Oakland Bicycle Boulevard Policy Final Recommendations
-
Upload
robertprinz -
Category
Documents
-
view
64 -
download
0
description
Transcript of Oakland Bicycle Boulevard Policy Final Recommendations
332 Pine Street, 4th Floor, San Francisco, CA 94104 (415) 348-0300 Fax (415) 773-1790 www.fehrandpeers.com
MEMORANDUM
Date: May 6, 2014
To: Jason Patton, City of Oakland
From: Nicole Foletta, Meghan Weir and Matthew Ridgway, Fehr & Peers
Subject: Final Bicycle Boulevard Recommendations
SF11-0552.01
The purpose of this memorandum is to provide citywide policy recommendations based on the
examples of two proposed bicycle boulevard corridors. These policies will address stop control,
traffic calming, and uncontrolled crossings.
The City of Oakland’s Bicycle Master Plan (2007) proposes 32 miles of Bicycle Boulevards and
provides the following definition for this bikeway type:
Bicycle boulevards are bicycle routes on residential streets that prioritize through
trips for bicyclists. The route should appeal to cyclists of varied skill levels by
providing direct connections on streets with low traffic volumes. The route should
reduce delay to bicyclists by assigning right-of-way to travel on the route. Traffic
calming should be introduced as needed to discourage drivers from using the
boulevard as a through route. (p. 66)
The Plan includes the following design guidance on the implementation of Bicycle Boulevards:
Intersection Control: Where feasible, modify stop signs and traffic signals to prioritize
bicycle travel and improve bicycle safety along the bicycle boulevard. In particular,
minimize the number of intersections where cross traffic does not stop. Such
modifications to intersection control shall be contingent on an engineering analysis of
operations and safety. (p. 83)
Traffic Calming: Consider bicycle-friendly speed humps, traffic circles, and partial street
closures on bicycle boulevards with speeds and/or volumes of motor vehicle traffic that
are incompatible with the bicycle route and the character of the residential street. (p. 84)
Two initial corridors were selected by the City for further study in developing bicycle boulevards:
The Shafter Avenue/Webster Street bicycle route, which provides north/south access on
neighborhood streets between Telegraph Avenue and College Avenue/Broadway,
connecting Alcatraz Avenue at the north and West MacArthur Boulevard at the south. The
following are the streets along this route which are within our study area:
Jason Patton May 6, 2014 Page 2 of 17
o Colby Street from Alcatraz Avenue to Claremont Avenue
o Forest Street from Claremont Avenue to Shafter Avenue
o Shafter Avenue from Forest Street to 48th
Street
o 48th
Street from Shafter Avenue to Webster Street
o Webster Street from 48th
Street to West MacArthur Boulevard
The Genoa Street/West Street bicycle route, which provides north/south access on
neighborhood streets immediately west of and parallel to Martin Luther King Jr. Way,
connecting Adeline Street near 61st Street at the north end and West Grand Avenue at the
south. The following are the segments along the route which are within our study area:
o Genoa Street from Adeline Street/Stanford Avenue to 52nd
Street
o 52nd
Street from Genoa Street to West Street
The two corridors were divided into segments A – J and each segment was evaluated to
determine whether it meets the target volume threshold of 3,000 or less average daily traffic
(ADT) and the target 85th
percentile speed threshold of 25 or fewer miles per hour (MPH), set
forth in the City’s Bicycle Boulevard Policies. Segments that do not meet these thresholds should
include traffic calming measures (Figure 1 and Table 1). Segments with ADTs between 1,500 and
3,000 are also candidates for traffic calming measures. All but two segments require at least some
traffic calming in order to comply with the speed and volume thresholds set forth in the City’s
Bicycle Boulevard Policies. This analysis is described in more detail in the Application of Bicycle
Boulevard Policies memorandum.
TABLE 1: COMPLIANCE WITH SPEED AND VOLUME THRESHOLDS
Segment Location Is the ADT ≤ 3000
vehicles?
Is the 85th
percentile
speed ≤ 25 mph?
