road diets

Download Road Diets

Post on 13-Dec-2014

112 views

Category:

Documents

4 download

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

The presentation and the photography to Dan Burden, Walkable Communities.org. This shows the possibilities if a city considers road diets to deal with traffic and transportation problems. The City of Davis California is considering implementing such a policy for Fifth Street. The issue will come before city council in April.

TRANSCRIPT

Stand by:The future is coming

Marty Jon

Paul

Earl

Dale

Dans Arm

The Pedestrian in America has been marginalized compromised to Death

What is the Purpose of Cities?

Reframing Key Transportation Conventions DESIGN TRAFFIC - Interpreting the Results

Capacity of Streets

Sustainable Transportation is about meeting present transportation needs without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs.The concept of sustainable transportation is a reaction to things that have gone radically and visibly wrong with current transportation and land use policy, practice and performance over the last half of the twentieth century. In particular unsustainable transportation consumes more energy and creates pollution and declining service levels despite increasing investments. It delivers poor service for specific social and economic groups. It reduces happiness. It raises the cost of personal transportation to 20% of a family budget and takes time away from family time and ties. Indirectly, it increases health care to 15-20%

The World Has Changed. Former Highway Agencies that see their job as moving cars and tonnage cannot build the next economy. The next economy requires that place be emphasized over speed and volume.

The streets of our cities and towns ought to be for everyone, whether young or old, motorist or bicyclist, walker or wheelchair user, bus rider or shopkeeper. But too many of our streets are designed only for speeding cars, or worse, creeping traffic jams. Theyre unsafe for people on foot or bike and unpleasant for everybody.With disincentives like this, is there any reason to expect people to switch from driving to walking, bicycling or transit? Seamless, integrated, balanced transportation systems requires equal consideration for every mode.

More Pavement More Lanes More Roads

Conventional Approach More Cars

System Management ITS More Car-Carrying Capacity

A Balanced Transportation ApproachMore Roads More Lanes System Management Transit Bicycling Walking HOV/HOT Lanes

ITS More CarCarrying Capacitys ar tClit y

ua

of

Tr av e

More Pavement

User View and Comfort Context-Sensitive Design Traffic Calming Personal SecurityIntensify land use densities Promote Mixed Use Development Transit Supportive Development Demand Management Pricing, e-commerce, telecommuting, etc

Conventional Approach

No

le,

e

Q

l

More Cars

In cr e

Mo

Mo

v

es eL

s

o Pe

ple

ve

ew ,F

Pe

e

il rM

op

es

as

Shift Policy Lateral Approach

Lane Limits Change Standards

Why do we need public places?

Not Walkable High Car Dependency Serious Congestion

Walkable Low Car Dependency Moderate Congestion

Smart Streets form highly-connected networks of complete streets. Street connectivity and sidewalk completeness are correlated with lower average vehicle use per person as well as dispersed vehicle loads that decrease congestion and improve safety.

Smart Streetsare right sized for their place an mission, and not built to a model that does not take in the values of the people who will live, work and shop there. Narrow streets help create comfortable settings for walking, gathering, and lingering, especially in neighborhoods and shopping districts. They often work within a larger network that provides a framework of higher-speed streets that offer connectivity to regional destinations. With regard to ecological aims, rightsizing means limiting impervious surfaces and potentially freeing right of way space that can do double duty by functioning to buffer roadside activity and travel lanes while also introducing ecological functions in the street space.

Smart Streetsare designed and managed with speeds and intersections appropriate to context. To advance walkability and compact development patterns, smart growth street designs manage speed and intersection operations to advance overall community objectives.Grandview Drive (Collector) above, and A Avenue (Arterial) below are examples of Complete Streets that greatly improved land values, safety. Changes helped stabilize tax revenues to keep streets well maintained and attractive. In both examples walking and bicycling increased over 1200%

Grandview Drive, University Place, Washington

A Avenue, Lake Oswego, Oregon

Above Or Below

Where would you rather walk? Where would you rather drive?

Where would you rather bike? Where would you rather live?

Which is the safest place to bike? Which is the safest place to drive?

MAIN STREET DEVELOPMENT30 mph speed zone

25 mph speed zone 45 mph speed zone

Every blizzard proves motorists prefer two lane roadsIndeed they place medians and edge buffers on 4-lane roads when they get to design them (before snow plows arrive). So why not convert to 2-3 lanes, when conditions allow?

