pine street bat lane final draft memo

719 Second Avenue Suite 1250 Seattle, WA 98104 206.382.9800 www.dksassociates.com

FINAL DRAFT MEMORANDUM DATE: October 1, 2015

TO: Jonathan Dong and Reiner Blanco, Seattle DOT

FROM: Chris Long, DKS

SUBJECT: Pine Street BAT Lane Analysis P#14005-010

INTRODUCTION The purpose of this project is to evaluate the benefits and impacts of installing a business access and transit (BAT) lane on Pine Street from north of 9th Avenue to 2nd Avenue. The study area is shown in Figure 1. Pine Street serves as the start and end of multiple transit routes that travel through downtown Seattle. Multiple trolley routes loop through downtown using Pine Street down to 2nd Avenue and back out on Pike Street. Multiple regional routes come into downtown off the I-5 ramp to Seneca Street in the morning, connect to 4th Avenue and stop at the zone between 4th Avenue and 3rd Avenue. The PM trips for these routes all start on 2nd Avenue and do not use Pine Street. 33 buses an hour travel this corridor in the PM peak; these routes are 10, 11, 43, 47 and 49, 216, 218 and 219. They will all travel the length of Pine Street in the study area and then make a left turn at 2nd Avenue. 22 buses an hour travel this corridor in the AM peak; these are routes 10, 11, 43, 47 and 49. There are an additional 18 buses (route 143, 157, 158, 159, 179, 190, and 577) entering the corridor from 4th Avenue and exiting on 2nd Avenue during the AM peak period.

Figure 1: Study Area

Memorandum Pine Street BAT Lane Analysis of 16

This memorandum presents a summary of existing conditions on the corridor and provides a description of the steps taken to perform the corridor analysis. The memorandum concludes with a summary of the impacts from channelization changes on the corridor.

EXISTING CONDITIONS Appendix A of this memorandum provides the existing channelization for the corridor. The north end of the project corridor starts with a two-way, two-lane cross-section over I-5, which gradually widens to two westbound lanes and one eastbound lane at 9th Avenue. This cross-section continues to 8th Avenue. Pine Street becomes one-way west of 8th Avenue and has a three-lane cross-section. The block between 8th and 7th Avenues has a short section of on-street parking on the south side of the street. The three-lane cross-section continues to 5th Avenue. From 5th Avenue to 4th Avenue, Pine Street is narrowed to two travel lanes and a parking pullout on the south side of the street.

The block between 4th and 3rd Avenues has been reconstructed to remove a westbound transit island. The space from the island and the southern curb lane has become back-in angle parking, leaving two westbound travel lanes. These two lanes continue to 2nd Avenue.

The traffic signals currently run on an 80-second cycle length with standard two-phase operation. The one exception is at 6th Avenue, where a westbound protected right turn phase is provided following the pedestrian interval to help clear the heavy right turn to 6th Avenue. The westbound left turns to 5th Avenue and 2nd Avenue have a dedicated left turn lane and a shared left and through lane. One of the proposed improvements is to eliminate the shared lane to promote pedestrian safety at 5th Avenue.

There are three bus zones in the study area on Pine Street; they are located farside of 9th Avenue, nearside of 5th Avenue, and farside of 4th Avenue. Table 1 shows the number of passengers boarding and alighting at each bus zone. The bus volumes, turn locations and bus stop locations are shown in Figure 2.

Table 1: Bus Zone Boarding and Alighting

Bus Zone Boarding Alighting

9th Avenue and Pine Street 118 984




Figure 2: Bus Stop Locations and Volumes

Field observations showed that the majority of buses would immediately move into the new westbound lane that forms at 9th Avenue and stay in this lane through 7th Avenue. Buses change lanes after 7th Avenue to avoid the queue of right turning vehicles at 6th Avenue, and then merge back to the north curb lane (right lane) to stop at the bus stop between 6th and 5th Avenues. The bus will stay in the right lane through 5th Avenue, and then change lanes again to avoid the right turn queue at 4th Avenue. The buses merge back to the right lane after 4th Avenue for the bus stop. All the trolley buses travel in the left lane after leaving the 3rd Avenue stop because they need to be in the south curb lane (left lane) on 2nd Avenue to make an immediate left turn onto Pike Street. Other routes will turn from the shared through and left turn lane so they can get into the BAT lane on 2nd Avenue.

