Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout122-07 RESOLUTIONRESOLUTION NO. 122-07 A RESOLUTION TO REAFFIRM THE ADOPTED POLICY OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE THAT HIGHWAY 265 NORTH OF MISSION BOULEVARD BE WIDENED AS A PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL AS DEPICTED ON THE CITY MASTER STREET PLAN AND AS SHOWN AS ALTERNATE H-1 BY THE ARKANSAS HIGHWAY & TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT WHEREAS, the Fayetteville City Council Street Committee recommended that Highway 265 be constructed by the Arkansas Highway and Transportation Department as a boulevard with bike lanes and a planted median as labeled Alternate H- 1; and WHEREAS, the Fayetteville City Council has adopted the Master Street Plan as amended in 1996 that depicts Highway 265 as a Principal Arterial Street that includes a boulevard with a planted median; and WHEREAS, numerous studies overwhelmingly indicate that a roadway with a divided median is safer than a five lane road with a continuous tum lane; and WHEREAS, tum lanes at street intersections or to serve high traffic facilities such as the Elks Club and the Nelson -Berra Funeral Home are compatible with the design and functioning of the proposed boulevard; and WHEREAS, a five lane road (with a continuous left tum lane) is neither as functional nor appropriate for the largely residential nature of Highway 265 as the proposed boulevard divided by a planted median and flanked by bike lanes. NOW, THEREFORE, 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 reaffirms its adopted policies that Highway 265 should be widened to a four lane boulevard divided by a planted median with appropriate turn lanes where needed and including designated bike lanes. Section 2: That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby th negs'� Arkansas Highway and Transportation Department for its cooperation and vit% Jtit1217Y.�F'�'� improvement work within Fayetteville. FAYETTEVILLE; PASSED and APPROVED this 3`d day of July, 2007. 'Wee, J ATTEST: By. 9ctp r SO DRA E. SMITH, City Clerk/Treasurer City of Fayetteville Staff Review Form City Council Agenda Items or Contracts 3 -Jul -07 City Council Meeting Date M g1J1 / Ron Petrie Engineering Operations Submitted By Division Department Action Required: Resolution to reaffirm the adopted policy of the City of Fayetteville that Highway 265 north of Mission Boulevard be widened as a principal arterial street as depicted on the City Master Street Plan and as shown as Alternate H-1 by the Arkansas Highway & Transportation Department N/A Cost of this request N/A N/A Project Number Budgeted Item N/A Category/Project Budget N/A Funds Used to Date N/A Remaining Balance Budget Adjustment Attached Pro ram Category / Project Name Program / Project CategoryName Fund Name Previous Ordinance or Resolution # 20• n`1 Date Original Contract Date: �d Q� Original Contract Number: to R i ity Clerk's Office Finance and Internal Service Director Date Received in Mayor's Office Ma r Date City Council Meeting of July 3, 2007 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO To: Mayor and City Council Thru: Gary Dumas, Director of Operations From: Ron Petrie, City Engineer 009 Date: June 20, 2007 Subject: A resolution to reaffirm the adopted policy of the City of Fayetteville that Highway 265 north of Mission Boulevard be widened as a principal arterial street as depicted on the City Master Street Plan and as shown as Alternate H-1 by the Arkansas Highway & Transportation Department RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of this resolution to accept the Arkansas Highway & Transportation Department's Alternate H-1 as the preferred option for the widening of Highway 265 north of Mission Boulevard. In 2004, the City Council approved a resolution agreeing to a 50% cost share with the Arkansas Highway & Transportation Department (AHTD) for the widening of Highway 265 up to a maximum of $7.7 million. The Transportation Bond Issue that was approved by a vote of the citizens on September 12, 2006 included $7.7 million for this project. The documentation that was provided to the Street Committee and City Council described this widening as a 4/5 lane principal arterial. There was not a conceptual drawing included in the packet just an aerial of the project route. The City Master Street Plan that was adopted by the City Council in 1996 designated Crossover Road as a Principal Arterial Street. This street section is described as having a 20' median with 28' wide 2 -lane street sections on both sides of the median. CURRENTSTATUS The AHTD has brought forth two typical street cross sections that they have labeled Alternates H-1 & H-2 for public comment (see attachment). In general, Alternate H -I RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION TO REAFFIRM THE ADOPTED POLICY OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE THAT HIGHWAY 265 NORTH OF MISSION BOULEVARD BE WIDENED AS A PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL AS DEPICTED ON THE CITY MASTER STREET PLAN