Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout198-03 RESOLUTION• • RESOLUTION NO. 198-03 • • A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION STUDY DATED OC1 OBER, 2003 AND PREPARED BY BUCHER, WILLIS AND RATLIFF BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS: Section I. That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby accepts the traffic and transportation study as submitted and attached to this document as Exhibit "A" � YET Trek PASSED and APPROVED this the 16th day of December, 2003. ATTEST: By: SONDRA SMITH, City Clerk APPROVED: By DAN COODY, Ma NAME OF FILE: CROSS REFERENCE: Item # Date Resolution No. 198-03 Document 1 11/15/03 memo to mayor and city council 2 draft resolution 3 12/03/03 Staff Review Form 4 12/22/03 email to Dawn Warrick 5 01/06/04 email to Paul Libertini 6 03/10/04 email to Gary Coover & Paul Libertini NOTES. • City Council Meeting of December 16, 2003 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO To: Mayor and City Council Thru: Hugh Earnest, Chief Administrative Officer From: Tim Conklin, Community Planning and Engineering Services Director Date: November 25, 2003 Subject: Traffic & Transportation Study Final Submittal RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that City Council accept the Traffic & Transportation Study dated October 2003 as prepared by Bucher, Willis & Ratliff (BWR). BACKGROUND The Traffic & Transportation Study was "kicked off" with a Public Workshop held in the Town Center on January 29th. The Notice to Proceed was issued earlier in October 2002 and the consultant was busy collecting traffic and population data prior to conducting the workshop. Citizen input gathered at the workshop was used as a framework to guide the consultant in specific areas of resident concern. Public Meetings were held on June 26th, August 18th, and August 26th for the consultant to present their findings and receive additional citizen comment. A final detailed workshop was held with City Council on October 20th to review the entire Traffic & Transportation Study with emphasis on the Master Street Plan, proposed typical sections, intersection and roadway deficiencies, and proposed improvements to mitigate the identified traffic deficiencies. DISCUSSION Staff recommends accepting the Traffic & Transportation Study as prepared and submitted by BWR. In the future, staff will prepare ordinances based on the policies drafted by BWR and incorporated within the study. Staff will present individual ordinances and policies to City Council for approval covering Access Management, Development Assessment, Traffic Calming and Smart Growth. Staff will also finalize 1 City Council Meeting of December 16, 2003 the Master Street Plan developed by BWR and also present this to City Council for adoption. BUDGET IMPACT The act of accepting the Traffic & Transportation Study will not generate any immediate expenditure of funds. However, Chapter 4, Implementation, has already been used by City staff in the development of the 2004 - 2008 Capital Improvement Program. Future implementation of the recommended Traffic Calming Policy may necessitate creation of a budget to administer the program, c.g. performing traffic counts, speed studies, traffic studies; installation of signs; construction of speed humps, traffic diverters, and etc. as outlined in Appendix C: Residential Traffic Calming Toolbox or to set aside a portion of the CIP budget for this program. 