MILLBOURNE + DOWNTOWN UPPER DARBY

PEDESTRIAN and BICYCLE PLAN

Part 1 Introduction

Part 2 Existing Conditions

Part 3 Improvement Strategies

Part 4 Prioritization

Introduction

This project is a pedestrian and bicycle plan for Millbourne and downtown Upper Darby. Millbourne and Upper Darby are two separate suburban municipalities in Delaware County. They are jointly studied in order to provide better regional connection. Only downtown part of Upper Darby is included because the high density of population, jobs and developments there requires and supports a pedestrian and bicycle plan better than the rest of Upper Darby. The total area of the study area is 1.2 square miles.

As shown on the map above, the study area lies on the west border of Philadelphia. Millbourne only comprises of a small number of blocks, while Upper Darby is relatively larger. Cobbs Creek Park stretches along the north and east borders of the study area. Two stations on the SEPTA’s Market-Frankford :Line (MFL) falls in the study area, including Millbourne Station and the westbound terminal station 69th Street Transportation Center. Norristown Highspeed Line (NHSL) starts from 69th Street Transportation Center, heading northwest to Norristown. Trolley routes 101 & 102 start from 69th Street Transportation Center, heading south to Media and Sharon Hill respectively. Also, 19 bus routes converge at the 69th Street Transportation Center. The study area is over 50% reidential, with 13.7%

!(

!(

!(

!(

Ü 0 0.4 0.80.2 Miles

LegendUpperDarby

Millbourne

Waterbodies

Streams!( Railstations

Raillines

Road Centerline

Municipal Boundaries

!(

!(

!(

!(

Ü 0 0.4 0.80.2 Miles

LegendUpperDarby

Millbourne

Waterbodies

Streams!( Railstations

Raillines

Road Centerline

Municipal Boundaries

69TH ST. TSPN CENTER MILLBOURNE

UPPER DARBY PHILADELPHIA

MILLBOURNE

NHSL

MFL

TROLLEY 101 & 102

commercial use, 12.7% open space and recreational use and 10.4% transportation & utilities.

This plan first analyzes the existing conditions of the study area in terms of walkability and bikeability. A demand analysis is included. Based on the existing conditions analysis, corresponding improvement strategies are recommended. In addition, priority of improvement elements is evaluated.

Goals This plan aims at making improvements in the following aspects: • Safety •Mobility •Aesthetics The desired effects would be as follows: 1. Streamlined walking and biking connections to transit, major community destinations and nearby resources 2. Improved walking experience for all kinds of pedestrians including seniors, children, physically challenged and visually/hearing impaired 3. Confident participation in biking from the “interested but concerned” group of people 4. Increase in the mode share for biking and walking

0 0.150.075 Miles

CO

BBS

CRE

EK P

KY

S 62

ND

ST

SPRUCE ST

LARCHWOOD AVE

WALNUT ST

MARKET ST

RACE ST

WASHINGTON AVE

SHORT LN

WALNUT ST

SANSOM ST

CHESTNUT ST

MARKET ST

S 69TH ST

GARRETT RD

LON

G L

N

MARSHALL RD

GLENWOOD AVE

EMERSON AVE

PEMBROKE AVEBALTIMORE AVE

E MARSHALL RD

UN

ION

AVE

N LANDSDOW

NE AVE

SHERBROO

K BLVD

FAIRFIELD AVE

S KEYSTONE AVE

N STATE RD

W CHESTER PIKE

PARKVIEW ROAD

VACANTPARKINGTRANSPORTATION & UTILITIES INDUSTRIAL

COMMERCIALMIXED USE

SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL

LEGEND

MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL

OPEN SPACE & RECREATIONINSTITUTIOINAL & COMMUNITY FACILITIES

Source: Millbourne-Upper Darby 2013 Workshop at PennDesign

Existing ConditionsWalkability

To evaluate how walkable the study area currently is, a series of tools are utilized, including: •Intersectiondensity •Link/noderatio •Walkscore •Jaskiewiczmatrix In this process, strengths and deficiencies in the network are identified for future improvements.

