City of Oxnard - Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan Appendices
City of Oxnard - Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan Appendices City of Oxnard - Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan Appendices
City of Oxnard | Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan Additional Discussion – Bicycle Boulevards This section describes various treatments commonly used for developing Bicycle Boulevards. The treatments fall within four main “application levels” based on their level of physical intensity, with Level 1 representing the least physically-intensive treatments that could be implemented at relatively low impact on roadways that already function well for bicyclists. Identifying appropriate application levels for individual Bicycle Friendly Street corridors provides a starting point for selecting appropriate site-specific improvements. Four Bicycle Friendly Street application levels are as follows: • Level 1: Signage • Level 2: Pavement markings See Sections 3.4.3. and 3.4.6-3.4.8 • Level 3: Intersection treatments See Sections 5-3.4.8 • Level 4: Traffic calming See Section 5 and 3.4.7 It should be noted that corridors targeted for higher-level applications would also receive relevant lower-level treatments (as illustrated below). For instance, a street targeted for Level 3 applications should also include Level 1 and 2 applications as necessary. It should also be noted that some applications may be appropriate on some streets and inappropriate on others. In other words, it may not be appropriate or necessary to implement all “Level 2” applications on a Level 2 street. Furthermore, several treatments could fall within multiple categories as they achieve multiple goals. To identify and develop specific treatments for each Bicycle Friendly Street, the City could involve the bicycling community and neighborhood groups. Further analysis and engineering work may also be necessary to determine the feasibility of some applications. Alta Planning + Design | A-31
Appendix A | Design Guidelines A.4.6. Bicycle Routes/Bicycle Boulevards at Local Intersections – Mini Roundabout Design Summary Design Example Design varies; see below and following pages for additional discussion. Mini Roundabout Discussion Roundabouts may be implemented where the Bicycle Friendly Street intersects a local street or even a collector if the ADT is less than 2,000. Signage and striping treatments should be implemented based on traffic volumes and may be appropriate for local/local intersections with very low ADT, while increased signage and splitter striping may be appropriate for larger ADTs and intersections with collector streets. Mini roundabouts can be landscaped with drought tolerant plants that do not impact sight lines for added visual impact and traffic calming effect. Treatment should be designed with the input of Oxnard Police and Fire Departments, City Traffic Engineer, Gold Coast Transit, and the affected school district(s). Advantages: • Reduces through bicycle and cross vehicle conflicts • Calms traffic overall in all directions • Eliminates unwarranted stop signs Disadvantages: • Moderate cost (approx $20,000 per intersection) • Required approval of neighborhood for installation • Required neighborhood support and adoption for maintenance of landscaping if installed Guidance • California MUTCD • Caltrans Highway Design Manual (Chapter 1000) • AASHTO Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities Berkeley Bicycle Boulevard Design Tools and Guidelines • FHWA Roundabouts: An Informational Guide A-32 | Alta Planning + Design
- Page 1 and 2: City of Oxnard Bicycle & Pedestrian
- Page 3 and 4: Appendix A | Design Guidelines Tabl
- Page 5 and 6: Appendix A | Design Guidelines Figu
- Page 7 and 8: Appendix A | Design Guidelines •
- Page 9 and 10: Appendix A | Design Guidelines Desi
- Page 11 and 12: Appendix A | Design Guidelines A.2.
- Page 13 and 14: Appendix A | Design Guidelines A.2.
- Page 15 and 16: Appendix A | Design Guidelines http
- Page 17 and 18: Appendix A | Design Guidelines Addi
- Page 19 and 20: Appendix A | Design Guidelines Addi
- Page 21 and 22: Appendix A | Design Guidelines Addi
- Page 23 and 24: Appendix A | Design Guidelines A.3.
- Page 25 and 26: Appendix A | Design Guidelines A.3.
- Page 27 and 28: Appendix A | Design Guidelines A.4
- Page 29 and 30: Appendix A | Design Guidelines A.4.
- Page 31: Appendix A | Design Guidelines A.4.
