Arlington Public Schools Thomas Jefferson Site Evaluation Preliminary Findings. Thomas Jefferson Working Group Meeting #2 October 1, 2014

Similar documents
Arlington Public Schools Abingdon Elementary School Site Evaluation Preliminary Transportation Findings

Arlington Public Schools Thomas Jefferson Site Evaluation Transportation Networks. Thomas Jefferson Working Group Meeting #6 November 10, 2014

Arlington Public Schools New Elementary School at Thomas Jefferson Site Off-Site Transportation. Thomas Jefferson BLPC / PFRC Meeting July 27, 2016

2016 APS Go! Surveys Summary Results for Oakridge Elementary School

2016 APS Go! Surveys Summary Results for Arlington Traditional School

2016 APS Go! Surveys Summary Results for Trades Center

Parent Survey Report: One School in One Data Collection Period

Arlington s Master Transportation Plan

APS Stratford Project Transportation Analysis Overview. Stratford BLPC #5 June 1, 2015

Abingdon Elementary School School Transportation Report

Parent Survey Report: One School in One Data Collection Period

Chapter 2. Bellingham Bicycle Master Plan Chapter 2: Policies and Actions

C/CAG. Sunnybrae Elementary School Walking and Bicycling Audit. San Mateo-Foster City School District JUNE 2013

PenPlace SPRC #6. September 27, DRAFT

Eliminate on-street parking where it will allow for a dedicated bus only lane %

NM-POLICY 1: Improve service levels, participation, and options for non-motorized transportation modes throughout the County.

Columbia Pike Implementation Team (CPIT) Meeting

Business owner or commercial property owner in Arlington, 8. Visitor in Arlington, 17

Bicycle Facilities Planning

CPC Parking Lot Riverside Drive. Transportation Rationale

El Paso County 2040 Major Transportation Corridors Plan

Development of Arlington County s Marked Crosswalk Guidelines. Jon Lawler, P.E. Design Engineer Arlington County, VA

July 5, Arthur R. Ware, Jr. Elementary School 2017 Safe Routes to School Walkabout Report

Update of the Master Transportation Plan s (MTP) Bicycle Element

MASTER BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN PLAN

Sustainable Transportation Initiatives and Plans in Caledon

TRANSPORTATION TRAINING TOPICS. April 6, 2010

Multimodal Transportation Plan

Virginia Hospital Center Expansion

N. Frederick Street to N. Manchester Street

Telegraph Avenue Complete Streets DRAFT Recommendations. Oakland Public Works Department September 11 and 13, 2014 Open Houses

Performance Criteria for 2035 Long Range Transportation Plan

Transportation, Parking & Roads

Getting Your SRTS Project Funded. Ryan Snyder

FY Transportation Capital Improvement Plan Update Arlington Committee for Transportation Choices

3 Silverton High School Report

Rail Station Fact Sheet CentrePort/DFW Airport Station

Living Streets Policy

Aitkin School Routing Plan July 2010

10/30/2012 VIA

SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL

US 41 COMPLETE STREETS CORRIDOR PLANNING STUDY from University Parkway to Whitfield Avenue

2018 Transportation Survey October 17, Prepared by:

Safe Routes to School Program in California: An Update

Priority 1: Ala Wai Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety and Mobility Project

Designing for Pedestrian Safety in Washington, DC

Parent Survey Report: One School in One Data Collection Period

COMPLETE STREETS PLANNER S PORTFOLIO

92% COMMUTING IN THE METRO. Congested Roadways Mode Share. Roadway Congestion & Mode Share

CITY OF ABBOTSFORD TRANSPORTATION AND TRANSIT MASTER PLAN

See Figure 38, Existing Nonmotorized Connections.

Built Environment Childhood Obesity Forum September 15, 2010

Physical Implications of Complete Streets Policies

Roads and Vehicular Traffic Design Principles. Roads and Vehicular Traffic Recommendations

Introduction. Using the Checklist. TDM-Supportive Development Design and Infrastructure Checklist Version 1.0 (30 June 2017) City of Ottawa

11/28/2016 VIA

Item 7 Enclosure Citizens Advisory Committee March 27, 2013 San Francisco Safe Routes to School Program

West Dimond Blvd Upgrade Jodhpur Street to Sand Lake Road

Bike Routes Assessment: 95 Ave, 106 St & 40 Ave. Replace with appropriate image in View > Master.

Route 29 Solutions Projects

CONNECTING PEOPLE TO PLACES

Data Analysis February to March Identified safety needs from reported collisions and existing travel patterns.

