This document provides a summary and evaluation of 9 alternatives for improving transit service on 16th Street in San Francisco. The alternatives vary the configuration of transit lanes, bicycle lanes, and other features. They were evaluated on criteria like transit performance, impacts to other modes, cost, and effects on parking and loading. Based on the evaluation, 3 alternatives were identified for further consideration because they balanced priorities well. The best alternative would create a center transitway on 16th Street with bicycle lanes on a parallel street, allowing for strong transit performance while maintaining other features.
By Dario Hidalgo, PhD. Director Research and Practice EMBARQ, The World Resources Institute Center for Sustainable Transport.
Sustainable Transport Symposium 2011.
Kocaeli, Turkey, April 6-8 2011.
Implementation of Cycling Policies in PragueViktor Zagreba
The document discusses bicycle transportation policies and infrastructure development in Prague, Czech Republic. It provides background on Prague's population and administration. It then summarizes Prague's evolving approach to bicycles, starting from seeing them as recreation only in the 1990s, to gradually establishing political and organizational support through working groups and commissions from the early 2000s. The document outlines Prague's plans and concepts for developing a comprehensive bicycle network using approaches from other European countries. It presents examples of infrastructure projects including designated routes, integration of bicycles into streets, and connections to public transportation.
This document provides best practices and elements for successful Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) systems. It recommends focusing on reliable service, improving public transit's image to gain loyalty, and viewing BRT as a service rather than just a route. Key elements of high-quality BRT include dedicated lanes, platform-level boarding, off-board fare collection, wide doors, and passenger information systems. BRT works best when placed in the most congested routes serving the largest number of existing bus riders to maximize ridership and improve bus speeds.
2pi+BRT Mira Mesa Boulevard Corridor comparison. Whilst Transit Priority on BRT\'s routs marginally benefits low volumes of transit users. The combination of 2pi System + BRT yields maximum cost-benefit ratios for all vehicles; delays and emissions are considerable reduced. This is an analysis of such scenario.
This document discusses the functional classification of roads which involves grouping roads based on the type of service they provide to traffic flow. It describes how functional classification establishes a road network hierarchy that channels trips efficiently from local roads to collector roads to arterial roads. The classification considers a road's role in providing both access to adjacent properties and mobility for through traffic. Additional factors like trip distances, traffic volumes, and the proportion of commercial vehicles vary based on a road's functional class. The purposes of functional classification include delineating responsibilities, planning road standards, and assisting road users.
The Federal Transit Administration approved the long-awaited extension of Metrorail to Tysons Corner and Dulles International Airport in Northern Virginia. The $5.2 billion project will ease congestion and spur economic growth in the region by expanding the regional rail system and offering an alternative to automobile travel. It will also support transit-oriented development along the corridor. The Federal Transit Administration has provided funding to advance the project to the final design phase and for site preparation work, including relocating utilities.
Session 57 - Southern Success Stories: Charting New Ground with Bicycle Frien...Sharon Roerty
The document summarizes Greenville, South Carolina's bicycle friendly community initiative. It provides information on Greenville's population, size, and roadways. It then details Greenville's resolution to adopt the League of American Cyclists' action plan to achieve bicycle friendly community status by 2008. This includes improving infrastructure like bike lanes and trails, enacting education programs, and encouraging bike use among city employees and residents. The document outlines goals and programs around safety, events, and integrating bikes with public transit.
This document discusses proposals to improve transportation infrastructure and connectivity at three scales in the metropolitan region of São Paulo:
1) The metropolitan region, with a focus on improving multi-modality between transportation methods like trains, metro, roads and waterways.
2) Guidelines along key transportation axes like the Tamanduateí river axis, with proposals to develop trains, metro lines, ports and roads.
3) Specific intentions for the Dom Pedro Park project area, including restoring the local river, improving access both within the park and connecting it to the larger region, and developing new cultural and transportation hubs.
By Dario Hidalgo, PhD. Director Research and Practice EMBARQ, The World Resources Institute Center for Sustainable Transport.
Sustainable Transport Symposium 2011.
Kocaeli, Turkey, April 6-8 2011.
Implementation of Cycling Policies in PragueViktor Zagreba
The document discusses bicycle transportation policies and infrastructure development in Prague, Czech Republic. It provides background on Prague's population and administration. It then summarizes Prague's evolving approach to bicycles, starting from seeing them as recreation only in the 1990s, to gradually establishing political and organizational support through working groups and commissions from the early 2000s. The document outlines Prague's plans and concepts for developing a comprehensive bicycle network using approaches from other European countries. It presents examples of infrastructure projects including designated routes, integration of bicycles into streets, and connections to public transportation.
This document provides best practices and elements for successful Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) systems. It recommends focusing on reliable service, improving public transit's image to gain loyalty, and viewing BRT as a service rather than just a route. Key elements of high-quality BRT include dedicated lanes, platform-level boarding, off-board fare collection, wide doors, and passenger information systems. BRT works best when placed in the most congested routes serving the largest number of existing bus riders to maximize ridership and improve bus speeds.
2pi+BRT Mira Mesa Boulevard Corridor comparison. Whilst Transit Priority on BRT\'s routs marginally benefits low volumes of transit users. The combination of 2pi System + BRT yields maximum cost-benefit ratios for all vehicles; delays and emissions are considerable reduced. This is an analysis of such scenario.
This document discusses the functional classification of roads which involves grouping roads based on the type of service they provide to traffic flow. It describes how functional classification establishes a road network hierarchy that channels trips efficiently from local roads to collector roads to arterial roads. The classification considers a road's role in providing both access to adjacent properties and mobility for through traffic. Additional factors like trip distances, traffic volumes, and the proportion of commercial vehicles vary based on a road's functional class. The purposes of functional classification include delineating responsibilities, planning road standards, and assisting road users.
The Federal Transit Administration approved the long-awaited extension of Metrorail to Tysons Corner and Dulles International Airport in Northern Virginia. The $5.2 billion project will ease congestion and spur economic growth in the region by expanding the regional rail system and offering an alternative to automobile travel. It will also support transit-oriented development along the corridor. The Federal Transit Administration has provided funding to advance the project to the final design phase and for site preparation work, including relocating utilities.
