2017 Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan
The City of Jacksonville's 2017 Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan offers a detailed strategy to improve safety, accessibility, and connectivity for pedestrians and cyclists across the city. The plan lays out a clear path to create a strong active transportation network, focusing on a prioritized system of bike facilities and pedestrian upgrades. It features an extensive list of impactful projects targeting key routes to enhance safety and ease of use.
Drawing on community input and data-driven methods, the plan works to improve walkability and bike-friendliness while supporting broader quality-of-life goals. It aims to make Jacksonville a more attractive place for residents and visitors who prefer active travel options. Among its key efforts are the citywide installation of rectangular rapid flashing beacons (RRFBs) at dangerous crossings—sped up by ordinances like 2018-189-E—and the adoption of a Vision Zero policy to eliminate all traffic fatalities.
The plan encourages teamwork with residents and stakeholders to address transportation challenges, including poor infrastructure and behavioral issues. It sets a ten-year timeline for completing hundreds of projects to fill gaps in the pedestrian and bike network. Adopted by the City Council in February 2019, the Master Plan represents a major move toward making Jacksonville one of Florida’s most walkable and bike-friendly cities.
Click here to download the 2017 Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan (pdf)
For questions, comments, and concerns, please contact JPDTransportation@coj.net
TEXT ONLY VERSION BELOW:
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
STAFF TEAM
Amy Ingles, City of Jacksonville, Planning and Development
Bill Killingsworth, City of Jacksonville, Planning and Development
Laurie Santana, City of Jacksonville, Planning and Development
Stephanie Zarkis, City of Jacksonville, Planning and Development
Nelson Caparas, City of Jacksonville, Public Works (former)
Denise Chaplick, City of Jacksonville (former)
PLAN STEERING COMMITTEE
Mark Atkins, North Florida Bicycle Club April Bacchus, ETM *Lori Boyer, City Council President Brian Burket, City of Jacksonville, Parks, Recreation &
Community Services
*Chris Burns, Jacksonville Bicycle & Pedestrian Advisory Committee Len Burroughs, North Florida Bicycle Club *Garf Cooper, RAP and ZenCog Bicycle Company Barry Cotter, Citizen Paul Davis, City of Jacksonville, Planning and Development Elizabeth de Jesus, North Florida Transportation Planning
Organization *Dimitri Demopoulos, Urban Core CPAC *Derek Dixon, Florida Department of Transportation *Jill Enz, City of Jacksonville, Parks, Recreation &
Community Services Jake Gordon, Downtown Vision, Inc. Robert Halstead, Citizen Shannon Hartley, City of Jacksonville, Sherriff s Office Haleigh Hutchison, Downtown Vision Inc. *Fred Jones, Jacksonville Transportation Authority
(formerly) Daryl Joseph, City of Jacksonville, Parks, Recreation & Community Services
Candy LeCompte, Citizen
Chris LeDew, Jacksonville Transportation Authority (formerly) *Steve Long, City of Jacksonville, Public Works Bernard Mazie, Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee Gary Miller, Nemours Colin Moore, City of Jacksonville, Finance and
Administration
*P.J. Napoli, City of Jacksonville, Sherriff s Office Kevin O Halloran, SPAR Council *Zak Ovadia, University of North Florida Guy Parola, City of Jacksonville, Downtown Investment
Authority *Christina Parrish, SPAR Council Don Redmond, Former Council Member Larry Roberts, JTC Running Club Vince Robinson, City of Jacksonville, Mayor s Office Katie Schoettler, Assistant to CM Scott Wilson *Jeff Sheffield, North Florida Transportation Planning
Organization Nicole Spradley, Assistant to CM Lori Boyer Lee Smith, City of Jacksonville, Sherriff s Office *Steve Tocknell, Groundworkers for the S-Line *Scott Wilson, City Council Member
(*denotes original invited members)
PREPARED BY
Ernie Boughman, Toole Design Group Andy Clarke, Toole Design Group Heather Deutsch, Toole Design Group Megan McCarty, Toole Design Group Galen Omerso, Toole Design Group Jess Zdeb, Toole Design Group Greg Kern, TranSystems Doug Lynch, TranSystems Matt McIntosh, TranSystems George Harlow, Baker Klein Chris Hite, Dix.Hite & Partners Kody Smith, Dix.Hite & Partners Jignshu Zhou, Dix.Hite & Partners Jenna Jakes, Baker Klein Victoria Pennington, MVP Marketing & Public Affairs Cantrece Jones, Acuity Design Group
ADDITIONAL THANKS
Special thanks to Open Road Bicycles for quality bike rentals and the North Florida Bicycle Club for the opportunity to ride with and meet the local bicycling community. Thanks also to the dozens of local residents who attended the four open house public meetings held as part of the planning process.
CONTENTS
1.
INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................... 7
Background............................................................................................................................................................................ 8
Goals .................................................................................................................................................................................... 10
2.
BACKGROUND.....................................................................................................................................14
Pedestrian and Bicycle Counts and Activity Levels ............................................................................................................ 18
Pedestrian and Bicycle Crashes ......................................................................................................................................... 20
Pedestrian and Bicycle Infrastructure.........................................................................................................................................24
Existing Plans and Guidelines......................................................................................................................................................27
3.
PROJECT APPROACH...........................................................................................................................30
Pedestrian Safety Action Plan Overview ............................................................................................................................ 32
Bikeway Network Improvements Overview..........................................................................................................................34
4.
PEDESTRIAN SAFETY ACTION PLAN .....................................................................................................35
Strategic Neighborhood Action Program for Pedestrians (SNAPP) .................................................................................... 37
Targeted Roadway Improvements for Pedestrian Safety (TRIPS).......................................................................................43
Installation of Rectangular Rapid Flash Beacons........................................................................................................................87
5.
BICYCLE NETWORK .............................................................................................................................98
Bicycle Network Recommendations. ................................................................................................................................ 100
Bicycle Network Prioritization .......................................................................................................................................... 104
6.
ROADMAP FOR CHANGE .................................................................................................................... 123
City Leadership. ................................................................................................................................................................ 124
Vision Zero ......................................................................................................................................................................... 126
Setting Standards for the Future ....................................................................................................................................... 128
Establishing Benchmarks and Performance Measures ..................................................................................................... 130
CONCLUSION ........................................................................................................................................ 131
INTRODUCTION
VISION STATEMENT
The City of Jacksonville Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan provides a roadmap for the transformation of Jacksonville into a city that is recognized as one of the most walkable and bike-friendly in the Southeast.
OVERVIEW
The City of Jacksonville has many of the necessary characteristics of walkable and bicycle-friendly
communities. The region is topographically flat
and enjoys weather that is conducive to walking and bicycling year-round. There are hundreds of miles of waterfront affording attractive views and popular social and recreational opportunities where people love to walk and ride. There are some older
neighborhoods, such as Springfield, Moncrief Park,
Riverside and Avondale, where the street and land use pattern makes active transportation modes relatively popular and convenient choices.
Jacksonville also has a sizeable population that is unable to drive because of age (22.4% of the population is age 14 or less), or for whom the costs of driving are
a significant economic burden (17.8% of individuals
live below the poverty line). This means that for many people, walking and biking is a necessity rather than a choice, especially in combination with transit services.
At the same time, Jacksonville has many of the characteristics that contribute to a less than safe, comfortable and convenient walking and bicycling experience. The City has developed with very low density suburban land use patterns dominated by a lot of multi-lane, high-speed roadways that offer few safe crossing points and limited access for people on foot or bike. There are many miles of streets and roadways in the City that have no sidewalks or sidewalks on just one side of the road. Where sidewalks do exist, they are often narrow, discontinuous and in a poor state of repair. There are very few dedicated facilities to accommodate bicyclists, leading many people on bikes to use the sidewalk, which is legal in the State of Florida.
The same waterways that provide terrific amenities also
create tremendous barriers for movement. Bridges are few and far between, especially over the larger bodies of water, and were frequently built without appropriate access for bicyclists and pedestrians. The city is also crisscrossed with major highways and busy rail corridors that create barriers to non-motorized travel.
The result of these factors is an alarmingly high number of fatal and serious roadway crashes,
particularly involving pedestrians. More than 100
people are killed on Jacksonville roadways each year (Figure 1), and between a quarter and a third of the victims are pedestrians or bicyclists mostly people on foot. Each life lost or affected by serious injury on the roadways of the City is a terrible tragedy for the victim and their friends and family.
JACKSONVILLE, FLA. TRAFFIC FATALITIES
ALL PEDESTRIAN % PEDESTRIAN BICYCLIST % BICYCLIST % NONMOTORIZED
2011 96 17 18% 5 5% 23%
2012 126 30 24% 8 6% 30%
2013 141 37 26% 7 5% 31%
2014 117 29 25% 1 1% 26%
2015 119 37 31% 2 2% 33%
Source: Signal 4, University of Florida
Figure 1. Traffic fatalities recorded in the City of Jacksonville 2011-2015. This shows a high percentage of non-motorized fatalities. Nationally, 16% of traffic fatalities are pedestrians or bicyclists.1
These crashes also impose a serious burden on
the resources of the City, and have a significant economic cost. The National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration estimates that the lifetime economic
cost to society for each traffic fatality in the United
States is $1.4 million, and each critically injured survivor costs society an average of $1 million2. (These costs include medical costs, property damage, lost productivity, congestion etc.)
In addition to the direct cost of crashes, Jacksonville has an image problem: a reputation as a dangerous place for walking and bicycling. Cities across the country are competing for an increasingly mobile workforce, and we know from demographic data, real
estate studies and directly from elected officials that quality of life, as defined by millennials 3 is driving the location decisions of individuals, families and
companies large and small. Walkability and bike-friendliness are critical components of quality of life and it is essential for Jacksonville to change the reality and perception of the city as a hostile environment for walking and bicycling.
Jacksonville needs a roadmap to quickly and effectively close the gap between the potential for bicycling and walking in the area and the reality of a dangerous, inconvenient and unattractive environment
for bicycling and walking today. The Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan is that roadmap.
The City of Jacksonville Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan should be the turning point; the moment when the City decided that an annual loss of 30-40
pedestrians and bicyclists on its roadways was simply unacceptable.
In order to be that turning point, the City of Jacksonville Pedestrian and Bicycle
GOALS
Master Plan embraces four goals. This Plan:
Creates a roadmap for the
City to follow to close the gap between reality and the potential for biking and walking;
Identifies short, medium
and long term safety
actions for the City;
Recommends specific
implementation strategies for addressing particular challenges and opportunities in Jacksonville; and
Establishes a series
of benchmarks and performance measures for the City to use in assessing progress over
the next five years.
GOAL 1: CREATE A ROADMAP FOR CHANGE
The City of Jacksonville Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan builds upon, rather than replaces, planning initiatives
that have already taken place at the local and regional
level. For example, the city developed a Bicycle Plan in 1999; the North Florida Transportation Planning Organization has a 2006 Trails Plan and a 2013 Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan that have already helped to identify key
non-motorized corridors and projects that need attention.
The Plan complements, rather than competes with,
ongoing work of agencies such as the Jacksonville Transportation Authority (JTA), Downtown Investment
Authority and Public Works Department. For example,
the JTA has been studying 14 key transit corridors for improvements that include pedestrian and bicycle
safety components as well as extensive public input;
this pedestrian and bicycle plan does not duplicate or
replicate the ongoing work of the JTA Mobility Works initiative. Equally, there are Capital Improvement Projects
and road resurfacing projects already scheduled that, with
only minor adjustments, can be a tremendous benefit to
addressing pedestrian and bicycle safety needs, for no extra cost.
The Plan recognizes numerous future development and
redevelopment opportunities in the city that can be used to deliver a more walkable and bike-friendly community
over time. The Plan identifies those opportunities and lays
out a process that will increase the likelihood that such development occurs with pedestrian and bicyclist safety to the fore. For example, as the downtown waterfront is redeveloped, it is essential that a trail or pathway be maintained for walking and bicycling and that access from that trail to key streets and bridges is enhanced as part of these larger redevelopment projects. (Chapter: Roadmap for Change)
That won t happen overnight or as part of one project
the Plan helps establish a process and a long term
vision for such infrastructure that informs each smaller development project along the way.
The Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan articulates a
series of guiding principles that establish the importance of dramatically improving the walking and bicycling environment in Jacksonville, to save lives and to ensure a bright and sustainable economic future for the community. These principles are relevant to the City, regional and state government as well as to developers, the business community and community groups throughout the city.
Similarly, the Plan is a clarion call for action in the face of
the terrible toll of death, injury and crashes on area roads. The death toll is just the tip of the iceberg: hidden beneath the surface is a level of fear and danger on Jacksonville
roads that stifles demand for active transportation, poorly
serves a population that has no choice but to walk or ride regardless of the conditions, and which provides little incentive for drivers, cyclists, or pedestrians to follow the rules or respect each other.
Public and stakeholder input into this plan provides a snapshot of conditions for bicycling and walking in 2017, together with a vision for the future. Most importantly, the Plan establishes the process by which the City moves
from today s reality toward the future goals and vision
of the community. Part of that process will be creating
mechanisms and tools by which the City can prioritize projects and programs to ensure progress and success.
Finally, the Plan offers a series of benchmarks and measures that define what success really means, and
to which the City can hold itself accountable. (Chapter: Roadmap for Change) Both the bicycle- and walk-friendly community programs at the national level identify the presence of performance measures and targets as critical indicators of success.
GOAL 2: IDENTIFY ACTION ITEMS
The Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan identifies
concrete actions that can be taken in the short, medium and long term for both walking (Chapter: Pedestrian Safety Action Plan) 4) and bicycling (Chapter: Bicyle Network). Many of those actions derive from
the assessment of existing conditions and public involvement activities completed as part of the
development of the Plan. Several recommendations
emerged that were exemplary of actions necessary on a city-wide scale, rather than just in the immediate plan study area.
The Plan did not set out to create or recreate
another long list of potential bicycling and walking
improvement projects. Rather, the Plan was designed
to identify a more data-driven prioritization process
for already identified needs and project lists (Chapter:
Roadmap for Change.). That prioritization process can be used citywide in the future.
The Plan also recognizes that while engineering issues
and solutions are critical in improving the environment for walking and bicycling in Jacksonville, there must be
a more holistic approach that identifies action items
and needs in the areas of education, enforcement, encouragement and evaluation. These areas of activity may not ultimately be the responsibility of the
Planning or Public Works Departments to implement,
but are essential complements to the work of those departments.
In summary, the Plan calls for:
Creation of a Strategic Neighborhood Action Plan for Pedestrians to systematically upgrade the pedestrian environment and improve accessibility and safety.
Implementation of Targeted Roadway Improvements
for Pedestrian Safety to address high crash
locations on streets that are typical of those found throughout the City.
Installation of at least 50 Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons in the next three years to improve safety and accessibility for vulnerable road users in targeted locations (based on demand and safety criteria).
Implementation of a prioritized City Bikeway Network.
Immediate action on a series of high priority projects that demonstrate the city s commitment to making Jacksonville more walkable and bike-friendly.
GOAL 3: DEVELOP SPECIFIC STRATEGIES
IN KEY AREAS
The Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan is a City of Jacksonville initiative, and identifies actions the
City can take to improve the safety, comfort and convenience of walking and biking. However, the
Plan also explicitly recognizes that numerous partner
agencies are critical participants in achieving the goals of the document.
The Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT), for example, owns and operates the major roadways
throughout the city. This network is a fraction of the overall roadway network in the City, but half of all pedestrian
and bicyclist fatalities in the city occur on state roads, as do one-third of all pedestrian and bicyclist crashes.
Moving forward, agencies such as FDOT, the
Jacksonville Transit Authority, and the development community (including the Downtown Investment Authority) will continue to have a profound impact on transportation and the built environment. It is essential that these agencies and organizations use the most current roadway design standards that prioritize pedestrian and bicyclist safety, and apply them consistently to their projects in the city.
Furthermore, these entities will create opportunities
to realize projects in the Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan that must be seized. For example, the
reconstruction of the I-95 Bridge over the St Johns River in downtown Jacksonville is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to improve walkability and bike-friendliness on both sides of the river, as well as on the bridge itself.
In summary, the Plan calls for:
Adoption of updated roadway design standards,
by all relevant agencies, to reflect the most current
bikeway and pedestrian design standards applicable to urban roadways.
Implementation of a comprehensive facility planning and design training program that is delivered to engineers, planners and landscape architects (urban designers) working for all area public agencies (FDOT, COJ, JTA, NFTPO, DIA) as well as the consultant community.
A twice yearly, high-level, inter-agency implementation meeting to coordinate plans, projects and programs to maximize the effective use of funding to implement the Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan. Agencies should include COJ, JTA, FDOT and NFTPO.
Increased funding levels for implementation of pedestrian and bicycle projects in the City.
GOAL 4: ESTABLISH BENCHMARKS AND PERFORMANCE MEASURES
The ultimate success of the Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan is quite simple. Did the Plan establish
meaningful, measurable targets that guided decisions
that resulted in fewer traffic fatalities and crashes and
more walking and bicycling in Jacksonville?
The Plan establishes two overarching goals that are to be met by 2030.
1.
Walking and bicycling should account for 10% of all trips (up from less than 2% in 2014)
2.
There should be no pedestrians or bicyclists killed or
seriously injured in traffic crashes (Vision Zero)
The Plan identifies the following
performance metrics that should be monitored and reported annually.
Annual number of pedestrian and bicyclist fatalities, serious injuries and crashes
- Signal4 database1
Participation in Walking and Bicycling in the City of Jacksonville
- City counts
- American Community Survey Journey to Work
Designation of Jacksonville in national benchmarking studies
- Bicycle-friendly Community program
- Walk-friendly Community program
1 Signal Four Analytics, University of Florida. http://s4.geoplan.ufl.edu/
- Dangerous by Design pedestrian danger index
Pedestrian and Bicycle-related Output
- Agency spending on pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure
- Miles of bikeway completed, connected
- Linear feet of sidewalk installed, repaired
- Number of RRFBs installed
- Number of curb ramps installed, repaired
- Number of intersection improvements for pedestrian and bicyclist safety
- Number of pedestrian and bicycle facility training course participants
- Percent of the Jacksonville population living within an area serviced by the SNAPP program.
Finally, implementation of the Master Plan should be
monitored and overseen by an interagency task force or committee, including representatives of stakeholder groups that meets at least quarterly. Initially, the Context Sensitive Streets Committee should perform this role.
EXISTING CONDITIONS
INTRODUCTION
The City of Jacksonville is a sprawling, suburban
community of some 850,000 people in Northeast
Florida and is very typical of many southeastern and Sun Belt cities in the United States in that it grew and
developed in the age of the automobile. In 1940, the population of Duval County was 210,143, of whom 173,065 lived in the then-separate City of Jacksonville. By 1960, the County population had more than doubled to 455,411, but only 28,000 of the 245,000 new
residents were in the City of Jacksonville.
The explosive growth of the County continued in the
1960 s and the City and County were consolidated in 1968. Since then, the near doubling of the County population from 1960 to the present day total of more than 850,000 has taken place almost exclusively
in those parts of the County that are outside the boundaries of the original City of Jacksonville. The timing of this growth means that the layout and physical infrastructure of the city [and larger region] is heavily auto-centric.
In recent remarks to the Center for American Progress,
U.S. Secretary of Transportation Anthony Foxx
confirmed that this pattern of development was very
typical in U.S. metropolitan areas, noting that while the interstate highway system and major roadways were built to connect our cities, instead of connecting us to
each other, highway decision-makers separated us.
Indeed, the City of Jacksonville has an extensive
network of major urban thoroughfares interstate
highways, urban expressways, high-speed arterial
roads that fall into this category. Roads such as
the Arlington Expressway, Beach Boulevard, and the
Martin Luther King Jr. Parkway connect dispersed, low
density and single-use residential, retail, commercial, military, and recreational areas, but they also starkly divide neighborhoods. Within those neighborhoods, the streets often follow a traditional suburban design with disconnected cul de sacs and curvilinear streets
channeling traffic onto ever-larger and busier collector
and arterial roadways.
