DOCSLIB.ORG

Gre at Places With

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Gre at Places With G R E A T P L A C E S W I T H T R A N S I T DELAWARE VALLEY Winter 2000 – 2001 REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION We will propose solutions. We will present In This Issue About This Newsletter case studies of success. We will also report on what is happening in this region and About This Newsletter across the nation. Communities have been clustered around Station Area Study for Schuylkill transportation since the beginning of time. One thing is certain: Creating great places Valley Metro Stage coach stops, train stations and trolley with transit as a real estate trend is building stops all inspired town building. Many of the momentum in unlikely places – Salt Lake City, Phoenixville: Philadelphia area ’ s greatest places were UT; Denver, CO; Houston, TX – areas that Model Transit-Oriented Development co n s t r ucted around transit: the Main Line, have been known to be rife with sprawling, Chestnut Hill, Swarthmore, Doylestown and out-of-control development for decades. But Rail-Volution 2000: Center City, just to name a few. it’s no accident. In places such as these, A Four-Day Conference on Building transit-oriented development (TOD) is a matter Livable Communities with Transit This newsletter, Great Places with Transit, of regional and local policy. Specific prog r a m s is intended to feature local and regional have been established, and funds are flowing efforts to revive the lost art of creating these to facilitate new development in support of places. Society has experimented for more transit and vice versa. than 50 years with neglecting transit and investing overwhelmingly in auto-dependent Will the Philadelphia region join the pack? Stay tuned. ––– Patrick Starr What is Transit-Oriented communities. The consequence is sprawl, the symptom is congestion and the legacy is PEC Regional Director Development? places that Americans love to hate, as poll after poll has confirmed. Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) Station Area Study for is mixed-use development consisting Americans love vibrant towns with sidewalks of homes, offices, shops, parks or Schuylkill Valley Metro filled with people to watch, stores to browse community facilities that have in and lots going on. We love to vacation convenient access to a transit line. in places that have these qualities, such as The agencies and stakeholders behind a Cape May, NJ; New Hope, PA; Annapolis, st a t i o n - a r ea planning and zoning study for the MD; and Celebration, FL. So, why doesn’t Schuylkill Valley Metro (SVM) – the prop o s e d the “marketplace” build more communities like fast train line that would carry 50,000 these? passengers a day between Reading and Philadelphia by 2007 – have begun a key Building great places isn’t easy. Building planning phase that emphasizes the input of great places with transit can be even trickier. community rep r esentatives in developing area s There are several institutional and perceptual of transit-oriented development (TOD). barriers: restrictive zoning, lack of financing, conflicting inter-governmental regulation and The Delaware Valley Regional Planning citizen hostility based on erroneous notions Commission, SEPTA and BARTA, Berks, about aspects of transit-friendly development Chester and Montgomery Counties, the City and what is good for the environment. of Philadelphia, the Pennsylvania Environ m e n t a l Council and the Reinvestment Fund are G R E AT PLACES W I T H This newsletter will focus on these issues and pa r tners in a two-year study that will explore set the record straight. We will examine the how the 62-mile SVM would best serve TRANSIT barriers. We will report on research findings. municipalities along its rou t e . (Continued on page 2) 2 SE P T A Adopts MetroRail for Schuylkill Valley Metro After much debate over the various options available for the prop o s e d Schuylkill Valley Metro line, SEPTA has selected "MetroRail", a system that combines some of the features of traditional commuter rail with fe a t u r es of light rail. The MetroR a i l system was chosen over six other plans for the new train line, which was recently approved by SEPTA’s bo a r d; construction is slated to begin in 2003. Me t r oRail uses environ m e n t a l l y friendly electric cars that can run on The proposed route and station stops of the Schuylkill Valley Metro, a new train line that would the same tracks as freight, Regional run from Philadelphia to Berks County. Rail and Amtrak trains and thus use the existing Center City Regional Rail (Station Area Study, continued from page 1) tunnel, allowing access to 30th Five station areas were selected for the study, St r eet, Suburban and Market East and a consultant team has been retained to Phoenixville: Stations. The cars are heavy and work with these communities to adopt zoning cr a s h - r esistant and have high that supports TODs around the stations. These Model Transit-Oriented pl a t f o r ms to make boarding easier economically vibrant areas would Development and wheelchair-accessible. Faster radiate from five Metro stations: 52nd Street and cleaner than traditional in Philadelphia; Port Kennedy and Pottstown di e s e l - p o w e r ed trains, the MetroR a i l in Montgomery County; Phoenixville in Chester The borough of Phoenixville, Pennsylvania, in system also has the highest estimated County; and Douglassville in Berks