Third & Fourth Streets Traffic Calming Study Presentation to Transportation Commission May 14, 2015.
Third & Fourth Street Traffic Calming Study
60
Third & Fourth Street Traffic Calming Study Community Workshop #1 August 6, 2014
Transcript of Third & Fourth Street Traffic Calming Study
Third & Fourth StreetTraffic Calming Study
Community Workshop #1August 6, 2014
Overview of Workshop & Summary of Previous Community Input
6:00 to 6:30 Open House
6:30 to 6:45 Welcome and Project Background
6:45 to 7:30 Presentation of Alternatives (Fehr & Peers)
7:30 to 8:00 Sticky Dot Exercise & Closing Remarks
• Understand the Goals & Scope of Work for the Traffic Calming Study
• Present the Results of the Existing Conditions & Alternatives Analysis
• Address Ideas and Concerns Raised During December Workshop & Follow Up Survey
• Provide Feedback on the Alternatives Developed
Policy: Maximize the existing arterial and collector street system to accommodate commuter traffic while reducing traffic intrusion into residential neighborhoods (adopted by the City Council on August 5, 2004)
1992 – Utilities on Third and Fourth Streets were placed underground.
1995 – Pomona Avenue near Glorietta Place was redesigned.
2002 – Caltrans overlayed Third and Fourth Streets with rubberized asphalt.
-- Semi-diverters prohibiting left turns onto A, B and C Avenues from Third Street were installed. (Removed in January 2005)
-- Travel lanes were narrowed to 11 feet in width and on-street parking was added on the south side of Third Street and the north side of Fourth Street.
2005 – 25 MPH speed limit was established on all segments of Third and Fourth Streets.
2007 – Navy opened the Third Street Gate.
2011 – Bulbouts were installed on Third Street at F and H Avenues and on Fourth Street at B Avenue.
May 2014
City awards contract
February 2014
City issues Request for Proposals
November 2013 through January 2014
Two public surveys and a workshop to gather resident input
September 2013
City Council approves the study and funding
April 2013Coronado Transportation Commission proposes the study
Initial Survey
November 2013
• 301 respondents
• Provided insight into the
concerns of residents
regarding the issues with
the traffic on Third and
Fourth Streets
• Provided input on
potential support for
specific traffic calming
measures.
Workshop
December 9, 2013
• 100 attendees briefed
on key issues:
• Navy initiatives to reduce
traffic volume
• Existing speed limits and
traffic speeds on Third
and Fourth Streets
• Traffic enforcement
activities and resources
• City’s traffic circulation
plan and goals
• Completed and planned
improvements to Third
and Fourth Streets
• Discussion of survey
results
Follow-up Survey
After the Workshop
• 123 respondents
• Provided their opinions
regarding specific traffic
calming measures.
Initial Survey Results: Percentage of Respondents Who Feel it is “Important” to Solve This Issue
Slide 1 of 2
90.3%
87.1%
87.1%
87.1%
83.9%
83.9%
53.5%
76.7%
67.4%
34.9%
79.1%
69.8%
65.9%
70.5%
79.5%
65.9%
61.4%
81.8%
71.7%
89.1%
60.9%
47.8%
82.6%
63.0%
Difficulty crossing or turning onto 4th Street
Speed of traffic on 4th Street
Speed of traffic on 3rd Street
Difficulty crossing or turning onto 3rd Street
PM rush hour traffic congestion on 4th Street
Failure of traffic to yield to pedestrians crossing 3rd Street
Bridge Side
NASNI Side
3rd Street
4th Street
20% 40% 60% 80%
Initial Survey Results: Percentage of Respondents Who Feel it is “Important” to Solve This Issue
Slide 2 of 2
80.6%
71.0%
71.0%
67.7%
61.3%
61.3%
83.7%
67.4%
34.9%
48.8%
53.5%
44.2%
81.8%
50.0%
54.5%
75.0%
70.5%
54.5%
78.3%
69.6%
58.7%
47.8%
47.8%
80.4%
Failure of traffic to yield to pedestrians crossing 4th Street
Cars blocking the intersections and alleys on 4th Street
Cars blocking the intersections and alleys on 3rd Street
AM rush hour traffic congestion on 3rd Street
Noise created by traffic on 3rd Street
Noise created by traffic on 4th Street
Bridge Side
NASNI Side
3rd Street
4th Street
20% 40% 60% 80%
• Failure of traffic to yield to pedestrians
• Difficulty crossing or turning onto Third and Fourth Streets from side streets
• Noise created by the traffic
• Cars blocking the intersections and alleys on Third and Fourth Streets
• Adding traffic signals• Creating parkways along Third and Fourth Streets• Installing additional bulbouts• Reducing the width of the travel lanes• Increasing the length of red curbs• Raising the height of the pavement at crosswalks or
intersections• Marking intersections “Keep Clear”• Installing pedestrian activated warning lights• Installing speed bumps
Existing
Conditions
Evaluate Travel
Time
Field
Observations
Review Survey
Results
Identify
Alternatives
Identify
Potential Tools
Develop Three
Alternatives
Technical
Analysis of
Alternatives
Community
InputMeeting #1
Community
SurveyMeeting #2
Revisions &
Reporting
Identify
Recommended
Alternatives
Technical
Analysis of
Preferred
Alternative
Present to
Transportation
Commission &
City Council
Traffic Calming: Reduce the actual speed of the traffic on Third and Fourth Streets to 25 mph
Mobility: Achieve a segment Level of Service (LOS) on Third and Fourth Streets of “C” during non-peak periods and “D” during the peak traffic hour while not increasing the volume of traffic or further delaying the traffic diverted onto adjacent streets during the AM and PM peak rush hours
Resident Concerns: Respond to the additional concerns with the traffic on Third and Fourth Streets and the concerns raised regarding specific measures
Traffic Data
Travel Time
Pedestrian & Bicycle Connectivity
Operating Condition:
AcceptableMarginalFailing
Marked CrosswalkSchool CrosswalkKey Pedestrian CorridorsBicycle Paths/Routes
Traffic calming tools aim to reduce speeds and cut through traffic using physical measures to change driver behavior
Purpose: Improve North-South Access Across the Corridor
Narrow the roadway by extending curb beyond parked vehicles either at intersections or midblock
Purpose: Maintain 25 mph travel speed during free-flow conditions. Most effective when combined with other tools.
