moving back towards complete...

Moving Back Towards Complete Streets

Transportation Education SeriesOctober, 2013

Presentation OverviewPresentation Overview

Complete Streets Movement

Complete Streets Ordinances

Complete Street Implementation

The Complete Streets Movement

The Complete Streets Movement

The Complete Streets MovementThe Complete Streets Movement

National effort to design and operate the entire right-of-way network with all users in mind

Enhance livabilityProvide travel choicesPromote healthier communitiesSupport redevelopment and economic prosperity

Complete Street ObjectivesComplete Street Objectives

Ease congestion using available resourcesSafely accommodate all modes of travelMake the most of limited ROW and limited resources

Complete Streets Movement and Infrastructure StewardshipComplete Streets Movement and Infrastructure Stewardship

PlanningNetworks and destinations

Designing Details of dimension, alignment, materials, functions

BuildingFunding and executing the plan. Identifying needs and opportunities.

OperatingPutting things into motion to work efficiently and conveniently.

MaintainingSustaining durability. Standing up under use.

Con

vent

iona

l App

roac

h

MoreEfficiency

Syst

em

Man

agem

ent

More Pavement

Mor

e La

nes

Mor

e R

oads

ITS

Mor

e C

ars

Traditional Street System DevelopmentTraditional Street System Development

7

Con

vent

iona

l App

roac

h

MoreEfficiency

Syst

em

Man

agem

ent

More Pavement

Mor

e La

nes

Mor

e R

oads

ITS

Mor

e C

ars

Complete Street System DevelopmentComplete Street System Development

8

Lateral Approach

User View and ComfortContext-Sensitive DesignTraffic CalmingPersonal Security

TransitBicyclingWalkingHOV/HOT Lanes

Complete StreetsComplete Streets

Complete Streets are streets for everyone.

They are designed and operated to enable safe access for all users.

People of all ages and abilities are able to safely move along and across streets in a community, regardless of how they are traveling.

Complete Streets make it easy to cross the street, walk to shops, and bicycle to work.

They allow buses to run on time and make it safe for people to walkto and from train stations.

Source: National Complete Streets Coalition

Complete Streets OrdinancesComplete Streets Ordinances

Complete Streets Ordinance HistoryComplete Streets Ordinance History

1971 “Routine Accommodation” adopted by Oregon.1990 Americans with Disabilities Act1998 Transportation Equality Act for the 21st Century.2005 “Complete Streets” coined by the National Complete Streets Coalition. 2010, “…USDOT policy is to incorporate safe and convenient walking and bicycling facilities into transportation projects.”To date, 500 city, county and state agencies have adopted complete streets policies.

Why Adopt a Complete Streets Policy/OrdinanceWhy Adopt a Complete Streets Policy/Ordinance

EndorsementTo change everyday transportation planning and design practice.To establish political and community support for change.

LongevityTo establish practices that endure change.To administer ongoing public works practices.

VisionTo express goals and aspirations

Guiding PrinciplesTo gradually create a complete network of streets for all modes.To apply solutions community- and system-wide.

Where Street Ordinances are HappeningWhere Street Ordinances are Happening

500 agencies have adopted complete street ordinances

34 state-level ordinances and policieshttp://www.smartgrowthamerica.org/documents/cs/policy/cs-state-policies.pdf

Cities with Complete Streets OrdinanceApproximately 60 large cities with population of >250,000 Approximately 54 mid-size cities with population of 100,000 to 250,00Approximately 90 small cities with population < 100.000

Source:http://www.smartgrowthamerica.org/documents/cs/factsheets/cs-rural-2.pdf

Ordinance ContentOrdinance Content

“Whereas” = The Reasons for Actions

“Therefore” = The Actions to be Taken

“Whereas” Content = The Reason for Actions“Whereas” Content = The Reason for Actions

DefinitionWhereas, the Complete Streets concept is an initiative to design the public right-of-way to adequately accommodate all users of a corridor, including pedestrians, bicyclists, users of mass transit, people with disabilities, the elderly, motorists, freight providers, emergency responders, utility providers, and adjacent land users; and….

Goals and BenefitsWhereas, a Complete Street approach will foster economic growth, prioritize safety, create greater connectivity between neighborhoods and amenities, meet the mobility needs of all users, be context sensitive and aesthetically pleasing, reduce traffic congestion and positively impact the health of the community; and….

“Whereas” continued“Whereas” continued

Approach/AdministrationWhereas, this Complete Streets Policy is written to empower and direct citizens, elected officials, government agencies, planners, engineers and architects to use an interdisciplinary approach to incorporate the needs of all users into design and construction of roadway projects; and….

