Chestnut Street Bikeway Pilot A Cycle Track From College Ave. to Mulberry St. Prepared by the Department of Public Works - November 2015
Overview In cities across the nation, and internationally, there is a growing trend of commuting by bicycle. A 2011 study by Rutgers University (Pucher 2011) showed that the total number of trips by bike increased more than 300% between 1977 and 2009. According to the U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS), there were almost one million bicycle commuters in 2014. To accommodate this increase in bicycling, cities of all sizes have been integrating bike lanes into street projects, and not just when streets are being reconstructed. From New York City to Honolulu, and cities of all sizes in between, bike infrastructure traditional bikes lanes, shared lane markings, protected bike lanes, bicycle parking facilities are being built and installed to meet the growing demand. Even with this increase in cycling, men are still 3 times more likely to commute by bike than women. Safety is the primary reason for this diference. Although much of the research done on increases in bicycling, as well as the most high profile examples of bike infrastructure, is from large cities, the trend extends into small and mid-sized cities. Research by the League of American Bicyclists shows that the 10 cities with the highest percentage of bike commuters all have population under 250,000, and 2 of the top 3 cities (Davis CA and Boulder CO) have populations similar to Lancaster s. Encouraging alternative transportation modes is a key principle of smart growth development. All reconstruction or restriping projects for arterial and collector roadways should routinely consider the best means of accommodating bicyclists. (PennDOT Smart Transportation Guidebook) What is this pilot all about? The bikeway pilot would be a short-term, smaller-scale experiment in establishing bicycle infrastructure that can help the City learn how a full-scale project might work in practice. The pilot project would extend along Chestnut Street from College Avenue to Mulberry Street. The purpose of the pilot is to assist the City in identifying issues and addressing concerns with establishing a twoway protected bike lane (cycle track). The one-year pilot would be installed in the spring of 2016 and wrap-up in spring of 2017. It would extend 6 blocks of W. Chestnut Street and is intended to test the proposed configuration before the City makes a significant investment in permanent bicycle infrastructure. The most important factor in redesigning W. Chestnut Street is the continued and improved safety of the residents of the Chestnut Hill neighborhood and the people walking, riding bicycles and driving cars. A one-year pilot would help the City make sure this works in Lancaster, from a bicycling, motor vehicle, neighborhood point of view. Figure 1. Philadelphia - Delaware Avenue 1 Figure 2. Seattle, Broadway
What exactly is a cycle track? A cycle track seperates bicyclists from motor vehicle trafic by a physical barrier. That barrier could be a painted bufer area, parked cars, bollards, or any combination of these and other elements, including a raised curb. Cycle tracks have diferent forms but all share common elements they provide space that is intended to be exclusively or primarily used for bicycles, and is separated from motor vehicle travel lanes, parking lanes, and sidewalks. Why is Lancaster testing a cycle track? Bicycling as an alternative to commuting by car has been growing every year for the past three decades, resulting in expanded transportation choices and reduced trafic congestion (and reduced parking needs). Additional research has been done on the quality of life, health improvements, and economic benefits associated with bicycling. Although bicycling is often viewed as a recreational activity, there are many people who either choose to commute by bicycle or have no afordable option other than to bike. On-street bicycle facilities provide bicycle commuters with safe and convenient ways of getting to and from work, often in combination with public transit, where the bicycle allows the