MASONIC AVENUE STREET DESIGN STUDY | Community Workshop 3 Masonic Ave Street Design Study Community Workshop 3 September 30, 2010
MASONIC AVENUE STREET DESIGN STUDY | Community Workshop 3 Introduction SF Municipal Transportation Agency Javad Mirabdal , Project Manager contact: Javad.Mirabdal@sfmta.com (415) ‐ 701 ‐ 4421 SF Department of Public Works Martha Ketterer , John Dennis, David Froehlich and Fiona Cundy SF Planning Department Nick Perry and Adam Varat Thanks to the SF Day School for allowing us to use their space for the community workshop. Also, thanks to Elizabeth Macdonald’s DCRP Studio at UC Berkeley for their Masonic Avenue analysis information, some of which we’ve used in the presentation tonight.
MASONIC AVENUE STREET DESIGN STUDY | Community Workshop 3 Agenda 45 minutes • Project overview • Existing conditions • Recap of community workshop 1 • Recap of community workshop 2 and survey results • Review new proposals 30 minutes • Breakout to review new proposals • Individual survey 30 minutes • Regroup for discussion • Next steps
MASONIC AVENUE STREET DESIGN STUDY | Community Workshop 3 Federal, State, Regional and City Policies Federal Planning Factors ‐ 23 CFR 450.214 Safety for motorized and non ‐ motorized users State Policy AB1358 State Complete Street Policy MTC Resolution No. 3765 MTC Complete Streets Policy SF City Charter Section 8A.115 SF Complete Streets Policy SF Admin Code Chapter 98 SF Better Streets Policy SF Public Works Code Section 2.4.13 SF Complete Streets Policy
MASONIC AVENUE STREET DESIGN STUDY | Community Workshop 3 Project Area Geary Blvd. Masonic Avenue from Fell Street to Geary Blvd. Masonic Ave. Fell St. Courtesy of UC Berkeley
MASONIC AVENUE STREET DESIGN STUDY | Community Workshop 3 Project Goals The primary goal of this project is to identify how Masonic Avenue between Geary Blvd. and Fell St. can safely and efficiently accommodate the needs of all roadway users, including but not limited to pedestrians, bicyclists, motorists, and Muni.
MASONIC AVENUE STREET DESIGN STUDY | Community Workshop 3 Existing Conditions Topography, Street Networks, Schools, Parking, Muni Line, Sidewalk Widths
MASONIC AVENUE STREET DESIGN STUDY | Community Workshop 3 Existing Conditions – Topography Lone Mountain The Panhandle Courtesy of UC Berkeley
MASONIC AVENUE STREET DESIGN STUDY | Community Workshop 3 Existing Conditions ‐ Street Networks Masonic Ave is the only through street running North/South Geary Blvd. between Park Presidio and Divisadero Streets. Fell St. East ‐ West North – South Streets Streets
MASONIC AVENUE STREET DESIGN STUDY | Community Workshop 3 Existing Conditions – Sidewalk Constraints Mature Street Trees Grade Changes Sidewalk Plantings
MASONIC AVENUE STREET DESIGN STUDY | Community Workshop 3 Existing Conditions – Transit Operation and Ameniti • Bus Route 43 Masonic (9, 12, 10, 20 minutes) • Total daily ridership 12,765 • Daily ridership between Geary and Fell 1,461 • Bus Route 31BX (9, ‐ , 11, ‐ minutes) • 10 Bus Stops • 5 stops are equipped with shelters and next bus • Bus routes 38 & 38L Geary, 31 Turk, 5 Fulton, 21 Hayes and GGT cross Masonic.
MASONIC AVENUE STREET DESIGN STUDY | Community Workshop 3 Existing Conditions – Parking Geary St. 10 7 167 parking spaces total 6 32 9 5 11 5 22 13 5 5 10 4 5 6 Fell St. Peak Tow ‐ Away Parking Lane 83 84 West side East side
MASONIC AVENUE STREET DESIGN STUDY | Community Workshop 3 Existing Conditions – Parking Occupancy
MASONIC AVENUE STREET DESIGN STUDY | Community Workshop 3 Existing Conditions – Daytime Parking Duration
MASONIC AVENUE STREET DESIGN STUDY | Community Workshop 3 Existing Conditions – Traffic Speed Study • Speed Limit lowered from 30 MPH to 25 MPH on 6/24/08 • After study on 9/8/10 found that average speed did not decrease • More changes are needed to modify driver behavior
MASONIC AVENUE STREET DESIGN STUDY | Community Workshop 3 Existing Conditions – Intersection Collision Summary 2004 ‐ 2009 Top 10 Collision Locations
MASONIC AVENUE STREET DESIGN STUDY | Community Workshop 3 Existing Conditions – Traffic Volume Southbound at Fulton Northbound at Fulton
MASONIC AVENUE STREET DESIGN STUDY | Community Workshop 3 Existing Conditions – PM Peak Southbound Traffic Modeling of Signal Delay Existing 3 Lanes Proposed ‐ 2 Lanes Intersection SB Delay (sec) SB Delay (sec) 29 53 Masonic & Geary 9 9 Masonic & Anza/O'Farrell (1 LT lane) 5 15 Masonic & Turk 4 5 Masonic & Golden Gate 13 17 Masonic & Fulton 2 3 Masonic & Grove 4 9 Masonic & Hayes 35 31 Masonic & Fell (2 RT lanes) 10 12 Masonic & Oak (1 LT lane) 111 154 Total Delay 44 Additional Delay