Purpose: Reduce capacity to reduce speeds during non-peak conditions
Purpose: Reduce capacity to reduce speeds during non-peak conditions
Tools aimed at improving the walking and bicycling environment along the corridor
Purpose: Improve the driver awareness of marked crosswalks at intersections
Purpose: Provide for minimum 8-9’ paved surface that pedestrians and bicycles can share
Purpose: Provide shade and aesthetic improvements
Purpose: Provide clear zone at intersections to improve visibility of pedestrians and bicyclist waiting to cross the street
Keep
Clear
Roundabouts
Chicanes
Angled Parking
Hawk Signals
Four elements included in all alternatives that provide safety, access and operational benefits to the corridor
Traffic Signals at Alameda
Traffic Signals at B
Keep Clear at 4th
& D
Keep Clear at 3rd
& C
Intersection modifications at Glorietta Place
Traffic Signal Alternative
Traffic Signals at◦ Alameda Boulevard **
◦ F Avenue
◦ H Avenue
◦ B Avenue **
◦ Glorietta Boulevard (no left access)
(** = Common to All Alternatives)
Intersection Reconfiguration at Palm Avenue to Reduce Pedestrian Crossing Distance
Operating Condition:
Acceptable
Marginal
Failing
Improved
over Existing
Increase in
travel time
Decrease in
travel time
x
x
Mode of
Travel
Benefit Assessed West of
Orange
East of
Orange
Automobile Improve Ability to Cross Third & Fourth Street?
Increase in Delay or Travel Time on Third/Fourth?
Reduces Off-Peak Traffic Speeds?
Pedestrian Increases Number of Controlled Crosswalks?
Improves Walking Environment by Widening
Sidewalks?
Improved Visibility of Pedestrians to Drivers?
Bicycle Increases Number of Controlled Crossing
Locations?
Provides Dedicated or Combined Off-Street
Bicycling Facility?
Significant Improvement
Moderate Improvement
About the Same
Traffic Signals Timed for 25 mph Travel Speed
Existing SpeedEstimated SpeedTraffic SignalVertical Deflection
34
(25)
Traffic Calming Alternative
WEST of ORANGE
Lane Reduction: Alameda Boulevard to D Avenue
Intersection Reconfiguration at Palm Avenue
High Visibility Raised Crosswalks
EAST of ORANGE
Operating Condition:
Acceptable
Marginal
Failing
Improved
over Existing
Increase in
travel time
Decrease in
travel time
x
x
Mode of
Travel
Benefit Assessed West of
Orange
East of
Orange
Automobile Improve Ability to Cross Third & Fourth Street?
Increase in Delay or Travel Time on Third/Fourth?
Reduces Off-Peak Traffic Speeds?
Pedestrian Increases Number of Controlled Crosswalks?
Improves Walking Environment by Widening
Sidewalks?
Improved Visibility of Pedestrians to Drivers?
Bicycle Increases Number of Controlled Crossing
Locations?
Provides Dedicated or Combined Off-Street
Bicycling Facility?
Significant Improvement
Moderate Improvement
About the Same
Speed Tables/ Raised Crosswalks Designed for 20-25 mph Travel Speed
Existing SpeedEstimated SpeedTraffic SignalVertical Deflection
34
(25)
Pedestrian & Bicycle Focus Alternative
WEST of ORANGE
Wider Sidewalks by Removing Parking
New Traffic Signals at:◦ Palm Avenue
◦ Third Street & F Avenue
Raised Crosswalks along F Avenue at Fourth Street & Palm Avenue
EAST of ORANGE
Bulb Outs at C Street & A Street
Traffic Signal at Glorietta Boulevard (no left turn access)
Operating Condition:
Acceptable
Marginal
Failing
Improved
over Existing
Increase in
travel time
Decrease in
travel time
x
x
Mode of
Travel
Benefit Assessed West of
Orange
East of
Orange
Automobile Improve Ability to Cross Third & Fourth Street?
Increase in Delay or Travel Time on Third/Fourth?
Reduces Off-Peak Traffic Speeds?
Pedestrian Increases Number of Controlled Crosswalks?
Improves Walking Environment by Widening
Sidewalks?
Improved Visibility of Pedestrians to Drivers?
Bicycle Increases Number of Controlled Crossing
Locations?
Provides Dedicated or Combined Off-Street
Bicycling Facility?
Significant Improvement
Moderate Improvement
About the Same
Traffic Signals & Raised Crosswalks Designed to Maintain 25 mph Speed
Existing SpeedEstimated SpeedTraffic SignalVertical Deflection
34
(25)
Review Concepts & Share Likes/Dislikes
Comment Cards
Community On-Line Survey
Follow Up Workshop with Preferred Alternative
Meetings with Caltrans
Cost Estimates
Reports & Presentations to Transportation Commission and City Council
6 green dots
3 red dots
Green: I like this element of the plan
Red: l do not like this element of the plan
For Additional Information:
Dave Johnson, Project Manager
Dawn Wilson, Project Manager
