Complete Streets Training. Georgia Municipal Association June 27, 2016

Transcription

1 Complete Streets Training Georgia Municipal Association June 27, 2016

2 Overview What are CS? GDOT s Policy Case Study 2

3 What are Complete Streets? According to the National Complete Streets Coalition, 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. 3

4 What are Complete Streets? Complete Streets are streets for everyone, no matter who they are or how they travel. 4

5 What are Complete Streets? Complete street policies are adopted by cities, counties, MPO s, and states ensure that the entire right-of-way is planned, designed, constructed, operated, and maintained to provide safe access for all users are not one special street project are not a mandate for immediate retrofit are not a silver bullet, other issues still need to be addressed (land use, environmental concerns ) 5

6 What are Complete Streets? Compete street designs result in streets for everyone, no matter who they are or how they travel do not conform to one specific design or facility type vary by context (urban, rural, truck route, etc.) typically exceed minimum standards 6

7 What are Complete Streets? rural shared street main street residential 7

8 Policy Why adopt a policy? Why is it not adequate to understand the needs and benefits and skip over policy to design and implementation? Policies change practice, integrating the needs of all road users into everyday transportation planning and design practices. Policies help gradually create a complete network of streets that serve all users. Policies provide innovative transportation planners with the political and community support for doing things differently. 8

9 Policy Resources Policy * National Complete Streets Coalition * * Other Georgia peer cities Milledgeville, Savannah, Macon, Suwanee 9

10 Policy What are the styles of policies? 3.4% 21.4% Elected board 7.4% 5.2% 15.3% Legislation Resolution 45.8% Legislation Resolution Tax ordinance Executive order Internal policy Plan 1.1% 0.4% Smart Growth America (2014). Complete Streets Policy Analysis 2014 Policy adopted by elected board Design guidance GDOT s State Policy 10

11 Why does GDOT support CS? Complete streets can benefit communities by Improving safety for all road users Creating better health Encouraging stronger economies Reducing costs Providing choices and creating livability 11

12 Why does GDOT support CS? Complete streets can benefit communities by Improving safety for all road users Pedestrian crashes 88% with sidewalks 69% with hybrid beacon 40% with high-vis xwalk All crashes 29% with road diet 49% with lighting 39% with medians Source: CMF Clearinghouse 12

13 GDOT s Policy History of CS in Georgia: GDOT passed a state-level CS policy in Result of years of work by complete streets supporters GDOT s Chief Engineer coordinated a policy task team GDOT Board resolution passed unanimously on 9/20/12 Integrated into GDOT s Design Policy Manual At least 2 counties and 12 cities in Georgia have passed CS policies. Result in Georgia is more consistent integration of all users in GDOT roadway projects. 13

14 GDOT s Policy Primary resource for design guidelines and standards adopted by GDOT for the design of roadways and related infrastructure. CS Policy is Chapter 9 14

15 GDOT s Policy 1. Principles: form the basis and need for the policy 2. Users: defines typical users and needs for peds, bikes, and transit 3. Networks: defines user networks 4. Warrants: details warrants for accommodation 5. Design: provides references for the design of accommodations 15

16 GDOT s Policy What the policy does: Ensures that the needs of people walking, biking, and using transit are always considered early in the project development process for GDOT projects The policy does not: Guarantee bike/ped/transit accommodations are built on every GDOT project (though we have seen improvement!) Initiate projects 16

17 GDOT s Policy Principles.integrated into roadway new construction and reconstruction projects through design features appropriate to the context and function of the transportation facility. anticipate likely demand for bicycling and pedestrian facilities within the design life of the facility. addresses the need for bicyclists and pedestrians to safely cross roadways, as well as travel along them. should not preclude future bicycle and pedestrian access along and across corridors. resurfacing opportunities to provide or enhance safety for pedestrians and bicyclists should be considered. 17