Toronto, Ontario, Canada Former 4-Lane Road

Multiple Benefits:Lower speeds Lower noise Lower pollution

More green Reduced crashes Safer crossings More parking

Higher property values More bike lanes Increased beauty More friendly

Road Diets and Road SizingPedestrian crash risk increases with number of travel lanes and speed. Reducing the number of travel lanes reduces risk, and makes it easier to cross the street Reducing non-essential lanes frees space for higher & better use Streets exist 24/7; peak traffic may be a concern for as little as 30 minutes a dayDesigning for Pedestrian Safety

California Street, Mountain View, California

Motorist:

Safety 25- 40% improvement

Traffic moves with greater uniformity Compact intersections more efficient Greater cost savings Turns are easier Senior friendly (as motorists)

Others:Senior friendly (as pedestrians) Supports transit, walking and bicycling Emergency response friendly Increased property values (and tax base) Community economic develeopment

Speed reductions of 37 mph are common

Hartford,

Orlando, Florida

Before Most speeds dropped to 20 mph Motorists do not drive in gutter pan 75% of costs charged to adjacent property owners Increased property values

After

As we age our walking speed will slowThis woman took twice as long to get into the street as the younger people. Once in the street it took her three times as long to get to the far side.

Olympia, Washington (School Crossing) Former 4-lane

A Quality Crossing D Quality Crossing C Quality Crossing20, 000 ADT

77 feet

25 feet

6 seconds 22 seconds 10-12 feet 3 seconds

If the Beatles would have tried to cross this road, rather than Abby Road, would we have been able to hear their music?Valley Boulevard at Monterey El Monte, CaliforniaIn3 seconds at 30 mph a a motorist travels 968 feet In 622 seconds at 30 mph motorist travels 264 feet (.9 132 (.4 (3.1 football fields) football fields)

1800 vehicles per hour per lane 1 vehicles per hour Per lane

Road Diets

10 Feet

Olive Avenue, West Palm Beach, Florida Former 3-lane, One-Way Ten foot travel lanes

20 Feet

Olive Avenue, West Palm Beach, Florida Former 3-lane, One-Way Ten foot travel lanes

Greenville, South Carolina

Art Walk Master

Doug Rice With Median adopter, Arnie

University Avenue

Designing for Pedestrian Safety

Designing for Pedestrian Safety

3 crash types can be reduced by going from 4 to 3 lanes: 1 rear enders

X

Designing for Pedestrian Safety

3 crash types can be reduced by going from 4 to 3 lanes: 2 side swipes

X

Designing for Pedestrian Safety

3 crash types can be reduced by going from 4 to 3 lanes: 3 left turn/broadside

X

Designing for Pedestrian Safety

$589,000 project scheduled in FDOT 5-year work plan FDOT open to 3-lane option if City takes over jurisdiction Changes must be accepted by neighborhood and business associations; before/after studies

Before

Concept

Designing for Pedestrian Safety

12.6

14.0 12.0 Crash Rate (per MVM)

34% Reduction10.0 8.0 6.0 4.0 2.0 0.0 Before After

8.4

1 crash every 2.5 days (146 per yr)

1 crash every 4.2 days (87 per yr)

Designing for Pedestrian Safety

Before/after studies: 2. Injury rate4.0 3.5 Injury Rate (per MVM) 3.0 2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 Before

3.6

68% Reduction

1 injury every 9 days (41 per yr)

1.21 injury every 30 days (12 per yr)After

Designing for Pedestrian Safety

Before/after studies: 3. Speeding analysisPercent of Vehicles Traveling over 36 MPH 35.0% 30.0% 25.0% 20.0% 15.0% 10.0% 5.0% 0.0% Before After Before After Before After

29.5%

19.6% 15.7% 7.5% 9.8% 8.9%

North End

Middle

South End

Designing for Pedestrian Safety

20,500

25,000 20,000 Vehicles per Day 15,000 10,000 5,000 0

18,100

Now 21,000+

Before

After

Designing for Pedestrian Safety

Before/after studies: 5. On-street parking utilization45% Parking Utilization Percentage 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% Before After

41% 29%

Designing for Pedestrian Safety

Before/after studies: 6. Pedestrian volumes3000 Number of Pedestrians 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 Before After23% Increase

2,632

2,136

Designing for Pedestrian Safety

Before/after studies: 7. Bicyclist volumes600 500 Number o