WHAT INFORMS OUR WORK AUTOMOBILE DEPENDENCY FORD SITE STREETS, TRAFFIC, and PARKING PRINCIPLES Do You Have Any Comments on These
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
BACKGROUND FORD SITE STREETS, TRAFFIC, AND PARKING PRINCIPLES • Interconnected system of streets, bikeways, and walkways that is safe and accessible for people of various ages and abilities. • Mix and density of activities to support transit through and around the site. • Urban design and site layout to reduce auto trips and manage traffic impacts. Do you have any comments on these concepts or statistics? High school seniors with driver’s Between 2001 and 2009, licenses: average annual car miles 1996 = 85% traveled per person declined: 2010 = 73% 16-30 year olds = - 21% …and dropping, data suggests 31-55 year olds = - 11% Source: AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety 56 years and up = - 4% Source: Federal Highway Administration (2011) AUTOMOBILE DEPENDENCY WHAT INFORMS OUR WORK • Transportation Trends • MnDOT Design Standards • Public Input • Saint Paul’s Comprehensive Plan • Other, new mixed-use developments • Ford Phase I Redevelopment Report • Professional Experience • Street Design Manual (In process) SUPPLY & DEMAND ASSUMPTIONS • Goal on Ford site is to accommodate cars, not to encourage them • If you build it, they will come; more infrastructure for cars will increase car use What do you think about the above assumptions? How should supply address demand on the Ford site? “Design where cars are guests on the street.” Daniel Skog - City of Malmo, Sweden Should this statement guide street design on the Ford site? TRAVEL DEMAND MANAGEMENT ASSUMPTIONS • A mixed-use site in Highland can help manage car trips using: • Transit • Carshare • Walking & Biking • Parking Management • Carpool What do you think could help manage car trips within and through the Ford site area? ? Transit Walking & Biking Carpool Car Share Parking Management Other When designing a place that includes cars, what’s more important - driving convenience or neighborhood livability? Are they mutually exclusive or compatible? Driving Convenience Neighborhood Livability They are mutually exclusive They are compatible Comment Comment Comment Comment TRAFFIC IN HIGHLAND TODAY ASSUMPTIONS • Average Daily Trips (ADT) in the area will increase with Ford site redevelopment • Some streets in Highland are more congested than others Ford @ Cleveland: Heavy Volume Near capacity (particularly at rush hour) Cretin: Medium volume Some capacity remains (direct link to and from I-94) Montreal: Lower volume Additional capacity remains What do you think are the most and least congested areas and how might they be managed? Please indicate with a dot and provide comments below. 9,2502 9,300 66262 531 AVE CRETIN AVE 11,725 615 3,375 SNELLING AVE 324 6,950,9, 45545 12,200 556 19,45045450 12,550 9,450 10122 649 499 14,750 9,650 485 3,675 206 1,450 2,775, 5,225 10,375 148 304 326 616 4,125 326 8,375 570 8,725 450 X,XXX Average Daily Traffic (traffic both directions during 24 hour period) X,XXX Peak Traffic (traffic one direction during one hour period) Signalized Intersection County or State Roadway City Collector Roadway that can carry additional traffic Comments: TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDIES ASSUMPTIONS • In 2015, the city will hire traffic modeling consultants to evaluate impacts of potential zoning and public realm plan • Future master developer will be required (under State law) to do a full traffic impact study on the final proposed development plan, to occur in 2016 or 2017 9,250 9,300 662 5;00 PM SB 531 5:00 PM SB XXXX Average Daily Trips Total of all day both directions XXXX Peak one hour in one direction Traffic Study Responsibilities & Timeline Average Daily Traffic (ADT) includes time and direction of travel Traffic Modeling Traffic Impact What Study Study When 2015 2017 To inform Ford site To examine viability Why zoning and public of proposed 3,375 6,950 12,200 455 5:00 PM SB realm plan development 11919,4509 12,550 9,450 1012 5:005:0 PMM EB High level analysis - Detailed Analysis - 14,750 based on based on PROPOSED POTENTIAL How transportation 3,675 transportation network and network and 1,450 2,775 5,225 connections 304 5:00 PM WB 326 5:00 PM WB 616 1:00 PM WB connections 4,125 Examines on-site, Examines on-site, Where adjacent, and more adjacent, and more distant impacts distant impacts 8,725 City pays Developer pays Who for study for study What should be evaluated in the 2015 Traffic Modeling Study? ALIGNMENT & CONNECTIONS ASSUMPTIONS • Cretin and Montreal seem to be logical connections to and through the site • Fewer connections will concentrate traffic onto a few streets; more connections will distribute traffic What alignments and connections do you suggest and why? Please mark on map and comment. Please Comment City Collector Roadways Proposed Collector Roadways on Ford Site County or State Roadway Do you favor more connections or fewer? Indicate which with dot and comment. More Fewer Why? Why? STREET TYPES ASSUMPTIONS • Street design affects how people travel through public space - what mode, how fast, etc. • Street design elements and considerations: • Car lanes – how many and width • Bike lanes – yes or no; type and width • Medians or turn lanes – yes or no • Boulevard – yes; style and width • Sidewalk – yes: width • Parking lanes – none, 1-sided, 2-sided Which forms do you like within each category? Why? Indicate with dots and comment. Very Low Volume Low Volume Medium Volume Alley Local Connection Major Connector Residential Lane Residential Corridor Mixed Use Corridor Collector/Arterial Please Comment Please Comment Please Comment ROUNDABOUTS & OTHER FORMS ASSUMPTIONS • Street design affects traffic volume and speed • Street features that can slow traffic: • Roundabouts • Bump outs • Angled or curved streets • Chicanes • Two-way streets • Other? What street design forms should be considered for the Ford site? Please mark up to 3. ? Roundabouts Angled/Curved Streets Two-way Streets Bump outs Chicanes Other (List) Additional Comments: PARKING: TYPE, LOCATION, QUANTITY ASSUMPTIONS • Parking in ramps and small, rear surface lots will save space and provide a more attractive and walkable place • Types and Location of Parking: • Private garages – rear, side or front • Ramps -- stand alone, attached, above • On-street – 1-sided or 2-sided ground, below ground, or interior to building • Parking lots – rear, side or front • Driveways or alleys – rear, side or front What type(s) of parking are most appropriate on the Ford site? Please mark up to 3. Building Garages On-Street Large Lots Public Ramps Driveways or Alleys Small Lots How and where should parking be provided?Indicate with dots and comment. PARKING: PUBLIC/PRIVATE, PAY ASSUMPTIONS • People in the Midwest are used to convenient parking that is free for the user • Parking is NOT free; someone pays to provide it • Parking has to be managed as a system: • Quantity • Car share • Location • Pay vs free ? Who should provide parking at the Ford site? Indicate which with dot and comment. Public - City of St Paul Private - Business or Landlord Both How should it be paid for? Indicate which with dot and comment. User Pays Landowner Covers Cost Both.