Shafter Avenue Corridor
A Colby between Alcatraz and 61st NO (3,079 ADT) YES (23 MPH)
B Colby between 61st and Claremont NO (3,161 ADT) YES (23 MPH)
C Forest between Claremont and Shafter NO (5,381 ADT) YES (23 MPH)
D Shafter between Forest and 51st YES (2,109 ADT) NO (26 MPH)
E Shafter between 51st and 48
th and
48th
between Shafter and Webster
NO (3,211 ADT) NO (26 MPH)
F Webster between 48th and 43
rd YES (1,369 ADT) YES (24 MPH)
G Webster between 43rd
and 40th YES (1,643 ADT) NO (27 MPH)
H Webster between 40th and 38
th YES (2,334 ADT) NO (31 MPH)
Genoa Street Corridor
I Genoa between Adeline and 52nd
YES (366 ADT) YES (22 MPH)
J 52nd
between Genoa and West YES (2,041 ADT) NO (28 MPH)
Source: Fehr & Peers 2013
W S
t
Tele
grap
h Av
e
Broa
dway
Mar
ket S
t
40th St
Alcatraz Ave
San Pablo Ave
College Ave
Clar
emon
t Ave
Shattuck Ave
Shaf
ter A
ve
Broadway Ter
55th St
Mar
tin L
uthe
r Kin
g Jr
Way
51st St
Piedmont A
ve
Sacramento St
Stanford Ave
Miles Ave
52nd St
Emery St
Adel
ine
St
45th St
42nd St
Aileen St
Chabot Rd
41st St
43rd St
57th St
56th St
Dover St
35th St
King St
61st St
36th St
54th St
Manila Ave
49th St
53rd St
44th St
Howe St
Webster St
66th St
Genoa St
63rd St
33rd St
Apgar St
Prince St
60th St
Lawto
n Av
e
38th StLinda Ave
Ocean View Dr
55th St
California St
Colby St
Gilb
ert S
t
N St
Regent St
Acton St
Julia St
Harmon St
Ayala
Ave
Harwood Ave
Emer
ald
St
Montell St
Salem St
51st St
Whitmore St
Vice
nte
Way
60th St
MacArthurBART Station
Oakland
Berkeley 3,079 autos457 bikes23 mph17 mph
3,161 autos405 bikes23 mph17 mph
5,381 autos600 bikes23 mph17 mph
2,109 autos424 bikes26 mph19 mph
2,512 autos758 bikes26 mph18 mph1,369 autos
530 bikes24 mph19 mph
1,643 autos731 bikes27 mph20 mph
2,334 autos621 bikes31 mph24 mph
366 autos656 bikes22 mph14 mph
2,041 autos66 bikes28 mph21 mph
a
b
c
d
e
g
f
h
i
j
Average Daily TrafficAverage Daily Bicycles85th Percentaile SpeedMean Auto Speed
DATA COLLECTION LOCATIONSFIGURE 1
Not to Scale
N
SF11-0552 Oakland Traffic Calming\Graphics
W S
t
Tele
grap
h Av
e
Broa
dway
Mar
ket S
t
40th St
Alcatraz Ave
San Pablo Ave
College Ave
Clar
emon
t Ave
Shattuck Ave
Shaf
ter A
ve
Broadway Ter
55th St
Mar
tin L
uthe
r Kin
g Jr
Way
51st St
Piedmont A
ve
Sacramento St
Stanford Ave
Miles Ave
52nd St
Emery St
Adel
ine
St
45th St
42nd St
Aileen St
Chabot Rd
41st St
43rd St
57th St
56th St
Dover St
35th St
King St
61st St
36th St
54th St
49th St
53rd St
44th St
Howe St
Webster St
66th St
Genoa St
63rd St
33rd St
Apgar St
Prince St
60th St
Lawto
n Av
e
38th StLinda Ave
55th St
California St
Colby St
Gilb
ert S
t
N St
Regent St
Acton St
Julia St
Harmon St Harwood Ave
Emer
ald
St
Montell St
Salem St
51st St
60th St
MacArthurBART Station
Oakland
Berkeley 3,079 autos457 bikes23 mph17 mph
3,161 autos405 bikes23 mph17 mph
5,381 autos600 bikes23 mph17 mph
2,109 autos424 bikes26 mph19 mph
3,211 autos758 bikes26 mph18 mph1,369 autos
530 bikes24 mph19 mph
1,643 autos731 bikes27 mph20 mph
2,334 autos621 bikes31 mph24 mph
366 autos656 bikes22 mph14 mph
2,041 autos324 bikes28 mph21 mph
a
b
c
d
e
g
f
h
i
j
Average Daily TrafficAverage Daily Bicycles85th Percentaile SpeedMean Auto Speed
DATA COLLECTION LOCATIONSFIGURE 1
Not to Scale
N
SF11-0552 Oakland Traffic Calming\Graphics
Jason Patton May 6, 2014 Page 4 of 17
Toolbox of Measures
Bicycle Boulevard measures were broken down into four categories:
Stop Control Changes
Traffic Calming
Crossing Treatments
Speed Limits
Stop Control Changes
In order to minimize the number of intersections where cross traffic does not stop and reduce the
number of times bicyclists must stop along the bicycle boulevard, the following changes to stop
control at intersections may be considered:
TABLE 2: MENU OF STOP CONTROL CHANGES
Existing Intersection Configuration Stop Control Change Priority
Appropriate at intersections with two-way stop control where traffic must stop along the bicycle boulevard but not along the cross street approaches
Flipping stop signs (removing stop signs from the bicycle boulevard and placing them on the cross street)
High
Appropriate at two-way or all-way stop controlled intersections
Stop sign removal (in conjunction with installation of traffic circles)
Medium
Appropriate at intersections with all-way stop control where traffic volumes are low enough on the cross street to justify removal of stop signs on the bicycle boulevard approaches
Stop sign removal in one direction, conversion from all-way to two-way stop
Low
Appropriate at intersections with two-way stop control where traffic must stop along the bicycle boulevard but not along the cross street approaches
Stop sign addition, conversion from two-way to all-way stop
Low
Appropriate at intersections with two-way stop control where traffic must stop along the bicycle boulevard but not along the cross street approaches
No stop control change, installation of “cross traffic does not stop” signs
Low
Proposals for the removal of stop signs should be evaluated with the following criteria: average
daily traffic on the intersecting streets, sight distances, and crash history. An existing stop sign
could be in place to address a history of crashes, a sight distance issue, or a significant difference
in traffic volumes on the intersecting streets. If this is the case, consider installing a traffic circle in
conjunction with the removal of stop signs.
