Complete Streets: Planning, Policy & Performance

Complete Streets: Planning, Policy & Performance

Tell Us About Your CS Experiences Successes Hardships Funding Politics Safety

Not every street needs to be complete, but every mode needs a complete network.

Session Agenda 45 minute presentation Fundamentals 15 minute Q&A / Discussion Planning Policy/Guidance Performance Measures Process Planning in a Rural Setting Planning & Design Elements Example Projects

Fundamentals: Complete Streets Planning

Fundamentals of CS Planning CS networks are best planned through alternate mode planning. Network Gaps Suitability and Safety Identify Routes and Facility Types What makes a good bike/pedestrian/transit facility or route?

Designing a CS Network Identify Activity Generators Schools, Health Centers, Higher Density Residential, Commercial or Employment Concentrations Alternate Mode Facilities (Parks, Trails, Open Space, Transit, Complete Streets) Demographic Considerations Identify Safety Characteristics Identify Gaps/Constraints Waterways/Washes, Highways, Rail Identify Key Connections

What makes a good transit facility? Bus Frequency Bike Racks Transit Stops Street Furniture Trees (shade) Lighting Trailheads Crosswalks

Facility Type Anticipated Performance

1 2 Community Layered Network Pedestrian Bike Auto Transit

Preliminary Planning for a Regionally Prioritized Multimodal Network- MAG MMLOS Project Bike Auto Transit

MAG - Active Travel Propensity Model

Preliminary Planning for a Regionally Prioritized Multimodal Network- MAG MMLOS Project

Tools for CS Network Planning Suitability Testing Community Layered Network Propensity Modeling Identification of Locally Planned Multimodal Corridors Extensions of Locally Planned Corridors Connectivity to Transit Connectivity to Trails, Washes, and Recreational Assets

Determine CS Facilities Define Context Land Use, Urban Design, Character Areas Determine Mode Priority Combination of component zones: Travel Way (Includes Bike Realm) Pedestrian Realm Context (Most important; dictates how people must negotiate a path to reach a destination) Land Use/Development Context Mode of Travel Priority 1 2 3 4 Urban Commercial/Mixed Use Walk Transit Bicycle Automobile Urban Residential Walk Bicycle Automobile Transit Urban Single Use Bicycle Automobile Walk Transit Suburban Commercial Automobile Transit Walk Bicycle Suburban Residential Walk Automobile Bicycle Transit Suburban Mixed Use Walk Bicycle Transit Automobile Suburban Single Use Bicycle Automobile Walk Transit Rural Residential/Agricultural Automobile Bicycle Walk Transit Rural Village Walk Automobile Bicycle Transit

MAG MMLOS Study HCM 2010 - Measuring LOS for All Modes Pedestrian LOS Transit LOS Vehicular LOS Bicycle LOS

Fundamentals: CS Policy and Performance Measures

Policy v. Plan Implementation Ordinance v. Guidance? Dedicated Funding or Pooled? Ongoing Process for Implementation? Citizen/Business Owner Input Prioritization Process Design Standards for Fixtures/Furniture

CS Policy Development Dictate intentions for publicly-paid and privately-paid infrastructure Focus on Arterials and Collectors safety, barrier, activity generators Use Subdivision Regulations tool for ongoing implementation of Minor Collectors and Locals) Determine Policy Components Determine Other Priorities economic development, activity generators, connections, character areas, gateways, comprehensive/strategic plan goals Establish Exceptions prohibited, creates an unsafe condition, emergency/general maintenance activities, cost prohibitive, impact on ROW/natural resources be careful with absence of need language Determine Exception Approval Process City Council v. Department Director

CS Policy References Smart Growth America Complete Streets Local Policy Workbook (identifies 10 essential components of good policies) The Best Complete Streets Policies of 2015 Regional and Comparable Agency Examples MAG Complete Streets Guide (Phoenix Region) From Policy to Pavement, Implementing Complete Streets in the San Diego Region

Regional Focus for Complete Streets Policy For MPOs and COGs Adopt Regionally Significant Networks for All Modes Link Funding to Regionally Prioritized Networks Design Guidelines Networks Funding Design Guidelines

Policy Adoption Municipality Plan Document Date Mentions Complete Streets Specifies "All Users" Street Connectivity New and Retrofit Flexible Performance Standards Implementation City of Scottsdale Transportation Master Plan 2008 City of Mesa Complete Streets Policy, Fourth Draft 2013 City of Phoenix Complete Streets Policy 2014 City of Phoenix Ordinances S-41094 & G-5937 2014 MAG Complete Streets Guide 2011 City of Gilbert Transportation Master Plan 2014 City of Tempe Transportation Master Plan 2015 City of Tempe General Plan 2014 City of Glendale Transportation Plan 2009 City of Avondale Transportation Master Plan 2012 City of Surprise General Plan 2013 Carefree/ Cave Creek Transportation Framework Study 2014 City of Tolleson General Plan 2014 Town of Youngtown General Plan 2014

Establish Performance Measures Inventory Measures v. Outcome Measures Inventory Measures Miles of trail, sidewalk, bike lanes Miles of pedestrian lighting installed Outcome Measures Change in pedestrian and bicycle related crashes Change in pedestrian/bicycle counts conducted Change in sales tax generated Change in property values

Weekday Peaking by Facility Type Chart 4-5: Average Hourly Weekday Bicycle Volumes by Facility Type

Impact of Improved Bike Facilities 1,100-1500 cyclists/month 1,800-2,000 cyclists/month 3000 2500 2000 1500 Buffered Bike Lane Project Opening 1000 500 0 4th Avenue 5th Avenue

Future ADOT Bicycle and Pedestrian Count Program Task Assignment recently released by Multimodal Planning Division Focus on conducting counts on State Highway System Can be leveraged to improve transportation plans and studies MAG Bike Count Program

Process: CS Planning in a Rural Setting

What are Contextually Complete Streets? Assumes the existing and potential future context of a study area. Informed by future mobility needs, transportation network, and Land Use plan.