2 • • RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION STUDY DATED OCTOBER, 2003 AND PREPARED BY BUCHER, WILLIS & RATLIFF. BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS• Section 1. That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, hereby accepts the traffic and transportation study as submitted and attached`to this document as Exhibit "A". PASSED and APPROVED this day of December, 2003 ATTEST: By: APPROVED DAN COODY, MAYOR STAFF PIEW FORM - NON-FINANCIAL O1iGATION x AGENDA REQUEST For the Fayetteville City Council Meeting of: December 16, 2003 FROM: Tim Conklin, AICP Name Comm. Planning & Eng. Svcs. Division CP&E Department ACTION REQUIRED: Resolution Approval SUMMARY EXPLANATION: To adopt a resolution to formally accept the Traffic and Transportation Study as prepared by Bucher, Willis & Ratliff. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval Division Head Date ' (.t/�1✓ W03 City Attoi ey Department Director Finance & Internal Services Dir. J�WvChief inistrative Office r' is .y yor Date h Date Date Date Received in Mayor's Office Cross Reference: Previous Ord/Res#: Orig. Contract Date: Orig. Contract Number: New Item. /7/Q743,/ Date 164-02 Yes No x Y Clarice Pearman - Re: Traffic & Transpprt;•n Study Page 1 J From: Dawn Warrick To: Pearman, Clarice Date: 12/22/03 1:24PM Subject: Re: Traffic & Transportation Study Clarice, This agenda request came from the Engineering Division. Paul Libertini is the project manager. I will forward this message to Paul and to Gary Coover. They should be able to provide the information that you need. Thanks, Dawn Dawn T. Warrick, AICP Zoning & Development Administrator Current Planning Division City of Fayetteville 113 West Mountain Street Fayetteville, AR 72701 (479) 575-8267 phone (479) 575-8202 fax planning@ci.fayetteville.ar.us »> Clarice Pearman 12/22/03 12:14PM »> The City Council passed a resolution accepting this study. We have not received a copy of this study to attached to the resolution as Ex. A as stated. Please see that we get a copy of the study. The resolution process will not continue until this received. Thanks. Clarice X309 CC: Coover, Gary Libertini, Paul Clarice Pearman - Traffic & Transportation dy a Page 1 From: Clarice Pearman To: Libertini, Paul Date: 1/6/04 10:09AM Subject: Traffic & Transportation Study It is my understanding that you are the project manager for this item, and that you or Gary Coover are responsible for getting a study to the city clerk's office to attach to the resolution as Ex. A passed by the City Council on December 16, 2003. This resolution has not been validated by the signatures of mayor and city clerk and without the study can not continue the resolution process until it is received. Please let me know when I might expect the study. Thanks. Clarice Pearman City Clerk Division x309 Clarice Pearman - Traffic & Transportati Ludy Page 1 From: Clarice Pearman To: Coover, Gary; Libertini, Paul Date: 3/10/04 9:28AM Subject: Traffic & Transportation Study On December 16, 2003 the City Council accepted this study. I have asked for the study on December 22nd and again on January 6th with no response from the engineering division. As of yet the clerk's office has not received the study for Ex. A as attachment to the resolution passed by council. Therefore this resolution has not continued the resolution