Intersection Density Intersection density is measured by number of intersections per square mile. It serves as an indicator about how walkable an area is, because the denser intersections are, the more routing options pedestrians have to make easier connections to their destinations. Intersections also have an impact on perceived distance. A street where there is no chance to turn to other streets is more likely to make the pedestrian feel that the street is endless and thus negatively affect the walking experience. The number of intersections within the study area is 357, and the study area is 1.2 square miles. Therefore, the intersection density for the whole study area is 297.5. The analysis is also carried out on block group level. The following map highlights the block groups with higher intersection density in the west and south of the study area. These block groups are likely more walkable than the block groups on the east border of study area.

Intersections per square mile

Link/Node Ratio Link/node ratio is calculated by dividing the number of street segments by the number of intersections. It shows how many links each node is connected with. This ratio functions as an indicator of walkability in the similar way as intersection density. The more links a node is connected to, the more options of directions and destinations a pedestrian could have when standing on that intersection. A ratio of 1.0 indicates a cul-de-sac subdivision, where the pedestrian has no choice but to walk straight on.

The total number of street segments in the study area is 622, while the total number of intersections is 357. The link/node ratio for the whole area is 1.74. On the block group level, this analysis returns a result divergent from that of intersection density. The block groups on the east border of study area turn out to be more walkable, and the southmost blockgroup, which has a high intersection density, seems to be less walkable based on link/node ratio. Such divergent results are because these two indicators are measuring different aspects of walkability. Intersection density measures how frequent a pedestrian gets the chance to change directions, whereas link/node ratio reflects that when a pedestrian have the change to change directions, how many different directions he can choose. Therefore, each indicator reflects different problems of walkability in different block groups.

Link/Node Ratio

Data Source: Walk Score

The analysis on intersection density and link/node ratio shows that the study area already has characterastics that are conducive to walkability.

Walk Scores WalkScoresforthemajorstreetsinthestudyareaare mapped to give a quick view of the walkability of major corridors.However,itisimportanttobearinmindthatWalkScores are calculated with a series of algorithms mainly based on choice and proximiy. So far the infrastructure and

6878

66

71

83

77

78

8366

73

80

63

CO

BBS

CRE

EK P

KWY

S 62

ND

ST

SPRUCE ST

LARCHWOOD AVE

WALNUT ST

MARKET ST

RACE ST

WASHINGTON AVE

SHORT LN

WALNUT ST

SANSOM ST

CHESTNUT ST

MARKET ST

S 69TH ST

GARRETT RD

LON

G L

N

MARSHALL RD

GLENWOOD AVE

EMERSON AVE

PEMBROKE AVEBALTIMORE AVE

E MARSHALL RD

UN

ION

AVE

N LANDSDOW

NE AVE

SHERBROO

K BLVD

FAIRFIELD AVES KEYSTONE AVE

N STATE RD

W CHESTER PIKE

PARKVIEW RD

0 0.150.075 Miles

environmental factors such as pavement conditions, traffic volume, street lighting are not taken into consideration yet. Also, the proximity is a crow-flies proximity, but two closely located destinations might not be connected by pedestrian-friendlypaths.(Vanderbilt,2012)Therefore,WalkScoresare used in this plan mainly to reflect how the resources in the study area are in general already very densely located, so as to further legitimize the need of a well-connected pedestrian network in the community.

Jaskiewicz Matrix FrankJaskiewicz(1999)inhispaper“PedestrianLevel of Service Based on Trip Quality” points out that the “pedestrian experience is dependent upon numerous qualitative factors that are not addressed in customary level-of-service analyses.” He proposed nine measures to evaluate the quality of pedestrian systems focusing on their “pleasantness, safety and functionality”. The nine measures are as follows: “enclosure/definition, complexity

of path network, building articulation, complexity of spaces, transparency, buffer, shade trees, overhangs/awnings/varied roof lines, and physical components/condition”. This plan evaluate the major streets of the study area based on the nine qualitative measures in a matrix. Scores from 1 to 5 were assigned to each street regarding to each measure on the basis of site inspection. This analysis is carried out to identify gaps, barriers and deficiencies in the pedestrian network.

