DOCSLIB.ORG

West Santa Ana Branch Transit Corridor Station Area Concepts

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
West Santa Ana Branch Transit Corridor Station Area Concepts WEST SANTA ANA BRANCH TRANSIT CORRIDOR STATION AREA CONCEPTS VERNON MONTEBELLO FOR THE CITIES OF: MAYWOOD HUNTINGTON PARK HUNTINGTON COMMERCE CUDAHY PARK BELL PICO RIVERA SOUTH GATE UNINCORPORATED WALNUT PARK BELL GARDENS DOWNEY CUDAHY SOUTH GATE LOS ANGELES DOWNEY LYNWOOD FINAL MARCH 2018 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS CONGRESSMEMBER LINDA SANCHEZ’S CITY OF CUDAHY CITY OF SOUTH GATE Jose Pulido, City Manager Michael Flad, City Manager OFFICE Joe Perez, Community Development Director Yvette Shahinian, District Director, Congressmember Arturo Cervantes, Public Works Director Linda Sanchez CITY OF DOWNEY Alvaro Betancourt, Senior Planner Gilbert Livas, City Manager ECO-RAPID TRANSIT Shannon DeLong, Assistant City Manager Michael R. Kodama, Executive Director Aldo Schindler, Community Development Director LOS ANGELES METRO Fanny Pan, Senior Director, Transit Corridors Planning Karen Z. Heit, Deputy Executive Director Ed Norris, Public Works Director Lillian Burkenheim-Silver, Community Development Mohammed Mostahkami, Public Works Director AECOM Allyn Rifkin, Transportation Planner/Engineer CITY OF HUNTINGTON PARK Nancy Michali, Project Manager Norman Emerson, Emerson & Associates Edgar Cisneros, City Manager Gaurav Srivastava, Lead Urban Designer Rene Bobadilla, City Manager Representative Sergio Infanzon, Community Development Director Catherine Tang Saez, Urban Designer Joel Ulloa, Planner A special thank you to Congressmember Linda Sanchez for sponsoring this project concept in 2005. HPLUL-6065(156) Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient, Transportation Equity Act – SAFETEA-LU Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) - LAE1883 Planning Study of Station Area Development for the Orangeline Development Authority, Los Angeles County 2 West Santa Ana Branch Transit Corridor STATION AREA DESIGN CONCEPTS 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS 0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..................................... 6 1 STUDY PROCESS .......................................... 9 1.1 PREVIOUS STUDY EFFORTS 1.2 THIS STUDY EFFORT 2 WEST SANTA ANA BRANCH CORRIDOR ...................... 15 2.1 CORRIDOR BACKGROUND 2.2 CORRIDOR STATION AREA GOALS 2.3 CORRIDOR STATION AREA CONCEPTS 3 STATION AREA DESIGN CONCEPTS ......................... 21 3.1 RAIL EXPLORATIONS 3.2 PACIFIC/RANDOLPH (HUNTINGTON PARK) 3.3 FLORENCE (CUDAHY) 3.4 FIRESTONE/ATLANTIC (SOUTH GATE) 3.5 GARDENDALE (DOWNEY) 4 NEXT STEPS & IMPLEMENTATION ............................ 81 4.1 IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES 4 West Santa Ana Branch Transit Corridor STATION AREA DESIGN CONCEPTS 5 West Santa Ana Branch Transit Corridor SCAG Alternatives Analysis Recommended Alignments EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In the first half of the twentieth century, the Pacific rail system and to the statewide California High-Speed ensure Corridor cities are ready for the future transit housing, retail, commercial, public, and cultural Electric (PE) Railway operated Red Car service along Rail system. Corridor cities have spent countless hours system and the related transit oriented development development. And while station area planning is many rail lines throughout Southern California, including envisioning and planning for the future as documented and revitalization efforts. traditionally done by each city through preparation of one running from downtown Los Angeles to downtown in the Station Concepts Plan prepared as part of the individual station area plans, the WSAB Corridor offers Santa Ana. Today, the northern portion of this former PEROW/WSAB Corridor Alternatives Analysis (AA) effort. Future rail station area visioning and planning efforts the unique opportunity for a new vision – creation of a PE alignment is used by the Metro Blue Line, and the This AA proved the viability of reintroducing rail service offer the opportunity to focus private real estate and Transit Oriented Development Corridor with all of the southern 20-mile segment, known as the West Santa public investment in a way that best serves each city. cities working together to create a unique Corridor Ana Branch (WSAB) Corridor in Los Angeles County and With adoption of supportive zoning and development identity, while celebrating each city’s unique role and the