STREETS, TRAFFIC and PARKING

1. STREETS, TRAFFIC and PARKING May 27, 2015

2. UPCOMING Ford MEETINGS Time and Location 7:00 – 8:30 p.m. at Gloria Dei Lutheran Church Stormwater& other infrastructure • June 23 (Tuesday) Jobs & Housing • July 22 (Wednesday) Future topics and dates in Fall 2015

3. agenda • 7:00 p.m. Welcome • 7:05 p.m. Remarks from Councilmember Tolbert • 7:10 p.m. From Vision to Priorities • 7:15 p.m. Priorities & Questions • 7:30 p.m. What Do You Think? - Topic Tables Input • 8:30 p.m. Adjourn

4. welcome “Any business only exists to make peoples’ lives better. At a certain point, shoving more vehicles into urban environments doesn’t do that.” Source: Bill Ford, Sept. 2014

5. Purpose of the topic meetings • Share information • Provide background • Identify choices and trade-offs • Clarify expectations • Seek input on priorities / questions • Use input to refine priorities • Prepare zoning and public realm plan Example only!

6. What informs this work? • Public Input • Professional Experience • MnDOT Design Standards • Transportation trends • Other, new mixed use developments Ford Site Phase I Report: 5 Scenarios (2007) St. Paul Street Design Manual (Draft) St. Paul Compre- hensive Plan (2008)

7. TRANSPORTATION principles • Interconnected system of streets, bikeways, and walkways that is safe and accessible for people of various ages and abilities. • Mix and density of activities to support transit through and around the site. • Urban design and site layout to reduce auto trips and manage traffic impacts.

8. residents who are opposed to new developments with increased density often cite fears of increased traffic and parking difficulties. Unfortunately, the reality is that low-density development patterns preclude transit options and force more people to drive. Trends & tradeoffs “Residents who are opposed to new developments with increased density often cite fears of increased traffic and parking difficulties. Unfortunately, the reality is that low-density development patterns preclude transit options and force more people to drive.” Source: Chicago Metro Agency for Planning

9. Trends & tradeoffs • Between 2001 and 2009, average annual car miles traveled per person declined: • 16-30 year olds = - 21% • 31-55 year olds = - 11% • 56 years and up = - 4% • Source: Federal Highway Administration (2011) • High school seniors with driver’s licenses: • 1996 = 85% • 2010 = 73% • …and dropping, data suggests • Source: AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety

10. Supply & demand “Design where cars are guests on the street.” Should this statement guide street design on the Ford site? Assumptions: If you build it, they will come; more infrastructure for cars increases car use Goal on Ford site is to accommodatecars,not to encourage them Questions: What do you think about the above assumptions? How should supply address demand on the Ford site?

11. Travel demand management Assumptions: • A mixed-use site in Highland is well suited to managing car trips using: • Transit • Walking & biking • Carpool • Car Share • Parking Management Source: Austin Chronicle Questions: • What do you think can help manage car trips within and through the Ford site area? • When designing a place that includes cars, what’s more important – driving convenience or neighborhood livability?

12. Traffic in highland today

13. Traffic in highland today Assumptions: • Average Daily Trips will increase with Ford site redevelopment • Some streets in Highland are more congested than others • Ford @ Cleveland: Heavy Volume Near capacity (particularly at rush hour) • Cretin: Medium volume Some capacity remains (direct link to and from I-94) • Montreal: Lower volume Additional capacity remains Question: • What do you think are the most and least congested areas and how might they be managed?

14. Alignment & connections Assumptions: • Cretin and Montreal seem to be logical connections to and through the site • Fewer connections will concentrate traffic onto a few streets; more connections will distribute traffic Questions: • What alignments do you suggest and why? • Do you favor more connections or fewer? Why?

15. Traffic impact studies Assumptions: • City will hire traffic modeling consultants to evaluate potential zoning and public realm plan in 2015 • Future master developer will be required (under State law) to do a full traffic impact study on the final proposed development plan Question: • What should be evaluated in the Traffic Modeling Study?

16. Street types Assumptions: • Street design affects which travel modes are in the public space and how it is utilized • Design Options: • Car lanes – how many and width • Medians or turn lanes – yes or no • Parking lanes – none, 1-sided, 2-sided • Bike lanes – yes or no; type and width • Boulevard – yes; style and width • Sidewalk – yes: width Question: • How should travel modes be prioritized and balanced using street design on the site?

17. Collector: thru-traffic • Access at intersections only • No street parking • Separated bike lanes • For thru-traffic • 84 foot ROW • 1-lane each direction • Central turn lane/median

18. Mixed use corridor – mixed • For local traffic on mixed-use blocks • 90 foot ROW • 1-lane each way • Mid-block access in rare circumstances • On-street parking • Separate bike lanes

19. Residential corridor - local 56 foot ROW • For local, residential traffic • 1-lane each direction • Central turn lane/median • No driveways • On-street parking • Separate bike lanes

20. Residential lane – local only • For local only traffic • 32 foot ROW • 1 wide, shared lane • Garage and front door access • On-street parking

21. Roundabouts & other forms Assumptions: • Roundabouts move traffic more efficiently through intersections, with fewer accidents • Design can slow traffic • Angled or curved streets • 2-way streets • Bump outs • Chicanes • Other? Question: What street design forms should be considered for the Ford site? Why?

22. Parking – type & location Assumptions: • Parking in ramps and small, rear surface lots will save space and provide a more attractive and walkable place • Types and Location of Parking • Driveways or alleys – rear, side or front • Private garages – rear, side or front • On Street – 1-sided or 2-sided • Parking lots – rear, side or front • Ramps -- stand alone, attached, above ground, below ground, or interior to building Questions: • How and where should parking be provided on the Ford site?

23. Parking - quantity Assumptions: • St. Paul has different parking requirements for uses and locations • Higher intensity uses require more parking • Locations with strong transit service require less parking (there is NO parking requirement on University Avenue) • Limited parking at the Ford site will help reduce car traffic Questions: • What types and quantity of parking are appropriate for the Ford site? • Are you concerned about spillover parking impacts near the site?

24. Parking – public/private; free/pay Assumptions: • People in the Midwest are used to convenient parking that is free to use • Parking is NOT “free”; someone pays to provide it • Parking has to be managed as a system: • Quantity • Location • Car share • Pay vs free Questions: • Who should provide parking at the Ford site and how should it be paid for?

25. Your Input – topic tables Input Tables: Background Info – Principles, Trends, and Trade-offs Supply & Demand Travel Demand Management Traffic in Highland today Alignment & Connection Priorities Traffic Impact Studies Street Types Roundabouts & other new forms Parking – Type, Location & Quantity Parking – Public-private, pay • How to engage: • Circulate among the tables • Consider the topic at each • Ask questions or chat with the table facilitator and others at the table • Provide input at each table -- notes; ‘dot’ voting; or drawing on the images

26. STAY CONNECTED http://www.stpaul.gov/open Open Saint Paul – provide Ford project input online www.stpaul.gov/21stCenturyCommunity Sign up for E-newsletters & Notifications www.facebook.com/cityofsaintpaul @cityofsaintpaul