Principles of Pedestrianization

Market St (North)

Market Street (South)

69th Street

Garrett Road

Long Lane

Chestnut Street

Walnut Street

Marshall Road

Short Lane

W Chester Pike

Enclosure/Definition 2 3 4 3 4 4 4 2 2 4

Complexity of path network

4 4 5 4 5 4 4 5 1 4

Building articulation 3 2 3 2 4 4 4 2 3 4Complexity of spaces 3 2 4 3 4 3 4 3 3 3

Transparency 4 4 5 3 3 3 3 2 3 3Buffer 4 3 4 2 4 3 3 1 2 4

Shade trees 4 2 3 1 3 4 4 2 4 2Overhangs/awnings 3 3 4 2 2 4 4 2 2 3

Physical condition 4 2 4 3 3 3 3 2 2 3

Analysis on some typical streets will be described in detail to show how these streets are rated against each of the measures.

Market Street Market Street is the commercial front of both Millbourne and Upper Darby, and it is also the major west-east thoroughfare connecting Philadelphia to the suburban counties to the west. The street configurations are very auto-oriented. There is a discrepency between the quality of walking environment on different sides of Market Street, mainly because the two municipalities’ boundaries are divided in the middle of Market Street, with the north side belonging to Millbourne and the south to Upper Darby. On both sides the street is not defined very well due to the existence of a number of parking lots scattered along the street. A certain portion of the buildings are smaller version of strip malls or box-shaped. The Millbourne side has more variations in character with more street trees. Most of the stores on both sides have large glass windows functioning as transitional elements between public and private spaces.

Market Street Upper Darby Side

On the Millbourne side, the sidewalks are buffered by on-street parking as well as street trees, while on the Upper Darby side only on-street parking acts as buffers most of the time due to lack of shade trees. On both sides there are incontinuous awnings from the store fronts, temporarily sheltering pedestrians from sunlight or rainfall. As for the physical conditions, while the sidewalks on the Millbourne side is wide, raised, continuous and articulated, on the Upper Darby side sometimes the sidewalks are too narrow or blurred with off-street parking space. Also, the street lights on Upper Darby side are the higher model aimed towards car safety, while those on Millbourne side are more pedestrian-scale low-mounted lights.

69th Street The north portion of 69th Street above Marshall Road is the major walkable commerical corridor of Upper Darby, while the south portion is more residential and car-oriented. Along the commercial corridor, the street is well defined with a variety of retail stores, buildings are articulated with large display windows and almost

continuous awnings. The sidewalks are buffered with a parking lane and sometimes street trees. The sidewalks are wide enough to accommodate some street furnitures such as benches and trash cans. The traffic speed and volume in this street are moderate, and street lighting is adequate. The only problem is that pedestrians cross the street anywhere they want to get to the store on the other side of the street, and this results in frequent pedestrian-vehicle conflicts. There is no marked crossings or signs to establish an order to guide pedestrian and car activities. The southern portion of 69th Street is less defined because of parking lots along the road, buildings are less articulated, and sidewalks are notably not wide enough, and there are less street trees. Overall 69th Street has a complex path network, connecting to various west-east streets and many different directions.

Walnut Street WalnutStreetisatypicalresidentialstreetintheneighborhood. The street is well enclosed by the side of the front of residential houses. Buildings are articulated, each following the overall style of the neighborhood with its own twist of the appearance. It is a diverse street with different characters, ranging from quiet residencial houses in the west to commecial parking space in the middle and neighborhood recreational and reflective open space in the east.

Market Street Millbourne Side

69th Street Commercial Corridor looking north

It is not the most transparent street because of the lack of front porches facing the street. The sidewalks can be buffered by street trees and the parking lane but the occupancy rate is not always high because many residents have their own off-street parking space attached to their houses. The diverse roof lines add to aesthetic quality of the street. The sidewalks are mostly raised, continuous, wide enough for two pedestrians to walk side by side, and vehicle speed in this street is low. However, the lighting is notably not sufficient at night to guarantee actual or perceived

Walnut Street looking east

safety. WalnutStreetintersectswithmajornorth-southcorridors such as 69th Street and Garrett Road, and it has the potential to function as the bike/ped-friendly connection between the study area and Philadelphia due to its location, orientation and physical conditions.