Determine the Mobility Context What is the character of your neighborhood? Countryside? Rural Village? Rural Development?

Context for Rural Area Types Less Developed More Developed Countryside Rural open space (Farmland, forestland, park land, etc) Few access points along ROW Little development Large setbacks Infrequent pedestrian activity Scenic routes Rural Village Concentrated development with businesses/civic uses Adjacent/interspersed housing Various buildings setbacks Frequent driveways and intersections Moderate-high pedestrian activity Variable bike activity Rural Developed Scattered, very low density development Mostly Residential Retains the rural character. Deep set backs & occasional driveways Frequent pedestrian and bike activity

Determine the future Mobility Context Mobility Corridor Economic Development Corridor Connecting between two places Local mobility & access Business attraction & expansion Destinations Community services

Typical Rural Area Street Characteristics Many roads function as arterial, collector or local route with range of speeds Roads serve various traffic levels in a rural setting Minimal roadway network presents connectivity challenges Travel lanes accommodate all modes Wide-paved shoulders & multi-use paths address user needs

Street & Area Type Matrix Integrates Area Type Land Use Context Functional Classification to determine desired Street Type

Linking Functional Criteria to Character

Elements of a Street Type

Evaluate Current and Future Needs

Process: Determining Character of Street Types

Rural Village Main Street Key Elements May function as: Arterial Collector Local Low speeds only Serves: Bikes Pedestrians Transit

Rural Village Main Street - Section

Rural Village Main Street - Intersection Emphasis on pedestrian travel needs Consider bulb-outs to reduce crossing distances Include high-visibility crosswalks Encourage shared lanes due to lower speeds Provide countdown pedestrian signals Minimize the number of turn lanes at intersections Allow on-street parking near intersection Have bus stops located at the far side of the intersection

Rural Village Main Street - Intersection West Jefferson, NJ Removed two stoplights Replaced them with all-way stop signs Restriped the road to make it safer, and look friendlier to pedestrians

Rural Boulevard - Plan Key Elements Mostly functions as Arterial Moderate speeds Deeper setbacks Wide sidewalks Transit stops/shelters along ROW

Rural Boulevard - Section

Rural Boulevard - Intersection Always has a median Mitigate higher speeds for bikes and pedestrians Typically have left-turn lanes Allow right-turn lanes and rightturn corner islands Include a refuge island within the pedestrian crossing Allow far side bus stops Include high-visibility crosswalks Include pedestrian countdown signals

Rural Road - Plan Key Elements Multi-use paths separated Road serving traffic in a rural setting Range of speeds Transit stops/shelters within ROW May function as Arterial Collector Local

Rural Road - Section

Rural Roundabouts Meaningful and safe connectivity Provide for safe bike & pedestrian interface

Complete Intersections Intersections should be designed to provide safe and adequate Level of Service (LOS) for motor vehicles and Quality of Service (QOS) for pedestrians and bicyclists. Integrate creative solutions within the land Use and mobility network context Enhance comfort and accessibility for pedestrians, cyclists and transit services. Address and minimize user conflicts Design trade-offs related to prevalent vehicle & user type

Process: Considering Quality of Service

Quality of Service What is Quality of Service (QOS) : Emphasizes the safety and accessibility of travel. Considers how buildings, circulation, parking, and landscaping effect the context of a street. Provides safety and comfort for cyclists, pedestrians, and transit users.

Bicycle Quality of Service Bicycle Lanes Shared-lane Markings Multi-Use Path Paved Shoulders Signage Cycling Elements at Intersections

Bicycle & Vehicle Integration

Pedestrian Quality of Service Sidewalks Signage Multi-Use Path ADA Requirements Other Pedestrian Amenities Buffer Lighting Curb Extensions Pedestrian Crossing

Pedestrian & Vehicle Integration Tighter radius slows traffic at intersection Larger radius allows higher speeds at intersection Appropriate for some contexts

Transit Quality of Service Transit Service Adequate Connections to Transit Schedules and Routes Signage Lighting Seating Transit Design Bus Shelters

Process: Sustainable Practices

Opportunities for Sustainable Solutions

Opportunities for Sustainable Solutions

Examples

Broadway Road Tempe, Arizona

Broadway Road Transformation 5 Lanes (3/2 Configuration) 4 Lanes multiple configurations Residential context Center median Peak hour congestion Mid-block crossing 11+ foot wide lanes Dedicated bike lanes Sidewalks on both sides Streetscape improvements Pubic art

Broadway Road Elements Separated Lane Public Art Bike Boxes Off-street parking Crossings Medians

Lessons Learned Planning & engineering are linked. Be flexible & innovative. Intersections define capacity & most conflicts. Understand funding affects phasing & public expectation. Trade-offs-public safety, public input, public need.

Lessons Learned Engage with the community directly affected by the project. Assign the right people. Create stakeholder impact report. Consistent project management. Understand surveys and utilities.

Addressing Context Along the Same Facility Striped Bike Lane leading to end of commercial area Double-stripe buffered bike lane entering residential area

Inexpensive Treatments for Short-Term Implementation Striped & colored cycle track Dedicated cycle track utilizing pinned down curbs, striping & color

Achieving Results 25% Bike accidents 60% Bikes on Sidewalks 33% Cyclists 20% Speed

Q&A / Discussion

Contact Information Vanessa Spartan, AICP Wilson & Company Tel: 602-283-2701 Vanessa.Spartan@wilsonco.com Tom Hester WSP Parsons Brinckerhoff Tel: 602-418-8091 hester@pbworld.com