Session 57 - Southern Success Stories: Charting New Ground with Bicycle Frien...Sharon Roerty
The document summarizes Greenville, South Carolina's bicycle friendly community initiative. It provides information on Greenville's population, size, and roadways. It then details Greenville's resolution to adopt the League of American Cyclists' action plan to achieve bicycle friendly community status by 2008. This includes improving infrastructure like bike lanes and trails, enacting education programs, and encouraging bike use among city employees and residents. The document outlines goals and programs around safety, events, and integrating bikes with public transit.
This document discusses proposals to improve transportation infrastructure and connectivity at three scales in the metropolitan region of São Paulo:
1) The metropolitan region, with a focus on improving multi-modality between transportation methods like trains, metro, roads and waterways.
2) Guidelines along key transportation axes like the Tamanduateí river axis, with proposals to develop trains, metro lines, ports and roads.
3) Specific intentions for the Dom Pedro Park project area, including restoring the local river, improving access both within the park and connecting it to the larger region, and developing new cultural and transportation hubs.
The document presents 9 alternatives for improving transit on 16th Street in San Francisco. All alternatives provide dedicated transit lanes and priority treatments. They differ in placement of bicycle facilities, type of transit lane, and location of bus stops. Alternative 1 provides the strongest transit performance with a center transitway and improved bicycle corridor on 17th Street. It was carried forward for further evaluation. Alternative 4 also provides a center "queue jump" lane for transit and was also carried forward.
The document provides an introduction and background on the EN TRIPS project, which aims to implement the transportation vision established in the Eastern Neighborhoods Area Plans of San Francisco. It discusses the project scope and objectives, which include identifying and designing key transportation infrastructure projects to address impacts of growth in the Eastern Neighborhoods. The objectives call for investing in improved transit, pedestrian, bicycle, and other multimodal facilities to efficiently move people and goods through these neighborhoods as population and employment are forecast to greatly increase. The document also reviews the relevant transportation policies that provide input to the EN TRIPS project.
This document summarizes the key issues and opportunities related to transportation along the 16th Street corridor in San Francisco. It discusses four distinct segments of 16th Street and identifies the segment between Potrero Avenue and 7th Street as the focus of the ENTRIPS corridor design project due to expected growth, congestion forecasts, transit constraints, and community priority. The objectives of transportation improvements for this segment are outlined, including prioritizing transit performance, enhancing the public realm, improving pedestrian and bicycle conditions, maintaining vehicle circulation, and delivering projects cost-effectively. Finally, nine project alternatives are presented and evaluated against the objectives.
This document summarizes transportation issues and opportunities for the Folsom and Howard Street corridor in San Francisco's South of Market neighborhood. It discusses the four distinct segments that make up the corridor and focuses on the segment between 5th and 11th Streets. This segment was prioritized for analysis due to expected growth and community priority. The summary identifies key challenges including limited pedestrian facilities, high vehicle volumes and speeds that diminish safety, and a lack of protected bicycle facilities. Project objectives are outlined to improve pedestrian safety and connectivity, enhance the public realm, improve transit legibility, maintain adequate vehicle capacity while prioritizing other modes, and deliver cost-effective improvements. A framework is proposed for east-west circulation in the area with Mission
This document summarizes issues and opportunities for improving the Seventh and Eighth Street corridor in San Francisco's South of Market neighborhood. It identifies three segments of the corridor and focuses on the segment between Market and Harrison Streets, which experiences high traffic volumes, speeds, and rates of pedestrian injury collisions. The document outlines the project's objectives to improve pedestrian conditions and safety, reduce crossing distances, and upgrade the public realm and landscaping, particularly on Seventh Street as a designated "green connector" street. Tradeoffs will be required due to the limited right-of-way. Proposed design alternatives aim to balance priorities like pedestrian comfort and traffic flow.
The document summarizes the analysis of circulation and operations for proposed transportation corridor projects in the Eastern Neighborhoods of San Francisco. It assessed potential impacts on traffic, the transportation network, transit delay, and signal timing. The analysis evaluated different design alternatives for Folsom Street, Howard Street, 7th Street, and 8th Street that vary the number of vehicle lanes, inclusion of transit and bicycle facilities, and direction of traffic flow. The preferred alternatives balance moving people by all modes efficiently while minimizing negative impacts to traffic flow and livability in the neighborhoods.
This document provides an overview of a community workshop to discuss preliminary design alternatives for three sets of streets in San Francisco: Folsom and Howard Streets, 7th and 8th Streets, and 16th Street. The agenda includes introducing the design alternatives for each corridor in breakout group discussions. The purpose is to get community input on alternatives that aim to improve transportation, safety, and the public realm while supporting appropriate development as part of the Eastern Neighborhoods Transportation Implementation Planning Study. Attendees will provide feedback on alternative designs through discussion, written comments, and prioritization voting. Refined design concepts and implementation strategies will be developed after the workshop.
This document provides recommendations for prioritizing transportation corridor improvement projects in San Francisco's Eastern Neighborhoods based on an analysis of growth and transportation needs. Key steps included: 1) Dividing corridors into segments; 2) Assessing growth areas; 3) Scoring segments on bicycle, pedestrian, and transit needs; 4) Identifying outliers. Recommended priority corridors for near-term projects include segments of Folsom St, 3rd/4th Sts, and 5th/6th Sts due to high growth, multimodal needs, and safety issues. Other corridors may be addressed through other planning processes.
This memorandum provides descriptions and analysis of concept alternatives developed for transportation projects on Folsom and Howard Streets and Seventh and Eighth Streets in San Francisco's South of Market neighborhood. Ten alternatives were initially considered. For Folsom and Howard, alternatives 1, 6, and 9 were recommended for further consideration. Alternative 1 would convert the streets to a two-lane, one-way configuration with cycletracks. Alternative 6 would implement a hybrid one-way/two-way configuration. Alternative 9 would convert the streets to a two-lane, two-way configuration with buffered bike lanes. The alternatives aim to improve safety and comfort for pedestrians and cyclists while maintaining adequate vehicle capacity and access for businesses.