Marshall Road Marshall Road is probably the most car-oriented road in the neighborhood. The fact that is is not even called a “street” reflects this reality to some extent. The road ismostly “enclosed” by parking lots. Many buildings are plain boxes and strips. Sidewalks are extremely narrow, and there is no street trees or enough space for on-street parking lane to act as buffer from the high-speed, high-volume vehicle traffic . The street lights, as most of other streets in the study area, are the high-mounted lamps for car safety.

ApartfromtheninequalitativemeasuresJaskiewiczspecified, this plan also looks into connection issues, mainly about pedestrian crossings. The study area is in certain need of improved pedestrian crossings, such as in front of 69th Street Station, along 69th Street commercial corridor and areas where three or more streets meet so as to mitigate pedestrian-vehicle conflicts and improve safety.

Conclusion

Based on the existing condition analysis, the following conclusion can be made:

1. The strength of the study area is that it is already a densely developed community with small blocks, complex road network and destinations within pedestrian-friendly distance.

2. The deficiencies are in the following aspects:

•Inadequatetreecover •Narrowsidewalks •Streetlighting •Insufficientstreetenclosure •Unsafepedestriancrossings •Highvehiclespeed

Marshall Road

To get a better understanding of where the pedestrians and bicyclists are likely to travel from and to, a demand analysis is carried out to identify potential areas of need based on the following indicators: •Populationdensity •Jobdensity •Householdswithnovehicle •Modeshare •Dailyons&offsfortransitstations

Population Density Population density indicates where most residents are living in the study area, and thus is correlated to relatively larger demand for walking and biking compared to areas where fewer people are living.

Currently there is no dedicated biking infrastructure in the study area, apart from a few bike racks in front of 69th Street Transportation Center. The mode share of biking for work trips is less than 1% in 2010. According to 2010 American Community Survey, among the estimated 9,977 work trips, only 19 are bike trips, all generated from Block Group 1 in Census Tract 4004.01, the area lying on the east of 69th Street, as highlighted on the map below.

Bikeability

Source: OnTheMap

However, in a conference call with the Millbourne BoroughCouncialPresident,JeanetteMacNeille,onFebruary 10, 2013, she pointed out that Millbourne hopes to establish complete streets along Market Street to accomodate bikers and pedestrians, better connect the community to the Cobbs Creek Park with a bike trail, and renovate the currently abandoned Newtown Square Trail as devised in the Delaware County Bike Plan to provide north-south conenction.

Demand Analysis

Overall speaking, the study area is very densely populated, with an average number of 20,480 people per square mile, only slightly lower than the figure for Center

Source: Social ExplorerPopulation Density by Block Groups

City Philadelphia, which is 24,960. The average population density for Delaware County is only 3,200 per square mile. Census data from 2010 on the map above shows a higher concentration of population in Millbourne and the block groups in the west compared to those in the southeast. Therefore, improvements in these areas are likely to be prioritized.

Existing Conditions

Job Density Density of employments is also a good indicator of pedestrians and bicyclists’ demand. In areas where jobs are concentrated, better walking and biking infrastructure would provide much convenience in a more economically efficient way and stimulate more business transactions.

Source: OnTheMapJobDensity in the Study Area

Based on data provided by OnTheMap, in 2010 the number of daily work trips to places outside of our study area is 10,135, while the daily work trips coming into our study area is 4,879. Only 341 people both live and work within the study area. This reveals that our study area is not really a regional job center, but more of a residential place, which is consistent with the land use distributions. Most of the jobs concentrate in a high density in the northwest part of the study area, mainly along the commercialcorridorssuchasWestChesterPike,GarrettRoad and 69th Street. Improved pedestrian and biking facilities would be better provided around there.

Households with No Vehicle Although the study area has commercial concentrations, the residents are not affluent compared to the rest of Delaware County. According to census data, in 2010, 22% of population in the study area is in poverty, while the number for Delaware County is 9.5%. The median income of the study area is $33,700, which is only

half of the median income of Delaware County. The study areaismoreassociatedwithWestPhiladelphiaintermsof its economic situation and demographic composition, less with the rest of Delaware County. In this situation it is conceivable that not every household can afford to buy and maintain a car.

