Newtown Borough Integrated Transportation and Circulation Study

Transcription

1 Newtown Borough Integrated Transportation and Circulation Study JANUARY, 2012 Submitted by: Jacobs Engineering Group Inc Ward Avenue, Suite 100 West Chester, Pennsylvania

2 HEADER Table of Contents Executive Summary...1 Introduction...2 Background...2 Purpose and Goals...2 Existing Conditions...2 Previous Studies / Reports...2 Data Collection...2 Regional Traffic Patterns...3 Crash Data...4 Roadway Classification...5 Smart Transportation...8 Existing Concerns...10 Findings...10 Recommendations...23 High Priority Recommendations...23 High Community Support Locations...25 Education and Enforcement...26 Bike / Trail Network...27 Toolbox of Standard Practices for Newtown Borough...28 Funding...44 List of Figures Figure 1: Newtown Borough Location Map...3 Figure 2: Percentage of Crashes by Roadway...5 Figure 3: Access vs Mobility Curve...6 Figure 4: Pedestrian and Bicycle Concerns...11 Figure 5: Traffic Safety and Congestion Concerns...12 List of Tables Table 1: Newtown Borough Crash Statistics...4 Table 2: Newtown Borough Roadway Functional Classifications...7 Table 3: Roadway Categories from the Smart Transportation Guidebook...8 Table 4: Newtown Borough Roadway Smart Transportation Categories...9 Table 5: Summary of Standard Practices...42 January 2012 Page i

3 HEADER EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Newtown Borough Traffic Committee commissioned this study to enhance pedestrian, bicycle and vehicle safety and mobility by identifying potential improvements and recommendations. This report begins by looking at the existing conditions, including regional traffic patterns, crash data and roadway classifications. Input from stakeholders and local residents at Stakeholder Meeting #1 was the basis for the existing concerns with regards to pedestrians, bicycles, traffic safety and congestion. At Stakeholder Meeting #2, the existing concerns were presented and ideas for improvements were discussed. Recommendations were developed based on these inputs as well as industry standards. Five (5) high priority locations were chosen that could be implemented quickly for a relatively low cost, but will make a significant impact on safety or congestion: Washington Avenue Corridor Washington Avenue & Lincoln Avenue Intersection State Street & Centre Avenue Intersection South State Street Corridor Lincoln Avenue Corridor Additionally, a toolbox of standard practices was developed to provide general strategies that can be used throughout the borough for a consistent approach to pedestrian and bicycle accommodations as well as traffic calming. Finally, potential funding sources are identified for pedestrian and roadway safety improvement projects. January 2012 Page 1

4 HEADER INTRODUCTION BACKGROUND Newtown Borough is a small, historic community located in lower Bucks County, Pennsylvania. Founded in 1683 by William Penn, it is less than one square mile and now has approximately 2,300 residents. The borough was originally built with the pedestrian in mind, long before vehicles were invented and provides great connectivity through its grid street system. The mix of retail along State Street and houses throughout the borough make it a very walkable community. However, with the increasing number of vehicles due to the growth of surrounding municipalities, there is a need for safety improvements for motorists and especially for pedestrians and bicyclists. PURPOSE AND GOALS The purpose of this study is to identify specific areas for pedestrian, bicycle, and vehicle safety improvements, as well as mobility improvements and provide the Borough with recommendations for addressing those areas. The goals of this study are in line with the goals of the Newtown Borough Comprehensive Plan to: Enhance connectivity, pedestrian movement, and ease of vehicular and bicycle mobility, by means consistent with preservation of the Borough s neighborhoods; Encourage improvement of the safety and accessibility of pedestrian and bicycle circulation systems; and Increase the compatibility of all modes of transportation, specifically with pedestrians and bicyclists. EXISTING CONDITIONS PREVIOUS STUDIES / REPORTS There are numerous goals and recommendations in relation to this study already summarized in various studies, reports, letters and presentations. The following documents have been reviewed and taken into consideration: Our Mission Presentation, Newtown Borough (April 15, 2011) Letter to Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Newtown Borough (February 14, 2011) Newtown Borough s Comprehensive Plan, Draft (April 2010) Taming Traffic, Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission (DVRPC) (2005) Newtown Borough Pedestrian Circulation Report, Bucks County Planning Commission Bucks County Regional Traffic Study, DVRPC (October 2007) DATA COLLECTION In addition to reviewing the previous studies and reports, Jacobs has performed field views and solicited input from the following stakeholders: Newtown Borough January 2012 Page 2

5 HEADER o Planning Commission o Police Department o Streets and Lights Committee o Traffic Committee o Borough Engineer o Residents/Business Owners Pennsylvania Department of Transportation Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission Bucks County Planning Commission Bucks County Transportation Management Association Southeastern Pennsylvania Transit Authority Newtown Township Additionally, a cognitive mapping exercise at Stakeholder Meeting #1 (May 25, 2011) provided input from local residents about the pedestrian and vehicular circulation in the borough. REGIONAL TRAFFIC PATTERNS Newtown Borough is a small, historic community located in Bucks County, Pennsylvania. Although it is less than one square mile and has a population of approximately 2,300, it is completely surrounded by Newtown Township, which exhibits continued growth. This growth has led to more vehicles traveling to, from, and through Newtown Borough. The Newtown Bypass (PA Route 332 / 413) was built in 1977 for vehicles, and especially trucks, to bypass the borough on their route to and from I-95 and PA 413. (See Figure 1) Some of the other main traffic generators in the surrounding area include Tyler State Park, Core Creek Park, St. Mary Medical Center, various schools including Council Rock High School North and Goodnoe Elementary, and multiple office and industrial parks, especially east of the borough on Newtown Yardley Road. The borough itself has many parks and a lively shopping and retail area on State Street that generate traffic. SEPTA Bus Route 130 with service to Franklin Mills Mall also has stops within the borough. According to the 2000 US Census, 20% of Newtown Borough residents also work in the municipality. 29% of Newtown Borough residents travel less than ten (10) minutes to work (including the 5% who work at home). This data shows that some of these residents have the potential to walk or bike to work. January 2012 Page 3 Figure 1: Newtown Borough Location Map

