[Type text] [Type text] [Type text]

885'

Red

esig

ning

Mai

n S

treet

CE

VE

452

Fin

al P

roje

ctB

y: J

ulia

nne

Cra

wfo

rd &

Kas

ia N

ikie

l

11x1

7" P

lot

1/64

" =

1.0'

-0"

04/1

4/15

Ric

e U

nive

rsity

CE

VE

Dep

artm

ent

[ C E V E 4 5 2 ~ U R B A N T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S Y S T E M S ~ S P I E L E R A N D C H A P A ]

[REDESIGNING MAIN STREET] Julianne Crawford and Kasia Nikiel

SPRING' 15

08 Fall'

REDESIGNING MAIN STREET 2

I. TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. INTRODUCTION 3 MAIN STREET BETWEEN CAMBRIDGE STREET AND UNIVERSITY BOULEVARD 3 PROBLEM: WHAT IS NOT WORKING ON THIS SECTION OF MAIN STREET 3 GOALS: WHAT WE HOPE TO ACHIEVE IN REDESIGNING MAIN STREET 3

II. SCALE DRAWINGS OF MAIN STREET 3

III. INTERSECTIONS 4 INTERSECTION OVERVIEW 4 MAIN STREET AT CAMBRIDGE STREET 4 MAIN STREET AT MH MEDICAL PLAZA 4 MAIN STREET AT JOHN FREEMAN 4 MAIN STREET AT UNIVERSITY BOULEVARD 5

IV. PARKING EXITS 5 6400 FANNIN PARKING EXITS 5 ORANGE, BLUE AND A&M EXITS 6 SMITH TOWER EXIT 6

V. OTHER FACTORS 6 BUS ROUTES ALONG MAIN STREET 6 CROSSING GUARDS 7

VI. APPLICABLE STANDARDS 7

VII. OPTIONS FOR REMEDIATION 8 OPTION 1: REMOVE THE LIGHT 8 OPTION 2: CREATE FAR RIGHT BUS LANE 8

VIII. PROPOSED SOLUTION AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER STUDY 9

IX. REFERENCES 9

REDESIGNING MAIN STREET 3

I. INTRODUCTION

Main Street between Cambridge Street and University Boulevard

For our project, we looked at redesigning the section of Main Street between Cambridge Street and University Boulevard

(Figure 1). This portion of Main Street is about 0.4 miles long with the Texas Medical Center lining it on its South side and Rice

University running along its North. The street has 3 lanes of traffic in either direction, a high density of bus routes and stops on either

side, 6 parking garage exits on its northbound side, and pedestrian crossings at each of its 4 intersections, namely the Cambridge

Intersection, the MH Medical Plaza Intersection, the John Freeman Intersection, and the University Intersection (Figure 5). Each of

these elements plays a distinct role in the functionality of Main Street and will be discussed in depth in the remainder of this report.

Problem: What is not working on this section of Main Street

Serving both Houston’s Medical District and Rice University, this section of Main Street has a high demand for drivers;

however, from what we could observe, the street is not equipped to handle such a high capacity, and is constantly afflicted by traffic

and delay during rush hour times. There are three major concerns that we will seek to address: (1) Traffic backed into the intersections

during rush hour necessitates the stationing of traffic guards to override the traffic signals and moderate traffic flow; (2) The frequency

with which cars exit from the 6 parking garages exacerbates the already heavy congestion as they attempt to merge into oncoming

traffic; and (3) Un-synced and, what we felt were, unnecessary lights prevent traffic from moving through this area smoothly and

efficiently.

