Louisville Loop - Coordinated Transportation Discussion Matrix

Loop Approaches/ Key Priorities Data Funding Training/Expertise Barriers Definition Outcomes

 Potential to induce  Exploit Loop as part of transportation system  Review and approve  Private developers  Knowledge on safety measures  Create connections with existing  Need for funding prioritization more multi-modal  Leverage public-private partnerships where construction plans  Federal transportation funds in designing infrastructure infrastructure system travel opportunity exists  Access, traffic studies, and  Council budget  Contract administration  Increase bike and ped modal  Lack of multi-modal  Viable  Request additional ROW and/or easements patterns of collision  Construction share transportation plan transportation  Create plan that identifies priorities for  Traffic volumes, turning  Use of federal funds for  Physical/Natural resources for  Increase safety conditions option with links to funding movements, 85% speeds application/implementation design  Integrate Loop with bike and Public Works key destinations  Roadway widths  Ability to generate cost  Public perception and pressures ped plans  Circumference of  Bike and ped counts estimates over spending transportation  Gaining access for easements system  Motivating force to get people to bike  Place to learn about  Building the Loop (planning, design,  Plan documents and resource  Grant opportunities in  GIS  Building the Loop  Funding and coordinating with community history constructing) documents unconventional sources  Planning, Engineering, Design  Reduction in traffic volumes other agencies  Meeting place  Installing amenities  Historic and ecological data  Local matches  Forestry and natural areas  Create premier facility in nation  Leadership continuity  Connector to  Maintenance  Development plan review  Olmsted Conservancy management  Progress through phases  Coordination and knowledge of community  Promotion/marketing  Stakeholder surveys  State transportation funds  Public participation  Active citizenry resources facilities and places  Connect Friends group with parks operations  Public input (focus groups and  MSD (stream restoration)  Finding funding  Improved built environment  Public awareness of parks’ and  Alternative public meetings)  Private developers  Marketing/PR conditions (air, water, etc.) Loop’s benefits Metro Parks transportation  Forming partnership (public and  Iconic emblem of Louisville  Maintenance of Loop corridor routes private)  No seat on KIPDA’s TTCC  Framework for ecological restoration  Promotes health and wellness Metro Parks – Natural  Resource to  Be able to reach a standard for care and  Biological inventories (invasive  Grant opportunities in  Land management knowledge  Looking at the Loop  Lack of budget and funding connect the stewardship species) unconventional areas like trail and baseline inventory (in order development in phases in terms support Areas community to areas  Establish resources to accomplish goal of  Track maintenance activities (in work, environmental work to help avoid sensitive areas and of success  Community engagement and where the Loop making the Loop a best practice future Hansen System) through projects, solid waste cleanup in protect their resources)  Show results of what it takes to connecting to neighborhoods touches and  Put in place a structure of accountability – a GIS tracking on routes of dump sites along Loop, and  Volunteer coordination manage Loop  Perception of Metro’s provides access to point of reference for community for problem spots other micro-sources of funding  Program-wise, they provide  Shape public perception on how competency in dealing with streams, river, maintenance and engagement (key step in  Community will be able to through foundations, experience and opportunities to the Loop could be maintained maintenance issues wetlands, and other building confidence). report and see real-time data governmental, and non- engage the public at events  Expanding volunteer base  Maintaining partnerships with natural areas.  “Boots on the ground” for users and  Volunteer hours and database of governmental sources  Interpretation of natural areas  Connect forest to community other agencies and creating a  Educational neighborhoods volunteers  In-kind volunteer work for clean- from places like Riverside (good clear line of authority resource to engage  Identify community leaders in areas that can  Eco-program: 2012-2013, ups example of how higher usage of  Concern with role of Friend’s of schools and general be engaged changes in academic  Education Department with park due to being on the Loop) the Loop group (or Forest vs. public in natural  Capitalize on talents and staff to reach into performance for kids knowledge of ecology and Shawnee Loop ground, or vs Parks) areas accessible to areas not typically engaged (e.g. Portland, participating in ecological  Volunteer naturalist in  Enhanced safety in all areas  Attention span of community Loop Shawnee, school kids, neighborhood groups) education programs will be community related to other concerns (fear)  Node areas (such as  Use Loop to implement tracking system to monitored amongst volunteer  Partnerships with ongoing  Changing perception of Loop as access points and monitor success on maintenance students in JCPS organizations, like Kentucky a “paved path” trailheads) where Department of Fish and Wildlife  Public safety enforcement entry points as Services, Kentucky Archeological capability (to avoid activities like natural areas Society, E-Corp, Boy Scouts, and dumping, ATV use,  Provides Girl Scouts neighborhoods like Lake opportunity to  Dreamland, hunting, etc.) and improve the ability to give citations at aesthetics and problem spots immediately. safety of certain areas of the city.  A catalyst for transformation, especially as it relates to reducing vandalism while neighborhoods potentially take pride in their areas.  Opportunity to engage people not typically involved 1 Louisville Loop - Coordinated Transportation Discussion Matrix

