Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Fehr &
November 2012
Peers 332 Pine Street, 4th FloorSan Francisco, CA 94104
Hearst Avenue Complete Streets Study
Submitted by:
Fehr &
November 2012
Peers 332 Pine Street, 4th FloorSan Francisco, CA 94104
Hearst Avenue Complete Streets StudyDRAFT
Submitted by:
Hearst Ave
November
Backgrou
Existing C
Planning
Preferred
Estimated
Phasing &
Appendix
Appendix
Appendix
Appendix
nue Complete S
2012
und ................
Conditions ...
and Design
d Design .......
d Costs .........
& Implement
A: 35% Desig
B: Cost Estim
C: Supportin
D: Crosswalk
Streets Study –
......................
......................
Process ........
......................
......................
tation ...........
gn Drawings ..
mates .................
g Traffic Anal
k Tool Docum
Final
Table
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
Ap
...........................
...........................
ysis ...................
entation..........
e of Conten
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
ppendices
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
nts
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
....... 1
....... 4
..... 17
..... 20
..... 33
..... 34
...... 36
...... 37
...... 38
...... 39
Hearst Ave
November
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
Figure 6
Figure 7
Figure 8
Figure 9
nue Complete S
2012
Study Area
Bicycle and
Existing Tr
Intersectio
Vehicle Vo
Segment 1
Segment 2
Segment 3
Segment 4
Streets Study –
a ........................
d Pedestrian V
ransit Service .
on Geometries
olumes .............
1 Conceptual
2 Conceptual
3 Conceptual
4 Conceptual
Final
List
...........................
Volumes .........
...........................
s .........................
...........................
Design ............
Design ............
Design ............
Design ............
of Figures
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
s
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
......... 2
......... 5
......... 9
...... 12
...... 13
...... 23
...... 26
...... 29
...... 32
Hearst Ave
November
Table 1:
Table 2:
Table 3:
Table 4:
Table 5:
Table 6:
Table 7:
Table 8:
Table 9:
Table 10:
Table 11:
Table 12:
Table 13:
nue Complete S
2012
Existing Ve
Hearst Ave
Proposed C
Segment 1
Segment 1
Segment 2
Segment 2
Segment 3
Segment 3
Segment 4
Segment 4
Cost Estim
Funding So
Streets Study –
ehicle Classific
enue Existing
Concept Alter
1 Intersection
1 Mid-Block R
2 Intersection
2 Mid-Block R
3 Intersection
3 Mid-Block R
4 Intersection
4 Mid-Block R
ates by Segm
ources .............
Final
List
cations .............
Parking Cond
rnatives by Co
Recommend
Recommendat
Recommend
Recommendat
Recommend
Recommendat
Recommend
Recommendat
ment ...................
...........................
t of Tables
...........................
ditions ..............
orridor Segme
ations ..............
tions .................
ations ..............
tions .................
ations ..............
tions .................
ations ..............
tions .................
...........................
...........................
..........................
..........................
ent ...................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
..........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
...... 14
...... 15
...... 19
...... 22
...... 22
...... 25
...... 25
...... 28
...... 28
...... 31
...... 31
...... 33
...... 35
Hearst Ave
November
BACK
The Unive
2011 to c
design an
while the
jurisdictio
This docu
within th
intersectio
and trans
carrying d
PURPOS
Many stu
infrastruct
changes i
the north
lane.
However,
made. A
balance t
improving
operation
mutli-mod
RELATED
This stud
recomme
C
A
u
nue Complete S
2012
GROUN
ersity of Califo
consolidate p
nd implement
corridor is lo
n and any ch
ment present
e study cor
ons. The stud
sit riders, and
delivery traffic
SE & NEED
udies and ad
ture changes
nclude signal
bound right-
a systematic,
A complete s
he needs an
g the biking
s and queuin
dal design for
D STUDIES
dy responds
ndations for t
City of Berkeley
venue and th
nder yield or
Streets Study –
D
ornia, Berkeley
previous prop
tation. The st
ocated on th
anges to the
ts the analysi
rridor betwee
dy corridor, s
d it also serv
c including lar
opted plans
along the H
lizing the Arc
turn slip lane
, complete str
treets approa
d improve th
and walking
g analysis wa
r Hearst Aven
& PLANS
to the varie
the Hearst Av
y Pedestrian P
e Euclid Aven
stop control.
Final
y commission
posals along
tudy was cond
e north side
corridor must
s and preferr
en the Shatt
hown on Fig
ves an import
rge trucks.
completed b
earst Avenue
ch Street/Le C
e at the Oxfo
reets approac
ach for the
he safety of
g environme
as conducted
nue.
ety of Unive
venue corrido
Plan – Recom
nue intersectio
ned the Hears
the corridor
ducted in col
of the Unive
t be approved
red designs fo
tuck Avenue
gure 1, is wel
tant commer
by the City
e corridor, som
Conte Avenue
rd Street/Hea
ch to changes
corridor wou
all roadways
ents, especial
iteratively to
ersity and C
r including:
mends a new
ons, and bring
st Street Comp
and move th
laboration wi
ersity’s campu
d by the City.
or transportat
e and the G
ll-traveled by
rcial function
and the Uni
me of which
e/Hearst Aven
arst Avenue i
s along the co
uld provide p
s users. For
ly near bus
test the vario
City planning
w sidewalk bet
ging channeli
plete Streets S
hese identifie
ith the City o
us, it also fal
tion changes
Gayley Road/
y drivers, ped
for local bu
iversity have
have been co
nue intersecti
intersection t
orridor had n
preferred des
example as
stops, were
ous proposals
documents
tween the Arc
ized right-tur
Study in Dece
ed projects to
f Berkeley be
lls within the
on Hearst Av
/La Loma Av
destrians, bicy
usinesses, rou
already iden
onstructed. R
ion and conv
to a bike-only
ot previously
sign solutions
consideration
e proposed,
s’ ability to cre
that have
ch Street/Le C
rns at Gayley R
1
ember,
oward
ecause
city’s
venue
venue
yclists,
utinely
ntified
Recent
erting
y slip-
y been
s that
ns for
traffic
eate a
made
Conte
Road
OXFORD STREET
WALNUT STREET
SPRUCE STREET
LE CONTE
AVENUE
ARCH STREET
EUCLID AVENUE
SCENIC AVENUE
LA LOMA AVENUE
SHATTUCK AVENUE
SF11
-060
0_Fi
gure
1FI
GU
RE 1
HEA
RST
AVEN
UE
STU
DY
CORR
IDO
R -
SHAT
TUCK
AVE
NU
E TO
LA
LOM
A AV
ENU
E/G
AYLE
Y RO
AD
UC
BERK
ELEY
CA
MPU
S
GAYLEY
ROAD
NN
OT
TO S
CALE
LE ROY AVENUE
KEY
=St
udy
Area
Hearst Ave
November
C
an
d
U
th
an
cu
U
C
U
ch
b
N
ch
La
Im
lo
in
d
STUDY G
En
tr
R
us
R
g
P
id
nue Complete S
2012
City of Berkeley
nd “Class 2.5
ownhill Class
UC Berkeley Lo
hree channeliz
nd reducing t
urb ramp upg
UC Berkeley La
onte Avenue
UC Berkeley Co
hanges at inte
etween Euclid
Northeast Qua
hanges along
awrence Berke
mpact Report –
ook at cumula
ntersection. A
emand mana
GOALS
ngage both th
ransportation
econfigure He
sers—pedest
esolve gaps a
eometries
rovide an imp
dentified proje
Streets Study –
y Bicycle Plan
lanes” betwee
3 route and a
ong Range De
zed right-turn
the turning ra
grades east of
andscape Mas
to make it a m
ollege of Engin
ersections bet
d and LeRoy A
adrant Science
Hearst Aven
eley National
– Mitigation M
ative year traff
Additional shu
gement (TDM
he University
changes for
earst Avenue
rians, bicyclist
and deficienci
plementation-
ects toward fi
Final
– Recomme
en Arch Stree
an uphill clim
velopment Pla
ns at the Hear
dius of the no
f Oxford Stree
ter Plan – Rec
major entranc
neering Maste
tween Euclid
Avenues.
e and Safety (N
ue as mitigati
Laboratory (L
Measure TRA
fic impacts at
uttle traffic is a
M) program.
and the City
Hearst Avenu
to a complet
ts, transit use
es in the bicy
-oriented plan
nal design an
ends Class 2 la
et / Le Conte A
bing lane.
an / New Cen
rst Avenue/Ga
ortheast corn
et to include t
commends en
ce into campu
er Plan – Reco
Avenue and G
NEQSS) Projec
ion.
LBNL) Long Ra
NS-1c states
t the Hearst A
anticipated o
to develop m
ue
te street to pr
rs, and driver
ycle and pede
nning docum
nd environme
anes from Sha
Avenue and G
ntury Plan – R
ayley Road/La
er as a priorit
truncated dom
nhancing the
us.
ommends ped
Gayley Road a
cts – Recomm
ange Develop
that LBNL sha
Avenue/Gayley
n Hearst Ave
mutually prefe
rovide optima
rs—including
estrian networ
ent and 35%
ental clearance
attuck Avenue
Gayley Road, c
Recommends
a Loma Avenu
ty project. Re
mes.
crossing at A
destrian cross
and a new mi
mends pedestr
ment Plan an
all fund and c
y Road/La Lo
nue associate
rred complet
al safety and c
users of all ag
rks, bus stops
design drawi
e
e to Arch Stre
consisting of
removing the
ue intersectio
ecommends A
Arch Street / L
sing and ADA
id-block cross
rian crossing
nd Environmen
conduct a stu
ma Avenue
ed with their t
e streets
convenience f
ges and abilit
s, and roadwa
ings to move
3
eet
a
e
on
ADA
Le
A
sing
ntal
dy to
travel
for all
ties
y
the
Hearst Ave
November
EXIST
The Hears
Hearst Av
campus b
gives way
Hearst Av
Downtow
bicycle an
through
important
Gayley Ro
and AC T
transporta
PEDESTR
Hearst Av
pedestrian
commerci
crossing d
the sidew
to just w
barriers.
are presen
Sidewalk
Sidewalks
Avenue w
Arch Stree
access to
sidewalks
of the cor
nue Complete S
2012
ING CON
st Avenue co
venue has tra
buildings are l
y to periphera
venue has th
n Berkeley, a
nd pedestrian
Berkeley, Alb
t cross-campu
oad, which p
Transit route
ation modes,
RIAN FACIL
venue is a crit
n circulation
ial and resid
distances we
walk gap from
west of Eucli
Pedestrian v
nted in Figure
Conditions
s are provide
with one notab
et/Le Conte A
the vehicles
exist, they ar
rridor, and six
Streets Study –
NDITION
orridor is a ke
aditionally be
ocated to the
al commercial
he potential t
nd residentia
n traffic from
bany and El
us route, link
rovide north-
s provide se
the corridor o
LITIES
ical interface
needs and
dential neigh
st of the Euc
Arch Street/
id Avenue, p
volumes alon
e 2.
d along both
ble exception;
Avenue and Eu
parked on t
re typically 10
or seven feet
Final
NS
ey east-west
een the nort
e north. Hear
uses and res
to create a d
l neighborho
m the Ohlon
Cerrito. For
king Universit
-south conne
ervice along
often struggle
between cam
the surround
hborhoods.
clid Avenue,
/Le Conte Ave
pose challeng
g Hearst Ave
h sides of He
; a 900-foot s
uclid Avenue.
the south sid
feet or more
t on the north
link for pede
hern bound
rst Avenue is
sidential neigh
direct east-w
ods. West of
e Greenway,
automobiles
y Avenue and
ections to Ber
the corridor.
es to meet the
mpus
ding
The
and
enue
ging
enue
earst
sidewalk gap
The lack of s
de of Hearst
e in width in fr
h side.
estrians, bicyc
of the UC B
also a transit
hborhoods. F
west link serv
f the study a
which provi
s and trucks,
d Downtown
rkeley neighb
. Given the
e needs of an
on the south
sidewalk also
Avenue durin
ront of univer
clists, transit
Berkeley camp
ional space, a
For those who
ving the Univ
rea, Hearst A
ides a north
, Hearst Ave
Berkeley to
borhoods. UC
demands of
ny one group.
side of Hears
o fails to provi
ng the off-pe
rsity buildings
users, and d
pus, though
as the core ca
o walk and b
versity comm
venue receive
-south conne
enue serves
Oxford Stree
C Berkeley sh
the full ran
.
st Avenue bet
ide ADA-com
eak hours. W
s on the sout
4
rivers.
some
ampus
icycle,
munity,
es the
ection
as an
et and
huttles
ge of
tween
mpliant
Where
h side
stop
-con
trol
on L
eRoy
Ave
nue
stop
-con
trol
on W
alnu
t Stre
et
*cou
nts
colle
cted
durin
g co
nstru
ctio
n of
Ebb
Bui
ldin
g.Cr
ossw
alk
on H
ears
tw
as re
mov
ed.