Goals: What we hope to achieve in redesigning Main Street

Our primary goals and considerations when re-designing Main Street were as follows: (1) Redesign and/or re-work the existing

system of intersections and parking garage exits to maintain a smooth flow of traffic using only traffic signals and no outside

moderation, even during rush hour times when traffic flow is particularly high; (2) Prioritize and ensure that cars, pedestrians crossing

the street, and buses moving through this area can all travel to their final destinations with minimum delay; and (3) Remain mindful of

the limited space within which redesigning Main Street must occur, and the fact that this section of Main Street does face peak times

of need during which more stress will be placed on the system. In the remainder of this report, we will address how we came to our

proposed re-design alternatives to meet each of these goals.

II. SCALE DRAWINGS OF MAIN STREET

On the next 5 pages, the following scale drawings are presented: Figure 1. Main Street between Cambridge Street Intersection and University Boulevard Intersection—Scale: 1/50” = 1.0’-0” Figure 2. Main Street between Cambridge Street Intersection and MH Medical Plaza Intersection—Scale: 1/64” = 1.0’-0” Figure 3. Main Street between MH Medical Plaza Intersection and John Freeman Intersection—Scale: 1/64” = 1.0’-0” Figure 4. Main Street between John Freeman Intersection and University Boulevard Intersection—Scale: 1/64” = 1.0’-0” Figure 5. Four intersections. Top Left: Cambridge St. Intersection, Top Right: MH Medical Plaza Intersection, Bottom Left: John Freeman Intersection, Bottom Right: University Blvd. Intersection—Scale: 1/32” = 1.0’-0”

410'

885'

781'

-0.3

5"

Red

esig

ning

Mai

n S

treet

CE

VE

452

Fin

al P

roje

ctB

y: J

ulia

nne

Cra

wfo

rd &

Kas

ia N

ikie

l

11x1

7" P

lot

1/50

" =

1.0'

-0"

04/1

4/15

Ric

e U

nive

rsity

CE

VE

Dep

artm

ent

410'

885'

Red

esig

ning

Mai

n S

treet

CE

VE

452

Fin

al P

roje

ctB

y: J

ulia

nne

Cra

wfo

rd &

Kas

ia N

ikie

l

11x1

7" P

lot

1/64

" =

1.0'

-0"

04/1

4/15

Ric

e U

nive

rsity

CE

VE

Dep

artm

ent

885'

Red

esig

ning

Mai

n S

treet

CE

VE

452

Fin

al P

roje

ctB

y: J

ulia

nne

Cra

wfo

rd &

Kas

ia N

ikie

l

11x1

7" P

lot

1/64

" =

1.0'

-0"

04/1

4/15

Ric

e U

nive

rsity

CE

VE

Dep

artm

ent

781'

-0.3

5"

Red

esig

ning

Mai

n S

treet

CE

VE

452

Fin

al P

roje

ctB

y: J

ulia

nne

Cra

wfo

rd &

Kas

ia N

ikie

l

11x1

7" P

lot

1/64

" =

1.0'

-0"

04/1

4/15

Ric

e U

nive

rsity

CE

VE

Dep

artm

ent

Red

esig

ning

Mai

n S

treet

CE

VE

452

Fin

al P

roje

ctB

y: J

ulia

nne

Cra

wfo

rd &

Kas

ia N

ikie

l

11x1

7" P

lot

1/32

" =

1.0'

-0"

04/1

4/15

Ric

e U

nive

rsity

CE

VE

Dep

artm

ent

REDESIGNING MAIN STREET 4

III. INTERSECTIONS

Intersection Overview

Intersections play a crucial role in moving cars through a street and dealing with high volumes of intercrossing traffic. Due to

this, the four intersections that are located in our 0.4-mile stretch of Main Street were of particular concern and observational focus in

this study. As we were gathering data about this section of road, each intersection was considered individually, with video and traffic

counts being taken for the length of a single traffic cycle.

Main Street at Cambridge Street

The Cambridge Street Intersection (Figure 5) has the smoothest traffic flow in terms of travel in the northbound and

southbound directions. The only navigability problem is the difficulty for cars turning right onto Cambridge Street from Main Street.