Whereas, this policy dictates that appropriate accommodations be made so all modes of transportation can function safely and independently in current and future conditions. This approach demands careful multi-modal evaluation for all transportation corridors integrated with best management strategies for land use and transportation; and….

Support/Popularity of the ConceptWhereas, the City Engineering Division, the County Public Works Division, the City Office of Sustainability, the Light Gas & Water Utilities, Health Providers, Modal Advocates, Realtors Association, Emergency Service and Enforcement Providers, and private citizens endorse the development of this policy; and….

“Therefore” = The Actions to be Taken“Therefore” = The Actions to be Taken

VisionThe City shall create an attractive, vibrant public realm that supports the diverse qualities of our neighborhoods and provides a robust, balanced transportation network that is safe, financially responsible, serves all users, and considers multiple modes of transportation.

InstitutionalizationAll relevant departments, boards and commissions shall make this Complete Streets Policy an integral part of their planning and programming by reviewing plans, guides, regulations and standard drawings to comply with this ordinance.

Transportation infrastructure shall be planned, constructed, reconstructed, and maintained according to this ordinance, with routine consideration for the variety of users whom they serve and for the opportunities to provide multiple benefits (social, environmental, economic, and health), enhancing the function, appearance and livability of the community.

“Therefore” continued“Therefore” continued

Exclusions/ExceptionsAppropriate justifications for non-compliance with this Complete Streets Policy are:

Where prohibited by law, such as bicycle and pedestrian facilities within interstate corridorsWhere compliance would substantially impair unique characteristics of great public value, such as historical importance.Where scarcity of population or other factors such as the physical character or context of the built environment surrounding the public right-of-way indicates an absence of current or future need.

Infrastructure Design GuidanceThe City Department of Engineering shall partner with relevant City, County, State, MPO and transit agencies to create a Street Design Manual for use in all City departments. The Street Design Guide will serve as a toolbox of design guidelines that reflect national Complete Streets best practices for sidewalks, shoulders, automobile lane widths, bicycle lanes, special transit lanes, curb ramps, audible crossing signals, crosswalks, median islands, curb extensions, transit stops, utility accommodations, site furniture, street trees, grass strips, etc.

“Therefore” continued“Therefore” continued

ImplementationIn order to implement this Complete Streets Policy, the City shall

Pursue additional planning efforts in collaboration with the County and MPO.Incorporate a project ranking matrix that complies with this Complete Street Policy into its annual CIP review process before the FY2014 CIP budget development.

PlanningIn order to assure that transportation decisions encourage and support a vision for optimal land-use throughout the City, the City should consider the following planning efforts within three years:

A comprehensive land-use planA complete streets Implementation Plan that will delineate and prioritize strategic transportation investments to build a transportation network that serves all users.

Ongoing Expectations and ResponsibilitiesOngoing Expectations and Responsibilities

Elected LeadersAuditors, Purchasing AgentsPublic Works AdministratorsPlannersCode EnforcementBudget/Funding AllocationStaffingInter-Agency Coordination/Cooperation

So what does a Complete Street Ordinance change?

Complete Street Implementation

Emerging Practices and ToolsEmerging Practices and Tools

Transportation System Plans (TSP)Project Prioritization MethodsHighway Capacity Manual’s Multimodal Level-of-Service (MMLOS)Highway Safety Manual (HSM)Lane Reductions (Road Diets)Improving Pedestrian Safety at Unsignalized Crossings (NCHRP 562)State and City Complete Streets Design Guide

Transportation System Plans

Juneau Comprehensive PlanJuneau Comprehensive Plan

CHAPTER 4. TRANSPORTATION, PUBLIC FACILITIES, SERVICES, AND AMENITIES

POLICY 4.2. IT IS THE POLICY OF THE CBJ TO PROMOTE A BALANCED, WELL-INTEGRATED LOCAL TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM WHICH PROVIDES SAFE, CONVENIENT AND ENERGY EFFICIENT ACCESS AND FACILITATES THE MOVEMENT OF COMMODITIES.POLICY 4.3. IT IS THE POLICY OF THE CBJ TO PROMOTE AND FACILITATE TRANSPORTATION ALTERNATIVES TO AUTOMOBILES AS A MEANS OF REDUCING CONGESTION AND AIR POLLUTION AND CONSERVING ENERGY.http://www.juneau.org/cddftp/compplan/Compplan_TOC.htm

Anchorage Metropolitan Transportation in 2035Anchorage Metropolitan Transportation in 2035

Summary of 2035 Transportation System NeedsInitial Road Project Screening ProcessPolicy Recommendations

http://www.muni.org/Departments/OCPD/Planning/AMATS/Pages/2035MTP.aspx

Summary of 2035 Transportation System NeedsSummary of 2035 Transportation System Needs

“The capital improvements needed to meet the 2035 travel demands within the metropolitan area are listed in Table 5-9 for roads, Table 5-10 for public transportation , and Table 5-11 for non-motorized transportation (pedestrian, bicycle, and trail). The projects in these tables are not listed in priority order. The sum of the capital costs for these improvements exceeds $4 billion (in 2010 dollars).”