Traffic Calming
Table 3 summarizes traffic calming measures from the City of Oakland’s Traffic Calming Manual,
which were selected as being appropriate measures to implement on Bicycle Boulevards to
reduce traffic volumes and speeds, thus improving the safety and comfort for bicyclists along the
Jason Patton May 6, 2014 Page 5 of 17
route. More details on the specifications of these measures can be found in the Traffic Calming
Manual.
TABLE 3: MENU OF TRAFFIC CALMING MEASURES
Traffic Calming
Measure Description Application Thresholds Priority
Speed Bumps (also referred to as Speed
Humps)
Rounded, raised areas placed across the roadway. Oakland speed humps are 12 feet long (in the direction of travel), 3.3” to 3.8” high, and have a design speed of 15 MPH. At either edge, the speed humps have a two-foot taper, conforming to street grade at the edge of the street’s gutter pans to allow unimpeded drainage. Historically, Oakland’s speed humps have had a parabolic profile. However, the sinusoidal profile is recommended for bicycle boulevards.
Roadway width ≤ 40’
Grade ≤ 7%
No more than one lane per direction
High
Traffic Circles
Raised islands, placed in intersections, around which traffic circulates. Stop signs should be removed at the approaches of the traffic circle. Circles reduce speeding and prevent motorists from passing cyclists through intersections by impeding the straight-through movement and encouraging motorists to slow down to yield.
To be determined Medium
Partial Closures
Barriers that block travel in one direction for a short distance on otherwise two-way streets. Partial closures are the most common volume control measure after full street closures. Partial closures are often used in sets to discourage through traffic by making travel circuitous through neighborhoods with “gridded” streets.
Evaluation to determine the amount and effects of traffic diverted to other routes
Low
Diagonal Diverters
Barriers placed diagonally across an intersection, blocking through movement. Like half closures, diagonal diverters are usually staggered to create circuitous routes through neighborhoods.
Evaluation to determine the amount and effects of traffic diverted to other routes
Low
Speed humps and traffic circles are generally considered speed control measures while partial
closures and diagonal diverters are generally considered volume control measures. However, each
of these measures can have an impact on both traffic speeds and volumes. A summary of the
speed, volume and safety impacts of each measure is provided in Table 4.
Jason Patton May 6, 2014 Page 6 of 17
TABLE 4: MENU OF TRAFFIC CALMING MEASURES
Traffic Calming Measure
Speed Impacts
(Average percent change
in speed)
Volume Impacts
(Average percent change
in traffic volume)
Safety Impacts
(Average percent change
in annual number of
collisions)
Speed Humps -22% -18% -14%
Traffic Circles -11% -5% -73%
Partial Closures -19% -42% I/D
Diagonal Diverters -4% -35% I/D
Note: I/D = Insufficient data
Source: US Traffic Calming Manual, 2009
Speed humps are good for locations where very low speeds are desired and reasonable, and
where some increase in vehicle noise and exhaust is an acceptable tradeoff. The magnitude of
reduction in speed is dependent on the spacing of speed humps between points that require
drivers to slow. Sinusoidal speed humps are recommended on bicycle boulevards to improve
comfort of bicyclists. However, due to variations in construction techniques, the bicycle-
friendliness of speed humps can vary even among humps with the same profile type.
The City of Oakland has been installing speed humps since the 1990s and has an established
design and process for doing so. A number of speed humps are located on existing and proposed
bicycle boulevards that are in various stages of development. Based on feedback and discussion
over the years, Oakland’s cyclists have mixed feelings about speed humps. On the one hand,
speed humps are highly effective at reducing motorist speeds to that of cyclist speeds, making it
more comfortable for cyclists to share a travel lane with motorists. On the other hand, speed
humps can be distracting and uncomfortable to cyclists because of the jolt the cyclist feels upon
first reaching the hump plus the following jolt when the cyclist returns to street grade.
A sinusoidal speed hump profile may be able to realize the traffic calming benefits while
minimizing the negative effects on cyclists. By blending the edges of the hump into the roadway
surface, either edge of the hump no longer has an abrupt grade break that is experienced as a jolt
by the cyclist. At the same time, the height of the speed hump remains the same and continues to
slow motor vehicles.
