pedestrian audit: ½ mile segement analysis · 2020-02-27 · pedestrian audit: ½ mile segement...
TRANSCRIPT
PEDESTRIAN AUDIT: ½ MILE SEGEMENT ANALYSIS
***Point of origin must be at least ½ mile from other Pedestrian Audits***
Albert Park
½ Mile Segment Location: Edgewater Drive from south of Preston Street to Albert Park
Date: July 9, 2011
***PROVIDE PHOTO FOR EACH ITEM TO VERIFY, TURN IN AS PDF***
1. Pedestrian Facilities (High): presence of a suitable walking surface, such as a sidewalk
or path.
1. No permanent facilities; pedestrians walk in roadway or on dirt path
2.
3. Sidewalk on one side of road; minor discontinuities that present no real obstacle to
passage
4.
5. Continuous sidewalk on both sides of road, or completely away from roads
Field Notes
Pedestrian Facilities (High) – Score #4
In this segment sidewalks are located along both sides of Edgewater Drive. On-street
public parking is parallel and immediately adjacent to the raised sidewalks. The
sidewalks in this segment are raised (higher than street level) and the curbing in many
parts are striped yellow with a 1-foot brick inlay.
2. Pedestrian Conflicts (High): potential for conflict with motor vehicle traffic due to
driveway and loading dock crossings, speed and volume of traffic, large intersections,
low pedestrian visibility
1. High conflict potential
2.
3.
4.
5. Low conflict potential
Field Notes
Pedestrian Conflicts (High) – Score #2
This segment contains numerous driveway cuts, medium traffic volume depending on
peak hour direction but relatively low speeds the closer in to the park and neighborhood
business district. Pedestrian visibility is low to medium due to the eclectic mix of
businesses and landscaping along the segment which creates visual stimulation for the
driver while potentially distracting them from pedestrians using the segment.
3. Crosswalks (High): presence and visibility of crosswalks on roads intersecting the
segment. Traffic signals meet pedestrian needs with separate “walk” lights that provide
sufficient crossing time.
1. Crosswalks not present despite major intersections
2.
3.
4.
5. No intersections, or crosswalks clearly marked
Field Notes
Crosswalks (High) – Score #3
There is a variety of crosswalk treatments along the segment. Several are new looking
signalized crosswalks, several are poorly striped with no signals and yet others are not
striped and contain no signals at all.
4. Maintenance (Medium): cracking, buckling, overgrown vegetation, standing water, etc.
on or near walking path. Does not include temporary deficiencies likely to soon be
resolved (e.g. tall grass)
1. Major or frequent problems
2.
3.
4.
5. No problems
Field Notes
Maintenance (Medium) – Score #5
No major deficiencies noted and the few areas that may be identified for purposes of
this analysis are not enough to low score.
5. Buffer (Medium): space separating path from adjacent roadway
1. No buffer from roadway
2.
3.
4 >4 feet from roadway
5 Not adjacent to roadway
Field Notes
Buffer (Medium) – Score #4
The sidewalks along the segment are buffered by a raised curb bed, 1-foot brick inlay
and occasional yellow striping. Public, on-street parallel parking is immediately
adjacent to the sidewalk which serves to further buffer the pedestrian from street
traffic.
6. Aesthetics (Medium): includes proximity of construction zones, fences, buildings,
noise, pollution, quality of landscaping, and pedestrian-oriented features, such as benches
and water fountains
1. Uninviting
2.
3.
4.
5. Pleasant
Field Notes
Aesthetics (Medium) - Score #2
The aesthetics for a majority of the segment are rather suburban in nature with
numerous driveway cuts and buildings setback from the road. However, the closer in to
the park and core of the neighborhood business district the more inviting the segment
becomes. Closer in to the core are numerous businesses and shops pushed up to the
street creating visual interest and protection to the pedestrian. The construction
underway in the segment appears to be of a short nature. There is one bench along the
segment and very close to the park.
7. Shade (Medium): amount of shade, accounting for different times of day
1. No shade
2.
3.
4.
5. Full shade
Field Notes
Shade (Medium) – Score #3
There were not many mature shade trees along the segment. One open area of
vegetation was noted about halfway through the segment providing a small oasis of
nature. The vegetation consisted of palm trees and a mixture of older trees and newer
small trees. It was unclear what variety of species these trees are and difficult to tell
what shade possibilities exist in the future. However, many of these street trees were
protected by a brick border and given time may provide well needed shade. In addition
to street trees there were opportunities for shade under awnings erected by many of the
businesses fronting the segment and closer in to the central core.
Sum of High Importance (1-3): 4+2+3 = 9 x 4 = 36
Sum of Medium Importance (4-7): 5+4+2+3 = 14 x 2 = 28
Total Score: 36+28 = 64
Observations
1. What is the most dangerous location along this segment?
The construction area near the ½ mile mark close to Edgewater High School due to the
debris and construction equipment. Additionally, the poorly marked crosswalks along
the segment reduces pedestrian safety and comfort.
2. What is the most unpleasant and pleasant element of this segment?
The beginning of the segment was more unpleasant due to suburban nature of setback
commercial uses and driveway cuts. Closer in to the park provides more shade and
visual opportunity and creates a more pleasing atmosphere.
3. What improvements would make this segment more appropriate for pedestrian use?
Short of redeveloping the businesses at the beginning of the segment, more mature shade
trees or awning structures providing shade would go a long way in pedestrian comfort.
