................................2.20

TABLE 12 Means of Transportation to Work Census 2000 ................................................................ 2.22

TABLE 13 Means of Transportation to Work 2005-2007 ACS........................................................... 2.23

TABLE 14 Total Vehicle Registrations in Tompkins County................................................................. 2.27TABLE 15 Vehicles Available and Vehicles per person.........................................................................2.27

TABLE 16 Tompkins County Total Number of Drivers Licenses (1988-2007)................................... 2.28

TABLE 17 Travel Time to Work (Workers Age 16+ Not Working at Home).......................................2.29

TABLE 18 Traffic Accident History for Tompkins County.................................................................... 2.30

TABLE 19 Federal Aid Road System Descriptive Statistics ................................................................. 4.4

TABLE 20 Road System By Type ...................................................................................................4.4

TABLE 21 Bridge Condition...................................................................................................................... 4.5

TABLE 22 Bicycle Suitability - Score .....................................................................................................4.17

TABLE 23 Roads With Sidewalks ...........................................................................................................4.20

TABLE 24 U.S. Transportation Carbon Emissions (% by mode)...........................................................4.36

TABLE 25 Overall Emissions by Sector..................................................................................................4.36TABLE 26 Tompkins County Mileage by Mode .................................................................................... 4.37

TABLE 27 Tompkins County Emissions by Mode .................................................................................4.37

TABLE 28 Summary of Local Highway Resource Estimates................................................................. 4.50

TABLE 29 Highway and Transit Resource Estimate (2010-2030).........................................................4.51

TABLE 30 Summary of Total Estimated Resources ...............................................................................4.51

TABLE 31 Estimated Expenditure Allocations ....................................................................................... 4.53

TABLE 32 Vehicle Miles Traveled and Vehicle Hours Traveled .......................................................... 5.10

TABLE 33... Road Congestion .................................................................................................................... 5.10

TABLE 34... Emissions Analysis.................................................................................................................5.17

TABLE 35... Energy Analysis...................................................................................................................... 5.18


11/219

2030 Long Range Transportation Plan

Climate Change and Energy Position Statement

INTRODUCTION

Energy-rich and easily adaptable fossil fuels form the foundation of our fast paced contemporarysociety. For decades, the supply seemed endless. More recently, the threats of climate change,energy descent, political instability in oil rich regions, and environmental degradation suggest weare reaching the limit to our fossil fuel intensive lifestyle and economy. Some people questionwhether fossil fuels are truly growing scarce and explain that supply restrictions are merely theresult of market influences. However, evidence to the contrary is strong. We cannot take thechance that these limits to energy supplies are imaginary, lest we find ourselves unprepared forthe future.

In recent years, scientific evidence indicating changes in the global climate system has

accumulated to highly convincing proportions. In November 2007, the United NationsIntergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, acting on reports from an extensive network ofexperts from around the world, formally agreed that, warming of the climate system isunequivocal

1. This report, along with many others, suggests that sometime in the near future

Earth will experience significant changes in weather patterns; the exact consequences of whichwe do not yet fully understand. The same UNIPCC report insists that action to mitigate andprepare for the effects of climate change must take place quickly, resulting in notableimprovements no later than within the next ten years, i.e. by 2017.

Together with climate change, fuel availability and affordability promise to remain significantelements in planning for the future. This trend is evidenced by rising costs of gasoline, increasingfood costs, and other widespread economic impacts. Limited and/or high cost access to fossilfuels is likely to have immediate and direct impacts on the general population. Americansresponded very quickly to the 2008 gasoline price spike by buying more efficient cars, drivingless, and looking for alternative ways to travel.2

In light of these concerns, the ITCTC deems it necessary to address the need to minimize thenegative impacts of transportation on the environment and to consider strategies that improve ourability to respond positively to changes in larger transportation networks and in the energyeconomy. The ITCTC is fortunate that our earlier Long Range Transportation Plans (LRTPs)have laid a solid framework that incorporates goals and objectives that help address thechallenges of climate change and energy descent. The ITCTC intends with this PositionStatement to refocus its attention on these objectives and advance cooperation within thecommunity and between all concerned local agencies.

1 United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report, Summaryfor Policy Makers. November 2007.2 Leonhardt, David. Big Vehicles Stagger Under the Weight of $4 Gas. The New York Times. 4 June 2008.


12/219

TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS and WHY PLANNING IS IMPORTANT

While many of the most articulated transportation related concerns around climate change areenvironmental in nature, the impacts of transportation extend well beyond the ecological. Theway we travel affects our lifestyle options, the quality of our air and water, our health, and also

our local economy. Addressing energy descent and climate change in our transportation planningwill not only improve our quality of life but also improve adaptability to changing pricepressures. What follows is a summary of the key impacts of transportation.

Public Health Increasing the modal share of human-powered transportation, such as walkingand bicycling, through the provision of improved facilities and the design of walkabledevelopments and neighborhoods, helps combat a range of modern health problems such asobesity, adult-onset diabetes, heart disease, osteoporosis, cancer, and stroke. Having access tosafe pedestrian and bicycle routes means people are more likely to choose walking or biking asmodes of transportation, thus increasing their physical activity. People are also better able tointeract with their community and engage in outdoor activities with their families, building

valuable social capital. Implementing transportation strategies and policies that reduce relianceon private motor vehicles will result in reduced air pollution leading to reductions in theincidence of asthma and other respiratory disease. Less fuel exhaust in our air will result in lessresidual pollution in our local soil and water resources.