County. Chester County may be the new “hot” ridership of the seven types of development site of the 21st century. The train service that were considered Community task forces will play a crucial rol e fu t u r e locations of new homes, retail and for the SVM. in planning and implementing TODs around of fice spaces lie not on the outskirts of the the SVM stations. Comprised of local elected bo r ough, but downtown. On the site of the The SVM, which will extend from of ficials, planners, business people and fo r mer Phoenix Iron and Steel Works, the Philadelphia to Reading in Berks rep r esentatives of economic development Fr ench Creek Center is planned to be a large Co u n t y , would replace SEPTA’s R6 agencies and neighborhood groups, the task mixed-use infill development adjacent to a line between Center City and fo r ces will brainstorm ideas about station area pr oposed train station on the SVM and No r ristown, running every 15 design and function, discuss transit-related issues bo rd e r ed by the French Creek — a model minutes during peak hours and and formally review developing plans. The goal TO D . ev e r y 30 minutes off- p e a k . of this collaborative effo r t is to educate ta s k Commuters would be able to travel fo r ce members so that they, rather than planners In the late 1980s, Phoenixville exemplified to 30th Street Station from Reading and developers, can advocate for the prop o s e d the post-industrial age of the Rust Belt. The mill, in 83 minutes, from Phoenixville to zoning amendments in their communities. situated at the center of town, had sat dorma n t Manayunk in 29 minutes, and from since 1991. As downtown retail was faltering King of Prussia to Market East With input from communities and guidance and prop e r ty values were falling, neglect Station in 43 minutes. ■ fr om experts involved in the station-area planning began to mar some of the attractive residential and zoning study, it is hoped that the SVM may districts — especially the North Side. G R E AT PLACES W I T H one day serve as a prototype for transit systems Meanwhile, other development had boomed th r oughout both the region and the state that all around the borough. Pharma c e u t i c a l TRANSIT will facilitate TODs and help battle sprawl. ■ he a d q u a r ters had been built nearby at US (Continued on page 3) As the real estate market heated up in the The January 2000 presentation was a grea t 1990s, rumors of likely redevelopment on success, as borough officials saw their desires the Iron Works site began to circulate. The incorporated and concerns addressed. Central 3 Phoenix Prop e r ty Group, a new owner in to the new plan was the integration of the 1999, proposed a suburban-style corporate development with an attractive transit station, (Phoenixville, continued from page 2) of fice park, a long-stay apartment complex the dedication of 39 acres of parkland along Route 422 and PA Route 29, and suburban-style townhouses on 120 acres . the French Creek, and careful connection to while large, national retail stores Bo r ough leadership felt that the plan did not the downtown and newly res t o r ed Phoenix we r e built in adjacent Schuylkill match their vision for downtown Phoenixville’s Ir on Works Foundry Building. Tow n s h i p . reb i r th, and tensions began to rise. At a special planning commission meeting, Ho w e v e r , a burst of civic energy , Late in 1999, the Chester County 2020 the developer proposed a unified development sparked in part by Chester County’s Trust, an organization that is committed master plan and a zoning ordinance. This Landscapes 2020 Compreh e n s i v e to managing growth and sprawl in pr oposal illustrated the needed changes to Plan, brought about the Vis i o n Chester County, brought Klaus Phillipsen, the present ordinance that will allow the Pa r tnership Task Force.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Greater Reading: a Call to Action
    GREATER READING: A CALL TO ACTION To: The Greater Reading Community The Initiative for a Competitive Greater Reading (ICGR) was started by several local business leaders in response to a challenge – and a commitment of support – by local elected political leaders. These early initiators recognized and stated that they wanted something differ- ent, something real, and something that would make an impact toward creating an exciting and vibrant future for the Greater Reading region. Our approach was based on a simple principle – quality of life begins with a healthy economy. Put more simply, we needed to provide jobs for our residents. And, given our recent history of losing so many jobs, this required us to begin to think about doing some things differently. The good news is that we found a widespread interest in bringing about the necessary changes. What we found lacking initially, at least, was the necessary consensus on priorities. The Initiative for a Competitive Greater Reading set about to change this. Our region is unique in many ways. Sure, we have our problems and challenges. Who doesn’t? But we took account of these, dealt with them and focused most of our efforts on a very real set of opportunities. This we called “dealing with reality”. And “dealing with reality” implies, first, that we recognize things as they actually are, not as we wish they might be or as we might remember them. Among today’s realities, we all need to accept and come to terms with the following: - The region cannot be successful without a vibrant urban core.