6 HEADER CRASH DATA Crash data was provided by PennDOT for all of the state routes in the borough (Washington Avenue, State Street and Centre Avenue) for a five (5) year period from There were 28 reportable crashes on Washington Avenue in the five (5) year period. A majority of the crashes were either angle crashes (39%) or rear end crashes (36%). 54% of the crashes occurred at midblocks between intersections. 32% of the crashes occurred at the intersection of Washington Avenue and Lincoln Avenue, including the only fatal crash in the borough and the only hit pedestrian crash on the corridor in the five (5) year period. There was one (1) pedalcycle crash between Congress Street and Chancellor Street. There were 19 reportable crashes on State Street. 37% of the crashes occurred midblock, 32% occurred at Centre Avenue and 31% occurred at other intersections along State Street. There were no fatal crashes in the five (5) year period, but five (5) of the crashes (26%) involved pedestrians three (3) at Centre Avenue, one (1) at Chancellor Street and one (1) between Greene Street and Jefferson Street. Another 26% were angle crashes, 16% were rear end crashes and 16% were same direction sideswipes. There were ten (10) reportable crashes on the small segment of Centre Avenue that is a state route from the western borough line to State Street. 40% of these crashes involved pedestrians, 30% were angle crashes and 20% were rear end crashes. Three (3) of the hit pedestrians occurred at State Street and the fourth occurred at the parking lot driveway. (Note: Crashes that occurred at intersections were included in the totals for both intersecting roadways. Therefore, since there were three (3) pedestrian crashes on State Street at Centre Avenue, and there were three (3) pedestrian crashes on Centre Avenue at State Street, there were only three (3) crashes at that location, not six (6).) Crash rates are determined based on the formula below and are reported in the form of crashes per million vehicle miles travelled (MVMT). Crash rates for each state route are provided in Table 1 below, along with the statewide averages for roads with the same characteristics. Washington Avenue and State Street have crash rates that are slightly above the average. The crash rate on Centre Avenue is more than ten times the state average, however this data may be skewed due to the extremely short segment length. Roadway Crash Rate = (Total # Crashes) * (1,000,000) (# yrs) * (Length) * (ADT) * (365) Length (mi) Table 1: Newtown Borough Crash Statistics ADT (vpd*) Total # of Crashes # Hit Peds # Fatal Crashes Crash Rate (crashes /MVMT) State Avg (crashes /MVMT) Washington Avenue , State Street , Centre Avenue , * vpd = vehicles per day January 2012 Page 4

7 HEADER This data was compared with the crash data provided in the DVRPC report Taming Traffic to identify any trends. The crash data in the DVRPC report was for the years 2000, 2001 and There were 17 crashes on Washington Avenue in the three (3) year period, including two (2) crashes at Lincoln Avenue and six (6) crashes at State Street. There was one (1) hit pedestrian during this period. On State Street, there were also 17 crashes in the three (3) years, including two (2) crashes at Centre Avenue and five (5) crashes at Washington Avenue. There were no hit pedestrians on State Street during this period. A comparison of the crash data reveals a significant increase in pedestrian crashes, as well as crashes at the intersection of Washington Avenue and Lincoln Avenue and the intersection of State Street and Centre Avenue. At the same time, the intersection of State Street and Washington Avenue seems to have gotten safer. Limited crash data was also provided by the Newtown Borough Police Department. The two (2) year period from April 2009 to March 2011 was reviewed and found to have a total of 129 crashes (both reportable and non-reportable crashes). Although crash types, crash severity, or driver actions were not provided, crash locations were detailed. Figure 2 summarizes the crash locations by percentage of total crashes over the two (2) year period. 33% of the total crashes occurred on State Street. 30% occurred on Washington Avenue. Lincoln Ave 7% Centre Ave 14% Other 16% State St 33% Washington Ave 30% Figure 2: Percentage of Crashes by Roadway ROADWAY CLASSIFICATION It is important to recognize the intent of the roadway within the community and the region. Some roads are designed to provide a high degree of mobility for longer trips with higher operating speeds and limited access. Others are intended for local access to accommodate shorter trips and feed the arterials with lower design speeds. An Access vs Mobility Curve is provided in Figure 3 to explain the different roadway classifications and their functions. Table 2 lists the different roadway classifications in Newtown Borough. It is also important to note if the roadway is a state route or a borough street. State routes must meet PennDOT design standards and all improvements must be reviewed and approved by the DOT through the highway occupancy permit (HOP) process. They may also be eligible for state funding. January 2012 Page 5

8 HEADER Figure 3: Access vs Mobility Curve January 2012 Page 6

9 HEADER Table 2: Newtown Borough Roadway Functional Classifications Classification Intent Roadways Minor Arterials (State Route) Major Collectors (State Route) Minor Collectors (Borough Street) Local Roads (Borough Street) Provides more mobility than access; interconnects with and augments principal arterials; accommodates trips of moderate length; provides intra-community continuity but does not penetrate neighborhoods; used by both through traffic and local traffic. Provides a balance between mobility and access; accommodates shorter trips and feeds the arterials; provides some degree of mobility and serves abutting properties; connects to the arterial highways. Provides more access than mobility; provides land access and traffic circulation within residential, commercial and industrial areas; collects traffic from local streets and channels it into the arterial system. Provides direct access to abutting lands; connects to higher order roads; offers lowest level of mobility; discourages through-traffic movement. Washington Avenue State Street (from southern Borough line to Washington Avenue) State Street (from Washington Avenue to Jefferson Street) Jefferson Street (from State Street to the eastern Borough line) Centre Avenue (from State Street to the eastern Borough line) Lincoln Avenue Jefferson Street (from State Street to Lincoln Avenue) Frost Lane (from Hillside Road to Andrew Drive) Andrew Drive Barclay Street Centre Avenue (from State Street to Elm Avenue) Chancellor Street Congress Street Court Street Edgeboro Drive Elm Avenue Federal Lane Frost Lane (from Edgeboro Drive to the northern Borough line) Greene Street Jefferson Court Lafayette Street Liberty Street Linton Hill Road Maple Avenue Mercer Street Norwood Avenue Penn Street Sterling Street Summit Street January 2012 Page 7

10 HEADER SMART TRANSPORTATION In March 2008, PennDOT and New Jersey Department of Transportation released the Smart Transportation Guidebook to help plan and design highways and streets that support sustainable and livable communities. This guidebook realizes the importance of roadway functional classification in the context of the community. It allows the user to break the roadway up into segments to define the roadway typology more in line with the actual access, mobility and speed characteristics within a community. Table 3 defines the roadway categories in the Smart Transportation Guidebook and Table 4 lists the characteristics of the roadways in Newtown Borough. This guidebook was also used in developing various recommendations for this report. Table 3: Roadway Categories from the Smart Transportation Guidebook January 2012 Page 8

11 Table 4: Newtown Borough Roadway Smart Transportation Categories 1 State Street Roadway Limits Volume Speed Southern borough line to Washington Avenue Int. Spacing Functional Classification 6, mph 300 ft Minor Arterial 2 Washington Avenue Entire length 12, mph 370 ft Minor Arterial Land Use Context Town/Village Center Town/Village Neighborhood SMART Transportation Category Community Arterial Community Arterial 3 State Street 4 Centre Avenue 5 Jefferson Street Washington Avenue to Jefferson Street Western borough line to State Street Western borough line to State Street 3, mph 415 ft Major Collector 6, mph 360 ft Major Collector * 25 mph 230 ft Major Collector Town/Village Neighborhood Town/Village Neighborhood Town/Village Neighborhood Community Collector Community Collector Community Collector 6 Jefferson Street State Street to Lincoln Avenue * 25 mph 295 ft Minor Collector 7 Lincoln Avenue Entire length * 25 mph 480 ft Minor Collector 8 Frost Lane * No data available Hillside Road to Andrew Drive * 25 mph 200 ft Minor Collector Town/Village Neighborhood Town/Village Neighborhood Town/Village Neighborhood Neighborhood Collector Neighborhood Collector Neighborhood Collector January 2012 Page 9