Oakland’s speed humps generally have a parabolic profile where there is an abrupt grade break
between either edge of the hump and the street surface. This is in part a result of the construction
method where asphalt is mounded on top of the existing roadway surface and there is limited
opportunity to blend the edges the speed hump into the roadway surface. The following
recommendations are a means for developing more bicycle-friendly speed humps:
Jason Patton May 6, 2014 Page 7 of 17
(1) Engage the cycling community to identify the best and worst speed humps on frequently
traveled routes. Organize a group ride to discuss these locations in the field and come to
agreement amongst the group as to which speed humps are the best and the worst.
(2) Survey these speed humps to determine the geometry of their profiles.
(3) Conduct a pilot project to retrofit existing speed humps. The retrofit would mill and
overlay a section of the roadway on either side and through the speed hump. The result
would be a continuous patch of asphalt that maintains the height of the speed hump but
no longer has an abrupt grade break or seam at either edge of the speed hump.
(4) Based on the outcomes of the previous three recommendations, develop a design detail
and construction method for the installation of new speed humps with a sinusoidal
profile.
Traffic circles not only help to reduce traffic speeds and volumes, but can also reduce the number
of times a bicyclist must stop along a route by removing stop signs. Before installing a permanent
traffic circle, the City may want to consider implementing a pilot traffic circle program. The
benefits of a pilot program are that they are relatively inexpensive to implement and impacts can
be tested. The pilot program should be accompanied by extensive outreach to the local
community.
Similar to traffic circles, the City may wish to test the impacts of partial closures or diagonal
diverters through a temporary pilot program. Such a program can help to determine whether a
traffic circle, partial closure, or diagonal diverter would be more appropriate at a location. An
example of such a program is the Pop-Up MANGo: Temporary Greenway Installation and
Community Festival; an interactive community workshop to define the Michigan Avenue
Neighborhood Greenway project in Santa Monica, California. The workshop included temporary
installations of potential elements of the project including a traffic circle and turn restrictions.1
Crossing Treatments
In order to improve crossing of major arterials, the crossing treatments summarized in Table 5
may be considered along Bicycle Boulevards.
1 Planning efforts for the Michigan Avenue Neighborhood Greenway were launched in 2013 and were
funded by a Caltrans Environmental Justice Grant. http://www.smgov.net/Departments/PCD/Plans/Streetscapes/Michigan-Avenue-Neighborhood-Greenway/
Jason Patton May 6, 2014 Page 8 of 17
TABLE 5: MENU OF CROSSING TREATMENTS
Crossing
Treatment Description When/Where Appropriate Priority
Warning Signs
“Cross Traffic Does Not Stop” signs (W4-4p) on bicycle boulevard approaches and Bicycle Traffic signs (W11-1) on intersecting streets
At intersections where cross traffic does not stop. Threshold: cross street traffic exceeds 5,000 ADT
1
High
Pavement Markings
“Bike xing ahead” legends on intersecting streets; chevrons to mark the cyclist path of travel through intersections; green-backed sharrows in intersections for cyclist wayfinding
“Bike xing ahead” legends on approaches and chevrons in intersections at major street crossings where cross traffic does not stop; green-backed sharrows in off-set intersections along the bike boulevard or in intersections where the bike boulevard turns; pending addition to CA MUTCD for chevrons and green-backed sharrows
High
Ladder crosswalks
Two-foot stripes and two-foot spaces oriented parallel to the roadway centerline and bounded by standard one-foot crosswalk stripes
At uncontrolled street crossings of bicycle boulevards to enhance the visibility of the intersection
Medium
Two-stage turn queue
boxes
A marked area within the intersection designated for queuing bicyclists to make two-stage turns; markings include a bicycle stencil and a turn arrow to indicate bicycle direction and positioning, and should be placed in a protected area (for example, aligned with an on-street parking lane or between the bicycle lane and pedestrian crossing); colored pavement inside the queuing area is recommended
At multi-lane signalized intersections for safe left-turns; where desirable to simplify turns from a bicycle lane or cycle track onto a bicycle boulevard; along roadways with high traffic speeds and/or traffic volumes. Multi-lane crossings, from major street onto bicycle boulevard (pending addition to CA MUTCD)
Low
Bike Boxes
A designated area at the head of a traffic lane at a signalized intersection that provides bicyclists with a safe and visible way to get ahead of queuing traffic during the red signal phase
At signalized intersections where there might be right or left-turning conflicts between bicyclists and motorists (pending addition to CA MUTCD)
Low
Rectangular rapid flashing
beacons
Active warning beacons for pedestrian crossings, located on the side of the road facing oncoming traffic (with secondary installations at medians); beacons are unlit when not activated, and use an irregular flashing pattern to alert drivers to presence of pedestrians when activated