People from these households are more likely to walk for short trips and take transit to destinations that are further away. Therefore, pedestrian facilities should be improved, and preferably biking facilities should be provided, so as to give these people more mobility and to better connect them to transit services and a variety of destinations. Improvement efforts should be prioritized in areas with higher concentrations of households with no vehicle, such as the Traffic Analysis Zone along Garret Road. Mode Share

Households with No Vehicle

Data Source: DVRPC Transit Score GIS data

54%

12%

25%

6%

1% 2%

JOURNEY TO WORK 2010

DRIVE ALONE

CARPOOL

PUBLIC TRANSIT

BICYCLE

WALK

OTHER

LEGEND

As shown in the charts above, the study area has a significantly lower share of car usage compared to many other suburban communities, and a large share of transit usage, mainly because of the convergence of multiple transit routes into the 69th Street Transportation Center. 6% of people walk to work, and only 0.002% of people bike.

Source: Millbourne-Upper Darby 2013 Workshop at PennDesign

Data Source: SEPTA Stop Level Ridership

LEGEND

Total Daily Ons & O�s

0 - 31

32 - 89

90 - 200

201 - 478

479 - 912

Study Area Boundary

Bus Routes

Rail Lines

> 30,000

Mode share as an indicator shows actual demand of each transportation modes, but it fails to reflect potential demand. A large mode share means high demand, regardless of the quality of infrastructure and services, but a small mode share does not necessarily mean low demand. It might also be a result of low-quality services. Therefore, mode share needs to be used in combination with other indicators to more accurately evaluate demand. Based on this chart, it is clear that the 6% of people are making use of the pedestrian environment, regardless of the level of comfortability, safety, or aesthetics right now. The deficiencies identified in the existing conditions analysis could be fixed to provide these people with a better walking environment. Although only 0.002% people bike to work, the high development density, ample transit services and demand for complete streets from the community lay a solid foundation for a robust, well-connected bike network that induces biking demand and makes people’s life more sustainable and convenient.

Daily Ons & Offs for Transit Stations

LEGEND

Total Daily Ons & O�s

0 - 31

32 - 89

90 - 200

201 - 478

479 - 912

Study Area Boundary

Bus Routes

Rail Lines

> 30,000

Transit service usage is relevant when determining the demand of pedestrian and biking facilities, because walking and biking are likely to serve as the first-mile/last-mile extension of transit services. The total daily ons and offs for each transit stations within the study area are mapped to show which stations areusedbylargergroupsofpeople.Weekdayusagedataabout el stations, trolley stations collected in 2008, and bus stations collected in 2012, are visualized in this map. Areas around and routes to these “popular” stations should receive certain improvements to facilitate pedestrians and bicyclists to get to the station. Also, bicycle parking should be provided near these stations, and this map helps to prioritize which stations get the bike racks first should the resources be limited. This map shows that 69th Street Transportation Center is used by more than 30,000 people on a daily basis, and the other popular stations are the 101 &102 trolley stations and bus stations along 69th Street and Long Lane. ThelowusageofbusstationsonMarketStreet,WestChester Pike might be because of the ample rail services provided there. However, the significantly low usage of bus stations on the east portion of Marshall road, especially compared to the west portion, might be because of the undesirable walking environment with elements such as high vehicle speed and narrow sidewalks with no buffer protection there.

Conclusion

Based on the demand analysis above, several areas are circled out in this map, identified as prioritized areas for pedestrian and bicycle improvements, which are discussed in details in the next section.

Improvement StrategiesWalkability

Based on the analysis above, several walkability improvement strategies are targeted toward prioritized areas, addressing the most severe issues for each area, including inadequate tree cover, narrow sidewalks, high-mounted treet lighting and unsafe pedestrian crossings.

Source: this map shows a strategic plan devised on the basis of the Streetscape Improvements Plan done by the Millbourne-Upper Darby 2013 Workshop at PennDesign. More details were added based on the existing conditions and demand analysis discussed in previous sections.