stop
-con
trol
on S
pruc
e St
reet
TRU
E
Hea
rst A
ve
7
TRU
ETR
UE
Le Roy Ave
TRU
E
Hea
rst A
ve
2
TRU
ETR
UE
Walnut St
TRU
E
Hea
rst A
ve
4
TRU
ETR
UE
Spruce St
Hea
rst A
ve
TRU
E
3
Oxford St
TRU
E
Le Conte Ave
Hea
rst A
ve
6
Euclid Ave
TRU
ETR
UE
Hea
rst A
ve
TRU
ETR
UE
8
La Loma Ave Gayley Rd
TRU
E
Hea
rst A
ve
5 Arch St
TRU
E
OXFORD STREET
LE CONTE
AVENUE
ARCH STREET
EUCLID AVENUE
LEROY AVENUE
LA LOMA AVENUE
SHATTUCK AVENUE
KEY
:
Sto
p-C
ontro
lled
==
XX
(XX
)
Sig
naliz
edIn
ters
ectio
n
=A
M (P
M)
Pea
k H
our V
olum
es
STO
P
12
34
56
78
WALNUT STREET
SPRUCE STREET
HEA
RST
AVEN
UE
GAYLEY ROAD
SF11
-060
0_Fi
gure
2
N
NO
T TO
SC
ALE
2 (0)
18 (2
)
39 (5)2 (1)
2 (0)
3(42
)0(
3)
0 (4
)
1 (2
)5
(0)
2 (5
5)
56 (4
)33
(5)
4 (1)
0 (0)24 (9)2 (0)
0 (4
)7
(82)
7 (9
)
2 (24)3 (26)1 (4)
0 (1)6 (27)
FIG
URE
2EX
ISTI
NG
PEA
K H
OU
R BI
CYCL
E &
PED
ESTR
IAN
VO
LUM
ES
0 (0)1 (1)
1 (7)
3(20
)0(
1)
1 (0
)
0 (0
)5
(1)3 (1)
14 (3)1(
16)
8 (6
3)
2 (0
)72
(5)
1 (3)6 (2)
0(0)
1 (7
8)
1 (3
)43
(5)
44 (9
5)71
(169
)
59 (94) 11 (40)
118
(146
)16
0 (1
36)
170 (285) 66 (40)
171
(394
)32
0 (4
81)
102 (191) 63 (57)
206
(575
)94
(299
)
120 (473)116 (163)37
(71)
96 (1
31)
96 (215)
53 (1
82)
no p
edes
tria
nor
bic
yclis
tda
ta a
vaila
ble
no b
icyc
list
data
ava
ilabl
e
146
(212
)
114 (178)
STO
P
STO
PST
OP
Hearst Ave
November
Crossing/
Marked c
and unma
risk of mu
Between
pedestrian
Pedestrian
exposed t
of Euclid A
Crossing
pedestrian
whereby t
a pedestr
driver in t
the oncom
Hearst Av
Avenue. N
cross mid
to get bet
campus c
to restrict
street fro
cross in th
ADA featu
deficient
or curbs a
At Gayley
located a
pedestrian
movemen
which de-
islands in
have pede
nue Complete S
2012
/Intersection
rossings are
arked—the hi
ultiple-threat c
Shattuck
ns must cr
ns crossing H
to vehicle traf
Avenue where
multiple lan
ns are expo
the motorist i
ian in the cro
the adjacent t
ming pedestri
venue narrow
Near Le Roy A
-block in fron
tween those
ore. Though
t access to the
m those buil
his mid-block
ures along H
either becaus
are not access
y Road/La Lom
t three corne
n refuge wh
nts. These slip
-emphasize pe
ntended to p
estrian accom
Streets Study –
n Treatments
provided acro
igher speeds
collisions mak
Avenue an
ross a five
Hearst Avenue
ffic for greate
e there is a tw
es of vehicle
sed to mult
in the outside
osswalk and th
travel lane fro
an.
ws to two l
Avenue many
nt of Soda Ha
buildings’ ma
the Universit
e campus pat
ldings, pedes
location.
Hearst Avenue
se there are
sible.
ma Road, rig
ers of the int
ile accommo
lanes are con
edestrians. So
provide pedes
mmodations s
Final
& ADA Com
oss Hearst Av
of downhill t
ke it difficult f
nd Euclid
e-lane cross
e on this segm
er distances t
wo-lane cross
e traffic mea
iple-threat c
e travel lane s
herefore prev
om being abl
lanes east o
pedestrians c
all and Etchev
ain entrances
ty has made a
ths directly ac
strians still ch
e are, in man
not complian
ht-turn slip la
tersection to
odating truck
ntrolled by yie
ome of the po
strian refuge
uch as curb c
mpliance
venue at all in
traffic, the dir
for drivers to
Avenue
-section.
ment are
han east
-section.
ans that
ollisions,
stops for
vents the
le to see
of Euclid
currently
verry Hall
and the
attempts
cross the
hoose to
ny cases,
nt ramps
anes are
provide
turning
eld signs
ork-chop
do not
cuts. The
ntersecting st
rect sun durin
adjust for pe
treets. At all c
ng the PM pe
destrians cros
crossings—m
eak period, an
ssing the stre
6
marked
nd the
et.
Hearst Ave
November
large cor
Pedestrian
where pe
taking the
BICYCLE
Hearst Av
lanes and
Berkeley B
presented
Avenue/G
Existing F
To the w
California
the Ohlon
Street and
that route
bicycle la
including
southeast
intersectio
The UC B
providing
using the
driveway f
appropria
Bicyclists
opens the
the eastb
motor veh
Avenue.
nue Complete S
2012
rner radii pri
n desire lines
destrians wer
e most direct
E FACILITIES
venue does no
enhanced Cl
Bicycle Plan.
d on Figure 2
Gayley Road/L
Facilities
west, Hearst
Street to Sh
ne Greenway
d then becom
e until Shattu
nes from Ba
a bicycle-on
t corner of th
on.
Berkeley camp
north-south
pedestrian s
for service ve
ate time.
using the Hea
eir door into t
ound directio
hicle traffic at
Streets Study –
ioritize heavy
s are not met
re observed n
path possible
S
ot presently h
lass III bicycle
Bicycle count
2. No bicycl
La Loma Aven
Avenue has
hattuck Aven
from Californ
me the on-stre
uck Avenue.
ancroft Way
nly right-turn
he Oxford Str
pus bicycle r
connections
signal to cros
hicles, makes
arst Avenue c
the path of a
on resulting i
t Oxford Stre
Final
y vehicles w
t for those tra
not using the
e.
have designat
es routes have
ts were collec
le data was a
ue.
s bike lanes
ue. These p
nia Street to
eet continuat
Oxford Stree
to Hearst Av
n slip lane a
reet/Hearst A
routes interse
through the M
ss. The lack o
s it challengin
corridor are ex
bicycle rider.
in greater sp
et and bus st
while creating
aveling north
e striped cros
ted bicycle fa
e been propo
ted in Januar
available at H
from
parallel
Milvia
tion of
et has
venue,
at the
Avenue
ect Hearst Av
Main Campus
of a traffic sig
g for bicyclist
xposed to po
The grade ch
eed differenc
tops near Arc
g long cross
h-south along
ssing of the
acilities within
osed along th
ry 2012 when
Hearst Avenu
venue at Arch
s. At Euclid A
gnal facing c
ts to navigate
otential “door
hanges along
ces with mot
ch Street conf
sing distance
g Gayley Road
southwest sli
n the study a
he corridor as
classes were
ue/Shattuck A
h Street and
Avenue, bicycl
campus, whic
e crossing the
ing” i.e., a dri
g the corridor
tor vehicle tra
flict with bicy
es for pedest
d/La Loma Av
ip lane, in fav
rea. Class II b
part of the C
in session an
Avenue and H
at Euclid Av
lists were obs
ch also serves
intersection
ver in a parke
slow bike rid
affic. Right tu
yclists using H
7
trians.
venue
vor of
bicycle
City of
nd are
Hearst
venue,
served
s as a
at the
ed car
ders in
urning
Hearst
Hearst Ave
November
TRANSIT
Transit s
connectio
campus a
as well as
shared by
Transit (U
Laborator
presented
The westb
Roy Aven
for a bus.
the westb
were obs
stopped
reasons; t
sight lines
poor sigh
when a
condition
because t
maneuver
Sidewalk a
of Euclid A
clutter lim
bus stop i
the bus d
curb into
AC Trans
AC Transi
routes an
Berkeley v
nue Complete S
2012
T SERVICE
service alon
ons around th
nd access to
s San Francisc
y the three se
C Berkeley), a
ry (LBNL).
d on Figure 3
bound bus sto
ue, has limite
Buses access
bound travel
served crossi
bus. This m
the grade cha
s of on-comi
ht lines crossi
bus is in th
does not ex
the eastboun
r in and out o
adjacent to th
Avenue) is co
mits space for
is very wide s
oor with the
the street to
it Service
t operates th
nd one Trans
via the North
Streets Study –
ng Hearst
he perimeter
all three Berk
co. The bus
rvice provide
and Lawrence
Transit route
.
op on Hearst
ed space for p
sing the bus s
lane and mo
ng the cent
aneuver is u
ange on Hear
ng traffic and
ng the street
he westboun
xist in the ea
d bus stop is
of the stop.
he eastbound
nstrained wit
r pedestrians
so that it can
curb. This ca
access the wa
ree routes in
bay route. R
Berkeley BAR
Final
Avenue pro
of the UC Be
keley BART st
stops are typ
rs: AC Transit
e Berkeley Na
es and stop
Avenue, east
pedestrians to
stop partially
otor vehicle d
er line to p
unsafe for s
rst Avenue re
d pedestrians
t at Le Roy A
nd bus stop
astbound dire
s located afte
d North Gate
h street furni
waiting for t
be difficult fo
n result in pa
aiting bus.
the study are
oute 52 conn
RT Station.
ovides
rkeley
ations
pically
t, Bear
ational
ps are
t of Le
o wait
block
drivers
pass a
everal
estricts
s have
venue
. This
ection
er the Le Roy
bus stop (loca
ture and sign
he bus. This
or a bus drive
atrons steppin
ea, including
nects Albany
y Avenue inte
ated west
nage. The
particular
er to align
ng off the
two local
y with UC
ersection and buses are ab
8
ble to
LE ROY AVENUE
HEA
RST
AVEN
UE
TRA
NSI
T RO
UTE
S &
STO
PS
Key
AC T
rans
itBe
ar T
rans
it
LBN
L Su
ttle
Bus
Stop
Rout
e N
umbe
r#
FF
65
6552
P N
P
N
blue
blue
oran
ge
oran
ge
oran
ge
N
52
65
FIG
URE
3
OXFORD STREET
LE CONTE
AVENUE
ARCH STREET
SPRUCE STREET
EUCLID AVENUE
LA LOMA AVENUE GAYLEY ROAD
52, 6
5, F
, P, N
orth
Si
de, B
lue,
& O
rang
e52
, F, P
, Nor
th S
ide,
Bl
ue, &
Ora
nge
52, P
, Nor
th S
ide,
&
Blue
52, P
, Nor
th S
ide,
&
Blue
Eucl
id @
Hea
rst (
EB)
Le R
oy @
Hea
rst (
EB)
Le R
oy @
Hea
rst (
WB)
Eucl
id @
Hea
rst (
WB)
Arch
@ H
ears
t (W
B)
52, 6
5, P
, Nor
th S
ide
Arch
@ H
ears
t (EB
)52
, 65,
F, P
, Nor
th
Side
, Blu
e, &
Ora
nge
SF11
-060
0_Fi
gure
3
N
NO
T TO
SC
ALE
Hearst Ave
November
Route 52
periods an
with 35-m
Route 65
Hearst Av
every 30 m
Route F is
Francisco
Emeryville
Bear Tran
Bear Tran
Hearst Av
is the day
during the
with camp
Shuttle tra
from 7:45
as well as
Avenue, a
Lawrence
Lawrence
the camp
employee
Hearst Av
eastbound
PM, with
are locate
Street inte
VEHICLE
Between S
each direc
nue Complete S
2012
runs from ab
nd 35-minute
minute headwa
connects the
venue and Oxf
minutes and h
an AC Trans
Transbay Te
e. Route F run
nsit
nsit, operated
venue corrido
ytime perime
e morning an
pus while the
avels the peri
PM to 2:11 A
the public. B
and Le Roy Av
e Berkeley Na
Berkeley Nat
pus perimete
es and their g
venue every 1
d service on
10 minute he
ed in both dire
ersection in th
E TRAFFIC C
Shattuck Ave
ction with left
Streets Study –
bout 5:53 AM
e headways in
ays througho
Downtown B
ford Street. I
hourly from 7
it Transbay b
erminal via t
ns from abou
by Bauer IT,
r. Running a
eter shuttle o
nd evening an
e general pu
meter of cam
AM with 30 m
Bus stops are
venue intersec
ational Labor
tional Laborat
r, and the D
guests. The Bl
0 minutes fro
Hearst Avenu
eadways betw
ections at the
he westbound
CONDITION
nue and Arch
t-turn lanes a
Final
M to 12:06 A
n the off-peak
ut the weeke
Berkeley BART
t runs from a
:30 AM-7:18
us, running a
he Downtow
t 6:10 AM to
, is the UC B
long the peri
perating from
nd 30 minute
blic can pay
mpus and alon
minute headw
e located in b
ctions.
ratory Bus
tory (LBNL) op
Downtown Be
ue Route (Bla
om 6:20 AM to
ue every 15 m
ween the 7:30
e Euclid Avenu
d direction.
NS
h Street/Le C
at select inter
M weekdays
k hours. The
nd.
T Station to E
bout 5:39 AM
PM on weeke
long the peri
wn Berkeley a
12:55 AM on
erkeley camp
imeter of the
m about 6:45
headways m
$0.50 to ride
ng University
ways. The Nig
oth direction
perates two s
erkeley BART
ackberry Gate
o 7:30 PM. T
minutes from
0 AM-9:45 AM
ue and Le Ro
onte Avenue,
sections. Lane
with 15-min
route operate
Euclid Avenue
M to 8:57 PM
ends.
imeter of cam
and Ashby B
weekdays an
pus shuttle an
campus and
5 AM to 7:30
midday. The
e the shuttle.