However because this is an issue with the congestion on Cambridge Street onto Fannin Street, it was outside the boundaries of

consideration that we established for the system in our study, and thus, its causes and solutions were not considered. At a traffic cycle

starting at 4:05 p.m. 50 cars were able to travel northbound through the intersection, and 32 cars travel through in the southbound

direction. The travel in the northbound direction is the highest here out of all the intersections, and it can be assumed that it is because

the road opens up past this point. Sunset Boulevard is the only major intersection between Cambridge Street and the traffic circle at

Hermann Drive. Importantly there are no more parking garage exits, which this study finds to be the primary cause of most of the

traffic issues during peak volume times on the stretch between Cambridge Street and University Boulevard.

Main Street at MH Medical Plaza

The MH Medical Plaza Intersection (Figure 5) is unique in that it includes no intersecting streets to Main Street. The entire

purpose of this light is to allow the traffic leaving the south exit of the 6400 Fannin parking garage to turn left onto Main Street

instead of just turning right and merging into traffic. This light was installed by the hospital that the parking garage serves, and on

most rush hour afternoons there is a traffic guard (also hired by the hospital) who helps direct traffic out of the garage and pedestrians

across the cross walk. The garage has two exits: one onto Main Street, and a second onto Fannin Street; this rear exit allows people to

exit the garage and turn right onto Fannin going in the southbound direction. As we will note later very few people used the rear exit

during the time that we observed it. This leads us to question the necessity of this light, without which, people would still be able to

turn right onto Main Street and exit the garage to travel in southbound direction. The biggest problem with this intersection is the

distance from Cambridge Street, only 400 feet, and the fact that these two lights are not synced to match green signals. Because this

distance is so short, there is no capacity to store traffic as it waits for the Cambridge signal and cars back into the intersection at MH

Medical Plaza. At 4:29 p.m. 35 cars travelled southbound and 37 cars travelled northbound (however, this number would have been

higher if cars weren’t backed into the intersection).

Main Street at John Freeman

The John Freeman Intersection (Figure 5) faces a very similar problem to the MH Medical Plaza light in that cars have

difficulty moving through the intersection and cannot advance forward even when the light is green if they don’t want to risk ending

up sitting in the middle of the intersection when the light turns red. This intersection does not have a parking exit associated with it,

and the cross street does not move through Main Street, but only feeds cars into it. In a sense it works as a feeder intersection in much

the same way the MH Medical Plaza light does, but with a much larger volume of cars per cycle. At 5:20 p.m. 38 cars moved in the

southbound direction and 31 cars moved in the northbound direction.

REDESIGNING MAIN STREET 5

Main Street at University Boulevard

The University Boulevard intersection (Figure 5) faces the largest problems in terms of the ability to move cars through in a single

cycle. The backup of cars is already so bad at this intersection due to the influence of the 6 parking garage exits in front of it that there

is a crossing guard stationed in the center of it during rush hour every weekday to override the traffic signals and prevent cars from

moving through if there is no room for them on the other side. As a result, at 5:16 p.m. only 14 cars were able to move through in the

northbound direction, while 51 cars travelled in the southbound direction.

Figure 6 below places the traffic counts listed above at their corresponding intersections on a map. Traffic moving the

southbound direction maintains a relatively stable flow, however congestion in the northbound direction become exponentially greater

when you move from Cambridge Street to University Boulevard.

IV. PARKING EXITS

The section of Main Street between Cambridge Street and University Boulevard has a total of 6 parking garage exits that feed

traffic into the northbound direction. As described in the previous section, the only significant difference between the northbound and

southbound traffic flows is the presence of these parking garage exits, and thus, we can fairly assume that the cars exiting from these

parking garages further exacerbate the already heavy congestion in the northbound direction of Main Street. To gain a greater sense of

the impact the exiting cars have on traffic flow, we observed each parking garage exit for a total of 10 minutes and counted the

number of cars that exited during this period of time. The following sections present our observations from each parking garage exit.