Land Use and Environment Approximately 90% of oil imports into the United States areused for transportation. According to a report from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agencys(EPA) Office of Transportation and Air Quality (OTAQ), transportation accounted for 27percent of U.S. Green House Gas (GHG) emissions in 20033. These numbers are stronglycorrelated with sprawl development patterns which depend on increased highway infrastructureand personal vehicle use. Transportation strategies can be used to facilitate the implementation ofmore efficient land use settlement patterns namely, land use designs that emphasize andprioritize public transportation, pedestrian, bicycling and shared (car share, car/vanpool,rideshare) modes of transportation.

Fuel Costs/Costs of owning a car When you add up financing, registration costs, insurance,maintenance, repairs, and fuel, the annual cost of car ownership is a significant expense. Thehigh cost of owning a depreciating but necessary asset like a car has a greater impact on the low-income households and on those who cannot afford to live near work and amenities. In theforeseeable future and almost with certainty within the 20-year planning horizon of the Long-Range Transportation Plan, as energy reserves - especially petroleum - decrease in quantity andquality, fuel prices are likely to increase. Investing in strategies that reduce car dependencyoffers more freedom to people who cannot afford personal vehicles and to those who wouldrather not own a personal vehicle. It will also reduce personal spending on transportation, andenhance our resilience in the event of future interruptions in larger energy networks.

3 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Transportation and Air Quality. Greenhouse Gas Emissions fromthe U.S. Transportation Sector: 1990-2003. March 2006. http://www.epa.gov/oms/climate/420r06003.pdf


13/219

INNOVATIONS and IMPROVING TRANSPORTATION

Planning departments around the country are becoming increasingly aware of the need forfundamental changes in the way we travel4. This awareness is spurring exciting innovations intransportation planning. Numerous strategies and tools, including a variety of Smart Growthtechniques and transportation-oriented development (TOD) concepts, can be applied to improve

multi-modal transportation in communities and the connectivity between them. Advances invehicle technology might result in a car and truck fleet that is cleaner and more efficient butnot necessarily cheaper or of less consequence with regards to congestion and land consumptionpatterns. The maturing of the information age has tremendous potential to help implementnetwork-based programs such as bike/car/ride sharing, vanpools, enhanced traffic operations andadvanced customer information and service strategies for public transit. Modern computercapabilities and other technological advances are helping in the development of newtransportation concepts like automated people movers, late generation light rail, personal rapidtransit (podcars), and intelligent transportation system applications. In thinking about long-rangetransportation planning for Tompkins County, it is important to emphasize aspects of our currentsystem that support sustainable transportation, sustainable land use, and encourage innovative

application of human, material, and technological resources. However, periods of crisis oftenproduce rapid innovation and the ITCTC must also keep abreast of arising innovations that canbe applied locally.

WHY ACT LOCALLY?

In a recent interview, Martin Wachs of the Rand Corporation noted, the United States is theonly major industrialized country in which the leadership on [climate change] issues is comingfrom local governments and states. There are numerous states and local jurisdictions that aretaking action on climate change in advance of federal action. As of the approval deadline of this2030 LRTP (Dec. 2009) strong national leadership in addressing climate change and energydescent was still lacking. Without a cogent national policy local action is of paramountimportance in combating and adapting to the impacts of climate change. Additionally, localplanning can influence regional transportation habits by providing an example of sustainabletransportation and by facilitating cooperation and innovation between communities. Sinceplanning affects the way we live long into the future, todays investment decisions will affecthow well our transportation system adapts to climate change and changes in energy availabilityfar into the future. Creating local and regional resiliency in our transportation system will helpthe area address any challenges that will come from reduced fossil fuel availability and variableclimate patterns.

SUSTAINABLE TRANSPORTATION IN TOMPKINS COUNTY

Ithaca and Tompkins County are fortunate to have a population that is aware and enthusiasticabout addressing climate change. In this respect, this community is well positioned to implementthe actions needed to address climate change and energy descent challenges.

Due in large part to a history of long-range transportation planning that supports many elementsof a sustainable transportation system, Ithaca and Tompkins County already have one of the bestpublic transit systems in Upstate New York. A relatively large proportion of Ithaca and

4 Hume, Christopher. A Planning Headache, 50 Years in the Making. The Toronto Star. 31 May 2008/


14/219

Tompkins County residents commute by walking and bicycling, especially in the urban areas. Itis important to continue to improve the safety and viability of public transportation and walkingin order to expand their modal shares. There is also great potential to increase the modal share ofbicycling by providing more dedicated facilities.

Private business models such as car sharing, ridesharing, and vanpooling must be encouraged to

operate to their highest capacity. In addition, as mentioned above, innovative use of resourcesand new information and transportation technologies must be considered for implementation,while evaluating new technologies and programs that are surely to arise in coming years. TheLRTP includes additional information on available strategies to enhance sustainable mobility andaccessibility in Tompkins County.

ROLE OF ITCTC//LOCAL GOALS

As an important contributor to planning efforts for the Ithaca Urbanized Area and TompkinsCounty, the ITCTCs role is one of cooperation, support and serving as a catalyst for

transportation programs and projects. In such a role, the ITCTC will help maintain an ethic andawareness that prioritizes climate change and energy security in transportation policy and inother policies that directly and indirectly affect the way our residents travel. The ITCTC will alsowork with local leadership to generate community involvement in planning for a moresustainable future.

In particular the ITCTC will work through its required core planning documents, the 20-yearLong-Range Transportation Plan (LRTP), the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) andthe annual Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP), to promote goals that help address thechallenges of climate change and energy descent. The LRTP embraces a the concept ofSustainable Accessibility, which reflects the communitys vision of transportation as a trulyintegrated multimodal system that recognizes the combined role of proximity of land uses,connectivity, mobility and its interaction with our environment and our quality of life.