The westbound left turn at 2nd Avenue will occasionally backup to 3rd Avenue. When this occurs, buses will cross 3rd Avenue and wait in the right lane until they can merge over to the left lane. This backup is primarily caused by congestion on Pike Street that causes the left turn from 2nd Avenue to Pike Street to fill the left turn pocket between Pine Street and Pike Street.

All the intersections have heavy pedestrian movements, but the east-west crossings at 3rd, 4th, 5th and 6th Avenues are exceptionally heavy with over 1,000 pedestrians counted during the peak hour in each crossing. Table 2 shows the existing AM and PM pedestrian and bicycle volumes at the intersections on Pine Street.


Table 2: Pedestrian and Bicycle Volume

PED BIKE PED BIKENorth Leg/SB 467 33 North Leg/SB 386 10South Leg/NB 247 2 South Leg/NB 131 1East Leg/WB 220 26 East Leg/WB 172 88West Leg/EB 151 34 West Leg/EB 124 3







Pine St./ 9th AvePM

Pine St./ 3rd AvePM

Pine St./ 8th AvePM

Pine St./ 7th AvePM

Pine St./ 6th Ave

Pine St./ 5th AvePM

Pine St./ 4th AvePM

PM

Pine St./ 9th AveAM

Pine St./ 8th AveAM

Pine St./ 7th AveAM

Pine St./ 3rd AveAM

Pine St./ 6th AveAM

Pine St./ 5th AveAM

Pine St./ 4th AveAM


General purpose traffic faces minimal delay while travelling through on Pine Street in both the AM and PM peaks. The westbound through level of service is B or better during both the AM and PM peak. General purpose traffic delays for the PM peak are shown in Table 3.

The westbound transit movement on Pine Street operates well during both the AM and PM peaks. Buses do not experience much delay, despite making multiple lane changes along the corridor as they progress from 9th Avenue to 2nd Avenue. The only issues on the corridor are related to vehicles turning off Pine Street against the heavy pedestrian volumes. The protected right turn for 6th Avenue helps dissipate this queue well. The westbound left turns at 5th Avenue and 2nd Avenue create backups onto Pine Street, but do not impact the through traffic. This backup is primarily due to congestion on 5th Avenue and 2nd Avenue. The westbound right turn at 4th Avenue has difficulty turning due to the pedestrians, but the volume is low and the adjacent through lane is not congested.

PINE STREET TRAFFIC ANALYSIS The traffic analysis for the proposed BAT lane was performed using a combination of Emme, Synchro and SimTraffic. Emme evaluated how converting a general purpose traffic lane to a BAT lane will impact overall travel patterns downtown. Synchro and SimTraffic estimated the changes in delay at each intersection.

These modeling efforts and the results are described further in the following subsections:

Emme Trip Distribution Analysis The Alaskan Way Viaduct replacement project developed a Trip Distribution Model (TDM) in 2008 for analyzing various design options associated with the viaduct project. This model was developed to represent 2015 land use and the 2017 roadway network. At the time this model was prepared, the viaduct was assumed down and the tunnel operational in 2017.

The model was updated to account for both the Pine Street BAT lane and BAT lanes proposed as part of the Madison Street Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) project. To best represent future conditions, the project team determined that both should be included in the model, because both impacted westbound connections into the City. Appendix B shows the percent of volume diversion anticipated from implementation of these two projects.

