WEC Analysis Committee/Improve efficiency of transportation network

From Eugene Neighbors

Jump to: navigation, search

Contents

[edit] Overview

This is one of eight integrated design issue clusters being developed by the WEC Analysis Committee starting mid-June, 2008.

Eight draft clusters... Intensify Development, Relocate Land Uses, Increase Public Transit, Enhance Pedestrian and Bikeways, Connections to Natural Resources, Enhance Natural Resources, Natural Watershed, Transportation Network

This cluster is the main holder for multiway boulevard info.

[edit] Description

Traffic congestion on West 11th (and Hwy 126) can be attributed, in part, to gaps in efficiency of the transportation network in West Eugene.

[edit] Key Parameters and Rules of Thumb

  1. There is a poor level of street connectivity in the WEC area of focus. The street grid is highly fragmented, forcing local traffic and through traffic to mix.
  2. Alternative (to West 11th) east-west and through routes in the area seem to be underused, for a variety of reasons including weak wayfinding aids (signage, etc.).
  3. The number of curb cuts and the associated turning movements along West 11th causes interruptions in traffic flow. Left and right turn movements on West 11th can be unsafe and lead to increased congestion.
  4. Buses stopping in primary traffic lanes of West 11th cause interruptions in traffic flow.
  5. There is significant evidence that in general, extra lane-miles added to a congested highway will increase emissions of carbon-dioxide in the long term, even assuming major improvements in vehicle fuel efficency. Sightline(1) Sightline(2) [Hansen & Huang, 1997, in Ewing et al., 2007 Figure 6-4, p102]
  6. A multiway boulevard can be appropriate when there is a need to carry both through traffic and local traffic, where there is good reason for the through traffic to move faster than the local traffic, and/or when there is real and/or potential conflict between the two traffic types (p209). Jacobs, MacDonald, and Rofe 2002
  7. A hard minimum right-of-way width for a basic complete multiway boulevard is 100 feet, from street facade to street facade of adjoining buildings (p212). A width of 125 to 140 feet is more likely to support a successful integrated boulevard design (p212). Jacobs, MacDonald, and Rofe 2002
  8. West 11th between Garfield and Bailey Hill has a relatively narrow city-owned right-of-way width of 80 feet.
  9. Most of the running length of West 11th from Chambers westward has a width between building facades of 140 feet or greater. Several buildings have separations across the street of about 120 feet, and a few have an smaller separation down to around 80-90 feet. Johnston & Matthews, 2008
  10. It may be possible to successfully include light rail within the pedestrian realm of the boulevard as part of wide medians (p222), but bus service should be placed within the through-going realm, either along the outer curb, possibly in an additional dedicated bus lane. or in additional lanes separated within an additional center median (p223). Jacobs, MacDonald, and Rofe 2002
  11. A minimum of 50% of the overall width of a multiway boulevard needs to be dedicated to the pedestrian realm, with 60% up to 70% being more realistic (p213-213, etc.). Jacobs, MacDonald, and Rofe 2002
  12. Boulevards are integrated wholes. One must beware of reducing them to a series of issues for which specific guideline dimensions and solutions are given, losing the vision of a whole street and the ways in which its different aspects interact. Jacobs, MacDonald, and Rofe 2002
  13. For a community design plan to meet the adopted Oregon greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets, it is likely to have to project large (on the order of 50% or even more) reductions over time in vehicle miles traveled (VMT), both per capita and in absolute terms. [1], sidebar at [2], [3], City GHG Report, City GHG Memo.
  14. Carpool or vanpool incentives such as dedication of high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes at peak hours between Veneta and Eugene might be useful tools. [But between Veneta and Eugene, lanes are available for only a short fraction of the distance, if at all]

[edit] Key Questions

  1. What share of the traffic on W11th and Highway 126 is directly related to Veneta?
  2. What share of the traffic on W11th and Highway 126 related to beyond Veneta?
  3. How many truck trips per day currently follow various routes through West Eugene? Would future plans for the Port of Coos Bay, or other potential growth, impact road freight traffic significantly?
  4. Do the growth plans in Veneta significantly impact traffic on 126 and W11th, and if so, how?
  5. What is the need and feasibility of a widened crossing of Fern Ridge Reservior?
  6. What are the greenhouse gas emission implications of various street and road network changes?
  7. What is the width needed for various configurations of multiway boulevard? How does the opportunity and utility for a multiway boulevard vary along the length of W11th between Chambers and Greenhill?
  8. What costs are associated with acquiring those widths of right of way, over various time scales?
  9. More specifically, what are the common intervals of distances from facade to facade across West 11th, between Chambers and Beltline? How many building facades (what is the length of building facade) are less than 60 feet from the current West 11th centerline? Less than 70 feet?
  10. What are the costs and benefits of improving/expanding various existing vehicle routes and intersections?

[edit] Community Design Implications

Based on the design storming elements and follow-up analysis, there are several methods by which mobility could be increased in the area:

  1. Implement Access Management practices on West 11th. This can be challenging as, in general, it limits turning movements in and out of private property.
  2. Multiway Boulevard design concepts are one way to implement access management tools and achieve other design goals
  3. Improve signage and identify along preferred and/or alternative routes
  4. As areas of West Eugene redevelop, design efficient and alternative methods of access and travel.
  5. Prioritize transportation design tools that ensure efficient travel for transit, bicycles, carpool and other alternatives to single occupancy vehicles
  6. Clearly identified preferred routes for trucking and freight could separate areas of transportation use for maximum efficiency.
  7. Increasing the efficiency of the transportation system through a variety of methods could increase mobility throughout the WEC area of interest and focus.
  8. Carpooling and vanpooling options and incentives could be designed into any proposal.

[edit] Community Design Elements

  • Couplet idea
  • Section needs to be either filled in comprehensively and analyzed, or covered by content of the comprehensive design elements table.
  • This entire subsection needs review, consideration, and adjustment

[edit] Implementation Process Comments

[edit] References

[edit] External Links

Retrieved from "http://wiki.eugeneneighbors.org/wiki/WEC_Analysis_Committee/Improve_efficiency_of_transportation_network"
Personal tools