    [Show full text]
  • Phase I Final Report and Recommended Plan 19 April 2012
    Phase I Final Report and Recommended Plan 19 April 2012 BPT Contract #4400006253 – MMOE2 Work Order #52 – Transit Development Plan for Berks Area Regional Transportation Authority Deliverable #7 – Recommended Plan and Phase I Final Report Transit Development Plan for Berks Area Regional Transportation Authority (Page Intentionally Left Blank) ______________________________________________________________________________ Final Report Page i Transit Development Plan for Berks Area Regional Transportation Authority TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page Introduction 1 Service Area Profile 3 Population Trends 5 Population Density 11 Transportation-Disadvantaged Population Groups 14 Employment and Commuting 28 Major Travel Generators 34 Mobility Needs Assessment 40 Future Land Use 42 Existing Conditions 45 Service Description 45 Fare Structure 53 Demand Responsive Services 55 Physical Plant and Assets 55 Organization 57 Trends 59 Summary 64 Peer and Trend Analysis 65 Peer Selection 65 Overview of Analysis Techniques 67 Peer Group Analysis 70 Trend Analysis 80 Combination Analysis 88 Rider Survey 94 Survey Methodology 94 Survey Results 99 Resident Survey 113 Survey Methodology 113 Survey Results 114 ______________________________________________________________________________ Final Report Page ii Transit Development Plan for Berks Area Regional Transportation Authority TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED) Section Page Community Leader Interviews 129 Community Leaders 129 Findings and Results 129 Staff Input 140 Process 140 Findings and Results 140 Route
    [Show full text]
  • City of Reading, PA, Comprehensive Plan, 2000
    City of Reading, Pennsylvania Comprehensive Plan 2000 JUNE 2000 Comprehensive Plan 2000 MAYOR JOSEPH D. EPPIHIMER, L1 READING CITY COUNCIL PAUL J. HOH, PRESIDENT VINCENT GAGLIARDO, JR. CASEY GANSTER JEFF WALTMAN CHARLES KNOLL JOHN ULRICH VAUGHN SPENCER CITY OF READING PLANNING COMMISSION - ,S. HENRY LESSIG, CHAIRMAN EDMUND PALKA, VICE-CHAIRMAN ERMETE J. RAFFAELLI, SECRETARY MIKE LAUTER, ASSISTANT SECRETARY STANLEY J. PAPADEMETRIOU CHARLES E. FAIRCHILD DONNA REED DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ERIC J. GALOSI, ACTING DIRECTOR June, 2000 -A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE S. Henry Lessig, Chairman Tom Brogan, Albright College Nelson deLeon, Reading Means Business Team Vito Ellison, Reading High Student Marcia Goodman Hinnershitz, Coalition for a Healthy Community William Hall, Member at Large Ted Jamula, Southern Middle School Principal Terry Knox-Ramseur, United Way of Berks County Tom McKeon, Berks County Industrial Development Authority Stanley Papademetriou, Reading Planning Commission Yvette Santiago, Human Relations Council Joseph Templin, Downtown Improvement District Sandra Wise, Police Athletic League COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STAFF Fritz Rothermel, Senior Planner Karl Graybill, Planner Amy Woldt, Community Development Specialist Neil Nemeth, Community Development Specialist David Johnson, Business Resource Center Coordinator The Planning Commission wishes to extend its appreciation to the many individuals who participated in the preparation of this plan., but who are no longer employed by the City or hold public office. In particular the Commission would like to acknowledge the contributions of the following individuals: Emily Richardson, City Council, District #2. Michael Fiucci, City Council, District #6. Thomas A. Cookingham, Community Development Department Director Pamela Shupp Straub, Community Development Department Director Jennifer Gober, Planner John Weller, Community Planning & Development Division Manager The Task Forces and membership lists can be found in Appendix B.