Pacific Electric Right-of-Way (PEROW) in Orange policies, along with the use of economic development vision. County, is now vacant. Red Car rail service shaped incentives, Corridor cities can encourage private this Corridor’s communities in many ways from the investment creating station areas that provide needed early 1900s through 1961 when it ceased operations. The PE rail system connected the region’s growing communities and created memories of fast, friendly transit service, first homes, walkable downtowns, and reliable transportation to work and shopping. After sitting vacant for more than 50 years, plans are underway to build a new Corridor rail system. Reuse of this once active transit corridor, along with Figure E.1 - Red Car service operating in Corridor in 1950s implementing station area visions and plans, provides the opportunity to recreate the once vibrant “transit and led to development of preferred station locations main street” that connected Corridor communities with and initial station area visions. This study builds on each other and with the rest of the Southern California those previous planning efforts to provide more detailed region – and beyond. Future rail service will connect station area land use concept plans and design plans Corridor residents to the regional five-county commuter for four of the Corridor’s station areas. These plans will Figure E.2 - View of WSAB Corridor today in city of Paramount Figure E.3 - Future Bellflower station area with light rail operation FigureSource: E.4 SCAG - WSAB AA Transit Corridor 6 West Santa Ana Branch Transit Corridor STATION AREA DESIGN CONCEPTS 7 “Visioning and planning for future WSAB 1 STUDY PROCESS Corridor station areas will focus private 1.1 PREVIOUS STUDY EFFORTS development and local public investment to serve 1.2 THIS STUDY EFFORT each Corridor city.” 8 9 1.1 ECO-RAPID TRANSIT PLANNING EFFORTS This study effort presents station area design concepts investment to serve as a community-driven catalyst for ERT PLANNING EFFORTS AA STATION AREA CONCEPTS The following station area questions focused for four Corridor stations reflecting city-specific creation of economically viable and environmentally Eco-Rapid Transit (ERT) is a joint powers authority As part of the PEROW/WSAB Corridor AA study, possible identification of station area-specific opportunities: visions and a detailed understanding of the existing sustainable cities. Corridor station area land use whose mission is to ensure the development of the new station locations and station area concepts were conditions and future plans for each station area. The planning efforts have been funded or completed by Metro WSAB Corridor transit line and the use of that identified for all Corridor stations as documented in • Identify opportunities to create and/or cultivate resulting concepts provide a land use and urban design SCAG, Metro, and Eco-Rapid Transit. investment to create revitalization opportunities and the PEROW/WSAB Corridor AA Station Area Concepts community identity. framework for local station area economic development healthier communities for Corridor residents. Resulting Report. Local stakeholder groups representing each • Create strategies to integrate future transit stations and revitalization efforts. planning strategies are documented in the ERT Transit- station area were engaged through a series of hands-on to support existing land uses, community plans, and Oriented Development (TOD) Guidebook completed in working sessions. These efforts identified local goals future development opportunities. PREVIOUS PLANNING EFFORTS 2014. The TOD Guidebook provides member cities and and knowledge for each proposed station area through • Build upon and support existing city zoning, general Reuse of the WSAB Corridor for transit operations has stakeholders with innovative planning and economic the eyes of city planners, public works directors, and and specific plans, and overlay zones. been studied through several planning efforts. The development strategies to coordinate the transit other city staff. • Create accessible, multi-modal station areas PEROW/WSAB Corridor Alternatives Analysis (AA) study Eco-Rapid Transit and economic development planning processes, and connecting into adjacent neighborhoods. completed in 2012 was led by the Southern California Transit-Oriented Development to position the Corridor for transit investment and • Identify opportunities to promote connectivity along Association of Governments (SCAG) with Metro’s Guidebook: Southern Corridor