Project Advisory Group (PAG) Meeting #2 January 31, SR 693 (Pasadena Avenue) Corridor Study from Shore Drive South to 66 th Street

Similar documents
SR 693 (Pasadena Avenue) Corridor Study from Shore Drive South to 66 th Street

City of Wilsonville 5 th Street to Kinsman Road Extension Project

Transportation Planning Division

Transportation Planning Division

City of Gainesville Transportation/Roadway Needs PROJECT SUMMARY

Financial Project ID No(s).: and ETDM No(s).: and 14181

Pinellas County Safety Initiatives

Route 79/Davol Street Corridor Study

Southview Blvd & 3 rd Avenue Improvement Project. Public Open House December 4, to 7pm

Planning Study SR 976. Project Advisory Team Meeting May 24, 2017

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

About the study. North Milwaukee Ave. Key goals of this study are to: Achieve Vision Zero* by. Harmonize the space and improve walkability

Dr. M.L. King, Jr. Street North Complete Streets Resurfacing Opportunities HOUSING, LAND USE, AND TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE MARCH 22, 2018

Columbia Pike Implementation Team (CPIT) Meeting

Giles Run Connector Road

MAKE YOUR PLACE IN CHANNELSIDE

HARRISON STREET/OAKLAND AVENUE COMMUNITY TRANSPORTATION PLAN

FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT 7 DISTRICT WIDE BICYCLE/PEDESTRIAN ACCESS TO TRANSIT SAFETY ASSESSMENT AND IMPROVEMENT PLAN

Pine Hills Road Pedestrian/Bicycle Safety Study Board of County Commissioners Work Session

Southbend to Prima Vista. October 30, Floresta Corridor Master Plan

North Shore Transportation Improvement Strategy

MASONIC AVENUE STREET DESIGN STUDY Community Workshop 2. Masonic Ave Street Design Study Community Workshop 2 August 10, 2010

54 th Avenue North Complete Streets Concept Plan

VT15 / Allen Martin Drive Intersection Scoping Study

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

Complete Street Analysis of a Road Diet: Orange Grove Boulevard, Pasadena, CA

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

Safety Emphasis Areas & Safety Project Development Florida Department of Transportation District Seven Tampa Bay

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

Tonight is for you. Learn everything you can. Share all your ideas.

Princeton Avenue and Spruce Street Transportation and Site Access Enhancements Project

BETHEL ROAD AND SEDGWICK ROAD CORRIDOR STUDY

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

Chapter 4 Traffic Analysis

APPENDIX G: INTERSECTION NEEDS AT OKEECHOBEE BOULEVARD

In station areas, new pedestrian links can increase network connectivity and provide direct access to stations.

Omaha s Complete Streets Policy

Table #6 VISION CHARACTERISTICS

Pine Hills Road Pedestrian/Bicycle Safety Study Community Meeting #1

Item to be Addressed Checklist Consideration YES NO N/A Required Description Complete Streets Guidelines

4 MOBILITY PLAN. Mobility Plan Objectives. Mobility Context. 1. Integrate with Local and Regional Transit Improvements

Draft MOBILITY ELEMENET. Community Meeting May 22, 2013

Station Plan: Penn & 43rd Avenue

US 19 PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE SAFE ACCESS

West Dimond Blvd Upgrade Jodhpur Street to Sand Lake Road

US HIGHWAY 19 CORRIDOR CONDITIONS, TRENDS, PLANNING ACTIVITIES. Pinellas County Metropolitan Planning Organization

Welcome! San Jose Avenue Open House August 25, 2015

WELCOME Mission-Geneva Transportation Study

Brooklyn Boulevard (County Road 152) Reconstruction Project Phase I. OPEN HOUSE June 20, 2017

Bay to Bay Boulevard Complete Streets Project

MASTER BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN PLAN

Road Diets FDOT Process

REGIONAL BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN DESIGN GUIDELINES

NEWMARKET UPHAM S CORNER

95 th Street Corridor Transportation Plan. Steering Committee Meeting #2

MASTER BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN PLAN

Executive Summary Route 30 Corridor Master Plan

Waterford Lakes Small Area Study

Purpose + Need. Connect: Thrive: Develop: < Strengthen the spine of our regional transportation system

Citizen Advisory Group Meeting #8 May 5, Welcome. Today s meeting will focus on: Land Use & Transportation CHARLOTTEPLANNING.