The graphic shows that volumes on Pine Street will drop between 48 and 155 vehicles per hour, depending on the block. The variation is a result of some blocks having greater opportunity for drivers to select an alternate route. Not all diverted traffic can be accounted for on other Central Business District (CBD) arterial streets. The model assumes a portion of traffic will shift to other modes of travel, or potentially not travel at all into the CBD. Stewart Street and Union Street showed the greatest increase in volume near Pine Street. The increase on Stewart Street is primarily between 6th Avenue and 9th Avenue, which is generally not heavily congested in the PM peak. The Union Street increase is fairly consistent from 7th Avenue to 1st Avenue. This corridor can also absorb this volume with little impact on the westbound delay.


The Emme model results were post-processed to generate future condition volumes in the study area from 1st Avenue to Boren Avenue and Union Street to Stewart Street. Existing and estimated future volumes are attached in Appendix C.

Alternatives Analysis The baseline operational assumption for the corridor was to have a BAT lane from north of 9th Avenue to 2nd Avenue in the right lane. The project’s analysis evaluated the feasibility of this BAT lane configuration and developed other channelization and signalization concepts to enhance this initial BAT lane direction.

The following is a summary of other alternatives considered on the corridor.

BAT Lane Alignment The initial operational assumption was for the bus lane to stay in the north curb lane the entire alignment; however, it is anticipated that drivers will choose to move out of this lane to avoid the congested right turns at 6th Avenue and 4th Avenue. The right turn at 4th Avenue does not have high volume, but does see a consistent queue in the PM peak. In addition, at 2nd Avenue the majority of the buses must use the heavily congested left lane to make a left turn at 2nd Avenue. The project team looked for options to preserve dedicated transit space to avoid each of these congestion points.

• 6th Avenue: Pine Street at 6th Avenue has three westbound lanes. The right lane acts as a dedicated right turn lane because of the heavy turn volume; the center lane is where all the through vehicles travel; and the left lane is primarily used by vehicles eventually turning left at 5th Avenue. Shifting the BAT lane to the center lane was considered, but deemed unnecessary since the delay in the through lanes is relatively low (less than 17 seconds in the PM peak) and there are ample gaps in traffic for drivers to make a lane change between the far side bus zone at 9th Avenue and 6th Avenue.

• 4th Avenue: Pine Street at 4th Avenue has only two westbound lanes. A BAT lane shift to the left lane would force the general purpose traffic into the right lane, which is effectively a right turn lane during the PM peak. Similar to 6th Avenue, the delay in the through lane is very low (less than 12 seconds in the PM peak), so there is little gained by trying to create a transit lane at 4th Avenue that is not shared with right turning traffic. The impact of forcing general purpose traffic into the right lane would be significant.

• 2nd Avenue: Pine Street at 2nd Avenue is also only two lanes. The left lane is left turn-only and the right lane is a shared through and left turn. A BAT lane through to 2nd Avenue in the right curb lane was reviewed, but ultimately not considered because two-thirds of the buses making a left turn at 2nd Avenue need to be in the left lane so they can make a subsequent left turn at Pike Street. The project team considered a left turn transit queue jump from the right lane, but it would both create a significant amount of delay at 2nd Avenue for the southbound and westbound general purpose traffic movements.


The project team also reviewed the option of a transit lane in the left lane at 2nd Avenue. The buses that eventually turn left onto Pike Street would benefit from the alignment, but this configuration would require a dual left to allow for general purpose traffic to turn exclusively from the shared through-left lane. The City is in the process of removing all dual turns to help promote pedestrian safety. There was concern a left turning general purpose vehicle would have difficulty seeing a pedestrian coming around the nose of a bus waiting to complete their left turn. In addition, this lane configuration would increase the delay for the bus routes not turning onto Pike Street.

Protected Right Turn Movements Seattle currently operates a lagging protected right turn at 6th Avenue on Pine Street to help clear the location’s heavy turn volume. The project team reviewed other locations to determine if queuing in the right lane would cause a delay for the bus. The analysis found that the right turn delay was minimal at 8th Avenue, 7th Avenue and 3rd Avenue. 4th Avenue was the one other location with a queuing issue due to the right turn conflict with the heavy pedestrian volume on the north leg (near 1,500 pedestrians in the peak hour). A lagging protected right turn phase was found to

provide approximately nine seconds of delay savings to that movement.