Jacksonville is distinguished from many other communities around the country by some unique characteristics that intensify the impact of this traditional suburban and ex-urban growth pattern.
RAIL CORRIDORS
Because of the importance of the Port of Jacksonville
and the strategic location of the City on the eastern seaboard of the United States, Jacksonville has an extensive network of rail lines, many of which are still active. However, just like Interstate highways today,
these rail corridors also create significant barriers to
movement. The impact of this is demonstrated quite dramatically in much of North Jacksonville, which is now dealing with the consequences of both rail lines and highway corridors dividing neighborhoods and areas of the city.
WATERWAYS
Jacksonville is fortunate to have proximity to the ocean as well as to numerous rivers and bodies of water that serve a commercial as well as recreational purpose. However, these same rivers and estuaries also create
significant barriers to movement. There are only seven
road bridges across the St John s River in the City of Jacksonville, of which only two currently have any kind of pedestrian and/or bicycle accommodation. The numerous tributaries to the St John s River, notably the Ortega, Arlington, and Trout River systems, create similar constraints to connectivity and access, and
serve to concentrate traffic on a small number of
critical crossing points that are rarely conducive to safe walking and bicycling.
CONSOLIDATION
The consolidation of Duval County and the City of
Jacksonville in 1968 created what is now the 12th most
populous city in the United States with the greatest
land mass of any city in the lower 48 states. However, this means the city also has the 16th lowest population density of the 297 U.S. cities with a population of more than 100,000. While this can partly be explained by the
rural nature of parts of the city (e.g., to the South and North-east of Baldwin), these statistics also highlight the low-density, suburban development pattern of much of the community.
The result of this pattern of explosive growth in an era of suburban, auto-centric development is that conditions for bicycling and walking in the city of
Jacksonville are poor. Before the mid-1980 s, no thought was given to accommodating let alone encouraging walking and bicycling in the planning,
design, construction and operation of the region s transportation system or development pattern.
In 1984, state legislation required metropolitan areas to include bicycling and walking in the traffic circulation elements of their Comprehensive Plans. The City
of Jacksonville responded by appointing a Bicycle
Advisory Committee and in 1986 adopted their first Comprehensive Bikeways Plan. These early efforts
to include non-motorized or active transportation in roadway design and new development have been met with limited success, and now look quite dated.
Thirteen years later, in 1999, the City and First Coast
Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), now called the North Florida Transportation Planning Organization (NFTPO), collaborated to produce a Comprehensive Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan for the Duval County and portions of St Johns and Clay Counties and the MPO published a Regional Trails and Greenways Plan in 2006.
The growing awareness of the need to address
pedestrian and bicyclist safety and access led NFTPO
to adopt the North Florida Regional Bicycle and
Pedestrian Plan in 2013, in part to generate projects for the 2040 Long Range Transportation Plan, and
to identify several smaller sub-area pedestrian and bicycle plans that are now being completed. Other agencies, including the Jacksonville Transit Authority (JTA), Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT), and City of Jacksonville have ongoing planning activities that focus on walking and bicycling.
"We can't change everything about the past, but we can certainly work as hard as we can today to repair our infrastructure to make it the connective tissue it ought to be."
These initiatives have resulted in some modest improvements. The Baldwin Trail is a regionally
significant bicycling destination; the Riverwalk path is a popular running, walking and cycling route; new bike
lanes on San Jose Boulevard have been welcomed by the bicycling community, and the S Line is an important
first step in a greenway corridor running through the heart of the city. Many new and improved roadways in
the region do include sidewalks, crosswalks and bike lanes as a matter of routine.
However, everyday walking and cycling as a means of transportation and basic access to work, transit, shops, services, and recreation is still perilous and unappealing for the vast majority of residents. For those residents who don t have a choice but to walk and/or bike, conditions for these active travel modes (including in combination with transit) are less than
ideal as evidenced in part by the high number of
crashes involving pedestrians and bicyclists in the City.
Secretary Foxx went on to say in his remarks to the Center for American progress that We can t change everything about the past, but we can certainly work as hard as we can today to repair our infrastructure
to make it the connective tissue it ought to be. This
review of the existing conditions for walking and bicycling in Jacksonville is written very much in that spirit: moving forward, based on solid foundations, so that bicycling and walking can thrive in the future.
What We Know About Walking and Bicycling in Jacksonville
The scope of work for the City of Jacksonville Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan explicitly recognized many
of the unique challenges faced by the region. First, rather than attempt to study the entire City, the study
area was focused on four of the Mobility Zones used to develop and implement the Comprehensive Mobility Plan: Mobility Zones 7-10, generally speaking those areas within the confines of the I-295 beltway (Figure 2).
However, the recommendations generated by the plan will be applicable to the entire city.
Secondly, the Master Plan tasks were designed to document and in many cases establish a baseline
of key indicators related to walking and bicycling that were missing from previous planning initiatives. Thus, in addition to gathering public input from two public meetings, an on-line survey and an interactive Wikimap that allowed people to identify and comment on locations and issues of note, the study team was tasked with reviewing and documenting the following factors:
- Pedestrian and bicycling activity levels
- Crashes involving pedestrians and bicyclists
- Current infrastructure for walking and bicycling, including bicycle parking
- Existing and future plans, policies and programs for walking and bicycling (including those developed by relevant non-city agencies and organizations)
In each of the first three bullets, the TDG team was
asked to identify and implement an appropriate method of documenting the necessary information in focused areas within the larger study area. So, for example, no counts had ever been done to determine how many and where people walk and bicycle in Jacksonville.
The study team identified an appropriate counting methodology, tested it out in the field in ten locations,
and is making recommendations for an ongoing counting program based on the lessons learned in that task.
These tasks are summarized below, and a separate appendix on each of these topics has been prepared as part of the overall Existing Conditions report.
Figure 2. Map showing the boundaries of Mobility Zones 7-10, City of Jacksonville.
PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLING ACTIVITY LEVELS
In common with most cities in the United States, there is very little hard data about walking and bicycling activ ity in the City of Jacksonville. The U.S Census Bureau captures information about the mode of transportation for journeys to work in the annual American Community Survey, and the numbers for walking and bicycling in Jacksonville are low. Less than two percent of people commuting to work in the City report walking or bicy cling as their primary mode of transportation, and that
number has fallen since 2010.
This data, however, doesn t capture non-commuting
trips, which represent more than 80% of all trips today,
or even those commuting trips that are made partially by foot or bike but primarily by bus, e.g. people walking to the bus stop or biking to a park and ride facility.
These numbers are important because any attempt to gauge the relative safety of walking and bicycling must consider exposure, or the amount of walking and bicy cling in a community. Additionally, a lot of transporta tion planning and project development depends on the journey to work data rather than any broader measure of trip making.
The Jacksonville Transit Authority reports that in 2015 an average of 20,000 passengers per month boarded a
bus with a bicycle (on the front rack), which is approxi mately 2% of all passengers.
The study team was tasked with counting pedestrians and bicyclists in ten locations with a view to capturing some real numbers about the amount of activity in the community, and to recommend potential ways to estab lish a regular counting program that would enable the City to monitor progress from one year to the next.
The ten locations were identified from a matrix of
factors including known areas of high pedestrian and bicycle activity, high crash locations, and sites where sidewalk improvements were scheduled in the near future (Figure 3). A counting methodology developed
by the National Bicycle and Pedestrian Documentation Project was selected to guide the process. This method
is a consistent, tried and tested method that also facili tates comparisons with other communities as well as from year to year in Jacksonville.
The counts were carried out, by hand, in January and February. The results were consistent with expectations in that the downtown location had the highest levels of activity, and there was a higher bicycle count on the San Jose Blvd corridor than most other locations because of new bicycling infrastructure. In addition, there were several notable and more surprising outcomes.
a. While there were no locations with huge numbers of
Figure 3. Map showing the location of ten bicycle and pedestrian counts within the study area.
pedestrians and/or bicyclists, the counts confirmed
that at all locations there were always people on
foot and on bike using the streets and sidewalks
for transportation and recreation. This confirms
anecdotal observations that pedestrians and bicyclists are a continuous presence at intersections and along roadways throughout the study area.
b. A significant number of bicyclists were observed using the sidewalk rather than the roadway. Of the total 250 bicyclists observed during the counts, almost 150 were riding on the sidewalk. In two of the three locations where bicyclists were riding almost exclusively on the roadway, there were marked bicycle lanes on the roadway San Jose Boulevard and Hendricks Ave.
c. The counting process did not make it easy to document where and how pedestrians were crossing the street, and in particular if they were using a crosswalk if one exists. Most pedestrians were recorded on the sidewalk and in the crosswalk; anecdotal observations suggest that this isn t the case in large swaths of the city. The counting forms make it difficult to record intersection movements when pedestrians are crossing close to the crosswalk but not actually in it, and whether or not the crosswalk is being used as intended.
Key Recommendation
The TDG team recommends the city establish a permanent counting program, initially using the framework and tools of the National Bicycle and Pedestrian Documentation Project in the locations chosen for this study. Expand ing the number of locations in the future should include bridge counts on either the Main Street or Acosta bridges or approaches, as well as locations outside Mobility Zones 7-10.
Looking further ahead, the City should identify opportuni ties to establish permanent counting sites using perma
nent counters, smart traffic light technology, and video or infra-red cameras built into traffic signals.
PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLIST CRASHES
One of the primary motivations for the Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan is to reduce the alarmingly
high number of pedestrian and bicyclist fatalities and serious injury-producing crashes in Jacksonville.
Each year, approximately 120 people are killed on Jacksonville roads and an average of 30% of
the victims are either pedestrians or bicyclists predominantly people walking. By comparison, in cities of a similar population like San Francisco, Boston and
Seattle an average of between 20-30 people are killed each year in traffic crashes. In 2015, 230 people died in traffic crashes in New York City not quite two times
the number of people killed in Jacksonville, with almost ten times the population.
The study team analyzed ten years of crash data
(2006-2015) for pedestrians and bicyclists, primarily within the area of Mobility Zones 7-10. We looked briefly at one year (2015) of data for all traffic crashes
in the Signal4 database for the same area. We have also looked at all the individual crash reports at one high crash location, 103rd Street (SR 134) and Blanding Boulevard (SR 21), and will be doing that for other high crash locations as part of a subsequent task.
Jacksonville has a serious traffic safety problem. The
raw numbers are simply alarming and place the city at or near the top of all the wrong rankings of pedestrian, bicyclist and motorist safety. Among the titles of dubious distinction are that Jacksonville is the:
10th Most Unsafe City to Drive (Dangerousroads.org)
9th Most Deadly American City for Drivers (thrilllist. org, using data from NHTSA)
3rd Most Dangerous City to Walk (Dangerous by Design, Transportation for America)
1st Most Pedestrian and Most Bicyclist fatalities per 10,000 Pedestrian/Bicycle commuters (Alliance for
Biking & Walking, Benchmarking Report)
The most important findings of the pedestrian and
bicycle crash analysis for the City of Jacksonville include the following:
There were 3,093 reported pedestrian and bicycle crashes in Jacksonville between January 1, 2011 and January 1, 2016, with 1,132 bicycle crashes and 1,961 pedestrian crashes. Of those, 22 bicycle
crashes and 149 pedestrian crashes resulted in
fatalities.
Pedestrian and bicyclist crashes represent 2.1
percent of the total crashes during this time period,
but they account for 27.6 percent of fatalities.
A higher percentage of pedestrian crashes (7.6
percent) resulted in fatalities than bicycle crashes
(1.9 percent)
State roads are overrepresented in crash numbers.
State roads comprise 6.2 percent of the street
network in Jacksonville yet account for 32.1 percent of crashes.
Crashes on state roads accounted for half of the
fatalities between 2011 and 2015.
Most pedestrian and bicyclist crashes (61.7 percent)
occur away from intersections. A higher percentage
of pedestrian crashes (70.0 percent) occur at mid-block locations than bicycle crashes (47.3 percent).
The detailed analysis identifies recommendations
for improved data collection. The analysis was used
to inform the needs assessment, Pedestrian Safety Action Plan, and Bicycle Level of Service Analysis tasks
that follow.
ALL PEDESTRIAN % PEDESTRIAN BICYCLIST % BICYCLIST % NONMOTORIZED
2010 388,067 6209 1.6 1552 0.4 2
2011 386,527 5025 1.3 1546 0.4 1.7
2012 382,986 5362 1.4 1532 0.4 1.8
2013 378,200 4917 1.3 1513 0.4 1.7
2014 380,698 4949 1.3 1903 0.5 1.8
Source: ACS 5-yr estimates
Figure 4. Share of trips made by walking and bicycling in Jacksonville
The American Community Survey1 collects annual data on a wide range of economic and demographic data, including the mode of transportation used by people to get to and from work. The data for Jacksonville, Fla., shows
a general decline in the number and percentage of people walking to work since 2010 (Figure 4). There is a small
increase in the share of people bicycling to work.
By way of comparison, data is also provided for Charlotte, N.C. a southeastern city with a similar population. Since
2010, Charlotte has seen a steady increase in both walking and bicycling (Figure 5).
ALL PEDESTRIAN % PEDESTRIAN BICYCLE % BICYCLIST % NONMOTORIZED
2010 354,478 6735 1.9 354 0.1 2
2011 357,349 7147 2 715 0.2 2.2
2012 364,855 7662 2.1 730 0.2 2.3
2013 367,443 8084 2.2 735 0.2 2.4
2014 378,456 8326 2.2 1135 0.3 2.5
Source: ACS 5-yr estimates
Figure 5. Share of trips made by walking and bicycling in Charlotte, NC.
1 American Community Survey, US Census Bureau
Figure 6. Location of pedestrian and bicyclist crashes in the study area, 2015
Key Recommendation
Adopt a goal of zero fatalities and serious crashes by 2030 as a primary goal of the Master Plan. In 2015 alone, 31 pedestrians and bicyclists were killed and 434 seriously injured in the City (Figure 6). Vision Zero policies have been adopted by numerous cities and counties across the
country in an effort to eliminate fatal and serious traffic
crashes. This approach requires a high level of account ability and transparency in the collection, analysis and presentation of crash data.
PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE INFRASTRUCTURE
The study team reviewed available documents showing
pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure in the city; visited large areas of the city as part of the field work for the project; and conducted extensive desktop reviews of the
sidewalk, crosswalk and bicycle infrastructure on city and state roads throughout the community.
Although there are notable exceptions in certain areas, it is generally true to say that:
Downtown
Downtown Jacksonville has a relatively complete network of sidewalks on both sides of the street, and marked and signalized crossings at most all intersections. The signals are timed and have an automatic pedestrian phase. The on-road bicycle infrastructure is minimal, with only a few streets having
even sharrows. Some of the traffic calming features
near Jacksonville Landing and the St John s River are detrimental to safe and comfortable cycling, notably the granite pavers used in the intersections along North Laura Street.
Recent changes to downtown streets include the addition of shared bus and bike lanes on Jefferson and Broad Streets. The relatively low volume and speed of both buses and bikes on these streets makes this an appropriate treatment. In the future, the potential switch from one-way to two-way operation on streets
such as Monroe, Forsythe, and Pearl has the potential
to make these streets more walkable and bike-friendly.
Downtown Jacksonville has a limited amount of bicycle parking available throughout the area. The JTA provides at least one or more bike rack at each bus stop, and is improving the provision of bike parking as it improves its bus stops over time. There is a need for more parking capacity, more evenly distributed at key locations throughout the downtown area and in other neighborhood commercial districts.
Key Recommendation
Improve the availability of bicycle parking in the City, especially in the downtown area. The Plan recommends the City establish a bicycle parking ordinance in place that meets or exceeds the standards recommended by the As sociation of Pedestrian and Bicycle Professionals.
Local Streets
Most local, residential streets in the City of
Jacksonville have no sidewalks on either side. This is true of the older, historic neighborhoods of Riverside
and San Marco, just as it is for post-war developments
such as Sweetwater (between Wilson Boulevard and
103rd Street just inside the I-295 Beltway), Arlington and Lake Lucina, and 45th Street & Moncrieff Road.
There are no bicycle facilities on these streets.
Collector streets in these neighborhoods may have a sidewalk on one side, often well set back from the roadway, and sometimes switching from one side of the road to the other. There are very few marked or controlled crosswalks. There are no bicycle facilities on these streets. A small amount of bicycle parking, of varying quality and effectiveness, can be found in local commercial centers such as Edgewood Avenue and Riverside Avenue.
Arterial Streets
Minor arterial streets often do not have sidewalks on
both sides, but may have them on one side. At the intersection of these streets with major roads, there are usually no marked or controlled crosswalks across the
major road; there may be marked crosswalks across the
minor arterial. Typically, there are no bicycle facilities on these roads, although notable exceptions include Lone
Star Road, Spring Park Road, and McDuff Avenue which
have striped bicycle lanes.
Major arterial streets, whether they are under City
or the Florida Department of Transportation (FODT) jurisdiction, typically do have sidewalks on both
sides. Particularly on new and recently improved state
roads, these sidewalks are often well setback from the roadway. At the intersection of major roads, fully signalized and controlled crosswalks are the norm on all legs of the intersection. However, there are very few crosswalks marked or controlled, at the intersection of these major roads with any other roadway. This means there are long distances between marked and controlled crossing locations for pedestrians on these
busy roadways with fast moving traffic.
Florida DOT and the City are including bicycle lanes on new and improved major roads such as Soutel
Drive (west of New Kings Road), San Jose Boulevard, Fort Caroline Road, and sections of 8th Street. This
is good, but has resulted in a discontinuous network of bike infrastructure, often with poor or no transition from sections of roadway with bike lanes to those without. Also, most of the bike lanes are of minimum recommended width (4 feet), even though they are on busy, high-speed multi-lane roadways. (e.g. San Jose
Boulevard between Kori Road and the I-295 Beltway.)
There are no examples of buffered or protected bike lanes in the City.
Bicyclists are frequently not detected at traffic signals with loop detectors; this is particularly challenging
where local and collector streets cross major roads and where bicyclists are turning left from a left turn lane. We recommend that FDOT and the City adjust the
sensitivity of their loop detectors at traffic signals to
detect bicyclists, and that the sweet spot in the detector loop is marked with a bike symbol to encourage bicyclist to position themselves in the location most likely to trigger the signals.
Off-road Facilities
Off road facilities for bicycling and walking are scattered throughout the City of Jacksonville. Although outside the area covered by this planning effort, the Baldwin Trail is clearly a popular and well-known destination for cyclists in the region. The S Line is a closer-in and more generally accessible greenway project at the heart of ambitious plans for redevelopment of an area that has suffered from underinvestment for many years. A shared use path
along Kernan Boulevard provides one of the longer
stretches of pathway in the area, although it suffers from discontinuity due to the frequent side streets that the path must cross.
Transit Infrastructure
Almost every transit trip starts and finishes with people on foot. We noted earlier that 20,000 bus passengers
each month access and egress the bus with their bikes, and there are some park and ride bus services run by the Jacksonville Transit Authority (JTA) where
the first and last miles are traveled by car; but walking
is the primary mode by which people access transit in Jacksonville. JTA has a comprehensive program of upgrading and improving transit stops, especially on the higher capacity and frequency corridors, so that shelters, concrete sidewalks and pads, bike parking and benches are provided.
However, there are still a lot of bus stops on roads where there are no sidewalks or sidewalks only on one side of the road. Equally important, there are many locations where no marked or controlled crosswalks exist to enable passengers to safely cross the road
at the start or finish of their transit trip. Even when
there are marked and signalized crosswalks near the
bus stops, the study team noted that a significant
percentage of riders cross in non-crosswalk locations.
The JTA Mobility Works initiative has identified
several exciting opportunities in key transit corridors to dramatically improve the walking and bicycling
environment as well as for transit passengers and drivers based on extensive public outreach and a
series of charrettes. To the maximum extent possible,
the Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan synchronizes
recommendations, focuses area work, and prioritizes projects to take advantage of JTA s work in these locations.