The document summarizes meetings of the ENTRIPS Task Force from 2009 to 2010. The Task Force provided feedback to the SFMTA and Planning Department on their transportation planning process for the Eastern Neighborhoods area. They discussed the existing conditions report, future conditions report, and evaluation framework to prioritize potential transportation projects. Urban Ecology facilitated the Task Force and ensured community input was considered in the ENTRIPS process.
This document provides an overview of future transportation conditions in San Francisco's Eastern Neighborhoods based on projected population and employment growth between 2005-2035. Key findings include:
- Significant increases in population and employment are projected, especially in the Central Waterfront and Mission Bay areas.
- Total daily trips are projected to increase by over 50% and PM peak period trips to grow by over 40%.
- Vehicle volumes on major streets are expected to rise substantially, potentially worsening congestion.
- Transit ridership is projected to more than double, straining the capacity of key bus and light rail lines.
- Pedestrian collisions may rise in areas with high projected density increases without street improvements.
This document discusses several transportation projects in San Francisco including a street plan, a transit effectiveness project, a bicycle plan, traffic calming measures, and SFpark. The projects aim to improve streets, transit, biking infrastructure, and manage traffic and parking through strategies such as traffic circles, speed cushions, and demand-based parking pricing.
This document outlines an evaluation framework and process for prioritizing transportation projects in Eastern Neighborhoods of San Francisco. It proposes a three-track system that evaluates: 1) major network projects, 2) neighborhood-scale projects, and 3) area-wide policy projects. Both qualitative and quantitative criteria will be used to assess projects according to goals like improving circulation, addressing deficiencies, and aiding street design. A timeline and next steps are discussed for applying this framework.
At the Feb. 2, 2011 Community Meeting, the EN TRIPS consultant team identified preliminary priority corridors, and asked the community for their feedback.
Brian Fitzsimmons on the Business Strategy and Content Flywheel of Barstool S...Neil Horowitz
On episode 272 of the Digital and Social Media Sports Podcast, Neil chatted with Brian Fitzsimmons, Director of Licensing and Business Development for Barstool Sports.
What follows is a collection of snippets from the podcast. To hear the full interview and more, check out the podcast on all podcast platforms and at www.dsmsports.net
The document presents 9 alternatives for improving transit on 16th Street in San Francisco. All alternatives provide dedicated transit lanes and priority treatments. They differ in placement of bicycle facilities, type of transit lane, and location of bus stops. Alternative 1 provides the strongest transit performance with a center transitway and improved bicycle corridor on 17th Street. It was carried forward for further evaluation. Alternative 4 also provides a center "queue jump" lane for transit and was also carried forward.
The document provides an introduction and background on the EN TRIPS project, which aims to implement the transportation vision established in the Eastern Neighborhoods Area Plans of San Francisco. It discusses the project scope and objectives, which include identifying and designing key transportation infrastructure projects to address impacts of growth in the Eastern Neighborhoods. The objectives call for investing in improved transit, pedestrian, bicycle, and other multimodal facilities to efficiently move people and goods through these neighborhoods as population and employment are forecast to greatly increase. The document also reviews the relevant transportation policies that provide input to the EN TRIPS project.
This document summarizes the key issues and opportunities related to transportation along the 16th Street corridor in San Francisco. It discusses four distinct segments of 16th Street and identifies the segment between Potrero Avenue and 7th Street as the focus of the ENTRIPS corridor design project due to expected growth, congestion forecasts, transit constraints, and community priority. The objectives of transportation improvements for this segment are outlined, including prioritizing transit performance, enhancing the public realm, improving pedestrian and bicycle conditions, maintaining vehicle circulation, and delivering projects cost-effectively. Finally, nine project alternatives are presented and evaluated against the objectives.
This document summarizes transportation issues and opportunities for the Folsom and Howard Street corridor in San Francisco's South of Market neighborhood. It discusses the four distinct segments that make up the corridor and focuses on the segment between 5th and 11th Streets. This segment was prioritized for analysis due to expected growth and community priority. The summary identifies key challenges including limited pedestrian facilities, high vehicle volumes and speeds that diminish safety, and a lack of protected bicycle facilities. Project objectives are outlined to improve pedestrian safety and connectivity, enhance the public realm, improve transit legibility, maintain adequate vehicle capacity while prioritizing other modes, and deliver cost-effective improvements. A framework is proposed for east-west circulation in the area with Mission
This document summarizes issues and opportunities for improving the Seventh and Eighth Street corridor in San Francisco's South of Market neighborhood. It identifies three segments of the corridor and focuses on the segment between Market and Harrison Streets, which experiences high traffic volumes, speeds, and rates of pedestrian injury collisions. The document outlines the project's objectives to improve pedestrian conditions and safety, reduce crossing distances, and upgrade the public realm and landscaping, particularly on Seventh Street as a designated "green connector" street. Tradeoffs will be required due to the limited right-of-way. Proposed design alternatives aim to balance priorities like pedestrian comfort and traffic flow.
The document summarizes the analysis of circulation and operations for proposed transportation corridor projects in the Eastern Neighborhoods of San Francisco. It assessed potential impacts on traffic, the transportation network, transit delay, and signal timing. The analysis evaluated different design alternatives for Folsom Street, Howard Street, 7th Street, and 8th Street that vary the number of vehicle lanes, inclusion of transit and bicycle facilities, and direction of traffic flow. The preferred alternatives balance moving people by all modes efficiently while minimizing negative impacts to traffic flow and livability in the neighborhoods.
This document provides an overview of a community workshop to discuss preliminary design alternatives for three sets of streets in San Francisco: Folsom and Howard Streets, 7th and 8th Streets, and 16th Street. The agenda includes introducing the design alternatives for each corridor in breakout group discussions. The purpose is to get community input on alternatives that aim to improve transportation, safety, and the public realm while supporting appropriate development as part of the Eastern Neighborhoods Transportation Implementation Planning Study. Attendees will provide feedback on alternative designs through discussion, written comments, and prioritization voting. Refined design concepts and implementation strategies will be developed after the workshop.