connection referred to as the first and last mile. Many health and medical organizations are advocating an active lifestyle as a way to improved health and fitness. In addition to health benefits, air quality benefits of bicycling are also well documented. More than 50% of work commutes, and 75% of shopping trips are less than five miles, and 40% of all trips are under two miles. Substituting those 2 miles of driving each day with walking or bicycling would keep 730 pounds of carbon dioxide from entering the atmosphere every year. All this research into bicycling is great, but saying it is good for the economy and good for people s health doesn t get people on bikes. Making the streets safe for bicycling is how that s done. Research shows that while unprotected bike lanes tend to increase bicycle ridership from 5% - 7%, protected bike lanes (cycle tracks) can increase ridership by 18% to 20%. Figure 3. Pittsburgh, Penn Avenue 2
How would Chestnut Street change? The one-year pilot being proposed would add a two-way protected bikeway adjacent to the south curb of West Chestnut Street between College and Mulberry. One lane of trafic would be removed, but parking would be maintained on both sides of the street. Parking on the southern side would be pulled of of the curb into what is currently a trafic lane. PROPOSED PARKING TRAVEL LANE PARKING BUFFER TWO WAY BIKEWAY WEST EAST 11 3 5 5 EXISTING PARKING TRAVEL LANE TRAVEL LANE PARKING 12 12 CARTWAY Figure 4. A cross-section of the proposed pilot looking east on Chestnut from intersection of Pine St. 40 Parking lane Travel lane Bike lane Bike buffer North 5 5 3 11 5 5 3 11 Figure 5. A plan view of the proposed pilot bikeway. 3
The Pilot would change west Chestnut Street between College Avenue and Charlotte St. or Mulberry St. in a way that creates a safe and convenient environment for all users of the street people (families, children, elderly) walking, regardless of ability; people driving cars, trucks and motorcycles; people riding bicycles; and people riding the bus. It should be noted there are currently many one-way streets in Lancaster with one travel lane, as well as two-way streets with less than 10 foot wide travel lanes and one one-way street proposed to be converted to two-way travel. With the ancillary changes brought about by the cycle track, W. Chestnut St. would become a more residential street and less a thoroughfare into downtown. Parking lane Parking lane Travel lane Travel lane Bike lane Bike lane Buffer lane Buffer lane 42' 38' 30' This 30 width will remain consistent between both treatments. Striping must be measured from north curb to +/-1. From College Ave to Mulberry St the width of Chestnut varies between 39-42. As width changes, this parking lane will vary from 9-12 and later become the bikeway. 12' 11' 8' 11' 8' EXISTING WITH PROPOSED BIKEWAY PILOT NORTH CURB 4 SOLID PARKING STRIPE 4 DOTTED CENTERLINE (FUTURE PARKING STRIPE) 4 SOLID PARKING STRIPE ALSO THE INSIDE OF THE FUTURE BIKE BUFFER. SOUTH CURB NORTH CURB 38' 42' This 30 width will remain consistent between both treatments. Striping must be measured from north curb to +/-1. 11' 8' 4 SOLID PARKING STRIPE 4 SOLID PARKING STRIPE As the width of Chestnut changes between College Ave and Mulberry, the bikeway lanes will vary from 4.5-6 each, or 9-12 total. 12' 8' 3' 8' BIKEWAY BUFFER TWO 4 PARALLEL STRIPES WITH HATCH FILL 4 SOLID BIKE LANE STRIPE SOUTH CURB Figure 6. The road striping for Chestnut Street that accomodates the bikeway pilot. Figure 7. Pittsburgh, Penn Avenue Figure 8. Copenhagen, Nyhavn 4
CHESTNUT ST. Start of Pilot Elm Street curb bump out narrows street width to ~28 ft Potential four-way stop would eliminate need for signalization End of Pilot (future two-way conversion) Cartway = 40 Chestnut Hill Cafe Cartway = 42 Cartway = 39 Cartway = 3 Location of driveways on south side of road Indicates location of bikeway on the south side of street Figure 9. The length of the pilot would extend from College Ave. to Mulberry St. MARIETTA AVE. W. MARION ST. NEVIN ST. N. PINE. ST. N. MARY ST. N. CHARLOTTE ST. N. CONCRD ST. N. MULBERRY ST. COLLEGE AVE ELM ST. LANCASTER AVE.