process. Please let me know what is happening with this item. Thanks. CC: Conklin, Tim City of Fayetteville, Arkansas Traffic andsTransportat n Study • October 2003 1111111 BUCHER, WILLIS & RATLIFF 1M/O\ CORPORATION The Louis Berger Group. Inc. Grafton. Tuit & Associates. inc. • • MICROFILMED Traffic and Transportation Study Prepared for City of Fayetteville Arkansas Prepared by 1111111 BUCHER, WILLIS & RATLIFF (MOIL CORPORATIO N in association with The Louis Berger Group, Inc. and Crafton, Tull & Associates, Inc. October 2003 • • City of Fayetteville, Arkansas Traffic and Transportation Study TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES IV LIST OF TABLES VI EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ES -1 1. INTRODUCTION 1 PROJECT BACKGROUND 1 STUDY SCOPE REPORT ORGANIZATION 2 TECHNICAL APPENDICES 2 2. MASTER STREET PLAN 3 INTRODUCTION 4 FUNCTIONAL ASSIGNMENT 4 FUNCTIONAL. HIERARCHY 8 TYPICAI. SECTIONS 9 3. TRAFFIC ANALYSIS 21 INTRODUCTION 21 PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC COUNTS 22 DAILY TRAFFIC VOLUMES 22 WINDSHIELD SURVEYS 22 TRAVEL TIME AND DELAY SURVEYS 23 TRAFFIC SIGNAL TIMINGS 23 TRAFFIC FORECASTS 23 SIMTRAFFIC MODEL 28 CAPACITY ANALYSIS 29 QUEUING ANALYSIS 32 ARTERIAL LEVEL OF SERVICE 37 TRAFFIC VOLUME/STREET CAPACITY 41 TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS 41 M vro:.35.51/41c.u. cnOoO .O3Icoal Repon mc Bucher. Willis & Ratliff Corporation - i • • • City of Fayetteville, Arkansas Traffic and Transportation Study 4. IMPLEMENTATION 48 INTRODUCTION 48 PROJECT IDENTIFICATION 48 SPECIAL STUDY PROJECTS 48 PROJECT COSTS 58 PRIORITIZATION 61 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN 62 5. MULTI -MODAL PLAN INTRODUCTION EXISTING TRANSIT RAIL TRANSIT EXISTING BICYCLING/WALKING DESTINATIONS TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGIES BICYCLING/WALKING IMPROVEMENT STRATEGIES TRAVEL DEMAND MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES 63 64 65 67 70 72 77 78 82 ACTION PLAN FOR MULTI -MODAL IMPROVEMENTS 85 TRANSIT ORIENTED IMPROVEMENTS ACTION PLAN 85 BICYCLE ORIENTED IMPROVEMENTS ACTION PLAN 86 PEDESTRIAN ORIENTED IMPROVEMENTS ACTION PLAN 87 INTEGRATION OF MULTI-MODAI. IMPROVEMENTS 87 MULTI -MODAL POLICIES 88 6. TRAFFIC CALMING POLICY 97 INTRODUCTION 97 REQUESTS FOR TRAFFIC CAI.MING CONSIDERATION 99 DOCUMENTATION OF TRAFFIC CALMING NEEDS 99 1DENTIFICATION OF TRAFFIC CALMING STRATEGIFS 101 PROGRAMMING OF TRAFFIC CALMING IMPROVEMENTS 102 DESIGN OF TRAFFIC CALMING PROJECTS 102 EVALUATION OF TRAFFIC CALMING PROJECTS 102 M V W!-1S>doca. I0 -05a1 Flw Reps Jrc Bucher, Willis & RatliifCanoration - ii Ci(P of Fayetteville, Arkansas Traffic and Transportation Study 7. ACCESS MANAGEMENT POLICY 103 INTRODUCTION 103 EXISTING ACCESS MANAGEMENT CRITERIA 104 ACCESS MANAGEMENT GUIDELINES 104 8. DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT POLICY 114 INTRODUCTION 114 DETERMINATION OF TRANSPORTATION FINANCING 114 TARGETED FINANCING OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS 115 TRAFFIC STUDY 116 RECOMMENDATIONS 118 9. SMART GROWTH POLICY INTRODUCTION SMARTGROWTH OBJECTIVES 119 119 121 125 REFERENCES APPENDIX A: RESULTS APPENDIX B: SURVEYS FAYETTEVILLE PEER CITY QUESTIONNAIRES AND SAMPLE USER AND PROVIDER PREFERENCE A -I B-1 APPENDIX C: RESIDENTIAL TRAFFIC CALMING TOOLBOX C -I M V000.15Ret aOkpmml0-01-01 Fen& Report doc Bucher, Willis & Ratliff Corporation -iii • • • City of Fayetteville, Arkansas Traffic and Transportation Study FIGURE 2-1 FIGURE 2-2 FIGURE 2-3 FIGURE 2-4 FIGURE 2-5 FIGURE 2-6 FIGURE 2-7 FIGURE 2-8 FIGURE 2-9 FIGURE 2-10 FIGURE 3-1 FIGURE 3-2 FIGURE 3-3 FIGURE 3-4 FIGURE 3-5 FIGURE 3-6 FIGURE 3-7 FIGURE 3-8 FIGURE 3-9 FIGURE 3-10 FIGURE 3-11 FIGURE 3-12 FIGURE 3-13 FIGURE 4-1 FIGURE 4-2 FIGURE 4-3 FIGURE 4-4 FIGURE 4-5 FIGURE 4-6 FIGURE 4-7 FIGURE 5-1 FIGURE 5-2 FIGURE 5-3 FIGURE 5-4 FIGURE 5-5 FIGURE 5-6 FIGURE 5-7 FIGURE 5-8 FIGURE 5-9 FIGURE 5-10 FIGURE 5-1 I LIST OF FIGURES PROPOSED MASTER STREET PLAN FOR YEAR 2023 7 FUNCTIONAL HIERARCHY 8 TYPICAL SECTIONS: PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL- 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 28 33 34 35 36 39 40 42 43 44 45 46 47 50 51 52 53 55 56 TYPICAL SECTIONS: CONSTRAINED PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL TYPICAL SECTIONS: MINOR ARTERIAI TYPICAL SECTIONS: COLLECTOR TYPICAL SECTIONS: HISTORIC COLLECTOR TYPICAL SECTIONS: LOCAL STREET TYPICAL SECTIONS: LOCAL STREET (NEW URBANISM) TYPICAL SECTIONS: RESIDENTIAL. AND ALLEY SIMTRAFFIC MODEL SAMPI.E SCREEN CAPTURE EXISTING PEAK HOUR INTERSECT ION LOS EXISTING PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION LOS 2023 PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION LOS 2023 PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION LOS EXISTING PEAK HOUR ARTERIAL LOS EXISTING PEAK HOUR ARTERIAL LOS TRAFFIC VOLUMES AND STREET CAPACITY TRAFFIC VOLUMES AND STREET CAPACITY SHORT RANGE TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS SIIORT RANGE TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS LONG RANGE (2023) TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS LONG RANGE (2023) TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS COLLEGE AND ROCK MT. COMFORT AND GARLAND SHILOH, DEANE SOLOMON, AND MT. COMFORT INTERSECTION SHILOH, DEANE SOLOMON. AND MT. COMFORT ROUNDABOUT 6" AND 1-540 NORTHBOUND COLLEGE TO FULBRIGHT EXPRESSWAY ALTERNATIVES NORTHBOUND COLLEGE TO FULBRIGHT EXPRESSWAY SIGNALIZED U-TURN (ALT 6 EXISTING TRANSIT ROUTES No FIXED -ROUTE TRANSIT AREAS EXISTING SIDEWALK INVENTORY EXISTING TRAILS AND PARKS PROPOSED TRAILS DESTINATIONS RECOMMENDED CONCEPTUAL BIKE RACK LOCATIONS RECOMMENDED PARK-AND-RIDE LOTS TRANSIT PRIORITY PROJECTS NEAR TERM PHASE BIKE ROUTES MID TERM PHASE BIKE ROUTES 57 68 69 73 74 75 76 81 90 91 92 93 M 12002.159do,U,yon110-0 Fmk] Rem dor Bucher, Willis & Ratliff Corporation - iv • • • City of Fayetteville, Arkansas Traffic and Transportation Stlldi FIGURE 5-12 FIGURE 5-13 FIGURE 5-14 FIGURE 7-1 FIGURE 7-2 FIGURE 7-3 FIGURE 7-4 LONG TERM PHASE HIKE ROUTES 94 PRIORITY SIDEWALK PROJECTS 95 EXAMPLE PEDESTRIAN CROSSING TREATMENTS 96 DRIVEWAY SPACING SPECIAL CRITERIA 107 INTERSECTION SIGHT DISTANCE 109 DRIVEWAY GEOMETRIC STANDARDS 110 GRAPHIC LAYOUT or TABLE 7-8 TO 7-10 1 13 M V002.1501drc1/41;tryMt10-05 L1 Foul Repan da Bucher, Willis d Bath [Corporation - v City of Fayetteville, Arkansas Traffic and Transportation Study LIST OF TABLES TABLE 3-1 POPULATION AND EMPLOYMENT PROJECTIONS 27 TABLE 3-2 LEVEL -OF -SERVICE CRITERIA 29 TABLE 3-3 MITIGATION STRATEGIES FOR CONGESTED INTERSECTIONS 30 TABLE 3-4 LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY FOR CONGESTED INTERSECTIONS 31 TABLE 3-5 FUNCTIONAL. AND DESIGN CATEGORIES 37 TABLE 3-6 URI3AN STREET CLASS BASED ON FUNCTIONAL AND DESIGN CATEGORIES 