6400 Fannin Parking Exits

We observed a total of 15 cars exit from the northern exit, and 51 cars from the southern exit. The reason we observed so many

more cars out of the southern exit is because it has its own designated stoplight to allow cars to exit, and about half the cars in this

time turned in either direction. This stoplight is what we have been referring to as the “MH Medical Plaza Intersection.” From our

perspective, it appears that the sole purpose of this light is to allow cars to turn left out of the parking garage to travel southbound on

Main Street. Otherwise, the light only serves to further back up traffic by causing unnecessary stops for cars moving in the north and

southbound directions. Further, we observed that cars are able to use an exit on the opposite side of the garage to turn onto Fannin

Street in the southbound direction. Even though during our 10-minute observation, we only saw about 2 cars utilize this option, we

believe it provides a viable option and alternative to having a designated light that allows cars to turn left. Furthermore, this is the only

Figure 6. Intersection traffic counts in the north and southbound directions.

REDESIGNING MAIN STREET 6

parking garage exit on this section of Main Street that has a stoplight to allow exiting cars to turn left. In each of the other garages,

cars are already using exits on the opposite side of the garage if they desire to travel in the southbound direction. Thus, we concluded

that there is no significant need for this stoplight. We will discuss this later in the report as one of our proposed solution options.

Furthermore, we observed some drivers getting overly impatient waiting for the light, and instead using the delivery and

loading dock entrance as an exit. This further supports our conclusion that the light itself is ineffective, and not needed.

Orange, Blue and A&M Exits

The next three exits are grouped together around the University of Texas Professional Building. We observed a total of 4 cars

exiting from the “Orange Exit;” however, current construction leads us to believe that this exit will see more traffic outflow once

completed. We observed a total of 23 cars out of the Blue and A&M Exits. We counted these two garage exits together because we

were thoroughly unclear about which building the Blue Exit serves. We were further concerned by the fact that the Blue Exit allowed

two lanes of traffic to exit at one time.

Smith Tower Exit

Finally, the exit on the corner of University Boulevard serves the Smith Tower. We observed a total of 20 cars exit from this

garage onto Main Street; however, also noticed that cars were able to exit onto University Boulevard directly from a side exit.

V. OTHER FACTORS

While redesigning Main Street there were other factors that we needed to consider in order to gain a more comprehensive

perspective of the factors influencing traffic flow.

Bus Routes Along Main Street

The first factor we investigated were the bus routes that run along this portion of Main Street. There are 4 routes that cross the

section of Main Street between Cambridge Street and University Boulevard, namely routes 8, 34, 87, and a separate Fort Bend route

that serves the Medical district (Figure 7).

We wanted to map out the frequency with which each of these buses might pass through our section of Main Street. The result

can be seen in Figure 8. Each of the colored bars on this plot represents, in a sense, a range in time during which a bus will be on our

stretch of Main Street. For example, bus route 34 has its second stop at the intersection of Main Street and University Boulevard, and

Figure 7. Bus routes along Main Street that pass between University Boulevard and Cambridge Street.

REDESIGNING MAIN STREET 7

its third stop further up Main Street at the intersection of Montrose and Richmond. Thus, at some point during the time it takes for the

bus to travel between bus stop 2 and bus stop 3, it will be on our section of Main Street. Essentially, this is what the bars represent—

the time period from one stop to another, during which a bus will travel between University Boulevard and Cambridge Street.

Thus, the only time when there is no chance for a bus to be on our section of the street is when there is no bar overlap. From the graph,

you can see that this does not happen very often, especially during rush hour times (Figure 9 and Figure 10). From this we can

conclude that there is likely at least 1 bus on our section of Main Street at most times during the day. This was corroberated by our

observations of the road. This fact will come into play later in the report when we discuss one of our proposed solutions for the

redesign.