CONCLUSION

The challenges of climate change and energy availability have the potential to fundamentallychange the ways in which we all live and work. As such, they will require a new way of thinkingabout local and regional planning and cooperation. The implementation of planning policiesmust meet new demands under potentially very different climatic and energy conditions.Although such change is often spoken about negatively, it is wrong to assume that the future isbleak and that these challenges will only make hard times bearablethis is also a time ofopportunity for Tompkins County. Many of the measures required to reduce our vulnerability tochanges in the environment and in the energy economy will serve to actually improve the waywe live, the way we travel, and the way we interact within our communities. ITCTCrepresentatives and staff, as members of the community, will work to find win/win solutions intransportation that result in sustainable improvements to the quality of life of Tompkins Countyresidents.


15/219

Ithaca-Tompkins CountyTransportation 2030 LONG-RANGE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

1. BACKGROUND

The MPO &

The LONG-RANGE

TRANSPORTATION

PLAN

What is an MPO

In 1974, the U.S. Congress amended the Federal Aid

Highway Act, which mandated that all urbanized areas

having a population of 50,000 or more designate a single

agency to administer federal transportation funds. The

agencies that were established were called Metropolitan

Planning Organizations. These organizations were toprovide a transportation planning process for local, state

and federal officials. Today, there are more than 300

MPOs across the country, including the Ithaca-Tompkins

County Transportation Council (ITCTC), the MPO for the

Ithaca-Tompkins County area. The ITCTC was created in

1992 after the Ithaca Urbanized area reached 50,000

population in the 1990 census.

What is the Long-Range Transportation PlanThe regulations that guide the operation of all MPOs

indicate that the transportation planning process must

include the development of a transportation plan covering

a 20-year planning horizon the Long-RangeTransportation Plan (LRTP). The ITCTC Long-Range

Transportation Plan needs to be updated every five years.

The first ITCTC LRTP was developed in 1995. The 2030

LRTP is the third update since the original.

Federal guidelines state the following basic direction for

long-range transportation plans:The transportation plan shall include both

long-range and short-range strategies/actions

that lead to the development of an integrated

mulitimodal transportation system to facilitate

the safe and efficient movement of people and

goods in addressing current and futuretransportation demand.

ITCTC Organizational Structure

As the designated MPO for the Ithaca metropolitan area,

the ITCTC is responsible for conducting a transportation

planning process that is "continuing, cooperative, andcomprehensive". In order to achieve this objective, the

ITCTCis structured at three levels.

The Transportation Policy Committee is the final MPO

decision-making authority and is composed of the

primary elected official from each member government.

Cornell University, the New York State Department ofTransportation, the Federal Highway Administration, the

Federal Transit Administration and Tompkins

Consolidated Area Transit (TCAT) and the other localgovernment in Tompkins County are also represented on

the Policy Committee.The MPO &

The Long-Range Transportation Plan The Transportation Planning Committee is responsiblefor coordinating and managing the area's transportation

planning activities and providing technical advice to the

Policy Committee. The Planning Committee is composed

primarily of lead technical staff members from themember entities and local transit operators.

The Central Staff is responsible for performing theadministrative and technical services necessary to operate

the MPO. The efforts of the Central Staff aresupplemented by the "in-kind services" of various

participants in the MPO process.

M P O S T R U C T U R E

F in a l D e c i s io n -ma k i ng A u t ho ri ty

T e c h n ic a l R e v ie w &R e c o m m e n d a tio n s

T e c h n ic a l A n a ly s isa n d S u p p o r t

I T H A C A - T O M P K I N S C O U N T YT R A N S P O R T A T IO N C O U N C I L

S T A F F

P L A N N I N G

C O M M I T T E E

P O L I C Y

C O M M I T T E E

The MPO holds a series of meetings during each calendar

year that are open to the public and where the public may

opine on issues taken up by the Committees. The Policy andthe Planning Committees meet alternately during the year,

holding two joint committee meetings in June and December

where both are present.

The core functions that the MPO must carry out include

developing and marinating both a long Range

Transportation Plan and a Transportation Improvement

Program of transportation planning and capital projects.During the process of developing these planning

documents the MPO informs the public of the activities

and encourages their participation

The operations and procedures of the ITCTC are guided

by the Unified Operations Plan, originally adopted by

formal resolution in August, 1992 and updated in May2000. This document specifies that the Transportation

Page 1.1

Council


16/219


Planning Committee is responsible for development of the

Comprehensive Long-Range Transportation Plan.

Public Involvement

In this 2030 update of the Long Range Transportation

Plan, the Ithaca Tompkins County Transportation Council

will describe the vision for the transportation systems in

Tompkins County taking into account the expressed

views of residents, transit users, bicyclists, pedestrians

and motorists concern for the environment and the quality

of life in their communities.

In the broadest sense, transportation in its many forms

affects our common future and what that our communitywill be like as it evolves. The LRTP looks at a

developmental path that makes strategic choices, which

have a positive impact on the overall quality of life. The

LRTP assumes the position of reducing the negative

impacts of transportation on the immediate environment

and seeks to involve the public in participating in making

choices that contribute towards improving the quality of

life in Tompkins County.

Through a series of public meetings, printed materials,

media outreach and public presentations, the Ithaca

Tompkins County Transportation County engaged thepublic and solicited comments and reactions on key

components of the LRTP update. The intent was to gather

comments on the publics thinking on a transportationsystem that:

1. Includes all modes.

2. Will be safe, convenient, and efficient.3. Serve and enhance existing land use and planned

growth.