economic development opportunities. ERT has also the Corridor ROW to other destinations. participation. The AA study demonstrated the growing prepared background and policy documents on a wide mobility need for reuse of the Corridor Right-of-way range of related issues, such as parking and parking The resulting station area concept plans highlighted Figure 1.3 - Pacific/Randolph station area sketch form city work session (ROW) for transit service. In a follow-on study, Metro, structure decision-making, environmental justice areas of opportunity for transit-oriented, mixed-use as owners of the WSAB Corridor ROW, completed the concerns, and the use of public-private development development and how future land uses could support WSAB Transit Corridor Technical Refinement Study partnerships. creation of a transit-oriented village around each AA DESIGN
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Download The
    DEVELOPMENT OF AN AGENT BASED SIMULATION MODEL FOR PEDESTRIAN INTERACTIONS by MOHAMED HUSSEIN B.Sc., Ain Shams University, 2004 M.Sc., Ain Shams University, 2010 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE AND POSTDOCTORAL STUDIES (Civil Engineering) THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA (Vancouver) December 2016 © Mohamed Hussein, 2016 Abstract Developing a solid understanding of pedestrian behavior is important for promoting walking as an active mode of transportation and enhancing pedestrian safety. Computer simulation of pedestrian dynamics has gained recent interest as an important tool in analyzing pedestrian behavior in many applications. As such, this thesis presents the details of the development of a microscopic simulation model that is capable of modeling detailed pedestrian interactions. The model was developed based on the agent-based modeling approach, which outperforms other existing modeling approaches in accounting for the heterogeneity of the pedestrian population and considering the pedestrian intelligence. Key rules that control pedestrian interactions in the model were extracted from a detailed pedestrian behavior study that was conducted using an automated computer vision platform, developed at UBC. The model addressed both uni-directional and bi- directional pedestrian interactions. A comprehensive methodology for calibrating model parameters and validating its results was proposed in the thesis. Model parameters that could be measured from the data were directly calibrated from actual pedestrian trajectories, acquired by means of computer vision. Other parameters were indirectly calibrated using a Genetic Algorithm that aimed at minimizing the error between actual and simulated trajectories. The validation showed that the average error between actual and simulated trajectories was 0.35 meters.
    [Show full text]
  • Gateway District SPECIFIC PLAN
    CITY OF SOUTH GATE Gateway District FACT SHEET SPECIFIC PLAN Upcoming Opportunities for Community CITY OF SOUTH GATE Participation South Gate’s collaboration with business and residential communities is of paramount importance to the development of the Specific Plan. The City will host three community meetings between January and Fall 2016. 1 Community Meeting 1: Project Initiation Meeting Wednesday, January 27, 2016 Gateway The focus of the initial meeting is to increase project awareness, provide interested residents and business groups information about the Specific Plan’s purpose, study goals and timeline, and to gather feedback on the TOD vision for South Gate. 2 Community Workshop 2: Project Specific Workshop Spring/Summer 2016 The second meeting will be a workshop where the information gathered from the first meeting, as well District as technical work, will be shared. Participants will provide feedback and input on preliminary land use and design scenarios, including public access and open space. Information gathered from the SPECIFIC PLAN workshop will help define the Specific Plan’s goals and policies, and will be used to develop the Public Review Draft Specific Plan. Community Meeting 3: Public Review Draft Specific Plan 3 Summer/Fall 2016 The third meeting will provide the community an opportunity to review and comment on the Public Review Draft Specific Plan. Participants will have the chance to review key components of the Specific Plan, such as site design concepts, proposed land uses, pedestrian- and transit-oriented concepts, and strategies for public access and open space. Comments will be documented and be responded to in the Final Gateway Specific Plan.