Key Recommendation
Adopt consistent, current roadway design standards for urban streets that increase the safety, comfort and acces sibility of streets and roadways for pedestrians and bicy clists. The Context Sensitive Streets Committee should coordinate this across agencies to ensure consistency of approach and design. This should be accompanied by an aggressive program of training on facility planning and de sign targeted at all agency planners, engineers and urban designers, as well as consultants that are hired to work on transportation projects within the City.
Detailed Facility Inventory
The study team was tasked with completing an inventory of new pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure in up to six focused areas in an effort to update the
2010 Mobility Plan data and maps. We determined that the current existing data in the 2010 plan was insufficiently detailed to provide a useful GIS layer to
update. The sidewalk inventory, for example, noted
whether a street segment had zero, 50% or 100%
sidewalk coverage, but did not provide information on which side or sides of the street the sidewalk was located, or whether the sidewalk was continuous and connected. Similarly, current bike infrastructure data failed to identify critical distinctions between shoulders, parking lanes and bike lanes, and didn t differentiate between the varying widths of these segments of bikeway.
As a result, the study team completed a fresh inventory of bike and pedestrian infrastructure in four areas of the city, and updated the bike infrastructure data in the San Jose Boulevard corridor. The four areas inventoried
included North Arlington, Sweetwater (103rd Street
& Blanding Boulevard), Lem Turner Road (SR115) and Edgewood Avenue W., and the area around the S Line and UF Health Center. In those areas, we also captured information about the presence of marked crosswalks.
The absence of reliable baseline data on the extent and nature of pedestrian and bicycling infrastructure
throughout the city is a significant challenge moving
forward. We recommend that the City undertake a comprehensive inventory of sidewalks, crosswalks, shared use paths, and bikeways to facilitate a more deliberate and data-driven approach to completing a bikeway network and improving conditions for walking. The City should conduct regular inventories on walking and biking infrastructure that are tracked using GIS and provide detailed information on the status, condition and design features of that infrastructure.
Key Recommendation
The city should maintain a current GIS layer with existing bike and pedestrian infrastructure to assist in ongoing planning efforts.
EXISTING PLANS AND GUIDELINES
The City of Jacksonville, North Florida TPO, JTA,
Downtown Investment Authority (DIA) and the Florida DOT all have several existing plans and guidelines that are generally supportive of pedestrian and bicycle transportation. The study team met with various agency stakeholders, including the JTA, DIA, and
NFTPO, and found a clear and consistent commitment
to address pedestrian and bicycle safety and access issues.
The study team has reviewed these planning
documents and identified specific areas of opportunity
in the recommendations of these documents. There is also room for improvement. The study team noted that while much of the planning framework exists already to make the City of Jacksonville a more walkable and bike-friendly community, there are three major challenges:
a) Ensuring coordinated action . There is little disagreement about the need or desire to improve conditions for walking and bicycling in the City of Jacksonville. The policy framework is largely in place, as is much of the technical guidance necessary to carry out existing plans. The opportunity exists to combine the efforts of numerous agencies and stakeholders into something much greater than the sum of its parts.
b) Not repeating the mistakes of the past. The current
NFTPO Long Range Transportation Plan calls for $8.9 billion of investment in new roads and additional roadway capacity over the next 20 years. The additional traffic, development, and auto-centric growth that this
investment will facilitate is destined to overwhelm even the best nonmotorized infrastructure that might be included in these and other projects.
c) Creating comprehensive design standards. The existing policy and regulatory framework does a good job of recognizing the need to address walking and bicycling in the development of the community. However, much of the guidance on what kind of infrastructure to provide to accommodate pedestrians and bicyclists is outdated and in need of revision. The work of the City s Context Sensitive Streets Committee
and the JTA Mobility Works initiative will be critical
to updating and improving the standard provision for pedestrians and bicyclists.
This Plan builds upon prior planning efforts for these modes to provide a more refined, strategic approach to
planning and implementation of infrastructure, policies and programs that will increase safe walking and bicycling in Jacksonville.
Key Recommendation
The City should take the lead on establishing a regular, twice-yearly meeting with its partner agencies (NFTPO, FDOT, JTA, DIA) to coordinate activities such as street resurfacing, major construction projects, planning studies, transit system changes, and development projects. The goal of this meeting should be to ensure every opportunity is taken to implement the Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan as effectively and efficiently as possible, using ongo ing projects to opportunistically improve conditions for walking and bicycling.
PROJECT APPROACH
LEADING BY EXAMPLE
PROJECT APPROACH AND NEEDS ASSESSMENT
When it comes to walking and bicycling, Jacksonville, Fla., can be described as a big city with a big challenge, and a lot of opportunity to improve. Encouraging walking and bicycling in a city covering the largest
geographic area of any in the lower 48 states, where more than 100 people are killed in traffic crashes every
year (one third of whom are cyclists or pedestrians), and where the majority of the metropolitan area has been built in the age of auto-dominated suburban development, is a daunting task. Tackling that challenge head-on, however, is vital for the long term economic and physical health of the community.
Where to start? The city does not have the benefit
of decades of prior planning and implementation of bikeway networks and pedestrian-friendly
development; there was no benchmark data on levels
of use, network mileage, connectivity, or even the relative safety of biking and walking on city streets
just the raw crash data and the disturbing near-
daily news stories of fatal or serious crashes on area roadways.
The development of the Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan was focused on the center of the city
approximately the area within the I-295 Beltway, or
Mobility Zones 7-10 to capture those areas with
the highest existing levels of bicycling and walking, the greatest concentration of crashes involving pedestrians and bicyclists, and the biggest likely demand for these activities in the future.
Within this limited geographical scope, the study team was tasked with a series of data collection and inventory tasks that were designed to establish precedent and a methodology that could subsequently be used throughout the whole city. The study included documenting pedestrian and bicyclist counts in the city and inventorying bicycle parking spaces and walking/ biking infrastructure in several neighborhoods. In each case, the study team has recommended an approach to continuing these tasks across the whole city in the future.
The discovery phase of the project also revealed:
A systemic, citywide traffic safety problem with 15,000-18,000 injury-producing motor vehicle
collisions every year
Serious and fatal crashes are heavily concentrated
on major arterial roadways especially FDOT roads
(Figure 7).
Pedestrian and bicyclist crashes are also heavily
concentrated on roads with higher speeds and multiple lanes
There is a significant absence of basic pedestrian infrastructure sidewalks on many roads in
neighborhoods throughout the city
There is a significant absence of crosswalks on all
but the busiest intersections, leaving long stretches of busy roadways with no controlled or marked crosswalks (with the notable exception of the downtown core where crosswalks and sidewalks are mostly present)
Infrastructure for bicyclists trails, striped lanes, signed and marked routes is highly disconnected
and is often the bare minimum required for designation (e.g. bike lanes are minimum widths
regardless of traffic volumes, speed and number of
lanes)
There is a widespread disregard for crosswalks by both motorists (failing to stop/yield) and pedestrians (not using push buttons, crossing out of the crosswalk or against the light)
Extensive sidewalk bicycling (except for riders in the
enthusiast category), even on streets with marked bike lanes such as North Main Street, suggests a
high level of perceived danger associated with on-road bicycling
An absence of any organized group(s) of pedestrians or voice for issues around walking safety, and
An active bicycling constituency representing a relatively narrow segment of the observed cycling population.
Against this backdrop and potentially overwhelming needs assessment, the study team pursued a strategy for addressing pedestrian and bicyclist issues separately. The goal was to provide both a systematic, long-term, city-wide approach to create a more walkable and bike friendly community while simultaneously creating an actionable list of projects
immediately ready for funding through the CIP and Mobility Fee process.
Figure 7. Crash frequency by roadway segment for pedestrians and bicyclists.
WALKING APPROACH
The study team identified five common Jacksonville
street types that emerged from the crash study,
facility inventory, field work, and other data collection
activities. In documenting these street types, the study team highlighted one prime example of each type, together with several similar streets within the study area that fell into the same category and had the most
significant crash history and demand for walking.
For each of the five street types, a summary of the key
issues and potential design solutions is presented. Before and after images are rendered to show the changes that are necessary to enhance safety and accessibility on that type of street.
BICYCLING APPROACH
Addressing the issues and opportunities around bicycling centered on a traditional approach to establishing a bikeway network in the study area that can be used to identify and prioritize key projects to improve bike safety, accessibility and mobility.
The study team identified a network of some 250 miles
of on-street and off-street trail infrastructure that includes existing bikeways (e.g. bike lanes on San Jose
Boulevard; the S Line Trail) on city and state rights of
way, as well as potential corridors for improvement.
CREATING A ROADMAP FOR CHANGE
The result of this needs assessment and project approach is an extensive set of recommended improvements to hundreds of miles of roadway
throughout the study area and, by extension, throughout the entire city. Clearly, such significant
change won t happen overnight, and isn t going to be accomplished by the City alone.
Therefore, the following sections of this Plan create a
roadmap for change that:
Focuses attention on target areas (both high crash locations as well as area- and system-wide improvements that are necessary)
Prioritizes recommended improvements based on
community-developed criteria, and
Identifies clear roles for the City, JTA, FDOT, DIA
and other related agencies to play in making this
transformation happen.
By following this roadmap, the City of Jacksonville can lead by example in implementing changes to create a more walkable and bike-friendly community.
PEDESTRIAN SAFETY ACTION PLAN
Elected officials, agency staff, the media, and the
general public in Jacksonville are all acutely aware
of the poor traffic safety record for which the city is
infamous, particularly in relation to pedestrian safety. The city is ranked as the third most dangerous city
in America for walking, and has been identified by
the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) as a
Pedestrian Safety Focus City.
FHWA recommends, and the City has embraced,
development and implementation of a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan to begin to address pedestrian
safety issues. The study team followed the steps in the
FHWA s How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan to identify problems, develop countermeasures,
and recommend an implementation plan. The implementation plan for Jacksonville is built around three key strategies.
SYSTEMATIC NEIGHBORHOOD ACTION PROGRAM FOR PEDESTRIANS (SNAPP)
The City has an extensive backlog of basic neighborhood pedestrian infrastructure needs that has to be addressed strategically to maximize
efficiency and make a noticeable difference. The plan
recommends an approach to improving sidewalks and crosswalks throughout the city that tackles all maintenance needs, as well as minor installation
projects (e.g. filling a missing section of sidewalk), in a defined neighborhood or area in one concentrated effort rather than in a reactive, piecemeal approach
in individual locations all over the city. This approach is modeled on the City s successful stormwater management program.
Further, the plan recommends that the prioritization
of neighborhoods to receive SNAPP treatment
incentivizes community involvement in completing walking audits (another tool provided by the Federal Highway Administration for Focus Cities) to identify needed improvements in the community.
TARGETED ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS FOR PEDESTRIAN SAFETY (TRIPS)
Too many of the roads and streets in the City of Jacksonville lack adequate infrastructure for safe,
convenient, and accessible travel by foot. Most streets
lack basic sidewalks, or have sidewalks intermittently
on one or other side of the road. Very few intersections
have marked or signalized crosswalks, even on roads
with significant volumes of traffic.
Only two of the five typical street types identified by the
study team have even basic sidewalk and crosswalk facilities in place. On downtown streets, there are sidewalks and crosswalks throughout, but they are often a bare minimum given the actual and potential volume of pedestrians. Along busy commercial and retail roadways, minimum width sidewalks and periodic crosswalks (usually with minimum crossing times and
continual turning traffic), are insufficient given the high volume and speed of motor vehicle traffic.
This is impossible to fix overnight. Each of the five typical street types identified in this plan is
illustrated with an archetypal example, together with recommended improvements to improve pedestrian and bicyclist safety in that location. In addition,
there are several locations identified with similar
characteristics to the example where there is a history of pedestrian crashes and/or high pedestrian demand.
Making the recommended improvements to these
streets will begin to tackle immediate high crash
locations in a highly visible manner and establish
concrete examples that are replicable, time and again, in locations all across the city.
The plan further recommends several strategies for
funding improvements to these specific roadways, including stand-alone projects for the Mobility Fee
process as well as projects that are included in larger roadway improvements funded by the City or state.
RECOMMENDED LOCATIONS FOR RECTANGULAR RAPID FLASHING BEACONS
During the development of the plan, the study team was asked to address pedestrian safety issues from the perspective of where a particular countermeasure
the rectangular rapid flashing beacon could be
used to improve conditions for walking and pedestrian safety. The team created a methodology and initial list of locations suitable for the installation of RRFBs based on projected crossing demand, roadway characteristics, and crash history.
Implementation by the City of this combination of
area-wide improvements, corridor-specific actions, and
individual location-based countermeasures can start to change the narrative around pedestrian safety and access in Jacksonville, and point the way forward for all transportation- and development-related agencies and partners in the city.
BIKEWAY NETWORK IMPROVEMENTS
Connecting existing bikeways, and improving the overall safety of the on-road bicycling experience, emerged as clear priorities from the public, project steering committee members and agency staff throughout the planning process.
NETWORK IDENTIFICATION
The study team was tasked with identifying a network of bicycling infrastructure to serve people of all ages
and abilities, and to focus on local i.e. short distance
-- bike access issues rather than longer distance cycling routes and trips. The city has a lot of local and neighborhood roads that offer a relatively low stress cycling experience, but connectivity of the street
network is very limited. As a result, traffic including bicycle traffic is inevitably channeled to a smaller
number of busy major roads and bridges that are very high-stress (if not downright hostile) bicycling environments.
Within the study area, the study team identified a potential low-stress network of 250-miles of bikeways,
comprising a wide range of bicycle facility types. The network was selected to provide connected, accessible travel throughout the study area.
In some instances, for example where there are limited roadway connections across a river or highway, major
arterials with high traffic volumes and speeds were
included in the network. In order to make them part of a low-stress bicycling network, these roadways will require protected bike lanes or shared use paths.
In other corridors, low volume local roads were included as reasonable direct alternatives to parallel,
busier major roads; on these routes, improvements
to busy intersections will be needed to facilitate safe connections between quieter streets.
The plan therefore includes a 250+-mile bikeway
network that, when implemented, will create a connected system of on- and off-street bikeways throughout the study area. Some segments of the network must be created as part of Florida DOT
projects, others as the JTA completes its Mobility
Works initiative, and still more will be the responsibility
of agencies such as the City of Jacksonville Parks
department and the Downtown Investment Authority. The balance of the recommended improvements on City streets will likely be funded primarily through the
annual CIP and multi-year mobility fee funding process.
NETWORK ASSESSMENT
Of this study network, approximately 150 miles was identified for assessment using the Bicycle Level of
Service (BLOS) tool that is a component of Florida DOT s Quality/Level of Service assessment. The BLOS
assessment uses roadway and traffic characteristics to
determine a level of comfort that bicyclists (with some
level of experience) typically feel on the road with vehicle speed, traffic volume and lane widths as key
determinants to that perception of safety or comfort.
Corridors with newly installed bike infrastructure, such as the San Jose Boulevard corridor, were excluded from the BLOS assessment as the goal was to focus on corridors where changes to the roadway would make a
significant difference to the comfort and attractiveness
of the route for cyclists, i.e. where the BLOS score could be noticeably improved.
For several reasons, the study team would not recommend continued use of the BLOS tool for additional application in the study area or when
initiating a planning process for Mobility Zones 1-6.
The BLOS tool is increasingly dated. For example, it does not adequately assess separated bikeway
infrastructure types (e.g. Protected bike lanes,
shared use paths) that are more and more common
today;
The BLOS assessment does not take into account intersections and turning movements, which are
a significant factor in the feeling of safety and
comfort on the roadway for bicyclists; and,
The BLOS tool was initially calibrated with cyclists
of some experience and tolerance for traffic this
does not provide the all ages, all abilities focus
that communities are using today to determine
facility choices and design. Instead, the City should use the Bicycle Network Analysis tool to assist in
the identification and development of the low stress
bikeway network.
Based on the BLOS assessment; an analysis of crashes, public input, and network gaps; and current
best-practice approaches to low stress bike network development, the study team has recommended
specific bikeway facility types for the 250-mile network. The principles behind the facility selection which
boils down to increasing the degree of separation between motor vehicles and bicyclists as speed and
traffic volumes increase should also be applied for
network development outside the study area.
PROJECT PRIORITIZATION
In order to create a prioritized list of bikeway projects
for the Mobility Fee and CIP funding process, the
consultant team worked with the City to break the proposed bikeway network down into individual project segments. These individual projects were then ranked
using a tool that reflected priorities established by the
Steering Committee, agency staff and the public. This process is documented in the bike network chapter that follows.
DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS
Throughout the planning process, there has been a clear recognition that while the City must take a leadership role in improving conditions for walking and bicycling, there is also a critical role for other agencies to play. Important segments of the bikeway network will need to be created as part of Florida DOT
projects. The ambitious Mobility Works initiative of
the Jacksonville Transportation Authority includes
critical corridors for walking and bicycling and
the full integration of walking, bicycling and transit is essential to provide real transportation choices in the community. In addition, players such as
the Parks Department, the Downtown Investment
Authority, and private sector developers all need to be following the city s leadership, and using the same roadmap to create a more walkable and bike-friendly
Jacksonville. Therefore the Plan includes general
design recommendations for these agencies and organizations to follow when implementing roadway, park and development projects.
PEDESTRIAN SAFETY ACTION PLAN
INTRODUCTION
Every year in the United States, up to 5,000 pedestrians are killed in traffic crashes. Throughout the 1990s and early 2000s, this represented approximately one in ten of all fatal traffic crash victims. In the last decade,
however, that percentage of overall fatalities has risen to more than 15%. This has prompted much greater attention from the Federal Highway Administration
(FHWA) and National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration (NHTSA) as well as state and local
government agencies particularly in Florida, where
12% of all pedestrian deaths nationwide occur each
year (compared to Florida s 6% share of the overall US
population).
One of the most popular programs to address
pedestrian safety is the Pedestrian Safety Action Plan (PSAP), developed by FHWA as a cornerstone of the agency s Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety Focus States
and Cities initiative (which includes both the State
of Florida and the City of Jacksonville). The PSAP
is also a featured element of the US Department of
Transportation s Mayors Challenge for Safer People
and Safer Streets, of which the City of Jacksonville is a participant.
One of the attractions of the PSAP is that it provides a
data-driven approach to developing an action plan that is also tailored to the local context. The recommended approach includes eight steps:
Define Objectives
Identify Locations
Select Pedestrian Safety Countermeasures
Develop an Implementation Strategy
Institutionalize Changes to
Planning and Design Standards
Consider Land Use, Zoning and Site Design Issues
Reinforce Commitment
Evaluate Results
By following these steps, a three-pronged PSAP
emerged as a key element of the City of Jacksonville s
overall Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan. One
element proposes a strategic approach to tackling the chronic lack of basic pedestrian infrastructure accessible sidewalks and crosswalks throughout
the community. A second strategy identifies design
changes for high-crash and high-demand corridors
on city streets, using five common street types found
throughout Jacksonville. The third piece of the puzzle starts with a preferred countermeasure, rectangular
rapid flashing beacons, and recommends locations
where they can be most effectively deployed to reduce pedestrian crashes.
Throughout this process, one fact dominated discussions. The overwhelming majority of fatal and serious injury crashes involving pedestrians occur on state highways, outside the direct control of the City. For example, the awful sequence of four pedestrian
fatalities in November 2016 on one stretch of New Kings Road demands attention yet this is a state
road. The state s response doesn t include the addition of controlled crosswalks, although the addition of sidewalks to the corridor will certainly improve the comfort of pedestrians and transit users who currently have to walk along a grass verge on this high speed roadway.
As a result of this challenge, the Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan focuses on specific recommendations
that the City itself can implement, and through which it can show leadership. However, the plan also provides recommendations for Florida DOT and other agencies, as their collaboration is essential to the creation of a more walkable community and safe pedestrian environment.
STRATEGIC NEIGHBORHOOD ACTION PROGRAM FOR PEDESTRIANS (SNAPP)
Creating a continuous network of sidewalks on both sides of the streets in residential neighborhoods is an important element in creating a safe and comfortable
environment for pedestrians. Many trips include walking to or from a particular destination; on the other hand,
most crashes take place close to home. Therefore, a complete sidewalk network linked to residences is vital to any pedestrian safety and multimodal strategy.