This document provides recommendations for prioritizing transportation corridor improvement projects in San Francisco's Eastern Neighborhoods based on an analysis of growth and transportation needs. Key steps included: 1) Dividing corridors into segments; 2) Assessing growth areas; 3) Scoring segments on bicycle, pedestrian, and transit needs; 4) Identifying outliers. Recommended priority corridors for near-term projects include segments of Folsom St, 3rd/4th Sts, and 5th/6th Sts due to high growth, multimodal needs, and safety issues. Other corridors may be addressed through other planning processes.
This memorandum provides descriptions and analysis of concept alternatives developed for transportation projects on Folsom and Howard Streets and Seventh and Eighth Streets in San Francisco's South of Market neighborhood. Ten alternatives were initially considered. For Folsom and Howard, alternatives 1, 6, and 9 were recommended for further consideration. Alternative 1 would convert the streets to a two-lane, one-way configuration with cycletracks. Alternative 6 would implement a hybrid one-way/two-way configuration. Alternative 9 would convert the streets to a two-lane, two-way configuration with buffered bike lanes. The alternatives aim to improve safety and comfort for pedestrians and cyclists while maintaining adequate vehicle capacity and access for businesses.
The document summarizes meetings of the ENTRIPS Task Force from 2009 to 2010. The Task Force provided feedback to the SFMTA and Planning Department on their transportation planning process for the Eastern Neighborhoods area. They discussed the existing conditions report, future conditions report, and evaluation framework to prioritize potential transportation projects. Urban Ecology facilitated the Task Force and ensured community input was considered in the ENTRIPS process.
This document provides an overview of future transportation conditions in San Francisco's Eastern Neighborhoods based on projected population and employment growth between 2005-2035. Key findings include:
- Significant increases in population and employment are projected, especially in the Central Waterfront and Mission Bay areas.
- Total daily trips are projected to increase by over 50% and PM peak period trips to grow by over 40%.
- Vehicle volumes on major streets are expected to rise substantially, potentially worsening congestion.
- Transit ridership is projected to more than double, straining the capacity of key bus and light rail lines.
- Pedestrian collisions may rise in areas with high projected density increases without street improvements.
This document discusses several transportation projects in San Francisco including a street plan, a transit effectiveness project, a bicycle plan, traffic calming measures, and SFpark. The projects aim to improve streets, transit, biking infrastructure, and manage traffic and parking through strategies such as traffic circles, speed cushions, and demand-based parking pricing.
This document outlines an evaluation framework and process for prioritizing transportation projects in Eastern Neighborhoods of San Francisco. It proposes a three-track system that evaluates: 1) major network projects, 2) neighborhood-scale projects, and 3) area-wide policy projects. Both qualitative and quantitative criteria will be used to assess projects according to goals like improving circulation, addressing deficiencies, and aiding street design. A timeline and next steps are discussed for applying this framework.
At the Feb. 2, 2011 Community Meeting, the EN TRIPS consultant team identified preliminary priority corridors, and asked the community for their feedback.
More from Eastern Neighborhoods Transportation Implementation Planning Study (20)
Brian Fitzsimmons on the Business Strategy and Content Flywheel of Barstool S...Neil Horowitz
On episode 272 of the Digital and Social Media Sports Podcast, Neil chatted with Brian Fitzsimmons, Director of Licensing and Business Development for Barstool Sports.
What follows is a collection of snippets from the podcast. To hear the full interview and more, check out the podcast on all podcast platforms and at www.dsmsports.net
Starting a business is like embarking on an unpredictable adventure. It’s a journey filled with highs and lows, victories and defeats. But what if I told you that those setbacks and failures could be the very stepping stones that lead you to fortune? Let’s explore how resilience, adaptability, and strategic thinking can transform adversity into opportunity.
[To download this presentation, visit:
https://www.oeconsulting.com.sg/training-presentations]
This presentation is a curated compilation of PowerPoint diagrams and templates designed to illustrate 20 different digital transformation frameworks and models. These frameworks are based on recent industry trends and best practices, ensuring that the content remains relevant and up-to-date.
Key highlights include Microsoft's Digital Transformation Framework, which focuses on driving innovation and efficiency, and McKinsey's Ten Guiding Principles, which provide strategic insights for successful digital transformation. Additionally, Forrester's framework emphasizes enhancing customer experiences and modernizing IT infrastructure, while IDC's MaturityScape helps assess and develop organizational digital maturity. MIT's framework explores cutting-edge strategies for achieving digital success.
These materials are perfect for enhancing your business or classroom presentations, offering visual aids to supplement your insights. Please note that while comprehensive, these slides are intended as supplementary resources and may not be complete for standalone instructional purposes.
Frameworks/Models included:
Microsoft’s Digital Transformation Framework
McKinsey’s Ten Guiding Principles of Digital Transformation
Forrester’s Digital Transformation Framework
IDC’s Digital Transformation MaturityScape
MIT’s Digital Transformation Framework
Gartner’s Digital Transformation Framework
Accenture’s Digital Strategy & Enterprise Frameworks
Deloitte’s Digital Industrial Transformation Framework
Capgemini’s Digital Transformation Framework
PwC’s Digital Transformation Framework
Cisco’s Digital Transformation Framework
Cognizant’s Digital Transformation Framework
DXC Technology’s Digital Transformation Framework
The BCG Strategy Palette
McKinsey’s Digital Transformation Framework
Digital Transformation Compass
Four Levels of Digital Maturity
Design Thinking Framework
Business Model Canvas
Customer Journey Map
SATTA MATKA SATTA FAST RESULT KALYAN TOP MATKA RESULT KALYAN SATTA MATKA FAST RESULT MILAN RATAN RAJDHANI MAIN BAZAR MATKA FAST TIPS RESULT MATKA CHART JODI CHART PANEL CHART FREE FIX GAME SATTAMATKA ! MATKA MOBI SATTA 143 spboss.in TOP NO1 RESULT FULL RATE MATKA ONLINE GAME PLAY BY APP SPBOSS
Unveiling the Dynamic Personalities, Key Dates, and Horoscope Insights: Gemin...my Pandit
Explore the fascinating world of the Gemini Zodiac Sign. Discover the unique personality traits, key dates, and horoscope insights of Gemini individuals. Learn how their sociable, communicative nature and boundless curiosity make them the dynamic explorers of the zodiac. Dive into the duality of the Gemini sign and understand their intellectual and adventurous spirit.
