senior landscape architect & planner jweesner@kittelson · 2020. 3. 30. · source: dangerous...
TRANSCRIPT
John Paul (JP) Weesner, PLASenior Landscape Architect & [email protected]
Agenda
• Why Complete Streets for Florida?
• What Are Complete Streets?
• Implementing Complete Streets onFlorida’s Space Coast
Complete Streets for Florida
Source:Dangerous by Design 2014
Metro Area Pedestrian Danger Index(PDI)
Orlando-Kissimmee, FL 244.28
Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater, FL 190.13
Jacksonville, FL 182.71
Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Pompano Beach, FL 145.33
Memphis, TN-MS-AR 131.26
Birmingham-Hoover, AL 125.60
Houston-Sugar Land – Baytown, TX 119.64
Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Marietta, GA 119.35
Phoenix-Mesa-Scottsdale, AZ 118.64
Charlotte-Gastonia-Concord, NC_SC 111.74
2014: Most Dangerous US Cities for Walking
Complete Streets for Florida
Complete Streets for Florida
• Childhood Obesity(1970-2000)• Has increased 3x for
Children (Ages 6-11)1
• Childhood Diabetes• 1/3 of American Children
(Born in 2000) willdevelop diabetes in theirlifetime2.
Source:1United States Government Accountability Office. (2005) Childhood Obesity: Most Experts Identified Physical Activity and the Use of Best Practices as Key to SuccessfulPrograms. Washington, D.C.2 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2005) Nutrition and the Health of Young People. Retrieved April 24, 2006 fromhttp://www.cdc.gov/healthyyouth/nutrition/pdf/facts.pdf.
Source:* 2010 Census; ** US Census Bureau, American Community Survey (2006-2010)
Complete Streets for Florida
• Americans Over 65 20% of Brevard County*
• Under 15 16% in Brevard County*
• Below the Poverty Line 11% of Brevard County (5% do not
own automobiles)*• Total Brevard County Population
that need Alternatives toAutomobiles 47% of Brevard County Residents
33%AMERICANSDON’T DRIVE
55%AMERICANS
WOULDRATHER
DRIVE LESS
What areComplete Streets?
Source: Complete Streets Coalitionwebsite; Dan Burden - photograph
Complete Streets arestreets designed and
operated to enable safeaccess for ALL USERS.
Complete Streets:
Complete Streets: Speed Matters
Odds ofPedestrianFatality at20 MPH is
5%
Odds ofPedestrianFatality at30 MPH is37-45%
Odds ofPedestrianFatality at40 MPH is
80%
Complete Street: Design Matters
Cross Section Elements: Vehicle LanesNarrow down travel lanes. Provide refuge islands.
Cross Section Elements: Bicycle FacilitiesProvide comfort & safety for bikes along the street.
Can also be a parallel multi-use path.
Complete Street: Design Matters
Cross Section Elements: On-Street ParkingSupports adjacent land uses. Buffers pedestrians.
Complete Street: Design Matters
Cross Section Elements: Landscape/Furnishings ZoneProvides shade, amenities, and places to sit.Helps to create vibrancy and “sense of place.”
Complete Street: Design Matters
Cross Section Elements: Pedestrian ZoneMinimum of 5 feet clear.
8 feet better for two-way travel.
Complete Street: Design Matters
Implementing Complete Streetson the Space Coast
A brief timeline…
2010 - Orientation
• Little $$ to Spend – Hitby Recession & Cuts toNASA
• Introduced Principles toCommittees and TPOBoard
• Introducing CompleteStreets was adopted as agoal as part of 2035 LRTP
• Funding proposed forFDOT Work Program
2011 - TPO Municipality Training
TPO & Municipality Training• Free training• One full day• National staff• Interactive class• Outdoor field work
Tool-Kit Creation• Draft resolutions• Sample policies• Presentation template• Staff support• National recognition
Complete Streets Resolutions &Comprehensive Plan
AmendmentsSpace Coast TPOBrevard County9 Municipalities
Funding Earmarked forConstruction
Results?