    [Show full text]
  • City of Readins; Psnrisylvania
    City of Readins; Psnrisylvania JUNE 2000 c Ji -e Executive Summary THE PROCESS The City of Reading faces an uncertain and challenging future. It has reached the point in its growth and evolution when it is necessary to look at and plan for the future. Significant changes continue to occur at local and regional levels. Changing economics, shifting population bases, industrial plant closings, older housing stock and aging public facilities are headlines that appear in the news media every day. On the other hand, there are prospects for regional economic growth, collaboration and other potential opportunities that can be pursued. The current Master Plan for the City of Reading was adopted in 1969. There were efforts in 1980 and 1986 to develop an updated plan, but support was limited and final drafts were never completed. In January 1997, the Reading Planning Commission suggested to the Mayor and City Council that the Commission and appropriate Planning staff develop a new Comprehensive P!an and related Strategic Action Plan. The recommendation was endorsed by the P,dministrz- tion, and the Planning Commission identified several critical objectives to be included in the creation of the new plan. These have been summarized in the following Mission Statement: 3. “The Comprehensive Plan for Reading serves as a formally adopted statement of poli- cies regarding the City’s future. It provides a framework for public and private decisions that impact the prioritization of resource allocation, increases neighborhood and busi- 2 ness stability, and improves the overall quality of life. The document can also serve as a guide to address changing human and physical environments, strengthen community confidence and involvement, provide investment security, preserve and enhance the positive qualities of Reading, and reinforce the City as a regional hub.” In June 1997, City Council directed the Planning Commission and appropriate staff of the Community Development Department to prepare a Comprehensive Plan and Strategic Action Plan for Reading.
    [Show full text]
  • Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority
    SOUTHEASTERN PENNSYLVANIA TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY AGENDA REGULAR MEETING To Be Held at 3:00 PM JUNE 25, 2015 1234 Market Street, Mezzanine Level Philadelphia, PA 1. Approval of Minutes of the Regular and Special Board Meetings of May 28, 2015 2. Financial Report 3. Resolutions I. Election to Move Up the Regular Meeting of the Board in the Month of September 2015 Scheduled For September 24, 2015 II. Budget, Planning & Information Technology Committee Review A. Amendment of the Fiscal Year 2015 Operating Budget and Transfer of Funds to the Service Stabilization Fund III. Administration Committee Review A. Renewal of Blanket Railroad Protective Liability Insurance with Arch Insurance Company B. Renewal of Radio Broadcasting Equipment Floater Insurance and General Liability Insurance with Travelers Insurance Company, Burlington Insurance Company and Scottsdale Insurance Company C. Consultant Services Contract Pursuant to a Request for Proposals D. Consultant Amendment E. Authority to Change the SAM Pension Plan and Retiree Medical Plan Agenda June 25, 2015 IV. Operations Committee Review A. Items for Consideration 1. Fiscal Year 2016 Annual Service Plan 2. Agreement with Independence Visitor Center Corporation Related to Philadelphia Phlash Service 3. Short Term Lease to the Center City District of an Approximate 844 Foot Long Portion of the City Branch Right-of-Way, and Subsequent Sale of the Same Area to the City of Philadelphia and Leaseback to SEPT A 4. Lease by Ewald and Eileen Stellrecht of20-30 Parking Spaces Located Near Whitford Passenger Station in Chester County, Pennsylvania 5. Relocation Agreement and Grant of Easement Between SEPTA and Sunoco Pipeline, L.P.