Navigating the world of forex trading can be challenging, especially for beginners. To help you make an informed decision, we have comprehensively compared the best forex brokers in India for 2024. This article, reviewed by Top Forex Brokers Review, will cover featured award winners, the best forex brokers, featured offers, the best copy trading platforms, the best forex brokers for beginners, the best MetaTrader brokers, and recently updated reviews. We will focus on FP Markets, Black Bull, EightCap, IC Markets, and Octa.
The APCO Geopolitical Radar - Q3 2024 The Global Operating Environment for Bu...APCO
The Radar reflects input from APCO’s teams located around the world. It distils a host of interconnected events and trends into insights to inform operational and strategic decisions. Issues covered in this edition include:
Event Report - SAP Sapphire 2024 Orlando - lots of innovation and old challengesHolger Mueller
Holger Mueller of Constellation Research shares his key takeaways from SAP's Sapphire confernece, held in Orlando, June 3rd till 5th 2024, in the Orange Convention Center.
❼❷⓿❺❻❷❽❷❼❽ Dpboss Matka Result Satta Matka Guessing Satta Fix jodi Kalyan Final ank Satta Matka Dpbos Final ank Satta Matta Matka 143 Kalyan Matka Guessing Final Matka Final ank Today Matka 420 Satta Batta Satta 143 Kalyan Chart Main Bazar Chart vip Matka Guessing Dpboss 143 Guessing Kalyan night
How MJ Global Leads the Packaging Industry.pdfMJ Global
MJ Global's success in staying ahead of the curve in the packaging industry is a testament to its dedication to innovation, sustainability, and customer-centricity. By embracing technological advancements, leading in eco-friendly solutions, collaborating with industry leaders, and adapting to evolving consumer preferences, MJ Global continues to set new standards in the packaging sector.
Best Competitive Marble Pricing in Dubai - ☎ 9928909666Stone Art Hub
Stone Art Hub offers the best competitive Marble Pricing in Dubai, ensuring affordability without compromising quality. With a wide range of exquisite marble options to choose from, you can enhance your spaces with elegance and sophistication. For inquiries or orders, contact us at ☎ 9928909666. Experience luxury at unbeatable prices.
How to Implement a Strategy: Transform Your Strategy with BSC Designer's Comp...Aleksey Savkin
The Strategy Implementation System offers a structured approach to translating stakeholder needs into actionable strategies using high-level and low-level scorecards. It involves stakeholder analysis, strategy decomposition, adoption of strategic frameworks like Balanced Scorecard or OKR, and alignment of goals, initiatives, and KPIs.
Key Components:
- Stakeholder Analysis
- Strategy Decomposition
- Adoption of Business Frameworks
- Goal Setting
- Initiatives and Action Plans
- KPIs and Performance Metrics
- Learning and Adaptation
- Alignment and Cascading of Scorecards
Benefits:
- Systematic strategy formulation and execution.
- Framework flexibility and automation.
- Enhanced alignment and strategic focus across the organization.
[To download this presentation, visit:
https://www.oeconsulting.com.sg/training-presentations]
This PowerPoint compilation offers a comprehensive overview of 20 leading innovation management frameworks and methodologies, selected for their broad applicability across various industries and organizational contexts. These frameworks are valuable resources for a wide range of users, including business professionals, educators, and consultants.
Each framework is presented with visually engaging diagrams and templates, ensuring the content is both informative and appealing. While this compilation is thorough, please note that the slides are intended as supplementary resources and may not be sufficient for standalone instructional purposes.
This compilation is ideal for anyone looking to enhance their understanding of innovation management and drive meaningful change within their organization. Whether you aim to improve product development processes, enhance customer experiences, or drive digital transformation, these frameworks offer valuable insights and tools to help you achieve your goals.
INCLUDED FRAMEWORKS/MODELS:
1. Stanford’s Design Thinking
2. IDEO’s Human-Centered Design
3. Strategyzer’s Business Model Innovation
4. Lean Startup Methodology
5. Agile Innovation Framework
6. Doblin’s Ten Types of Innovation
7. McKinsey’s Three Horizons of Growth
8. Customer Journey Map
9. Christensen’s Disruptive Innovation Theory
10. Blue Ocean Strategy
11. Strategyn’s Jobs-To-Be-Done (JTBD) Framework with Job Map
12. Design Sprint Framework
13. The Double Diamond
14. Lean Six Sigma DMAIC
15. TRIZ Problem-Solving Framework
16. Edward de Bono’s Six Thinking Hats
17. Stage-Gate Model
18. Toyota’s Six Steps of Kaizen
19. Microsoft’s Digital Transformation Framework
20. Design for Six Sigma (DFSS)
To download this presentation, visit:
https://www.oeconsulting.com.sg/training-presentations
Innovation Management Frameworks: Your Guide to Creativity & Innovation
ENTRIPS Summary of All Priority Corridor Alternatives
1. EN TRIPS | Final Report
San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency
4.3 ALTERNATIVES DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION
KEY ●●● Greatest benefit ○ Neutral ●●● Greatest impact
Full list of project alternatives
The EN TRIPS project team developed a total of nine project alternatives. These alternatives are described and evaluated for each design principle in the Figure 4-2. The project alternatives share a number of similarities. First, all of them
provide dedicated transit lanes (either on the center or the side of the street), as well as other transit priority treatments such as near-level boarding and transit signal priority. All would restrict left turns for vehicles at most intersections on
16th in order to maintain capacity for through-travel. Most would remove a large share of the parking on 16th Street. It is important to note, however, that with 90 degree parking present on most side streets in this segment, the parking on 16th
Street represents a relatively small share of the total parking in the corridor (most parcels on the corridor front onto at least one side street). All would require substantial public investment in transit and pedestrian facilities. Key differences
between the alternatives include the placement of bicycle facilities (either 16th or 17th Street), the type of transit only lane (center or side-running), and the placement of bus stops (boarding island or curb stops).