because it reaches into so many parts of our community’s backyards.  Output for community volunteering in neighborhoods  An asset for  Encourage use of alternative transportation  Collect various data through  Technical and institutional  GIS mapping  Better quality development that  Education and understanding of improving quality of modes development review process expertise on land use policies  Knowledge of land use and recognizes potential connections best practices by decision- life and community  Promote active lifestyles  Review plans against and regulations transportation connection, best  Connectivity from surrounding makers, developers, and other building  Create nodes, corridors, and connectors comprehensive plan  Staff time practices areas agencies.  A connectivity tool between communities/neighborhoods  Through area plans, collect  Understanding of  Knowledge of policies and  In-line with adopted policies and  Lack of understanding the  Alternative way to  Improve quality of life census, land use, historic, and comprehensive issues dealing implementation techniques coordination with transportation benefits of quality, pedestrian access different other place-based data with land use and transportation  Community engagement  Permanent notoriety and and bicycle-friendly parts of the  Zoning and land use data connections practices national recognition of our development Planning and Design community  Encourage implementation of  Neighborhood notification efforts in order to promote  Lack of funding for planning and  Can provide a link Loop-related policies through system and listserves for investment and increase implementation of adopted Services between activity discretionary review and community engagement property values in community plans centers neighborhood plans  Increase development  Existing zoning conditions that  Identify opportunities to opportunity in appropriate make it difficult to implement connect development plans to locations plans and policies (i.e. R4 single- the Loop  Higher quality development that family residential zoning) or low is inclusive, mixed-use, designed density residential zoned to encourage physical activity properties. through walking and bicycling