    [Show full text]
  • 1. Introduction
    4. THE GREENWAY BUILDING BLOCKS • West Pottsgrove Township • Pottstown Borough • Lower Pottsgrove Township • Limerick Township • Royersford Borough • Upper Providence Township • Lower Providence Township • West Norriton Township • Upper Merion Township Norristown Borough • Bridgeport Borough Plymouth Township • Conshohocken Borough • West Conshohocken Borough • Whitemarsh Township • Lower Merion Township • West Pottsgrove Township • Pottstown Borough Lower Pottsgrove Township • Limerick Township Royersford Borough • Upper Providence Township • Lower Providence Township • West Norriton Township • Upper Merion Township • Norristown Borough Bridgeport Borough • Plymouth Township Conshohocken Borough • West Conshohocken Borough • Whitemarsh Township • Lower Merion Township West Pottsgrove Township • Pottstown Borough • Lower Pottsgrove Township Limerick Township • Royersford Borough • Upper Providence Township Lower Providence Township • West Norriton Township • Upper Merion Township Norristown Borough • Bridgeport Borough Plymouth Township • Conshohocken Borough • West Conshohocken Borough • Whitemarsh Township • Lower Merion Township • West Pottsgrove Township Pottstown Borough Lower Pottsgrove Township • Limerick Township Royersford Borough • Upper Providence Township • Lower Providence • Upper Providence Township • Lower Providence Township • West Norriton Township • Upper Merion Township Norristown Borough • Bridgeport Borough Plymouth Township • Conshohocken Borough • West Conshohocken Borough • Whitemarsh Township • Lower Merion Township
    [Show full text]
  • Final Program: the 2010 Annual Conference Final Program Is Printed on Roland Opaque50 Smooth Bright White 70# and Contains FSC Certified 50% Post-Consumer Fiber
    2010 ANNUAL CONFERENCE cultivating strong communities this year! \ Earn up to 14.5 CM credits including Law and Ethics require- ments, plus an extra 6 CM credits CULTIVATE! at the Post Conference Workshop \ Opening Session on the Land Use – Transportation Connection with former seven-term Charlotte, NC mayor, the Honorable Pat McCrory \ Pitkin Lecture with Christopher Leinberger of The Brookings Institution \ Plenary Session on Marcellus Shale – the pros, the cons, and the practical realities for planners \ Special Post Conference Education – APA Pilot Workshop on Planning the Urban Forest \ Three and a half days of Education \ Welcome Reception at the New Lancaster Marriott at Penn Square \ Monday Evening Reception at Clipper Stadium, home of the Lancaster Barnstormers \ PA Chapter Annual Awards and Annual Meeting October 3–5, 2010 Post Conference Workshop, October 6, 2010 Lancaster, PA www.planningpa.org American Planning Association APA Pennsylvania Chapter PA Making Great Communities Happen PLANNING COMMITTEE COMMITTEE CO-CHAIRS: James Cowhey, AICP Lancaster County Planning Commission Jeffery Featherstone, PhD Temple University, Center for Sustainable Communities Richard Koch, AICP Gannett Fleming COMMITTEE: John Ahlfeld, AICP Lancaster Inter-Municipal Committee Eugene Aleci, AICP American Planning Association Community Heritage Partners APA Pennsylvania Chapter Christina Arlt Warwick Township Making Great Communities Happen Andrew Batson PA Michael Baker, Jr., Inc. Angela Cuthbert, PhD Millersville University Thomas Daniels, PhD University of Pennsylvania WELCOME Mary Frey, AICP Lancaster County Planning Commission TO LANCASTER... Joiann Galiano, AICP York County Planning Commission 2010 PA Chapter of the American Planning Association Annual Conference William Gomes, AICP Mifflin County Planning Department Matthew Harlow ON BEHALF OF THE 2010 CONFERENCE COMMITTEE of the Pennsylvania Chapter of ELA Group Inc Tara Hitchens, AICP the American Planning Association, we welcome you to Lancaster.