To create time for the protected right turn, the split for the northbound movement would need to be reduced so the overall pedestrian crossing time was not impacted. This timing adjustment would increase the northbound delay. The project team found that the right turn delay savings was not enough to warrant the

Right Turn Pedestrian Conflict at 4th Avenue

Left Lane Queue at 2nd Avenue


disruption to the pedestrian movement or an increase in delay to northbound traffic. In addition, field observations showed buses easily change lanes around the right turn queue and experience very little delay in the westbound through lane.

Queue Jumps In addition to the queue jump previously described for 2nd Avenue, a queue jump was also considered for Pine Street at 3rd Avenue. Periodically throughout the PM peak, the queue for the left turn from 2nd Avenue will reach 3rd Avenue. When the 3rd Avenue signal goes green, general purpose traffic looking to turn left at 2nd Avenue will quickly fill available space in the queue. The project team considered a queue jump for the buses in the right curb lane to allow them to get into the queue ahead of general purpose traffic.

There were a few challenges with this operation that resulted in the project team not recommending this queue jump:

1. The queue jump will only be needed for the buses making a left turn onto 2nd Avenue and then onto Pike Street. Starting in late September, this will be roughly two-thirds of the routes. The other third could potentially impact the success of the queue jump if they are at the front of the queue.

2. The BAT lane is also a right turn lane and could have right turning vehicles at the front of the queue when the queue jump is needed.

3. When the queue is long on the approach to 2nd Avenue, there is often not enough space for the bus to enter the lane without leaving the tail of the bus in the intersection at 3rd Avenue. The project team observed that almost all drivers chose to pull forward in the right lane and wait for motorists in the left lane to let them over.

Synchro and SimTraffic Analysis for Recommended Configuration The Synchro and SimTraffic models used the PM peak existing conditions model developed for the Seattle Next Generation ITS – City Center project. The City Center project Synchro model is bound by Denny Way, Broadway, Alaskan Way and Jackson Street. All channelization and signal phasing was updated in this model area to match existing conditions. The model’s volumes used a combination of new counts and historic counts less than a year old.

The large CBD model can be difficult to run in SimTraffic because of the number of nodes; therefore, the model was trimmed to a smaller area of influence for analyzing the changes on Pine Street. The trimmed model was bound by Virginia Street, Alaskan Way, Columbia Street and Boren Avenue.

One of the limitations of the large CBD model is the ability to model the true vehicle demand in areas of downtown that are over-saturated. On 5th Avenue, the congestion near the freeway ramp to Spring Street causes the southbound movement to exceed capacity, resulting in gridlock at the north end of the CBD during most evening commutes. Only the vehicles that actually pass through the intersection are counted; there is no efficient way to account for the cars waiting in the queue at the end of the one-hour count period. This metering of the volume results in delay values that are significantly less than reality on these congested arterials. For the


Pine Street study area, this issue impacted Synchro results for the intersections at 2nd Avenue and 5th Avenue. The delays on Pine Street are realistic, but the reported Synchro delays on the southbound movement and the westbound left turns are not.

SimTraffic confirmed that conditions in the model matched those observed in the field. Limited data was collected from SimTraffic because the model is too congested to get accurate delay numbers on a per-movement basis. Even with the trimmed model, it reaches an excessive gridlock state at the end of the simulation, which can alter the results.

The future condition channelization for Pine Street is shown in Appendix D. The final proposed alignment assumes the BAT lane would start north of 9th Avenue, where the second westbound through lane begins, and continue to 3rd Avenue.

The future condition channelization includes removing the shared through and left turn lane at 5th Avenue, making it into a through only lane to eliminate the dual left turn and promote pedestrian safety. 2nd Avenue also has a dedicated left turn lane and a shared through and left turn lane; however, this channelization will not be changed through this project since there are no proposed BAT lane improvements on this block.