 Achieve health and  Using it to promote physical activity, promote  Behavioral Risk Factor  Leverage from previous grants  Knowledge of behavioral  Increased physical activity rates  Coordination funding priorities wellness, bicycling and walking as active transportation Surveillance System (BRFSS) with CDC and RWJF theories such as knowing how to in the community, including with other agencies  Provide physical and not just recreation, survey for baseline indicators  Future CDC grants, like motivate and encourage measuring and evaluating usage  Awareness of the Loop, its activity  Advocating for separated space for all users such as obesity, physical activity, Community Transformation behavioral change. of the Loop. connections, and the affiliated opportunities for to enjoy, and other key health indicators. Grant.  Use of data indicators as it  Citizens feel safe on the Loop or programs. relates to health to monitor bicycling and  Assuring neighborhood connections and  Access to Body Mass Index (BMI)  “Mayors Miles” help promote connecting to the Loop since  Safety and accessibility. progress of programs and walking, community engagement as a tool for social data for JCPS students (used connections to the Loop as a stress is an indicator.  Aesthetics are a major policies.  Connect the city in cohesion, generally), programmatic enhancement.  Assure that Loop connects to attractor/detractor for  Oversee a fundamental value that ways not addressed  Help shape how spokes of the Loop reach  Baseline data for Youth Risk facilities into the neighborhoods. connections into the  Mini-grants provide funding binds the community together – before, in all parts Behavior Surveillance System into the neighborhoods. opportunities for community health. neighborhood, particularly in of city (YRBSS) survey (being conducted organizations and Metro Parks  Experience and expertise in parts of community already  Help develop a under current LPPW grant). to provide programming for programming for physical perceived as unsafe. sense of  Center for Health Equity is such groups as seniors and activity and social engagement  Condition and maintenance to community through developing a Health Equity youth. with neighborhoods around create the right perception. Health and Wellness such activities like Report using social determinant programs to improve health. “porch sitting”, data as baseline indicators.  Help connect users  In a partnership with UL Public to other activities Health School, they have and facilities for developed asset maps that show physical activity such locations as community (i.e. gyms, gardens, food stores, and other gardening), similar community-based asset  Provide points. opportunity to link to food (both urban and rural),  Provide “mental refreshment” as a stress relief Economic Development  Quality of life  Recruiting tool for quality of life  Access to ESRI Market data  Regional and Federal funds  GIS mapping  Make Loop user friendly  Access point/gateway main resource in terms  Assuring connection to workplaces,  Current & upcoming lease and (Daniel will follow up with Susan  Loan programs  Increase quality of Life factor for success of health and neighborhoods, and services Creating access sale opportunity for retail spaces regarding this funding)  Environmental assessment  Job creation  Need appropriate meeting space recreation and connecting neighborhoods and sites  Revolving Loan Program  Economic Development  Investment in properties for businesses-lack of amenities  Catalyst for new  Viable transportation route  Business Association  Facade program expertise in general  Work cross-functionally, business and  Retail service  Co. Alliance of Business  EDA money-directed towards  Assessment and site partnering opportunities development  Create job opportunities—coffee trucks, Association- transportation improvement development issues related to  Making the right strategic 2 Louisville Loop - Coordinated Transportation Discussion Matrix

 Amenity to attract vendors  Industrial and commercial  Low interest loan program commercial and industrial areas connections to connect people and keep workforce  Make sure Economic Development is involved properties for sale (more  Retail forgivable loan  Site selection and land assembly to jobs and companies and aware of project industrial emphasis)  Gap financing -$100,000 or 25%  Retail development  Joining forces to go after funding  Connecting  Making sure route is compatible in areas of  Track publicly-owned parcels  EPA brownfield funds and  Job creation getting more aggressive going neighborhoods to heavy truck and industrial activity (Riverport,  Try to keep up on underutilized alignment with APCD funding  Farm to table initiatives after funding other Renaissance Zone, Rubbertown) properties through windshield (through assessment, clean ups,  Lack of a comprehensive neighborhoods-  Supporting connections internally to the Loop surveys etc.) infrastructure strategy residential, (from areas like California, Russell) for  Track land for assembly to  US Economic Development  Decision-making mechanisms at whether residential workforce access to jobs in and from public attract investors Administration money for all levels or employments and private interest  Social compact data on informal infrastructure to support centers economy data commercial uses  Opportunity to bike  Gardening and farming through or hike to work tobacco settlement funds (use of  Good place for UK Co-op Extension Service) public art  Part of a framework for economic development to focus types of retail that support and compliment the Loop  It is a connector – physical and cultural  A place for ideas

 Multi-use trail for  Assure good connection between Loop and  Bike racks on board users  No direct funding (all allocated)  Knowledge on type of bus  Increase ridership on routes that  Assure good connection recreation and existing transit routes  Track ridership of TARC Loop-to-  Service to Loop area transportation to serve the Loop serve Loop between Loop and existing transportation  Improve pedestrian and bicycle connections Loop (neighborhoods)  Expertise on bike and ped  Customer satisfaction with transit routes purposes to transit routes  Monitor ridership and on-time  New Freedom Funds to improve facilities, particularly connecting routes  Improve pedestrian and bicycle  Connector of  Improve transit facilities to accommodate performance facilities around transit stops with TARC facilities  Need to seek more funding to connections to transit routes neighborhoods, pedestrian and bicycles, especially to meet  Monitor accident, customer (need 20% local match)  Knowledge to accommodate provide services for Loop  Improve transit facilities to activity centers, ADA requirements complaints, request for service more users in high usage areas accommodate pedestrian and TARC and parks  Serve the Loop by bringing people to Loop  Inventory bus stops and shelters bicycles, especially to meet ADA with bus  Monitor development plans requirements  Assure TARC is involved in road improvement  Serve the Loop by bringing projects that affect bus circulation, bus stop people to Loop with bus location, access  Assure TARC is involved in road improvement projects that affect bus circulation, bus stop location, access