    [Show full text]
  • City Council Agenda Report
    CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT MEETING DATE: 4/12/2021 ITEM NO: 15 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council SUBJECT: Approval of a Letter to the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority in Support of Federal Funding for the West Santa Ana Branch Light Rail Project FROM: Karen Lee, Management Analyst REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY: Melissa Burke, Administrative Manager HongDao Nguyen, City Attorney William Rawlings, City Manager RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council authorize the Mayor to sign, and direct staff to submit, the attached letter to the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority. BACKGROUND: The West Santa Ana Branch (WSAB) light rail line is a substantial public works and transportation project that will have a permanent impact on the region. This project will have tremendous impact on the City as the City’s planned station location in the Downtown will be the line’s terminus. The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) is overseeing this project. During the January 12, 2021 meeting of the WSAB City Manager Technical Advisory Committee, and the board meeting of the Orangeline Development Authority/Eco-Rapid Transit on January 13, 2021, Metro staff reported that it intends to lobby for federal funding for the WSAB project to help pay the estimated cost of $6.3 to $6.5 billion in 2018 dollars based on 5% design level plus the addition of project revisions. The project costs will be updated this month based on the 15% design level. 1 ANALYSIS: Metro has requested that cities along the WSAB corridor provide letters in support of the WSAB project and Metro’s efforts to pursue federal funding for this project.
    [Show full text]
  • Oei Office of Extraordinary Innovation
    Tab 9 INNOVATION Defining the Problem Problem: Mobility in Los Angeles County is not working Thesis: We need to do things very differently to reduce Single Occupancy Vehicle (SOV) use Proposed solutions: Set a course, accelerate projects, and try new stuff 2 “We have to have stretch goals that area realistic” 3 ROLE OF METRO STRATEGIC PLAN • Foundation that aligns all plans, programs, and services to achieve a common vision • Establishes mission, vision, and goals to be adopted by other plans (e.g. Long Range Transportation Plan, NextGen Bus Study, etc.) • Sets principles for making decisions and conducting business 4 STRATEGIC MOBILITY: SUPPLY • Increase capacity for non-SOV modes • Improve quality of existing transit system Common Interest 5 STRATEGIC MOBILITY: DEMAND • Manage demand • Pricing beyond transit fares • CongestionCommon pricingInterest • Regulate TNCs 6 “This is a really innovative idea but we can’t do it. It’s never been done before” 7 MicroTransit Pilot Can Metro increase customer satisfaction & attract new riders? > A cross between a pooled ride and a shuttle bus > Meets increasing expectation for convenience > Expands FMLM solutions > Flexible and seamless o Integrated with transit system o Serves non-linear travel On Demand | Dynamically Routed Data Driven | Corner to Corner 8 “If we improve our service more people will use it and we can’t afford that.” 9 Mobility on Demand Partner with a transportation network company to provide better and more equitable access to 3 pilot transit stations “We could have thought of that on our own.” 11 Unsolicited Proposals: Background In February 2016, Metro opened its doors to the private sector, at an Industry> Pledged our Forumcommitment.
    [Show full text]
  • Minneapolis Transportation Action Plan (Engagement Phase 3)
    Minneapolis Transportation Action Plan (Engagement Phase 3) Email Comment Topic Comment # The recommendations in this submission expand on this principle and support the overall Transportation Action Plan goals of designing transportation to achieve the aims of Minneapolis 2040, address climate change, reduce traffic fatalities and injuries, and improve racial and economic equity. In line with these goals, our most significant recommendations for the Prospect Park area are to • Invest in the protected bike network: extending the Greenway over the River, and building the Prospect Park Trail along railroad right-of- way • Transform University Avenue and Washington Avenues • Complete the Grand Rounds and use the Granary corridor to redirect truck traffic Priorities for transportation improvements in Prospect Park 1. Improve pedestrian infrastructure throughout the community including safe crossings of University Avenue SE (Bedford, Malcolm, 29th and 27th), Franklin Avenue SE (Bedford, Seymour) and 27th Avenue SE (Essex, Luxton Park to Huron pedestrian overpass). We encourage the city to narrow residential intersections, particularly in Bicycling, the Tower Hill sub-neighborhood where streets do not meet at right Walking, 1 angles, and crossing distances are significantly longer than needed. Additional Planters and plastic delineators could be used to achieve this ahead of Comments reconstruction. Maintenance and improvements should focus on public safety, adequate lighting and landscape upkeep. Throughout the neighborhood residents have cited safety (particularly at night), sidewalk disrepair, narrowness, snow and ice issues, and have expressed support for full ADA compliance. 2. Complete the Minneapolis Grand Rounds and the Granary Corridor (see Map 2) to enhance community access to city and regional parks and trails as well as to adjoining neighborhoods.