Neighborhood schools also benefit through the creation
of safe linkages for school-aged children.
In Jacksonville, as in many cities, the repair and infill
of the sidewalk network in residential neighborhoods is performed on a case-by-case basis as community members request repairs. While this system has
benefits such as directing resources to a specific need
and being responsive to community concerns, it has many drawbacks as well, such as:
Many communities suffer from missing or
unmaintained sidewalks, but are not aware that repairs only take place in response to requests to the City.
When a repair is made at a specific location while
nearby repairs are not addressed, community members may become frustrated with the City s service.
Moving city staff, equipment and supplies across the
city daily to address individual maintenance needs is
inefficient and typically leads to extensive backlogs
and increased maintenance costs.
A reactive response to maintenance can lead to an increase in sidewalk replacement, whereas regular maintenance can prolong the longevity of a sidewalk.
A reactive spot-improvement maintenance system does not provide an opportunity to collect data on the existence and maintenance needs of sidewalks neighborhood-wide.
The lack of a proactive and transparent system of neighborhood sidewalk assessment, repair
Sidewalks reduce the incidence of pedestrian
collisions, injuries, and deaths in residential areas
and along two-lane roadways.
Institute of Transportation Engineers, Technical Council Committee 5A 5 (1998)
and installation can lead to negative community-
government relations.
It is recommended that the City of Jacksonville establish a proactive neighborhood-based sidewalk
assessment, maintenance and infill program. The
program should be managed by the Right of Way and
Stormwater Maintenance Division within the City of Jacksonville Department of Public Works, which has
had success implementing a similar system for the maintenance of drainage facilities.
The following are recommended steps for this approach:
Create Maps of Priority Areas using Council District boundaries. Starting with Council District boundaries, use readily available Geographic Information Systems (GIS) data to establish priority zones. It is recommended that the following data be used: pedestrian and bicycle crashes, schools, transit stations/bus stops, percent of seniors, percent disabled, percent in poverty, percent of households without vehicle access, and residential/commercial density.
Establish Priority Neighborhoods in each Council District. Based on the mapping exercise, establish annual neighborhood areas to be the focus of sidewalk
assessments, repairs and infill. Determine the size of
the areas based on staff s ability to assess and repair all the sidewalks in the area.
Convene a Neighborhood Assessment Walk. Work with
the citizen Planning Advisory Committees (CPACs) to
convene a Neighborhood Assessment Walk. For each
neighborhood area, work with the CPAC to coordinate
a walk with residents and City staff during which the sidewalk network is mapped including sidewalks needing maintenance, sidewalks needing replacement and missing sidewalks the community would like to see installed. As a suggestion, programs or extra- curricular activities can be incorporated in school systems or after school programs to teach the youth in the community about pedestrian crossing safety. For
example, K-12 could take annual field trips that include
traveling along and crossing their local streets. Such activities would educate the community on pedestrian safety, encourage people to become move active, make communities more family-oriented and take advantage of the new sidewalks.
In some instances, new sidewalks may not be easy to install due to a lack of right-of-way or complicated terrain. If right-of-way is needed, including the neighborhood in the process is more likely to lead to the
provision of a sidewalk easement. Sidewalks on difficult
terrain, such as steep slopes or those experiencing stormwater issues among others, may require design and engineering plans. These projects should be sent immediately to the Engineering and Construction
Management Division within the City of Jacksonville Department of Public Works. The community should be notified that engineering work is needed and provided a
timeframe for installation.
Establish sidewalk prioritization. Some neighborhoods may lack sidewalks throughout the area and due to budgetary constraints installing a complete network of sidewalks on both sides of the street may not be possible as part of this process. In these cases, sidewalk installation should be prioritized and installed based on the following factors:
Demand where there is expected pedestrian
demand such as routes to school, retail centers,
parks, and transit stops, among others.
Missing links/network gaps on missing blocks or
lots that would form part of a larger network.
Through-streets on streets that create connections
through the neighborhood and link to collector
streets.
Complete Sidewalk Repairs, Replacement and Infill Immediately. Sidewalk repair, replacement and infill
should commence within thirty days of the Assessment Walk to ensure that community members quickly see the results of their work. This also helps to reduce liability as the city has documented issues which it then has immediately addressed.
DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS
Three important elements to designing for pedestrian safety and comfort in residential areas are sidewalk widths, sidewalk buffers and curb radii.
Sidewalk widths provide a comfortable space for pedestrian use and including allowing for passing. While
recommended sidewalk minimums tend to be five feet
in width, six feet in width further encourages walking by providing space for increased social interaction.
Sidewalk buffers provide space between the sidewalk
and vehicles either moving or parked. Buffers
enhance sidewalks in numerous ways. Buffers provide a place for street trees or stormwater management,
enhancing the health of the environment. Vegetative
buffers create a more welcoming environment reminding drivers that they are in a community and leads to safer driving. Buffers separate pedestrians from the roadway, increasing pedestrian s feeling of safety, and leading to increases in walking. Buffers also create a place for street elements, such as street signs and light poles. Without buffers, signs and poles are often placed in the sidewalk, reducing their functionality and creating unsafe conditions. Lastly, buffers provide space for driveway ramps without affecting the
slope of the sidewalk. A minimum five foot buffer is
recommended to accommodate stormwater, street trees, and roadway signs and poles.
Curb radii are important elements that affect pedestrian safety. The curb radii of a street corner at an intersection, a driveway, or alleyway affects the speed of turning vehicles and the crossing distance of
pedestrians. Vehicle speeds are directly correlated to
pedestrian fatalities. The longer the crossing distance, the longer the pedestrian is in the roadway, increasing their chances of coming into contact with vehicles. In residential neighborhoods, a 15-foot curb radii is recommended at street intersections with tighter radii at driveways.
SIDEWALK MAPPING
The following maps show where residential sidewalks are needed in neighborhoods with high pedestrian
injury rates (Figures 8-11). Similar maps should be created as the first step in the Repair and Infill of
Residential Sidewalks process.
Figure 8. Existing sidewalk conditions proximate to The S-Line.
Figure 9. Existing sidewalk conditions at 103rd and Blanding.
Figure 10. Existing sidewalk conditions in the Arlington neighborhood.
TARGETED ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS FOR PEDESTRIAN SAFETY (TRIPS)
Residential Neighborhoods
Residential neighborhood streets serve the transportation needs of every resident every time they leave their homes. As such, it is especially important that residential streets are safe and comfortable for all users including people who walk and bicycle.
Most crashes take place close to home and those crashes often
involve Jacksonville s most vulnerable users such as children walking to school. A complete sidewalk network is vital to any pedestrian safety strategy and addressing motor vehicle speeds are the key to enhancing safety.
Roadways in residential neighborhoods of Jacksonville commonly consist of:
Two lane roadways
Limited sidewalks
Wide buffer areas
Limited curb ramps and ADA-compliant truncated domes
Wide curb radii
No marked crosswalks
Safety Enhancements
INSTALL SIDEWALKS WHERE MISSING AND INCREASE SIDEWALK WIDTHS. The width of a sidewalk allows for comfortable use by pedestrians and allows for passing. While recommended sidewalk minimums
tend to be five feet in width, six
feet further encourages walking by providing space for increased social interaction.
CONTINUE TO PROVIDE AMPLE SIDEWALK BUFFERS.
The sidewalk buffer is the area between the sidewalk
and the roadway; in residential
neighborhoods in Jacksonville, this area is typically used for stormwater management which improves the
environment. Vegetative buffers
enhance community safety by reminding drivers that they are in a neighborhood. Buffers create a comfortable distance between the sidewalk and vehicles either moving or parked increasing pedestrian s feeling of safety, and leading to increases in walking. Buffers also create a place for street elements, such as street signs, light poles, and street trees. Without buffers, signs and poles are often placed in the sidewalk, reducing their functionality and creating unsafe conditions. A minimum
five foot buffer is recommended to
accommodate stormwater, street trees and roadway signs and poles.
REDUCE CURB RADII AT INTERSECTIONS. Curb radii at intersections are important elements that affect pedestrian safety. The curb radii of a street corner at an intersection, a driveway, or alleyway affects the speed of turning vehicles and the crossing distance of
pedestrians. Vehicle speeds are
directly correlated to pedestrian fatalities. The longer the crossing distance, the longer the pedestrian is in the roadway, increasing their chances of coming into contact with vehicles. In residential neighborhoods, a 15-foot curb radii is recommended at street intersections and a tighter radii is recommended at driveways.
MARK CROSSWALKS ALONG ROUTES WHICH SHOULD EXPECT HIGH NUMBERS OF PEDESTRIANS. In Jacksonville, a pedestrian is legally allowed to cross the street and has the right-of-way at all intersections. Along routes which should expect high numbers of pedestrians, such as routes to school, transit and local retail establishments, marking crosswalks further communicates to drivers that pedestrians may be present and that they have the right-of-way. In locations with higher motor vehicle volumes or speeds, it is recommended that high visibility (ladder, parallel, zebra) crosswalk markings are installed.
INSTALL TRAFFIC CALMING.
In areas that experience excessive vehicular speeds, additional traffic calming measures may be needed.
MINI-TRAFFIC CIRCLES.
Mini-traffic circles are circular
islands that are installed in the center of residential street
intersections to reduce traffic speeds and collisions. Traffic
circles require vehicles to reduce speed while allowing continuous
traffic flow. They can be installed
in lieu of signals or stop signs and can be landscaped or paved.
Vegetation should be planted/
maintained so that it does not
block visibility. Mini-traffic circles
should be accompanied by tight curb radii on the adjacent corners to reduce right turning vehicle speeds. Larger vehicles such as school buses or transit vehicles that make wider turns can be
accommodated by building traffic circles with mountable curbs;
however, in general, streets with transit routes should not be
considered for traffic circles.
HUMPS, BUMPS, AND SPEED TABLES. These traffic calming
devices consist of a raised section of roadway meant to slow motorists. They communicate to motorists that they are nearing a pedestrian crossing or entering a pedestrianized zone such as a neighborhood. Depending on the desired reduction of speed, the length, height and slope/ramps will vary.
A study in the City of Seattle found a 90% reduction in
crashes after mini-traffic
circles were installed.
Figure 12. These residential streets in Jacksonville have a higher number of pedestrian crashes than other areas and should
be retrofitted using the
safety enhancements recommended on the previous pages.
NeighborhoodCollector Streets
Collector streets provide access to and through neighborhoods and
provide cross town connections. As such, they often have high volumes of bicyclists and pedestrians and can create barriers for those who need to cross. When these roadways are designed with a focus on motorized vehicles, crashes are likely to occur. In the Jacksonville area, neighborhood collector streets are the location of a high number of pedestrian and bicycle crashes.
Common current design elements of neighborhood collector streets include:
Four-lane roadways, two-lane roadways with on-street parking, or three-lane roadways with a center turn-lane
Limited or no marked crosswalks
Limited or no pedestrian median-islands
Wide curb radii
Fast speeds and speed limits And, less frequently:
Missing sidewalks
Sidewalks located adjacent the roadway (with no buffer)
Safety Enhancements
COMPLETE THE SIDEWALK NETWORK BY FILLING IN GAPS AND INSTALLING SIDEWALKS ACROSS DRIVEWAYS. The most
significant countermeasure for
increasing pedestrian safety is to have a network of sidewalks. Sidewalks create a safe place for pedestrians to travel away from motor vehicles. Although, much of the sidewalk network along collectors in Jacksonville is complete, missing segments
significantly decrease pedestrian
safety. Network gaps include sidewalks missing across driveways, which like roadways
are conflict areas. Continuing
the sidewalk across a driveway communicates to drivers that pedestrians have the right-of way and that pedestrians may be present.
PRIORITIZE LANE REDUCTIONS/ROAD DIETS ON FOUR LANE OR TWO-LANE ROADWAYS WITH PARKING. Many
collector roadways in Jacksonville have four lanes, when only three lanes with a center-turn lane or less are needed. Reducing lanes has been found to increase safety for pedestrians while also reducing motor vehicle crashes. Four to three lane conversions have been found to reduce total crashes by an average of 29%.1 These conversions reduce pedestrian exposure
to motor vehicle traffic, crossing distances, vehicle speeds, and
the potential for rear end collisions. They also improve sight distances for left-turning vehicles, provide space for pedestrian median islands and bicycles lanes.
In many areas in Jacksonville, collector streets consist of two
travel lanes and two parking lanes; however, the parking lanes
are generally not being utilized. This creates the opportunity for vehicles to use the parking lane for overtaking. Bicyclists use the parking lane to travel requiring them to swerve into the travel lane when vehicles are parked. On both four-lane and two-lane roadways with parking, redesigning the roadway to include bike lanes, one travel lane and one center turn lane could enhance safety for all modes.
1 Crash Modification Factor Clearing House, www.cmfclearinghouse.org
INSTALL HIGH VISIBILITY CROSSWALKS WITH FREQUENCY. Although all intersections constitute legal places to cross (crosswalks) for pedestrians, it is recommended that crosswalks be marked on collector streets to communicate to drivers where pedestrians should be expected and that they have the right-of-way. Creating safe places to cross the street also reduces mid-block crossings. It is recommended that high visibility (sometimes called zebra or ladder) marked crosswalks are installed. Anecdotal evidence suggests that drivers in Jacksonville do not frequently stop for pedestrians at crosswalks, so it is further recommended that driver education is accompanied by enforcement measures as well as other infrastructure countermeasures.
INSTALL CENTER MEDIAN ISLANDS WITH FREQUENCY. To increase safety, it is recommended that pedestrian median islands are installed. This provides a safer waiting area for pedestrians after crossing one direction of
traffic. Pedestrian median islands also reduce vehicle wait
times as vehicles can continue moving after a pedestrian has reached the island. As many neighborhood streets are offset from collector streets, pedestrian median islands can easily be
installed without affecting turning traffic. It is recommended
in high pedestrian areas or at high crash locations that center
median islands and marked crosswalks be installed every 200 300 feet.
IDENTIFY LOCATIONS FOR AND INSTALL RECTANGULAR RAPID FLASHING BEACONS (RRFBS). Crosswalks or mid-block crossings can be made more highly visible by the installation of Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFB) which include
pedestrian-actuated flashing
lights and a pedestrian warning sign. RRFBs in other communities have increased driver compliance with
pedestrian stop and yield laws by up to 75%.
REDUCE CURB RADII. The degree to which a vehicle must slow at an intersection is dependent on the curb radii. Large turn radii allow for vehicles to turn at much faster speeds. Small turn radii compel vehicles to slow.
When vehicles slow, their field of vision
increases, better allowing them to see pedestrians, and slow speeds, if a crash does incur, are more likely to result in an injury rather than a fatality. Smaller radii shorten crossing distances for
pedestrians; improves sight distances; and allows for greater flexibility of curb
ramp placement.
Figure 13. These collector streets in Jacksonville have a higher number of pedestrian crashes than other areas and should
be retrofitted using the
safety enhancements recommended on the previous pages.
Downtown
Downtown Jacksonville is one of the major commercial hubs of the city and the design of its streets can create an atmosphere that attracts new services and employment opportunities as well as places to dine, shop and live. Employers and residents are attracted to downtowns that are attractive to pedestrians and bicyclists, include transit access to other parts of the city, and have great public spaces. Providing access for all modes including those walking, bicycling and using transit can accommodate the greatest number of users for the least cost. As new commercial and residential hubs emerge in Jacksonville, the attributes of the downtown may extend into new regional centers which are also best served by a variety of transportation options.
In downtown Jacksonville, streets share these common elements:
Narrow sidewalks
Limited or no space for sidewalk cafes and outdoor dining
No bicycle facilities
Multi-lane one-way streets
Automatic pedestrian signals
Safety Enhancements
CONVERT ONE-WAY STREETS TO TWO-WAY. One-way streets often lead to vehicular speeding due to a perceived
lack of conflict. This creates
a less comfortable and safe environment for pedestrians and bicyclists. One-way streets also reduce connectivity. Re establishing a two-way street grid increases network connectivity by dispersing vehicles throughout the system.
CONSIDER LANE REDUCTIONS/ ROAD DIETS. Many roadways
in downtown Jacksonville may have more lanes than needed. This space can be made available for widened sidewalks, bicycle facilities or outdoor seating. If the facilities
are flexible, space can be made
available during non-peak periods.
WIDEN SIDEWALKS. Many
sidewalks in downtown are narrow which creates bottlenecks for pedestrians and reduces comfort and accessibility. It is recommended that sidewalks be widened to create an eight-foot clear zone.
CREATEA BICYCLE NETWORK THROUGHOUT DOWNTOWN.
Most roadways in downtown lack
bicycle facilities. Adding separated facilities increases comfort, safety and accessibility for bicyclists.
ADD OUTDOOR SEATING THROUGH THE CREATION OF PARKLETS OR ON WIDENED SIDEWALKS. Outdoor seating creates vibrancy and will increase the attractiveness of downtown Jacksonville. Outdoor seating areas can be created by reallocating space used for parking (parklets) or by narrowing vehicular lanes and reallocating the space to outdoor seating, widen sidewalks or bicycle facilities.
INSTALL SIDEWALKS ACROSS DRIVEWAYS AND LIMIT DRIVEWAY WIDTH. Designing sidewalks to continue across a driveway communicates to drivers that pedestrians have the right of-way, that pedestrians may be present, and maintains ADA compliance. It is recommended that the material (e.g. concrete) and width of the sideway be continued across all driveways. Driveways, like
roadways, are places of conflict and
their width should be minimized as much as possible.
KEEP CURB RADII NARROW. Vehicles
must slow to turn at an intersection. The degree to which they must slow is dependent on the size of the curb radii of the intersecting streets. Large turn radii allow for vehicles to turn at much faster speeds. Small turn radii compel vehicles to slow and allows them to see pedestrians more easily. Smaller radii shorten crossing distances for pedestrians
which also improves signal timing;
provides larger pedestrian waiting areas
at corners; improves sight distances; and allows for greater flexibility of curb ramp
placement. It is recommended that curb
radii in downtown be fifteen feet with curb
radii into driveway and parking garages
be five to ten feet. Small turn radii are able to accommodate buses; however,
Jacksonville Transit Authority (JTA) should
be included in discussions on specific
routes.
ADD MID-BLOCK CROSSINGS. On long blocks or where there is a lot of pedestrian demand, install mid-block crossings with high visibility pavement markings and center median islands.
NeighborhoodCommercial Streets
Jacksonville is served by a plethora of neighborhood-serving commercial districts. While attractive to residents from afar, these commercial areas consist of small enterprises with a focus on serving the needs of the immediate neighborhood. Neighborhood commercial streets in Jacksonville could be made safer and more comfortable for patrons, most of who live a short walk or bicycle-ride away.
Currently, commercial streets in Jacksonville include:
Narrow, interrupted, and indirect sidewalks often with obstacles
Some outdoor retail space (for seating, signage, etc.)
Abundant vehicular parking including front-in diagonal parking
Limited bicycle parking and accommodation
Safety Enhancements
REPAIR, REPLACE AND INSTALL SIDEWALKS WITH A CLEAR PEDESTRIAN ZONE, OUTDOOR SEATING AREAS AND BUFFERS FROM THE ROADWAY.
Neighborhood commercial streets attractthe most local and regional patrons when pedestrians are accommodated and there is visible activity along the street. A clear zone for pedestrians, with no obstructions, allows patrons to easily move throughout the area. A space allocated for outdoor seating creates vibrancy and attracts patrons. And, a buffer area for street signs and lights, street trees, and bicycle parking enhances patron comfort.
REDUCE DRIVEWAY WIDTHS AND REMOVE PARKING THAT HAS REPLACED THE ORIGINAL SIDEWALK AREA.
Driveways create areas of conflict
for pedestrians. Reducing the width of driveways enhances pedestrian safety and comfort. Along some neighborhood commercial streets in Jacksonville, sidewalks have been rerouted and replaced with diagonal parking. In these areas, it is recommended that parking be moved and the original sidewalk alignment and buffer areas be re-installed.
INSTALL CURB EXTENSIONS.