4. Sustain the quality of the environment and enhanceour communities.

5. Be financially feasible.6. Provide access and connectivity with diverse land uses

and modes.7. Be maintained through local officials and citizens

participating in transportation decision-making.

Page 1.2

Council


17/219

2. DEMOGRAPHIC

OVERVIEW


Located in Upstate New York, Tompkins County containsnine towns, six villages and is home to the City of Ithaca,one of the principal cities of the scenic Finger Lakes region(see FIGURE 1). The City of Ithaca, which is centrallylocated within Tompkins County, is situated at the southernend of Lake Cayuga and serves as the activity hub for theCounty and indeed for a greater multi-county region. Thearea is characterized by topography that is restricted andinterrupted by the aftereffects of past glacial activity thatcreated the Finger Lakes region. The climate of the area isvariable and is characterized by well-defined seasons. TheCounty is best known as an education center, as it is hometo Cornell University, Ithaca College, and Tompkins

Cortland Community College. These institutions provideimportant sources of revenue, employment, and culturalamenities for the residents of Tompkins County as well assurrounding counties.

Metropolitan Planning Organization Urbanized Area

The ITCTC Urbanized Area is composed of the City ofIthaca, the Village of Cayuga Heights, the Village ofLansing, most of the Town of Ithaca, and small portions ofthe Towns of Caroline, Dryden, Lansing, Newfield, andUlysses (see FIGURE 2).

Demographic Characteristics

The purpose of this chapter is not to provide a detaileddemographic analysis, but rather to provide a "snapshot"of demographic characteristics that may have significanteffects on the transportation system. The latest dataavailable is used in tables and charts. In most cases 2007Census Estimate data can be applied, in other cases 2000Census data is the latest available. In addition, AmericanCommunity Survey (ACS) data was used when available(ITCTC considers ACS data to be more accurate thanstandard Census Estimate data).

The ACS is an annual survey of the population that isdesigned to eventually replace the decennial census. In2008 the first ACS data, reflecting a three year (2005-2007) average of survey results, was received forpopulation areas greater than 20,000 (i.e. TompkinsCounty, City of Ithaca, Town of Ithaca). ACS willcontinue to be implemented with the goal of generating 5-year averages. The first 5-year results will becomeavailable in 2010 which will also be the first dataavailable for all municipalities in the County.

According to the 2007 Census Estimate, Tompkins Countygrew in population by 4,554 persons between 2000 and2007, representing an annual average increase ofapproximately 0.7% (see TABLE 1). The City of Ithaca andall nine of the Towns in the County showed populationincreases from 2000 to 2007. In terms of the highestpercentage of persons gained, the Town of Ithaca gained8.1% (1,511 of 18,710) and the Town of Danby gained6.4% (191 of 3,007). The Towns with the smallest increasein population were the Town of Groton (1.1%) and theTown of Newfield (1.2%).

INTRODUCTION TO

TOMPKINS COUNTY

Regarding population changes in the six villages inTompkins County, the total population in all villagesdecreased by 0.14% per year and only 2 of the 6 villagesgained population (see TABLE 2). The only villageshaving population increases between 2000 and 2007 werethe Village of Trumansburg and the Village of Lansing(with increases of 2.8% and 0.7% respectively).

A review of the 1990-2007 population changes by Census-defined "urban" and "rural" areas confirms the notion that

Tompkins County continues to become more urbanizeddemographically (see TABLE 3). This is a trend that wasnoted in previous Long Range Transportation Plans(LRTPs). As the area becomes more urbanized, the travelpatterns and behaviors of its residents will continue tochange.

TABLE 4 provides a more detailed view of the area'sdemographic changes in terms of population density(persons per square mile,) for the 2000-2007 period for theTowns and the City of Ithaca, while TABLE5 show similarinformation for the Countys villages. Population densitybased on 2000 Census block data is presented in FIGURE

3. While pockets of urban density can be found throughoutthe County, representing traditional agricultural-communitydevelopment patterns, it is apparent from this figure wherethe urbanized areas (i.e., 1,000 persons/mile2 or more) lie.By far the greatest concentration of population lies in theurbanized area of the City of Ithaca. Other populationdensity pockets are centered on the villages of CayugaHeights, Groton, Dryden and Trumansburg. Furthermore,the map displays how density data can be correlated toseveral variables: the location of the major employmentcenters (e.g., Cornell University, Ithaca College, Route 96-Bindustrial corridor, the Central Business District (CBD), andthe northeast industrial corridor); the location of sanitarysewer and water service areas; and the ease and availabilityof transportation services/infrastructure.

While there is significant debate over the cause of suburban"sprawl", which is usually attributed to the attractions ofcheap land and the low cost of automobile transportation,there may be other reasons such as: the desire to escapeperceived liabilities and disamenities of the inner city; desireto belong to a relatively small homogenous community;desire for a smaller local government with the expectationthat it would be more responsive. Some of these

Page 2.1

Council


18/219

generalizations may hold true for the trends experienced inthe Ithaca urbanized area during the 1980s and 90s, whenmost of the population growth occurred in the towns andvillages surrounding the City of Ithaca. The continuingchallenge for local governments is to recognize these trendsand to work cooperatively to prevent sprawl from gettingworse.