    [Show full text]
  • Selection of Pedestrian Crossing Treatments at Controlled and Uncontrolled Locations
    JOINT TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH PROGRAM INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND PURDUE UNIVERSITY Selection of Pedestrian Crossing Treatments at Controlled and Uncontrolled Locations Suleiman Ashur Mohammad Alhassan SPR-3723 • Report Number: FHWA/IN/JTRP-2015/03 • DOI: 10.5703/1288284315522 RECOMMENDED CITATION Ashur, S., & Alhassan, M. (2015). Selection of pedestrian crossing treatments at controlled and uncontrolled locations (Joint Transportation Research Program Publication No. FHWA/IN/JTRP-2015/03). West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University. http://dx.doi.org/10.5703/1288284315522 AUTHORS Suleiman Ashur, PhD, PE Professor of Civil Engineering and Program Coordinator Department of Engineering Indiana University–Purdue University Fort Wayne (260) 481-6080 [email protected] Corresponding Author Mohammad Alhassan, PhD Associate Professor of Civil Engineering and Program Coordinator Department of Engineering Indiana University–Purdue University Fort Wayne ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The authors would acknowledge the help and support provided by the following individuals throughout the study: served as the Project Administrator; and the SAC committee members: Michael Holowaty, Jessica Kruger, and Greg RichardsDana Plattner, from INDOT,who requested Rick Drumm the study from andthe FHWA, served and as the Hardisk Business Shah Owner; from American Shuo Li of Structurepoint, INDOT’s Research Inc. The Office, authors who also acknowledge the assistance of the following students: Jerry Brown, Allee Carlasgrad, Austin Eichman, Elizabeth McClamrock, and Paul Robinson. The authors are thankful for the assistance of Naseera Azad in proofreading the draft of the report. JOINT TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH PROGRAM The Joint Transportation Research Program serves as a vehicle for INDOT collaboration with higher education institutions and industry in Indiana to facilitate innovation that results in continuous improvement in the planning, https://engineering.purdue.edu/JTRP/index_html design, construction, operation, management and economic efficiency of the Indiana transportation infrastructure.
    [Show full text]
  • Metro Public Hearing Pamphlet
    Proposed Service Changes Metro will hold a series of six virtual on proposed major service changes to public hearings beginning Wednesday, Metro’s bus service. Approved changes August 19 through Thursday, August 27, will become effective December 2020 2020 to receive community input or later. How to Participate By Phone: Other Ways to Comment: Members of the public can call Comments sent via U.S Mail should be addressed to: 877.422.8614 Metro Service Planning & Development and enter the corresponding extension to listen Attn: NextGen Bus Plan Proposed to the proceedings or to submit comments by phone in their preferred language (from the time Service Changes each hearing starts until it concludes). Audio and 1 Gateway Plaza, 99-7-1 comment lines with live translations in Mandarin, Los Angeles, CA 90012-2932 Spanish, and Russian will be available as listed. Callers to the comment line will be able to listen Comments must be postmarked by midnight, to the proceedings while they wait for their turn Thursday, August 27, 2020. Only comments to submit comments via phone. Audio lines received via the comment links in the agendas are available to listen to the hearings without will be read during each hearing. being called on to provide live public comment Comments via e-mail should be addressed to: via phone. [email protected] Online: Attn: “NextGen Bus Plan Submit your comments online via the Public Proposed Service Changes” Hearing Agendas. Agendas will be posted at metro.net/about/board/agenda Facsimiles should be addressed as above and sent to: at least 72 hours in advance of each hearing.