COMMUNITY MEETING AGENDA

Complete Streets Chicago: Data Driven Design. Luann Hamilton Deputy Commissioner

CONNECTING PEOPLE TO PLACES

Chapter 2: Standards for Access, Non-Motorized, and Transit

Public Meeting #1 Comment Summary

PEDESTRIAN SAFETY STUDY

MOBILITY WORKSHOP. Joint City Council and Transportation Commission May 5, 2014

North Avenue Corridor Study

BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY

WELCOME. Stakeholder Involvement Group Meeting #2 Round Lake Public Works October 24, 2018

Road Diets. Presented by: Cristine Gowland, P.E. LADOTD District 62 March 2, 2016

Agenda. Citizen Advisory Committee. CSAH 101 (CSAH 62 to Hutchins Drive) City of Minnetonka May 29, :00 pm

Frequently Asked Questions

North Avenue Corridor Study

Roadways. Roadways III.

Project Description Form 8EE

Project Development & Environment (PD&E) Study. November 17, SR 90 (SW 8th Street and SW 7th Street) SW 8 th Street/SW 7 th Street PD&E Study 1

CRESTON ROAD COMPLETE AND SUSTAINABLE STREETS CORRIDOR PLAN

CONTEXT SENSITIVE STREETS STANDARDS COMMITTEE

Lee s Summit Road Improvement Study Public Open House June 7, 2007 Summary of Comment Card Responses

Route 7 Corridor Study

THE ALAMEDA CONCEPT DESIGN COMMUNITY MEETING 3. A Plan for The Beautiful Way JANUARY 28, 2010

Public Involvement Meeting Tuesday, June 13, Albany Shaker Road Corridor Study

Central Avenue Corridor Study FPID Number:

Progress Report on the Design and Planning of an Infrastructure Improvement Project for the Sunnyside TIF District (Phase II)

180 Grand Avenue, Suite x117 Dowling Associates, Inc.

ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION

Upper Market Street Bike Lane Project

Presentation Starts at 5:30 PM

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

Joshua Saak, P.E., PTOE Traffic Design Engineer Ada County Highway District May 23, 2013

Monterey Road Complete Streets

Corridor Advisory Group and Task Force Meeting #10. July 27, 2011

State Street and Pierce Park Lane Intersection Concept Report

Northbound San Jose Avenue & I-280 Off-Ramp Road Diet Pilot Project

Boston Post Road Design Feasibility Study

Bicycle Crashes. Number of Bike Crashes. Total Bike Crashes. are down 21% and severe bike crashes down 8% since 2013 (5 years).

4. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS 9. TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC

Performance Criteria for 2035 Long Range Transportation Plan

2014/2015 BIKE ROUTE PLAN 83 AVENUE PROTECTED BIKE LANE

Transcription:

Project Advisory Group (PAG) Meeting #2 January 31, 2018

Welcome & Introductions AGENDA 1. Where are we at? 2. Project Survey / Virtual Comment Tool / PAG Meeting #1 / Visioning Workshop Corridor Map Exercise Results 3. Opportunities for Safety, Congestion, and Intersections o Park Street, 66 th Street, Central Avenue, and Gulfport Boulevard/Sunset Drive 4. Opportunities for Roadway Typical Sections (Ped/Bike/Transit) 1. Roadway Typical Section By the Book 2. Roadway Typical Section(s) working within the Existing Footprint 5. Pinellas Suncoast Transit Authority (PSTA) Update on Central Avenue Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) 6. Schedule Update 7. Questions? 2