Curb extensions can be placed at intersections to reduce the crossing distance for pedestrians, improve sight-lines for both pedestrians and vehicles, and reduce curb radii which reduces vehicle speeds. Curb extensions visibly reduce the roadway width which further slows vehicular
traffic creating a more pleasant
commercial environment.
REALIGN DIAGONAL PARKING FROM FRONT-IN TO BACK-IN. Front-in diagonal parking limits visibility when drivers exit the parking space. This creates a hazardous condition for anyone in the roadway (e.g. drivers and bicyclists). Back-in diagonal parking aligns the driver to be able to see roadway users when exiting the parking space. Diagonal parking may not be needed in all neighborhood commercial
areas. Parallel parking should be
considered as a substitute. This would provide more space for sidewalks, outdoor seating and buffer areas.
REDUCE CURB RADII. Large turn radii at intersections allow for vehicles to turn at faster speeds than at small
radii. When vehicles slow, their field of
vision increases, better allowing them to see pedestrians, and slow speeds, if a crash does incur, are more likely to result in an injury rather than a fatality. Smaller radii can also shorten crossing distances for pedestrians
which also improves signal timing;
provides larger pedestrian waiting
areas at corners; improves sight distances; and allows for greater flexibility of curb ramp placement. It
is recommended that curb radii on neighborhood commercial streets be
fifteen feet.
INSTALL TRAFFIC CALMING MEASURES SUCH AS RAISED CROSSWALKS AND RAISED INTERSECTIONS. Raised crosswalks and intersections function as speed tables reducing the speeds of vehicles and creating a safer environment for pedestrians. Locating the speed table at a crosswalk or intersection further enhances safety by reducing vehicle speeds at the location where pedestrians are in the roadway. Raised crosswalks and intersections further enhance safety by raising the height of pedestrians making them more visible to oncoming vehicles.
Figure 15. These neighborhood commercial streets in Jacksonville have a higher number ofpedestrian crashes than other areas and should
be retrofitted using the
safety enhancements recommended on the previous pages.
Major Arterials and Regional-Serving Retail Centers
Major arterial roadways are typically focused on quickly moving cross-town vehicular traffic.
They have higher speeds and higher volumes than other roadways and often include multiple
lanes. To accommodate through movements, cross-traffic is limited. Because major arterial
roadways allow quick access from across the region, retail centers that serve a regional clientele are often positioned along them and located on large parcels. Their placement is typically vehicle-oriented and include large parking lots at the front of buildings, no bicycle facilities and no or limited pedestrian connections. However, many regional retail centers are also destinations for adjacent residents providing both jobs and places to shop who arrive by foot or bicycle. The vehicle-oriented design of major arterial roadways and adjacent regional retail centers has resulted in a very high number of crashes along these corridors. These major arterial roadways are often the routes of cross-town bus service. Bus stops
along the roadway further attract pedestrians. Most of the roadways are managed by FDOT,
requiring special state-level approval for the installation of safety measures.
Major arterial roadways typically include the following design elements:
High speed multi-lane roadways
Limited locations for crossing
Large driveway widths and turn radii
Large blocks
Limited pedestrian connections
No (or basic/minimum) bicycle facilities
Safety Enhancements
The following recommendations will enhance pedestrian and bicycle safety on major arterial roadways and create enhanced connections for pedestrians:
CONSIDER LANE REDUCTIONS/ROAD DIETS WHERE POSSIBLE. Major
arterial roadways may not warrant the number of lanes or the lane width (typically twelve feet) in Jacksonville currently present. Lane reductions reduce the number of lanes pedestrians need to cross and can enhance intersection signal timing. Reducing lane widths can contribute to slower driving speeds and provide space for bicycle facilities.
INCLUDE PEDESTRIAN PHASING, LEADING PEDESTRIAN INTERVALS, NO RIGHT TURNS ON RED, AND AUTOMATIC OVER ACTUATED SIGNALS AT SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS.
At signalized intersections, pedestrian safety can be increased. Leading pedestrian intervals
(LPI) provide a pedestrian walk signal a few
seconds prior to the vehicle green phase. This allows pedestrians to enter the roadway, increasing their visibility to right-turning vehicles. No right
turns on red signage and enforcement limits
vehicles from entering the crosswalk when pedestrians are present. Automatic pedestrian signals automatically provide a pedestrian phase with enough time to cross the street during each signal cycle, reducing pedestrian wait times and mid-block crossing. Automatic pedestrian signals should be used in high pedestrian crash locations and where pedestrians are expected to be present.
The following recommendations will enhance pedestrian and bicycle safety on major arterial roadways and create enhanced connections for pedestrians:
REDUCE CURB RADII AT SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS AND UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS. Large curb radii allow vehicles to maintain faster speeds while turning, which can lead to a crash with pedestrians who are crossing the
street. Faster speeds reduce a driver s field of vision, making it more difficult to see pedestrians and leading
to more serious injuries if a crash occurs. Smaller radii shorten crossing distances for pedestrians which
leads to improved signal timing; the ability to provide larger pedestrian waiting areas at corners; and greater flexibility of curb ramp placement.
USE HIGH VISIBILITY MARKED CROSSWALKS AT ALL CROSSING LOCATIONS.
High visibility marked crosswalks (sometimes called zebra or ladder) are more visible to drivers. Increasing the visibility of pedestrians along high-volume and high-speed roadways such as major arterials enhances safety.
The following recommendations will enhance pedestrian and bicycle safety on major arterial roadways and create enhanced connections for pedestrians:
IDENTIFY LOCATIONS AND INSTALL RECTANGULAR RAPID FLASHING BEACONS (RRFB). Crosswalks at uncontrolled intersections or mid-block
crossings can be made more highly visible by the installation of Rectangular Rapid
Flashing Beacons (RRFB). Pedestrian-actuated flashing lights are installed in
combination with a pedestrian warning sign and crosswalk markings to create a more visible place for pedestrians to cross. On roadways with higher vehicle speeds and/ or multiple lanes, the pedestrian crossing may be accompanied by a protective refuge or median island to provide the choice of crossing the road in two stages (in which case, additional RRFBs would be installed in the median as well as at either side of the roadway). RRFBs in other communities have increased driver compliance with pedestrian
stop and yield laws by up to 75%.
PROVIDE FREQUENT OPPORTUNITIES TO CROSS THE ROADWAY. Along major arterials, controlled locations for pedestrians to cross the street are limited
at intervals of up to half a mile. These distances lead
to pedestrians crossing at uncontrolled locations, often using the center-turn lane as a pedestrian refuge, which contributes to crashes, injuries and fatalities. At signalized intersections, pedestrian safety should be prioritized though the use of tight curb radii, marked crosswalks, and automatic pedestrian signals at every leg of the intersection. At unsignalized intersections, treatments such as the installation of pedestrian
refuge islands and rapid flashing beacons should be
considered.
The following recommendations will enhance pedestrian and bicycle safety on major arterial roadways and create enhanced connections for pedestrians:
INSTALL MEDIANS WHICH REDUCE CONFLICTS BY CREATING RIGHT-IN/RIGHT OUTS. Right-in/right-out (RIRO) is an access management technique that refers to a type of driveway where only right turns are permitted, thus
reducing conflict points associated
with left turning vehicles and improving safety for pedestrians crossing a driveway or roadway. RIRO should be used at locations with high pedestrian volumes, at high crash locations, along arterial
streets with speeds of 40 mph or
greater, and locations with driveways in close proximity to intersections or other driveways.
REDUCE DRIVEWAY WIDTHS AND DRIVEWAY CURB RADII. Driveways
create conflict points and the wider
the driveway, the more opportunity for
conflict with pedestrians. Driveway
curb radii determine the speed at which a vehicle can enter the driveway. At faster speeds, stopping distances and visibility is reduced, and the likelihood of a serious injury is increased.
The following recommendations will enhance pedestrian and bicycle safety on major arterial roadways and create enhanced connections for pedestrians:
CREATE SAFE AND ATTRACTIVE CONNECTIONS TO ADJACENT NEIGHBORHOODS. The regional-serving retail found along arterial roadways is often located on large-blocks which create barriers to access for adjacent residential
neighborhoods. Many of these
neighbors may wish to walk or bicycle to the retail center if facilities existed. Large blocks need not create barriers if connections such as pedestrian and bicycle pathways are created though the site and into adjacent communities.
The following recommendations will enhance pedestrian and bicycle safety on major arterial roadways and create enhanced connections for pedestrians:
REALIGN BUILDINGS TO FRONT THE ROADWAY. Regional-serving retail along major arterial roadways is often separated from the roadway via large parking lots. Not only is this esthetically unpleasing for people walking, but pedestrian connections from the roadway to the retail entrances do not often exist. As retail centers are renovated or replaced, buildings should be located fronting the roadway with parking at the side or back. This reduces the need for designing and installing two sets of pedestrian
infrastructure one along the roadway and one
connecting the roadway to the building entrance.
Figure 16. These major
arterial roadways in Jacksonville have a higher number of pedestrian crashes thanother areas and should
be retrofitted using the
safety enhancements recommended on the previous pages.
INSTALLATION OF RECTANGULAR RAPID FLASHING BEACONS
The Pedestrian Safety Action Plan addresses general
issues of pedestrian safety and accessibility in
neighborhoods (SNAPP), and targeted pedestrian improvements on typical streets in the City (TRIPS).
A third approach to tackling pedestrian safety is to address individual crash or high priority locations
with specific countermeasures. For this approach
to be manageable, especially for a city the size of Jacksonville, the City needs to have a robust prioritization process to ensure a thoughtful and data-driven selection of locations.
The City has identified Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs), which use LED flashing beacons in
combination with pedestrian warning signs to provide a high-visibility strobe-like warning to drivers when activated by pedestrians, as one countermeasure to supplement standard uncontrolled pedestrian crossings
and help enhance pedestrian safety. The City identified
areas with high concentrations of senior residents and school-aged children as priority populations.
The study team used a three-pronged approach to completing the RRFB assessment, and:
Conducted a review of national and regional best
practices for RRFB installation;
Completed a demand analysis to understand where pedestrian activity is expected and identify general
corridors where pedestrian activity may benefit
from the installation of RRFBs; and,
Analyzed corridor-based data to identify and prioritize a list of recommended locations for RRFB installation.
The results of this assessment are provided
in Appendix 6.
DEMAND ANALYSIS
The TDG team performed a demand analysis to understand where the most pedestrian activity is expected and to identify general corridors where
pedestrians may benefit from the installation of
RRFBs. This was done for the whole City, rather than
just Mobility Zones 7-10 which were the focus of the Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan. Heat maps
were constructed to illustrate which areas should be prioritized for potential installation of RRFBs (Figure
17).
The results of the demand and proposed corridor analysis can be seen on the following map (Figure
18). As data related to roadway characteristics (i.e., street widths, annual average daily traffic, speed limits
and pedestrian counts) were not available or were incomplete, a desktop evaluation of existing roadway conditions was completed on the corridors showing the highest demand.
This evaluation focused on capturing basic data including the posted speed limit, availability of transit, adjacent land uses, the presence of sidewalks and buffers, as well as the presence of bicycle facilities. To provide a concise list of corridors for further analysis, corridors with the following conditions were excluded:
Roadways under the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) jurisdiction,
Roadways with posted speed limits of 40 mph or higher,
Corridors with more than four lanes, and
Roadways with more than 20,000 Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT).
Thirty-six roadway corridors were identified as part of
this review for further analysis and prioritization. The complete list of corridors and characteristics captured is provided on the following pages (Figure 19).
SELECTION OF LOCATIONS
Following the identification of corridors based on the Demand Analysis, the study team requested additional data from the City of Jacksonville related to traffic volumes (AADT) and transit ridership (boardings and alightings). Together, this data was used to construct a final composite heat map for each of the corridors to highlight the specific locations where the installation of RRFBs may be appropriate. The final map can be found below (Figure 20).
The study team used a similar methodology to the one used in the Demand Analysis to construct heat maps for each individual corridor based on the weighted values assigned to the aforementioned data. The study team also
used the location of elementary and middle schools, as well as retirement communities to inform the final location of the proposed RRFB improvements. Eighty-eight specific locations were identified along the study area corridors. These locations may benefit from the installation of crossing improvements such as enhanced and improved
marked crosswalks, RRFBs, and the relocation of a number of bus stops to increase pedestrian comfort and convenience when connecting to and from transit (Figure 21).
RRFB PRIORITIZATION CRITERIA AND METHODOLOGY
A prioritization methodology was developed.
Prioritization provides the opportunity for all projects
to be compared with each other using the same set of criteria. This helps the City identify which projects
should be focused on first, based on the most likely beneficial impact on pedestrian safety.
This project used the ActiveTrans Priority Tool (APT),
a model methodology developed by the National
Cooperative Highway Research Program, to evaluate
and prioritize pedestrian improvements on existing
roadways. The APT is a spreadsheet tool that provides a flexible, transparent, and step-by-step methodology
that incorporates community and City values into the project prioritization process. This methodology uses
a modified version of the APT to quantitatively and objectively compare and prioritize the 88 identified
projects.
The modified version of the APT used several factors
agreed upon with City engineers to compare and evaluate projects. Four factors were used in the
prioritization; each factor was given a weighting based
on priorities expressed by the City. The table notes the weighting and provides an explanation of the scaling of variables used in the methodology (Figure 22).
Figure 22. Variables Used in RRBF Location Prioritization
Variable Explanation Source Weight
Proximity to Pedestrian Deaths Number of pedestrian deaths for the years of 2011 2014 within one-half mile of the proposed crossing improvements. 2011-2014 State of Florida Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles Crash and Citation Reports & Statistics 40
Proximity to Pedestrian Crashes Number of pedestrian crashes for the period between 2011 and 2014 within one-half mile of the proposed crossing improvements. 2011-2014 State of Florida Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles Crash and Citation Reports & Statistics 30
Proximity to Schools Number of pedestrian crashes for the period between 2011 and 2014 within one-half mile of the proposed crossing improvements. Florida Geographic Data Library 15
Proximity to Senior Centers Number of pedestrian crashes for the period between 2011 and 2014 within one-half mile of the proposed crossing improvements. City of Jacksonville Website. 15
TOTAL 100%
The rankings provide a scoring based on proximity to schools, senior centers, pedestrian crashes and deaths throughout the city. A full list of rankings can be found in below (Figure 23). Although the top ranked projects will likely improve conditions for walking and crossing the street along selected corridors, it is recommended that Jacksonville review all projects to take advantage of other opportunities to increase the safety and comfort of people walking. The City should especially consider including walking improvements as part of scheduled repaving, road reconstruction and adjacent development projects.
Figure 23: Prioritized List of RRFB Locations
Road Name RRFB ID Improvement Type Priority Ranking
East Bay Street 55 RRFB Installation 1
Laura Street 59 RRFB Installation 2
Toledo Road 28 RRFB Installation 3
Moncrief Road 49 RRFB Installation 4
East Bay Street 56 RRFB Installation 5
Toledo Road 27 RRFB Installation 6
Adams Street 54 Bus stop relocation 7
St. Augustine Road 25 RRFB Installation 8
Forsyth Street 58 RRFB Installation 9
Road Name RRFB ID Improvement Type Priority Ranking
Catoma Street 67 High Visibility Crossing
Soutel Drive 45 RRFB Installation
Moncrief Road 50 Bus stop relocation
Dupont Avenue 85 RRFB Installation
Wesconnett Boulevard 66 RRFB Installation
Acorn Street 74 RRFB Installation
45th Street W 77 High Visibility Crossing
45th Street W 78 High Visibility Crossing
Park Street 69 RRFB Installation
Post Street 60 RRFB Installation
44th Street W 48 RRFB Installation
East Bay Street 57 RRFB Installation
Post Street 61 RRFB Installation
Park Street 70 High Visibility Crossing
Rogero Road 39 RRFB Installation
Ricker Road 17 RRFB Installation
Barnes Road 33 RRFB Installation
Rogero Road 38 RRFB Installation
Dupont Avenue 86 RRFB Installation
Soutel Drive 46 RRFB Installation
New Berlin Road 7 RRFB Installation
Crown Point Road 87 High Visibility Crossing
Firestone Road 19 High Visibility Crossing
Wesconnet Boulevard 68 RRFB Installation
Lenox Avenue 21 RRFB Installation
Commonwealth Avenue 52 RRFB Installation
Acorn Street 75 RRFB Installation
Townsend Blvd 34 RRFB Installation
Lone Star Road 71 RRFB Installation
Post Street 62 High Visibility Crossing
Ricker Road 18 RRFB Installation
Post Street 63 High Visibility Crossing
Leonid Road 12 RRFB Installation
Leonid Road 11 RRFB Installation
Winton Drive 79 High Visibility Crossing
45th Street W 76 RRFB Installation
Leonid Road 13 RRFB Installation
Post Street 64 High Visibility Crossing
Loretto Road 84 High Visibility Crossing
Spring Park Road 29 RRFB Installation
Losco Road 0 RRFB Installation
University Boulevard 42 RRFB Installation
Moncrief Road 51 RRFB Installation
Road Name RRFB ID Improvement Type Priority Ranking
San Pablo Road 6 RRFB Installation
Rogero Road 37 RRFB Installation
Howell Drive 81 RRFB Installation
Lone Star Road 72 RRFB Installation
Spring Park Road 30 RRFB Installation
St. Augustine Road 26 RRFB Installation
University Boulevard 43 RRFB Installation
Broward Road 15 RRFB Installation
Broward Road 16 RRFB Installation
Soutel Drive 47 RRFB Installation
University Club Boulevard 73 RRFB Installation
Howell Drive 80 RRFB Installation
Rogero Road 40 RRFB Installation
Losco Road 1 RRFB Installation
San Pablo Road 2 RRFB Installation
San Pablo Road 3 RRFB Installation
Firestone Road 20 RRFB Installation
Spring Park Road 32 RRFB Installation
Staples Mill Drive 65 High Visibility Crossing
Harts Road 10 RRFB Installation
San Pablo Road 4 RRFB Installation
Broward Road 14 RRFB Installation
Townsend Blvd 36 Bus stop relocation
Old Kings Road 22 RRFB Installation
Commonwealth Avevenue 53 RRFB Installation
Barnes Road S 82 RRFB Installation
Barnes Road S 83 RRFB Installation
Hartley Road 88 RRFB Installation
Spring Park Road 31 RRFB Installation
University Boulevard 41 RRFB Installation
San Pablo Road 5 RRFB Installation
Old Kings Road 24 RRFB Installation
Townsend Blvd 35 Bus stop relocation
Harts Road 8 RRFB Installation
Harts Road 9 RRFB Installation
Old Kings Road 23 RRFB Installation
The previous table presents normalized scores for all variables based on their proposed weights. Such scores were calculated by using the following formulas (Figure 24).
Figure 24. Formulas for calculating normalized scores for each of the proposed variables
Variable Formula
Pedestrian Deaths Number of pedestrian deaths within mile of the proposed RRFB location divided by the number of total pedes trian deaths in the City, multiplied by the weight assigned (40 percent).
Pedestrian Crashes Number of pedestrian crashes within mile of the proposed RRFB location divided by the number of total pedes trian crashes in the City, multiplied by the weight assigned (30 percent).
Schools Number of schools within mile of the proposed RRFB location divided by the number of total schools in the City, multiplied by the weight as signed (15 percent).
Senior Centers Number of senior centers within mile of the proposed RRFB location divided by the number of total senior centers in the City, multiplied by the weight assigned (15 percent).
FINAL PROJECT SELECTION AND IMPLEMENTATION
While the APT provides an objective ranking
methodology based on criteria developed in consultation with City staff, other factors may still
influence final project selection, including:
Grouping of projects along the same corridor (e.g. Soutel Drive or Moncrief Avenue). RRFB s are still a relatively new traffic control devices and may be unfamiliar to Jacksonville residents. Installing a series of RRFBs along the same road or corridor, even though some locations are ranked higher than others, may assist with complementary public information and education programs and hasten understanding and acceptance of the devices by drivers and pedestrians alike.
Mobility zones. The list does not consider geographical or political boundaries within the city that may influence the final order in which these devices are installed.
