A new look for Brooklyn's Park Street

[thelakelander]

As an aside, COJ put in ADA compliant curbs at each intersection late last year. (as part of the ongoing ADA compliance settlement/corrections going up all around the county)... all of that work will be ripped up when Park St road diet breaks ground (likely not until Q4 of 2022).
Also, JTA plans to install some of their new BRT stations along with the road diet construction.

Why is this going for Final Approval now if not until late 2022?

Riverplace Blvd streetscape went before DDRB about 2.5/3 years before work began, for context.

My question still stands:)

What's shown in this presentation won't be built like that. The pictures are pretty but when they move into some detailed design work, they're going to discover items typically overlooked with a +100 year old corridor. It will be either value engineered and/or the budget will balloon. From that angle, it's early to get design approval but I guess that's the process Jax has in place.

[Charles Hunter]

If the design is being done to accommodate "one developer that controls most of Park Street," is this developer contributing anything to the design or construction costs?

Can JTA's BRT buses pass when going in opposite directions on a 20' roadway without bumping mirrors?

[Steve]

I also think the mini roundabout things are overkill and a waste of money but I do love the use of chicanes. They are a great way to slow motorized traffic down within a ROW constrained corridor.

Are there any studies that show that people expecting a straight road, "hop the curb" and create a dangerous situation for a pedestrian?

I like the concept better than a roundabout, but I tend to look at this like the "lane shift" done on I-95 between the end of the overland bridge project and Emerson. There's a lane shift that looks like it was done to create a larger shoulder on the left side. Fine, but it results in a permanent unnatural lane shift where you wouldn't expect it.

I sort of look at this the same way.

[fieldafm]

If the design is being done to accommodate "one developer that controls most of Park Street," is this developer contributing anything to the design or construction costs?

Can JTA's BRT buses pass when going in opposite directions on a 20' roadway without bumping mirrors?

I think a more accurate description is that the project consultants are designing a streetscape that accommodates the desires of surrounding property owners. They have also held numerous public meetings and incorporated suggestions from the public into the proposed design. Ultimately they designing the streetscape to support economic development within a walkable corridor, in a way that supports the redevelopment of existing building stock.  Kind of the way that public engagement is supposed to work?

Not intending to sound like a smart@ss, but 10' bus lanes on a 25mph thoroughfare are a thing.  JTA doesn't have a problem with the lane width.  I can understand the preference to not mix bike traffic with bus and auto traffic... but Gaines Street in Tallahassee is very much the model used for Park Street, where the pedestrian realm has been prioritized over bike lanes (particularly a pedestrian realm that can accommodate robust outdoor dining options while also accommodating special events, IE festivals and the like).  High frequency buses operating on a 25mph roadway with sharrows, seem to be working just great there.

As far as 'is this developer contributing anything to the design or construction costs?', the Mobility Plan and specifically Downtown's TCEA are setup to encourage this very sort of development.  If you want a developer to now contribute the same mobility fee that a suburban developer pays for new construction, in order to rehab an existing building in an urban neighborhood that has been around for over 150 years... then we might as well bulldoze whatever is left of the urban core.

[thelakelander]

Can JTA's BRT buses pass when going in opposite directions on a 20' roadway without bumping mirrors?

Mirror to mirror is typically 10.5' or so for a bus, but maybe JTA has something different. Typically don't recommend lane widths of less than 10.5' on transit corridors. There will likely be some clips and sideswipes along the way but it will help slow traffic down if that's the goal.

[thelakelander]

Not intending to sound like a smart@ss, but 10' bus lanes on a 25mph thoroughfare are a thing.  JTA doesn't have a problem with the lane width.  I can understand the preference to not mix bike traffic with bus and auto traffic... but Gaines Street in Tallahassee is very much the model used for Park Street, where the pedestrian realm has been prioritized over bike lanes (particularly a pedestrian realm that can accommodate robust outdoor dining options while also accommodating special events, IE festivals and the like).  High frequency buses operating on a 25mph roadway with sharrows, seem to be working just great there.

Sharrows are fine for 25 mph however the recreational or leisure bike rider will avoid it and use side streets. Given the width of the travel lanes, with transit included, actual travel speeds may likely be lower. Travel lane width wise, Gaines appears to be a bit wider for transit. It's got a middle turn lane and curb and gutter that probably adds another 2' or so of horizontal width, in addition to the actual width of the asphalt travel lanes. Because of the type of curb and gutter used, and the presence of a suicide lane with spot medians, bi-directional transit on that corridor is spaced apart. In this scenario, I can see bus drivers waiting or slowing down in order to pass each other at intersections, where there's some more space to get around each other.