12 EXISTING CONCERNS FINDINGS Newtown Borough is a generally walkable town, however there are a number of locations that would benefit from safety improvements. Pedestrian facilities are lacking near schools and parks. Overall disregard for pedestrians, poor pedestrian visibility, and lack of sidewalks, mid-block crossings, and lighting were noted as areas for desired improvement. Biking is another viable means of transportation in the borough that is underutilized because of the unsafe conditions. High vehicular speeds, dangerous intersections and narrow bridges were all identified by residents. A link from the residential areas to the shops and businesses on State Street is also missing. Traffic safety and traffic congestion are major concerns in the borough as well. Residents expressed concerns about cut through traffic and high speeds. Although through traffic on local roads should be limited, through traffic on arterial roadways is appropriate since it is intended for mobility. However, mobility should not come at the cost of safety, therefore all roads should be made safe for all users, including pedestrians and bicyclists. Locations of perceived cut through traffic and speeding, as well as locations for desired intersection improvements are noted in the figures and tables below. Specific roadways in the borough are described in detail on the following pages. The tables provide the classification, speed limit, volume, intersection spacing, description, existing concerns and proposed recommendations of each roadway. The existing concerns were provided by the stakeholders at the Stakeholder Meeting #1 on May 25, These concerns were also summarized in the maps provided in Figures 4 and 5. At Stakeholder Meeting #2, the existing concerns were presented and potential solutions were discussed. It was widely accepted that creating an atmosphere conducive to pedestrians and bicyclists by narrowing roads and using gateway treatments, instead of simply installing more signs and crosswalks was favored by the residents. However, locations for signs and crosswalks, as well as speed humps and pedestrian lighting were also discussed and are shown below. Stakeholder Meeting #3 was used to present the draft report and seek final concerns. January 2012 Page 10

13 ± Eagle Rd Washington Crossing Rd Edgeboro Dr Linton Hill Rd Durham Rd!i Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Concerns about bicycle connectivity to Tyler Park Richboro Rd Sycamore St!n!m Ó Barclay St Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Sycamore St!k Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Newtown Creek Ö Ö Ö Ö Ö Ö Ö Ö Ö Ö Ö Ö Ö Ö Ö Ö Ö Ö Ö Ö Ö Ö Ö Ö Ö Ö Ö Ö Ö Ö Ö Ö State St Ö Ö Ö Ö Ö Ö Ö Old Skunky ^_ Ö Ö P F Liberty St Ö Ö Ö Ö Ö Ö Ö Ö Ö Ö Ö Ö Ö Ö Ö Ö Ö Ö Ö Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó!j Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó!i Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Mercer St Jefferson St Federal Ln L!l Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Court St Sterling St Frost Ln Congress St Chancellor St Lincoln Ave Ó Ó Washington Ave Centre Ave Taylor Ave Summit Ln Greene St Norwood Ave Penn St Lafayette St Sterling St Andrew Dr Elm Ave Grant St!j ,000 1,500 Feet Ó Ó Ó Ó Concerns about bicycle connectivity to Core Creek Park Ó Ó Ó Ó Figure 4: Pedestrian and Bicycle Concerns Newtown Borough Integrated Transportation and Circulation Study ^_ Newtown Borough Newtown Township Parks Newtown Trail Newtown Borough Council Chamber P Newtown Borough Police Department F Newtown Fire Association L Newtown Library!i Pickering Field!j Brian S. Gregg Memorial Park!k Newtown Commons!l Linton Memorial Park!m Carl Sedia Park!n Chandler Fields!i A Childs World Development!j Goodnoe Elementary School Lack of sidewalks Poor pedestrian visibility/disregard for pedestrians Desire for pedestrian lighting Potential pedestrian connections Desire for mid-block crossings Ó Ó Ó Unsafe conditions for pedestrians and bicycles Ö Ö Ö Lack of bike racks

14 Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó É C ± Durham Rd Richboro Rd Sycamore St Barclay St Sycamore St Newtown Creek èé Washington Crossing Rd É É É É É É É É É É É Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É Ó É É É É É É É É É É É É Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó É É É É É É É É É É É É Ó Ó Ó Ó É É É É É Ó Ó É É Ó É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É Ó Ó Ó É É É É Ó Ó Ó Ó É É É Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó State St èé Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É ÉÉ É Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Old Skunky èé G Mercer St Court St G Jefferson St Liberty St Sterling St Ó Ó Ó Ó Frost Ln Federal Ln Congress St Chancellor St Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Edgeboro Dr Lincoln Ave G èé Ó É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó G Ó Ó Washington Ave Centre Ave Taylor Ave Linton Hill Rd Summit Ln Greene St G Norwood Ave Penn St Lafayette St Sterling St Andrew Dr Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó É É É É Elm Ave Grant St É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É É Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó ,000 1,500 Feet Newtown Borough Integrated Transportation and Circulation Study Figure 5: Traffic Safety and Congestion Concerns Newtown Township Newtown Borough Arterials Major Collectors Minor Collectors Local Roads Ó Ó Ó Ó É É É É ass Perceived Cut Through Traffic Perceived Speeding èé Perceived Intesection Signal Issues G Perceived Intersection Operation Issues

15 Roadway Washington Avenue Classification Urban, Minor Arterial / Town Neighborhood, Community Arterial Speed Limit 25 mph Volume 12,710 vpd 1 Intersection Spacing 370 ft Description Washington Avenue is the major east-west corridor in the borough. There is on street parking on one side and sidewalks on both sides. There are two signalized intersections. Concerns Poor pedestrian visibility / disregard for pedestrians Desire for pedestrian lighting (Congress Street and Chancellor Street) Perceived cut through traffic Perceived speeding Perceived signal issues (at Lincoln Avenue desire for left turn signal) Recommendations Add crosswalks where they are missing Add pedestrian crossing signs where they are missing Add signage for Newtown Trail (missing link in Newtown Borough to existing Newtown Township Trail) Perform traffic signal analysis at Washington Avenue and Lincoln Avenue (to optimize timings and see if a protected left turn phase is warranted) Add gateway treatment at eastern end (to create an awareness of a change in environment and increased pedestrian activity) Install pedestrian lighting where missing Add edge line striping Install rectangular rapid flash beacons at Congress Street Utilize speed display sign and enforcement Washington Avenue, looking west, east of Lincoln Avenue Washington Avenue, looking east, east of State Street 1 vpd = vehicles per day January 2012 Page 13

