Ite 2008 Pp2


Published on

Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) 2008 Annual Meeting Presentation

Published in: Economy & Finance, Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Ite 2008 Pp2

  1. 1. Presentation at 2008 ITE Annual Meeting Anaheim, California August 20, 2008 JOSEPH KOTT, AICP, PTP, ITE (M) Senior Transportation Projects Manager, Wilbur Smith Associates, San Francisco, California Doctoral Candidate, Curtin University of Technology, Perth, Western Australia Former Chief Transportation Official, City of Palo Alto (CA)
  2. 2. <ul><li>Doctoral Dissertation research in progress under supervision of Prof. Jeff Kenworthy and Prof. Peter Newman (authors of Sustainable Cities: Overcoming Automobile Dependence ) </li></ul><ul><li>Comprehensive data collection and analysis: pedestrian, bicycle, public transit, and private vehicular modes; land use; socio-economics; “space for nature” (extent of tree canopy and permeable surface in ROW); focus groups, opinion surveys, and visual assessment surveys; comprehensive physical inventory of research study streets and street frontages; street histories, plans, and studies </li></ul><ul><li>This presentation covers one aspect of the research : street design/re-design and pedestrians </li></ul>
  3. 3. <ul><li>Matched 1:2 comparison of one re-designed street with two control (not re-designed, but with similarities in function, characteristics) </li></ul><ul><li>Two subsets of streets : “Big City Arterials” and “Small City Main Streets” </li></ul><ul><li>Street sections range from approximately .3 to .6 miles (.5 to .8 kilometers) in length </li></ul>
  5. 5. <ul><li>What are “active” streets and how to measure “activity” on streets? </li></ul><ul><li>What are “complete” streets and how to measure their “completeness” </li></ul><ul><li>Does dedicated space matter for use of alternative modes of transportation and how to measure the effects? </li></ul><ul><li>Does continuous street (building) frontage contribute to “active” streets? </li></ul><ul><li>How does the partitioning of ROW space affect street use? </li></ul><ul><li>How does allocating “space for nature” affect street use? </li></ul><ul><li>How does a street’s aesthetic appeal affect street use? </li></ul>
  6. 6. <ul><li>“ Big City” Commercial Arterials: </li></ul><ul><li>King Street/The Embarcadero from 3 rd to Brannan in San Francisco (.56 mi/.9 km/47,000 AADT) </li></ul><ul><li>Lombard Street from Broderick to Fillmore in San Francisco (.47 mi/.76 km/41,000 AADT) </li></ul><ul><li>The Alameda from Race to Stockton in San Jose (.43 mi./.69 km/16,000 AADT) </li></ul>
  7. 7. <ul><li>“ Small City” Main Streets: </li></ul><ul><li>Castro Street in Mountain View, CA from Church to W. Evelyn (.52 mi/.84 km/15,500 AADT) </li></ul><ul><li>California Avenue in Palo Alto, CA from El Camino Real to W. Park (.31 mi/.49km/9,700 AADT) </li></ul><ul><li>San Carlos Avenue in San Carlos, CA from Cedar to El Camino Real (.35 mi/.56 km/20,000 AADT) </li></ul>
  8. 11. <ul><li>Links I-280 and San Francisco Peninsula to Downtown San Francisco </li></ul><ul><li>Site of ATT Park (SF Giants home park) and re-development s in Mission Bay, South Beach districts </li></ul><ul><li>Replaced Embarcadero Freeway after it was damaged in 1989; rebuilt as surface boulevard in late 1990s; dedicated on June 17, 2000 </li></ul><ul><li>Study section has bike lanes, wide sidewalks, light rail in center median; 2 through lanes in each direction </li></ul><ul><li>Near Caltrain (commuter rail) terminus in San Francisco; two light rail stops on and two within one block of study section </li></ul><ul><li>Car speeds@85 th percentile = 35 mph, 56 kph (off-peak) </li></ul>
