Presentation on theme: "Updating Boulder’s work zone traffic control guidelines Marni Ratzel Bicycle & Pedestrian Transportation Planner GO Boulder/city of Boulder."— Presentation transcript:
Updating Boulder’s work zone traffic control guidelines Marni Ratzel Bicycle & Pedestrian Transportation Planner GO Boulder/city of Boulder
2 GO Boulder >Make it easier to get around town by… >Providing “Great Options” in transportation.
3 Pedestrian detour?
4 Bikeway detour?
5 Presentation overview >About Boulder >Update process >Case study examples >Draft policies >Progress on practices
6 About Boulder
7 >101,500 people >25 square miles >County seat >Home of CU-Boulder serving 29,000 students >Gateway community to the Rocky Mountains
8 Biking System >On-street lanes miles* 175 built 69 more proposed *Includes bike shoulders >95% of arterial streets have bike facilities
9 Boulder’s Greenway System >a series of corridors along Boulder Creek and six of its tributaries
10 Biking System >Multi-use path miles 111 built 66 more proposed >Underpasses 74 built 53 more proposed >Bike rack on all buses
11 On-Street bike facilities
12 Mode share
13 Bikeway detour?
14 Updating Boulder’s WATCaSH Work Area Traffic Control and Safety Handbook
15 >Adopted in 1980 >Outdated >Policy but not practice
16 Involve stakeholders >Interdepartmental work group >Transportation Advisory Board >Barricade companies and contractors >Bicycling and walking organizations and individuals
17 Next generation document Update process >Address all modes >Clear expectations >Codified into code >Supplement MUTCD
18 Traffic Engineering Responsibilities Boulder Revised Code 1)The standards of the traffic engineering profession and of the state and federal governments; 2)Public safety; 3)The most efficient use of the streets and city parking areas; and 4)The costs involved.
19 WATCaSH Update Goals >Assure public safety >Protect system integrity and travel mobility of all >Achieve balance among often competing impacts: environmental, financial and social impacts
20 Interdepartmental Work Group >Planning & Development Services >Transportation and Utilities Project Management, >Transportation and Utilities Maintenance, >and Communications
21 Key issues: operations >When is it acceptable or necessary to close public ROW? >When a facility is closed, how should that closure be handled? >What factors should be considered? >Would policies for closing a sidewalk be different than for closing a multi- use path or bike lane/vehicular lane?
22 Key issues: authorization >What role does transportation operations / planning staff have in making decisions about closures? Review all public ROW closures or Grant authorization to project manager/right-of-way inspector? >Do we charge fee for closures?
23 Key issues: other >Non-standard signing City obligated to furnish Liability >Communication Requirements for advance notice On site accountability
24 Key factors of work zone impacts >Duration and time >Scope and size >Type of facility impacted >Type and amount of each mode impacted
25 Case Study Examples
26 When are differing levels of impact reasonable in interest of … 1.Safety, efficiency and mobility for all modes of travel in the public right of way; and 2.Financial costs involved with projects and their related work zone traffic control
27 Carnegie between Baylor and Yale Carnegie impacts: >Sidewalk closure >Three to 10 days >Pedestrians detoured to other sidewalk sidewalk closure = detour = Example: sidewalk repair program 27
28 The Peloton Arapahoe impacts: >North side multi- use path closed for several months >Temporary path provided through site during construction path closure = path detour = Example: redevelopment project
29 Example: 2008 CIP project 29 N. Broadway bike lane project >Phase II impacts: >(Linden – Norwood) >East side multi-use path closed >NB outside travel lane closed to motorists & barricaded for path detour Path closure = Lane closure = detour =
30 Draft policies
31 Hierarchy of closures Standard closures >Closures that occur between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m. >Gives implied authorization from traffic engineer >Includes some vehicular lane, sidewalk and bike lane closures.
32 Standard closure: vehicular lane >Closure of one lane, where at least one other lane for that direction or movement will remain open; or >A short-term closure –20 minutes or less; or >A rolling closure –generally stopped at a single location for 20 minutes or less.
33 Standard closure: sidewalk >A sidewalk adjacent to a roadway that is classified as a “Local” roadway; and >Not within the CAGID or UHGID boundary areas; and >The closure is to occur for one week or less; and >Not the only sidewalk adjacent to the roadway. >Doesn’t require pedestrians to detour to a sidewalk on a separate, parallel roadway.
34 Standard closure: bike lane >A bicycle lane upon a roadway that is classified as local or collector roadway; and >Closure is handled using the city of Boulder Method for Handling Traffic (MHT) for bicycle lane closures policy.
35 Hierarchy of closures Non-standard closures >Any closure not defined as a “standard” closure in Section 5-a is defined as a “non-standard” closure. >Authorization requires review from Traffic Engineer and agreement on the method of handling impacts. >Non-standard closures include but are not limited to the following types of facility closures…
36 Non-standard closure: vehicular lane >Any lane closure during any time of day outside of the 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. time period; or >Any multiple lane closure; or >Any closure that requires a flagging operation; >Any closure that detours traffic to another roadway
37 Non-standard closure: sidewalk >Any sidewalk adjacent to a roadway classified as other than a “Local” roadway, >Any sidewalk within the CAGID or UHGID boundary areas, >Any sidewalk for the duration of more than 7 days. >Any sidewalk along a roadway where no other sidewalk is adjacent to the roadway. >Any sidewalk closure that will require pedestrians to detour to the sidewalk on a separate, parallel roadway.
38 Non-standard closure: bike lane >a bicycle lane upon a roadway classified as an arterial; >a contra-flow bicycle lane; >a bicycle lane which requires the bicycle traffic to detour to another roadway.
39 Non-standard closure: path >A multi-use path closure is never considered to be “standard”; >Detour plan required; >Detour onto a facility where bicyclists are not allowed to ride requires temporary designation as multi-use path; >Construction detour signing must be furnished and installed by the Project.
40 Detour options 1.Construct a temporary detour facility 2.Allocate a roadway lane as the detour facility 3.Detour to the other side of the street 4.Detour to another corridor
41 Closures requiring detours >Must develop and execute a detour sign and marking plan >Sidewalk and multi-use path detour signing must include but is not limited to MUTCD signing to: Inform users of facility closure Direct users at each decision point along the detour route to guide users around the closure, including “End Detour” signing.
44 Communication policies Notification: >The nature/purpose of the work; >The time and duration; >Anticipated impacts; >Detour routes, if any; and >Contact information
45 Other policies >Special events must adhere to guidelines >Emergency closures are exempt during mobilization only >Review fee structure for ROW permits
46 Progress on Practice
47 Detour designating a sidewalk as a multi-use path
48 Detour using roadway lane
49 Detour closing a wide shoulder
50 Thank you Please visit GOBoulder.net For more information, contact Marni Ratzel at email@example.com