At major uncontrolled street crossings where traffic signals are not warranted and cyclists are dismounting and crossing as pedestrians due to safety concerns; include both crosswalks and beacons at each to serve two-way bicycle traffic
Low
Jason Patton May 6, 2014 Page 9 of 17
TABLE 5: MENU OF CROSSING TREATMENTS
Crossing
Treatment Description When/Where Appropriate Priority
Median refuge islands
Protected spaces in the center of the street to provide a two-stage crossing for cyclists; at least six feet wide (10 feet preferred), buffered by a raised curb
At multi-lane streets; where a bikeway crosses a moderate to high volume or high speed streets; where crossing distance is long or crossing two-way traffic is difficult; when desirable to restrict vehicle cross traffic or turning movements
Low
Traffic Signals
Signaling devices positioned at road intersection, pedestrian crossings and other locations to control competing flows of traffic
At major intersections with high volumes of traffic in both directions
Low
1. NACTO Urban Bikeway Design Guide (http://nacto.org/cities-for-cycling/design-guide/)
Speed Limits
The City of Oakland may wish to reduce speed limits on Bicycle Boulevards in order to improve
safety and reduce stress levels of bicyclists using these facilities. The typical speed limit on local
street in Oakland is 25 MPH. Precedent for setting lower speed limits under certain circumstances
has been set through adoption of law AB 3212, which enables local government to extend school
zones to 1,000 feet and reduce the speed limit within 500 feet of a school site to 15 MPH at
schools that are located in residential areas or on highways with a speed limit of 30 MPH or less,
during school hours. Furthermore, according to California Vehicle Code, Division 11, Section
22358.3, a local authority may reduce the speed limit on a narrow street of less than 25 feet in
width to 20 MPH or 15 MPH if deemed appropriate, reasonable and safe.3 The California MUTCD
gives some guidance for setting posted speed limits. Section 2B.13 states that a posted speed
limit should be set to the nearest 5 MPH increment of the 85th
percentile speed of free-flowing
traffic.4 A 5 MPH reduction may be applied to this speed limit if approved by a registered Civil or
Traffic Engineer.
Consider posting speed limits of 20 MPH on bicycle boulevards where the prevailing speed is low
due to the effects of previously implemented traffic calming measures. Specifically, consider
posting the 20 MPH speed limit where the 85th
percentile vehicle speed is 22 MPH or less.
Additionally, consider including both motorists and cyclists in the computation of the 85th
percentile speed. The lower posted speed limit is intended to reinforce the existing operating
conditions on such roadways: low motorist speeds due to traffic calming plus high cyclist volumes
due to the bicycle boulevard designation.
2 http://catsip.berkeley.edu/ab-321-15-MPH-school-speed-limit
3 http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/veh_code.pdf
4 http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/traffops/signtech/mutcdsupp/pdf/camutcd2012/Part2AB.pdf
Jason Patton May 6, 2014 Page 10 of 17
Genoa Specific Recommendations
Recommendations have been developed for the Genoa Street corridor in order to meet with the
speed and volume thresholds and to reduce frequency of stops for bicyclists.
The Genoa Street corridor is currently compliant with volume thresholds at both data
collection points.
The corridor is compliant with the speed threshold at the northern data collection
point (Location I – Genoa Street between Adeline Street and 52nd
Street), and is not
compliant at the southern data collection point (Location J – 52nd
Street between
Genoa Street and West Street).
There are currently seven bicycle route stops through this corridor (along Genoa Street,
52nd
Street and West Street), which is equivalent to approximately 9 stops per mile.
Table 6 summarizes the specific stop control, traffic calming, and crossing treatment measures
recommended for the Genoa Street corridor. These measures are intended to reduce traffic
volumes, traffic speeds, and required stops along the corridor, thus reducing bicyclist stress levels
and improving safety. Implementation of these measures would reduce the number of required
stops along the corridor from 7 to 3, which would be 4 stops per mile. Furthermore, crossing
treatments at arterials improve connectivity with adjacent streets, neighborhoods and nearby
attractions. Bicycle crossing treatments at the Adeline Street/Genoa Street intersection will
provide access to Stanford Avenue and King Street, and will create a more comfortable bicycle
entry onto Adeline Street, which connects to 62nd
Street and other neighborhood routes to the
north.
The Genoa specific recommendations are displayed in Figure 2.
The City may also want to consider creating a pedestrian plaza between
60th
Street and Adeline Street. This would involve converting the
segment of 60th
Street between Adeline Street and Genoa Street, as well
as the triangular parking lot with 4-5 informal spaces at the northern
border of this location, into pedestrian space. The plaza would be
accompanied by removal of the stop sign in the northbound direction of
Genoa Street at 60th
Street and addition of a stop sign on 60th
Street in
the westbound direction and would replace the recommendation for a
traffic circle. This configuration would both reduce traffic volumes on
60th
Street and enhance the pedestrian realm.