  9. 15. <ul><li>Surface street section of Highway 101 (Caltans-owned) linking North Bay via Golden Gate Bridge and Van Ness to downtown San Francisco and the San Francisco Peninsula </li></ul><ul><li>3 travel lanes in each direction, narrow center median, narrow sidewalks, no nearby rail transit </li></ul><ul><li>Auto-oriented land uses (motor inn motels and car repair) </li></ul><ul><li>Car speeds @ 85 th percentile = 33 mph, 53 kph (off-peak) </li></ul>
  10. 19. <ul><li>Historic urban street, part of Highway 82 (El Camino Real elsewhere on the San Francisco Peninsula; Caltrans-owned) </li></ul><ul><li>Becomes West Santa Clara Street (San Jose’s main downtown street) east of Stockton Street </li></ul><ul><li>Links I-880 to downtown San Jose </li></ul><ul><li>Near HP Pavilion, Home of San Jose Sharks </li></ul><ul><li>Redeveloping, transit-oriented </li></ul><ul><li>2 through lanes in each direction with 2-way center left turn lane </li></ul><ul><li>Near Caltrain (commuter rail)/Amtrak/Capitol Corridor/ACE (commuter rail) station </li></ul><ul><li>Car speeds @85 th percentile = 37 mph, 60 (kph off-peak) </li></ul>
  11. 23. <ul><li>Re-designed in 1990 from 2 travel lanes in each direction to 1 in each direction with center-left turn lanes at intersections </li></ul><ul><li>Curbside “flex-zone”, used as either parking or outdoor café space </li></ul><ul><li>Near Caltrain (commuter rail) station and light rail stop </li></ul><ul><li>Successful café street with regional draw </li></ul><ul><li>Main street for Mountain View, CA (home of Google) </li></ul><ul><li>Car speeds @ 85 th percentile = 26 mph, 42 kph (off-peak) </li></ul>
  12. 27. <ul><li>“ Main street” for Palo Alto, CA’s “second downtown” </li></ul><ul><li>Near Stanford Research Park and Stanford campus </li></ul><ul><li>Near Caltrain (commuter rail) station (street ends at tracks) </li></ul><ul><li>Scheduled for re-design from 2 travel lanes in each direction to 1 lane in each direction with center-left turn lanes </li></ul><ul><li>Café street, well-known locally for its restaurants </li></ul><ul><li>Car speeds @85 th percentile = 22 mph, 35 kph (off-peak) </li></ul>
  13. 31. <ul><li>Links west San Carlos and San Carlos Hills residential neighborhoods to Highway 101 via El Camino Real and Holly Street </li></ul><ul><li>Two travel lanes in each direction; suburban section also has center left turn lanes </li></ul><ul><li>Half of the study section has bike lanes in each direction, half has no bike lanes </li></ul><ul><li>Half of the study section is “main street” downtown design (no setback from sidewalk, continuous street front); half is mixed suburban commercial and residential use </li></ul><ul><li>Car speeds @85 th percentile = 32 mph, 51.5 kph (off-peak) </li></ul>
  14. 32. <ul><li>Mid-October to early December 2007; dry weather conditions, temperature range = </li></ul><ul><li>49 to 77 degrees F </li></ul><ul><li>Student workers and researcher </li></ul><ul><li>Pedestrian and bicycle volumes (along and crossing street) </li></ul><ul><li>Pedestrians standing, sitting </li></ul><ul><li>Pedestrians interacting </li></ul><ul><li>Café chair count </li></ul><ul><li>Space allocation in ROW (to private vehicles, public transit, pedestrians, bicycles, “nature”) </li></ul><ul><li>On-line surveys (street users, merchants), focus groups (one each street), visual assessment survey </li></ul><ul><li>Vehicle speed surveys, vehicle classification surveys </li></ul>
  15. 49. <ul><li>Effect of comparative land use (residential and commercial) density </li></ul><ul><li>Effect of comparative “catchment area” (.25 mile/.4 kilometer) population and employment (2007 est.) </li></ul><ul><li>Effect of comparative public transit boardings and service intensity </li></ul><ul><li>Relationship of crash and crime rates to non-motorized travel volumes </li></ul><ul><li>Factorial, difference among means, and multivariate statistical analysis </li></ul><ul><li>Ped, bike, transit LOS analysis </li></ul><ul><li>Focus groups themes, key words evaluation </li></ul>