Corridor Study Where are we at? Introduce Project Elected Officials Email Kick-off Meeting Newsletter #1 Vision of Corridor Collected Input Project Advisory Group (PAG) Meeting #1 Visioning Workshop Project Surveys Virtual Comment Tool NEXT STEP Develop Short-term, Mid-term, and Long-term Strategies and Opportunities for Corridor 3

Project Survey Results 29 Survey Responses 7 online 22 at Visioning Workshop Demographics 100% own automobile Age 50% above 66 32% 56-65 18% 41-55 82.8% Live on or near corridor 34.5% Work on or near corridor 58.6% Travel primary for local trips 31% Travel primarily for regional trips 13.6% Other Modes of transportation 96.6% Car (Driver) 58.6% Walking/Pedestrian 41.4% Car (Passenger) 24.1% Bicycle 6.9% Bus Main mode of transportation 93.1% Car 6.9% Walking 4

Project Survey / Virtual Comment Tool / PAG Meeting #1 / Visioning Workshop Corridor Map Exercise Results 5

Most Important Area of Concern Survey Bicycle, Pedestrian and Bus Stop Amenitites 8% Connectivity 5% Congestion 21% Intersections 20% Safety 46% 1. Safety 46% 2. Congestion 21% 3. Intersections 20% 4. Bicycle, Pedestrian and Bus Stop Amenities 8% 5. Connectivity 5% 6. Community Identity 0% 6

Virtual Comment Tool / PAG Meeting #1 / Visioning Workshop Corridor Map Exercise Results Combined Results Safety Issues 16 comments Congestion 9 comments Intersection Issues 7 comments Bus/Transit Issues 7 comments Community Identity 4 comments Bicycle Issues 3 comments Connectivity 2 comments Pedestrian Issues 1 comment 7

Safety Issues # Comment 1 Vehicles speed through the light and are not able to navigate that turn at high rates of speed. 2 Operation/safety issues at Shore Drive and Pasadena Ave S. 3 Safety & Accessibility (Dunkin' Donuts) 4 Safety & Accessibility (Horse & Jockey) 5 Pavement conditions, such as, rutting and hydroplaning 6 Signage - all users 7 Median landscaping- EMS to hospital 8 ADA Corridor Wide 9 Pavement grooved and prevents runoff/ floods during heavy rain. Gives rise to hydroplaning and severe spray. 10 Severe flooding during heavy rain. 11 Safety - Sharp curve at 66th Street 12 Blind turn - fast cars 13 Get rid of the palms in middle of road. 14 Sign - NO SEMI TRUCKS; They turn around & sometimes damage condo properties parking lots. 15 Too tight between 1st Ave. S. and Central making left turn going South on Pasadena difficult & dangerous. 16 Safety - sharp curve; Option: Roundabout 8

Crashes at Signalized Intersections 30 19 42 107 19 Pasadena Ave 58 98 55 Total Crashes from January 2012 to December 2016 TOP THREE: Gulfport Boulevard/Sunset Drive, Central Avenue, and 66 th Street 9

Congestion # Comment 1 Traffic back-ups from the bus at various locations. Congestion at various locations during spring break time. 2 Line of vehicles turning right can stretch back beyond Ted Peters. 3 Are there 37,000 bikes or cars? Don't choke traffic with bike lanes. 4 No bike lanes, it will create MORE congestion. Widen sidewalk where applicable. 5 Open the "green area" in center & make it a left turn lane. 6 Remove center lane landscapes Liebman to Gulfport. 7 As you are aware, lane turns going East on Gulfport Blvd. on Pasadena Avenue North is backed up to one or two light series. Also getting out onto Pasadena from Carwash at Majestic Ave. Palms Cleaners. 8 Too many rights & access. The rights at Sunset back-up and block the side street. 9 Keep lanes open/traffic flowing. SURVEY RESULTS - 21% Motorist Behavior (i.e. speeding, red light running, aggressive behavior, etc.) 53% Traffic Congestion/Delays 47% 10