2010 – 2011 Total Investment
• $15,000
Complete StreetsEvaluation
Methodology
2012-13 – Project Identification
Goals:
• Identify List of PriorityProjects
• $18 Million forConstruction (3 years)
3 PhaseScreening ProcessPhase 1:Project IdentificationPhase 2:Feasibility AnalysisPhase 3:Project Selection
Suitable AreasScore
Existing BicyclePedestrian and
Transit Generators
Future BicyclePedestrian and
Transit Generators
Tourism
Parks andRecreation Areas
Ph
ase
1
Suitable Areas
Functional Accessibility Score80th Percentile and Above
Bike, Pedestrian, & Transit GeneratorsRedevelopment Areas & CDBG Target Areas
TourismHistoric Districts, Arts Districts, &
Tourists Sites
Parks¼ Mile Buffer Around all Parks
Identifying Suitable Areas
Suitable Areas
1 – Least Suitable2 – Less Suitable3 – Suitable4 – Most Suitable
Metric
Safety
Sidewalks
Bicycle Lanes
Pedestrian/Bicycle Five YearCrash Analysis
Support/Expand ExistingMultimodal Investments
Proximity to ExistingSidewalk or Bicycle LanesTransit
Permeability ofRoadway/ Compatibility
with MultimodalTransportation
Posted Speed
Traffic Volumes
Ph
ase
1
Opportunity Corridors
Metric Criteria Points
Safety
Sidewalks• Provided on both sides• Missing on 1 side• Missing on both sides
012
Bicycle Lanes
• Bike Lanes Provided and/or Roadways with ADT lessthan 3,000 vpd
• Missing on roadways with volumes greater than3,000 vpd
0
2
Pedestrian/Bicycle FiveYear Crash Analysis
• Less than 2 crashes• 2 to 4 crashes• 5 or more crashes• Fatality
0123
Expand Ex.Multi-ModalInvestments
Proximity to ExistingSidewalk or Bicycle Lanes
• New sidewalk would connect to existingsidewalks; Extend an existing sidewalk along anarterial or collector road;
• New bicycle facility would connect to existingbicycle facilities; Extend an existing bicycle facility
21
21
Transit • One or more routes located along the corridor• One or more routes traverse the corridor
31
Permeabilityof Roadway
Posted Speed
• 25 to 30 mph• 35 mph• 40 to 45 mph• Over 45 mph (Segment Not Considered)
210
N/A
Traffic Volumes• Under 3,000 vpd• 3,000 to 18,000 vpd• Over 18,000 vpd
210
Opportunity Corridor Scoring Criteria
Phase I Screening Criteria
Suitable Areas Score:• 3 or Greater
Opportunity Corridor Score:• 7 or Greater
65 Corridors Listed
“Long List” of Corridors
2013 - Phase 2Feasibility Analysis Scoring Criteria
1. Meet Complete Streets ProjectCriteria (established by 2010-11 Resolutions)
2. Complete Streets Goals Supportedby Municipality (willing to match or partially fundand build project)
3. Timeline/Constructability (within 3 Years)
2013 - Design Workshop
PURPOSE: Refine “Long List”to Candidate Corridors forPhase 2 Analysis
• Met with 9 Municipalities
• Removed Corridors Already inProcess
Design Workshop
• NarrowedTravel Lanes
• Medians
• Bulb-Outs
• Landscape
• Bus Stops &Shelters
• Lighting
• Traffic CalmingMeasures
• PedestrianAmenities
Proposed Section & Amenities
Candidate ProjectsFrom 65 Corridors, 11Corridors moved to Phase 3
1. Singleton Avenue, Titusville2. Hopkins Avenue, Titusville3. N Atlantic Avenue, Cape Canaveral4. Peachtree Street, Cocoa5. Florida Avenue, Cocoa6. Minutemen Causeway, Cocoa Beach7. Pineapple Avenue, Melbourne8. Hickory Street, Melbourne9. Front Street, Melbourne10.Country Club Road, Melbourne11.Palm Bay Road, Palm Bay
2013 - Phase 3Project Ranking Score Criteria
1. Quality of Complete Streets Project
2. Cost/Benefit Analysis
3. Land Uses Supported
4. Supports Bike/Pedestrian/TransitInfrastructure/Planning
5. Complete Streets Goals Supported byMunicipality
Metric Criteria
Quality ofComplete Streets
Project
MMLOS Pedestrian and bicycle LOS as calculated by HCM 2010 criteria
Ability to Cross RoadwayProposed design speed
Average distance between pedestrian crossings
Pedestrian amenities included lighting/street furniture/bus stop amenities/landscaping
Cost/ BenefitAnalysis
Cost per mile
Crash history Number of pedestrian and bicycle crashes between 2006-2011
Percent of bicycle facilities added Percent coverage as compared to existing conditions
Percent of pedestrian facilities added Percent coverage as compared to existing conditions
Coordination with other projects Programmed improvements along or adjacent to corridor
Land UsesSupported
Residential Units within a half mile
Commercial Acreage within a half mile
Schools/parks /civic uses served by projectwithin ½ mile Number within a half mile
Tourism Historic districts or tourist site cluster areas served
Multimodal Supportive Land Use Areas andRedevelopment Districts
If located within a multimodal supportive future land use,redevelopment area, or CDBG target area
Supports Bike/Pedestrian/
TransitInfrastructure/
Planning
Ridership of transit route served Ridership on route as a percent of total ridership on SCAT in2012
Serves area with low automobile ownershiprates
Proximity to future rail stations Located within a quarter or mile of a future rail station
Connection the existing or proposed regionaltrail system Located within a quarter or mile of a proposed regional trail
Complete StreetsGoals Supported
by MunicipalityLocal matching funds Percent of project costs covered by local funds
RecommendedProjects
Hickory Street in Melbourne
Hopkins Avenue in Titusville
Atlantic Avenue in Cape Canaveral
Peachtree Street in CocoaFlorida Avenue in Cocoa
Minutemen Causeway in CocoaBeach
From 11 Corridors, 6 Corridorswere Recommended to be
Constructed
• Public Engagement• Conceptual Development• Construction Feasibility + Cost
Estimation• 30% Conceptual Documentation
2014 – Engagement & Concepts
Public Engagement
More Data Collection, Section Alternatives
PreferredAlternative
CivicDistrict
Land Use/ Character DistrictsCharacter Districts, Innovative Ideas
Curbless, “Festival Street” for Park & Civic Setting
Vision – Festival Street
Vision – Festival Street
Vision – Complete Street
Vision – Complete Street
2013-14: Planning Investment
Evaluation MethodologyFeasibility Studies
Concept Development
Multi-Use PathwaysMulti-Use Pathways
Traffic CalmingTraffic Calming
Transit StopTransit StopLow Impact StormwaterLow Impact Stormwater
$664,000
Design/Construction Investment
$16,233,699Federal SurfaceTransportationFunds
$5,787,099 Local Match
$22,020,798 TOTAL INVESTMENT
2015: Earmarked Funding forConstruction
Thank You!