The number of persons per household is an importantfactor in determining trip rates for an area. Large familiestend to generate fewer trips (per person) than do smallerfamilies because there is a tendency towards increasedvehicle occupancy with each trip. In Tompkins Countythe number of persons per household (pph) increasedslightly from 2.32 in 2000 to 2.37 in 2007(see TABLE 6).This slight increase was fairly insignificant compared tothe large decrease in persons per household from 1990(2.46) to 2000 (2.32). The figure for 1980 was 2.55pph,evidence of the length of this trend. While these figuresare slightly lower than national averages, probably due tothe influence of the university community on the area'sdemographics, they do correspond to national trendstowards smaller household sizes.

Ithaca-Tompkins CountyTransportation 2030 LONG-RANGE TRANSPORTATION PLAN Page 2.2

Council


19/219


Council

FIGURE 1


20/219

Ithaca-Tompkins CountyTransportation 2030 LONG-RANGE TRANSPORTATION PLAN Page 2.4Council

FIGURE 2

FIGURE 2


21/219


Council

TABLE 1

Population Totals for Tompkins County Municipalities

1990 Population 2000 Population 2007 Population

Estimate

2000-2007

Numeric

2000-2007

Percent

(% of County Total) (% of County

Total)

(% of County

Total)

Change Change

Civil Division

(% of County

Change)

Town of Caroline 3,044 (3.2%) 2,910 (3.0%) 3,012 (3.0%) 102 (3.5%) 3.5%

Town of Danby 2,858 (3.0%) 3,007 (3.1%) 3,198 (3.2%) 191 (6.4%) 6.4%

Town of Dryden 13,251 (14.1%) 13,532 (14.1%) 14,068 (13.9%) 536 (9.8%) 4.0%

Town of Enfield 3,054 (3.3%) 3,369 (3.5%) 3,566 (3.5%) 197 (4.3%) 5.9%

Town of Groton 5,483 (5.8%) 5,794 (6.0%) 5,857 (5.8%) 63 (1.4%) 1.1%

City of Ithaca 29,541 (31.4%) 28,775 (29.8%) 29,974 (29.7%) 1,199 (27.0%) 4.2%

Town of Ithaca 17,797 (18.9%) 18,710 (19.4%) 20,221 (20.0%) 1,511 (36.6%) 8.1%

Town of Lansing 9,296 (9.9%) 10,521 (10.6%) 11,011 (10.9%) 490 (9.3%) 4.7%

Town of Newfield 4,867 (5.2%) 5,108 (5.3%) 5,170 (5.1%) 62 (0.9%) 1.2%

Town of Ulysses 4,906 (5.2%) 4,775 (5.0%) 4,978 (4.9%) 203 (4.1%) 4.3%

Total County 94,097 (100.0%) 96,501 (100.0%) 101,055 (100.0%) 4,554 (100.0%) 4.7%Source: 1990 Census, 2000 Census, and 2007 Census Estimate

Note: Village population statistics are included as part of respective Town totals

TABLE 2

Population Totals for Tompkins County Villages

2000-2007

Numeric

2000-2007

Percent

Civil Division 1990 Population 2000 Population 2007 Population

Estimate

Change Change

Village of Cayuga Heights 3,457 3,785 3,674 -111 -0.30%

Village of Dryden 1,908 1,832 1,825 -7 -0.40%

Village of Freeville 437 505 505 0 0.00%

Village of Groton 2,398 2,470 2,408 -62 -0.70%

Village of Lansing 3,281 3,417 3,441 24 0.70%

Village of Trumansburg 1,611 1,581 1,592 11 2.80%

Total Village Population 13,092 13,590 13,445 -145 -0.10%

Source: 1990 Census, 2000 Census, and 2007 Census Estimate


22/219


Council

TABLE 3

Population Trends in Urban and Rural Areas

Census 2007 2000-2007 Percentage

Area

1990 2000

ACS Numeric Change ChangeUrban 50,133 53,528 59,408 5,880 10.99%

Rural 43,964 42,973 41,182 -1791 -4.17%

Total 94,097 96,501 100,590 4,089 4.24%

Source: 1990 Census, 2000 Census, and 2005-2007 ACS Three-Year Estimate

TABLE 4

Population, Size and Density Figures for Tompkins County 2000-2007

(City of Ithaca and Towns)

Civil Division TotalLand

Area

2000

Population

2000

Population

Density

(pop/mi2)

2007

Population

2007

Population

Density

(pop/mi2)

2000-2007

Change

(mi2) (pop)

Town of Caroline 55.0 2,910 52.91 3,012 54.76 +102

Town of Danby 53.6 3,007 56.10 3,198 59.66 +191

Town of Dryden 93.9 13,532 144.11 14,068 149.82 +536

Town of Enfield 36.9 3,369 91.30 3,566 96.64 +197

Town of Groton 49.6 5,794 116.81 5,857 118.09 +63

City of Ithaca 5.5 28,775 5,231.18 29,974 5,449.82 +1,199

Town of Ithaca 29.1 18,710 642.95 20,221 694.88 +1,511

Town of Lansing 60.7 10,521 173.33 11,011 181.40 +490

Town of Newfield 58.9 5,108 86.72 5,170 87.78 +62

Town of Ulysses 33.0 4,775 144.69 4,978 150.85 +203

Total County 476.1 96,501 202.69 101,055 212.26 +4,554

Source: 2000 Census and 2007 Census Estimate


23/219


Council

TABLE 5

Population Size and Density for the Villages of Tompkins County 2000-2007

Civil Division TotalLand

Area(mi

2)

2000

Population

2000

Population

Density(pop/mi

2)

2007

Population

2007

Population

Density(pop/mi

2)

2000-

2007

Change(pop)