16 Roadway Classification Speed Limit Volume Intersection Spacing Description Concerns Recommendations South State Street (Southern Borough line to Washington Avenue) Urban, Minor Arterial / Town Center, Community Arterial 25 mph 6,650 vpd 300 ft State Street is a typical main street with retail shops, on street parking and high pedestrian activity. Poor pedestrian visibility / disregard for pedestrians (from Penn Street to southern borough line) Desire for mid-block crossing (Centre Avenue to Washington Avenue) Desire for bike racks Desire for on street parking Perceived speeding (at Stockburger curve accelerating into town) Perceived signal issues (Newtown Bypass in Newtown Township; Penn Street desire for left turn phase; Centre Avenue; and Washington Avenue) Perform traffic signal analysis Centre Avenue (potentially install exclusive pedestrian phase) Install textured and/or colored intersection at Centre Avenue Add pedestrian crosswalks (from Penn Street to Lincoln Avenue) Add pedestrian crossing signs (from Penn Street to Lincoln Avenue) Add bike racks along State Street and in municipal parking lots Add on street parking where feasible Install gateway treatment at southern end (to create an awareness of a change in environment and increased pedestrian activity) Do not add mid-block crossings (due to closely spaced intersections and safety issues) Utilize speed display sign Install rectangular rapid flash beacons Add edge line striping State Street, looking north, near Lincoln Avenue State Street, looking south, between Washington Avenue and Centre Avenue January 2012 Page 14

17 Roadway Classification Speed Volume Intersection Spacing Description Concerns Recommendations State Street (Washington Avenue to Jefferson Street) Urban, Major Collector / Town Neighborhood, Community Collector 25 mph 3,420 vpd 415 ft State Street transitions from commercial to residential from Washington Avenue to Jefferson Street. There are still sidewalks and on street parking, however the buildings are set back further from the street. Desire for mid-block crossing (between Greene Street and Jefferson Street) Desire for bike racks Desire for pedestrian lighting (between Washington Avenue and Jefferson Street) Desire for pedestrian lighting (between Washington Avenue and Jefferson Street) Perceived speeding (between Greene Street and Jefferson Street) Add bike racks along State Street and in municipal parking lots Install pedestrian lighting (between Washington Avenue and Jefferson Street) Do not install mid-block crossings (due to closely spaced intersections and safety issues) Install bulb outs / curb extensions at Greene Street and Jefferson Street Utilize speed display sign State Street, looking north, north of Washington Avenue January 2012 Page 15

18 Roadway Classification Speed Volume Intersection Spacing Description Concerns Recommendations Centre Avenue (State Street to western Borough line) Urban, Major Collector / Town Neighborhood, Community Collector 25 mph 6,430 vpd 360 ft This portion of Centre Avenue crosses the Newtown Creek with one lane in each direction and a sidewalk on one side and ends at the traffic signal at State Street. Unsafe conditions for pedestrians and bicyclists (across bridge) Perceived cut through traffic Perceived signal issues (at State Street) Perform traffic signal analysis at State Street (potentially install exclusive pedestrian phase) Install textured and/or colored intersection at State Street Centre Avenue across the Newtown Creek, looking east January 2012 Page 16

19 Roadway Classification Speed Intersection Spacing Description Concerns Recommendations Jefferson Street (State Street to western Borough line) Urban, Major Collector / Town Neighborhood, Community Collector 25 mph 230 ft This portion of Jefferson Street crosses the Newtown Creek with one lane in each direction and a sidewalk on one side. Unsafe conditions for pedestrians and bicyclists (across bridge) Perceived cut through traffic Perceived signal issues (at Sycamore Street in Newtown Township congested) Install pedestrian lighting Jefferson Street at the Newtown Creek, looking east January 2012 Page 17

20 Roadway Classification Speed Intersection Spacing Description Concerns Recommendations Lincoln Avenue Urban, Minor Collector / Town Neighborhood, Neighborhood Collector 25 mph 480 ft Lincoln Avenue is a straight, flat road with wide shoulders and discontinued sidewalks for a majority of the northern section. The southern section of Lincoln Avenue narrows down and has sidewalks on either one or no sides of the road. Lack of sidewalks (between State Street and Sterling Street) Poor pedestrian visibility / disregard for pedestrians (at Centre Avenue) Desire for pedestrian lighting (between Greene Street and Jefferson Street) Unsafe conditions for pedestrians and bicyclists Perceived cut through traffic Perceived speeding Add bike lanes on both sides of the road Add crosswalk at Jefferson Street Add pedestrian crossing signs at Jefferson Street Add sidewalks on one side of the street, where feasible (between State Street and Sterling Street) Install pedestrian lighting (between Greene Street and Jefferson Street) Utilize speed display sign and enforcement Conduct intersection analysis at Centre Avenue Add on street parking where feasible Lincoln Avenue at Pickering Field near Jefferson Street, looking south January 2012 Page 18

21 Roadway Classification Speed Intersection Spacing Description Concerns Recommendations Jefferson Street (State Street to Lincoln Avenue) Minor Collector 25 mph 295 ft Jefferson Street is a small road with no pavement markings and sidewalks on one side of the road. Perceived cut through traffic Install center and edge line pavement markings Install sidewalks Jefferson Street at Pickering Field near Lincoln Avenue, looking west Frost Lane at Andrew Drive near Goodnoe Elementary, looking west Roadway Classification Speed Intersection Spacing Description Concerns Recommendations Frost Lane (Hillside Road to Andrew Drive) Minor Collector 25 mph 200 ft Frost Lane is a narrow road that links residential neighborhoods with Goodnoe Elementary School, but has no sidewalks. Lack of sidewalks (near Goodnoe Elementary) Desire for intersection improvements (at Linton Hill Road) Install sidewalks Install crosswalks Install pedestrian crossing signs Perform intersection analysis at Linton Hill Road and Edgeboro Drive January 2012 Page 19

22 Roadway Classification Description Concerns Recommendations Edgeboro Drive Local Road Edgeboro Drive is a residential road with no pavement markings, but some sharp horizontal curves. Lack of sidewalks Perceived cut through traffic Perceived intersection issues (at Frost Lane) Install sidewalks Install centerline and edge line pavement markings (Jefferson Street to Frost Lane) Install curve warning signs and striping Install roadway lighting at the curve Perform intersection analysis at Frost Lane Enforcement Temporary speed humps Edgeboro Drive north of Jefferson Street, looking north Edgeboro Drive in the residential neighborhood, looking east Roadway Classification Volume Description Concerns Recommendations Centre Avenue (State Street to Elm Avenue) Local Road 620 vpd The eastern portion Centre Avenue is one way westbound for a couple blocks between Lincoln Avenue and State Street. Perceived cut through traffic Perceived intersection issues (at Lincoln Avenue and at Court Street) Unsafe conditions for pedestrians and bicyclists Install curb extensions / bulb outs Perform intersection analysis at Lincoln Avenue and at Court Street January 2012 Page 20

23 Roadway Classification Concerns Recommendations Linton Hill Road Local Road Lack of sidewalks Perceived speeding Install sidewalks Roadway Classification Concerns Recommendations Congress Street Local Road Perceived cut through traffic (southbound to Centre Avenue westbound) No recommendations identified at this time Roadway Classification Volume Concerns Recommendations Penn Street Local Road 680 vpd Lack of sidewalks (between Norwood Avenue and Elm Avenue) Perceived cut through traffic (from Industrial Park to Lincoln Avenue) Perceived speeding (from Elm Avenue to Chancellor Street) Unsafe conditions for pedestrians and bicyclists Install sidewalks Study converting to one way street Install curb extensions Utilize speed display sign and enforcement Install crosswalks Install temporary speed humps Roadway Classification Concerns Recommendations Elm Avenue Local Road Lack of sidewalks (south of Washington Avenue) Perceived speeding Install sidewalks Utilize speed display sign Roadway Classification Concerns Recommendations Court Street Local Road Perceived cut through traffic Install curb extensions / bulb outs Perform intersection analysis at Centre Avenue Roadway Classification Concerns Recommendations Mercer Street Local Road Lack of sidewalks Install sidewalks January 2012 Page 21