[jaxlongtimer]

Also, the primary developer of this area has an overwhelming desire (rightly I might add) to add as much outdoor dining space as possible, and is keenly interested in keeping as much as the existing building stock in place.  As you know, within 60' of ROW... there are choices to be made.  The preferential choice would be to prioritize pedestrian space and redevelopment of existing buildings... over accommodating a cycle track and having to heavily modify existing building stock in order to accommodate the preferred vibrant pedestrian streetscape desired, as a result of constructing a cycle track.

If the developer/primary property owner has this much sway over the design, are they contributing anything to the project, dollars or in-kind?  Seems like they will be the #1 beneficiary and it's a lot to benefit mostly a single owner (mayor's buddy, Shad, the exception!) who hasn't gone public with their plans for the area.

Don't get me wrong, I support projects like this, but there are corridors all over the NW Quadrant, for example, that could use a makeover like this after decades of neglect and we are told there is no money for it.  Who decides Park Street comes ahead of these other areas under these circumstances?

[fieldafm]

Not intending to sound like a smart@ss, but 10' bus lanes on a 25mph thoroughfare are a thing.  JTA doesn't have a problem with the lane width.  I can understand the preference to not mix bike traffic with bus and auto traffic... but Gaines Street in Tallahassee is very much the model used for Park Street, where the pedestrian realm has been prioritized over bike lanes (particularly a pedestrian realm that can accommodate robust outdoor dining options while also accommodating special events, IE festivals and the like).  High frequency buses operating on a 25mph roadway with sharrows, seem to be working just great there.

Sharrows are fine for 25 mph however the recreational or leisure bike rider will avoid it and use side streets. Given the width of the travel lanes, with transit included, actual travel speeds may likely be lower. Travel lane width wise, Gaines appears to be a bit wider for transit. It's got a middle turn lane and curb and gutter that probably adds another 2' or so of horizontal width, in addition to the actual width of the asphalt travel lanes. Because of the type of curb and gutter used, and the presence of a suicide lane with spot medians, bi-directional transit on that corridor is spaced apart. In this scenario, I can see bus drivers waiting or slowing down in order to pass each other at intersections, where there's some more space to get around each other.

Fully understand that Gaines has a wider ROW due to the turn lane/median islands.... my point was in relation to the mix of auto/bus traffic with bicycle traffic via sharrows.  Actual speed along Gaines is slower than 25mph, and I believe there has only been one bicycle crash (not fatal) on Gaines since they redid the roadway.  Sharrows seem to work fine when auto traffic is very slow.

[fieldafm]

Also, the primary developer of this area has an overwhelming desire (rightly I might add) to add as much outdoor dining space as possible, and is keenly interested in keeping as much as the existing building stock in place.  As you know, within 60' of ROW... there are choices to be made.  The preferential choice would be to prioritize pedestrian space and redevelopment of existing buildings... over accommodating a cycle track and having to heavily modify existing building stock in order to accommodate the preferred vibrant pedestrian streetscape desired, as a result of constructing a cycle track.

If the developer/primary property owner has this much sway over the design, are they contributing anything to the project, dollars or in-kind?  Seems like they will be the #1 beneficiary and it's a lot to benefit mostly a single owner (mayor's buddy, Shad, the exception!) who hasn't gone public with their plans for the area.

Don't get me wrong, I support projects like this, but there are corridors all over the NW Quadrant, for example, that could use a makeover like this after decades of neglect and we are told there is no money for it.  Who decides Park Street comes ahead of these other areas under these circumstances?

See response above about TCEA/Mobility Fees.

You won't get an argument out of me that there are corridors within NW Jax that don't deserve infrastructure investments.

You also won't get an argument out of me, that an urban neighborhood that has existed for more than 150 years with houses that still do not have access to sewer lines... and a corridor that will directly connect to the Emerald Trail (which will also go through many of those NW Jax neighborhoods you reference)... isn't also deserving of a few million in infrastructure upgrades (the overall price tag isn't particularly high). You can walk and chew gum at the same time in a city that is over 800 square miles.


If you think Brooklyn infrastructure hasn't been influenced by large property owners over the last 30 years.... then you are mistaken.

Since everything West of Park Street has basically been torn down... there are several additional developers that have assembled parcels in that area, who will also benefit from the Park Street redevelopment. You'll see a lot more infill in that long-neglected area over the next 5 years, in conjunction with Park Street breaking ground.

Vestcor didn't decide to erect an affordable housing project in Brooklyn, by throwing darts at a dart board and randomly hitting Stonewall Street.

[thelakelander]

Sharrows seem to work fine when auto traffic is very slow.

Posted speeds of 35 mph and under on a low volume street are fine for sharrows.

[tufsu1]

yes Gaines Street has sharrows - but parallel roadways have separated and buffered bike lanes. Perhaps the Park Street project should be done in concert with changes to Riverside Avenue.