Frequently Asked Questions Following are some of the questions, and answers, that have come up since the conversation began on incorporating the two-way protected bike lane on Chestnut St. 1. How would on-street parking change? On-street parking on the northside of W. Chestnut Street would remain as it is. Parking on the southside of W. Chestnut St. would be moved of the curb. The distance from the south curb line to where the parking lane begins would vary from 11 to 13 feet due to the varying width of the street. A few parking spaces near intersections could be lost to maintain clear sight distances. As used here, sight distance is how far a driver (and someone walking or riding a bicycle) can see as they are entering a street from a cross street or driveway. Vehicles traveling on W. Chestnut St. may be required to stop and wait for vehicles parallel parking. However, this is the current situation on the narrow intersecting one-way streets; Nevin St., Pine St., Mary St. and Lancaster Ave. 2. How would emergency vehicles reach emergencies if cars on West Chestnut cannot pull over? Emergency vehicles will still be able to reach addresses along West Chestnut Street and the pilot would not delay emergency response. The city s grid network allows many alternatives to West Chestnut Street. 3. How would we deal with trash pickup? Sector 11 Trash pickup on Tuesdays Trash pickup occurs once a week. Trafic would likely slow during that period. Trash pickup could occur before rush hour or between peak travel times late morning, early afternoon. Trash pickup is already coordinated with street cleaning. Trash trucks would have pull-of space due to an empty parking lane. 4. How would the bike lanes be cleaned/kept clear of debris, snow, etc? Street sweeper and snow plow would fit down bikeway, which would vary between 10 and 12 feet wide as wide as or wider than most vehicle travel lanes. The 3ft door bufer area would be a potential location for piling snow, which is similar to what most streets currently have for snow piling. Chestnut St. would remain a Snow Emergency Route. 5. How would bus stops be afected? How would that afect trafic? W Chestnut is along Route 2 Park City B/6th Ward appears to run around 24 times on weekdays, 21 times on Saturdays, 7 times on Sundays It s not unusual for buses to stop in the street in many cities. The stop is usually short under a minute. 6. How would Chestnut function as a snow emergency route? During snow emergencies, parked vehicles must be removed from these routes. W. Chestnut Street would still essentially have 3 lanes (27 ) available to emergency vehicles and snow plows. 7. With parking pulled of the curb, would cars be able to park in front of fire hydrants? How would fire trucks access homes on south side? Barriers to the bike lane would be moveable and/or flexible and would not create an obstacle or barrier in the event of emergency. In the event a fire truck would need access to a home, at roughly 13 feet the bikeway would be wide enough for a fire truck to fit down it. Fire hydrants are located at each intersection no midblock hydrants alternating between the northside and southside of the street. Parking is currently prohibited at these locations for the sake of intersection visibility. 8. What would the bufer consist of and who would maintain the bufered areas? A 3-foot wide bufer consisting of two white 4 parallel lines and some sort of vertical treatment would be installed between the bicycle lanes and the on-street parking. The vertical treatment could be flexible bollards or other more permanent treatment such as planter boxes, concrete (jersey) barriers, concrete curb (wheel) stops or a combination of these and other similar products. The flexible bollards are the least restrictive and least expensive. The paint and any city-installed bufer treatments would be maintained by City 5