Proposed White Flint Separated Bike Lane Network September 2015

Traffic Impact Memorandum. May 22, 2018

2 Mark Twain Elementary School Report

Lawrence Safe Routes to School. Community Meeting January 14, 2015

Castro Valley Municipal Advisory Council March 19, 2018

City of Novi Non-Motorized Master Plan 2011 Executive Summary

Community Bicycle Planning

Washington State University Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan Working Paper #7: Implementation Strategies

SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL

J Street and Folsom Boulevard Lane Conversion Project (T ) Before and After Traffic Evaluation

Measuring Transportation: Traffic, Mobility and Accessibility

Completing the Street: Denning Drive

WALK- AND bike-friendly TURLOCK

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY. Vision

Pedestrian, Bicycle and Traffic Calming Strategic Implementation Plan. January 18, 2011

2018 AASHTO BIKE GUIDE

Project Goals Project Limits Boston Bikes Data Existing Conditions Proposed Options Discussion

Planning Guidance in the 2012 AASHTO Bike Guide

City of Gainesville Transportation/Roadway Needs PROJECT SUMMARY

Rim Rock Elementary School Walking and Biking Audit

Why Zone In on Speed Reduction?

The Transformation of Portland into a Two-Wheeled Mecca. Mia Birk, Principal, Alta Planning + Design

Bluffdale South (SR140) Bicycle/Shoulder Lanes Project Type Bicycle

3/10/2016 VIA th Street, Suite 203 Sacramento, CA

MULTIMODAL TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS FIRST DRAFT NEW ES AT REED SITE WASHINGTON, DC. May 8, 2018 (DRAFT)

Active Transportation Access to Transit

A Safe Routes to School Survey in Hillsborough County

Multimodal Analysis in the 2010 Highway Capacity Manual

Houma-Thibodaux Metropolitan Planning Organization STP<200K Funding Application APPLICATION

APPENDIX A. Outreach Summary

LTAC: Katie Mencarini, Central & Hampton Roads streets and a fifteen minute debrief to discuss the findings. Participants walked along Mill Road

CITY OF COCOA BEACH 2025 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. Section VIII Mobility Element Goals, Objectives, and Policies

LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY COMPREHENSIVE & STRATEGIC CAMPUS MASTER PLAN. APPENDIX L - Mobilitiy Component Implementation Matrix

Vallecito Elementary School. Travel Plan

MTP BICYCLE ELEMENT UPDATE. November 2017

Transportation 2040 Update: Eudora Public Input As of June 1, 2017

Solana Beach Comprehensive Active Transportation Strategy (CATS)

NJDOT Complete Streets Checklist

Transcription:

Arlington Public Schools Thomas Jefferson Site Evaluation Preliminary Findings Thomas Jefferson Working Group Meeting #2 October 1, 2014 SAN ANTONIO BEXAR COUNTY PEDESTRIAN SAFETY ACTION PLAN

INTRODUCTION

Observations and mode counts during arrival & dismissal on a typical day Intersection counts (cars, trucks, pedestrians, bicyclists) Daily roadway counts (car volume, speed and class) Parking counts Crash data Infrastructure assessment Intersection operational analysis Parent, student, staff surveys Special event observations

Inclement weather day observations Community center user survey Data on use of theatre, cooking kitchen, community center, fields and courts Case studies of similar sites Analysis of existing transit service Infrastructure recommendations Assess impacts of new school and middle school expansion on transportation network Coordinate with design team on site layout Parking supply considerations SRTS Team

How does the transportation system currently operate on and surrounding the TJ campus? What is the Transportation Demand Management (TDM) potential for the TJ campus? How might the transportation system operate if a new elementary school is built?

HOW DOES THE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM CURRENTLY OPERATE ON THE TJ CAMPUS? Transportation System Infrastructure

Bike Share Station

Route Art 41 4A 10B 23A/23B/23T Stops on roads S. Glebe Road Arlington Blvd S. Glebe Road and 2 nd Street S. Glebe Road Hours, Monday to Friday 5:30 a.m. to 12:55 a.m. 5:30 a.m. to 12:50 a.m. 5:35 a.m. to 1:40 a.m. 5:30 a.m. to 1:20 a.m. Headways between 7a.m. and 5 p.m. 15 to 20 minutes 5 to 40 minutes combined 30 minutes 10 to 30 minutes combined

370 spaces available on TJ campus, including 11 ADA spaces 227 spaces available in lots west of middle school, including 5 ADA spaces 58 spaces available in community center lot, including 3 ADA spaces 57 spaces available in tennis court lot, including 3 ADA spaces

HOW DOES THE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM CURRENTLY OPERATE ON THE TJ CAMPUS? Transportation System Use

40 To School 40 From School 35 30 25 Student Tally Parent Survey 35 30 25 Student Tally Parent Survey 20 20 15 15 10 10 5 5 0 0