Initial Road Project Screening ProcessInitial Road Project Screening Process

“Because of the approximately $525 million shortfall in road project funding identified in Chapter 6, it was necessary to strategically pare the list of roadway projects originally identified as needed to meet the 2035 travel needs….Each future road project was scored by using the six criteria identified in Table 7-1.”

Project Screening CriteriaProject Screening Criteria

Page 7-5. 2035 Metropolitan Transportation Plan

Policy RecommendationsPolicy Recommendations

Comprehensive PlansFinancial IssuesPublic InvolvementTransportation SystemRoadsPublic TransportationNon-Motorized System

FreightRegional ConnectionsCongestion ManagementCoordination of Local PlansMaintenance and OperationsEnvironmental Concerns

Explore the feasibility of “Complete Streets” legislation at the state and/or local level.

-Page 8-12. 2035 Metropolitan Transportation Plan

Fairbanks Metropolitan Area Transportation SystemFairbanks Metropolitan Area Transportation System

The FMATS Plan was adopted July 2010 and has the following chapters:

Plan Requirements and GoalsExisting Conditions (Mode-specific)Future Needs (Mode-specific)Regional Corridor AlternativesFreight PlanProject PrioritiesFinancial PlanAir-Quality Analysis

Multi-Modal Level-of-Service

Why Measure Level-of-ServiceWhy Measure Level-of-Service

Provides a consistent, systematic evaluation and documentation of conditions

Puts results in terms that transportation professionals and the public can understand

Provides an objective way to identify needs and prioritize improvements

Provides a way to evaluate different improvements and mitigations

What Does LOS Look Like for Each Mode?What Does LOS Look Like for Each Mode?

Uses of Multimodal Level of Service (MMLOS)Uses of Multimodal Level of Service (MMLOS)

Quantify operational tradeoffs among modes for a given streetscape feature or strategy

Help prioritize transit, bicycle, and pedestrian improvements

Assist and inform the public involvement process

Document compliance with Complete Streets directives

Highway Safety Manual

Road Diets

Reasons for Eliminating Traffic LanesReasons for Eliminating Traffic Lanes

CapacityThere is residual capacity. Time can be managed to create residual space.

SafetyMultiple lanes pose a threat or liability.Fewer lanes keep things simple and predictable

OpportunityRepurposing space can improve or expand benefits

CapacityCapacity

Lane UsageIntermittent DelaysMinor Cross Street Intersections and DrivewaysMajor Signalized Intersections

SafetySafety Highway Safety Manual CMF Clearinghouse Findings

Countermeasure CMF

Road diet (Convert 4-lane undivided road to 2-lanes plus turning lane) 29

Introduce TWLTL (two-way left turn lanes) on rural two lane roads 36



Narrow cross section (4 to 3 lanes with two way left-turn lane) 37





Crash Modification Factor (CMF) — produces an estimate of the percentage reduction in crashes due to a particular countermeasure. The factor can vary for different scenarios, such as for different traffic volume scenarios. http://www.cmfclearinghouse.org/resources_hsm.cfm

SafetySafety

OpportunitiesOpportunities

Technical ResourcesTechnical Resources

Road Diet Handbookhttp://www.oregonite.org/2007D6/paper_review/D4_201_Rosales_paper.pdf

Proven Safety Countermeasureshttp://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/provencountermeasures/fhwa_sa_12_013.htm

Pedestrian Crossing Enhancements

NCHRP Report 562Improving Pedestrian Safety at Unsignalized CrossingsNCHRP Report 562Improving Pedestrian Safety at Unsignalized Crossings

A systematic methodology that accounts for :Pedestrian crossing popularity (a minimum of 20 people crossing a street during an hour)Pedestrian crossing delay

Depending on the pedestrians’ delay, crossing opportunities are supported by:

Requiring traffic to stop (with a red signal or beacon indication)Enhancing the visibility of crossings (with static full-time features)Alerting drivers to the real-time presence of pedestrians (with features that are active only when pedestrians are present)

http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/nchrp/nchrp_rpt_562.pdf