Pairing with other planned projects. As mentioned above, the opportunity may arise to install an RRFB on this list as a part of a scheduled project.
This page intentionally left blank.
BICYCLE NETWORK
BIKEWAY STUDY
More than 800 people lost their lives in the United States in 2015 while riding a bike. As has been the case for several years, almost one in five of those fatalities (150 in 2015) occurred on Florida roads. While this may
be in part attributable to a climate and topography that encourages year-round riding, this unacceptable death toll has led Florida to be at the forefront of initiatives to
improve bicyclist safety. The state was one of the first
to have a statewide bicycle safety plan, and in the late
1980s and early 1990s Florida communities led the way
in local bicycle planning and program development.
Unfortunately, crashes involving bicyclists remain stubbornly high throughout the state, and in particular in big cities such as Jacksonville. Education and enforcement programs are an important element of an overall strategy to improve bicycle safety, however
having a safe place to ride and a place that feels safe is still absolutely fundamental to creating a safe,
bicycle-friendly community.
Bicycle planning and engineering has evolved
significantly since the Bicycle Level of Service
measure was developed and widely implemented in Florida communities, including Jacksonville. Today, the emphasis is on creating a comprehensive and connected network of low stress bicycling routes that comprise trails (such as the Baldwin Trail), separated infrastructure on busy roads, marked bike lanes on less busy roads (e.g. Lone Star Road), and signed routes on low volume, local neighborhood streets.
Taking this approach for the bicycle element of
the Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan, a 250
mile connected network of roads within the I-295
Beltline was identified as the core of a citywide bike
network (Figure 25). This network includes existing
infrastructure; recommended changes to existing bike
facilities to increase separation from motor vehicle
traffic on roads with higher volumes and faster traffic;
and proposed new facilities to complete the connected network.
The bicycle element also identifies a range of potential
facility types to use in creating the network, and uses
the ActiveTrans Prioritization Tool (APT) to generate
a prioritized list of projects necessary to complete the network. This list is divided into two parts: one
identifies projects on City streets, the other has
changes necessary to State roads.
The prioritized list of projects on City streets is designed to assist in the evaluation and selection of
projects for funding through the Mobility Fee and CIP
process. However, the network map and list of projects should guide and inform any changes made to these streets whether through regular resurfacing programs,
JTA s Mobility Works initiative, or grant funded projects unrelated to the Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan specifically.
As with the pedestrian element of the plan, the role of the state is critically important. Not only are crashes involving bicyclists clustered around state roads that
tend to have higher speeds and traffic volumes, but the state roads are also the most direct and sometimes the only routes serving major retail, commercial,
education and residential areas in the city. Therefore, the plan has recommendations for the State DOT to update its design standards and do more than the bare minimum wherever possible. And, the value of the network map is that it provides guidance to encourage the State DOT to include recommended bike network changes in all of its projects on those roads.
Figure 25. Bicycle network study area and route map.
BICYCLE NETWORK RECOMMENDATIONS
Network recommendations use the suite of facility types discussed below. They are listed from those providing the most protection and space for bicyclists to those providing the least where riders will share space with automobiles. Some facility types already exist on Jacksonville streets, and others will be new to the City. As mentioned in other areas of this plan, national design guidance should be used when implementing facilities, such as the AASHTO Guide to the Development of Bicycle Facilities and the NACTO Urban Bikeway Design Guide.
Shared use paths
Paths shared by both bicyclists and pedestrians come in two distinct types and there are several different ways in which they might be described. Paths that are largely within their own right of way such as the Baldwin Trail and much of the S-Line are often referred to as trails or greenways, especially if they have been developed and funded by a park authority or land management agency. Paths that are built within a highway right of way, parallel to the roadway and often on one side of the road for both directions of bicycle traffic, are usually referred to as sidepaths. Good examples in the Jacksonville area include Kernan Boulevard and the Black Creek Trail alongside US 17
south of Doctor s Inlet. Sidepaths are typically built by transportation agencies such Florida DOT and the City of
Jacksonville Public Works Department.
The advantage with shared use paths that fall into the trails and greenways category is that as they exist in their own right of way, there are few interruptions from roads and driveways and users are well separated from motor
vehicle traffic. By contrast, sidepaths are in the same right of way as the parallel roadway and may be frequently
interrupted by driveways, curb cuts, intersections with local as well as major roads, and are subject to a lot of
turning traffic. In addition, sidepaths often tend to be close to the motor vehicle traffic and that traffic is likely traveling quite fast. Finally, sidepaths often replace traditional sidewalks and have a heavier mix of pedestrians who may be waiting at a bus stop, crossing the road, managing strollers and children with whom cyclists must
interact safely.
Sidepaths are an appropriate solution where separation from higher-speed, higher-volume traffic is needed; where pedestrian volumes aren t high enough to create frequent conflicts; and where the issue of frequent interruptions and turning movements can be minimized. Most corridors with shared use path recommendations in Jacksonville
are large, commercial streets. These corridors tend to have a high number of driveways, and consolidation of these driveways should be prioritized to improve both bicyclist and pedestrian safety. Consolidating driveways decreases
the number of potential conflict points between road users. Shared use path pavement and surface treatments
should be carried across those driveways that do remain so drivers are aware that they are crossing a pedestrian and bicycle facility. Signage should also indicate two-way bicyclist and pedestrian travel at these crossings.
BEACH BOULEVARD
A shared use path is recommended on Beach Boulevard. For most of the corridor, this would require widening the existing sidewalk to accommodate both people traveling by foot and on bikes. This may require relocation of some utilities, and driveway consolidation is also recommended to decrease the number of potential conflicts between shared use path users and automobiles. Beach Boulevard currently rates BLOS F meaning it is extremely uncomfortable for all bicyclists. Shared
use paths are not evaluated in the BLOS method, but this separation from automobile traffic would greatly increase bicyclist
comfort.
Protected Bike Lanes
Protected bike lanes provide space for the exclusive use of bicyclists that is separated from both automobile and pedestrian traffic. This is a new facility type for Jacksonville.
Lanes may be at the street or sidewalk level, or at an intermediate level. Separation types range from less-
permanent, lower-cost options such as flexible delineator posts, to mid-range cost options like pre-cast or cast-in
place concrete curb, to full reconstruction of the street providing a separated bike lane at intermediate or sidewalk level.
SBLs may be implemented either as two one-way facilities on each side of the street as typical bike lanes are, or they may be constructed as two-way facilities on one side of a one-way or two-way street. Two-way facilities may require less right-of-way space, but they can also create more complicated movements at intersections that need
to be controlled with bicycle-specific signal phasing. In some cases, where streets are very wide, safe crossings
are infrequent, and destinations are present on both sides of the street, it may even be desirable to have two-way
SBLs on both sides of the street. However, this type of implementation can incur significant space and economic
costs, so it is not likely to occur until Jacksonville has implemented a more basic bike network.
Many separated bike lane recommendations in Jacksonville can be implemented within existing curb lines through
the removal of travel or parking lanes. In these cases, initial implementation can be done in a cost-effective manner
by using striping and lower cost materials such as flexible delineator posts. When major street work is done in the
future, these facilities can be upgraded to curb-separated or sidewalk-level lanes.
MERRILL ROAD
Protected bike lanes are recommended on Merrill Road. They can be implemented through a road diet that removes two travel lanes, providing space for the bike lane and buffer area where vertical separation will be placed. Merrill Road currently
rates BLOS E, but the new configuration cannot be measured by BLOS which does not account for Protected bike lanes.
However, other analysis methods show that this will be a much more comfortable facility.
Buffered Bike Lanes
Buffered bike lanes are dedicated space for bicyclists on the roadway and provide greater horizontal separation
from automobile traffic. This facility already exists in Jacksonville on the Acosta Bridge where it was implemented in 2016.
Typically, the buffer is located between the bike lane and the adjacent travel lane, but it may also be located adjacent to a parking lane where there is concern about a the potential for dooring in areas of higher parking turnover. Where space is available, often where an entire travel lane is removed, there may be adequate width for buffering on both sides of the lane. Buffering both sides of the lane may also make it more evident to drivers that this roadway space is now dedicated to bicyclists.
This greater separation can increase bicyclists comfort on busier streets, but it does not prevent automobiles from entering, stopping or parking in the bike lane and impeding travel. In locations where parking is removed from a street to implement buffered bike lanes, enforcement of the new no parking regulation may be needed. The same is true for locations where a travel lane is removed to prevent driving in the buffered bike lane. Buffered lanes may also be used as an interim treatment before implementation of a separated bike lane to gauge the impact of parking or travel lane removal. After a testing period, vertical separation may be added in the buffer area, or the space dedicated to the buffered bike lane may be reconstructed and built as an intermediate- or sidewalk-level separated bike lane.
Most buffered bike lane projects will be implemented through parking removal on both sides of the street, or
through road diets that remove two travel lanes. These actions will provide ample space for buffered bike lanes.
They may also be implemented through removal of center turn lanes where the volume of turning traffic is
anticipated to be low.
AVENUE B
Buffered bike lanes are recommended on Avenue B. They can be implemented through removal of the center turn lane which provides space for a six foot bike lane with a three foot buffer on the travel lane side. The additional space will increase bicyclists comfort, especially as this is a bus route, and the buffer places bicyclists farther from large buses. The addition of buffered bike lanes improves the BLOS score on Avenue B from a grade D to a grade A.
Bike Lanes
Bike lanes are dedicated space for bicyclists on the roadway that exist on a number of Jacksonville streets today. They provide an increased level of comfort for bicyclists but may not appeal to all riders if located on higher-volume, higher-speed streets. For example, the bike lane on Fort Caroline Road can be uncomfortable due to its
minimal width (four feet from gutter pan edge) and higher volumes and speeds of adjacent traffic. Most people
would not be comfortable riding here and would likely instead ride on the sidewalk.
Recommendations for bike lanes in this plan focus on streets with moderate to low traffic speeds and volumes, streets like those in the neighborhood collector and neighborhood commercial typologies. Most recommendations
will be implemented through road diets which are in line with the recommendation to prioritize lane reductions on these streets to improve pedestrian safety. Reducing the number of lanes provides space on the roadway to stripe bike lanes, and in cases of a four-to-three road diet where a center turn lane is introduced, can provide space for introduction of median refuge islands at pedestrian crossings.
Some projects may also be implemented through lane diets where travel lanes today are wider than necessary or through removal of center turn lanes where turning volumes are not anticipated to be high.
SOUTEL DRIVE
Bike lanes are recommended on Soutel Drive. They can be implemented as part of a road diet project that will benefit
pedestrians, bicyclists and motorists along this corridor. A road diet converts a four lane roadway to one with two travel lanes, a center turn lane, and bicycle lanes. The center turn lane can also be built as a pedestrian refuge to help people cross the road safely. The addition of bike lanes on improves the BLOS score on Soutel Drive from a D to a C grade still
somewhat uncomfortable due to the traffic volume and speed.
Bicycle boulevard
Bicycle boulevard routes take advantage of low-speed, low-volume streets that are already comfortable for most
bicyclists. As such, limited additional infrastructure is needed on many segments of these streets other than traffic
calming described below. Bicycle boulevards are recommended on local streets in Jacksonville, and many of the infrastructure improvements for pedestrians noted for the residential street typology are applicable on bicycle boulevards.
Many local streets are already comfortable for bicycling and are unlikely to have issues with higher speed automobiles. However, some local streets in Jacksonville are wider, around 30 feet in width, have no striped
centerline and low on-street parking occupancy. Where these streets have been recommended to be a bicycle
boulevard, traffic calming measures should be implemented. These can take the form of either vertical (speed
humps, speed cushions, etc.) or horizontal (curb extensions, chicanes, mini circles, etc.) elements. These features
are further detailed in the residential street typology. Where traffic calming is not needed, bicycle boulevards should be designated with wayfinding signage, and the City may also consider pavement markings. Because these facilities follow smaller, more circuitous routes, wayfinding signage is of particular importance and should be
considered for bicycle boulevards.
A critical part of implementing bicycle boulevards will be to address crossings of major streets. Some of these are already signalized and provide a reasonable means for bicyclists to cross a higher-volume, higher-speed street. Unsignalized crossings will need to be studied at the time of design to determine the appropriate accommodation to make a safe and comfortable crossing for bicyclists. Appropriate treatments will range from marked crosswalks
with rectangular rapid flashing beacons (RRFBs), to addition of a median refuge island, to consideration of additional traffic control such as a pedestrian hybrid beacon or full signal.
OAK STREET
A bicycle boulevard is recommended on Oak Street. While the street is already somewhat mostly comfortable for bicyclists,
traffic calming should be added. Curb extensions at intersections and mid block locations are good candidates because of
on street parking. The crossings to the bridge over Willow Branch should also be highlighted and signed so drivers expect bicyclists to continue with a through movement in these locations. Oak Street already rates BLOS B, and though the addition
of traffic calming and signage does not change its BLOS rating, these actions are likely to increase bicyclist comfort and
improve conditions for pedestrians as well.
Priority Sharrows
Priority sharrows (PSLs) are used on streets where space is not available to provide a dedicated bicycle facility, such as bike lanes, and where a more prominent notification to drivers is desired. These markings are spaced more
frequently than standard sharrows and also have a green backing. They are recommended in commercial areas
where more complex traffic patterns will be present as a result of higher parking turnover and anticipated higher
bicycle volumes to access adjacent businesses.
While PSLs do not provide dedicated space on the roadway for bicyclists, they do bring a higher level of awareness
to drivers than typical sharrows. As a new facility for Jacksonville, they will likely have a large impact by drawing attention, but may also require some education for drivers and bicyclists. Future use of this marking on streets not
in this Plan s network should be restricted to those with higher traffic volumes to maintain the difference in usage between PSLs and standard sharrows.
PARK STREET
Priority sharrows are recommended on a short segment of Park Street in the Five Points area. This block has high turnover angled parking with many small retail and restaurant destinations and higher pedestrian volumes. These factors can lead to
somewhat chaotic traffic movements where drivers awareness of potential bike traffic should be heightened. PSLs do not
change the BLOS rating of this street.
Sharrows
Sharrows, also known as Shared Lane Arrows, are used on streets where space is not available to provide a dedicated bike facility, such as bike lanes. Sharrows are recommended on lower-volume, lower-speed streets where
centerlines are present. Many of these streets are similar to those recommended to become bicycle boulevards, but they likely have higher traffic volumes which warrant centerline striping.
Some streets where sharrows are recommended would also benefit from traffic calming, either vertical or
horizontal. The existing sharrows in Jacksonville are on Riverside Avenue near the I-95 underpass and on San
Marco Boulevard through a constrained area with medians and a commercial center.
KING STREET
Sharrows are recommended for King Street to connect the College Street bicycle boulevard to bike lanes on McCoy Creek Boulevard. King Street is one of the few connections through the barrier of I 10 in this area, and it is preferable to Stockton Street which is busier and higher speed. While King Street is lower speed and volume, the 28 foot width means there is also
room for horizontal traffic calming which may help keep automobile speeds close to the speed limit of 30 mph. Sharrows do
not change the BLOS rating of this street.
ADDITIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS
Critical Bridge Connections
There are some potential connection projects within the
study area that do not lend themselves to identification
as segments within the recommended network. One critical area would be to create a connection for bicyclists and pedestrians through the interchange at Arlington Expressway and Southside Boulevard. The frontage roads along Southside Boulevard present an easy project for north-south travel in this area,
and reconnecting Mill Creek Road via a bicycle and
pedestrian bridge or underpass would enable travel to continue farther north. The connection through the
Myrtle Avenue underpass would also require major
construction work, but it would link two segments
of Myrtle that otherwise are an easy win in terms
of connectivity from near downtown to nothern neighborhoods.
Lighting
Due to the many highways that criss-cross the Jacksonville landscape, there are a number of bike routes which use underpasses. Typically, these are not well lit. While this may be reasonable for automobiles with headlights, typical bike lights do not also light the roadway. The addition of lighting should be considered where bike facilities use underpasses.
BICYCLE NETWORK PRIORITIZATION
The recommendations of the bike network were prioritized in order to help the City decide how to spend available funding sources, where the pursuit of additional funding may be necessary, and projects that could occur with partners such as FDOT, JTA and the Downtown Investment Authority.
Facility recommendations were aggregated or divided into corridors based upon the following criteria:
FACILITY TYPE: A single facility type recommendation that applies to multiple streets along a route, e.g., a bicycle boulevard that include a
number of turns;
STREET: A single street with multiple facility types that are implemented through similar means, e.g., a street where bike lanes and sharrows are recommended for different sections, but both projects are implemented through application of
paint, not through moving curbs; and/or
LOGICAL EXTENTS: A longer corridor with a single facility type broken at logical end points to create
shorter segments, e.g., a five-mile shared use path
recommendation broken into corridors based upon places where it connects with other planned/existing facilities or major destinations.
Corridors may not always be implemented as a whole where costs are high or where other roadway projects have different extents. A single corridor may end up being implemented through a series of projects that occur at different times. However, planners should be conscious of perpetuating the existing problems of network connectivity in Jacksonville. The critical problem of the existing bike network is a lack of connectivity, so while connectivity is assessed in the prioritization, common sense consideration of connections should dictate project timing and extents.
Although the data-driven process is intended to determine broad priorities, it should be used as a guide, not as an infallible list of priorities. It s important that the prioritized list not be taken so literally as to preclude
projects lower on the list from being constructed first if
opportunity arises. For example, if a road rehabilitation project is imminent, a project lower on the list should be considered for implementation even if projects above it are not yet funded.
Prioritization Methodology
The prioritization methodology used for the plan is
based on the 10-step method for prioritizing pedestrian
and bicycle improvement locations developed for National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Report 803: Pedestrian and Bicycle Transportation Along Existing Roads ActiveTrans Priority Tool Guidebook. The
10-step method is the result of findings from a national
survey, literature review, and agency interviews.
The prioritization tool reflects input of a project steering
committee regarding community priorities, as well as
feedback heard at open houses conducted for this Plan.
Each project is scored based on a set of criteria and weighting determined by the steering committee and
reflect the vision and goals of the project. The scoring
uses a combination of selected factors and variables. Factors are categories used in the prioritization process to express community/agency values and group
variables with similar characteristics. Variables are
measurable characteristics of roadways, households,
neighborhood areas and other features. For this Plan,
factors, variables and weighting were recommended by the project team and reviewed by stakeholders (Figure
26).
Prioritization Results
The results of this prioritization exercise are listed in
the figures below (Figures 28-29). Those projects near
the top of the list will likely have the greatest impact on improving the bicycling environment in Jacksonville. As noted, this list is not the only factor that should inform decisions about project implementation, but the top corridors listed here are those that are more likely to improve safety in high-crash locations, serve areas with higher demand for bicycling, connect to other facilities, and serve historically underserved populations throughout Jacksonville.
Implementation Opportunities
Some projects that present the opportunity for quicker implementation are not included in the top tier of prioritized corridors. However, there is value in implementing these recommendations early in order to demonstrate the City s interest in improving the
bicycling environment (Figure 27).
Some of the projects listed below will be new facility types for Jacksonville. It is important to start to get these on the ground so users of all modes people driving, biking and walking become accustomed to the rules of the road associated with each.
Some of the projects listed below will also be new methods of implementation for Jacksonville. By working through these project designs soon, City staff will be prepared for how they will assess these project types in the future.
Figure 26. Variables and values used for the network prioritization process.