18 GDOT s Policy STANDARD WARRENTS FOR BICYCLES (shall) 1. if the project is on a designated (i.e., adopted) U.S., State, regional, or local bicycle route; 2. where there is an existing bikeway along or linking to the end of the project corridor (e.g., shared lane, paved shoulder, bike lane, bike boulevard, or shared-use path); 3. along corridors with bicycle travel generators and destinations (i.e. residential neighborhoods, commercial centers, schools, colleges, scenic byways, public parks, transit stops/stations, etc.); 4. on projects where a bridge deck is being replaced or rehabilitated and the existing bridge width allows for the addition of a bikeway without eliminating (or precluding) needed pedestrian accommodations; and 5. where there is an occurrence of reported bicycle crashes which equals or exceeds a rate of five for a 1-mile segment of roadway, over the most recent three years for which crash data is available. Design variance 18

19 GDOT s Policy GUIDELINE WARRENTS FOR BICYCLES (should) 1. within close proximity (i.e., 3 miles) of a school, college, university, or major public institution (e.g., hospital, major park, etc., ); 2. where a project will provide connectivity between two or more existing bikeways or connects to an existing bikeway; 3. where there is an occurrence of bicycle crashes; 4. along a corridor where bicycle travel generators and destinations can be expected prior to the design year of the project; 5. any location where engineering judgment, planning analysis, or the public involvement process indicates a need. 19

20 DESIGN GDOT s Policy Brief section on minimum standards. Adopts the PROWAG requirements as minimum standards for the design of pedestrian accommodations. Refers to planning and design resources. 20

21 GDOT s Policy CHALLENGES AND NEXT STEPS Implementing CS through resurfacing working with GDOT s District offices Integrating performance measures into the Bike/Ped program new FHWA guidance available Digitizing local and regional bike ped plans working with Georgia s RC s 21

22 GDOT s Policy ACCOMPLISHMENTS More frequent coordination policy and guidance to engineers emphasizes need to coordinate with planners and local government officials. Consistent Application consideration in concept reports has greatly increased City/County adoption of Complete Streets about 14 to date, others considering Education/Training many classes/workshops have been sponsored by local governments, advocacy groups, planning organizations, and GDOT. 22

23 Case Study Ponce de Leon Ave./ US 29/ US 278/ SR 8 35 mph urban principal arterial, RTOP Corridor ADT: 30,000+ vpd Home to large mixed-use developments, apartments, churches, fast food, fancy restaurants, iconic landmarks Crosses under the Atlanta BeltLine trail Recently inspired a locally brewed beer 23

24 Case Study Why Ponce? Major east-west state route, connecting Midtown to Decatur and Stone Mountain Section of Ponce in Atlanta was scheduled for repaving City saw opportunity GDOT completed a Road Safety Audit Historic substandard width lanes were challenging to modern drivers. Safety concerns and low left lane utilization rate 24

25 Case Study Phase 1: The repaving project 25

26 Case Study Phase 1: The repaving project Ponce before the road diet Ponce after the road diet (from Juniper to Kroger Shopping Center) Ponce after the road diet (from Kroger Shopping Center to Moreland Ave..) 26

27 Case Study Before and after

28 Case Study Findings: ADT 28

29 Case Study Findings: Travel times AM Scenario Travel Time (min) Speed (mph) average Spring Difference min mph PM Scenario average Spring Difference min -2.4 mph 30

30 Case Study Findings: collision data 25% decrease in overall crashes between 2013 and

31 Case Study Next steps (Phases 2, 3 ) Livable Center Initiative project Will provide sidewalks improvements, bus shelters Will slightly extend current bike lane to intersection Potential to include flex posts in the buffered bike lane GDOT pedestrian crossings project Includes 3 crossing islands and PHB s Atlanta BeltLine plaza project Transportation, Community, and System Preservation Grant Will connect Ponce City Market and Ponce de Leon Ave to Beltline GDOT Quick response project 33

32 Case Study Lessons Learned Road diets can increase both vehicular ADT and bike/ped access Pedestrian accommodations must also be considered when improving a corridor With high ADT s, more substantial bike lane protection needed Observed a decrease in overall collisions (to date) 34

33 Questions Katelyn DiGioia State Bicycle and Pedestrian Engineer Office of Traffic Operations Follow up: Katelyn to request the Georgia Complete Streets Newsletter issued every other month 35