pages: TransportationCommission/2009-04-22.pdf, 3
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
TransportationCommission | 2009-04-22 | 3 | DRAFT Santa Clara Avenue was used as an example; for the entire corridor, from west of Webster Street to Broadway it had a bicycle LOS D (3.65). Variables in the LOS calculation included the amount of space, presence of a bike lane, traffic volume, vehicle speed, pavement conditions and truck traffic. He described the conditions on different sections of the corridor: Webster Street to Grand Street - bike lane; the LOS score has improved to 2.4, LOS B, due to the bike lane and more space for the bicyclist. East of Grand Street, between Grand Street and Oak Street - 3.32, LOS C, the LOS degraded because there is no bike lane. East of Oak Street between Oak Street and Park Street - 3.83, the LOS further increased because the street narrows. East of Park Street, between Park Street and Broadway - 4.01. The travel lanes are narrower, and there is no bike lane. Chair Knox White asked about vehicle volumes. Staff Bergman stated that for bicycle LOS, vehicle volumes did not have as much of an impact as the lack of space. Chair Knox White stated that the bicycle LOS did not take into account off road paths. Staff Bergman agreed that this was only for on-street environments. Chair Knox White asked if the bicycle route on Oak Street would impact the LOS score. Staff Bergman replied that it would be counted in only if, for example, vehicle speeds were slowed. He also pointed out also that intersections with turn pockets could affect the results within a segment. If that were to be done, the portion of the segment with the turn pocket would be evaluated separately. Commissioner Schatmeier asked if bicycle usage had anything to do with this. Staff Bergman replied that it did not. The model is based on the user perception and comfort. Commissioner Schatmeier asked if the bicycle LOS was relevant if the formula does not account for demand. Staff Bergman commented that if the conditions were good, it could attract more riders. Staff Bergman discussed how the thresholds were analyzed. Two different alternatives for resolving conflicts between preferred modes: looking for auto mode of LOS D as threshold of significance, although intersection LOS F would be acceptable if LOS D could be maintained along the segment. Regarding transit, staff proposed the recommendation from the staff report following discussions with AC Transit. Staff report said LOS D would be a threshold for a segment, but that the segment would be allowed to degrade below LOS D if LOS C could be maintained for the route across the entire City. Staff revised this to recommend a threshold of LOS C for the segment; if the corridor is already below LOS C, than the impact would be significant if the transit's vehicle average speed decreased by 10% or more. A corridor is defined by the impacted bus stop and taking two bus stops further ahead and behind, a total of Page 3 of 15 | TransportationCommission/2009-04-22.pdf |