CO

BBS

CRE

EK P

KWY

S 62

ND

ST

SPRUCE ST

LARCHWOOD AVE

WALNUT ST

MARKET ST

RACE ST

WASHINGTON AVE

SHORT LN

WALNUT ST

SANSOM ST

CHESTNUT ST

MARKET ST

S 69TH STGARRETT RD

LON

G L

N

MARSHALL RD

GLENWOOD AVE

EMERSON AVE

PEMBROKE AVEBALTIMORE AVE

E MARSHALL RD

UN

ION

AVE

N LANDSDOW

NE AVE

SHERBROO

K BLVD

FAIRFIELD AVES KEYSTONE AVE

N STATE RD

W CHESTER PIKE

PARKVIEW RD

69TH STREETTRNSP CENTER

LEGENDINCREASED TREE COVER

IMPROVED PEDESTRIAN CROSSING

WIDENED SIDEWALK

IMPROVED STREET LIGHTING

Improved Tree Cover It is proposed that tree cover should be increased primarily along the Upper Darby side of Market Street, GarrettRoad,WestChesterPikeandMarshallRoad.Increasing street treets would enhance pedestrian experience, and it can function as a buffer from traffic and shelter from sunlight and rainfall.

Source: Google Map Street ViewPeople trying to cross Market Street in front of 69th Street

Source: Hiddencityphiladelphia.orgExample of street trees and wide sidewalk

Improved Pedestrian Crossing Pedestrian crossings should be improved in front of 69th Street Station, at the complicated intersection of Garrett Road, Long Lane, and other roads, and along the 69th Street Commercial Corridor. Right now pedestrians are crossing these areas in a very unsafe way, often causing pedestrian-vehicle conflicts.

Frequent pedestrian-vehicle conflict on 69th Street

People make such crossings no matter whether crosswalks are provided because there exist the need of making such crossings at these locations. Sometimes the amount of such need is huge, and that’s where pedestrian crossing facilities should be improved. Elements such as painted, clearly marked crosswalks, countdown crossing signals, crossing islands, and signs that cars should yield to pedestrians should be provided at the identified locations.

Source: Tooledesign.comExample of good street crossings

Widened Sidewalk The sidewalks on the Upper Darby side of Market Street, Marshall Road, northern portion of Long Lane, and southern portion of 69th Streets are notably not wide enough.Wideningthesidewalkstoatleast5feetwouldenable two pedestrians to maneuver in both directions, and a wider sidewalk would allow for a furnishing or vegetation zone to act as buffer from the traffic.

Lighting Street lights in most of the study area are the high-mounted model for car safety. A more pedestrian-scale street lighting like those on the Millbourne side of Market Street should be promoted to other streets in the study area, starting from the Upper Darby side of Market Street, so as to discourage crime and mitigate the risks of pedestrian-vehicle conflicts. Especially the hidden corners should be illuminated, such as unlit parking lots and alleys.

ADA Accessible Design The crossing time at some intersections is remarkably short for physically challenged people to cross safely. Also, curb ramps at multiple spots are not smooth enough for a wheelchair to pass stably. Not to mention the narrow sidewalks at the locations mentioned above, which fail to accommodate wheelchairs. Increasing crossing time, improving curb ramps and widening sidewalks would create a much smoother environment to better connect physically challenged people to their destinations. Similarly, audible traffic signals at intersections and tactile pathways could benefit visually impaired people. A more specific study could be carried out to identify primary change locations. Also, sidewalks should be kept clear of obstacles such as poles or newspaper racks. Such changes would not only benefit people in wheelchairs, but also benefit the seniors and pedestrians with suitcases and strollers.

BikeabilityImprovement Strategies

0 0.150.075 Miles

69TH STREETTRNSP CENTER

63RD ST.

MILLBOURNE

CO

BBS

CRE

EK P

KWY

S 62

ND

ST

SPRUCE ST

LARCHWOOD AVE

WALNUT ST

MARKET ST

RACE ST

WASHINGTON AVE

SHORT LN

WALNUT ST

SANSOM ST

CHESTNUT ST

MARKET ST

S 69TH ST

GARRETT RD

LON

G L

N

GLENWOOD AVE

EMERSON AVE

PEMBROKE AVEBALTIMORE AVE

E MARSHALL RD

UN

ION

AVE

N LANDSDOW

NE AVE

SHERBROO

K BLVDFAIRFIELD AVE

S KEYSTONE AVE

N STATE RD

W CHESTER PIKE

PARKVIEW RD

MARSHALL RD

VINE STCA

RDIN

GTO

N R

D

ARCH ST

PROPOSED BIKE LANES

PROPOSED BIKE RACKS

PROPOSEDSHARROWS

COMMMUNITY FACILITIES

NEWTOWNSHARED-USETRAIL

EXISTING BIKING FACILITIES Apart from walkability improvements, the study area also has the potential to develop a bike network to provide more non-motorized options for residents and business owners. This bike plan proposes addtion of bike lanes and sharrows, enhancement of an abandoned trail into a shared-use path, and installation of bike racks throughout the study area. The aim is to provide people with better access to transit and local amenities, and enhance the connections to Philaelphia and other the surrounding resources.