Figure 4-2 16th Street: Full List of Project Alternatives
Bicycle Pedestrian
Transit circulation Vehicle circulation The public Parking and Cost
Description Cross Section Performance and safety circulation and safety realm loading comparison Notes Disposition
1 Median Provides strong transit Carried forward – evaluated
Transitway
●●● ○ ● ●● ●●● ● $$$ priority. Removes existing
bicycle lane on 16 but
further below.
replaces it with an enhanced
bicycle corridor on 17th. Wide
sidewalks would benefit
pedestrian safety and the
public realm.
2 Median This alternative provides most Not carried forward because
Transitway
+ Bike
●●● ○ ● ● ●● ●● $$$ of the same advantages as
Alternative 1. However, it
bicycles can be
accommodated on 17th Street
Lanes reduces sidewalk space to in an improved facility
maintain bicycle lanes on 16th
street.
3 Median This alternative would Not carried forward because
Transitway
+ Bike
●● ○ ● ● ●● ●● $$$ maintain space for wide
sidewalks by foregoing transit
of insufficient transit
performance improvement
Lanes + boarding islands, instead and potential bus-bike
Curb Stops bringing buses out of the conflicts.
transitway to stops at the
curb.
4 Median Provides a center "queue Carried forward – evaluated
Queue
Jump Lane
●● ○ ● ● ●● ○ $$$ jump" lane that would allow
transit to safely bypass traffic
further below.
+ Parking in either direction. Would
permit both wide sidewalks
and maintenance of parking
lanes. Carried forward, but
most appropriate for other
segments of 16th.
4-9 16th Street Alternatives
2. EN TRIPS | Final Report
San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency
Figure 4-2 16th Street: All Alternatives (Continued)
Bicycle Pedestrian Deliverability
Transit circulation Vehicle circulation The public Parking and and cost-
Description Cross Section Performance and safety circulation and safety realm loading effectiveness Notes Disposition
5 Median Identical to Alternative 4, but Not carried forward because
Queue
Jump Lane
● ○ ● ● ●●● ●● $$$ would provide bicycle lanes
instead of parking.
bicycle lanes can be
accommodated on 17th Street.
+ Bike
Lanes
6 Median This alternative would provide Not carried forward because
bikeway
● ○ ● ● ● ●● $$ side-running transit, and
would accommodate two-way
of uncertainty about
functionality of the bicycle
travel in a 12’ median. While facility.
this would be a premium
facility for through-travel, it is
not clear that bicycle turning
movements could be safely
accommodated.
7 Median Side-running transit lanes Carried forward – evaluated
Green
● ○ ● ●● ●●● ●● $$$ would provide some transit
priority, but buses would wait
further below.
behind right turning vehicles.
Would provide for a wide
landscaped median,
improving streetscape.
8 Reversible This alternative would provide Not carried forward due to low
Lane
○ ○ ● ○ ○ ●● $$ a reversible vehicle lane on
16th, maximizing traffic
pedestrian and public realm
benefit.
capacity in the peak direction
of travel. It would require
overhead gantries that would
negatively affect the
streetscape.
9 Side- Side-running transit lanes Not carried forward because
Running
Transit
● ○ ● ● ● ●● $$ would provide some transit
priority, but buses would wait
bicycle lanes can be
accommodated on 17th Street.
Lane + Bike behind right turning vehicles
Lanes and potentially conflict with
bicycles.
4-10 16th Street Alternatives
3. EN TRIPS | Final Report
San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency
5.4 ALTERNATIVES DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION
KEY ●●● Greatest benefit ○ Neutral ●●● Greatest impact
Full list of project alternatives
The SFMTA, working with other City departments, the study team and the public developed a total of eight project alternatives for Folsom and Howard Streets. These alternatives are described and evaluated for each project objective in the
tables below. The project alternatives share a number of similarities. First, all of them provide reduced pedestrian crossing distances through pedestrian bulb outs; all seek to reduce vehicle speeds by progressing signals at a consistent,
moderate speed. All alternatives maintain parking lanes on both streets, and most provide protected bicycle facilities. Key differences between the alternatives include the directionality of travel for vehicles and transit (there are both one-way
and two-way alternatives for Folsom Street and Howard Street), the location of bicycle facilities (either on Folsom, on Howard, or split between them), and the width of sidewalks. All eight alternatives are summarized and evaluated below. In
the next section, the recommended alternative is developed in detail. Finally, in Section 5.6, three other promising alternatives were evaluated in greater detail presented for comparison.
Folsom and Howard Streets: One-way alternatives
The alternatives presented on this page maintain one-way operations on Folsom and Howard Streets. Signals would be timed to favor a steady vehicle progression, and mid-block signals would be fixed-time. These alternatives vary with
respect to the number of one-way lanes.
Figure 5-2 Alternatives featuring a one-way Folsom Street
Transit
Transit legibility/
Pedestrian The public performanc consolidatio Bicycle Vehicle Parking and Cost
Description Cross Section conditions realm e n conditions circulation loading comparison Notes Disposition
1 Folsom: One- This alternative would narrow the roadway to Carried forward
way, two lanes,
two-way
●●● ●●● ● ○ ●●● ● ● $$$ two, one-way lanes on each street, providing
important benefits for pedestrians, cyclists,
cycletrack and the public realm with 15-foot sidewalks,
greatly narrowed crossing distance, wide
cycletracks, and traffic calming.