Crossing Guards

Another factor we considered were the crossing guards. As previously mentioned, these crossing guards are stationed at

stoplights during rush hour times to facilitate the traffic flow through intersections. However, we also discovered that these crossing

guards are hired by the medical center; thus, it is fair to assume that one of their priorities is to ensure that their employees are able to

exit the parking garages in a timely manner. This again, further serves to impede traffic flowing in the north and southbound

directions.

VI. APPLICABLE STANDARDS

Due to the fact that any solution we are considering will not require extensive refitting of the existing infrastructure in the area,

and will not introduce any new forms of transportation, the study did not need to be as concerned with the ability to meet regulatory

standards. However, we will review the standards that are in place and which the street currently conforms to. Main Street in this

stretch is considered a “low-speed urban street” and as such “AASHTO highlights the benefits of narrower (10 to 11 feet) travel lanes”

which lead to a myriad of safety benefits for both pedestrians and vehicular traffic of all forms.i Similarly, buses “require a minimum

11-foot wide lane on roadways with 30 to 35 mph target speeds” which fits into the criteria for a design of Main Street.ii The

American Public Transportation Association also recommends a minimum bus lane width of 11 feet.iii Because of these compatible

roadway standards, we see no geometric or regulatory issues with establishing something like a dedicated bus lane if such a solution

would prove to be useful, as we will examine further.

Figure 8. Frequency with which buses pass between University Boulevard and Cambridge Street

Figure 9. Morning rush hour bus frequencies

Figure 10. Evening rush hour bus frequencies

REDESIGNING MAIN STREET 8

VII. OPTIONS FOR REMEDIATION

Option 1: Remove the Light

After examining the current situation, several ways of dealing with different aspects of congestion became apparent. The first

solution involves removing the MH Medical Plaza light. Currently, because this light is so close to the Cambridge Street intersection

and because the traffic signals are rarely synced correctly, this light simply stops traffic that would otherwise be able to pass through

(Figure 11). This causes a choke point when the light is red, and the light has an inability to pass people through the intersection even

during times when the light is green. The light’s purpose of allowing people to turn left onto Fannin can also be reasonably managed

by the rear exit of the 6400 Fannin garage, which allows people to turn southbound onto Fannin Street. We expect that making this

change would not greatly increase the traffic onto Fannin Street seeing as only a few cars were turning left on any one light cycle.

Nevertheless, more analysis would need to be done of the traffic situation on Fannin and the intersecting cross streets in order to

confirm this. Another potential issue that would arise with this option would be the elimination of a pedestrian crossing that connects

the Texas Medical Center to Rice University. However because this crossing is only 400 feet from the crossing at Cambridge Street,

eliminating this crossing would not be a major detriment. Furthermore, the crossing connects into a portion of the Rice outer loop that

doesn’t provide an official access point into the campus anyways. Another issue would be convincing the owning hospital to work

with the city and remove the light. There may be issues here since their main priority of the hospitals is to move their employees and

patients in the most efficient way possible and to them the light helps to facilitate this. Despite these concerns, we are still convinced

that this option would serve to significantly decrease the congestion and delay on Main Street (Figure 12).

Option 2: Create Far Right Bus Lane

The second option we considered on Main Street would be to establish a bus lane along the right side of the street (Figure 13).

Currently, cars are forced to slow down or even stop as cars exit each of the six parking garages along this stretch and merge into the

oncoming traffic. Furthermore, buses need to stop all of the traffic behind them when they pick up passengers along their route. Both

of these considerations contribute to the heavy traffic on this stretch during rush hour. Establishing a bus lane would mitigate several

of these problems. Primarily, the bus lane would lead to quicker bus routes, as they would be able to move through and pick up

passengers with minimum obstruction. Second, the bus lane could be used by cars exiting the parking garage instead of turning

directly into traffic, and also by cars trying to turn right onto connecting side streets. Finally, and perhaps most importantly

considering that the Texas Medical Center directly lines this road, a dedicated lane would provide a safe and clear route for emergency