Roadway Design

Professional Design GuideProfessional Design Guide

NACTO Urban Street Design Guide. Released 9/23/13“A blueprint for the 21st century streetscape, the Urban Street Design Guidedemonstrates how streets of every size can be reimagined and reoriented as safe, sustainable public spaces for people walking, driving, biking, and taking transit. In cities, streets must serve multiple purposes, from storefront or doorstep to throughway. The Guide emphasizes the core principles for making urban streets great public places with an instrumental role in building communities.”http://nacto.org/2013/09/23/cities-release-new-guide-on-world-class-street-design/

ITE Designing Walkable Urban Thoroughfares: A Context Sensitive Approach Released 3/10

“This report has been developed in response to widespread interest for improving both mobility choices and community character through a commitment to creating and enhancing walkable communities. Many agencies will work towards these goals using the concepts and principles in this report to ensure the users, community and other key factors are considered in the planning and design processes used to develop walkable urban thoroughfares”http://www.ite.org/emodules/scriptcontent/orders/ProductDetail.cfm?pc=RP-036A-EX

State DOT Design GuidesState DOT Design Guides

FHWAhttp://www.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/publicroads/10julaug/03.cfmNorth Carolinahttp://www.completestreetsnc.org/wp-content/themes/CompleteStreets_Custom/pdfs/NCDOT-Complete-Streets-Planning-Design-Guidelines.pdfWashingtonhttp://www.wsdot.wa.gov/NR/rdonlyres/A49BBBE7-16BC-4ACE-AF2B-3C14066674C9/0/CompleteStreets_110811.pdfTennesseehttp://www.tdot.state.tn.us/bikeped/CompleteStreets.pdfGeorgiahttp://www.dot.ga.gov/doingbusiness/PoliciesManuals/roads/DesignPolicy/GDOT-DPM-Chap09.pdf

City Complete Street Design GuidesCity Complete Street Design Guides

Philadelphia 6/4/09http://philadelphiastreets.com/handbook.aspx

Chicago 4/13/13http://www.cityofchicago.org/city/en/depts/cdot/provdrs/future_projects_andconcepts/news/2013/mar/complete_streetsdesignguidelines.html

Bostonhttp://bostoncompletestreets.org/about/

Charlottehttp://charmeck.org/city/charlotte/transportation/plansprojects/pages/urban%20street%20design%20guidelines.aspx

San Franciscohttp://www.sfbetterstreets.org/why-better-streets/designing-complete-streets/

Tacomahttp://www.cityoftacoma.org/government/city_departments/planning_and_development_services/planning_services/complete_street_design_guidelines_project/

Thank You!Thank You!

Questions & Discussion

Gary KatsionEmail: [email protected]: (907) 433-8101

Mike ColemanEmail: [email protected]: (503) 535-7420

Hermanus SteynEmail: [email protected]: (503) 535-7455

Questions & Discussion

Gary KatsionEmail: [email protected]: (907) 433-8101

Mike ColemanEmail: [email protected]: (503) 535-7420

Hermanus SteynEmail: [email protected]: (503) 535-7455

Pedestrian LOS: Model FactorsPedestrian LOS: Model Factors

LinkSidewalk presence and clear width (+)

Vehicle volume and speed in outside travel lane (–)

Bicycle lane, shoulder, and outside vehicle lane widths (+)

Buffer presence and width (+)

On-street parking utilization (+)

IntersectionPermitted left turn, right-turn-on-red volumes (–)

Cross-street motor vehicle volumes and speeds (–)

Crossing length (–)

Average pedestrian delay (–)

Right-turn channelizing island presence (+)

Bicyclist LOS: Model FactorsBicyclist LOS: Model Factors

LinkBicycle lane, shoulder, and outside vehicle lane widths (+)

Vehicle volume and speed in outside travel lane (–)

Heavy vehicle percentage (–)

Pavement condition (+)

Bicycle lane presence (+)

On-street parking utilization (–)

Number of access points on right side (–)

IntersectionCross-street width (–)

Transit Passenger LOS: Model FactorsTransit Passenger LOS: Model Factors

Segment

Access to transit (pedestrian link LOS) (+)

Wait for transit (frequency) (-)

Riding transit (perceived travel time rate)

Excess wait time due to late bus/train arrival (–)

Actual bus travel speed (+)

Bus stop amenities (+)

On-board crowding (–)

Motorist LOS: ScoringMotorist LOS: Scoring

Vehicle LOS thresholds based on percent of free-flow speed

< 1.0 > 1.0> 85% A F

68% to 85% B F51% to 67% C F41% to 50% D F31% to 40% E F

< 30% F F

LOS by Critical V/CTravel Speed / Base Free Flow Speed

The critical volume‐to‐capacity ratio is based on the through movement in the analysis direction at the downstream intersection

Funding Prioritization

Slides from Hermanus’ presentation

moving back towards complete...

Documents