It would not provide for one-way circulation or
consolidation of transit routes onto Folsom
Howard: One- Street. It would require the expense of moving
way, two lanes, curblines on both streets. It is very likely that
one-way the project would be implemented on Folsom
cycletrack Street first, and the Howard Street project
would be optional.
2 Folsom: One- This alternative would narrow the roadway to Not carried forward
way, three
lanes, one-way
●● ● ○ ○ ●● ○ ● $$ three one-way lanes on both Folsom and
Howard Streets and provide one-way buffered
because Alternative 1
provides many of the
cycletrack bike lanes on both streets. It would provide same benefits with
bulb outs and mid-block crossings but widen greater gain for
the sidewalk on one side of Folsom rather pedestrians.
than both sides. The net gain for pedestrians
would be less, but the vehicle capacity would
Howard: One- be higher, which would result in less transit
way, three delay. Transit would not be consolidated.
lanes, one-way
cycletrack
5-13 Folsom & Howard Streets Alternatives
4. EN TRIPS | Final Report
San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency
Two-way, three-lane Folsom alternatives
Each of the alternatives summarized on this page converts Folsom Street to two-way operations in order to achieve transit consolidation. In each, Folsom Street would provide two lanes eastbound and one lane westbound. Signals would be
timed to favor a steady eastbound progression at moderate speed. In some cases, mid-block signals may be pedestrian-actuated. These alternatives vary with respect to the configuration of Howard Street and the placement of bicycle faculties.
Figure 5-3 Alternatives featuring a two-way, three-lane Folsom Street
Pedestrian The public Transit Transit Bicycle Vehicle Parking and Cost
Description Cross Section conditions realm performance legibility conditions circulation loading comparison Notes Disposition
3 Folsom: Two This alternative would allow for three lanes of traffic Carried forward
lanes EB, one
lane WB with
●● ●● ○ ●● ●● ● ● $$ on each street plus buffered bicycle lanes. Two lanes
would operate in the dominant direction of travel
one-way (eastbound on Folsom and westbound on Howard),
cycletrack while a third lane would operate in the opposite
direction. A one-way cycletrack would be provided on
each street. It allows for transit consolidation,
Howard: Two
upgraded bike facilities, six lanes of vehicle capacity
lanes WB, one
to reduce transit delay, and wider sidewalks on one
lane EB with
side of the street.
one-way
cycletrack
4 Folsom: Two This alternative would create a two-way Folsom Carried forward
lanes EB, one
lane WB
●●● ●●● ● ●● ● ● ● $$ Street, with two eastbound lanes and one westbound
lane. Two-way travel would allow for transit service to
be consolidated. All bicycle facilities would be
removed from Folsom. A two-way bicycle cycletrack
Howard: Two
would be added on Howard Street, which would be
lanes WB with
narrowed to two westbound vehicle lanes.
two-way
cycletrack This alternative would maximize pedestrian space on
a two-way Folsom Street while providing premium
bicycle facilities on Howard. Howard has bicycle
connectivity to the Mission District,
5 Folsom: Two This alternative would provide a two-way Folsom, with Carried forward
lanes EB, one
lane WB with
●● ● ○ ●● ●●● ● ● $ two lanes eastbound and one lane westbound.
Instead of widening the Folsom Street sidewalks, it
two-way would provide a two-way cycletrack on Folsom.
cycletrack Howard would also be converted to two-way, with two
westbound lanes, two eastbound lanes, and a
landscaped median/turn lane.
Howard: Two
lanes WB, one It would allow for transit consolidation, six lanes of
lane EB with vehicle capacity to maintain transit speeds, and a
center turn premium bicycle facility with optimal connectivity.
lane/median While it improves pedestrian connectivity, It would not
widen sidewalks and provides little new pedestrian
space.
5-14 Folsom & Howard Streets Alternatives
5. EN TRIPS | Final Report
San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency
Folsom/Howard: Two-way, two-lane Folsom alternatives
Each of the alternatives summarized on this page converts Folsom Street to two-way operation but provides just one through-lane in each direction. These alternatives would substantially reduce vehicle capacity on Folsom, changing its role
from an arterial to a neighborhood street. To maintain transit operations at an acceptable level, major diversion of vehicle traffic from Folsom would be required. To absorb part of this diversion, more capacity is provided on Howard Street.
Figure 5-4 Alternatives featuring a two-way, two-lane Folsom Street
Pedestrian The public Transit Transit Bicycle Vehicle Parking and Cost
Description Cross Section conditions realm performance legibility conditions circulation loading comparison Notes Disposition
6 Folsom: one lane in This alternative would provide one Not carried forward
each direction with
center turn lane
●●● ● ●● ●● ● ●● ● $ through lane in each direction on Folsom
Street with a center turn lane, similar to
because of negative
impacts on transit
the current configuration of Valencia due to increased
Street north of 15th and South of 19th. delay and bus-bike
Bicycle lanes would be provided on both conflicts.
Howard: Two lanes sides of the street. Howard Street would
in each direction be converted to two lanes in each
direction, absorbing some of the vehicle
capacity diverted from Folsom. This
alternative could slow transit and
introduce conflicts between buses and
cyclists at bus stops.
7 Folsom: One lane + This alternative would provide one lane Not carried forward
peak period tow-
away lane in each
○ ○ ○ ●● ●● ○ ●● $ in each direction and a parking lane on
both sides of the street during off peak
due to minimal
upgrades to
direction periods. During peak travel periods, pedestrian realm
parking would be eliminated and the during peak travel
street would offer two lanes in each periods.
Howard: One lane +
direction. This traffic pattern would be in
peak period tow-
place on both Folsom and Howard, but
away lane in each
Folsom would feature a two-way
direction
cycletrack, while Howard would feature a
bike lane in each direction.