24 Roadway Classification Concerns Recommendations Chancellor Street Local Road Perceived cut through traffic (from Sterling Street to State Street) No recommendations identified at this time Roadway Classification Concerns Recommendations Norwood Avenue Local Road Perceived intersection issue (at Lafayette Street) Perform intersection analysis January 2012 Page 22

25 RECOMMENDATIONS Now that the existing concerns and recommended solutions have been documented, it is helpful to prioritize these recommendations to expedite implementation and allocation of resources. With limited funds available, it is desirable to get the most bang for your buck. Therefore, the high priority recommendations are ones that can be implemented quickly for a relatively low cost, but will make a significant impact on safety or congestion. These locations were chosen based on their high crash rates and high number of vehicles. Addressing the safety concerns at these locations will have the biggest impact on the most users. Below are descriptions of the high priority locations and explanations. HIGH PRIORITY RECOMMENDATIONS Washington Avenue White Edge Lines (0.57 mi): $3,000 Pedestrian Crossing Signs (2 ea): $600 Painted Crosswalks (4 ea): $2,400 Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons: $10,000 Total: $16,000 Washington Avenue has the highest number of vehicles and the highest number of crashes in the borough and is consistently noted as having poor pedestrian visibility, disregard for pedestrians, perceived cut through traffic and perceived speeding traffic. Although there are existing pedestrian crossing signs and crosswalks at most of the intersections, they are usually ignored by motorists. There is on street parking in the eastbound direction for a majority of the stretch, however when cars are parked there it is sometimes difficult to see pedestrians, and when cars are not parked there it creates a wide open road that leads to speeding. It is easy to see why Washington Avenue is the highest priority location in the borough for recommended improvements. The roadway is not wide enough to install full bike lanes and keep the on street parking, however it is recommended that white edge lines be installed. Another short term, low cost improvement is to install pedestrian crossing signs and crosswalks at intersections where they are missing. Rectangular rapid flashing beacons should be installed at Congress Street to draw more attention to pedestrians when activated. Washington Avenue & Lincoln Avenue Intersection Revised Signal Timings: $10,000 Textured Asphalt Crosswalk: $10,000 Total: $20,000 The intersection of Washington Avenue and Lincoln Avenue is the most dangerous intersection in the borough with nine (9) crashes in five (5) years, including one fatal crash and one pedestrian crash. At least five of these crashes were due to running red lights. It has also been noted that this intersection has perceived signal issues, including the need for a left turn phase. This intersection is also a very high priority location and it is recommended to revise the signal timings to possibly increase the yellow time. Increasing the yellow time will increase safety by allowing more time for the cars to stop before the conflicting light turns green. It is also recommended to install colored and/or textured crosswalks at this location to draw attention to the intersection and to the possibility January 2012 Page 23

26 of pedestrians. Hopefully these improvements will help to reduce the crashes at this location. State Street & Centre Avenue Intersection Revised Signal Timings: $10,000 Textured Asphalt Intersection: $20,000 Total: $30,000 The intersection of State Street and Centre Avenue is also a dangerous intersection, especially for pedestrians. There were six (6) crashes there in five (5) years and half of them involved pedestrians. This intersection was also noted as having perceived signal issues and is obviously a very high priority location in need of increased pedestrian safety. It is recommended to analyze the signal timings with the installation of an exclusive pedestrian phase. When the push button is activated by a pedestrian, the exclusive pedestrian phase gives an extended red light to all four directions of traffic and allows pedestrians to cross in any direction, including diagonal. This may decrease the efficiency and level of service for vehicles, but it will greatly increase pedestrian safety and may also deter some of the perceived cut through traffic on Centre Avenue. New signing and striping is also recommended to inform pedestrians and motorists of this new phase including a colored and/or textured intersection. (West Palm Beach, Source: FHWA) South State Street Pedestrian Crossing Signs (4 ea): $1,200 Painted Crosswalks (2 ea): $1,200 On Street Parking: $8,000 Total: $10,400 There is poor pedestrian visibility, disregard for pedestrians and bicyclists and perceived speeding along South State Street from Penn Street to Lincoln Avenue. There were five (5) crashes in that area in five (5) years, one involving a pedestrian. It is recommended to install pedestrian crossing signs and crosswalks. There is a potential for on street parking on one side of the street in some January 2012 Page 24

27 sections of South State Street. Adding on street parking would provide more parking for local businesses on State Street and it could act as traffic calming to slow traffic, but only when cars are parked there. There are several factors that go into determining if on street parking is feasible, including street width and the presence of driveways, crosswalks and intersections. South State Street between Penn Street and Sterling Street is, for the most part, too narrow to support on street parking, even on just one side. There is the potential to add a couple of spaces right at Penn Street and right at Sterling Street where the roadway width is a little wider. Between Sterling Street and Chancellor Street, the street is wide enough to accommodate on street parking on one side, however the large number of driveways prevents there from being a consistent parking lane and would only provide a limited number of spaces. A minimum distance from the on street parking to each driveway, crosswalk and intersection must be maintained to provide sufficient sight distance to the pedestrians and motorists. Lincoln Avenue Bike lanes: $25,000 Total: $25,000 The entire length of Lincoln Avenue is noted as having unsafe conditions for pedestrians and bicyclists, perceived cut through traffic and perceived speeding. The majority of Lincoln Avenue has 11 foot lanes with 7.5 foot shoulders. North of Washington Avenue, including in the vicinity of Pickering Ball Field, Lincoln Avenue is very straight and wide with little stops. Adding bike lanes will narrow the lanes and slow traffic and also give bicyclists a dedicated spot on the road. If the Borough feels more parking is needed on Lincoln Avenue, another alternative is to allow parking on both sides of the street and install sharrows on the road. HIGH COMMUNITY SUPPORT LOCATIONS There are also a number of local roads with lower traffic volumes, but important safety concerns. Although these roads do not have as many vehicles or as many crashes as the state roads, these roads are not intended to have many vehicles or high speeds. These roads are intended to be residential and safely support local vehicles, pedestrians, bicyclists, children and pets. Penn Street is currently a one way street in the eastbound direction from State Street to Lincoln Avenue and a two way street from Lincoln Avenue to Elm Avenue. From Norwood Avenue to Elm Street, Penn Street is a long, straight, open road. It is a very residential street that is noted as having perceived speeding and perceived cut through traffic. Recent development of the law school and industrial park has increased the number of vehicles and speed of vehicles, especially during the AM, PM and lunchtime peak hours. Sidewalks are recommended to separate pedestrians from vehicles and narrow the roadway. Stop bars and crosswalks are recommended at Norwood Avenue and Elm Avenue, and especially where there are school bus stops. Temporary speed humps are also recommended to reduce speeds. Converting Penn Street to a one way street for the entire length of the borough was discussed at the Stakeholder Meeting and supported by residents to increase pedestrian safety by reducing speeding and cut through traffic. One-way street conversions are best implemented in pairs, and it is possible that Penn Street and Centre Avenue could operate as such a pair. While this idea may January 2012 Page 25

