physically separated bike lanes, solo cup separator

[toi]

I thought the group would find this article interesting - effect of using red solo cups to separate car traffic from bike lanes --

http://www.theatlanticcities.com/commute/2012/08/case-separated-bike-lanes/3015/

[thelakelander]

This basically says it all...

The message? Physical barriers, even small ones, have a greater effect on driver behavior than painted lines.

I'd love to see more physically separated bike facilities in this town. IMO, bike lanes on highways like Philips and Beach are death traps waiting to happen. Other than hardcore cyclist, they'll get little use.

[Lunican]

The bike lane on Beach Blvd is extremely dangerous, especially at intersections.

The bike path alongside Kernan is really the best thing to do along these roads. FDOT should really update their standard to include a bike path and stop putting in bike lanes along these major arterials.

[tufsu1]

I'm working on a study on SR 60 in Brandon (just outside Tampa).  It is an 8 lane road with 45-50 mph speed limit and bike lanes.  Needless to say, most cyclists ride on the sidewalk.

As part of our study, we recommended reducing the travel lanes from 12 feet each to 11 feet, allowing the opportunity to get a painted buffer between the outside travel lane and the bike lane.  Officially these are called buffered bike lanes (vs. separated bike lanes).  At first, FDOT seemed open to the idea, but recently has pushed back, as they view narrowing the lanes to be detrimental to freight traffic on the corridor. 

[Lunican]

Why can't they just make the sidewalk a multiuse path? Paint isn't very helpful on these major roads.

[tufsu1]

because there is not nearly enough room.  And data shows that riding on the sidewalk is far more dangerous than the road itself on corridors with lots of driveways.

[Lunican]

So what is the answer? Drive a car or move out of FDOT's jurisdiction.

[thelakelander]

^That's not exactly true. Although things are slowly getting better, FDOT is their own animal caught up in their own inertia.  I've actually worked on quite a few projects where they've refused various multi-modal recommendations from consultants and desires of the surrounding community.

Just earlier this year, FDOT Secretary Ananth Prasad spoke out against road diet projects that would result in less capacity for moving cars.  This stemmed from a study in Ocala where the city desired a reduction in lanes on a FDOT road that cut right through their downtown. On another project, the county and community wanted street trees and were flat out told it ain't happening because the roots would tear up the streets. My compromise to the standoff was, instead of saying no, let's recognize there's more than one type of tree out there. Let's attempt to find species that can provide shade, with root systems that would not tear up the streets.

The reality of it is, FDOT's primary modal focus revolves around moving motorized vehicles fast and efficient, even at the expense of other modes.  Until that focus changes in-house, it will always be a struggle to make FDOT maintained roads like Beach, truly multimodal friendly.

As for Kernan, it's a COJ street. For local streets, it's just a matter of COJ developing multimodal and context sensitive friendly street design standards.

So what is the answer? Drive a car or move out of FDOT's jurisdiction.

It all depends at this point.  Unfortunately, that is the answer right now for many autocentric FDOT arterials.  However, there are cases cities are choosing to take over the maintenance of FDOT roads to make the multimodal changes their communities desire. In Miami, the city has been trying to take over Brickell Avenue because FDOT has refused having auto movement compromised to facilitate a safer environment for cyclist and pedestrians....despite it being the heart of their financial district with Florida's tallest skyscrapers lining it. 

Miami's Brickell Avenue (US 1)





Also, in Central Florida, Orlando successfully took over an FDOT street in College Park to make a road diet possible. A decade later, that strip is lined with sidewalk dining, restaurants, and shops within a walkable neighborhood setting.

Orlando's Edgewater Avenue today



When it comes to Jax, the first place we should start with is ourselves. Our design standards for local streets are autocentric as well but we have more local control over changing and modifying them for specific projects.  Kernan is a good local example.

[mvp]

Speaking of bike lanes, I'm working on a brochure for the TPO's bike/ped plan and I'd like to include photos/stories of people who bike and walk to work, shopping etc. (not just for recreation).  I will compensate you for your time and use of your photo.  Please PM me if interested.