    [Show full text]
  • R6 Norristown Line Service Extension Study Final Report
    February 2009 Submitted to and the Submitted by DMJM Harris R6 Norristown Line Service Extension Study Final Report Acknowledgments This report was produced in collaboration with AECOM Consult, a DMJM Harris affiliate, and CHPlanning, a transportation and land use planning firm located in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Mercator Financial Advisors prepared the analysis of potential tolling options for this report. Mercator Advisors is under contract to Select Greater Philadelphia/CEO Council for Growth which participated in this study. The authors gratefully acknowledge the contributions of the Study Technical Advisory Committee for the R6 Norristown Line Service Extension Study. We wish to thank the following organizations: · Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission (DVRPC) · Berks County Planning Commission · Chester County Planning Commission · Montgomery County Planning Commission · Office of US Senator Arlen Specter · Office of Congressman Jim Gerlach · Norfolk Southern Railroad · SEPTA · PennDOT District 6-0 · Berks Area Reading Transportation Authority (BARTA) · Greater Valley Forge Transportation Management Association · Select Greater Philadelphia/CEO Council for Growth The authors also appreciate the participation and efforts of Leo Bagley, Section Chief, Transportation Planning, of the Montgomery County Planning Commission, in the preparation of this report. July 2008 R6 Norristown Line Service Extension Study Final Report Table of Contents Executive Summary Chapter 1: Introduction Chapter 2: Study Process & Public Involvement
    [Show full text]
  • The Joint Comprehensive Plan Lower Alsace Township
    THE JOINT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LOWER ALSACE TOWNSHIP MOUNT PENN BOROUGH 2006 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT This document was largely financed by Berks County’s Federal Community Development Block Grant Program. Berks County has established a policy for funding local planning with CDBG funds that implements the principles defined in the Berks County Comprehensive Plan Revision. A major objective is to promote joint municipal planning, intergovernmental and regional cooperation. As a result, the County initiated a Local Planning Partnership Fund, to fund the preparation of local comprehensive plans for municipalities that engage in joint planning efforts. The County commends municipal officials of Lower Alsace Township and Mount Penn Borough, as well as the joint committee members, for their participation in this program. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Chapter 1 Introduction to the Comprehensive Plan 1-1 Chapter 2 Vision and Community Development Goals and Objectives 2-1 Chapter 3 Planning Questionnaire Results 3-1 Chapter 4 Issues Facing the Township and Borough 4-1 Chapter 5 Future Land Use and Housing Plan 5-1 Chapter 6 Community Facilities and Services Plan 6-1 Chapter 7 Economic and Community Development 7-1 Chapter 8 Circulation Plan 8-1 Chapter 9 Plan for the Protection of Natural and Historic Resources 9-1 Chapter 10 Action Plan 10-1 Chapter 11 Plan Interrelationships 11-1 Chapter 12 Existing Land Use 12-1 Chapter 13 Public Sanitary Sewer and Water Facilities 13-1 Chapter 14 Agricultural Resources 14-1 Chapter 15 Natural Features 15-1 Chapter 16 Geology
    [Show full text]
  • Getting on Track Good Investments for Pennsylvania’S Public Transit System
    Getting on Track Good Investments for Pennsylvania’s Public Transit System Getting on Track Good Investments for Pennsylvania’s Public Transit System PennPIRG Education Fund Timothy Telleen-Lawton Frontier Group James Browning PennPIRG Education Fund September 2008 Acknowledgments The authors wish to thank Lance Haver of the Philadelphia Mayor’s Office and Nathan Wilcox of PennEnvironment for their review of and assistance with this report. The au- thors would also like to thank Tony Dutzik of Frontier Group and Phineas Baxandall of U.S. PIRG for their editorial assistance. The generous financial support of the Surdna Foundation made this report possible. The authors bear responsibility for any factual errors. The recommendations are those of PennPIRG Education Fund. The views expressed in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of our funders or those who provided review. Copyright 2008 PennPIRG Education Fund With public debate around important issues often dominated by special interests pursuing their own narrow agendas, PennPIRG Education Fund offers an independent voice that works on behalf of the public interest. PennPIRG Education Fund, a 501(c)(3) organiza- tion, works to protect consumers and promote good government. We investigate problems, craft solutions, educate the public, and offer Pennsylvanians meaningful opportunities for civic participation. Frontier Group conducts independent research and policy analysis to support a cleaner, healthier and more democratic society. Our mission is to inject accurate information and compelling ideas into public policy debates at the local, state and federal levels. For more information about PennPIRG Education Fund or for additional copies of this report, please visit www.pennpirg.org.