Drive throug
ght Safety Sh
s at the Arch
huttle routes
T Station. T
e) runs eastb
he Orange Ro
6:30 to 7:30
M peak servic
oy Avenue inte
, Hearst Aven
es are genera
nute headway
es from abou
e and Grizzly
on the weekd
mpus and con
BART Stations
nd weekends e
nd it has two
through Dow
PM with 15
P Line is free
. The North
h the campus
uttle is free t
Street/Le Co
between its c
The shuttle is
ound and we
oute (Strawbe
AM and from
ce. Bus stops
ersections as
nue includes
ally 10 to 11 f
ys during the
t 8:40 AM-7:4
Peak Bouleva
days approxim
nnecting to th
s and the C
every 30 minu
o routes alon
wntown, the P
minute head
e to those affi
Side Night S
s. Service ope
o campus aff
onte Avenue,
campus in the
s limited to
estbound bus
erry Gate) ope
m 9:45 AM to
s for LBNL sh
well as at the
two travel lan
feet wide, wit
10
e peak
44 PM
ard via
mately
he San
City of
utes.
ng the
P Line
dways
iliated
Safety
erates
filiates
Euclid
e hills,
LBNL
ses on
erates
o 7:05
huttles
e Arch
nes in
th on-
Hearst Ave
November
street par
Avenue, H
right-of-w
and one p
the eastbo
one trave
configurat
direction w
Vehicle V
Traffic vo
were der
intersectio
Sh
W
O
Sp
A
Eu
Le
La
Passenger
Street/Le
Walnut St
Shattuck
Avenue/G
Berkeley N
During th
to Downt
the prima
Lawrence
nue Complete S
2012
rking or bus
Hearst Avenu
way in each di
peak period t
ound directio
el lane and in
tions are rev
with on-stree
Volumes
lumes are sh
rived from p
ons along Hea
hattuck Aven
Walnut Street
Oxford Avenue
pruce Street
rch Street/Le
uclid Avenue
e Roy Avenue
a Loma Avenu
r vehicle, tru
Conte Avenu
treet on May
Avenue are
Gayley Road i
National Lab i
e AM peak h
own Berkeley
ary vehicular a
Berkeley Nat
Streets Study –
stops adjace
e is grade se
irection. The l
travel lane in
on has two tra
ncludes on-st
versed. East o
et parking. Ex
own on Figu
peak period
arst Avenue:
ue
e
Conte Avenu
e
ue/Gayley Roa
uck, bus, bicy
e, Euclid Aven
3 and May 4
from the Do
ntersection a
in 2009.
our, vehicle v
y along south
access to the
ional Lab. Du
Final
ent to the c
eparated betw
ane configura
each directio
avel lanes and
treet parking.
of Euclid Ave
xisting lane co
ure 5 for the
intersection
ue
ad
ycle, and pe
nue, and Le R
4, 2012 and a
owntown Are
re from a me
volumes are g
hbound Shatt
UC Berkeley
ring the PM p
urb. Between
ween the eas
ation along th
on. During the
d no on-street
. During the
nue, Hearst A
onfigurations
AM and PM
turning mo
destrian cou
Roy Avenue on
at Spruce Stre
ea Plan EIR (
emorandum
generally high
tuck Avenue
parking gara
peak hour, the
n Arch Street
st and westb
his stretch inc
e morning co
t parking, wh
evening com
Avenue narro
are shown on
peak hours.
ovement cou
nts were co
n January 24,
eet on April 2
(IBI Group, 2
prepared by
hest traveling
and Oxford
ges along the
ese trends are
t/Le Conte A
ound directio
cludes one de
ommute time
ile the westb
mmute (PM p
ows to one t
n Figure 4.
The peak ho
unts collecte
llected at O
2012. Count
26, 2012.. Inte
2008). Counts
Fehr & Peers
g eastbound H
Street. Hears
e north side o
e reversed.
Avenue and
ons, narrowin
edicated trave
(AM peak pe
ound directio
peak period),
travel lane in
our traffic vo
d at eight
xford Street,
ts were collec
ersection cou
s at the La
s for the Law
Hearst Avenu
st Avenue pro
of campus an
11
Euclid
ng the
el lane
eriod),
on has
these
each
lumes
study
Arch
ted at
nts at
Loma
wrence
e and
ovides
nd the
TRU
E
Hea
rst A
ve
7
TRU
ETR
UE
TRU
E
Le Roy Ave
1
TRU
E
Shattuck AveH
ears
t Ave
TRU
ETR
UE
Hea
rst A
veTR
UE
3
Oxford St
TRU
E
TRU
E
3
Hea
rst A
veTR
UE
2
Walnut St
TRU
E
Hea
rst A
ve
6
Euclid Ave
TRU
ETR
UE
TRU
EFA
LSE
Hea
rst A
ve
TRU
E
TRU
ETR
UE
8La Loma Ave
Gayley Rd
TRU
EH
ears
t Ave
4
TRU
EFA
LSE
Spruce St
TRU
ETR
UE
Hea
rst A
ve
5
TRU
EFA
LSE
Arch St
TRU
E
Le C
onte
Ave
Sig
naliz
edIn
ters
ectio
n
KEY
:
=
Sto
p-C
ontro
lled
=ST
OP
12
34
56
78
OXFORD STREET
WALNUT STREET
SPRUCE STREET
GAYLEY ROAD
HEA
RST
AVEN
UE
LE CONTE
AVENUE
ARCH STREET
EUCLID AVENUE
LE ROY AVENUE
LA LOMA AVENUE
SHATTUCK AVENUE
SF11
-060
0_Fi
gure
3
N
NO
T TO
SC
ALE
STU
DY
INTE
RSEC
TIO
NS
& E
XIST
ING
LA
NE
GEO
MET
RYFI
GU
RE 4
stop
-con
trol
on L
eRoy
Ave
nue
stop
-con
trol
on W
alnu
t Stre
etst
op-c
ontro
lon
Spr
uce
Stre
et
STO
P
STO
PST
OP
TRU
E
Hea
rst A
ve
7
TRU
ETR
UE
Le Roy Ave
1
TRU
E
Shattuck AveH
ears
t Ave
TRU
ETR
UE
Hea
rst A
veTR
UE
2
Walnut St
TRU
E
Hea
rst A
ve
6
Euclid Ave
TRU
ETR
UE
Hea
rst A
ve
TRU
E
TRU
ETR
UE
8La Loma Ave
Gayley Rd
OXFORD STREET
LE CONTE
AVENUE
ARCH STREET
Hea
rst A
veTR
UE
4
Spruce St
TRU
E
TRU
E
TRU
EH
ears
t Ave
5
TRU
E
Arch St
TRU
E
Le C
onte
Ave
ARCH STREET
EUCLID AVENUE
4
Hea
rst A
veTR
UE
3
Oxford St
TRU
E
TRU
E
LE ROY AVENUE
LA LOMA AVENUE
SHATTUCK AVENUE
KEY
:
Sto
p-C
ontro
lled
==
XX
(XX
)
Sig
naliz
edIn
ters
ectio
n
=A
M (P
M)
Pea
k H
our V
olum
es
STO
P
12
34
56
78
WALNUT STREET
SPRUCE STREET
HEA
RST
AVEN
UE
GAYLEY ROAD
SF11
-060
0_Fi
gure
5
N
NO
T TO
SC
ALE
104 (72)44 (44)
17 (3
8)18
9 (4
31)
87 (9
5)40
1 (2
40)
17(41)11(10)
10 (2
6)18
1 (4
33)
24 (3
4)40
3 (2
45)
15 (2
0)31
5 (2
30)
36 (38)9 (17)
10 (2
0)21
2 (4
44)
48 (27)682 (534)132 (100)
88 (1
44)
187
(327
)64
(92)
20 (7
3)
10 (17)291 (601)
34 (14)
280
(238
)36
(3)
15 (45)224 (175)10 (7)
5 (2
8)29
(141
)22
(76)
24 (2
2)
183 (256)159 (219)
95 (16)
164
(24)
243
(272
)
FIG
URE
5EX
ISTI
NG
PEA
K H
OU
R V
OLU
MES
10 (1
3)
26 (21)2 (1)
9 (9
)4
(4)
253
(624
)
144
(86)
511
(335
)
12 (4
1)62
0 (4
54)
0 (3) 67
(116
)2 (
14)
87 (57)13 (16)
9 (1
1)31
4 (7
74)
19 (3
0)27
9 (1
47)
82 (7
0)46 (28)483 (276)28 (28)
19 (4
6)18
8 (4
17)
255
(333
)
42 (82)254 (677)354 (285)
stop
-con
trol
on L
eRoy
Ave
nue
stop
-con
trol
on W
alnu
t Stre
etst
op-c
ontro
lon
Spr
uce
Stre
et
STO
P
STO
PST
OP
Hearst Ave
November
Daily road
Hearst Av
less than
degrading
along Hea
Although
trucks de
University
expected
majority o
axels or m
heavy tru
transporta
Hearst Avebetween OAvenue/ Ga
Source: Fehr
Parking
On-Street
On-street
Table 2 li
1 Walton
in TransDC, pp.Incorpo
nue Complete S
2012
dway volume
venue east of
12,000 vehic
g traffic flow1
arst Avenue in
Hearst Aven
estined to pa
y Avenue and
on a typical c
of the truck tr
more, signifyi
ucks, combin
ation solution
Segment
enue Oxford Street an
ayley Road
r & Peers, 2008.
Parking
parking is a
sts the parkin
, C.M. et al (19sportation Rese. 43-54. Also, Borated
Streets Study –
s collected in
Oxford Street
les per day a1. Observation
n either the tw
ue is not a C
arts of UC B
Oxford Stree
city street, wi
raffic consists
ing heavy tru
ned with hig
ns must be se
EX
t
nd La Loma
available alon
ng conditions
83). Accident aearch Record 9Burden, D. and
Final
n 2008 by the
t during a typ
are strong po
ns during the
wo-lane or fou
City of Berke
Berkeley and
et. As a resul
ith almost sev
s of two-axle
ucks traversin
gh levels of
nsitive to a w
TXISTING VEH
AverageDaily Traff
10,400
ng the majori
by block. Typ
and Operationa923. TransportaP. Lagerway (1
e City of Berk
pical weekday
tential candid
e AM and PM
ur-lane segm
ley designate
Lawrence B
lt, truck traffic
ven percent t
vehicles or b
g the corrido
f pedestrian
ide variety of
TABLE 1: ICLE CLASSIF
e fic
Autos,Vans, &Pickup
93%
ty of Hearst
pes of parking
al Guidelines foation Research
1999), Road Die
keley indicate
. Research ind
dates for a re
M peak period
ents of the co
ed truck rout
erkeley Natio
c is higher on
truck traffic, a
uses, one per
or each day.
and bicycle
f users.
FICATIONS
, & ps
2-AxlTrucks a
Buse
5%
Avenue exce
g include:
or Continuous T Board, Nation
ets: Fixing the B
that about 1
dicates that fo
eduction in tr
ds indicate m
orridor.
e, it is an im
onal Laborat
n Hearst Aven
as shown in T
rcent of the t
The presen
e activity, ar
le and s
3- andAxle Tr
<1%
ept where th
Two-Way Left-al Research Co
Big Roads, Walk
11,000 vehicle
our lane road
ravel lanes w
minimal conge
mportant acce
tory from I-8
nue than wou
Table 1. Whi
total traffic ha
ce and numb
re indicators
d 4- rucks
5 or MAxle T
% 1%
ere are bus
-Turn Median Louncil. Washinkable Communi
14
es use
s with
ithout
estion
ess for
80 via
uld be
le the
as five
ber of
s that
More Trucks
%
stops.
Lanes ngton, ities,
Hearst Ave
November
Oxford Ave
Spruce StreConte Aven
Arch Streetto Scenic A
Scenic Ave
Euclid Aven
Le Roy AveAvenue / G
Notes: 1. DaSource: Fehr
R
p
M
30
Hearst Av
restricted
direction o
Off-Street
There are
Hearst Pa
Berkeley s
Lower Hea
Scenic Av
parking s
nue Complete S
2012
Block
enue to Spruce
eet to Arch Strenue
t / Le Conte AvAvenue
nue to Euclid A
nue to Le Roy A
enue to La LomGayley Road
ata obtained fromr & Peers, 2012
estricted resid
ermit from 9:0
Metered Parkin
0-minute or o
venue betwee
parking dur
of travel. The
t Parking
several park
arking Structu
students and
arst Parking S
venue and Euc
paces, includ
Streets Study –
HEARST A
e Street
eet / Le M
venue p
Avenue One
Avenue
ma
m SafeTREC.
dential parkin
00 AM to 6:00
ng – One- and
one-hour park
en the Arch S
ring the AM
ere are 42 par
king garages
ures. These s
faculty.