Village of Dryden 1.7 1,832 1,077.65 1,825 1,073.53 -111

Village of Freeville 1.1 505 459.09 505 459.09 -7

Village of Groton 1.6 2,470 1,543.75 2,408 1,505.00 +0

Village of CayugaHeights

1.8 3,738 2,076.67 3,674 2,041.11 -62

Village of Lansing 4.6 3,417 742.83 3,441 748.04 +24

Village of

Trumansburg

1.2 1,581 1,317.50 1,592 1,326.67 +11

Source: 2000 Census, and 2007 Census Estimate


24/219


Council

N

34B

34B

366

13A

392

222

227

327

96B

34

36634

1313

38

38

13

89

96

79

34

96

38

79

13

CENSUS BLOCK POPULATION DENSITY, 2000TOMPKINS COUNTY

Fig. 3

Municipal Boundaries

The standard geo-referencing format for Tompkins County digitalspatial data is New York State P lane Central coordinate grid system,

based on the 1983 North American Datum and GRS80 Spheroid.

2 0 2 Miles

Scale: 1:240000

Persons Per Square MileNo Permanent Population

1 - 100101 - 1000>1000

FIGURE 3


25/219


Council

TABLE 6

Persons per Household in Tompkins County

Persons per

household

Population Households Population

Change

Household

Change

(excluding group

quarters)

1990 2000 2007 1990 2000 2007 2000 to

2007

2000 to

2007

2000 2007

Tompkins

County

94,097 96,501 100,590 33,338 36,420 37,374 4,089(4.2%)

954(2.6%)

2.32 2.37


Households in Tompkins County

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

16,000

1 person 2 person 3 person 4 person 5 person 6 person 7 or more

personHousehold Size

NumberofH

ouseholds

1990

20002007

FIGURE 4



26/219


Council

Another interesting observation is the change inhousehold size as a percentage of the total population.TABLE 6 indicates that the average number of personsper household decreased significantly from 1990 to 2000;FIGURE 4 shows how these changes are occurringwithin the total population. There were reductions in thepercentage of total population residing in large families(4, 5 and 6 persons) since 1990, while there was thesignificant increase in the number of two (2) person andthree (3) person households in Tompkins County.Regarding one (1) person households, the numberincreased from 1990-2000 and then decreased from 2000-2007. The effects of these trends can be inferred as: (a)more vehicle trips with lower auto occupancy; (b) theavailability of more small household dwelling units; and(c) fewer people residing in families and in communaldwellings.

A summary review of population by age group (seeFIGURE 5 and TABLE 7) reveals the largest increaseoccurs in the 45 to 64 year old cohort. An interesting

observation in this table is the shift from the 25 to 44 yearold group to the 45 to 64 year old group, from 1990 to 2007.This is reflective of the aging of the baby-boom generation.The 45 to 64 year old group has increased in size by 56.5%since 1990. The phenomenon establishes the trend for asignificant portion of the population. The majority of thechanges are probably due to natural cohort variation (and

the way the cohorts have been reported). The figures in thistable demonstrate the national trend towards our agingsociety.

Due largely to the influence of the university/colleges,local demographics indicate that there are relatively highrates of education in the Ithaca-Tompkins area. The 2007ACS Three-Year Estimate figures indicate 52.6% (29,636out of 56,331) of the Tompkins County population aged25 and older have completed four plus years of college;the corresponding figure for the City of Ithaca is 64.3%(7,528 of 11,708). These figures are correlated to therelative size of the different age groups within the County(see FIGURE 5 andTABLE 7).

Tompkins County has a substantial student population ofapproximately 25,000. The bulk of the students attendCornell University and Ithaca College, both within theIthaca urban area. Many of these students are year-roundresidents, but most reside in Tompkins County onlyduring the school year. Therefore, they create a significant

seasonal impact in the demand for services includingtransportation. ITCTC staff and other transportationprofessionals in the county are aware of this dynamic.Transportation studies and data gathering efforts areroutinely coordinated with student schedules in order tocapture the true peak in the travel demand.

Age of Populat ion in Tompkins County

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

35,000

0 to 4

years

old

5 to 9

years

old

10 to 14

years

old

15 to 19

years

old

20 to 24

years

old

25 to 44

years

old

45 to 64

years

old

65+

years

old

Age

Persons 1990

2000

2007

FIGURE 5



27/219


Council

TABLE 7

Age of Population in Tompkins County

1990 2000 2007 ACS Numeric Differencebetween 1990

and 2007

Age Group

(% of Total) (% of Total) (% of Total) (% change)

0 to 4 years old 5,293(5.6%)

4,285(4.4%)

4,078(4.1%)

-1215(-3.0%)

5 to 17 years old 12,943(13.8%)

14,011(14.5%)

11,771(11.7%)

-1172(-9.1%)

18 to 24 years old 25,110(26.7%)

25,054(26.0%)

28,410(28.2%)

3300(+13.1%)

25 to 44 years old 28,914(30.7%)

25,250(26.2%)

25,883(25.7%)

-3031(-10.5%)

45 to 64 years old 13,372

(14.2%)

18,644

(19.3%)

20,930

(20.8%)

7558

(+56.5%)65+ years old 8,465

(9.0%)9,257

(9.6%)9,518(9.5%)

1053(+12.4%)

Total 94,097

(100%)

96,501

(100%)

100,590

(100%)

6,493

(+6.9%)

Source: 1990 Census, 2000 Census, and 2005-2007 ACS Three-Year Estimate.