vehicles that would otherwise be stopped amidst all the rush hour traffic. The bus lane would be in both the northbound and

southbound directions and would stretch up and down the length of Main Street to cause minimum confusion. There would also be

clearly marked areas for merging into the rest of traffic and for queuing to turn right. There are several issues that may arise for a bus

lane. First, a bus lane would reduce the number of normal travel lanes in each direction from three to two; however, it is hoped that the

bus lane would improve flow by managing the buses and parking exits so that the current traffic volume would be able to move

through more clearly. Second, enforcing a bus lane might be difficult at the beginning while drivers are getting accustomed to the new

system. Once established, however, this issue would disappear. Ultimately, we believe that establishing a bus route in the far right lane

of the north and southbound directions would serve to not only increase the rate of transit, but would also serve to mitigate congestion

caused by garage exit traffic flows (Figure 14).

410'

885'

Red

esig

ning

Mai

n S

treet

CE

VE

452

Fin

al P

roje

ctB

y: J

ulia

nne

Cra

wfo

rd &

Kas

ia N

ikie

l

11x1

7" P

lot

1/64

" =

1.0'

-0"

04/1

4/15

Ric

e U

nive

rsity

CE

VE

Dep

artm

ent

410'

885'

Red

esig

ning

Mai

n S

treet

CE

VE

452

Fin

al P

roje

ctB

y: J

ulia

nne

Cra

wfo

rd &

Kas

ia N

ikie

l

11x1

7" P

lot

1/64

" =

1.0'

-0"

04/1

4/15

Ric

e U

nive

rsity

CE

VE

Dep

artm

ent

885'

Red

esig

ning

Mai

n S

treet

CE

VE

452

Fin

al P

roje

ctB

y: J

ulia

nne

Cra

wfo

rd &

Kas

ia N

ikie

l

11x1

7" P

lot

1/64

" =

1.0'

-0"

04/1

4/15

Ric

e U

nive

rsity

CE

VE

Dep

artm

ent

Figure 14. Option 2: Add bus lanes on either side of the street

Figure 15. Final proposed solution. Remove the MH Medical Plaza light and implement bus lanes

REDESIGNING MAIN STREET 9

VIII. PROPOSED SOLUTION AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER STUDY

This study proposes to implement both of the options discussed in the previous section (Figure 15). They are not mutually

exclusive and would work well in conjunction to solve most of the issues identified in this study. A combined approach eliminates

choke points at unnecessary and un-synced lights, and makes regulation by traffic guards unnecessary. This proposal would also allow

freer movements and safer exits for people coming out of the garages and would likely result in quicker run times for bus routes.

The next step to solving this problem would be a study of Fannin Street and the connecting cross streets to see how changing

design aspects on Main Street might cause these areas to be affected. There would also need to be a discussion with the hospitals that

own the parking garages along this stretch to ensure that the best decision can be made for patrons and travellers.

IX. REFERENCES

i Institute of Transportation Engineers. Designing Walkable Urban Thoroughfares: A Context Sensitive Approach. Congress for the New Urbanism, n.d. Web. 12 Apr. 2015. <http://library.ite.org/pub/e1cff43c-2354-d714-51d9-d82b39d4dbad>. Page 138. ii Institute of Transportation Engineers. Designing Walkable Urban Thoroughfares: A Context Sensitive Approach. Congress for the New Urbanism, n.d. Web. 12 Apr. 2015. <http://library.ite.org/pub/e1cff43c-2354-d714-51d9-d82b39d4dbad>. Page 137. iii APTA Bus Rapid Transit Working Group. Designing Bus Rapid Transit Running Ways. Rep. no. APTA-BTS-BRT-RP-003-10. American Public Transportation Association, n.d. Web. <http://www.apta.com/resources/standards/Documents/APTA-BTS-BRT-RP-003-10.pdf>. Page 8.