38 TABLE 3-7 ARTERIAL STREET LEVEL -OF -SERVICE CRITERIA 38 TABLE 3-8 SERVICE VOLUMES AND LEVEL -OF -SERVICE 41 TABLE 4-1 TOP 9 PRIORITY ROAD PROJECTS 59 TABLE4-2 TOP 15 PRIORITY INTERSECTION PROJECTS 59 TABLE4-3 LONG RANGE PROJECTS 60 TABLE 5-1 RAZORBACK TRANSIT ANNUAL. RIDER -SHIP 66 TABLE 6-1 LOCAL. STREETS RATING CRITERIA 100 TABLE 6-2 COLLECTOR STREETS RATING CRITERIA 101 TABLE 7-I RECOMMENDED INTERSECTION SPACING - 105 TABLE 7-2 RECOMMENDED TRAFFIC SIGNAL SPACING I05 TABLE 7-3 DRIVEWAY SPACING FROM STREET CORNERS 106 TABLE 7-4 DRIVEWAY SPACING SPECIAL. CRITERIA 107 TABLE 7-5 INTERSECTION SIGHT DISTANCE 108 TABLE 7-6 DRIVEWAY GEOMETRIC STANDARDS 109 TABLE 7-7 RECOMMENDED MEDIAN OPENING SPACING 1 10 TABLE 7-8 LEFT TURN LANE WARRANT 1 1 1 TABLE 7-9 MINIMUM LEFT TURN LENGTHS I 1 I TABLE 7-10 MINIMUM RIGHT TURN LENGTHS 112 �I ‘2002.3 tedoc%Revon'I0-05-0J haul Report doc Bucher, Willis & RadifCorporation - vi City of Fayetteville, Arkansas Traffic and Transportation Study Executive Summary • EXECUTIVE SUMMARY INTRODUCTION The City of Fayetteville authorized the completion of a city-wide traffic and transportation study to determine the needs and priorities for transportation projects over the next 20 years. The objectives of the study were threefold: ❑ Develop transportation and land use policies to guide development practices and transportation investment decisions. ❑ Identify and prioritize street improvements to accommodate existing and future traffic demands. ❑ Develop an overall transportation plan that provided for a street master plan, a multi- modal plan, and a basis for a transportation capital improvement plan. The study scope included all major streets and major intersections within the City planning limits, the public transportation systems, and the City trail and sidewalk systems. Services provided as pan of the study included data collection, analysis, public involvement facilitation, policy preparation, and establishment of improvement priorities. The study was documented through a study report comprised of chapters addressing: o Introduction o Master Street Plan o Traffic Analysis o Implementation o Multi -Modal Assessment o Traffic Calming Policy o Access Management Policy o Development Assessment Policy ❑ Smart Growth Policy The study also included an executive summary and eight technical appendices containing data and analysis worksheets. M 1.ro02.1594docUtgm11005-01 I'n4 Report dm Bucher, Willis & Ratliff 'Corporation ES -1 • • • City of Fayetteville, Arkansas Traffic and Transportation Study Executive Summary MASTER STREET PLAN A street system must include local streets to provide access to properties, arterial streets to provide mobility through the community, and collector streets to link local streets to arterial streets. The proposed functional hierarchy of major streets for Fayetteville has been identified in Figure ES -I. The street system functions best when the intended purposes of arterial, collector, and local streets are protected, and when the overall street system includes the proper proportion of each type of street. One of the purposes of identifying streets according to function is so that standards can be established which will protect the function of the street. Typical roadway sections have been developed based on street function and emphasize multi -modal design. Sufficient right of way should be secured for moving vehicles, auxiliary lanes, parking lanes if appropriate. transit activities. bicycle traffic, pedestrians, landscaping buffers, and utilities. Eight typical right of way sections have been recommended to accommodate the future traffic circulation demands in Fayetteville: 150 feet and 110 feet for principal arterial streets, 90 feet for minor arterial streets, 70 feet for collector streets. 