Table 3 presents the results of the Synchro analysis of existing conditions and future conditions with the BAT lane. The following is a summary of the results by intersection:

• 9th Avenue: The north curb lane was simulated as a right turn pocket to estimate a separate delay value for the BAT lane. The lane was configured to have no right turn on red and no conflicting pedestrian volume due to no right turning general purpose vehicles at this intersection. There is very little delay at this intersection, so the delay savings for the bus was minor. Synchro reported approximately 2.5 seconds of savings. This is based on a comparison of the westbound through lane for existing conditions and the westbound right turns for the BAT lane conditions.

• 8th Avenue: The BAT lane is simulated as a right turn pocket. Synchro reported approximately 2.2 seconds of savings.

• 7th Avenue: The BAT lane is simulated as a right turn pocket. The right turn volume is much lower at this intersection, so it is assumed that all general purpose traffic can make a right turn on red. The lane was coded as no right turn on red, with no pedestrian conflict to better simulate conditions for the bus. Field observations showed a bus rarely waited for a right turning vehicle at this intersection. Synchro reported approximately 3.4 seconds of delay savings from the BAT lane.

• 6th Avenue: The right lane was coded as a right turn-only lane to simulate a BAT lane, but it is anticipated the bus will not stay in this lane due to the heavy right turns. This lane acts like a right turn-only lane under current conditions, so there is no anticipated delay change for buses.

• 5th Avenue: This intersection was configured the same as 9th Avenue. The model shows a slight increase in delay for the bus, but it realistically will not operate any differently than today’s conditions. There is no delay savings anticipated at this intersection. The southbound through and westbound left turn delays are underestimated because the effect of the congestion downstream of Pine Street on 5th


Avenue is not factored into the Synchro calculation. Synchro’s results for the westbound left turn lane without the shared through lane and left turn lane are not reliable because the queuing on 5th Avenue is not factored into the calculations. SimTraffic showed that adding a protected left turn phase of about 15 seconds would help mitigate the loss of the shared lane, resulting in very little change in delay.

• 4th Avenue: The BAT lane is simulated as a right turn pocket. It is assumed buses will move out of this lane because there is a consistent right turn queue. The estimated delay dropped for this movement, but that is due to the trip redistribution, which reduced the volume of right turning vehicles. Even with the reduced volume, it is anticipated that buses will move around the right turning vehicles and not gain any benefit from the BAT lane.

• 3rd Avenue: This intersection was coded the same as 7th Avenue. There are very few right turn vehicles so the volume was reduced to the count of buses that would use the lane. The lane was coded as no right turn on red, with no pedestrian conflict to better simulate conditions for the bus. The anticipated delay savings of the BAT lane at this intersection is approximately 7.2 seconds.

• 2nd Avenue: No improvements are proposed for 2nd Avenue, because there was not a reasonable way to use a BAT lane on the block from 3rd Avenue to 2nd Avenue.


Table 3: BAT Lane Analysis Results

Delay (sec) LOS Delay (sec) LOSIntersection 13.4 B 15.6 BEBT/R 4.1 A 4.3 AWBT/L 14.1 B 18.8 BWBR 11.6 BSBT/L/R 14.6 B 15.2 B

Delay (sec) LOS Delay (sec) LOSIntersection 17.5 B 17.6 BWBT/L 15.1 BWBR 13.7 BNBT/L/R 18.6 B 19.0 B

Delay (sec) LOS Delay (sec) LOSIntersection 9.9 A 9.1 AWBL 16.5 B 18.7 BWBT 22.8 CWBR 14.7 BNBT/L 6.7 A 6.6 ASBT/R 5.2 A 4.2 A

Delay (sec) LOS Delay (sec) LOSIntersection 10.0 B 10.6 BWBT 16.4 BWBR 17.6 BNBL 4.5 A 3.7 ANBT 8.0 A 8.4 A

Delay (sec) LOS Delay (sec) LOSIntersection 10.6 B 14.8 BWBL 19.9 B 8.3 AWBT/L 2.7 A 5.0 AWBR 4.5 ASBT 12.3 B 18.9 B

Delay (sec) LOS Delay (sec) LOSIntersection 12.8 B 14.7 BWBT 11.2 BWBR 12.2 BNBT/L 11.4 B 15.1 B

Delay (sec) LOS Delay (sec) LOSIntersection 15.0 B 14.9 BWBT / L 13.9 BWBR 10.2 ANBT 13.4 B 15.9 BSBT 12.5 B 16.3 B

Data does not account for significant downstream congestion impact intersection operations.