AND AS SHOWN AS ALTERNATE H-1 BY THE ARKANSAS HIGHWAY & TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT WHEREAS, the Fayetteville City Council Street Committee recommended that Highway 265 be constructed by the Arkansas Highway and Transportation Department as a boulevard with bike lanes and a planted median as labeled Alternate H-1; and WHEREAS, the Fayetteville City Council has adopted the Master Street Plan as amended in 1996 that depicts Highway 265 as a Principal Arterial Street that includes a boulevard with a planted median; and WHEREAS, numerous studies overwhelmingly indicate that a roadway with a divided median is safer than a five lane road with a continuous tum lane; and WHEREAS, tum lanes at street intersections or to serve high traffic facilities such as the Elks Club and the Nelson -Berra Funeral Home are compatible with the design and functioning of the proposed boulevard; and WHEREAS, a five lane road (with a continuous left tum lane) is neither as functional nor appropriate for the largely residential nature of Highway 265 as the proposed boulevard divided by a planted median and flanked by bike lanes. NOW, THEREFORE, 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 reaffirms its adopted policies that Highway 265 should be widened to a four lane boulevard divided by a planted median with appropriate turn lanes where needed and including designated bike lanes. Section 2: That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby thanks the Arkansas Highway and Transportation Department for its cooperation and vital road improvement work within Fayetteville. By: PASSED and APPROVED this 3 a day of July, 2007. APPROVED: DAN COODY, Mayor By: ATTEST: SONDRA E. SMITH, City Clerk/Treasurer City Council Meeting of July 3, 2007 includes a raised median with 28' wide 2 lane street sections. As a part of the 28' wide street width, a 4' wide marked bicycle lane is proposed. Alternate H-2 is a five lane street with a continuous two-way left tum lane and 4' bicycle lanes on each side of the street. On June 18, 2007 the City Council's Street Committee was presented with both options for consideration. After receiving public comment, the Street Committee voted 3-1 to forward this to the full City Council with a recommendation to support the AHTD Alternate H- 1. The approved resolution will be forwarded to the AHTD for inclusion in the public comments that are currently being received by the State. This does not guarantee that the AHTD will select the preferred option of the City Council. BUDGETIMPACT The City currently has agreed to spend up to 57.7 million for this project. The selection of either option will not change this previous commitment. At this time, the attached resolution will not encumber any funds. ALTERNATM H-1 PROPOSOROADWAY j 110' ROs (USUAL) j � 1 I 1 I 3' BUFFER I!6' 3' BUFFER ! S. 11' LANE 11' LANE RAISED!WDIAN 11' LANE I1' LANE 5' 10.5 S/W VAR 5/W 10.5' USUAL USUAL 1 B B I.5' s 4'BICYCLE LANE 4' BICYCLE LANE or 1 1 1 t t t i 1 2% =x }st 7YP 311 TYP ALTERNATIVE H-2 ILROADWAY PROPOSED j I I1O' ROW IUSUALI j i I BB I 1 i 3' BUFFER 1.6 3' BUFFER i S• 11' LANE I ,1' LANE 11' LANE 11' LANE 5• 10.5' S/W S/W 1 I USUAL USUAL i i B' B i ,. 5' 4'BICYCLE LANE I 4' BICYCLE LANE i i 1 t t i 2'/. won � 31, 7YP 311 1YP LEGEND Highway 265 Improvements Design Speed 45 mph (72 km/h) Figure 2-5 1 Foot =.3048 Meter Build Typical Sections -Alternatives H-1 and H-2 mil Riu `_ Iii �.�1lie�-�' €` .. iw r � F ,; I \ :. , _� � \ \ -.; I i c 4Ec J E S �-V two Dear General McDaniel, In September of 2006 Fayetteville voters were asked to consider 4 questions regarding the sale of bonds for City improvements. Questions three and four dealt with street improvements and trail improvements, respectively. These ballot questions are copied below with my emphasis added: Ouestion three There is submitted to the qualified electors of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, the question of the issuance of capital improvement bonds in principal amount not to exceed $ 65, 900, 000 (the" Street Improvement Bonds" ) pursuant to the Local Government Bond Act for the purpose of financing all or a portion of the costs of acquisition, construction and equipping of certain street improvements. If the issuance of the Street Improvement Bonds is approved, the Street Improvement Bonds shall be secured by a pledge of and lien upon (i ) all of the receipts of the 0. 25 % Sales and Use Tax and (ii ) all of the receipts of the 0. 