Structure – Th
clid Avenue. I
ing 145 spac
Final
TAVENUE EXIS
Eastboun
Motorcycle / M
One hour (Nopeak period pa
hour and 24-mAM peak
period parki
ng – Two-hou
0 PM
d two-hour m
king from 9:00
Street/Le Con
and PM pea
rking spaces o
located in th
structures pro
his four story
It has 622 pa
es dedicated
TABLE 2: STING PARKI
Type of Pa
d
Not Allow
etered
o AM arking)
minute (No k ng)
M
Metere
Metere
r parking limi
metered parkin
0 AM to 6:00
nte Avenue a
ak periods to
on this segme
he study area
ovide permitt
parking gara
rking spaces
to attendant
ING CONDIT
arking
Westb
wed
Restricted R
Open Parkinpeak period
Metered (No PMparki
ed
ed
it for vehicles
ng from 9:00
PM
nd the Euclid
o allow addit
ent of Hearst A
including th
ted and met
age is located
with a mix of
t parking. Th
TIONS
bound
Residential
ng (No PM d parking)
M peak period ing)
s without resid
AM to 6:00 P
d Avenue inte
tional travel
Avenue.
he Lower Hea
tered parking
d along Hears
f permit park
e peak parkin
NumberSpaces
0
20
17
25
38
7
dential parkin
PM
ersections inc
lanes in the
arst and the U
g primarily fo
st Avenue bet
ing and publ
ng demand a
15
r of s1
ng
cludes
peak
Upper
or UC
tween
ic pay
at this
Hearst Ave
November
garage is
via one dr
such that
Avenue th
out of the
Upper He
corner of
Avenue, a
to attend
percent o
5:30 PM a
times. Ve
wait to tu
2 Coinformation
nue Complete S
2012
547 vehicles,
riveway on He
each drivew
hat provides a
e parking gara
arst Parking
La Loma Ave
and Ridge Roa
ant parking.
occupancy rat
and is open t
hicles headin
rn left into th
ounts and utilin also provided
Streets Study –
, which result
earst Avenue
way provides
access to two
age to look fo
Structure – T
enue. Access
ad. The parki
The peak pa
e2. The garag
to public par
ng eastbound
e parking gar
ization data prd by UC Berkele
Final
ts in an 88 pe
and two driv
access to on
o floors. This c
or available pa
his four story
to the garag
ng garage ha
arking deman
ge is restricte
king on week
on Hearst A
rage.
rovided by UC ey Parking & T
ercent occupa
veways on Sce
ne floor, with
creates a circ
arking spaces
y parking gar
ge is provided
as 446 parkin
nd at this ga
d to permit p
kdays from 5
Avenue could
Berkeley Parkransportation (
ancy rate2. Ac
enic Avenue.
h the excepti
ulation issue
s in a different
rage is locate
d via drivewa
g spaces and
arage is 327
parking on w
5:00 PM to 2:
d potentially b
king & Transpo(2011).
ccess to the g
This parking
ion of one d
when vehicle
t level.
ed along Hea
ays on Hearst
d includes 110
vehicles, whi
weekdays betw
00 AM and o
block Hearst
ortation (2009)
garage is pro
garage is arra
driveway on S
es have to circ
arst Avenue o
t Avenue, La
0 spaces dedi
ich results in
ween 7:00 AM
on weekends
Avenue as d
. Parking rest
16
ovided
anged
Scenic
culate
on the
Loma
icated
a 73
M and
at all
drivers
triction
Hearst Ave
November
PLAN
Once the
and City s
address t
corridor w
1) Sh
2) O
3) Le
4) Eu
Once a co
modal len
operation
process w
the variou
With the
These des
the Unive
Multiple k
University
north sid
represent
U
U
U
C
C
3 The Cro
Highwatreatme
4 Refer to
nue Complete S
2012
NING A
existing tran
staff worked c
the existing
was divided in
hattuck Aven
Oxford Street t
e Conte Aven
uclid Avenue
omprehensive
ns. Analysis m
s analysis usi
was a team eff
us proposals.
alternatives
signs were de
rsity and City
key stakehold
y and City are
e of campus
ed various Un
niversity cam
niversity tran
niversity land
ity traffic eng
ity bicycle an
osswalk Tool is ay Administratients are identifo Appendix C
Streets Study –
ND DES
sportation ch
collaborativel
transportatio
nto four segm
ue to Oxford
to Le Conte A
ue/Arch Stree
to La Loma A
e set of alter
methodologie
ing Synchro a
fort, with Univ
evaluated, p
eveloped as a
to create fina
ers have been
e core stakeh
s and are loc
niversity and C
mpus planning
sportation pla
dscape archite
ineering
d pedestrian
based on reseon. Refer to Apfied. for the traffic o
Final
IGN PRO
haracteristics
ly with Fehr &
n deficiencie
ents including
Street
Avenue/Arch S
et to Euclid Av
Avenue/Gayley
rnatives was i
es include th
and SimTraffi
versity and Ci
preferred des
set of 35% d
al designs and
n actively eng
holders, as th
cated within
City staff with
anning and e
ecture
planning
arch from the Nppendix D for
operations and
OCESS
had been ide
& Peers to de
es. To facilita
g:
Street
venue
y Road
identified, ea
e use of Feh
c4, and qualit
ity staff worki
igns for each
esign drawing
d construction
gaged in the p
he projects w
the City of
h expertise in:
ngineering
National Coopean overview of
micro-simulat
entified for th
evelop possib
ate this proc
ch concept w
r & Peer’s cr
tative analysis
ing closely an
h segment a
gs. This level
n documents,
planning and
will enhance t
Berkeley’s rig
erative Highwaf the Crosswalk
ion analysis.
he study corri
ble transporta
cess, the Hea
was evaluated
rosswalk evalu
s based on b
nd providing
and intersecti
of design de
, as funding a
design for th
the circulatio
ght-of-way.
ay Research Prok Tool and how
idor, the Univ
ation solution
arst Avenue
d through a
uation tool3,
best practices.
direct feedba
ion were sele
evelopment re
allows.
his Study. Bot
n along the
The project
ogram and Fedw potential cros
17
versity
s that
study
multi-
traffic
. This
ack on
ected.
eadies
th the
entire
team
deral ssing
Hearst Ave
November
In additio
were pres
the propo
Coalition
Some des
both direc
divided ro
and pede
lanes. Th
intersectio
A two-wa
between t
the need
segment.
potential
Table 3 s
and the v
that was c
nue Complete S
2012
on to the pro
sented to the
osed changes
also provided
sign ideas we
ctions all the
oadway to all
strian path. A
his concept w
on, grade tran
y cycle track
the Arch Stre
for a minimu
In addition,
safety conflic
summarizes t
various consid
carried forwar
Streets Study –
oject team, ot
City of Berke
s, and membe
d their input a
ere discussed
way to Euclid
motor vehicl
All motor vehi
was infeasible
nsitions, the l
concept was
et/Le Conte A
um width of 1
the grade o
ts with pedes
he outcome
derations in th
rd into 35% d
Final
ther stakehol
eley Transpor
ers of the pu
and support th
but were no
Avenue was
e traffic, conv
cle traffic wou
e due to roa
oss of metere
also discusse
Avenue and t
12.5-feet, whi
of the roadwa
strians.
of the collab
he selection p
esign develop
lders also pro
rtation Comm
ublic as well a
hrough the co
t developed
considered.
verting it to a
uld be rerout
adway geom
ed parking sp
ed. It would r
he Euclid Ave
ch would not
ay would enc
borative proce
process. The
pment.
ovided input.
mission, which
as representa
ommission he
as alternative
This would cl
a pocket park
ted to the exis
etries at the
paces, and the
run along the
enue intersec
t allow for co
courage faste
ess highlight
next chapter
. The Study
h passed a res
atives from th
earing.
es. Continuin
lose the south
k with space f
sting westbou
Arch Street/
e loss of an A
e eastbound
ctions and wa
onstruction of
er bicycle spe
ing the desig
describes th
recommenda
solution in fav
he East Bay B
ng the road d
hern portion
for a bicycle f
und Hearst Av
/Le Conte Av
ADA parking s
motor vehicle
s discarded d
f a sidewalk i
eeds and intro
gn options st
e preferred d
18
ations
vor of
Bicycle
diet in
of the
facility
venue
venue
space.
e lane
due to
in this
oduce
tudied
design
H N
Shat
tuck
A
Oxf
ord
St
Spru
ce S
tAv
enue
Arch
Str
eeEu
clid
Ave
Eucl
id A
veG
ayle
y Ro
Hea
rst A
venu
e Co
m
Nov
embe
r 201
2
Stre
et S
egm
en
Aven
ue to
Oxf
ord
S
tree
t to
Spru
ce S
tre
tree
t to
Arch
Str
eet/
et/L
e Co
nte
Aven
ueen
ue
enue
to L
a Lo
ma
Avoa
d,
mpl
ete
Stre
ets
Stud
y
nt
Stre
et
Tw bic
eet
Th we
ea lan
/Le
Cont
e Th w
eea w
eea an
e to
Eastbound
On
bu sid
Westbound
On
cla
venu
e/
Pedestrian
Sid
m Etc
Ro
Bicycle
Cl sh
– Fi
nal
TABL
E 3:
PRO
PO
Opt
ion
1
wo-
lane
road
die
t wcy
cle
lane
s an
d m
e
hree
-lane
road
die
t es
tbou
nd la
nes,
onas
tbou
nd la
ne),
bicy
nes
and
med
ian
hr
ee-la
ne ro
ad d
iet
estb
ound
lane
s, on
astb
ound
lane
) with
estb
ound
Sha
rrow
sas
tbou
nd b
icyc
le la
nnd
med
ian
ne
-la
ne ro
ad d
iet w
uffe
red
bicy
cle
lane
dew
alk
ne l
ane
at a
ll tim
esas
s III
sha
rrow
s
dew
alk
exte
nsio
n o
edia
n be
twee
n ch
ever
ry H
all a
nd L
oy A
venu
e
ass
III ro
ute
with
ha
rrow
s bo
th d
irect
iOSE
D C
ON
CEPT
A
Opt
with
di
an
(two
e ycle
(two
e h s, ne
Two-
lane
rco
nver
t Ar
right
-out
ola
nes
and
with
a
nd
One
-lane
rw
ith o
ne-w
cycl
etra
ck
side
wal
k
s an
d O
ne la
ne a
bicy
cle
lan
or
Le
ions
Cl
imbi
ng c
lane
and
dcl
ass
III s
haALT
ERN
ATI
VES
tion
2
road
die
t, rc
h St
reet
to
only
, bik
e m
edia
n
road
die
t w
ay
and
One
two
and
buffe
red
e
clas
s II
bike
do
wnh
ill
arro
ws
BY C
ORR
IDO
R S
Opt
ion
3
e -la
ne ro
ad d
iet w
o-w
ay m
ulti-
use
patSE
GM
ENT
Pref
erre
d O
ptio
n O
ptio
n 1
Opt
ion
1
Opt
ion
2
ith
th
Opt
ion
1
Opt
ion1
-
Opt
ion
1
Sele
ctio
n Co
Prov
ides
veh
icle
sw
estb
ound
left
-tu
Prov
ides
veh
icle
sea
stbo
und
left
-tu
Allo
ws
for b
icyc
lePr
ovid
es v
ehic
le s
wes
tbou
nd le
ft-t
uAl
low
s fo
r bic
ycle
Allo
ws
for m
edia
Opt
ion
2 al
low
s f
both
dire
ctio
ns w
adeq
uate
veh
icle
Opt
ion
2 re
duce
sat
mul
tiple
loca
tio
Opt
ion
1 an
d 2
pbi
cycl
e fa
cilit
y
Opt
ion
2 m
ay e
ncrid
ing
O
ptio
n 3
may
cre
conf
lict w
ith fa
st-
(wes
tbou
nd) b
icy
With
ste
ep d
own
bicy
clis
ts tr
avel
at
spee
ds a
nd m
ay
cent
er o
f the
roa d
Opt
ion
2 w
ould
run
rest
ricte
d an
d O
ptio
n 1
wou
ld r
heav
ily u
sed
met
side
of H
ears
t Av
Clim
bing
Cla
ss II
re
quire
rem
oval
om
eter
ed p
arki
ng
Hea
rst A
venu
e
19
onsi
dera
tion
s
stor
age
for
urns
ont
o Sh
attu
ckst
orag
e fo
r ur
ns o
nto
Wal
nut
e la
nes
st
orag
e fo
r ur
ns o
nto
Oxf
ord
e la
nes
n
refu
ge
for b
icyc
le la
nes
in
whi
le p
rovi
ding
c
apac
ity
s cr
ossi
ng d
ista
nces
ons
prov
ide
sepa
rate
d
cour
age
wro
ng-w
a
eate
ped
estr
ian
-mov
ing
dow
nhill
yc
lists
hi
ll (w
estb
ound
), t c
lose
to v
ehic
le
pref
er to
ride
in th
edw
ay
requ
ire re
mov
al o
f m
eter
ed p
arki
ng
requ
ire re
mov
al o
f er
ed p
arki
ng o
n on
venu
e
bike
lane
wou
ld
of h
eavi
ly u
sed
on s
outh
sid
e of
s y e ne
Hearst Ave
November
PREFE
Conceptu
conceptua
CORRID
Multiple c
bicyclists
corridor-w
be installe
Pavemen
It is assum
Road will
requires a
applicatio
Bicycle A
Where Cl
recomme
zone. The
may merg
where au
associated
Median D
All media
minimum
Medians a
delineate
Crosswalk
The cross
Crosswalk
nue Complete S
2012
ERRED D
al and 35%
al preferred d
OR-WIDE C
corridor-wide
through bus
wide issue, as
ed wherever f
nt Considerat
med that the
be slurry-sea
adequate pav
on of the slurr
ccommodati
ass II bicycle
nded to indic
e skip-stripe
ge across or s
tos merge ac
d with the LBN
Design
ans proposed
recommend
at intersectio
the waiting s
k Striping
swalk striping
k striping sho
Streets Study –
DESIGN
designs wer
design propos
CONSIDERA
e changes we
stops, and de
s discussed in
feasible along
tions
e Hearst Aven
aled prior to
vement qualit
y-seal.
ion at Bus St
e lanes pass
cate the pres
green conflic
stop in the bik
cross the bik
NL was also c
d in the conc
ded width to
ns should als
pace for pede
g shown on
uld be reeval
Final
re developed
sal. The 35%
ATIONS
ere identified,
esign of med
n the City’s AD
g the corridor.
nue corridor
implementat
y. Several lo
ops
through bus
sence and ap
t zones are p
ke lane near s
ke lane to tur
onsidered.
ceptual desig
provide refu
so include a
estrians at int
the 35% de
luated during
d for the pr
design drawin
, including pa
ians. ADA ac
DA Transition
.
between Sha
ion of the ro
cations along
stop areas,
ppropriate pla
proposed at b
stops. Skip-s
rn at intersec
gn should be
uge for bicy
median tip a
ersections.