MSD  Opportunity to  Raise awareness to public about issues and  Sampling of water quality,  Rate driven means that the  Green controls and experience  Overflow reduction  Misperception that MSD has an coordinate prior to projects that remove CSOs ground monitors that capture opportunity to capture and treat over the years handling these  Education abundance of money negotiating  Not impair flood protection over flow data storm water before it gets into installments  Linkage of past projects  Communication within agency easement  Opportunity to help  For water quantity, capture flow separate or combined system,  BMP manual with guidelines on  Education about funding and and coordination of resources  Enhancement to  Connect loop segments as green data that could impact low to helps keep rates down-and building and maintenance consent decree  Floodwall limitations (must be flood protection infrastructure for CSO areas. Outside CSO inform of possible overflows saves in the long run  Sharing data inside floodwall) system areas, focus on water quality issues  For green projects, working with  Restricted on what happens, so  Design projects  Concurrency of projects with  Opportunity to  Take advantage of consent decree funds EPA to monitor flow and if practice treats stormwater,  Tracking and modeling controls external projects enhance, partner (projects are schedule for 15 years out) and ancillary benefits of green then it becomes a priority(apply  Ability to put a value to a project and coordinate make it prudent to foresee opportunities to projects (such as heat island values, models, and other  GIS mapping (leave area in include Loop and its links effect, soil conditions, etc.) measures for control) better area)  Consider MSD’s published projects.  Asset management system of  Design/construction-be  Most out of conditions of sites (like considerate of things that can investment manholes) to collect data on treat storm water-defined  Community these specific components of values, models, etc on types of resource the system (including trees) controls  Opportunity for  Best management practice  Coordinate overlapping stream restoration (BMP) opportunities  Cannot fund items that don’t deal with storm water 3 Louisville Loop - Coordinated Transportation Discussion Matrix

 Largest bike and  Regional priorities-loop project  Traffic counts (contract with  Ability to coordinate federal  No engineering but focus on  To see primary focus is  Making connectivity to pedestrian KIPDA  Serve as a functional transportation metro) transportation funding inventories of data transportation neighborhoods has ever had in alternative  Geographic inventories  Federal sources— CMAQ, SLO,TE  Assist with coordination of  CMT update-performance  Security scope or geography  It is a project that promotes Bike and  Socioeconomic (census and (transportation enhancement) funding that address federal measure on S.O.V. shift  Convincing neighbors  Has potential to pedestrian use other) issues  Project advancement  Massive $ create more  Viable alternative to single occupancy vehicle  Air quality –other sources  Offer input to planners  Measure the overall impact on  Finding multiple funding sources recreation, but also  Crash information-other sources  Travel model (how linkages can the entire network beyond conventional ones loop and  Anything pertaining to enhance transportation system)  Sustainability of project once  Getting full buy-in with KYTC on connections as transportation system  Inventory data implemented practices and integration with alternate mode  Bike and pedestrian (not a huge  Best practices knowledge or projects resources. amount) connections to other  Air quality and  Regional Transportation communities reduce congestion. household survey (1 every 10  Assist with process and assuring  Assures years) compliance with federal funds KIPDA transportation system provides purpose for entire community  Circumvention transit route versus radial  Loop provides assistance in the idea of linking radial bike and pedestrian  Alternative to single-occupancy vehicle  Provides a key  Have the Loop defined enough (access points,  In the annual reports, collecting  Due to the MOU with Louisville  Project management experience  Part of revitalization of the areas  Physically connect it through alternative connections into the downtown) so it can be benchmark data on such Metro, DDC’s mission is to  Planning to maximize between 10th and 14th Streets downtown transportation link fully integrated into the pending update to indicators as employment, maximize efficiency of spending connectivity opportunities  Bring people to Waterfront Park  Getting people clear direction in to reach downtown the Downtown Master Plan population growth, industry on projects in downtown area  Knowledge to inform economic and connect to downtown and out of downtown into the from other parts of  Have downtown biggest gateway for the Loop demographics, recent  Advocate for direct capital and business development  Conceptually, use downtown as surrounding neighborhoods and town.  Create internal loops. Most dynamic “loop-to- investment, office space, funding  Facilitation, building main gateway to rest of rest of city  Serve as a loop” opportunities within the downtown residential environment, and  Assist with state, local, and partnerships, and knitting parts community from the Loop  Must have positive impact on recreation area. housing fund information private funding (private and together other things in order to justify destination for  Engagement piece for east downtown in  Analyze data compiled by foundations) action Downtown downtown order to connect this area to River Road Louisville Downtown  Provide project management  Impact or potential for Loop businesses as well Management District assistance must resonate with more Development as a tourism  Contracting with UL’s Paul stakeholders, magnet Coombs to collect benchmark  Planning efforts must focus on  Provides a BIG data for strategic planning how to keep people downtown opportunity for efforts when they come to use the areas like Loop/Waterfront Park for Shippingport and events. systemic issues accessing River Road

