CONCEPT DESIGN COMMUNITY MEETING 3 JANUARY 28, 2010
AGENDA INTRODUCTION COMMUNITY INPUT ROADWAY STUDIES STREETSCAPE DESIGN STATIONS DISCUSSION SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION NEXT STEPS CLOSE
INTRODUCTION SCHEDULE
COMMUNITY INPUT COMMUNITY SURVEY 18 online 198 responses 117 written SUMMARY OF SURVEY KEY ISSUES PEDESTRIAN SAFETY Crossing, lighting VEHICULAR TRAFFIC Excessive speed, cut-through traffic BICYCLE FACILITIES IMAGE / IDENTITY Sense of place, historic character AS LOCAL AND REGIONAL DESTINATION STREETSCAPE Trees, medians, furnishings
COMMUNITY MEETING 2
COMMUNITY MEETING 2 SUMMARY IMPROVED PEDESTRIAN CROSSINGS 100% KEY INTERSECTIONS: University, Emory, Naglee, Magnolia/Pershing, Hanchett/W Julian, Martin/Race and Morrison PERCENTAGES BASED ON 10 GROUPS 50% yes GATEWAY Historic Way I-880/McKendrie 100% 100% Town Center Undercrossing/Stockton PUBLIC GATHERING SPACE Historic Way Town Center Race Intersection 70% 80% 60% BIKE LANES Historic Way Town Center 70% 80%
COMMUNITY MEETING 2 SUMMARY BIKE PARKING Historic Way 50% Town Center 60% PERCENTAGES BASED ON 10 GROUPS PLANTED MEDIAN Historic Way 50% Town Center 30% PARKING STRUCTURE Historic Way Town Center PARKING IMPROVEMENTS Historic Way 0% 70% Town Center 20% 50% LIGHTING- No consensus
ROADWAY STUDIES A B C1 C2 PHASE ONE PHASE TWO
FIXED DESIGN CRITERIA VEHICULAR ACCESS CRITERIA ELIMINATE LEFT TURNS INTO DRIVEWAYS U-TURNS FOR TRUCKS PROHIBITED TRAFFIC CONTROL LEFT TURN POCKETS REQUIRED NO NEW SIGNALS FOUR TRAVEL LANES TWO TRAVEL LANES POSSIBLE FUTURE OPTION TRANSIT INCORPORATE BRT STATIONS
FIXED DESIGN CRITERIA TREES PRESERVE EXISTING TREES PARKING CRITERIA MINIMIZE ON-STREET PARKING LOSS ESPECIALLY IN TOWN CENTER BALANCE LOSS AMONG BLOCKS BIKE LANE CRITERIA 5 MINIMUM STANDARD
ADDITIONAL PREFERRED DESIGN CRITERIA VEHICULAR ACCESS CRITERIA LEFT AND U-TURN MAXIMUM SPACING 1-3 BLOCKS PEDESTRIAN ACCESS CRITERIA CORNER BULBS-OUTS INCREASE NUMBER OF CROSSINGS TREES MAINTAIN OUTSIDE EXISTING CURB ALIGNMENT
ADDITIONAL PREFERRED DESIGN CRITERIA PEDESTRIAN ACCESS and SAFETY CRITERIA MAXIMIZE PEDESTRIAN MEDIAN REFUGE MIN. 6 WIDE LADDER CROSSINGS WHERE POSSIBLE PEDESTRIAN ACTIVATED CROSSING SIGNALS WHERE POSSIBLE PROTECTED INTERSECTIONS THROUGHOUT CORRIDOR MAXIMIZE CORNER BULBOUTS (22% CROSSING DISTANCE REDUCTION) BIKE LANE CRITERIA 8 WIDTH ENHANCE WITH COLOR POSSIBLE FUTURE OPTION
EXISTING STREET SECTION VERSUS DESIRED STREET ELEMENTS CURB TO CURB WIDTH TOO NARROW ALL DESIRED ELEMENTS WOULD REMOVE TREES
A PEDESTRIAN REFUGE / MEDIAN, MAXIMUM POSSIBLE INTERSECTION LEFT TURNS
B BIKE LANES WITH PEDESTRIAN REFUGES AND OCCASIONAL LEFT TURNS AT INTERSECTIONS, LIMITED MEDIAN
C1 MAXIMUM PEDESTRIAN REFUGE / MEDIAN WITH RESTRICTED INTERSECTION LEFT TURNS
C2 PHASE TWO TWO TRAVEL LANES WITH BIKE LANES, MAXIMUM PEDESTRIAN REFUGE AND MEDIAN WITH RESTRICTED INTERSECTION LEFT TURNS
C2 PHASE TWO PROCESS ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS REPORT AND ANALYSIS WILL STUDY: TRAFFIC IMPACTS AT INTERSECTIONS REDISTRIBUTION OF EXISTING TRAFFIC POSSIBLE NEIGHBORHOOD CUT-THROUGH ACCESS IMPROVEMENTS AT OTHER ROADWAYS TO ACCOMMODATE ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC POSSIBLE PHASING FUNDING FOR EIR CITY WILL ASSIST NEIGHBORHOODS TO IDENTIFY FUNDING
PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENT LOCATIONS C1&C2
NEIGHBORHOOD ACCESS CONCEPT C1&C2
CHARACTERISTICS MATRIX CHARACTERISTICS A B C1 C2 PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENTS (more crossings and more bulb outs) BICYCLE LANES IMAGE / IDENTITY SIDEWALK ENHANCEMENTS (Bulb outs) PARKING QUANTITY LEGEND GOOD FAIR POOR *CHARACTERISTICS EVALUATED FOR TOWN CENTER ENLARGEMENT AREA ONLY
PARKING ANALYSIS TOWN CENTER CONCEPT C1 and C2 ITEM EXISTING TOTALS ON-STREET SPACES * 431 OFF-STREET SPACES * 471 TOTAL PARKING * 902 PARKING LOSS DUE TO BRT 13 PARKING LOSS DUE TO PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENTS 8 TOTAL PARKING LOSS 21 TOTAL PARKING 881 % REDUCTION FROM TOTAL PARKING SUPPLY 2.3% % REDUCTION DUE TO PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENTS >1% OCCUPANCY RATE MID WEEK * 67% *Fehr & Peers Parking Study September 2008
PARKING ANALYSIS HISTORIC WAY CONCEPT C1 and C2 ITEM EXISTING TOTALS ON-STREET PARKING ON ONLY 174 PARKING LOSS DUE TO BRT 5 PARKING LOSS DUE TO PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENTS 15 TOTAL PARKING LOSS 20 TOTAL PARKING 154 % REDUCTION FROM EXISTING PARKING SUPPLY 11.4% % REDUCTION DUE TO PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENTS 8.6%
STREETSCAPE DESIGN
STREETSCAPE CONCEPT ALAMEDA GATEWAY HISTORIC WAY NEIGHBORHOOD GATEWAY (TYP) TOWN CENTER RACE INTERSECTION ALAMEDA GATEWAY
LIGHTING CONCEPT ALAMEDA GATEWAY HISTORIC WAY NEIGHBORHOOD GATEWAY (TYP) TOWN CENTER RACE INTERSECTION ALAMEDA GATEWAY
STREETSCAPE LIGHTING
STREETSCAPE ACCENT LIGHTING
STREETSCAPE TREES AND MEDIAN HISTORIC WAY EXISTING MEDIAN WITH SHRUB PLANTING
STREETSCAPE TREES AND MEDIAN HISTORIC WAY MEDIAN WITH FLOWERING TREES AND SHRUB PLANTING MEDIAN WITH SYCAMORES AND SHRUB PLANTING
STREETSCAPE TREES AND MEDIAN - TOWN CENTER EXISTING MEDIAN WITH SHRUB PLANTING
STREETSCAPE TREES AND MEDIAN - TOWN CENTER MEDIAN WITH FLOWERING TREES AND SHRUB PLANTING MEDIAN WITH SYCAMORES AND SHRUB PLANTING
STREETSCAPE GROUNDPLANE PLANTING AND STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
STREETSCAPE DESIGN MEDIAN ELEMENTS, IMAGE AND IDENTITY
STREETSCAPE DESIGN GATEWAYS
STREETSCAPE DESIGN INTERPRETIVE SIGNAGE
ILLUSTRATIVE ENLARGEMENT PLANS HISTORIC WAY STREETSCAPE ENHANCEMENTS
ILLUSTRATIVE ENLARGEMENT PLANS TOWN CENTER STREETSCAPE ENHANCEMENTS PLANTED MEDIAN
STREETSCAPE DESIGN PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENTS
RACE STREET INTERSECTION PLANS ROUNDABOUT STUDY
RACE STREET INTERSECTION PLANS MARTIN AVENUE PARTIAL CLOSURE ICONIC ARCHITECTURE, FOCAL POINTS DEFINE SENSE OF PLACE RIGHT-OF-WAY (TYP) PUBLIC GATHERING SPACE OPPORTUNITY PARKING LOT & NEIGHBORHOOD ACCESS
RACE STREET INTERSECTION PLANS MARTIN AVENUE FULL CLOSURE ICONIC ARCHITECTURE, FOCAL POINTS DEFINE SENSE OF PLACE RIGHT-OF-WAY (TYP) PUBLIC GATHERING SPACE OPPORTUNITY EMERGENCY VEHICLE ACCESS
STREETSCAPE DESIGN PUBLIC GATHERING SPACES
STREETSCAPE DESIGN PUBLIC GATHERING SPACES
STATIONS 1 2 3 VEHICULAR CIRCULATION STREETSCAPE DESIGN URBAN DESIGN
SUMMARY & DISCUSSION
NEXT STEPS FINALIZE PLAN NEXT COMMUNITY MEETING END OF MARCH / BEGINNING OF APRIL APEX STRATEGIES