sign drawing
g final design
eferred desig
ngs are prese
avement con
ccess changes
n Plan, and b
attuck Avenu
oadway projec
g the corrido
a dashed gr
acement of b
bus stops alon
stripe green c
ction approac
e a minimum
yclists as wel
as feasible to
gs replicate t
to be consis
gns. This c
ented in Appe
nsiderations, a
s should also
i-directional c
e and La Lom
cts. Slurry-se
r may require
reen conflict
bicyclists thro
ng Hearst Av
conflict zones
ches. Additi
m of six feet-
l as pedestri
provide ped
the existing
stent with the
hapter detail
endix A.
accommodati
be addressed
curb ramps s
ma Avenue/G
ealing the roa
e repaving pr
zone treatm
ough the bus
venue, where
are also prop
onal shuttle
-wide. This
ians with str
estrian refug
crosswalk str
e design guid
20
ls the
ion of
d as a
should
Gayley
adway
rior to
ent is
s stop
buses
posed
traffic
is the
rollers.
e and
riping.
elines
Hearst Ave
November
in the City
signalized
these guid
be the on
SEGMEN
Existing C
Between S
at the sig
width of
constructe
segments
reflect thi
and the w
Helios bu
Hearst Av
Proposed
A road di
with bicyc
Avenue a
Street and
modificati
Walnut St
condition
At the ea
through a
the westb
northbou
be centere
The existi
would be
nue Complete S
2012
y of Berkeley’
d intersection
delines would
ly locations w
NT 1: SHATT
Configuratio
Shattuck Aven
nal-controlled
the roadway
ed, the Ebb
of Walnut St
s new desire
west leg high
ilding. Hears
venue/Shattuc
d Configurati
et is propose
cle lanes and
nd Walnut St
d Oxford Stre
ions at the Ox
treet. Table 4
s, respectively
astbound app
a shared bike
bound Oxford
nd approache
ed in the outs
ng striping c
restriped to m
Streets Study –
’s Pedestrian M
s. At uncontr
d mean that t
where high-vis
TUCK AVEN
n
nue and Oxfo
d intersection
y includes o
building incl
treet, and the
line At Wal
h-visibility cro
t Avenue wid
ck Avenue inte
ion
ed for this se
a median. A
treet intersect
eet, with a lef
xford Street i
4 and Table 5
y, and Figure
proach to Ox
-lane and rig
d Street appr
es with bike l
side travel lan
onfiguration
match the pro
Final
Master Plan. T
rolled location
the uncontrol
sibility crossw
NUE TO OXF
ord Street, He
ns with Shattu
on-street par
udes a new
e west leg of
lnut Street, n
osswalk was
ens from one
ersection.
gment of He
striped medi
tions. A raise
ft-turn pocke
ntersection, R
5 show additio
6 presents th
xford Street, t
ght-turn pock
roach. Bike b
anes at the O
ne with an adv
on the west
oposed geom
The guideline
ns, high-visib
lled crosswalk
walks are prov
FORD STRE
earst Avenue i
uck Avenue a
allel parking
mid-block, m
the intersecti
o crosswalk i
ground out i
e lane to two
earst Avenue
ian would allo
ed median wit
t at the Oxfo
RRFBs would b
onal propose
he conceptua
the skip-strip
et. A green
boxes are pro
Oxford Street
vanced stop b
side of the H
metry on Hears
es suggest sta
bility ladder st
ks at Walnut
vided.
EET
is a four-lane
and Oxford St
on both si
multi-use pat
ion is striped
s marked at t
in conjunctio
lanes in each
to provide o
ow for left-tu
th landscapin
ord Street inte
be installed a
ed changes to
l design.
pe green con
conflict zone
oposed on th
intersection.
bar placed fou
Hearst Avenu
st Avenue eas
andard crossw
triping is sug
Street and Sp
e roadway wit
treet. The 60
ides of the
th to connect
as a high-vis
the east leg o
on with the c
h direction at
ne travel lane
rn pockets at
ng is propose
ersection. In
at the high-vis
o the intersect
nflict zone tre
e treatment is
he eastbound
Southbound
ur feet back f
e/Shattuck A
st of Shattuck
walk striping
ggested. Follo
pruce Street w
th left-turn po
0-foot curb-to
street. Rec
t the two iso
sibility crossw
of the interse
construction o
the west leg
e in each dire
t both the Sha
ed between W
addition to
sibility crossw
tion and mid-
eatment is m
s also propos
d, westbound
d, a sharrow w
from the cross
Avenue interse
k Avenue.
21
at the
owing
would
ockets
o-curb
ently-
olated
walk to
ection,
of the
of the
ection
attuck
Walnut
signal
walk at
-block
marked
ed on
d, and
would
swalk.
ection
Hearst Ave
November
Locatio
Walnut StrHearst Ave
Oxford StreHearst Ave
Loca
Shattuck AWalnut Str
Walnut StrOxford Stre
nue Complete S
2012
T
on Curb Extns
eet/ enue
NW andSW corners
eet/ enue
NW corner
tion
Avenue to eet
Twlan
eet to eet
Twlan
Streets Study –
TABLE 4: SEG
Engineering
Median Refuge
d
East crosswalk
TABLE 5: SE
Road Diet
wo-lanes to onene in each dire
wo-lanes to onene in each dire
Final
MENT 1 INT
g Solutions
Bus Bulb
ReCR
GMENT 1 MI
e- ction
e- ction
Rala
ERSECTION R
Sieduce Curb Radii
RRFBs
Signamodif
ID-BLOCK RE
Trea
Median
Painted
aised and ndscaped
RECOMMEN
ignal Cr
s
HigvisiwescrosStacroson W
al fications
Stacros
ECOMMEND
atments
Bike Fac
Bike la
Bike la
DATIONS
Signage
osswalk BikBo
gh-bility st leg sswalk, ndard sswalk Walnut
ndard sswalks
EB,WBNB
DATIONS
ilities
nes
nes
e & Striping
ke ox
Green SStripe Co
Zon
B, B
EB (sharedlane/turn WB, NB
Sidewalk
22
Skip-onflict e
d bike lane),
Figu
re 6
Hea
rst A
venu
e Co
ncep
tual
Des
ign:
Sha
ttuck
Ave
nue
to O
xfor
d St
reet
OXFORD STREET
SHATTUCK AVENUE
WALNUT STREET
new
bic
ycle
lane
bike
box
curb
ext
ensi
on-f
easa
bilit
ym
ay d
epen
d on
futu
re b
usla
yove
rs o
n so
uth
side
of
Hea
rst
alig
n cr
ossw
alk
with
rece
ntly
con
stru
cted
mid
-blo
ck c
onne
ctio
nbe
twee
n H
ears
t &U
nive
rsity
Ave
nues
new
bic
ycle
lane
curb
ext
ensi
on
exis
ting
bicy
cle
lane
s
adva
nce
yiel
dm
arki
ngs
inst
all R
RFBs
rest
ripe
high
-vis
ibili
ty c
ross
wal
k
add
75’ l
eft-
turn
poc
ket
exis
ting
curb
ext
ensi
on
adva
nced
sto
p ba
rst
riped
med
ian
*des
ign
of H
elio
s Bu
ildin
g&
driv
eway
s m
ay im
pact
med
ian
desi
gn
adva
nced
sto
p ba
r
shar
row
exis
ting
bicy
cle
lane
s
strip
ing
to c
onfo
rmw
ith p
ropo
sed
strip
ing
east
of
Shat
tuck
Ave
nue
Bbu
s st
op
curb
line
exist
ing
curb
line
strip
ing
KEY
com
bine
d bi
ke la
ne/
turn
lane
bike
box
and
das
hed
gree
n pa
vem
ent t
hrou
ghco
nflic
t zon
e
bike
box
and
das
hed
gree
n pa
vem
ent
thro
ugh
conf
lict z
one
Hearst Ave
November
SEGMEN
Existing C
Between O
street par
Arch Stree
Street/Le
intersectio
intersectio
crossing.
Proposed
A road die
bicycle la
Street/He
Avenue w
of Spruce
RRFBs wo
The Arch
existing fo
would bec
be further
Avenue, a
extension
providing
extension
Table 6 a
respective
nue Complete S
2012
NT 2: OXFO
Configuratio
Oxford Street
rking, measur
et. Hearst Av
Conte Avenu
on, Spruce
on, where the
d Configurati
et is proposed
anes and a
arst Avenue i
would be close
e Street. A b
uld be installe
Street/Le Co
our-way inter
come the thre
r narrowed th
and a sidewa
s are propose
a new sidew
s.
and Table 7
ely, and Figur
Streets Study –
RD STREET
n
t and Arch St
ring 60 feet c
venue has lef
ue intersectio
Street inters
e north and e
ion
d for this seg
raised media
intersection.
ed at Spruce S
bicycle cut th
ed on the eas
onte Avenue
section. Arch
ee-way inters
hrough a curb
alk extension
ed on the nor
alk along the
show additio
re 7 presents
Final
TO ARCH S
reet/Le Conte
curb-to-curb
ft-turn pocket
ns. Approxim
sects Hearst
east crosswalk
ment of Hear
an. The rai
The raised,
Street, restrict
hrough would
st crosswalk a
intersection w
h Street would
ection of Le C
b extension on
on south sid
rth side of the
new face of c
onal proposed
the conceptu
STREET/LE C
e Avenue, He
and widening
ts and is sign
mately 200 fe
Avenue at
ks are marked
rst Avenue to
ised median
landscaped m
ting motor ve
d allow bicyc
t Spruce Stre
would be rec
d become sto
Conte Avenue
n the northwe
de of the int
e street, main
curb. One pa
d changes to
ual design.
CONTE AVE
earst Avenue i
g to 80 feet
nal-controlled
eet east of th
a side-stre
d. The east le
create one t
would be e
median betwe
ehicle movem
lists to turn
et.
configured to
op-controlled
e and Hearst A
est corner, be
tersection. W
ntaining acces
arking space w
o the intersec
ENUE
is a four-lane
at its widest
d at the Oxfo
he Oxford Str
eet stop-con
eg is marked
ravel lane in e
extended thr
een Oxford St
ments to right
onto and off
o remove Arc
d and the sign
Avenue. The
tween Arch S
West of Arch
ss to the exist
would be lost
ction and mid
e roadway wit
point just w
rd Street and
eet/Hearst Av
trolled, three
as a high-vis
each direction
rough the S
treet and Le C
turns into an
f of Spruce S
ch Street from
nalized interse
intersection w
Street and Le C
Street, large
ting driveway
t with the new
d-block cond
24
th on-
est of
d Arch
venue
e-way
sibility
n with
Spruce
Conte
nd out
Street.
m the
ection
would
Conte
e curb
ys and
w curb
itions,
Hearst Ave
November
Locatio
Spruce StreHearst Ave
Le Conte Avenue/ Hearst Ave
Loca
Oxford StreSpruce Stre
Spruce StreConte Aven
nue Complete S
2012
T
on Curb Extns
eet/ enue
enue
NW corner, south side
ation
eet to eet
Twla
eet to Le nue
Twla
Streets Study –
TABLE 6: SEG
Engineering
s Median Refuge
East crosswalk
TABLE 7: SE
Road Diet
wo-lanes to onane in each dire
wo-lanes to onane in each dire
Final
MENT 2 INT
g Solutions
Bus Bulb
ReCR
GMENT 2 MI
t
ne- ection
Raisedmedia
ne- ection
Raismed100’left-Le C
ERSECTION R
Sieduce Curb Radii
RRFBs
SignmodRemArchfrominte
ID-BLOCK RE
Trea
Median
d, landscaped an
ed, landscapeddian ’ westbound turn pocket at
Conte
RECOMMEN
ignal Cr
s
Higvisieascros
nal difications move h Street m ersection
Stacros
ECOMMEND
atments
Bike Fac
Bike lanes
d
Bike lanes
DATIONS
Signage
osswalk BikBo
gh-bility t leg sswalk
ndard sswalks
DATIONS
cilities
ScoSoC
e & Striping
ke ox
Green SStripe Co
Zon
Bus stopsof Le Con
Sidewalk
Sidewalk on newcurb extensionof Le Conte Sidewalk extenson south side aConte
25
Skip-onflict e
s west nte
w west
sion t Le
Figu
re 7
Hea
rst A
venu
e Co
ncep
tual
Des
ign:
Oxf
ord
Stre
et to
Arc
h St
reet
/Le
Cont
e Av
enue
Figu
re 7
Hea
rst A
venu
e Co
ncep
tual
Des
ign:
Oxf
ord
Stre
et to
Arc
h St
reet
/Le
Cont
e Av
enue
B
B
ARCH STREET
LE CONTE
AVENUE
SPRUCE STREET
OXFORD STREET
new
bic
ycle
lane
new
bic
ycle
lane
one
WB
trav
el la
ne
exte
nd le
ft-tu
rn
pock
et b
y 50
feet
side
wal
k ex
tens
ion
exte
nd d
rivew
ays
tone
w fa
ce o
f cur
b
bike
box
and
das
hed
gree
n pa
vem
ent t
hrou
ghco
nflic
t zon
e
mai
ntai
n 2
lane
s
dash
ed c
olor
ized
bic
ycle
la
ne th
roug
h bu
s st
op
pote
ntia
l bus
pul
lout
cons
ider
inst
allin
gso
ft-hi
t pos
ts o
r oth
er
delin
eato
r nea
r to
inte
rsec
tion
to h
ighl
ight
bike
lane
rest
rict S
pruc
e to
right
-in/r
ight
-out
only
ope
ratio
ns fo
rau
tos
two-
way
bic
ycle
cut-
thro
ugh
inst
all R
RFBs
inst
all R
RFBs
rest
rict A
rch
torig
ht-o
uton
ly o
pera
tions
inst
all “
DO
NO
TEN
TER”
sig
n
exis
ting
bicy
cle
lane
s
Hearst Ave
November
SEGMEN
Existing C
Hearst Av
and Euclid
parking a
residentia
Le Conte
feet east
are 23 fee
Avenue an
Proposed
A road die
the peak-
approxim
The westb
hours. Gr
lane. The
changes t
changes.