Pine St./ 9th AvePM

Existing BAT Lane Alt 1

Pine St./ 8th Ave Existing BAT Lane Alt 1PM

15.9 B



15.1 B

18.1 B

PMExisting BAT Lane Alt 1Pine St./ 5th Ave

B

PM

Pine St./ 4th Ave Existing BAT Lane Alt 1

Pine St./ 3rd Ave Existing BAT Lane Alt 1

19.0 B

PM

17.1


CONCLUSION The total anticipated delay savings from the BAT lane at 9th, 8th, 7th and 3rd Avenues is 15.3 seconds per trip during the PM peak hour. No savings is anticipated at 6th, 5th and 4th Avenues. This delay savings is significant considering it would improve the travel time for 33 trips in the PM peak. The BAT lane would also improve the reliability of trips, especially on days where the downtown street network begins to break down.

Although the Synchro analysis was only performed for PM conditions, it is anticipated a similar delay savings for buses would be realized during the AM peak as well because the existing condition volumes are very similar. The pedestrian volumes are much lower in the AM peak, which will reduce the queuing in the right turn pockets, making the BAT lane more usable for buses.

General purpose traffic will see no change in travel time along the corridor based on the Synchro results. The overall intersection delay at each intersection remains virtually unchanged. The net delay change for the southbound through lane is also near zero. The reduction in southbound through lane capacity is largely offset by the anticipated reduction in volume resulting from the addition of the BAT lane.

The BAT lane should have no impact on pedestrians. All pedestrian crossing splits remained unchanged with the exception of the south leg of 5th Avenue where a lagging westbound protected left turn will be added. Although there will be less crossing time, overall pedestrian safety will be improved because of the elimination of the westbound dual left turn.

Bicycle travel on the corridor should be improved because cyclists will have the option of riding in the BAT lane, which will now have a lower vehicle volume through most blocks.