28 be feasible, it may also lead to even more speeding and cut-through traffic. One-way street conversions do have benefits such as reduction in pedestrian crashes, but often lead to higher speeds because drivers now have a wide-open road without the friction of on-coming traffic. Still, this could be studied further and coordinated with the township and perhaps in conjunction with bike lanes and curb extensions could achieve the borough s goals. Edgeboro Drive is a local road with a more suburban feel than the majority of the borough. There is perceived cut through traffic and a sharp, narrow curve at the southern end. Sidewalks are recommended from Frost Lane to Linton Hill Road. The roadway geometry at the curve on Edgeboro Drive is substandard, however bringing it up to the current standard would require a complete roadway reconstruction and significant land acquisition and is not practical. Roadway lighting is recommended at the curve to increase both pedestrian and vehicle safety at night. Centerline and edge line striping on Edgeboro Drive, from Jefferson Street to Frost Lane will help to reduce vehicle speeds, especially if they are striped for 10 foot lanes. On the narrow, curved section, drivers will need to go slow to stay in their lane, where as now they have practically the whole width of the road to navigate the curves if there are no other oncoming cars. This location may also be a good candidate for temporary speed humps to decrease speeds and increase pedestrian safety. EDUCATION AND ENFORCEMENT Education and enforcement are also very important to successfully increasing pedestrian and vehicle safety in the borough. Engineering and traffic calming alone will not eliminate crashes, speeding or cut through traffic. This study and the community support and involvement are a great start to educating local residents about traffic safety and pedestrian and bicyclist concerns. Pedestrian Safety Week at the end of May and International Walk to School Day in October are also great initiatives to promote in schools and local media. Borough police have indicated that daily traffic enforcement is currently being done in the borough, however limited personnel, limited funds and limited areas to pull people over restrict the amount of enforcement that can be done. Locations such as Edgeboro Drive, Penn Street, Washington Avenue, Lincoln Avenue and South State Street could really benefit from increased enforcement of the posted speed limit and yield to pedestrian laws. In addition to increased enforcement, increased fines would help to discourage motorists from speeding and other violations. The current fines for traffic violations are set by the state and sometimes do little to discourage people from breaking them. Raising the fines would increase compliance with the laws and increase funding for more enforcement. It is also important to know and understand the laws in the Pennsylvania Vehicle Code, Chapter 35 ( pertaining to both motorists and pedestrians: When traffic-control signals are not in place or not in operation, the driver of a vehicle shall yield the right-of-way to a pedestrian crossing the roadway within any marked crosswalk or within any unmarked crosswalk at an intersection No pedestrian shall suddenly leave a curb or other place of safety and walk or run into the path of a vehicle which is so close as to constitute a hazard. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) publishes the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) ( that governs all signs and January 2012 Page 26

29 pavement markings on all state and federal roads. Section 2B has very specific requirements and warrants for installing stop signs at intersections. A stop sign should not be used for speed control and should not be installed on the higher volume roadway unless justified by an engineering study. Justification would include a minimum number of reported crashes, minimum volume thresholds, left turn conflicts, pedestrian conflicts or sight distance requirements. If a stop sign is installed without meeting these requirements, it will not be effective, not be adhered to and not be enforceable. BIKE / TRAIL NETWORK Providing a dedicated bike / trail network is a long term goal for the borough. It is important to provide dedicated pedestrian and bicyclist connections throughout the borough and to locations outside the borough, such as the Newtown Township Trail. Furthermore, exclusive pedestrian and bicyclist bridge crossings are desired over the Newtown Creek in the long term. Locations such as the Frost Lane trolley bridge and Barclay Street were identified as potential crossings. However, many residents feel that safety concerns such as speeding and an overall disregard for pedestrians and bicyclists must be addressed before determining the exact locations of the trail network. January 2012 Page 27

30 TOOLBOX OF STANDARD PRACTICES FOR NEWTOWN BOROUGH In addition to the prioritized list of recommendations, it is important to have a toolbox of standard practices to draw from to provide general strategies that can be used throughout the borough for a consistent approach to pedestrian and bicycle accommodations as well as traffic calming. 1 - Pedestrian Crossing Signs Description Warning sign to alert motorists to the potential presence of pedestrians crossing the street. Typical Uses At marked crosswalks to draw attention to pedestrians and increase safety. Cost Estimates $200 - $400 each, depending on the size of sign and type of installation. Recommended Locations Washington Avenue South State Street Lincoln Avenue at Jefferson Street 2 - Share the Road Signs Description Warning sign to alert motorists of the potential presence of bicycles on the road. Typical Uses On roads where there is high bicycle activity or sharrows installed. Cost Estimates $200 - $400 each, depending on the size of sign and type of installation. Recommended Locations Lincoln Avenue January 2012 Page 28

31 3 - Curve Warning Signs Description Warning sign to alert motorist of a sharp horizontal curve ahead. Typical Uses Horizontal curves that may require motorists to slow down. Cost Estimates $200 - $400 each, depending on the size of sign and type of installation. Recommended Locations Edgeboro Drive 4 - Newtown Trail Signs Description Sign depicting the location of the trail. Typical Uses Notifies pedestrians and bicyclists of the trail. Cost Estimates $200 - $400 each, depending on the size of sign and type of installation. Recommended Locations Washington Avenue January 2012 Page 29

32 5 Speed Display Signs Description Variable sign with radar that measures and displays vehicle speeds. Usually mounted on a trailer with the posted speed limit above it. Typical Uses To draw attention to the speed limit and the driver s speed to reduce vehicle speeds. Cost Estimates $3,000 - $3,500 or PennDOT can install on state routes for about three weeks (upon request). Recommended Locations Washington Avenue Lincoln Avenue South State Street State Street between Greene Street & Jefferson Street Penn Street Elm Avenue 6 Rectangular Rapid Flash Beacon Description Supplements a standard pedestrian crossing sign with rapidly flashing lights that are activated when a pedestrian pushes the push button. Typical Uses At unsignalized intersections and pedestrian crosswalks to increase driver awareness of potential pedestrian conflicts. Cost Estimates $10,000 - $15,000 for purchase and installation on two units (one on either side of the street). Recommended Locations Washington Avenue at Congress Street S State Street January 2012 Page 30