1% Carpool 1% Other 4% Transit 4% Walk 90% Drive

Observation & Mode Count Locations Traffic Count Locations

Community center user survey (mode of travel, parking location) Data on use of theatre, cooking kitchen, community center, fields and courts

2 nd Street Speed Data Overall Speed Limit: 25 MPH 85 th Percentile Speed: 30 MPH During Arrival and Dismissal School Zone Speed Limit: 20 MPH 85 th Percentile Speed: 27MPH/29MPH (AM/PM)

During arrival, motorists may experience increased delay: Turning right onto Arlington Blvd from S. Old Glebe Road Crossing Arlington Blvd on Irving Street Traveling east on Arlington Blvd Traveling west on 2 nd Street towards Glebe Intersection of 2 nd Street & Old Glebe Road During dismissal, the study intersections operate better due to less commuter traffic and fewer trips associated with the school

370 spaces on TJ campus, including 11 ADA spaces Over 1,000 spaces on streets surrounding TJ campus

50% 45% 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% Occupancy of Lots 47% 42% 44% 14% Parking Occupancy *Shows parking before dismissal (~1:30PM) on a typical day

On site over 100% occupied On street approx. 50% occupied (concentrated near school)

Three years of crash data Crash data doesn t capture near misses or close calls Arlington Blvd and Glebe Road most crashes typical of high volume roads Seven crashes involved pedestrians Two crashes involved bicycles

WHAT IS THE TDM POTENTIAL FOR THE SITE?

Advantages Joint use potential Existing multimodal infrastructure Disadvantages Existing barriers to non Single Occupancy Vehicle travel

Safety of intersections and crossings Amount of traffic along route Child's age Speed of traffic along route Distance Concerns about bullying, violence, or crime Heavy/bulky items to carry Darkness Lack of adequate pedestrian and bicycle facilities on the way Weather or climate Lack of adults to walk or bike with Other transportation options are more convenient Afterschool activities School is on the way to another destination Lack of crossing guards Lack of bicycle Lack of adequate pedestrian and bicycle facilities at school (e.g., Hills Before school activities 0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% 70.0% Very Important Somewhat important

Route 50 ( bike path has no guardrail between it and Route 50 ) Intersection of Columbia Pike and Glebe Road ( a great concern that my child has to cross Col Pike & Glebe Road no crossing guards at these intersections ) George Mason Drive ( difficult to cross even for adults ) Jackson St ( winding hill with cars parked on both sides )

Trip distance Trip duration Convenience Weather or climate Heavy or bulky items to carry Comfort Lack of adequate sidewalks or pathways Difficult road crossings Need car for travel during work Lack of showers or lockers Hills Concern about violence or crime on route 0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% 70.0% 80.0% 90.0% Very important Somewhat important

Weather or climate Heavy or bulky items to carry Convenience Trip distance Lack of comfortable places to bike (bike lanes, paths, or safe streets) Trip duration Difficult road crossings Comfort Don't own a bike or a bikeshare membership Lack of showers or lockers Don't know safe route Lack of covered bicycle parking Lack of secure bicycle parking Need car for travel during work Bikeshare stations too far away Concern about violence or crime on route Don't know how to ride a bike 0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% Very important Somewhat important

Concern about bullying, violence, or crime Prefer other transportation options Afterschool activities Heavy/bulky items to carry Weather or climate Lack of adult supervision School is on the way to another destination Bus schedule is not convenient Child's age Traffic safety on route to bus stop Bus stops are not conveniently located Before school activities Bus does not reliably follow established schedule 0.0% 5.0% 10.0% 15.0% 20.0% 25.0% 30.0% 35.0% 40.0% 45.0% Very Important Somewhat Important

Trip duration Convenience to other destinations (e.g., home, errands) Convenience to APS work location Stops/stations too far away Comfort Trip distance Heavy/bulky items to carry Reliability Weather or climate Frequency Cost Operating hours Need car for travel during work 0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% 70.0% 80.0% Very important Somewhat important

HOW MIGHT THE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM OPERATE IF A NEW ELEMENTARY SCHOOL IS BUILT?

Distribution of uses over time bell times Choice versus neighborhood school Spatial relationship of uses on the site relative to transportation facilities (e.g. vehicle and bike parking, pedestrian pathways, transit stops) school location combined bus and/or pick up/drop off areas parking needs Minimize conflicts between users (i.e. separate modes)

Walk Bike School Bus Personal Vehicle Carpool Transit Other Choice School 5% 1% 66% 27% 1% 0% 0% Neighborhood School 22% 1% 47% 29% 1% 0% 0%

Inclement weather day observations Community center user survey Data on use of theatre, cooking kitchen, community center, fields and courts Case studies of similar sites Analysis of existing transit service Infrastructure recommendations Assess impacts of new school and middle school expansion on transportation network Coordinate with design team on site layout Parking supply considerations SRTS Team