Factor Variables Weight (points)
Safety 10
# bike/ped crashes
# fatal or severe bike/ped crashes
Demand
Average demand over corridor length
# bus lines crossed
# elementary schools within 1 mile
# middle and high schools within 2 miles
Connectivity # connections to an existing bike facility
Equity # connections to a planned bike facility
% population in poverty
% non-white population
% youth population
% population in rental housing
Figure 27. List of top implementation opportunities
Soutel Drive
New Kings Road
Lem Turner Road
Bike lanes
Road diet (4 to 3 lanes)
Avenue B
30th Street
Moncrief Road
Buffered bike lanes
Center turn lane removal
Oak Street
Margaret Street
Challen Avenue
Bicycle boulevard
Traffic calming; signage
Moncrief Road
Golfair Boulevard
MLK Jr Parkway
Buffered bike lanes
Center turn lane removal
Project Project Street(s) Facility(ies) From To City FDOT Number Ranking Ranking
1 Lem Turner Road (Trout River Bridge) Separated Bike Lane Dolly Drive Bayview Avenue 36 2 Lem Turner Road Shared use path Bayview Avenue Clyde Drive
26
Carbondale
3 Bassett Road Sharrows Lem Turner Road 130
Drive
Lem Turner
Clyde Drive Bicycle boulevard Soutel Drive
Road
Lem Turner
5 Soutel Drive Bike Lanes Moncrief Road 124
Road
6 Sibbald Road Bike Lanes Trout River Boulevard Soutel Drive 146
7 Howell Drive; Ribault Scenic Drive Bike Lanes Clyde Drive Winton Drive 121 8 Winton Drive Bike Lanes Moncrief Road Van Gundy Road 74
Palmdale Street; Champlain Road; Van Gundy Lem Turner
9 Bicycle boulevard Winton Drive 125
Road Road
10 Lem Turner Road Shared use path Edgewood Avenue Clyde Drive 48
11 Edgewood Avenue Separated Bike Lane Lem Turner Road Bunker Hill Blvd 9 Lem Turner
12 Edgewood Avenue Separated Bike Lane Moncrief Road
21
Road
Oakhurst Avenue; Rutledge Avenue; Smyrna Bicycle boulevard; Shar
13 Lem Turner Road Moncrief Road 105
Street rows
Edgewood Av
14 Moncrief Road Separated Bike Lane Soutel Drive
109
enue
15 Cleveland Road; Marlo Street Bike Lanes; Sharrows 25th Street Moncrief Road 129
16 Edgewood Avenue Separated Bike Lane New Kings Road Moncrief Road
10
Edgewood/
Edgewood Avenue, Edgewood Court, McLen
17 Paved Shoulder New Kings Road McLendon Inter-82
don Drive
section
McLendon Street
18 Edgewood Avenue Separated Bike Lane I-10 underpass
31
(RR bridge)
19 575th Street; Norman E Th agard Boulevard Bike Lanes; Sharrows Edgewood Avenue Huron Street Bike Lanes; Paved Shoul
20 Melson Avenue Broadway Avenue 20th Street
116
der
Edgewood Av
21 90
Broadway Avenue Bicycle boulevard McDuff Avenue
enue
Figure 29. List of prioritized bikeway network projects, by project number
Bicycle boulevard; Shar
22
Green Street, Luna Street, Melba Street
Lenox Avenue Post Street
65
rows
23 Edgewood Avenue Buff ered Bike Lanes Mayflower Street I-10
67
Project Project Street(s) Facility(ies) From To City FDOT Number Ranking Ranking
Bicycle boulevard; Shar-
Edgewood Avenue Plymouth Street Waterfront 136
rows
Bike Lanes; Bicycle bou-
Challen Avenue; Herschel Street; Oak Street;
26
levard; Priority Sharrows; Riverside Avenue San Juan Avenue 139
Margaret Street; Oak Street trail
Trail
27 Hamilton Street Bicycle boulevard College Street Blackburn Street 149
28 College Street, Falmouth Street Bicycle boulevard Cassat Avenue Luna Street 89
29 Post Street Bike Lanes; Sharrows Roosevelt Boulevard Cassat Avenue 6
Edgewood Av-
Lenox Avenue Bike Lanes Normandy Boulevard
76
enue
Hyde Grove
31 Lenox Avenue; Old Middleburg Road Buff ered Bike Lanes Lane Avenue 114
Avenue
32 Normandy Boulevard Paved Shoulder Memorial Park Road Lane Avenue
19
Wilson Boule
33 Lane Avenue Separated Bike Lane Normandy Boulevard 27
vard
Roosevelt Bou
34 103rd Street; Timuquana Road Separated Bike Lane I-295
28
levard
Harlow Boule-
Wesconnett Boulevard Separated Bike Lane 110th Street 111
vard
36 110th Street; Ortega Farms Boulevard Bicycle boulevard Wesconnett Boulevard Timuquana Road 160
Wesconnett
37 Harlow Boulevard Bicycle boulevard 103rd Street 111
Boulevard
Bike Lanes; Bicycle bou-
Wilson Boule
38 Lane Avenue; London Bridge Lane
Harlow Boulevard
96
levard; Sharrows
vard
39 Jammes Road Buff ered Bike Lanes Wilson Boulevard 103rd Street 119
Blanding Boule-
Wilson Boulevard Separated Bike Lane Lane Avenue
63
vard
41 Wilson Boulevard Shared use path Firestone Road Lane Avenue 17
Herschel Street; Lakeside Drive; Birkenhead Bicycle boulevard; Shar
42
San Juan Avenue Hamilton Street 108
Road; Wabash Avenue rows
San Juan Avenue; Grand Avenue; Ortega Bou-Bicycle boulevard; Shar
43 Roosevelt Boulevard Herschel Street 162
levard rows
Blanding Boule
44
Blackburn Street Bicycle boulevard Hamilton Street
105
vard
Blanding Boulevard (Cedar River Bridge) Shared use path Wilson Boulevard Blackburn Street
1
Project Project Street(s) Facility(ies) From To City FDOT Number Ranking Ranking
Lake Shore Bou-
Bike Lanes; Bicycle bou-Lane Avenue; Blanding
47 Park Street (two segments) levard; Hamilton 88
levard Boulevard
Street
48
Roosevelt Boulevard/Railroad alignment Trail Timuquana Road Forest Street 145
Buff ered Bike Lanes; Bike
49 Riverside Avenue Margaret Street Leila Street 23
Lanes
McCoy Creek Boulevard; Forest Street; Fitzger
50
Bike Lanes; Sharrows McDuff Avenue I-95 Underpass 79
ald Street
McCoy Creek
51 King Street Sharrows College Street 47
Boulevard
College Street, Goodwin Street, Post Street, Bicycle boulevard; Shar
52
Park Street McDuff Avenue 91
Roosevelt Boulevard rows; Priority Sharrows
Buff ered Bike Lanes; Bike
53 Lee Street; Park Street Lanes; Priority Sharrows; Adams Street Post Street 15 Sharrows
Contraflow Bike Lane;
54 Church Street
Eaverson Street Lee Street 69
Sharrows
55 Beaver Street; Eaverson Street Bike Lanes; Sharrows Church Street Kings Road 28
56 Kings Road; New Kings Road Bike Lanes MLK Jr Parkway Eaverson Street
16
57 25th Street Bicycle boulevard New Kings Road Almeda Road 66
58 Meharry Avenue; Paris Avenue; Brooklyn Road Bicycle boulevard Avenue B Moncrief Road 40
Buff ered Bike Lanes; Bike
Avenue B; Restlawn Drive; Canal Street; Alm
59 Lanes; Sharrows; Paved 26th Street Palmdale Street 72
eda Street; 30th Street
Shoulder
Golfair Boule
60 Moncrief Road Shared use path Edgewood Avenue
27
vard
Buff ered Bike Lanes; Bike S Line existing
61 Moncrief Road 34th Street 7
Lanes; Sharrows trail
62 26th Street; Almeda Street Sharrows Canal Street Moncrief Road 87
63 33rd Street Sharrows; Bike Lane Almeda Street Myrtle Avenue 100
64 13th Street Sharrows Canal Street Davis Street 43
65 Myrtle Avenue Buff ered Bike Lanes 33rd Street I-95 Underpass 32
66 Myrtle Avenue (I-95 underpass) Shared use path Dennis Street Bay Street 14
67 Myrtle Avenue Buff ered Bike Lanes Forest Street Dennis Street 25
68 Forest Street Separated Bike Lane Forest STreet I-95 SB off-ramp 4
Project Project Street(s) Facility(ies) From To City FDOT Number Ranking Ranking
69 Jeff erson Street Separated Bike Lane Leila Street Forsyth Street 16 Jeff erson Street Sharrows Forsyth Street Ashley Street 54
Separated Bike Lane; Bike Washington
71 44
Church Street Jeff erson Street
Lanes; Sharrows Street
Washington
72
Ashley Street Separated Bike Lane Jeff erson Street
51
Street
Protected bike lanes; Bike
73 Coast Line Drive; Pearl Street Water Street 1st Street 6
Lanes; Sharrows
Buff ered Bike Lanes; Bike
74 Laura Street
Independent Drive 1st Street 2
Lanes; Priority Sharrows
Bay St Separated Bike Lane BAY ST Liberty Street 21 A Philip Ran
76 Bay Street Bike Lanes Liberty Street
22
dolph Boulevard
Buff ered Bike Lanes; Bike Courthouse
77 Liberty Street 1st Street 7
Lanes; Bicycle boulevard Drive 78 Liberty Street Bicycle boulevard 1st Street 21st Street 56
79 21st Street Bike Lanes Liberty Street Phoenix Avenue 61 Phoenix Avenue Bike Lanes Dyal Street 21st Street 36
81 Dyal Street and Florida Avenue Bicycle boulevard First Street Phoenix Avenue 44 82 A Philip Randolph Boulevard Bike Lanes; Sharrows Bay Street 1st Street 64
Bike Lanes; Bicycle bou
83 1st Street Pearl Street US-1 35
levard
84 S Line Extension Trail Phelps Street Hubbard Street 94
Talleyrand Av
8th Street Bike Lanes Franklin Street 60
enue
Buffalo Avenue; Wigmore Street; Talleyrand Buff ered Bike Lanes; Bike
86
44th Street 11th Street 141
Avenue Lanes
87 Talleyrand Avenue Buff ered Bike Lanes Duval Street 11th Street 115 Northbank Riv
88
Bryan Street; Duval Street Sharrows Talleyrand Avenue
85
erwalk Extension
89 41Hart Bridge Shared use path south bank north bank Northbank Riverwalk Extension Trail ive 135
91 11Acosta Bridge Shared use path south bank north bank Avenues Walk
FEC Rail Corridor Trail Acosta Bridge
Boulevard
Project Project Street(s) Facility(ies) From To City FDOT Number Ranking Ranking
University Bou
93 St Augustine Road Bike Lanes Emerson Street 133
levard
San Jose Boule
94
St Augustine Road Bike Lanes University Boulevard
41
vard
St Augustine
95 92
University Boulevard Separated Bike Lane San Jose Boulevard
Road
96 University Boulevard Separated Bike Lane Powers Avenue I-95 SB off-ramp 9
Bike Lanes; Bicycle bou
97 Kennerly Road; Spring Glen Road Spring Park Road Beach Boulevard 117
levard
Hendricks Av
98 San Jose Boulevard Sharrows Hendricks Avenue
163
enue
San Jose Park
100 Hendricks Avenue; San Jose Boulevard Buff ered Bike Lanes San Marco Boulevard
Drive
101 Phillips Highway Separated Bike Lane I-95 Interchange Emerson Street
39
102 Phillips Highway Shared use path University Boulevard Emerson Street 22 Sharrows; Priority Shar-
Hendricks Av
103 San Marco Boulevard Nira Street
50
rows enue
Childrens Way; Nira Street; Palm Avenue; Pru-Hendricks Av
104 Sharrows San Marco Boulevard 13
dential Drive enue
105 San Marco Boulevard Separated Bike Lane Mary Street Prudential Drive 24
106 Riverplace Boulevard Bike Lanes San Marco Boulevard Prudential Drive 11 107 Main Street Bridge Shared use path south bank north bank 69
Southbank
Southbank Riverwalk
108 Southbank Riverwalk East Extension Trail Riverwalk East 97
East Extension
Extension
Buff ered Bike Lane; Bike
109 Atlantic Boulevard
San Marco Boulevard I-95 interchange 38
Lane; Priority Sharrows
Spring Park
110 Atlantic Boulevard Shared use path I-95 Interchange 52
Road
Spring Glen
Beach Boulevard Shared use path Spring Park Road
Road
113 Beach Boulevard Shared use path Spring Glen Road Dean Road Bike Lanes; Bicycle bou-
Dean Road; Parental Home Road Bowden Road Beach Boulevard 159
levard; Sharrows
Project Project Street(s) Facility(ies) From To City FDOT Number Ranking Ranking
Bartram Road; Hickman Road; Ryar Road;
Bicycle boulevard University Boulevard Beach Boulevard 138
Smallwood Road
University Bou
116 Bartram Road Paved Shoulder Atlantic Boulevard
147
levard
Southside Bou
117 32
Atlantic Boulevard Shared use path Beach Boulevard
levard
Bicycle boulevard; Shar-
Atlantic Boule
118 Berry Avenue; Mill Creek Road
Arlington Road
132
rows
vard
119 Arlington Road Buff ered Bike Lanes Atlantic Boulevard Alderman Road 73 Arlington Road Shared use path Arlington Expressway Alderman Road 33
Arlington Ex
121 Arlington Road Separated Bike Lane King Arthur Road 17
pressway 122 Arlington Road Separated Bike Lane Cesery Boulevard Rogero Road 39
123 Rogero Road Buff ered Bike Lanes Merrill Road Arlington Road 102 Buff ered Bike Lanes; Bike
Arlington Ex
124 Cesery Boulevard Merrill Road
98
Lanes; Bicycle boulevard pressway
Cesery Boule-
Arlington Expressway; Service Road Shared use path Matthews Bridge 83
vard
126 Matthews Bridge Shared use path
A Philip Randolph
127 Arlington Expressway Shared use path Matthews Bridge 93
Boulevard
128 University Boulevard Bike Lanes Tanglewood Avenue Clift on Lane 98
Shared use path; Protect-Arlington Ex
129 University Boulevard Fort Caroline Road 81
ed bike lanes pressway
University Club Boulevard; University Boule-
Fort Caroline
Bicycle boulevard Fort Caroline Road
141
vard
Road
Townsend Bou
131 Fort Caroline Road Separated Bike Lane University Boulevard 103
levard
Gilmore Heights
132
Fort Caroline Road Separated Bike Lane Townsend Boulevard
151
Road
Regency Square
133 Southside Connector Service Road Shared use path Merrill Road
148
Boulevard
Southside Boule
134 Merrill Road Shared use path Sunrise Ridge Lane
vard underpass
Dames Point
Merrill Road Separated Bike Lane University Boulevard Crossing Boule-74 vard
Project Project Street(s) Facility(ies) From To City FDOT Number Ranking Ranking
Bike Lanes; Bicycle bou
137 Rogero Road Fort Caroline Road Merrill Road 113
levard
Fort Caroline
138
Townsend Boulevard Bike Lanes Merrill Road
59
Road
139 Townsend Boulevard Bicycle boulevard Arlington Expressway Merrill Road 80
Townsend Bou
140 Arble Drive Bicycle boulevard Mill Creek Road
131
levard
141 Samontee Road; Wedgefield Boulevard Bicycle boulevard Lone Star Road Merrill Road 120
Bike Lanes; Paved Shoul-Regency Square Boule
142 Mill Creek Road
Arble Drive 125
der; Bicycle boulevard vard
Protected bike lanes;
143 Lone Star Road; Trednick Parkway Mill Creek Road Monument Road 48
Trail; Sharrows
Mill Creek Road/Southside Boulevard and con-
Regency Square
144
Trail/Shared use path Atlantic Boulevard
19
nection under Arlington Expressway
Boulevard
145 Southside Boulevard Sharrows Atlantic Boulevard Orr Street 37
Southside Blvd
Southside Boulevard (through Beach Blvd inter-
Southside Blvd service
146
Shared use path
service road
24
change)
road north
south
147 Beach Boulevard Shared use path Southside Boulevard Dean Road 33
Altama Road, Glynlea Road, Grove Park Bou
149
Bicycle boulevard Atlantic Boulevard Beach Boulevard 157
levard
Arlington Road; Crane Avenue; Holiday Road; Atlantic Boule
150 Bicycle boulevard Altama Road 134
Singapore Road vard
Atlantic Boule
151 University Boulevard Separated Bike Lane River Hills Drive
13
vard
Atlantic Boule
152 Spring Park Road Bike Lanes Emerson Street 104
vard
153 Barnes Road Shared use path University Boulevard Carrevero Drive 29
Parental Home
154 Barnes Road Bike Lanes Carrevero Drive 140
Road
Bike Lane; Paved Shoul
155 Bowden Road
Spring Park Road Tiger Hole Road 152
der
156 Southpoint Drive Bike Lanes Bowden Road Belfort Road 143
157 Bridges Street; Tiger Hole Road Bicycle boulevard Bowden Road Belfort Road 158
158 153
Project Project Street(s) Facility(ies) From To City FDOT Number Ranking Ranking
Beach Boulevard exit southern end of
160 Southside Boulevard Service Roads Sharrows
40
ramp service road
Southside Bou
161 Gate Parkway Shared use path Belfort Road
144
levard
Paved Shoulder; Bicycle Atlantic Boule
162 Bradley Road; Live Oak Drive Southside Boulevard 118
boulevard vard
Atlantic Boule
164 Monument Road Shared use path Tredinick Parkway
vard
165 Regency Square Boulevard Shared use path Mill Creek Road Monument Road 36
166 Lillian Road Bike Lanes Arlington Road Lone Star Road 30
167 Toledo Road Bicycle boulevard St Augustine Road Powers Avenue 52
168 McDuff Avenue Existing Bike Lanes Phyllis Street Lenox Avenue 34
Bicycle boulevard; Bike
169 McDuff Avenue St Johns Avenue Post Street 57
Lanes
170 James Street Bicycle boulevard College Street Oak Street 101
Bicycle boulevard; Bike
171 Broadway Avenue, McQuade Street, State Street Myrtle Avenue McDuff Avenue 86
Lanes; Sharrows
172 Canal Street Bike Lanes 13th Street 26th Street 46
Edgewood Av
173 New Kings Road Shared use path MLK Jr Parkway 8
enue
Buff ered Bike Lanes; Bike
174 45th Street
New Kings Road Moncrief Road 121
Lanes
176 5th Street; Grothe Street Sharrows Davis Street Myrtle Avenue 20
4th Street, 5th Street, Jeff erson Street (also in-Bicycle boulevard; Bike
177
Davis Street Pearl Street 18
cludes existing path across Hogans Creek) Lanes; Sharrows
180 Ashley Street; Davis Street Bike Lanes Lee Street 8th Street 12
181 8th Street Separated Bike Lane Boulevard Davis Street 1
182 8th Street Bike Lanes Myrtle Avenue Francis Street 3
Protected bike lanes; Bike
S Line existing
183
12th Street, 14th Street, Boulevard, Main Street
Liberty Street
55
Lanes; Bicycle boulevard
trail
Buff ered Bike Lanes; Bike
184 Pearl Street 1st Street 39th Street 69
Lanes
185 Pearl Street Buff ered Bike Lanes Tallulah Avenue 39th STreet
84
186 Tallulah Avenue Buff ered Bike Lanes Lorain Street Main Street 25
Project Project Street(s) Facility(ies) From To City FDOT Number Ranking Ranking
Norwood Av
188 41st Street; 44th Street; Norwood Avenue Bike Lanes; Sharrows Pearl Street
15
enue
189 Lem Turner Road Shared use path Edgewood Avenue Norwood Drive
5
190 44th Street Bicycle boulevard Buffalo Avenue Main Street 76
S Line existing
191 Main Street Buff ered Bike Lanes Main Street Bridge
20
trail
192 Main Street (Trout River Bridge) Shared use path Sterling Street Broward Road 43
193 11th Street; Carmen Street; Evergreen Avenue Bicycle boulevard Talleyrand Avenue Liberty Street 78
Southbank
Southbank Riverwalk
194 Southbank Riverwalk West Extension Trail Riverwalk West 62
West Extension
Extension
Memorial Park
195 Northbank Riverwalk Expansion Trail Fuller Warren Bridge
121
Drive
196 Fuller Warren Bridge Shared use path Riverside Avenue Palm Avenue 18
197 Water Street Buff ered Bike Lanes Park Street Jeff erson Street 26
Bike Lanes; Paved Shoul-Baymeadows
198 Hood Road; Old Kinds Road Losco Road 155
der Road
San Jose Boule
199 Baymeadows Road Shared use path Old Kings Road
33
vard
200 Beauclerc Road; Scott Mill Road Paved Shoulder San Jose Boulevard I-295 164
201 Sunbeam Road Shared use path San Jose Boulevard Old Kings Road 137
San Jose Park
202 San Jose Boulevard Shared use path Lake Mandarin Court 38
Drive
Caravaca Court, Greenway Drive, Ortega Bluff BL, NG, TR Bike Lanes;
Roosevelt Bou
203
Collins Road
156
Parkway, Ortega Hills Drive (plus new trail) Bicycle boulevard; Trail
levard
Roosevelt Bou
204 Collins Road Bike Lanes Blanding Boulevard 127
levard
205 Roosevelt Boulevard Shared use path I-295 Timuquana Road 161
206 Collins Road Separated Bike Lane Blanding Boulevard Rampart Road 109
207 Shirley Avenue Bicycle boulevard Cassat Avenue Hamilton Street 107
208 8th Street (I-95 underpass) Shared use path Francis Street Davis Street 10
209 Cassat Avenue (I-10 underpass) Shared use path I-10 EB off-ramp Rosselle Street
7
210 Cassat Avenue Separated Bike Lane Blanding Boulevard I-10 23
212 University Boulevard Shared use path Beach Boulevard I-95 SB off-ramp
14
Project Project Street(s) Facility(ies) From To City FDOT Number Ranking Ranking
213 University Boulevard Shared use path Hart Expressway River Hills Drive 35 Cesery Boule
214 University Boulevard Separated Bike Lane Atlantic Boulevard
4
vard
215 University Boulevard Separated Bike Lane Beach Boulevard FL-228 3 311 University Boulevard Shared use path St Augustine Road Powers Avenue 5
This page intentionally left blank.