PEDESTRIAN AUDIT: ½ MILE SEGEMENT ANALYSIS
***Point of origin must be at least ½ mile from other Pedestrian Audits***
Albert Park
½ Mile Segment Location: Vassar from Edgewater Drive (Albert Park) west to Northumberland
Date: July 9, 2011
***PROVIDE PHOTO FOR EACH ITEM TO VERIFY, TURN IN AS PDF***
1. Pedestrian Facilities (High): presence of a suitable walking surface, such as a sidewalk
or path.
1. No permanent facilities; pedestrians walk in roadway or on dirt path
2.
3. Sidewalk on one side of road; minor discontinuities that present no real obstacle to
passage
4.
5. Continuous sidewalk on both sides of road, or completely away from roads
Field Notes
Pedestrian Facilities (High) – Score #4
Closest to the Vassar Street/Edgewater Drive portion of the segment the sidewalks go
from both sides of the street to abruptly ending on the north side. Sidewalks on both
sides of the road resume at the Westmoreland/Vassar intersection and are generally
comfortable for the pedestrian.
2. Pedestrian Conflicts (High): potential for conflict with motor vehicle traffic due to
driveway and loading dock crossings, speed and volume of traffic, large intersections,
low pedestrian visibility
1. High conflict potential
2.
3.
4.
5. Low conflict potential
Field Notes
Pedestrian Conflicts (High) – Score #4
This segment contains numerous residential driveway cuts, light traffic volume
depending on peak hour direction and relatively low speeds. Pedestrian visibility is
medium to high. One source of conflict seen several times during the field observation
was the occurrence of vehicles parked across the driveway apron forcing pedestrians to
walk into the street to maneuver around the parked vehicle. Those few occurrences are
not enough to low score.
3. Crosswalks (High): presence and visibility of crosswalks on roads intersecting the
segment. Traffic signals meet pedestrian needs with separate “walk” lights that provide
sufficient crossing time.
1. Crosswalks not present despite major intersections
2.
3.
4.
5. No intersections, or crosswalks clearly marked
Field Notes
Crosswalks (High) – Score #3
There are relatively few crosswalk treatments at the intersections along the segment.
However, the segment consists of mainly single family residential units and therefore
provides a sense of comfort to the pedestrian in crossing the small intersections. There
is one landscaped roundabout at the intersection of Vassar and Reading that provides a
more formalized area of traffic and pedestrian circulation.
4. Maintenance (Medium): cracking, buckling, overgrown vegetation, standing water, etc.
on or near walking path. Does not include temporary deficiencies likely to soon be
resolved (e.g. tall grass)
1. Major or frequent problems
2.
3.
4.
5. No problems
Field Notes
Maintenance (Medium) – Score #5
No major deficiencies noted and the few areas that may identified for purposes of this
analysis are not enough to low score. During the field analysis it was noted that some
segments of sidewalk went from 3’ to 4’. It is surmised that the difference in width was
due to redevelopment of those lots under an updated land development code.
5. Buffer (Medium): space separating path from adjacent roadway
1. No buffer from roadway
2.
3.
4 >4 feet from roadway
5 Not adjacent to roadway
Field Notes
Buffer (Medium) – Score #4
The sidewalks along the segment are buffered from the street by a large grassed
setback, approximately 10’ wide. On the other side of the grassed buffer the street is
immediately adjacent to a raised curb. No striping for on-street parking was observed.
6. Aesthetics (Medium): includes proximity of construction zones, fences, buildings,
noise, pollution, quality of landscaping, and pedestrian-oriented features, such as benches
and water fountains
1. Uninviting
2.
3.
4.
5. Pleasant
Field Notes
Aesthetics (Medium) - Score #5
The aesthetics for a majority of the segment are rather suburban (T3) in nature with
numerous driveway cuts and single family dwelling units setback from the road.
However, the closer in to the park and core of the neighborhood business district
(heading east on Vassar Street towards Edgewater Drive) the more diverse the segment
becomes, transitioning from a T3 to a T5 transect with several transitional businesses
and multi-family dwelling units pushed up to the street creating visual interest. The
further from the park and core heading west the less visual interest and more
residential the segment becomes.
7. Shade (Medium): amount of shade, accounting for different times of day
1. No shade
2.
3.
4.
5. Full shade
Field Notes
Shade (Medium) – Score #4
There were many pockets of mature shade trees along both sides of the segment. There
is room, however, for the addition of more trees in this area.
Sum of High Importance (1-3): 4+4+3 = 11 x 4 = 44
Sum of Medium Importance (4-7): 5+4+5+4 = 18 x 2 = 36
Total Score: 44+36 = 80
Observations
1. What is the most dangerous location along this segment?
The transitional area close to the Vassar Street / Edgewater Drive intersection near the
park where the sidewalk abruptly ends at the Skambis Law Firm on the north side of the
street. The pedestrian then has to cross the street to the south in order to use the
sidewalk.
2. What is the most unpleasant and pleasant element of this segment?
The most unpleasant part of the segment was the inappropriate parking over the
driveway apron by a few vehicles. However, the segment provided an overall pleasant
experience due to the varied, well-kept homes and variety in landscaping treatments.
3. What improvements would make this segment more appropriate for pedestrian use?
Providing striped crosswalk treatments at each intersection along the segment and
informing residents of appropriate parking behaviors (i.e. not in the driveway apron
blocking the sidewalk).