8 Folsom: one lane in This alternative would reduce Folsom to Not carried forward
each direction with
bike lanes
●●● ●●● ●● ●● ● ● ●● $$$ one lane in each direction at all times of
day. Private vehicles would be required
because of expense
and because
to turn right at every intersection, planned level of
eliminating Folsom as a through-route. development and
Howard: One lane +
To compensate, Howard would be high- transit service does
one peak period tow
capacity during peak periods, with two not justify eliminating
away lane in each
lanes in each direction and a center turn Folsom as a vehicle
direction, center turn
lane. I t would have just two lanes during through route.
lane/median
off-peak periods. This alternative
provides total peak-period traffic
capacity similar to the three-lane Folsom
alternatives, but converts Folsom Street
into a boulevard for bicycles and transit.
5-15 Folsom & Howard Streets Alternatives
6. EN TRIPS | Final Report
San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency
This page intentionally left blank.
5-16 Folsom & Howard Streets Alternatives
7. EN TRIPS | Final Report
San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency
6.3 ALTERNATIVES DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION
KEY ●●● Greatest benefit ○ Neutral ●●● Greatest impact
Full list of project alternatives
The SFMTA developed a total of six project alternatives for Seventh and Eighth Streets. These alternatives are described and evaluated for each project objective in the tables that follow. Several of these concepts are very similar to projects
developed for Folsom and Howard Streets. These similarities result from the fact that the two sets of streets have the same overall right-of-way dimensions (82.5 feet) and many similar functions. All of these alternatives provide reduced
pedestrian crossing distances through pedestrian bulb outs, maintain parking lanes on both streets, and provide bicycle facilities. As with Folsom and Howard, key differences between the alternatives include the directionality of travel for
vehicles and transit (there are both one-way and two-way alternatives), the type of bus facilities, the location and type of bicycle facilities, and the width of sidewalks. All six alternatives are summarized and evaluated below. In the next
section, the recommended alternative is developed in detail. Finally, in Section 6.5, three other promising alternatives that were evaluated in detail are presented for comparison.
Figure 6-2 Seventh and Eighth Streets: Full List of Project Alternatives
Transit
legibility/
Pedestrian The public Transit consolidati Bicycle Vehicle Parking and Cost
Description Cross Section conditions realm performance on conditions circulation loading comparison Notes Disposition
1 Seventh and This concept would narrow the roadway to Not carried forward due
Eighth Streets:
one-way, two
●●● ●●● ● ○ ●●● ● ● $$$ two, one-way lanes on each street and
provide important benefits for pedestrians,
to impact of forecast
traffic queues on cross
lanes, one-way cyclists, and the public realm with 15-foot streets including Market.
cycletrack sidewalks, greatly narrowed crossing distance,
wide cycletracks, and traffic calming.
It would not provide for two-way circulation or
allow for consolidation of transit routes. It
would require the expense of moving curblines
on both streets.
2 Seventh and This concept would narrow the roadway to Carried forward,
Eighth Streets:
one-way, three
●● ● ○ ○ ●● ○ ● $$ three, one-way lanes on both Seventh and
Eighth Streets and provide one-way buffered
recommended
alternative.
lanes, one-way bike lanes on both streets. It would provide
cycletrack bulb outs and mid-block crossings but widen
the sidewalk on one side of each street rather
than both sides. The net gain in pedestrian
space would be less than Alternative 1, but
the vehicle capacity would be higher, which
would result in less transit delay and less
impacts on adjacent streets.
3 Seventh and Like Alternative 2, this concept would narrow Not carried forward due
Eighth Streets:
one-way, three
●● ●● ○ ○ ● ○ ● $$ the roadway to three, one-way lanes on both
Seventh and Eighth Streets. It differs from
to lack of improvement to
cycling conditions.
lanes, one-way Alternative 2 in that it would provide a Class II
bike lane bike lane on each street instead of a
cycletrack, and widen the sidewalk to 15 feet
on both sides providing additional benefit for
pedestrians and the public realm.
6-9 7th & 8th Streets Alternatives
8. EN TRIPS | Final Report
San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency
Figure 6-3 Seventh and Eighth Streets: All Alternatives (Continued)
Transit
Transit legibility/ Parking
Pedestrian The public performanc consolida Bicycle Vehicle and Cost
Description Cross Section conditions realm e tion conditions circulation loading comparison Notes Disposition
4 Seventh and This alternative would provide two one-way Not carried forward due
Eighth Streets:
two lanes with
● ●● ●● ○ ● ●● ● $$ vehicle lanes and two parking lanes. In a
buffered space outside the parking lane, it
to impact of forecast
traffic queues on cross
buffered bike would provide a wide shared bus/bike lane. streets and an over-
lane and This alternative would provide a high level of emphasis on transit
busway transit priority. However, on a set of streets priority.
with moderate planned transit frequencies (15-
minute headways), this may not be the most
efficient use of street space.
5 Seventh: two This alternative would provide two-way Evaluated further and
lanes EB, one
lane WB with
○ ● ● ●● ●●● ●● ● $ circulation on Seventh and Eighth Streets.
Seventh Street would have two lanes
proposed for further
consideration if the City
two-way northbound, one lane southbound, and a two- can lower vehicle travel
cycletrack way cycletrack. Eighth Street would have two demand in this corridor
lanes in each direction and no bike facilities. through TDM or
Transit would be consolidated on Eighth diversion.
Eighth: two
Street. Sidewalks would remain at 10 feet.
lanes WB, two
This alternative improves bicycle connectivity
lanes WB
and consolidates transit. However, it would
not improve the pedestrian realm on Eighth
Street. Reduced capacity could lead to
substantial traffic impacts on other streets,
including Market.
6 Seventh and This alternative would allow for three lanes of Not carried forward.
Eighth Streets:
two lanes EB,
●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ●● ● $$ traffic on each street plus buffered bicycle
lanes. Two lanes would operate in the
However, recommended
Alternative 2 could be
one lane WB dominant direction of travel (northbound on converted to this
with one-way Seventh and Southbound on Eighth), while a configuration if the City
cycletrack third lane would operate in the opposite can lower vehicle travel
direction. A one-way cycletrack would be demand in this corridor
provided on each street. It allows for transit through TDM or
consolidation but would not improve bicycle diversion.
connectivity like Alternative 5 and has less
total vehicle capacity.
6-10 7th & 8th Streets Alternatives