Employment CharacteristicsThe 2005-2007 ACS Census Estimates reveals thateducation is the still the leading employment sector inTompkins County capturing 47.0% (24,097 of 51,252) of

the resident workforce. The remainder of the residentworkforce is employed as follows: manufacturing /construction 9.8% (5,021), agriculture / forestry 2.0%(1,042), retail / wholesale trade 10.5% ( 5,382 ),transportation / communication / public administration7.3% ( 3,760), professional services 10.2% (5,231),finance / real estate 3.8% (1,944), and arts /entertainment / food services 9.3% (4,775) (see TABLE8).

The ITCTC maintains employment information (i.e.number of jobs) at a Traffic Analysis Zone level of detail.This information, which has been provided by the UnitedStates Bureau of the Census in its 2000 CensusTransportation and Planning Package, is crucial to thedevelopment of a travel demand model. TABLE 8provides employment information from the Census basedon number of employees. FIGURE 6 provides agraphical comparison between 1990, 2000, and 2007. Areview ofTABLE 8 andFIGURE 6 reveals a reductionin employment across many sectors with parallelincreases concentrated in educational and health servicesand communications, transportation and other utilities.Overall, the data indicates a gain in resident employment

of 5,196 from 1990 to 2007. The ITCTC will continue tomonitor these developments and work with localmunicipalities and agencies to address transportationissues.

While the impacts of economic trends need further study,they can be expected to have an impact on transportation.For example, it is well known that different types ofbusinesses have different trip generation potential; majorretail centers will have higher trip generation impacts thanwill basic manufacturing locations (i.e., shoppers versusemployees). In general, it can be inferred that the changesin the composition of the Tompkins County job markethave had some impact on the increased number of tripsand travel levels experienced in the area.

Other observations can be made regarding thesocioeconomic profile of the County's residents. Forinstance, the unemployment rate in Tompkins County isconsistently one of the lowest in the State of New York,and yet there are still many pockets of poverty. While theinfluences of the college / university include economicstability, the cost of living in Tompkins County isrelatively high, affecting housing and transportationdecisions. The high cost of living also results in reduceddiscretionary income affecting retail and other sectors ofthe economy.


28/219


Council

Population increases and low unemployment haveresulted in increased demand and price pressure on thehousing market (pushing people further out of urbanareas, creating sprawl or longer trip lengths). This hasresulted in higher tax and service fees in the core urbanareas as they cope with the loss of tax base whileretaining the same service and infrastructure maintenancecosts. While this plan does not directly address theseissues, it is important to recognize the potential effects of

this particular type of service-based economy ontransportation and energy issues.

TABLE 8

Employment of Tompkins County Residents Age 16+

Economic Sector 1990 2007 Numerical

Change

Percent

Change

Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing,Mining 1,328 1,042 +286 -21.5%

Construction 1,992 1,999 +7 +0.04%

Manufacturing 4,290 3,022 -1,268 -29.6%

Transportation and Utilities 886 1,078 +192 +21.7%

Communications & Other Public

Utilities

843 1,091 +248 +29.4%

Wholesale Trade 627 481 -146 -23.3%

Retail Trade 6,560 4,901 -1,659 -25.3%

Finance, Insurance, & Real Estate 1,903 1,944 +41 +2.2%

Personal, Arts, Entertainment,

Recreational and Food Services

3,189 4,775 +1,586 +49.7%

Educational, and Health Services 19,898 24,097 +4,199 +21.1%

Professional and Scientific and

Other Related Services

3,540 5,231 +1,691 +47.8%

Public Administration 1,000 1,591 +591 +59.1%

Total 46,056 51,252 +5,196 +11.3%

Source: 1990 and 2005-2007 ACS Three-Year Estimate.


29/219


Council

Employment in Tompkins County

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

Ag,Fore

stry,

Fishin

g

Cons

tructi

on

Man

ufactu

ring

Trans

&Utili

ties

Inform

ation

Wholes

aleTrad

e

RetailT

rade

Fin&In

s&RealEs

t

A&E+F

oodS

ervice

s

Profe

ssion

al

Educatio

nal&

Health

OtherProf

essio

nal

PublicA

dmini

strati

on

Industry

NumberofEmployees

1990

2000

2007

FIGURE 6



30/219


Council

General Travel TrendsThis section presents information based on data from the

1995 National Personal Transportation Surveys (NPTS)and the 2001 National Household Transportation Survey(NHTS). The NHTS data include information specific tothe Ithaca urbanized area. Data sources are identifiedthroughout the text and tables. This is the most recentlocally generated trip based data available fordevelopment of the 2030 LRTP. One of this plansrecommended projects for implementation includesperforming a new travel survey for Tompkins County,which will generate updated travel related data.

For preparation of the original Long Range Plan theITCTCacquired the data sets that were created followingthe completion of a travel survey of Tompkins Countyresidents in 1988. Complications associated with the wayin which the data was coded limited its interpretation andmade comparison with the 1990 NPTS data exceedinglydifficult (in some cases the data was re-aggregated in anattempt to force compatibility. For the current LRTPupdate the 1995 NPTS and 2001 NHTS, including theirNew York State Add-On, Ithaca MPO Add-on and tabularsummaries and graphics for the Ithaca Urban Area, wereused for comparisons. These data sources includeinformation for New York State in addition to nationaland Tompkins County figures. These were included in theanalysis where appropriate.

The data limitations that existed during preparation of theoriginal Long Range Plan, particularly the lack of recenttravel survey data, remain. However, the data that isavailable through the census, NPTS and NHTS continueto provide an excellent starting point for the analysis ofgeneral travel trends and characteristics in the greaterIthaca-Tompkins County area.