nue Complete S
2012
NT 3: ARCH
Configuratio
venue is a div
d Avenue. Th
llowed durin
al on-street pa
Avenue, park
of the interse
et curb-to-cur
nd the bus pu
d Configurati
et is proposed
-period lane/o
ately 34 parki
bound geom
reen-backed s
e westbound e
to the interse
Streets Study –
STREET/LE
n
ided roadway
he roadway co
g off-peak h
arking occupy
king is restrict
ection. The e
rb. No sidew
ull-out west o
ion
d for eastbou
off-peak park
ing spaces an
etry would la
sharrows wou
existing dashe
ection and mi
Final
CONTE AV
y with vertica
onsists of one
ours. One t
ying what wo
ted, allowing
eastbound lan
walk is provide
of Euclid Aven
und Hearst Av
king lane to a
nd 40 feet of m
argely be una
uld be spaced
ed lane line w
d-block cond
VENUE TO E
l grade separ
e travel lane a
ravel lane ex
uld be the ou
the roadway
nes are 25.5 f
ed on the sou
ue.
venue to crea
a buffered bi
motorcycle pa
affected, reta
d approximate
would be rem
ditions, respec
EUCLID AVE
ration betwee
and one peak
xists westbou
utside travel l
to function a
feet curb-to-f
uth side of He
te a single tra
ike lane and
arking.
ining all exist
ely every 100
moved. Table
ctively, and F
ENUE
en Arch Stree
k hour travel l
nd with a m
lane. Near th
as two-lanes
fence, and the
earst Avenue
avel lane with
a sidewalk. T
ting parking,
feet and cen
e 8 and Table
Figure 8 pres
t/Le Conte Av
ane, with on-
ix of metered
he intersection
approximatel
e westbound
between Le C
h the convers
This would re
even during
tered on the
e 9 show prop
sents the prop
27
venue
-street
d and
n with
ly 130
lanes
Conte
ion of
emove
peak
travel
posed
posed
Hearst Ave
November
Location
Euclid Avenue/ Hearst Avenue
Loca
Le Conte AEuclid Aven
nue Complete S
2012
T
n
En
Curb Extns
South side
ation
Avenue to nue
Streets Study –
TABLE 8: SEG
ngineering So
Median Refuge
BB
TABLE 9: SE
Road Diet
Two-lanes to olane eastboundExisting westbogeometry to rebut remove peperiod parkingrestrictions
Final
MENT 3 INT
lutions
Bus ulb
ReduceCurb Radii
GMENT 3 MI
t
one- d ound emain eak g
ERSECTION R
Signale
Signal modificatio
ID-BLOCK RE
Trea
Median
RECOMMEN
Crosswa
onsStandardcrosswalk
ECOMMEND
atments
Bike Fa
Five-foot lane with buffer easGreen-basharrowson lane w
DATIONS
Signage &
alkBike Box
d ks
DATIONS
acilities
climbing two-foot
stbound acked
centered westbound
Siso
Striping
Green Skip-SConflict Zo
Bus stop wesEuclid Green-backesharrows throEuclid interse
Sidewalk
ix-foot sidewalouth side
28
Stripe one
st of
d ough ection
k
k on
Figu
re 8
Hea
rst A
venu
e Co
ncep
tual
Des
ign:
Arc
h St
reet
/Le
Cont
e Av
enue
to E
uclid
Ave
nue
B
ARCH STREET
B
B
buffe
red
bicy
cle
lane
side
wal
kin
stal
l ped
estr
ian
scal
e lig
htin
g be
twee
n Le
Con
te
Aven
ue a
nd e
xist
ing
bus
stop
wes
t of E
uclid
Ave
nue
inst
all s
afe-
hit p
osts
for f
irst 5
0’ o
f str
iped
buffe
r
EUCLID AVENUE
LE CONTE
AVENUE
SCENIC AVENUE
curb
ext
ensi
on
thro
ugh
inte
rsec
tion
inst
all b
read
cru
mb
trea
tmen
t & s
harr
ows
at c
ampu
s en
tran
ce
cons
ider
dec
orat
ive
stam
ped
pave
men
t or p
aver
sac
ross
cro
ssw
alks
shar
row
s
gree
n sh
ared
lane
trea
tmen
t(”s
uper
sha
rrow
s”) w
ith
“BIK
ES M
AY U
SE F
ULL
LAN
E”
sign
age
reta
in p
arki
ng
reta
in p
arki
ng
exis
ting
reta
inin
g w
all/
grad
e se
para
tion
reta
in p
arki
ng
curb
ext
ensi
on,
incr
ease
siz
e of
bu
s w
aitin
g ar
ea
inst
all “
DO
NO
TEN
TER”
sig
n
dash
ed g
reen
pav
emen
t th
roug
h bu
s st
op c
onfli
ct z
one
Bbu
s st
op
curb
line
exist
ing
curb
line
strip
ing
KEY
Hearst Ave
November
SEGMEN
Existing C
At Euclid
Avenue, H
street, an
becomes
Le Roy Av
west of th
Hall. At t
northwest
crossing d
Proposed
The existi
hour park
The Le R
Avenue/G
southwest
the north
eastbound
Table 10
respective
nue Complete S
2012
NT 4: EUCLI
Configuratio
Avenue, the
Hearst Avenu
d a 40-foot
a peak-hour t
venue is a si
he intersectio
he La Loma A
t and southw
distances and
d Configurati
ng two-lane
king restriction
Roy Avenue i
Gayley Road w
t corners, bri
heast, northw
d right-turn
0 and Table
ely, and Figur
Streets Study –
D AVENUE
n
eastbound d
e becomes o
curb-to-curb
travel lane be
de-street, sto
on, a high nu
Avenue/Gayle
west corners
poor sightlin
ion
cross-section
n would be re
intersection w
would be reco
nging those
west, and sou
onto Gayley
e 11 show p
re 9 presents
Final
TO LA LOM
departure lan
one lane in ea
width. Dur
etween Euclid
op-controlled
umber of mid
y Road inters
and the larg
nes.
with on-stre
emoved. Sha
would be fu
onfigured to r
right-turns u
uthwest corn
Road, the G
proposed ch
the proposed
MA AVENUE
es merge do
ach direction
ing the AM
Avenue and
intersection
d-block pedes
section, large
ge radii on th
eet parking w
arrows would
lly signalized
remove the c
nder signal c
ners. To acc
ayley Road c
hanges to th
d changes.
E/GAYLEY R
own from two
with metered
peak hours,
Le Roy Avenu
with high pe
strian crossin
turning radii
he northeast
would remain;
be added in
d. The inter
hannelized rig
control and a
commodate l
centerline wo
he intersectio
ROAD
o lanes to on
d parking on
the parking
ue.
edestrian vol
gs occur in f
and right-tur
corner creat
however, the
both directio
rsection geom
ght-turns on
dding tighten
larger semi-t
ould shift five
on and mid
ne. East of
n either side o
on the south
umes. Just t
front of Etche
rn slip lanes o
te long pede
e eastbound
ons on the cor
metry at La
the northwes
ning the radi
trucks makin
e feet to the
-block cond
30
Euclid
of the
h side
to the
everry
on the
estrian
peak-
rridor.
Loma
st and
us on
g the
e east.
itions,
Hearst Ave
November
Locatio
Le Roy Avenue/ Hearst Ave
La Loma Avenue/ Gayley RoaHearst Ave
Loca
Euclid AvenRoy Avenu
Le Roy AveLoma AvenGayley Roa
nue Complete S
2012
TA
on Curb Extns
enue
NW corner
ad/ enue
tion
nue to Le e
enue to La nue/ ad
Streets Study –
ABLE 10: SEG
Engineering
Median Refuge
Nc
TABLE 11: SE
Road Diet
Final
GMENT 4 INT
g Solutions
Bus Bulb
ReCR
NE corner
NE, andcorn
EGMENT 4 M
TERSECTION
Sieduce Curb Radii
Full trsigna
NW, SW ners
Signamodif
MID-BLOCK R
Trea
Median
RECOMMEN
ignal Cr
raffic l
Stacros
al fications
Stacros
RECOMMEND
atments
Bike Faci
Sharrows ceon-lane, spaevery 150’
Sharrows ceon-lane, spaevery 150’
NDATIONS
Signage
osswalk BikBo
ndard sswalks
ndard sswalks
DATIONS
ilities
ntered aced
ntered aced
NewexistcornAveninter
e & Striping
ke ox
Green SStripe Co
Zon
Sidewalk
w sidewalks repting sidewalk oner of La Loma nue/Gayley Rorsection
31
Skip-onflict e
place on NW
ad
Figu
re 9
Hea
rst A
venu
e Co
ncep
tual
Des
ign:
Euc
lid A
venu
e to
La
Lom
a Av
enue
/Gay
ley
Road
B
B
B
B
EUCLID AVENUE
LEROY AVENUE
LA LOMA AVENUE
GAYLEY ROAD
elm
inat
e sl
ip la
ne,
add
new
sid
ewal
k
redu
ce ra
dii
redu
ce ra
dii,
elim
inat
e sl
ip la
ne
add
land
scap
ing
sign
aliz
ein
ters
ectio
ncu
rbex
tens
ion
bus
bulb
out
shar
row
s
Bbu
s st
op
curb
line
exist
ing
curb
line
strip
ing
KEY
inst
all s
peed
feed
back
sign
inst
all “
BICY
CLIS
TS M
AY
USE
FU
LL L
ANE”
sig
nage
curb
ext
ensi
on
thro
ugh
inte
rsec
tion
inst
all b
read
cru
mb
trea
tmen
t & s
harr
ows
at c
ampu
s en
tran
ce
Hearst Ave
November
ESTIM
Based on
developed
the City o
Appendix
The estim
control, 5
and 20% f
Seg
1. ShattucOxford
2. Oxford Arch StConte A
3. Arch StConte AEuclid A
4. Euclid ALa LomAvenueRoad
Source: Fehr
nue Complete S
2012
MATED C
n the 35% de
d. The cost e
of Berkeley as
x B.
mated total co
% for constru
for contingen
ment
ck Avenue to Street
Street to reet/Le Avenue
reet/Le Avenue to Avenue
Avenue to a
e/Gayley
r & Peers, City of
Streets Study –
COSTS
esign drawin
estimates wer
s well as curr
ost for all ide
uction manag
ncies. Table 1
TABL
Lane Class IntersInters
Lane Class IntersInters
EastbEastbSidewWestIntersSpeed
Class IntersInters
f Berkeley, 2012.
Final
gs presented
e determined
rent industry
entified proje
ement, 5% fo
12 shows the
LE 12: COST
P
reduction, botII bicycle lanes
section changesection change
reduction, botII bicycle lanes
section changesection change
bound lane redubound Class II bwalk on south sbound Class IIIsection changed feedback sig
II bicycle routesection changesection change
d in Appendi
d based on re
standard cos
ects is $2,885
or mobilizatio
cost breakdo
ESTIMATES B
Project Overvie
h directions s s at Walnut Strs at Oxford Str
h directions s s at Spruce Strs at Arch Stree
uction buffered bicycleside of Hearst AI bicycle route ws at Euclid Avens
e with sharrowss at Le Roy Aves at La Loma A
ix A, concep
ecent construc
sts. Detailed c
5,614. This e
n, 15% for de
own by the fou
BY SEGMENT
ew
reet reet
reet et/Le Conte Ave
e lanes Avenue with green-bac
enue
s, both directioenue
Avenue/Gayley
ptual level co
ction bid repo
cost estimate
estimate inclu
esign and env
ur segments.
T
enue
cked sharrows
ons
Road
ost estimates
orts obtained
es are present
udes 5% for
vironmental re
Cost Estim
$402,9
$701,7
$906,1
$874,6
33
were
d from
ted in
traffic
eview,
mate
30
74
87
92
Hearst Ave
November
PHAS
Full fundin
approach
Criteria fo
In
D
Im
Im
Es
An impor
planning
segments
those dec
Additiona
implemen
FUNDIN
Multiple s
City, regio
related pr
13. The
review, fin
the City a
nue Complete S
2012
ING & I
ng for the pre
to prioritizin
or project prio
nclusion in an
Documented p
mmediate safe
mplementatio
stimated dem
rtant aspect
and engineer
of a project
cisions to pro
ally, some proj
ntation will be
NG
sources of fun
onal and Stat
rojects, poten
intention of
nal design do
nd UC Berkele
Streets Study –
MPLEM
eferred desig
g these proje
oritization may
adopted plan
public support
ety need
on feasibility a
mand
of any plann
ring concerns
may have a h
ovide key co
ojects are inte
e based on fun
nding will be r
te funds that
tial funding s
this table is
ocuments and
ey staff.
Final
ENTATIO
n has not yet
ects, pending
y include:
n
t
and costs
ning and im
s as the proje
high priority,
nnections an
rrelated and
nding availab
required to de
t may be ava
sources from
to begin a d
d constructio
ON
been identifi
g further conv
plementation
ects move tow
it is importan
nd continuous
may have a n
bility and appr
esign and con
ailable for co
UC Berkeley t
discussion of
n, and will re
ied. The City
versations be
n proposal fo
ward final de
nt to conside
s, cohesive fa
necessary ord
ropriate phas
nstruct the pr
omplete stree
that may be a
possible fund
equire refinem
is currently p
tween Univer
or Hearst Av
esign. While
er the circulat
acilities to th
er to their im
ing strategies
roposed proje
ets and bicycl
available are p
ding sources
ment and add
pursuing a de
rsity and City
venue is bala
certain proje
tion implicatio
he extent pos
mplementation
s.
ects. In addit
le and pedes
presented in
for environm
ditional input
34
etailed
y staff.
ancing
ects or
ons of
ssible.
n. Any
ion to
strian-
Table
mental
t from
Hearst Ave
November
Fun
Foothill Br
Northeastand Safety(NEQSS) ETRAF-2
UC WorkeFund
LRDP Sett
UC BerkeleMaster Pla
UC CollegeStreetscapPlan
Source: Fehr
nue Complete S
2012
nding Source
ridge Project
Quadrant Sciy Projects EIR EIR Mitigation
ers Compensat
lement
ey Landscape an
e of Engineeripe and Open S
r & Peers, City of
Streets Study –
Fundsinfrast
ence RequirAvenu
tion
Item 2
ng Space
f Berkeley, UC Be
Final
TABLE 13: F
from UC Berketructure on Hea
res advanced pue/Le Roy Aven
26 – Hearst FroProvide sideIntersectionEliminate veHearst/GayProvide bike
Goal to creaintersection
erkeley, 2012.
