Presentation at 2008 ITE Annual MeetingAnaheim, California

August 20, 2008

JOSEPH KOTT, AICP, PTP, ITE (M)

Senior Transportation Projects Manager, Wilbur Smith Associates, San Francisco, California

Doctoral Candidate, Curtin University of Technology, Perth, Western Australia

Former Chief Transportation Official, City of Palo Alto (CA)

Doctoral Dissertation research in progress under supervision of Prof. Jeff Kenworthy and Prof. Peter Newman (authors of Sustainable Cities: Overcoming Automobile Dependence)

Comprehensive data collection and analysis: pedestrian, bicycle, public transit, and private vehicular modes; land use; socio-economics; “space for nature” (extent of tree canopy and permeable surface in ROW); focus groups, opinion surveys, and visual assessment surveys; comprehensive physical inventory of research study streets and street frontages; street histories, plans, and studies

This presentation covers one aspect of the research: street design/re-design and pedestrians

Matched 1:2 comparison of one re-designed street with two control (not re-designed, but with similarities in function, characteristics)

Two subsets of streets: “Big City Arterials” and “Small City Main Streets”

Street sections range from approximately .3 to .6 miles (.5 to .8 kilometers) in length

RESEARCH STREETS

What are “active” streets and how to measure “activity” on streets?

What are “complete” streets and how to measure their “completeness”

Does dedicated space matter for use of alternative modes of transportation and how to measure the effects?

Does continuous street (building) frontage contribute to “active” streets?

How does the partitioning of ROW space affect street use?

How does allocating “space for nature” affect street use?

How does a street’s aesthetic appeal affect street use?

“Big City” Commercial Arterials:

King Street/The Embarcadero from 3rd to Brannan in San Francisco (.56 mi/.9 km/47,000 AADT)

Lombard Street from Broderick to Fillmore in San Francisco (.47 mi/.76 km/41,000 AADT)

The Alameda from Race to Stockton in San Jose (.43 mi./.69 km/16,000 AADT)

“Small City” Main Streets:

Castro Street in Mountain View, CA from Church to W. Evelyn (.52 mi/.84 km/15,500 AADT)

California Avenue in Palo Alto, CA from El Camino Real to W. Park (.31 mi/.49km/9,700 AADT)

San Carlos Avenue in San Carlos, CA from Cedar to El Camino Real (.35 mi/.56 km/20,000 AADT)

Links I-280 and San Francisco Peninsula to Downtown San Francisco

Site of ATT Park (SF Giants home park) and re-development s in Mission Bay, South Beach districts

Replaced Embarcadero Freeway after it was damaged in 1989; rebuilt as surface boulevard in late 1990s; dedicated on June 17, 2000

Study section has bike lanes, wide sidewalks, light rail in center median; 2 through lanes in each direction

Near Caltrain (commuter rail) terminus in San Francisco; two light rail stops on and two within one block of study section

Car speeds@85th percentile = 35 mph, 56 kph (off-peak)

Surface street section of Highway 101 (Caltans-owned) linking North Bay via Golden Gate Bridge and Van Ness to downtown San Francisco and the San Francisco Peninsula

3 travel lanes in each direction, narrow center median, narrow sidewalks, no nearby rail transit

Auto-oriented land uses (motor inn motels and car repair)

Car speeds @ 85th percentile = 33 mph, 53 kph (off-peak)

Historic urban street, part of Highway 82 (El Camino Real elsewhere on the San Francisco Peninsula; Caltrans-owned)

Becomes West Santa Clara Street (San Jose’s main downtown street) east of Stockton Street

Links I-880 to downtown San Jose Near HP Pavilion, Home of San Jose Sharks Redeveloping, transit-oriented 2 through lanes in each direction with 2-way

center left turn lane Near Caltrain (commuter rail)/Amtrak/Capitol

Corridor/ACE (commuter rail) station Car speeds @85th percentile = 37 mph, 60 (kph

off-peak)

Re-designed in 1990 from 2 travel lanes in each direction to 1 in each direction with center-left turn lanes at intersections

Curbside “flex-zone”, used as either parking or outdoor café space

Near Caltrain (commuter rail) station and light rail stop

Successful café street with regional draw Main street for Mountain View, CA (home

of Google) Car speeds @ 85th percentile = 26 mph,

42 kph (off-peak)

“Main street” for Palo Alto, CA’s “second downtown”

Near Stanford Research Park and Stanford campus

Near Caltrain (commuter rail) station (street ends at tracks)

Scheduled for re-design from 2 travel lanes in each direction to 1 lane in each direction with center-left turn lanes

Café street, well-known locally for its restaurants

Car speeds @85th percentile = 22 mph, 35 kph (off-peak)

Links west San Carlos and San Carlos Hills residential neighborhoods to Highway 101 via El Camino Real and Holly Street

Two travel lanes in each direction; suburban section also has center left turn lanes

Half of the study section has bike lanes in each direction, half has no bike lanes

Half of the study section is “main street” downtown design (no setback from sidewalk, continuous street front); half is mixed suburban commercial and residential use

Car speeds @85th percentile = 32 mph, 51.5 kph (off-peak)

Mid-October to early December 2007; dry weather conditions, temperature range = 49 to 77 degrees F

Student workers and researcher Pedestrian and bicycle volumes (along and crossing

street) Pedestrians standing, sitting Pedestrians interacting Café chair count Space allocation in ROW (to private vehicles, public

transit, pedestrians, bicycles, “nature”) On-line surveys (street users, merchants), focus

groups (one each street), visual assessment survey Vehicle speed surveys, vehicle classification

surveys

Effect of comparative land use (residential and commercial) density

Effect of comparative “catchment area” (.25 mile/.4 kilometer) population and employment (2007 est.)

Effect of comparative public transit boardings and service intensity

Relationship of crash and crime rates to non-motorized travel volumes

Factorial, difference among means, and multivariate statistical analysis

Ped, bike, transit LOS analysis

Focus groups themes, key words evaluation