Appendix A Existing Channelization

Memorandum Pine Street BAT Lane Analysis Page 14 of 16

Appendix B Trip Distribution Results

61

6

2

-13

5

16

-12

-1

-40

6

-3

2

6

-3

6

-2

-2

4

-2

4

-1

9

-7

-1

1

-9

7

0

-87

-9

-3

21

5

21

-52

-3-3

6

-43

-2-11

13

36

24

-2-30

36

93

-5

-8

11

19

-6

20

6

-8

-0

-1

31

-2

23

-169

48

9

-41

28-17

1911

-1

-0

29 24

-530

-12-6

-0

20

-5

11

24

-2

-4

11

12

-0

12

20

-4

9

15

7

12

14

20 -150

-0

-130

14

-11 16

15

-11

2

7

-8

-14

-2

4

-34

-1

-38

9

-1

4

-88

1

-5

21

-1

-3

-1

-1

12

13

-6

1

12

-0

5

-6

16

-3-0

-9

6

-1

-1416

7

-159

-1

19

-74

63

11

1

-4

-27

28

-7

-132

-54

7

-36

40

6

2

-15

2

24

0

-3

-2

5

-12

-2

-11

9

0

-6

-0

18

-6

-11

73

-3

3

-2

2

-6

10

0

4

4

-18

0

39

-7

-3

5

1 -4

-2

4

-6

7

0

-3

4

1

3

-5

-175

-3

15 1

0

6-18

2

258

00 48

2

5

2

08

9

21

8

8

840

-15-0

19 -5

7

42 23

5-2

26

-10

2

2

158

130

17

23

-16

-9

20

-18

14

-5

-1729

-21

-37

-2

-42

-114

18

93

1 2

23

1

4

0

6-6

25

30

62-25

46

61

27 24

-42

7

-10

9 1

3

-8

2

3 0

-6

1

3

7

-32

4

20

21

7

25

-18

42

-1

-7

0

0

4

-14

-7

6

211

-0

0

4

4 4

2

-3

2

1

-3

4

2

-0

-6

0

1

-6

6-4

-4

2

-8

218

4

-2

7

6

11

11

-7

0

3

6

-5

-13

214

-2

2

3

12

1

55

-9

-7

52

3

1

-1

3

-0

72

-26

21

12

0

10

-5-4

11

30

12

7

10

12

-66

-5

48

-29

73

16

-13

3

-61

-34

-2

1

-33

25

17

10

-2

14

-35

-1

9

34

-8

-3

17

19

30

-13

4

0

1

-11-2

-1

20

23

2

-4

-2-6

-2

-9

-142

-6

155

12

-30189

93

3

9

-24

18

-40

28

244

-9

-13

-3320

0

44

14

-2

0

20

-10

5

716

053

24

-0

0

-4-16

-64

-24

0-61

-149

-253-8

-76

6

35

-363

-170 -97

13

17

-22

4 1

-232

18

-0

-3

-0

0

0

-21

30

-18

-18

1

-811

0

16

8

0

28

24

20

7

-14

3

-0-6

-14

91 21

1

15

31

32

28

8

22

121

8

2

15 0

0

0

4

-0

0

46

26

6

-12

37

-13

-34

-42 -27

-2

16-39

-33

-2

-0

-2

6

-9

5

23

-18

27

-5

8

29

-48

-7

14

1

4

-46

4

-2

22

-35

3

2

24

0

0

0

-4

0

3

2-7

0

0

-54

-101

37

-139

47

27

-22

10

-261

39

-14

-0

6

31

5

-7

-16

-7

-0

-0

-2

12

-3

11

-6-1

53

15

52

-2156

23

-8

-4

-8

0

-2

1

5

44

-8

12

-14

-17

-1

-2

-1

-1

-17

-6

6

-1

-6

-0

-3

-33

-12

38-5

7

49

-21

58

-3

29

-20

28

5

36

46

-1

-4

-1

-68

-54

5

-51

7

6

0

-42

-9

-1

5

0

-8

-13

5

1-0

2

-15

78

-18-219

30

32

-40

9

9

51

-8

-4

-2

-13

-7

-3 35

5

20

-2

20

242

4 13

3

-51

14

-17

1

6

-14

-10

-191

-2

53

2

3

122

24

1271

-9

-19

-28

3

6

-40

-2

36

-16

-31

10

-31

-1612-0

12

-12

2-0

3

-33

-5

3 -16

-23

-0

11

-9

-2

-162

-16

16-3

0

12

0

46

-1

-4

20

63

13

-10

5

20

44

-22

17

6

2

-20 4

5

4

27

-5

41

25

67

-3

6

3

-4

0

9

-12

0

17-2

1

-0

15

123

1

-6

-6

2

-5

1

-13

20

1

1

-4

7

-7

8

-14-22

0

-21

-22

-5

-3

-6

2

-145

3

-20

7

44

-16

-51

9

0

-33

0

7

1

-8

-1

-1

12

-2

-16

11

7

00

-22

-4

17-3

17 -3

-6

0

14

-15

9

0

11

6

0

-6

0

-7

2

2

22

22

22

Volume Difference2015 W ith Bus Lanes - 2015 Base

Hourly Volume PM Peak

Decrease in VolumeIncrease in Volume

Pine St

Madison St

Seneca St

Union St

Stewar

t St

1st Ave

3rd Ave

5th Ave

James St

Boren Ave

Cherry St7th Ave


Appendix C Existing and Future Volumes

Existing Condition Volumes

Alternative 1 Volumes


Appendix BAT Lane Channelization

pine street bat lane final draft memo

Documents

avenue suite

street parking

length of pine street

seneca street

pike street

shared lane

eastbound lane

corridor analysis