50 feet for historic collector streets, 60 and 50 feet for local streets, 40 feet for residential streets, and 20 feet for alleys. These eight widths' accommodate 17 different typical roadway sections. The sections also make provision for bicycle and pedestrian use of the right of way. 1.1‘2032. 35OdocIRcp"I-O5-01 Fund Rrywl dot Bucher, Willis & Radit%Cotporation ES -2 •` - • % 1��� •-. ' °tom b -..r i _ :, _ anis • . t / 1vi``-... •"r %I i r. g - • «-_ ;SCA • dtAi • • • F !r » 1 4 , , 77IR-� :"• • • • Cita of Fayetteville, Arkansas Traffic and Transportation Study Executive Samna°, TRAFFIC ANALYSIS During the initial project interactive workshop, one of the key issues of public concern was traffic congestion within the community. This issue has been studied through a comprehensive traffic data collection and analysis effort. The traffic analysis included all the signalized intersections within the City and all the arterial streets. In addition, several non signalized intersections and several collector streets were also identified for traffic analysis, for a total of 88 intersections, 30.5 miles of Arkansas Highway and Transportation Department (AHTD) highways, and 30.6 miles of City streets. These study streets were identified as arterial streets in the previous Master Street Plan, or were collector streets that the City staff identified might be functioning as arterial streets. The data collection involved compiling: ❑ Morning and afternoon peak hour traffic counts for major intersections. ❑ Daily traffic volumes. ❑ A windshield survey of the arterial streets, identifying road geometry. U Travel time and delay surveys in a test car, on all arterial streets. ❑ Traffic signal timings. The analysis of the traffic data included the following elements: u Preparation of 20 year traffic forecasts. ❑ Development of a traffic simulation model. U Intersection capacity analysis. ❑ Intersection queuing analysis. ❑ Arterial level of service analysis. U Traffic volume/capacity comparison for arterial streets. U Traffic congestion mitigation recommendations. The analysis identified existing deficiencies in the street system's ability to carry traffic, and deficiencies in carrying projected 2023 traffic volumes. Mitigations to accommodate existing traffic volumes were identified as short range improvements, and additional mitigations to accommodate the projected 2023 traffic volumes were identified as long range improvements. Other improvements were recommended to accommodate future land development in Priority Growth Areas or to complete street system continuity. Figures ES -2. ES -3, ES -4. and ES -5 depict the recommended short and long range improvements. M e`002.3w4ocmw n\IooLI f iul Mcp,n Jrc Bucher, Willis K Ratliff Corporation ES -4 • • • • 1 • • • • • r • 771 21 • 1' • o f?"'ur.4.u- 1e•---1 - - v ?TY : ii t .Q•uuG.I kr"..c.-".Ta` • 3;6 war v 1 -.n— t•Armcsw•r [ �.v.. attar...ti,ra++pi5- . ._n,C.zr • PiraY 1 • • 9 , • • • • • • • • Pay • 10 r .v_ _•O,a -i'�-i-:Kc3 I • • ¢te4E631 /,F 'a mi1 y` i *" --.1.