VIC

TORY

AV

E

Bike Lanes This plan proposes adding bike lanes to Market Street, Garrett Road, and 69th Street, probably by taking away on-street parking lanes. On-street parking lanes, while serving as buffer protection for the pedestrian, can also be a waster of limited land resources, especially when off-street parking provisions are ample nearby for all these three streets. This arrangement provides people in Upper Darby with north-south connections from the transit station through commercial activities to the residential areas. Also it enables people in Millbourne to bike to and from the 69th Street Transportation Center too. The reason why bike lanes could not be added to WestChesterPikeandMarshallStreet,assuggestedintheDelaware County Bike Plan, is because on these two streets the traffic volumes are remarkably high and the vehicle speed there is not acceptable for a safe biking environment. However, it is also understandable that these two routes were included in Delaware County Bike Plan, because the selection of routes in that plan was based on demand, but this bike plan makes selection based on both demand and suitability. Adding bike lanes to 69th Street Commercial Corridor has several benefits. Such additional convenience to travel to the commercial destinations along the street could stimulate more business transactions along the corridor. Also, a stricter speed limit would be established to ensure bicyclists safety, and sequentially pedestrians, who constantly cross 69th Street at multiple points, would also benefit from a low-speed environment. In areas where the streets are wide enough, such as the south portion of 69th Street, it could also be a possible improvement to buffer a bike lane with a on-street parking lane, such as those in New York City, to enhance safety for bicyclists. People are encouraged to park in nearby off-street parking lots when shopping at these streets. As a result,

Source: The Architects NewspaperExample of how a bike lane could be added to Market Street

more people would be walking for a short distance in the street from their vehicle to their destination. This adds vitality to street life and increases chance of social interactions.

Sharrows The quieter residential streets, where vehicle speed and traffic volume are generally low, could be arranged as sharrows, where bicyclists and cars share the same right-of-way. A narrow sharrow with less traffic can be much safer than a bike lane on a street with many fast cars. Residential streets such as Hampden Road, Chatham Road,MillbourneAvenueandWisterDrivecouldbeturned into sharrows to provide north-south connections, whileWalnutStreetifturnedintoasharrowcouldprovidewest-eastconnection.BikewayonWalnutStreetwouldalso complete this bike network by weaving through all the north-south bike corridors and connecting the study area to the existing bike lane in Spruce Street in Philadelphia. Turning Victory Avenue in the north of 69th Street Station would link the study area to existing bi-directional bike lanes on Cardington Road, which leads to the recreational resources in Cobbs Creek Park.

Example of a sharrow in residential streetSource: Community Design Collaborative

If drivers are really in a hurry and not willing to share the row with bicyclists, they could take other parallel routes to get to their destinations quickly. A few sharrows are not likely to greatly impact the road capacity of accommodating car traffic.

Shared-Use Path The currently abandoned Newtown Square Trail runs from Baltimore Avenue near East Lansdowne through Upper Darby, Haverford, Maple, Radnor and Newtown to NewtownSquare.Withinthestudyarea,thistrailrunsfromwest to east through the south part, stretching parallel with

The currently abandoned trail, the part next to Short Lane

Example of Shared-Use Path

Guilford Road. Currently it is not effectively utilized. This plan proposes to convert this trail into a bike/ped shared-use recreational path along the existing green belt to the north of Guilford Road, extend it into the green space next to Short Lane, and at the end connect to the Cobbs Creek Parkway and the existing bikeways on the Philadelphia side. This shared-use path would be designed for both commuting and recreational purposes.