ROADMAP FOR CHANGE
LEADERSHIP IN ACTION
The preceding chapters have identified a significant
number of projects to make the City of Jacksonville more walkable and bike-friendly.
The SNAPP program lays out a strategy for fixing deficiencies in the safety and accessibility of
the pedestrian environment across the city, one neighborhood at a time.
The TRIPS initiative identifies design strategies, for more than 30 high-crash locations on five common
types of Jacksonville street, to reduce crashes and increase walkability and bike-friendliness .
More than 80 prioritized locations are identified on
city streets for the installation of Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFB).
A recommended 250-mile bikeway network is identified, together with a prioritized list of projects
for the City and State DOT to use in completing the network.
In addition, during the development of the
Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan, a number of
recommendations were made to establish policies and programs to ensure that:
Regular bicycle and pedestrian counts are taken to establish and monitor a baseline level of use,
Bicycle parking is routinely provided as part of development activity,
Details of bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure are captured in an updated GIS layer, and
Prioritization of projects is determined with an
objective process.
Several of these recommendations are already being implemented. However, this is a large body of work for the City to undertake, and it won t happen overnight. It is also important to note that the City of Jacksonville is not the only player in bringing this plan to life. The Florida Department of Transportation, for example, owns and operates major roadways throughout the city on which half of all pedestrian and bicyclist fatalities occur. These roads are also critical connections across major waterways, railroads and other barriers, and serve important origins and destinations throughout the city.
The Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan is a City of Jacksonville initiative and identifies actions the
city can take to improve the safety, comfort and convenience of walking and biking. In this Chapter, the
plan also identifies a series of specific implementation
strategies through which the City can demonstrate leadership and a commitment to action that is intended to bring partner agencies along as well. This example of Leadership in Action is central to successful
implementation of the Master Plan.
CITY LEADERSHIP
The Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan is an important
and valuable stand-alone document. However, neither
the Plan, nor walking or bicycling itself, exist in a
vacuum. The future of this document and the future of active transportation in Jacksonville depend on the actions of many players.
Fortunately, critical agencies and departments in the City are fully aware of the need to address
Jacksonville s high traffic fatality rates and to improve
conditions for walking and biking as part of a broader
quality of life strategy that is essential to remain economically competitive. The Master Plan provides
an approach and actionable list of projects that
will greatly assist the work of the Planning, Public Works, Parks and Recreation, and other departments. Implementation of the JTA s Mobility Works projects
dovetail well with the pedestrian improvements and bikeway network recommended in this document.
A bold step is needed to capture this concern and commitment for walking and bicycling safety and mainstream it into the daily operations and actions of the City.
Key Recommendation
This Plan recommends that the City further demonstrate its leadership by adopting a bold Vision Zero policy that places pedestrian and bicycle safety in the context of a
much broader commitment to eliminate all traffic fatalities
and serious injuries in the City by 2030.
There are several benefits to this approach:
Walking and bicycling issues are still somewhat marginalized within the City and public perception.
Vision Zero is an initiative that explicitly benefits
all road users (and thus the entire community) and uses a data-driven approach to focus on particularly vulnerable populations and road users. In this context, improving the safety of pedestrians and bicyclists shifts from being a special interest issue, as it is sometimes perceived, to an issue that is
firmly in the public interest.
The singular focus of a Vision Zero approach
ensures a coordinated multi-agency, multi disciplinary approach that can harness the demonstrated commitment of numerous City departments and partner agencies to collaborate in
improving traffic safety.
The Vision Zero and Safe Systems approach eliminates the tendency we all have to accept traffic
crashes as an inevitable part of daily life, and to
explain away crashes by blaming the victims
especially in relation to pedestrian and bicyclist
crashes. A significant cultural change is needed in
Jacksonville (and throughout the Country) to shift perceptions about poor pedestrian and bicyclist behavior and to address inadequate roadway design and enforcement that enables speeding, and aggressive, distracted, and impaired driving to create unsafe and unpleasant conditions.
MORE ABOUT VISION ZERO
Since New York City adopted the first Vision Zero policy in the United States in 2014, several major US
Cities have followed suit. While Boston, Seattle, San
Francisco, and Washington, D.C., were in the vanguard;
smaller cities such as Eugene, OR and states like Washington and North Carolina have since taken up
the challenge. In 2015, a Vision Zero Network was established to coordinate work among active Vision Zero communities.
Ten common elements from these Vision Zero policies
include:
1. Vision Zero policies are data-driven. The goal is to
eliminate fatal crashes through a relentless focus on those roadway designs and human behaviors that
contribute to crashes which can most effectively be identified and isolated with thorough data collection
and analysis.
2. Engaging the community is essential to creating
both the political backing for difficult policy and
program decisions and changing the culture of safety in the community.
3.
Accountability for implementation is transparent in targeted action plans which include measurable outcomes as well as outputs. Each task or action item has a clear assignment of responsibility.
4.
The best plans successfully balance the need for immediate, responsive actions with a long-term, proactive approach to eliminating fatal and serious crashes.
5.
Vision Zero and the Safe Systems approach is explicitly multi-modal, benefitting all users of the
transportation system.
6. Vision Zero also benefits enormously from a multi-disciplinary approach to preventing traffic crashes solutions are rarely limited to enforcement,
engineering, education, or legislative actions alone.
7. Equity is a key principle in the development and implementation of Vision Zero policies. Fatal and
serious crashes typically disproportionately affect populations already underserved by the transportation
system; and enforcement strategies must be
addressed with extreme sensitivity in economically distressed communities, communities of color, and neighborhoods with a high percentage of immigrant populations.
8. Leadership from the highest political level is
essential to ensure all relevant agencies and stakeholder groups come together with a common purpose to create that multidisciplinary, multimodal approach.
9. Vision Zero documents are action-oriented. Most of
the action plans developed in other cities have an initial two-year horizon and are focused on actionable items.
10. Make it Personal. Powerful personal stories and
testimonials from the people affected by fatal crashes
help change traffic safety culture, and help make
it clear that everyone has both a role to play and a
personal stake in getting to Zero.
Leadership is demonstrated by a commitment to consistent levels of investment to implement the
specific projects and programs identified in the Master Plan. There are several ways in which this investment
can be made.
A specific allocation of Mobility Fee or Capital Improvement Program funding can be identified for Master Plan projects (as is currently the case)
Master Plan projects can be included as part of
other ongoing activities (e.g. the street resurfacing
program, JTA Mobility Works, new development
projects)
Bicycle and pedestrian projects are eligible for
numerous transportation funds administered by the Florida Department of Transportation and North
Florida Transportation Planning Organization,
including: Highway Safety Improvement Program
(HSIP), Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality
Improvement, Transportation Alternatives, Surface
Transportation Block Grant, National Highway
System, Highway Safety (Section 402 grants from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration).
The City can continue to aggressively pursue grant funding from a variety of additional sources including Federal, state and local funding for health, recreation, environment, community development, and equity. These funds may come from government agencies, corporations, and foundations.
Key Recommendation
The City will sustain an annual funding commitment, to be determined by the City Council and Administration, for implementing pedestrian and bicycle projects in the Mas ter Plan, as well as incorporating incidental projects into the ongoing work of the City and partner agencies.
LEADING BY EXAMPLE
Leadership is also shown through action. There have been false dawns before in the City of Jacksonville s commitment to improving conditions for walking and bicycling. Today, however, many of the pieces are in place to demonstrate that the City is acting on that commitment:
A new bicycle and pedestrian coordinator is in place
A Master Plan has been developed
Individual projects are happening, such as changes to the Acosta Bridge, striping of bicycle lanes on San Jose Boulevard, and the initial installation of RRFBs around the City
Funding is committed in the CIP and Mobility Plan
The Plan has identified a wide range of action items covering issues as varied as fixing curb ramps to
rebuilding major bridges. The various projects and programs were developed around high-crash locations, based on demand and professional judgement, and with an eye to equity issues, safety, access and public input.
Four potential Statement Projects stand out as
capturing the essence of the plan. These Statement
Projects exemplify opportunities for immediate and long term actions; they combine several strategies and actions; they focus on safety; they
affect neighborhoods that have traditionally been underserved by the transportation system and have been over-represented in the crash statistics.
These four projects are:
1. Soutel Drive between Lem Turner Road and New
Kings Road. This stretch of Soutel Drive has seen several fatal and severe pedestrian crashes; is identified as a corridor for the installation of three [additional] RRFBs; is a key section of the bike network; has high-frequency transit service; has a
mix of schools, shops, business and residential trip
generators; and serves a significant number of North
Jacksonville residents living in an economically distressed area. Soutel Drive is a candidate for a road
diet taking the street from 4-lanes to three, with the
addition of bike lanes and raised medians. Improved crosswalks, sidewalks and ADA ramps would increase
the walkability of the corridor both along and across
the road.
2. Implement the first SNAPP project in the Phoenix neighborhood. Walking conditions in the Phoenix
neighborhood are poor. There are missing and poorly
maintained sections of sidewalk; curb ramps and ADA features are below standard; there is a considerable amount of high-speed, cut-through traffic; there are
relatively high levels of walking and bicycling as well as high-crash locations. Equally important, there is community leadership in place that is ready to work with the City to model the implementation of the
SNAPP program.
3. Accelerated installation of Rectangular Rapid
Flashing Beacons. The plan has identified a prioritized list of more than 80 locations where these devices
can be installed. The assessment was based on demand, crash records, and the presence of vulnerable populations (seniors and school-aged children). These are highly visible devices, especially when installed
in several locations in the same area or corridor
and compliance with the devices is anticipated to be increased with the additional awareness that can be generated from more widespread installation.
4. Waterfront Trail Development. The programmed rebuilding of the Fuller Warren Bridge carrying I-95 over the St Johns River is a once-in-a-generation opportunity to change the landscape of the neighborhoods at each end of this project. In particular, the bridge project should be the catalyst for the creation of a world-class waterfront trail loop/ network on the south side of the river, linking tourist attractions, hotels, medical facilities, and emerging residential communities. While initial planning has
begun to pursue this the potential this has to change
the perception of Jacksonville among visitors and residents alike calls for even more concerted action.
Key Recommendation
The City commits to immediately pursue four Statement Projects emerging from the Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan as a demonstration of the City s commitment to implement the plan and achieve the goals set out in the document.
The Statement Projects highlighted above will also
demonstrate the need for seamless coordination between the many agencies that will ultimately
be involved in implementing the Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan. Similarly, the funding strategies necessary to implement the Plan require coordination
and collaboration between implementing agencies
to maximize the efficient and effective use of funds
invested in the community.
Key Recommendation
The City will establish a regular (every six months) director-level meeting to coordinate the work programs and planning activities of the Planning, Public Works, and Parks departments, the JTA, DIA and to the extent pos sible the FDOT.
Every resurfacing, reconstruction, and rehabilitation project in the City undertaken by these agencies represents an opportunity to implement portions of
the Plan and improve conditions for bicycling and
walking, as does every development permit and major development project.
SETTING STANDARDS FOR THE FUTURE
Roadway design is going through a period of rapid evolution, especially in the ways in which pedestrians, bicyclists, and people with disabilities are
accommodated. Beginning in the early 2000 s with a
shift towards a Complete Streets approach and more universal design principles, the last decade has seen
significant changes in roadway technology, design for people with disabilities, more extensive traffic
calming techniques, and more recently a fundamentally different approach to designing roadways for use by
bicyclists by separating them from traffic rather than
integrating them. Roadway design standards and guidance are struggling to keep up with these changes, especially for urban streets.
The emergence of the National Complete Streets Coalition and the National Association of City
Transportation Officials (NACTO) has seen the
publication of new manuals and design guidance with
a more inclusive and urban focus. More established
groups such as the Institute of Transportation Engineers and Congress for a New Urbanism have collaborated to produce an urban streets design guide. The Federal Highway Administration has issued a wide range of publications and design guidance related to improving pedestrian and bicyclist safety
for example, road diets are one of nine proven countermeasures promoted by FHWA s Office of Safety.
The 2018 edition of the AASHTO Guide for the
Development of Bicycle Facilities is expected to
include detailed information, for the first time, on the
design and implementation of cycle tracks and other separated bikeway treatments.
The development of a 250-mile bikeway network,
the implementation of a wide range of pedestrian safety improvements, and a move towards a Safe
Systems/Vision Zero approach to traffic safety in the City of Jacksonville will benefit enormously from the
consistent adoption and application of current roadway designs by all implementing agencies in the area.
Key Recommendation
The City of Jacksonville and partner agencies should update their roadway design standards and guidance to reflect the most current bikeway and pedestrian design treatments applicable to urban roadways.
Both the City and State Department of Transportation are in the midst of updating their design standards
to reflect many of these changes. Key principles to
include in such a revision are:
Reduce the opportunity for high-speed collisions by physical separation (e.g. raised medians or barriers
or cables to prevent head-on collisions; protected left-turns to prevent side impact collisions; rumble
strips)
Reduce motor vehicle speeds to 35mph or less where that separation can t be achieved, and 25mph or less where pedestrians and bicyclists will be present.
Changes to the lighting, signing, and marking of intersections and crosswalks to address pedestrian safety issues (e.g. eliminating free- and continuous-
right turn lanes; reviewing the use of right turn on red after stopping in core areas; installing signalized
crossings for pedestrians)
Develop effective gateway and transition zones to effectively ensure roadway users adjust appropriately as they travel between rural, suburban and urban roadways and land uses within the City.
Key Recommendation
The City or a partner agency should implement a compre hensive facility planning and design training program as soon as these new guidance documents are complete.
Within six months, training should be delivered to engi neers, planners, and landscape architects (urban design ers) working for all area public agencies including FDOT, COJ, NFTPO, JTA, and DIA. Consultants working for these agencies should be expected to have attended this train ing program.
ESTABLISHING BENCHMARKS AND PERFORMANCE MEASURES
The ultimate success of the Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan is quite simple. Did the Plan establish
meaningful, measurable targets that guided decisions
that resulted in fewer traffic fatalities and crashes and
more walking and bicycling in Jacksonville?
The Plan establishes two overarching goals that are to be met by 2030.
Walking and bicycling should account
for 10% of all trips (up from less than
2% in 2014)
There should be no pedestrians or bicyclists killed or seriously injured
in traffic crashes (Vision Zero)
Key Recommendation
Implementation of the Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan should be monitored and overseen by an interagency task force or committee, including representatives of stakeholder groups, that meets at least quarterly. This committee should present an annual report to City Council on progress towards these goals.
The Plan identifies the following performance metrics
that should be monitored and reported annually.
Annual number of pedestrian and bicyclist fatalities,
serious injuries and crashes
Signal4 database
Participation in Walking and Bicycling
in the City of Jacksonville
City counts
American Community Survey Journey to Work
Designation of Jacksonville
in national benchmarking studies
Bicycle-friendly Community program
Walk-friendly Community program
Dangerous by Design pedestrian danger index
Pedestrian and Bicycle-related Outputs
Agency spending on pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure
Miles of bikeway completed, connected
Linear feet of sidewalk installed, repaired
Number of RRFBs installed
Number of curb ramps installed, repaired
Number of intersection improvements for pedestrian and bicyclist safety
Number of pedestrian and bicycle facility training course participants
Percent of the Jacksonville population living within an area serviced by the SNAPP program.
CONCLUSION
The City of Jacksonville has the reputation as one of the most dangerous cities, in one of the most dangerous states in the nation, for walking and
bicycling. The death of close to 40 pedestrians and
bicyclists each year does little to dispel this image, and almost daily reports of deaths and serious injuries on City streets feeds the perception that walking and bicycling are inherently dangerous activities.
This reputation is harming the City in many ways. The loss of life destroys families and causes grief and despair among family members, friends and colleagues of those who perish. In purely economic terms, the loss of life is devastating at an average cost of $1.4 million per fatality and $1 million for a serious injury. There are enormous health, environmental and societal costs associated with physical inactivity that is in part fueled by the unwillingness or inability of residents to walk or bike more frequently out of fear.
The economic competitiveness of the City in attracting
new businesses and residents especially millennials
is severely hampered by the lack of transportation
choices and degraded quality of life that comes with a lack of opportunities to walk, bike and take transit.
So it is time to change. Jacksonville can and should be a great place for walking and bicycling. The city has a good year-round climate, perfect topography, numerous vibrant neighborhoods and communities, and City leadership that recognizes the opportunity and need for Jacksonville to become more walkable and bike-friendly.
The City of Jacksonville Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan is a powerful roadmap for that change. The plan
includes recommendations for hundreds of pedestrian and bicycle projects to be completed over the next decade.
More importantly, perhaps, the Plan also acknowledges
that pedestrian and bicycle safety is just one part of a much larger challenge. For every pedestrian or
bicyclist killed in the city, two people are killed in cars; more than 15,000 motor vehicle crashes are recorded in the city every year. The City has a traffic safety and
transportation problem that transcends any one mode or agency.
This realization has shaped the Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan in several critical ways. First, the Plan calls for the adoption of a Vision Zero policy by the City, to address the overwhelming traffic safety issues in the
community in a new, data-driven approach that starts with the belief that no loss of life on our roadways is acceptable or inevitable.
Second, the Plan identifies a leadership role for the
City in changing the way it does business, and also in leading its partners at the city, regional and state level to rethink roadway design and community
development, by putting people first.
Third, the plan acknowledges that the physical environment is such a crucial determinant of the viability and popularity of walking and bicycling and that without a dramatic change in infrastructure to accommodate active travel, no amount of education,
encouragement or enforcement will make a significant
change in behavior possible in the area.
The time will come when a robust plan for non-
engineering solutions is timely and necessary; and
there will continue to be opportunities for very targeted
outreach and safety campaigns for example as new infrastructure is put in place in the short
term. Similarly, there is a critical role for community groups such as the North Florida Bicycle Club to organize rides, events, education programs and safety campaigns, ideally with the support of the City. For now, however, this plan focuses on the unique and critical role the City can play in creating safer, more inviting places for people to walk and bike, especially in combination with transit.
Finally, the plan recommends an approach to
implementation that is essentially collaborative
engaging the City with the community and with agency partners at the City, regional and state level in a variety of ways. With the leadership and commitment of the City, an engaged community, and willing partners across the region, Jacksonville can become one of the best cities for walking and bicycling in the Southeast.