75 % Sales and Use Tax, each levied pursuant to the Local Government Bond Act. FOR the issuance of Street Improvement Bonds in principal amount not to exceed $ 65, 900, 000 for the purpose of financing all or a portion of the costs of acquisition, construction, reconstruction, repair, straightening and widening of certain City streets, which may include related sidewalk, traffic signal and control, curbing, guttering and drainage improvements and right-of-way acquisition. AGAINST the issuance of Street Improvement Bonds in principal amount not to exceed $ 65, 900, 000 for the purpose of financing all or a portion of the costs of acquisition, construction, reconstruction, repair, straightening and widening of certain City streets, which may include related sidewalk, traffic signal and control, curbing, guttering and drainage improvements and right-of-way acquisition. Ouestion four There is submitted to the qualified electors of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, the question of the issuance of capital improvement bonds in principal amount not to exceed $ 2, 100, 000 (the " Trail Improvement Bonds" ) pursuant to the Local Government Bond Act for the purpose of financing all or a portion of the costs of acquisition, construction and equipping of certain City trail system improvements. If the issuance of the Trail Improvement Bonds is approved, the Trail Improvement Bonds shall be secured by a pledge of and lien upon (i ) all of the receipts of the 0. 25 % Sales and Use Tax and (ii ) all of the receipts of the 0. 75 % Sales and Use Tax, each levied pursuant to the Local Government Bond Act. FOR the issuance of Trail Improvement Bonds in principal amount not to exceed $ 2, 100, 000 for the purpose of financing all or a portion of the costs of acquisition and construction of certain City trail system improvements, which may include related pedestrian signal and drainage improvements and right-of-way acquisition. AGAINST the issuance of Trail Improvement Bonds in principal amount not to exceed $ 2, 100, 000 for the purpose of financing all or a portion of the costs of acquisition and construction of certain City trail system improvements, which may include related pedestrian signal and drainage improvements and right-of-way acquisition. Many of our citizens in voting for Question three may have assumed the proceeds would pay only for streets and sidewalks and associated curbs, signs or signals. Similarly those voting for Question four may have assumed the proceeds of its passage would pay for alternative transportation modes such as pedestrian pathways or bicycle lanes since that was a separate ballot question. I hereby request your opinion on the following: May Fayetteville may use proceeds from the passage of Question three to pay for Bicycle Lanes (which sometimes are referred to as "Bicycle Trails" or "Bicycle Paths")? If your answer is "yes", must those Bicycle Lanes be part of the paved roadway or may they be separated from the roadway? Sincerely, (���eq, U , .{,Q�c/ ('' �Qt�efle�;!(e,S C�do ND I i (',v]. 41'11QJacLo� SOS ( c_� ,� � � (' 1 0 U HIGHWAY 265 EXPANSION PROJECT NOTES FOR CITY COUNCIL COREY OSBORNE 2740 NORTH CANDLEWOOD DRIVE I. INTRODUCTION II. CLARIFY PROJECT'S MISSION Is the purpose of this project to more effectively move vehicle traffic? Is the purpose of this project to implement alternative transportation routes? The expansion project's mission must be one or the other. It cannot be both as these two goals are diametrically in opposition. III. BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN USEABILITY AND SAFETY I am a personal proponent of alternative transportation options such as bicycle routes; however, unless these projects are implemented within the right context they simply become green space unnecessarily sacrificed for additional asphalt. believe that the key is to implement only those projects that promote and ensure ridership and use by all levels of the community. A. BCI (BICYCLE COMPATIBILITY INDEX) METHODOLOGY (SOURCE: httn:`www.bicvclineinfo.ore rdoperatiom.cfm) 1. "Determining how existing traffic operations and geometric conditions impact a bicyclist's decision to use or not use a specific roadway is the first step in determining the bicycle compatibility of the roadway'. 2. "...assess the "bicycle friendliness" of a roadway (such as curb lane width, traffic volume, and vehicle speeds)". a. Curb Lane Width -wide curb lane widths may somewhat assist in rider comfort levels b. Traffic Volume -265 is heavily traveled, and the highway's expansion will promote even higher traffic counts - Around 44,000 people die in car crashes in the U.S. each year. About in 54 is a bicyclist. (SOURCE: htto•//bicvclesafe.com/). -By introducing a bike lane within the context of a heavily traveled divided highway with multiple cross -traffic ingress and egress points, safety is significantly compromised. c. Vehicle Speeds - The current posted speed limit throughout the 265 residential corridor is 45. However, if the existing large trees and additional median green spaces that border the road and instinctively restrict the motorists' speed of travel are destroyed, vehicle speeds will increase. -For evidence of this phenomenon please refer to 265 south of the Mission and Crossover intersection. -Refer to the "Road Diet" theory for optimal bicycle/vehicle design standards from the U.S. DOT. (SOURCE: htty://w"".tfhre.2oN /safety /hsis/ou bs/04082/index.ht m). 