- Page 35 and 36: Appendix A | Design Guidelines A.4.
- Page 37 and 38: Appendix A | Design Guidelines Addi
- Page 39 and 40: Appendix A | Design Guidelines •
- Page 41 and 42: Appendix A | Design Guidelines A.6.
- Page 43 and 44: Appendix A | Design Guidelines Addi
- Page 45 and 46: Appendix A | Design Guidelines Cove
- Page 47 and 48: Appendix A | Design Guidelines A.6.
- Page 49 and 50: Appendix A | Design Guidelines A.7.
- Page 51 and 52: Appendix A | Design Guidelines Addi
- Page 53 and 54: Appendix A | Design Guidelines Addi
- Page 55 and 56: Appendix A | Design Guidelines A.7.
- Page 57 and 58: Appendix A | Design Guidelines Addi
- Page 59 and 60: Appendix A | Design Guidelines A.8.
- Page 61 and 62: Appendix A | Design Guidelines A.8.
- Page 63 and 64: Appendix A | Design Guidelines A.8.
- Page 65 and 66: Appendix A | Design Guidelines A.8.
- Page 67 and 68: Appendix A | Design Guidelines A.8.
- Page 69 and 70: Appendix A | Design Guidelines A.8.
- Page 71 and 72: Appendix A | Design Guidelines A.8.
- Page 73 and 74: Appendix A | Design Guidelines A.8.
- Page 75 and 76: Appendix A | Design Guidelines A.9.
- Page 77 and 78: Appendix A | Design Guidelines A.9.
- Page 79 and 80: Appendix A | Design Guidelines This
- Page 81 and 82: Appendix B | Trip and Emissions Red
Appendix A | Design Guidelines<br />
A.4.6.<br />
<strong>Bicycle</strong> Routes/<strong>Bicycle</strong> Boulevards at Local Intersections – Mini Roundabout<br />
Design Summary<br />
Design Example<br />
Design varies; see below <strong>and</strong> following pages for additional<br />
discussion.<br />
Mini Roundabout<br />
Discussion<br />
Roundabouts may be implemented where the <strong>Bicycle</strong> Friendly<br />
Street intersects a local street or even a collector if the ADT is less<br />
than 2,000. Signage <strong>and</strong> striping treatments should be<br />
implemented based on traffic volumes <strong>and</strong> may be appropriate<br />
for local/local intersections with very low ADT, while increased<br />
signage <strong>and</strong> splitter striping may be appropriate for larger ADTs<br />
<strong>and</strong> intersections with collector streets. Mini roundabouts can be<br />
l<strong>and</strong>scaped with drought tolerant plants that do not impact sight<br />
lines for added visual impact <strong>and</strong> traffic calming effect.<br />
Treatment should be designed with the input <strong>of</strong> <strong>Oxnard</strong> Police<br />
<strong>and</strong> Fire Departments, <strong>City</strong> Traffic Engineer, Gold Coast Transit,<br />
<strong>and</strong> the affected school district(s).<br />
Advantages:<br />
• Reduces through bicycle <strong>and</strong> cross vehicle conflicts<br />
• Calms traffic overall in all directions<br />
• Eliminates unwarranted stop signs<br />
Disadvantages:<br />
• Moderate cost (approx $20,000 per intersection)<br />
• Required approval <strong>of</strong> neighborhood for installation<br />
• Required neighborhood support <strong>and</strong> adoption for<br />
maintenance <strong>of</strong> l<strong>and</strong>scaping if installed<br />
Guidance<br />
• California MUTCD<br />
• Caltrans Highway Design Manual (Chapter 1000)<br />
• AASHTO Guide for the Development <strong>of</strong> <strong>Bicycle</strong> Facilities<br />
Berkeley <strong>Bicycle</strong> Boulevard Design Tools <strong>and</strong> Guidelines<br />
• FHWA Roundabouts: An Informational Guide<br />
A-32 | Alta <strong>Plan</strong>ning + Design
Change language