`, - • ===� . I.a_ aeamvp.....2 S?_t f • a___ 1 • 7.....,w I Y'` i -__tart r.:. • a .1 -—�. •r "aaa .,.•-mac., m • • ca 7 L 0 CD 1` • • • • .•••••"'. Y 1 0 mem 0 rti Irmati V I n O y +.1 mmamp i — , c 1 - C ; • ,44i (+Fkeo[ Y r Ire • • Fy S. 4+ • . (I 1 • • • • . � w • 4' t y r • csC uE • • . r_ I r liona � . rrcr 1 • m m n c 7 3 r J ' • • • • 1• • • • • • • •• • 1 • laails saue1 E CD to 0 z r ' acay.E _ A ` fVV : F r �' i _IFMA •(G' L P ..x ,`gAniE r` m -.i1' fit xn- 041 •'DOL` .>. yhro; ,.ate L 1 :m \rte E- A -t • _ • N• . -V L o.ac - e SS SST r • tN • • • PIN iM ISMAIMW C 2 n'^ A x A r PCZ r- T • 9 • • • • 1 • • • • =1: s,EE) 1 • • • 1 •. • 1 • •S • • • 1 • • g• • • 1 Z w :4 _ 7.a a VA • • nw • 7 i • • • _ r 17. • - 171 • t • • 1•,_:•••• J • • • 1 a N (.13 a• mCD Al N H Z 3= F� 0 Q F.) o Q, o= N 0 o N cn -i A > > r W r -3 r 2 = co a w c co • U: ,E n N CO N N -c N N 188.1is saue1 E lanais soue1 Z • w % 3 • --.'[Y V • ..L • j -riEocc; _," 5.: •4 • • • • • • • • tC ?-----__ L • 7• • a • • • • • • City of Fayetteville, Arkansas Traffic and Transportation Study Even: five Summary IMPLEMENTATION The study has provided a slate of recommended traffic improvements and multi -modal strategies to enhance transportation in the City over the next twenty years. The total cost of these recommendations is such that the improvements will need to be implemented throughout the full twenty years. as funding will allow. Therefore. the improvements must be prioritized so as to implement the most critical recommendations first. with less pressing improvements following later. Traffic congestion relief projects may be prioritized for both short range and long range improvements on the basis of a congestion relief benefit to construction cost ratio. Projects not geared to congestion relief should be allocated funding based on policy decisions for multi -modal improvements. neighborhood preservation. development of priority growth areas, or other non - quantifiable factors. The study has identified 9 short range roadway priority projects at a an estimated cost of $45 million (in 2003 dollars) and 16 shoe range intersection priority projects at an estimated cost of $21 million (in 2003 dollars). The study has also identified 36 long range projects needed in the next twenty years. totaling more than $155 million in estimated project costs (in 2003 dollars). A number of these projects are likely to remain un -funded in the City's capital improvement plan. Tables ES -1, ES -2, and ES -3 summarize the projects and costs. These tables do not constitute the capital improvement program, hut rather serve as source material for the development of the program. M VOa2.3'Q \RgoTU0-0'61 Flnu: Repm, Ep, Bucher, Willis & RatlifCaporation ES -9 • • • Cite. of Fayetteville, Arkansas Traffic and Transportation Study Ever:are Summary Table ES -1 Short Range Roadway Priority Projects Rank. Project Description ..+',. ,..r';. .... ".?:' Project Cast.' 1 Gregg. Township to Joyce, 5 lanes plus traits 56,376,000 2 Crossover, Mission to City limits, 5 lanes plus trails 515,428,000 3 Razorback, 15th to Garland, 5 lanes plus trail 5221,000 58,680,000 4 Township, Gregg to College, minor arterial 52,156,000 5 MI Comfort, Deane Solomon to Rupple, minor arterial 54,588,000 6 Rupple, Wedington to Mt. Comfort, pnncipal arterial r/w (2 lane construction) 53.644,000 7 Shiloh and Fullbnght, auxiliary lane 5400,000 8 Van Asche, Steele to Gregg, principal arterial r/w (4 lane construction) 9 52,380,000 9 Arkansas, Maple to Leverelt. collator 51,376,000 Table ES -2 Short Range Intersection Priority Projects Rank ' •..1:: Project Description ... v 1.... , w T.; r . <. .. .