    [Show full text]
  • TCSP Application
    Implementing Transit Oriented Development in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area Transportation and Community and System Preservation Pilot Program (TCSP) SUMMARY INFORMATION Type of Project Request: Planning and Implementation Grant Project Title and Location: Implementing Transit Oriented Development in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area: Schuylkill Valley Metro (SVM) Corridor Station Area Planning and Implementation; Berks, Chester, Montgomery and Philadelphia counties, Pennsylvania (See attached Study Corridor Map). Organization: Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission (DVRPC) Key Contact: Richard G. Bickel, Associate Director, Regional Planning Address: The Bourse Building, 111 South Independence Mall East, 8th Floor, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19106-2515 Phone/Fax/E-mail: 215-238-2830; 215-592-9125; [email protected] Grant Request: $893,000 total program cost; $665,600 federal grant request (74.5%) ABSTRACT The proposed project involves a coordinated, cooperative, region wide and focused transit oriented development (TOD) program, encompassing three concurrent components: • A regional Location Efficient Mortgage (LEM) Product. • A regional TOD advocacy and educational support campaign. • A prototype corridor case study to prepare five (5) transit station area plans, TOD regulations, consistent with current and forecasted real estate market conditions, and a concurrent, multi-media and technology-driven public participation process. The proposed project strives to implement TOD principles and induce private sector investment in
    [Show full text]
  • Potential Passenger Rail Options
    #2–04 October 2004 Potential Passenger Rail Options Technical Memorandum An Element of Connecting Landscapes—the Transportation Plan for Chester County PREPARED BY THE CHESTER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION C CPC The Chester County Planning Commission is developing a long range transportation plan as was recommended in LANDSCAPES, the County's comprehensive policy plan. Connecting Landscapes will review all modes of travel and make recommendations for strategies and improvements. As the transportation plan develops, between 20 and 25 technical memorandums will be published and made available for public review. Different modes of travel will be addressed with back- ground information, analyses, discussion of issues, and recommenda- tions. When all technical memorandums are completed a final report will synthesize the recommendations into a plan element. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Carol Aichele Andrew E. Dinniman Donald A. Mancini Table of Contents Background . .1 Project Need and Description . .1 Figure 1 | Existing and Potential Passenger Rail Services Relating to Chester County . .1 Chester County Projects . .2 1| Paoli Transportation Center . .2 2| Expansion of SEPTA R-5 Passenger Rail Service . .2 3| Existing SEPTA R-5 Service and Station Improvements . .2 4| Extension of SEPTA R-3 Passenger Rail Service . .3 5| Octorara Passenger Rail Service . .3 Regional Projects . .4 1| Keystone Service Upgrade . .4 2| Schuylkill Valley Metro . .4 3| Cross Country Metro . .4 Recommended Priorities . .5 Highest Priority Paoli Transportation Center . .5 Figure 2 | Sketch of the Planning Area of the Paoli Transportation Center Area . .5 High Priority R-5 Expansion . .6 Schuylkill Valley Metro . .7 Figure 3 | Schuylkill Valley Metro Corridor .
    [Show full text]