Also, I'm working on a bike/ped safety initiative for the City of St. Augustine and would appreciate input from anyone who lives and regularly bikes or walks in that area.

[Scrub Palmetto]

^That's not exactly true. Although things are slowly getting better, FDOT is their own animal caught up in their own inertia.  I've actually worked on quite a few projects where they've refused various multi-modal recommendations from consultants and desires of the surrounding community.

Just earlier this year, FDOT Secretary Ananth Prasad spoke out against road diet projects that would result in less capacity for moving cars.  This stemmed from a study in Ocala where the city desired a reduction in lanes on a FDOT road that cut right through their downtown. On another project, the county and community wanted street trees and were flat out told it ain't happening because the roots would tear up the streets. My compromise to the standoff was, instead of saying no, let's recognize there's more than one type of tree out there. Let's attempt to find species that can provide shade, with root systems that would not tear up the streets.

The reality of it is, FDOT's primary modal focus revolves around moving motorized vehicles fast and efficient, even at the expense of other modes.  Until that focus changes in-house, it will always be a struggle to make FDOT maintained roads like Beach, truly multimodal friendly.

As for Kernan, it's a COJ street. For local streets, it's just a matter of COJ developing multimodal and context sensitive friendly street design standards.

So what is the answer? Drive a car or move out of FDOT's jurisdiction.

It all depends at this point.  Unfortunately, that is the answer right now for many autocentric FDOT arterials.  However, there are cases cities are choosing to take over the maintenance of FDOT roads to make the multimodal changes their communities desire. In Miami, the city has been trying to take over Brickell Avenue because FDOT has refused having auto movement compromised to facilitate a safer environment for cyclist and pedestrians....despite it being the heart of their financial district with Florida's tallest skyscrapers lining it. 

Miami's Brickell Avenue (US 1)
[/img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/44/Brickell_Avenue_aerial_20100211.jpg/450px-Brickell_Avenue_aerial_20100211.jpg[/img]

[/img]http://www.metrojacksonville.com/photos/thumbs/lrg-7953-p1170164.JPG[/img]


Also, in Central Florida, Orlando successfully took over an FDOT street in College Park to make a road diet possible. A decade later, that strip is lined with sidewalk dining, restaurants, and shops within a walkable neighborhood setting.

Orlando's Edgewater Avenue today
[/img]http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/944282318_RiYde-M.jpg[/img]


When it comes to Jax, the first place we should start with is ourselves. Our design standards for local streets are autocentric as well but we have more local control over changing and modifying them for specific projects.  Kernan is a good local example.

Great post. I had no idea about Edgewater, but it's one of my favorite spots in Orlando. What was FDOT's viewpoint in conceding that section? And is Miami's a much more daunting fight because Brickell's a federal highway? What state roads do you think Jax should pursue taking over someday, once local design standards are tackled?

[thelakelander]

From what I remember, Orlando wanted a road diet and FDOT was just planning to resurface Edgewater as an undivided four-lane facility.  The agreement that was reached, ended up being FDOT resurfacing it as three lanes with bike lanes added and Orlando agreeing to take over it.


Where Edgewater Avenue transitions from a state to local road now.

Some information about that project:

A 2001/02 roadway resurfacing project converted this narrow undivided four-lane facility to a three lane roadway with bike lanes and parallel parking in Orlando's College Park neighborhood. This complete streets road diet involved a transfer of jurisdiction and maintenance from the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) to the City of Orlando.  As a result of the road diet, Edgewater Drive has seen a 23% increase in pedestrian traffic (2,632 trips after verses 2,136 trips before), a 30% increase in bicycle traffic (486 trips after verses 375 trips before), and automobile travel delays increased by only 10 seconds during the morning peak hours.  Furthermore, the automobile Daily Traffic Volume for this roadway has decreased 12%, from 20,501 trips before improvements to 18,131 trips four months after the project's completion.

full article: http://www.cityoforlando.net/transportation/TransportationPlanningDiv/pdf/Edgewater.pdf

What state roads do you think Jax should pursue taking over someday, once local design standards are tackled?