FUNDING SO
Description/N
eley for pedestarst corridor
pedestrian warnnue and Hearst
-
-
ntage: ewalk with pedn changes at Leehicular use of ley to improve e lanes where p
ate “campus” dn/Davis Hall No
OURCES
Notes
trian safety and
ning devices atAvenue/Gayle
destrian lightinge Roy and Arch/free right turn pedestrian saf
possible
door near Le Roorth
d public
t Hearst ey Road
g /Le-Conte lane at fety
oy
Potential Am
$200,000
unknown
$150,000
Design: $90,00Construction: $375,000
unknown
unknown
35
mount
00
APPENDIX A: 35% DESIGN DRAWINGS
SIG
NIN
G &
S
TR
IP
IN
G P
LA
N
10/10/12
8
HE
AR
ST
A
VE
NU
E S
TR
EE
TS
CA
PE
SF11-0600
SIG
NIN
G &
S
TR
IP
IN
G P
LA
N
10/10/12
8
HE
AR
ST
A
VE
NU
E S
TR
EE
TS
CA
PE
SF11-0600
SIG
NIN
G &
S
TR
IP
IN
G P
LA
N
10/10/12
8
HE
AR
ST
A
VE
NU
E S
TR
EE
TS
CA
PE
SF11-0600
SIG
NIN
G &
S
TR
IP
IN
G P
LA
N
10/10/12
8
HE
AR
ST
A
VE
NU
E S
TR
EE
TS
CA
PE
SF11-0600
SIG
NIN
G &
S
TR
IP
IN
G P
LA
N
10/10/12
8
HE
AR
ST
A
VE
NU
E S
TR
EE
TS
CA
PE
SF11-0600
SIG
NIN
G &
S
TR
IP
IN
G P
LA
N
10/10/12
8
HE
AR
ST
A
VE
NU
E S
TR
EE
TS
CA
PE
SF11-0600
SIG
NIN
G &
S
TR
IP
IN
G P
LA
N
10/10/12
8
HE
AR
ST
A
VE
NU
E S
TR
EE
TS
CA
PE
SF11-0600
SIG
NIN
G &
S
TR
IP
IN
G P
LA
N
10/10/12
8
HE
AR
ST
A
VE
NU
E S
TR
EE
TS
CA
PE
SF11-0600
APPENDIX B: COST ESTIMATES
SHEET 1 OF 1
DATE November 15, 2012
LOCATION Segment 1
Project No. SF11-0600
QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT
Demolition
Remove Thermoplastic Lane Striping 1,590 LF $1.00 $1,590.00
Remove Thermoplastic Pavement Legends 20 SF $3.00 $60.00
Paving
Slurry-Seal 31,320 SF $2.00 $62,640.00
Asphalt 2.3 TON $220.00 $506.00
Concrete Curb and Gutter (Curb Extensions) 160 LF $44.00 $7,040.00
Concrete Curb (Medians, Median Tips) 405 LF $34.00 $13,770.00
Concrete Sidewalk (Curb Extensions) 800 SF $10.00 $8,000.00
Green Pavement (Bike Box & Conflict Zone) 730 SF $15.00 $10,950.00
New Accessible Ramp (Case E) 4 EA $3,500.00 $14,000.00
Upgrade Accessible Ramp 6 EA $3,500.00 $21,000.00
Relocate Storm Drain 1 EA $10,000.00 $10,000.00
Landscaping
Median Landscaping 3,400 SF $8.00 $27,200.00
Striping and Signing
Yellow Center Lines 385 LF $3.70 $1,424.50
12" Thermoplastic Advanced Stop Bar 130 LF $4.60 $598.00
Bicycle Lane Striping 1470 LF $3.70 $5,439.00
Bicycle Lane Pavement Legends 110 SF $4.70 $517.00
8' Turn Arrow 30 SF $4.70 $141.00
Lane Line 230 LF $3.70 $851.00
4" Solid Edgeline 75 LF $3.70 $277.50
Advanced Yield Markings 40 SF $4.70 $188.00
Crosswalk Striping 620 LF $4.60 $2,852.00
New Sign and Steel Post 6 EA $700.00 $4,200.00
New Sign on Existing Post 1 EA $500.00 $500.00
Pedestrian Barricade on Existing Sidewalk (Walnut) 1 EA $650.00 $650.00
Lighting and Traffic Signal
Install AC-Powered Rectangular Rapid-Flashing Beacons (RRFBs) 1 EA $27,000.00 $27,000.00
Emergency Vehicle Detection 1 EA $12,500.00 $12,500.00
Video Detection 1 EA $20,000.00 $20,000.00
SUB-TOTAL : $253,894.00
Traffic Control (5%) $12,694.70
Construction Management (5%) $12,694.70
Mobilization (5%) $12,694.70
$291,978.10
$58,395.62
TOTAL CONSTRUCTION: $350,373.72
Design and Environmental: 15% $52,556.06
Estimated by : RJM/CN $402,929.78TOTAL ESTIMATE :
CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATESegment 1: Hearst Avenue between Shattuck and Oxford
Notes : TOTAL :
20% CONTINGENCIES :
SHEET 1 OF 1
DATE November 15, 2012
LOCATION Segment 2
Project No. SF11-0600
QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT
Demolition
Remove Lane Striping 1,360 LF $1.00 $1,360.00
Remove Pavement Legends 180 SF $3.00 $540.00
Remove Curb 80 LF $10.00 $800.00
Clear and Grub 320 SF $2.00 $640.00
Paving
Slurry-Seal 45,070 SF $2.00 $90,140.00
Asphalt 5.4 TON $220.00 $1,188.00
Concrete Curb and Gutter 470 LF $44.00 $20,680.00
Concrete Curb (Median) 1,003 LF $34.00 $34,102.00
Concrete Sidewalk 3,970 SF $10.00 $39,700.00
Green Pavement (Bus Stop Conflict Zone, Bike Box, Green Conflict Zone at Oxford) 1,850 SF $15.00 $27,750.00
New Accessible Ramp (Case E) 8 EA $3,500.00 $28,000.00
Upgrade Accessible Ramp 3 EA $3,500.00 $10,500.00
Landscaping
Median Landscaping 3,300 SF $8.00 $26,400.00
Striping and Signing
12" Thermoplastic Advanced Stop Bar (Oxford, Arch/Le Conte) 90 LF $4.60 $414.00
Bicycle Lane Striping 1,360 LF $3.70 $5,032.00
Bicycle Lane Pavement Legend 170 EA $4.70 $799.00
Yellow Center Lines 150 LF $3.70 $555.00
4" Solid Edgeline 190 LF $3.70 $703.00
Lane Line 325 LF $3.70 $1,202.50
8' Turn Arrow 90 SF $4.70 $423.00
13' Arrow 30 SF $4.70 $141.00
Sharrow Legend 10 SF $4.70 $47.00
Crosswalk Striping 470 LF $4.60 $2,162.00
Paint Curb 220 LF $2.70 $594.00
Bicycle Loop Detector Pavement Legend 20 SF $4.70 $94.00
Remove and Salvage Signs and Steel Posts 5 EA $150.00 $750.00
Relocate Existing Sign Panel and Post 1 EA $160.00 $160.00
New Sign and Steel Post 4 EA $700.00 $2,800.00
New Sign on Existing Post 4 EA $500.00 $2,000.00
Pedestrian Barricade on Existing Sidewalk (Spruce) 1 EA $650.00 $650.00
Pedestrian Barricade on New Sidewalk (Le Conte) 1 EA $925.00 $925.00
Lighting and Traffic Signal
Signal Modification 1 EA $75,000.00 $75,000.00
Install AC-Powered Recantgular Rapid-Flashing Beacons (RRFBs), including device in median 1 EA $33,000.00 $33,000.00
Install Pedestrian Push Button 1 EA $450.00 $450.00
Emergency Vehicle Detection 1 EA $12,500.00 $12,500.00
Video Detection 1 EA $20,000.00 $20,000.00
SUB-TOTAL : $442,201.50
Traffic Control (5%) $22,110.08
Construction Management (5%) $22,110.08
Mobilization (5%) $22,110.08
$508,531.73
$101,706.35
TOTAL CONSTRUCTION: $610,238.07
Design and Environmental: 15% $91,535.71
Estimated by : RJM/CN $701,773.78TOTAL ESTIMATE :
20% CONTINGENCIES :
CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATESegment 2: Hearst Avenue between Oxford and Arch/Le Conte
Notes : TOTAL :
SHEET 1 OF 1
DATE November 15, 2012
LOCATION Segment 3
Project No. SF11-0600
QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT
Demolition
Remove Lane Striping 2060 LF $1.00 $2,060.00
Remove Pavement Legends 100 SF $3.00 $300.00
Paving
Slurry-Seal 43,510 SF $2.00 $87,020.00
Asphalt 4.6 TON $220.00 $1,012.00
Concrete Curb and Gutter (Curb Extensions, New Sidewalk) 1,260 LF $44.00 $55,440.00
Concrete Sidewalk (Curb Extensions, New Sidewalk) 7,190 SF $10.00 $71,900.00
New Accessible Ramp (Case E) 2 EA $3,500.00 $7,000.00
Upgrade Accessible Ramp 4 EA $3,500.00 $14,000.00
Green Pavement (Conflict Zones, Green-Backed Sharrows, EB Bike Lane) 1,200 SF $15.00 $18,000.00
Striping and Signing
Yellow Center Lines 340 LF $3.70 $1,258.00
Lane Line 60 LF $2.70 $162.00
4" Solid Edgeline 500 LF $3.70 $1,850.00
12" Thermoplastic Advanced Stop Bar 60 LF $4.60 $276.00
Crosswalk Striping 300 LF $4.60 $1,380.00
Bicycle Lane Striping (including Striped Buffer) 2,050 LF $3.70 $7,585.00
Bicycle Lane Pavement Legend 40 SF $4.70 $188.00
Bicycle Loop Detector Pavement Legend 20 SF $4.70 $94.00
Sharrow Legend 170 SF $4.70 $799.00
Paint Curb 1,260 LF $2.70 $3,402.00
New Sign and Steel Post 18 EA $700.00 $12,600.00
Remove and Salvage Signs and Steel Posts 8 EA $150.00 $1,200.00
Relocate Existing Sign and Steel Posts 3 EA $160.00 $480.00
New Sign on Existing Post 9 EA $500.00 $4,500.00
Lighting and Traffic Signal
Signal Modification 1 EA $100,000.00 $100,000.00
Pedestrian Scale Lighting 1,000 LF $150.00 $150,000.00
Transit Signal Priority and Emergency Vehicle Detection 1 EA $8,500.00 $8,500.00
Video Detection 1 EA $20,000.00 $20,000.00
SUB-TOTAL : $571,006.00
Traffic Control (5%) $28,550.30
Construction Management (5%) $28,550.30
Mobilization (5%) $28,550.30
$656,656.90
$131,331.38
TOTAL CONSTRUCTION: $787,988.28
Design and Environmental: 15% $118,198.24
Estimated by : RJM/CN $906,186.52TOTAL ESTIMATE :
CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATESegment 3: Hearst Avenue between Arch/Le Conte and Euclid
Notes : TOTAL :
20% CONTINGENCIES :
SHEET 1 OF 1
DATE November 15, 2012
LOCATION Segment 4
Project No. SF11-0600
QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT
Demolition
Remove Pavement Legend 25 SF $3.00 $75.00
Paving
Slurry-Seal 41,910 SF $2.00 $83,820.00
Asphalt 1.4 TON $220.00 $308.00
Concrete Curb and Gutter (Curb Extensions) 390 LF $44.00 $17,160.00
Concrete Sidewalk (Curb Extensions) 3,090 SF $10.00 $30,900.00
Drainage 1 EA $25,000.00 $25,000.00
Accomodate Man-Hole At-Grade 1 EA $750.00 $750.00
Accessible Ramp (Case E) 8 EA $3,500.00 $28,000.00
Upgrade Accessible Ramp 3 EA $3,500.00 $10,500.00
Striping and Signing
Yellow Center Lines 1070 LF $3.70 $3,959.00
Lane Line 100 LF $4.60 $460.00
12" Thermoplastic Advanced Stop Bar 121 LF $4.60 $556.60
4" Solid Edgeline 484 LF $3.70 $1,790.80
Crosswalk Striping 720 LF $4.60 $3,312.00
Sharrow Pavement Legends 196 SF $4.70 $921.20
Bicycle Loop Detector Pavement Legend 40 SF $4.70 $188.00
Paint Curb 100 LF $2.70 $270.00
New Sign and Steel Post 8 EA $700.00 $5,600.00
Relocate Sign and Steel Post 1 EA $160.00 $160.00
Remove and Salvage Existing Sign and Steel Post 3 EA $150.00 $450.00
Lighting and Traffic Signal
Install Traffic Signal at LeRoy 1 EA $160,000.00 $160,000.00
Replace Signal at Gayley and Add Eastbound Right Flashing Yellow/Red Arrow Signal 1 EA $160,000.00 $160,000.00
Solar-Powered Speed Feedback Sign and Steel Post 1 EA $10,000.00 $10,000.00
SUB-TOTAL : $551,180.60
Traffic Control (5%) $27,559.03
Construction Management (5%) $27,559.03
Mobilization (5%) $27,559.03
$633,857.69
$126,771.54
TOTAL CONSTRUCTION: $760,629.23
Design and Environmental: 15% $114,094.38
Estimated by : RJM/CN $874,723.61TOTAL ESTIMATE :
CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATESegment 4: Hearst Avenue between Euclid and Gayley/La Loma
Notes : TOTAL :
20% CONTINGENCIES :
APPENDIX C: SUPPORTING TRAFFIC ANALYSIS
332 Pine Street, 4th Floor, San Francisco, CA 94104 (415) 348-0300 Fax (415) 773-1790 www.fehrandpeers.com
MEMORANDUM
Date: March 14, 2012 To: Billy Riggs, UC Berkeley From: Matt Goyne, Brooke DuBose and Rob Rees, Fehr & Peers
Subject: Hearst Avenue Corridor: Vehicle Traffic Operations
SF11-0600
Traffic operations were evaluated at six intersections along Hearst Avenue, between Shattuck Avenue and La Loma Avenue/Gayley Road. Traffic operations at intersections are typically described in terms of “Level of Service” (LOS). LOS is a qualitative measure of the effect of several factors on traffic operating conditions, including speed, travel time, traffic interruptions, freedom to maneuver, safety, driving comfort, and convenience. It is generally measured quantitatively in terms of vehicular delay and described using a scale that ranges from LOS A to F, with LOS A representing essentially free-flow conditions and LOS F indicating over-capacity conditions with substantial congestion and delay. The appendix in the final study report will contain additional information regarding the use of LOS in peak hour intersection analysis. Fehr & Peers can provide this information now, if requested.