MASONIC AVENUE STREET DESIGN STUDY | Community Workshop 3 Existing Conditions – Typical Roadway Section Masonic Ave between Ewing and Fulton • Property line to property line width is 100 ft • Sidewalk width ranges from 9 ft (Hayes to Fell) to 22 ft (Ewing to Fulton) • Generally, two traffic lanes in each direction off ‐ peak • AM tow ‐ away lane on east side (northbound), PM tow ‐ away lane on west side (southbound) • Approx. 83 parking spaces on west side and 84 parking spaces on east side
MASONIC AVENUE STREET DESIGN STUDY | Community Workshop 3 Existing Conditions – Atypical Roadway Section Masonic Ave between Hayes and Fell
MASONIC AVENUE STREET DESIGN STUDY | Community Workshop 3 Upcoming Major Projects – Geary BRT • Traffic at surface (2 lanes each Construction Duration: 1½ ‐ 2 yrs direction) Cost: $10 – 15m • BRT in bus ‐ only tunnel; stations at tunnel approaches • Traffic flows with additional turn restrictions • Improved transfer to 43 ‐ Masonic
MASONIC AVENUE STREET DESIGN STUDY | Community Workshop 3 Upcoming major projects – Proposed Target Project
MASONIC AVENUE STREET DESIGN STUDY | Community Workshop 3 Community Workshop 1 Comments, Small Group Conceptual Exercise, Community Priorities
MASONIC AVENUE STREET DESIGN STUDY | Community Workshop 3 Likes and Dislikes Community Workshop 1
MASONIC AVENUE STREET DESIGN STUDY | Community Workshop 3 Small Group Conceptual Exercise Community Workshop 1 Creating an “Ideal Section”
MASONIC AVENUE STREET DESIGN STUDY | Community Workshop 3 Community Workshop 2 Presentation of 4 Potential Street Design Options
MASONIC AVENUE STREET DESIGN STUDY | Community Workshop 3 Workshop 2: Option A East side parking, 4 traffic lanes, bike lane
MASONIC AVENUE STREET DESIGN STUDY | Community Workshop 3 Workshop 2: Option B Night parking, 4/2 traffic lanes, shifting bike lanes
MASONIC AVENUE STREET DESIGN STUDY | Community Workshop 3 Workshop 2: Option C No parking, 4 traffic lanes, cycle track
MASONIC AVENUE STREET DESIGN STUDY | Community Workshop 3 Workshop 2: Option D Parking at all times, 4 traffic lanes, cycle track on existing sidewalk Intersection Mid ‐ Block
MASONIC AVENUE STREET DESIGN STUDY | Community Workshop 3 Workshop 2 Survey Results Overall Rankings Overall Rankings 100% Option A was the 2% 16% 15% 10% most liked 16% 15% 90% 24% 74% 80% 24% Option C was the 18% 18% most strongly liked 70% option. Strongly Dislike 60% Somewhat Dislike Options B & D 50% 32% 41% Somewhat Like were the most 42% 40% strongly disliked 69% Strongly Like 30% 34% 20% 34% 26% 24% 10% 5% 0% Option A Option B Option C Option D
MASONIC AVENUE STREET DESIGN STUDY | Community Workshop 3 Workshop 2 Survey Results Traffic Lane Configuration Roadway with Median Configuration 100% 2% 8% 10% Option C shows that 90% 17% four traffic lanes 79% 33% calmed with a 25% 80% 20% median is preferred. 70% Strongly Dislike 60% 27% 48% Somewhat Dislike 50% 35% Somewhat Like 40% 50% Strongly Like 30% 41% 20% 33% 31% 10% 12% 0% OPTION A OPTION B OPTION C OPTION D
MASONIC AVENUE STREET DESIGN STUDY | Community Workshop 3 Workshop 2 Survey Results Transit Facilities Transit Facilities 2% 3% 96% 100% 95% 7% 3% 12% 90% Options A and D 15% 80% show that Bus bulbs with inside bike lanes 45% 70% 36% was favored 67% Strongly Dislike 60% Somewhat Dislike 50% 49% Somewhat Like 40% Strongly Like 31% 30% 50% 20% 29% 22% 10% 17% 0% OPTION A OPTION B OPTION C OPTION D
MASONIC AVENUE STREET DESIGN STUDY | Community Workshop 3 Workshop 2 Survey Results Bike Facility Design Bike Facility Design 100% 5% 7% Option A and C 91% 2% reflect permanent 20% 20% 90% 12% 84% bike lanes or a cycle 80% track in existing 33% 12% parking/tow ‐ away 70% lane is preferred. 32% Strongly Dislike 60% Somewhat Dislike 60% 29% 50% Somewhat Like 40% Strongly Like 32% 30% 58% 20% 39% 24% 10% 17% 0% OPTION A OPTION B OPTION C OPTION D
MASONIC AVENUE STREET DESIGN STUDY | Community Workshop 3 Workshop 2 Survey Results Sidewalk Design Sidewalk Design 2% 2% 100% 2% Option D reflects that a cycle 7% 13% track on the existing sidewalk 90% 20% 42% was seen by many as a 80% degradation of the pedestrian environment. 70% 22% 44% 43% Strongly Dislike 60% 68% Somewhat Dislike 50% Somewhat Like 40% 41% Strongly Like 30% 44% 40% 20% 22% 10% 17% 0% OPTION A OPTION B OPTION C OPTION D
Recommend
More recommend