I'm sure my list is longer but off the top of my head and in no particular order...

Adams/Forsyth (Downtown)
Kings Road (I-95 to MLK Parkway)
Beaver Street (probably McDuff to downtown)
Cassat (I-10 to Blanding)
Main Street (Downtown to MLK Parkway)
Riverside Avenue/Jefferson/Broad

I think we could do some pretty cool things with these corridors if there were more flexibility with the design standards.

[toi]

Adding to Ennis's list of roads to look at for separated bike lanes -

Pearl Street between the Courthouse and Springfield (the first roundabout), which is a combination of two-way/two lane, two-way/four lane, and one-way/two lane, all with more right of way and capacity than needed.  A two lane, two way is all that is needed for car traffic.

Park Street in Brooklyn area and viaduct by the convention center, to connect Brooklyn, Five Points and Downtown - minimal traffic, parking in the travel lane tolerated due to the absence of traffic, though the northbank riverwalk is a pretty good east-west corridor, too.

Newnan Street or Liberty Street, both four lane, two-way streets connecting downtown to Springfield, with minimal traffic.  Both run all the way to the riverwalk, which can then go to Five Points, Riverside and Avondale.

St. Augustine Road between University Boulevard and San Jose Boulevard - wide right of way, four lane road with minimal turning lanes and no medians, lots of turning movements, connecting a commercial area with residential neighborhoods, the Bolles School, San Jose Catholic School, and San Jose Episcopal School.

Oak Street (Riverside), Five Points to King Street - a wide two lane road (I think a former streetcar street).

[tufsu1]

So what is the answer? Drive a car or move out of FDOT's jurisdiction.

The answer is to change the laws and show up to the meetings and demand action.

Its hard getting advice from FDOT contractors because they simply are not wired to think along the lines of whats good for the public over the demands of their employers.

dude...it would be really helpful if you knew what you were talking about.

I've been advising my client to push back on FDOT and challenge their statements with data...that's just what we will be doing tomorrow!

[tufsu1]

Adding to Ennis's list of roads to look at for separated bike lanes -

Pearl Street between the Courthouse and Springfield (the first roundabout), which is a combination of two-way/two lane, two-way/four lane, and one-way/two lane, all with more right of way and capacity than needed.  A two lane, two way is all that is needed for car traffic.

Park Street in Brooklyn area and viaduct by the convention center, to connect Brooklyn, Five Points and Downtown - minimal traffic, parking in the travel lane tolerated due to the absence of traffic, though the northbank riverwalk is a pretty good east-west corridor, too.

Newnan Street or Liberty Street, both four lane, two-way streets connecting downtown to Springfield, with minimal traffic.  Both run all the way to the riverwalk, which can then go to Five Points, Riverside and Avondale.

St. Augustine Road between University Boulevard and San Jose Boulevard - wide right of way, four lane road with minimal turning lanes and no medians, lots of turning movements, connecting a commercial area with residential neighborhoods, the Bolles School, San Jose Catholic School, and San Jose Episcopal School.

Oak Street (Riverside), Five Points to King Street - a wide two lane road (I think a former streetcar street).

nice list toi...as you know, TransForm Jax is working on several of these...we decided Liberty Street was the easiest one to start with as there are very few obstacles and very low traffic volumes.

[fieldafm]

Just earlier this year, FDOT Secretary Ananth Prasad spoke out against road diet projects that would result in less capacity for moving cars

When I was on the editorial board of the Times Union last year, we interviewed Prassad and this was one of the questions I asked him (I actually framed it in terms of Green Cove Springs and Sy Augustine).  He said the same thing, that FDOT was against any road reconfigurations that reduced automobile capacity in any way, shape or form.