3. Based upon the three primary components that ultimately determine levels of ridership and safety; Lane Width, Traffic Volume, and Vehicle Speeds, the proposed 265 expansion overwhelming fails to pass the BCI Methodology. Thus, it is a safe, clear, and historically proven assumption to conclude that very few bicyclists will ultimately, repeatedly utilize bike lanes as proposed on the 265 expansion. C. VISIBILITY ISSUES -If paved areas are maximized to the point in which the road's edge is pushed within close proximity to residential neighborhood entrances, motorists' field of vision will be significantly reduced- thereby increasing the danger to bicyclists and pedestrians. Additionally, motorists traveling on 265 and exiting into a neighborhood will have less reaction time in which to slow, stop or evade bicyclists, pedestrians, and/or children at play. D. LITMUS TEST PROPOSAL FOR ALTERNATIVE TRANS. ROUTES -Determine some minimum threshold for likely ridership that justifies the expense and displacement of existing, mature landscapes. For example: is the proposed bicycle route for experienced riders/adults only, families, kids, etc.? If the project is designed to be totally inclusive than we must ask ourselves if the common Fayetteville citizen would allow their families, children, etc. to utilize the bike path. IV. GRASSY MEDIANS A. LANDSCAPE USEFULNESS AND VIABILITY -Sacrificing existing, viable, and vibrant mature trees, green areas, and beautification projects in exchange for "landlocked" grassy medians is counterintuitive. 19303 F41 hh I OICI:1► -Currently, for the most part Fayetteville citizens beautify and maintain the "green" medians throughout the 265 residential corridor. If the "green" borders are destroyed in favor of "green" medians, the burden and expense of landscaping and maintenance will fall entirely to the City or the State. As evidenced by any divided highway, the State is quite simply not in the business of maintaining residential quality green spaces. If the City maintains the medians, the expense to taxpayers and the danger to city workers increase exponentially. V. SOLUTIONS A. UTILIZATION OF EXISTING AREAS FOR BIKEIPEDESTRIAN ROUTES 1. Tulsa Example 2. Safety and Advantages -"One of the biggest mistakes that people make when they start biking is to take the exact same routes they used when they were driving. It's usually better to take the streets with fewer and slower cars. Sure, cyclists have a right to the road, but that's a small consolation when you're dead. Consider how far you can take this strategy: If you learn your routes well, you'll find that in many cities you can travel through neighborhoods to get to most places, only crossing the busiest streets rather than traveling on them" (SOURCE: htto://bicyclesafe.com/). -We could protect riders and pedestrians, revitalize mature neighborhoods, and protect existing green spaces (by utilizing existing asphalt areas) by introducing a creative bike route plan that followed the direction of bicylcesafe.com. 3. Speed Restrictions and Traffic Calming Strategies -Signage and road identifiers could be used to clearly identify bike routes. -In similar fashion to "Work Areas," more punitive fines could be established for speeding (etc.) along bike routes B. FLEXABLE MEDIAN WIDTHS BASED UPON ENVIRONMENTAL CONTEXT ."Green" medians may serve a valuable aesthetic purpose in those portions of 265 that fall within the commercial context in which "green" borders are absent. VI. CONCLUSION Fayetteville is a vibrant, eco -progressive community. I hope that the 265 expansion will ultimately mirror these characteristics and that we will utilize a design that delicately deals with the existing environment rather than brutishly obliterating the residential corridor with a wide swath of pavement. 014Xl� OJ RESOLUTION A resolution to support the Hl Design for the widening of Highway 265 including bike lanes. WHEREAS, a goal of the City of Fayetteville's 2025 Plan (which was created with public input) was to create efficiency and connectivity through road improvements and to development a trail system; this plan designates Highway 265 as a major north/south artery. WHEREAS, a goal of the City of Fayetteville's FATT Plan (which was created with public input) is to create a sustainable alternative transportation system through the development of a trail system which would connect residential, commercial and recreational areas of the city. This plan designates Highway 265 as a major north/south artery for bike lanes. WHEREAS, the City of Fayetteville has already pledged $7.7 million to the improvements to Highway 265 which includes bike lanes, and the City of Fayetteville would not realize any savings if the bike lanes were omitted. WHEREAS, the ideal time to build the bike lanes would be during the construction phase and not after the improvements have been completed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE SIDEWALK AND TRAILS TASK FORCE OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS: We do unanimously support the H1 Alternative for the widening of Highway 265 including bike lanes. PASSED and APPROVED this 27 h day of June, 2007. at?. �Lz a2b 7 Chairman, Sidewalks and Trails Task Force