    [Show full text]
  • AASHTO Guide for the Planning, Design and Operation of Pedestrian Facilities
    Update of the AASHTO Guide for the Planning, Design, and Operation of Pedestrian Facilities Prepared for: The National Cooperative Highway Research Program Transportation Research Board of The National Academies Prepared by: Jennifer Toole, Principal Investigator OCTOBER 11, 2010 The information contained in this report was prepared as part of NCHRP Project 20-07/Task 263, National Cooperative Highway Research Program, Transportation Research Board. NCHRP 20-07/Task 263 Page 1 Update of the AASHTO Guide for the Planning, Design and Operation of Pedestrian Facilities Acknowledgements This study was requested by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), and conducted as part of the National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Project 20-07. The NCHRP is supported by annual voluntary contributions from the state Departments of Transportation. Project 20-07 provides funding for quick response studies on behalf of the AASHTO Standing Committee on Highways. The report was prepared by a team led by Jennifer Toole of Toole Design Group. The work was guided by a task group which included George Branyan, Jim Ercolano, Eric Glick, Richard Haggstrom, Thomas Huber, Dwight Kingsbury, John N. LaPlante, Paula Reeves, Brooke Struve, R. Scott Zeller, and Gabriel Rousseau. The project manager was Christopher Hedges, NCHRP Senior Program Officer. Disclaimer The opinions and conclusions expressed or implied are those of the research agency that performed the research and are not necessarily those of the Transportation Research Board or its sponsors. The information contained in this document was taken directly from the submission of the authors. This document is not a report of the Transportation Research Board or of the National Research Council.
    [Show full text]
  • City Council Agenda Report
    CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT MEETING DATE: 11/9/2020 ITEM NO: 7 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council SUBJECT: Informational Report Regarding the 3% Local Contribution Required Under Measure M to Fund the West Santa Ana Branch Light Rail Line FROM: Karen Lee, Management Analyst REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY: Melissa Burke, Administrative Manager Christi Hogin, City Attorney William Rawlings, City Manager RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council receive and file the report. BACKGROUND: Los Angeles County voters approved Measure M on November 8, 2016, which implemented a permanent county-wide sales tax increase to fund projects to greatly expand the County’s public transit system, including new rail lines, roads, and related infrastructure. The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) administers Measure M funds. Funding for the West Santa Ana Branch (WSAB) line is provided by Measure M. One of Measure M’s requirements is a local contribution by jurisdictions for constructing a rail project with a new station within their boundaries. The rationale for the contribution is that local jurisdictions receive a direct benefit due to the increased access to transit service that is above and beyond the project’s benefit to the County as a whole. The contribution amount is 3% of the project’s total costs at the 30% level of its final design. It is capped at this amount for local contribution purposes, even if the total project cost increases. This amount is then divided by the number of new rail stations constructed on the line. Jurisdictions located within a one-half mile area of the new station will proportionally share the costs based on each jurisdiction’s share of the area.
    [Show full text]
  • Health Impact Assessment of Phase I of the Downtown Crossing Project Promoting Pedestrian and Bicyclist Physical Activity and Safety
    2012 Health Impact Assessment of Phase I of the Downtown Crossing Project Promoting Pedestrian and Bicyclist Physical Activity and Safety Clara Filice, MD, MPH and Gregg Furie, MD April 2012 TABLE OF CONTENTS Content Page Foreword 1 Acknowledgements 2 Executive Summary 3 Introduction 6 Phase I of the Downtown Crossing Project: Summary of 9 Plan Features Health Impact Assessment of Phase I of the Downtown Crossing 11 Project: HIA Process and Methodology Assessment of Baseline Demographic and Health Conditions in New 14 Haven and the Area Demographics 14 Health Conditions 20 Assessment and Recommendations 24 Projecting Impacts and Providing Recommendations 24 Balancing HIA Recommendations with Other Project Goals 24 Promoting Physical Activity 24 o Existing Conditions Analysis Pedestrian and Bicyclist Environment Mode of Transportation o Projected Impacts and Recommendations Objective 1: Promoting Pedestrian Physical Activity Objective 2: Promoting Bicyclist Physical Activity Promoting Safety and Reducing Unintentional Injury 36 o Existing Conditions Analysis Crash Analysis Fatality Analysis o Projected Impacts and Recommendations Objective 3: Promoting Pedestrian Safety and Reducing Pedestrian Injury Objective 4: Promoting Bicyclist Safety and Reducing Bicyclist Injury Summary of Assessment and Recommendations 42 Limitations 43 Project Impacts and Future Directions 44 Conclusion 46 Appendices 47 FOREWORD The Downtown Crossing project has been the source of intense interest and debate among residents of New Haven. Residents of the surrounding communities and the City as a whole could benefit from the project’s potential to support new development, create jobs, and expand the existing tax base. Furthermore, many residents welcome the possibility that a redeveloped Route 34 East could provide enhanced facilities for all road users, including vehicle users, pedestrians, and bicyclists.
