Downtown Appleton Mobility Study :2 2m?. Public Meeting April 7, 2016 Meeting Agenda • Purpose of study • Study area • Points to remember: Traffic, bike & ped • What we heard from the stakeholders • Alternatives – Traffic • Alternatives – Bike & ped • Next steps Purpose of study Determine and evaluate strategies to improve multi-modal mobility and traffic circulation in downtown Appleton r? [If f'r? swam 1smou4 gar: Ir. Apm? Almqow ??03 1u01e ddv (Agaxxm-r JBAIH r-r _r vr r- r' rl'fr. . *2 .I .?F?rrfl'r'vj? rivJIfr-rlrll'j'x l- I rr F'rnr'r-rl rd? r-rf Ff! r'r? 7 Ag agaam 1?11; mrT?rr-F: r'J'J-l rr .- rr-A l?n :rf ..-A r~ In Earn?r . rr'frr.gr- Fltr. m-gligr?-rcg \u-rm-r'rf r-a'"own-m - - r, r] uonns . I 53"? JinnEOVHW I - UJ a \q Is?z??an [?rjm I a - ., _E?mgrjugvma? {Ti puowqaga r" [i ?rl'crr? (?132?ng -: r7353"? r: a1H3_ - [Zr'rrirlls ??at?1 2 ~11 15 831132?rm-r uonma .r 7. - rr, 'rr rr?r rr.r. [Fr furl - - "vaf'rr-l. - rr'l' ['rr .la-V 5111.11 . 2' -1 H1 :11 .11 31111 . 13111 "1 111 3111' 11 444 ls?ryvihbo1f1lflf~j1 31 I1 1. '111 NVNSIVH 1:11 111* 11 F?m ,rr 7. 'il?l?s??rrrr/ r'11:1 lanlS onuenv eaJe Apms Bicycle Pedestrian - 4 points to remember No crosswalk Pedestrian path on hill Crossing streets and getting to the waterfront can be problematic. Many streets are good for bicycling, but they rarely have destinations people want to get to. MUNGIEEZ OPEN LATE TIL 3 AM FREE DELI "fl I - 1 II . Vang- I. . .I. arr-war s: A: a Designated bicycle parking in the downtown area is very limited. There is an oversupply of car parking throughout downtown. Traffic - 5 points to remember No serious traffic congestion is anticipated in the study area for the next 20 years. Morrison St. Oneida St. Appleton St. Northbound routing through downtown Appleton is very confusing. Almost all of the confusing intersections identified in the study area are a result of confusing northbound routing. Franklin St. & Oneida St. Franklin St. & Superior St. There are traffic signals that could be removed. Washington St. College Ave. Lawrence St. Blue lines = Truck routes Truck routing is confusing. What we heard The Downtown Appleton Mobility Study stakeholders group consisted of representatives from: • Lawrence University • Appleton Area School District • YMCA of the Fox Cities • City of Appleton Health Department • East Central Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission • The History Museum at the Castle • City of Appleton Library • City of Appleton Community and Economic Development • Appleton Downtown, Inc. • City of Appleton Alderpersons • Valley Transit • City of Appleton Police Department • City of Appleton Public Works • City of Appleton Traffic • City of Appleton Mayor’s Office What we heard – traffic Lawrence Street & Morrison Street intersection is confusing. North/south connector needs to be improved. Need better directions/ routing/ awareness of parking ramps. Consider the possibility of Appleton Street being 2-way. One-way Morrison Street is an issue. Left turns are problematic at intersections without left turn lanes. Traffic Improvement Ideas Alt. 1: Maintain NB routing Alt. 2: 2-way Appleton Street Alt. 3: College Avenue Road diet Alt. 1: Maintain NB routing • Does not address NB routing or confusing intersection issues • No major changes to Lawrence St. / Morrison St. intersection Alt. 2: 2-way Appleton Street • Appleton Street is 2-way and the main NB/SB route through downtown • Existing 1-way streets converted to 2-way streets • Grid pattern prominent Alt. 2: 2-way Appleton Street Alt. 2: 2-way Appleton Street Alt. 3: College Ave. road diet • College Avenue typical section consists of parking on both sides, bike lanes, one lane of traffic in each direction and left turn lanes • Does not address NB routing or confusing intersection issues Alt. 3: College Ave. road diet Alt. 3: College Ave. road diet What we heard – bike/ped Vehicles impede on pedestrian’s right of way. The pedestrian crossing at the curve on Water Street is located at a blind spot. Bike access is difficult around the YMCA. Lighting for bikes/peds is poor Bike violations on College Avenue sidewalks are common. It is not easy to access the waterfront. Pedestrian Facilities General Recommendations • Mark crosswalks consistently • Provide policies for sidewalk maintenance and ADA compliance Pedestrian Facilities College Avenue Crossing at Lawrence University • Evaluate if the current crossing is working well for all modes Pedestrian Facilities Access to Water Street • Provide better access to Water Street and the Fox River Bike Lane Lane specifically marked for bicycle use Used on higher-volume streets .l . Buffered Bike Lane • Similar to a standard bike lane, but adds buffer • Provides greater level of comfort for bicyclists Separated Bike Lane (Cycle track) • Similar to a standard bike lane, but adds vertical element • Provides greater level of comfort for bicyclists Shared Lane Markings • Indicate where bicyclists should ride • Used on medium- and low-volume streets Bicycle Boulevard • Neighborhood street prioritized for bicycle use • Varying levels of treatments Signed Bike Route Signed routes without pavement markings - Typically on lower volume roads 5" ?i SPASH Maciiaon . .. . .Shared Use Path • Off-street bicycle & pedestrian facility • 10’ to 12’+ wide and typically paved Bicycle Improvement Ideas Oklahoma St .. Elsie St 2 Arbutus Lorain St State St Sherman Franklin St Fair 5t nsto 5! Lawrence SWalnut St WSixth Fifth St Locust St Fourth St WThird St FrontE? Garfield PI 2? 2- Eighth St 5 Pacific St Clark St (9 a To an Oneida 5: Packard St Harris Harris St Morrison St Center St Kimball i: 2 F: as 1390 as . .- Unnamed Pork Hancock St Franklin St Morrison SI 5 Madison Pacific St Bateman Park Av Sauth Flats Pka South River St 5 Jefferson ?1 51? :1 a. Jackson St SJ?ulcanjt f? Center Eldorado St Alton St Lawe St Bike Lane, Existing Path, Existing Proposed Bicycle Facilities Bike Lane Shared Lane Marking Bicycle Boulevard Signed Route Bike Lane (2010 Plan) 0 ii i Signed Route (2010 Plan) Path (Previous Plans} Packard Street Options Existing Buffered Bike Lanes 3&3? .4 . ivf parated Bike Lanes Next steps Activity Draft recommendations Municipal Services Committee meeting Date (2016) April 21 Late April/early May Draft report Late May Final report June Questions?