Source: Visitphilly.com

Bike Racks Bike racks, as shown in the bike plan map, would be installed in front of transit stations, along the commercial corridors, and in front of major community facilities to provide streamlined connection to transit services and local amenities. The number of racks near 69th Street Transportation Center should be much larger that those for bus stations in the south part of the study area, based on the analysis on total daily stop-level ons and offs in the previous part.

Bike Racks in PhiladelphiaSource: Bicycle Coalition

Signage System Improvements The study area lacks a comprehensive signage system to orient pedestrians and bicyclists. Turn signs and direction signs should be established at intersections on important routes such as Market Street, 69th Street, Garrett Road, WalnutStreetandNewtownTrailtodirectpedestriansandbicyclists to transits, major landmarks and other bikeways. Similarly, confirmation signs should be added to make sure the bicyclists and pedestrians know that they have reached the right places.

Source: NACTOExample of Warning Beacon

For both Pedestrians and BicyclistsImprovement Strategies

Direction Sign Turn Sign Confirmation SignSource: NACTO

Traffic Signals Currently the traffic signals in the study area are configured mainly for cars and pedestrians. Incorporating biking elements into the traffic signal system is important to ensure traffic efficiency and safety. Bicycle signal heads should be installed at busy intersections to provide guidance for bicyclists where they might have different needs from cars or pedestrians. Such signal heads would be used to indicate bicycle signal phases and other bicycle-specific timing strategies. Warningbeaconscouldalsobeaddedatunsignalizedintersections or mid-block crosswalks. Such beacons would be actuated either by pushing a button or through detection of pedestrians or bicyclists. This costs less than signal heads but still effectively draws attention from drivers.

Source: NACTOExample of Bicycle Signal Head

Curb Radius Reduction A wide curb radius typically increases the speed of turning movements by cars, which might do harm to the safety of pedestrian and bicyclists. Therefore, transforming the turning radius to a tighter angle is proposed to reduce turning speeds and make it easier for pedestrians to cross the street. However, the needs of large vehicles such as trucks and buses should be taken into consideration, because they would run onto the sidewalks if the turning radius is made too small for them. Therefore, further inspections and analysis need to be done to identify the most appropriate spots to reduce curb radius.

Source: FHWA Pedestrian Facilities User GuideReducing a curb radius

Prioritization

Demand analysis in the previous part prioritizes several districts for pedestrian and biking improvement strategies. However, due to limitation in resources, it is also necessary to give more implementation priorities to certain improvement strategies based on severity of need, cost and complexity. A table is organized to compare the severity of need, cost and complexity of the different strategies. A rating of 1 to 5, with 1 meaning lowest and 5 meaning highest, is given to decide the levels.

Increased Tree Cover

Improved Pedestrian Crossings

Widened Sidewalks

Improved Street lighting

ADA Accessi-ble Design

Severity of Need 3 5 4 2 4

Cost 4 3 5 5 5Complexity 3 2 5 3 5

Bike Lanes Sharrows Shared-Use Path

Bike Racks

Severity of Need 5 5 4 4

Cost 4 3 5 4Complexity 4 2 3 3

Signage Traffic Signals Curb Radius Reduction

Severity of Need 5 5 2

Cost 3 4 5Complexity 3 4 4

Conclusion Based on the ratings above, a conclusion could be drawn to direct future implementations. Improving pedestrian crossings, adding sharrows, and establishing a signage system are the must-have improvements which cost relatively less and are more logistically feasible than others. These strategies would be given the highest priority. Adding bike lanes, enhancing traffic signals, widening sidewalks, ADA accessible design, building the shared-use path and adding bike racks are necessary projects, but not the most urgent ones. Also, they are more expensive or logistically difficult to deal with. More resources and collaborations are needed to implement these strategies. Improving street lighting, increasing tree cover and reducing curb radius are the would-be-nice improvements but the costs are high. These strategies would be given a lower priority.

References

FHWAPedestrianFacilitiesUsersGuide

Jaskiewicz,Frank.“PedestrianLevelofServiceBasedonTripQuality”

Vanderbilt, Tom. “America’s pedestrian Problem” (April 2012 four-part Slate.com series)

AASHTO Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities

NATCO Urban Bikeway Design Guide

Philadelphia City Planning Commission. “City of Philadelphia Pedestrian and Bicycle Plan”

Delaware County Planning Deparment. “Delaware County Bicycle Plan”