Intersections 23% 22% SURVEY RESULTS - 20% Turning at signalized intersections Need for more or improved pedestrian markings/crosswalks at unsignalized intersections Hotspots 20% 18% 17% Turning at unsignalized intersections Need for more or improved pedestrian markings/crosswalks at signalized intersections Turning at driveways Red light runners Pasadena Ave Most Identified Intersection Pedestrian Crossings/Safety 11

Intersections # Comment 1 Need for a signal (1st Avenue N.) 2 Light at Majestic Way needs trigger panel in road so that light changes only if traffic waiting to left turn into Pasadena Ave. 3 Please consider a right turn only lane northbound Pasadena Ave. on to Gulfport Blvd. 4 Liebman In/Out ACCESS Wendy's - use light on way out. 5 Valid left turn into Pasadena Cove form Westbound Pasadena Ave.So. 256 Residencies 6 more dedicated left turn lanes to accommodate businesses on both sides of Ave. Shore Dr. to 66th! 7 Difficult left turn lane with signal timing to go east onto 1st Avenue South. 12

Existing Vehicle Level of Service (LOS) C(C) A(A) A(A) E(D) C(C) Pasadena Ave B(B) D(D) C(C) Mid-Day (PM) LOS A = Free-flow traffic LOS F = Highly congested traffic conditions 13

No Build 2040 Vehicle Level of Service (LOS) C(C) A(A) A(A) E(E) C(C) Pasadena Ave B(B) E(E) C(C) Mid-Day (PM) LOS A = Free-flow traffic LOS F = Highly congested traffic conditions 14

Bicycle, Pedestrian & Transit Enhancements 73% 16% 11% SURVEY RESULTS 8% Need for more or improved bicycle lanes Need for more or improved bicycle parking Need for more or improved bus shelter amenities (i.e. covered benches, bike racks, etc.) # Comment 1 corridor wide - no bicycle lanes 2 Widen sidewalk for bicycle access 3 dedicated bike lanes on roadway Mixed Feelings about Bicycle Facilities Bike Lanes No Bike Lanes Bikes on Sidewalk 4 Widen walkways for people & bikes on Pasadena Ave. 15

Connectivity SURVEY RESULTS 5% Better connectivity between the east and west side of SR 693 (Pasadena Avenue) for pedestrians and bicyclists 18% Access to businesses and other uses along the corridor 21% # Comment 1 Cut thru traffic: Head on traffic and lane alignment 2 Opportunity to Park S A more walkable environment along the corridor (i.e. walkways between properties, canopies along the sidewalk and parking areas, etc.) 16% Need for more or improved bicycle connections 11% Need for more bus stops 2% Need to relocate or consolidate bus stops 4% Need for improved transit access and connections 7% Need for more or improved designated bicycle paths/lanes 15% Need for more or better pedestrian connections between bus stops and sidewalks 6% 16

Community Identity # Comment 1 Preserve the sign 2 Clear empty lots. Encourage new business (IHOP, Chinese Rest., etc.) 3 Signage for 1st Avenue North & Central Avenue needed. Post before trail. 4 Sonrise Preschool 17

Park Street Short Term Opportunity Pasadena Ave DRAFT 18

Safety Review 66 th Street 55 Total Crashes 30 Injury Crashes 26 Roadway Departure Crashes Sharp Curve at 66 th Street 66 th St 19

Safety Review 66 th Street 66 th St DRAFT 20

Safety Review 66 th Street STOP Explore Opportunities 66 th St DRAFT 21

66 th Street FHWA Proven Safety Countermeasures Roundabout Alternative? Requires Step 2 Analysis Analysis to be completed within the next few weeks for FDOT to review 22

Central Avenue Safety - 98 Total Crashes 2 nd Highest on Corridor Ranked Number one in Severity Index Left Turn Crashes an Issue Congestion - 2040 LOS E Major Delay EB/WB - Lefts Major Delay Southbound Thru 23

