• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
Complete Streets Sussex - Eric Snyder
 

Complete Streets Sussex - Eric Snyder

on

  • 233 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
233
Views on SlideShare
233
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
2
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment
  • Goal

Complete Streets Sussex - Eric Snyder Complete Streets Sussex - Eric Snyder Presentation Transcript

  • Complete Streets Summit October 21, 2013
  • Stakeholder Meetings Key Findings • There is a general support for consideration of complete streets “where appropriate.” Not all streets need sidewalks, crosswalks, and bike lanes to accommodate complete streets in a rural context. • Priority should be given to completing “missing links” in the sidewalk infrastructure. Connecting low-income and/or low mobility populations to shopping, schools and other services should also be prioritized. • Bike accommodations should be strategically placed to link parks, trails and other recreational facilities and stay “off-road” wherever practicable. • Safer trail crossings, and better linkages between recreational areas and nearby businesses is important to tourism. • Initial and life-cycle cost was a major concern related to complete streets infrastructure. In addition, the responsible party for general maintenance (snow shoveling and weeding) of sidewalks caused apprehension. • Communities should weigh the long term cost of not providing safe pedestrian/bicycle accommodation against initial capital cost (e.g. bussing students that could otherwise walk if safe accommodations were present). • Complete Streets is a key component to the healthier communities initiative, critical for tourism, and important to retaining and attracting young residents.
  • Transect-Based Implementation Planning • Street Typology Plan • Developed using public input from June 17 community meeting. • Roadway types and design features reflect local desires and priorities. • Roadway functions were articulated and desired operating speeds identified. • Local examples identified.
  • Transect-Based Implementation Planning Street Typology Draft – Sussex County Typology Workshop
  • Transect-Based Implementation Planning Street Overlay Draft – Sussex County Typology Workshop
  • Transect-Based Implementation Planning Street Types Identified & Function • Rural Highway A – long distance travel. • Rural Highway B – thru traffic/land access. • Rural Highway C – urban edge development. • Main Street – mixed use, walking-oriented. • Residential (Traditional) – grid development. • Residential (Subdivision) – low/moderate density. • County Connector – connects state highways. • Trails & Greenways.
  • Typology: Rural Highway C urban edge development Route 23, Franklin Borough
  • Typology: Main Street mixed use, walking-oriented. Spring Street
  • Typology: County Connector Limecrest Road
  • Transect-Based Implementation Planning Special Overlay Zones • Destination Streets. • Village and Hamlet. • School Zone/Trail Connector. • Lake Street/Family-friendly. • Scenic/Historical Highway. • Natural Preservation Zone. • Transit Stop.
  • Overlay: Lake Street
  • Transect-Based Implementation Planning Initial policy and design recommendations – All of the planning in this effort emphasizes specific contexts. There are no Madisons in Sussex County nor is it Monmouth. – Lake streets were identified as a priority for traffic calming. – Creating better connections to and between recreational trails was identified as a priority. – Destination streets were identified as points of civic pride (Spring Street, Newton).
  • Route 206 - Main St. and Spring St. Strengths • Traditional town main street designed for both pedestrians and motorists • Proximity to destinations and employment • Pedestrian signals and signage Challenges • Fast, left-turning traffic • No third crosswalk • Deteriorated physical condition of crosswalks Town of Newton
  • Route 206 and Spring St. Low Investment Strategies 1. Paint crosswalk on third leg of intersection. 2. Provide pedestrians a dedicated walk signal at this third crosswalk. 3. Install signage with wording similar to “Town of Newton is a Pedestrian- Friendly City” to stress to motorists the presence of pedestrians on Spring St. Town of Newton
  • Route 206 and Spring St. Medium Investment Strategies 1. Color unit pavers or tinted concrete crosswalks. 2. Textured roadway surfaces approaching crosswalks for visual, audible, and vibratory alerts to motorists. Town of Newton
  • Route 519 from Water Street/ Route 206 to North Park Drive Strengths • Several generators of pedestrian activity • Flat terrain and space in right-of-way for sidewalks • Existing transit service Challenges Inconsistent pedestrian facilities Lack of sidewalks in northern half Gaps in sidewalks in southern half Obstacles on east side of Route 519 where sidewalk could be built • Multiple, wide driveways • • • • Town of Newton
  • Route 519 – from Water Street/ Route 206 to North Park Drive Medium Investment Strategy • Build a consistent sidewalk from Swartswood Road to Project Self Sufficiency. Town of Newton
  • Example for Park Drive: Build sidewalks around the obstacles
  • Route 607/Hopatchung Rd/River Styx Rd from North River Styx Rd to Brooklyn Stanhope Rd Strengths • Commercial destinations along the road • Scenic road in spots, with lake destinations Challenges • Tight rights-of-way and no shoulders in some areas • Limited sight distances • Inconsistent sidewalks • Seasonal higher traffic volumes Hopatcong Borough
  • Lake Context: River Styx Road - North Segment Low Investment Strategy • Alternatives to full sidewalk installation that keep a semirural feel • Create safe pedestrian spaces next to the road Replace with new photo with crosswalks Bucks County, PA Rolled curb Portland, OR Rock separation between path and road
  • Route 669/Limecrest Road from Skytop Road to Long Pond School Strengths • Adjacent to natural preservation area • Close to a residential area Challenges • No sidewalks or paths • Tight right-of-way with narrow shoulders • Short sight distances Andover Township
  • Route 669/Limecrest Road from Skytop Road to Long Pond School Andover Township
  • Route 669/Limecrest Road from Skytop Road to Long Pond School Medium Investment Strategy • Use Township of Andover land easement on Limecrest Road across from Broadview Drive to provide off- road trail link to the school. Andover Township
  • Trail Crossing Improvements 1. Sussex Branch Trail 2. Paulinskill Valley Trail 3. L&NE Trail Challenges • Trails cross several major roads Sid Taylor Road and Route 206 • Low visibility of trail crossings from vehicles • Fast-moving traffic • No warnings of upcoming trail crossings for motorists in some instances Route 94 W of Route 15
  • Trail Crossings Strategies • Painted crosswalks • Pedestrian refuge medians • Pedestrian-activated overhead signal • Signs in advance of the crossing Give motorists warnings!
  • Trail Crossings: Strategies Mid-block pedestrian refuge Pedestrian activated signals
  • Thank You!