    [Show full text]
  • Pedestrian Scramble Crossings – a Tale of Two Cities
    Pedestrian Scramble Crossings – A Tale of Two Cities by Rajnath Bissessar, City of Toronto & Craig Tonder, City of Calgary ABSTRACT Pedestrian Scramble crossings (also called “exclusive pedestrian phase” or “pedestrian criss-cross”) have been used in a number of cities around the world to enhance the safety and mobility of pedestrians at signalized intersections. A dedicated phase for pedestrians allows them to cross in any direction, including diagonally, without coming into conflict with turning vehicles. In 2008, both Calgary and Toronto implemented pedestrian scramble phases at select downtown intersections. While pedestrian safety can be enhanced, other operational problems can arise, particularly for blind and visually impaired pedestrians who use guide dogs and/or the sound of traffic as cues to cross the intersection. This paper will outline the justification and analysis prepared in advance of the installations, along with the implementation process, including stakeholder consultation, design and education. The paper will also discuss the similarities and differences in the approaches adopted by Calgary and Toronto. Finally, the paper will discuss the findings from the evaluation studies completed for each project. 1 of 27 1. INTRODUCTION A pedestrian scramble phase is a traffic signal phase that provides pedestrians with exclusive access to a signalized intersection while vehicular traffic is stopped in all directions. This form of phasing is useful at intersections with heavy pedestrian traffic and vehicle turning volumes as it serves to reduce vehicle- pedestrian conflicts by providing exclusive phases for pedestrians, and sometimes, for motorists. A scramble phase is generally displayed as a red signal in all directions for vehicles in conjunction with the “Walk” display in all directions for pedestrians.
    [Show full text]
  • Ourhkfoundation Art Book We
    About the Authors Introduction: Our Museums the Hidden Gems of Hong Kong 3 CHANG HSIN-KANG (H. K. CHANG) Professor H.K. Chang received and holds one Canadian patent. In his B.S. in Civil Engineering from addition, he has authored 11 books National Taiwan University (1962), in Chinese and 1 book in English, M.S. in Structural Engineering from mainly on education, cultures and Stanford University (1964) and Ph.D. civilizations. His academic interests in Biomedical Engineering from now focus on cultural exchanges Northwestern University (1969). across the Eurasian landmass, particularly along the Silk Road. Having taught at State University of New York at Buffalo (1969-76), McGill Professor Chang is a Foreign Member University (1976-84) and the University of Royal Academy of Engineering of of Southern California (1984-90), he the United Kingdom and a Member of became Founding Dean of School of the International Eurasian Academy Engineering at Hong Kong University of Sciences. of Science and Technology (1990- 94) and then Dean of School of He was named by the Government Engineering at the University of of France to be Chévalier dans l’Ordre Pittsburgh (1994-96). Professor Chang National de la Légion d’Honneur in served as President and University 2000, decorated as Commandeur Professor of City University of Hong dans l’Ordre des Palmes Académiques Kong from 1996 to 2007. in 2009, and was awarded a Gold Bauhinia Star by the Hong Kong SAR In recent years, Professor Chang has Government in 2002. taught general education courses at Tsinghua University, Peking University, Professor Chang served as Chairman China-Europe International Business of the Culture and Heritage School and Bogazici University in Commission of Hong Kong (2000- Istanbul.
    [Show full text]