9. How would safety for all people on bicycles and people walking be maintained? Signage and pavement markings would be installed and maintained in accordance with PennDOT, FHWA, AASHTO and NACTO, as would be applicable. 10. Why this way and not a single bike lane with a westbound lane on Walnut Street? The varying width of W. Chestnut St. precludes installing an in-street, unprotected bike lane the full length of the street. The curb-to-curb width of Chestnut Street narrows to 38 feet between Concord and Prince Streets. At this width, there is not enough space to put a safe bike lane and two parking lanes and two travel lanes without reducing the latter two lanes to the absolute minimum for local streets 2X9 travel lanes + 2x 7.5 parking lanes and 1x5 bike lane. Regardless of number of bike lanes, a single, one-way bike lane or a two-way cycle track, in order to provide a protected bike lane something must be eliminated. Eliminating a travel lane would provide the greatest benefit to the greatest number of people. 11. How would we maintain safety? The safety of all users people walking, driving and bicycling - of the street is the most important factor in designing W. Chestnut Street to safely accommodate bicycling. A combination of nationally approved signage and pavement markings would be utilized. The cycle track would be clearly marked with painted lines, symbols and vertical barriers. An example of possible signage and pavement markings are shown in the attached Signage and Pavement Marking Plan for East King Street Bike Lane, City of York, prepared by the Transportation Resource Group, Inc. 12. Why is the City not converting Chestnut Street to two-way trafic? Conversion of two-way streets are very expensive and it may be many years before such a conversion would occur on Chestnut Street. 13. How would the success of the cycle track be measured? Success of the cyle track would be measured by safety pre- and post pilot: rate of accidents or injuries for pedestrians, cyclists, and motor vehicles; trafic volume; speeding; impact on parking availability; and neighborhood input. Resources AASHTO Guide for the Planning, Design, and Operation of Bicycle Facilities, 4th Edition, 2012 Association of Pedestrian and Bicycle Professionals http://www.apbp.org/ Institute of ttransportation Engineers (ITE) and Congress for the New Urbanism (CNU) Designing Walkable Urban Thoroughfares: A Context Sensitive Approach, http://library.ite.org/pub/e1cf43c-2354-d714-51d9-d82b39d4dbad Journal of the American Medical Association, Active Commuting and Cardiovascular Disease Risk by Penny Gordon-Larsen, PhD; Janne Boone-Heinonen, PhD; Steve Sidney, MD, MPH; Barbara Sternfeld, PhD; David R. Jacobs Jr, PhD; Cora E. Lewis, MD, 2009 Lancaster, Pennsylvania Downtown Walkability Analysis, Speck and Associates, LLC. 2015 http://www. cityoflancasterpa.com/sites/default/files/documents/walkabilityanalysis.pdf League of American Bicyclists, Where We Ride, Analysis of Bicycling in American Cities, Annual American Community Survey data report for 2012 - http://www.bikeleague.org/ League of American Bicyclists and the Alliance for Biking and Walking The Economic Benefits of Bicycle Infrastructure Investments, 2009 http://www.advocacyadvance.org/docs/economic_benefits_bicycle_ infrastructure_report.pdf 6
NACTO Urban Bikeway Design Guide April 2011 Edition http://nacto.org/publication/urban-bikeway-design-guide/cycle-tracks/two-way-cycle-tracks/ Pennsylvania Department of Transportation, New Jersey Department of Transportation Smart Transportation Guidebook: Planning and Designing Highways and Streets That Support Sustainable and Livable Communities. March 2008 PennDOT Bicycle/Pedestrian Information - http://www.penndot.gov/projectandprograms/ ProjectRequirementsResources/Bike%20and%20Pedestrian/Pages/default.aspx PennDOT Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan, 2007 - http://www.dot.state.pa.us/public/pdf/bpplan.pdf PeopleForBikes and Alliance for Biking & Walking, Building Equity - Race, ethnicity, class, and protected bike lanes: An idea book for fairer cities http://www.peopleforbikes.org/blog/entry/race-ethnicity-class-andprotected-bike-lanes-an-idea-book-for-fairer-citie Pucher, John et al. Bicycling Renaissance in North America? An Update and Re-Appraisal of Cycling Trends and Policies. Rutgers University s Bloustein School of Planning and Public Policy, 2011 U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/acs/ U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration Bicycle and Pedestrian Program http://www. fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bicycle_pedestrian/guidance/policy_accom.cfm U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration Separated Bike Lane Planning and Design Guide, 2015 https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bicycle_pedestrian/publications/separated_bikelane_pdg/ page00.cfm U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration, National Bicycling And Walking Study, Case Study No. 15 The Environmental Benefits Of Bicycling And Walking Publication No. FHWA-PD-93-015, 1993 7
Appendix A 8
Appendix B 9