Insert 1: Pavement legend denoting jog. Source: nacto.org
Jason Patton May 6, 2014 Page 11 of 17
TABLE 6: GENOA CORRIDOR SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS
Segment Stop Control Traffic Calming Crossing Treatments
I Flip stop sign at Genoa
Street/59th
Street –
change from 2-way stop
for Genoa Street to 2-
way stop for 59th
Street
Remove stop sign at
Genoa Street/60th
Street
(in conjunction with
traffic circle installation)
Remove stop signs at
Genoa Street/Arlington
Avenue along Genoa
Street, converting
intersection from 4-way
stop controlled to 2-way
stop controlled (in
conjunction with addition
of “Cross Traffic Does
Not Stop” signs on
Arlington Avenue)
Install “Cross Traffic
Does Not Stop” signs
on Genoa Street at 55th
Street
Sinusoidal speed
humps between
Arlington Avenue
and 60th
Street
Traffic circle at
Genoa Street/60th
Street
Pavement legends
demarcating recommended
path of bicyclist at Adeline
Street/Genoa Street
i. These legends may be in
the form of green-backed
sharrows (pending addition
to CA MUTCD) or other
branded marking specific to
bicycle boulevards in
Oakland, which would
demarcate the path of the
bicyclist in both the
northbound and
southbound direction along
Adeline Street connecting
60th
Street with the bicyclist
crossing connecting to King
Street
ii. In the southbound direction
it may be beneficial to
include a pavement legend
marking with a left turn
arrow denoting a required
jog in the route as seen in
Insert 1
J Remove stop signs at
Genoa Street/52nd
Street
(in conjunction with
traffic circle installation)
Sinusoidal speed
humps on 52nd
Street
Traffic circle at
Genoa Street/52nd
Street
Source: Fehr & Peers 2014
Mar
ket S
t
55th St
MLK Jr W
ay
Stanford Ave
Adel
ine
St
52nd St
45th St
Aileen St
57th St
58th St
59th St
60th St
61th St
Arlington Ave
44rd St
56th St
54th St
53rd St
California St
Genoa St
Oakland
Berkeley
GENOA SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONSFIGURE 2
Not to Scale
N
SF11-0552 Oakland Traffic Calming\Graphics
500 ft250 ft0 ft
Stop controlled intersection
Signal controlled intersection
Stop sign
Stop sign removed
Speed bump
Traffic circle
Intersection Control
Stop Signs
Traffic Calming
Proposed Bike Boulevard
Existing
Proposed
I
J
|24
PavementMarkings
Cross Traffic DoesNot Stop Sign
Cross Traffic DoesNot Stop Sign
Jason Patton May 6, 2014 Page 13 of 17
Shafter Specific Recommendations
Recommendations have been developed for the Shafter Avenue corridor in order to meet with
the speed and volume thresholds and to reduce frequency of stops for bicyclists.
The Shafter Avenue corridor is currently compliant with volume thresholds at four
data collection points (Location D – Shafter between Forest and 51st Street, Location F –
Webster between 48th
and 43rd
Streets, Location G – Webster Street between 43rd
and 40th
Streets, and Location H – Webster Street between 40th
and 38th
Streets), and is not
compliant at four data collection points (Location A – Colby Street between Alcatraz
Avenue and 61st Street, Location B – Colby Street between 61
st Street and Claremont
Avenue, Location C – Forest Street between Claremont Avenue and Shafter Avenue, and
Location E – Shafter Avenue between 51st Street and 48
th Street and 48
th between Shafter
Avenue and Webster Street)
The corridor is compliant with the speed threshold at four data collection points
(Location A – Colby Street between Alcatraz Avenue and 61st Street, Location B – Colby
Street between 61st Street and Claremont Avenue, Location C – Forest Street between
Claremont Avenue and Shafter Avenue, and Location F – Webster between 48th
and 43rd
Streets) , and is not compliant at four data collection points (Location D – Shafter
between Forest and 51st Street, Location E – Shafter Avenue between 51
st Street and 48
th
Street and 48th
between Shafter Avenue and Webster Street, Location G – Webster Street
between 43rd
and 40th
Streets, and Location H – Webster Street between 40th
and 38th
Streets)
There are currently 17 bicycle route stops through this corridor, including three signal-
control stops, and 14 stop-control stops (along Colby Street, Forest Street, Shafter
Avenue, 48th
Street, and Webster Street). This is approximately 9 stops per mile.
Shafter specific recommendations are summarized in Table 7 and shown in Figure 3.
Implementation of these measures would reduce the number of required stops along the corridor
from 17 to 7, which is approximately 4 stops per mile.