TABLE 9 compares the 1995 and 2001 national, state andlocal data on the basis of Person Trips by Trip Purpose(reported in relative percentages). Tompkins County had areduction in the percentage ofWork Trips between 1995and 2001. Some of this difference may be a result of the

use of different data sets. The 2001 figure for work tripsin Tompkins County (17.80%) is just below comparableNPTS figures for New York State (18.40%) and almosteven with the nationwide figure (17.7%). Family and

Personal Business trip purposes account for the mosttrips nationally (45.86%), in New York State (43.96%)and within the County (42.86%). The 2001 national andlocal trends for the other trip purposes seem to berelatively comparable: Educational & Religious(National=9.80%, Tompkins County=11.47%); Social

and Recreational (National=27.1%, Tompkins County =

26.70%); andMiscellaneous (National=0.8%, TompkinsCounty=1.17%). The higher than state and nationalnumbers for the Educational & Religious category isprobably due to the large number of students associatedwith the three institutes of higher learning found in thecounty.

Work Trips are most responsible for peak hour traffictrends by the way they cluster in the mornings andevenings. Generally, peak hours are congruent to rushhour, or the period of time when the majority of peopleare on their way to or from work. For this reason theyreceive much of the attention of planners and engineersseeking to address congestion at peak times. However, thebulk of trips on our roadways (approximately 80%) arenot work related. These trips also need to be consideredwhen determining travel trends and characteristics.

Person Trips by Mode of Transportation figures are

presented in TABLE 10 comparing 1995 and 2001estimates. Some important trends from the comparisoninclude a reduction in the use ofPrivate Vehicles as apercentage of trips per day in Tompkins County, from88.7% in 1990 to 83.2% in 1995 to 80.33% in 2001. Incontrast, the national figures for this category changedfrom 87.1% in 1990 to 89.3% in 1995 to 86.5% in 2001.Walking as a mode of transportation showed increasepercentages from 1995 to 2001 in the National, State andCounty figures. County increases in the percent of Walktrips date back to 1990 at 7.8%, compared to 1995(10.68%) and 2001 (14.99%). Bicycle use went frombeing below the national average to being almost 50%

above from 1990 to 1995. The 2001 bicycle figure show aslight reduction form 1.46% to .94%, which is still abovethe State average.

Public Transportation use, as a percent of total dailytrips, remained below the national average in the 1995 to2001 comparison. However, the data available to generateestimates from 1995 and 2001 do not register substantialimprovements in service and ridership since 1995. Themost significant change arose from the creation ofTompkins Consolidated Area Transit in 1998 andTCATs re-organization in 2005 (as a non-profitcorporation). Public transportation ridership (transit plusparatransit ridership) grew from 2,360,400 in 1995 to3,371,340 in 2008, an increase of 43%. The growth inridership is not reflected in the NHTS estimates of 1995and 2001.

TRAVEL TRENDS

& CHARACTERISTICS


31/219


Council

TABLE 9

Person Trips per Day by Trip Purpose 1995 & 2001 estimates

Trip Purpose National

1995 2001

New York State

1995 2001

Tompkins County

1995 2001

Work 20.26% 17.7% 19.85% 18.40% 19.63% 17.80%

Family and

Personal Business45.86% 44.6% 45.88% 43.96% 44.52% 42.86%

Educational /

Religious8.80% 9.8% 9.28% 9.89% 11.42% 11.47%

Social and

Recreational24.91% 27.1% 25.00% 26.65% 24.20% 26.70%

Miscellaneous .16% .8% 0.00% 1.10% .23% 1.17%

Sources: Nationwide Personal Transportation Survey 1995; 2001 National Household Travel Survey;2001 National Household Travel Survey, New York Add-On Ithaca MPO

TABLE 10

Trips per Person per Day by Mode of Transportation 1995 & 2001 estimates

Mode of Transportation National

1995 2001

New York State

1995 2001

Tompkins County

1995 2001

Private Vehicle 89.34% 86.5% 70.27% 65.6% 83.25% 80.33%

Public Transportation* 1.81% 1.5% 9.73% 10.0% 1.46% 1.17%

Walk 5.55% 8.6% 15.41% 20.1% 10.68% 14.99%

Bicycle .91% n/a .81% .7% 1.46% 0.94%

Other 2.39% 3.4% 3.78% 3.4% 3.16% 2.58%

Sources: Nationwide Personal Transportation Survey 1990 Databook Volume 1, FHWA, Publication No.FHWA-PL-94-010A; and Nationwide Personal Transportation Survey 1995; 2001 NationalHousehold Travel Survey; 2001 National Household Travel Survey, New York Add-On Ithaca MPO

*TCAT data indicate recent substantial increases in ridership that are not captured in this table. See thelast paragraph of page 2.XX.


32/219

Ithaca-Tompkins CountyTransportation 2030 LONG-RANGE TRANSPORTATION PLAN Page 2.16Council

CommutationTompkins County is a net labor importer, the number ofnon-resident workers in Tompkins County is greater thanthe number of people who reside in Tompkins County andwork outside the county (see TABLE 11). Based on the2000 Census the total number of persons working withinTompkins County was 57,032 while the number ofpersons that live and work in Tompkins County is only43,319. Slightly over 8.6% (4,075 of47,394) of TompkinsCounty's resident workers commuted out of the county forwork in 2000. This percentage is very close to that from1990, 8.28%. Meanwhile over 13,713 or 24% of totalworkers engaged in Tompkins County c

2030 Long Range Transportation Plan for the Ithaca Metropolitan Area published by the...

Documents

Transcript of 2030 Long Range Transportation Plan for the Ithaca Metropolitan Area published by the...