4 Louisville Loop - Coordinated Transportation Discussion Matrix

What are the common What are the common themes? What types of data exist to be Do we create a funding matrix What training and expertise sharing What are the synergies? What is the shared concern? Is there themes?  All agencies want to be involved and attune shared? ) demonstrating the different areas of exists? a shared strategy that can help  A physical to the planning to take advantage of  Place specific data such as need?  Creating an iconic project with provide mutual benefit?) connector to and opportunities history, assets, demographics,  Create technical team to advice notoriety (locally, nationally, between  Assure Loop is used as part of the market, ecological, etc.  Local: capital budget, on community engagement internationally)  Building awareness of Loop’s neighborhoods, transportation system  Land development data  State practices  Perception and reality of making benefits (health, economic) and workplaces, parks  Create good connections between Loop and  Development plans  Federal  Identify sources of GIS analysis Loop a safe destination  Coordinate funding and decision and open spaces, workplaces, neighborhoods, transit, and  Traffic and transportation-  Private and mapping  Loop use (counts, events) and making strategically and services services related data  In-kind  Grant process knowledge ( satisfaction (surveyed)  Collaborate for more leverage in  An alternative  Promote Loop as a community asset and  Health data  Operational  Specialized baseline data for  Loop used as tool for economic attracting resources transportation amenity for active transportation, recreation,  Transit ridership and amenity measuring progress investment (having a multiplier  Mitigate and remove perceived route tourism, and investment catalyst. inventories  Project management effect) and real safety barriers through  A health and  Make Loop a tool for promoting green  Planning documents  Knowledge of best practices  Plan followed and evaluated to public safety enforcement wellness asset to infrastructure and general community measure progress  Assure high aesthetic value and promote physical sustainability. maintenance of Loop facilities Synthesis activity and social  Within Loopshed, create clear interaction points of connection and routes  A quality of life from neighborhoods, amenity to attract workplaces, parks, transit and and maintain services companies, families, and individuals  A tool for engaging neighborhoods and populations, particularly around items of history, environment, and social interaction.

 Purpose of tool is to identify resources and synergies, create tool for future prioritization, and assure transition of work group partners and informing future planning effort.  Team can use table to identify next steps, effective strategy for leveraging resources, additional partners or shared approaches. Implications  Align matrix outcomes with Strategic Plan items  Ask stakeholders: Based on what you observe here, what are most obvious strategies and action steps to take to make Loop a national model of success within the next 10 years?

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS ASKED

1. Loop Definition How does each agency define the Loop as a community resource? What terms do different agencies use?

2. Key Priorities What are each agency’s priorities related to the Loop?

3. Data/Evidence What information does each agency collect, and how? What is the information to which each agency reacts with concern or need to intervene? What evidence affirms that efforts are succeeding?

4. Funding What funding sources or other resources does each agency bring to advance the project?

5. Training/Expertise What expertise can each agency share with other partners?

6. Approaches/Outcomes What results does each agency seek in relation to the Loop?

7. Barriers What are the perceived barriers for the agency in accomplishing those results? 5