Central Avenue Opportunity Central Ave DRAFT 24

Gulfport Boulevard / Sunset Drive Safety 107 Total Crashes Highest on Corridor Ranked #2 Number one in Severity Index Operational Issues with SB Left Congestion 2040 (LOS E ) Major Delay SB Left Major Delay WB Left Heavy NB Right High Pedestrian / Transit Activity 25

Short Term Opportunity Gulfport Blvd. / Sunset Dr. Pasadena Ave DRAFT 26

Roadway Typical Sections Constrained Corridor Context Based Design Typical by the Book (Engineering Judgement) Typical with existing Footprint 27

Constrained Roadway Forward Pinellas 2040 Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) classifies SR 693 (Pasadena Avenue) as a Constrained Roadway Constrained Roadway A roadway that cannot be expanded as necessary to alleviate congestion due to either physical or policy limitations, environmental concerns or other factors. SR 693 (Pasadena Avenue) Corridor 28

FDOT Context Classification 29

FDOT Context Classification Land Use Building Height Building Placement Fronting Uses Location of Off-Street Parking Description Floor Levels Description Yes/No Description Residential, Commercial, Event use, Mobile Home 1-3 No Side or rear; occasionally in front Zoning Commercial Public/Semi public Recreation/Open space Corridor Residential Suburban Corridor Commercial Suburban Primary Measures Roadway Connectivity Intersection Density Block Perimeter Block Length Intersections/ square mile Feet Feet 157 2677 577 Future Land Uses Residential Office General Recreation/Open space Planned Redevelopment Mixed Use Major Attractors Major Public/Semi Public PUD 30

FDOT Context Classification C4-Urban General Mix of uses set within small blocks with a wellconnected roadway network. May extend long distances. The roadway network usually connects to residential neighborhoods immediately along the corridor or behind the uses fronting the roadway. 31

Typical Existing (Shore Drive to Park Street) SEGMENT 1 DRAFT 100 Varies (94.5 107.5 ) 32

Typical By the Book (35 mph) SEGMENT 1 POSTED SPEED LIMIT 35 DESIGN SPEED 35 DRAFT 115.5 33

Typical Existing Footprint (Wide Sidewalk Option) SEGMENT 1 DRAFT 100 34

Typical Existing Footprint (Wide Median Option) SEGMENT 1 DRAFT 100 35

Typical Existing (Park Street to 66 th Street North) SEGMENT 2 DRAFT 100 Varies (100 120 ) 36

Typical By the Book (45 mph) SEGMENT 2 Creates Connectivity Issue with SEGMENT 1 POSTED SPEED LIMIT 40 DESIGN SPEED 45 DRAFT 130 37

Typical By the Book (40 mph) SEGMENT 2 Match Posted Speed to Design Speed POSTED SPEED LIMIT 40 DESIGN SPEED 40 DRAFT 119.5 38

Typical Existing Footprint (Wide Sidewalk Option) SEGMENT 2 DRAFT 100 Varies (100 120 ) 39

Typical Existing Footprint (Wide Median Option) SEGMENT 2 Same as Existing DRAFT 100 Varies (100 120 ) 40

Pinellas Suncoast Transit Authority (PSTA) Update on Central Avenue Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) 41

Study Schedule TASK 2017 2018 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN Study Begins PAG Meeting PAG Meeting PAG Meeting Public Involvement Data Collection / Analysis (Environmental, Traffic, Etc.) Kick-Off Meeting Visioning Workshop Alternatives Public Workshop Analysis / Alternatives Development Corridor Alternatives & Strategies Report 42

Thank You! Brian Shroyer, CPM Multimodal Project Manager 813-975-6449 Brian.Shroyer@dot.state.fl.us Remember to be Alert Today, Alive Tomorrow. Safety doesn t happen by accident. Visit the project website at: www.fdotd7studies.com/pasadenaave 43