_:n73f3e09d44a945f3a4517599bb2db061xb0
<http://schema.org/articleBody>
"Microsoft PowerPoint - draft US 1 summary presentation for BPAC_081114.pptxR2CTPO Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee Meeting &ndash; August 13, 2014 Overview of Study Process &amp; Activities Overview of Study Process &amp; Activities 85 30 Phase I Summary and Outcome &bull; Outcome of Phase I: Shared desire of US 1 as a complete street, with improved bicycle, pedestrian, and transit mobility Key Product of Phase I - GIS Database of ProjectsKey Product of Phase I - GIS Database of Projects &bull; Ormond Beach &bull; Holly Hill &bull; Daytona Beach &bull; South Daytona &bull; Port Orange &bull; New Smyrna Beach &bull; Edgewater &bull; Oak Hill &bull; Volusia County &bull; River to Sea TPO &bull; Votran &bull; VCARD &bull; FDOT &bull; State Parks &bull; National Wildlife Refuge StakeholdersStakeholders Goals of Phase II Study Goals of Phase II Study Understand the current and future anticipated travel patterns along US 1 Identify the vision for the corridor and how it supports desired local and regional mobility, local community livability and economic development goals and needs Identify specific action items (program, policy, and/or infrastructure), that could support the vision for the corridor Phase II Study Process and ActivitiesPhase II Study Process and Activities Key Findings Key Findings Income and Car Ownership Income and Car Ownership &bull; Concentration of 0-Car Households in Northern Portion of the Study area Vehicular Traffic Volumes and &bull; More growth occurs along Nova Road Traffic DistributionTraffic Distribution &bull; Trips along US 1 and Nova Road drop off at Holly Hill/Daytona Beach area &bull; Neither US 1 nor Nova Road are being used for regional trips Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety &bull; Concentrations of crashes and fatalities in Daytona Beach area Parks and TrailsParks and Trails &bull; Existing and Planned Parks and Trails are Corridor-wide Corridor Character Districts Traditional &bull; Character Districts were developed based on existing &amp; future land use plans and intended transportation function of US 1 &bull; Character Districts were developed with the Working Group Corridor Character Corridor Needs Corridor Needs PRINCIPLE ONE &ndash; Enhance Mobility Enhance local multi- modal mobility to connect activity areas along the corridor. PRINCIPLE TWO &ndash; Increase Connectivity PRINCIPLE THREE &ndash; Leverage Investments Maximize efficiency by leveraging local and state public investments to catalyze private economic development. PRINCIPLE FOUR &ndash; Preserve &amp; Enhance Preserve and enhance existing environmental and recreational assets within the Corridor. What potential strategies can address the corridor principles/needs? What potential strategies can address the corridor principles/needs? Potential Strategies (short- and long-term)Potential Strategies (short- and long-term) Implement Strategic Pedestrian and Bicycle Improvements Implement Policy and Regulatory Mechanisms to Advance Land Use/Economic Development Initiatives Along US 1 Implement Changes to US 1 Cross Sections Based on Character Districts (coinciding with land use/development changes) and Develop Potential Gateways Implement Transit Improvements, Including Transit Signal Priority (TSP) Develop/Implement Educational and Marketing Campaign for US 1 (Market the Environment, Recreational and Cultural Assets of the Region) Pedestrian/Bike Gaps/Project OpportunitiesPedestrian/Bike Gaps/Project Opportunities Pedestrian/Bike Gaps/Project OpportunitiesPedestrian/Bike Gaps/Project Opportunities Pedestrian/Bike Gaps/Project OpportunitiesPedestrian/Bike Gaps/Project Opportunities Pedestrian/Bike Gaps/Project OpportunitiesPedestrian/Bike Gaps/Project Opportunities Implement Policy and Regulatory Changes to Advance Land Use/Economic Development Initiatives Along US 1 Implement Changes to US 1 Cross Sections based on Character Districts and Develop Potential Gateways ROW Varies (100&rsquo; +/- 5&rsquo;) ROW = 100&rsquo; (with exception of Oak Hill where ROW = 160&rsquo;) Urban Village Center Section Option 2 Urban Village Center Section Option 2 ROW = 100&rsquo; (with exception of Oak Hill where ROW = 160&rsquo;) Traditional SectionTraditional Section Eco Byway SectionEco Byway Section ROW varies (&gt;130&rsquo;) to adjust to existing ROW Summary of Potential Section AlternativesSummary of Potential Section Alternatives Cross Section High &ndash; high cost (move curbline), left-turn challenges Urban Village Center Option 2 High Low High High Yes Medium &ndash; mixed bike/auto traffic or identify parallel bicycle route Traditional Medium High Medium Medium Yes Low &ndash; keep existing cross section, restripe in some sections Eco Byway Medium to High High Medium Low N/A Low to medium - add shared-use path (some areas require bridge modifications) Public InputPublic Input General Preferences for Urban Village Center: Option 2 and Traditional Lower Cost Options That Do Not Require Moving Curb Line Implement Transit Improvements - Recreational and Cultural Assets of the Region) Recreational and Cultural Assets of the Region) Loop Refuge"
<https://vdocuments.net/us-1-corridor-improvement-program-phase-ii.html>