- ..1^�_ ... _' .Project Cost • . • 1 Gregg and North, auxiliary lanes 5431,000 2 Old Wire and Mission, signal or roundabout 5221,000 3 Huntsville and MappY Hollow. signal 5221,000 4 Maple and Mission, signal 5221,000 5 College and Longview, auxiliary lane 5296,000 6 College and Millsap. auxiliary lane 5296,000 7 Old Wire and Old Missouri, roundabout 5324,000 8 Razorback and 6th, auxiliary lanes 52,589,000 9 Rupple and Wedington signal 5221,000 10 West and Maple Signal 5221,000 11 Crossover and Joyce, auxiliary lanes 51,997,000 12 Garland and Sycamore, auxiliary lane 5296,000 13 Gregg and Poplar, signal 5221,000 14 Rock & College, intersection and local street 51,447,000 15 6th and 1-540 Interchange Reconstruction 512,076,000 16 College to Fullbright Signalized U-turn 5400,000 izort:-.15sworikkoni ow1UI Final Report da Buchu, Willis & Raiff Corporation ES -10 AI • • • City of Fupetteville, Arkansas Traffic and Transportation Studp Executive Summary Table ES -3 Long Range Projects Project Description .. - _ • Project Cost 15th and Morningside Signal $221,000 6th, Finger to School, 6 lanes $10,993,000 Appleby to Rolling Hills ext., collector 5688,000 Business 71 Flyover $12,000,000 Cato Springs, Razorback to Morningside, collector $6,880,000 College and Dickson, auxiliary lanes 5578,000 College and Harold Signal $221,000 College and Lafayette, auxiliary lane $261,000 College and Longview Signal $221,000 College and Poplar Signal 5221,000 Crossover and Cliffside Signal 5221,000 Deane Solomon. Mt. Comfort to Howard Nickell, minor arterial 58,258,000 Garland and Deane Signal 5221,000 Garland, North to Truckers Drive, 5 lanes plus trails 512,012,000 Gregg and Drake Signal and Extension, minor arterial 5701,000 Huntsville, School to Paradise Lane, principal artenal r/w (4lanes construction) 526,712,000 Joyce and Front Signal 5221,000 Joyce and Mall, intersection 5385,000 Maple and Leverett, auxiliary lane 5127,000 Mission, North to Crossover principal artenal r/w (4 lanes construction) 511,153,000 Mount Comfort and Deane Solomon, Intersection 53,854,000 Mount Comfort and Garland, intersection 5200,000 North, Gregg to Mission, principal arterial r/w (4 lanes construction) 57,495,000 Old Missouri and Rolling Hills signal 5221,000 Persimmon, Rupple to Shiloh, minor arterial 53,670,000 Rupple, 6th to Persimmon, principal arterial r/w (2 lane construction) 55,830,000 Rupple, Mt. Comfort to Howard Nickell, pnncipal arterial r/w (2 lane construction) 56,559,000 School and Willoughby Signal 5221,000 Shiloh, Mt. Comfort to Wedington, collector $1,720,000 Township Garland to Gregg, minor artenal 54,588,000 Van Asche/Howard Nickell, Garland to Rupple, principal arterial r/w (2 lane construction) $6,559,000 Van Asche, Gregg to Garland, principal arterial r/w (4 lane construction) 55,949,000 Wedington and Shiloh, auxiliary lane 5146,000 Wedington, west to Double Springs Rd. principal arterial r/w (4 lane construction) 57,734.000 Zion and Old Missouri Roundabout 5324,000 Zion Rd, College to Crossover, minor arterial 57,341,000 M `100:-1'0dx'Rcper010-01U1 Fines Repu,i 4x Bucher, Willis R Ratliff Corporation ES -11