For this study, the intersection peak hour operational analysis was conducted using the Synchro/SimTraffic software package. The intersection analysis was conducted using Synchro, while SimTraffic was used to visually confirm operating and queuing conditions along the corridor. SimTraffic provides a microsimulation of vehicular traffic, capturing the variations in the nature of driver behavior and modeling the interaction between vehicles within the roadway network. More information on Synchro and SimTraffic and the development and calibration of the SimTraffic model will be included in the report appendices.
EXISTING CONDITIONS
During the development of the existing Synchro traffic analysis model, the following assumptions were made to ensure the Synchro/SimTraffic model was calibrated to match existing operations along the corridor:
Traffic volumes were balanced between study intersections for use in SimTraffic.
Hearst Avenue Corridor Study March 14, 2012 Page 2 of 4
During the PM peak hour, the existing pedestrian volumes at the intersection of Hearst Avenue / Le Roy Avenue cause excessive vehicle delay and queuing at this intersection in Synchro/SimTraffic, which does not match observations in the field of minor queuing and delay. The cause of these mismatched results in the Synchro/SimTraffic model is due to the assumption that pedestrians will arrive randomly and consistently throughout the peak hour, rather than in groups between classes. Therefore, pedestrian volumes were adjusted until the overall vehicle operations matched field observations. The proposed road diet is not likely to affect operations at this intersection.
Based on this calibrated Synchro model, the LOS was calculated at each of the six study intersection for the weekday AM and PM peak hours (the final study report will include the detailed level of service calculations). Table 1 lists the resulting level of service and corresponding delay at each study intersection. Under existing conditions, there is minimal congestion along the Hearst Avenue corridor during the AM and PM peak hours. All of the study intersections operate at LOS C or better during both peak hours. The SimTraffic model matched observations in the field of minimal queuing between intersections during the peak hours.
TABLE 1 HEARST AVENUE INTERSECTION LOS
Intersection Traffic Control
Peak HourExisting
Existing Plus Full Road Diet
Delay1 LOS Delay LOS
1. Hearst Avenue / Shattuck Avenue Signal AM PM
15 15
B B
16 16
B B
2. Hearst Avenue / Oxford Street Signal AM PM
12 14
B B
19 17
B B
3. Hearst Avenue / Le Conte Avenue / Arch Street2
Signal AM PM
10 14
B B
12 19
B B
4. Hearst Avenue / Euclid Avenue Signal AM PM
17 24
B C
19 23
B C
5. Hearst Avenue / Le Roy Avenue SSS AM PM
18 14
C B
18 14
C B
6. Hearst Avenue / La Loma Avenue / Gayley Avenue
Signal AM PM
< 10 12
A B
< 10 14
A B
Notes: SSS = Side-Street Stop-Controlled intersection. Results presented are from Synchro. A SimTraffic model was developed forinformational purposes only.
1. Delay shown is average delay in seconds per vehicle.
2. The road diet results assume that the PM peak hour signal timings would be modified at this intersection to give more green time to the westbound approach.
Source: Fehr & Peers, 2012
Hearst Avenue Corridor Study March 14, 2012 Page 3 of 4
PROPOSED ROAD DIET SCENARIO CONDITIONS
The Hearst Avenue Corridor Study alternatives include a proposal to reduce the number of vehicle travel lanes, also known as a “road diet”, between Shattuck and Euclid Avenue. As shown in Table 1, vehicle traffic along the corridor would continue to operate acceptably with the proposed road diet in place. However, the Synchro model does not account for the effects of queue interactions between adjacent intersections. When queues extend between adjacent intersections, the likelihood of congestion and unacceptable (LOS F) traffic operations along a corridor increases dramatically. Therefore, SimTraffic was tested iteratively to determine what road diet configuration would be required to minimize queues on Hearst Avenue from extending between study intersections. Based on the SimTraffic analysis of the road diet alternative, Fehr & Peers recommends the following treatments so that vehicle queues do not extend past adjacent intersections along the Hearst Avenue corridor:
Retain the existing turn pockets at all approaches. The 100 foot eastbound left turn pocket at Arch Street / Le Conte Avenue should be extended by approximately 50 feet to 150 feet to prevent eastbound queues from extending to Oxford Street. Retain two westbound lanes on Hearst Avenue between Spruce and Oxford Street. Modify the approach to include one dedicated left turn lane and one through-right lane. Either of the following treatments to minimize westbound congestion and queues at the intersection of Arch Street / Le Conte Avenue:
o Modify signal timings during the PM peak hour to reallocate additional green
time to the westbound approach. o Maintain two lanes on the westbound approach, extending back approximately
200 feet. This would also require two westbound lanes between Arch Street and Oxford Street.
Modify the signal timing at Oxford Street to reallocate additional time to the eastbound approach during the AM peak hour Modifications to pedestrian signal timings:
o Signal timings should be based on the updated MUTCD standard for a walking
speed of 3.5 feet per second, compared to the 4.0-4.5 feet per second that the signals are currently timed for. The road diet analysis assumes 3.5 feet per second.
o Since the roadway and cross section configurations are currently being evaluated in the Hearst Corridor Study, the pedestrian crossing distances were reduced by 10 feet from the existing roadway width to account for the proposed removal of vehicle travel lanes which may be replaced by a median or curb extensions. This calculation can be adjusted as the preferred alternative design is further refined.
Hearst Avenue Corridor Study March 14, 2012 Page 4 of 4
With these treatments and adjustments included in the proposed road diet scenario, queues would not extend back to block upstream intersections. The primary constraint for traffic operations with the proposed road diet is at Oxford Street and Arch Street / Le Conte Avenue, in the westbound direction during the AM peak hour and in the eastbound direction during the PM peak hour. Although the recommendations above would reduce congestion and queues, some minor queuing between intersections would continue to occur. These queues are shown in Figure 1 and are described below:
During the AM peak hour, maximum westbound queues would extend from Arch Street / Le Conte Avenue to in between Spruce Street and Oxford, and from Oxford Street to between Walnut Street and Shattuck Street. These queues would only occur during the peak 15 minutes, and in general would clear within one cycle period and therefore not cause unacceptable levels of delay. During the PM peak hour, maximum eastbound queues would extend from Arch Street / Le Conte Avenue to Scenic Avenue. These queues would only occur during the peak 15 minutes, and in general would clear within one cycle period and therefore not cause unacceptable levels of delay.
Peak
Hou
r Que
ues
AM Q
ueue
sAv
erag
eM
ax
PM Q
ueue
sN
ote:
Q
ueue
s ar
e ba
sed
on
prel
imin
ary
Sim
Traf
fic
anal
ysis
runs
. I
n ge
nera
l, ob
serv
ed q
ueue
s cle
ared
w
ithin
one
sig
nal
cycle
and
did
not
ext
end
to a
ffect
up
stre
am in
ters
ectio
ns.
Max
que
ues
occu
r onl
y du
ring
the
peak
15
min
utes
of t
raffi
c.
OXFORD STREET
WALNUT STREET
SPRUCE STREET
LE CONTE
AVENUE
ARCH STREET
EUCLID AVENUE
SCENIC AVENUE
LE ROY AVENUE
LA LOMA AVENUE
GAYLEY ROAD
SHATTUCK AVENUE
UN
IVER
SITY
AVE
NU
E
SF11
-060
0
N
NO
T TO
SCA
LE
LOCA
TIO
NS
OF
PEA
K H
OU
R Q
UEU
ES W
ITH
FEH
R &
PEE
RS R
ECO
MM
END
ED R
OA
D D
IET
FRO
M S
HAT
TUCK
AV
ENU
E TO
ARC
H S
TREE
T
APPENDIX D: CROSSWALK TOOL DOCUMENTATION
APPENDIX D: PEDESTRIAN SAFETY ANALYSIS
Appendix D explains the methodology and rationale behind Fehr & Peers Crosswalk Tool, which
was used to identify potential treatments for existing unsignalized crosswalk on the Hearst
Avenue corridor. The recommended intersection improvements include considerations such as:
Best Practices at uncontrolled intersections and mid-block locations
Demand considerations
Stopping sight distances
Signal warrants
Based on research from the National Cooperative Highway Research Program and Federal Highway Administration, a crosswalk treatment identification tool was used to identify appropriate crossing treatments for the Hearst Avenue corridor. The tool used inputs from recent multi-modal traffic counts and fieldwork, including pedestrian and vehicle volumes, number of lanes, posted speed, and average daily traffic, to provide candidate crosswalk treatments at the intersections at Walnut Street, Spruce Street, and LeRoy Avenue.
Best Practices at uncontrolled intersections and mid-block locations
The following is the recommended or best practice for pedestrian treatments at uncontrolled
intersections and mid-block locations.1
Crossings should be marked where all of the following occur:
Sufficient demand exists to justify the installation of a crosswalk (see Demand
Considerations below)
The location has sufficient sight and/or sight distance will be improved prior to crosswalk
marking
Safety considerations do not preclude a crosswalk
Demand Considerations
Uncontrolled and mid-block crossings should be identified as a candidate for marking if there is a
demonstrated need for a crosswalk. Need can be demonstrated by any of the following:
1 The most common crosswalk of this type will be at intersections where a minor side street is stop controlled and a
major street is uncontrolled.
Location near existing or proposed pedestrian generators (such as a school or park)
Existing pedestrian volumes
Pedestrian-vehicle collisions at this location (over several years)
Location of nearest (adequately) marked or controlled crosswalk
Citizen surveys, requests, walking audits, etc.
Demand considerations at along Hearst Avenue include major pedestrian routes and volumes
between academic buildings and commercial areas. Based on the results of Chart 1 shown on the
following page, the Crosswalk Tool was used at each uncontrolled crosswalk within the study area.
The Crosswalk Tool follows a two-step process to determine a “match” for the study location
characteristics. The first step is to determine if the pedestrian and vehicle volumes meet the
signal warrant requirements to install a pedestrian signal. If this warrant is met, the tool will
recommend a signal. If the warrant is not met, the tool recommends one or more less “intense”
treatments, as described below.
Level 1 Treatments:
High Visibility Crosswalk Markings, Advance Yield Lines, Advance Signage
Level 2 Treatments:
Curb Extensions, Bus Bulb, Reduced Curb Radii, Staggered Pedestrian Refuge
Level 3 Treatments:
In-pavement Flashers, Overhead Flashing Beacons (two-lane roads)
Stutter Flash (multi-lane roads)
Level 4 Treatments:
HAWK, Stutter Flash, or Direct Pedestrians to Nearest Safe Crossing
Treatments are selected within each level based on the characteristics of the location (presence of bicycle lanes, transit, etc.). For higher levels of treatments, combinations of treatments across levels (such as a HAWK signal with curb extensions) may be appropriate. These combinations should be determined based on site feasibility and engineering judgment.
Chart 1: Feasibility Analysis for Treatments at Uncontrolled Locations
Note: Where no engineering action is recommended in Chart 1, consider applicable education and enforcement efforts.
20 pedestrians
per hour (15
elderly and/or
children) or 60
in 4 hours cross
at location and
ADT 1500 vpd
Location is near
an existing or
proposed park,
school, hospital
or other major
pedestrian
generator/
attractor
Citizen surveys or
walkability audits
overwhelmingly
suggest the need
No action
recommended
Nearest
appropriately
marked or protected
crosswalk is at least
300 feet away
YES
YES
Pedestrians can be easily
seen from a distance 10x
the speed limit or 250
feet
40 pedestrians per
hour (30 elderly
and/or children)
or 120 in 4 hours
cross at location*
YES
NO
Pedestrian
injuries or
fatalities have
occurred at this
location in the
past 5 years
YES YES
Is it feasible
to remove
sight distance
obstruction
or lower
speed limit?
Direct pedestrians
to the nearest
marked crosswalk
or consider
installing signal or
grade separation
NOinfeasible
Use Crosswalk
Treatment
Identification Tool
and Engineering
YES
Direct pedestrians
to the nearest
marked or
protected
crosswalk
NO
YES
feasible
optional
* Consider lowering the volume requirements in rural
locations or to meet local ranges for pedestrian volumes