Jason Patton May 6, 2014 Page 14 of 17
TABLE 7: SHAFTER CORRIDOR SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS
Segment Stop Control Traffic Calming Crossing Treatments
A
Sinusoidal speed
hump on Colby
Street, south of 63rd
Street
Pavement legends on both the
northbound and southbound
approaches of Colby Street at
Alcatraz Avenue to denote a
jog in the route, similar to the
pavement legend shown in
Insert 1
B Remove stop signs
along Colby Street
at 61st Street,
converting from an
all-way to a two-
way stop (in
conjunction with
traffic circle
installation at 60th
Street)
Remove stop signs
along 60th
Street at
Colby Street, (in
conjunction with
traffic circle
installation at 60th
Street)
Traffic circle (or
partial
closures/diagonal
diverters) at Colby
Street/60th
Street
Bikeway marking through the
intersection of
Colby/Claremont/ Forest to
formalize the bicycle route
across the intersection, and
provide connections to the
bicycle priority streets (Colby
Street and Forest Street) from
connecting streets (Claremont
and the north leg of Forest
Street)
Pavement legends on both the
westbound approach of Forest
Street at Claremont and the
southbound approach of Colby
Street at Claremont to denote a
turn in the route, similar to the
pavement legend shown in
Insert 1 except with a left or
right turn arrow rather than a
jog arrow
Bike box at the westbound
approach of Forest Street at
Claremont Avenue with bike
lane on intersection approach
only
C Sinusoidal speed
humps along Forest
Street
D Remove stop signs
at Shafter Avenue/
Hudson Street (in
Sinusoidal speed
humps along Shafter
Avenue
Jason Patton May 6, 2014 Page 15 of 17
TABLE 7: SHAFTER CORRIDOR SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS
Segment Stop Control Traffic Calming Crossing Treatments
conjunction with
traffic circle
installation)
Remove stop signs
at Shafter Avenue/
Clifton Street (in
conjunction with
traffic circle
installation)
Remove stop signs
at Shafter Avenue/
Cavour Street (in
conjunction with
traffic circle
installation)
Traffic circle (or
partial closures/
diagonal diverters) at
Shafter Avenue/
Hudson Street
Traffic circle (or
partial closures/
diagonal diverters) at
Shafter Avenue/
Clifton Street
Traffic circle (or
partial closures/
diagonal diverters) at
Shafter Avenue/
Cavour Street
E Remove stop signs
at Shafter Avenue/
49th
Street (in
conjunction with
traffic circle
installation)
Sinusoidal speed
humps along Shafter
Avenue
Traffic circle (or
partial
closure/diagonal
diverter) at Shafter
Avenue/49th
Street
Bikeway marking through the
intersection of the Shafter
Avenue/51st Street intersection
to formalize the bicycle route
across the intersection
F Remove stop signs
at Webster Street/
48th
Street (in
conjunction with
traffic circle
installation)
Remove stop signs
at Webster Street/
45th
Street (in
conjunction with
traffic circle
installation)
Remove stop signs
at Webster Street/
43rd
Street (in
conjunction with
Sinusoidal speed
humps along
Webster Street
Traffic circle (or
partial closure/
diagonal diverter) at
Webster Street/48th
Street
Traffic circle (or
partial closure/
diagonal diverter) at
Webster Street/45th
Street
Traffic circle (or
partial closure/
diagonal diverter) at
Pavement legends on both the
westbound approach of 48th
Street at Webster Street and
the northbound approach of
Webster Street at 48th
Street to
denote a turn in the route,
similar to the pavement legend
shown in Insert 1 except with a
left or right turn arrow rather
than a jog arrow
Jason Patton May 6, 2014 Page 16 of 17
TABLE 7: SHAFTER CORRIDOR SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS
Segment Stop Control Traffic Calming Crossing Treatments
traffic circle
installation)
Webster Street/43rd
Street
G Remove stop signs
at Webster Street/
42nd
Street (in
conjunction with
traffic circle
installation)
Remove stop signs
at Webster Street/
41st Street (in
conjunction with
traffic circle
installation)
Sinusoidal speed
humps along
Webster Street
Traffic circle (or
partial closure/
diagonal diverter) at
Webster Street/42nd
Street
Traffic circle (or
partial closure/
diagonal diverter) at
Webster Street/41st
Street
Bikeway marking through the
intersection of the Webster
Street/40th
Street intersection
to formalize the bicycle route