33 7 - Centerline Striping Description Double yellow line down the center of the road. Typical Uses Used to separate two directions of travel. Used on all roadway types with two directions of travel. Shown to reduce vehicle speeds by reducing the width of the travel lane to the driver. Cost Estimates $5,000 -$10,000 per mile Recommended Locations Edgeboro Drive (Jefferson Street to Frost Lane) Considerations Centerline striping was considered on Edgeboro Drive, Chancellor Street and Penn Street in conjunction with edge line striping to reduce the width of the travel lane and therefore reduce vehicle speeds. However, the Newtown Borough Traffic Committee would rather not have striping on these local roads. They would like to avoid increasing speeds that could potentially arise with centerline striping due to motorists perceiving these local roads as highways or feeling protected by the double yellow centerline from oncoming traffic. 8 - Edge Line Striping Description White lines at the edge of the travel lanes separating the lane from either the shoulder or a parking lane. Typical Uses Used to delineate the travel lane from the shoulder or parking lane. It effectively reduces the roadway width of the travel lane to the driver. A combination of centerline and edge line striping that provides foot travel lanes and 7-8 foot parking lanes is the most effective method of reducing the overall travel way width of the roadway. Proven method to reduce vehicle speeds. Cost Estimates $5,000 - $10,000 per mile Recommended Locations Washington Avenue South State Street Edgeboro Drive (Jefferson Street to Frost Lane) January 2012 Page 31

34 9 - On Street Parking Description White pavement marking lines on the edge of the roadway to delineate a driving lane from a parking lane. Typical Uses Provides spaces for visitors to park and also effectively narrows the width of the roadway. Parking spaces are typically 7-8 feet wide and approximately 24 feet long. A 20 foot space between the end of the parking space and the crosswalk must also be provided. On street parking is shown to reduce vehicle speeds by increasing friction along the street, special attention must be given to pedestrian crossings. Cost Estimates $5,000 - $20,000 per mile, depending on if the existing striping needs to be removed. Recommended Locations South State Street potentially Lincoln Avenue potentially 10 - Bike Lanes Description Markings on the roadway, accompanied by signing, to designate an area for preferential or exclusive use by bicyclists. They are one-way travel only and lie on both sides of the roadway. Bike lanes are typically 6 feet wide. Typical Uses To encourage people to ride bicycles for short trips by providing dedicated lanes to increase safety. Also effective in narrowing travel lanes to decrease vehicle speeds. Cost Estimates $10,000 - $15,000 Recommended Locations Lincoln Avenue January 2012 Page 32

35 11 - Sharrows Description Pavement marking depicting a bicycle and two chevrons to alert drivers to the potential presence of bicycles on the road. Typical Uses Used where there is bicycle activity, but not enough roadway width to install full bike lanes on both sides of the road. Cost Estimates $350 each Recommended Locations No locations identified at this time 12 - Curve Warning Pavement Markings Description Pavement marking depicting an arrow and the word SLOW. Typical Uses To alert drivers to slow down because there is a sharp curve approaching. Cost Estimates $700 each Recommended Locations Edgeboro Drive January 2012 Page 33

36 13 - Painted Crosswalk Description Typical pavement markings provided to guide pedestrians across the street and alert motorists to the presence of pedestrians. Typical Uses For all major and minor intersections that have pedestrian traffic and sidewalks. Cost Estimates $600 each Recommended Locations Washington Avenue South State Street Lincoln Avenue at Jefferson Street Penn Street Frost Lane 14 - Textured Crosswalk Description Can be stamped concrete, textured asphalt, brick pavers or other materials to demarcate crosswalks and alert motorists that they are entering a pedestrian friendly area. Typical Uses At pedestrian crossings where increased visibility and awareness is desired. Cost Estimates $2,500 each Recommended Locations Washington Avenue at Lincoln Avenue January 2012 Page 34

37 15 - Textured Intersection Description Can be stamped concrete, textured asphalt, brick pavers or other materials that are a different texture and color than the rest of the roadway. Typical Uses Draw attention to the intersection and the presence of pedestrians. Cost Estimates $20,000 each Recommended Locations State Street & Centre Avenue 16 - Sidewalks Description Pathway separated from vehicular traffic by a curb. Typical Uses To physically separate pedestrians from motor vehicles. Appropriate for local and neighborhood streets, collectors and arterials. Cost Estimates $100 per linear foot Recommended Locations Frost Lane Lincoln Avenue Penn Street Elm Avenue Edgeboro Drive Linton Hill Road Mercer Street New Development Projects January 2012 Page 35

38 17 - Curb Ramps Description Cut outs in the curb that provide ramps from the sidewalk elevation to the street elevation. Typical Uses Accommodates wheelchairs, strollers, carts, luggage, the elderly and pedestrians with mobility limitations. Curb ramp designs should follow PennDOT Publication 72M RC 67. Cost Estimates $1,500 each Recommended Locations Roadway Reconstruction Projects New Development Projects Sidewalk installations 18 - Speed Hump Description A raised surface on the roadway, typically 3 to 4 inches high and 12 to 20 feet long. Typical Uses Installed at midblock locations to slow traffic. Consideration must be given to emergency vehicle response time, buses, noise pollution, drainage problems and maintenance and snow removal issues. Also has the potential to divert traffic to other roads that may not be designed for higher traffic. Only appropriate on local roads. Cost Estimates $1,500 - $3,000 each January 2012 Page 36

39 19 - Speed Table Description Long, broad speed humps. Typical Uses Used to reduce vehicle speeds. Generally more accepted by emergency vehicles than speed humps, but still must consider emergency vehicle response time, buses, noise pollution, drainage problems and maintenance and snow removal issues. Only appropriate on local roads. Cost Estimates $2,500 - $4,500 each 20 - Temporary Speed Hump Description Rubber speed hump that can easily be installed and removed by borough forces. Can be moved to various locations depending on need. Typical Uses Used to slow vehicle speeds. Cost Estimates $3,000 - $4,000 each January 2012 Page 37

40 21 - Curb Extensions / Bulb-Outs Description Bulb outs extend the line of the curb into the traveled way to reduce the width of the street. Typically used at intersections with a 6 foot extension. Typical Uses Improves visibility of and by pedestrians, reduces the length of pedestrian crossings and slows traffic by funneling it through a narrower street opening. Cost Estimates $7,000 - $15,000 each Recommended Locations State Street at Greene Street and Jefferson Street Penn Street Centre Avenue Court Street 22 - Bike Rack Description Secure metal racks to lock bikes. Typical Uses Gives bicyclists a place to lock their bikes and draws more attention and awareness to the fact that this is a bicycle friendly community. Typically installed at traffic generators such as parks, schools, and retail districts. Cost Estimates $800 each Recommended Locations State Street Pickering Ball Field Brian S. Gregg Memorial Park Carl Sedia Park Chandler Fields January 2012 Page 38

41 23 - Signal Analysis / Timing Changes Description Engineering study of vehicle and pedestrian volumes and turning movements to optimize and implement new signal timings and phases., including pedestrian timings, phases and accommodations. Typical Uses Revised timings and phases used to increase safety and efficiency. Cost Estimates $3,000 - $5,000 per signal for new timings $8,000 - $10,000 per signal for added left turn phase Recommended Locations Washington Avenue & Lincoln Avenue State Street & Centre Avenue Sycamore Street & Centre Avenue (Newtown Township) State Street & Newtown Bypass (Newtown Township) 24 - Intersection Analysis Description Engineering study to analyze traffic volumes, turning movements and operation at stop controlled and uncontrolled intersections. An intersection must meet warrants and volume thresholds to install stop signs. Includes installation of signs. Typical Uses Used to determine if stop signs are warranted and/or if additional warning signs or pavement markings are needed to increase safety and operation of the intersection. Cost Estimates $2,500 $3,000 per location Recommended Locations Centre Avenue & Lincoln Avenue (two-way stop perceived as four-way stop, poor visibility) Edgeboro Drive & Frost Lane (three-way stop warranted?) Frost Lane & Linton Hill Road (poor intersection configuration) Centre Avenue & Court Street (blown stops) Norwood Avenue & Lafayette Street (four-way stop warranted?) January 2012 Page 39

42 25 - Gateway Treatment Description Gateway treatments provide an identity to a neighborhood and increase driver awareness of the environment in which they are driving by using a combination of physical and textural changes. May include textured pavement, medians, landscaping and signing. Typical Uses To make the driver more aware of a change in environment and increased pedestrian activity. Cost Estimates $5,000 - $25,000 each Recommended Locations Washington Avenue at Elm Avenue South State Street at Lincoln Avenue 26 - Pedestrian Lighting Description Lighting specifically designed with the pedestrian in mind. Typical Uses Provides safety and comfort to pedestrians. Cost Estimates $2,000 - $3,000 per streetlight Recommended Locations Washington Avenue (Lincoln Avenue to Maple Avenue) State Street (Washington Street to Jefferson Street) Washington Avenue (State Street to Sycamore Street) Washington Avenue & Congress Street Bridges over Newtown Creek January 2012 Page 40

43 27 - One Way Street Conversion Description Converting an existing two way street to one way traffic only. Includes an engineering study of traffic flows and traffic volumes, new signing and striping plans and installation of One Way and Do Not Enter signs and new roadway striping. Network connectivity, traffic diversion, business access and community support must be taken into account. Converting a street from a two-way street to a one-way usually increases speeds because it increases the lane widths, so other measures need to be considered to decrease lane width. Typical Uses Used to manage traffic patterns and reduce pedestrian conflicts. Cost Estimates $10,000 - $15,000 Considerations Converting Penn Street and Centre Street to a full one way pair in the borough was discussed at the Stakeholder Meetings and supported by various residents. Currently, Penn Street is one way eastbound and Centre Street is one way westbound from State Street to Lincoln Avenue. From Lincoln Avenue to Elm Avenue, both roads are two ways. Further detailed study of driver origin and destinations and turning movements as well as vehicle speeds is recommended before implementation. While converting to a one way street may reduce vehicle and pedestrian conflicts, it may also increase speeds and divert traffic to other local roads. Note that it is not recommended to install any midblock crosswalks in Newtown Borough. As was seen in Table 4, intersection spacing in the borough ranges on average from 200 to 500 feet. Therefore, an intersection crossing is usually not more than 100 to 250 away. Also, research has shown that midblock crossings do not make it any safer for pedestrian to cross the street because they are unexpected from a driver s perspective, and they create a false sense of security from a pedestrian s perspective. January 2012 Page 41

44 Table 5: Summary of Standard Practices Standard Practice Pg # Recommended Locations Cost Washington Avenue Pedestrian Crossing 1 28 S State Street $200 - $400 each signs Lincoln Avenue Lincoln Avenue 2 Share the Road signs 28 $200 - $400 each 3 Curve Warning signs 29 Edgeboro Drive $200 - $400 each 4 Newtown Trail signs 29 Washington Avenue $200 - $400 each Washington Avenue Lincoln Avenue 5 Speed Display signs 30 S State Street $3,000 - $3,500 State Street each Penn Street Elm Avenue 6 Washington Avenue at Rectangular Rapid $10,000 - $15, Congress Street Flash Beacon for two S State Street 7 Centerline Striping 31 Edgeboro Drive $5,000 - $10,000 per mile 8 Edge Line Striping 31 Washington Avenue $5,000 - $10,000 per S State Street mile Edgeboro Drive 9 On Street Parking 32 S State Street? $5,000 - $20,000 per Lincoln Avenue? mile 10 Bike Lanes 32 Lincoln Avenue $10,000 - $15,000 per mile 11 Sharrows 33 To be determined $350 each 12 Curve Warning Pavement Markings 33 Edgeboro Drive $700 each Washington Avenue S State Street 13 Painted Crosswalks 34 Lincoln Avenue $600 each Penn Street Frost Lane 14 Textured Crosswalks 34 Washington Avenue $2,500 each 15 Textured Intersection 35 State Street & Centre Avenue $20,000 each 16 Sidewalks 35 Frost Lane Lincoln Avenue Penn Street Elm Avenue Edgeboro Drive Linton Hill Road Mercer Street New Project Developments $100 per linear foot January 2012 Page 42

45 Standard Practice Pg # Recommended Locations Cost Roadway Reconstruction 17 Curb Ramps 36 Projects New Development Projects $1,500 each Sidewalk Installations 18 Speed Humps 36 To be determined $1,500 - $3,000 each 19 Speed Table 37 To be determined $2,500 - $4,500 each 20 Temporary Speed Hump 37 To be determined $3,000 - $4,000 each State Street 21 Curb Extensions / Bulb Penn Street $7,000 - $15, Outs Centre Avenue each Court Street State Street Pickering Field 22 Bike Racks 38 Brian S. Gregg Memorial Park $800 each Carl Sedia Park Chandler Fields Washington Avenue & Lincoln Avenue 23 State Street & Centre Avenue Signal Analysis / Timing $3,000 - $10, Sycamore Street & Centre Changes each Avenue State Street & Newtown Bypass Centre Avenue & Lincoln 24 Intersection Analysis 39 Avenue Edgeboro Drive & Frost Lane $2,500 - $3,000 Centre Avenue & Court Street each Norwood Avenue & Lafayette Street 25 Gateway Treatment 40 Washington Avenue $5,000 - $25,000 S State Street each 26 Pedestrian Lighting 40 Washington Avenue $2,000 - $3,000 per State Street light Bridges over Newtown Creek 27 One Way Street Conversion 41 To be determined $10,000 - $15,000 January 2012 Page 43

46 FUNDING There are various sources that provide funding for pedestrian and roadway safety improvement projects, however many of the FY 2012 sources are now depleted. PennDOT offers Low Cost Safety Improvement (LCSI) funding, but they are currently not accepting any new projects in Bucks County until FY The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) provides information on their website about a number of different funding alternatives at including: Surface Transportation Program (STP) Transportation Enhancement Activities (TEA) Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) Safe Routes to School Program (SRTS) Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program (CMAQ) State and Community Highway Safety Grant Program The Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission (DVRPC) also provides helpful information about transportation funding on their website at including: Regional Trails Program Transportation & Community Development Initiative Home Town Streets and Safe Routes to Schools Transportation Enhancements Efficient Growth for Growing Suburbs Municipal Resource Guide The Transportation Management Association of Bucks County (TMA Bucks) is also a valuable resource in the community. They can provide assistance to the borough in various ways such as conducting traffic counts, which is an important first step in any traffic study or design. January 2012 Page 44

47