across the intersection
H Remove stop signs
at Webster Street/
38th
Street (in
conjunction with
traffic circle
installation)
Sinusoidal speed
humps along
Webster Street
Traffic circle (or
partial closure/
diagonal diverter) at
Webster Street/38th
Street
Source: Fehr & Peers 2014
Tele
grap
h Av
e
Colle
ge A
ve
Tele
grap
h Av
e
Broa
dway
Broa
dway
Alcatraz Ave
Clar
emon
t Ave
Shat
tuck
Ave
MLK
Jr W
ay
51st St
50th St
48th St
W M
acArthur Blvd
34th St
Adel
ine
St
45th St
41st St
40th St
60th St
61st St
62nd St
63rd St
36th St
49th St
44th St
43rd St
42nd St
38th St
Montell St
Clifton St
Cavour St
Hudson St
Stop controlled intersection
Signal controlled intersection
Stop sign
Stop sign removed
Speed bump
Traffic circle
Intersection Control
Stop Signs
Traffic Calming
Proposed Bike Boulevard
Existing
Proposed
SHAFTER SPECIFIC RECOMMEDATIONSFIGURE 3
Not to Scale
N
SF11-0552 Oakland Traffic Calming\Graphics
Shaf
ter A
ve
Web
ster
St
Colb
y St
Forest St
Oakland
Ber
kel
ey
MacArthurBART Station
|24
|24
|24
E
D
C
B
F
G
H
A
PavementMarkings
PavementMarkings
PavementMarkings
PavementMarkings
PavementMarkings
Bike Box
Appendix A: Weekday Auto and Bike Volumes Page 1 of 5
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
4000:
001:
002:
003:
004:
005:
006:
007:
008:
009:
0010
:00
11:0
012
:00
13:0
014
:00
15:0
016
:00
17:0
018
:00
19:0
020
:00
21:0
022
:00
23:0
0
Ave
rage
Vol
ume
Hour
A: Colby St between 62nd St and 63rd St
WeekdayAutoVolumes
WeekdayBikeVolumes
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
0:00
1:00
2:00
3:00
4:00
5:00
6:00
7:00
8:00
9:00
10:0
011
:00
12:0
013
:00
14:0
015
:00
16:0
017
:00
18:0
019
:00
20:0
021
:00
22:0
023
:00
Ave
rage
Vol
ume
Hour
B: Colby St South of McAuley St
WeekdayAutoVolumes
WeekdayBikeVolumes
Appendix A: Weekday Auto and Bike Volumes Page 2 of 5
0
100
200
300
400
500
6000:
001:
002:
003:
004:
005:
006:
007:
008:
009:
0010
:00
11:0
012
:00
13:0
014
:00
15:0
016
:00
17:0
018
:00
19:0
020
:00
21:0
022
:00
23:0
0
Ave
rage
Vol
ume
Hour
C: Forest St east of Oak Grove Ave
WeekdayAutoVolumes
WeekdayBikeVolumes
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
0:00
1:00
2:00
3:00
4:00
5:00
6:00
7:00
8:00
9:00
10:0
011
:00
12:0
013
:00
14:0
015
:00
16:0
017
:00
18:0
019
:00
20:0
021
:00
22:0
023
:00
Ave
rage
Vol
ume
Hour
D: Shafter Ave between Hudson St and Clifton St
WeekdayAutoVolumes
WeekdayBikeVolumes
Appendix A: Weekday Auto and Bike Volumes Page 3 of 5
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
4000:
001:
002:
003:
004:
005:
006:
007:
008:
009:
0010
:00
11:0
012
:00
13:0
014
:00
15:0
016
:00
17:0
018
:00
19:0
020
:00
21:0
022
:00
23:0
0
Ave
rage
Vol
ume
Hour
E: Shafter Ave south of 50th St
WeekdayAutoVolumes
WeekdayBikeVolumes
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
0:00
1:00
2:00
3:00
4:00
5:00
6:00
7:00
8:00
9:00
10:0
011
:00
12:0
013
:00
14:0
015
:00
16:0
017
:00
18:0
019
:00
20:0
021
:00
22:0
023
:00
Ave
rage
Vol
ume
Hour
F: Webster St between 44th St and 43rd St
WeekdayAutoVolumes
WeekdayBikeVolumes
Appendix A: Weekday Auto and Bike Volumes Page 4 of 5
0
50
100
150
200
2500:
001:
002:
003:
004:
005:
006:
007:
008:
009:
0010
:00
11:0
012
:00
13:0
014
:00
15:0
016
:00
17:0
018
:00
19:0
020
:00
21:0
022
:00
23:0
0
Ave
rage
Vol
ume
Hour
G: Webster St between Rich St and 41st St
WeekdayAutoVolumes
WeekdayBikeVolumes
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
0:00
1:00
2:00
3:00
4:00
5:00
6:00
7:00
8:00
9:00
10:0
011
:00
12:0
013
:00
14:0
015
:00
16:0
017
:00
18:0
019
:00
20:0
021
:00
22:0
023
:00
Ave
rage
Vol
ume
Hour
H: Webster St between 40th St and 38th St
WeekdayAutoVolumes
WeekdayBikeVolumes
Appendix A: Weekday Auto and Bike Volumes Page 5 of 5
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
800:
001:
002:
003:
004:
005:
006:
007:
008:
009:
0010
:00
11:0
012
:00
13:0
014
:00
15:0
016
:00
17:0
018
:00
19:0
020
:00
21:0
022
:00
23:0
0
Ave
rage
Vol
ume
Hour
I: Genoa St between 59th St and 58th St
WeekdayAutoVolumes
WeekdayBikeVolumes
0
50
100
150
200
250
0:00
1:00
2:00
3:00
4:00
5:00
6:00
7:00
8:00
9:00
10:0
011
:00
12:0
013
:00
14:0
015
:00
16:0
017
:00
18:0
019
:00
20:0
021
:00
22:0
023
:00
Ave
rage
Vol
ume
Hour
J: 52nd Street between Genoa Street and West Street
WeekdayAutoVolumes
WeekdayBikeVolumes